Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-06-05 Budget Committee MinutesBudget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 1 of 14 BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES June 5, 2017 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Budget Committee Chair David Runkel called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. in in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present: Sal Amery Mike Morris Mary Cody James Nagel Traci Darrow David Runkel Garrett Furuichi Stefani Seffinger Paula Hyatt Dennis Slattery Greg Lemhouse John Stromberg Shaun Moran Rich Rosenthal Mr. Runkel moved agenda item V. Discussion of Funding for Council Priority Budget Add -ins before IV. Motion to Approve the 2017-19 Biennial Budget & Levy Tax. Mr. Slattery wanted a committee vote on the matter and agreed to discuss it further following Public Input. PUBLIC INPUT Ken Morrish/Fly Water Travel/479 Russell Suite 103/Supported the Climate Energy Action Plan (CEAP) position and commented on the violent weather patterns his client's had experienced. Bryan Sohl/283 Scenic Drive/Served on the Conservation Commission and the CEAP ad hoc Committee and both strongly supported the CEAP position. He explained how raising the property tax rate could fund the position. Annika Larson/795 Ellendale Drive/Medford, OR/Supported the CEAP position and explained how climate change was already effecting the local area. Julian Rice/1411 Evergreen Lane/Supported the CEAP position. The City had made a promise to make a difference on climate change and it was essential to have a dedicated position. Carson Barry/134 Church Street/Noted President Trump pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement and the effect it had on her graduating class. She explained what it was like to be a recent high school graduate looking to her future and how often it was terrifying because of climate change. Kayla Fennell/1350 East Nevada Street/Supported the CEAP position. She graduated from High School the week before and noted how her future was uncertain due to unstable climate leadership. She would not have a secure future. Climate change disasters would breed instability around the world resulting in more wars and desperation. John Nosco/840 B Street/Asked the Budget Committee to support funding for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF). He spoke on the advantage of having an ongoing commitment to affordable housing via an AHTF. The City could use revenues from the marijuana tax. Another benefit was funds were not spent until partners had committed to joining the AHTF effort. Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 2of14 Andrew Kubik/1251 Munson Drive/Wanted to know why businesses did not employ private security. Businesses submitted trespass affidavits to the Police Department and paid property taxes but nonprofits could do the same and did not pay taxes. He did not support adding five new police officers. Claudia Alick/460 Siskiyou Blvd/Explained she was the Oregon Shakespeare Festival community producer of the Green Show and explained how staff now had extreme weather protocols for weather events. She was inspired by the high school students who spoke to climate change and proud of the community and City efforts to develop a Climate Energy Action Plan. Huelz Gutcheon/2253 Hwy 99/Submitted a document into the record and spoke on the Ashland Renewable Energy Acquisition Department. The conservation department in the budget was $1.5 million with $1 million going to purchase clean Kilowatt-hour equivalents at $1.20 that should be .05 cents. City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the chair had the authority under meeting rules to rearrange the order of business on the agenda. A committee member could also make a motion to lay a matter on the table that meant to postpone an item later in the meeting. This form of motion was not amendable or debatable and prevailed on a majority vote. Mr. Slattery explained why he thought the current agenda order was important. Chair Runkel wanted to discuss the add packages prior to approving the budget. Administrative Services/Finance Director Mark Welch confirmed the Budget Committee could approve the tax rate then make a motion to levy the other .09 cents if needed. Furuichi/Amery m/s move agenda item V. before approving the .09-cent increase on taxes. DISCUSSION: Mr. Amery explained if the discussion was on funding add packages the Committee should understand what they were and how to pay for them first. Mr. Furuichi thought the assumption of approving the .09 cents was premature and wanted to discuss all of the expenditures and possible cuts to balance the budget. Ms. Cody agreed with Mr. Furuichi. Mr. Lemhouse clarified the budget as presented was balanced at the current tax rate, not with the proposed increase. He agreed with Mr. Slattery on the agenda order. Mr. Stromberg supported keeping the agenda as is and would not support the motion. Ms. Darrow confirmed the process and supported retaining the agenda. Chair Runkel thought discussing add packages after approving the budget went against state budget law. Mr. Lemhouse disagreed commenting this was not an attempt to limit the discussion. Mr. Furuichi raised of point of information on changing an allocation once the tax rate was approved. Mr. Welch confirmed the Committee could do that by motion. Mr. Furuichi thought that would lengthen the meeting and wanted to discuss add packages prior to approving the budget. Roll Call Vote: Furuichi, Cody, Moran, Hyatt, Runkel, and Amery, YES. Slattery, Nagel, Morris, Seffinger, Stromberg, Rosenthal, Lemhouse, and Darrow, NO. Motion failed 8-6. OLD BUSINESS Discussion on material provided pursuant to the Budget Committee action on May 25, 2017 Administrative Services/Finance Director Mark Welch compiled and posted budget questions received by May 30, 2017 to the website. Staff answered all the questions. There were three categories, clarifications, management and operational questions, and Council policy direction. Chair Runkel was troubled by increases he saw in the numbers that looked to be a $570 increase for every person in Ashland. Mr. Rosenthal noted staff s efforts. There were over one hundred questions and staff responded to each one. Mr. Amery was unclear on options regarding the healthcare fund and the $525,000 that rolled in and out of the fund. Mr. Welch explained there was a 2% interest on the loan. Council could forgive the loan or just the interest via a resolution. Removing the $525,000 from the fund would create a negative balance of Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 3of14 $300,000. If the loan was forgiven for five years and in that time the fund gained a healthy balance, the City could reduce the healthcare benefit contributions that would affect the General Fund and the enterprise funds that could reduce fees charged to customers. He cautioned against forgiving the loan for five years or reducing the interest. It was the same as continuing the loan practice. The Employee Health Benefit Advisory Committee (EHBAC) recently imposed a higher deductible on employees as well as an increase in contributions. Human Resource Director Tina Gray further explained the City raised the premium contribution 5% in January and would raise it another 10% in July. The City paid 95% and the employee paid 5% but the premium costs increased and resulted in the City and employees paying more. Premium costs were reflected in the budget. The deductible for employees went up $100 and out pocket maximum increased to $900. Mr. Slattery suggested not forgiving the loan, leaving it in place and moving on to the rest of the budget. Mr. Amery preferred discussing the item. Chair Runkel moved the discussion forward. Mr. Furuichi explained the answers provided by staff raised even more questions. The $1.66 million in the General Fund showed a transfer in from CIP on page 3-20 in the budget document. A Central Services Fund charged departments higher than anticipated fees so that amount came from the Capital Improvement Fund. He questioned whether it complied with ORS 223.208 that prohibited capital funds transfers to the general fund. Mr. Welch clarified it was going to the Central Services Fund not the General Fund. Mr. Furuichi thought the Central Services Fund passed through all the departments and wanted to know the funding source for those departments. Mr. Welch explained the Central Services Fund serviced electric, water, and sewer citywide and did not receive direct taxes. Franchise Fees went to the General Fund and not the Central Services Fund. Mr. Furuichi considered departments funded with General Fund money that had the Central Services allocation increase a transfer to reduce the General Fund. Mr. Welch clarified the General Fund was not the main funding source of the Central Services Fund. Chair Runkel asked if the transfer paid for current government cost through capital money. Mr. Welch responded it did not. The facilities portion of the Capital Improvement Fund came from fees paid by departments for upkeep of buildings and facilities. The change lowered the internal service charge to all departments and enterprise funds in order to balance the budget and accommodate the PERS increase. Chair Runkel thought it was a budget gimmick. Mr. Slattery raised a point of order on Chair Runkel's statement and explained no one was trying to hide items or move things. Questions were fine but it was important to respect and not diminish the process. Chair Runkel took note and commented he had not seen operating transfers like this in previous budgets. Mr. Stromberg added former Interim Administrative Services/Finance Director Bev Adams had worked hard at putting together a balanced budget that continued to deliver the services the City provided to the community. She transferred approximately $1 million from the Facilities Fund into the Central Services Fund to reduce the charges from the Central Services Fund to all departments to offset the PERS allocation. Mr. Furuichi countered the alternative to raising fees was cutting costs. Page 3-6 showed the long-term plan for the General Fund reflecting a negative. Mr. Welch clarified the General Fund would end with approximately $4.4 million of fund balance. The 2017-19 projection was $2 million. Mr. Furuichi had grave concern regarding the General Fund reflecting a negative fund balance. Mr. Stromberg noted future year projections were based on increasingly arbitrary assumptions. Mr. Furuichi wanted to work with the City on determining a realistic projection of fund balance. Mr. Slattery did not support a biennium budgeting process and thought there should be regular ongoing discussions during the off budget year. He wanted to appoint an ad hoc committee under his leadership to Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 4 of 14 determine rules of engagement, and uses of the Budget Committee in the off years. Mr. Amery suggested meeting quarterly instead of creating an ad hoc committee. Furuichi/Cody m/s to have regular quarterly meetings two to three weeks after the close of a quarter to review the budget to actual financials and any topic that came up. DISCUSSION: Mr. Stromberg raised a point of order whether the Budget Committee had the ability to schedule meetings outside the budget process. City Attorney Dave Lohman replied no. Those decisions were made by the City Council. Once the Committee approved the budget, any decisions on subsequent meetings by the Budget Committee up until the next biennium budget were for the City Council to decide. Additionally, those discussions would need to be limited. Chair Runkel ruled the motion was not in order. Mr. Furuichi referenced the motion he made on May 18, 2017 that staff provide budget support in compliance with Oregon Budget Law 294.358(3) and 294.388(5). The information staff provided at the May 25, 2017 meeting did not tie to the budget. There were significant variances. Mr. Welch explained the only way he could answer Mr. Furuichi's request was going page -by -page showing how they did tie to the budget. The salaries provided at the May 25, 2017 meeting were actual work papers they used in the office. Additional pay factored into some of the benefit calculations. Removing deferred compensation from the salary amount tied to every department page. Mr. Furuichi wanted to know the total deferred compensation on page 29. Mr. Stromberg raised a point of information regarding Mr. Furuichi's questions. It sounded like he was challenging the competency or ethics of staff. Mr. Furuichi explained he did not understand the information and was asking for clarification. He was not satisfied with the responses. Mr. Welch was uncomfortable having the conversation during the meeting. Page 29 of the handout provided at the May 25, 2017 meeting showed salaries. At the bottom of that page, the number was $1.09 million for total salaries. The difference between the two numbers was the deferred compensation portion he spoke to earlier. Mr. Furuichi moved on to Personal Services. It was a total of $1.938614 million in the budget but on this paper, it was $1.867030 million. Mr. Welch explained the difference was overtime. It was not aposition specific calculation. Overtime, holiday pay, and sick time were not specific calculations. Adding overtime and sick time pay out to the number provided on position costing would get to that number. Mr. Furuichi raised a point of clarification. The Budget Committee should be presented a number that made sense and tied rather than having the Committee "hunt" around to find where the balance and transactions were. He was a volunteer and this took a lot of time. He would have preferred a spreadsheet with links. Mr. Rosenthal addressed Mr. Welch and asked him if it was his professional opinion that the City had complied with Oregon budget law 294.358(3) and 294.388(5) based on the information requested. Mr. Welch replied it did comply. Mr. Moran had not liked the response he received on metrics used in Public Works to evaluate performance on page 28 of 89 in the handout. Looking at the 2015-17 budget, he wanted to know how many projects had come in on, under, or over budget. Engineering Services Manager Scott Fleury had put together an email on the status of the CIP projects as a continuation of information presented to the Budget Committee September 2016. In addition to the email, he had forwarded hard copies to the Finance Department to distribute to the Budget Committee. It provided a current overall status of each project in the list and funding detail. Mr. Welch clarified his earlier comment on being uncomfortable. Staff had provided the best possible and accurate information they had. The suggestion of going through the information line by line to justify every single number during a public meeting was difficult. Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 5of14 Motion to AUUrove the 2017-19 Biennial Budget & Levv Tax Slattery/Lemhouse m/s to leave the loan in the healthcare fund in place for the time being and look at other opportunities down the line to have it paid back with interest. DISCUSSION: Mr. Amery thought the loan should be forgiven in a manner that allowed the fund to be healthy in the future. Mr. Slattery thought the point of Mr. Amery's discussion was that he did not want the loan forgiven. Mr. Amery clarified he did not want it forgiven but postponed without interest for a period so the fund could grow. Mr. Stromberg raised a point of order and suggested Mr. Amery amend the motion. Amery/Slattery m/s to amend the motion that staff come up with an alternative means to address the loan without forgiving it that enabled the healthcare fund to grow with Council approval. DISCUSSION: Ms. Darrow raised a point of order and asked Mr. Amery to define Committee. Mr. Amery clarified he meant the Budget Committee. He was not sure if this was in the Committee's purview. Mr. Slattery explained the reasoning behind his motion was to hold the loan in place until a committee could decide how to proceed. That could be in six months or the next biennium. City Attorney Dave Lohman noted if the amendment passed it would take a subsequent action by the Council through a resolution. Mr. Lemhouse would oppose it due to the wording. It gave the Committee the responsibility of coming up with solutions. He thought that was staff s job. Mr. Stromberg thought the amendment was a good idea but staff with Council approval should determine the details. Mr. Amery confirmed the intent of his amendment was having staff come up with solutions that Council would approve. Roll Call Vote on amendment: Nagel, Runkel, Cody, Morris, Amery, Lemhouse, Moran, Darrow, Stromberg, Seffinger, Hyatt, Rosenthal, Slattery, and Furuichi, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call on the main motion as amended: Hyatt, Rosenthal, Runkel, Darrow, Lemhouse, Amery, Stromberg, Cody, Morris, Furuichi, Nagel, Seffinger, Moran, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. The Committee discussed whether to make the motion to approve the budget first or make amendments prior. Mr. Stromberg raised a point of order and explained why the process was better making the main motion first then adding amendments. Chair Runkel agreed. Mr. Amery raised a point of information and asked for further clarification on the voting process and projects. Mr. Slattery explained CIP projects were approved within the budget but individual items still needed to come forward to Council along with public hearings. CIP projects were not automatically approved when the Budget Committee passed the budget. Mr. Stromberg further explained the budget provided financial capabilities to implement various projects although some funding sources may need to be found. Having the Budget Committee pull money out of the budget regarding a specific project would be pre-empting Council process. Mr. Amery was concerned that the City had spent and raised many fees over the past few years for projects and thought the City needed to be more sensible on how it spent the funds. He was also concerned about the Reserve Fund and the potential for another economic crisis. Chair Runkel cited state budget law and stated capital projects had to be appropriated through a CIP fund approved by the Budget Committee. Every item in the CIP was subject to approval or consideration by the Budget Committee. Mr. Rosenthal explained budget was a strategy. A budget manager tried to project every potential expenditure and the revenue source. It did not mean the pro] ect would happen. To remove Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 6 of 14 a project from the budget at this point would be irresponsible. Every department had projects that would not go forward and some would through grants. The budget was a plan. Mr. Furuichi wanted to know how the projects were being funded. Mr. Slattery noted that information was already supplied. Mr. Welch explained there was not one specific funding source for each CIP project listed. The budget document had a summary on page 1-10 and 1-11 that laid out the proposed project along with planned resources. This information was in the department section as well. Mr. Furuichi asked if revenue bonds and general obligation bonds were part of the plan if they needed to be included in the budget. Mr. Lemhouse responded Council decided whether to use bonds or not. Alternately, the Council could decide not to do the project. Mr. Furuichi explained ORS 294-388 stated it did not have to go into this budget if it was a revenue bond that's referral period ended after the preparation of the budget or a general obligation bond approved by electors in the current budget year. Capital projects did not need to be included in the Budget Committee review and should not. It caused the Budget Committee to spend time on things they did not need to address. Mr. Slattery further explained the CIP was part of the plan. Slattery/Nagel m/s to approve the City of Ashland 2017-19 biennial budget and recommend the budget to the City Council for adoption, approve the property tax levy in the amount of 4.1972 per $1000 of assessed value for fiscal year 2017-18 and fiscal year 2018-19 respectively, approve property taxes for the payment of general obligation principal and interest bonded debt in the total of $515,309 for fiscal year 2017-18, and $514,499 for fiscal year 2018-19. DISCUSSION: Mr. Slattery noted it was a balanced budget and time to approve. Mr. Furuichi and Chair Runkel discussed reductions and additions in line items to preserve the funding balance. Mr. Stromberg raised a point of order and explained budget law did not allow discussions outside of the budget. It seemed Mr. Furuichi and Chair Runkel was having a colloquy. Committee members could make amendments. Mr. Slattery agreed Committee members should make amendments. Furuichi/Cody to amend the motion that the Fire Department budget be reduced by the supplemental budget approved last year that expires end of fiscal period, and could provide $1.3 million for the Police Department, CEAP, and some others. DISCUSSION: Mr. Furuichi understood Council had approved three new positions in the Fire Department budget as a mid -year adjustment using overtime. This year, their budget reflected a small reduction in overtime with three full time positions. It was prudent to let the supplemental expire and use the funds to fund other priorities. Ms. Cody confirmed the Fire Department would use the General Fund to fund the three firefighters once the overtime expired. Mr. Welch clarified the supplemental budget was binding until the fiscal year ended, June 30, 2017. The amendment would not add $1.3 million to the budget. Mr. Furuichi explained he had another proposal for the Fire Department. Mr. Rosenthal stated the process was "just flat crazy." This was a City Council consideration. This was one of the oddest motions he had ever heard. There was not enough information to begin consideration of the amendment. Ms. Darrow read the following the Citizens Budget Committee page on the City website, "The budget committee does not change staffing level, salary schedules or negotiate salary contracts. It is not the committee's role to adjust policies or priorities set by the Council, or add, delete, increase or decrease programs." She noted a gray area in the sentence following, "The budget committee can make changes to any of the line items in the budget to meet the goals and services established by the Council within the revenues projected." She agreed with Mr. Rosenthal that this was not within the Committee's purview. Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 7 of 14 Roll Call Vote on amendment: Furuichi, YES, Hyatt, Morris, Nagel, Lemhouse, Runkel, Seffinger, Moran, Rosenthal, Darrow, Amery, Slattery, Cody, and Stromberg, NO. Motion failed 13-1. Slattery/Stromberg m/s called for the question. Roll Call Vote: Stromberg, Morris, Amery, Darrow, Seffinger, YES; Runkel, Cody, Lemhouse, Moran, Furuichi, Hyatt, Rosenthal, Slattery, and Nagel. Motion failed 9 to 5. Furuichi/Amery m/s to amend the motion by reducing the AFN budget by $1.3 million to fund the Police FTEs and LEAP. DISCUSSION: Mr. Furuichi explained the City had spent a lot of time investing in AFN and he thought there was a better way to provide the service. He wanted AFN to find a way to fund itself with a reduced budget. Mr. Amery explained AFN finally had a platform that could be successful. Taking away funds and reducing that capability would hurt it in the long term. Removing funds was not prudent. Mr. Welch confirmed that AFN was currently covering operating costs and contributing $409,000 to the debt reduction. Mr. Stromberg agreed with Mr. Amery. Mr. Slattery added his agreement that it was not the time to reduce funds for AFN. Mr. Furuichi clarified his intention was pushing AFN to increase their customer service base. Roll Call Vote: Furuichi, YES; Darrow, Morris, Runkel, Lemhouse, Cody, Slattery, Stromberg, Hyatt, Rosenthal, Nagel, Seffinger, Amery, and Moran, NO. Motion failed 13 to 1. Mr. Moran stated AFN performance had not performed well and needed attention. Even when AFN presented, they mentioned a marketing plan that did not show the necessary results. The budget showed where they were $300,000 below forecast. Mr. Stromberg raised point of order that Mr. Moran's comments did not pertain to the discussion on the main motion. Chair Runkel explained the Committee had the discussion on the motion. Mr. Moran's statement was out of order. Mr. Lemhouse raised another point of order and clarified Mr. Moran could speak to the main motion and could talk about AFN as it related to the whole budget. Runkel/Cody m/s to amend the motion to reduce the Economic Development program from $360,000 to $100,000. DISCUSSION: Chair Runkel explained this would allow cost savings in the budget. This area showed a weak performance, business licenses had declined and he wanted to see it centralized within the City. He was disappointed that in this budget process they had not looked at ways to save money. Ms. Cody agreed on the lack of performance and bringing it into the City. Mr. Lemhouse understood the desire to cut expenses. He thought the City could operate within the budget and did not advocate reducing the Economic Development fund. Without a detailed plan on how to use that $100,000, it was difficult to support that kind of reduction. Mr. Moran noted the Chamber of Commerce used to handle many of the Economic Development tasks and thought it should revert to the Chamber. Mr. Stromberg explained the Council passed a resolution allocating the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) with $175,000 going to the Economic Development. He did not think the Budget Committee could undo a resolution. In addition, the City and the Chamber collaboration on Economic Development had been remarkable. Chair Runkel clarified the motion did not intend to remove money from the TOT and indicated page 2-7 of the budget and explained it was a $100,000 in City expenses. His motion would move Economic Development back into the City. Ms. Darrow commented the motion had merit but would not support it. She did support Council reviewing different ways to appropriate money. Mr. Morris would not support the motion either. The Economic Development plan was in place. Cutting funds would cause reallocations. It did not make sense. Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 8 of 14 Mr. Stromberg raised a point of order during the roll call because Mr. Slattery and Mr. Amery abstained from the vote. Mr. Amery abstained because he was confused on how add packages would be funded. Mr. Slattery abstained because of a potential conflict of interest. Mr. Lemhouse raised a point of order and explained a person could not abstain unless there was a conflict of interest. City Attorney Dave Lohman agreed. A committee member had to vote yes or no unless they were recused after providing an explanation. Mr. Slattery declared his wife was the executive director of the Chamber of Commerce. Even though it was a potential conflict of interest, he wanted to recuse himself. Lemhouse/Stromberg m/s to recuse Mr. Slattery. Voice Vote: ALL AYES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote: Furuichi, Runkel, Moran, Amery, Cody, YES; Morris, Nagel, Lemhouse, Darrow, Seffinger, Rosenthal, Stromberg, Hyatt, NO. Motion failed 8-5. Mr. Runkel motioned to zero out social services grants, and the non -tourism aspects of the economic cultural and sustainability grants because TOT funded them. Mr. Stromberg raised a point of order regarding the motion. The Budget Committee voted to accept the recommendations of the subcommittee regarding grants at the May 25, 2017 meeting. Chair Runkel withdrew the motion. Furuichi/Amery m/s to amend the motion by reducing the health fund by $1.3 million per year to fund the Police Department and CEAP positions. DISCUSSION: Mr. Furuichi thought the employees were doing a good job looking at ways to reduce the self-insurance nightmare. It was fiction that it would create savings in the future. He wanted them to research other insurance programs. His personal analysis showed apotential savings of $1.5 million or $2.1 million. Mr. Welch explained there was reinsurance on the health benefit plan. Mr. Stromberg thought this was wildly crazy and irresponsible to dismantle a self- insurance program. It was not a nightmare. Self-insurance had helped keep costs down. The City was saving $400,000 a year. Staff was learning along the way. It was not a disaster. Mr. Lemhouse would not support the motion and did not think it was a nightmare either. The City had saved some and there was a potential to save more. Premiums had gone up nationally and the City rate had increased but not as much. He took issue with using words like "nightmare" and "crazy." Roll Call Vote: Furuichi, and Cody, YES; Seffinger, Runkel, Lemhouse, Moran, Slattery, Darrow, Stromberg, Hyatt, Rosenthal, Nagel, Morris, Amery, NO. Motion failed 12-2. Mr. Lohman clarified the Department of Revenue Budget Manual stated the Budget Committee's role was not to directly establish or eliminate specific programs or services. The Budget Committee's influence was most often exerted at a higher level when it approved the budget and established the tax levy. The manual also stated if a majority of Budget Committee members agreed, it could add or delete funding for specific services. Runkel/Furuichi m/s to amend the motion and remove from the budget the expenditure of $631,000 year one and $631,000 in year 2 for shading of Bear Creek. DISCUSSION: Mr. Runkel explained the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) no longer supported this type of mitigation for shading effluent and did not think it was a worthwhile project. Mr. Furuichi noted there was $189,000 in sewer SDCs and $1,000,000 in fees and rates as a source of funds. He supported using that source to fund other positions. Mr. Slattery asked Chair Runkel if he had calculated what it would cost the citizenry by not doing the shading project. This was similar to deferred maintenance. Chair Runkel responded DEQ had Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 9of14 not given a current ruling on the temperature reduction. Mr. Slattery thought this was a City Council policy decision and not up to the Budget Committee. Ms. Darrow thought it was premature to remove the item from the budget until there was a final ruling from DEQ. Engineering Services Manager Scott Fleury explained this was one of the projects to achieve compliance with wastewater effluent. In December 2015, DEQ proposed and passed legislation that approved Water Quality Trading or shading for credits for far field built temperature compliance. The near field compliance effort was the outfall relocation from Ashland Creek to Bear Creek. They were dual solutions and separate projects built to achieve total temperature compliance for the effluent. Alternative solutions were building a cooling tower and chillers. Shading was environmentally sound and less expensive. Costs for a cooling tower and chiller was $8 to $9 million in capital with $175,000 to $250,000 annual operating costs. The oxidation ditch was the biological treatment of the wastewater. Mr. Fleury was not aware that DEQ no longer thought this process was viable. Staff would meet with DEQ in a few weeks to discuss moving forward with the program. Chair Runkel stated DEQ was very favorable at one point but no longer. Mr. Fleury clarified it was not a requirement and one of the ways the City could meet temperature compliance. DEQ was not requiring the City to do specific mitigation measure. They were requiring the City to mitigate the issue with a solution the City chose. Mr. Morris thought this demonstrated the issue with changing the CIP items. It affected technical, engineering, and master plan solutions by not funding them. The temperature requirement was a requirement the City had to meet. Mr. Fleury explained the temperature requirement would be in the City's new permit. The timetable was 2019. If the City proceeded before the permit, DEQ would issue credits prior to establishing the new permit itself. Mr. Furuichi agreed with Mr. Morris. The pro] ects needed a schedule and time frame associated with them. He submitted a document into the record from Ted Hall providing a process he wanted the City to incorporate. Mr. Lemhouse explained amounts in the CIP were reflective of a strategy Council had discussed thoroughly years ago how to resolve cooling the effluent. He would not support the motion. Mr. Stromberg acknowledged Mr. Hall but noted there were competent people in Public Works. These projects involved serious research and consideration. Mr. Furuichi clarified he was not questioning the competency of staff. Mr. Stromberg added although the Budget Committee was highly qualified it did not have the engineering expertise and Committee members needed to be aware of the influence their words had on the viewing audience. Mr. Amery thought some of the frustration was not knowing how the City would pay for the add packages and extra head count. No one was looking at delaying projects to free up funds. Roll Call Vote: Runkel, YES; Rosenthal, Cody, Stromberg, Hyatt, Lemhouse, Moran, Darrow, Amery, Seffinger, Nagel, Slattery, Furuichi, and Morris, NO. Motion failed 13-1. Cody motioned to amend the motion and remove the East Nevada Street Extension from the budget. Motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Hyatt observed the Budget Committee was looking ahead taking into consideration PERS, forecastable economic cycles, and a static population and expectations of that population. There were also regulations, and an infrastructure that needed attention. Some of the solutions suggested tonight were products of trying to do right by the citizenry. She was struggling with the budget. Three weeks reviewing the budget was not enough time to make a decision. She thought Mr. Slattery`s idea was critical. She wanted to know if the motion could be amended to include next steps for the ad hoc committee and the Budget Committee. Mr. Amery added he too struggled with budget. Predominately because he did know the history on some items. He wanted to start planning to build the reserve fund over time to be proactive. Roll Call Vote on main motion: Seffinger, Darrow, Hyatt, Lemhouse, Amery, Slattery, Nagel, Morris, Stromberg, and Rosenthal, YES; Moran, Cody, Runkel, and Furuichi, NO. Motion passed 10-4. Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 10 of 14 DISCUSSION OF FUNDING FOR COUNCIL PRIORITY BUDGET ADD -INS Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to provide a dedicated revenue stream to fund the Affordable Housing Trust Fund using City proceeds from the marijuana tax. DISCUSSION: Mr. Lemhouse commented it was not a solution to affordable housing but was a crucial piece. Mr. Slattery added this was another tool to move forward. It would grow over time. Administrative Services/Finance Director Mark Welch anticipated the City's portion of the tax would be $100,000 for the biennium. Ms. Hyatt clarified the Budget Committee was not allowed to budget funds unless they were available and measurable. City Attorney Dave Lohman explained once the money was available they could do a supplemental budget. The purpose of the discussion was to get Budget Committee input so when it did become available, the Council would have the benefit of the Committee's input. Mr. Lemhouse withdrew the motion. Lemhouse/Darrow m/s the Budget Committee support the Council using City marijuana dedicated revenue steam to fund the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. DISCUSSION: Mr. Amery suggested using only part of the City portion for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and the other portion elsewhere. Ms. Seffinger agreed with Mr. Amery and thought the second portion could go towards building the reserve fund. Stromberg/Slattery m/s to amend the motion to establish a target level of funding up to $100,000 a year of the City's marijuana tax portion. DISCUSSION: Ms. Hyatt was encouraged to know they could revisit the allocation in two years if needed. Mr. Darrow thought there were constraints within the ordinance itself that required matching funds and oversight. If it could not leverage the money for the intended programs, Council could address using the funds in another area. Ms. Seffinger supported the motion, it was important for the community. She thought $100,000 was more than they would receive. Mr. Lemhouse would support the motion. Mr. Amery would support the motion but was concerned on building the reserve fund. Roll Call Vote: Amery, Furuichi, Hyatt, Lemhouse, Moran, Morris, Nagel, Seffinger, Slattery, Stromberg, Rosenthal, and Darrow YES; Cody and Runkel, NO. Motion passed 12-2. Mr. Morris preferred funding the Affordable Housing Trust Fund through another source other than marijuanataxes. Roll Call Vote on amended main motion: Morris, Stromberg, Cody, Darrow, Amery, Lemhouse, Moran, Furuichi, Seffinger, Hyatt, Rosenthal, Slattery, and Nagel, YES; Runkel, NO. Motion passed 13-1. Slattery/Darrow m/s to fund the Climate Energy Action Plan position within the current budget as already approved, having the City Administrator, Mayor, and staff to figure out how to incorporate that position without spending more money in the budget. DISCUSSION: Mr. Slattery wanted a dedicated person to the position and there was enough room within the budget to fund one position at this level. Ms. Darrow would support the motion. The Conservation Commission had programs that already addressed some of the items in CEAP. She wanted a collaboration on the position between the City and the community. Mr. Lemhouse supported the position and the motion. He did not see an alternate revenue stream he felt comfortable using to fund the position. Mr. Rosenthal urged a no vote on the motion. Supporting the motion effected staff three ways. Someone could lose their job to make room for the CEAP position. There was the possibility current staff did not have the expertise required for the position. It could eliminate a pertinent position when someone retired. The right way was finding a new revenue source and not sacrificing another position. Ms. Seffinger noted Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 11 of 14 this was one of the most important issues of our time. She wanted a dedicated revenue stream for the position. She would not support the motion. Mr. Stromberg thought the City needed to create a new position. The meter fee would turn out to be less than a dollar a month per meter. He would not vote against the motion but supported a new position with its own funding. Cody/Seffinger m/s to amend the motion for funding sources for the Climate Energy Action Plan position to come out of the Electric and Water Conservation programs. DISCUSSION: Ms. Cody explained this was a viable funding source. Ms. Seffinger agreed. Mr. Rosenthal raised a point of information and asked Assistant City Administrator Adam Hanks whether this was a viable funding source. Mr. Hanks explained water and electric rates funded both divisions. Diverting funds to the CEAP position would require cuts to either division or rate increases in water or electric. Both programs did CEAP related actions already and he was not sure what they could change to accommodate the new position. Primarily the Energy Conservation Division was energy efficiency, renewable programs, and water efficiency in the Water Master Plan. Ms. Darrow clarified her second to Mr. Slattery's motion. She wanted to find within the budget, programs and other things to put together funding for the position. Mr. Hanks would bring information on what might be lost or gained regarding funding the position and options to a future Council meeting for consideration. Mr. Lohman explained Mr. Slattery's motion would eliminate positions in the Electric Department and Public Works Department in order to have a CEAP position. Ms. Cody's amendment spoke to how it would happen. Mr. Slattery thought his motion was funding the position out of the existing budget and did not think anyone would lose his or her job to fund the position. Mr. Lohman clarified the amendment would take funds out of the conservation programs. Essentially, the only thing in the conservation programs was staff. Mr. Moran thought staff could multitask. Mr. Hanks explained they could not fund a new position using existing funds. The two people in both divisions had full time tasks and more. Staff in these divisions would perform some of the actions in the CEAP because they already did those duties. The CEAP position was beyond what staff in those divisions currently did. Although there was overlap, the current positions could not assume CEAP position duties. They were a function of the plan but the position defined in the plan covered much more. Mr. Morris would not support the amendment or the motion. The CEAP position was not what the conservation people were doing, it was bigger. The CEAP position needed a dedicated funding stream in order for it to be successful. Mr. Slattery agreed the City needed a specialist. He just thought the funding might be available within the current budget. Stromberg/Rosenthal m/s to call for the question. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on the amendment: Runkel, Cody, Moran, Furuichi, and Seffinger, YES; Stromberg, Morris, Amery, Lemhouse, Darrow, Hyatt, Rosenthal, Slattery, and Nagel, NO. Motion failed 9-5. Rosenthal/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion to identify the following funding sources for the Climate Energy Action Plan staff, 50% from the Electric Fund, and 50% the Central Service charges. DISCUSSION: Mr. Rosenthal explained this was the staff recommendation. He thought the intent was finding a way to create the position that did not take from something else and fund it with the most logical non -property tax -funding source. That would be from the Electric Fund and internal charges to all departments. Mr. Lemhouse would support the motion. It would not threaten jobs and the revenue streams identified were possible. However, if it turned out there were problems with this funding, he wanted staff to bring forth an alternative. Ms. Darrow could not support the motion fully. She agreed with 50% coming from Central Service fees but wanted other options instead of using the Electric fund. Mr. Amery Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 12 of 14 questioned why the motion could not have the concerned parties look within the budget to try and fund the position. Ms. Hyatt agreed with Mr. Amery and Ms. Darrow. Mr. Furuichi raised a point of clarification and wanted further details on the funding recommendation. Mr. Rosenthal responded it was in the memo regarding the CEAP position and provided to the Budget Committee as one of two possible funding sources. The second option was raising the property tax. Mr. Amery raised a point of clarification and confirmed the motion would increase fees in the Electric Fund. For the Central Services, staff could take it out of the Ending Fund Balance this year or they could reallocate charges. They would not be able to reallocate all the Central Services charges between now and when Council approved the budget. Mr. Furuichi raised point of clarification to confirm there were Central Services charges to the Electric fund. He thought it was "double dipping." Mr. Hanks clarified only a small portion. Mr. Furuichi commented it would be 50.5% for the Electric Fund due to the Central Services allocation. Stromberg/Seffinger m/s to call for the question. Voice Vote: Amery, Cody, Darrow, Furuichi, Hyatt, Lemhouse, Moran, Morris, Nagel, Runkel, Seffinger, Slattery, and Stromberg, YES; Rosenthal, NO. Motion passed 13-1. Roll Call Vote on the amendment: Morris, Nagel, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Stromberg, YES; Hyatt, Furuichi, Runkel, Moran, Darrow, Amery, Slattery, and Cody, NO. Motion failed 8-6. Roll Call Vote on main motion: Nagel, Runkel, Cody, Amery, Lemhouse, Darrow, Stromberg, Seffinger, Hyatt, Slattery, and Furuichi, YES; Morris, Moran, and Rosenthal, NO. Motion passed 11-3. Morris/Stromberg m/s to add the permit ombudsman using one tenth through the Community Development building permit fee, $20,000-$25,000 from existing Economic Development, and the remaining from Central Service charges to the departments. DISCUSSION: Mr. Morris thought the program was long overdue. They needed the position and it would make the process more effective. He did not think Community Development could fund the position entirely. The economic development portion was appropriate for the position along with the building permit fees. Mr. Stromberg agreed with Mr. Morris. The Community Development fee increase was appropriate. Mr. Lemhouse supported the intent and confirmed raising the one -tenth percent permit fee would increase fees significantly. Ms. Hyatt confirmed with the exception of the permit fee increase, the rest of the funding would be accomplished within the existing budget. Interim City Administrator John Karns explained the methodology was three tiered. He wanted to capture people managed or advantaged by this position. The ombudsman would create a link between the departments affecting development. Development had become complex with many overlays that required a combination of efforts from several departments. It also served as an economic development tool. Mr. Furuichi asked what the performance metrics were for the position. Mr. Karns explained the position would be a communication link between departments. A reporting mechanism would come to Community Development and Administration to check on performance of the departments and developers. The ombudsman would provide outreach for a new inter -governmental software that would allow the public and developers to view the status of their projects. Mr. Furuichi wanted to know what value the position would provide in terms of new permits and revenues. Mr. Karns replied the coordination efforts from the ombudsman would produce increased performance from the departments involved. Mr. Stromberg added the position would improve coordination, and execution. Mr. Moran agreed with Mr. Furuichi and wanted Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 13 of 14 to know the metrics around what the Budget Committee could expect for $110,000 a year. Roll Call Vote: Seffinger, Darrow, Hyatt, Lemhouse, Slattery, Nagel, Morris, Stromberg, Runkel, and Rosenthal, YES; Moran, Amery, Cody, and Furuichi, NO. Motion passed 10-4. BUDGET COMMITTEE COMMENTS Furuichi/Amery m/s to recommend to Council there is a budget meeting scheduled in July to review the 81b quarter financial information year to date actuals compared to the 2015-17 budget and have a summary of actual fund balances at the end of that fiscal period. DISCUSSION: Mr. Furuichi thought regularly scheduled meetings were important and something he wanted to have occur monthly. A quarterly meeting would suffice. Mr. Amery agreed. There was a lot of misunderstanding on what was expected and required. Mr. Lemhouse supported the motion with the caveat there was an understanding that approving the financial report was a function of the Council. Mr. Stromberg raised a point of order and explained the Council decided what the Budget Committee did. Meetings were something the ad hoc committee could determine. Mr. Furuichi raised a point of clarification and explained staff was already working on quarterly financials for the Council, he was not asking for additional work. Mr. Stromberg clarified the Committee did not have the authority to require additional meetings, Council did. Mr. Furuichi reframed his motion as a recommendation to Council and thought regular meetings would eliminate the need for an ad hoc committee. Mr. Slattery disagreed with both Mr. Furuichi and Mr. Stromberg. He did not think the Budget Committee knew the rules of engagement. The current budget process proved that. An ad hoc would sort that out for the Budget Committee. He was fine meeting quarterly or every other quarter. This budget process had not shown good government and the way the committee members were treating each other. Members could not keep from interrupting one another and that was just common decencies that occurred during meetings. The Budget Committee needed to improve how they met. This was important business and needed to be treated that way. City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the Budget Committee did not have authority to set meetings during the off-season after the budget was approved. It was clear in the Department of Revenue Budget Manual. Local budgeting for Oregon from the Department of Revenue explained the governing body might reconvene the Budget Committee in the event the financial conditions of the district changed at the discretion of the governing body. Some of the Committee members' terms would lapse between now and the next biennium. This Budget Committee finished its work when it adopted the budget. Council could decide to call back the members but the members were not automatically members anymore. The motion was invalid because it conflicted with budget law. Darrow/Seffinger m/s to raise the property tax the remaining 9 cents to the assessed value, raising approximately $222,000 annually as a start to funding the commitment to funding the police officers. DISCUSSION: Ms. Darrow thought it was important to fund the officers. She was not in favor of raising utility rates and this was a valid way to get started on funding the police positions. That Ashland was a quiet town of over 20,000 people was a ridiculous notion. Up to 400,000 people came to Ashland annually and it stressed public safety and city infrastructure. Ms. Seffinger explained there were many reasons to add police staff. One was the prevention of crime. Job responsibilities were increasing. Police now had to deal with mental health issues. Police safety was an issue. The police were crucial in disaster events. Crime had also increased. Mr. Lemhouse would not support raising the property tax. He supported the additional staff and thought it would fall to the Council to find ways to fund the positions. It would take time to hire five police officers and it may occur incrementally. Mr. Furuichi supported the Budget Committee Meeting June 5, 2017 Page 14 of 14 additional positions. He had proposed several options to fund them that were unsuccessful. He would not support the property tax increase and encouraged Council to look at his ideas. Mr. Morris added other options included using the state portion of the marijuana tax, or funds from the call center if it went to a separate district. Council had time to determine funding. He went on to comment on the Budget Committee discussing what to fund. The budget process was not determining who was over paid. It was an investment in the community. It was something that should continue. Throughout the meetings, he often heard references on how other cities managed their budget process and it frustrated him. If someone wanted to do things the way another city did they should move back there. Yet no one wanted to go back so there must be a reason. Mr. Amery agreed with Mr. Morris and Mr. Lemhouse. He supported more officers but was concerned on limited funds. The City could not keep spending. He wanted to allocate funding for two officers for now, create a plan and reserve funds and in two to three years add more. Mr. Lohman noted if the motion passed it would be at odds with the earlier motion to approve the budget and set a tax rate. The Council could resolve it subsequently. Mr. Runkel explained this was why he had wanted to change the agenda. Mr. Runkel wanted to the revise the motion. Mr. Slattery commented changing the motion was not necessary at this time. Presently, there was a motion to fund the police officers using nine cents in the property tax. If that passed, they could make another the motion. Mr. Runkel questioned doing two motions when one could cover both. Stromberg/Seffinger called for the question. Vote by show of hands: Amery, Cody, Darrow, Hyatt, Lemhouse, Moran, Nagel, Rosenthal, Runkel, Seffinger, Slattery, and Stromberg, YES; Furuichi and Morris, NO. Motion passed 12-2. Roll Call Vote on main motion: Darrow, Morris, Stromberg, Rosenthal, and Seffinger, YES. Runkel, Lemhouse, Cody, Slattery, Furuichi, Hyatt, Nagel, Amery, and Moran, NO. Motion failed 9-5. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder CITY OF ASH LAN D Budget Committee Meeting #4 Agenda June 6, 2017 at 6:00prn Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street Call to Order a. Roll call IL Public Input Public comments on the 2017/19 biennial budget 111. Old Business Discussion on material provided pursuant to the Budget Committee action on May 25, 2017 IV. Motion to Approve the 2017-19 Biennial Budget & Levy Tax "/ move to approve the City of Ashland 2017-19 biennial budget [as revised] and recommend the budget to the City Council for adoption, approve the property tax levy in the amount of — [up to $4.2865] per $1000 of assessed value for fiscal year 2017-18 and fiscal 2018-19 respectively, approve property taxes for the payment of general obligation principal and interest bonded debt in the total of $515,309 for fiscal year 2017-18, and $514,499 for fiscal year 2018-19. (if budget has been revised, then "as revised" should be added to motion) V. Discussion of Funding for Council Priority Budget Add -ins V1. Budget Committee Comments Vil. Meeting Adiourned In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35,102-35.104 ADA Title 1). A ■ / d a a / ■ Title: Discussion of Funding for Council Priority Budget Add -ins From: John Karns Interim City Administrator John. karns@ashland.or. us Prior to the start of the 2017-19 biennial budget process, Council held three special meetings to discuss, deliberate and agree on its priority items for additional funding through the budget process. The following "key decisions" summary provides the Budget Committee with a summary of the four approved Council priorities and the funding options identified during the Council special meetings. The available funding strategies for these prioritized items include: • Utilize the unused available property tax rate of $.09/1000, yielding approximately $220,000 annually • Water meter fee, electric meter fee, or combination of water and electric meter fees yielding approximately $565,000 annually • State marijuana tax (unknown but likely $40,000 to $60,000 for first year) • City marijuana tax (unknown but likely $30,000 annually) Because the Budget Committee has the legal responsibility to set the property tax rate, all Council priorities list the nine cents of available property tax rate as the first potential funding source. Should the committee vote not to increase the property tax rate, alternative funding source options are provided to assist the committee in offering recommendations to the Council as the approval and implementation of those alternative funding sources resides outside of the budget approval process. Key Decisions: Police Staffing • Does the committee wish to apply the available property tax increase ($220,000/yr), or a portion thereof, to fund a portion the five police officer positions approved by Council ($550,000/yr)? • Or, does the committee wish to recommend the use of a Public Safety Support Fee charged on each customer's utility bill to fund the five new police officers approved by Council? o Customer accounts with water meter only - $3.00/month AND o Customer accounts with electric meter only - $1.75/month OR o Customer accounts with both electric and water meters - $4.75/month *With current utility account statistics, total revenue from this fee generates approximately $565, 000 CEAP Staff Pagel of 3 CITY OF -ASHLAND2 Does the committee wish to apply a portion of the available property tax increase ($220,000/yr) to fund the proposed Climate and Energy Action Plan new staff position at a cost of $105,000 /yr? Or, does the committee wish to fund the Climate and Energy Action Plan new staff position through the following schedule? o .5 from the Electric Fund (Electric Rates) o .5 from Central Service Charges (Internal charges to all Departments) Permit Ombudsperson • Does the committee wish to fund the Permit Ombudsperson through a portion of the available property tax increase? • Or, does the committee wish to fund the Permit Ombudsperson ($11 0,000/yr) through the following schedule? o On -tenth of a percent increase in the Comm Dev building permit fee producing $30,000 (approx.) o $20,000 to $25,000 from the existing $150,000 Economic Development Program budget (unrestricted TOT funds) o Remaining expense allocated through central service charges to the other Depts/Divisions (.40 to .50 FTE to CS-Admin) Rebuild Reserve Fund • Does the committee wish to fund the Reserve Fund through a portion of the available property tax increase? • Or, does the committee wish to recommend rebuilding the reserve fund with all or some of the local 3% portion of the total annual marijuana tax revenues? Tax disbursements from the State will likely not start until August or September of 2017, and the amount is not yet known. The state portion of the total annual marijuana tax revenue is restricted to funding law enforcement activities, but the local portion carries no restrictions. Suggested Next Step: As the formal body that determines the property tax rate for the City, the Budget Committee will need to decide whether to increase the property tax rate above the current level of $4.1972 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation to any approved amount up to but not exceeding the maximum total tax rate of $4.2865. Additionally, the Budget Committee can provide guidance and recommendation to Council regarding other potential funding mechanisms for the four Council prioritized add -ins. Potential template for property tax related motions: I move to increase the property tax rate by cents to provide funding for Background and Additional Information: At a Council Special Meeting on May 4 the Council approved the top four add -ins as Council priorities and moved to discuss funding mechanisms at subsequent Budget Committee meetings. • Police staffing (5 FTE) had previously been approved by Council at a business meeting on April 18, 2017. Page 2 of 3 CITY OF -AS HLAN D3 • CEAP staffing (I FTE) is a "Year One" implementation priority in the CEAP master document approved by Council on March 7, 2017. • The Permit Ombudsperson (I FTE) is the result of significant public and development sector customer dialogue with the Community Development Department and City Administration and is a restoration of a position eliminated in 2008-09, • The Reserve Fund was originally established by Council via resolution (Reso 2010-18) on June 15, 2010. Attachments: N/A Page 3 of 3 CITY OF -ASHLAND4 CITY OF ASHLAND -UT M 01 DATE: June 2, 2017 TO: City of Ashland Budget Committee FROM: Mark Welch, Administrative Services/Finance Director At the May 25th Budget Committee Meeting members agreed to send all remaining BN 2017/19 to myself before May 30th Close of Business. I received several pages of questions and have attached the responses to each questions. The questions fall into three major categories: 1. BN 2017/19 Budget Clarification/Additional material request 2. Management/Operational Questions 3. City Council Policy Direction All BN 2017/19 Budget Clarification/Additional material request have been answered and backup material provided. The Management/Operational questions have been answered to the extent that they relate to the current BN 2017/19 Budget. Any question that requires City Council policy direction is stated as such. The City Staff cannot answer potential policy discussion of the City Council. Please review the questions and answers prior to the June 5th Budget Committee Meeting FINANCE DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5300 Mark Welch, Director Fax: 541488-5311 20 East Main Street TTY: 800-735-2900 PFF441A Ashland, Oregon 97520 wwashland.orms BN 2017/19 Budget Committee Questions Chair 1. The proposed 2017-19 general fund budget is balanced as a result of a nearly $500,000 increase in water and electric franchise fees, which are payments by these utilities to the general fund. The budget also includes $40[i0UOinadditional parking fees and fines and another nearly $5U[\O00infire and rescue charges. The increase inwater/ranchiscis due to the reinstatement of the franchise fee from 6% to 8%. The electric franchise fee increase due to an increase in consumption (and proposed rate increases). Franchise Fees are based ongross revenue. What other new or increased tax rates, fees or charges are built into the budget as proposed? The utilities have built their new rate structures into the budget. Please provide details on the current year Charges for Services and the proposed budget,Page l-Z2and Page 3-2under Charges for Services, for JU27-19which grows from $Il2,6D5i65Oto $122,206,928? Please see attachment 1 3. Does the citvycontract with Bonneville Power allow and ifsotowhat degree, the income from electric use charges tobeused for non -utility purposes? |sthere federal law or regulations on this subject? There isnolonger urestriction /nthe BP4contract. There are nufedero/statutes regarding the transfer of utility income out of the utility to the City. We are awaiting legal review and opinion ofstate statutes. ]. What are the chv'sbad debt experiences, which appears tobegrowing? Various pages inthe misc. charges and fees document. Please see attachment 22for odetail of the City'sbad debt experience since FY 2014mnd current BNPrcjection. 4. Is the Airport Master Plan, Pages 58 and 86, $300,000 or $150,000? What is the goal? Airport /sosystematic process used toestablish guidelines for the efficient ia airport planning is to assure the effective use of airport resources in order to satisfy aviation demand in ofinanciallyfeasible manner. What this means for our airport isoninventory of existing conditions, development of current ondfutureoviation demondonsite, development ofnoise contours based on current service levels andfuture service level and general environmental review. In addition, the plan looks ''nirpo/t/oyoutp/on''ALPmh/th/nox/nizesthecffic/entuseofthes/&yhorhongordeve/opnnent and day to day operations to meet the current ondfuture aviation demands. This leads to a capital improvement plan for the facility and discussion on funding the capital projects within the planning window. The capital plan details the general maintenance required to keep the airport operating and also expansions required as the airport grows. The master plan also helps the City ensure FAA compliance with respect togront/und/ngcqp/to/pro/ectsons/te. The current master plan is online and can be viewed here: 5. Why is the Police Department contracting with Charter for Cable TV, Pages 48 and 75? In the post PDsgotfree cable. That changed ofew years ago and Charter started charging us The basic oblehrom charter is less costly than thcbGsic0rom Ashland Home Net Sal AmerV Fire & Rescue annualized costs please What is the cost of running the ambulance service on its own? (please breakdown the FTE's required per shift, per truck per night, amount of overtime, etc) [Page 2-47] a. What isthe cost ofrunning the fire department onits own? (please breakdown the FTE's required per shift, per truck per night, amount of overtime, etc) b. What if any overlap are there between the two? (i.e., what if any savings does the city make assuming the two are run asthey are currently, keeping inmind that each has its own licensing requirements and FTE needs per night, per truck, An evaluation offire department services and the relationship with running a transporting ambulance /sonimportant discussion but should occur outside ofthe current budget process /f Council so chooses. c. What is the net revenue/cost of running the ambulance service to the city on its own, taking into consideration the revenues generated from the service? d. What is the net revenues of the ambulance service? (actual collected funds please, if there is a portion that is billed but not collected what is that amount and how can the city recognize these funds and what is the likelihood of that occurring?) �� e. What would bethe savings ifany, reductions inFTEcost ofspace, truck leases etc, ifthe ambulance service was not part ofthe cities cost t How would these savings, if any affect the running of the fire department, regarding FTE,space, support etc It is important to keep inmind that the fire departmentwill continue to respond to medical emergencies whether vvehove onambulance service ornot. Italso important torealize that the department will still need at least 27firefighters to handle calls generated within the City of Ashland. Giving upthe ambulance service could result insavings due to elimination of ambulance replacement and maintenance cost, EMS billing cost, bad debt expense, medical supplies, and elimination of three FTEs. Consequently, giving up the ambulance service would result in a significant loss ofrevenue. Again, part ofomuch larger discussion. g. A question was asked of the fire department regarding the need for additional FTE's and whether or not the overtime funds would once again be used as back door way of hiring additional staff. No clear answer was given. I would personally feel better if we could have this on the table if additional staff is necessary, now rather than later, could you please clarify? At this point in time, the deportment has no intention of adding additional FTEs during the budget biennium. All overtime funds are sloted to be used to maintain daily minimum staffing levels and cover the cost of deportment programs requiring firefighters to be hired back on their off -duty days. That being said, thefire deportmenthas been presenting data for years that indicates the need for additional stoff./1isour current goal tnreach u9112staffing model (currently ut8/10/.fy12 staffinq would dramatically change our response model and allow the department tufield uthird ambulance on a routine basis. We have also identified the needfor a Deputy Fire Marshall and hope toodd that position /nthe future. Soyes, // given the opportunity tnhire additional FTls (recognizing that a funding mechanism would have to be identified) the department would certainly take it. I. AFN I have heard a few different numbers regarding AFN and would like your a. Operational cost of AFN, FTE, space, hardware, etc, per year? 20 b. Revenue generated byend nf7mquarter and what the projections aneasof today for the full period, annualized? 7thquarter chorgey6orservices $3,532,2S3, Year-end charges for services projection $4058,38% c. What additional costs, marketing, 3,d party studies etc are budgeted for, if any? 2017119 marketing budget $70,000 per year d. What is the breakeven number of household contracts required, at what rate, to pay for the operational cost ofAFNa5Oftoday, expast debt? — AFN and its ISPs currently serve approximately 4,000 residences & businesses which covers the current operational costs and pays $409,000 annually towards the debt. f. What iythe above assumption, toinclude the debt service of($4O9k)| understand to be AFN's commitment per year? If this is incorrect, what is their share and what if any principal is included in this payment? The total debt payment is roughly $1.2million oyear. ARV portion b$4O9000 Please see attachment 2for details. g. What iSthe overall debt outstanding due topast AFNexpenditure, | have heard figures ranging from $9mm to $12mm? The current balance /s$91million. h. What is the interest due on this debt and which parties are sharing in its burden? The interest rate is 2 to 2.8% i What is the expected time line to pay this debt nff, at what amount of interest paid during this time period? (cash number please) The debt will bepaid off on 81112024 with ototal interest for the refinanced debt of 8. Health Care Plan Cost [Page l-7] a. What impact, if any, is the current arrangement of rolling the loan amount of $525khave onthe funds ability tobuild critical mass and why? C� �� Currently the City of Ashland Health Plan is finishing the year at a 68% loss -ratio compared to 90% at the some time lost year. Unless something significant happens before June 30th, we ore on track to have a "good" year in terms of claims. If the loon were forgiven, we could end the year with head start on building adequate reserves. Although our health core advisors performed on analysis and recommended a minimum of $500K in reserves, the Employee Health Benefits Advisory Committee (EHBAC) believes $1 million or even $1.2 million is more appropriate given our size and potential for claim volatility. As of April 30th the City's Health Benefit Fund had a balance of $280,730. If you remove the $525,000 loan balance the fund would have a negative $244,270 position. The plan was started with a loan to build a reserve. In retrospect it may have been better to have startup costs transferred to the fund to ensure the long term financial viability of the plan. The City in 2013 saved over $400,000 by switching to a self -funded plan. The loan forgiveness would allow for better financial practices and ensure the long term viability of the fund. The employee bargaining groups recently agreed to increase the employee shore of their health premiums to help the financial stability of the fund. b. Why is the figure on page 1-7 ($525k) different to the amount on page 3-51 ($650k) The Loan was for $900,000 and the City repaid $250, 000 in BN 2013115for a balance of $650,000. Then the fund borrowed another $200,000 so the new balance would be $850,000 and paid back $325,000for the loan balance of $525,000. Attachment 3 shows the fund balance as of April 30th. If there is a monetary negative impact on the fund to roll the $525k in and out of the fund, as is the current form, what other options can we have, from a legal and regulatory perspective, such as a term forgiveness of say 3 or 5 years before the funds come for deliberation again, does the city have? When the City initially went self -insured, we didn't budget for worse -case scenario, and unfortunately our first year we experienced a $2 million dollar claim and higher than anticipated utilization of the plan. A bad year can haunt a plan for a few years when getting bids for TPA services and for specific and aggrego te stop loss coverage. So our administrative costs have run higher than expected due to the "bad" year. Unfortunately, our first few years we were struggling to budget adequately due to starting off underfunded. EHBAC has worked hard to understand the funding issues of the plan. The committee took immediate action to increase the amount we charge employees and modified the plan design to reduce costs. The fund would be a negative position without the current loan. If the loan is not forgiven, it could take several years to have a strong fund balance to address high claim years. As mentioned above the employees of the City have stepped up to address the I problem. If the loan stays in place the budget will increase in revenue and expenditures to accountfor the loan. /f/nthe long run the City begins to experience more positive years, and hove o healthy fund balance, then the contributions to the fund could be reduced thus providing odditiono//undsfor the City. d. What can the city do to reduce the overall impact of the health insurance costs, as bringing it internal was supposed to save money, not cost the city more than it was spending before? How much would we save if we went to 3,d parties to get health insurance? Health insurance bnutjustoCity of Ashland problem, employers and individuals all over the nation are grapplingwith this issue. People are living longer and healthier lives due to advances in medicine, marketing of pharmaceuticals has increased demandfor designer drugs, medical malpractice insurance, the Affordable Core Act (ObonnoCore) did increase the number of Americans with coverage, extended the coverage for dependents through age 26 which meant that many more covered lives were included in the City's health care costs but it also required that a// plans include certain benefits which increased the costforo/L Becoming self -insured has soved the City money over being fully -insured, just not as much osm/ethought initially. The City ofAshland had been apart ufthe City County Insurance pou/forhealth benefits for 20+years. After leaving the pool, their rates continued between 3-22%every year. Our increases have been less during that some period osoself-insured employer. Asmentioned previously, EH&4[ismaking changes that will shift more ufthe cost burden onto the employees. N/ealso have constraints vve have to work within due to collective bargaining contracts, so the issue is very complex. 4. E.NavadaBridge [Page 1-1O] a. Budgeted costs of$O,494,4OOare assumed for this project, vvithexpectedgrants of$]rnmo, where is the remainder coming from? Reference page 1-2Ofnrthe project cost breakdown between SDCs,grants andfees and Questions bthrough fare Council policy issues. The Council is currently scheduled to discuss the merits of the Nevada St. bridge connection project at the June 20th meeting. This discussion will include the Transportation Commission's recommendation and a// dotclstudiescollected todate. b. What isthe expectation that this project miUoon1eOnbudg2t taking into consideration the 96Ofprevious projects conlinginontargetand1irne? c. What was the transportations commissions' opinion on this project? d. What was the citizen's vote onthis project? e. What ifany impact does this bridge have onreducing the congestion inthe town, and what study was done 10show this? f. What other studies were done tomotivate the building ofthis bridge? g. |fthe bridge isnot built, what can hedone with the funds? Loans won't be appliedfor or acted upon, grants will not be occeptedlacted upon so no project specific outside funds will come tothe City. Transportation SQC'swill beutilized on other eligible transportation projects S. Reserve Fund a. What is the current size of any reserve fund, broken down by department to include any restrictions of each fund? The reserve fund is described inattachment J3. Please see attachment 4for the breakdown ofFund Balance showing the amount restricted and not restricted. The City has one rezervefund(Page 3-10and 3- 2/wdhocur/entbokznceof$26362 The discussion on potential reserve fund increases will be part of the June 6th Budget Committee meeting. b. What amount of funds are to be reserved to any fund for the next Biennium, to include any restrictions? (I'm assuming when these funds are set up, they are done so with the most amount of latitude possible to allow for future changes in the cities planning and development? Unrestricted funds con bemsedfor any purpose in thotfundThe restrictedfundsmust beusedforthe specific purpose for which they were collected. c What isthe expected projects aroundvvhid11hecitvhassctupreservefunds and planned ahead? The reservehundbdescribed in Attachment 13. The endingfund balance, more specifically in the enterprise funds, do collectfunds to payfor capital projects. An example would be the woterfund and the water treatment plan project. 