Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-09 Budget Committee Minutes Budget Committee Meeting September 9, 1999 7:30 p.m. Civic Center Present: Cameron Hansen, Martin Levine, Richard Nichols, Jim Moore, David Fine, Regina Stepahin, Carole Wheeldon, David Williams, Howard Braham, and Don Laws. Absent were: Susan Reid and Cathy Shaw Staff present: Jill Turner, Mike Freeman, and Ken Mickelson. Hartzell called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. The agenda was reviewed and a decision was made on how to proceed with the meeting. Budget Charge Fine offered to respond to any questions about the Budget Charge that he and Steve Hauck drafted. Hauck said that it states what is expected from a budget committee. Fine said that he had looked at statute and charter to draft the charge. Wheeldon said that it reflects what the council talked about. Braham asked whether the committee was satisfied that the points meet the goals, and whether the committee could really promote efficiency and economy. Levine noted that it wasn’t clear what to do if it didn’t. Braham asked what part of the charge is mandated. Fine said the last point is. Freeman said he thinks the first one is also. Levine stated that the points imply that the budget committee will not see the budget until it’s completed. Freeman asked for clarification. Levine said in the past, the committee wasn’t allowed to be involved, and wondered it would continue this way. A discussion developed about the various points of the charge and whether the committee should accept them. Laws reminded all that the charge had been accepted by council and couldn’t be changed by the budget committee. Fine said he had been advised that Freeman was undertaking a means to measure performance. Freeman then elaborated on the importance of gauging the successfulness of the city operations. In the past, the measurements have been limited. Over summer, a consultant came in to help set up a performance measurement system. He said the new system would match up with budget and strategic plans. He stated that the committee would see goals and performance standards and measures. Levine asked how the budget would demonstrate the process. Freeman said it will look and feel different. He added that the departments will be required to build line item September 9, 1999 Budget Committee Meeting 1 X:\\Shared City Files\\Council Packets\\Commissions\\Budget Committee\\2000 Minutes\\09-02-1999 BC Minutes.doc budgets and that’s what we will print. He said it will make it easier to find the explanations of line item expenses. A lengthy discussion ensued about when the budget committee would get involved in the budget process, whether it’s the committees place to determine if departments are meeting their goals, how the strategic planning process fits in, and how the roles of the city council differed from those of the budget committee. Wheeldon said budget committee would look at what was promised versus what was done. Laws said the council is responsible for setting priorities, but budget committee’s job is to add citizen members for a broader perspective. In regards to measuring efficiency, if a department needs more money, the committee must asked if the money was used effectively. Nichols said it was worthwhile that Fine and Hauck attempted to do this, but he is surprised with the points of the charge. He’s not sure it’s a logical charge for budget committee. He thinks that the budget committee may be inundated with minutia that is not the financial responsibility of the budget committee and less time will be spent on the big things. Freeman responded by saying that the committee will see statements by departments describing the programs, what will be accomplished, what the goals are, and how they will be measured. Nichols pointed out that the last point of the charge states that the budget will be approved no later than May 1, 2000. He reminded the committee that this year they didn’t receive the budget message, etc. until April 15, and then it wasn’t complete. There was no capital improvement plan or fund balance summary schedules. He would rather comment on those kind of things rather than on how a department is performing. Levine doesn’t think performance is related to the amount of money that is being spent, and it may be beyond the scope of this committee. Secondly, he continued, half of this body is on the city council; consequently, if one citizen votes with the council, then the committee just “rubber stamps” everything. Hartzell thinks the tools will be a relief and asked the committee what they wanted and when. Fine said that last year the committee spent more than half of the time listening to presentations detailing departments. He said it was important to him because he was new. He suggested that each department create a video and distribute it to the committee members so they wouldn’t have to listen to presentations. Laws commented that it should be written rather than on tape, but he agreed with principle. He said the main point is how money ties to performance and you can’t evaluate efficiency or economy without knowing the quality of the program. Levine added that this is his fifth year, and members of the committee are frustrated over the amount of material with so little time. He feels could do a better job if it was clear about exactly what they were supposed to do. He proposed to Freeman that before the process begins with dept heads, the committee should meet and discuss in general terms the parameters that the departments would use to draw up their budgets. He doesn’t think we can come in on April 15 and determine whether the council did a good job. Laws said he feels that budget committee should have a broad charge and appreciates the citizen perspective. He went on to say that he didn’t like the idea of narrowing the budget committee responsibilities, but this charge expands responsibility and can define its own September 9, 1999 Budget Committee Meeting 2 X:\\Shared City Files\\Council Packets\\Commissions\\Budget Committee\\2000 Minutes\\09-02-1999 BC Minutes.doc role. Jim Moore agrees with Laws. He said the committee needs general guidelines for the 2000-01 budget. He asked what things they would see and how much money the city would have. Freeman said he could not deliver updated financials by December. Freeman said the council could develop a number of priorities that would affect the budget. Fine asked to have a full-blown capital improvement