HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-05-24 Budget Committee Minutes
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 24, 2006- PAGE 1 OF 8
Budget Committee Meeting
Draft Minutes
May 24, 2006, 7:00pm
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
The Citizen’s Budget Committee meeting was called to order at 7:03 pm on May 24,
2006 in Council Chambers at 1175 East Main Street, Ashland Oregon.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Morrison was present. Councilor Amarotico, Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell, and
Chapman were present. Budget Committee members Bond, Everson, Mackris,
Stebbins, Thompson, Levine, and Gregorio were present.
STAFF PRESENT: MARTHA BENNETT, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
LEE TUNEBERG, AMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR
KEITH WOODLEY, FIRE CHIEF
MIKE MORRISON, PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT
JIM OLSON, ENGINEERING SERVICES MANAGER
BILL MOLNAR, INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR
ADAM HANKS, CODE COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST
CINDY HANKS, PROJECT MANAGER
BRYN MORRISON, ACCOUNT REPRESENTATIVE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of Budget Committee minutes dated:
5/04/06
5/10/06
5/18/06
Everson/Bond ms to accept the minutes as presented. All Ayes.
The Committee offered condolences to the family of Jack Hardesty who passed away
on May 22.
PUBLIC INPUT
None
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 24, 2006- PAGE 2 OF 8
Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services/Finance Director pointed to the packet that was
distributed. See attached. He spoke to the changes that had happened throughout the
year, and provided a summary of what had happened throughout the budget meetings.
He spoke to items that the Committee had tentatively approved to that point. Items
include: city wide reduction in health care, redundant amount in dispatch moved to
CERT program, $250,000 cut for software, the $4,000 included for the Electric Recycle
Commission, and IT department reduction of CATV services with the addition of moving
the debt service to the debt service fund from the telecommunications fund. He spoke
to eight items that were new. They are a regional problem solving group for land use
funding $3,300, rental needs analysis of $25,000, central service fund reduction of
$262,506, RVTD bus service change, Municipal building assessment, additional
programs and positions that require a property tax rate increase, the aerial fire
apparatus truck, and to identify a revenue source for the AFN debt service payment.
Mr. Tuneberg added that the fire apparatus has a 10-12 month delay between when the
equipment is ordered and when it is received. He suggested that it should be budgeted
in 2008 as a result, if it passes the vote in November. Mr. Tuneberg notified the
Committee that the Council meeting to discuss the AFN debt service would be June 6,
but the Committee could discuss it as part of setting the property tax rate.
The Committee asked to clarify item 6 and which utility worker was added already to the
budget. Mr. Tuneberg responded that a line worker in Electric and water worker in
Public Works are included in budget; two other utility workers for Public Works are in the
outstanding items. He confirmed that the forest interface position and the CERT
positions are included in the budget. The Committee asked if when the Budget
Committee approves the budget, if they approve the salary schedule. Mr. Tuneberg
responded that this Committee doesn’t set the wages specifically, this Committee
approves the appropriation levels and then Council adopts a resolution that sets the
appropriation.
The Committee asked where the nearest aerial fire apparatus was. Keith Woodley, Fire
Chief responded it is at Medford station 6 on Barnett Road but it does not have it’s own
crew that only works on it. If they are out fighting a fire, then there is no crew available
to bring the engine to Ashland. The Committee asked if it is the City’s intention, if the
station and the truck go to the vote, if they would be separate issues. Mr. Tuneberg
responded that he would suggest separate issues but doesn’t know who would make
that decision. He would ask the legal department to write it up and then get approval
from Council.
Mr. Tuneberg spoke to the Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Summary of Changes spreadsheet.
He explained to the Committee that the outstanding items show what they could change
if they chose to approve them. He pointed to the third page which shows the
appropriation level and total budget. He explained that they do not set the ending fund
balance in the appropriation so this shows only what is appropriated which is
$78,065,338. The Committee asked what tax rate that figure represented. Mr. Tuneberg
responded that is the same rate as last year with no increase, $3.7147.
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 24, 2006- PAGE 3 OF 8
Mr. Tuneberg clarified that the outstanding items column only includes the outstanding
items from the cover memo, excluding the parking lot items. He explained that the item
letter and/or number represented in the memo is shown in the right column of the
spreadsheet. He spoke to the central service reductions for the departments affected
and that the exact figure for each department can be negotiated.
