HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (1065) AGENDA
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL
BUDGET WORK SESSION
JUNE 6, 2005
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL
1. REVIEW OF MAY 12, 2005 BUDGET SESSION — FOLLOW-UP
MEMORANDUM
2. REVIEW OF MAY 16, 2005 BUDGET SESSION — FOLLOW-UP
MEMORANDUM
3. REVIEW OF WATER UTILITY DEPARTMENT
A. Water Utility Fund Page 590
B. Water Company Acquisition Page 623
4. REVIEW OF EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS FOR 2005-06 FISCAL
YEAR
5. BUDGET WRAP-UP
ADJOURNMENT
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 Oro Valley Town Clerk, at 229-4700
POSTED: 06/02/05
4:30 p.m.
Ih
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor &Town Council
FROM: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
DATE: May 27th 2005
SUBJ: Follow-up MemorandumMay to 12th 2005 Budget Review Session
Attached is the May 12th 2005 Budget et Review Session follow-up memorandum.
in advance of the distribution
This is being distributed to you of the agenda for
Session which will be Monday, June 6th2005 @ 5:30
the next Budget Review Sess
p.m. The intent is to give you it's time to review �t s contents. Thank
you.
1/
1,77
Chuck Sweet,Town Manager
Attachments (1)
C: David i Andrews, Finance Director/Assistant Town Manager
Craig Civalier, Acting Town Engineer
MEV1ORANDIJVI
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
David Andrews, Finance Director/Assistant Town Manager
Joseph Meyer, Management and Budget Analyst
DATE: May 23, 2005
SUBJ: Follow-up Issues from May 12 Budget Review Session
A number of issues were raised during the Mayor and Council's Budget Review Session
on May 12. This memorandum serves as staff follow-up to these issues.
1) Issue: Greater Oro Valley Arts Council (GOVAC) Business Plan
Response: Carmen Feriend, Executive Director of GOVAC will present the
business plan to the Community Development Director on May 27th
Immediately thereafter, the business plan will be forwarded to Town Council for
their consideration.
2) Issue: Town Council Fax Lines
Response: The Town Attorney has left the cancellation of fax lines for Town
Council members at the discretion of Town Council. Attached please see an
email from the Town Attorney regarding this issue.
3) Issue: Highway Fund landscaping line item.
Response: The name of the contracted landscaping company will not appear
in the Final Budget Document.
4) Issue: Certified welder
Response: Public Works researched the necessity of a certified welder and
has concluded the Town is in compliance with the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration's (OSHA) standards. However Public Works will
encourage staff to attend classes at Pima Community College and obtain
welding certification. Attached please find a memo from Public Works regarding
this issue.
5) Issue: Copy of Transit Plan.
Response: A copy of the Transit Plan was distributed to the Town Council on
May 13, 2005 for review.
G:\BUDGETWY 05-06\Issue-Response 5-23-05.doc
6) Issue: Bus pullouts for the Oracle Road Improvement District (ORID) and
other future roadways.
Response: Attached, please find a memo from the Acting Town Engineer, Mr.
Craig Civalier. Additional transit routes and their respective locations may be
established in the future.
7) Issue: Lease agreements and the Building Maintenance budget.
Response: After reviewing lease agreements from various departments, staff
has determined that building leases deem the landlord responsible for major
appliance/structural repairs. However any modifications made by the Town to
leased facilities are the responsibility of the Town and not the owner.
The revised year end estimated actuals for the building repair and maintenance
line item within the Custodial and Facilities Maintenance Budget is $11,000
instead of$8,000. The Manager's Recommended Budget for FY 2005/06 is
$8,000. Public Work's proposes a possible $3,000 increase to this line item for
a total of $11,000 in FY 2005/06.
8) Issue: Pusch View Lane setback requirements.
Response: The Public Works Department has provided drawings for this road
construction project indicating lane setbacks and "clear zone" standards.
Attached please find a memorandum from the Acting Town Engineer, Mr. Craig
Civalier.
9) Issue: Pusch View/Lambert Lane Construction Fund Outlook.
Response: A revised Outlook page has been completed and is attached to this
memorandum.
10) Issue: CDO Linear Park Construction Fund Revenues.
Response: The CDO Linear Park Construction Fund receives revenues on a
reimbursement basis. Therefore there is not a carryforward balance of Pima
County Bond Proceeds nor Transportation Enhancement Grant monies.
However the project does reflect a carryforward balance from funds received
through a transfer from the Townwide Development Impact Fees Fund.
11) Issue: Pick-Up Trucks for Building Safety
Response: Two Toyota regular cab pick-up trucks with tool storage boxes
have been added to Building Safety's budget. The total amount for these trucks
is $32,000 ($31 ,420 trucks, $580 tool boxes)
G:\BUDGET\FY 05-06\Issue-Response 5-23-05.doc
Joseph Meyer
Management and Budget Analyst
David Andrews
Finance Director
Chuck Sweet
Town Manager
CC: All Department Heads
Bob Kovitz, Public Information Officer
G:\BUDGET\FY 05-06\Issue-Response 5-23-05.doc
2
NEIVIORANDUNI
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
David Andrews, Finance Director/Assistant Town Manager
DATE: June 3, 2005
SUBJ: Follow-up Issues from May 16 Budget Review Session
A number of issues
were raised duringthe Mayor and Council's Budget Review Session
on
May16. This memorandum serves as staff follow-up to these issues.
1) Issue: Pie charts for proposed departmental expenditures
Response: At the request of the Mayor, these charts will be distributed for
each department/division at the scheduled budget study session.
2) Issue: Gasoline and Oil Estimated Actuals
Response: At the request of the Mayor, attached please find a chart of the
q
estimated year end actuals for gasoline and oil throughout the Town's
departments. The department's proposed FY 2005/06 gasoline budget is also
included for reference.
3) Issue: List of reclassificaitons
Rep s
Response: At the request of Council Member Conny Culver, attached please
find a list ofp roposed position reclassifications by department.
4) Issue: Proposed costs for Legal Department.
Response:nse: The followingoutlines the proposed and revised proposed costs for
the Legal Department:
Total LegalDepartment Expenditures with proposed revisions: $846,496
Total LegalDepartment Expenditures originally proposed: $730,220
Difference rence $116,276
The $116,276 figure is composed of the following:
G:\BUDGET\FY 05-06\Issue-Response 5-23-05 PD_LEGAL_POLICE.doc
Subtotal Personnel $97,876
Subtotal Operations & Maintenance $6,400
Subtotal Capital Outlay $12,000
Total for Revisions: $116,276
Personnel
Salary Related Expenses Total
Civil Attorney Reclassification $7,500 $1,415 $8,915
New Civil Attorney
(1/1/2006 hire date) $25,000 $9,836 $34,836
New Paralegal $41,600 X12,525 $54,125
Subtotal Personnel $74,100 $23,776 $97,876
Operations and Maintenance/Capital Outlay
O&M Capital Outlay Total
Civil Attorney Reclassification $0 $0 $0
New Civil Attorney
(1/1/2006 hire date) $4,400 $6,000 $10,400
New Paralegal $2,000 $6,000 $8,000
Subtotal Personnel and O&M $6,400 $12,000 $18,400
5) Issue: Magistrate Court Software Request.
Response: A total of$16,500 has been added to the Magistrate Court's
Capital Outlay budget request. That request will also be reflected as denied by
the Town Manager and Town Council.
6) Issue: Description of all Requested Capital Improvement Plan items within the
Police Department Budget.
Response: Attached please find the project sheets for all CIP items requested
for FY 2005/06. Each project sheet features a project description section along
with other pertinent information related to implementation of any given project.
GABUDGET\FY 05-06\Issue-Response 5-23-05 PD_LEGAL_POLICE.doc
7) Issue: LTAF II funds in the amount of $89,000 in the Public Transportation
Fund budget will not be received in FY 2005/06. Please see attached
executive summary.
Response: Increase transfer from General Fund to Public Transportation Fund
by $89,000.
8) Issue: A 7% increase in health insurance premiums was included in the Town
o
Managers Recommended budget. The actual increase will be 3.4%.
Response: This will result in a decrease in health insurance by $56,018.
9) Issue: A 7% increase in dental insurance premiums was included in the Town
o
Managers Recommended budget. The actual increase will be 0%.
Response: This will result in a decrease in dental insurance by $10,116.
