HomeMy WebLinkAboutMid Year Document 2009-102009-10 Mid-Year Budget Review For the 2009-11 Financial Plan Major City Goal: Preservation of Critical Services Major City Goal: Infrastructure Maintenance Major City Goal: Economic Development Major City Goal: Traffic Congestion Relief City of San Luis Obispo
2009-11 Financial Plan MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW: 2009-10 DAVID ROMERO, MAYOR ANDREW CARTER, VICE-MAYOR JOHN ASHBAUGH, COUNCIL MEMBER JAN HOWELL MARX, COUNCIL MEMBER ALLEN SETTLE, COUNCIL MEMBER KATIE LICHTIG, CITY MANAGER Prepared by the Department of Finance & Information Technology Bill Statler, Director/City Treasurer Debbie Malicoat, Finance Manager City of San Luis Obispo
TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Transmittal Memorandum Overview A-1 Financial Condition Summary A-3 Mid-Year Budget Requests A-4 Status of Goals and Objectives A-6 Conclusion A-6 General Fund Financial Condition Summary: Ups and Downs A-7 B. Financial Condition Summaries Revenues by Major Category and Source B-1 Operating Programs B-9 Capital Improvement Plan B-12 Interfund Transactions Operating Transfers B-14 Reimbursement Transfers B-16 Changes in Financial Position Combined Statements All Funds Combined B-17 Governmental Funds B-18 Enterprise and Agency Funds B-19 General Fund B-20 Special Revenue Funds Downtown Business Improvement (D-BID) Fund B-21 Gas Tax Fund B-22 Transportation Development Act Fund B-23 CDBG Fund B-24 Law Enforcement Grant Fund B-25 Public Art (Private Sector Contributions) Fund B-26 Proposition 42 Fund B-27 Proposition 1B Fund B-28 Tourism Business Improvement (T-BID) Fund B-29 Capital Project Funds Capital Outlay Fund B-30 Parkland Development Fund B-31 Transportation Impact Fee Fund B-32 Los Osos Valley Road Sub-Area Fund B-33 Open Space Protection Fund B-34 Airport Area Impact Fee Fund B-35 Affordable Housing Fund B-36 Fleet Replacement Fund B-37 Debt Service Fund B-38 Enterprise Funds Water Fund B-39 Sewer Fund B-40 Parking Fund B-41 Transit Fund B-42 Golf Fund B-43 Whale Rock Commission B-44 C. Mid-Year Budget Requests Summary of Mid-Year Budget Requests C-1 Operating Programs C-2 Capital Improvement Plan C-20 D. Recent Financial and Revenue Reports Quarterly Financial Newsletter: December 2009 D-1 Sales Tax Newsletter: Second Calendar Quarter 2009 D-3 Monthly TOT Report: December 2009 D-4 E. Status of Goals and Objectives Introduction E-1 Status of Major City Goals E-4 Status of Other Council Objectives E-16 Status of Carryover Goals and Objectives E-26 Status of Major Capital Improvement Plan Projects E-28
Section A TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM
TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM A-1 February 23, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager Bill Statler, Director of Finance & Information Technology Debbie Malicoat, Finance Manager SUBJECT: MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW FOR 2009-10 OVERVIEW In monitoring the City’s fiscal condition, staff provides ongoing financial information through a variety of methods, including on-line access to up-to-date information, “hard copy” monthly reports, quarterly financial newsletters, and focused reports on key fiscal indicators such as sales tax, transient occupancy tax (TOT) and investments. In addition to these, the City’s Budget and Fiscal Policies also call for preparing a formal report to the Council every six months on the City’s financial status. This allows the Council to take a broader look at the City’s financial picture at the mid-point of the fiscal year by: 1. Updating beginning fund balance projections based on actual audited results for the prior fiscal year. 2. Analyzing revenue trends since adoption of the Financial Plan, and revising revenues and ending fund balance projections accordingly. 3. Identifying and presenting any fiscal problem areas to the Council, and recommending corrective action or additional funding if required. This is also an opportunity to provide the Council with a formal update on the status of major City goals, capital improvement plan (CIP) projects and other objectives. Summary of Findings and Conclusions The 2009-11 Financial Plan indicated that significant challenges faced the City; the most significant being the largest economic downturn since the Great Depression. It was estimated that the City’s most important revenues would decline or experience tepid growth and that without corrective action, costs would continue to grow. The City faced a projected annual budget gap of $11.3 million in 2009-11, which was closed through a variety of strategies; the largest being expenditure reductions, which accounted for 80% of the gap-closing solution. In reviewing the current fiscal circumstances, there are both positives and negatives. Key positives include: 1. Property tax revenues are slightly better than original projections. “Ups and Downs” Summary Following the Transmittal Memorandum is a one-page overview of the City’s projected ending financial condition for the General Fund at June 30, 2011 that summarizes “where we’re up” and “where we’re down” from the initial estimates in the 2009-11 Financial Plan. 2. Beginning fund balance is stronger than original estimates. This is consistent with the information provided to the Council in October 2009 and with audited financial results presented to the Council in December 2009. 3. Transfers from the General Fund for capital improvement plan (CIP) projects and fleet replacements are slightly lower than initial projections. On the downside: 1. Sales tax (including Measure Y sales tax), which is the City’s top revenue source, continues to decline, reflective of consumers
TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM 2A-2 lackluster activity in the marketplace. . Development review activity has decreased more than anticipated, reflective of tighter commercial lending markets and decreased capital available to the development community. Implementing Fiscal Health Contingency Plan Short-Term Actions. In light of significant downturns in key revenues since the adoption of the 2009-11 Financial Plan, it is time to implement the City’s Fiscal Health Contingency Plan. The “triggers” for implementing at least the short-term budget actions in the plan include both economic downturns in general or whenever there are two consecutive quarters of adverse fiscal results in top five revenues. The City has now experienced two quarters of adverse results in sales tax and transient occupancy tax (TOT) in addition to the overall economic downturn. As set forth in the Fiscal Health Contingency Plan, staff recommends the following short-term actions, effective immediately: 1. Hiring freeze. A hiring “chill” has been in place since the adoption of the Financial Plan in June 2009. Staff recommends that this becomes a freeze, at least until the Financial Plan Supplement is prepared in June 2010, when we will have a better idea of sales tax (based on Christmas quarter trends, which we won’t know until April at the soonest) and TOT trends. The goal of the hiring freeze is not just the short-term savings that result, but more importantly, to also to preserve future options if the problems continue to be ongoing. 2. Travel and training chill. City Manager approval will be required for all Travel Authorizations. 3. Develop a plan to address budgetary shortfalls. This plan may include a combination of CIP Project deferrals and operating budget savings. The CIP review team and budget review team will identify potential projects or opportunities for possible deferral or deletion as well as operating budget savings for future consideration by the Council. The goal of these groups will be to identify $1.5 million in reductions between the operating and capital project budgets in 2010-11. 4. Use of reserves. Maintaining minimum fund balances provides the first line of defense in adverse circumstances and can allow for continued operations while forming comprehensive responses to longer term problems. While it is important to maintain prudent reserves, there may be an opportunity to strategically use the reserves in the short term. The amount of reserves to be dedicated to this purpose will be reviewed as part of the comprehensive plan formulation identified above. Recommendations for specific operating and CIP reductions in meeting the $1.5 million target and any use of reserves will be presented to the Council as part of the 2010-11 Financial Plan Supplement. Longer-term solutions, if needed, are likely to be developed as part of the 2011-13 Financial Plan process. General Fund Focus This mid-year budget review primarily focuses on programs and projects financed through the General Fund. Consistent with the City's policy of annually reviewing the enterprise fund rates, a comprehensive analysis will be presented in June 2010 addressing rate and revenue issues in the water, sewer, parking, transit and golf funds. Limited Mid-Year Budget Requests In general, staff has only proposed mid-year budget requests that need to be considered now in order to meet timing requirements or adequately fund current programs through the end of the 2009-11 Financial Plan
TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM A-3 FINANCIAL CONDITION SUMMARY Beginning General Fund Balance As previously discussed with the Council when staff presented the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 2008-09 in December 2009 the beginning General Fund balance (net of encumbrances and carryovers) is $2.3 million greater than projected in the 2009-11 Financial Plan. As noted at that time, this was due to lower than anticipated expenditures. Over 70% of the expenditure savings came from staffing savings, largely due to regular position vacancies during the year. These are one-time in nature and cannot be relied upon in the future. Projected Ending Financial Condition. Due to the decline in key revenues, $1.5 million in expenditure savings are recommended in 2010-11 in order to maintain a fund balance at minimum policy levels of 20% of operating expenditures. As noted above, staff will begin surfacing alternatives and return to the Council with the Financial Plan Supplement for approval of these additional cost saving measures. Maintaining strong reserves is important given the uncertainties that continue to face the City. Although economic recovery will happen, it is likely to take longer and be slower than originally anticipated. General Fund Revenues Included in Section B of this report is a summary of revenues by fund and major source that provides actual results for 2008-09 along with a comparison of the revised 2009-10 revenue projections with original budget estimates. Over the next two years, overall projections for General Fund revenues are anticipated to be about $3.3 million lower than projected in the 2009-11 Financial Plan. The following summarizes the most significant General Fund revenue revisions: 1. General Sales Tax. Based on year-to-date results and estimates for the balance of the year, as well as information from the City’s sales tax advisor, Hinderliter deLlamas (HdL), revenues from this source are projected to be 5% less than 2008-09, compared with original estimates for a decrease of 2.5%. This revised downward projection is based on a year-to-date decrease for the first six months of 10% and an assumption that the balance of the year will be flat, which results in a reduction of 5%. This downturn is largely due to the current economic situation being experienced throughout California and the nation. Slight recovery is anticipated in 2010-11 and staff projects sales tax revenues will increase by 2% in the second year of the Financial Plan. . Since the prior year results were weaker than estimated in the 2009-11 Financial Plan, this results in a lower “base” upon which to calculate the anticipated decline and thus results in lower revenues than estimated of $2,014,800 over the course of the 2009-11 Financial Plan: $874,900 in 2009-10 and $1,139,900 in 2010-11. 2. Measure Y Sales Tax. Revenues from the ½-cent Measure Y sales tax are also affected by the decline in the economy and projections have been revised downward to reflect this. Like general sales tax revenues, the prior year results were weaker than anticipated. After applying the same decline and growth assumptions, it results in reduced revenues of $213,500 in 2001-10 and $311,600 in 2010-11. 3. Property Tax. This revenue source is the one bright spot, albeit a modest one. Housing values for assessment purposes in the City have remained relatively stable. Based on year to date results as well as information from the County assessor, revenues are estimated to increase slightly from the initial 2009-11 Financial Plan projections, increasing by 3% compared with the original estimate of 2%. This results in an upward revised projection of $82,800 in 2009-10 and $85,200 in 2010-11. 4. Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). Based on year-to-date results through December 2009, staff continues to assume that 2009-10 will end with a 10% reduction in revenue from the prior year and a modest increase of 2% in 2010-11. Because the prior year slightly
TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM A-4 exceeded projections, this results in additional revenue of about $26,000 in each of the two years of the Financial Plan above the initial 2009-11 Financial Plan estimates. 5. Development Review Fees. These continue to fall as development activity has decreased due to the economic conditions. Based on current activity as well as staff assessment of developments in the pipeline, these revenues have been adjusted downward by $476,300 in 2009-10 and $249,600 in 2010-11. Operating Programs Section B includes an overview of changes to the operating program budgets. Organized by fund, these schedules include the original budget, re-appropriations for encumbrances and carryovers, and budget changes to-date since approval of the 2009-11 Financial Plan in June 2009. These summaries also reflect the mid-year budget requests, which are discussed below. Capital Improvement Plan This part of Section B reflects the original CIP budgets for 2009-11 by fund, re-appropriations for encumbrances and carryovers, and budget changes to-date since approval of the 2009-11 Financial Plan in June 2009. These summaries include mid-year budget requests, which are discussed below. Interfund Transactions This portion of Section B reflects actual interfund transfers for 2008-09 along with the original budget and revisions for 2009-11. The revised operating transfers are generally driven by other changes in the mid-year budget review. The reimbursement transfers are based on the 2009-11 Cost Allocation Plan adopted by Council on February 2, 2010, resulting in decreased reimbursements in the General Fund of $142,800 in 2009-10 and $146,800 in 2010-11. In addition, the 2009-11 Financial Plan approved replacing two police patrol sedans. Over the past year, the police department has reviewed the size of the fleet and has determined that the department could reduce the number of marked patrol cars by one. This results in a $34,300 reduction in the transfer of funds from the General Fund to the Fleet Replacement Fund. Projected Fund Balances/Working Capital Based on the revised revenue projections and expenditures summaries, this part of Section B includes a summary of projected changes in financial position for each of the City's operating funds. As with the revenue projections, the changes in financial position schedules include the actual fund balances/working capital for 2008-09 and the original budget and revised projections for 2009-10. MID-YEAR BUDGET REQUESTS As noted previously, mid-year budget requests focus on areas that need to be approved now in order to meet timing requirements or adequately fund current programs through the end of the fiscal year. Supporting documentation that fully justifies the need for these adjustments is provided in Section C, summarized as follows. Operating Programs There is only one operating program mid-year budget request, which totals $235,000 in 2009-10 and $40,000 in 2010-11 in the Water and Whale Rock Funds: 1. Whale Rock Reservoir Operations: Electric Utility Increase. Increasing water supply pumping from Whale Rock Reservoir, to ensure consistent water quality during repair of an ozone generator at the Water Treatment Plant, will cost $75,000 in 2009-10 and $40,000 in 2010-11 in the Water Fund.
TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM A-5 Increasing the Whale Rock pumping budget to met increased water supply pumping costs for the City will cost $160,000 in 2009-10 with offsetting revenues of $160,000, resulting in no net fiscal impact to the Whale Rock Fund. Capital Improvement Plan The following summarizes the three CIP mid-year budget requests by fund: CIP Budget Request Summary2009-10 2010-11General Fund936,500 Water Fund138,000 Sewer Fund92,000 Parking Fund34,500 Transit Fund23,000 Transportation Impact Fee Fund1,126,000 Grant Funding1,191,000 Total$3,541,000$0 The following provides a brief summary of the three CIP requests, which are further described in Section C: 1. FoxPro Application Replacement. Replacing FoxPro applications that can no longer be supported with one or more packaged systems that will meet a variety of user needs, allow integration among programs and retain historical data will cost $1,150,000 in 2009-10 for base software, data conversion, implementation and user training. The General Fund component of this cost is the $862,500; the balance is allocated to the enterprise funds based on benefit. 2. Gateway Paving: Upper Monterey Paving and Mission Style Sidewalk Installation. Resurfacing Monterey Street and replacing existing sidewalk with new Mission Style sidewalk will cost $1,691,000. Of this amount, $500,000 was previously budgeted in the 2009-11 Financial Plan. The additional $1.2 million is proposed to be funded from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA). 3. LOVR Interchange Right-of-Way Acquisition. Design work on construction plans and specifications for the Los Osos Valley Road/Highway 101 (LOVR) interchange project continue and is nearing the 65% completion stage. As part of this process, staff has refined the right-of-way needs for the project and has begun appraisals of potential acquisition areas needed for construction. Funding for the right of way acquisition has been secured via a State grant in the amount of $1.2 million, which is programmed for 2011-12. Since the project design continues to move forward and is anticipated to be complete by early 2011, staff believes it is timely to begin right-of-way negotiations now and to concurrently seek ways of advancing funding for this in order to take advantage of the downturn in the real estate market and secure the properties to complete a “bid ready” project. It is anticipated that if the City advanced the $1.2 million in right of way funding, the grant would be amended to transfer the grant funding to the construction phase of the project, resulting in no net loss to the overall project grant amount of $13.8 million. Given the very high priority of this project, staff recommends advancing the $1.2 million to complete the right-of-way acquisition to ensure that LOVR interchange project remains on track. Of this amount, $1,126,000 is proposed to be funded from transportation impact fees, (which includes $846,000 transferred from other projects) and $74,000 from the General Fund (of this amount, $24,700 would be transferred from other projects, resulting a net added General Fund appropriation of $49,300). This is consistent with the City’s adopted Budget and Fiscal Polices for the use of transportation impact fees (TIF) resources, which provide for advancing funds from the General Fund for high-priority projects if adequate TIF funds are not available, which should be reimbursed as soon as funds become available. Other Mid-Year Budget Review Issues
TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM 1 A-6 . Railroad Safety Trail Phase 3 and 101 Overcrossing Bridge. Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) has notified the City that it will not approve a lease agreement for Phase 3 of the Railroad Safety Trail (Amtrak to Marsh Street). UPRR has stated that its corporate policy does not allow any type of easement that would place activities closer than 40 feet from the centerline of the tracks. Based on UPRR approvals received in 2004, the trail through this area has been designed inside that limit. The Highway 101 pedestrian/bikeway bridge project is also adversely affected by this decision. While staff will continue to explore options to complete the Railroad Safety Trail through other routes, staff recommends reallocating the current City funding for these two projects to other high priority projects as follows: • The Phase 3 project included $1.2 million in ARRA grant funds that are recommended to be reallocated to the Gateway Paving project discussed above as well as $417,100 in TIF funding. • The Highway 101 bridge project included $428,900 in TIF funding. The TIF funds will be reallocated to the LOVR Interchange project discussed above along with $24,700 in General Fund resources previously allocated for the bridge project. 2. Transit Fund. Reductions in revenue, most notably Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenue from the State, result in significant adverse impacts to the Transit Fund. While the Transit Fund is expected to have enough funding in 2009-10, actions will need to be taken in 2010-11 in order to remain in a positive financial position. Staff will be reviewing all options, including service reductions and revenue enhancements and will return to the Council in Spring 2010 with recommendations. STATUS OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Section E of this report provides a formal look at the status of Major City Goals, Other Council Objectives and Major CIP Projects as of February 2010. As reflected in the report, with about 30% of the Financial Plan period completed, we are generally on track in achieving the major City goal “action plans.” However, as discussed above, there are two notable exceptions: the “Action Plans” for the Railroad Safety Trail Phase 3 and Highway 101 bridge projects have been revised to reflect the new scope of work of exploring alternative routes. CONCLUSION The Budget Review Team and Department Heads will be prepared to respond to any questions the Council may have regarding this report at their February 23, 2010 meeting. If you have any questions in the interim, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL CONDITION SUMMARY: UPS AND DOWNSComparison of Mid-Year Budget Projections with Those Initially Presented in the 2009-11 Financial PlanWHERE WE'RE UP2009-102010-11Two-Year TotalRevenues andProperty Tax82,800 85,200 168,000Other SourcesTransient Occupancy Tax26,300 26,800 53,100Non-RecurringBeginning Fund Balance (Net of Carryovers)2,242,5002,242,500Sale of Surplus Property35,00035,000Operating Transfers310,700 (9,600) 301,1000WHERE WE'RE DOWNRevenues andSales Tax (including Measure Y)(1,095,400) (1,463,800) (2,559,200)Other SourcesFranchise Fees(38,500) (39,900) (78,400)Business Tax Certificates(8,000) (8,200) (16,200)Vehicle Code Fines(25,000) (25,000) (50,000)Vehicle License Fees(15,000) (18,000) (33,000)Development Review Fees(476,300) (249,600) (725,900)Public Safety, Recreation & General Govt Service Charges(79,400) (91,800) (171,200)Reimbursement Transfers (142,800) (146,800) (289,600)Other Ups and Downs(44,500)(44,500)ExpendituresCouncil Approved Budget Changes-To-Date(1,200)(1,200)and Other UsesMid-Year Budget Requests0Fox Pro Replacements(862,500)(862,500)Advance to TIF Fund for LOVR Interchange(49,300)(49,300)2010-11 Budget Reduction Targets1,500,000 1,500,000NET CHANGE($140,600) ($440,700) ($581,300)Ending General Fund Balance at June 30, 2011$9,359,800Percent of Operating Expenditures at June 30, 201120%Changes from the 2009-11 Financial PlanA-7
Section B FINANCIAL CONDITION SUMMARIES
REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE2008-09 Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceGENERAL FUNDTaxes & Franchise Fees43,828,600 43,637,200 42,604,400 (1,032,800) 45,106,400 43,706,500 (1,399,900)Sales & Use TaxGeneral12,070,700 12,342,100 11,467,200 (874,900) 12,836,400 11,696,500 (1,139,900)Measure Y5,641,400 5,572,800 5,359,300 (213,500) 5,778,100 5,466,500 (311,600)Public Safety (Proposition 172)308,400 260,800 253,800 (7,000) 271,200 258,900 (12,300)Property Tax8,788,400 8,968,800 9,051,600 82,800 9,237,900 9,323,100 85,200Transient Occupancy Tax4,679,500 4,185,300 4,211,600 26,300 4,269,000 4,295,800 26,800Utility Users Tax4,358,500 4,456,200 4,456,2004,612,200 4,612,200Property Tax In Lieu of VLF3,504,700 3,354,100 3,354,1003,454,700 3,454,700Franchise Fees2,439,400 2,519,100 2,480,600 (38,500) 2,607,300 2,567,400 (39,900)Business Tax Certificates1,878,500 1,828,000 1,820,000 (8,000) 1,864,600 1,856,400 (8,200)Real Property Transfer Tax159,100 150,000 150,000175,000 175,000Fines and Forfeitures261,000 235,000 210,000 (25,000) 242,100 217,100 (25,000)Vehicle Code Fines182,700 175,000 150,000 (25,000) 180,000 155,000 (25,000)Other Fines and Forfeitures78,300 60,000 60,00062,100 62,100Investment & Property Revenues1,108,300 648,000 648,000650,600 650,600Investment Earnings1,038,300 475,000 475,000475,000 475,000Rents & Concessions70,000 173,000 173,000175,600 175,600Subventions & Grants2,823,300 1,151,200 1,214,200 63,000 1,172,500 1,154,500 (18,000)Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 166,500 135,000 120,000 (15,000) 150,000 132,000 (18,000)Homeowners' Property Tax Relief75,200 89,000 89,00090,000 90,000Other in-lieu Taxes15,700 17,200 17,20017,500 17,500SB 90 ReimbursementsBooking Fee ReimbursementsPolice Training (POST)51,900 70,000 70,00070,000 70,000Local Law Enforcement100,000 100,000 100,000100,000 100,000State Office of Traffic Safety Grant30,000 30,000Mutual Aid Reimbursements2,230,900 625,000 637,900 12,900 650,000 650,000Maintenance of State HighwaysZone 9 Reimbursements76,700 85,000 85,00095,000 95,000Other State & Federal Grants106,40065,100 65,1002009-102010-11B-1
REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE2008-09 Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection Variance2009-102010-11Service Charges4,581,900 5,422,700 4,867,000 (555,700) 5,448,500 5,107,100 (341,400)Police ServicesAccident Reports3,9004,0003,000 (1,000) 4,0003,000 (1,000)Collision Investigation15,700 15,000 15,00015,000 15,000Alarm Permits and False Alarm Fees124,700 110,000 110,000110,000 110,000DUI Cost Recovery32,800 27,400 14,000 (13,400) 27,400 14,000 (13,400)Tow Release Fee46,900 30,200 25,000 (5,200) 30,200 25,000 (5,200)Tobacco Permit Fees 12,500 12,000 12,00012,000 12,000Administrative Citations159,200 179,300 179,300179,300 179,300Parking Citations50,000 50,00050,000 50,000Other Police Services19,300 37,500 45,3007,800 37,500 44,300 6,800Total Police Services 415,000 465,400 453,600 (11,800) 465,400 452,600 (12,800)Fire ServicesCal Poly Fire Services224,700 250,000 250,000257,500 257,500Medical Emergency Recovery162,500 157,300 157,300160,400 160,400Fire-safety/Haz Mat Permits78,100 187,100 136,000 (51,100) 188,700 136,000 (52,700)Multi-Dwelling Unit Inspections188,200 188,300 188,300188,300 188,300CUPA Fees68,900 95,200 95,20096,600 96,600CUPA Fines30,000 46,500 46,50017,200 17,200Other Fire Services74,200 13,600 18,3004,700 13,900 13,900Total Fire Services826,600 938,000 891,600 (46,400) 922,600 869,900 (52,700)Development ReviewPlanning & Zoning Fees591,900 774,200 493,500 (280,700) 772,100 592,500 (179,600)Construction Plan Check & Inspections775,100 944,700 805,000 (139,700) 944,700 944,700Infrastructure Plan Check & Inspections72,800 422,800 353,700 (69,100) 422,800 350,000 (72,800)Encroachment Permits219,200 76,800 120,000 43,200 76,800 120,000 43,200Fire Plan Check & Inspections62,800 155,400 125,400 (30,000) 165,400 125,000 (40,400)Waterways Management Plan Fees30,800Total Development Review1,752,600 2,373,900 1,897,600 (476,300) 2,381,800 2,132,200 (249,600)B-2
REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE2008-09 Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection Variance2009-102010-11Parks & RecreationAdult Athletic Fees 113,700 107,600 107,600 109,600 109,600Youth Athletic Fees 37,200 31,000 31,000 31,600 31,600Skate Park 1,500 100 100 200 200Instruction Fees 102,800 80,700 80,700 82,300 82,300Special Event Fees 97,700 82,000 82,200 200 83,700 83,700Batting Cages 1,200Other Rental & Use Fees 183,500 201,300 172,500 (28,800) 205,000 178,700 (26,300)Childrens' Services 528,200 590,800 590,800 601,600 601,600Teens & Seniors 2,600 3,300 3,300 3,400 3,400Aquatics 226,000 208,800 208,800 215,700 215,700Other Recreation Revenues (1,000) 5,000 12,400 7,400 5,000 5,000Total Parks & Recreation 1,293,400 1,310,600 1,289,400 (21,200) 1,338,100 1,311,800 (26,300)General GovernmentBusiness License 252,700 289,800 289,800 295,600 295,600Sales of Publications 19,300 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000Other Service Charges 22,300 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000Total General Government 294,300 334,800 334,800 340,600 340,600Other Revenues751,600 778,000 813,000 35,000 128,000 128,000Insurance Refunds566,200Sale of Surplus Property39,40035,000 35,000Other Revenues146,000 778,000 778,000128,000 128,000TOTAL GENERAL FUND$53,354,700 $51,872,100 $50,356,600 ($1,515,500) $52,748,100 $50,963,800 ($1,784,300)B-3
REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE2008-09 Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection Variance2009-102010-11SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDSDowntown Business Improvement DistrictInvestment and Property Revenues 3,400Service ChargesAssessments222,500 216,500 216,500220,800 220,800Total Downtown BID Fund$225,900 216,500 216,500220,800 $220,800Tourism Business Improvement DistrictInvestment and Property Revenues6,80010,000 10,000Service ChargesAssessments646,900 837,100 837,100853,800 853,800Total Tourism BID Fund$653,700 837,100 $847,100 10,000 853,800 $853,800Community Development Block GrantSubventions and Grants$634,300 620,000 1,681,200 1,061,200 620,000 620,000Gas Tax FundSubventions and Grants$765,900 787,000 787,000791,000 791,000Transportation Development Act FundSubventions and Grants$31,000 22,400 22,40022,500 22,500Law Enforcement Grant FundInvestment and Property Revenues2,5001,2001,2001,4001,400Subventions and GrantsService Charges6,0005,2005,2005,4005,400Total Law Enforcement Grant Fund$8,5006,400 $6,4006,8006,800Public Art (Private Sector Contributions) FundInvestment and Property Revenues20,1006,1006,1006,8006,800Service Charges19,6005,0005,0005,0005,000Total Public Art Fund$39,700 11,100 $11,10011,800 11,800Proposition 42 FundSubventions and Grants378,300 422,800 422,800463,300 463,300Total Proposition 42 Fund$378,300 422,800 $422,800463,300 463,300Proposition 1B FundSubventions and Grants657,700Total Proposition 1B Fund$657,700B-4
REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE2008-09 Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection Variance2009-102010-11CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDSCapital Outlay FundSubventions and GrantsState of CaliforniaSurface Transportation (STIP/SLTPP)2,176,200430,900 430,900State SHA Grant479,0001,811,100 1,811,100Safe Routes to Schools Grant1,053,800 1,053,800Other State Grants61,100102,200 102,200Federal GovernmentTransportation enhancement (TEA)67,50048,600 48,600Highway and Bridge Rehabilitation andReplacement (HBRR)32,400486,900 486,900Other Federal Grants63,900360,000 360,000Service Charges125,000 150,000 25,000 90,000 90,000Other Revenues1,014,700 100,000 258,200 158,200Total Capital Outlay Fund$3,894,800 225,000 4,701,700 4,476,700 90,000 90,000Parkland Development FundInvestment and Property Revenues54,900 36,100 36,10037,200 37,200Subventions and Grants94,80042,700 42,700 50,000 50,000Service ChargesPark in-lieu Fees175,700 45,000 45,00050,000 50,000Dwelling Unit Fees900200200200200Other Revenues323,300 323,300Total Parkland Development Fund$326,300 81,300 124,000 42,700 460,700 460,700Transportation Impact Fee FundInvestment and Property Revenues197,400 15,000 30,000 15,0007,5007,500Subventions and Grants668,900 2,090,000 2,914,900 824,900Service Charges498,400 150,000 100,000 (50,000) 200,000 150,000 (50,000)Other Revenue57,200 57,200Total Transportation Impact Fee Fund $1,364,700 2,255,000 3,102,100 847,100 207,500 157,500 (50,000)Los Osos Valley Road Sub-Area Fee FundInvestment and Property Revenues15,100200200300300Service Charges79,700Total LOVR Sub-Area Fee Fund$94,800200200300300B-5
REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE2008-09 Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection Variance2009-102010-11Fleet Replacement FundInvestment and Property Revenues 101,000 61,300 61,300 63,700 63,700Other Revenue 24,300 20,000 24,600 4,600 20,000 20,000Total Fleet Replacement Fund$125,300 81,300 85,9004,600 83,700 83,700Open Space Protection FundInvestment and Property Revenues16,2005,0005,0005,0005,000Subventions and Grants6,400 750,000 1,100,000 350,000Other Revenue500Total Open Space Protection Fund$22,600 755,000 1,105,500 350,0005,0005,000Airport Area Impact Fee FundInvestment and Property Revenues48,500 29,900 29,90030,700 30,700Service ChargesTotal Airport Area Impact Fee Fund$48,500 29,900 29,90030,700 30,700Affordable Housing FundInvestment and Property Revenues201,100 119,800 85,000 (34,800) 123,400 86,700(36,700)Service Charges465,700 350,000 350,000350,000 350,000Total Affordable Housing Fund$666,800 469,800 435,000 (34,800) 473,400 436,700 (36,700)TOTAL-GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS$62,635,800 $58,692,900 $63,935,400 $5,242,000 $57,089,400 $55,218,400 ($1,871,000)B-6
REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE2008-09 Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection Variance2009-102010-11ENTERPRISE & AGENCY FUNDSWater FundInvestment and Property Revenues 854,000 166,600 178,600 12,000 182,100 182,100Subventions & GrantsService Charges 13,447,400 14,259,000 14,124,000 (135,000) 15,980,700 15,682,700 (298,000)Other Revenue 388,600 25,600 48,600 23,000 26,400 26,400Total Water Fund$14,690,000 14,451,200 14,351,200 (100,000) 16,189,200 15,891,200 (298,000)Sewer FundInvestment and Property Revenues343,900 43,800 68,800 25,000 40,000 55,000 15,000Subventions & GrantsService Charges11,774,400 12,787,600 12,732,200 (55,400) 13,961,800 13,846,900 (114,900)Other Revenues10,800 19,100 11,000 (8,100) 19,700 11,600 (8,100)Total Sewer Fund$12,129,100 12,850,500 12,812,000 (38,500) 14,021,500 13,913,500 (108,000)Parking FundFines and Forfeitures 770,500 927,500 927,500 838,000 838,000Investment and Property Revenues 442,100 141,200 176,600 35,400 110,000 145,000 35,000Service Charges 2,725,300 3,018,200 2,861,100 (157,100) 5,542,600 5,302,700 (239,900)Other Revenues 12,300 70,700 (70,700) 118,800 70,700 (48,100)Total Parking Fund$3,950,200 4,157,600 3,965,200 (192,400) 6,609,400 6,356,400 (253,000)Transit FundInvestment and Property Revenues55,9005,0005,6006005,0005,000Subventions and Grants3,819,500 2,693,200 4,544,300 1,851,100 2,331,700 2,049,400 (282,300)Service Charges593,800 546,300 498,900 (47,400) 558,500 489,300 (69,200)Other Revenues 13,200 10,000 11,0001,000Total Transit Fund$4,482,400 3,254,500 5,059,800 1,805,300 2,895,200 2,543,700 (351,500)B-7
REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE2008-09 Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection Variance2009-102010-11Golf FundInvestment and Property Revenues 3,700 8,800 64,300 55,500 9,000 66,200 57,200Service Charges 353,100 412,800 391,800 (21,000) 443,200 432,200 (11,000)Other Revenues 29,100 55,500 10,400 (45,100) 57,200 (57,200)Total Golf Fund$385,900 477,100 466,500 (10,600) 509,400 498,400 (11,000)Whale Rock CommissionInvestment and Property Revenues45,300 20,000 10,000 (10,000) 20,000 10,000 (10,000)Service Charges971,800 981,200 1,141,200 160,000 1,281,700 1,281,700Other Revenues 1,500Total Whale Rock Commission Fund$1,018,600 1,001,200 1,151,200 150,000 1,301,700 1,291,700 (10,000)Total Enterprise & Agency Funds$36,656,200 $36,192,100 $37,805,900 $1,613,800 $41,526,400 $40,494,900 ($1,031,500)TOTAL - ALL FUNDS$99,292,000 $94,885,000 $101,741,300 $6,855,800 $98,615,800 $95,713,300 ($2,902,500)B-8
OPERATING PROGRAMSALL FUNDS COMBINED Original Carryovers & Other Mid-Year Other RevisedBudget Encumbrances Changes Requests Changes Budget2009-10General FundPublic Safety24,275,500 67,100 239,90024,582,500Transportation3,162,800 141,400 15,1003,319,300Leisure, Cultural & Social Services6,689,200 28,000 11,6006,728,800Community Development 5,731,100 68,000 47,200 5,846,300General Government 11,836,700 89,900 129,600 12,056,200Total General Fund 51,695,300 394,400 443,400 52,533,100Downtown Business Improvement District Fund 216,500 1,100 217,600Tourism Business Improvement District Fund 837,100 268,000 1,105,100Community Development Block Grant Fund 272,100 4,700 276,800Water Fund 6,461,300 125,400 75,000 6,661,700Sewer Fund 5,935,000 141,500 6,076,500Parking Fund 1,663,000 4,000 1,667,000Transit fund 2,606,400 25,000 21,000 2,652,400Golf Fund 524,400 5,400 400 530,200Whale Rock Fund 804,400 6,500 160,000 970,900Total - All Funds Combined $71,015,500 $966,200 $473,500 $235,000 $1,100 $72,691,300SUMMARY OF BUDGET CHANGES TO-DATE: 2009-10Council/CM Budget Revenue or NetApproval Date Change Transfer Offsets ChangeGeneral FundIncrease Grants in Aid for Friends of Prado 7/21/2009 1,200 1,200 CIP Engineering temporary staffing from CMP capital project8/17/2009 12,500 12,500 - Handheld parking citation equipment for SNAP8/24/2009 13,900 13,900 - Recreation donationsvarious 7,700 7,700 - Fire mutual aid10/20/2009 12,900 12,900 - Fire concrete pad12/2/2009 4,700 4,700 - MOA Adjustmentsvarious 302,000 302,000 - Trash services adjustment12/22/2009200 200 - Police reimbursement grantsvarious 72,900 72,900 - Damage to city property cost recoveryvarious 15,400 15,400 - Total General Fund443,400 442,2001,200Mid-Year Budget ChangesBudget Changes To-Date B-9
OPERATING PROGRAMSALL FUNDS COMBINED SUMMARY OF BUDGET CHANGES TO-DATE: 2009-10RevenueCouncil/CM Budget Or Transfer NetApproval Date ChangeOffsets ChangeCommunity Development Block Grant FundAdditional funding for homeless shelter contract4,7004,700 Total4,7004,700 Parking FundLandscape maintenance contract6/16/2009 4,0004,000 Total4,0004,000 Transit FundWebsite/Marketing10/6/2009 20,000 20,000 - Donation for marketing transit week10/12/2009 1,0001,000- Total21,00021,000- Golf FundDonation for yardage markers400400- Total400400- TOTAL$473,500 $463,600 $9,900B-10
OPERATING PROGRAMSALL FUNDS COMBINED Original Carryovers & Other Mid-Year Other RevisedBudget Encumbrances Changes Requests Changes Budget2010-11General FundPublic Safety24,820,40024,820,400Transportation3,177,9003,177,900Leisure, Cultural & Social Services6,876,8006,876,800Community Development5,846,2005,846,200General Government12,148,20012,148,200Total General Fund52,869,50052,869,500Downtown Business Improvement District Fund220,800220,800Tourism Business Improvement District Fund853,800853,800Community Development Block Grant Fund270,700270,700Water Fund12,147,10040,00012,187,100Sewer Fund6,177,0006,177,000Parking Fund1,699,2001,699,200Transit Fund2,681,2002,681,200Golf Fund539,800539,800Whale Rock Fund826,200826,200Total - All Funds Combined$78,285,300$40,000$78,325,300Budget Changes To-Date Mid-Year Budget ChangesB-11
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANALL FUNDS COMBINED Original Encumbrances/ Other Budget Mid-YearOther Budget Carryovers Changes Requests Changes Revised2009-10Capital Outlay3,984,200 18,588,600387,500862,500(24,700) 23,798,100Affordable Housing2,462,800 1,034,4003,497,200Fleet Replacement1,492,000136,4001,628,400Community Development Block Grant403,000 1,061,2001,464,200Airport Area Impact Fee375,000375,000Transportation Impact Fee2,912,500 5,428,000 (543,500) 1,200,000 (2,342,900) 6,654,100Law Enforcement Grant 6,5006,500Public Art (Private Sector Contributions)185,000185,000Parkland Development374,000155,800529,800Los Osos Valley Road Impact Fee68,00068,000Open Space Protection1,072,500514,7005001,587,700Water2,808,200 4,849,100122,700138,0007,918,000Sewer1,813,800 5,241,30092,0007,147,100Parking885,000 1,825,60023,0002,733,600Transit2,746,10034,5002,780,600Golf25,60061,00086,600Whale Rock75,000148,400223,400TOTAL$15,845,800 $43,853,500 $1,001,600 $2,350,000 ($2,367,600) $60,683,300SUMMARY OF BUDGET CHANGES TO-DATE AND OTHER MID-YEAR CHANGES: 2009-10Revenue orOtherCouncil/CMChanges Other Source Mid-YearNetApproval Date To-Date OffsetChanges ChangeCapital Outlay Fund 387,500 400,000 (12,500)Hwy 1/Santa Rosa Major Investment Study07/21/09 400,000400,000CIP Engineering temporary staffing08/13/09(12,500)(12,500)Affordable Housing Fund1,034,4001,034,400Village at Broad08/04/09 1,034,4001,034,400Transportation Impact Fee Fund(543,500)(543,500)Higuera Widening Marsh/High06/16/09 (543,500)(543,500)Open Space Protection Fund500500Donation to Open Space enhancements7/31/09500500Water Fund122,700122,700Raw Water Bypass 09/01/09 122,700122,700Total 2009-10 Adjustments$510,700 $400,000$110,200Budget Changes-to-DateMid-Year Budget Changes B-12
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANALL FUNDS COMBINED Original Encumbrances/Other Budget Mid-YearOther Budget Carryovers Changes Requests Changes Revised2010-11Capital Outlay 3,365,4003,365,400Parkland Development 1,293,0001,293,000Fleet Replacement 160,800 (34,300) 126,500Community Development Block Grant* 100,000100,000Transportation Impact Fee 253,600253,600Water 3,882,5003,882,500Sewer 1,846,7001,846,700Parking 40,40040,400Transit 1,3001,300Whale Rock 350,000350,000Total $11,293,700 ($34,300) $11,259,400*Preliminary estimate of expenditure activity for 2008-09 as approved by Council June 17, 2008.Budget Changes-to-Date Mid-Year Budget Changes B-13
