STATE OF KANSAS
WYANDOTTE COUNTY
CITY OF KANSAS CITY, KS
)
)) SS
)
SPECIAL SESSION, MONDAY, JULY 20, 2009
The Unified Government Commission of Wyandotte County/Kansas City,
Kansas, met in special session, Monday, July 20, 2009, with eleven members present:
Holland, Commissioner At-Large First District; Mendez, Commissioner At-Large Second
District; Barnes, Commissioner First District; Miller, Commissioner Second District;
Murguia, Commissioner Third District; Mitchell, Commissioner Fourth District; Kane,
Commissioner Fifth District; Pettey, Commissioner Sixth District; Cooley, Commissioner
Seventh District; Ellison, Commissioner Eighth District; and Reardon, Mayor/CEO
presiding. The following officials were also in attendance:
Dennis Hays, County
Administrator; Hal Walker, Chief Counsel; Tom Roberts, Unified Government Clerk;
Doug Bach, Deputy County Administrator; Lew Levin, Chief Financial Officer; and Lisa
Kearney, Budget Director.
MAYOR REARDON called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Cooley, Ellison, Holland, Mendez, Barnes, Miller, Murguia, Mitchell,
Kane, Pettey, Reardon.
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING of the Unified Government of Wyandotte
County/Kansas City, Kansas, to be held Monday, July 20, 2009, in the 6th floor Human
Resources Training Room of the Municipal Office Building for a budget work session
immediately following the standing committee meetings which start at 5:00 p.m.
CONSENT TO MEETING of the governing body of Wyandotte County/Kansas City,
Kansas, accepting service of the foregoing notice, waiving all and any irregularities in
such service and in such notice, and consent and agree that the governing body shall meet
at the time and place therein specified and for the purpose therein stated.
Mayor Reardon presented the agenda and said it is constantly a work in progress driven
by the commission.
Discussion regarding County Museum
Mayor Reardon said several Commissioners had asked for this item to be separately
considered by the commission. He allowed staff time to discuss this item as it was
presented in the Administrator’s proposed budget and then to allow the membership of
the Wyandotte County Museum to make a separate presentation. Given the nature of the
museum and how it is governed, the Mayor felt it was important for their board
membership to be able to address the commission directly.
Mr. Hays said since a week ago tonight when the proposed budget was presented there
has been much discussion over recommendations regarding the museum. The notion of a
permanent closure of the museum was never intended. We are in a financial situation and
the proposal before the commission was to reduce the budget substantially and maintain
utilities, maintain the museum as an existing facility, but have limited operational basis
only.
Mr. Hays said at the direction of Mayor Reardon staff contacted representatives and
invited them this evening. As the Mayor indicated, it will be the commission’s choice to
hear from them. At 4:00 p.m. today members of that group were invited to meet with
staff to discuss specifics regarding this proposal and also to discuss alternatives in
looking at what the options might be to have minimal effect, but yet maintain the
reduction in cost that was proposed in the budget. Mr. Roddy was Chair for staff.
Mr. Roddy said we talked about the financial goals of this budget and we wanted to
emphasize this is a temporary measure and we have every intention of maintaining
utilities and security of the building. The museum will be open but in a limited way. We
have a reduced amount of staff budget available so we are going to have to work with the
Historical Society in how we maximize those resources. I think in the next month or so
as we start looking at the final options, we will probably be able to come back with a plan
July 20, 2009
that works best to maximize service with the dollars available. We talked about going to
appointments on some days, perhaps complete closure except for appointments during the
real cold months when attendance drops off. There are some fees that are not charged at
the museum that other places do charge so we are at the beginning of trying to understand
what options are available, but I think we are trying to do this in a cooperative way.
There has been a good relationship over the last ten years between the Unified
Government and the Historical Society and is one we want to continue.
Mr. Walker said many years ago the State Legislature prescribed the aggregate tax cap
and in doing so it was their intent to limit the amount of taxes that a local municipality
could raise. Unfortunately, for those that were intending that, they would pass laws that
would create certain things and could operate outside of the tax cap.
