Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/2004, PH8 - PRELIM 2003-05 FINANCIAL PLAN SUPPLEMENT city of san luis oi3ispo ZD P6ba� •� r / r Damon Garcia Sports Fields Keeping SLO Green with Recycled Water Preliminary 2003-05 FINANCIAL PLAN SUPPLEMENT Approved 2004-05 Budget July 1, 2004 city of San tuis OBISPO DAVID F. ROMERO,MAYOR KEN SCHWARTZ,VICE MAYOR JOHN EWAN, COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE MULHOLLAND, COUNCIL MEMBER ALLEN K. SETTLE,COUNCIL MEMBER Ken Hampian, City Administrative Officer Prepared by the Department of Finance & Information Technology Bill Statler, Director/City Treasurer Carolyn Dominguez, Finance Manager 2003-05 FINANCIAL PLAN SUPPLEMENT Approved 2004-05 Budget July 1, 2004 REPORT PRODUCTION AND ANALYSIS Budget Review Team Carolyn Dominguez,Finance Manager Wendy George, Assistant City Administrative Officer Karen Jenny,Risk Manager Betsy Kiser,Principal Administrative Analyst Debbie Malicoat,Accounting Supervisor Monica Moloney,Director of Human Resources Jodi Polk, Customer Services Supervisor Bill Statler, Director of Finance&Information Technology CIP Review Committee Carolyn Dominguez,Finance Manager Betsy Kiser, Principal Administrative Analyst Paul LeSage,Director of Parks&Recreation Deb Linden,Police Chief Mike McCluskey, Director of Public Works John Mandeville,Director of Community Development John Moss,Utilities Director Bill Statler,Director of Finance&Information Technology Jay Walter, City Engineer Department Fiscal Officers Sue Baasch,Utilities Kathe Bishop,Police Deborah Cash,Downtown Association Viv Dilts,Fire Carolyn Dominguez, Finance &Information Technology Dave Elliott,Public Works Karen Jenny, Human Resources Betsy Kiser,Administration Kathy Mills,Parks &Recreation Claudia Prows, City Attorney's Office Diane Reynolds, City Clerk's Office Diane Stuart, Community Development Cover Photography& Graphics Sue Baasch TABLE OF • PREFACE Section C r -' � MMBUDGET GRAPE9CS AND SUMMARIES Budget Process Overview i How to Use the Financial Plan Supplement ii Overview C-1 About the City iii Combined Expenditures and Revenues Section A Total Expenditures C-2 INTRODUCTION Total Funding Sources C-3 L h, e a}r Operating Program Expenditures By Function C-4 By Type C-5 Budget Message A-I Capital Outlay Expenditures Budget M g Highlights A-10 By Function C-6 General Fund Financial Condition Summary A-14 By Funding Source C-7 Directory of Officials and Advisory Bodies A-15 Debt Service Expenditures by Function C-8 Organization of the City A-16 Mission Statement A-17 Expenditures and Revenues by Fund Type Organizational Values A-18 Total.Expenditures by Fund C-9 Awards for Distinguished Budget Presentation A-19 General Fund Expenditures and Uses C-10 General Fund Operating Program Expenditures Section B By Function C-11 POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES By Type C-12 General Fund Revenues and Sources C-13 Changes in Financial Position Overview B-1 Fiscal Year 2003-04 C-14 Changes in Budget and Fiscal Policies B_2 Fiscal Year 2004-05 C-15 Status of Major City Goals Authorized Regular Positions by Function C-16 Introduction Section D Overview B-4 OPERATING PROGRAMS Report Card:Major City Goals B-4 Action Plan Changes B-5 Next Report B-5 Overview Action Plan Updates Long-Term Water Supply B_6 Purpose and Organization D-1 Street and Sidewalk Maintenance g_g Summary of Major Functions and Operations D-2 Los Osos Valley Road Interchange B-9 Operating Expenditure Summaries Bikeway Improvements: Railroad Safety Trail B-10 Overview D-3 Therapy Pool B-11 Operating Expenditures By Function D4 Housing B-12 Operating Expenditures By Program Neighborhood Wellness B-13 Public Safety D-6 South Broad Street Corridor Plan B-14 Public Utilities D-7 Downtown Improvements: Transportation D-8 Monterey Plaza B-16 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services D-9 Economic Development: Community Development D-10 Transient Occupancy Tax B-17 General Government D-11 Economic Development: Sales Tax B-19 Operating Expenditures By Department D-12 Long-Term Fiscal Health B-21 Operating Expenditures By Type All Funds D44 General Fund D-15 a- TABLE OF • Significant Operating.Program Changes Transportation.Development Act Fund G-9 Community Development Block Grant G-10 Summary D-16 Law Enforcement Grant Funds G-11 Supporting Documentation Mardi Gras Weekend D-17 Capital Project Funds 919 Palm Street Garage Operations D-22 Capital Outlay Fund G-12 919 Palm Street Office Operations D-24 Parkland Development Fund G-13 Transportation Impact Fee Fund G-14 Section E Open Space Protection Fund G-15 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANCIP Airport Area Impact Fee Fund G-16 Affordable Housing Fund G-17 Fleet Replacement Fund G-18 Overview E-1 Debt Service Fund 6-19 Summary of CIP Expenditures Enterprise Funds By Function E-2 Water Fund G-20 By Funding Source E-3 Sewer Fund G-21 Supplemental CIP Projects Parking Fund G-22 Summary Transit Fund E-4 G-23 Supporting Documentation Golf Fund G-24 Water Treatment Master Plan Implementation E-5 Tank Farm.Gravity Sewer and Lift Station E-9 Agency Fund:Whale Rock Commission G-25 Marsh Street Bridge Repair E-13 Traffic Signal Reimbursement E-16 Section H Parking Fleet Replacements E-18 FINANCIAL AND STATISTICAL TABLES Status Summary of Major CIP Projects E-20 *Ar d Section F Overview H=1 DEBT SERVICE RE UIREMENTS Revenue Summaries Summary of Key Revenue Assumptions H-2 Overview F-1 Revenues by Major Category and Source H-7 Debt Service Expenditures Expenditures by Type and Function H-12 By Function F-2 By Source F-3 Interfund Transactions Legal Debt Margin F-4 Reimbursement Transfers H-13 Operating Transfers H-14 Section G Staffing Summaries CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION Regular Positions by Department H-16 Regular Positions by Function H-25 Temporary Full-Time Equivalents Overview (FTE's)by Function H-26 Introduction G-1 Other Statistical and Financial.Summaries Organization of the City's Funds G-2 Appropriations Limit History H-27 Revenue and Expenditure Trends: Combining Financial Position Statements Last Five Completed Years H-28 Demographic and Statistical Summary H-29 All Funds Combined G-3 All Governmental Funds Combined G-4 Section I All Enterprise and Agency Funds Combined G-5 BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Individual Financial Position Statements General Fund G-6 Overview I-1 Budget Adoption Resolution I-2 Special Revenue Funds Downtown Association Fund G-7 Gas Tax Fund G-8 b- PREFACE • • • BUDGET PROCESS OVERVIEW The City of San Luis Obispo has received national balance and reserves, human resource management and recognition for its use of a two-year budget process that productivity. emphasizes long-range planning and effective program management. Significant features of the City's two-year Preparation and Review Process Financial Plan include the integration of Council goal- setting into the budget process and the extensive use of Under the City Charter, the CAO is responsible for formal policies and measurable objectives. The Financial preparing the budget and submitting it to the Council for Plan includes operating budgets for two years and .a approval. Although specific steps will vary from year to capital improvement plan(CIP)covering four years. year,the following is an overview of the general approach used under the City's two-year budget process: While appropriations continue to be made annually under this process, the Financial Plan is the foundation for First Year. As noted above, the Financial Plan process preparing the budget in the second year. Additionally, begins with Council goal-setting to determine major unexpended operating appropriations from the first year objectives for the next two years. The results of Council may be carried over into the second year with the approval goal-setting are incorporated into the budget instructions of the City Administrative Officer(CAO). issued to the operating departments, who are responsible for submitting initial budget proposals. After these Purpose of the Two-Year Financial Plan proposals are comprehensively reviewed and a detailed financial forecast is prepared, the CAO issues the The fundamental purpose of the City's Financial Plan is to Preliminary Financial Plan for public comment. A series link what we want to accomplish for the community with of workshops and public hearings are then held leading to the resources necessary to do so. The City's Financial Council adoption of the Financial Plan by June 30. Plan process does this by: clearly setting major City goals and other important objectives; establishing reasonable Second Year. Before the beginning of the second year of timeframes and organizational responsibility for achieving the two-year cycle, the Council reviews progress during them;and allocating resources for programs and projects. the first year, makes adjustments as necessary and approves appropriations for the second fiscal year. Major City Goals Mid-Year Reviews. The Council formally reviews the Linking important objectives with necessary resources City's financial condition and amends appropriations, if requires a process that identifies key goals at the very necessary, six months after the beginning of each fiscal beginning of budget preparation. Setting goals and year. priorities should drive the budget process,not follow it. Interim Financial and Project Status Reports. On-line For this reason, the City begins each two-year Financial access to"up-to-date" financial information is provided to Plan process with in-depth goal setting workshops where staff throughout the organization. Additionally, the Council invites candidate goals from community comprehensive financial reports are prepared monthly to groups, Council advisory bodies and interested monitor the City's fiscal condition, and more formal individuals; reviews the City's fiscal outlook for the next reports are issued to the Council on a quarterly basis. The five years and the status of prior goals; presents their status of major program objectives, including CIP individual goals to fellow Council members; and then set projects, is also periodically reported to the Council on a and prioritize major goals and work programs for the next formal basis. two years. City staff then prepare the Preliminary Financial Plan based on the Council's policy guidance. Administration Financial Plan Policies As set forth in the City Charter,the Council may amend or supplement the budget at any time after its adoption by Formally articulated budget and fiscal policies provide the majority vote of the Council members. The CAO has the foundation for preparing and implementing the Financial authority to make administrative adjustments to the budget Plan while assuring the City's long-term fiscal health. as long as those changes will not have a significant policy Included in the Financial Plan itself,these policies cover a impact nor affect budgeted year-end fund balances. broad range of areas such as user fee cost recovery goals, enterprise fund rates, investments, capital improvement management, debt management, capital financing, fund -i- s � � HOW TO USE THE FINANCIAL PLAN SUPPLEMENT This supplement reflects the City's continued use of Section C a two-year financial plan that emphasizes long-range Budget Graphics and Summaries planning and effective program management. The benefits identified when the City's first two-year Provides simple tables and. graphs which highlight plan was prepared for 1983-85 continue to be key financial relationships and summarize the overall budget document. realized: 1. Reinforcing the importance of long-range Section D planning. Operating Programs 2. Concentrating on developing and budgeting for Presents the operating budget at the function and significant objectives. program levels, and summarizes changes from the 2003-05 Financial Plan. 3. Establishing realistic schedules for completing program objectives Section E 4. Creating a pro-active budget providing for Capital Improvement Plan orderly and structured operations. Summarizes changes in capital improvement plan 5. Promoting more orderly spending patterns. expenditures from the 2003-05 Financial Plan. 6. Reducing the amount of time and resources Section F allocated to preparing annual budgets. Debt Service Requirements Appropriations continue to be made annually; Summarizes the City's debt obligations at the however, the Financial Plan is the foundation for beginning of the fiscal year. preparing the budget for the second year: Additionally, unexpended operating appropriations Section G from the first year may be carried over for specific Changes in Fund Balance purposes into the second year with the approval of Provides an individual summary of revenues, the City Administrative Officer. expenditures and changes in financial position for each of the City's operating funds. The 2004-05 Budget document uses the same format as the 2003-05 Financial Plan and is organized into Section H the following sections, which primarily focus on Financial and Statistical Tables_ changes from its parent document: Summarizes revenues by major category and Section A sources; expenditures by type and function; and Introduction authorized regular employees by department. Includes the Budget Message from the City Section I Administrative Officer highlighting key issues Budget Reference Materials considered in preparing the Financial Plan Supplement. Lists a number of major policy documents that guide the preparation and execution of the City's financial Section B plan. Policies and Objectives Highlights any changes to the 2003-05 Financial Plan policies and objectives; and provides a status summary of Major City Goals. -ii- ABOUT THE CITY `�jho We Are and How We Got Started These qualities contribute to the superb quality of W life our residents enjoy, and attract visitors from The City of San Luis Obispo serves as the many other areas. commercial, governmental and cultural hub of California's Central Coast. One of California'sdowntown oldest communities, it began with the founding of Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa in 1772 by Another key feature contributing to the City's great Father Jumpero Serra as the fifth mission in the quality of life is our delightful downtown. The heart California chain of 21 missions. of downtown is Mission Plaza. With its wonderful creek side setting and beautifully restored mission The mission was named after Saint Louis, a 13th (that continues to serve as a parish church to this Century Bishop of Toulouse, France. (San Luis day), Mission Plaza is the community's cultural and Obispo is Spanish for "St. Louis, the Bishop.') It social center. was first incorporated in 1856 as a General Law City,and became a Charter City in 1876. This historic plaza is complemented by a bustling downtown offering great shopping, outdoor and Where We're Located indoor dining, night life, and its famous Thursday Night Farmers' Market, where you can buy locally With a population of 44,000, the City is located grown fresh produce and enjoy an outdoor BBQ. eight miles from the Pacific Ocean and is midway between San Francisco and Los Angeles at the This unique blend of history, culture, commerce and junction of Highway 101 and scenic Highway 1. entertainment make San Luis Obispo's downtown one of the most attractive, interesting and San Luis Obispo is the County Seat, and a number economically vibrant downtowns in America. of federal and state regional offices and facilities are located here, including Cal Poly State University, overnment Cuesta Community College, Regional Water Quality Board and Caltrans District offices. The City operates under the Council-Mayor-City Administrative Officer form of government. The City's ideal weather and natural beauty provide Council members are elected at-large and serve numerous opportunities for outdoor recreation at overlapping, four-year terms. The Mayor is also nearby City and State parks, lakes, beaches and elected at-large for a two-year term, and serves as an wilderness areas. equal member of the Council. The Council appoints the City Administrative Officer (CAO) and City (`t reat Place to Live,Work and Visit Attorney. All other department heads are appointed by the CAO. While San Luis Obispo grew relatively slowly during most of the 19th century, the coming of San Luis Obispo is a full-service city that provides Southern Pacific Railroad in 1894 opened up the police, fire, water, sewer, streets, transit, parking, area to the rest of California. The City's distance planning, building, engineering and parks & from major metropolitan areas to the north (San recreation services to the community. Francisco Bay Area) and south (Los Angeles) have allowed our area to retain its historic and scenic qualities. Section A INTRODUCTION tel_ BUDGET MESSAGE TO: City Council FROM: Ken Hampian,City Administrative Officer OVERVIEW included new State takeaways in 2003-04 from cities and counties in 2003-04 totaling $1.3 billion related to the transition period between the takeaway and Our community continues to face two significant later restoration of the "VLF" backfill from June and distinct threats to our fiscal health in both the 2003 through October 2003. This was supposed to short and long-run: be a "one-time" takeaway to be repaid in 2006-07. The cost to the City in 2003-04 was$808,000. 1. State budget impacts on the City as the State deals with its very real (and very large) budget However, the Governor's January 2004 budget deficits. proposed continuing this overall level of takeaways 2. And our own local challenges based on the from local cities and counties via a 25% increase in performance of our local economy and added contributions to the Educational Revenue operating cost pressures. Augmentation Fund (ERAF). This was the budget- balancing grab from local government that the State State Budget Cuts the Greatest Threat. Of these used in balancing its budget in the mid-1990's, two, State budget cuts present. the greatest threat, which now costs the City$1.4 million annually. since—without a fundamental change in State-local If approved, 10% of this $1.3 trillion cut would have fiscal"ground rules"—there is no conceptual limit to been taken from cities and 90% from counties; and the amount that the State can take away from us: the the fiscal impact on the City would have been use of local sources as a State piggyback in tough fiscal tunes is simply, from their perspective, all too $350,000 annually. easy and expedient. Current "Two-Year" Proposal. The most recent In short, no matter how successful we are at a local proposal introduced with the Governor's "May level in managing our own finances, and navigating Revise" replaces the January .2004 proposal with a responsibly through tough fiscal times, this can be similar $1.3 billion takeaway from local undone arbitrarily and capriciously by the State at government, but for the next two years only, with the drop of a hat "in the midnight hour." As a the Governor's support for a ballot measure that detailed look at State takeaways shows over the last constitutionally protects cities from any further 15 years, they are never based a rational realignment takeaways. The takeaway would be distributed as of State-city revenues, but a blatant self-serving follows: desire to avoid making hard decisions about State ■ Cities: $350 million programs and service levels, based on State ■ Counties: $350 million revenues. ■ Special Districts: $350 million So, let's start with the impact of State budget cuts, ■ Redevelopment Agencies: $250 million and the prospects for fundamental change in the nature of State-city fiscal relationships. The fiscal impact on the City would be takeaways of $684,000 in 2004-05 and another$684,000 in 2005- STATE BUDGET PdPACTS 06. However, in 2006-07 we would be repaid the $808,000 taken away from us in 2003-04. This would be implemented through a structural change Governor's Two-Year - that rescinds the "VLF backfill" and replaces it with Local Government Budget Proposal a comparable increase in property taxes, effective 2004-05 (less, of course, the "two-year"takeaway). Background State takeaways from the City's General Fund totaled $3.1 million in 2003-04. This A-1 Short-Term Pain for Long-Term Gain. After 2005- The LAO believes that it reflects budget gaps of$8 06, there would be a constitutional protection for billion in 2006-07, and $6.5 billion thereafter on an cities: ongoing, "systemic"basis. 1. Against takeaways. Mav Revise:u►o's Prolected Budget GaP 2. Against un-reimbursed mandated costs. Large Operat ng Shortfalls to Persist 3. For repayment in 2006-07 of 2003-04 loan. Under h Revision$- �.��. 6sned Fund This proposal would provide stronger constitutional (in&512%, protection than the "Local Taxpayers and Public $„n Safety Protection Act" (an initiative constitutional 105 measure supported by the City as well as the 100Ewa "LOCAL" coalition composed of cities,counties and 95 special districts), which has qualified for the November 2004 ballot. -- � nenam The Governor's initial response to the "LOCAL" T initiative was that he would not support it, as it ra -- .........._. would prohibit him from achieving his goal in the short term of bringing down the state budget deficit. 60 However, the Governor has pledged his active oz m 96-06 °� ' U°`' support for a stronger constitutional protection ballot w .a,tom �aeta ,:nmaaacon measure in conjunction with his proposed two-year takeaway proposal. While the LAO concurs that this will achieve a Because of its potential for "long-term gain in worthy goal of stabilizing local government finance, stabilizing local government revenues, the League of she is highly critical of this proposal for four key California Cities and California State Association of reasons: Counties support working with the Governor on his 1. It makes the State's long-term fiscal outlook proposal. worse. Importantly, the "LOCAL' initiative remains on the 2. It locks in place a state-local fiscal relationship ballot. This was essential in giving us any that everyone agrees is broken. bargaining power at all: without it, the Governor's 3. There is no rationale for the complicated "VLF- proposal (and support) for long-term protection and for-Property Tax"swap. stabilization simply would not be on the table at all; and it continues to serve as a powerful"Plan B." 4. It has a significant short-term impact on local government. The"May Revise" All of the LAO's concerns are valid. However, to The Governor's current budget proposal (the "May paraphrase Winston Churchill's take on democracy: Revise") includes the "local government" piece yes, it's a terrible solution—except for all of the described above, along with similar "deals" with others. We have to play the hand we've been dealt, others. While it reflects a slight short-term not the one we wish had been dealt. And without improvement from his January 2004 budget, with the Governor's support (in fact, his clear opposition "almost" balanced budgets for 2003-04 and 2004-05 at this point), the LOCAL initiative is unlikely to (largely based on a number of short-term fixes), the pass. Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO)--one of the most credible sources on the State's budget and State Budget Outcome Uncertain fiscal situation—believes that the long-term impacts of the current proposal are worse. The Governor's "May Revise" budget proposal is the start of the budget process,not the end: A-2 BUDGETMESSAGE 1. Budget adoption requires two-thirds legislative 2. We are now planning on a $684,000 State approval, takeaway in 2004-05.. 2. Placing a constitutional amendment on the 3. Development.review fees are down. November 2004 ballot to provide the protection 4. Transient occupancy tax (TOT) revenues are supported by the Governor also requires two- flat. thirds legislative approval. 3. And the legislative leadership has already 5. We are projecting$374,000 in "net"added costs for Mardi Gras weekend in 2004-05. (This will signaled that it is not supportive of the be $180,000 higher if planned "in-kind" Governor's proposal. contributions from allied local agencies do not Against this backdrop of the uncertainty of State occur.) budget cuts,let's discuss our local situation. 6. We have had higher construction. costs for the Damon-Garcia fields and Foothill bridge totaling LOCAL BUDGET CHALLENGES $465,000. As discussed in greater detail below, there are some Background offsets to these"downs," including: In February 2004, we took a formal, detailed look at 1. Lower worker's compensation costs by our fiscal condition as part of the Mid-Year Budget changing to a different insurance joint powers Review, which included an update of our revenue authority ($279,800 in the General Fund in and expenditure projections from our two-year 200405). budget for 2003-05. This review showed that 2. Lower PERS costs by selecting a "fresh start" instead of ending 2003-05 with a "20% reserve" as amortization of unfunded liabilities ($926,300 in projected in the 2003-05 Financial Plan (and per our the General Fund in 2004-05). policy of maintaining a minimum General Fund balance that is 20% of operating expenditures), our 3. And the recommendation to reduce paving funds reserve would be down to 18%. allocated for 200405 by$200,000.. While there were a number of"ups and downs" that Along with other operating and capital reductions, caused this, one of the main drivers was $808,000 in the net affect of these "ups and downs" will be an State takeaways in 2003-04 that were not assumed ending General Fund reserve in 2004-05 of about when we adopted the Financial Plan one year ago. 17% of operating costs versus our policy minimum of 20%. We also highlighted in the mid-year review that our fiscal situation would continue to get worse if: As discussed below, this will be the fust time since the City adopted a minimum reserve policy fifteen 1. The State again took away more money from us years ago that a CAO has recommended doing so 2004-05 in the budget. 2. Key revenues like sales tax and TOT performed While this recommendation is a significant one in below our already modest projections. signaling the tough fiscal times ahead of us,it is also 3. Downward trends in development review fees consistent with the strategy adopted as part of the continued. 2003-05 Financial: to maintain reserves at policy levels as our first line of defense against even more Current Situation State budget grabs. Unfortunately, virtually all of these"ifs" (and more) In fact, "but for" the added State takeaways totaling have happened. For example: $1.5 million in 2003-05 ($808,000 in 2003-04 and $684,000 in 200405), the ending unreserved 1. Costco is slower coming online than projected. A-3 BUDGET General Fund balance for 2004-05 would be 21% of importance of maintaining the City's reserves at operating expenditures policy levels. Tough Fiscal Past,Tougher Fiscal Future 2003-05 Budget-Balancing Strategy. In April 2003, the Council conceptually approved the budget- Background: Hard Decisions Last Year. In balancing strategy in closing this $7.0 million gap. balancing the two-year budget for 2003-05 just one This strategy was ultimately reflected in the adopted year ago, the City faced its toughest fiscal outlook in 2003-05 Financial Plan and consists of the following over ten years, since the 1992-94 recession and State four key components: budget grabs at the same time. As shown below, the revised five-year forecast presented to the Council in 1. Using available reserves above minimum policy April 2003 projected an annual "budget gap" of levels. about$7.0 million in 2003-05: 2. Developing a General Fund Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that is the lowest PwooW Bwg*QM:2003-0 possible while reasonably maintaining our ------__ existing infrastructure and facilities. m 3. Reducing operating program costs and related service levels. 4. Implementing selected new revenues as allowed a•„o.,,, _ tinder Proposition 218. As shown below, expenditure reductions played the role in this strategy, largest s,•,�,m,i_.._._...__ __..____.._. ._.__..__._.._._.__...--._..__..~' g gy, accounting for about 75% of the total, with CIP reductions accounting for °"°WeOd FWG= ' about 50%. As previously discussed with the Council, there BUDGETBALANCWGSTMTEGY were five key factors driving this gap, which Closing Me Gap together create the"perfect storm"for fiscal stress: O New 1. Unprecedented increases in retirement costs ae75%s. largely due to investment losses by the California Public Employee Retirement System °R s o CIP (CaIPERS), which the City contracts with for r%vas 49% retirement benefits for our regular employees. 2. Increasing insurance costs in all areas: workers EYpetitliturea 74% compensation, general liability and property. ❑operating 3. Tepid trends in two of our three top General Programs Fund revenues: sales tax and transient zs% occupancy tax. 4. Infrastructure maintenance costs. Even Tougher Outlook for 2005-07 We are now entering our"Second Perfect Storm"for fiscal stress, 5. New service responsibilities, most notably resulting in a financial outlook for 2005-07 that is maintaining the new Damon-Garcia athletic even tougher for three reasons: fields currently under construction once they are completed. 1. It comes on the heels of the hard budget choices already made as part of the 2003-05 Financial.. Significantly, this forecast did not assume any This means that further expenditures will be further State takeaways, underscoring the even harder to make; there are fewer(and thus A-4 BUDGET much tougher) revenue options available to the However, this is a conscious decision, consistent Council; and our reserves will be lower. with our 2003-05 budget strategy, to use reserves as a one-time bridge in responding to State budget 2. Growth in our key revenues continues to be takeaways while we craft a longer-term solution as tepid, and new revenue opportunities—like part of the 2005-07 Financial Plan. Costco, the San Luis Marketplace and Airport Area Annexation—are taking longer to bring on Other short-term actions per our Fiscal Health line, and may not materialize at all within the Contingency Plan in preparing for what will be next two years. another very tough budget process in 2005-07 include: 3. And we will incur higher operating costs due to projected PERS rate increases, maintenance of 1. luring Chill. While we will continue to fill the Damon-Garcia fields, and debt service selected, essential-service positions, doing so payments for 919 Palm Street offices and needed requires CAO approval before recruitment starts improvements to our dispatch center and radio (and thus a "chill" rather than a "freeze"). In system. requesting to fill vacant positions, Department Heads are making an important, early WHERE TO FROM HERE? assessment (and commitment) that the vacant position is more important from a program- priority perspective than others that are currently Stormy Fiscal Seas Ahead filled; and thus this request should not be made—nor approved—lightly. Navigating the "Second Perfect Storm." Although we must sail though more fiscal storms, we now While this obviously has the potential for short- have a destination that offers long-term stability in term cost savings,its main purpose is to preserve the State-local fiscal future options in avoiding regular staffing lay- relationship. However, 6-Step Fiscal Heath offs if the problem turns-out to be a longer-term to reach this destination, Contingency Plan one. we have to be smart 1. Maintain reserves 2. Training Chill Developing and maintaining sailors and proactively at minimum policy navigate through danger level. employee skills continues to be very important as soon as it is spotted 2. Follow other key to the organization. In fact, as the organization on the horizon. budget and fiscal becomes smaller, it is even more important to policies. ensure the high productivity that comes from a Accordingly, we3. Monitor fiscal highly-skilled organization. However, in the recommend that the City health on an short-tens, we are limiting travel and training undertake a number of ongoing basis. costs. During this interim period, this means "short-term" actions 4. Assess the that all Travel Authorizations require CAO immediately as set forth challenge:short approval. in our Fiscal Health or long-term Contingency Plan. The problem? 3. More `Belt-Tightening." The 2004-05 already most significant of these 5. Identify options. assumes that we will achieve overall expenditure is that we use reservessavings of I%. One of our budget-balancing 6. Prepare and below our policy level in implement action tools is to change this from an "assumption" to an increased,formal goal of 2% savings. balancing the budget for plan. g g • the 2004-05. 4. CIP Review Committee Review. As part of the As noted above, this is a significant 2004-05 budget process, the CIP Review recommendation, as it is the first time since the City Committee has already undertaken an in-depth adopted a minimum reserve policy fifteen years ago analysis of completed and lagging CIP projects, that a CAO has recommended doing so in the with the goal of freeing-up resources for higher budget. priority purposes. As a result of this process,the A-5 BUDGET Committee identified (and the Council Given our fiscal circumstances, we will now be approved) $524,200 in CEP project balances that revisiting "The Pantry," and making should be closed and made available for other recommendations to the Council either on a purposes as follows: case-by-case basis, or as part of the 2005-07 Financial Plan process. N $200,000 to the Damon-Garcia sports fields. e $264,600 to the Foothill Bridge replacement What Isn't Recommended As Part of the 2004-05 Budget Supplement. While we recommend protect. implementing a"hiring chill,"we do not recommend ■ $59,600 to the CIP Reserve in better formally deleting any authorized regular positions at positioning us for the 2004-05 budget this time,nor any regular staff lay-offs. process. This is also in keeping with our 2003-05 Financial With over 200 projects "in-progress, the "good Plan strategy of avoiding the kind of fiscal and news" from this review is that we are making organizational chaos that the State—due to its lack excellent progress in achieving our CIP goals. of financial planning, prudence and will—engages in However, the CIP Review Committee will now constantly. undertake another, more difficult task from a policy perspective of reviewing the status of Fortunately, we have the capacity (by design)---and projects that should be deferred or deleted in equally importantly, the will—to make any needed light of the City's fiscal situation: we may be decreases in a reasoned and timely way. While we making excellent progress in the study or design may not be able to avoid further position reductions phase, but in light of competing needs, we may (and directly related service reductions to the need to set-aside our previous commitment to community) as part of the 2005-07 Financial Plan, the project. we recommend "staying the course" for 2004-05, and using the "hiring chill" and use of reserves as And this will be even tougher than in prior our primary strategy in positioning us for 2005-07. years, since—in accordance with our 2003-05 budget-balancing strategy—our General Fund BUDGET FRAMEWORK CIP is now geared to essential maintenance work, and there are few "enhancement-type" projects. Budget Supplement Concept. Although budgets are adopted annually under the two-year financial The results of this review will be presented to plan concept, appropriations in the second year of the Council in Fall 2004. the plan are based upon the framework and foundation developed during the two-year planning 5. The "Pantry." As part the 2003-05 budget- and budgetary process. balancing process, we received over "500 bright ideas for tough times" from our employees. Limited Budget Changes. In accordance with this Because of the uncertainties facing us at the two-year budget framework and in light of current time, we left several budget-balancers "in the fiscal uncertainties, the 2004-05 budget is primarily pantry" that we could draw upon in the case key intended to "stay the course" while responding to revenues did not perform as well projected, the changed circumstances since adoption of the 2003- State took away more revenue, or other 05 Financial Plan,and in positioning us for 2005-07. unforeseen,adverse events emerged. Like the mid-year budget review, the Supplement Moreover, several of these were not "fully provides an opportunity to review recent revenue cooked" then (which is why they were still in and expenditure trends, identify any fiscal problem the pantry), but with more analysis and areas,and recommend corrective action or additional community review, they might be available in funding if required. the longer term. A-6 BUDGET In short, very few GeneralFund expenditure Engineering Fees: The shortfall in engineering changes are planned for 2004-05 in this Supplement; fees reflects staff spending about 30% less of and these are limited to those needed in order to their time on fee generating infrastructure plan maintain service levels set forth in the 2003-05 check and inspection for development projects, Financial Plan. and more time on inspection of City CIP projects. KEY BUDGET FEATURES 3. State Takeaways. The budget reflects the Governor's proposed two-year reduction in City General Fund Revenue Highlights revenues of$683,900 in 2004-05. As part of the 2003-04 Mid-Year Budget Review, General Fund Expenditure Highlights we discussed unfavorable trends for several revenue sources along with the negative impact of the Operating Programs. The specific operating proposed State budget actions. The following program changes reflected in the 2004-05 budget are highlights three significant revenue reductions detailed in pages D-16 through D-28, and are incorporated into the 2003-05 Financial Plan discussed more fully in the Budget Highlights Supplement compared with the Mid-Year Budget section. Key changes for 2004-05 include: Review, which we highlighted as likely areas for change at that time: 1. Funding increased overtime and contract services related to Mardi Gras weekend will 1. Sales Tax. The 2004-05 projection for sales tax have a"net"cost of$374,000 in 2004-05. revenue has been reduced by $250,000 due to 2. Operating the offices in the new 919 Palm Street anticipated delays in the opening of Costco: building will cost$26,700 in 2004-05. instead of Fall 2004, we are now projecting April 2005. CIP Project Requests. Only $16,000 of the 2. Development Review Fees. As "foreshadowed" proposed CIP requests affect the General Fund, in the Mid-Year Budget Review, we are representing its share (20%) of the cost of significantly reducing our projection for recommended improvements to the Marsh Street development review fees by $843,200 for the Bridge. The specific supplemental CIP projects period ($607,200 in reflected in the 2004-05 budget are detailed on pages 2003-05 Financial Plan perigod ($6. While E-2 through E-18, and are discussed more fully in 2003-04 and $236,000 in the Budget Highlights section below. development review activity remains high(albeit slightly lower than we estimated), two factors Reduced Budget for Paving in 2004-05. In helping account for most of this: planning and balance the budget and mitigate even further engineering fees reductions in