10.2. SR 09-03-2013 City of
Elk - Request for Action
River O.
To Item Number
Mayor and City Council 10.2
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Work Session September 3, 2013 Tim Simon, Finance Director
Item Description Reviewed by
2014 Budget Cal Portner, City Administrator
Reviewed by
Action Requested
Continue 2014 budget discussion.
Background/Discussion
General Fund Update
An update of the General Fund will be provided. Over the next several months we will work on
updating the budget with new information on expenditures and any revenue adjustments. Currently, the
General Fund revenues are over expenditures by$65,189,which will be adjusted up or down as new
information is made available on estimates.
The county has recently indicated that our preliminary Net Tax Capacity (NTC) number will increase
0.66%,which is the first increase in several years. As a result, based on the maximum tax levy and an
increase in the NTC the overall city tax rate will decrease for 2014. This is preliminary information and
subject to change as the county completes their assessment work.
Personnel Requests
At the last budget work session the Council asked for some time to review the personal requests that are
included in the preliminary 2014 budget. They are summarized on the personnel request sheet that is
attached in your packet. The positions included in the preliminary budget have been requested by staff
during the budget review process and recommended by the city administrator. You will also notice
several other positions or position modifications that have been requested but not included in the budget
which is summarized in the lower part of the spreadsheet.
Financial Impact
N/A
Attachments
• Budget Summary (General Fund)
• Budget Adjustment Summary (General Fund)
• Tax rate breakout
• Personal Summary worksheet
P a w E A E U s r
NaA f RE]
CITY OF ELK RIVER
Requested budget analysis snap shot(General Fund)
2013 YTD 2014 %of
Adopted 08/14/2013 Requested budget
General Fund Revenues:
Property taxes 9,203,100 4,567,142 9,256,689 72.2%
All Other Revenues 3,433,850 2,187,758 3,562,800 27.8%
Total General Revenues 12,636,950 6,754,900 12,819,489 100.00%
General Fund Expenditures
General Government:
Mayor&Council 151,500 66,520 150,550 1.18%
Cable TV 87,550 49,679 92,700 0.73%
Administrative Services 588,250 337,805 588,300 4.61%
Human Resources 96,350 60,085 95,850 0.75%
Elections - - 38,750 0.30%
Finance 540,450 349,060 555,250 4.35%
Information Technology 296,700 172,481 265,800 2.08%
Legal 228,000 119,089 218,000 1.71%
Community Development 213,800 154,601 325,150 2.55%
Planning 236,700 89,759 137,850 1.08%
City Hall Maintenance 517,350 299,612 544,250 4.26%
Energy City 31,450 9,992 16,550 0.13%
Contingency* 8,400 287 (47,500) -0.37%
Total General Government 2,996,500 1,708,970 2,981,500 23.3%
Public Safety:
Police 4,370,300 2,384,361 4,487,850 35.15%
Fire 668,250 342,358 787,700 6.17%
Code Enforcement 85,050 49,218 88,600 0.69%
Building Safety 663,600 357,859 616,600 4.83%
Environmental 52,350 15,569 15,000 0.12%
Total Public Safety 5,839,550 3,149,365 5,995,750 46.96%
Public Works:
Street Maintenance** 1,530,200 716,670 1,252,750 9.81%
Snow Removal 285,700 189,155 277,300 2.17%
Equipment Services 252,750 133,935 183,850 1.44%
Engineering 173,350 110,459 166,850 1.31%
Total Public Works 2,242,000 1,150,219 1,880,750 14.73%
Culture&Recreation:
Parks Maintenance 807,450 468,655 926,900 7.26%
Recreation 718,600 393,500 730,950 5.72%
Sr.Citizen Programs 188,050 111,415 193,200 1.51%
Total Culture&Recreation 1,714,100 973,570 1,851,050 14.50%
Transfers Out 44,800 - 59,950 0.47%
Total General Fund Expenditures 12,836,950 6,982,124 12,769,000 100.00%
General Fund Gap Before Adjustments: (200,000) (227,224) 50,489
Revenue Adjustments
0
Expenditure Adjustments
Street Office Assistants(Pay grade 3) 14,700
Projected Total Budget Gap After Adjustments (200,000) (227,224) 65,189
Notes:
Total Tax Levy of$9,929,235
*=Contigency is$50,000 less employee turnover rate.5%(2013)1%(2014)
**=Sealcoating contract moved to pavement management fund(franchise fee)
Tax Levy(General Fund)
$ 9,256,689
Revenues Expenditures Difference
2014 Preliminary Budget $ 12,807,389 $ 12,797,350 $ 10,039
Adjustments (Discussion Items) Revenues Expenditures
Transfer-In(EDA/HRA staff allocation) 12,100
Liability Insurance -
Workers Comp Insurance(1) (25,850)
Contingency(4th of July in budget) (2,500)
Fuel-currently at$3.25 average
Fund Balance-transfer in
Contractual services(tree inspections)
Street Office Assistants(pay grade 3) (14,700)
2014 Proposed $ 12,819,489 $ 12,754,300 $ 65,189
2013 Adopted $ 12,636,950 $ 12,836,950 $ (200,000)
%change 1.44°% -0,64%
Notes
(1)=workers comp modifier dropped to.82 from 1.02.
