Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental - Questions from Robert Goldberg /'y &jide,....tal Budget Questions & Comments: Workshop 5/29/19 Position Allocation Plan (PAP) Page 7, Police: The PAP shows 3.95 Police Aides (Part-time) for parking enforcement. This is an increase of 2.32 from FY 18-19. The part-time salary cost on this increase will range from $63,842 (Step 1) to $77,595 (Step 5). How many parking tickets will the additional Police Aides have to write for us to break even? Is the plan still to deploy all or part of this new staff after 5 or 6 p.m.?If so, what enforcement areas will they focus on? Page 7, Community Development: The Director of Community Development title still has "(Unfunded)" adjacent to it. Is this correct? Page 8, Public Works: The PAP shows a full-time Mechanic (1.0). This is a change from a 0.74 part- time Mechanic in FY 18-19. Currently, there is no position of full-time Mechanic in the City's pay structure. The current hourly pay range for part-time Mechanic is $22.09-$26.85. The lowest paid full-time classifications (Grade 8: Maintenance Worker, Community Services Officer) have a pay range that is 9% higher at $24.09-29.28 per hour. Is staff proposing to add Mechanic to the full-time classifications at Grade 8, or would a lower Grade be created? Page 151, Fleet Maintenance, shows the expected FY 18-19 cost of our current part-time (0.74) Mechanic at $23,100 with another$300 for PARS retirement. With the conversion to full-time, Total Personnel Services will increase by over $40,000 to $160,000. What would be the FY 19-120 budget for Total Personnel Services for General Fund Vehicle Maintenance if we stayed at 0.74 part-time Mechanic? The PAP indicates 40% of the new position would be paid for by the Sewer and Water Funds. What is the cost impact, including employee benefits, of this proposal to the Sewer and Water Funds? The descriptive information for Fleet Maintenance on page 149 indicates that we currently already have one full-time mechanic with two if the request above is approved. Is the current full-time "mechanic"our Fleet Maintenance Program Manager? The PAP shows 4.46 Water Operators. This is a change from a 4.00 in FY 18-19. The proposed fractional number of positions implies the use of one or more part-time employees. However, Water Operators are not listed on our part-time pay structure. Is staff going to propose creating a part-time classification for Water Operator?If so, what will be the pay range? 1 Operating Transfers Page 16: The middle of the page shows a transfer of$64,700 from the General Fund to the Street Lighting District. However, at the 4/22/19 Council meeting, staff indicated (Item J) that the transfer for FY 19-20 would be only $47,998 Why is the proposed transfer amount almost$17,000 higher? Revenue Summary By Fund Page 20, Charges for Services: "Inmate Fee from Other Agencies" (001-024-30841) is only $3000, essentially no change from last year. However, in March, we signed an agreement to house up to 18 inmates/day with the US Marshals Service. Why is there no anticipated revenue from this agreement shown in this account? Page 21, Parking Citations (not including beach lots): Staff is expecting a $350,000 increase in revenue for FY 19-20 vs the expected for FY 18-19. However, FY 18-19 estimated revenue already reflects the full impact of new credit card meters in the Main St lots and the use of LPR for enforcement for at least six months (I think). The only things that will change in FY 19-20 is the 150 ft movement rule for commercial areas and the proposed hiring of 2+ parking enforcement officers. What is the likelihood that these two improvements for FY 19-20 will increase parking citation revenue by 37%? Page 23, Tidelands: The estimated insurance reimbursement for 18-19 is $5,955,500. The original estimated reimbursement for the pier fire was $4.7 million. However, the financial update presented on 4/22/19 indicated that the reimbursement amount will probably end up being around $4.5 million. Why is the City budgeting for reimbursement revenue that is likely to be$1.4 million larger than what we are likely to receive? City Manager Page 49: "Contract Professional Services" is budgeted at $40,000 which is a $15,000 increase in the budgeted authorization from last year. The account explanation on page 48 only lists "Communication and consultant services." Please provide a listing and cost itemization for the proposed$40,000 in professional service contracts. City Manager— Human Resources Page 49: "Contract Professional Services" is budgeted at $87,000 which is a $37,000 increase in the budgeted authorization from last year. The account explanation on page 54 lists the same contractors as last year. Please explain why the$37,000 increase in professional service contracts. 2 Finance-Non Departmental Page 68: The listing of Contract Professionals shows a new contractor—Clear Source. What services does Clear Source provide and what are their fees? Page 69: There is $20,000 budgeted for PERS Retirement. However, there are no employees on this "Non-Departmental" page. Please explain the nature and reason for this budget item. City Manager-Information Systems Page 70-71: After a 28% ($145,430) budget increase in FY 18-19, staff is proposing another 22% ($146,000) increase for FY 19-20. Besides adding Office 365, it is not clear to this layperson why our IT costs are skyrocketing. Please provide an itemized cost table or equivalent to show the source and necessity of the proposed$146,000 increase. Special Projects Page 73: In FY 18-19, there was a transfer to the General Fund of$28,000 to cover operational expenses related the City Clerk's Office Archival Plan and Public Works' GIS system. Why is this not being repeated in FY 19-20? SB Cable Page 77: In FY 18-19, there was a transfer to the General Fund of$10,000 to cover operational expenses for video streaming of meetings. Why is this not being repeated in FY 19-20? Police—Field Services Pages 84-85: The proposed budget for Trainings and Meetings was more than doubled to $60,000 from FY 18-19 with the "actual" from FY 17-18 at just under $37,000. Can staff provide some insight as to the necessity to substantially increase the training budget? How many additional officer days "out-of-the-field"are anticipated if the increased training budget is approved? 