The Committee asked to clarify the bus service and what service RVTD would provide
for the $290,000. Mr. Tuneberg responded that Council had not made the decision yet
on what direction to go in that issue and that Council will need to decide what level of
service they want to continue. Mayor Morrison added that the City has spoken to RVTD
and there are options for service, and feels the City should leave the $290,000 in the
budget as it is now until Council looks at the options.
Mr. Tuneberg spoke to item 5. He is proposing to cut the archive building, the city
council remodel, electric building enclosure moved to electric fund rather than
administration and to be funded through rates, and a space needs analysis be
implemented to determine the needs of the City. The Committee asked what the
consequences would be of moving the electric building to the electric fund. Mr.
Tuneberg responded that it would need to be paid through rates rather than facilities
fees or a property tax rate increase. The Committee questioned what other than rates
could pay for it. Mr. Tuneberg explained that the Electric department had talked about
some things they may need to cut and they may not change rates depending on the
fund balance in August. The Committee questioned what percent of the building is used
by the Electric department. Mike Morrison responded that it is 100% Electric.
Councilor Chapman asked where the $75,000 was that was already allocated for the
Council Chamber remodel. Mr. Tuneberg responded that some had been spent on
consultants. The Committee questioned why the City didn’t go back to the original
lighting and sound upgrade only. Mr. Tuneberg responded that the original $75,000 was
budgeted for lighting and sound but the scope had changed and the project would need
to be rebudgeted for the next year. The Committee asked to clarify if all of the funds
were spent and what would be rebudgeted. Mr. Tuneberg explained that the project will
not be completed this year so the remaining funds will need to be rebudgeted in the
next year. Mr. Chapman asked who decided to increase the amount needed for the
project and how it was to be spent. Mr. Tuneberg responded that he did and told the
consultants to reevaluate the project. He explained that the City may need to have an
analysis done and may either decide to go to bond or fund internally or not do at all. The
Committee asked if the $50,000 that was proposed to be budgeted for the entire City
needs assessment for the buildings was reasonable. Mr. Tuneberg responded that he
looked at previous studies and what they cost.
Mr. Tuneberg spoke to item 6 and that they could not fit originally in the budget to
balance so they were put on the parking lot list. The City needs to establish a revenue
source if they want to fund those items. Mr. Tuneberg proposed that the Committee
include the outstanding items in the approved budget, excluding the parking lot list. The
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 24, 2006- PAGE 4 OF 8
Committee asked if the decision on property tax needed to be made that night. Mr.
Tuneberg responded that they could hold another hearing to propose a property tax rate
but that would push the calendar out and make it difficult to comply with the state
requirements for completing the budget. He added that they need to talk about if they
want to use the levy to pay for debt service. He clarified the revenue stream is not
identified yet; only the expense is shown so far. He explained that there is $.57 left of
the limit that could be levied, and that would generate $1 million. The debt service for
AFN is $865,000. He added that the Committee would need to levy $.51 to generate
enough to pay the debt service.
He clarified that if the Committee did not raise the property tax, the City would have to
raise fees to make the payment. The Committee questioned if the payment would come
from the ending fund balance if they did not raise property taxes. Mr. Tuneberg
responded that Council could use ending fund balance or set rates and fees to make
the debt service. The Committee questioned if the $300,000 for the Council Chambers
and the $100,000 for the archive building could be cut to add to the ending fund balance
and use that for the debt service. Mr. Tuneberg responded that would be an alternative
to do subsidies by transferring money from other funds. The Committee asked if the
Debt Service on the Summary of Changes spreadsheet $1,656,169 represented AFN
and General Obligation (GO) debt. Mr. Tuneberg responded that it includes all GO debt
and includes that previously shown debt that was in the Telecommunications Fund and
shown as option 1.
Mr. Tuneberg spoke to the process staff had gone through to determine alternatives for
the debt service payment. He stated that he asked Council to provide their opinion on
how the debt should be paid, and did not receive input from some. He stated that from
those that submitted recommendations, there was an interest in that half of the debt is
paid through property taxes, which would be a $.25 increase and also an interest in,
most if not all, paid through a percentage charge through the utility bill. It was clarified
that they were only talking about a solution for the debt service for the next year, not an
ongoing solution. Councilor Jackson would like to use a property tax increase to fund
the debt service for one year, but look into other options for the long term to possibly go
to a GO bond. She stated that she would like the ability the GO bond would allow some
to deduct on their tax return. Marty Levine pointed out that not all would benefit from the
property tax deduction.
