Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 4/4/2000 (5) *PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at the Workshops, Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council. MINUTES GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS - WORKSHOP ROOM 5850 West Glendale Avenue April 4, 2000 8:30 a.m. PRESENT: Mayor Scruggs, Vice Mayor Eggleston, and Councilmembers Goulet, Lieberman, and Martinez ABSENT: Councilmembers McAllister and Samaniego ALSO PRESENT: Martin Vanacour, City Manager; Ed Beasley, Assistant City Manager; Peter Van Haren, City Attorney; and Pamela Oliveira, City Clerk. FISCAL YEAR 2000-01 BUDGET PROCESS CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Charlie McClendon, Budget Director; Mr. Ken Ready, Deputy City Manager; Ms. Jean Baxter, City Judge, Mr. Daniel Edwards, Court Administrator; Ms. Pam Kavanaugh, Director of Council and Management Services; Mr. Erick Strunk, Neighborhood Partnership Administrator; Ms. Sammi Mangus, Management Intern; Stuart Kent, Senior Management Assistant; Ms. Deborah Mazoyer, Building Safety Director; Mr. Dean Svoboda, Planning Director; Mr. Jim Coleson, Director of Economic Development; Mr. Grant Anderson, City Engineer; and Mr. Jim Book, Transportation Director This was the second of four scheduled City Council workshops to review the Fiscal Year 2000-01 Annual Budget. At this meeting, staff focused on the departments in the City Manager Group, the Appointed Officials Group, and the Community Development Group. Highlights of the issues presented included proposed technological improvements to the planning and permitting processes in the Community Development budget and funding for additional traffic signals in the Transportation budget. The first step in the Fiscal Year 2000-01 Budget Process was the City Council Goal- Setting Retreat held in November of 1999. The Council came away from this meeting with goals that included projects such as Freeway Sound Walls, Paradise Storm Drain Completion, West Area Plan Update and Street Landscaping improvements. In addition to these infrastructure goals, the Council also approved 18 new police officer positions to maintain the current levels of public safety within the City of Glendale. The City Manager reviewed the budget requests of all departments and prepared a balanced budget for presentation to the City Council. The Council approved the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) at its March 7, 2000 Workshop. The budget for the Fiscal Year 2000-01 CIP is $51,926,874. This includes $25,182,000 For Water/Sewer, $10,910,000 for Streets, $3,050,000 for Flood Control, $2,715,000 for Airport, $1,460,000 for Landfill, $1,420,000 for Parks & Open Space/Trails, and $1,000,000 for Economic Development. The first City Council budget workshop was held on March 28, 2000 and included discussion of the Landfill, Sanitation, and Fund 16 department budgets. Public meeting notices will be posted in the same manner as regular Council workshops. The City Council will review the Fiscal Year 2000-01 budget at workshops during March and April of 2000. The recommendations made at these workshops will direct staff in preparing for final City Council budget review and adoption in June of 2000. The recommendation was to review the Fiscal Year 2000-01 Proposed Annual Budget for the Appointed Officials Group, the City Manager Group and the Community Development Group and provide staff with direction. THE APPOINTED OFFICIALS GROUP The City Attorney Group Mr. McClendon explained that the City Attorney Group consists of the City Attorney's Office and the Prosecutor's Office. He noted that the functions of the Attorney's Office include providing legal advice to the City Council and Management and to represent the City in legal proceedings and ensure that City operations comply with Federal, State and local laws. He explained that the Prosecutor's Office handles prosecution of all violations of City codes, misdemeanor violations of State law within the City of Glendale and appeals from the City Court to the Superior Court. He stated that the base budget for the Attorney's office is $1,523,000 and they had no carryover or supplementals. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if the budget for the City Attorney Group allowed for contracting outside attorneys. Mr. McClendon explained that there is a continuing contractual line item in their budget to pay for outside legal assistance. Councilmember Goulet asked how the City is prepared, both in terms of budget and the amount of time a trial could take, should a suit be filed against the City. Mr. Van Haren stated that they put what they have historically spent for outside counsel in the budget for the next year. He noted that a majority of outside counsel expenses are paid by the Risk Management Trust Fund and will be seen there. 2 Vice Mayor Eggleston asked what last year's budget was for the City Attorney's Office. Mr. Van Haren stated that it was $1,478,393. He noted that this year's budget represents a 3% increase. Mr. McClendon attributed the increase to the salary and benefit plans. City Clerk Group Mr. McClendon explained that the responsibilities of the City Clerk's Office include citywide records management, conducting municipal elections, preparing and maintaining official City Council meeting records, coordinating the publishing of public notices and qualifying ordinances for inclusion in the Municipal Code Book. He stated that the base budget is $614,679 and there were no supplementals or carryover City Court Group Ms. Jean Baxter, City Judge, noted that the City Court adjudicates all misdemeanor and traffic cases that occur in the City of Glendale. She stated that the City Court's cases include arrests that have taken place in the City of Glendale, as well as people who have been charged with crimes committed in Glendale who are brought to the City jail from the County jail; over 1 ,200 orders