HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (1536) AGENDA
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL
BUDGET STUDY SESSION
May 18 , 1999
5:30 p.m.
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
BUDGET STUDY SESSION - AT OR AFTER 5:30 PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. FOLLOW-UP ISSUES FROM MAY 12, 1999 BUDGET REVIEW
SESSION
2. FACILITIES MAINTENANCE (15 minutes)
(Pages 204 - 213)
3. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUILDING CONSTRUCTION (10 minutes)
(Pages 421 —433)
4. LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION (20 minutes)
(Pages 434 —439)
5. HIGHWAY FUND — PUBLIC WORKS (20 minutes)
(Pages 360 - 377)
6. TOWNWIDE ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES (10 minutes)
(Pages 412 —417)
7. ORACLE ROAD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION FUND
(10 minutes) (Pages 418 —420)
8. REVIEW OF BUDGET ISSUES FROM THIS EVENING'S MEETING
AT OR AFTER 7:00 P.M. — COMPENSATION TASK FORCE
8. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF COMPENSATION STUDY FOR
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
ADJOURNMENT
A copy of the Manager's proposed budget for fiscal year 1999/2000 is available
for public inspection in the office of the Town Clerk between the hours of 8:30
a.m. — 5:00 p.m.
The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify
the Town Clerk at 297-2591.
POSTED: 5/13/99
4:30 P.M.
LH
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: MAY 18, 1999
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR& COUNCIL
FROM: Nancy Mager, Chair, Mayor and Council Compensation Task Force
SUBJECT: Compensation Study for Mayor and Council
BACKGROUND:
The Oro Valley Mayor and Town Council created the Compensation Task Force on January 6, 1999. Its
mission is to review the issue of compensation for Town Council Members. Task Force members include Frank
Butrico, Kit Donley, Nancy Mager, Nick Vale, and Tom Vetrano. At its first meeting, the Task Force met with
Tobin Sidles to discuss relevant legal issues. Jeff Grant attended all meetings to provide staff support. In all, the
Task Force met a total of four times. In addition, the Task Force sought public input through the media.
Informal conversations were held with numerous residents, and 15 residents responded in writing or by phone
to the Task Force's request for input. Of the 15, only four responded in writing that they did not feel
compensation was warranted. Over two-thirds of the public input was in favor of some form of compensation
for the Mayor and Council. Sentiments in favor of formal compensation ranged from paying $10 per hour to
creating full-time Mayor and Council positions. The Task Force determined that overall the public strongly
supported compensation.
SUMMARY:
Using data provided by Jeff Grant from the 1999 League of Arizona Cities and Towns Salary Survey (Appendix
A), the Task Force selected the communities depicted, and reviewed comparative data by:
• Town size
• Size of town staff(and the utilization of a town manager model vs. "strong"mayor model)
• Town budget
• Size of Town Council
• Travel policy (allowance vs. reimbursement for all returned receipts)
• Benefit levels for Mayor and Council
Oro Valley is the largest city in the State of Arizona that does not compensate its Mayor and Council, and based
on the data presented in Appendix A., it appears to be usual and customary for communities of similar size and
structure to compensate town officials accordingly.
The Task Force strongly believes in the uniqueness of the Town of Oro Valley. The Mayor and Council should
be compensated for the professional standards Oro Valley citizens have grown to expect. The expectation of
professionalism at this level must be strongly supported and maintained. Moreover, it is noted that the Town
staff is compensated at a high level and is expected to perform in a professional manner. The Town Council
needs to be held to similar standards. Appropriate compensation is consistent with such expectations.
Furthermore, compensation at this level will likely increase public participation in Oro Valley governance,
including voter turnout. We strongly believe that the Town Council should be a reflection of the diversity of the
citizenry of Oro Valley. Public service in our Town should be something to aspire to, and not something to be
taken lightly. Implementing fair compensation for the Mayor and Town Council is instrumental to attracting
individuals who may not have considered running for office previously. In addition,the Task Force believes
compensation will help to better balance the composition of the Council in order to represent the entire
community, and not just those who can afford to donate their time, energy and skills.
The Town Council must be equipped to make high-level decisions that will have a lasting effect on our rapidly
growing community. Oro Valley faces significant challenges in the very near future. It is incumbent upon us to
seek access to the most talented people possible to help make these important decisions for generations to come.
Compensation for the Mayor and Council will help provide Oro Valley with access to the deepest pool of
qualified applicants who perhaps could not afford to consider to volunteer for elected office, but who can
ultimately help lead our town into the 21st century.