INTERFUND TRANSACTIONSOPERATING TRANSFERS 2008-092009-102010-11OriginalOriginalActual Budget Revised Variance Budget Revised VarianceGeneral FundOperating Transfers InGas Tax Fund765,900 787,000 787,000- 791,000 791,000 - TDA Fund31,00022,400 22,400- 22,500 22,500 - Proposition 1B Fund- Open Space Protection Fund- Proposition 42 Fund378,300 422,800 422,800- 463,300 463,300 - Total operating transfers in1,175,200 1,232,200 1,232,200- 1,276,800 1,276,800 - Operating Transfers OutCommunity Development Block Grant(113,600) (55,100) (59,800) (4,700) (55,100) (55,100) - Law Enforcement Grants Fund- - Capital Outlay Fund(3,849,100) (3,759,200) (4,301,000) (541,800) (3,275,400) (3,275,400) - Open Space Protection Fund(234,000) (322,500) (322,500) - - Transportation Impact Fee Fund(74,000) (74,000) Fleet Replacement Fund(550,000) (113,400) (79,100) 34,300 - Debt Service Fund(2,075,800) (2,901,800) (2,901,800) - (2,670,900) (2,670,900) - Golf Fund(335,000) (242,600) (257,500) (14,900) (207,200) (216,800) (9,600) Total operating transfers out(7,157,500) (7,394,600) (7,995,700) (601,100) (6,208,600) (6,218,200) (9,600)Total Operating Transfers(5,982,300) (6,162,400) (6,763,500) (601,100) (4,931,800) (4,941,400) (9,600)Community Development Block Grant FundOperating Transfer InGeneral Fund113,60055,100 59,800 4,700 55,100 55,100 - Gas Tax FundOperating Transfer OutGeneral Fund(765,900) (787,000) (787,000) - (791,000) (791,000) - Transportation Development Act FundOperating Transfer OutGeneral Fund(31,000) (22,400) (22,400) - (22,500) (22,500) - Proposition 42 FundOperating Transfer OutGeneral Fund(378,300) (422,800) (422,800) - (463,300) (463,300) - B-14
INTERFUND TRANSACTIONSOPERATING TRANSFERS 2008-092009-102010-11OriginalOriginalActual Budget Revised Variance Budget Revised VarianceProposition 1B FundOperating Transfer OutCapital Outlay Fund(657,700)- Capital Outlay FundOperating Transfer InGeneral Fund3,849,100 3,759,200 4,301,000 541,800 3,275,400 3,275,400 - Proposition 1B Fund657,700Total operating transfers 4,506,800 3,759,200 4,301,000 541,800 3,275,400 3,275,400 - Open Space Protection FundOperating Transfer InGeneral Fund234,000 322,500 322,500 - - - Fleet Replacement FundOperating Transfers InGeneral Fund550,000 113,400 79,100 (34,300) - Transportation Impact Fee FundOperating Transfer InGeneral Fund74,000 74,000 Debt Service FundOperating Transfer InGeneral Fund2,075,800 2,901,800 2,901,800 - 2,670,900 2,670,900 - Golf Course FundOperating Transfer InGeneral fund335,000 242,600 257,500 14,900 207,200 216,800 9,600NET OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0B-15
INTERFUND TRANSACTIONSREIMBURSEMENT TRANSFERS 2008-092009-102010-11OriginalOriginalActual Budget Revised Variance Budget Revised VarianceGeneral Fund(4,210,800) (4,406,800) (4,264,000) 142,800 (4,496,200) (4,349,400) 146,800Community Development Block Grant Fund1,9000- Enterprise and Agency FundsWater1,447,300 1,524,500 1,669,300 144,800 1,555,000 1,702,700 147,700Sewer1,708,800 1,789,700 1,438,400 (351,300) 1,825,500 1,467,200 (358,300)Parking479,300 500,400 538,500 38,100 510,400 549,300 38,900Transit292,100 300,700 350,200 49,500 306,700 357,200 50,500Golf163,600 169,700 168,300 (1,400) 173,100 171,700 (1,400)Whale Rock Commission117,800 121,800 99,300 (22,500) 125,500 101,300 (24,200)Total Enterprise and Agency Funds4,208,900 4,406,800 4,264,000 (142,800) 4,496,200 4,349,400 (146,800)NET REIMBURSEMENT TRANSFERS$0$0$0$0$0$0$0B-16
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONALL FUNDS COMBINED2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesTax Revenues43,828,600 43,637,200 42,604,400 (1,032,800) 45,106,400 43,706,500 (1,399,900)Fines and Forfeitures1,031,500 1,162,500 1,137,500 (25,000) 1,080,100 1,055,100 (25,000)Investment and Property Revenues 3,520,200 1,308,000 1,416,700 108,700 1,292,700 1,353,200 60,500Subventions and Grants12,760,200 8,536,600 17,023,000 8,486,400 5,451,000 5,150,700 (300,300)Service ChargesGovernmental Funds6,697,300 7,156,700 6,426,000 (730,700) 7,223,700 6,742,300 (481,400)Enterprise Funds28,909,100 31,023,900 30,608,000 (415,900) 36,486,800 35,753,800 (733,000)Trust and Agency Revenues973,300 981,200 1,141,200 160,000 1,281,700 1,281,700Other Revenues 2,229,600 1,078,900 1,234,500 155,600 693,400 580,000 (113,400)Total Revenues 99,949,800 94,885,000 101,591,300 6,706,300 98,615,800 95,623,300 (2,992,500)ExpendituresOperating ProgramsPublic Safety26,002,400 24,275,700 24,582,500 (306,800) 24,820,400 24,820,400Public Utilities12,757,200 13,200,700 13,709,100 (508,400) 19,150,300 19,190,300 (40,000)Transportation7,564,400 7,432,200 7,638,700 (206,500) 7,558,300 7,558,300Leisure, Cultural, & Social Services 7,128,700 7,213,700 7,259,000 (45,300) 7,416,600 7,416,600Community Development6,280,800 7,056,800 7,445,800 (389,000) 7,191,500 7,191,500General Government11,002,000 11,836,700 12,056,200 (219,500) 12,148,200 12,148,200Total Operating Programs 70,735,500 71,015,800 72,691,300 (1,675,500) 78,285,300 78,325,300 (40,000)Capital Improvement Plan28,925,300 15,845,800 60,615,300 (44,769,500) 11,293,700 11,259,400 34,300Debt Service 8,721,100 9,822,900 9,863,800 (40,900) 9,934,000 9,974,900 (40,900)Total Expenditures 108,381,900 96,684,500 143,170,400 (46,485,900) 99,513,000 99,559,600 (46,600)Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In8,990,400 8,626,800 9,227,900 601,100 7,485,400 7,495,0009,600Operating Transfers Out(8,990,400) (8,626,800) (9,227,900) (601,100) (7,485,400) (7,495,000) (9,600)Proceeds from Debt Financings19,144,100 1,040,000(1,040,000)Other Sources (Uses)(950,400) (100,000) 850,400 (150,000) 349,100 499,100Potential MOA Adjustments136,900 (852,500) (675,500) 177,000 (735,700) (735,700)Expenditure Savings1,033,900 1,050,700 16,800 1,057,400 2,557,400 1,500,000Total Other Sources (Uses) 19,281,000 271,000 275,200 (4,200) 171,700 2,170,800 (1,999,100)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses10,848,900(1,528,500)(41,303,900)(39,775,400)(725,500)(1,765,500)(1,040,000)Fund Balance/Working CapitalBeginning of Year63,874,100 39,891,500 74,723,000 34,831,500 38,363,000 33,419,100 (4,943,900)End of YearReserved for Debt Service 2,285,700 1,645,500 2,285,700 640,200 1,299,500 1,939,700 640,200Unreserved 72,437,300 36,717,500 31,133,400 (5,584,100) 36,338,000 29,713,900 (6,624,100)Total Fund Balance $74,723,000 $38,363,000 $33,419,100 (4,943,900) $37,637,500 $31,653,600 ($5,983,900)B-17
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONALL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesTax Revenues43,828,600 43,637,200 42,604,400 (1,032,800) 45,106,400 43,706,500 (1,399,900)Fines and Forfeitures261,000 235,000 210,000 (25,000) 242,100 217,100 (25,000)Investment and Property Revenues 1,775,300 922,600 912,800 (9,800) 926,600 889,900 (36,700)Subventions and Grants8,940,700 5,843,400 12,478,700 6,635,300 3,119,300 3,101,300 (18,000)Service Charges6,697,300 7,156,700 6,426,000 (605,700) 7,223,700 6,742,300 (391,400)Other Revenues1,790,700 898,000 1,153,500 255,500 471,300 471,300Total Revenues63,293,600 58,692,900 63,785,400 5,217,500 57,089,400 55,128,400 (1,871,000)ExpendituresOperating ProgramsPublic Safety26,002,400 24,275,700 24,582,500 (306,800) 24,820,400 24,820,400Transportation3,224,200 3,162,800 3,319,300 (156,500) 3,177,900 3,177,900Leisure, Cultural, & Social Services 6,598,900 6,689,300 6,728,800 (39,500) 6,876,800 6,876,800Community Development6,280,800 7,056,800 7,445,800 (389,000) 7,191,500 7,191,500General Government11,002,000 11,836,700 12,056,200 (219,500) 12,148,200 12,148,200Total Operating Programs 53,108,300 53,021,300 54,132,600 (1,111,300) 54,214,800 54,214,800Reimbursed Expenditures(4,208,900) (4,406,800) (4,264,000) (142,800) (4,496,200) (4,349,400) (146,800)Total Operating Expenditures 48,899,400 48,614,500 49,868,600 (1,254,100) 49,718,600 49,865,400 (146,800)Capital Improvement Plan11,296,400 10,238,200 39,726,000 (29,487,800) 5,172,800 5,138,500 34,300Debt Service 2,075,800 2,901,800 2,901,800 3,016,900 3,016,900Total Expenditures 62,271,600 61,754,500 92,496,400 (30,741,900) 57,908,300 58,020,800 (112,500)Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In8,655,400 8,384,200 8,970,400 586,200 7,278,200 7,278,200Operating Transfers Out(8,990,400) (8,626,800) (9,227,900) (601,100) (7,485,400) (7,495,000) (9,600)Proceeds from Debt Financings8,785,200 1,040,000Potential MOA Adjustments(758,400) (581,400) 177,000 (484,900) (484,900)Expenditure Savings/Other Sources (Uses)1,033,900 1,050,700 16,800 1,057,400 2,557,400 1,500,000Total Other Sources (Uses) 8,450,200 1,072,900 211,800 178,900 365,300 1,855,700 1,490,400Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses9,472,200 (1,988,700) (28,499,200) (25,345,500) (453,600) (1,036,700) (493,100)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year34,933,700 21,669,600 44,405,900 22,736,300 19,680,900 17,028,700 (2,652,200)Fund Balance, End of YearReserved for Debt Service2,285,700 1,645,500 2,285,700 640,200 1,299,500 1,939,700 640,200Unreserved41,428,200 18,035,400 13,621,000 (4,414,400) 17,927,800 14,052,300 (3,875,500)Total Fund Balance$44,405,900 $19,680,900 $15,906,700 ($3,774,200) $19,227,300 $15,992,000 ($3,235,300)B-18
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONALL ENTERPRISE AND AGENCY FUNDS COMBINED2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesFines and Forfeitures770,500 927,500 927,500838,000 838,000Investment and Property Revenues 1,744,900 385,400 503,900 118,500 366,100 463,300 97,200Subventions and Grants3,819,500 2,693,200 4,544,300 1,851,100 2,331,700 2,049,400 (282,300)Service Charges28,909,100 31,023,900 30,608,000 (415,900) 36,486,800 35,753,800 (733,000)Other Revenues438,900 180,900 81,000 (99,900) 222,100 108,700 (113,400)Trust and Agency Revenues973,300 981,200 1,141,200 160,000 1,281,700 1,281,700Total Revenues36,656,200 36,192,100 37,805,900 1,613,800 41,526,400 40,494,900 (1,031,500)ExpendituresOperating ProgramsPublic Utilities12,757,200 13,200,700 13,709,100 (508,400) 19,150,300 19,190,300 (40,000)Transportation4,340,200 4,269,400 4,319,400 (50,000) 4,380,400 4,380,400Leisure, Cultural, & Social Services 529,800 524,400 530,200 (5,800) 539,800 539,800General Government4,208,900 4,406,800 4,264,000 142,800 4,496,200 4,349,400 146,800Total Operating Programs 21,836,100 22,401,300 22,822,700 (421,400) 28,566,700 28,459,900 106,800Capital Projects17,628,900 5,607,600 20,889,300 (15,281,700) 6,120,900 6,120,900Debt Service6,645,300 6,921,100 6,962,000 (40,900) 6,917,100 6,958,000 (40,900)Total Expenditures46,110,300 34,930,000 50,674,000 (15,744,000) 41,604,700 41,538,800 65,900Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In335,000 242,600 257,500 14,900 207,200 216,8009,600Proceeds from Debt Financings10,358,900Other Sources (Uses)(950,400) (100,000) 850,400 (150,000) 349,100 499,100Expenditure SavingsPotential MOA Adjustments136,900 (94,100) (94,100)(250,800) (250,800)Total Other Sources (Uses) 10,830,800 (801,900) 63,400 865,300 (193,600) 315,100 508,700Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses1,376,700 460,200 (12,804,700) (13,264,900) (271,900) (728,800) (456,900)Working Capital, Beginning of Year28,940,400 18,221,900 30,913,000 12,691,100 18,682,100 18,108,300 (573,800)Fund Balance, End of Year$30,317,100 $18,682,100 $18,108,300 ($573,800) $18,410,200 $17,379,500 ($1,030,700)B-19
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONGENERAL FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesTax Revenues43,828,600 43,637,200 42,604,400 (1,032,800) 45,106,400 43,706,500 (1,399,900)Fines and Forfeitures261,000 235,000 210,000 (25,000) 242,100 217,100 (25,000)Investment and Property Revenues 1,108,300 648,000 648,000650,600 650,600Subventions and Grants2,823,300 1,151,200 1,214,200 63,000 1,172,500 1,154,500 (18,000)Service Charges4,581,900 5,422,700 4,867,000 (555,700) 5,448,500 5,107,100 (341,400)Other Revenues751,600 778,000 813,000 35,000 128,000 128,000Total Revenues53,354,700 51,872,100 50,356,600 (1,515,500) 52,748,100 50,963,800 (1,784,300)Expenditures Public Safety26,002,400 24,275,700 24,582,500 (306,800) 24,820,400 24,820,400Transportation 3,224,200 3,162,800 3,319,300 (156,500) 3,177,900 3,177,900Leisure, Cultural, and Social Services 6,598,900 6,689,300 6,728,800 (39,500) 6,876,800 6,876,800Community Development5,576,200 5,731,100 5,846,300 (115,200) 5,846,200 5,846,200General Government11,002,000 11,836,700 12,056,200 (219,500) 12,148,200 12,148,200Total Program Expenditures 52,403,700 51,695,600 52,533,100(837,500)52,869,500 52,869,500Reimbursed Expenditures(4,210,800) (4,406,800) (4,264,000) (142,800) (4,496,200) (4,349,400) (146,800)Total Expenditures48,192,900 47,288,800 48,269,100 (980,300) 48,373,300 48,520,100 (146,800)Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In1,175,200 1,232,200 1,232,2001,276,800 1,276,800Operating Transfers Out(7,157,500) (7,394,600) (7,995,700) (601,100) (6,208,600) (6,218,200) (9,600)Proceeds from Debt Financings(16,700)Expenditure Savings1,033,900 1,050,700 16,800 1,057,400 2,557,400 1,500,000MOA & Other Adjustments(758,400) (581,400) 177,000 (484,900) (484,900)Total Other Sources (Uses)(5,999,000) (5,886,900) (6,294,200) (407,300) (4,359,300) (2,868,900) 1,490,400 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(837,200) (1,303,600) (4,206,700) (2,903,100) 15,500 (425,200) (440,700)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year14,829,100 11,229,400 13,991,900 2,762,500 9,925,800 9,785,200 (140,600)Fund Balance, End of Year$13,991,900 $9,925,800 $9,785,200 ($140,600) $9,941,300 $9,360,000 ($581,300)B-20
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONDOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (DBID) FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues3,400Service ChargesAssessments222,500 216,500 216,500220,800 220,800 Total Revenues225,900 216,500 216,500220,800 220,800Operating ExpendituresCommunity Development322,800 216,500 217,600 (1,100) 220,800 220,800 Total Expenditures322,800 216,500 217,600 (1,100) 220,800 220,800Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(96,900)(1,100) (1,100)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 98,0001,100 1,100Fund Balance, End of Year$1,100B-21
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONGAS TAX FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesSubventions and Grants Gasoline Tax765,900 787,000 787,000791,000 791,000 Total Revenues765,900 787,000 787,000791,000 791,000Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers Out(765,900) (787,000) (787,000)(791,000) (791,000)Total Other Sources (Uses)(765,900) (787,000) (787,000)(791,000) (791,000)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other UsesFund Balance, Beginning of Year Fund Balance, End of Year-$ -$ -$ B-22
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONTRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesSubventions and Grants TDA Revenues 31,00022,400 22,40022,500 22,500Total Revenues31,00022,400 22,40022,500 22,500Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers Out(31,000) (22,400) (22,400)(22,500) (22,500)Total Other Sources (Uses)(31,000) (22,400) (22,400)(22,500) (22,500)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other UsesFund Balance, Beginning of Year Fund Balance, End of Year-$ -$ -$ B-23
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection* VarianceRevenuesSubventions and GrantsCDBG Allocation634,300 620,000 1,681,200 1,061,200 620,000 620,000Total Revenues634,300 620,000 1,681,200 1,061,200 620,000 620,000ExpendituresOperating ProgramsCommunity Development251,900 272,100 276,800 (4,700) 270,700 270,700General Government1,900Total Operating Programs253,800 272,100 276,800 (4,700) 270,700 270,700Capital Improvement Plan Projects494,100 403,000 1,464,200 (1,061,200) 100,000 100,000Total Expenditures747,900 675,100 1,741,000 (1,065,900) 370,700 370,700Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfer In113,60055,100 59,800 4,70055,100 55,100Total Other Sources (Uses)113,60055,100 59,800 4,70055,100 55,100Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses304,400 304,400Fund Balance, Beginning of YearFund Balance, End of Year-$ -$ $304,400 $304,400*Preliminary estimate of revenue and expenditure activity for 2010-11 as approved by Council June 17, 2008.B-24
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONLAW ENFORCEMENT GRANTS FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues2,5001,200 1,2001,4001,400Subventions and GrantsService Charges6,0005,200 5,2005,4005,400Total Revenues8,5006,400 6,4006,8006,800ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects18,8006,500 (6,500)Total Expenditures18,8006,500 (6,500)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(10,300)6,400(100) (6,500)6,8006,800Fund Balance, Beginning of Year57,50041,200 47,200 6,00047,600 47,100(500)Fund Balance, End of Year47,200$ 47,600$ $47,100 ($500) $54,400 $53,900 ($500)B-25
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONPUBLIC ART (PRIVATE SECTOR CONTRIBUTIONS) FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues20,1006,100 6,1006,8006,800Service ChargesIn-lieu Fees19,6005,000 5,0005,0005,000 Total Revenues39,70011,100 11,10011,800 11,800ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects53,900185,000 (185,000)Total Expenditures53,900185,000 (185,000)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(14,200) 11,100 (173,900) (185,000) 11,800 11,800Fund Balance, Beginning of Year430,000 220,900 415,800 194,900 232,000 241,9009,900Fund Balance, End of Year$415,800 $232,000 $241,900 $9,900 $243,800 $253,700 $9,900B-26
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONPROPOSITION 42 FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesSubventions and GrantsState Grants378,300 422,800 422,800463,300 463,300 Total Revenues378,300 422,800 422,800463,300 463,300Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers (Out)(378,300) (422,800) (422,800)(463,300) (463,300) Total Other Sources (Uses)(378,300) (422,800) (422,800)(463,300) (463,300)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other UsesFund Balance, Beginning of YearFund Balance, End of Year-$ -$ B-27
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONPROPOSITION 1B FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property RevenuesSubventions and GrantsState Grants657,700 Total Revenues657,700Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers (Out)(657,700) Total Other Sources (Uses)(657,700)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other UsesFund Balance, Beginning of YearFund Balance, End of Year-$ -$ Operating transfers out are for street reconstruction, resurfacing and sealing.B-28
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONTOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (TBID) FUNDOriginal RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues6,80010,000 10,000Service Charges646,900 837,100 837,100853,800 853,800 Total Revenues653,700 837,100 847,100 10,000 853,800 853,800Operating ExpendituresCommunity Development129,900 837,100 1,105,100 (268,000) 853,800 853,800 Total Expenditures129,900 837,100 1,105,100 (268,000) 853,800 853,800Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers InRevenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses523,800(258,000) (258,000)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 523,800 523,800265,800 265,800Fund Balance, End of Year$523,800$265,800 $265,800$265,800 $265,800B-29
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONCAPITAL OUTLAY FUND 2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesSubventions and Grants2,880,1004,293,500 4,293,500Service Charges125,000 150,000 25,00090,000 90,000Other Revenues1,014,700 100,000 258,200 158,200 Total Revenues3,894,800 225,000 4,701,700 4,476,70090,000 90,000ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects 7,289,800 3,984,200 23,798,100 (19,813,900) 3,365,400 3,365,400Total Expenditures7,289,800 3,984,200 23,798,100 (19,813,900) 3,365,400 3,365,400Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In4,506,800 3,759,200 4,301,000 541,800 3,275,400 3,275,400Proceeds from Debt Financing8,161,700 Total Other Sources (Uses)12,668,500 3,759,200 4,301,000 541,800 3,275,400 3,275,400Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses9,273,500(14,795,400) (14,795,400)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year5,521,90014,795,400 14,795,400Fund Balance, End of Year$14,795,400-$ -$ B-30
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONPARKLAND DEVELOPMENT FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenue54,90036,100 36,10037,200 37,200Subventions and Grants94,80042,700 42,70050,000 50,000Service ChargesPark In-Lieu Fees175,70045,000 45,00050,000 50,000Dwelling Unit Fees900200200200200Other Revenue323,300 323,300Total Revenues326,30081,300 124,000 42,700 460,700 460,700ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan22,700 374,000 529,800 (155,800) 1,293,000 1,293,000Total Expenditures22,700 374,000 529,800 (155,800) 1,293,000 1,293,000Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses303,600 (292,700) (405,800) (113,100) (832,300) (832,300)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 1,016,300 1,127,300 1,319,900 192,600 834,600 914,100 79,500Fund Balance, End of Year$1,319,900 $834,600 $914,100 $79,500$2,300 $81,800 $79,500B-31
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONTRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenue197,40015,000 30,000 15,0007,5007,500Subventions and Grants668,900 2,090,000 2,914,900 824,900Service Charges498,400 150,000 100,000 (50,000) 200,000 150,000 (50,000)Other Revenue57,200 57,200Total Revenues1,364,700 2,255,000 3,102,100 847,100 207,500 157,500 (50,000)ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects 1,829,300 2,912,500 6,654,100 (3,741,600) 253,600 253,600Total Expenditures1,829,300 2,912,500 6,654,100 (3,741,600) 253,600 253,600Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In74,000 74,000Total Other Sources (Uses)74,000 74,000Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(464,600) (657,500) (3,478,000) 4,662,700 (46,100) (96,100) (50,000)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year4,057,400 825,500 3,592,800 2,767,300 168,000 114,800 (53,200)Fund Balance, End of Year$3,592,800 $168,000 $114,800 $7,430,000 $121,900 $18,700 ($103,200)B-32
