The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2021-04-13 Budget Committee MinutesBudget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 1 of 10 BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES April 13, 2021 Meeting conducted via Zoom Chair Shane Hunter called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. via online meeting on Zoom ROLL CALL Present: Councilor Paula Hyatt Councilor Stephen Jensen Councilor Shaun Moran Councilor Gina DuQuenne Councilor Tonya Graham Councilor Stefani Seffinger Mayor Julie Akins Absent: None Ellen Alphonso Jim Bachman Shane Hunter Bob Kaplan Mike Morris Saladin Amery David Runkel CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS (Time Stamp 00:01:36) City Manager Pro Tem Adam Hanks clarified to the Committee on the package that was presented to the Committee in the first meeting including the proposed changes to the food and beverage tax and franchise fees. He reminded the Committee that these two items go together and that if one is changed it will change many other presented parts of the budget. He also specified that all these changes do not need to occur by July 1 st so there is time to work with the Parks Commission and Council on any changes that are made. Hanks added that these items are not the solution but are a step toward the solution and that these as they will explain further are a foundational piece that sets in motion policy changes and other financial decisions for the current and future biennium. Lastly, Hanks spoke on a memo that was sent to the Committee in response to needed clarifications on assertions and accusations that came to Council, Budget Committee and staff (see attached). Hunter spoke to the Committee on its role (Time Stamp 00:05:31). He clarified using examples what is a policy of City Council and what is something that the Committee will be working through. He also explained the format noting what information would be presented by staff in this and upcoming meetings. He asked that the committee direct questions to him as the Committee chair but that questions could be asked preferably after each fund has been presented by staff, as time will be given. Emailed questions will also be accepted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (Time Stamp 00:08:45) Bachman/Alphonso m/s to move approving the March 30, 2021 meeting minutes as presented. DISCUSSION: None, Voice Vote All in Favor, Motion Approved PUBLIC FOURM (Time Stamp 00:09:28) Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 2 of 10 Written Testimony Submitted (see attached)- No discussion from the Committee. Oral Testimony Given — No requests to give oral testimony to the Committee were sent prior to the deadline. FUNDS PRESENTATION (Time Stamp 00:09:58) Melanie Purcell, Finance Director presented to the Committee a presentation on Funds (presentation attached). She spoke first to Governmental Funds, what these funds cover, the challenges and the opportunities associated. She also spoke to the General Fund balancing priorities going forward. Councilor Shaun Moran asked about a gap and imbalance that he noted within the budget book. He asked most specifically about the $5.2 million listed on page 12 regarding sustainable revenues and expenditures, as well as a reference to $2 million listed on page 16. This $2 million he referenced was to a structural imbalance of contingencies and notes that according to the text this will grow to 3 million over the biennium. His question to this is what is being done to balance this gap. Hunter suggested that this may be a question for after the presentation. Mayor Julie Akins added that she wondered if it would be possible to ask questions during the presentation. Hunter responded that the question may be in the presentation and that he would prefer deeper analysis questions be written down and asked at the end or emailed to Purcell for an answer. Councilor Stephen Jensen stated that he agreed that the question asked would be best asked in the end. Purcell went on to speak on key issues within the General fund, issues listed include maintaining COVID reduced operational staffing levels and looking at a holistic approach to utility rate relief. She also related this to the balancing approach that was used for the General Fund, these included focuses on types of activities, uses of a federal stimulus package and the possibility of more grants. Purcell went on to speak to changes in operations, including the full implementation of a cost allocation plan, deferral of vehicle replacement, less administrative or support staff and employees paying a higher share of insurance costs. Changes in service both current and future includes a reduction of hours for public access, use of technology, grant funds, as well as changes to General Fund revenues, and a possible look at a reduction in staff Purcell stated. Next Purcell added information on rate relief and funding stabilization in addition to the General Fund forecast. General Fund revenues including a source by type, property taxes, property tax rate comparisons, user taxes, and charges for services including fees and permits, as well as transient occupancy taxes, and franchise fees were also presented to the Committee by Purcell. She also spoke to franchise fees as part of rate relief and funding stability. Additionally, Purcell explained General Fund expenditures and sources by type. Going into more detail she explained the anatomy of expenses within this fund. She presented to the committee what is mandated and what is variable. She lastly spoke to Policy decisions that will need to take place in the future. Moran clarified his question asking what the overall structural deficit was and if it was the $2.5 million or $2 million discussed previously. She responded that where staff started was around $5.2 million prior to receiving state retirement and insurance numbers. She further explained that there is also a reoccurring debt between $2 million to $3 million deficit that needs to be addressed. Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 3 of 10 The $5.2 million she explained is where staff started, and they then broke this down. She added they became comfortable drawing against this as an extra surplus had been built up. Without federal funds this would not be possible she went on to say, which will allow Council time to make decisions. Moran then asked if it was assumed that federal funds will go into the General Fund. Purcell answered that the purpose of the funds is General Fund revenue replacement, but there are assumptions on the use of the funds. Saladin Amery, Committee Member asked Purcell if she could clarify that the information above would mean that in fiscal year 2022 that the budget would be running at a deficit of $2.5 million. Purcell explained that these funds are spread out over FY21 and FY22 and that the remaining balance is an operating deficit. Amery added that this would mean that the Committee is looking to find cuts of $2.5 million to bring this amount down. Purcell responded that staff is looking at a longer -term solution rather than looking at cuts within the first year as there is more fund balance then is required by policy. This she added could be used as a time to have conversations, so this does not reoccur in the future. Amery ended by asking if the hope would then be to have the balance go down to zero. To which Purcell confirmed. Bob Kaplan, Committee Member then asked if previously listed items totaling over $3 million dollars were already reflected in the presentation or if these reductions would further change the overall number. Purcell stated that those items listed are already reflected in the presentation. David Runkel, Committee Member asked about the proposed budget presented in relation to page 43 and a possible typo in the amount of $47 million that is listed for the budget amount. He also added that some of the numbers listed do not match up with what was presented. Purcell agreed that some numbers have since been corrected, sent out and reposted. He then asked when he went through the General Fund by department, he kept seeing major increases compared with the last fiscal year that ended June 301h. He commented that with the current financial situation departments should be holding the line. Purcell responded that much of what he was looking at was actuals in areas where there were significant vacancies and the proposed budget always budgets to 100%. Runkel furthered asked to clarify if there were vacancies in the last budget. Purcell responded yes saying that many of them still exist. Runkel asked about costs in Human Resources, to which Purcell stated that the increase in costs was due to outside counsel for labor negotiations. He further added that in past years the budget was gone through line by line and department by department and it would be helpful for the committee to look over the budget document and see where spending is proposed. Amery asked about items on page 18 of the proposed budget in regards to the $2.5 million deficit that will be carried forward and cuts that need to be made to subsidize and take amounts down to zero. Looking towards the future he sees a deficit that increases from $2.5 million to $4 million. Purcell responded by noting the assumptions presented, focusing on the growth of labor contracts and employee benefits considering that this does not reflect any service changes. Amery then asked if these items were required by law or if this is an assumption of what it should be. He spoke to the City making less and the revenues streams being down by 60% and most citizens are making less as well, and this 5% increase cannot be justified. Purcell then explained that the City does not have control over the rate that the healthcare market is at, as well as PERS rates. These numbers she added are dictated to the City. She then explained the unfunded and funded liability. The influencing factors of programs can change this number and that is why she explained conversations need to take place surrounding this. Amery explained that since over 60% of the costs of the budget are personnel the City should be looking at ways to cut this amount down with unnecessary benefits like car payments. Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 4 of 10 Councilor Gina DuQuenne stated that looking at the General Fund over 50% is personnel. She suggested a roll back of wages similar to those in 2019-20 for Department Heads. She asked that Purcell bring this information back to the Committee. She added that it was important to do this and that she would not ask anyone to do anything that she herself has not already done. Akins also suggested looking into contributions of PERS and Healthcare for employees. She also suggested a change in car allowances. She then asked about the previously passed public safety fee and what funds from this were used for. Hanks noted that some officers were funded from this revenue stream but staffing levels are still the same as 15 years ago, as part of the funding for more officers never came in. Hanks added that these funds go into the General Fund, but that Council could make a policy change to it. Hanks also added that many items related to staff are part of a contract. He suggested looking at the scope and scale of change, one of these being staffing levels including implications that go beyond the City and will affect the community. Ellen Alphonso, Committee Member stated that she is less interested in the reduction of staff or benefits. She stated that the City needs to remain a competitive employer and retain good talent as this improves the efficiency of government. Councilor Paula Hyatt asked about the strategy of the healthcare benefit package. She added that part of the cost share percentage has been shifted to employees, but nothing with premiums has been shifted yet. She asked as the strategy's over the next two -three biennium's in regard to the healthcare benefits, as this is one of the largest cost share drivers. Purcell stated that this is a conversation between Council, HR and Legal that is coming up. Many of these labor negotiations sessions that are coming up will look at consistency so that issues don't come up she explained. She added as far as a strategy, a national committee that she currently sits on, are looking at these sorts of topics and recommendations. Hanks added that the employee share had been discussed in the Cost Review Adhoc Committee but these plans take time to fully implement. With seven different groups of staff he added that all of the elements in compensation need to be looked at as to what is being gained when making changes. He also stated that many times the City is not in the dominant position with these contracts and that bargaining structure of some groups is done differently. Moran thanked Hanks for bringing this up adding that he had been a part of the committee looking at these costs. He added that the time has now come to look from analysis to results. He also stated that he agreed with Alphonso on wanting the highest quality of people and that the City pays a competitive rate. He stated that most employees are making over a $150,000 in total compensation which is up from the last biennium. Speaking to the current pandemic everyone needs be cognizant of what is at stake realizing that the citizens of Ashland are tapped out. He added that he would like to pull this back to the 2018-19 level. 40% of staff are not represented he explained and that along with department heads they should be realizing what rate payers are going through and that the committee should be willing to discuss this. Moran went on to ask about the $4.3 million in aid that was coming to the City from the federal government and why it is being assumed to be for the structural deficit as he thought the use was for infrastructure. Purcell stated that these funds were specifically cited to be used for revenue replacement and that if Council chooses not to back fund the General Fund slashing services would take place. This she added is where Hanks and she had begun but that it had not been Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 5 of 10 pretty and that this has been coming for a long time. She went on to say that the funds from the federal government will allow the City to make thoughtful decisions. Councilor Tonya Graham stated that there was time for strategic planning. She further explained that out of the last budget cycle the deficit was clear and that's when the Cost Adhoc Committee had been created. The strategic planning was set to begin when COVID hit so conversations with the community did not take place. She added that the City is facing the same structural shortfall as line items are large and are growing faster than the property tax. There is a desire she explained to keep everything the City has ever done, and this is done by scrambling, which she explained cannot be done anymore. She suggested that looking at first year changes and the capacity to have thoughtful conversations surrounding the budget. Runkel asked about when departments would be presenting. Hanks noted that they are not scheduled to attend as this is a City Managers recommended budget and himself and Purcell would be addressing questions. Runkel then specifically asked about increases in the Fire department material and services and operations budgets. Purcell and Hunter discussed the best format to answer this question and agreed that it may be easier to answer this in an email. Purcell further explained that there was a massive change in the central services allocation plan particularly in areas of vehicle repair and replacement, which greatly affected Fire and Police. Additionally, included in this is replacement gear and an ambulance. Runkel further asked about costs in Administration, the City Manager's office, Legal Department, Information Technology, Finance administration, Accounting and Risk Management. Purcell explained that these were due to labor negotiations, unfilled positions, increases associated with software, redistributed costs from the change away from central service, and an increase in insurance costs. He lastly asked about costs to Ashland Fiber Network which Purcell asked to be deferred to the next meeting as it is an enterprise fund. Runkel asked about this being in the General Fund part of the budget to which Hanks responded that it was organizationally there, but it was indeed an enterprise fund. His last questions had to do with increases to Public Works. Hunter advised that those specific of requests would be best in an email. Hanks then stated that most of Public Works are in enterprise funds, which would be gone over in the next meeting. Runkel further asked about these funds being in the General Fund portion of the proposed budget and Hanks replied that just Public Works administration and engineering were a part of this. Hyatt went back to the question about strategy. She added that some decisions made previously may be making it more difficult given the current financial situation. She added looking back at the 2017 budget that some decisions had been made regarding the parks assessed value and policies on the locations of parks. She further explained that the allocation in the last biennium had dropped and that parks is being setup in a way that is not advantageous or supportive of the parks mission. She questioned if the comp plan needs to be revisited in regard to the location and maintenance of parks. Looking at undeveloped lands she explained could be looked at as a solution to the affordable housing situation, which would also add a greater tax base which would allow for more funds to sustain parks. Property she added needs to be used to encourage people to move to Ashland, so that tax revenues are not lost and if revenues are lost it will become increasingly hard to fund value added services like parks. She ended by explaining the contract that this body has is the charter and what is listed is what should be provided to the residents, so the input from the Citizens is vital. Looking at the charter she added would make the priority fire, police and then parks. Other decisions she noted are making it hard to support the mission of parks. Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 6 of 10 Hunter put the meeting into a break at 4:42 p.m. asking that any other questions regarding the General Fund be emailed to Purcell as the committee would be discussing the reserve fund upon its return. (Time Stamp 01:41:58) Hunter called the meeting back to order at 4:51 p.m. (Time Stamp 01:51:16) Hunter asked that the presentation on the reserve fund begin. Moran asked about a point of clarification, by stating that Hanks had stated that Ashland Fiber network would be discussed at the next meeting but wanted to know if there would be a way to discuss the information technology department overall and not just Ashland Fiber Network, as there are questions that pertain to that department. Hunter responded that this should be possible. Hanks noted that this is one department with two divisions one being an enterprise fund. Amery also made a request regarding a report that he thought previous Councilor Dennis Slattery had done regarding a deep dive into the financials of Ashland Fiber Network. Hanks stated that he could seek this out to see if it had occurred but that he was not aware that it had. Purcell spoke about the reserve fund, its uses, and its revenue stream. (Time Stamp 01:53:48) (presentation attached). Hanks spoke to the policy resolution on the reserve fund that had recently been adopted. She then went on to speak about the parks General Fund, this fund she noted is funded by a transfer from the City General Fund. (Time Stamp 01:56:47) Hanks added that the conversation being had makes it seem that the food and beverage revenue is a windfall to Parks, which is not the case as this is only a change in revenue stream. Moran asked about what the rationale was for doing this if the General Fund is still liable, as he understands that the goal is to export the volatility of the revenue stream. He added that there are assumptions being made about the levels to the food and beverage tax. Purcell added that this is true but that the General Fund would not cover costs to the Parks fund to make up for any deficits. She spoke to Hyatt's comments about goals for Parks. Moran further clarified if this would mean that there was no other money but food and beverage tax going to Parks. Purcell explained that there will still be a property tax transfer as set by ordinance that will decrease over time as it is a percentage. Hanks added that there is a connection for Parks and food and beverage tax funds. He also explained that other Departments such as Police, Community Development and Fire are regulatory required, and that Parks can be more flexible with funding. Amery asked what the purview of the Parks Department was outside of maintaining City wide parks and open spaces. Councilor Stephen Jensen asked about a point of order as to whether the conversation was being diverted from the task at hand. Hunter stated that he thought that the Parks General Fund presentation was finished and that the meeting could be opened for questions. Kaplan asked about the next two fiscal years presented for the Parks General Fund revenues and their balances. He also asked why the revenues were so much lower than the expenses. Hunter ask to confirm that Jensen's point of order was addressed and Amery stated that his question was not to waste time, as future revenue streams were talked about he wanted to know if Parks would be responsible for helping these revenue streams come into the community. He wants to make sure that they are getting a stable revenue stream in order to do this. As cuts are Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 7 of 10 still being talked about, he added there are also increases in lines that are relying on future incomes. In the past he explained these incomes were not stable and can be influenced by unpredictable factors. Purcell confirmed after Hunter asked if the Parks General Fund presentation had been completed. Jensen confirmed that this satisfied his point of order. Kaplan explained his question. Purcell answered that Parks is drawing down their ending fund balance and that along with the City, Parks will have to make some decisions going forward as to what happens next. Kaplan then asked what the ending fund balance was for this fund. Purcell stated that she did not have this but she would get this to the Committee. Kaplan asked if this was a part of the recent policy change, which he did not think it was. Purcell stated that it did apply to the Parks but that there was a little more discretion in their decision to abide by this. Hanks added that this is a long-standing part that is weaved between the Budget Committee, Council and Parks. The decisions of Council are constrained as it relates to Parks due to them electing a separate body and what they do with their money is the decision of this body. Kaplan explained that he saw that the ending fund balance for parks was $1.3 million and that most of this would be used up. Hyatt began by stating that by knowing that there was an understanding that the Citizens' Budget Committee was setting the allocation for Parks that would then be approved by Council, the point made by Amery was critical to understanding the expectation of the services provided. After looking at the combination of funding streams she added which include tax revenues, combination of food and beverage charges and charges for service she believes having the property taxes will allow the City to pay operational costs. Reading Ashland Municipal Code 4.34 regarding Food and Beverage, the City she noted is only allowed to do repair, rehabilitation, planning and acquisition not operations. Hyatt further added that she feels there needs to be a mix with a little bit of property tax to cover the operational portion and that if agreed to by the Committee, food and beverage tax can be used to work on the other aspects. She stated that she felt that this was a part of the decision that needs to be brought back to the people during the year when decisions need to be made. Her belief is that Parks will help bring the City back from a very difficult economic situation and they need to set up as such. Moran added that citizens have been willing to pay the property tax because it helps to fund Parks. His concern was that if Parks draws down on their ending fund balance that it will be blown through in the next two years for operational expenses and this feels as if the can is be being kicked down the road again. Moran suggested a conversation on what happens when the ending fund balance has been drawn down, just like in the City's General Fund. He added that in the City's General Fund revenues can be raised, cuts can be made, or the 40 million in ending fund balance from citizen paid high utility bills over the last ten years, which he does not think is the solution to solve the structural deficit. He would like more clarification he added regarding drawing down the ending fund balance if this was to be approved and what would happen when this money is gone. Councilor Stefani Seffinger added that over the years Parks has been asked to do more and more including Senior Services and help with Homeless Services. Akins reiterated that it was important to note that the City cannot set policy for Parks and that staff for Parks report to the Commission. She added it was important to note that whatever money is given to Parks will be theirs to set the priorities with. Pioneer Hall and the Community Center she noted still belong to the City and Parks does the rentals on them. She went on to say that her Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 8 of 10 hope is to solve the issues on these soon. Akins also added comment on the affordable housing fund and the marijuana tax. She wanted to have dialogue around this and the funding source of a sale is not a stable revenue source she stated. She requested Purcell's response on this. Purcell responded that this was in today's agenda. Graham wanted to confirm something that had be previously stated by Kaplan and Akins regarding the expenditures for Parks. She added that it seemed to her that the Committee can decide on how much is assigned to Parks but it's their decision around whether to draw down their ending fund balance. Her assumption she stated was that Parks would do something similar to what the City has done looking at the structure over time and adjusting plans. Purcell responded that this is what is at the heart of the conversation being had. Purcell then presented information on special revenue funds. (Time Stamp 02:23:01) (presentation attached). These include the Community Development Block Grant, the Street Fund, Airport Fund and the Housing Fund. She explained what each was, how revenue was collected and how it can be used. Akins responded to the explanation on the Housing Fund and how it does not answer the question on long term stabilized funding, which she understands would be a policy discussion. She further asked if the option to put money from the sale of surplus property was used, would there also be an option to put the money back in for affordable housing after it has been put in the General Fund. Purcell stated that this was possible. Hanks added that this is a Council decision, but it is capped at $100,000 with excess marijuana tax going into the General Fund. DuQuenne added that she agrees with the variability of the surplus properties and that the marijuana tax revenues seem to keep giving. She believes that the funds from the sale of surplus property should go into a strategic plan keeping marijuana tax funds solid in the Housing Trust Fund. Hanks responded that as this a policy decision, that Council would need to decide what to do with the proceeds with the sale of surplus property. Council will need to make a decision he added on the level of resource allocation that they want to be put toward affordable housing. Moran added that it needs to be clear that what is being proposed on slides 54 and 55 is more debt that taxpayers will have to pay for Streets. Further looking at page 204 of the proposed budget he noted that in the future, $7 million of debt will be needed to fund Streets. He believes this a stretch considering the funding source that is had at this time. This leaves Streets vulnerable as the solution will just be to ask taxpayers to pay more debt which he believes is not a solution. Hanks added that this is what is in ordinance, and that Food and Beverage Tax is there to utilize debt servicing larger projects. He explained if Council was interested in cash financing of projects that is what has been intended. If cash funding is done, then cash will be held longer, and the projects will increase in cost before the City is able to get to them. He added that there has to be a balancing act with debt servicing to get to projects before they are broken. Moran agreed with this and stated that he has proposed not raising utility bills but accessing debt markets which are the cheapest in American financial history. Hanks responded that is what is being done. Moran responded that he thought what was being said, as if it was the only option, he is trying to spur a conversation about some optionality. He added that in the past debt servicing should have been used as opposed to higher utility bills. Hanks then explained that revenue is needed to pay the debt service, however. Purcell clarified that debt service is premised on the idea that you are either using food and beverage which already exists or as proposed in the budget the use of franchise fees. This would mean the burden of utility costs would be lowered by the franchise Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 9 of 10 fees. The idea is to align them so rather than rate payers or taxpayers being a part of a utility tax or bond referendum, the budget is recommending the opposite Graham asked about the Clay Street Project which is fully grant funded and if this project would be taking place in this biennium and if it is a part of the funding listed. Hanks stated that this may be towards the end of the biennium but he would need to check on it as changes have been made in the grant, but he expects that it may be in the engineering stage but maybe not construction. DuQunne asked about the $4.3 million and if it can be set aside to be used for future Streets projects. Purcell responded that it could not be used like this, as it has not been permitted under the federal statue, but this could change. Hanks added that this a great conversation to have, if this was allowed and because of that the question would be asked about what doesn't get funded in the General Fund. DuQuenne asked that the question about rolling back rates for Department Heads as she wanted to make sure that it was answered and brought back to the committee at its next meeting. Purcell stated that she would get this information out to the Committee. Moran stated that he wanted to respond to Hanks' comments and pulling the fear factor card by saying its Police or Fire. He explained that Runkel's comments that Hanks' office is indicating an increase a couple hundred thousand dollars, Human Resources at $150,000, Information Technology at $200,000 and Legal up $100,000 should be looked at. He further commented that the Human Resources and Legal Department's cost $1.1 million. He asked if other ways had been investigated to reduce costs in these areas including Courts, Community Development, and the Administration office. He stated that he would caution the group that no one is saying for cuts to Fire and Police and that Hanks' is the only one saying this. What he added that he is talking about is having a broad discussion on other ways to "peel the onion" in looking at the General Fund, which may entitle that Department Heads and senior staff take a pay cut. He wanted to prevent or be hesitant about pulling the Police and Fire card when it comes to cuts. He asked that the narrative around this be changed. Graham stated that she would appreciate it if staff were spoke to with respect and that characterizing this as pulling a fear card is inappropriate. She then asked Hunter if there was another presentation in comparison to the time. Hunter and Purcell both responded yes. Purcell presented to the Committee the Capital Improvement Fund, Parks Capital Improvement Fund, Debt Service, what they are, what revenues are used and what each is used for. Debt service she spoke to is set by an approval of the voters. (Time Stamp 02:42:25) (presentation attached). Alphonso asked about the Capital Improvements Fund. She noted that she saw a swing up in the expenditures and asked of the expectation is that this will operate in a deficit below the revenues or if the budgeted plan is that this will be a balance budget. Purcell responded that this will be a balanced budget and that funds had been set aside towards some significant projects. She added that facility operations had been taken out of this fund due to it not truly being capital. This was put into General Fund as an operation in Public Works. Hyatt commented that many points are put out as places to look into and thanked staff for the explanation on the $150,000 in Human Resources as being for labor contracts. She also spoke to the thoughts behind Municipal Court which she thought is required by charter, operate four days a week and that it must be funded unless there is a charter change. Purcell responded that it is a chartered department but that she would need to check into the hours of operation. Hanks Budget Committee Meeting April 13, 2021 Page 10 of 10 added that he thought there was some flexibility in the hours but that there are timelines that have to be met. Moran asked about the Central Service Funding merging into the General Fund. He noted that as of December 31st that there was about $2.5 Million that was in the Central Service Fund that was growing and that at the end of this year $3 million would be reflected. He then asked why is this happening as these are fees that should be charged to the various funds and if the idea is that once the Central Service Fund merges into the General Fund, the $3 million in ending fund balance will be returned to the various funds that it came from. Purcell responded that she does not see there being that high of a balanced due to the distribution in the current biennium and how costs are allocated. She added there is an offset due to more vacancies then expected in the Central Service Fund, this balance will roll into the General Fund. She also stated the fund does not operate to make a profit. However, if there is one its stays with department that receives the funds. The cost allocation plan she explained is part of this understanding of not having departments subsidize. Moran explained that most of the disproportion funds came from the enterprise funds and that this may explain the urgency to merge the Central Service Fund into the General Fund. Purcell explained that this is not the case. Kaplan spoke to Moran's point and asked about the standards from auditors and if these conformed