The Committee questioned if the debt could be paid through the existing property taxes
that are collected. Mr. Tuneberg spoke to the policies that have been established for
ending fund balance. He explained that he would not suggest using fund balances to
make payments or use as a one time fix, that the City would not have the revenue to
restore it. He added that they could divert projects in the Capital Improvements Fund to
pay for debt service for a year, it would be a subsidy. The Council would need to
determine what revenue stream would be used to pay the debt service for the long term.
Mayor Morrison explained that when Council had the discussion about how to pay the
debt service, they did not talk about using the ending fund balance. He added that it is
the responsibility of the Committee and Council to approve the healthiest option. He
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 24, 2006- PAGE 5 OF 8
questioned if using the carryover was healthy for the City. Lynn Thompson stated that
her suggestion was not that it was a one year approach, that it would need to be a
policy decision, and asked if the City would be able to accommodate the AFN debt in
the current operating budget, adjusting City services to accommodate it. Mr. Tuneberg
responded that may require reductions in operating budgets for departments or not do
projects that are proposed, and do a transfer, that could pay for the debt service. He
stated that eventually a rate or fee increase would be necessary to pay the out years.
The Committee questioned if they did raise the property tax for one year to cover the
debt service, then the next year they would reduce it by the $.51. Mr. Tuneberg
responded that would be his expectation and it also would be the Committee’s and
Council’s decision and they would need to decide how to pay the debt the following
year. Councilor Amarotico stated that he appreciated Ms. Thompson’s idea, but thought
that if the City could use the existing budgets, they would. The citizens are using the
services the tax supports and would not like to see those cut. He supports the option of
a surcharge or increasing the property tax and eventually turning it into a GO bond.
The Committee clarified that Mr. Tuneberg was not suggesting that they add any of the
additional parking lot positions to the budget. Mr. Tuneberg confirmed. Dee Anne
Everson supported using the excess fund balance to cover the debt service and
supports adding the community visioning. It would help to know what level of service
the people in the community expect or want.
The Committee discussed postponing the decision of the debt service until after the
June 6 Council meeting. Mr. Tuneberg explained that they could adjust the schedule if
the Committee did not want to approve the budget that night and wanted to wait until
after the June 6 Council meeting. He added that would require an additional Council
meeting to adopt the budget at the end of June putting pressure on staff to complete the
budget by July 1. Councilor Hartzell expressed her concern over moving the electric
storage building to another area of the budget, and not addressing the affect of reducing
the ending fund balance of electric.
The Committee asked what the state of Oregon requires as the ending fund balance.
Mr. Tuneberg pointed to page A-9 where each requirement for ending fund balance is
shown. He spoke to some funds meeting the target and some that struggle, depending
on what happens throughout the year. He pointed to page 3-143 to show the ending
fund balance and the comparison of reserved or restricted to operating. Mr. Tuneberg
added that he would not like to use the ending fund balance for the long term. He
explained that the proposed utility increases will be looked at in August to see how each
fund looks at the end of the year and then the needed increases will be implemented.
He explained that the budget is balanced now even with the unidentified revenue
stream for the debt service.
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 24, 2006- PAGE 6 OF 8
The Committee asked what the tax rate would be including the amount needed to repay
the debt. Mr. Tuneberg responded $4.23. The Committee asked if they used the ending
fund balance of $570,000, what the rate would need to be increased to. The Committee
discussed it would be approximately $3.89.
Ms. Hartzell asked what moving the $220,000 from the facility fee back into the Electric
Fund impacts and what the rate increase would be to meet the required 12% fund
balance policy. Mr. Tuneberg responded that he talked to the Electric department and
would not change the electric rate increase to accommodate. He stated that they would
cut the position they have asked for and possibly programs since it is much more
important to enclose the building than have the position. Ms. Hartzell asked what
programs would be cut. Mr. Tuneberg responded operational costs would be cut, not
entire programs.
Councilor Silbiger clarified that the net electric rate increase proposed is 2%. The
Committee questioned if the current tax rate of $3.71 included a subsidy for AFN. Mr.
Tuneberg responded that tax rate didn’t go to AFN or to the Electric Fund. He explained
that the $3.71 is split for General Fund and Parks and added that interest payments
have not been paid through property taxes. The interest payments that had been made
to date, have come from a transfer from the Electric Fund or another fund as a subsidy
but not from property taxes. The Committee asked if the money that did not pay for debt
last year is available. Mr. Tuneberg responded that this year we were supposed to raise
rates and did not to generate the funding needed for debt service.