These were
additional mill levies. One of those was a mill levy for a Historical Museum. For a
number of years Wyandotte County had a separate mill levy that it utilized under the
statute that went for the purpose of funding the museum. It was non uniform so the
County, at the time, pre 1997, could add to that by County resolution so they could
change it each year. There was only one option. You did not have to fund the museum
in that manner. In last year’s budget the decision was made to discontinue a separate mill
levy for the museum and the cost of operating the museum and the mill levy that would
fund its operation was rolled into the General Fund. Whatever part of the County
General Fund was spent on the museum, it was the same as any other County General
Fund. There is no separate dedicated mill levy for museum operations. It’s a department
of the County; it has a certain amount of cost that we have agreed to fund. There is an
agreement and a series of agreements over a number of years between the Historical
Society and the County and now the Unified Government for the Historical Society to
operate and oversee the operation of the museum, keeping the employees within the
Unified Government so they would have whatever seniority, benefits and salary. The
general manner in which the museum is operated is overseen by this board of people that
are elected from the museum membership. Also, you need to understand the museum has
a lease. Originally the lease was a 99 year lease, one dollar a year and it was intended to
be a token of consideration at the time. That lease is paid up in full through the full 99
July 20, 2009
years so the Society will still have, under the lease, access and can hold events, meetings,
etc. inside this building. To the extent that we fund, that is an option that you have to
consider. On the other side of it, the control of the building and grounds that are
dedicated for museum purposes are under the control of the Society.
Action: Commissioner Ellison made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Barnes,
to allow a member of the Historical Society to make a presentation. Mayor
Reardon asked all in favor to signify by saying “Aye.” Motion carried
unanimously.
Loren Taylor said I realize this is a very trying time for you. You are faced with an
awesome responsibility and I fully realize that. As far as the Historical Society is
concerned, I’m afraid there have been a lot of misunderstandings in the past. The
Historical Society has been around for a long time. Our mission is to collect, preserve
and then educate, but to any historian we know you can’t educate unless you preserved
the history. It was during the 1950’s the State decided it was public policy to preserve
the history of the counties and there were several statutes passed at that time. The
purpose was to allow the continuity of this historical preservation. By the 1950’s we had
acquired a large number of irreplaceable items in our history relating to the Native
Americans and before. We’ve always been fortunate in this county to have resources
within our community. It was the estate of Harry Trowbridge that formed the basis of the
Trowbridge Trust that is the bedrock for the Historical Society. During the 1950’s it was
decided to have a permanent museum in Wyandotte County for the benefit of our
educational mission which means for the public. Harry Trowbridge showcased artifacts
in cases at Memorial Hall. We were then able to move much of Trowbridge’s collection
and then acquire from the business community cases, bookcases, number of items and
enough to make a true museum. We were in operation from that time. In 1962 the
County Commissioners approved a 99 year lease to 7.7 acres of County land in the park
area. In 1958 the County for the first time gave a one-tenth mill levy in their budget for
the museum and by 1961 it amounted to about $16,000. We already had treasurers that
cannot be replaced and many feel should be in a National Museum. Our canoe of over
July 20, 2009
200 years was taken from the Kansas River. We have fabric that is a thousand years old
in the museum. The heart of any historical museum is the archives’ because that is where
we preserve the history of the people of the county. The archives’ go back to the 1840’s.
There is irreplaceable material from the Grinter House. Mr. Trowbridge was the curator
for the museum and he set up a bookkeeping system that’s amazing for that time. We
still use it as the foundation for what we have today. After the lease we mentioned we
were then able to break ground for the first stage of the museum. It was not until 1967
that the museum was moved into a new small building. The museum was still in
operation across the street.
In 1975 the new museum complex was dedicated. We were growing, the exhibits were
growing, enough to be a museum that we could all take pride in. In 1976 the Trust
Agreement was signed concerning the Trowbridge Trust which is a million dollars. We
cannot touch that money and the bit of money we do receive from it is from the interest.
We cannot touch the money and we dedicate it to the preservation of the artifacts. In
1962 the Curator’s Agreement was updated. We had already been appointed as the
Curator’s for the County history. These agreements and those that followed, we took
seriously as partners and as a result we raised monies to build. There were no tax dollars
involved in the physical building of these structures and yet they belong to government.
