Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2011-1017 Study Session PACKET
CITY OF ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA Monday, October 17, 2011 at 5:30 p.m. Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way 5:30 p.m. Study Session 1. Look Ahead Review 2. What feedback does the Council have on the proposed revisions of the City's economic, cultural, and sustainability grant program? [45 Minutes] 3. Does Council have direction for staff related to working capital that carried over in the General Fund and Parks & Recreation Fund from the prior fiscal year that exceeded the amount that was included in the adopted budget? 145 Minutes] In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735- 2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). COI_INCII MF111\6SARF_ 13ROADC \S"I I.JVF:ON' CI1ANNE.L9 V I S I I' I'IIF CITY 01= AS]ILAND'S \\ I-M SI1 ` AT \V\V\\..AS1ILAND.0R I_ S City of Ashland Council Meeting Look Ahead *****THIS IS A DRAFT AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE***** last Sh'haession Can'celefg 11 Departments Responsible 10/31 1111 11/14 11115 1215 1216 12119 12120 1/2 1/3 1116 1117 216 2/7 2120 2121 315 316 3119 3120 412 4/3 4116 4117 11/1 �Re uularCouncillMe'etin' —_ tt/t 1 Grant application for AFG Grant for Fire John Fire CONS 2 Ordinance re: Pedestrian Places Code Amendments(Bill) CD PH ORD-1 ORD-2 3 Ordinance re:Wireless Communications Code(Bill) CD PH ORD-1 ORD-2 a Approval of Supplemental Budget? Lee Finance PH 5 Award of bid for gun club environmental review Mike PW UNFIN 6 Update from CERT John Fire NEW Conservation Commission Sustainabilit Goal Update Lee Electric NEW e Adoption of Buildable Lands Inventory update Bill CD ORD-2 11/14 �$t'ud-yIBesion iZSliki ou Room' - 1tn4 9 Discussion re rding Police Station options Ter Police SS Executive Session 6:30 pm 11/15 10 For real property transaction pursuant to ORS 192.660.(2)(0 Lee Electric EXEC 11/15 �Re ular Cou'ncillMeetin 11 Presentation of Tree of the Year Winner Bill) CD PRIES 12 lAcceptance of FY11 CAFR Lee Finance NEW 13 Approval of FY2013 CIP Mike PW NEW ' 14 Infrastructure financing plan for employment development/TIF Feasibility Final Plan Bill CD NEW 15 TSP Update Mike PW NEW 16 Ordinance re: Pedestrian Places Code Amendments Bill CD ORD-2 17 Ordinance re:Wireless Communications Code Bill CD ORD-2 12/5 �utt d'gession i-nTSliki ou 18 Discussion re: Recology rate increase request Ann Admin SS 12/6 �Re Ular C-OUncillMeetin'� ®_ ® ® ®® NMI 19 Approval of Recology Rate Increase(Ann) Admin PH RES 20 Sewer line service policy(Mike) PW NEW 12/19 —�Stud'1$ession i—nlSiiki .OU ROom' — _ _ _ _ _ _ 12/19 21 Discussion regarding a new model for telecommunications franchise agreements and application of rights-of-way usage Lee/Dave IT Legal Finance ss C12_-120 Re ular iaouncillMeetin g�IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 12201 1/2 �$t'ud'ISesion Canceile'dENBw Years HoliBa M=— r 1/2 1/3 �Re uular CouncillMe'eti W73-6 6 22 Mayors State of the City Speech(Mayor) Mayor PRIES 23 Discussion regarding criteria for selection of new City Administrator Tina HR PH 24 Election of Council President Barbara Recorder NEW 1/16 Stu 19ession Cancelle'dT'JMLKfJ7Da Ti t41s ular CouncillMee%ii ®0 0 M ® ®® um7 Page 1 of 2 10/13/2011 City of Ashland Council Meeting Look Ahead *****THIS IS A DRAFT AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE***** Page 2 of 2 10/1312011 Study Session(in Siskiyou Room Departments Responsible ss 10131 cc 1111 ss 11114 cc 11115 SS 1215 cc 1216 ss 12119 cc 12)20 SS 112 cc 113 ss 1116 cc 1117 ss 216 cc 217 ss 2120 cc 2121 Ss 315 cc 316 Ss 3119 cc 3120 ss 412 cc 413 Ss 4116 cc 4117 © Regular Council Meeting Approval of TSP(Mike) Study Session Cancelled-Presldenfs Day_ Regular Council Meeting Approval of Water Masterplan(Mike) ® Regular Council Meeting Regular Council Meeting Reguarcouricil Meeting Study Session vAth OSF Board Study Session re:Business Licimses Joint Meeting vAth Housing Commission to discuss Clay Street Property Joint Study Session Wth Parks re MOU � - IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII�OIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII��IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII���IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII��IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII�II���� Page 2 of 2 10/1312011 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Study Session: Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grant program Meeting Date: October 17, 201 1 Primary Staff Contact: Martha Bennett Department: Administration E-Mail: bennettm @ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: AdministrativieSF ices Secondary Contact: Lee Tuneberg Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: 45 minutes Question: What feedback does the City Council have on the proposed revisions of the City's economic, cultural, and sustainability grant program? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council review staff's proposal for revising the City's economic, cultural, and sustainability grant program. These recommendations are designed to implement the City's economic' development strategy, respond to 2010 City Council goals, and respond to concerns expressed in the last two budget cycles. Background: Annually, the City uses a portion of funds collected from the transient occupancy tax to fund grants to non-profit agencies for specific programs related to economic development, cultural opportunities, or sustainability programs. These grants are not charitable gifts. Rather, the grants allow the City to provide services through non-profits that the City might otherwise choose to provide directly. Because the services are provided by non-profit organizations with specific missions, the City is often able to obtain more effective services at a lower cost than if the City provided the service directly. The City allocates approximately 1/3 of the total transient occupancy tax revenue to outside grants and contracts. Some of these funds are required to be spent on tourism promotion activities as outlined in state law and some of the funds are general purpose dollars that the City Council has chosen to budget for the grant program. The City directly contracts with the Ashland Chamber of Commerce for tourism promotion and the Oregon Shakespeare Festival for marketing. Staff recommends that the Council continue to allocate those funds separately from the rest of the grant program, although Council may wish to use the same outcomes in the required reporting for those allocations. The remaining outside funds are allocated through the grant program. In the last three fiscal years the allocation has been as follows: FV 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Actual Total TOT Collection $1,639,281 $1,880,596 $1,917,685 Chamber of Commerce $262,722 $275,000 $280,000 Contract Oregon Shakespeare $120,201 $110,000 $110,000 Festival Grant program (both $125,410 $157,079 $167,080 general and tourism) Page ] of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND There are three reasons staff is bringing an action to Council to recommend changes to the economic, cultural, and sustainability grant program. First, the Economic Development Strategy adopted in July 2011 contains a top priority action item to better align the City's grant program with the selected strategy. As Council will recall, the strategy focuses on Ashland's competitive advantages and targets certain types of economic enterprises, both within tourism and more broadly. The proposed grant program would align the funds the City spends on all three