The Committee discussed that if they set a property tax rate, the Council could use up
to that amount, and may choose to also lower it, but cannot raise it beyond the point the
Budget Committee set. Mr. Levine didn’t recall the Council levying less than the
Committee authorized in his time on the Committee. Mr. Chapman stated that he
believes a 10% increase in the budget is too high and that departments need to live
within their means.
Everson/Bond moved that the City of Ashland budget committee approve and
convey the amended budget including the $100,000 for community visioning, the
public art master plan, the ad hoc economic development, and the AFN debt
reducing the total of that by the $570,000 increased in the fund balance leaving a
balance of $406,000 approximately and levying that in the tax rate.
Ms. Thompson stated the $100,000 for the community visioning, and because of the
constraints they are operating under, is not warranted. She sees it as more of a luxury
item and that it would require them to raise the property tax to fund it.
Ms. Jackson added that she would like to include the Planning position in the
Community Development department. She stated that by having the constant pressure
to not raise taxes, they wind up raising fees. Ms. Jackson stated that she supports the
department heads and that the City has squeezed every department’s budget. She sees
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 24, 2006- PAGE 7 OF 8
how it is important to add staff and that the further we put off staffing, more expensive
capital improvements get pushed off. The Committee questioned if the proposed
increase in the Planning position could come from the community development fee. Ms.
Jackson responded it could be funded through 75% of the community development fees
and would result in only .001 increase in the community development fee. Arlen
Gregorio supports that position being funded through the activities that person performs.
Ms. Thompson added that the 75% target is not being met through fees and is not
always within their control. The Committee questioned the need for the position. Bill
Molnar responded that it was his suggestion to wait to add the position until the director
and some of the other positions are filled. He thought the department would possibly be
ready in January to bring on that position. Mayor Morrison added that now that the City
has hired a new City Administrator, they can put the search for Community
Development Director on the fast track, and could have a director in place by January.
Ms. Jackson stated that the three items previously included in the motion along with the
Planner position would result in a $.89 increase to the property tax rate. Ms. Everson
amended her motion to include funding ½ year of the Planning position for a 1.0
FTE, approximately $.25 increase to the property tax rate. The Committee
questioned why the property tax was being increased if this position should be funded
through the community development fee. Ms. Everson responded she wanted to leave
room for the Council to levy the full amount approved if needed. Mr. Tuneberg clarified
that amended motion would require the tax rate to increase $.26 to $3.9747. Without
increasing the community development fee.
Mr. Chapman left at 9:06 pm.
Mr. Silbiger stated he would rather vote on some items and not others, Ms. Hartzell
agreed. She would like to have the dispatch for Fire budgeted under Fire and the Police
portion budgeted under Police. Mr. Tuneberg suggested they support the motion and
then the Council could change it at the time of adoption up to 10%, or once the funds
are appropriated, they could do a supplemental or transfer.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE FY 2006-07 BUDGET
The Motion was voted on. Amarotico, Bond, Everson, Gregorio, Jackson, Mackris,
Morrison voted yes. Hartzell, Levine, Silbiger, Stebbins, Thompson voted no. Motion
passed 7 to 5.
Everson/Amarotico ms to approve Property Tax Permanent Levy of $3.97470/$1,000. 9
yes, Thompson, Stebbins, Levine opposed.
Jackson/Bond ms to approve Bond Levies of $367,262. All Ayes
Jackson/Thompson ms to approve Local Option Tax Levy of $1.38000/$1,000. All Ayes
Silbiger/Mackris ms to accept recommendations of the economic and cultural
development grant subcommittee as presented. 11 yes, Hartzell opposed.
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 24, 2006- PAGE 8 OF 8
COMMITTEE COMMENTS
Ms. Everson stated that she would like to see Council address the requirements of the
grants and define more specifically requirements for grant applicants, applications, and
those that review the applications. She would also like Council to look at the Mayor and
Council’s access to health insurance and compare what they receive to other cities. The
Committee thanked the Committee and staff for the work they did on the budget. Mr.
Tuneberg thanked the Committee on the work they did through the process. He asked
the Committee to give feedback and to complete the survey’s that will be sent out.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:31 pm.