the City's reserves, we recommend cutting $200,000 from the current CIP paving Planning Fees: The City increased its planning budget for 2004-05 of$1.6 million. fees effective September 1, 2003, to be implemented as a surcharge on building permits. What's the impact on achieving Pavement We prorated our estimate proportionately in Management Plan goals? The proposed reduction 2003-04 to reflect the September start date. is on top of an already significantly reduced paving However, many projects had already submitted budget as part of the 2003-05 budget, which reduced plan cheek applications before this date, and scheduled funding by $1.2 million: elimination of were thus "grandfathered" at the lower fee. downtown street resurfacing ($150,000); reduction Applicants have one year to submit plans, so of seasonal pavement repair ($38,800); and after September 1, 2004, we should begin reduction in contract resealing and resurfacing ($1 experiencing fuller cost recovery. This is why million). the fee shortfall is less in 2004-05 than in 2003- 04. A-7 BUDGET MESSAGE This added $200,000 reduction in the paving slurry seals on the worst streets to try to hold them program will further impact the City's ability to together for a little while longer until the City is able complete the City's goals set forth in the Pavement to allocate additional funding to improve the overall Management Program(PMP), which was adopted by condition of the streets at some time in the future.. the Council in 1998. Plans for the Downtown. As mentioned above, For 2004-05, the existing budget is targeted for specific funding for downtown paving was cut for "Paving Area 8" scheduled overlays, road budget reasons in 2003-05. The program now in reconstruction and slurry seals. As noted above, place for the downtown depends upon the limited funding for arterial street systems' repair and paving budget in the streets operations account and downtown paving was already cut in order to help any left over funds from the area wide paving of the solve budget problems in those years. Accordingly, PMP. the remaining funding is allocated for paving specific areas. Between the two programs, we feel that we can address the downtown's needs in a moderate fashion In short, the recommended $200,000 reduction via our "grind and pave" program that was very represents a 12% reduction in available funding, successful in the past,summarized as follows: which already reflects a 40% reduction from 2003- 05. This will simply translate into fewer streets to ® For 2003-04. We plan on paving Monterey be reconstructed or overlaid. (Broad to Nipomo) and Broad (Monterey to Higuera) with existing funds through our "job The preliminary assessment for Area 8 streets shows order contract"(JOC)system. that with the proposed reduction, 56% of the streets will be slurry sealed, 20% of the streets will receive ■ For 2004-05. We plan to pave Higuera (Broad an overlay and the remaining 24% of the streets that to Morro)and Chorro (Higuera to Monterey) need paving treatment will be deferred. By contrast, with the 2003-04 project that has been approved by ® For 2005-06 Depending on funding Council, 43% of the streets in Area 7 will be slurry availability, we plan to pave Osos (Palm to sealed, 48% of the streets will receive an overlay, Higuera) and Monterey (Chorro to Osos). and only 9% of the streets that need paving treatment will be deferred to the future. As noted above, funding is available for the proposed work in 2003-04, and construction will As detailed in the 2003-05 CIP project request, the start.shortly. However, funding for the other years is $1,570,000 funding level previously approved by dependent upon good bids and funds left over in the Council for 2004-05 would have keep the overall PMP or from the operating account.. While we Pavement Condition Index (PCI) at its current level cannot commit to either of these, from our past of"74 points" (compared with the highest rating of experience it seems likely that we will be able to 100 points) for the next two years. While this is achieve the work discussed above. short of the City's PMP goal of 80 points, it reflects a significant increase from the 68-point rating before General Fund"Ups and Downs"Summary we began implementing the PMP in 1998. Rather than maintaining the status quo, the proposed An overview of "where we're up and where we're appropriation of $1,370,000 would decrease the down" in the General Fund compared with the Mid- overall PCI by about 0.5 points in the next year. Year Budget Review is presented on page A-14. Continuing the focus of the Pavement Enterprise Funds Management Plan. The heart of the PMP is to preserve existing streets in good to excellent Projections for our five enterprise funds—Water, condition while also affording every street in the Sewer, Parking, Transit and Golf—are based on the area some form of pavement treatment. For 2004 rate and working capital reviews approved by the 05, this translates into a lot of slurry seals to Council on June 1, 2004. The Budget Highlights preserve the good streets, and a few overlays and section further discusses the Enterprise Funds and A-8 BUDGET MESSAGE� related operating and capital improvement plan requests. SUMMARY The proposed budget for 2004-05 builds on the foundation and strategy used in preparing the 2003- 05 Financial Plan. It achieves the major goals and objectives set forth in the Plan, while prudently preparing us for the difficult decisions we will need to make as part of the 2005-07 Financial Plan. Based solely on local circumstances, we should be able to weather this storm and position ourselves prudently for 2005-07. However, the uncertainty of the State process means that we may need to again— as we did for the 2003-05 Financial Plan— fundamentally revisit our General fund resources and related service levels. And from past experience, this will be a painful process for the community—and for the organization through which services are delivered to the community. Ken pian City Administrative Offieei A-9 BUDGET OVERVIEW Insurance Authority (CJPIA�—­Iast fiscal year). With the planned transfer of workers compensation coverage to the CJPIA in 200405, the City will do Total appropriations for 200405 are $91.0 million significantly less work for the CCCSIF as it winds summarized as follows: down its activities, so related cost recovery for City Gov&runental Enterprise services will be$45,600 less. Funds Funds 'Tot91 Operating Programs 36,639,800 16,383,800 53,023,600 Fiber Infrastructure Protection Fees. This new fee CIP 9,534,700 21,409,900 90,944,600 for cost recovery of underground service alert(USA) Debt service 2,001,400 5,000= 7.001,900 marking services related to protecting the. City's Total $48,175,900 1$42,7WM $90,970,100 fiber optic system is not generating the revenues originally anticipated, and we have" reduced our As discussed below, compared with 2003-04, this projections by $25,600 annually accordingly. There represents a significant increase in Capital are three reasons for this shortfall. In setting this Improvement Plan (CIP) projects in the Water Fund fee, we tied its collection to the issuance of for treatment plant improvements, and in the Sewer encroachment permits; however, many calls for Fund for the Tank Farm sewer lift station. marking services do not result in an encroachment permit. Moreover, when it does, there may be REVENUE HIGHLIGHTS several call-outs for one encroachment permit. Lastly, encroachment permit activity is down from our estimates. To place this is context, we have had Detailed revenue projections for all City funds, 380 USA call-outs and 38 re-marks related to the including descriptions and underlying assumptions City's fiber system in the last eleven months; this for our "top" revenues, are provided in Section H. resulted in four fees being collected in conjunction The following summarizes key revenue issues. with encroachment permits. We plan to take a close look at how we can restructure this fee. However,in General Fund the final analysis; this may be one of those cases where full cost recovery is not feasible. Most of the revenue projections in the 2004-05 Supplement are consistent with the revised estimates State Takeaways. As described above, the largest presented to Council as part of the 2003-04 Mid- reduction in revenue is the $684,000 that the Year Budget Review. However, as discussed as Governor proposes to take away from us during the likely revisions at that time, this document reflects next two fiscal years. reductions to several key revenue sources as discussed below: Enterprise Funds Sales Tax. Anticipated revenues from Costco have Comprehensive rate reviews and revenue been reduced by an additional $250,000 because of requirement projections for the next five years were additional delays in the expected opening date. presented to the Council on June 1, 2004 for each of the City's five enterprise funds. The following is a Development Review Fees. As discussed in the brief overview of enterprise fund revenue issues and Budget Message,revenues from development review rate requirements incorporated into the 2004-05 fees have been reduced by $607,200 in 2003-04 and approved budget: $236,000 in 2004-05. Water Fund. Largely to accomplish the City's long- CCCSIF Reimbursements. The City performs term water supply goal, water rates will increase by accounting and other administrative services for the 8% effective July 1, 2004. Under a multi-year, Central Coast Cities Self Insurance Fund (CCCSIF), phased approach, this is the first of several rate which currently provides the City with workers' increases—estimated to range from 8% to 5% compensation coverage. (We transferred general annually—that will be needed over the next seven liability coverage from the CCCSIF to another joint years to pay for the Nacimiento supply project, as powers authority—the California Joint Powers well as other needed infrastructure improvements. A-10 -BUDGET HIGHKIGHTS__ The 2004-05 budget also assumes significant Significant Operating Program Changes. Detailed increases in impact fees to fund new development's supporting documentation for each of the share of the Nacimiento project. recommended operating program additions is provided in the Expenditure Summaries part of Sewer Fund. A rate increase of 6.5% will be Section D. The following is a summary of these. effective July 1, 2004 to meet wastewater service goals and continue to meet current and future Public Safety regulatory requirements. In addition, the 2004-05 budget assumes an increase in impact fees (effective Mardi Gras Weekend Increasing public safety September 1, 2004) for the areas to be serviced by services to support increased special event activity the new Tank Farm lift station. will have a net cost to the City of$374,000 in 2004- Parking 004Parking Fund. The Parking Fund is generally 05. performing as projected in the 2003-05 Financial Transportation Plan. As previously approved, a $0.,15 per hour increase in daily parking garage fees and a Parking. Operating the public parking portion of corresponding increase to passcard fees will be the new 919 Palm Street garage will cost$45,600 in effective July 1, 2004. A previously approved 2004-05 and$136,800 each year thereafter.. increase of$10 per month on 10-hour meter permits will also become effective July 1,2004. General Government Transit Fund. Transit fares are not scheduled to increase: apportionments currently anticipated from Building Maintenance. Maintaining the office and the Federal Transit Administration and State below-grade parking level in the new 919 Palm Transportation Development Act are adequate to Street office building will cost $26,700 in 2004-05 fund current transit service levels. However, we and$80,100 annually thereafter. need to continue closely monitoring fare box recovery ratios for compliance with State CIP HIGHLIGHTS regulations. Golf Fund. An increase of 25 cents per round The four-year CEP for 2003-07 is summarized in (about 3%) in golf fees effective July 1, 2.004 is Section E by function and funding source. The CIP required to ensure continued operation of the course for 2004-05 totals $30.9 million summarized as with reasonable General Fund subsidies in follows by function and funding source: accordance with the City's adopted user fee policy. CIP'Expendl-twe-s-by run-c ��• OPERATING PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS Public safety 935,000 Public Utilities 19,837,300 Transportation 6,180,300 Appropriations for operating programs—day-today Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 698,200 delivery of services—total $53 million for 2004-05 Community Development 2,330,000 summarized as follows: General Government 983,BOD Total 1 30,944,600 Governmental ii EnterpriseFunds Ftinds. 6o Public Satiety 18,301,400 18,301,400 General Fund _ 1,844,800 Public Utilities 91518,500 9,518,500 CDBG Grant 235,300 Transportation 1,949,700 3,040,800 4,990,500 Leisure,Cultural& Other Grants 4,243,000 SodOcher Sources 1,308,800a)Services 5,468,300 400,700 b,869,000 Fleet Replacement Fund 84,000 Community Development 5,282,400 5,282,400 Enterprise and Agency Funds 21,409,900 General Government 1 5.638,000 3,423,800 9,061,800 Debt Financing 1.818,800 Talal 1$36,639,800 $16383,800 553,023,600 Total 30,944,600 A-11 BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS Changes to the 2003-05 Financial Plan'for 2004-05 E Fund Balance Designations and Reserves total$5.3 million as highlighted below. ■ Capital Improvement Management ® Capital Financing and Debt Management Public Utilities ® Conduit Financing ® Human Resource Management Water Fund. Implementing the Water Treatment ® Productivity Master Plan will cost an additional $3,825,300 in ■ Contracting for Services 2004-05. Policy Changes. This Supplement presents two Sewer Fund. Completing the design and construction of the Tank Farm Lift Station will cost minor additions to our Capital Financing and Debt Management polices regarding land-based an additional$1,295,000 in 2004-05. financings: eligible projects and appraisal methodology. These changes are recommended by Transportation the City's Bond Counsel (Jones Hall) based on their review of our current polices. With these two Streets. Reconstructing a portion of the Marsh Street "technical" additions, they believe that our current Bridge will cost $80,000 in 2004=05. 80% of this policies will fully cover all of the key areas required project ($64,000) will be funded by a Federal grant, by State law for community facility (special tax) with a$16,000 match from the General Fund. districts,and consolidate them in one place. Signal & Light Maintenance. Reimbursing a An excerpt of the current policy in its entirety from developer for the cost of a traffic signal will cost the the 2003-05 Financial Plan, with the additions noted Transportation Impact Fee Fund $41,000 in 2004 in italics,is presented in Section B. 05. STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS Parking Fund. Replacing two utility scooters will cost$52,000 in 200405. Background. The fundamental purpose of the Detailed supporting documentation for each project City's Financial Plan is to link what we want to is provided in Section E. accomplish over the next two years with the resources required to do so. The two-year Financial FINANCIAL PLAN POLICIES Plan process approved by the Council does this by: The overall goal of the City's Financial Plan is to 1. Identifying the most important, highest priority link what we want to accomplish over the next two things for us to accomplish for the community. years with the resources required to do so. Formal 2. Establishing a reasonable timeframe and statements of fiscal policies and major objectives organizational responsibility for achieving them. provide the foundation for achieving this goal. 3. Allocating the resources necessary to do so. The following budget and fiscal policies are set forth As part of the 2003-05 Financial Plan, the Council in the 2003-05 Financial Plan: adopted twelve Major City Goals, which represent the most important, highest priority goals for the ■ Financial Plan Purpose and Organization City to accomplish over the next two years. s Financial Reporting and Budget Administration ■ General Revenue Management Ongoing Status Reporting. To ensure clarity about e User Fee Cost Recovery Goals the objective and to measure our progress in ® Enterprise Funds Fees and Rates achieving it, the Council also approved detailed ■ Revenue Distribution work programs and "action plans" for each goal. ® Investments Accordingly, an essential component of the goal- ® Appropriations Limitation setting process is to report on our progress on an A-12 UDGET HIGHLIGHTS ongoing basis to ensure we stay "on track" in accomplishing them. For this reason, along with "ad hoc" reporting on an ongoing basis, we present formal reports to the. Council on the status of Major City Goals at least three times during the year: Fall Quarter, Mid-Year Budget Review and the Preliminary Budget. As such,- Section B of the 2003-05 Financial Plan Supplement includes a comprehensive status report on our progress in achieving Major City Goals. CONCLUSION The 2004.05 Budget includes the resources required to maintain current service levels and achieve adopted Council goals for 2003-05. It reflects a careful course of action given our current fiscal environment and the challenges that remain ahead of us. It makes progress in addressing current needs while positioning the General Fund for the next two-year budget process where we can place our unmet needs in the context of Council goal-setting and our limited fiscal resources. A-13 GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL CONDITION SUMMARY: DOWNS Comparison of 2004-05 Supplement with the Mid-Year Budget Review Change frmn Mid-Year Budget Review 2003-04 2004-05 • . WHERE WE'RE UP Revenues and Other Sources Mutual Aid Reimbursements(Net of Direct Costs) 45,000 45,000 Expenditures and Other Uses Damon-Garcia Fields:Partial Year Start-Up 75,800 759800 PERS Fresh Start 926,300 926,300 Reduced 2004-05 Paving CIP 200,000 2001,000 Reduced Golf Fund Subsidy 9,900 91900 Increased Estimate for Expenditure Savings 133,000 358,800 4919800 Transfer to CJP1A for Workers'Compensation 279,800 2799800 Total "UPS" 1789000 19850,600 29028,600 WHERE WERE DOWN Revenues and Other Sources State Two-Year Budget Takeaway (683,900) (6837900) Sales Tax (250,000) (2509000) Development Review Fees (607,200) (2369000) (8439200) Fiber Infisstrucure Protection Fees (25,600) (25,600) (519200) CCCSIF Reimbursements (45,600) (457600) Other Ups&Downs (11,900) (24,700) (36,600) Expenditures and Other Uses Budget Requests Operating Mardi Gras Weekend (133,000) (374,000) (507,000) 919 Palm Offices Operations&Maintenance (26,700) (269700) CIP: 20%of Marsh Street Bridge (16,000) (169000) Total "Downs" (777,700) (1,6829500) (294609200) NET CHANGE SS999700 5168,100 5431,600 Ending Fund Balance(%of (%of Operating Expenditures $79073,500 $6,008,800 17% at June 30,2005) Note: The "Downs"would have been $465,000 higher to furcal overages in Damon-Garcia Sports Fields and Foothill Bridge Replacement projects "but for"the CIP Review Committee's fiscal status review. A-14 DIRECTORY ANDADVISORY BODIES CITY COUNCIL David F.Romero, Mayor Ken Schwartz,Vice-Mayor John Ewan,Council Member Christine Mulholland,Council Member Allen K. Settle, Council Member ADVISORY BODIES Architectural Review Commission Jack Residence Advisory Committee Bicycle Committee Joint Recreational Use Committee Board of Appeals Mass Transportation Committee Campaign Regulation Committee Parks and Recreation Commission Cultural Heritage Committee Personnel Board Downtown Association Planning Commission Housing Authority Promotional Coordinating Committee Human Relations Commission Tree Committee APPOINTED OFFICIALS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS Appointed Officials Ken Hampian City Administrative Officer Jonathan P.Lowell City Attorney Department Heads Wendy George Assistant City Administrative Officer Wolfgang Knabe Fire Chief Paul LeSage Director of Parks and Recreation Deb Linden Police Chief John Mandeville Director of Community Development Mike McCluskey Director of Public Works Monica Moloney Director of Human Resources John Moss Director of Utilities Diane Reynolds Acting City Clerk Bill Statler Director of Finance&Information Technology A-15 ORGANIZATION OF THE CITY OF�SAN LUIS OBISPO CITIZENS '- MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ADVISORY BODIES CITY CITY ADMINISTRATIVE ATTORNEY OFFICER(CAO) Publit Community Mim Mim Works Development Patrol Pre,Medical&Haz Mat Engineering Water Long Range Planning Traffic Safety Emergency Response Transportation Sewer Development Review Investigations Hazard Prevention GIS Management 1.1tllitles Resource Building&Safety Neighborhood Swvices Disaster Planning Maintenance Services Conservation Housing Human i Finance& Resources. Inloirn, Assistant CAO City Clerk Recreation Programs Recruf went Accounting Natural Resources Records Management Ranger Services Labor Relations Revenue Management Economic Development Agenda&Minutes Park.Planning Far Employment Information Technology Cultural Activities Elections Golf Course Risk Management Support Services General Administration Disclosure Rlings Appointed by the dry Council Appointed by the CAO A-16 MISSION SAN LUIS OBISPO STYLE Quality With Vision WHO ARE WE? WIMRE ARE WE GOING? People Serving Ce o le Into the Future**h a Desi B A team that puts high value on each citizen it • Planning and managing for levels of service serves. consistent with the needs of the citizens. Providers of programs that meet basic service v Offering.skills development and organizational needs of each citizen. direction for employees in order to improve the delivery of municipal services. • Enhancers of the quality of life for the community as a whole. ■ Developing sources of funding and establishing a sound financial management program which WHAT DO WE STAND FOR? will result in fiscal independence and flexibility QuaWy in all.Endeavors—Pride in Results in the delivery of City Services. • Providing the residents of the City with accurate ■ Service to the community-the best—at all and timely information on issues which affect times them,and encouraging the full utilization of City services. • Respect—for each other and for those we serve. • Promoting the City as a regional trade, • Value—ensuring delivery of service with value recreational and tourist center and improving the for cost. quality of life for residents and visitors. • Community involvement—the opportunity to participate in attaining the goals of the City. A-17 DRGANIZATIONAL VALUES We, as an organization, embrace opportunities to honesty,Respect and Trust improve our services and the quality and effectiveness of our relationships with the We honor commitments, acknowledge legitimate community and our teams. The following values differences of opinion and accept decisions reached guide and inspire our efforts. with integrity. ' Initiative and Accountability Shared Vision,Mission and Goals We take personal responsibility to do what needs to be done and report the results in a straightforward We have a sense of common purpose and direction manner. pursued with passion and translated into concrete actions. Innovation and Fleitibility Service We are open to change and willing to try new ways to fulfill the organization's vision, mission, and We are dedicated to the best use of resources to goats more effectively. fulfill identified community goals and needs. Employee Development and Recognition Leadership and Support We encourage and support each employee to We recognize that the ability to lead can be found at improve relevant job skills and celebrate personal all levels and that to create an environment to and team accomplishments. succeed requires leading by example. Stewardship and Ethics Communication We promote public trust by using City resources We foster open and clear discussion that encourages wisely, and through consistent fulfillment of these the willingness to speak up and to listen, within a values. framework of respect and understanding. Team Players We encourage effective working relationships within and between departments and the public to address issues and achieve valuable results. A-18 FA,V a 1 The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to the City of San Luis Obispo,California for its biennial budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2003. Our 2003-05 Financial Plan received special recognition as an outstanding policy document. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan and as a communications device. The award is valid for a period of two years only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements. low GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Distinguished Budget Presentation Award PRESENTED TO City of San Luis Obispo California For the Biennium Beginning July 1, 2003 President Executive Director A-19 For our 2003-05 Financial Plan, the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) Award Program for Excellence and Innovation in Budgeting presented the City with, its highest level of recognition with Certificates of Excellence for Operational Budgeting (two-year award) and Capital Budgeting. In addition, Certificates of Merit were received for Innovative Budgeting and Public Communications. These awards are valid for a period of two years only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements. L. California Society of _ �` California Society of Z Municipal mance officers Municipal mance officers Certificate of Award Certificate of Award Excellence in Operational Budgeting 2001-2002 Excellence in Capital Budgeting 2003-04 Presented to Presented to City of San Luis Obispo City of San Luis Obispo nbrpe.rASM+•rM�✓ra..rWwr.+r4rvrMm�wrrtr.a.war rra.fler�v�.sbe..deri�rr cyr+eMMarM.ma..e.aarrtn�r �ewaY•Moa•trd4/•®rRa->awbatratbi�i�e•.a �'brl�4W[1•®riRi-Ytl w�•MrrPI��wL Fek"721,2007 March 1.700( 60 • ,r^ arta.r.reaAaasr�� a.orsr•wa Deft dm8m17aa L Af&WdpdReanddmstugsm . Ddkaldq Ewdlem e im Maala(ya1FbaadalMaaa,{'u- a Caflfornia Society of Cakfornia Society°f ~ Municipal mance Officers Muntapid5rmance officers Certificate of Award Certificate of Award Merit in Public Communication Budgeting 2003-04 Merit in Innovative Budgeting 2003-04 Presented 6 Presented to City of San Luis Obispo City of San Luis Obispo rrawpisq.mrrio.r�.rr�G�rrYda¢r.pt.m•upb�arta m q.m..rrv.w..rsrn...ww64rN�•aOeWrde+rra•trrre.t ws.rwwr.brrWrara�•sM++e+a•4ara.�a ..rwr.64a.tracts.®+.yarue.r0i�ba.sdora Marc*1.iou Mar*1.204 . ar.aya.,aw�wa�� o..ra Ddrimdm b PcMlaaam Mdatpr[FLuddMm .at ap Jr/ Osd4nreQto s'-.wr.-.. Muaidve Fkmafaf Maaigsaae T IF A-20 Section B POLICIES & OBJECTIVES -POLICIIES 'AND OBJECTIVES OVERVIEW The overall goal of the City's Financial Plan is to policies will fully cover all of the key areas link what we want to accomplish over the next two required by State law for community facility years with the resources required to do so. Formal (special tax) districts, and consolidate them in one statements of fiscal policies and major objectives place. provide the foundation for achieving this goal. An excerpt of the current.policy in its entirety from In the "parent" 2003-05 Financial Plan document, the 2003-05 Financial Plan, with the additions this section outlines the policies used in guiding the noted in italics,is presented on page B-2. preparation and management of the City's overall budget, the major objectives to be accomplished, MAJOR CITY GOALS and status of prior plan major City goals. For the 2003-05 Financial Plan Supplement, this Background. The fundamental purpose of the section is composed of two major parts: City's Financial Plan is to link what we want to accomplish over the next two years with the 1. Budget and Fiscal Policies resources required to do so. The two-year 2. Major City Goals for 2003-05 Financial Plan process approved by the Council does this by: BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES 1. Identifying the most important, highest priority things for us to accomplish for the community. The following budget and fiscal policies appear in 2. Establishing a reasonable timeframe and the 2003-05 Financial Plan: organizational responsibility for achieving them. ■ Financial Plan Purpose and Organization ® Financial Reporting and Budget Administration 3. Allocating the resources necessary to do so. ® General Revenue Management As part of the 2003-05 Financial Plan, the Council ® User Fee Cost Recovery Goals adopted twelve Major City Goals, which represent ■ Enterprise Funds Fees and Rates the most important, highest priority goals for the ■ Revenue Distribution City to accomplish over the next two years. ® Investments ■ Appropriations Limitation Ongoing Status Reporting. To ensure clarity ■ Fund Balance Designations and Reserves about the objective and to measure our progress in e Capital Improvement Management achieving it, the Council also approved detailed ® Capital Financing and Debt Management work programs and "action plans" for each goal. ® Conduit Financing Accordingly, an essential component of the goal- ® Human Resource Management setting process is to report on our progress on an ® Productivity ongoing basis to ensure we stay "on track" in s Contracting for Services accomplishing them. Policy Changes. This Supplement presents two For this reason, along with "ad hoc" reporting on additions to our Capital Financing and Debt an ongoing basis, we present formal reports to the Management polices regarding land-based Council on the status of Major City Goals at least financings: eligible projects and appraisal three times during the year: Fall Quarter, Mid-Year methodology. These changes are recommended by Budget Review and the Preliminary Budget. As the City's Bond Counsel (Jones Hall) based on such, this part of the 2003-05 Financial Plan their review of our current polices. With these two Supplement includes a comprehensive status report "technical" additions, they believe that our current on our progress in achieving Major City Goals. B-1 POLICIES AND s CHANGES IN BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES The following is an excerpt from the 2003-05 pedestrian paths; transit facilities; and Financial Plan of the City's Budget and Fiscal bike paths. Policies regarding land-based financings (Section E e. Storm drainage, creek protection and under Capital Financing and Debt Management), flood protection improvements. with the two additions regarding eligible projects and appraisal methodology highlighted in italics. f. Parks, trails, community centers and There are no other changes to the City's Budget and other recreational facilities. Fiscal Policies in the 2003-05 Financial Plan. g. Open space. E. Land-Based Financings h. Cultural and social service facilities. i. Other governmental facilities and 1. Public Purpose. There will be a clearly improvements such as offices, articulated public purpose in forming an information technology systems and assessment or special tax district in telecommunication.systems. financing public infrastructure improvements. This should include a School facilities will not be financed except finding by the Council as to why this form under appropriate joint community facilities of financing is preferred over other funding agreements or joint exercise of powers options such as impact fees, reimbursement agreements between the City and school agreements or direct developer districts. responsibility for the improvements. 3. Active Role. Even though land-based 2. Eligible Improvements. Except as financings may be a limited obligation of the otherwise determined by the Council when City, we will play an active role in managing the district. This means that the proceedings for district formation are City will select and retain the financing commenced, preference in financing public team, including the financial advisor, bond improvements through a special tax district counsel, trustee, appraiser, disclosure shall be given for those public improvements counsel, assessment ser, di and that help achieve clearly identified underwriter. Any costs incurred engineer the Ci community facility and infrastructureCity goals in retaining these services will generally be ty in accordance with adopted facility and the responsibility of the property owners or infrastructure plans as set forth in key policy developer, and will be advanced via a documents such as the General Plan, deposit when an application is filed; or will Specific Plan, Facility or Infrastructure be paid on a contingency fee basis from the Master Plans, or Capital Improvement Plan. proceeds from the bonds. Such improvements include study, design, construction and/or acquisition of. 4. Credit Quality. When a developer requests a. Public safety facilities. a district, the City will carefully evaluate the applicants financial plan and ability to carry b. Water supply, distribution and treatment the project, including the payment of systems. assessments and special taxes during build- c. Waste collection and treatment systems. out. This may include detailed background, credit and lender checks,and the preparation d. Major transportation system of independent appraisal reports and market improvements, such as freeway absorption studies. For districts where one interchanges, bridges; intersection property owner accounts for more than 25% improvements; construction of new or of the annual debt service obligation, a letter widened arterial or collector streets of credit further securing the financing may (including related landscaping and be required. lighting); sidewalks and other B-2 POLICIES OBJECTIVES CHANGES IN BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES 5. Reserve Fund A reserve fund should be total property taxes, special assessments and established in the lesser amount of: the special taxes payments collected on the tax maximum annual debt service; 125% of the roll should generally not exceed 2%. annual average debt service; or 10% of the bond proceeds. 10. Benefit Apportionment. Assessments and special taxes will be apportioned according 6. Value-to-Debt Ratios. The minimum value- to a formula that is clear, understandable, to-date ratio should generally be 4:1. This equitable and reasonably related to the means the value of the property in the benefit received by—or burden attributed district, with the public improvements, touch parcel with respect to its financed should be at least four times the amount of improvement. Any annual escalation factor the assessment or special tax debt. In should generally not exceed 2%. special circumstances, after conferring and receiving the concurrence of the City's 11. Special Tax District Administration. In the financial advisor and bond counsel that a case of Mello-Roos or similar special tax lower value-to-debt ratio is financially districts, the total maximum annual tax prudent under the circumstances, the City should not exceed 110% of annual debt may consider allowing a value-to-debt ratio service. The rate and method of of 3:1. The Council should make special apportionment should include a back-up tax findings in this case. in the event of significant changes from the initial development plan, and should include 7. Appraisal Methodology. Determination of procedures for prepayments. value of property in the district shall be based upon the full cash value as shown on 12. Foreclosure Covenants. In managing the ad valorem assessment roll or upon an administrative costs, the City will establish appraisal by an independent Member minimum delinquency amounts per owner, Appraisal Institute (MAI). The definitions, and for the district as a whole, on a case-by- standards and assumptions to be used for case basis before initiating foreclosure appraisals shall be determined by the City proceedings. on a case-by-case basis; with input from City consultants and district applicants, and 13. Disclosure to Bondholders. In general, by reference to relevant materials and each property owner who accounts for more information promulgated by the State of than 10% of the annual debt service or California, including the Appraisal bonded indebtedness must provide ongoing Standards for Land-Secured Financings disclosure information annually as described prepared by the California Debt and under SEC Rule 15(c)-12. Investment Advisory Commission. 14. Disclosure to Prospective Purchasers. Full 8. Capitalized Interest During Construction. disclosure about outstanding balances and Decisions to capitalize interest will be made annual payments should be made by the on case-by-case basis, with the intent that if seller to prospective buyers at the time that allowed, it should improve the credit quality the buyer bids on the property. It should not of the bonds and reduce borrowing costs, be deferred to after the buyer has made the benefiting both current and future property decision to purchase. When appropriate, owners. applicants or property owners may be required to provide the City with a 9. Maximum Burden. Annual assessments (or disclosure plan. special taxes in the case of Mello-Roos or similar districts) should generally not exceed 1% of the sales price of the property; and B-3 POLICIES OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS OVERVIEW as part of the 2003-05 Financial Plan. As a benchmark, at June 2004 we are about 50% through the two-year Financial Plan period Half This report details the status of major City goals set of the goals are very near or exceed this level. by the Council as part of the 2003-05 Financial Plan. In general, we are on- Organization. The "report card" is followed by a track in accomplishing ". I - short summary of notable changes from the original these objectives based on action plan. Following this is a more detailed report the work programs Many of these are on each goal and objective, which shows the adopted b the Council. multi-year goals that objective, action plan as adopted by the Council,any P Y have activities � associated with them revisions (additions are shown in italics; date Report Card. The that go beyond the changes since the mid-year budget review are also following is a quick two-year 2003-05 shown in italics and highlighted in a separate "report card" on the time frame. column; and deletions are shown in strikeout) and a status of major City goals brief status summary as of June 2004. based on the "action plans"approved by the Council Report Card: Major City Goals . - ill1111 �i -- - — Long-Term Water Supply Street and Sidewalk Maintenance j � � I Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Railroad Safety Trail I , Therapy Pool I Housing i Neighborhood Wellness I South Broad Street Corridor i Monterey Plaza Economic Development: TOT I I Economic Development: Sales Tax Long Tenn Fiscal Health 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% B-4 ,-,-PO,LICIES AND OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS ACTION PLAN CHANGES grant was received, this project must move forward using only City resources, thus extending the original estimated completion date for this goal to As noted above, in general we are on-track in November 2005. accomplishing these objectives based on the work programs adopted by the Council. However, notable Downtown Improvements:Monterey Plaza. Due to changes from the original action plans include the consultant delays in completing the concept plan, following. Council review of the plan will not occur before July 2004. Long-Term Water Supply. Staff has been working with the consultant and regulatory agencies to With the time required for the additional staff work, simplify the approach to user site modifications for advisory body review and Council summer the Water Reuse Project to reduce costs while schedules, Council identification of preferred design maintaining compliance. This has pushed the concepts has been delayed until September 2004. completion of modification design to August 2004. Economic Development: Transient Occupancy Los Osos Valley Road Interchange. The Project Tax. Completing the assessment of local lodging Development Team has begun work on Phase A of industry conditions and establishing the tourism task the Project Report, which now includes geometry force have been delayed by three and four months and environmental documentation. A late starting respectively. Both tasks will be move forward with date has resulted in the need to push back the summer addition of a graduate student intern to completion of the Report until October 2004. assist staff in this effort. Other staff responsibilities have also delayed further exploration of using the Railroad Safety Trail. Staff is preparing minor Veterans Memorial Building as a convention center revisions to the alignment plans based upon input and completion of the marketing study until Fall from Union Pacific Railroad. UPRR delays have 2004. pushed tasks associated with right of entry permits, land surveys and preparation of a legal description of Economic Development. Sales Tax. Development the area for acquisition into October 2004. of the "Shop Locally" program has been postponed to coincide with the holiday shopping season later Therapy Pool. While this task is on schedule, staff this year. Staff continues to work with a potential is proceeding at this time under the assumption that developer for the McBride property and will State grant funding will be the only source of outside continue working with the Madonna family with funding. regard. to the "Gap" property. Any potential annexation could not occur until after the Dalidio Neighborhood Wellness. The Student- property is annexed. Neighborhood Liaison Committee (SCLC) had insufficient time to review the proposed Rental NEXT REPORT Inspection Ordinance Program prior to the end of the school year. To allow for SCLC input, presentation of the program to Council has been rescheduled for We will present the next "formal report" to the November 2004. Council in November 2004 as part of the 2005-07 Financial Plan process. In the interim we will keep South Broad Street Corridor Plan. The City the Council up-to-date on the status of major received a minor grant through Caltrans to conduct a projects through agenda reports, Council Notes and neighborhood outreach "charrette" program in May other briefing opportunities. 