HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (1280) AGENDA
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL
BUDGET STUDY SESSION
JUNE 2, 2003
ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER: 4:30 P.M.
I . Review of 5/22/03 Budget Session
2. Discussion of "Parking Lot" Budget items:
a. Merit Recommendation
b. COLA Recommendation
c. Health Insurance Renewal Rates
d. F.O.P. Negotiation Items
e. Security for Council Chambers
f. Town Clerk's Document Imaging
g. Design Costs for Library Expansion
h. Programming Costs for Naranja Town Site
3. Review of Schedule for adoption of 2003/04 Budget
4. Scheduling of Additional Budget Study Sessions (If Necessary)
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: 05/30/03
4:30 p.m.
Ih
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
*_,FROM: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
David Andrews, Finance Director '`
DATE: June 2, 2003
S U BJ: Follow-up Issues from May 22 Budget Review Session
A number of issues were raised during the Mayor and Council's Budget Review
Session of May 22. This memorandum serves as staff follow-up to these issues.
1. Issue: Increase the Magistrate Court credit card fees budget expenditure
request of$2,500 to $3,500 to cover the 2% service charge related to
revenue collections from fines.
Response: This line item has been adjusted to reflect the $3,500
adjustment.
2. Issue: Include anticipated revenue from water rate increases in the
budget.
Response: The projected revenue for FY 2003-04 should be increased by
$492,000 for fees assessed to water customers to begin to repay the
anticipated debt incurred to construct the reclaimed water system. It has
not been determined whether these fees will come in the form of
increased potable water rates or as a "surcharge" on the volume of water
used.
Also, the projected revenue for FY 2003-04 should be increased by
$57,600 to allow for plan review and construction inspection fees the utility
G:1BUDGETIFY 03-041Memosllssues 5-22-03.doc
Town of Oro Valley
Debt Service Schedules
.
.
.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA - MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
WATER SYSTEM ACQUISITION BONDS, SERIES 1996
(FINAL DEBT STRUCTURE)
DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE
DATE PRINCIPAL COUPON INTEREST PERIOD TOTAL FISCAL TOTAL
7/ 1/95 374,368.75 374,368.,5 374,368.75
1/ 1/97 748,737.50 745,737.50
7/ 1/97 100,000.00 3.700000 745,737.50 848,737.50 1,597,475.00
1/ 1/98 746,887.50 746,887.50
7/ 1/95 325,000.00 3.900000 746,887.50 1,071,887.50 1,818,775.00
1/ 1/99 740,550.00 740,550.00
7/ 1/99 350,000.00 4.10000E 740,550.00 1,090,550.00 1,831,100.0C
1/ 1/ C 733,375.00 733,375.00
7/ 1/ 0 350,000.0C 4.25000E 733 375.00 1,083,375.00 1,816,750.00
1/ 1/ 1 725,937.50 725,937.50
7/ 1/ 1 375,000.00 4.350000 725,937.50 1,100,937.50 1,826,875.00
1/ 1/ 2- ______.----_ -- /17,7137:2t. /17771:1-= _.--.._.._...__,_._r-_________..__.
7/ 1/ 2 500,000.0E 4.450000 717,781.25 1,217,781.25 1,935,562.50
1/ 1/ 3 706,656.25 706,656.25
7/ 1/ 3 525,000.00 4.600000 706,656.25 1,231,656.25 1,938,312.50
1/ 1/ 4 694,581.25 694,581.25
7/ 1/ 4 550,000.00 4.700000 694,581.25 1,244,581.25 1,939,162.50
1/ 1/ 5 681,656.25 681,656.25
7/ 1/ 5 575,000.00 4.800000 681,656.25 1,256,656.25 1,938,312.50
1/ 1/ 6 667,856.25 667,856.25
7/ 1/ 6 600,000.00 4.900000 667,856.25 1,267,856.25 1,935,712.50
1/ 1/ 7 653,156.25 653,156.25
7/ 1/ 7 650,000.00 5.200000 653,156.25 1,303,156.25 1,956,312.50
1/ 1/ 8 636,256.25 636,256.25
7/ 1/ 8 675,000.00 5.200000 636,256.25 1,311,256.25 1,947,512.50
1/ 1/ 9 618,706.25 618,706.25
7/ 1/ 9 700,000.00 5.200000 618,706.25 1,318,706.25 1,937,412.50
1/ 1/10 600,506.25 600,506.25
7/ 1/10 750,000.00 5.200000 600,506.25 1,350,506.25 1,951,012.50
1/ 1/11 581,006.25 581,006.25
7/ 1/11 775,000.00 5.450000 581,006.25 1,356,006.25 1,937,012.50
1/ 1/12 559,887.50 559,887.50
7/ 1/12 825,000.00 5.450000 559,887.50 1,384,887.50 1,944,775.00
1/ 1/13 537,406.25 537,406.25
7/ 1/13 875,000.00 5.450000 537,406.25 1,412,406.25 1,949,812.50
1/ 1/14 513,562.50 513,562.50
7/ 1/14 925,000.00 5.450000 513,562.50 1,438,562.50 1,952,125.00
1/ 1/15 488,356.25 488,356.25
7/ 1/15 975,000.00 5.550000 488,356.25 1,463,356.25 1,951,712.50
1/ 1/16 461,300.00 461,300.00
7/ 1/16 1,025,000.00 5.550000 461,300.00 1,486,300.00 1,947,600.00
1/ 1/17 432,856.25 432,856.25
7/ 1/17 1,075,000.00 5.550000 432,856.25 1,507,856.25 1,940,712.50
1/ 1/15 403,025.00 403,025.00
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 04-16-1996 C 10:13:07 Filename: ORC Key: ALL-1
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA - MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
WATER SYSTEM ACQUISITION BONDS, SERIES 1996
(FINAL DEBT STRUCTURE)
DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE
DATE PRINCIPAL• COUPON INTEREST PERIOD TOTAL FISCAL TOTAL
7/ 1/15 1,125,000.00 5.600000 403,025.00 1,528,025.00 1,931,050.0C
1/ 1/19 371,525.00 371,525.00
7/ 1/19 1,175,000.00 5.600000 371,525.00 1,546,525.0C 1,918,050.0C
1/ 1/20 338,625.00 338,625.00
7/ 1/20 1,275,000.00 5.375000 338,625.00 1,613,625.00 1,952,250.00
1/ 1/21 304,359.38 304,359.38
7/ 1/21 1,350,000.00 5.375000 304,359.38 1,654,359.38 1,958,718.75
1/ 1/22 268,078.12 268,078.12
7/ 1/22 1,425,000.00 5.375000 268,078.13 1,693,078.13 1,961,156.25
1/ 1/23 229,781.25 229,781.25
7/ 1/23 1,500,000.00 5.375000 229,781.25 1,729,781.25 1,959,562.50
1/ 1/24 189,468.75 189,468.75
7/ 1/24 1,575,000.00 5.375000 189,468.75 1,764,468.75 1,953,937.50
1/ 1/25 147,140.62 147,140.63
7/ 1/25 1,675,000.00 5.375000 147,140.63 1,822,140.63 1,969,281.25
1/ 1/26 102,125.00 102,125.00
7/ 1/26 3,800,000.00 5.375000 102,125.00 3,902,125.00 4,004,250.00
28,400,000.00 31,576,662.50 59,976,662.50
ACCRUED 37,436.88 37,436.88
28,400,000.00 31,539,225.62 59,939,225.62
Dated 4/ 1/96 with Delivery of 4/10/96
Bond Years 587,575.000
Average Coupon 5.374065
Average Life 20.689261
N I C % 5.532922 % Using 96.7133569
T I C % 5.555081 % From Delivery Date
Bond Insurance:
0.400000 % of (Total Debt Service Only) = 239,906.65
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 04-16-1996 @ 10:13:07 Filename: ORO Key: ALL-1
$5,125,000
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION, SERIES 1996
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Period Total Fiscal Total f -r r 1.(_i
1/ 1/97 92,220.42 92,220.42 5_ !`S cit. -,
7/ 1/97 170,000.00 3.900000 138,330.63 308,330.63 460,551.04
l-�!'_
��Gi1 35,C1 5.63 1 35,01 5.63 .
1/ 1/98 � G r---`-�-'
7/ 1/98 150,000.00 4.250000 135,015.63 285,015.63 420,031.25
,a4-
t-`
1/ 1/99 131,828.13 131,828.13 T `-fa
7/ 1/95 150,000.00 4.500000 131,828.13 281,828.13 413,656.25
128,453.13 1• /()OC=
7/ 1/ 0 155,000.00 4.625000 128,453.13 283,453.13 411,906.25
1/ 1/ 1124,868.75.. ___A24,868,75
7/ 1/ 1 160,000.00 4.750000 124,868.75 284,868.75 409,737.50
1/ 1/ 121.,068.75 121,068.7 1.1-�
7/ 1/ 2 170,000.00 4.875000 121,068.75 291,068.75 412,137.50
'a 1/ 1/___._3 116,925.00 116.925.00
p' c
_•:_.:___...___ .._ . . .
v 7/ 1/ 3 180,000.00 5.000000 116,925.00 296,925.00 413,850.00
01
1907•00C.
1/ 1/ 4 112,425.0C 112,425.00. J1 �--�--w--?
7/ 1/ 4 190,000.00 5.100000 112,425.00 302,425.00 414,850.00
9)...,_
G 1/ 1/ 5 107,580.00 107,5 8 0.C C ___..... .:..- - -------
+..•-o+.-.,.-.......+_.._..,._.._..-,.,..,.:•._-_:.-._-...�. :.....,..__:...._....+....:..__.n. ....-..._...v..:.....,......._.,_-.;.....,.._..._..-_...,..-....,_..______.._..,.:..'..v.•s._.a._..r._...........--_-.__..__._._- 42._._.-...1...60 GO
• t
7/ 1/ 5 205,000.00 5.150000 107,580.00 312,580.00 0,
L(..17c. "s 5-9 C N.Y:
1/•1/ 6 102,301.25 . 102,301.25 --,.j.
