Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0016_1_Operating Budget FY 2016-17 - SR REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Grant Yates, City Manager Prepared by: Jason Simpson, Director of Administrative Services Date: May 31, 2016 Subject: Adoption of the FY 2016-17 Annual Operating Budget Recommendations: That the City Council: 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FY 2016-17 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND ESTABLISHING THE CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN THE APPROPRIATIONS 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS 3. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FY 2016-17 AND SELECTING THE POPULATION AND INFLATION FACTOR ACCORDINGLY Adoption of the FY 2016-17 Annual Operating Budget May 31, 2016 Page 2 Background Attached for your review is the Proposed FY 2016-17 Annual Operating Budget. The budget includes revenue projections and expenditure requests for the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Capital Project Funds and Agency Funds. Also presented with this report is the fiscal year 2016-17 proposed authorized position schedule and the FY 2015-16 accomplishments, major goals for FY 2016-17 and performance measures related to each department. The budget subcommittee has met and reviewed and discussed the FY2016-17 Annual Operating Budget On May 31, 2016, the City Council held a workshop to review and discuss the proposed operating budgets and the City’s Capital Improvement Plan. Any recommended changes have not yet been incorporated into this budget, but can be made my motion of the City Council (this evening) when approving the Resolution to adopt the FY2016-17 Annual Operating Budget. Discussion Current Condition - State of California – May 2016 Revision Budget In May 2016, the Governor presented his May Budget Revision to the proposed budget released in January of this year. Significant details of the May Revision are as follows: The Challenge of Fiscal Balance The May Revision revenue forecast has been reduced by $1.9 billion, reflecting poor April income tax receipts and more sluggish sales tax receipts than expected, while Proposition 2's required contributions have been reduced by a combined $1.6 billion. Even if the voters pass an extension of taxes, the longer-term budget outlook would be barely balanced. Until the voters decide in November whether temporary taxes should be extended, the May Revision reflects the principle that no significant new ongoing spending commitments should be made. Investing in Education Under the May Revision, the minimum guarantee of funding for K-14 schools is expected to grow to $71.9 billion in 2016-17, an increase of $24.6 billion over the last five years (52 percent). For K-12 schools, funding levels will increase by over $3,600 per student in 2016- 17 compared to 2011-12 levels. This reinvestment provides the opportunity to correct historical inequities in school district funding with continued implementation of the Local Control Funding Formula. The May Revision provides $2.9 billion in new funding, bringing the formula's implementation to nearly 96 percent complete. The Budget also invests in the state's higher education system to maintain the quality and affordability of one of California's greatest strengths. The Budget keeps tuition at 2011-12 levels and commits $25 million in new one-time funding for the California State University to reduce the time it takes a student to successfully complete a degree. Reducing Housing Costs Approximately 1.5 million low-income California households pay more than half their income in rent, straining their ability to pay for other essential household expenses. In addition, the state has a disproportionately high share of the nation's homeless and chronically homeless populations. The May Revision reflects $3.2 billion in state and Adoption of the FY 2016-17 Annual Operating Budget May 31, 2016 Page 3 federal funding and award authority for various affordable housing and homelessness programs. This amount includes recently created programs that pay for affordable housing in sustainable communities and housing for veterans. Local land use permitting and review processes have lengthened the approval process and increased production costs. The May Revision proposes additional legislation requiring ministerial "by right" land use entitlements for multifamily infill housing developments that include affordable housing. This would help constrain development costs, improve the pace of housing production and encourage an increase in housing supply. The May Revision also endorses a $2 billion bond from a portion of future Proposition 63 mental health revenues, which would enable the Department of Housing and Community Development to develop and administer homelessness and affordable housing programs with a particular focus on chronic homelessness. The May Revision proposes first-year funding of $267 million from the bond proceeds. Counteracting Poverty The state has taken historic steps in recent years to assist the state's neediest residents. The implementation of health care reform has increased coverage under Medi-Cal to an additional 6 million Californians in just four years. The Local Control Funding Formula is concentrating the greatest school funding to students with the greatest need. The state guaranteed that 6.5 million workers are eligible for paid sick leave. The 2015 Budget Act created California's