2004. General Plan amendment and rezoning recommendations, which will be based on the outcome of the charrette program, will now return to Council in September 2004. Because only a small B-5 POLICIESAND OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS LONG-TERM WATER SUPPLY Objective. Continue aggressive efforts to develop permanent, reliable water supplies to meet City General Plan needs,including all options consistent with Council policy. Action Plan •. Water Reuse 1. Complete design of required user site modifications. 12/03 8/04 2. Complete Water Reuse Master Plan defining the logical expansion of the 11/04 water reuse system and include funding for associated CIP in the 2005-07 Financial Plan. 3. Complete construction of the water reuse project backbone pipeline 12/04 system,Water Reclamation Facility improvements and user site modifications. Ground Water Development 4. Issue RFP for groundwater development and treatment system feasibility 12/03 Complete analysis. 5. Select engineer and begin design. 3/04 Complete 6. Complete design,invite bids for construction and award contract. 6/05 (Construction is scheduled for completion by June 2006).. Conservation 7. Develop program elements and required informational and programmatic 12/03 Complete resources. 8. Develop monitoring and evaluation program. 3/04 Complete 9. Fully implement landscape and non-residential program. 4/04 Complete 10. Present program evaluation_ report to Council. 6/05 Nactmiento.Pipeline 11. Present project reservation agreements and full project information to 1/04 Complete. Council for consideration. Salinas.Reservoir Ex anion - 12. Review options and issues with Council for consideration of possible 6/04 project. Status Summary: 75% Complete. Progress on completion of the above action plan toward achieving a dependable long term water supply, is proceeding on or ahead of schedule. The construction of the water reuse project is proceeding ahead of schedule and interest in the project is growing. Staff has received and reviewed the consultant's recommendations for user site modifications and is currently working with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board and Department of Health Services to simplify the approach to user site modifications to reduce cost while maintaining compliance. This effort has required significant additional time to complete; however staff anticipates completion of this alternative analysis by August 2004. B-6 • OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS Expanded water conservation programs addressing both commercial as well as landscape water use have been developed and were initiated in April 2004. Program monitoring is in place and results will be presented to Council with the June 2005 Water Resource Status Report. Council has approved the City's participation in the Nacimiento Pipeline Project and execution of the final participation agreement is expected on June 29,2004. B=7 POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS STREET AND SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE Objective. Continue maintenance of streets and sidewalks at a moderate level. Action Plan Task Original 1. Continue the program of monitoring the condition of existing sidewalks. Ongoing 2. Continue to repair damaged sidewalks, curbs and gutters using City staff. Ongoing 3. Continue implementation of the 1998 Pavement Management Plan for Ongoing Areas 7 and 8. 4. Pursue State grant funding for pavement projects. Ongoing 5. Continue to retrofit existing curbs for disabled access using CDBG funds. Annually in Fall 6. Continue contracts of$60,000 per year to repair damaged sidewalks in Annually in Complete Area 7. Spring 7. Establish permit guidelines to expedite sidewalk repairs by private 12103 Complete property owners. Status Summary: 50% Complete. All ongoing work is on schedule. B-8 : ,POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD INTERCHANGE Objective. Continue working towards improvements at the Los Osos Valley Road/Highway 101 interchange. Action Plan ;Original . - - — - - -- - 1. Obtain Caltrans approval of the PSR-PDS. 7/03 Complete 2. Finalize plans for Phase 1 improvement/mitigation strategies not requiring 7/03 Complete Cal Trans approval(non-interchange improvements), such as relocation of Calle Joaquin. 3. Prepare Request for Proposal for the CEQA Environmental Impact Report 9/03 Complete (EIR),NEPA Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)and Project Report. 4. Pursue Advance Development Funding for the E11/EIS, Project Report 9/03 Complete and PS&E. 8. Hire consultant and begin preparing Initial Study,EIR/EIS and Project 12/03 Complete Report. 6. Complete design of Phase 1 improvements and invite construction bids. 3/04 Complete 6/04 the pfqjee�. 8. Complete Phase A of Project Report to narrow possible designs and speed 10/04 environmental documentation for the project. 9. Complete Draft Project Report. 5/04 1/05 10. Complete Administrative Draft EIR/EIS. 6/04 12/04 11. Complete negotiations for CalTrans cooperative agreement. 6/04 12/04 12. Award contract and begin construction of Phase 1 improvements. 7/04 7/04 13. Complete construction of Phase 1 improvements, 6/05 9/04 Status Summary: 25% Complete. Phase 1 improvements are 100% designed but Costco has not invited construction bids pending formal Army Corps of Engineering permitting. The Council approved splitting the Project Report into two phases (A & B) to speed the overall project schedule and save expenses. Although the Project Development Team has met and begun work on Phase A of the Project Report, which now includes both geometry and environmental documentation, the late date in starting has caused the completion date to be pushed back to October 2004. B-9 POLICIES ® OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS BIKEWAY EMPROVEMENTS: RAILROAD SAFETY TRAIL Objective. Acquire right-of-way and property for extension of the Railroad Safety Trail from the Jennifer Street Bridge to Cal Poly. Action Plan _ Task Wigirial RdViimd 1. Secure Union Pacific support for the final schematic design of the bike 9/03 7/04 path between the AMTRAK passenger depot and Foothill Boulevard. 2. Secure rights of entry permits from UP,complete land survey and prepare 2/04 10/04 a legal description of the area proposed for acquisition. 3. Complete negotiations and execute a contract of sale with UP to acquire 4/05 the property. Status Summary: 10% Complete. Staff has received feedback from UPRR staff that a positive recommendation for alignment can be made to the UPRR Board of Directors when plans with minor revisions are received. Staff is now preparing those revisions. Sale, lease and liability issue negotiations will follow UPRR approval of the alignment. Staff is hopeful that all issues will be addressed by July, which pushes other tasks back several months. B-10 STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS THERAPY POOL Objective. Pursue development of a warm water therapy pool at the Swim Center through a financing program for its construction and on-going operation that does not use general-purpose revenues. Action Plan 1. Receive funding approval from the State and formalize SLO Swim Club 1/04 Partially donations. Complete* 2. Select a consultant 3/04 Complete 3. Begin study and environmental review. 3/04 Complete 4. Complete study and environmental review and begin design. 9/04 5. Complete design;invite construction bids and award contract. 4/05 6. Begin construction. 6/05 Status Summary: 15% Complete. The State has approved its funding. * At this point,staff will be proceeding under the assumption that the State grant will be the only source of outside funding, although donations may eventually be realized. The architect has been retained and has begun initial studies. In case supplemental funding happens to become available, the architect has been instructed to present two preliminary plans. The first will be a pool design using only City and State funds, while the second will be of a larger pool, requiring additional outside funding. B-11 POLICIES -OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS HOUSING Objective. Adopt a housing element that expands housing opportunities for very low, low and mod erate.income households,preserves and enhances residential neighborhoods and complies with state laws including CEQA;and encourage and support Cal Poly's efforts to provide more on-campus housing consistent with their adopted master plan for housing and enrollment. Action Plan OriginalTask 1. Implement existing affordable housing incentive and inclusionary housing Ongoing programs. 2. Encourage the Chamber of Commerce to implement programs that achieve Ongoing their goals for producing workforce housing. 3. Continue working closely with the County-wide Housing Trust Fund. Ongoing 4. Continue working closely with Cal Poly in encouraging and supporting Ongoing their efforts to provide more on-campus housing consistent with their adopted master plan. 5. Coordinate preparation and administration of annual Community Annual Development Block Grant program. Cycle 6. Update the General Plan Housing Element 12/03 Complete a. Complete background analyses and documentation. " b. Identify issues through Housing Element Task Force. " c. Draft policies and programs. " d. Begin preparing EIR. " e. Hold town hall meeting. f. Hold Planning Commission study session. " g. Hold Council study session. h. Complete environmental review. " i. Submit draft for State Housing and Community Development(HCD) " review. j. Hold Planning Commission public hearings. " k. Hold Council public hearings and adopt update. 1. Submit for final HCD certification. Complete in. Begin implementation. ongoing Status Summary: 80% Complete. Most of these tasks are ongoing and are moving forward as predicted. The Housing Element Update is complete. The Planning Commission and Council reviewed drafts, and the Council adopted the Housing Element update on March 30, 2004. Staff submitted the Element to HCD on April 21, 2004 and implementation will be an on-going process that has already begun. B-12 �POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS Objective. Improve neighborhoods and neighborhood involvement by continuing to implement the neighborhood wellness program,including consideration of a rental inspection ordinance. Action Plan Task • . 1. Maintain and support all existing neighborhood wellness programs Ongoing currently in place. 2. Continue encouraging formation and involvement of new voluntary Ongoing neighborhood groups by use of the Neighborhood Managers Coffee program,WIN,Neighborhood Services Team,Neighborhood Planner and similar outreach strategies. 3. Continue involving residents early in the public review of proposed Ongoing projects by a more defined Neighborhood.Planner program in Community Development, including expanding the Neighborhood Planner duties to include two-year terms,an annual neighborhood issues conference and attendance at City neighborhood meetings and coffees. 4. Continue contract Building Inspector position to support continued high 7/03 Complete levels of building applications and allow the continuation of a full-time Code Enforcement Officer. 5. Evaluate a cost recovery program for code enforcement efforts as a 12/03 Complete strategy to reduce and deter repeat offenders while generating increased revenues,and present findings and recommendations to the Council. 6. Research a Rental Inspection Ordinance in an effort to provide a safer 7/04 11/04 housing environment for renters and present findings and recommendations to the Council. Status Summary: 50% Complete. Staff is currently working with Cal Poly and Cuesta College to establish a collaborative, cost effective Community Solutions Program that is available to residents and students living in the City to resolve conflicts and community challenges. The Contract Building Inspector position was filled by the temporary transfer of Dave Fogg from Public Works. Council approved a cost recovery program for code enforcement functions within the Community Development Department in April 2004, after an extensive review and work program on behalf of staff. Staff required more time than originally thought to consider which methodology would best fit the community. Staff also traveled to the City of Azusa in March to review their Rental Inspection program. The Azusa program has been studied by cities from across the country and is viewed as a very successful model. Unfortunately, there was insufficient time between the Azusa trip and the end of Cal Poly's school year for the Student-Neighborhood Liaison Committee (SCLC) to discuss the proposed program. Since it is imperative that the SCLC have input, along with other stakeholders. the program will not return to Council until late Fall after SCLC reconvenes. B-13 POLICIES OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS SOUTH BROAD STREET CORRIDOR PLAN Objective. Adopt General Plan and zoning amendments to create a mixed-use residential neighborhood along the South Broad Street corridor from South Street to Orcun Road and seek grant funding to create a neighborhood concept plan for the area. Action Plan Task • . 1. Identify housing targets as part of the adopted Housing Element update. 12/03 Complete 2. Hold community meetingrssue identification meeting to develop a 5/04 Complete schematic concept plan. 3. Develop work program for General Plan amendment/rezoning. 3/04 7/04 . 4194 5. Schematic concept plan study session at Planning Commission 8104 6. Council initiation of General Plan amendment/rezoning program based on 9104 conceptplan 7. Illustrate schematic concepts,complete inventory analysis and issue 9/04 11104 identification. 8. Hold additional community meeting to discuss concept plan, General 11/04 1105 Plan and rezoning;and review policies and programs. 9. Refine schematic illustrations concurrent with#10 and#11. 6105 10. Prepare environmental review(concurrent with#9 and#11). 1/05 7105 11. Prepare Fiscal Impact Analysis(Concurrent with#9 and#10) 7/05 12. Hold Planning Commission hearings and finalize Council 3/05 8/05 recommendation. 13. Hold Council hearing and adopt General Plan amendment/rezoning. 6/05 11105 14. Continue to seek grant funding for preparation of a follow-up Ongoing Complete neighborhood concept plan. Status Summary: 5% Complete. The March 2004 updated Housing Element includes direction to intensify housing in this and similar areas. The City received a minor"grant"through Caltrans for a two-day neighborhood outreach "charrette" program that was held in May 2004 (step 2). The neighborhood charrette provides the foundation for a schematic concept plan to be prepared by City staff with community assistance. This concept plan will help define land use changes as well as streetscape and circulation improvements and guide the general plan/rezoning changes. Based on the outcome of the charrette program, staff will return to Council to initiate the 1344 POLICIES o OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS amendment/rezoning in September 2004. Because the larger grant request was not successful, this program will be completed mostly using City resources. This will extend the original estimated completion date for this goal. No additional funding,however,is requested at this time. B-15 POLICIES i OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS DOWNTOWN BIPROVEMENTS:MONTEREY PLAZA Objective. Pursue the creation of a"Monterey Plaza"for civic gatherings and passive recreation, dependent upon the start-up of the Copeland's Court.Street retail-commercial and the Palm-Morro parking projects. Action Plan sk O . 1. Consultant completes concept plan. 7/03 Complete 2. Council reviews concept plan and forwards it for advisory body review. 9/03 7/04 3. After advisory body and public review,Council identifies preferred design 7/04 9/04 concept(s) and establishes the scope of technical and environmental studies(such as circulation, access,utility and drainage analysis, and project phasing)for additional study. 4. Consultants complete technical and environmental studies, and project 6/05 design is modified as necessary to address findings. Status Summary: 5% Complete. After being unresponsive, the consultant has finally provided the City with a final drawing that the staff will forward to the advisory bodies and Council. Although the revised drawings are not quite what staff had requested for a complete submittal to the Council, with additional work by staff they will be adequate to proceed to conceptual review. Council review of the concept plan cannot occur before July 2004 and with the time required for the additional staff work, advisory body review and Council summer schedules, it will be unrealistic to return to Council for task:3 until September 2004. As this is an unfunded program, meeting the June 2005 date for completion of technical and environmental studies will require a budget adjustment that may be difficult if the State budget problems remain unsettled. B-16 POLICIE- SANDOBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX Objective. Encourage and promote projects that will increase lodging and conference facilities in order to generate additional Transient Occupancy Tax revenues. Action Plan . . 1. Refocus existing resources toward Direct Advertisement of the City. Ongoing Develop a focused advertising and PR campaign for the City that establishes a stronger identity for the City as a tourist destination with a wide variety of activities to undertake during a stay. 2. Work with various organizations for tourist promotional purposes Ongoing benefiting both the City and the organizations. 3. Work with property owners and real estate brokers to explore increasing Ongoing Bed and Breakfast opportunities,consistent with City land use and zoning policies. 4. Complete assessment of local lodging industry conditions by identifying 9/03 7/04 all such properties in the City;identifying all property owners and their managers;and identifying future expansion locations for tourist serving businesses. 5. Assess transportation opportunities for visitors and if necessary make 9/03 Complete service improvements. Strongly consider extending trolley service to the Monterey Street Hotel Area. 6. Present recommendations for improved tourism transportation and trolley 12/03 Complete service to Council for approval. 7. Establish a Task Force of local tourism experts to develop a transient 7/03 7/04 occupancy tax enhancement strategy. a. Explore ways to coordinate efforts amongst property owners and 1/04 10/04 ways to cooperatively book rooms to prevent business losses to other communities. Explore ways to increase midweek business travel. b. Present Tourism Task Force recommendations to Council. 3/04 12/04 8. Update advertising conversion study completed approximately four years 6/04 10/04 ago. B-17 POLICIES • t OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS • -. 9. Explore reuse of large properties on Monterey Street,including sites 6/04 Complete occupied currently by auto dealers(some of whom are expected to relocate). 10. Explore possibility of using the Veterans Memorial Building for 9/04 12104 convention center purposes, work closely with the Veterans and the County in this effort. 11. Upon construction,encourage the Dalidio Project hotel to work with the 1/05 Embassy Suites and develop a coordinated effort to use rooms to support existing conference services at the Embassy Suites. Status Summary: 45% Complete. Council's adoption in July 2003 of a Tourism Marketing Plan established six objectives for the City's community promotions. The February 2004 approval of the community promotion brand, "San Luis Obispo, Experience the SLO Life" has resulted in staff and the City's promotions contractors implementing a focused advertising and public relations campaign. Work on other Tourism Marketing Plan objectives continues, with a marketing study about to begin to collect information about the City's market position, and many strategic alliances enhanced. Staff and the promotions contractors continue to work with numerous organizations in an effort to collaborate on tourism promotion opportunities, including the Tourism Council, Visitors and Conference Bureau (VCB) Marketing Subcommittee, Downtown Association, SLO Vintners and Growers Association, Central Coast Lodging Association, the arts community and Cal Poly. Specific outreach has been undertaken with respect to the"Roll-Out-the-Barrels"event and Cal Poly Open House, as well as planning for the Fall Plein Aire Festival and Summer Downtown Auto Show. Construction has begun on a Bed & Breakfast on Santa Barbara Street. Staff continues to work with Larkspur Hotels as part of the San Luis Obispo Marketplace Project, the Motel Inn remodel and expansion and various Calle Joaquin hotel projects. A report on the assessment of the local lodging industry is forthcoming. Council established trolley service to the upper Monterey Street area hotels in August 2003. Ridership has improved and the initial feedback from hotels is positive. In May, the Mass Transportation Committee considered and recommended the application of the tourism promotion brand to the trolleys in an effort to further identify this service to visitors. This recommendation will be forwarded to the.Council for approval in August 2004. Work on a tourism task force will begin this summer when a graduate student intern in tourism is available to assist staff-in this effort. B-18 POLICIES ® OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:SALES TAX Objective. Encourage and promote retail projects that will increase sales tax revenues. Action Plan O . 1. Identify retail types that would complement and augment existing market Ongoing conditions. Develop a retail recruitment strategy to encourage new retailers to locate in San Luis Obispo on properties zoned for this purpose. Use direct mail and attendance at industry events to support recruitment strategy. Hold quarterly meetings with local real estate brokers and property owners. 2. Continue to contract with Hinderliter deLlamas(HdL)for sales tax Ongoing analysis services to analyze market conditions. 3. Continue to conduct demographic research and information gathering Ongoing about the City,its residents,its visitors and the region to provide to individuals,businesses,real estate professionals and others in analyzing San Luis Obispo for their business purposes. Continue to use the UCSB Economic Forecast Project as a data source. 4. Continue to facilitate and coordinate City involvement in major Ongoing . development projects as directed by the Council. In particular,continue to facilitate the Copelands Project toward construction. Continue involvement in the proposed San Luis Marketplace Project through negotiations,Development Review,EIR,Annexation and Pre-zoning and Agreements for Sales Tax Reimbursement. Continue involvement in the Airport Area Specific Plan and Annexation. 5. Continue to conduct"economic gardening"in the retail industry through Ongoing existing customer service oriented programs like the Quick Response Team,the Economic Development Program's involvement in major development projects,the Economic Development Program's high level of customer service to individuals, businesses and real estate professionals. 6. Continue to support the Downtown Strategic Plan. Focus support on Ongoing efforts that maintain the retail health of Downtown and increase customer sales in a sustainable way. 7. Explore training opportunities, with local agencies like Cuesta College Ongoing Institute for Professional Development,Private Industry Council, Small Business Development Center and others to assist local retailers in improving their marketing efforts and their"E"Business presence. 8. Promote shopping as an activity for visitors to San Luis Obispo. Ongoing B-19 POLICIES 1 OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS sRevised , 9. Continue to work with auto dealers in the City. When possible,pursue the Ongoing expansion of the Auto Park Way area. Consider broadening the program of incentives to auto dealers who relocate out of downtown to Auto Park Way to include those who relocate out of downtown to other acceptable sites in the City. Continue to assist Stanley Motors in its efforts to relocate to a larger,new facility. Work closely with remaining Downtown auto dealers to find new locations that are more functional. Explore the reuse of Downtown auto dealer locations for other retail purposes. If space is available, encourage new car lines to locate in San Luis Obispo. 10. Advocate for legislation to extend sales tax to include Internet sales. Ongoing 11. Conduct an assessment of current retail conditions by surveying existing 9/03 Complete retail centers, identifying the types of retail business located in existing centers,identifying retail center property owners or representatives. 12. Develop a"Shop Locally"marketing and PR campaign to encourage 11/03 11/04 residents to purchase goods in the City. Focus on branding San Luis Obispo as the shopping destination for the region. Work with the Chamber of Commerce,Downtown Association and others to coordinate efforts and message about shopping in San Luis Obispo. 13. Explore the potential annexation of the McBride Property and Gap 2104 12/04 Property if the Dalidio Property is annexed. 14. Work with each retail arra in the City to define itself and develop, when 9/04 possible,niche-marketing efforts. Work closely with property owner and businesses in each area Status Summary: 45% Complete. Staff has begun work on a strategy for further enhancing the retail sector, which will include a competitive assessment and discussion of market opportunities. Work with the City's sales tax advisor (Hinderliter del-lamas) continues, as does involvement with the UCSB Economic Forecast Project. The Copelands Project is under construction and on time to open in early 2005. Costco is processing its building permit application and could begin construction in several months, once the Army Corps of Engineers issues a permit. There is continued involvement in major development projects such as the Airport Area Specific Plan and the upcoming Chinatown Project. Significant staff involvement and efforts continue on the San Luis Marketplace project, with Council providing input on the deal points in January 2004 and hearings on the EIR underway. We anticipate this project reaching Council for approval in July. Staff has provided high levels of customer service, and particular attention, including Quick Response Team Meetings, to medical professionals, several automobile dealerships, businesses in the downtown that have been impacted by the construction of private and City projects, as well as to several local businesses in the process of expanding. Work with Cole Motors continues with the construction of their new facility on Broad Street, and the planning process for Smith Volvo's relocation has begun: Staff has also worked with a potential developer of the McBride Property and will continue to work with the Madonna family in regard to the"Gap Property." The Shop Locally program will be timed to coincide with the holiday shopping season later this year. B-20 -POLICIES ® OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS LONGTERM FISCAL HEALTH Objective. Develop a comprehensive strategy for preserving essential services, adequately maintaining existing facilities and infrastructure,and protecting the City's fiscal health. Action Plan TaskR 1. Organizational Productivity. Continue organizational vitality program Ongoing in improving productivity and customer service. 2. Fiscal Independence. Support AB 1412 (Wolk),which would allow local Ongoing Complete voters to approve an increase of 0.25% or 0.5%in the local sales tax rate without special legislation. 3. Legislative Advocacy. Continue working closely with our employee Ongoing associations,the League of California Cities,other local governments, professional associations and other groups to prevent further State raids on city revenue sources. 4. Review and Monitor the City's Fiscal Condition. Continue to Ongoing effectively review and monitor the City's fiscal condition on an ongoing and timely basis,including on-line access to financial data,quarterly newsletters,focused reporting on key revenues, mid-year budget reviews and preparation of annual financial reports (CAFR)in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and nationally recognized excellence in financial reporting guidelines. 5. Analyze Feasibility of.Revenue Ballot Measure in 2004. Use professional assistance in analyzing the feasibility of a revenue ballot measure in March or November 2004: a Enter into an agreement with The Lew Edwards Group. 7/03 Complete b. Complete the feasibility analysis and present the results to the Council 11/03 Complete for a"go/no-go"decision in taking the next step in preparing for a revenue measure in 2004. Status Summary: 75% Complete. The following highlights the status of key milestones. Legislative Advocacy. Staff continues to work closely with the Regional Coordinator for the League of California Cities to develop and implement alegislative response strategy for dealing with the VLF take-away and to prepare for the Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act slated for the November 2004 ballot. Review and Monitor the City's Fiscal Condition. In addition to ongoing financial reports,.we presented the Council with a formal "fi=st quarter review" of the City's financial condition on November 4, 2003. On January 6, 2004, we presented the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 2002-03 to the Council; and presented the Mid-Year Budget Review to the Council on February 17, 2003. For the 2004-05 Financial Plan Supplement, we presented comprehensive rate reviews and multi-year forecasts for the enterprise funds to the Council on June 1, 2004;and the Preliminary Budget to the Council on June 15,2004. B-21 POLICIES P OBJECTIVES STATUS OF MAJOR CITY GOALS Analyze Feasibility of Revenue Ballot Measure in 2004. On November 4, 2003, we presented the Council with the results of the revenue ballot measure feasibility assessment. The Council concurred with the report recommendation not to go forward with a measure at this time, but to return to the Council.in Summer 2004 with an analysis of the feasibility of forming an assessment district to assist with funding storm drainage maintenance and improvements in conjunction with the Storm Drainage Master Plan. B-22 Section C BUDGET GRAPHICS BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES OVERVIEW This section provides simple charts and tables which Expenditures and Revenues by Fund highlight key financial relationships and summarize the overall budget document. Graphics summarizing the following areas are included: ■ Total Expenditures by Fund Combined and Revenues ■ General Fund Expenditures and Uses ■ General Fund Operating Program Expenditures by Function ■ Total Operating Program,Capital Improvement 0 General Fund Operating Pro Expenditures Plan and Debt Service Expenditures by Type ■ Total Funding Sources ■ General Fund Revenues and Sources ■ Operating Program Expenditures by Function ■ Operating Program Expenditures by Type Changes in Financial Position ■ Capital Improvement Plan Expenditures by Function ■ Summary of Revenues,Expenditures and ■ Capital Improvement Plan Expenditures by Changes in Financial Position by Fund for 2003- Funding Source 04 and 2004-05 ■ Debt Service Expenditures by Function Authorized Regular Positions ■ Authorized Regular Positions by Function C-1 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES TOTAL EXPENDITURES BY TYPE- ALL FUNDS COMBINED 2004-05 Expenditures By Type: $91.0 Million o Debt service s% 0 Operating Programs ® Capital Improvement Pian 34% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Operating Programs 42,363,700 45,565,000 51,980,900 53,023,600 Capital Improvement Plan 24,203,500 16,398,300 75,341,300 30,944,600 Debt Service 6,008,400 6,368,400 6,676,800 7,001,900 TOTAL $72,575,600 1 $68P31,700 1 $133 ,000 1 $90,970,100 C-2 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES - ALL FUNDS COMBINED 2004-05 Funding Sources: $91.0 Million 0Other Sources 22% D Taxes 32% 0 From Other Governments 13% 0 Other Service E Enterprise Fund Charges Service Charges 7% 26% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Bud eted BUDGET Taxes 25,807,300 26,503,200 28,343,300 29,694,100 Service Charges Governmental Funds 6,528,400 6,755,200 5,673,800 6,611,700 Enterprise&Agency Funds 20,822,500 22,151,100 21,494,800 23,580,400 From Other Governments 13,988,100 10,312,300 23,385,800 11,519,000 Use of Money&Property 1,870,400 1,852,500 1,028,800 896,000 Other Revenues 1,766,600 1,376,500 3,354,800 1,225,500 Total Current Sources 70,783,300 68,950,800 83,281,300 73,526,700 Proceeds from Debt Financings 5,263,300 2,151,100 25,339,800 17,698,800 Fund Balance/Other Sources(Uses) (3,471,000) (2,770,200) 25,377,900 (255,400) TOTAL 1 $724759600 $68,331700 $133 000 1 $90,970,100 C-3 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND A. OPERATING PROGRAM EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION 2004-05 Operating Budget: $53.0 Million p General Government 17% p Community Development p Public Safety 10% 35% p Leisure,Cultural& Social Services 11% 6 ■Public Utilities OTransportation 18% 9% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Public Safety 13,897,200 15,328,000 17,165,000 18,301,400 Public Utilities 7,928,900 8,280,200 9,882500 9,518,500 Transportation 4,411,400 4,915,000 4,997,300 4,990500 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 4,908,100 5,128,800 5,667,400 5,869,000 Community Development 4,406,800 4,548,400 5,510,400 5,282,400 General Government 6,811,300 7,364,600 8,758,300 9,061,800 TOTAL $42,363J00 1 $45,565,000 $51,980,90 $53,023,600 C-4 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND a . OPERATING PROGRAM EXPENDITURES BY TYPE 2004-05 Operating Budget: $53.0 Million E3 Other Operating Expenditures 14% ®Contract Services E3 Staffing 1 Tib 690/6 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Sig 27,916,700 30,380,800 35,028,500 36,821,000 Contract Services 7,799,200 8,287,700 9,358,600 8,831,100 Other Operating Expenditures 6,273,600 6,310,300 7,332,800 7,235,900 Minor Capital 374,200 586,200 261,000 135,600 TOTAL $42 700 $45,565,000 1 $51,980 900 1 -$-5-3,- C-5 :BUDGET ■ , GRAPHICS • , SUMMARIES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION 2004-05 Capital Improvement Plan: $30.9 Million 0 General 0 Public Safety Government 3% 3% 0 Community Development 6% 0 Leisure,Cultural& Social Services 0 Public Utilities 2% 64% 12 Transportation 20% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Public Safety 716,200 971,600 1,801,500 935,000 Public Utilities 4,891,100 4,144,800 25,866,300 19,837,300 Transportation 13,902,200 6,911,600 35,073,100 6,180,300 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 1,104,500 3,335,100 6,918,100 698,200 Community Development 3,018,000 503,500 4,390,100 2,330,000 General Government 571,500 531,700 1,292,200 963,800 TOTAL $24,203,500 1 $162398,3W $75 1 $30,944 600 C-6 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES CAPITAL RAPROVEMENT PLAN EXPENDITURES BY FUNDING SOURCE 2004-05 Capital Improvement Plan: $30.9 Million D Governmental Funds: Current Sources 25% G Enterprise Funds: Debt Financing O Governmental 51% Funds: Debt Financing 6% ■Enterprise Funds: Current Sources 18% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Governtnental Funds Current Sources 12,222,400 8,855,200 29,491,800 7,715,900 Debt Financing 471,600 5,900,800 1,818,800 Total Governmental funds 12,222,400 9,326,800 35,392,600 9,534,700 Enterprise&Agency Funds Current Sources 6554,500 5,392,000 20509,700 5,529,900 Debt Financing 5,426,600 1,679500 19,439,000 15,880,000 Total Enterprise&Agency Funds 11,981,100 7,071,500 39,948,700 21,409,900 TOTAL 1 $24 03 $16 98,300 1 $75,341 $3044,600 C-7 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES DEBT SERVICE EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION 2004-05 Debt Service: $7.0 Million 0 Public Safety O General 4% Government 2% O Leisure,Cuttural& Social Services 18% 0 Public Utilities OTransportation 58% 18% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Public Safety 263,700 261,900 270,600 257,100 Public Utilities 3,295,500 3,228,700 3,526,900 4,090,800 Transportation 1,057,800 1,504,100 1,446,300 1,281,800 Leisure,Cultural 8t Social Services 1,281,300 1,262,800 1,320,000 