CONCLUSION:
The Task Force recommends that the Mayor and Council be compensated as follows:
$750 per month for each Council Member
$950 per month for the Mayor
The compensation level noted would include local travel expenses, thereby voiding the current stipend of$150
per month. Out-of-state travel would continue to be compensated through reimbursement of receipts.
In addition, approximately half of the Cities and Towns surveyed in Appendix A also provide benefits for their
Council Members. The Task Force feels that because of the part-time nature of the Oro Valley Council
positions, benefits should not be provided, but that a portion of the compensation noted above is intended as an
offset for the benefits which are offered elsewhere.
As noted above, the opportunity to provide input regarding this recommendation was highly publicized in the
local media. Oro Valley is a community inclined to use the local media for communication and expression of
opinion. Therefore, it is the position of the Task Force that this recommendation should not require public vote.
Further, the Task Force recommends that a standing Task Force should be established to evaluate the level of
Mayor and Council compensation every two years. This Task Force should be charged with continuing the
practice of seeking public input in future years, as well. Additionally, it must be stressed that the task force
itself is representative of the public and public sentiment. We also feel that submitting this issue to a public
vote will be both costly and time-consuming, and that the issue of compensation would further politicize the
election.
It should be noted that the current Mayor and Council would not be voting for compensation for themselves, but
rather for the Council members who are elected beginning in May 2000. The three Council members elected in
May 2000 will be the first to be compensated. The two remaining Council seats (including the Mayor) are up
for election in the year 2002. We expect all members would receive compensation by that date.
ATTACHMENTS: Appendix A
FISCAL IMPACT: $27,000 per fiscal year in 2000 and 2001, $47,400 per fiscal year beginning in 2002, less
$9000 annually for the current $150 per month per Council member stipend for local travel.
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION:
The members of the Mayor and Council Compensation Task Force recommend that the Oro Valley Town
Council adopt compensation levels of$950 per month for the Mayor, and $750 per month for each of the other
Council Members beginning with the next election of each of the Council seats.
,,)-A// r// e2
Nancy Mager, Chair,lVlayor, and Council
Compensation Task Force
EXHIBIT A
COST OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMPENSATION BY POPULATION
# of Council Mayor Salary Council Salary
City/Town _Population ulation Members Annual $ Per Res. Annual $ Per Res. Total Cost
Peoria , Mayor 74,565 Ma or+ 6 $13,200 $0.18 $9,792 $0.13 $71,952
,
YumaMayor 60,547 Ma or+ 6 $12,000 $0.20 $3,600 $0.06 $33,600
GilbertMayor 59,338 Ma or + 6 $15,600 $0.26 $4,800 $0.08 $44,400
Flagstaff _. Mayor + 6 $5,400 $0.10 $3,600 $0.07 $27,000
Sierra Vista y 37,815 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.13 $2,400 $0.06 $19,200
Lake �
Havasu Ci 36,285 Mayor + 6 $11,400 $0.31 $7,800 $0.21 $58,200
Prescott 30,606 Mayor + 6 $6,000 $0.20 $3,600 $0.12 $27,600
,
Bullhead City 26,940 Mayor + 6 $4,800 $0.18 $2,400 $0.09 $19,200
Oro Valle 25,455 Mayor + 4 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Avondale 22,771 Mayor + 6 $4,800 $0.21 $2,400 $0.11 $19,200
Casa Grande 20,880 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.23
Y , $2,400 $0.11 $19,200
Nogales 20,655 Mayor + 6 $600 $0.03 $300 $0.01 $2,400
Apache Junction 19,525 Mayor+ 6 $7,200 $0.37 $4,800 $0.25 $36,000
,Kingman 16,769 Mayor+ 6 $9,600 $0.57 $6,000 $0.36 $45,600
Prescott Valley 16,043 Mayor+ 6 $8,400 $0.52 $4,800 $0.30 $37,200
Y
Dog Mayor las 14,780 Ma or + 6 $3,600 $0.24 $2,400 $0.16 $18,000
_
untain Hills 14,146 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.34 $3,600 $0.25 $26,400
Fo .
Mean * I 32,884 Mayor + 6 $7,313 $0.25 $4,043 $0.15 $31,572
,
,Median 24,856 Mayor+ 6 $5,700 $0.22 $3,600 $0.12 $27,300
Mode N/AI Mayor+ 6 $4,800 N/A $2,400 N/A $19,200
*Mean does not include Oro Valley data
* 47 572 Mayor+ 6 $9 150 $0.19 $4,749 $0.10 $37,644
Mean (Top 8) y
Median (Top 8) 46,148 Mayor + 6 $8,700 $0.19 $3,600 $0.08 $30,600
Mode(TopN/A Mayor+ 6 $4,800 N/A $3,600 N/A $19,200
8) _
Oo
0
_ o
ao
II
0
0
0
0
N.