of protections and injunctions against harassment; 1,381 juvenile cases; and over 3,000 criminal trials scheduled and resolved by trial or other outcome. She stated that every month a total of over 63,000 new violations are filed, over $5 million is received in fines and approximately 4,900 citizens are served by telephone. She pointed out that 148,000 people have entered the court and the Court has benefited from over 2,400 volunteer hours. Councilmember Goulet asked Ms. Baxter what she meant when she said that over 4,900 citizens were served by telephone each month. Ms. Baxter explained that one person in the Court answered over 4,900 citizen inquiry telephone calls. Councilmember Martinez asked where the $5 million they had received in fines went. Ms. Baxter explained that a portion of that money goes back into the General Fund and a greater portion goes to the State because of the surcharges it imposes. Mr. Edwards noted that the General Fund for Fiscal Year 1998-1999 received $2,532,419 out of the $5 million that was taken in. Councilmember Martinez asked about unserved warrants. Ms. Baxter stated that they have two Warrant Officers, who are assigned by the Police Department and paid out of the City Court budget. She explained that their sole function is to enforce court orders that have not been complied with. Councilmember Martinez suggested that a portion of the money which is being put back into the General Fund could be invested in additional Warrant Officers, especially when a fine may be involved. Ms. Baxter stated it would take a considerable increase in staff to make a significant dent. She explained that it would require a team from the Prosecutor's Office, the Police Department and the City Court. She noted that they do 3 • refer all of their civil offenses to a collection service and are looking at implementing that referral system for criminal cases as well. She also pointed out that they have implemented the ACAP computer system from the Supreme Court and hope to generate automatic reminders. Mayor Scruggs stated that this issue was larger than what could be handled during the budget process. She asked Dr. Vanacour to compile general information so that the Council could determine if it wanted staff to devote time to this as a stand-alone issue. Councilmember Martinez asked if the individuals who were referred to a collection agency have already been adjudicated. Ms. Baxter stated that the items that are currently referred to the collection agency involve people who have not paid a civil traffic violation. Councilmember Lieberman asked if some of the people who were referred to a collection agency were those who had agreed to pay on a monthly payment plan and have defaulted. Ms. Baxter stated that they had defaulted for a variety of reasons. Mr. Edwards stated that the base budget is $2,631 ,639, with a carryover of $133,238 and supplementals of $6,765. He explained that the carryover consists of two funds: the operating fund ($57,237) and the securities surcharge fund ($76,011). He said that the supplemental consists of the call center upgrade, which will provide the City Court with two individuals to monitor and answer calls, as well as the ability to analyze call patterns and notify customers as to how long they will have to wait for service. He noted that they had received almost 7,000 calls in October of 1999. He explained that the City Court's current system has five lines and it is possible they are not answering all of the incoming calls. He stated that the new system would allow them to track the incoming calls and hopefully provide better customer service. Vice Mayor Eggleston expressed his opinion that this was a good way to spend money. Mayor Scruggs noted that, when the number of telephone calls in the Utility Department get too high, they roll over to the Arizona Public Service (APS) Group. She asked if APS could also assist in court matters. Mr. Edwards explained that they have had intensive cross training between APS and the City's Finance staff because of the similarities of the types of calls. He suggested that it would not be an easy transition to do the same with the Court because of the types of issues that the Court handles. He offered to look into the possibility. Mayor Scruggs asked about the unfunded supplementals. She stated she was concerned that, if these were not addressed, they would continue to be deficient in terms of automation of the Court. Ms. Baxter stated that they did not believe there was a problem with the funding for the two consultants. She explained that they have carryover funding to partially fund the computer system consultant and have requested grant funding for the remainder. She noted that grant funding has also been requested for the Electronic Reporting Consultant. She stated that she had been assured by the 4 City Manager's Office that, if the grant funding fell through, they would have discussions with regard to meeting the Court's needs. Mayor Scruggs asked if they had submitted a grant for the Electronic Consultant. Ms. Baxter stated that they had not. She explained that this was a cross-departmental benefit and not critical this year. She stated that the Electronic Consultant deals with analyzing the functional needs of the Police Department, the Prosecutor's Office and the City Court to eliminate redundancies. She noted that this was just a study and she stated that implementing something would be much more costly. Mayor Scruggs asked if this would be done in-house. Ms. Baxter stated that the request was for a consultant to do the study. Mayor Scruggs asked if the City had in-house staff who do this type of efficiency analysis. Mr. McClendon replied that the City does have people in the Information Systems Department and in other departments who could work on this type of project. He explained that many of the routine items have been so time consuming that they have kept staff occupied on a full-time basis. Mayor Scruggs asked if they were comfortable with this not being done at this time. Ms. Baxter stated that it was not an operational necessity this year and that she would bring it back next year. Councilmember Martinez noted that there had been recommendations made with respect to the operations of the Utilities Department. He asked if the City Court could be included in those recommendations. Mayor Scruggs expressed her concern that, because the Court is an appointed group off by itself, it does not always get looked at in terms of how technology can best be used. Ms. Baxter stated that, with the assurance that it would get the necessary services to address the post conversion needs, the Court's needs would be met for this year. She said that it was then a question of priorities and efficiencies across departments. