Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 21 Adopt of FY 2017-18 Ann Oper BudgetText File City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 www.lake-elsinore.org File Number: RES 2014-027 Agenda Date: 6/13/2017 Status: BusinessVersion: 1 File Type: ResolutionIn Control: City Council Agenda Number: 21) Page 1 City of Lake Elsinore Printed on 6/8/2017 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL To:Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From:Grant Yates, City Manager Prepared by:Jason Simpson, Assistant City Manager Date:June 13, 2017 Subject:Adoption of the FY2017-18 Annual Operating Budget Recommendations: adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FY2017-18 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND ESTABLISHING THE CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN THE APPROPRIATIONS; and, adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS; and, adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS GANN LIMIT FOR FY2017-18 AND SELECTING THE POPULATION AND INFLATION FACTOR ACCORDINGLY. Background Attached for your review is the Proposed FY2017-18 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 2017-18 proposed authorized position schedule and the Gann Limit Calculation. The budget subcommittee has reviewed and discussed the FY2017-18 Annual Operating Budget. Discussion Current Condition - State of California – May 2017 Revision Budget (Governor Brown) Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal No Affordable Housing Funding Proposed; Cap and Trade Outcome Pending Gov. Jerry Brown held a press conference to unveil his revised FY2017-18 budget proposal. Despite improved state revenue projections since January, Governor Brown continued to urge fiscal restraint, and cautioned that the next recession is long overdue. Concerns also continue over potential changes to federal policies, with an estimated loss of $4.3 billion annually by 2020, and $18.6 billion by 2027, should the House Republican’s replacement of the Affordable Health Care Act be enacted. Adoption of the FY2017-18 Annual Operating Budget June 13, 2017 Page 2 “Cuts are coming,” warned Governor Brown. The May Revise budget proposes $183.4 billion in total spending, which includes $124 billion for the state’s General Fund. By the end of FY 2017-18, the Rainy Day Reserve Fund is projected to have a balance of $8.5 billion, equivalent to 66 percent of the constitutional target. No proposed funding for affordable housing is included in the proposal, or any mention of the policy issues. In response to a reporter’s question, the Governor says he wants reforms that will lower the cost of construction and increase efficiency before he considers state investment, but also expressed doubts that a package would come together. Neither of the brief statements on the budget by Senate Pro Tem Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) nor Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) mentioned housing. A major component of the Governor’s May Revise document focused on projected allocations from recently enacted SB 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, to address deferred street, road and highway maintenance. The chart below, from that document, illustrates how the revenues from that measure return the gas tax’s purchasing power to 1994 levels. In response to the state’s growing unfunded pension liabilities, the Governor is proposing a $6 billion additional payment to CalPERS funded by a loan mechanism developed with the State Treasurer. Under this mechanism, the state would borrow from state funds currently earning low interest rates in the Treasurer’s Surplus Money Investment Fund then repay the loan over time. The state projects this loan will save the state $11 billion over 20 years. Nothing new was included in the May Revise on Cap-and-Trade. Since January, the Governor has urged the Legislature to reauthorize the program with a two-thirds vote. When questioned by a reporter on timing, the Governor was non-committal, while stressing the benefits of a solution and not ruling out the possibility of obtaining votes from Republican legislators. Adoption of the FY 2017-18 Annual Operating Budget June 13, 2017 Page 3 Projected allocations for K-14 education increased by $1.1 billion due to the requirements of Proposition 98. Funds for higher education are also included, however, $50 million was withheld from the University of California (UC) budget until the recent recommendations from the State Auditor and other UC proposals are implemented. Details on these and other budget areas of importance to cities are outlined in the League budget analysis of May Revise attached as Attachment A at the very end of this staff report package. General Fund Revenues The projected General Fund revenues are $43.3 million for fiscal year 2017-18, which reflects a $1.76 million, or 4.25% increase from fiscal year 2016-17 revenue estimates. General Fund revenues have increased primarily due to continued growth for the local economy. The most significant revenue increases are identified below: •$509,812 in Sales Tax •$529,962 in Property Tax •$1,236,077 in Fees/Charges for Services These increases were offset by some minor 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. Lastly, the loss of Canyon Lake shared funding of fire costs, due to the reopening of Station 60, resulted in a decrease of reimbursements by approximately $1,000,000. General Fund Expenditures Overall, the proposed budget of $44.5 million reflects an increase in General Fund expenditures of $2,169,930 or 5.12% from the fiscal year 2016-17 budget. The primary increases contributing to this include: 1) increase in Police and Fire personnel cost increases passed through by the County; 2) negotiated increases for employees and increases in CalPERS retirement rates, and 3) increase in plan check costs (offset by fee revenues) in Planning and Engineering. The authorized Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions are proposed to be decreased from the prior year total of 85 to 84 authorized positions due to elimination of an unfilled office clerical position. Staff eliminated the GIS Analyst positon and added a Code Enforcement Officer position to focus enforcement on parks and areas closer to the lake. Additionally, no changes to the existing 46 part-time positions. 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 FY2017-18: City Manager: Increased due to reallocation of personnel costs and increase expenditures for charge for services chargeback to Internal Service Funds. Administrative Services:Increased due to reallocation of personnel costs and increase expenditures for charge for services chargeback to Internal Service Funds. Adoption of the FY2017-18 Annual Operating Budget June 13, 2017 Page 4 Community Development: Increased due to 1) continued hiring of economic development consultant; and 2) hiring of additional Code Enforcement Officer that will serve as a Park Ranger role throughout the City; and 3) continued homeless camp clean-up costs. Public Safety: Another large increase in contract administration costs passed down from the County of Riverside for Police and Fire 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: Fire Suppression Services (CalFIRE Contract): A significant impact to the budget was realized when the City of Canyon Lake, with approval of the County Board of Supervisors, elected to re-open Fire Station 60 with a modified two-man engine company resulting in no funding of services (compensation to) to the City of Lake Elsinore resulting in a loss of approximately $1.0 million. Therefore, the County Fire Department recommended the reduction for one year of one (1) engine company at Station 10 to offset this loss. Police Services (Sheriff Contract): 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. 