1 co
To
1o (i)
I o '75
13 I o
a c0 p
0
z
0 . •
}_. 1
o
. o U)
Q - co
o
to l'5
co
a.. z 2
O o
CL o i—
>. , .
o a co
o J iv
m a , • a. CI)
0
a 6
Z c
O 0.
17, 0• 8•
Cl) , ,
0
Z M
a s c�
WTo
CL cn
2 . • 0
O 2 0
C.) - ■ 6 a
N
I
a a
g 111O
O
--it
O
O
r
2
0
0 0 0 0
0 0 O 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
cc CO n N O d- g a N
g) Eft To-
(71 (7)
A MVS 1df1NNV
EXHIBIT B
COST OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMPENSATION BY STAFF SIZE
Staff Size Mayor Salary Council Salary
CitylTown Full Time Part Time Temporary Total Annual$ _ Per Staff Annual$ Per Staff
Peoria 645 15 200 860 $13,200 $20.47 $9,792 $15.18
Yuma 633 76 345 1054 $12,000 $18.96 $3,600. $5.69,
Gilbert 472 146 25 643 $15,600_ $33.05 $4,800. $10.17
Flagstaff 569 30 206 805 $5,400 $9.49 $3,600 $6.33
Sierra Vista 277 75 35 387 $4,800 $17.33 $2,400 $8.66
Lake Havasu Ci 349 0 171 520 $11,400 $32.66 $7,800 $22.35
Prescott 401 6 34 441 $6,000. $14.96 $3,600, $8.98
Bullhead City 329 10 40 379 $4,800 $14.59 $2,400. $7.29,
Oro Valley 156 10 2 168 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00
Avondale 226 12 0 238 $4,800 $21.24 $2,400` $10.62
Casa Grande 225 12 17 254 $4,800 $21.33 $2,400 $10.67
Nogales 290 4 9 303 $600 $2.07 $300 $1.03
Apache Junction 169 12 55 236 $7,200 $42.60 1)4,800 $28.40
Kingman 247 37 40 324 $9,600 $38.87 $6,000 $24.29
Prescott Valley 99 17 17 133 $8,400 $84.85 $4,800 $48.48
Douglas 180 2 60 242 $3,600 $20.00 $2,400 $13.33
Fountain Hills 73 18 0 91 $4,800 $65.75 $3,600 $49.32
MEAN * 324 30 78 432 $7,313 $28.64 $4,043 $16.92
MEDIAN 284 14 38 352 $5,700 $20.85 $3,600 $10.64
MODE N/A 12 40 N/A $4,800 N/A $2,400 N/A
(TOP 8)
MEAN* 459 45 132 636 $9,150 $20.19 $4,749 $10.58
MEDIAN (TOP 8' 437 23 106 582 $8,700 $18.14 $3,600 $8.828
MODE (TOP 8) N/A N/A N/A N/A $4,800 N/A $3,600 N/A
*Mean does not include Oro Valley data
0
0
ti
• ■
• ! •
o
o
co coTo
■ -'
v
c
8
co
o
a)
c
I in J
co
W To
u)
N `'
Cfi • s 0 co
U
U W
Q N
c
C" • I ;-C-CO �
Z 0 a'
I„ M co co
Q • to
t/1 'v
Z c
a • c�
O o
✓ O Z,
N co
• ■
• co
0
2
•
, •-' i a o
OW •
ce J
O Q
i
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
c6 c6 N c 6 c 6 N
r �— r ;7} 61�} t
Zi;� Efl d,? Ef
A2IVIVS 1dn N NV
EXHIBIT C
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMPENSATION BY TOTAL BUDGET
Mayor Salary Council Salary ,
Ci /Town Total Budget Annual $ Per Budget$ Annual $ Per Budget$
City/Town 9
Peoria $219,000,000 $13,200 $0.000060 $9,792 $0.000045
Yuma $62,028,452 $12,000 $0.000193 $3,600 $0.000058
Gilbert $139,877,038 $15,600 $0.000112 $4,800 $0.000034
Flagstaff $106,973,191 $5,400 $0.000050 $3,600 $0.000034
Sierra Vista $77,816,277 $4,800 $0.000062 $2,400 $0.000031
Lake Havasu Ci $63,085,232 $11,400 $0.000181 $7,800 $0.000124
Prescott $108,000,000 $6,000 $0.000056 $3,600 $0.000033
Bullhead City $61,875,000 $4,800 $0.000078 $2,400 $0.000039
Oro Valley $38,823,040 $0 $0.000000 $0 $0.000000
Avondale $60,118,023 $4,800 $0.000080 $2,400 $0.000040
Casa Grande $40,900,000 $4,800 $0.000117 $2,400 $0.000059