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if the Police Department and Prosecutor's Office were aware of the integrated system. He inquired as to why the Court was asking for the funding. Ms. Baxter explained that, since it was their system that was being changed, she decided they should take the lead in trying to work together. She stated that she had discussed it with the City Prosecutor, the City Attorney and the Police Chief and there was a consensus that it was a good idea, it was just a matter of identifying priorities. 5 CITY MANAGER GROUP City Manager's Office Ms. Kavanaugh discussed the first supplemental for the Neighborhood Resources Handbook ($8,000). She stated that this request arose from a variety of questions that have repeatedly come up from students attending Glendale University and about the community through the Neighborhood Partnership Program. She stated that she felt it would be a useful tool and pointed out that it has been the main project of Ms. Mangus, this year's management intern. Ms. Mangus provided a brief overview of the Neighborhood Resources Handbook. She stated that the handbook would be made available to the Council, neighborhood leaders, block watch captains, and Board and Commission members, as well as current students and alumni of Glendale University. She noted that it would also be downloadable from the City's website and that they were working on providing a feedback section on the Internet version. Councilmember Goulet stated that he liked the fact that it would be available on the Internet. He asked for a more detailed description of the contents. Ms. Mangus provided copies of the rough draft of the handbook for the Council's review. She identified the sections as: I Just Moved to Glendale, which tells how to turn on water and sewer, garbage, trash, electric service, phones, cable, and so forth; Frequently Asked Questions, which covers education, water and wastewater services, Neighborhood Partnership, Neighborhood Revitalization, environmental issues and animal ownership; Code Questions; Streets and Traffic; Youth and Teens Fire and Police;and a Guide to Frequently Called Phone Numbers. Councilmember Martinez stated that he had originally thought it would be a compilation of all of the City's pamphlets and brochures. He said that he now sees it as being in addition to those items and asked if he was correct. Ms. Kavanaugh stated that he was correct. She explained that they felt it was important to have all of the information in one location. Mayor Scruggs asked who they saw as their audience and how they would get the handbooks to that audience. Ms. Mangus explained that it is their intention to give the handbooks to people who are viewed as leaders in the neighborhoods, students of Glendale University, and others who may be a source of information for the citizens. She reiterated that it would also be available on the Internet. Mayor Scruggs asked if the handbook would include a section that would guide people to community services and provide information about the Civic Pride Ambassadors, Glendale University and not-for-profit organizations. Ms. Kavanaugh stated that they had included information on the mandatory training and could include a listing of community groups. Mayor Scruggs suggested limiting it to those things that are directly connected with the City of Glendale. 6 Councilmember Martinez asked if citizens could request copies of the handbook. Ms. Kavanaugh stated that they plan to have extra copies available; however, they only intend to deliver them by the aforementioned methods. Councilmember Goulet asked when the handbook would be available and if people would be able to come to City Hall to have a section of the book downloaded. Ms. Kavanaugh stated that they could provide that service. She explained that they will print it shortly after funding becomes available in July of 2000. Mayor Scruggs asked if the Internet version would be set up to enable a person to print a single page. Ms. Kavanaugh replied that she would work with staff to make it as easy to use as possible. Councilmember Lieberman stated that the 150 copies each Councilmember will receive should be adequate; however, because of the minimal cost of printing the handbooks, funds could be located should additional copies be necessary. Ms. Kavanaugh explained that, because it was a pilot program, they wanted to make sure that they did not print too many copies. Mayor Scruggs expressed her opinion that it was good to try it as a pilot. She asked for assurance that this would not result in a request for a full-time person to produce the handbook in the future. Ms. Kavanaugh explained that the Management Intern would produce the handbook on a regular basis. She noted that it is also a great learning experience for the intern in terms of what is available in the community. Vice Mayor Eggleston stated that it will be a good introduction for newcomers. Mr. Kent reviewed the supplemental for Glendale University ($3,500). He explained that this supplemental was requested to cover the ongoing increased costs of producing