plan. Turner agreed. Hartzell said that last year the first hearing came in February. This year the committee would like to see the bigger stuff earlier. Fine said looking at the budget law, the council sets policy and priorities. Fiscal policy is a shared responsibility of budget committee. Proposed process Hartzell stated that she heard there is a place for the budget committee to show up at strategic planning process in January. Freeman said plan is to do assumptions in January. Hartzell then asked if committee wants to meet in December, January, or February which would include a discussion of the capital improvement plan. Freeman said it will change and may not be ready in January. Nichols thinks the meeting should be held when it would be of the most value. The budget committee members want to contribute some value and not to usurp policy-making parameters of council. Stepahin said that Levine is right about the frustrations year after year. We are broadening the perspective by having an advisory capacity, not policy, but oversight. She went on to say that she agrees with Hartzell. The committee has been getting clearer information. Also concurs with Wheeldon and thinks the committee thinks we should get involved with the strategic planning process. The committee should always be aware of what’s going on and the committee should participate on a regular basis. Cameron said it seemed that the committee should figure out how to implement the charge rather than nit pick it. Hartzell thinks the charge has been a good thing to discuss. Hartzell wants to know if committee would like to meet earlier. Wheeldon explained the new process of involving the citizens of Ashland in the strategic planning process and welcomes the budget committee to be involved with these meetings with the citizens. Hartzell thinks if budget committee attends we can asked the citizens who attend what they think about what is being discussed. Fine disagrees. He doesn’t feel that it’s the budget committee’s place to take part in the strategic planning. Because of the type of government we have, it’s not the business of the budget committee to share in policy. Hartzell asked if budget committee would not be invited to participate except as members of the public. Laws said here’s a lack of clarity in state law.. Not sure how the issue is resolved. He said he thinks the budget committee should have ability to put on the breaks. Braham said could we meet the charge. Laws disagreed. Hartzell asked whether the entire budget committee meeting would be in January to review the proposed budget process. Turner suggested that they meet by January 15. Second Thursday night as a kick off meeting—which is close to strategic planning session meeting. September 9, 1999 Budget Committee Meeting 3 X:\\Shared City Files\\Council Packets\\Commissions\\Budget Committee\\2000 Minutes\\09-02-1999 BC Minutes.doc Hartzell then moved on to the subject of subcommittees and asked whether this was the old process. Freeman said yes and reviewed the proposed process. Members can choose to go to whichever subcommittee meetings they want. Hartzell asked for questions. Laws asked about streets and whether it will be in the general fund. Freeman said yes and parks will too. Public input: None Budget Process continued Nichols asked Freeman when the first meeting would be and if it would be a budget overview? Freeman said the assumptions meeting will be first. Then, the second would be the end of February. Then after spring break, they would start the subcommittee meetings. Nichols asked if would have a preliminary budget document? Yes, per Freeman. Freeman blamed himself for the delay last year. Hartzell wants it as early as possible in March. Nichols asked for clarification about how we could control the presentations. He would rather have the department head go through and comment on where they are, as opposed to presenting to the budget committee. He would assume everyone has read the material. Hartzell suggested to Freeman what he should direct the department heads on what they should cover. Levine said that the committee had to balance the department head desire to speak to us with the time the committee has. He asked whether performance measures would be on how the budget compares to last year or how they drew up budget. Freeman answered by giving an example of the street department. He said there would be a program statement and performance measures would be applied to budgeted numbers. They will have a target. Wheeldon left at 9:28. Hartzell asked if the proposal is one everyone is comfortable with. How does it relate back to charge? Levine proposed that the committee go through this budget year to see if they are able to meet the charge. All agreed. No motion. OSF and the Chamber of Commerce Turner said that she notified both organizations that this would be on the agenda tonight. Levine said he thought that the organizations would have to come before the budget committee to show how the money would be used. Freeman said that it was not stipulated in resolution. Turner said the motion was to come back to the council, not the budget committee. That was the recommendation at that time. Hartzell asked for clarification. She said when the change was made, she thought would be some sort of accountability for the money. This \[the information they provided\] is so general—there’s no sense of how dollars fulfill the goals. Freeman says they meet the resolution, but out of the September 9, 1999 Budget Committee Meeting 4 X:\\Shared City Files\\Council Packets\\Commissions\\Budget Committee\\2000 Minutes\\09-02-1999 BC Minutes.doc purview of budget committee. Hauck said it’s worth taking a look at and will bring it up at the council meeting. Fine agrees with Hauck. He would like the supporting data on how the money is allocated. Wrap up Hartzell asked if there was anything else? Laws made the suggestion to the staff that every report and document related to the budget should be given to the budget committee members. He said there’s a need to expand the information sent to the budget committee. Approval of the minutes of the May 20, 1999, budget committee meeting. Fine motioned to approve the minutes. Nichols seconded. No discussion. Ayes all. Motion passed. Meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m. September 9, 1999 Budget Committee Meeting 5 X:\\Shared City Files\\Council Packets\\Commissions\\Budget Committee\\2000 Minutes\\09-02-1999 BC Minutes.doc