HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (741) AGENDA
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
MAY 4, 2009
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
STUDY SESSION - AT OR AFTER 5:30 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1 . Follow-Up Issues from April 20, 22, 27 & 29 Budget Review Sessions
2. Community Funding Update
3. General Budget overview status report/summary
4. Discussion and consideration of proposed additional revenue sources
ADJOURNMENT
POSTED: 04/29/09
4:00 p.m.
ekf
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.
1
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 4, 2009
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM: David Andrews, Town Manager
Stacey Lemos, Finance Director
RE: Follow-up Issues from April 20th, 27'n and 29th Budget Review Sessions
A number of issues were raised during the Mayor and Council's Budget Review Sessions on
April 20th, April 27th, and April 29'h. This memorandum serves as staff follow-up to these issues.
April 20tn:
1.) Issue: Capacity needs to be included in the FY 2009/10 budget for a Department of
Energy grant for the Office of Conservation and Sustainability program.
Response: The contingency line item in the Planning & Zoning department's budget
under the Office of Conservation and Sustainability program has been revised to
$164,200 to account for the grant. Concurrently, $164,200 has been added as a
revenue source under Federal Grants for receipt of this grant.
2.) Issue: Council has requested a more comprehensive organizational chart for the
Development Services department.
Response: Please reference Attachment A.
3.) Issue: Council requested a review of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between
the Town Engineer and Development Services Director.
Response: The MOA will be completed by Friday, May 8th and distributed to Council via
email.
4.) Issue: Council has directed staff to include potential grants from the Indian nations -
Tohono O'Odham and Pascua Yaqui for Honey Bee Village in the FY 2009/10 Budget.
Response: $50,000 from each nation ($100,000 in total) has been included in the FY
2009/10 budget to fund the initiation of the interpretive elements for Honey Bee Village.
1
April 27th:
1.) Issue: Council has directed the Parks & Recreation Department to revise the fees
charged for Summer Camp to realize a cost recovery of 60% for Town residents and
100% recovery for non-residents.
Response: Starting with the upcoming summer program, user fees will be increased to
$160 per child per week for residents and $270 per child per week for non-residents,
versus a current fee of $105 per child per week for residents, resulting in an increase to
revenue of $29,288.
2.) Issue: Guidance was given by Council to try to achieve full cost recovery of the
Summer Camp program at the 60% fee level by reducing costs to operate the program
as much as possible.
Response: The Parks & Recreation staff will perform a cost analysis during the next
fiscal year to measure achievement of this goal.
3.) Issue: Council has requested a study session centered on the Police take home vehicle
policy.
Response: A future study session will be scheduled to address this topic.
4.) Issue: Council raised concern on the $6K budgeted in the Administration program in the
Human Resources department for temporary clerical support to assist with the open
enrollment period for employee healthcare benefit changes.
Response: The $6K will remain in the Human Resources budget pending the outcome
of staffing decisions.
5.) Issue: Council has given staff direction to discontinue mailing of the Oro Valley Vista
newsletter and to distribute instead via the Town's website.
Response: In FY 2009/10, the Oro Valley Vista will be distributed via on-line resulting in
cost savings of $65,240.
6.) Issue: Council has requested the $1OK budgeted for an Animal Licensing Feasibility
Study in the General Administration budget be considered a one-time expenditure.
Response: The $1 OK will be ear-marked as a one-time expenditure for the FY 2009/10
budget.
7.) Issue: Council has directed staff to reduce the amount budgeted for a Naranja Townsite
survey in the General Administration budget.
2
Response: The $20K originally budgeted for the survey will be reduced to $1,000.
8.) Issue: Council has directed staff to reduce the Police Departments budget per
"Attachment B" presented at the April 13th study session totaling $479K, and an
additional reduction of$1.2M as presented by Councilmember Garner at the April 20th
special session.
Response: Staff will make the appropriate changes.
10.) Issue: Council has questioned staff's decision to classify CIP expenditures as recurring
expenses vs. non-recurring expenses.
Response: As CIP expenditures are expenditures requested each year and is a
continuing process, staff deems it necessary to classify such expenses as recurring.
Staff recommends looking at other potential recurring revenue sources to fulfill CIP
needs in the General Fund.
April 29th:
1.) Issue: Council requested a five-year history on the amount the Legal Department has
spent on outside legal counsel.
Response: The below table provides a history of costs associated with outside legal
counsel.
FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Est.
92,577 209,023 79,030 33,092 36,000
2.) Issue: Council requested information on what has been spent on Council retreats over
the previous five years.
Response: The below table provides a history of costs associated with Council
retreats.
FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Est.
- 165 3,792 4,573 6,005
3.) Issue: Council requested information on what has been spent on the Volunteer
Recognition line item over the previous five years.