the classes. He noted that they produce two semesters of Glendale University annually and that they hope to go to a ten-week course next fall. He stated that they also offer ten different graduate classes. He noted that they have graduated 208 citizens, 44 of whom are serving on boards and commissions. He explained that the supplemental will allow them to produce the classes at the Civic Center where meeting space, audio- visual devices and catering needs can be met. Mr. Strunk reviewed the Neighborhood Partnership Program. He noted that they had two supplemental requests: Part-Time Clerical Assistance ($15,000) and the New Van — Volunteer Program ($23,000). He explained that, although the number of registered neighborhoods has increased from 48 to 129, they have had the same level of clerical staffing since 1995. He noted that the number of neighborhood newsletters increased to 31,563 in 1999. He pointed out that, during the past year, they have incorporated the community volunteer program, which has impacted how quickly they can process correspondence and are also asking for assistance in this area. He explained that the second supplemental was for a new van, as they currently do not have a vehicle that can adequately cover the needs of the volunteer coordinator. He stated that they currently use a City motor pool vehicle to move supplies and tools. He noted that there were 54 different community service projects in 1999. Councilmember Lieberman expressed his opinion that $1,000 for equipment repair and fuel was not enough. Mr. Strunk stated that they had received the price of $1,000 from the fleet manager and that it was generated by using the standard calculation. He offered to ask the fleet manager to re-calculate the figure. Councilmember Lieberman identified some of the costs associated with the van and suggested that it be raised to $2,000. Councilmember Martinez asked why they were not purchasing a pick-up truck. Mr. Strunk explained that they were requesting a van because it would allow them to lock equipment inside the vehicle. City Auditor Mr. McClendon identified the responsibilities of the City Auditor as conducting internal and external audits, including financial compliance audits, financial audits and analysis and performance audits. He stated that the City Auditor has a base budget of $301,186, with no carryover or supplementals. Intergovernmental Relations Mr. McClendon explained that the Intergovernmental Relations Department is responsible for representing the City's interests with other governmental and non- governmental jurisdictions at the local, regional, state and federal levels. He stated that they have a base budget of $336,428, a carryover of $63,897 and no supplementals. Councilmember Martinez asked what the base budget was for last year and why there was such a large carryover. Mr. McClendon stated that last year's total budget for the Intergovernmental Relations Department was $396,911, which is somewhat larger. He explained that it was probably larger due to one-time expenses and that often those one-time expenses bridge over to the next year causing a carryover of the unspent portion. The meeting was recessed for a short break from 9:45 a.m. to 10:05 a.m. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GROUP Community Development Administration Mr. McClendon explained that Community Development Administration consists of the Deputy City Manager of Community Development and the Administrative Support 8 Group, which provide administrative and clerical support to the Planning, Building, Safety and Economic Development Departments. He stated that they have a base Budget of $593,861, a carryover of $42,379 and no supplementals. Building Safety Mr. McClendon stated that the mission of the Building Safety Department is to provide for safety and quality assurance and planned review and inspection of all construction plans and projects to ensure compliance with building codes established to protect the health, safety and welfare of Glendale's citizens. He noted that this department's base budget is $1.9 million, with a carryover of $1,958. Mr. Reedy highlighted the first supplemental: a Technology Enhancement for a Permit Tracking Process, which would be used to hire a contract programmer to build on the City's system ($90,000). Councilmember Martinez asked if this tied in with the money back guarantee. Mr. Reedy stated that they hoped this tracking process would help make the money back guarantee work effectively. Ms. Deborah Mazoyer stated that it was not directly related to the money back guarantee - it was mainly for routing projects from department to department. In response to Councilmember Martinez' request, Ms. Mazoyer explained that the money back guarantee went into effect on Monday and basically guarantees that employees of the Building Safety Department will make their building inspections within 48 hours of a request, that tenant improvement building plan reviews will be done within three days and that standard home builders can get their permits on previously approved homes within five days. Councilmember Lieberman noted that they had received good press on the money- back guarantee in the newspaper. Councilmember Goulet asked how long it would take to implement the computerized process. Ms. Mazoyer estimated that it would take three to four months to determine what needs to be done, another three to four months to program, and a period of time to test the system. She stated that they expect the entire process to take approximately one year. Planning Mr. McClendon stated that the mission of the Planning Department was to accommodate future growth, development and redevelopment, in harmony with community values to ensure compatible land use relationships and to encourage quality site and building designs that maintain and enhance the character of the community. He stated that this department has a base budget of $1,161,000, a carryover of $83,900 and $347,000 in supplementals. 