Nogales $32,522,763 $600 $0.000018 $300 $0.000009
og ,
Apache Junction $22,000,000 $7,200 $0.000327 $4,800 $0.000218,
Kingman $40,000,000 $9,600 $0.000240 $6,000 $0.000150
Prescott Valley $29,928,172 $8,400 $0.000281 $4,800 $0.000160
Douglas $18,341,818 $3,600 $0.000196 $2,400 $0.000131
Fountain Hills $14,062,333 $4,800 $0.000341 $3,600 $0.000256
Mean* $66,785,373 $7,313 $0.000109 $4,043 $0.000061
Median $60,118,023 $5,700 $0.000095. $3,600 $0.000060
Mode #N/A $4,800 #N/A $2,400 #N/A
*Mean does not include Oro Valley data
(Top Mean* 8) $104,831,899 $9,150 $0.000087' $4,749 $0.000045
Median(Top 8) $92,440,882 $8,700 $0.000094 $3,600 $0.000039
Mode(Top 8) #N/A $4,8001 #N/A _ $3,600 #N/A
w
O
0
, O
O
Y J
N
ft
• ■ �•
O CO
_�
0
O o
O U)
O =
O
O
t.)
C
0 8i6
a)
C
Eft
J
0
111
I 0
I- o to
Wt o Cl)To
0
0
ow to 8
CO Q 0
>- >
m om R� J
Z � Q J
O
I- oO
Q • I o I-
cao a
Z o co
W 5o 76
(n0. o -
2 Ti C
O
o 0
•
■
a
• ■ 0 ca
0 �o
0 in
0 0
1 O >
• � 1 2
• to
••
•
• ■
• ■
• a
A
0
V>
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0
N
O m � � � � �
(73t Ef) EA Eft
AdV1VS]VnNNV
EXHIBIT D
# of Council Mayor Council
City/Town Population Members Annual $ Per Res. Annual $ Per Res. Total Cost
Phoenix 1,149,417 Mayor + 8 $37,500 $0.03 $33,996 $0.03 $309,468
Tucson 442,910 Mayor+ 6 $36,000 $0.08 $18,000i $0.04 $144,000
Mesa 338,117 Mayor+ 6 $19,200 $0.06 $9,600 $0.03 $76,800
Glendale 182,615 Mayor + 6 $35,004 $0.19 $17,496 $0.10 $139,980
Scottsdale 168,176 Mayor + 6 $25,476 $0.15 $12,732 $0.08 $101,868
Tempe 153,821 Mayor+ 6 $29,664 $0.19 $14,844 $0.10 $118,728
Chandler 132,360 Mayor + 6 $10,800 $0.08 $6,000 $0.05 $46,800
Peoria 74,565 Mayor + 6 $13,200 $0.18 $9,792 $0.13 $71,952
Yuma 60,547 Mayor + 6 $12,000 $0.20 $3,600 $0.06 $33,600
Gilbert 59,338 Mayor + 6 $15,600 $0.26 $4,800 $0.08 $44,400
Flagstaff 54,480 Mayor + 6 $5,400 $0.10 $3,600 $0.07 $27,000
Sierra Vista 37,815 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.13 $2,400 $0.06 $19,200
Lake Havasu Cit 36,285 Mayor + 6 $11,400 $0.31 $7,800 $0.21 $58,200
Prescott 30,606 Mayor + 6 $6,000 $0.20 $3,600 $0.12 $27,600
Bullhead City 26,940 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.18 $2,400 $0.09 $19,200
Oro Valley 25,455 Mayor+ 4 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Avondale 22,771 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.21 $2,400 $0.11 $19,200
Casa Grande 20,880 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.23 $2,400 $0.11 $19,200
Nogales 20,655 Mayor + 6 $600 $0.03 $300 $0.01 $2,400
Apache Junction 19,525 Mayor + 6 $7,200 $0.37 $4,800 $0.25 $36,000
Kingman 16,769 Mayor+ 6 $9,600 $0.57 $6,000 $0.36 $45,600
i i
Prescott Valley 16,043 Mayor + 6 $8,400 $0.52 $4,800 $0.30 $37,200
Douglas 14,780 Mayor+ 6 $3,600 $0.24 $2,400 $0.16 $18,000
r
Fountain Hills 14,146 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.34 $3,600 $0.25 $26,400
Paradise Valley 12,448 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Florence 11,390 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Payson 11,004 Mayor+ 6 $6,000 $0.55 $3,000 $0.27 $24,000