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 8%-10% 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. Furthermore, it appears that an additional $1.5 billion (or more) in CalPERS costs are coming (within the next 5 years) due to the planned change in discount rate from 7.5% to 7.00%. With latest unfunded accrued liability of their pension plans at June 30, 2015 of $1.399 billion and $705 million totaling $2.104 billion for Adoption of the FY 2017-18 Annual Operating Budget June 13, 2017 Page 5 miscellaneous and safety employees, respectively, the change in actuarial assumptions are expected to have a dramatic impact on County costs. Public Services: Increased due to 1) continued hiring of plan check services; and 2) continued efforts on maintaining the parks and lake. “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 2017- 18. Using population and per capita personal income data provided by the State Department of Finance, the City’s Appropriations Limit for FY 2017-18 has been computed to be $94,300,401. Appropriations subject to the Limit in the proposed FY 2017-18 budget total $27,772,809, which is $66,527,593 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 $66,527,593 variance indicated above. Further, any overall actual receipts from tax sources greater than $666,527,593 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 2017-18 Annual Operating Budget provides a reinvestment of fund balance resources, in addition to operating revenues, to fund operating expenditures by $1,333,164 (budget deficit) after the operating transfers. The designation for economic uncertainty is $7,885,692, an amount equal to 17.5% of General Fund Operating Appropriations for FY2017-18. Exhibits A Resolution Operating Budget A1 Operating Budget Schedule B Resolution Authorized Positions B1 Authorized Position Schedule C Resolution GANN Limit C1 GANN Limit Schedule D League on Governors’ Budget RESOLUTION NO. 2017- _______ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FY 2017-18 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND ESTABLISHING THE CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN THE APPROPRIATIONS Whereas, the City Council (Council) has a policy of adopting an annual operating budget to plan expenditures and to match anticipated revenues available in various City accounts in order to make the most efficient use of the City’s limited resources for each fiscal year; and, Whereas, the City of Lake Elsinore (City) Municipal Code Section 3.04.010 defines the fiscal year for the City of Lake Elsinore as extending from July 1st of each year to and including June 30th of the following year. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City of Lake Elsinore Annual Operating Budget is hereby approved and adopted for the 2017-18 fiscal year as attached per Exhibit A to this Resolution. Section 2. A copy of the City of Lake Elsinore Operating Budget hereby adopted and certified by the City Clerk shall be filed with the City Manager or a designated representative, and a further copy so certified shall be placed and shall remain on file in the Office of the City Clerk where it shall be available for inspection. Copies of the certified budgets shall be made available for the use of departments, offices and agencies of the City. Section 3. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfer of budget appropriations: (a)No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure. (b)The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the City Manager. (c)The City Council must authorize transfers (appropriations) of funds from the Unreserved Fund Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts. (d)The City Council must authorize any changes to the Schedule of Authorized Positions. The City Manager may authorize the hiring of temporary or part-time staff as necessary within the limits imposed by the controls listed above. (e)The City Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the City Council in amounts up to project contingency established by the City Council. (f)Outstanding encumbrances shown on the City books at June 30, 2017, that are approved by the City Manager, are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for FY2017-18. (g)The City of Lake Elsinore Annual Operating Budget is hereby approved. CC Reso. No. 2017- Page 2 of 2 This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. Passed and Adopted on this 13th day of June, 2017. ______________________________ Robert E. Magee, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Susan Domen, MMC City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2017-______ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at the Regular meeting of June 13, 2017, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA SUMMARY OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND FY2017‐18 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET FY15‐16 ACTUALS FY16‐17 PROJECTED FY 17‐18 ADOPTED $ Variance Increase (Decrease) % Variance Increase (Decrease) Revenues: Sales Tax 9,939,637$ 9,720,300 10,230,112 509,812 5.24% Property Tax 6,523,663 7,068,582 7,598,544 529,962 7.50% Franchise Tax 2,423,707 2,650,200 2,755,808 105,608 3.98% Building Permit Fee 1,953,331 2,275,000 2,343,250 68,250 3.00% Property Transfer Tax 327,367 327,656 337,486 9,830 3.00% Transient Occupancy Tax 487,423 480,000 508,800 28,800 6.00% Other Licenses & Permits 1,738,911 1,280,561 1,315,326 34,765 2.71% Intergovernmental 151,526 89,500 92,185 2,685 3.00% Fees, reimbursements, other 7,720,995 9,382,524 9,665,319 282,795 3.01% Fines and Forfeitures 546,861 555,600 561,668 6,068 1.09% Fire Service Tax Credit 2,288,085 2,478,981 2,583,134 104,153 4.20% Investment Earnings 231,526 105,000 108,150 3,150 3.00% Special Assessments 3,791,923 3,598,979 3,689,246 90,267 2.51% Traffic Safety, Offender & Enforce 564,024 734,510 723,665 (10,845) ‐1.48% Reimbursements for Street Program 798,500 798,500 798,500 ‐ n/a Total Revenues 39,487,480 41,545,893 43,311,192 1,765,299 4.25% Expenditures by Department General Government: City Council 306,828$ 233,864 227,299 (6,565) ‐2.81% Community Support 33,534 89,200 92,900 3,700 4.15% City Treasurer ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ n/a City Clerk 432,681 603,973 577,810 (26,163) ‐4.33% City Attorney 587,691 500,000 500,000 ‐ n/a City Manager 592,447 758,121 901,293 143,172 18.89% Administrative Services Finance 1,355,936 1,736,024 1,518,371 (217,653) ‐12.54% Human Resources 307,684 293,185 447,149 153,964 52.51% Public Safety: Police Services 11,462,439 12,431,410 13,010,246 578,836 4.66% Fire Services 6,913,288 7,597,637 7,900,281 302,644 3.98% Animal Services 804,184 839,200 836,640 (2,560) ‐0.31% Community Development: Planning 1,176,424 1,243,418 1,214,828 (28,590) ‐2.30% Building & Safety/Fire Prevention 1,361,712 1,722,026 2,602,499 880,473 51.13% Code Enforcement/Graffiti 624,055 745,926 962,062 216,136 28.98% Economic Development 373,533 440,896 278,043 (162,853) ‐36.94% Public Services: Engineering Department 2,082,484 1,799,224 2,062,723 263,499 14.65% Public Works 1,741,231 2,567,218 2,186,487 (380,731) ‐14.83% Park Maintenance 1,590,228 2,041,631 2,395,377 353,746 17.33% Lake Maintenance 1,498,080 1,376,069 1,554,841 178,772 12.99% Community Services: Recreation 692,706 926,806 674,866 (251,940) ‐27.18% Community Center 610,588 929,773 1,134,387 204,614 22.01% Senior Center 246,965 301,844 264,079 (37,765) ‐12.51% Campground 410,502 482,630 527,777 45,147 9.35% Non‐Departmental ‐ Operating 2,801,932 2,698,592 2,658,638 (39,954) ‐1.48% Total Expenditures 38,007,153 42,358,667 44,528,597 2,169,930 5.12% Excess of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 1,480,327 (812,774) (1,217,405) (404,631) 49.78% Operating Transfers: Operating Transfers In ‐ 80,885 416,739 335,854 415.22% Operating Transfers Out (1,056,361) (260,000) (532,498) (272,498) 104.81% (1,056,361) (179,115) (115,759) 63,356 ‐35.37% Excess of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures and Operating Transfers In/(Out)423,966 (991,889) (1,333,164) (341,275) 34.41% Fund Balance, Beg. of Year 11,970,943 12,394,909 11,403,020 Fund Balance, Beg. of Year 12,394,909$ 11,403,020$ 10,069,856$ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA SUMMARY OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND FY2017‐18 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET Nonspendable: Deposits and prepaid items 29,015$ 25,000$ 1,034,879$ Due from Successor Agency ‐ ‐ Loans Receivable 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Designated: Uncertainty reserve (17.5%) 6,836,115 7,458,267 7,885,692 