6. Markets and future planning 8. What studies, i{any, has the city done tostudy the impact ofrecessionary market events and the impact on the city of Ashland? (a 10% or 20% correction to the stock market, a drop in tourism due to recessionary forces, reduction to city revenues ofx%etc) Can you please share with the budget committee b. What matrix does the city use when looking at past years performance tostudy the efficiency of departments, how they could do better, what they could change or add to to help future years be more productive while spending less? (such as on CIP projects, what % of projects are finished on time and on budget, what % go over time and budget, and by what amount, where are the shortfalls, etc) How can we share this information with the budget committee to help better understand what was done in the previous years when monies were allocated, and what will change in the coming years to better address any hurdles or shortfalls in performance? Planning for the future is an important task for the City to undertake. The long term financial pion needs to be updated and requires a great deal of analysis to complete. The Finance Department is committed to creating a strong financial plan that can address the impacts of future recessionary forces and analyze the impacts that they City has experienced in the post recessionary periods. Performance matrix can always be improved and refined to improve their use as a management tool. Once the long range financial plan is created it will be shared with budget committee. Any long term financial plan will utilize assumptions that are always worthy of review and refinement to ensure the most accurate model. Garrett Furuichi Item Page Questions General Questions from Citizens 1 1-9 What are property tax assumptions? Shows taxes at $4.3888, Motion approves $4.2865? The highest allowable rote is $4.2865 the $4.3888 was a typo and will be updated. 2 What were the final Actual Salaries of all Ashland City employees what retired between 2012 and 2017? W This is not on item that has any impact on the BN 2017119 Budget. This would be a public records request if the information is needed. 3 CIP rates and fees, where do they come from? Do we pay them now or are they levied on us once the project is authorized. Do citizens have a vote? The revenue comes from the Deportment revenues that relate to the project, i.e. water line replacement would have rates and fees from the Water Fund/water rote revenue. Rates are designed based on the long range infrastructure project lists in the master plans and ore collected in advance of the project and are used along with any other available funding source (grants, SDC's) to either directly apply to the project or pay the annual debt service on any associated loans obtained for the project The CIP rates and Fees are only spent when the project is authorized. The revenue is presented on pages 1-10. The only public vote would be for General Obligation bonds. 4 What is a Transportation SDC and where do I find it in the budget? Water SDC? What is the source? System Development Charges. All SDCs are fees calculated and collected through the development/building permit process by those adding to the use of City infrastructure (Water, Wastewater, Parks, Storm Drain and Transportation). They are found in the fund balance sheets and Transportation is in the Street Fund 3-12 or 2-63. Water 3-28 or 2-83. 5 Central Services fund has a $1.667 million "Operating Transfer In" and significant increase in Administrative Services. Has this been explained to you? Facility use fees are paid into the Capital Improvement (CIP)fund by each deportment each year. Upon creation of the budget, it was determined that the Central Service fund would need to charge each department higher than anticipated fees to balance the fund, $1.667 million was budgeted as a transfer from the Capitol Improvement fund ending fund balance to the Central Service fund to lessen the amount that departments would have needed to pay for Central Service charges. The movement in Administrative Services was explained at the 5111 meeting. 6 Restricted funds do not appear, over stating Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance. Where are they, please see page 4-10in BN15-17. This item has been added and can be found in the attachment 4 7 Working capital carry forward dropping into large negative territory, with projections of huge tax, fines, etc. I'd like to see practical realistic future projection. 14 The longer term future projections are based on a generalization of future increases. The long term financial plan will be updated in the near future and analyze future forecast in more details. A strong financial plan will take months to develop. 8 Looking at cash reserves the funds appear to go negative driven by expenses, it would be prudent to start dealing with this problem now. What is the plan? Same as above. The PERS increases remain a long term challenge to the City and the cost of business increases each year. The City will continue to track the actual performance and adjust as needed. The long term financial plan will be developed to help address these issues and can be provided far reference once complete to the Budget Committee. 9 What is the present value of the fully loaded compensation for one Full Time equivalent? This information was provided in the May 25th pocket Position Costing details. The total compensation can be found for every City position. 10 1-21 What is the cause of increase in Administration from $2.4 million to $20.6 in BN17-19?. The increase reflected in the question can be partially explained by the change from a 1 year fiscal year to a 2 year biennium. The other large changes are the inclusion of Health benefits fund, electric conservation, econ devltourism grants, parking in the Administration Budget that were previously in other of the budget ----areas 11 1-21 Same Question for Administrative Services and Administrative Services — Non Operating? Please see attachment 5 for more details. 12 1-21 Public works is on a tear increasing from $22.1 million to $116.6 Million? Is this all capital projects, can the city separate Operations from Capital Projects? Refer to the corrected budget page 2-58 which you received on May 25, 2017. The biennium shows the total Public Works budget as $106,373,570. FY 12113 was a single year budget and thus shouldn't be compared to a biennium budget. You are correct, a majority of the increase is from capital projects as outlined in the adopted master plans. 13 1-22 How and why do we see an increase in fine and forfeitures? From $410k to $857? Parking fines were moved to the General Fund that were being used to pay for the parking structure debt in previous years. W 14 Is there a Bond debt ceiling? Yes. Please see attachment 12 Summary 1-3 Any position reclassifications? Why? Any reclassifications have been added to the Proposed BN 2017119 Budget. 15 Future reclassifications would fall under the City Charter that allows the City Administrator to make reclassifications based on the current position duties. The Budget does not include any potential reclassifications since none are know at this time. If reclassifications need additional funding, the reclassification would be brought to the City Council far direction. 1-6 CLEP no FTE not in budget how to pay for expense? 16 The CEAP position is not included in the proposed BN 2017119 Budget but will be a discussion item at the June 5th Budget Committee Meeting. 1-7 PERS, only states the change what is the total PERS expense? Forecast? Overall, rates increased 20% to 24%6from PERS for a total increase of $2.2 million for this biennium. Of that amount, the portion due to employee cost 17 increase was $439,500, approximately 20% of the $2.2 million. The other 80%, $1.76 million was due to the rate increase (that pays for the overall system cost, not costs associated with currently City staff). Please see attachment 6 for more details on post PERS payment along with projected future payments. 1-7 Forgivable loan? What is the impact on General Fund Balance? 18 The Loan is currently built into the Proposed Budget as being forgiven. If the Loan is not forgiven it will show up as a revenue and expense to the reserve fund and have no impact on the ending fund balance. 1-8 The City does not generate $23.9 million and the current ad valorem tax is not $4.3888 to the General Fund. a. Current authorized is $10,649,903 (Table 4a SAL, prepared 10/3/2016) b. If 95% is realized = $10,117,407 or $20,234,814 19 c. Shortfall of $3,665,186 d. What is impact on Fund Balance? With Restricted Funds? The City used a 3.4% growth rate on the assessed valuation certified from Jackson County as shown in attachment 7. The proposed budget does not include any additional revenue above the 4.1972 tax rate and a 95% collection rote. The last year of the BN includes a 3.5% growth in assessed valuations. ire State low allows current properties to increase by 3% each year. The amount above 3% would be from new construction and housing sales (increased assessed values). It is staffs opinion that 3.4% and 3.5% are not overly -aggressive. Revenues please explain forecast and budget increases BN17-19? Please see page 3-5. See attachment 10 1-8 a. Property taxes increase $1.7 million - 9.02% Calculated using the assessed value provided by Jackson County increased for growth less the 5% uncollectible based on previous history. b. Electrical User tax increase $592,471 - 9.9% associated with proposed electric rate increase c. Franchises increase $713,690 — 11.22% Primarily relates to Water Fund increase (restoration from 2010) in franchise fee payment to General Fund, also associated increase in Electric franchise fee due to rate increases. 20 d. Hotel/motel increase $651,090 — 12.4% Based on historical projections and forecast of existing and new lodging units coming online e. Where is food and beverage? Shown in Street Fund resources (pg 3-13), Wastewater Fund resources (pg 3- 35), and Parks Capital Improvement Fund resources (pg3-59) f. Fire and Rescue increase $480,650 Primary increase is in Ambulance Revenue which was explained during the Fire Deportment presentation. Please see attachment 8for a detailed breakdown of the ambulance revenue. The projections are for a small increase over estimated year end. 1-22 Charges for service increase to $122 million please provide forecast spreadsheet? 21 This information is presented on page 3-5 on the budget. Please see the attachment 1 Munis details for a breakdown of each Charge far Service. 1-24 BN17-19 projected $1.1 million in uncollected, why so high? 22 The $1.1 is the calculation on Jackson County not collecting 5yo of the total Property Tax revenue. This is a 2 year calculation. 1-27 Why new wastewater debt of $1.8 million after voter approved reallocation of F&B? 23 The food and beverage tax allocation to debt service was to pay off the existing wastewater treatment plant upgrade loan which will be paid off in FY 2023. The proposed new debt in the budget is earmarked for regulatory capital projects as outlined in the adopted wastewater master plan. Administration 24 2-3 BN 15 - 17 Approved budget is $18,749,461 we approved $16,427,260 a. Personnel Service increased $100,200, please provide details? This is primarily the unanticipated final payout to the previous City Administrator. b. Material and Supplies increased $2,221,898 please provide details? Management determination on potential move from Asst City Attorney as contract to hired FTE. Net neutral to budget 25 2-3 Where are resources? Please see any Program section for BN15-17. No resources by program. Resources are found in Resources -General Fund pg 3-4. Remoinder are internal central service fees based on matrix of services by Dept/Div 26 2-3 BN 17 - 19 Additional expenses over BN15-17 please explain. See question #24 a. PS increase $90,998 = 5.1%, any position change % increase is actually 2.3% - PERSIHeolth care increases for the 14.07 FTE b. MS increase another $1,805,835 = 12.15% 27 2-3 In 4 years the budget has increased at a very aggressive rate, what is reason? a. PS Budget increase $191,198 = 5.1% PERSIHeolth care increases, step increases, reclassifications and retirement costs b. MS $4,027,721 = 31.87% Primarily due to move of health benefits into Administration from Administrative Services 28 2-7 Metrics for Economic Development, pgs. 2 — 7 a. What are contracted service for? 9RO-1 • Includes partnership projects with SOREDI, Chamber, internal direct projects (Econ strategy for airport, pre -development assessments, etc) b. What are the accomplishments? Business workshops, healthcare industry conference, enterprise zonele- commerce activity, etc. All work driven by Economic Development Strategy adopted by Council in July 2011. 29 2-7 Source of RVTV funding — where do I find it? Cable TVfranchise fees and related PEG fees (pg. 3-4) 30 2-8 Parking Program — Resources? Parking fines and paid parking revenue. Please see attachment 9 31 2­11 Contractual Service going from $75K to $180,000 — BN15-17 is $105,000 not $75,000. Additional budget for three exec level recruitments and citywide mgmt. training 32 2-2 Any vacancies or position reclassifications? Asst. City Administrator currently unfunded. Three reclassifications in BN15-17. None proposed at this time for BN1 7-19 33 2­3 Which programs are general fund? All Division/Program budgets have fund listed in titles on charts 34 2-3 Which programs are Central Series Fund? All Division/Program budgets have fund listed in titles on charts 35 2-13 Total Resources —$357,437 —Total cost $944,095. Impact of transfer to County court system? Policy decision of Council. Not proposed in this budget 36 2-15 How many FTE's? Vacancies? Contractual Services - $300,000 ? Management determination on potential move from Asst City Attorney as contract to hired FTE. Net neutral to budget 37 2-16 Resources? How many FTE's? Vacancies? Performance Metrics? Resources = $250,000 from BPA for Employee and loan repayment, remaining $500,000from Electric Rates. 2.40 FTE. No vacancies Administrative Services 38 2-24 Any vacancies or reclassifications? What was FTE classification --comparison BN15-17 to BN17-19? im No 39 2-25 What are the resources? Not shown by program. please refer to BN15- 17 page 3-36 Please refer to attachment 9 40 How much did the Central Services fund increase between BN15-17 and BN17-19? This can be found on page 3-47 41 2-25 What is included in Capital Outlay, no details present, total of $2,571,545? Primarily SDC/Porks Open Space (pg 2-23) In the Accounting Division, $196,905 is the remainder of the Munis software conversion. In the Insurance Division, $480,000 is for key lock system and restoration 42 2-25 Is the $500,000 Financial Software package included? Please provide details. Only $196,905 included to finish the project. Can be found on page 2-30. 43 2-25 Any Tyler Munis purchase cost above the $213,489 licensing fees? No. 44 2-25 Parks increase from $9,560,000 to $10,601,000 at 10.8 percent increase, what is this for? This is the amount of the 209 Property Tax to is received by the City and then transferred to the Parks Department, which equals $10,601,000 Information Technology 46 2-19 What are the program resources? How much in Central Service Charges? How much revenue? There ore two divisions in the Information Technology Department: Information Systems Division: a. Information Systems Division is funded entirely from the Central Services Fund. b. Information Systems Division does not pay into Central Services. c. No revenue sources other than Central Service Fund. Telecommunications Division (AFN): Budgeted resources are from Charges for Services, Interest on Investments all Central Service Fees are $490,267 per year The forecasted revenue is as follows: FY2017118 $2,141,010, FY2018119 $2,198,145 47 2-23 Where is AFN in this budget? 2-23: Telecommunications Davison. AFN Is the commercial name for Information Technology Deportment, Telecommunications Division. 48 2-23 Where is AFN debt service? Please refer to attachment 2, the shows the debt schedule along with the allocation between funds. 49 2-23 With Debt Service how much surplus revenue is generated? While revenues do exceed expenses, the available funds exceeding our costs ore used to provide required contingencies, to provide far afund ending balance sufficient to deal with emergencies and to provide for the timing of capital projects. 50 2-23 605 Contractual Services is over $1 million per year. What is the detail? Contractual services are $11,000. Misc charges and fees are over $1 million. Misc charges and fees include central service charges, equipment costs (bucket trucks, etc) and other overhead costs described on A-25. 604 Contractual Services are $11, 000 605 Misc. Charges & Fees are $1,046,277 made up of.- 605810 Central Service Fee — $490,267 605811 Insurance Services - $6,180 605812 Tech Debt - $409,000 605813 Facility Use - $55,620 605814 Fleet Maint - $26,310 605815 Equip Replacement — 20, 000 605400 Bad Debt Expense — 1, 750 605700 Licensing - $37,100 Police Department 51 2-40 What are the resources? These are provided as attachment 9 From Showing 37.25Ftes Attachment 2015-17 budget for personal services = $9,861K 21 2017'I9budver=$11,167K a13%increase. This isnot assignificant asitshould begiven they are adding 5people. either earlier budget istoo high (check against actual which |dunot have) orbudget for this biennium iatoo low. Given PER5,health care and Sguys itshould bemore. The 5additional people hove not been added into the proposed budget. The proposed budget isforcurrent staffing levels, with funding for the Snew tobe worked out yet. Misc. charges and fees /$1.6M\ are high but there are no contractual services $.VVhy? /don't know where the 16Mcomes from, / see 12A0for operations nnbc charges ondfcecThis isupbpcousefleetmaintenance were nnovedhnnnline 602 to 605, to this is up, just as line 602 is down a similar amount. 6O2rental repair and maintenance isway down $221Kprojected vs. $613|ast budget and $52Okactual, previously. See above Fire and Rescue These are provided as attachment 9 From Questions: Attachment 17-19budget ismissing: Where are comparative performance metrics? The currentfire chieffeels that post performance metrics did not speak to the department's mission ofsaving lives, reducing property damage and protecting the environment. Therefore, performance measures have been altered. Did the Department achieve the metrics, in8N15-l7? The department accomplishedmost ufthe goals ithod established. No revenue sources —where is the detail of resources? Page 3-5. '�"� ���� Where is detail on personnel Services? Fire department detail was handed out tubudget committee members. Budget represents $338,945per FTE?this isfor biennium not per year. Only $169M/yr. /bfire departments must remain open 74/7/268hours oweek vs. o4Ohour o week business) w/e0nditmore cost efficient tohove fewer employees and work then//uro/onge/periodo/time. Consequently, firefighters vvork2754hours o year compared to 2080 hours (typical 40 hour employee) a year which results in somewhat higher yearly compensation (and thus, a total benefits package). |sthere built inovertime? How much? Enough tofund 3FTE Total overtime budget this 8Nb$646000,o25%reduction from the previous Where is actual revenues and expenditures for 15-17? Please see attachment 9 How can you make decisions without this information? Management staff receives and analyzes financial reports monthly. Goal of5minutes -8Opercent oftime, IO1]was 49% Last BN $4.1 million from EMS billing. Do not see actual nor budget. Total expenditures increased $3.4million in5year. Need detail. Last BN 3 FTEsvvere hired mid -cycle, Dept. states they need 3 more. Fringe accounts for 63 percent of Salaries. Hope you have some new actual numbers. Alot ofthese points ask about actuals. I don't have anything since 6/30/16. Question regarding oaUUuts? When and for what? | believe, but don't know that most calls are for EMT service. Given these are for "old People" they may begrouped more. There was comment made about having th organization perform ambulance service. Status? ^��� ^�,� Request for training facility is understandable but , to my mind overreach. Economic justification missing. Inconvenient sure but... Back to added personnel. The headcount table does not include the requested 3 firemen but the identified department requests do, and the budget amounts suggest that those men are hidden in there. I don't understand why they don't come out and put them in the fte count ---- open and transparent. Misc. charges and fees are large numbers - what are they? approx. $3M for biennium. Public Works 53 2-102 What are the resources? These are provided as attachment 9 Recreation and Parks 54 2-119 What are the resources? These ore provided as attachment 9 Community Development 55 Why are we putting in new systems if there is not cost savings? What will be the impact on personnel? In the post biennium, Council approved the purchase of a new permit processing software — EnerGov, by Tyler Technologies. The existing building permit software currently used by the City, EDEN Systems, was acquired by the City in 2000, but has had no significant enhancements to keep pace with technological changes. The significant changes in computing technology combined with the community's expectations regarding access to information and services via the web, have made the prior permitting program largely obsolete. While there are no initial cost savings associated with acquisition of the new permitting software, there will be potentially significant time savings with what are currently monuol and time intensive tasks becoming automated. City staff will have access to materials and plan submittals both in the office and while in the field to better address questions and code enforcement issues as they are identified. The ability to shore plan and permit information digitally, MA will provide the City with increased internal efficiency, while affording the public greater access to track the status of a building permit or land use application without relying on the time and actions of city personnel. Health insurance Fund 56 What's up with internal loan covering self insurance? That $500,000 should have been built into the budget? What happens if loan is not made? The $525,000 remaining loan for the Health Benefit Fund is built into the budget as being forgiven. If it is not forgiven then a revenue and expense will be built into the budget to continue the loan. 57 1-27 Wastewater increase of debt $1.8 million? See answer provided in question #23. Below: Example of a proposed PW Project needing reconciliation E. Nevada Bridge Project str#2012-28 1998 TSP Ped/Bike Bridge Total: $1,198,000.00 OCT/2012 TSP Ped/Bike/Vehicle Bridge Total: $2,261,000.00 11/25/13 Grant Application Ped/Bike/Vehicle Bridge Total: $1,961,600.00 2015-2017 Budget PW CIP Ped/Bike/Vehicle Bridge Total: $5,481,000.00 Budget PW CIP Ped/Bike/Vehicle Bridge Total: $6,494,400.00 Where is the Scope Reconciliation?? 2013-2015. + $4.5 Million 2015-2017. + $1.0 Million 09 Public Works tracks o8[V, expenditures and budgets only neressoryfbnos.The detailed CIo descriptions match the details provided on page 1-10. Chamber of Commerce It appears the City is considering entering into contracts with the Ashland Chamber of Commerce (Page 2-7), totaling $210,230. What are those services for? Not accurate. $210,230is total Economic Development program funding dues, personnel costs, central scrvice/ees,ek). Aportion ofthose funds will becontracted tothe [honnberfbrovariety of services, inducing follow upanalysis of the B,R&£Survey, continuation ofthe business workshop series and the annual innovators conference. How are the services evaluated for success, compliance, and effectiveness? Mayor, a Councilor and the City Administrator are ex-officio members of the Chamber Board and have a role in impocting and assessing the outcomes of the various activities that are contracted with the Chamber. Difƒerentprojects have different measures ofsuccess and effectiveness. Has the Chamber received these contracts inprevious years? Yes, different contracts have been done with the [hmnnber/or specific economic development related work over the course of many years. Ifso, how long? At least 10-15 years, although the total dollars and projectlactivity change from year to year. The Ashland Chamber of Commerce also receives grants from the City for the Visitor's Convention Bureau in the amount of $431,239 each year or $862,478 for the biennium from TOT funds? Yes, asallocated bvCouncil via resolution based on state legislation directing ospecified portion of TOT funds to be spent on eligible tourism promotion What are these services for? Tourism promotion. The Visitor and Convention Bureau (A component of the Chamber) has specific contract with the Cityfor tourism promotion services and provides on annual report tuCouncil ontheir activities and accomplishments relative to the contract The Chamber also receives Economic Development money, presumably for surveys such asthe Business Retention and Expansion evaluation. Yes, see above 0a� These total over a million dollars for the biennium. Are there other funds going to the Chamber? Several other City Departments use the Chamber's publications far outreach/promotion/marketing for various City programs including water and energy conservation, AFN After reading Ashland Chamber of Commerce Visitor & Convention Bureau Report for 2014-15 and 2013-14, 1 am unsure of the achievements for 2014-15 VCB grant. The reports are more than 30 pages about what the Chamber, in general, has achieved over many years and it is unclear what the VCB has accomplished for the particular grant period of the grant. It appears the majority of grant was for the Visitor Convention Bureau so I would think it would be very easy to provide the number of conventions, providing such detail as the number of conventions, people staying overnight, etc. Considering the amount of money, I would hope that the Chamber would be agreeable in providing more detailed, concise expenditure reports that describe how funds were spent and accomplishments/goals met each specific grant period, starting in 2014-15. It has been suggested that the Ashland Chamber be included in the annual audit, in light of prevailing monetary amounts and a city councilor and the Director of the Chamber being married. Shaun Moran AFN: (3-44) 1) Can the full budget committee get a copy of the latest AFN marketing plan? The plan is currently under development and a copy will be available on the City's website once complete. It is estimated to be complete on July 1st. 2) The 7th quarterly financial report shows that AFN will likely miss the FY 2015-2017 expected budget target by $300,000 (charge for services). What are the measurable steps being taken to insure theses same mistakes are not repeated in the 2017-2019 budget? Use historical information and market trends to derive more conservative revenue forecasts. Ensure the marketing plan and strategic plan are in alignment. Expanded marketing activities in both business & residential markets, and increased involvement in community based organizations. 