Response: The below table provides a history of costs associated with Volunteer
Recognition.
FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Est.
10,013 13,402 11,894 14,030 13,800
3
4.) Issue: Council requested information on what has been spent on Travel and Training
over the previous ten years in the Council's department.
Response: The below table provides a history of costs associated with Travel and
Training. Expenditures relating to Council retreats have been removed in order to
provide a more accurate representation of Travel and Training.
FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 01/02 FY 02/03 FY 03/04 FY 04/05 FY 05/06 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09
Est.
21,195 _ 10,808 11,882 11,049 16,575 30,229 27,282 19,345 18,561 39,272
Consequently, of the $39,272 estimated to be spent by year-end, $4,313 was for the
League of Arizona Cities & Towns conference held earlier this year in Phoenix. For FY
09/10, the conference will be held in Oro Valley, which should reduce Council's costs to
registration fees only in the amount of $280 per registrant.
i
/ 4 �/ ,✓ ,✓'C/ P t�l•tea
Stacey Lemos
Finance Director
David Andrews
Town Manager
cc: All Department Heads
4
Q
C
a)
E
s
: i : s
O 10 c''••'':•'.''.•
• '0'0 0it O i ,0 0i0 0 0 O ••0 010 0 0 0 0 010i 0 0'O4., iMN M ' tt: rQ ',-• { f: ::i F:r r r , r r r (y r;
u t.. -
' E j::::.*:.::..:••••:*: :::•:.:*::?::1 , : •••••.
_ W
C
t
O
.'�� i ' R
c u, L O 12 ::� 3
CB O O::: , N L N
O) 0 +r i. i LJ �' cLa L1}, + , 'C OSS C a1
al 0
0 —r 'c cn a o 'v
Z3 (f) t: , N •• •••• �., C'•5 1 C ca u) +r Q a)'_ O
a) -F-• ii;u)�: .
C c:::::::::: C -O' L 1'(� N C :: - C3 i �..; �/ U Cl)
O a' cu
t to co0- c .�;: :, O O = 'cn C U 10) CL- H
::1 O 'cn > C —' o
U
is a) ofl•? c,� •_ L r:• cv 1 c„ . O�: C C:icn'_ —Ica a ca —, n/� 1 N _,:::... _
O w • L C_ O L N C O L L O i t•:':•:•:: a)
C C C C W
4' m'CO co;Q. co '�'
o
t.:•:•:•:'' W
tnUCn � N'N.� �� Cn (nO DCn, ...,''il i" ' ' i
U I—
s , i 1 11 7
a) `a) a) (I) a) a), i ,i
I I a) a) a)
C 2 Cc L� L i u L� L c: C j • 1 ! L f 0
C O o o O O a) O! a) O;a) O 'O a) o'a) a)' a) a)' a) a) O a) a) a) o a) O a) O
.0 ca.L.L (CS (a LL• O O LL O LLca (a 0) 01 O O L1. 0 a) O ca a)L.L. a)u_
() O C O O C C C C C C C O C O C C C C C C C C C C O C C C C
9= - 9 9 - (13 - (a - (6 - 4- CDC' c0 (Q R3 (a CO CO '- CD (13 (D 4= ca '- (D --
D C 'C15 C _ C .0 C _ C '55 _ 'N .0 ..0 _ _ _ _ C _ _ _ 'c _ C _ C
a) cn O u) u) O U ▪O U O U ° 000' (i) UO U O
• •
O U O 0 U U O ▪U O U▪ O
Q . z . z . z t ,-9 0 ,9 O O O O O O U o o O
. z zzzzzz . zzz � z . z .
� a � � m � � c . .
to � � a) CC,
I a) 1
CD gI
3 ., , , i .! ' 1 1 1 ' i ' 1 'i
N ' i ), . ri , Ilii
1 i ! 1 i 11 1 1 1
.� 1 1
a)
CO O O O'O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.'0. 0.'0. 90. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0..P0. 0 O O'O:::, 0 O O
,'ti ..--: r- O N r- 00 V... e- r r M e-' ,. N ,— r- +r .c- r r - N CO r
zt
•
O •
i
Q 1 ! dp -----i -• •
i
O j a) i 0
j E.' " L 1 '
414g „
Q Cl)a) a`• •� d 1 0` C, N
N •: a5; (a W
. Q: ° N N I—
.O (13 �` i. N • :(..2.0"ii.'
Lj • a > C L
v W �' O'er O ps L1 cn O _ •�
RI C Uig; v L ca °� •— O Q; C v 'c (a 1 O 3 �1 v u~.
CT) • a) 0 0 = = L_ o 0 o o z' c cu 1. 1, N a) o C,a)
L._.
