The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPackets - Council Packets (655) AGENDA ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL BUDGET STUDY SESSION APRIL 24, 2010 ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE 8:00 AM - 12:00 NOON STUDY SESSION - AT OR AFTER 8:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. Welcome & Opening Review of Session Structure 2. Where we are today: context of budget and structural deficit and what that means to this and future budgets 3. Discussion and Q &A with Council on Financial Sustainability 4. Presentation on consolidation of Departments & Discussion with Council 5. Review and discussion of items excluded from recommended Budget 6. Response to Council questions to Department Directors ADJOURNMENT * *(If time is not sufficient for review of information, agenda items will be continued to Wednesday, April 28 Study Session) POSTED: 04/21/10 4:00 p.m. cp The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA). If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify the Town Clerk's Office at (520)229-4700. n MEMORANDUM DATE: July 9, 2008 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: David L. Andrews, Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Finance Director RE: Fiscal Impact of Proposed Residential Impact Fees In anticipation of the Town Council's consideration of implementing new impact fees areas of parks and recreation, police, library and general administration and revised fees for transportation, staff felt it would be valuable to estimate the monetaryimpact these fees might p have on the Town in future years, focusing primarily on the fees applied to residential development. To perform this analysis, the attached map wasreared showing p an inventory of the remaining undeveloped, residentially-zoned parcels of land currently available within the Town boundaries. These remaining residentialarcels are shown on p the map according to the legend. Based on this inventory assessment, there are approximately 4,500 residentially-zoned d lots remaining to be developed within the Town's boundaries. Assumingthe issuance average g of 300 single-family residential building permits per year, the Town could expect to reach full ull build out in about 15 years. Using this estimate of 4,500 remaining lots and the average of 2.4 persons per household for Oro Valley per the 2000 Census, the Town could see its population grow by another 11,000 residents over this 15 year timeframe. With the Town's current population estimated at 44,000, the population at full build out could reach approximately 55,000 residents. These population estimates confirm the fact that the Town is now approximately 80% built out in terms of residential construction. The table below illustrates the estimated revenues that could beenerated from each impact pact fee by category to provide funding for future infrastructure and capital needs: T Proposed Impact Estimated Annual Estimated Total Revenue Impact Fee Type Fee Per Housing Revenue @ 300 SFR over 15-Year Build Out Unit PmtslYr. ' Period-4,500 SFR Pmts. Parks and Recreation $2,699 $ 809,700 $ 12,145,500 Library $ 694 _ $ 208,200 $ 3,123,000 Police $ 513 $ 153,900 $ 2,308,500 General Administration $ 389 $ 116,700 $ 1,750,500 Transportation** $ 1,908 $ 572,400 $ 8,586,000 Subtotal New Proposed Fees $6,203 $ 1,860,900 $27,913,500 Alternative Water Fees $4,982 $ 1,494,600 $22,419,000 Potable Water Fees $2,567 $ 770,100 $ 11,551,500 Subtotal Water Impact Fees $7,549 $ 2,264,700 $ 33,970,500 Total All Impact Fees $13 752 4 * --� .... - - - -- 1- ---- $ ,125,600 ' $ 61,884,000 Estimates do not include the effects on annual inflationary indexing. - -� **The current impact fee for transportation is $3,467 per single family housing unit. New proposed fee is reduced to $1,908 per housing unit due to the applicability to commercial development. 1 Therefore, if the proposed impact fees are adopted, and residential development occurs sat the assumed rate of 300 permits per year, almost $1.9 million in impact fee revenues could ould be generated annually to supplement the Town's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) needs. With an added $2.2 million generated from potable and alternative water impact fees, the e estimated total annual revenue from these sources becomes slightly over $4.1 million. g Y The totals become even more significant over the 15-year build out periodwith the proposed fees generating almost $28 million. This total, together with theotable and alternative water ate r impact fees of nearly $34 million, results in approximately $62 million in total residential impact fee revenue from all categories. Please feel free to contact either myself or Stacey Lemos with anyquestionsyou mayhave regarding this information. 0,4dezift 62vtit4AA...„), David L. Andrews, Town Manager 7ilei a X10/ Stacey Lems;., Finance Director Attachment ',:r '4,-,;7,7—, t'.'T'i M1 ► •`'�rwr"!r+•i•---{•��.+:w... ...,..-..—..-----7----,TiJ .,.-„,; '- •^rte. ,;. f ., • ET' !N tjfyC !s�•(, i , , -, ,{' `y i` ` ,, a • a a, ` x l f•y I J,I �• i N ,•v ,,•t( . '1(�. 1 -.• 7/ • ,�'t �L,' .. r•‘ i.' N, !t• 't `{.1 +.`f "4 i �' ► ire �• ' '1 t��;N�1� i ► , .�r. (• +>v�,•-. �„ },lf � � "at• M2 ,w `! t Y �`I . Lr •Ir 1'{ f i�ti17.1 r 1-x �.” '�,;•.rla1 �. r...(2„, ...,e, S`f r,r♦1+4+�' •r�r • .rt • f I . .� ' r t ., i. '� ' fr, .i 1 i '�. kk .► , , - ' # ie L/• �. \ '� .. t,„ •t ,E,..• 7,,..11,1:0:, 'r /•.r .S" - ,,i ' R',` t/-��[...._`,'''a*, ` !r�:r , l.. . -fit 4` •t• t F it t • �. t.:.:.,,: l '''t f t , �o yY a .� 1 -rj�i ,t't, p I,r ,..-t !#.�� ,r"�! .y� � _ a.; t• S �� '� �,,��R' a - ,� t .� , /••///'"'� will , ' y.f t F+r� _ ftp i.-�a•i�,i• t '' � j ,r ,.Ry� 't � � SRj +a ��f .�rM�1► "'�� •�(rill""ti•+•rj,�'P � �� ` '►rti ••`� I;-' c` `3`ti .��>�•y• '.,`l, �� ,• i, 1f t;r•11 ••, .7,;,,,‘ r . :egli Cr j A,...:. ' k ' f.• /,1 , y ,,,,::::/:,,,,41:4:'.',.' '1 ..J" `�`. �r .Y -:-41,:i;'::* `��5-i f 'fJ' {r ♦• •. r"•I} `' T ,/...•1 4',4„.; ,i � A+ /r t�t'Jy' 1,'•• F > y: ''...i,,,"f.ft...„.* :' I'',,'`‘ . . ',,..-` ,',,‘i : �t�" a a• \ A ,A:mt.,•.4 ç '1�/.� ,�,� Ir �I rra . # .A ' '/a �� M 41/4�j y` /y s f i',i' - et 7 :; ;# • i1.,. I 1Vi, f ,. ,SI'' . . .� S_ .,,• ,,. .. ir , ��{7 rf'y+J/+ .i , t ) ,( ff f ., it • ��♦ p'1 y+ ,P }T If, ..�Y r r�F � '" ` t f`t vhf{,`,.'_.•a' a� ,, r ' 'f 0 ,:t. ��FF i •f "T',`�i e '�`.r fl '6'�..f*Ri.► J`.' r ,r,„,,�•61,''I j ..; ♦ 'i ♦ �: �'J.J'•"�+"�'t .. ��_I % fr.t 'r F ( ....I ., .-.'i; '. + ki 11- .C,,,' . y A.. ,�', -/ , -,] lit► • ii ' 'I !�. ••r'R s �,`. « y�v�t �,. �y t/ , jit. •.iJy / ' et X� e , ..'"V.,.. , � •4-,A e / f. vr, )iii r'F• it ♦ x ,! 1. l •,e 4 ...: ",'t-1 'i' ��` �. _ ,i!....1. - X�, � y ;0'4' * ,1. `1,,,•„r Y��.. -r F.,,w 'moi w iJ ; t 1 �q�t, i 4 ttr ti f F''a fir '• ( x r r.'e` . ; r •~ ;r o j • • •4\ to;;��//..pp.t; ` • rJ1 Ayw f , .r(}�{ , .,,,, 1 \ ,•• )`•'4 '. , i►t ', H ` ° ' ,r • �•; .,i. tx / \t •i•:i 1 /1 1 N., I. A a,. 't r �..r' frt p R,( ,y f„;� �f' 61. 'f L f1 1t • J •1, 1: 1.�� • • j.• sd) Al . F,.', ,\• . •` .j ?Y , ,e •r'3.. 15; '”; ' I ' '' ', ,A,. •, 't• r •M t,'; ay t. f'r1•" e.L J”.a .� { YrV 4 ' r r r ' `� i „../...,,f,,,' •a.. , 4 ! V`'” �,- I r • t `f•"'`f�, 'i ,', /, R� ' Ji �,.I;�Y 1.I l ,. ~r i "�," '� t'=;, "''fffj. rt .d r ,,r' •.t••r. 6.. ' 'taw' ( 4.,„", / i,i4!, 41 ,,' ?., .y,. > v `, �,,,: • It 1 'f 1 t 3 `� • R ;.,,c!.� i ` t ' t ' • ,,;�f,.� ! .•;.r '• ,r • ••t r"..,i ti:, .3_,',.... 4) ! t. ,' i / .J ' _ .•.ry wIr f °. . •.• ., ... ,, •, , . 'a:1` •.'f ,.. 1 � ' , u, f_ti,r- , l>y � ♦ /,'�.� .�i.ti.f� ..: +/..Ft , ,/isI J y ,, :i i 1 ,' ; ♦tir 1,'% I.i • t,., y 1/ �I;f 112,4;1 1 r/JI r(oi , t, f 'r'I s , ,'J / '/,r' ., .„.... • ,-• .t •,,'r'y s •i/ r• ,' •.„.r r 1 --•�'t„ 4-.. 1! •,, r i ' �:i/ i �y�, ••,' .".-f---...--17 /'/�Y ,‘,./:e.,,4,,, t 1 ''1y`L'r T 4 / r• ,' 1 t • r.( -"r c4,4 f'.A 1, , •y,�a- t , 7 d•t/ • / r',r 1IL} C�( t _ �r y' ! I ri ' :!J• ` f ,•. R•;• •7 n I,`_"q t '•J '"....� .f .i► 1 1,!" ¢• .. y. • I 111 ;i• J • ''•�•/ f ' .+..::k..• -';.� _ ., Q. • `, / \ fir"! .. r , j{ � , .f a, r y. . , ,.,,.J.0 6/ • r r F l C- i • i.• , P� ` �, ', .- .J ! .}4 t t �(jifik .,r ., - +-; '— 1 ',, , ,, ♦ _ k q...' �- > %/'• _ �'. ''rte ./ �, ice,`a .:i.,1*j( .' t.F r t' i Y:•l.• a.. ef'. !- ��*' �. ', • t - A,1`.'. ,• jt-:1 .- •, '-',4;,•").; .♦t • .`, s. r • _-.6 t".Lk t ,t' t � f1 ., { 1':` �.!i�` ��f•-"` r, ,.• !�a, j -i `v i /7 -'Y'- +/ t�- ` •.. f .. { • •a, •s' �� ', f3 ... i 4. .....''rii• 14•'I...:1 '♦e' •'\•-1j • `a •!••. r ,. - • `J.it ♦. ;.♦,r #7••it v .'r,fir'; ..1 , •1• Y'.. i, . '``• • i�� ••. i 17 • :t 1 11" ,f r `• •t' .t.1,_,,%:.-,-'!•,':,:',.',',,,:, iiA'I,Jt,!Y+. •►�.4• , rl J�'�',f•,. '�rj ,., •,� �,.i'� r.J �' M . s, �' � ç �i• r4 i t /1j'j: !! 1►. `�P — • ' 0' f • f> ._p' ,y-F•+ r'.tr,,,`. ..`t , t • i ♦ ..• '',% ,r<'• sir.' r.� ,. ',41r;' t 1r;'>'r,tY i 4`,' . ' l\ •i• 1 }.r 1 a•.'. --- t„;,..,,,,,..4,..,,1( ry!.4 i ,f •. — � 't}f •�t"t .w. ''''.^7' ;fY'r'' '��PX .'1 '�.R-�'. '/�V 1'',/ ,1 t r_t..� tt'•{f � � I r,.:�ii`� ,{ ,j� r� r -.....,.'P.`,;,• i•j►,7 e , ; . ,pi-:, r .ir: t$!"r 1 1 r t.,r +� , */6 A 1,. t. • ,••,,,.4.;• f 'r _-r. - r.,t:-r; ,,I',.--_ ` ,-,,f,"4,•",.• ♦•,r,L'"11 • i t' I J`I •'� l ; .,.�.� 1' J ' ! • +y...::,, -r r, , !•• .. �'• t 'Ae^,••?7,-?'---.. ,t'{ ,2;It, i ' r` ',if� i '. + '�f' ^� ,,, ,..,•, , ....„. •iffi! , t „at-"�►fi ' • jt',��r'.' f J �. Jl. •�i r ...a..-..L_..-.moi`_..� ' .� +'--'-'—'": ... �i t-� i+rr �� k.- F,. !I= ;`+, �.I` •r1 ♦+ �r, , 4,>ir,l�.,}.♦• ,-.{:, �,' » '�..r `r1 [.,y.f,•r♦ n ' �, 4.,...., _ a1, _' .. _ SY• rt�,.r...f:•`f_., ..- ar„� '• ti.a- : !/ • li Ali ►r�y��. ' 1^.: ¢j y a .Ii , •1', Z ' 1 1`j J 'r _.'�i r L.. !!•s r, '1', r ,,'"-41•' " •`` f ,9 �J , =r .". a r rp,.1�� ., • 4 , eN• • f�j�•/riX.+ ,N 4'�, V J• ` - - ; (!. �,' / ) rly J, .• t J'4, , t"t,`. t �. `!'�.. �+' It•. 1•/ . •i ! 1 {it M(• k ''-1 r ! o - #y • a.l „,•. ►+li"rc i' ', - ., ., tt1iF' 1. - — ,de 5 � 1 1 F t c,i:j • ,' r. + R`'f' f tt!`. '' ` 4,,L,.,4 3 r a • f�.. t j w.,� "♦ • '4/ ."...-4,,k.' •S.'i 1 f t• ./' 1 1 'i,' 1 ' `-t ( t •.4,-"-'• �)�♦' f [..`"..•.: O.; ')� j 3 -,,.,. ' 44',•. it N• . , I tf f' 1 _', ,h�_ - r1r. 'F•• f`= .,• '�i.r:= , .� .yy7/„,,,,f". ' • Jf' / ;,� f -.•. t y1 a r'{�4a, a',.--rr : 4 0 r'—' ' Y r., L FrR'=*]-;4},,;,.rN�(. 1„ •. J • r t , , __ i f ! , )t /'1,•1•c I .I i 3 ► y ,i kai - TV 1*,4ro�• fY.,F IpfJfr _l .•r 'ti �,f' f �1 t9 /r, T'.: , 1 ,/ ,.0,a, }�1y•'! rr-.x r .`` •� I s' ', rYC I r r�'r�� r ;!'�'+•,• 1 .� �,/�.� f t(i. .•�i r t�� f .• `+ �, � � i 1 T, ti r.,, =',I � :ani,° � . ,-'4111 • ar��'f -.._ - r A , ' ', i ,• .. ' 1 1-t; .0:11 to...1 `.,f+' fI •r 1'A .." E • •.� i �i'-".'')'..' -'w/ 1 ft �t. f •te i.‘//fly it • /' r r \ tt t :. 01: 101.t."? Y -1 iR•*alj`I'f ,r i wQC::./ I - .'/ It `,I-y ; ',\ • iir rl�.,r},�' .J �.1„4� '�rr• , r't': ,'`„ , •'14 ''''i /.t N I.+y', Mil • t w I'* 10,00 7! • �'r i '�• !w t"`.LS.•,,... , • ',.rm' r _;____7'',/1.-1-'-'- .,ei ' 11'I:,,'f-!,• : .LI.• '•-44,� /‘,7,2,1* y� j Mt, f 1 ,• _ f F",, , r,.....,a, `� ,/'•-'• •""`; .• , _ r •.,1.'..,\ ,\ ♦ 1 t _ ', ,,,, - ,�,,,1.!�, 4' 4L,-r ,:/'' i r I,{ {�' , "�, ,,-,?„,..4,:�_ 1J r s�• ��1- • �r i - i ')f 'j�}. /! Ir -�flf.r..•7 b• ..r 'O. .•r .. �, � ` / .w'• •"J ' ,,,1f i J t4141‘;r1v;ta 'j- .r ;., 4.;1_, j•':1,..• = ..4,:i_. ‘ i /,,' - A.,'.?I'l°,,*-I..-, , y�e) . \ r� ,�f 1. 4• .t �.ry., ,:�f '� • li r � '� 1•"F ,,•t...� 1 �♦ I `'`'` i 1, � �r y'.p 1 f moi_ ♦ ' r R r, i fr...... • • fw '� '(fb*. !{ R /j! "*llw� t iq•ifr i .•1.".lA,nJ'!4' :'4..+'� '` r h ' ,i .{' -. 1 ti t ; .5, E ,)I 't 1:41 1'f ,,,,'!• .,;)�.,. ` ,,', : , ; s'.• ,'-',,,j• ,� `,',•', ,-A .� '•. wqr (�. , :-s �•• • , �...;',4 .1-'' , � , 1! t � ��t�•,, ,,.'Sys�'O;l r ",.s. •••,` .1 1 :; r'J ♦, ,rw ♦ , !Att.,'A. .'",r1. ..-...,,,,..,1 /"ffi� ar , •r, ._, s a r• ► './ � ,/. "S1 hr. .,yr.?"' ..,t.,,;..,... ' - I, /�- .:' •r 1'Pt •ti.F1p�, ,',•,,.- ± 'r•';':,•:•.";,'.7 :, ', it f• �s r,.. T '",r,y `►�i.i,�,,.4-,./r, ,1� - . �r >,.r S •,. .f.R., -t r„•,r F,•r., ri + ,i r1:�tCr Ek`- • :, t •- '}, i. E'Fi'/-J •.sr f..i✓= 1 . •1 , r/� ;,! . •z f ,a'_� *. ..- ` its ,,,,t.,...-4, fto• j'f, t -----, t, fir. .• :: �. ._' 'Z'r: ` , �cr • i r,`4� • _;)�:, Subdivided Vacant Residential t -�•��rrtt�� ], - �'l 1r ' s?``4 ' =� `► ,, ` , Subdivided Vacant PAD(Res.) r JC.,1,,,. " ' ' j !, �,1 4,i0.4!... ,. ' --•• ` ' t- ' Unsubdivided Vacant Residential ' C, ALL FiGURES ARE APPROXIMATE . a 1.4 , -,•,,,'t` • E. Unsubdivided Vacant PAD(Res.) ACRES AVAILABLE ''! `'` / �' `t•� Parcels SUBDIVIDED WITH OV ZONING:709.54 •'�` / 'r 4' ;r1 l''..; ,/ SUBDIVIDED WITH PAD ZONING:1118.96 •ry r' r r UNSUBDIVIDED WITH OV ZONING:1965.59 UNSUBDIVIDED WITH PAD ZONING:416.34 • ' N• `�' r'r • t; rre,;a. • TOTAL ACRES AVAILABLE=4213.42 fll+ri' ''9!34 ,. _ * • LOTS AVAILABLE •r" 1..4/ ••1 • ,,,,.- `, F,r SUBDIVIDED WITH OV ZONING:331 '�✓ w,, i • ' • •, ,�I'les''. 4, t" SUBDIVIDED WITH PAD ZONING:1302 '' Jr 1 %J) lr• "�t ` I UNSUBDIVIDED WITH OV ZONING:1059 POTENTIAL LOTS "',•,, ',4),i`►`n ry er .°.y 'r �,'' -r. . viNiteli UNSUBDIVIDED WITH PAD ZONING:1803 POTENTIAL LOTS ...Y.' ..: •.- ` 1 TOTAL LOTS AVAILABLE=4495 `• r '♦ ri T Disclaimer:The town of Oro Valley does not guarantee � ,"� .A ► .t ,t--, !',, .f' '.. {r+ `.�`► ..',�r• Mtn:, cis_ �y�/ I I• that the in/ormation depicted/contained :u1 ,: ,-,�,: ,•' �t'r 't f �• t .c'" ;,4 `�r r It.s,,,,, - • in this ma !s accurate. ,, � rr 1t"':.,',.,,/,‘•*., ,R ,� ..�, r ,j� 4r r°fir t.,„.,,,,,:..., t.. f1(wry is p ,— r' e:,"'tet: ,J' „,Z ., .F a,f J '' ,.,Q±.{ - t: % 'r.'4?:.'44101 3' t,„.,L,.:.:..,1.. `;:,.•f-Il"l%RT I�1,.; +k�i,etw , ti T�. "'' • I'''''''..,6,..,:71 J i 1 .J<.f*'1• .-!_�# •rJ-'f 4�•t`.... ,' r 4' 1' - T . TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: April 23, 2010 TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Kevin Burke, Assistant to the Town Manager CC: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Department Directors SUBJECT: Response to Requests from Town Council Vice-Mayor Bill Garner • RFP clawback provisions • Cultural resources • Department of Development and Infrastructure • General Administration O&M Councilmember Mary Snider • Management Studies • Service reductions TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.232010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Brian Garrity, Procurement Administrator Tobin Rosen, Town Attorney SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING RFP CLAWBACK PROVISIONS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding RFP clawback provisions. What are the clawback provisions in our RFPs where if the Town awards a contract (professional services) but then cancels it, we are penalized? If we don't have such, should we put that language in place? DISCUSSION Clawback provisions are terms within a contract that require repayment of certain kinds of funds or compensation due to changed circumstances. These provisions generally exist in the financial sector and are used to allow a corporation to take back performance based compensation or bonuses if the information used to calculate that compensation later proves to be misleading or erroneous. Research indicates that these provisions have become increasingly popular since the credit/banking crisis saw many top executives getting huge compensation packages based on front-loaded earnings reporting that later dropped significantly in value. The Town does not have any performance based contracts of this type; therefore, there is no need for clawback provisions in our contracts at this time. If the Town were to enter into an agreement with a performance based compensation structure, a clawback provision may prove beneficial. Our standard cancellation clause allows the Town to cancel a contract with or without cause giving 30 days notice. In the event we terminate a contract the Town is liable for payment for services rendered prior to the effective date of the termination. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING CULTURAL RESURCES AND DEPARTMENTAL CONSOLIDATION, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding Cultural Resources and departmental consolidation. This question relates to the consolidation of Parks, Recreation and Library with the addition of Cultural Resources under one department. Cultural Resources was always embedded in other departments and did not really exist as a separate budget entity; however, expecting a number of people to carry on dual assignments is a gamble. What kind of workload analysis was done?Also, where is the Operations & Maintenance line item for the new cultural resources? DISCUSSION Staff assessed the cultural resource (CR) workload impacts as follows: Property Management and Maintenance The proposed Parks, Recreation, Library and Cultural Resources Department (PRL&CR) will assume stewardship responsibility for tracking and monitoring CR plans and projects; however, significant cross-department coordination to support historic preservation projects, construction projects, utility issues, and safety mandates will continue. This coordination will temper the proposed departments' additional workload, but will provide for a point of responsibility for overall management and coordination. The Parks Division will continue to provide landscape maintenance at Steam Pump Ranch (SPR) with no new workload impacts anticipated. The Administration Division will assume responsibility for SPR scheduling, resulting in limited workload impacts due to restricted public access. Programs & Special Events The Recreation Division's workload will be reprioritized to accommodate event coordination at SPR. The Town will continue to partner with the Oro Valley Historical Society and other agencies when possible, to develop programs and special events. Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) The Administration Division has assessed the time required to support the HPC meetings and associated activities. These additional responsibilities will require ongoing assessment of the Division's workload, and adjustments will be made as necessary. Grants & Funding Department staff is currently responsible for a variable number of grant applications each year. Due to ever changing application processes and schedules, staff is adept at shifting priorities to insure timely application. Because of the priority of these potential funding opportunities, staff will continue to seek the assistance and expertise of other departments as necessary. Operations & Maintenance(O&M) Line Item The CR budgets, including the Steam Pump Ranch Fund, Honeybee Village Fund, and Naranja Town Site Fund have historically been stand alone funds not included in any one department. These funds, including the O&M line items for SPR, are included in the PRL&CR Program budget for FY 10/11. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. - • TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE PROPOSED DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the proposed Department of Development and Infrastructure (DIS). For the last six months of 2010 (July- December 2010), the organizational structure is somewhat the same with three original departmental groups. Please explain when the transitions of personnel or savings will occur. Beginning in 2011 (Jan - June 2011), there appear to be inconsistencies with the two new super departments, Development and Infrastructure: In some cases a job description was left in but had no staffing listed. In other cases there is a job description and staffing but also the vacant column with whole numbers or a percentage like .33. (Even if you defend a placeholder for a whole number how do you justify a decimal in the vacant column?) DISCUSSION The transition of personnel under the consolidation plan, if approved, is recommended to become effective no later than July 1, 2010 and may occur as early as the adoption of the Town's Tentative Budget, proposed for May 19 or June 2, 2010. All savings associated with personnel vacancies and the reduction in force are already in place. The savings associated with one of the two retirements will be effective May 7, 2010 and the other as of July 1, 2010. Job positions shown as vacant, but not funded, are expected to remain vacant throughout the fiscal year. Should the building industry rebound and workload significantly increase, an evaluation and determination will need to be made to see if the existing workforce can maintain service levels, or if service levels need to be adjusted, or if the vacancy(s) need to be filled in the future due to critical expertise and experience necessary to accomplish the work. Other than the Transit Division, all staff positions are full time positions, we do not have any part-time staff positions. Staffing levels shown as percentages indicate that the staffing position is being shared among different programs and/or fund sources. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. . TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE MAYOR BILL GARNER'S REQUEST TO SEE THE LINE ITEM DETAIL FOR THE O&M SECTION OF GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice Mayor Garner's request to see the line item detail for the operations and maintenance section of the General Administration budget. DISCUSSION Please see the line item detail attached. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. . r FY 2010111 ANNUAL BUDGET SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION INPUT:'.:• -: ,D. , -_-_„,....._=...iv,,,,,,.4.,„_,t,....m w2:01.-.P--,,,ix.:4,...,.t,,_,„ 1213112009' :•YEAR-END :::Department BUDGET ACTUAL :.PROJECTION-., w':,:.:;Request 0001 GENERAL FUND to f7IPw.ww.w W..014110.111.. IM..MH, • 20 OPERATIONS&MAINTENANCE 1 • . 0001/590 GA-O&M PROF SERV 6005_ _ 46,000. . 19,711 ‘••:••••••••••••.,•„-::•::...46,000.. ::••••• •. •301;000 PPEP Crew Services •••• .. • ... • • State of the Town Address prep Intergov Costs/Mteage • • • : 25;000 Mgmt.Retreat/Training •• : 10,000: Town Mgr.Search Firm • " • 2 ,000 Community Survey • • _:25,000 PC Animal Control Services • • : 8,000 PD Management Study " :79,500: i�•Csr..:#.1F..,..�?..i f' . .w•., .r1i= ' '' ' 2.•:9r�: t:f � - --.:•7: 4•:5 •:0••0: 0r.: .Parks Management Study . • 25;004:1 . t':i•►- '}.r:• .L:7'1._9 i•••1 yY,is .•':st!a.,:Ci:�:i>+. 'e>i`r�=t.{•'1.:.xtf'►►l�: J.�.•S .�1,:LYI:.r�•.i>•t1•. �ir/::k�,k:::fiaE>.a>s.r..:.3:':: i1.'olN�Iirn.c.e.'ISP y.e,•.. .d,.-.r1,-'�1Ji i.I<.::t-,x•rT:al{•'.�;'•�•a,},w':.r.,x,,{•.,i8.9I/'1hr..rlI;�jl.d::I:1�� t'-«.:_.� -'«:-.-11,k•i-.1[r:-•�'%-1 ::aiiF.!l:l., . i!v.'r:•. S%�'.i Lf>r:C•,--:- :, 7ia:�s;C:l; ..1.00,000 15000• 180;000CVS PRISON 013,__ ••,�.Y.f::, ! f,i YSR rl>''-•.l1�:!r 1'1r�"a>'r SI,.Z�.`k•ff':• _-...<. l:.'4.•.•.>iE,'•.,? ri •st�l:�r'�`:-._.. i>1{ .e=2L'ii .f �:I>'.Y-. , i l�.'.Y..-.•.Y..-f.. :r ir i r.ifrirw�3r18i:9: t.Y.t E'ir• ryr 800. _ .l!:•!l ,`•i fi:!...i..i....r.M. 5' K`�>00Y,WTR&SEW 6014 _ 8,000 r : • , - r ••+1.ti':. . l `. ilk • k J0 1' ! / 7 Y 1•': • •-. ra!/! : ' rt �i• 'i�l:i-'IC•�-I- >I:�':.ii':I:�t'd� ii. s'i' i' .r ''^, .d•a. �!.:!mo, c• •r!.'e:: :'�r'_'i': �:1FF.':,:'.k:li'i•x ', 6•.5a: }. Y<r.'�t:-'r�t0?:r rY>!• -1:N Cr3:<.:i.:' .61100!re.0.1zi::'Ya>'i'�r:Yiid-:i<-;,•" 'i >N �:fi>!:!'i6051 . 1 , tr WASTE DISP - 6,000. •4 •: . r..'� :>•iY.¢',1. ''/ l '.' [ s•..('., :J-: .a"i, �y:'•+.•.. :J•:'•' t'' 's': 'J. ', 'i �`k� i't 1' 4. ..c. .c"r• f �, rr...Z ,'i'.,;j1y'.. .'I 1� Ili•'i� tik- >:i. .►: .>::!. '>:- !r >7'. 7 i r''" l [ f•. •:wl� � s J i!' r' .�i .i , '�i Lir '-r•i7',s: 1, :.f G't •'.j,.. r,i.':::..J.. :Y!J:� iJ.J:i::l�:C:�;� •. /" .� Y•,. : �. .�.. -r• 1 1 / �% 1•� .•s tr . r+<">i •i:.1 '•F".,•'�• 'etl:I`.�;1<,.I�•i'i,l' ,..'.. r'''`al r k.k d:,..�'Y:,.kt>.•..+ . ,1r::rai> :a•. .. .•-_ ..:�-.. .._......- orf-'•>lf-i : :'r• - 'i: t1..7':.::� .Y•.��;� 1 «1 , •T VEH R&M 601 8_ _ - - ••. 1•: -r r.[•. :•,'1•C :•V•'�' '�rP a •'•r::::'e-. 1' r� 1 I r 1 f' r!': .•f.••_f•+ y.Y \'• ,•.r •'y,e'f'1'}`<✓1++,v- C': yl !- n:f.l .a.7•<: ai.u•i,:lrf1131. _ ,.I•. �. L:f. „'i ,•, y.r. s_• i i'i[r[-.1>,1.1 S•#.: •1��i':'i ••[••!.><n.l 1.<'K ►•a i �{:. '1 •►, `'i-1 {`�' i:'- :�'�. i'=. '�•1 �•"i:•'1'�i'i'Y$<11 .>:1}' i 7' • tis J. ..« 'te! 1 .r: _ .•J•. •.1. f t.. •.��.•.^� r� .1>...ti•L..�!' .:.1>!�`•:: k <. ,, .r.,r< .YI[ .Y<« [•:v 'lel 1'• '.Y,!•r ::"Y::�: !rr: ,'r'r •t' 'is x. 't•e _ 1 J•.>. i !•. .i.- 1.4 i:!K•1• .I! .r• rti: �';:':':'. yy�1 'YS - i}•.;rr ,'. .•7'4.. 1.l S��aid3• > a' #is ,f. f' ' ': ti�' ,� 1 .6'i i J it� 3==� i�::i,:.,;:'<;,- ". ?:: `''�'. °i?•�1 I. .r'.!"�mss' .i:_�.Y•+ :f:�-• '•j' r '-:N. '•1' 1.1 1, "r •1 i �1 T•. r'!Y•'1 1 -1 1 •1 1.I ..1 ... . `h .:•T•�. yl�:�i�f:�:"1 �• �y}��i ` 1�'!-'.:.: d. �1r!'SN:.�Ly,I'�.11,.. ./':.?,..1�. �I:i.f. .. . .-C a•t....i'aFN r.<({.,.. r,..�1...3": r .x.1° . i•:•. .I•,��Jl:'?:':'r:....r!t-: :_ .. _�_> �l: .LF,: I-•:.'•Y,LC•�i'I.ri:�-L:•s...�i�at1 EQUIP R&M 6019_ _ 3;500 21119 .,...::::,.....,..1.....•••,...,,:r.:...;..:090. " 4,000': Twn Clerk area copier,Admin copier,color copier :•- �. - :- I - 9•1-f-4,-,- i:i' �i:�'� .i.k..,fa: +.;'.? :.i .t :.P- ,•��^r-^ i:� '•i::� 1 • i':�•' iY•{.,!'�^:e �F ..rd d. ,[...iL J:. .�:�I.►.r- •11 } .�':.: :.y":w" :!t .a fx . ;,.e�r-i •r..-,....� . •�.�� I. �"1"� ;G',f:7.=-..t: l:�...l.: • .,'t J.�::!.f!: :•li'.,.r.•.<•�.r .N':. ..3... ..'�f. ii .•>-d.r?•I; i.,,,SS.,1. •;r• .,• - ..�s; 'T::1��5::7':9.:..�+ •i?.:i _•„':..,. •.t.. •i., � Y. .�. [<.>.l. ::a r r'iL''i l':�•> i i'L.T!'t�'b': z.l:a'.•1.•,•:i:.'•$•:. I 3''r: T, ..�-: :r?�[:-,.--1.']^,. K.l.' F� .�. � �. ,if'.! i,. t•: Y•. •i T.. .YY•� _ .::- r.r::'7�'�.i.�i�� t ��3�.i.'Ceb r :>.: ..�: t >e•• C :=*.> t•: to .<� .>� •s� iia: ,.!.;::`:":.::. . .:t •a.`r.. '•1 .1. '1-'t'� x3`-�1 !!':, �' AJC 1.<: , •r' �x '►i.i' 1. .I .:y-,i•':[?�� ..>.< s3-••r�. - ..fel!':.f, s... r: .J{r •ti ',If::::{'>�►: #'!"i ..�.. 41: i�is::;::F�>f`1`i::�-i'N.1':'1�1:,7�.t�.�1'.�I.>I'r�!a}.[F:�::l�i.''1.k.1'tF'iih t:..{:I"!u..8:.►'F'�..it:.:I.,..i...rf ., :, ., ... .:�5`:x«.. ...r..-•.+. .... BLDG R&M 6020_ _ 10,040 175 :20{3:: _ , '. .:!I..,� 'ir, ,: <•.a« : . . .: -i`♦, =: r;- .. : r� ', < iY,I..a.<.1_>• ''1>i:f <.J1:<'_q•>L..1.1 l• .'r>, >.>'«<I .,.!"i:i\ J'!',: I^.Y1•j•'. = 1.`:iiit..r1{R1:•1.itik 1.h.tS 'aYaI«6Ya !. l. r! r1 I::i5r.'[. 0y 0->'>..<ai��r�-- • 3:: • Y?S' '1.rLaJ.srf5s"0s00-v«, {l':.;,..,45:,,,-;-;!....i'-'!....:::.'.1'i::!1.i.:::-'00',,,RENTALS 6025 _ Color Copier ' : I . 2t i' :'E'r'< c'� �1 <!S � � 1 � �( 1 I�,:i:l[ �`:4[...! Ys�1l� • � < i" [ �s : ce; r1 t `E. ...-zx..!z:^r';`�:�i.._ :t•+: �, -' Y -':.115;40 0 • • - :s [ n'2.'�is K i ' Y, i< 1.i:i,� :t> °:f � 4f,'.. i.00,.000 38,806' . :._- : 154;0002. .�N«�i- :(f•i� `r'fF3 •.,•1ra•',S �- ', < la.7 .�<. ... .� INSURANCE 6026 _ 1: i:'1 •.'!,•e . �'• .': ` :3 <•..rr . • • -.1 • i ': •• : r�.: F�: ._• 4;� �.::'.i , Kr a'aL r" s.tk!�'.i,.!'.I1,e>> i,•'I 'Iii J :.-;:::h�J62. tl•Yi}N,''.lr _' '1 l.1C-I,I: .!h1',1I'yi 6j If-��I. 1•►• 1►J.:[r•I1l,:[Sf:.ar.11Y7r•l�t..•i.>iSr'l.i�.1',��: r�•it1•r -ri•,'_ce �'1�!r<� si.•• 3:ri:i'i'Viit53r'r`-.a: s r 3I!'a 'i:.,�• 44a{.: I:..�.Y:..J.II<T.Ir. ✓ :>. _-POSTAGE 9_ , 1. .. • S; <•r-ie. • d. �. ' • ..:e. [ :• ' � :4':!•.�t �. i' ,",.r[.+.r:+ j7N'2r'-1 Ai�: .i 0- +.1:•>�•... t'r._1.•.:'•.-tr�:i-�.rf.`� :iT•S ': tera •`i 1 'f.c•':- =-3+.r i i•t^:. •r` 3.:.:if• :s•1. i :<�y7t'i3'#�''▪.:1: �,r:- 4z.1i'si�:.}�v/.�J,...,. .,l.1�•y.,a .,.:.:�id. ' i> X .�:fYs> .4< .:! s: i:l/ :!� .r l;.1::•�i: k J> i �•�.I'-..:_ ...i.r.a.r�....r_t:J.: ... -i -C � J j. • PRINTING 1 _ aR.. i •I.� !I•vi:=•rn••ri.- ,,:>_ >y. '•>"^'t-' 'sti::,-.::6i'tio::i 1•:�Yt1. !�' >y 1:+: .�.. rf 1•'1['.7i. . :. ..e.;;: ti•Il: 1't `4r- .:r,�� _IV1:i;iM. 2r„ k-?:=: \:�_. . '1 .�'. d„.}ZL .i"'�•!, ley. ..rt .L'i['d`: <:.'i!«r,r ,�1=j� �q.ti:�. ..� ••�It -d. :>'< •::,: .e3ff•!•„- .i•. .!L'.?Xs'.. .h: ;•,••,�II:.�•t�>•Y fr ,t• >i[•1• ;, Nr• �a t•. .�'r .3:%`��:>"�:•: t••+r•: ter• .�:>.e:{>.,. ,,aa,,•''I�r•1 <„._i.s•1!;1•i'[r Y i► rYl :1'•1'N:,Il[N;•_:'I"'0'i'�1 k n 1.••,ii r�'1'f i l Y11 n r.44•I,Il c J;•4 1�:. Y "1 t:J::� so.�}�•ss r[r•a�, ,a- ..a :lt^=- <..x>a.:•:::. >'a'+. • M. .r,r. ..11. �. _:.. :>.r.'•"•'►:'. �.�►i<• ':z='i = ♦•> :e. 3::3•.. a`it';i=,� r'•. 't L t 1 1 �' �'� 1 r.IC". 'f:. .11 J:' .,. >� 'f•• '•Y-•: 1 eJ, 1 ':[.._.. >rtr."11'..._.1-.1_.,I!'�:•-------------- -. _ [ .`iN'IN:r'�r'a`•Y��[��-� •,•i.!'.ri'y.::i<'i'>:�''1•1=•i'"`v`•i':r!'E.'. f•rti<v .. 1'�zF ,�e•• z•- .. .... :,71...r:,.:c••yC�:''.i:`!�a'r:!.:.�.�}.,_.�...,-.i,....i.�t:r.•.. .,..'c•.p:..•:E.. TRAVEL 6034- _ 15,0042,683 :;':15,000. °: 15,000 Boards&Commissions Training • • • ••''15,000 L! n.<.; .,,. .r. •/.J, w•.j i. ,>-,fi• a.,'+v d. '�a.. .i2 .I.-r,,.:. >:: t..: [ - I .• . -.•- •- .. � . i.:# ^7:"►i>'.'ai. ':��. 'r-. -I-r t I I I 'i' moi. L r .-.,, •al^r.=. 1 �,. ,.h•: I ::i', •.r•:.u"•ta•I r l r r'.1 :i:=J ,r,.� .St< :a..5.::►.,t. .:'s' 19. ii:•'.-w..ti�'.::t i xz:.> �: r Y r , [ [ _:. F t'�!-.•. E F`._ -j ,e.•.�.,�S:-.> {. S � ..>. _ - .11" r E'?'s r I�o!' ',EI;t.1. <4'J-'t... 7 :�•'?:� ��!•u•:�c•.s. N. I. r'tl r.. .Y.1' ryn't,I:r= 1'rF '[ [ 'h r t�' a >[r•e : - ::r •;�:.+ A. -s t. 1• p n '!t. +�:� �- a Y: i ;>'. :•3: - '•= d° - _i-_.c./�•r'r:}°'ri .,(. •- > r.I 1 K'•:t •�l' i %'!.'.J:• '.k... !.i':P ..1 �i art :t! :#.R.#. I. X11. •r.' •r t-. 'a I r •[�•[• 7 1 1,{i. �"r:'t '�.••r.'r�tG�n•.�i�l.�l.r �! 'i' t. d�E�• .�[•.��.,r7'•.•r.� ..-'rale:,.=.•.�1 v.'r�..-•1,,:'1."ra:._... .:r.:..rl:r... .. ..- -. 'I...r'S99 4.f. 3. :/. t :,. ;k; ..�.,. - . �.,•v N:!.r.-. ^�. ,�V?:: :�...f.�.S+•:�:i�•I�f:�Fi::•t6'�.J: 'X'. �....t ,N;� t........ <.I :',i:_' :�.: MEMBER&SUBSCRIP 6035 .x„- '�f-=.=1 �: .�:::.::,•�,'::t::a.:>:;`!:?:d:t;=': - 1,250 6,297 , :. •6;500:: I. 3,000 Alliance for innovation :: •• •' 2,500 Pima County Recorder 500 9 i•- f I'wi' ,i �r { i '{'r r .ii .r p i •h•! , _<, Z..:"'• 1f�.;...., ,'.{`_':,.•!�' !r !.f:: .I.S •f••s .l;. •:s's•d. 1'3.!'F't F.:<•.�:S•',f>:r:s.•t�, :�3[•t��[':'s.! ';' �:•� � �'.i: .,:•�y��:L';.1 i�' �.•.r :.•!..s i>r•��i:`•!':'i'.!.�..{>!'•:t•['('•i'•:i• }1d>•:-;r['i- I'j ,.{.r. ;s.,. .�'F:•,i L e..:.�:'rlP.-. i 1 .ir--= i•''t.►iti-t!<'t':.: ...E S i,s�•as^.:t'•> ►<,,t; ,_�_►�.::>'<..,.:e.t.:art :<..,.r,..-t-t�t'.•I.Ir.,l-:<.I.s,r<at<,r.t•►r..i tr.t•t-+1> L.:. y �iqi ,�I.J1;P:"' ..1. i �;P. r�: :rl.• ,F' >! I• ..fl<.,"•'t,i„tr�.fi}:�..:::� . ....t..�... a.. ..[.l•... r•, ..�. f.... t..i.l if•..,.t[ •,r',t••.rJ,: 1.: ...-. .... x. ..Lni:Y�<.. '.r�=•• .-.<r •f: .i R:. ,1.- -1. �r`• ::r='-:i •'rr fyS'>•: `L- 1't•i r,t,I�, ,,<F 1;'t::. f'd' ^E! n _ti• �1: ^- �1 ••�;_a!• c::j«:' .> }" y1 - .• >J- ::-:...-:J�..i:...11:..:< 7 r.r:.��-C.�i..,.•t.:Y rl:':,.. :I, :��w 1;!.i,.f�S.L'.r':�ii SUPPLIES 6037 12,000 3,557 '.:10,000•• Admin Area Supplies(Shared) • •'1.0;000' • :.wr':':1,<V �•I:rx•tat.nr,ri�et•tt:..r.,:.:>-.,.1...>ra,,>.:• s..i>t ►•[x rr►yxt•>n:.:.:I..:a. i. :a• . . d'iaa+114• r=<`'i't•I�•a rw�•a •Y.t la:1 .4 ,ti. ,1„►A.:1.,•,s: :.R-.I'>e.=r• a••T•k. :r^.xa q<•a �><�>e. '.: r i .}..aJ::Ilt:.,a::S,r :Y;. •.k^• ::•<r x-.� I,P P:7' 1 t t':.►•iA +cP':' JC :'<•:4• ► :.,►.r•�.'tia,.,-.►•.,. ..i �i. •I' :d' .i ,�: �°a'Y%'.r•l..:I.r r..�� Is a>.I c i ��r :r:• !a:<t-�:.': � I a. •►' i.' :[a- �V .I:a•t♦4i<i A'•.. Q^�-� .j'. fl�5 .k '�! fl.:Nal. a �:i� �>i: [` •.a••:!�" 'trt' r. 1 •�,�",�, �-tA. I,�:c: Ery.• 1.:,�', 3 F:i>. .•a<�..L<.•; .'!:i<:•.��••�{- .ail:• �: :;a.'' .:, GAS&ELEC .r_ 6I,d0a 38.Y}..,. -.. .•.. _"� •,1t.A....,.,•,1>,.I:1.•.ki.r+l:,r.�.....I•i'.i.;��r:'.i:.!'.i.?.L..:,a1.�•;��.�i.!i..fl:1 1!,.�:�N.�,.:'t„$ !�0�$,0.•1•0fir.n,:,. 42;740 2,740 .�::..•'.rA..y.a.. .:}<7a�0:"•r:•1;0a":f•l'0..•:`0bL•• __..fw1•,..•...•�-::::lr,'E:.•>^i<�,.:•r::.+<l s.>ypY:+-'::1rr.,:�.L . energy energy eficiency audit savings - _ • a�i,iw■ .c,t,'zr.i:.t,?:•:t::.!:.s;:c:F'�!�.: s.Y .'..F ',s: d=. .e.:s 2.s.•.:.:. 1. r.. .!' I•.,s�:'' },.1,:,t.::[°:. �!1 t�:.1" .. 1 ':I'• :I t.:: < •'.:Fh?,::,:1:-.:r. ..I.:t-!.:t: a,•:'• :a=::. •.1. ,�•� t�th!•I..fx,l.t:i,:!Lj,:. I..t�th.iR:l::1?�:'��,_ Y .Y�'i:I�.;J.,.>, Y IY: .,IJ:, F Vit'.' •r••:�i -':E•;i .,t{:V,•'L ::t♦ 1.: _ , [-t'i�I�: .s•t• E .t '.'.s 7 L+..P-..`J'i K •ir: J E.:ii«!-: :., t•:•! i'-!"w!•!I < .n. ar •1. I>, .a .<; .:RC�a=•.:�<:-:�. •7:'. ''r r.<•' !r <:.. •>!•:*.r.L'_!.• •t-1.- <_ {'i.a / .�'.•i{i'#:.3i7.a J•tr-: .r:: -i='•r. •'F.. -.r', it <,!•s:: ;':"• ••'kk' ,t'I11.N :t•. r .•r:�' :}- :[-'4 .i 7. ''F..:.a s.�' r.' I :. Via' .•s !•:..-. :.,. r , ..} :p,, ,( x 'i.•'t J 'd. I i' Pt. Y t 4•' �'J '-i -'I' Vii'"!ta , '��,. 1. EZ •I Yfl' �'• •',J•: :.�• ••. .. .Ikr.... .!. •.<.i:: ,. .S. .h-.J d!•,.1•:,i'>i-i f�•'':F�:is�� 'ems' :r-" �!+% {. '.�_..{:�'R k..i:.. 1......!.. .,. E s','r.-?.i:.,i�.�.:•E:.1'J v,rl.:=..i�:.�Jrt+E i !. r;.<L':f:r .. r<'r "'<'r` GAS&OIL 6039 : ::..�.._,:` :s �i 'Ir.�'•.� .r •.1''i. I - J � rS, �;.. .l :'k ,i.. �'s t <. ?I: L. �:�;•.. F;:i =!!'.!itJ' r.; '.s•1 1:.1 ,i':'r.n;�L'd°.:'.t•,, :.{,.::r!'•��fi is•+c.�:.,.ts£:�.��,E '.�::•' rr((,,:•:� :;r]�•a/�'s ;.�. t_r L;• i':.�•:•• j:• rj.•.> :i.,.,.•>.t;. .+'_' _7�'' 2. :S,L:F,. ,r d.I•�•�s::••,. .y,. :Y',. .n>: r. s'a 1e". h .a.,h�'••<. et•. i t:::` :�:' •.!a.. ..!�.,c.;y.j..t, �1:�:•d'z .f..t � .{r... ):"!, :'I: •,I►! :+: 3 •t•t •-! :t>• :,!> r'i r :A r M•4:•'•t� it 9.i.'i Y[ E'a<t''a lr..!: -.I lj,, _.z•. . ..K.T i .R.^. .f:: I t a[�:.a!'.fi':}�'z•,_I_r�. `j F:S .a.,.a't��:�• •�'e i� r} • e.a• <...�: ..�.�-... ... __.. ..r.[. ,� •`�':i:.°�siJ�.►.:�tt�!•+i.:y+.:�3.... `.' =•:t,...L� ,,,,{•.ai r,�..-:�:ria:•.``' MISC OTHER 8045 • r ... ..��:-��:: i♦ ��: .. 'i..�._:'_:�,>: t rrl••• '�� • 30,000 13,402 X0;0.00: :2'7 Q50 Coffee Service .... :3,1Q0- Shred It • "' Bank Fees • 54 Kitchen Supplies Misc Other(plaques,nameplates,various) '" 1500 -•I r. is a .a.... z.•1 f: s 1��a? $ .� '!'• .!. =.E'�:!`�. .i. •I- _,:_ ::r!�•r•:_'•ice• a.k- :,li j. '>:: ?'d.' !t ltd.; } 1:.7~ i' y ;:r"Gh' �t;t..i' ,•. i. r P. ..p' J' ..r •�K' :>is a�_ s.':�:�a>.I <•1 S T `i �'r' r•i:F :1i' .-C�%C''::::+}:i ,�t 1 7 yF .I' ,,• !!•• :h•i_.a+•r Y•t w• } rel Y. ^Y t:�'�i-r Fi.:r"!'�' r2>E i�1i'r r�I•n =•l=•-•r• 'a <F..-J [.}t:,.J_•. [ I' I `4t I i• .i f'`� • .•-li.^ ..Z � i � -1 I..E 4. '�'EJr.-2. :+I�. .J. < ..:5:!1.:..:e.: I :I _ .�.� �•3'.:i:r.:,�.Yr. ti�f::i:�'- �3[ �,',�.. .r _ .,k ..... ,.F►.r ...:..+a:.,:,�::..r:'r!... ..,...,).�ir�::•�.:!.,.:.i.I-i•.I.,isi'.:�::.i3�::=E-is.I�iaJ:itJ�.F.'F=��>;:(zs•7}:•l ..i��0; ANNEX 6050_ - 10x,000 111 •: TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Tobin Rosen, Town Attorney Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director Craig Civalier, Town Engineer SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT STUDIES, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding departmental management studies. Please provide information on previous management studies that have been done for Departments within the Town. Which departments have had them?What were the dates, cost of the studies and the findings? DISCUSSION Public Works The Town contracted with The Mercer Group, Inc. in May 2007 for the Public Works Management Study and Strategic Plan in the amount of$51,000. The Final Report was presented to Mayor and Council in August 2008. The Major Findings and recommendations were implemented and continue to be a focus as part of the Management Study and Strategic Plan. 1. High level of responsiveness to citizen and customer needs, as well as a strong commitment to resolution of service requests, maintenance of Town's infrastructure, and excellent service delivery. 