HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 08-21 FCAAGENDA
0 CITY COUNCIL AND FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION
August 21, 2006
6:30 P.M.
1. Review of 2007 Budget Dates:
a. September 11th - Preliminary General Fund Levy and Budget Adoption
b. October 16th - Capital Projects and Enterprise Budget Reviews
c. November 20th - Final Review
d. December 4th - Truth in Taxation Hearing
e. December l lth -Budget Adoption
Action Consideration
• Confirm schedule
2. Review of Previous and Current Year General Fund Budget Priorities
• 2006 Budget
3. Overview of 2007Budget Issues:
a. Revenue Trends and Issues
b. Local Government Aid
Policy Considerations
• What level of State Aid should the City devote to recurring operating
expenses?
• What level of State Aid should the City devote to non-recurring
expenditures or costs?
o What type of non-recurring costs should we consider?
• What should the property tax levy be?
c. Expenditure Trends and Issues
• The Status Quo Budget
4. Budget Expenditure Priorities for 2007
Policy Considerations
i. What should we budget as a wage limit increase?
ii. Should current expenditure priorities be maintained?
iii. Should expenditure priorities be modified?
5. Adjourn
1*
• Memorandum
Date: 21 June 2006
To: Curt Boganey
Interim City Manager
From: Daniel Jordet
Director of Fiscal & Support Services
Re: City Council Compensation for 2007 & 2008
Recommendation form Financial Commission
The attached materials comprise the information presented by and considered by
the Financial Commission Subcommittee on City Council Compensation and by
the Financial Commission as a whole. The packet begins with the information
presented to the subcommittee and finishes with the minutes from the 2006
meetings of those bodies.
In summary, the recommendation from the Financial Commission is that the City
illCouncil receive no increase for 2007 and a 2% increase for 2008. This
recommendation is, as is indicated in the Financial Policies, advisory only and the
City Council must take the action to either affirm this recommendation or change
it. Any change in compensation will take effect after the first day of the
succeeding year following a general election.
If you have questions or need clarification, please contact me.
cc: Financial Commission
•
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL AND FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION
August 21, 2006
6:30 P.M.
1. Review of 2007 Budget Dates:
a. September 11th -Preliminary General Fund Levy and Budget Adoption
b. October 16th - Capital Projects and Enterprise Budget Reviews
c. November 20th -Final Review
d. December 4th - Truth in Taxation Hearing
e. December 11th -Budget Adoption
Action Consideration
• Confirm schedule
2. Review of Previous and Current Year General Fund Budget Priorities
• 2006 Budget
3. Overview of 2007Budget Issues:
a. Revenue Trends and Issues
b. Local Government Aid
Policy Considerations
• What level of State Aid should the City devote to recurring operating
expenses?
• What level of State Aid should the City devote to non-recurring
expenditures or costs?
o What type of non-recurring costs should we consider?
• What should the property tax levy be?
c. Expenditure Trends and Issues
• The Status Quo Budget
4. Budget Expenditure Priorities for 2007
Policy Considerations
i. What should we budget as a wage limit increase?
ii. Should current expenditure priorities be maintained?
iii. Should expenditure priorities be modified?
5. Adjourn
•
Date: August 21,2006
• To: City Council and Financial Commission
From: Curt Boganey, Interim City Manager
Subject: General Fund Budget Work Session
1. Review 2007 Budget Dates:
The listed meeting dates are the same as those provided to you at the May 22, 2006 Joint Meeting.
With the exception of the September 11th, December 4th and December 11th meetings, all meetings are
joint work sessions of the City Council and Financial Commission at 6:30 p.m. If there are any
changes that should be made to the schedule,they can be proposed at any point in the budget process.
Action Proposed:
Confirm meeting schedule or propose modifications.
2. Review of Previous and Current Year General Fund Budget Priorities:
On May 22, 2006 the Council and Commission met in joint session to begin discussion on the
preparation of the 2007 budget. At that meeting the City Manager reviewed the status of the 2006
budget and gave an overview of the many ongoing issues underway by the administration. Since that
time we have proceeded to prepare a budget that is referenced as Status Quo. This budget is not
• prepared with the expectation that it is the final budget. It is prepared as a starting point for further
policy discussion and direction.
The 2006 Budget
Reflected in the Expenditure by Department and Business Unit Charts,the 2006 budget is a
continuation of the 2005 budget service levels and expenditure priorities. This budget reflects the
reduction strategies implemented in 2004 and 2003. The underlying principle guiding these reductions
was to eliminate whole activities and to reduce core operations at the margins to retain effective core
services, rather that to cut all services across the board. It was the sense of the Council and
Commission that doing what is done at an effective level was seen as more beneficial/effective than
doing more things poorly.
The 2006 budget continued the reductions implemented in 2004 after a lengthy prioritization process.
The continuation of the 2004 cuts and priorities reflected in the 2006 budget were:
• The budget for all operations provides for 151 full time positions in all funds, a decrease of 9
full time positions from the 2002 budget, a total of 15 fewer full time positions than in 2000.
This number of 151 full time positions was an increase of 1 position over the 2005 budget
with the change from a part to full time support position for Fire/Emergency Management.