(
i
i
I
I
a,
a, a,
u O
o C u
OP 4
Ln >
v v N Y
M
N
o
o a
a, 7
co z
u —
_ 4!
rl N ail O r
I, M M O �
O I, M Cil
u
� O � u'1 rl I, �' C
£ o
r r o nn
O
oo
'm N u'f N N rl O
W a
tl0
t �
u
M N rl u) o t =3
to M M M M u O
r I' 'zz N W L u
m a o rn o m N 3 3
.� �o r m rn >
£ '^ 0 0 of " -'
Ln N O N N u co O 0
W CL N
u
u
v� x
C
v CL u 6 C x
I, W Cil u1
l0 rl M � O u• I- rl L! u'1 ^ C O
rl M w
M N O u1 O It O N N O N M N
N N O I, u•1 u1 u1 to lA m
M rl N rl r1 41 Y
fO M O O O Q N
3 -y N N rl
V N Y u
Q u
a
4! C
�n —
aj
aJ O
t/? v
? �n
h
a
O
> 0
cu a�i aaj
0
E U aaj
Y N -0 a1 co
L y C C Y
Z h
O — > p � F= ai
C O' v
\ K 1
O N r-+
U
x u £ U -O CO u
aJ N
3 '� F C E 00 00 •�n p
V m J u Q C ^ 7 -O
-0 aj CL U m (0 7 Z N _ V (x0 (x0 N U
a (0 H u h
N coo v U Q w x w Q � N 'O m
x co ? ? N r O O n0
C' v u ~ C O C \ — N ° ° v v 'N
x x x `0 x . t Q 2 " >. >. Q u
F H Z H H H U N U 2 H LA uJ uJ Z 0 H
C
NN N I r l l l l l r l l l r l l l r l l I
'O C
U�m
C M 69
C V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O
O N O O O N N N O O O N N O
�I'I O c- O r I r I I I I p
w0 O N p� tD(D�
a N
= 0 =
U N m
c
M FA
N
—C
•V U I I r I 1 r r l l r l I I I I I I I I
C E
= N
O =
¢ t» to
0
N 'N
� O—
U O'—
O
m
c m d
ac N 2c av°, w
E E m o w
a
° > Q
o
.2 _
C E
E'y o " >, o
B `m (w a w o_ o_c .d
O U N •O o C C
4 O ¢
d LL€ N a a a p O
M w
Q N F-
t a) 20 t t o O
U C UQ~, U C C oo U ULL
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0
(!) N o o o N N N o 0 o N N o O N N o 0 0 a
Z �of nowrnwM V Ot00)r- o orno.-rn o
O ° O c2 0 f2 NN ON' N N N w o V M
F U '-N�-w�- -to t2 M to O N N N N
wfi) f9
O
O d O O N N
O O
m w O v r M M
O W q
N �
� EA fA
N N N O OD N N
ID
aU
» F»
