Loading...
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - MINUTES - 9/16/2004 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE – CITY OF MUSKEGO Approved 9/23/04 MINUTES OF MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 16, 2004 Mayor Slocomb called the meeting to order at 7:06 PM. Also present were Aldermen Salentine, Patterson, Buckmaster, Borgman, Melcher and Schroeder, Finance Director Gunderson, and Deputy Clerk Blenski. Members of the Teen Advisory Board were present for a portion of the meeting. Those present recited the Pledge of Allegiance. The Mayor stated the meeting was noticed in accordance with the open meeting law. Ald. Buckmaster moved for approval of minutes of meeting held September 9, 2004 noting a correction on Page 6 to change “CAD” to “CAT.” Ald. Schroeder seconded; motion carried. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ald. Schroeder moved to approve the agenda as prepared. Ald. Salentine seconded; motion carried. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Continue Discussion on 2005 Historical Society Capital Budget Request Mayor Slocomb stated that following discussion held at the September 9 meeting, he believes the Committee would like to hold a separate meeting with the officers of the Historical Society. Several of the aldermen confirmed that they could not support the money requested for capital budget items until they see some type of plan. Ald. Melcher agreed that a meeting with the Historical Society people “in the know” was needed. He stated that representatives from the Historical Society appeared before the Parks and Recreation Board on Monday (9/13) and proposed that they have the exclusive use of the lower level of the Old Town Hall building. Ald. Schroeder moved not to approve any capital budget items for the Historical Society until this budget cycle is over and the Committee of the Whole can meet with the organization and see what their direction is with the exception that the barn roof issue be resolved following inspection by one of the City’s building inspectors. Ald. Patterson seconded. Ald. Buckmaster recommends that the Mayor’s office correspond with the Historical Society so its representatives can bring the information that has been requested in the past to the meeting. The Committee expressed confidence that the Parks and Recreation Director would work with the Historical Society to accommodate its needs. It was determined that a joint meeting would be held in January. Motion carried unanimously. Continue Discussion of Tess Corners/Janesville Road Street Lighting Mayor Slocomb gave a brief history regarding the stamped concrete issue. A special Council meeting was held on February 12, 2004 to continue discussion on the Two- Party Agreement with the County. It was noted at that meeting that the City had 10 days from the date the bids were open to delete any portion of the project even if the item came in at a cost lower than the estimate. It was also stated that should anything come in at higher than 10%, it would automatically come back to the Council for reapproval. The resolution to approve the agreement, which included the stamped concrete, was adopted at the February 12 meeting by a vote of 4 to 2. The issue of the Committee of the Whole Page 2 September 16, 2004 stamped concrete was again raised in March (11) during discussion regarding the capital plan and the decorative lighting for the area. At that time, the Mayor stated he would check to see if a change order could be approved. His notes reflect that the bids were opened on February 19 and the contract was awarded on February 20, so the 10- day period for deletion had passed by March 11. The stamped concrete portion of the project was subcontracted to Munson Fence. The contract specified that if the contract amount was reduced by more than 25%, the contractor could rebid the job. It is estimated that the cost for the decorative stamping at the Janesville/Durham intersection represents 35% of the total project cost, which exceeded the 25% limit. The dollar amount involved is approximately $57,700. The Mayor stated the focus now is on what has to be done and the resources available to do it. The Committee discussed various options including lights that are less decorative, or installing fewer of them. Installing fewer would mean that the area for the decorative lighting would not be extended out as far as originally planned. That way, additional lights could be done later. Ald. Patterson expressed concern about the total cost for the lighting ($400,000). Ald. Schroeder stated when the Council voted on the issue in February, it was not made clear that the money for the stamping had not been budgeted. He did not become aware of that until the March 11 Committee of the Whole meeting. Ald. Schroeder also believes there will be a crossing safety issue at Janesville and Durham that will have to be addressed. He estimates it will cost in the $5,000 to $10,000 range. At this time, he recommends all infrastructure for the lighting be installed and work begin in the middle of the district and work out. The issue can be revisited next year. Upon further discussion, Ald. Schroeder stated it was probably more prudent to do all the lighting now and look closely at other capital budget items to see what could be moved out until next year. Ald. Melcher agreed because if we wait and do a portion of the lighting now and do another later, there could be a conflict if the contractors are different. The consensus was to move forward with the decorative lighting project now because it would ultimately cost more if a portion were completed later. Ald. Schroeder stated the lighting was planned to define the district. Ald. Patterson questioned the exact area where the lighting would be located. He recalls it going as far east as Poe’s Place. Maybe it could be scaled back. Ald. Buckmaster supported the idea of reducing the area potentially having developers contribute toward extending the lighting in the future. The Mayor stated that might not be possible. The Mayor suggested the light detail come back to the Committee for review and then different options can be explored. It was noted that the item is on the September 20 Public Works Committee agenda. NEW BUSINESS Presentation of Administrative Recommended Budget Finance Director Gunderson briefly explained the documentation that has been prepared and provided to the aldermen. Tonight, she will present the recommendation Committee of the Whole Page 3 September 16, 2004 of administration. She welcomed comments or questions that any of the aldermen may have. Ms. Gunderson began with the Summary Recap and reviewed the Revenues, Expenditures, and Other Financing Sources/(Uses) reflected on the recap. She noted that the expenditures for Health Sanitation/Refuse for 2001 and 2002 were represented in the operating budget but are now part of a special revenue fund. The Finance Director noted that Pages 8 through 14 are entitled City Totals are probably the most useful. Ms. Gunderson stated she would provide the line item detail for each of the fire departments. Several aldermen noted that there was a large difference between what each