areas more closely with this strategy, including adopting some of the same outcome measures for the grant program. Second, a number of questions and concerns have come up in the middle of the last two or three budget cycles related to this program. Put simply, there has been disagreement on the subcommittee of the Budget Committee about what criteria from the old grant resolution are most important, and the subcommittee has requested that the Council clarify the direction for the program. Third, when Council added the sustainability grants in 2009, the criteria for this program was significantly different than the criteria for the economic development and cultural grants. Staff recommends that the Council better align the activities and criteria for these grants with the other two programs. Key recommendations in this proposal include: • Recommendation that Council allocate the funds for each of these activities into three "buckets." Councilor Chapman has recommended this in the past, and staff concurs that pre- deciding how the Council wants to allocate funds among the three types of activities would help staff, applicants, and the Budget Committee. Staff recommends allocating the "small grant" funds as follows: 40% for grants that are primarily "economic development;"40% for "cultural development;" and 20% for sustainability. Council can, of course, modify those percentages. . • Clearer articulation of outcome-based criteria. Council will see in the proposed description of the program that staff has used the outcomes defined in the economic development strategy, in the budgets, and in the prior grant resolution to define the criteria for evaluating grants. • Pre defined evaluation criteria and point allocation. Staff recommends that the Council adopt a scoring system for use by the Budget Committee which should improve the committee's ability to debate the reasons for funding (or not funding) some applications. It should also help focus the debate over which applications best meet the criteria. • Continuation of an annual allocation of funds between the City, the two tourism contracts (Chamber and OSF) and the small grant program. Staff recommends that Council continue to set the dollar amounts for TOT funds each year in February. The proposed resolution, however, takes out the grant program, which would be adopted separately. After Council provides feedback, staff will schedule the grant program for discussion and adoption by Council. Staff would then update the application forms to implement this new program. The allocation of actual dollars would come back to Council in February 2012. Page 2 of 3 Imo, CITY or -ASH LAN D Related Council Policies: Economic Development Strategy. http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?Nav]D=14254 Council Options: Provide feedback to staff on the proposal Attachments: • Economic, Cultural and Sustainability Grants: Program Goals, Categories and Criteria • Draft Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grants Scoring Sheet • Draft 2012 TOT Resolution Page 3 of 3 �r, DRAFT Economic, Cultural and Sustainability Grants Program Goals, Categories and Criteria The City of Ashland collects a Transient Occupancy Tax, from people who stay in overnight lodging within the City limits. Over half(58%) of those funds are reserved for the City's General Fund and are used to support Police, Fire, Community Development, and Municipal Court. Slightly more than a quarter(26.67%) of those funds are used to support the tourism industry. The tourist funds are either allocated directly to groups that market Ashland to tourists or are spent-on capital facilities that enhance the tourism experience within the community. The remaining funds are dedicated to the City's annual grant program. The amounts that go to each of these programs are allocated prior to the beginning of each fiscal year by the Ashland City Council, generally in February. The City of Ashland reinvests a portion of the funds generated by the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) in'community non-profits through an annual grant program. Through the grant program, the City is purchasing services from non-profits that it might otherwise provide directly. The grant program has three basic goals: • Economic Development. The grant program will support the creation, retention, and expansion of businesses and other ventures that enrich our community by creating goods and services that provide employment opportunities while maintaining and enhancing the overall quality of life. • Cultural Development. The grant program will support increased diversity and accessibility of the creative arts and cultural opportunities in Ashland for citizens and visitors both to support the visitor economy and to enrich the quality of life in the community. • Sustainability. The grant program will support efforts to ensure Ashland is environmentally, economically and socially resilient as a community. DRAFT—Grant Program - 9/20/2011 Page 1 1. GRANT CATEGORIES Non-profit organizations applying for these grants must identify the category of funds that their application meets. Applicants may request funds from multiple categories, but the justification for applying in multiple categories needs to be clearly spelled out in the application. In addition, the City may allocate a portion of any grant as one that serves tourists. That is, some of the awarded funds will need to be used to attract visitors from over 50 miles away or to encourage people to spend the night in a hotel, motel, or bed &breakfast inn within Ashland. Each of the three grant categories includes a score for how well the application promotes tourism. This aspect of each grant will only be scored one time, not three separate times. A. Economic Development (40% of the funds for the small Brant cateeory will be awarded in this cateaorv) Grant allocations in the Economic Development category will be made to support implementation of the City's Economic Development Strategy. Eligible activities include: 1. Specific implementing actions or programs identified in the economic development strategy. Those activities can be found at http://ashland.or.us/files/Ashland EconomicDevelopmentStrategy Pinal.pol; on pages 8 through 22. 2. Programs that foster creation, expansion or retention of existing businesses in the community that • rely on and earn a competitive advantage from innovation, creativity, design, proto- typing and technology • produce specialty and value added goods or services with a market beyond our local economy 3. Programs and activities that improve the coordination and collaboration among local and regional economic development partners. 