The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011-2012 Biennial Budget Biennial Budget 2011-2012 CITY OF AUBURN WASHINGTON 2011-2012 BIENNIAL BUDGET For Fiscal Years January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011 and January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012 February 28, 2011 Prepared by Department of Finance CITY OFFICIALS MAYOR Pete Lewis CITY COUNCIL Nancy Backus Virginia Haugen Lynn Norman John Partridge Bill Peloza Sue Singer Rich Wagner DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS Finance Director Shelley Coleman City Attorney Dan Heid Human Resources Director Brenda Heineman Information Services Director Lorrie Rempher Parks Director Daryl Faber Planning Director Kevin Snyder Chief of Public Safety Bob Lee Public Works Director Dennis Dowdy TABLE OF CONTENTS 2011– 2012 BIENNIAL BUDGET TRANSMITTAL LETTER........................................................................................................................................ ..... 1 The Budget Process ...................................................................................................................................... 2 2011 – 2012 Biennial Budget Considerations .................................................................................................. 3 Our Fiscal Condition ....................................................... ................................................................. 3 Significant Budget Measures and Initiatives........................................................................................ 4 Vision 2016..................................................................................................................................... 4 Closing Comments ................................. .......................................................................................... 6 Distinguished Budget Presentation Award .................................................................. ....................... 8 SECTION I: BUDGET SUMMARY............................................................................................................................11 Reader’s Guide ............................................................................................................................................11 Financial Structure of the City Budget............ ...............................................................................................12 General Fiscal Environment........................................................................... .............................................. 15 Key Issues Affecting the 2011 – 2012 Budget Process...................................................................................... 16 2011 Budget Summary – All Funds............................................................................................................... 20 2012 Budget Summary – All Funds .................. ............................................................................................ 22 Staffing Trends........................................................................................ ................................................... 28 SECTION II: PROCESS/POLICIES.................................................................................................................... ........ 35 Basis of Budgeting...................................................................................................................................... 35 Budget Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 39 Budget Process............................................ ............................................................................................... 39 Budget Structure ................................................................................... ..................................................... 40 Components of the Budget ..................................................................................................................... .... 40 Capital Planning ......................................................................................................................................... 41 Budget Policies .......................................................................................................................................... 42 Citywide Goals and Strategies ........................... .......................................................................................... 45 2009 and 2010 Progress on Citywide Goals ................................................................ ................................ 47 2011– 2012 Budget Strategy ........................................................................................................................ 49 SECTION III: FINANCIAL PLAN ............................................................................................................................. 55 Introduction .......................... .................................................................................................................... 55 Analysis of 2011 – 2012 Revenues by Sources for All Funds ..................... ..................................................... 56 Analysis of 2011 – 2012 Budgeted Expenditures for All Funds....................................................................... 58 Revenue Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 60 General Fund ........................... ..................................................................................................... 60 Special Revenue Funds ........................................................................ ........................................... 64 Capital Project Funds ..................................................................................................................... 66 Enterprise Funds............................................................................................................................ 68 Internal Service Funds.............................. ....................................................................................... 70 Fiduciary Funds ............................................................................................ ................................... 71 Permanent Fund............................................................................................................................ 72 General Fund Six-Year Forecast ................................................................................................................... 73 Long-Term Debt Obligations and Debt Capacity............. ............................................................................. 76 General Fund Fiscal Capacity ......................................................................................... ............................. 79 Working Capital ......................................................................................................................................... 81 SECTION IV: OPERATING BUDGET....................................................................................................................... 87 Introduction ................................ .............................................................................................................. 87 Total Baseline Budget ............................................................... ................................................................. 88 Total General Fund................................................................................................................ .................... 89 Mayor & City Council................................................................................................................................ 93 Human Resources, Risk, and Property Management ...................................................................................103 Finance…. ............................................................. ....................................................................................113 Legal….…. ..................................................................................................... .......................................... 147 Planning, Building and Community ........................................................................................................... 153 Police Department .................................................................................................................................... 165 Public Works............................................................................................................................................ 173 Parks, Arts and Recreation................ ........................................................................................................203 Information Services....................................................................... .......................................................... 221 SECTION V: DETAILS ..................................................................................................................... .....................229 2011 Revenue by Type – All Funds ............................................................................................................230 2011 Expenditure by Object – All Funds .....................................................................................................232 2012 Revenue by Type – All Funds........................................ ....................................................................234 2012 Expenditure by Object – All Funds ........................................................................................ ............236 Administrative Structure ............................................................................................................................239 Costs by Administrative Structure...............................................................................................................240 Departmental Expenditures by Cost Center: General Fund .................... .................................................... 241 SECTION VI: PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS AS PROPOSED BY CITY DEPARTMENTS............................................245 SECTION VII: CAPITAL PLANNING, PROGRAMMING, AND BUDGETING ..........................................................283 2011 – 2012 Capital Budget ................................................................. ......................................................284 Capital Facility Items – Transportation Projects ..........................................................................................28 7 Capital Facility Items – Water Utility Projects ............................................................................................. 301 Capital Facility Items – Sanitary Sewer Projects............................................................................................ 311 Capital Facility Items – Storm Drainage Projects ....................................... .................................................. 317 Capital Facility Items – Parks and Recreation Projects .................................................................................325 Capital Facility Items – General Municipal & Community Improvement Projects.........................................335 Capital Facility Items – Other Proprietary Projects............................ ..........................................................343 SECTION VIII: APPENDICES Appendix A: Employee Position Classification Salary Schedule.................................................... ...............349 Appendix B: Community.........................................................................................................................357 Appendix C: Glossary.............. ............................................................................................................... 374 AUBURN’S VISION FOR THE FUTURE: As a city of regional significance, proud of its small town heritage as well as the diversity of its people and neighborhoods, Auburn offers an opportunity for people of all ages to enjoy life. CITY OF AUBURN MISSION STATEMENT To provide a service-oriented government that meets the needs of our citizens and business community through efficient and professional management with responsive and accessible leadership. February 1, 2011 Citizens of Auburn c/o City of Auburn 25 West Main Auburn, Washington 98001 Re: Transmittal of the 2011-2012 Adopted Biennial Budget Dear Citizens of Auburn: It is a pleasure to present the City of Auburn’s Adopted Biennial Budget for 2011-2012. The budget is a policy guide, operations plan and a communications tool that describes the overall vision of the Council and then allocates available City resources to a variety of community services and programs. Through the policy set by City Council, it anticipates the basic needs of the City and our citizens’ overall quality of life. Information included herein presents a course of action that facilitates the City’s continuing development as a responsible, efficient and effective government. The City continues to experience both opportunity and challenge. The current economic slowdown requires us to take a closer look at our business. Legislative enactments have resulted in limitations in revenue growth over the past decade. One of the more significant issues the City needs to address in the future is how to deal with the effects of voter-approved initiatives that limit future growth in revenues. The City has endeavored to maintain a positive development climate by living within its present revenue and by avoiding such additional taxes and fees as an employee head tax and local B&O taxes. Still, the basic economic formula remains the same. City income is divided into three primary revenue sources with property tax providing almost twenty five percent, sales tax providing nearly thirty percent, and grants, fees and other income types just under fifty percent. Economist’s state that because of voter approved measures, by State law property tax revenues will grow at a rate of less than one percent. Sales tax revenues are forecasted to remain stable through next year, and fees are at the maximum allowed by our Council. If income goes up less than the cost of living expenses, then the City must watch all revenues and expenditures closely. The continued success of our many established businesses together with a variety of new businesses should continue to provide support for City services and public facilities in the coming years. Further reduction in revenues from other sources and the impact of voter-approved initiatives places a priority on preserving as many programs and services as possible. Local efforts, therefore, will be directed toward Public Safety and then exploring ways to maintain quality services. A major focus will be towards developing long-range forecasts of costs associated with City services that are presently supported by general tax revenues to project the long-term impacts of decreases in revenue. In addition, the City will continue supporting those economic development efforts that will show an economic benefit to the City in the form of new jobs and sales tax. In 2006, the City of Auburn also took another step toward implementing the vision for quality, pedestrian oriented development, as outlined in the adopted Auburn Downtown Plan. Following a public hearing, the City Council adopted a Downtown Community Renewal Plan in September 2006. The Community Renewal Plan, which is authorized by State law, provides the City with another tool in promoting the redevelopment of the Auburn Downtown, particularly in the vicinity of the transit station. By adopting the Community Renewal Plan, the City will have more flexibility to address impediments to the growth of the Auburn Downtown. Situations involving obsolete platting, multiple ownerships on a block or underutilization of land contribute to making the consolidation of property to achieve a larger high quality redevelopment project Page 1 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Transmittal Letter difficult. The Community Renewal Plan provides a mechanism to help facilitate development in these situations if necessary. The City’s General Fund continues to be budgeted conservatively. Expenditure budgets are thoroughly reviewed to maintain levels of service needed by our citizens. A portion of the carry over from prior years has been used to sustain these service levels. At this time, it is anticipated that revenue will decrease from 2010 due to the current state of the economy. Expenditures will have moderate decreases over 2010. The City froze 22 positions with the adoption of the 2009/2010 budget and cut an additional 63.5 positions during the 2009/2010 Biennial Budget cycle. This was accomplished by a hiring freeze and two reductions in force. The City is currently in negotiations with all of its unions and the budget assumes no wage increases over the next two years. The City will still need to utilize reserves to balance the budget. Every