Winslow 10,780 Mayor + 6 $4,800 $0.45 $2,400 $0.22 $19,200
Surprise 10,737 Mayor+ 6 $3,600 $0.34 $2,400 $0.22 $18,000
Goodyear 9,250 Mayor + 6 $14,400 $1.56 $3,960 $0.43 $38,160
Eloy 8,915 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.54 $3,600 $0.40 $26,400
Sedona 8,894 Mayor+ 6 $36,000 $4.05 $21,600 $2.43 $165,600
Safford 8,773 Mayor+ 6 $9,600 $1.09 $4,800 $0.55 $38,400
r
San Luis 8,026 Mayor + 6 $4,800 $0.60 $2,400 $0.30 $19,200
Page 7,950 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.60 $3,600 $0.45 $26,400
Camp Verde 7,465 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Globe 7,058 Mayor+ 6 $2,400 $0.34 $1,200 $0.17 $9,600
Coolidge 7,055 Mayor + 6 $2,400 $0.34 $1,200 $0.17 $9,600
Show Low _ 6,988 Mayor+ 6 _ $4,500 $0.64 $2,700 $0.39 $20,700
# of Council Mayor Council
Ci /Town Population Members Annual $ Per Res. Annual $ Per Res. Total Cost
tY P
Cottonwood 6,545 Mayor + 6 $3,000 $0.46 $1,800 $0.28 $13,800
Bisbee 6,500 Mayor + 6 $2,400 $0.37 $1,200 $0.18 $9,600
Chino Valley 6,278 Mayor + 6 $2,400 $0.38 $1,200 $0.19 $9,600
Somerton 5,824 Mayor+ 6 $3,600 $0.62 $1,800 $0.31 $14,400
El Mirage 5,741 Mayor+ 6 $3,600 $0.63 $2,400 $0.42 $18,000
Guadalupe 5,458 Mayor+ 5 $2,400 $0.44 $1,200 $0.22 $8,400
South Tucson 5,452 Mayor+ 6 $4,800 $0.88 $2,400 $0.44 $19,200
Marana 5,309 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Holbrook 5,070 Mayor + 6 $2,400 $0.47 $1,200 $0.24 $9,600
Buckeye 4,857 Mayor+ 6 $3,000 $0.62 $1,800 $0.37 $13,800
Wickenburg 4,765 Mayor + 6 $4,800 $1.01 $2,400 $0.50 $19,200
Eagar 4,515 Mayor + 6 $2,400 $0.53 $1,200 $0.27 $9,600
Tolleson 4,436 Mayor + 6 $6,480 $1.46 $3,600 $0.81 $28,080
Snowflake 4,120 Mayor + 6 $2,400 $0.58 $1,200 $0.29 $9,600
Benson 4,115 Mayor+ 6 $2,400 $0.58 $1,200 $0.29 $9,600
Thatcher 3,957 Mayor + 6 $2,400 $0.61 $1,800 $0.45 $13,200
Litchfield Park 3,739 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Willcox 3,533 Mayor+ 6 $2,400 $0.68 $1,200 $0.34 $9,600
Superior 3,485 Mayor + 6 $3,000 $0.86 $1,200 $0.34 $10,200
St. Johns 3,360 Mayor + 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Pinetop-Lakeside 3,301 Mayor+ 6 $5,700 $1.73 $3,000 $0.91 $23,700
Colorado City 3,190 Mayor+ 6 $21,216 $6.65 $120 $0.04 $21,936
Cave Creek 3,076 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Queen Creek 3,072 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Clifton 2,995 Mayor+ 6 $2,400 $0.80 $1,200 $0.40 $9,600
Parker 2,950 Mayor+ 6 $2,700 $0.92 $1,500 $0.51 $11,700
Youngtown 2,694 Mayor+ 6 $3,000 $1.11 $2,400 $0.89 $17,400
Williams 2,690 Mayor+ 6 $2,400 $0.89 $1,200 $0.45 $9,600
Taylor 2,655 Mayor + 5 $3,000 $1.13 $480 $0.18 $5,400'
Clarkdale 2,600 Mayor+ 4 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Kearny 2,455 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Carefree 2,286 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Sahuarita 2,173 Mayor+ 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Miami 2,040 Mayor+ 6 $1,800 $0.88 $900 $0.44 $7,200