first-ever earned income tax credit to help the poorest working families and encourage more families to claim the existing federal credit. The January Budget proposed the first state cost-of-living increase for Supplemental Security Income/State Supplementary Payment (SSI/SSP) recipients since 2005. In April, the Governor signed legislation that will raise the minimum wage for all workers to $15 per hour as soon as 2023. Accounting for the full implementation costs, the General Fund has incurred new obligations in the effort to counteract the effects of poverty totaling more than $19 billion (about $10.7 billion of which will be paid for through Proposition 98 funds). Strengthening Infrastructure The May Revision continues to reflect the Governor's transportation package that would provide $36 billion over the next decade to improve the maintenance of highways and roads, expand public transit and improve critical trade routes. The increased funding would be coupled with Caltrans efficiencies, streamlined project delivery and accountability measures. The budget also includes $737 million ($500 million General Fund) for critical deferred maintenance at levees, state parks, universities, community colleges, prisons, state hospitals and other state facilities. Fighting Climate Change The May Revision supports California's ambitious policies to advance clean energy with a $3.1 billion cap-and-trade expenditure plan that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions through programs that support clean transportation, promote transformational sustainable communities, reduce short-lived climate pollutants and protect natural ecosystems. Over Adoption of the FY 2016-17 Annual Operating Budget May 31, 2016 Page 4 multiple years, the cap-and-trade program gives the state the chance to transform communities - particularly those disadvantaged ones - into innovative, sustainable economic centers. Current Condition – General Fund Despite current economic conditions, the City of Lake Elsinore’s financial condition still requires the reinvestment of resources to meet operating expenditures without any reductions in City public service levels and to provide core services to the community. Recent population information for 2016 released by the Census Bureau and incorporated into the population data released by the California Department of Finance, estimates the City of Lake Elsinore’s population as of January 1, 2016, and is estimated at 61,006. This is an increase from the prior year population estimate of 58,426. General Fund Revenues The projected General Fund revenues are $40.4 million for fiscal year 2016-17, which reflects a $1,936,308, or 5.03%, increase from fiscal year 2015-16 revenue estimates. General Fund revenues have increased primarily as a result of continued growth for the local economy. The most significant revenue increases are identified below: • $513,070 in Property Taxes • $302,101 in Franchise Taxes • $583,545 in Fees/Charges for Services • $823,779 in Reimbursements for Fire Station costs (#97) The increases were offset by revenue reductions in other categories primarily due to the change in State required building fees, the State reducing certain revenues to local governments, by the maturation of higher interest bearing investments that had been reinvested at lower, market interest rates, as well as a reduction in staff recovery costs for financing district administration. Some of the significant decreases are identified below: • $306,560 in Sales Taxes • $373,203 in Miscellaneous revenues General Fund Expenditures The proposed budget of $41.7 million reflects an increase in General Fund expenditures of $2,472,010 or 6.31% from the fiscal year 2015-16 budget. The primary increases contributing to this include: 1) increase in Police and Fire personnel cost increases passed through by the County; 2) sharing cost increase of the Southwest Communities Animal Shelter; 3) negotiated increases for employees and increases in CalPERS retirement rates; and 4) new programs which are offset by revenues for City Attorney and the La Laguna campground operation. The authorized Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions are proposed to increase from the prior year total of 84 authorized to 85 authorized positions due to a two (2) new Senior Engineer positions in Engineering offset by elimination of unfilled positions in other departments. The City is converting the Director of Administrative Services position to an Assistant City Manager position. Additionally, no changes to the existing 46 part-time positions. Adoption of the FY 2016-17 Annual Operating Budget May 31, 2016 Page 5 The City has continued to focus on reorganizing department structures in an effort to streamline processes and enhance efficiencies without reducing essential public services to the community. The following is a summary of significant items by department in the proposed Preliminary Annual Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2016-17: City Clerk: Increased due to 3% increase added to the base salary per MOU negotiations. Administrative Services: Increased due to 3% increase added to the base salary per MOU negotiations. Community Development: Increased due to 1) continued hiring of economic development consultant; and 2) implementation of new land-based application tracking and permitting systems (Tyler Energov). Public Safety: There will be a large increase in contract administration costs passed