L. Q L L' a) a) •N (a C co N U Q i V t 0• .> C_
_ 'cn. O�
''^^ ,,ma,,xx �. 'U L ;
• .c_ C V 0 L �(� V! c' 'c 3 W i a) L i O •C O Q (n •� •�s Q�
rY }, -_a Ia) a)lC mi.— —• 'Q O C O UjC O1 O U L U c.):u) Q C Ccr) �' �_ C: L p 'L Q-
�� ,�' cy) G. �' — —1 a) El, N •� L a) U a) a) a) — a) C W;a) a) O 't
— cn u) 'a 'U U — i— 0 , a); 0.1 U I U u) •C —a N 01 a) _
a m -0 C c � •—, a) a- �5;� 2 a• �' cn �- O�cn l '� C O '� C c Q.
u) • E'' 5 a) a) x m 'O '� 0'cz Q' c a Q_ v)' cij - 0.O 7 Q ca �.CU '�•�''� a) a)
O C i C C i W i- C L- m C Q_ Q; L a) C): C i 0 �: L- L? �- _Q L a)i 0 O
Q , N �i ' N O'' a) O C •V'•V O' C CC •C, O CO 0, ': (1) —
'6 a) oW Cjw -
0 = "- a) _= =� C •C l- - •C C N O C_ 'C: C''c 1'C C E U_ f = - c6 (0
> 'C 'c' > C 'cni• 4•.i
" C cn -C'•= 'C; a) C. a) O cn o.'L a); (Q O o ai' o O a) a)'4- 0 a) a) •— C •- O 0
1 i
d. m Qy0m_oo,Q_ wm0wf— 0_ Q:CnQ. Cn;a.,N'NQ.l0,NU) OtOF— DCnU,WUF— E—
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY 2
Page 1 of 2
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 05/04/09
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: TORY SCHLIEVERT,MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT
ART CUARON, FINANCE ANALYST
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF COMMUNITY FUNDING SUBCOMMITTEE
RECOMMEDNATIONS
SUMMARY:
On April 6, 2009, Town Council was presented with the Town Manager's Recommended Budget for FY 09/10,
including recommended funding amounts for the Community Funding Program. At that time Council provided
direction to the Community Funding Subcommittee to convene and provide their funding recommendations
based on presentations given by each of the applicants.
On April 30, 2009, the subcommittee invited all 18 agencies to give a presentation explaining their agency and
application. The subcommittee was also able to ask the applicants in depth questions about their organizational
needs. All but one agency elected to participate in the presentation day. After hearing each agency's
presentation, the subcommittee members rated the applicants based on criteria adopted as part of the
CommunityFunding process. The table below indicates the amount each agency requested, the amount of
funding that was included in the Town Manager's Recommended Budget and the subcommittee's
recommendation.
Funding Town Manager's Subcommittee
Agency Request Recommendation Recommendation
Amphi Foundation $ 5,500 $ - $ 2,000
Arizona Distance Classic $ 7,500 $ 7,500 $ 3,000
Arizona Paralyzed Veterans $ 6,000 $ 6,000 $ 4,500
Arthritis Foundation $ 6,000 $ - $ 1,375
Catalina Community Services $ 10,000 $ - $ 3,750
Community Food Bank $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000
C-Path $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ -
Dance Magnificat $ 5,000 $ - , $ -
GOVAC $ 98,704 $ 98,704 $ 61,930
Interfaith Community Services $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 1,250
MTCVB $160,000 $ 120,000 $ 72,000
OV Parade $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 1,893
Perimeter Bicycling $ 35,800 $ 35,800 $ 13,750
Pima Council on Aging $ 14,150 $ 7,000 $ 9,019
Project Graduation $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000
Santa Cruz Heritage Alliance $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ -
TREO $ 60,000 $ 50,000 $ 24,000
TriSports Racing $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 13,250
Total $487,154 $ 403,504 $ 237,716
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Page 2 of 2
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 05/04/09
All of the recommended funding amounts are to be monetary donations with the exception of Tri-Sports Racing
and the Arthritis Foundation. Both of these organizations will be holding their events for the first time and
therefore the subcommittee is recommending that these events receive in-kind funding for an amount not to
exceed the figures listed above.
Finally, the subcommittee recommends that the $10,000 award to Project Graduation come out of the Oro
Valley Police Department's seizure and forfeiture funds in order to reduce the burden on the Town's General
Administration fund.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total funding amount recommended by the Community Funding Subcommittee was $236,716. This
represents a difference of$166,788 in funding under the Town Manager's Recommended Budget. Funding for
these requests will be available as part of the General Administration budget with an amount to be determined
by the recommendation of the subcommittee and the vote of the Town Council. Funding for agencies like the
Metropolitan Tucson Convention and Visitors Bureau and TREO that are funded through the Economic
Development budget will continue to be funded using Economic Development dollars out of the Bed Tax Fund.