The mix of full time and part-time employees is an ongoing process of balancing needs and
the best mechanisms to meet those needs through personnel configurations.
o Maintain Police Patrol at full strength
• o Maintain Fire Operations
o Maintain general operations as reduced in 2004
o Continue reductions in:
• o Street and Park maintenance
• Reduced seasonal hiring
• Not replacing positions vacated in 2003
• Reduced use of portable toilets
o Retain
• Senior Transportation
• Staffing for Earle Brown Days committee
• Support for Earle Brown Days parade
• Funding for REACH added to the 2005 budget
o Provide no funding for:
• PRISM medical transportation funding in the 2004 budget (service
may be continued in 2004 through an additional transfer in 2003)
• DARE
o Restoration of funding for North Hennepin Mediation Services that was
restored in 2006 budget
o Reduced levels in the following areas are continued:
• Pool hours
• Programming for
• Seniors
• Youth after school
• Recreation programs
• Ice Rinks
• Reduced to 5 rinks
• Eliminates warming houses altogether
• City Watch newsletters from 6 to 4 issues annually
• Entertainment in the parks and fireworks are held to the extent
donations are received
3. Overview of 2007 Budget Issues:
a. Revenue Trends and Issues
Since 2002 Total revenue from all sources has declined from $16,091,234 to $13,841,838.
Revenue from Taxes was 69.9% of the budget in 2002 in the 2006 budget Revenue from
taxes represents 78.23 % the result the constant decline of LGA. In 2002 LGA was $
2,843,629 representing 17.67% of total revenue. In 2006 LGA is $ 667,665 or 4.82% of all
revenue sources.
Licenses and permits have fluctuated but they have remained relatively stable representing
5.1 %of 2002 sources and 4.93%of the 2006 budget sources.
Charges for services have increased slightly from $ 575,747 in 2002 to $654,753 in 2006 as
the City has made a policy decision to recover 100% of the operating costs for adult
• recreation activities i.e. league programs.
2
The singular trend departure in the City revenue stream anticipated for 2007 is the substantial
increase in Local Government Aid. The LGA estimate for 2007 is $1,229,388. This is a
special case and will be discussed in greater detail below.
REVENUE TABLE AND CHARTS
S
111
3
3
.11 City of Brooklyn Center
Revenues by Source
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
Revenue Type 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Property Tax 10,539,107 10,137,807 9,368,636 10,418,176 10,179,301 10,159,270
Lodging Tax 717,176 661,267 656,859 710,619 650,000 650,000
Taxes 11,256,283 10,799,074 10,025,495 11,128,795 10,829,301 10,809,270
Licenses 214,763 207,720 242,754 246,612 260,254 362,443
Permits 609,233 619,965 435,323 428,918 423,500 409,000
Licenses& Permits 823,996 827,685 678,077 675,530 683,754 771,443
-
-
Federal Revenues - - -
LGA 2,265,267 1,319,661 877,555 543,183 667,665 1,229,388
Other State Revenues 578,362 601,143 485,477 527,973 527,365 467,365
County/Other Local Government Revenues - 27,653 56,178 64,488 50,000 55,000
Intergovernmental Revenue 2,843,629 1,948,457 1,419,210 1,135,644 1,245,030 1,751,753
General Charges for Service 39,637 29,542 36,323 47,131 29,440 31,040
Public Safety Charges for Service 25,468 25,039 23,533 42,076 13,500 13,500
Public Works Charges for Service 461 180 - - - -
Recreation Charges for Service 275,176 294,901 314,415 310,641 288,563 293,601
Community Center Charges for Service 235,005 329,213 303,784 321,206 323,250 332,650
itCharges for Service 575,747 678,875 678,055 721,054 654,753 670,791
ines & Forfeits 281,575 290,408 254,980 253,748 220,000 240,000
Interest Income 205,340 96,522 86,208 151,612 130,000 156,015
Refunds and Reimbursements 89,287 86,553 90,222 16,647 60,000 40,000
Other Miscellaneous Revenues 15,377 196,899 3,480 48,000 19,000 5,100
Miscellaneous Revenue 310,004 379,974 179,910 216,259 209,000 201,115
TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES 16,091,234 14,924,473 13,235,727 14,131,030 13,841,838 14,444,372
S
revenues by source.xls
I
! 1
I .
