HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-17-2013 ph1 consider financial plan review & adopt budgetcounctL
âqenòa pepopt
Mccti4Datc 6-n-2013
rrcn Number pH 1
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Wayne Padilla, Interim Director of Finance & Information Technology
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF 2013-15 FINANCIAL PLAN
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the 2013-15 Financial Plan and 2013-14 Budget.
DISCUSSION
After extensive community participation and eight Council budget workshops and hearings
beginning in October 2012, the 2013-15 Financial Plan is ready for adoption. Key features of the
upcoming two-year budget include:
Alignrnent of available resources with the delivery of essential services
Reinvestment in Capital Improvement Plans
Cost control measures focused on the increase in staffing costs while maintaining the ability
to attract and retain well-qualifìed employees
Maintenance of the operating fund balances within policy reserve levels
Continuing focus on delivering essential services with local tax dollars generated by the
Measure Y Yz cent sales tax
The 2013-15 Financial Plan includes budget appropriations for 2013-15 of $240.3 million as
summarized below:
Although the City adopts a two-year Financial Plan, appropriations continue to be made annually
under the process. The City Council must adopt the 2013-15 Budget by June 30,2013.
Traditionally, this has been accomplished by resolution. The Budget Resolution is provided as
Attachment I to this report.
a
a
a
a
a
2013-14 2014-15
Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Plan
Debt Service
$ 82,369,900
27,073,100
7,g77,goo
$ 83,198,500
3 8,218,100
7,579,600
TOTAL $111,320,800 $128,996,200
201 3- I 5 Fina ncia I Pla n
PH1.1
Adoption of 2013-15 Financial Plan Page 2
Changes to the Preliminary Financial Plan
In preparing for adoption at this meeting, the Council will have held three budget workshops and
hearings on June 10, l l, and 12,2013. If changes are directed at these hearings, an exhibit to the
Budget Resolution will be issued under separate cover before the meeting on June 17 ,2013.
Budget and Fiscal Policy Changes
A change was made to the Budget and Fiscal Policies to establish the reserve requirement for the
Major Facility Replacement Fund to be that which is adequate to fully fund the improvements
included in the five-year Capital Improvement Plan.
Adopted User Fees and Service Charges
Consistent with adopted City policy, fees are reviewed and updated on an ongoing basis to ensure
they keep pace with cost-of-living as well as changes in methods or levels of service delivery. A
comprehensive cost of services study is undertaken at least every five years with the next one
scheduled for July 2013. In the interim, the City's Master Fee Schedule is adjusted by annual
changes in the Consumer Price Index.
Final Documents
After Council adoption of the 2013-15 Financial Plan, staff will prepare and distribute a final version
reflecting all approved changes from the Preliminary Financial Plan. Based on these changes, staff
will also revise and distribute a final version of the Capital Improvement Plan. Along with a
standard printed distribution of these documents, they will also be published on the City's web site.
Additionally, staff will prepare a Budget-in-Brief that highlights the City's budget process, key
budget features, major City goals and basic "budget facts." This budget summary is widely
distributed: it will be available at all public counters, included with the utility billings in August and
published on the City's web site. With this broad distribution, it will also meet the Measure Y
reporting commitments to the community on the use of these funds.
Ongoing Monitoring
Adoption of the Financial Plan is the beginning of a continuous fïnancial management process.
Ongoing monitoring efforts include:
1. Interím Financial Reports. On-line access to up-to-date financial information is provided to
staff throughout the organization. Additionally, comprehensive financial reports are prepared
monthly to monitor the City's fiscal condition, and a concise but comprehensive report is issued
on a quarterly basis. These are complemented by special reports such as the quarterly Sales Tax
Newsletter, Monthly TOT Report and Monthly Investment Report.
2. Goal Status Reports, Formal reports are provided to the Council on status of Major City Goals,
other important objectives and major Capital Improvement Plan projects at least three times each
year - in the fall, with the Mid-Year Budget Review, and in the spring with the Financial Plan
Supplement preparation. These reports are prepared in addition to ongoing updates through
Agenda reports, Council Notes, and other special reports.
3. Mid-Year Budget Revíews. The Council formally reviews the City's financial condition and
makes course corrections as needed six months after the beginning of each fiscal year.
PH1.2
Adoption of 2013-15 Financial Plan Page 3
4. Generøl Fund Fíve-Year Físcal Forecøsl. Throughout the Financial Plan period, the Council
will receive updates to the Five-Year Fiscal Forecast with the Mid-Year Budget Review and the
Financial Plan Supplement. Additional updates may be provided if large or unexpected changes
to the GeneralFund occur.
5. Financial Plan Supplement for 2014-15. While the City prepares a two-year Financial Plan,
appropriations are still made annually. As such, staff will return to the Council in June 2014 for
formal approval of the 2013-15 Budget. However, these "second year" appropriations will be
based on the foundation developed during the two-year planning and budgetary process. In
short, the Supplemenl is much like a mid-year budget review, and focuses on changes since
adoption of the Financial Plan.
6. Comprehensíve Annual Fínuncíal Report. This year-end report shows the final results of the
City's financial operations for all funds. It includes audited financial statements by the City's
independent certified public accountant as well as a comprehensive transmittal memorandum
highlighting key trends and fìndings about the City's financial condition.
Budget Process Review
Consistent with our long-standing practice, once the Financial Plan process has concluded, we will
review areas where it went well, and areas where we can improve in the future. This will include
soliciting comments from the Council as well as Department Heads, Budget Review Team and key
staff from the departments involved in the budget preparation process. This type of analysis has been
very valuable in the past in surfacing areas of improvement. After completing this review, we will
return to the Council with recommendations for the 2015-17 Financial Plan process.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
2. Legislative draft of Budget and Fiscal Policies
T:\Council Agenda Reports\2013V013-06-17\Financial Plan Review & Adopt Brdget (Lichtig-Codron-Padilla)\CAR - Adoption of2013-l 5 Financial Plan doc
PH1-3
Attachment 1
RESOLUTTON NO. XXXXX (2013 SERTES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING THE 2OI3-15 FINANCIAL PLAN AND 2OI3-15 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City Manager has submitted the 2013-15 Financial Plan to the Council
for its review and consideration in accordance with budget policies and objectives established by
the Council; and
V/HEREAS, the 2013-15 Financial Plan is based upon extensive public comment and
direction of the Council after fourteen scheduled budget workshops and public hearings.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that
the 2013-15 Financial Plan is hereby approved and that the operating, debt service and capital
improvement plan budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2013 and ending June 30, 2014 is
hereby adopted.
On motion of
and on the following vote:
seconded by
AYES:
NOTE:
ABSENT
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted on June 17,2013.
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
Maeve Kennedy-Grimes, City Clerk
APPROVED
Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
PH1.4
Attachment 2
¡UDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
F'INANCIAL PLAN PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION
A. Financial Plan Objectives. Through its Financial Plan, the City will link resources with results by:
l. Identifying comrnunity needs for essential seryices.
2. Organizingthe programs required to provide these essential services.
3. Establishing program policies and goals, which define the nature and level of program services required.
4. Identifiing activities performed in delivering program services.
5. Proposing objectives for improving the delivery of program services.
6. Identifuing and appropriating the resources required to perform program activities and accomplish
program objectives.
7. Setting standards to measure and evaluate the:
a. Output of program activities.
b. Accomplishment of program objectives.
c. Expenditure of program appropriations.
B. Two-Year Budget. Following the City's favorable experience, the City will continue using a two-year
financial plan, emphasizing long-range planning and effective program management. The benefits identified
when the City's first two-year plan was prepared for 1983-85 continue to be realized:
L Reinforcing the irnportance of long-range planning in managing the City's fiscal affairs.
2. Concentrating on developing and budgeting for the accomplishment of significant objectives.
3. Establishing realistic timeframes for achieving objectives.
4. Creating a pro-active budget that provides for stable operations and assures the City's long-term fiscal
health.
5. Promoting more orderly spending patterns.
6. Reducing the amount of time and resources allocated to preparing annual budgets.
C. Measurable Objectives. The two-year hnancial plan will establish measurable program objectives and allow
reasonable time to accomplish those objectives.
D. Second Year Budget. Before the beginning of the second year of the two-year cycle, the Council will review
progress during the first year and approve appropriations for the second fiscal year.
E. Operating Carryover. Operating program appropriations not spent during the first f,rscal year may be
carried over for specific purposes into the second fiscal year with the approval of the City Manager.
F. Goal Status Reports. The status of major program objectives will be formally reported to the Council on an
ongoing, periodic basis.
G. Mid-Year Budget Reviews. The Council will formally review the City's fiscal condition, and amend
appropriations if necessary, six months after the beginning of each fiscal year.
H. Balanced Budget. The City will maintain a balanced budget over the two-year period of the Financial Plan.
This means that:
PH1.5
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
1. Operating revenues must fully cover operating expenditures, including debt service.
2. Ending fund balance (or working capital in the enterprise funds) must meet minimum policy levels. For
the general and enterprise funds, this level has been established at20o/o ofoperating expenditures.
Under this policy, it is allowable for total expenditures to exceed revenues in a given year; however, in
this situation, beginning fund balance can only be used to fund capital improvement plan projects, or
other "one-time," non-recurring expenditures.
FINANCIAL REPORTING AND BI]DGET ADMINISTRATION
C
A. Annual Reporting. The City will prepare annual financial statements as follows
l. In accordance with Charter requirements, the City will contract for an annual audit by a qualihed
independent certif,red public accountant. The City will strive for an unqualif,red auditors' opinion.
2. The City will use generally accepted accounting principles in preparing its annual financial statements,
and will strive to meet the requirements of the GFOA's Award for Excellence in Financial Reporting
program.
3. The City will issue audited financial statements within 180 days after year-end.
B. Interim Reporting. The City will prepare and issue timely interim reports on the City's fiscal status to the
Council and staff. This includes: on-line access to the City's financial management system by City staff;
monthly reports to program managers; more formal quarterly reports to the Council and Department Heads;
mid-year budget reviews; and interim annual reports.
Budget Administration. As set forth in the City Charter, the Council may amend or supplement the budget
at any time after its adoption by majority vote of the Council members. The City Manager has the authority
to make administrative adjustments to the budget as long as those changes will not have a significant policy
impact nor affect budgeted year-end fund balances.
GENERAL REVENUtr MANAGEMENT
A. Diversified and Stable Base. The City will seek to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base to protect
it from short-term fluctuations in any one revenue source.
B. Long-Range Focus. To emphasize and facilitate long-range financial planning, the Cþ will maintain
cunent projections ofrevenues for the succeeding five years.
C. Current Revenues for Current Uses. The City will make all current expenditures with current revenues,
avoiding procedures that balance current budgets by postponing needed expenditures, accruing future
revenues, or rolling over short-term debt.
Interfund Transfers and Loans. In order to achieve important public policy goals, the City has established
various special revenue, capital project, debt service and enterprise funds to account for revenues whose use
should be restricted to certain activities. Accordingly, each fund exists as a separate financing entþ from
other funds, with its own revenue sources, expenditures and fund equity.
D
PH1.6
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
Any transfers between funds for operating purposes are clearly set forth in the Financial Plan, and can only be
made by the Director of Finance & Information Technology in accordance with the adopted budget. These
operating transfers, under which financial resources are transferred from one fund to another, are distinctly
different from interfund borrowings, which are usually made for temporary cash flow reasons, and are not
intended to result in a transfer offinancial resources by the end ofthe fiscal year.
In summary, interfund transfers result in a change in fund eguity; interfund borrowings do not, as the intent is
to repay the loan in the near term.
From time-to-time, interfund borrowings may be appropriate; however, these are subject to the following
criteria in ensuring that the fiduciary pulpose of the fund is met:
1. The Director of Finance & Information Technology is authorized to approve temporary interfund
borrowings for cash flow purposes whenever the cash shortfall is expected to be resolved within 45 days.
The most common use of interfund borrowing under this circumstance is for grant programs like the
Community Development Block Grant, where costs are incurred before drawdowns are initiated and
received. However, receipt of funds is typically received shortly after the request for funds has been
made.
2. Any other interfund borrowings for cash flow or other purposes require case-by-case approval by the
Council.
3. Any transfers between funds where reimbursement is not expected within one fiscal year shall not be
recorded as interfund borrowings; they shall be recorded as interfund operating transfers that affect equity
by moving financial resources from one fund to another.
USER F'BE COST RECOVERY GOALS
A. Ongoing Review
Fees will be reviewed and updated on an ongoing basis to ensure that they keep pace with changes in the cost-
oÊliving as well as changes in methods or levels of service delivery.
In implementing this goal, a comprehensive analysis of City costs and fees should be made at least every five
years. In the interim, fees will be adjusted by annual changes in the Consumer Price Index. Fees may be
adjusted during this interim period based on supplemental analysis whenever there have been significant
changes in the method, level or cost of service delivery.
B. User Fee Cost Recovery Levels
In setting user fees and cost recovery levels, the following factors will be considered:
i. Community-ll/ide Versus Speciøl Benefil The level of user fee cost recovery should consider the
community-wide versts special service nature of the program or activity. The use of general-purpose
revenues is appropriate for community-wide services, while user fees are appropriate for services that are
of special benefit to easily identified individuals or groups.
2. Service Recipient Versus Service Driver, After considering community-wide versus special benefit of
the service, the concept of serttice recipient versus service driver should also be considered. For example,
it could be argued that the applicant is not the beneficiary of the City's development review efforts: the
community is the primary beneficiary. However, the applicant is the driver of development review costs,
and as such, cost recovery from the applicant is appropriate.
PH1.7
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLIGIES
3. Effect of Pricing on the Demand for Services. The level of cost recovery and related pricing of services
can significantly affect the demand and subsequent level of services provided. At full cost recovery, this
has the specific advantage of ensuring that the City is providing services for which there is genuinely a
market that is not overly-stirnulated by artificially low prices.
Conversely, high levels of cost recovery will negatively impact the delivery of services to lower income
groups. This negative feature is especially pronounced, and works against public policy, if the services
are specifically targeted to low income groups.