This evening, the Council may wish to discuss or ask questions of the subcommittee as to their
recommendations or choose to accept or change the recommendation as they see fit. Once the Town Council
has determined the funding amount for each agency and adopted the final budget, the Town Manager's Office
and Legal staff will work with each agency to develop a financial participation agreement that clearly outlines
the performance measures, frequency of payment, and explains the criteria upon which each agency will be
evaluated. All of the financial participation agreements will be placed on a Council agenda for formal approval
after the adoption of the final budget.
.r
Art • aron, 'a:nce Analyst
Tory Sc revert, Management Assistant
r-a4vbitt aoidd
David Andrews, Town Manager
Pfee(F"1
.,
(-06,--,te-iii-11/44--)-4'1-1r,„_
f _._,.__u&r-2--
Survey conducted 4/25/09-5/4/09 of 394 registered Oro Valley voters.
For each of the following outside agencies, please indicate how much taxpayer money
should be used to fill their funding requests. (Requested amount in parentheses)
more than
zero, but
requested less than
zero amount
requested
amount
Amphi Public Schools Foundation
28.2% (111) 50.0% (197) 22.1% (87)
($5,500)
Arizona Distance Classic Half- 62.4%(246) 6.9% (27) 31.0% (122)
marathon and 5k ($7,500)
Arizona Paralyzed Veterans ($6,000) 26.1% (103) 41.6%(164) 32.7% (129)
Arthritis Foundation ($6,000) 51.0% (201) 17.0% (67) 32.2% (127)
Catalina Community Services 32.5% (128) 29.2% (115) 38.3% (151)
($10,000)
Community Food Bank ($15,000) 11.9% (47) 57.6%(227) 30.7% (121)
Critical Path Institute medical product 56.1%(221) 10.4% (41) 34.3% (135)
development ($25,000)
Dance Magnificat performing arts 68.8% (271) 5.8% (23) 25.6% (101)
($5,000)
Greater Oro Valley Arts Council ( 35.8% (141) 12.2% (48) 52.8%(208)
$98,704)
Interfaith Community Services 46.2% (182) 33.8% (133) 20.3% (80)
($2,500)
Metropolitan Tucson Convention and 44.2% (174) 5.8% (23) 50.0%(197)
Visitors' Bureau ($160,000)
Oro Valley Community Foundation 35.3% (139) 37.6%(148) 27.4% (108)
($3,000)
Oro Valley Historical Society($6,000) 34.8% (137) 23.9% (94) 41.9% (165)
Oro Valley Holiday Parade ($2,000) 47.2%(186) 31.7% (125) 21.3% (84)
Pima Council on Aging Mature Worker 33.2% (131) 19.3% (76) 47.7% (188)
Connection Program ($14,150)
Perimeter Bicycling El Tour de Tucson 44.4% (175) 9.9% (39) 45.7% (180)
($35,800)
Project Graduation alcohol-free, all-
29.7% (117) 41.6%(164) 29.2% (115)
night celebration ( $10,000)
Santa Cruz Heritage Alliance tourism 64.7% (255) 6.1% (24) 29.2% (115)
& cultural resources ($4,000)
Tucson Regional Economic
Opportunities business development 38.3% (151) 15.5% (61) 46.7% (184)
($60,000)
TriSports Racing National Iron Kids 55.3%(218) 5.1% (20) 39.6% (156)
Triathalon ($20,000)
Do you have school-aged children in your household who may attend summer day care or
day camp?
Yes 15.5% (61)
No 84.5% (333)
For Families with Children:
Please select the answer that corresponds most closely to how much are you willing to
pay per week for summer day care or day camp this year.
Response Response
Percent Count
More than $270 per week 3.2% 2
$270 per week 1.6% 1
$240 per week 9.7% 6
$160 per week 25.8% 16
$120 per week 14.5% 9
$105 per week 22.6% 14
less than $105 per week 22.6% 14
How much do you think taxpayers should subsidize families with children attending Oro
Valley Summer Fun Camp?
Response Response
Percent Count
Zero. Families should pay the entire cost of camp. 50.0% 31
10%, or$30 per child per week, for a total of$25,400 from 30.6% 19
the Town's general fund.
40%, or$110 per child per week, for a total of$101,600 11.30/0 7
from the Town's general fund.
55%, or$150 per child per week, for a total of$139,700 1.6% 1
from the Town's general fund.
62%, or$165 per child per week, for a total of$157,480 6.5% 4
from the Town's general fund (last year's rate).