N C
a)
Et
3
- O
N
I C
N
T)
o
1 Sco
o n
Nmi
N
O
Q - IL
0 atS
J
O C_
o I o
Oi O
N N a)
N U
y, N
R
d O
V }
L
o
1 co
• I o U
7 =
C a)
d
o>
d _ cC
CL
.a c}u
C c
co
O >
Gu l N
C
a
V1
i
a
Fil I o
N N
N
C
a)
U
J
1 •
$ I
I
I
•
� N
4
saelloa
iii.w City of Brooklyn Center
Revenues by Source
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
Revenue Type 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Property Tax 10,539,107 10,137,807 9,368,636 10,418,176 10,179,301 10,720,993
Lodging Tax 717,176 661,267 656,859 710,619 650,000 650,000
Taxes 11,256,283 10,799,074 10,025,495 11,128,795 10,829,301 11,370,993
Licenses 214,763 207,720 242,754 246,612 260,254 362,443
Permits 609,233 619,965 435,323 428,918 423,500 409,000
Licenses& Permits 823,996 827,685 678,077 675,530 683,754 771,443
-
-
Federal Revenues -
- - -
LGA 2,265,267 1,319,661 877,555 543,183 667,665 667,665
Other State Revenues 578,362 601,143 485,477 527,973 527,365 467,365
County/Other Local Government Revenues - 27,653 56,178 64,488 50,000 55,000
Intergovernmental Revenue 2,843,629 1,948,457 1,419,210 1,135,644 1,245,030 1,190,030
General Charges for Service 39,637 29,542 36,323 47,131 29,440 31,040
Public Safety Charges for Service 25,468 25,039 23,533 42,076 13,500 13,500
Public Works Charges for Service 461 180 - - - -
Recreation Charges for Service 275,176 294,901 314,415 310,641 288,563 293,601
Community Center Charges for Service 235,005 -329,213 303,784 321,206 323,250 332,650
9Charges for Service 575,747 678,875 678,055 721,054 654,753 670,791
Fines&Forfeits 281,575 290,408 254,980 253,748 220,000 240,000
Interest Income 205,340 96,522 86,208 151,612 130,000 156,015
Refunds and Reimbursements 89,287 86,553 90,222 16,647 60,000 40,000
Other Miscellaneous Revenues 15,377 196,899 3,480 48,000 19,000 5,100
Miscellaneous Revenue 310,004 379,974 179,910 216,259 209,000 201,115
TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES 16,091,234 14,924,473 13,235,727 14,131,030 13,841,838 14,444,372
S
revenues by source.xls
I
0
a
h-
o m
N C
N
O
N
O
0 C
m
cocn
2
o
N
El
O
-
Iets
4 cv
t
rill §
0
m N 0
7 j
C C
> >
d N
-0 }0
= C
o C
C rn
N
C
a
A
E
a
ril CV oo
`v
co
C
O
U
J
gCD
r �
O O
O O O O O N
O O o O o o ~
O O O O O O
411111 N O 00 cc CV
sielloa
b. Local Government Aid
• In 2006 the City received $667,665 in Local Government Aid from the State of Minnesota.
Due to an increase in State Funding and a change in the formula the City of Brooklyn Center
is projected to receive$1,229,388 in Local Government Aid. The good news is that this is an
unexpected increase of$561,723. The bad news is that the new formula has approximately
16 factors that together determine each City's aid and a small change in any of these factors
can have a dramatic impact on the aid result. In the 2007 revenue formula, it was a 1.14%
reduction in population according to estimates of the State demographer between the years
1995 and 2005 that result in the dramatic swing in revenue from this source.
So while it would be wonderful to use this increase as if it were annual revenue that the City
can count on in future years, it is my judgment that this would not be a prudent decision
consistent with your policy of conservative revenue forecasting.
Policy Actions to Consider:
1. Consider what level of State Aid should the City devote to recurring operating expenses?
2. Consider what level of State Aid should the City devote to non recurring expenditures or
costs?
3. Managements Perspective:
a. It is my opinion that at least for the first year of this change in formula the
Council should consider the entire increase as a one time windfall. While this
may be a very conservative approach I believe it is also prudent. I believe that
the excess funds could be devoted to any of the following uses:
i. Contingency for Manager or Council initiatives
• 1. Following the retreat and after appointing a permanent
Manager it may be helpful to have a certain amount of funds
available for new studies or implementation of Council goals
yet undetermined.
ii. Contribution to the equipment Replacement Fund
1. This is an opportunity to begin the process of supplying the
Equipment Replacement Fund with the capital needed for
future equipment purchases and avoid anticipated shortages
iii. Contribution to Capital Projects Fund
1. There is no shortage of capital projects i.e. Street Construction
or Park Improvements that could use an infusion of capital
iv. Contribution to Technology Fund
1. Several technology improvements currently go unfunded i.e.
software for improved code enforcement, replacement of the
key entry system with an electronic key card managed system
that eliminates risks and costs associated with lost keys and
improves safety for City employees.
v. Property Tax relief
1. While 100% of the funds available would be well used in any of
the activities above, the Council may wish to devote a portion
to property tax relief with the understanding that this may be a
one time benefit which could result in a more significant tax
increase in 2008.
411
0 ix)
I)
co0o
N- O
8 N
l
00
a0 to
O
crj O
3 N
Q CO
.5 G1
I
co
co
7
i
8 co
o O
O
M N
h-
O •
N N
cotri
O CV
N
I
O O O O O '
C O O O O
O t0C) co to
• N N
siei,oa
• ao
00
b M p
M 4 0
N � ;5. iytR r Oi
I �n I "
(gyp^ t ..' ,:''„ c8
oIO 4" . an s ., N
co u LU
' O
S; ... N
.O
•QRS
C }
d
E
• C
0 in
in
0
C7 (0 N
R
C)
0
1
J
rn o
o
M _ N
1
1
1
N
N N
I O
CO O
N N
N
O OI
ii
I
O p O OIn O
Lo
N• SJelloa
•
ti
S
N
CO
0
CA 0
c N
0
r
43 a
d
o Mill
L C
�O CCL
CU
J O o U'
O N Ta
c)
o
COin J
CD
ti CO coCD H I-
V? a
S i o
• CV
C
7
am LL
C.