Feøsibility of Collection and Recovery. Although it may be determined that a high level of cost recovery
may be appropriate for specific services, it may be impractical or too costly to establish a system to
identifu and charge the user. Accordingly, the feasibility of assessing and collecting charges should also
be considered in developing user fees, especially if significant progralx costs are intended to be financed
from that source.
C. Factors Favoring Low Cost Recovery Levels
Very low cost recovery levels are appropriate under the following circumstances:
1. There is no intended relationship between the amount paid and the benefit received. Almost all "social
service" programs fall into this category as it is expected that one group will subsidize another.
2. Collecting fees is not cost-effective or will significantly impact the efficient delivery of the service.
3. There is no infent to lirnit the use of (or entitlement to) the service. Again, most "social seryice" programs
fit into this category as well as many public safety (police and firc) cmcrgcncy response services.
Historically, access to neighborhood and community parks would also fit into this category.
4. The service is non-recurring, generally delivered on a "peak demand" or emergency basis, cannot
reasonably be planned for on an individual basis, and is not readily available from a private sector source.
Many public safety services also fall into this category.
5. Collecting fees would discourage compliance with regulatory requirements and adherence is primarily
selÊidentified, and as such, failure to comply would not be readily detected by the City. Many small-
scale licenses and permits rnight fall into this category.
D. Factors Favoring High Cost Recovery Levels
The use of service charges as a major source of funding service levels is especially appropriate under the
following circumstances :
1. The service is similar to services provided through the private sector
2. Other private or public sector alternatives could or do exist for the delivery of the service.
3. For equity or demand management purposes, it is intended that there be a direct relationship between the
amount paid and the level and cost of the service received.
The use of the service is specifically discouraged. Police responses to disturbances or false alarms might
fall into this category.
4
4
PH1.8
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
5. The service is regulatory in nature and voluntary compliance is not expected to be the primary method of
detecting failure to meet regulatory requirements. Building pennit, plan checks, and subdivision review
fees for large projects would fall into this category.
E. General Concepts Regarding the Use of Service Charges
The following general concepts will be used in developing and implementing service charges:
l. Revenues should not exceed the reasonable cost ofproviding the service.
2. Cost recovery goals should be based on the total cost of delivering the service, including direct costs,
departmental administration costs and organization-wide support costs such as accounting, personnel,
information technology, legal services, fleet maintenance and insurance.
3. The method of assessing and collecting fees should be as simple as possible in order to reduce the
administrative cost of collection.
4. Rate structures should be sensitive to the "market" for similar services as well as to smaller, infrequent
users ofthe service.
5. A unified approach should be used in determining cost recovery levels for various programs based on the
factors discussed above.
F. Low Cost-Recovery Services
Based on the criteria discussed above, the following types of services should have very low cost recovery
goals. In selected circumstances, there may be specific activities within the broad scope of services provided
that should have user charges associated with them. However, the primary source of funding for the
operation as a whole should be general-purpose revenues, not user fees.
L Delivering public safety emergency response services such as police patrol services and fire suppression.
2. Maintaining and developing public facilities ihatare provided on auniform, community-wide basis such
as streets, parks and general-purpose buildings.
3. Providing social service programs and economic development activities.
G. Recreation Programs
The following cost recovery policies apply to the City's recreation programs
l. Cost recovery for activities directed to adults should be relatively high.
2. Cost recovery for activities directed to youth and seniors should be relatively low. In those circumstances
where services are similar to those provided in the private sector, cost recovery levels should be higher.
Although ability to pay may not be a concern for all youth and senior participants, these are desired
program activities, and the cost of determining need may be greater than the cost of providing a uniform
service fee structure to all participants. Further, there is a community-wide benefit in encouraging high-
levels of participation in youth and senior recreation activities regardless of financial status.
3. Cost recovery goals for recreation activities are set as follows
PH1.9
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
High-Range Cost Recovery Activities - (60% to 100%)
a. Adult athletics
b. Banner permit applications
c. Child care services (except Youth STAR)
d. Facility rentals (indoor and outdoor; excludes use of facilities for internal City uses)
e. Triathlon
f. Golf
Mid-Range Cost Recovery Activities - (30% to 60%o)
g. Classes
h. Holiday inthePlaza
i. Major commercial film permit applications
Low-Range Cost Recovery Actìvíties- (0 to 30%)
j Aquatics
k. Batting cages
L Community gardens
m. Junior Ranger camp
n. Minor cornmercial fihn permit applications
o. Skate park
p. Special events (except for Triathlon and Holiday in the Plaza)
q. Youth sports
r. Youth STAR
s. Teen services
t. Senior/boomerservices
4. For cost recovery activities of less than 100%o, there should be a differential in rates between residents and
non-residents. However, the Director of Parks and Recreation is authorized to reduce or eliminate non-
resident fee differentials when it can be demonstrated that:
a. The fee is reducing attendance.
b. And there are no appreciable expenditure savings from the reduced attendance
5. Charges will be assessed for use of rooms, pools, gymnasiums, ball fields, special-use areas, and
recreation equipment for activities not sponsored or co-sponsored by the City. Such charges will
generally conform to the fee guidelines described above. However, the Director of Parks and Recreation
is authorized to charge fees that are closer to full cost recovery for facilities that are heavily used at peak
times and include amajorily of non-resident users.
6.A vendor charge of at least l0 percent of gross income willbe assessed from individuals or organizations
using City facilities for moneymaking activities.
7. Director of Parks and Recreation is authorized to offer reduced fees such as introductory rates, family
discounts and coupon discounts on a pilot basis (not to exceed 18 months) to promote new recreation
programs or resurrect existing ones.
8. The Parks and Recreation Department will consider waiving fees only when the City Manager determines
in writing that an undue hardship exists.
H. Development Review Programs
PH1-10
Attachment 2
¡UDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
The following cost recovery policies apply to the development review programs:
l. Seruices provided under this category include:
a. Planning (planned development permits, tentative tract and parcel maps, rezonings, general plan
amendments, variances, use permits).
b. Building and safety (building permits, structural plan checks, inspections).
c. Engineering (public improvement plan checks, inspections, subdivision requirements,
encroachments).
d. Fire plan check.
2. Cost recovery for these services should generally be very high. In most instances, the City's cost recovery
goal should be 100%.
3. However, in charging high cost recovery levels, the City needs to clearly establish and articulate
standards for its performance in reviewing developer applications to ensure that there is "value for cost."
I. Comparability With Other Communities
In setting user fees, the City will consider fees charged by other agencies in accordance with the following
criteria:
1. Surveying the comparability of the City's fees to other communities provides useful background
information in setting fees for several reasons:
a. They reflect the "market" for these fees and can assist in assessing the reasonableness of San Luis
Obispo's fees.
b. If prudently analyzed, they can serve as a benchmark for how cost-effectively San Luis Obispo
provides its services.
2. However, fee surveys should never be the sole or primary criteria in setting City fees as there are many
factors that affect how and why other communities have set their fees at their levels. For example:
a. What level of cost recovery is their fee intended to achieve compared with our cost recovery
objectives?
b. What costs have been considered in computing the fees?
c. When was the last time that their fees were comprehensively evaluated?
d. What level of service do they provide compared with our service or performance standards?
e. Is their rate structure significantly different than ours and what is it intended to achieve?
3. These can be very difficult questions to address in fairly evaluating fees among different communities.
As such, the comparability of our fees to other communities should be one factor among many that is
considered in setting City fees.
ENTERPRISE X'T]ND FEES AND RATES
PH1-11
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
A. Water, Sewer and Parking. The City will set fees and rates at levels which fully cover the total direct and
indirect costs-including operations, capital outlay, and debt service-of the following enterprise programs:
water, sewer and parking.
B. Transit. Based on targets set under the Transportation Development Act, the City will strive to cover at least
twenty percent of transit operating costs with fare revenues.
C. Ongoing Rate Review. The City will review and adjust enterprise fees and rate structures as required to
ensure that they remain appropriate and equitable.
D. Franchise Fees. In accordance with long-standing practices, the City will treat the water and sewer funds in
the same manner as if they were privately owned and operated. This means assessing reasonable franchise
fees in fully recovering service costs.
At 3.5yo, water and sewer franchise fees are based on the mid-point of the statewide standard for public
utilities like electricity and gas (2Yo of gross revenues from operations) and cable television (5% of gross
revenues).
As with other utilities, the purpose of the franchise fee is reasonable cost recovery for the use of the City's
street right-of-way. The appropriateness of charging the water and sewer funds a reasonable franchise fee for
the use of City streets is further supported by the results of studies in Arizona, California, Ohio and Vermont
which concluded that the leading cause for street resurfacing and reconstruction is street cuts and trenching
for utilities.
REVENUE DISTRIBUTION
The Council recognizes that generally accepted accounting principles for state and local governments discourage
the "earmarking" of General Fund revenues, and accordingly, the practice of designating General Fund revenues
for specific programs should be minimized in the City's management of its fiscal affairs. Approval of the
following revenue distribution policies does not prevent the Council from directing General Fund resources to
other functions and programs as necessary.
A. Property Taxes. With the passage of Proposition 13 on June 6, 1978, California cities no longer can set their
own propeffy tax rates. In addition to limiting annual increases in market value, placing a ceiling on voter-
approved indebtedness, and redefining assessed valuations, Proposition 13 established a maximum count¡r-
wide levy for general revenue purposes of lYo of market value. Under subsequent state legislation, which
adopted formulas for the distribution of this countywide levy, the City now receives a percentage of total
property tax revenues collected countywide as determined by the State and administered by the County
Auditor-Controller. The City receives 74.9o/o of each dollar collected in property tax after allocations to
school districts.
Accordingly, while property revenues are often thought of local revenue sources, in essence they are State
revenue sources, since the State controls their use and allocation.
With the adoption of a Charter revision in November 7996, which removed provisions that were in conflict
with Proposition 13 relating to the setting of properly tax revenues between various funds, all property tax
revenues are now accounted for in the General Fund.
B. Gasoline Tax Subventions. All gasoline tax revenues (which are restricted by the State for street-related
purposes) will be used for maintenance activities. Since the Cþ's total expenditures for gas tax eligible
programs and projects are much greater than this revenue source, operating transfers will be made from the
PH1-12
gas tax fund to the General Fund for this purpose. This approach significantly reduces the accounting efforls
required to meet State reporting requirements.
C. Transportation Development Act (TDA) Revenues. All TDA revenues will be allocated to alternative
transportation programs, including regional and municipal transit systems, bikeway improvements, and other
programs or projects designed to reduce automobile usage. Because TDA revenues will not be allocated for
street purposes, it is expected that alternative transportation programs (in conjunction with other state or
federal grants for this purpose) will be self-supporting from TDA revenues.
D. Parking Fines. All parking fine revenues will be allocated to the parking fund, except for those collected by
Police staff (who are funded by the General Fund) in implernenting neighborhood wellness programs.
INVESTMENTS
A. Responsibility. Investments and cash management are the responsibility of the City Treasurer or designee. It
is the City's policy to appoint the Director of Finance and Information Technology as the City's Treasurer.
B. Investment Objective. The City's primary investment objective is to achieve a reasonable rate of return
while minirnizing the potential for capital losses arising from market changes or issuer default. Accordingly,
the following factors will be considered in priority order in determining individual investrnent placements:
l. Safety 2. Liquidity 3. Yield
C. Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes: Not for Investment Purposes. There is an appropriate role for tax
and revenue anticipation notes (TRANS) in meeting legitimate short-term cash needs within the fiscal year.
However, many agencies issue TRANS as a routine business practice, not solely for cash flow purposes, but
to capitalize on the favorable difference between the interest cost of issuing TRANS as a tax-prefered
security and the interest yields on them if re-invested at full market rates.
As part of its cash flow management and investment strategy, the City will only issue TRANS or other forms
of short-term debt if necessary to meet demonstrated cash flow needs; TRANS or any other form of short-
term debt financing will not be issued for investment purposes.
As long as the City maintains its curent policy of maintaining fund/working capital balances that are 20%o of
operating expenditures, it is unlikely that the City would need to issue TRANS for cash flow purposes except
in very unusual circumstances.
D. Selecting Maturity Dates. The City will strive to keep all idle cash balances fully invested through daily
projections of cash flow requirements. To avoid forced liquidations and losses of investment earnings, cash
flow and future requirements will be the primary consideration when selecting maturities.
E. Diversification. As the market and the City's investment portfolio change, care will be taken to maintain a
healthy balance of investment types and maturities.
F. Authorized Investments. The City will invest only in those instruments authorized by the California
Government Code Section 53601.
The City will not invest in stock, will not speculate and will not deal in futures or options. The investment
market is highly volatile and continually offers new and creative opportunities for enhancing interest
earnings. Accordingly, the City will thoroughly investigate any new investment vehicles before committing
City funds to them.
PH1-13
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
G. Authorized Institutions. Current financial statements will be maintained for each institution in which cash is
invested, Investments will be limited to 20 percent of the total net wofth of any institution and may be
reduced further or refused altogether if an institution's financial situation becomes unhealthy.
H. Consolidated Portfolio. In order to maximize yields from its overall portfolio, the City will consolidate cash
balances from all funds for investment purposes, and will allocate investment earnings to each fund in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
I. Safekeeping. Ownership of the City's investment securities will be protected through third-party custodial
safekeeping.
J. Investment Management Plan. The City Treasurer will develop and maintain an Investment Management
Plan that addresses the City's administration of its portfolio, including investment strategies, practices and
procedures.
K. Investment Oversight Committee. As set forth in the Investment Management Plan, this committee is
responsible for reviewing the City's portfolio on an ongoing basis to determine compliance with the City's
investment policies and for making recommendations to the City Treasurer (Director of Finance and
Information Technology) regarding investment management practices.
Members include the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Director of Finance & Information
Technology/City Treasurer, Finance Operations Manager, the City's independent auditor, one City Council
rnember, and one member of the public.
The member of the public shall be appointed by the City Council in accordance with the City's process for
appointing advisory body members.
L. Reporting. The City Treasurer will develop and maintain a comprehensive, well-documented investment
reporting system, which will comply with Government Code Section 53607. This reporting system will
provide the Council and the Investment Oversight Committee with appropriate investment performance
information.