For Households Without Children:
How much do you think taxpayers should subsidize families with children attending Oro
Valley Summer Fun Camp?
Response Response
Percent Count
Zero. Families should pay the entire cost of camp. 59.0% 227
10%, or$30 per child per week, for a total of$25,400 from 25.2% 97
the Town's general fund.
40%, or$110 per child per week, for a total of$101,600 10.6% 41
from the Town's general fund.
55%, or$150 per child per week, for a total of$139,700 1.6% 6
from the Town's general fund.
62%, or$165 per child per week,for a total of$157,480 3.6% 14
from the Town's general fund (last year's rate).
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Page 1 of 4
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: MAY 4, 2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: STACEY LEMOS, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: FY 2009/10 BUDGET OVERVIEW STATUS REPORT/SUMMARY
OVERVIEW
Staff has reviewed the budget issues that were discussed during the April budget work sessions with the Town
Council and identified and summarized the various adjustments that have been made to the budget thus far.
These adjustments are shown by fund in the following attachments:
• Attachment A— General Fund
• Attachment B — Highway Fund
• Attachment C — Bed Tax Fund
• Attachment D —Water Utility Funds
Each attachment begins with the Town Manager's Recommended Budget totals for revenues and expenditures
and lists the adjustments in these categories per the study sessions.
General Fund —Attachment A
The Town Manager Recommended revenues totaled $28,461,766 in the General Fund. Adjustments have
been made to reduce this revenue amount by $523,110, resulting in a revised General Fund revenue total of
$27,938,656. The main factors causing this revenue reduction are the recommended drop in single family
residential (SFR) building permits from 100 to 75 next year ($188K) and the withdrawal of the Federal COPS
grant application ($414K).
The Town Manager Recommended expenditures totaled $28,879,073 in the General Fund. Adjustments have
been made to reduce this expenditure amount by $730,192, resulting in a revised General Fund expenditure
total of $28,148,882. The main factors causing this expenditure reduction are the budget reductions in the
Police Department budget ($585K) and eliminating the costs of printing and mailing the Oro Valley Vista
publication ($65K) and Community Funding reductions ($78K). Therefore, the resulting budget status in the
General Fund is shown below:
Adjusted Revenues $27,938,656
Adjusted Expenditures ( 28,148,882)
Budgetary Deficit ($ 210,226)
Adjusted By One-Time
Expenditures in the total above 448,500
Revised Recurring Surplus $ 238,274
Additional program budget shifts and consolidations were approved by the Town Council in the areas of Risk
Management (move to Human Resources), Police Department Fleet Maintenance (move to Public Works),
Police Information Technology (move to Town IT Department), Police Public Information Office (move to Town
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Page 2 of 4
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: MAY 4, 2009
Manager budget), and the Custody of Prisoners budget line (moved to General Administration). Staff has not
had sufficient time to further analyze the potential for cost savings with these program consolidations, so for
now, they are not shown on the budget adjustment attachments with any cost savings results.
It is important to note that the adjusted expenditures above still include the elimination of 17.63 full-time
equivalent (FTE) positions in the General Fund in the areas of Administration (6.0), Development Services
(9.0), Library (1.13), Parks and Recreation (1.0) and Transit (.5), and while certain costs for one-time, non-
recurring items have been identified during the budget review process and identified for funding out of cash
reserves, these types of adjustments do not address the Town's long-term financial sustainability. In order to
effectively address the Town's structural imbalance between recurring revenues and recurring expenditures in
this fund, new recurring revenue sources need to be considered and/or staffing levels need to be reduced as
proposed in the Town Manager's Recommended Budget, especially as the Town looks to try to regain
recurring revenue sources for funding capital improvement program (CIP) needs that are being deferred next
fiscal year. This will ensure stability in this fund over the next five years as presented in the Five-Year Budget
Stabilization Plan forecast included in the budget document.
Highway Fund — Attachment B
The Town Manager Recommended revenues totaled $7,733,653 in this fund. Adjustments have been made to
reduce this revenue amount by $3,065,249, resulting in a revised Highway Fund revenue total of $4,668,404.
The revenue reductions were caused by the reduction in single family residential building permits (construction
tax) by $65,249, and removing the federal stimulus funding for roadway improvements in the amount of
$3,000,000 to a separate fund.
The Town Manager Recommended expenditures totaled $7,591,285 in the Highway Fund. With the removal
of the $3,000,000 in expenditures funded by the federal stimulus monies, the revised expenditure budget in the
Highway Fund is $4,591,285. The resulting budget status in the Highway Fund is as follows:
Adjusted Revenues $ 4,668,404
Adjusted Expenditures ( 4,591,285)
Budgetary Surplus $ 77,119
Bed Tax Fund — Attachment C
The Town Manager Recommended revenues totaled $563,693 in this fund and expenditures totaled $558,254.