N
O
L CU
a a
co 0
✓ U
L
m co
O ' S
y MI N
m
c
c
m
U.
L
O
ea
2
N
O
O
N
8 O 0 0 O 0 O
SO 0 O 0 0 0 0 '
O 6
O O 6
O ci
O O 6
• d cV O o0 CD (V
c
SJ@��OQ
0
rg
y O
C O
0 N
` Ia) 1 d
a ..
0 c
a)
L E
`� L
4
CD to O
O 0
4O N c0
co 8
00 -J
M IN
ta N
CI d
}
0
X03
O
N
7
a`)
L c
0. a)
d
7 co
O o
(n N
C_
C
7
LL
L
O
03
2 N
O
O
N
O O I
O O O I
O o O O O O O O O a0 (D
City of Brooklyn Center
. iv Preliminary Property Tax Levy
(using $ 667,665 of LGA for Operations)
Total Levy All Sources
2006 to 2007 2006 to 2007
Pay 2005 Pay 2006 Pay 2007 $ Change % Change
General Fund Operations 10,117,000 10,494,126 10,939,788 445,662 4.25%
1994 Bonds - - - - 0.00%
0.00%
1995 Bonds 73,626
1996 Bonds 118,023 118,830 - (118,830) (100.00%)
Police & Fire Bonds 759,074 757,394 753,955 (3,439) (0.45/°)
Housing & Redevelopment Authority 251,295 257,065 265,000 7,935 3.09%
11,319,018 11,627,415 11,958,743 331,328 2.85%
S
S
15
'IF City of Brooklyn Center
Property Taxes by Type
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Property Tax Levy:
General 9,205,545 9,081,894 9,497,064 10,117,000 10,494,126 10,939,788
PERA - 16,337 -
- -
HRA/EDA 445,736 213,562 232,395 251,295 257,065 265,000
Debt: TC Based 259,068 261,446 262,914 191,649 118,830 -
Debt: MV Based 781,602 782,048 786,584 759,074 757,394 753,955
10,691,951 10,355,287 10,778,957 11,319,018 11,627,415 11,958,743
Dollar Increase (336,664) 423,670 540,061 308,397 331,328
Percentage Increase (3.15%) 4.09% 5.01% 2.72% 2.85%
City of Brooklyn Center
AI
Local Government Aid
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
II Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Local Government Aid 2,265,267 1,319,661 877,555 543,183 667,665 667,665
allw City of Brooklyn Center
Primary Funding Sources - Property Tax and LGA
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
General Fund Property Tax 9,205,545 9,098,231 9,497,064 10,117,000 10,494,126 10,939,788
Local Government Aid 2,265,267 1,319,661 877,555 543,183 667,665 667,665
11,470,812 10,417,892 10,374,619 10,660,183 11,161,791 11,607,453
III
property tax by type.xls
16
•
'
No
I -p
in
CO
N
C
O - a)
w 0
fCD0
0.
= Is
co
0 N H
L. (1)
c0 I
0
0 40 W
�, o
o. =
H ■
>+ g
.0 W
Z, - a
o ■
N cp
a)
R g 8
~ N •
ti
1.111111111=1111.111111=1J
c.
O
0
I c8
0
N
i
$ cp
S O O 0 O 0 O O O O O 6
g 0 O 0 O O
N O a0 O V N
11111
SJ@Iloa
City of Brooklyn Center
Preliminary Property Tax Levy
(using $ 1,229,388 of LGA for Operations)
Total Levy All Sources
2006 to 2007 2006 to 2007
Pay 2005 Pay 2006 Pay 2007 $ Change % Change
General Fund Operations 10,117,000 10,494,126 10,378,065 (116,061) (1.11%)
-
1994 Bonds - -
- 0.00%
1995 Bonds 73,626 - - - 0.00%
1996 Bonds 118,023 118,830 - (118,830) (100.00%)
Police & Fire Bonds 759,074 757,394 753,955 (3,439) (0.45%)
Housing & Redevelopment Authority 251,295 257,065 265,000 7,935 3.09%
11,319,018 11,627,415 11,397,020 (230,395) (1.98%)
II
S
2007prelimtaxlevy.xls
Id
ear City of Brooklyn Center
Property Taxes by Type
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Property Tax Levy:
General 9,205,545 9,081,894 9,497,064 10,117,000 10,494,126 10,378,065
PERA - 16,337 - - -
HRA/EDA 445,736 213,562 232,395 251,295 257,065 265,000
Debt: TC Based 259,068 261,446 262,914 191,649 118,830 -
Debt: MV Based 781,602 782,048 786,584 759,074 757,394 753,955
10,691,951 10,355,287 10,778,957 11,319,018 11,627,415 11,397,020
Dollar Increase (336,664) 423,670 540,061 308,397 (230,395)
Percentage Increase (3.15%) 4.09% 5.01% 2.72% (1.98%)
City of Brooklyn Center
Local Government Aid
AI2002-2007 Fiscal Years
1. Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Local Government Aid 2,265,267 1,319,661 877,555 543,183 667,665 1,229,388
City of Brooklyn Center
Primary Funding Sources - Property Tax and LGA
millw
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
General Fund Property Tax 9,205,545 9,098,231 9,497,064 10,117,000 10,494,126 10,378,065
Local Government Aid 2,265,267 1,319,661 877,555 543,183 667,665 1,229,388
11,470,812 10,417,892 10,374,619 10,660,183 11,161,791 11,607,453
S
property tax by type.xls
14
S
1 0
0
O
N
I
O
0 CO
m
N
C -i-'
O
cc
I
C li 8CO
N coQ
0 F—
J
co
co R a)
M - a)
•
N I Q
N o
n- W
0 tA.