to good practice. Purcell stated that she would check back with the Auditors to see if this something that is tested. She added that as this was spoken to earlier that it is her understanding under federal regulations there could not be a deviation from the plan that was developed by outside consultant as it dictates what should be charged. Graham asked if it was more difficult to compare from previous biennium's as the change has taken place from the Central Service to General Fund. Purcell stated that in some cases that she can note in the future, there may be an issue, but the majority of the funds can be tied back out as changes were made in the code structure. ADJOURNMENT Graham/Bachman m/s the adjournment of the meeting. Discussion: None. DISCUSSION: None, Voice Vote All in Favor, Motion Approved Meeting adjourned at 5:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Natalie Thomason Administrative Assistant From: Dean Silver Sent: Sunday, April 4, 2021 6:29 PM To: Tonya Graham Cc: City Council; Budget Committee Subject: RE: BUDGET: Vetting Questionable Items in the CIP [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hi Tonya, I agree with the most of your comments, but you seem to have missed the substance of mine. What I am questioning is the magnitude of the design fees that are assumed in the CIP. They're simply unrealistic. If they are wildly inflated, as I believe they are, then rational decisions cannot be made when budgeting for them. Can you tell me your position on whether CC should investigate the feasibility of joining RVSS, as opposed to continuing to maintain the current WWTP? A simple presentation of facts and figures by a representative of RVSS would be an excellent, no cost way start to that process. If, in fact, joining RVSS would be more cost effective over time, it would make no sense to proactively upgrade systems in the current WWTP, as proposed in the CIP. Of course we would have to maintain the plant until a transition to the regional system could be made. Multiple millions could be saved. I'm also interested in your views regarding building a new WTP as opposed to upgrading the current plant. It's an issue that I have not even begun to look at. But I must say the $40.7M price tag gives me pause. Of course the City needs competent technical assistance when dealing with engineering issues, since we don't have that competence in house. But first, we need to decide if the path we are pursuing is optimal. We can't simply rely on decisions that were made ten years ago or more to guide us. They need to be constantly reexamined as circumstances change. I don't envy Council's job finalizing this budget. Many significant choices must be made. Everyone agrees, I think, that our current trajectory is unsustainable. What I and many others are simply saying is that the emphasis has to shift from revenue enhancement to expense reduction. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me. Dean From: Tonya Graham [mailto:tonya@council.ashland.or.us] Sent: Sunday, April 4, 2021 5:42 PM To: Dean Silver Subject: Re: BUDGET: Vetting Questionable Items in the CIP Dean, I appreciate your perspective that all elements of the CIP need to be vetted carefully. I agree in general, but also recognize that limitation that we come against, particularly for any repairs that are more than a few years out. By necessity, those estimates are much more "ballpark" than the estimates for projects that are going into the immediate biennial budget. The first step for each of these projects is to start the process of clarifying exactly what is needed and what it will cost. Taking those steps for projects that are years down the road would be an inappropriate use of the public purse given how much changes on these systems in just a few yea rs. In terms of the fact that much of these issues are maintenance, that doesn't mean that whole systems within larger operations don't need to be switched out at various points. When that happens, we need to make sure that the new system is going to work well within the larger operation and that means investing, as necessary, in design. Of course, we need to be asking the right questions and watching this carefully, but infrastructure systems are much more technical than they used to be and that is why we hire experienced engineers and technical consultants to help us determine the best next steps. Thank you for your engagement in this budgeting process. All the best, Tonya Graham Ashland City Councilor From: Dean Silver Sent: Monday, March 29, 20214:41 PM To: City Council <council@ashland.or.us>; Budget Committee <BudgetCommittee@ashland.or.us> Subject: BUDGET: Vetting Questionable Items in the CIP [EXTERNAL SENDER] Esteemed Mayor, Councilors, and Citizens' Budget Committee members: Here is a small but striking example of why the items in the CIP need to be examined very carefully. The accompanying chart lists the WWTP projects, their total costs, and their design costs and associated portions of the total. Also listed is portion paid for by rates and fees, and a few comments I jotted down for reference. It should be used as a jumping off point for your own investigations. It is an extremely informal, preliminary examination. Please note that the majority of these projects are for maintenance of current systems. Those items should not require extensive, or often ANY, design costs. Replacing parts is replacing parts. If parts are being replaced with new systems, design requirements should be relatively limited. The basic physical plant is in place. Some of the items are extremely vague and non -targeted. They read like descriptions of projects that are so amorphous that they could not be quantified, e.g., "miscellaneous improvements and upgrades" $900,000 total, and "headworks process improvements" $3,760,000 total. Yet, you will see there are OVER ONE MILLION DOLLARS of design costs. Some of those design costs may be necessary. But the extent of them is should certainly raise questions. $400,000 are apparently for design fees for the two projects mitigating the discharge. Assuming $150/hr for a civil engineer's time, that would pay for 2,666+ hours of design time. Does that sound reasonable? This chart is not intended to be a definitive analysis, but merely a demonstration of the necessity to vett each and every line item of each and every project in the CIP. You don't have to be an engineer or have any technical expertise to learn enough about a project to be able to ask relevant and intelligent questions. As you know, two of the goals of the Council are: - Develop current and long term budget resiliency, and - Analyze various departments/programs with the goal of gaining efficiencies, reducing costs, and improving City services. In order to meet those goals, Council must thoroughly vett all projects in the CIP. Thank you for your consideration. Dean Silver From: gwen davies Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 2:01 PM To: Finance Subject: CBC meeting [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello: I know the first budget meeting is this afternoon. My comments:. Do not fund anything we cannot afford. Live within our means which is drastically down. Do not fund anything that is not absolutely the most essential. Prioritize among the most essential for the next 2 years. Use the next two years to overhaul spending and involve the public. Many of us have been requesting this for over 2 years now ... and others have requested it for 4 or 5. Do it this time!!! Do not raise any rates or charges to residents of Ashland this. Cut expenses and many bloated staff, department budgets, projects. Cut CIP projects now. For instance: drop immediately the "Walker st Festival street project"; it is NOT ESSENTIAL and a terrible idea. Drop the 50,000 proposed to study changing the speed limit to 20 through town. Drop it now! Try enforcing the 25 miles an hour speed limit first. This is someone's pipe dream. Go for efficiencies and new ideas to be carefully vetted with full public participation. There are lots of other projects that could be cut too. Remember APRC has many projects that are not essential. Keep that source of taxation and spending well under control ... it still comes out of residents' pockets. Consider hooking up to the valley's waste water system rather than wasting millions on or own. Consider other ideas like if it would be cost effective..... maybe having our utility billing outsourced. Everything should be on the table with quality, efficiency, cost, and benefit to the City central. I would like to know what efficiencies Shaun Moran and Dave Runkel would identify ... and Gina DuQuenne too -and Mayor Akins too. They are the ones I know of who wish to overhaul destructive spending patterns and programs. How do they recommend we dig ourselves out of this hole? We are at a tipping point. Please take this approach. From: Dean Silver Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2021 9:37 PM To: City Council; Budget Committee; Melanie Purcell Subject: CBC 3/30 meeting feedback [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello all, I was extremely disappointed watching the first CBC meeting. I hope the next three meetings will be more productive. I trust you all read the entire budget document, as I did, before the meeting. Assuming you had, I think you will agree with me that the two hours you spent watching that Powerpoint was basically a waste of time. It was essentially a presentation of the same material that is in the document. Your time would have been spent much more fruitfully in general discussion of the budget issues. I realize that was the intent of the PP, but it was presented so fast, so cursorily, with no allowance for questions, that it served very little purpose. You are allocated only 12 hours to meet, a huge job to do, and an awesome responsibility. So looking forward, may I respectfully suggest: more discussion, fewer long Powerpoint presentations. Finally, let me echo one of Julie's points: do as much homework as possible. Try to prepare as much as you can outside the meetings. Ideally, you would all know what your duties and responsibilities are before the start of the first meeting. As Dave pointed out, the resources are there on the website for easy access. I hope your future meetings will be much more productive. The City's financial future is riding on your deliberations and the Council's final decision. The proposed budget you have been presented does not come close to addressing the structural and long term issues facing the City. It's up to you to fix it. We can't afford to kick the can down the road any more. Thank you for your consideration. From: Dean Silver Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 12:33 PM To: Melanie Purcell; Budget Committee Cc: Department -Heads Subject: RE: benefits inquiry [EXTERNAL SENDER] Thank you for taking the time, Melanie, this explains quite a bit. I hope it helps others gain a fuller understanding of some of the intricacies, as well. The system you have to deal with is amazingly complex, especially to a person without government accounting experience such as myself. After working with Opengov recently, as you suggested, I have come to agree with you that it is an excellent tool, albeit with a rather quirky interface. The only problem is that so much is still missing from it. I'm sure that will improve as time goes on, but I fear that much of the historical data will never wind up there. As you probably know, it can be quite challenging to locate much of the older information. I hope that my questions and comments are also helping to clarify and facilitate the budget process for everyone. Dean From: Melanie Purcell [maiIto: melanie.purcell@ash land.or.us] Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 10:58 AM To: Dean Silver; Budget Committee Cc: Department -Heads Subject: RE: benefits inquiry Good morning Dean, Just catching up on emails. Hope these add clarification: The Department Head salaries are NOT included in the average salary line. There are salary ranges for each department head position but each individual is hired under a contract approved by the City Council and salaries are usually dependent on qualifications within the salary range. Under the Council- Manager form of government, the City Manager and HR Director would bring the contract to City Council, previously the Mayor did. The difference between the spreadsheets I've presented and the OpenGov data has two sources: 1) the list of positions includes part-time and temporary positions listed individually and in budgeting, we count Full -Time Equivalents (FTEs), hence the fractions, so there are usually more positions listed than FTEs; and 2) the way OpenGov was originally set up included the same position listed multiple times for each portion assigned to a different funding source. We've tried to minimize this in the latest iteration to make it easier for future comparisons and tracking. The current count of funded FTE's, including vacancies, is 245.32. The current staff count is 232.82, with vacancies excluded. All Councilmembers are eligible for family health coverage and the full cost is budgeted. I cannot break down the actual coverage each member has registered for without violating privacy restrictions. All Councilmembers receive $350 per year in stipend and the Mayor receives $500. The City is also required to pay for FICA/Medicare which is 7.65% of compensation. Hope this helps. Thank you for the vote of confidence; it is greatly appreciated. Melanie Melanie Purcell Finance Director City of Ashland I Finance 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520 541-488-5300 Office I Voice, TTY 800-735-2900 1 541-552-2059 fax This email transmission is official business of the City of Ashland, and it is subject to Oregon Public Records Law for disclosure and retention. If you have received this message in error, please contact me at (541) 488-5300 From: Dean Silve Sent: Friday, April 02, 2021 10:55 AM To: Melanie Purcell <melanie.purcell@ashland.or.us> Subject: RE: benefits inquiry [EXTERNAL SENDER] Good morning Melanie, That spreadsheet is very useful, thanks again. I'm unclear on your first paragraph below. Are you saying that the represented group Department Head salaries ARE included in the average salary line? It appears that the department heads' compensation is NOT part of union negotiations because they are management. Is that correct? How is their compensation agreed upon? Who negotiates with management on behalf of the city, and with whom do they negotiate? Each individual? I see that the opengov positions report shows 299 lines, but the spreadsheet lists 234.32 FTE. What is the reason for that discrepancy? What's the current accurate count of FTEs? I notice that the benefits for all of the councilors is identical, so can you tell me how that breaks down? Maybe I just didn't see it. If you could point me in the right direction. I know this is a very busy time of year for you-- perhaps all year is busy for you! You have certainly inherited a complicated and fraught fiscal situation. Because I have seen you in several meetings now, I have confidence that you have the knowledge and ability to handle it with skill and grace. Thanks so much for your help, Dean From: Melanie Purcell[ma iIto: melanie.purcell@ashland.or.us] Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 5:18 PM To: Dean Silver Cc: Budget Committee; Department —Heads Subject: RE: benefits inquiry Good afternoon Dean, Attached is a break-out of the various employee groups including the benefits structures and average salaries. Department Head salaries are not included in the non -represented average salaries but instead are in their respective employment agreements. The salary schedules by position classification for all groups, including department heads, are on the City's website at Union Contracts & Salaries - Human Resources - City of Ashland, Oregon. Please note Workers' Compensation is calculated on a classification or category basis that reflects relative risk of positions according to the insurance industry. While the City reports the Unfunded Actuarial Liability as part of the overall Personnel Services expenses, it is tied to benefits already earned and is required to be paid regardless of the City's current staffing levels. It is calculated using current salaries by ORS but is not tied to current personnel; it is the accrued obligations already incurred by the City for past services that is not actuarially calculated to be covered by past contributions and ORS interest on investments. Employees are required to make a matching contribution for FICA/Medicare of 7.65% and contributions to healthcare coverage and PERS based on their respective units. Hopefully, this addresses your request. Have a wonderful weekend, Melanie Melanie Purcell Finance Director City of Ashland I Finance 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520 541-488-5300 Office I Voice, TTY 800-735-2900 1 541-552-2059 fax This email transmission is official business of the City of Ashland, and it is subject to Oregon Public Records Law for disclosure and retention. If you have received this message in error, please contact me at (541) 488-5300 From: Dean Silver Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 6:41 PM To: Melanie Purcell <melanie.purcell@ashland.or.us> Subject: RE: benefits inquiry [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hi Melanie, Thanks for helping me with this. I understand that the budget book is the highest priority. I was hoping this would be something that would be easily pulled up. To be clear, I am NOT