Respectively Submitted,
Bryn Morrison
Account Representative
Memo
TO: Budget Committee
FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Budget Officer
RE: Summary of changes and issues
DATE: May 24, 2006
In an attempt to facilitate tonight’s discussion I have summarized below the changes made to
date and the outstanding issues:
Tentatively Approved Changes:
A. City-wide reduction in health care of $202,759 based upon new premium estimates.
B. Reduction in the Fire Department of $43,000, eliminating the redundant amount for
dispatch services.
C. Increase in the Fire Department of $20,000 for the remaining portion of CERT position.
D. Utility Billing software cut from the Equipment Fund budget of $250,000.
E. Add $4,000 to the Electric Fund for the omitted Recycle Commission budget.
F. IT Department reduction in AFN – Reduced by $1,993,621 (including $864,454 moving
to the Debt Service Fund) for the transition away from cable television services.
Outstanding Items:
1. New – The Regional Problem Solving process requires $3,300 to complete the Regional
Land Use Plan. It could be added or absorbed in the Community Development dept.
2. New – A rental needs analysis of $25,000 has been requested by the Housing
Commission for a survey to provide baseline information for programs. This can be
added to the Community Development budget or absorbed, displacing other programs.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
D. L. Tuneberg, Director Tel: 541-488-6002
20 East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
Memo
3. Central Service Fund $262,506 reduction - Reductions in Telecommunication Fund’s
internal payments requires reductions in Central Service Fund appropriations in
Administration (including Mayor & Council and Legal) of $58,893, Information
Technology of $48,549, Admin Services of $144,360, City Recorder of $8,672, and
Public Works of $2,032 to balance the fund.
4. RVTD Bus Service change. Currently, $290,000 is budgeted. New figures for service
exceed $820,000. Staff proposes that the budgeted amount remain and Council
address the service level and funding issue at the 6/6/06 meeting.
5. Municipal Building: Staff proposes eliminating the $300,000 Council Chamber remodel
and $100,000 Archive Building preliminary work and moving the $220,000 Equipment
Structure improvement to the Electric Fund, Capital Outlay. Also, use Facility Use Fees
to pay CIP Fund back for repairs over the last five years and add $50,000 in Contracted
Services to fund a review of municipal building needs and funding. City Council will
need to review and adopt the process for the next budget process. Fire Station #2
remains and goes to voters in November.
6. Other Budget Considerations (“Parking lot”) – Additional positions and programs require
increasing taxes and fees for inclusion. Committee may need to defer these items for
one year giving the city time to resolve operational issues and priorities that are in flux.
7. Staff requests concurrence that the aerial fire apparatus can go to voters in November
with Fire Station #2. If approved by the voters, purchase of the apparatus would
actually be budgeted and occur in FY 2007-08 due to the long lead time for delivery.
8. AFN Full Faith & Credit debt service – This has been moved to the Debt Service Fund,
but the revenue stream is still unidentified. Council is considering a “cafeteria”
approach to funding the $864,454 debt service including a possible property tax portion,
surcharges or selling assets. If paid completely by fees there is no property tax
increase for this.If an operating levy property tax solution is needed it would require
Budget Committee approval as part of setting the rate for the approved budget.
Depending on other resource options, the added tax rate could be from zero $.21 to
$.51 of the un-levied $.57 remaining.
I hope the above is helpful to the Committee in working toward adopting the budget.