3 N I
0. ■
H
W
.0 a
0
I co c
x O 8la 0
1- N N
d
Q
O
L
0.
N
O
O
O O O O O O
O O O O O O
(V 6 00 CD �t N
111111
SJelloa
c. Expenditure Trends and Issues
• Since 2002 General fund expenditures have declined from $14,828,988 to the 2006 budget of
$13,841,838. During this same period service levels and activities have generally declined or
remained status quo at best. General fund full time employment has been reduced from 130.5
to 120. Overall employment has been reduced from 160 to 151. During this same period calls
for service in generally every area have increased except in recreation where specific
programs have been eliminated.
1. The Status Quo Budget
The status quo budget if adopted would maintain current service levels. It assumes no
significant increase or decrease in service levels. The actual number of full time personnel in
the General Fund will be reduced from 120 to 118 due to the transfer of the dispatch
operations to Hennepin County.
The status quo budget would increase General Fund expenditures by $602,534 a 4.35%
increase. Of this increase, $325,156 represents an increase in the cost of current personnel.
These costs represent funding sufficient for a 3% wage adjustment, splitting the increase in
healthcare insurance costs and a mandated increase to PERA contributions. The balance of
the total increase is $277,378. Included in this amount are inflationary cost increases in
supplies and materials i.e. fuel, utilities and salt. Supplies and material increases amount to
$70,842.
The most recent review of wage adjustments approved for Minnesota Cities in 2007 averaged
3.07% for Police and 3% for all other employees. Though many Cities have yet to settle with
411 unions or finalize wages for non union employees at this point it seems something very close
to 3% will be necessary to settle the 2007 contract with the Police.
Capital costs (equipment replacement) increase by $133,956 which represents a more normal
level of annual equipment purchases. Of these equipment purchases, $48,600 is for minor
equipment replacement in the fire department largely to meet mandated OSHA and NFPA
safety requirements.
The final expenditure increase is an increase of $72,580 for professional contracts and
services. Of this amount $40,000 is in the Department of Community Development to cover
the cost of updating the City Comprehensive Plan as mandated by state law.
I
7
0
o
0
CO
O
O
N
LO
U
W
CL
M
H
CIto
d
Z }
W
a
111 x
w
o
Z N
D
LL
Q
W
Z
W
0
M
O
O
N
N
0
O
N
I I I
O O O O 0
0
O O '
g O 0
6
0
6
0
6.
0
$ S
0
0 CO N O Co O N
saelloa
S
City of Brooklyn Center
Expenditures by Department
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
General Government 1,948,618 1,917,123 1,966,890 1,971,944 2,073,070 2,243,934
Police 5,088,384 5,100,714 5,410,423 5,586,429 5,829,622 5,800,076
Fire 746,493 765,535 774,105 828,695 820,929 924,867
Community Development 434,785 406,626 457,726 479,289 505,640 563,836
Other Services 444,150 405,683 379,332 423,618 392,275 389,701
Buildings&Grounds 604,806 580,483 618,708 621,056 613,945 739,393
Public Works 2,715,092 2,514,629 2,478,429 2,494,380 2,674,008 2,769,296
CARS. 1,298,008 1,223,946 1,183,010 1,176,694 1,271,069 1,381,348
Miscellaneous 1,548,652 1,921,999 (425,725) 186,271 (338,720) (368,079)
GENERAL FUND 14,828,988 14,836,738 12,842,898 13,768,376 13,841,838 14,444,372
II
I
expenditures by BU.xls
1L
City of Brooklyn Center
Expenditures by Business Unit
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Mayor&Council
125,799 121,938 127,553 136,520 132,235 129,279
City Manager 184,024 176,675 182,987 187,210 203,656 206,911
Elections 83,922 59,138 92,767 48,268 95,259 86,646
City Clerk 81,051 88,467 90,259 85,114 486,657,657 4900,950F0
414,0884
427,291 0
Assessing 215,356 238,778 247,622 264,463 283,419 292,111
Legal 342,716 263,725 251,222 320,628 290,000 335,000
Human Resources 194,377 209,270 207,944 212,879 226,777 239,172
Information Technology 255,232 345,044 339,245 315,084 339,823 370,548
General Government 1,948,618 1,917,123 1,966,890 1,971,944 2,073,070 2,243,934
Administration 127,202 211,573 322,882 269,412 339,489 313,980
Investigation 633,220 591,550 698,530 729,569 672,047 812,479
Patrol 3,097,404 3,105,499 3,365,909 3,440,563 3,695,348 3,601,385
Support Services 1,094,744 1,054,965 884,635 969,382 962,544 902,413
