HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 9/16/2008 (3) *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
CITY OF GLENDALE
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
1:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Manuel D. Martinez, and
Councilmembers Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet,
Yvonne J. Knaack, and H. Phillip Lieberman
ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City
Manager; Craig Tindall, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City
Clerk
1. FISCAL YEAR-08 FOURTH QUARTER GENERAL FUND STATUS REPORT
ON REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Horatio Skeete, Deputy City Manager; Sherry
M. Schurhammer, Management & Budget Director; and Raymond H. Shuey, Chief
Financial Officer/Finance Director
This is a request for the City Council to review the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007-08 fourth
quarter report on General Fund (GF) revenues and expenditures. The fourth quarter
report covers the full fiscal year encompassing July of 2007 through June of 2008.
The FY 2007-08 GF fourth quarter report is consistent with the Council's goal of
ensuring the city's financial stability by conducting timely reviews of expenditures and
revenues.
In response to Council requests, staff committed to providing quarterly reports on the
GF beginning with FY 2003-04.
The bottom line for the GF through the fourth quarter of FY 2007-08 is as follows:
o GF revenues are $4 million or(2.1%) below budget and
o GF expenditures are $16.4 million or (9%) below budget.
The following table is a comparison of full FY actual revenues for FY 2006-07 and FY
2007-08. This comparison is important because it indicates whether revenue
collections have grown when compared to the prior fiscal year.
1
Comparison of
FY 2006-07 to FY 2007-08 Actuals
(in 000s)
GF revenue receipts through the fourth quarter of FY 2007-08 are $7.2 million or 4%
more than the same period in the prior FY.
FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 Percent Change
YTD Actuals YTD Actuals From FY 2006-07
City Sales Tax $63,621 $61,306 (3.6%)
State Income Tax $27,517 $34,109 23.9%
State Sales Tax $23,037 $22,237 (3.4%)
State MV In-Lieu $10,044 $9,730 (3.1%)
HURF $17,332 $16,647 (3.9%)
Primary Prop Tax $3,743 $3,877 3.5%
All Other $31,832 $36,419 14.4%
. :- $177,126 $184,325 4%
City sales tax collections are $61.3 million, or about $2.3 million or 3.6% less than the
FY 2006-07 city sales tax receipts of$63.6 million.
State-shared revenue collections are $66.1 million, $5.5 million (9%) ahead of the $60.6
million collected through the fourth quarter of the prior FY.
o State income tax receipts of about $34.1 million are $6.6 million or 24%
more than FY 2006-07 collections;
o State sales tax receipts are about $800,000 or 3.4% less than FY 2006-07
collections; and
o Motor vehicle in-lieu receipts are about $314,000 or 3.1% less than FY
2006-07 collections.
HURF revenues are about $685,000 or 3.9% less than FY 2006-07 receipts.
2
Revenues for the All Other category are $4.6 million or 14.4% more than FY 2006-07
collections.
The following chart reflects the year-to-year comparison for revenue collections, but by
quarter rather than as a total. The chart shows that each quarter in FY 2007-08 out
performed each quarter in FY 2006-07.
e - Ka R . spa
$200,000
$180,000
$160,000fr-tiker, '®'
$140,000 - x
$120,000 x`
$100,000 T
$80,000
$60,000 $47,419 :; $47,763
$40,000
$20,000 $41,035 $44,434
$0
FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08
❑ First Quarter ❑ Second Quarter
El Third Quarter El Fourth Quarter
3
The following table reflects a comparison of the GF revenue budget and GF actual
collections for FY 2007-08.
YTD Comparison
Budget to Actuals, FY 2007-08
(in 000s)
FY 2007-08 FY 2007-08 Percent
YTD Budget YTD Actuals Over (Under)
Budget
City Sales Tax $67,552 $61,306 (9.2%)
State Income Tax $34,141 $34,109
State Sales Tax $24,583 $22,237 (9.5%)
State MV In-Lieu $10,862 $9,730 (10.4%)
HURF $16,986 $16,647 (2.0%)
Primary Prop Tax $3,888 $3,877
All Other $30,318 $36,419 2%
`I"ittal =. $188,330 $184,325 (2.1%)
GF revenue receipts through the fourth quarter of FY 2007-08 are about $4 million (2%)
under budget.
GF city sales tax collections are $61.3 million. This amount is approximately $6.2
million (9.2%) under budget.
State-shared revenue collections are $66.1 million. This amount is approximately $3.5
million (5%) under budget. The three components of state-shared revenue are shown
below:
o State income tax receipts came in as expected through the fourth quarter
of FY 2007-08;
o State sales tax receipts are $2.3 million (9.5%) less than expected; and
o Motor vehicle in-lieu receipts are $1.1 million (10.4%) less than expected.
4
HURF revenues.are commonly called the gas tax even though there are several other
transportation-related fees that comprise this revenue source. This revenue source is
based primarily on the volume of fuel sold rather than the price of fuel. HURF receipts
are $339,000 (2.0%) under budget.
The All Other category is doing fairly well, primarily because of strong revenue receipts
for community development fees for construction activity such as building permits and
plan check fees, interest earnings, and better than expected gas and electric franchise
fees. Compared to budget, this category is $6.1 million (2%) ahead.
Below is a table that reflects the revenue to budget comparison for only the fourth
quarter (April through June) of FY 2007-08. It shows that the FY 2007-08 collections for
only the fourth quarter are about $950,000 or 2% under budget for the same time
period.