effort has been made to maintain an adequate ending fund balance in anticipation of continuing adverse impacts of economic trends and possible regulatory change. The budget includes program improvements that, in most cases, are supported by offsetting revenue. Efforts are being made to preserve the current programs that have been adopted in previous years. THE BUDGET PROCESS The 2011-2012 Biennial Budget is the culmination of a detailed process involving both City staff and the City Council. Council has established a Citywide Vision and Goals. The departments, in developing the capital and program areas of the 2011-2012 Biennial Budget, used this vision. Budget requests were developed jointly by Department Directors and the Mayor, and presented to Council committees for review. The desire is to maintain essential programs at present levels of service, develop a workable strategy to achieve Council goals, recommend modifications to meet changes in the City's circumstances, and continue the responsible financial management management of the City's resources. THE BUDGET DOCUMENT Auburn’s Vision and Mission Statements are highlighted in the budget document. These statements, developed jointly by the Council and City staff, describe the City’s direction and priorities. The statements provide a framework for action and direct future activities and development within the City. The 2011-2012 Biennial Budget format presents the budget as a policy and fiscal planning tool as well as a plan for the wise commitment of available resources. As in the past, departmental quantitative and qualitative performance objectives are highlighted throughout the document. These objectives can be found in the Budget Policies (Section II) and by department in the Operating Budget (Section IV) of this document. Each department section contains three measures that best show the program performance of their department. Organization of the budget is intended to focus on the key policy issues involved in its development and present financial data in meaningful detail while portraying the full scope of the budget and City operations. This Letter of Transmittal presents an overview, serves as an introduction, and sets forth the policy and strategic considerations involved in the budget’s preparation. The Budget Summary (Section I) summarizes the 2011-2012 fiscal plan, presenting budget amounts as well as staffing trends by department. The Budget Process -Policies (Section II) describes the purpose and process of the budget document. It also presents a summary of the policies implemented by the budget. This section identifies City issues, goals and planned initiatives. It includes policies and priorities that were employed in budget development along with funding requirements. The Financial Plan (Section III) outlines the budget as a financial plan, focusing on and analyzing the budget’s financial data to describe how City operations will be financed and how fiscal resources will be allocated to different functions and services. This section presents an overall summary of both revenues and expenditures, including a discussion of General Fund revenue estimates and the basis of these estimates. Also included is a five-year financial forecast of the General Fund based on the actions and policies of the budget. Page 2 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Transmittal Letter The Operating Budget (Section IV) details City operations on a department-by-department, fund-by-fund basis. Each department includes an organizational chart, mission statement, current year accomplishments, and next year’s objectives. Also included are historical, current and future financial data, staffing and performance measures by department. The Details (Section V) depicts a more detailed view of City operations. Program Improvements (Section VI) discusses the 2011-2012 program improvements that are included in the budget. The Capital Program (Section VII) summarizes the City’s 2011-2012 Capital Facilities Plan. This section provides an overview of those projects budgeted in 2011 and 2012. For future plans in more detail, see the City’s 2011-2016 Capital Facilities Plan published as a separate document. 2011-2012 BIENNIAL BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS This biennial budget builds upon past experience and past budgets to protect the sound financial condition of the City. It continues the initiatives of prior years with a priority placed on Public Safety and an array of programs responding to community needs and instituting modest baseline adjustments that form the basis for maintaining current levels of service as the community grows through natural expansion and annexation. Our Fiscal Condition The budget has been prepared with the objective of maintaining the City’s financial condition and facilitating achievement of Council objectives. The General and Cumulative Reserve Funds include essential balances; other fund balances continue to be adequate. The Utility Funds have maintained healthy working capital balances needed to perform extensive upgrades to the systems. Current economic conditions have impacted sales tax revenue estimates and are budgeted conservatively. The slight increase reflects anticipated revenues from the sales tax credit that Auburn receives from the State from the newly annexed area of Lea Hill. The City’s sales tax revenues have also been negatively impacted by the Streamlined Sales Tax legislation and will continue to be closely monitored should the State not be able to mitigate the effect as originally anticipated. The City issued utility system revenue bonds totaling $21,295,000 in 2010 for projects relating to the combined water supply and distribution system, the sanitary sewage system and the storm drainage system. Additionally, in 2010 the City issued $31,990,000 in GO bonds to be used for refunding the 1998 Library bonds; funding downtown infrastructure improvements and to pay a portion of the City Hall Annex. In 2006, the City issued $5,160,000 in limited tax general obligation (LTGO) bond debt to construct a golf course clubhouse and complete a mausoleum/niche wall project. In 2005, the City refunded a portion of the 1997 revenue and 1999 general obligation bonds and effectively reduced the annual interest cost. Refunding utility revenue bonds were issued in the amount of $2,765,000 and refunding Airport GO bonds were issued in the amount amount of $1,375,000. The utility bonds enabled continued development of infrastructure necessary for the City to provide utilities for growth and wholesale water to other communities in need of service, as well as to meet domestic water treatment standards and storm water treatment system requirements. Revenues from utility sales will be used to repay related bond debt. The Airport limited tax general obligation bond was issued for the construction of enclosed hangars and other improvements at the airport. All of the rental hangars were pre-leased prior to breaking ground. Other unmatured bonds previously issued Include: the 1999 GO Bonds, original issue of $2,551,600 for the Valley Com 911 Center that was refunded in 2010, reaching maturity in 2015 and the 2009 GO Bond of $26,732,850 used to construct the South Correctional Entity (SCORE) facility. The City participated jointly with four other cities in the construction of the Valley Communications Center and is responsible for 20% of the general obligation debt associated with the facility. In addition, the City in conjunction with six other cities established the South Correctional Entity (SCORE) to provide correctional services and is responsible for 31% of SCORE debt service. The City enjoys an outstanding bond rating and a solid reputation within the financial community. Again, a fiscally responsible budget is proposed for 2011-2012 to anticipate substantial unknowns in revenue stability. Page 3 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Transmittal Letter Sales tax revenue has been projected at $15,472,600 in 2011, including the Criminal Justice distribution, which is a decrease of 0.48% over 2010 budgeted sales tax revenue. Due to the economic downturn and implementation of streamlined sales tax, the City has not projected an increase in sales tax receipts as in past years. Longer-term economic growth projections for the City continue to be positive, although reason for caution remains. The national financial crisis has affected the regional economy in recent months. To ensure stability and continuing economic security, the City has maintained adequate reserves. In accordance with this strategy, the Cumulative Reserve Fund is budgeted at $5.6 million in 2011, and the General Fund 2011 fund balance is budgeted at $6.4 million. Additionally, an insurance reserve of $2.3 million is maintained to meet litigation claims and $2.7 million for the City’s obligations for health care and pension costs of firefighter LEOFF 1 retirees. Significant Budget Measures and Initiatives Careful financial planning and management allows the City to continue meeting its goals through implementation of a coordinated strategy by: 1. Limiting new staff and reviewing replacement staff for essential need, and limiting staff and new programs unless staff or program can fully support such growth either through new revenue generation or specific cost reductions. 2. Applying the fiscal capacity of the City to meet potential future needs. 3. Using fund balance or working capital to finance capital equipment that maintains or enhances productivity. 4. Controlling optional, discretionary expenses. 5. Providing adequate training, technology and tools to enhance productivity. 6. Maintaining a baseline of funding which continues to deliver high quality municipal services with special attention to: a) Continuing support of growth management. b) Supporting effective law, safety and justice services. c) Delivering a diversity of recreational and cultural programs. 7. Providing staff support and funding for street maintenance, repair and improvements to meet planning requirements and benefit from available funding opportunities. 8. Enhancing the capacity of infrastructure where funding opportunities exist by assigning priority to providing necessary matching funds. 9. Continuing operation of the City's enterprise functions on a business basis. 10. Exploring all opportunities for economic development that will provide a return to the City of Auburn. 11. Exploring all opportunities for additional services that can be supplied by the City for a fee that will result in a net positive revenue to the City, including any required personnel to deliver the service. Budget Status Since effective fiscal planning is carried out on a multi-year basis, this budget should be viewed in the context of past budgets. Responsible fiscal management and the City’s current revenue levels have enabled the City to support a baseline General Fund budget that responds to the City’s need need to provide quality community services at reasonable levels. The 2011 budget allocates $203,375,808, and the 2012 budget allocates $147,921,880 among all budget functions and funds. General Fund revenue is anticipated to remain stable from $49,863,903 as budgeted for 2011, to $49,252,800 in 2012 and anticipates that reserves will be reduced from previous high levels as revenues level off. A strong financial position is not the only objective of responsible city government. The Council has developed the future vision of the City. VISION 2016 The goals set the overall direction for the City and priorities for program support and development. The 2011-2012 Biennial Budget allocates the City’s resources to achieve citywide goals. This program is facilitated by the budget and administered by the Mayor. As such, the goals set the direction of activity for the various departments throughout the year. A ten year plan called “Vision 2016” was developed by the Mayor and City Council during the 2006 Council Page 4 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Transmittal Letter Retreat. Overall goals to guide development and implementation of the 2011-2012 departmental objectives are presented as follows: Encourage Economic Development • Complete the Promenade project • Development of the Robertson/Valley Drive-in properties • Build out I Street Corridor with appropriate buffers • Development of Emerald Downs area • Complete A/B Street Corridor and develop adjacent areas • Develop the Airport area, including runway extension, new commercial area via land lease and new entrances on D Street • Develop/improve Multicare site • Develop environmental building, commercial and technology in the Green Zone adjacent to Auburn Environmental Park (AEP), including rezone • Development of the Golden Triangle area • Redevelopment of C Street SW and 15th Street SW properties • Create Auburn Way South Redevelopment Plan • Pursue joint economic development area with Muckleshoot Tribe • Develop strategic plan for making Auburn a center for entertainment and arts • Market Auburn as the regional entertainment center • Develop criteria for reviewing City owned properties Improve Designated Urban Center • Improve B Street Plaza • Revitalize and redevelop urban center with extended areas • Create medical/hospital zone • Construct the S Division Street Promenade • Review zoning codes within Urban Center to allow increased development/density • Continue efforts to make Auburn’s Urban Center more pedestrian friendly • Improve and expand public parking opportunities Plan Future City Development • Complete Phase 2 Code Update and Development of a Master Plan Code • Develop a site plan review process • Complete Pierce County annexations Provide for Public Safety • Ensure that Auburn is a safe and secure place to live or have a business • Provide adequate funding sources for public safety • Continue to provide for public safety by holding forums for community needs Complete Public Works Projects • Complete I St. Corridor from 40th Street to 277th Street • Pursue revenue sources to support bonding of Street Preservation • Complete M St. Underpass • Continue commitment to Save Our Streets (SOS) Program Actively Support Regional Transportation Improvements • Complete SR 164 improvements • Complete link road from SR 164 to SR 18 Page 5 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Transmittal Letter Enhance Quality of Life • Complete Green River Trail • Restore Mill Creek • Develop Auburn Environmental Park • Develop espresso/juice bar and possible bike/skate shop on Interurban Trail (seasonal concessions) • Restore White Lake • Proactively work with BNSF to encourage buffer zones at rail yard • Build south end trail loop and horse trail • Preserve former Carnegie Library and former Post Office • Pursue opportunities for indoor and outdoor soccer facilities • Complete connections from downtown to the Interurban and White River Trails • Continue efforts to partner with, fund and enhance human services • Encourage public art on downtown buildings • Include the area on Auburn Way South from F Street to 12th Street in Les Gove Community Campus Encourage Sense of Community • Promote continuous community outreach by involving citizens and business in their City government • Continue to seek opportunities to partner and work with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe • New Post Office • Promote stability in neighborhoods and the downtown area • Integrate public efforts with efforts of service clubs and faith community • Construct Community Center, Teen Center and Gymnasium at Les Gove Park • Work toward unification of new communities with centralized communication and outreach to bring them into the existing community • Promote pride in Auburn – “It’s More Than You Imagined” Miscellaneous Endangered Species Act The City is represented on various WRIA (Watershed Resources Inventory Area) 9 (Green River) committees, and staff is also working with the WRIA 10 (White River) work group. The City continues to review development applications, policies and projects to ensure that damage to fish habitat is minimized and opportunities for enhancement are undertaken. The City’s Environmental Protection Manager is responsible for coordinating and implementing efforts to respond to Endangered Species Act issues and concerns. Water Supply The City has completed its years-long, intensive effort to characterize and model the hydrogeology underlying the city. This work has been at the center of the process necessary to pursue additional water rights for the City's water utility. Partnering Opportunities The City will continue to pursue opportunities to partner with the Muckleshoot Tribe, school districts, railroads, service organizations, private enterprises and the religious community to plan, develop and improve the Auburn area for the benefit of all concerned. CLOSING COMMENTS As Mayor, and as a citizen of Auburn, I am proud of the City’s accomplishments. The City Council has established a vision for Auburn’s future. Building a bridge to that vision is our challenge as we move into the 21st Century—and continuing dialogue with Auburn’s citizens and businesses is a firm foundation for that bridge. The 2011-2012 Biennial Budget for the City of Auburn represents a balanced approach to planning for Auburn's future. It continues a reasonable level of service while maintaining the financial integrity of the City. The increase in residential development and an increasing population are placing greater demands upon City services. Increases in programs must be managed carefully and brought on only as revenues become available. Every opportunity to Page 6 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Transmittal Letter increase revenue from sales tax must be explored and careful consideration given to each possibility. The City, businesses and individual citizens must work hand-in-hand for all of us to succeed. The City is presenting a conservative, balanced budget that meets the basic service requirements for Auburn’s citizens and businesses. The objective, as always, is to provide a reasonable level of service to the Auburn community within the framework of fiscal integrity and sound financial management. Auburn is a special place to live, a home of over 68,200 people who still believe it is a small town. This is a challenge for all of us, and we will find solutions that make sense for Auburn by working together as we have always done. Sincerely, Peter B. Lewis Mayor Page 7 January 1, 2009 For the PRESENTED TOBeginning City of Auburn President Executive Director Biennium Washington The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to City of Auburn, Washington for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2009. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan, and as a communications device. The award is valid for one year only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. Page 8 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Section I – Budget Summary Page 9 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Page 10 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary SECTION I: BUDGET SUMMARY This section summarizes the 2011-2012 biennial budget and provides comparisons to previous years’ revenues and expenditures. The section begins with a Reader’s Guide which provides the reader with the general layout of the budget document; continues with a summary of the City’s financial structure and an overview of the City’s General Fiscal environment including legislative measures affecting City revenue. This section continues with summarized budget data which shows a breakdown of the General Fund and then all funds combined. The reader is encouraged to refer to the Operating Budget, Section IV for a more detailed account of the departmental budgets. Also, an expanded explanation of revenue sources and trends can be found in the Financial Plan, Section III. Reader’s Guide Understanding a governmental budget and its specialized terminology and organization can be a challenging exercise. This Reader’s Guide has been provided to highlight the kinds of information contained in this document and to inform the reader where to find particular information. It also provides a description of the City’s expenditure groupings and budget account structure. Budget Document Organization This budget document contains legally required budget information, descriptive background information and various illustrative graphs and tables that will be helpful to the reader’s understanding. It is divided into nine major sections, the contents of which are explained below. Transmittal Letter -The budget begins with a message from the Mayor of the City of Auburn presenting the biennial budget. The letter addresses major changes and upcoming issues that effected policy when preparing the upcoming budget. Section I, Budget Summary -This section contains a broad overview of the budget and the City’s financial structure. Section II, Budget Process/Policies – Presents the City’s budget process and the policies that guided the preparation of this budget document. Section III, Financial Plan – Historical and future revenue trends are presented for each fund group as well as a six-year revenue forecast of the General Fund. Section IV, Operation Budget – The operating budget is organized by department with each tab representing the divisions assigned to one of the City’s eight directors. See the following table “Summary of Financial Structure” for a listing of the director responsible for each fund. Section V, Details – Detailed information on city operations based on administrative, functional and financial structures. Section VI, Program Improvements – Presents, in detail, each program improvement (increase in personnel or program expansion) contained in the current budget. Section VII, Capital Budget – Briefly discusses each capital project authorized by the current budget and impacts on future operating budgets. Section VIII, Appendices – Includes employee salary schedules, “About Auburn” information, and a glossary of terms. Page 11 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Financial Structure of the City Budget The City of Auburn’s accounting and budget structure is based upon Governmental Fund Accounting to ensure legal compliance and financial management for various restricted revenues and program expenditures. Fund accounting segregates certain functions and activities into separate self-balancing ‘funds’ created and maintained for specific purposes (as described below). Resources from one fund used to offset expenditures in a different fund are budgeted as either a ‘transfer to’ or ‘transfer from’. The City of Auburn budget is organized in a hierarchy of levels, each of which is defined below: Fund A fund is an accounting entity used to record the revenues and expenditures of a governmental unit which is designated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives. For example Fund 102, the Arterial Street Fund, is designated for the purpose of maintaining the arterial streets within the City. Department Department designates a major department of the City operations, e.g. Public Works and Parks and Recreation. Program A specific distinguishable line of work performed by the department, for the purpose of accomplishing a function for which government is responsible. For example, “Traffic Control” is included within the Street Funds. Object The appropriation unit (object of expenditure) is the level of detail used in the budget to sort and summarize objects of expenditure according to the type of goods or services being purchased, e.g., salaries, supplies. FUND DESCRIPTIONS Governmental Fund Types General Fund – The General Fund is the City’s primary fund that accounts for current government operations. This fund is used to account for all resources not required to be accounted for in another fund. The General Fund supports police protection, parks and recreation, planning and economic development, general administration of the City, and any other activity for which another type of fund is not required. Special Revenue Funds – Special Revenue Funds are used to account for revenues which are legally or administratively restricted for special purposes. These funds receive revenues from a variety of sources, including Federal and State grants, taxes, and service fees. These revenues are dedicated to carrying out the purposes of the individual special revenue fund. The City currently has eleven Special Revenue Funds. Examples of restricted revenues that must be spent on specific purposes are gas tax revenues, federal and state grants for transportation, community development block grants, forfeited drug funds, business improvement assessments, hotel/motel tax and mitigation fees. Debt Service Funds – Debt Service Funds account for resources used to repay the principal and interest on general purpose long-term debt not serviced by the enterprise funds. These funds do not include contractual obligations accounted for in the individual funds. Capital Project Funds – Capital Project Funds pay for major improvements and construction. Revenues for capital funds are derived from contributions from operating funds and bond proceeds. These revenues are usually dedicated to capital purposes and are not available to support operating costs. The City has three Capital Project Funds. Page 12 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Permanent Funds – These funds report resources that are legally restricted to the extent that only earnings, and not principal, may be used for purposes that support the programs. The City has one permanent fund, the Cemetery Endowed Care. Proprietary Fund Types Enterprise Funds – Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner similar to business enterprises. They are established as fully self-supporting operations with revenues provided primarily from fees, charges, or contracts for services. The City maintains eight Enterprise Funds to account for the operations of Water, Sewer, Storm, Solid Waste, Airport, Cemetery, Commercial Retail and the Golf Course. Internal Service Funds – Internal Service Funds are used to account for operations similar to those accounted for in Enterprise Funds, but these funds provide goods or services to other departments on a cost reimbursement basis. The City maintains four Internal Service funds to account for information services, facilities, fleet management and self-insurance activities. Fiduciary Funds -Fiduciary, or Trust Funds, are used to account for assets held by the City in a trustee capacity and cannot be used to support the City’s own programs. These include pension trust, investment trust, private-purpose trust, and agency funds. The City’s pension trust fund is the Fire Relief and Pension Fund and is budgeted on the accrual basis of accounting where revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recorded when incurred. The City’s agency fund is custodial in nature and is not budgeted. The City does not have any investment trust funds or private purpose trust funds. Page 13 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Fund Responsibility Budget Description 001 General Fund Mayor & Council Mayor Mayor & Council costs Human Resources HR Director General government employment, safety, court and building maintenance Finance Finance Director General government finance costs City Attorney City Attorney General government legal costs Planning Planning Director Planning, building permits and social service Jail Police Chief General government jail costs Police Police Chief Direct police department costs Public Works Public Works Director General engineering costs Parks & Recreation Parks Director Park maintenance, recreational programs, arts and senior programs Streets Public Works Director Street maintenance costs Non-Departmental Finance Director Citywide expenditures, fund transfers, fund balance & one-time expenditures Special Revenue Funds 102 Arterial Street Public Works Director MVFT and grants for Arterial Street projects 103 Local Street Public Works Director Property Tax Levy Lift for Local Street projects 104 Hotel/Motel Tax Finance Director Lodging tax for promotion of tourism 105 Arterial Street Preservation Public Works Director Utility Tax 117 Drug Forfeiture Police Chief Forfeited drug money used for drug enforcement 118 Justice Assistance Grant Finance Director Police overtime 119 Housing/Commt'y Development Mayor Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) 120 Recreational Trails Parks Director Dedicated funds for recreational trails 121 Business Improvement Area Planning Director Financial activity of the downtown area 122 Cumulative Reserve Finance Director Governmental reserves 124 Mitigation Fees Finance Director Collection of mitigation & impact fees Debt Service Funds 229 1998 Library Bond Finance Director Principal & Interest, 1998 bonds 230 City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond Finance Director Principal & Interest, 2010 bonds 231 Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond Finance Director Principal & Interest, 2010 bonds 249 LID Guarantee Finance Director Reserves for security of LID's 250 LID #250 Finance Director Principal & Interest, Local Improvement District 275 LID #350 Finance Director Principal & Interest, Local Improvement District Capital Projects Funds 321 Municipal Parks Parks Director Capital projects at municipal parks 328 Capital Improvements Finance Director Capital improvements -citywide projects 330 Local Revitalization Finance Director Capital improvements -downtown urban center Enterprise Funds 430 Water Public Works Director Operating fund for water utility 431 Sewer Public Works Director Operating fund for sewer utility 432 Storm Drainage Public Works Director Operating fund for storm water utility 434 Solid Waste Finance Director Operating fund for solid waste utility 435 Airport Finance Director Operating fund for municipal airport 436 Cemetery Parks Director Operating fund for municipal cemetery 437 Golf Course Parks Director Operating fund for municipal golf course 438 Commercial Retail Planning Director Operating fund for commercial retail Internal Internal Service Funds 501 Insurance Finance Director Self-insurance reserves 505 Facilities HR Director Operating fund for facilities and property management 518 Information Services IS Director Operating fund for information services 550 Equipment Rental Public Works Director Operating fund for equipment rental Fiduciary/Trust Funds 611 Fire Pension Finance Director Pension fund for firemen's retirement system Permanent Funds 701 Cemetery Endowment Finance Director Long-term reserves for cemetery operations All funds listed are appropriated. SUMMARY of FINANCIAL STRUCTURE Page 14 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary General Fiscal Environment Effective budget and financial policies are developed gradually over a period of time in response to longterm fiscal and social-economic conditions. Accordingly, although this document responds to the City’s financial policy, framework has been developed in response to multi-year fiscal pressures. General Fund Auburn’s economy is generally cyclical following the economic cycles of the surrounding region. However, the economic down periods in the cycles have generally been less severe for Auburn than for other municipalities in the region due to the relatively stable nature of Auburn’s economy. Economic cycles are not the only determinants of revenues for municipal budgeting. Even with an up sloping economy, laws that determine who pays taxes and how much they pay can also have a major impact. The Washington State Legislature has adopted several pieces of legislation, which have limited the ability of local governments to increase increase revenues and future taxing ability. Most recently the State adopted Streamlined Sales Tax laws, which reallocates tax revenue from the source of the transaction to the destination. While Auburn’s economy remains diversified, these exemptions have impacted Auburn’s revenues. Although inflation is controlled, these altered revenue sources are having, and will continue to have, a substantial impact on Auburn’s budget. Other significant concerns for the future are the demand for services. In particular, public safety services will increase with continued development and recent annexations. Residential construction continues, but at a much slower pace than in the previous years. Development continues in the Lakeland (South) area of the City and the newly incorporated areas of Lea and West Hills. Furthermore, due to mandatory sentencing guidelines required by the State, we have experienced over a 100% increase in the care and custody of prisoners in the past few years. Alternatives to incarceration are being used, such as increasing the Home Monitoring Program and utilizing drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs. These programs appear to be having a positive effect on incarceration costs, yet come with cost themselves. The General Fund must be budgeted and monitored very carefully during this period. Passage of voter approved initiatives and other pending voter initiatives, can negatively impact the general fund. Severe downturns in the recent economy have drawn heavily on the reserves built in previous years. The City is employing strong fiscal management in this budget to maintain adequate reserves yet maintain levels of service to citizens. Service levels may need to be visited in the interim if the downturn in the economy continues or deepens. Current and Potential Legislative Action There have been several legislative actions at the state level that have permanently reduced sales tax revenues for the City of Auburn. This legislation and other pending legislation, including federal legislation, are summarized below, along with potential impacts on Auburn’s revenue. Sales Tax Exemption on Purchase and Lease of Manufacturing Equipment, Retooling of Manufacturing Equipment, and General Research and Development (1995) Legislation was passed to exempt the purchase and lease of manufacturing equipment from state and local sales taxes. The next year further legislation was enacted exempting sales taxes on research and development and on the retooling of manufacturing equipment. The impact of this legislation had been offset by