7/ 1/ 6 215,000.00 5.250000 102,301.25 317,301.25 419,602.50
`L-C 3 -..H.C.
1/ 1/ 7 96 657.50 96,657.50 •-' --J' `-_
7/ 1/ 7 230,000.00 5.300000 96,657.50 326,657.50 423,315.00
'F-_
1/ 1/_8_ 90,562.50 90,562.50 _._. I ---
7/ 1/ 8 240,000.00 5.750000 90,562.50 330,562.50 421,125.00
1-/ 1/ 9 _ 83,662.50 81,662.50 -.---.._--_--_-._
7/ 1/ 9 255,000.00 5.750000 83,662.50 338,662.50 422,325.00
1/ 1/10 7 6,3 31.2 5- - 7 6,3 31.2 5
7/ 1/10 270,000.00 5.750000 76,331.25 346,331.25 422,662.50
1/ 1/11 68 568.75 68 568.7 j -._
7/ 1/11 285,000.00 5.750000 68,568.75 353,568.75 422,137.50
1/ 1/12 60,375.00 60,375.00
rXMO
_ _
7/ 1/12 300,000.00 5.750000 60,375.00 360,375.00 420,750.00
L �L-LJiv�JJ
ti
1/ 1/13 51,750.00 51,750.00 _._._----_----
7/ 1/13 320,000.00 5.750000 51,750.00 371,750.00 423,500.00
1/ 1/14 42,550.00 42,550.00 _-0()/
/°; �,(-.
7/ 1/14 340,000.00 5.750000 42,550.00 382,550.00 425,100.00
_ � 1/ 1/15• • _..__ _-...___._- - 3 7 7 5.0 0 ---_ 3 2,7 7 5.O C .y'
^ 7/ 1/15 360,000.00 5.750000 32,775.00 392,775.0C 425,550.00
,( )€
1/ 1/16 22,425.00 22,425.00
7/ 1/16 380,000.00 5.750000 22,425.00 402,425.00 424,850.00 ''��
/`\C:
--. 1/ 1/17 _ ___ 1 1_,500.00 1 1,500 OC _ _ _
7/ 1/17 400,000.00 5.750000 11,500.00���
411,500.00 423,000.00
.............._0 --7-
5,125,000.00 3,665,797.29 8,790,797.29 0
ACCRUED 13,064.56 13,064.56
5,125,000.00 3,652,732.73 8,777,732.73
Dated 9/ 1/96 with Delivery of 9/18/96
Bond Years 65,260.833
' TOWN OF ORO VALLEY MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
EXCISE TAX REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1999
COMBINED DEBT SERVICE
Debt Service Schedule
s=___.................a=_____=a=x=asx
Tota�-- Fiscal1OtQ�
Date Principal :�Coupo
Interest Period Tota:
5. 00000 127,080.00 241,050.0C
1/ 1/ C i1G,QGc.cc -= 206,887.5C 448,937.5C
(' 0� C 500000106,887.50
105137.50° 270,137.5
1/ 1/ 76�,CvG.GC 700000
c 202,085.00 472,222.50
7/ 1/ o 100,000.0C -.700000 ,
102,08...0.:
00 280,235.00
�.80000C 100,235.
1/ 1/ 2 180,000.00
7/ 196,815.0C 477,o5c.oc
1/ 3.800000 96, .
100,000.00 81500 269,915.00
1/ 1/ 175,000.00 4.000000 94,915.00
120,000.00 4.000000 91,415.00
211,415.00 481,330.00
7/ 1/ 3 89,015.00 269,015.00 1/ 1/ 4 180,000.00 4.000000
7/ 1/ c 120,000.00 4.000000 474 436.00
85,415.00 205,415.00
1
�� OC
268,C.._.
5 ,85,000.00 4.20000C 83,015.00472,145.00
7/ 1 j 79,130.00 204,130.00
, � 125,000.00 4.200000
�/ 1' 76,505.00 28E,505.00
210,000.00 4.20000C ,�€ 483,600.00
1/ 4.20000C 72,095.00 1�`,
1/ E197,095.0C 7/ 1/ E 125,000.00 69,470.00 269,470.00
1/ 1/ 7 200,000.00 4.400000 65,070.00 215,070.00 484,540.00
11 7/ 1/ 7 150,000.00 4.400000 61,770.00 286,770.00
1/ 1/ 8 225,000.00 4.400000 483,590.00
7/ 1/ 8 140,000.00 4.400000
56,820.00 196,820.00
4.50000C 53,740.00 283,740.00
i/ i/ ` L30,000.00 - 48G,?OS.GC
7/ 1/ 5 150,000.00
4.500000 48,565.00 198,565.00
45,190.00 180,190.00
1/ 1/10 135,000.00 4.800000 41,950.00 91,950.00 272,140.00
II
7/ 1/1G 50,000.00 4.800000 185,750.00
1/ 1/11 145,000.00 4.800000 40,750.00
37,270.00 87,270.00
7/ 1/11 50,000.00 4.800000 186,070.00 273,020.00
36,070.00
1/ 1/12 150,000.00 4.8000000 2,g70.OG 82,470.00 268,540.00
7/ 1/12 50,000.00 4.8000
31,
270.00 81,270.00
1/ 1/1II
3 50,000.00 4.800000 30,070.00 85,070.00 166,340.00
7/ 1/13 55,000.00 4.800000 113,750.00
1/ 1/14 85,000.00 5.000000• 28,750.00
85 000.00 5.000000 26,625.00 111,625.00 225,375.00
7/ 1/14
1/ 1/15 85,000.00 5.000000 24,500.00 109,500.00
�
7/ 1/15
90 000.00 5.000000 22,375.00 112,375.00 221,875.00
1/ 1/16 95,000.00 5.000000 20,125.00
III
7/ 1/16 95,000.00 5.000000 17,750.00 110,375.00
227,875.00
1/ 1/17 95,000.00 5.000000 15,
375.00 1112,750.00
15,125.00
7/ 1/17
100 000.00 5.000000 13,000.00 113,000.00 223,375.00
110500.00
1/ 1/18 100,000.00 5.000000 10,500.00 110,500.00 223,500.00
11 7/ 1/18
1/ 1/19 105,000.00 5.000000
105,000.00 5.000000 8,000.0
5,375.00 110,375.00
112,750.00 223,125.00
7/ 1/19 110,000.00 5.000000 2,750.00
2,155,315.00 7,085,315.00
4,930,000.00 13,915.00
13,915.00
III ACCRUED
4,930,000.00 2,141,400.00 7,071,400.00
__.........
111 _
Dated 6/ 1/99 with Delivery of 6/24/99
Bond Years 46,040.833
Average Coupon 4.681312
Average Life 9.338911
4.859427 % Using 98.3366000
Illi
N I C %
T I C 4.811717 % From Delivery Date
Bond Insurance: 24,090.07
0.340000 % of (Total Debt Service Only) =
IIIPREPARED BY: PEACOCK, HISLOP, STALEY & GIVEN, INC.
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 06-11-1999 4; 13:51:48
Filename: OROVLY Key: 99COM
lit •
• ` ' TOWN OF ORO VALLEY MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
EXCISE TAX REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1999
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUILDING PORTION
all =sss=c3=====sac===s==
Debt Service. Schedule
________
Date Principal Coupon Interest Period Total Fiscal Total
1/ 1/ C 70,000.00 3.500000 40,605.82 110,605.82_.___.... �...__�,__._.___.___.-..-.-
7/ 1/ C 70,000.0f— 3-.--tdo-obC__.._-___- 3:,-,580.0C _03,580.0C 214-,185.82
III r-ir.
. 11 / 1 70,000.00 3.70000C 32,355.00 102,355.00
_ - _. _._..._...,
.�.
- 7//- 1/ + 'It-16-66:667-
,5,.�000.0.C.. 0C�7000 -... - 31,060.00 106,.060.00 Y208,415 00
`'" 1/ 1/ 2 75 000.O0.-___3,800000______29,_672,.50_. __104,.672„50
., -% 7/ 1/ 2 75,000.00 3.800000 28,247.50 103,247.50207,920.00
C)'' 1/ 1/ 3 80,000.00 4.000000 M 26,822.50 106,822.50
7/ 1/ 3 80,000.00 4.000000 25,222.50 105,222.50 —21:270-4-57011-----
1/ 1/ 4 75,000.00 4.000000 23,622.50 98,622.50
7/ 1/ 4 90,000.00 4.000000 22,122.50 112,122.50 210,745.00
1/ 1/ 5 85,000.00 4.200000 20,322.50 105,322.50
1111 7/ 1/ 5 85,000.00 4.200000 18,537.80 103,537.50 208,860.00
1/ 1/ E 90,000.00 4.200000 16,752.50 106,752.50
7/ 1/ E 90,000.00 4.200000 14,862.50 104,862.50 211,615.00
1/ 1/ 7 90,000.00 4.400000 12,972.50 102,972.50
11/ 7/ 1/ 7 95,000.00 4.400000 10,992.50 105,992.50 208,965.00
1/ 1/ 6 95,000.00 4.400000 8,902.50 103,902.50
7/ 1/ 8 100,000.00 4.400000 6,812.50 106,812.50 210,715.00
1/ 1/ S 100,000.00 4.500000 4,612.50 104,612.50
7/ 1/ 9 105,000.00 4.500000 2,362.50 107,362.50 211,975.00
III 1,695,000.00 410,440.83 2,105,440.83
ACCRUED 4,447.31 4,447.31
1,695,000.00 405,993.52 2,100,993.52
=sss=zzz=sszss ==ss:sasses=ss =z=zs=ssas�===
III
Dated 6/ 1/99 with Delivery of 6/24/99
Bond Years 9,636.250
Average Coupon 4.259342
L.— Average Life 5.685103
N I C 4.428050 % Using 99.0408791
T I C % 4.360468 % From Delivery Date
III Bond Insurance:
0.340000 % of (Total Debt Service Only) = 7,158.50
PREPARED BY: PEACOCK, HISLOP, STALEY & GIVEN, INC.