Comparison of 4th Quarter Only
Budget to Actuals FY 2007-08
(in 000s)
FY 2007-08 FY 2007-08 Percent
4th Quarter Budget 4th Quarter Actuals Over (Under) Budget
City Sales Tax $16,888 $13,782 (18.3%)
State Income Tax $8,535 $8,526
State Sales Tax $6,146 $5,525 (10.1%)
State MV In-Lieu $2,716 $2,577 (5.1%)
HURF $4,247 $4,239
Primary Prop Tax $972 $1,461 50.3%
All Other $7,580 $10,022 32.2%
rr'' Teal $47,084 $46,132 (2%)
5
The FY 2007-08 budget expenditures and actuals for the GF operating and pay-as-you-
go (PAYGO) capital expenditures are shown in the following table.
Expenditures Comparison
Budget to Actuals, FY 2007-08
® FY 2007-08 FY 2007-08 Amount
YTD Budget YTD Actuals Under/(Over)
Budget
GF Salaries/Benefits $118,131 $113,060 $5,071
GF Non-Personnel $53,838 $47,305 $6,533
GF Debt Service $2,994 $2,683 $311
(leases)
PAYGO Capital $7,751 $3,257 $4,494
TOTAL $182,714 $166,305 $16,409
Overall, the year ended with actual expenditures of $16.4 million or 9.0% less than the
amount budgeted.
Designated Sales Tax Receipts
At the end of the fourth quarter, the transportation sales tax budget to actuals
comparison shows that this fund met projections with the actual collections exceeding
budget by $55,000.
YTD Comparison
Budget to Actuals, FY 2007-08
(in 000s)
FY 2007-08 FY 2007-08 Percent
Budget Actuals Over/(Under)
bud=et
Transportation $23,617 $23,672 0%
Sales Tax
6
The following table shows a comparison of budget to actuals for FY 2007-08 for the
two components of the public safety sales tax.
YTD Comparison
Budget to Actuals, FY 2007-08
(in 000s)
FY 2007-08 FY 2007-08 Amount
Budget Actuals Over/(Under)
Budget
Police sales tax $ 12,694 $10,625 (16.2%)
Fire sales tax $6,347 $5,312 (16.2%)
For FY 2007-08, the police component of the public safety sales tax was $2.1 million
(16.2%) less than the budget.
For the FY 2007-08, the fire component of the public safety sales tax was $1 million
(16.2%) less than the budget.
While the designated sales taxes have the same rate of one-half cent, the base for
each rate is different. The transportation sales tax base is 100% of all retail sales.
The financial information included in this report is un-audited.
This is a status report on the General Fund covering the fourth quarter of FY 2007-08.
No Council guidance is requested on this report.
Mr. Horatio Skeete, Deputy City Manager and Ms. Sherry M. Schurhammer,
Management & Budget Director, provided a summary on the fourth quarter report.
Mr. Skeete reported that Glendale performed well when compared to other valley cities.
Other cities undertook budget measures that reduced staffing and service levels. He
said Glendale was not immune to the current economic situation, but the bottom line
results show that the city's resources were well managed to minimize impacts on the
community and the city's employees. He said management will continue to monitor
revenues and expenditures throughout the course of the year to ensure the city lives
within its means.
Ms. Sherry M. Schurhammer presented several slides regarding a comparison of
revenue collections between fiscal years and between budget and actuals.
7
Councilmember Clark asked about state income tax revenue for FY 2009-10. Ms.
Schurhammer said there is a two-year lag in the distribution of income tax revenues.
That means the income tax the state collected in FY 2008 will be distributed to the cities
in FY 2010. Income tax receipts in 2008 were 16% below the prior fiscal year's
collections so the city will see a decline in the income tax distribution for FY 2010. She
said the decline in receipts is the result of a slowing economy and a 5% income tax cut
that the state legislature approved.
Councilmember Clark asked about the amount of income tax revenue expected in FY
2008-09. Ms. Schurhammer said Glendale expects to receive approximately $36.3
million or about $2.1 million more than the amount collected in FY 2007-08. Ms.
Schurhammer noted that the $36.3 million figure included about $1.5 million to $2
million in one-time revenue related to prior fiscal year legislative agreements.
Councilmember Clark asked if there was an estimate for the amount of decline
expected for the state's and city's sales taxes. Mr. Skeete said they were not in the
position to make any good estimates regarding revenue collections until more
information becomes available. He noted that the city was continuing to see a 5% - 9%
reduction in sales tax in the last quarter when compared to the prior fiscal year.
Councilmember Clark inquired about the status of HURF funds. Ms. Schurhammer
said the city will not completely lose HURF funds for the fiscal year. She said the city is
not expecting to collect the same amount of HURF revenue in FY 2009 as it received in
FY 2009.
Vice Mayor Martinez asked a question about information in the memo from Mr. Skeete
and Ms. Schurhammer regarding supplementary information for the FY 2007-08
General Fund report. He specifically asked about the replacement of the city's sales
tax system. Mr. Skeete said the city was in the process of replacing the current sales
tax system because it is an old system that is very limited in its capacity to produce the
kind of detailed information reports needed to analyze the data. He said the project will
take close to two years to complete. Vice Mayor Martinez asked if this replacement will
insure that information will be available in a timelier manner. Mr. Skeete explained this
will improve the user friendliness of the system and provide the city's taxpayers with
opportunities to use the web for filing sales tax reports.