Lee
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
D. L. Tuneberg, Director Tel: 541-488-6002
20 East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
City of Ashland
Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Summary of Changes
2007Tentatively 2007
ApprovedOutstanding
ProposedChangesRevisedItemsApproved
GENERAL FUND
Administration Department141,780 141,780 141,780
Administrative Services - Municipal Court395,450 (415) 395,035 395,035 A. Heath Care Savings
Administrative Services - Social Services Grants115,360 115,360 115,360
Administrative Services - Economic & Cultural Grants504,650 504,650 504,650
Administrative Services - Miscellaneous7,000 7,000 7,000
Administrative Services - Band61,554 61,554 61,554
Police Department5,354,896 (29,122) 5,325,774 5,325,774 A.Heath Care Savings
Fire and Rescue Department5,313,257 (43,000) 5,262,372 5,262,372 B.Remove Dispatch Services
C.20,000 CERT Coordinator
A.(27,885)Heath Care Savings
Public Works - Cemetery Division358,243 (2,868) 355,375 355,375 A.Heath Care Savings
Community Development - Planning Division2,263,304 (12,013) 2,251,291 2,279,591 A.Heath Care Savings
13,300 Regional Land Use Plan
225,000 Rental Needs analysis
Community Development - Building Division801,756 801,756 801,756
Transfers 500 500 500
Contingency400,000 400,000 400,000
Ending Fund Balance980,020 95,303 1,075,323 1,075,323
TOTAL GENERAL FUND -16,697,770 16,697,770 28,300 16,726,070
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND-
Personal Services35,900 (415) 35,485 35,485 A.Heath Care Savings
Materials and Services385,350 415 385,765 385,765 A.Heath Care Savings
Other Financing Uses (Interfund Loans)215,000 215,000 215,000
TOTAL CDBG FUND -636,250 636,250 - 636,250
STREET FUND
Public Works - Street Operations4,068,492 (8,224) 4,060,268 4,060,268 A.Heath Care Savings
Public Works - Storm Water Operations739,870 739,870 739,870
Public Works - Transportation SDC's274,850 274,850 274,850
Public Works - Storm Water SDC's47,500 47,50047,500
Public Works - Local Improvement Districts 343,498343,498343,498
Contingency 153,000153,000153,000
Ending Fund Balance6,300,542 8,2246,308,7666,308,766
TOTAL STREET FUND -11,927,75211,927,752-11,927,752
AIRPORT FUND
Materials and Services111,532 111,532 111,532
Debt Service35,173 35,173 35,173
Other Financing Uses (Interfund Loans)- - -
Contingency5,000 5,000 5,000
Ending Fund Balance12,382 12,382 12,382
TOTAL AIRPORT FUND -164,087 164,087 - 164,087
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND
Personal Services154,065 (1,658) 152,407 152,407 A.Heath Care Savings
Materials and Services394,750 394,750 394,750
Capital Outlay3,626,000 3,626,000 (100,000) 3,056,000 5 Cut Archive Building
5(300,000)Cut Council Chambers Remodel
5(220,000)Move Enclosing of Storage to Electric
550,000 Space Needs
Transfers335,434 335,434 335,434
Other Financing Uses (Interfund Loans)530,000 530,000 530,000
Contingency50,000 50,000 50,000
Ending Fund Balance1,678,870 1,658 1,680,528 570,000 2,250,528
TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS -6,769,119 6,769,119 - 6,769,119
DEBT SERVICE FUND
Debt Service791,716 864,453 1,656,169 1,656,169 F.Option 1
Ending Fund Balance147,356 147,356 147,356
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 864,453939,072 1,803,525 - 1,803,525
City of Ashland
Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Summary of Changes
2007Tentatively 2007
ApprovedOutstanding
ProposedChangesRevisedItemsApproved
WATER FUND
Electric - Conservation Division172,005 172,005 172,005
Public Works - Forest Lands Management Division196,000 196,000 196,000
Public Works - Water Supply2,700,879 2,700,879 2,700,879
Public Works - Water Treatment1,400,354 1,400,354 1,400,354
Public Works - Water Distribution3,277,302 (13,190) 3,264,112 3,264,112 A.Heath Care Savings
Public Works - Reimbursement SDC's467,670 467,670 467,670
Public Works - Improvement SDC's702,580 702,580 702,580
Public Works - Debt SDC's123,932 123,932 123,932
Debt Services544,457 544,457 544,457
Other Financing Uses (Interfund Loans)- - -
Contingency152,000 152,000 152,000
Ending Fund Balance5,388,117 13,190 5,401,307 5,401,307