27 3) Considering the precarious financial condition of AFN when the new "AFN AD -HOC COMMITTEE" is set up is it possible to have at least 1 citizen member of the Budget Committee assigned/selected to this new committee? City Council Policy determination. A Council Study Session is scheduled for July 17 2017 on this subject. 4) Please explain on Page (1-27) the $9.1ml in debt refinancing for AFN; is that the total outstanding debt of AFN? What % of the principal is paid off each year in the $409,000 debt service payment? Please attachment 2. The $9.16 million is the outstanding balance. The current principal reduction is just under $1 million for FY18 and just over a million in FY19. AFN Contributes $409,000 of the total $1.25 million annual debt payment. 5) What is the status of the "forgivable loan" dependent on future AFN revenues/profitability, given to AFN in 2015? A Council policy decision. At this point the status of the loan has not changed. 2• Eml 1) Please explain the metrics used in Public Works to evaluate performance of a CIP project? Looking at the 2015-2017 budget how many projects came in 1) on budget, 2) under budget 3) over budget, based on the originally assumed budget forecasts (before any additional appropriations) were added? CIP project timeliness is driven by many variables including statelfed permit approvals, funding acquisition, legal challenges, biddinglaword processes, contractor availability, on site changes, etc so %6 on time and on budget are not the sole determinants of success or measurement of staff performance. As to your question about additional appropriations above the project forecasts, any contract over $100,000 requires Council approval. Such approvals include explanations for the fiscal implication. Debt Service (1-27) 1) New debt issuance for projects is highlight to be nearly $20ml in the 2017-2019 budget. Please outline specifically what the funds from the debt issuance will be used to fund, The proposed uses of debt can be found on page 1-10 that list the projects and proposed funding sources. Health Benefits Fund (1-7) ray -&I MW 1) What are some other funding options instead of forgiving the $525,000 loan outlined in the Health Benefits Fund? The fund would beonegative position without the current loan. /fthe loan /snotit could take several years to hove a strong fund balance to address high claim years. If the loon stays /nplace the nese/vefundbudget will increase /nrevenue and expenditures tuoccountfur the loon. if in the long run the City begins toexperience more positive years, and have o healthyfund balance, then the contributions to thefund could be reduced thus providing additionolfundsfor the City. I\ In March, the Mayor prepared a memo entitled 2017-19 Budget Add -ins & Funding Resources - Draft that laid out 28-possible additions to the budget. |tappears several ofthe projects, such asAssistant tothe City Administrator (1 FTE) and Emergency Shelter contract were incorporated tuthe 2O17-19budget. What other, ifany, ofthe Z8possible additions, Downtown Streets, City Employee Preparedness, etc., have been incorporated in the 2017-19 budget document? What are the funding sources for each project? This was odraft document that assisted /ninitiating the conversation with Council onpotential Council priorities for the upcoming budget process. The asultofo0of those discussions was the four items that were in the Budget memo in the meeting packe1forlost Thursday. 2) What isthe funding source for the three newest firemen? |twas revealed during the May 1O Budget Hearing that the three new firemen were hired using overtime in 2016? VVenePERS and healthcare also paid out ofovertime inZO16? The full cost ofthe employees were reflectedwhen the City Council gave direction tohire the 3 new Firefighters. How are those same three recently hired firemen being paid out of this budget for the 2017- 19bienniuno? Does that include PERSand healthcare? What isthe source uffunds? The personnel ore port ofthe Fire Department and being ouidfromthe General Fund. The City budgets the positions ot the full cost including all benefits. This will bethe first time the citizens unthe Budget Committee will bevoting onfunding the three new firemen, correct? Staff calculated that nnovingfron/onfk9 staffing model to8/1Ucould potentially save the department about 53D hours ofovertime each year. This equated to roughly $215,00in overtime salary cost savings. Additionally, payment ofovertime also incurs additional NE8A, FICA, Medicare and PFRSexpenses. The department's $213,O00reduction /novertime will have onet savings of approximately $383,O0Oover the 8NoropPn7x�no/ely8the funding needed for the three firefightershired/n2026.Aswecontinuetnvvorktouxarosreducingourovertimeit is likely that mewill realize the full B00hours ofovertime reduction in each year ofthe 8N, effectively poyingfor the three firefighters by overtime costsavings. 3\ Under Police, Personnel Services (page 2-40) shows an increase from 2015-17 of $1.3 million for 2O17-19.How much isattributed tnpolice officers? Considering there are only 28officers what are the salary increases for the police officers for each year? None. The 5 new Council approved Police Officers are not built into the proposed budget. Discussion bneeded onpotential revenue sources to payfor the Police Officers. The increase in Police salary relate to a new collective bargained contractfor Police Officers. Does the salary quoted for the proposed five additional police officers reflect the new salary/benefits? Yes What is the complete, projected monetary ramifications of hiring five police officers? Toto/horthe0rstyear assuming lateral officers that need oVnew equipment and works lots of overtime would be235,OOUper yeon5 officers =675,000 However, because /anticipate absorbing the equipment and OTinto my current service level budget, the costfor thefirst year remains at $550,000. .... including increased workload on the court system especially considering more staff time is spent onthose who are mentally challenged? Also, what are the additional costs of hiring legal and support staff to handle an anticipated increased workload? Will this translate into more FTEs in future biennium? The courtstoffondjudoestated that the number ufcitations they have processed /shalf ufwhat itused tnbe. /don't think that the udddiono/ƒ/veofficers (keeping /nmind one extra onduty oto time plus a SRO) will make a substantiol difference in the workload the court and legal offices see. Even if the number of tickets processed doubles it only returns us to the level the court was operating otofew years ago. However, this isoquestion that perhaps isbest answered bythe court staff. What are the implications of the court collecting fewer fines because people are unable to pay? To make upfor the loss in revenue will the City increase traffic fines, placing the burden of generating compensatory revenue on those who can generally afford to pay fines? is The Ashland Muni Court does not, and should not exist to operate otoprofit. It exists to offer convenience to our citizens and to save them a trip to Central Pointfor Justice Court. This is part of the City Charter. 4) What isthe cost ofTalent, Ashland, and Phoenix pipeline iodate? How much more is needed tocomplete this project, including SDCtoMedford? This cost isfar more expensive than the original TAP emergency, of $2.2 million. What is the reason for the added expense for the project? When will the city inform its citizens of the direction or purpose of this project? This project has been completed atototal cost of $5I51,920. In addition, the City will pay .2,620,329.25 at $372000per year to the Medford Water Commission over the next 20years forSD{s. What will be the cost per gallon for TAP compared to cost per ga lion for our reservoir water? Water customers pay the some rate for water consumed regardless ofits source. What is the purpose of a new $ 15 m il lion dolla r water plant when the city recently invested this much money for o pipeline? The woterwkzntisfor treating water, the pipeline isforsupplying water NagelJim Would the addition of two new officers, one SRO and the other one that could work four ten hour shifts on the busy nights of Wednesday through Saturday in any way help the needs of our city. While two officers would help, they donot get us tmwhere weneed tobcinorder tohave J417 sup+3 coverage. Only by bringing on one additional officer on each team can we accomplish this, and the SRO re -engagement is the lost of the 5 officers hired. 31 C) 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 CD 0 0 0 " 0 0 0 0 0 0 a CD 0 0 0 0 C� 0 a 10 C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a C) r, 0 00 0 0 C� C0 C) w 0 0 0 a 0 0 c c:� oo " a q Ln w) w tD N r, Nks 6 Ln Lji I�i i & 06 Lli 06 r-� kb 00 Ln 1-i m 0) 00 I-f 46 r-q to 0 in itf Ln rq N H ry 0 r4 C 0 0 C) C) 0 0 C) C 0 C> a 0 0 0 CD CD 0 C) 0 C) 0 0 0 C) (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 C) (D C) C) O 06 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 CY) C� Ui C) a CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m a 0 0 0 Ln Ln 0 C) 0 0 0 a C> 0 )6 C� Lr� (-� C%' 6 fy� 6 lc� r-Z 06 1� rf� d r-: r.: Ln " w Lt� 0 Cl Ln r1i 0 0 Ul ai C) r,4 w W H C�, r, m vi m fl� 06 06 14:1 6 6 Kz� H 0 0 CL rq cli m rl r1i to -It ui r, r-I rj C) a a 0 0 0 0 0 0O 0 C) C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 C) 0 C) C=l 0 0 o o p o 0 0 a 0 a 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 O o a0 C) C) 0 0 Cp 0 C) 0 0 C� Ci C5 0 ci 6 6 6 6 C3 OLn000Ln0 0 0 0 C) (D m 0 0 0 Ln Ln L6 Lo CD C) 0 0 C) 0 0 0 rl N 06 Ll� C� ry� 06 1:F Lr� 06 1� cl� C5 � rl" mLr� C C� C� cli C� Ci CL C� C, 00 0 (N 00 00 rq 0 kD cli r-q H m r14 w 00 -cr Ln 00 m M r, Ln rlj 0 r1l a. -zr C, r-4 0) m N r, Ln 6 m c, m 0 w o 0 w o rl w Ln 0 0 0) t, m r, o 00 " N C) 0 0 C) m m " rl r, * H m P, w r, kD Ln m 1-4 -* 0 m w m " m kg� 00 :,� a) _l 01 t-q 0 r, -j r, CD M W W C-4 00� Im LM Cl 0 a to r-I m al r,� zl� Cl 1,7� 'a j 00 C', " m m rq -1 N Nr,� ZF 06 r--� CF C� r,.: Ln� ul fy� ry� 6 Lri ry� r%� Ln m a) r, r, m m d) t.0 rq Ln m 14 T , r, m m CN C) -4 0) 00 m 00 — r, — H aj E C) 00 0 0 a CD p 0 C> Cl 0 v a o 0 0 o v 0 Cl CD 0 00 0 d 0 0 0 C) cn m C� a0 o Ln 0 0 aLD 0 0 0 0 o1.4 LQ CCL 0 0 r, 0 to 0 a 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 cn In C� I C� C� C C C C C� C� c fN 00 Ln r-CF Ln� C; & cy1 06 to C6 V� Ln� 14 ci ks 4 C) to Ln 00 It C) w 00 C*4 r-I C) rl " W N NH H m rq rq (A IT -4 00 a) 00 -4 11 CL H m LU a r-4 4A 0- < 0 u w 0 m w m m C, 11 a H 0 r4 tD co CD .4 r, m Ln W 0) Ln r-I r-, H co M M 0 Ln r, Ln 0 C) �4 r14 r, r- cn 0 C, w m r, r4 Ln 0) rJ C� H -0 m ri �r Ln 0 cO M W LO N r-4 rl H (orz a) fy� 06 d t-: e N r-: l0 rl C; CD C) -�r H tD d C;tD M r� 0 V ci Ln tD 4- 14 (q fy� k6 CS r4 m co r-i 00 W m Nr-4 r-i m 00 m co -1 co H C) TT UD < C� -4� so :) CD E (U u > � Ln w CL t10 CL m E c w 4) w .0 (U 1>1 ,u u LA In .2 2: E 10 E (U n 4) w OW 00 Lj CL V) a- U r m 0 t2 0 .0 c U LL (n cu w (U 2� 2 E twn -i� Owl 'n -Z� LL C W w M M W w 2 o w E > m LI) D I I U- U M C w m w t E > m w 10 w a w w w cu 0 m > C C 'n t 0 (U m m z to 0 0- 1 1 cu u u u (u -0 cu m I W > C: C r C CL C: LL bD bn LL M CU W CL W CL 'i 2 m > CE 0. o u 0 < w CL) r-I V) C) i.3 T C: LL 0 2 :3 =1 W C 0 c 0 < g (u Ln R (N < E t t CL > -o -a ' w m I V c .2 E w (U E L W—.- C C 3: 0 0 0 o :� r4 m o o w E E E w -T 'Li. 0- co u U LL < < .0 7. CL < u u F- < UL < < < Lu kA w 0 LL u ui V) 11 aiN 0 1-1 an C< r4, D cu .1 u CO (N 2.' w j q tn i r4 rn -�T Ln w l rq m 0 V) 0 m Ln w rl w 0 0 H m Ln w L.D w w w tD 11, 0 a 0 0 0 0 W ui < z In H " " m m m m m m -* * �* Ln kD w C) a o o C) o c> a CD o 0 00 C) 0 0 a) a 0 a 00 H m m m m m m 0 0 0 0 Q 0 0 a 0 0 0 C) a > uj co :3 00 0 o a o o o o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 o o o o ;T T .0- 0 �t %r -tr to W -C LL' u az rN m u 00 m M 00 O 00 0-0 z C: LL 'n c c c c a c c c c c a c 0 C) - P LL U- LL LL LL Li- LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL Li- — — LL LL LL LL LL LL LL L� LL Li- U- LL LL t5 z — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I-- E (N = LU m m m be Z� CD u E3 u c c c a a c c a c c c c a c c c c c w w w w w w w w w w I - I � m m m m m m m m m m m m m i W u a) w w w w w w w w kD 0 (9 0 kq o (D o (D Q (D 0 (D (D a- n. 6. 6- 6. a a- 0. a a. a 0. aa. < 32 C) C) C) C) 0 C) C) CD C) C) C) C) 0 C) C 0 C) Ul Ln C) 0 C) 0 C) zT 0 IT (Z) C) 0 C) U) C) C) Lf) CD CZ) C) 0 0 C) (D CD C�(-, 'cCl C� ChC 0 00 - , � C� I i 0 CD C) m Ci vi ()) 0(i C) C� (D , R I I � Cl Ci I Ci � � I I I - I rl C) LD Ln 0 C) 00 r" f, CN 03 Ln r, 00 Lr) N C) Ln Ln C) 0 0 �t Cf V) to CO I �t M 1-i m C-) ko rl 00 U') 'r CY) r, Lr) ,zA rn m rq 0 0 0 0 0 0 a C) (D 0 a 0 0 CD C) C) 0 0 0 C) 0 a 0 a 0 0 a C! q C� C� 0 p C� q q q C? q C� 9 q q q 0 0 0 C, N 0 0 C) rl rl 0 0 C� 0 0 0 C) 0 Q 0 0 0 0 C> 0 0 a C) �r 0 m Ili C� R ci lzzt It 0 0 C) 0 0 C) 0 Lf) C) (D LI) C) c) 0 d Lf Lr � 06 m LO Ln 0 f� L'I C� Lf! c! "I C� C� r,� c� C� Lf! C� C� Lf) 1-4 00 -1 m fn lO h m 0) C) m vi Ln cN Ln o �t I-i P, 'IT LnLr) Ln Lf) w 1.4 C� 00 rl �q �l CY) V-1 H 0 0 C) C) CD C) 0 0 C) C) C) C) 0 0 0 0 0 C) Lr) Ln C) 0 C, q q Cl C], q C) q C) ID 0 (D 0 q q CD 0 0 0 C) C) C) C) CD CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD C) C) CD 0 C) 0 0 0 0 C� C� C� 0 p 0 o Ln b C) C) 0 0 c) Ln c) CD r% LO Lt) Ln C, <r C! L'I C� 't C� C-r � t cl C� C� C! NLD ul 00 m m 1.0 00 0 rq c) Ln oo W mW Ln 'r (D " [tN LI) vi H Ha) C� r-4 m r14 00 LD 1-1 0 -1 Ln m r-I ri k.o Ln w r, o in r m zt LD C) 0 N to M -I N Ln C) C) a --4 M 00 N 00 N CD CD 00 CD r, H 0) 00 S a) rN 'D (Y) C) LD Ln N r14 It (n C> w r, M 00 a) Cli Lri Lri fli Lr) lll� G� I'li (r)(yi H lzt Vi ll� C� 00 0q. 00C� ll� Lri Lri Ci kr� ll�, 12:t lz' -It 00 r, Lr) h m Lf) m rq rN li 00 0) 1-1 m m C) 0 <t 0 00 r, 00 Ln Ln a) 0) m m Ln Lf) rl m 0 w 't C) V) LI) ri Ln H C-A G) rl� C� Lr N e i (14 0 0 C) C) 0 0 0 (D C) CD 0 C) C) 0 C) C) 0 0 C 0 a C) 0 0 cm) m h O 0 Ln C) It r, 0 0 0 C) 0 0 C) 0 (D 0 0 0 0 0 C) 0 L'i 0 0 0 0 Ili C� Ili Cli C) IR CZ)O C� I-i W 0 00 C� C� C� , C C C C C� Ci Ci C� C� lz� C' C 11 00 -1 r, Ln 00 �t 't r� m cT m Lr) m LD r% w LD OC) LD CF) 0) r- r, Ln W -i N 6 (s Ln o (Y) r14 rN CD H r-I cT m N 1-4 Lf) Ln Ln m m It Lq -t rq H It Lr) It Ln ro C) rl rh W LD 00 1-1 k.0 m to zT C) 00 Ln M (3) 00 Ln lD LD H rN Cr) 0 00 CY) (N 1--i m 00 LI) (3) ry m rh m 1:41 r1i r, Ln 0 O 0 -:r C) r, 0 h H rl m rl� lzzt Ln 'Ci Lni r1i C� r,� 1-t Cli kc� V lfL lzl' Lf) a� 00 rll� lyi Cli -1 ai N o c,4 m e i m Ln m 0) m " LD M 0 1-4 G) rq r% Lr) Lr) CO O LI) h m r, H r1l rlj Ln w Lf) N H kR N t Ln rl LO ct� al r"i N H N Ln 1-4 r1l c C 0 0 0) LL 'P a) c t C Li Ln o to0 o w E Ur ro0 0 r c E >tw aj c c m c 0 0 0 :Ll 0 EcC,wlw,wCt&c�v)c,m CO w ru CL Q) U Ir > Oa() (u 2 c > o (D 2 0 > 0 .c U� u -r CL u 0 a- u 0 w E o E E CLu a b E 'E > 0 0 m c 0 (u 0r c c , m 0 ,'-Q)O-Ooo(uoow 0- 0 Ca D. Cf CL D. U: Fr R E w z u Ln rr Ln Ln m m 0- (L G u vi w th > r, oo cn o cp --' L—n tn to) n 00 aj V) rl V) w Lr) LD m 12 r, r, ol m .i r-I -4 C-4 " r,4 r-4 (Y) m m m m 't 14 (Ij ICDHHi 0 0 0 00-1 0 loo 0 0 0 0 c) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 0 C) C) 0 0 q '4q q 0 (D C) C� 0 -Ct 0 C) 0 C5 C) I:T VCOto bo bjD ED u C u C u u u C u 00 00 00 00 LL LL LL LL LL LL U- LL LL LL LL 0- D. uu o Q < a- 8- L cL 0- m a- L LL 0- a. om am a- E a- a- Ln V) u u u 33 0 0 0 r, CD 00 LO '1 00 m -�T w w e4 m 0 0 mto Lr) Ln (N r-i a C) 0 (D (D 0 m N0 o) m CD Ln co " Ln r-i Ln lfl kR 00 I-i 00 rl C� ffi R Gi r-t C� C� R Cli crl' n 00 C"t 00 00 kD Lf) C) LO w -i N 0) 'r r, N C) 0 cn tD' 00 Lo Lf) to O a 1-4 w rq 0 r, r, to I-q 00 Ln m m w m r -,t r, I-t 10 rl� I-i C� ll� L'i I-t -t 00 Ili (q rll� 00 .H a) rN to CN m LO -1 1-1 14 0 tD V' -i rl 1-1 H 0 0 0 li N m w Ln at V) 0 m 00 C) 0 0) Lf) rl 'r 0 C) r1i a lv� rl m N m m 00 C� C� C� a r� lzl� r4 OD 00 1* W r-4 w 0 ko 0 C) 0 Ci (3) 00 r" W 0 m kD, kR lzt� r,� C� I-t I:t 1* V m U) Lr) Lr) 0 tt i rf� fy� -Z 6 a 0 Id' " m 00 (Y) Lt) Ln T, m 14 tD in LI) M 00 r14 m tr C) 0 rn 0 LI) r-4 m I-t C� M CO IR C� I-i G) rl r1IR I-i Iq H m R to r, rl U") m " Lr) cli h C, 0 r-I G) to 1-1 Ln m W rN N 0 0 'll t- m Ln Lf) C) CD C) oo 00 IT rl H r" 00 r, 't r- cn 0 0 Lr) CF) It m r-i Cli rl� C� 00 1-1� n ll� Lr) rIL cl� cl Cli Ui 00. dT t r*lj rq Ln C) 0 0 flj Ln cD lzr 0 CD 0 00 N in r.4 r, m Ef) Ln 'T M 0 �t N r-4 w m w H 1.4 Cy) (n Ln M 0) (N M -i C� rr, 00 Lfi Ci ll r� Lfi C� 00 LO %D rl� Cli 00 IH ri 11 Ct H f, 'A 14 m to Ln m w Ct 00 m 0 LA h -t w r, -i m -;T ri m O o o r, m oo N to 00 <-4 " Lr) Ln rl 00 (n C) a) rq rl r, m r,4 to Lf) rq Ln C) C) r, LO C14 (n CF) -IT r, 0 m �t lyi "i ly� rl� rl� cli LR r", I-i LQ tR rr� ll� C� 00 clV � , IH en 00r� I-L Iq to rl � ! NLn �t li rl 14 r, U) "q m 0 m -:T m C:) r-i o L6 rf� It m m 0 m 0 Lf) r, r, H LD m r-4 oo 00 N co LO 0) CY) It I-i " In H 1-t U) " 00 c� r-, cl� rl) C� ui O� O�� N H Lo I-i IH m Ln 'r r- to It cT 0 00 C> 0 C) C:) C) 0 C> a C) C) 0 C C) (3) 0 m C) m rIA r-I 0) " 0 ri C) 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) CDC) co 00 r4 0 w It Im -t ryi r1i 00 C� if Lr± ri oc� C� ci 00I C' cri I-i , m Ili O� It ai ai Vi C� cr� ID 00 �T 00 0 m rl -A cn cn 00 m C) rlj 00 a) a CD Lf) 00 1-1 r1l Ln m m if! N CD H rq 0 (Y) �t 00 r-4 IH C, 00 LM N to h C4 Ln I-t r� ri cz� m 00 ri h N 11 Lr) m tD 0 (3) h ri rl -4 H tlzl Lt) U) r-� 00 H CD H rl to r-4 ro 0) H 0 1-4 r, 0 m m N 00 H 00 " IH CD 00 a Iz o -cr 143- rl r1l (N -It rh m Ln r, Ln (14 QO h O V) r1l r, Ln (Y) r- ci . C� lyi cl� rl� rl� r1i rl� L'i Lri -t r1l rl� Lr) L'i r1i kR r-� -L rl� lyi rl� Lfi 0 rl4 d* to r" 0 Ln rt to 00 C) 0) rq m 00 r-i c m 0) " 00 r14 CT) 'i cn m Ln 00 rl 00 m IH 00 w et m -4 U) QO 't cn r1l 0 0 N m rN cn m T, a! r, C� r1i tD R C) lzi ll� m h 1-1 li r14 Ln It (14 r- M 'a a) a T U ai u (1) aj V) i> (1) cu LL ai 06 7D 41 :3 N06 -F" -, 0*6 -Fo (D a) - LL v) E 0 a) a) -F, " a) —.- -F 0 'cv: 0 fu 0 E E ';- cc cm c w E E (a to 0 C: :3 E 1 (U E E c m ai 0 CL -C aj U E > —:3 a) E CL E E 0 ro N a] ai 0 0 :3 o 0 0 0 a) 0 0) cu u ww o- u cr U 0 of -j U ow u (U L) .0 > E �r ko Ln a) in w n t Ln tD r, 00 cn to L 0) Ln a) to CD rl 00 It �D (U a) ri V) w V) t �D W C) H M VI r- r- to C) 0 H Ln -A (11 N (N (14 N" m H H r-A ri rq H H -i 0 Ln rl C) N (14 NN o -4 I-q 1-4 1-1 IN 1 1-1 0 0 N N N M m (Y) 8 q -4 -4 H H 0 00 b o 0 0 CD 0 0 6 0 00 a 0 00 0 0 C, C) 0 0 0 .4- lzr It It tt In -T q 't r It 'r 11 r -t' �t CT �t -:t lzt lu u U tw 00'IT V.t �t 00 OD �t �t �t �t 'T to 00 't u .0 u u u u u C u _C u -r- u m u-C 00 00 00 00 00 u u u il- i� i! m m m m m m ?: 3 �: 3: 3: 3: — cu ?: L) u u u u u Lf) U') V) "Gj - - - - - - - - w w w w w w - - — - - - < E c c c c c c -0 -0 -0 0 cu w a; 0 m m m m m m m m 0 m m m m mtt5 m 0 0 lu w ui w LU F- LU W 34 ,7A Ln c::) c, 0 0 n C) 8 00 (14 C) 't �H CD C, Lo 0 C) cl, Ln C) C� c 00 C) r, Ln C, C, C L'i I C:� C� R L'i U) . Ct C� Ci m (,4 ol� 0 n I-i .1 . 101, Lri I - 0 0 C) C4 CD 00 C) 00 Lr) (N tD rlj co (n Ln 00 C� -i r,4 Cq Lt) Ln en tD Lr) Oct Ln 00 r, kD Lr) ai Cli M 00 Ili 00 Lr) Ln r4 r-4 fn m Ln �o r4 00 rl Iq rj mT-4 1-4 fn 00 r, N rq 0 0 a O Ll. n 00. 00 0 0 Lr) Ln q 13� 00 C) llc� C) 0 0 0 r, r- 6 00 00 Lr� ll;� 00 CD I Ln C� 'Y� C5 g� o r.4 tO 00 0 00 co rl r4 LO fv� Ln a) -4 UD r14 rj oc� -1 m N m 0) H w rl ko kD C 0 CO) CC3' CS C:' CD 0 O Ln Q0 Ln LO tD C) rq 0 0 C) m a) C C:) C) 00 C�l 0 14 (D 1) In 0 C� C� 0 11-i C� r*l Ln 03 �t kD M 1� 11) 0 Ln Lr) CD 0 r- rll� C� R U) Zt Ln I�F rli N ai 00 Lr) -i od (,� 6 C:5 cr� 0 0 0 r-4 W C) 00 00 00 r, �r 1-1 00 -1 M H H m H H Lf) N N cq �q li ro f� LO 110 0) 0) r-I O r-I cl� oc� r-j w rl U) Ln Ln rn 0 m m (14 to if) H H (n (D m o Rt N r-i rl m 00 (,1 ur) L.0 H �* 0 00 a) r14 kD r- Iq C' -i q� LL r- Ol m (n 0 00 o 14 00 co 00 C) IM)O Ilyr) N, cr� ryi G� c) m CD Lr) C.) M rl m 00 00 00 C) 0 Lr) CY) lyi ri (31 m �i -i -inj Ln L ac Ln 0 C) a C) 0 00 Ln f) CD ko cl L ICIP, C) (CE), (I=nl N 0 C� 0 C:) 0 C� CL -1 0 cyl �D W ol� L(, Lf) C"! cl� lzzl� Ci ll� Lr) LA Lf� Ln r-� 00 (n o C) 0 0 m Ln al 00 co 00 00 00 �T 6 r- M N to C) lo 00 ,o Cl LO 00 al �T m rl a) 0) C� Ln r4 H 00N N Ln 1 N IV,, 'MY) Ln Ln 00 C3 r4 C� 00 00 Lr) r- LnIn In OHO OMO Iq 0 rl lyi "It LA N Iq Lq r-4 li (n G) Lnz� (3) rn 00 (n COoc� Ln 06 00 6 �� r,� %D 00 CN 06 a) 0 00 (j) rl a) kD CD ct t r., 00 1�0 0 N r,� (3) 0C-4 pa 1-1 C) w Ln m P% 00 00 m 0) 00 0 kc! ro - 1 E :3 E E Na) 0 E u w m ww a y Cm M� I wUl cr m ? , Q) (v E c :3 (U w u (u V) 0 0 vi Lo c (n C: LL E all -C aj I E ru 0 0- to a) Qj E wo= qj m Sw 0 �6 Ln U Ln c m Ea�) C: a) n m (D L) c m m ai JW) (u C: u L, M Ln m 'n (I n (U (U (D w wai u wu't u u r, CO M w (A Ln Ql 0 CD 0 -1 ai V) a, Ln Ln (V -i 1.6 r, (U V) 1 lu tD r, oo �2 w Lo kD w tA (U in LO m ro V) Ln rn m m r, 00 0) C) 0 0 0 1 H 0 0 cm) 0 C 0 0 0 o a C) Q 0 0 CD CD 0 ,f C) 0 q :t 't Z;r to 'It 0 to ,I 0 �t �r tw OD V* -C bD u u u u u -C u u 00 00 00 00 r w 00 00 - er- E (u SL a) 0) C: (U w :3 cr Ln �A V) V) vi Ln u u c c 02 E E E w u -A m m _g_- -j a a D- z Z Z z cr U- cr 0 m CL LL < < < F- u u u u wLu W 35 }` 0 00 O ' O 00 ct h0 Ili'Y 01 O N O C11 Ln LJDN ON N N Ln O V N N ci Cij Q Ln ON tom' (n 00 O 0) i.., ut N N ll O M %..r, N O' m .-i th e-i Ln N N N O IH ut O eel O N Lri rl d' O Lf1 N O m e-i Ln Ln e-i N --I rf N to 0l 0 b' � r- d' -1 to to N h. 00 a N 00 CD Ln O N ri 0) Ln oN m 00 O M ' tf7 N V M V 1� f+')' c-i N' n 00 00 N cT 0) tLDD N 00 LA L l6 .-1 M 00 h .-f' (V rl N u � u i ? Q 0 0 O O ca u u u u u 00 T T T a) a` aai Qu aaii a Q F u u u F 2013 AFN Debt (Refinanced 2004) Full Faith and Credit Refunding Bonds FKom08101/2013 tm81112024 PRINCIPAL 11,675,000 INTEREST 2.00b2.80% TERM 12 PAYMENT January 16N(interest Only) July 15th(Principal plus Interest) Payment Date Due PRINCIPAL INTEREST TOTAL BALANCE 3/7/2013 111,675,50- 1 01/13 176,000.00 103'824.00 27882400 2 2M04 1 PY14 175,000.00 232'079.00 407079.00 11,500,000 8 8004 295.00.00 128'155.00 423.155.00 4 2UU5 205.00 125,205.00 FY15 295,000.00 253,360.00 548,360.00 11,205,000 S 8U/15 1.010.000-00 125,205.80 1.135.205.00 8 2/1116 115,105.00 11 D5.0O FY16 1.010,00000 240310.00 1,250,310.00 10.196,000 7 8/1/10 1,035,000.00 115.106.00 1,150,105.00 D 2/1/17 104,755.00 10475580 FY17 1.035.000.00 218,860.00 1,254,860.00 9.160.000 Q 8/1/17 1.060.000.80 104,755.00 1.164.755.08 10 2/1/18 - 9415500 9415500 FY18 1'080'000.00 108.810.00 1'358'910.00 8.100'000 11 8/1/18 1.080.000.00 04`155.00 1'174'155.00 12 211/18 83,355.00 8335500 FY19 1'080'000.00 177,510.00 1,257,510.00 7'030'000 13 8/1/18 1,100,000.00 83.355.00 1,183,355.00 14 2/1/20 - 7235500 7235500 FY2O 1'100'000.00 155,710.00 1'355'710.00 5,020.000 15 01/20 1.130.000.00 72.355.00 1.282.355D0 18 211/21 - 81055DO 8105500 FY21 1j30.000.00 133.410.00 1.263.410.00 4,790.000 Payment Date Due 17 8/1/21 18 2/1/22 FY 22 19 8/1 /22 20 2/1 /23 FY 23 21 8/1/23 22 2/1124 FY 24 23 8/1/24 FY 25 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 if� P, M � PRINCIPAL INTEREST TOTAL BALANCE 1,155,000.00 61,055.00 1,216,055.00 - 48,061.25 48,061.25 1,155, 000.00 109,116.25 1,264,116.25 1,180,000.00 48,061.25 1,228,061.25 - 33,311.25 33,311.25 1,180,000.00 81,372.50 1,261,372.50 1,210,000.00 33,311.25 1,243,311.25 17,430.00 17,430.00 1,210,000.00 50,741.25 1,260,741.25 1,245,000.00 17,430.00 1,262,430.00 1,245,000.00 17,430.00 1,262,430.00 11,675,000 1,869,809.00 13,544,809.00 Principal Interest Total 175,000.00 232,079.00 407,079.00 295,000.00 253,360.00 548,360.00 1,010,000.00 240,310.00 1,250,310.00 1,035,000.00 219,860.00 1,254,860.00 1, 060, 000.00 198, 910.00 1, 258, 910.00 1, 080, 000.00 177, 510.00 1, 257, 510.00 1,100, 000.00 155, 710.00 1, 255, 710.00 1,130,000.00 133,410.00 1,263,410.00 1,155, 000.00 109,116.25 1,264,116.25 1,180,000.00 81,372.50 1,261,372.50 1,210,000.00 50,741.25 1,260,741.25 1,245,000.00 17,430.00 1,262,430.00 11,675,000.00 1,869,809.00 13,544,809.00 13,544,809.00 Crosscheck 3,635,000 2,455,000 1,245,000 C:1UserstwelchmlAppDatatLocal\MicrosofttWindowslTemporary Internet FileslContent.Outlook1BG12MFYNIAFN Debt A116M 059 PM Ack--vA � /.