Councilmember Lieberman asked Mr. Schurhammer about the 'all other' category of
revenue that performed so well in FY 2008. He asked if this revenue was related to
development impact fees. Ms. Schurhammer said this revenue did not come from
development impact fees, but rather from development-related activities. For example,
contractors and developers paid for various permits and plan reviews in FY 2008.
Councilmember Lieberman requested the detail behind the category and Ms.
Schurhammer said she would provide the information after the workshop meeting.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if the city receives state sales revenue tax two years
behind actual collections and Ms. Schurhammer said no.
8
Councilmember Frate asked why the salaries and benefits series of expenses came in
under budget. Ms. Schurhammer said there were vacancies in almost every General
Fund department at some point during the fiscal year. Therefore the vacancy savings
were the result of the time it takes to recruit and interview candidates to fill new
positions that council approved as well as vacancies that occurred because of
retirements or promotions. Councilmember Frate inquired if a hiring freeze was in
place. Ms. Schurhammer replied that no freeze was in place yet.
Mayor Scruggs said she had concerns with the level of salary savings. She noted she
had sent several emails to staff expressing her questions and concerns regarding this
matter. She inquired if this savings was normal, why they continue to program 4%
when they were in a situation of looking for additional revenue. Ms. Schurhammer
explained that salary savings were generated every year and are programmed into the
budget the following fiscal year to address one-time items.
Mayor Scruggs suggested programming 2% instead of the 4%. Mr. Skeete explained
that, as keepers of the process, staff was doing their best with providing the most
prudent financial position for the city. He explained the current economic employment
predicament. He said he understood why Council might think it was reasonable to use
the 'float' to pay for ongoing items given the economy. However, the best way to use
that salary savings was for one-time expenditures in the following year's budget. He
noted it was the most prudent and fiscally responsible way to expend that money.
Mayor Scruggs reiterated her concerns. She stated that using this as a savings
account for one-time expenditures was not practical at a time when on-going funds
were in peril. She added holding that much back did not do the city the greatest
service.
Councilmember Lieberman commented on the comparisons for police and fire sales tax
against the transportation sales tax. He explained the difference was because the
public safety sales tax adjustment was not in place for a full 12 months in FY 2008.
The sales tax rate adjustment was not effective until the first of November. Mr. Skeete
said the city will continue to see differences between the totals for the two designated
sales taxes because the base for each is different, with the transportation component
including sales of food for home consumption. Councilmember Lieberman agreed.
Mayor Scruggs said the transportation sales tax and city sales tax were applied to the
same sales tax base. She wondered how we were able to accurately project the
transportation tax collections, but not the city sales tax collections. She said Ms.
Schurhammer explained to her before the meeting how a portion of the regular city
sales tax is pledged to cover debt service payments for some specific projects like the
Arena and Zanjero development. She asked if the city sales tax number for the
General Fund represented collections before or after the set asides for debt service.
Mr. Skeete said the city sales tax amount shown for the General Fund was exclusively
available to the General Fund for expenditures. He said the city sales tax revenue
9
generated from activity at the Arena, Zanjero development and stadium are not
included in the General Fund city sales tax number.
Mayor Scruggs suggested staff include those set aside figures for the debt service to
avoid any surprises. She talked about the time last FY when she read about the $4.4
million from the General Fund that was needed for the Arena debt service. Mr. Ed
Beasley said those figures were tracked but were in different detailed reports.
Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Art Lynch to clarify. Mr. Lynch explained that the questions
being asked dealt with debt services funds. He said Council is provided debt
management reports, and other separate reports that are provided in different sessions
rather than part of the operating budget itself.
Vice Mayor Martinez asked for the debt information to be provided to Council. Mr.
Lynch replied he would be happy to provide that information. He reiterated that the
reason for not providing it today was because this was dealing with the General Fund
year end report and this report did not include debt service funds. He said he will try to
include the requested information in the total picture for the budget and the operating
activities of the city.
Councilmember Knaack said this issue was a serious concern because some debt
service payments were being covered by the city sales tax. This situation impacted the
actual amount available for General Fund operations so Council must be kept aware of
these situations. She understood that the debt service amount was non-negotiable and
had to be paid. Mr. Lynch agreed and said he realized it is important and will provide a
total picture of debt service activities.
Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Skeete to explain their projections.
Mr. Skeete explained that projections made for the General Fund require information
gathered from the sales tax system. He said they find themselves every year trying to
estimate what the General Fund sales tax number is going to be. They try to factor in
the number of restaurants coming on line, as well as hotels, and when they will open.
He explained they try to adjust the sales tax projections based on those types of items
coming on line or expect to come on line and use that number to build a budget. Mayor
Scruggs said she understood the process better now.
Mayor Scruggs commented on Mr. Skeete's memo. She commented that the food-for-
home-consumption activity was between 25% and 35% of the sales tax base. She said
that number was outstanding. Mr. Skeete said the city's sales tax system did not track
retail sales based on food because the city's sales tax was broadly based. Until the
passage of the public safety sales tax increase, retailers did not have to break out sales
for non-food items from food items. He said now vendors must make that distinction in
their sales tax figures. The report shows actual figures provided during the first eight
months of the public safety sales tax. Mayor Scruggs asked if this included restaurants
and lodging. Mr. Skeete replied it did not because food sold at those places is taxed
because it is not considered "food for home consumption" under the state's tax
regulations. He added the movement to stay home and cook instead of eating out
reflected the changing economy. He noted this revealed why food-for-home-
consumption was at 25% to 35%.