3 Police— Parking Enforcement Pages 92-93: "Contract Professional Services" is budgeted at $126,100 which is a $44,400 increase from the budgeted authorization from last year. The account explanation on page 92 lists "Dixon" as a new contractor for FY 19-20. Is staff planning on seeking a new contract with Dixon Resources (parking consultant used two years ago)? If not, please explain how the additional$44,000 will be spent. See additional questions above in section on Position Allocation Plan regarding the hiring of additional Police Aides for parking enforcement. Community Development— Planning Pages 126-127: "Contract Professional Services" is budgeted at $165,000 which is an $80,000 increase from the budgeted authorization from last year. The account explanation on page 127 lists "Housing Element consultant" and "CEQA review" as new contractors for FY 19-20. Our current Housing Element runs through October 2021, and the SCAG will not be adopting new local housing quotas (Regional Housing Needs Assessments) until October 2020 (FY 20-21). Why does staff want to engage a Housing Element consultant so far ahead of time? What project does staff anticipate will require our hiring of a consultant for CEQA review? See additional question above in section on Position Allocation Plan regarding the position of Community Development Director. Public Works—Street Maintenance Page 147: Street sweeping is going up almost $52,000 (55%). Please explain the basis for this increase. Contract Professional Services are going up $200,000 (36%). The account explanation on page 146 indicates a consultant for "Pavement Management Plan" has been added. That cost us about $21,000 in 2018. The Council was told last January that the new tree-trimming contract awarded last January will increase FY 19-20 costs by $50,000. Thus, an approximate increase of$75,000 was expected. Please explain the basis for additional$125,000 increase. 4 Public Works—Vehicle Maintenance See questions above in section on Position Allocation Plan regarding promotion of part-time mechanic. Community Services: Sr. Services Page 114: The budget was increased by$41,000. What transportation services are being added? Tidelands Beach: Marine Safety Page 207, Aquatics: The proposed budget for Equipment/Materials is $29,100, more than double the actual amount for FY 17-18 and estimate for FY 18-19. However, the account explanation on page 206 reads the same as in last year's budget. Please provide further details regarding increased proposed expenditure? Public Works: Beach Maintenance Page 169: The proposed budget for Contract Prof Services is $453,500. This account should include the biannual sand backpass every other year. FY 19-20 is a backpass year, but only $31,000 more is budgeted than was in FY 18-19. Does the$453,500 include an estimated backpass surcharge for FY 19-20? What is the status of our current bid solicitation for berm/backpass services? Proprietary Funds Public Works: Vehicle Replacement Fund Page 223: Capital Outlay-Vehicles shows an FY 17-18 Actual of only $6,505. However, the Council approved $36,292 on 9/11/17 for the purchase of a police patrol car, and another$102,913 on 3/26/18 for the purchase of new parking enforcement vehicles. Why aren't these purchases included in FY 17-18 Capital Outlay-Vehicles? 5 Allocation of Reserves/Policy Page 259: The table on this page shows the allocation of reserves supposedly based on the Reserve Policy adopted by Council in July 2018. As presented to Council at that meeting, considerable emphasis was given to having reserves be allocated in a "waterfall" fashion to a series of six sequential "cascading" pools of money. While the table correctly shows the first pool as "General Fund Unassigned," the July 2018 policy discussion indicated that funding the "Disaster/Hazard Mitigation" pool would be the second priority. However, this is shown as the third pool on page 259. Why are the reserve "pools"on page 259 not listed in funding priority? It also appears from the table on page 259 that staff has not allocated the reserves in the expected "waterfall" fashion to the extent reasonably possible. This is illustrated below: Allocation of Reserves Proposed Budget Per Reserve Policy Reserve Policy (In Priority Order) Year-End Funding Priority# Reserve Policy Target 20%of GF operating 1) General Fund Unassigned $1,020,900 $6,888,100 $6,888,100 expenditures* 10%of GF operating 2) Disaster/Hazard Mitigation $1,750,000 $3,358,835 $3,444,050 expenditures 3 months'worth of GF 3) General Fiscal Policy $7,475,991 $0 $8,610,125 operating expenditures 4) Vehicle Replacement $321,857 $321,857 Maintain$500,000 $500,000 5) Capital Improvement^ $44 $0 25%of SCyIPa r* total GF $4,784,575 25%of 5-year total 6) Tidelands Improvement $1,850,479 $1,850,479 $233,250 Tidelands CIP^^ $12,419,271 $12,419,271 $24,460,100 #To the extent reasonable feasible *GF Operating Expenses = $34,440,500 **5-year total General Fund CIP cost = $19,138,400 ^Staff informed the Council that the $4.7 million assigneded for the Swimming Pool would not "count" towards a Capital Improvement Reserve. This is apparently is also the case for the $117,167 assigned for street improvement. ^^5-year total General Fund CIP cost = $933,000 Why does the budget not allocate reserves per the funding priority presented in July 2018? 6