Amounts recommended by the Town Council sub-committee for Community Funding to TREO, MTCVB and C-
Path have been reduced by $99,000 from the Town Manager Recommended amounts. If these changes are
approved, the resulting budget status in the Bed Tax Fund is as follows:
Bed Tax Revenues $ 563,693
Adjusted Expenditures ( 459,254)
Budgetary Surplus $ 104,439
This surplus amount is available to provide additional funding in the General Fund, if the Council so desires.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Page 3 of 4
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: MAY 4, 2009
Water Utility Enterprise Fund & Impact Fee Funds — Attachment D
The Town Manager Recommended revenues totaled $16,919,300 in the Water Enterprise Fund and no
adjustments have been made to this figure. The Town Manager Recommended expenses in the Enterprise
Fund totaled $18,056,474. Adjustments have been made to transfer budget capacity ($131 K) from the Water
Utility's capital budget identified for project inspection costs to the salaries and benefits budget in order to
retain the 2.5 positions that were proposed for layoffs in the Town Manager's Recommended Budget. Also, an
error was corrected in the original budget amount for the North La Canada 24" "E" Zone Main, thereby saving
$350,000. The resulting budget status in the Water Utility Enterprise Fund is as follows:
Water Utility Revenues $16,919,300
Adjusted Utility Expenses (17,705,897)
Deficit (Planned Use of Reserves) ($ 786,597)
Also, as a result of lowering the SFR building permits from 100 to 75, the impact fee revenue budgeted in the
Alternative Water Resources Development Impact Fee Fund will be reduced by $189,316. Similarly, the
impact fee revenue budgeted in the Potable Water System Development Impact Fee Fund will be reduced by
$97,546.
Staffing Reduction Recommendation Current Status —Attachment E
Attachment E summarizes the current status of the positions originally recommended for elimination in the
Town Manager's Recommended Budget. The Manager's Budget originally proposed 31.13 FTEs to be
eliminated. This number of FTEs has been reduced by 6 Police Officers and 2.5 Water Utility positions being
retained through identification of additional line item cost savings. One (1) Planning & Zoning Senior Office
Specialist position has been requested to be retained and 5.38 positions are currently vacant. This leaves
16.25 FTEs remaining that are currently filled positions subject to layoff. There currently exists an opportunity
to fill the vacant Office Assistant position in the Legal Department internally with a position that may be subject
to layoff.
In addition, the Police Department has offered the elimination of a Reserve Officer, two (2) Police Officer
positions and a part-time Records Specialist position which are either currently vacant or expected to be
vacant; and the Magistrate Court has voluntarily eliminated a part-time Court Clerk I position from its budget
that is currently vacant.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. ATTACHMENT A — General Fund FY 2009/10 Budget Adjustments
2. ATTACHMENT B — Highway Fund FY 2009/10 Budget Adjustments
3. ATTACHMENT C — Bed Tax Fund FY 2009/10 Budget Adjustments
4. ATTACHMENT D — Water Utility Funds FY 2009/10 Budget Adjustments
5. ATTACHMENT E — Reduction-In-Force Current Status
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Page 4 of 4
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: MAY 4, 2009
J' L
r
‘,:, (w.,„.: t (-11:1,( ;"
Stacey Lem Finance Director
Z,), - , --7
#1.1.11.4.1 ‘. .. (1.4A4....„„,...