APPROPRIATIONS LIMITATION
A. The Council will annually adopt a resolution establishing the City's appropriations limit calculated in
accordance with Article XIII-B of the Constitution of the State of California, Section 7900 of the State of
California Government Code, and any other voter approved amendments or state legislation that affect the
City's appropriations limit.
B. The supporting documentation used in calculating the City's appropriations limit and projected appropriations
subject to the limit will be available for public and Council review at least l0 days before Council
consideration of a resolution to adopt an appropriations limit. The Council will generally consider this
resolution in connection with final approval of the budget.
C. The City will strive to develop revenue sources, both new and existing, which are considered non-tax
proceeds in calculating its appropriations subject to limitation.
D. The City will annually review user fees and charges and report to the Council the amount of program subsidy,
if any, that is being provided by the General or Enterprise Funds.
PH1-14
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
E. The City will actively support legislation or initiatives sponsored or approved by League of California Cities
which would modifu Article XIII-B of the Constitution in a manner which would allow the City to retain
projected tax revenues resulting from growth in the local economy for use as determined by the Council.
F. The City will seek voter approval to amend its appropriation limit at such time that tax proceeds are in excess
of allowable limits.
FUND BALANCE AND RESERVES
A. Minimum Fund and Working Capital Balances. The City will maintain a minimum fund balance of at
least 20Yo of operating expenditures in the General Fund and a minimum working capital balance of 20Yo of
operating expenditures in the water, sewer and parking enterprise funds. This is considered the minimum
level necessary to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for:
1. Economic uncertainties, local disasters, and other financial hardships or downturns in the local or national
economy.
2. Contingencies for unseen operating or capital needs.
3. Cash flow requirements.
B. Fleet Replacement. For the General Fund fleet, the City will establish and maintain a Fleet Replacement
Fund to provide for the timely replacement of vehicles and related equipment with an individual replacement
cost of $ 15,000 or rnore. The City will maintain a minimum fund balance in the Fleet Replacernent Fund of
at least 20Yo of the original purchase cost of the items accounted for in this fund.
The annual contribution to this fund will generally be based on the annual use allowance, which is determined
based on the estimated life of the vehicle or equipment and its original purchase cost. Interest earnings and
sales of surplus equipment as well as any related damage and insurance recoveries will be credited to the Fleet
Replacement Fund.
C. Information Technology QT) Replacement Fund. The City will establish an IT Replacement Fund for the
General Fund to provide for the timely replacement of information technology, both hardware and software,
with an individual replacement cost of $25,000. The City will begin building the fund balance with the long
term objective of maintaining a minimum fund balance in the IT Replacement Fund of at least 20%o of the
original purchase costs of the items accounted for in this fund.
D.
Improvement Plan.
E. Water and Sewer Rate Stabilization Reserryes. The City will maintain a reserve for the purposes of
offsetting unanticipated fluctuations in Water Fund or Sewer Fund revenues to provide financial stability,
including the stability ofrevenues and the rates and charges related to each Enterprise. The funding target for
the Rate Stabilization Reserve will be 10% of sales revenue in the Water Fund and 5Yo of sales revenue in the
Sewer Fund.
Conditions for utilization and plan for replenishment of the reserve will be brought to Council for its
consideration during the preparation and approval of the Financial Plan or as may become necessary during
any fiscal year.
PH1-15
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
F. Future Capital Project Designations. The Council may designate specific fund balance levels for future
development of capital projects that it has determined to be in the best long-term interests of the City. For
example, replacement of critical information technology infrastructure or other projects.
G. Other Designations and Reserves. In addition to the designations noted above, fund balance levels will be
sufficient to meet funding requirements for projects approved in prior years which are carried forward into the
new year; debt service reserve requirements; reserves for encumbrances; and other reserves or designations
required by contractual obligations, state law, or generally accepted accounting principles.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT MANAGEMBNT
A. CIP Projects: $25,000 or More. Construction projects and equipment purchases which cost $25,000 or
more will be included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP); minor capital outlays of less than $25,000 will
be included with the operating program budgets. Such projects are accounted for in the Capital Outlay Fund.
B. CIP Purpose. The purpose of the CIP is to systematically plan, schedule, and finance capital projects to
ensure cost-effectiveness as well as conformance with established policies. The CIP is a five-year plan
organized into the same functional groupings used for the operating programs. The CIP will reflect a balance
between capital replacement projects that repair, replace or enhance existing facilities, equipment or
infrastructure; and capital facility projects that significantly expand or add to the City's existing fixed assets.
C. Project Manager. Every CIP project will have a project manager who will prepare the project proposal,
ensure that required phases are completed on schedule, authorize all project expenditures, ensure that all
regulations and laws are observed, and periodically report project status.
D. CIP Review Committee. Headed by the City Manager or designee, this Committee will review project
proposals, determine project phasing, recommend project managers, review and evaluate the draft CIP budget
document, and report CIP project progress on an ongoing basis.
E. CIP Phases. The CIP will emphasize project planning, with projects progressing through at least two and up
to ten of the following phases:
l. Designate. Appropriates funds based on projects designated for funding by the Council through adoption
of the Financial Plan.
2. Study. Concept design, site selection, feasibility analysis, schematic design, environmental
determination, property appraisals, scheduling, grant application, grant approval, specification preparation
for equipment purchases.
3. Environmental Review. EIR preparation, other environmental studies.
4. Real Property Acqaisitions Properly acquisition for projects, if necessary.
5. Site Preparation. Demolition,hazardous materials abatements, other pre-construction work.
6. Design. Final design, plan and specification preparation and construction cost estimation.
7. Constructioz. Construction contracts.
8. Construclion Management, Contract project management and inspection, soils and material tests, other
support services during construction.
PH 1-16
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
9. Equípment Acquisitions. Vehicles, heavy machinery, computers, office furnishings, other equipment
items acquired and installed independently from construction contracts.
10. Debt Service. Installment payments of principal and interest for completed projects funded through debt
financings. Expenditures for this project phase are included in the Debt Service section of the Financial
Plan.
Generally, it will become more difficult for a project to move from one phase to the next. As such, more
projects will be studied than will be designed, and more projects will be designed than will be constructed or
purchased during the term of the CIP.
F. CIP Appropriation. The City's annual CIP appropriation for study, design, acquisition and/or construction
is based on the projects designated by the Council through adoption of the Financial Plan. Adoption of the
Financial Plan CIP appropriation does not automatically authorize furrding for specific project phases. This
authorization generally occurs only after the preceding project phase has been cornpleted and approved by the
Council and costs for the succeeding phases have been fully developed.
Accordìngly, project appropriations are generally made when contracts are awarded. If project costs at the
time of bid award are less than the budgeted amount, the balance will be unappropriated and returned to fund
balance or allocated to another project. If project costs at the time of bid award are greater than budget
amounts, five basic options are available:
1. Eliminate the project.
2. Defer the project for consideration to the next Financial Plan period.
3. Rescope or change the phasing of the project to meet the existing budget
4. Transfer funding from another specified, lower priority project.
5. Appropriate additional resources as necessary from fund balance.
G. CIP Budget Carryover. Appropriations for CIP projects lapse three years after budget adoption. Projects
which lapse from lack of project account appropriations may be resubmitted for inclusion in a subsequent
CIP. Project accounts, which have been appropriated, will not lapse until completion of the project phase.
H. Program Objectives. Project phases will be listed as objectives in the program naratives of the programs,
which manage the projects.
I. Public Art. CIP projects will be evaluated during the budget process and prior to each phase for
conformance with the City's public art policy, which generally requires that lYo of eligible project
construction costs be set aside for public art. Excluded from this requirement are underground projects, utility
jnfrastructure projects, funding from outside agencies, and costs other than construction such as study,
environmental review, design, site preparation, land acquisition and equipment purchases.
It is generally preferred that public art be incorporated directly into the project, but this is not practical or
desirable for all projects; in this case, an in-lieu contribution to public art will be made. To ensure that funds
are adequately budgeted for this purpose regardless of whether public art will be directly incorporated into the
project, funds for public art will be identified separately in the CIP.
In2013-15, the City will continue to fund public at the same level required by the private sector: 0.50l0.
J. General Plan Consistency Review. The Planning Commission will review the Preliminary CIP for
consistency with the General Plan and provide is findings to the Council prior to adoption.
PH1-17
Attachment 2
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
CAPITAL T'INANCING AND DEBT MANAGEMENT
A. Capital Financing
L The City will consider the use of debt financing only for one-time capital improvement projects and only
under the following circumstances:
a When the project's useful life will exceed the term of the financing
b. When project revenues or specific resources will be sufflicient to service the long-term debt.
2. Debt financing will not be considered appropriate for any recurring purpose such as current operating and
maintenance expenditures. The issuance of short-term instruments such as revenue, tax or bond
anticipation notes is excluded from this limitation. (See Investment Policy)
3. Capital improvements will be financed primarily through userfees, service charges, assessments, special
taxes or developer agreements when benefits can be specifically attributed to users of the facility.
Accordingly, development impact fees should be created and implemented at levels sufficient to ensure
that new development pays its fair share of the cost of constructing necessary community facilities.
4. Transportation impact fees are a major funding source in f,rnancing transportation system improvements.
However, revenues from these fees are subject to significant fluctuation based on the rate of new
development. Accordingly, the following guidelines will be followed in designing and building projects
funded with transportation impact fees:
a. The availability of transportation impact fees in funding a specific project will be analyzed on a case-
by-case basis as plans and specification or contract awards are submitted for City Manager or Council
approval.
b. If adequate funds are not available atthattime, the Council will make one of two determinations:
. Defer the project until funds are available.
¡ Based on the high-priorþ of the project, advance funds from the General Fund, which will be
reimbursed as soon as funds become available. Repayment of General Fund advances will be the
first use of transportation impact fee funds when they become available.
5. The City will use the following criteria to evaluate pay-as-you-go versus long-term financing in funding
capital improvements:
a. Factors Favoring
Pay-As-Yo u-Go Financing
1. Current revenues and adequate fund balances are available or project phasing can be accomplished.
2. Existing debt levels adversely affect the City's credit rating.
3. Market conditions are unstable or present difficulties in marketing.
b. Factors Føvoring Long Term Financing
1. Revenues available for debt service are deemed sufficient and reliable so that long-term financings
can be marketed with investment grade credit ratings.
PH 1-1 I
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
2. The project securing the financing is of the type, which will support an investment grade credit rating.
3. Market conditions present favorable interest rates and demand for City financings.
4. A project is mandated by state or federal requirements, and resources are insuffìcient or unavailable.
5. The project is immediately required to meet or relieve capacity needs and current resources are
insuffi cient or unavailable.
6. The life ofthe project or asset to be financed is l0 years or longer.
7. Vehicle leasing when market conditions and operational circurnstances present favorable
opportunities.
B. Debt Management
l. The City will not obligate the General Fund to secure long-term financings except when marketability can
be significantly enhanced.
2. An internal feasibility analysis will be prepared for each long-term financing which ana\yzes the impact
on current and future budgets for debt service and operations. This analysis will also address the
reliability of revenues to support debt service.
3. The City will generally conduct financings on a competitive basis. However, negotiated financings may
be used due to market volatility or the use of an unusual or complex financing or security structure.
4. The City will seek an investment grade rating (Baa/BBB or greater) on any direct debt and will seek
credit enhancernents such as letters of credit or insurance when necessary for marketing purposes,
availability and cost-effectiveness.
5. The City will monitor all forms of debt annually coincident with the City's Financial Plan preparation and
review process and report concerns and remedies, if needed, to the Council.
6. The City will diligently monitor its compliance with bond covenants and ensure its adherence to federal
arbitrage regulations.
7. The City will rnaintain good, ongoing communications with bond rating agencies about its financial
condition. The City will follow a policy of full disclosure on every financial report and bond prospectus
(Official Statement).
C. Debt Capacity
1. General Purpose Debt Capacity. The City will carefully monitor its levels of general-purpose debt.
Because our general purpose debt capacity is limited, it is important that we only use general purpose
debt financing for high-priority projects where we cannot reasonably use other financing methods for two
key reasons:
a. Funds borrowed for a project today are not available to fund other projects tomorrow.
b. Funds committed for debt repayment today are not available to fund operations in the future
PH1-19
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
In evaluating debt capacity, general-purpose aruìual debt service payments should generally not exceed
10Yo of General Fund revenues; and in no case should they exceed 15010. Fufther, direct debt will not
exceed 2Yo of assessed valuation; and no more than 600/o of capital improvement outlays will be funded
from long-term financings.
2. Enterprise Fund Debt Capacity. The City will set enterprise fund rates at levels needed to fully cover
debt service requirements as well as operations, maintenance, administration and capital improvement
costs. The ability to afford new debt for enterprise operations will be evaluated as an integral part of the
City's rate review and setting process.
D. Independent Disclosure Counsel
The following criteria will be used on a case-by-case basis in determining whether the City should retain the
services of an independent disclosure counsel in conjunction with specific project financings:
l. The Cify will generally not retain the services of an independent disclosure counsel when all of the
following circumstances are present:
a. The revenue source for repayment is under the management or control of the City, such as general
obligation bonds, revenue bonds, lease-revenue bonds or certificates of participation.
b. The bonds will be rated or insured.
2. The City will consider retaining the services of an independent disclosure counsel when one or more of
following circumstances are present:
a. The financing will be negotiated, and the underwriter has not separately engaged an underwriter's
counsel for disclosure purposes.
b. The revenue source for repayment is not under the management or control of the City, such as land-
based assessment districts, tax allocation bonds or conduit financings.
c. The bonds will not be rated or insured.
d. The City's financial advisor, bond counsel or underwriter recommends that the City retain an
independent disclosure counsel based on the circumstances of the financing.
E. Land-BasedFinancings
Public Purpose. There will be a clearly articulated public purpose in forming an assessment or special
tax district in financing public infrastructure improvements. This should include a finding by the Council
as to why this form of financing is preferred over other funding options such as impact fees,
reimbursement agreements or direct developer responsibility for the improvements.
2. Eligible fmprovements. Except as otherwise determined by the Council when proceedings for district
formation are commenced, preference in financing public improvements through a special tax district
shall be given for those public improvements that help achieve clearly identified community facility and
infrastructure goals in accordance with adopted facility and infrastructure plans as set forth in key policy
documents such as the General Plan, Specific Plan, Facilþ or Infrastructure Master Plans, or Capital
Improvement Plan.