down from the County of Riverside for Sheriff Service costs. The City, along with several other contract cities, are in the process with studying the feasibility of creating a regional police force as a way to address rising costs. The overall anticipated costs Staff’s Concerns and Risk Factors: The KPMG consultants stressed in their recent report, as well as in their presentation to the Board in April 2016, that they are recommending the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution that defines “Baseline Services” and “General Overhead.” Currently, “Baseline” includes all the services that Contract Cities do not pay for in the Rate (i.e. aviation, swat, etc.). They stated that no two Counties in California calculate their contract rates the same way, but several have adopted Resolutions to better define what goes into the rate. While they stated that Riverside’s Rate Legend is “in line” with how other Counties calculate it, they did not offer any specific changes to the Rate calculations, other than to adopt this defining resolution. The underlying tenor and tone is that the County can recoup more costs through a change in this definition, which is concern of Staff because the County may try to shift costs for services that the County is required to be provide. While the KPMG consultants advised City staff that of the review of PSEC costs was not a part of their review, the Board of Supervisors also did not speak to it at the KPMG presentation. While a review of PSEC may be part of the $18 million change order the County approved in April for KPMG to implement measures, the status has not been confirmed. Furthermore, the County has not spoken of any plans to charge new development for their fair share cost of the PSEC communication system. Staff is concerned because it is estimating 8% to 10% annual increases for at least the next five years of which 2% is attributable to the PSEC costs as the County has chosen to pass along this cost to the contract cities through the operating rate without any discussion of funding strategies. It is perplexing because recovery of an estimated $250 million investment in a system passed through the operating agreement rate/budget without any input from contract cities creates further financial challenges to the City’s resources. The CEO/Finance Director’s recommendation to the Board will be to hold all Departments (except for the Sheriff’s Office) flat over the coming 5-years, in order to correct the structural deficit. They expect the Sheriff’s Office to grow at 4% next year (if labor is held status quo – no COLAs). There doesn’t seem to be any acknowledgement of the rising CalPERS costs facing the County over the next several years. If they do not hold department’s flat, they will exhaust their $220M+ reserve by FY18-19. Adoption of the FY 2016-17 Annual Operating Budget May 31, 2016 Page 6 Public Services: Increase due to reallocation of all personnel cost to the General Fund from other Special Revenue Funds. Community Services: Increase due to additional programming and transitioning to improve the quality of services at the La Laguna campground facility. “Gann” Appropriations Limit In accordance with Government Section 7910, the City Council is required, on an annual basis, to adopt by resolution the “Gann” Appropriations Limit. The Appropriations Limit creates a restriction on the amount of revenue that can be appropriated in any fiscal year. The Limit is adjusted each year based on the change in population and either the change in non-residential assessed valuation or the change in California per capita income. The Limit for fiscal year 2016- 17 is based on population and nonresidential assessed valuation factors. As the change in California per capita income is more readily available, it will be used as a factor rather than the nonresidential assessed valuation change in order to calculate the limit for Fiscal Year 2016-17. Using population and per capita personal income data provided by the State Department of Finance, the City’s Appropriations Limit for FY 2016-17 has been computed to be $86,752,899. Appropriations subject to the Limit in the proposed FY 2016-17 budget total $25,958,879, which is $60,794,020 less than the computed limit. Additional appropriations to the budget are funded by non-tax sources such as service charges, restricted revenues from other agencies, grants, or beginning fund balances would be unaffected by the Appropriations Limit, however, any supplemental appropriations funded through increased tax sources could not exceed the $60,794,020 variance indicated above. Further, any overall actual receipts from tax sources greater than $60,794,020 from the budget estimates will result in proceeds from taxes in excess of the City’s Appropriations Limit, requiring refunds of the excess within the next two fiscal years, or voter approval to increase the City’s Appropriations Limit. Fiscal Impact The Proposed Fiscal Year 2016-17 Annual Operating Budget provides a reinvestment of fund balance resources, in addition to operating revenues, to fund operating expenditures by $1,230,622 before the operating transfers. The designation for economic uncertainty is $7,293,655, an amount equal to 17.5% of General Fund Operating Appropriations for fiscal year 2016-17. Exhibits A: Resolution No. 2016-___ Adopt the Operating Budget B: Resolution No. 2016-___ Adopt the Schedule of Authorized Positions C: Resolution No. 2016-___ Adopt the GANN Limit