Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Information - Goldberg - Public HearingRobin Roberts From: Robert Goldberg <roldberg @live.com> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 6:45 PM To: Mike Varipapa; Ellery A. Deaton; Schelly Sustarsic; Thomas Moore; Sandra Massa -Lavitt Cc: Robin Roberts; Steve Myrter, Vikki Beatley, Jill Ingram Subject: Questions for Public Hearing on Budget and CIP Attachments: Budget 17- 18.Questions for Public Hearing.doc; Budget 17- 18.Questions for Public Hearing.doc; Budget 17- 18.Questions for Public Hearing.doc; Budget 17- 18.Questions for Public Hearing I.doc Dear City Council Members and City Staff, After review of the recently revised Proposed Budget for FY 17 -18,1 have compiled the attached listing of questions for the public hearing scheduled for June 26. These are organized into three sections: 1) New questions following review of the recent posted Budget revision, 2) The sub -set of my previous questions which remain unanswered and have potential budgetary impacts of greater than $10,000, and 3) Remaining questions regarding the CIP. Respectfully submitted, Robert Goldberg 6/23/17 Dear City Council Members and City Staff, After review of the recently revised Proposed Budget for FY 17 -18,1 have compiled the following list of questions for the public hearing scheduled for June 26. These are organized into three sections: 1) New questions following review of the revision, 2) The sub -set of my previous questions which remain unanswered and have potential budgetary impacts of greater than $10,000, and 3) Remaining questions regarding the CIP. Respectfully submitted, Robert Goldberg 6/23/17 1) New Questions Post Budget Revision Page 41 GF Transfer Out: The revised page increased the 16-17 Estimated figure for "Transfer Out - Operations" by $15,900. Where did this additional GF money get transferred to? Page 237 Vehicle Replacement Fund: The revised page changed the 16-17 Amended Budget figure for "Capital Outlay— Vehicles" from $343,600 to $434,400, an increase of $89,200. The lower figure was presented to Council and confirmed as adequate for the FY 16 -17 Fleet Replacement on 2/27/17 (Item G). That item did not include a budget amendment. When was a budget amendment adopted to increase the Capital Outlay- Vehicles by $89,100? Page 243 Sewer Capital Fund: The proposed budget shows an interest payment on the three outstanding sewer bonds of $206,400. Page 261 indicates that a principal payment of $334,510 is also required in FY 17 -18. Where is the principal payment of $334,510 budgeted? Page 257 Retirement Obligation Fund: In 2011, the Sewer Fund (not sure if Operations vs Capital) gave the RDA a $1,200,000 loan to settle a lawsuit with the Bay City Partners over an easement to the sewer lines that run down to the 1rt St beach parking lot. The RDA was supposed to pay this money back with interest. Principal payments began in FY 14-15. In FY 15 -16, the principal payment was $238,234 (per page 122 of FY 15 -16 CAFR). However, this "actual' is not recorded on page 257 of the proposed Budget in Account Number 304- 081 -47888 "Principal Sewer." Why is this 15 -16 actual payment not shown on page 157? Why is the RDA/SuccessorAgency making no principal payment to the Sewer Fund in 16 -17? The FY 17 -18 Proposed Budget shows a principal payment on this loan of $242,600 to the Sewer Fund. Why is this payment not shown as revenue to either the Sewer Operations or Capital Fund on page 15? 2) Remainina Previous Questions Regarding the Budget Revenue Summary by Fund Page 20 Charges for Services: 001- 051 -30740 Refuse Services 15 -16 Actual was $1,007,651. This turned out to be $220,000 less than what we expected at this time last year. What was the reason for this large shortfall? Is there a risk that this will reoccur? General Fund: Analysis of Unassigned Fund Balance Page 35 Storm Drain Assigned Funds: This page is showing no listing, no money assigned for Storm Drains. However, per the CAFR, there was $678,036 assigned to Storm Drains as of 6/30/16. Since that time, I am aware of possible expenditures of up to $118,000 to close out the VFD replacement project at the West End Pump Station (WEPS). Additionally, the Council approved spending up to $200,000 on the emergency pump failure there in January. According to the carry-over figures from