3
David Andrews
Finance Director
a
Chuck Sweet
Town Manager
CC: All Department Heads
Bob Kovitz, Public Information Officer
G:\BUDGET\FY 05-06\Issue-Response 5-23-05 PD_LEGAL POLICE.doc
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
FY 2005/06 BUDGET
Council Line Item Changes
Through May 16,2005
Department/Division Line Item Manager's Council's Increase/(Decrease)
General Fund:
Recurring
Town Council NLC&Other Travel and Training $ 22,280 $ 33,280 $ 11,000
Town Council Project Graduation 5,000 10,000 5,000
General Administration Project Graduation 10,000 - (10,000)
Town Clerk Recording Fees 1,000 1,500 500
Town Manager Assistant Town Manager - 71,718_ 71,718
Finance Assistant Town Manager - (18,683) (18,683)
Library October 1,2005 hire date for new personnel -+ (45,000) (45,000)
Custodial/Facilities Maint. Additional money for Building Improvements - 3,000. 3,000
GF Various Departments ASRS Contribution Rate Reduction - (51,245) (51,245)
General Administration Transfer to Public Transportation Fund 79,232 168,232 89,000
GF Various Departments Health Insurance Reduction -, (40,4121 (40,412)
GF Various Departments Dental Insurance Reduction -- (7,350). (7,350)
Subtotal117,512 125,040 7,528
Non-Recurring
Town Manager Public Information Services Carryforward - 12,000 12,000
Finance Economic Vitality Plan - 65,000 65,000
G&A Procurement Analysis -_ 35,000 35,000
Parks and Recreation Playground Shade Structure(JDK Park) 20,000 20,000
Building Safety Pick-up Trucks with Tool Boxes - 32,000 32,000
Subtotal 164,000 164,000
G&A General Fund Contingency $ 8,985,555.$ 8,814,027 $ (171,528)
Highway Fund:
Recurring $ -
ASRS Contribution Rate Reduction $ - y $ (9,921) $ (9,921)
Health Insurance Reduction - (6,490) $ (6,490)
Dental Insurance Reduction - (1,1511 $ (1,151)
HIGHWAY FUND TOTAL $ - _$ (17,562L$ (17,562)
TWDIF: - -
Recurring
ASRS Contribution Rate Reduction $ - $ (2,491)_$ (2,491)
Health Insurance Reduction - (2,200) (2,200)
Dental Insurance Reduction - (204), (204)
TWDIF TOTAL $ - ,$ (4,895)$ (4,895)
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Recurring
ASRS Contribution Rate Reduction $ - , $ (2,075)$ (2,075)
Health Insurance Reduction - (432), (432)
(163L (163)
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TOTAL $ - , $ (2,670), $ (2,670)
WATER UTILITY
Recurring
ASRS Contribution Rate Reduction $ - $ (12,233)_$ (12,233)
Health Insurance Reduction - (6,381) (6,381)
Dental Insurance Reduction - (1,230), (1,230)
TOTAL WATER UTILITY $ - $ (19,844) $ (19,844)
STORMWATER UTILITY
Recurring
ASRS Contribution Rate Reduction $ - $ (306) $ (306)
Health Insurance Reduction - (103) (103)
Dental Insurance Reduction - (18)_ (18)
G:\BUDGET\FY 05-06\Council Changes 2005-06.xls
Water Utility Department
Manager's
Recommended
2004/2005 Budget Estimated Actuals Budget
Personnel $
1,700,436 $ 1,689,881 $ 1,922,321
Power (Pumping) Potable $ 1,082,275 $ 1,074,026 $ 1,032,575
1 955,173
Depreciation/Amortization _ $ . $ 1,765,074 $ 1,767,190
Regulatory Expense $
372,000 $ 396,800 $ 506,800
Wells $
1,230,600 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,275,000
Booster Stations $
300,000 $ 660,900 $ 600,000
Transmission /Distribution
Mains $
3,734,200 $ 1,511,981 $ 2,213,000
Reclaimed Water Mains $ 6,869,600 . $ 5,591,070 $ 700,000
Reservoirs $
299,500 $ 300,000 $ 1,000,000
.
CAP Water Rights $
- $ - $ 1,876,705
Contingency $
15,616,335 $ 18,593,648 $ 11,347,409
Debt Service $
4,425,194 $ 4,422,715 $ 4,795,587
Other $ 4,357,012 $ 8,100,274 $ 1,404,573
OTAL: $
41,942,325 $ 45,106,369 $ 30,441 ,160
Power (Pumping) -
PersonnelPotable able Depreciation/
$1,922,321 — Amortization
°° °° $1,767,190 Re ulato(6/) (3/) ryAll Other Regulatory
Expense
$1,404,573 p
$506,800
(5%) (2%)
a
Wells
$1,275,000
Debt Service (4`)/0)
$4,795,587
(16%)
Booster Stations
iT,
f $600,000
trailitior (2%)
Transmission
Contingency /Distribution Mains
$11,347,409 $2,213,000
(38%) (7%)
Reclaimed Water
CAP Water Rights Reservoirs Mains
$1,876,705 $1,000,000 $700,000
(6%) (3%) (2%)
2005/06 BUDGET FOR GASOLINE & OIL
Annualized Budget Page
Department Actuals Amount Number
General Administration $ 1,380 $ 1 ,800 129
Planning & Zoning $ 1,482 $ 1 ,955 195
Parks & Recreation $ 4,320 $ 5,600 208
Building Safety $ 5,177 $ 8,050 248
PW Highway Fund $ 19,192 $ 25,000 345
Public Transportation $ 27,895 $ 36,000 _ 361
Magistrate Court $ 498 $ 1 ,380 464
Police $ 38,011 $ 175,000 479
Water Utility $ 31,076 $ 40,100 599
-TOTAL _ $ 129,031 $ 294,885
The budget figures for gasoline and oil account for increased fuel prices
anticipated in FY 2005/06 of 30%.
* In Pi: 2004/05, the Police Department budgeted $125,000 for
Gasoline & Oil, $75,000 in the Justice Seizure and Forfeiture Fund
and $50,000 in the General Fund.
G:\Danielle\For Joseph\Gas&Oil.xls
Town of Oro Valley
Recommended Reclassifications for FY 2005106
Approved Town Manager's Total Cost for
Department FY 2004/2005 Recommended FY 2005/2006 Reclassification
Town Clerk Office Assistant Senior Office Assistant $
Building Safety Building Inspector II Building Inspector I _ $ -
Building Safety Building Inspector II Building Inspector I $
Highway Fund Maintenance Worker Senior Maintenance Worker $ 4,500
Highway Fund Traffic Signs & Markings Senior Traffic Signs & Markings $ 4,256
Highway Fund Traffic Signs & Markings Senior Traffic Signs & Markings $ 4,256
Water Utility Water Utility Operator I Water Utility Operator II $ 4,300
Water Utility Water Utility Operator I _Water Utility Operator II $ 4,300
G:\Danielle\For Joseph\Reclass 04-05 to 05-06
PROJECT SHEET
— ` 6 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FY 200 PLAN 0
REQUEST FOR FUNDING r
Q
PROJECT NAME: Protection S stems for Crown Victorias l Tumber.
Fire Panel Vehicular ar Department Priority:
Deponent:Police .
• tion: e ui•fRetrof t existing ere 2005 Crown V i ctoria •oli ce vehi c]es with"Fire
1. Project Description: �� s attached to the fuel tanks.The premise of this,
tectl on Systems . These are panel
panel V eh�cular Pro that would puncture or i�.nite the
• the fuel cell or tank with some ob'ect
•rote�cb on is that to reach - ..Tessin• went The �unci
• the •rotective • -• containine fire sus _
e it must first ass through - - "inerts" space around
f= cloud of fire su• ressing powder.which inerts
this •rotective wra� releases a P .
of thi 'tion of the fuel or •zu ckl su••Tessin• a fire.
ill/ . � thereb •reventin• the ignition
the fuel FY that it was previously funded in: N/A
rollover project? No List any
Is this a p �
2. Project Location(if applicable):
.
P
olive De artment/Town wide
thispublic health, safety, and welfare?
3. How does project improve ct of Crown Victoria Police vehicles,
Reduces the chance of a fire due mainly to rear end impa
project support stated community goals?
4. How does this PP cludin the �ublic safety workers
S�.Ports con�r
uni olicin for a safer community in g P
. Town'sresources,A_ if funded B.) if not funded?
impact the fiscal )
�• How does this project el in all activities where the Crown
additional safety of the public safety persona
A. Allows for .ease related to trate c accident and in'
•cle is utilized.Ma avoid some of the ex
Victoria vehicle
l�abils COQ' Victoria vehicles will •resent a dan•er of rear im.act
' ued use of our •re 2005Crown V�cton
B.Contin
collision and in- due to fire danger.
service levels, if funded B.)if not funded?
this an effect on Town's A.)
6. How does project have • e time for these •ersonnel
' ' to .ublic safe eersonnel and related recon
A,Ma avoid in
B. Could result in
extended time off if fire related in- occurs
' and Maintenance costs for the Town?
How does this project impact Operation - stems" after
7. associated with "Fire P an el V eh1 cul�Protects on S
There are no maintenance costs
initial installation
this threateninglitigious situation or a legal mandate?
Does project answer a of a known
g' to fire related injury. We would not be taking advantage
We could be liable for loss due Victoria vehicles All
and in related to collisions involving Crown
technolo to reduce dama.�e 1T-- 'aliment will include the advanced
Crown Victories •urcbased b the PoliCe De arfm
new 2005 and later
. ession s stem first offered b Ford Motor come an in
the 2005models .
fire sue•r
' to create significant savings of time,money, and
with other project(s)Is this project coordinated P
9 P
conven.ienCe?....o
. PROJECT BUDGET
(All Costs in Thousands—S,000)
Protection S stems for Crown V i ctori as un�b er:
PROJECT NAME; Fire Panel Vehicular Y
CAPITAL COSTS
' ct cost,the capital funds requested from the Town, all
listthousands of dollars)the total project P
Please (in 's costs,funds carried forward from
fundingsources that could defray the Torn in - .
probable outside anfi�ci anon of the project
• years, and funds that were banked in previous yearsP
previous
iscal Total Town Outside Funds Outside Funds Outside Funds
Year Cost Funds
Amount Source Amount Source Amount Source
005 '061,20.2 0.2 $20.2 $ ti,
2006 '07$
?007—`08i,
2008—'091. $ $
2009 $ $
—;10 I.