a local strong economy and low unemployment rates. Initiative 695 In November 1999, the voters of Washington State approved Initiative 695, which repeals the State’s long standing motor vehicle excise tax (MVET) and requires future voter approval of tax and fee increases Page 15 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary proposed by state, county and local governments. The ruling was upheld on appeal at the Washington State Supreme Court. The loss of the MVET eliminated an average of $750 million annually as a funding source for local governments, transit systems and state transportation projects. The loss of MVET revenues was approximately 2% of total General Fund revenues. During 2000, State funding was provided to assist in the revenue losses. The City of Auburn received approximately $200,000 in 2001 and 2002. Early in 2003, the State discontinued this funding assistance. Initiative 747 One of the largest losses to City revenue is due to I-747 which limits property tax increases to the lesser of 1% or inflation. I-747 was passed by Washington State voters in November of 2001. This measure was declared unconstitutional by the King County Superior court on June 13, 2006. In November 2007, the State Supreme Court decision was to overturn I-747. Following this decision, the Washington Legislature approved House Bill 2416 reinstating the provisions of I-747 retroactively to 2002, restoring the one percent limit on property tax increases. Initiative 776 The voters approved this initiative in the fall of 2002 to repeal the $15 local option vehicle excise tax levied in King, Snohomish and Douglas counties. The voters of these counties initially approved this tax and there was argument whether a statewide vote could repeal a local voted tax. After several court cases and subsequent appeals the state Supreme Court upheld the initiative. The loss to the City street program is approximately $450,000 annually. Streamlined Sales and Use Tax (SST) In 2003, the Legislature enacted Senate Bill 5783 to adopt several provisions of the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement. The agreement attempts to create a Sales Tax collection system that is uniform across all States. Washington State changed from a point of sale collection process to a point of delivery collection process in July 2008. Analysis shows the City of Auburn is losing $2 million per year, which is currently mitigated by the State. Key Issues Affecting the 2011-2012 Budget Process As is the case with most cities, one of the major issues is the funding of our streets’ transportation system. While the City has enjoyed an increase in population growth and commercial and residential construction projects, the ability to provide ongoing preservation and maintenance of our system becomes more difficult, due to the sizable investment needed on an ongoing basis. Gridlock exists along the major arterials of the City due primarily to a failing state highway system that has inadequate capacity for commuter traffic and forces traffic on to the City arterials. Transit stations have been constructed in valley downtown areas to help alleviate transportation gridlock on our highways. The City placed a proposition on the November 2004 ballot asking voters to increase the property tax levy lid for six years. This proposition was successful and the the additional funds are being used to support a local street improvement program. The City’s fiscal planning effort over the past several years has included efforts to accumulate reserves necessary for the City to weather a moderate recession. The City decreased staffing and reduced spending in order to maintain its reserves through this recession. This has allowed the Cumulative Reserve Fund to be maintained at around the $5.6 million dollar level. The Auburn Community The City of Auburn is located in southern King County and northern Pierce County, the two most populous counties in the State. It is strategically located in relation to the labor and consumer markets of these two metropolitan counties. The City serves approximately 67,000 people within its incorporated Page 16 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary limits, and another 25,000 to 30,000 people who reside in the adjacent unincorporated area considered to be within the Auburn community. The City of Auburn was incorporated in 1891 and operates as a noncharter code city under the laws of the State. According to the King County Assessor’s Office the City’s total assessed valuation for tax roll 2011 is $7,544,294,006. This is lower than 2010 assessed valuation mainly due to changes related to the Boeing Company’s property valuations. In 2010, the City employed 407.5 people (on a full-time equivalency basis) providing a full-range of municipal services. These services include: police protection, municipal court services, parks, arts & recreation services, land use management and development regulation, street maintenance and construction, water services, sanitary sewage collection, storm drainage management, solid waste collection, a general aviation airport, a municipal cemetery, and a golf course. The City’s water and sewage utilities also serve large areas of the adjacent unincorporated area. Other local governmental services are provided by other governmental entities serving the Auburn area, and these services are not included in Auburn’s budget. The Auburn School District provides public educational services to the City. Green River Community College is located inside the City limits. King County provides solid waste disposal, public transportation, regional sewage treatment, property assessment and tax collection, some judicial services, public health services, and other county services to the City and its residents. The King County Housing Authority, for the most part, provides housing services. Sound Transit provides commuter rail service in the Puget Sound region, with a train/bus station located in the City of Auburn. Retailing has also become a significant factor in Auburn’s economy. Auburn has been a center for automotive sales for many years. Currently in 2010, automotive sales represent 20.4% of total sales tax collections. In previous years the City has experienced tremendous growth in the sale of wholesale durable goods, which currently represents 9.1% of total sales tax collection. Growth surrounding the SuperMall of the Great Northwest continues. Two of the major sources of sales tax in 2010 are from retail sales at 28.6% and services at 27.8% of total sales tax collections. New home construction continues. Major developments are in the planning stages and include Kersey 3 near Lakeland with 400 homes; Robertson Properties on the current drive-in theater site, which will include a mix of retail, office and housing. Other Funds The most significant issue for the proprietary funds (which account for the activities of the City utilities, cemetery, golf course, and airport) over the past several years has been ensuring that these entities are selfsufficient and needed capital projects are accomplished. The Water, Sewer and Storm funds are issuing revenue bonds in late 2010. This will increase their working capital temporarily until the construction projects associated with the bonding are completed. The Les Gove Neighborhood Improvements project was completed for all utilities in 2010. The Water Fund working capital has been reduced as capital construction projects are completed. Wholesaling water to neighboring communities is an important part of the water utility. The City fully supplies water to a neighboring city in addition to supplementing the supply of water for three other jurisdictions. Water utility rate increases will take effect each January 1, through 2014 to fund the capital program. The Sanitary Sewer Fund working capital has been reduced as capital construction projects are completed. Sewer rates are evaluated to be sure future capital and operational costs are covered. Sewer utility rate increases will take effect each January 1, through 2014 to fund the capital program. The Storm Drainage Fund completed the Peasley Canyon Culver Replacement project and has many projects proposed in the the 11-12 budget. Working Capital has been reduced as capital construction projects Page 17 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary are completed. The storm drainage utility will continue to implement requirements of the NPDES phase II permit. Storm utility rate increases will take effect each January 1, through 2014 to fund the capital program. The Golf Course Fund has reduced working capital while providing facility improvements and upgrades over the past several years. In 2007, construction of a new Clubhouse which includes a restaurant was completed. Greens fees were increased regularly over the last few years to cover the cost of operations. Page 18 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Overview of Summary Section The tables and graphs on the following pages reflect summarized budget information for 2011 and 2012. Please keep in mind that the information presented here is intended for summary purposes only. For more detailed budget information, refer to Sections IV through VII of this budget document as well as the Capital Facilities Plan. Tables and Graphs in Order of Presentation • 2011 Budget Summary, All Funds (Table) • 2011 Budgeted Revenues & Expenditures by Fund, % of Total (Graph) • 2012 Budget Summary, All Funds (Table) • 2012 Budgeted Revenues & Expenditures by Fund, % of Total (Graph) • Comparative Budget Summary, 2009-2012 – All Funds (Table) • 2011 & 2012 Budgeted Revenue – All Funds (Graph) • 2011 & 2012 Budgeted Expenditures – All Funds (Graph) • Comparative Budget Summary, 2009-2012 – General Fund (Table) • 2011 & 2012 Budgeted Revenue – General Fund (Graph) • 2011 & 2012 Budgeted Expenditures – General Fund (Graph) • Staffing Trends, 2000-2010 (Graph) • Position Allocation by Funding Source, 2006-2010 (Table) • Position Allocation by Department, 2006-2010 (Table) Page 19 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Beginning 2011 2011 Ending Fund Balance Resources Expenditures Fund Balance $ 11,763,355 $ 4 9,863,903 $ 55,139,320 $ 6 ,487,938 Arterial Street 383,118 13,210,200 1 3,328,300 265,018 Local Street 9 40,806 2,155,000 2,000,000 1,095,806 Hotel/Motel Tax 1 18,126 106,600 209,000 15,726 Arterial Street Preservation 33,589 1 ,501,500 1 ,500,000 3 5,089 Drug Forfeiture 710,547 2 98,700 496,010 5 13,237 Justice Assistance 16,468 -16,468 -Housing & Community Development 99,286 5 10,000 542,410 66,876 Recreational Trails 8,177 7,200 -15,377 Business Improvement Area 44,396 53,100 54,000 43,496 Cumulative Reserve 5,623,464 23,000 44,900 5 ,601,564 Mitigation Fees 3,444,973 900,000 2,679,200 1,665,773 1998 Library Bond 338,120 2 87,200 2 86,200 339,120 LID Guarantee 63,200 300 11,000 52,500 City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond -1,695,600 1,695,600 -Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond 62,500 5 94,500 5 94,300 62,700 LID #250 347 56,500 56,400 447 LID #350 -7,300 7,300 -Municipal Park Construction 374,368 19,089,200 19,261,700 201,868 Capital Improvements 3,792,206 1 ,571,000 2,972,500 2,390,706 Local Revitalization 5,335,300 2,553,000 7,888,300 -Water 19,168,199 10,918,400 27,509,320 2,577,279 Sewer 10,818,244 1 7,956,300 25,602,100 3,172,444 Storm Drainage 7,695,982 7,213,700 1 3,066,950 1,842,732 Solid Waste 800,406 9,513,800 9,883,470 430,736 Airport 708,342 639,380 769,190 578,532 Cemetery 3 00,328 9 24,800 1,078,930 146,198 Golf Course 228,668 1,806,200 1 ,939,380 95,488 Commercial Retail ----Insurance 2,403,069 3,700 58,700 2,348,069 Facilities 307,539 3,999,300 3 ,960,400 346,439 Information Services 3,546,577 4 ,271,670 5,720,450 2,097,797 Equipment Rental 4,857,654 2,827,100 4,825,800 2,858,954 Fire Pension 2,789,842 90,000 146,910 2,732,932 Agency Disbursement ----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment 1,528,962 54,500 31,300 1,552,162 88,306,158 $ 154,702,653 $ 203,375,808 $ 39,633,003 $ DEBT SERVICE CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL BUDGET 2011 BUDGET SUMMARY -ALL FUNDS INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FIDUCIARY FUNDS SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS GENERAL FUND Fund ENTERPRISE FUNDS Page 20 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Budgeted Revenues by Fund -2011 Enterprise Funds 31.7% Capital Projects 15.0% General Fund 32.2% Special Revenue Funds Debt Service 12.1% 1.7% Other Misc. Funds 0.1% Internal Service Funds 7.2% Budgeted Expenditures by Fund -2011 Internal Service Funds 7.2% Other Misc. Funds 0.1% Debt Service 1.3% Special Revenue Funds 10.2% General Fund 27.1% Capital Projects 14.8% Enterprise Funds 39.3% Page 21 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Beginning 2012 2012 Ending Fund Balance Resources Expenditures Fund Balance $ 10,487,938 $ 49,252,800 $ 54,612,340 $ 5,128,398 Arterial Street 265,018 1 4,715,500 14,806,900 1 73,618 Local Street 1,095,806 2 ,155,000 2,000,000 1,250,806 Hotel/Motel Tax 15,726 79,400 85,000 10,126 Arterial Street Preservation 35,089 1,501,500 1 ,500,000 36,589 Drug Forfeiture 513,237 298,700 298,230 513,707 Justice Assistance ----Housing & Community Development 66,876 450,000 439,220 77,656 Recreational Trails 15,377 7,200 -22,577 Business Improvement Area 43,496 5 4,100 54,000 43,596 Cumulative Reserve 5,601,564 24,000 -5,625,564 Mitigation Fees 1,665,773 902,000 1,120,700 1,447,073 1998 Library Bond 339,120 288,100 286,900 340,320 LID Guarantee 52,500 500 11,000 42,000 City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond -1,696,100 1,696,100 -Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond 62,700 595,600 595,400 62,900 LID #250 447 55,600 55,500 547 LID #350 -7,200 7,200 -Municipal Park Construction 201,868 201,868 1,874,100 1,979,100 96,868 Capital Improvements 2,390,706 1,737,700 1,159,100 2,969,306 Local Revitalization ----Water 2,577,279 1 1,624,400 12,867,420 1,334,259 Sewer 3,172,444 1 8,361,600 20,472,820 1 ,061,224 Storm Drainage 1,842,732 7,923,300 8,323,710 1,442,322 Solid Waste 430,736 9,513,800 9,910,560 33,976 Airport 578,532 652,380 738,610 492,302 Cemetery 1 46,198 942,600 1,075,880 1 2,918 Golf Course 95,488 1,877,700 1,943,550 29,638 Commercial Retail ----Insurance 2,348,069 3,800 58,700 2,293,169 Facilities 346,439 3,658,200 3,548,540 456,099 Information Services 2,097,797 4,351,070 5,006,990 1 ,441,877 Equipment Rental 2,858,954 3,073,250 3,098,660 2,833,544 Fire Pension 2,732,932 90,000 147,450 2,675,482 Agency Disbursement ----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment 1 ,552,162 54,700 22,300 1,584,562 $ 43,633,003 $ 1 37,821,900 $ 1 47,921,880 $ 33,533,023 DEBT SERVICE CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL BUDGET 2012 BUDGET SUMMARY -ALL FUNDS INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FIDUCIARY FUNDS SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS GENERAL FUND Fund ENTERPRISE FUNDS Page 22 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Budgeted Revenues by Fund -2012 Enterprise Funds 36.9% Capital Projects 2.6% General Fund 35.8% Special Revenue Funds 14.7% Debt Service 1.9% Other Misc. Funds 0.1% Internal Service Funds 8.0% Budgeted Expenditures by Fund -2012 Internal Service Funds 7.9% Other Misc. Funds 0.1% Debt Service 1.8% Special Revenue Funds 13.8% General Fund 36.9% Capital Projects 2.1% Enterprise Funds 37.4% Page 23 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Budget Summary 2010 2009 2010 Estimated 2011 2012 Actual Adj. Budget Actual Budget Budget REVENUES Taxes $ 44,555,705 $ 43,853,409 $ 4 4,056,109 $ 44,526,950 $ 45,258,715 Licenses & Permits 1 ,326,875 1,128,800 1,081,000 1,129,000 1,129,000 Intergovernmental 1 1,401,444 1 8,992,520 12,013,403 1 8,644,905 14,123,505 Charges for Services 5 2,247,127 5 3,071,850 52,737,463 57,984,730 5 9,199,380 Fines & Forfeitures 2 ,215,960 2,327,400 2,537,375 2,458,500 2,458,500 Other Revenue 5,549,973 7,579,675 8 ,100,959 1 9,223,400 4,404,200 Total Revenues 117,297,083 126,953,654 1 20,526,309 1 43,967,485 1 26,573,300 EXPENDITURES Salaries & Wages 3 1,996,562 3 2,314,590 3 1,957,090 3 1,652,660 3 2,010,260 Personnel Benefits 11,931,134 1 2,453,590 1 2,438,990 1 3,229,890 1 4,699,770 Supplies 2,940,590 4,439,200 4,430,343 3,927,400 3,906,090 Other Services & Charges 2 6,692,145 31,695,105 31,417,555 30,628,550 30,840,560 Intergov't Services & Charges 1 5,834,368 16,170,799 15,116,799 20,349,760 1 8,454,540 Interfund Payments for Services 9 ,817,773 9,680,110 9,680,110 1 0,894,250 1 0,704,650 Debt Service 2,365,827 33,739,786 32,788,969 5,897,060 5,827,590 Capital Outlay 52,432,492 63,626,603 38,365,045 79,161,070 27,279,820 Total Expenditures 154,010,891 204,119,783 176,194,901 1 95,740,640 1 43,723,280 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Debt Proceeds & Capital Leases 24,585,064 5 5,364,715 5 5,364,715 2 ,000,000 6 ,000,000 Intergovt'l Loan Proceeds 921,400 4 5,000 4 5,000 --Proceeds from Sale of Fixed Assets 157,093 895,336 895,336 --Transfers In 7 ,439,901 13,998,371 13,585,391 7 ,635,168 4 ,198,600 Transfers Out (7,439,901) (13,998,371) (13,585,391) (7,635,168) (4,198,600) Net