IIIMicro-Muni Debt Date: 06-11-1999 a 14:13:42 Filename: OROVLY Key: 99BLDG
III
III
III
III
III
III
40
,. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
EXCISE TAX REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1999
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ONLY
/ ==.===========
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Period Total Fiscal Total
1/ 1/ C 15,000.0C 3.500000 35,795.17 50,799.17
7/ 1/ C 20,000.00 3.50000C 30,422.50 50,422.50 101,221.67
"
1/ 1/ 1 30,000.00 3.700000 30,072.50 60,072.50
7/ 1; 1 15,000.00 3.700000 29,517.50 44,517.50 104,590.0C
1/ 1/ 2 35,000.00 3.800000 29,240.00 64,240.00
7/ 1/ 2 15,000.00 3.800000 28,575.0C 43,575.00 107,815.00
1/ 1/ 3 25,000.00 4.000000 28,290.00 53,290.00
7/ 1/ 3 25,000.00 4.000000 27,790.00 52,790.00 106,080.00
1/ 1/ 4 30,000.00 4.000000 27,290.00 57,290.00
7/ 1/ 4 20,000.00 4.00000C 26,690.00 46,690.00 103,980.00
4 1/ 1/ 5 25,000.00 4.200000 26,290.00 51,290.00
7/ 1/ 5 25,000.00 4.20000E 25,765.00 56,765.00 102,055.00
1/ 1/ E 35,000.0C 4.200000 25,240.00 60,240.00
7/ 1/ 6 20,000.0C 4.200000 24,505.00 44,505.00 104,745.00
1/ 1/ 7 20,000.00 4.400000 24,085.00 44,085.00
7/ 1/ 7 40,000.00 4.400000 23,645.00 63,645.00 107,730.00
1/ 1/ 8 35,000.00 4.400000 22,765.00 57,765.00
7/ 1/ 8 25,000.00 4.400000 21,995.00 46,995.00 104,760.00
1/ 1/ 9 30,000.00 4.500000 21,445.00 51,445.00
7/ 1/ 9 30,000.0E 4.500000 20,770.00 50,770.00 102,215.00
1/ 1/10 30,000.00 4.800000 20,095.00 50,095.00
7/ 1/10 35,000.00 4.800000 19,375.00 54,375.00 104,470.00
1/ 1/11 35,000.00 4.800000 18,535.00 53,535.00
7/ 1/11 35,000.00 4.800000 17,695.00 52,695.00 106,230.00
1/ 1/12 35,000.00 4.800000 16,855.00 51,855.00
7/ 1/12 35,000.00 4.800000 16,015.00 51,015.00 102,870.00
1/ 1/13 35,000.00 4.800000 15,175.00 50,175.00
7/ 1/13 40,000.00 4.800000 14,335.00 54,335.00 104,510.00
1/ 1/14 40,000.00 5.000000 13,375.00 53,375.00
7/ 1/14 40,000.00 5.000000 12,375.00 52,375.00 105,750.00
1/ 1/15 40,000.00 5.000000 11,375.00 51,375.00
7/ 1/15 40,000.00 5.000000 10,375.00 50,375.00 101,750.00
1/ 1/16 45,000.00 5.000000 9,375.00 54,375.00
7/ 1/16 45,000.00 5.000000 8,250.00 53,250.00 107,625.00
1/ 1/17 45,000.00 5.000000 7,125.00 52,125.00
7/ 1/17 45,000.00 5.000000 6,000.00 51,000.00 103,125.00
1/ 1/18 45,000.00 5.000000 4,875.00 49,875.00
7/ 1/18 50,000.00 5.000000 3,750.00 53,750.00 103,625.00
1/ 1/19 50,000.00 5.000000 2,500.00 52,500.00
7/ 1/19 50,000.00 5.000000 1,250.00 51,250.00 103,750.00
1,330,000.00 758,896.67 2,088,896.67
ACCRUED
1,330,000.00
3,920.86 3,920.86
754,975.81 2,084,975.81
.......====...=. _________ _____
Dated 6/ 1/99 with Delivery of 6/24/99
I Bond Years 15,750.833
Average Coupon 4.818137
Average Life 11.842732
N I C % 4.999960 % Using 97.8467180
T I C % 4.983083 % From Delivery Date
Bond Insurance:
0.340000 % of (Total Debt Service Only) = 7,102.25
IPREPARED BY: PEACOCK, HISLOP, STALEY & GIVEN, INC.
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 06-11-1999 a 14:13:32 Filename: OROVLY Key: 99WTR
''C
r
'' TOWN OF ORO VALLEY MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
. ' EXCISE TAX REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1999
REFUNDING PORTION - REFUNDS SRS 92 BONDS AND TUCSON AGRMT
O Debt Service Schedule
illDate: Principal Coupon Interest Period Total Fiscal Total
1/ 1/ C 30,000.00 3.500000 50,645.00 80,645.0C
7/ 1/ 0 10,000.00 3.500000 42,885.00 52,885.00 133,530.00
1/ill
1/ 1 65,000.00 3.700000 42,710.00 1G7,710CC
7/ 1/ 3 10,000.00 4.700000 41,507.50 51,507.50 159,217.90
1/ 1/ 2 70,000.00 3.800000 41,322.50 111,322.50
7/ 1/ 2 10,000.00 3.800000 39,992.50 49,992.50 161,315.0C
III 1/ 1/ 3 70,000.00 4.000000 39,802.50 109,802.50
7/ 1/ 3 15,000.00 4.000000 38,402.50 53,402.50 163,205.00
1/ 1/ 4 75,000.00 4.00000C 38,102.50 113,102.50
7/ 1/ 4 10,000.00 4.000000 36,602.50 46,602.5C 159,705.00
1/ 1/ 5 75,000.00 4.20000C 36,402.5C 111,402.50
III 7/ 1/ 5 19,000.00 4.200000 34,827.50 49,827.50 161,230.00
1/ 1/ 8 85,000.00 4.200000 34,512.50 119,512.50
7/ 1/ 6 15,000.00 4.200000 32,727.5C 47,727.50 167,240.00
1/ 1/ 7 90,000.00 4.400000 32,412.50 122,412.50
ill 7/ 1/ 7 15,000.00 4.400000 30,432.50 45,432.50 167,845.00
1/ 1/ 6 95,000.00 4.400000 30,102.50 125,102.50
7/ 1/ 8 15,000.00 4.400000 28,012.50 43,012.50 168,115.00
1/ 1/ 5 100,000.00 4.50000C 27,682.50 127,682.5C
7/ 1/ 5 15,000.00 4.50000C 25,432.50 40,432.50 168,115.00
1/ 1/10 105,000.00 4.80000C 25,095.00 130,095.00
7/ 1/10 15,000.00 4.800000 22,575.00 37,575.00 167,670.00
1/ 1/11 110,000.00 4.800000 22,215.00 132,215.00
7/ 1/11 15,000.00 4.800000 19,575.00 34,575.00 166,790.00
III 1/ 1/12 115,000.00 4.800000 19,215.00 134,215.00
7/ 1/12 15,000.00 4.800000 16,455.00 31,455.00 165,670.00
1/ 1/13 15,000.00 4.800000 16,095.00 31,095.00
7/ 1/13 15,000.00 4.800000 15,735.00 30,735.00 61,830.00
1/ 1/14 45,000.00 5.000000 15,375.00 60,375.00
7/ 1/14 45,000.00 5.000000 14,250.00 59,250.00 119,625.00
1/ 1/15 45,000.00 5.000000 13,125.00 58,125.00
7/ 1/15 50,000.00 5.000000 12,000.00 62,000.00 120,125.00
1/ 1/16 50,000.00 5.000000 10,750.00 60,750.00
III 7/ 1/16 50,000.00 5.000000 9,500.00 59,500.00 120,250.00
1/ 1/17 50,000.00 5.000000 8,250.00 58,250.00
7/ 1/17 55,000.00 5.000000 7,000.00 62,000.00 120,250.00
1/ 1/18 55,000.00 5.000000 5,625.00 60,625.00
7/ 1/18 55,000.00 5.000000 4,250.00 59,250.00 119,875.00
1/ 1/19 55,000.00 5.000000 2,875.00 57,875.00
7/ 1/19 60,000.00 5.000000 1,500.00 61,500.00 119,375.00
1,905,000.00 985,977.50 2,890,977.50
ACCRUED 5,546.83 5,546.83
III
1,905,000.00 980,430.67 2,885,430.67
Dated 6/ 1/99 with Delivery of 6/24/99
III Bond Years 20,653.750
Average Coupon 4.773843
Average Life 10.841864
N I C % 4.953519 % Using 98.0519753
III T I C % 4.924805 % From Delivery Date
Bond Insurance:
0.340000 % of (Total Debt Service Only) = 9,829.32
711 PREPARED BY: PEACOCK, HISLOP, STALEY & GIVEN, INC.
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 06-11-1999 14:13:50 Filename: OROVLY Key: 99REF
III
III
III -i
$2,580,000
. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA
EXCISE TAX REVENUE OBLIGATIONS, SERIES 2000
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Period Total Fiscal Tota
; �- 7/ 1/
:� 120,000.00 4.400000 88,176.67 208,176.67 206,176.67
1/ 1/ 2 _63 492.50 63_492.50
4
2 80 000.00 4.500000 ^63,492:5C--'T! 143,492.5C 206,985.00
61,692.50
1/ 1/ 3
208,385.00
` _ - - 146
- 69�.5CE
61,692.50
71 "1 85,000.00 4.600000 61,692.50 ,
11 -11 -- ._.__... ..�____ ...�_�.._.0 -___ 59,..737.50 _ ._ 59,737.50 M �09 475.00
7/ 1/ 4 90,000.00! 4.600000 59,737.50y 149,737.5
1/ 1/ 5 57 667.50 57,667.507/ 1/ 5 100,000.00 4.700000 57,667.50 157,667.50 215,335.00
1/ 1/ 6 55,317.50 55,317.50
7/ 1/ E 100,000.00 4.70000C 55,317.50 155,317.50 210,635.00
1/ 1/ 7 52,967.50 52,967.50
7/ 11 7 100,000.00 4.800000 50' ,967.50 152,967.50 205,935.00
1/ 1/ 8 567.50 50,567.50
7/ 1/ 6 100,000.00 4.800000 50,567.50 150,567.50 201,135.00
1/ 1/ 9 48,167.50 48,167.50
7/ 1/ 9 110,000.00 4.900000 48,167.50 158,167.50 206,335.00
1/ 1/10 45,472.50 45,472.50
7/ 1/10 115,000.00 4.900000 45,472.50 160,472.50 205,945.00
1/ 1/11 42,655.00 42,655.00
7/ 1/11 120,000.00 5.200000 42,655.00 162,655.00 205,310.00
1/ 1/12 39,535.00 39,535.00
7/ 1/12 130,000.00 5.200000 39,535.00 169,535.00 209,070.00
1/ 1/13 36,155.00 36,155.00
7/ 1/13 135,000.00 5.200000 36,155.00 171,155.00 207,310.00
1/ 1/14 32,645.00 32,645.00
7/ 1/14 145,000.00 5.200000 32,645.00 177,645.00 210,290.00
1/ 1/15/ ,875.00 28,875.00
7/ 1/15 150,000.00 5.500000 28,875.00 178,875.00 207,750.00
1/ 1/16 24,750.00 24,750.00
7/ 1/16 160,000.00 5.500000 24,750.00 184,750.00 209,500.00
1/ 1/17 20,350.00 20,350.00
7/ 1/17 170,000.00 5.500000 20,350.00 190,350.00 210,700.00
1/ 1/18 15,675.00 15,675.00
7/ 1/18 180,000.00 5.500000 15,675.00 195,675.00 211,350.00
1/ 1/19 10,725.00 10,725.00
7/ 1/19 190,000.00 5.500000 10,725.00 200,725.00 211,450.00
1/ 1/20 5,500.00 5,500.00
7/ 1/20 200,000.00 5.500000 5,500.00 205,500.00 211,000.00
2,580,000.00 1,592,071.67 4,172,071.67
ACCRUED 9,919.88 9,919.88
2,580,000.00 1,582,151.79 4,162,151.79
Dated 11/ 1/ 0 with Delivery of 11/28/ 0
Bond Years 29,990.000
Average Coupon 5.308675
Average Life 11.624031
N I C % 5.403328 % Using 98.8997531
T I C % 5.416226 % From Delivery Date
Bond Insurance: - 18,357.12
0.440000 % of (Total Debt Service Only) -
PREPARED BY: PEACOCK, HISLOP, STALEY & GIVEN, INC.
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 11-15-2000 El 14:55:58 Filename: OROVLY Key: SRS00
.
EXHIBIT A-2
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY,ARIZONA
DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ON OUTSTANDING AND UNDEFEASED 2000 OBLIGATIONS
Interest
Date Principal Rate Interest Total
07/01/0: S - - E 135,200.00 (1) $ 135,200.00
01/01/04 - - 135,200.00 135,200.00
07/01/04 - - 135,200.00 135,200.00
01/01/0E - - 135,200.00 135,200.00
07/01/05 - - 135,200.00 135,200.00
01/01/06 - - 135,200.00 135,200.00
07/01/06 - - 135,200.00 135,200.00
01/01/07 - - 135,200.00 135,200.00
07/01/07 - - 135,200.00 135,200.00
01/01/08 4,225,000 6.40% 135,200.00 4,360,200.00
$ 4,225,000 $ 1.352,000.00 $ 51577,000.00
(1) Will be paid with funds available in the Separate Trust Account—see Exhibit A.
il ' 3 .
2 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
EXCISE TAX REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Period Total Fiscal Total
7/ 1/ 1 580,000.00 3.250000 100,001.88 680,001.88 680,001.88
1/ 1/ 2 190,578.75 190,578.75
II 7/ 1/ 2 300,000.00 3.400000 190,578.75 490,578.75 681,157.50
1/ 1/ 3
185,478.75 185,478.75
7/ 1/ 1 325,000.00 3.500000 185,478.7`_ 510,478.75 695,957.50
1/ 1/ 4 179,791.25 179,791.25
7/ 1/ 4 325,000.00 3.750000 179,791.25 504,791.25 684,582.50
11 1/ 1/ 5 173,697.50 173,697.50
7/ 1/ 5 340,000.00 3.800000 173,697.50 513,697.50 687,395.00
1/ 1/ 6 167,237.50 167,237.50
7/ 1/ 6 350,000.00 3.900000 167,237.50 517,237.50 684,475.00
II 1/ 1/ 7 160,412.50 160,412.50
7/ 1/ 7 360,000.00 4.000000 160,412.50 520,412.50 680,825.00
1/ 1/ 8 153,212.50 153,212.50
7/ 1/ 6 375,000.00 4.125000 153,212.50 528,212.50 681,425.00
1/ 1/ 9 145,478.13 145,478.13
II 7/ 1/ 9 400,000.00 4.300000 145,478.13 545,478.13 690,956.25
1/ 1/10 136,878.13 136,878.13
7/ 1/10 400,000.00 4.375000 136,878.13 536,878.13 673,756.25
1/ 1/11 128,128.13 128,128.13
I/ 7/ 1/11 425,000.00 4.400000 128,128.13 553,128.13 681,256.25
1/ 1/12 118,778.13 118,778.13
7/ 1/12 440,000.00 4.500000 118,778.13 558,778.13 677,556.25
1/ 1/13 108,878.13 108,878.13
7/ 1/13 465,000.00 4.625000 108,878.13 573,878.13 682,756.25
li 1/ 1/14 98,125.00 98,125.00
7/ 1/14 485,000.00 5.000000 98,125.00 583,125.00 681,250.00
1/ 1/15 86,000.00 86,000.00
7/ 1/15 505,000.00 5.000000 86,000.00 591,000.00 677,000.00
1/ 1/16 73,375.00 73,375.00
11, 7/ 1/16 530,000.00 5.000000 73,375.00 603,375.00 676,750.00
1/ 1/17 60,125.00 60,125.00
7/ 1/17 560,000.00 5.000000 60,125.00 620,125.00 680,250.00
1/ 1/18 46,125.00 46,125.00
I 7/ 1/18 585,000.00 5.000000 46,125.00 631,125.00 677,250.00
1/ 1/19 31,500.00 31,500.00
7/ 1/19 615,000.00 5.000000 31,500.00 646,500.00 678,000.00
1/ 1/20 16,125.00 16,125.00
I 7/ 1/20 645,000.00 5.000000 16,125.00 661,125.00 677,250.00
9,010,000.00 4,619,850.63 13,629,850.63
ACCRUED 25,556.03 25,556.03
9,010,000.00 4,594,294.60 13,604,294.60
I/ -
Dated 4/ 1/ 1 with Delivery of 4/24/ 1
Bond Years 97,097.500
II Average Coupon 4.757950
Average Life 10.776637
N I C 4.924756 % Using 98.2023957
T I C % 5.016441 % From Delivery Date
I Bond Insurance:
0.299000 % of (Total Debt Service Only) = 40,753.25
Prepared by: Peacock Hislop
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 04-05-2001 @ 18:56:27 Filename: OROVALLY Key: 01MPC
I
i • Page 19
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
EXCISE TAX REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001
• DEBT SERVICE TO BE PAID FROM NET WATER SYSTEM REVENUES (63%)
Debt Service Schedule
111 Date Principal Coupon Interest Period Total Fiscal Total
7/ 1/ 1 363,544.00 3.250000 62,681.1E 426,225.16 426,225.16
1/ 1/ 2 119,454.77 119,454.77
111 7/ 1/ 2 188,040.00 3.400000 119,454.77 307,494.77 426,949.53
1/ 1/ 3 116,258.09 116,258.09
7/ 1/ 203,710.00 3.500000 116,258.09 319,968.09 436,226.17
z`
1/ 1/
4 112,693.16 112,693.16
7/ 1/ 4 203,710.00 3.750000 112,693.16 316,403.16 429,096.32
111 1/ 1/ 5 108,873.60 108,873.60
7/ 1/ 5 213,112.00 3.800000 108,873.60 321,985.60 430,859.19
1/ 1/ 6 104,824.47 104,824.47
7/ 1/ E. 219,380.00 3.900000 104,824.47 324,204.47 429,028.93
1/ 1/ 7 100,546.56 100,546.56
7/ 1/ 7 225,648.00 4.000000 100,546.56 326,194.5E 426,741.13
1/ 1/ 6 96,033.60 96,033.60
7/ 1/ 6 235,050.00 4.125000 96,033.60 331,083.60 427,117.19
1/ 1/ 9 91,185.69 91,185.69
ill 7/ 1/ 9 250,720.00 4.300000 91,185.6Q 341,905.69
.