4. Programs and activities that increase the availability of investment capital for local business 5. Programs and activities local educational & technical skills to match local business workforce needs 6. Specific programs that increase tourism throughout the year. Criteria for evaluation The City seeks to accomplish the desired outcomes from the economic development strategy (page 23) through the grants, and therefore these outcomes will be used to evaluate applications. Applications for the Economic Development Grants will be evaluated based on the following criteria: • Likelihood that the proposed activity will increase total employment within Ashland (15 points). Up to five additional points can be awarded if the additional employment will be DRAFT—Grant Program - 9/20/2011 Page 2 added in businesses that rely on innovation, creativity(etc). or produce a specialty good or service for export as identified in paragraph #2. • Likelihood that the proposed activity will increase the number of businesses required to obtain a business license in Ashland (15 points). Up to five additional points can be awarded if the additional employment will be added in businesses that rely on innovation, creativity (etc). or produce a specialty good or service for export as identified in paragraph #2. Likelihood that the proposed activity will assist existing businesses within Ashland in expanding or remaining in the community(15 points) • Likelihood that the proposed activity will increase the hotel/motel occupancy in Ashland (10 points). Up to three additional points may be awarded if occupancy would increase in the months of October through April. • Likelihood that the proposed activity would result in jobs that are at or above the median income for Ashland (15 points). B. Cultural Development (40% of the funds for the small grant category will be awarded in this category) Cultural development grants are intended to support the retention and growth of Ashland's unique cultural offerings, both to residents and tourists alike. Leveraging and expanding Ashland's cultural assets such creative, performing and visual arts, historic preservation and education, brings creative community prosperity and adds to the overall quality of life of the community. Ashland's visitor economy also thrives on the cultural and performing arts sector, so increasing the diversity of cultural opportunities for visitors strengthens the tourism economy overall. The City's grant program is designed to strengthen existing cultural activities, increase the number and diversity of cultural activities, and increase access to these activities. Eligible activities include: 1. Programs or activities that create of new cultural offerings unique from existing local offerings, activities or programs 2. Expansion in size or scope of an existing cultural offerings, activities or programs 3. Expansion of access by audiences to those existing offerings, activities or programs 4. Support services targeted to existing or proposed cultural offerings, activities or programs Criteria for Evaluation. Grant applications for cultural development monies will be evaluated based on the following. • Amount that the proposed activity will diversify the number, type, or availability to cultural service, activity or program proposed compared with existing local cultural opportunities.(20 points) • Degree to which the proposed activity will collaborate with an existing cultural program or will leverage another cultural opportunity.(20 points) DRAFT—Grant Program - 9/20/2011 Page 3 • Amount which the proposed activity will increase access to cultural programs or activities, especially by those who may not otherwise have access such as low income residents, children, or minority groups (20 points) • Likelihood that the proposed activity will increase the hotel/motel occupancy in Ashland or increase visits to local restaurants and retail businesses (10 points). Up to three additional points may be awarded if'occupancy would increase in the months of October through April. C. Sustainability (20% of the total program funds will be allocated to this grant category) The goal of the sustainability grants process is to support the exploration and expansion of efforts to ensure that Ashland is an environmentally, economically, and socially resilient community well into the future. Eligible activities include: 1. Program development, education & training, and outreach related to: local renewable energy supply, production and use; energy efficiency and conservation; water use efficiency and conservation; local food supply; local natural resource or ecology; resource reclamation, reuse and recycling 2. Programs that would directly assist local employers in energy, water, waste, and supply chain efficiencies and reductions 3. Programs that increase local to local purchasing either by businesses or by retail consumers. Criteria for Evaluation. Grant applications for sustainability monies will be evaluated based on the following. • Likelihood that the proposed activity will reduce consumption of a critical resource by citizens or businesses in the community. Resources include fuel, electricity, water, land, air, or other natural resources. (20 points) • Likelihood that the proposed activity will be "transferable."That is, the lessons and experiences gained through the program or activities can be transferred to another resource, organization, or community. (10 points) • Likelihood that the proposed activity will reduce citizen or business dependence on food, goods or services shipped in from outside the Rogue Valley (10 points). • Likelihood that the proposed activity will increase the hoteUmotel occupancy in Ashland or increase visits to local restaurants and retail businesses (10 points). Up to three additional points may be awarded if occupancy would increase in the months of October through April. DRAFT—Grant Program - 9/20/2011 Page 4 II. GRANT APPLICATION AND AWARD REQUIREMENTS Grant applicants and corresponding grant applications must adhere to the following program requirements: 1. Grantee shall be registered as a 501(c) non-profit 2. Grantee shall be a non-government entity 3. Minimum grant award will be $1,000 per grant category and $2,500 per grant application 4. Grant award shall be utilized consistent with the associated applicant proposal and shall be primarily oriented to the grantee's Ashland activities and programs. Grant funds may also be utilized for a proportionate share of Grantee's overall administrative expenses. 5. An applicant can apply for grant funds from more than one category, however, it is the responsibility of the applicant to specify the categories and funds requested for each category and clearly describe how the proposal meets the criteria for each category. 6. Grantees must submit the application to the City prior to the deadline, which is established each year by the City's Administrative Service Department. Absolutely no late applications will be accepted. The City is aware that sometimes"life" intervenes, and therefore, we urge grantees to have a back up plan to ensure that the application is not late. III. GRANT REPORTING Grant award recipients shall submit to the City of Ashland and end of grant report. Report requirements include: Report Content 1. Financial summary of the utilization of grant funds towards the objectives set forth in the grant award application. 2. Statistical summary of the positive economic, cultural or sustainability impacts associated with the utilization of grant funds based on the scoring categories used to make the grant award. Applicants should provide actual data on one or more of the following outcomes: • Number of actual jobs created as a direct result of the City grant • Number of new business licenses issued as a direct result of the City grant • Median wage of actual jobs created as a direct result of the City grant • Number of people who travelled to Ashland from over 50 miles away as a direct result of activities funded by the City's grant • Number of additional overnight stays in Ashland transient lodging businesses as a direct result of the City's grant • Number of additional events offered in Ashland as a direct result of the City's grant • Number of additional people who attended a cultural event in Ashland as a direct result of the City's grant • Number of additional children, seniors, or low income residents who attended a cultural event in'Ashland as a direct result of the City's grant • Amount of conservation or reduction in use of a critical natural resource by Ashland residents, businesses or visitors that is directly attributable to the grant. Document the resource and the evidence that the grant activity resulted in its conservation. DRAFT—Grant Program - 9/20/2011 Page S . 