Change in Restricted Assets ( 747,550) ----Contributed Capital 1,992,261 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,100,000 1,050,000 Total Financing Sources (Uses) 26,908,268 5 7,305,051 5 7,305,051 3,100,000 7,050,000 Net Change in Fund Balance ( 9,805,540) (19,861,078) 1 ,636,459 ( 48,673,155) (10,099,980) Fund Balances Balances -Beginning 94,577,678 84,668,259 84,669,699 8 8,306,158 43,633,003 Fund Balances -Ending $ 84,772,139 $ 64,807,181 $ 8 6,306,158 $ 39,633,003 $ 33,533,023 ALL FUNDS Page 24 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary 2011 /2012 Budgeted Revenue – All Funds $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 Taxes Licenses & Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Fines & Forfeitures Other Transfers In Thousands 2011 2012 2011 /2012 Budgeted Expenditures – All Funds $0 $8,000 $16,000 $24,000 $32,000 $40,000 $48,000 $56,000 $64,000 $72,000 $80,000 Salaries & Benefits Supplies Other Services Intergov't Services Interfund Payments Debt Service Capital Outlay Transfers Out Thousands 2011 2012 Page 25 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Budget Summary 2010 2009 2010 Estimated 2011 2012 Actual Adj. Budget Actual Budget Budget REVENUES Taxes: Property $ 1 0,601,791 $ 1 2,357,309 $ 1 2,357,309 $ 1 2,022,340 $ 12,162,565 Sales & Use 16,769,195 17,111,800 1 7,082,400 1 7,089,200 1 7,151,630 Utility 3,042,567 2 ,140,200 2 ,208,100 2,522,800 2,620,200 Business 7 ,938,021 7 ,206,100 7,384,000 7,358,110 7,503,820 Excise 680,373 546,500 5 06,500 371,500 381,500 Licenses & Permits 1 ,326,875 1,128,800 1,081,000 1,129,000 1,129,000 Intergovernmental 5,629,055 4 ,536,100 3,999,953 3 ,841,685 3,756,285 Charges for Services 1 ,709,191 1 ,866,000 1 ,505,116 1,804,100 1 ,831,100 Fines & Forfeitures 1 ,911,034 2 ,107,400 2,237,375 2,208,500 2,208,500 Other Revenue 664,555 785,800 861,076 4 58,200 466,200 Total Revenues 50,272,657 49,786,009 49,222,829 48,805,435 4 9,210,800 EXPENDITURES Salaries & Wages 21,597,711 21,790,190 21,458,190 21,015,650 21,300,910 Personnel Benefits 7,892,393 8,749,750 8,739,750 8,975,230 1 0,023,260 Supplies 1 ,000,828 1 ,304,800 1 ,257,543 1 ,072,730 1 ,092,450 Other Services & Charges 7 ,518,263 9,389,495 9,299,545 9,322,690 9,489,270 Intergov't Services & Charges 4,425,063 3 ,916,700 2,882,700 6,492,670 4,597,450 Interfund Payments for Services 6 ,103,740 6,034,900 6,034,900 6 ,472,150 6,355,400 Debt Service 372,498 2 ,164,600 2 ,164,600 3 92,200 304,100 Capital Outlay 1 26,769 1,158,336 1,158,336 170,700 15,000 Total Expenditures 49,037,265 5 4,508,771 52,995,564 5 3,914,020 5 3,177,840 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Debt Proceeds & Capital Leases 3 5,878 1,069,000 1,079,000 --Insurance Recoveries 114,607 5 5,000 4 2,703 2 5,000 2 5,000 Transfers In 1 ,773,957 1 ,501,913 1 ,501,913 1 ,033,468 17,000 Transfers Out ( 3,093,827) (2,325,377) (2,325,377) (1,225,300) (1,434,500) Proceeds from Sale of Fixed Assets 100,754 ----Contributed Capital -----Total Financing Sources (Uses) (1,068,631) 300,536 298,239 (166,832) (1,392,500) Net Change in Fund Balance 166,761 (4,422,226) (3,474,496) (5,275,417) (5,359,540) Fund Balances -Beginning 1 3,071,091 1 3,237,852 13,237,851 11,763,355 1 0,487,938 Fund Balances -Ending $ 13,237,852 $ 8 ,815,626 $ 9,763,355 $ 6,487,938 $ 5 ,128,398 GENERAL FUND *$4 million was added to the 2012 beginning fund balance to estimate one time revenue and unspent 2011 budget. Page 26 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary 2011 /2012 Budgeted Revenue – General Fund $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 Taxes Licenses & Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Fines & Forfeitures Other Revenue Transfers In Thousands 2011 2012 2011 /2012 Budgeted Expenditures – General Fund $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 Salaries & Benefits Supplies Other Services Intergov't Services Interfund Payments Debt Service Capital Outlay Transfers Out Thousands 2011 2012 Page 27 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Staffing Trends The opposite page presents the current and past staffing as allocated by funding to the various City departments. The second table presents departmental staffing on the basis of the City’s administrative structure. As can be seen, the City’s staffing had steadily increased from 2002 to 2008. This increase was due to continued development and increased population. In 2007, two events took place that affected the staffing levels in Auburn. First was the creation of the Valley Regional Fire Authority. When the Authority was created the Fire and EMS personnel became Valley Regional Fire Authority personnel. This resulted in a decrease of 82 personnel. The second event that took place at the end of 2007 was the annexations of Lea Hill and West Hill into the City of Auburn. As a direct result of the annexations, the City added a total of 56 positions in the 2008 budget. As the population of Auburn increases, so does the demand for additional staffing in areas directly affected. The two areas that are most affected are public safety and some administrative service functions. In public safety, increased staffing is needed not only to keep up with increased call demand, but also to maintain the City’s existing level of service in police. With the increase in population due to the annexations and the increase of police officers, comes the increased caseload for the court, having an impact on both the court and legal department. Of the 56 positions, 22 positions were for police officers and support staff, 4 staff positions were Court and 2 staff positions were Legal. In 2009, staffing was decreased as a direct result of the recession by eliminating vacant positions and two reductions in force one in May and one in December. The decrease in staffing levels in 2011 is due to the creation of the multi-jurisdictional South Correctional Entity (SCORE) in 2010. Effective January 1, 2011, all city correctional staff will become SCORE personnel. As seen in the following graph, the number of employees per 1,000 citizens has been reduced in recent years. This is due in part to revenue restrictions, and to improved operations. Population vs Staff Levels 2002-2012 0 100 200 300 400 500 FTE Positions 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0 Positions Per 1,000 Population FTE 438 447 448 457 463 422 488 430 408 395 395 Staff/Pop 9.8 9.9 9.7 9.6 9.5 8.4 7.3 6.4 6.0 5.7 5.7 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Page 28 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary 10-11 11-12 Department 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Changes Changes Mayor 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 Human Resources 16.44 4.90 4.90 5.01 5.01 0.11 0.00 Municipal Court 21.20 18.20 17.20 17.13 17.13 -0.07 0.00 Finance 9.32 7.85 7.85 7.85 7.85 0.00 0.00 Legal 13.98 12.38 11.69 11.70 11.70 0.01 0.00 Planning 37.80 24.93 25.82 26.12 26.12 0.30 0.00 Police 150.10 132.20 128.20 115.20 115.20 -13.00 0.00 Fire 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Emergency Medical Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PW Engineering 27.36 20.91 15.61 18.10 18.10 2.49 0.00 Parks & Rec. 38.51 36.01 33.01 33.01 33.01 0.00 0.00 PW Street 17.57 15.52 14.52 14.48 14.48 -0.04 0.00 Non Dept 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-Total General Fund 335.78 275.90 261.80 251.60 251.60 -10.20 0.00 Water 36.05 35.65 34.64 34.94 34.94 0.30 0.00 Sewer 24.64 23.91 22.87 23.25 23.25 0.38 0.00 Storm Drainage 31.66 28.25 27.23 27.49 27.49 0.26 0.00 Solid Waste 6.98 6.70 6.72 6.71 6.71 -0.01 0.01 0.00 Airport 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.00 Cemetery 7.60 7.54 7.54 7.51 7.51 -0.03 0.00 Golf Course 8.97 8.42 8.45 8.42 8.42 -0.03 0.00 Facilities 0.00 9.68 9.68 9.78 9.78 0.10 0.00 Communications 4.50 3.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 0.00 0.00 Information Services 18.00 15.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 0.00 0.00 Equip. Rental 8.46 6.97 5.16 5.55 5.55 0.39 0.00 Other Funds 5.20 7.57 6.75 2.59 2.59 -4.16 0.00 Sub-Total Other Funds 152.22 153.35 145.70 142.90 142.90 -2.80 0.00 TOTAL FTE's 488.00 429.25 407.50 394.50 394.50 -13.00 0.00 POSITION ALLOCATION BY FUNDING Page 29 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary POSITION ALLOCATION BY DEPARTMENT 10-11 11-12 Department 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Changes Changes Mayor 12.00 11.25 9.50 9.50 9.50 0.00 0.00 Human Resources 18.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 0.00 0.00 Municipal Court 21.00 18.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 0.00 0.00 Finance 25.00 22.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 0.00 0.00 Legal 16.00 14.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 0.00 0.00 Planning 34.00 21.00 24.00 24.00 24.00 0.00 0.00 Police 151.50 134.50 130.50 117.50 117.50 -13.00 0.00 PW Engineering 63.00 52.00 43.00 43.00 43.00 0.00 0.00 Parks & Rec. 40.00 38.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 0.00 0.00 PW Street 14.00 13.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 Dept 98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-Total General Fund 395.00 330.25 311.50 298.50 298.50 -13.00 0.00 Water 20.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 0.00 0.00 Sewer 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 0.00 0.00 Storm Drainage 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 0.00 0.00 Solid Waste 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 Airport 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cemetery 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 0.00 0.00 Golf Course 9.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 Facilities 0.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 0.00 0.00 Info Services 18.00 15.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 0.00 0.00 Equip. Rental 10.00 8.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-Total Other Funds 93.00 99.00 96.00 96.00 96.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL FTE's 488.00 429.25 407.50 394.50 394.50 -13.00 0.00 Changes in 2009 through 2011 Budget: (FTE – Full-time Equivalent) Positions listed below reflect changes made after the adoption of the 2009 budget. Does not include seven elected Council positions and one elected Judge. Mayor/Communications & Community Services: .75 FTE was moved from Planning to create a Cultural Diversity Liaison in April 2009. 0.5 FTE -Council Assistant and 1.0 FTE -Communications Specialist Coordinator were part of reduction in force in May 2009. 1.0 FTE -Multimedia Manager and 1.0 FTE Economic Development Manager were part of reduction in force in December 2009. .25 FTE was moved from Finance to make the Cultural Diversity Liaison a full time time position in early 2010. Human Resources: 1.0 FTE -Recruitment and Employment Manager was frozen in 2009. 1.0 FTE -Human Resources Assistant was part of reduction in force in May 2009. Municipal Court: 1.0 FTE -Court Clerk I was frozen with Original 2009/2010 Budget. 2.0 FTE -Court Clerk II were frozen in 2009. 1.0 FTE -Court Commissioner was frozen in 2010. Finance: 1.0 FTE -Financial Analyst was part of reduction in force in May 2009. .75 FTE -Accounting Assistant was part of reduction in force in December 2009. .25 FTE was moved to Community Services to make the Cultural Diversity Liaison position full time. 2.0 FTE -Meter Readers were moved to Water Department in 2009. Legal: 2.0 FTE's were part of reduction in force in May 2009: 1.0 FTE City Prosecutor and 1.0 FTE Office Assistant. 1.0 FTE -Associate City Attorney was part of reduction in force in December 2009. Page 30 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Changes from the 2011 to 2012 Budget: (FTE – Full-time Equivalent) Water: 2.0 FTE -Meter Readers were moved from Finance Department in 2009. Police: 12 FTE's -1 Commander, 2 Sergeants, 1 Detective, 5 Police Officers, 1 Corrections Officer and 2 Police Specialists were frozen in the 2009/2010 Budget. 4 FTE's -2 Police Officer, 1 Police Secretary and 1 Corrections Officer were frozen in early 2009. 1.0 FTE Crime Analyst was part of the reduction in force in May 2009. 4 FTE's -2 Police Officers, 1 Professional Standards Coordinator and 1 Police Receptionist were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. 13.0 FTE's -2 Corrections Supervisors, 11 Corrections Officers are being eliminated in the 2011 budget as a result of the elimination of the City jail and formation of the multi-jurisdictional South Correctional Entity (SCORE). PW Engineering: 3 FTE's -1 Office Manager, 1 Engineering CAD Manager and 1 Construction Clerk were frozen in the 2009/2010 budget. 2.0 FTE's -1 Transportation Manager, 1 Traffic Signal Technician were frozen in early 2009. 6.0 FTE's were part of the reduction in force in May 2009: 1 Construction Inspector, 1 Development Review Engineer, 1 Contract Administrator, 1 Engineering Design Technician, 1 Project Engineer and 1 Capital Projects Support Clerk. 3.0 FTE's were part of the reduction in force in December 2009: 1 Senior Project Engineer, 1 Senior Construction Coordinator, and 1 Administrative Support Supervisor. 6.0 FTE's were moved from Engineering to Planning in May 2010. Planning: 3 FTE's -Principal Planner, Senior Planner and Building Inspector were frozen in the 2009/2010 Budget. In early 2009, 3.25 FTE's were frozen: 2 Plans Examiners, 1 Planning Technician, .25 Building Inspector. .75 FTE was moved to Mayor to create a Cultural Diversity Liaison. 6 FTE's -2 Senior Planners, 1 Assistant Planning Secretary, 1 Graphic Specialist/Planning Technician, 1 Permit Technician, 1 Code Compliance Officer were part of the reduction in force in May 2009. 3 FTE's -1 Planner, 1 Senior Planner, 1 Development Services Specialist were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. In May 2010, 6 FTE's -3 Development Review Engineers, 1 Support Clerk, 1 Development Administrative Specialist, 1 Engineering Permit Technician were moved from Engineering to Planning. Parks: 1.0 FTE -Field Supervisor was frozen in the 2009/2010 Budget. 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was part of the reduction in force in May 2009. 3 FTE's -1 Registration Clerk, 1 Cultural Arts Manager, 1 Parks Planning & Development Manager were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. Golf Course: 1 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was frozen in the 2009/2010 Budget. None. Storm: 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I added in the 2009/2010 Budget was frozen in early 2009. 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I position added in the 2009/2010 for 2010 was eliminated in December 2009. Information Services: 1.0 FTE -Desktop Support was frozen in 2009. 2.0 FTE's were part of the reduction in force in May 2009: 1 Systems Analyst and 1 Technical Services Manager. 1.0 FTE -Webmaster was part of the reduction in force in December 2009. Equipment Rental: 1.0 FTE -Equipment Rental Shop Supervisor added in the 2009/2010 Budget for 2009 was eliminated in early 2009. 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I and 1.0 FTE -Custodial Helper were part of the reduction in force in May 2009. 1.0 FTE -Fleet & Warehouse Manager and 1.0 FTE -Office Assistant were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. Street: 1 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was frozen in the 2009/2010 Budget. 