Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 08-16MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 16. 1999 The special meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:04 p.m. on August 16, 1999 by Council President Charlie Rountree. MEMBERS PRESENT: Glenn Bentley, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree, Mayor Corrie. OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Janice Smith. ITEM #1: AMENDED 1998/1999 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET: Rountree: It's August 16th at 6:04, I'll open up the special meeting for approval of a draft budget for the City of Meridian to be published this week. I've got some additional information Will and Janice put a sharper pencil to my rather crude approach last week and I think we have some numbers that we need to discuss. Glenn, you had a comment. Bentley: Is that something new? Rountree: No, you should have had that in your box. Rountree: That's a notice of public hearing. — This may be what you're looking for. Bentley: No, I've got a copy of that. Bird: Oh, this is right? Bentley: Charlie do you want to — Rountree: Glenn? Bentley: I was going to say we ought to have her look at the new way the Mayor is putting it together. I've got that but I don't have all the additional figures that he's added to it. Bird: I don't have that one. Bentley: You didn't get that one Keith? Corrie: No, I just made it up. Rountree: Okay so what we've got is the numbers that are presented here in the general fund, including two million for Capital so that gives that number shows just a little more than a million dollars that's going to have to come out of our reserve account which is shown down here in General Fund proposed revenue and fund balance a couple million seven hundred and seventy-one thousand — million, seventy-one thousand. Bentley: But I thought we'd put — Rountree: Well — but this number on the General Fund does not show any increase, correct Mayor? That doesn't show any three- percent? Corrie: (Inaudible) Rountree: But it should and I believe that — Bird: This one shows it. Rountree: Actually those numbers do. Bird: No, they don't. Rountree: Parks should be 903 instead of — well no. Rountree: It's wrong. That one's different. Corrie: It should be 503 — 903 is adding in the Capital Improvements that they did last year. Rountree: I didn't get all the Capital pulled out of that when I did my calculation. Bird: (Inaudible) I thought I had it all pulled out, I must not have either. Rountree: I did too. Corrie: I went back and — we didn't do it right. Rountree: Apparently not, but the Police number is the same number I came up with with the three percent, the Fire is the same, the General is less but they've pulled out Planning & Zoning and — that's the 1314. We still need to — Bird: And we're short 2 million. Bentley: Up on top but not on the bottom. Bird: Capital Improvement. Rountree: Right. Bentley: But we're not showing it on the bottom. Rountree: We've got — where do we get the revenue from the one three? Corrie: General Administration. Rountree: Special Service Fund. Bird: What's the Special Service Fund? Building, Planning and Zoning? — Is it that that much money in there? (Inaudible) — Well yeah but it's showing that as a revenue for next year, that's shouldn't be — by the ordinance that is not supposed to be a revenue is it? It's an expense. We are supposed to have that in reserve to run that department without any income by ordinance for four months, so why would we show it as a revenue Janice? Smith: (Inaudible) Berg: My understanding is we build up this reserve account and it's set aside for a rainy day. Bird: But it isn't shown as revenue, it's expense. Berg: Well after we generate it (Inaudible) Rountree: After you generate it it's not. Bird: Yeah, but it isn't a revenue coming in, it's an expense going out. Rountree: It's a balance. Bird: It don't balance out with their total budget — shouldn't be complete revenue. Rountree: Let Will try to explain this to us and see if we can understand it, if not, then we'll ask him questions. Berg: This is my interpretation. When that fund was set up, it was because they generated surplus amount of revenues that they (inaudible) within those two departments so it was decided to set up a reserve account of operating for four months and to set that account up for a rainy day in case they had to resize, decrease the number of employees or just reduce it down. My understanding was that it's kind of like a dedicated separate fund and Janice you can correct me but after you get the balance for each current year in there, if there's surplus revenues from Building and Planning and Zoning it goes into a Capital Improvement Fund but for instance last year, we had to use somewhere like $80,000 from General Fund to supplement that reserve account because they increased that much and we created that reserve. Now my understanding from year to year we have to analyze our operating expense for those two departments to see if we had to increase any more in that reserve account and if we don't then the surplus goes to Capital Improvements. Bentley: My question would be if in FY 98 our four month cushion was $100,000.00 so we set aside that $100,000.00, at the end of FY 98 we had $120,000.00 in there, $20,000.00 rolls out to the Capital Improvements, no problem, what happened to the $100,000.00? Berg: To me, it would sit in an account called reserve account and would be holding until the next fiscal