David Andrews, Town Manager
Q`OJPL�EYAkRe. Attachment A
O
�-��-
FY 2009/2010 General Fund
'ENDED 1141
Revenue:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 28,461,766
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Single Family Residential Permits Reduction (187,598)
Withdraw of COPS Grant (414,000)
PCLD Reimbursement Reduction (5,000)
Impound Fee Revenue (60,000)
Energy Efficiency & Conservation Block Grant 114,200
Increase Cost Recovery for Summer Programs 29,288
Total Adjustments (523,110)
New Adjusted Revenue _ $ 27,938,656 I
Expenditures:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 28,879,073
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Elimination of 0.5 FTE Court Clerk Position (27,369)
Reduction of Collections Budget in Library (10,000)
Remove Expenditures for Impound Fees (60,000)
Remove Printing Associated with O.V. Vista (65,240)
Include Capacity for Conservation Block Grant 114,200
Reduction in Costs for NTS Survey (19,000)
Budgetary Savings in Police Department (584,996)
Community Funding Reductions (77,787)
Total Adjustments (730,192)
New Adjusted Expenditures I $ 28,148,882
Excess/(Deficiency) (210,226)
Use of Cash Reserves for One-Time Expenditures:
Carry-Forward of FY 08/09 Costs for Historic Inventory & ESLO 128,500
Arroyo Grande Legal & Consulting Expenses 300,000
Temporary Clerical Assistance for Open Enrollment 6,000
Munis Training for Processing Open Enrollment 4,000
Animal Licensing Feasibility Study 10,000
$
448,500
Net Excess/(Deficiency) $ 238,274
G:\BUDGET\FY 09-10\Fund Balances 2009-2010_with Council Adjustments 05/01/2009
OHO
Attachment B
2009/2010FYHighway Fund
�a/NDED.19�a
Revenue:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 7,733,653
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Single Family Residential Permits Reduction (65,249)
Economic Stimulus Funding (3,000,000)
Total Adjustments (3,065,249)
New Adjusted Revenue I $ 4,668,404 1
Expenditures:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 7,591,285
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Economic Stimulus Funding (3,000,000)
Total Adjustments (3,000,000)
New Adjusted Expenditures $ 4,591,285
Excess/(Deficiency) $ 77,119
G:\BUDGET\FY 09-10\Fund Balances 2009-2010_with Council Adjustments 05/01/2009
O�OJP,LLEYq/Qj2o2�
Attachment C
�- - FY 2009/2010 Bed Tax Fund
a/NOED g1
Revenue:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 563,693
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Total Adjustments -
New Adjusted Revenue I $ 563,693 I
Expenditures:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 558,254
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Community Funding Reductions (99,000)
Total Adjustments (99,000)
New Adjusted Expenditures l $ 459,254 I
Excess/(Deficiency) $ 104,439
G:\BUDGET\FY 09-10\Fund Balances 2009-2010_with Council Adjustments 05/01/2009
OHO�P,LLE Y qR/202
Attachment D
= FY 2009/2010 Water Utility Fund
"(LADED 191 A
Enterprise Fund
Revenue:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 16,919,300 1
Expenses:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 18,056,474
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Removal of Reduction-in-Force Plan for 2.5 FTE's 130,423
Reduction of Inspection Services Costs for CIP Projects (131,000)
Reduction in Capital Costs for North La Canada 24" "E" Zone Main (350,000)
Total Adjustments (350,577)
New Adjusted Expenses I $ 17,705,897
Excessj(Deficiency) I $ (786,597)1
Alternative Water Resource Development Impact Fees
Revenue:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 5,021,300
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Single Family Residential Permits Reduction (189,316)
Total Adjustments (189,316)
New Adjusted Revenue $ 4,831,984 I
Expenses:
Town Manager Recommended Budget I $ 4,973,831 I
Excess/(Deficiency) I $ (141,847)1
Potable Water System Development Impact Fees
Revenue:
Town Manager Recommended Budget $ 521,050
Adjustments per Study Sessions:
Single Family Residential Permits Reduction (97,546)
Total Adjustments (97,546)
New Adjusted Revenue I $ 423,504 I
Expenses:
Town Manager Recommended Budget I $ 2,554,021 I
Excess/(Deficiency) I $ (2,130,517)1
G:\BUDGET\FY 09-10\Fund Balances 2009-2010_with Council Adjustments 05/01/2009
FY 2009/10 TOWN MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET
REDUCTION-IN-FORCE, DEPARTMENTAL REORGANIZATION ATTACHMENT E
AND RECLASSIFICATION PLAN
TMRB
FTEs
Recomm. Salaries+Benefits May 4, 2009
Department Position Title For Reduction Savings Current Status
ADMINISTRATION
Town Manager Constituent Services Coordinator 1.00 $ (65,188) Subject to layoff
Economic Development Economic Development(ED)Administ. 1.00 $ (98,494) Vacant
Finance Senior Office Specialist 1.00 $ (48,099) Subject to layoff
Human Resources Human Resources Analyst 1.00 $ (84,652) Subject to layoff
Legal Civil Attorney 1.00 $ (89,797) Vacant
Information Technology GIS Technician 1.00 $ (62,015) Vacant