1 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was part of reduction in force in December 2009. Page 31 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section 1: Budget Summary Page 32 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies Section II – Process Policies Page 33 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies Page 34 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies SECTION II: PROCESS/POLICIES Organization The City has a “strong mayor” form of government as organized under the Optional Municipal Code as provided in state law. The independently elected Mayor is responsible for all administrative functions of the City and all of the department directors report to the Mayor. The City Council exercises legislative and quasi-judicial functions. All seven members of the City Council and the Mayor are elected at large for four-year terms. Since 1998, the City has had an elected Judge. This position is also elected at large and serves a four-year term. The Mayor develops and proposes the budget while the Council reviews and requests modifications, as it deems appropriate. The optional municipal code confers a limited form of “home rule” to those municipalities organized under its provisions. Basis of Budgeting The City prepares its biennial budget in accordance with Optional Municipal Code 35A.33 of the Revised Code of Washington. Biennial budgeting has been permitted for Washington cities since 1985 and allows cities to adopt a twoyear appropriation. An appropriation represents the city’s legal authority to expend funds. Traditionally, the appropriations have been for one-year terms. State law has extended this legal authority so that a city’s legislative body may approve an appropriation, or budget, for a two-year term. Currently, an annual budget means that every other budget is developed in the context of elections for many of the policy makers. By design, the city biennial budget is considered in non-election years, as the biennium must begin in odd-numbered years. The most common reason for using a twenty-four month appropriation is the time savings in both the budget development and approval process. This is true of staff time invested in preparing the budget as well as the time Council spends during the approval and adoption phases. While it does take more time to prepare a twenty-four month budget than one for the traditional twelve months, the additional time spent is not as significant as preparing two annual budgets. As a result, over the two-year period, there is a substantial time savings. This time savings allows staff and Council to focus on long-range strategic planning. The concept of a two-year appropriation is straightforward. Rather than a twelve-month window during which the appropriated funds can be legally spent, a biennium provides for a twenty-four month window. The two-year budget provides an opportunity to widen the planning horizon and allow more long-term thinking to be part of the financial plan that the budget represents. However, there may also be concerns about spending portions of the budget earlier in the biennium than had been planned. For this reason, many cities have adopted variations of a biennial budget. One approach is to adopt two, one-year budgets. This is the method that the City of Auburn has chosen. The requirements for preparing an annual budget and a biennial budget are similar. similar. One distinction is that a “midbiennium review” is required with a biennial budget. The purpose of this review is to make adjustments to the budget or essentially, a tune up. This review is not intended to become another complete budget process in itself. The midbiennium review begins September 1st and is to be completed by the end of the first year of the budget. All governmental fund type budgets are prepared on the modified accrual basis of accounting in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The budget for proprietary funds is prepared on an accrual basis, also in accordance with GAAP. The legal level of budgetary control where expenditures cannot exceed appropriations is at the individual fund level. Revisions that alter the total expenditures of any fund must be approved by the City Council and adopted by ordinance. All appropriations lapse at the end of each year. Page 35 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies Policy/Strategy Phase Needs Assessment Phase Review/Development Phase Adoption/Implementation Phase Steps in the Budget Process Mayor & Council update the vision for the City. Goals, policies and/or mission statements are set to accomplish the vision Mayor & Finance Director meet to discuss budget priorities Mayor reviews budget requests Property Tax Levy Established Preliminary Budget prepared & filed with City Clerk City Clerk publishes notice of Preliminary Budget & public hearing Copies of Preliminary Budget are made available to the public Revisions/Adjustments made to Preliminary Budget, resulting in the Final Budget City Clerk publishes notice of public hearing on Final Budget Estimates submitted to Finance for review & compilation Department directors prepare estimates of expenditures for next two years Final public budget hearing prior to Council adoption Council adopts final balanced budget Budget document finalized Final Budget Document becomes available to the public Page 36 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies 2011-2012 Budget Calendar Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 Mayor and Council budget retreat to update the vision for the City. Mayor and Finance director meet to discuss budget priorities. Budget instructions and forms are distributed to departments. Department Directors complete budget and return to Finance. Departments review budgets, goals, and accomplishments with the Finance Director. Departments review budgets, goals, and accomplishments with the Mayor. Finance department prepares preliminary revenue forecasts. Department budgets are adjusted based on the Mayor's recommendations. Department budgets are reviewed by Planning/Community Development & Municipal Services Committees. Notice of public budget hearing #1 is published. Revenue forecast is finalized. Preliminary CFP and SEPA check list to Planning (Planning Commission, SEPA, State Overview) Department budgets are reviewed by Finance & Public Works Committees. Hold public budget hearing #1 with revenue presentation. Preliminary budget is filed with the City Clerk, distributed to City Council and made available to the public. Public notice of preliminary budget filing and of public hearing #2 is published. Council/Mayor Work Session on budget recommendations. Public budget hearing #2. Property tax levy is set by ordinance. Budget and CFP are adopted by ordinance. 10/22 & 29 7/21-7/30 8/16 8/23 on 9/20 on 10/22 on 11/04 on 11/15 on 11/15 on 12/06 8/26 7/26 on 6/28 9/7 9/7 7/12-7/16 9/7 on 5/15 on 5/28 on Fall '10 Page 37 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies 2011-2012 Budget Calendar Budget Process Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 Mayor and Council budget retreat to update the vision for the City. Adopted budget published and distributed. Instruction packet for Mid-biennial review and modification distributed to Departments. Departments review budgets and prepare Budget modifications. Department Directors return budget modification requests to Finance. Departments review budget modifications with the Mayor. Preliminary CFP and SEPA check list to Planning (Planning Commission, SEPA, State Overview) Budget modifications adjusted based on Mayor's recommendations. Notice of public budget hearing #1 on proposed budget modification is published. Public budget hearing #1. Department budget modification requests are reviewed by Planning/Community Development & Municipal Services Committees. Department budget modification requests are reviewed by Finance & Public Works Committees. Proposed budget modification is filed with the City Clerk, distributed to City Council and made available to the public. Notice of public budget hearing #2 is published. Council/Mayor Work Session on budget recommendations. Public budget hearing #2 is held and Property tax levy is set by ordinance. CFP Amendment and Mid-biennial budget modification are adopted by ordinance. 2012 Mayor and Council budget retreat to update the vision for the City. Mid year Budget Amendment is adopted by ordinance. Year-end Budget Amendment is adopted by ordinance. 7/05-8/05 on 11/21 7/05 9/05 8/08 on 10/10 9/1-9/09 9/19 on 10/17 on 12/05 on 11/07 on 10/17 on 11/17 7/16 on 12/03 on 333/15 3/07 on 10/03 on 9/19 3/17 Page 38 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies Budget Purpose The City of Auburn’s budget seeks to achieve four basic purposes: A Policy Tool The City’s budget process is conducted in a manner that allows the City’s policy officials to comprehensively review the direction of the City and to redirect its activities by means of the allocation of financial resources. On this basis, the budget sets policies for the following year. This budget also facilitates the evaluation of City programs by providing a means to examine both the financial activities and the progress towards performance objectives of City departments over time. An Operations Guide This budget provides financial control by setting forth both legislative and administrative guidance to City employees regarding the character and scope of their activities. This direction is set forth in both summary and detail form in the various products of the budget process. A Financial Plan This budget outlines the manner in which the financial resources of the City will be managed during the budget process. This allocation of resources is based on both the current needs and on a longer-term view of the development of City programs. The budget takes into account unforeseen contingencies and provides for periodic adjustments. As a Communications Medium A budget cannot be effective unless it communicates. Since this budget has a diverse audience, it seeks to communicate at several levels and for several purposes. This budget seeks to communicate clear policy at a usable level of detail to City employees. It also seeks to communicate significant policy issues and options in a form that can be acted on by policy officials. It also seeks to provide information to the City’s constituents that enables meaningful dialog with elected officials. Budget Process The City of Auburn’s budget process meets these purposes by integrating the planning and implementation of City programs with the allocation of financial resources necessary to support those services. The budget process starts in early spring, of each even numbered year, with a retreat for the City Council and Mayor who meet to review the Vision and Mission Statement as well as the previous year’s goals and objectives. At that retreat, Council and Mayor discuss such issues as staffing, emerging topics and program priorities. Then during the summer, departments develop their budgets and objectives that are described in the operating budget for biennium. These objectives include capital projects scheduled for construction in the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). Generally, most departments use a “bottom-up” approach to budgeting, with divisions or other administrative units developing their objectives along with identifying their fiscal requirements. These divisional budgets are then modified for integration into department objectives and budget proposal. During the summer, these tentative budget proposals are submitted to the Mayor. At the same time the Finance Department develops a tentative revenue projection for the following budget cycle. The Mayor and Finance Director along with each department director review the budget in detail. On the basis of this process, the Mayor formulates his recommended budget for the following year. In September, the City Council holds a public hearing to solicit comments from the general public regarding issues for the City to consider during its review of the budget. This hearing is held early in the process in order to afford the public an opportunity to comment before the budget takes a formal shape. At the same time the Mayor is reviewing the department proposals, the departments present their budget proposals in detail to appropriate committees of the Council. Page 39 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies The Mayor’s recommendations for the next budget cycle are formally transmitted to the Council in the form of the Preliminary Budget during the month of October. During November, the Council holds a second public hearing on the preliminary budget and conducts workshops to examine the budget in detail. The Council conducts a preliminary budget hearing before acting formally on the budget as modified during its workshop hearings. Final adoption of the budget, by ordinance, usually occurs in early December. The entire process is coordinated, as needed, in regular meetings of the City department heads, chaired by the Mayor. Various Council committees are consulted continually through the year as potential issues surface and new program ideas incubate. Budget Structure The budget process results in various budget products at appropriate stages of the process. Budget and Accounting System The official budget is maintained, both before and after adoption, on the City’s financial management and accounting system at a very detailed line item level. Computerized reports may be generated at any time and at various levels of detail. Departments can also access these budgets at any time on a readonly inquiry basis to compare actual revenue and expenditures to their budgets. This computerized budget becomes the accounting system that controls expenditures after adoption of the final budget. Preliminary Budget The Preliminary Budget is prepared, pursuant to State law, as the Mayor’s budget recommendations to the City Council. This public document contains a summary of information at the fund level, and for the General Fund at the department level. It focuses on key policy issues, while still providing a comprehensive overview of the complete budget. Budget Ordinance The actual appropriations implementing the budget are contained in the budget ordinance adopted by the City Council. Final Budget The Final Budget is issued as a formal published document as modified by the City Council. It is this document which is formally filed as the Final Budget. Programs While the budget proposals of the administration are developed in concert with the fiscal proposals in the budget, the budget documents themselves only summarize the individual objectives and performance measures. Generally, these programs are not finalized until the budget is in final form since the budget will determine the actual activities undertaken by each department. Components of the Budget The budget consists of three parts: operating budget, program improvements, and capital budget. Operating Budget The operating budget consists of departmental budget proposals, which would be sufficient to maintain the objectives set by the departments to meet Council goals. Program Improvements Program improvements consist of new initiatives or substantial changes to existing programs. Page 40 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies Capital Budget The capital budget authorizes and provides the basis of control of expenditures for the acquisition of significant city assets and construction of capital facilities. Separation of the budget into these three components separates key policy issues in order to facilitate their consideration. The policy officials can examine the level at which existing programs should be funded, what program improvements should be made and at what level of funding. Capital Planning The Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) was originally adopted as an element of the City Comprehensive Plan that provides the City’s plans to finance capital facilities that will be needed during the next 20 years. The CFP includes both longrange strategy and a specific six-year plan of projects. The CFP is maintained and reports are published separately from the budget. The Capital Budget, in this budget document, includes a summary of the projects and their appropriations for the upcoming biennium. For more detailed information see the six-year Capital Facilities Plan. Implementation, Monitoring and Amendment The budget and its policies are implemented through the objectives of individual departments and accounting controls of the Finance Department. Progress in the implementation of the budget is monitored by a monthly reporting system consisting of monthly reports to the Mayor from the department heads on the progress of departmental objectives and performance measures. The reports are then summarized into a monthly report by the Mayor to Council. In addition, each department prepares detailed quarterly and annual reports on their goals and performance measures. Implementation of the budget is further monitored by the oversight activities of various City Council committees, which meet twice monthly to not only consider proposals before the City Council, but also to review the activities of the various City departments. Both the report function of the Finance Department and the oversight function of the Finance Committee of the Council include the status of the fiscal management policies of the budget. The financial aspects of the budget are monitored in periodic reports issued by the Finance Department comparing actual expenditures and revenues with the budget. In these reports, financial data can be presented at a higher level of detail than the final budget. These reports include an analysis of the City’s financial condition. From time to time it becomes necessary to modify the adopted budget. The procedure for amending the budget depends upon the type of change that is needed. One type of change does not affect the “bottom line” total for a department or a fund. These changes, mainly transfers from one line-item to another within a department’s operating budget or changes between divisions within a department may be effected by the Mayor and the Finance Director with written request from the department director. The second type of budget amendment brings about a change in the total appropriation for a department or fund. Examples of these changes include but are not limited to the following: the acceptance of additional grant money, an adjustment to reflect increased revenues such as tax receipts, the appropriation of additional funding if expenditures are projected to exceed budgeted amounts, and re-appropriation of monies from one fund to another when deemed necessary. These changes require council approval in the form of an ordinance. The status of the budget is comprehensively