,$ $ $ ..
•
OPERATING AND
MAINTENANCE(O&M) COSTS
list talo operating and maintenance costs including additional
Please (in thousands of dollars)the to p gP - • t cost savings the source of the savings
and so on associated with this project Lisg
personnel,leases, columns. The"Total Cost"for each year
improvements,deferred costs,etc.) in the Savings(efficiency p .
is the costs minus the roje —min savings.
I iscal Total
Costs Projected Savin:s Projected Savin•s
Cost Personnel Other Amount Source Amount 1 Source
ear
,
r 005--'06 i, '
1►006—`07 ii.
007—`08 '
008—`09 i,
009—`10 $ ",
EVALUATION(for TAC use only)
Assumption Project Yes _ No
,
Criterion Score Criterion
Score Impact on Operation and Maintenance
Health, Safe ,Welfare P
Supports Stated Community Goals Legal Ramifications
Fiscal Impact
Relationship to Other Projects/Coordination
Impact on Service Levels
PROJECT SHEET
FY 2005—'06 CAPITAL I1'1PROVE1 F ENTS PLAN
REQUEST FOR FUNDING
,(9\
PROJECT NAME_ Glock Pistol upgrade to "generation 3" Glock model 22 pistols Number:
Department: Police Department Priority:
1. Project Description:Provide all officers with the new 3rd Generation Glock 22 pistols including
.istol monnted need li ghis mounted with the light rails available on the 3rd generation Glocks and
r uired holsters. These runs have also gone through upgrades with trizger pins magazines and
of our current in the past. This
,sp
rims. Trigger pins have presented a problem with a numberguns
that the Glock reps includes a trade allowance of $18k for 60 current weapons will take on trade.
Is this a rollover project? No List any FY that it was previously funded in: N/A
•
2. Project Location(if applicable):
•
Police Department/Town wide
3. How does this project improve public health, safety, and welfare?
3rd Generation Glocks with attached lights allow law enforcement officers to utilize one hand for
light source and weapon during the most dangerous tactical situations improving their chances to
defend themselves and remain safe in these situations.
4. How does this project support stated community goals?
Su.•ori communi •oli cine for a safer communi including the safe •ublic safe workers
How does this project impact the Town's fiscal resources,A..) if funded B.) if not funded?
5. A. Allows for additional safety of the public safety personnel and public in all night time or reduced
lightin• situations r-p uirin• the de.lo pp ent of the pistol. This ma avoid some of the e •ense
related to in liabili costs for *ublic safe •ersonnel and •ublic involved in these situations.
B. Continued use of our current equipment and tactics may result in injury claims and officer
recover
time off that could be avoided b the use of the 3rd generation Glocks with lights.
6. How does this project have an effect on Town's service levels,A.)if funded B.)if not funded?
A.May avoid injury to public safety personnel and related recovery time for these personnel
B. Could result in extended time off for public safety personnel if injury occurs that may have been
avoided throu•h the use of the 3rd •enerati on Glocks -.ui p sed with li ghtin_ s stems.
How does this project impact Operation and Maintenance costs for the Town?
7. P
There are maintenance costs associated with the purchase of batteries as necessary for the lightin g
s stems.There should be some minor reduced costs for maintenance of issued pistols due to the
disposal (trade) of the oldest ones.
8. Does this project answer a threatening litigious situation or a legal mandate?
We could be liable for loss due to injury related to the use of tactics and equipment not recognized as
the most advanced that is available.
9. Is this '
roect coordinated with other project(s) to create significant savings of time,money, and
P � -
conven i ence?Yes.we have been e urchasin• and will continue to purchase 3rd gen eratl on Glocks
through the normal budget process to provide for additional personnel. This will allow us to have one
stall( T
d u•graded pistol and lightin• stem issued to all Officers.
PROJECT BUDGET
(All Costs in Thousands—S,000)
PROJECT NAME: Glock Pistol uptrade to"generation 3" Glock model 22pistols I Number.
i
CAPITAL COSTS
• t cost,the capital funds requested from the Town, all
thousands of dollars)the total project P
Please list(in costs,funds carried forward from
• sources that could defray the Town's
probable outside funding ' ' 'on of the project P funds that were banked in previous years in anticipate p J
previous years, and
I iscal Total Town Outside Funds Outside Funds Outside Funds
ear Cost Funds
Amount Source Amount Source Amount Source
005 —t06 '38.0 '.20.0 $18.0* Trade in $ $ .
value
►006—`07
r 007—'08 it
008—`09 '.
009—`l0$ $
* 18k is trade in value that has already been deducted from the total funding request
OPERATING AND
MAINTENANCE(O&M) COSTS
list talo operating and maintenance costs including additional
Please C113.thousands of dollars)the to p gP1 - List cost savings the source of the savings
and so on associated with this project
personnel, leases, s col;1mns. The"Total Cost"for each year
(efficiencY improvements, deferred costs,etc.) in the Saving
is the costsm.%nus the ro'ected savvaas.
I fiscal Total , .
Costs Projected Savings Projected Savings
ear Cost Personnel Other Amount Source Amount Source
t 1 ,S
r 005— 06 $-5 $
OP 006— 07 $.5 $
,007_c08 5.5 ,$
008- 09 ,$.5 $
,009—'l0 $.5 $ $ S 1-
EVALUATION(for TAC use only)
Assumption Project Yes No
Score Criterion
Scare Criterion Impact on Operation and Maintenance
Health, Safe ,welfare -
' Goals Legal Ramifications
Su..orfs Stated Commune
Fiscal Im.act
Relationship to Other Proj ects/Coord in ati on
Ira a act on Service Levels
PROJECT SHEET
FY 2005—'06 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
REQUEST FOR FUNDING
Data Computer Systems I`'umber.
AME Replacement of Patrol Car MobileP _
PROJECT P
Department: Police
. Department Priority:
Provides forreplacement of oldest mobile data computer systems which have
1. Project Description:.
been in use for 5 plus ears.
• project?JiQ List FY that it was previously funded in: N/ALsthisarollover prod any —
2. Project Location(if applicable):
Police De at. - Town wide
project improve public health, safety, and welfare?
3. How doesthi.sp J P
Su•sorts commune olicin' and decentrali
• zation allowin' for the efficient flow of aublic safe
e • rmation between patroL dispatch and the Az. C • justice information
and mer�encY information P
stem..
project How J
does this ro•ect support stated community goals?
Supports communi •olicin' for a safer communi
5. How does this project• ct impact the Town's fiscal resources,A.)if funded B.) if not funded?
A.Efficienc
•ro•ect to hel• eliminate excessive re•etitive service interruptions allowing officers to
respond in a timely manner to calls for service
B.Lack of timely
information due to "down" equipment could delay response to calls for service.
Reduces
costlymaintenance and repair of old mobile data computer systems.
6. How does this project have an effect on Town's service levels, A.) if funded B.)if not funded?
A. Allows officers to respond more quickly and efficiently to calls for service
P
B.
Could delayofficers response to calls for service
7. How does this projectm Operation and Maintenance costs for the Town?
impact P
Reduces hiab maintenance costs related to the use of old computer equipment
_
project answer a threatening litigious situation or a legal mandate?
g. Does this pr � e we could be
unable to respond to emergency calls for service in the most timely manner If we are
liable for loss and injury due to an extended response time.
thiscoordinated with other project(s)to create significant savings of time,money, and
9. Is project P �
convenience?
Purchased
and installed at the same time we outfit new patrol vehicles
PROJECT BUDGET
(All Costs in Thousands—S, 000)
e Data Corn outer S stems Number:
ement of Patrol Car Mobil
PROJECT NAME: Re•lac
CAPITAL COSTS ed from the Town, all
project cost,the capital funds request
thousands of dollars)the total p J forward from
Please list(in the Town's costs,funds carried
sources that could defray
robable outside funding ears in anticipation of the project.
P and funds that were banked in previous y
previous years,
- Outside Funds Outside Funds
iscal Town. Outside Funds Source
� Total Amount Source Amount Soar
ear Cost
Funds Amount Source
li 11111111111111111111111111111111111111
P 00—`06$48.3 .48.
006— '071,49.7
'49.7 111111111111111$ IIIIII
007—`08 M
_ � IIIIMIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIFIIIIIIIIIIII
008— 09 .52.8 ',52.8
009_ 10$79.2
' 79.2 $
MAINTENANCE (O&M) COSTS
OPERATING AND - additional
ratio and maintenance costs including
listthousands of dollars)the total operating Please t. List cost savings and the source of the savings
and so on associated with this project. Cost" for each year
personnel,leases, the Savings colz�rnns. The"Total
P ents deferred costs, etc.) in g
(efficiency improvements,
is the
costs minus the ro ected sav °in .
Pro'ected Savi.n:s Pro'ected Savin:s
I iscal Total Costs Amount Source Amount Source
ear
Cost Personnel Other
$2.2 i aint.
005
—`06 $
3.II
$2.3 i
nil
006—`07 1111111111111111111111amt.