10
Ms. Schurhammer explained the original estimate of sales taxes related to "food for
home consumption" that was provided in the budget workshops held in the spring of
2007. She noted that the city did not require retailers to break out sales based on food
and non-food items because our sales tax rate was all inclusive. Ten or fifteen years
ago, it was easier to estimate sales related to food because most people purchased
their groceries at traditional grocery stores. That is different now with the big box stores
like Sam's, Costco, and Wal-Mart, which sell large quantities of food and non-food
items. Therefore we tried to estimate the percentage of sales at those stores related to
food. Since the public safety sales tax rate adjustment in November 2007, we've
learned that 25% - 35% of the sales at these big box stores are related to food. Also,
these percentages might be higher than originally expected because we are in an
economic downturn, and that situation usually drives people to eat more meals at
home.
Mayor Scruggs commented that state's sales tax collections have decreased much
more than Glendale's collections. She said the state does not tax food for home
consumption. She also noted the growing trend of people eating at home more often
than might have been the case one and one-half to two years ago. She said these
could be the reasons why the state's sales tax collections were not doing as well as
Glendale's collections. Mr. Skeete stated it did seem reasonable; however, they did not
have any data to back it up.
Councilmember Lieberman commented that this had been going on for quite some
time. He said in his early years on Council, automobile sales were the biggest
component of sales tax revenue; however, that has been changing over the last several
years.
Ms. Schurhammer stated they were at the end of their presentation.
Mayor Scruggs thanked them and asked for any questions or comments. She added
she will continue her conversation with staff concerning the kind of information she
would like to see presented.
2. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW OF CITY COURTHOUSE AND WEST
BRANCH LIBRARY
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager, and Larry
Broyles, City Engineer
This is a request for City Council input on the design concepts for the new Glendale
City Courthouse and the West Branch Library.
The new City Courthouse design-build agreement with D.L. Withers requires the
architectural firm of Dick & Fritsche Design Group to develop two design concepts. The
various design concepts will be presented for City Council input.
DWL Architects & Planners has worked closely with city staff and Haydon Building
Corporation, the Construction Manager at Risk, to develop the design plan for the West
Branch library. DWL will present this plan for City Council input.
11
The new courthouse addresses the City Council strategic goal of one community
focused on public safety for citizens and visitors. A key objective of this goal is to begin
phased implementation of the Court, Police and Fire plans.
The new library addresses the goal of a city with high quality services for citizens, as
well as one community with strong neighborhoods.
The new Glendale City Courthouse will be located on the southwest corner of 47th and
Glendale Avenues and will occupy approximately eight acres. The West Branch Library
will be located an a seven-acre parcel within the Western Area Regional Park site at
83rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road.
The City is utilizing the design-build process for the design and construction of the
courthouse. In July 2008, the design-build team of D.L. Withers Construction LC and
Dick & Fritsche Design Group were selected to design and construct the new Glendale
City Courthouse. The new Glendale City Courthouse is scheduled to be in service by
March 2010.
The new West Branch Library site is planned for seven acres within the Western Area
Regional Park located at 83m Avenue and Bethany Home Road. The Library building
will be approximately 33,500 square feet and will be designed as a compatible structure
to the existing Gateway Public Safety building.
The West Branch Library is utilizing the Construction-Manager-at-Risk process.
Haydon Building Corporation was selected to perform this service. Construction is
scheduled to allow for a July 2010 opening.
Courthouse
On August 26, 2008, the Council approved the design-build contract with D.L. Withers
Construction LC for the design and construction of the new Glendale City Courthouse.
On May 13, 2008, the Council approved a demolition contract with Ground Level Co. to
demolish the existing building and on-site improvements on the property for the new
Glendale City Courthouse.
In February of 2008, the Council approved a professional services agreement with
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK) for consulting services to develop the Court
programming, efficient building layout, and design-build bridging documents.
In 2004, the Council approved the purchase of the property located at 4701 West
Glendale Avenue. The purchase agreement was formally ratified in January of 2005.
Also, in 2004 the city hired HOK to conduct a City Court Needs Assessment, which
supported the construction of the new Court Complex at approximately 93,000 square
feet.
12
West Branch Library
On January 8, 2008, the Council approved professional services agreements for
architectural and interior design services and Construction-Manager-at-Risk
construction management services for the West Branch Library.
The West Branch Library was first identified as a project in the FY1998-2007 Capital
Improvement Plan.
Redevelopment of underperforming properties will spur economic development in the
area.
A new enhanced Glendale City Courthouse will allow the City to continue meeting the
needs of Glendale residents and provide better customer service.
By 2010 the West Branch Library will serve a population of approximately 50,000 in the
western area of Glendale, and it is anticipated that more than 1,000 people per day will
utilize the services of this branch.
The West Branch will offer more than 870 programs annually.
This branch will provide services and programs to children, teens, adults and seniors
that are not currently accessible for many residents.
Staff is seeking guidance from the Council on the design concepts for the new City
Courthouse and the West Branch Library.
Mr. Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager and Mr. Larry Broyles, City Engineer presented
an overview of the items. Mr. Reedy informed them of alternative methods currently
being used for the construction manager at risk and design build contracting processes.
He explained the test had been used first for ADOT and had been very successful.
ADOT had been able to bring projects in much more rapidly than had been coming on
line using these two processes.