1,264,800 General Government 110,100 110,900 113,000 107,400 TOTAL $61008 400 $6 8 400 $6,676 $7 001900 C-8 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES TOTAL EXPENDPIUUM BY FUND 2004-05 Expenditures By Fund: $91.0 Million 0General Fund 450/6 C3 Enterprise& Agency Funds 47% ■Other Funds 8% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Governental Funds General Fund 35,386,600 35,695,000 40,342,500 40,549,900 Other Funds 7,614,200 6,707,300 32,530,500 7,626,000 Total Governmental Funds 43,000,800 42,402,300 72,873,000 48,175,900 Enterprise&Agency Funds Water Fund 9,346,200 8,298,200 27,053,200 18,686,100 Sewer Fund 8,282,700 8,740,900 13,184,100 16,459,600 Parking Fund 1,708,100 4,640,200 15,738,300 3,895,800 Transit Fund 3,038,500 2,895500 2,994,400 2,338,900 Golf Fund 481,800 505,400 580,200 507,000 Whale Rock Reservoir Fund 717,500 849,200 1,575,800 906,800 Total Enterprise Funds 29,574,800 25,929,400 61,126,000 42,794,200 TOTAL 1 $72,575,600 31700 1 $133,999,000 $90 0,100 C-9 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES GENERAL FUND EXPENDPI'URES AND USES 2004-05 General Fund Expenditures and Uses: $40.5 Million D Debt service 0 Capital 4% Improvement Pian 6% D Operating Programs 90% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Operating Programs 28,158,700 30,404,800 34,676,000 35,980,800 Capital Improvement Plan 5,291,000 3,342,100 3,750,400 2,303500 Debt Service 1,715,200 1,696,100 1,760,200 1,672,500 Other Uses(Sources) Golf Fund 221,700 252,000 220,800 208,900 MOA&Other Compensation Adjustments 269,200 419,900 Expenditure Savings (334,100) (719,600) State take-away 683,900 TOTAL $35 $35,695 000 $40,U2,500 , $40,549 C-10 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES GENERAL FUND OPERATING PROGRAM EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION 2004-05 General Fund Operating: $36.0 Million 0 General Government 16% 0 Community Development 13% ■Public Safety 51% 0 Leisure,Cultural& Social Services 15% Wransportation 5% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Public Safety 13,897,200 15,328,000 17,165,000 18,301,400 Transportation 1,954,100 2,015,900 2,018,200 1,949,700 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 4,540,000 4,753,800 5,257,400 5,468,300 Community Development 3,852,000 3,925,000 4,870,300 4,672,200 General Government 3,915,400 4,382,100 5,365,100 5,589,200 TOTAL $28,158,7001 $30 404,800 $34 676,000 1 $35,980 RM C-11 BUDGET GRAPHICS i • GENERAL FUND OPERATING PROGRAM EXPENDITURES BY TYPE 2004-05 General Fund Operating: $36.0 Million 0 Other Operating Expenditures 12% 13 Contract Services 10% O Staffing 78% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-M Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Staffing 23,239,100 25,297,100 29,113,800 30,653,400 Contract Services 3,577,700 3,585,100 4,003,400 3,950,600 Other Operating Expenditures 3,953,700 4,263,500 4,757,900 4,760,800 Minor Capital 284,100 241,600 194,100 88,600 Reimbursed Expenditures From Other Funds (2,895,900) (2,982,500) (3,393,200) (3,472,600) TOTAL 1 $28,158,700 1 $30 404,800 1 $34 676 000 1 $35 8%8W C-12 BUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES GENERAL FUND REVENUES 2004-05 General Fund Revenues: $38.6 Million 0 All Other Revenues 3% 0 Service Charges 13% 0 Other Taxes ®Sales Tax 10% 31% O VLF 7% 0 Property Tax 0 Utility Users Tax 16% 10% OTOT 10% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Taxes Sales Tax 10,099,200 10,179,300 10,964,300 11,468,200 Property Tax 5,219,000 5,584,200 5,947,300 6,333,900 Utility Users Tax 3,532,300 3,666,200 3,820,500 3,973,300 Transient Occupancy Tax(TOT) 3,790,300 3,840,800 3,840,800 3,956,000 Other Taxes 3,166500 3,232,700 3,770,400 3,962,700 Total Taxes 25,807,300 26,503,200 28,343,300 29,694,100 Fines&Forfeitures 321,700 330,600 330,000 330,000 Use of Money&Property 742,500 812,700 347,000 347,000 From Other Governments Vehicle License In-Lieu Fees(VLF) 2,467,400 2,621,600 1,896,400 2,840,100 Other Intergovernmental Revenues 906,100 1,031,200 1,020,300 423,100 Service Charges 4,409,900 4,011,400 4,341,300 4,869,600 Other Revenues 179,700 104,900 170,300 75,000 TOTAL ,600 $35,415,600 $36,448,600 $38,578,900 C-13 BUDGET m ® -GRAPHICS m SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION 2003-04 Changes in Financial Position REVENUES,EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION:2003-04 Other.Souices(uses) FundBalancdWodrin Capital Operating Sources Over Beginning End other SorRevenues Transfers Other (Under)Uses of Year of Year Go%vrm rental Funds_... ...._ . - -- - - -- - General Fund 36,448.600 34.676.000 (4.833,400) 64,900 (2,995,900) 10,069,400 7,073,500 Special Revenue Funds Downtown Association 361,400 361,400 - 61,000 61,000 Gas Tax 876,500 (876,500) - - - TDA(Note 1) 20,500 (20,500) - CDBG(Note 2) 1,556.000 1,556,000 - - - Law Enforcement Grants 128,100 305,600 (11000) (178,500) 271,800 93,300 Capital.Project.Funds Capital Outlay 8,729,000 25.610,600 3,316,700 5.900.800 (7.664,100) 7,664,100 - Parkland Development 433,500 1,288;500 (855,000) 958,200 103,200 Transportation Impact 1,031,300 2,861,700 (1,830,400) 2,100,800 270,400 Open Space Protection 3,527,000 4,025,600 (498,600) 507,300 8,700 Airport Area Impact 34.100 34,100 437.400 471,500 Affordable Housing 478,800 478,800 1,247,900 1,726,700 Fleet Replacement 55.000 427,400 433,700 61;300 612,900 674,200 Debt Service Fund 1 1,760,2001 1,760,200 I - 1,569,5001 1,568,500 Ente rise&AgEncy..F�nds Water 11.946.400 27.053.200 (10,400) 8,856.000 (6,261,200) 12,408.500 6.147.300 Sewer 8,248,800 13,184,100 10,400 1,991,400 (2,933,500) 4,813,000 1,879,500 Parking 5,320,700 15,738,300 8.628,000 (1,789,600) 5,246500 3,456.900 Transit 2,755,700 2,994,400 (238,700) 401,300 162,600 Golf fund 295.300 580,200 220,800 (5,800) (69,900) 69,900 - Whale Rock Commission 1 1,034,6001 1,575,800 (2,200) (543,400)1 639,2001 95,800 TOTAL I $83,28100 I$133,999,000 1 $61 $25,433,100 I ($25a84AW)J $49,077,7001 $23,793,100 1. Transportation Development Act 2. Community Development Block Grant These two charts summarize changes in financial position for 2003-04 and 2004-05 for all of the City's funds. Detailed statements for each fund are provided in Section G(Changes in Financial Position), which provide additional information on revenues,expenditures and changes in financial position for the last two completed fiscal years(2001-02 and 2002-03)and for the two years covered by the Financial Plan(2003-04 and 2004-05). Section G also provides an overview of the purpose and organization of the City's funds. C-14 B ® GRAPHICS o SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION 2004-05 Changes in.Financial Position REVENUES,EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION:2004-05 Other Sources(Uses). I I Fund Capital Operating Sources Over Beginning End Revenues 'tures Transfers Other (Under)Uses of Year of Year Gaverntnentalfunds General Fund 38,578,900 35,980,800 (3,278,600) (384,200) (1,064,700) 7,073,500 6,008,800 Special Revenue Funds - Downtown Association 384,600 381,000 3,600 61,000 64,600 Gas Tax 885,200 (885,200) - TDA 21,100 (21,100) CDBG 842;200 842,200 - - Law Enforcement Grants 20,600 20,600 93,300 113,900 Capital Project Funds - - - Capital Outlay 2,213,000 5,776,600 1,744,800 1,818,800 - - Parkland Development 155,000 193,800 (38,800) 103,200 64,400 Transportation Impact 844,600 1,115,000 (270,400) 270,400 - Open Space Protection 2,032,000 2,130,000 100,000 2,000 8,700 10,700 Airport Area Impact 35,100 35,100 471,500 506,600 Affordable Housing 493,200 493,200 1,726,700 2,219,900 Fleet Replacement 55,000 84,000 458,700 429,700 674,200 1,103,900 Debt Service Fund 1 1,672,5001 1,672,500 1,568,5001 1,568,500 1 ute rise&Agency.Funds Water 10,556,600 18,686,100 8,039,700 (89,800) 6,147,300 6,057,500 Sewer 9,001,700 16,459,600 7,687,400 229,500 1,879,500 2,109,000 Parking 3,593,500 3,895,800 (12,200) (314,500) 3,456,900 3,142,400 Transit 2,541,400 2,338,900 (2;700) 199,800 162,600 362,400 Golf Fund 304,100 507,000 208,900 (6,000) - - - W6ale Rock Commission 1 968,90 01 906,800 (12,100)1 50,0001 95,800 145;800 TOTAL $73,526,700 1 $90,970100 $0 1 $17,128,700 1 ($314.700)1 $23,793 00 $23 78 400 C-15 LBUDGET GRAPHICS AND SUMMARIES AUTHORIZED REGULAR STAFFING BY FUNCTION 2004-05 Authorized Positions: 347.3 0 General Government 16% 0 Community Development 11% 0 Public Safety 42°/6 0 Leisure,Cultural& Social Services 8% 0 Transportation 7% 0 Public Utilities 16% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Budgeted BUDGET Public Safety 144.5 142.5 142.0 142.0 Public Utilities 57.8 56.8 56.8 56.8 Transportation 25.5 25.5 25.0 25.0 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 30.0 30.0 28.0 28.0 Community Development 39.6 39.6 39.6 39.6 General Government 55.4 58.4 55.9 55.9 TOTAL i 352.81 352.81 347.31 3473 C-16 31 Ir74. r Al 7l - OPERATING vm • m OVERVIEW-PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION PURPOSE ® Public Safety ® Public Utilities ® Transportation The operating programs set forth in this section of the E Leisure,Cultural and Social Services Financial Plan form the City's basic organizational ® Community Development units, provide for the delivery of essential services R General Government and allow the City to accomplish the following: Operation ® Establish policies and goals that define the nature and level of services to be provided. An operation is a grouping of related programs within a functional area such as Police Protection within ■ Identify activities performed in delivering Public Safety or Water Service within Public Utilities. program services. ® Set objectives for improving the delivery of Progmm services. Programs are the basic organizational units of the ® Appropriate the resources required to perform Financial Plan establishing policies, goals and activities and accomplish objectives. objectives that define the nature and level of services to be provided. ORGANIZATION Activity The City's operating expenditures are organized into Activities are the specific services and tasks the following hierarchical categories: performed within a program in the pursuit of its objectives and goals. ® Function e Operation • Program Sample Relationship:_Public Utilities- e Activity The following is an example of the hierarchical Function relationship between functions, operations, programs and activities: The highest level of sunnmarization used in the City's Financial Plan, functions represent a grouping of FUNMON_Public Utilities related operations and programs that may cross OPERATION Water Service organizational (departmental) boundaries aimed at accomplishing a broad goal or delivering a major PROGRAM Water Treatment service. The six functions in the Fnancial Plan are: AC'nvny Laboratory Analysis D-1 OPERATING PROGRAMS OVERVIEW-SUMMARY OF FUNCTIONS AND OPERATIONS Responsible Department Funding Source Public Safety Police Protection Police General Fund Fine&Environmental Safety Fire General Fund Public Utilities Water Service Utilities Water Fund Wastewater Service Utilities Sewer Fund Whale Rock Reservoir Utilities Whale Rock Fund Tra nspomdon Transportation Planning&Engineering Public Works General Fund Streets Public Works General Fund Creek&Flood Protection Public Works General Fund Parking Public Works Parking Fund Municipal Transit System Public Works Transit Fund Leisure, Cultural&Social Services Parks and Recreation Recreation Programs Parks&Recreation General Fund Golf Course Parks&Recreation Golf Fund Maintenance Programs Public Works General Fund Cultural Activities Administration General Fund Social Services:Human Relations Human Resources CDBG Fund Community Development Development Review&Long Range Planning Community Development General Fund Housing Community Development CDBG Fund Construction Regulation Building&Safety Community Development General Fund Engineering Public Works General Fund Natural Resources Protection Administration General Fund Economic Health Economic Development Administration General Fund Community Promotion Administration General Fund Downtown Association(DA) Council&Advisory Bodies DA Fund General Government Legislation&Policy Council&Advisory Bodies General Fund General Administration City Administration Administration General Fund Public Works Administration Public Works General Fund Legal Services City Attorney General Fund Records&Elections City Clerk General Fund Organizational Support Services Human Resources Administration Human Resources General Fund Risk Management Human Resources General Fund Accounting&Revenue Management Finance&Information Technology General Fund Information Technology Finance&Information Technology General Fund Geographic Information Services Public Works General Fund Building&Fleet Maintenance Public Works General Fund D-2 OPERATING �PROGRAMS EXPENDITURE S VERv aEW The following expenditure summaries precede the Expenditum by Type: individual operating program narratives in order to All Funds and the General:Fund highlight the financial relationships between programs as well as to summarize the overall ® Summarizes all operating expenditures by type: operating program budget: staffing (salaries and benefits), contract services, other operating expenditures (materials, Expenditures by Function communications, utilities, and insurance) and minor capital (capital purchases with a per item Summarizes operating expenditures at the cost greater than$5,000 and less than$15,000). function and operation level. Significant Operating Program Changes Expendittim by M Summarizes all significant operating program A Summarizes all operating expenditures at the changes--both increases and reductions required program level grouped within related functions to balance the budget—by function and and operations. operation. Expenditures by Department B Summarizes all operating program expenditures at the program or operation level grouped by the Department that is responsible for administering them D-3 OPERATING so • s EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET PUBLIC SAFETY Police Protection 7,990,700 8,822,800 9,759,000 10,735,900 Fire&Environmental Safety 5,906,500 6,505,200 7,406,000 7,565,500 Total Public Safety 13,89T,200 15,328,000 17,165,000 18,301,400 PUBLIC UTILITIES Water Service 3,866,400 3,973,500 4,702,400 4,577,200 Wastewater Service 3,474,100 3,768,600 4,489,700 4;251,400 Whale Rock Reservoir 588,400 538,100 690,400 689,900 Total Public Utilities 7,928,900 89280,200 918821500 9,518,500 TRANSPORTATION Transportation Management 335,900 339,300 457,800 412,700 Streets 1,419,100 1,414,100 1,327,700 1,297,900 Creek&Flood Protection 199,100 262,500 232,700 239,100 Parking 875,100 1,019,200 1,199,400 1,335,600 Municipal Transit System 1,582;200 1,879,900 1,779,700 1,705,200, Total Transportation 49411,400 4,9159000 4,997,300 4,990,500 LEISURE,CULTURAL&SOCIAL SERVICES Parks&Recreation Recreation Programs 2,334,000 2,461,700 2,815,300 2,872,700 Maintenance Services 1,752,100 1,849,600 1,923,400 2,071,900 Golf Course Operations&Maintenance 368,100 375,000 410,000 400,700 Cultural Services 332,900 317,700 343,100 344,300 Social Services 121,000 124,800 175,600 179,400 Total Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 4,908,100 5,128,800 5,667,400 5,869,000 D-4 OPERATING PROGRAMS EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning 1,357,300 1,395,500 2,016,200 1,753,700 Construction Regulation Building&Safety 566,300 538,900 659,600 647,100 Engineering 1,303,300 1,372,000 1,579,600 1,641,600 Natural Resources Protection 252,200 311,000 298,800 303,500 Economic Health Economic Development 139,500 174;500 193,400 180,300 Community Promotion 404,400 346,100 401 AM 375,200 Downtown Association 383,800 410,400 361,400 381,000 Total Community Development 4,406,800 4,548,400 5,510,400 5,282,400 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Legislation At Policy 87,600 102,400 101,200 119,900 General Administration City Administration 473,600 489,000 543,100 561,300 Public Works Administration 619,500 646,100 908,900 940,400 Legal Services 337,600 343,500 411,700 392,000 City Clerk Services 342,900 330,200 396,000 436,600 Organizational Support Services Human Resources Programs 1,386,300 1,490,000 1,693,400 1,694,800 Finance&Information Technology Programs 2,055,900 2,263,200 2,955,300 3,116,800 Geographic Information Services 197,600 250,500 298,300 310,400 Buildings&Equipment Building Operations&Maintenance 786,000 857,500 856,200 887,100 Fleet Maintenance 524,300 592,200 594,200 602,500 Total Genual Government 6,811,300 793649600 8,758,300 9,061,800 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES $42,363,700 $45,565,000 $51,9809900 $53,023,600 D-5 OPERATING ,PROGRAIMS EXPENDITURES BY PROGRAM-PUBLIC SAFETY 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET POLICE PROTECTION Administration 766,700 1,036,300 1,172,500 1,262,400 Neighborhood&Crime Prevention Services 180,600 184,400 200,500 211,300 Support Services 1,165,800 1,248,600 .1,465,700 1,534,400 Investigative.Services 1,142,500 1,201,900 1,349,400 1,424,300 Traffic Safety 603,700 607,300 589,600 671,600 Patrol Services 4,131,400 4544,300 4,981,300 5,631,900 Total Police Protection 7,990,700 8,822,800 9,759,000 10,735,900 FIRE&ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY Administration 212,500 349,100 432,200 444,000 Emergency Response 4,926,000 5,383,700 6,394,200 6,411,000 Hazard Prevention 374,700 393,500 405,100 546,900 Training 108,800 111,000 106,600 130,400 Technical Services 96,200 74,400 26,200 23,800 Radio Communications Services+ 175,400 163,100 0 0 Disaster preparedness 12,900 30,400 41,700 9,400 Total Fire&Environmental Safety 5,906,500 6,505,200 7,406,000 7,565,500 TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY $13,897,200 $15,328200 $17,165,000 $1801,400 " The radio communications services program is included m information technology in 2003-05. D-6 -OPERATING PROGRAMS EXPENDITURES BY PROGRAM- PUBLIC UTII.ITIES 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET WATER SERVICE Water Source of Supply 879,600 882,200 1,121,000 1,041,700 Water Treatment 1,008,800 971,000 1,145,700 1,111,600 Water Distribution 710,800 684,900 809,800 821,600 Water Customer Service 199,100 242,300 261,600 274,700 Utilities Conservation Office 341,400 345,300 412,300 397,500 Water Administration&Engineering 726,700 847,800 952,000 930,100 Total Water Service 3,8664400 3,973,500 49702,400 4,577,200 WASTEWATER SERVICE Wastewater Collection 550,400 583,400 674,000 691,100 Wastewater Pretreatment 174,600 176,900 267,300 256,200 Water Reclamation Facility 2,290,600 2,390,800 2,733,500 2,680,200 Wastewater Administration&Engineering 458,500 617,500 814,900 623,900 Total Wastewater Service 3,474,100 3,768,600 4,489,700 4,251,400 WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR Reservoir Operations 588,400 538,100 690AW 689,900 TOTAL PUBLIC UTILITIES $7,928,900 $8,280400 $9,882,500 $97518,500 D-7 OPERATING • s • ■ ■ l EXPENDMJM BY PROGRAM-TRANSPORTATION 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-0 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT . Transportation Planning&Engineering 335,900 33%3W 457,800 412,700 STREETS Pavement Maintenance 630,200 559,300 598,900 610,900 General(Sidewalks,Signs&Markings) 442,200 484,400 399,300 368,600 Traffic Signals&Street Lights 346,700 370,400 329,500 318,400 Total Streets 1,419,100 19414,100 1,3271700 1,297,900 CREEK AND FLOOD PROTECTION Operations&Maintenance 199,100 262,500 2329700 239,100 PARKING Operations,Maintenance&Enforcement 875,100 1,019,200 1,199,400 1,3359600 MUNICIPAL TRANSIT SYSTEM Operations&Maintenance 1,582,200 1,879,900 1,779,700 1,705,200 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION $41411,400 $4,9151000 $4,9979300 $4,990,500 D-8 OPERATING m osi s EXPENDITURES BY PROGRAM-LEISURE, CULTURAL:&SOCIAL SERVICES 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET PARKS&RECREATION Recreation Programs Recreation Administration 451;500 512,300 602,200 576,700 -Aquatics 253,300 265,500 288;200 305,300 Day Care 687,700 663,900 787,900 788,700 Classes&Adult Athletics .272,900 302,900 318,900 351,100 Major Events/Facilities 114,700 127,800 142,000 149,200 Youth Sports&Special Events 207,200 241,700 255,400 257,700 Teen&Senior Services 205,200 195,200 245,000 253,500 Ranger Services 141,500 152,400 175,700 190,500 Total Recreation Programs 2,334,000 2,461,700 2,815,300 .2,872,700 Maintenance Services Parks&Landscape Maintenance 1,222;500 1,329,000 1,363,800 1,528,100 Swim Center Maintenance 289,100 310,700 293,900 268,400 Tree Maintenance 240,500 209,900 265,700 275,400 Total Maintenance Services 1,752,100 .1,849,600 1,923,400 2,071,900 Golf Course Operations&Maintenance 368,100 375,000 410,000 400,700 Total Parks&Recreation 49454,200 4,686,300 5,148,700 5,34513110 CULTURAL SERVICES Cultural.Activities 332,900 .317,700 343,100 .344,300 SOCIAL SERVICES Human Relations 121,000 124,800 175,600 179,400 Total Social Services 1219000 124,800 175,600 179,400 TOTAL LEISURE,CULTURAL& SOCIAL SERVICES $4,908,100 $5428,800 $5,667,400 $518699000 D-9 EXPENDITURES BY PROGRAM- COMMUNTTY DEVELOPMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET PLANNING Commissions&Committees 25,200 26,900 41,700 42,000 Community Development Administration 357,600 358,300 458,200 484,400 Development Review 517,800 466,400 544,900 558,600 Long Range Planning 285,700 330,900 692,700 439,500 Housing 171,000 213,000 .278,700 229,200 Total Planning 1,357,300 1,395,500 2,016,200 1,753,700 CONSTRUCTION REGULATION Building&Safety 566,300 538,900 659,600 647,100 CIP Project Engineering 1,075,200 1,130,400 1,291,400 1,323,000 Engineering Development Review 228,100__ 241,600 288,200 .318,600 Total Construction Regulation 1,869,600 1,910,900 2,239,200 2488,700 NATURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION Natural Resources Protection 252,200 311,000 298,800 303,500 ECONOMIC HEALTH Economic Development 139,500 .174,500 193,400 180,300 Community Promotion 404,400 346,100 401,400 375,200 Downtown Association 383,800 410,400 361,400 381,000 Total Economic Development 9279700 9319000 956,200 936,500 TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $4,406,800 $4,548,400 $59510,400 $5,282,400 D-10 11,.07PERATING PROGRAMS EXPENDITURES BY PROGRAM- GENERAL GOVERNMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET LEGISLATION AND POLICY City Council 87,600 102,400 101,200 119,900 GENERAL ADMIlVISTRATION City Administration 473,600 489,000 543,100 561,300 Public Works Administration 619,500 646,100 908,900 940,400 Total General Administration 1,093,100 1,135,100 1,452,000 1,501,700 LEGAL SERVICES City Attorney 337AM 343,500 411,700 392,000 CITY CLERK SERVICES Administration&Records 340,100 303,900 390,500 401,400 Elections 2,800 26,300 5,500 35,2 . Total City Clerk Services 342,900 330,200 3969000 436,600 ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES Human Resources Administration 695,700 538,300 619,000 640,600 Risk Management 690,600 951,700 1,074,400 1,054,200 Finance&Information Technology Administration 203,500 231,200 245,300 .201,300 Accounting 428,200 462,600 585,600 553,500 Revenue Management 404,200 415,000 411,800 487,200 Support Services 245,800 230,000 401,100 451,100 Information Technology 774,200 924,400 1,311,500 1,423,700 Geographic Information Services 197;600 250,500 298,300 310,400 Total Organizational Support Services 396399800 49003,700 4,947,000 .591229000 BUILDINGS&EQUIPMENT Building Maintenance 786,000 857,500 856,200 887,100 Fleet Maintenance 524,300 592,200 594,200. 602,500 Total Buildings&Equipment 1,310;300 1,449,700 19450AN 1,489,600 TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT $6,811;300 $7,364,600 $8,758,300 $9,061,800 D-11 OPERATING PROGRAMS OPERATING EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET CITY COUNCIL Legislation&Policy 87,600 102,400 101;200 119,900 Total City Council 87,600 102,400 101;200 119,900 ADMINISTRATION City Administration 473,600 489,000 543,100 561,300 Culttral Activities 332,900 317,700 343,100 344,300 Natural Resources Protection 252,200 311,000 298,800 303,500 Economic Development 139,500 174,500 193,400 180,300 Community Promotion 404,400 346,100 401,400 375,200 Total Administration 1,602,600 1,638,300 1,779,800 1,764,600 CITY ATTORNEY Legal Services 337,600 343,500 411,700 392,000 Total City Attorney 3379600 343,500 411,700 392,000 CITY CLERK SERVICES Records&Administration 340;100 303,900 390,500 401,400 Elections 2,800 26,300 .5,500 35,200 Total City Clerk Services 34299M 330,200 396,000 436,600 HUMAN RESOURCES Human Resources Administration 695,700 538,300 619,000 640,600 Risk Management 690,600 951,700 1,074,400 1,054,200 Human Relations 121,000 124,800._ _ _ 175,600 179,400 Total Human Resources 11507,300 1,614,800 1,8699000 1,874,200 FINANCE&INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Finance&Information Technology Administration 203,500 231,200 245,300 201,300 Accounting 428,200 462,600 585,660 553,500 Revenue Management 404,200 415,000 411,800 487,200 Support Services 245,800 230,000 401;100 451,100 Information Technology 774,200 924,400 1,311,500 1,423,700 Total Finance 2,055,900 29263,200 2,9559300 3,116,800 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Commissions&Committees 25,200 26,900 41,700 42,000 Administration 357,600 358,300 458,200 484,400 Development Review 517,800 466,400 544,900 558,600 Long Range Planning 285,700 330,900 692,700 439,500 Housing 171,000 213,000 278,700 229,200 Building&Safety 566,300 538,900 .659,600 647,100 Total Community Development 1,9239600 1,9349400 2,6751800 2,400,800 D-12 OPERAm m • m OPERATING EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET PARKS&RECREATION Recreation Programs 2,334,000 2,461,700 2,815,300 2,872,700 Golf Course Operations&Maintenance 368,100 375,000 410,000 400,700 Total Parks&Recreation 29702,100 2,8369700 3,225,300 3,273,400 UTILITIES Water Services 3,866,400 3,973,500 4,702,400 4,577,200 Wastewater Services 3,474,100 3,768,600 4,489,700 4,251,400 Whale Rock Reservoir 588,400 538,106 690,400 689,900 Total Utilities 7,928,900 8,280,200 9,882,500 9,518,500 PUBLIC WORKS Administration 619,500 646,100 908,900 940,400 CIP Project Engineering 1,075,200 1,130,400 1,291,400 1,323,000 Geographic Information Services 197,600 250,500 298,300 310,400 Transportation&Development Review Engineering Development Review 228,100 241,600 288,200 318,600 Transportation Planning&Engineering 335,900 339,300 457,800 412,700 Parking 875,100 1,019,200 1,199,400 1,335,600 Municipal Transit System 1582,200 1,879,900 1,779,700 1,705,200 Maintenance Services Creek&Flood Protection 199,100 262,500 232,700 239,100 Street Maintenance 1,419,100 1,414,100 1,327,700 1,297,900 Parks&Landscape Maintenance 1,222,500 1,329,000 1,363,800 1,528,100 Swim Center Maintenance 289,100 310,700 293,900 268,400 Tree Maintenance 240,500 209,900 265,700 275,400 Building Maintenance 786,000 857,500 856,200 887,100 Flea Maintenance 524,300 592,200 594,200 602,500 Total Public Works 9,5949200 109482,900 11,157,900 11,444,400 POLICE 799909700 898229800 99759,000 109735,900 FIRE 5,906,500 6,505,200 7,406,000 79565,500 NON-DEPARTMENTAL Downtown Association 383,800 410,400 361,400 381,000 Total Non-Departmental 383,800 410AN 361,400 3811000 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES $42,363,700 $45,5651000 $51,98%900 $53,023,600 D-13 OPERATING PROGRAMS' OPERATING EXPENDITURES BY TYPE- ALL FUNDS COMBINED 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET STAFFING Salaries and Wages Regular Salaries 19,938,800 20,440,700 21,523,300 22,263,100 Temporary Salaries 1,923,800 2,002,600 2,229,000 2,189,000 Overtime 1,456,500 1,645,200 1,673,900 1,155,000 Benefits Retirement 1,218,300 2,121,400 4,280,400 5,865,300 Group Health and Other Insurance 1,960,700 2,200,200 2,518,600 2,755,200 Medicare&Social Security 223,400 242,600 264,800 286,900 Unemployment Reimbursements 7,300 44,100 95,500 99,200 Wcrkers'CQ124xnsation 1,187,900 1,684,000 2,443,000 2,207;300 Total Stung 27,9169700 30,380,800 359028,500 36,8219000 CONTRACT SERVICES 7,799,200 8,287,700 9,358,600 89831,100 OTHER OPERATING E%PENDIT IJRES Ccnimiinications&Utilities 2,532,300 2,468,500 2,733,900 2,712,400 Rents&Leases 135,600 114,600 169,300 144,700 Insurance 574,200 777,800 938,500 923,900 Other Operating Expenditures 3,031,500 2,949,400 3,491,100 3,454,900 Total Other Operating Expendit u ms 6,273,600 6,3109300 7,332,800 7,235,900 MINOR CAPITAL 374,200 586,200 261,000 1359600 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDTPURES $42,3637700 $45,$66,000 $51,980,900 $53,023,600 D-14 OPERATING PROGRAMS OPERATING EXPENDITURES BY TYPE-GENERAL FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET STAFFING Salaries and Wages Regular Salaries 16,576,000 17,028,700 17,911,100 18,555,000 Temporary Salaries 1,621500 1,657,900 1,812,000 1,703,600 Overtime 1,336,800 1,512,600 1,508,700 1,011,000 Benefits Retirement 956,800 1,755,400 3,620,200 5,017,500 Group Health and Other Insurance 1;581,500 1,784,800 2,053,200 2,278,400 Medicare&Social Security 186,400 202,800 222,100 239,000 Unemployment Reimbursements 6,100 37,100 79,100 82,200 Workers'Compensation 974,000 1,317,800 _ _ 1,907,500 1,766,700 Total Stafft 23,239,100 259297,100 29,113,900 30,6539400 CONTRACT SERVICES 3,577,700 3,585,100 4,003,400 3,95OA00 OTHER OPERATING EXPENDITURES Communications&Utilities 1,214,500 1,210,000 1,293,900 .1,371,100 Rents&Leases 118,700 96,200 145,200 120,500 Insurance 566,700 767,000 928,000 907,400 Other Operating Expenditures 2,053,800 2,190,300 2,390,800 2,361,800 Total Other Operating Expenditures 3,9535700 4,263,500 4,7579.900 41760,800 MINOR CAPITAL 2849100 241,600 194,100 88,600 TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENDITURES 31,054,600 33,387,300 38,069,300 399453,400 Reimbursed Expenditures (2,895,900) (2,982,500) (3,393,200) (3,472,600) TOTAL GENERAL FUND OPERATING EXPENDITURES $28,158,700 $30,404,800 $349676,100 $35,980,800 D-15 OPERATING s • m SL%lMARY OF SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES 2003-04 2004.05 Police hwedion ® Mardi Gras Weekend 133,000 374,000 Trahs:.ba�t Parking ® 919 Palm Street Garage Operations 45,600 General'Governmetit BurU*Maintenance B 919 Palm Street Office Operations 26,700 1 - I =" $1331,0001 FUnding Summary General Ftmd 133,000 400,700 Par ` Fund 45,600 Total $133y0001 $"6-vml D-16 OPERATING s • SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES MARDI GRAS WEEKEND Request Summary Increasing public safety service levels to support increased special event activity demands over the Mardi Gras weekend while maintaining public safety in the community cost the City an added $133,000 in 2003-04 for overtime, related benefits and contract services; and will cost an added $554,000 for overtime, related benefits and contract services in 2004-05. For 2003-04, there will be offsetting savings in other areas, which would otherwise have increased ending reserves and been available for other purposes. For 2004-05,we project that in- kind contributions from allied law enforcement agencies will total$180,000,resulting in net costs of$374,000. Key Objectives 1. Provide appropriate public safety service levels in the community 2. Support increased community special event activity demands,particularly Mardi Gras weekend 3. Provide information technology support for effective public safety operations Factors Driving the Request for Change The increased number of attendees and the resulting environment and activity during during Mardi Gras weekend requires an increase in public safety resources to provide: 1. Increased event public safety planning and management 2. Traffic and pedestrian safety and crowd management 3. Law enforcement 4. Public safety in the community 5. Information technology support to meet increased public safety activity operational needs Police Special Event Overtime Costs. Actual Police Department overtime costs for special events have increased annually over the past six years, with the exception of one year when the Mardi Gras parade was cancelled. Although the Mardi Gras parade was moved from a nighttime parade to a daytime parade in 2002,the parade time change did not significantly decrease associated public safety costs-in fact actual costs continue to increase to provide public safety for special events and particularly for the weekend of Mardi Gras. The majority of special event public safety planning and management is performed by police management personnel whom are exempt from overtime, as such, the overtime costs below reflect actual police staffing for special events including pre- event briefings. Projected Patrol Services overtime costs including benefits for 2004-05 are less then the actual costs in 2003-04 because the 2003-04 amount includes approximately $30,000 of special event activity for added enforcements reimbursed under the Alcoholic Beverage Control grant which were not directly associated with community special events. Police Overtime& Actual 2003-04 2004-05 Benefits Special Events 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 °2001-02 2002-03 Buoget StActual Budget Projected Administration 593 568 ' 270 0 1,312 0 0 0 0 Patrol Services _ 23,706 32,807 69,251 32--.'l-1'3 *'5--4'-,-3-3--0-_ 41,500 87,066 42,700 62.900 Investigations 4,399 2,904 4,547 1,806 3,240 4,300 1504 4,400 4,400 Support Services _ 337 _ 658 1,739 2,576 3,146 900 1,743 1,000 3,200 ._I_ -_2,-5.7. - ._ . ._.._ _ Traffic Safe 0 0 0 21,223 8,878 0 11,653 0 13,500 Total $29,035 $36,937 $75,807 $57,718 $70,906 $46,7001 $101,966 $48,100 $84,000 -No Mardi Gras Parade in 2002 -•2003-04 Expendiaues through April 30,2004 D-17 OPERATING e , m SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES Special event overtime costs for 2003-04 are projected to be absorbed in the current Police Department budget,. due to staffing vacancies and resulting salary savings and because the Police Department has conducted fewer major investigations this year than in past years. The largest wave of police Polloe retirements resulting in staffing vacancies ede Event° ' has passed and consequently the same level $i2o,000 of salary savings is not projected for 2004 $100,000 05. $80,000 Additionally, in 2003-04 the special events overtime expenses are projected to be X0'00° absorbed in the current budget because s40.000 $22,000 of Mardi Gras weekend overtime will be reimbursed under the Alcoholic $20.000 - Beverage Control(ABC)grant. The current f I ABC grant expires June 30, 2004. Had a $0 Y. 1998-09 1 2000-01 120DI-02 2=-03 —=034Xportion of this grant not been expended on Mardi Gras weekend, then this funding •N0 Mardl gyres Parade In 2002 "2003-04 Expenditures throughWI 30,2004 would have been available to address other alcohol related issues in the community over a period of time greater than one weekend event. Staff has submitted a proposal for an ABC grant in 2004- 05 00405 through a competitive grant process competing with 85 other law enforcement agencies in the state. Should San Luis Obispo be awarded an ABC grant in 2004-05, the funding would be intended to address issues associated with on-sale and off-sale alcohol establishments. In summary, staffing vacancies and salary savings;fewer major investigations,and ABC grant reimbursements for special events are not projected in 200405. Consequently, an increase in special events overtime is requested in 200405 to meet projected staffing costs. Police Contract Services Costs. The City contracts with the San Luis Obispo County Sheriffs Department for Booking Teams to process and transport the large number of arrestees to jail during the Mardi Gras weekend. Under normal police operations, SLOPD officers would individually transport their arrestee to the County Jail; this results in SLOPD officers leaving the City jurisdiction for a period of time. Contracting for this service results in our officers remaining in our community to provide patrol services throughout the community special event while the Sheriff s Correctional Officers transport our arrestees to the County Jail for processing. The costs for the Booking Teams have increased because additional Correctional Officer hours were needed to support the higher arrest activity than projected(an increase of$8,100 is projected for 2004-05). Mardi Gras Weekend Allied Agency Police Officer Staffing Friday Saturday Sunday Tuesday Total Total Number of Contract Police Officers 250 250 125 125 Total.Number of Contract Officer Hours 10-hr shifts 2,500 2,500 1,250 1,250 7,500 Total Cost for Contract Police Staffing at$60/hr $150,000 $150,000 $75,000 $75,000 $45%000 Projected Number of In-Kind Police Officers 100 100 50 50 Projected Number of In-Kind Officer Hours 11000 1,000 500 500 3,000 Projected Offsetting Costs Savings ($60,000) ($60,000) ($30,000) ($30,000) ($180,000) Net Contract Officer Operating Costs $90,000 $90,0001 $45,0001 $45,000 $270,000 D-18 OPERATING PROGRAMS SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES This past year the City contracted with Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department for horse Mounted Patrols to increase effectiveness of patrols within large gatherings of people. This service proved to be effective and will be included,at an increased level,in future large special events(an increase of$12,000 for 2004-05). Additionally, this past year Mardi Gras weekend included a riot on Saturday night which required the need for a Mutual.Aid response from several allied law enforcement agencies. Due to this experience, the City must prepare to include added contract police officers in.the special event planning to meet the public safety demands in our community during the Mardi Gras weekend and Fat Tuesday. Contract police officer staffing needs and costs for the weekend of Mardi Gras are outlined in the table below. Although discussions with some allied law enforcement agencies regarding in-kind contributions are pending, staff projects in-kind police officer staffing as noted above based on initial conversations. It is important to recognize that the outcome for state and local budgets for 2004-05 are pending and these budget results can have an impact on state and local agency in-kind contributions. If the projected off-setting cost savings for in-kind police officer staffing changes,then the City would need to fund the appropriate level of police staffing to provide for community public safety. An effective communication component for ending Mardi Gras weekend will require media advertising to deliver the appropriate message to the public($10,000 for 2004-05). To summarize,police contract service increases are outlined in the table below. 2007-03 2003-04 2004-05 Contract Services Budget Actual Budget Estimated Budget Projected Booking Teams 0 6,037 9,720 12,100 9,900 18,000 Mounted Patrols 0 0 0 5,000 0 12,000 Police Officers* 0 0 0 0 0 270,000 JAdvertising 0 0 0 1,300 0 10,000 Total 1 $0 $6,0371 $9,720 $18,4001 $9,9001 $310,000 •Na after projected m4and staffing contributions Police Information Technology Support Costs. Information technology support needs in such circumstances have increased triggered primarily by Mardi Gras, because: (1)Technology integrated into the delivery of public safety services has increased, improving service capabilities and effectiveness; and (2) Police information technology support was previously provided by the former Public Safety Information Systems Coordinator position whom was exempt from overtime. With the elimination of that position information technology support is provided at an improved level by information technology technicians resulting in special event overtime costs for the Information Technology division. Cellular phone rental to provide inter-agency operability are a necessary communication component for effective multi-agency deployment and coordination. The actual costs paid this past.year were 50% of estimated costs due to a.significant vendor discount to compensate for a contract error. Cellular phone rental costs will be$5,000 in 2004-05. D-19 OPERATING o . SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES 200344 2004-05 Information Technol2gy Budget Actual Budget ..Projected IT Staffing Overtime & Benefits 0 4,452 0 5,400 Cellular Phone Rental . 