3. Any other program or activity specific data associated with the grant award Report Submittal 1. End of Grant report shall be submitted to the City Administrator's Office by October I" following the end of the grant award period (July I-June 30) 2. Failure to submit an acceptable End of Grant report by the required due date disqualifies the grantee from future grant application eligibility. DRAFT—Grant Program - 9/20/2011 Page 6 Draft Economic, Cultural, and Sustainability Grants Scoring Sheet Grant Applicant Name: Proposed Project Summary: (FILLED IN BY FINANCE STAFF) _[i'llaiiinum Possible Points t Likely to increase total employment 15 BONUS for target industries 5 Likely to increase number of businesses in Ashland with a license 15 BONUS for target industries 5 Likely to assist existing businesses to remain or expand 15 Likely to result in jobs at or above the median income 15 � t • 1 � -� -' + r - ' 1 ' 1 � t/i':�T'�It�O�iSiX� Significant increase in number, type or availability of cultural events 20 Significant collaboration with existing cultural program or leverage of existing program - 20 Significant increase in access to people who might not otherwise have access, e.g., low income,children,minority groups 20 Reduction in consumption of fuel, electricity, water, land, air or other natural resource 20 Activity is transferable to another situation,resource,or community 10 Reduction ih dependency on food,good,or services shipped in from outside the Rogue Valley 10 i. t r _ i lip t LWT 1 1 i Increase in hotel/motel occupancy or increase to restaurants and retail 10 BONUS: Increased occupancy will occur in October through April 3 MAMELam- TOTAL NUMBER OF POINTS FOR APPLICATION1 183 0 I would expect that most applications would score actually between 30 and 80 points. It should really be tough to get more than 100 points,so those applications will be ones that really knock your socks off. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ALLOCATING ANTICIPATED REVENUES FROM THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX FOR THE FY 2012-2013 BUDGET AND ECONOMIC, CULTURAL,AND SUSTAINABILITY GRANT PROGRAM AND REPEALING RESOLUTION XXXXXX. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I.That the City of Ashland collects a Transient Occupancy Tax,as outlined in the Ashland Municipal Code REFERENCE HERE. Revenues from the Transient Occpancy Tax are used to fund General Governmental expenses,economic development,tourism promotion and the City's Economic,Cultural,and Sustainability Grant program. SECTION 2. The City of Ashland has adopted policies for the grant program.Through the grant program,the City is purchasing services from non-profits that it might otherwise provide directly.The grant program has three basic goals: • Economic Development. The grant program will support the creation,retention,and expansion of businesses and other ventures that enrich our community by creating goods and services that provide employment opportunities while maintaining and enhancing the overall quality of life. • Cultural Development. The grant program will support increased diversity and accessibility of the creative arts and cultural opportunities in Ashland for citizens and visitors both to support the visitor economy and to enrich the quality of life in the community. • Sustainability. The grant program will support efforts to ensure Ashland is environmentally,economically and socially resilient as a community. SECTION 3. The City of Ashland has determined that as of July 1,2003,$186,657 or 14.23%of total Hotel/Motel tax revenues were expended on tourism promotion,as defined in Chapter 818 of the 2003 Oregon Laws,and will continue to be spent on tourism promotion increased or decreased annually consistent with the estimated TOT revenues budgeted. Additionally,Chapter 818 requires 70%of any increased TOT revenue generated by a higher tax rate is committed to tourism promotion. Appropriations for tourism are based upon the following percentages established in FY 2009-10 when the rate was increased from 7%-9%: ' 1. A minimum of 14.23%of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by the first 7%tax rate for tourism promotion per Chapter 818, 2. A minimum of 70%of the estimated TOT revenue to be generated by additional tax rates approved by Council on June 3,2008 for tourism promotion per Chapter 818. Page] of 3 For fiscal year 2012-2013,the City of Ashland expects to budget 51,960*6 in total Transient - eommenr[etl:1 increased the Occupancy Tax. Those funds are split between tourism and non tourism uses as follows: � "s=tnar� amount for ry 2010-2011 by P Y P ac. 1t'., a SWAG J Tourism(26.67%of total): $ 522,000 Non Tourism(73.33%of total): $1,438,000 Tourism Portion Chamber of Commerce VCB $XXX Oregon Shakespeare Festival $XXX City Economic,Cultural and Sustainability,Grant program-Tourism $XXX Public Art $REQUIRED PERCENT Other City Capital Projects that q alify or Grants for FY 2012 BALANCE If the actual TOT revenue,dedicated for Tourism,is in excess of the above allocations or if actual,qualifying expenditures in the year are less than the appropriated amount,the additional or unused amount(s)will be reserved for future Tourism related projects or Capital Improvements that qualify per the state definition as determined by Council. Non Tourism Portion The remaining estimated TOT revenue(not restricted by use)will be appropriated for other uses through the budget process with the following priorities and dollar amounts as minimums unless insufficient tax proceeds remain after meeting tourism requirements: I st Priority General Fund operations-the greater of 70%of Unrestricted $XXX funds or 2nd Priority City Economic Development program 10%of Unrestricted $XXX funds or 3rd Priority City Economic,Cultural,and Sustainability Grant program for SBALANCE FY 2013 Economic Development programs or other projects are City activities unless otherwise specified by Council prior to the budget process. Council may determine that such funds are available for granting purposes and they will then be made available for the coming budget process and allocation. If insufficient TOT revenues are generated for the above allocations,the highest priority uses will receive their full allocation before a lower priority allocation. Unrestricted TOT revenue unspent in a budget year becomes part of the General Fund unrestricted ending fund balance unless otherwise determined by City Council. SECTION 4. Resolution 2010-06 is repealed upon passage of this resolution. SECTION 6. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ,day of 2012 and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Page 2 of 3 Barbara Christensen,City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,2012. John Stromberg,Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman,City Attorney Page 3 of 3 CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication Study Session: FY 2011-2012 Beginning Fund Balances in General Fund and Parks'& Recreation Fund Meeting Date: October 17, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Martha Bennett Department: Administration E-Mail: bennettm @ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Administrative Se es Secondary Contact: Lee Tuneberg Approval: Martha Bennet Estimated Time: 45 minutes Question: Does the City Council have direction for staff related to working capital that carried over in the General Fund and Parks & Recreation Fund from the prior fiscal year that exceeded the amount that was included in the adopted budget? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council distribute working capital carryover in both the Parks and Recreation Fund and the General Fund by: transferring $150,000 to the Reserve Fund from both the General Fund and the Parks & Recreation Fund; restoring two public safety positions that were eliminated in December 2008; and allowing the balance to sink to the Ending Fund Balance to be budgeted in FY 2012-2013. This communication also discusses several other options. Background: The informal work for the audit for both the City and the Parks & Recreation Department are complete, and we have final numbers for the actual revenue and expenditures for all of the City's funds. The City's audit committee will meet later this month to talk about the findings from the audit. As was true in FY 2009-2010, both the General Fund and the Parks & Recreation fund had ending fund balances at the end of FY 2010-2011 that were both above the amount that was included in the adopted budget (for FY 2011-2012) and above each fund's target ending fund balance (the amount set by policy for carry forward). In the case of the General Fund, this was largely due to unanticipated payment in delinquent property taxes and to a large federal asset forfeiture payment at the end of the year. In addition, because of turnover, the Police Department's expenditures were less than projected. In the Parks & Recreation fund, this larger-than-planned carry forward is due to both revenues in excess of budget and expenditures that were less than projected. The short summary is: Fiscal Year 2011-2012 General Fund Parks & Rec. Fund Total Fund $15,608,988 $5,435,170 Minimum Working Capital Carryover(set by policy) $1,778,000 $1,287,000 Budgeted Working Capital Carryover $2,518,066 $1,991,310 Actual Working Capital Carryover $2,938,556 $2,214,031 Actual Working Capital Carryover Less Budgeted $420,490 $222,721 Working Capital Carryover Page 1 of 3 �r, CITY OF ASHLAND Staff is reporting to Council on these larger-than-budgeted working capital amounts because we recommend that you allocate these funds prior to the beginning of the next budget process. Council has several options. Those options include: • Do nothing and budget the funds in FY 2012-2013. Council can choose not to do anything at this time and consider what to do about excesses in both funds during the budget process. There are good reasons to wait, including watching what actually happens with property tax collections this November, especially given the news about the possibility of another recession and the potential impact of continued declines in assessed value. In the General Fund, additionally, the impact of any loss of tourism due to the Bowmer Theater will not be known until November 1. If revenues in both funds remain high, Council can decide during the upcoming budget whether to spend, transfer, reserve, or otherwise allocate the funds. The downside of leaving the funds in the Ending Fund balance is that there will be pressure to spend these funds from a variety of places. • Transfer an amount from both funds to the reserve fund. For several years; staff has been recommending that the City set aside funds to ensure against the impact of a crisis. The City Council could direct any portion of the non-federal asset forfeiture funds in the General Fund and the Parks & Recreation Fund to the Reserve Fund. • Transfer all or part of the General Fund amount to the debt service fund for future AFN debt payments. This could potentially relieve the amount that needs to be paid for debt service by the utility funds. While it may be technically legal to transfer Parks & Recreation Fund money to the debt service fund, this has never been done before because Parks & Recreation is not responsible for AFN or the debt, and staff recommends that the.Council continue not to use Parks moneys for AFN. • Reduce the amount of franchise payments to the General Fund from the water and wastewater funds. Again, this is a recommendation for the General Fund amounts only and does not apply to the Parks & Recreation Fund. As Council knows, both the water fund and the wastewater fund pay a franchise fee of 8% to the General Fund., Council could reduce the franchise payments from either the water and sewer funds. The water fund in particular is in a weak financial condition. Reducing the franchise payment could reduce the amount of a rate increase that may be needed next spring. • Staff Recommendation for Hybrid Option. Staff recommends that Council consider a hybrid option that would make a transfer to reserves and would also fund two positions in the City. As Council knows, the City eliminated one firefighter position and one police officer position in December 2008. As part of the FY 2011-12 Budget process, staff stated that they recommended that these positions be restored only after it appeared that City revenues had recovered enough to sustain these position restorations over the long haul. As Council will xecall, the Budget Committee voted on both of these positions. The committee rejected a motion to restore the Police Officer position by a vote of six to eight. The committee also rejected a motion to add the firefighter position by a vote of four to ten. Page 2 of 3 �r, CITY OF ASHLAND In particular, staff recommends: General Fund Parks & Rec. Fund Actual Working Capital Less Budgeted $420,490 $222,721 Working Capital Restricted Federal Asset Forfeiture funds 67,481 $0 Funds Available $353,009 $222,721 Transfer to Reserve Fund $150,000 $150,000 in FY 2012-2013 Restore Police Officer art ear) 45,000 $0 Restore Firefighter position art year 48,000 $0 BALANCE TO SINK TO EFB for use in FY $100,009 $72,721 2012-2013 Budget Process If Council approves this option, there is sufficient appropriation in the General Fund for the three expenditures (the transfer, the Police Officer, and the Firefighter), although it will require a transfer from Contingency. Parks & Recreation does not have sufficient appropriation to make the transfer to reserves, so it would be included in next fiscal year's budget. Parks and Recreation Commission Fund Balance Policy Discussion The Parks & Recreation Commission has been discussing their policy wishes relative to ending fund balances. Their draft policy is attached. Please note that if this policy were applied;the Parks and Recreation Working Capital would be treated in the following manner: Parks and Recreation Fund DRAFT POLICY Actual Working Capital $2,214,031 Fund Balance Requirement $1,287,000 Amount to be distributed $930,031 Amount to EFB for use in FY 2012-2013 $93,003 Amount to Reserve Fund in FY 2012-2013 $93,003 Amount to Parks Capital to budget in FY $744,025 2012-2013 Related Council Policies: City Financial Policies Council Options: As discussed above Attachments: Draft Parks & Recreation Fund Policy Draft Minutes from May 12, 2011 Budget Committee meeting Please see pages 4-8 and 4-9 and Pages 4-84 and 4-85 of the Adopted 2011-2012 Budget Page 3 of 3 Imo, Draft Policy Parks Ending Fund Balance Council policy says that ending fund balances should be equal to 25% of projected revenues for a given fiscal year. In the event the ending fund balance exceeds, by more than 10%, the 25% of revenue requirement, the commission will propose for the budget in the following fiscal year that: • The first 20% be split in half and distributed back to the ending fund balance and to the City reserve account equally. • The balance be distributed to the Parks Capital budget and /or the Parks portion of the City Capital Improvement Plan as designated by the commission. • The funds in excess of