year comes around you analyze — Bentley: Let me move ahead now. We're in FY 99, our system has grown, we now need a hundred and fifty thousand so we budget a hundred and fifty thousand, we've got a hundred thousand left over from '98 so we have to save aside another fifty thousand, we generated a hundred and fifty thousand, that rolls another hundred thousand into the building fund, now what I don't understand is what we're doing with this four-month cushion that we're developing from year to year. Berg: We shouldn't be taking the whole four-month cushion for each fiscal year, we should only be adding to it as a balance of the operation expense increases and we don't have that in reserve. Bentley: But we still have to have the original four -months because we allocated funds the first year that ordinance went into effect to set up that four month cushion. Berg: Yes. Bentley: At the end of that first year that four-month cushion should still be there and yes, the following year we would have to re -assess because of growth how much more we need to add to build to a four-month cushion. Once that four- month cushion is reached, any additional money leftover there goes into the Capital Fund but what I'm saying is end of the year somewhere along the line here and what has happened to that cushion that was established, because I agree with what Keith is saying, we shouldn't have to re-establish this thing every year, we should have carryover and the only thing we have to make up is the growth factor. Berg: And the concept is, is that after you establish your reserve account you would have surplus every year that would go into a Capital Improvement. Bentley: But what I'm saying is, where is the carryover and how are we tracking it? Bird: Have you got the ordinance Will? I thought the ordinance was very clear on how it was taken care of. I thought that once we got built up to that fund, I'm like Glenn, then it just went into the general fund but each year — we know what the fiscal year going so if we had a hundred thousand in there and we need a hundred and fifty for this fiscal year 2000, we dedicate fifty thousand and that's it. Berg: We dedicate whatever they generated and if they couldn't generate it then we would have to take it out of the General Fund. Bird: But we would dedicate in their budget as an expense fifty thousand dollars. Berg: Yes. Bird: Because we already had a hundred from fiscal year '98 and '99. That's the way I understood it but I might be — Berg: That was my understanding, I don't know how the bookkeeping is keeping track of it. Rountree: So I guess what's the question? Have they lost it in the bookkeeping? Is it trackable in the audit? Berg: All the revenues that are generated by the Building Department have to be shown as a revenue on that — (inaudible) — on your public notice but what is actually used and gone into other things you're going to have to deduct it out, especially if it's going into Capital Improvement. Bentley: Okay, well let's backtrack to '98. So we set up the fund at a hundred thousand. In '99 we should be showing a line item stating that this is the four- month cushion and we have in revenue of a hundred thousand that is a carry over plus we've budgeted for a hundred and fifty so we need an additional fifty thousand revenue to cover that so that the two would balance out. I don't know whether we got lost in the audits and everything else and didn't get this thing tracked. Smith: We didn't set up a special fund like it stated there and we were going to do it at the end of this fiscal year because our auditor, one of the gals didn't feel that it was approved by state code, since she found out yeah, it was legitimate. It's a special — Berg: When did we officially set up reserve balance for that department? Smith: I think in '97, right after that was — Berg: I'm not talking about the ordinance but — Smith: No, the ordinance was done and we didn't start doing it until '98. Berg: So for the `98-'99 -- or `97-'98? Bentley: That would be '98 — '99. Berg: So this was the first year that we had it, and we had to put in eighty thousand from the General Fund to get it to that reserve and my understanding is we see what's in reserve, we see what our operation is, if there's more that needs to be added, they take their revenues and add to it, if they can't, then we have to pull more out of General Fund, so in theory we shouldn't be touching it too much at all because we should be also gaining interest on that reserve unless you hire a bunch of personnel to — Rountree: But it sounds to me that that reserve is just part of the General Fund balance at this point. It's part of that 5.7. Berg: Probably so. Bird: So it's not supposed to be, it's supposed to be in it's own fund. Smith: And we're going to — Bentley: So we need to straighten it out in either '99 or 2000. Smith: At the end of this audit we'll see what excess they have left over and then we'll address it to you guys. Bentley: As an adjustment for two thousand and make sure we have a line item set up so we — with an explanation so when somebody picks it up they know what it is. Bird: Yeah, it is supposed to be a line item Glenn and it's supposed to be based on the prior three years what their average monthly deal is and we're a minimum of four months operating based on the average of the monthly operating costs of the prior three years. Berg: That was calculated out, I had some pen scratching last year — Bird: Yeah, I know you did. Bentley: We had the figures done, that wasn't the problem, it's just that bookkeeping — Bird: Did we put that as a line item expense last year didn't we? Didn't we do that Janice or didn't we? Smith: Yeah, I think he's got (inaudible) — he put some excess over in here. It's not by itself when we convert it to MIP, you'll see it on your next one, it's going to be by itself. Bentley: Well that's where we're getting a little off base here, we're getting things combined here when we need to — even though it's another thing to track but — Bird: This should be set aside just like the fire truck fund is. Rountree: Yes, exactly. Bird: And if it can draw interest, the interest we're making every year then we don't have to budget that much expense. Berg: It should be drawn in just like — Bird: Well yeah, but this should be in by itself so Janice can say there's a hundred thousand and it's 1 % interest so it's worth this much. Rountree: It can be by itself on paper but it needs to be lumped together with our best investments. Bird: I agree there, but it needs to be in a line item that we can walk to and find. Bentley: We need to clean up several of these that are hidden reserve funds. The question I've got is — and it's something we may want to discuss after we get done here or in a separate meeting, that concerns the difference in the fund balance, that seven hundred thousand the Mayor was talking about, between the 1071 and the two million we put in as to whether we want to up the budget to the 26 million and then maybe have a special meeting and sit down and discuss where we want to go with it, whether we want to use it, whether we want to cut it back — Rountree: Well we were agreeable to taking out of the General Fund Reserves up to two million dollars and with these refined numbers, however I did run these numbers and those numbers up there do include the 3% Bob. Corrie: Not according to this one it doesn't. Bentley: Which one are you looking at Bob? Corrie: Oh, sorry. Rountree: The only one that's really changed is the Parks and then General Administration because they pulled out P & Z. (Inaudible discussion) Corrie: Janice, does this line here include the 3%? Smith: This includes the 3%. Corrie: All this includes the 3%, 6 million 8924. Smith: I think on this one I rounded up on the Parks. Corrie: Oh okay, yeah you did. Smith: I was being real generous. Corrie: Then it still comes out if you have the 2 million rather than the 1.071000 fund balance, if you put that as a 2 then there's $927,000.00 in the budget. You're not giving it 3%, it's already in there except for the Fire Department shouldn't have a 3%. Bird: They're 2,200 with just their budget. Smith: They're by themselves. Corrie: They're by themselves, okay, good, that's all I needed to know. Alright, so— Smith: o— Smith: These others were real close. I rounded up quite a bit on the Parks, only because Charlie's was so high but I didn't want to go as high as he had because of the Capital — but you can knock it down. Rountree: I tried. Actually, I screwed up. Corrie: Okay, so what it amounts to is if you add the two million in there then you have a 929 balance. I didn't think that the 3% was in that. Bird: So in other words the Parks is 550 and that's his operating and wages with the 3% plus. Corrie: The Police Department is at 2 million eight hundred and ninety-one with the 3% increase. Now does that include moving the Code Enforcement Officer's over to them. Bird: No, it don't and another thing it don't include and this is something we're just going to have to sit down and debate but when we went through that wage thing all these departments got hit pretty — you know some of them got hit pretty heavy, I know Bill did, I don't know Tom did too and that isn't included in this budget adjustment so that's something that I feel we have to take a look at — how much? Bentley: I think it was about a 150, wasn't it? 130 to 150, something like that. Bird: Bill's was 90. Bentley: I'm talking about the wage adjustment for the whole city. Bird: For the whole city, I think you're right. But that's something we need to take into consideration too but the thing I've been — I'm just looking through this (inaudible) up to this year, our revenues that we projected last year, a lot of them aren't even coming close to what we projected, big time and that kills us. Bentley: What I started to elude to before, there's several other issues that I think we really — as Keith has suggested too, need to sit down and address and one of them is we did the wage study, the wage study is set up on the matrix or I believe it's seven years, we plugged our people into the middle and that matrix shows what the raises should be this coming year and I thought the concept was that we go by the matrix, if we have somebody exceptional they get to jump two steps instead of one, we've got an average person they get what the matrix calls for and it calls for four and three percent depending on where you're at in the line and if we've got below average he gets nothing. Now, we've gone with the study and my contention right out of the box is if we're going to go with it we need to go with it whole heartedly and I think we need to discuss this issue of just giving three percent because I think it's wrong. We also have the problem of a Code Enforcement Officer for the daycare, that's going to take additional people to go around here and everyone's been in favor of getting this ordinance up and going and there's nothing