Quartzsite 2,005 Mayor + 6 $6,000 $2.99 $4,800 $2.39 $34,800
Mammoth i 1,960 Mayor + 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Huachuca City i 1,940 Mayor+ 6 $1,200 $0.62 $600 $0.31 $4,800
Springerville 1,920 Mayor + 4 $4,800 $2.50 $3,000 $1.56 $16,800
Pima 1,850 Mayor+ 4 _ $600 $0.32 $600 $0.32 $3,000
# of Council Mayor Council
Ci /Town Population Members Annual $ Per Res. Annual $ Per Res. Total Cost
Gila Bend 1,747 Mayor + 6 $4,800 $2.75 $300 $0.17 $6,600
Tombstone 1,405 Mayor + 4 $3,000 $2.14 $1,800 $1.28 $10,200
Fredonia 1,250 Mayor+ 4 $12,000 $9.60 $720 $0.58 $14,880
Wellton 1,126 Mayor + 4 $3,000 $2.66 $1,800 $1.60 $10,200
Patagonia 945 Mayor + 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Hayden 910 Mayor + 6 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
.
Duncan 735 Mayor + 4 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Winkelman 676 • Mayor+ 3 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Jerome 460 • Mayor + 4 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0
Average 39,194 Mayor + 5.73 $6,210 $0.16 $3,258 $0.08 $26,337
m 40
r —
O. =
m E
>. o
.c= u
m
m -
W � =
0, 3
a >.' al)
91)4,0:1 4
s 13- >
. � ate =
X a6
W E; -
7
sqlad o 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
keit/ 4,. , • , , ,
Ilk
a�ea
aw
4
.//qt
,
•O
I I . . + , . • 1 1 Y 1
Z
/eke v
s a0 >- >
w � - >.
a 04451
„my
.q *et)
u- a4y >- >- >-
W '�0
Z 4 o ,r -
W eI0 I/ 0/4„
Ma� � ›- z >- z >- z >- zzz z
040 45,e . , • , _ - . - .z
s' >- >- >. zz z z >- zz z
0
C.)
0c
Z U 0 >,
Q = = >, a) 0 a� cn
Ce 0
11) CCs U c j =
0 u>. "5 ca - ;a > = O 0 a) _cgm 'c5cocii
Q 0 .� al a) ai _ Ca O U E 2 5) c
2 c 0 E= a) = :_ c6 ,a) 5 Ne > ca O a. .0 c- O O
b � un _1a. mQUz < R- a. ou_
a. }- i ,
'D
•
= y
$ m S
s m
i C
0 c E
U. t O
� a v
iii SS E'er a) (I)
_ Cwi,
_ �
X �� t�7 N co. N
w /ate
s >- >. >- >- z z z z Z
%.06e m
co
&,9; a a)
-15 'g% "C
o
41/
.e E a) 0
01& 96 >- ' >- >- >- a) >- 2
o -i
o >- ›.
c
>' O
//o
il
44, 0 0
/0a 0 Vn to 0
colff, Ilk 2
4o/
.,�/p ./off, 0
at, # 2 0 0 8
II/ wr iiiiiiiiii• p4aEf}
414
%i
CO y
W 4'/fir
11111111111111111111111111111
u a
-7J d
0
a- 4a
LU 10%0040111-494/
E
> iia
1111111111111111
%"/G4/ 11111111111111111111111111i
J
NI
z °ii IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
M
b
0
✓ c
CI _ 0
z
-z. a) w
_ O V —
IS
d ,C
O (I) t6 � C ±-
U > flili - -
O m -,_- c
.a O E .a •• " .. O -5
p to • cs A N O =
Q = a) = — al O as L 5 > t0 O • .— L O
2 -5 a. >- OLL 05 _Ja. cn < 0z < 2a_ oLi.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager ��,
David Andrews, Finance Director
DATE: May 18, 1999
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
of May 12. This memorandum serves as staff follow-up to those issues.
Issue: Possible consolidation of photocopy machines maintenance.
Response: Please see attached inventory listing. Possibility of consolidation
will be explored
J2. Issue: Community Development Administration —Arts Projects Line Item.
Response: Increase funding from existing $5,000 to a total amount of$10,000.