interested in any of the individuals' specifics, but rather what is available for the various employment positions in general. Looking forward to your response next week. Thanks, Dean From: Melanie Purcell[ma iIto: melanie.purcell@ashland.or.us] Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 1:30 PM To: Tina Gray; Dean Silver Subject: RE: benefits inquiry Importance: Low Good afternoon Dean, Thank you for your interest. I can pull something together in a format that should address your questions. Unfortunately, it will need to wait until next week as we are immersed in getting the budget book put together for the Budget Committee and City Council meeting on Tuesday. I'll reach out to you later next week with what I have and see if that works. Have a great week, Melanie Melanie Purcell Finance Director City of Ashland I Finance 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520 541-488-5300 Office I Voice, TTY 800-735-2900 1 541-552-2059 fax This email transmission is official business of the City of Ashland, and it is subject to Oregon Public Records Law for disclosure and retention. If you have received this message in error, please contact me at (541) 488-5300 From: Tina Gray <Tina.Gray@ashland.or.us> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 1:03 PM To: Dean Silver Cc: Melanie Purcell <melanie.purcell@ashland.or.us> Subject: RE: benefits inquiry Hi Dean, I am copying Melanie Purcell, our Finance Director, on this one. I'm not sure if we can break it down the way you suggest. Benefits are specific to the individual, and we may not be allowed to share because it reveals too much about the individual. (The health plan they are on and the number of family members covered, married vs. single, and PERS tier all impact the employee's total cost to the City). We generally use an average of about 45% above salary for benefit and payroll costs. The percentage is often higher for entry-level jobs and lower for higher -paid positions. As an example, for a salary of $50,000, the City's total cost is going to be around $72,500 ---with variation by employee. Benefit costs include: • Medical, Dental, Vision and HRA VEBA contribution • Life insurance, long-term disability, deferred compensation match — and other fringe benefits by bargaining group. • PERS Retirement (based on tier and job class) the PERS rate assessed to the City changes annually based on what PERS estimates is needed to fund current and expected retirements; it is not a cost tied directly to the individual employee. (The City has very few active Tier 1 employees). • FICA (6%) and Medicare (1%) are mandatory payroll costs • Workers' compensation and unemployment assessments also vary from year to year. In your example, the City Council only receives $350/year as a stipend. So, the City's total benefit -cost could be up to $26,567.28 for full -family coverage if a council member covered their entire family. For City Attorney, the top of the salary range is $152,821, so anything above that amount reflects the benefit and payroll cost for the position. I'm not sure we can show that data in a way that doesn't compromise the individual employees' circumstances. Two employees at the same salary point may have a different total compensation cost to the City. I hope this helps, Tina Tina Gray, IPMA-SCP Human Resource Director City of Ashland Human Resource Department 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Phone: 541.552.2101 TTY: 800-735-2900 Fax: 541.488.5311 This email transmission is official business of the City of Ashland, and is subject to the Oregon Public Records Law for disclosure and retention. If you have received this message in error, please contact me at 541.552.2101. Thank you. From: Dean Silve Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 12:17 PM To: Tina Gray <Tina.Gray@ashland.or.us> Subject: RE: benefits inquiry [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hi Tina, I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm interested in the dollar amount breakdown of benefits for the various positions. For example, I see that the councilors receive $21,132.06 total benefits annually. How much of that dollar amount is health insurance, any other benefit, etc.? Likewise, the City Attorney receives $247,242.05 total benefits. How much of that is health insurance, how much is PERS, how much is any other line item in those benefits? Likewise for all city employees. To be clear, I am interested in the breakdown per position, not necessarily for any individual employee. I am also in the breakdown of city vs. employee contribution. I understand that may vary depending on each employee's length of service, so is there a formula that I can see to help me understand? Is there some place I can find all of these data in tabular form? I have found the breakdown of the totals for each benefit in Opengov, but not broken out by position. Perhaps I just don't know where to look. Thanks for your help, Dean From: Tina Gray[mailto:Tina.Gray@ashland.or.us] Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 9:17 AM To: Dean Silver Cc: Marisa Lehnerz Subject: RE: benefits inquiry Importance: Low Sorry, just catching back up from weekend emails. Are you looking for the employee cost -share or more detail about the plans? I have attached the plan details that most of the City currently has. (Police and Fire have a different health plan and cost -share through the end of their current contracts). The remaining groups at the City contribute 7.5%/month, and effective July 1, 2021, the employee cost - share increases to 10%. The Mayor and Council do not receive a wage. They receive an annual stipend, so the City cannot collect a cost -share through payroll for the City Council. Those on the Council that elect health benefits have 100% city -paid benefits for their service to the community. I hope this is helpful. Please feel free to reach out if you have other questions. Sincerely, Tina Gray Tina Gray, IPMA-SCP Human Resource Director City of Ashland Human Resource Department 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Phone: 541.552.2101 TTY: 800-735-2900 Fax: 541.488.5311 This email transmission is official business of the City of Ashland, and is subject to the Oregon Public Records Law for disclosure and retention. If you have received this message in error, please contact me at 541.552.2101. Thank you. From: Dean Silve Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2021 12:35 PM To: human —resources division <human resources division @ashland.or.us> Subject: benefits inguiry [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello, I would like to learn the breakdown of the benefits given to our city employees, including the Mayor and Councilors. I have found the total amounts and the summary description, but am looking for the specifics of the individual components. Please send me a link where I can find that info. Thank you. Salary - Average Overtime - Last Fiscal Average Subtotal Salary Legislated Benefits: Workers Comp City Portion PERS/OPSRP (ave 10.07 % ) City Portion PF PERS/OPSRP (ave 15.33 % ) City Portion FICA/Medicare tax (7.65 % ) Subtotal Legislated Benefits Negotiated Benefits: Employee PERS/OPSRP (6 % ) Health/Dental Insurance Life Insurance & Long Term Disability Mercy Flights Deferred comp HRAVEBA Subtotal Negotiated Benefits Sub -Total Benefits Total Salary & Benefits Ratio of Benefits/Salary City of Ashland Representative Annual Salary and Fringe Benefits As of July 1, 2021 87,262.00 61,789.00 63,087.00 93,445.00 61,253.00 84,835.00 103,911.00 220.00 346.00 250.00 3,283.00 1,672.00 9,338.00 19,264.00 87,482.00 62,135.00 63,337.00 96,728.00 62,925.00 94,173.00 123,175.00 812.00 645.00 381.00 1,254.00 1,492.00 1,603.00 2,464.00 8,810.00 6,257.00 6,379.00 9,741.00 6,337.00 - - - - - - - 14,343.00 18,785.00 6,693.00 4,754.00 4,846.00 7,400.00 4,814.00 7,205.00 9,423.00 16,315.00 11,656.00 11,606.00 18,395.00 12,643.00 23,151.00 30,672.00 5,249.00 3,729.00 3,801.00 5,804.00 3,776.00 5,651.00 7,391.00 19,495.00 19,584.00 19,495.00 19,495.00 19,495.00 19,495.00 22,350.00 148.00 112.00 112.00 112.00 97.00 123.00 100.00 - - 70.00 70.00 70.00 - 70.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 540.00 600.00 600.00 1,750.00 1,243.00 1,267.00 1,935.00 1,259.00 1,884.00 2,464.00 27,242.00 25,268.00 25,345.00 28,016.00 25,237.00 27,753.00 32,975.00 43,557.00 36,924.00 36,951.00 46,411.00 37,880.00 50,904.00 63,647.00 131,039.00 99,059.00 100,288.00 143,139.00 100,805.00 145,077.00 186,822.00 50% 59% 58% 48% 60% 54% 52% Non- Represented Positions FTE Parks Positions FTE Clerical Positions FTE Electric Positions FTE ACCOUNTING & AUDIT MANAGER 1 ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST 1 AFN NETWORK TECHNICIAN 1 CONNECT -DISCONNECT 1 ACCOUNTING ANALYST 1 EXECUTIVE ANALYST 1 ASSOCIATE ENGINEER 1 ELECTRICAL WAREHOUSE 1 ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST 4 GOLF CLUB ASSISTANT 1 ASSOCIATE PLANNER 1 ELECTRICIAN 1 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 2 GOLF COURSE MANAGER 1 BUILDING INSPECTOR 2 GENERAL FORMAN 1 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE MANAGER 1 GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENT 1 CLIMATE & ENERGY 1 LEAD WORKING LINE INSTALLER 1 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISOR 1 IRRIGATON SUPERVISOR 1 CODE COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST 1 LINE INSTALLER/SERVICE 5 AFN MANAGER 1 NATURE CENTER COORDINATOR 1 CONSERVATION SPECIALIST 3 LINE TRUCK DRIVER 1 ASSETS MANAGEMENT 1 NATURE CENTER MANAGER 1 COURT SERVICE CLERK 1.5 METER READER 1 ASSISTANT ATTORNEY 1 OFFICE ASSISTANT II 1.75 ENG PROJECT MANGER 1 METER RELAY TECHNICIAN 1 BAILIFF 0.07 OPEN SPACE & OUTER PARKS 1 ENG TECH III 1 TELECOMMUNICATION TECHNICIAN 3 Band Director 1 PARK TECHNICIAN 1 10 ENGINEER PROJECT MANGER 1 TREE TRIMER 1 BUILDING OFFICIAL 1 PARK TECHNICIAN 11 6 ENGINEERING TECH 11 1 Total Electrical Positions 17 CERT 0.5 PARK TECHNICIAN 111 1 FINANCIAL CLERK II 2 CITYRECORDER 1 PARKS SUPERINDENT 1 GIS ANALYST 2 COMPUTER SERVICE MANAGER 1 RECREATION MANAGER 1 HOUSING PROGRAM ANALYST (PARTIAL GRANT FUNDED) 1 CUSTOMER SERVICES SUPERVISOR 1 RECREATION SUPERINDENT 1 INVESTIGATION SPECIAL 1 DEPUTY POLICE CHIEF 1 SENIOR CENTER SPECIALIST 1 LEAD COURT SERVICE CLERK 1 DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 1 SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT 1 OFFICE ASSISTANT 11 1 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COORDINATOR 1 VOL & EVENT OPS 1 PERMIT TECHNICIAN 2 DIVISION CHIEF- FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY 1 Total Parks Positions 33.75 PERMIT TECHNICIAN 11 1 DIVISION CHIEF- FOREST 1 POLICE RECORDS SPECIAL 2 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 1 PARK DIRECTOR 1 PURCHASING SPECIAL 1 FIRE ADAPTED COMMUNITIES CORRDINATOR 1 SENIOR ENGINEERING 1 GIS MANAGER 1 SENIOR FINANCIAL CLERK 2 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGER 1 SENIOR POLICE RECORD 1 JUDGE 1 UB TECHNICIAN 3 LIEUTENANT 1 USER SUPPORT TECHNICIAN 2.5 MAINTENANCE SAFETY SUPERVISOR 1 WATER RESOURCE TECHNICIAN 1 NETWORK ADMINISTRATOR 2 Total Clerical Positions 40 PARALEGAL 1 PLANNING MANAGER 1 POLICE SERGEANT 5 PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT 1 SENIOR ACCOUNTING ANALYST 1 SENIOR INF ANALYST 1 SENIOR INFORMATION ANALYST 1 SENIOR PLANNER 2 STREET SUPERVISOR 1 WATER PLANT SUPERVIS 1 WATER QUALITY SUPERVISOR 1 WW COLLECTIONS SUPERVISOR 1 WWWATER REUSE 1 Total Non Represented Positions 50.57 CITY ATTORNEY 1 CITY MANAGER 1 DEPUTY CITY MANAGER 1 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 DIRECTOR OF ELECTRIC 1 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE 1 FIRE CHIEF 1 HUMAN RESOURCE DIRECTOR 1 POLICE CHIEF 1 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 1 Leadership Team 10 Laborers Positions FTE Police Positions FTE Fire Positions FTE CEMETERY SEXTON 1 COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER 1 BATTALION CHIEF - PARAMEDIC 3 LUBE TECH 1 EVIDENCE & PROPERTY 1 CAPTAIN- PARAMEDIC 6 MECHANIC 4 POLICE OFFICER 8 ENGINEER- PARAMEDIC 6 METER READER/REPAIR 1 SENIOR POLICE OFFICER 12 FIREFIGHTER- BASIC 2 SENIOR PLANT OPERATOR 1 Total Police Positions 22 FIREFIGHTER -PARAMEDIC 13 SENIOR UTILITY WORKER 12 Total Fire Positions 30 SENIOR WW TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR 1 UTILITY TECHN WW 1 UTILITY TECHNICHIAN 1 UTILITY WORKER 1 4 UTILITY WORKER 11 7 WATER QUALITY TECHNICIAN 2 WATER TREATEMENT PLANT OPERATOR 1 WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR 11 2 WW TREATMENT PLANT LAB TECHNICIAN 1 WW TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR 1 Total Laborers Positions 41 Non- Represented Positions FTE ACCOUNTING & AUDIT MANAGER 1 ACCOUNTING ANALYST 1 ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST 4 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 2 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE MANAGER 1 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISOR 1 AFN MANAGER 1 ASSETS MANAGEMENT 1 ASSISTANT ATTORNEY 1 BAILIFF 0.07 Band Director 1 BUILDING OFFICIAL 1 CERT 0.5 CITY RECORDER 1 COMPUTER SERVICE MANAGER 1 CUSTOMER SERVICES SUPERVISOR 1 DEPUTY POLICE CHIEF 1 DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 1 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COORDINATOR 1 DIVISION CHIEF - FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY 1 DIVISION CHIEF - FOREST 1 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 1 FIRE ADAPTED COMMUNITIES CORRDINATOR 1 GIS MANAGER 1 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGER 1 JUDGE 1 LIEUTENANT 1 MAINTENANCE SAFETY SUPERVISOR 1 NETWORK ADMINISTRATOR 2 PARALEGAL 1 PLANNING MANAGER 1 POLICE SERGEANT 5 PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT 1 SENIOR ACCOUNTING ANALYST 1 SENIOR IN ANALYST 1 SENIOR INFORMATION ANALYST 1 SENIOR PLANNER 2 STREET SUPERVISOR 1 WATER PLANT SUPERVIS 1 WATER QUALITY SUPERVISOR 1 WW COLLECTIONS SUPERVISOR 1 WWMATER REUSE 1 Total Non Represented Positions 50.57 CITY ATTORNEY 1 CITY MANAGER 1 DEPUTY CITY MANAGER 1 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 DIRECTOR OF ELECTRIC 1 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE 1 FIRE CHIEF 1 HUMAN RESOURCE DIRECTOR 1 POLICE CHIEF 1 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 1 Leadership Team 10 Parks Positions FTE ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST 1 EXECUTIVE ANALYST 1 GOLF CLUB ASSISTANT 1 GOLF COURSE MANAGER 1 GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENT 1 IRRIGATON SUPERVISOR 1 NATURE CENTER COORDINATOR 1 NATURE CENTER MANAGER 1 OFFICE ASSISTANT II 1.75 OPEN SPACE & OUTER PARKS 1 PARK TECHNICIAN I 10 PARK TECHNICIAN II 6 PARK TECHNICIAN III 1 PARKS SUPERINDENT 1 RECREATION MANAGER 1 RECREATION SUPERINDENT 1 SENIOR CENTER SPECIALIST 1 SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT 1 VOL & EVENT OPS 1 Total Parks Positions 33.75 PARK DIRECTOR Clerical Positions FTE AFN NETWORK TECHNICIAN 1 ASSOCIATE ENGINEER 1 ASSOCIATE PLANNER 1 BUILDING INSPECTOR 2 CLIMATE & ENERGY 1 CODE COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST 1 CONSERVATION SPECIALIST 3 COURT SERVICE CLERK 1.5 ENG PROJECT MANGER 1 ENG TECH III 1 ENGINEER PROJECT MANGER 1 ENGINEERING TECH II 1 FINANCIAL CLERK II 2 GIS ANALYST 2 HOUSING PROGRAM ANALYST (PARTIAL GRANT FUNDED) 1 INVESTIGATION SPECIAL 1 LEAD COURT SERVICE CLERK 1 OFFICE ASSISTANT II 1 PERMIT TECHNICIAN 2 PERMIT TECHNICIAN II 1 POLICE RECORDS SPECIAL 2 PURCHASING SPECIAL 1 SENIOR ENGINEERING 1 SENIOR FINANCIAL CLERK 2 SENIOR POLICE RECORD 1 UB TECHNICIAN 3 USER SUPPORT TECHNICIAN 2.5 WATER RESOURCE TECHNICIAN 1 Total Clerical Positions 40 Electrical Positions FTE CONNECT - DISCONNECT 1 ELECTRICAL WAREHOUSE 1 ELECTRICIAN 1 GENERALFORMAN 1 LEAD WORKING LINE INSTALLER 1 LINE INSTALLER/SERVICE 5 LINE TRUCK DRIVER 1 METER READER 1 METER RELAY TECHNICIAN 1 TELECOMMUNICATION TECHNICIAN 3 TREE TRIMER 1 Total Electrical Positions 17 Laborers Positions FTE CEMETERY SEXTON 1 LUBE TECH 1 MECHANIC 4 METER READER/REPAIR 1 SENIOR PLANT OPERATOR 1 SENIOR UTILITY WORKER 12 SENIOR WW TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR 1 UTILITY TECHN WW 1 UTILITY TECHNICHIAN 1 UTILITY WORKER 1 4 UTILITY WORKER 11 7 WATER QUALITY TECHNICIAN 2 WATER TREATEMENT PLANT OPERATOR 1 1 WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR 11 2 WW TREATMENT PLANT LAB TECHNICIAN 1 WW TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR 1 Total Laborers Positions 41 Police Positions FTE COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER 1 EVIDENCE & PROPERTY 1 POLICE OFFICER 8 SENIOR POLICE OFFICER 12 Total Police Positions 22 Fire Positions FTE BATTALION CHIEF - PARAMEDIC 3 CAPTAIN - PARAMEDIC 6 ENGINEER - PARAMEDIC 6 FIREFIGHTER - BASIC 2 FIREFIGHTER -PARAMEDIC 13 Total Fire Positions 30 From: Steven Crowthers Sent: Tuesday, April 6, 2021 10:28 AM To: Finance Subject: Please increase the budget for recreational opportunities [EXTERNAL SENDER] 1) expand the trails, support running and cycling events to draw tourists here for three days several times a year ( early spring, late fall) to capture the tourists for shoulder season! 2) expansion of the trails will increase the city's financial diversity leading to a safer more resilient economy! Fire season and the pandemic have made it abundantly clear we can't rely on Shakespeare and wine tasting. Just look at towns like Moab, Sedona, St. George and Durango: all thriving during this down turn! 3) green trails please: health and wellness for all ages and abilities. Not just us who run the sob and pine to palms! 4) take a look at the social and financial demographic who tend to value trails that are close to town with good connectivity!!! 