1/ 1/10 85,795.21 85,795.21 433,091.38
7/ 1/10 250,720.00 4.375000 85,795.21 336,515.21 422,310.42
1/ 1/l1 80,310.71 80,310.71
III 7/ 1/11 266,390.00 4.400000 80,310.71 346,700.71 427,011.42
1/ 1/12 74,450.13 74,450.13
7/ 1/12 275,792.00 4.500000 74,450.13 350,242.13 424,692.26
1/ 1/13 68,244.81 68,244.81
7/ 1/13 291,462.00 4.625000 68,244.81 359,706.81 427,951.62
II 1/ 1/14 61,504.75 61,504.75
7/ 1/14 303,998.00 5.000000 61,504.75 365,502.75 427,007.50
1/ 1/15 53,904.80 53,904.80
7/ 1/15 316,534.00 5.000000 53,904.80 370,438.80 424,343.60
LI 1/ 1/16 45,991.45 45,991.45
7/ 1/16 332,204.00 5.000000 45,991.45 378,195.45 424,186.90
1/ 1/17 37,686.35 37,686.35
7/ 1/17 351,008.00 5.000000 37,686.35 388,694.35 426,380.70
1/ 1/18 28,911.15 28,911.15
11 7/ 1/18 366,678.00 5.000000 28,911.15 395,589.15 424,500.30
1/ 1/19 19,744.20 19,744.20
7/ 1/19 385,482.00 5.000000 19,744.20 405,226.20 424,970.40
1/ 1/20 10,107.15 10,107.15
II 7/ 1/20 404,286.00 5.000000 10,107.15 414,393.15 424,500.30
5,647,468.00 2,895,722.42 8,543,190.42
ACCRUED 16,018.52 16,018.52
5,647,468.00 2,879,703.90 8,527,171.90
II
Dated 4/ 1/ 1 with Delivery of 4/24/ 1
Bond Years 60,860.713
II Average Coupon 4.757950
Average Life 10.776637
N I C 4.966727 % Using 97.7500843
T I C ,t 4.795420 % From Delivery Date
IPrepared by: Peacock Hislop
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 04-10-2001 @ 14:36:13 Filename: OROVLY Key: 01MPC-WTR
Page 23
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION
f EXCISE TAX REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001
DEBT SERVICE TO BE PAID FROM EXCISE TAX REVENUES (37%)
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Period Total Fiscal Total
7/ 1/ 1 216,456.00 3.250000 37,320.70 253,776.70 253,776.70
1/ 1/ 71 123.99 71,123.99 254,201.98
7/ 1/ 111,960.00 3.400000 71,123.99
1-83,66.3.99 r-.,'
,220
67
121,2 9 0.0 0 3.500000 6 9,2 .67 190,510.6/ 259,731.34
�". 7/ 1/ _ 67,098.10 67,098.10 _...
1 L_.1/_4 _ ____ _ _ ..,._�. �.
..,-.�.,._.______ ��_����___..�.67,098.10 18 8,3 8 8.10 255,486.19
7/ 1/ 4 121,290.00 r3�.750000
k'` 64,823.91 64,823.91
7/ 1/ E 126,888.00 3.800000 64,823.91 191,711.91 256,535-.81
1/ 1/ E 62,413.04 62,413.04
7/ 1/ E
130,620.00 3.900000 62,413.04 193,033.04 255,446.07
1/ 1/ 7 59,865.95 59,865.95
7/ 1/ 7 134,352.00 4.000000 59,865.95 194,217.95 254,083.89
1/ 1/ 8 57,178.91 57,178.91
7/ 1/ 8 139,950.00 4.125000 57,178.91 197,128.91 254,307.81
1/ 1/ 9 54,292.44 54,292.44
7/ 1/ 9 149,280.00 4.300000 54,292.44 203,572.44 257,864.87
1/ 1/10 51,082.92 51,082.92
7/ 1/10 149,280.00 4.375000 51,082.92 200,362.92 251,445.83
1/ 1/11 47,817.42 47,817.42
7/ 1/11 158,610.00 4.400000 47,817.42 206,427.42 254,244.83
1/ 1/12 44,328.00 44,328.00
7/ 1/12 164,208.00 4.500000 44,328.00 208,536.00 252,863.99
1/ 1/1; 40,633.32 40,633.32
7/ 1/13 173,538.00 4.625000 40,633.32 214,171.32 254,804.63
1/ 1/14
36,620.25 36,620.25
7/ 1/14 181,002.00 5.000000 36,620.25 217,622.25 254,242.50
1/ 1/15 32,095.20 32,095.20
7/ 1/15 188,466.00 5.000000 32,095.20 220,561.20 252,656.40
1/ 1/16 27,383.55 27,383.55
7/ 1/16 197,796.00 5.000000 27,383.55 225,179.55 252,563.10
1/ 1/17 22,438.65 22,438.65
7/ 1/17 208,992.00 5.000000 22,438.65 231,430.65 253,869.30
1/ 1/18 17,213.85 17,213.85
7/ 1/18 218,322.00 5.000000 17,213.85 235,535.85 252,749.70
1/ 1/19 11,755.80 11,755.80
7/ 1/19 229,518.00 5.000000 11,755.80 241,273.80 253,029.60
1/ 1/20 6,017.85 6,017.85
7/ 1/20 240,714.00 5.000000 6,017.85 246,731.85
252,749.70
3,362,532.00 1,724,128.24 5,086,660.24
ACCRUED 9,537.51 9,537.51
3,362,532.00 1,714,590.73 5,077,122.73
Dated 4/ 1/ 1 with Delivery of 4/24/ 1
Bond Years 36,236.787
Average Coupon 4.757950
Average Life 10.776637
N I C rt 4.924756 % Using 98.2023957
T I C % 4.795420 % From Delivery Date
Prepared by: Peacock Hislop
Micro-Muni Debt Date: 04-26-2001 @ 14:46:55 Filename: OROVLY Key: 01MPC-TAX
CITE CLERK'S FILE NOTE:
Correction of scrivener's errors.
See memo from City Attorney's
Office dated February 27, 2002. Exhibit C to
Settlement Agreement
SCHEDULE OF SETTLEMENT PAYMENTS
-AND CAPITAL CHARGE REIMBURSEMENTS
Settlement Total
Principal Remaining Settlement Settlement
Month Payment Principal Interest Payment.
1 $375,000 $3,375,000 $375,000
7 $168,750 $3,206,250 $109,688 $278,438
13 $168,750 $3;037,500 $104,203 $272,953
19 $168,750 $2,868,750 $98,719 $267,469
25 $168,750 $2,700,000 $93,234 $261,984
31 $168,750 $2,531,250 $87,750 $256,500
37 $168,750 $2,362,500 $82,266 $251,016
43 $168,750 $2,1.93,750 $76,781 $245,531
49 $168,750 $2,025,000 $71,297 $240,047
55 $168,750 $1,856,250 $65,813 $234,563
61 $168,750 $1,687,500 $60,328 $229,078
67 $168,750 $1,518,750 $54,844 $223,594
73 $168,750 $1,350,000 $49,359 $218,109
79 $168,750 $1,181,250 $43,875 $212,625
85 $168,750 $1,012,500 $38,391 $207,141
91 $168,750 $843,750 $32,906 $201,656
97 $168,750 $675,000 $27,422 $196,172
103 $168,750 $506,250 $21,938 $190,688
109 $168,750 $337,500 $16,453 $185,203
115 $168,750 $168,750 $10,969 $179,719
121 $168,750 $0 $5,484 $174,234
Reimbursemnt Total
Principal Remaining Reimbursemnt Reimbursemnt TOTAL
Payment Principal Interest Payment PAYMENT
1 $ 166,000 $1,494,000 $ 166,000 $541,000
7 $ 74,700 $1,419,300 $ 48,555 $ 123,255 $401,693
13 $ 74,700 $1,344,600 $ 46,127 $ 120,827 $393,780
19 $ 74,700 $1,269,900 $ 43,700 $ 118,400 $385,868
25 $ 74,700 $1,195,200 $ 41,272 $ 115,972 $377,956
31 $ 74,700 $1,120,500 $ 38,844 $ 113,544 $370,044
37 $ 74,700 .$1,045,800 $ 36,416 $ 111,116 $362,132
43 $ 74,700 $971,100 $ - 33,989 $ 108,689 $354,220
49 $ 74,700 $896,400 $ 31,561 $ 106,261 $346,308
55 $ 74,700 $821,700 $ 29,133 $ 103,833 $338,396
61 $ 74,700 $747,000 $ 26,705 $ 101,405 $330,483
67 $ 74,700 $672,300 $ 24,278 $ 98,978 $322,571
73 $ 74,700 $597,600 $ 21,850 $ 96,550 $314,659
79 $ 74,700 $522,900 $ 19,422 $ 94,122 $306,747
85 $ 74,700 $448,200 $ 16,994 $ 91,694 $298,835
91 $ 74,700 $373,500 $ 14,567 $ 89,267 $290,923
97 $ 74,700 $298,800 $ 12,139 $ 86,839 $283,011
103 $ 74,700 $224,100 $ 9,711 $ 84,411 $275,099
T 109 $ 74,700 $149,400 $ 7,283 $ 81,983 $267,186
115 $ 74,700 $74,700 $ 4,856 $ 79,556 $259,274
121 $ 74,700 $0 $ 2,428 $ 77,128 $251,362
MSC1flJ010.507/416587.1)(l 0-31-0 I)
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY L
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: June 2"d 2003
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
SUBJECT: 2003/04 Parking Lot Budget Issues
SUMMARY:
During the 2003/04 budget study sessions several significant issues have been placed in the
"Parking Lot" until this evening. Those issues and associated costs to the town are identified
below, with a Manager recommendation for each.
Merit Recommendation:
The following is the merit recommendation that was included in the May 1st 2003 cover memorandum
when the Manager's Proposed Budget was delivered to you:
"The Town Manager recommends providing funding for step increases for police employees and up to
3% merit increases for non-police employees whose salaries are less than $60,000 per year as of
June 30th 2003. All employees who earn $60,000/yr. or more would not be eligible for the suggested
merit increase."
Budget Impact (All Funds $ 209,000 —General Fund $150,000 approximately):
The budget impact related to the above was originally estimated to be approximately $ 200,000 for
the 2003/4 fiscal year for the General Fund. A re-examination of that calculation indicates that the
actual General Fund budget impact would be approximately $ 150,000.
Town Manager Recommendation:
The recommendation for the 2003/04 budget relating to merit consideration is the same
as indicated above and on the May 1s` 2003 memorandum to Town Council.
COLA Recommendation:
The recommendation regarding a Cost of Living Increase for 2003/04 was no COLA increase due to
budget constraints. There will be a further discussion about method to determine COLA when
funding becomes available during the response to the FOP items later in this Council Communication.