Building 135,814 137,127 138,467 177,503 160,194 169,819
Police 5,088,384 5,100,714 5,410,423 5,586,429 5,829,622 5,800,076
Fire 693,021 712,530 719,131 774,985 756,862 859,855
Emergency Preparedness 53,472 53,005 54,974 53,710 64,067 65,012
Fire 746,493 765,535 774,105 828,695 820,929 924,867
Building Inspections 315,163 285,116 330,727 346,158 361,825 364,433
Planning&Zoning 119,622 121,510 126,999 133,131 143,815 199,403
Community Development 434,785 406,626 457,726 479,289 505,640 563,836
Convention&Tourism 340,659 314,102 312,008 337,575 308,750 308,750
Social Services 103,491 91,581 67,324 86,043 83,525 80,951
Other Services 444,150 405,683 379,332 423,618 392,275 389,701
Buildings&Grounds 604,806 580,483 618,708 621,056 613,945 739,393
Engineering 579,767 434,800 472,140 383,303 519,263 539,379
Street Maintenance 1,227,805 1,053,378 1,035,298 1,084,733 1,145,900 1,154,460
Traffic Control 179,119 161,227 172,002 178,059 176,930 185,308
Forestry
88,036 103,522 105,272 155,393 88,836 97,354
Parks 640,365 761,702 693,717 692,892 743,079 792,795
Public Works 2,715,092 2,514,629 2,478,429 2,494,380 2,674,008 2,769,296
Administration 169,646 149,620 153,840 151,799 165,071 170,734
Recreation Administration 417,096 324,786 334,958 346,780 376,115 434,776
Adult Recreation 171,308 174,244 179,144 178,400 174,821 187,563
Teen Programs 3,479 5,103 2,366 4,469 2,785 4,062
Youth Programs 103,031 51,342 40,019 4,128 49,500 45,939
General Recreation 56,026 44,121 18,950 20,733 13,901 13,674
Community Center 170,482 197,040 199,423 203,486 217,833 225,844
Swimming Pool 206,940 277,690 254,310 266,899 271,043 298,756
CARS 1,298,008 1,223,946 1,183,010 1,176,694 1,271,069 1,381,348
Civic Events 7,487 1,957 (310) - - -
Insurance 174,290 153,078 148,480 142,821 192,700 195,180
Central Supplies&Support 334,506 179,530 185,189 172,535 228,945 212,241
Reimbursement from Other Funds (596,541) (607,221) (784,084) (754,085) (830,365) (845,500)
I Tansfers Out/(In) 1,628,910 2,194,655 25,000 625,000 70,000 70,000
Miscellaneous 1,548,652 1,921,999 (425,725) 186,271 (338,720) (368,079)
GENERAL FUND 14,828,988 14,836,738 12,842,898 13,768,376 13,841,838 14,444,372
expenditures by BU.xls
1
•
o 0 f •
N EL c)
c
PN
in
O
O
N
co
d
L co
V 6 o
0 a)
c.
I \''' r
t O
LL t. N
d � it.
U - -- co
c
a)
E
'\ f-/1\\,
a
o
TD
cn v) o 0 o
73 w
`O o c (n 00
C\IM
O ch •c
U co (7 0 _c 7
d p>'t O
c 0
=a
CD
0
S
a)
U e—
a) 7
°' ar'
E v
> *o CV
a)
CD
O
N
co
d
.a
S d
•
LL
U ao
a)
Q
O(
a)
Cl, a) CD ti
p
o E
o .oc N o
°6 M
M 0
Cs •
c
CO
S
•
a) e
U co
N d M
E
C
Q> o
(0
a)
C
ti
0
0
N
N
L
.
7
C
SW
C.x
w
v
C
w
c
a)
c
a) vim
d "'
a) CN
`. LL N
(D
C
a)
Lbcn
O e. -0 a) C
o C
co� 2 0 E
0 E
n- °�r
rn U
0
S City of Brooklyn Center
Expenditures by Type
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Wages 7,237,145 7,227,537 7,516,840 7,393,239 7,812,008 7,978,482
Retirement Contributions(LR) 950,519 971,539 1,035,998 1,022,406 1,134,529 1,218,951
Insurance Contributions 649,179 675,690 771,750 771,932 960,720 1,011,908
Worker's Compensation Insurance(LR) 131,125 199,763 169,217 182,866 239,301 262,373
Personal Services 8,967,968 9,074,529 9,493,805 9,370,443 10,146,558 10,471,714
Operating Supplies 254,986 226,431 228,470 239,996 270,150 282,217
Repair&Maintenance Supplies 215,231 171,110 146,263 153,891 181,250 202,500
Small Tools&Minor Equipment 29,047 42,300 46,504 40,370 56,550 94,075
Supplies 499,264 439,841 421,237 434,257 507,950 578,792
Professional Services 581,833 403,058 437,094 580,419 424,107 549,739
Communications 180,501 146,561 145,593 171,120 186,647 162,694
Utilities 373,467 449,854 469,042 511,995 486,480 511,495
Insurance 160,053 139,187 136,644 127,383 178,800 177,200
Repair&Maintenance Services 318,592 185,067 349,678 374,443 253,467 257,575
Central Garage Charges 940,745 861,999 890,570 959,650 988,146 986,905
Software/IT Licenses&Services 303,492 402,516 308,876 322,199 323,754 296,422
Other Services 1,007,035 962,385 949,443 985,970 1,051,844 1,038,930
Transfers 1,324,819 1,589,649 (759,084) (129,085) (760,365) (775,500)
Other Charges&Services 5,190,537 5,140,276 2,927,856 3,904,094 3,132,880 3,205,460
Capital Outlay 171,219 182,092 - 59,582 54,450 188,406
GENERAL FUND 14,828,988 14,836,738 12,842,898 13,768,376 13,841,838 14,444,372
III
expenditures by Type.xls
1
•
N
a)
U
N
C 06
O
N
a
In
0
0
N
a)C.