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONLOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD SUB-AREA FEE FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues15,100200200300300Service Charges79,700Total Revenues94,800200200300300ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects4,10068,000 (68,000)Total Expenditures4,10068,000 (68,000)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses90,700200 (67,800) 68,000300300Fund Balance, Beginning of Year77,5007,200 168,200 161,0007,400 100,400 93,000Fund Balance, End of Year$168,200$7,400 $100,400 $229,000$7,700 $100,700 $93,000B-33
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONOPEN SPACE PROTECTION FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenue16,2005,000 5,0005,0005,000Subventions and Grants6,400 750,000 1,100,000 350,000Other Revenues100500500Total Revenues22,700 755,000 1,105,500 350,5005,0005,000ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects384,000 1,072,500 1,587,700 (515,200)Total Expenditures384,000 1,072,500 1,587,700 (515,200)Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In234,000 322,500 322,500Total Other Sources (Uses)234,000 322,500 322,500Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(127,300)5,000 (159,700) 865,7005,0005,000Fund Balance, Beginning of Year388,80089,100 261,500 172,40094,100 101,8007,700Fund Balance, End of Year$261,500 $94,100 $101,800 $1,038,100 $99,100 $106,800 $7,700B-34
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONAIRPORT AREA IMPACT FEE FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues48,50029,900 29,90030,700 30,700Service ChargesTotal Revenues48,50029,900 29,90030,700 30,700ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects21,000375,000 (375,000)Total Expenditures21,000375,000 (375,000)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses27,50029,900 (345,100) (375,000) 30,700 30,700Fund Balance, Beginning of Year966,200 638,000 993,700 355,700 667,900 648,600 (19,300)Fund Balance, End of Year$993,700 $667,900 $648,600 ($19,300) $698,600 $679,300 ($19,300)B-35
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONAFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues201,100 119,800 85,000 (34,800) 123,400 86,700 (36,700)Service Charges465,700 350,000 350,000350,000 350,000Total Revenues666,800 469,800 435,000 (34,800) 473,400 436,700 (36,700)ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects892,4003,497,200 (3,497,200)Total Expenditures892,4003,497,200 (3,497,200)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(225,600) 469,800 (3,062,200) (3,532,000) 473,400 436,700 (36,700)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year4,010,600 3,802,600 3,785,000 (17,600) 4,272,400 722,800 (3,549,600)Fund Balance, End of Year$3,785,000 $4,272,400 $722,800 ($3,549,600) $4,745,800 $1,159,500 ($3,586,300)B-36
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONFLEET REPLACEMENT FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues101,00061,300 61,30063,700 63,700Other Revenues Sale of Surplus Property24,30020,000 24,600 4,60020,000 20,000Total Revenues125,30081,300 85,900 4,60083,700 83,700ExpendituresCapital Improvement Plan Projects286,300 1,492,000 1,628,400 (136,400) 160,800 126,500 34,300Total Expenditures286,300 1,492,000 1,628,400 (136,400) 160,800 126,500 34,300Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers InGeneral Fund550,000 113,400 79,100 (34,300)Proceeds from Financing1,040,000 1,040,000Total Other Sources (Uses)550,000 1,153,400 1,119,100 (34,300)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses389,000 (257,300) (423,400) (166,100) (77,100) (42,800) 34,300Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 1,834,900 2,042,900 2,223,900 181,000 1,785,600 1,800,500 14,900Fund Balance, End of Year$2,223,900 $1,785,600 $1,800,500 $14,900 $1,708,500 $1,757,700 $49,200B-37
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONDEBT SERVICE FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceExpenditures Debt Service2001 Refunding Revenue Bonds799,600 797,800 797,800799,800 799,8002004 Refunding Revenue Bonds295,000 293,200 293,200295,000 295,0002005 Refunding Revenue Bonds465,900 463,100 463,100469,900 469,9002006 Lease Revenue Bonds458,200 459,600 459,600458,400 458,4002009 Lease Revenue Bonds830,700 830,700839,400 839,400Fire Engine/Truck Lease Purchase97,000 97,000Energy Conservation Lease 57,10057,400 57,40057,400 57,400Total Expenditures2,075,800 2,901,800 2,901,8003,016,900 3,016,900Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In2,075,800 2,901,800 2,901,8002,670,900 2,670,900Proceeds from Debt Issuance640,200Total Other Sources (Uses)2,716,000 2,901,800 2,901,8002,670,900 2,670,900Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses640,200(346,000) (346,000)Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 1,645,500 1,645,500 2,285,700 640,200 1,645,500 2,285,700 640,200Fund Balance, End of Year Reserved for Debt Service2,285,700 1,645,500 2,285,700 640,200 1,299,500 1,939,700 640,200UnreservedTotal Fund Balance$2,285,700 $1,645,500 $2,285,700 $640,200 $1,299,500 $1,939,700 $640,200B-38
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONWATER FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues854,000 166,600 178,600 12,000 182,100 182,100Subventions and GrantsService Charges Water SalesWater Service Charges11,386,600 12,743,100 12,743,10014,144,800 14,144,800Sales to Other Agencies1,107,600 925,700 925,7001,027,500 1,027,500Development Impact Fees663,000 380,500 230,500 (150,000) 593,800 293,800 (300,000)Connection Charges and Meter Sales 19,70010,400 5,400 (5,000) 10,7005,700 (5,000)Account Set-up Fee135,70064,300 84,300 20,00066,200 85,200 19,000Other Service Charges134,800 135,000 135,000137,700 125,700 (12,000)Other Revenues 388,60025,600 48,600 23,00026,400 26,400Total Revenues14,690,000 14,451,200 14,351,200 (100,000) 16,189,200 15,891,200 (298,000)ExpendituresOperating Programs Public Utilities6,430,200 6,461,300 6,661,700 (200,400) 12,147,100 12,187,100 (40,000) General Government1,447,300 1,524,500 1,669,300 (144,800) 1,555,000 1,702,700 (147,700)Total Operating Programs7,877,500 7,985,800 8,331,000 (345,200) 13,702,100 13,889,800 (187,700)Capital Improvement Plan Projects 2,745,500 2,808,200 7,918,000 (5,109,800) 3,882,500 3,882,500Debt Service2,323,100 2,279,900 2,279,9002,274,400 2,274,400Total Expenditures12,946,100 13,073,900 18,528,900 (5,455,000) 19,859,000 20,046,700 (187,700)Other Sources (Uses)Potential MOA Adjustments(83,300) (83,300)(121,000) (121,000)Other Sources (Uses)592,300 (719,200) (100,000) 619,200 (75,000) (75,000)Total Other Sources (Uses)592,300 (802,500) (183,300) 619,200 (196,000) (196,000)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses2,336,200 574,800 (4,361,000) (4,935,800) (3,865,800) (4,351,500) (485,700)Working Capital, Beginning of Year11,560,900 8,332,000 13,897,100 5,565,100 8,906,800 9,536,100 629,300Working Capital, End of Year$13,897,100 $8,906,800 $9,536,100 $629,300 $5,041,000 $5,184,600 $143,600B-39
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONSEWER FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues343,90043,800 68,800 25,00040,000 55,000 15,000Subventions and GrantsService Charges Customer SalesSewer Service Charges10,946,700 12,015,800 12,015,80013,097,200 13,097,200Sales to Cal Poly608,000 513,400 513,400528,800 528,800 Industrial User Charges48,70050,600 58,000 7,40051,100 58,5007,400Development Impact Fees171,000 133,100 55,300 (77,800) 207,800 70,500 (137,300) Other Service Charges74,700 89,700 15,00076,900 91,900 15,000Other Revenues10,80019,100 11,000 (8,100) 19,700 11,600 (8,100)Total Revenues12,129,100 12,850,500 12,812,000 (38,500) 14,021,500 13,913,500 (108,000)Expenditures Operating ProgramsPublic Utilities5,440,500 5,935,000 6,076,500 (141,500) 6,177,000 6,177,000General Government1,708,800 1,789,700 1,438,400 351,300 1,825,500 1,467,200 358,300Total Operating Programs7,149,300 7,724,700 7,514,900 209,800 8,002,500 7,644,200 358,300Capital Improvment Plan12,276,900 1,813,800 7,147,100 (5,333,300) 1,846,700 1,846,700Debt Service 2,807,400 3,167,300 3,167,300 3,167,700 3,167,700Total Expenditures 22,233,600 12,705,800 17,829,300 (5,123,500) 13,016,900 12,658,600 358,300Other Sources (Uses) Proceeds from Debt Financing 10,358,900Potential MOA Adjustments (5,700) (5,700) (83,200) (83,200)Other Sources (Uses) (231,200) 231,200 (75,000) (75,000)Total Other Sources (Uses) 10,358,900 (236,900) (5,700) 231,200 (158,200) (158,200)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses254,400 (92,200) (5,023,000) (4,930,800) 846,400 1,096,700 250,300Working Capital, Beginning of Year7,910,600 2,188,400 8,165,000 5,976,600 2,096,200 3,142,000 1,045,800Working Capital, End of Year$8,165,000 $2,096,200 $3,142,000 $1,045,800 $2,942,600 $4,238,700 $1,296,100B-40
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONPARKING FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues442,100 141,200 176,600 35,400 110,000 145,000 35,000Fines and Forfeitures770,500 927,500 927,500838,000 838,000Service Charges Meter Collections - Lots362,800 456,000 398,100 (57,900) 255,700 223,100 (32,600) Meter Collections - Streets1,036,000 1,206,400 1,131,100 (75,300) 1,218,400 1,142,400 (76,000) Parking Structure Collections743,000 742,800 712,800 (30,000) 851,200 719,900 (131,300) Long-Term Parking Revenues376,900 369,300 369,300373,000 373,000 Lease Revenues216,400 227,400 194,500 (32,900) 227,700 227,700 Parking In-Lieu Fees15,10016,200 55,200 39,000 2,616,500 2,616,500 Other Service Charges(9,800)100100100100Other Revenues (2,800) 70,700(70,700) 118,800 70,700 (48,100)Total Revenues3,950,200 4,157,600 3,965,200 (192,400) 6,609,400 6,356,400 (253,000)ExpendituresOperating ProgramsTransportation1,865,000 1,663,000 1,667,000 (4,000) 1,699,200 1,699,200General Government479,300 500,400 538,500 (38,100) 510,400 549,300 (38,900)Total Operating Programs 2,344,300 2,163,400 2,205,500 (42,100) 2,209,600 2,248,500 (38,900)Capital Improvement Plan Projects 34,900 885,000 2,733,600 (1,848,600) 40,400 40,400Debt Service 1,514,800 1,473,900 1,514,800 (40,900) 1,475,000 1,515,900 (40,900)Total Expenditures3,894,000 4,522,300 6,453,900 (1,931,600) 3,725,000 3,804,800 (79,800)Other Sources (Uses)Potential MOA Adjustments(1,200) (1,200)(23,100) (23,100)Other Sources (Uses)136,900Total Other Sources (Uses)136,900(1,200) (1,200)(23,100) (23,100)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses193,100 (365,900) (2,489,900) (2,124,000) 2,861,300 2,528,500 (332,800)Working Capital, Beginning of Year7,057,800 5,499,100 7,250,900 1,751,800 5,133,200 4,761,000 (372,200)Working Capital, End of Year$7,250,900 $5,133,200 $4,761,000 ($372,200) $7,994,500 $7,289,500 ($705,000)B-41
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONTRANSIT FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues55,9005,000 5,6006005,0005,000Subventions and Grants TDA Revenues1,139,500 1,200,000 1,068,200 (131,800) 1,031,700 854,000 (177,700)Other Grants600,0001,536,900 1,536,900FTA Grants2,080,000 1,493,200 1,939,200 446,000 1,300,000 1,195,400 (104,600)Service Charges593,800 546,300 498,900 (47,400) 558,500 489,300 (69,200)Other Revenues 13,20010,000 11,000 1,000Total Revenues4,482,400 3,254,500 5,059,800 1,805,300 2,895,200 2,543,700 (351,500)ExpendituresOperating Programs Transportation2,475,200 2,606,400 2,652,400 (46,000) 2,681,200 2,681,200 General Government292,100 300,700 350,200 (49,500) 306,700 357,200 (50,500)Total Operating Programs2,767,300 2,907,100 3,002,600 (95,500) 2,987,900 3,038,400 (50,500)Capital Improvement Plan Projects 2,432,4002,780,600 (2,780,600)1,3001,300Total Expenditures5,199,700 2,907,100 5,783,200 (2,876,100) 2,989,200 3,039,700 (50,500)Other Sources (Uses)Potential MOA Adjustments(1,200) (1,200)(7,500) (7,500)Other sources499,100 499,100Total Other Sources (Uses)(1,200) (1,200)(7,500) 491,600 499,100Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(717,300) 346,200 (724,600) (1,070,800) (101,500) (4,400) 97,100Working Capital, Beginning of Year1,446,300 1,593,400 729,000 (864,400) 1,939,6004,400 (1,935,200)Working Capital, End of Year$729,000 $1,939,600 $4,400 ($1,935,200) $1,838,100($1,838,100)B-42
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONGOLF FUND2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues3,7008,800 64,300 55,5009,000 66,200 57,200Service ChargesRetail Sales35,20038,100 38,10039,300 39,300Green Fees271,300 311,000 300,000 (11,000) 348,600 337,600 (11,000)Other Fees46,60063,700 53,700 (10,000) 55,300 55,300Other Revenues29,10055,500 10,400 (45,100) 57,200(57,200)Total Revenues385,900 477,100 466,500 (10,600) 509,400 498,400 (11,000)Expenditures Operating ProgramsLeisure, Cultural & Social Services 529,800 524,400 530,200 (5,800) 539,800 539,800General Government163,600 169,700 168,300 1,400 173,100 171,7001,400Total Operating Programs693,400 694,100 698,500 (4,400) 712,900 711,5001,400 Capital Improvement Plan Projects110,70025,600 86,600 (61,000)Total Expenditures804,100 719,700 785,100 (65,400) 712,900 711,5001,400Other Sources (Uses)Operating Transfers In335,000 242,600 257,500 14,900 207,200 216,8009,600Other sources (uses)3,600Potential MOA Adjustments(3,700) (3,700)Total Other Sources (Uses)338,600 242,600 257,500 14,900 203,500 213,1009,600Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(79,600)(61,100) (61,100)Working Capital, Beginning of Year 140,70061,100 61,100Working Capital, End of Year61,100$ -$ -$ B-43
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITIONWHALE ROCK COMMISSION2008-092009-102010-11Original RevisedOriginal RevisedActual Budget Projection Variance Budget Projection VarianceRevenuesInvestment and Property Revenues45,30020,000 10,000 (10,000) 20,000 10,000 (10,000)Service ChargesMember Agency Contributions568,300 660,900 660,900946,700 946,700Water Distribution Charges403,500 319,700 479,700 160,000 334,400 334,400Other Revenues1,500600600600600Total Revenues1,018,600 1,001,200 1,151,200 150,000 1,301,700 1,291,700 (10,000)ExpendituresOperating ProgramsPublic Utilities886,500 804,400 970,900 (166,500) 826,200 826,200General Government117,800 121,800 99,300 22,500 125,500 101,300 24,200Total Operating Programs1,004,300 926,200 1,070,200 (144,000) 951,700 927,500 24,200Capital Improvement Plan28,50075,000 223,400 (148,400) 350,000 350,000Total Expenditures1,032,800 1,001,200 1,293,600 (292,400) 1,301,700 1,277,500 24,200Other Sources (Uses)Potential MOA Adjustments(2,700) (2,700)(12,300) (12,300)Total Other Sources (Uses)(2,700) (2,700)(12,300) (12,300)Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses(14,200) (2,700) (145,100) (142,400) (12,300) 1,900 14,200Working Capital, Beginning of Year 824,100 609,000 809,900 200,900 606,300 664,800 58,500Working Capital, End of Year$809,900 $606,300 $664,800 $58,500 $594,000 $666,700 $72,700B-44
Section C MID-YEAR BUDGET REQUESTS
SUMMARY OF 2009-10 MID-YEAR BUDGET REQUESTSPage No.2009-10 2010-11OPERATING PROGRAMSWater FundWhale Rock Reservoir Operations: Electric Utility Increase C-2 75,000$ 40,000$ Whale Rock FundWhale Rock Reservoir Operations: Electric Utility Increase160,000Total Operating Programs235,000 40,000CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANFoxPro Application ReplacementC-6 1,150,000Gateway Paving: Upper Monterey Paving and Sidewalk Installation C-14 1,191,000Los Osos Valley Road Right-of-Way AcquisitionC-19 1,200,000Total CIP Projects 3,541,0000TOTAL 3,776,000$ 40,000$ REQUEST SUMMARY BY FUNDING SOURCEGeneral Fund936,500$ -$ Water Fund213,000 40,000 Sewer Fund92,000 Parking Fund23,000 Transit Fund34,500 Whale Rock Fund160,000 Transportation Impact Fee Fund1,126,000 ARRA Grant 1,191,000 TOTAL3,776,000$ 40,000$ C-1
OPERATING PROGRAMS WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR OPERATIONS: ELECTRIC UTILITY INCREASE C-2 Request Summary Increasing water supply pumping from Whale Rock Reservoir, to ensure consistent water quality during repair of an ozone generator at the Water Treatment Plant will cost an additional $75,000 in 2009-10 and $40,000 in 2010-11 in the City’s Water Source of Supply budget in the Water Fund. Increasing the Whale Rock pumping budget is necessary in the Whale Rock Reservoir operating program to meet increased water supply pumping costs for the City and partnering agencies. This will cost an additional $160,000 in 2009-10 with offsetting revenues in the amount of $160,000 resulting in no net fiscal impact to the Whale Rock Reservoir Operations budget in the Whale Rock Fund. Key Objectives 1. Continuing to ensure a safe and reliable water source to meet city-wide demand. 2. Providing a higher level of blended raw water quality to the Water Treatment facility. 3. Adjusting Whale Rock Reservoir Operations budget to meet increased water deliveries to partnering agencies. Existing Situation: Factors Driving the Need for Change 1. City of San Luis Obispo. Repair of one of three ozone generators at the Water Treatment Plant will require increased water supply pumping from Whale Rock Reservoir and decreased water pumping from the Salinas Reservoir (Santa Margarita Lake) to ensure water treatment and delivery to the City’s water customers. The water treatment plant has three ozone generators installed, but is currently operating on two generators as pump station unit #1 is in need of repair. The French equipment manufacturer that fabricated the generators is now out of business, and repairs are being handled by a new company which has caused prolonged delays. The 2009-11 budget assumptions for raw water deliveries were made assuming three ozone generators would be fully operational, thereby allowing for increased water use from Salinas Reservoir. Since Whale Rock Reservoir typically has higher quality raw water than that delivered from Salinas Reservoir, the treatment process for Whale Rock water requires less ozone generation to meet disinfection requirements. Because the Water Treatment Plant has only two of the three generators available, more water has been and will continue to be supplied from the Whale Rock source than was assumed in earlier budget projections. Providing funding for increased pumping of water from Whale Rock will cost an additional $75,000 in 2009-10 and $40,000 for 2010-11 to meet the City’s water pumping requirements during repair of the ozone generator at the plant. This increase will result in a total budget of $249,000 in 2009-10 and $222,000 in 2010-11 for the City’s pumping from Whale Rock. A corresponding decrease in water supply pumping from the Salinas Reservoir will cause electric utility costs to be less than original electric budget estimates within the Salinas Reservoir Budget. The outcome from the decrease in Salinas Reservoir electric expense will not change the City’s annual
OPERATING PROGRAMS WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR OPERATIONS: ELECTRIC UTILITY INCREASE C-3 payment for Salinas Reservoir because that payment is fixed in advance, but will result in a more favorable fund balance within the Salinas Reservoir Budget at 2009-10 year-end. 2. Partnering Agencies: Cal Poly and the Men’s Colony. Water supplies provided to partnering agencies of the Whale Rock Commission, including Cal Poly University and California Men’s Colony (CMC), are greater than 2009-10 budget assumptions provided by those agencies. An increased water supply to the University is related to occupancy of the Poly Canyon student housing (final phase) and CMC’s increased water supply is due to a reduction in its use of State water. Increased water deliveries will require an increase to the Whale Rock Reservoir operating budget to fund the increased electric utility pumping expenses, which will cost an additional $160,000 in 2009-10 for a total budget of $479,700 in 2009-10. The Whale Rock Reservoir pumping costs are directly billed to the partnering agencies and fully offset by revenues from each agency, resulting in no net fiscal impact to the Whale Rock Fund. However, it is necessary for accounting purposes to increase the expenditure budget to meet revised electrical cost estimates for 2009-10. It is important to note that the Whale Rock Operations budget is developed by Utilities staff and presented annually to the Whale Rock Commission for approval. The 2010-11 budget will be presented to the Commission in May 2010 and will include revised pumping estimates for 2010-11, which will be reflected in the City’s 2009-11 Financial Plan Supplement: 2010-11 Budget. Goal and Policy Links Operating Program Goal of providing reliable, high quality water to meet community water demands. Program Work Completed Staff has completed an evaluation of the existing situation in order to estimate the potential length of time that one ozone generator would likely be down for maintenance and repair to determine the electrical budget adjustments necessary to support increased pumping needs from the Whale Rock Reservoir in 2009-10 and 2010-11. Environmental Review No environmental review required. Program Constraints and Limitations No significant constraints or limitations. Stakeholders