9 Mr. Reedy reviewed the supplemental for the Phase II Application Tracking System, which would be used to hire a contract programmer ($137,000). Vice Mayor Eggleston asked how this tied into the building permit process. Mr. Svoboda explained that this would be a complementary system to the permit tracking system and would work parallel with it. He stated that this would allow the Planning Department to track the projects from start to finish, integrate the two systems and cover all of the public hearing items, as well as the many administrative approvals. He stated that it would also allow them to do reviews more efficiently. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if the technology already exists. Mr. Svoboda stated that it has been available for a number of years and they would be using the experience that other cities have gained when refining their system. Mayor Scruggs asked how savings in manual effort are reflected. Mr. McClendon explained that existing staff is then able to focus on more customer service oriented or professional work. He stated that savings are often realized in terms of avoided employee costs. He stated that many times things have to be sent out or temporary employees have to be hired to process data entry and those expenses do not have to be renewed. In response to Mayor Scruggs' question, Mr. McClendon reviewed how workloads are shifted. Mayor Scruggs asked if this would free people up in the Planning Department and, if so, what could be expected as a result of the free time. Mr. Svoboda stated that they have a tremendous backlog and they hope to increase efficiency to a point where they can improve customer service and reduce the backlog. He stated that the more time the Planning Department staff has to solve problems, the better service they can provide their customers. Mr. Reedy noted that it would allow them a much better level of communication with their customers, the City Council, and the management team. He stated that they would be able to manipulate data and print reports much more rapidly. Councilmember Martinez expressed his opinion that the system will be great. Mr. Reedy explained that their goal was to minimize the amount of time they spend shuffling papers and maximize the time they have with their customers. Mr. Reedy reviewed the Western Area General Plan. Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Reedy to elaborate on the Western Area General Plan and the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. She stated that she had received inquiries as to why the City would spend money for consultants to do this work and why someone that is not part of the City was going to make decisions. She asked if input would be gathered from citizens and the City's staff. Mr. Reedy stated that consultants are used in many areas because they have the specific expertise necessary. He explained that 10 many one-time projects require a lot of research and have to be done quickly and they do not have the staff available. He stated that by using consultants they avoid having to hire people with special expertise on a long-term basis for short-term projects. Dr. Vanacour noted that many of the firms the City hires have similar projects elsewhere, which allows the City to benefit from their experience. He stated, however, that the Mayor and City Council always make the final decision. Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Svoboda how many hours one of these projects generally involves and what would staff do if they had to assume the workload of these two plans. Mr. Svoboda stated that it was a hard analogy to make because, at times, specialized skills are involved that would not be available in the department. He estimated that it would take three to five additional individuals in the long-range planning program. He stated that, between the Economic Development and Planning Departments, they could easily employ an additional five to ten people if they did not use consultants for some of the services. Mayor Scruggs asked for confirmation that there was no way these plans could be completed by the staff currently in place, either because the staff does not possess the specialized skills needed, or because other work would have to stop. Mr. Reedy stated that it would take longer than desirable. Mr. Svoboda explained that they have three factors they can work with: cost, schedule and performance. He stated that in order to use the existing staff, they would either have to lengthen the time frames, reduce the quality, or increase the cost in terms of reduced service to other ongoing customers. Councilmember Lieberman agreed with the City Manager's appraisal. He asked if anything had been done with the Miracle Mile or Gruan & Gruan reports that were done on the downtown area. Mr. Reedy stated that the Gruan report recommended pedestrian retail orientation of the downtown area and they had adopted an ordinance and zoning that implemented this. He noted that there are a number of other direct recommendations from those reports that have been implemented over the past five to eight years. Mr. Svoboda noted that consultant studies, even prior to those mentioned by Councilmember Lieberman, have resulted in recommendations that have been implemented. Councilmember Martinez asked if it would be fair to say that, although staff could do the work, it is more efficient to do it through a consultant. Mr. Svoboda explained that, while he and his staff are generalists and have a wide range of skills, they need consultants to do specialized projects in a timely manner. Mayor Scruggs stated that they also get a wider range of ideas when they hire consultants. Mr. Reedy agreed that an outside consultant provides a more global perspective. Mayor Scruggs noted that they are often more accepting of recommendations made by consultants than those made by staff. 