analyzed during the mid-biennial review and periodically through each year to identify any needed adjustments. All requests for amendments are first filed with the Finance Department. Page 41 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies BUDGET POLICIES This section of the budget sets forth the objectives of the budget as a policy document together with a description of the basis of the policy. Policy Context of the Budget The City budget process is part of an overall policy framework that guides the services and functions of the City. The budget serves a key role in that policy framework by allocating financial resources to the programs, which implement the City’s overall policies. The budget also establishes financial policies to influence the availability of future resources to carry out the City’s policies. This budget is a balanced budget with legal budgetary control at the fund level; i.e., expenditures and other financing uses may not exceed budgeted appropriations at the fund level. The City’s basic policy document is its Comprehensive Plan. This plan sets the basic vision for the development of the City and establishes policies and programs intended to achieve that vision. The plan is further articulated by a series of planning elements, which include capital improvement elements (such as utility plans), policy elements (such as housing plans, economic development programs, etc.) and regulatory measures. According to state law the Comprehensive Plan is amended annually to incorporate changes in policies or programs. In addition to the Comprehensive Plan, the City has also developed an Emergency Operations Plan. CITY POLICY FRAMEWORK COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM COMPLETED ACTIONS (AS OF DECEMBE R 2009) Capital Facilities Plan Update (2010-2015) Comprehensive Plan Update Water Comprehen sive Plan Update Sewer Comprehen sive Plan Update Storm Comprehensive Plan Update SCHEDULED ACT IONS (2011-2012) Comprehensiv e Plan Update Capital Facilities Plan Update (2011 – 2016) Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update including non-Moto rized plan Parks, Arts & Recreation Plan Update FUNDING P ROGRAM Biennial Ci ty Budget Community Developm ent Consolidated Plan Capital Facilities Plan Page 42 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies Budget Policy Development The budget process is linked to this policy framework by the development of Council Goals. The citywide goals guide departmental objectives funded by the budget, which govern the activities of various departments in the implementation of the policy. The Capital Facilities Plan, which is derived from the Comprehensive Plan, is funded in the budget process. Budget policy development involves several distinct steps. This policy starts with an understanding of needs and issues, describes explicit policies governing the development and management of financial resources, identifies broad goals, sets objectives with which to apply available funding, and concludes with specific funding proposals. In assessing issues and needs, this policy builds on actions taken in previous budgets, thereby providing continuity with previous programs. This allows community needs to be addressed on a multi-year basis, rather than attempting to satisfy all needs in one year. Explicit budget policies are statements, which describe how financial resources of the City are obtained (various taxes, fees, rates, etc.) together with how they are allocated, managed, and controlled. The Council goals are broad policy statements that outline the significant objectives of the City. Budget objectives are policy statements summarizing the actions that are to be implemented in the budget. These budget policies result from an ongoing process of economic and financial analysis by the Finance Department. The periodic financial reports, which are routinely reviewed by the Mayor, Council and Finance Committee, monitor progress against this analysis. The development of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) is also an important part of the analysis process. The financial management policies result from combining the above analysis with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Financial Management Policies The following policies guide the manner in which the budget develops, allocates, manages and controls financial resources available to the City. These policies are goals that the City seeks to achieve in its decision-making. However, since fiscal conditions and circumstances continually shift and change in response to operating needs, it may not be practical or always desirable to continually achieve these policies. Therefore, these policies are intended to guide, not govern, financial decision making and may not be fully achieved within any given budget period. Operating Policies 1. The City should accept ongoing service obligations in new areas of programming only when adequate funding is available. 2. Indirect administrative costs associated with the operation of funds should be identified and charged against the operation of those funds. 3. The City’s role in social service funding shall continue to be supplemental (addressing special or unique local needs) to the basic responsibilities of regional agencies. 4. The City shall continue to advocate that the responsibility for funding basic social service needs rests with regional (or broader) agencies that have access to a broader basis of funding and can more appropriately address needs on a regional basis. Budgeting, Accounting, and Financial Reporting Policies 1. In accordance with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB), the financial structure of the City shall be divided into tax-supported governmental funds (including a General Fund to support the governmental services of the City) and self-supporting proprietary funds established for non-governmental purposes. Proprietary funds shall include a series of enterprise funds, which shall be managed as business enterprises, completely supported by revenues derived by that enterprise. 2. The accounts of the City and its operating budget shall be maintained in accordance with the State Budgeting, Accounting, and Reporting System (BARS) code and shall provide current financial data on request. Page 43 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies 3. The State Auditor will annually perform a financial and compliance audit of the City’s financial statements. Their opinions will be contained in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), and the State Auditor’s Report. 4. As an additional independent confirmation of the quality of the City’s financial reporting, the City will annually seek to obtain the Government Finance Officers Association Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting and the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. The Budget and CAFR will be presented in a way designed to communicate with citizens about the financial affairs of the City. 5. Enterprise funds shall be budgeted on a flexible basis, which allows activities to expand and contract in accordance with increased or decreased revenue earning activity. 6. The City should adjust utility and other enterprise fund rates in increments adequate to offset inflation and to maintain adequate working capital balance and equities. 7. Depreciation shall be accounted for, and should be used, as a measure of capital development needs in the utilities. As such, the first priority for the use of such funds should be in maintaining existing services. Costs incurred as a result of growth should be borne by new users, and extension of services to new users should be on the basis of an investment decision by which the capital expenses will be recouped by rate income from new users. Revenue Policies 1. The City will seek to avoid dependence on temporary or unstable revenues to fund mainstream municipal services. 2. The City should avoid dependence on federal revenues to fund ongoing mainstream municipal services. 3. General Fund services should be supported by user fees to the extent appropriate for the character of the service and its user. 4. Grant funds or similar contractual revenue of a temporary nature will be budgeted only if they are committed at the time of the preliminary budget. Otherwise, separate appropriations will be made during the year as grants are awarded or contracts made. 5. Revenue estimates for budget purposes should be conservative yet realistic. Reserve Policies 1. The City will maintain a Cumulative Reserve Fund to provide counter-cyclical balance, to protect the City from unforeseen contingencies and to allow an accumulation of resources to finance foreseeable general governmental capital projects. 2. Each enterprise fund and the General Fund should maintain adequate fund balances or working capital to meet unexpected contingencies. Each utility will maintain a minimum balance equal to 1% of system fixed assets for fund emergency repairs and unanticipated capital expenditures. The General Fund balance is to be maintained at a level sufficient to meet the cash flow needs of the fund without borrowing. A $1,000,000 minimum working capital balance will be maintained in each utility fund. Other enterprise funds should maintain working capital balances of 20% of their operating and capital expenses. 3. Each utility fund shall strive to ensure ongoing system integrity through reinvestment in the system by funding full depreciation net of debt. Cash Management and Investment Policies 1. The City investment practices will be developed in accordance with Municipal Treasurers’ Association standards. 2. Ongoing operations of City government shall be funded from ongoing revenues. An appropriate Tax Anticipation Note or Revenue Anticipation Note may support funds experiencing temporary cash deficits due to cash flow. Interfund loans may be provided at interest rates determined by current outside investments. Such loans should be paid back during the fiscal year. Page 44 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies Capital Budget Policies 1. The burden for financing capital should be borne by the primary beneficiaries of the facility. 2. Long-term borrowing for capital facilities should be considered an appropriate method of financing large facilities that benefit more than one generation of users. 3. The City will develop a multi-year plan for capital improvements as required by the Growth Management Act of Washington State. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually and be financially constrained for the appropriated budget period. 4. The City will maintain its physical assets at a level adequate to protect the City’s capital investment and minimize future maintenance and replacement costs. The budget will provide for the adequate maintenance and orderly replacement of capital and equipment from current revenues where possible. 5. The City will strive to rely on a strong local improvement district program for certain street, water, sewer, and storm drainage improvements. They will be funded with no protest covenants obtained from property owners whenever possible. 6. Enterprise fund working capital in excess of that needed for operations may be used for capital needs in order to conserve the debt capacity of those funds for major facility expansions to meet future needs. Debt Policies 1. General Obligation (GO) Bond debt should be scheduled for repayment on the basis of the entire outstanding debt not just the individual issue; in a manner which seeks to reduce fluctuation in the total tax rate. 2. The City will ensure compliance with existing loan/bond covenants by having at least 1.25 times revenue bond debt service, including system development charge revenues. 3. The City will strive to maintain a ratio of 50% debt/50% equity (cash); achieved by debt-financing no more than 75% of Capital Facilities Plan in the utility funds. 4. The City will strive to improve its bond ratings by improving its financial stability. 5. The City shall employ competent financial advisors and bond attorneys for all large bond issues. Auburn’s Vision for the Future Auburn’s vision sets the overall direction for the City, and as such, focuses city goals on strategies developed toward implementation of this vision. The 2011-2012 Budget allocates City’s resources through the development of departmental objectives. The department objectives are designed to implement the city-wide strategies which in turn work toward the citywide goals. These goals are designed to implement the Vision adopted by Council. The strategies coordinated by this budget are developed by Council and administered by the Mayor. The City Council and Mayor set the direction in 2006 for the City by establishing Vision 2016 which looks ahead and envisions what the City should look like in 10 years. The 2011-2012 budget continues to implement the vision that the City Council and Mayor developed. Citywide Goals and Strategies I. Provide for Public Safety 1. Ensure that Auburn is a safe place to live or have a business (Lead Department: Police) 2. Provide adequate funding sources for public safety (Lead Department: Finance) 3. Continue to provide for public safety by holding forums for community needs (Lead Departments: Community Services and Public Works) Page 45 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies II. Encourage a Sense of Community 4. Promote continuous community outreach by involving citizens and business in their City Government (Lead Departments: All) 5. Continue to seek opportunities to partner and work with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Lead Departments: All) 6. New Post Office (Lead Departments: Mayor and Planning) 7. Promote stability in neighborhoods and the downtown area (Lead Department: Community Services) 8. Integrate public efforts with the efforts of service clubs and the faith community (Lead Department: Community Services) 9. Construct a Community Center, Teen Center and Gymnasium at Les Gove Park (Lead Department: Parks) 10. Work toward unification of new communities with centralized communication and outreach to bring them into the existing community (Lead Departments: Mayor and Community Services) 11. Promote pride in Auburn-“It’s More Than You Imagined” (Lead Departments: All) III. Encourage Economic Development 12. Complete the Promenade Project in downtown (Lead Departments: Planning and Public Works) 13. Development of the Robertson/Valley Drive-In properties (Lead Department: Planning, Economic Development) 14. Build out I Street Corridor with appropriate buffers (Lead Department: Planning) 15. Development of Emerald Downs area (Lead Department: Planning, Economic Development) 16. Complete A/B Street Corridor and develop adjacent areas (Lead Department: Public Works) 17. Develop the Airport area, including runway extension, new commercial area via land lease and new entrances on D Street (Lead Department: Finance, Public Works, and Planning) 18. Develop/improve Multicare site (Lead Department: Planning) 19. Develop environmental building, commercial and technology in the Green Zone adjacent to Auburn Environmental Park (AEP), including rezone (Lead Departments: Planning, Public Works, and Parks) 20. Development of the Golden Triangle area (Lead Department: Planning, Economic Development) 21. Redevelopment of C Street SW and 15th Street SW properties (Lead Department: Planning) 22. Create Auburn Way South Redevelopment Plan (Lead Department: Planning) 23. Pursue joint economic development area with Muckleshoot Tribe (Lead Department: Planning, Economic Development) 24. Develop strategic plan for making Auburn a center for entertainment and arts (Lead Department: Parks) 25. Market Auburn as the regional entertainment center (Lead Department: Planning, Economic Development) 26. Develop criteria for reviewing City owned properties (Lead Department: Planning) IV. Improve Designated Urban Center 27. Improve B Street Plaza (Lead Departments: Parks and Planning) 28. Revitalize and redevelop urban center with extended areas (Lead Department: Planning) 29. Create medical/hospital zone (Lead Department: Planning) 30. Construct the South Division Street Promenade (Lead Department: Planning) 31. Review zoning codes within Urban Center to allow increased development/density (Lead Department: Planning) 32. Continue efforts to make Auburn’s Urban Center more pedestrian friendly (Lead Departments: Public Works and Planning, Economic Development) 33. Improve and expand public parking opportunities (Lead Departments: Public Works and Planning, Economic Development) V. Complete Public Works Projects 34. Complete I Street Corridor from 40th to 277th Street (Lead Department: Public Works) Page 46 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies 35. Continue to work on new revenue sources to support bonding of street preservation (Lead Departments: Public Works and Finance) 36. Complete M Street Underpass (Lead Department: Public Works) 37. Continued commitment to SOS program (Lead Department: Public Works) VI. Plan Future City Development 38. Complete Phase 2 Code Update and development of a master plan code (Lead Department: Planning) 