Undesignated: Unallocated reserve 4,529,779 2,919,753 149,286 Total Fund Balance (net) 12,394,909$ 11,403,020$ 10,069,856$ Detail of Fund Balance CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA SUMMARY OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE CITY WIDE ALL FUNDS SUMMARY ‐ FY2017‐18 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET FUND NAME PROJECTED BEGINNING FUND BALANCE REVENUES APPROPRIATIONS NET TRANSFERS IN/(OUT) PROJECTED ENDING FUND BALANCE FY2017‐18 Adopted Operating Budget Fund:001 GENERAL FUND 11,403,020$ 43,311,192$ 44,528,597$ (115,759)$ 10,069,856$ Fund: 101 SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENF. (SLESF) ‐ 100,000 100,000 ‐ ‐ Fund: 104 TRAFFIC OFFENDER FUND ‐ 124,836 124,836 ‐ ‐ Fund: 106 AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN‐LIEU 1,302,001 435,740 12,800 (124,739) 1,600,202 Fund: 107 DEVELOPER AGREEMENT REVENUE 359,489 289,490 ‐ (292,000) 356,979 Fund: 110 STATE GAS TAX FUND (OPER & CIP) 910,715 1,733,220 2,643,935 ‐ ‐ Fund: 115 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND ‐ 499,035 499,035 ‐ ‐ Fund: 130 CITY‐WIDE LLMD FUND ‐ 1,422,370 1,942,641 520,271 ‐ Fund: 135 LLMD NO. 1 460,817 518,117 530,344 12,227 460,817 Fund: 155 NPDES 115,451 364,580 426,631 ‐ 53,400 Fund: 300 INSURANCE SERVICES 769,421 999,730 993,740 ‐ 775,411 Fund: 305 INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICES 191,769 1,141,036 1,132,830 ‐ 199,975 Fund: 310 SUPORT SERVICES 20,051 126,837 119,100 ‐ 27,788 Fund: 315 FLEET SERVICES 508,944 745,434 685,520 ‐ 568,858 Fund: 315 FACILITIES SERVICES 723,668 817,095 461,670 ‐ 1,079,093 Fund: 342 CFD 2007‐5S RED KITE SERVICE AREA FUND ‐ 1,534 1,534 ‐ ‐ Fund: 343 CFD 2006‐2S VISCAYA SERVICES AREA FUND ‐ 51,555 51,555 ‐ ‐ Fund: 344 CFD 2005‐2S ALBERHILL RANCH SERVICE ‐ 142,000 142,000 ‐ ‐ Fund: 367 CFD 2006‐1S SUMMERLY SERVICE AREA 68 171,851 171,919 ‐ ‐ Fund: 373 CFD 2005‐5S WASSON CANYON SERVICE 2,692 58,314 61,006 ‐ ‐ Fund: 650 CFD 2003‐1S LAW, FIRE & PARAMEDIC SVCS ‐ 2,443,729 2,443,729 ‐ ‐ Fund: 651 CFD 2006‐5S PARK, OPEN SPACE & STORM ‐ 83,165 83,165 ‐ ‐ Fund: 652 CFD 2007‐1S LAW, FIRE & PARAMEDIC SVCS ‐ 85,444 85,444 ‐ ‐ Fund: 653 CFD 2009‐1S PARK, OPEN SPACE & STREET ‐ 498,794 498,794 ‐ ‐ Fund: 654 CFD 2003‐2S FIRE TAX SERVICE AREA FUND ‐ 130,292 130,292 ‐ ‐ Fund: 655 CFD 2015‐1S SAFETY SERVICE AREA FUND ‐ 7,500 7,500 ‐ ‐ Fund: 114 SB1186 CAS EDUCATION FUND 5,698 2,500 8,198 ‐ ‐ Fund: 604 ENDOWMENT TRUST FUND 11,347 200 11,547 ‐ ‐ Fund: CFD's/AD's/PFA/LERA 281,131,000 32,888,000 82,357,100 ‐ 231,661,900 SUBTOTALS 297,916,151 89,193,590 140,255,462 ‐ 246,854,279 FY2017‐18 Adopted Capital Budget Fund: 105 GENERAL PROJECTS (OPER & CIP)664,091 18,363 579,450 1,193,241 1,296,245 Fund: 111 TUMF CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 2,718 8,933,613 8,933,613 ‐ 2,718 Fund: 112 MEASURE 'A' FUND 1,733,908 1,291,300 1,925,565 (495,938) 603,705 Fund: 113 SB821 FUND ‐ 749,015 749,015 ‐ ‐ Fund: 116 CITY HALL/P.W. DIF FUND 1,363,151 190,000 ‐ (1,500,000) 53,151 Fund: 117 COMMUNITY CENTER DIF FUND 524,906 114,610 ‐ (639,516) ‐ Fund: 118 LAKE SIDE FACILITIES DIF FUND 679,325 161,242 16,300 (824,267) ‐ Fund: 119 ANIMAL SHELTER FACILITY DIF FUND 58,304 68,610 ‐ ‐ 126,914 Fund: 121 TOTAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PRGM (TRIP)3,917,167 1,140 505,498 (3,412,809) ‐ Fund: 140 GEOTHERMAL FUND 20,712 140 100 ‐ 20,752 Fund: 150 CDBG FUND 378,466 330,357 330,357 ‐ 378,466 Fund: 160 PEG GRANT FUND (5,854) 43,890 6,048 ‐ 31,988 Fund: 205 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE FUND 3,942,567 504,400 9,700 (4,395,293) 41,974 Fund: 211 STORM DRAIN CIP FUND 758,340 503,740 100,000 (262,080) 900,000 Fund: 221 QUIMBY FUND (192,011) 192,011 ‐ ‐ ‐ Fund: 231 LIBRARY CIP DIF FUND 1,739,748 82,860 20,000 (1,802,608) ‐ Fund: 232 FIRE PROTECTION DIF FUND ‐ 150,120 ‐ (100,000) 50,120 Fund: 400 LE FINANCING AUTHORITY FUND 9,605,420 101,600 ‐ (9,707,020) ‐ Fund: 500 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FUND 3,798,191 7,213,980 7,755,179 20,964,390 24,221,382 Fund: 510 SARDA AREA 1 FUND (8,882,992) 3,031,044 3,524,024 ‐ (9,375,972) Fund: 520 SARDA AREA 2 FUND 346,386 3,855,197 3,360,986 ‐ 840,597 Fund: 530 SARDA AREA 3 FUND (1,300,000) 1,564,108 1,809,926 ‐ (1,545,818) Fund: 540 SARDA DIAMOND STADIUM FUND 3,909,789 690,211 4,600,000 ‐ ‐ Fund: 605 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN‐LIEU FUND 782,466 33,700 ‐ (161,015) 655,151 Fund: 606 AB2766 AIR POLLUTION REDUCTION FUND 282,135 80,950 6,000 (357,085) ‐ Fund: 608 TRUST DEPOSITS FUND ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,500,000 1,500,000 Fund: 617 SARDA HOUSING FUND 42,249,180 130,000 480,000 ‐ 41,899,180 Fund: 630 LAKE MAINTENANCE FUND 559,028 1,501,000 1,600,000 ‐ 460,028 Fund: 631 DESTRATIFICATION EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 232,093 150,000 380,000 ‐ 2,093 SUBTOTALS 67,167,234 31,687,201 36,691,761 ‐ 62,162,674 TOTALS 365,083,385$ 120,880,791$ 176,947,223$ ‐$ 309,016,953$ RESOLUTION NO. 2017-__________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS Whereas, the City Council has a policy of adopting an annual operating budget to plan expenditures and to match anticipated revenues available in various City accounts in order to make the most efficient use of the City’s limited resources for each fiscal year; and, Whereas, the City Council, pursuant to Section 4501 of the California Government Code, has a policy of adopting a schedule of authorized positions for each fiscal year; and, Whereas, the City Council has a policy of promoting transparency and adopting a schedule of authorized positions for each fiscal year so that CalPERS may verify payrates in accordance with publically available salary schedules. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Schedule of Authorized Positions, attached hereto, Exhibit A is hereby adopted pursuant to Section 4501 of the California Government Code. Section 2.The Schedule of Authorized Positions shall become effective July 1, 2017, and may be, thereafter, amended. Section 3.The City Manager shall implement the attached Schedule of Authorized Positions and has the authority to select and appoint employees in accordance with the City’s personnel policies. Section 4.All prior resolutions in conflict with this Resolution are hereby rescinded. Section 5.The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. Passed and Adopted on this 13th day of June, 2017. ______________________________ Robert E. Magee, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk CC Reso. No. 2017- Page 2 of 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2017-_______ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at the Regular meeting of June 13, 2017, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk AUTHORIZED FY2016‐17 CHANGES AUTHORIZED FY2017‐18 MONTHLY LOW RANGE MONTHLY HIGH RANGE CITY COUNCIL Council Member 5.00 ‐ 5.00 400.00$ 400.00$ CITY TREASURER City Treasurer 1.00 ‐ 1.00 CITY CLERK City Clerk 1.00 ‐ 1.00 10,276.90$ 13,116.20$ Deputy City Clerk 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,426.66$ 5,649.71$ Office Specialist II 1.00 ‐ 1.00 2,820.15$ 3,599.32$ Total 3.00 ‐ 3.00 CITY MANAGER City Manager 1.00 ‐ 1.00 15,000.01$ 19,687.51$ Executive Assistant II 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,426.66$ 5,649.71$ Assistant City Manager 0.50 ‐ 0.50 14,427.75$ 18,413.86$ Senior Management Analyst 1.00 ‐ 1.00 6,918.15$ 8,829.51$ Total 3.50 ‐ 3.50 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FINANCE Assistant City Manager 0.50 ‐ 0.50 14,427.75$ 18,413.86$ Executive Assistant I 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,426.66$ 5,649.71$ Finance Manager 1.00 (0.67) 0.33 8,897.75$ 11,356.02$ Finance Administrator 1.00 ‐ 1.00 7,675.63$ 9,796.18$ Fiscal Officer 1.00 ‐ 1.00 7,107.50$ 9,071.19$ Accountant I 2.00 ‐ 2.00 4,157.85$ 5,306.58$ Account Specialist II 3.00 (1.00) 2.00 3,170.65$ 4,653.69$ Total 9.50 (1.67) 7.83 HUMAN RESOURCES Finance Manager ‐ 0.33 0.33 8,897.75$ 11,356.02$ Human Resources Analyst 1.00 ‐ 1.00 5,260.23$ 6,713.55$ Human Resources Specialist 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,395.11$ 5,609.45$ Total 2.00 0.33 2.33 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commissioner ‐ PT 5.00 ‐ 5.00 100.00$ 100.00$ PLANNING & ZONING Director of Community Development 1.00 (0.60) 0.40 10,276.90$ 13,116.20$ Planning Manager 1.00 ‐ 1.00 8,897.75$ 11,356.02$ Principal Planner 1.00 ‐ 1.00 7,107.50$ 9,071.19$ Project Analyst ‐ PT ‐ 1.00 1.00 $25 per hour $55 per hour Senior Planner 1.00 ‐ 1.00 6,728.77$ 8,587.77$ Associate Planner 1.00 ‐ 1.00 5,594.30$ 7,139.93$ Community Development Technician 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,157.85$ 5,306.58$ Office Specialist III 1.00 ‐ 1.00 3,646.27$ 4,653.69$ Total 7.00 0.40 7.40 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET ‐ FY2017‐18 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET ‐ FY2017‐18 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (cont.)AUTHORIZED FY2016‐17 CHANGES AUTHORIZED FY2017‐18 MONTHLY LOW RANGE MONTHLY HIGH RANGE BUILDING & SAFETY Director of Community Development ‐ 0.50 0.50 10,276.90$ 13,116.20$ Building & Safety Manager 1.00 ‐ 1.00 8,897.75$ 11,356.02$ Building Inspector 2.00 ‐ 2.00 4,677.00$ 5,969.20$ Building Inspector ‐ PT 1.00 1.00 $26.20 per hour $33.43 per hour Senior Community Development Technician 1.00 ‐ 1.00 5,260.23$ 6,713.55$ Community Development Technician 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,157.85$ 5,306.58$ Office Specialist III 1.00 ‐ 1.00 3,646.27$ 4,653.69$ Total 7.00 0.50 7.50 CODE ENFORCEMENT Director of Community Development ‐ 0.05 0.05 10,276.90$ 13,116.20$ Code Enforcement Administrator 1.00 ‐ 1.00 7,675.63$ 9,796.18$ Code Enforcement Officer II (Unfunded)2.00 ‐ 2.00 4,426.66$ 5,649.71$ Code Enforcement Officer I 2.00 1.00 3.00 3,821.51$ 4,877.37$ Community Development Technician II 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,677.00$ 5,969.20$ Total 6.00 1.05 7.05 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Director of Community Development ‐ 0.05 0.05 10,276.90$ 13,116.20$ GIS Analyst 1.00 (1.00) ‐ 5,594.30$ 7,139.93$ Total 1.00 (0.95) 0.05 GRAFFITI Graffiti Technician 1.00 ‐ 1.00 3,370.88$ 4,302.22$ PUBLIC SERVICES ENGINEERING City Engineer 1.00 ‐ 1.00 10,276.90$ 13,116.20$ Senior Civil Engineer 2.00 ‐ 2.00 7,107.50$ 9,071.19$ Engineering Inspector 2.00 ‐ 2.00 5,876.50$ 7,500.09$ Senior Engineer Technician 3.00 ‐ 3.00 5,260.23$ 6,713.54$ Office Specialist II ‐ PT 1.00 1.00 2,820.15$ 3,599.31$ Total 9.00 ‐ 9.00 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION General Services Manager 1.00 ‐ 1.00 8,897.76$ 11,356.02$ Public Works Superintendent 1.00 ‐ 1.00 8,304.82$ 10,599.29$ Public Works Supervisor 1.00 ‐ 1.00 5,594.31$ 7,139.91$ Equipment Operator 2.00 (1.00) 1.00 4,157.84$ 5,306.60$ Maintenance Worker II 2.00 (1.00) 1.00 3,370.89$ 4,302.25$ Maintenance Worker I 4.00 ‐ 4.00 2,943.18$ 3,756.27$ Maintenance Worker I (Unfunded)2.00 ‐ 2.00 2,943.18$ 3,756.27$ Administrative Assistant 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,157.84$ 5,306.60$ Office Assistant (PT) (Unfunded)1.00 (1.00) ‐ 2,452.27$ 3,129.81$ Office Specialist III 1.00 ‐ 1.00 3,646.28$ 4,653.69$ Total 16.00 (3.00) 13.00 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET ‐ FY2017‐18 PUBLIC SERVICES (cont.)AUTHORIZED FY2016‐17 CHANGES AUTHORIZED FY2017‐18 MONTHLY LOW RANGE MONTHLY HIGH RANGE PARKS MAINTENANCE Senior Lead Worker 1.00 ‐ 1.00 5,025.98$ 6,414.59$ Equipment Operator ‐ 1.00 1.00 4,157.84$ 5,306.60$ Maintenance Worker II 1.00 2.00 3.00 3,370.89$ 4,302.25$ Maintenance Worker I 5.00 (1.00) 4.00 2,943.18$ 3,756.27$ Total 7.00 2.00 9.00 LAKE SERVICES LAKE MAINTENANCE Maintenance Worker I 1.00 ‐ 1.00 2,943.18$ 3,756.27$ Maintenance Worker II 1.00 ‐ 1.00 3,370.89$ 4,302.25$ Total 2.00 ‐ 2.00 COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Director of Community Services 1.00 ‐ 1.00 10,276.90$ 13,116.20$ Management Analyst 1.00 ‐ 1.00 6,015.79$ 7,677.90$ Project Analyst ‐ PT 1.00 (1.00) ‐ $25 per hour $55 per hour Special Events Coordinator 1.00 (1.00) ‐ 4,426.66$ 5,649.71$ Volunteer Coordinator ‐ PT 1.00 1.00 2,598.75$ 3,158.81$ Office Specialist III 1.00 ‐ 1.00 3,646.28$ 4,653.69$ Total 6.00 (2.00) 4.00 RECREATION Recreation Supervisor 1.00 ‐ 1.00 5,594.31$ 7,139.91$ Special Events Coordinator ‐ 1.00 1.00 4,426.66$ 5,649.71$ Recreation Aide ‐ PT 11.00 ‐ 11.00 1,733.33$ 2,212.24$ Recreation Specialist ‐ PT 2.00 ‐ 2.00 2,167.27$ 2,634.34$ Recreation Leader ‐ PT 5.00 ‐ 5.00 1,864.39$ 2,271.59$ Water Safety Instructor ‐ PT 10.00 ‐ 10.00 2,167.27$ 2,634.34$ Total 29.00 1.00 30.00 SENIOR CENTER Community Services Coordinator 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,426.66$ 5,932.20$ Recreation Specialist ‐ PT 1.00 ‐ 1.00 2,167.27$ 2,634.34$ Recreation Leader ‐ PT 2.00 (1.00) 1.00 1,864.39$ 2,271.59$ Recreation Aide ‐ PT ‐ 1.00 1.00 1,733.33$ 2,212.24$ Total 4.00 ‐ 4.00 CAMPGROUND Recreation Leader ‐ PT 1.00 ‐ 1.00 1,864.39$ 2,271.59$ Total 1.00 ‐ 1.00 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET ‐ FY2017‐18 AUTHORIZED FY2016‐17 CHANGES AUTHORIZED FY2017‐18 MONTHLY LOW RANGE MONTHLY HIGH RANGE INTERNAL SERVICES RISK Finance Manager ‐ 0.34 0.34 8,897.75$ 11,356.02$ INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Information Technology Manager 1.00 ‐ 1.00 8,897.76$ 11,356.02$ Information Technician I 1.00 ‐ 1.00 4,157.85$ 5,306.60$ Business Process Analyst 1.00 ‐ 1.00 6,918.15$ 8,829.51$ Information Technology Database Analyst 1.00 ‐ 1.00 6,918.15$ 8,829.51$ Total 4.00 ‐ 4.00 FLEET Chief Mechanic 1.00 ‐ 1.00 5,594.31$ 7,139.91$ Mechanic 1.00 ‐ 1.00 3,370.89$ 4,302.25$ Total 2.00 ‐ 2.00 FACILITY MAINTENANCE Maintenance Worker II 1.00 ‐ 1.00 3,370.89$ 4,302.25$ Totals 132.00 (2.00) 130.00 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS GANN LIMIT FOR FY 2017-18 AND SELECTING THE POPULATION AND INFLATION FACTOR ACCORDINGLY Whereas, Proposition 4, the "Gann Limit" Initiative, was approved by voters on November 6, 1979 in a statewide special election ballot as an initiated constitutional amendment which would limit the growth in appropriations made by the state and individual local governments. The limit in the rate of growth is the percentage increase in the cost of living and the percentage increase in the state or local government's population. Require state and local governments to return any funds to taxpayers in excess of the amount appropriated for a given fiscal year. Require the state to reimburse local governments for the cost of complying with statemandates. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Appropriations Limit will be calculated based on the changes in City population and California per capita personal income. Section 2.The Appropriations Limit for the City of Lake Elsinore for FY 2017-18, attached hereto, (Exhibit A) is hereby adopted. Section 3.That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. Passed and Adopted on this 13th day of June, 2017. Robert E. Magee, Mayor Attest: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2017-was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at the Regular meeting of June 13, 2017, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk EXHIBIT A CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROPRIATIONS (GANN) LIMIT PROCEEDS OF TAXCALCULATION FISCAL YEAR2017-18 REVENUE SOURCE TAXES BUDGETED PROCEEDS OF TAX BUDGETED NON-PROCEEDS OF TAX TOTAL REVENUE Sales (1)$10,230,112 $10,230,112 Property (2)7,599,044 7,599,044 Property Transfer Tax 337,486 337,486 Franchise Tax 2,755,808 2,755,808 Other Tax 508,800 508,800 Fire Tax Credit 2,583,134 2,583,134 Special Assessments 3,687,624 3,687,624 FEES Fees, Licenses & Permits $9,038,000 $9,038,000 Intergovernmental 217,935 217,935 Fines & Forfeitures 1,216,491 1,216,491 Reimbursements 3,075,121 3,075,121 Other 1,887,632 1,887,632 Total 27,702,007 15,435,179 $43,137,186 % of Total 64.22%35.78%100.00% Investment Earnings $70,801 $39,449 $110,251 Adjusted Total 27,772,809 15,474,628 $43,247,437 Revenues are based on FY 2017-18 Proposed Budget. Notes: (1)Includes PropertyTax In-Lieu of Sales Tax (2)Includes PropertyTax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fees and Parcel Tax EXHIBIT B CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROPRIATIONS (GANN) LIMIT FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO THE LIMIT FY 2017-18 Total Revenue*$43,247,437 Less Non-Proceeds of Tax 15,474,628 