department was requesting for its operating budget. Tess Corners’ 2005 request is for $157,575 and Muskego’s 2005 request is for $294,921. The Finance Director noted that one main component that explains the difference is that Tess Corners pays a substantially lower amount per call than Muskego. The Mayor noted that these would not be the final numbers. He will be working with staff to critique the dollar amounts requested. Ald. Buckmaster stated between capital and operating, Muskego Fire was requesting a lot. Ald. Schroeder requested to see the detail for the specific amounts before he can support. Ms. Gunderson recommended representatives of Muskego Volunteer Fire Company be requested to appear before the Committee regarding the requested increase. Finance Director Gunderson explained that the pages following reflect the revenue and expenditures of General Government and are then broken down for each department. The information for the Parks and Recreation Department is broken down further to provide specific detail regarding the parks, which includes the historical site and high school athletic fields as well as the recreation component which includes program details. Ald. Schroeder stated he was pleased that it was proposed to have the restroom facilities open in 2005. The Finance Director pointed out that revenue generated by the recreational programs supports the wages and benefits of the Recreation Supervisor. Ms. Gunderson distributed a schedule requested by Ald. Buckmaster to reflect the percentage of 2005 tax levy for each department as it compares to the 2004 adopted budget. Ald. Buckmaster asked if the support departments are charging other departments for the services they provide. The Finance Director stated those costs could be allocated accordingly. However, she pointed out that the fees charged by the Building and Planning departments, incorporate a 15% overhead intended to offset some of the costs of other departments. Ald. Buckmaster asked about the budget for Economic Development (Pages 48-49) and if it included the CDA. Ms. Gunderson stated the CDA has its own special revenue fully supported by the general fund. Ald. Buckmaster stated he would like to see a running total for economic development expenditures sometime in the future. Ms. Gunderson stated costs have been expended in previous years for economic development that are contained in other line items. She is not sure where the previous Plan Director allocated all of the expenses. The Finance Director referred those present to the Tax Calculation sheet. She stated it reflects where we were, where we wanted to go and where we are in terms of levy. The Department Request would have required a levy of $11,688,538, which would result in a tax rate of $7.10. The Mayor’s goal was to bring forward an administrative budget that Committee of the Whole Page 4 September 16, 2004 reflects a 3% tax increase. That proposed increase would have taken last year’s tax rate of $6.28 to $6.47. What is being presented tonight is the administration’s recommendation of a $10,711.197 levy with a tax rate of $6.50, which represents a 3.49% increase. The schedule reflects the breakdown of the proposed levy with $8,828,837 as general levy and $1,882,360 as debt service levy. A large component of the tax changes for 2005 is an increase in debt service (approximately 17%). The Finance Director then presented a comparison between the 2004 and 2005 budget numbers. She highlighted the proposed items that impact the increase in the 2005 budget. Many of the items relate to employee costs and total $1,459,236. Added to that is a proposed reduction in financing sources (state shared revenue and reduction in the use of fund balance) which total $197,983. The two amounts together total $1,657,219. The Mayor and Finance Director have spent the last several weeks working to reduce the $1.6 million levy increase to $624,206. In order to get there, several reductions have been proposed including $250,000 to the road program, filling one of police officer positions and the building inspector position in July (vs. January) which represents a $70,877 reduction, reducing some overall expenses in the amount of $165,168, increasing funding sources by $287,391 and using nonlevy dollars (excess TIF funds from 2003) to fund expenses in the amount of $203,905. The total reductions proposed are $977,341, which subtracted from the $1,657,219 equals $624,206. The Mayor noted that regarding the proposed addition of a building inspector; he has requested documentation from the department head to support the position. It is proposed that $1,500 be added to the Mayor’s budget for the employee picnic. Ald. Schroeder requested that the amount spent in 2004 be discussed. He believed that the gift idea and the amount spent in 2004 were not prudent. Ms. Gunderson stated not every employee can attend the picnic. The gift item chosen has the Muskego logo on and is given to all employees whether they attend the picnic or not. This year, the Mayor was approached about the gift idea and informed that the cost was greater. Because the Mayor did not attend a conference this year, he did approve the additional expenditure making it clear that it was only for this year. The Finance Director noted it has been a difficult year for some employees who have been required to make contributions towards health insurance costs without receiving cost of living adjustments. She believes the additional money was not substantial overall. Ald. Schroeder stated that perhaps a gift is not necessary, and the picnic itself is enough. He suggested looking at an increase in vending machine prices with the proceeds used for the picnic and/or gift. The Finance Director did point out that some items are still unknown at this time: final numbers from the state for shared revenue and aid, finalization of the CDA budget, final rates for insurance, additional discussion with the Muskego Volunteer Fire Co. She requested that the aldermen review the information within the next week. Ms. Gunderson distributed two memos from Police Chief Johnson regarding the open detective position and manpower allocation study in his department. Ald. Melcher requesting information regarding replacement vehicles for the Police Department and the mileage when replacement occurs. The Finance Director stated the department replaces vehicles on a rotating cycle. Committee of the Whole Page 5 September 16, 2004 Ald. Melcher also requested the number of building inspections an inspector does and a projection looking forward. Ald. Schroeder requested that the Police Chief and Engineering/Building Inspection Director attend the September 23 meeting to respond to any questions. He also requested that the Chief submit activity numbers for the three school liaison officers for September to June. He wants to see what they do. Lastly, the Finance Director distributed a City of Muskego Per Capita Costs by Service Area graph, which depicts historical information from 1996 to 2004. She will add the data for 2005. Ald. Borgman moved to adjourn at 10:28 PM. Ald. Melcher seconded; motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Jill Blenski, CMC Deputy Clerk