F— co
•
Oo
M
i d O
��. CD
.p U
C
CDC.
K
W
‘1"11)\
Q Lc)
c„5
Cl) ce)
coN
L
0
a)
0
S
•
U)
a)
o
U)
C ti
O
N
LL
CO
0
0
G1
C.
F— co
•
OP
o
N L
d
a)
U
a)
� o
O O
N
Q CO
L M
S
S
a)
cn
op
N
O N-
N
I-
4)
d
ti
O
O
N
N
Q
N 7 0
d Or :iiiiiiico.
I
cn
N
o
N N
2' N Q O
N 0
-c n4
U
a)
r
O
S
. ,,
S City of Brooklyn Center
Expenditures by Type
2002-2007 Fiscal Years
Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Status Quo
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Personal Services 8,967,968 9,074,529 9,493,805 9,370,443 10,146,558 10,471,714
Supplies 499,264 439,841 421,237 434,257 507,950 578,792
Other Charges&Services 5,190,537 5,140,276 2,927,856 3,904,094 3,132,880 3,205,460
Capital Outlay
171,219 182,092 59,582 54,450 188,406
GENERAL FUND 14,828,988 14,836,738 12,842,898 13,768,376 13,841,838 14,444,372
•
0
expenditures by Type.xls
31
S :I
City of Brooklyn Center
2007 Budget
Summary of Full Time Employee Positions Projected
Fund 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
General Fund
Administration 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Human Resources 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
City Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Elections 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Finance 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Assessing 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Information Technology 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Planning&Zoning 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
General Government Buildings&Facilities 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Police Administration 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Police Investigation 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 8.0
Police Patrol 33.0 33.0 33.0 34.0 34.0 34.0 35.0 35.0
Police Support Services 15.0 14.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 9.0
Police Facility Maintenance 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Fire 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Inspections 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
1.0 1.0
Emergency Preparedness
Public Works Administration/Engineering 10.0 10.0 10.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Street Maintenance 8.9 8.9 9.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 8.0 8.0
Traffic Control 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Park Maintenance 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.0
Forestry 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
CARS Administration 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
CARS Recreation Administration 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
CARS Community Center 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
11 CARS Pool 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Central Supplies&Support 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -
1.0 -
1.0 1.0
Subtotal:General Fund 133.8 132.9 130.5 126.5 121.0 119.0 120.0 118.0
Special Revenue Funds
Economic Development Authority 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Subtotal:Special Revenue Funds 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Enterprise Funds
Liquor Operations 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Centerbrook Golf Course 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Subtotal: Enterprise Funds 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Earle Brown Heritage Center
Administration 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Inn on the Farm 2.0 2.0
Convention Center 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
Subtotal: EBHC 13.0 13.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Utility/Internal Service Operations
Water Utility Fund 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.3 2.3
_ - 1.4 1.4 1.4
Storm Sewer Utility Fund -
Central Garage Fund 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Subtotal:Utility/Internal Service Operations 12.1 12.1 12.0 12.0 12.0 14.0 14.0 14.0
Total Full Time Employees 166.5 165.5 160.0 156.0 150.0 150.0 151.0 149.0
ill
staffsummary2007.xis
3(I
4. Budget Priorities for 2007
Policy Actions to Consider:
Consider budgeted wage adjustment limit for regular full time employees
2. Confirm continued support for 2006 General Fund Budget expenditure priorities
3. Consider proposed modifications to General Fund Budget expenditure priorities
a. The intent of this policy discussion is to ask the larger question. Should the City
Government shift its general direction in some meaningful way?Should we be doing
more or less of some programs or activities?If so, what activities and to what degree
(how much more or less)should we increase or decrease these activities?
b. This not a question about costs. This is question about priority and the proper mix of
services levels. Do we have the right mix of services or should the mix be different in
some meaningful way?
4. Managements perspective:
a. Given the cuts in the General Fund Operations in recent years, my opinion is that
• for the most part current service levels in virtually every area exist at levels that
are very close to minimally acceptable service quality. This is not meant to suggest
that further cuts can not be made. Further cuts can be made but it should be
understood that further cuts at the margin are likely to violate the premise that
services should be continued at reasonable level of quality and effectiveness.
Therefore any suggested activity reductions should best be accomplished by specific
program elimination.
b. During the brief period that I have been City Manager and over the time that I have
worked for the City it has become increasingly clear that there may be a need to
improve or expand service offerings in a few areas to meet citizen expectations and
to ward off long term deterioration in community quality of life. Specifically the
areas that come to mind are the following:
c. Proactive policing
i. The evidence available suggests that current calls for service absorb a very
high percentage of the available time available to patrol officers making it
very difficult to randomly patrol or perform proactive policing on a targeted
basis. This is not intended to conclude that the solution is to increase the
number of Police officers or to significantly expand the Police Department
Budget. I believe this is an issue that the permanent City Manager should
examine thoroughly next year to confirm the need if it exists, quantify the
potential benefits and to review all of the viable alternatives to addressing
the need if it exists.