2. Senior management team is skilled, experienced, and respected internally and externally. 3. Likewise, employees are skilled, experienced and dedicated. 4. Engineering services are effectively performed, with a strong emphasis on construction management and inspection. 5. Transit is providing an excellent service in Coyote Run. 6. Operatons is strengthening operations management practices, particularly through the Crew leader Model that has been fully implemented. 7. The asset management and stormwater management services have been implemented. The Cartegraph system has been installed and is on track of managing the numbers (time use for people and equipment, work and projects accomplished) for Streets, Traffic, Pavement Management, Fleet and Facilities. 8. Development Review has fully implemented the Permits Plus system, optimizing the Development Review process from the Engineering side. 9. The Fleet Maintenance Program was added to the Operations Division as recommended in the Study. 10. The Public Works Organization should consider restructuring its organization to reflect the shift from a growth/development focus to a maintenance focus. As the shift occurs the size and number of crews will need to expand to meet the need for increased maintenance activities performed. Legal The Town hired the consulting firm of Management Partners to conduct a study of the Town Attorney's Office in 2007 at a cost of approximately $36,000. The report, which was presented to the Council in March 2008, concluded that the office is appropriately managed and that the staffing levels of both the Prosecution and Civil Divisions of the Town Attorney's Office were appropriate for a town the size of Oro Valley. Because of subsequent budgetary reductions and the ongoing hiring freeze, the Town Attorney's Office has lost two of the six positions that it had in its Civil Division since the time of the report. The report did include some specific management recommendations for the Town Attorney's Office. However, most of the suggestions identified in the report had already begun to be implemented within the office or are not practicably capable of being implemented presently due to ongoing budget constraints. Building Safety The Town contracted with Matrix Consulting Group in April 2006 to perform the management study of the building permit process as requested by Council for a fee of$39,000. The Management Study of the Building Permit Process Report was presented at the Town Council Study Session on August 30, 2006. At that time, Council directed staff to develop an Implementation Plan. The Implementation Plan was developed, presented and approved by Council in December 2006. Based on the Management Study, there were three key areas for improvement in order to reach the goal of enhancing customer satisfaction and altering the perception that it is difficult to develop projects in the Town of Oro Valley: 1. Improve the permitting process: Improve cycle time of plan checking by all departments Provide on-line and over-the-counter processes Single point of responsibility/case management 2. Improve the inspection process: Expand commercial inspection capacity Clear communication of inspection reports, code citation(s), and on-line access to the reports Consistency of inspection comments and in-field policies 3. Provide easy access to information: Access to Building Safety information s Access to all Organizational Unit's project status and comments during the plan check/ permit process Access to Inspection Report detail during construction There were also a number of critical variables that had to be included in the Implementation Plan for the successful attainment of these goals as follows: Process Improvements 1. Permits Plus Expansion of Permits Plus capability Expand Permits Plus use to all Organization Units in the permitting process 2. Case Management System -Single point of responsibility (Asst. Building Official)for building permit plan check process/ resolving delays -All Divisions involvement in creating cycle time goals & process improvements 3. On-line and Over-the-counter permits -Web and process development -Revised and/or Expanded job duties Staffing Improvements, 1. Staff Addition of one (1) Commercial Plans Examiner -Revised and/or Expanded job duties 2. Training -To accomplish revised and/or expanded job duties -Keep current, knowledgeable and provide consistency in the application of codes and practices Communication Improvements 1. Process/Information/Communication -Ability to provide code citations and access to inspection reports by customers&Town staff -Web-based checklists, typical comments, code interpretations, new requirements and 'Home Improvement Center' to navigate the process The Implementation Plan was completed and a status update was presented to Council in June 2009. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager/Finance Director Betty Dickens, Human Resources Director Kevin Verville, Information Technology Director George Dunscomb, Town Magistrate Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director Daniel Sharp, Chief of Police Craig Civalier, Town Engineer SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING SERVICE REDUCTIONS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding service reductions. Please describe what services in any department have been reduced based on the budget reductions this year and what further reductions are anticipated next year. DISCUSSION Building Safety The Building Safety Department had two administrative support positions: Office Specialist and Sr. Office Assistant. The Office Specialist position provided all administrative support for the department while the Sr. Office Assistant position primarily provided the public interface for all three departments in the building (Planning &Zoning, Public Works and Building Safety); answering the phone, greeting customers, and responding to requests for service. In June 2009 the Office Specialist position was vacated and has remained vacant due to the hiring freeze. All administrative duties for the department were reassigned to the Sr. Office Assistant, the phone system has been automated rather than direct personal contact, and walk-in customers now ring a bell for service, In addition, the Sr. Permit Technician position was eliminated for FY 09/10. This was one of three Permit Technician positions that provide the intake and issuance of permits for all three departments in the building. As a result, when one of the two remaining Technicians is on vacation or sick, there is no one to cover lunch time or other short absences necessary in the course of the day. Although this has reduced the ability to respond and process permits as quickly as in the past, we have been able to mitigate this by cross training Inspectors to perform i this duty as time permits due. Some of the more labor-intensive over-the-counter permits, such as model pools and spas, previously provided by the Permit Technicians, have been eliminated. Due to the economic downturn, which has continued to affect the building community, we also reduced force by two positions in February 2010 (Assistant Building Official and Inspector). In addition, there are two planned retirements at the end of this fiscal year and these positions are intended to remain vacant (Plans Examiner and Inspector). The Department will continue to meet timeline goals for review and inspection in the coming year, provided there is no significant growth in building activity. Should building activity increase, service levels will need to be adjusted or vacancies will need to be filled. Finance The main budget reductions in the Finance Department are associated with 2 vacant positions: Senior Office Specialist and Payroll Specialist. As a result, the duties associated with these two vacancies have been taken on by remaining Finance Department staff and the Town Manager's administrative support staff. This includes duties such as minute taking and packet preparation for Finance & Bond Committee meetings (Sr. Office Specialist in Town Manager's Dept.); liability insurance claims administration (shared between Accounting Supervisor and Risk Manager in HR); process daily bank deposit (Finance Analyst); processing bi-weekly payroll (shared by Accounting Supervisor and Sr. Accountant); reconciliation of benefit billings (Sr. Accountant); quarterly payroll tax reports (Sr. Accountant); and office supply ordering (Sr. Office Specialist in Town Manager's Dept.). Human Resources Numerous program needs identified and/or implemented by the former HR Director, Sandra Abbey, have been placed on hold. The majority of these programs address employee and organizational development, key performance competencies. Department Directors have provided the new HR Director with numerous requests for specific employee support for their immediate work groups. The HR Analyst position became vacant on 09/26/09. TOV HR Specialists and the Safety and Risk Management Manager picked up additional duties due to this vacancy. The current workload for staff is high and HR has sought volunteer and/or intern support options without success. Routine tasks (filing, MUNIS maintenance) are being postponed in order to meet day- to-day customer requests, needs, and emergencies. The high work load has resulted in a raised level of stress and anxiety for staff. Staff are extremely aware of the responsibility of HR and Safety to address the needs of employees, their families and injuries or emergencies in a timely and accurate manner. HR and Safety service support to personnel is directly linked to organizational success. Management and personnel development programs are on hold for the majority of department staff. A HR needs assessment has identified gaps for training and development needs in the areas of communication skills, performance management, team building, team management, organizational values, leadership, supervisory skills, customer service, employee relations issue management, succession I workforce management, organization innovation and TOV policies, procedures and administrative directives. These programs and services have been placed on hold. When the discussions concerning the creation of the Safety Managers position were first initiated, the HR Department had a three person staff and a Director. The discussion centered on the added responsibilities of the new dual role, Safety and Risk Management, and the ability of one person to handle that effectively. It was felt that a Safety Specialist would be a necessary addition and that between the three HR staff members, administrative needs generated by the Safety& Risk Mgt. office would be shared and easily accomplished. Since that time, with the loss of one HR staff member and the negation of the Safety Specialist idea, all administrative work is handled by the Safety and Risk Manager. Additionally, occasional overload experienced by the two remaining HR staff members, or the Director, necessitates the Safety and Risk Manager to suspend his duties to provide assistance. This staff reduction has and continues to cause the Safety and Risk Manager to prioritize his responsibilities, activities and his time in very creative ways, but not necessarily those consistent with HR best practice. Information Technology GIS Tasks delayed or not completed due to of the elimination of the GIS Technician position: - Data updates from Pima County (mostly parcels and streets, updating the streets requires a lot of manual labeling) - Maintenance of existing data (keeping current versions of layers in the geodatabase, updating and cleaning up the PAD/GP/Zoning layers) - Online mapping (not able to devote the amount of time necessary) - Keeping the various maps around town at the most current version (framed maps in the Kachina room, maps in the drawers, etc) Larger projects (ESLO, CarteGraph, etc) consume a lot of time, thus leaving less time for projects that a GIS Tech would normally do - Maintaining the OVGIS map that the planners use (still have some damaged or missing data that needs to be recreated and/or relocated from the server crash) Magistrate Court The Court has implemented the following service reductions: Number of Warrants issued. Number of postcards and phone calls to defendants. Number of scanned documents. Further reductions would impede the court's ability to process cases as mandated by Arizona law. Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation has implemented the following service reductions: Aquatics: In November, the Oro Valley Municipal Pool began closing on Sundays. It is anticipated that the pool will remain closed on Sundays until Memorial Day. For FY 10/11, the pool will remain closed on Sundays and will be closed an additional five hours each day, Monday—Saturday, during the fall, winter and spring seasons. This will impact public swim as well as swim teams. The spring swimming lessons, the "Dive-In" special event (movie at the pool), and the Egg Dive have been suspended for this year, and are not planned for FY 10/11. Parks: Burnt out ball field lights are now scheduled for replacement annually, rather than semi- annually. Although it is still safe to play, it is not the preferred schedule by ball teams. This practice will remain in effect for FY 10/11. Due to the increased workload (caused by the elimination of contracted landscapers), the baseball and softball infields are not being groomed on a set schedule, but rather when staff have time to fit it in. Additionally, on occasion the Parks staff relies on teams using the fields to manually drag the fields themselves. This practice will remain in effect for FY 10/11. A part time Park Monitor position, which is currently vacant, is recommended to remain vacant for FY 10/11. This decreases the number of Parks staff available to perform park maintenance, and will continue to result in a decrease of 20 hours of maintenance being accomplished at the parks each week. This year, facility usage fees for ramadas, courts and ball fields were increased, affecting all users. For FY 10/11, staff will recommend another incremental increase in facility usage fees to be implemented on January 1, 2011. For FY 10/11, cuts are recommended in operations and maintenance in all areas, representing a reduction in fertilizer and water for all non-field grassy areas at James D. Kriegh Park and Riverfront Park. Recreation: This year, fees were substantially increased for Summer Camp and Junior Golf, affecting families of school age children in these programs and resulting in decreased participation. Additionally, one of the three summer camp sites were eliminated. For FY 10/11, another summer camp site will be eliminated, leaving one operational camp at Copper Creek Elementary School with a capacity of 200 participants each week. Special Events: The Parks & Recreation Department works with a number of special events, providing venues, staff support, equipment, and other related services. Due to the elimination of community funding, any special events held in Town that are dependant on Town funding and/or in-kind services will have to either pay for all services, move the event to another jurisdiction, or cancel the event. It is unclear at this time which events—such as IronKids, the SAACA Arts Festival and the Arizona Distance Classic-will take place in Oro Valley without community funding and in-kind services. Planning and Zoning Services in Planning & Zoning are primarily in service to customers (the general public, applicants, and business owners) rather than in quantitative programs that rely directly on budget allocations. The following Planning & Zoning programs have been or will be impacted by budget reductions: The Household Hazardous Waste Program was eliminated in the FY 09/10 budget. The Neighborhood Cleanup Program is proposed for elimination in the FY 10/11 budget. Police The Oro Valley Police Department is comprised of three Divisions: The Administrative Division (Office of the Chief of Police), the Field Services Division (FSD) and the Support Services Division (SSD). Most service reductions to date have come in the form of personnel cuts through attrition and hiring freezes. These cuts have included both civilian and sworn personnel from Communications (SSD), Records (SSD), Task Force Operations (SSD) and Patrol (FSD). In an effort to minimize the service reduction impact to the Oro Valley community, the OVPD has evaluated its patrol deployment methodology and will transition from a Squad System deployment to a Platoon System deployment in July 2010. This change will strategically reallocate or"stagger"the Police Department patrol resources during each 24 hour period, allowing the Police Department to enhance street coverage and ensure continued timely and appropriate responses to calls for service. However, the Platoon System makes consistency in supervision more challenging and scheduling Advanced Officer training more difficult. For FY 09/10, the OVPD reduced costs associated with the take-home vehicle fleet by 25 percent. This change has impacted the OVPD Command Staffs ability to get to significant incidents in a timely manner. it has also precluded most members of the Command Staff from conducting random audits on personnel. In addition, the OVPD has eliminated or reduced a number of community outreach and education programs. Events like "Investigate OVPD" and the annual "Police Easter Event" have been eliminated, while OVPD will remove one of its three annual Police Citizen Academies for FY 10/11. These programs were geared toward maintaining positive relationships with the public while educating them about the skills, abilities, and services of the OVPD. The annual OVPD Awards Ceremony has also been eliminated. This program was designed to formally recognize the heroic and outstanding performances by the men and women within the OVPD and residents of the Town. This event builds morale within the organization and strengthens the partnership shared by the OVPD and Oro Valley community. Public Works Public Works has made service level reductions in the Engineering and Development Review Divisions in the last two years. These reductions were market driven based on economic conditions. There was less demand for development review services; therefore, two staff members were retrained and reassigned to the Stormwater Utility and Fleet Maintenance programs, where there was an increased demand for services. The Engineering Division staff was reduced based on workload. The reorganization planned for Public Works to become part of Development Infrastructure Services will shift Traffic Engineering and Pavement Management sections from the Operations Division to the Engineering Division. This will allow more cross training and flexibility for staff assignments. Another area where there is reduction in services is our surface treatment program. The funding level was reduced from $1.2M last year to $700K this year. We have budgeted $700K for FY 10/11 as well. If this trend continues the Town's pavement surface condition rating will begin decline. This budget year we had planned to operate three street maintenance crews. Because of the hiring freeze the third crew never was realized. In FY 10/11 we have budgeted to run two larger street maintenance crews, In the future we will need to reassess staffing three street crews based on increases in infrastructure to maintain. As has been discussed with Council in study sessions, our transit division has been forced to reduce response to calls due to lack of drivers, whether volunteers or paid. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. i TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: April 23, 2010 TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Kevin Burke, Assistant to the Town Manager CC: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Department Directors SUBJECT: Response to Requests from Town Council Vice-Mayor Bill Garner • RFP clawback provisions • Cultural resources • Department of Development and Infrastructure • General Administration O&M Councilmember Mary Snider • Management Studies • Service reductions TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Brian Garrity, Procurement Administrator Tobin Rosen, Town Attorney SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING RFP CLAWBACK PROVISIONS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding RFP clawback provisions. What are the clawback provisions in our RFPs where if the Town awards a contract (professional services) but then cancels it, we are penalized? If we don't have such, should we put that language in place? DISCUSSION Clawback provisions are terms within a contract that require repayment of certain kinds of funds or compensation due to changed circumstances. These provisions generally exist in the financial sector and are used to allow a corporation to take back performance based compensation or bonuses if the information used to calculate that compensation later proves to be misleading or erroneous. Research indicates that these provisions have become increasingly popular since the credit/banking crisis saw many top executives getting huge compensation packages based on front-loaded earnings reporting that later dropped significantly in value. The Town does not have any performance based contracts of this type; therefore, there is no need for clawback provisions in our contracts at this time. If the Town were to enter into an agreement with a performance based compensation structure, a clawback provision may prove beneficial. Our standard cancellation clause allows the Town to cancel a contract with or without cause giving 30 days notice. In the event we terminate a contract the Town is liable for payment for services rendered prior to the effective date of the termination. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4,23.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING CULTURAL RESURCES AND DEPARTMENTAL CONSOLIDATION, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding Cultural Resources and departmental consolidation. This question relates to the consolidation of Parks, Recreation and Library with the addition of Cultural Resources under one department. Cultural Resources was always embedded in other departments and did not really exist as a separate budget entity; however, expecting a number of people to carry on dual assignments is a gamble. What kind of workload analysis was done?Also, where is the Operations & Maintenance line item for the new cultural resources? DISCUSSION Staff assessed the cultural resource (CR) workload impacts as follows: Property Management and Maintenance The proposed Parks, Recreation, Library and Cultural Resources Department (PRL&CR) will assume stewardship responsibility for tracking and monitoring CR plans and projects; however, significant cross-department coordination to support historic preservation projects, construction projects, utility issues, and safety mandates will continue. This coordination will temper the proposed departments' additional workload, but will provide for a point of responsibility for overall management and coordination. The Parks Division will continue to provide landscape maintenance at Steam Pump Ranch (SPR) with no new workload impacts anticipated. The Administration Division will assume responsibility for SPR scheduling, resulting in limited workload impacts due to restricted public access. Programs &Special Events The Recreation Division's workload will be reprioritized to accommodate event coordination at SPR. The Town will continue to partner with the Oro Valley Historical Society and other agencies when possible, to develop programs and special events. Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) The Administration Division has assessed the time required to support the HPC meetings and associated activities. These additional responsibilities will require ongoing assessment of the Division's workload, and adjustments will be made as necessary. Grants & Funding Department staff is currently responsible for a variable number of grant applications each year. Due to ever changing application processes and schedules, staff is adept at shifting priorities to insure timely application. Because of the priority of these potential funding opportunities, staff will continue to seek the assistance and expertise of other departments as necessary. Operations & Maintenance(O&M) Line Item The CR budgets, including the Steam Pump Ranch Fund, Honeybee Village Fund, and Naranja Town Site Fund have historically been stand alone funds not included in any one department. These funds, including the O&M line items for SPR, are included in the PRL&CR Program budget for FY 10/11. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE PROPOSED DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the proposed Department of Development and Infrastructure (DIS). For the last six months of 2010 (July- December 2010), the organizational structure is somewhat the same with three original departmental groups. Please explain when the transitions of personnel or savings will occur. Beginning in 2011 (Jan - June 2011), there appear to be inconsistencies with the two new super departments, Development and Infrastructure: In some cases a job description was left in but had no staffing listed. In other cases there is a job description and staffing but also the vacant column with whole numbers or a percentage like .33. (Even if you defend a placeholder for a whole number how do you justify a decimal in the vacant column?) DISCUSSION The transition of personnel under the consolidation plan, if approved, is recommended to become effective no later than July 1, 2010 and may occur as early as the adoption of the Town's Tentative Budget, proposed for May 19 or June 2, 2010. All savings associated with personnel vacancies and the reduction in force are already in place. The savings associated with one of the two retirements will be effective May 7, 2010 and the other as of July 1, 2010. Job positions shown as vacant, but not funded, are expected to remain vacant throughout the fiscal year. Should the building industry rebound and workload significantly increase, an evaluation and determination will need to be made to see if the existing workforce can maintain service levels, or if service levels need to be adjusted, or if the vacancy(s) need to be filled in the future due to critical expertise and experience necessary to accomplish the work. Other than the Transit Division, all staff positions are full time positions, we do not have any part-time staff positions. Staffing levels shown as percentages indicate that the staffing position is being shared among different programs and/or fund sources. RECOMMENDATION 1 CONCLUSION This report is for information only. _ r TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE MAYOR BILL GARNER'S REQUEST TO SEE THE LINE ITEM DETAIL FOR THE O&M SECTION OF GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice Mayor Garner's request to see the line item detail for the operations and maintenance section of the General Administration budget. DISCUSSION Please see the line item detail attached. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. FY 2010/11 ANNUAL BUDGET SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ( INPUT. :.. . 12/31/2009 YEAR=END- :::Department BUDGET ACTUAL .PROJECTION :Request • 0001 GENERAL FUND 20 OPERATIONS&MAINTENANCE I • rrr.11.r.rr.wrw. .. .. . 00011590 GA-O&M PROF SERV 6005_ _ 46,000• . 19,711 • ::.'46,000 :• .. • 101.;000, PPEP Crew Services State of the Town Address prep • • • 5,000 Intergov Costs/Mfeage • 25,000•• Mgmt.Retreat/Training • •• 10,000: Town Mgr.Search Firm • 29,000 Community Survey • ,:25;000• PC Animal Control Services • i •8;ooa PD Management Study • :.:. Parks Management Study ••• 74,500. Cost of Service Study....: M :.y 25,000 ... ..._......_..,.... ........ ... �..�.�.• '.,'•'aia�.i..T:. _i' ;r; r.r i.- ..c.. ;e''ea' � -f '�•.k�'3 ;} -rr'•':�..2;:2,.. :.i.;'•'�.. - c . ,.•!>!>t .•t :.�I.r +' iZtl :3>•,>E:::.t;:l::cl. ,!. ! ;a 1. s�:ilr l•:_r.sl....r.p .,Iti. y.;"!;' ¢, Y.^'t7�'}. - 't•R ,� -.3..:'� ,ay. .}rr..:'x':�l.11>:a>i':.::;:'::a ri>.1 .f.l r +.='I!.In•1. h. .1. �..��-_... t.. •1•� 3r j i. a .► r�ry- .t'if. '.�. I '1 'cJ'• �J:J:�iF .0. •J• !�7{a'�� 'f.. � <'' .�i.s .b:.•1 F'-'^• c•'s -i'.. : i.:1°. =�1.�.ifi�?:'.YIi.E' !.:�•:. .1.. -•r,•t.. t•1 ,��11��•t y. S:T'^ :.•il�... J v< :14:.- •:�4:s. :}• :;i" � 'iI:E �J 13,i .Z.J. a.Y '�'�..{` }y: "S.i..,i= 4 i:'•i:1 s d• 9��.i 1':fc[' €:i-ii.J�, •s: Ji- •i !�� 1, �J } •!t.; { ,�! .1'�ail;l'�,-!'iii'.!': -t�i`(!%i'°i-.ti:Ef'ia! �ir:1'�F•, '�.-: �'i.�-•4a< •< 7'•l t:J�'t4 r3'1. :.:/:. •,S,d:•}!^•• •% :I I' .!•/> .1(r; .,}:3 ��,,r l I.:y'-:,..yI:r�>!':::{'�f�}. 'J..•, 1'•1�i,:�{.�J t,-�'a'.��:L.2 i'1•11. :i•I�,!i„�-' :-�':r- .2i ,P.. ...- ':F''e':.: I' �".. i•'t1.I.-,�.�, _J ,•:K►s :•�s/�= L i}•,c�✓L: .t:%.:it I.f::::ri;:"-.a•�I'rr.i..a.c...:�4:'.<.k=:r.<!4.:.r11�a�.is,<:.t.•1.,.�y..�1!,fs,k:•..::i:h..;lr,_M:,.•JS i...L<_•.=_....`.i k....r_s s•...•,•r,_,_ r.r,:l Z�l•,�.t..}JI.._. .: '•�::!l.a�Z::k:t-.r.e..z r }.r-.rs�r3':�.-t.i.. ..a r.1 ..eY L� CVS PRISON 6013 - • 180,000 •19,279 1.00 000: '150.,000•. .tv• •b• .Y•-Y:",'-Y•.f • ^\•. '••-•, f:l, v.5�•!1'ri.:w •.;:y� • ;i"- 1 , '••! J's'J ::,;4;;(01.!1%;k:,,!:!:;!7;!;.,: i 1'�'!.•.•r.•• .Y�•:::-Z.-. _.J:'ii=i% _,.. .•yrr i: .i 1, i'�t-1!�<:::"i'•;;ti.:'E.[i'I:'4';:d�'�Ir,•E !::il. •;•.:i i:.'rJ•�• :'t.i a dda''::'s(1 ��i'r =R6 J�% I.. :r• s J�' J• • �{''•1 �r.'.'1'A:i:t'"It !f:�f�.'.,�A'+1'1•-I r'r^�:Iir4�f n�l�f�•1:i.S r ! .<..a> •.I•N t�'i' .1.:'1i, •i• �I i Ii.� #.•' ''s'i' ;i.:�.1, I. .i'. •i::` ff r 1• 1•J• is• f,�^C_ .1 �. .;. .i�••'JS, t:>��: 11, SI! :,: r•:-J:.r�•lr.l. "�". -Iq7"l i;•>, ....... ....... ...r r .,i .a �i.��... •>- •�i!!F�i l:� .<S. .E -f.• •!','i'1.,,: •!c{.�S'!>..lir!'"�''..� .:�l�`4fllo- !'r..:'�'JFs,: .Nc�. :'1s. .r�.:.;r.r�'.'s..%�e.. �<:`l r1!r2'I'7 tl�f�`. _ •WTR&SEW 6014_ - 8,000 3!188 ••• 000 :9,000.: 2 s 1.. .I., 1:•F:r:r:.rel'.Pc.r:.l!• 'i!rel�/ .i!`.� �.�! i::1. Y.:. I [. , ( r:r...I �:'s.:::i is•ii •€ rr� �,},I _•4 y. ,- i '�N E- ':r S. .f•1'. f•r•�.j,Ti!.•.'J it '-Y•,i!. :S• w.y. .... if: �.1 .1••� WASTE DISP 6015 - 6,000 1,865 f 000= :, 6,000' _ ':f :'1 '1• '.f'J_.L•:J•: 'a'�•-r„'.,' 1•a r' 1 !: k• •i•��T- ML:::... •ti' ':I% '.r f'il:,:• •.' is 'li. �`. ..S!. 7. F ..> / J+• 1 .l::f" 1. .a Vii:':•'•s:;:��' :IP' :ii'•!:ii�' !!a. •.i. ''i�a "f,.. .r.'`.Y .?. 'I •i _ .3 1 t;::. rte.ti-1::'.r. I•. �1� �1 !Y':aJ. %r.n :�-•I .I l� ItI �! ~t' .'!!. :�3 :- J-,. `r.�i 1 :>d:•.t.>: �>' .St.> �!'.i:> � .. J. P- ��• '.EJ•a� -:I`�i•.- i,.. _'4> , t � ..:>.._ .a�•i:_.... ..IJ-'S2f-:'i. :'s• r. - .. 'i: ,'1!' +'i . :'�' '!�i I` f"II•a.'. `h'k•:.. ..1.rl'i'�.i.1':r n.._is'r.. 1! ....>t•:• ,•.if:� ._ .. , r rc'i'a i. ti:.<. ilr-.• •I i 'r'ii•i>� -I`:�s' 1 k.9 k: �ltl�..r i.. VEH R&M 6018_ - - - :•a- r r �• '.•: ri;.•.•w•7' •"1.. -6 •n.l•'I:F•1`:�i { ►a.lE:('.I L�i 1' S ��''• .i •i. �� :1`I.t '1' . ��i'>.a� C e'i'.i i r S'�#��•i:i:� �-i a•i�I.>. F � .r� r. i •3': 'i e .r"s:: :'f':`�: .1�t t: r•Jf:w!r'��:a��"i'$:ii JI' r: '.Y ..! ::'Y::t: +s�•is' r. i,{r.'.V: 'LF,:ro, I.: .F}..^.t�.i'::'�;:.CJ: r,i. -.i1 'r ..�....'sc.. ..._:..._... ��•i.. •►< •.rk :.r.!!<• <" 1•!kk�l ,.1i •1• .!1' �:/': - .1 r i k. .ice r.. :.l::' et., ../r• rel '••h.. •:.i:.:-.E�-„' ...•�,..... :l:iyi:�'� ,:�i=�%.' !t'•!i• r i<:!:f�� i'.•�. 1 .i-.- -+J. Vii.. •:w. S i E.i .S,+I�..l:�=••li ti��. 1:�:.:-,;'.i ''�' .:.�•1 ...r'!�'ik .•t--•!. JJ �},• ':}a.. �'�"� i .. . .•:. {•I'• '"P:..�..: ...•:_ ,4. •.:�1':.c !:'. •L:r' 7.•,•r•.Jr:._.- S`•.J�. ilNti'�,:'?t1k1 f:r,�1J..'I�'l't1.I!'..'J.�.i�;:�i l:l..1'r/r�':!,lJ i r:Yi.l'I.Yt....!•::Y,i�..!.C:.l:1..-C•t1r J•r[EN�!:1•r.,1.�1...S':`='is.. < ,'•^i��P.r. . .�:.� ='1: Tr•_•L.' 1 EQUIP R&M 6019_ _ 3,500 2,11.9 4;004. •4,040:: Twn Clerk area copier,Admin copier,color copier � �:i.::�'•�r F:: `t:r.r ;, f...;�1. ;¢!•:..S').1 i:. ..<.: ':r iiY.:i�.it'!� ':'�'• rrt<.: :.. y:..j .}7• \{�,_]v:,.. :•I'•I :rl k:: . •�a- it �'.:.,�'.:_;i,.l.1:,.1.. .iI ,+ Ij sr"� _ .T. ?'. J'i'�'-�.. :I`"r'i:i�.`.F a.i..1. •I• -1•I •1. -1'�.r:- ID- ( :6'<s r :.<.. ..>. 'i"'IF }}�� 1!.'o-E:::(�'�'; i.J.:•t:1.rn:r-.ij:Y::.: I sl.. F•..•11:'� :•):: .i iS� - .:j:s ,7 ..i .:f.: ¢.F>.:.'�'J.� fca.r•.r'� -r►�>I E'.tf'.'i � ,,I •i ,.. �i,� - ��ti•:. Y •. �.,. ter•<.>•..<:�:L't •:ir•%`i:"r l:( d �t l'' .<.. "til l:• �1' •:i! •:a i •?_< '-1:3`:il.. .:il l._ .-!:I!::6 ail••.�!,. K: ..:�... <. >•. a. .>.> ;ri.' :tc= -d:: .3:' :"i:i �?-3r ••� !•s... t' •.?. �c !.'.lir ..�. -r 1 ,,:qq 'r' -L �::Ca'i..I.t':}�F.:.i".I..k•1't.4i:[.•::I'�'1 I..li. P ,.i '.YF FaF:f'r.iCr.ts,#'tl`i .�:.'L'-i. -:js:!:F-i`i'i'. _T9.1.•i'.J'1=1'•1•!� - ... BLDG R&M 6020_ - 10,000 . 175 :204:: , "f"r' `i�. `iJw• .t`.l Wil• • 'f •i.:moi..•ii: r'r a; rI ,>'c q....rr,.:_rL.K,<1•'=s'~,:.•til..�.'.i��'..9.3:'.�•F<J ▪ .:• Jt - y. _ l 1,964 . - 0 )0�. 0RENTALS 602518,500 Color Copier • 1 :i• 1 Ir Y Jk. •i i �+i` •i.'•N i'•i.` � --i:t�'i;+i::l!t 'I.IJ' f=1 34Y.:... it-• '::=:rrs.rii i:'rtJ<r.1 N•;r:'r`-J`;'::i:I.:1�`i�.r..!,..-r:.•.'r'J<i-.?-J:r r•�..i :'c.. ... ....:.:':,s::� ,.;.e.:�'•>', INSURANCE 6028- _ 200,000 38,806 c• •�� "I: r. .i. •I::'I •fes '•�"_:! 1 is .moi:'.{'• `` ..> .a:',>:<•: r •-I.i. ` F: •1. .tt• ':�':: ,,yY�� !�� t .s 's7•.c ��r7t:fi �I'•I 1• � ,P':�� .e• ..i ti • [,i .a• a 1 •'I 9 J 11:'1�►h,r.l :'l :<,r�' ,.}t:�:i'ii':r.. +•t i r: 'i•t:':�::i'�::i':._ s'ii:�"i'i. tea: .r. � >r. y,•.•:1 •-'i'r'k.'<w i:A•-.y�,r'k. >1 t!1 rl11-,1.tf<':iE:'1.r r tl /.4 r ,>.f J k.. .I_ �1� .�t. , ,;�...rli.. �'l.r•r s�.G� •f�... .•1-:I.I.>..f....t<:�> .. `Y-•�',i!,:1•�':�••'7 r:••• r 1 �..-:Y1�'I-• .1.• +l '.Y•II .�1. 1 L ,.<:. _FCr :. .:�r .;7:: ..>1 i•!rJ�.�1;', • � �� i>.::: •• ::I,.,,,.,,..�:c.:r.�'s.•.,r•,•,,e...-n.a<�;:.L•..•!'l:.r.•. .>i:-i'•r.e•e:>1c::.��..:5::\rtr•.r�•..r:•ri+c.,.1r•i:.l.. 1�'i1. !,•,.- r =er,- .:,I.1- ::r-r•'-..,•.rk.r... 1•!..,:..J<: ::_h :"fit.. .>�`��. POSTAGE 6029_ 353 _404 •'i < t•:.Y•.>•'>•.t: •,. - - ..,.. .,�`•.`;•I:i 'Y:1'.;t_:•I:i' ::>i- 1',1, t: `:JJ/•'r•..•. .L.; _ •tr >.r' �a•• .+r •�l• '+f c i'Y "a'i":: .r s..: :•s>`:•:s"�K.' ..:� •��`: •.1.�'_ .'� 1' _ •..t.. c`,:'-e''.•"i` >`'t'.ri .<1.:!` .'r'}ii. �"•i i r'R t i:..• :r !•Z. ..i:s.i' �4• !.. .['"-�:. -e'- .:'i i`•f•le•<'- �I,i�a:1 i .t ,i!::-'! ;,i: ! i�- .t ?•� .r 1 -'r N :i x�� ..yi�� •.t s� s •r T.. ..;�> �G• '�'•:i i. ,•k' 'f'p• d'I• {`: > tl r •t .I.'rl. R:i--�;.�..I'.f��_: ':i•.t��I t`t.. .f...Y i::R 1::i { :►••r 'I'':C 'I; .Y• ,� .N..1 .J •.�..,, .li:. 2 ••) .�• mJR� •_i.�.1 ..•!"k•'•-. _�•.a J:c:�!•,.. ..<•I�h��!Sk¢s. �.•i t�. •�1• y 1 i,�.:I•, •,_1. 1••.J:. ,1•. ,r.. !•. '.' !'�i• II'.•7.It:.q.. ..0?�'C•J..J •�, •!,<..a t.ii,. i•'s�'t!•i�:i�_Ft-�v i!: :'t.'}•!;' .��., •.I' .r..i,s;. `,>• .z;:•�i�:'.T, r!.; •:!.!"."r .,,;� .,Il:;�..l. '•'Fd�'i" :L,•` .�1J�•..!