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 6.00 $ (448,245)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Planning &Zoning Planning &Zoning Director 1.00 $ (131,180) Subject to layoff
Planning &Zoning Senior Office Specialist 1.00 $ (37,439) Retained
Planning &Zoning Zoning Inspector Technician 1.00 $ (49,325) Subject to layoff
Building Safety Assistant Building Official 1.00 $ (111,288) Subject to layoff
Building Safety Senior Building Permit Technician 1.00 $ (62,876) Vacant
Building Safety Building Inspector II 1.00 $ (65,025) Subject to layoff
Building Safety Office Specialist 1.00 $ (38,216) Subject to layoff
Development Review Div. Civil Engineering Technician 1.00 $ (59,149) Subject to layoff
Development Review Div. Civil Engineer 1.00 $ (79,381) Subject to layoff
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 9.00 $ (633,879)
LIBRARY
Library Customer Service Rep. 0.25 $ (7,627) Subject to layoff
Library Library Page 0.88 $ (22,502) Vacant
TOTAL LIBRARY 1.13 $ (30,129)
PARKS & RECREATION
Parks& Recreation Multimodal Planner 1.00 $ (70,969) Subject to layoff
TOTAL PARKS &RECREATION 1.00 $ (70,969)
1 POLICE
Police Police Officer I 6.00 $ (415,789) Retained
TOTAL POLICE 6.00 $ (415,789)
Page 1
TRANSIT
FY 2009/10 TOWN MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET
REDUCTION-IN-FORCE, DEPARTMENTAL REORGANIZATION ATTACHMENT E
AND RECLASSIFICATION PLAN
Transit Transit Dispatcher 0.50 $ (15,277) Vacant
TOTAL TRANSIT 0.50 $ (15,277)
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 23.63 $ (1,614,288)
HIGHWAY FUND
Public Works Construction Manager 1.00 $ (87,309) Subject to layoff
Public Works Construction Inspector 1.00 $ (67,965) Subject to layoff
Public Works Construction Clerk 1.00 $ (51,176) Subject to layoff
Public Works Senior Office Assistant 1.00 $ (43,983) Subject to layoff
Public Works Civil Engineering Technician 1.00 $ (61,288) Subject to layoff
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS - HIGHWAY FUND 5.00 $ (311,721)
WATER UTILITY FUND
Water Utility Water Utility Operator I 1.00 $ (54,063) Retained
Water Utility Construction Inspector 1.00 $ (63,107) Retained
Water Utility Water Conservation Assistant 0.50 $ (13,253) Retained
TOTAL WATER UTILITY 2.50 $ (130,423)
TOTAL ALL FUNDS 31.13 $ (2,056,432)1
CURRENT VACANT POSITIONS I
SUMMARY OF CURRENT STATUS
FTEs
Positions Subject to Elimination per Town Mgr. Budget 31.13
Less:
P&Z Sr. Office Specialist Requested to be Retained (1.00)
Police Positions Retained (6.00)
Water Utility Positions Retained (2.50)
Vacant Positions (5.38)
Filled Positions Remaining Subject to Layoff 16.25
Note: The following positions have been eliminated from the Police Department as
part of the Chief's Alternate Plan B budget cuts. Also shown is a
voluntary position elimination in the Magistrate Court:
Reserve Officer (0.48)
Officer (2.00)
Records Specialist (0.50)
Court Clerk I (0.50)
Total (3.48)
Page 2
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY 4
Page 1 of 1
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: MAY 4, 2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: STACEY LEMOS, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ADDITIONAL REVENUE
SOURCES
SUMMARY
Included with this communication, please find Attachment A entitled "Additional Funding Sources" for your
review and consideration. This table outlines a variety of other possible revenue sources that the Town may
consider implementing to further diversify its revenue base, provide future financial stability, and strengthen our
ability to weather future economic downturns.
The table shows the estimated amount that would be generated in each category and the process for approval
of each.
Staff will be prepared to discuss these in further detail as requested at the Study Session.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . ATTACHMENT A —Additional Funding Sources
ry
• r 0; !i
Stacey Lemos,, dnance Director
.1rTh -
..eat,ad 4:2
David Andrews, Town Manager
ATTACHMENT A
Additional Funding Sources
Proposed FY 09/10
Revenue Category Estimated Approval Process
Tax Rate!Fee
Revenue
Increase to Utility Tax 2.0% 1,201,792
Commercial Rental Tax 2.0% r 1,013,369
013,369
Residential Rental Tax 2.0% 245,732
0 25% 1181a5 Adoption of Local Ordinance
Increase in Local Sales Tax Rate* ��--
0.500/0 2,363,067
Tax on Food for Home Consumption 2.0% 2,895,762
Gas/Electric Franchise Fee 5.0%
�.�..�..�..��.__ ..�.�.. ... _ 2,365,665
$0.40/$100 2,033,377
Primary Property Tax $0.95/$100 5,005,$11 Voter Approval
- $2.00/$100 10,166,805
$2.76/$100 14.;030,301
100% Reimbursement from County Library Tax 700,000
Negotiation w/Pima County
Library Operations Transferred to County 700,000
Sales_Tax Rebate Relief 1,200,000 Court Ruling on Turken v. Gordon Case
Bed Tax Revenue 100,000 Council Direction
* Excludes lodging and construction
G:\BUDGET\FY 09-10\Revenue Projections\Funding Sources_Additional.xls