OPERATING PROGRAMS WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR OPERATIONS: ELECTRIC UTILITY INCREASE C-4 City water customers, Whale Rock Reservoir staff, Water Treatment Plant staff, Cal Poly State University and California Men’s Colony Implementation There are no implementation issues. Key Program Assumptions The projected increase for the City’s pumping assumes a total of 4,000 acre feet from Whale Rock during 2009-10, and 3,000 acre feet in 2010-11. Program Manager and Team Support Program Managers. Bob Hamilton, Water Supply Supervisor and Dean Furukawa, Water Treatment Plant Supervisor Project Team. Whale Rock Reservoir staff and Water Treatment Plant staff Alternative Continue the Status Quo. Do not plan for additional raw water supplies from Whale Rock Reservoir and instead provide raw water from Salinas Reservoir. This could jeopardize the City’s ability to properly treat water to meet city-wide water demands. While there would be some cost savings, since pumping from Salinas Reservoir is less (due to elevation) than from Whale Rock Reservoir, this alternative is not recommended since it could impact water quality to City customers.
OPERATING PROGRAMS WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR OPERATIONS: ELECTRIC UTILITY INCREASE C-5 Operating Program Source of Supply (55110) and Whale Rock Operations (55500) Cost Summary Line Item DescriptionAccount No.2009-102010-11Water Fund75,00040,000Whale Rock Operations500-55110-7311City of San Luis Obispo75,000 40,000Whale Rock Fund160,0000Electric Whale Rock Pump640-55500-7607- City of San Luis Obispo75,000 Cal Poly University65,000 California Men's Colony20,000 Total Operating Costs235,00040,000Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues 640-57520(160,000)- Net Operating Costs - Water Fund75,00040,000
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOXPRO APPLICATION REPLACEMENT C-6 CIP Project Summary Replacing FoxPro applications that can no longer be supported with one or more packaged systems that will meet a variety of user needs, allow integration among programs and retain historical data will cost $1,150,000 in 2009-10 for base software, data conversion, implementation and user training. The General Fund component of this cost is the $862,500; the balance is allocated to the enterprise funds based on benefit. Background The City currently uses 34 applications written and customized in Microsoft Visual FoxPro. These applications were created over the past 25 years by an outside, one-person consulting firm (Bonnie McKee), who maintained and modified them as necessary. These applications are the user interface software for a wide range of mission-critical applications throughout the organization, including land use inventory, geographic information system (GIS), payroll timecards, and work orders. The applications automate City business processes and are accessed by all departments. Most of the applications are front ends/user portals to Microsoft Structured Query Language (SQL) databases. While the City has benefitted significantly over the past 25 years from high-quality, low-cost software in contracting with Ms. McKee for the development and support of these integrated applications, we are now facing two distinct challenges in supporting these applications: 1. Obsolescent Software. Microsoft has stated that it will no longer support Visual FoxPro nor will it release any further versions. The City has very limited ability to support and maintain these custom Visual FoxPro applications since this is a disappearing programming language and the code libraries that power the City’s applications have been customized by Ms. McKee, who recently passed away. Support for both Visual FoxPro and ESRI’s Map Objects (which powers the maps in the City’s applications) is scheduled to end within the next few years. The specific version of Map Objects currently used by the City has been end-of-life for several years. For this reason, the four-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in the 2009-11 Financial Plan showed converting these applications to Microsoft’s current “.NET” framework in 2011-13 at an estimated cost of $370,000. 2. No Viable Support for Existing Visual FoxPro Applications. The obsolescence of the software language has been compounded by the sudden death of Ms. McKee last year. In our efforts to find replacement contract programmers, it became clear that due to the outdated software and lack of programming documentation, it will not be possible to contract with programmers both willing and capable of maintaining the City’s current applications. In short, the challenge facing the City has shifted from converting these applications to more current software to the more difficult and resource-intensive task of replacing them entirely. In accordance with our Information Technology (IT) Acquisition and Support Policy, in replacing these applications we are moving away from using locally developed systems to selecting industry-standard “packaged systems.”
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOXPRO APPLICATION REPLACEMENT C-7 Project Objectives 1. Complete application inventory, identify replacement priorities and determine application groups (“clusters”) as appropriate. 2. Select vendor(s) and begin replacing existing Visual FoxPro applications with appropriate packaged systems in accordance with the City’s IT Acquisition and Support Policy. 3. Allocate appropriate resources to acquire and support the replacement applications. 4. Develop training strategy for all City staff who use these applications. Existing Situation Given the lack of vendor resources, it will be very difficult to support and maintain these applications in the interim (which is one of the reasons why it is so important to complete their replacement quickly). In-house IT staff has some ability to make minor programming changes. For this reason, any changes to these programs until they are replaced will need to be limited to those that are essential for mission-critical functions and within the capacity of existing staff. The Project Plan for this replacement was presented to the Council on October 20, 2009. It provides additional background information on why it is important to replace these applications and on the City’s IT Acquisition and Support Policy in supporting the “packaged system” approach. It also includes a detailed listing of the applications; outlines key tasks and due dates; and discusses the challenges we will face in replacing these applications. The goal is to complete the selection process by April 2010; and complete application installation by September 2010. Goal and Policy Links 1. IT Acquisition and Support Policy 2. 2009-13 Capital Improvement Plan Project Work Completed The project is on track with the timeframe set forth in the project plan. We have: 1. Completed an inventory of all current FoxPro applications. 2. Compiled application descriptions and identified the managing departments. 3. Finalized a high level assessment of the City’s other IT needs, including processes that are automated with software other than FoxPro that could be improved but that don’t work well and processes that are not currently automated. This will help assure that we make good decisions in meeting our short-term needs as well as for the long-term.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOXPRO APPLICATION REPLACEMENT C-8 4. Completed the “Request for Qualifications” (RFQ) process with vendors identified as industry leaders in their fields. We received packages from 20 vendors, many who indicated that they can meet most (if not all) of our FoxPro application replacement needs. 5. Formed two evaluation teams with members from the affected departments who thoroughly assessed the RFQ submittals, analyzed vendor qualifications and performed background checks with similar agencies that use their software to narrow the list of 20 firms to the top vendors in each group that could best meet the City’s software replacement needs. The GIS/Permitting/Work Orders group chose six finalists and the Timecards/Overtime/Staffing group selected three finalists. GIS/Permitting/Work Orders • Accela • CitizenServe • Cityworks (Azteca) • EnerGov • Infor (Hansen) • Sungard Timecards/Overtime/Staffing • Kronos • Sungard • Telestaff Key criteria in selecting finalists included the ability to meet most, if not all, of our replacement needs and operate in our current technology environment (such as Microsoft SQL Server database: the only exception to this is Telestaff, which specializes in Fire staff scheduling and time reporting). Additionally, all of the finalist vendors confirmed their ability to meet the software installation timeframe of April-August 2010. 6. Both evaluation teams have conducted detailed “City to Vendors” pre-proposal briefings/demonstrations of the City’s current FoxPro applications with finalists as a group to ensure they have a full understanding of the City’s application needs. All finalists attended the briefings with the exception of Sungard and CitizenServe in the GIS/Permitting/Work Orders group. 7. Held detailed “Vendor to City” demonstrations/briefings with all finalists to evaluate their software products and proposed solutions. These briefings addressed: a. Overview of the firm’s experience and its capabilities b. How the software will meet the City’s needs, as detailed in the RFQ and the “City to Vendors” briefing; and areas the vendor will either not be able to address or where significant modifications would be required. c. Proposed approach to the conversion/installation and tentative schedule d. Services or data to be provided by the City 8. Based on the results of the demonstrations, the finalist vendors provided “order of magnitude” cost estimates.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOXPRO APPLICATION REPLACEMENT C-9 A formal Request for Proposals (RFP) will be issued pending Council approval of the project budget and granting of authority to the City Manager to issue the RFP and award the contract(s) if within the project budget. Environmental Review No environmental review required. Project Constraints and Limitations Project Constraints 1. Urgency to replace applications within a short time frame while keeping long-term needs in mind. 2. Commitment of significant financial and staffing resources in a challenging fiscal environment. 3. Need for stakeholder support and buy-in for the project. 4. Standardization of custom applications. 5. Integration of applications and prevention of overlap. 6. Highly unlikely that there will be one vendor with an acceptable universal solution. 7. Training users on new applications. 8. Ongoing support and maintenance of new programs. Project Limitations 1. Under the proposed packaged system approach, replacement applications will not be customized. However, City staff have become accustomed to using applications customized exactly to their specifications and that can be quickly modified at a low cost. It is highly unlikely that any packaged program will be able to deliver the exact functionality that users have become accustomed to. On the other hand, the benefit of the packaged systems is the greater assurance of their viability as ongoing application support is not dependent on one individual. 2. It will be difficult to balance the need to make good long-term decisions with the need to also act quickly in selecting and implemeting replacement applications. Stakeholders Stakeholders include all City employees and the community at large that benefits from the cost-effective services performed and information provided by these applications. The IT Steering Committee concurred with the project plan. Additionally, all City departments have been extensively involved in the FoxPro application inventory, IT needs assessment, RFQ evaluations, vendor background checks, and the finalists’ demonstration process.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOXPRO APPLICATION REPLACEMENT C-10 Project Phasing and Funding Sources As reflected in the 2011-13 Capital Improvement Plan (Appendix b, page 3-420), simply upgrading to a “.NET” system was estimated to cost approximately $370,000. Accordingly, replacing all FoxPro applications will cost significantly more. Initial estimates presented to the Council in October 2009 ranged from $500,000 to $1.5 million. Based on “order of magnitude” cost estimates from the finalist vendors ranging from $451,000 to $1.8 million, we recommend a project budget of $1,150,000, which is the mid-point of these cost estimates. The vendor cost estimates include: 1. Base software 2. Software modifications 3. Installation/system integration 4. Data conversion 5. Training 6. Annual license fees/ongoing contract support costs 7. Other initial one-time and ongoing cost estimates as appropriate, such as technology infrastructure improvements needed to support the applications or added City staff resources that might be required for system support or database administration Project Costs by Phase Budget-to-Date 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13TotalSoftware Acquisition1,150,0001,150,000Total- 1,150,000 - 1,150,000 Project Costs
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOXPRO APPLICATION REPLACEMENT C-11 Project Funding by Source Budget-to-Date 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13TotalGeneral Fund862,500862,500Water Fund138,000138,000Sewer Fund92,00092,000Parking Fund34,50034,500Transit Fund23,00023,000Total- 1,150,000 - 1,150,000 Project Funding Sources As reflected above, costs for this project will be allocated between the General Fund and Enterprise, based on the following benefit percentages: Allocated CostPercentGeneral Fund75%Water Fund12%Sewer Fund8%Parking Fund3%Transit Fund2%Total100% These were determined via a weighted average of three factors: computer workstations, GIS usage and full-time equivalent employees. This is based on the average of allocation factors used in the 2007-09 and 2009-11 Cost Allocation Plans. Key Project Assumptions 1. We will be able to adequately support these applications with in-house resources until they are replaced. 2. We will be able to quickly select a packaged system for each application group at a reasonable cost. 3. These solutions will meet our short and long-term needs; maintain the current level of operational efficiency; allow program integration; and retain historical data. Project Manager and Team Support Project Manager: IT Manager
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOXPRO APPLICATION REPLACEMENT C-12 Team Support: Application Administrators; Finance & IT Administrative Analyst; IT staff; Evaluation Teams: GIS/Permitting/Work Orders and Timecards/Overtime/Staffing Alternatives 1. Appropriate a different amount. Given the range of the estimates, the Council could reasonably select a higher or lower amount for the project budget. However, at the mid-point of the range of cost estimates we received from the finalist vendors, we believe that $1,150,000 is a reasonable project budget at this time. 2. Wait until we receive and evaluate proposals before appropriating funds. We could wait to establish a project budget until we have evaluated the proposals and prepared an award recommendation, and return to the Council at that time for both budget adoption and contract award. This has the benefit of waiting until we have a more refined cost based on a detailed evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the vendor proposals. However, there are two downsides to this approach that we believe outweigh this benefit: • We believe it is important to formally recognize a cost for this project and reflect it in our financial planning and management. Doing otherwise could lead to a misleading picture of the City’s fiscal situation if no costs for this replacement are assumed in our budgeting and financial planning. Stated simply, we are now in a much better position to reasonably assess what the replacement costs will be than we were in October 2009 and as such we should adopt a formal project budget at this time. • Proposal evaluation and the City’s position in vendor negotiations will be significantly enhanced if there is a clearly established project budget. In summary, it is the City’s longstanding practice to adopt budgets for all City programs and projects as early as possible in the financial planning and purchasing process. We believe that the City has been well-served by this approach and it should be used in this case as well. 3. Allocate costs differently between funds. We believe that it is reasonable to allocate a “fair share” of the project cost to the enterprise funds. The proposed allocation methodology is consistent with the City’s established cost allocation plan methodology, and as such, we do not recommend apportioning costs differently. 4. Debt finance the replacement cost. The annual General Fund cost if the replacement was debt financed over five years (the longest term we would recommend for software), the annual cost would be about $210,000. While debt financing could be used, which would mitigate the fiscal impact in 2009-11, we do not recommend doing so for three reasons: • It would make balancing the budget that much more difficult in future years. We believe it makes more sense to use our reserves today in mitigating higher costs tomorrow. • The interest cost would add about $115,000 (12%) to the total project cost.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOXPRO APPLICATION REPLACEMENT C-13 • Under our Budget and Fiscal Policies, debt financing should generally be used when the life of the asset to be financed is 10 years or longer (page B-19 of the 2009-11 Financial Plan). 5. Defer or re-phase the project. Given the lack of viable alternatives, it will not be possible to support and maintain these applications if the project is defered (which is one of the reasons why it is so important to complete their replacement quickly). Several programs, such as building permits, are already experiencing decreased productivity due to the inability to make programming changes to the applications. The City cannot wait several years to address these applications due to the lack of support and maintenance resources. 6. Change the scope of the project. There are no significant opportunities for changing the scope of the project: the applications need to be replaced; and data conversion, software implementation, system integration and user training are all required elements of this project 7. Do not replace these applications. Given the importance of these FoxPro applications in supporting a wide range of mission-critical applications throughout the organization, as well the ability of these programs to increase productivity and improve customer service, we do not recommend this alternative. Operating Program Information Technology Project Effect on the Operating Budget Project Management Significant staff resources will be required during the project by Finance & IT staff as well by the operating departments in managing this project. Operations and Maintenance After Project Completion There will be significant costs ongoing costs, including annual license fees, ongoing support costs for database maintenance and software modifications or upgrades as needed.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN GATEWAY PAVING: UPPER MONTEREY PAVING AND MISSION-STYLE SIDEWALK INSTALLATION C-14 CIP Project Summary Resurfacing Monterey Street and replacing existing sidewalk with new Mission Style sidewalk from California Boulevard to the Highway 101 onramp at Buena Vista will cost $1,691,000 to complete in 2010-11. Of this amount, $500,000 has already been funded; and the expanded scope of $1.2 million is proposed to be funded from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA). Background. The reconstruction of upper Monterey Street is included as part of the Downtown and Gateway Paving project in the 2009-11 Financial Plan in the amount of $500,000 from the General Fund. We recommend funding an expanded project work scope (including the upgrade of existing sidewalks) by $1.2 million by reallocating ARRA funds previously designated for Phase 3 of the Railroad Safety Trail (Amtrak to Marsh Street), which will be significantly deferred due to Union Pacific Railroad’s (UPRR) last minute and unexpected decision to deny us use of its right-of-way. The decision to move the City’s share of ARRA funding to this project was discussed during December 2009, when the Council was informed that the deadline for construction authorization of the ARRA funding was near. This project was an eligible type and could receive federal environmental clearance quickly enough to qualify. No other city project could be cleared as easily, and so discussion with SLOCOG identified this as an acceptable alternative project. The SLOCOG board approved the substitution at their January 2010 meeting. Project Objectives 1. Improve the smoothness and appearance of City street pavement. 2. Prevent street pavement from deteriorating. 3. Replace damaged sidewalks 4. Upgrade sidewalks to Mission Style 5. Upgrade sidewalk ramps to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements Existing Situation The Pavement Management Plan, adopted by the Council in 1998, recommends annual pavement maintenance work to be performed in the downtown area. The 2009-11 Financial Plan’s “Downtown and Gateway Paving” includes the following locations for pavement upgrades: 1. Marsh Street from Higuera to Santa Rosa (scheduled for 2010) 2. Monterey Street from California Blvd to the Hwy 101 onramp (scheduled for 2011) 3. Chorro Street from Monterey to Higuera & Pacific Street from Nipomo to Broad (tentatively scheduled for 2014) Upper Monterey Street from California Boulevard to the Highway 101 onramp at Buena Vista is an old concrete street that was overlaid with asphalt approximately 30 years ago. Repairing this aged asphalt is recommended as a needed improvement given that the location is a “City Gateway” where visitors get their first and last impressions of the City.