0 2,500 0 5,000 Network Connectivity 0 0 0 4,100 Electrical Power Supply _.__..___ _ ____.__ 0 0 0 9,800 Construction Manager 0 0 0 2,200 Total 1 $0 $6,952 $0 $26,500 The Police Department facility is too small to effectively host and staff an incident command center(also known. as a Department Operating Center or DOC) during large scale, pre-planned, special events such as Mardi Gras. The Police Department, in coordination with the Parks and Recreation and Information Technology departments, has begun utilizing the Ludwick Community Center as the Police Department DOC for such events, and the center has proven an excellent facility to meet our unique police operational needs. For the Ludwick Community Center to be fully utilized as a police DOC for large scale, pre-planned events, it will require additional cabling and data drops for computer system network connectivity. Technology support needs at the Ludwick Center will require additional electrical wiring and outlets to provide adequate power supplies insuring safe technology and equipment operability. These facility upgrades are one time costs. Police information technology supports cost increases are summarized in the following table. Police Other Operating Support Costs. Meals for the increased police staff will require approximately $4,000 to fund food and water. In the event of a large-scale disturbance or riot, it will be necessary to deploy non-lethal crowd dispersal munitions, such as pepper balls. Consequently, we will need to have an adequate supply of inventory on hand at a cost of$7,500. Other operating.costs are planned in the Police Department budget. Alternatives Reasonable alternatives include: 1. Continue the status quo. Continuing the status quo is not a reasonable alternative. If we do nothing at this time to respond to the increased public safety demands during Mardi Gras the consequences could include critical public safety risks to the community. 2. Defer or re phase the request Though the increase in public safety resources cannot be deferred without significant risks, the funding to support the increased resources could be considered for deferment to year- end. However, particularly during tight budget times deferring funding for significant projected costs is not recommended. The projections for offsetting in-kind contributions of officer staffing could change,based on a number of budget outcomes,and could consequently result in a second phase funding request. Operating Program Police Patrol Services Cost Summary Net costs for Mardi Gras staffing and contract service increases will be $133,000 in 2003-04 and $374,000 in 2004-05. Placed in perspective, this is about 3.4% of total Police Department costs. The City's net costs for contract police officers may change after pending discussions with allied law enforcement agencies regarding in- D-20 OPERATING PROGRAMS SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES kind contributions, and staff may have to return to Council for added funding if in-kind staffing is not available as projected. The chart below summarizes all net added costs, as discussed in this request: Line Item Desaiption 7 Account No.1 2003-04 2004-N Staffing 121800 411300 Patrol Special Events OT/Benefits 80200-7024 117,400 20,200 Support Services Special Events OT/Benefits 80400-7024 2,200 Traffic Safety Special Events OT/Benefits 80600-7024 13,500 Information TechnolM OT/Benefits 25300-7024 4,400 5,400 Contract Services 11,200 501.200 Booking Teams 80100-7227 2,400 8,100 Mounted Patrols 80200-7227 5,000 12,000 Allied Agency Police Officers 80200-7227 450,000 Media Advertising 80500.7227 1,300 10,000 Cellular Phone Rental 25300-7227 2,500 5,000 Ludwick Network Connectivity 25300-7227 4,100 Ludwick Electrical Power Supplies 25300-7227 9,800 Construction Managernent 1 25300-7227 1 2,200 Other Operating Expendiures 0 11 r500 Meals and Water for Personnel 80200-7843 4,000 Non-Lethal Pepper Balls 80200-7843 7,500 Total Opemting Costs 133,000 554 ttin In-Kind Sta&g 80200-7227180,000 Net Costs 133 000 374 D-21 ee 'PROGRAMS SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES 919 PALM STREET GARAGE OPERATIONS 77 Request Summary Operating the public parking portion of the new 919 Palm Street Garage will cost$45,600 in 2004-05 and $136,800 each year starting in 2005-06. Key Objective Provide public parking for the Court Street development project. Factors Driving the Request for Change The new 919 Paha Street Garage is scheduled to begin operations in March 2005 with the attendant booth staffed for 11-1/2 hours per day on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays and for 15-1/4 hours per day on Thursdays, Fridays, and Saturdays. Required contract services will include parking controls maintenance, deck sweeping and scrubbing, security guard patrol, janitorial maintenance, elevator maintenance, printing, alarm monitoring, and uniform laundering. Full utilities services will also required. The need for these staffing and services costs was anticipated two years ago in the original CIP project request for the garage. This request appears on pages E-7 through E-13 of the 2001-03 Financial Plan Supplement and Approved 2002-03 Budget. 1 TaskIm tion a Negotiate terms with existing contractors for expansion of services November 2004 Draft and submit required amendments to existing agreements December 2004 Execute amendments January 2005 Begin contract services at the new garage March 2005 Submit personal requisitions for new parking attendants December 2004 Advertise for parking attendant positions January 2005 Hire parking attendants and begin February 2005 Operating Program Parking D-22 OPERATING PROGRAMS SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES Cost Summary Line tem n Account Na 2004-03 Staffing I LUL Salaries-Temporary 510.50600.7014 13,700 Medicare 51050600.7044 200 Unemployment 51050600.7046 100 Workers ComD Insurance 510.50600.7048 1.000 Contract Services 510.50600.7227 23,300 Laundry and Linen Service Contracts 510.50600.7259 1,100 Primong 1510.50600.7283 2,000 Qtkr Opemtua Expenditures 4.2M City Water Service 510.50600.7603 300 City Sewer Service 51050600.7604 100 Electric Utility Service 510.50600.7605 3,600 Telephone Services 510.50600.7617 100 -T-ras-h Service -510.50600.7621 100 Total Owniting Co.* 1 45.6001 D-23 -OPERATING • • • • • SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES 919 PALM STREET OFFICE OPERATIONS .o-•4 �.. ... �a?..5— f ai � c9' k 6i. � a _.a 3 4 P. ..0 i Request Summary Operating the offices and the below-grade parking level in the new 919 Palm Street.Building will cost$26,700 in 2004-05 and$80,100 each year starting in 2005-06. Key Objective 1. Provide office space for City Hall operations over the next 20 years. 2. Consolidate development review activities at one location. 3. Reunite the inspectors with the engineers in the CIP Project Engineering Program 4. Provide flexibility to sell the 955 Morro Street property at some time in the future to facilitate development of the Chinatown project. Factors Driving the Request for Change The offices in the 919 Palm Street Building are scheduled for occupancy. Required contract services for the offices include janitorial maintenance, HVAC maintenance, fine extinguisher service, fire alarm panel service, and alarm monitoring. Required contract services for the below grade parking level include deck sweeping and scrubbing, security guard patrol, janitorial maintenance, elevator maintenance, and alarm monitoring. Full utilities services are also required. The need for these staffing and services costs was anticipated two years ago in the original CIP project request for the garage. This request appears on pages E-7 through E-13 of the 2001-03 Financial Plan Supplement and Approved 2002-03 Budget. Implementation Negotiate terms with existing contractors for expansion of services November 2004 Draft and submit required amendments to existing agreements December 2004 Execute amendments January 2005 Begin contract services at the new garage March 2005 Operating Program Building Maintenance D-24 , OPERATING m ePROGRAMS SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES Cost Summary Account No.1 2004-0 Lim Item Descrinfim - 1100.50230.72Z7- Con= 11 100.50230.7603 1,200 City Wates Service 100.50230.7604 1,200 City Sewer,Service Electric Utility Service 100.50230.7605 10,700 Telephone Services 100.50230.7617 300 .Trash 00.50230.7621 1400 T 700 Note: Offsetting savings available after vacating 955 Morro Street have been applied to these cost calculations, as shown in the following table: Annual Costs-- 919 Patin 955 Morro Net Janitorial Service 50,900 14,800 31,600 Other Contract Services 6,300 2;200 4,100 Waux 5,700 2,100 3,600 Sewer 5,300 1,700 3,600 Electricity 49,200 17,100 32,100 Telephone 1,400 500 900 Trash Service 6,400 1 2,200 4,200 Total_ $80100 D-25 Section E CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN At �[..1•FM1 M� Y �J�J. l .: i .' r CAPITAL e B PLAN OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION S. Listing of all CIP projects by finding source. 6. Project description summaries. All of the City's construction projects and equipment purchases costing $15,000 or more are included ip APPENDIX B:CIP PROJECTS the Capital Improvement Plan. (Minor capital outlays costing less than $15,000 are included with the operating program budgets.) 2003-07 CIP Project DehdL Additionally, Appendix B to the 2003-05 Financial Plan (Capital Through the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), the Improvement Plan: 2003-07) includes detailed City systematically plans, schedules and finances information about the CIP preparation and review capital projects to ensure cost-effectiveness and process,and provides comprehensive descriptions of conformance with established polices. each CIP project,including: Comprehensive policies governing the development and management of the CIP are set forth in the ® Project summary Policies and Objectives section of the Financial Plan ■ Project objectives (capital improvement management; capital financing ® Existing situation and debt management). ■ Goal and policy links ® Project work completed. The CIP is a four year plan organized into the same ■ Environmental review six functional groupings used for the operating ■ Other special review considerations programs: ■ Project phasing,costs and finding sources ■ Department coordinator 1. Public Safety ■ Alternatives 2. Public Utilities ® Project effect on the operating budget 3. Transportation ■ Location map/schematic design 4. Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 5. Community Development FINANCIAL PLAN SUPPLEMENT 6. General Governments-` w '� ORGANIZATION The following schedules have been included in this 1. 7-7. 7, % document as a supplement to the 2003-05 Financial Plan CIP: The CIP section of the original 2003-05 Financial Plan is composed of six parts: L. Summary of CIP Expenditures by function 2. Summary of CIP expenditures by finding source 1. Overview introducing the CIP and describing 3. Summary of CIP changes project types,phases and financing. 4. Status of major CIP projects 2. Summary of CIP expenditures by function and operation. 3. Summary of CIP expenditures by funding source. 4. Listing of all CIP projects by function providing the project title, phase (study, environmental review, design, real property acquisitions, site preparation, construction, construction management and equipment acquisitions), project cost and schedule. E-1 CAPITAL v v ® v SUMMARY OF CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 BUDGETED BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED PUBLIC SAFETY Police Protection 1,263,300 935,000 4,162,800 405,000 Fine&Environmental Safety 538,200 Total Public S4fety 1,801,500 935,000 4,162,800 405,000 PUBLIC UTILITIES Water Services 19,837,400 11,065,000 2,718,100 2,014,000 Wastewater Services 5,603,100 8,682,300 3,612,000 1,477,400 Whale Rock Reservoir 425,800 90,000 90,500 Total Public Utflies 25,866,300 19,837,300 5,820,600 3,491,400 TRANSPORTATION Streets 13,883500 3,567,800 5,514,000 12,977,300 Creek&Flood Protection 263,900 50,000 70,000 35,000 Pedestrian&Bicycle Paths 1,478,400 1,003,560 2,060,000 2,400,000 Parking 18;518,600 1,222,000 2,600,000 16,000,000 Transit 928,700 337,000 487,000 387,000 Total Transportation 3S,073,100 6,180,300 10,731,000 31,799,300 LEISURE,CULTURAL AND SOCIAL SERVICES Parks&Recreation 5,782,300 532,800 80,100 126,000 Social Services 305,600 141,800 Cultural Services 830,200 23,600- 85,200_- 44,400 Total Leisure, Cultural& - Social Services 60918,100 698,200 16S,300 170,400 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Natural Resource Protection 4,158,300 2,330,000 450,000 400,000 Economic Development 89,200 Construction Regulation 142,600 16,000_ Total Community Development 4,390,100 2,330,000 466,000 400,000 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Information Technology 967,500 963,800 1,712,800 1,225,000 Geographic Information Services 54,200 Buildings 101,100 Fleet Maintenance 7,400 Completed projects 162,000 Total General Government 1,292,200 963,800 1,712,800 1,22S,000 TOTAL $75,341,300 $304944,600 $23,058,500 $37,491400 E-2 CAPITAL. e o . PLAN SUNIIVIARY OF CIP EXPENMURES BY FUNDING SOURCE 2003-04 2004-OS 2005-06 2006-07 BUDGETED BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND General Fuad '11,629,200 1,744,800 7,529,100 3,242,200 Debt Financing 5,900,800 1,818,800 160,000 200,000 Federal&State Grants 8,080,600 2,213,000 2,806,300 9,685,200 Total Cgwd Ouday Fund 25,610,600 5,776,600 10,495,400 13,127,400 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBG)FUND Federal Grants 8731,200 235,300 80,000 809000 LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANTS FUND Fedvnl&State Grants 305AN PARKLAND DEVELOPMENT FUND Park In-lieu Fees 1,288,500 193,800 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FUND Transportation Impact Fees 29861,700 1,115,000 2,426,800 3,4729700 OPEN SPACE PROTECTION FUND General Fund 500,600 .100,000 200,000 200,000 Grants _ 3,525,000 2,030,000 250,000 200,000 Total 4,025,600 2,130,000 450,000 400,000 FLEET REPLACEMENT FUND General Fund 427,400 84,000 192,000 205,000 ENTERPRISE AND AGENCY FUNDS Water Fund 19,921,300 11,669,500 2,889,400 2,136,500 Sewer Fund 5,198,900 8,686,800 3,183,300 1,599,900 Parldng Fund 13,070,400 1,224,300 2,682,800 16,045,300 Transit Fund 928,900 339,300 568,300 424;300 Golf Fund 67,000 Whale Rock Fund 762,200 90,000 90,500 Total Enterprise and Agency Funds 39,948,700 21,409,900 99414,300 20,2069000 TOTAL $75,341,300 $30,944,600 $23,058,500 $379491,100 E-3 CAPITAL • • • PLAN SUNIIvIARY OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CHANGES 2004.05 -Pwilic Utilities Water Fund ® Water Treatment Master Plan Implementation 3,825,300 Sewer Frond E Tank Farm Gravity Sewer and Lift Station 1,295,000 Signal&Light Maintenance ■ Higuera-Margarita Traffic Signal Reimbursement 41,000 Street B Marsh Street Bridge Repair 80,000 Parking ■ Parking Fleet Replacements:Enforcement Scooters 52,000 �3 General Fund 16,000 Grant Funding-HBRR 64,000 Transportation Impact Fee Fund 41,000 Water Fund 3,825.300 Sewer Fund 1,295,000 Farling Fund 52,000 Total ,293,300 E-4 CAPITAL ° m ° PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS TREATMENT MASTER PLAN DdPLEMENTATION CIP Project Summary Implementing projects at the Water Treatment Plant as identified in the Water Facilities Master Plan, in order to maintain water treatment quality and reliability, will cost an additional $235,000 in 2004-05 for design, and an additional $3,590,300 in 2004-05 for construction and construction management. Total cost estimate for construction and construction management is$7,800,000. Project Objectives 1. Construct a second clearwell to provide needed flexibility in treated water storage, and replace the existing clearwell which has reached the end of its service life. 2. Construct a new plant water supply line to allow the plant to be served from Reservoir #2, eliminating the need for pumps to serve domestic and related water plant uses. 3. Replace existing transfer pump station located about 1/s mile from water plant site with new transfer pump station at water treatment plant to improve efficiency,reliability and security of facilities. 4. Retrofit existing steel wash water tank to meet current seismic design standards to insure reliable operation following an earthquake event. 5. Add additional sedimentation facilities to increase the sedimentation capacity from 8 mgd to the full plant rated capacity of 16 mgd. 6. Construct additional plant improvements which include new fluoride feed system, new HVAC systems, new plant control system,etc.to insure efficient and reliable operation of the water treatment plant facility. Revised CIP Request The City's Water Master Plan was completed in October 2000 and identified improvements necessary to meet full build-out of the City as identified in the General Plan. The Master Plan identified several improvements at the water treatment plant which included an additional treated water storage tank, seismic upgrade of existing tanks, replacement of existing pumps and several other-minor projects. During development of the Preliminary Design Report for the project,a number of other improvements were identified by staff for inclusion in the project(see#6 above). These area were not identified in the "higher level" review undertaken during the Water Master Plan. development. In addition, as discussed below, the Master Plan identified a need for an additional sedimentation basin which was not included in the initial CIP request for this project. Funding has been included in this revised CIP request for an increase in the sedimentation process as well as other needed improvements/upgrades identified above. The project is anticipated to be debt financed. Existing Situation The existing Water Treatment Plant was originally constructed in the early 1960's. In the early 1990's, the City completed substantial improvements at the plant to meet more stringent water quality requirements mandated by the federal government. In addition, the plant capacity was increased from 11.5 mgd to 16.0 mgd following the plant upgrade. The additional capacity assumes that 8 mgd is delivered from Whale Rock Reservoir and bypasses the existing sedimentation basin. The rated capacity of the sedimentation basin is 8 mgd. Treatment of water from other than Whale Rock Reservoir, will require additional sedimentation capacity. In addition, utilization of the sedimentation process for Whale Rock water supplies, enhances the treatment process and improves plant filter efficiencies. E-5 CAPITAL s m PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS The water treatment plant currently has one 4-million gallon treated water storage tank on-site. The tank was scheduled to be recoated dining the upgrade project at the Water Treatment Plant, but due to system constraints and complications,the recoating was deleted from the contract. The Water System Master Plan recommended an additional treated water storage facility (clearwell) on-site to provide enhanced operations and reliability.. The preliminary recommendation was for an additional 4.0 mg tank. The Preliminary Design Report prepared by Black and Veatch reevaluated the appropriate onsite storage needs as well as performed a seismic evaluation of the existing clearwell. Based on the evaluation of the existing tank and the cost for seismic retrofit of the tank, it was determined that the existing clearwell should be demolished and a new replacement clearwell constructed The study recommended two onsite storage tanks with a combined capacity of 5.0 mgd. This will provide the necessary storage for operation flexibility and provide the ability to take one tank out of service for maintenance or repairs. The Preliminary Design Report also recommended the following improvements at the water treatment plant to insure reliable,high quality water service to our customers: 1. Seismic retrofit of the older wash water tank to insure operation following an earthquake event. 2. Construct a new transfer pump station onsite to replace the old transfer pump station located%mile.from pest. 3. Replace existing fluoride feed system to minimize maintenance problems and increase system reliability. 4. Replace/upgrade existing computer monitoring and control system to insure reliability. 5. Install HVAC and ventilation systems at various locations for buildings and equipment to provide improved environment for operations staff and minimize equipment failures due to overheating. 6. Upgrade existing wash water structure to eliminate hydraulic limitations which impact plant operations. 7. Construct a new plant water supply line to allow the plant to be served from Reservoir#2, eliminating the need for pumps to serve domestic and fire protection uses. Goal and Policy Links 1. Urban Water Management Plan,Section 4.1 2. Draft Airport Area Specific Plan,Section 8.3 3. Water System Master Plan,October 2000, Chapter 3 4. 2001-03 Financial Plan,Appendix B—Capital Improvement Plan,Page 110 5. Water Treatment Plant Preliminary Design Report,October 2003 Project Work Completed 1. Water System Master Plan 2. Water Treatment Plant Preliminary Design Report 3. Water Treatment Plant Ballasted Flocculation Evaluation E-6 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT n • • PROJECT DESCR=ONS Environmental Review The consultant contract includes the preparation of the initial environmental assessment for the project. All required environmental study and documentation will be included with the project in accordance with CEQA requirements. The Community Development Department will review the environmental documentation to ensure compliance with CEQA. Other Special Review Considerations 1. These projects must comply with the requirements of other regulating agencies. 2. Construction of the projects must not interfere with the City's water treatment operations. Project Phasing and Funding Sources Pro'ed Costs bv Type Project Costs To-Date 2004-05 2005-06 2W"7 2007-68 Total Study ads 200 247,200 Design&Environ.Review 1,017,400 235,000 1,252,400 Original Constriction Budget 4,000,000 4,000,000 Additional Construction Budget 3,100,000 3,100,000 Original Construction Management 209,700 209,700 Additional Construction Management 1 490,3001 1 490,300 Total 1,264,600 1 81035,000 9,299,600 The projects identified in this request are 29.4%attributable to new development. Project Funding Source: Water Fund. The project will be debt financed. Department Coordinator and Project Review/Support Department Coordinator. Gary W.Henderson,Water Division Manager Project Review and Support: The Community Development Department will review and comment on the environmental documentation to insure compliance with all requirements. The Community Development Department will also review the treatment plant improvement plans. The Public Works Engineering division will review the plans and specifications, bid the project, and assist with construction management during construction. Ron Whisenand has reviewed this request on behalf of Community Development, and Barbara Lynch has reviewed this request on behalf of Public Works. Alternatives I. Deny the Project, Denial of these projects may result in limitations in water treatment capabilities to meet existing and future customer demands. In addition, the improvements to water storage facilities will enhance operational abilities at the plant and provide additional storage in the event of an emergency. 2. Defer or Re-phase the Request. Delaying the request will extend the time it takes to implement the improvements necessary to insure reliable water treatment facilities to meet the community's water needs. E-7 CAPITAL s s e PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Operating Program Water Treatment Project Effect on the Operating Budget 1. Requesting Depwonent. Approximately 200 hours of Utilities staff time will be required for consultant oversight,coordination,plan review,meetings,etc. 2. Projed Support. Approximately 48 hours of Community Development Department staff time will be required for review of the environmental documentation and project review. Approximately 20 hours of Engineering Division staff time will be required to review plans and specifications. In addition, approximately 250 hours of Engineering Division staff time will be required during construction for inspection services and contract management, which assumes a portion of the construction management will be provided by an outside consultant. E-8 CAPITAL ■ e PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS TANK FARM GRAVITY SEWER AND LIFT STATION CIP Project Summary Implementing the Collections component of the Wastewater Master Plan, in order to correct existing deficiencies and provide adequate infiastructm for areas of town having development potential, will cost approximately $7,200,000 in 2004-05 for construction of the Tank Farm Lift Station Project. This is an increase of$1,295,000 to the prior project design and construct estimate of$6,500,000. Total project costs, including design, are now estimated at$7,795,000. Background The Tank Farm Road gravity sewer and regional lift station have been envisioned for more than 25 years. The new facilities are essential to providing wastewater collection service to the Margarita and Airport Annexation Areas. The new sewer and regional lift station will allow the retirement of the existing Airport Lift Station,Tank Farm Lift Station,and the Rockview Lift Station. The Tank Farm and Rockview lift stations are at capacity and have reached the end of their serviceable life. After completion of the project, the wastewater will not be pumped as far, increasing the overall energy efficiency of the project. The new facilities will also have adequate capacity to support build-out of the Margarita and Airport Specific Plan areas. However, it is estimated that 32.5% of the project relates to the need to increase efficiency and replace aging infrastructure for existing customers in the Tank Farm/Broad Street area of the City. Project Objectives 1. Replace aging and deteriorated infrastructure. 2. Address existing deficiencies in the wastewater collection system 3. Provide infrastructure needed to serve new development planned within the Urban Reserve Line. Revised CIP Request The City's Wastewater Master Plan was completed in October 2000 and identified improvements necessary to meet the full build-out of the City as identified in the General Plan. The Master Plan described and identified the most desirable alignment and design for a new gravity line,lift station and force main to replace the City's aging, problematic and over capacity TankFarm, Rockview and Airport Lift Stations. Much of the information for the Master Plan, including of costs for this recommended project, had been developed a year earlier and was not an in-depth analysis. During development of the preliminary design letter for this project many costs had changed,a much more detailed scope of work was developed and the project received a thorough cost estimation analysis. This assessment has resulted in the revised,and more accurate,cost estimate for construction of the project. This project is anticipated to be debt financed. Existing Situation Currently, public wastewater collection facilities do not exist to serve the Airport and Margarita areas. Since small annexations have been occurring at the edge of the City, trunk facilities have not yet been provided to serve the overall area. Certain existing facilities are at capacity, aging, and inefficient. These facilities are currently in need of either- upgrade or replacement. The draft Wastewater Master Plan includes recommendations for improvements to these deficiencies. The plan also makes recommendations for improvements to areas within the existing City limits. The 2003-05 Financial Plan allocated funding for the design and construction of this project. Council approved the design contract with Brown and Caldwell Engineers for$595,000 in September of 2003 and the project is expected to begin construction in the 2004-05 fiscal year. The increase in construction costs is due E-9 CAPITAL ■ • OPLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS to the preliminary cots estimate in 1999 for the Wastewater Master Plan. The revised costs of 7,795,000 provides a costs that better reflects the scope of the project. Goal and Policy Links 1. Approved 2001-03 Financial Plan,Appendix B—Capital Improvement Plan,Page 136 2. Wastewater Element of the General Plan, Section 12 3. Airport Area Specific Plan,Section 8.4 4. Wastewater Master Plan,Chapter 6 Project Work Completed 1. Wastewater Master Plan 2. Design agreement with Brown and Caldwell Engineers was approved in September 2003. 3. Design Letter Report with construction cost estimate completed in March 2004. 4. Some preliminary pipeline design. 5. Agreement with right of way agent to secure property and easements was approved in March.2004 and negotiations with property owners are proceeding. 6. Some environmental work performed with review of Margarita/Airport Area-Specific Plan. Environmental Review Thorough environmental analysis will be necessary along the gravity sewer alignment and for the lift station. Archaeological assessment and investigation of possible soil contamination may also be needed. Other Special Review Considerations 1. Construction of this project must occur in such a way as to prevent interference with the City's ability to provide wastewater collection service to its customers. 2. Caltrans plans to repave Highway 227 (Broad Street)between Fuller Road and South Street sometime around 2004-05. The Tank Farm Lift Station and Sewer Improvements project should be constructed prior to the repaving project and should be coordinated with Caltrans throughout the design process. 3. The project will also require coordination with SLO County,who has plans to repave Tank Farm Road. Project Phasing and Funding Sources The total project costs are now estimated at$7,795,000,an increase of$1,295,000 from the 2003-05 Financial Plan that identified$500,000 for the design and$6,000,000 for construction,(total of$6,500,000). An addition of $95,000 was transferred from construction to fund the design contract was approved earlier this year,reducing the available construction budget to$5,905,000. The table below shows the revised design contract amount of $595,000 and an increase of$1,295,000 to the construction costs to reflect the design agreement with Brown and Caldwell and their cost estimate in the preliminary design letter. E-10 CAPITAL m . PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Pro ed Costs e Project Costs To-Date 2004-05 2005-66 2006-W Total Original Budget 5009000 61000,000 6400,000 Approved Change Revised Design(transfer from Construction) 595,000 5,905,000 6,500,000 Requested Change Increase to Construction 1,295,000 1,295,000 Revised Project Budget Tank Farm Lift Station 5959000 7,=9000 7,795,000 The Wastewater Facilities Master Plan indicates that 67.5%of the cost of this project is attributable to new development. Project Funding Source: Debt Financing, Sewer Fund Department Coordinator and Project Review/Support Department Coordinator. Dave Hix,Wastewater Division Manager Project Review and Support: The Community Development Department will review the environmental documentation for compliance with CEQA.. Public Works Engineering will provide review of the project plans and specifications, bidding, and contract management More involvement may be necessary if Public Works provides engineering design services on the gravity sewer or any other portion of the project. Barbara Lynch has reviewed this request on behalf of Public Works and Ron Whisenand has reviewed this request on behalf of Community Development. Alternatives 1. Deny the Project Without successful completion of this project, there will not be adequate infrastructure to support annexation of the Margarita and Airport.Annexation Areas. In addition,two of the three lift stations that would otherwise be retired by this project would need substantial improvement to increase capacity and replace aging equipment.. 2. Defer or Re phase the Request Deferral or rephrasing of the project is not recommended, as it could affect the timing of the Margarita,Orcutt,and.Airport Annexations. Also,deferral of the project would result in the need to keep the existing Tank Fane and Rockview Lift Stations in service, though they are operating at capacity and have reached the end of their serviceable life. Operating Program: Wastewater Collection Project Effect on the Operating Budget 1. Utilities staff will work with the consultant to ensure facilities are properly designed. Public Works staff will bid the project and provide construction and contract management services. Requesting Department Wastewater Division Manager and Utilities Engineer, 40 hours for project approvals,design assistance,and plan review. E-11 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN p x•' CAPITAL m m . PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS MARSH STREET BRIDGEMEPAIR CIP Project SuIrumary Reconstructing one of the upstream wing walls for the Marsh Street Bridge over San Luis Obispo Creek to prevent catastrophic damage will cost$5,000 for design and$72,000 for construction in 2004-05. Project Objectives 1. Prevent further deterioration to the Marsh Street Bridge 2. Prevent the collapse and closing of Marsh Street between Santa Rosa and Osos Eiristing Situation The Marsh Street Bridge over San.Luis Obispo Creek is located under Marsh Street between Santa Rosa and Osos. It was built in 1909 and is in satisfactory condition overall. In Winter 2004 CIP Project Engineering staff observed that a portion of the bridge railing had shifted outward over the creek. Further investigation showed that one of the upstream wing walls, which are concrete extensions of the bridge abutments that serve as retaining walls, had cracked through horizontally. This situation has allowed the lower portion of this wing wall to shift outward,dragging the bridge railing along with it. So far the wing wall has shifted about 100 millimeters(four inches), and the bridge railing above it has moved about 25 millimeters (one inch). Unless corrected, this movement will continue until the bridge fails and collapses into the creek. The rest of the bridge is in satisfactory condition overall. This project will either 1) remove the cracked wing wall and replace it with a new structure or 2) stabilize and strengthen the existing structure. The tentative schedule is to start design in Fall 2004, advertise for construction contract bids in Winter 2005,and start construction in Spring 2005. Goal and Policy Links Transportation Planning and Engineering goal. safe and well-maintained streets Project Work Completed Other than examination of the damage and preparation of preliminary cost estimates, no work has been completed. At the time this project request was prepared, Caltrans structural engineers were scheduled to inspect the bridge in late April 2004 and then recommend a conceptual design solution. Environmental Review This project will probably require a mitigated negative declaration from the City. Other Special Review Considerations Review will probably be required by the State Department of Fish and Game. Review by other regulatory agencies,such as the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, will probably not be required. E-13 CAPITALIMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Project Phasing and Funding Sources Pro'ed Costs.by Ave Project Costa To-Dam 2003-04 2004-05 W-66 2006-07 Total Design 81000 8,000 Construction 72,000 72,000 Total 80,000 801000 Project Funding by Source General Fund Project Revenues T6-Date _ 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07. Total C'ieneral Find 16,000 16,000 HBRR Grant 64,000 64,000 Total 80 000 80000 Department Coordinator and Project Review/Support Department Coordinator Barbara Lynch Project Review and Support Project Management—CIP Project Engineering Environmental Review—Long Range Planning Site Monitoring—Natural Resources Protection Alternatives 1. Deny or Defer the Project. As mentioned, if this problem is not corrected, eventually the bridge will be undermined and will collapse into the creek. Although it does not appear that the wing wall is in danger of imminent collapse, strong creek flows during heavy storms could quickly exacerbate the situation. Repair and replacement under emergency conditions would be extremely disruptive and expensive. 2. Change the Scope of the Project The anticipated scope of the project is to remove and replace the cracked wing wall. After review by Caltrans engineers, Public Works will evaluate various alternatives that may reduce the scope of the project and still result in a satisfactory solution. Operating Program General Street Maintenance Project Effect on the Operating Budget Requesting Department. 250 hours for project design. 120 hours for construction inspection. Project Support. 15 hours for environmental review. 160 hours for site monitoring. Future maintenance cost for this bridge will be reduced E-14 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Location Map/Schematic Design P -57 O O Q �o s Location Map `Q r Bridge Detail—Damage Location E-15 CAWAL IMPROVEMENTPLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS HIGUERA-MARGARITA TRAFFIC SIGNAL RE MURSEMENT CIP Project Summary Reimbursing Walter Brothers Construction Co. for a portion of the installation cost of the traffic signal at the intersection of South Iiiguera and Margarita to fulfill agreement obligations will cost$41,000 in 2004-05. Project Objectives Fulfill agreement 4-3-1985 approved by Resolution No. 5648(1985 series)of the City Council. Elisd Situation In the early 1980's, Walter Brothers Construction Company constructed offices at 3220 South I iguera. As a result of use permit conditions and two agreements between Walter Brothers and the City, Walter Brothers installed a traffic signal at the intersection of South Higuera and Margarita,even though minimum traffic warrants for such an installation had not been established. These agreements required the City to 1)determine the share of the installation cost to be paid by surrounding property owners 2)assess those surrounding property owners at the time of development and 3)reimburse Walter Brothers with the proceeds. The agreement also required the City to conduct periodic warrant analyses at this intersection to determine when traffic warrants were met. At that time, the City would be required to pay Walter Brothers for any remaining unreimbursed costs. At the request of Walter Brothers, in March 2004 Public Works conducted traffic counts and other warrant analyses to determine if minimum warrants could be established. Of the eleven warrants needed to justify installation of a traffic signal, only two were met. Nonetheless,Public Works realized a fundamental flaw in the original agreement condition: after the signal was installed, several of the problems measured by the warrants were corrected. Consequently, it is possible that needed warrants will never be met. This has created an unfair situation for Walter Brothers. Public Works is recommending that the City pay Walter Brothers now for the remaining unreimbursed costs so that the agreement obligations can be satisfied and the agreement can be closed. Goal and Policy Links 1. 