The construction manager at risk qualification based selection process has very specific
requirements. It also has a detailed scoring process with the most qualified proposal,
not the lowest bidder chosen. Mr. Reedy stated an architect or engineer was hired first
to do the design and then immediately after, they hire the construction manager at risk.
Both work very closely within the design phase until the project is bid out for evaluation
for each component of the project. This process has eliminated a lot of the surprises
and has allowed them to develop guaranteed maximum price contracts based on a
detailed understanding of the design intentions. He explained they end up with a better
product and a faster design and construction phase. He noted this process has been
very successful.
13
Mr. Reedy also explained the design-build contracting process and how it differs from
the Construction Manager at Risk process. This process has also allowed the city to
move more quickly through the design phase to a construction project within the budget
for the project. Design-build is a one-step selection of a contractor and designer using
the qualification based selection process.
Mr. Reedy stated that the discussion today was for Council to look at two alternatives
and provide direction. A slide presentation provided the Council with a visual of the two
alternatives.
Councilmember Goulet commented he was not clear what they were being asked to do
regarding these two processes. He asked why they were doing it two different ways if
the goal was to minimize unexpected surprises and cost. Mr. Reedy explained that the
process was new and staff felt it might be helpful to explain the terms. Councilmember
Goulet reiterated he still did not understand. He asked if the goal was for them to
decide if they should utilize the former process rather than the latter. Mr. Reedy noted
that both were useful, and the decisions to use one versus the other of these processes
were technical. Staff was only providing background on the differences so that council
could have an opportunity to have an explanation of the differences.
Councilmember Clark agreed with Councilmember Goulet. She indicated she still was
not clear on the differences between design build and construction manager at risk
because of the subtle differences. Mr. Reedy explained that the design build process
was selected when they hire a team with a contractor taking the lead. The lead takes
the budget and works with an architect to design a project to that budget. The
construction manager at risk process also has a budget. They hire a designer to scope
the project and hire a construction manager at risk to work continuously estimating the
design process, therefore, at the end, they know exactly what it will cost and verify that
they stayed within the budget. The distinction was that when using design, bid, build
process commonly used by the city for many years, the price was not always current.
When using a construction manager at risk, they were continuously estimating the
design process. He clarified that in the design build process, the price is set when they
first present their guarantee maximum price. When utilizing the construction manager
at risk process, the price is determined at the end of the design process, making it more
reliable.
Mr. Craig Tindall, City Attorney, commented that both procedures have a lot of subtle
differences; however, attain the same result with different advantages. He said some
projects were not suited for design build when many others were.
Councilmember Lieberman commented that sometimes the design build was quicker
because they did not have to wait for the complete architectural set of drawing to be
presented before the contract is granted. Mr. Reedy agreed, however, stated it could
also be done for the construction manager at risk process.
Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Reedy if Council really needed to understand this procedure.
Mr. Reedy explained Council did not fully need to understand the concept; however, he
wanted to make certain they knew about this new process.
Mr. Larry Broyles, City Engineer, explained the selection process used to hire the
architects and designers. On August 26, 2008, the Council approved the design-build
contract with D.L. Withers Construction LC for the design and construction of the new
Glendale City Courthouse. He added today, they were asking Council for guidance on
concepts for the new Courthouse. Mr. Broyles introduced Mr. John Dick with Dick and
Fritsche Design group.
Mr. Dick stated his firm was very pleased to be working with D.L. Withers on this design
build project. He provided a power point presentation. He presented two options;
Option A is a rotunda entry with tan brick and metal accents. He provided a second
slide with the same option, but with a deeper color brick. He stated it was determined
brick was a wonderful material which can be used. It has a strong connection to the
City of Glendale and it was low maintenance. Option B is a blending of a contemporary
design with the concept of the early American courthouse. He said it had a glass atrium
entry; however, the dominant visual element is the portico supported by columns.
Vice Mayor Martinez asked if the whole building would be brick. Mr. Dick explained the
parking area walls will be a stucco type finish; however, will be painted to match the
brick. Vice Mayor Martinez asked if both entries would have glass. Mr. Dick replied,
yes. He added that the entry will be functional and highly secure. Vice Mayor Martinez
asked if there were any raised steps. Mr. Dick stated he was correct and added they
also had easy access ramps.
Mayor Scruggs inquired as to the closeness of the neighborhoods to the south of the
building. Councilmember Lieberman commented there was a small shopping center
and the Blue Horizon mobile home village. Mr. Dick indicated there was substantial
distance behind the back of the Courthouse, as well as parking, buildings and an
access road way.
Mayor Scruggs commented she was a bit unsettled with the architecture only finishing
three sides. Mr. Dick explained that the original design was brick on all four sides. He
said the option was offered to the city as a cost savings. Mayor Scruggs asked if it can
be changed. Mr. Dick stated it could. He said the area was not highly visible to the
public. Mayor Scruggs reiterated she was still uncomfortable having one side finished
by stucco because they believe no one will notice it.
Councilmember Frate asked if maintenance on the upper part in Option B would have
to be replaced in the future. Mr. Dick stated the panels were pre-formed and fairly well
protected. Councilmember Frate asked if the two options cost the same. Mr. Dick
responded they were both cost neutral. Councilmember Frate stated he preferred
Option A because it looked more like a Courthouse building.
15
Mayor Scruggs indicated that she felt Option B would make it easier to have compatible
development in and around Glendale Avenue rather than placing something that looked
territorial.