One major comment, we have invested all of these monies. We owned other materials
and monies too at that time. At 110th & Parallel on the northeastern corner that was land
owned by the Historical Society. We sold that property so we could invest it in reliance
on our contractual agreements. We invested all of that. We stripped of ourselves all our
discretionary money so literally all we have left is our trust money. The entire beautiful
wing to the west was also built and dedicated just a few years back. It’s a great pride to
us and is worth a half million dollars. We have spent over $225,000 in upgrading the
displays for the public. We are getting ready to start a new fund drive. We have hired a
professional fundraiser and we anticipate enlarging that facility. The State Statute of
1955 was to preserve the history of the counties. The collection, preservation, displays
and housing of records, documents and other articles of historical value or interest is
hereby declared to be in the public interest. Then they passed the other statutes and one
July 20, 2009
of them was a way of funding these institutions so that we would feel safe in spending
and collecting all these monies and that was the mill levy and that was the purpose of the
mill levy. I understand the complexity of society today. The key for us is that we relied
on this and we understand the necessities of today. It may well be that we need to modify
our agreement temporarily. We certainly shouldn’t just destroy our partnership, but if we
could modify it to meet some of the needs that we have today and at the same time
remembering what we have put into this and are continuing to and will. We are on the
verge of possible irreputable cultural and historical preservation harm. The importance
of this project was well understood by both parties when they went into this well thought
out agreement. We should remember that our combined reputations and the image of our
county are at stake. I’m sure you have heard already of some of the problems we have
and that are continuing. NAGPRA (Native American Protection and Repatriation Act) is
a very serious federal law and if violated, it affects the relationship of the federal
government and a community. We were in the process of having this worked out and we
are still working on it. Just a few months ago the Interior Department chose us to host a
daylong seminar on NAGPRA issues. We do have items in the museum, as most do, that
are very seriously preserved. We need professional staff to continue working on it.
Large numbers of valuable historical and often perishable items are housed along with
numbers of historically valuable documents. This is the first time we’ve heard that there
will be preservation of at least temperature control, security and such of these
irreplaceable archives’. This is a time for people of goodwill on both sides to sit and
compromise to see what can be done. It’s not a time for controversy or for confrontation.
We are partners. I wish we would have had more knowledge that some of this was going
to occur, but we understand the problems that develop. If we are of goodwill, we can
work through all these problems. I will close with the partnership that we developed with
the Kansas City Kansas Ethnic Council. Just a month ago the Ethnic Council raised an
obelisk outside of the doorway to our museum. To all of the early ethnic groups of
Wyandotte County, we’re quite proud of that.
July 20, 2009
Mayor Reardon said I couldn’t agree more, it is a partnership. It’s something that will
go on no matter what and we need to be partners, we are by the nature of what you do
and what the museum means, we are partners. I’m very appreciative of your willingness
to quickly come to the table and meet with staff today. I think it was important for us to
at least sit down and discuss.
Commissioner Ellison said I would like to direct staff to search for alternatives to
closure. I would like for staff to work towards alternatives with representatives from the
Historical Society and to restore as much of the funding as possible.
Commissioner Barnes said I understand the severity of this budget and in meetings with
the Board, they get it. They know it is tough times and they know that in the very near
future that it is not going to be the way it has been in the past and they want to do their
fair share. I heard this thing partnership over and over again. I have never had a partner
where I walked out on them. I have never breached a relationship and still called them
partner. All we are asking tonight is that yes, we want to do our fair share, we want to
participate, we want to be good partners, but if I fail to exist in a reasonable fashion, then
it’s not a partnership. I think there is room for compromise. We are asking you to hold
our hands as we hold your hand through this process. I have not heard the cost savings
and how through some type of innovation address that. Even if that had been the case
that we were going to shut down with a limited schedule and everything, by that going
out to the media in the wrong fashion, it sent the wrong message to everybody. I’m
hesitant to say restore the funds because that is not a good partner. How do you make a
motion on something when you want to be a partner and we only have a choice to say
stay open or close? Commissioner Ellison is trying to say he wants them to stay open
and I want us to have an alternative way of addressing this and how do you put
something like that in a form of a motion. I think he was saying we would really like for
the Administrator to go back to the table.
Mayor Reardon said I heard you loud and
clear. I don’t believe we need a motion to do that. Commissioner Ellison said the
direction was for staff to get together with representatives from the Historical Society and
come up with alternatives to the term closing and to restore as much of the funds as they
July 20, 2009
both see they can operate with. Mayor Reardon said staff should do that and I think that
is on target and then it comes back to the commission for consideration as we would with
anything else we are dealing with in the budget. I further might add that it might make
sense, and I would certainly be willing to do this, designate several of the Commissioners
to be able to interact in that process.