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN GATEWAY PAVING: UPPER MONTEREY PAVING AND MISSION-STYLE SIDEWALK INSTALLATION C-15 As discussed above, the proposed re-allocation of ARRA funds from Phase 3 of the Railroad Safety Trail project increases available funding for the upper Monterey Street project. Staff recommends the use of these additional funds to upgrade to Mission Style sidewalks for the entire stretch. Performing the sidewalk upgrades under a single construction contract will result in a uniform appearance of the Mission Style sidewalk. This work has been scheduled for January through March of 2011 to coincide with low tourist activity for the area’s hotel industry. Goal and Policy Links 1. 1998 Pavement Management Plan 2. Transportation Planning and Engineering Program Goal: Safe and Well-Maintained Streets 3. Measure Y Priority: Neighborhood Paving & Deferred Street Maintenance 4. 2009-11 Major City Goal: Infrastructure Maintenance 5. 2009-11 Important Council Objective: Downtown Maintenance and Beautification Project Work Completed 1. Draft construction plans have been completed. 2. Authorization to proceed has been obtained from the State of California for expenditure of the ARRA funding. 3. Federal environmental clearance has been obtained. 4. Staff has met with the Tourism Business Improvement District Board to discuss the project and gain concurrence for the project scheduling, currently placed to coincide with the slowest time of year for the area. Environmental Review There are no special conditions for environmental review. The Federal environmental clearance has been obtained. The State environmental clearance is anticipated to be a Notice of Exemption. Project Constraints and Limitations The project will have impacts as this is a highly traveled street. Tourist businesses will be impacted as well as traffic into the university. Staff is completing community outreach. Stakeholders The business community is the largest stakeholder for the project. Residents and visitors are also impacted temporarily during construction. Those same stakeholders are anticipated to reap the benefits of smooth pavement surface and new Mission Style sidewalks.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN GATEWAY PAVING: UPPER MONTEREY PAVING AND MISSION-STYLE SIDEWALK INSTALLATION C-16 Project Phasing and Funding Sources Project Costs by Phase Budget-to-Date 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13TotalConstructionPaving850,000850,000ADA Improvements91,00091,000Misison Style Sidewalk Upgrade750,000750,000Total- - 1,691,000 - - 1,691,000 Project Costs Project Funding by Source Budget-to-Date 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13TotalGeneral Fund (1)500,000500,000ARRA (2)1,191,0001,191,000Total- - 1,691,000 - - 1,691,000 Project Funding Sources Notes: 1. The General Fund portion of this work has already been allocated in the 2009-11 Financial Plan: no added funding is requested for this. 2. American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) Funding was originally approved for Railroad Safety Trail Phase 3 and budgeted that way in the 2009-11 Financial Plan, Appendix B, Page 3-222. Union Pacific Railroad is not allowing that project to go forward at this time. The Monterey Street paving project was a project which could be reasonably expanded and delivered on within the timeframe required by the ARRA grant.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN GATEWAY PAVING: UPPER MONTEREY PAVING AND MISSION-STYLE SIDEWALK INSTALLATION C-17 Key Project Assumptions 1. The costs are based on recent construction and could change with increases in costs for labor and asphalt. The project also assumes that there is no significant utility underground work to be completed in the near future. 2. This is the highest priority use of available ARRA funding. Project Manager and Team Support Project Manager CIP Project Engineering staff Project Team Public Works Administration Community Development Alternatives 1. Deny the Project. Paving and sidewalk improvements would not occur on this gateway street and the City would lose the ARRA funding and possibly jeopardize future funding opportunities. 2. Allocate the Funding to Another Project. The decision to move the City’s share of ARRA funding to this project was based on the ability to meet all of the requirements before the deadline for construction authorization of the ARRA funding was reached. This project was an eligible type and could receive federal environmental clearance quickly enough to qualify. No other city project could be cleared before the deadline was reached. 3. Redefine the Project Scope. The limits or scope of the project could be adjusted. If additional work was proposed, additional funding would be required. If the scope of the project was reduced significantly, the City could lose a portion of the ARRA funding. Operating Program General Street Maintenance (50300)
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN GATEWAY PAVING: UPPER MONTEREY PAVING AND MISSION-STYLE SIDEWALK INSTALLATION C-18 Project Effect on the Operating Budget Project Management CIP Engineering Design Staff: 250 hours CIP Engineering Inspection Staff: 200 hours Public Works Administration Staff: 90 hours Community Development Environmental Review Staff: 1 hour Operation and Maintenance after Project Completion Improving the condition of the downtown streets will result in less time and money required for routine maintenance tasks, such as pothole repairs.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION C-19 CIP Project Summary Accelerating the right-of-way (ROW) acquisition for the Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR)/Highway 101 interchange project will cost $1,200,000 for acquisition in 2009-11. Of this amount, $1,126,000 is proposed to be funded from transportation impact fees (which includes $846,000 from transferred funds from other projects) and $74,000 from an advance from the General Fund to help fund this acceleration. However, there will be no net added costs when the project is ready for construction. Project Objectives 1. Accelerate ROW acquisition for the project to get a “bid ready” project completed as soon as possible. 2. Reduce traffic congestion at the LOVR/Highway 101 interchange. 3. Provide sufficient capacity to accommodate traffic demands of future development anticipated by both City and County General Plans. 4. Improve pedestrian and bicycle access and circulation in the area. 5. Identify and then acquire necessary ROW as they become available or area properties develop. 6. Acquire additional funding from regional, state and federal sources to complete the project. Existing Situation Design work on construction plans and specifications for the LOVR interchange project continue and is nearing the 65% completion stage. As part of this process, staff has refined the ROW needs for the project and has begun appraisals of potential acquisition areas needed for construction of the project. Staff continues to proceed quickly on the design of the project in order to complete the work and have the project “bid ready” to take advantage of any early grant funding that may become available. Funding for ROW for the project has been secured via a State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) grant in an amount of $1.2 million, which is programmed for 2011-12. This programming year was later than the initial request submitted by the City (2010-11) due to other local project needs and over programming of the STIP at the State level. In addition, there has been speculation that due to the State budget deficiency, there is a high likelihood that currently programmed STIP projects will be “pushed out” to future years to balance revenues with State needs. Should this occur, ROW funding for the project could be deferred into later fiscal years. Since the project design continues to move forward and is anticipated to be complete by early 2011, staff believes it is timely to begin ROW negotiations now and to concurrently seek ways of advancing funding for this in order to take advantage of the downturn in the real estate market, secure the properties to complete a “bid ready” project that is ready to go and seek additional funding to jump start the construction. Staff has consulted San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) on this issue and has received concurrence that if the City was willing to advance the $1.2 million in ROW funding, they would support and advocate for a STIP amendment request that would transfer the $1.2 million in right-of-
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION C-20 way funding to the construction line item in the STIP grant that is currently programmed for 2012-13. This would result in a no net loss to the overall project grant amount of $13.8 million that we received for this project. In short, although the City would need to advance the money now to complete the purchase of these properties, the total amount of outside funding for the project would remain the same and the reimbursement to the General Fund for the advance to the project would likely be realized in a correspondingly smaller local matching amount the City would need to bond for at the time of construction. Although staff continues to budget for ROW costs that may be as high as the $1.2 million estimate, it is likely that the actual costs will be lower due to the depressed level of the local real estate market and information we have received from the appraiser on the project. Securing these properties now will likely mean a lower overall cost to the City and reduce the amount of any borrowing we must do to meet our local funding obligations. Because of the magnitude of funding needed to complete the project, it is anticipated that the City funding component of the project will need to be debt financed through general bond obligations or other funding mechanisms. Staff recommends using the General Fund reserve for this purpose since the expenditure would be a “one-time” cost and the repayment of the funding would occur at a later time that is fully under the control of the City. The reimbursement would occur at the time that construction goes forward and all grant and bond funding is in place. It could occur sooner if other outside funding sources emerge or we receive higher-than-anticipated Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) revenues before then. However, we do not believe that either of these is likely. Staff continues to work on local access issues associated with the Los Verdes condominium developments. This project request does not include costs associated with creating additional access to Higuera Street to these complexes. If access options are resolved that include creating new access to Higuera Street for the condominiums, staff will need to bring forward an additional funding request for Council consideration. Goal and Policy Links 1. 1994 General Plan Circulation Element (Figure 4, project C.2) 2. 1995 Transportation Impact Fee Program 3. 2005-07 Major City Goal: Traffic Congestion Relief 4. 2007-09 Major City Goal: Traffic Congestion Relief 5. 2009-11 Major City Goal: Traffic Congestion Relief
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION C-21 Project Work Completed 1. Caltrans and the City have approved the Project Study Report (PSR). 2. The relocation of Calle Joaquin is complete. 3. Minor operational improvements along LOVR have been completed. 4. The LOVR sub-area impact fee program has been established to help fund the project. 5. The Project Report and Environmental Determination process is approximately 95% complete. 6. Plans and specifications are approximately 65% complete. Environmental Review Environmental review under both federal (NEPA – National Environmental Policy Act) and state requirements (CEQA – California Environmental Quality Act) for this project is complete. Project Phasing and Funding Sources Project Costs by Type To-Date 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 TotalStudy (PSR)200,000200,000Environmental Review700,000 700,000Design2,500,000 79,7002,579,700Construction Management800,000 800,000Right-of-Way1,200,0001,200,000Construction 15,500,000 15,500,000Total3,400,000 1,279,70016,300,000 20,979,700Project Costs
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION C-22 Project Funding by Source To-Date 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 TotalState Grant (Note 1)100,000100,000County of SLO Grant (Note 2)30,000 30,000Direct Developer Contribution600,000 600,000Transportation Impact Fee (Note 3)2,670,000 1,126,0001,874,000 5,670,000LOVR Impact Fee (Note 4)79,700700,000 779,700General Fund74,000(74,000)Regional, State or Federal Grants 13,800,000 13,800,000Total3,400,000 1,279,70016,300,000 20,979,700Project Funding Sources 1. State Highway Assistance (SHA) grant through SLOCOG 2. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) grants – City and County apportionments 3. The Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program was amended by Council on May 2, 2006 to reflect project cost increases. In is anticipated that the City funding for the project may need to be financed due to limitations on annually accrued TIF amounts. Reimbursement to the General Fund for advancement of ROW costs would likely come from this funding source at the time that all bond funding is in place. 4. The LOVR sub-area fee area has been amended to reflect project cost increases. $846,000 of the proposed TIF funding is transferred from available balances in the Railroad Safety Trail Phase 3 (Amtrak to Marsh Street: $417,100) and Railroad Safety Trail Bridge Over Highway 101 ($428,900) projects. Due to the reversal of previous approvals by Union Pacific Railroad in licensing the ROW for these trails, these projects will need to be significantly re-scoped. Accordingly, the TIF funding previously committed for these two projects will not be used in 2009-11. The balance of the TIF funding ($280,000) comes from available fund balance. Department Coordinator and Project Support 1. Department Coordinator: Tim Bochum, Deputy Director of Public Works 2. Project Support: Project management – Timothy Bochum, Deputy Director of Public Works Construction management –Construction Management Supervisor – Contract Services Project design – Matt Horn, Supervising Civil Engineer Environmental review – Doug Davidson, Deputy Director of Community Development
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION C-23 Alternative Do not advance funding for RQW acquisition at this time and await funding from STIP. This alternative would require that the project wait for acquisition of the right of way until at least 2011-12 when STIP funding may become available. Staff does not recommend this due to the likelihood that the STIP program may be deferred due to budget issues and over programming and deferring right of way acquisition would delay completing the “bid ready” objective of the project design that could take advantage of federal or state funding that may become available when other projects are delayed. Project Effect on the Operating Budget Staff Resources: Transportation Planning and Engineering: 400 hours for project coordination CIP Project Engineering Program: 1,000 hours for project management Development Review Program: 60 hours for environmental review Once the project is complete, the City and Caltrans will maintain the interchange, under the terms of an existing maintenance agreement. City Street Maintenance staff will likely have fewer requests for pavement repair as a result. LOVR Interchange Project Area Location Map
Section D RECENT FINANCIAL AND REVENUE REPORTS
D-1
D-2
D-3
D-4
Section E STATUS OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES STATUS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Overview 1 Report Card: Major City Goals and Other Important Objectives 1 Report Card: Other Council Objectives 2 Action Plan Changes 2 Next Report 3 MAJOR CITY GOALS Infrastructure Maintenance 4 Traffic Congestion Relief 6 11 Economic Development Preservation of Essential Services and Fiscal Health 14 OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTIVES Land Use and Circulation Revisions 16 Open Space Preservation 17 Green House Gas Reduction and Energy Conservation 19 Downtown Maintenance and Beautification 21 Historic Preservation 23 OTHER COUNCIL OBJECTIVES Creek and Flood Protection 24 Urban Forest 24 Skate Park 24 Homeless Services 24 CARRYOVER GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Major City Goals Economic Development: Sales Tax and TOT Revenues 26 Other Council Objectives Waterways Management Plan Implementation Program 26 Laguna Lake Dredging Study 26 Tree Planting and Maintenance 26 Airport Area Annexation 26 Broad Street Corridor Plan 27 STATUS OF MAJOR CIP PROJECTS Status of Major Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Projects 28 OVERVIEW
INTRODUCTION E-2 This report details the status of major City goals and other important objectives set by the Council as part of the 2009-11 Financial Plan as of February 1, 2010. In general, we are on-track in accomplishing these objectives based on the work programs adopted by the Council. Report Card. The following is a quick “report card” on the status of major City goals and other important objectives based on the “action plans” approved by the Council as part of the 2009-11 Financial Plan. As a benchmark, at February 1, 2010, we are about 30% through the two-year Financial Plan period. Most of the goals and objectives are near or exceed this level. Organization. The “report card” is followed by a short summary of notable changes from the original action plan. After this is a more detailed report on each major city goal and other important objective, which shows the objective, action plan as adopted by the Council, any revisions (additions are shown in italics; date changes are also shown in italics and highlighted in a separate column; and deletions are shown in strikeout) and a brief status summary as of February 1, 2010. Shorter reports are provided for “other Council objectives” for 2009-11 as well as for “carryover goals” from 2007-09.Important Note Many of these are multi-year goals that have activities associated with them that go beyond the two-year 2009-11 time frame. This status report is focused on approved “Action Plan” tasks as of February 1, 2010. Report Card: 2009-11 Major City Goals & Other Important Objectives Percent Complete as of February 1, 2009 Per Actions Plan Tasks0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Historic PreservationDowntown Maintenance & BeautificationGreen House Gas Reduction & Energy ConservationOpen Space PreservationLand Use & Circulation Revisions OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTIVESPreservation of Essential Services & Fiscal Health Economic DevelopmentTraffic Congestion ReliefInfrastructure MaintenanceMAJOR CITY GOALS
INTRODUCTION E-3 Report Card: 2009-11 Other Council Objectives Percent Complete as of February 1. 20100% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Homeless ServicesUrban ForestSkate ParkCreek & Flood Protection ACTION PLAN CHANGES As noted above, in general we are on-track in accomplishing these goals and objectives based on the work programs adopted by the Council. However, notable changes from the original action plans include the following. Major City Goals Traffic Congestion Relief. Funding from the Transportation Development Act (TDA) has been reduced by a minimum of $212,000 for 2009-10. Transit service change recommendations, if any, will be presented to the Council in Spring 2010. The Bob Jones Trail bridges project has been delayed as staff works with Caltrans to coordinate the Los Osos Valley Road interchange project (the south end of the project). However, the northern connection at Prado Road is anticipated to be designed and ready for construction by summer 2010. Staff has received final confirmation from Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) that a lease agreement for the Railroad Safety Trail Phase 3 (Amtrak to Marsh Street) and Highway 101 Bridge is not possible as these projects are currently designed, which was based on UPRR approvals received in 2004. UPRR has reversed its earlier approval based on their corporate policy that does not allow any type of easement that would place activities closer than 40 feet from the centerline of the tracks. The bicycle path through this area had to be placed inside that limit. Staff will explore other options to complete the Trail in these two key locations and plan to present initial findings to the Council by June 2011. Preservation of Essential Services and Fiscal Health. The un- anticipated need to replace all FoxPro software applications has resulted in a deferral of Council consideration of changes to the Property Management Manual to May 2010. Other Important Objectives Land Use and Circulation Revisions. The traffic model update has been partially incorporated into the State Route 1 Major Investment Study (SR 1 MIS) project and will be completed by a consultant in Spring 2010. Evaluation of the Land Use Element policies and programs is slated to begin in July 2010.