-% c ",k-- LL g g g C� ID Ct O g g O ai N 8 6 cd C� Ld ai O S S S S S S ci g gg g ct mli c5 C� O ct g g O ss 8 8 8 g g g g g g d g 'd g g 8 c5 g.6 6 i O 10 ci cd c5 16 Ci CO"! Ct -ct g tb m So O g g C8CO 5 g g 1O O 0 Me 2 W w LL -160 11 Z< 2 Lu 9 City of Ashland Statement of Resources, Requirements, and Changes in Fund Balance April 30, 2017 Biennial Percent Biennial To Date Actuats Budget Collected 2013.2015 (22 Months) 2015�2017 Expended Balance Biennium to Date End of Biennium 725 Health Benefits Fund Charges for Services - Internal S 9,140,680 S 9,730,000 93.9% $ (589,320) $ 7,467,093 $ 8,158,032 Interest on investments 7,914 10,000 79.1% (2,086) 3,364 3,614 Miscellaneous 23,872 - N/A 23,872 211,795 211,795 Interfund Loan (Reserve Fund) 200,000 450,000 44A% (250,000) 900,000 900,000 Transfer In (insurance Fund) - 500,000 0.01/0 (500,000) 500,000 Total Revenues and other Sources 9,372,467 10,690,000 87.7% (1,317,533) 8,582,252 9,773,441 Materials and Services 9,240,463 9,830,000 94.01/6 589,537 8,281,080 9,049,715 Interfund Loan 325,000 650,000 50.0eh 325,000 250,000 250,000 Contingency - 250,000 0.0% 250,000 - - Totai Expenditures and Other Uses 9,565,463 10,730,000 89.1% 1,164,537 8,531,080 9,299,715 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (192,996) (40,000) 482.5°1° (152,996) 51,172 473,725 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2015 473,726 73,370 645.71% 400,356 Fund Balance, Apr 30, 2017 S 280,730 $ 33,374 841.3% $ 247,360 $ 51,172 $ 473,726 Reconciliation of Fund Balance: Restricted and Committed Funds 280,730 Unassigned Fund Balance $ (0) to, Apr FY17 Financlal Reponxlsx 5/1612017 2 IN 2016 basic financial statements ASSETS Current assets: Cash and investments Interest and accounts receivable, net Notes and contracts receivable Interfund receivable Inventories Total current assets Non Current Capital assets: Accumulated depreciation Capital assets, net Non -current assets: Start up costs (net of amortization) Total noncurrent assets Total assets Deferred Outflows of Resources: Deferred Outflows Return to Table of Contents %fir--14 Mc-n.,T CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON STATEMENT OF NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS June 30, 2016 Water Fund Wastewater Fund Electric Fund Tele- communications Fund Total Governmental Activities Internal Service Funds $ 4,971,518 $ 5,590,373 $ 1,676,115 $ 224,633 $ 12,462,639 $ 6,441,039 1,184,351 1,051,383 987,172 190,760 3,413,666 45,670 123,776 - 123,776 30,552 421,787 13,452 680,875 1,116,114 65,010 6,577,656 6,655,208 3,467,938 415,393 17,116,195 6,582,271 LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS AND NET POSITION Current liabilities: 38,944,914 53,238,712 15,266,578 9,662,171 117,112,375 12,679,035 (17,438,057) (18,902,419) (8,348,052) (9,039,229) (53,727,757) (9,783,679) 21,506,857 34,336,293 6,918,526 622,942 63,384,618 2,895,356 - - 178,703 178,703 - 21,506,857 34,336,293 6,918,526 801,645 63,563,321 2,895,356 28,084,513 40,991,501 10,386,464 1,217,038 80,679,516 9,477,627 270,232 158,147 298,637 88,286 815,302 826,819 Accounts payable 388,256 114,231 1,151,411 27,065 1,680,963 526,982 Accrued salaries, vacation and payroll taxes 341,901 200,033 369,222 104,577 1,015,733 890,718 Accrued interest payable 24,432 58,706 67 83,205 Interfund payable - - - 165,544 165,544 525,000 Other liabilities - 241,447 - 241,447 2,862,649 Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability 1,032,133 604,032 1,140,624 337,203 3,113,992 3,157,975 Notes/bonds payable, current portion 1,620,202 1,334,561 21,714 - 2,976,477 - Totai current liabilities 3,406,924 2,311,563 2,924,485 634,389 9,277,361 7,963,324 Long-term liabilities: Revenue bonds payable, net 2,878,067 1,812,746 108,572 4,799,385 General obligation bonds payable, net 3,741,010 7,702,300 - 11,443,310 Total long-term liabilities 6,619,077 9,515,046 108,572 16,242,695 - Totalliabilities 10,026,001 11,826,609 3,033,057 634,389 25,520,056 7,963,324 Deferred Inflows of Resources: Deferred inflows - pensions 239,787 140,330 264,991 78,339 723,447 733,665 Net Position: Net Position (deficit): Net Investment in capital assets 13,267,578 23,486,686 6,788,240 622,942 44,165,446 2,895,356 Restricted for system development 1,985,482 1,874,318 - - 3,859,800 - Restricted for debt service - _ _ Unrestricted 2,835,897 3,821,705 598,813 (30,346) 7,226,069 (1,287,899) Total Net Position 18,088,957 29,182,709 7,387,053 592,596 55,251,315 1,607,457 Total liabilities, Deferred Inflows and Net Position $ 28,354,745 $ 41,149,648 $ 10,685,101 $ 1,305,324 $ 81,494,818 $ 10,304,446 otal Net Position $ 55,251,315 Adjustment to reflect the consolidation of internal service fund activities related to enterprise funds 279,062 Net Position of business -type activities $ 55,530,377 The accompanying notes are an integral part of the basic financial statements. 0- A9 - -4- of nehianrl ietunntoTable ofContents 2016 notes to basic financial statements F. Fund Balance Constraints The specific purposes for each of the categories of the fund balance as of June 30, 2016, are as follows: Non Major Fund Balances: General Fund Street Fund Parks Funds Total Restricted for: Asset foriehre TOT tourism CDBG[8Sthct|OD SDC-Transportation 8DC-Parks Perpetual care Debt commitment Committed for: Parking surcharge Public art Affordable housing Grubbs Case Street activities Parks activities Airport activities Food and beveragetaX Assigned for: Unassigned: 76784 - - - 25,784 129,783 - - ' 129J03 - - - 33804 33,804 - 2.818'728 - - 2.018,723 - - ' 600.689 806.089 ' - - 944.552 944,552 - - ' 1.028.812 1,028^912 370,085 - - - 370,085 109,938 - - - 109,938 188.351 - - - 166.351 22'235 - ' - 22,235 - 2'795.238 - ' 2.785`238 - - 313.140 1,348.001 1.859.141 - - - 138,905 138.905 - - ' 190,023 180.823 - - - 2.004.725 2.084.725 - ' - 3,636,527 Total fund balances: $ 4,460,683 $ 5414867 $ 313140 $ 8204190 $ 16,482,980 G. Service Concession Agreement The City ofAshland contracts with the Skinner Aviation tooperate the City owned airport, Skinner Aviation has been the airport's Fixed Base Operator since 1993 and is responsible for all oversight ofthe airport facilities including radio control, fuel facility, aircraft meinhanance, hangar rental ooUecUon, flight training and facility maintenance. They collect the income for the City and remit the Cit`/arevenue onemonthly basis, they keep 25% of the monthly revenue and receive a credit for Water and Garbage services. No upfront monies were exchanged by either party when the contract was executed, so thus there is not an asset orliability torecognize inthe financial statements. �^T�\ /���'ka "��,�vT- �= �� ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Biennium 2017-19 FY201243 BN2013-15 BN201547 FY2017-18 FY01849 BN2017'19 Description Actual Actual Amended� d �� Proposed Proposed Proposed Department Total By Category Personal Services Q 1.453.413 $ 3'084.148 * 3.371.840 $ 1.794.067 $ 1.847.518 & 3.641.506 Materials and Services 1.976.555 13.161.626 13.080.387 7.03.938 7.158.909 14.232.848 Capital Outlay 20.743 808.183 4.092.352 1.336.725 1.234.820 2.571.545 Debt 8nmkm 2,659,975 3 4,270,200 i 1 3,740,387 Biennium 2017-19 FY 2012-13 BN2013-15 8N%M5-17 IFY 2017-18 IFY3M8-18 BN2017-18 Description Actual Actual Amended Proposed Proposed Proposed Department Total by Division: Operating Divisions Administration $ 031.028 $ 1.243.421 $ 1'335.272 $ 948.05 $ 892.085 $ 1.040.918 Accounting 650.284 1.442,875 2.137.180 957'233 877.522 1.834.755 Non -Operating Divisions Band 55,584 $ 114,017 $ 130,550 65770 $ 65J70 $ 131,540 Social Services 123,394 254,205 Economic and Cultural 623.419 1,304,744 � Miscellaneous��� 43,776 � 185715 269,000 13,000 19,000 38/00 S.D�.'Parks Open Space 238,485 06J27 3,707,182 949,828 944,820 1,884,640 Bancroft Debt ' - 400.00 ' Notes and Contracts Debt 808,982 89,011 135,240 97,614 97,865 185,479 GO Bonds 1,900.689 3.579,222 3,734,960 1.773.829 1,771,079 3,544.908 Insurance 696,118 1,654,314 2,019,750 1 1 $ 6,368,68 * 20J20,660 $ 24,823779 * 12,070174 * 12110j82 Xi�84,1Oo,3no- For the 20J-15W«nithim,the Health Beoefimexpenditures were included iti the AdiniiiistrativeServices Depnmxod. For the 20/5-J7bimaitt/a, the Health Benefits are inchided/nthe AdiniaistratiouDep^mxmt. 'Parks s, C�l C13 co — C') - C, a, 00 m co w �o cli CN to— (Q ,It 0) I=cc i i It r- -0 co co CD 0) r-- co CD rr M Lh m V3 't - 0::� IT t-:, m (D m Ci "t cq co r r a) M co C-4 z m Vk ER kR (o (v O m m CKZ C" r 0) CD C) cq =� cyi C) C) CIS C'i UO CICA C13 C:) r- 00 U*) r- CD CD in w co co Cli cj:z w Clt 04 C) " Ci V-- Ci Ui to ot 0) (D Nr C.0 fl- C.0 CO CD -41 It CV "Z to (D co L6 co 1co� r-, m C11 t w Iq z GL m 0 03. 0 ai m 2 U) is 0 O 0 = .CL E o is CL 00 0 Co LL o C: U- ici —0 -a 45 LL co Lj- CO m E (D UED (D 3: M: CL 0 0 k, a RESOLUTION NO. 2017- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FOR CHANGES TO THE 2015-17 BIENNIAL BUDGET RECITALS: ORS 294.471 permits the governing body of a municipality to make a supplemental budget for one or more of the following reasons a. An occurrence or condition which had not been ascertained at the time of the preparation of a budget for the current year which requires a change in financial planning. b. A pressing necessity which was not foreseen at the time of the preparation of the budget for the current year which requires prompt action. c. Funds were made available by another unit of federal, state or local government and the availability of such funds could not have been ascertained at the time of the preparation of the budget for the current year. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. In accordance with provisions stated above, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland determine that it is necessary to adopt a supplemental budget, establishing the following amendments: Transfers: Central Service Fund Administration/Salary &Wages Public Works-Administration/Salary & Wages City Recorder/Bank Charges Contingency Electric Fund Electric/Energy Electric/Transmission Airport Fund Capital Outlay Contingency Professional Services Central Service Health Benefits Fund Health Benefits/Claims Contingency General Fund Fire Life & Safety/FEMA Grant Expense Fire Forest Division/OWES Grant Expense Grant Revenue Appropriation 100,300 80,000 180,300 300,000 300,000 Resource W70110001 125,000 $ 180,300 13,000 10,000 ,25,000 48000 $ 48,000 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Additional appropriations, 110,717 568,100 678,817 678,817 $ 678,817 Pagel of2 45 w9up-P2 Ergaisl-1 All other provisions of the adopted 2015-2017 BIENNIUM BUDGET not amended or revised in this Supplemental Budget remain in full force and effect as stated Section 3. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 7th day of March, 2017, ffect upon signing by the Ma-yor. Barbara J=tensen, City Recorder S APPROVED this f day of 32017. as to form: a Attorney Yip Stro4erg, Mayor M 0% - - - - - 01 r% N a a A N Title: Supplemental Budget & Resolution for 2015-17 Biennium From: Beverly Adams Interim Finance Director bev.adams@ash land. or. us Summajy:, It is necessary to amend the 2015/17 biennial budget in order to appropriate new grant revenue and to make a transfer of appropriations to cover unexpected expenditures. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: I move to adopt a resolution titled, " A resolution adopting a supplemental budget for changes to the 2015-17 Biennial Budget." Staff Recommendation: That Council adopt the attached resolution to authorize proposed changes as defined within this report for a 2015/17 supplemental budget. Resource Requirements All budget changes and requirements are shown in the Background section and the proposed resolution. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: Administrative/Governance goal: "To ensure on -going fiscal ability to provide desired and required services at an acceptable level" Background and Additional Information: Oregon budget law (ORS 294.471) provides for mid -year amendments to the budget through the supplemental budget process. This supplemental budget contains two types of amendments: the first is merely a transfer of appropriation from one category to another which does not increase nor decreases the original budget; and the second is an additional appropriation of revenue which will increase the total budget. Because these proposed changes consist of transfers and additional appropriation of less than 10% of the budgeted fund, Oregon budget law allows adoption by Council resolution with no public hearing requirement. For additional detail, please refer to the attached "Budget Transfer Request" forms which provide a revenue source, expenditure account and brief description of the request. The following illustrates the proposed budget changes: Page I of 2 CITY Of -AS HLAN413 Transfer of appropriation only: :Central Services/Salary &Wages To cover unbudgeted costs associated with the City ADM resignation $ 100,300 Central Services/Bank Charges To cover bank fees in excess of budget 80,000 �Electric/Energy To cover BPA forecast for increased energy purchases 300,000_ Public Works/Airport-Capital. Outlay 'Unplanned airport maintenance requirements 48,000 :Health Benefits/Claims Higher than anticipated health claim expense 250,000 Total transfer of appropriation needed $ 778,300 Increase in appropriation: -Fire Life &Safety[FEMA Grant Revenue New grant revenue for home fire sprinklers promotion. 110,717 .Fire Forest Division/OWEB Grant Revenue New grant revenue for forest health restoration projects. 568,100 Total Increased Appropriation $ 678,817 Attachments: Resolution adopting the supplemental budget Staff budget transfer requests & information Page 2 of 2 CITY OF A c A, A k4i Date: Department: Explanation of request: 1111 111114 1111 2/27/2017 Central Services/Administ. -9< A transfer of appropriation is necessary to cover Central Services personnel costs following salary and wages due the prior City Administrator upon his resignation in November; 2016. Transfer From I-Irte Ittem Name A Rdu4t Central SerVices:, 0710.01,99.00.00, Contingency $45,000.00 Public Works/Administration 0710.01.08.11,00.510100 Salaries & Wages $55,300.00 i I Total Amount of l ranter 0 -1 UU,.jvU.UU Transfer To Ace;6uht Number Line I�Qifl -kathp Amount 0710.01.01.02.00.510100 'Salary & Wages $ 100,300,00 Total Amount of Transfer $ 100,300.00 Requested By: Approved By: Department Head M EVEM" Date: 2/1712017 Department: City Recorder Explanation,of request: Additional budget appropriation is needed to cover the City's banking expenses. The appropriation will be transferred from Central Services/ Contingency to Contra[ Services/City Recorder/Bank Charges expense as shown below. �wlyAtliLl.k -111/TIN11 Total Amount of Transfer Transfer To Requested By: XV, Approved B - Department Head a Date: 21912017 Department-. Electric Explanation of request: Based on forecasts from BPA we are going to be over budget on energy purchase charges by approximately $246,'000. Based on the same forecasts we will be under bpd4et by $460,000 in transmission. Transfer Total Amount of Transfer Transfer T Total Amount of Transfer 211 a Approved By: Department Head 51 i. : 1 0' 1 Date: 218/2017 Department: Public Works Explanation of request: The Airport is budgeted by major category and in the current biennium there are plans to perform a major tree topping project that was not initially planned for. The Airport also required more internal project Improvements (maintenance) then was originally forecasted, casted, requiting a transfer from major categories in order to keep the budge whole. ,C_ Transfer From Account Nuhjb6r, Ll pjidMo' .- mpunt_i 280.99.00.00.905000 Airport Contingency 1 S13.000.00 280.08.00.00.604100 Professional Services $10,000.00 280,08.00.00,6068110 Central Service $25,000.00 rotas Amount of Transfer $48,000.00 Transfer To 52 11-MUPFIS, j Date: 2/1612017 Department: Administration Explanation of request: Transfer from contingency up to $250,000.00 for higher than budgeted claims expenditures in the health benefits fund. Transfer From Transfer T Total Amotint of Tran§W Requested By., Approved By: 4"— 6�1� U DopodmentHe-ad M 11g: 1111 111111111 1, UTZ, ! -1 A Date: 2121/2017' Department: Fire Dept -Fire & Life Safety Explanation of request: AF&R received a FEMA Fire and Life Safety grant in the amount of $110,717 for the purpose of i)ronnotinci home fire sprinklers in Southern Orecion, Most of the funds have been used to build a fire sprinkler demonstration trailer. The remaining funds will be used for advertising and education. New Revenue 1111111 11111ritt;r1lirili r I L 110.717.00 Total Amount of Transfer Requested By: Approved By: artnidnt Re —ad LN VA I Llw� Date: 2[21/2017 Department: Fire Dept -Forest Division Explanation of request: The Citv was recently awarded the "Oregon WatershedEnchancement Board Grant" {OWES) from State, lottery funds in the total amount of $1 J 63.430. Of the total want. only $568,100 is expected to be used this fiscal vear. leaving the remainder to be included. in the next budget cycle. We are reauest- !no a unique obiect number for the OWEB grant. (Grant detail attached) New Revenue 1 07.2900.604*** 1 Gtant Exbense 1 $.568.100.001 Total Amount of Transfer Requested By. Approved By: Devkftment Head W lug DATE: February 15,2017 TO: Bev Adams, City Financial Officer FROM: Chris Chambers, Forest Division Chief, Ashland Fire & Rescue RE: Fire Department General Fund Budget Supplement Request for BN15-1.7 The following is a budget supplement request for the current biennial budget in the Fire Department (General Fund). These are items that are previously unbudgeted expenditures with corresponding revenue from an Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board grant (See attached Director's Award Letter), FOREST INTERFACE ACCOUNT (GENERAL FUND, FIRE DEPARTMENT) Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Focused Implementation Partnerships Grant The City has been awarded a total of $1,153,430 for the current period with O)VEB's expectation that a portion of this amount will carry over into BN 2017-2019. Based on projections, $568,062.00 of these funds need to be added to the current biennium budget with the balance entered in the next biennium. This includes an allowable 4.5% administrative fee, $568,062.00 Materials and Services 110.07,29.00.604*** $568,062.00 TOTAL REQUEST Kel OWES DIRECTOR'S AWARD MEMO To: Meta Loftsgaarden, Executive Director From-, Eric Hartstem, Senior Policy Coordinator Date: February 9, 2017 Project Name: Ashland Forest All -Lands Restoration Initiative Program: Focused Investment Partnership Application/Prej cot No.: 216-8204-15366 Application Type: Restoration Applicant: City of Ashland OWES Funding Requested: $ 1,153,430 Staff Recommendation. $ 1,153,430 Fund Source: Lottery Summary Description of Project, This application seeks funding to implement forest health restoration activities at nine sites totaling 1,100 acres, Treatment will include ecological, and maintenance thinning, prescribed fire, and noxious weed control. Landscape �°skt tcata entsaoclosed late seral forests, enhance oak habitats, and ameliorateoftrophic fire, among other community benefits. Reviewer Comments and Recommendations. The Technical Review Team (TRT) described the Ashland Forest All -Lands Initiative as a high performing partnership and applauded the holistic restoration approach that takes into consideration varying land ownerships, complex forest habitats, and the dynamic social environment of the community. The, TRT expressed a high degree of confidence in the ecological approach and the ability of the partnership to deliver strong restoration outcomes, The TRT noted that the partnership has been strategic in selecting restoration sites building on earlier assessment and prioritization work, it was obvious that momentum and support for this effort is growing in the community. The partnership has been successful at leveraging funding, and is implementing projects in a manner that allocates this funding effectively across the landscape. TO assist with the TRT review, the partnership developed a summary handout that describes each of the proposed treatments, a pricing sheet for use in the field to determine restoration costs, monitoring objectives, and a matrix illustrating how the proposed properties were ranked in relation to the objectives of the Ashland Forest All -Lands Restoration Initiative, The TRT found this summary document useful for the discussion and it has been appended to the application. The TRT and partnership discussed the need for maintenance at treated sites, This will be an ongoing concern as, once treated, each site will need regular activity to maintain the restoration gains into the future. The -iiscussion focused on using prescribed fire as the practice becomes accepted in the community, as well as 'eveloping new innovative ways to fund this work, which may include, tax incentives, The, TRT appreciated that the partnership was actively planning for the future and was confident that the partnership is poised to find Iona -term solutions to this concern, The TRT also noted that the partnership has a rigorous monito11ing r 1 57 approach, and believe it would be beneficial to incorporate a way to quantify wildlife habitat outcomes for Northern Spotted Owl and Pacific fisher. Staff Recommendation. Fund, with conditions Special Conditions, The following special conditions apply to the miaplementation of the prof oct; (a) Notify the Board's Project Manager before ec6 logical thinning activities commence on the MoUnterest Forestry proyerty to ensure activities are conipatible with the pending conservation easement and associated management plan. (b) Pre -Project Photos and Map: (i) OWEB will not release any funds for a Project site until Grantee has submitted to the Board's Project Manager pre -project photos at photo points established to track visual change(s) resulting from restoration project. Grantee should carefully consider photo point locations to ensure photos clearly show the same sites and perspective in future photos to meet reporting requirements and demonstrate that completed restoration meets the scope of work described in the grant application, (ii) OW M will not release any funds for a Project site until Grantee has submitted to the Board's Project Manager amap that show's where the photo points have been established. Baseline criteria for the map include 8 V2. x 11 size and pdf format. Minimum background layers include recent aerial imagery, Project boundary, streams,and roads/ilighways. The following special conditions apply to the to the project completion report (PCR): (a) Provide, at least one (1) photo point fi-oul five (5) of the properties being treated. Photo points should include a pre-treatment photo and post-treatment'photo. The following special conditions apply to the post -implementation status report (PISR). (a) Provide at least five (5) photos from the photo points as provided for in the PCR. Director's Award, By the virtue of the authority vested in the OWEB Executive Director by the Board, I hereby authorize an award of $1,153,430, with an, award date of January 26, 2016 for the project as modified in an.ainountnot to exceed $1,153,430, Submitted by., Eric Hartstein, Senior Policy Coordinator Reviewed by: jric�Wil` - ms, Grant Program Manager Appriovedby: Me a r *ffttsga?rdaen, Executive Director Date Date Date rm-r*l MW M0 RESOLUTION NO. 2016 - IS - A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE 2015-2017 BIENNIUM BUDGET THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Because of the circumstances stated below, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland determine that it is necessary to transfer appropriations as follows: Transfer of Appropriations: TO: Administration Department - Library $ 8.930 Police Department $12.500 FROM: Contingency $21,430 To transfer appropriations from General Fund Contingency to the Administration Department to remit $8,930 in restricted property tax receipts above the amount estimated for payment this budget period and $12,500 to the Police Department to fund You Have Options Program speaker costs that were originally anticipated in the prior year. SECTION 2. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 7 day of June, 2016) d takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this Reviewed as to form: David Loh an, City Attorney day of June, 2016: J hn Stro rg, Mayor Page 1 of I 99 F-10M CITY OF ASHLAND Budget Transfer Request Date: 412012016 Department: Administration Explanation of request, Am i int b1dr.letted was leess than an-Alwal �a-sh, AGtjujal arnol int was transferred I'to the Library District, since it cannot be used for any other purpose. Transfer From X.- . . - -10- - I - - Z- - , - ` * - f. -. , - - " -'4- - � , ; . , R :�' Am Lim oun 'Contingency $8,930.00 Total Amount ot I ransler 3! 