Commissioners Ellison, Barnes and Kane volunteered to be ad hoc members of a group
that gets together to explore the opportunities with the Historical Society and staff.
Revised Summary of Major Revenue/Expenditure Projections
Commissioner Mitchell said that he may be the one that initiated this information and
has read through it and is fine with no discussion, but reserved the right to revisit.
Updated information regarding Snow Removal
Mr. Hays said there is a lot of concern amongst everyone on this item. In trying to
reduce cost, it is one of the areas where they thought they could reduce service.
Mr. Tobin said snow removal is an inexact science. Every snow storm is a different
operation. Charged with the task of trying to reduce cost in this area, you can only look
at the major concerns which are salt, labor, overtime and fuel. In order to come up with a
workable program and in talking with field managers, they decided to try to reduce the
use of the more expensive material upfront, cut some of the labor by moving through the
routes quicker than normal and that would also save fuel and, hopefully, reduce some
maintenance costs as well. The reduction of the use of salt and the cutting of overtime,
we hope to save approximately $400,000 for the winter of 2009-2010.
Mr. Hays said one of the most drastic changes is the elimination of plowing
neighborhood routes. We all have great pride in the quality of service we have today and
it is with reluctance the staff submits this.
July 20, 2009
Commissioner Barnes said the other night he asked how many six inch snow events
there have been over the years and that is not included. Mr. Tobin said I’m sorry if the
six inch was given as a hard and fast rule. When we go into a full scale plowing
operation, normally we have about four of those events a year. Commissioner Barnes
said the six inch is not the measure. Mr. Tobin said we normally start plowing at four
inches. Commissioner Barnes said you are not going to plow the residential areas at full
scale and you are only going to save $400,000. This is not adding up. If you are going to
put salt and sand down, why can’t you drop the plow at the same time? Mr. Tobin said
the fastest we have ever plowed the whole city is about 30 hours and the cost of that is
approximately $150,000 and a lot of that is labor. When it snows we are still going to
treat primary, secondary and neighborhood routes. They will receive a sand and salt
mixture. We won’t plow them so the four events or so every year is where we will cut
back. The largest savings of the $400,000 will be in the reduction of salt. The second
largest savings is in overtime. Normally we will have between 16 and 20 events per year
and most of the snow events do not require plowing.
UG Real Estate Asset on South 18th
Mr. Hays said this is the property that was of discussion in terms of asset for disposal.
Commissioner Murguia had requested the information and agreed discussion was not
necessary.
City/County General Fund Transfers
Mr. Hays said this is in regards to the question of repayment of transferred funds.
Essentially it is a very tight budget. In the case of transferring back transfers and
deferrals we’re making, we will be keeping accurate bookkeeping information on these
and as our funding position improves in the next several years, we would then be working
towards budgeting refunding of those different deferrals that we made. One of the ideas
that Mr. Levin offered was as new casino revenues come in, perhaps that would be a new
funding source that you could consider or refunding or restoring the funds that are
transferred out or deferred into various funds. We do not have a specific plan contained
in this budget because it is very lean.
July 20, 2009
Senior Citizen Utility Tax Rebate Program
Commissioner Mendez said this is from comments made last week and his intent was to
go from a $300 to just $200 maximum. I don’t think any group in this community has
suffered more than our senior citizens and when we do the PILOT that hits our seniors
just as hard, if not more so. I want to see us keep $200,000 in the budget for the senior
citizens. I think we’ve done a good deed in giving our senior citizens the utility rebate
that they so deserve. I’m asking the Commissioners that we not reduce it by one-half, but
reduce it by one-third.
Commissioner Pettey said there are two alternatives shown. Alternative #1 is to reduce
the maximum payout to $150 and Alternative #2 is to reduce the maximum payout to
$200. The difference we’re looking at is almost $63,000. If we want to go to Alternative
#2, we would have to find $63,000.
Mr. Levin said the action last week set our
maximum level of expenditures and would have to off-set that $63,000 increase in
expenditures.
Mayor Reardon recessed the meeting for ten minutes at 7:45 p.m.
Mayor Reardon called the meeting back to order at 7:55 p.m.
Sales Tax
Mr. Levin said we prepared a report and tried to organize the report to respond to each of
the questions raised last Thursday.