the 25% ending fund balance be considered "one time only" monies and used to fund infrastructure repairs, capital improvement projects, equipment reserves, City/ Parks reserve accounts, or remain as part of the ending fund balance for the Parks Department.. • All uses of any excess funds will comply with Oregon Budget law and may require additional processes prior to use including a supplemental budget or re-budgeting via the City budget process. In the event the ending fund balance does not exceed the requirement in excess of 10%, all funds shall accrue to the ending fund balance. CITY OF -ASHLAND Budget Committee Meeting Draft Agenda May 12,2011 6:00pm Civic Center Council Chambers,1175 East Main Street CALL TO ORDER 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Everson,Gentry,Keil, Lemhouse, Morris,Runkel, Silbiger,Slattery, Stebbins, Stromberg, Thompson,Voisin Absent: Chapman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of minutes from previous meeting sent by email and dated: • 4/6/2011 Economic and Cultural Grant Presentations • 4/7/2011 Economic and Cultural Grant Proposed Allocations PUBLIC INPUT SHarie Chaney 335 kent street Ashland. Conservation commission to urge that the conservation manager position. Could benefit from it. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Martha Bennett and Lee Tuneberg went over Report Items. Lee discussed memo and attachments. Discussed existing debt.Not proposed debt and sources. Pages of funds with debt service. Response to item number 3 regarding PERS rate and commitment handout. 4-memo on critical CIP what could come back hit us and cause additional costs. Item 5 reserve fund on back of memo. Item 6 up for discussion. Last item Biennial Budget information. Gentry questioned the reserve fund:Will come up later. 1-6 Add package-assistant administrator convert a existing DH to have same duties but additional for administration. 80,000 from electric 40,000 GF and 40,000 central services. 30,000 fire to do weed abatement-part-time staff. Reduce ending fund balance. Lynn-summer season 30,000 if approved ask council for supplemental for current year. So can start in June. 9000 in 2011 and 30,000 in 2012. Weed on private property?Yes. Pull weeds or notify the people. In general cut the weeds. Assess cost of abatement to the property owner. Can get back direct cost but not staff cost back. Silbiger-how we get 30,000 for 3.5 months? Its very staff intensive and supplies..have to contract out. Not all staff cost. Martha-the number is wrong it is actually 20,000. Lemhouse-Agreement to deal with the weeds in county property.No..we approached the county to have an ordinance they said no. So only within the City limits. Baldwin-20,000 is the fact that your identifying. Wouldn't put a net dollar amount expenditure amount. Stromberg-why taking out of GF. Admin Dept conservation manager positions $112,000. Create it would supervise 3 conservation staff 700,000 program and 313 city council goals regarding conservation. Slattery-return on investment-get something back. Bennett-electric fund programs-Having someone knowledgeable in BPA. Body of work council has set out for this program. There isn't a staff position responsible for administering this. Proposal 2/3 electric. Reducing FTE by 1. Chapman zero impact. Project manager was temporary position funded through TOT anyway you look at it y our adding to GF.Martha NO adding an FTE to the city paid for out of electric and water. 112,000. Comm dev,urban renewal-$85,000 already in budget if council proceeds with urban renewal cost will show up next year. Council will decide this prior to end of June. Half time court clerk add half time FTE to the City useful for cover. 23,000.Had to close 13 times. GF not stable enough to permanently add positions.Everson-is it a big deal court closed for 13 days? It was done spontaneously so not convenient for public. Restore police officer that was cut in 2008-half time downtown patrol 1/2 high school and JH. Stromberg-having more police presence down there-2 unfilled positions.. suppose we did want to get someone downtown spend additional money on overtime? Presented it gives an initial impression to get an officer downtown for summer to hire new it wont be happening till prob after summer. Not increasing OT as great strategy. Flow can we can vote tonight that would put an officer downtown soon. Not a decision of budget committee Council should discuss this with the chief. Council and Police Chief Decision. Runkel-3-56-one out of 4 citizens don't feel sate in hours of darkness-startling-yes,but better than comparable community. Not a budget committee decision. GF not stable enough to add FTE. Hard to do in the middle of the fiscal year. Keil-important functions of city is public safety and health.. convincing from police chief we need additional staff. Done both new and bring one back. Thompson-inclined to support this add despite impact on GF be what chief said about time line of filling this positions if it takes a year then we aren't talking about current year. Bennett-if you add he may hire July. For the sake of setting budget you should assume hire of July if hired laterally could start immediately. Stebbins-the 2 that are coming in are budgeted. How long vacant-both officer positions. Retirement in winter. Lemhouse-vacancies come up unexpectedly. If position is funded don't be surprised more vacancies-ashland police department has been successful getting laterals. Firefighter-I fte vacant in 2008 left it vacant important is be two shifts with 9 and one shift with 8 people. Minimum staffing requirements means shift of 8 when people are gone or sick end up paying overtime.. not ready to fill position we are better because we made those cuts..needed but not ready. Ked-public safety concerns not enough people how much do we actually have before we go to voters and ask. Measure 50 limitation roughly 9cents. Could we fund them with the 9 cents. Yes. Within striking distance. Not sure raise taxes or add staff. Can do it or not? 8.9 cents left$176,000. Fire Department equipment-91,000. Reductions in M& S to conserve staff. Haven't regularly funded equipment should encourage savings. Don't want to increase taxes for this. Gentry-funding through end of year savings.. if departments under spend that is the time to talk about what to use it for. Baldwin-91,000 would be an annual amount. Successful at getting grants and is reluctant..chief kams doing a great job doing things for places that have lacked. Look for alternative ways. 1.6 cents for hoses and turnouts this is more of the same sort of thing. At this point don't recommend. Slattery-court clerk-have to close court 13 days be don't have this positions. Yes,and this position gives staffing cover. Have to have 2 people working to be open safely. Is there a less expensive way. Cheapest in the budget. Hired a temp recently and can keep doing that. GF EFB-Reserve Fund-Looking at long-term page 4-7,8,9. Stebbins 2011 amended budget 188,000 to be in excess of policy requirement the estimated actual is that there will be 746,550 of which council acted to remove 365 over to the reserves. Before transferred to reserve fund. In 2012 budget for the first time budget 349,000 to go into reserve from Parks and Rec. Martha-Council made this decision. Transfer straight into reserve never tough GF. Stebbins change is the fund balance policy requirement 12%? Fail to grasp it increased 2%. Stromberg-in fund balance requirement-policy requirement has gone up?Yes, you increased it a year ago. Gentry-Contingencies reserved in EFB. Contingency is something Council has to move. Cannot spend until Council