1994 General Plan Circulation Element (Transportation Goals & Objective, Transportation Goals No. 3 & 6 and Strategy No. 7) 2. Resolution No. 5648(1985 series) 3. Approved mitigation measures for Use Permit U-0794A at 3220 South Higuera. Project Work Completer) As per Resolution No. 5648 (1985 series) of the City Council, all work related to this project was completed approximately 20 years ago- E-16 CAPITAL s e ® PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Environmental Review No environmental review required. Project Phasing and Funding Sources Pro ed Costs by Type Proed Costs To-Date 2003-04 1 2004-05 1 2005-06 2006-07 Total Construction 1 $41,0001 1 1 $41000 Total 1 $41,0001 1 1 $410011 Project Funding Source: TIF Fund $41,000 will be programmed into the general Plan Transportation Impact Fees to recover this cost. Department Coordinator and Project Review/Support Department Coordinator Timothy S.Bochum,Public Works Deputy Director Project Review and Support Not Applicable Alternatives Defer Reimbursement on the basis that the minimum vehicular volume warrant has not been met. If reimbursement were to be deferred warrant analysis would be conducted again after the Margarita Area has been developed. In the mean time Walter Brothers Construction Company could challenge the validity of the warrant analysis. Project Effect on the Operating Budget Signalization of the S. I3iguera and Margarita intersection has already been implemented,therefore existing staff resources and operating costs will not be affected. The existing annual operating costs for the S. Iiiguera & Margarita traffic signal are approximately$672 annually for electricity and$1,018 annually for ma;ntOnanre_ E-17 _CAPITAL • . PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS PARING FLEET REPLACEMENTS:ENFORCEMENT SCOOTERS s- CIP Project Summary Replacing two 1997 GO-4 Interceptor utility scooters with two new utility scooters in the Parking fleet will cosy. $52,000 in 2004-05. Project Objectives 3. Maintain fleet reliability 4. Keep maintenance costs reasonable 5. Improve employee productivity 6. Maintain safety for Parking Service Officers 7. Discourage scofflaws from violating parking ordinances 8. Implement Parking Management Plan requirements that"parking laws will be strictly enforced" 9. Manage the downtown street parking inventory by encouraging regular turnover Existing Situation The decision to replace a fleet unit is based on combination of the following factors: 1. Actual miles or hours of operation compared to expected miles or hours 2. Actual years of operation compared to expected years 3. Possible unsuitability of the equipment for future operations 4. Evaluation of mechanical condition by the Fleet Maintenance Supervisor 5. Evaluation of maintenance costs by the Fleet Maintenance Supervisor The scooters to be replaced entered service in 1997. Under Fleet Management Policy replacement guidelines, these units should be evaluated for possible replacement when they reach six years of age or 30,000 miles of service. Although they have only accumulated about 20,000 miles,they are almost seven years old. In an effort to stretch budget resources, staff tried to hold off this replacement for the 05-07 financial period and thus did not submit as a part of the 03-05 budget. However,reliability of the vehicles is now suffering,maintenance costs are escalating, and downtime has affected Parking Services. Thus, the Fleet Manager is now recommending replacement. It is particularly important to have reliable scooters,because when they are out of service for repair, the Parlang Enforcement Officer must patrol on foot. When that happens,revenue plummets.. Goal and Policy Links Fleet Management Policy(Section 405 of the Finance Management Manual) Adopted Parking Management Plan Project Work Completed Public Works has met with the Parking Manager to insure that the units to be acquired have been correctly specified. E-18 CAPITAL m m PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Environmental Review No environmental review is requited. Project Phasing and Funding Sources Pro ect Costs by Type Pro' ct Costs To-Date 2003-04 2004-05 1 2005-06 1 2006-07 Total Equipment Acqu=ton 52,0001 52,000 Total 1 52,0001 Project Funding Source:Parking Fund Department Coordinator and Project Review/Support Department Coordinator: Robert Horch Project Review and Support: Ron Holstme and Dave Elliott Operating Program Parking(50600) Project Effect on the Operating Budget Hours of time needed for project coordination: 10 Description of Units to be Replaced: Replacement Unit and Coat Detail*: City Fleet Number 9826 9827 Make: GO-4 Model Year, 1997 1997 Model: Interceptor Make: GO-4 00-4 Description Utility Scooter Model: Interceptor Interceptor Base Vehicle Cost: $21,640 Description: Utility Scooter Utility Scooter Sales Tax 07.25 Percent: $1,569 Year Entered Service: 1997-98 1997-98 Delivery:. $300 Scheduled Replacement Year. 2063-o4 2003-04 Light Bar. $300 Recon mended Replacement Year,. 2004-05 2004-05 Radio: $1,000 Original Acquisition Price: $2066 $20,000 Cadingencies @ 5 Percent: $1,240 Pfimated Surplus Value» $2,000 $2,000 Total Acquisition Cost: $26,049 Odometer Reading at 04!04: 18,779 19,693 °two required Total Maintenance Cost at 04104: $8,285 $8,280 Target Age: 6 6 ProjecW Age at Replacement: 7 7 Target Mileage: 30,000 30,000 Projected Mileage at Repiacemmt: 19,260 20,200 E-19 CAPITAL - -OPLAN STATUS OF MAJOR CIP PROJECTS Percent Complete As of June 1,2004 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 80% 70% 80% 90% 100% I i i I Water Reuse 2003-05 Paving Program Foothill Bridge Replacement i Bill Roalman Bicycle Boulevard Palm-Morro Parking Structure/Offices Damon-Garcia Athletic Fields Ludwick Center Remodel Energy Conservation Projects I Ah i Water Facilities Master Plan Projects I Tank Farm Sewer&Lift Station Wastewater Facilities Master Plan Projects Laurel Lane/Orcutt/Bullock Realignment j Santa Barbara Street Widening EI Chorro Park Athletic Fields I I Radio System Upgrade UNDERSTUDY Groundwater Development Higuera Street Widening ; i LOUR Interchange Railroad Trail:Jennifer Bridge to Cal Poly Palm-Nipomo Garage i Therapy Pool i Public Safety Dispatch Upgrade E-20 Section F ®EBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS w 40 mow: y DEBT REQUIREMENTS OVERVEEW This section summarizes the debt service obligations of the City as of July 1, 2004. These obligations represent the City's annual installment payments of principal and interest for previous capital improvement plan projects or acquisitions funded through debt financings. The City's debt management policies are comprehensively discussed in Section B (Capital Financing and Debt Management) of the 2003-05 Financial Plan. The following is a description of each lease or bond obligation existing at July 1, 2004: 1986 Lease Revenue Bonds 19%Lease Revenue Bonds Refunded in 1994 and 2004 ® Purpose:Construct a new headquarters fire station;make e Purpose:Construct parking structures(net proceeds: seismic safety and HVAC improvements to City Hall; $5,758,400);male road improvements and purchase expand Mission Plaza;acquire property at Higuera and facilities(net proceeds:$4.450,000). Marsh streets(Mathews property)and the lot adjacent to e Maturity Date:2014 the Bowden Adobe;and purchase the street lighting ■ Original Principal Amount:$13,970,000 system. ■ July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$7,520,000 ® Maturity Date:2026 ■ Interest Rate:3.5%to 6.375% 11 Original Principal Amount:$7,100,000 ■ Funding Source:Debt Service and Parking Funds ® July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$6,235,000 ■ Interest Rate:5.30%to 7.25% 1988 Water Certificates of Participation i Funding Source:Debt Service Fund Refunded in 1999 and 2001: Series A Lease Revenue Bonds ■ Purpose:Construct various water system improvements. 1999 Section 108 Loan ■ Maturity Date:2008 ■ Purpose:Build affordable housing($1.0 million)and ® Original Principal Amount:$5,000,000 rehabilitate the old Carnegie Library($650,000). ® July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$1.790,000 ■ Maturity Date:2005 ® Interest Rate:3.25% ■ Original Principal Amount:$1,650,000 ■ Funding Source:Water Fund ■ July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$320,000 N Interest Rate:5.0%to 6.0% 1990 Certificates of Participation ■ Finding Source:CDBG Fund Refunded in 1999 and 2001:Series B Lease Revenue Bonds ■ Purpose:Acquire land for open space,rehabilitate the 1999 Series C Lease Revenue Bonds City's Recreation Center and acquire land for parks and Refunded in 2001:Series C Lease Revenue Bonds recreation offices/neighborhood parks. ■ Purpose:Purchase property and build athletic fields; ® Maturity Date: 2010 purchase property for police expansion;purchase ■ Original Principal Amount: $4,500.000 Downtown Plan properties ■ July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding: $2.170,000 Interest ■ Maturity Date:2029 Rate: 3.25%to 3.50% 0 Original Principal Amount:$6,745,000 ■ Funding Source:Debt Service Fund ■ July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$6,985,000 E Interest Rate:3.25%to 4.6% 1992State Clean Water Revolving bund Loan ® Funding Source:Debt Service Fund ■ Purpose:Upgrade the City's water reclamation plant and 2001 State I�asttctetm a Bank CJEDB collection system to meet discharge standards. ( )Loan o Maturity Date:2012 ® Purpose:Expand Marsh Soret parking structure ■ Original Principal Account:,$31,227,400 a Maturity Date:2031 ® July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$16,345,200 B Original Principal Amount:$7,765.900 ■ Interest Rate:3.00%to 3.20% ■ July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$6,944,800 s Funding Source:Sewer Fund ® Interest Rate:3.37%(including annual loan fees) ■ Funding Source:Parking Fund 1993 Water Revenue Bonds Refunded in 2002 Lease Purchase Financing ® Purpose:Upgrade the City's water treatment plant to meet i Purpose:Fund energy conservation measures at various water quality standards. City locations. e Maturity Date:2023 i Maturity Date:2031 ® Original Principal Amount:$10,890,000 a Original Principal Amount:$3,023;100 ■ July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$8,865,000 ® July 1,2004 Principal Outstanding:$2,271,100 ■ Interest Rate:5.00%to 5.50% ■ interest Rate:3.6% ■ Funding Source:Water Fund a Funding Son=:Water,Sewer and Debt Service Funds F-1 DEBT SERVICE flEQUIREMENTS ANNUAL PAYMENTS BY FUNCTION 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET PUBLIC SAFETY Police Protection 22,600 22,500 23,200 22,000 Fire&Environmental Safety 241,100 239,400 247,400 235,100 Total Public Safety 263,700 261,900 270,600 257,100 PUBLIC UTILITIES Wastewater Service 2,129,400 2;099,700 2,418,600 2,412;200 Water Service 1,166,100 1,129,000 1,108,300 1,678,600 Total Public Utilities 39295,500 3,228,700 3,52000 49090,800 TRANSPORTATION Streets and Flood Control 381,600 382,400 391,600 372,100 Parking 676,200 1,121,700 1,054,700 909,700 Total Transportation 1,057,800 19504,100 1,446,300 1,281,800 LEISURE,CULTURAL&SOCIAL SERVICES Cultural Services 64,600 64,400 66,300 63,000 Parks and Recreation 895,200 876,500 918,700 872,900 Social Services 321,500 321,900 335,000 .328,900 Total Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 19281,300 192629800 19320,000 19264,800 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Buildings 110,100 110,900 113,000 107,400 TOTAL DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS $6,0089400 $6,368,400 $6,676,800 $79001,900 F-2 DEBT SERVICE e fA s ANNUAL PAYMENTS BY SOURCE 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET GENERAL FUND 2004/1994 Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds Principal 179,800 190,600 199,800 210,900 Interest 201,100 191,800 181,400 82,800 1996 Lease Revenue Bonds Principal 120,000 125,000 135,000 145,000 Interest 404,200 395,500 .386,500 376,700 2001 Revenue Refunding Bonds Series B and Series C Principal 339,600 405,000 425,000 440,000 Interest 470,500 388200 374,700 360,600 Energy Conservation Lease Financing Principal 39AM 40,900 Interest 18,400 15,600 Total Debt Service Fund 1,715,200 1,6961100 11760,200 1,672,500 CDBG FUND Section 108 Loan Principal 265,000 280,000 300,000 320,000 Interest 56,500 41,900 35,000 8,900 Total CDBG Fund 321,500 321,9M 335,000 328,900 WATER FUND 2001 Revenue Refunded Bonds Series A Principal 300,000 315,000 325,000 335,000 Interest 107,000 98,000 63,500 52,700 2002 Revenue Refunding Bonds Principal 235,000 295,000 325,000 335,000 Interest 524,100 421,000 365,600 354,200 Energy Conservation Lease Financing Principal 19,900 20,700 Interest 9,300 7,900 Water Reuse Project Loan Principal 122,800 Interest 450,300 Total Water.Fand 1,166,100 1,1291000 1,108,30019678,600 SEWER FUND 1992 State Revolving Fund Loan Fund Principal 1,482,200 1,528,500 1576,300 1;625,400 Interest 647,200 563,100 559,400 510,100 Energy Conservation Lease Financing Principal 192,700 200,400 Interest 8,100 90,200 76,300 Total Wastewater Fund 2,129,400 2,099,700 2,418,600 2,412;200 PARKING FUND 2004/1994 Refunded Lease Revenue Bonds Principal 144,500 324,500 340,200 359,100 Interest 531,700 373,500 308,800 141,000 CIEDB State Loan Principal 169,900 169,900 175,,100 Interest 253,800 235,800 . 234,500 Total Parking Fund 676,200 1,1219700 19054,700 - 9099700 TOTAL DEBT SERVICE REQUIREN[ENTS $61008,400 $6,368,400 $6,676,800 $7,001,900 Note.All General Fund debt service payments are accounted for in the Debt Service Fund. F-3 T SERVICE REQUIREMENTS s COMPUTATION OF LEGAL DEBT MARGIN Gross Assessed Valuation(2003-04) $3,801,335212 Legal Debt Limit-3.75%of Gross Assessed Valuation(See Note Below) $142,550,100 Other Long-Term Debt: Revenue Bonds Secured by Capital Leases 24,700,000 State Water Resources Revolving Fund Loans 16,345200 State Infrastructure Bank Loans 6,944,800 Federal Section 108 Loan(Repayble from Community Development Block Grant) 320,000 Lease Purchase Financing 2,271,000 Water Revenue Bonds 8,865,000 59,446,000 LESS DEDUCTIONS ALLOWED BY LAW: Revenue Bonds Secured by Capital Leases and Grant Funds 48,310,000 Water Revenue Bonds 8,865,000 57,175,000 TOTAL DEBT APPLICABLE TO COMPUTED LIMIT $2,271,000 LEGAL DEBT MARGIN $140,279,100 NOTE The California Government Code provides for a legal debt limit of 15%of gross assessed valuation based on 25%of market value. Since this limit was set,the State Constitution has changed,requiring assessed value to be set at 100%of market value. Adjusting for this change results in a comparable legal debt limit of 3.75%of assessed value. The City's debt management policy,however,sets a lower direct debt limit of 2%of assessed valuation. F-4 Section G CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION - CHANGES ► ► POSITION OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION Individual Financial Position Statements Governmental Funds This section summarizes revenues, expenditures, and changes in financial position for each of the General Fund City's operating funds. For the Governmental Special Revenue Funds Funds, financial position is defined as fund balance, Downtown Association Fund for the enterprise funds it is defined as working Gas Tax Fund capital; and for the Whale Rock Reservoir (an Transportation Development Act Fund Agency Fund of the City) it is defined as fund Community Development Block Grant Fund balance as reported by the Whale Rock Commission Law Enforcement Grants Fund in its separately issued financial statements. Capital Project Funds Because governmental and enterprise funds use Capital Outlay Fund different bases of accounting, fund balance and Parkland Development Fund working capital are different measures of financial Transportation Impact Fees Fund position under generally accepted accounting Open Space Protection Fund principles. However, they represent similar Airport Area Impact Fee Fund concepts: resources available at the beginning of Affordable Housing Fund the year to fund operations, debt service, and capital Fleet Replacement Fund improvements in the following year. Accordingly, Debt Service Fund to establish a similar framework for evaluating and projecting the City's overall financial position, these Enterprise Funds two measures of financial position are used interchangeably in this section. Water Fund Sewer Fund Changes in financial position are provided for the Parking FundTransit Fund last two completed fiscal years (2001-02 and 2002- Golf Fund 03); and the two years covered by the 2003-05 Financial Plan(2003-04 and 2004-05). Agency Fund FINANCIAL POSITION SCHEDULES Whale Rock Commission x, 77- a ,7,, The organization of the City's funds and basis of The following schedules are included in this section:. accounting are further described on the following page. Combining Financial Position_Statements • All Funds Combined • All Governmental Funds Combined • All Enterprise and Agency Funds Combined G-1 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION ORGANIZATION OF THE CITY'S FUNDS In accordance with generally accepted accounting ® Capital Project Funds principles, the City's financial reporting system is • Capital Outlay Fund organized on a fund basis consisting of three major • Parkland Development Fund fund types—governmental, proprietary and • Transportation Impact Fees Fund fiduciary—and two self-balancing account groups: • Open Space Protection Fund general fixed assets and general long-term The City's various funds have been established in order • Airport Area Impact Fees Fund to segregate and.identify those financial transactions • Affordable Housing Fund and resources associated with providing specific • Fleet Replacement Fund activities or programs in conformance with special regulations,restrictions,or limitations. ® Debt Service Fund Budgets are prepared for each fund in accordance Enterprise Funds with its respective basis of accounting. All governmental funds have legally adopted budgets Enterprise funds are distinguished from except capital project funds. While budgets are governmental funds by their similarity to private prepared for the City's capital project funds, the sector enterprises, as it is intended that the cost of capital projects generally span more than one year providing services will be financed or recovered and are effectively controlled at the project level. primarily through user charges. The City uses the following five enterprise funds: The following funds are included in the Financial Plan; additional descriptions of each of the fund ® Water types are provided in the Budget Glossary (Section ■ Sewer 1)of the 2003-05 Financial Plan: ® Parking ■ Transit , Governmental Funds ® Golf Most of the City's programs and functions are Trust and Agency Funds provided and financed through the following governmental ftmds, which are distinguished by Also known as fiduciary funds, trust and agency their measurement focus on determining financial funds are used to account for assets held by the City position and changes in financial position, rather in a trustee capacity for private individuals, than upon determining net income: organizations,or other governmental agencies. ® General Fund Agency funds are custodial in nature (assets equal ® Special Revenue Funds liabilities) and do not measure the results of operations (revenues, expenditures, and changes in • Downtown Association fund balance). Because of their custodial nature, • Gas Tax agency funds are not typically included in budgetary • Transportation Development Act documents. In this case, however, the City is • Community Development Block Grant directly responsible for the day-today management • Law Enforcement Grants Fund and operations of the Whale Rock Reservoir. As such, because of its significance to the City's operations and organizational structure, budget information for the Whale Rock Commission(which is accounted for as an agency fund of the City) is provided in the City's Financial Plan. G-2 ANGES IN FINANCIAL ° • • ALL FUNDS COMBINED 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Tax Revenues 25,807,300 26,503,200 28,343,300 29,694,100 Fines and Forfeitures 957,400 1,030,500 1,075,000 1,093,500 Investment and Property Revenues 1,870,400 1,852,500 1,028,800 896,000 From Other Governments 13,988,100 10,312,300 23,385,800 11,519,000 Service Charges Governmental Funds 6,528,400 6,755,200 5,673,800 6,611,700 Enterprise Funds 20,822,500 22,151,100 21,494,800 23,580,400 Other Revenues 809,200 346,000 2,279,800 132,000 Total Revenue 70,783,300 689950AN 83,281,300 73,526,700 Espendftares Operating Programs Public Safety 13,897,200 15,328,000 17,165,000 18,301,400 Public Utilities 7,928,900 8,280,200 9,882,500 9,518,500 Transportation 4,411,400 4,915,000 4,997,300 4,990,500 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 4,908,100 5,128,800 5,667,400 5,869,000 Community Development 4,406,800 4,548,400 5,510,400 5,282,400 General Government 6,811,300 7,364,600 8,758,300__ 9,061,800 Total Opeuting Programs 42,363,700 45,565,000 51,980,900 53,023,600 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 24,203,500 16,398,300 75,341,300 30,944,600 Debt Service 6,008,400 6,368,400 6,676,800 _ 7,001,900 Total Expenditures 72;573,600 68,331,700 1339999,000 90,970,100 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 8,273,700 6,304,100 6,629,400 5,091,200 Operating Transfers Out (8;273,700) (6,304,100) (6,629,400) (5,091,200) Proceeds from Debt Financings 5,263,300 2,151,100 25,339,800 17,698,800 Potential MOA Adjustments (340,800) (541,900) Other Sources(Uses) (683,900) Expenditure Savings 434,100 655,700 Total Other Sources(Uses) 5,263,300 2,151,100 259433,100 17,128,700 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 3,471,000 2,770,200 (25,284,600) (314,700) Fund Balance(Worldng Capital, Beginning of Year 42,836,500 46,307,500 49,077,700 .23,793,100 Fund Balance/Working Capital, End of Year Reserved for Debt Service 1;568,500 1,568,500 1,568,500 1,568500 Unreserved 44,739,000 47,509,200 22,224,600 21,909,900 Total Fund Balance/Working Capital $46,307,500 $49,0779700_ $23,793,100 $23,478,400 G-3 CHANGES IN FINANCIALPOSITION ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS COMBINED 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004.05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Tax Revenues 25,807,300 26,503,200 28,343;300 29,694,100 Fines and Forfeitures 321,700 330,600 330,000 330,000 Investment and Property Revenues 923,100 960,200 429;300 430,000 From Other Governments 11,234,900 7,576,200 18,150,600 9,379,700 Service Charges 6,528,400 6,755,200 5,673,800 6,611,700 Other Revenues 495,900 250,800 752,800 115,000 Total Revenues 45,311,300 42,376,200 53,679,500 46,560,500 Expenditures Operating Programs Public Safety 13,897,200 15,328,000 17,165,000 18,301,400 Transpaatation 1,954,100 2,015,900 2,018,200 1,949,700 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 4,540,000 4,753,800 5,257,400 5,468,300 Community Development 4,406,800 4548,400 5,510,400 5,282,400 General Government 6,839500 7,393,900 8,827,400 9,110,600 TotalOperadng Programs 31,637,600 34,040,000 38,778,400 40,112,400 Reimbursed Expenditures (2,895,900) (2,982500) (3393,200) (3,472,600) Total Operating Expea t res 28,741,700 31,057500 35,385,200 36,639,800 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 12,222,400 9,326,800 35,392,600 9,534,700 Debt Service 2,036,700 2,018,000 2,095,200 2,001,400 Total Expenditures 43,0009500 42,4029300 7295739000 45,1759,900 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 8,052,000 6,052,100 6,408,600 4,882,300 Operating Transfers Out (8,273,700) (6,304,100) (6,629,400) (5,091,200) Proceeds from Debt Financings (163,300) 471,600 51900,800 1;818,800 Potential MOA Adjustments (269,200) (419,900) Other Sources(Uses) (683,900) Expenditure Savings 334,100 719,600 Total Other Sources(Uses) (385,000) 219,600 5,744,900 1,225,700 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 1,925,500 193,500 (13,448,300) (389,700) Fund Balance,Beginning of Year. 23,380,300 25,305,800 25,499,300 12,051,000 Fund Balance,End of Year Reserved for Debt Service 1,568500 1,568500 1568,500 .1568,500 Unreserved 23,737,300 23,930,800 10,482500 10,092,800 Total Fund Balance $25,305,800 $25,499,300 $12,051,000 $11,661,300 G-4 CHANGES POSITION ALL ENTERPRISE AND AGENCY FUNDS COMBINED 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Fines and Forfeitures 635,700 699,900 745,000 763,500 Investment and Property Revenues 947,300 892;300 599,500 466,000 From Other Governments 2,753,200 2,736,100 5,235,200 2,139,300 Service Charges 20,822,500 22,151,100 21,494,800 23,580,400 Other Revenues 313,300 95,200 1,527,000 17,000 Total Revenues 25,472;000 26,574,600 29,601,500 26,9669200 Expenditures Operating Programs Public Utilities 7,928,900 8,280,200 9,882,500 9,518,500 Transportation 2,457,300 2899,100 2,979,100 3,040,800 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 368,100 375,000 410,000 400,700 General Government 2,867,700 2,953,200 3,324,100 3,423,800 Total Operating Programs 13,622,000 14507500 16595,700 16,383,800 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 11,981,100 7,071,500 39,948,700 21,409,900 Debt Service 3,971,700 4,350,400 4581,600 5,000500 Total Expenditures 29,574,800 259929,400 619126,000 429794,200 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In(Out) 221,700 252,000 220,800 208,900 Proceeds from Debt Financings 5,426,600 1,679500 19,439,000 15,880,000 Expenditure Savings 100,000 (63,900) Potential MOA Adjustments (71,600) (122,000) Total Other Sources(Uses) 59648,300 1,931,500 19,688,200 15,903,000 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 1545,500 2576,700 (11,836,300) 75,000 Working Capital,Beginning of Year 19,456200 21,001,700 23,578,400 11,742,100 Worldng Capital,End of Year $21,001,700 $23,578,400 $11,742400 $1128179100 G-5 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION GENERAL FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Tax Revenues 25,807,300 26,503,200 28,343,300 29,694,100 Fines and Forfeitures 321,700 330,600 330;000 330,000 Investment and Property Revenues 742,500 812,700 347,000 347,000 From Other Governments 3,373,500 3,652,800 2,916,700 3,263,200 Service Charges 4,409,900 4,011,400 4;341,300 4,869,600 Other Revenues 179,700 104,900 170,300 75,000 Total Revenues 34,834,600 359415,600 36,448,600 38,578,900 Expenditures Operating Programs Public Safety 13,897,200 15;328,000 17,165,000 1001,400 Transportation 1,954,100 2,015,900 2,018,200 1,949,700 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 44540,000 4,753,800 5,257,400 5,468,300 Community Development 3,852,000 3,925,000 4,870,300 4,672,200 General Government 6,811,300 7,364,600 8,758,300 9,061,800 Total Program Expenditures 31,054,600 33,387,300 38,069,200 39,453,400 Reimbursed Expenditures (2,895,900) (2,982,500) (3;393,200) (3,472,600) Total Ex mWft res 28,158,700 309404,800 34,676,000 35,980,800 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 934,700 897,800 898,000 906,300 Operating Transfers Out (7,227,900) (5,291,200) (5,731,400) (4,184,900) MOA&Other Compensation Adjustments (269,200) (419,900) Proposed State Budget Takeaway (683,900) Expenditure Savings 334,100 719,600 Total Other Sources(Uses) (6,2939200) (493939400) (4,768,500) (3,662,800) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 382,700 617,400 (2,995,900) (1,064,700) Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 9,069;300 9,452,000 10,069,400 7,073,500 Fund Balance,End of Year $99452,000 $109069,400 $7,073400 $6,008,800 G-6 CHANGES a a • • • DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETID BUDGET Revenues Investment and Property Revenues 6,200 3,700 4,000 4,000 Service Charges 402,200 397,000 357,400 380,600 Other Revenues 1300 Total Revenues 408,400 402,000 361,400 384AN Expenditum Operating Programs- Community Development 383,800 410,400 361,400 381,000 Total Expenditures 383,800 410,400 361AN 3819000 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In Total Other Sources(Uses) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) EVenditures and Other Uses 24,600 (8,400) 3,600 Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 44,800 69,400 61,000 61,000 Fund Balance,End of Year $699400 $61,000 $61,000 564,600 G-7 ' • • - CHANGES IN GAS TAX FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues From Other Governments- Gasoline Tax 869,800 863,200 876,500 885,200 Traffic congestion grant 111,100 115,100 Total Revenues 980,900 978,300 876,500 8851200 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers Out (980,900) (978,300) (876,500) (885,200) Total Other Sources(Uses) (980,900) (978,300) (876,500) (885400) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses Fund Balance,Beglnnmg of Year Fund Balance,End of Year $ - $ - $ - $ G-8 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA)FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues From Other Governments- 21,200 34,600 20,500 21,100 Total Revenues 21,200 34,600 20,500 21,100 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers Out (21;200) (34,600) (20.500) (21,100) Total Other Sources(Uses) (21,200) (34,600) (20,500) (21,100) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) EVenditures and Other Uses Fund Balance,Beginning of Year Fund Balance,End of Year $ - $ - $ - $ G-9 POSITION - CHANGES IN- FINANCIAL CONRAUN=DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBG)FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues From Other Governments CDBG Allocation 1,153,800 1,151,700 1,555,100 818,300 State Grant Close-Out 22,200 900 23,900 Total Revenues 1,176,000 1,151,700 11556,000 842,200 Expenditures Operating Programs Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 171,000 213,000 278,700 229;200 General Government 28,200 29,300 69,100 48,800 Tocol Operating Progmms 199,200 242,300 347,800 278,000 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 655,300 587,500 873,200 235,300 Debt Service 321,500 321,900 335,000 328,900 Total Expenditures 1,176,000 1,151,700 14556,000 842,200 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfer In Proceeds From Debt Financing Total Other Sources(uses) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses Fund Balance,Beginning of Year Fund Balance,Eud of Year $ - $ - $ - $ G-10 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANTS FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Investment and Property Revenues 20,700 9,100 10,000 10,000 From Other Governments 53,400 179,100 107,800 Service Charges 16,700 13,400 10,300 10,600 Total Revenues 90,800 201,600 128,100 20,600 Expenditures Operating Programs Public Safety Total Operating Expenditures Capital Improvement Pian Projects 9,700 156,800 305,600 Total Expenditures 9,700 156,800 305,600 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfer In 4,900 9,900 Operating Transfer Out (43,700) (11000) Total Other Sources(Uses) (38,800) 9,900 (11000) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 42,300 54,700 (178,500) 20,600 Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 174,800 217,100 271,800 93,300 Fund Balance,End of Year $217,100 $271,800 $937300 $111900 G-11 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL " • • CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues From Other Governments 3,708,600 1,122,800 8,139,100 2,213,000 Service Charges 47,400 Other Revenues 113,800 133,900 542,500 Total Revenues 39822,400 19256,700 8,729,000 292139000 Expenditures Capital Improvement Plan Projects 7,718;500 6,937500 25,610,600 5,776,600 Total Expenditures 7,718,500 6,937,500 25,610,600 5,776,600 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 4,685500 2,761,600 3,316,700 1,744,800 Proceeds from Debt Financing 471,600 5,900,800 1,818,800 Total Other Sources(Uses) 4,685,500 3,233,200 9,217,500 3,563,600 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Egmmifdures and Other Uses 789,400 (2,447,600) (7,664,100) Fund Balance,Begfmning of Year 9,322,300 10,111,700 7,664,100 Fund Balance,End of Year $ 10,1119700 $ 796641100 $ - $ - G-12 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION PARKLAND DEVELOPMENT FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Investment and Property Revenues 21,900 30,700 20,000 20,000 From Other Governments 403,500 125,000 Service Charges Park In-Lieu Fees 493,600 170,900 5,000 5,000 Dwelling Unit Fees 4,900 2,400 5,000 5,000 Total Revenues 520,400 204,000 433,500 155,000 Expenditures Capital Improvement Plan Projects 27,100 293,100 1,288,500 193,800 Total Expenditures 27,100 293,100 1,2889500 1939800 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In Operating Transfers Out Total Other Sources(Uses) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 493,300 (89,100) (855,000) (38,800) Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 554,000 1,047,300 958,200 103,200 Fund Balance,End of Year $1,0477300 $958,200 $103400 $64,400 G-13 CHANGES ♦ ♦ POSITIOR TRANSPORTATION RAPACT FEE FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Investinem and Property Revenue 39,200 44,400 10,000 10,000 From Other Governments 605,500 Service Charges 638,200 1,275,600 415,800 834,600 Other Revenues Total Revenue 677,400 1,320,000 1,031,300 8449600 Expenditures Capital Improvement Plan P%yects 69,500 100,900 2,861,700 1,115,000 Total Expenditures 699500 100,900 298619700 1,115,000 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfer Out Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 607,900 1,219,100 (1,830,400) (270,400) Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 273,800 881,700 2,100,800 270,400 Fund Balance,End of Year $881,700 $2,100,800 $270,400 G-14 CHANGESM FINANCIAL POSITION OPEN SPACE PROTECTION FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200445 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Service Charges 58,800 From Other Governments 1,921,300 456,900 3;525,000 2,030,000 Investment and Property Revenue 24,400 4,100 2,000 2.000 Other Revenues 105,800 Total Revenues 2,110,300 461,000 .3,527,000 2,0329000 Expenditures Capital Improvement Plan Projects 2,848,300 251,500 4,025,600 2,130,000 Total Expenditures 2,848,300 2519500 4,0259600 2,1301000 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfer In 250,000 200,000 .100,000 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Enmmdihrns and Other Uses (488,000) 409,500 (498,600) 2,000 Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 585,800 97,800 507,300 8,700 Fund Balance,End of Year $97,500 $507;300 $8,700 $109700 G-15 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION AIRPORT AREA nM PACT FEE FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Service Charges 39,200 136,700 28,100 28,900 Investment and Property Revenue 10,900 .10,400 6,000 6,200 Total Revenues 50,100 147,100 34,100 35,100 Expenditures Capital Improvement Plan Projects Total Expenditures Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfer In Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 50,100 147,100 34,100 35,100 Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 240,200 290,300 437,400 471,500 Fund Balance,End of Year $290,300 $4377400 $471,500 $5069600 G-16 CHANGES IN-FINANCIAL POSITION- AFFORDABLE • •AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Service Charges 464,900 747,800 463,500 477,400 Investment and Property Revenue 20,000 28,300 15,300 15,800 Total Revenues -484,900 776,100 478,800 493,200 Expenditures Capital Improvement Pian Projects 215,000 Total Expenditures 215,000 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfer In Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 484,900 561,100 478,800 493,200 Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 201,900 686,800 1,247,900 1,726,700 Fund Balance,End of Year $686,800 $1447,900 $1,726,700 $2,219,900 G-17 aNGES IN -FINANCIALPOSITION F7 EET REPLACENMNT FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004.05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Investment and Property Revenues 37,300 16,800 15,000 15,000 Service Charges Other Revenue Sale of Surplus Property 96,600 10,700 40,000 40,000 Total Revenues 1331900 27,500 55po 559000 Expenditures Capital lmprovernent Pian Projects 994,000 784,500 427,400 84,000 Total Expenditures 894,000 784,500 4279400 84,000 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 461,700 486,700 433,700 458,700 Total Other Sources(Uses) 461,700 4869700 433,700 4589700 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses (298,400) (270,300) 61,300 429,700 Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 1,181,600 883,200 612,900 674,200 Fund Balance,End of Year $883,200 $612,900 $674,200 $1,103,900 G-18 CHANGES + + 'POSITION DEBT SERVICE FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Expenditures Debt Service .1994 Refunding Revenue Bonds 381,600 382,400 381,200 1996 Financing Issue 524,200 520,500 521,500 521,700 2001 Refunding Revenue Bonds 809,400 793,200 799,700 800,600 Energy Conservation Lease Financing 57,800 56,500 2004 Refunding Revenue Bonds 293,700 Total Expenditures 1,715,200 1,696,100 1,760,200 1,6729500 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 1,715,200 1,696,100 1,760,200 1,672,500 Proceeds from Debt Financing (163,300) Total Other Sources(Uses) 1451,900 1,696,100 19760,200 1,672,500 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses (163,300) Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 1,731,800 1,568,500 1,568,500 1,568,500, Fund Balance,End of Year Reserved for Debt Service 1,568,500 1,568,500 1,568,500 1,568,500 Unreserved - Total Fund Balance $1468,500 $1,561500 $1468,500 $1,568,500 G-19 CHANGES a a POSITION WATER FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Service Charges Water Sales Water Service Charges 7,055,700 6,976,800 7,092,400 7,739,500 Sales to Cal Poly 414,600 450,600 476,000 504,900 Development Impact Fees 1,546,500 2,650,600 1,011,000 1,873,800 Connection Charges and Meter Sales 34,900 51,800 22,500 22,500 Account Set-up Fee 99,100 130,600 102,500 105,600 Other Service Charges 114,800 140,100 107,500 110,700 Total Service Charges 9,265,600- 10,400,500 8,811,900 10,357,000 Other Revenues 313,300 88,600 15,000 15,000 From Other Governments 5,000 5,000 2,869,500 Investment and Property Revenues 504,300 443,500 250,000 184,600 Total Revenues 109088,200 109937,600 11,946,400 10,556,600 Expenditures Operating Programs Public Utilities 3,866,400 3,973,500 4,702,400 077,200 General Government 1,104,500 .1,137,600 1,321,200 1,360,800 Total Operating Programs 070,900 5,111,100 6,023,600 5,938,000 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 3,209,200 2,058,100 19,921,300 11,069,500 Debt Service 1,166,100 1,129,000 1,108,300 1,678,600 Total Expenditures 9,346,200 8,298,2110 27,053,200 18,686,100 Other Sources(Uses) Other Sources(Uses) Proceeds from Debt Financing 152,400 8,883,200 8,085,000 Potential MOA Adjustments (27,200) (45,300) Operating Transfer Out (10,400) Total Other Sources(Uses) 152,400 81845,600 8,039,700 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 742,000 2,791,800 (6,261,200) (89,800) Working Capital,Beginning of Year 8,874,700 9,616;700 12,408,500 6,147,300 Workbag Capital,End of Year $9,6169700 $12,408,500 $6,147,300 $6,057,500 G-20 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION SEWER FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 .2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Service Charges Customer Sales Sewer Service Charges 6,880,600 6,958,800 7,400,000 7,959,800 Sales to Cal Poly 313,400 229,600 250,000 262,500 Industrial User Charges 39,800 47,700 47,000 47,500 CUPA Inspection Fees 39,600 40,200 Development Impact Fees 761,500 977,900 400,000 655,600 Other Service Charges 118,900 .11,700 7,900 10,000 Total Service Charges 8,153,800 8,265,900 8,104,900 8,935,400 Other Revenue Investment and Property Revenues 173,600 .163,300_ 143,900 _ 66,300 Total Revenues 8,327,400 8,429,200 8,248,800 9,001,700 Expenditures Operating Programs Public Utilities 3,474,100 3,768,600 4,489,700 4,251,400 General Government 986,400 1,015500 1,076,900 1,109,200 Total Operating Programs 4,460500 4,784,100 5,566,600 5;360,600 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 1,692,800 1,857,100 5,198,900 8,686,800 Debt Service 2,129,400 2,099,700 2,418,600 2,412,200 Total Expenditures 8,282,700 897409900 13,184,100 169459,600 Other Sources(Uses) Proceeds from Debt Financing 1,920,900 7,795,000 Potential MOA Adjustments (29500) (43,700) Operating Transfer In 10,400 Other Sources(Uses) 100,000 (63,900) Total Other Sources(Uses) 29001,800 71687,400 Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 44,700 (311,700) (2,933,500) 229,500 Working Capital,Beginning of Year 5,080,000 5,124,700 4,813,000 1,879500 Working Capital,End of Year $5424,700 $4,8139000 $1,879400 $2,109,000 G-21 CHANGES POSITION PARHING FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-0 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Service Charges Parking Meter Collections Lots 414,600 451,400 354,500 308,200 Streets 762,800 821,700 898,200 896,700 Parking Structure Collections 379,300 435,200 531,800 735,700 Long-Term Parking Revenues 110,800 286,800 342,300 430,800 Lease Revenues 162;000 131,200 169,600 160,900 Parking In-Lieu Fees 75,400 64,900 587,500 106,600 Other Service Charges 101,500 11,600 300. 