Mr. Levin said the initial question related to what different alternatives as it relates with
sales tax are available to us. Currently the City rate is at 1.25% and includes the general
sales tax rate of 1% and .25% for EMS purposes. Currently on the County we are at the
maximum rate of 1%. We can go up to 2% on the City rate for general purposes so we
can increase the 1.25% three-quarters of a percent. On the County rate if we are to
increase it, we have to have a specific purpose and those purposes are limited to
July 20, 2009
remodeling County facilities, court house, jail, etc. or we can use it directly for the
provision of health services. In addition, we can have a dedicated sales tax up to 1% on
the City side so on the City side you can actually go up to 3% and 2% would be for
general purposes and then 1% for a dedicated tax. If it is a dedicated tax, you implement
it for a ten year period.
Another question raised was about a storm water tax and Mr. Hays mentioned that tax is
only eligible for counties that actually had a program for storm water management in
place in the period of 1988-1990. Johnson County has such a tax, but we cannot. We did
not have that program in place and under current statutes we cannot have a storm water
sales tax.
The opinion we received from Legal Counsel is that any monies, if we had additional
sales tax money, it would be collected in the STAR Bond district, but the monies would
go directly towards payoff of STAR Bonds.
Mr. Levin said the second question raised was how we compare with area cities. We
looked at 15 other area cities, more limited on the Missouri side, just Kansas City, MO.
and Independence. This does not include any special taxing districts. We are at 7.55%,
we are below the average and 12 of the cities have a higher rate than we do currently.
With a ¼ cent increase we would be at 7.8% and numerically we would be the fifth
highest of the 16, but I would point out that cities from Merriam to Shawnee, six through
nine, would be at essentially the same rate as us at 7.775%. My conclusion is that with a
¼ cent increase, we would fall in the middle among the area communities. Mayor
Reardon said some of the cities that are below us are actively considering whether they
should have a sales tax as well. Mr. Levin said I have heard that Edwardsville is, but
I’m not sure what their actual budget proposal is. Mayor Reardon said he thinks some
Johnson County cities are also and requested staff to look at that and do some
investigating, but he was not asking for that information right away. As we look at this,
the data is what it is, but to assume that Shawnee, Roeland Park, Mission or Merriam are
going to stay at 7.775%, I would like to investigate that more to understand if that is the
July 20, 2009
case or not. Mr. Hays said I can confirm there are jurisdictions in northeast Johnson
County that are considering and actually are having public discussions and debate over
the proposed referendums later this fall. Mayor Reardon said any information you can
provide that is out in the public on that would be helpful to me.
Mr. Levin said if we went from 1/4 to 3/8% we would still be under 8% and 8% seems to
be the threshold of at least regionally the higher end, but we would be just slightly under
the 8% level. Each 1/8 cent increment generates nearly $2 million in revenue on the City
side for a City sales tax and that would be monies we could apply for General
Government purposes. In addition, an additional 1/8 cent would be applied to STAR
Bond areas and in Village West it’s estimated the 1/8 cent would generate $750,000
towards early payment of STAR Bonds. In total it would be $2.7 million, but $2 million
is what we could use for General Government purposes.
Mr. Levin said Commissioner Ellison raised a question about what has been the trend in
sales tax and in verifying numbers through mid-year this year; we are seeing a decline of
approximately 5% in our sales tax revenues. The STAR Bond revenues are near 2%
lower than they were at this time last year.
Mr. Levin said the next question related to how other communities have fared with sales
tax initiatives. We have on record for the last three years; we’re showing the results of
recent sales tax initiatives that have been approved in various communities. The report
showed the purpose of the tax, amount, when approved, and the most recent one
approved was in April, 2009 in Topeka.
Their tax was dedicated to streets and
infrastructure. We are seeing a variety of taxes; primarily the emphases are in the area of
Public Safety and Public Infrastructure.
Mr. Levin referenced charts from the community survey that was done in late 2007 and
said one of the questions was “would you support a sales tax for various purposes.” The
results of that survey showed strong support with the two highest being additional police
officers and infrastructure with over 50% community support. There was still a fair
July 20, 2009
amount of undecided. We also asked about the DOT Promise on a separate question and
that also had a high level of support.
Mr. Levin said there was an article in the Kansas City Star that Independence is going to
have an election next month on three-tenths of 1% sales tax dedicated to fund police
projects including personnel and capital related projects. If it passes, there will be the
appointing of a citizen oversight committee to monitor the community’s expenditure of
the money.