Councilmember Clark agreed with Mayor Scruggs on choosing concept B. She asked if
there was a cost difference if they were to use historic looking red brick instead of the
lighter brick. Mr. Dick stated there was not. Councilmember Clark explained that this
appeared closer to the Civic Center look; however, this building will be closer to the
Sugar Beet Factory, which is red brick. She voiced her concerns on the glass in the
rotunda and the problems it might involve with keeping the building cool. Mr. Dick
explained that the atrium faced north and would not receive the full sun. In addition,
Option A has a shading element which extends out about ten feet and casts a shadow
on the glass. He added that in Option B, there was also a slight overhang. He noted in
either of the options, there would be some shading of the glass on the west side. He
explained that in many Courthouses, the glass near the entry is to promote a sense of
openness to the public. The glass atrium also gives the building an opportunity to not
go completely dark in the evenings. He added he appreciated her concern; however,
the system will be designed to handle the sun/heat issue.
Councilmember Clark commented she still believes it will increase the O&M cost unless
they find glass which reduces the heat. She said another one of her concerns was
public safety and asked if the glass was bullet proof. Mr. Dick stated the intent right
now was not to have it bullet proof; however, there was bullet proof glass around the
security area and arriving into the Courthouse. Councilmember Clark suggested using
bullet proof glass throughout the atrium because of the liability and the public safety
issues that have occurred throughout the country. She reiterated she liked Option B
because it made a superior statement and a greater presence.
Councilmember Lieberman commented he did not see glass as a major issue. He
noted that comparing it to the Sandra Day O'Conner Courthouse was not a fair
comparison because most of those exterior walls are made out of glass, not just the
rotunda atrium.
Councilmember Goulet asked for information for the viewing public. He asked what the
square footage was. Mr. Dick stated it was 93,000 square feet. Councilmember Goulet
stated he liked Option B, but would like some red color to tie it into the downtown area,
which has a lot of the red brick aspect. Mr. Dick noted this building was designed for
expansion in the future to the west and some to the east as the city grows.
Councilmember Goulet inquired as to the signage. Mr. Dick indicated the signage in
front of the building.
Councilmember Knaack indicated she also liked Option B. She stated it was very
streamline looking. She discussed not using too much landscaping that would block the
view of the building. She asked how large the rotunda area was. Mr. Dick responded it
was 3,000 square feet. He added in Option B, the upper two floors were solid brick and
16
in Option A, all three levels were solid brick. Councilmember Knaack noted she liked
the color as is because it set it apart and really makes a statement.
Vice Mayor Martinez stated he also liked Option B. He noted this building will give the
Glendale Corridor a huge boost. He added the rotunda was very distinctive in design.
He made a comment in regards to the landscaping around the building and the need for
shade.
Mayor Scruggs surmised that most Council members supported Option B. She
indicated the two discussion points were the color of the brick and the four sided
architecture verses three sides. Vice Mayor Martinez, Councilmember Clark and Frate
supported four sided architecture and red brick. Mayor Scruggs, Councilmember
Goulet, Councilmember Knaack supported four sided and tan color.
Mayor Scruggs asked for information on the cost of including brick on four sides, as well
as the elevation which shows the public's view of the backside of the building and the
immediate surroundings. Mr. Dick stated he will be happy to include that information at
the next meeting.
Mr. Reedy and Mr. Broyles presented an overview of the design selection process for
the West Branch Library. On January 8, 2008, the Council approved professional
services agreements for architectural and interior design services and Construction-
Manager-at-Risk construction management services for the West Branch Library. Staff
is seeking guidance from the Council on the design concepts for the West Branch
Library. Mr. Broyles introduced Mr. Dwight C. Todd with DWL Architects.
Mr. Todd explained the design process and provided a slide presentation on the
building. He provided details on two concepts.
Vice Mayor Martinez asked of the differences between the two roof concepts. Mr. Todd
stated that the white roof was a flexible product guaranteed for about 20 years because
of the climate. He noted the other product can be repainted and would probably last
about 30 years.
Councilmember Goulet asked what the height of the entrance was. Mr. Todd stated it
was approximately 28 feet. Councilmember Goulet asked if they had factored in the
strong winds that may occur. Mr. Todd explained they had, because they have found it
to be a big problem. Councilmember Goulet commented he liked Option two. Mr. Todd
indicated they still would need to see the final price. Councilmember Lieberman asked
what the difference in price was for Option two. Mr. Todd responded that the current
estimate was a $300,000 difference.
Councilmember Frate asked if there was a difference in energy savings on either one.
Mr. Todd stated there had not been any calculations on the difference between the two;
however, the white membrane roofs are very effective in reflecting heat.
17
Councilmember Clark stated her preference was for the metal roof. She also voiced
her concerns on having so much glass and suggested only using it half way. Mr. Todd
explained the effect the glass area brings. He noted the windows all face north with
very minimal direct light coming in. He added there were many new glass products that
alleviated the sun's effect.
Vice Mayor Martinez commented he liked the glass. He added it brings a wonderful
element to the building.
Councilmember Lieberman indicated the Foothills Library also has a lot of glass and it
has not created any problems.
Mayor Scruggs surmised there was support for the design. The only issue remaining
was to decide on a copper metal roof or a white membrane roof. Councilmember
Goulet, Knaack and Clark supported the metal roof. Vice Mayor Martinez and
Councilmember Frate support the white membrane.