budgeted for it and we've got other offices that are talking about needing key people that we really need to take a look at so I'm kind of wondering if we don't take and take a look at plugging in the two million like we said we were going to do and then sit down and have another meeting and pair through this, it isn't a gimme for all of it. Rountree: But my opinion on that Glenn is that when you start dipping into your reserves to operate your business you're out of whack. Bentley: I agree, that's wrong. But what I'm saying is we need to take a look and see exactly that we've got the right figures for the operating budget so that we don't wind up with our toe caught in the door. Bird: I agree with Charlie on the thing that we can't — I hate to see that Capital Improvement or that fund balance, whatever you want to call that 2 million, put in anything but property, buildings, -- in fact, I think by ordinance and state law we can't use it for that, anything but that, development of parks, we can do that I think but I agree with you Glenn we need to sit down — and I knew that this deal and I can't see you spending the money we did and I think it was a great thing that we did with that and for one year — I mean like Glenn says we've got to go along with it and I know Charlie agrees with that too and I — we might have to take some sugar out of some of the budgets to pay the wages, there isn't much sugar but — Bentley: Well what I'm concerned with is we've had figures and new figures and more new figures and more new figures, we've got to get a set that we can work with and fine tune this thing to make sure that we have everything exact and the revenues are right. Bird: That's the thing that scares me the most, you know we're showing 7 million 900 hundred basically in revenues, is that going to be true? There's some right now going through with only a couple of months left that's — you know they're down 30% of what was projected last year and they're not going to make it up and that's not just talking about one item. Rountree: Well, I wish I had answers. Bird: So do I. Rountree: Your interpretation of the wage table is somewhat different than the way Pauline explained it to us. She explained it to us that there would be no moving on the table and it's a meritorious increase based on whatever we establish as the percentage of increase so you're right if there's a less than standard employee there's no increase. If there's a standard employee (inaudible) then you establish a meritorious percentage increase, not a (inaudible) based on longevity or whatever. Bentley: Well I called to get an explanation and make sure I was on the right trail today but she wasn't available. Bird: That's the hundred percent and she said that that and of course another thing we look at is this happens on their anniversary so it isn't all going to take affect on October 1S', that's the one nice thing -- that's the one thing that can help the bleeding a little bit is you know some people aren't going to — it's going to be six months into the budget year before that increase comes about. Bentley: But did we screw up by giving everybody the initial raise on the same day? Bird: I think that we went so dadgummed long Glen, that it was only fair to do that, I mean we'd only been doing this thing for eighteen months before we ever made up our mind to do it. Bentley: I'm not arguing that point. (Inaudible) Bird: What she told us here was that they will do it on their anniversary date from now on. Sure, we'd given all that one sum — someone's going to go fourteen months without another raise, some will only go eight or nine months without another raise but after that then it's on their anniversary date, that's what I understood the night she talked to me. Bentley: Yeah, but see the only part about that is yeah we'll save some money this year but we won't next. Bird: Well no, I realize that. Rountree: Depending on what the revenue situation is next year there may not be any meritorious increases, there might be an extra turkey. Bentley: Well what I just don't want to see is I don't want to see us falling back to what happened before and getting so darned far behind in trying to keep parody, but I realize the dollar is the issue but — Bird: We've just got so much to work with, we've just got to — and these guys have worked with it every year, our Department Heads — being tight isn't nothing new to them. Bentley: So what do we have now for real figures? Rountree: Will or Janice, in terms of the published numbers, what number is it that fixes — is it the fixed departmental number or is it the total budget, in other words could we at some point and time adjust the individual departments as long as we don't exceed the published total? Bird: The total revenue and the total expenses have got to match up with — it's just total though isn't it Will? Rountree: For instance, if we publish the 2.9 million -dollar police budget and we decide to adjust that to 3.1 or 2.7, the bottom line stays at the 25 million or whatever the number is we could do that? Berg: I understand what you're saying, we would have to make an amendment to the budget next year. Bentley: The only thing we can't do is we can't exceed the ceiling. Berg: We could exceed the ceiling if we have more revenues come in. Rountree: Yeah, but I'm talking about this published — Berg: What we publish, we can't go over, if we go over, we have to amend the budget and that's — Rountree: The bottom line then, by department. Berg: No, whatever's published in those departments. Rountree: Okay. Berg: We amended it last year. Rountree: Right, and we've got an amendment this year — or do we? Berg: So it's not like — Smith: No, because Building Department this year is going to go over in the revenue (inaudible) Rountree: Yeah that's true. Bird: Will, as we publish each one of these department numbers right now, we go over that, we have to go back and amend the budget? Berg: Yes. Rountree: That's why I asked the question gentlemen. Berg: And the reason being is because the public is going to get this and say oh, I don't have a problem with 550,000 for the parks and they may just say (inaudible). So, like I said it's not a life or death matter, if things happen then you have to amend it. Bird: Do we have to publish the amendments then too Will? Publicly publish the amendments? Berg: You can amend the budget once and that's why we've got the amendment on the agenda also because we have to figure out what we're going to amend the budget for this year. One year we had an increased surplus of — of course back then it was different, the way we logged it in but it was Ada County Highway District impact fees, almost another million dollars in fees, even though it was money in and money out along with building permits, we had to amend the budget. Those are circumstances beyond our control. With building fees, we increased the building fees but we also increased our expenses to that department as well, so usually there's a kind of a match for (inaudible) with that department. In this particular instance that we're going to have to amend tonight deals with increase in wages which (inaudible) contributed to any kind of revenue increases (inaudible) Bird: Will, let me ask you a dumb question. Why do we have to amend it without knowing what our actual figures are going to be? I mean, we might each department in October — I mean I know we have to amend the line item, don't get me wrong there, but say like Tom in Parks has a fifty thousand dollar increase in his wages because of that deal, but say come September 30th he has seventy- five thousand left over from his budget, maybe he got seventy-five thousand more revenues in. Smith: Personnel and operations (Inaudible) — Bird: We have to do that different in our — Smith: If you take money out of operations without — overall figures bottom line but you're taking money out of operations to pay for (Inaudible) Bird: That's how you amend it then? Berg: Unfortunately, the way the state statute is you can't wait until September 30th to see what your bottom lines are because — unfortunately we're two months ahead trying to project even this month and next month but the idea I think bottom line is that we don't go over whatever our budget is, revenues or expenditures, we don't go over it so we kind of have to guess on the high side to a certain degree. Bird: I agree on guessing on expenses a little bit on the high side but revenues I don't because that's what gets us in problems. Berg: Well, what I'm saying is we want to make sure we cover the revenues but you're very right, be conservative on revenue estimating but when you were talking about the budget part, it's kind of foolish but that's the way it's set up, it's not an exact science because you're (inaudible) Rountree: Got that figured out Glenn? Bentley: All the numbers, no. What are we going to do, are we going to add an additional $929,000.00 to the Capital Improvements for the expenditures? Rountree: Well that's what I'm trying to (Inaudible) Bird: I'm trying to figure that out right here. Rountree: I get 871. Corrie: Well the difference between $1,071,000.00 and $2,000,000.00 is (inaudible) — and I erroneously (Inaudible) — so it's still the 929. Bentley: So then we should go up above in our Capital Improvements instead of 2 million, make it $2,929,000.00? Bird: We'd have to to balance out down there. When you added these figures up did you come up with 25244? Corrie: Yes, that's what you have there right now at the top — Bird: And with 2 million up here we're at 25244. Bentley: Yeah, so we'd have to add that into there or spread it out amongst there. Corrie: See you're 929,000 too much on the revenue against what you (Inaudible) Bird: -- what you've got here. Corrie: What she was doing, she just -- to make that balance, she was $1,071,000.00 to balance out at $25,244,500.00. Rountree: So was this $26,173,500.00? Corrie: Right. Rountree: So that fund balance is 2 million and the Capital Improvements would be $2,929,000.00. Bird: The total was 25244. Rountree: Your total would be $26,173,500.00. Bird: Oh okay, I see what you mean by adding that 929 on it. Rountree: Okay. Bird: How accurate is your other sources of revenue Janice? Smith: Which one are you looking at? Bird: Probably tax levy, we know that's going to be pretty close but the other sources, your three million eight hundred and five dollars, how accurate is that? Smith: It's high in some departments. Bird: Did you compare these to what actually was up through June? (Inaudible) Smith: Fire Department's behind right — Bird: But that will be picked up, right? That will be picked up. Smith: I think we're low on some grants money right here and see you're over on that. (Inaudible) This is only through June. (Inaudible) Smith: -- and I'll have to get after them, there's no reason that (inaudible). It's probably logged in for July's statement. Rountree: (Inaudible) Smith: (Inaudible) (Inaudible discussion)