•>. i•'€;��..,S jt,k_ :��•.;3�i s '1:. 1•�.M.:�::�......:.r_.:...h ar..f-.:. �. . .:1•y,; .��.J:::•�::moi:... J:.:�e 4'lir N.. x.::..tT.r. .Y•�:'>�.."E.`'r{:'.T....•r�:'1...�;°• :.. ...�..:r.. .z..-"�.:• .....•.1. .s. ..r s-.r .1 ':1► :.l:.e a ..!..� • PRINTING 6031 _ • - - - - • _ �Jr,� �.:.. t• t.1 :n 1 :.,. >•1 :.y�• ,,;:• t':'�r.x...:: �:.-:Y:•.� •.%i.J•f,.b::<rli s!::' ' :c: ^,. ,:t•e,- -,e, � .r.t: 'i:, .;15711;'_::}: � •2'....!h= 1-_. r•, >,•...-a.' •t:.a..:..: �,'<..•>t.1 s I fi •'d'•C iti. x "'i�r rt ,iar �r _ !'�•F ii'r.' . .t` �! it ::," J:. .�.: •> ..'��.• ;f��.�.e-7•J••a=�i•�i•! {N_��f kt•��:t I< �r r.•: _r}•>.!:�.>.:. p<...,,>, .'i'al. .L '•i'• ,I:` .t i•1'r' i V�1��:,!�� .li•)'1•"•. '� �i r 1 J !• `! IE: Z. 1�h� L. 9}. •M;,. .y:: I p}!': � , ♦ ?! ,S' :�� a ".2 .r ._.• s;:•::j:r�. 1 1;►..i''�l !tt`d>-I" •+' 'ir .,, T .I '4:'rl'�r.l�,�!; t.. M,.k•e I,Yt r��.i.tt'.::i..Tia-:�' i. � �1; { ••Lf.�'._.i: .. .I.,:...y'.s' -`!S',i.•.IS[,i:•_:':"'\'�, [i1,."r•y:•y 1'J 1 Ltl11'�FF r.'••r• .Y7E:.= :►.11 a.'?.I:r:il t:ii. ..i !T• �% .�•�. ...+.p1.�: _ .\�'t.>'k: �=a. .t.J 1 J Ii0♦'r'N N. .k•r. .�. .�� .�1 1' •' - 'r L;.,• ,,.• .�I '.'i•i:� •.�::!� :1 '� il•-L '-li:. 1!:.:3 .i.,- r R• •..,{ '•`t•' .�. •, .,.> L ,s....r• I- �P'!'•-S•I. •! '>, :t :>•:J.-::f.1.� •.t'�'-'ab.!• .K. -l'.. '-:.... ,>� �'i:...�.•......,..a...i,tt;..•,!s:r..rc•.,r:.., i ;i:' 'C 'f iii: k- Ife.: ...,•, .:E: !` I tl'd. s•:..�:. _:.�ffa!•til.i..:_..1.�il'._.__._s__s•:_e__ .. .•c.� ..Il.'E�.1tYl'"{!C''�E.�ai$�-i'�•`. I..t.::'i.<li:�,:i•pc..y';'�,.�'r.• •.I!r:i.y:.,.;:P�'td:�`, j=••T:::'v`•i•:.r'^ft,'.•. i•<��i..r�:�..,.�:�.r r'i•':Y-r:s'-'I zJ�l 1 i. _.:•i. • TRAVEL 6034- _ 15,000 • 2,688' :..:::'':':.151000' •:: :15,000.- Boards&Commissions Training .. • •_ '15,000 C!:i _•N,r>t!!.!!'>E:''•J,.11,i1� i#�":.••}!.t1 Ief ,rr:=�I,!:r,:1.••r.'r.T.I1r;>M:�'I!•Ir•Y a.#1'ti�'.:t'_r�,l!.f;.-.'.r��!�C F,,:,a. $1r�1'r_..n.:. f}..f_:r•t:.yi.ryNi�'�,�r•11:M,Gww P•�/': F =>.:J.•�.f•r1:.•C�:`s t}I..'> :+�t�K::n AJ�t..+-� .dt!.s.'}w.•%.: •Y .ItN .ii.R•att..:E�jJ,l�r3-::1i•i�•,�,�ai�!l� .r�et:F.•�r.g1f�,-:; i`..':.:rj:i.>a�:{X� ;rSrt.{ 4»::<�ir.:::i'Z i.:'>;!..:j!; !.�i;''P-:`{.t Ni :0:1 :',-:' • :- MEMBER&SUBSCRIP 6035 - 1,2b0 fi,297 �_.�"': :'�.•:6500:: • •.• :''3a000;Alliance for Innovation 2,500 Pima County Recorder " '' :' ••• :......:' i-''- ••. ' Soo' •.t.:E �s•1:1 i••f•.al,: . !-. i.. Ii I.•. � rJ..'►.c_". -:..F:' : > i._►_ i.w.�.,t:•c< _• :�•. ,f •,. ,•.•i. � ••'� .`a.'fa::+1:.:':..kr 'r ':cr:,. f...♦:l.•rii�.#.: :.!`.t.p :.�'-'l1'.;:1 t•i'r. .!{•rt•'�t'.'•.i.'..ileF',ti:ra_ :I.:'t''N 1y�:�•"•'►!-'n�.#t•'a•i.I<•:l.>!1nf.p�=r. <.i?i,�t if:iLa.J11�.r�rry...;{cY�i!..:�4cf,!.,.!:1'.:i.k,rI. :a.'i_':!1„f,>:..i�,.�',:,:!?,-�ii«i,I:"e.�r,i"y:!„.L ..?:••>�.•<a :.i:i'•y,ii...i :::f?�3S'['.; }:...`:.il .. .ii-S L4 i> SUPPLIES 6037 12,000 3,657 `'12000 10,000.Admin Area Supplies(Shared) 10;000 ) :.; ► ►c � . • ► _f ._ .::, •- ;,•,....7::::::::::.;•;..*::::,:,...• .'. - It<.i1>itl Y4JiF!'f'v.,:i,� .g.t:1Y�.\. �.•• '7' a• .t.^F.,?F.:.t,•.l::,:>.,ri::'i�.Il l:t�? •a,=.•.'K..::+.::>iite'.►�.i Y.IN..I.�.•Vi•.I:•a.id�`:.;1'.►�►.:::,;:?iii',;.•:{]>t-.tII_;>�,vJax. .;7;!:-I;l, p; .aF.i� ,ff:ri••,:II.. t:.1 =. yr:-..'.,f<i<..,r•x r,!•;Z:.c•:I�^'c•,:; �r.:.I r{�,.„,,.?,................„.„?.1...�r! 1Y. Y'•t�.X � �re:r ' r:t .`,...-t._..,rif , dGAS&ELEC 6038 70,000 42,740 :- '. - . .:70,000: "•60,000-: energy efficiency audit savings • ,:60;400::. .Y..r.:.1Z •;t::i s,::t_,:a A.,:,.f.V r'r.te.i.9f;. ,:,s,?•.r: .t•.. J ,�! .• - .. 1.r: t'!■'1 i.1`.tt•s•G" i'. 1��::� ,z, •1" ..I.. :1.::1.'j.::,I_:N.. : <� 'i' �1.E'f F't••t:>ts•Lt: r :.rt'' ' r.�i� f , 1 .I 1 to' _.s .r: .1 •�. .C='C�•: .a � I 1 s :::.5.o-•: :y: 1. -1• lP��} t .•i _ 4 .X..1:1443 '-l:'r:tilt �G'' 1'.%.' •ri •iq 'ice•�i ��,1 • 1 _ :.{.!. i�ii.. tib Y. :i"�i•'.:;�.i' •i.: �, ,. �� i. ..a•.. .'� G:.S I:[ •::«••,tri 'i 1� 1.•1. _Y.'• .: :r:L.i.••_ •< :�''%' .•.J':� .. a�i .. Ifs yrs. 'y:: 'r• a',L .!.` f•'•` .{ f. .Iti... . an:..�.ti - .:..I t.:.E:'E <r' ,r.::� �I r:. if,• .1' .'.�:'.S:•..:;Sd .. ..!!;i��:r.:,••,•:a rfi i••E:"r:' +.!r�s :-1'•'!%, s...R .Y. 1a. .R: i,., >F;!• %' :••:! :R GAS&OIL 6039 _K.»... .... . ....1.::1..L..-.-f ,,., ..z..+t":.s; -:J•=�. .!is....rt i`?It paL..=.^41: l�:1,. ..:. - (880) -:i '... .'.. is . :Fc>'.LJ4:':•:.tiA.1er atI'i::k.irr.i!....�!.Y..1�1::1.._..;�•>:{:,:..kt.,.Y x..f�••::-::'eN'l' 'F1'.:'.1,'".r•<::'.�•-�F/..'R.4%..�1.y!.F::.1•-`•i.;..:I,�t'a= r)t.> 4}..1•c•Y.�F1::.�wI,.:a.Cr••>2t"!e.•.I.:�..F'i.dsI'.!r''Ir �a: :~ ._::4 I,.s-. 4� :irr•.-J.•�" ._i�j.?`f_: :jr1 r::..Z.S::r�•is...._:•: y ��. 1i;.-I.._•!. rt',. 1i• .r,^.1>, R :...• ti.�r ,- MISC OTHER8045 - 30,000 13,402 '30,0.00: '7;0 .:250•- Coffee Service . Shred It :3,100' Bank Fees • • • : 5p. Kitchen Supplies _ _ / 15;Op0 i,..•:>;•ii ` �{ii�: r : . i, r.- 'I•� :,.!.!r•�,r.I:. . �I:, �i:I.:•. iJ:`.. d 1:Y�;.•.:!`.: iFfr` II�..:.>�.a<i"iu.iFl 1•.. f�;. L.. I..1: .iti':t>J"! J. F ifr.a. C'�}"J a• $ � 4 0Misc Other(plaques,nameplates,:variou!s). .� ''''..:.-'...'.:::,.:....*......;......i:.:::"......7...... 1. • .7!+ O•:•; .. t• eI.•'..{:.!.!iij.,C.•.'�:f�...I...a^.l l!i,J. .1i."Y.< :.�i,. {:.!:TV�.. :.!:F'.i�u•5:,_..,.i} {:.l.` ¢ti}'�[;,F,r{:•.►} �>!:1S!..1+. C :>1.1:'J tf. ,.:•r/I:r1 s'ar.;Yr<� '! -:,.-i '�. v: :k.:ir:.;k.i .r!_'-.l!i::>�.;iN;•?i•:1�.j_'aa_ •'y, r:1:« �� _. f}:.w',:!i1i1!;,,?';,1w:" .</?i. ,�.`.:s>ZsAVNEX 6050 111 .. .:11:1;. -.15;000_:Legal Costs ~Surveyor services for potential annexations(non-Arroyo Grande) .' •••••••••*:*::.*::*.... ,000 :•6000:' ... .r,:t<->....•K++.:.._•..i.'v,.:..>.. .a....�.:.. .=J<•..tr:.>1:.:. :1::;:.1:.:�l.s .<.r.r`iJ':�;.-,: t.••.-a.1..il..:.r.,[�•>..,�'- ..•.•�......ei:•..i:t�L:..'.J--.s'F-.=:'._,:. �,... s.•._.! ._'i:..r•r.--• ,.••-r•••••:::::.±.::::.--:'.-....:...:::,:'::: -.:. �'.�.!:•:.:,�::.•;�.•!•1.ff s�;>�.�.. ''� .. ►ir.i-aiI<.1!•:a-!f> .[+li.� �Y 1•.t:K:>it1>i.:ir.I;J;.fiyaN,llrN.;, %I#/':>�Ti1''t':•.��1a1.��:l:�. +1'.;YI.0Y.'l •c1: f;i:> I••Y:•4:;•.:.,la'.iNfrY }!. sJr••.<rl;►..:f. rl:i'.:-f-rt-'e':i:.iLrry•:c1:':3 r .i::: i'.-'iJ:•�'.>I.4.it_.:r:i•{Ir%-��.�6 :.1•Yh.� { :'''i !j' :f�f.pi4. 4+t:•.It��;'le i. 'i,tSAFETY 6064 1,000 1,746_ :'1900; . . ....: - it ..1.• F '_r:: ':..F..•' '' : 4:.:>�,', . s. ! :' '.. : 4 .. i":....rFg�' :.:tMxr: y> •.!!4�>':, .;:Tt:'•'>.:�'.:.:.pr9'.>r<l,Il:<i!r:;Y.:lit.<•r 'i"2S1'::`%'= agN2r..>�,.e •tr':l.:aj' i.:' tY.. a�N►lIr:N!•::I►Lt-y..:sart.<c.r:1r'..d'_:A+.e• !-.>>i•: :•=rIi:<j. �fi:: '.,:-_rt:•::,j��:.tei!,.'r:..��'r �,ii>zrk.i•=Pa:•,'r;->i•9'x ka.3 ! r�rt.,;:: g: ,EMP HOLDAY PARTY 6078_ - - 6'000Moved from HR Budget ut: -5,000: .t.l`.la<!F.'.y,: +.:•F.1r •2!'!1.t e. .F .r.1LS#L'a: ..�:`{'t:I 4;.-�•:.r:..:.•;'rfte.ry. s_ri .1..;"1 e!!.�;,!.tJ:'I,is:.!:;:4.•ic.;itl+: .-i rL3�t.1•-1>z: �:.ii.',!' r ...ri>>';'_s:.i;•:•.1 4`-rY:Cf::a•:J:>:•��i}-3tr-,•'1. 0,vt .,F.L:�1..1!,._, > ?.a• :r; t},FF t �. FUND OUT 6098 - 116,092 24,664116 092: ._ _],,._Y<,>t�r,�ra•:rrl�a:��::rrl:1.-: ::r.1.I�11.: :1_•.r:.1'::.,1:>t::•I Irl::,t: :.1;.I.•l:•1./.1.:',.•,t•a a .a:.. , � _ , : •. "•I. ��•;, �- -••.:.WiN_..i. .. r,:�It".ti�J.;0,- I.'.Y•.!.r. r:i:.a{�.!,,::{+a.5.:t1..i{r=J•:1 1I�T:!I 1.;1..;:4f, � ::.<I.,.1. .!r�r::_,.-.(:•= .s�-•.:�}. ..iJ<_�..,�•:J_°:._i'_r:sJ,•::-i.i� :i',:;f;:ri::.,=r�.G 1.',iyy�r'=K,�•w�fa...3Y.J1��,it•_ r ,7,; 1�:�r.r� t:.�+t.`?ir..i:itr, :.. '-r0•��,k TAX REBATE 7001 15001._ ORACLE CROSSING 235,991 • 122,162 � ,�. .:325,0.00 ::325,000: ..-,-..-;--,••••••••••::.:.-•,.:-.3 ;P..0,9••• -' .325 0.00.... : .►.,Sl-i:.r�r <_ :•l;:a: >..'a•'-/:�'a ~ ':t-� :" �� i�» a�:'G' iI•�E� ,:•i.i T- • . .. .r)>i':.i'.t<::•,2F;•l<' .;i#•.,ir;tL:LZrii<.jR.J•Y;1f>i y:J,1...�..!f}:>Y•-!.:•IaV;':I.•.!'!M>:k1 aF.I.'.-s`...' rii'.;#:='G.r><:'1� :w..;'! e; -�'r•'. .�.t,;r.<';� %.,ri� :• .!!/Kh>�:i>_�•::'r:.:cis_� tj�`. :�J,!<�.M.�-1.$1::.:':.`1:.I _k,i•!. 'Si' F'.lf d•�1�v. : TAX REBATE 7001 15002, STEAM PUMP VILLAGE 40,983 T `5� • 16,237 .: .: :• , . .. . :'4 ,000 40000, ,•.: ••, 4$,000: •.l.':A'. 'I '!C•.I:•i• '.a'1• `.>f:i r,.: :r i: .. :•�a.1.a..:: •. r.. ',.., ;,i:. '.: .. t r � - -`p.;. i "!.� U Rr: k t. I .1.I YI:-a•.:;+. ::r•:: i{�. .i:'. w. !.. •.N Fr•t, 1.f..> �r 1 1 1 1 1 [ 'V-. - :r.a: -.a- • n •� :.ti :�ftE. .:: •e:a •.r: 'dr• •�•.: r�•+ir= •. ..t,,,�' '.> '3'_. : •.:i•.F ri �iiOL s �•`i. "t: i!.' !', •• •1,'.$ :k. .l i c ' 7i:r 'i!{:�. ss-.s' " .t. :i.�>: 'i •Ir.'' •R! ..7:.:.� � •.: 1. Xll 'a. I:•1�. •-�:�., 1 �,t .r7-I{� •i . .,: i. 'f.. :.�. .j-'. , .':I'•!!!•:It.;lr...i�.1�.t:![IF�i ''f'It - r�� a N .fi': A .I. !- 1'.!r"' �:a<.. =:s..< .:f..: ,+:• .r••f .•7�'.-,��:-« ,ij. ::5�`�: _:'�r�.'" ,. -9.,.,..... .:-ii?3 y::o:l. ..-7.r'A.'l��N.IEd..•.y.::.t:•,.!.'i,i.- .�."X.! .>:: x ,i:t• •_ .� :�•. - :'i-• 11'r:.: :�:i �E;is>..::j.:.. •.{r.Y:i:r,+7 r �. ...�'? I. :. _:�,. '.�'•:.t• :.r 1:•r. :.�� r .> r e,;.> . 7A1..L•ii.i:.. :.�I:•.1:'>'.i..1.:a J.:.:�: e.s:.•_?.I:s s:!^��ii.:x�'#::y?.<y 7L .r;,. ��>''i;'•..�1T3u'I,�tri xo,r':�ti..}i.+'1F TAX REBATE 7001, 15004•_, VESTAR(OVMP) - • 855,748 . • .228,769 ..---;•••••••:•-..*:-..:''•::625;000: ......:-,1:........:':650;000. <,;:.:::--:--. 6 ;-••-_ • r._•r @ <!.. r+, r!.•>,•',...,•_•_ N.•:#Y.i► i-ti .'„:ti.i,�lti y>,�Sa.►s> -.-. :":l,.. t ��7a►rr: . Z�. :"•:?}`.H!i�i ,. ,...,...,.,••••::, t. . .: :YN :N•;iit9;'J ia`,,"'r'a ','.'► La�'+i;.:►«:s?.'..a.d1ArY.k• w >:kFiN t ''t„�i,t I •I-I::1ar.r lJ.-:'l'i.'er.r:. _' I;.rr'J; .l�A.' I::` ViR!-<t:1Yrr.:'<5;:.f:;F.i',!I:� rrY 1�.: tj . ✓ � t�� i �.i',.;��!�.:g�z.�4t.2�ai�).{}: 'TAX REBATE 700119001_ SANOFI AVENTIS _ ' • . P,N . �.:.•. l:� !I!J'':'.'. ::. :=I'r'r•f:-::...!t-#,. f.':> -r•J .i i (t- N •-;fi�_! i.'i.:-=tr'r: .>..1:....��::r;:si.••.':« �:i._L..:� • .'.�. -•'••.• -:: .:;:.:*.•:::......'... ..::.;r,. �.�:•,'!..•.:-.:..:::- .>>.•."�l"..> •':.:-• !'.r!':•1il'•!a'•�t1:•.'i!•, r I E.:S;A.:14l:>.. `g'•aJ,.::�!:!!,yr, ':'....ri�i _r:'.►:rYi3fs:fi�tf•:•R!;>yZ��r:•,•.4 ',•Frlr•�•b4•+-•!trki:$�,i: �N�f�i'„�,1��'!!r .'f:rt (: _1s... �•:. i-:f::r:s•::"►-. :rs.i- : :r.7Ktj:::r. ,:-.t,i.i,•4' .JT•� 5, :'ti1"-ai[�.F,r�<r .:i: i?rrt� �:••:•'+' :i:< �;'-,. TOTAL GA-O&M .1,950064 548,949 ::1, 6i 203:.• ... ..:1;74.6,050:: , TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Tobin Rosen, Town Attorney Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director Craig Civalier, Town Engineer SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT STUDIES, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding departmental management studies. Please provide information on previous management studies that have been done for Departments within the Town. Which departments have had them?What were the dates, cost of the studies and the findings? DISCUSSION Public Works The Town contracted with The Mercer Group, Inc. in May 2007 for the Public Works Management Study and Strategic Plan in the amount of$51,000. The Final Report was presented to Mayor and Council in August 2008. The Major Findings and recommendations were implemented and continue to be a focus as part of the Management Study and Strategic Plan. 1. High level of responsiveness to citizen and customer needs, as well as a strong commitment to resolution of service requests, maintenance of Town's infrastructure, and excellent service delivery. 2. Senior management team is skilled, experienced, and respected internally and externally. 3. Likewise, employees are skilled, experienced and dedicated. 4. Engineering services are effectively performed, with a strong emphasis on construction management and inspection. 5. Transit is providing an excellent service in Coyote Run. 6. Operatons is strengthening operations management practices, particularly through the Crew leader Model that has been fully implemented. 7. The asset management and stormwater management services have been implemented. The Cartegraph system has been installed and is on track of managing the numbers (time use for people and equipment, work and projects accomplished) for Streets, Traffic, Pavement Management, Fleet and Facilities. 4 8. Development Review has fully implemented the Permits Plus system, optimizing the Development Review process from the Engineering side. 9. The Fleet Maintenance Program was added to the Operations Division as recommended in the Study. 10. The Public Works Organization should consider restructuring its organization to reflect the shift from a growth/development focus to a maintenance focus. As the shift occurs the size and number of crews will need to expand to meet the need for increased maintenance activities performed. Legal The Town hired the consulting firm of Management Partners to conduct a study of the Town Attorney's Office in 2007 at a cost of approximately $36,000. The report, which was presented to the Council in March 2008, concluded that the office is appropriately managed and that the staffing levels of both the Prosecution and Civil Divisions of the Town Attorney's Office were appropriate for a town the size of Oro Valley. Because of subsequent budgetary reductions and the ongoing hiring freeze, the Town Attorney's Office has lost two of the six positions that it had in its Civil Division since the time of the report. The report did include some specific management recommendations for the Town Attorney's Office. However, most of the suggestions identified in the report had already begun to be implemented within the office or are not practicably capable of being implemented presently due to ongoing budget constraints. Building Safety The Town contracted with Matrix Consulting Group in April 2006 to perform the management study of the building permit process as requested by Council for a fee of$39,000. The Management Study of the Building Permit Process Report was presented at the Town Council Study Session on August 30, 2006. At that time, Council directed staff to develop an Implementation Plan. The Implementation Plan was developed, presented and approved by Council in December 2006. Based on the Management Study, there were three key areas for improvement in order to reach the goal of enhancing customer satisfaction and altering the perception that it is difficult to develop projects in the Town of Oro Valley: 1. Improve the permitting process: Improve cycle time of plan checking by all departments Provide on-line and over-the-counter processes Single point of responsibility/case management 2. Improve the inspection process: Expand commercial inspection capacity Clear communication of inspection reports, code citation(s), and on-line access to the reports Consistency of inspection comments and in-field policies 3. Provide easy access to information: Access to Building Safety information Access to all Organizational Unit's project status and comments during the plan check/ permit process Access to Inspection Report detail during construction There were also a number of critical variables that had to be included in the Implementation Plan for the successful attainment of these goals as follows: Process Improvements 1. Permits Plus -Expansion of Permits Plus capability -Expand Permits Plus use to all Organization Units in the permitting process 2. Case Management System -Single point of responsibility (Asst. Building Official)for building permit plan check process/ resolving delays -All Divisions involvement in creating cycle time goals & process improvements 3. On-line and Over-the-counter permits -Web and process development -Revised and/or Expanded job duties Staffing Improvements 1. Staff -Addition of one (1) Commercial Plans Examiner -Revised and/or Expanded job duties 2. Training -To accomplish revised and/or expanded job duties -Keep current, knowledgeable and provide consistency in the application of codes and practices Communication Improvements 1. Process/information/Communication -Ability to provide code citations and access to inspection reports by customers &Town staff -Web-based checklists, typical comments, code interpretations, new requirements and 'Home Improvement Center' to navigate the process The Implementation Plan was completed and a status update was presented to Council in June 2009. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.23.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager/Finance Director Betty Dickens, Human Resources Director Kevin Verville, Information Technology Director George Dunscomb, Town Magistrate Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director Daniel Sharp, Chief of Police Craig Civalier, Town Engineer SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING SERVICE REDUCTIONS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding service reductions. Please describe what services in any department have been reduced based on the budget reductions this year and what further reductions are anticipated next year. DISCUSSION Building Safety The Building Safety Department had two administrative supportositions: Office Specialist and p p Sr. Office Assistant. The Office Specialist position provided all administrative support for the department while the Sr. Office Assistant position primarily provided the public interface for all three departments in the building (Planning &Zoning, Public Works and Building Safety); answering the phone, greeting customers, and responding to requests for service. In June 2009 the Office Specialist position was vacated and has remained vacant due to the hiring freeze. All administrative duties for the department were reassigned to the Sr. Office Assistant, the phone system has been automated rather than direct personal contact, and walk-in customers now ring a bell for service, In addition, the Sr. Permit Technician position was eliminated for FY 09/10. This was one of three Permit Technician positions that provide the intake and issuance of permits for all three departments in the building. As a result, when one of the two remaining Technicians is on vacation or sick, there is no one to cover lunch time or other short absences necessary in the course of the day. Although this has reduced the ability to respond and process permits as quickly as in the past, we have been able to mitigate this by cross training Inspectors to perform this duty as time permits due. Some of the more labor-intensive over-the-counter permits, such as model pools and spas, previously provided by the Permit Technicians, have been eliminated. Due to the economic downturn, which has continued to affect the building community, we also reduced force by two positions in February 2010 (Assistant Building Official and Inspector). In addition, there are two planned retirements at the end of this fiscal year and these positions are intended to remain vacant (Plans Examiner and Inspector). The Department will continue to meet timeline goals for review and inspection in the coming year, provided there is no significant growth in building activity. Should building activity increase, service levels will need to be adjusted or vacancies will need to be filled. Finance The main budget reductions in the Finance Department are associated with 2 vacant positions: Senior Office Specialist and Payroll Specialist. As a result, the duties associated with these two vacancies have been taken on by remaining Finance Department staff and the Town Manager's administrative support staff. This includes duties such as minute taking and packet preparation for Finance & Bond Committee meetings (Sr. Office Specialist in Town Manager's Dept.); liability insurance claims administration (shared between Accounting Supervisor and Risk Manager in HR); process daily bank deposit (Finance Analyst); processing bi-weekly payroll (shared by Accounting Supervisor and Sr. Accountant); reconciliation of benefit billings (Sr. Accountant); quarterly payroll tax reports (Sr. Accountant); and office supply ordering (Sr. Office Specialist in Town Manager's Dept.). Human Resources Numerous program needs identified and/or implemented by the former HR Director, Sandra Abbey, have been placed on hold. The majority of these programs address employee and organizational development, key performance competencies. Department Directors have provided the new HR Director with numerous requests for specific employee support for their immediate work groups. The HR Analyst position became vacant on 09/26/09. TOV HR Specialists and the Safety and Risk Management Manager picked up additional duties due to this vacancy. The current workload for staff is high and HR has sought volunteer and/or intern support options without success. Routine tasks (filing, MUNIS maintenance) are being postponed in order to meet day-- to-day customer requests, needs, and emergencies. The high work load has resulted in a raised level of stress and anxiety for staff. Staff are extremely aware of the responsibility of HR and Safety to address the needs of employees, their families and injuries or emergencies in a timely and accurate manner. HR and Safety service support to personnel is directly linked to organizational success. Management and personnel development programs are on hold for the majority of department staff. A HR needs assessment has identified gaps for training and development needs in the areas of communication skills, performance management, team building, team management, organizational values, leadership, supervisory skills, customer service, employee relations issue management, succession I workforce management, organization innovation and TOV policies, procedures and administrative directives. These programs and services have been placed on hold. When the discussions concerning the creation of the Safety Managers position were first initiated, the HR Department had a three person staff and a Director. The discussion centered on the added responsibilities of the new dual role, Safety and Risk Management, and the ability of one person to handle that effectively. It was felt that a Safety Specialist would be a necessary addition and that between the three HR staff members, administrative needs generated by the Safety& Risk Mgt. office would be shared and easily accomplished. Since that time, with the loss of one HR staff member and the negation of the Safety Specialist idea, all administrative work is handled by the Safety and Risk Manager. Additionally, occasional overload experienced by the two remaining HR staff members, or the Director, necessitates the Safety and Risk Manager to suspend his duties to provide assistance. This staff reduction has and continues to cause the Safety and Risk Manager to prioritize his responsibilities, activities and his time in very creative ways, but not necessarily those consistent with HR best practice. information Technology GIS Tasks delayed or not completed due to of the elimination of the GIS Technician position: - Data updates from Pima County (mostly parcels and streets, updating the streets requires a lot of manual labeling) - Maintenance of existing data (keeping current versions of layers in the geodatabase, updating and cleaning up the PAD/GP/Zoning layers) -- Online mapping (not able to devote the amount of time necessary) - Keeping the various maps around town at the most current version (framed maps in the Kachina room, maps in the drawers, etc) - Larger projects (ESLD, CarteGraph, etc) consume a lot of time, thus leaving less time for projects that a GIS Tech would normally do - Maintaining the OVGIS map that the planners use (still have some damaged or missing data that needs to be recreated and/or relocated from the server crash) Magistrate Court The Court has implemented the following service reductions: Number of Warrants issued. Number of postcards and phone calls to defendants. Number of scanned documents. Further reductions would impede the court's ability to process cases as mandated by Arizona law. Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation has implemented the following service reductions: Aquatics: In November, the Oro Valley Municipal Pool began closing on Sundays. it is anticipated that the pool will remain closed on Sundays until Memorial Day. For FY 10/11, the pool will remain closed on Sundays and will be closed an additional five hours each day, Monday—Saturday, during the fall, winter and spring seasons. This will impact public swim as well as swim teams. The spring swimming lessons, the "Dive-In" special event (movie at the pool), and the Egg Dive have been suspended for this year, and are not planned for FY 10/11. Parks: Burnt out ball field lights are now scheduled for replacement annually, rather than semi- annually. Although it is still safe to play, it is not the preferred schedule by ball teams. This practice will remain in effect for FY 10/11. Due to the increased workload (caused by the elimination of contracted landscapers), the baseball and softball infields are not being groomed on a set schedule, but rather when staff have time to fit it in. Additionally, on occasion the Parks staff relies on teams using the fields to manually drag the fields themselves. This practice will remain in effect for FY 10/11. A part time Park Monitor position, which is currently vacant, is recommended to remain vacant for FY 10/11. This decreases the number of Parks staff available to perform park maintenance, and will continue to result in a decrease of 20 hours of maintenance being accomplished at the parks each week. This year, facility usage fees for ramadas, courts and ball fields were increased, affecting all users. For FY 10/11, staff will recommend another incremental increase in facility usage fees to be implemented on January 1, 2011. For FY 10111, cuts are recommended in operations and maintenance in all areas, representing a reduction in fertilizer and water for all non-field grassy areas at James D. Kriegh Park and Riverfront Park. Recreation: This year, fees were substantially increased for Summer Camp and Junior Golf, affecting families of school age children in these programs and resulting in decreased participation. Additionally, one of the three summer camp sites were eliminated. For FY 10/11, another summer camp site will be eliminated, leaving one operational camp at Copper Creek Elementary School with a capacity of 200 participants each week. Special Events: The Parks & Recreation Department works with a number of special events, providing venues, staff support, equipment, and other related services. Due to the elimination of community funding, any special events held in Town that are dependant on Town funding and/or in-kind services will have to either pay for all services, move the event to another jurisdiction, or cancel the event. It is unclear at this time which events—such as IronKids, the SAACA Arts Festival and the Arizona Distance Classic -will take place in Oro Valley without community funding and in-kind services. Planning and Zoning Services in Planning & Zoning are primarily in service to customers (the general public, applicants, and business owners) rather than in quantitative programs that rely directly on budget allocations. The following Planning & Zoning programs have been or will be impacted by budget reductions: The Household Hazardous Waste Program was eliminated in the FY 09/10 budget. The Neighborhood Cleanup Program is proposed for elimination in the FY 10/11 budget. Police The Oro Valley Police Department is comprised of three Divisions: The Administrative Division (Office of the Chief of Police), the Field Services Division (FSD) and the Support Services Division (SSD). Most service reductions to date have come in the form of personnel cuts through attrition and hiring freezes. These cuts have included both civilian and sworn personnel from Communications (SSD), Records (SSD), Task Force Operations (SSD) and Patrol (FSD). In an effort to minimize the service reduction impact to the Oro Valley community, the OVPD has evaluated its patrol deployment methodology and will transition from a Squad System deployment to a Platoon System deployment in July 2010. This change will strategically reallocate or"stagger"the Police Department patrol resources during each 24 hour period, allowing the Police Department to enhance street coverage and ensure continued timely and appropriate responses to calls for service. However, the Platoon System makes consistency in supervision more challenging and scheduling Advanced Officer training more difficult. For FY 09/10, the OVPD reduced costs associated with the take-home vehicle fleet by25 percent. This change has impacted the OVPD Command Staff's ability to get to significant incidents in a timely manner. It has also precluded most members of the Command Staff from conducting random audits on personnel. In addition, the OVPD has eliminated or reduced a number of community outreach and education programs. Events like "Investigate OVPD" and the annual "Police Easter Event" have been eliminated, while OVPD will remove one of its three annual Police Citizen Academies for FY 10111. These programs were geared toward maintaining positive relationships with the public while educating them about the skills, abilities, and services of the OVPD. The annual OVPD Awards Ceremony has also been eliminated. This program was designed to formally recognize the heroic and outstanding performances by the men and women within the OVPD and residents of the Town. This event builds morale within the organization and strengthens the partnership shared by the OVPD and Oro Valley community. Public Works Public Works has made service level reductions in the Engineering and Development Review Divisions in the last two years. These reductions were market driven based on economic conditions. There was less demand for development review services; therefore, two staff members were retrained and reassigned to the Stormwater Utility and Fleet Maintenance programs, where there was an increased demand for services. The Engineering Division staff was reduced based on workload. The reorganization planned for Public Works to become part of Development Infrastructure Services will shift Traffic Engineering and Pavement Management sections from the Operations Division to the Engineering Division. This will allow more cross training and flexibility for staff assignments. Another area where there is reduction in services is our surface treatment program. The funding level was reduced from $1.2M last year to $700K this year. We have budgeted $700K for FY 10/11 as well. If this trend continues the Town's pavement surface condition rating will begin decline. This budget year we had planned to operate three street maintenance crews. Because of the hiring freeze the third crew never was realized. In FY 10/11 we have budgeted to run two larger street maintenance crews. In the future we will need to reassess staffing three street crews based on increases in infrastructure to maintain. As has been discussed with Council in study sessions, our transit division has been forced to reduce response to calls due to lack of drivers, whether volunteers or paid. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: April 23, 2010 TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Kevin Burke, Assistant to the Town Manager CC: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Department Directors SUBJECT: AMENDED—Response to Requests from Town Council Mayor Paul Loomis • General Fund contingency Vice-Mayor Bill Garner • Vacancies • * Human Resources • Budget Format • Economic Development • Community survey • Cost of service study Councilmember Pat Spoerl • Steam Pump Ranch / Naranja Town Site funding • Steam Pump Ranch CIP Councilmember KC Carter • Employee benefits • Communications and outreach Councilmember Mary Snider • Cost of Living Adjustment • Bed taxes • OV Marketplace Councilmember Barry Gillaspie • CREBs • * Phone system TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY RESERVE LEVELS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding General Fund contingency levels. What is the dollar difference between the Town's adopted 25% contingency reserve amount and the current estimated contingency reserve amount at 43%? DISCUSSION For FY 10/11, the proposed General Fund expenditure budget is $25,751,743. The current estimated contingency reserve amount for FY 10/11 is $10,964,713, which represents 43% of the expenditure budget. A contingency reserve budget at the Council-adopted policy level of 25% equals $6,437,936, a difference of$4,526,777. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING PERSONNEL CHANGES AND STAFFING LEVELS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding personnel changes and staffing levels. Under the header Personnel Changes and Staffing Levels under FY2010/2011 budget, it discusses why a new column called VACANT was added to each department. It explains that the vacant positions should be identified as authorized positions in the budget with no funding allocated. It goes on to explain: "As has been our practice, positions that are essential when vacated are not considered frozen". To my knowledge in Oro Valley budgets that has never been a practice like this. Please explain. DISCUSSION The Town put its first hiring freeze in place in November 2008. Through the remaining FY 08/09 budget, the Council required the Town Manager to seek approval from Council before any hiring was done, creating additional oversight of the Manager in matters relating to hiring. In June of FY 08/09, during the adoption of the FY 09/10 budget, authority was restored to the Town Manager in matters relating to the hiring freeze. A list of"frozen positions" was presented to Council in a memo (attached) dated August 6, 2009, that listed the FTEs in a hiring freeze until January 2010. As indicated in the memo, a mid-year review was done to update Council, and the Interim Town Manager recommended that the hiring freeze continue. It was anticipated that due to existing Vacancies, some departments would reorganize job duties among staff to better balance work needs in each area. As was the practice under the former Town Manager, evaluation has been given on a case by case basis for any filling of vacancies due to turnover and whether those positions perform critical operational functions. A recent example of this was the Water Operator II vacancy that was filled through an internal promotion process. The promotion left a vacancy in the Water Operator I position which has been left vacant. During last fall, there were several processes opened to keep the agreed-upon level of Police Telecommunications Dispatchers filled after a series of resignations. One dispatcher position remains frozen as identified in the 2009 memo. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. FY 2009/10 Personnel Status Report Memo Page 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 0, 2009 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members FROM: David L. Andrews, Town Manager RE: FY 2009/10 Personnel and Financial Status Report .overview . Management staff has had the opportunity to evaluate the budgetary and operational impacts of all town- wide vacant positions due to the recently offered severance plan as well as the hiring freeze enacted last November. Attached as Exhibit A is the listing of current vacant positions by title within each department. This table also indicates which positions became vacant due to the severance plan or the hiring freeze. The following memo outlines management's plan to rehire staff in a few critical program areas, while keeping the remaining positions frozen until mid-fiscal year. The voluntary severance plan, even factoring in the rehiring of these few positions, has resulted in sufficient budgetary savings to balance this year's budget and likely • prevent the use of contingency reserves to fund recurring salaries and benefits expenses. In total, there are 20.33 vacant full-time equivalent (FTE) positions town-wide, If left unfilled, these vacant positions would result in the following amount of estimated annual budgetary savings in each of the below funds: Fund Estimated Ann uai Savings General $ 773,773 Highway 249,224 Fleet Maintenance -116,932 Total All Funds $1,139,929 Critical Positions Identified There are, however, several key vacant positions that are critical to the operations of various programs within the Town and are recommended to be filled immediately. Those positions and the justification for their immediate need are listed in the table below: Annual • Position FTE sale /BenefitsJustification for Rehire Planning & 1 00 $ 130,691 Key department head position needed since Development Services Zoning Director reorganization was not implemented Police Lead 1.40 $ 56,819 Key position to provide coverage in 24 hr./7 day a week operation center Dispatcher _.- _ Senior Office1.00 $42,881 Key clerical position to provide support to numerous Planning&Zoning boards Assistant(P&Z) &commissions Assistant Pool Key position needed to provide backup for Aquatics Manager and assistance Manager 0.75 $23,554 with Pool operations. The cost of this position is expected to be recovered by increased p2Ql revenues. Park& Keyposition needed to handle in-housepark maintenance duties absorbed Recreation crew 1.a0 $81,727 by Leader eliminating a portion of outside contract services Fleet . Maintenance 1.00 $ 54,289 Key position needed to staff new centralized fleet maintenance program Mechanic 11 FleetMaintenance 1.00 $62,390 Key position needed to staff new centralized fleet maintenance program Mechanic III Totals 6.76 $432,351 FY 2009/10 Personnel Status Report Memo Page 2of3 It is anticipated that these positions will be opened up first as internal recruitment opportunities to existing employees, and then to external applicants if unable to be filled with internal candidates. The goal is to fill these positions within the next 90 days, or by the end of October. Keeping these positions unfilled for this length of time allows the FY 2009/10 budget to recover the costs of the severance packages taken by those employees. It is estimated that the annual cost of filling these positions would amount to $315,672 in the General Fund and $116,679 in the Fleet Maintenance Fund. Positions to Remain Frozen Until_January, 2010 It is further anticipated that the following vacant positions listed in Exhibit A remain unfilled at least until mid- year, January, 2010, to allow time to evaluate the Town's financial status and determine whether it would be financially feasible or operationally necessary to refill any additional positions based on workload and affordability at that time: Position E Annual Budgeted _ saiary/genefits Senior Office Assistant(Town Clerk - .63 $23,531 Human Resources Anal st HR 1.00 $'83 514 Senior Office Specialist(Finance) 1.00 $48,099 LibraPage(Library) - Customer Service Rep. (Library) ,25 $ 7,627 u Offices•ecialist Suildin' Safet 1.00 $38 216 Zoning,I nspection Tech. (P&Z) _-� 1.00 $48,590 Development Coordinator f_P&Z) 1.00 $561925 Dispatcher(PD) 1.00 $ SOS Part-time Records Specialist(PD} 1_. - .50 $ �4�703 Police Officer(PD} 1.00 - $62,872 Senior Office Assistant(P1lv-Hw r Funder 1.00 $43,983 Streets& Drainage Crew Leader(PW-Hwy Fund) 1.00 $68,329 -f Totals 11.58 $670,413 Po 'dons to be Eliminated from FY'20091'10 Budget Two (2) positions vacated due to the voluntary severance plan listed on Exhibit A are recommended for elimination from the FY 2009/10 budget due to affordability, reduced workload in the roadwayconstruction Y . . area, and the available capacity for these job duties to be absorbed by other filled positions: Posit. Annual Budgeted - 1=TE Salary/Benefits Construction Clerk(PW Hwy Fund) 1.00 $50,313 - _ Construction Manager(PW-Hwy Fund) _�__�_ - 1.00 $86,599 Totals 2.80 $ 136 912 Summary . Management feels that opening these key, critical positions up for internal recruitment opportunities and re evaluating our needs at mid-year is the most advantageous way of realigning our human resources and balancing the Town's budget. It is also anticipated that with these current existing vacancies, some departments may be reorganizing job duties among their remaining staff to better balance work needs in each area. FY 2009/10 Personnel Status Report Memo Page 3 of 3 Staff is in the process of preparing a 5-Year Economic Resiliency Plan for the Town which will provide a - more comprehensive 5-year financial forecast of the Town's major operating funds projecting the fiscal impacts of these position vacancies. This plan is scheduled to be presented to the Town Council at the November 91" Study Session as a means of beginning early discussions regarding the FY 2010/11 budget. As always, I would like to thank the Town Council and staff for their continued dedication, support and patience as we manage through these trying financial times; Attachment: Exhibit A- FY 2009/10 Position Vacancy Listing TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2 010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING HUMAN RESOURCES STAFFING LEVELS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding Human Resources staffing levels. In the original FY09/10 budget there were four FTE authorized in Human Resources. As part of the Voluntary Reduction, one FTE was eliminated in Human Resources. In theory, this department was supposed to operate with three FTE? Yet, when the budget was approved there were still four FTE listed. In the new FY201012011 there are five FTE recommended. Please explain. DISCUSSION Only two positions organization-wide were eliminated from the FY 09/10 budget and are listed in the August 6, 2009 memo attached. The addition of one FTE in Human Resources is the result of the transfer of the Risk &Safety Manager function from PD to an organization-wide function under the HR Department, at the direction of last year's Council. The Human Resources Analyst was a frozen position listed in the memo, but was not one of the eliminated positions. It is one of three positions being recommended for funding in this budget, and is titled Employee and Organizational Analyst to reflect the training and programming functions it will perform. As referenced in the Interim Town Manager's budget message, this position is being recommended to be filled. This is due to the continually pressing and long-unaddressed human resources needs within the organization and the lack of staff capacity available for the nearly four dozens projects and assignments in the Director's work plan. The work plan does not account for weekly situations that require the Director's time in counseling and meetings with supervisors and employees, among other responsibilities and non-project responsibilities. The reality is there is a workload of two senior-level employees but only the Director position is filled at this time. See the attached memo for additional details. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. N1PL EY AR�� p~� ,��r,4`�J t17's I F , A c �4 '7136 13 N ED Human Resources March 29, 2010 TO: Jerene Watson interim Town Manager 6 FROM: Betty Dickens 41.7; Li O !,1( L141 Human Resources Director REFERENCE: Employee and Organizational Development Analyst Per our discussion on the Town's Human Resources Program and Team Goals, HR Director Goals, tasks and duties and my assessment of HR services provided, I am requesting to have the HR Analyst position open for recruitment. Numerous program needs identified and/or Implemented by the former HR Director, Sandra Abbey, have been placed on hold. The majority of these programs address employee and organizational development key performance competencies. These programs are listed on the Town Manager—Staff Assignment Tracking document which we have discussed. Since my start date I have met with all Department Directors to survey management and employee development needs. Several Directors provided me with requests they have been anxious to discuss and implement. The HR Analyst position became vacant on 09/26/09. TOV KR Specialists continue to provide excellent quality customer services. The current workload for the two HR specialist positions is high and we are addressing volunteer and/or"intern support options. Routine tasks (filing, MUNI'S maintenance) are being placed to the side in order to meet our day-to-day customer requests and needs. The high work load has resulted in a raised level of stress and anxiety for staff. They are extremely aware HR must address the needs of employees and their families in a timely manner. HR support is directly linked to organization success. The Analyst position would relieve and shift tasks and duties. Management and personnel development programs are on hold for the majority of department staff. Since my start date 1 have assessed the gap for training and development needs in the areas of communication skills, performance management, team building, team management, organizational values, leadership, supervisory skills, customer service, employee relations issue management, succession /workforce management, organization innovation and TOV policies, procedures and administrative directives.. These same areas of need are also reflected in the tracking document mentioned above. I am in the process of adapting several job descriptions from other cities and towns (Goodyear, Mesa, Peoria, Tempe)reflecting the type of essential functions needed to meet the Town's mission and what I feel reflect the needs of TOV. I recommend the job title reflect HR Employee and Organizational Development Analyst. Please let me know if this strategy reflects your vision and needs. www.orovalUeyaz.gov 11000 N.La Canada Drive - Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 phone:(520)229-4700 - fax:(520)229-0428 . . TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING BUDGET PRESENTATION FORMAT, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the format of the Town Manager Recommended Budget presentation. Every department in the budget has a line item called O&M instead of a detailed breakdown of what that entails. This single line item hides many expenditure details. Why has the budget presentation been changed so dramatically? DISCUSSION This change was a result of Council direction and dialogue over recent budget years and is part of the evolution towards a program-based budget, which is not intended to be a line-item depiction. As we move more fully towards performance measurement and reporting, the budget tool is intended to facilitate Council's policy role and dialogue on achieving the outcomes you want to see while maintaining the responsibility of the Town Manager to determine "how we get there" through the review and management of the Department Directors' budget recommendations. These recommendations are based on the knowledge and familiarity that comes with the expertise of those performing the daily operations of the Town's service delivery and programs, refined through the perspective of the Town Manager who is guided by Council direction and the lens of established community standards. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE TOWN MANAGER AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the Town Manager and Economic Development. Why is Economic Development combined under Town Manager in the FY-10/11 Recommended Budget? What is the breakdown of the O&M line item under Town Manager (Economic Development) shown as $478,758 for FY09/10 and $232,800 for FY10/11? DISCUSSION • The Economic Development division has always been within the Town Manager's Office. The inclusion of its reporting as a division within the Office and under the Town Manager's tab in the budget is an administrative change that occurred in this year's budget document, along with other housekeeping changes in the budget format. The following is the breakdown of the O&M line items for Economic Development under the Bed Tax fund: Economic DevelopmentO&M (Bed Tax Fund} FY 09/10 Budget FY 10/11 Recom Economic Development Marketing 60,000 60,000 Hilton Bed Tax Rebate 281,758 172,800 Community Funding 137,000 0 Total $478,758 $232,800 RECOMMENDATION 1 CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE COMMUNITY SURVEY, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the Community Survey. In the Town Manager Recommended Budget for FY 10/11, there is a Community Survey listed for$25,000 in the narrative. What is it and where is it buried in the budget? DISCUSSION In January 2010, as a result of the Performance Measurement presentation given to Council, direction from Council was to include the Community Survey in the upcoming budget in order to include information gleaned from the Community Survey as part of our performance measurements initiative. The $25,000 budget for this survey is included in the Outside Professional Services line item in the General Administration budget. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE COST OF SERVICE STUDY, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the Cost of Service Study. In the Town Manager Recommended Budget for FY-10/11, there is a Cost of Service Study listed for$25,000 in the narrative. What is it and where is it buried in the budget? DISCUSSION This item is more appropriately called a "Cost Allocation Plan" and involves the assistance of a consultant to analyze all of the indirect overhead services provided by departments in the General Fund (i.e. Finance, HR, Legal, Town Manager, IT, etc.) to the Town's utility funds (Water and Stormwater) to more accurately substantiate interfund administrative reimbursement amounts that would be charged by the General Fund to these utility funds. A formal study has never been done in this area and would result in a more accurate interfund allocation plan that could be easily updated every year, In recent discussions with a consultant that specializes in preparing these plans, staff has determined that approximately $12,000 would be a more realistic cost for this study, which could be finalized in under eight weeks. The budget amount for this study is included in the Outside Professional Services line in the General Administration budget. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING STEAM PUMP RANCH AND NARANJA TOWN SITE FUNDING, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding Steam Pump Ranch and Naranja Town Site funding. The Town received a $250,000 donation from Walmart that can only be used for the Naranja Town Site; however, on page 20 of the recommended budget it appears that $250,000 is included in the budget for Steam Pump Ranch. Please explain. DISCUSSION The Naranja Town Site fund includes $258,821 in contingency reserve, reflecting the $250,000 donation from Walmart, as well as smaller donations from other sources. No money has been moved into any other fund, including the Steam Pump Ranch fund. The $250,000 shown on page 20 of the recommended budget for the Steam Pump Ranch Fund reflects the award of federal grants or Congressional appropriations for the property. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. r TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING STEAM PUMP RANCH CIP PROJECTS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding Steam Pump Ranch CIP projects. Other than the $909,000 for the current fiscal year, there does not appear to be additional funding for Steam Pump Ranch for FY 2011 - 2015. Does this mean that Staff feels that there are insufficient funds for the next five years to propose any further restoration of the historic facilities after the current Town and Pima County funds are expended? (I note that O&M funds are included for 10/11). DISCUSSION The proposed budget for Steam Pump Ranch for FY 10/11 includes $909,000 for building stabilization and rehabilitation purposes. Beyond FY 10/11, there are no Council-adopted dedicated funds identified for further restoration of the Steam Pump Ranch facilities that staff is aware of at this time. There is the potential for further allocations to come from a future Pima County bond election. Once that election is held and a specific amount is approved for Steam Pump Ranch, staff will include those funds in the five-year CIP. At Council direction, staff will continue to seek Congressional appropriations and other grant funding sources for this project. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Betty Dickens, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER CARTER REGARDING TOWN EMPLOYEE BENEFITS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding Town employee benefits. What are the most recent proposed costs of employee benefits? What percentage is being carried by the Town and what percentage is carried by the Employees? Are there menu options that Employees can choose among to help them with their costs? DISCUSSION What are the most recent proposed costs of employee benefits? Working with our benefit plan consultant, CBIZ, the United Healthcare (UHC ) premium increase was negotiated down to a 15.3% total increase (split at 7.8% employee and 7.5%Town), effective with our plan renewal on 8/1/2010. We are currently in the process of reviewing alternate UHC plan designs in order to meet the eight percent increase provided for in the Town Manager Recommended Budget for FY 10111. CBIZ has provided us with single and dual option plan designs and associated cost analysis. What percentage is being carried by the Town and what percentage is carried by the Employees? The Town of Oro Valley is currently paying 100% of the employee only medical premium cost and 75% of the dependent medical premium cost. The Town is also paying 100% of the cost of the employee only dental and 75% of the dependent dental premium cost. The Town is currently reviewing other employee/employer contribution strategies for the upcoming plan year. Staff is hoping to have final negotiated figures to bring forward at the May 12, 2010 Budget Study Session. Are there menu options that Employees can choose among to help them with their costs? CBIZ has recently presented various plan designs with accompanying cost analysis to the Town. On April 20 and 21, employee focus group sessions were conducted to obtain feedback and opinions on some of these plan designs, and on various methods of employee cost-sharing including different deductibles, medical and prescription drug copays. We have also discussed Health Reimbursement Accounts (HRAs) and Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). The Town continues to review these plan design options for the upcoming plan year and will have final numbers in May. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Mary Davis, Communications Administrator SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding Communications and Outreach. What staff are included under the Town Manager Communications and Outreach program? DISCUSSION The following 3.6 full-time equivalent (FTE)staff are included in the Communications and Community Relations program area within the Town Manager's department: FTE [Communications.m_....Mµ.._.....,._......_.........._.....,__...._.,..._.......�.... Davis,Mar Administrator { 1.00 1 f Wright, Elizabeth Public Info Officer 1.00 Hanson, Kelsie i Communications Specialist 1,00 Asper, Arinda E Senior Office Specialist 0.50 T ) i ] I l Trewern Rem ingn Communications Intern 0.10 RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS AND COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING EMPLOYEE BONUSES AND COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to requests by Mayor Loomis and Councilmember Spoerl for information regarding Town employee bonuses/cost of living adjustments (COLA). The budget does not include cost of living adjustments for employees. Please describe the budget impact of a 1/2 percent and a 1 percent cost of living increase or bonus for Town employees for the next fiscal year. DISCUSSION Table 1. Approximate impact of.5% COLA by fund for FY 2011 �wr+.......r.••w.if�-IYr rW M IyW^F`*......:iwi �.wrw.r..ww. �' `M'�^w>H w'�'�i < __....w... N•IY..w.ti. .� •Z... .i..w..� w..-.w w..._...«.: Tn_ . -r`VV:".`....._........w-.... w�r«.v'w .w^w�w.w�rw.ww M1.MMwM Awv.�: �www..Mw.. ♦ wn,w r w I i...i. .............. www.w•w� _ �..... .....�...�•� '!:.!:...'....^".�=.Y.e...-�.r+w.!!!....5.....:�...._..-.__...�!!!W._'.,�..�«�.n!�..�..°�....."'!�1CZT.e:.._.^.!K_-........................:X.........._._.._-.__..w�w�7......_ww_]M..__..w..ww..w..-......�•_ "'...w'."S.w...._....._.._w.,..,,....•.�......�.�.�.».... General Fund $ 84,000 Bed Tax Fund $ 55 Impound Fee Fund $ 250 Highway Fund $ 9,000 Transit Fund $ 1,200 Fleet Maint Fund $ 600 Stormwater $ 1,260 Water $ 11,000 °, `. """"'�3'�� ...:...r��- .�'� .a,..•.�..-mac »«"'»:—».�•..�'....».;M,.~� ^�.:�:-..-�.- '�..«». .,.'.....t.-. """" ^s _....-.......,x�.r'.,......ri.,L-:r-sw---� •"" _ w..w._-..,.. - - _- • Table 2. Approximate impact of 1% COLA by fund for FY 2011 ,..:-�.-. ..'�S!'�S"�,.�'"•:..C;:. �',. ..YYi�"':' .'jt_:...�.. �s:;;;,,::�,,,K-,!, .µ ~',C"..-"' �.L --�'x-.:.;.:.F-ti::�,--..».r..'...--S:z%�:t:b':;d:»a:�::.:...._.... }--:_'u,� .�t;"JC'_"'....i.:w��.rz:�'r.��..`t��s"�-^• .„.a a--•-��' "' �.'" "�"��. �' d"r'^��` � :`Mi•��`�ic- �I. _Rao �".M.... �».». i �'"�ri• w.aCr�.:wti.«.<.w..»..e7r+.....,a...«%H w..,.lw.,nwsw- i�.:,G.M:.HT....""`,eT :��` �-i-. µ .'"' .w ' «JI .3.w..2''.'"..'—.LG:v..,".. . �� General Fund $ 168,000 Bed Tax Fund $ 110 Impound Fee Fund $ 500 Highway Fund $ 18,000 Transit Fund $ 2,400 Fleet Maint Fund $ 1,200 Stormwater $ 2,520 Water $ 22,000 ......•_- ..._ - ,,,,,,,"��'. ,."^`".""X.' �. ........•-"�t^".�. «s.... ...«.w�••�. .».' ?�...y........:�'�.-yam... ..,a.,�,w .,rw.�. ""� ��'�.w. �.«�'."„�.,.-":r..:."'"-.' "��..^"...ICS.'":�4 tr".,:',WL .. .".`'"^d...'."w"'�L'":"' ""`".' `wvw"Si.�~ ...Yh�w,3--�• ---.��w�".w"'..-S�'"�' r�� '��.».,.""'""M.:� .«.....,...... .':'C"..�.'.�.o.".r-+,-„�.M.,��`S � ��"� �`.:J�.”.Il""" "'..""w"i�+w.w.�""�....,..., �•:M�.��.S....^'—�"':'>^` �.9M'��.,,',;.SQL'.--•«,:.^„.�w"'.�.,."��••=�Y��:..^`^."^'..-"-«"„...--..�' ..3 ......—_ While a COLA results in a permanent increase to an employee's annual base pay, a bonus is a one-time, lump sum payment that does not increase an employee's annual base pay. The estimated cost impact of a bonus is approximately $150,000 in the General Fund and the same as the amounts shown for all other funds in Table 2 above. The difference between the cost impact of a bonus and a COLA in the General Fund is the fact that a bonus is not considered a part of salary subject to Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS)town-matching contributions, and a COLA is subject to PSPRS town-matching contributions. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. • TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Amanda Jacobs, Economic Development Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING BED TAXES, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding bed taxes. Please describe sources of revenue for the Bed Tax Fund? How much revenue do we receive? What do the varying balances by year mean? DISCUSSION The Bed Tax Fund accounts for the Town's local six percent bed tax revenues collected and paid by local hotels and motels. Bed tax collections in this fund have ranged from a peak of almost $1.3 million collected in FY 07/08, down to $980,000 in FY 08/09, with an estimate of slightly over$800,000 for FY 09/10. These decreases are largely reflective of the economic recession, fewer families traveling, and companies cutting back on annual conventions/conferences, etc, RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Snider FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING OV MARKETPLACE SALES TAX RECEIPTS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding OV Marketplace sales tax receipts. During FY 08/09, how many months did the Town collect sales tax revenue from OV Marketplace? DISCUSSION During FY 08/09, the Town collected sales tax receipts from OV Marketplace for seven months, from December through June. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Barry Gillaspie FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Kevin Verville, Information Technology Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER BARRY GILLASPIE REGARDING CREBs, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Gillaspie's request for information regarding Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs). It is confusing to state that we are not planning any 'budget capacity for solar CREBs financing." Is this a savings when we were not supposed to fund this in the first place? Please explain. DISCUSSION For the CREBs, the Finance Director will need to include the capacity to issue and spend the approximately $2.4 million in CREBs proceeds on the solar PV project, and the annual cost of debt service on these bonds will be offset by energy cost savings in the budget. Revenues will be increased by bond proceeds of$2,4 million, and that will be offset by capital expenditures of$2.4 million to pay for the solar panel installation. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Barry Gillaspie FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Kevin Verville, Information Technology Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER BARRY GILLASPIE REGARDING THE PHONE SYSTEM BUDGET, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Gillaspie's request for information regarding the phone system budget. The Recommended Budget includes $180,000 to replace the phone system and $108,000 per year for operating costs. Later, in the items excluded from the Town Manager's budget it is stated that: "No funding of O&M of town-wide telephone system replacement as mentioned above". Please explain. Also, is it possible to reduce the $108,000 per year operating cost for the new system? DISCUSSION The upfront cost of the phone system installation, $180,000, will come from available funds in the Capital Asset Replacement Fund. The annual operating cost of this hosted voice over IP system does not hit our budget until we go live on the system. If approved, staff intends to implement this project during the second half of next fiscal year, so the O&M costs will have no budget impact until FY 11/12. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION This report is for information only. PHONE SYSTEM UPGRADE - VOICE OVER IP (VOIP) OPTIONS 3-Year Cost Comparison OPTION 1: UPGRADE EXISTING PBX TO VOIP (3 Year Phased Implementation) Phased Implementation Total Continued Total 3 Year Costs per Year Hardware/Softwr O&M During Implementation Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Costs Implementation Cost $ 200,000 $ 140,000 $ 260,000 $ 600,000 $ 166,800 $ 766,800 ONGOING YEARLY O&M AFTER IMPLEMENTATION Phone System Maintenance(Year 2+) $ 64,000 T1 Interlinks $ 5,000 PRI Trunks $ 12,000 Long Distance $ 4,800 Analog Telephone Lines $ 1,600 TOTAL $ 87,400 OPTION 2: HOSTED VOIP(1 Year to Implement) Initial Estimated Estimated Total 3 Year Continued Total 3 Year Equipment Monthly Annual Estimated Hosted O&M During Implementation Investment* Hosted Cost Hosted Cost Services Payments Implementation Cost $ 180,000 $ 9,000 $ 108,000 $ 324,000 $ 68,800 $ 572,800 ONGOING O&M AFTER IMPLEMENTATION Estimated Hosting Service Payments $ 108,000 Phone System Maintenance $ - T1 Interlinks $ 5,000 PRI Trunks $ - Long Distance $ - Analog Telephone Lines $ 1,600 TOTAL $ 114,600 r . . OPTION 2 IMPLEMENTATION COST SAVINGS OVER OPTION 1 (3 Years) $ 194,000 POST IMPLEMENTATION MONTHLY OPERATIONS&MAINTENANCE COMPARISON CURRENT OPTION 1 OPTION 2 Monthly Est, Monthly Est,Monthly O&M O&M O&M $ 4,600 $ 7,300 $ 9,600 * Initial investment in equipment can be used with virtually any VOIP platform if the Town chooses to switch VOIP hosting vendors, or invest in an in-house sytstem. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: April 23, 2010 TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Kevin Burke, Assistant to the Town Manager CC: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Department Directors SUBJECT: AMENDED—Response to Requests from Town Council Mayor Paul Loomis • General Fund contingency Vice-Mayor Bill Garner • Vacancies • * Human Resources • Budget Format • Economic Development • Community survey • Cost of service study Councilmember Pat Spoerl • Steam Pump Ranch / Naranja Town Site funding • Steam Pump Ranch CIP Councilmember KC Carter • Employee benefits • Communications and outreach Councilmember Mary Snider • Cost of Living Adjustment • Bed taxes • OV Marketplace Councilmember Barry Gillaspie • CREBs • * Phone system TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY RESERVE LEVELS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding General Fund contingency levels. What is the dollar difference between the Town's adopted 25% contingency reserve amount and the current estimated contingency reserve amount at 43%? DISCUSSION For FY 10/11, the proposed General Fund expenditure budget is $25,751,743. The current estimated contingency reserve amount for FY 10/11 is $10,964,713, which represents 43% of the expenditure budget. A contingency reserve budget at the Council-adopted policy level of 25% equals $6,437,936, a difference of$4,526,777. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING PERSONNEL CHANGES AND STAFFING LEVELS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding personnel changes and staffing levels. Under the header Personnel Changes and Staffing Levels under FY2010/2011 budget, it discusses why a new column called VACANT was added to each department. It explains that the vacant positions should be identified as authorized positions in the budget with no funding allocated. It goes on to explain: "As has been our practice, positions that are essential when vacated are not considered frozen';. To my knowledge in Oro Valley budgets that has never been a practice like this. Please explain. DISCUSSION The Town put its first hiring freeze in place in November 2008. Through the remaining FY 08/09 budget, the Council required the Town Manager to seek approval from Council before any hiring was done, creating additional oversight of the Manager in matters relating to hiring. In June of FY 08/09, during the adoption of the FY 09/10 budget, authority was restored to the Town Manager in matters relating to the hiring freeze. A list of"frozen positions"was presented to Council in a memo (attached) dated August 6, 2009, that listed the FTEs in a hiring freeze until January 2010. As indicated in the memo, a mid-year review was done to update Council, and the Interim Town Manager recommended that the hiring freeze continue. It was anticipated that due to existing vacancies, some departments would reorganize job duties among staff to better balance work needs in each area. As was the practice under the former Town Manager, evaluation has been given on a case by case basis for any filling of vacancies due to turnover and whether those positions perform critical operational functions. A recent example of this was the Water Operator II vacancy that was filled through an internal promotion process. The promotion left a vacancy in the Water Operator I position which has been left vacant. During last fall, there were several processes opened to keep the agreed-upon level of Police Telecommunications Dispatchers filled after a series of resignations. One dispatcher position remains frozen as identified in the 2009 memo. RECOMMENDATION l CONCLUSION This report is for information only. FY 2009/10 Personnel Status Report Memo Page 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 6, 2009 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members FROM: David L. Andrews, Town Manager • RE: FY 2009/10 Personnel and Financial Status Report .overview Management staff has had the opportunity to evaluate the budgetary and operational impacts of all town- wide vacant positions due to the recently offered severance plan as well as the hiring freeze enacted last November. Attached as Exhibit A is the listing of current vacant positions by title within each department. This table also indicates which positions became vacant due to the severance plan or the hiring freeze. The following memo outlines management's plan to rehire staff in a few critical program areas, while keeping the remaining positions frozen until mid-fiscal year. The voluntary severance plan, even factoring in the rehiring of these few positions, has resulted in sufficient budgetary savings to balance this year's budget and likely prevent the use of contingency reserves to fund recurring salaries and benefits expenses. In total, there are 20.33 vacant full-time equivalent (FTE) positions town-wide. If left unfilled, these vacant positions would result in the following amount of estimated annual budgetary savings in each of the below . funds: Fund stimalted Annual avin s General $ 773,773 Highway 249,224 Fleet Maintenance 116 932 Total All Funds $1,139,929 Critical Positions identified There are, however, several key vacant positions that are critical to the operations of various programs within the Town and are recommended to be filled immediately. Those positions and the justification for their immediate need are listed In the table below: • Annual Position FTE Sala /Benefits Justification for Rehire ry Planning & ,04 $ �I 36,691 Key department head position needed since Development Services ZoningDirector reorganization was not implemented Police Lead 1.00 $ 56,819 Key position to provide coverage in 24 hr./7 dayweek operation center Dispatcher a p Senior Office 1.00 42 881 Key clerical position to provide support to numerous Planning&Zoning boards • Assistant(P&Z) $ &commissions _ Assistant Pool Key position needed to provide backup for Aquatics Manager and assistance Manager 0.75 $23,554 with pool operations. The cost of this position is expected to be recovered by increased pool revenues. Park& Recreation Grew 1.00 $61 727 Key position needed to handle in-house park maintenance duties absorbed by eliminating a portion of outside contract services Leader Fleet Maintenance 1.00 $ 54,289 Key position needed to staff new centralized fleet maintenance program Mechanic II Fleet Maintenance 1.00 $62390 Key position needed to staff new centralized fleet maintenance program Mechanic Ill Totals 6.76 $432,351 FY 2009/10 Personnel Status Report Memo Page 2 of 3 it is anticipated that these positions will be opened up first as Internal recruitment opportunities to existing employees, and then to external