Mill$2.4 ► aint~
x007—`08 �� '
1111111111111111111111 aunt~ NMI
008—'09 $ NMI
r 009—'10 $ IIIIIIIIIIII$3-7 i aLnt+
EVALUATION (for TAC use only)
Assumption Project Yes . No
Score Criterion
Score Criterion MI Im.act on 0•eration and Maintenance
Health, Safe ,welfare
IMO ' Goals Legal Ramifications
Su•�•oris Stated Communityb.i. to Other Pro'ectslCoordination
FiscalMI
Im.act �elatiOzs
MI Im•act on Service Levels
PROJECT SHEET
— CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
FY 2005 '06
REQUEST FOR FUNDING
INumber
NAME: O•ticom Emitters
artment:Police De
Department Priority:
g
• 0 sticom is a •non control
• ' . •ui• •atrol vehicles with 0•is com emitters.
1. Project Description- - e the individual casabili to move throu�i
that . yes an authorized vehicle
traffic ss gnat s stem 'on or other traffic. This occurs in an orderl
• t undul disru•tin• signal s •chronlzab .
traffic without
.edestrians and traffic en.�neenn-1 re•uuements. The
• that accounts for cross traffic
fashion selector in a manner that appears normal.
Gins the right-of-wa from the phase
emeTgenc vehicle � - changes to green it will recycle through the,
stem re •onds to the emitter and ch
After the O'�COm whereere the emergenc vehicle goes notice. 0 aticom is directional it onloes
signals without ,
disru•tin• •arall el traffic intersections. in: N/A
withoutFY that it was previously funded
thisrollover roj ect?� No Listany
Is a P
Project Location(if applicable):
2.
Police artment/
Ce De Town wide
thisimprovepublic health, safety,and welfare?
3, How does project . • l owi.n., emergency vehicles to request and
• enhances tune-critical travel.b al
The O'tiCOm s stem
is at traffic signal locations as the go to emergent calls for service.
receive green lights
project support
�. How does this stated community
Sus sorts
comms •oli cin• for a safer commune
Town'sfiscal resources, A.)if funded B.) if not funded?
How does this project impact the i d ent reduction
5. onse to calls which will promote traffic act
A.All ows for a safer ewer enc res sense related to traffic accident li abili
• e to calls. Would avoid some of the e
i.nvolVzn• our res ons
and re air costs• emergency calls for service will present increasing
con estion increases our res onse to - e aced to
B. �trafficintersections. This may result 1n increased costs r 1
collision and injury in signalized
dander of •onse and liabili insurance
traffic collisions associated with emer enc res
. project have an effect on Town's service levels,A.) if funded B.) if not funded?
6. How does this P � and efficientl to emu.enc calls for service
A. Allows
officers to res•and more •w ckl
E.Could dclz
officers res onse to.calls for service
. Operation and Maintenance costs for the Town?
How does this project impact Operate offset bysome minor
7. - d to negligible e in cost and this should be
Maintenance of embers is ro�ecte �
ex•ected maintenance cost s
avinn.s as •atrol vehicles should be driven with less severe brakin• and
acceleration to emer enc calls
a
litigious situation or a legal mandate?
Does this project answer a threatening g� timelymanner we could be
8. ergenc calls for service in the most
1 f we are unable to res and to em be takin• advantage of a
• extended res•onse time. We would not
liable for loss and in due to an - re ,oases for Police service.
known techs of o gv
to reduce damage and in dune emergenc
• create significant ficant savings of time,money, and
' ct coordinated with other project(s)to
9. Is this project
convenience? Some will be purchased and installed at the same time we outfit new patrol vehicles
'
PROJECT BUDGET
(All Costs in Thousands—S,000)
CT NAME: 0.ticom Emitters
Number:
PROJE
CAPITAL COSTS
• the capital funds requested from the Town, all
listthousands of dollars)the total project cost, P
Please (in Town's costs,funds carried forward from
din sources that could defray the
probable outside funding years in amici anon of the project.
funds that were banked in previous P
previous years, and
Funds Outside Funds Outside Funds
I iscal Total Town Outside Fun
ear Cost Funds Amount Source Amount Source Amount Source
—`06$31.5 $31.5 $ 11111111111111 11111111111111
►005 NEE r006—`07$ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I 11111111 111111
007—`08$ '
'
r 008— `09 � '
P009
—`10$ $ 11111
MAINTENANCE(O&11 ) COSTS
OPERATING AND . .
and maintenance costs including additlon�1
listthousands of dollars)the total operating
Please (in project List cost savings and the source of the savings
leases, and so on associated with this P j year
personnel, the Savings columns. The"Total Cost"for each
improvements, deferred costs, etc.) in g
(efficiency p .
is
the costs minus the ro'ected savin s.
Total Costs
Pro'ected Savin:s Pro'ected Savin:s
I iscal Other Amount Source Amount Source
ear
Cost Personnel
1111111
005-`06 3.11111111111.1111
1.1111111111.11006— 07
MN
r007—`08 $ S MI
r 008—`09 111.1111111.1111
31.111
009—`10 MIMS
EVALUATION (for TAC use only)
Assumption Project Yes No
Score Criterion
Score Criterion �.act on Operation and Maintenance
Health, Safe ,Welfare
i Goals Legal Ramifications
Su••orts Stated Community
Fiscal Tm tact Rel
ationshi• to Other Pro'ectslCoordination
Im.act on Service Levels
PROJECT S H :ET
FY 2005—'06 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
REQUEST FOR FUNDING
6.,), F-
PROJECT
. cement Patrol Vehicles I�urnber:
NAME: la
artinent: Police
De Department Priority:
P
• replacement of 14 older police units in excess of 100.000 miles
Project Descri tion: Prove des for
1' Pr°� preplacement •atrol vehicles es were funded_ 6 from the 03I04
town .olic -SOP#34. no 04/05 re•lac m .
.er gra. hics
for vehicles (i.e.radio, siren light bar,cage, p
roll over were funded for 04105
Equipment .
• ossibl one to three marked motor units may be included in
etc. in rear o1�ce non cap budget Possibly .anagement evaluation at time of availability and purchase o
the total depending on the fleet m .
Crown Victoria's.
Is this a rollover project?No
List anyFY that
it was previously funded in: N/A
_
• cation(if plicable):
2. Prodect Lo applicable):
Police Dept—Town w•
i e
public health, safety, and welfare?
3. How does this project improve promoting a secure atmosphere for all
Supports comm
uni olicing and decentralization while prom. p -
• Allowse re•lacement •atrol vehicles with the advanced fire su••ression
residents. us to �urchas
system first available in the 2005 Ford Police Crown Victoria Interceptor ,
- t support stated community goals?
4. How does this prod ec PP
au
P
orts community poli cing for a safer community,._ --
• resources,A.) if funded B.) if not funded?
impact the Town's fiscal
5.. How does this projectP - , ' 've breakdowns allowingofficers to respond
roect to help eliminate excessive,repetitive
A. E� •
icienc .
in a timel manner to calls for service.
maintenance will take Police officers off the street while the are
B.Excessive breakdowns and m .
vehicles or getting them to repair services.Excessive service expense.
switchln out
levels, A. if funded B.)if not funded?
6. How does this project
have an effect on Town's service
A.Restores vehicles to service level of SOP 434
B.Vehicles would be o•erated
that do not corn•1 with SOP#34
thisimpact Operation and Maintenance costs for the Town?
�_ How does project P
Reduces h1 2h maintenance ma'or overhauls necess. as .olice •atrol vehicles exceed 1000.000
miles
this a threateninglitigious situation or a legal mandate?
8. Does project answer g us to
• e • glbraldn systems could lead to serious accidents Allows
Broken/worn suspense onlste rLn '
vehicles with the advanced fire sus•ression s stem first available in
the
Purchase replacement •atrol 2005 Ford Police Crown Victoria Interceptor
9. Is this project coordinated - savings time, and
with other project(s)to create si gnificant s avigmoney,
convenience?
Purchased with
unmarked •olive vehicles and re•lacement MDC systems..
PROJECT BUDGET
(All Costs in Thousands—S, 000)
PROJECT NA.NIE-
Re lacement Patr
of Vehicles Number:
_______]
CAPITAL COSTS all
the capital funds requested from the Town,
of dollars)the total project cost, PP1ease Ilst(in thousands To wn`s costs,funds carri e�d forward from
• fundingsources that could defray the
probable outside - - years in anticipation of the project
P funds that were banked in previous P
previous years, and
I iscal
Outside Funds Outside Funds
Total Town Outside Funds
ear Cost Funds Amount Source Amount Source Amount Source
x005— '061.361.6 1.361.6 IMO S 11111111
P 006— `071.186.2 186.2
!j1.IIIIIIIIMIMII 3.11
007— '081.191.8 .191.8
F008
—`09$197.6 197.6 $ 1111111
P 009 - `10$290.5 1.290.7 1M" 11.11 Milli
NA.NCE (O&M) COSTS
OPERATING AND . .
' and maintenance costs including�additional
list thousands of dollars)the total operating the Please withproject List cost savings and the source of savings
eases and so on associated this p J "TotalCo-A" ach year
personnel,l � the Savings columns. The fore
improvements,deferred co sts� etc.) in g
(efficiency �p
iS
the costs minus the roj ected savu1gS.
Savings Pro'ected Savi
s n
• Total Costs Projected �
I fiscal
ear Cost Personnel OtherAmount Amount � Source Source
5—`06 $58.8) $0
'.58.8 Maint is
00 A
� .