. d. Maintenance of gardens and streetscapes.
9
i. Because of the cu back in Public Work employees the City has failed to
• maintain the streetscape improvements and garden areas in our Parks and
Grounds at a level of quality that a citizen can take pride in. While
volunteers may be part of the solution, managing volunteers is significant
use of staff time and to restore some of these areas back to an acceptable
standard there is a need for an up front investment of equipment, time and
materials which do not exist in the current budget. In the absence of a
budget increase we will need to decide if these high maintenance areas can
be effectively maintained with volunteers, other sources of man power,
private donations, reduced service in other areas or by the elimination of
some of these areas by the removal of the landscape materials.
e. Code Enforcement
i. While I believe that the City has a Code Enforcement Program that is
reasonably effective, the impression I have been given in recent weeks by
resident calls and complaints, is that for many Citizens our responsiveness is
less than satisfactory. I believe that the response to these concerns is more
complex than it might appear on the service and the solution may not be
simply more code enforcement. To find the right solution, I believe this
matter should be thoroughly analyzed by clarifying Council expectations,
considering logistics, staffing, use of technology,public education,
departmental coordination, changes in code requirements, measuring citizen
satisfaction scientifically to name just a few of the factors that may be
contributing to unrealized expectations of some citizens.
f Rental Property Trends
i. One of the most significant frustrations that I have experienced in recent
months is the fact that it is nearly impossible to determine the number of
• single family homes that have been converted to rental units. While knowing
this fact will not in and of itself solve any problem, the trend toward
conversion is an issue that I believe we should understand in order to
measure the impact on the community. It is also important to identify all of
the units so that they can be properly licensed and the landlords can be held
accountable for upkeep in a timely manner. It is my sense that this trend to
conversion has been increasing at an increasing rate but we don't have
sufficient information to know if it is an impending, current problem or no
problem. If my instincts are correct it may be the canary in the coal mine
informing the City of other socio-economic dynamics affecting the City and
its future.
g. Equipment Replacement Fund
i. It is my opinion that the equipment replacement fund has not been
adequately funded. While the forecast offund need is both art and science
the Finance, Public Works Director and I agree that unless contributions to
the fund are increased at some point in the not to distant future the fund will
not be sufficient to replace the rolling stock required in a timely fashion.
Specifically, it unlikely that there will be sufficient funds available to fully
fund the new piece of Fire Apparatus using the present funding levels when
it becomes eligible for replacement in 2010. Because of the reduction in pull
tab sales, it will not be possible to rely on the Relief Association as a source
to make up the shortfall. We estimate that in order to build the balance to
the proper level the annual funding should be increased substantially over
the next several years. If this is not done the City will need to identify
another source of funding when the shortfall occurs, eliminate or delay
• equipment purchases which may be an imprudent decision.
h. Fire Code Enforcement
10
i. The Fire Code is enforced using part-time fire fighters. The goal is to
• inspect each Commercial Building not less than every two years. With part-
time fire fighters performing this service on a 25-30 hour basis, we have not
been able to meet this objective. The Fire Chief has recommended a full-time
Fire Inspector to accomplish this task and perform other duties. I believe the
need for these inspections is legitimate. I believe a variety of options should
be considered so that we can meet our reasonable safety standards.
i. Firefighter Recruitment and Retention
i. In my opinion the maintenance of a volunteer fire department is critical to
the continued fiscal well being of the City. Like most Cities our ability to
recruit and retain volunteers has been negatively affected by changing life
styles and changing demographics.
Citizens tend to be more mobile and transient. An aging population reduces
the potential pool of candidates. Finally, more recruits view firefighting as a
part-time job and the motivation based on a sense of community
contribution seems to be waning. Each of these factors suggests that the cost
of recruitment and retention may grow significantly in future years as the
supply of willing volunteers diminishes.
j. Capital Projects:
i. While we will have a discussion on the Capital Projects Fund in a few
weeks, it is important for the Council and Commission to consider the needs
and priorities related to major Capital Projects i.e. the Street
Reconstruction Program which is scheduled to complete it cycle in about
fifteen years at the current pace of funding. Park projects such as tennis
courts that were initially funded using Bond proceeds have now reached the
end of their useful lives and will require major renovation, replacement or
• abandonment in the near future. We have been in the process of depleting
these amenities due to a lack of resources for maintenance and up keep.
At some time over the next year, it would seem important that the Council
have discussion about the policy goals of the Capital Projects Program so
that the funding process does not become the single factor driving
infrastructure investment decisions.
k. Economic Development
i. Though this issue is more directly related to the EDA budget, I felt it was
important to acknowledge the continuing need to foster an environment in
which private business can thrive. This environment includes a safe, secure
and well maintained infrastructure with attractive amenities.As a fully
developed City, it is my opinion that Brooklyn Center operates at a
disadvantage to some of our surrounding suburban neighbors due to a lack
of green fields space available for development. To compete in the market
place for more jobs and high valued tax base to reduce the residents tax
burden the City remain active as a facilitator of redevelopment.
11