Councilmember Frate asked Mr. Todd to comment. Mr. Todd indicated that the original
roof was copper; however, because of the larger roof, he recommends the white
membrane. Mr. Reedy commented they did not have a guaranteed maximum price
established and will be happy to bring both prices so Council can make an informed
decision.
Mayor Scruggs commented on the white roof looking out of place. She stated the
copper metal looked much nicer; however, she was sensitive to the energy issue. Mr.
Todd said he will come back with more information and images that show different
angles. Mayor Scruggs commented on the Foothills Library possibly having some
issues with patrons having some discomfort in seating areas close to the glass area
when the sun is at its worst.
Mr. Todd explained how the windows did not face the sun. He stated only two months
out of the year will there be direct sunlight into the windows. He noted most of the
windows would only get a small amount of light in the evening. Councilmember Clark
commented on most patrons preferring shade over sitting next to windows. She said
she was thinking of the patron's comfort.
Councilmember Knaack commented that since the Foothills Library was built, glass has
come a long way. Mr. Reedy stated this design was different from the other libraries in
that the glass patterns turn away from the sun. Mayor Scruggs asked for additional
information at the next meeting.
3. ESTIMATED OPERATING, MAINTENANCE, AND SERVICE NEEDS FOR THE
WEST BRANCH LIBRARY AND THE NEW COURTHOUSE
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Horatio Skeete, Deputy City Manager, and
Sherry M. Schurhammer, Management & Budget Director
18
This is a request for the City Council to review the estimated operating and
maintenance costs for two new capital facilities, the west branch library and new
courthouse.
The presentation of the estimated operating and maintenance costs for the west branch
library and the new courthouse is consistent with the Council's goal of ensuring the
city's financial stability.
At the April 10, 2007 budget workshop, October 16, 2007, budget workshop, and the
November 2007 Council Retreat, the Council requested information about projected
new expenses such as operating and maintenance costs for capital projects scheduled
to come on line in upcoming fiscal years. Specifically, the Council asked for workshop
discussions about the estimated operating impact of upcoming large-scale capital
projects before construction commences.
On January 8, 2008, the Council approved a professional services agreement with
DWL Architects & Planners for the design of the west branch library and a professional
services agreement with RNL Design for the interior design of the west branch library.
On August 26, 2008, the Council approved the award of a design-build contract to D.L.
Withers for the design and construction of the new municipal courthouse to be located
at 4705 West Glendale Avenue.
On May 13, 2008, the Council approved a demolition contract with Ground Level Co., to
demolish the existing building and on-site improvements on the property for the new
municipal courthouse.
On February 26, 2008, the Council approved a professional services agreement with
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc (HOK) for consulting services to develop the court
programming and design-build bridging documents.
Preliminary information about the estimated operating costs for the 2 new capital
facilities was presented to the Council at the December 18, 2007 Workshop, as part of
the Fiscal Year 2007-08 first quarter general fund status report on revenues and
expenditures.
The west branch library is expected to have additional ongoing costs of an estimated
$2.5 million beginning with Fiscal Year 2010-11. The estimated ongoing costs are
associated with additional staffing consistent with the Foothills branch library and
operating costs for a new building such as electricity, water, custodial services, building
maintenance, etc.
The additional staffing associated with the west branch library is estimated to total 24
FTEs.
19
The new courthouse is expected to have additional ongoing costs of an estimated $3.8
million beginning with Fiscal Year 2010-11 and about $245,000 in one-time costs
associated with the purchase of vehicles and related equipment. The estimated
ongoing costs are associated with additional staffing and operating costs for a new
building such as electricity, water, custodial services, building maintenance, etc.
The additional staffing associated with the new courthouse is estimated to total 39
FTEs,
The timing of the actual opening of the west branch library and the new courthouse will
be determined as the construction schedules for both facilities are finalized once the
designs for both facilities are completed.
Staff is seeking guidance from the Council on the estimated operating and maintenance
costs for two new capital facilities, the west branch library and the new courthouse.
Mr. Horatio Skeete, Deputy City Manager, and Ms. Sherry M. Schurhammer,
Management & Budget Director, presented this item.
Mr. Ed Beasley stated the discussion presented today was only an estimate based on
current information. He noted it may change as they get closer to the time of
completion. He said they will have the opportunity to hear from Judge Elizabeth Finn
and Ms. Sue Komernicky, Library Director.
Ms. Komernicky said Council approved, on January 8, 2008, a professional services
agreement with DWL Architects & Planners for the design of the west branch library
and a professional services agreement with RNL Design for the interior design of the
west branch library to be located at 83`d Avenue and Bethany Home Road. She
provided an overview of the service areas for the three existing libraries in Glendale as
well as the service area for the west branch library. The west branch library service
population is expected to be approximately 50,000 in the year 2010. The services
provided will be similar to the other libraries and will offer a variety of activities for the
entire family. The west branch library is expected to have additional ongoing costs of an
estimated $2.5 million beginning with Fiscal Year 2010-11. Staff is evaluating staffing
and operational needs as we move toward the budget process.
Judge Finn provided a brief summary on the new courthouse and the needs attributable
to the growing population in and outside of Glendale. She also discussed the
significant judicial demands in court growth and resources. She indicated the current
mandates in DUI cases that must be now processed within a certain amount of time.
She stated that to meet these aggressive time lines, they need additional courtrooms,
judges and staff. She noted the increase in court proceedings were up 28%. She
remarked on how other courts have moved out of the City of Glendale, which indicates
the Glendale court must service those areas.