A) Total Appropriations Subject to the Limit $27,772,809 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT B) FY 2016-17 Appropriations Limit 86,752,899 C) Change Factor**% Increase Factor Cost of Living Adjustment - CPI 3.69 1.0369 Population Adjustment - PA 2.00 1.0200 Change Factor (CPI x PA)1.0576 D) Increase (decrease) in Appropriations Limit $7,547,502 E) FY 2017-18 Appropriations Limit (B x C)$94,300,401 REMAINING APPROPRIATIONS CAPACITY (E - A)$66,527,593 Remaining Capacity as Percent of the FY 2017-18 Appropriations Limit 70.55% *Revenues are based on FY 2017-18 Proposed Budget. ** State Department of Finance Percent of Change in California Per Capita Income Percent of Change in City of Lake Elsinore Population EXHIBIT C CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE SUMMARY OF ANNUAL APPROPRIATION (GANN) LIMITS COST OF APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL LIVING POPULATION APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO REMAINING YEAR CHANGE LIMIT LIMIT LIMIT CAPACITY 2009-10 0.62%1.43%$61,354,225 $-$61,354,225 2010-11 -2.54%1.31%$60,579,153 $-$60,579,153 2011-12 2.51%2.06%$63,378,943 $28,740,639 $34,638,304 2012-13 3.77%1.40%$66,689,086 $30,767,943 $35,921,143 2013-14 5.12%4.24%$73,075,959 $34,802,791 $38,273,168 2014-15 3.77%2.30%$74,581,324 $23,076,212 $51,505,112 2015-16 3.82%3.07%$79,809,475 $24,438,621 $55,370,854 2016-17 5.37%3.16%$86,752,899 $25,958,879 $60,794,020 2017-18 3.69%2.00%$94,300,401 $27,772,809 $66,527,593 EXHIBIT A CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROPRIATIONS (GANN) LIMIT PROCEEDS OF TAX CALCULATION BUDGETED BUDGETED PROCEEDS NON-PROCEEDS TOTAL REVENUE SOURCE OF TAX OF TAX REVENUE TAXES Sales (1)10,230,112$ 10,230,112$ Property (2)7,599,044 7,599,044 Property Transfer Tax 337,486 337,486 Franchise Tax 2,755,808 2,755,808 Other Tax 508,800 508,800 Fire Tax Credit 2,583,134 2,583,134 Special Assessments 3,687,624 3,687,624 FEES Fees, Licenses & Permits 9,038,000$ 9,038,000$ Intergovernmental 217,935 217,935 Fines & Forfeitures 1,216,491 1,216,491 Reimbursements 3,075,121 3,075,121 Other 1,887,632 1,887,632 Total 27,702,007 15,435,179 43,137,186$ % of Total 64.22%35.78%100.00% Investment Earnings 70,801$ 39,449$ 110,251$ Adjusted Total 27,772,809 15,474,628 43,247,437$ Revenues are based on FY 2017-18 Proposed Budget. Notes: (1)Includes Property Tax In-Lieu of Sales Tax (2)Includes Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fees and Parcel Tax FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 EXHIBIT B APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO THE LIMIT FY 2017-18 Total Revenue*43,247,437$ Less Non-Proceeds of Tax 15,474,628 A) Total Appropriations Subject to the Limit 27,772,809$ APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT B) FY 2016-17 Appropriations Limit 86,752,899 C) Change Factor**% Increase Factor Cost of Living Adjustment - CPI 3.69 1.0369 Population Adjustment - PA 2.00 1.0200 Change Factor (CPI x PA)1.0576 D) Increase (decrease) in Appropriations Limit 7,547,502$ E) FY 2017-18 Appropriations Limit (B x C)94,300,401$ REMAINING APPROPRIATIONS CAPACITY (E - A)66,527,593$ Remaining Capacity as Percent of the FY 2017-18 Appropriations Limit 70.55% *Revenues are based on FY 2017-18 Proposed Budget. ** State Department of Finance Percent of Change in California Per Capita Income Percent of Change in City of Lake Elsinore Population CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROPRIATIONS (GANN) LIMIT FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 EXHIBIT C COST OF APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL LIVING POPULATION APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO REMAINING YEAR CHANGE LIMIT LIMIT LIMIT CAPACITY 2009-10 0.62%1.43%61,354,225$ -$ 61,354,225$ 2010-11 -2.54%1.31%60,579,153$ -$ 60,579,153$ 2011-12 2.51%2.06%63,378,943$ 28,740,639$ 34,638,304$ 2012-13 3.77%1.40%66,689,086$ 30,767,943$ 35,921,143$ 2013-14 5.12%4.24%73,075,959$ 34,802,791$ 38,273,168$ 2014-15 3.77%2.30%74,581,324$ 23,076,212$ 51,505,112$ 2015-16 3.82%3.07%79,809,475$ 24,438,621$ 55,370,854$ 2016-17 5.37%3.16%86,752,899$ 25,958,879$ 60,794,020$ 2017-18 3.69%2.00%94,300,401$ 27,772,809$ 66,527,593$ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE SUMMARY OF ANNUAL APPROPRIATION (GANN) LIMITS League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 1 Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal No Affordable Housing Funding Proposed; Cap and Trade Outcome Pending Gov. Jerry Brown held a press conference to unveil his revised FY 2017-18 budget proposal. Despite improved state revenue projections since January, Governor Brown continued to urge fiscal restraint, and cautioned that the next recession is long overdue. Concerns also continue over potential changes to federal policies, with an estimated loss of $4.3 billion annually by 2020, and $18.6 billion by 2027, should the House Republican’s replacement of the Affordable Health Care Act be enacted. “Cuts are coming,” warned Governor Brown. The May Revise budget proposes $183.4 billion in total spending, which includes $124 billion for the state’s General Fund. By the end of FY 2017-18, the Rainy Day Reserve Fund is projected to have a balance of $8.5 billion, equivalent to 66 percent of the constitutional target. No proposed funding for affordable housing is included in the proposal, or any mention of the policy issues. In response to a reporter’s question, the Governor says he wants reforms that will lower the cost of construction and increase efficiency before he considers state investment, but also expressed doubts that a package would come together. Neither of the brief statements on the budget by Senate Pro Tem Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) nor Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) mentioned housing. A major component of the Governor’s May Revise document focused on projected allocations from recently enacted SB 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, to address deferred street, road and highway maintenance. The chart below, from that document, illustrates how the revenues from that measure return the gas tax’s purchasing power to 1994 levels. League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 2 In response to the state’s growing unfunded pension liabilities, the Governor is proposing a $6 billion additional payment to CalPERS funded by a loan mechanism developed with the State Treasurer. Under this mechanism, the state would borrow from state funds currently earning low interest rates in the Treasurer’s Surplus Money Investment Fund then repay the loan over time. The state projects this loan will save the state $11 billion over 20 years. Nothing new was included in the May Revise on Cap-and-Trade. Since January, the Governor has urged the Legislature to reauthorize the program with a two-thirds vote. When questioned by a reporter on timing, the Governor was non-committal, while stressing the benefits of a solution and not ruling out the possibility of obtaining votes from Republican legislators. Projected allocations for K-14 education increased by $1.1 billion due to the requirements of Proposition 98. Funds for higher education are also included, however, $50 million was withheld from the University of California (UC) budget until the recent recommendations from the State Auditor and other UC proposals are implemented. Details on these and other budget areas of importance to cities are outlined below. Transportation Funding On April 28, the Governor signed SB 1 (Beall), a historic transportation funding plan of $54 billion over the next decade. The Governor’s May Revision includes the first $2.8 billion in FY 17-18 appropriations for:  “Fix-it-first” investments for local streets and roads, bridges, and the state highway system.  Trade corridor investments, including funding to implement a sustainable freight strategy.  State-local match funds for high-priority transportation projects.  Passenger rail and public transit modernization/improvements. Funds are allocated under the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account as follows: Local allocations  $445 million for local streets and roads (divided equally between cities and counties). o For cities, the amount in FY 17-18 is $222 million distributed to cities on a per capita basis (population based).  $330 million for the Transit and Intercity Rail Program (TIRCP).  $305 million for the State Transit Assistance program (STA).  $200 million for the State-Local Partnership Program (SLPP).  $100 million for the Active Transportation Program (ATP).  $25 million for Local Planning Grants. State allocations  $445 million for the State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP).  $400 million for bridges and culverts.  $250 million for congested corridors.  $200 million for trade corridor enhancement.  $54 million for the Department of Parks and Recreation.  $25 million for Freeway Service Patrol.  $17 million for the Department of Food and Agriculture. League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 3  $7 million for transportation research at the CSU and UC.  $5 million for the Workforce Development Board.  $4 million for administration (including the State Controller’s Office, the California Transportation Commission (CTC), and $3.8 million for DMV). The $2.8 billion in FY 2017-18 is generated from:  $727 million from the tiered Transportation Improvement Fee ($25-$175 depending on value of the vehicle).  $1.25 billion from restoring gas tax purchasing power to 1994 levels (12 cent increase in the base gasoline excise tax).  $600 million from the diesel sales and excise tax increases (11 cent increase in the diesel excise tax and an additional 4 percent in the diesel sales tax).  $235 million from general fund loan repayments. In addition to providing transportation funding for local streets and roads, bridges, the state highway system, transit, active transportation, trade corridors, congestion management, self-help municipalities, intercity rail, transportation research, and freeway patrols, the measure also included a series of reforms, such as:  Creation of the Office of Transportation Inspector General, whom would have audit and investigatory oversight authority over Caltrans.  Establishment of the State Highway Performance Plan to create measurable targets for improvements and reporting requirements to the CTC and Legislature.  Creation of the Advanced Mitigation Program to get early permitting approval for transportation projects to help prevent delays and strategically mitigate environmental impacts.  Additional CTC oversight for each phase of the State’s project delivery.  Constitutional protection in ACA 5 (Frazier), which would go before the voters in the June, 2018, general statewide election to ensure the revenues are dedicated to transportation. For local streets and roads, it’s important to note that the $445 million in direct subventions to cities and counties in FY 2017-18 is reflective of partial year funding for the first year of the transportation deal. In the first full fiscal year (FY 20 18-19) $1.1 billion will be allocated for local streets and roads, divided equally between cities and counties. An additional $75 million split between cities and counties will be made available for loan repayments. An additional detailed explanation of the transportation funding deal and city-by-city local streets and roads estimates is available online for FY’s 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19. Housing Unfortunately, like the January budget proposal, the May Revise does not include a meaningful funding proposal for affordable housing. The only mention of housing is contained in sections reporting various economic data, which projects housing supply to remain lower than needed to accommodate population growth through 2018. Curiously, however, in numerical tables that compare national economic trends versus California, housing permit issuance data reveals that California is actually recovering faster than the nation as a whole. Between 2012 through 2016, the level of housing permits issued nationwide grew from 830,000 to 1.19 million, an increase of 31 percent. In California, however, over the same period, housing permits grew from 59,000 to 100,000, an increase of 41 percent. While California debates its housing policies, such national League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 4 trends may reflect larger economic undercurrents affecting housing production since the recession. The Governor’s January budget outlined his desired reform as follows:  Streamline Housing Construction. Reduce local barriers to limit delays and duplicative reviews, maximize the impact of all public investments, and temper rents through housing supply increases.  Lower Per-Unit Costs. Reduce permit and construction policies that drive up unit costs.  Production Incentives. Those jurisdictions that meet or exceed housing goals, including affordable housing, should be rewarded with funding and other regulatory benefits. Those jurisdictions that do not build enough to increase production should be encouraged by tying housing construction to other infrastructure-related investments.  Accountability and Enforcement. Compliance with existing laws such as the housing element should be strengthened.  No Impact to the General Fund. No new costs, or cost pressures, can be added to the state’s General Fund, if new funding commitments are to be considered. Any permanent source of funding should be connected to these other reforms. Transitional Housing The 2016 Budget allocated $25 million for the Community Based Transitional Housing Program, which encourages cities and counties to support transitional housing that provides treatment and reentry programming to offenders released from the criminal justice system, and to any other persons who the applicant city or county believes may benefit. The applicant must partner with a private entity, either for-profit or nonprofit, to operate the transitional housing facility and provide a slate of statutorily prescribed services. While there has been interest in this program, its regulations were viewed as overly cumbersome. The May Revision broadens the purposes for which cities and counties may use their program funds based on feedback from many potential applicants. The proposed statutory changes do the following:  Allow cities and counties to provide a portion of their program funds to the facility operator, if the facility operator agrees to use those funds for facility operations and services to residents. There is no limit on the amount the city or county may provide the facility operator.  Allow cities and counties to use program funds for other purposes that their governing boards determine are in furtherance of the program’s goals as long as the proposed uses are specified in the application. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) The May Revise provides total funding of $11.4 billion; $11.1 billion General Fund and $308 million from other sources. Since January, changes in the adult inmate and parolee population have resulted in decreases of $29.4 million General Fund in FY 2016-17; and further decreases of $21.3 million General Fund in FY 2017-18. As of May 3, the prison population was at 135.0 percent of capacity, below the court-ordered population cap of 137.5 percent — this is attributable to population reduction measures and new bed and programming space. The average daily inmate population League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 5 projections are for an increase of 260 inmates for a total of 129,275 in FY 2016-17, and a decrease of 466 inmates to 127,693 in 2017-18. The May Revise includes $34.9 million for rehabilitation of CDCR roof structures due to record rainfall Average daily parolee population projections are projected to increase from 44,445 in FY 2016- 17 to 47,274 in FY 2017-18. Proposition 57 and 47 Implementation: While policy debates continue over these two propositions which result in inmates being released earlier than otherwise and altering the prior definitions of crimes, the implementation of these measures continue to reduce the state’s prison population and the influx of new inmates into the prison system.  