applicants if unable to be filled with internal candidates. The goal is to fill these positions within the next 90 days, or by the end of October. Keeping these positions unfilled for this length of time allows the FY 2009/10 budget to recover the costs of the severance packages taken by those employees. It is estimated that the annual cost of filling these positions would amount to $315,672 in the General Fund and$116,679 in the Fleet Maintenance Fund. . Positions to Remain Frozen Until January1 2010 It is further anticipated that the following vacant positions listed in Exhibit A remain unfilled at least until mid- year, January, 2010, to allow time to evaluate the Town's financial status and determine whether it would be financially feasible or operationally necessary to refill any additional positions based on workload and affordability at that time: Position FTE Annual Budgeted salary/Benefits Senior Office Assistant(Town Cier�k�_ .63 $23,531 Human Resources Anal st HR 1.00 $'83 510 senior OfffGe Specialist{Finance} 1.00 $48,099 Librax Pa s Libra .20 $30,819 Customer Service Re Lura ,25 $ 7 627 Office Specialist(Building Safety) — 1.00 $34,216 Zonin Ins ection Tech. P&Z 1.00 $48,590 Development Coordinator(f>&Z) 1.00 $66,p25 Disatcher Part-time Records Specialist(PD) .50 $ 4 70 Police Oficer PD} - -- ---- ----------_-- ---- --- - . f, - - 1.00 $62,872 Senior Office Assistant(PV1l2Hwy Fun 1.00 $43,983 Streets&_..Drainage Crew Leader(PW-Hwy Fund) 1.00 $68,329 Totals 11.68 $678,413 Pions to be Eliminated from FY'20091'10 Budget Two (2) positions vacated due to the voluntary severance plan listed on Exhibit A are recommended for elimination from the FY 2009/10 budget due to affordability, reduced workload in the roadway construction area, and the available capacity for these job duties to be absorbed by other filled positions: Pos"tic Annual Budgeted - n FTE SalaSalary/Benefits ry is Construction Clerk(PW-FI Fund _ 1-.90 $50,313 Construction Manager(PW-Hwy Fund) 1.00 $86,599 Totals 2.00 _$ 136,912$ 136,912 Summary Management feels that opening these key, critical positions up for internal recruitment opportunities and re- evaluating our needs at mid-year is the most advantageous way of realigning our human resources and balancing the Town's budget. It is also anticipated that with these current existing vacancies, some departments may be reorganizing job duties among their remaining staff to better balance work needs in each area. FY 2009/10 Personnel Status Report Memo Page 3 of 3 Staff is in the process of preparing a 5-Year Economic Resiliency Plan for the Town which will provide a - more comprehensive 5-year financial forecast of the Town's major operating funds projecting the fiscal impacts of these position vacancies. This plan is scheduled to be presented to the Town Council at the November 91" Study Session as a means of beginning early discussions regarding the FY 2010/11 budget. As always, ! would like to thank the Town Council and staff for their continued dedication, support and patience as we manage through these trying financial times; Attachment: Exhibit A R FY 2009/10 Position Vacancy Listing TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING HUMAN RESOURCES STAFFING LEVELS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding Human Resources staffing levels. In the original FY09/10 budget there were four FTE authorized in Human Resources. As part of the Voluntary Reduction, one FTE was eliminated in Human Resources. In theory, this department was supposed to operate with three FTE? Yet, when the budget was approved there were still four FTE listed. In the new FY2010/2011 there are five FTE recommended. Please explain. DISCUSSION Only two positions organization-wide were eliminated from the FY 09/10 budget and are listed in the August 6, 2009 memo attached. The addition of one FTE in Human Resources is the result of the transfer of the Risk &Safety Manager function from PD to an organization-wide function under the HR Department, at the direction of last year's Council. The Human Resources Analyst was a frozen position listed in the memo, but was not one of the eliminated positions. It is one of three positions being recommended for funding in this budget, and is titled Employee and Organizational Analyst to reflect the training and programming functions it will perform. As referenced in the Interim Town Manager's budget message, this position is being recommended to be filled. This is due to the continually pressing and long-unaddressed human resources needs within the organization and the lack of staff capacity available for the nearly four dozens projects and assignments in the Director's work plan. The work plan does not account for weekly situations that require the Director's time in counseling and meetings with supervisors and employees, among other responsibilities and non-project responsibilities. The reality is there is a workload of two senior-level employees but only the Director position is filled at this time. See the attached memo for additional details. RECOMMENDATION 1 CONCLUSION This report is for information only. ,e,7eV .41 Ami '�'Tl't- •' `4-',/)� k• f Human Resources March 29, 2010 TO: Jerene Watson interim Town Manager0 0 P.M FROM: Betty Dickens ��L✓✓✓I Human Resources Director REFERENCE: Employee and Organizational Development Analyst Per our discussion on the Town's Human Resources Program and Team Goals, HR Director Goals, tasks and duties and my assessment of HR services provided, I am requesting to have the HR Analyst position open for recruitment. Numerous program needs identified and/or implemented by the former HR Director, Sandra Abbey, have been placed on hold. The majority of these programs address employee and organizational development key performance competencies. These programs are listed on the Town Manager—Staff Assignment Tracking document which we have discussed. Since my start date I have met with all Department Directors to survey management and employee development needs. Several Directors provided me with requests they have been anxious to discuss and implement. The HR Analyst position became vacant on 09/20109. TOV HR Specialists continue to provide excellent quality customer services. The current workload for the two HR specialist positions Is high and we are addressing volunteer and/or intern support options. Routine tasks (filing, MUNIS maintenance)are being placed to the side in order to meet our day-to-day customer requests and needs. The high work load has resulted in a raised level of stress and anxiety for staff. They are extremely aware HR must address the needs of employees and their families in a timely manner. HR support is directly linked to organization success. The Analyst position would relieve and shift tasks and duties. Management and personnel development programs are on hold for the majority of department staff. Since my start date 1 have assessed the gap for training and development needs in the areas of communication skills, performance management, team building, team management, organizational values, leadership, supervisory skills, customer service, employee relations issue management, succession /workforce management, organization innovation and TOV policies, procedures and administrative directives.. These same areas of need are also reflected in the tracking document mentioned above. I am in the process of adapting several job descriptions from other cities and towns (Goodyear, Mesa, Peoria, Tempe) reflecting the type of essential functions needed to meet the Town's mission and what I feel reflect the needs of TOV. I recommend the job title reflect HR Employee and Organizational Development Analyst. Please let me know if this strategy reflects your vision and needs. www.orovalleyaz.gov 11000 N.La Canada Drive • Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 phone:(520)229-4700 • fax:(520)229-0428 • TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DA• E: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING BUDGET PRESENTATION FORMAT, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the format of the Town Manager Recommended Budget presentation. Every department in the budget has a line item called O&M instead of a detailed breakdown of what that entails. This single line item hides many expenditure details. Why has the budget presentation been changed so dramatically? DISCUSSION This change was a result of Council direction and dialogue over recent budget years and is part of the evolution towards a program-based budget, which is not intended to be a line-item depiction. As we move more fully towards performance measurement and reporting, the budget tool is intended to facilitate Council's policy role and dialogue on achieving the outcomes you want to see while maintaining the responsibility of the Town Manager to determine "how we get there" through the review and management of the Department Directors' budget recommendations. These recommendations are based on the knowledge and familiarity that comes with the expertise of those performing the daily operations of the Town's service delivery and programs, refined through the perspective of the Town Manager who is guided by Council direction and the lens of established community standards. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only_ TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE TOWN MANAGER AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the Town Manager and Economic Development. Why is Economic Development combined under Town Manager in the FY10/11 Recommended Budget?What is the breakdown of the O&M line item under Town Manager (Economic Development) shown as $478,758 for FY09/10 and $232,800 for FY10/11? DISCUSSION The Economic Development division has always been within the Town Manager's Office. The inclusion of its reporting as a division within the Office and under the Town Manager's tab in the budget is an administrative change that occurred in this year's budget document, along with other housekeeping changes in the budget format. The following is the breakdown of the O&M line items for Economic Development under the Bed Tax fund: Economic Development O&M (Bed Tax Fund) FY 09110 Budget FY 10!11 Recom Economic Development Marketing 60,000 60,000 Hilton Bed Tax Rebate 281,758 172,800 Community Funding 137,000 0 Total $478,758 $232,800 RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION • This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE COMMUNITY SURVEY, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the Community Survey. In the Town Manager Recommended Budget for FY 10/11, there is a Community Survey listed for $25,000 in the narrative. What is it and where is it buried in the budget? DISCUSSION In January 2010, as a result of the Performance Measurement presentation given to Council, direction from Council was to include the Community Survey in the upcoming budget in order to include information gleaned from the Community Survey as part of our performance measurements initiative. The $25,000 budget for this survey is included in the Outside Professional Services line item in the General Administration budget. RECOMMENDATION 1 CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE COST OF SERVICE STUDY, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the Cost of Service Study. In the Town Manager Recommended Budget for FY10/11, there is a Cost of Service Study listed for$25,000 in the narrative. What is it and where is it buried in the budget? DISCUSSION This item is more appropriately called a "Cost Allocation Plan" and involves the assistance of a consultant to analyze all of the indirect overhead services provided by departments in the General Fund (i.e. Finance, HR, Legal, Town Manager, IT, etc.) to the Town's utility funds (Water and Stormwater)to more accurately substantiate interfund administrative reimbursement amounts that would be charged by the General Fund to these utility funds. A formal study has never been done in this area and would result in a more accurate interfund allocation plan that could be easily updated every year. In recent discussions with a consultant that specializes in preparing these plans, staff has determined that approximately $12,000 would be a more realistic cost for this study, which could be finalized in under eight weeks. The budget amount for this study is included in the Outside Professional Services line in the General Administration budget. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING STEAM PUMP RANCH AND NARANJA TOWN SITE FUNDING, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding Steam Pump Ranch and Naranja Town Site funding. The Town received a $250,000 donation from Walmart that can only be used for the Naranja Town Site; however, on page 20 of the recommended budget it appears that $250,000 is included in the budget for Steam Pump Ranch. Please explain. DISCUSSION The Naranja Town Site fund includes $258,821 in contingency reserve, reflecting the $250,000 donation from Walmart, as well as smaller donations from other sources. No money has been moved into any other fund, including the Steam Pump Ranch fund. The$250,000 shown on page 20 of the recommended budget for the Steam Pump Ranch Fund reflects the award of federal grants or Congressional appropriations for the property. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING STEAM PUMP RANCH CIP PROJECTS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding Steam Pump Ranch CIP projects. Other than the $909,000 for the current fiscal year, there does not appear to be additional funding for Steam Pump Ranch for FY 2011 - 2015. Does this mean that Staff feels that there are insufficient funds for the next five years to propose any further restoration of the historic facilities after the current Town and Pima County funds are expended? (I note that O&M funds are included for 10/11). DISCUSSION The proposed budget for Steam Pump Ranch for FY 10/11 includes $909,000 for building stabilization and rehabilitation purposes. Beyond FY 10/11, there are no Council-adopted dedicated funds identified for further restoration of the Steam Pump Ranch facilities that staff is aware of at this time. There is the potential for further allocations to come from a future Pima County bond election. Once that election is held and a specific amount is approved for Steam Pump Ranch, staff will include those funds in the five-year CIP. At Council direction, staff will continue to seek Congressional appropriations and other grant funding sources for this project. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. 1. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Betty Dickens, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER CARTER REGARDING TOWN EMPLOYEE BENEFITS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding Town employee benefits. What are the most recent proposed costs of employee benefits? What percentage is being carried by the Town and what percentage is carried by the Employees? Are there menu options that Employees can choose among to help them with their costs? DISCUSSION What are the most recent proposed costs of employee benefits? Working with our benefit plan consultant, CBIZ, the United Healthcare (UHC ) premium increase was negotiated down to a 15.3% total increase (split at 7.8% employee and 7.5%Town), effective with our plan renewal on 8/1/2010. We are currently in the process of reviewing alternate UHC plan designs in order to meet the eight percent increase provided for in the Town Manager Recommended Budget for FY 10/11. CBIZ has provided us with single and dual option plan designs and associated cost analysis. What percentage is being carried by the Town and what percentage is carried by the Employees? The Town of Oro Valley is currently paying 100% of the employee only medical premium cost and 75% of the dependent medical premium cost, The Town is also paying 100% of the cost of the employee only dental and 75% of the dependent dental premium cost. The Town is currently reviewing other employee/employer contribution strategies for the upcoming plan year. Staff is hoping to have final negotiated figures to bring forward at the May 12, 2010 Budget Study Session. Are there menu options that Employees can choose among to help them with their costs? CBIZ has recently presented various plan designs with accompanying cost analysis to the Town. On April 20 and 21, employee focus group sessions were conducted to obtain feedback and opinions on some of these plan designs, and on various methods of employee cost-sharing including different deductibles, medical and prescription drug copays. We have also discussed Health Reimbursement Accounts (HRAs) and Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). The Town continues to review these plan design options for the upcoming plan year and will have final numbers in May. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Mary Davis, Communications Administrator SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding Communications and Outreach. What staff are included under the Town Manager Communications and Outreach program? DISCUSSION The following 3.6 full-time equivalent (FTE)staff are included in the Communications and Community Relations program area within the Town Manager's department: FTE ............M..�___.__.__.__..__._._�...._._....___.... . [Communications _.._._.,...__.....__... Davis, Mn___ Administrator { 1.00 •Wright, Elizabeth_.�..__._.._.._,. Public Info Officer 1 1.00 Hanson, Kellie i Communications Specialist1 00 Asper, Arinda_„. ._..__......_...........___. Senior Office Specialist 10.50 Trewern, Reminon Communications Intern 0.10 RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS AND COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING EMPLOYEE BONUSES AND COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to requests by Mayor Loomis and Councilmember Spoerl for information regarding Town employee bonuses/cost of living adjustments (COLA). The budget does not include cost of living adjustments for employees. Please describe the budget impact of a 1/2 percent and a 1 percent cost of living increase or bonus for Town employees for the next fiscal year. DISCUSSION Table 1. Approximate impact of.5% COLA by fund for FY 2011 ..�......." :'�"""�•.....,.�5..».�-•,.;.,.....«.�: .... - ••N :.::.::.x L:.V..�i:.::��... .. � �s�3..,••-t:::ta.:x.x:�::».::.3y......... ... ...... .,. �........�»...rc__ ,.,,.,. .....».. .,.•�+�-x-.'-...._..- 'r_----._.._.._.._... ._,......�.............!�!�!�t�+'_-�r-.r.�---.'-�'-�"'"''"e�i-Tom"'-"�-----._..._....�-^-7r--.�-�'Y-_:re-..�.....�'y-"_"'=----"^-----.........._....,,...r. _ _�-w=�,w:,_=.,.. �,,,,,:.,�"x.�;.»,.. , General Fund $ 84,000 Bed Tax Fund $ 55 Impound Fee Fund $ 250 Highway Fund $ 9,000 Transit Fund $ 1,200 Fleet Maint Fund $ 600 Stormwater $ 1,260 Water $ 11,000 ..., ,}W ----•----- �... ----r� .-�^• ,..�.-�.--,.�._�....:».�.... '"'"rr>~'�'"'°'�.,",.:'""' ».::�........ ...amu.»:...,......,,,,�;;x, ��-�;.:�--a::.w. ._V.-- ..._..t.� ........-.»�.�_.. - -�..�~w:s_......._,-._....-........-..,.....�•r_�.....s. x�.,.,«....V.s»..-.........��-...,.........,.._-.r...�:-�r�•�._..:_.....ww,.___.,._..._r__ ___�.._.._ _.., ._,w...._......._.,._. Table 2. Approximate impact of 1% COLA by fund for FY 2011 Nri-7- ""�;"'...; "�x°:..�='�= r _-r,,,,.,..';,s: ...'.� F:a.,,,,1t". C;:.L"�.=.:a��r:x»:;♦-��u--. � :M:-;�.:::�:s:.c..s.;�,.x;:�,:.�,:<, �c'.:, .! r.....,.� �� r��s ✓1M;.�N°° r...w � t�� W"l w.�ri:�r ��."�'w��wxw.}��!��+ti'�♦ ♦ w.��.r'i"i.7�i..sy�yw+F�N�heS"iusvwM�TiZ%.v�.�::lFii.1'::w+i_.....fv�.w.t��♦. �•(e1 � w�Y..v�.�. w.rw. Mt'^^^' rFw. F+Mw�.��.�i.:_.w"<�w�"w�i'....W'w�w_.w s.vw.... _: ^�'°..,^ft7Y w <..�w� 3a.-- ♦.... 14 ♦w�+. ---1.1:it �.�.4- '■■■ v <.�wr W.w.r. _ r. ..w'w iiYe�rnti � � I+ � �rM� f �°�.nw�iv��• w ^✓" « ,Pa : ....w..7.w . r. ,*..y........n.,,..u'w«... ..s-Y»^�.;'♦.,.=.5tr. e. ;r.,_..�.''x"'^....-....,....._.,...--^""r:."=d''S L"'. o.-...,.....,-. �...,,.""':..""..`^t"�m.✓:�:�..":w.,..'; General Fund $ 168,000 Bed Tax Fund $ 110 Impound Fee Fund $ 500 Highway Fund $ 18,000 Transit Fund $ 2,400 Fleet Maint Fund $ 1,200 Stormwater $ 2,520 Water 22,000 f-'-'� '°2' ......�.'�..'�''' .. �. .»...t,.,.;: ,.,�,..z;::;-• .n,�.�_......_,�;. ...�.r;;;,,�;yw,a,,;gwiwa,,,, .,fir„ ✓ -.- ''« «»«.«..www""""`""'"C''�:..✓«a....R...._._•_.._.".�,iLX:.:_.... ^_Z:T -ww Zi...,.,.ww..«.•".._•-'„�"�•----•--•-.��-_Y:.._..-....;:.....--...-....-........a„'.'.'S ...... .�i.R:.r:.w..wn.r.* +wK.v»nr.r-♦ww x .,+..wwrww.n.::«v.«»�� .. .........._ °-rx-.w..,+. 'L"A ^.CUNv:�,:,,,,..,..."Y..^.z..,� ° ew��K."�.'�'i:•-:f While a COLA results in a permanent increase to an employee's annual base pay, a bonus is a one-time, lump sum payment that does not increase an employee's annual base pay. The estimated cost impact of a bonus is approximately $150,000 in the General Fund and the same as the amounts shown for all other funds in Table 2 above. The difference between the cost impact of a bonus and a COLA in the General Fund is the fact that a bonus is not considered a part of salary subject to Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS)town-matching contributions, and a COLA is subject to PSPRS town-matching contributions. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. irirCT TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Amanda Jacobs, Economic Development Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING BED TAXES, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding bed taxes. Please describe sources of revenue for the Bed Tax Fund? How much revenue do we receive? What do the varying balances by year mean? DISCUSSION The Bed Tax Fund accounts for the Town's local six percent bed tax revenues collected and paid by local hotels and motels. Bed tax collections in this fund have ranged from a peak of almost $1.3 million collected in FY 07/08, down to $980,000 in FY 08/09, with an estimate of slightly over$800,000 for FY 09/10. These decreases are largely reflective of the economic recession, fewer families traveling, and companies cutting back on annual conventions/conferences, etc. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Snider FROM: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING OV MARKETPLACE SALES TAX RECEIPTS, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding OV Marketplace sales tax receipts. During FY 08/09, how many months did the Town collect sales tax revenue from OV Marketplace? DISCUSSION During FY 08/09, the Town collected sales tax receipts from OV Marketplace for seven months, from December through June. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Barry Gillaspie FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Kevin Vervi l Ie, Information Technology Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER BARRY GILLASPIE REGARDING CREBs, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Gillaspie's request for information regarding Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs). It is confusing to state that we are not planning any 'budget capacity for solar CREBs financing." Is this a savings when we were not supposed to fund this in the first place? Please explain. DISCUSSION For the CREBs, the Finance Director will need to include the capacity to issue and spend the approximately $2.4 million in CREBs proceeds on the solar PV project, and the annual cost of debt service on these bonds will be offset by energy cost savings in the budget. Revenues will be increased by bond proceeds of$2.4 million, and that will be offset by capital expenditures of$2.4 million to pay for the solar panel installation. RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION This report is for information only. r TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.22.2010 TO: Councilmember Barry Gillaspie FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Kevin Verville, Information Technology Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER BARRY GILLASPIE REGARDING THE PHONE SYSTEM BUDGET, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Gillaspie's request for information regarding 9 g the phone system budget. The Recommended Budget includes $180,000 to replace the phone system and $108,000 per year for operating costs. Later, in the items excluded from the Town Manager's budget it is stated that: "No funding of O&M of town-wide telephone system replacement as mentioned above". Please explain. Also, is it possible to reduce the $108,000 per year operating cost for the new system? DISCUSSION The upfront cost of the phone system installation, $180,000, will come from available funds in the Capital Asset Replacement Fund. The annual operating cost of this hosted voice over IP system does not hit our budget until we go live on the system. If approved, staff intends to implement this project during the second half of next fiscal year, so the O&M costs will have no budget impact until FY 11/12. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. PHONE SYSTEM UPGRADE - VOICE OVER IP (VOIP) OPTIONS 3-Year Cost Comparison OPTION 1: UPGRADE EXISTING PBX TO VOIP (3 Year Phased Implementation) Phased Implementation Total Continued Total 3 Year Costs per Year Hardware/Softwr O&M During Implementation Year 1 1 Year 2 I Year 3 Costs Implementation Cost $ 200,000 $ 140,000 $ 260,000 $ 600,000 $ 166,800 $ 766,800 ONGOING YEARLY O&M AFTER IMPLEMENTATION Phone System Maintenance(Year 2+) $ 64,000 T1 Interlinks $ 5,000 PRI Trunks $ 12,000 Long Distance $ 4,800 Analog Telephone Lines $ 1,600 TOTAL $ 87,400 OPTION 2: HOSTED VOIP(1 Year to Implement) Initial Estimated Estimated Total 3 Year Continued Total 3 Year Equipment Monthly Annual Estimated Hosted O&M During Implementation Investment* Hosted Cost Hosted Cost Services Payments Implementation Cost $ 180,000 $ 9,000 $ 108,000 $ 324,000 $ 68,800 $ 572,800 ONGOING O&M AFTER IMPLEMENTATION Estimated Hosting Service Payments $ 108,000 Phone System Maintenance $ - T1 Interlinks $ 5,000 PRI Trunks $ - Long Distance $ - Analog Telephone Lines $ 1,600 TOTAL $ 114,600 OPTION 2 IMPLEMENTATION COST SAVINGS OVER OPTION 1 (3 Years) $ 194,000 POST IMPLEMENTATION MONTHLY OPERATIONS& MAINTENANCE COMPARISON CURRENT OPTION 1 OPTION 2 Monthly Est. Monthly Est.Monthly O&M O&M O&M $ 4,600 $ 7,300 $ 9,600 * Initial investment in equipment can be used with virtually any VOIP platform if the Town chooses to switch VOIP hosting vendors, or invest in an in-house sytstem. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: April 20, 2010 TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Kevin Burke, Assistant to the Town Manager CC: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Department Directors SUBJECT: Response to Requests from Town Council The attached reports respond to requests from members of the Town Council: • Cultural Resources Inventory Phase II Mayor Paul Loomis • PAG debt service policy • Recovery Act (ARRA) fund tracking • Water infrastructure projects • Cultural Resources Plan Vice-Mayor Bill Garner • Ventana Medical Systems Inc. project update • Street project costs; OCI • Finance and Bond Committee elimination • Coyote Run advertising • Ramada fees FY 08/09 and FY08/10 • Swim team contracts Councilmember Pat Spoerl • Parks and Recreation cost reductions Councilmember KC Carter • Planning and Zoning Special Projects position TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director Mary Davis, Communications Administrator SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR & COUNCIL REGARDING PHASE II OF THE CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY, APRIL 14, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 2. This report is in response to the Mayor and Council's request that staff develop a plan to complete Phase II work identified as part of the Cultural Resources Inventory within the $50,000 appropriated. What could staff do to lower costs so that the $11,000 unspent is all that is necessary to develop and publish the plan? DISCUSSION The Historic Preservation Plan can be completed within the existing budget of$11,000 for Phase II of the Cultural Resources Inventory. That plan will effectively address policies, procedures and strategies for maintaining and preserving cultural resources identified in the Phase I Inventory. The plan will also outline general procedures, but Phase II will not include any specific action from the consultant on potential historic neighborhood designations or any documentation of specific properties. This work can be performed at a later date. The existing budget will also include limited printing of the Phase I report: Rock Art, Ranch and Residence: Cultural Resources in the Town of Oro Valley. The additional component of public outreach and education as well as developing the lecture series and other promotional opportunities in collaboration with the Historical Preservation Commission and the Oro Valley Historical Society will be coordinated through in-house staff and not by outside consultants. This will eliminate any budgetary needs, although a minimal expenditure may be required to publish informational materials for the public. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Craig Civalier, Town Engineer SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING PAG DEBT SERVICE POLICY, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding PAG debt service policy. Is PAG working on a policy to cover debt service requirements to help pay the bill for road projects if a city or town bonds for roadwork? Is any money not designated for our projects this year by PAG potentially at risk? If PAG policy is not changed or clarified to cover debt service on bonds first, what does that mean to the Town if we bond for a street project such as Lambert Lane, especially if our Roadway Impact Fee Fund balance isn't sufficient to cover the cost? DISCUSSION The use of HURF funds for debt service is authorized by Article 9, Section 14 of the Arizona Constitution, which states that monies derived from motor vehicle fees and taxes shall be expended only for highway and street purposes, including, "....for distribution to counties, incorporated cities and towns to be used by them solely for highway and street purposes...and payment of principal and interest on highway and street bonds." In discussions with PAG officials, payment of debt service is a reimbursable cost for a roadway project. The Town will not be required to expend Roadway Impact Fee monies to pay the debt service on the Lambert Lane project. The Town may wish to pursue a policy through PAG that would protect the financial viability of local transportation projects by ensuring that in the event state shared revenues were reduced, monies intended for debt service payments cannot be redirected to other projects. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. A,. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Craig Civalier, Town Engineer Bayer Vella, Conservation and Sustainability Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING RECOVERY ACT (ARRA) FUND TRACKING, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID- YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding how the Town is tracking American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. What is being tracked (ADOT/PAG, Energy) and who is responsible for tracking that information? DISCUSSION Highways The highway preservation portion of the ARRA funding is being tracked by the Pima Association of Governments Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) process. Jose Rodriguez, DPW Engineering Division Manager, is our representative on the TIP. ARRA funding will not come directly to the town and we will not procure any direct contacts to use these funds because we are not federally certified. ADOT is managing the project for the town. Jose Rodriguez is our liaison with ADOT on this project and we will observe all of the construction. The contract has been awarded to Markham Contracting out of Phoenix. All construction should be completed by the end of June. Energy Efficiency The Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds are being tracked by Bayer Vella, Office of Conservation and Sustainability, with assistance from Mary Rallis, Finance Department. The Town is required to submit progress and financial reports on a quarterly basis to two different federal databases. All reporting is performed according to federal guidelines. Once Town Council acts in May on the non-grant financial vehicles to implement the Energy Efficiency Conservation Strategy, the implementation phase will commence in June. The $164,200 in grant monies will be used to purchase new HVAC systems. All grant funds will be expended no later than September 2010. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Philip Saletta, Water Utility Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING WATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, MARCH 31, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 1. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding water infrastructure projects. Is it better to build infrastructure when project bids are coming in lower and rates are lower, as they are now? DISCUSSION Management and timing of water system capital projects is critical with respect to the prudent use of cash during this fiscal year. The water utility will pace the development of capital projects over the next two to three years and use cash to pay for those projects, eliminating the need for additional debt. In addition, we have and will continue to use cash to pay off high interest debt incurred for previous water infrastructure projects. Due to current economic conditions, there is some potential for cost reductions. Specifically, costs have decreased for labor and contract services, while material costs have not dropped significantly. Developing these projects over the next two to three years should not have a significant impact on potential cost savings. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING THE CULTURAL RESOURCES PLAN, APRIL 14, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 2. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding the Cultural Resources Plan. Could some of the tasks in the Cultural Resources Plan be completed by a partnership of the Town with the Historical Society? DISCUSSION The creation of a Historic Preservation Plan involves professional expertise and knowledge of cultural resource management, which will require the Town to rely on outside consultants. Implementation of the Historic Preservation Plan will involve extensive planning and outreach to the community, particularly when exploring the possibilities for historic neighborhood designation. The Town and the Historic Preservation Commission can partner with the Historical Society in those efforts as well as in helping to build and implement a public program for lectures, participation in community events, and future efforts to document historic properties and other cultural resources within the Town. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE VENTANA MEDICAL SYSTEMS PROJECT, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID- YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the the Ventana Medical Systems Inc. (VMSI) project. Where is Ventana Medical Systems Inc. on the timing of their project since it had been delayed? DISCUSSION Staff met with Gregg Forszt of VMSI on April 15, 2010. Mr. Forszt stated that the project funding request is currently awaiting approval from corporate headquarters in Switzerland. He anticipates a response in 2 months and will initiate design work for Laboratory Building #7 and the Central Plant Building at that time. It is anticipated that building permits could be issued as early as April 2011, with construction beginning prior to the end of the fiscal year. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Craig Civalier, Town Engineer SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING STREET PROJECT COSTS AND OCI, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding street projects. Are we getting lower bids today on street projects? If we pull back in doing projects, will we pay more in the future if we delay? If all projects are completely done, how much stretch will we get, and could we reduce from 80 to 78 OCI? DISCUSSION Based on our recent bid opening for the spring 2010 surface treatment contract, it appears that prices are actually rising. Our pavement management staff estimated this project at $445K; however, the low bid came in at $510K. (We do have a fund balance of $530K to cover this project.) Surface treatment prices are increasing for two reasons: the price of oil and the number of surface treatment contracts currently out to bid in the market. This trend is likely to continue because many American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) economic recovery pavement preservation projects are coming on line at this time. With this spring's surface treatment contract and our ARRA projects the town's OCI will be nearly 81. Next year the highway fund proposed budget includes $700K for surface treatment. At this funding level the OCI rating will drop about one point per year. It will take approximately 3 years for the OCI to drop to 78, which is our target OCI. Unless the surface treatment budget is increased to $1.2M per year, the OCI will continue to drop one point per year. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. I TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE FINANCE AND BOND COMMITTEE, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the Finance and Bond Committee. Should we consider elimination of the Finance & Bond Committee? DISCUSSION The decision to eliminate the Finance & Bond Committee (FBC) is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The adopted scope of the FBC states that it primarily advises the Town Council on Town budgetary issues and reviews expenditures from long-term debt issuances for conformity to the intended uses of the funds. The FBC is also presented the results of the Town's financial audit performed by a certified public accounting firm and makes a recommendation to the Council regarding acceptance of the audit. The FBC typically meets quarterly on the last Monday of the month following each calendar quarter end (i.e. January, April, July, October), but at times, has had monthly meetings to work on special assigned tasks from the Town Council. Over the last few years, many of the functions performed by the FBC have duplicated functions already performed by the Town Council, such as review of the budget versus actual revenue and expenditure reports. The FBC scope calls for this to occur on a quarterly basis, while the Town Council is already provided this information on a monthly basis. One FBC scope area that will change greatly is the review of proceeds from long-term debt issuances. The Town has not issued any new long-term debt since the 2005 bonds were issued to purchase the land for the municipal operations center. With the significant effort recently approved to defease a large portion of our outstanding bonds, the only remaining activity related to our existing outstanding debt is the routine payment of required principal and interest. Another scope area is review of the Town Manager's Recommended Budget. All FBC members receive a copy of the Recommended Budget and have been invited to attend the budget study sessions and are welcome to present comments and suggestions to the Council with regard to the budget. Finally, with Finance Department staffing levels down almost 25% from prior years with no dedicated administrative support staff, the resources to support the functions of the FBC have been stretched very thin. In fact, it has been common that the spring quarterly FBC meeting that typically occurs at the end of April is cancelled because staff are heavily involved in the budget process and with Council study sessions. The FBC currently has one member who will be termed out at the end of June, 2010, which requires staff to advertise for a replacement in May; therefore, staff would seek guidance on whether to move forward with filling this vacancy or to hold off pending a possible Council decision to eliminate the committee. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. • L TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Craig Civalier, Town Engineer Aimee Ramsey, Transit Administrator SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING COYOTE RUN ADVERTISING, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding Coyote Run advertising. Transit staff should investigate whether allowing advertising on our Coyote Run buses would generate money to cover the funding shortage. What are the results of this investigation? DISCUSSION Transit advertising options range from interior bus ads to full-size bus wraps. Coyote Run has a fleet of nine vehicles: five 24' vehicles and four 18' raised full-size vans. These vehicles have no interior ad space; the only available advertising space is on the exterior of the bus. Due to the complexity of transit advertising issues, transit systems typically hire an outside contractor to manage an advertising program. If the Town were to hire a contractor to manage a transit advertising program the potential revenue from wraps on the five 24' vehicles could range from approximately $10,000 to $45,000 net annually. This assumes a per bus monthly revenue between $1,000 and $2,500, a contractor fee of 30%, and fixed design and installation fees of approximately $2,500 per bus. For reference, Sun Tran had 15 wraps under annual contract and generated just over $229,000 at the peak of their bus advertising program in FY 2004/2005. Sun Tran administered this program in-house. Due to current economic conditions Sun Tran does not have any wrap contracts at this time. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING RAMADA FEES, MARCH 31, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 2. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding ramada fees. What is the difference in ramada fees between FY 08/09 and FY09/10? DISCUSSION The following fees are shown on a per ramada basis: Park FY 2008-2009 FY 2009 —2010 (Effective 01-01-2010) James D. Kriegh Park • $25 per day Residents and Non-Profits: $25 per 4-hour rental Non-Residents: $35 per 4-hour For-Profits: $50 per 4-hr rental CDO Riverfront Park* $25 per day $25 per 4-hour rental *Because CDO Riverfront Park was constructed in part utilizing Pima County bond funds, the fees must be in line with Pima County fees. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. ik R TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 ' TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING SWIM TEAM CONTRACTS, MARCH 31, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 2. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding swim team contracts. Will swim team contracts be mandatory for all teams in the upcoming year so costs and savings can be projected? DISCUSSION Annual swim team contracts will be offered to all swim teams, but will not be mandatory. An annual contract may be too expensive for some swim teams. Additionally, many swim teams and other user groups contract for lanes on a short term basis, which would not warrant an annual contract. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING PARKS AND RECREATION COST REDUCTIONS, FROM MARCH 31, 2010 STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding Parks and Recreation cost reductions. What reductions in cost have been undertaken to try to bring down end-user costs in Parks & Recreation? DISCUSSION In reality, there has been no direction from the Town Council to bring down end-user costs. In fact, the Town Council took action last year to increase all facility usage fees and directed that incremental increases be proposed on an annual basis to prevent "sticker shock" for end-users. This fall, staff will present recommended facility usage fee increases to the Town Council for possible implementation on January 1, 2011. This year, the Parks and Recreation Department has implemented a number of cost reductions and service level cut backs as outlined below. Aquatics: In November, the Oro Valley Municipal Pool began closing on Sundays. It is anticipated that the pool will remain closed on Sundays until Memorial Day. In FY10-11, the pool will remain closed on Sundays and will be closed an additional five hours each day on Monday—Saturday during the fall, winter and spring seasons. This will impact public swim as well as swim teams. The spring swimming lessons, the "Dive-In" special event (movie at the pool), and the Egg Dive have been suspended for this year, and are not planned for FY10-11. Parks: The burnt out ball field lights are planned to be replaced annually, rather than semi-annually. Although it is still safe to play, it is not the preferred schedule by ball teams. This practice will remain in effect for FY10-11. Due to the increased work load (caused by the elimination of contracted landscapers) the baseball and softball infields are not being groomed on a set schedule, but rather when staff have time to fit it in. Additionally, on occasion the Parks staff relies on teams using the fields to manually drag the fields themselves. Once again, this same practice will be in place for FY10-11. A part time Park Monitor position, which is currently vacant, is recommended to remain vacant for FY10-11. This decreases the number of parks staff available to maintain the parks, and will continue to result in a decrease of 20 hours of maintenance being accomplished at the parks each week. As mentioned above, facility usage fees for ramadas, courts and ball fields were increased, affecting all users. For FY10-11, staff will recommend another incremental increase in facility usage fees to be implemented on January 1, 2011. In FY10-11, cuts are recommended in operations and maintenance in all areas, representing a reduction in fertilizer and water for all non-field grassy areas at James D. Kriegh Park and Riverfront Park. Recreation: This year, fees were substantially increased for Summer Camp and Junior Golf, affecting families of school age children in these programs and resulting in decreased participation. Additionally, one of the three summer camp sites were eliminated. For FY10-11, a second summer camp site will be eliminated, leaving one operational camp at Copper Creek Elementary School with a capacity of 200 participants each week. Special Events: The Parks & Recreation Department works with a number of special events, providing venues, staff support, equipment, and other related services. Due to the elimination of community funding, any special events held in Town that are dependant on Town funding and/or in-kind services will haveto either pay for all services, move the event to another jurisdiction, or cancel the event. It is unclear at this time which events—such as IronKids, the SAACA Arts Festival and the Arizona Distance Classic -will be able to host events in Oro Valley without community funding and in-kind services. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION • This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING THE SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR POSITION, FROM BUDGET RETREAT. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding the Special Projects Coordinator position. What is the cost of the Special Projects position in Planning & Zoning, and what does that employee do? DISCUSSION The Special Projects Coordinator position includes project and consultant management, contract negotiations, annexation outreach, department budgets and administration, grant applications, liaison for the Planning Director to regional agencies and special interest groups, and coordination with PAG and the Census Bureau on community demographics. This position serves a critical role in department support and project implementation. With the department reorganization, duties of the Special Projects Coordinator have been redefined to support the Planning & Zoning Work Plan with the following specific tasks totaling 100% of that position time: Steam Pump Ranch (5%) - Finalize next phase of SPR project with project team - Ongoing coordination during project transition by October 1 (building programs, maintenance, OVHS garden, user groups, archival resources) Annexations (5%) - Tohono Chul annexation - Other potential annexations in Town Planning Area General Plan and Zoning Code Updates (30%) - Content/policy review and updating - Supporting research and coordination - Inter-departmental coordination I • Sustainability Programs (15%) - Energy Efficiency Program support, Green Team implementation - Campus LEED certification for existing buildings as part of Federal Stimulus funded energy program Special Projects, Outreach and Administration (30%) - Coordinate public notice requirements and procedures for all projects - Contribute institutional knowledge based on multiple projects completed over last 8 years - Start and complete special projects as assigned - Liaison between P&Z Director and general public; represent Town in various settings - Support and participate in project neighborhood meetings - Participate in departmental administration including budget, work plan, transition plan for reorganization - Coordinate Board and Commission appointments and procedures Community and Regional Participation (15%) - Currently serves as Chair for PAG POPTAC committee - Complete Census 2010 program (complete Fall 2010) - Coordinate periodic updates for Town demographics - Occasional PAG and other regional issues The total personnel cost of this position (salary and benefits) is $ 89,390. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: April 20, 2010 TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Kevin Burke, Assistant to the Town Manager CC: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Department Directors SUBJECT: Response to Requests from Town Council The attached reports respond to requests from members of the Town Council: • Cultural Resources Inventory Phase II Mayor Paul Loomis • PAG debt service policy • Recovery Act (ARRA) fund tracking • Water infrastructure projects • Cultural Resources Plan Vice-Mayor Bill Garner • Ventana Medical Systems Inc. project update • Street project costs; OCI • Finance and Bond Committee elimination • Coyote Run advertising • Ramada fees FY 08/09 and FY08/10 • Swim team contracts Councilmember Pat Spoerl • Parks and Recreation cost reductions Councilmember KC Carter • Planning and Zoning Special Projects position • TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director Mary Davis, Communications Administrator SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR & COUNCIL REGARDING PHASE II OF THE CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY, APRIL 14, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 2. This report is in response to the Mayor and Council's request that staff develop a plan to complete Phase II work identified as part of the Cultural Resources Inventory within the $50,000 appropriated. What could staff do to lower costs so that the $11,000 unspent is all that is necessary to develop and publish the plan? DISCUSSION The Historic Preservation Plan can be completed within the existing budget of$11,000 for Phase II of the Cultural Resources Inventory. That plan will effectively address policies, procedures and strategies for maintaining and preserving cultural resources identified in the Phase I Inventory. The plan will also outline general procedures, but Phase II will not include any specific action from the consultant on potential historic neighborhood designations or any documentation of specific properties. This work can be performed at a later date. The existing budget will also include limited printing of the Phase I report: Rock Art, Ranch and Residence: Cultural Resources in the Town of Oro Valley. The additional component of public outreach and education as well as developing the lecture series and other promotional opportunities in collaboration with the Historical Preservation Commission and the Oro Valley Historical Society will be coordinated through in-house staff and not by outside consultants. This will eliminate any budgetary needs, although a minimal expenditure may be required to publish informational materials for the public. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Craig Civalier, Town Engineer SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING PAG DEBT SERVICE POLICY, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding PAG debt service policy. Is PAG working on a policy to cover debt service requirements to help pay the bill for road projects if a city or town bonds for roadwork? Is any money not designated for our projects this year by PAG potentially at risk? If PAG policy is not changed or clarified to cover debt service on bonds first, what does that mean to the Town if we bond for a street project such as Lambert Lane, especially if our Roadway Impact Fee Fund balance isn't sufficient to cover the cost? DISCUSSION The use of HURF funds for debt service is authorized by Article 9, Section 14 of the Arizona Constitution, which states that monies derived from motor vehicle fees and taxes shall be expended only for highway and street purposes, including, "....for distribution to counties, incorporated cities and towns to be used by them solely for highway and street purposes...and payment of principal and interest on highway and street bonds." In discussions with PAG officials, payment of debt service is a reimbursable cost for a roadway project. The Town will not be required to expend Roadway Impact Fee monies to pay the debt service on the Lambert Lane project. The Town may wish to pursue a policy through PAG that would protect the financial viability of local transportation projects by ensuring that in the event state shared revenues were reduced, monies intended for debt service payments cannot be redirected to other projects. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Craig Civalier, Town Engineer Bayer Vella, Conservation and Sustainability Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING RECOVERY ACT (ARRA) FUND TRACKING, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID- YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding how the Town is tracking American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. What is being tracked (ADOT/PAG, Energy) and who is responsible for tracking that information? DISCUSSION Highways The highway preservation portion of the ARRA funding is being tracked by the Pima Association of Governments Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) process. Jose Rodriguez, DPW Engineering Division Manager, is our representative on the TIP. ARRA funding will not come directly to the town and we will not procure any direct contacts to use these funds because we are not federally certified. ADOT is managing the project for the town. Jose Rodriguez is our liaison with ADOT on this project and we will observe all of the construction. The contract has been awarded to Markham Contracting out of Phoenix. All construction should be completed by the end of June. Energy Efficiency The Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds are being tracked by Bayer Vella, Office of Conservation and Sustainability, with assistance from Mary Rallis, Finance Department. The Town is required to submit progress and financial reports on a quarterly basis to two different federal databases. All reporting is performed according to federal guidelines. Once Town Council acts in May on the non-grant financial vehicles to implement the Energy Efficiency Conservation Strategy, the implementation phase will commence in June. The $164,200 in grant monies will be used to purchase new HVAC systems. All grant funds will be expended no later than September 2010. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Philip Saletta, Water Utility Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING WATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, MARCH 31, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 1. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding water infrastructure projects. Is it better to build infrastructure when project bids are coming in lower and rates are lower, as they are now? DISCUSSION Management and timing of water system capital projects is critical with respect to the prudent use of cash during this fiscal year. The water utility will pace the development of capital projects over the next two to three years and use cash to pay for those projects, eliminating the need for additional debt. In addition, we have and will continue to use cash to pay off high interest debt incurred for previous water infrastructure projects. Due to current economic conditions, there is some potential for cost reductions. Specifically, costs have decreased for labor and contract services, while material costs have not dropped significantly. Developing these projects over the next two to three years should not have a significant impact on potential cost savings. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING THE CULTURAL RESOURCES PLAN, APRIL 14, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 2. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding the Cultural Resources Plan. Could some of the tasks in the Cultural Resources Plan be completed by a partnership of the Town with the Historical Society? DISCUSSION The creation of a Historic Preservation Plan involves professional expertise and knowledge of cultural resource management, which will require the Town to rely on outside consultants. Implementation of the Historic Preservation Plan will involve extensive planning and outreach to the community, particularly when exploring the possibilities for historic neighborhood designation. The Town and the Historic Preservation Commission can partner with the Historical Society in those efforts as well as in helping to build and implement a public program for lectures, participation in community events, and future efforts to document historic properties and other cultural resources within the Town. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE VENTANA MEDICAL SYSTEMS PROJECT, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID- YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the the Ventana Medical Systems Inc. (VMSI) project. Where is Ventana Medical Systems Inc. on the timing of their project since it had been delayed? DISCUSSION Staff met with Gregg Forszt of VMSI on April 15, 2010. Mr. Forszt stated that the project funding request is currently awaiting approval from corporate headquarters in Switzerland. He anticipates a response in 2 months and will initiate design work for Laboratory Building #7 and the Central Plant Building at that time. It is anticipated that building permits could be issued as early as April 2011, with construction beginning prior to the end of the fiscal year. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. r TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Craig Civalier, Town Engineer SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING STREET PROJECT COSTS AND OCI, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding street projects. Are we getting lower bids today on street projects? If we pull back in doing projects, will we pay more in the future if we delay? If all projects are completely done, how much stretch will we get, and could we reduce from 80 to 78 OCI? DISCUSSION Based on our recent bid opening for the spring 2010 surface treatment contract, it appears that prices are actually rising. Our pavement management staff estimated this project at $445K; however, the low bid came in at $510K. (We do have a fund balance of $530K to cover this project.) Surface treatment prices are increasing for two reasons: the price of oil and the number of surface treatment contracts currently out to bid in the market. This trend is likely to continue because many American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) economic recovery pavement preservation projects are coming on line at this time. With this spring's surface treatment contract and our ARRA projects the town's OCI will be nearly 81. Next year the highway fund proposed budget includes $700K for surface treatment. At this funding level the OCI rating will drop about one point per year. It will take approximately 3 years for the OCI to drop to 78, which is our target OCI. Unless the surface treatment budget is increased to $1.2M per year, the OCI will continue to drop one point per year. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. J TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING THE FINANCE AND BOND COMMITTEE, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding the Finance and Bond Committee. Should we consider elimination of the Finance & Bond Committee? DISCUSSION The decision to eliminate the Finance & Bond Committee (FBC) is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The adopted scope of the FBC states that it primarily advises the Town Council on Town budgetary issues and reviews expenditures from long-term debt issuances for conformity to the intended uses of the funds. The FBC is also presented the results of the Town's financial audit performed by a certified public accounting firm and makes a recommendation to the Council regarding acceptance of the audit. The FBC typically meets quarterly on the last Monday of the month following each calendar quarter end (i.e. January, April, July, October), but at times, has had monthly meetings to work on special assigned tasks from the Town Council. Over the last few years, many of the functions performed by the FBC have duplicated functions already performed by the Town Council, such as review of the budget versus actual revenue and expenditure reports. The FBC scope calls for this to occur on a quarterly basis, while the Town Council is already provided this information on a monthly basis. One FBC scope area that will change greatly is the review of proceeds from long-term debt issuances. The Town has not issued any new long-term debt since the 2005 bonds were issued to purchase the land for the municipal operations center. With the significant effort recently approved to defease a large portion of our outstanding bonds, the only remaining activity related to our existing outstanding debt is the routine payment of required principal and interest. Another scope area is review of the Town Manager's Recommended Budget. All FBC members receive a copy of the Recommended Budget and have been invited to attend the budget study sessions and are welcome to present comments and suggestions to the Council with regard to the budget. Finally, with Finance Department staffing levels down almost 25% from prior years with no dedicated administrative support staff, the resources to support the functions of the FBC have been stretched very thin. In fact, it has been common that the spring quarterly FBC meeting that typically occurs at the end of April is cancelled because staff are heavily involved in the budget process and with Council study sessions. The FBC currently has one member who will be termed out at the end of June, 2010, which requires staff to advertise for a replacement in May; therefore, staff would seek guidance on whether to move forward with filling this vacancy or to hold off pending a possible Council decision to eliminate the committee. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Craig Civalier, Town Engineer Aimee Ramsey, Transit Administrator SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING COYOTE RUN ADVERTISING, FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 MID-YEAR BUDGET UPDATE. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding Coyote Run advertising. Transit staff should investigate whether allowing advertising on our Coyote Run buses would generate money to cover the funding shortage. What are the results of this investigation? DISCUSSION Transit advertising options range from interior bus ads to full-size bus wraps. Coyote Run has a fleet of nine vehicles: five 24' vehicles and four 18' raised full-size vans. These vehicles have no interior ad space; the only available advertising space is on the exterior of the bus. Due to the complexity of transit advertising issues, transit systems typically hire an outside contractor to manage an advertising program. If the Town were to hire a contractor to manage a transit advertising program the potential revenue from wraps on the five 24' vehicles could range from approximately $10,000 to $45,000 net annually. This assumes a per bus monthly revenue between $1,000 and $2,500, a contractor fee of 30%, and fixed design and installation fees of approximately $2,500 per bus. For reference, Sun Tran had 15 wraps under annual contract and generated just over $229,000 at the peak of their bus advertising program in FY 2004/2005. Sun Tran administered this program in-house. Due to current economic conditions Sun Tran does not have any wrap contracts at this time. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING RAMADA FEES, MARCH 31, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 2. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding ramada fees. What is the difference in ramada fees between FY 08/09 and FY09/10? DISCUSSION The following fees are shown on a per ramada basis: Park FY 2008-2009 FY 2009 —2010 (Effective 01-01-2010) James D. Kriegh Park $25 per day Residents and Non-Profits: $25 per 4-hour rental Non-Residents: $35 per 4-hour For-Profits: $50 per 4-hr rental CDO Riverfront Park* $25 per day $25 per 4-hour rental *Because CDO Riverfront Park was constructed in part utilizing Pima County bond funds, the fees must be in line with Pima County fees. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Vice-Mayor Bill Garner FROM: Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO VICE-MAYOR BILL GARNER REGARDING SWIM TEAM CONTRACTS, MARCH 31, 2010 STUDY SESSION, ITEM 2. This report is in response to Vice-Mayor Garner's request for information regarding swim team contracts. Will swim team contracts be mandatory for all teams in the upcoming year so costs and savings can be projected? DISCUSSION Annual swim team contracts will be offered to all swim teams, but will not be mandatory. An annual contract may be too expensive for some swim teams. Additionally, many swim teams and other user groups contract for lanes on a short term basis, which would not warrant an annual contract. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING PARKS AND RECREATION COST REDUCTIONS, FROM MARCH 31, 2010 STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding Parks and Recreation cost reductions. What reductions in cost have been undertaken to try to bring down end-user costs in Parks & Recreation? DISCUSSION In reality, there has been no direction from the Town Council to bring down end-user costs. In fact, the Town Council took action last year to increase all facility usage fees and directed that incremental increases be proposed on an annual basis to prevent "sticker shock" for end-users. This fall, staff will present recommended facility usage fee increases to the Town Council for possible implementation on January 1, 2011. This year, the Parks and Recreation Department has implemented a number of cost reductions and service level cut backs as outlined below. Aquatics: In November, the Oro Valley Municipal Pool began closing on Sundays. It is anticipated that the pool will remain closed on Sundays until Memorial Day. In FY10-11, the pool will remain closed on Sundays and will be closed an additional five hours each day on Monday—Saturday during the fall, winter and spring seasons. This will impact public swim as well as swim teams. The spring swimming lessons, the "Dive-In" special event (movie at the pool), and the Egg Dive have been suspended for this year, and are not planned for FY10-11. Parks: The burnt out ball field lights are planned to be replaced annually, rather than semi-annually. Although it is still safe to play, it is not the preferred schedule by ball teams. This practice will remain in effect for FY10-11. Due to the increased work load (caused by the elimination of contracted landscapers) the baseball and softball infields are not being groomed on a set schedule, but rather when staff have time to fit it in. Additionally, on occasion the Parks staff relies on teams using the fields to manually drag the fields themselves. Once again, this same practice will be in place for FY10-11. A part time Park Monitor position, which is currently vacant, is recommended to remain vacant for FY10-11. This decreases the number of parks staff available to maintain the parks, and will continue to result in a decrease of 20 hours of maintenance being accomplished at the parks each week. As mentioned above, facility usage fees for ramadas, courts and ball fields were increased, affecting all users. For FY10-11, staff will recommend another incremental increase in facility usage fees to be implemented on January 1, 2011. In FY10-11, cuts are recommended in operations and maintenance in all areas, representing a reduction in fertilizer and water for all non-field grassy areas at James D. Kriegh Park and Riverfront Park. Recreation: This year, fees were substantially increased for Summer Camp and Junior Golf, affecting families of school age children in these programs and resulting in decreased participation. Additionally, one of the three summer camp sites were eliminated. For FY10-11, a second summer camp site will be eliminated, leaving one operational camp at Copper Creek Elementary School with a capacity of 200 participants each week. Special Events: The Parks & Recreation Department works with a number of special events, providing venues, staff support, equipment, and other related services. Due to the elimination of community funding, any special events held in Town that are dependant on Town funding and/or in-kind services will have to either pay for all services, move the event to another jurisdiction, or cancel the event. It is unclear at this time which events—such as IronKids, the SAACA Arts Festival and the Arizona Distance Classic-will be able to host events in Oro Valley without community funding and in-kind services. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.20.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING THE SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR POSITION, FROM BUDGET RETREAT. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding the Special Projects Coordinator position. What is the cost of the Special Projects position in Planning & Zoning, and what does that employee do? DISCUSSION The Special Projects Coordinator position includes project and consultant management, contract negotiations, annexation outreach, department budgets and administration, grant applications, liaison for the Planning Director to regional agencies and special interest groups, and coordination with PAG and the Census Bureau on community demographics. This position serves a critical role in department support and project implementation. With the department reorganization, duties of the Special Projects Coordinator have been redefined to support the Planning & Zoning Work Plan with the following specific tasks totaling 100% of that position time: Steam Pump Ranch (5%) - Finalize next phase of SPR project with project team - Ongoing coordination during project transition by October 1 (building programs, maintenance, OVHS garden, user groups, archival resources) Annexations (5%) - Tohono Chul annexation - Other potential annexations in Town Planning Area General Plan and Zoning Code Updates (30%) - Content/policy review and updating - Supporting research and coordination - Inter-departmental coordination Sustainability Programs (15%) - Energy Efficiency Program support, Green Team implementation - Campus LEED certification for existing buildings as part of Federal Stimulus funded energy program Special Projects, Outreach and Administration (30%) - Coordinate public notice requirements and procedures for all projects - Contribute institutional knowledge based on multiple projects completed over last 8 years - Start and complete special projects as assigned - Liaison between P&Z Director and general public; represent Town in various settings - Support and participate in project neighborhood meetings - Participate in departmental administration including budget, work plan, transition plan for reorganization - Coordinate Board and Commission appointments and procedures Community and Regional Participation (15%) - Currently serves as Chair for PAG POPTAC committee - Complete Census 2010 program (complete Fall 2010) - Coordinate periodic updates for Town demographics - Occasional PAG and other regional issues The total personnel cost of this position (salary and benefits) is $ 89,390. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: April 21, 2010 TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Kevin Burke, Assistant to the Town Manager CC: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Department Directors SUBJECT: Response to Requests from Town Council Mayor Paul Loomis • Citizen donations Councilmember Pat Spoerl • Department consolidations • Walmart donation Councilmember KC Carter • Federal grants • Fund transfers • Real property rental • Town Clerk O&M Councilmember Mary Snider • Impact fees • OV Marketplace • �:' i • • i • t - a TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING CITIZEN DONATIONS TO THE TOWN FOR THE NARANJA TOWN SITE. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding citizen donations to the Town for the Naranja Town Site. What has happened to donations from citizens since the bond election failed to pass? DISCUSSION All donations for the Naranja Town Site have been accounted for in a separate fund within the Town's budget. The Town received community donations toward the park site in 2006 totaling $19,171 from citizens, Ventana Medical Systems, and the Sun City Community Foundation. In 2007, Wal-Mart donated $250,000 toward Naranja Town Site, bringing the total donations to $269,171. In 2008, the Town spent $10,350 from these donations to pay for signage to be installed along the walking trails in the park. The remaining balance of the donations is $258,821. At the upcoming May 12th Council Study Session, an agenda item is included to discuss ways that those remaining donations could be used to improve Naranja Town Site. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING DEPARTMENT CONSOLIDATIONS AND REORGANIZATION, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding department consolidations and reorganization. As part of the department consolidations and reorganization, was consideration given to the possibility of shifting the responsibility for the Art Review Commission to the Parks, Rec, Library and CR department along with the Historic Preservation Commission rather than retaining it as part of the Planning Division? DISCUSSION The ARC is currently managed by Planning & Zoning, but its review and approval processes are also integrated with Building Safety and Public Works staff that may be consolidated under Development and Infrastructure Services. Shifting the Art Review Commission (ARC) to the Parks, Recreation, Library and Cultural Resources Department was not considered as part of proposed departmental reorganizations for the following reasons. The ARC primarily reviews public art proposals for private development projects where 1% of the building cost is required for public art. The art work is integrated very closely with the project development plan, landscape plan and architecture. Each proposal is reviewed by planning, zoning and engineering staff for conformance to the funding requirements as well as to site conditions and proposed improvements. Public art approvals and permits are also directly tied to approvals of the development plan. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Tobin Rosen, Town Attorney SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING THE $250,000 DONATION FROM WALMART. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding the $250,000 donation WalMart made to the Town. What have we heard from WalMart regarding their donation? DISCUSSION The Town Attorney's Office has made repeated attempts to contact corporate staff at WalMart to ascertain their position on the Town's request to utilize these funds for purposes other than the original specified use for the Naranja town Site. These communications have included attempts to call the appropriate WalMart executive, Delia Garcia, in Phoenix, and repeated electronic mail follow ups with her. Additionally, we obtained the name of Joshua Rogers, an individual in the corporate headquarters of WalMart in Arkansas, and the Town Attorney sent a letter to this individual on January 26, 2010, requesting a response to our inquiry (attached). Additional electronic follow up was made earlier this month both with Mr. Rogers and Ms. Garcia. To date, WalMart has not responded to any of our requests on this matter. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. ISI January 26, 2010 Joshua Rogers Wal Mart 2001 SE 10th Street Bentonville, Arkansas 72716 RE: Naranja Town Site Funds Dear Mr. Rogers: Allen Kasen at Vestar has given me your name as the most appropriate person to contact in the Wal Mart organization to assist with an ongoing issue. The Town of Oro Valley has been in repeated contact with Delia Garcia of the Wal Mart staff in Phoenix to ask for a final, written determination from Wal Mart with regard to the Town's request to make alternative use of$250,000.00 that had previously been provided to the Town by Wal-Mart for development of the Naranja Town Site Park. Because the Town's proposal for a bond issue for development of the Naranja Town Site Park property was defeated by the voters in 2008, the Town could not use the funds that Wal Mart had generously provided for that purpose. Although the Town has requested (through repeated requests to Ms. Garcia) formal permission from Wal-Mart to apply the funds instead to the restoration of the historic Steam Pump Ranch property in Oro Valley, the Town has yet to receive a formal response to the request. I would greatly appreciate it if you could let the Town know Wal-Mart's final position on this pending request in writing at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Very truly yours, Tobin Rosen Town Attorney Cc: Mayor and Council Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter i FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING FEDERAL GRANTS FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding federal grants. On p. 27, Revenue Schedule by Fund, under Miscellaneous Federal grants FY2011, there is an amount of$174,200. Please provide the detail of what is in this grant with each item broken out. DISCUSSION Of the $174,200 in Miscellaneous Federal Grants, $164,200 is rollover of the Department of Energy Conservation and Sustainability Grant, and $10,000 is a U.S. Dept of Justice Ballistic Vest Grant for the Police Department. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING FUND TRANSFERS FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding fund transfers. Do we have fund transfers? If so, where are they listed in the budget and are there details or footnotes to explain them? If not, please provide a detail on each transfer. DISCUSSION Transfers In are budgeted in a category called "Other Financing Sources." Transfers Out are budgeted in a category called "Other Financing Uses." Please see the attached spreadsheet. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. FY 2010/11 Recommended Budget Fund Transfers Transfers In are budgeted in a category called "Other Financing Sources" Transfers Out are budgeted in a category called "Other Financing Uses" Transfers In: Transfer from Stormwater Fund for storm cleanup services provided by Highway Highway Fund 14,804 Fund (Street Maint)employees Transfer from Stormwater Fund for in-house design and project administration Highway Fund 50,000 services provided for Stormwater projects by Highway Fund (Transportation Engineering)employees Transfers from General, Highway, Transit,Water Utility, and Stormwater Utility Fleet Maint Fund 839,917 Funds for fleet maintenance and repair services Transit Fund 300,000 Transfer from General Fund for subsidizing of operations Municipal Debt Service Fund 127,000 Transfer from General Fund for FY 2010/11 debt service payments Transfer from General Fund for FY 2010/11 operations and maintenance Steam Pump Ranch 43,000 expenditures Water Utilit Fund 100,000 Transfer from Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee Fund for y repayment of loan Total Transfers In: $1,474,721 Transfers Out: General Fund 300,000 Transfer to Transit Fund for subsidizing of operations General Fund 127,000 Transfer to Municipal Debt Service Fund for FY 2010/11 debt service payments General Fund 43,000 Transfer to Steam Pump Ranch Fund for FY 2010/11 operations and maintenance expenditures General Fund 452,612 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Highway Fund 203,033 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Transit Fund 44,949 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Water Utility Fund 95,323 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Stormwater Utility Fund 44,000 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Transfer to Highway Fund for storm cleanup services provided by Highway Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 14,804 (Street Maint)employees Transfer to Highway Fund for in-house design and project administration services Stormwater Utility Fund 50,000 provided for Stormwater projects by Highway Fund (Transportation Engineering) employees Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee 100,000 Transfer to Water Utility Fund for repayment of loan Fund Total Transfers Out: $1,474,721 r TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING REAL PROPERTY RENTAL FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding real property rental. On page 27, Revenue Schedule by Fund, the last line on the page shows an amount of$81,200 for real property rental. On page 31, it seems to indicate under major revenue account an item list for $18,000 for this rental. Please explain. DISCUSSION On page 27, $81,200 is the rent charged to the Water Utility Enterprise Fund. On page 31, $18,000 is rental income from a lease with Verizon Wireless for a cell tower located on Town property. RECOMMENDATION /CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING TOWN CLERK O&M COSTS FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding Town Clerk O&M costs. On page 36, Town Clerk Program Expenditures, O&M costs of $174,986 are projected with a budget of$44,452. What does this item cover and can you explain more about this entry? DISCUSSION Election costs, projected at $130,000, are included in the FY 2009/10 year-end estimate. This is an alternate-year expenditure, and so is not included in the FY 2010/11 budget. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING IMPACT FEES FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding impact fees. Please provide a short primer on our impact fees; what they are called and how they are set. Please explain how impact fees impact the budget. DISCUSSION Development or Impact Fees are a financing mechanism used by local governments to help cover the cost of needed service improvements created by "impact-generating" development. Most often these fees are present in jurisdictions experiencing rapid growth. Impact fees are one-time charges collected before the issuance of a building permit for both residential and commercial projects. The essential purpose of these types of fees is to ensure that new development pays for its fair share of capital improvements necessary to maintain current levels of service provided to the community. By law, impact fees can only be collected for capital improvement projects and the proceeds are not allowed to be used to cover operating or maintenance costs. The Arizona impact fee enabling act authorizes jurisdictions to utilize impact fees if they can meet the following criteria: • The jurisdiction must demonstrate an increased demand for service based on the new development; • Impact fees can be levied if the local jurisdiction can show a direct benefit from the revenues collected; • The fees charged must be assessed in proportion to the development's use of the capital improvements (Arizona Revised Statues, Section 9-463.05). In April of 2008, the Town contracted with Tischler Bise to calculate development fee for all infrastructure categories. The Executive Summary of the consultants report is attached. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. lischlerBise 4701 SANGAMORE ROAD SUITE 5240 I BETHESDA, MD 20816 I: 800,424.4318 I F: 301.320.4860 Fiscal,Economic& Planning Consultants 80 ANNANDALE ROAD I PASADENA, CA 91105-1404 T. 818,790.6170 I F: 818790.6235 Www.TISCHLERBISE.COM Executive Summary The Town of Oro Valley,Arizona has contracted with TischierBise to calculate development fees for the following infrastructure categories: • Parks & Recreation; • Library; • Police; • General Government;and a Transportation. DEVELOPMENT FEE OVERVIEW Development fees are one-time payments used to construct system improvements needed to accommodate new development. A development fee represents new growth's fair share of capital facility needs. By law, development fees can only be used for tvital improvements, not operating or maintenance costs. Development fees are subject to rigorous legal standards, which require the fulfillment of three key elements: demand, benefit and proportionality. First, to justify a fee for public facilities, it needs to be demonstrated that new development will create a demand for capital improvements. Second, new development must derive a benefit from the payment of the fees (i.e.,in the form of public facilities constructed within a reasonable timeframe). Third, the fee paid by a particular type of development should not exceed its proportional share of the capital cost for system improvements. The development fee methodologies established in this report show that: • The capital facilities for which the fees are Prepared are a consequence of new development, • Development fees will substantially benefit new development;and that • Development fees are proportionate and reasonably related to the capital facility service demands of new development. Another general requirement common to development fee methodologies is the evaluation of credits. Two types of credits should be considered: future revenue credits and site- specific credits. Future revenue credits are necessary to avoid potential double payment situations arising from a one-time development fee payment plus the payment of other revenues that may also fund growth-related capital improvements. Future revenue credits are dependent upon the development fee methodology used in the cost analysis. As new development will provide front-end funding of infrastructure,there is a potential for double payment of capital costs due to future principal payments on existing fiscal Impact Analysis.Impact Fees Restenue Strategles EconomiL Impact Analysis Fiscal software } Town of Oro Valley,Arizona--Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements 'tan debt for public facilities. A credit is not necessary for interest payments if interest costs are not included in the development fees. The second type of credit is a site-specific credit for system improvements that have been included in the development fee calculations. Policies and procedures related to site-specific credits for system improvements should be addressed in the Town's development fee ordinance. However, the general concept ,. pt is that developers may be eligible for site-specific credits or reimbursements only if the;provide system improvements that at have been included in the development fie calculations. Project improvements normally required as part of the development approval process are not eligible for credits against development fees. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN REQUIREMENTS Arizona's current development fee legislation requiresadopt an that municipalities p infrastructure improvements plan prior to assessing new or modified developmentment fees. Development fees for municipalities to Arizona ere authorized by bonaRevised Statutes (A.R.S.) 9-463.05. The complete legislation is included in Appendix of this report. Subsection E � � pp p states that, "for each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee,the infrastructure improvements plan shall: 1. Estimate future necessary public services that will be required as a result of new development and the basis for the estimate . Forecast the costs of infrastructure, improvements, real property, financing, other capital costs and associated appurtenances, equipment, vehicles, furnishings and other personalty that will be associated with meeting those future needs for necessary public services and estimate the time required to finance and provide the necessary public services." Each development fee component in this report includes a corresponding Infrastructure Improvements Plan (IIP . Based on development projections, the HP illustrates jproected 1 demand for public facilities, the amount of capital facility required to serve projected growth and e associated capital costs to new residential and nonresidential development. DEVELOPMENT FEE AND HPCALCULATION METHODOLOGIES TischlerBise evaluated several possible methodologies to determine the best measure of the demand created by new development for additional infrastructure careport capacity. This re p � p documents the appropriate methodology and demand indicators by of development for . typep each IIP.The report documents the relationship between the 1IP and the development fees. Specific capital costs have been identified using local data and current dollars. The general formula for calculatinng the development fees and corresponding TIP is shown in Figure 1. The formula used to calculate each development fee is diagrammed in a flow chart at the beginning of each section. Also, each fee category includes a summary table indicating the specific factors used to derive the development fee. These factors are also referred to as level-of-service(LOS) standards. There are three basic methods used to calculate the various components of Oro Valley's HP and development fees. A plan-based method is best suited for public facilities that have adopted plans or commonly accepted service delivery standards to guide capital improvements. Under the plan-based methodology, there are two approaches considered. TischleilBise 2 Fiscal,.Economic&Planning Consultants • Town of Oro Valley,Arizona—Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan The average approach is used for projects that are the rest* of both new and existing deveiopment. The planned costs are allocated to both new and existing development which ensures that new growth only pays its share of the costs. The marginal approach is used for projects that are the result of only new growth. The planned costs are allocated to the net increase in new growth. The incremental expansion method documents the current level-of-service(Los) for each type of public facility. LOS standards are determined using the'Cown's current inventory of capital facilities and assets as well as current costs to construct or purchase comparable facilities or assets. I-lowever, Oro Valley will not use the funds for renewal and/or replacement of existing facilities. Rather the Town's intent is to use development fee revenue to expand or provide additional facilities, as needed to accommodate new development. A third method, known as the cost recovery method, is best suited for facilities that have been oversized in anticipation of growth and have excess capacity available. New development would buy-in to the excess capacity of the facility. The rationale for the cost recovery approach is that new development will pay for its share of the useful life and remaining capacity of recently constructed facilities. The generic formula used to calculate the IIP and development fee is diagrammed in Figure 1. The diagram starts in the upper left corner and progresses left-to-right and down through the lower right corner. T isch ise fiscal,Economic to Planning Consultants Town of Oro Valley,Arizona—Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan Figure 1.Infrastructure Improvement Plan (IIP and Development Fee Formula NT MAN INFRASTRUCT1/R I'.FORECAST FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT Levei ot- r rs t,Ia.Prt tdc,f :11 1 k nranded by , V, I kNektssnt 1rt LLN =._ I 3,,,..411,222.L...; (e.g.acres per person, (e.g.new persons (e.g.total number of square feet of facilities and/or jobs from acres,total number per person and job) new development) square feet demanded by new development) COST FORECAST FOR NEW INFRASTRUCTURE, n fra Inlet,Ire 16- Cfmt AT .... )eininded by N: = 4. , (e.g.total number of (e.g.cost per acre, (total dollar amount) (e.g.new persons (e.g.cost per person acres,total number cost per square foot and/or jobs from and/or per job to square feet demanded of facility) new development) provide the new by new development) infrastructure) NOTE: The infrastructure forecast and cost forecast calculations are repeated for each component of the infrastructure category. DEVELOPMENT rnit, killAnd1 n r N. 1 per Dcsdopillolt im BP Unit (Includes all (e.g.person per (dollar amount by components for the household,jobs per type of housing unit, infrastructure category) square foot,trips per dollar amount per housing unit/square square foot by type foot) of nonresidential development) SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT FEE CALCULATIONS IW FACILITY CATEGORY As noted above,TischlerBise, Inc. calculated the TIP and development fees for five types of public facilities in Oro Valley: parks and recreation, library, police,general government and transportation. All types of development—residential and non-residential—create a demand for capital facilities. This analysis determines those capital needs — and the related costs — brought about by new development. The resulting Hp and maximum supportable development fee amount represents each type of land uses' fair share of the capital cost for different improvements. For parks and recreation and library, residential development is the only type of land use that directly drives the need for additional facilities. The need for police,general government and transportation improvements, however,is brought about by both residential and non-residential development. Therefore, calculations for these development fees are based on both residential and non-residential demand, with the Tischieri3ise Fiscal,Economic 5,Planning consultants Town of Oro Valley,Arizona—Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan resulting development fee amount reflecting each type of development's fair share of related costs. The following summarizes the methodologies used in each fee category. Also presented is the maximum supportable development fee amount. Parks and Recreation The parks and recreation development fee is allocated to residential development. The fee utilizes the incremental-expansion method for all fee components. The development fee is calculated based on household size and the capital cost per person for parkland acquisition and development, park amenities, park recreational facilities, park vehicles/equipment and the parks and recreation component of the development fee study. The maximum supportable development fee amounts for parks and recreation are: $2,699 for a single family housing unit and$1,607 for all other housing types. Library The library development fee is allocated to residential development. The fee utilizes the incremental-expansion method for all fee components. The development fee is calculated based on household size and the capital cost per person for the library facility, land for the library facility, collection materials and the library component of the development fee study. The maximum supportable development fee amounts for library are: $694 for a single family housing unit and$413 for all other housing types. Police The police development fee calculates new growth's contribution for the planned police facility at the Municipal Operations Center, the land acquisition for the police facility,police vehicles/equipment and the police component of the development fee study.As demand for police facilities is driven by residents and businesses, the development fee is allocated to both new residential and nonresidential development.The maximum supportable residential development fee amounts for Police are: $513 for single family housing units and$305 for all other housing types. Non-residential development fees vary based on the use and/or size of the development. General Government The general government development fee uses the incremental-expansion, method to calculate new growth's contribution for future general government facilities, general govt. vehicles/equipment, transit vehicles and the general government facilities component of the development fee study. As demand for general government facilities is driven by residents and businesses, the development fee is allocated to both new residential and nonresidential development. The maximum supportable residential development fee amounts for general government facilities are: $389 for single family housing units and$232 for other housing types. Non-residential development fees vary based on the use and/or size of the development. Tramportation The plan-based method is used to calculate the road construction portion of the Town's transportation development fee based on projects defined in the Pima County Transportation Improvement Plan and the Regional Transportation Authority Regional Transportation Plan. The development fee provides the per development unit cost for the TwhierBise riscat Economic&Planning Consultants Town of Oro Valley,Arizona-Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan Town's planned expansion of its transportation system. The plan-based method is also used to calculate the expansion of Public Works facilities at the Municipal Operations Center Other fee components are calculated using cost recovery method (public works portion of land acquired at Municipal Operations Center) and the incremental expansion method (road vehicles and equipment). Demand for the transportation system is driven by residents and businesses, so the development fee is allocated to both new residential and nonresidential development. The maximum supportable development fee amounts for transportation are: $1,908 for single family housing units and$1,314 for other housing types. Non-residential development fees vary based on the use and/or size of the development. SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM SUPPORTABLE DEVELOPMENT FEE AMOUNTS Figure 2 provides a schedule of the maximum supportable development fee amounts for residential and non-residential development in Oro Valley. The development fees shown are for parks and recreation, library, police, general government, and transportation. For a single family housing unit, the maximum supportable development fee amount is $6,203 and for all other housing units, $3,871. Non-residential development fees vary based on the use and/or size of the development. The maximum supportable development fee for a commercial/shopping center from 100,001-900,000 sq. ft. is $3,654 per 1,000 sq. ft, while the maximum supportable development fee for warehousing is $580 per 1,000 sq, ft. The maximum supportable development fee for a lodging room is$595. Figure 2: Schedule of Maximum Supportable Development Fees Residential-Per Housing Unit Parks and General Recreation Library Polio Goa Transportation Fowl Single Family $2,699 $691 $513 $389 $1,908 $6,203 All Other Hou sin $1,607 $413 $305 $232 $1,314 $3,871 Non-Residential-Per1,000 utile Fee Parks and General Recreation Library Police Govf. Transportation Total Com Shop Ctr 25,000 SF or less N/A N/A $199 $209 $5,462 $5,870 Corn/Shop Ctr 25,001-50,000 SF N/A N/A $172 $179 $4745 $5,097 Com/Shop Ctr 50,001-100,000 SF N/A N/A $144 $157 $3,963 $4,264 Com Shop Ctr 100,001-200,000 SF N/A N/A $1231 $139 $3,392 $3,654 Corn Shop Ctr 200,001-400,000 SF N/A N/A $105 $125 $2,8831 $3,113 Office/Inst 25,000 SF or less N/A N/A $59 $260 $1 789 $2,109 Office Inst 25,001-50,000 SF N/A N/A $50 $245 $1,526 $1,822 Office Inst 50,001-100,000 SF N/A N/A $43 $231 $1,301 $1,575 Office/Inst 100,001-200,000 SF N/A N/A $37 $219 $1,109 $1,364 Business Park /A N/A $41 $198 $1,244 $1,483 Light Industrial N/A N/A $22 $145 $680 $847 Warehousing N/A N/A $16 $80 $484 $580 N A N/A $12 $112 $373 $497 Non-Residential-Per Room Lod in $28 $549 $595 IschierBise 6 cai tomiornit&PbrEmng,Consultants • Town of Oro Valley,Arizona .Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan All costs in the development fee calculations are given in current dollars w' assumed . in fla tion rate over time. Necessary cost adjustments should be made as part of the recommended annual evaluation and update of development fees.The Town will use the Engineering News Record Construction and/or Materials Cost Index for the annual update of the transportation development fee.The Marshall Swift Valuation Service will be used to annually update the. remaining development fee categories (parks and recreation, library, police and general government). The multipliers will be applied against ainst the calculated � development fee. If cost estimates and/or growth projection change significantly, the Town should redo the fee calculations. A note on rounding: Calculations throughout this report are based on an analysis • �' s conducted using Excel software. Results are discussed in the report using one-and two-di.:itp-laces in most cases), which represent rounded figures. However, the analysis itself uses figures carried to their ultimate decimal places; therefore the sums and products generated in the l analysis may not equal the sum or product if the reader .replicates the calculation with the factors shown in the report(due to the rounding of figures shown not in the analysis). . { 'Sub • • Ike 7 Fiscal con mic&PlanningConsu1tan s TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Amanda Jacobs, Economic Development Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING OV MARKETPLACE SALES TAX RECEIPTS FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding OV Marketplace sales tax receipts. What sales tax receipts have been received by the Town from OV Marketplace (i.e., what numbers have we been basing our rebates on?) DISCUSSION The Town collected a total of$863,640 in sales tax collections from OVMP in FY 2008/2009 and has collected a total of$949,113 through February of the current fiscal year. Per the Economic Development Agreement, the Town is required to remit 45% of the total sales tax collections to Vestar. As of the quarter ending December 31, 2009, the Town has disbursed a total of$691,695. The Town will remit the first quarter (Jan. 2010— March 2010) rebate by June 1. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: April 21, 2010 TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Kevin Burke, Assistant to the Town Manager CC: Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Department Directors SUBJECT: Response to Requests from Town Council Mayor Paul Loomis • Citizen donations Councilmember Pat Spoerl • Department consolidations • Walmart donation Councilmember KC Carter • Federal grants • Fund transfers • Real property rental • Town Clerk O&M Councilmember Mary Snider • Impact fees • OV Marketplace • e - " A • ent TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Mayor Paul Loomis FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MAYOR PAUL LOOMIS REGARDING CITIZEN DONATIONS TO THE TOWN FOR THE NARANJA TOWN SITE. This report is in response to Mayor Loomis' request for information regarding citizen donations to the Town for the Naranja Town Site. What has happened to donations from citizens since the bond election failed to pass? DISCUSSION All donations for the Naranja Town Site have been accounted for in a separate fund within the Town's budget. The Town received community donations toward the park site in 2006 totaling $19,171 from citizens, Ventana Medical Systems, and the Sun City Community Foundation. In 2007, Wal-Mart donated $250,000 toward Naranja Town Site, bringing the total donations to $269,171. In 2008, the Town spent $10,350 from these donations to pay for signage to be installed along the walking trails in the park. The remaining balance of the donations is $258,821. At the upcoming May 12th Council Study Session, an agenda item is included to discuss ways that those remaining donations could be used to improve Naranja Town Site. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Paul Popelka, Acting Planning and Zoning Director Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director Ainsley Legner, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING DEPARTMENT CONSOLIDATIONS AND REORGANIZATION, FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding department consolidations and reorganization. As part of the department consolidations and reorganization, was consideration given to the possibility of shifting the responsibility for the Art Review Commission to the Parks, Rec, Library and CR department along with the Historic Preservation Commission rather than retaining it as part of the Planning Division? DISCUSSION The ARC is currently managed by Planning & Zoning, but its review and approval processes are also integrated with Building Safety and Public Works staff that may be consolidated under Development and Infrastructure Services. Shifting the Art Review Commission (ARC) to the Parks, Recreation, Library and Cultural Resources Department was not considered as part of proposed departmental reorganizations for the following reasons. The ARC primarily reviews public art proposals for private development projects where 1% of the building cost is required for public art. The art work is integrated very closely with the project development plan, landscape plan and architecture. Each proposal is reviewed by planning, zoning and engineering staff for conformance to the funding requirements as well as to site conditions and proposed improvements. Public art approvals and permits are also directly tied to approvals of the development plan. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember Pat Spoerl FROM: Tobin Rosen, Town Attorney SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER PAT SPOERL REGARDING THE $250,000 DONATION FROM WALMART. This report is in response to Councilmember Spoerl's request for information regarding the $250,000 donation WalMart made to the Town. What have we heard from WalMart regarding their donation? DISCUSSION The Town Attorney's Office has made repeated attempts to contact corporate staff at WalMart to ascertain their position on the Town's request to utilize these funds for purposes other than the original specified use for the Naranja town Site. These communications have included attempts to call the appropriate WalMart executive, Delia Garcia, in Phoenix, and repeated electronic mail follow ups with her. Additionally, we obtained the name of Joshua Rogers, an individual in the corporate headquarters of WalMart in Arkansas, and the Town Attorney sent a letter to this individual on January 26, 2010, requesting a response to our inquiry (attached). Additional electronic follow up was made earlier this month both with Mr. Rogers and Ms. Garcia. To date, WalMart has not responded to any of our requests on this matter. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. January 26, 2010 Joshua Rogers Wal Mart 2001 SE 10th Street Bentonville, Arkansas 72716 RE: Naranja Town Site Funds Dear Mr. Rogers: Allen Kasen at Vestar has given me your name as the most appropriate person to contact in the Wal Mart organization to assist with an ongoing issue. The Town of Oro Valley has been in repeated contact with Delia Garcia of the Wal Mart staff in Phoenix to ask for a final, written determination from Wal Mart with regard to the Town's request to make alternative use of $250,000.00 that had previously been provided to the Town by Wal-Mart for development of the Naranja Town Site Park. Because the Town's proposal for a bond issue for development of the Naranja Town Site Park property was defeated by the voters in 2008, the Town could not use the funds that Wal Mart had generously provided for that purpose. Although the Town has requested (through repeated requests to Ms. Garcia) formal permission from Wal-Mart to apply the funds instead to the restoration of the historic Steam Pump Ranch property in Oro Valley, the Town has yet to receive a formal response to the request. I would greatly appreciate it if you could let the Town know Wal-Mart's final position on this pending request in writing at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Very truly yours, Tobin Rosen Town Attorney Cc: Mayor and Council Jerene Watson, Interim Town Manager TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING FEDERAL GRANTS FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding federal grants. On p. 27, Revenue Schedule by Fund, under Miscellaneous Federal grants FY2011, there is an amount of$174,200. Please provide the detail of what is in this grant with each item broken out. DISCUSSION Of the $174,200 in Miscellaneous Federal Grants, $164,200 is rollover of the Department of Energy Conservation and Sustainability Grant, and $10,000 is a U.S. Dept of Justice Ballistic Vest Grant for the Police Department. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. 3 TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING FUND TRANSFERS FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding fund transfers. Do we have fund transfers? If so, where are they listed in the budget and are there details or footnotes to explain them? If not, please provide a detail on each transfer. DISCUSSION Transfers In are budgeted in a category called "Other Financing Sources." Transfers Out are budgeted in a category called "Other Financing Uses." Please see the attached spreadsheet. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. FY 2010/11 Recommended Budget Fund Transfers Transfers In are budgeted in a category called "Other Financing Sources" Transfers Out are budgeted in a category called "Other Financing Uses" Transfers In: Highway Fund 14,804 Transfer from Stormwater Fund for storm cleanup services provided by Highway Fund (Street Maint)employees Transfer from Stormwater Fund for in-house design and project administration Highway Fund 50,000 services provided for Stormwater projects by Highway Fund (Transportation Engineering)employees Fleet Maint Fund 839,917 Transfers from General, Highway, Transit,Water Utility, and Stormwater Utility Funds for fleet maintenance and repair services Transit Fund 300,000 Transfer from General Fund for subsidizing of operations Municipal Debt Service Fund 127,000 Transfer from General Fund for FY 2010/11 debt service payments Steam Pump Ranch 43,000 Transfer from General Fund for FY 2010/11 operations and maintenance expenditures Water Utility Fund 100,000 Transfer from Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee Fund for repayment of loan Total Transfers In: $1,474,721 Transfers Out: General Fund 300,000 Transfer to Transit Fund for subsidizing of operations General Fund 127,000 Transfer to Municipal Debt Service Fund for FY 2010/11 debt service payments General Fund 43,000 Transfer to Steam Pump Ranch Fund for FY 2010/11 operations and maintenance expenditures General Fund 452,612 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Highway Fund 203,033 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Transit Fund 44,949 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Water Utility Fund 95,323 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Stormwater Utility Fund 44,000 Transfer to Fleet Maintenance Fund for fleet maintenance and repair services Stormwater Utility Fund 14,804 Transfer to Highway Fund for storm cleanup services provided by Highway Fund (Street Maint)employees Transfer to Highway Fund for in-house design and project administration services Stormwater Utility Fund 50,000 provided for Stormwater projects by Highway Fund (Transportation Engineering) employees Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee 100,000 Transfer to Water Utility Fund for repayment of loan Fund Total Transfers Out: $1,474,721 TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING REAL PROPERTY RENTAL FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding real property rental. On page 27, Revenue Schedule by Fund, the last line on the page shows an amount of$81,200 for real property rental. On page 31, it seems to indicate under major revenue account an item list for $18,000 for this rental. Please explain. DISCUSSION On page 27, $81,200 is the rent charged to the Water Utility Enterprise Fund. On page 31, $18,000 is rental income from a lease with Verizon Wireless for a cell tower located on Town property. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember KC Carter FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER KC CARTER REGARDING TOWN CLERK O&M COSTS FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Carter's request for information regarding Town Clerk O&M costs. On page 36, Town Clerk Program Expenditures, O&M costs of $174,986 are projected with a budget of$44,452. What does this item cover and can you explain more about this entry? DISCUSSION Election costs, projected at $130,000, are included in the FY 2009/10 year-end estimate. This is an alternate-year expenditure, and so is not included in the FY 2010/11 budget. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. r TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Suzanne Smith, Building Safety Director SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING IMPACT FEES FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding impact fees. Please provide a short primer on our impact fees; what they are called and how they are set. Please explain how impact fees impact the budget. DISCUSSION Development or Impact Fees are a financing mechanism used by local governments to help cover the cost of needed service improvements created by "impact-generating" development. Most often these fees are present in jurisdictions experiencing rapid growth. Impact fees are one-time charges collected before the issuance of a building permit for both residential and commercial projects. The essential purpose of these types of fees is to ensure that new development pays for its fair share of capital improvements necessary to maintain current levels of service provided to the community. By law, impact fees can only be collected for capital improvement projects and the proceeds are not allowed to be used to cover operating or maintenance costs. The Arizona impact fee enabling act authorizes jurisdictions to utilize impact fees if they can meet the following criteria: • The jurisdiction must demonstrate an increased demand for service based on the new development; • Impact fees can be levied if the local jurisdiction can show a direct benefit from the revenues collected; • The fees charged must be assessed in proportion to the development's use of the capital improvements (Arizona Revised Statues, Section 9-463.05). In April of 2008, the Town contracted with Tischler Bise to calculate development fee for all infrastructure categories. The Executive Summary of the consultants report is attached. w RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. II 4701 SANGAMORE ROAD I SUITE 5240 1 BETHESDA, MD 20816 1z 800.424.4318 1 Fi 301.320.4860 Fiscal,Economic&Planning Consultants 80 ANNANDALE ROAD I PASADENA, CA 91105-1404 if: 818.790.6170 1 F; 818.790.6235 WWW,TISCHLERBISE.COM Executive Summary The Town of Oro Valley,Arizona has contracted with TischlerBise to calculate development fees for the following infrastructure categories: • Parks&Recreation; • library; a Police; • General Government;and • Transportation. DEVELOPMENT FEE OVERVIEW Development fees are one-time payments used to construct system improvements needed to accommodate new development. A development fee represents new growth's fair share of capital facility needs. By law, development fees can only be used for capital improvements, not operating or maintenance costs. Development fees arc subject to rigorous legal standards, which require the fulfillment of three key elements: demand, benefit and proportionality. First, to justify a fee for public facilities, it needs to be demonstrated that new development will create a demand for capital improvements. Second, new development must derive a benefit from the payment of the fees (i.e.,in the form of public facilities constructed within a reasonable timeframe). Third,the fee paid by a particular type of development should not exceed its proportional share of the capital cost for system improvements. The development fee methodologies established in this report show that: • The capital facilities for which the fees are prepared are a consequence of new development, a Development fees will substantially benefit new development;and that • Development fees are proportionate and reasonably related to the capital facility service demands of new development. • Another general requirement common to development fee methodologies is the evaluation of credits. Two types of credits should be considered: future revenue credits and site- specific credits. Future revenue credits are necessary to avoid potential double payment situations arising from a one-time development fee payment plus the payment of other revenues that may also fund growth-related capital improvements. Future revenue credits are dependent upon the development fee methodology used in the cost analysis.As new development will provide front-end funding of infrastructure,there is a potential for double payment of capital costs due to future principal payments on existing 4,Fiscal Impact Analysis Impact Fees Revenue Strategies-Economic Impact Analysis-Fiscal Software AM° Town of Ow Valley,Arizona—Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan debt for public facilities.A credit is not necessary for interest payments if interest costs are not included in the development fees. The second type of credit is a site-specific credit for system improvements that have been included in the development fee calculations. Policies and procedures related to site-specific credits for system improvements should be addressed in the Town's development fee ordinance. However, the general concept is that dc dopers may be eligible for site-specific credits or reimbursements 0/4 ff they propide system improlvmenis that have been included in the deve/opment fie calculations. Project improvements normally required as part of the development approval process are not eligible for credits against development fees. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN REQUIREMENTS Arizona's current development fee legislation requires that municipalities adopt an infrastructure improvements plan prior to assessing new or modified development fees. Development fees for municipalities in Arizona are authorized by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) 9-463.05. The complete legislation is included in Appendix 2 of this report. Subsection E states that, "for each necessary public service that is the subject of a development fee,the infrastructure improvements plan shall: I. Estimate future necessary public services that will be required as a result of new development and the basis for the estimate. 2. Forecast the costs of infrastructure, improvements, real property, financing, other capital costs and associated appurtenances, equipment, vehicles, furnishings and other personalty that will be associated with meeting those future needs for necessary public services and estimate the time required to finance and provide the necessary public services." Each development fee component in this report includes a corresponding Infrastructure Improvements Plan (HP). Based on development projections, the HP illustrates projected demand for public facilities, the amount of capital facility required to serve projected growth and the associated capital costs to new residential and nonresidential development. DEVELOPMENT FEE AND HP CALCULATION METHODOLOGIES TischlerBise evaluated several possible methodologies to determine the best measure of the demand created by new development for additional infrastructure capacity. This report documents the appropriate methodology and demand indicators by type of development for each TIP.The report documents the relationship between the IIP and the development fees. Specific capital costs have been identified using local data and current dollars. The general formula for calculating the development fees and corresponding TIP is shown in Figure 1. The formula used to calculate each development fee is diagrammed in a flow chart at the beginning of each section. Also, each fee category includes a summary table indicating the specific factors used to derive the development fee. These factors are also referred to as level-of-service LOS) standards. There are three basic methods used to calculate the various components of Oro Valley's TIP and development fees. A plan-based method is best suited for public facilities that have adopted plans or commonly accepted service delivery standards to Ode capital improvements. Under the plan-based methodology, there are two approaches considered. artsdgeose FIstat Economic&Pianrang Consultant$ r r Town of Oro Vatley,Arizona--Development Fee Study and Infrastructure The average approach is used for projects that are the result of both new and existing development. The planned costs are allocated to both new and existing sttng de v clopment which that newgrowth only pays its phare of the costs. � he marginal approach is used for projects that are the result of only ne �g owth The 3latmed costs are allocated a to the net increase in new growth. The incremental expansion method documents the . current level-of-service (LOS) for each type of public facility. LOS standards are determined using the Town's capitalfacilities andassets as well as � current inventory of current costs construct or purchase comparable facilities or assets. However, Oro Valle.. will not use the funds dor renewal and/or replacement of existing facilities. Rather the Town's intent is too use development fee revenue to expand or provide ide addit:ional facilities, as needed to accommodate new development. A third method, known as the cost recovery . '��'' method, is best suited for facilities that have oversized in anticipation of growth and have excess capacity available. New development would buff-in to the excess capacity of the facility.;� The rationale for thecost recovery approach is that new development will pay for its share of the useful .. life and remaining capacity of recently constructed facilities. The generic formula used to calculate the IIP and development fee is diagrammed in Figure 1. The diagram starts in the upper left coaxer and progresses resses left-to-r� � iht and down throughthe lower right corner. ischlease 3 &Planning Consultants .... 74' i Town of Oro Valley,Arizona—Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan Figure 1. Infrastructure Improvement Plan (11P) and Development Fee Formula iwpRAgntetT004,4,-impRovittoiNt otAr4 ________ INFRASTRUCTURE FORECAST FOR NEW DEVELOPM.ENT ..............—_ 1.evr-i ot- '---- N. ,..w Infrastructur,— S:.-rvike to b,I'-,,v.td,s,I x 1)c,,,‘c 4 pmcnt I kmandcd 1...r- tk,NM tkvekomcilt 1..1,:cr,,,n, N,,„ 1 (t g.acres per person, (e_gaiew persons (e.g.total number of square feet of facilities and/or jobs from acres,total number per person and job) new development) square feet demanded by yew development) r..........................mm........................--....w F()RtiCAST FOR NEW 1NERASTRUCTUR . ,intctrt: 171,,,i, , ,,,,', t,,,! . ----- iin.inkkd by , i',,,-.7!.'1,:t 4 i 1,0,-,,,t,r,,,,-k,-to 1,' i,:,'',:7:',..:,•!1,, i),1,,:w,1 .......2LL242.22. _ 1 ElfrattuAture N,, I),,:,,rni,la _ , 1,4i1,,: ,,, til,.." (C..g.total number of (e.g.cost per acre, (total dollar amount) (eq.ncw persons (e.g.cost per person acres,total number cost per square foot and/or jobs from and/or per job to square feet demanded of facilit)) new development) provide the new by new development) infrastructure) NOTE: The infrastructure forecast and cost forecast calculations are repeated for each component of the infrastructure category. DtvEto pmENT F!,r,, . .........,.... . .,...,.. ir I ktrAnd('mt for N ptl-1)evelopment rcr I)eveliymcm . (.:onsvkix HP Unit 1..,;I:lit (Includes all (e.g.person per (dollar amount by components for the household,jobs per type of housing unit, infrastructure category) square foot,trips per dollar'amount per housing unit/square square foot by type foot) of nonresidential development) SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT FEE CALCULATIONS BY FACILITY CATEGORY As noted above,TischlerBise, Inc. calculated the IIP and development fees for five types of public facilities in Oro Valley: parks and recreation, library, police,general government and transportation. All types of development—residential and non-residential—create a demand for capital facilities. This analysis determines those capital needs — and the related costs — brought about by new development. The resulting IIP and maximum supportable development fee amount represents each type of land uses' fair share of the capital cost for different improvements. For parks and recreation and library, residential development is the only type of land use that directly drives the need for additional facilities. The need for police,general government and transportation improvements,however,is brought about by both residential and non-residential development. Therefore, calculations for these development fees are based on both residential and non-residential demand, with the . I , tse ar Fiscai, cone &Nanning C.onsult ants 4,------ r Town of Oro Valley,Arizona—Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan . , resulting development fee amount reflecting each type of development's fair share of related costs. Ilie following summarizes the methodologies used in each fee category. Also preserned is the maximum supportable development fee amount. Parks and Recreation The parks and recreation development fee is allocated to residential development. The fee utilizes the incremental-expansion method for all fee components. The development fee is cidculated based on household size and the capital cost per person for parkland acquisition and development, park amenities, park recreational facilities, park vehicles/equipment and the parks and recreation component of the development fee study. The maximum supportable development fee amounts for parks and recreation are:$2,699 for a single family housing unit and$1,607 for all other housing types. Libra?), The library development fee is allocated to residential development. The fee utilizes the incremental-expansion method for all fee components. The development fee is calculated based on household size and the capital cost per person for the library facility, land for the library facility, collection materials and the library component of the development fee study. The maximum supportable development fee amounts for library are: $694 for a single family housing unit and$413 for all other housing types. Police The police development fee calculates new growth's contribution for the planned police facility at the Municipal Operations Center, the land acquisition for the police facility, Police vehicles/equipment and the police component of the development fee study.As demand for police facilities is driven by residents and businesses, the development fee is allocated to both new residential and nonresidential development.The maximum supportable residential development fee amounts for police are: $513 for single family housing units and$305 for all other housing types. Non-residential development fees vary based on the use and/or size of the development. General Government The general government development fee uses the incremental-expansion method to calculate new growth's contribution for future general government facilities, general govt. vehicles/equipment, transit vehicles and the general government facilities component of the development fee study. As demand for general government facilities is driven by residents and businesses, the development fee is allocated to both new residential and nonresidential development. The maximum supportable residential development fee amounts for general government facilities are: $389 for single family housing units and $232 for all other housing types. Non-residential development fees vary based on the use and/or size of the development. Transportation The plan-based method is used to calculate the road construction portion of the Town's transportation development fee based on projects defined in the Pima County Transportation Improvement Plan and the Regional Transportation Authority Regional Transportation Plan. The development fee provides the per development unit cost for the T tsch • 5 Fiscal,ECW10f1114,&Planning Consultants . I V Town of Oro Valley,Arizona-Development Fee Study and Infrastructure Improvements Plan Town's planned expansion of its transportation system.The planbasedrTiethod is also used to calculate the expansion of Public Works facilities at the Municipal Operations Center Other fee components are calculated using cost recovery method (public works portion of land acquired at Municipal Operations Center) and the incremental expansion method (road vehicles and equipment). I)etnand for the transportation system is driven by residents and businesses, so the development fee is allocated to both new residential and nonresidential development. The maximum supportable development fee amounts for transportation are: $1,908 for single family housing units and$1,314 for all other housing types. Non-residential development fees van'based on the use and/or size of the development. SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM SUPPORTABLE DEVELOPMENT FEE AMOUNTS Figure 2 provides a schedule of the maximum supportable development fee amounts for residential and non-residential development in Oro Valle , The development fees shown are for parks and recreation, library, police, general government, and transportation. For a single family housing unit, the maximum supportable development fee amount is $6,203 and for all other housing units, $3,871. Non-residential development fees vary based on the use and/or size of the development. The maximum supportable development fee for a commercial/shopping center frotn 100,001-200,000 sq. ft. is $3,654 per 1,000 sq. ft., while the maximum supportable development fee for warehousing is $580 per 1,000 sq. ft. The maximum supportable development fee for a lodging room is$595. Figure 2:Schedule of Maximum Supportable Development Fees Residential-Per Ilousing Unit ..„ ,._,..........._ Parks and General Recreation NI,raty Police Govt. Transportation l'otal 4 , Single Family $2,699 $694 $513 $389 $1,908 $6,203 $1,607 $413 5305 5232 $1,314 $3,871 -......., Non Residential-Per 1,000 Square Feet of Floor Area _ .,... Parks and General Recreation Library Police Govt. Transportation Total Com/Shop Ctr 25,000 SF or less N/A N/A $199 $209 $5,462 $5,870 COM/Shop Ctr 25,001-50,000 SF N/A N/A $172 $179 $1,745 Corn/Shop Ctr 50,001-100,000 SF N/A N/A $144 $157 $3,963 $4,264 Com/Shop Ctr 100,001-200,000 SF N/A NiA $123 $139 $3,392 $3,654 Corn/Shop Ctr 200,001-400,000 SF N/A Ni A $105 $125 $2,883 $3,113 Office/Inst 25,000 SF or less N/A N/A $59 5260 $1,789 $2,109, Office/Inst 25,001-50,000 SF N/A N/A $50 $245 $1,52o $1,822' Office/Inst 50,001-100,000 SF N/A N/A $43 $231 $1,301, $1,575 Office/Inst 100,001-200,000 SF N/A N/A $37 $219 $1,109 $1,364 Business Park N/A N/A $41 $198 $1,244 $1,483 Light Industrial N/A NiA $22 $145 $680 $847 Warehousing N/A N/A $16 $80 $484 $580 Manufacturin. - N/A N/A $12 $112 $373 $497 Non-Residential---Per Room Lodgin& IIIMNIA N/A ME $28 TIT $549 $595 TisclilerB 0 Fiscal*Economic&Planning Consultants Town of Oro Valley,Arizona---Development Fee Study and.infrastructure Improvements� uvments Pmt All costs in the development went fee calculations are given in current dollars with no assumed inflation.on rate over time• Necessary cost adjustments should be recommended annual evaluation and update of development fees.The Town wnusehe - r Engineering News Record Construction and/or Materials Cost Index for the annual update of the transportation development fee,The Marshall SwiftValuation • ecce will be used to annually update the remaining development fee categories (parks and recreation, library, police and general government). multipliers be applied against the. calculated development ment l"ee. If cost estimates and/or growth projectionchange significantly,��. cand�,the Town should redo the fee calculations. A note on rounding Calculations throughout this are report based � sed on an analysis conducted using Excel software. Results are discussed in the report using one-and and two-digit places (in most cases), which represent roundedres. However, the analysis �� Itself uses figures carried to their ultimate decimal places; therefore the sums and products generated in the analysis may not equl the sum or product ifthe reader. replicates calculation with the factors shown in the report(due to the rounding � cates the of figures shown,not in.the analysis). , • lisdierBise 7 Fist.Economic&Pfanning CDosultants TOWN COUNCIL REPORT DATE: 4.21.2010 TO: Councilmember Mary Snider FROM: Stacey Lemos, Interim Assistant Town Manager Amanda Jacobs, Economic Development Manager SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER MARY SNIDER REGARDING OV MARKETPLACE SALES TAX RECEIPTS FOR THE SATURDAY APRIL 24, 2010 BUDGET STUDY SESSION. This report is in response to Councilmember Snider's request for information regarding OV Marketplace sales tax receipts. What sales tax receipts have been received by the Town from OV Marketplace (i.e., what numbers have we been basing our rebates on?) DISCUSSION The Town collected a total of$863,640 in sales tax collections from OVMP in FY 2008/2009 and has collected a total of$949,113 through February of the current fiscal year. Per the Economic Development Agreement, the Town is required to remit 45% of the total sales tax collections to Vestar. As of the quarter ending December 31, 2009, the Town has disbursed a total of$691,695. The Town will remit the first quarter (Jan. 2010— March 2010) rebate by June 1. RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION This report is for information only. Page 1 of 1 Cuvelier, Kathryn From: jjmusolf@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 2:00 PM To: Loomis, Paul; Carter, Kenneth; Garner, William; Gillaspie,Barry; Spoerl, Pat; Snider, Mary Cc: Watson, Jerene; Lemos, Stacey; Cuvelier, Kathryn; Rosen, Tobin; hiremath.orovalley@gmail.com; mrzinkin@msn.com; joehornat@aol.com; mrabb@rabbpenny.com; louwtrs@aol.com; d perry@explorernews.corn Subject: Budget Attachments: Letter to Editor DIS.doc; Letter to Editor PRLCR.doc Mayor, Council, Candidates, Town Staff, Explorer News On January 23, 2010 I attended the Town Budget Retreat at Ventana (8 hours). The Public was allowed by the Chair (Mayor Loomis) to provide budget input. On April 24, 2010 I attended a Town Council Budget Study Session (4 hours). The Public was not allowed by the Chair (Mayor Loomis) to provide budget input. Therefore, I decided to send two letters to the editor of the explorer news, the mayor & council, candidates and Town Staff to provide some comments on the budget. John Musolf Resident, Taxpayer, Voter 4/27/2010 FY2O1O/2011 Budget Recommendation calls for a Consolidated Department called Development & Infrastructure Services (DIS) that combines Building Safety, Planning & Zoning and Public Works Departments. The concept of combining three departments into one super- department appears to be a good streamlining approach. It looks like the goals are: 1. Realign supervision 2. Spread the workload among remaining personnel due to departmental reductions from retirement, voluntary reduction in force and job elimination because of economic conditions 3. Some of the positions were spread across functions in decimal equivalents (.50 department 1, .50 department 2) July-Dec 2010 There are still 3 standalone departments during transition period: Building Safety, Public Works, and Planning & Zoning Jan-June 2011 There will be one department called Development & Infrastructure Services (DIS): Development Section and Infrastructure Section. Planning and Zoning disappears. The Town staff used this good consolidated department recommendation as an excuse to add a column called Vacant (authorized but unfunded position) throughout all departments in the budget presentation. In my opinion, when a position is not funded it is not authorized and should not appear in a projected budget. If the workload increases then an increase in personnel must be justified before being added back to the budget. Otherwise the budget is out of . . balance because positions cannot be added without having the associated revenue that would fund them. The town staff argument is that a vacant placeholder needs to be added because these positions are essential. If they are essential then they should be in the budget. For example, the Building Inspector II — Inspection &Compliance Division already has 4 funded positions and Town staff is saying that a vacant position column should be added to reflect that an added position may become essential to the operation of that department in the future if the economy improves? Development Section There are 6 FTE listed as Vacant in the budget. Infrastructure Section There are 5 FTE listed as Vacant in the budget. In my opinion, the Town Council should seek a second opinion from a major accounting firm on this type of budget accounting presentation. FY2O1O/2011 Budget Recommendation calls for a Consolidated Department entitled Parks, Recreation, Library, Cultural Resources (PRL&CR) The concept of combining two departments and adding a 3rd entity into one super-department appears to be a good streamlining approach. It looks like the goals are: 1. Realign supervision 2. Spread the workload among remaining personnel due to departmental reductions from retirement, voluntary reduction in force, job elimination because of economic conditions July-Dec 2010 Jan-June 2011 There were two departments: Parks & Recreation and Library. A new group called Cultural Resources was added with 4 project teams. Cultural Resources Project Property Management & Maintenance (Dual Assignments) PRL&CR Director Parks Maintenance Manager Parks Maintenance Crew Leader Programs & Special Events (Dual Assignments) Recreation Manager Assistant Recreation Manager Historic Preservation Commission (Dual Assignments) PRL&CR Director Senior Office Specialist Grants & Funding (Dual Assignments) PRL&CR Director MultiModal Planner . , There is no workload analysis for the dual assignments that some positions are responsible for. For example, the PRL&CR Director is listed as 1 FTE under Administration but has dual assignments under Cultural Resource Project Teams (Property Management & Maintenance, Historic Preservation Commission and Grants & Funding). There is no decimal workload analysis of how much time will be spent on dual assignments by these positions. There is also no line item for Operations & Maintenance cost for these 4 Project Teams.