Budget Impact ($ 0):
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY p-
ll
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 of/
Town Manager Recommendation:
The recommendation is the same as indicated on the May 1s` 2003 budget
memorandum......." It is also recommended that there be no COLA adjustment for any
employee."
Health Insurance Renewal:
In the May 1st Cover memorandum it was indicated that a 20% increase had been placed in the
proposed budget based upon trends staff was aware of in the medical insurance industry. Due to a
error in preparing the formula to calculate this 20% increase the proposed budget DOES NOT include
the 20% originally indicated, but only an approximate 2% increase. The flip side of this bad budget
news is the original bid from Cigna of a 32% increase over the existing 2002/03 medical insurance
rates has been reduced to 12.4% increase with negotiations continuing between our broker, Mr.
Grant and CIGNA.
Budget Impact (All Funds $ 119,000 — Gen. Fund $ 85,000):
The net budget impact at this point after taking everything into consideration is $119,000 total
adjustment to the budget with General Fund's portion being $ 85,000.
Town Manager Recommendation:
The Manager's recommendation relating to health insurance renewal rates and health
and dental premium is the same as the May 1st 2003 memorandum......."It is proposed
that the Town continue to pay for 100% of employee-only coverage and 75% of
dependent coverages as a health insurance benefit to its employees."
2003 Fraternal Order of Police Negotiation Items:
The list of negotiation items that was delivered to the Town Council on May 19th is attached for your
review. The following is Management's response from a budget perspective to this list.
1. Cost of Living Annual Proposal
Budget Impact (All fund $266,000 — Gen. Fund $ 204,000):
The net budget impact using a 2.3% COLA adjustment for town employees for the 2003/04 budget
year would be a total for All Funds of $266,000 with the General Fund's portion being
$204,Q00.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
r,
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 3 of
Management Response:
recommendation regarding COLA is indicated above (no COLA adjustment for any
The e 9 9 .
town employee due to fiscal constraints). Management does agree with the FOP team
.
however in proposing to use one reporting source , that being the Eller Business College
p p g p
of the Universityof Arizona to determine COLA amount in future years when funding is
available.
2. Added Vacation Day or Birthday
The FOP hasro osed that the Town add an 11th Holiday beginning in FY 2003-04. The new Holiday
p p
would be a "floating y Holida " to be used to celebrate the individual employee's birthday. The Holiday
would have to be celebrated during the employee's birth month or the employee would lose the
holidayfor that fiscal year. This parallels a similar request that was recommended by the Employee
Focus Group.
Currently the Town of Oro Valley celebrates 10 paid holidays. Comparing Oro Valley to the other 87
incorporated communities in Arizona indicates that the average annual paid holidays for the majority
of cities and towns in Arizona is 10.9 per year.
Budget Impact ($ Minimal):
The budget impact is anticipated to be minimal since those employees covered by this proposed
9 p
additional holiday are salaried and it would not be a holiday benefit that would accrue and be on the
books should an employee leave the employment of the town.
Management Response:
Based upon where Oro Valley compares to other communities in Arizona regarding Paid
Holidays, Management supports the addition of an 11th holiday. The additional holiday
y
would be designated as the employee's birthday, and would need to be used during the
month of the employee's birthday or the holiday is forfeited for that fiscal year. It is
understood that this additional holiday (employee's birthday) could not be used for the
purposes of calculating Holiday pay, overtime or compensation time.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 4 off
3. Additional Vacation Time
The request for an additional week of vacation for those employees that have 15 or more years with
the town potentially could have financial impact to the town. Currently the Town vacation benefit for
employees is as follows:
0 — 5 years 2 weeks vacation
5 — 10 years 3 weeks vacation
10+ years 4 weeks vacation
The League of Arizona Cities and Towns Salary and Benefits survey reveals the following:
Of the 87 communities in the state: 1) 17 offer vacation accrual rates in excess of those used by Oro
Valley; 2) 12 offer accrual rates that are less than Oro Valley at 15 years of service, but are greater
than Oro Valley at a later time (at 20 years of service, for example); 3) 19 offer accrual rates that
are equal to Oro Valley; 4) 36 offer accrual rates that are less than those offered by Oro Valley, and
5) 3 are unknown. Therefore, 29 offer accrual rates that are better than Oro Valley (or partially
better), while 36 offer accrual rates that are less than Oro Valley's, with 19 equal to Oro Valley. Our
current accrual pattern appears to be competitive.
Budget Impact ($55,000):
Of equal importance is the cost to the Town of Oro Valley. 24 employees will be eligible during FY
2003-2004. The lost productivity equals 960 hours. Utilizing the average salary for these 24
employees, that equals a cost to the town of $25,728. If overtime is employed to replace these
employees while they are gone, the town is potentially liable for 1440 hours of overtime (at 1.5 times
the regular hours lost). Using the average salary for the balance of the workforce, the replacement
labor hours have a potential cost of $29,480 for a total potential cost to the town of $55,208 for this
proposal. Pursuant to Town Policy, all accrued vacation time must be paid to employees at the time
of separation of employment, creating a bona fide liability for the Town.
Management Response: It is not recommended to add an additional weeks' vacation for
town employees that have 15 or more years of employment with the Town.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 5 off
4. Additional Comp. Time
The FOP has requested that the Town allow Police Officers to accrue an additional 40 hours of
Compensatory Time-Off ("Comp-time"). The 40 hours represents a 33% increase over existing
comp-time limits (120 hours for Police Officers). They further propose that the additional time off
must be used prior to retirement, and that if not used by the employee the additional comp. time
would be forfeited.
Initially, the "use it or lose it" portion of the FOP proposal is clearly illegal under the terms of the Fair
Labor Standards Act (ELBA). Pursuant to the FLSA, comp-time is earned as the result of working
overtime (at a premium of 1.5 hours of comp-time per hour of overtime worked). As a result, comp-
time must be paid by the employer, and cannot be part of a "use it or lose it" scenario.
Last, the current accrued liability for comp-time town-wide is $163,142. If that liability is increased
by 33% (assuming that all employees would receive the same 33% increase in the comp-time
"cap."), the Town's total comp-time liability would increase by $54,326. This is a liability that must
be paid by the Town at some point in the future.
Budget Impact ($54,326)
Management Response:
It is the recommendation of management that the Compensation Time Cap remain at
120 hours maximum for Police Officers and 60 hours for Non-Police Employees.
5. Medical Retirement Benefit
The FOP has requested that the Town of Oro Valley allow employees to "piggyback" on the Town's
health insurance coverage until they qualify for Medicare. Under the terms of the FOP proposal, the
employees would be responsible for paying 100% of the cost of the coverage.
This proposal requires additional study, in that the cost of including retirees (at any age) must be
considered actuarially in order to be accurately projected for the future.
Budget Impact ( $ Unknown)
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 6 of
Management Response:
It is recommended that this proposal be delayed, and that the Town's HR Director and
the Town's Broker work jointly to develop additional proposals from the Town's health
insurance carrier for the cost of coverage 1) if retirees are in included in existing lines of
coverage, and, 2) if the retirees are rated separately. Quotes of this nature (and/or the
development of other possible alternatives) can be developed for consideration by the
Town Council for the FY 2004-2005 budget.
6. Arizona State Retirement System
The FOP "encourages" the Town Council to "move forward with implementing the ASRS for all eligible
employees." The Town is currently surveying eligible employees regarding their preference. Results
of the survey will be made available to the Town Council upon its completion (middle of June 2003).
The Council will then be able to act upon the information at their pleasure.
Budget Impact (All Funds for those eligible - $ 124,000 Savings)
Management Response:
It is recommended that the Town continue pursuing the employee survey regarding
ASRS, and bring the results to the Town Council in Mid-June, so that a decision can be
reached on this important matter by the adoption of the Final Budget in July 2003.
7. Long —Term Disability
The FOP has requested that the Town review the current plan and make adjustments to allow
employees to maintain their current medical coverage while on LTD.
A review of our existing LTD and Health Insurance contracts will be completed subsequent to the
Town Council consideration of the ASRS issue (No. 6, above). LTD is included as an integral part of
the ASRS plan (with an associated cost of approximately .5% of salaries). Pending Town Council
consideration of the ASRS issue, we will know what approach to take regarding LTD.
Budget Impact ($Unknown):
Management Response:
As noted above in Item #6.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page fofir
Security For Council Chambers:
$ 20,000 was originally requested in the capital portion of the Town Council budget to remodel the
Council Chambers to provide security for the Town Council and staff at Council Meetings.
Budget Impact ($20,000):
Town Manager Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Town Council provide the funding necessary to improve the
security of the Town Council Chambers.
Town Clerk's Document Imaging:
Phase I of the Town Clerk's Document Imaging Software was requested in the 2003/04
budget, with Phase II of the system being requested in the following fiscal year 2004/05
in the amount of $ 11,000.
Budget Impact ($ 2,900 — 2003/04)
($11,000 — 2004/05)
Town Manager Recommendation:
It is recommended that Phase I of the Town Clerk's Document Imaging Software be
funded this year, and Phase II be funded in 2004/05.
Design Costs for Library Expansion
The Town Council received a proposal from the Friends of the Oro Valley Public Library to match the
anticipated design fees for the vacant 10,000 sq. ft. at the library building.
Budget Impact ( $22,500)
Town Manager Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Town Council accept the proposal from the Friends of the
Oro Valley Public Library and fund the $22,500 to complete the design of the vacant
10,000 sq. foot library space. This recommendation is made with the understanding that
even when the space is designed, it will be necessary to secure the necessary funding to
construct and operate this additional space.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
r r.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Pa$efof�
Programming Costs for Naranja Town Site:
It is estimated that it will cost approximately $250,000 to complete the programming phase for the
Naranja Town Site, which would be the next logical step in making this project a reality. Presently
there is no funding available for construction at this site, and there is an ongoing effort to see if there
is a possibility of this site along with the land to the north to becoming a World Technology Satellite
site in some manner.