the proposed CIP (page 246), only $141,000 of this was spent in FY 16-17. Therefore, the drawdown for the Storm Drains assignment should be about $260,000, leaving at least $418,000 currently. Why is there no listing of the Storm Drain assigned funds in the listing of these on page 35? City Manager "Contract Professional Services" is budgeted at $35,000. $10,000 of this is for Long Beach Transit (Routes 131/171). Please provide a listing and cost itemization of the additional $25,000 in professional service contracts that will he needed in FY 17 -18. Finance -Non Departmental Page 68: The explanation for "Contract Professional" has two new contracts —Gov Invest and Transparency Management. What are these and how much do they cost? Pace 69: The Council was told on 10/24/16 that our retiree medical costs are currently $449,700 /year. This figure was adopted for the FY 16 -17 budget. However, the expenditure for FY 16-17 is now estimated at $52,000 higher at $502,000. Did we pay $52,000 more than our ARC (Annual Required Contribution)? 'Intergovernmental' is being Increased by $45,000. Only about $8000 of this would be due to the 5% increase in the LB Animal Services contract. Is the remaining increase related to the "Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) ?" (See the account note on page 68.) If so, what commitment have we made to LAFCO? City Manager — Information Systems Page 71: Actual expenditures for "Office and Technology Resources' for the past several years have averaged about $72,000 (FY 12/13 $64,955, FY 13/14 $116,670, FY 14/15 $86,451, FY 15/16 $19,047). Please explain why we are budgeting more than twice this amount for 17/18? 004 Special Projects Page 73: $100,000 was transferred into this account in late FY 15 -16 and earmarked for one- time $1000 /employee signing bonuses. $51,000 was paid out in FY 16 -17. Why is the expenditure of these bonuses not shown here? If the bonuses were paid from operating departmental funds, where is the transfer of funds from 004 into these respective departmental funds shown? 005 Waste Management Act Page 74: The description for "Equipment and Materials" includes non - specific references to "outreach, education, and training." Please explain what is intended here? What are the legal constraints on the use of this money? Police — Support Services Page 88: The proposed funding for "Equipment and Materials" at $74,000 is up $20,000 from the actual for 15 -16 and the expected for 16-17. Why is this figure so high? Community Development — Planning Page 126: The explanation for Contract Professional lists "Local Coastal Planning Consultant" However, this project is not being funded from the General Fund, but rather from Tidelands, Sewer, and Water, and a CCC grant. Therefore, it should not be listed here. Does the proposed budget for Contract Professional on page 127 include money for the LCP consultant? Page 127: The 16 -17 Estimated for Vacation Payout and Sick Payout are $5100 and $1300, respectively. However, Mr. Basham alone received $22,487 and $13,209, respectively, in May. Why is the General Fund portion (i.e., 80 %) of these payouts not included in these accounts? There is $105,000 proposed for Contract Professional. $60,000 of this is for Civic Stone's administration of the LW bathroom remodels (CDBG). What services /contracts is the other $55,000 for? Public Works —Storm Drains The 17 -18 Proposed Budget for Contract Professional is $42,000 higher than last year. What new contracts are anticipated? Public Works — Building Maintenance Page 161: The Proposed Budget for Contract Professional Services has been increased by $56,000 from the 16 -17 Amended Budget. What new contracts are anticipated? Public Works — Traffic Impact Fund 049 Page 177: The 16 -17 Estimated indicates that $187,700 was spent on the Parking Management Program project. I am aware of billings from JR Parking Consultants for services in July and August for about $30,000. However, this contract was terminated in August. Please provide an accounting for the expenditure of the remaining $157,700, or so. Community Services — Recreation Admin Page 186: The explanation for Contract Professional Services includes just two contracts — Senior meals and parking at the North Community Center. These cost $30,000 and about $10,000 per year, respectively. However, $71,300 is