5) we need a Recreation Center with a pool that is affordable. Thank you, Steven Crowthers MSN, CRNA, BSN From: Natalie Thomason Sent: Friday, April 9, 2021 2:12 PM To: Holly Wanless Cochran Subject: RE: Survey errors Hello Holly, Thank you for reaching out to us regarding the survey and noticing the errors, I really appreciate the feedback. I have gone ahead and made some changes as you suggested and the survey should now be more user friendly. We unfortunately cannot change or add any answers to the first question you mentioned as the survey has already started, but we have made this question optional in order to better represent the data. In the second error that you discussed we have changed it to better explain what we are asking. I apologize that such errors were in this survey and again appreciate your feedback. In regards to your question on the nature of input we are seeking for this week we decided to get some service quality feedback as part of the series of questions. They all provide the Budget Committee and City Council with points of information regarding the success or need for improvement in all service areas. Below is a full list of the questions that have been or will be presented for public input: 1) How closely do you follow the news about Ashland City government and the City's finances including the budget: a. very closely, b. somewhat closely, c. not too closely, or d. not at all? 2) What do you feel are the three biggest concerns currently facing the City of Ashland? Please choose your top three responses: a. Homeless Services b. Affordable Housing c. Streets or other Infrastructure d. Public safety (Fire and Police Response) e. City finances f. Government and city council oversight g. Parks commission oversight h. Fire prevention/ Emergency management i. Climate Change/ Environmental Sustainability j. Diversity, equity, and inclusion activities for the community k. Local economy/ Business opportunities I. Other 3) Overall, would you say you approve or disapprove of the job being done by the City of Ashland? 4) How satisfied are you with the services listed? (Very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, very dissatisfied) Service Very Somewhat Somewhat I Very I satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Providing police protection and crime prevention in your neighborhood Supporting the development of housing affordable to working families Preparing for natural disasters Using technology for communication and to improve access to information and City services Maintaining public areas like street medians Maintaining public parks and related facilities Maintaining streets and roads 5) Would you say you approve or disapprove of the job being done by the City of Ashland in managing local tax dollars? 6) How satisfied are you with the services listed? (Very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, very dissatisfied) Service Very Somewhat Somewhat Very satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Providing building code enforcement Enforcing traffic laws to protect the safety of pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers Promoting environmental sustainability; pursuing climate sustainability Providing diversity, equity, and inclusion activities for the community Providing adequate fire services in your neighborhood Providing adequate medical response services in your neighborhood Communicating with residents on upcoming changes in the City 7) In your personal opinion, do you think there is a great need, some need, little need, or no real need for additional funds to provide the level of City services that Ashland residents need and want? 8) How important is it to you personally that the City allocate funding to this service (extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important)? Service Extremely Very Somewhat Not too important important important important Providing police protection and crime prevention in your neighborhood Supporting the development of housing affordable to working families Maintaining/ improving streets and roads Providing building and other code enforcement Enforcing traffic laws to protect the safety of pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers Preparing for natural disasters Maintaining public parks Expanding public parks facilities Promoting environmental sustainability Diversity, equity, and inclusion activities for the community Providing adequate fire services in your neighborhood Providing adequate medical response services in your neighborhood Communicating with residents on upcoming changes in the City Using technology for communication and to improve access to information and City services Maintaining public areas like street medians and downtown Plaza 9) Over the last two years, have you had contact with a City department or agency? 10) With which City department did you have contact? a. City Administration b. Finance Department c. Police Department d. Fire Department e. Public Works (Water, Sewer, Engineering, Stormwater) f. Electric g. Planning, Building, and Community Development h. Ashland Fiber Network (AFN) i. City Council/ City Recorder 11) Would you say that overall, you are very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not too satisfied, or not at all satisfied with the service you received from the City of Ashland? 12) How do you rate the following issues? (Extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, a somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem) Issue Extremely serious problem Very serious problem Somewhat serious problem Not too serious a problem Crime in general Amount paid in taxes Amount paid for utilities including water, sewer, stormwater, electric, and internet Cost of housing Condition of local parks and recreation facilities Waste and inefficiency in City government Insufficient homeless services and/or facilities Condition of City streets Other 13) Over the past three years, do you think the following have increased, stayed the same, or decreased in the City of Ashland? Circumstance Increased Stayed the same Decreased Crime, in general Homeless activity Homeless services Property crimes Person crimes Structure fires Medical emergency responses Planning/building activities Communications from the City Value of City services for taxes/fees/charges paid Environmental protection activities Diversity, equity, and inclusion activities for the community 14) In your opinion, what is the most important thing the City of Ashland can do to improve City services for the people who live here? (pick top three) a. Expand City services i. Street maintenance ii. Homeless shelters and services iii. Law enforcement and crime prevention iv. Fire prevention and response v. Emergency medical response vi. Parks facilities and maintenance b. Support the development of affordable housing c. Local economy/ business opportunities/ business support d. Diversity, equity, and inclusion activities for the community e. City government transparency and communication f. Environmental impact/ climate change g. Reduce services and related taxes/charges/fees 15) Which areas of service do you think the City of Ashland should explore as part of a regional approach? Mark as many as apply. a. Parks & Recreation b. Fire Protection c. Medical Response (Ambulance) d. Emergency Management e. Law Enforcement f. Court g. Water and/or Wastewater h. None of these i. Other I am hoping this gives you a look at the full spectrum of questions we are trying to get input on. 4 Once again we really appreciate your feedback and welcome any other questions and comments that you may have, please feel free to reach out to us again. Thank you, Natalie Thomason Administrative Assistant Risk Management Claims Intake City of Ashland Finance 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520 541-552-2012 Direct Voice, TTY 800-735-2900 1 541-552-2059 fax From: Holly Wanless Cochran - Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 11:41 PM To: Finance <finance@ashland.or.us> Subject: Survey errors [EXTERNAL SENDER] I just answered your very odd survey about the budget process. Someone needs to be more careful about making these survey pages. On this page: https://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavfD=13461#peak democracy a) If you choose "No" for the first option (did not have contact with a City Dept), you are still required to choose a city dept from the next list of options. This will skew your data about which depts are contacted most frequently, unless you eliminate all the No answers up front. Either that list needs to have a "not applicable" option, or it should disappear if the user selects 'No' above it. b) The last option has this mangled -English question: How satisfied are you received from the City of Ashland? I assume it meant "satisfied with the services" or "satisfied with the response" or something - remember to proofread before going live! What do either of these questions, which seem designed to measure customer satisfaction on a very gross level, have to do with the budget process? I was expecting questions about budget priorities. --Holly From: Dean Silver Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2021 9:58 PM To: City Council; Budget Committee Subject: the mystery of the missing reports and unanswered questions [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear Mayor, Councilors, and CBC members, I want to share my experiences dealing with City Hall during the past few weeks with you. Some of you have seen some of this before, but I present it here in a more continuous narrative form. I hope you can do something to help rectify the problems noted below, both internally in City Hall, and in their dealings with the citizens. I have been attempting to look into the City's finances during this budget season in order to better understand the issues and challenges facing the City during these difficult times. I have run into several unexpected roadblocks that are hard to understand and extremely concerning. First, essential information has gone missing from the City website. Previously, the taxpayers were able to access a "position report" that lists the job title, salary, benefits, and total compensation of every City employee. On 4/8, 1 noticed that it was no longer available. I emailed the Finance Director asking for an explanation. This is what she wrote, in part: "We pulled the report because we found errors and data we had trouble corroborating. We will update it and replace it in the next week or so." As a former small business owner, I found that answer to be unacceptable. If these errors are so complex that it might take a "week or so" to correct, one could presume that they might be serious. If there are serious errors in payroll information, those errors would necessarily propagate throughout the City's finances. During this time of crafting the budget for the next two years, it is essential that accurate accounting information is available to the Budget Committee, the City Council, and the taxpayers, to say nothing of the Accounting Department itself in order to conduct the City's business. I am grateful that any errors present have been identified, because accuracy in accounting is absolutely essential. I trust that the Finance Director will be able to give the Citizen's Budget Committee a full explanation of what has gone wrong with this data in the Finance Department, and how it has been repaired. It is essential that the Committee has accurate financial data in hand now. Second, I noticed that the staff directory, which lists all current employees and their positions, was also missing from the City website. When I asked the Human Resources Director about this, she responded, in part: "... we removed the department lists from our website. As I recall, it was a recommendation from our Risk Management Consultants, and our IT Team fully supported it because of the volume of targeted scam emails to city employees." This is another inadequate, unacceptable response. This information should be publicly available; these are public employees. If contact information was a security concern, it alone could have been easily removed. Virtually every municipality makes staffing information available. It would appear that efforts are being made to suppress this information from the public. Finally, because the staff information was no longer available, I requested several items from the HR department on 4/2. The requests were rather complex, and I was told that they would be treated as a Public Records Request. Fair enough. So on 4/5, 1 modified my request to read exactly thus: "1- A list of positions with their corresponding salaries and benefits from FY 2017. Names would be helpful, but are not necessary. 2- A list of current employees and their positions. I do not need any personal or contact information, just names and positions." These are basic reports that any HR department in the world should be able to produce within a few minutes. There is no research necessary. Yet, as of 4/11, a full business week later, I had not received any response to my modified request, nor my original request. I cannot help but wonder why my request has not been fulfilled, or even addressed as a Public Records Request. The implication again is that they do not want this basic public information to be released. I want to know why, or if there is another justifiable explanation. It is not unreasonable to expect full transparency, accountability and responsiveness from our city government. In fact it should be demanded by every taxpayer. I hope that in the future, the City will make all public information easily available to the taxpayers so that they do not have to make special requests as I have, sometimes only to have them unfulfilled. Thanks for your consideration, Dean Silver From: Ellen Alphonso Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 11:16 AM To: City Council; Budget Committee Subject: Fwd: the mystery of the missing reports and unanswered questions - 2 [EXTERNAL SENDER] FYI, my response. Didn't hit reply all. On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:58 AM Ellen Alphonso wrote: Mr. Silver, To clarify, "external" or more officially, independent auditors gain assurance that the financial information provided by the city is accurate within a materiality threshold by performing a combination of procedures, including review of an organization's internal controls (including review of the approvals of source data and the calculation process of final numbers), substantive testing (in which source data is compared, recalculated and tied to final results) and substantive procedures (in which auditors create expectations of what final results should be based on historical data, benchmarking of similar size organizations and comparison of market/economic conditions). At any rate, even if auditor do not "take reliance" on internal controls (what I believe you are deeming an internal audit), auditing standards require the walkthroughs and understanding of the internal control system as part of their planning process. At no circumstance would a prudent auditor take numbers wholly provided by the city without verifying and understanding the internal controls that produced those numbers. Not to editorialize the municipal audit process at the city, but even a systemic error, such as you suggest, would most probably have been revealed either from the internal control walkthroughs, fund transfer testing or Oregon Minimum Standard Testing. The individuals reviewing the internal processes and controls are independent- not within the government staff. Hope this assists, Ellen Alphonso On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:15 AM Dean Silve wrote: Thanks for reading and taking the time to reply, Ellen. I appreciate your concern. To be clear, I said nothing and implied nothing about fraud, just anomalies. It could be a simple error that propagated through the system. Anyone can make an error, and often they're not immediately caught. It could be a series of errors that compounded. It could be due to someone misinterpreting a rule. It could even be a matter of incompetence. Or something else that I haven't considered. I don't know and have no way to find out, not being an experienced accountant and not having access to the data. But if it's serious enough to pull data from public view during budget deliberations, and is expected to take days, not hours, for the finance department to correct, then I suggest it demands scrutiny. I'm glad that you mentioned auditing. I watched my first Audit Commission Meeting this year. I noticed several things, not the least of which was Melanie's statement that all the funds are "in good health" with the exception of streets and insurance. A different message than the one presented at the CBC meeting. She also said that the City was shifting from revenue based calculation of fund balances to an expenditure based calculation. I know generally, but not exactly what that means, but I wonder if that could be the source of the "errors and data we had trouble corroborating". I also know that the City is transitioning from the use of the Central Services Fund to Internal Service Funds. Another possible source for errors. Since you're an accountant, Ellen, perhaps you could explain two questions for me. Another takeaway for me from that MAC meeting was that the audit performed was what I would describe as an "external" audit. By that I mean, the auditors are provided summary numbers corresponding to the chart of accounts that they reconcile, and that