INTRODUCTION E-4 Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Energy Conservation. This work program is ahead of schedule. The City will receive $199,400 from the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (EECBG) and will use these funds to develop a Climate Action Plan. The Council has adopted a resolution to participate with the County of San Luis Obispo in the CaliforniaFIRST energy efficiency financing pilot program. Staff will work with the program team to implement the program over the spring and summer of 2010. Other Council Objectives All objectives have seen progress. There are no significant changes to report. NEXT REPORT We will present the next “formal report” to the Council in June 2010 as part of the 2009-11 Financial Plan Supplement. In the interim, we will keep the Council up-to-date on the status of major projects through agenda reports, Council Notes and other briefing opportunities.
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-5 INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE Objective. Sustain an effective level of core existing infrastructure maintenance such as streets, sidewalks, creeks and flood protection, as well as the protection and maintenance of other physical assets. Action Plan Task Current Revised Building Maintenance Projects 1. Fire Station 3 Shower Stall Construction, Police Annex Sewer Lateral Replacement, Carnegie Library Exterior Sealing, Laguna Lake Restroom Replacement 6/10 10/10 2. Meadow Park Roof Replacement, Santa Rosa Restroom Replacement 6/11 Playground Equipment Projects 1. Meadow and Throop Park playground Equipment Replacement 6/10 8/10 2. Johnson, Santa Rosa and Emerson Park playground Equipment Replacement design 6/11 Street and Flood Protection Projects 1. Andrews Drainage System Design, Drainage Facility Design, Higuera Culvert Repair, Street Reconstruction and Resurfacing Design, Sign Reflectivity Software and Equipment Purchase, Sidewalk Repairs, Sidewalk Ramp Construction, Warden Bridge Resurfacing and Street Light Pole Painting 6/10 10/10 2. Andrews Drainage System Permitting, Drainage Facility Construction, Sidewalk Repairs, Pavement Area and Downtown Street Reconstruction and Resurfacing Design and Construction, Sign Replacements, Sidewalk Ramp Construction, Parking lot resurfacing, Street Light Pole Painting, Downtown Tree Management Plan Tree and Sidewalk work 6/11 3. Pavement and sidewalk maintenance by City staff Ongoing Utility Projects 1. Polybutylene Water Service Replacement, Waterline Replacement, Sewerline Replacement, Raw Waterline Coating 6/10 2. Polybutylene Water Service Replacement, Waterline Replacement, Sewerline Replacement, Water Treatment Plant Roof Replacement and Filter Media Replacement, Water Reclamation Facility Digester Repair, Clarifier Recoating, 6/11 Downtown Design Standards Complete review and modifications of Downtown design standards used in infrastructure maintenance as part of the Council’s Downtown Maintenance and Beautification objective 3/10
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-6 Status Summary: 35% Complete. The following is a summary of accomplishments and important next steps for this goal. Due to a heavy workload in Engineering, and other factors such as the UPRR negotiations, Caltrans permit delays and neighborhood issues, some delay in project schedules has occurred. Staff is working to keep these new schedules for project delivery. Engineering staff has also accelerated the delivery of the Upper Monterey Street reconstruction project to take advantage of ARRA funds from the RRST Phase 3 project, which has been put on hold. Building Maintenance Projects. The Fire Station 3 Shower Stall construction Police Annex lateral replacement and the Laguna Lake restrooms are complete. Design for the sealing of the Carnegie Library is underway. Park Projects: Design is underway for Santa Rosa restrooms and Meadow Park Roof with construction expected to start in June/July 2010. Design is underway for Meadow and Throop play equipment replacement projects. Street and Flood Protection Projects. The Andrews Street drainage system plans are nearing completion. Higuera Culvert and Street Reconstruction projects are under design. Sidewalk repairs are completed. Staff is continuing with a combination of street crack sealing and repairs in preparation for street microsurfacing, as well as smaller scale full overlay maintenance work. Preparation work is complete for the paving project for Area 3 to begin this summer
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-7 TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF Objective. Continue efforts on projects and programs which relieve traffic congestion, such as street modifications, intersection improvements, pedestrian improvements, bicycle facilities, trip reduction programs, traffic signal operations and public transit. Action Plan Task Current Revised Transit Service Levels 1. Maintain existing transit levels for local and regional services with uncertain levels of State and Federal funding. Ongoing 2. Implement recommendation in the Short Range Transit Plan if funding is available. Ongoing 3. Explore alternative fuel and vehicle type to offset operational costs. Ongoing Transit Improvements 1. Use federal and state capital funding to replace and upgrade vehicles. Ongoing 2. Use federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and state capital funding to upgrade Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) system for improved on time performance. 3/10 3. Use federal (ARRA) and state capital funding to improve the transit facility on Prado Road. 3/10 Congestion Management Report Implement low cost recommendations of the Congestion Management Report. Ongoing State Route 1/Highway 101 Work with San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) and Caltrans regarding further planning for State Route 1 (Santa Rosa Street) including an alternatives assessment for US 101/State Route 1 interchange. 6/10 Prado Road Extension Work with west side Margarita area property owners to implement phased improvements to Prado Road. Ongoing Signalization of US 101/Grand Avenue Intersection 1. Complete design. 12/09 2/10 2. Begin Construction. 5/10 3. Complete construction. 9/10 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange 1. Complete construction plans and specifications. 5/10
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-8 Task Current Revised 2. Begin right of way acquisition. 6/10 3. Complete right of way acquisition. 6/11 4. Pursue additional funding. Ongoing 5. Implement phase improvements as new development occurs. Ongoing Traffic Model Update 1. Complete base year traffic model update. 6/10 2. Recruit temporary or contract staff, or consultant assistance for traffic model development. Complete 3. Complete Traffic Model Update with existing Land Use scenarios. 6/10 4. Identification and development of strategic revisions to the Land Use Element in superseded sections. 6/11 5. Conduct traffic model assessments of various land use modifications for future year forecasts and strategic revisions to the Circulation Element. 6/11 Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Update Update the Neighborhood Traffic Management program to reflect current practices and principles. 2/10 Aero Drive Realignment Work with the County of San Luis Obispo to relocate Aero Drive and signalize access to San Luis Obispo Regional Airport. Complete SLO County 511 Work with Rideshare to promote a new 511 traffic hotline. Ongoing Johnson and Buchon Intersection Improvements 1. Begin project design (combined scope of Pismo/Buchon neighborhood traffic management program). 12/09 3/10 2. Begin construction. 6/10 8/10 3. Complete construction. 9/10 12/10 Tank Farm Road Intersection Improvements 1. Initiate design of Tank Farm Road widening project. 2. Complete project design. 3. Begin construction. 4. Complete construction. 12/09 6/10 9/10 6/11
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-9 Task Current Revised Railroad Safety Trail - Phase 3: Amtrak to Marsh Street 1. Complete construction documents. 2. Identify alternative routes and present initial findings to the Council.. 3. Pursue additional funding. 4. Award contract and begin construction. 12/09 Ongoing TBD 6/11 Railroad Safety Trail - Phase 4a: Foothill to Hathaway 1. Complete construction drawings. 12/09 Complete 2. Begin Construction 3/10 3. Complete Construction 9/10 Railroad Safety Trail Bridge: Highway 101 Crossing 1. Complete Union Pacific Railroad and Caltrans Agreements 2/10 2. Complete design 5/10 3. Identify alternative routes and present initial findings to the Council. 6/11 4. Pursue additional funding Ongoing 5. Award contract and begin construction. TBD Bob Jones City-to-Sea Trail: North Connection to Prado Road 1. Pursue outside funding for trail connections. Ongoing 2. Complete construction drawings 4/10 3. Complete construction. 9/10 Bill Roalman Phase II Complete construction. Complete Madonna Road Bike Path Work with property owners and Caltrans to implement a new bicycle facility that connects Madonna Road to Marsh Street 8/10 Mid-Higuera Widening Evaluate the costs and benefits of landscaped medians in the as set forth in the Mid-Higuera Street Enhancement Plan and present results to the Council. 5/10 2/10
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-10 Task Current Revised Other Projects That Reduce Traffic Congestion 1. Complete curb ramps, on-street bicycle facility paving and striping improvements in conjunction with City Street paving projects. Ongoing 2. Implement Neighborhood Traffic Management projects. Ongoing 3. Construct curb ramps and install sidewalks. Ongoing 4. Conduct bi-annual vehicle and bicycle traffic counts. Ongoing 5. Complete miscellaneous bicycle facility improvements identified in the Bicycle Transportation Plan, as resources permit. Ongoing 6. Develop a list, in conjunction with the Bicycle Committee, of streets that would benefit from increased street sweeping and coordinate with Street Maintenance to use miscellaneous sweeping hours, when available, to increase frequency. Ongoing 7. Seek funding for the design and construction of bikeways and pedestrian paths within the City. Ongoing 8. Promote bicycling, walking and transit as alternative forms of transportation. Ongoing 9. Provide more bicycle parking through the City’s “Racks with Plaques” program. Ongoing Status Summary: 35% Complete. The following is a summary of accomplishments and important next steps for this goal. 1. The City learned in October 2009 that TDA funding will be reduced by a minimum of $212,000 for 2009-10 as a result of shortfall in State tax revenues. It is unknown at this time how this reduction may affect basic levels of transit services. However, staff will be reviewing this issue and bringing service changes forward, if necessary, in spring 2010. 2. ARRA grant funding for transit improvements has been programmed and projects are substantially completed or are in construction. The AVL system is approximately 80% completed and the City is in beta testing mode for the on-line application. The fare box upgrade project is underway. The transit facility improvements are approximately 65% complete and the roof repairs are almost entirely complete. 3. A consultant has been hired for the State Route 1 Major Investment Study (SR 1 MIS) project and work has begun gathering background information. The traffic model work is being completed as part of this effort, which is why completion of both the base and future forecast models have been deferred to June 2010. The project must be completed prior to June 2010 or state funding will be lost. 4. The City has requested that SLOCOG accelerate right of way funding for the LOVR/Highway 101 interchange project. A letter has been sent to SLOCOG enquiring into alternatives to accomplish right of way in 2010-11 rather than 2011-12. Plans, specifications and engineering (PS&E) for the interchange is approximately 50% complete however, the Project Report still needs to be approved by Caltrans. The environmental determination of the project was approved by Caltrans in December 2009.
MAJOR CITY GOALS 5. The draft update to the Neighborhood Traffic Management (NTM) Program has been completed and is circulating internally for review. Final Council review of these changes will be delayed until April of 2010 in order to complete the process for the Buchon/Pismo/Johnson NTM and Laguna Village Shopping Center driveway issues. E-11 6. The neighborhood vote on the Buchon/Pismo/Johnson NTM was completed in November 2009. While there was consensus for some traffic calming measures, the NTM Task Force has asked for a follow-up survey for alternatives along Buchon Street. The additional survey will be circulated by staff in late January or early February 2010. Design of the Johnson Street modifications need to await the outcome of that process so that substantial redesigns do not need to be done. We are also proposing to delay construction of the work until San Luis Obispo High School is out of session in order to minimize construction impacts to the school traffic. 7. The Bob Jones Trail bridges project has been delayed as efforts are underway with Caltrans to coordinate the work with the LOVR Interchange project and seek encroachment into the Caltrans right of way. The design of the northern bridge connection (to Prado Road) is moving forward and should be completed in April. 8. Design of Railroad Safety Trail Phase 4a (Foothill to Cal Poly) is complete and the project is advertising for construction. 9. Staff has received final confirmation from Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) that a lease agreement for the Railroad Safety Trail Phase 3 (Amtrak to Marsh Street) and Highway 101 Bridge is not possible as these projects are currently designed, which was based on UPRR approvals received in 2004. UPRR has reversed its earlier approval based on their corporate policy that does not allow any type of easement that would place activities closer than 40 feet from the centerline of the tracks. The bicycle path through this area had to be placed inside that limit. Staff will explore other options to complete the Trail in these two key locations and plan to present initial findings to the Council by June 2011..
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-12 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Objective. In collaboration with Cal Poly, Cuesta and the business community, develop strategies to increase economic development including emphasis on head-of-household jobs and environmentally sustainable businesses. Action Plan Task Current Revised Business Retention and Expansion (BRE) – Data Collection and Analysis 1. Finance & Information Technology (IT) hires Administrative Analyst. Complete 2. Develop Business Retention and Expansion (BRE) database using existing data from city and external sources. Ongoing 3. Conduct 72 business surveys (4 per month beginning January 2010). Ongoing 4. Update BRE database with information from surveys and existing sources of information. Ongoing 5. Use BRE data to produce a quarterly newsletter on business retention and expansion efforts. 12/09 3/10 6. Use BRE data to produce metrics about inquiries to the City. Ongoing 7. Work with Administrative Analyst to manage the BRE database, analyze the information, produce metrics and disseminate information. Ongoing 8. Continue to conduct 10 business visitations with Council per year. Ongoing 9. Continue to collaborate with Community Development on the Seismic Retrofit Program. Ongoing Identify Industry Clusters and Opportunities 1. Begin a series of forums to identify industry clusters and opportunities for job growth drawing on expertise from the business, environmental, educational and governmental communities. 3/10 2. Draft a working list of industry clusters and opportunities. 12/09 Ongoing 3. Present working list of industry clusters and opportunities to participants and foster opportunities for continuing collaboration on the list and opportunities. 3/10 Information Outreach 1. Identify changes that would make economic development information more accessible to users of the City web pages. Complete
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-13 Task Current Revised 2. Work on web upgrades as time and staffing constraints permit. Ongoing 3. Coordinate with available staff to periodically update the web pages with data to market City as place to do business. Ongoing 4. Explore ideas and opportunities to support the business community during the economic downturn through strategic economic development initiatives program. 12/09 Complete 5. Continue to contract with HdL and economic forecasters for data pertinent to businesses. Ongoing Collaborative Economic Development Efforts 1. Develop Strategic Economic Development Initiatives Program and recommend funding allocations to Council. 8/09 Complete 2. Participate with the Chamber of Commerce coordinated committee for collaboration between business, government and universities. Ongoing 3. Foster collaborative activities with the environmental community (including ECOSLO, Sierra Club, and Land Conservancy) beginning with participation with the Chamber’s Sustainability Committee. Ongoing 4. Collaborate with Community Development and Finance & IT Departments to explore opportunities for economic development action presented by AB 811. Ongoing 5. Partner with tourism efforts to market the community as a place to do business. Ongoing Status Summary: 30% Complete. The following is a summary of accomplishments and important next steps for this goal. Business Retention and Expansion Efforts The City’s new business retention database (Executive Pulse) is building through regularly scheduled visits to local companies. The Chamber has partnered with the City to help facilitate the four monthly retention visits. The initial stage resulted in minor changes to the program and set the stage for visits to companies not so closely tied to the Chamber. These visits begin in January and will continue to drive refinements to the program. Work is ongoing with the new Finance & IT/Economic Development Analyst using existing business license data to produce metrics to help staff gain better ongoing understanding of our local businesses. The November 2009 business visitation was held at the emerging Railroad Square building. Several business owners from the district attended with their views on the future possibilities in that area of town. The program continues to be a valuable tool for highlighting successful businesses and economic endeavors in our City while allowing for the collection of information and knowledge that helps to inform macro-lelev decisionmaking.
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-14 Seismic strengthening projects continue to make progress. All buildings with 2009 deadlines continue to make good progress with two remaining to complete the construction. The one-year extension contracts with the other buildings from the original July 1, 2009list are making progress toward construction with one completed well ahead of their July 1 2010 deadline. The contractual obligation of each building owner to complete mitigation of the hazard by the July 1, 2010 deadline is being managed by the Building Division to assure compliance. Buildings from the original July 1 2010 deadline group exclusively include buildings that are part of larger redevelopment projects as well as the Springfield Baptist Church, currently listed for sale. With 2012 clearly in our sights, the buildings that qualified for that deadline group by strengthening to Level A has started to come to life with owners looking at beginning their work. Seismic Task Force has been meeting to discuss recommendations to Council for the July 1, 2010 deadline group. Their recommendations will be communicated to Council on February 16, 2010. Industry Clusters and Opportunities An analysis of industry types is currently underway using existing business licensing data. City staff has been analyzing business tax data for information about clusters; the Collaboration Committee’s efforts to begin the process of planning for how to encourage business has included clusters as a point of reference; and the business retention efforts have highlighted micro-clusters that will inform the choice of businesses to survey over the coming months. Information Outreach The web presence is in the process of being improved to facilitate access to information and organizations that assist business. Utilizing the expertise of existing staff, changes have been accomplished but the need for further expertise has been identified to maximize the usefulness of the web to businesses. The necessary changes have been identified and professional help will be sought via an RFP for website upgrades that build on the progress made by staff and effect an efficient interface between newsletters and the web. Collaborative Economic Development Effort Collaborative economic development activities are scheduled to move forward in the New Year. The Chamber sponsored “Collaboration” Committee has taken steps to secure work by a consultant on assessing the entrepreneurial ecosystem in our region sponsored jointly by the City, CalPoly, the County and local businesses. The strategic economic development initiative approved in concept by Council on July 21, 2009 has provided the City’s portion of funding for this joint effort. Businesses continue to use the support of Cuesta College’s Business Assistance Center and SCORE. The Economic Development mamager continues to investigate opportunities for “green” initiatives via Chamber of Commerce programs, Cuesta College workforce programs, and the City/County efforts to facilitate an AB 811 program. Economic Development Program collaborates with the City’s tourism efforts, particularly to get the word out about the new initiatives that support tourism through marketing and event promotion.
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-15 PRESERVATION OF ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND FISCAL HEALTH Objective. Adopt a balanced budget that retains the City's fiscal health, preserves essential services and implements long-term productivity improvements and cost-reduction strategies. Action Plan Task Current Revised 1. Implement organization-wide savings recommended by community members and City employees. Ongoing2. Continue to closely review and monitor the City’s fiscal situation.Ongoing3. Implement budget-balancing strategies adopted in the 2009-11 Financial Plan.Complete4. Review and update as appropriate key infrastructure maintenance plans.a. Present Pavement Management Plan update to Council.Completeb. Review other plans for update as appropriate and present the results to the Council. 6/115. Resume “best practice reviews” that focus on one to two significant internal control areas annually that typically cross department activities. Ongoing 6. Continue supporting pension reform. Ongoing7. Implement ongoing “benchmark” analysis of key financial and outcome measures with comparable communities every two years. 11/10 8. Update the Property Management Manual: comprehensive review of our property management policies and procedures, including property acquisition, sale and lease.2/10 5/10 9. Continue evaluating contracting-out opportunities for cost reductions or service improvements. Ongoing10. Maximize grant funding opportunities, including “Stimulus Package.”Ongoing11. Review Memorandums of Agreements.Ongoing12. Continue succession planning efforts.Ongoing13. Continue to develop, review, modify and implement Human Resources policies in support of fiscal health. Ongoing Status Summary: 40% Complete. The following highlights key accomplishments so far and important next steps:
MAJOR CITY GOALS E-16 Implement Organization-Wide Savings Recommended by Community Members and City Employees. Many of these, such as deferring vehicle replacements, lengthening technology replacement cycles and reducing overtime and temporary staffing costs, were implemented as part of the 2009-11 budget-balancing actions. Departments continue to indentify and implement cost saving measures on an ongoing basis, Continue to Closely Review and Monitor the City’s Fiscal Situation. We have continued to issue timely interim reports on the City’s overall fiscal condition, including an interim report on financial results for 2008-09; quarterly financial reports; quarterly sales tax reports; monthly transient occupancy tax (TOT) reports; and monthly cash and investment reports. We presented a detailed review of interim 2008-09 financial results and key fiscal trends to the Council on October 3, 2009. This included a recommendation to participate in the “securitization” of Proposition 1A takeaway from the State, which the Council approved on October 17, 2009. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 2008-09, which includes audited financial statements, was presented to the Council on December 15, 2009. A detailed review of the City’s current financial position and revised projections for 2009-11 will be presented to the Council as part of the Mid-Year Budget Review on February 23, 2010. Implement Budget Balancing Strategies Adopted in the 2009-11 Financial Plan... All budget-balancing strategies have been implemented. Present Pavement Management Plan Update. This was presented to the Council on October 6, 2009. Resume Best Practice Reviews. We plan to perform four best practice reviews in 2009-11 on the following areas: petty cash and grant management policy in 2009-10; and fare box collections and parking meter collections in 2010-11. Candidates for future years (2011-13) include construction change orders; new development-related fee collections and Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) compliance. Update the Property Management Manual. Due to the unanticipated need to replace FoxPro applications, presenting an update of the Property Management Manual has been deferred to May 2010. Maximize Grant Funding Opportunities, Including “Stimulus Package.” We have pursued several “stimulus” grants as described in further detail on the City’s webpage http://www.slocity.org/administration/econstim.asp. Departments continue to look for opportunities to pursue grants for which the City is eligible. Continue Succession Planning Efforts. The Succession Planning Steering Committee continues to meet bimonthly. The committee’s work on improving the Educational Assistance Program was implemented July 1, 2009. The committee is now reviewing performance management rating scale standards and updating guidelines for performance appraisals to ensure constructive feedback is provided and received as part of the City’s employee development process. Participation in CAL-ICMA Coaching webinars continue to be well attended, with post-call discussions facilitated by City staff. Employee Profiles and Lunch and Learn sessions continue to profile employee’s career paths. As of February 2010, the City filled 60% of its job openings through the Employment Opportunity Program, the City’s internal promotion program.
OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTVES E-17 LAND USE AND CIRCULATION REVISIONS Objective. Initiate a focused revision to the Land Use and Circulation Elements. Action Plan Task Current Revised 1. Recruit temporary or contract staff or consultant assistance for traffic model development. Complete 2. Develop traffic forecast model. 6/10 3. Evaluate effectiveness of existing Land Use and Circulation Element policies and programs and identify where changes should be considered. 12/10 4. Public outreach and input (throughout process). Ongoing 5. Identify and develop of strategic revisions to the Land Use Element and Circulation Element where sections have been superseded. 6/11 6. Produce work program for Sphere of Influence areas and identify new programs that may be warranted to address changing legislation. 6/11 7. Conduct traffic model assessments of various land use modifications for future year forecasts and strategic revisions to the Land Use and Circulation Elements. 6/11 Status Summary: 5% Complete The traffic model update component of this project has been partially incorporated into the State Route 1 Major Investment Study (SR 1 MIS) project and a consultant has been hired to complete this work in spring 2010. The modeling work will then be updated by staff (possibly via temporary/contract services) to be used in forecasting land use scenarios and changes. Evaluation of existing Land Use and Circulation Element policies and programs is slated to begin in July 2010.
OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTVES E-18 OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION Objective. Continue efforts to acquire, preserve, and protect open space, and develop a master plan for City-owned agricultural land at Calle Joaquin. Action Plan Task Current Revised Continued Open Space Acquisition, Preservation and Protection 1. Secure grant funding for the acquisition of Froom Ranch and take ownership. 6/10 2. Participate in planning efforts that at a minimum include: (a) the Chevron Tank Farm; (b) the Orcutt Area; (c) County property near General Hospital and the Filipponi/Twisselman property to the east; (d) the Filipponi/Denbow property at the end of Calle Joaquin; and (e) the Gap property on Los Osos Valley Road. Ongoing 3. Continue implementation of elements of City adopted Conservation Plans for: Johnson Ranch; South Hills; Stenner Springs; and the Bob Jones Trail. Ongoing 4. Continue efforts to improve informational signage, trail signage, trail conditions and environmental restoration programs. Ongoing 5. Continue to participate and oversee City-sponsored or –directed mitigation projects, including the Los Osos Valley Road interchange, Bob Jones Trail environmental enhancements, and various private mitigation and enhancement projects throughout the city. Ongoing 6. Review open space “Conservation Guidelines” for consistency with Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan and recommend changes if appropriate. 12/09 6/10 7. Continue leadership role in management of the City’s natural waterways through Zone 9 projects, and provide administrative oversight to the Stormwater Management Program. Ongoing Develop Master Plan for City-Owned Agricultural Land 1. Present a Project Plan for Council Review and consideration including recommended task force structure. 8/09 Complete 2. Conduct and complete research on various public and quasi-public farming models (e.g., Fairview Gardens). 10/09 Complete 3. Identify interested parties and groups. Hold a series of public input workshops to identify various ideas for the use of City-owned agricultural lands. Develop an email group of participants and provide electronic information updates to this group. 11/09 Complete
OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTVES E-19 Task Current Revised 4. Develop a project plan from initial public input that will outline the remainder of the process. Hold a study session with Council to discuss project plan and public participation. 3/10 Complete 5. Complete public workshops on master plan for City-owned agricultural lands. Use public input as the basis for drafting the master plan for the use of City-owned agricultural lands. 6/10 5/10 6. Draft a master plan for the use of City-owned agricultural lands. 9/10 7/10 7. Present draft master plan to: Stakeholders, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission. 11/10 9/10 8. Present Master Plan for adoption by Council. 12/10 10/10 Status Summary: 75% Complete. The following is a summary of accomplishments and important next steps for this goal. Secure Grant Funding for Froom Ranch Acquisition and Take Ownership. This project is on target. $310,000 in City funds are available for the project and it has been awarded another $300,000 in outside grants. Staff is working with the granting agencies to finalize the contracts for those grants. We are also preparing a fundraising brochure that will be published in February 2010 and distributed to potential donors throughout the community. Agricultural Master Plan for Calle Joaquin Open Space. This project is also on target. The Council has approved the project “approach” and the first public workshop, attended by about 20 interested citizens, has been held. The next workshop is scheduled for March 4, 2010. The property has been seeded with a cover crop designed to improve organic material levels in the soil.
OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTVES E-20 GREEN HOUSE GAS REDUCTION AND ENERGY CONSERVATION Objective. Adopt and begin implementing a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and conserve energy for municipal operations and the community. Action Plan Task Current Revised 1. Research Climate Action Plans from other jurisdictions and explore formation of an energy facilities financing district. 12/09 2. Analyze green house gas (GHG) emissions inventory to identify GHG sources and opportunities for reductions. 12/09 3. Review International Council for Leadership and Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) best practices information. 12/09 4. Identify policies and programs already underway that address energy reductions. 1/10 5. Develop “talking paper” for internal staff review and brainstorming including review of Utilities Conservation Office role in the delivery and oversight of energy conservation programs. 2/10 6. Present review of progress to Council and adoption of reduction target. 3/10 7. Develop website and information mailer. 10/09 8. Implement public outreach and input (i.e. Earth Day event, mailers, interactive web site). 10/09 9. Enter data and model alternatives. 3/10 10. Prepare draft action plan. 3/10 11. Continue public outreach and input. 6/10 12. Present Action Plan for Council adoption. 9/10 Status Summary: 30% Complete. The following is a summary of accomplishments and important next steps for this goal. 1. The Council adopted a baseline Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory on September 15, 2009. This report summarizes the sources of emissions from both municipal operations and the community at large for the base year 2005. City staff applied for Recovery Act Stimulus funds in the form of an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) and is slated to receive $199,400. A portion of these funds will be used for development of the Climate Action Plan and exploration of formation of an energy improvements financing district.
OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTVES 2. To date we are ahead of schedule. The City has contracted with the Cal Poly Climate Team to collaborate in development of a Climate Action Plan. The Team has submitted their preliminary audit of the City’s policies, procedures and programs to understand where emissions reductions might already be occurring due to efficiencies implemented since 2005; and where future emissions reductions might be captured with implementation of existing programs. City staff has reviewed and commented on the audit and is providing comments and corrections. The Cal Poly Climate Team is researching other communities’ Climate Action Plans and is meeting with City staff and touring City facilities. E-21 3. The Team coordinated a kick-off meeting with the Planning Commission and hosted a booth at two Farmers’ Market events. 4. A website (SLOCOOL.org) has been created as well as a Facebook page. The first community forum workshop was held on November 19, 2009. Information about the Climate Action Plan effort was included in the November utility mailer newsletter. 5. With the creation of a state-wide AB 811 program sponsored by the League of California Cities and California State Association of Counties to provide energy financing districts, City and County participation has become much more feasible. Council adopted a resolution formalizing the City’s commitment to participation with the County in the CaliforniaFIRST pilot program (which is organized around counties) at the December 1, 2009 Council meeting. Program development is anticipated to begin in February with an anticipated “roll out” in early summer 2010.
OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTVES E-22 DOWNTOWN MAINTENANCE AND BEAUTIFICATION Objective. Expand Downtown beautification efforts to include enhanced maintenance and cleanliness, a review and upgrade of standards and phased physical improvements. Action Plan Task Current Revised Design Standards & Upgrades 1. Assemble all current downtown design guidelines and standards. Complete 2. Working with the Architectural Review Commission, review the current guidelines and standards and revise or confirm the public improvement design strategy for the downtown including street furniture, trash and recycling containers, and regulatory signage, for Council consideration. 3/10 3. Develop costs, spending options, and sequencing options to bring the downtown up to new standards. 4/10 4. Develop a design and identify possible locations for a centralized news rack enclosure to accommodate a range of different papers in a consolidated and uniform manner, for Council consideration, and possible funding approval. 3/10 5. Assess existing planters in the downtown for condition, including planter box, plant material and irrigation, and develop funding request for the 2010-11 budget to improve appearances. 12/09 6. Install pedestrian level lighting, repair Mission Style Sidewalk and install other upgraded improvements within selected areas of the Downtown. 6/11 Signage Develop a coordinated program for the City informational and directional signage and recommend implementation plan. 12/10 Solid Waste Identify solid waste issues with the Downtown Association and Chamber of Commerce and develop a work plan to address them. 6/11 Facility Maintenance 1. Provide sidewalk scrubbing service and daily cleanup maintenance work. Ongoing 2. Implement the Downtown Tree Management Plan. Ongoing 3. Complete Warden Bridge resurfacing project. 6/10 10/10
OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTVES E-23 Task Current Revised 4. Complete painting of existing street light poles. 6/10 & 6/11 3/11 5. Complete downtown street and parking lot resurfacing projects. 4/11 6. Complete water and sewerline replacements. 4/11 Status Summary: 15% Complete. The following is a summary of accomplishments and important next steps for this goal. 1. Staff has assembled all current downtown design guidelines and standards and is beginning to assess what needs to be modified or included. Two Downtown walk-throughs have been conducted in order to understand the most problematic items and what the highest priorities for upgrade: one with staff and one with members of the Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Association. Staff has scheduled an “all hands” meeting for the end of November to discuss a recommended approach to prioritizing and completing the improvements with the resources available to the City. Parking space conversion policies are to be reviewed by Council in December 2009 along with the Sidewalk Café Ordinance revisions. On December 7, 2009, Community Development and Public Works staff presented an update to the Architectural Review Commission on the progress of the goal and looked ahead to the reviewing the downtown guidelines in spring, 2010. 2. Staff will be presenting Council with an update on the beautification efforts near the Wineman Hotel, as well getting direction on the approach to Downtown improvements on February 23, 2010. 3. A new contract has been approved for the Downtown Sidewalk Scrubbing program, with revisions to allow for more frequent problem area scrubbing. 4. Painting of street lights poles is being combined with other downtown projects to take place in early 2011. Public Works staff painted numerous traffic signal poles in the Downtown.
OTHER IMPORTANT OBJECTVES E-24 HISTORIC PRESERVATION Objective. Adopt a Historic Preservation Ordinance, and if funding permits in 2010-11, update the City’s inventory of Historic Resources. Action Plan Task Current Revised 1. Review and evaluate draft historic preservation ordinance. 3/10 1/10 2. Present draft ordinance for discussion with stakeholder groups. 6/10 3/10 3. Hold early study session with Council to solidify approach. 6/10 4. Complete public hearings on draft ordinance. 12/10 6/10 If Funding Is Available 5. Contract for Historian and Architect to lead inventory. 10/10 6. Train volunteers. 12/10 7. Conduct historic survey. 2/11 8. Hold public hearings for consideration of nominated properties. 6/11 Status Summary: 15% Complete Preliminary draft ordinance language has been created and circulated to an internal staff team. The Cultural Heritage Committee received the revised draft ordinance and portions of draft Historic Preservation Guidelines at their January 2010 meeting. An intern has been researching and organizing information related to the City’s historic districts for inclusion in updated Historic Preservation Guidelines that will accompany the ordinance. Several stakeholder groups have been identified and staff has asked the Cultural Heritage Committee for input regarding groups or individuals that should be included as part of the outreach. To date, no funding has been identified to conduct additional historic surveys or inventories.
OTHER COUNCIL OBJECTIVES E-25 The following provides brief status reports on “Other Council Objectives” for 2009-11. Creek and Flood Protection Objective. Advance Mid-Higuera flood protection improvements by seeking Zone 9 funding to complete design, obtain approvals and make progress toward construction as resources will allow. Status Summary: 10% Complete. The Zone 9 committee recommended and the Board of Supervisors approved additional funding to allow for the technical studies needed to for the environmental document to be completed. The County Environmental Division has offered to complete this work with some consultant service assistance to minimize the costs. The studies will take a considerable time period due to the need for seasonal verifications of certain species. Skate Park Objective. Develop plans and specifications and seek funding to construct a skate park. Status Summary: 10% Complete. The Council approved an agreement with RRM Design Group to complete the plans and specifications for the design of the Skate Park. RRM is making good progress on the plan and specs and is currently preparing a report for presentation to the Architectural Review Commission. Staff is pursuing a Proposition 84 grant (2008 Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program). This competitive grant could fund the entire skate park project, including design costs. For the project to be eligible, it must create or substantially improve recreational opportunities, located in an area where there is a shortage of park space; address the needs of a critically underserved community with significant poverty; utilize sustainable techniques; have a public art component; and engage the community in the planning process. Staff believes this is a very strong project for the grant. The application deadline is March 1, 2010. Staff received word in December that the Tony Hawk Foundation awarded the City a $25,000 construction grant for the skate park project. Community fundraising efforts to date have raised almost $8,000. Staff is currently developing an “engraved brick” fundraising campaign that will be rolled out in early March. Urban Forest Objective. Update master plan and develop recommendations to renew the urban forest and plant more trees. Status Summary: 90% Complete. The Council approved matching funds to complete a Street Tree Inventory and software to manage the Street trees in the City. The grant was approved the street tree inventory is now complete. The inventory and software package will be completely installed by February 2010. Staff will recommend a Tree Management Plan for the whole City including parks, open space and private property. Staff largely complete with a major replanting to replace trees blown over during the heavy winds of October 2009 and to replace trees removed as part of the sidewalk repair program. Homeless Services Objective. Identify and pursue opportunities to implement the "Ten-Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness." Status Summary: 25% Complete. The Homeless Services Oversight Council (HSOC) was created on June 2, 2009 and meets monthly in an effort to coordinate the efficient provision of homeless services in the County. The HSOC is envisioned by the “Ten Year Plan” as an organization that can plan, advise and advocate for homeless services in the County. The City’s Police Chief, Deborah Linden currently serves as the HSOC Vice-Chair and Council Member Ashbaugh is also an HSOC member. The City’s Housing
OTHER COUNCIL OBJECTIVES E-26 Programs Manager attends meetings as necessary to report on City program activities that improve homeless services. On January 20, 2010, staff made a presentation to the HSOC regarding the Homeless Services Campus proposed for 3451 South Higuera Street, adjacent to the County Department of Social Services. The City is currently processing entitlements to permit the site as a replacement for the Maxine Lewis Homeless Shelter. The facility is programmed to provide coordinated homeless services, including day services, overnight shelter, case management and limited health services, consistent with the objectives of the “Ten-Year Plan.” The first major step in this entitlement process is review by the Airport Land Use Commission, scheduled for February 17, 2010.
CARRYOVER GOALS AND OBJECTIVES E-27 The following summarizes the status of “carryover” Major City Goals and Other Council Objectives from the 2007-09 and 2005-07 Financial Plans. In several cases, “carryover tasks” have been incorporated into the Major City Goals (or “Other Council Objectives”) for 2009-11, and as such, they are not repeated in this section. MAJOR CITY GOALS Economic Development: Sales Tax and TOT Revenues Objective. Encourage and promote projects and programs that will increase sales tax and transient occupancy tax revenues. Status Summary: 80% Complete. The Economic Development Program continues to highlight businesses via the City/Chamber of Commerce Business Visitation Program continues to highlight the diversity of businesses in our area. Work in support of Garden Street Terraces application continues to move forward. The Chinatown Project received final approvals in November 2009 bringing future sales tax and transient occupancy tax revenues closer to fruition. The Prefumo Creek Commons project, including the Target Store, received final architectural approvals in December 2009 followed by annexation approval by LAFCO in January 2010. OTHER COUNCIL OBJECTIVES Waterways Management Plan Implementation Program Objective. Upon completion of the Waterways Management Plan, adopt an implementation program. Status Summary: 100% Complete. The “Record of Decision” by the Army Corps of Engineers is now complete. Staff is now implementing projects under the program outlined in the Plan. Laguna Lake Dredging Study Objective. Develop options and decide future of Laguna Lake, and begin implementation of approved dredging plan. Status Summary: 100% Complete. The Laguna Lake Environmental Document was approved by Council on December 1, 2009, completing the study phase of this project. Staff will be returning to the Council in the summer to discuss possible future action or budget proposals. Tree Planting and Maintenance Objective. Boost tree planting and maintenance. Status Summary: 100% Complete. The City’s tree crew continues to plant vacant wells as they develop and recently assisted in a second neighborhood tree planting event on Higuera Street. Additional trimming funds allocated as part of the 2007-2009 Financial Plan were reduced for 2008-09 on September 30, 2008 as part of the budget balancing activity. The additional funds were used in 2008-09 to accomplish additional tree trimming. Airport Area Annexation Objective. Annex the Airport Area. Status Summary: 100% Complete for Phase 1A. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) completed the annexation process for 626 acres associated with Phase 1A of the annexation area. The map and certificate of annexation was delivered to the State Board of Equalization and the land was officially added to the City boundary on July 25, 2008. Discussion with property owners in the Phase 1B area was conducted in early 2009. The proposed development of the Chevron property will result in an amendment to the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). That project is in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
CARRYOVER GOALS AND OBJECTIVES E-28 preparation stage and City and County staffs are collaborating in the review of the project. The public review draft of the EIR, along with the scope of work for a financing plan, shall be underway in early 2010. Annexation of the Chevron property will provide another key piece of the Airport Area annexation. Discussions with LAFCO staff have indicated that LAFCO would prefer the City pursue annexation of the entire remaining area including the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. This issue is significant because several areas of the AASP are not contiguous to existing City boundaries and the only way to bring those properties into the City will be to address the airport property itself. Including the airport may significantly alter the timing anticipated for Phase 1B. Broad Street Corridor Plan Objective. Adopt and implement a plan for South Broad Street corridor planning and improvements. Status Summary: 80% Complete. The focus group that helped develop the plan is still active in the process and has provided input to current projects within the plan area. The detailed traffic study has been completed and the consultant is responding to comments on the second draft. The Planning Commission discussed the traffic information and directed additional work for the Broad Street Area north of South Street and consideration of traffic calming measures in the Meadow Park neighborhood. Staff brought the information back to the Planning Commission in January 2010 who continued the item to February 2010. Once Planning Commission conducts their final review of the traffic improvements and associated plan modifications, the plan will be considered by Council. Staff anticipates this occurring in late Spring 2010.
STATUS OF MAJOR CIP PROJECTS E-29 As of February 1, 2010