11 Councilmember Martinez asked if the City of Phoenix uses outside consultants. Mr. Reedy stated that they do and he added that this type of project is done by consultants in almost every municipality. Councilmember Goulet stated that people look at the money being spent on consultants and do not consider the salaries of the professionals who would be needed if projects were done in-house. He stated that the outside perspective they gain is critical. Councilmember Lieberman mentioned impressive downtown improvements he had seen in other cities. Economic Development Mr. McClendon stated that the Economic Development Department maintains, attracts and expands quality businesses, providing jobs and expanding and diversifying the City's tax base. He noted that the Economic Development Department promotes and facilitates the orderly redevelopment of the City's older residential, commercial and industrial neighborhoods. He stated that they have a base budget of $623,915, a carryover of $58,600 and supplementals of $1 .2 million. Mr. Reedy explained that the first supplemental was an Opportunities Fund to Foster Economic Development ($1,000,000). He explained that they do not have a definitive plan on how to spend the money, as it is for opportunities that have not as yet happened. He added that there are an array of projects that would interest the City. Mr. Coleson explained the Opportunity Fund, stating that the objective was to provide the City with a fund to enable it to respond when an opportunity that benefits the City becomes available. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if any other cities had a similar fund. Mr. Coleson stated that many cities have an incentive policy that allows them to respond to the needs of a company that wants to relocate. He said that they were being innovative in having the money available. He stated that they intend to continue to develop an economic development policy so that they can anticipate the opportunities that are available and be prepared to respond. Vice Mayor Eggleston stated that it was similar to matching grant fund monies. Mr. Coleson said that they believed the critical factor is that any investment the City makes has a beneficial payoff to the City. He noted that they would do a cost/benefit analysis on any investment made. Mayor Scruggs noted that they have offered incentives in the past, when the benefit has been deemed great enough. She stated that they are always in competition with other cities and this would allow Glendale to be proactive. 12 With regard to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan, Mr. Coleson noted that the community is better served when the City uses consultants because the consultants focus on what the citizens want. He stated that both the process and the product are enhanced by the involvement of consultants. Vice Mayor Eggleston agreed with Mayor Scruggs that it is important they make it clear that they are not wasting citizens' money and that the Council is trying to do a better job for them. Engineering Mr. Anderson stated that the Engineering Department is responsible for locating, acquiring and managing properties, selecting consultants, designing the project, bid sourcing, value engineering, and site inspections. He noted that they are also responsible for keeping documentation relative to the projects. He said that the Department's mission is to provide a wide range of services necessary to ensure that the infrastructure and facilities throughout the city are properly designed and constructed. He stated that they have a base budget of $2,736,700, a $50,000 carryover and $481,597 in supplementals. Mr. Reedy explained that the first supplemental is for sound walls ($300,000), which is a ten-year payback that will allow them to construct the first phase of the projects approved by the Council. He noted that there would be a second sell in 2003, allowing them to complete the sound walls on Loop 101. He stated that the total program over the next ten years would cost approximately $7 million. Mayor Scruggs stated that they were in ongoing discussions with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) to ensure that ADOT assumes the responsibility that the Council believes is theirs in constructing those sound walls. Councilmember Martinez asked if those improvements were the result of a noise study that was done, starting west of 51St Avenue and going to the Loop at 83rd Avenue. Mr. Anderson responded in the affirmative. He added that, for the most part, the whole area will get sound walls on both the north and south sides. Councilmember Martinez asked if neighborhood meetings would be held with the affected property owners. Mr. Anderson answered in the affirmative. He stated that they were in the process of setting up the first of those meetings in the area of 51st Avenue and Beardsley Road. Mr. Reedy reviewed the second supplemental, the Orangewood and 51st Avenues Landscaping Project ($35,000). He explained that it would landscape and beautify the south side of Orangewood Avenue from 51st to 53rd Avenues. He noted that Richmond American Homes developed a project north of Orangewood Avenue and enhanced the landscaping on the north side of the street; however, the south side has been incomplete in terms of landscaping for many years. 