Maint006—'07 . $30.9 $0 $30.9 Ma
P007—`08 $32.4 $0 '.32.4 Maint
x008— `09 $34.) $0 '.34. Maint. '.
r 009 - '10 $51) $0
$51 Maim. $
EVALUATION(for TAC use only)
Assumption Project Yes No
Score Criterion
Score Criterion Impact on Operation and Maintenance
111111111 Health, Safety,Welfare Ramifications
Communi Goals Legal Rani '
MI Su"°� Stated Rel ati onshi to Other Prod ectsiCoord ination
MI MI
Fiscal Im'act
P
Im•act on Service Levels
PROJECT SHEET
FY 2005—'06 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
REQUEST FOR FUNDING
PROJECT NAME: Pro•e &ID Addition Number: }
Department Priority:
Department: Police_
• T ent •Ian/construction of new •oli ce •ro•e &ID addition.
1. Project Description: Dei elo•m •
shelving. flush station fume hood,##1 security for drugs/weapons.
3500 s . ft. Moveable state of art .
q � FY that it waspreviously funded in: N/A
Is this a rollover prod ect. No List any2. Project Location(if applicable):
de artme t complex 11.000 N. La Canada,Preferably a free standing
Town Hall /Police n com P
ed
parking area or an addition on the south east section of the Police
structure located north of secur p
facili
o•ect improve Public Health, Safety, and Welfare? •
3• How does this Pr � P 40' one 8 x 20 stora.�e containers full of
maxed out. We now have three 8' x and
Current space.n
•manl •ro•e and evidence.items. These storage containers are located at 11.000 N.
La Canada
technicians are approaching OSHA limits related to
and 680 W. Calle Concordia_ Property/I.D.sp
ements and load liftinglevelsfting equipmentace movement reguiri
as there is no space for lifting
.
bloom DNA.homicide sexual assault evidence and a.•roved
Need more refn gerati on for
ventilation s stems •
for handlin: and •rocessin• of such materials..
project this ro' goals?ect stated community
4. How does support
Enhances professional community policing uni olicin efforts and allows for continued compliance with State
and Federal ADOSH/OSHA statutes.
thisfiscal resources? if funded B.) if not funded?
ro ect impact the Town's A.)
5. How does p � man aisles provides for
in consistent packaging on moveable shelves eliminating
a. Items storedP e onnel efficientl . we
be stored in less space and safely accessed by dept. p rs more Y
more to
antics•ate s ellin• 3 current convex sto .s e units for a.•roxima
tel $9000.00 total.
_
8X40 storage containers or rent
b. Forced to add several commercial storage space. Increased
staffing to evaluate and maintain ADOSH/OSHAcompliance.
thisan effect on Town's service levels? A.) if funded B.) if not funded?
6. How does� project have
orderl in one location for •uicker retrieval throu•h stemat i c stora`e.
a,. Kee•s all items
forced to wait while we travel to different storage locations and/or move
b. Customers will be for
other •ro•e to get to re•uired .ro•e
7. How does this project ect imPact Operation and Maintenance costs for the Town?
.
• operations. Much lower-maintenance than most bldgs due to absence
More efficient staff and ID
of windows s lights numerous doors or small offices.
thisanswer a threateninglitigious situation or a legal mandate?
8. Does project - . .
Would get one storage
container out of 680 W Calle Concordia and keep out additional storage
• would hel us avoid ADOSHIOSHA compliance issues.,
containers there. P
• with other project(s)to create significant savings of time,money, and
this s ro ect coordinated P � ( )
9. Is project
convenience?
*_Possibly a Libr
arkin ex ansion ro'ect &the bar-coding_.propertY management system
-gip .�
PROJECT BUDGET
All Costs in Thousands--S,000)
. Number:
PROJECTNAME: ropee
P _ &ID Addit�an
CAPITAL COSTS
ct co the ca ital funds requested from the Town., all- (inthousands of dollars)the total prode st, PPlease Ll.st costs,funds carried forward from
funding sources that could defray the Town's
probable outside g in anticipation of the project
• and funds that were banked in previous yearsp
previous years,
iscal
Outside Funds Outside Funds
ear Amount Source Amount Source Forward Funds
�
005—`06$785 $785 $ • * Bonds? * 0$
006— 07 $ $
.$ $
007— 08 $ $ v
S $
008—'09 $ ,S
$ S. 1
$
OPERATING AND
MAINTENANCE (O&M) COSTS
list total operating and maintenance costs including additional
Please (in thou-sands of dollars).the p g -
P List cost savings the source of the savings
eases and so on associated with this project g
personnel,leases, s�l�,mns. The"Total Cost"for each year
• rovements, deferred costs, etc.) i n the Saving
(efficiency improvements,
is the costs minus the ro'ected savings.
iscal Total Costs Projected Savings Projected Savings
ersonnel Other Amount Source Amount Source
ear Cost P _
005—'06 $.5 $
$ . $9 Sale of storage ', .
. ts
$ $ $4.5 1 o new storage ',
.
P006 006— '07 $.5 t purchase
A
t ~
F007— 08 $.5 S
$ $5 I o new storage $
t purchase
P008- $ $ $5.5 No new storage
09 $.6purchase
unit .
009— 10 $.6 $
$ $6 No new storage i.
unit •urchase
EVALUATION(for TAC use only)
Assumption Project Yes No-----
Score Criterion .
Score Criterion
Health, Safety,Welfare Impact on Operation and Maintenance
.
Stated Community Goals Legal Ramifications
Supports �' to Other Projects/Coordination
Fiscal Impact
Relationship �]
Impact on Service Levels
PROJECT SHEET
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
2005–`06 CAPITAL I PR
FY
REQUEST FOR FUNDING '
PROJECT NAME; TASER
non- alethl. -
conducted ever weapons Number:
Department Priority:
Department Police
' officers with TASER non-lethal, conducted energy weapons. TASER
Project Description:Provide all .
1' P � �artm eats in the United States and abroad . and hundreds
ducts are used b over 6.000 •olice d e •
'r° - • �• Phoenix San Diego Sacramento.Albu•uer•ue.Pima Coon and
of.P
olive de•artr�entsinclu
chased TASER •roducts for eve •atrol officer.
Reno–have aur itwas previouslyfi?nded in: N/A
rollover project? No List any FY that
Is this a p )
2. Project Location(if PP applicable):
Police De artment/Town wide
thisproject improve public health, safety, and welfare?
3. How does p violentitu.ati ons and keepour
law enforcement officers to effectively face s
TAS ERs enable e' desi�� allows for
• • ERs reduce officer shootings and sus•ect In uries and their communities safe. TAS
their use as valuable protection devices that help ensure the security_of our communities.
this
ro•ect support stated community goals?
4. How doesP � P the safe •ublic safe workersuni •oli cin• for a safer commune including
Sup sorts cornr�a
thisimpact the Town's fiscal resources, A.) if funded B.) if not funded?
• How does project ' ' wherephysical force is
safetyof the public safety personnel in all activities
A. Allows for additional . .
• •ects.Ma avoid some of the ex•ense related to in liabili costs for
likel in d ealin• with sus
ublisafe personnel and suspects.
—ccurrent equipment and tactics may result in injury claims and officer
B._Continued use ofour
recove time off that could be avoided by the use of the TASER system technology.
have an effect on Town's service levels,A.) if funded B.)if not funded?
6. How does this project h e ersonnel and related recovery time for these personnel
A.Ma�avoid in ul..�'to public saftX..P
B• Could result in extended ed time off for •ublic safe •ersonnel if a use of force in occurs that
have been avoided through the use of the TASER system technology .
thisproject impact Operation and Maintenance costs for the Town?
7. How does p P everytwo ears $3 S per
costs associated with the purchase of batteriesy
There are maintenance •
TASER
and the aurchase of cartridges for trainln• new o aerators.
thisanswer a threateninglitigious situation or a legal mandate?
8. Does project a .
loss due to use of force related int ury to suspecand public safety personnel
we could be liableforl ts.
We would not be ti�ne
advantage of a known technolo• to reduce in relaxed to use of force
situations.
thiscoordinated with other project(s)s to create si gni.f cant savings of time,money, and
project p ) � )
9. IsP )convenience? from the"100 Club for the purchase of 5 TASERS S�
Yes we have a$�000.00 grant
we are .urchasui• an
additional 12 TASERS out of our re• ar SWAT budget for the SWAT
p ' i atin in the Pima Regional SWAT team. We will be purchasing the
Officers who will beart�cP g
required softwareFkit with the ant funds. Instructors will be trained.,training curriculum.
tracking
and rules and procedures will be in place..
PROSECT BUDGET
All Costs in Thousands--4, 000)
energyweapons ,Number:
PROJECT NAME; TASER non-lethal. conducted
CAPITAL COSTS
' the capital funds requested from the Town, all
listthousands of dollars)the total project cost, p
Please (in Town's costs funds carried forward from
• fundingsources that could defray the T
outside anticipation of the project.
probable funds that were banked in previous years in p
previous years, and
Funds Outside Funds Outside Funds
iscal Town Outside .
I
ear Cost Funds Amount
Source Amount Source Amount Source
P 005
— '06$66.0 $66.0 $ '
P 006—`07 '
$ $
,007—`08 "' '
$ $
008— `09 '. ii. '
$
009—'104. "' '
MAINTENANCE(O&M) COSTS
OPERATING AND
operating and maintenance costs including additional
' (in thousands of dollars)the total op gPlease]sst - project List cost savings and the source of the savings
leases, and so on associated with this
personnel, the Savings columns. The"Total Cost"for each year
in the
(efficienCY improvements, deferred costs, etc.)
is the costs minus the ro ect sawn s.