Population Reduction: The Governor’s January Budget assumed an average daily inmate population reduction of 1,959 inmates in FY 2017-18. The May Revise, however, reflects accelerated implementation dates proposed in emergency regulations and increases the projected population reduction to 2,675 in FY 2017-18, growing to 11,500 in 2020-21. If these figures hold, it will CDCR to remove all inmates from one of the two remaining out- of-state facilities in FY 2017-18, and the second facility beginning in January 2018. The net savings from these changes is projected to grow to $186 million in FY 2020-21.  Timing: o November, 2016: Juvenile Justice provisions (assigning judges responsibility to decide whether minors should be charged as adults) went into effect immediately upon the passage of Proposition 57. o May 1: implementation of Good Conduct Credits began. o July 1: new parole consideration process for non-violent offenders (requiring inmates to serve 100 percent of their base sentence, but no time for sentencing enhancements before being eligible to appear before the Board of Parole Hearings). o August 1: Milestone Completion, Rehabilitative Achievement, and Educational Merit Credits (time off for active efforts to participate in and complete rehabilitation and educational programs) begins.  Funding: $6.7 million is allocated for implementation, including $1 million augmentation for more case records staff to review and process inmate records related to new credit earning structure and parole process. Proposition 47 This initiative’s re-classification of certain felony offenses to misdemeanors is expected to reduce adult inmate population by 4,425 in FY 2016-17, based on avoided new admissions to state correctional facilities. This change is expected to yield a savings of $45.6 million in FY 2017-18. Post Release Community Supervision May Revise includes $15.4 million General Fund for county probation departments to supervise increased offenders released with a condition of Post Release Community Supervision. This is an increase of $4.4 million over the amount allocated in the Governor’s January Budget based on Prop. 57’s accelerated implementation dates. Cannabis Regulation League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 6 The Governor’s January Budget appropriated $52.2 million for cannabis regulation. The May Revise appropriates an additional $43.2 million for cannabis programs across all state entities, for a total of $95.4 million. Funded activities include:  Initial development of regulations.  Development of licensing and track-and-trace programs.  Development of standards for pesticide use in cannabis cultivation.  Programs to protect instream flows from water diversion.  Studying health risks associated with cannabis use. Individual agency allocations are as follows:  $11.3 million to Bureau of Cannabis Control within Dept. of Consumer Affairs for regulation and licensing.  $4.6 million to Office of Manufactured Cannabis Safety within Dept. of Public Health.  $5.0 million to Department of Health Care Services for a public information program, including education and prevention.  $13.7 million to Department of Fish and Wildlife for water quality and instream flows;  $7.2 million to the State Water Resources Control Board for the Cannabis Cultivation Waste Discharge Regulatory program.  $700,000 to the Department of Pesticide Regulation for cannabis pesticide regulation and enforcement.  $1.1 million to the Board of Equalization for tax collection.  $8.6 million to the Department of Food and Agriculture for cultivation licensing. Funding Adjustments are being made as follows:  Department of Fish and Wildlife: $17.2 million from multiple fund sources for 63 positions supporting regulatory programs in the Dept. of Food and Agriculture and the State Water Resources Control Board.  State Water Resources Control Board: $9.8 million from multiple fund sources for 65 positions statewide water quality permit and related regulations.  Department of Pesticide Regulation: $1.3 million for the Cannabis Control Fund to develop guidelines for pesticide use on cannabis.  Cannabis Control Appeals Panel: $1 million for 8 positions for the panel’s operations;  Bureau of Cannabis Control: $664,000 and 5 positions for environmental impact review activities.  Department of Public Health: $9.3 million for the Cannabis Control Fund to implement cannabis manufacturer regulations.  Department of Food and Agriculture $3.9 million for the Cannabis Control Fund for environmental impact review activities. Cap-and-Trade Governor Brown did not propose any revisions to his January proposal on Cap-and-Trade, indicating he is holding firm on his proposal to reauthorize the Cap-and-Trade system with a two- thirds vote of the Legislature. The two-thirds vote is widely seen as insulation against current and future legal challenges to the system. While some 60 percent of the revenue auctions will be spent based on continuous appropriation, the Governor proposes to make appropriation of the League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 7 remaining 40 percent of auction revenues be contingent on the vote to reauthorize the Cap-and- Trade system. When asked during his press conference, Governor Brown indicated he believes there is a good chance the Legislature will reauthorize this system because 50 percent of the revenues go to disadvantaged communities. The Governor further articulated the importance of this system to the credibility of the state’s Climate Action Plan, and a willingness to work with lawmakers on proposals to restructure the program and potentially use Cap-and-Trade revenues for air quality priorities in addition to reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs). Public Utilities Commission: Transfer of Responsibilities According to the Governor’s May Revision Budget Summary, transportation functions currently regulated by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) will be transferred to various other departments starting July 1, 2018, as follows:  Private carriers of passengers (limousines, party buses, shuttles, etc.) — transferred to the DMV.  Household goods carriers (residential or office moving companies) — transferred to the Department of Consumer Affairs’ Bureau of Electronics and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation.  For-hire vessels (ferry services) — transferred to the Department of Parks and Recreation’s Division of Boating and Waterways.  Commercial air operators (flight schools, sightseeing services, chartered intrastate flights) — transferred to cities and counties. In addition to these transfers the PUC will see an increase of $636,000 to strengthen their Transportation Enforcement Branch. It is unclear at this time if any of these transfers of budget increases will impact regulations over the transportation network company industries, such as Uber and Lyft. Drought Response Concluding Activities The May Revise decreases the projection needed for drought response activities from $178.7 million to $62.9 million. This $115.8 million decrease is due to end of the statewide drought. Funding resources included in the May Revise are intended to conclude activities that began during the drought, and the Administration expects the state to transition to prioritizing activities associated with climate change. Major proposed appropriations include the following: Protecting Water Supplies and Water Conservation  $5 million to Department of Water Resources (DWR) for emergency drinking water for assistance for small communities in the Central Valley with dry private domestic wells;  $600,000 to the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board) to conclude water curtailment compliance and enforcement; and  $1 million to DWR for the Save Our Water Campaign. Emergency Response  $41.7 million to Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to address fire protection needs due to continuing tree mortality. An unprecedented bark beetle outbreak is estimated to have killed 100 million trees.  $42.3 million to CAL FIRE for expanded firefighting capabilities and extended fire season. League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 8  $6.5 million to the Office of Emergency Services (OES) for emergency water tank activities including periodic refills and tank storage and sanitation to the nine counties that continue to experience effects from the drought (a reduction from January due to drought conclusion).  $2 million to OES for local agencies to remove dead or dying trees. Protecting Fish and Wildlife  $2.6 million to the Department of Fish and Wildlife for at-risk fish monitoring including protection of fish and wildlife affected by future drought and climate change.  $3.5 million for Delta Smelt Resiliency Strategy implementation.  $21 million from water bond funds for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay Watershed from Prop. 13 over five years to DWR for scientific, engineering, and construction to support salmon habitat restoration. Five positions within the Department of Fish and Wildlife for expert staff, as the negotiations continue with water districts and environmental groups on voluntary agreements to protecting drinking water and habitats for numerous species Enhancing Dam Safety and Flood Control The Governor proposes enactment of a comprehensive dam safety and emergency flood response package including legislation requiring updated emergency action plans, updated inundation maps, and granting enforcement authority to DWR. Funding proposals include:  $387.1 million Prop. 1 to accelerate flood control projects over the next two fiscal years, including projects in the Central Valley, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and other parts of the state with significant flood risk.  $3.5 million to DWR to carry out dam safety activities.  $1.8 million to OES to carry out dam safety activities.  $3 million to the DWR to conduct evaluation of appurtenance structures such as spillways, gates, outlets. Making Water Conservation A Way of Life The Administration has proposed a trailer bill and funding in the May Revision to support his long- term water conservation proposal called, “Making Water Conservation A Way of Life”. Also pending in the Legislature are policy bills designed to implement the Administration’s plan, an alternative proposal developed by local water agencies, as well as a handful of other proposals for water conservation. The May Revise proposes five positions in the State Water Resources Control Board from existing funding to implement the proposed legislation. Department of Parks and Recreation SB 1, the transportation funding package, includes $54.3 million in additional funding for the parks. The May Revise proposes the following allocations:  $31.5 million increase to repair state parks system infrastructure.  $1.5 million to establish a pilot project to provide transportation to parks from urban areas and schools.  $1 million increase to support off-highway vehicle recreation including increased law enforcement, environmental monitoring an maintenance grants.  $1 million increase for the Abandoned Watercraft Abatement grant program.  $1 million increase to establish recruitment and training program for hard-to-fill classifications including park rangers, lifeguards, maintenance workers, administrators and managers. League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 9  $18 million increase for the Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District. Beverage Container Recycling Program While the January budget proposal contained a reform proposal for this 30-year old program, the May Revise does not contain additional details. CalRecycle held a series of stakeholder workshops in the early part of 2017 and stakeholders continue to await additional details. At stake for cities is funding that supports local recycling programs. Economic Development: Small Business Assistance An additional $2 million is allocated to the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development to match federal funds that are available to the California Small Business Development Center for efforts to support small businesses. Funds will be made available through a one-time competitive grant program, with emphasis on high poverty areas of California. Governor’s Office of Emergency Services The May Revise proposes $500,000 from the Anti-Terrorism Fund for the California NonProfit Security Grant Program, assisting nonprofit organization at high risk of terrorist attack:  Target hardening.  Physical security enhancements.  Public/private coordination and collaboration in emergency preparedness (includes state and local agencies and nonprofits). State Retirement Cost (CalPERS) Investment The May Revise includes a onetime $6 billion supplemental payment to CalPERS through a loan from the Surplus Money Investment Fund. In an effort to mitigate the significant impacts resulting from the lowering of discount rate, this proposed one-time payment to CALPERS is projected to save the state $11 billion over the next two decades. This action would effectively double the state’s annual payment for this year as they are projected to pay approximately $5.8 billion ($3.4 billion general fund dollars). This proposal to address the state’s rapidly growing unfunded pension liabilities is a step in the right direction. While the details of this proposal emerge, it is likely that many cities facing challenges with pension obligations may not have the surplus reserves to avail themselves of such options. Public Employees Relations Board Allocates $750,000 to PERB, which administers and enforces public sector collective bargaining laws, to support permanent positions, cover the costs of “fact finding fees” and relocate an office in Southern California. League budget analysis of May Revise: Caution and Fiscal Restraint Dominate Governor’s Revised Budget Proposal 10 California Department of Justice Litigation $6.5 million GF and 31 positions is allocated to the Department of Justice to address new legal workload related to various federal actions taken since January 2017 impacting public safety, health care, the environment, consumer affairs, and general constitutional issues. This increased workload is expected to continue. Courts The May Revise allocates a total of $3.6 billion for the state’s court system. This figure includes:  Trial Courts: $2.7 billion.  Courts of Appeal: $234 million.  Supreme Court: $48.6 million.  Judicial Council: $140. 3 million.  Judicial Branch Facility Program: $440.9 million.  Habeas Corpus Resource Center: $15. 8 million.  Court Construction Projects: $2.2 million. $75 million will be allocated in FY 2016-17, and $55 million in FY 2017-18, to backfill the shortfall in the Trial Court Trust Fund revenues resulting from lower filing fees and criminal assessments. Also included is a $1.2 million loan over two years to implement a statewide electronic filing program for court pleadings. The cost recovery fee charged to users will fund the loan repayment. The Governor’s January Budget included language deleting provisions from statute related to placing holds on driver’s licenses for failure to pay fines and penalties. The Judicial Council has advocated for a need to address the resulting loss in revenue for court operations, but no amount has been specified. The May Revise contains no solutions on this point, but dialogue between the Administration and the Courts. $2.2 million is included for two courthouse construction projects:  $664,000 for demolition of existing structures on the site of the Siskiyou County Courthouse, including lead and asbestos abatement and clearing of debris.  $1.6 million to complete a data center at the Alameda County Hall of Justice  Re-appropriation of $16 million to support design phase of the Sacramento County Criminal Courthouse. Child Care In January, Governor Brown proposed to pause until FY 2018-19 child care provider rate increases and 2,959 additional full-day state preschool slots that were agreed to in FY 2016-17. Since the May Revise assumes modestly improved revenue growth over January, the Administration has reversed this proposal. The scheduled increases in reimbursement rates for child care providers and expanded preschool slots would result in a $500 million increase for child care providers in the current fiscal year through FY 2018-19. Next Steps: The League will continue to review the Governor’s Budget May Revise and keep city officials informed of any new developments. The Legislature is required by the Constitution to send the Governor a budget by June 15 to be signed and take effect by July 1.