0'zIaU.UU Transfer To 1 110.01.02.17.604100 Professional Services $8,930.001 Total Amount of Transfer 0 01-a3U" Requested By: Approved By: Department Head m CITY C!F -AS"LAND Date: 4/5/2016 Department: Police Explanation of request: To reimburse for speaker cost for You Have Option Program (YHOP) , The payments for the classes had been paid in the prior fiscal year. Transfer From Transfer To Account Number Line Item Name Amount 1 110.06,12.00.606400 Trainina $12,500.00 Total Amount of Transfer Requested ByCj��_-4La-Q& Approved -ByzIi-epaitment Head Administration Department DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The Administration Department provides the policy and communication link with the citizens of Ashland and the employees of the City who serve those citizens. The department consists of six divisions: Mayor and Council, Administration, Human Resources, Legal, Municipal Court and Energy Conservation. Among the services provided by the Administration Department are: • Leadership on and development of City policy • Guidance and direction to all departments on work plans, employee development and customer service • Economic development • Human resources • Legal counsel • Communications and public outreach • Judicial process for local traffic and municipal code violations • Energy conservation Significant Issues, Changes, Highlights The Department's most significant issues continue to revolve around the fiscal integrity of the City government and supporting the work of our employees in delivering the day-to-day services. Description PY 2012-13 Actual BN 2013.15 Actual BN 2015-17 Amended Budget ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT Biennium 2017-19 FY 2017-18 FY2018-19 ' BN 2017-19 Proposed Proposed Proposed Department Total By Category Personal Services $ 1,297,652 $ 3,667,198 $ 3,846,490 $ 1,938,614 $ 1,998,874 $ 3,937,488 Materials and Services 1,111,534 11,866,911 14,856,283 8,318,438 8,343,670 16,662,108 Debt Service 47,771 46,688 22,937 22,665 45,602 $ 2,409,186 $ 15,581,880 $ 18,749,461 $ 10,279,989 $ 10,365,209 $ 20,645,198 Department Total by Fund General Fund $ 1,120,441 $ 1,857,935 $ 4,037,923 $ 2,129,320 $ 1,820,925 $ 3,950,245 Electric Fund - Conservation - 1,434,991 1,466,718 760,468 772,024 1,532,492 Water Fund - Conservation 442,021 - - - - Health Benefit Fund 9,049,715 9,830,000 5,586,266 5,971,035 11,557,301 Central Services Fund 1,288,745 2,797,218 3,414,820 1,803,935 1,801,225 3,605,160 $ 2,409,186 . $ 15,581,880 $ 18,749,461 $ 10,279,989 $ 10,365,209 $ 20,645,198 .For fiscal years 2011-12 and 2012-13 both of the Conservation Divisions were included In the Electric Department. For the 2013-1Sbienniun4 both of the Conservation Divisons were included in the Administration Department. .For the 2015-17biennium, the Water Conservation Division is included in the Public Works Department. For the 2015-17bienniut,4 the Electric Conservation Division is included in the AdininistrationDepartment. For the 2013-IS biennium, the Health Benefits expenditures were included in the AdittlizistradveServices Depart.-nelit. For the 20IS-17 biennium, the Health Benefits expenditures are included in the Administration Department. ri-am M--X Administration Department Description Department Total Resources Charges for Services Fines Interest on Pooled Investments Miscellaneous interfund Loans Operating Transfers in Subtotal Resources (over) under requirements Department Total By Function Personnel Services Materials and Services Debt Service Department Total by Fund General Fund Water Fund - Conservation Electric Fund - Conservation Health Benefit Fund Central Services Fund ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT FY 2011-12 FY 2012.13 BN 2013-15 BN 2013.15 BN 2015.17 BN 2015.17 BN 2015.17 Actual Actual Amended Estimated Proposed Approved Adopted - $ 1,536,341 $ 1,674,714 $ 3,735,278 $ 3,278,447 $ 3,816,386 $ 3,816,386 $ 3,816,386 151,104 161,920 327,000 298,792 330,000 330,000 330,000 1,023 850 2,134 5,804 2,134 2,134 2,134 14,375 22,462 2,000 16,571 12,000 12,000 12,000 - - 900,000 900,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 - - - - 500,000 500,000 600,000 1,702,843 1,859,946 4,966,412 4,499,614 5,110,520 5,110,520 5,110,520 399,496 549,240 2,790,016 1,985,999 11,316,745 11,316,745 11,316,745 $ 2,102,339 $ 2,409,186 $ 7,756,428 $ 6,485,613 $16,427,265 $16,427,265 $16,427,265 $ 1,224,392 $ 1,297,652 $ 3,638,090 $ 3,664,981 $ 3,746,190 $ 3,746,190 $ 3,746,190 877,947 1,111,534 4,070,564 2,772,590 12,634,387 12,634,387 12,634,387 - - 47,774 48,042 46,688 46,688 46,688 $ 2,102,339 $ 2�409,186 $ 7,756,428 $ 6,485,613 $16,427,265 $16,427,265 $16,427,265 11 1_ 1 I $ 886,836 $ 1,120,441 $ 2,709,392 $ 1,745,812 $ 2,066,027 $ 2,066,027 $ 2,066,027 - - 489,010 440,254 - - 1,542,664 1,540,857 1,466,718 1,466,718 1,466,718 - - 9,580,000 9,580,000 9,580,000 1,216,503 1,288,745 3,015,362 2,758,690 3,314,520 3,314,520 3,314,520 $ 2,102,339 $ 2,409,186 $ 7,756,428 $ 6,485,613 $16,427,265 $16,427,265 $16,427,265 For fiscal years 2011-12 and 2012-13 both of the Conservation Divisions were included in the Electric Department. For the 2013-15 biennium, both of the Conservation Divisons were included in the Administration Department. For the 2015-17 biennium, the Water Conservation Division is included in the Public Works Department. B. For the 2015-17 biennium, the Electric Conservation Division is included in the Administration Department, For the 2013-15 biennium, the Health .Benefits expenditures were included !it the Administrative Services Department. For the 2015-17 biennium, the Health Benefits expenditures are included in the Administration Department. • Adopted revised economic development strategy. • Completed and began implementation of the Citywide facilities energy audit. • Solar installation incentive participation resulted in more than 240,000 watts of renewable energy generation. • More than 1.4 million annual kilowatt hour savings from residential and commercial weatherization, heating system, appliance and lighting programs. • Updated the Film and Video ordinance and fee resolution. • implemented an agreement with ORHA and ACCESS to establish the Ashland Community Resource Center. • Updated the resolution and community partnerships to increase the number of nights the city provides a Win- ter Shelter to two and to allow dogs in the shelter. • Completed the Plaza enhancements, including new colors for the information booth and hanging baskets/ pennants. • Planned and held the first State of the City celebration event. • Worked closely with the Oregon Shakespeare Festival to plan and execute improvements to Chautauqua Square in front of the Black Swan Theater. - - .. --*-,-.--R is! r= :q CD CD © CD CD 0 �crt- o=-urnm —'t < CO CO ev s'—' = CD- " � < co can co D a) --v v 0 u c� 0 ' CD 0 �' h-a 0) 0� �) 0 0 "' CD m 0) < o..0 ©� �..�� CD a CD cn CD ro � � CD m (D = CO) CD CD Q. m CD -09 -69 N ~ CO w W -� - J CT7 0 .-+ N a " � 0 P y P C 0 '^J -� Cri N 0 --J W C11 co C,J O O w N W GO P N CTi CO Y .! -4 N -,I .a COD cOJ7 COJt 007 _O �-4' " CO CO O `J O -P 0 .P P C0 �l W W W 00 N O N C.0 N -i O O 07 00 N -lj co O P O O Cori O 0000 -G V O � � y Cri � Cn CO (Yi O W -4 W J O W W C0 �1 DD O CJ1 `J -1 W C31 C71 W O n -P IV N P CO �! P Cri - coO --1 (31 - ONO coE (.00 -� cn - mil O CO -� C0 -A- 0) cn " N O -P.---4C0 W Cri -4 O cn alCN4 N OP O W P N P O P P C0 P CO0 O O m --4 --4--I k Cn W Z _ CID --4 N C 1 N Cn -� -a p 0 a {� W W C) CID co � co N C�7 t 0�0 CJt � N � coO cOJi N O --4 -P O W O m - CTt O C0 (r, -h- -A -J O N -1 " CJ1 m 00 GJ C0 0 -P W U'i W 0) O N -� Cn cn N OP O CO 4- P O W 6) O CO O CO0 CO)) COO O .NP -en fA C7) N W co N C0 N (3) W 00 j CO _a W P O CWO CTi -•I 4`- ^�7 w N) O 00 CO O 00 W CL-' O C Y) W 'J `-4 P -� W OD 0) W -1 O 0) N C.W O GTt O N In O P P W -00 N Cy0 a o Oo 00 -y cn rn -•1 Co O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 m 0 CO C=) 00 CO 0 0 000CL ao m c.nN W W CO N Cri N J W _a Cl)N W N W 0 � 00 O O.) -P W QD W CD -� C0ri co co •�-� CCD CO- CT� -� 000 P Cyri yP CD 00 0) _W W Cri W Cri Cri .P W 0 OP , -4 CL N O OP oo O N rn O � O N Cul Cori CW0 U7 O CEO cO0 -en -09 W W -1 Z p y (DD O C0 W N s O-P (D cTI O Ul �'�J C OCF) CWT1 000 --I O CD cn 00 -P CNri O O W -co oc) 0) V7 N P CS) N 0 C) 00 C0 0 rn� w O 0 CO 0 --4 N 0o C3) 0 0) -� 0 P N O O( O -0P O `-I O "0 P j 0 Cat Cri N O co C37 O N p y -En CD W _ Z Q7 n W tJt N) coP O O _a O 00 -,j -� - N O� N a -4 M � N CCP p CC n W COO cn N (00 )I Cori � m 0) N V-WP ' O ro �P al N O N 0 co Oo C3) -P 0 -� O W M co W CO W 0) 0 A N O -i W C3) G CD O N N O O O `-4 N N N.)07 Cri Cri CID O '� i `I O a m -60 iJ (/) m " C 0 N P W Cri �I N 00 W C0 -' O O 0) C37 ! O tV 00 P cn � N �G O _ O 00 y P O N O W OP O CO a O 6 4> CNJ --4 CO C� N O) _ W -� N 00 - - - - F�iTIKNM�iv'� 0 �- Property Tax Collection Calculations 2016/17 Assessed Valuation 2,537,384,808 2017/18 Increase to AV 3.41 % _ 2017/18 Assessed Valuation 2,623,782,823 Rate/1000$ 4.1972 Property Tax Collection 2017/18 17 11,012,541 2018/19 Increase in AV 3.50% 2018/19 Assessed Valuation 2,715,615,222 i Rate $ 4.1972 11,397,980 Property Tax Collection 2018119 m JACKSON COUNTY Oregon October 14, 2016 City of Ashland Attn: City Recorder/Treasurer 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 RE: Notification of Taxes to be received :�- Treasury & Taxation Shannon Bell Tax Collector 10 S Oakdale Room 113 Medford, OR 97501 Phone: 541-774-6535 bellsa@jacksoncounty,org www.jacksonr-ounty.org The amount of taxes for your district to receive from the 2016-17 property tax levy is calculated to be: Code 200 City of Ashland $10,650,471.53 Code 201 City of Ashland Bonds $ 515,116.30 Total to be received $11,165,587.83 We will process weekly tax turnovers through the end of November, and then return to a schedule of processing turnovers early each month. Each turnover will include current and delinquent property taxes, as well as interest earned on delinquent payments. Sincerely, Shannon Bell,/" Tax Collector rA-Orlo MOO TABLE 4a -- DETAIL OF TAXING DISTRICT LEVIES TAX YEAR 2016-2017 County: JACKSON Taxing District Code .......................... +'axing District Name ......................... 3 Counties in which District lies .................. 4 Levy Approved Before or After 10/6/01 ........ Ad Valorem Tax Levies 5 Permanent Levy (if dollar amount) ........ 6 Local Option Levy (if dollar amount)* ............. 7 "GAP" Bond Levy ........................... . 8 Urban Renewal Special Levy .................. . 9 Bond Levy ................................. 10 Total Dollar Levy (add lines 5 through 9) ........ Adjustments 11 Amount Raised in Other Counties ................. 12 Net Dollar Levy for Tax Rate (line 10 minus line 11). Taxable Property Value 13 Total Taxable Assessed Value .................. . 14 Add: Nonprofit Housing Value ................. . 15 Add: Fish and Wildlife Value .................. . 16 Subtract: Urban Renewal Excess (amount used only)** 17 Value to Compute the Tax Rate ................ Tax Computations 18 Tax Rate (for dollar levies, line 12 divided by line 17)*** 19 Amount Tax Rate Will Raise (tine 17 times line 18).. . 20 Truncation Loss (line 19 minus line 12) .......... . 21 Total Timber Offset Amount (county district only) ... . 22 Timber Tax Rate (line 21 divided by line 17)....... . 13 Billing Rate (line 18 minus line 22) .............. . Calculated Tax for Extension for District (line 23 times line 17) 4.. Gain from UR Division of Tax Rate Truncation..... . 24b Gain or Loss from UR Division of Tax Across Counties 24c Net Tax for Extension (24 + 24a + 24b) .......... . 25 Actual Tax Extended for District. ................ 26 District's Gain or Loss from individual Extension (25-24c) 27 District's Compression Loss (enter as a negative number)**** 28 District Taxes Imposed (line 24c+ line 26 + line 27) . Additional Taxes/Penalties 29 Farmland (ORS 308A.703) ..................... 30 Forestland (ORS 308A.703) .................... 31 Small Tract Forestland (STF) (ORS 308A.703)..... . 32 Open Space (ORS 308A.318)................... . 33 Single Family Residence (ORS 308.686) .......... 34 Historic Property (ORS 358.526)................. 35 Other 36 Late Filing Fee County Only (ORS 308.302) ........ 37 Roll Corrections (ORS 311.206).................. incl. omitted propertylother roll corrections, but excl. roll corrections under ORS 311.208. 38 Total Additional Taxes/Penalties (add lines 29 thru 37) 39 TOTAL TO BE RECEIVED (line 28 plus line 38) ... September 30, 2016 12:56 PM BONDS LOCALor UR PERMANENT OPTIONBONDS W- 1., M5 Lie Inside Inside Outside mit I M6 Limit I M6 Limit I M5 Limit 1 TOTAL r�LL ps`� 0.0o.o o.0 0.00m 0.oq 0.0g 0.00 0.004197 0.0000000 0.000000q 0.0000000 0.004197 10,649,911.5 0.00 0.00 0.0 10,649,911.5 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.0 0,0 0.000000 0.004197 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.004197 10,649,911.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,649,911.52 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,649,911.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 649,911.5 10,649,911.91 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,649,911.91 0.3 0.0 6.0 0.0 0,39 -8.4 0.0 0.0 -8.44 10,649,903.4 o.og 0.0g 0.00 10,649,903.4 10,649,90,' 0.0 0.0 568.0 10,650,471.53 40 Percentage Schedule (ORS 311.390) [OPTIONAL, SEE INSTRUCTIONS] 11 111 11 low 0.0393973 * if district has multiple Local Option or Bond levies, please show each levy on a separate 4a page (see instructions about combining in some cases). '* For urban renewal special levies, enter zero on this line: excess value is not subtracted. "* Line 1211-ine 17 computation applies ONLY to dollar levies; if district has a rate levy, enter the tax rate used. **** Enter only the district or U.R. special levy compression loss. Urban renewal division of tax compression loss is reported on table 4e. See Instructions. TABLE 4a -- DETAIL OF TAXING DISTRICT LEVIES TAX YEAR 2016-2017 County: JACKSON Taxing District Code .......................... razing District Name ......................... 3 Counties in which District lies .................. 4 Levy Approved Before or After 1016l01 ........ Ad Valorem Tax Levies 5 Permanent Levy (if dollar amount) .............. . 6 Local Option Levy (if dollar amount)` ............ . 7 "GAP" Bond Levy ............................ 8 Urban Renewal Special Levy .................. . 9 Bond Levy ................................ . 10 Total Dollar Levy (add lines 5 through 9) ...... , . Adjustments 11 Amount Raised in Other Counties ................ . 12 Net Dollar Levy for Tax Rate (line 10 minus line 11). Taxable Property Value 13 .Total Taxable Assessed Value ............:. . . . 14 Add: Nonprofit Housing Value ................. . 15 Add: Fish and Wildlife Value ................... 16 Subtract: Urban Renewal Excess (amount used only)** 17 Value to Compute the Tax Rate ..... . ......... . Tax Computations 18 Tax Rate (for dollar levies, line 12 divided by Tine 17)*** 19 Amount Tax Rate Will Raise (line 17 times line 18).. . 20 Truncation Loss (line 19 minus line 12) ........... 21 Total Timber Offset Amount (county district only) .... 22 Timber Tax Rate (line 21 divided by line 17)....... . 93 Billing Rate (line 18 minus line 22) .. . ........... . Calculated Tax for Extension for District (fine 23 times line 17) Gain from OR Division of Tax Rate Truncation..... . 24b Gain or Loss from OR Division of Tax Across Counties 24c Net Tax for Extension (24 + 24a + 24b) , , ........ . 25 Actual Tax Extended for District ................. 26 district's Gain or Loss from individual Extension (25-24c) 27 District's Compression Loss (enter as a negative number)**** 28 District Taxes Imposed (line 24c+ line 26 + line 27) . Additional Taxes/Penalties 29 Farmland (ORS 308A.703) .................... . 30 Forestiand (ORS 308A.703) ................... . 31 Small Tract Forestiand (STF) (ORS 308A.703)..... . 32 Open Space (ORS 308A.318)................... . 33 Single Family Residence (ORS 308.685) .. , ..... 34 Historic Property (ORS 358.525)................ . 35 Other 36 Late Filing Fee County Only (ORS 308.302) ....... . 37 Roil Corrections (ORS 311.206)................. . Incl. omitted property/other roll corrections, but excl, roll corrections under ORS 311.208. 38 Total Additional Taxes/Penalties (add lines 24 thru 37) 39 TOTAL TO BE RECEIVED (line 28 plus line 38) ... September 30, 2016 12:56 PM "GAP" BONDS or OR PERMANENT LOCAL OPTION I SPECIAL LEVY BONDS BEFORE BEFORE Inside Inside Inside Outside M5 Limit I M5 Limit I M5 Limit I M5 Limit I TOTAL 0.0 0.01 0.0 0.00 Q.0 0.0g o.og 515,309.0 515,309.00 0.000000 0.0000001 0.0000000 0.0002030 0.0002030 0.0 0.0 0.0 515,089.1 515,089.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 -219.8 -219.88 0.0 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000203 0.00 0.000000 0:000000 0.000203 0.0 0.0 0.0 515,089.1 515,089.12 Q.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.01 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0c 0.04 0.0 515.089.11 515,089.12 o,oc 0.00 0.0c 515,088.8 515,088.82 0.0c o.oq 0.0 -0.3 -0.3 0.0 o.00 Eoc .o 0.0 0.0 0.0c 515,088.81 515,088.8 0.Q 0.0 OA 515,116.3 515,116.3 ...:z.i.' .• I l f l i i l# * If district has multiple Local Option or Band levies, please show each levy on a separate 4a page (see instructions about combining in some cases). ** For urban renewal special levies, enter zero on this fine: excess value is not subtracted. *** Line 12/1-ine 17 computation applies ONLY to dollar levies; if district has a rate levy, enter the tax rate used. **** Enter only the district or U.R. special levy compression loss. Urban renewal division of tax compression loss is reported on table 4e. See Instructions. 'a 03 -0 > c co m -j CO O CO V zi b, 6 c, 5N S. P� pA - 8 T - CO to t00 OD [h OO M M to LlKI 67if FAMMO 2 CS !9' Cc> 8 a 8 tt> OMm cli 1:1 C:l 00 IU-) IG ri Cli s a 0 U) am cf r m co cv O 'S coc, C�l ccl C� cl c)I cf� -t al -k I'd "C�- En- Im- C:> co -.r w cli 0 S C'! 00 111 'f! u-, c:::! M Cl) EGO LO 'r C, OM C,j CO 2! 401 to C� Cn,:L cc::! -I N W V �Q M, Cc, M 0 0 d" C-1 Lo co lCt C', CL 2 C'4 N co CN m Co 0- U- W FR CO O C"D C', 'r- w m r 11 C'� C'! to 6 q06 CVf 1600 Z:� C0 tO "" CVr- 02 cl cCr n C) :z uj co cn m 04 P- cli O eq C) m a> m CO U� Clli 5� cli E E •CN to C'i r N W) r- N w ?., LL, co: tU to C"L r'_ 2 c, c, C6 M, ".0 '10 9 "m C CO .0 C' ;; C%� Iq i w C4cm. CIE co ': r�: CN 00 LO 1.0 C> 0 t0 h CD M r m I. ul Ci C! C! C"! tq ONOC> co tmO 1�2 CO6 C11 <D Cl� CD C4 CV _47 c! al 1 CVL 'r tO VO C"! ai CIA co - �r M 0c5� q� CD Cl) Cl) CN to 00 CT) m c:, r-., C"t tq. C� -cl C6 " = to " O t!3 L6 m t6 --ccC,: a: �i i i ,1 G - - a) LO Cl) C-i xi G 6f> *& 691 V> (M to CO cic� C> <r �r C-i C6 o Cli al Oct C-4 -It oi LL 69. (6 V> 61} Q to (D in w (D a 0 0 co 4) CO CC v > E trt 42 E Q wm- E O a) . U- cm 0 = tn w OR 00 4G.) m G. :E o g, C�. q, CD C�. p c) CD 0 w CL 04 M LO COO t- CO M 4) r 1.4- �r v- ' r <r Vr Nr NT Ci In all F- m CD r- 0 0 CD m 00 z cn (D m CD C) -'r u-, �2 LU C:t LQ C:i Ci Iq LQ - 0 LQ m ccLo i m A CN m = 2 V co LM m 0- 0 a, z P) m C) C) LO CF) F- m Cl) CD r- C) C> C�l C:� C) -1 LQ -t LQ al -t oc� C'i to t- U., co P- 00 1- r- U.) Q. C) �2 C=) r- co ci to E C) cl� Cli Cli cli >- 2 o U- 0- � Q in .0 C:> C�l LO CD C) tr) 'r m ,a r— CD w C) m U') co w (:::L IQ Ci lrC"! t--� � r— fn O UD to co m CD 0) O 0 1-- ( ,22 �T C2 CC) m rl- cq cc� r-�, Cli 0 U"7 co Cl) C� 0- 1- Cl) co 't 04 C) cq m LO cq CC) CD rl- co cciC14 Cli co C::: t-L ClLO i LO w �t co m co a) CD �t co E r- co F- cc-3-3 c) (o m m cli cq Ci cr� :z uj m cr m co co co �r o LQ rl-i cri Cl ocof to C) CD c" I- — s2 Ci LQ Lr� UJ LO CO N 00 2 m-fl-r- - Cl) M CD P- oo CD 00 M L6 -a cc l ocl 1�3- .0CECD - -1 - cl- -1 (C� CD M C�l I�r M m C� cic� Cli oci LQ Cli LO N 00 U- C) C=) CD CD CD (D CD Qy m CD c::) CD go Q m =� L6 COD Zt �r m . Cli m 2 C- Ill-L "a CO CV co z m E 09, V.� 0) co LO CCD C�) C14 C') cf� - rrIt C; lC 7t - zT CII M CO C14 CC) f- LO 'n CVU3 ai r-� C-4 V') I- z m co co r- r-- m Co C" co C*4 tO 4z OS cq v Cli Cli U'j f-- N CO 04 03 CD m m U")N 03 d0' C� C14 L E CD cu cu a) cy CO U) S ) 8) to (D a) 0 0 > E ` rn a) a> > >0 Z3 Z5 a LT- 75 (D E" 2) T 0 �3 6 >< Co cu CZ J-- a) 0 r:, 7E 'D -S t--- 0 — :5 0 U) � 71 ' Z z m 'Li to O r N M W N 0 M M M 00 M fl-- N 1 NCL Z d' 'Id-N P dto r 64 to N p O W 0 N 0O0_ W N CO co u> Z E p CL CU CA O'er!' CCQ VN N r Cl) L HL Zm 0 co 'a 0 0 t O 4) O 4 N O M M M Q r O N N N M 'c!' 00 o r r M u? z_ cl m � 0 N Cf! P T Cl) M t0 L N Z W C= CO SY O M <i M et 6e V} P r r , N cD M O co CF) O O c7 CC) CA tom'- N P N t- h- M O C> U'> c0 N a+ r O - O N N EW CV CV N 63 tO W T <t rt m -eY 0 O LO — O O r N Q P CD r O r T y CV CV N L 6H V) d O � M C`n L M r O to 10 r to P Lf) m -a 1' cj- CV P N N «O z C E Q 69 tR u? co h- O I O o0 00 M f0 Ll CCV ham+, C j Cl) Ci r cN `t to n .N N C.? coo 00 m rO-- Co (c Cl7 Z Q M M N CO m ffJ V3 00 CO cq co [V CY3 4M h_ O Cl) N OS Ch Cf N 003r r O O N Q 0 CA 00 0 N W 69, 64 rn C fll E N V v is c s � 2 N U N N V N � 0 Cc 0 N Ui C = U Ov C 10 O O C _ in U U E E) O O a)U N N_ 0c 0� 10 C) C:) C> O CD O LO c� C> cD C> 'It Lo C:� C:� c� "I� O> "t o w cN'-d- co oo " cD a 'Ir 01� a� rL cli U-) co a- z 2 LU m a. Lu 17 o C> c:) c3 u) c::> (N ul c> C> C> cli L'i c�l c�l c� cz:t r czt Lo r-i w cr� =� 'mt v 0 co (D c> �r to co cD c:� �t t�2 E aL 04 (o � r N m L.L CL m �. uco cD c:l cD oo c:l C> C> 0 CD m cl! to 1--L 7 w w Cli u) (=i oci c7i D " C�, O c� c�l c) --: m r.- 0 to to co Lo Ict -Ir cD to C� a2L Lo C-) LQ 04 (q "14i < C-4 cr, u- CL r-- c> u, co m r- rto 17 w C0 m u� Clr- fl� i �i aiC:- wi aco c�) Oct tQ v) cl� lo O 04 m ;, Cli �E cli LO CN LU f m r-- 04 .2 :: � cD r-�. ci �2 "t oi co clL c7> c o ci 6 O - co cl"> W> u) co W3 E f-- co co r- c) (3i c,A E Lo CVrl-L clj clj LU oo rl- cD Lo 17 '@ co Vi 'r clj fl- ci r-- cli tD c7i C*4 Q (9) Lo cN " �o (" t- u) c:, m CI(i co cor.- 04 <" co co C> tD C) 0 -.t m C) OIL ci ai "'t c--� I=t cc 7 a) cooO <D C) m co c) �2 m f- co C:> Zt co In oc� -4- It IQ cli Z�"> - ce) LO mw E C) to :4 co C) cli Lo cc� cc zi; cQ cv(:, i lo cl st - co to m a m Lo m cN cc) I;R Lo = — a! r-� I vi g m cN clj o) m rl. u3 m cci cli C:t u.) cc - co m - cr� Ili ccO q C> I 't cD co m Lo c3 C) m 2, cD Cy� �t Cl) ;- c) "tr oo 'r cli cli O cn cli LL 0 W r v) CL Q N O a Z n W rn m 0�/ T ids W r N 0 E 0 oo r W N O O } N tL a. F- m t ) c0 O r N t-% to r O O CL N O Ll- a` a> Lo t6 N A Z LU m L�, r r r N CD, tp R T E E O N N c d m _ L r O V N Q ?- U- m 1�- 'CS r O LI; m O N N 'O Z = Co Q cA N to a" Q m M r w O V N Q u. O O O � LO o LO Cl) r N r tM 61T O O M co r N 6s} O O O tc) cc) cV N LO r u7 N o ram-- --t N N M N N �i G-? W o a o O O c0 r M 6s3 O O co O> O~'> N CV N Ln r r c0 69 O co 'R N 6fi O O M c0 <t r N h C77 rn rn co N N co 6s} O IO O CO c0 � r c`'i 0 r M LO cci N T tC) ti N 6f} O M co c0 N 6R3 v N r c0 tc? O 69 O to M 40 LZ N co Q1 ts> O O N O O! LO to r c0 to co 603, O r M O M 613, F— O O O O Z O O O C. T W r tom•• V' to O O) O) co NO Vt CV M ONO Cl) O N Ln T LO V a' W m j3 W 'T V CO cc O N Q IQ p � Co Q. oo (n M E O O O N CL N O d' Ci0 r ct N tp m 00 c:)oCD, oc` O u> O " rn <t ~ O N o O CL r t~fi r N st N LL H O N O N O L N cc ti V—I N N cf) O) I-• M h- O T C G N N eM- co00 Z W CO � ti as CO C*Y o0 h- to M N N L O CC to t L N T "T co h- V' cn N r E to W co ukcii W CO C N m w T N cD M N co CO tt) it O d' Cl) t`- O O CD i+ i`r cc Ln ~ r N cz ,� OO � co N cm cO w t7L' ER y O O Q) ci' M Of T O O � W h. 'O O Ut - O) Id- N I - T O v!) m O O N O M m C' M cc T O N M M T N .� Z G m w Q 69 N T QDD N O h- cc fN- M O 00 M m M M <o O V z ~ N <t m Clii m r tR M M N �. r CO 00 r -- M T c0 co O) CO c0 p Q LO U') ~ QO LLO © o 0 o Laic) o o ocD o000cc cc O r+ '0 U�? O r CMp 3 CS IQ N CD US COD UO ' Co 1iTi Q cy a � N � M � L ui CL co0 cn 61k U- CD T CD' ' O O O CD O N N N d O O O LC) O� CCoo `e0� O y ti M CC .M- UO") COO OM'r 00 'n O LO 0 0 0 0 Lra)') 0.0 U) O CD O O Lf� O CD cc r C h-- O iJ M M V5 r- r-- Zo CD00. m N N M Lf) a C-4 co co O h- M (D a) O (7) �.. r CO O N O O K7 8r 'rt M O N r- O cD N o0 r D 'd O Lo N O m 0 V' O Cct() UD O CX) o0 N 'U, Z Lu td r- r O r- O O a) m Itt a) N O cr -- LC 6) - C' - O to O O <t LC? N O N U'3 CQ CV r_ 1M- aN) cMD rl- O LO N Lham•. CDtD N r N CV O) r N >- W C4 Ir co L ul C N m 0 co CN') N c�D 0 IOC) — cm cc? tc "t lz Cf 0 O •'' ~ CC D N r N M ooc W CN Q r rCf3 Ln r- !i ER y O Lij O b N Lrn o00 UicriOoom cc z3 v co r- sr CDcl i n ai r = VN' coO N LC} cOD CY) a LC7 CD CV Ch M CO N of 6g r Z � Ln ccoo co tMD o rr- co m r N LCa L cY r- LC7 M M t0 m r O N M LC) a) C Cl) a) CN N M CNV N L U} O Z `Z N " = .�- fd t� r U7 cf? r- c")d' U? N N M O CD Y c3i C, O ODcdO N teYO N C) . N U- cn C O � Qy LL d E < 6 N 43 N CT � w . a v tY v m o u! c9 U N (6 E L` ii cT U) N 03 4) to > .0 w ii c� As6.. a.): C j N V > CN tL C6 �-•' in 1 W G 0 Q) C) X d N U=m cn L- N CD Cn fY N I-- z LLJ a_ LLJ 0 ca CD. O C> LO LO O CD C> C> N C'j cn CD CD uj M 0l CD O C) M �t 04 ,7 cri P-:, Ct cs:t oci Ili (=� (=� CllM i I Oct CO C� 1'- 4) LO CD co cn. r-- Lo C) co CD C� co LO 0 Lo 00 r-- 0 Cl i Cli C�L OCL "*: C� It z: co w " CO to CO C" U) C,4 CL Cl) cli CY3 to "Lo co m m 2 Cl) O c) CD CID Lrl L�or co LO cl -a2 CD D �t It 00 'r w r-, r-I C! - - - - vo 0 U') C) CV) CD LO co co to C14 O 0 �r V m LO m CL LQ (=� Lri C') to O LO LL- C-9. 00 O CD CD U'J LO CD CD C:) Lo 1- C, r- CD CD C:) C) CD 03 W P- cz:� (n L6 Lo r- co w O 00 m to m co occc 0 �2 u-I 't " " m 'r Cq m - LQ 'It Idi I i � 2 r- C14 r- ;3 co V) '14 co CCOJD 4m Oc 7 tO C"- ! LO -ao LLBOct -00 &I --I LO rl_ 00 C:) 00 co co C� ;!Z: co m co O CC) co " V) 0� co Cli C"t C-4 C-4 ,:t cq ocC� U) 00 r-- Lu co cn r-- co c) CD CD r-- M co : C', C:> CD L" C', �t lZr co �r 11 V L" r- " It 'L 16 :6 C:5 rz CO CO CO C'j- a,- .0- r,.o - to r.- C, L" q Cp I" mr- CI-04 C'A V O:i - - CN v- >- w C14 LL rst C14 t O7 LO OD t 00 to m �o :D It " �LO r-- co '7 00 Lq CL Oct ,4� cl! cl! CIL Oct Cli r- co r- I-- C-4 C'i C'4 CN Lo C_ Co LO C:) r- C =, LOcll� -,d7 cq co CN LL 613. V9. 8 Cc:3 8 8 CC-t-4 M' cn cc� r.-I OCI --I cl! Ul LQ ocl a z;; �r to ru, -) CWD CWD Wt I ED 9 a lw- m rl- 17 cl! Cl� cc C! "*L r-1 Cli U, Z; LO cq LO C:) co r-- -000CLO CN w cl� cli rl- co 2"a C m 0 E 6,3. 