Such improvements include study, design, construction andlor acquisition of:
a. Public safety facilities.
PH1-20
-DGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
b. Water supply, distribution and treatment systems.
c. Waste collection and treatment systems.
d. Major transpoftation system improvements, such as freeway interchanges; bridges; intersection
improvements; construction of ne\¡/ or widened arterial or collector streets (including related
landscaping and lighting); sidewalks and other pedestrian paths; transit facilities; and bike patlis.
e. Storm drainage, creek protection and flood protection improvements.
f. Parks, trails, community centers and other recreational facilities.
g. Open space.
h. Cultural and social service facilities.
i. Other governmental facilities and improvements such as offices, information technology systems and
telecommunication systems.
School facilities will not be financed except under appropriate joint community facilities agreements or
joint exercise of powers agreements between the City and school districts.
3. Active Role. Even though land-based financings may be a limited obligation of the City, we will play an
active role in managing the district. This means that the City will select and retain the financing team,
including the financial advisor, bond counsel, trustee, appraiser, disclosure counsel, assessment engineer
and underwriter. Any costs incured by the City in retaining these seruices will generally be the
responsibility of the property owners or developer, and will be advanced via a deposit when an
application is filed; or will be paid on a contingency fee basis from the proceeds from the bonds.
4. Credit Quality. When a developer requests a district, the City will carefully evaluate the applicant's
financial plan and ability to cany the project, including the payment of assessments and special taxes
during build-out. This may include detailed background, credit and lender checks, and the preparation of
independent appraisal repofts and market absorption studies. For districts where one property owner
accounts for more than 25Yo of the annual debt service obligation, a letter of credit further securing the
financing may be required.
5. Reserve Fund. A reserve fund should be established in the lesser amount of: the maximum annual debt
service, l25Yo of the annual average debt service; or 70%o of the bond proceeds.
6. Value-to-Debl Rstios. The minimum value-to-debt ratio should generally be 4:1. This means the value
of the properry in the district, with the public improvements, should be at least four times the amount of
the assessment or special tax debt. In special circumstances, after confering and receiving the
concuffence of the City's financial advisor and bond counsel that a lower value-to-debt ratio is financially
prudent under the circumstances, the City may consider allowing a value-to-debt ratio of 3:1. The
Council should make special findings in this case.
1. Appraisal Methodology. Determination of value of property in the district shall be based upon the full
cash value as shown on the ad valorem assessment roll or upon an appraisal by an independent Member
Appraisal Institute (MAI). The definitions, standards and assumptions to be used for appraisals shall be
determined by the City on a case-by-case basis, with input from City consultants and district applicants,
and by reference to relevant materials and information promulgated by the State of California, including
the Appraisal Standards for Land-Secured Financings prepared by the California Debt and Investment
Advisory Commission.
8. Capitalized fnturest During Constructioz. Decisions to capitalize interest will be made on case-by-case
basis, with the intent that if allowed, it should improve the credit quality of the bonds and reduce
borrowing costs, benefiting both current and future property owners.
PH1-21
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
9. Moximum Burden. Annual assessments (or special taxes in the case of Mello-Roos or similar districts)
should generally not exceed IYo of the sales price of tlre property; and total properly taxes, special
assessments and special taxes payments collected on the tax roll should generally not exceed2%o.
10. Benefit Apportionment. Assessments and special taxes will be apportioned according to a formula that is
clear, understandable, equitable and reasonably related to the benefit received by-or burden attributed
to--each parcel with respect to its financed improvement. Any annual escalation factor sliould generally
nolexceed2%o.
1l. Special Tax District Admínistration. In the case of Mello-Roos or sirnilar special tax districts, the total
maximum annual tax should not exceed Il}Yo of annual debt service. The rate and method of
apportionment should include a back-up tax in the event of significant changes from the initial
development plan, and should include procedures for prepayments.
72. Foreclosure Covenants. In managing administrative costs, the City will establish minimum delinquency
amounts per owner, and for the district as a whole, on a case-by-case basis before initiating foreclosure
proceedings.
73. Dísclosure lo Bondholders. In general, each property owner who accounts for more than l0%o of the
annual debt service or bonded indebtedness must provide ongoing disclosure information annually as
described under SEC Rule l5(c)-12.
74. Dísclosure to Prospective Purchasers. Full disclosure about outstanding balances and annual payments
should be made by the seller to prospective buyers at the time that the buyer bids on the property. It
should not be deferred to after the buyer has made the decision to purchase. When appropriate, applicants
or properly owners may be required to provide the City with a disclosure plan.
F. Conduit Financings
1. The City will consider requests for conduit financing on a case-by-case basis using the following criteria:
a. The City's bond counsel will review the terms of the financing, and render an opinion that there will
be no liability to the City in issuing the bonds on behalf of the applicant.
b. There is a clearly articulated public purpose in providing the conduit financing.
c. The applicant is capable of achieving this public purpose.
2. This means that the review of requests for conduit financing will generally be a two-step process
a. First asking the Council if they are interested in considering the request, and establishing the ground
rules for evaluating it.
b. And then returning with the results of this evaluation, and recommending approval of appropriate
financing documents if warranted.
This two-step approach ensures that the issues are clear for both the City and applicant, and that key
policy questions are answered.
3. The workscope necessary to address these issues will vary from request to request, and will have to be
determined on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, the Cþ should generally be fully reimbursed for our
costs in evaluating the request; however, this should also be determined on a case-by-case basis.
PH1-22
B. Refinancings
1. General Guidelines. Periodic reviews of all outstanding debt will be undertaken to determine refinancing
opportunities. Refinancings will be considered (within federal tax law constraints) under the following
conditions:
There is a net economic benefit.
It is needed to modernize covenants that are adversely affecting the City's financial position or
operations.
The City wants to reduce the principal outstanding in order to achieve future debt service savings, and
it has available working capital to do so from other sources.
2. Standards for Economic Savings. In general, refinancings for economic savings will be undertaken
whenever net present value savings of at least five percent (5%) of the refunded debt can be achieved.
a. Refinancings that produce net present value savings of less than five percent wjll be considered on a
case-by-case basis, provided that the present value savings are at least three percent (3%) of the
refunded debt.
b. Refinancings with savings of less than three percent (3%o), or with negative savings, will not be
considered unless there is a compelling public policy objective.
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
a.
b.
c
' A. Regular Staffing
l. The budget will fully appropriate the resources needed for authorized regular staffurg and will limit
programs to the regular staffing authorized.
2. Regular employees will be the core work force and the preferred means of staffing ongoing, year-round
program activities that should be performed by full-time City employees rather than independent
contractors. The City will strive to provide competitive compensation and benefit schedules for its
authorized regular work force. Each regular employee will:
a. Fill an authorized regular position.
b. Be assigned to an appropriate bargaining unit.
c. Receive salary and benefits consistent with labor agreements or other compensation plans.
3. To manage the growth of the regular work force and overall staffing costs, the City will follow these
procedures:
a. The Council will authorize all regular positions.
b. The Human Resources Department will coordinate and approve the hiring of all regular and
temporary employees.
c. All requests for additional regular positions will include evaluations of:
. The necessity, term and expected results of the proposed activity.
o Staffing and materials costs including salary, benefits, equipment, uniforms, clerical support and
facilities.
PH1-23
. The ability of private industry to provide the proposed seryice.
. Additional revenues or cost savings, which may be realized.
4. Periodically, and before any request for additional regular positions, programs will be evaluated to
determine if they can be accomplished witli fewer regular employees. (See Productivity Review Policy)
5. Staffing and contract service cost ceilings will limit total expenditures for regular employees, temporary
employees, and independent contractors hired to provide operating and maintenance services.
B. Temporary Staffing
1. The hiring of temporary employees will not be used as an incremental method for expanding the City's
regular work force.
2. Temporary employees include all employees other than regular employees, elected officials and
volunteers. Temporary ernployees will generally augment regular City staffing as extra-help employees,
seasonal employees, contract employees, interns and work-study assistants.
3. The City Manager and Depaftment Heads will encourage the use of temporary rather than regular
etnployees to meet peak workload requirements, fill interim vacancies, and accomplish tasks where less
than full-time, year-round staffing is required.
Under this guideline, temporary employee liours will generally not exceed 50o/o of a regular, full-time
position (1,000 hours annually). There may be limited circumstances where the use of temporary
employees on an ongoing basis in excess of this target may be appropriate due to unique programming or
staffing requirements. However, any such exceptions must be approved by the City Manager based on
the review and recommendation of the Hurnan Resources Director.
4. Contract employees are defined as temporary employees with written contracts approved by the City
Manager who may receive approved benefits depending on hourly requirements and the length of their
contract. Contract employees will generally be used for medium-term (generally between six months and
two years) projects, programs or activities requiring specialized or augmented levels of staffing for a
specific period.
The services of contract employees will be discontinued upon completion of the assigned project, program or
activity. Accordingly, contract employees will not be used for seruices that are anticipated to be delivered on
an ongoing basis.
C. Overtime Management
L Overtime should be used only when necessary and when other alternatives are not feasible or cost
effective.
2. All overtime must be pre-authorizedby a department head or delegate unless it is assumed pre-approved
by its nature. For example, overtime that results when an employee is assigned to standby and/or must
respond to an emergency or complete an emergency response.
3. Departmental operating budgets should reflect anticipated annual oveftime costs and departments will
regularly monitor overtime use and expenditures.
4. When considering the addition of regular or temporary staffing, the use of oveftime as an alternative will
be considered. The department will take into account:
PH1-24
Attachment 2
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
a. The duration that additional staff resources may be needed.
b. The cost of overtime versus the cost of additional staff.
c. The skills and abilities of curent staff.
d. Training costs associated with hiring additional staff.
e. The impact of overtime on existing staff.
D. Independent Contractors
Independent contractors are not City employees. They may be used in two situations:
1. Short-term, peak workload assignments to be accomplished using personnel contracted through an outside
temporary employment agency (OEA). In this situation, it is anticipated that City staff will closely
monitor the work of OEA employees and minimal training will be required. However, they will always
be considered the employees of the OEA and not the City. All placements through an OEA will be
coordinated through the Human Resources Department and subject to the approval of the Human
Resources Director.
2. Construction of public works projects and delivery of operating, maintenance or specialized professional
services not routinely performed by City employees. Such services will be provided without close
supervision by City staff, and the required methods, skills and equipment will generally be determined
and provided by the contractor. Contract awards will be guided by the City's purchasing policies and
procedures. (See Contracting for Services Policy)
PRODUCTTVITY
Ensuring the "delivery of service with value for cost" is one of the key concepts embodied in the City's Mission
Statement (San Luis Obispo Style- Quality With Vision). To this end, the City will constantly monitor and
review our methods of operation to ensure that services continue to be delivered in the most cost-effective manner
possible.
This review process encompasses a wide range of productivity issues, including:
A. Analyzing systems and procedures to identiô, and remove unnecessary review requirements.
B. Evaluating the ability of new technologies and related capital investments to improve productivity.
C. Developing the skills and abilities of all City employees.
D. Developing and implementing appropriate methods of recognizing and rewarding exceptional employee
performance.
E. Evaluating the ability of the private sector to perform the same level of service at a lower cost.
F. Periodic formal reviews of operations on a systematic, ongoing basis.
G. Maintaining a decentralized approach in managing the City's support service functions. Although some level
ofcentralization is necessary forreview and control purposes, decentralization supports productivity by:
L Encouraging accountability by delegating responsibility to the lowest possible level.
PH1-25
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Attachment 2
2. Stimulating creativity, innovation and individual initiative.
3. Reducing the administrative costs of operation by eliminating unnecessary review procedures.
4. Improving the organization's ability to respond to changing needs, and identifli and implement cost-
saving programs.
5. Assigning responsibility for effective operations and citizen responsiveness to the department.
CONTRACTING F'OR SERVICES
A. General Policy Guidelines
1. Contracting with the private sector for the delivery of services provides the Cþ with a significant
opportunity for cost containment and productivity enhancements. As such, the City is committed to using
private sector resources in delivering municipal services as a key element in our continuing efforts to
provide cost-effective pro grams.
2. Private sector contracting approaches under this policy include construction projects, professional
services, outside employment agencies and ongoing operating and maintenance services.
3. In evaluating the costs of private sector contracts compared with in-house performance of the service,
indirect, direct, and contract administration costs of the City will be identified and considered.
4. Whenever private sector providers are available and can meet established service levels, they will be
seriously considered as viablc scrvicc dclivcry altcrnativcs using the evaluation criteria outlined below.
5. For programs and activities currently provided by City employees, conversions to contract services will
generally be made through attrition, reassignment or absorption by the contractor.
B. Evaluation Criteria
Within the general policy guidelines stated above, the cost-effectiveness of contract services in meeting
established service levels will be determined on a case-by-case basis using the following criteria:
L Is a sufficient private sector market available to competitively deliver this service and assure a reasonable
range of alternative service providers?
2. Can the contract be effectively and efficiently administered?
3. What are the consequences if the contractor fails to perform, and can the contract reasonably be written to
compensate the City for any such damages?
4. Can a private sector contractor better respond to expansions, contractions or special requirements of the
seruice?
5. Can the work scope be sufficiently defined to ensure that competing proposals can be fairly and fully
evaluated, as well as the contractor's performance áfter bid award?
6. Does the use of contract services provide us with an opportunity to redefine service levels?
7. Will the contract limit our ability to deliver emergency or other high priority services?
8. Overall, can the City successfully delegate the performance of the service but still retain accountability
and responsibility for its delivery?
PH1-26
PH1-27
Page i ntentiona I ly left
blank.