13 Councilmember Lieberman asked for clarification of the cost differences. Mr. Anderson explained that the City does not charge the City's budget for its manpower. He stated, however, the City's manpower was not available and the only way to get the project done in a timely manner was to hire a design consultant. Councilmember Martinez stated that this project would have been good for the Neighborhood Partnership office. Mr. Anderson said that the mobile home complex does not have an association and does not want to form one. Mr. Reedy highlighted the Temporary Engineering Inspection Services supplemental ($62,000). He explained that these funds were being requested to hire temporary staff to cover the projects that cannot be covered by existing staff. Mr. Reedy reviewed the supplemental for the Storm Sewer Project on Paradise Lane ($200,000). Mr. Reedy highlighted the Street Scallop supplemental ($250,000), explaining that over time the City or a developer has improved street segments, while in-between those segments there are areas that are unimproved. He stated that they have done an analysis as to where these situations have occurred. Councilmember Martinez asked why the 61st Avenue and Greenbriar Drive scalloped street was not being completed. Mr. Anderson stated that the Scallop Street Improvement Program does have that street on the list. However, he explained that it is a low volume street, with undeveloped properties that have the potential for development, and that the scallop money generally goes to streets with a much higher traffic volume, more safety concerns, and a relatively small potential for improvement. He stated that the road which Councilmember Martinez mentioned will come up in the program; however, it is not listed under the five-year program. Councilmember Martinez noted that there is a school on the south side of the street. He asked how that affects the criteria. Mr. Anderson stated that it was a factor and they were looking at temporary improvements for the shoulder. He explained that the arterials are raised to the top of the list because of their pedestrian nature and the high- speed traffic. Mr. Reedy reviewed the Street Beautification supplemental ($100,000). He explained that this request would bring them closer to completing their landscaping improvements along arterials that were not previously done. Neighborhood Services Mr. McClendon reviewed work done by the housing rehabilitation program. He explained that Neighborhood Services promotes the well being of the community through the provision of housing assistance to low income groups, preserves and enhances the livability of neighborhoods by working with citizens to obtain compliance 14 with City codes and administers Federal grants and delivers housing rehab programs to qualified citizens. He stated that they have a base budget of $11.4 million, most of which is Federal money. He stated that the carryover of $947,000 is also mostly Federal money and is due to the difference in fiscal years. He stated that there are no supplementals in this group. Councilmember Martinez asked if this was a reduction over last year. Mr. McClendon stated that the budget for Fiscal Year 1999-2000 was $12.328 million. He also noted that the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) was $2.6 million for the same time period and is $2 million for the upcoming year. He pointed out that this does not include the carryover. Transportation Mr. McClendon stated that the Transportation Department provides traffic engineering, traffic signals, traffic signage and striping, street lighting, ad transit and bicycle programs to meet the transportation needs of the citizens. He stated that the base budget for the Transportation Department is $7.4 million, with a carryover of $342,000 and supplementals totaling $857,000. Mr. Reedy explained that the first supplemental is the new full-time position of Transportation Planning Manager ($94,923). Mr. Book explained that the Transportation Planning Manager would address transportation issues in terms of coordinating with the Federal agencies, the Arizona Department of Transportation and the Maricopa Association of Governments. He noted that they were requesting that this be accelerated so that they could start the recruitment process early. Councilmember Martinez asked if any of these duties fell under Mr. Book's job description. He stated that it was his understanding that Ms. Paula Moloff was responsible for grants. Mr. Book explained that the Transportation Department has, at times, sought grants in conjunction with Ms. Moloff; however, the Department pursues them separately through its committee memberships. He stated that it takes a great deal of effort to follow all of the available funding grants. He said that they are not currently doing much transportation planning; they are in more of a reaction mode. He explained that they are looking at this position to lead that effort, particularly the long- range planning efforts. Councilmember Martinez asked if $90,000 was the standard starting salary for the industry. Mr. Reedy explained that the actual salary for the position is $76,000 and that social security, retirement and other benefits increases the total to $90,000. Mr. Beasley stated that they had also learned that other municipalities have people who work on this on a full-time basis to plan and strategize for the future. He suggested that this was a critical position if the City wished to remain competitive. 15 • Mayor Scruggs stated that other cities have people devoted to moving money to their City. She noted that the RARF (Regional Area Road Funds) funding mechanism goes away in 2005. She stated her belief that there would be significant raids on those funds. She said that they should all be concerned about a raid on the money which they had obtained for the intersections on Grand Avenue. Vice Mayor Eggleston agreed with Mayor Scruggs. Mr. Reedy identified the second supplemental as the addition of a new left turn signal at 59th and Sweetwater Avenues ($25,000). Councilmember Martinez inquired as to the status of the left turn signal at 67th Avenue and Greenway Road. Mr. Book stated that they would have that in by June 30, 2000. Mr. Reedy noted that other supplementals include: Two New Traffic Signals ($150,000); a Sign Installation Truck ($70,000); Street Lighting Utilities Increase ($48,000) and a Traffic Educator and Instructor ($56,432). Councilmember Lieberman stated that the Traffic Educator was great to work with. He noted that he had participated in the first trial program and