100 Tatal Service Charges 2,006,400 2,202,800 2,884,200 2,639,000 Investment and Property Revenues 237,700 254,400 181,500 191,000 Other Governments 75,000 Fines and Forfeitures 635,700 699,900 745,000 763,500 Other Revenues 1,510,000 Total Revenues 2,879,800 392329100 3,320,700 39593,500 Expenditures Operating Programs Transportation 875,100 1,019,200 1,199,400 1,335,600 General Government 313,200 322,600 413,800 4262W Tottil Operating Programs 1,188,300 1,341,800 1,613,200 1,761,800 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 5,843,600 2,176,700 13,070,400 1224,300 Debt Service 676,200 1,121,700 1,054,700 909,700 Total Expenditures 7,708,100 4,640,200 15,738,300 3,895,800 Other Sources(Uses) Proceeds from Debt Financing 5,426,600 1,527,100 8,634,900 Other Sources(Uses) Potential MOA Adjustments (6,900) (12,200) Total Other Sources(Uses) 5,426,600 1,527,100 8,628,000 (12,200) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 598,300 119,000 (1,789,600) (314,500) Working Capital,Beginning of Year 4,529,200 5,127,500 5,246,500 3,456,900 Working Capital,End of Year $59127400 $5,246,500 . $32456,900 53,142,400 GmM POSITION - CHANGES IN FINANCIAL TRANSIT FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Investment and Property Revenues 5,700 2,600 2,600 From Other Governments TDA Revenues 1,236,900 1,182,900 1,265,000 1,339,300 Other Grants 118,900 FTA Grants 1,511,300 1,354,300 1,100,700 800,000 Service Charges 370,500 361,100 385,400 397,500 Other Revenues 6,600 2,000 2,000 Total Revenues 39118,700 30029,500 2,7559700 2,541,400 Operadmg Programs Transportation 1,582,200 1,879,900 1,779,700 1,705,200 General Government 270,800 278,900 285,800 294,400 ToW Operudng Programs 1,853,000 2,158,800 2,065,500 1,999,600 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 1,185,500 736,700 928,900 339,300 Total Expenditures 3,038,500 218959500 2,9949400 2;33000 Other Sources(Uses) Potential MOA Adjustments (2,700) Other Revenue Sources Expenditure Savings (2,700) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) EMmmditures and Other Uses 80,200 134,000 (238,700) 199,800 Worldng Capital,Beginning of Year 187,100 267,300 401,300 162,600 Worldng Capital,End of Year $267,300 $401,300 $1629600 $362,400 G-23 CHANGES IN FINANCIAL ° i i GOLF FUND 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004.05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Service Charges Retail Sales 9,200 12,800 16,000 16,500 Green Fees 223,700 229,900 236,800 243,900 Other Fees 38,100 37,100 41,000 42,200 Total Service Charges 271,000 279;800 293,800 302,600 Other Revenues Investment and Property Revenues 1,600 3,000 1,500 1,500 Total Revenues 272,600 282,800 295,3110 304,100 Expenditures Operating Programs Leisure;Cultural 8r.Social Services 368,100 375,000 410,000 400,700 General Government 113,700 117,100 103,200 106,300 Total Operating Programs 481,800 492,100 513,200 507,000 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 13,300 67,000 Total Expenditures 481,800 505,400 5801200 5071000 Other Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 221,700 252,000 220,800 208,900 Potential MOA Adjustments (5,800) (6,000) Total Other Sources(Uses) 221,700 252,000 215,000 202,900 Revenues and Other Sources Over(under) Expenditures and Other Uses 12,500 29,400 (69,900) Working Capital,Beginning of Year 28,000 .40,500 69,900 Working Capital,End of Year $40,500 $69,900 G-24 CHANGES :IN FINANCIAL POSITION WHALE ROCK CONEMSION 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Revenues Service Charges Member Agency Contributions 477,700 447,300 717,600 651,900 Water Distribution Charges 276,400 191,800 296,000 296,000 Other Revenues 1,100 1,900 11000 1,000 Total Service Charges 755,200 641,000 1,014,600 948,900 Investment and Property Revenues 30,100 .22,400 20,000 20,000 Total Revenues 785,300 663,400 1,0349600 968,900 Eipenditures Operating Programs Public Utilities 588,400 538,100 690,400 689,900 General Government 79,100 81,500 123,200 _ 126,900 Total Operating Program 667,500 619,600 813,600 816,800 Capital Improvement Plan Projects 50,000 229,600 762,20() 90,000 Total Eapeoditures 717,500 849,200 1,575,800 9069800 Other Sources(Uses) Potential MOA Adjustments (2,200) (12,100) Total Other Sources(Uses) (2,200) (129100) Revenues and Other Sources Over(Under) Expenditures and Other Uses 67,800 (185,800) (543,400) 50,000 Working Capital,Beginning of Year 757,200 825,000 639200 95,800 Working Capital,End of Year $8259000 $6392200 $95,800 $145,800 G-25 Section H FINANCIAL & STATISTICAL TABLES FINANCIAL AND ► ► TABLES OVERVIEW This section provides summaries that integrate the Staffing Summaries other Financial Plan sections as well as provide supplemental financial and statistical information. E Regular Positions by Department Generally, each schedule provides information for ® Regular Positions by Function four fiscal years: last two completed fiscal years (2001-02 and 2002-03); and the two fiscal years ® Temporary Full-Time Equivalents (FI'E's) by covered by the 2001-03 Financial Plan(2003-04 and Function 2004-05). The following schedules are included in this section: Other Statistical and Financial Summaries Revenue and Expenditure Summaries 11 Appropriations Limit History ® Summary of Key Revenue Assumptions ® Revenue and Expenditure Trends: Last Five Completed Fiscal Years ® Revenues by Major Category and Source ® Demographic and Statistical Summary ® Total Expenditures by Type and Function Interfund Transactions ■ Reimbursement Transfers ■ Operating Transfers H-1 FINANCIAL • 1 STATISTICAL TABLES SUMMARY OF KEY REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS GENERAL FUND Five-Year Forecast and 2003-05 Financial Plan. One of the key analytical tools developed during the 2003-05 Financial Plan process was a comprehensive five year financial forecast for the General Fund. This forecast considered key revenue and expenditure projection factors such as population,increases in the consumer price index (CPI)and other growth fags. The trending of these key factors and their effect on revenues and expenditures for the past fifteen years provided an historical basis for the five year financial forecast. The forecast was initially prepared in December 2002 and updated in April 2003. With some revisions,this forecast became the basis for the revenue projections in the 2003-05 Financial Plan. 2003-04 Mid-Year Budget Review. As part of the 2003-04 mid-year budget review,the revenue assumptions included in the 2003-05 Financial Plan were comprehensively reexamined based on actual results for 2002-03 as well as emerging trends at the mid-point of the year. As a result,General Fund revenues for the 2003-05 Financial Plan period were reduced by$1.9 million($1.1 million in 2003-04 and$800,000 in 2004-05). Key downward adjustments at that time included: ■ Reduced vehicle license m-hen fees(VLF)of$808,500 in 2003-04 due to State budget cuts in this revenue source. • Reduced transient occupancy taxes of$338,000 in 2003-04 to reflect lower a base from 2002-03 than initial estimates,and"flat"sales from 2002-03 compared with the original estimated growth rate of 5%;and$431,700 in 2004-05 to reflect a lower"base"in 2003-04 and a reduction in the projected growth rate from 5%to 3%. ■ Reduced sales taxes for 2004-05 of$350,000 to reflect:slower opening of Costco by one-quarter($125,000 based on full-year revenues of"net revenues"of$500,000 after adjusting for transfer affects);and based on its status, no revenues from the Airport Area(initially estimated based on annual"base"revenues of$450,000 prorated for half of the year,or$225,000 in 2004-05). 2004-05 Financial Plan Supplement. In the mid-year budget review,we noted that further downward revisions might be needed in the 2004-05 Supplement based on:trends at that time in development review fees;sales taxes depending upon the status of the Costco project;and the possibility of more State takeaways.Overall,the 2004-05 Supplement reflects find=General Fund reductions in revenue estimates during 2003-05 of$1.8 million($600,000 in 2003-04 and$1.2 million in 2004-05). The three"foreshadowed"revenues noted above are the main drivers for this as summarized below: tit Reduced development review fees of$607,200 in 2003-04 and$236,000 in 2004-05. ® Reduced"net"sales tax from Costco of$250,000 based on an April 2005 opening date rather than Fall 2004. • Estimated further State takeaways of$684,000 in 2004-05 based on the Governor's proposed two-year local government package. If implemented,this would involve a complicated,long-term swap of the"VLF Backfill'for a comparable increase in property revenues,less the proposed two-year takeaway of$684,000 annually. Rather than adjust underlying revenue projections for these two sources based on solely on a "proposal,"the impact of this takeaway is shown under"other sources and uses"in the General Fund's changes in financial position- fop ten General runa -- The following provides a brief description of the City's top ten General Fund revenues along with an overview of the assumptions used in preparing 2003-05 revenue projections. These"top ten"revenues account for over 95%of total General Fund revenues. ® Sales Tax The City currently receives 1%from all taxable retail sales occurring in its Gram by 7.7%in 2003-04 limits. This is collected for the City by the State of California along with Gr~bv 0.6%in 2004-05 their component of the sales tax(5%for the State General Fund and 1%for 2003-04 revenue $10,964,300 local transportation purposes,for a total sales tax rate in San Luis Obispo 2004-05 revenue x11,468,200 County of 7%). The existing sales tax base is projected to grow by 3% 96 romt,rVe,A,e 31 annually in both 2003-04 and 2004-05. In addition to this,a net increase of H-2 FINANCIAL • e STATISTICAL 1 e SUMMARY OF KEY REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS $250,000 is projected in 2003-04 from the recently opened Home Depot For 2004-05,an additional$175,000 is projected from the following sources:based on"net"annual revenues of$500,000(after adjusting for transfer affects),$125,000 from Costco assuming an April 2005 opening; and$50,000 from the Copeland project($200,000 on an annual basis prorated for 25%of the year). Impact of the"Triple Flip." Effective October 2004,the State plans to reduce the City's sales tax rate by 25%(to an effective nue of 0.75 percent rather than the City s locally enacted rate of 1%)as part of a needlessly complicated,"zero-sum"swap in sales tax revenues in creating a"new"dedicated repayment source for its$15 billion deficit reduction bond issue.The State plans to backfill this loss with a complicated shift in contributions to the"Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund;"and a new backfill source called"sales tax in-lieu." It is not clear at this time how this"in-lieu"revenue source should be classified. However,since it is the State's intent to backfill this lost revenue"dollar-for-dollar"based on sales tax revenues,for simplicity at this time we consolidated both the City's reduced rate of 0.75%and the"in-lieu"revenue under"general sales taxes." ® Property Tax Under.Proposition 13 adopted in June of 1978,property taxes for general Grows by 6.5%in 1003-04 purposes may not exceed 1%of market value. Property tax assessment, Grows by 6.5%in 2004-05 collection and apportionment are performed by the County.The City 2003-04 revenue S5.947,M receives approximately 14%of the levy within its limits.Assessment 2004-05 manor $6,333,900 increases to reflect cement market value are allowed when property %o romtrevenue 16% ownership changes or when improvements are made;otherwise,increases in assessed value are limited to 2%annually.The 2003-05 estimates add 4.5%to this for the next two years based on trends for the past fifteen years. State's Two-Year Budget Proposal for Local Government. The Governor's bod8et proposal includes taking away$1.3 billion annually for the next two years from local gove>nment As noted above,the impact of this on the City will be.$694,000;and as part of this package, there will be a complicated,long-term swap of the"VLF Backfill"for a comparable increase in property revenues(less the proposed two-year takeaway of$684,000 annually)..Since this is simply a proposal at this time,we have not revised our underlying revenue projections for these two sources(in this case,property taxes). The impact of this takeaway is shown under"other sources and uses"in the General Fund's changes in financial position. ® Transient Occupancy Tax Transient occupancy taxes(TOT)are levied on all individuals occupying RemaiesJlat in 200344 their dwelling for 30 days or less. This is generally most applicable to Grum by 3.0%in 2004-05 room rentals at motels and hotels,although it is also applicable to other 1003-04 revenue 53,840800 types of short term rentals. The TOT rate is 10°/"of the room rental rate. 2004-05 revenue 53,956,00u Although the tax is collected for the.City by the operators,it is a tax on the %o much revenue r occupant;not the hotel or motel.Based on both long-tern and current trends,this revenue projection is consistent with the reduction taken at mid-year to reflect no growth in 2003-04 and 3%for 2004-05 H-3 FINANCIAL • 6 STATISTICAL TABLES SUbyMARY OF KEY REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS ® Utility Users Tax The City lcvies a 5%tax on all residences and businesses using the Grows by 4.0%in 1003-04 following utilities:telephone,electricity,natural gas,water and cable Grows I.0%in 1004-05 television. Although the tax is collected for the City by the utility 2003-04 revenue ni companies,it is a tax on the user,not the utility. Based on long-term and 1004-05 revenue current trends,trends,this revenue source is projected to grown by 4°/n. % tom►revenue annually in 2003-05 based on trends for the past fifteen years. ® Vehide License Fees Until 1998-99,the State levied vehicle license fees(VI.F)in the amount of Reduced by 1896 in 1003-04 2%of the market value of the motor vehicle m lieu of local property taxes. Grows by 5.0%fivm"base"in 100405 The State then allocated 81..25%of these revenues equally between cities 1003-04 revenue $1,896,400 and counties,apportioned based on population.The State subsequently 1004.05 revenue $2,840,100 reduced this rate by 65%in 1998,but made up the difference to local % tow revenue agencies through the State General Fund. As part the State budget process, California cities lost the part of the"VLF backfill"for 2003-04 as the State bounced back and forth between restoring rates to 1998 levels and rescinding the backfill,and then again restoring both the rate cut and the VLF backfill one-month later. The resulting"gap"of reduced fee collections from mid-June to October 2004,which should have been a "one-time"loss,cost the City$808,500 in 2003-04. State's Two-Year Budget Proposal for Local Government. The Governor's budget proposal includes taking away$1.3 billion annually for the next two years from local government. As noted above,the impact of this on the City will be$684,000;and as part of this package, there will be a complicated,long-term swap of the"VLF Backfill"for a comparable increase in property revenues(less the proposed two-year takeaway of$684,000 annually).Since this is simply a proposal at this time,we have not revised our underlying revenue projections for these two sources(in this case,VLF). The impact of this takeaway is shown under"oom sources and uses"in the General Fund's changes in financial position. ® Franduise Fees Franchise fees are levied by the City on a variety of utilities at various Tar base grows by 4.0%in 1003-04 rates.The State sets franchise fees for utilities regulated by them(most Tax base grows bv 4.096 in 1004-05 notably gas and electricity):2%of gross revenues.The City sets rates 200344 revenue $1,ss8so0 on a gross receipts basis for the following utilities:water and sewer 1004-05 revenue $11956,sso (3.51/6),solid waste collection(IOOA);and cable television(5n./o).The %2cloW revenue 59L underlying revenue base is projected to increase 4.01/6 annually in 2003-05 based on historical trends during the past fifteen years. ® Business Tax Certificates Anyone conducting business in the City is subject to a municipal Grows by 4.0%in 1003-04 business tax. The tax basis and rate are thesame for all businesses: Grows by 4.096 in 1004-05 $50 per$100,000 of gross receipts(or one-twentieth of one percent). 1003-04 revenue $1A871100 The tax is not regulatory,and is only imposed for the purpose of 100405 revenue $1,546,600 raising general purpose revenues. Based on recent trends,this % n total revs rre 496 revemue.source is projected to grow by 4%annually during 2003-05. H-4 FINANCIAL ♦ ® STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF KEY REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS Service Charges The City sets charges for a broad range of services in accordance Based on Comprehensive User with a comprehensive user fee cost recovery policy asset forth in Fee.Cost Recovery Policy Section B(Policies and Objectives)of the Financial Plan. While no one fee category on its own accounts for more than 1%of total General Fund revenues,.collectively service charges total$4.9 million, and account for 13%of General Fund revenues. ® Develo mint Review Fees Development review fees recover costs for planumg,building&safety, 2003-W revenues $2,368,400 engineering and fire plan check services. Cost recovery for these 2004-05 revenues $2,900,200 services is generally set at 100°/6 of total costs. However,revenues % rorat revenue s^i, projections have been reduced($607,200 in 2003-04 and$236,000 in 2004-05)to reflect that applications received prior to September 1, 2003 were"grandfathered"at a lower cost recovery rate,as well as a slight reduction in development review activity. ® Parr&Rerrmtion Feer Fees are charged for a wide variety of recreation activities including 1003-04 revenues $1,094,600 adult and youth athletics,classes,special events,facility rentals, 1004-05 revenues $.1,127,300 aquatics,teen and senior services,and before and after school programs. %oftow/revenue 3%J Specific cost recovery goals are set for each activity based on a general policy framework that cost recovery should be relatively high for aduh-oriented programs,and relatively low for youth and senior programs. Overall,recreation fees recover about 40%of total costs. �i Other Few Fees are also assessed for a wide range of public sa&ty,.transportation 200344 revenues $87J2% and general government services,including emergency medical services, 1004-05 revenues $8fire service to Cal Poly,maintenance of State highways,and financial %o carat revenue services to the Central Coast Cities Self Insurance Fund joint powers authority. These are generally projected to grow about 3%annually. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS The City maintains five special revenue fiords:Downtown Association Fund,Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)Fund,Gas Tax Fund,Transportation Development Act(TDA)Fund(to account.for the 2%required allocation of TDA fiords for bicycle planning)and Law Enforcement Grant Fuad. The following summarizes revenue assumptions for the two largest funds:Gas Tax and CDBG. ® Gasoline Tax Subventions The State allocates a portion of gas tax revenues to cities under four Grows b 1.0%annuallin 2003-05 distinct finding categories on a population basis totaling about$18.00 1200344 revenue $876.500 per capita. Gas tax revenues are restricted by the State for street 2004-05 revenue saes400 purposes only(see Section B,Policies and Objectives-Revenue Distribution,for the City's policy regarding the use of gas tax revenues). They are projected to grow at 1.0%annually during 2003-05. H-5 FINANCIALANDSTATISTICAL a 0 SUMMARY OF KEY REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS ® Comm Development Block Grant Community development block grant fiords are allocated by the federal Bated on Fadmated Allocation government to eligible local agencies for housing and community 2003-04 revenue $115561000 development purposes. Within general program guidelines to assure that 2004-05 revenue $842.200 federal program goals are being met,entitlement cities determinetheir own projects and priorities. The 2003-04 estimate imchudes carryover finds from prior years. ENTERPRISE FUNDS The City mamtams five enterprise fiords,which account for about 45%of the City s fiscal operations:water,sewer, parking,transit and golf. Comprehensive rate reviews and revenue requirement projections for the next four years are presented to the Council as part of the 2003-05 Financial Plan process for each of these fiords.The following is a brief overview of the enterprise find revenue issues and the rate actions taken by the Council on June 1,2004 as part of the 2004-05 Supplement process- ® Water Fund Largely to accomplish the City's long-term water supply goal,water 12003-W mvnue $1 1,446,aoo rates will increase by 9%effective July 1,2004. This is the first of 2004-05 revenue $10,966,600 several rate increases-estimated to range from 9%to 5%amorally-that will be necessary over the next seven years to pay for the Nacimiento pipeline amply project,as well as other needed infrastruchue improvements. The 2004-05 budget also assumes a significant increase in development impact fees to.find new developmenes share of the Nacimiento project ® Sewer Fund In order to continue supporting an adequate capital improvement plan 2603.04 mwmw $&A48.ao0 and avoid large rate increases in the future;the Council approved 2004-05 revenue $9AOI,700 modest rate.increases of 5.5%in 2003-04 and 6.5%in 2004-05. The 2004-05 rate reflects a 1.5%increase over previously adopted rates. ® ParkJ=Fund As previously approved,a$0.15 per hour increase in daily parking 12003-0a revenue $s,3m,7oo garage fees and a corresponding increase to pass card fees will be 2004-05 reve ar S3.593,500 effective July 1,2004. A previously approved increase of$10 per month on 10-hour meter permits will also become effective July 1,2004. ■ Transit Fund Transit fares are not scheduled to increase:apportionments currently 2003-04 revenue $2,755,700 anticipated from the Federal Transit Administration and State 2004-05 revenue S2.541AN Transportation Development Act are adequate to fiord current transit service levels.However,we need to continue closely monitoring fire box recovery ratios for compliance with State regulations. ® Golf Fund Modest increases of 25 cents per round(about 3%)will apply to the 2003-04 revenue $295.340 basic rate structure. The General Fund operating transfer is $9,900 less 2004.05 revenue S304,100 than projected at mid-year. H-6 FINANCIAL AND STATISTICAL TABLES REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200405 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET GENERAL D Tax Revenues Sales&use tax General 10,099,200 10,179,300 10,964,300 11,468,200 Public safety(Proposition 172) 217,300 230,600 237,500 244,600 Property.tax 5,219,000 5,584,200 5,947;300 6,333,900 Transient occupancy tax 3,790,300 3,840,800 3,840,800 3,956,000 Utility users tax 3,532;300 3,666,200 3,820,500 3,973,300 Franchise fees 1,388,100 1,356,200 1,830,800 1,956,500 Business tax certificates 1,355900 1,429,900 1,487,100 1,546,600 Real property transfer tax 205,200 216,000 215,000 215,000 Total Tax Revenues 259807,300 26,503,200 28,343,300 29,694,100 Fines and Forfeitures Vile code fines 216,900 221,500 220,000 220,000 Other fines and forfeitures 104,800 109,100 110,000 110,000 Total Filmes and Forfeitures 3219700 330,600 330,000 330,000 Investment and Property Revenues Investment earnings 700,800 766,000 300,000 300,000 Rents&concessions 41,700 46,700 47,000 47,000 Total Investment and Property Revenues 742,500 812,700 3479000 347,000 From Other Governments Motor vehicle in-lieu 2,467,400 2,621,600 1,896,400 2,840,100 Homeowners&othu property taxes in-lieu 81,800 81,300 82,000 84,000 Oil=in-lieu taxes 44,600 45,800 47,400 48,800 SB 90 rets - - - - Police training(POST) 48,000 40,100 82,400 84,900 Traffic Safety Grant 131,400 COPS grafi AB3229 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Mutual Aid reimbursements 337,600 596,600 518,300 Booking fee reimbursement 105,400 105,400 105,400 105,400 Other state&federal grants 57,300 62,000 84,800 Total From Other Governments 3,373,500 3,652,800 2,916,700 3,263,200 Service Charges Police Services Accident reports 3,100 3,800 4,100 4,200 Alum pests 114,400 131,600 123,000 126,100 DUI cost recovery 10,000 4,100 6,200 6,400 Second response fees 1,600 4,300 5,200 5,300 Booking fee reimbursements 18,500 16,600 17,700 18,100 Tobacco permit fees 12,500 12,500 Other police services 23,100 46,500 49,200 50,400 TntalPolice Sen*es 170,700 206,900 217,900 223,000 H-7 FINA I NC I I AL ♦ , STATI STICAL • C REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Fire Services Cal Poly fire services 168,000 167,100 200,000 200,000 Medical emergency recovery 120,300 131,900 126,100 129,900 Fire-safety/haz that permits 41,800 28,100 50,200 51,700 CUPA fees 18,700 19,300 78,200 80,500 Other fire services 66,600 11,900 4,500 4,500 Total pAre Servkes 415,400 358,300 459,000 466,600 Transportation Maintenance of state highways 23,700 24,400 25,000 25,000 Zone 9 reimbursements 83,800 67,000 67,000 67,000 Total Transportation 107,500 91,400 92,000 92,000 Development Review Planning&zoning fees 456,800 480,700 658,400 946,300 Construction plan check&inspections 1,512,000 1,410,900 1,179,800 1,380,000' inf astruct+±r•plan check&inspections 335,000 76,900 177,100 187,900 Eitcroachnient permits 58,100 60,800 188,100 206,000 Fire plan check&inspections 263,500 178,400 165,000 180,000 Total Development Review 2,625,400 2,207,700 2,368,400 2,900,200 Parks and Recreation Adult athletic fees 107,200 93,800 103,000 106,100 Youth athletic fees 21,900 20,300 32,000 33,000 Instruction fees 85,700 98,000 97,900 100,800 Special event fees 64,600 77,600 73,900 76,200 Rental&use fees 84,800 77,500 71,800 74,000 Children services 485,000 494,500 539,600 550,500 Teens&seniors 23,700 21,800 24,300 25,000 Aquatics 141,900 150,800 148,500 153,000 Other recreation revenues - 4,400 3,600 3;700 Total Parks and Recreation 1,014,800 1,038,700 1,094,600 1,122x300 General Government Sales of publications 20,300 39,500 35,000 35,000 CCCJPA reimbursements 50,000 51,500 54,000 10,100 USA marking fees 400 400 Other service charges 5,800 17,400 20,000 20,000 Total General Government 76,100 108,400 1.09,400 65,500 Total Service Charges 41409,900 4,011,400 4,341,300 4,869,600 Other Revenues Insurance refunds 137,400 7,200 Sale of surplus property 93,200 Other reveres 42,300 97,700 77,100 75,000 Total Other Revenues 179,700 104,900 170v300 75,000 Total General Fund _349834,600 3574159600 36,448,600 38,578,900 H-8 FINANCIAL • ® STATISTICAL TABLES REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE 2001-02 2002-03 .2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET e Downtown Association Fund Investment and Property Revenues 6,200 3,700 4,000 4,000 Service Charges Business tax surcharge 163,700 155,300 140,400 144,600 Other service charges 238,500 243,000 217,000 236,000 Total Downtown Association Fund 408,400 402,000 3619400 384,600 Community Development Block Grant Fund From Other Govemments 1,176,000 1,1519700 1,556,000 842,200 Gas Tax Fund From Other Governments 980,900 978,300 876,500 885,200 Transportation Development Act Fund From Other Governments 21,200 34,600 20,500 21,100 Law Enforcement Grant Fund Invesmtent and Property Revenues 20,700 9,100 10,000 10,000 From Other Governments 53,400 179,100 107,800 Service Charges 16,700 13,400 10,300 10,600 Total Law Enforcement Grant Fund 90,800 201;600 1289100 209600 PROJECTCAPITAL Capital Outlay Fund From Other Governments State of California Traffic safety grant 40,000 Surface transportation program(STIP/SLTPP) 738,300 1,162,000 1,069,000 State SHA grant 1,686,100 - 1,032,400 Other state grants 7,900 538,700 540,000 Federal Government Highway and bridge rehabilitation and replacement(HBRR) 2,022,500 338,700 4,784,500 64,000 Transportation enhancement(TEAj 37,900 552,200 Other federal grants - 69,300 500,000 Service Charges 47,400 Other Revenues Sale of surplus property - 490,500 Contributions 113,800 133,900 52,000 Total Capital Outlay Fund 3,822,400 1,2569700 8,729,000 2,213,000 Parkland Development Fund Investment and Property Revenues 21,900 30,700 20,000 20,000 From Other Governments - 403,500 125,000 Service Charges Park in-lieu fees 493,600 170,900 5,000 5,000 Dwelling unit charge 4,900 2,400 5,000 5,000 Other Revenues - Total Parkland Development Fund 520,400 204,000 433,500 155;000 H-9 FINA-NCIAL ► , STATISTICAL TABLES REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Transportation Impact Fee Fund Investment and Property Revenues 39,200 44,400 10,000 10,000 From Other Governments - 605;500 Service Charges 638,200 1;275,600 415,800 834,600 Total Transportation Impact Fee Fund 677,400 1,320,000 1,031,300 844,600 Fleet Replacement Fund Investment and Property Revenues 37,300 16,800 15,000 15,000 Other Revenues Sale of surplus property 96,600 10,700 _40,000 40,000 Total Equipment Replacement Fund 133,900 27,%0 55,000 55,000 Open Space Protection Fund Investment and Property Revenues 24,400 4,100 2,000 2,000 From Other Governments 1,921,300 456,900 3,525,000 2,030,000 Service Charges 58,800 - Other Revenues 105,800 - Total Open Space Protection Fund 2,110,300 461,000 3;527,000 3,032,000 Airport Area Impact Fee Fund Investment and Property Revenues 10,900 10,400 6,000 6,200 Service Charges 39,200 136,700 28,100 28,900 Total Airport Area Impact Fee Fund 50,100 147,100 34,100 35,100 Affordable Housing Fund Investment and Property Revenues 20,000 28,300 15,300 15,800 Service Charges 464,900 747,800 463,500 477,400 Total Affordable Housing Fund 484,900 776,100 478,800 493,200 TOTAL-GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 45,3111300 42,376400 531679,800 46,560,500 ENTERPRISE & AGENCY FUNDS Water Fund Investment and Property Revenues 504,300 443,500 250,000 184,600 Subventions&Grants 5,000 5,000 2,869,500 Service Charges 9,578,900 10,400,500 8,811,900 10,357,000 Other Revenues - 88,600 15AQ 15,000 Total Water Fund 10,088400 1099379600 11,946,400 10,556,600 Sewer Fund Investment and Property Revenues 173,600 163,300 143,900 66,300 Service Charges 8,153,800 8,265,900 8,104,900 8,935,400 Other Revenue - Total Sewer Fund 8,327,400 8,429,200 8448,800 9,001,700 Parking Fund Fines and Forfeitures 635,700 699,900 745,000 763,500 Investment and Property Revenues 237,700 254,400 181,500 191,000 Subventions&Grants 75,000 Service Charges 2,006,400 2,202,800 2,884,200 2,639,000 Other Revenue - 1,510,000 Total Parldng Fund 2,879,800 3,232,100 5,320,700 3,593,500 H-10 FINANCIAL AND a aTABLES REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY AND SOURCE 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Transit Fund Investment and Property Revenues 5,700 2,600 2,600 From Other Governments 2,748,200 2,656,100 2,365,700 2,139,300 Service Charges 370,500 362,800 385,400 397,500 Other Revenues - 4,900 2,000 2,000 Total Transit Fund 3;118,700 3,029,500 2,755,700 2,541,400 Golf Fund Investment and Property Revenues 1,600 3,000 1,500 1,500 Service Charges 271,000 279,800 293,800 302,600 Total Golf Fund 272,600 282,800 295,300 304,100 Whale Rock Commission Investment and Property Revenues 30,100 22,400 20,000 20,000 Service Charges 755,200 641,000 1,014,600 948,900 Total Whale Rock Commission.Fund 785,300 663,400 1,034,600 %8,900 Total Enterprise&Agency Funds 25,4729000 26,574,600 29,6019500 26,966,200 TOTAL-ALL FUNDS $70 783 %8,950.800 $83 1 $73,526,700 H-11 FINANCIAL AND • • TABLES TOTAL EXPENDITURES BY TYPE AND FUNCTION 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET OPERATING PROGRAMS Public Safety 13,897,200 15,328,000 17,165,000 18,301,400 Public Utilities 7,928,900 8,280,200 9,882,500 9,518,500 Transportation 4,411,400 4,915,000 4,997,300 4,990,500 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 4,908,100 5,128,800 5,667,400 5,869,000 Community Development 4,406,800 4,548,400 5,510,400 5,282,400 General Government 6,811,300 7,364,600 8,758300 9,061,800 Total Operating Programs 42,363,700 45,565,000 51,980,900 53,023,600 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Public Safety 716,200 971,600 1,801,500 935,000 Public Utilities 4,891,100 4,144,800 25866,300 19,837,300 Transportation 13,902,200 6,911,600 35,073,100 6,180,300 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 1,104,500 3,335,100 6,918,100 698,200 Community Development 3,018,000 503,500 4,390,100 2,330,000 General Government 571,500 531,700 1,292,200 963,800 Total Capital Improvement Plan 24,203,500 16,398;300 75341,300 30,944,600 DEBT SERVICE Public Safety 263,700 261,906 270,600 257,100 Public Utilities 3,295,500 3,228,700 3,526,900 4,090,800 Transportation 1,057,800 1,504,100 1,446,300 1,281,800 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 1,281,300 1,262,800 1,320,000 1,264,800 Community Development General Government 110,100 110,900 113,000 - . 107,400 Total Debt Service 6,008,400 6,368,400 64676,800 7,0019900 TOTAL EXPENDITURES Public Safety 14,877,100 16,561;500 19,237,100 19,493,500 Public Utilities 16,115,500 15,653,700 39,275,700 33,446,600 Transportation 19,371,400 13,330,700 41,516,700 12,452,600 Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 7,293,900 9,726,700 13,905,500 7,832,000 Community Development 7,424,800 5,051,900 9,900,500 7,612,400 General Government 7,492,960 8,007,200 10,163,500 10,133,000 Total Expenditures 72,575,600 68,331,700 133,999,000 90,970,100 H-12 FINANCIAL • ® STATISTICAL TABLES INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS-REIMBURSEMENT TRANSFERS 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200405 ACTUAL ACTUAL BURG= BUDGET General Fund (2,895,900) (2,982,500) (3,393,200) (3,472,600) Community Development Block Grant Fund 28,200 29,300 69,100 48,800 Enterprise and Agency Funds Water 1,104,500 1,137,600 1,321,200 1,360,800 Sewer 986,400 1,015,500 1,076,900 1,109,200 Parking 313,200 322,600 413,800 426,200 Transit 270,800 278,900 285,800 294,400 Golf 113700 117,100 103,200 106,300 Whale Rock Commission 79,100 81,500 123,200 126,900 Total Enterprise and Agency Funds 2,867,700 2,953,200 3,324,100 3,423,800 NET REIMBU1LgEXIENT TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 $0 SLImmary of .. All of the Citys General Government and CiP Project Engineering program are initially accounted and budgeted for in the General Fund However,these support service programs also benefit the City's CDBG,enterprise and agency fiord operations; and accordingly,transfers are made from these fiords to reimburse the General Fund for these services. These transfers are based on a Cost Allocation Plan prepared for this purpose which distributes these shared costs in a uniform,consistent manner in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.Copies of the most current Cost Allocation Plan are available from the Department of Finance&Information Technology upon request. For fiscal years 2003-05,the following is a summary of total general government,CII'project engineering and facility use costs,and the percentage level supported by the General,CDBG, Enterprise and Agency Funds: 2003-04 2004-05 General Government Programs City Council 101,300 119,900 General Administration City Administration 540,100 561;300 Public Works Administration 905,400 940,400 Transportation Planning&Engineering 410,200 412,700 Parks&Recreation Administration 552,000 576,700 Legal Services 384,700 392,000 City Clerk Services 388,900 436,600 Organiational:Support Services Finance,Human Resowces,Information Technology and Geographic Information Services 3,386,200 3,616,700 Risk Management and Insurance Emcpendium 1,044,100 1,054,200 Other Support Services(telephones,copiers;etc) 437,800 451,100 Buildings and Fleet Maintenance 1,434,600 1,489,600 Total General Government Programs 9485,300 10,051,200 CEP Project Engineering Program 1,142,500 1,193,000 Facilities and Equipment Use 3,602,200 3,710,300 Total Reimbursed Programs 14,330,000 14,954,500 Percent Funded By General Fund 771* 77% Enterprise and Agency Funds 23% 23% Total Reimbursed Programs 100% 100% ------------ H-13 FINANCIAL • 0 STATISTICAL TABLES DiTERFUND TRANSACTIONS-OPERATING TRANSFERS 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET General Fund Operating Transfers In Gas Tax Fund 869,800 863,200 876,500 885,200 TDA Fund 21,200 34,600 20,500 21,100 Law Enforcement Block Grant Fund 43,700 1,000 Total operating transfers in 934,700 897,800 898,000 906,300 Operating Transfers Out Law Enforcement Block Grant Fund (4,900) (91900) Capital Outlay Fund (4574,400) (2,646,500) (3,316,700) (1;744,800) Open Space Protection Fund (250,000) (200,000) (100,000) Fleet Replacement Fund (461,700) (486,700) (433,700) (458,700) Debt Service Fund (1,715,200) (1,696,100) (1,760,200) (1,672,500) Golf Fund (221,700) (252,000) (220,800) (208,900) Total operating transfers out (7,227,900) (5,291,200) (5,731,400) (4,184,900) Total Operating Transfers (6,293,200) (4,393,400) (4,833,400) (3,278,600) Gas Tax Fund Operating Transfer Out General Fund (869,800) .