3. Issue: Community Development Administration — Rural Development
Conference.
Response: Increase travel and training line item by $625 for Director attendance
at this conference.
J4. Issue: Community Development Administration — Non-Capitalized Equipment
Line Item.
Response: Decrease line item for desk and bookcase ($700) and telephone
($478). Deletion of office chairs ($500) is pending further research.
✓5. Issue: Branch Library Position.
Response: Discussion of when to hire a branch Librarian for the Oro Valley
Library will be schedule during staffing discussions at future budget study
sessions.
/6. Issue: Provide consolidated budget report for Community Development
Department and other departments.
Response: Please refer to the attachment.
/7. Issue: Transfer of Custodial and Facilities Maintenance from Parks & Recreation
to Public Works.
Response: Town Manager to consider this issue and provide recommendation.
%8. Issue: Pima County After-School and Summer Programs.
Response: Parks & Recreation Administrator and Town Manager to research
and provide recommendation.
i9. Issue: Dennis Weaver pool repair and maintenance.
Response: Parks & Recreation Administrator to research and provide
recommendation.
/10. Issue: Heritage Fund Grant.
Response: Parks & Recreation Administrator to follow-up with Ms. Karen Novak
to enhance Town's chance of successful award.
Staff appreciates the opportunity to review these issues with the Mayor and Council.
CC: Bryant Nadine, Planning & Zoning Administrator
Ainsley Reeder, Parks & Recreation Administrator
Town of Oro Valley
Townwide Copiers/Maintenance Agreements
FY 1998/99
Annual
Department/ Maintenance Agreement
Division Make/Model Amount Expiration
Town Clerk Xerox 5365 $ 7,400 6/30/99
Magistrate Court Mita DC4685 $ 1,740 + copy chrg. 6/30/99
Legal Sharp SF857 $ 1,232 10/12/99
Community Development Konica 4065 $ 2,523 6/30/99
.
Public Works/Parks & Recreation Ricoh AF400 $ 593 6/30/99
Water Utility/Transit Mita DC3060 $ 416 9/9/00
Police Mita 4585 i $ 1,948 8/1/99
Ricoh F6655 .0059 per copy 8/20/99
Ricoh F4527 .025 per copy 8/20/99
Sharp SD227 $ 1,500 11/26/99
Town of Oro Valley
Consolidated Budget
FY 1999/2000
Other
Capital Debt Financing
Departments/Divisions Personnel O&M Outlay , Service Uses Contingency TOTAL
Town Council $ - $ 79,383 $ 11,100 $ - $ - $ - $ 90,483
Town Clerk 152,217 110,315 12,600 - - _ - 275,132
Town Manager 195,690 22,211 ' 1,500 - - 10,000 229,401
Human Resources 120,052 41,760 1,750 - - - 163,562
Finance:
' 329,000
Finance 288,355 40,645 - - -
Economic Development 76,579 232,670 4,000 - - - 313,249
_ General Administration 59,795 321,880 196,000 - 1,901,810 6,481,082 8,960,567
Muncipal Debt Service - 8,500 - 692,554 - 34,000 735,054
Naranja Debt Service - 950 - 96,525 73,860 - 171,335
_
Oracle Rd. Imp.District - 5,000 - 687,789 - - 692,789
Total Finance 424,729 609,645 200,000 1,476,868 1,975,670 6,515,082 11,201,994
Legal:
Legal 318,519 135,291 6,000 - - - 459,810
Seizures&Forfeitures - - - - - 5,248 5,248
Total Legal 318,519 135,291 6,000 - - 5,248 465,058
Community Development:
Administration 160,982 89,043 - - - - 250,025
Planning&Zoning 624,092 321,400 11,000 - - - 956,492
Building Safety 655,322 182,950 64,000 - - - 902,272
Custodial&Facility Maintenance - 109,500 51,500 - -
161,000
Parks&Recreation 373,167 306,125 140,000 - - - 819,292
Public Transportation 149,986 58,923 24,980 - - 25,764 259,653
_ CDO Riverfront Park Construction - - 2,412,132 - -
2,412,132
Heritage Fund Grant - - 570,000 - - -
570,000
Municipal Facilities Construction - - 1,435,944 - - - 1,435,944
Library Construction Fund - - 144,000 - - 2,000,000 2,144,000
Total Community Development 1,963,549 1,067,941 4,853,556 - - 2,025,764 9,910,810
Police: •
Police 4,343,626 617,293 349,700 12,120 - 132,493 5,455,232
Seizures&Forfeitures-State Funds - 50,265 18,600 -
4,786 73,651
Seizures&Forfeitures-Justice Funds - 25,525 - - - 27,529 , 53,054
Total Police 4,343,626 693,083 368,300 12,120 - 164,808 5,581,937
Magistrate Court 255,323 82,668 2,231 - - - 340,222
Public Works:
Highway Fund 634,724 540,584 1,270,000 .. 55,982 - 1,104,748 3,606,038
Townwide Roadway Development Impact - - 2,218,000 - - 4,787,238 7,005,238