Mr. Levin said after the review of the data he thinks we would be in the strongest
position if we did a City sales tax as opposed to a County, if we had it as a general
purpose, but when it is general purpose we still have to be specific on how we intend to
use the monies. His preference for general purpose would be there is no sunset provision
so it would be a permanent tax. He believes public safety and public infrastructure would
present the best opportunity.
It appears that a ¼ cent rate will still maintain our
competitiveness and would fall near the middle of area communities. We would want to
involve both the elected officials as well as individuals from the community in
determining the priority. He thought the citizen community oversight committee would
be a good addition to the plan.
Commissioner Miller said the County General Fund is not as strong as the City General
Fund so I was surprised the recommendation would be for a City based sales tax.
My
concern about passing a City based sales tax, does it put our City at a competitive
disadvantage compared to Edwardsville and Bonner who ultimately benefit from it if you
pass it in the City and not the County. Mr. Levin said those are valid points. The
concern on the County side is that we have limited purposes on what we can do it for. It
has to be the County facilities or for the provision of health care services and I think that
would be more difficult to sell. Commissioner Miller said one strategic concern I would
have is I don’t want to put someone who opens a business on the Kansas City, Kansas
side of I-70 at a competitive disadvantage to somebody who opens in Edwardsville when
I think ultimately these dollars benefits everybody. As I look at it, it seems more
July 20, 2009
equitable although the funding outcomes may be stronger, but I think we should look at
that.
Commissioner Ellison said I think where you run into a problem, and I agree with Lew,
the problem of dedication of funds would be a much more difficult problem in those two
places, Edwardsville and Bonner, than in Kansas City, Kansas. There is no doubt people
will pay for what they get and what they see. People in my district want sidewalks,
guttering for the streets and they want sewers. I think the sell is infrastructure which
includes curbs and sidewalks.
Mayor Reardon said as far as competitiveness is concerned, Bonner Springs is already
above 8% on the chart. If we were to go for the ¼ cent, a business in Kansas City,
Kansas the base rate would be lower. Edwardsville is considering a sales tax and if they
end up advocating or putting on a November ballot a sales tax and we did a County one,
you could have two sales tax initiatives in part of our community at the same and I think
the commission needs to be careful about how we are setting things forward in the
messages were giving.
Commissioner Miller said as we look at our community over the last decade, it is clear
that we have tried to become more competitive on the property tax side and I think we are
accomplishing that over time. Even this year we will make progress given the mill levy
that we set.
With that being said, we are at competitive disadvantage in terms of
providing services to our residents because our neighboring communities provide a
greater percentage of their funding from sales tax or consumption based revenue within
their community. I’m supportive of this and I think at the end of the day you do have to
have a community vision that people buy into. We have to have community involvement
so they understand why this particular initiative is important, the community has to
understand we are trying to be good stewards of the resources we have and certainly this
budget would reflect that. We have to show it is a long-term commitment that goes along
with what we have outlined over the last decade. I would encourage staff to look at other
revenue streams as they relate to sales tax. If you issue an IRB, there is a fee charged for
July 20, 2009
the issuance of that debt and I think we should have the same fee on every TDD that is
done. I think we should have an annual fee on every TDD that is done so we receive
revenue back on these huge streams that are going out.
Commissioner Pettey said it wasn’t mentioned directly, but on his presentation he
thought it would be 70/30. Mr. Levin said on table 3, I put those percentages for
discussion and to show over a ten year period the impact. In an example shown a ¼ cent
sales tax would generate approximately $50 million over the ten year period. If it would
be split 30%, 70%, it would be $15 million for infrastructure, $35 million for public
safety. In year 2014 when the STAR Bonds are paid off, the additional revenue from that
¼ cent is almost $1.4 million. Commissioner Pettey said I think it should be 50/50.
Commissioner Holland asked if this would actually provide budget relief or would it
have to be designated for new projects? If we designated 50% for Public Safety, is that
going to offset budget needs or is that going to necessitate our adding $2 million to our
Public Safety budget?