TOTAL WATER FUND -15,125,296 15,125,296 - 15,125,296
WASTEWATER FUND
Public Works - Wastewater Collection2,249,996 (9,339) 2,240,657 2,240,657 A.Heath Care Savings
Public Works - Wastewater Treatment2,022,260 2,022,260 2,022,260
Public Works - Reimbursement SDC's192,160 192,160 192,160
Public Works - Improvement SDC's108,090 108,090 108,090
Debt Services1,793,196 1,793,196 1,793,196
Contingency149,000 149,000 149,000
Ending Fund Balance3,026,100 9,339 3,035,439 3,035,439
TOTAL WASTEWATER FUND -9,540,802 9,540,802 - 9,540,802
ELECTRIC FUND
Electric - Conservation Division976,645 976,645 976,645
Electric - Supply6,557,504 6,557,504 6,557,504
Electric - Distribution5,206,012 4,000 5,192,851 5,412,851 E.Recycle Commission
A.(17,161)Heath Care Savings
5220,000 Move Enclosing of Storage to Electric
Electric - Transmission1,048,600 1,048,600 1,048,600
Transfers- - -
Contingency381,000 381,000 381,000
Ending Fund Balance1,169,731 13,161 1,182,892 1,182,892
TOTAL ELECTRIC FUND -15,339,492 15,339,492 220,000 15,559,492
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUND
IT - Customer Relations\\Promotions223,608 223,608 223,608
IT - Cable Television 1,822,360 (1,343,614) 478,746 478,746 F.Option 1
IT - Internet 683,180 93,130 776,310 776,310 F.Option 1
IT - High Speed 286,588 20,907 301,179 301,179 F.Option 1
A.(6,316)Heath Care Savings
Debt Services864,454 (864,454) - - F.Option 1
Contingency100,000 100,000 100,000
Ending Fund Balance110,884 106,726 217,610 217,610
TOTAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUND (1,993,621)4,091,074 2,097,453 - 2,097,453
CENTRAL SERVICES FUND
Administration Department1,033,615 (10,632) 1,022,983 1,022,983 A.Heath Care Savings
Administrative Services Department 2,092,085 (14,175) 2,077,910 2,077,910 A.Heath Care Savings
IT - Computer Services Division 1,018,237 (4,965) 1,013,272 1,013,272 A.Heath Care Savings
City Recorder Division280,098 (1,658) 278,440 278,440 A.Heath Care Savings
Public Works - Administration and Engineering1,538,706 (10,243) 1,528,463 1,528,463 A.Heath Care Savings
(262,506)(262,506) 3 Central Service reductions
Contingency179,000 179,000 179,000
Ending Fund Balance43,626 41,673 85,299 85,299
TOTAL CENTRAL SERVICES FUND (0)6,185,367 6,185,367 (262,506) 5,922,861
City of Ashland
Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Summary of Changes
2007Tentatively 2007
ApprovedOutstanding
ProposedChangesRevisedItemsApproved
INSURANCE SERVICES FUND
Personal Services400,000 400,000 400,000
Materials and Services661,291 661,291 661,291
Contingency32,000 32,000 32,000
Ending Fund Balance492,028 492,028 492,028
TOTAL INSURANCE SERVICES FUND -1,585,319 1,585,319 - 1,585,319
EQUIPMENT FUND
Personal Services268,955 (2,479) 266,476 266,476 A.Heath Care Savings
Materials and Services519,955 519,955 519,955
Capital Outlay1,665,000 (250,000) 1,415,000 1,415,000 D.Cut UB Software
Contingency42,000 42,000 42,000
Ending Fund Balance366,320 252,479 618,799 618,799
TOTAL EQUIPMENT FUND -2,862,230 2,862,230 - 2,862,230
CEMETERY TRUST FUND
Transfers19,000 19,000 19,000
Ending Fund Balance735,213 735,213 735,213
TOTAL CEMETERY TRUST FUND -754,213 754,213 - 754,213
PARKS AND RECREATION FUND
Parks Division3,890,750 (22,500) 3,868,250 3,868,250 A.Heath Care Savings
Recreation Division969,700 (7,500) 962,200 962,200 A.Heath Care Savings
Golf Division416,000 - 416,000 416,000
Transfers110,000 110,000 110,000
Contingency35,000 35,000 35,000
Ending Fund Balance637,250 30,000 667,250 667,250
TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION FUND -6,058,700 6,058,700 - 6,058,700
YOUTH ACTIVITIES LEVY FUND
Personal Services96,000 96,000 96,000
Materials and Services2,335,361 2,335,361 2,335,361
Ending Fund Balance- -
TOTAL YOUTH ACTIVITIES LEVY FUND -2,431,361 2,431,361 - 2,431,361
PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND
Capital Outlay331,000 331,000 331,000
Ending Fund Balance44,866 44,866 44,866
TOTAL PARKS CAPITAL IMP. FUND -375,866 375,866 - 375,866
TOTAL BUDGET101,483,770 (1,129,168) 100,354,602 (14,206) 100,340,396
Less Ending Fund Balance21,133,305 571,753 21,705,058 570,000 22,275,058
Total Appropriations80,350,465 (1,700,921) 78,649,544 (584,206) 78,065,338