Oracle Rd.Imp.Dist.Construction - - 5,000,000 - - - 5,000,000
Total Public Works 634,724 540,584 8,488,000 55,982 - 5,891,986 15,611,276
Water Utility:
Water Utility 892,339 3,046,891 3,167,450 2,001,833 - 1,475,504 10,584,017
Oro Valley Water Connection Fees - - 1,324,000 73,290 - 121,014 1,518,304
Altemative Water Resources Dev.Fee - 140,000 - - - 863,680 1,003,680
Water Company Acquisition - - - _ - -
3,500,000 3,500,000
Total Water Utility 892,339 3,186,891 4,491,450 2,075,123 - 5,960,198 16,606,001
SUBTOTAL: 9,300,768 6,569,772 18,436,487 3,620,093 1,975,670 : 20,573,086 _ 60,475,876
Adjusting Entries: _
Transfer to Heritage Fund Grant - - - (285,000) - (285,000)
Transfer to Municipal Debt Service - - -
(699,554) - (699,554)'
Transfer to CDO Riverfront Park Construction - - - (773,256) - (773,256)
Transfer to Library Construction Fund - - - (144,000) -
(144,000)
Water Utility-Depreciation - (1,306,000) - - _ - -
Water Utility-Amortization - (45,000) - - - -
Residual Equity Transfer to Highway Fund - - - (73,860) - (73,860)
TOTAL FY 1999/2000 BUDGET $9,300,768 $5,218,772 $18,436,487 $3,620,093 $ - $20,573,086 , $57,149,206
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
INTEROFFICE MEMO
DATE: MAY 15, 1999
TO: CHUCK SWEET
FROM: WILLIAM A. JANSEN L
RE: REQUEST FOR NEW STA POSITION
As a follow up to our discussion on Friday, May 14, 1999, I am requesting.the
establishment of a Transportation Planning staff position in the Department of
Public Works. This position will be responsible for the development and
implementation of the Department's Capital Improvement Program and for the
determination and pursuit of potential funding sources for the CIP. Due to the
major road improvements that the Town will have to accomplish in the next
several years to accommodate both commercial and residential development, I
am requesting that this position be included in the FY 99/00 budget presently
under review.
From information and observations that I have obtained since joining the
Department of Public Works, the Town of Oro Valley has had limited success in
obtaining transportation funding from sources other that the Town's highway
fund. in my opinion, this is the result of a lack of knowledge of the potential
outside funding sources and the understanding of the requirements to obtain
and spend these funds. The existing professional staffing level and work load in
Public Works does not allow for the time to research, pursue and program these
funding opportunities. As a result, we have not been able to execute
transportation projects in a timely manner due to the lack of knowledge of the
procedures required to initiate projects using outside funding sources.
I am proposing that this new staff position will be responsible for obtaining,
programming and management of the following potential sources.
1. Federal Transportation Aid (STP Funds).
2. HURF funding from the Pima Association of Governments.
3. ADOT transportation programs including the HELP Loan Program and
other grant and aid provided or managed by ADOT.
INTEROFFICE MEMO
4. Transportation Enhancement Grants.
5. Stormwater management grants from Pima County, ADEQ, USEPA,
and others.
6. Highway improvement districts.
7. Impact fees.
8. Developer contribution for required off-site road improvements.
9. Bicycle facility and other alternate transportation funding possibilities.
This staff person will maintain a close working with ADOT, PAG, PCDOT, and
other government agencies that are involved in transportation and stormwater
management.
The desired qualifications for the requested Transportation Planner position are
as follows.
1. Civil Engineering graduate.
2. PE registration desired but not required.
3. At least 4 years experience with a transportation agency and familiar
with project programming and funding.
I anticipate that the salary needed to recruit for this position will be in the
$50,000 range. Since most of the job activities of this position relates to
development related impacts to the Town's transportation infrastructure, I
recommend that this position be funded from the development impact fees fund.
A Personnel Requisition form for this position is attached.