• Total Costs Pro'ected Savin:s Pro'ected Savin:s
I Lscal
ear Cost Personnel
Other Amount Source Amount Source
005—`06 IIIIIIIIIIIIII
P 006— '07
111111111111.111$1.4 NMI
P 007--'08 Millnill'.2.8 11.II BM
008—'09 11.1111111.111`.2.9
009—'10 $ ,
',3.0 ME BM
EVALUATION(for TAC use only)
Assumption Project j�ect Yes No
Score Criterion
Score Criterion
11111111111 Health, Safe ,Welfare Impact on Operation and Maintenance
uni Goals Legal Ramifications
Su•sorts Stated Community hi to Other Projects/Coordination
Fiscal Im
.act Relationship �I
Im•act on Service Levels
PROJECT SHEET
FY 2006—`06 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
REQUEST FOR FUNDING (1,A.r-q
PROJECT NAME: :Town Service Center&Police substation Number:
Department: Town (completed tm bythe Police Department) Department Priority:
1. Project Description:on• P
urchase land. eyeelo ,plan and construct new 15,000 to 20.000 sq. ft
Town Service Center&Police substation.
thisproject?jjç List FY that it was previously funded in: N/A
Is a rollover prodany 2. Project Location(if applicable):
Located near southern boundary of Oro Valley Town limits.
projectHealth, Safety,
improve Public and Welfare?
3. How does thes P
Current To t�P '
Town/Police facili s ace maxed out. Locates Town/Police services to provide for less
travel to obtain Town services.ces. Provides adequate space to comply with staff workspace and
movement standards.
does this project support stated community goals?
4. How -
community policing efforts and allows for continued compliance with State
Enhances professional �'P
OSH/OSHA statutes. Brings services closer to a large number of customers.
and Federal AD
Mavatins .
• ace near Town facilities b avoidin• encroachment from continued facile
ao en s
eand parking lot construction at existing locations.
xansaon P
o'ect impact the Town's fiscal resources?A.) if funded B.) if not funded?
5. How does this pr J P at the Town Hall
continued expansion and intrusive/expensive"add-on" construction
a.. Avoids P
Complex that interferes with service levels and productivity.Efficient use of space and resources
by
all Town services sharing some areas of a facility.
b. Continued negativeimpacton productivity due to intrusive "add-on" construction projects at
current facilities.
6. How does this project have an effect on Town's service levels? A.) if funded B.)if not funded?
a. Increases service location options resulting in less travel and time for customers.
b. Customers will
be forced to travel to crowded service locations with increased wait times.
7. How does this projectimpact Operation and Maintenance costs for the Town?
More effic�entaffo
• erations. Lower individual maintenance costs by facility sharing practices
t s �
between Town Departments. Eliminates rental expense @a Oracle &Maw
project answer a threatening litigious situation or a legal mandate?
8. Does this prof
Posequipment l
relocating some of 680 W Calle Concordia staff and light q upment~ Would help
usslbil� of
avoid ADOSH/OSHA compliance issues. .
thiscoordinated with other project(s)to create significant savings of time,money, and
9• Is project
convenience
convenience?
Combine resourcesP of many departments for one shared facili rather than each de•artment
searchinp.for facility space solution.
PROJECT BUDGET
(All Costs in Thousands—$, 000)
T
• Police substation I Number:
PROJECT
NAME: Town Service Center &
CAPITAL COSTS
list total project cost, the capital funds requested from the Town, all
Please (in thousands of dollars)the p � .Plcosts, funds carried forward from
outside fundingsources that could defray the Town's , .
probable in in anticipation of the project
• and funds that were banked previous yearsP
previous years,
1 iscal Total Town
Outside Funds Outside Funds Outside Funds
ear Cost Funds
Amount Source Amount Source Amount Source
005— 06 $ $ $ $ $
r 006—'07 $5000 $5000
$ Bonds? $ $
007— 08 $ $ $ $ $
008--`09 $ $ $ $ $
P009—'10 $ $ $ $ $
OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE(O&M) COSTS
ar the total o erating and maintenance costs including additional
Please list(in thousands of dollars) P
associated with this project List cost savings and the source of the savings
personnel, leases, and so on P
P
(efficiencyin the Savings co111mns. The"Total Cost" for each yearm improvements, deferredetc.)costs,
is the costs minus the ro'ected savings.
Fiscal Total
Costs Projected Savings Projected Savings
Year Cost
Personnel Other Amount Source Amount Source
2005— 06 $ $
2006— '07 $11.1
$47.2 lease canceled $
2007—'08 $11.7
$ $50 lease canceled
2008—'09 $12.4 , $
$52.5 lease canceled ,$
2009— 10 $13
$ $55 lease canceled _$
EVALUATION (for TAC use only)
Assumption Project YesNo
Score Criterion Score Criterion
Health, Safety,
Welfare Impact on Operation and Maintenance
Stated Community Goals Legal Ramifications
Supports - ro'ects/Coardination
Fiscal Impact
Relationship to Other P
1 Impact on Service Levels
PROJECT SHEET
FY 2005— '06 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
REQUEST FOR FUNDING
Number:Replacement Unmarked Police Vehicles
PROJECT 1`T�►1�
Department Priority:
Department: Police
• replacement of older unmarked police units in excess of 100.000.
Description: Provides for ,
1. ProjectPreplacement unmarked police vehicles were funded in 04/05) • _
' er town olic —SOP #34 ono
nodes p Pit waspreviously funded in: N/A
rollover project?Na List any FY that
Ist�1saP J
2.
Project Location(if applicable):
Police De artment -Town wide
improve Public Health, Safety, and Welfare?
•3, How does this project P � • • in d e•aitment; such as Detectives
' .endable trans•ortation for critical •ersonnel
Provides de
Inv esti g.aor_ Trainor� Officers,cers Professional Standards Personnel & Professional Developmentwent
Administrator and s
' Dols?
How does this project support stated community g .
4. ' ' .ersonnel to be readil available for su•sort. Allows
For u21kc safe :provi5 for critical -
Fpto plan. schedule. attend, instruct etc., in a variety of
perso
nnel to corn fete investigations coordinate..
locations. Such as Detectives Investi•ators Training Officers Professional Standards Personnel &
,
Prof.
Dev. Admin . and personnel for support in times ofcrisis.
ro'ect impact the Town's fiscal resources?
;�, How does this p � P
cleric ro ect to hel eliminate excessive repetitive breakdowns allowing personnel to
a_ E� _
respond in a timely manner., while they Excessive breakdowns and maintenance will take •ersonnel away from operations
are svvitchln
• out vehicles or •ettin• them to re•air services. Excessive service ex•ense.
_
6. How does this project have an effect on Town's service levels?
.
a. Restores vehicles to service level of SOP #34
b. Vehicles would be o•erated that do not corn.1 with SOP #34
impact •
Operation and Maintenance costs for the Town?
7. How does this project P exceed 100 000 miles
maintenance ma or overhauls necess. as vehicles
Reduces�.
thisanswer a threateninglitigious situation or a legal mandate?
8. Does project i dents
Broken/��vorn s
us ension/steering/braking systems could lead to serious acc
9. thisIsP 1 to create significant savings of time, money,and
project coordinated with other pro'�ect(s)
convenience?
Purchased and e ui ed with marked atrol vehicles --
PROJECT BUDGET
(All Costs in Thousands--S, 000)
• . ace�n ent Unmarked Police Vehicles
Number:
PROJECT NAME: Re 1
CAPITAL COSTS
' the capital funds requested from the Town, all
list of dollars)the total project cost, pPlease thousands Town's costs, funds carried forward from
din sources that could defray the
probable outside funding years in anticipation of the project
funds that were banked in previous P
previous ous years, and
I iscal
Funds Outside Funds Outside Funds
.scal Total Town Outside Amount Source Amount Source
Cost Funds Amount Source
ear
005 — `06 $170 $170 $
006—`07 $90 $90
►007—`08 $111 $111 1 :
008- `09 $121 $121 i
009- '10 $190 $190 $ .
1 1
OPERATING AND
MAINTENANCE (O&M) COSTS
thousands of dollars}the total ope t� and maintenance costs including additional
• (in ra gplease list with project List cost savings and the source of the savings
eases and so on associated this pr �
personnel, l � Savings colllrnns. The"Total Cost"for each year
improvements,deferred costs,etc.) in theg
(efficiencY
is
the costsminus the ro'ected savvy s.
Costs Projected Savings Pro'ected Savin
iscal Kcal Total �ear Cost Personnel Other Amount Source Amount Source
$0 Repl $15Heavy ,
00�—`06 $-15 Maint.
Re 1 $g Heavy $
6—`07 $-g $0 P
00 Maint
�
$0 Rep]. $8.5 Heavy
007—`O8 $-8.�
Maint
r Re 1 $9 Heavy $
r 008- '09 $-9 $0 P
Maint
$0 Repl $14 Heavy
009- '10 $ 14 Maint
s
EVALUATION(for TAC use only)
Assumption Project Yes _ No
P .
Score Criterion
Score Criterion �1111111 Impact on Operation and Maintenance
Health, Safe ,Welfare
uni Goals _ Legal Ramifications
Mill IIIIIII S u••orts Stated C°�°Fiscal im•act R el ati onsh ip to Other Prod ects/Coordin ati on
111111111 Ira•act on Service Levels 1
Executive Summary
LTAF II Funding Cuts
BACKGROUND
The State of Arizona LTAF II fund is administered by the Arizona Department of Transportation
and is derived from Arizona Lottery revenues generated by lottery sales and is contingent on
tickets sold. The LTAF II fund is separate from the Local Transportation Assistance Fund or most
commonly known as LTAF which is administered by the Department of Revenue. The LTAF II
fund in its current state was first administered in the year 2000.