PH1-28
R IVËD
.t-)l 17 2013Goodwin, Heather
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Grimes, Maeve
Monday, June 17, 2013 L0:48 AM
Goodwin, Heather
FW: Public Comment on Budget Considerations AGENDA
CORRESPON DENCE
PH,|
Heather,
Please distribute as Agenda Correspondence for tonight's meeting, for ltem PH1
Thank you
nìÀ€v€ kenneòy clRtm€s
City Clerk
ctty of sÀr] lurs oBrspo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
plrone, (805)781-7102
enr¡rl, mgrimes@slocitv.orR
From: Greg and Mary Bettencouft [mailto:qmbett@cha]ter.netl
Sent: Sunday, June 16,2013 11:04 PM
To: Grimes, Maeve
Subject: Public Comment on Budget Considerations
Dear Mayor Marx and City Council Members
I am writing to provide input regarding budget considerations. More to the point, I am writing to reiterate the support of
those who appreciate open space in general and the Central Coast Concerned Mountain Bikers in particular for a budget
which provides sufficient Ranger staffing to effectively manage City open space and fulfill other duties. The need for
expanded staffing has only increased since I wrote the letter which I have included below.
We are well aware of conflicting demands for limited financial resources. But we also know that the Parks and Recreation
Ranger staff, as it is now constituted, cannot continue to provide the level of service it currently performs (dealing with
homeless, creeks, open space and trails) throughout the next budget cycle without an additional full-time ranger.
Please see my letter below for more details.
Thank you.
Greg Bettencourt
Director, Central Coast Concerned Mountain Bikers
gmbett@charter. net
http://cccmb.org
April 9, 2013
Dear Mayor Marx and City Council Members
I am writing regarding your efforts to adopt an appropriate city budget. Specifically I am asking you to reconsider how that
budget can best provide for sufficient staffing to effectively manage City open space.
Fortunately, city open space has grown and become an integral part of community life in the last 20 years. As you know,
better than most, that growth is the result of a very high level of support from the community. Residents and visitors of all
ages and interests use city open space to enjoy nature, exercise and recreate. Parks and open space are among the
most valued services provided by the city.
Unfortunately, P & R Ranger Service staffing which is essential for the maintenance and safety of those areas has not
kept pace with the size and demands of the open space. Nor has it kept pace with the city's needs regarding the
homeless and creek clean-up issues.
As the president of the Central Coast Concerned Mountain Bikers I can say that CCCMB is proud and happy to partner
with the city to help maintain, improve and expand open space and we appreciate that maintaining the partnership is a
priority for the city. CCCMB fully intends to continue to provide volunteers to support and assist the P&R Ranger
Service.
However as policy makers for and managers of city resources you know that over-reliance on volunteers is a
mistake. Currently the relationship between staff and volunteers is appropriate and healthy. CCCMB worries, however,
that as open space demands increase (as they surely will) and Ranger Service staffing does not keep pace, the reliance
on volunteers will become unhealthy and unrealistic.
It is for these reasons that we urge you to reconsider increasing the Parks and Recreation Ranger Service allocation to
accommodate at least one additionalfull{ime ranger.
Thanks
Greg Bettencourt
Director, Central Coast Concerned Mountain Bikers
qmbett@charter.net
http://cccmb.orq
2
JUN 17 2013
REC
5 Lr cirY cLtr
Goodwin, Heather
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Please consider this agenda correspondence
Thanks,
Jan
Marx, Jan
Monday, June 17, 20L3 4:25 PM
Grimes, Maeve; Goodwin, Heather
FW: Transient downtown SLO yesterday at about 4:45 PM on Hlguera Street-F/U
-----Origina I Message-----
From: leebrenl5@aol.com Imailto:leebrenl5@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, June 17,2013 4:24 PM
To: Gesell, Steve
Cc: Lichtig, Katie; Staley, Chris; Storton, Keith; Smith, Jeffery; dancarpent@slocity.org; Johnson, Derek; Ashbaugh, John;
Marx, Jan
Subject: RE: Transient downtown SLO yesterday at about 4:45 PM on Hlguera Street-F/U
Dear Police Chief Gessell
Thank you for your response and information
ln reflection of this incident, I have a few more observations and
recommendations:
1. During this incident, a security guard, across the street, associated with the Copeland mall project, watched the
incident. lam amazed he did notget involved, norapparentlycalled the police, peryourcomments below. Persistent
City police outreach to these private property owners and security guards is critical to everyone's safety.
2. When I retreated into the Ross store, and asked the check out lady to call the police, she said NO. I asked for her
manager, and even she was hesitant to call the police when she arrived at the front door.
lronically,
as he entered the Ross store, the manger could not call the police fast enough, but was so alarmed, she simply froze
from the immediate fear.
This again underscores, the apparent mismatch between the private sector's unwillingness to get involved in calling the
police, I do not know if this is a result of:
a. A Ross Company policy
b. A distrust of the past police responses or system(s) c. The Wolf crying for help syndrome too many times or d. all or
some of the above
I appears police outreach is needed
Chronic mental health cases and or drugs or some combination thereof is a real problem here. However, when a person
or persons persistently bring problems to our community, something else needs to be done before a citizen is hurt or
worse,.lt simply is a matter of time before the unthinkable occurs in our city.
The first responsibility of our elected leaders is to assure the community that safety is goal number one. I hope our
elected officials will resolve their differences regarding the budget tonight, and also continue to take their sworn duty
1
into consideration, At the minimum, I am hopeful, that common sense prevails, and the Council puts their thinking caps
on, and resolves the fiscal impasse that appears to be impeding active and measured responses to the current safety
situation in San Luis Obispo.
Regards
Lee Bren
SLO citizen
-----Origina I Message-----
From: Gesell, Steve <sgesell@slocity,org>
To:'leebrenL5@aol.com' <leebren15@aol.com>
Cc: Lichtig, Katie <klichtig@slocity.org>; Staley, Chris <cstaley@slocity.org>; Storton, Keith <kstorton@slocity.org>;
Smith, Jeffery <jsmith@slocity,org>
Sent: Mon, Jun 17,20L3 3:04 pm
Subject: RE: Transient downtown SLO yesterday at about 4:45 PM on Hlguera Street-F/U
Lee, l'm told we received a 911- call regarding a subject yelling at pedestrians at that time from a man identifying himself
as "James" who did not want police contact, The dispatchers diverted the CATteam from another callto respond (this
was theirfirst day fyi), They arrived on scene in 7 minutes and could not locate the individual. However, the following
day CAT responded to a similar calland arrested one of our chronic offenders and obtained a probation and mental
health hold.
Unfortunately, we've arrested and or cited this individual countless times. One of our objectives is to find better
solutions (involving the Courts, Mental Health, Business Community, and Jail) particularly for repeat offenders like this
individual. BCC: City Council Stephen Gesell San Luis Obispo Police Chief
L042 Walnut Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(8os) 781-7020
From: Ashbaugh, John
Sent: Friday, June 1-4, 20L3 10:41 PM
To:'leebrenL5@aol.com'
Cc: Gesell, Steve; Lichtig, Katie
Subject: RE: Transient downtown SLO yesterday at about 4:45 PM on Hlguera Street
Thanks for letting us know what happened, Lee. I'm sure that Chief Gesell will respond to your inquiry as to the police
response.
I am also interested in your remarks about aggressive panhandlers in the area, I am asking Chief Gesell also to provide
you with our informational material about our rules regarding panhandlers and specifically to note the type of behavior
that could result in a citation for "aggressive panhandling".
lf you observe such conduct in the future, it would be helpfulto us if you report it.
One of the problems that we have in dealing with these issues is not the police response, but rather with clogged
courtrooms and the lenient treatment that is given to those whom we arrest or cite for such behavior. I suggest that you
2
also write to the Legislature and Governor to restore reasonable funding to the Court system - now completely under
their control and budget authority.
We will continue to do all we can in law enforcement and in related programs that address the problems you witnessed
yesterday. Meanwhile, once again let me thank you for the work you do on those planter boxes!
John Ashbaugh
SLO City Council
John B. Ashbaugh
San Luis Obispo City Council
-----Original Message-----
From: leebrenl-5@aol.com ileebren15@aol.coml
Sent: Friday, June 14,2013 t2:4L PM Pacific Standard Time
To: Marx, Jan; dancarpent@slocity.org; Ashbaugh, John
Cc: Gesell, Steve; dcash@downtownslo.com; Johnson, Derek; Lichtig, Katie;kbren2003@yahoo,com
Subject: Re: Transient downtown SLO yesterday at about 4:45 PM on Hlguera Street
Yesterday at around 4:45 PM lwas on Higuera doing my normalcity planter box watering in front of the Ross Store.
Suddenly directly across the street comes a white man, with black baseball cap, with gold tipped worn down capped
teeth, screaming, yelling, swearing, threatening every one in site as he came forward towards me. A young college
student came up from behind him, and tried to calm him down, but to no avail. This student nearly came to blows with
this person as he taunted the student and threatened to kill him. I asked the student to back off,
Clearly, this transient was on meth, or drugs, or is mentally ill or some combination of all of these, but he was violent,
verbally threatened death to many in the area, and was violent beyond words. Many women with babies were within 3
feet of this person as they fled from him.
I had to retreat to within the Ross Store, and asked the police be called. Others on the street were calling police as
well, To my amazement, he then came into the Ross Store and continued his taunting assault on the store management,
and customers.
I am curious, with this also being the first day for two police officers on the street, what became of this situation. Did
the police respond at all? This type of street behavior has to come to an end in our good town. lt is unacceptable and
intolerable; plain and simple, Yesterday, I continued to see other aggressive panhandlers with cardboard signs on the
streets as if nothing had changed.
I know the City is trying to address this problem, but yesterday's situation highlights the ever growing and escalating
problem in our community.
Regards
Lee Bren
SLO citizen
3
Goodwin, Heather
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Grimes, Maeve
Monday, June17,2013 3:49 PM
Goodwin, Heather
FW: RED FILE
Scanned from a Xerox multifunction deviceOO1-.pdf; Memo Council 6-L7.doc
Heather, please distribute as Agenda Correspondence for this evening's public hearing
mÀeve kenneÒy qfìrmes
City Clerk
cfiv oÊ s.ìn lurs ot]rspc)
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401.
¡rhc'rne; (805) 781-7102
e;m"\tl.r mgrimes@slocitv.org
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
From: Deborah Cash lmailto:dcash@downtownslo,coml
Sent: Monday, June 17,2013 3:10 PM
To: Grimes, Maeve
Subject: RED FILE
Maeve, hello
I have rec'd some communications from members that I'd like to forward to Council if it's not too late, thank you
Deborah
Deborah Cash
Executive Director
SLO Downtown Association
P O Box 1402
San Luis Obispo CA 93406
805-54 I -0286
dcash@downtownslo.com
RECEIVT;D
JUN 17 2013
LO CIT'V ilLf;R.K
1
17 lune20l3
To: Mayor Jan Marx and City Council members
From: Deborah Cash, Executive Director
San Luis Obispo Downtown Association
Re: Communications from members re: police patrol
Thank you for accepting these late communications from some of our members that
hopefully will provide additional insight into the issues we are facing Downtown and
understanding the Board of Director's desire to address them adequately.
We appreciate your support and will see you later this evening.
SLO Downtown Association <sloda@ downtownslo. com>
I*. Oa*h ü*borah <cicasir @ cicrwntr.rwr rsln.conr>
Fwd: Downtown patrols
Begin forwarded message;
From: Arlhur Hamilton <6¡119lo@msn co!!Þ
SubJect: Oownlown pstrol8
Datc: June'13,2013 12:50:26 PM PDTTo;DeborahCashM
SLO Downtown Associatlon
1108 Gârden Streel, Suite 210
(8o5) 541-0286
$loda'&dr¡wnlr¡wnslo com
Juns ì3, â013 1;Sä PM
As a downtown business person, with a store here for 31+ years, I have seen many problems in policing
downtown from loiterinB, panhandl¡ng, "Goth" gatherings, altercations from the mentally unstable and
drunk, to name a few. "Beat cops" ¡n my younger days were more than great at keeping the community in
good order, and the same applies when we have had presence in our downtown, They are a welcome
addition, in my view, to help ma¡ntäin our wonderful downtown ätmosphere and let clients/shoppers/friends
know that thís is THE PLACE TO SHOP"
Keith Hamilton
Hamilton Estate Jewelry
Ehb*lo@ msn.gQ¡u
(not ale to attend June 17th meeting)
SLO Downtown AEsociatlon <sloda@downtownslo.com>
Tr:r Ca*h l)*bn rah <rji;a sh (Orl r¡wn tcwfl slö, rrnìþ
Fwd:
June 14, f01S 7:434M
see below
Begln forwarded message:
From: "W!.U!¿Ulhå{¡12Q.@-gL¿ruû" @
Datc; June 13, 2013 5:27:29 PM PDT
Tor
Feply"fs¡ "lueÌtrar¿tha{¡ UÇ.QsqlJra_m" <Upflrg¡lbËgl?.ù@lêELÊgü>
Þowntown areas ne mätlor what the size need a special police presenco.."face to face aç a delerenl that doeßn'l disappear around the corner
leaving the street smarl trans¡ent lo reclaim the street
$êr!Ì lrDiyr il ry Vôrizilil Wrgl0$$ 4{:i i 'T Ë Smârlphurìf,
SLO Downtown Association
1108 Garden Street, Suite 210
(805) 541-0286
glaqs&dü!y$q-v{0$lo. c.p m
\4rw"!4lpqul¡Qua$LQ-l¡ljl!
leebrenls@aol.com Junê 14, gÛTg 1ä:41 PM
Tn: Jmarx@slocity.org, dancarpent@sloc¡ly.org, Jashbaug@slocity.org
Cc; sgesell@slocity.org, dcash@downtownslo.com, djohnson@slocity.org, kllchtig@slocity.org, kbren2003@yahoo.com
Fe: Transient downtown SLO yeslerday at about 4:45 PM on Hlguera Street
Yesterday at around 4:45 PM I was on Higuera doing my normal clty planter box watering
in tront of lhe Ross Store.
Suddenly directly across üe street comes a wh¡te man, wilh black baseball cap, wÍth gold tipped
worn down capped leelh, screaming, yelling, swearing, lhr€atening every one in site as he
came forward towards me, A young college student came up from behind him, and
tried to calm him down, but to no avail. This studant neafy came to blows wlth
this person as he taunted the student and throalened to kill him. I asked lhe student to back ofl,
Clearly, this transient was on melh, or drugs, or ls menlally lll or some comblnatlon
of all of these, but he was violenl, verbally lhreatened death lo many in the area, and was violent
beyond words. Many womon with bables were within 3 feet of lhls pe¡son as th6y tled fom him.