(863,200) (876,500) (885,200) Capital Outlay Fund (111,100) (115,100) Total operating transfers out (980,900) (978,300) (876,500) (885,200) Transportation.Development Act Fund Operating Transfer Out General Fund (21,200) (34,600) (20,500) (21,100) Law Enforcement Block Grant Fund Operating Transfer In General Fund 4,900 9,900 Operating Transfer Out General Fund (43,700) (1,000) Total operating transfers (38,800) 91900 (11000) Capital Outlay Fund Operating Transfer In General Fund 4,574,400 2,646,500 3,316,700 1,744,800 Gas Tax Fund 111,100 115,100 Total operating transfers in 4,685,500 21761,600 3,316,700 1,744,800 Open Space Protection Fund Operating Transfers In General Fund 250,000 200,000 100,000 H-14 FINANCIAL AND • • TABLES INTERFUND TRANSACTIONS -OPERATING TRANSFERS 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Fleet Replacement Fund Operating Transfers In General Find 461,700 486,700 433,700 458,700 Debt Service Fund Operating Transfer In General Fund 19715,200 1,696,100 1,760,200 1,672,500 Water Fund Operating Transfer Out Sewer Fund (10,400) Sewer Fund Operating Transfer Out Water Fund 10,400 Golf Fund Operating Transfer In General Fund 221,700 2529000 220,800 208,900 NET OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 $0 H-15 FINANCIAL ♦ STATISTICAL TABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET ADNUNTSTRATION &0 8.0 8.0 8.0 City Admmistration City Administrative Officer(CAO) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Asdstant CAO 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Assistant to the CAO 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Principal Administrative Analyst 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 CAO Executive Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Total City Administration 4.4 4A 4.4 4A Natural Resource Protection Natural Resources Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 City Biologist 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Total Natural Resources Protection 23 23 23 23 Economic Development Economic Development Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Total Economic Development 13 13 13 13 CITY ATTORNEY 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Legal Services City Attorney 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Assistant City Attorney 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Legal Assistant/Paralegal 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Legal Services 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 CITY CLERK 4 4.0 3.0 3.0 Records and Administration City Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Assistant City Clerk 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Administrative Assistant 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Total City Clerk 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 110AA N RESOtWn 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Human Resources Administration Director of Human Resources 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Human Resources Analyst 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Human Resources Executive Assistant 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Human Resources Specialist 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 Total Human Resources Administration 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Risk Management Risk Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 H-16 FINANCIAL AND a ► TABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET FLNANCE&MFORMA17ION TECHNOLOGY 19.0 22.0 20.0 20.0 Finance&Information Technology(171)Administration Director of Finance&Information Technology 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Total Finance&IT Administration 2.0 2.0 lA 1.0 Accounting Accounting Manager 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Finance Manager 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 Accounting Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Accounting Assistant 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Accounting 6.0 6.0 55 55 Revenue Management Revenue Manager 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Finance Manager 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 Customer Services Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Accounting Assistant 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Revenue Management 6.0 6.0 55 55 Information Technology Information Technology Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Telecommunications Supervisor 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Information Systems Technician 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Radio Systems Technician(1) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 TelemetryAnshmmmffition Technician(2) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Information Technology 5.0 8.0 &0 &0 1. Transferred from Fire during 2002-03. 2. Transferred from Utilities during 1002-03. COMMUMW DEVELOI MW" 19.0 19.0 19.0 I9.0 Community Development Administration Director of Community Development 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Supervising Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 3.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 Permit Technician 0.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 Total Administration 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Planning Development Review Deputy Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Planning Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Associate Planner 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Total Planning Development Review 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Long-Range Planning Deputy Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Associate Planner 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Long-Range Planning 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 H-17 FINANCIAL AND STATISTICAL TA AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Budding&Safety Chief Building Official 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Building Permit Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Building Inspector 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Building inspector 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Plans Examiner 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Code Enforcement Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Building&Safety 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 1&0 1&0 I PARKS&REC REAMN', ��7 67, Parks&Recreation Administration Parks&Recreation Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Recreation Manager 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Supervising Administrative Assistant 1.0 1,.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0- -1.0 Total Parks&Recreation Administration 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Aquatics Recreation Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Aquatics 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Children's Services Recreation Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Children's Services 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Adult Athletics,Classes&Facility Rentals Recreation Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Adult Athletics,Classes&Facility Rentals 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Major Special Events/Facilities Recreation Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Major Special Events/Facilities 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Youth Sports&Special Events Recreation Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Youth Sports&Special Events 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Teen&Senior Services Recreation Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Teen&Senior Services 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Ranger services Park Ranger Administrator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Ranger Services 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Golf Course Golf Course Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Maintenance Worker 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Golf Course 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 H-18 FINANCIAL • ® STATISTICAL TABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Public Works. Transportation Progrmns 25.5 215 .25.0 25.0 Transportation Planning&Engineering Principal Transportation Planner 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 City Traffic.Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Transportation Associate 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Transportation Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Transportation Planning&Engineering 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Pavement Maintenance Streets Maintenance Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Heavy,Equipment Operator 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Maintenance Worker 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Pavement Maintenance 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 General Street Maintenance Streets Maintenance Supervisor 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Maintenance Wow 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total General Street Maintenance 5.0 5.0 4.0 70- Signal Signal&Light Maintenance Signal Maintenance Electrician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Signal&Eight Maintenance 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Creek&Flood Protection Heavy,Equipment Operator 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Maintenance Worker 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Creek&Flood Protection 25 25 25 2.5 Parking Parking Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lead Parking Attendant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Parking Enforcement Officer 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Parking Meter Repair Worker 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Parking 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Transit Transit Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Transportation Assistant 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 Total Transit 1.0 1.0 15 15 Public Works:Lecture,Cultural&Social Services Program: 15.0 15.0 13.0 13.0 Parks&Landscape Maintenance Parks Supervisor 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 Parks Maintenance Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Maintenance Worker 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 Total Parks&Landscape Maintenance 11.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 H-19 FINANCIAL AND STATISTICAL TABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED- BUDGET Swim Center Maintenance Building Maintenance Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Swim Center Maintenance 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Tree Maintenance Urban Forestry Supervisor 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Urban Forestry Technician 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Tree Trimmer 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Tree Maintenance 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Pun k Works:Community Developmew Programs 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Engineering Development Review Supervising Civil Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Principal Civil Engineer 0.0 1.0 1.0 1,0 Assistant Engineer 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Associate Engineer 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Assistant 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Engineering Development Review 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 CIP Project Engineering Deputy Director/City Engineer 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Supervising Civil Engineer 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Principal Civil Engineer 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Associate Engineer 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Assistant Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Technician 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Construction Engineering Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Field Engineering Assistant 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Public Works Inspector 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Program&Project Coordinator 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Total CIP Project Engineering 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Public Works:General Governmeet Programs 20.0 20.0 20.5 20.5 Public Works Administration Director of Public Works 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Deputy Director/City Engineer 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Deputy Directoermnsportation&Development Review 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Analyst 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Administrative Services Manager 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Program&Project Coordinator 0.0 0.0 1.0 1;0 Supervising Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 Total Public Works Administration 7.5 7.5 9.5 9.5 Geographic Information Services(GIS) GIS Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 GTS Specialist 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Geographic Information Services 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 H-20 FINANCIAL ♦ e STATISTICAL TABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSMONS BY DEPARTMENT , 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Building Maintenance Facilities Maintenance Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1:0 Building Maintenance Technician 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Maintenance Worker 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0, Total Banding Maintenance 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Fleet Maintenance. Fleet Maintenance Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Heavy Equipment Mechanic 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 Total Fleet Maintenance 35 35 3.0 3.0 1u,'rp{um:Y. 561: Uhilsam Water Service PrW=w 27.1 26.6 26.6 26.6 Water Administration&Engineering Utilities Director 0.5 0.5 0.5 0:5 Deputy Director/Water 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 Utilities Engineer OS 0.5 0.5 0:5 Water Projects Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Administrative Analyst 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Supervising Administrative Assistant 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Administrative Assistant 0.4 0.4 0.4 OA Telemetry/Tnshumentation Technician° 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Water Administration&Engineering 4.8 43 43 43 Water Treatment Treatment Plant Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Treatment Plant Chief Operator 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Treatment Plant Operator 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Treatment Plant Maintenance Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Chief Laboratory Analyst 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Laboratory Analyst 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 Total Water Treatment 83 83 83 83 Water Distribution Distribution Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Utility Worker 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Total Water Distribution 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Water Customer Service Water Service Worker 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Total Water Customer Service 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Utilities Conservation Office Utilities Conservation Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Utilities Conservation Technician 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Utilities Conservation Office 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 ° Transferred to Information Technology during 2002-03. H-21 FINANCIAL AND • ♦ TABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET Utilitfes: Wastewater Service Programs 27.0 26.6 26.6 26.6 Wastewater Administration&Engineering Utilities Director 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Deputy Director/Wastewater 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Utilities Engineer. 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Senior Administrative Analyst 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Supervising Administrative Assistant 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Administrative Assistant 03 03 03 0.3 Telemetry/Instrumentation Technician* 0.4 0.0 0.0 _ 0.0 Total Water Administration&Engineering 33 2.9 2.9 2.9 Wastewater Collection Wastewater Collection Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Utility Worker 6.0 6.0 3.0 3.0 Wastewater Systems Collection Operator 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 Total Wastewater Collection 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Wastewater Pretreatment Industrial Waste Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Industrial Waste Inspector 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Wastewater Pretreatment 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Water Reclamation Facility Wastewater Reclamation Plant Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Chief Laboratory Analyst 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 Laboratory Analyst 2.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 Water Reclamation Cbief Operator 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Water Reclamation Operator(One position frozen for 2003 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 Chief Maintenance Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Maintenance Technician 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Water Reclamation Facility 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 Utilities: Whale Rock Reservoir 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 Whale Rock Administration&Engineering Utilities Director 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Deputy Director/Wastewater 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Utilities Engineer 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Senior Administrative Analyst 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Supervising Administrative Assistant 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Administrative Assistant 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Telemetry/Instramentation.Technician* 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Whale Rook Administration&Engineering 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 Reservoir Operations Supply Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Water Supply Operator 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Reservoir Operations 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 ° Transferred to Information Technology during 1001-03. H-22 FINANCIAL AND STATISTICAL TABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSMONS BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET pocE4. 7-0 -893 " .. r Police Administration Police Chief 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Captain 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Police Lieutenant° 1.0 1:0 1.0 1.0 Police Sergeant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Analyst 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 Total Police Administration 6.0 6.0 65 6S Police Support Services Communications Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Communications Supervisor 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Communications Technician 12.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Records Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Records Cly 4.5 4.5 4:5 4.5 Maintenance Worker 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Public Safety Information System Coordinator 1.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Police Support Services 20.5 195 19.5 19.5 Neighborhood&Crime Prevention Services Neighborhood Services Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - Total .0 _Total Neighborhood&Crime Prevention Services 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Patrol Services Captain 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Police Lieutenant 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Police Sergeant 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Police Officer 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 Field Service Technician 2.0 2.0 2.0 .2.0 Total Patrol Services 44.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 Traffic Safety Police Sergeant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Pow Of=° 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Total Traffic Safety 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Investigative Services Police Lieutenant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Police Officer 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Evidence Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Field Service Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Investigative Services 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 °Beginning 2003-04, one Police Lieutenant position and one Police Officer position arefrozen indefinitely. Sworn Positions 61.0 61.6 61.0 61.0 Non-Sworn Positions 28.5 27.5 28.0 28.0 Tond Positions 895 8&5 89.0 890 H-23 FINANCIAL AND • • TABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSMONS BY DEPARTMENT 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET FIRE 55.0 54.0 53.0 53.0 Fire Administration Fire Chief 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Analyst 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 Total Fire Administration 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 Emergency Response Battalion Chief 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Fire Captain 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.Q Fire Engineer 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Firefighter 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Fire Vehicle Mechanic 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Emergency Response 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 Hazard Prevention Fire Marshal 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Hazardous Materials Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Fire Inspector 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total Hazard Prevention 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Radio Communication Services Radio Systems Technician" 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Radio Communication Services 1.0 OA 0.0 0.0 s Sworn Positions 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 Non-Sworn Positions 9.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 Total Positions 55.0 54.0 53.0 53.0 TOTAL REGULAR POSITIONS 352.8 352.6 347.3 347.3 H-24 FINANCIAL AND • aTABLES AUTHORIZED REGULAR POSITIONS BY FUNCTION 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET PUBLIC SAFETY Police Protection 89.5 88.5 89.0 89.0 FIIe&Environmental Safety 55.0 54.0 53.0 53.0 Total Public Safety 1445 142.5 142.0 142.0 PUBLIC UTIIJTIES Water Service 27.1 26.6 26.6 26.6 Wastewater Service 27.0 26.6 26.6 26.6 Whale Rock Reservoir 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 Total Public Utilities 57.8 56.8 56.8 56.8 TRANSPORTATION Transportation Planning&Engineerring 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Streets 11.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 Creek&Flood Protection 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Parking 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Municipal Transit System 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 Total Transportation 25.5 25.5 25.0 25.0 LEISURE CULTURAL&SOCIAL SERVICES Recreation Programs 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Mabnenance Services 15.0 15.0 13.0 13.0 Golf Course Operations&Mamtenance 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Total Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 30.0 30.0 28.0 28.0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Pig 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Natural Resource Protection 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Economic Development 1.3 1.3 1.3 13 Building&Safety 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Engineering Development Review 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 CIP Project Engineering 14.0 14.0 14.0 . 14.0 Total Community Development 39.6 39.6 39.6 39.6 GENERAL GOVERNMENT City Administration 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 Public Works Administration 7.5 7.5 9.5 9.5 Legal Services 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 City Clerk Services 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 Human Resources Programs 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Finance&Information Technology 19.0 22.0 20.0 20.0 Geographic Information Services 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Building Maintenance 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Fleet Maintenance 3.5 3.5 _ 3.0 3.0 Total General Government 55.4 58A 55.9 55.9 TOTAL REGULAR POSITIONS 352.8 352.8 3473 3473 H-25 FINANCIAL • , STATISTICAL TABLES TEMPORARY FULL-TME EQUIVALENTS(FM'S)BY FUNCTION 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200405 ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED BUDGET PUBLIC SAFETY Police Protection 5.3 3.5 3.5 3.5 Fire&Environmental Safety 1.9 2.6 2.6 2.6 Total Public Safety 7.2 6.1 6.1 6.1 PUBLIC unuriIFFS Water Service 0.3 0.8 1.1 1.6 Whale Rock Reservoir 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 Total Public Utilities 0.7 1.2 1.1 1.6 TRANSPORTATION Streets 3A 3.4 0.9 0.9 Creek&Flood Protection 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Parking 5.3 6.6 7.6 7.6 Total Transportation 8.8 10.1 8.6 8.6 LEISURE,CULTURAL&SOCIAL SERVICES Recreation Programs 50A 50.6 48.5 50.1 Maintenance Services 6.5 6.5 9.5 9.5 Golf Course Operations&Maintenance 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Total Leisure,Cultural&Social Services 59x4 59.6 60.5 62.1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT pInnnrag 2.6 2.6 3.5 3.5 Building&Safety 0.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 CIP Project Engineering 3.8 2.5 3.5 3.5 Downtown Association 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 Total Community Development 9.8 9.4 113 113 GENERAL GOVERNMENT City Administration 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 Public Works Administration 03 03 03 0.3 City Attorney 0.1 0.2 0.2 02 City Clerk Services 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 Hannan Resources Administration 0.2 02 02 0.2 Risk Management 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Finance&Information Technology 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.4 Geographic Information Services 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 Fleet Maintenance 0.0 0.0 03 0.3 Total General Government 3.0 3.8 3.6 3.6 TOTAL TEMPORARY FTE'S 88.9 .90.2 91.2 933 H-26 TINANCIAL AND-STATISTICAL T APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT HISTORY The Gann Spending Limit Initiative,a State constitutional amendment adopted by the voters on June 6, 1979,restricts Appropriations Limit:1979 to 2005 appropriations from tax revenues by State and local governments. y10'0°°°°° Under its provisions;no local agency can appropriate proceeds of taxes in excess of its"appropriations limit." Excess fiords may sio aoo oao -be carried over into the next year. However,any excess fiords remaining after the second year must be returned to taxpayers by reducing tax rates or fees;or a majority of the voters may approve �- an override to increase the limit. sso,000,oao The following summarizes changes in the City's appropriations limit and appropriations subject to the limit since the effective date of the initiative. While there are exceptions,in general,the Citys s appropriations limit increases annually by compound changes in $ - - - $ S - - - - cost-of-living and population. This summary also reflects changes wm r9aa Eao made by Proposition 111(adopted in June 1990)in detlermining F-AWWMWM Umt ®nvc to Uma the appropriations limit as well as the appropriations subject to it. Fiscal Year Limit 3asl.e Factor Factor Limit Subject to Limit varialic� 1978-79 $8,018,200 $8,018,200 1979-80 $8,018,200 10.17% -034% 8,803,600 6,189,700 2,613,900 1980-81 8,803,600 12.11% 0S2% 9,921,000 5,795,500 4,125,500 1981-82 9,921,000 9.12% 1.03% 10,937,300 8,296,800 2,640,500 1982-83 10,937,300 6.79% 2.59% 11,982,500 8,247,800 3,734,700 1983-84 11,982,500 2.35% 1.420/a 12,438,200 9,414,900 3,023,300 1984-85 12,438,200 4.74°/9 2.13% 13,305,300 10,356,500 2,948,800 1985-86 13,305,300 3.74% 2.04% 14,084,500 11,451,800 2,632,700 1986-87 14,084,500 2.30% 2.97°/9 14,836,300 13,081,800 1,754,500 Pre-Proposition 111 1987-88 14,836,300 3.04% 0.71% 15,395,900 14,41.1,700 984,200 1988-89 15,395,900 3.93% 4.10% 16,657,000 15,223,500 1,433,500 1989-90 16,657,000 4.98% 2.93% 17,998,800 16,753,800 1,245,000 Post-Proposition 111 1987-88 14,836,300 3.47°/9 2.93% 15,800,900 14,411,700 1,389,200 1989-89 15,800,900 4.66% 4.10% 17,215,200 15,223,500 1,991,700 1989-90 17,215,200 5.19% 3.92% 18,818,600 16,691,800 2,126,800 1990-91 18,818,600 4.21% 4-59% 20,511,000 15,005,400 5,505,600 1991-92 20,511,000 4.14% 3.04°/9 22,009,500 14,911,100 7,098,400 1992-93 22,009,500 -0.64% 1.00°/9 22,087,300 18,094,900 3,992,400 1993-94 22,087,300 2.72% 1.86% 23,110,100 15,215,000 7,895,100 199495 23,110,100 0.71% 1.40% 23,600,000 16,778,400 6,821,600 1995-96 23,600,000 4.72% 1.600/6 25,109,300 15,530,800 9,578,500 1996-97 25,109,300 4.67% 2.31% 26,889,000 16,825,500 10,063,500 1997-98 26,889,000 4.67% 2.06% 28,724,500 17,513,200 11,211,300 199&99 28,724,500 4.15% 2.70% 29,671,300 17,291,800 12,379,500 1999-00 29,671,300 4.53% 2.28% 31,717,100 18,030,500 13,686,600 2000-01 31,717,100 4.91% 2.46% 34,093,000 18,802,000 15,291,000 2001-02 34,093,000 0.33% 1.80% 34,820,900 23;227,900 11,593,000 2002-03 34,820,900 0.33% 1.800/0 35,564,400 25,040,000 10,524,400 2003-04° 35,564,400 2.31% 132°/a 36,865,900 26,022,400 10,843,500 12004-050 36,865,900 3.28% 1.15% 38513,100 27,670400 10,842,700 •Approprutnons subject to limit are estimates for these years. H-27 FINANCIAL AND a a TABLES REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE TRENDS -LAST FIVE COMPLETED YEARS 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Inchrdes all goventotadal fund"a ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL REVENUES Taxes Sales and use 8,272,600 9,480,000 9,737,000 10,316,500 10,409,900 Property 4,169,300 4,501,300 4,799,800 5,219,000 5,584,200 Utility users 2,943,400 3,079,100 3,425,200 3,532,300 3,666,200 Transient occupancy 3,256,800 3,582,700 3,920,200 3,790,300 3,840,800 Franchise fees 883,900 1,089,600 1,211,800 1,388,100 1,356,200 Business tax certificates 1,041;500 1,107,800 1,275,200 1,355,900 1,429,900 Real property transfer 167,200 158,300 198,000 205,200 216,000 TotalTaxes 20,734,700 22,998,800 .24,567,200 25,807,300 26,503,200 Fines and Forfeitures 239,400 278,200 276,700 321,700 330,600 htvestmeat and Property Revenues 671,000 1,077,700 1,410,700 923,100 960,200 From Other Govermmts 5,786,600 5,866,100 6,811,900 11,234,900 7,576,200 Service Charges 4,437,400 4,867,300 5,205,500 6,528,400 6,755,200 Other Revenues 290,600 124,100 1,481,100 495,900 250,800 Total Revenues 32,159,700 35412,200 39,753,100 45,311,300 4293769200 ERPENDIIURES Operating Programs Public.Safety 11,146,400 11,483,800 12,181,900 13,897,200 15,328,000 Transportation 1,890,000 1,501,100 1,659,700 1,954,100 2,015,900 Leisure,Cnhural&Social Services 3,558,200 3,972,100 4,295,800 4,540,000 4,753,800 Community Development 3,444,100 3,437,100 3,962,800 4,406,800 4,548,400 General Government 3,427,100 3,868,800 3,888,400 _ 3,943,600 4,411,400 Total Operating Programs 23,465,800 24,262,900 25,988,600 28,741,700 31,057;500 Capital Outlay 6,240,500 11,576,400 9,253,200 12,222,400 9,326,800 Debt Service 1,346,500 1,505,000 2,395,700 2,036,700 2,018,000 Total Expenditures 31,0529800 37,344,300 3796379500 43,000,800 4294029300 OTHER SOURCES(USES) Operating Transfers In(Out) (127,800) (172,700) (218,700) (221,700) (252,000) Proceeds from(uses of)Debt Fundings 800,500 6,992,400 313,300 (163,300 471,600 Total Other Sources(Uses) 6r2,9006,19,700 94 219,600 Excess of Revenues&Sources Over(Under)Expenditures&Uses 19779,600 407,600 2410,200 1,925,500 193,500 Fund Balance,Beginning of Year 14,494,700 16,2749300 20,9611.900 23,M809300 25,305,800 Fund Balance,End of Year General Fund 7,448,400 7,970,100 9,069,300 9,452,000 10,069,400 Special Revenue Finds 20,100 69,200 219,600 286,500 332,800 Capital Outlay Funds 7,487,200 11,190,800 12,151,400 13,998,800 13,528,600 Debt Service Find 1,3187600 1,731,800 1,73.1,800 1,568,500 1,568,500 Total-All Governmental Funds $16,274,300 $20,961,900 523,172,100 $25,305,800 525,499,300 H-28 FINANCIAL AND STATISTICAL TABLES DEMOGRAPHIC AND STATISTICAL SUMMARY LOCATION Central Coast of California,235 miles south of San Francisco and 200 miles north of Los Angeles INCORPORATED FORM OF GOVERNMENT February 19, 1856 Council-Mayor-City Administrative Officer Chartered May 1, 1876 POPULATION(JANUARY 112004) PHYSICAL SIZE 44,176 11.0 Square Miles 200 2-03 ee 2004-05 Public Safet:v Fire Sworn petsonad........................................................... 46 46 46 Number of fire stations.................................................. 4 4 4 Police sworn personnel.........................................W............ 61 61 61 Public Utilities - Water services Souses of supply(acre feet) Whale Rock Reservoir capacity(City share)..........:.............................................................. 22,380 Salinas Reservoir capacity....,................................................................................................ 23,800 Groundwater(a=feet pumped calendar year 2003)........................................................... 140 Estimated miles of main line.................................................................:........................................ 200 Customeraccounm......................................................................................................................... 14,160 Wastewater services Treatment plaint capacity(million gallons per day).......................................................................... 5.1 Average daily plant flows(million gallons per day)...................................................................... 4.5 Estimated miles of sewer line......................................................................................................... 130 Streets and Fl. . Estimated miles of paved streets.....................::...........................................................,.................... 120 lmersections with traffic signals....................... .................. 49 Street lights operated&maintained....................................:................................................................ 2,165 Estimated miles of creekbed maimained.....................................................:....:::............................. 29 SERVICES PROVIDED BY OTHER AGENQES Public elementary and secondary schools...........I.................San Luis Coastal Unified School District Cresta Community College.................................................San Luis Obispo Community College District Animal regniation...............................................................San Luis Obispo Comity Property tax collection&administration............................San Luis Obispo County Solid waste collection and disposal........................:........... Private companies under franchise H-29 Section I BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS BUDGET 'REFERENCE MATo IALS OVMVMw Complementing the City's Budget and Fiscal Policies are a number of major policy documents that also guide the preparation and execution of the City's Financial Plan. A brief narrative summary for each of the following documents is provided in Section I of the 2003-05 Financial Plan. Citywide Policy Documents Finance&Information Technology ■ City Charter ■ General Fund Five Year Fiscal Forecast: 2003- ■ Municipal Code 2008 ■ City Council Policies and Procedures Manual ■ Financial Management Manual ■ City Code of Ethics ■ Investment Management Plan ■ General Plan ■ Revenue Management Manual ■ Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center ® Cost Allocation Plan ■ Facilities Master Plan: 1988-2010 ■ Monthly and Quarterly Financial Reports ® Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR) Utilities ■ Information Technology Strategic Plan ■ Urban Water Management Plan ■ Wastewater Management Plan Transportation The following materials are also included in Section I it Short-Range Transit Plan of the 2003-05 Financial Plan to facilitate the r'eader's ■ Access and Parking Management Plan understanding of the CIP document and preparation ■ Pavement Management Plan process: ■ Bicycle Transportation Plan ■ Budget Glossary. Defines terms that may be ■ Flood Management Policy � �r'y Y used in a manner unique to public finance or the Leisure,Cultural&Social Services City's budgetary process in order to provide a common terminology in discussing the City's ■ Parks and Recreation Master Plan financial operations. ■ Public Art Policy ■ Major Preparation Guidelines and Budget Administrative Calendar. Describes the steps, procedures and calendar used in developing and documenting the ® Property Management Manual 2003-05 Financial Plan. B Fleet Management Program ■ Budget Resolution. Provides the resolution ■ Goals and Objectives Reporting System adopted by Council approving the 2003-05 ■ Risk Management Manual Financial Plan and 2003-04 Budget. 77 -77M The 2003.05 Financial Plan Supplement includes the resolution adopted by the Council approving the Supplement and the 2004-05 Budget. I-1 RESOLUTION NO. (2004 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE 2003-05 FINANCIAL PLAN AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 WHEREAS, the Council adopted the 2003-05 Financial Plan on June 17, 2003, which established comprehensive financial and policy guidelines for fiscal years 2003-04 and 2004-05; and WHEREAS, the 2003-05 Financial Plan included appropriations for fiscal year 2004-05; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed proposed changes to the 2003-05 Financial Plan to be effective for fiscal year 2004-05 after holding noticed public hearings;and WHEREAS, the City Administrative Officer has submitted the 2003-05 Financial Plan Supplement and Preliminary 2004-05 Budget to the Council for their review and consideration. NOw,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby approves amendments to the 2003-05 Financial Plan and appropriates funds for fiscal year 2004-05. Upon motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted on June 15, 2004. Mayor David F.Romero ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jonathan P.Lowell, City Attorney I-2