PLAN/ PURPOSE
The LTAF it Fund (Local Transportation Assistance Fund II) is a fund that was created by the
State Legislature and signed into law by Governor Hull in 1998 to assist local communities in
Arizona with their transportation needs. In the year 2000 the program was made"transit use
only," i.e.., unless a jurisdiction got less than $2,500 in distribution, the funds must be used for
transit purposes only(public transportation sponsored by a local governmental entity or special
needs transportation).
SUMMARY
The LTAF II fund is one that fluctuates greatly from year to year and the grant cycle falls within
the middle of the Town of Oro Valley's fiscal year and because the State does not know in
advance how much money if any will be allocated; it is very difficult to place it in the revenue
portion of the town transit budget. After discussions with the Town Engineer(Bill Jansen retired)
and after notifying finance we made the determination to include in the 05/06 transit budget a
projected LTAF II revenue amount of$89,000.00. This is basically the same amount($89,262.00)
the Town received for the current fiscal year.
CURRENT
Governor Napalotono most recently signed HB 2770, which contained provisions adverse(in the
opinion of the Arizona Transit Association)to the interest of the public transportation community.
HB 2770 simultaneously increases the LTAFF II distribution threshold to$37 million (from the
current$31 million)and lowers the amount of available allocations to$12 million (from the current
$18 million).
CONCLUSION & FISCAL IMPACT
HB 2770 will have an impact on funding transit projects in the State of Arizona and especially
small urban and rural systems, similar to Coyote Run. It was anticipated because of the strong
Power ball tickets sales in recent years that the next fiscal year of 0/5-0/6 would also be a year
that LTAF II funding would be released. Unfortunately legislative budget analysts are now
predicting that this year the multistate lottery game will not generate enough revenue to meet the
existing threshold which is currently set at$31 million.
Therefore the budgeted revenue amount of$89,000 LTAF II revenues in the proposed 05/06
transit budget will most likely not be available. Taking this into account it will be necessary to
adjust the forecasted revenue amount for transit budget 05/06 down by$89,000.00
.r
W O -0 = C� " -t) O a) = L- V Lf) -O a) .0 0 �'
a) U) LL 4- : 0 E +.5 LL -6 U3 CN O = 4)
C6 c O- H- a) .o -a) H 0 Q. a) Q r
"C ° 2 --j > a- -�C 5 -1 c 'EC ___ .c... CD
L- a)a ) E a) Cj E co u) 0) O = O N.
CO CDR 42 ° — a) S3 a) a) c c >, c -o -...-.-,
2....= cu o 175'> � •- a) V a u) o
:,c O O -�.., ca — O a) O > V •� CO
via ° -E o co ea ca Q � cis ci)
:,._, 'a) — o a) a) 4- a) - ca
� � •E = u) > .c � a) > o > -C
a) -5 — a) O °' cn v ,� co -� ca V O a) C
a) C o U -o -0 '- c Q) 0 -- -te a) > o
C2. �� -� O -U -co � � � >> ; -L3 a) C, CO O V E Ni
co C - a-V >,%-r.....- a) -�-' = = Q 0 CO c_n v O
cv a. U V O 0 m J N -5 L" .c
CCS o 73 a) C = a) .&- g). a) .� tU
TO a) ' _ a) c 1_. 2 LL O- a) ca �"' s= cu -0 U) CO
i
cam � E- .� 8 � � � 773
� � `a
� o � caca tn-6 C V
cm u) a) o �u a) - u) = Q a.. -° u) -U) v 03 O)
� - j U) ''"' .2 -+..° j E ..� as a) O o cn -- c w
.moo — - tea) Ua1a. a) oa) . (J
._ X >7:5 tt3 u) - O u) F- X u) cn cn tI) O C
N a) a) c 2 c w > co g V a) a) 2 a) o:.,.Rs ) c tC3
> a) O C O- O a) .0) o)-4_,- = c > L > C > rf w E
ca j � _ -2 -O Ca co U .0 = CU U CO CI COcf) E C V
L-
-)o a) 8 ca o �- t) o 0)- 4c-f) - ♦= -v)- --t5) o 2a -0 a) 0 a) 0)
_ ® tic � 2 � o � � � .C) = moo
-0 - Q- -� L- ID O — � u3 L -cn LN
CD a) O RS g V O O 2 0
cm a) � 9a) ca co oa'u) ---E C U) �
'u) C V v L O e > o u) > '> co >,.�..
ft 'c5 a) (I)
N cn O c � a) � o a) � � > a � C2 .0 L o .L
I-' Q a. c > O cn — . Cts L .C.a) .C., a) D „ a) -o
o oaa2 2OVan.Co ° o �= 0Ea) � � - a'U Ce o a) ,13. a) CO .-
> , o ° o ° �z m > o LO Q�. o LL },
Q N C cn += a) = E -I
• ,- ceM -oma � o � -� ET- � -- a) - "0 ` CDtva)
Z co c .� gE C� .E -0to 0u) ( C >
xca � co �
a)
2 to C C a- U cm'`"' = co U) v) cF. c `,,._
Z
0 - O .�N Li. u) ..%:,' 2 t--
-'_' ea .� U U o .F s O O
. a 4._ , u)c,) -0
0 -� c - cam °' a) a o :a ..0 > -ov -,>, o -- a) c 0) �
CD Q 0 C= C o �, - a) }, E O L c a) .E o
ti
w
L '> : U700. :a) ° � � 4. U) U) ° � 0)V oaaU)2 2)-6 .t. -5 � o � oo u) E — .?%. co cu ..g. =s= o � � o � � Ucaoj
a) � � C" > a) = - = ° � -2oa) o) cam
Q � � v oF- ° Q `-� (NI U) v � o E o L > --
J aN -c 2Q JVI m � vQ Y 0WCcvn2
4
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: JUNE 6, 2005
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: JEFF GRANT, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: RENEWAL OF EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS
The following summarizes the Human Resources recommendations for the Town of Oro Valley Employee
Benefits Plans for FY 2005-2006
HEALTH INSURANCE:
The Town of Oro Valley is completing our second year with Aetna as the provider of our health insurance. Two
years ago, faced with sizable rate increases with our previous carrier(CIGNA), we opted to change carriers for
the second successive year and offered two Aetna products (the HMO and the POS) to our employees. As a
result of our active involvement with our annual rate negotiations, in most years Oro Valley has had health
insurance premium increases that have been significantly less than the trend for the Tucson Metropolitan area.
xhibit A depicts the premium history for the Town of Oro Valley for the past five fiscal years.)
we expected last year, we have experienced a general reluctance on the part of other carriers in extending
inpetitive bids because of our carrier changes in both FY 2002-2003 and FY 2003-2004. Our stability with
ctna for the past two years should help us obtain more favorable bids in the next few years, assuming that we
:;main with Aetna for FY2005-2006.
EXHIBIT B depicts the general terms of coverage for the current Aetna HMO plan, as well as rates for possible
plan design changes. Aetna initially quoted a rate increase of 14.52% for FY 2005-2006 with no plan changes.
Through negotiations and concessions by Aetna, they reduced their proposed rate increase to 11.08%with no
plan design changes. As the result of yet additional negotiations, Aetna has proposed varying levels of plan
design changes, resulting in correspondingly different rate increase scenarios.
The Human Resources recommendation involves an increase in the prescription drug co-payment schedule for
participants in both the Aetna HMO and POS plans. Currently the employee co-payments for a 30-day supplies
of prescription medications are $10.00 for generic, $20 for preferred, and $35.00 for brand name drugs. By
increasing the co-pays by$5.00 per tier(i.e., $15.00 for generic, $25.00 for preferred, and $40.00 for brand
name drugs) the Town of Oro Valley will realize an increase in premiums of 3.48% for FY 2005-2006, as
opposed to the 14.52%premium increase that was originally proposed by Aetna with no plan design changes..
In the past year, approximately 95% of the Town of Oro Valley employees who have elected health care
coverage have chosen the HMO plan. The remaining 5% of our employees have opted for POS coverage, which
grants them more flexibility in the choice of doctors for a significantly higher premium. Because of better
utilization by the participants in the POS plan during the current plan year, if we effect the same prescription co-
payment change noted previously, the premiums for the POS plan for FY 05-06 will decrease slightly below the
FY 04-05 rates. With the exception of the change in prescription co-pays noted for the HMO plan, Human
Resources does not recommend any additional plan design changes for the POS plan for FY 2005-2006.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 of 4
By current policy the Town contributes 100% of the employee-only cost of coverage and 75% of the additional
cost of the dependent coverage for the least expensive plan offered (i.e., the Aetna HMO). Therefore, per
policy, the additional cost of the POS coverage will be the responsibility of those p
employees who opt for the
y
plan for personal reasons.
The Human Resources Director recommends that the Town continue to utilize Aetna for FY 2005-2006
with the plan design changes noted above.
RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE:
In FY 2004-2005, Oro Valley began offering medical benefits to early retirees under the Aetna Plan. Per that
agreement, our retiree plan is rated as a separate group with its own experience and premiums. Our FY 2004-
2005 retiree plan has premiums that are 11.6%higher than our active employee plan, and it currently only has
two participants. Aetna has extended premium quotes for the early retiree plan for FY 2005-2006 that parallels
our active employee plan both in design and in proposed premium increases. On that basis, premiums for the
'Y 2005-2006 early retiree plan will also increase by 3.48%, and will remain approximately 11.6% higher than
premiums for the active employee plan. As a reminder, the participants pay the entire cost of the retiree
`h plan.
Ian Resources recommends that the Town continue to offer the early retiree health insurance
ram (as defined above) through Aetna for FY 2005-2006.
NTAL AND LIFE INSURANCE:
MetLife Dental provides the current dental coverage for the Town of Oro Valley, as well as our basic life
insurance package. (The Town provides all full-time employees with basic life insurance coverage of one-time
the individual employee's annual salary.)
MetLife's dental quote remains constant (no increase) for FY 2005-2006. There are no proposed changes to the
terms of coverage. In addition, because of administrative difficulties that were encountered during the current
fiscal year relative to the dental plan, MetLife has tentatively agreed to guarantee the existing dental rate for two
years (through the end of FY 2006-2007).
There is no change to the Life Insurance premium quote for MetLife for FY 2005-2006.
The Human Resources Director recommends that the Town renew with MetLife Dental and MetLife Life
for FY 2005-2006.
NOTE: The Town Manager's budget projected 7% increases in both the health and dental premiums.f or FY
2005-2006. Based on the revised figures noted above, the 3.4%premium increase for health insurancefor
.
active employees represents a budget decrease of approximately $60,000. In addition, the lack of an
increase for dental insurance results in a budget decrease of approximately $10,000 for the dental insurance
renewal.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Page 3 of 4
Other ancillary program recommendations are as follows:
LONG-TERM DISABILITY:
Jefferson-Pilot continues to be the only significant bidder for our Long-Term Disability y cover age. They propose
no increase in their premiums for FY 2005-2006. (Premiums will remain at $.410er$100 of covered
p payroll.)
The Human Resources Director recommends that we continue to offer the LTDro ram through
g
Jefferson-Pilot for FY 2005-2006.
MEDICAL AND DEPENDENT CARE REIMBURSEMENT ACCOUNTS:
Since 1997 the Town of Oro Valley has offered our employees Medical Care and Dependent Care
iC p
mbursement Accounts, in which employees may have monies deducted from theira
p y on a pre-tax basis to
o pay for health and dental care-related items for themselves and their dependents. This has the effect fect of
y reducing the employee's taxable income, and allowing them to payfor necessarymedical and dental
ises with pre-tax dollars. We have limited the Medical Care Reimbursement Accounts to1500
$ per
)yee annually since inception.
pile
employees ioyees who participate lose any unreimbursed deductions at the end of thelanyear, the Town is
,,;quirecd to contribute for reimbursement amounts that have not been deducted for
employees who terminate
their employment during the plan year. This happens infrequently, but does represent minimal exposure posure for the
j Town of Oro Valley.
The Human Resources Director proposes that the Town amend thelan to allow employees to
ppayroll
deduct up to $2000 annually for medical expenses.
OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL PRODUCTS:
The Human Resource Director recommends that the Town continue to offer the MetLife Supplemental Life
Insurance Product (employee-paid).
In the past, the Town has offered an assortment of supplemental insurance benefits through AFLAC.
Unfortunately, the quality of administrative support from AFLAC has continued to erode for theast few
p years.
As a result, Human Resources recommends that we discontinue our offerings throw h AFLAC, and offer similar
ar
products through Colonial Penn Insurance as replacements. All of the supplementalroducts are employee-paid
p
and there is no cost to the Town other than the administrative costs associated with employee orientations, etc.
Employees who currently have the AFLAC products may continue to obtain them directly from AFLAC
(although the Town will no longer offer them through payroll deduction).
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 4 of 4
The Town currently offers a supplemental vision plan through Eye Care Direct (employee-paid), and the
Employee Assistance Program through Brooks-Jorgenson EAP (Town-paid). No plan changes or rate changes
are anticipated in either program for FY 2005-2006.
The Human Resources Director recommends that the Town continue to offer the supplemental products
as noted above.
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A—Town of Oro Valley Health Insurance Premium History
EXHIBIT B —Town of Oro Valley current and proposed Aetna Premium Rate Exhibit.
fr
--\\/31/",
/
,
ms'^'�'
�d w !
Jeff Grant,Human Resources Director
1,;;;
,
Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
EXHIBIT A
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM HISTORY
(All rates shown are monthly costs)
owes cos pan op ion Higher cost plan option
2001-2002
UNITED HEALTHCARE PACIFICARE
Premium OV paid EE Paid Premium OV paid EE Paid
Employee only $196.93 $196.93 $0.00 $216.19 $196.93 $19.26
Employee + child(ren) $334.76 $300.30 $34.46 $367.52 $300.30 $67.22
Employee + spouse $433.22 $374.15 $59.07 $475.61 $374.15 $101.46
Employee + family $636.98 $526.97 $110.01 $698.28 $526.97 $171.31
2002-2003
CIGNA - HMO CIGNA - POS
Premium OV paid EE Paid Premium OV paid EE Paid
Employee only $199.84 $199.84 $0.00 $255.25 $199.84 $55.41
Employee + child(ren) $339.72 $304.75 $34.97 $433.92 $304.75 $129.17
Employee + spouse $439.64 $379.69 $59.95 $561.55 $379.69 $181.86
Employee + family $645.84 $534.34 $111.50 $824.46 $534.07 $290.39
of change 1.50%
2003-2004
AETNA AETNA - POS
Premium OV paid EE Paid Premium OV paid EE Paid
Employee only $203.30 $203.30 $0.00 $249.50 $203.30 $46.20
Employee + child(ren) $345.61 $310.03 $35.58 $424.20 $310.03 $114.17
Employee + spouse $447.17 $386.20 $60.97 $548.90 $386.20 $162.70
Employee + family $656.64 $543.31 $113.34 $805.90 $543.31 $262.59
of change 1.70%
2004-2005
AETNA AETNA - POS
Premium OV paid EE Paid Premium OV paid EE Paid
Employee only $238.10 $238.10 $0.00 $292.21 $238.10 $54.11
Employee + child(ren) $404.78 $363.11 $41.67 $496.82 $363.11 $133.71
Employee + spouse $523.72 $452.32 $71.40 $642.77 $452.32 $190.45
Employee + family $769.06 $636.32 $132.74 $943.87 $636.32 $307.55
of change 17.10%
2005-2006
AETNA AETNA - POS
Premium OV paid EE Paid Premium OV paid EE Paid
Employee only $246.40 $246.40 $0.00 TBD $246.40 TBD
Employee + child(ren) $418.80 $375.70 $43.10 TBD $375.70 TBD
Employee + spouse $541.90 $468.03 $73.88 TBD $468.03 TBD
Employee + family $795.80 $658.45 $137.35 TBD $658.45 TBD
of change 3.48%
EXHIBIT B
ITCAcna Town of Oro Valley Arizona HMO and POS Plan Options
Member Benefits Current HMO -HMO-Hospital Change HMO Flex HMO-RX Change , Medium HMO Alt. Medium HMO
In-Net In-Net In-Net In-Net In-Net In-Net
Plan Coinsurance 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Calendar Year Deductible
Individual None None None None None None
Family None None None None None None
Coinsurance Limit _
Individual $1500 $1500 $1500 $1500 $1500 $1500
Family 2x 2x 2x 2x 2x 2x
Lifetime Maximum Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited _ Unlimited Unlimited
Inpatient Hospital 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Hospital Inpt
Copay/Ded./Admit $100/Admit $500/Admit $150/Admit $100/Admit $250/Admit $500/Admit
Primary Physician Office Visit -
Copay or Coinsurance $10 $10 $15 $10 $15 $15
Specialist Office Visit Copay $10 $10 _ $25 $10 $15 $25
Approved Outpatient Services
'Diagnostic/X-Ray/Lab) $10 $10 $25 $10 $15 $25
tpatient Surgery $100
$100 $150 $100 $100 $200
,.rgency Room(Copay $100 ER($50 UC $100 ER($50 UC $100 ER($50 UC $100 ER($50 UC $100 ER($50 UC $100 ER($50 UC
ve if Admitted) copay) copay) copay) copay) copay) copay)
able Medical Equipment No Copay No Copay No Copay No Copay 50% 50%
'al Health Covered Covered Covered Covered Covered Covered
tance Abuse Detox Only Detox Only Detox Only ( Detox Only Detox Only Detox Only
jrmacy Triple Tier Copay _$10/$20/$35 $10/$20/$35 $15/$20/$35 ; $15/$25/$40 $15/$25/$40 $15/$25/$0
fail Order Drug Copay(90- _
ay supply) ,2x copay 2x copay 2x copay ': 2x copay 2x copay 2x copay
.;ontraceptives-Standard Included Included Included Included Included Included
Current Rates: $238.10
$523.72
$404.78
$769.09
Renewal Rates with concession: $264.48 $262.00 $252.00 $246.40 $240.50 $232.80
$581.75 $576.30 $554.30 $541.90
$529.00 $512.00
$449.63 $445.40 $428.40 $418.80 $408.90 $395.70
$854.30 $846.30 $813.90 $795.80
$776.80 $751.90
Increase over current rates: 11.08% 10.0% 5.8% ° 1.0%
3.4/° Decrease of 2.25%