20
Ms. Schurhammer said the design and construction of the court house is budgeted at
approximately $44.6 million and at about $17 million for the library. She assured
Council that capital funding for both facilities was available and included in the capital
plan.
Mr. Skeete provided information about the estimated operating costs for the two
facilities and when they were scheduled to come on line. He noted that the operating
numbers were based on the current plan for opening the facilities. Given the current
economic situation, he said we anticipate having to make adjustments to this current
plan. He explained that we have two years to plan for the opening of the new facilities
given that actual construction has not started on either facility. He said this time will be
used to review the city's capacity to absorb the estimated operating costs and to
develop implementation options including alternative staffing plans that phase in the
estimated new positions for the facilities. He said an early estimate of revenues for FY
2010-11 shows a $2 million increase in General Fund revenue. He indicated they need
to start planning now to be able to accommodate these two projects as they come on
line in the year 2011.
Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Skeete if the General Fund expenditures for FY 2009-
10 were anticipated to be an additional $8.5 million and the revenue growth to be
nothing. Mr. Skeete stated that at this point, she was correct.
Mayor Scruggs asked what was included in the $8.5 million. Ms. Schurhammer stated
it included many items that were funded on a one-time basis in this fiscal year's budget.
She then provided a list of the items included in the $8.5 million:
o electricity rate increases at $1 million
o vehicle fuel at $500,000 to $1 million
o step increases per the memorandums of understanding with labor at $1.2
million
o merit increases for other employees at $1.8 million
o increases for benefits costs at $1 million
o street maintenance supplies at about $200,000
o building operations and maintenance issues at over $200,000 and
o other miscellaneous operational costs at about $1.5 to $2 million
Mayor Scruggs said these items also had to be funded in 2010 and 2011.
Mr. Skeete said these were the types of decisions they will be making throughout the
budget process. As part of the budget process, there will be recommendations
regarding whether the city can afford to add all of these expenditures in a particular
fiscal year or continue to fund them on a one-time basis. He said the city will possibly
see enough growth in revenue to be able to absorb them.
Mayor Scruggs said this was an element Council had not seen before. She said staff is
now stating there might not be any revenue growth for the next two years. She noted
when Councilmember Clark expressed her concerns about there not being enough
money for the library to be funded along with the courthouse, there was never any
mention of not having any revenue growth. She said the information today shows no
additional revenue is projected for FY 2010. Consequently, there was no budget
process.
21
Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Skeete to clarify. Mr. Skeete said these are the
expenses that are anticipated to need full funding. He said these were increases in
expenses that are anticipated over the next two years based on the information
available today. Mayor Scruggs commented on the running list of expenditures they
had asked for in advance to avoid surprises. She added that most of these
expenditures were already known by staff.
Mr. Beasley said the purpose of this information is to provide the estimated costs based
on current information. He added there were still options to deal with some of the $8.5
million in additional expenses expected for FY 2009-10. He said Council requested that
it be provided the overall picture of what the city might be looking at before starting the
budget process and making hard decisions. He noted this was the overall big picture
without making any cuts or adjustments. He commented it was better to see this type
of information prior to the budget process, recognizing there might be some hard
decisions to be made. He added he did not want people concerned there was no
budget process. He explained there was a lot of work that happens before the budget
workshops occur in the spring. Mayor Scruggs explained that the $8.5 million can
easily double because they were dealing with funding items in 2010 and 2011. She
reiterated the things listed earlier were things that were critical and could not be
postponed. She added they were not one-time expenses that were going to go away.
Mr. Skeete said he understood Mayor Scruggs' concerns but he believed it was still
early in the process as staff has sufficient time to make adjustments to prepare for the
future. Councilmember Clark understood staff is going to explore strategies and bring
forward to Council recommendations during the budget process.
Ms. Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City Manager, said this was not a unique process. She
said staff does this every year before the formal budget process begins in the spring.
She noted staff brings recommendations and options to Council for consideration
before Council makes the final decisions. Mayor Scruggs asked Ms. Kavanaugh if she
believed most of the $8.5 million were items that were non-negotiable. Ms. Kavanaugh
responded that with all the fluctuations and changes, she could not be sure. Mr.
Beasley reiterated that the purpose is to have a discussion about strategies during the
budget process relating to the issues identified today.
Mayor Scruggs remarked on a previous discussion regarding police and fire salaries.
She said Mr. Beasley explained that they were in the middle of negotiations; therefore,
they were not able to fully discuss that item at the time.
Mayor Scruggs asked Craig Tindall, the City Attorney, if the step increase for those
sworn employees who are currently paid out of the General Fund could be paid out of
the public safety sales tax funds. Mr. Tindall said both portions of the public safety
sales tax are for new positions, not existing positions.
Mayor Scruggs reiterated this was not a complete picture of expenditures that will be
expected in the next couple of years. She remarked it was astounding that staff is
projecting zero revenue growth. Mr. Beasley responded they still do not know with
certainty if that would be the case but they are reasonable estimates based on the
current economic conditions.
22
Mayor Scruggs commented on the library's estimate for 24 new positions and the
court's estimate for 39 new positions. She asked why the new court house's estimated
costs are only 52% higher than the library's when the court house is expected to be
larger. She asked if these numbers were correct. Mr. Skeete said a more detailed
analysis of these numbers will be conducted over the next several months as
implementation and phase-in alternatives are evaluated.
Mayor Scruggs adjourned the meeting after hearing no questions or comments.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m.
23