moves into whatever Department or line item. Transfer from contingency to expenditure. Reserve fund and adding larger EFB? Martha-put into EFB and carry it as unappropriated the problem is that money is available to you in the budget process with less transparency explanation it would take to transfer from a reserve. The council could set parameters. Gentry-used to meet unanticipated needs. No-contingency is for unexpected. Policies related to contingency set dill levels. For example contingency 50,000 be they think budgeted good to things that might happen. EFB is there for cash carryover issues. EFB could be for cash or restricted funds or unspent money. Reserve fund-is there for the disproportionate unexpected event. Revenues crashed in 2008 if we had a significant event. Martha would Set aside 10%of operating revenues in a reserve. Don't want to spend more than you can afford. Runkel-Opposed to a big fund taxing people for services later. Keil-disagree with runkel-spreading risk.. its insurance policy for the unexpected event that happens but we need to be prepared its part of maintaining public safety and health. No adequate reserves we would be in deep trouble. Thompson-contingency was increase from 400,000 to 500,000 if to adjust that down what impact does it have on the bottom line of the budget? None really. Budgeted less than policy. Voisin-does contingency go back into EFB? Longterm shows %. This year anticipate using some contingency. Thompson-would like to go over revenue assumptions-heard informally some revenue may have improved...in looking at GF budget adjust some of the expectations for the next FY based on what you may now predict. Tuneburg-projecting to receive in total taxes higher than we have budgeted. Receive more in any of the revenue streams. Projections. We think police projection for their cost for people is a little high may see some saving be of vacancies FY 2011. Look at this year we think police may not spend as much on personnel services but fire may spend more(assumption). Martha-projections- expenditures. 80,000 too much for police,comm. Dev 30-35,000. Off 100,000. 75,000 more in EFB at this point to FY2012. Estimates in February. For next year 2 places under forecasts hotel motel tax substantial portion of this is restricted to Tourism. Projected no growth but will prob see 3A%. Planning and Zoning fees may be low. Construction hard to foresee. Gentry-didn't think GF wasn't healthy. Martha-History that we end FY better than budgeted. Silbiger4- 8? 4-7 prop tax 4.3,users 2.8.. V. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION B. Unresolved issues(add packages on page 1-5 to 1-7) Fundine Source 1. Admin. Dept. -Assistant City Administrator position ($15,000) Central Svcs—net Roll Call Vote: Name Yes No Baldwin Chapman ' Everson Gentry Kyle Lemhouse Morris Runkel Silbi er Slattery Stebbins Stromber Thompson Voisin 2. Fire Dept.—Weed abatement ' ($30,000) Gen Fund EFB Roll Call Vote: Name Yes No Baldwin Chapman Everson Gentry Kyle Lemhouse Morris Runkel Silbi er Slattery Stebbins Stromber Thompson Voisin 3. Admin. Dept.—Conservation Manager position ($112,000) Rates&Fees Motion/David: Accept recommendation-have a Conservation Mgr/S:? Stebbins concerned about transferrance of burden to enterprise funds-note impact Chapman-needs a manager Lemhouse-supports-needs mgr to adavance council goals Silbiger-opposed-far more pressing needs;not a zero net Roll Call Vote: Name Yes No Baldwin Chapman Everson Gentry Kyle Lemhouse Moms Runkel Silbi er Slattery Stebbins Stromber Thom son Voisin. 4. Com. Dev. Dept.—Urban Renewal Plan ($85,000) TOT proceeds Motion/?: committee supports possibility of funding an urban renewal plan/S:? Thompson: defer to council Roberta: requires no current action?MB: correct Roll Call Vote: Name Yes No Baldwin Chapman Everson Gentry Kyle Lemhouse Morris Runkel SilbS er Slattery Stebbins Stromber Thompson Voisin Vote Count 10:4 Motion: Support of possibility of funding an urban renewal plan Passed 5. Future Add packages and property tax implication: Everson asked if committee wanted to vote in part or in whole Discuss/Vote individually V.B. 5.a 0.5 FTE Court Clerk ($23,000 or 1.20 cents/$1,000) Motion: Slattery Adopt Court Clerk Second:? Everson: opposes adding any positions for reasons already stated Silbiger: this one is a no-brainer for getting things done; pays for itself; favors Stromberg: missing position is wasting other court efforts; small amt of money Runkel:what can't more cooperation in government; why can't other city ees fill in? MB: position is unique' certified position Voisin: in process of rebuilding legal dept; could new ees be qualified to cover? MB: no, prosecutor can't be court clerk Thompson: $23K would be absorbed by GF;support Everson: proposed with tax revenues attached Stebbins: did motion include tax levy? DE: no RB: gain outweighs cost Roll Call Vote: Name Yes No Baldwin X Chapman X Everson X Gentry X Kyle X Lemhouse X Morris X Runkel X Silbi er X Slattery X Stebbins X Stromberg X Thompson X Voisin X Vote Count: 10:4 Motion: Approve conversion of current %time temporary Court Clerk to a regular P/T(.05 FTE)position Passed V.B.S.b 1.0 FTE Police Officer ($90,000 or 4.55 cents/$1,000) Motion: Keil Accept add'] police officer Second: Lemhouse Martha: clarified motion only adds cop; does not address funding/tax increase Stromberg: 2 unfilled positions; 2 lateral candidates; this adds a position above that; an outside candidate;not likely that cop on the street in this year MB: proposal includes designated%of position's duties; 12 mo. ramp up Lemhouse: wants downtown and schools to be safe; takes staff/resources; reasonable to do; take existing officer Everson: 25%could be afraid of dark no matter what; cannot support adding a position even though very important Stebbins:ditto Thompson: would like to be in favor;wondering about filling two other vacancies;defer add for one year?Concerned about financial condition; supportive of school resource officer and more presence DT MB: recommend deferring for a year,but option is to fund for partial fiscal year Stromberg: if two vacancies are filled,will staffing same as when Terry DaSilva was doing this job?MB: yes MB: already have an assigned officer,but has had to do other things due to understaffing of dept Voisin: $1 M reserve fund; robust end fund balance; fully resourced police dept; add pkgs continue to build"Mercedes government"while busting"Chevy citizenry"; food,gas, insurance,mortgage rates are all increasing;must stop putting taxes on citizens;opposed all future add packages. Roll Call Vote: Name Yes No Baldwin X Chapman X Everson X Gentry X Kyle X Lemhouse X Moms X Runkel X Silbi er X Slattery X Stebbins X Stromber g X Thompson X Voisin X Vote Count: 6:8 Motion Approve Budget Add Package for additional police officer dedicated to addressing downtown issues and providing drug & alcohol abuse education programs and enforcement efforts at/around Ashland schools. Failed V.B.5.c 1.0 FTE Firefighter ($96,000 or 4.85 cents/$1,000) Motion: Silbiger Restore unfunded firefighter position Second: ? Gentry: similar to police staffing issue;feels that police can cover with existing staff; fire is important one; favored Keil: also in favor; looking at cost benefit analysis; what do we get for what it costs?Low cost fire insurance policy; faster response time; more safety; reasonable price Stromberg: a good thing to do but a year too early; could hold off Roll Call Vote: Name Yes No Baldwin X Chapman X Everson X Gentry X Kyle X Lemhouse X Morris X Runkel X Silbi er X Slattery X Stebbins X Stromberg X Thom son X Voisin X Vote Count: 4:10 Motion Approve Budget Add Package for a 1.0 FTE Firefighter position. Failed V.B.S.d Fire Department equipment ($91,000 or 4.60 cents/$1,000) Roll Call Vote: Name Yes No Baldwin Cha an Everson Gentry Kyle, Lemhouse Moms Runkel Silbi er Slattery Stebbins Stromber Thompson Voisin Vote Count - Motion 6. General Fund EFB,tax rate and transfers to the reserve fund C. Other issues as desired by Committee Keil/Stromberg ms Move accept the staff recommendation and include Assistant to the city administrative assistant position in the budget. 