those numbers are provided by City staff. This, as opposed to what I would call an "internal" audit, where the source data and calculations that yield those summary numbers are examined. Am I correct in that description? And second, is what I describe as an internal audit ever performed on the City's books, where the source data and calculations are checked for accuracy by someone other than City staff? Thanks again for your help. -Dean From: Accounting [mailto: ] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 7:32 AM To: Dean Silver Cc: council@ashland.or.us; Budget Committee Subject: Re: the mystery of the missing reports and unanswered questions - 2 Dean, As an auditor, I would caution you from assuming fraudulent activity within a municipal government, particularly within payroll systems and fund transfers. All Oregon governments are subject to annual rigorous audit financial and budgetary testing. Oregon Minimum Standards testing would have easily found anomalies such as you speculate and the results of that testing is available in annual financial reports. Our goals for a financially balanced, transparent budget are the same, and the best tool for that is fact based information and collaborative efforts over the budget. Sincerely, Ellen Alphonso Sent from my iPhone On Apr 11, 2021, at 10:31 PM, Dean Silve wrote: [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear Mayor, Councilors, and CBC members, First a fact, then a bit of speculation. I trust you will be able to get to the bottom of this and find out what's really going on by asking the right questions at your next meeting. I just noticed Saturday night that even more data is missing on OpenGov. The Ending Fund Balance information on OpenGov only lists data up to 2018-2019 Actual. Where is 2019-2020 Actual? Where is 2021 year to date? Also notice that it was "updated 15 Apr, 2020". Why a year ago, when some other data on OpenGov is updated as of yesterday? I'm pretty sure those numbers were there previously, but I can't swear to it. I didn't take screenshots, not expecting data to go missing. And my memory isn't even close to perfect, so I could be mistaken. But regardless, WHY AREN'T THOSE NUMBERS THERE? If we don't know last year's ending fund balances, and current fund balances, we don't have ESSENTIAL information. I have a theory. It may be totally off base, but it could explain what's going on. It may be that Melanie Purcell, our new Finance Director, has discovered some serious anomalies in the City's previous financial reporting, or in the ways funds have been used, transferred, etc. Therefore she had to pull the compensation info and Annual fund balances until she could figure out what's going on and reconcile the data. Remember, her statement was "We pulled the report because we found errors and data we had trouble corroborating." And that it would take some time to repost the data. Not an easy fix. I hope that Melanie is able to correct those errors... and that those errors haven't done any damage to the City's finances. Try to find out, please. Thanks for helping. Dean Silver From: gwen davies Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2021 2:27 PM To: Finance Subject: CBC purpose [EXTERNAL SENDER] To all members of the CBC committee. Please read the letter to the editor from Ashland Aces' treasurer Sue Wilson in the Tribune today, Sunday April 11, 2021.. 1 suspect it has been submitted to you already. She points out the obvious. Please have all members review the law covering the purpose of the CBC .... to submit a balanced budget. Since all members of the CC and the Mayor are part of the CBC already, they can immediately act to change policies and put us on a path toward financial stability. If some members are struggling with comprehending the responsibilities of the committee they serve on, I am sure there are others who could step in. Perhaps someone in Salem could help orient those members. My advice: Fund the essentials first. Deal with water security, waste water management and expenses, replacing old sewer pipes, keeping our infrastructure up, replenishing the reserve fund, renegotiating contracts, eliminate the outrageous perks some staff have, and meet our MOST ESSENTIAL NEEDS. Of course I include police, fire, and emergency evacuation planning. Figure out the way to financial health. CC is right there. They can jump into action, change policies or enact ordinances immediately to resolve our crises. Put together a balanced budget that does as much as possible to get us back to financial solvency as soon as possible. Review and reduce the overspending that has put us in this position. Some have been elected to office because of their dedication to making these course corrections. Listen to them. Do not assist the Parks Department insetting up a fiefdom. Do not sell or transfer property or other funds that are needed to cover essentials.. Remember we have issues in our Schools too -and although they are independent they are another huge challenge. What we spend on our schools comes out of our pockets too. Finally, I hear from those who comb the public record, that essential information is disappearing and the public cannot get information they need to be responsible citizens and voters. I hear reports that more and more categories are being removed. This is the critical time for the public to participate and all information needs to be accessible. I would think there are legal issues in this and there certainly are "optics." Return all information so the public can see it and participate in this crucial budget process. Thank you Gwen Davies I From: Dave Kanner Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 10:16 AM To: Finance Subject: 4/13/21 Budget Committee Testimony [EXTERNAL SENDER] Members of the Budget Committee - I write to you today to express my serious concern about numerous items in the proposed 2021-23 budget. I believe these items deserve serious skepticism, if not outright rejection. By way of introduction, my name is Dave Kanner. I am a resident of and taxpayer in the City of Ashland. I am also the former city administrator, as well as the former county administrator in Deschutes County and deputy county administrator in Jackson County. That is, I am a resident with much more in-depth knowledge of public budgeting and finance than the average Ashland resident. also offer the caveat that my comments are based on what I read in the budget message. I've have not delved deeply into the numbers. 1. The projected deficit in the General Fund, in particular the projected decline in revenues in FY'23, should be met with deep skepticism. Projected deficits are not unusual. They are normal. Absolutely, 100% normal. Take a look at any of Ashland's budget documents over the last ten years (or longer) and they will routinely show deep General Fund deficits in the outer years. That's because these projections assume that expenses will rise faster than revenues and that the city will spend every penny of projected expenditure while collecting no more than projected revenue. What happens in fact is that the city under -spends and over -collects and the deficit disappears. (Oregon local budget law actually encourages locals governments to overestimate expenditures and underestimate revenues.) The city is in an unusual position today because the pandemic negatively impacted tourism -related revenue streams, but Ashland will receive $4.4 million from the American Rescue Plan, at least some of which can be used to backfill tourism -related revenue losses and COVID-related expenses in Police and Fire. What has happened over the past year is a one-time bump in the road, not a long-term structural problem. 2. The projection of a decline in General Fund revenue in FY'23 is very dubious. Major General Fund resources will not decline and in some cases will grow. Property tax revenue will increase by at least 3%, electric user tax will likely not decline and transient occupancy tax should rebound to pre - pandemic levels as the Shakespeare Festival re -opens next year. If I'm reading the budget message correctly, staff is proposing to decrease franchise fee contributions from city utilities next year and dedicate franchise fee revenues to Roads. I believe both of these tactics are extremely unwise, as I will discuss below. Please do not reduce franchise fees and leave all franchise fees in the General Fund. (The argument that franchise fees are payment for use of the right-of-way and should therefore be spent on right-of-way maintenance could have been written by utility industry lobbyists and should be rejected.). 3. The General Fund will also grow under the proposal to eliminate the Central Services Fund and move expenditures and resources that previously went into the CSF into the General Fund. This is a fairly transparent scheme to convert dedicated and restricted revenues into unrestricted revenues. Unless there is some measure taken to ensure that operating departments will pay no more than actual cost of internal services, this idea should be rejected. Put another way, if this is such a good idea, why doesn't every city do this? (I will acknowledge that there are some cities in Oregon that do it this way, but they tend to be very small and have few employees.) 4. The proposals to funnel 98% of Food & Beverage Tax collections to Parks and to allocate to Parks a fixed portion of property tax collections are horrible, terrible ideas and should be rejected. First, F&B tax. The F&B tax can be used for only three things: wastewater treatment debt, street maintenance (specifically the pavement management program) and parks capital projects ("acquisition, planning, development, repair and rehabilitation" of parks). F&B tax cannot be used for Parks Department general operations, nor should it be. Because the F&B tax sunsets in 2030 with no guarantee of renewal, it should be considered one-time revenue and be used only for one-time purposes, not for ongoing operations. That's Finance 101. 1 authored the 2016 amendment to the F&B ordinance that directed money to Roads and increased the contribution to Parks. In its original iteration, the ordinance allowed F&B to be spent on operations. The council voted to amend the language to disallow spending on operations and limit it to capital projects. What's more, the ordinance clearly states that F&B can only be used for the three purposes previously stated, "unless other purposes are approved by a Council -adopted ordinance enacted by a vote of the Ashland electorate." Parks may have capital needs, but they are likely not equivalent to 98% of F&B collections. It's also highly questionable as to whether the city should be acquiring and developing new parks if the money is not there to maintain what we already have. A better idea would be to continue to channel F&B revenue to Roads and leave franchise fees in the General Fund, but limit the F&B appropriation to Roads to an amount equal to franchise fee collections. The balance of what's left after that appropriation can be given to Parks capital projects. Next, the idea of channeling a fixed portion of property tax collections to Parks should be rejected. The city did this from 1998 to 2013 before abandoning it for good reasons that I'll not go into. Parks is, for all intents and purposes, a General Fund department. (I know the Parks Commission will blanch at that description, but Parks is in fact dependent on city General Fund dollars.) Why should it, alone among General Fund departments, get a fixed percentage of property tax collections? Why not Police? Or Fire? Parks should have to make its case for General Fund dollars in each budget cycle, as other General Fund functions do, and then live within the means appropriated by the Budget Committee. 5. While the idea of reducing franchise fee payments from city utilities to the General Fund, presumably for the purpose of allowing utility rates to remain flat for one year, is noble in its intent, the timing is wrong and it will unnecessarily harm the General Fund which is supposedly in an existential crisis. I'd recommend postponing this tactic until FY 2024, when the AFN debt is paid off, thus creating a windfall of sorts in the General Fund and the utility funds that would offset a year with no rate increases. I understand the pressure to do something NOW, but again, the timing isn't right. In closing, let me say I know all too well that you have an extraordinarily difficult job in front of you. I do not envy you. However, every municipal budget consists of "gotta haves" and "wanna haves." Until or unless the Budget Committee and City Council takes on the difficult task of clearly identifying the wanna haves and cleaving them from the budget, these budget stresses will continue well into the future. Thank you for taking the time to read this. Sincerely, Dave Kanner CITY OF ASH LAN D Memo TO: Budget Committee Members FROM: Melanie Purcell, Finance Director DATE: April 13, 2021 RE: Recent Public Statements regarding City Financial Information Several recent statements made directly to Councilmembers and the Budget Committee and in public forums regarding the City of Ashland's and its Finance Department's intent, responsiveness, and competence have been grievously misleading. Normally, staff would not take valuable time to respond to specious attacks on their professionalism and integrity. Unfortunately, these particularly spurious allegations seem to be circulating in the community, causing unwarranted distrust and animosity. The following is to refute such claims and clarify facts. The City has significantly increased financial transparency in recent years, in part through the use of the OpenGov tool. OpenGov, however, is just a communications portal, not an accounting system; it is conspicuously not the City's financial system of record. The City's OpenGov software does not purport to be an accounting system and was deliberately designed for lay communication of financial information, as opposed to standard rigorous accounting verification. The City's OpenGov portal can be useful for displaying specified financial data but does not- and does not have the requisite capacity to - replace or replicate all of the information provided through other methods, including the City's annual audit, biennial budget, and financial reports. Recently, several outdated reports were removed from OpenGov page of the City's website because they were not current and were not automatically maintained as part of the City's financial systems. These particular reports were initially created to respond to discrete matters arising at a specific point in time. These are not retained as ongoing special reports. Attempting to reconstruct and update such analyses would be time-consuming with little or no benefit to the scrutiny of the proposed BN2021-2023 budget. The reports that remain are those that are automatically updated from the City's accounting system, MUNIS, and are prepared so as to provide consistent presentation of the information. These reports contain much of the data of prior reports with the most current data added. As noted in the Finance Department section of the workplan discussed with City Council in February, an update of the pertinent OpenGov reports has been planned for this summer. In my response to a recent inquiry, I stated that the some of the past OpenGov report display had errors and/or data that could not CITY OF ASH LAN D Memo be corroborated; this was in reference to the Positions report that was created in 2019 that would require manual export and research to verify, recreate, and then update. Not retaining or reconstructing the Positions report is an example of judicious management of only that financial data which can be useful - not, as has been alleged, a sign of misleading financial data management. The City of Ashland maintains its financial records in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB), the State of Oregon regulations and statutes, and the federal government requirements including those governing grants, debt issues, loans, and personnel. The City also prepares its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and biennial budget in accordance with the Government Finance Officers Association presentation awards criteria. The City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (audit) is reviewed by an external audit firm, Moss Adams, LLP, selected by the City's Municipal Audit Commission. The financial report is subjected to strenuous testing per national and state standards, procedures and policies are vetted and verified, and staff has been commended for the accuracy and detail of the records maintained by the City. Staff has also had some repeated requests for personal information about City employees with frustration shown when that information is not immediately provided. Many public agencies have recognized that their agency cyber security is at greater risk when individual names are made readily available, particularly those in non -leadership positions. City staff are committed to protecting the public's assets and information by not exposing the systems to direct access to the degree possible. In addition, as noted below public agencies and their employees are personally at greater risk than ever before. The City of Ashland is exploring ways to create greater access for web users without compromising the system. Federal law specifically prohibits the release of information that can be used to identify medical or health information about individuals. Therefore, healthcare coverage information is not provided either by cost or other detail on an individual or easily