6Rs 7 00 co N m Lo ;" Q I- C> co m m U-3 r� r, co Cf) CNE "a Cli Clli CIL - LO Lo CIJ CO cl) to ::t CR CIF r-- CD to cq C, LO Lo C', CO ', a� C'! f-- Lq - -CO a� It N (D to co cn C%j ,t m rsl cl> O CO CD M O CO C, �:: C3 LO cy, C3 f.- LO co <D m CD in LQ - - I cli m m ui co m co co- CO CN m 2 r- ;a,; cli 0co mr 04 oj T N w coc,0 Cf C,4 U. *09, E can coo E cr wc) cu > cr- =w3 c (D 0 2 m CD -F, > X 0 0 C2 > d) (D W > E S� Z5 0 a -c� cn 0) m C13 > 00 E 0 aff 2' 67 2) rn P �-) 0 0 0 0 a) LL- . cu �i Z6 , 1: C. CD C. 105 2:,:- =, < E :E 0 C/) . of -S t-I cc CL 4) 4) 00 w O u'> CDZ O ohCi c (m LLI O CZo 1- o C7 O CT O 0 C 0 r V O tip C 'V Q N Q � N a. W m n' l� �.J in m 4a Lij N c� I O OOi r- IN=- 0�'O 4) _CL N c0 C I— G O E— o ccv a trio r m otn Cl! tt N to �Ju Wr r 4& TO o CD+n o tc> <r o tc� c rn r- 00 to 0 Cl O v rn rn m a N OO h N Ncli C� to aa` � r +fl tf) CV c N_ W co tU j (D m to tfj N M C+) O N LO OO 00 'CN d_ N Z N r 1 uj m � r O tip CO Cp V O tC? h N tfi tf! r N � O CO N 47 N N O E N C"' Cv r N E> 11J tR C U') co N r"� O t0i r- CND � O Cl) M ��-' v h N N co C 04 LL Ef} O 00 N M I— O t C", O � t1j Ca [q m 6�i 00 h tO kR z G m Q � N co co N Lo N h cm 11 O CD !3l CV m ' h M i{! U? CZ)h - to 11) 04d �h co r N N C= 'a' ram- z Q r (dl t{N-i CA O O coh to a0 m {mT h N m N CV r0 M C" 0 r Ca Ll � O r LL Wq. Cn c N E N CU � C N cr tU 1 m a a, m E o m } ' m CD is tomco - N U N_ CU a m CD C:) C) c:> C) 't to C� rn LU (:::t cl� (Zi h to CD to C) CN CN LO a) LO C%4 C:� cq 0) Cf) co 0 to— -,I -I c'! C, CL cli co = P M m CL aLU m CD CD r- 00 (9 co f- L 0 CD C\1 r- , - f- cl, u co w C� cw)- r- C*4 -j C; 1.0 E cc)L LCOD 0' m--o U- co 4) c=� cl) ci 0� CNL ai vi� U) O 00 f-- r- CD co CD 0 'r m (2 ham-0)C.4 m cli Ic" 00 i , 0 a. 601, m r- m U-3 co r- to r- C14 CO "IdL C-4 lc:� Cli lc� Fes- r �2 C'A O Cl) Lu Cl) CIA m 40), C� co Cl) C- 00 00 CD to (3i co Cli Cli C� ocoC:) ors ri cq — E r-nor - oc0 co O� cm E rLL ui m to :F C") m co to CIZ clco Cli to LO C> CD co m m t- U*) m C'i I Ld LL- 69� CD r M C-4 CD C'J LO in m C') al m co co C� rn CD cm co m m E4) c:> Lo r- Lo U, C� co 00 (D to Ln m w m C14 CO CD coco co to co C-to 4 C-4 cli m C14 M 10 CC' LO C" Cl) m U*) rl- cn (=� Vi Ico Lr� Cli co co 6 -:t CN A 'N wi C Ll- E CD cr U, > OS (D C. co TO: 2— cu E > a) :3 =5 (n (D cn E > (n S =3 > 'C� Eo c 0 C) w F- to 2) (2 W cn c U) 0 E tf tu CL a) 0 vice FANOWA F- 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD O CO O O CD O LO CD O O -Itt0 I-- CC) wCO O N Ir d_ O O C6 W O O m Co r CO T m t- t- o --i C coo M N O v II W m � CT) EH t!i � CD , CD d) d N CD 8 O M I` O O tN9 O 04 in O f ) CO O 0) - OM to CD � b- 'sY LO]. = N O 1�- O m m CO •= y, t_ r r U) M r G LL to N m b N 0 1 O N co m O O r Oto to ~ co O NQ N a1 I`- r V N r co V' ? co O Cl) r U) O LLL d ts> ro ' ' O m 0) O C2 � O2 oc O O r C U) tO r yN„ Ln w h- N O CV N N CO r M N W [a EA h- r , ' .ram. O �, t,- � tmO tD {OVI) N E m 00 t.- O d' m O CM+ :3 `l- Lu G N La to tmo Od- O CD O CO O O N LO of M O I- m - h- CO p CD C� N O N O tom.) [O ( an d N N ` ITl V h- N O 00 d Lcli O M O O D O coc N a O O CD-O I CO N n r r-c`oo mt000 3 Ln 0� o Un CD LO rr v v o m tv m N O Z G in E Q tt C~O C) O> O CO r tD O OR ao O Ct) O C14 co N -It U") f+ N O m CDU O CO 00 O) O) t0 N Q 2 r N o7 N m M Cl) , Cl) � O N O N N CO M CO N. 7 CN CO i` O CDi to O V co 'ct Om) com tb r N Q 9- � `O U- {� U C C N Li CU N C c N a) a) E > E CD O c Z 5 cn c > E cn to o -0� C p> ta am m rn 'C � imo) m—_o co X N � iOr, SF-in� 0 rnm0000 0 r O O P 1:11 M N O N N M h- Cl) r h- i W iV1 H CDO Q OM7 N(D 00 O COD CN r 0 n. W rn Cf3 or r- Oo m.0 o(CDvLOoLOaOo N E — O o a � N N CY) CAD mcocot t N O O CO ��a. C N (f} m O O O O O O C> M .a O) CC) (D u) O O y C") t� O u) CD O h Cn O V M CSC co (D O co r N N t O rL O CO oc t N N O - CD co r CV LL C{3 N O LO O O 1- O ti M O n t O CON I'li O O Cl O m w CO t t CD " r' E u) t CC) O O u) t O. CZ0 C M M h- N Ni 1 r M 2 W M r m E� F- to Or O N M O ' r ,F; h^- �- O t O CD Cb CCI 00 CO Ph- M Cc) u7 o E c\1 cD C) LO N CA tD �.► LU LL CO O m co co ccam}-� ''d O r a O " [D O c7 CD to O N O C> M N N d Cal CO r W 691 .a.. O t LO O O CO O t CD0 0 'SOf' N NCO M O t M M CCS m M t V t N 0 C M .M-^ r CDO N .O Z G m E d M 00 r h- U") a) V) ut') sM- tt) Or Ocl M � rO a0+ Cn (D co t O N V p+ O M N N m 61), 00 00 O CC) CD It ' M r N 0) O M r- N Oc u7 Cl) O co h ; O w CCV O— M O N Q CO }- lL r � Q) C N Cn U O c v N � a @ CD W a> O C O C N ca N N > C) N O c — LL G N Cn N — O X N O N con s � 0 LL - � O I— C-4 LO co �r ti N N r- m CV bh O O t- O (O c» N M C7) M t-� CN() Ev M M M N tR to N Ct i N 613 d' ti M C() 00 M O c0 cm t+ V3 O t7) tND L • ii �om W' i A CJkM6ov'f \ 0 2017-19 Biennial Budget General Fund Revenue Description FY 2012-13 Actual BN 2013-15 Actual BN 2015-17 Amended BN 2017-19 Proposed 400 Working Capital Carryover $ 3,495,819 $3,385,681 $3,400,277 $4,412,535 Taxes Property Taxes Current 4,349,412 18,624,711 19,515,640 21,276,400 Prior 222,158 750,349 900,000 770,000 Electric Utility User Tax 2,704,335 5,818,200 6,298,000 6,890,47.0 Water surcharge for AFR - - 350,000 350,000 Franchises 2,774,205 5,748,952 6,358,340 7,072,030 License 218,903 436,242 443,200 498,700 HoteVMotel Tax 2,009,703 4,554,424 5,229,810 5,880,900 Marijuana - 330 2,000 - 410 Total Taxes 12,278,716 35,933,208 39,096,990 42,738,500 Licenses and Permits Planning and Zoning Fees 316,845 1,116,283 1,064,000 863,000 Building Permits 236,005 664,979 779,925 622,300 Fire Permits 30,829 91,535 66,500 115,000 420 Total Licenses and Permits 583,679 1,872,797 1,910,425 1,600,300 Intergovernmental Revenue Federal 19,215 26,171 940,392 825,659 State 552,298 1,347,204 1,658,978 1,361,930 430 Total Intergovernmental Revenue 571,513 1,373,375 2,599,370 2,187,589 Charges for Services Police 96,174 284,725 205,000 215,000 Court 355,273 522,333 500,000 386,000 Legal 2,606 3,986 4,000 5,000 Fire and Rescue 1,106,437 2,170,563 2,087,350 2,568,000 .+� Cemetery 23,414 71,253 70,000 63,000 Planning Division Services 32,190 63,540 70,000 60,000 Building Division Services 17,850 32,441 45,000 30,000 Miscellaneous 263,000 - - - 440 Total Charges for Services 1,896,944 3,148,841 2,981,350 3,327,000 Fines Court Fines 196,535 362,187 410,000 857,900 450 Total Fines 196,535 362,187 410,000 857,900 Interest on Investments 1 Interest an Pooled Investments 22,045 47,932 60,000 75,000 470 Total interest on Investments 22,045 47,932 60,000 75,000 Miscellaneous Revenues Donations 24,508 46,670 21,400 55,200 Miscellaneous Income 51,483 110,366 61,600 340,000 t 480 Total Miscellaneous Revenues 75,991 157,036 73,000 395,200 Other Financing Sources Operating Transfers In, From Reserve Fund - 100,000 - - From Water Fund - 500,000 500,000 From Cemetery Trust 4,826 9,139 10,800 13,000 490 Total Other Financing Sources 4,826 109,139 510,800 513,000 Total General Fund $ 19,126,068 $ 46,390,196 $ 51,042,212 $ 56,107,024 RJ f 001, IF w I m CD ��l I- cO �2 (10 IN 0? IN 7 9 , CD C) CD C) 0 C) C) C) C) (D 0 0 0 0 C) CD o 0000000 f- (D cli 00 0 CI C) C) M 0 0 'd' q q q q M Or 7 0 0 9 q e? — (D — L)f- IN IN C) m (0 r-- m w m C> fl- LO (0 Nr m co C) co (0 — h (3) T — to (D M 0) cq(140 C)I to to " C) a� Clt cccl i � IQ ClCli i to ii Cl) f- — 00 -1 -476 N ';t cq () r- r- (D 6 "q ti 0) Co Co (D to -4Zr 0) (D(o IQ U) "r) cm c) 0 t� N co co I;r (D C) ED o) M C) to to N C) to -It r-- N >- in C4 '! Vi (d (,r �: N(1) cNi 1-: (d lq7 C4 C6 LL — co >- — C\l U. 61) 6030 (D C) LO t- CD 0 CD 03 to h m w IN O In to 0) cq (q (P IN q q c! 7r rcq M W ce) q, M W h LO 't C) r- (D a) (1) LO �NCO0 0 1_ 0) Cq Ce) (D cl� Cl i Ili Iq rr a) v co ON to rd,, r- (0 (0 — 00 C> to "i C4 (D i 6 r Lr) Ld It co 6% 'I-, 'I-, 00 0 0 'I-, to 0) CT) 0) Q C%4 t- a) r� a "r 0 Ei� M c? Iq 7 "q: (l) a 0 C) CD C) 0 a C) m IN m C, a a (D (D a I- a 0000 fl- co m 0 a Q CD a C%j 0 — W a 0 a C) C:) 11: h 6 06 6 vi 6 rl- 6 h (6 06 Cn 4 rl: M LO 11, r- w IN CD 1211 O C'! IQ 01311 U) t, r- to I- Lo Cl) �r C%j 4) — It r CO CC) r- (D 0) Lo a) F) to F) cj to N 4) 0) LO 0 C) 1� LO I- IN M C) CID IN co (1) M0) 00 (0 00 — to Cl c" cm a (D -It co 0 "It LO Clq Cf rz i 't- cl)- — C� cli 1: (d L6 CV Cl) >- ce) LL U. (0) co a) IN 0 fl, C) (D 04 00 r- Lr) C14 LO O rl- co to V: (R U� q (P (q 0O CDN P': r,: cq ",t U r--: U) Imo- cr) C> It LO CD to 00 r- V 0) 00 t- V) 00 o C) (0 C) (D 0 (0 C) C) I ON) CMO C.2 34 (tenLO Vi Cli Vi (r-1) N CJ 0) cj (o r- ci (14 C4 0 -It G)vr '�6 ":,5 Ci to m (D 2 2 Cl. CL U) (1) Q) 06 cu OZ$ (D 0 4) 4) 0 E x C x cu 0 0 0 c a E 0) c Q. cn CD �5 CL) C IV) (IS w o c 70 c 0 0 70 c LLS, LL:3 f-. to c 0 0 C N a 'a .0 M Im MaLL io C U U LL S I c =3 EE LL C: r-�5 n E < LL =3 LL LL LL LL 3: OL E 0 0 i3 0 En 0 o ow In o <m C: 2 (D (2 (u 3: -2 , a) 3: F- �5 (c9 2 -Z� �>w 0 3� > 000*0 -0 .000 1 F.9 13 00 U) c cc 0 U) LL < x 4- x 00- ,�" 4) m 41 ; W 0 0 CL u- m U (D w 4) 0) �-, -.1 -1 O -.lZ e -.* -I ry (D to CN 0 ce) co C, 0 a C) Co C) 0 o C) C, a a C. 0 0 C:) 0 n 0 0 Ol C) ci a0 . . ,f m c> n o N C5 C6 L6 C\F C5 cli CO U-i n co (1) Iq C) U') Lo Lo a) 0 f- CO �2 CON Ce)0:) 6F� C) 0 Q 0 C3 0 S, 0 C� cv) CD 0 0 r"i r�co Iq U') a) lo� C� LQ � CIJ r- rl- CY) — (f) (D w .-I -I 0 0 0 0 -.1 -.1 Ci q O 0 C) C> C) (D C C) C) CD 0 0 0 0 0 C) C) 00000on C, CD Lo (S CD 0 o M t- C> o C) ED (3i LQ Ci Ccl� Ct Lq Ul) to (D co 0) Cl i LQ rll�. - CO CO I- LO to C,� r-� Ce) C13 Y., C 0 E p 4) . C- m 0 m o a) cnwti C: =3 U- tlJ .0 C: C = :3 LL U- E LL U- LL E 619� V). 0 tt 0 LL ea CO co F 0 00co co 0 2 cu CL E V) x a) t� ca F-m 0 mruU) w n 0 4V cc D LL mr- LL -0 'c LL a -0 -a v C :3 titiro3E LL E o (D 5 CL r*-Tiq AM 0ti = Z; Ct P C� p " O --M Z C! Z5 O Ci I=L to I=! 0 6 6 rn 1� cli o6 16 — �2 6 cli �2 ONi W Ci > 4) U) ce r — 4, cc CJ X LU i 6 yj 5 E >, ► — cc 0 cc EO Iq crf O 6 ci c:i Ili w t2 A t2 iry � Ill cli ai 6 Ii Ci O V: to c —0 Li E E E E w u < < < Lu a_ m aii - Return to Table of Contents 2016 statistical section �Q CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON COMPUTATION OF LEGAL DEBT MARGIN June 30, 2016 - Unaudited True cash value $ 3,493,732,448 3 % of true cash value 0.03 $ 104,811,973 NET BONDED DEBT: Gross bonded debt 16,131,707 Less amounts exempted: Water Water re -funding - Total debt applicable to margin 16,131,707 LEGAL DEBT MARGIN $ 88,680,267 ORS 287.004 provides a debt limit of three percent of the true cash value of all taxable property within the Municipality's boundaries. According to ORS 287.004, the three percent limitation does not apply to bonds issued for water, sanitary or storm sewers, sewage disposal plants, hospitals, power or lighting purposes, nor to bonds issued pursuant to applications to pay assessments for improvements or - installments for benefited property owners. Source: Jackson County Assessor's Office Audited Financial Statements Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 287,004, Pa 144 - city of ashland A - F-1fA7'Ar-W RESOLUTION 2010-A A RESOLUTION REITERATING THE NEED OF A, RESERVE FUND AND THE INTENDED SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS ACCUMULATED THEREIN RECITALS: The City must annually adopt a budget that identifies resources, requirements and reserves for the coming year. As part of the budget process the Budget Committee reviews financial policies and provides input on changes in financial condition and the need to use or increase reserves held for general or specific purposes. In FY 2009-2010 a Reserve Fund was established to help prepare for financial constraints. Initial resources identified were a transfer from the Street Fund equal to the amount of Water and Wastewater franchises paid to that fund in that year. The City represented in the budget process that the funds would be held in reserve until a future, annual budget process in which the Budget Committee approved appropriating some or all of the. reserve for use. Other specific resources (revenue streams) and requirements (operational, capital or emergency) were not identified. This resolution is intended to provide clarification on these issues. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: A. Resources to the Reserve Fund will be identified during the annual budget process and may include the following as approved by the Budget Committee: 1. Specific revenue streams such as taxes, franchises, charges for services, interest charges, etc. 2. During the year Council may elect to: a. Transfer surpluses from another fund when its projected ending fund balances reasonably exceeds the target amount for an acceptable period. b. Commit unanticipated resources ("windfalls") to be deposited to the Reserve Fund when doing so is preferential to other uses. B. Requirements of the Reserve Fund will be identified during the annual budget process and may include the following as approved by the Budget Committee: 1. Appropriations to fund a capital improvement identified in the coming fiscal year for which sufficient funding sources have not been accumulated. 2. Appropriations to meet a financial obligation in the coming year that an alternative revenue source has not been identified and accepted. Page 1 of 2 88 3. Appropriations to fund an important program or project in the coming year that will be repaid by a dedicated revenue stream in the subsequent year(s). C. The unappropriated ending fund balance of the Reserve Fund identified in the budget process is restricted from use. This amount cannot be transferred by resolution or used through a supplemental budget, unless necessitated by a qualifying emergency (ORS 294.371). SECTION 2: All references to an annual process for identifying resources and requirements will change to a two-year cycle if the City transitions to a biennial budget. SECTION 3: This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this_Z�rday of June,.2010 13arbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED AND APPROVED this day of June, 2010. Reviewed as rd Appi¢effb, City Attorney Page 2 of 2 89 Documents) Submitted at the 06/05/2017 Ashland Renewable Energy Acquisition Department 1 Introduction to AREAD Global warming isbad, Global -warming isreally bad. Global warming isterrible scary bad. Disasters are happening, People are losing it. Climate -change isALREADY here with more disasters on the way, VVeaccidentally created o monster carbon blanket pile-up. The "least'we can do is STOP adding MORE. Can't do the cars and factories from here. But weCAN ^magnificently''STOP COLD the gunnaboproblem homes and buildings that are designed »uspew atrocious amounts ofcarbon oaueingsfor the next 1OOyears. Oh, whoops. That would ruin our economy Surprise, Stopping bad growth doesn't ruin our economy atall Ashenders actually pay 2times more to suffer new construction then they d�� inother words, new construction costs everybody twice the money it brings in. And fairness, it is not You see, It's the ever increasing environmental externalities Road hazard Rush hours Frantic driving Intersection mass stampedes Get out ofmy density restraining unprotected human bodies inharm's way Hospital emergencies More crime Unemployment Higher Utility bills Water bills More over emped Pipes Wires Water treatment plants Impossible local food production And nnand on Inequities and miseries exponentially cannibalizing the quality of life which now can be identified, measured, and priced. Oh, and don't forget the carbons. And the monster stranded inveetments. inshort Ashland has been wasting $7million dollars eyear toruin the atmosphere 3Otimes faster than not. VVeHAVE TJstop adding houses, buildings, and the externalities they bring. Let's put umoratorium onall dirty growth. Effective today And be done with it. Government salaries can now bespent unenergy engineers toinstall megawatts ofsolar, run cutting - edge upgedeprngnams.andganarat intelligent Structural Wattage destinations. Afantastic future. The Ashland Renewable Energy Acquisition Department would then oversee planning. And who's going toput all this together. Yours truly. 8othe heck with nusteinabNhytalk. Anemic green washing. Barely -hanging -on. Getting used toit. Qrsimply accepting defeat. Best the Ashland Renewable, Energy Acquisition Department asopriority. With Huelz as directoc Putting up to1D MVVanf Energy upgrading your homes. And teaching true Structural Wattage growth. So call your counselors. Call the mayor. Appoint Huelz. Ashland Community Development Director. And let's get started bycost-effectively leasing Tesla electric cars for all the counselors sowecan quioNylearn where we're all going to. And what itfeels like to be going the right way. 2. Home Energy Upgrades The home energy upgrade program is especially exciting, oeitaccomplishes effeotveneaa never before achieved. This is because ALL existing homes and buildings inAshland will receive energy upgrades with the first be|ng� Empty homes for sale, Then those ofpolicy people, Then those eager tohave anupgrade, and finally, ifnecessary, drawing straws (with the option togotothe end ofthe |ine). The city would hire anexperienced managing Energy Performance Contractor tohand-pick from VVDR0NG-loca|'carpentsrs 1Oapplicants who would bn meticulously trained and thoroughly equipped with advanced education modules, updated procedural techniques, and cutting -edge specialty tools. These brand new techniques and tools will increase performance -per -time effectiveness 5times over what isnow existing, enabling atrue market transformation at cost. AHome Performance Contractor can walk into your house, doowalk through with you, setup his measuring equipment, share with you avideo |Rcamera performance MEASURING walk through, print out adetailed itemized sequence ofcost-effective measures, arrange ano'mnney'downloan payment plan, identical toyour current utility payment plan, and guarantee the entire set ofresults. All -in under 2hours. Then. To complete mnoU-2g'mne-timacomprehensive 4Opercent energy reduction, the construction itself requires anaverage cf5days With aloan pay back time of between 7and 15years, after which the savings increase, your home has accumulated value, the upgradoraget REALLY GOOD atwhat they're doing, and you've eclipsed the dreaded retrofit dabb|inga. Also hired isemMBA loan expert, who also manages the paperwork and crew scheduling, Why all the cutting -edge todo? Because the 1O0full-time contractors, subs, and suppliers fully -employed for the entire 25years necessary tu upgrade ALL the homes and buildings inAshland) would reduce Ashland's structural -energy needa 40pooen across the board, conveniently creating clean energy for something else. Although these upgrades themselves do NOT require any incentives, asthey cost the HOMEOWNER only 5cents ak-watt-hour, they DOrequire Ashland tostaff these two new people, and those two would replace our current energy Conservation division which is, and has been, buying efficiency at$1 20 perk -watt-hour This division only measures electrically heated homes and then leaves. Cfthose measured, only 3percent goontocall apart-time.minimally trained, ,hopefully somewhat equipped waatherizer who can only dabble with improvements. And since Bonneville only incentivizescertain dabbles, they seem toget done whether the home needs itornot. All this, combined with redundant paper work isthe cause ofthe $1.2Oper k-watt-hour efficiency acquisition price. Furthermore, Ashland's MILLION DOLLAR DOLLAR /yr "conservation divisimi' would need tospend amentire $15Moyear SIMPLY tocancel-out the planning department's fascination with bi|igepsntlyfoss|izivg this wonderful town with typewriter and oarbun-paper remns, complimented with ever suinnocent what -ever -you -say green -washings. And then, add 1nthat, the D7M from the damgerizingexternalities of real estate gotta -grow before gotta learn. And then, add ontop of that, the coming cost ofclimate change. | remind you, the Ashland Renewable Energy Acquisition Department simply stops all new construction inAshland and inits place administers a3Otimes greater carbon reduction solution, environmentally and morally providing asolid foundation for the hopefully doable planet Earth. 3. Structural Wattage Learning Center The Structural Wattage Learning Center uses absolutely the best-in-tho+woddultimate zam-net-energy-gen°rationdesign uaconstruct amixed-use retail shop right downtown easily gotten toiromthe regular tourist walk and easily recognized byit's awesome solar roof Upon entering, you would see asectional cut -away of the 2-foot thick R-7Owall assembly, Afully functional of the automatic window coverings, An animation of the entire solar -roof voltaga-swhrhingoptions for space heating, elect�lc vehicle charging, or both, Aview ofthe actual utility room tracing the air-to+vatarheat pump and it's various water tank heat tank battery modes, And ofcourse, a real-time.see through fresh -air heat -recovery -ventilator showing air movement through the transfer channels which can be adjusted by your very own breathing. The floors above Would beovernight accommodations with more information, hands-on with the actual equipment, and topped -off with otour ofthe solar roof's various attic configurations. Since this isthe wodd's firs global -warming demonstration so|uticm that actually functions perfectly, both creating money and stabilizing the future planet Earth, itwould boworth experiencing up -close and personal And what ifthe Department ofEnergy chipped inonthis monstorDuelearning event with instrumented data -logging verifications. the sooner the better. |npreparation, there's ovideo tobefound at YouTube Structural Wattage. And if you can get through the uberprofessional presentation, and ifyou Qosofar asto study and research this Structural Wattage YouTubevideo tothe point ofthorough understanding, you'll confidently be on top of the whole subject. What we're seeing here isaprogression, Throughout ancient history, the extra -human power source was wood. And then wefound coal, which took ahundred years 1ointegrate. and then wediscovered gas, which took ahundred years tointegrate. and now we've arrived sttechnology, whirk'||need ahundred years tpintegrate. The only problem is, we've only got 2Oyears to deploy the renewable energy transition inorder toavoid cooking the planet. Global warming solutions are here. All, including everybody, have tolearn and activate the sesolutions pronto. Nnmatter what they look like orfeel like - In other words, quicker than faster. Aesthetics are important. Learning new aesthetics needs tohappen. And aesthetics are already changing. For instance, tospy anentire solar panel roof, consisting nfonly solar panels, what ewelcome sight. 4. City Policy Procured Solar Generators Solar generators are roof -mounted solar panels and/or free-standing panel -arrays ground -mounted inyards munused fields. Although these solar generators produce clean energy dependably for the next 3Ota5Oyears, they have tobepaid for all atonce, from the get -Do. In other words, the purchaser actually has to pre -pay for 3Oyears nfelectricity. And that's a lot of up -front capital. Creative financing 10the rescue. Thankfully, in the USthere are dozens of financial mechanisms, precisely designed toenable solar for every income bracket, with new and improved methods introduced regu|ady. The one requirement is Aproperly-facing sturdy roof. Todate however, in Ashland, the only financial arrangement used has been the simp|istofall direct buy where the waU-to-doowner can only purchase the installation for his own roof, with his own cash, leveraging his own tax liability, and the oity'scash grants. Ashland has acquired ototal of 1.3megawotts inthis way. The only trouble is, Ashland should have already acquired 5megywatts by now. Again, creative financing tnthe rescue. A1this time, the three best financial mechanisms for solarizing any -and -all g-oupproperties inAshland are: 1The third -party tax -equity pass -through ownership 2. Community solar cooperative group buy, and the 3 Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) All are most complicated. And necessitate mountains ofpaperwork. Choosing one or two or three of thee esacity policy for the duration would bmgreat, but the returns would quickly become sub -optimal and need tobeconstantly reinvented. Therefore, the best city policy would beto hire an expert M B4type, experienced insolar financing tostay ontop «rthe best methods and combinations ofmethods. And the Up -Level picture gets even more complex. Washington may ormay not continue the federal tax credits, The state istrying-out anumber ofnew policy rules The environmental externalities acknowledged true "value nfsolar' may become monetized etany Time, and the inevitable car "ontax would definitely rewrite everything across the board. Chase. Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and onand on the big banks and their buddies have already signed up. There's plenty of money out there eager toinvest insolar right now. Wejust gotta goget it. Organize it. and bring itonhome. And here, getting onwithiL Ashland would baappropriately ]ust-in-tima to retire it's solar incentive program all together, with one single exception: Every year, the residential roof with the biggest panel array, mostperfeoty aimed.pruducingthe most energy, would win anup-front cash grant for 3O percent ofthe total installation cost and be given the first prize for environmental leadership, Emmgle"Structural Wattage" (Youtube "Structural Wattage") Understanding these energy movement fundamentals will prepare you nicely,