a o o 0 o o 0 o o 0 o 0 0 o o o 0 0 0 o 0
N o o O N N N o o O N N o N O N N 0 0 N o
I O w V w N v'c (O O)�- '-O N N c al (O LQ
N
'6,6,6,6 N W
m U
e0
T
C
� O
_ •N
O
� a
m �
c d
m
s �
c
m
U
N O
o Na m
.N N0 € a uE t
o
Glc°-. m v m o-�' E2
'o m �,d.Ei 'R o m E o c a d O c o ° o 2
y'� Qii m e ro.�C E w E rj E aE'S u u=, a
m > > m 1-v c m O
�0 v)o a n.�u)aX0 d a:L o v) w
v �
v v �
a v
m
0
.. C N C = M
F m N ¢ a' Z p N
o 4��nn N p C N
(0 N o U C d C O
p N > >N .N O
w
1 N N C C C o.
v) CK U N
of
•O C C..N. E C o p U C =
ZZ
amaiiiim(ndaaw t° a° T ia° Lwu) F° ww
City of
Ells Memorandum
Ri*I=::-mi
TO: Mayor and City Council
From: Jeremy Barnhart,Deputy Director, CODD
Date: September 3, 2013
Subject: Environmental Division
The 2013 budget for the environmental division includes an administrator and a technician. The
technician position has been vacant since April of 2012. Since then,the division has been operating above
capacity, resulting in longer response times for phone calls and questions, fewer proactive inspections, and
significantly reduced education activities and programs, all falling below acceptable standards. With the
expected increased responsibilities related to the storm water MS 4 permit,it is appropriate to evaluate the
needs of the department prior to filling the vacant position.
This discussion is the first of a two-step process to identify the responsibilities of the division, and to
identify which skills need to be incorporated. The recommended level of service will require additional
staffing. The second step will occur at the completion of the Storm Water Plan, expected in November.
The current environmental technician and environmental administrator position descriptions include a
number of tasks that overlap,including Wedand Conservation Act (WCA) activities, recycling and solid
waste programs, and`other environmental'programs. The division workload has been evaluated by the
new department director and deputy director to reduce redundancies,prioritize efforts, and identify tasks
that can be eliminated or scaled back.
Environmental responsibilities are easily classified as mandatory (i.e. city ordinance, state or federal
mandates) and discretionary (local initiatives or past practices). There are a number of initiatives that can
be included in discretionary that are difficult to measure and even more difficult to schedule or account
for, such as relationship-building and education with Waste Management (landfill), Great River Energy,
gravel mine operators, developers and residents (wet land management).
Before updating the environmental administrator job description, staff seeks Council direction regarding
the discretionary tasks expected of the environmental division as without additional staffing it is
impossible for one person to maintain the current service levels previously outlined in the job description.
Responsibilities of the city by state or federal rule:
(2) Wetland conservation act
(4A) Admin of Shore land, Floodplain,Wild and Scenic...
(4H) NPDES program
P0WIeI1 9
N:\Public Bodies\Agenda Packets\09-03-2013\x10.2 at 4 Environmental.docx INAWREI
Locally imposed requirements (discretionary)
(3A)Recycling program/solid waste collection/Organics program
(313) Landfill abatement
(3D) General recycling
(413) gravel mining licenses, environmental permits for landfill, RDF plant, and GRE power station
(4E) Environmental education
(5A) Heritage Preservation Commission and Energy City
(513) Lake Orono Improvement Association
Diseased tree programs
Relationship-building tasks:
Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) representative, collaboration with DNR,BWSR and Sherburne SWCD
Landfill (gas to electric plant), training,tours
Recycling Association of Minnesota board member (recycling initiatives, trial programs)
Great River Energy (district heating,wastewater reuse research and opportunities)
Energy City, (especially city tours)
Membership in Source Reduction and Recycling (CISSR), results in Elk River outreach
Gravel mining
Heritage Preservation,including maintenance of Certified Local Government
Erosion control outreach/education to developers
Wetland education
Reductions
To reduce the division workload, some tasks have already been redirected or reduced including:
- Transition commission work to HPC commissioners (5A)
- Moved some Energy City Commission activities to Elk River Municipal Utilities staff(5A)
- Administration of right-of-way permits moved to building department staff(4D)
- Decrease in erosion control education
- Decreased recycling marketing and education
- Participation in fewer workshops for recycling,wetlands and general environmental
Staff does not recommend discretionary item cuts as they add identifiable and unique benefits to the city.
However, Staff seeks Council confirmation on these discretionary programs, and whether they should still
be offered.
Further consideration
The director has looked into delegating a number of regulatory tasks to different agencies including:
- Landfill oversight to the state,but found that it would be difficult maintain the city's interests
without significant opposition.
- The county could administer gravel mining operations at a reduced service level possibly impacting
established relationships/partnerships and a loss of gravel mining income.
- Heritage Preservation was considered for delegation to the county,but they don't perform the
same type of service.
- Shifting administration of certain agreements and licenses for GRE and the landfill to a consultant.