Budget Impact (Approximately $250,000)
Town Manager Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Town Council NOT fund this project at this time due to the
number of unresolved issues with the site and the potential for even minor changes that
could cause programming changes in the future.
Other Information:
The "running budget total" of where the Town is with respect to the previous budget sessions will be
hand delivered at the Budget Session on June 2nd 2003.
Attachments:
1. 2003 Fraternal Order of Police Negotiation Items (handed delivered May 19th 2003)
/ .. --, . zat_____
Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
200.E Eraternar Order of code. e Wegotiation Items
1) Cost of Living Annual Propos l-We would like the Town and the FOP to
agree to use Marshall Vest's Economic Outlook Report to determine the cost
v
of living increase for Arizona employees. This report is published by the Eller
Business College of the University of Arizona. The Consumer Pricing Index
primarily determines cost of Living. This index is established nationally, not
locally or state by state. The report allows us to notice current economic
trends and see how we compare nationally as a state.
2) Added Vacation Day or Birthday-This day would be used anytime in the
month of your birthday.
3) Additional Vacation Time.-We are proposing to add forty hours of vacation
time to employees with fifteen years or more to be accrued in the same
manner as the current town policy. The only stipulation would be that the
employee has to utilize the vacation time prior to separation. It has to be
utilized prior to separation. if you do not use it, you will lose it. The cap would
remain at 240 hours; therefore, the Town of Oro Valley would not have to
show it as a liability.
4) Additional Comp Time-Currently, comp time allows us to retain up to 120
hours. We are going to request an additional forty hours be added with the
stipulation that the additional forty hours has to be utilized prior to separation.
If you do not use it, you will lose it.
5) Medical Retirement Benefit-Upon retirement, we would like the Town of Oro
Valley to allow employees the benefit of remaining on the Town's medical
plan (piggyback). Employees would be able to remain on the plan until
Medicare age. The employee would pay one hundred percent of coverage
cost (monies provided by PSPRS payable to the Town). If the Town elects to
take part in the State Retirement System, the employees in that system would
be covered under the State plan.
6) Arizona State Retirement System-We encourage the Town Council to move
forward with implementing the ASRS for all eligible town employees. The
current retirement plan does not provide a stable investment for most of the
town employees. ASRS would add stability to their investment and benefit the
town by lowering the town's contribution to the plan.
7) Long-Term Disability-We hope you will review the current plan and make
adjustments to allow employees to maintain their current medical benefits
while on Long-Term Disability. The current plan discontinues medical benefits
when the empioyee needs it the most. Currently, the employee loses forty
percent of their income in addition to the loss of the medical coverage. This
burden is overwhelming to.the employee.
3
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
FINANCIAL PLANNING CALENDAR
FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004
DATE ACTIVITY
January 13 — February 5 Prepare budget workpapers, instructions,
revenue estimates, fund balance projections
February 6 Distribute New Personnel and Employee
Reclassification Requests to Department
Heads
February 6 Distribute budget request forms and related
materials to Department Heads
March 3 New Personnel and Employee
Reclassification Requests Due to Human
Resources
March 5 Council adoption of FY 2003-2004 Capital
Improvements Plan
March 7 Departmental Budget Requests Due to
Manager's Office
March 8 — March 23 Employee Staffing, Compensation and
Benefits Analyses due from Human
Resources
March 8 — March 23 Finance Department reviews and analyzes
departmental budget requests
March 24 —April 11 Manager's Budget Reviews with Department
Heads
April 12 —April 27 Finance Department assembles Manager's
Proposed Budget
April 28 Deliver proposed Tentative Budget to Mayor
and Council, Budget & Bond Committee
May 5 — June 2 *
Council's Budget Work Sessions
(including Budget & Bond Committee)
June 3 —June 10 Finance prepares budget packet materials
for delivery to Manager's Office
June 25 Adoption of Tentative Budget
June 26 —July 1 Finance prepares budget packet materials
for delivery to Manager's Office
June 30 & July 7 Publish Tentative Budget
July 21 State-imposed deadline for adoption of
Tentative Budget
July 16 Adoption of Final Budget
FY 03-04 Financial Planning Calendar Revised
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY 2
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: June 2nd 2003
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
SUBJECT: 2003/04 Parking Lot Budget Issues
SUMMARY:
During the 2003/04 budget study sessions several significant issues have been placed in the
"Parking Lot" until this evening. Those issues and associated costs to the town are identified
below, with a Manager recommendation for each.
fir:0414ki9
09/vvi�i�ler�t Recommendation:
The following is the merit recommendation that was included in the May 1st 2003 cover memorandum
when the Manager's Proposed Budget was delivered to you:
"The Town Manager recommends providing funding for step increases for police employees and up to
3% merit increases for non-police employees whose salaries are less than $60,000 per year as of
June 30th 2003. All employees who earn $60,000/yr. or more would not be eligible for the suggested
merit increase."
Budget Impact (All Funds $ 209,000 — General Fund $150,000 approximately):
The budget impact related to the above was originally estimated to be approximately $ 200,000 for
the 2003/4 fiscal year for the General Fund. A re-examination of that calculation indicates that the
actual General Fund budget impact would be approximately $ 150,000.
Town Manager Recommendation:
The recommendation for the 2003/04 budget relating to merit consideration is the same
as indicated above and on the May 1st 2003 memorandum to Town Council.
COLA Recommendation:
The recommendation regarding a Cost of Living Increase for 2003/04 was no COLA increase due to
budget constraints. There will be a further discussion about method to determine COLA when
funding becomes available during the response to the FOP items later in this Council Communication.
Budget Impact ($ 0):
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 of/
Town Manager Recommendation:
The recommendation is
the same as indicated on the May I.st 2003 budget
memorandum......." It is also recommended that there be no COLA adjustment for any
employee."
Health Insurance Renewal:
1st Cover memorandum it was indicated that a 20% increase had been placed in the
In the May
proposedbudgetupon based u on trends staff was aware of in the medical insurance industry. Due to a
error in preparing the formula to calculate this 20% increase the proposed budget DOES NOT include
° originally indicated, but onlyan approximate 2% increase. The flip side of this bad budget
the 20/o o g y p
news is the original bid from Cigna of a 32% increase over the existing 2002/03 medical insurance
9 9
rates
has been reduced to 12.4% increase with negotiations continuing between our broker, Mr.
Grant and CIGNA.
Budget Impact (All Funds $ 119,000 - Gen. Fund $ 85,000):
9 P
The net budget impact at this point after taking everything into consideration is $119,000 total
9 p
adjustment to the budget with General Fund's portion being $ 85,000.
Town Manager Recommendation:
The Manager's recommendation relating to health insurance renewal rates and health
and dentalp remium is the same as the May ist 2003 memorandum.....-"It is proposed
that the Town continue to pay for 100% of employee-only coverage and 75% of
dependent coverages as a health insurance benefit to its employees."
2003 Fraternal Order of Police Negotiation Items:
Thelist of negotiation items that was delivered to the Town Council on May 19th is attached for your
g
review. The following is Management's response from a budget perspective to this list.
1. Cost of Living Annual Proposal
Budget Impact (All fund $266,000 - Gen. Fund $ 204,000):
The net budget impact using a 2.3% COLA adjustment for town employees for the 2003/04 budget
9 p
year would be a total for All Funds of $266,000 with the General Fund's portion being
$204,000.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 3 of/
Management Response:
I to, recommendation regarding COLA is indicated above (no COLA adjustment for any
town employee due to fiscal constraints). Management does agree with the FOP team
however in proposing to use one reporting source , that being the Eller Business College
of the University of Arizona to determine COLA amount in future years when funding is
available.
2. Added Vacation Day or Birthday
The FOP has proposed that the Town add an 11th Holiday beginning in FY 2003-04. The new Holiday
would be a "floating Holiday" to be used to celebrate the individual employee's birthday. The Holiday
would have to be celebrated during the employee's birth month or the employee would lose the
holiday for that fiscal year. This parallels a similar request that was recommended by the Employee
Focus Group.
Currently the Town of Oro Valley celebrates 10 paid holidays. Comparing Oro Valley to the other 87
incorporated communities in Arizona indicates that the average annual paid holidays for the majority
of cities and towns in Arizona is 10.9 per year.
Budget Impact ($ Minimal):
The budget impact is anticipated to be minimal since those employees covered by this proposed
additional holiday are salaried and it would not be a holiday benefit that would accrue and be on the
books should an employee leave the employment of the town.
Management Response:
Based upon where Oro Valley compares to other communities in Arizona regarding Paid
Holidays, Management supports the addition of an 11th holiday. The additional holiday
would be designated as the employee's birthday, and would need to be used during the
month of the employee's birthday or the holiday is forfeited for that fiscal year. It is
understood that this additional holiday (employee's birthday) could not be used for the
purposes of calculating Holiday pay, overtime or compensation time.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 4 of/
rtei:u6
1/Pf 5/ )'19
3. Additional Vacation Time
The request for an additional week of vacation for those employees that have 15 or more years with
the town potentially could have financial impact to the town. Currently the Town vacation benefit for
employees is as follows:
0 — 5 years 2 weeks vacation
5 — 10 years 3 weeks vacation
10+ years 4 weeks vacation
The League of Arizona Cities and Towns Salary and Benefits survey reveals the following:
Of the 87 communities in the state: 1) 17 offer vacation accrual rates in excess of those used by Oro
Valley; 2) 12 offer accrual rates that are less than Oro Valley at 15 years of service, but are greater
than Oro Valley at a later time (at 20 years of service, for example); 3) 19 offer accrual rates that
are equal to Oro Valley; 4) 36 offer accrual rates that are less than those offered by Oro Valley, and
5) 3 are unknown. Therefore, 29 offer accrual rates that are better than Oro Valley (or partially
better), while 36 offer accrual rates that are less than Oro Valley's, with 19 equal to Oro Valley. Our
current accrual pattern appears to be competitive.