budgeted on page 187. What contracts make up the additional $31,000? Marine Safety— Tidelands Beach 034 Page 201: The Proposed Budget for Medical Insurance is $91,400 which is $20,000 more than an estimated cost for 16 -17. Why do we anticipate such a large increase in Medical Insurance costs? There is a new appropriation of $45,000 for Contract Professional with an explanation on page 200 of "Recreation programs at the beach, water watcher tag." What are these beach programs and how much revenue will they generate? Public Works— Beach Maintenance Page 204: The explanation for Contract Professional now lists "sand nourishment lobbying" which it didn't last year. Who have we hired and for how much? Finance — 209 CFD Pacific Gateway Page 229: The Fund Balance for 17/18 projects a year -end (6/30/18) figure of just over $63,000. If this is correct, then this money should be available to contribute more for project ST 1509. On 5/8/17, the Council authorized the use of $119,000 in M2 money to subsidize this project due to a higher than expected bid (total project cost about $250,000). Is there any reason why the "Transfer out "for ST 1509 cannot be increased from $111,000 to $185,000 to reduce the hit to our M2 funds? Public Works— Water Operations Page 233: The 15 -16 Actual shows a credit of $87,554 from CalPERS. Is this correct? If so, how did this happen? The revised Fund Balance Analysis gives an estimated Balance of $2,135,267 as of 6/30/17. How much of this is in cash or bonds? Public Works— Water Capital Fund Page 235: The Fund Balance Analysis gives an estimated Balance of $21,550,434 as of 6/30/17. How much of this is in cash or bonds? Public Works — Vehicle Replacement Fund Page 237: The proposed spending for FY 17 -18 is $260,000. However, at the CIP workshop, a figure of $130,000 was presented. Which is correct? Public Works — Sewer Operations Page 241: The Proposed Budget for Contract Professional goes from an estimated $90,000 in 16- 17 to $203,800 for 17 -I8. What new contracts are causing this? Public Works —Sewer Capital Fund Page 243: The Fund Balance Analysis gives an estimated Balance of $23,793,136 as of 6/30/17. How much of this is in cash or bonds? 3) Remaining Previous CIP Questions: FY 16 -17 CIP Accomplishments and Project Status Page 5: These listings of ongoing projects omit BG -0904, New Swimming Pool. However, the Swimming Pool assigned balance (page 35, Proposed Budget) dropped by $54,500 in FY 16 -17, and we have a contract with Westbert & White Inc. from FY 13 -14 to do site planning. Was the $54,500 paid to Westbert & White? Buildings and Facilities Page24: Countywide 800 MHz Agreement. When this agreement was presented to Council on 3/23/15, the payment for FY 17 -18 was scheduled to be $155,633. Why has this amount increased to $180,000? Page26: Council Chambers AN Upgrade. The write -up states that $30,000 is just for design. Are there any cost estimates for the construction and integration phases of the project? Page28: Police Station Electric Vehicle Chargers Would employees be charged for electricity? Would there be any net cost recovery for the capital investment costs? Streets and Transportation Page 52: Westminster Ave Median Improvements. Theoretically, this project should be paid for by the Boeing Gateway Pacific CFD Fund. However, on 5/8/17, the Council authorized the use of $119,000 in M2 money to subsidize this project due to a higher than expected bid. However, the 17/18 year -end Fund Balance for the CFD is now projected to be just over $63,000. Is there any reason why the "Transfer out "for ST 1509 cannot be increased by $63,000 from $122,000 to $185,000 to reduce the hit to our M2 funds? Page 80: Westminster Ave Water Main Replacement. During the recent discussion on the Westminster Ave repaving project, staff indicated that this main would not be replaced simultaneously with the road rehab project. However, the main was said to be in fair condition and that work could be put off for several years. Additionally, it was stated that the pipe's capacity was adequate enough to allow a trenchless re -pipe (recoating). Given that this project would not involve excavation, would the estimated cost still be $2.9 million? Given the current road project and the fair condition of the pipe, shouldn't this project be programmed for some time after FY 17 -18?