it was an outstanding event. Mayor Scruggs expressed her support and appreciation of staff's recognition of the importance of working with the young children. She stated that it takes a while to see the results and people need to be patient. Mr. Book noted that they were up front and had admitted that it would take a while when they first came to the Council. He stated that he appreciated the support they had received. He pointed out that the City of Mesa has copied the program. Mr. Reedy reviewed the Transit Reserve supplemental ($150,000), which would allow transit services to continue operating in the event of a decrease in outside funding. He admitted that they would have to consider if, over time, this was an adequate amount. Mayor Scruggs asked how they would address this as an ongoing problem. Mr. McClendon stated that the advantage of this type of fund is that they know, if something happens mid-year, the City has maneuvering time to continue the service while the long-term solution is developed. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if the $150,000 would carry over to the next year. Mr. McClendon explained that they believed the transit system was fully funded for next year, in which case the funds would be carried over into the following year. Mr. Reedy highlighted the HB 2565 supplemental ($195,000) and deferred to Mr. Book for a more detailed explanation. 16 Mr. Book explained that they were told there would be a certain amount of funding coming as part of HB 2565; however, the lottery revenues have been higher and they have received one-time contributions. He stated that they had originally wanted to put this amount of money as a supplemental to do the transportation planning effort; however, there are other things that the funding may, in fact, be used for. He explained that the $178,000 is the figure they assume they will need to commit towards getting an overall transportation plan for the City. Mayor Scruggs asked if they were going to use the money to continue service and not to do planning. Ms. Diane Adams, Transit/Dial-A-Ride Manager, explained that they received more money from HB 2565 in 1999 than they had anticipated and the $178,000 was giving them the budget authority to commit that money. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked for a review of HB 2565. Ms. Adams explained that this was the vehicle license tax which they are currently receiving. She stated that they expected to get $400,000 and ended up getting $723,000. Mayor Scruggs stated that she was confused because page 750 states that this money will be used for service on routes and the presentation says the money will be used for transportation planning efforts. Mr. Reedy stated that the service items were already funded and this would be a contingency fund to allow the Council to make a decision as to how much of the $178,000 it wants to spend on other projects. Councilmember Lieberman asked if some of these funds would be required to continue bus service if the State cut down on the amount of funding through HB 2565. Mr. Book explained that they have a base of approximately $400,000 that they have been willing to allocate towards their fixed routes and extending service. He stated that the remaining money is not guaranteed and, therefore, they have been reluctant to assign that money to fixed routes. Mayor Scruggs asked where the $178,000 figure came from. Mr. Book explained that it is the increment amount that they did not predict from the past year and for which they need budget authority. Councilmember Martinez asked if they would be receiving the $178,000 each year. Mr. Book said that they could not guarantee this; however, revenue streams look as though they will. Councilmember Martinez suggested that this amount be put away, since they do not know what will happen in the future. Mr. McClendon explained that the $178,000 represents an increase over what is currently in the base. He stated that they set it up as a separate account to enable it to be tracked separately from other transit money. He explained that they did this because it has to be used for services, in addition to what they were already providing. He explained that, under Arizona law, even if it was budgeted, they would not be able to appropriate it. He stated that it cannot be used for 17 the transit reserve because it is tied to a specific funding source and has restrictions placed on it. Mr. Book noted that this money cannot be carried over. Mayor Scruggs asked if HB 2565 has a sunset. Mr. Book explained that it is tied to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). Mayor Scruggs stated that this points to the seriousness of the issue of transit funding. She said that, although transit is extremely expensive and continues to rise in costs, it is generally funded with sources of revenue that fluctuate according to public or legislative activities. She stated that that was why some cities had dedicated resource funds. Mr. McClendon stated that this was a good example of what happens in an area where they have a capped funding source. He stated that the lottery funding has never increased, which has resulted in the need to put general fund money into the transit program. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if the State of California dedicates a percentage of its gasoline tax. Mr. Book stated that he did not know, but offered to find out. Mayor Scruggs asked about the $193,000 carryover request for the Faith House facility. She asked if this was from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. Mr. McClendon stated that all of the items that say Fund 11 are Community Development Block Grants and they almost always have to carry over a substantial portion of that money because of the difference in fiscal years and because, typically, the projects take longer than one fiscal period to complete. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 a.m. 18