I had to retreat to within the Ross Store, and asked the pollce be called. Others on
the slreel wero calllng police as well. To my amazement, he then came into
lhe Ross Store and continued his launling assault on the store managemenl, and customers.
I am curious, with th¡s also being the flrst day for lwo police otficers on the slreet, what
became of th¡s s¡tual¡on. Did the police respond at all? This type ol street behavior has lo come
to an end in our good town. lt is unåcceptable and ¡ntolerable;plain and simple. Yesterday, I continued
to see other aggressive panhandlers with cardboard slgns on the streets as if nothing had changod.
I know lhe City is trying to address this problem, but yesterday's sltuation highlights the ever growing
and escalating problem in our community.
Regards
Lee Bren
SLO cllizen
Êrllln¿y <brif nðyrene@gmíl ¿om>/lr ¡rlodã@)doMloffilo com' qlodû@downlownslo com>
14 ?rtji 1r 1 r"¡?ì
Hl th6r6
Brent Vanderhoot <brent@downtownslo.com>
Tcl tash nsborah <dcush@downtçwnçic.cqm>
Fwd: Downtown pollce presence
June f7,2013 1û;074M
Begin forwarded messager
From: 4rslcls@aof.conl
9ubJect: Re: Downtown pollce prosence
Datc: June 1 4, 2013 5:31 :31 PM PDT
To : hrent@dqw!qq\l¿ï çf p-çQm
Tks &rent - I did speak to Oebra at the cafe - she explalned also how thls "police presenco* program with J¡m and Jeremy will work - ils all over the cìty not
just döwntown and we do need Police Prosence Just for the downtown êxclus¡vely, See you et the meetlng tlon. if you go, Tks.
Rëne Scåmêg¡
west End Ê$presso & Teå
805-543-4902
Brent Venderhoof
Adminlstrative Asslslant
SLO Downtown Assoclallon
1 108 Garden Streel, Sulte 21 0
(805) 541"0286
Qtp. ttl(Èdo w{lgkv"nfi lg. Çgm
wwru.DowntownSLû.com
INHOUSE SECURITY SERVICE
( YTr¡ E¡porb,"
^tl|f,in?
of Prlvrtr t¡cudtv I
INC]DENT REPORT
PO Bo¡ ltll Prro ç¡ ¡3..71 I Fr¡: 23t{tt2
OF
;oTEOREFOFJUBERDATOFFlgEN
- //-tl /tl-nh ,-' J .þ/;,t. I'tta.'lt.t,I l"t,
lî06/larz
o.oEESS
HOES HAÏ TATTOOIJEANSSHORTJACKETAôEHEIGH-}tAIRCOLORHE¡rr€ or GEiOER lll)
ßnuu tunßu,ßttllll r l/n'r ('q"foJ,¡ ll;))r,,r,
TATÏOOHAIRJEANSSHORTIiHOESACKETHAfCOLORAGEI{AHE ot OENDER (rz
SHOES JACKET HAT TATTOOSñnJr¡lE or OENDER (tl)COLOR AGE f-tAlR JEAN.q SHORTS
NAME or OENDER (L)COLOR AGE HAIR JFJìNS SHORTS ¡HOES JACKET HAT TATTOOS
VEHICLE MAKE (I1)YEAR COLOR P!ATE SÏATE
A
J
t¡
-r9/. 6://-/1
ü/ winer***qg'J*t*g' LLC
lune 17, 2013
5an Luis Obispo Clty Councll
990 Pólm st.
San Luis Oblspo, CA 93401
RIr Perm¡nent police petrol dowñtown
Dear councll,
MV nåm€ ls Gary StEvenson and I havp the pleasure to manðBe the Wlneman Buildfng downtown San
Lu¡s Oblspo, I encour¡ge the council to vote in fàvor of budgelinB fot å permanent police presence irl
lhe downtown viclnìty,
ThefrontentranceoftheW¡nemsnwashlstorlcally6hotspotforvägrântðctlvlty. Theðwningðndthe
pårk bench had become ¿ regular locatlon for panhandlers to fet up for lhe entire day and night. One
female tenant ln parllcular had ö frlBhtenlnE lnter¡ctlon wlth one such gentleman on the street bench,
As she approôchÉd the en¡rance to the bulldlng Ð man slttin8 on the bench (alled her by name ând
asked where she went dnd what took her so long and refetenced th8 speclflc time she left. The polic€
wherecontactedandwewereadv¡sedtorallgllonthlstypÉoflncidenl. lhâvosincêtakenstepstoftr
the probhm by moving the bench to the.esldent¡äl pallo and ¡nslalling a rallln8 under th6 ¿wnlng lhat
has deterred the act¡vity, Though thl$ hss improvêd thè sltuatlon at the front of lhÊ Wineman, the
s¡fuatlon has undoubledly movsd locåtlóns, I fêel thãt ð pêrmðnenl la$/ enforcemênt presence would
dlscourage thls type of behavior,
On ¡everal occaslons I have ¿emoved sleeping bags and pillows from the roof of the bllldlnt ând
repaired broken t¡bles ðnd fences on the roof top patlo from people sttemptlnE to hop over to camp on
the roof, The sltúati0n ¡s out ofrontrol and I hope the Clty responds in a responrlble mannerto remedy
it.
On a personal note, my }vlfe and I love to take walks to downtown ln the evan¡n8s. on many occas¡ons
lhe sldewalkr hôve been bloeked by young adult vrgrants cnd thelr dogs cômpin8 on the sidew¡lks'
Severål ilmes we ðttempted to pass and were confronted and my small children were confronted by
them whlch made my wife and me vêry uncomtortable, lam I Sth generatlon san Luis oblspo reslden!
åndtheincreasedvagrantãctlvltythalh¡soccuÍedovermylifetiméi3 Incredlble. Myfondest
memorles of my chlldhood were of r¡dlng my bikê wllh a fr¡end to downtown for the afternoon, I would
ever ¿llow my deughters to vlslt downtown unäccompsnled under the curr€nt sítuation. MY famlly
hopes thöt we as a communlty can repai¡ the situãtion and we look to you for help.
sinceråly
Gary
Pcli(e Parrol .d$cx (3f*Kg)
RECEIVED
councrl memopânòum .,-"',J il::.,^
AGENDA
June 13,2013
TO: City Council
FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Prepared by: Brigitte Elke, Principal Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: 2013-15 Financial Plan Resolution
In preparation for the June 17,2013 City Council meeting, attached please find an updated
budget resolution that reflects the Council's discussion points during the June 10, 11, and 12,
2013 public meetings.
The resolution will be fuither updated according to the Council's discussion and decisions during
the June 17,2013, meeting.
d.
Attachment2
RESOLUTTON NO. (2013 SERTES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING THE 2OI3-15 FINANCIAL PLAN AND 2013-14 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City Manager has submitted the 2013-15 Financial Plan to the Council for its
review and consideration in accordance with budget policies and objectives established by the Council;
and
WHEREAS, the 2013-15 Financial Plan is based upon extensive public comment and direction
of the Council after fourteen scheduled budget workshops and public hearings,
WHEREAS, during its June 2013 budget hearings, the City Council made several adjustments to
the2013-2015 Preliminary Financial Plan and 2013-14 budget as outline in Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that:
1. The Preliminary 2013-15 Financial Plan with amendments as presented in Exhibit A is hereby
approved and that the operating, debt service and capital improvement plan budget for the fiscal
year beginning July 1,2013 and ending June 30, 2014 is hereby adopted as amended.
2. The City Manager is hereby directed to make modifications to work programs to reflect
consistency with funding approvals set forth in Exhibit A.
On motion of
the following vote:
seconded by , and on
AYES:
NOTE:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted on June 17,2013.
ATTEST Mayor Jan Marx
Maeve Kennedy Grimes, City Clerk
APPROVED:
Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
Resolution No, (2013 Series)
2013-15 Financial Plan and 2013-14 Budget
Exhibit A
Council Approved Changes to the Preliminary 2013-15 Financial Plan and 2013-14 Budget
During its June 10, l l , and 12,2013, Budget Hearings, the City Council discussed and approved the
following changes and amendments to the 2013-15 Financial Plan and 2013-14 budget:
l. The annual Open Space Capital Improvement Budget (2013-15 Capital Improvement Plan 3-
331) is set at $200,000 per year.
2. The Capital Improvement project to rebuild the Jack House Gazebo (2013-15 Capital
Improvement Plan 3-506) is included in the 2014-15 fiscal year at a cost of $40,000.
3. The Capital Improvement project to construct bicycle facility improvements (2013-15 Capital
Improvement Plan 3-289) will be funded at $100,000 annually.
4. The Capital Improvement project for City Wayfinding Signs (2013-15 Capital Improvement Plan
3-268) is tunded at $65,000 in2013-14, $65,000 in20l4-15 with an additional $50,000 planned
in 2015-16 and2016-17.
5. The Capital Improvement project (2013-15 Capital Improvement Plan 3-72) to remodel the
dorms and bathroom at Fire Station 2 is financed in 2013-14 with 52,700 for design and $27,800
in 201 4-l 5 for construction.
6. The Major City Goal "Essential Service, Infrastructure, & Financial Health" is amended as
follows:
Task: Continue to closely review and monitor the City's fiscal condition
3. Beginningin29I4-l5, selÊassess one percent of salaries to be used to reduce
CaIPERS obligation.
4. Present a cost benefit analysis to Council regarding the City's ability to make
payments on the CaIPERS Tier I Safety Side Fund, pension obligations, or to offset
ongoing employer rate increase. Due Date: April2014
7 . The Fleet Fund investment will be reduced by $91,000
RECË
JUN 1? 2013
CLERK
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 17,2013
TO: Mayor and City Council
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
VIA: Chief Gesell, Chief of Police
Prepared by: Chris Staley, Police Captain
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
On June "lsth 2013, Mayor Marx requested the number of authorized police officer
positions over the last ten years. The table below lists the authorized police officer
positions which does not include sworn supervisors or managers:
*Note: Measure Y funding for four (4) additional patrol officers to staff the
Neighborhood Services Team; funding for these positions was eliminated for the 2009-
11 Financial Plan due to city-wide budget reductions.
"*Note: 2OO9-10 Three (3) members of the Special Enforcement Team (SET) were
moved from the Patrol Division to the lnvestigation Division to better reflect the unit's
functionality.
The Mayor also asked how police coverage would be effected in the rest of the city if an
officer position was deployed specifically to the Downtown core. This additional
resource would conceivably increase capacity for patrol officers in the remainder of the
City provided crime trends remain as they are today during the daytime hours (i.e., a
disproportionate percentage of calls for service throughout the Downtown core).
However, an additional officer assigned on foot or bicycle Downtown would not enable a
reduction in the minium number of patrol officers deployed during the day as Downtown
officers would be limited in their ability to respond outside their zone to assist as
L
2003-
o4
2004-
05
2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08*
2008-
09
2009-
10**
2010-
11
2011-
12
20'12-
13
Patrol
lnvestigations
Traffic
33I
5
33I
5
32
8
4
32
8
4
36
8
5
36I
5
30
11
4
30
11
4
30I
4
30I
4
Total 46 46 44 44 49 49 45 45 43 43
needed. As previoiusly mentioned, crime trends change through time and program
impacts are continunally assessed by my staff and I to ensure avaihbÞ public safety
resources are deplolyed in the most efficient manner.
2
Elcouncrl memopânòum
crty o[ san turs oorspo, frnance anò l.t. òepantment
DATE J:une 14,2013
Mayor & Council Members
Katie Lichtig, City Manager
TO cVIA
FROM: Wayne Padilla, Interim Director of Finance & I.T.
SUBJECT: Funding Options for Downtown Officer Alternatives
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
Please find attached 6 worksheets which relate to the City Council's discussions from this
week's budget hearings. Attachment 1 reflects the city's financial position after incorporating the
amounts from the items that were previously on the "Parking Lot" list and which received the
concurrence of the City Council on Wednesday night. Each of Attachments 2 - 5 combines the
information from Attachment 1 with the costs related to one of the four staffing options
(highlighted in green) for the Downtown Offrcer that are identified in the Council Memorandum
that was sent out Thursday evening. Also shown (highlighted in yellow) in Attachments 2 - 5
are the potential adjustments identified by staff that could be made to ofßet the staffing option
cost that is shown, in order to maintain a stable financial position of revenues over expenditures
for the city and a reasonable excess over the 20o/o resewe requirement over the 5-year Financial
Forecast period.
More specifically, these spreadsheets use the same format as the one that was shared with the
City Council on V/ednesday night as it reflects the impact that a change in the cost structure has
on both the total ending fund balance and the amount in excess of the 20o/o resewe. In order to
make this calculation correctly, adjustments to operating costs are shown under the header,
"subject to 20Vo adjustment" and 20Yo of the amounts shown in this section are added to the
General Fund's 20Yo reserve requirement. As a result, any increases to the 20Yo resewe
requirement lower the amount of the fund balance that exceeds the 20o/o reserve as a result.
Attachment 6 reflects the options that staff has identified for offsetting the cost of the police
staffrng alternatives. As noted in previous discussions, the Council may wish to identify other
adjustments than those proposed by staff. During the June 17, 2013 meeting, staff will be
prepared to respond to requests for information on these items. V/ith regard to the options listed
in Attachment 6, the Public Works Director has confirmed that the listed reductions to general
pu{pose capital improvement projects will not have a material effect on the overall group of
projects and replacements that are shown. As discussed on V/ednesday night, if the additional
Ranger position that was identified in an SOPC and included in the Preliminary Financial
Forecast is removed from the cost structure, there will be an impact on the city's ability to
address certain enforcement issues. Nonetheless, it is a possible alternative for the City
Council' s consideration.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have by calling me at 781-7125 or by
e-mail at wpadilla@slocity.ore.