identifiable basis. In the current heightened environment, public agencies must be cautious in releasing information that can be extrapolated to potentially cause harm to its employees. Further, while City employees must expect to have their positions and salary ranges made public pursuant to Public Records requirements, as an employer, the City has an obligation to ensure that its employees' privacy is compromised only to the degree required by law. The unfortunate reality of the current political environment across the United States includes online harassment and even physical aryJAill CITY OF ASH LAN D Memo assaults on public employees and public workspaces. Where discussion of public policy is furthered by the release of information, such as the recent release of average salaries and benefits by employee group, City staff makes every effort to provide relevant information promptly. However, where discussion of public policy is not obviously furthered by release of personal information, the City provides personal information only to the degree required by law. Hence the use of the Public Records request process is the appropriate means for determining what personal information about staff is disclosable. Finally, some of the erroneous allegations discussed in this memo cast aspersions on the professionalism and integrity of my staff and me. Those allegations warrant a moment of refutation. Through many years of public service, I have adhered to the Codes of Ethics proudly espoused by the International City/County Management Association and the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. Both organizations demand steadfast, demonstrable commitment to the best interests of the community and the organization I serve. In the time I have served as Ashland's Finance Director, the Finance Department staff to a person has proven to be responsive and professional in their actions and product. When mistakes are made, we own them and correct them. We do not ever hide information, mislead, or undermine the public or governing body. Reckless or intentional misstatements about the City staff's motives or competence cause disruption and distrust, undermining the capacity of the community to address its real issues and make reasoned preparations for upcoming challenges. i////////OOOO CITY OF ASH LAN D i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D What are Governmental I I I M Funds? "used to account for activities primarily supported by taxes, grants, and similar revenue sources." Government Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting (the Blue Book) • General Fund: the core administrative and operational tasks of the government entity (City also uses a Parks General Fund) • Special revenue funds: • Streets, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Airport, Affordable Housing, and Reserve Funds • Debt service funds: Debt Service Fund • Capital projects funds: • Capital Improvement Fund, Parks Capital Improvement Fund • Permanent funds: Cemetery Perpetual Care General Fun(*,' mi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D 10 • General operations of the City and all activities not required to be included in other funds • Sources: Property Tax, Electric Utility User Tax, Transient Occupancy Tax, Franchise Fees, Licenses & Permits, Grants, Charges for Services • Uses: Police, Fire, Community Development, Municipal Court, Finance, Information Technology, Public Works Support and Engineering, Administration, contribution to the Parks and Recreation Commission General Fund - Challenges and Opportunities • Long term, stable funding package for APRC • Future Plans for Ambulance Service mi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Ic • Funding Wildfire Prevention and Emergency Management • Long term regionalization of public safety operations • Align revenue streams with compatible expenditure areas • Avoid diluting sources across many program areas • Avoid pitting programs • Scrutinize/ maximize short-term solutions • Prioritize services and service levels • Revenue Analysis and opportunities • Operations Analysis and Capital Planning • Transparency and Communication i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Key Issues C Maintain COVID reduced operational staffing levels • 28 sworn Police Officers 30 Firefighters to maintain 8/10 staffing model • No reduction in Community Development staffing - high activity (revenue) levels and critical to economic recovery efforts • Financial commitment to APRC Holistic approach to Utility Rate Relief Reduction of franchise fees Commitment of resources to transportation infrastructure mi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D In • Focus on mandated and regulated activities • Maintain COVID related expenditure reductions as feasible • Address/Incorporate Ad -Hoc Cost Review Committee Recommendations • Maximize utilization of one-time revenue streams (surplus property) • Identify program/activity areas where funding levels have been capped or reduced for post Budget Council discussion and direction • One-time resources to temporarily bolster the General Fund • Does not carry same restrictions as funds being replaced • Does contain its own restrictions on allowable uses • Increased reporting and audit requirements result from ARPA and other successful grant opportunities across the organization i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Changes in urpeNrations IM • Full allocation of internal (central) service charges across non -governmental funds • Deferral on select vehicle replacements across all Departments • Less Administrative/Support staff within Departments and within internal (central) service operations • Employees paying higher share of Insurance costs i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Cnanges in Service - Current and Future Is Current • Staffing levels may result in reduced hours for open public access (phones, counters) - Payment kiosk and other technologies/ efficiencies in place to offset • Economic, Cultural and Sustainability small grant categories eliminated Future • Dependent on Recommended changes to key GF revenue streams for Parks, Utility Rate Relief and Street Infrastructure projects • Potential further reductions in Public Safety (discretionary elements first) • Potential further reductions to APRC, likely with a focus on Recreation (City Charter related) i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Cnanges in Service - Current and Future i. Delay replacement of lesser used vehicles and reassigning vehicles for more optimal usage ($405,819); ii. Redistribute position funding to more accurately reflect organizational needs, i.e. Deputy City Manager role is designed to consolidate management for Information Technology and Ashland Fiber Network, and provide support to the Electric Fund as all three departments develop long-term strategic plans over the next biennium ($24,629); iii.Smooth the impact of healthcare costs over several years, taking advantage of lower than anticipated increases ($317,532); and iv.Reduce PIERS contribution costs per most recent valuation statement as provided by PIERS ($560,0660); and v. Unfund the previously approved Communications Specialist ($303,178); solutions and seek regional partnerships ($423,000); vii. Evaluate Police staffing ($606,000); and viii. Discontinue the payment of Marijuana Tax revenues to the Housing Fund with dedication of property or proceeds from the sale of property instead ($200,000); and ix. Unfund Fire administration positions if additional grant funds are not secured ($150,000); and x. Unfund social service grants through Community Development ($134,000). i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Rate Relief and Funding Stabilization IN • Better policy and financial alignment of franchise fee revenue stream • Increased stability and structure for General Fund, APRC and Streets Capital funding • Three elements only work when implemented concurrently • Food & Beverage Tax Revenues to APRC/ reduction of property tax transfer to APRC • Reduction of Franchise Rates to Water, Wastewater and Electric Utilities • Allocation of a portion (eventually up to 50%) of franchise fee revenues to Street Fund for capital only i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Genera �-una �-orecast IM The City has had a recurring budget gap for several years that is forecasted to grow without definitive actions to change course. Assumptions include: • Property tax revenues grow at 3.5% per State law. • Food & Beverage and Transient Occupancy Tax revenues grow at 10-15% annually with economic recovery. • Salary costs are estimated to grow at under 2% until labor contracts are settled. • Benefit costs are estimated to grow approximately 6% annually based on historical patterns. Unfunded Actuarial Liability is expected to grow at less than 5% depending on market behavior, current year dropped about 2%. • Other costs are anticipated to grow at or below 3% depending on contract and market behaviors, i.e. asphalt moves with oil prices, software contracts are fixed with average increases of 3-5%. • Debt service will drop then potentially increase depending on projects, market behavior, and availability of federal and state grants and loans. General Fund Forecast �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Reven u e: =Experiditure*: —Ending Fund Balance Is FY2 1. FY2 1. Adopted Estimated *less contingency FY22 Proposed FY23 Proposed Forecast Forecast $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 .Y26 $4,000,000 Forecast $5,000,000 H —Ending Fund Balance: Revenue less Expenditure: Im Taxes Licenses & Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Service Internal Charges for Service Fines Other i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D In FY21 FY22 FY23 FY21 Adopted Estimated Proposed Proposed FY24 Forecast FY25 Forecast FY26 Forecast 24,443,164 24,343,198 25,223,494 23,836,365 25,190,283 26,531,405 27,685,671 949,150 1,090,849 950,000 850,000 875,000 900,000 950,000 1,657,044 3,807,044 1,692,841 175,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 2,144,001 1,894,001 1,297,003 1,350,000 8,365,502 7,271,010 6,371,010 6,371,010 607,900 607,900 350,000 274,085 226,328 226,328 225,000 225,000 1,350,000 1,450,000 1,650,000 6,625,850 6,890,884 7,166,520 300,000 350,000 40,000 225,000 225,000 225,000 Revenues: 38,393,089 39,240,330 36,109,348 33,081,460 34,616,133 36,397,289 37,767,191 Transfer in 425,000 215,000 115,000 115,000 100,000 75,000 50,000 Total Revenues 38,818,089 39,455,330 36,224,348 33,196,460 34,716,133 36,472,289 37,817,191 CITY OF ASH LAN D General Fund Forecast ,,,, FY21 FY21 FY22 FY23 �� Expenditures: Adopted Estimated Proposed Proposed FY24 Forecast FY25 Forecast FY26 Forecast Admin, HR, Court, Legal 3,426,764 3,233,779 3,499,053 3,488,516 3,636,778 3,791,341 3,952,473 IT 1,522,549 1,477,905 1,457,578 1,395,964 1,455,2927 1,517,142. 1,581,621 Parks contribution 5,391,900 5,391,900 5,552,939 3,539,072 3,510,785 3,617,605 3,585,340 Finance 2,899,687 2,450,088 2,887,875 2,955,807 3,081,429 3,212,390 3,190,035 City Recorder 192,752 194,586 175,787 180,004 187,654 195,629 203,944 Police 8,482,466 8,201,465 7,751,922 8,000,987 8,353,030 8,720,564 9,104,268 Fire 9,902,676 9,712,438 10,577,810 10,461,557 10,921,866 11,402,428 11,904,134 PW-support, cemetery, facilities 3,075,374 3,731,483 3,936,879 4,160,707 4,337,537 4,521,882 4,714,062 Com Dev 2,233,243 2,540,473 2,036,652 2,030,828 2,117,138 2,207,117 2,300,919 Other System -wide Adjustments (195,358) (512,890) Expenditures: 37,127,411 36,934,117 37,681,137 35,700,552 37,601,509 39,186,097 40,536,797 Transfer out 10,550 274,401 500 500 500 500 500 Contingency 505,209 - 1,119,229 1,103,158 1,109,832 1,124,882 1,173,244 Total Expenditures: 37,643,170 37,208,518 38,800,866 36,804,210 38,711,841 40,311,479 41,710,541 Revenue Minus Expenditures 11174,919 2,246,812 (2,576,518) (3,607,749) (3,995,708) (3,839,190) (3,893,351) Ending Fund Balance 4,517,003 10,446,189 7,869,671 4,261,922 266,214 (3,572,976) (7,466,327) Fund Balance Policy 7,386,823 7,461,525 7,354,387 7,398,880 7,499,210 7,821,627 Over/(under) Policy 3,059,365 408,146 (3,092,465) (7,132,666) (11,072,186) (15,287,954) i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D General Fund Revenues 10 • Reduce property tax transfer to APRC • Full allocation of Food & Beverage Tax to APRC (98%) • Reduction in Franchise Fee Rate for Water, Wastewater and Electric Utilities • Allocation of Franchise Fee Revenues for Street Fund Capital Projects • All three above to be approved by Council via Ordinance to ensure stability and structure for taxpayers and rate payers a lwi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D ////I . .... ...... 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. Adopted 2021. 22 2022 23 Budget Proposed Budget Proposed Budget �111111111 Taxes Charges for Services Franchise Fees lritergovernmental Revenue Licenses and Permits Fines and Forfeitures 0 Operating Transfers ln 0 lriterest on Pooled lrivestments I111111111 Miscellaneous Revenues General Fund Sources by Type iiiiiiii Taxes 11111111111 Charges for Services iiiiiiiFranchise Fees �Umtergm;ermrnemta|Re;emue iiiiiiiiiiiLicenses and Permits iiiiiiiiiiiFines and Forfeitures * Operating Transfers Um * Umterestmm Pooled Um;estrnemts 11111111 Miscellaneous Revenues lmi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Property Taxes 111111111111M Property Taxes are the largest revenue source for the General Fund. IN • Total Property Tax rate for City of Ashland: 4.3561 per $1,000 of assessed valuation • City Operating Levy: 4.2865 • Debt Service: 0.0696 (a reduction of 0.0339) • Assessed valuations can only increase by 3.5% annually per State law. $1.4,000,000 1111111 Current Property Taxes IIIIIIIIIIIII Prior Property Taxes $1.2,000,000 $1.0,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 Y, Z\ b\ b\ Z\ b\ b\ Z\ b\ b\ b\ Z\ b\ Ally"- 1111,- �V v� 0i Qz 0 0 1�z lcpA C� Q, Q) 55 (01 e; CITY OF ASH LAN D ® IN Central Klamath Woodburn Ashland Medford Talent Phoenix Point Falls* Hermiston Wilsonville Operating 4.2865 5.2835 3.2316 3.2525 4.3545 5.4423 6.086 2.5206 6.0534 Fire 2.4938 3.1976 2.8522 3.0388 2.8822 2.1322 Parks Happy Roseburg Newberg* Valley* Lebanon Canby* Operating 8.4774 4.3827 0.671 6.5749 3.4886 Fire 2.1167 2.2947 1.5456 Parks 1.2766 0.54 0.2137 *Does not include Fire and/or Park District levies West Linn Milwaukie Sherwood Pendleton Average 2.12 6.5379 3.2975 6.5771 4.591 2.4012 2.4955 0.6768 i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Utility User Tax/ Ashland Forest Resiliency M Charge/ Public Safety Support Fee I" The Utility User Tax is 25% applied to all the charges on electric meter accounts. Each electric meter account pays $1.50 per month to help fund police services. Ashland Forest Resilience (AFR) program: $3.00/ .75" equiv./ month on each water account. 5,000,000 IIIIIIIII Water Surcharge for Arse Electric Utility user Tax Public safety Fee 4,000,000 r�rrrr� 0 /'�,^t ,I, �� °� ('y,,,�6." p^y"�h" e�'1P ,�;'a ,�bd ,�� „�G� (�✓,��1, /y ,�`h 6�,�� ,��" ��, f"*.±3'r/_ ®.. �y'bJe?N q�y'bJ (W4J /�'bJ (W4✓ q'\'bJ ary"+.J Py'bJ ry"+.J Py4J ryM,A ��""� ry'4J Py4J /7'�J ��® d�,\ �"p�\ i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Charyes for Services/ Fees and Permits • Building and Planning fees • Internal Services charges (formerly Central Service) • Ambulance Transports • Police reports, research, etc., Court costs e rie r ll I:::uirid Charges, F::ees, OW ce ris s, Fle rm is Dove rwe Il fistoiry 1.4,000,000 1.2,000,000 0 licenses and Permits e Charges es for Services Fines and Forfeitures uiu 1.0,000,000 t<«ru t<«ttt 8,000,000 „ 0 C� i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D ransient Occupancy Tax (TOT) State Law requires that approximately 70%, of TOT revenues be allocated for tourism prorrio ion or tourism infrastructure. The BN2021-23 budget includes TOT estimated at 42% of 2019 collections with gradual growth over the next few years. If tax collections exceed the budget, the City Council can revisit options to utilize the increased revenue. $3,500,000 $3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1.,500,000 1.,000,000 500,000 0 ' 11P �� 11Y 11Y �/ 1 �� a, " fro Rb 1 { '" g^a","� ° emu""' from'' "v g ' � :' ,xny",�y"`a n ',' ,rv.. N d'.}v°w.A 4'M�✓ A}I"'wd' d°y / F'ip°/w.7 Aq°/w.A 4'M°✓4X d"pI"'wd' d°y / F'ip°/w.7 p.I\V,.�9J'MW d'yIV ""' ryYY/y""�' ��@y. 'u^✓, � /'y d� ,64 Jimy1\ ��.� i////////0000/ CITY OF •se ASH LAN D FranchFees Charged to utilities for use of the City's rights -of -way for reimbursement for impacts, particularly to the City's infrastructure F:: it ire dMF::ee I""'1 i st o ry 2,500,000 2,000,000 01 �II11J 111111J 1.,500,000 1.,QQQ,QQQ 500,000 `N bra IIIIIIIII Electric Utility Franchise Water Utility Franchise Wastewater Utility Franchise natural leas Franchise ��'� �� • i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Franchise Fees as part of Rate Relief I" • The BN2019-2021 budget recommended a comprehensive review of franchise fees to maintain affordability and competitiveness of the utilities. The BN2021-2023 Recommended Budget includes stepped reductions in franchise fees and codification of the rates for consistency across utilities including external agencies. Franchise Fee Rate Structure Current Franchise Rates Proposed FY2022-23 Franchise Rates FY2023-24 and forward Franchise Rates Wastewater 8.00% 7.50% 7.50% Water 8.00% 7.50% 7.50% Electric 10.00% 8.50% 7.50% Avista 7.00% 7.50% 7.50% Charter 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% HomeNet 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Stormwater 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% AFN 0.00% 0.00% 3.00% mi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Franchise • The City has struggled to find a stable and appropriate funding stream for Streets repairs. Franchise Fees are designed to pay the City for impacts to Streets making a clear nexus. • The BN2021-2023 Recommended Budget includes stepped increases in the percentage of franchise fees dedicated to Streets capital improvements and codification of the contribution. Franchise Fee Distribution FY2022-23 FY2023-24 I FY2024-25 I FY2025-26 Dedicated to Streets Funding 20.00% 25.00%1 35.00%1 50.00% lm� CITY OF ASH LAN D Generai �-una txpenditures Geinerall F::uind Proposed F::Y2021-2022 Exper6tures rontingpncv 11111liq Imm $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $1.5,000,000 $1.0,000,000 $5,000,000 lmi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D ........... ........... $ Emmum Emmum Emmum Emmum Emmum Emmum 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. Adopted 2021. 