Budget Impact ($55,000):
Of equal importance is the cost to the Town of Oro Valley. 24 employees will be eligible during FY
2003-2004. The lost productivity equals 960 hours. Utilizing the average salary for these 24
employees, that equals a cost to the town of $25,728. If overtime is employed to replace these
employees while they are gone, the town is potentially liable for 1440 hours of overtime (at 1.5 times
the regular hours lost). Using the average salary for the balance of the workforce, the replacement
labor hours have a potential cost of $29,480 for a total potential cost to the town of $55,208 for this
proposal. Pursuant to Town Policy, all accrued vacation time must be paid to employees at the time
of separation of employment, creating a bona fide liability for the Town.
Management Response: It is not recommended to add an additional weeks' vacation for
town employees that have 15 or more years of employment with the Town.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 5 of
WcA5)6i)vvi) etoLer)
4. Additional Comp. Time
The FOP has requested that
the Town allow Police Officers to accrue an additional 40 hours of
- C'Comp-time"). The 40 hours represents a 33% increasCompensatory Timeffe over existing
0 . .
for Police Officers). Theyfurther propose that the additional time off
comp-time limits (120 hours )
must be used prior to retirement, and that if not used by the employee the additional comp. time
would be forfeited.
itor loseit" portion of the FOP proposal is clearly illegal under the terms of the Fair
Initially, the "use
Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Pursuant to the FLSA, comp-time is earned as the result of working
overtime (at a premium of 1.5 hours of comp-time per hour of overtime worked). As a result, comp-
time must beaid bythe employer, and cannot be part of a "use it or lose it" scenario.
P
accrued liabilityfor comp-time town-wide is $163,142. If that liability is increased
Last, the current .
33% (assumingthat all employees would receive the same 33% increase in the comp-time
by
" the Town's total comp-time liability would increase by $54,326. This is a liability that must
"cap."),�, p
be paid by the Town at some point in the future.
Budget Impact ($54,326)
Management Response:
It is the recommendation of management that the Compensation Time Cap remain at
120 hours maximum for Police Officers and 60 hours for Non-Police Employees.
5. Medical Retirement Benefit
The FOP has requested that the Town of Oro Valley allow employees to "piggyback" on the Town's
health insurance coverage until they qualify for Medicare. Under the terms of the FOP proposal, the
employees would be responsible for paying 100% of the cost of the coverage.
This ro osal requires additional study, in that the cost of including retirees (at any age) must be
P P
considered actuarially in order to be accurately projected for the future.
Budget Impact ( $ Unknown)
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
9*.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 6 of
Management Response:
It is recommended that this proposal be delayed, and that the Town's HR Director and
the Town's Broker work jointly to develop additional proposals from the Town's health
insurance carrier for the cost of coverage 1) if retirees are in included in existing lines of
coverage, and, 2) if the retirees are rated separately. Quotes of this nature (and/or the
development of other possible alternatives) can be developed for consideration by the
Town Council for the FY 2004-2005 budget.
6. Arizona State Retirement System
The FOP "encourages" the Town Council to "move forward with implementing the ASRS for all eligible
employees." The Town is currently surveying eligible employees regarding their preference. Results
of the survey will be made available to the Town Council upon its completion (middle of June 2003).
The Council will then be able to act upon the information at their pleasure.
Budget Impact (All Funds for those eligible - $ 124,000 Savings)
Management Response:
It is recommended that the Town continue pursuing the employee survey regarding
ASRS, and bring the results to the Town Council in Mid-June, so that a decision can be
reached on this important matter by the adoption of the Final Budget in July 2003.
7. Long —Term Disability
The FOP has requested that the Town review the current plan and make adjustments to allow
employees to maintain their current medical coverage while on LTD.
A review of our existing LTD and Health Insurance contracts will be completed subsequent to the
Town Council consideration of the ASRS issue (No. 6, above). LTD is included as an integral part of
the ASRS plan (with an associated cost of approximately .5% of salaries). Pending Town Council
consideration of the ASRS issue, we will know what approach to take regarding LTD.
Budget Impact ($Unknown):
Management Response:
As noted above in Item #6.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page f off
Security For Council Chambers:
$ 20,000 was originally requested in the capital portion of the Town Council budget to remodel the
Council Chambers top rovide security for the Town Council and staff at Council Meetings.
Budget Impact ($20,000):
Town Manager Recommendation:
that the Town Council provide the funding necessary to improve the
It is recommended
security of the Town Council Chambers. •
5-41"
Town Clerk's Document Imaging: - ,
UP
Phase I of the Town Clerk's Document Imaging Software was requested in the 2003/04
y
budget,
with Phase II of the system being requested in the following fiscal year 2004/05
in the amount of $ 11,000.
Budget Impact ($ 2,900 — 2003/04)
($11,000 — 2004/05)
Town Manager Recommendation:
It
isrecommended that Phase I of the Town Clerk's Document Imaging Software be
funded this year, and Phase II be funded in 2004/05.
Costs for Library Expansion - J
Design p A.
The Town Council received a proposal from the Friends of the Oro Valley Public Library to match the
o p p
anticipated design fees for the vacant 10,000 sq. ft. at the library building.
Budget Impact ( $22,500)
Town Manager Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Town Council accept the proposal from the Friends of the
Oro Valley Public Library and fund the $22,500 to complete the design of the vacant
10,000 sq. library space.foot s pace. This recommendation is made with the understanding that
even when the space is designed, it will be necessary to secure the necessary funding to
p 9
construct and operate this additional space.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Pae of
Programming Costs for Naranja Town Site:
It is estimated that approximately it will costa roximatel $250,000 to complete the programming phase for the
Naranja Town Site, which would be the next logical step in making this project a reality. Presently
there is no funding available for construction at this site, and there is an ongoing effort to see if there
u d g
is a possibility of this his site alongwith the land to the north to becoming a World Technology Satellite
site in some manner.
Budget Impact (Approximately $250,000)
Town Manager Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Town Council NOT fund this project at this time due to the
issues with the site and the potential for even minor changes that
number of unresolved
could cause programming changes in the future.
Other Information:
The "running budget et total" of where the Town is with respect to the previous budget sessions will be hand delivered at the Budget Session on June 2nd 2003.
Attachments:
1. 2003 Fraternal Order of Police Negotiation Items (handed delivered May 19th 2003)
9
Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
2003 aterrta[Order of ToL e fKegotiation Items
-1 Cost of Living Annual Proposz.i-We would like the Town and the FOP to
agree to use Marshall Vest's Economic Outlook Repor to determine the cost
of living increase for Arizona e m poyees. This report is published by the Der
Colle e of the of Arizona. The Consumer Pricing index
�us�ne.s., �, g University
primarily determines cost of Living. This index is established nationally, not
locally or state by state. The report allows us to notice current economic
trends and see how we compare nationally as a state.
2) Added Vacation Day or Birthday-This day would be used anytime in the
month of your birthday.
3) Additional Vacation Time.-We are proposing to add forty hours of vacation
time to employees with fifteen years or more to be accrued in the same
manner as the current town policy,. The only stipulation would be that the
employee has to utilize the vacation time prior to separation. It has to be
utilized prior to separation. if you do not use it, you will lose it. The cap would
remain at 240 hours; therefore, the Town of Oro Valley would not have to
show it as a liability.
4) Additional Comp Time-Currently, comp time allows us to retain up to 120
hours. We are going to request an additional forty hours be added with the
stipulation that the additional forty hours has to be utilized prior to separation.
If you do not use it, you will lose it.
5) Medical Retirement Benefit-Upon retirement, we would like the Town of Oro
Valley to allow employees the benefit of remaining on the Town's medical
plan (piggyback). Employees would be able to remain on the plan until
Medicare age. The employee would pay one hundred percent of coverage
cost (monies provided by PSPRS payable to the Town). If the Town elects to
take part in the State Retirement System, the employees in that system would
be covered under the State plan.
6) Arizona State Retirement System-We encourage the Town Council to move
forward with implementing the ASRS for all eligible town employees. The
current retirement plan does not provide a stable investment for most of the
town employees. ASRS would add stability to their investment and benefit the
town by lowering the town's contribution to the plan.
7) Long-Term Disability-We hope you will review the current plan and make
adjustments to allow employees to maintain their current medical benefits
while on Long-Term Disability. The current plan discontinues medical benefits
when the employee needs it the most. Currently, the employee loses forty
percent of their income in addition to the loss of the medical coverage. This
burden is overwhelming to.the employee.
3
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
FINANCIAL PLANNING CALENDAR
FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004
DATE ACTIVITY
January 13 — February 5 Prepare budget workpapers, instructions,
revenue estimates, fund balance projections
February 6 Distribute New Personnel and Employee
Reclassification Requests to Department
Heads
February 6 Distribute budget request forms and related
materials to Department Heads
March 3 New Personnel and Employee
Reclassification Requests Due to Human
Resources
March 5 Council adoption of FY 2003-2004 Capital
Improvements Plan
March 7 Departmental Budget Requests Due to
Manager's Office
March 8 — March 23 Employee Staffing, Compensation and
Benefits Analyses due from Human
Resources
March 8 — March 23 Finance Department reviews and analyzes
departmental budget requests
March 24 —April 11 Manager's Budget Reviews with Department
Heads
April 12 —April 27 Finance Department assembles Manager's
Proposed Budget
April 28 Deliver proposed Tentative Budget to Mayor
and Council, Budget & Bond Committee
May 5 — June 2
Council's Budget Work Sessions
(including Budget & Bond Committee)
June 3 — June 10 Finance prepares budget packet materials
for delivery to Manager's Office
June 25 Adoption of Tentative Budget
June 26 —July 1 Finance prepares budget packet materials
for delivery to Manager's Office
June 30 & July 7 Publish Tentative Budget
July 21 State-imposed deadline for adoption of
Tentative Budget
July 16 Adoption of Final Budget
FY 03-04 Financial Planning Calendar Revised