JUN I ¿ ?ot3
VED
çTt
H:\informat¡on memos\6-12-1 3 CC meet¡ng follow-up\COUNCIL MEMORANDUM-downtown otficer fL
City of San Luis Obispo Revised Forecast with Council Recommendations from 6lt2lL3
Fy t3lL4 FY L4lLs tY LslL6 FY t6lL7 FY L7lL8
(s2,7oo)
(s25,000)
(s33,200)
(s7s,ooo)
$o
S91,4oo
So
(s27,800)
(s4o,ooo)
(s49,600)
(s75,000)
(s4o,ooo)
$gt,¿oo
$o
52,7oo
S15,ooo
(sso,8o0)
($75,ooo)
So
Sg1,4oo
So
5z7,8oo
So
(Ssz,roo¡
(s75,000)
So
Sgt,+oo
$o
$o
Sso,ooo
(ss3,4oo)
(s7s,ooo)
So
Sg1,4oo
So
ttt
Ê,o
I
tn
N
r0
Not Subiect to 20% adiustment
Fire Station #2 Upgrade
lncrease Wayfinding Signs:
Open Space CIP
lncrease Bikeway Funding:
Jack House Gazebo:
Decrease Fleet Funding:
Net changes above:
Full Year Revenues Over (Under) Exp.
Beginning Fund Balance:
Ending Fund Balance:
20% Reserve Amount:
Excess Over 20% Reserve Requirement
($44,s00) ($141,000) (s16,700) (s7,900) srg,ooo
(s44,s00) (s141,000) (s16,700) (s7,e00) s13,000
5314,200 $116,200 546,874 5815,904 541,300
59,987,300 Si-0,30i.,500 5r0,4r7,700 5r0,464,574 51-1,280,478
SLo,3o1,5oo
$9,879,300
5qz
5ro,4t7,7oo
S1o,i.o3,ooo
5314 700
$r0,464,s74
5ro,4ss,z74
S9,3oo
itt,z$o,478
S10,768,378
S512,100
$1-1-,321-,778
51,1,,r29,778
S192,ooo
ATTACHMENT 1
H:\Budget informatìon\13-15 issues\Syr fiscal plan\revision for SOPC changes
City of San Luis Obispo Revised Forecast with Downtown Staffing Option A
Subiect to 20% adiustment: FY t3lL4 FY L4lL5 FY LslL6 FY L6lL7 FY t7lL8
(s114,100)
(sz,zoo¡
(s2s,oo0)
(sas,zoo¡
(s75,000)
So
S91,4oo
S43,ooo
S5o,ooo
s40,000
So so 5o So
t^tr
.9
I
tYl
N
ro
Not Subiect to 20% adiustment:
Fire Station #2 Upgrade
I ncrease Wayfinding Signs:
Open Space CIP
I ncrease Bikeway Funding:
iack House Gazebo:
Decrease Fleet Funding:
Redirect Street Sweeping Funding
Reduce Storm Drain Replacements
Reduce Traffic Sign Maintenance
Ending Fund Balance:
20% Reserve Requirement
Excess Over 20% Reserve Requirement
(szz,aoo¡
(s+o,ooo¡
(s49,600)
(s75,000)
(s+o,ooo¡
S91,4oo
52,700
S15,ooo
(sso,aoo¡
(s75,000)
So
S91,4oo
S27,80o
So
(ssz,roo¡
(s75,000)
So
S9i_,400
So
S5o,ooo
(ss3,400)
(s75,000)
So
S9i.,4oo
s88,s00 (s141,000) (s16,700) (s7,900) s13,000
Net changes above:(szs,6oo¡ (sr+r,ooo¡ (sr0,zoo¡ (sz,soo¡ s13,000
FullYear Revenues over (Under) Exp. 5333,100 51L6,200 546,874 5815,904 541,300
Beginning Fund Balance 59,987,300 51"o,320,400 S10,436,600 5ro,483,474 St'J",299,378
SLo,32o,4oo
59,goz,tzo
S418,280
Si_0,436,600
Si-o,i.o3,ooo
S333,600
5L0,483,474
5L0,4s5,274
S28,2oo
5rL,299,378
S10,768,378
S53i_,ooo
S1i.,340,678
irL,r29,779
s210,900
ATTACHMENT 2
H:\Budget information\13-15 issues\Syr fiscal plan\revision for SOPC changes
City of San Luis Obispo Revised Forecast with Downtown Staffing Option B
FY Ltlt4 FY t4lt5 FY LslL6 FY t6lt7Subiect to 20% adiustment:
Remove Ranger SOPC:
FY t7ltB
S75,7oo300s7s700 s75,700 s75,700
ss9,300 (s89,000) (se3,100) (s97,300) (s101,700)
Co
(J
(Yt
F{
Nç{
(o
Not Subiect to 20% Adiustment:
Fire Station #2 Upgrade
I ncrease Wayfinding Signs:
Open Space CIP
lncrease Bikeway Funding:
Jack House Gazebo:
Decrease Fleet Funding:
Street Sweeping Augmentation :
Reduce Storm Drain Replacements
Net changes above:
Full Year Revenues Over (Under) Exp
Beginning Fund Balance
Ending Fund Balance:
20% Reserve Requirement
Excess Over 20% Reserve Requirement
(s44,s00) (s48,000) s76,300 s8s,100 s106,000
s14,800 (s137,000) (s16,S00) ($12,200) s4,300
s373,500 5r2O,200 546,11+ 5811,604 532,600
s9,987,300 s10,360,800 s1-0,48L,000 5r0,527,774 s11,339,378
(s2,7oo)
(s25,000)
(s33,200)
(s7s,ooo)
$o
s91_,400
So
So
(s27,800)
(s40,000)
(s49,600)
(s7s,ooo)
(s40,000)
S9i.,4oo
s43,ooo
s5o,ooo
52,700
S15,ooo
(sso,8oo)
(s75,000)
So
s91,400
S43,ooo
S5o,ooo
S27,80o
5o
(s52,100)
(s75,ooo)
So
S91,4oo
s43,ooo
s5o,ooo
$o
S5o,ooo
(s53,400)
(s75,000)
So
s91,400
S43,ooo
S5o,ooo
Si.o,360,8oo
59,867,440
s493,360
Si-0,481,000
Si.o,i.2o,8oo
S360,2oo
5r0,s27,774
5r0,473,994
s53,880
s1L,339,378
$10,787,838
S55i-,540
51,1,,371,,979
Si.i.,i.50,118
Szzt,aao
ATTACHMENT 3
rt ;l ' 'l i rtjr ',(ì i::, i,r,l lili-l) i:. ..rl,:,''),)l .l.l t I rì,ìilì 'i i'ii,ìr'
H:\Budget information\13-1-5 issues\Syr fiscal plan\revision for SOPC changes
City of San Luis Obispo Revised Forecast with Downtown Staffing Option C
Subiect to 20% adiustment: FY L3lL4 FY L4lLs FY L5lL6 FY L6lL7 tY L7lL8
1i:',., ì i,,,r rL, ),; íi .' ., it,), il iirll'lì r.r. : rll r,.l iL lrìl iil ,' 'r|;' ,ì 1t,r,i,_''lìirIiilj,
(ssz,oso¡ (sroo,roo¡ (s102,600) (s10s,200) (sroz,aoo¡
t^c
.9
(J
rn
N
(o
Not Subiect lo 20% Adiustment:
Fire Station #2 Upgrade
lncrease Wayfinding Signs:
Open Space CIP
lncrease Bikeway Funding:
Jack House Gazebo:
Decrease Fleet Funding:
Redirect Street Sweeping Amount:
Reduce Storm Drain Replacements
Reduce Annual Paving:
Reduce Traffic Sign Maintenance:
Ending Fund Balance:
20% Reserve Requirement
Excess Over 20% Reserve Requirement
(sz,zoo¡
(szs,ooo¡
(s33,200)
(s75,000)
5o
s91,400
So
S43,ooo
S5o,ooo
So
S40,ooo
(s27,S00)
(s40,ooo)
(s49,600)
(5zs,ooo¡
(s+o,ooo¡
S91,4oo
So
100
So
So
52,7OO
Si_5,ooo
(s5o,8oo)
(s75,ooo)
So
Sgi_,400
So
S43,ooo
S5o,ooo
S5o,ooo
So
S27,8oo
So
(ss2,100)
(s75,000)
So
s91,400
S43,ooo
Sso,ooo
5L2,2Oo
So
So
S5o,ooo
(ssr,+oo¡
(s75,000)
So
S9i.,4oo
So
s43,ooo
S5o,ooo
So
So
43,000s
s 57,
s88,500 (s40,900) s126,300 s97,300 s106,000
Net changes above:(ss,rso¡ (s141,000) s23,700 (sz,soo¡ (s1,800)
Full Year Revenues Over (Under) Exp 5349,550 5116,200 587,274 S8i.5,904 Sz6,soo
Beginning Fund Balance S9,987,300 S10,336,850 Si.0,453,050 51.o,s4o,324 51.1.,356,228
S10,336,850
S9,898,830
S438,020
S10,453,050
ito,r23,o2o
S33o,o3o
5r0,540,324
5!o,475,794
S64,530
5L1,3s6,228
Si_0,789,418
S566,gto
5r1.,392,728
s11,151,338
s231,390
ATTACHMENT 4
H:\Budget information\13-15 issues\Syr fiscal plan\revision for SOPC changes
Subiect to 20% adiustment:
Remove Ranger SOPC:
City of San Luis Obispo Revised Forecast with Downtown Staffing Option D
FY t3lL4 FY L4lLs tY LslL6 FY L6lL7
s59,3oo s75,7oo 575,700 575,700
FY L7lL8
s7s 700
i'ìtt;'¡,ilr iìl r., ri¡r'\ iì 't ,í,',i '.,,.' ,i. ''''.t.,.,'..(-:::,
(s76,600) (s7e,s00) (sar,+oo¡ (saz,+oo¡ (ssr,soo¡
t^E
.9
¡J
(n
N
rC,
Not Subiect to 20% Adiustment:
Fire Station #2 Upgrade
lncrease Wayfinding Signs:
Open Space CIP
lncrease Bikeway Fu nding:
Jack House Gazebo:
Decrease Fleet Funding:
Reduce Annual Paving:
Redirect Street Sweeping Amount:
Reduce Storm Drain Replacements:
Ending Fund Balance:
20% Reserve Requirement
Excess Over 20% Reserve Requirement
510,431,,200 510,527,674 5Lr,343,s78 Si.1,384,878
Si.0,i.18,900 5r0,47r,954 Si_0,785,858 Si_1,i_48,078
5312,300 555,720 55s7,720 5236,800
(sz,zoo¡
(s25,000)
(ses,zoo¡
(s75,000)
So
S9i_,400
S43,ooo
S33,600
(s27,S00)
(s+o,ooo¡
(s49,600)
(s75,000)
(s40,000)
s91,400
S43,ooo
S5o,ooo
52,70O
Si.5,ooo
(sso,aoo¡
(s75,ooo)
So
S9i.,4oo
s5o,ooo
S43,ooo
S40,ooo
S27,8oo
So
(ssz,roo¡
(szs,ooo¡
So
S91,4oo
s43,000
S44,4oo
So
S5o,ooo
(ssa,+oo¡
(s75,000)
So
S91,4oo
S43,ooo
S48,5oo
00 (s48,000) s11_6,300 s79,500 s104,s00
Net changes above (s++,soo¡ (s127,500) s32,900 (s7,900) s13,000
Full Year Revenues over (Under) Exp. 5314,200 5129,700 596,474 581-5,904 541,300
Beginning Fund Balance
s32,1
59,987,300 S10,301,500 Si.0,43i-,200 510,527,674 Si-1,343,578
Si.o,3o1,5oo
59,894,620
s406,880
ATTACHMENT 5
H:\Budget information\13-15 issues\5yr fiscal plan\revision for SOPC changes
Options to Offset the Cost of Additional Downtown Policing
Street Sweeping Augmentation:
Remove Ranger SOPC*
Annual Paving
Reduce Storm Drain Replacements:
Traffic Sign Maintenance
Reduce Parking Lot Maintenance:
tY t3lL4
S43,ooo
s59,3oo
so
S5o,ooo
s40,oo0
tY L4lts
$43,000
S75,7oo
$o
s5o,ooo
tY LslL6
s43,000
575,700
s5o,ooo
S5o,ooo
FY t6lL7
S43,ooo
S75,7oo
S5o,ooo
S5o,ooo
tY L7lt8
s43,000
57s,7oo
s5o,ooo
S5o,ooo
Page Reference
Prelim Fin Plan pg #C-73
CIP page #3-223
CIP page #3-313
S5o,ooo CIP page #3-495
s192,300 $218,700 52L8,700 5218,700 521-8,700
* This will limit the work done in handling creek enforcement and homeless issues; all functions returned to Parks and Rec. Department
ATTACHMENT 6
H:\Budget information\13-15 issues\Syr fiscal plan\revision for SOPC changes
CO
L
I
N
C
I
L
IT
E
M
NO
.
:
G
/7
a
^&
t
h
.
á
"
h
/
¿
7
9t
-
'
4
En
vt
o
D
tí
o
n
i
on
i
s
FY 2OI3lI
4
z
#lo1b4
do
y
s
,
10
hr
s
(4
O
)
-
2
mo
n
t
h
s
$
3
do
y
s
,
5
hr
s
(1
5
)
-
2
mo
n
t
h
s
$
1 c 7
do
y
s
,
5
hr
s
(3
5
)
-
4
mo
n
t
h
s
$
4g
,
9
O
O
(O
T
)
#l d 4
do
y
s
,
10
hr
s
(4
o
)
-
6
mo
n
t
h
s
$
ll
7
,
T
o
o
(N
H
)
#D
(2
4
)
6
mo
n
t
h
s
(2
4
)
-
6
m
o
n
t
h
s
$
(s
R
o
)
&
1O
,
ó
O
O
(O
T
)
(o
r
)
&
Ió
3
,
0
8
0
(N
H
)
(2
O
'
1
"
od
d
e
d
)
3
do
y
s
,
3
do
y
s
,
hh
8I
rsrs
FY - 20l4ll
5
z
#r 4
do
y
s
,
10
hr
s
.
(4
o
)
-t
z
mo
n
t
h
s
$
lb
5
,z
o
o
(N
H
)
?
#D 3
do
y
s
,
I
hr
s
.