22 2022 23 Budget Proposed Budget Proposed Budget 11111111 Personnel Services Material and Services IIIIIII Capital Outlay Contingency Operation Transfers Out i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Anatomy %/.-j%f Costs- Personnel • Salaries & Wages includes Base, Payouts, Leave, and Overtime • Steps and COLAs governed by contracts • Benefits: Mandated vs. Negotiated • Retirement: PERS, Deferred Compensation • Healthcare Coverage • FICA/ Medicare, Workers Compensation, Unemployment City-wide Staffing and Costs Change Gty-wde Chainges in Flersoinind Costs aind F::FEs 20.00% 1.5.00% 1.0.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1.0.00% —Salaries & Wages —Fringe Benefits —FTEs lmi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D 13 0, 0 lwi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D General Fund Personnel Costs vs FTEs 11111111111111111 Regular Employees Overtime Temporary Employees Leave Pay Out l Bealth :are Coverage Retirement MFlCA/MEDlCARE Contribution =Work Comp/ Unemploy —TOTAL FTEs $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $1.5,000,000 .......................... $1.0,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 "N "N Q,� 1�kcl 1.90 1.85 1.80 1.75 1.70 1.65 1.60 1.55 30.00% 20.00% 1.0.00% 0.00% 1.0.00% 20. o 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% —� ealth :are Coverage —Retirement —HCA/MEMCARE Contribution Anatomy of Costs- Personnel City of Ashland Representative Annual Salary and Fringe Benefits As of July 1, 2021 Salary - Average Overtime - Last Fiscal Avg Subtotal Salary Legislated Benefits: Workers Comp PERS (avg 10.07%/ 15.33%) FICA/Medicare tax (7.65%)* Subtotal Legislated Benefits i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D 10 87,262 61,789 63,087 93,445 61,253 84,835 103,911 220 346 250 3,283 1,672 9,338 19,264 87,482 62,135 63,337 96,728 62,925 94,173 123,175 812 645 381 1,254 1,492 1,603 2,464 8,810 6,257 6,379 9,741 6,337 14,343 18,785 6,693 4,754 4,846 7,400 4,814 7,205 9,423 16,315 11,656 11,606 18,395 12,643 23,151 30,672 Anatomy of Costs- Personnel City of Ashland Representative Annual Salary and Fringe Benefits As of July 1, 2021 Negotiated Benefits: Employee PERS/OPSRP (6%)* Health/Dental Insurance* Life Insur. & Long -Term Disability** Mercy Flights** Deferred comp** HRAVEBA Subtotal Negotiated Benefits Sub -Total Benefits Total Salary & Benefits % Ratio of Benefits/Salary i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D IM 5,249 3,729 3,801 5,804 3,776 5,651 7,391 19,495 19,584 19,495 19,495 22,350 148 112 112 112 97 123 100 - - 70 70 70 - 70 600 1,750 600 1,243. 600 1,267 600 1,935 540 1,259 600 1,884 600 2,464 27,242 25,268 25,345 28,016 25,237 27,753 32,975 43,557 36,924 36,951 46,411 37,880 50,904 63,647 131,039 99,059 100,288 143,139 100,805 145,077 186,822 50% 59% 58% 48% 60% 54% 52% • *Employee contributes additional amount • **Voluntary participation/Employee pays primary portion 111111 Tier 1/2 Rates E Tier 1/2 UAL Tier 1/2 Prepayment Tier 1/2 PF Rates Tier 1/2 PF UAL IIIIIII Tier 1/2 PF Prepayment OPSRP Rates OPSRP UAL 0 OPSRP Prepayment 0 OPSRP PF Rates ll OPSRP PF UAL 0 OPSRP Prepayment 1.20.00% 1.00.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% BN 07....0 BN 09 1.1. BN 1.1. 1.3 BN 1.3 1.5 BN 1.5 1.7 BN 1.7...1. BN 1.9 21. BN 21. 23 Rates Rates Rates Rates Rates Rates Rates Rates 40% 30% 20% 1.0% 0% BN 09 ....1.1. BN I.A. 1.3 BN 1.3 1.5 BN 1.7 1.9 BN 1.9 21. BN21....23 �ncrease fr n Icreasefrom 15�ncrease from rl, -r �ncrease from �ncrease from encrease from f 20% previous N previous BN previous BN pre' 'ou N previous BN previous BN previous BN 30% V 40% 50% i////////0000/ CITY OF ® ASH LAN D als • Basket of goods for City more influenced by petroleum and construction costs than consumer basket • Continued leverage of external and restricted sources to fund grants i////////0000/ CITY OF ® ASH LAN D Anatomy o--f Costs- Materials & Supplies ire it II F:: u ire d MaterWs aind Services I....Ht o it Y IIIIIIIII S u p p I i es Rental, Repair, Maintenance Communications Contractual Services Other Purchased Svcs � n s u r a n c e ■ Commission 0 Grants IIIIIIIII Programs IIIIIIIII Other ,000,000 $7,000,000 In $5,000,000 IN IN 000 000 1.,000,00 0 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $1.5,000,000 $1.0,000,000 $5,000,000 a 11111liq 0 . 9 7 =irfilms lmi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. Adopted 2021. 22 Proposed2022 23 Proposed Budget Budget Budget 11111111 Fire and Rescue Department Police Department Finance Department Adminstration Department information Technology Dept City Recorder Department 0 Public Works 0 Community Development 11111111 Non Departmental CITY OF ASH LAN D Governmental Fund ® Functons Central Klamath "" Governmental Funds Ashland Medford Talent Phoenix Point Falls Hermiston Wilsonville Woodburn Police Department X X X X X X X X Fire Department w/ Ambulance X Fire Only X Planning Department X X X X X X X X Building Safety Department X X X X X X X X Parks and Recreation Department X X X X X X X X X Municipal Court X X X X X X Communications Program X X X X X X X City Band X Cemeteries 3 1 Municipal Airport X X X Golf Course X Senior Center X X X Swimming Pool X X X X X CITY OF ASH LAN D Governmental Fund ® I Functons Happy Governmental Funds Ashland Roseburg Newberg Valley Sherwood Canby West Linn Lebanon Milwaukie Pendleton Police Department X X X X X X X X X Fire Department w/ Ambulance X X X Fire Only Planning Department X X X X X X X X X X Building Safety Department X X X X X X X X X X Parks and Recreation Department X X X X X X X X Municipal Court X X X X X X X X X X Communications Program X X X X X X City Band X Cemeteries 3 1 1 3 Municipal Airport X X X Golf Course X X Senior Center X X X Swimming Pool X X X r Now i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D IM • Update of the TOT ordinance to meet State regulations and approval of an intergovernmental agreement with the State of Oregon for administration of Ashland's lodging tax; • Enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Talent to provide police patrol, supervision, and investigative services; • Approve the transfer and/or sale of surplus property to benefit the Housing Trust Fund; • Update of the F&B ordinance to distribute 98% of the proceeds to the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission and 2% to be retained by the General Fund to offset administration. This change does not require an election but F&B modifications have been referred to the voters in the past; • Adopt an ordinance directing the specific allocation of property tax millage to be transferred to the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission on a stepwise decreasing schedule; • Adopt a Franchise Fee ordinance to establish universally applied franchise fees to all purveyors of utilities within Ashland City limits and direct a stepwise increasing amount to the Streets Fund for capital investment; and • Schedule exploratory discussions for Council of strategic financial plan elements including Capital Improvements Plan, debt management, labor negotiations strategy, and service array options such as a regional fire district or partnership. $1.0,000 $9,000 $8,000 $7,000 $6,000 $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 Reserve Revenues linterest On Flooled linvestmeints IS IN Mm 201.7 1.8 201.8 1.9 201920 2020 21. Actual Actual Actual Adopted Budget Em Em 2021. 22 2022 23 Proposed Proposed Budget Budget i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D 10 • General operations of the Parks and Recreation programs. The Parks and Recreation Commission is a separately elected governing body. • Sources: Property Tax (via transfer from the General Fund), Food & Beverage Tax, Charges for Services, Grants • Uses: Control and manage, develop and maintain parks and open space; provide recreation activities as separately funded. Parks General Fund Revenues by Type $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 lmi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Arm 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. Adopted 2021. 22 2022 23 Budget Proposed Budget Proposed Budget �111111111 Charges for Services Taxes III Operating Transfers In lritergovernmental Revenue Miscellaneous Revenues lriterest on Pooled lrivestments i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Parks General Fund Revenues Forecast Flarks Geinerall F::uir6in Sources $1,000,000 EMEN mil lull IN IN 0 Food & Beverage existing IIIIIIIII Food & Beverage additional Property Tax Parks $9,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 a General Fund Expenses by Type m"Wom CITY OF ASH LAN D ................ I 99k±±± 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. Adopted 2021. 22 Proposed2022 23 Proposed Budget Budget Budget 111111 Personnel Services Material and Services IIIIIII Capital Outlay Contingency Special Revenue Funds Rio///////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D 13 This category includes all funds that are not operated as profit and loss structures, i.e. proprietary funds outside of the General Fund. There are usually restrictions on the uses of these funds determined by the source. • Community Development Block Grant- Account for entitlement and other grant funds to assist low- and moderate -income households and neighborhoods. Receives grants from US Housing & Urban Development for affordable housing projects and assistance. • Street Fund- House street related operations and capital projects. Receives State gas tax, utility bill street user fee, Food & Beverage Tax, grants to pay for streets repair, maintenance, and construction. • Airport Fund- Account for airport operations and revenues. Receives Service charges, hangar rents, and lease fees to maintain and improve the airport. • Housing Fund- Uses Marijuana tax and transfers from General Fund to support affordable housing projects and services. 11 Imm- -� �ousing Fund —Community Block Fund —Reserve Fund Street Fund $1.2,000,000 $1.0,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. Adopted Budget 2021. 22 2022 23 Proposed Budget Proposed Budget 5 1450,000 CDBG Revenues and Exper6tures $400,000 EMPersonnel Services IVaterial and Services —btergovernrnental Revenue $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $1.50,000 $1.00,000 $50,000 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201920 Actual 2020 21. 2021. 22 2022 23 Adopted Budget Proposed BudgetProposed Budget $1.2,000,000 $1.0,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. 2021. 22 2022 23 Adopted Proposed Proposed Budget Budget Budget 11111111 Debt Revenue Charges for Services lritergovernmental Revenue Taxes Franchise Fees Miscellaneous Revenues 0 lriterest on Pooled lrivestments i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Street Fund - House street related operations and capital projects. Receives State gas tax, utility bill street user fee, Food & Beverage Tax, grants to pay for streets repair, maintenance, and construction. Expense by ...Fyp 1.2,000,000 1.0,000,000 1f ff11111111111111 8,000,000 6,000,000 �11111D111 �111111�111�111)1J 2,000,000 �111111111111 201.7...1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9....20 Actual 2020..21. 2021....22 2Q22....2 g Adopted Proposed Proposed Budget Budget Budget IIIIIIIII Capital Outlay I Material and Services IIIIIIII Personnel Services Debi: Services II Contingency Airport Fund - Account for airport operations and revenues. Receives Service charges, hangar rents, and lease fees to maintain and improve the airport. $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1.,000,000 Airport F::urid F�everiue by Fype 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. Adopted Budget �111111111 intergovernrnental Revenue llll Miscellaneous Revenues lwi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D 2021. 22 2022 23 Proposed Proposed Budget Budget CFiarges for Services interest on Pooled �nvestrnents $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. 2021. 22 2022 23 Adopted Budget Proposed Proposed Budget Budget 11111111 Material and Services Debt Services Capital Outlay Contingency �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII T axes Miscellaneous Revenues $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $1.50,000 $1.00,000 $50,000 a I IOUS�Ing F::uind lReveinues aind Exper6tures 0 perati rig Transfers ln lriterest on Pooled lrivestments —Material and Services 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. 2021. 22 2022 23 Adopted Budget Proposed Proposed Budget Budget $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 a Captall IImprovemeit F::uind lReveinue by Fype 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. Adopted 11111111 lritergovernmental Revenue Charges for Services lriterest on Pooled lrivestments Operating Transfers In 2021. 22 Proposed Im 2022 23 Proposed IIIIIII Miscellaneous Revenues lwi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Capital Improvements Fund C Account for capital projects for the governmental funds. Uses internal charges and transfers, grants, taxes, and system development charges to pay for capital projects. Cap�talI IImprovemerit F::urid Experise by Fype $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1.,000,000 $500,000 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. 2021. 22 2022 23 Adopted Proposed Proposed 1111111 Personnel Services Material and Services IIIIIII Capital Outlay Operation Transfers Out Contingency $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 Flarks Captall F::uind lReveinue by Fype M M 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. 2021. 22 2022 23 Adopted Budget Proposed Proposed Budget Budget 11111111 Taxes lritergovernmental Revenue llll Miscellaneous Revenues lriterest on Pooled lrivestments $9,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 Flarks Captall F::uind Expeinse by Fype I III M, M, III� lam 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. 2021. 22 Adopted Budget Proposed Budget �111111111 Material and Services Capital Outlay III Operation Transfers Out 2022 23 Proposed Budget lwi////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Debt Service Fund 10 Receives Property taxes, charges for service, assessments, transfers to pay Principal and interest on debt, bonded and unbonded. 1111111 Taxes Cl-iarges for Services $2,500,000 Miscellaneous Revenues interest on Pooled �nvestrnents Operating Transfers �n $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1.,000,000 $500,000 a 201.7 1.8 Actual 201.8 1.9 Actual 201.9 20 Actual 2020 21. 2021. 22 2022 23 Adopted Proposed Proposed Budget Budget Budget � Total Expenses $ 1,872,161 $ 2,029,809 $ 2,026,211 $ 1,765,520 $ 1,765,520 $ 1,766,451 i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Looking Forward • U date of the TOT ordinance to meet State re ulations and a roval of an inter overnIm t p g pp intergovernmental agreement with the State of Oregon for administration of Ashland's lodging tax; • Enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Talent to provide police patrol, supervision, and investigative services; • Approve the transfer and/or sale of surplus property to benefit the Housing Trust Fund; • Update of the F&B ordinance to distribute 98% of the proceeds to the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission and 2% to be retained by the General Fund to offset administration. This change does not require an election but F&B modifications have been referred to the voters in the past; • Adopt an ordinance directing the specific allocation of property tax millage to be transferred to the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission on a stepwise decreasing schedule; • Adopt a Franchise Fee ordinance to establish universally applied franchise fees to all purveyors of utilities within Ashland City limits and direct a stepwise increasing amount to the Streets Fund for capital investment; and • Schedule study sessions for Council to explore strategic financial plan elements including Capital Improvements Plan, debt management, labor negotiations strategy, and service array options such as a regional fire district or partnership. September 2021- March 2022 i////////0000/ CITY OF ASH LAN D Im Budget Committee Meetings •Tuesday, April 27 (Enterprise Funds- Water, Sewer, Electric, Ashland Fiber Network, Stormwater, and Internal Service funds) •Tuesday, May 1 1 (Final Review and Approval including Grants Recommendations). City Council Meetings •Tuesday, June 1 and Tuesday, June 15 at 6 p.m. Please visit the City's website, for polling questions and more information.