Mr. Levin said the budget submitted limited the future
recruitment classes in the area of Public Safety recognizing, however, at some time we
would have to have additional recruit classes. This certainly would be a funding source
that could be used for that purpose or for Capital. In this budget there is no Capital, for
example, for the replacement of police vehicles or fire vehicles and this could present a
funding opportunity to do that. We are in the process now of amending the 2009 budget
and approving the 2010 budget. Next year at this time we will be amending the 2010
budget and if we know we have a sales tax in place that will be generating revenue for the
second half of the year. I think that would enter into decisions this commission will
make as it relates to amending that budget.
Mayor Reardon said clearly in the 2010 budget I agree with your analysis. As you
move forward, at some point does this revenue stream not begin to become available to
offset costs in General Fund as we expend them today? I’m having a little difficulty if
we are simply saying this money for the long haul all it does is grow government from
the base we have, is that what you are telling me? Mr. Levin said I think it would not
July 20, 2009
necessarily be just to grow government, that you would look at it and I will say maybe
reduce your areas of expenditure and this gives you a source to put those areas back
where you feel is appropriate. This revenue would give you the opportunity to prioritize
those needs. Mayor Reardon said I would ask staff to provide some information about
how this interplay would work if we were to move forward with the sales tax initiative
and if it were to be successful. The Administrator is proposing in his budget a PILOT
that moves up and then starts to ramp down and what assumptions are made on that
ramping down of the PILOT and does the sales tax have any interplay with that. I don’t
need the answer tonight, but I would like to have at least some explanation as to how
those two things may or may not interplay in the out years.
Mr. Levin said table 4 is a schedule for the earliest timetable that we could have. It
would go to standing committee in late August and then have an ordinance adopted by
the commission in September. Prior to August there would be some discussion among
the commission and community for input of what the tax would be used for and what the
rate would be. A November election would give the Election Commissioner at least three
months to prepare for the election and it would be a special purpose election. The State
would be notified with collection to begin April 1st.
Discussion regarding Election Commission Office
Mayor Reardon said Commissioners received correspondence from the Election
Commissioner and based on that correspondence we set-aside time for the Election
Commissioner to make presentation.
Bruce Newby, Election Commissioner, said my goal and concern is to make sure there
is sufficient budget to do what we have to do in the Election office to meet our statutory
obligations and to meet your expectations of what you expect us to do. There are certain
things in the law that are optional to us that based on our meeting last fall, I certainly got
the impression that it was your expectation that I do them so I want to make sure we are
funded appropriately so we can meet your expectations. The way I operate with a budget
is that I don’t spend it just because I have it. There has to be a legitimate reason to spend
July 20, 2009
that money. I have found in the law that I am required, as the Election Commissioner, to
certify my budget requirements to the Board of Commissioners and that apparently hasn’t
been done before. Previously, I have used the Unified Governments budget process to
communicate my budget needs to you. In 2009 certain line items were not being funded
correctly which created a problem for me. One of the problems was in the postage where
I normally would have had $117,000 for postage that line item was cut to $4,000. In
cutting that line item to $4,000 it leaves me in a position where I can’t do voter
registration and communicate with voters. I can’t do Advance Balloting and Advance
Ballot Applications. I’m prepared to go through the budget lines item by item, answer
your questions on what specific things are paid for.
Ms. Kearney said throughout the budget process, staff met with all departments at the
beginning of this year to address any oversights, budget issues that were pending that we
had not anticipated prior to this year since last year’s adoption and working with those
departments to make those corrections. As part of a solution in the interim, departments
will transfer funds and prior to the amended budget process the funds are restored. We
worked closely with them to do that.
Commissioner Pettey said in the letter you referenced delay and the timely replacement
of voting machines. I would like elaboration on that. Mr. Newby said we use the optical
scan reader which is called the AccuVote which is what we feed the paper ballot into.
We were notified earlier this year by Premier Election Systems which manufactures that
piece of equipment that they no longer would be making the memory cards.
That is the
first component that is vital to the operation of that machine. I discovered in May their
solution was to come up with a new machine that uses an entirely different kind of
memory card. As the memory cards start to fail, and we usually have four or five each
election, we are going to be put in a situation, and I think we will make it through the
next couple of years, but over time we are going to have to replace those machines.
Those machines have been around since the late 80’s.
July 20, 2009
Mayor Reardon said in the budget you addressed to us in your letter, are you
contemplating your staff taking furlough days next year? Mr. Newby said absolutely.