(2
4
)
rz
mo
n
t
h
s
$
18
6
,z
4
o
(N
H
)
(2
O
%
od
d
e
d
)
a
RECETVED
JUN I 4 2013
SLO CTÏY CLËRK
COUNCIL MEMORAI{DUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
Prepared by
ENC:
June 13,2013
Mayor and City Council
Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Chief Gesell, Chief of Police
Captain Keith Stonon
Downtown Patrol Options Matrix
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENOE
On June 12,2013 I provided a presentation to Council explaining several alternative options in
order to provide a consistent presence of two police ofhcer positions dedicated to daytime
Downtown patrol. The essence of that presentation is highlighted in this memorandum.
As explained to Council on June 11,2013 some of the options have been modified from their
original presentation to provide more accurate information as to outcomes the Police Department
can reasonably expect to accomplish considering exiting deployment capabilities and use of
overtime availability.
Historically, the Police Department has concentrated patrol and enforcement efforts in the
Downtown area. Some key operational deployment dates include:
. 1996 - Introduction of Downtown Daytime Bicycle Offrcer. 1998 - Introduction of Downtown Nighttime Bicycle Offrcers (l Sgt. and 3 ofhcers). December 20ll - Loss of Daytime Ofïicer - Retirement. March 2012- Interim CAT Team Deployment. June 2013 - Permanent CAT Team Deployment
Recognizing the need to address chronic adverse behaviors, such as panhandling, camping,
loitering, alcohol, vandalism and other public nuisance crimes, common in the Downtown and
other areas of the City, I initiated an interim Community Action Team (CAT) in March 2012.
This team consisted of two officers that regularly worked daytime patrol to directly address
adverse behaviors. The chart on Slide 3 of the attached PowerPoint displays the number of shifts
and hours these CAT teams have applied toward this directed citywide effort.
Although the CAT team efforts were directed citywide a great deal of activity and enforcement
occurred in the Downtown area, including foot patrols and contacts in the downtown business
district, creek areas, surrounding parks and residential areas. As of June 13,2013 the CAT team
is a permanently deployed special assignment filled by two officers that work 10 hours a day,
four days a week.
Downtown Patrol Options PaEe 2
The current Preliminary 2013-2015 Financial Plan provided to Council represents a multi
pronged approach to address specific adverse behaviors in the Downtown and as these activities
move throughout the City.
The following graphic depicts several resources that the Police Department provides specifically
concentrated in the Downtown core as part of the 2013-2015 Financial Plan.
Existing Resources
*This resource will be limited to July ønd August 201-3.
**This resource will end in December 2073.
Recognizing the interest among City Council Members to pursue a more intensiflred effort and
directed police presence Downtown, specifically during the daytime hours, my staff and I have
reviewed four different alternatives outlining to present to Council to address this need. These
options should be considered as "add-ons" to the existing recommended Preliminary 2013-15
Financial Plan that already proposes providing overtime resources from July through December
2013, and an additional 1.0 full time police officer position dedicated to daytime Downtown
patrol starting January 2014.
The four plans are represented on the attached graphic.
As I mentioned during the Council meeting on June 11, it is important for public to understand
police resources are deployed in the most efhcient manner to address fluctuating crime trends
throughout the City. Additionally, deployments are often impacted by periodic stafhng
challenges. Ultimately, deployment decisions must fall to the discretion of the chief of police in
order to best serve the community's public safety interests. I would greatly appreciate your
support and assistance in setting apropriate public expectations should Council decide to
authorize additional police personnel.
Please feel free to contact me directly should there be any questions regarding the strategy and
options outlined in this memorandum.
Downtown
Polrce
Vo¡u rìlcel
Prograrl
Downtown
Bicycle Team -
Night Patrol
Patrol Services
Day and Night
Prrblic Safety
C¿ nler as
SRO- &
Ove rtiûìe
Dôw rìl own
Parr ol' +
L)owtìtOwn
Off ice r
D.ry P¿trolCommunity
Action Team
(cAr)
New Resources
Attached: Alternative Options Graphic, Updated Presentation Slides
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
Op
t
i
o
n
s
fo
r
Tw
o
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Da
v
t
i
m
e
Pa
t
r
o
l
Of
f
i
c
e
r
s
FY
2O
L
3
-
L
4
FY
2O
t
4
-
I
5
th
r
u
2O
L
7
-
t
g
OF
C
JU
L
AU
G
SE
P
OC
T
NO
V
DE
C
JA
N
FE
B
MA
R
AP
R
MA
Y
JU
N
JU
L
AU
G
SE
P
OC
T
NO
V
DE
C
JA
N
FE
B
MAR APR MAY JUN
A*
B*
*
c*
*
*
D*
*
*
*
Sc
h
o
o
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
Of
f
i
c
e
r
Op
t
i
o
n
A
co
s
t
is
S1
1
4
,
1
0
0
in
20
1
3
-
1
4
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
Ne
w
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
Re
d
e
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
(T
r
a
f
f
i
c
to
Downtown)
**
Op
t
i
o
n
B
co
s
t
is
51
6
4
,
7
0
0
in
20
L
4
-
L
5
;
51
6
8
,
8
0
0
in
20
1
5
-
1
6
;
S1
7
3
,
0
0
0
in
2O
t
6
-
1
7
;
5
L
7
7
,
4
O
O
in
2O
L
7
-
L
8
**
*
op
t
i
o
n
c
co
s
t
is
S9
7
,
6
5
0
in
2
o
t
3
-
t
4
;
S1
0
0
,
1
0
0
in
2
o
L
4
-
L
5
;
S1
0
2
,
6
0
0
in
20
1
5
-
1
6
;
S1
o
5
,
2
o
o
in
2
o
L
6
-
L
7
;
S1
o
7
,
8
o
o
in
20
1
7
-
1
8
**
*
*
op
t
i
o
n
D
co
s
t
is
S1
3
5
,
9
0
0
in
2
o
t
3
-
L
4
;
S1
5
5
,
2
0
0
in
2
o
t
4
-
L
5
;
S1
5
9
,
1
0
0
in
20
1
5
-
1
6
;
S1
6
3
,
1
0
0
in
2
o
L
6
-
L
7
;
5
!
6
7
,
2
o
o
in
20
1
7
-
1
8
No
t
e
:
Al
l
co
s
t
s
sh
o
w
n
ab
o
v
e
ar
e
in
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
to
th
o
s
e
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
in
th
e
Pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
Pl
a
n
;
Co
s
t
s
sh
o
w
n
do
no
t
re
f
l
e
c
t
th
e
2
0
%
ad
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
to the General
Fu
n
d
Re
s
e
r
v
e
.
1 2 t 2 L 2 t 2
*
No
Se
c
o
n
d
Of
f
i
c
e
r
De
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
of
Po
l
i
c
e
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Ju
n
e
12
,
2
0
1
3
Hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
De
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
Ef
f
o
r
t
s
I
L9
9
6
-
ln
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
of
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Da
y
t
i
m
e
Of
f
¡
c
e
r
I
L9
9
8
-
ln
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
of
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Ni
g
h
t
t
i
m
e
Of
f
¡
c
e
r
s
(c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
th
i
s
da
y
)
r
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
20
I
I
-
Lo
s
s
of
Da
y
t
i
m
e
Of
f
i
c
e
r
-
Re
t
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
r
Ma
r
c
h
20
1
2
-
ln
t
e
r
i
m
CA
T
Te
a
m
De
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
r
Ju
n
e
20
1
3
-
Pe
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
CA
T
Te
a
m
De
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
2
In
t
e
r
i
m
CA
T
De
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
Ef
f
o
r
t
s
Ho
u
r
s
28
6
23
2
25
6
26
4
2L
6
24
0
27
2
17
6
t4
4
64 96
L2
0
Da
y
s
*
13 13 L4 13 TL TL L2 L0 8 4 6 L6
Mo
n
t
h
/
Y
e
a
r
Ma
y
2O
t
2
Ju
n
e
2O
t
2
Ju
l
y
2O
t
2
Au
g
.
2O
L
2
Se
p
t
.
2O
L
2
Oc
t
.
20
L
2
No
v
.
2O
I
2
De
c
.
2O
L
2
Ja
n
.
2O
t
3
Fe
b
.
2O
t
3
Ma
r
.
2O
t
3
Ap
r
.
2O
L
3
*T
w
o
of
f
i
c
e
r
s
pe
r
da
y
3
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
20
1
3
-2
0
1
5
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
Pl
a
n
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
*T
h
i
s
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
wi
l
l
be
li
m
i
t
e
d
to
Ju
l
y
on
d
Au
g
u
s
t
20
1
.
3
.
**
T
h
i
s
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
wi
l
l
en
d
in
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
20
1
3
.
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
4
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
Te
a
m
-
N¡
g
h
t
Pa
t
r
o
l
Pa
t
r
o
l
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Da
y
an
d
Ni
g
h
t
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Ac
t
i
o
n
Te
a
m
(c
A
r
)
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Of
f
i
c
e
r
-
Da
y
Pa
t
r
o
l
SR
O
*
&
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Pa
t
r
o
l
*
*
Po
l
i
c
e
Vo
l
u
n
t
e
e
r
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Pu
b
l
i
c
Sa
f
e
t
y
Ca
m
e
r
a
s
Ne
w
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
Op
t
i
o
n
A
ln
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
to
th
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
2O
L
3
-
2
0
L
5
F¡
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
Pl
a
n
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
:
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
da
y
t
i
m
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Pa
t
r
o
l
ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
co
v
e
r
a
g
e
fr
o
m
July
20
1
3
-
Ma
r
c
h
20
1
4
.
Re
d
e
p
l
o
y
a
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Of
f
i
c
e
r
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
*
(due to
re
t
i
r
e
in
Ma
r
c
h
20
L
4
)
as
a
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Da
y
t
i
m
e
Of
f
¡
c
e
r
.
Ov
e
r
s
t
a
f
f
in
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
20
1
3
to
hi
r
e
an
d
tr
a
i
n
pa
t
r
o
l
of
f
i
c
e
r
po
s
i
t
i
o
n
to
pr
e
p
a
r
e
fo
r
re
t
i
r
e
d
po
s
i
t
i
o
n
I T
To
t
a
l
co
s
t
in
20
L3
-
1
,
4
is
S1
1
,
4
,
L
0
0
*O
T
S
Gr
a
n
t
Op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
fo
r
ni
g
h
t
t
i
m
e
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
DU
I
Of
f
i
c
e
r
a
5
9
mo
n
t
h
s
-
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
Co
v
e
r
a
g
e
1
Of
f
i
c
e
r
-
3
da
y
s
a
we
e
k
/
8
ho
u
r
s
a
da
y
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
Co
s
t
s
2O
I
3
-
Ma
r
.
2
O
L
4
Sz
z
,
z
o
o
Ju
l
4
mo
n
t
h
s
-
Ov
e
r
s
t
a
f
f
i
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
Op
t
i
o
n
B
ln
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
to
th
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
20
L
3
-
2
0
I
5
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
pl
a
n
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
:
Co
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
Ad
d
¡
t
¡
o
n
of
L
FT
E
po
s
i
t
i
o
n
fo
r
20
1
4
-
2
0
1
5
2O
L
4
-
L
S
Co
s
t
¡s
St
6
+
,
2
0
0
an
d
es
c
a
l
a
t
e
s
2.
5
%
pe
r
ye
a
r
th
e
r
e
a
f
t
e
r
,
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
Ci
t
y
'
s
fi
s
c
a
l
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
6
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
FT
E
-
Po
l
i
c
e
Of
f
i
c
e
r
&
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
To
t
a
l
me
n
t
ul
E
Sa
l
a
FY
2O
L
4
-
T
5
St
s
+
,
+
o
o
St
o
,
¡
o
o
St
o
q
l
o
o
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
Op
t
i
o
n
C
ln
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
to
th
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
2O
L
3
-
2
O
L
5
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
Pl
a
n
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
:
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
De
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
wi
t
h
Pa
t
r
o
l
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
co
v
e
r
a
g
e
fr
o
m
Ju
l
y
20
1
3
-
Ju
n
e
20
L
5
Co
s
t
in
20
1
3
-
L
4
is
5S
Z
,
6
S
0
an
d
es
c
a
l
a
t
e
s
2.
5
%
pe
r
ye
a
r
th
e
r
e
a
f
t
e
r
,
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
Ci
t
y
'
s
fi
s
c
a
l
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
7
24
mo
n
t
h
s
-
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
Co
v
e
r
a
g
e
lO
f
f
i
c
e
r
-
3
d
a
a
we
e
k
/
8
ho
u
r
s
a
d
Ju
l
y
20
1
.
3
-
Ju
n
e
20
1
5
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
Co
s
t
s
S
tg
s
,
¡o
o
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
Op
t
i
o
n
D
ln
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
to
th
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
20
1
3
-
2
0
L
5
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
Pl
a
n
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
:
B
e
g
i
n
ov
e
:i
il
?
:;
å
T
i
'
.
i
åi
i
I
ï
ä
*i
J
:
Iü
J
'
st
a
rt i n g
ln
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
20
L
4
hi
r
e
on
e
FT
E
Of
f
¡
c
e
r
po
s
i
t
i
o
n
to
cr
e
a
t
e
a
2n
d
de
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
to
da
y
t
i
m
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Pa
t
r
o
l
Co
s
t
in
20
L
3
-
1
4
is
St
g
s
,
g
o
o
;
Sr
s
s
,2oo
in
2O
L
4
-
1
5
th
e
n
es
c
a
la
t
e
s
2.
5
%
th
e
r
e
a
f
t
e
r
,
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
City
fi
s
c
a
l
f
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
6
mo
n
t
h
s
-
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
Co
v
e
r
a
g
e
lO
f
f
i
c
e
r
-
3
d
a
we
e
k
/
8
ho
u
r
s
a
d
20
1
,
3
-
De
c
2O
L
3
Ov
e
r
t
i
m
e
Co
s
t
s
S+
g
,
g
o
o
Ju
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
FT
E
-
Po
l
i
c
e
Of
f
i
c
e
r
(1
8
mo
n
t
h
s
)
To
t
a
l
me
n
t
ur
E&
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
Sa
l
a
Sz
q
z
,
g
o
o
St
o
,
z
o
o
Sz
g
t,
o
o
o
Ja
n.
2O
L
4
-
J
u
ne
20
1
5
8