11/I Convincing argument-if want Martha to maximize talents. Fears in having an assistant admin not familiar with electric. Right person could handle the job. Baldwin in support it be wide variety of responsibilities substantial number of things. Stromberg- support. Find a way to relieve her from some of her duties that could be done by others. Gentry/silbiger accept staff recommendation to include weed abatement in the budget. 11/1 Runkel/voisin ms to accept staff recommendation to include conservation manager position for the budget. 7/7 motion fails - Stebbins-support but doesn't want to burden. Lemhouse supports-transfer significant council goals that rely on conservation if don't do amount to being unfunded mandates. Silbiger opposed-far more pressing needs to pay for than this position not in any way. 12,000 increase that will come out of utility rates and police officer and fire fighter as priorities. Not a priority. Stromberg/Voising motion to amend-to decrease franchise fee in electric fund the amount to the portion. Reduce franchise fee from the water fund in the amount equivalent to the increase for the conservation manager position. Keil main motion we are in crisis-conservation needed. Support primary. Stebbins- prob with amendment. Slattery-could the assistant could serve as conservation manager-martha-does not believe this could be possible. Chapman-discussing franchise fees is worth while but not in this context. Cant support amendment. Wont support for reasons already stated need to re arrange staff and save spaces somewhere else. Not a zero its adding. Voisin-adding staff for conservation is giving to our citizens a reserve fund it will help them. Silbiger/keil m/s that the budget committee approve the possibiltity to add the comm. Dev department urban renewal plan. Stromberg-support. Keil/lemhouose ms accept priority six additional police officer into the budget. Keil-convinced from police recommendation. Stromberg-2 unfilled positions two lateral candidates available. Recruitment open right now. If new will be 12 month period. Council discussion. Lemhouse-want downtown to be safe and schools if that's what we want then put resources there. 25%great rate. Cant support adding a position to City government at this time. Incredibly important would be terrible to add and have to cut it again. Stebbins-as important as it is can't support. Thompson-like to be in favor of this-desire is to do with the fact not a complete budgetary impact but was wrong. Defer for a year and see what financial condition is. Martha recommends refer for year but in past when want to have a position can support on January 1 as opposed to July. Stromberg-when terry Silva was here was staffing level same as it will be when fill 2 vacancies? Voisin-reserve fund almost million EFB robust-by adding any add packages we are building and flourish busting citizens. Slattery/Silbiger ms adopt court clerk Silbiger-supports. Stromberg-missing position were wasting what others can do in the court. Runkel-why cant they have someone else fill ihejob. Voisin-rebuilding legal can we include someone do this. Cannot. Everson-proposed with tax revenues attached. 10/4 Silbiger/Keil m/s restore the unfunded firefighter position. Gentry-in support. Keil-in favor-cost benefit analysis at what gain by adding these positions 4.85 cents.. less than $15.00 a year. Small investment. Stromberg-good to do but this year but timing too early. Voisin-having issues on how dealing with debt. 7.4 mill of loans??? Revenue streams pay debt service. Confused. Everson-if money is borrowed are you looking at payment stream? Runkel/voisin m/s approve prop tax permanent levy at 4.0973/1,000 Thomspon/runkel amend that the reduction be specifically allocated to GF obligations. 7/7 fails Keil-idea not collecting taxes preserves a reserve-Respects but our tax burden is low no need to reduce what staff has proposed. Thompson-concern health of general fund. $750,000 more than EFB policy requirement. Commend dept and city management for the result-would not support if felt putting GF in jeopardy. Lemhouse-respect both sides. Staff should be commended that we can talk about this and how conservative they have been. Next year cut franchise fees to lower rates. Stromberg-10 cents 198,000. Would vote for 5 cent. Slattery-ok with 10 cents not fond of untargeted budget cutting. Open the way for a larger conversation. Gentry-doesn't think city finances are healthy enough to think about cuts.. preserve tax rate where it is and allow EFB to grow so we apply funds to projects. Silbiger-finally getting back on out feet-getting EFB to reasonable amounts. Not gonna get there by cutting the tax rate. Everson-we rely on Staff to provide a budget in a year when you feel comf will come forward. Morris-prefer to have 10 Cents less but can't support now. Baldwin-can't support. Bennett47,000 per percent in water and 35 per percent in wastewater franchises pay 8%of their revenues. Stromberg/runkel m/s to reduce the franchise fee in the water fund from 8%to 6%. 9/5 Keil-what happens to$100,000. How much will this impact utility bill?No. Water fund EFB would increase. Reduction to the rate payers?2%of the water rate. Thompson-impact on water rates. No immediate impact. Chapman-arbitrary. Small piece of big issue. Keil/thomspns m/s approve as modified by discussion this evening. 14/14 Keil/silbiger m/s property tax permanent levy at 4.1973/1000 13/1 Silbiger/slattery- Voisin ms proceed 8:37 VI. MOTION TO APPROVE THE FY2011-2012 BUDGET NOTE: See sample motion or enact them separately. A. Motion to approve the Budget(as adjusted) and convey it to Council for adoption. B. Motion to approve the Property Tax Permanent Levy. (The original proposed budget is calculated at$4.1973/$1,000). Total permanent rate is calculated at$4.2865/$1,000. C. Motion to approve the 2005 GO Bond Levy of$416,610. D. Motion to approve the Fire Station#2 GO Bond Levy(at the rate appropriate rate-estimated at $259,200)as approved by voters. E. Motion to approve the Local Option Library Levy of$.XX/$1,000. (The original proposed budget is calculated at$.1921/$1,000). Sample: I move that the City of Ashland budget committee approve and convey the budget(as revised) to council for adoption,approve property taxes for the 2011-2012 fiscal year at the rate of$4.1973 per $1,000 of assessed value for oMatingpurposes,$0.1921 per$1.000 of assessed value for the Local Option Library Levy,$416,610 for payment of 2005 bond principal and interest and an amount (estimated at $259,200) for payment of Fire Station#2 bond Principal and interest as approved by citizens. (Amount in bold was included in the proposed budget Changes in taxes approved by the committee must be reflected in the motion.) V11. WRAP UP (If time allows,otherwise it is scheduled for May 16) B. Process debrief--What worked,what didn't, what would you like to do differently next year? C. Biennial Budget—Questions,comments,suggestions(hand out) D. Other Issues and Suggestions from Committee VIII. ADJOURNMENT G:\finance\Administrat ion\Budget\Committee\Meeting Minutes\2011-12\051211 Draft Minutes.docx