Commissioner Mitchell said in essence the Administration has said what your budget
needs to be next year. Are you saying you cannot do that? Mr. Newby said my concern
is what I was hearing as I was told to make cuts, somehow I had to come up with another
$240,000 worth of cuts and that would cause my office to fail. Commissioner Mitchell
said you can do the job, it’s going to be tough and then we are going to have to deal with
the fact that we don’t get the machines replaced as fast as we would like. Mr. Newby
said my main problem and issue is that you were all disappointed with me last fall for not
doing satellite advance voting and I made the decision not to do satellite advance voting
because of budget issues. That puts me in the same situation where I basically can’t do
satellite advance voting because there is not sufficient funding for it. Now that I have
seen hard numbers, it is going to be difficult, but I think we can make it and meet our
statutory obligations.
Mr. Newby said a comment about the election information Lew was presenting earlier,
November 11th is a holiday and could be a problem and it is also a Wednesday and we
traditionally do elections on a Tuesday. November 3, 10 or 17th would be fine. Mayor
Reardon requested Mr. Newby to prepare some analysis as to if we were to do a special
sales tax election, what the threshold requirements would be and a suggested timeframe.
Mr. Newby said it will also depend if you want a mail ballot election where you get a
higher turnout versus a polling place election. Mayor Reardon requested an analysis on
both.
Agenda review of upcoming Budget Sessions
Mayor Reardon asked staff to go through and do some analysis about potential new
revenue sources or additional revenue sources.
Commissioner Miller said he would like the CMIP budget broken down by Commission
district and sorted by the years that are out on those projects that go across multiple
July 20, 2009
Commission districts to see what the totals look like and wants total project cost. Mr.
Hays said I will go on record, I have had this request from other Commissioners and I
want to publicly go on record that we have declined because from my specific role in the
organization when we start chopping dollars on an annual basis on a specific period of
time by district, it tends to create a lot of parochial issues. Over time if you look at an
individual year, it particularly happens. If you look over time, it is less so because I think
this commission has done a good job in distributing so I would just caution, and I have
told some of you in the past, that we decline unless it is at the direction of the full
commission.
Commissioner Kane said I have asked in the past and have been told no.
Commissioner Murguia said I have asked and been denied.
Commissioner Miller said at this point Mr. Roberts; I would like to make a formal
request that the Legislative Auditor review the CMIP budget and give me a breakdown
by commissioner district.
Commissioner Ellison said I still think that creates a division. It could be used as a
political tool pro and con.
I think we are fair in giving and dishing out and the
administration does things that benefit the whole city. When we start dividing it up, it
becomes public knowledge.
Mayor Reardon said perhaps we could have staff make a presentation on the proposed
CMIP Projects budget to the commission and let them explain the reasoning behind why
the budget is set up the way it is proposed to be set up. Commissioner Miller said I
appreciate that, but over time and particularly over the last period of time, there have
been allegations of not enough money being spent in this area and too much money spent
in others. I think it is an appropriate time to ask the question, receive a breakdown, I’m
not asking for individual years. I realize there will be fluctuations, look at a 5 year period
and right now it is actually a six year period if you go 2009 to 2014. I would think
July 20, 2009
variances would be evened out through that process. Mayor Reardon said I’m going to
work with staff to move forward with a presentation on CMIP Projects that would happen
next week and put in front of the commission given the request that was made.
Commissioner Murguia said I agree with Commission Miller’s comment and I’m not
sure how the process works, but I want to bring it up in a public session. When those
dollars were brought in front of the commission there were some projects proposed and
the commission voted on the projects based on what was presented to us. Then I received
an email from staff thirty to forty-five days later that removed some of the projects
claiming they were ineligible projects with the CDBG-R. The concerning part is that all
the information was not gathered at the time it was brought to a vote.
Commissioner Pettey said I think there is probably the thought that could be looked at
as being nepotistic. I do not believe there is any possibility of opening up CDBG, all our
dollars, again. The list that was there was greater than the amount of money that was
there so that left flexibility for if HUD rejected projects, which they did, so the amount of
projects that were on the list were greater, but they were prioritized. It doesn’t appear to
me that there is any possibility of us reopening that because that was a proposal that had
to be submitted and at the time it was submitted within two days of the time we voted on
it. Mayor Reardon said it would be helpful to have the CDBG staff give a memo saying
that.
MAYOR REARDON ADJOURNED THE MEETING
AT 9:38 P.M.
dt
Tom G. Roberts, CMC
Unified Government Clerk
July 20, 2009