39. Develop a site plan review process (Lead Department: Planning) 40. Complete Pierce County annexations (Lead Department: Planning) VII. Actively Support Regional Transportation Improvements 41. Work with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe to coordinate and complete SR 164 improvements (Lead Departments: Public Works, Planning and Mayor) 42. Work with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe to plan and coordinate remaining activities to complete the link road from SR 164 to SR 18 (Lead Departments: Public Works, Planning and Mayor) VI. Enhance Quality of Life 43. Complete Green River Trail (Lead Department: Parks) 44. Restore Mill Creek (Lead Departments: Planning, Public Works and Parks) 45. Develop Auburn Environmental Park (Lead Departments: Planning, Public Works and Parks) 46. Develop seasonal concession espresso/juice bar and possible bike/skate shop on Interurban Trail (Lead Department: Parks) 47. Restore White Lake (Lead Departments: Public Works and Planning) 48. Proactively work with BNSF to encourage buffer zones at rail yard (Lead Department: Mayor) 49. Build south end trail loop and horse trail (Lead Departments: Public Works and Parks) 50. Preserve former Carnegie library and former post office (Lead Department: Planning) 51. Pursue opportunities for indoor and outdoor soccer facilities (Lead Department: Parks) 52. Complete connections from downtown to the Interurban and White River Trails (Lead Departments: Parks and Public Works) 53. Continue efforts to partner, fund and enhance human services (Lead Department: Community Services) 54. Encourage public art on downtown buildings (Lead Departments: Parks and Planning) 55. Include the area on Auburn Way South from F Street to 12th Street in Les Gove Community Campus (Lead Departments: Parks and Planning) 2009 & 2010 Progress on Citywide Goals: I. Provide for Public Safety Accomplishments • Police reduced crime through community programs educating citizens on reducing crimes in their neighborhood and have maintained a response time of less than four minutes to all serious incidents • Relocated Emergency Operations Center • Worked jointly with Green River cities to install a safety barrier on the Green River, conducted community meetings and worked with the federal government on the Howard Hanson Dam issues • Continued to fund and research alternatives for funding sources to provide for Public Safety • Improved animal control • Expanded the use of Photo Safe Red Light Enforcement and Speed Enforcement to enhance the public safety of our pedestrian and vehicular traffic Page 47 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies • Continued implementation of the neighborhood traffic calming program using revenues from the Photo Safe Red Light Enforcement program • Co-authored the South Correctional Entity (SCORE) to create a south county regional jail for misdemeanants • Installed additional street lighting along key corridors to improve driver and pedestrian safety • Added technology for Public Safety including License Plate Recognition program that scans traffic for stolen plates, surveillance cameras for various City properties, conversion to new false alarm monitoring and creation of crime analysis tools II. Encourage a Sense of Community Accomplishments • Citizens have many opportunities to become involved including council meetings and various committees • Staff continues to work with and cooperate in multiple agreements with the Muckleshoot Tribe • Continued to fund Neighborhood Revitalization Plan and made major strides in helping to bring about redevelopment of downtown Auburn • Initiated coordinated response to graffiti and gangs with Community Services, Police, Code Enforcement, and Planning • Opened Auburn International Farmer’s Market • Implemented the Multi-Cultural Roundtable to bring our community together • Through technology, enhanced communications with Auburn citizens including new websites and new email communications service to citizens III. Encourage Economic Development Accomplishments • Facilitated the permitting and construction of the new Pick-Quik restaurant, One East Main Professional Plaza and Medical Office Building/Parking Garage projects, Super Wal-Mart, Mary Olson Farm parking area expansion, Salish Building at Green River Community College, King County Housing Authority major rebuild at Green River Homes and Activity Center at Les Gove Park • Improved permit process through institution of Fast track review for small project permits, two iteration review for engineering permits, and early coordination efforts with applicants on project reviews • Implemented department reorganization into 4 key service areas to enhance customer service, promote staff accountability, and clarify roles and responsibilities IV. Improve Designated Urban Center Accomplishments • Continued pedestrian friendly crosswalk improvement assessments of the City • Continued efforts to provide opportunities for remodeling, new construction and high-density housing in the designated Urban Center • Completed Downtown Sidewalk Guidelines • Received $3 million Economic Development Administration Grant for the South Division Street Promenade project • Completed design of the South Division Street Promenade project • Completed design and began construction of the City Hall Plaza project V. Complete Public Works Projects Accomplishments • Provided support to the fifth year of Save Our Streets program for local street projects • Completed Urban Area Transportation System Management Improvements • Secured funding for the South Division Street Promenade project Page 48 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies • Completed design and began construction of the City Hall Plaza project VI. Plan Future City Development Accomplishments • Completed the update of the Comprehensive Plans for Arterial Streets, Storm Drainage, Water and Sewer of the Lea Hill annexation areas • Undertook implementation of Economic Development Strategies • Secured new water supply with settlement agreement with Cascade Water Alliance • Worked with a citizens’ bicycle task force to update the City’s Non Motorized Plan • Completed the update of the City’s Transportation Comprehensive Plan • Commissioned a storm water study of the Urban Center to determine innovative options to meet NPDES requirements VII. Actively Support Regional Transportation Improvements Accomplishments • Continued Tri-Party Agreement with WSDOT and Muckleshoot Tribe for safety improvements to SR 164 and By Pass route planning for a link road from SR 18 to SR 164 • Worked with the Association of Washington Cities to promote legislation for street maintenance utility VI. Enhance Quality of Life Accomplishments • Provided greater opportunity for citizens in need of human service agency services to use those services in a more coordinated manner • Renovated, redeveloped use of, and began programming at the Auburn Ave Theater • Secured water supply for the future of the City, secure Lake Tapps and completed the historic Lake Tapps Agreement in partnership with the Cities of the Lake and Cascade Water Alliance • Implemented habitat improvements at Fenster Park and Olson Creek • Enhanced communications with Auburn Citizens through technology, including new websites for booking golf tee times, crime statistics, downloading project bid documents and pay for business licensing online. Implemented new email communications service for citizens • Completed one-stop multiservice center • Completed Olson Canyon Farm Parking lot and trail access and opened the farm to the public. • Opened new Discovery Playground at Les Gove Park and Dorothy Bothell Park 2011-2012 Budget Strategy The 2011-2012 Budget will be implemented by a series of objectives regarding development of resources and their allocation to various competing demands. 1. Avoid the addition of permanent staff positions, unless there is an offsetting revenue stream or reduction in current expenses to support the position, and reviewing replacement staff for essential need. Limiting new programs until economic conditions or revenue streams capable of supporting them are in place 2. Conserve the fiscal capacity of the City to meet potential future needs 3. Use fund balance or working capital to finance capital equipment that maintains or enhances productivity 4. Control discretionary expenses Page 49 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies 5. Provide adequate training, and increasing technology and tools to enhance productivity 6. Maintain a baseline of funding which continues to deliver high-quality municipal services with special attention to: a. Continue support of growth management b. Maintain effective law and justice services c. Provide continued public safety d. Support a diversity of recreational and cultural programs e. Maintain existing facilities 7. Provide staff support and funding for street maintenance repairs and improvements to meet planning requirements and benefit from available funding opportunities 8. Enhancing the capacity of the infrastructure where funding opportunities exist by giving priority to providing necessary matching funds 9. Continuing operation of the City’s enterprise functions on a business basis 10. Exploring all opportunities for economic development that will provide a return to the City of Auburn Use of Budget Tools This budget uses a variety of tools to implement these objectives: Financial Measures The City of Auburn budget places a high priority on maintaining the fiscal integrity of the City by managing reserves to counterbalance economic cycles while responding to emerging needs. During a long period of economic growth, revenue increases allowed both the opportunity to fund additional programs and to set aside reserves. When new programs are added, each is closely evaluated to ensure that it can be supported over the long run after a growth cycle ends. Temporary “growth period” revenues can also be used for capital needs of a non-continuing nature. Enhanced revenue also can build reserves to provide counter-cyclical balance (e.g., a rainy-day fund). The main purpose of such a reserve is to allow the City to respond to funding needs in an economic recession without having to resort to new taxes. The City has established a Cumulative Reserve Fund for both building revenues for major capital needs and to provide a counter-cyclical balance. Interest rates are being cut to stimulate economic growth. It is anticipated that the development of residential construction will continue due to current low interest rates, but at a much slower rate than the past two years. The need for services has and will continue to be substantial, particularly police services. Some of these services are required before revenue is actually received from the developments. The challenge becomes to judiciously expand services at a rate that provides reasonable coverage and protection to the public within the constraints of available revenue. New long-term funding commitments need to be avoided as much as possible until new revenue capacity develops. Consequently, the priority is on completing existing funding commitments and baseline needs, while carefully expanding services and protecting reserves. The City also maintains an insurance reserve to supplement its on-going insurance program to provide for the City’s obligation for lifetime health care for LEOFF 1 police and fire personnel, and to maintain independence in the insurance market. The Insurance Fund reserve is approximately $2.3 million in both 2011 and 2012, and no additional contributions were budgeted for the next biennium. Page 50 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies Baseline Budget The baseline budget funds the City’s ongoing operations. As such, it is an essential tool for implementing goals and elements of strategy directed at continuing the existing array of services at a high-level of effectiveness and efficiency. The budget strategy places a high priority on continuing to fund programs that will protect the City’s ability to maintain and enhance quality of life and on programs that meet the continuing public safety needs of our neighborhoods. These needs will be funded by the appropriate use of the existing capacity of City programs. Capital Budget The Capital Improvement Fund is used to accumulate funds to finance large projects that could not otherwise be done in one year from General Fund revenues. Projects include major improvements, acquisition of new municipal facilities, and Downtown Revitalization. The fund is budgeted for over $2.9 million of expenditures in 2011. 2012 is budgeted for almost $1.16 million in expenditures with an ending fund balance over $2.9 million for future projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan. General Fund Priorities City General Fund revenues are forecasted conservatively but realistically because of anticipated voter approved initiatives. Increases in salary and benefits and in contractual services will be increased in accordance with union contracts. Revenue estimates are conservative and based on the 2009 revenue received. Costs may need to be reduced if revenue decreases from estimated amounts. The General Fund budget was developed under the following policy priorities: 1. Avoid new programs until new revenue sources to support them are identified 2. Protect the City’s long-term fiscal integrity and Moody’s bond rating 3. Maintain productivity 4. Enhance efficiency and effectiveness 5. Ensure adequate and ongoing support for City programs and activities 6. Provide training, adequate technology and tools to enhance productivity 7. Fund priority planning needs to enhance or promote economic development within the City and enforce code compliance 8. Maintain programs directed at protecting the quality of life in the community and its neighborhoods 9. Provide grant required matching funds for street improvements 10. Seek out additional sources of revenue for street improvement and construction 11. Fund continuing public safety needs; especially increases in prisoner custody Many of these priorities are implemented in the development and review of the baseline budget proposals of various departments. Proprietary Fund Priorities The budget priorities in the Proprietary Funds are a continuation of past budget priorities, which have generally placed these funds on a sound, self-supporting basis. 1. Continue operation of the funds on a self-supporting basis 2. Maintain the fiscal capacity of the utilities with appropriate measures 3. Implement programs and rates to encourage resource conservation, particularly in water usage 4. Maintain orderly development of capital facilities to meet needs 5. Continue measures to enhance productivity and maintain new facilities as they come on line 6. Continue programs that encourage greater recycling of our waste materials Page 51 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies 7. Focus on capital projects that deal effectively with the City’s growth Other Funds Budget Priorities Fiduciary funds will be managed in a manner that continues to provide for their long-term obligations. The Insurance Fund will provide for insurance independence if needed. Debt service funds will continue to retire debt as appropriate. No additional funds will be added to the LID Guarantee Fund, as the fund is currently considered adequate. Page 52 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Section III – Financial Plan Page 53 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Page 54 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan SECTION III: FINANCIAL PLAN Introduction The National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting (NACSLB) endorses the forecasting of revenue and expenditures in their Recommended Budget Practices. This section of the budget provides a combined view of both past and anticipated future revenue and expenditures for all funds. A detailed revenue analysis is presented for each fund type. The plan focuses analysis on revenue sources in order to inform users of this document on how the City funds services it provides to its citizens. A table, graph and explanation of major changes is provided for the General Fund, Special Revenue funds, Capital funds, Enterprise funds, Internal Service funds, Fiduciary funds and the Permanent fund. This is followed by a six-year forecast of revenue and expenditures along with a discussion of the factors that affect the forecast. Long term debt and debt capacity is discussed as well as the General Fund fiscal capacity. This chapter ends with a discussion of fund balance and working capital balances. A budget is a plan that develops and allocates the City’s financial resources to meet community needs in both the present and future. The development and allocation of these resources is accomplished on the basis of the foregoing policies, goals and objectives addressing the requirements and needs of the City of Auburn. While the other sections of this document will present the budget in detail, this section provides an overview of the budget as a Financial Plan. As such, this section will focus on City strategies to maintain its financial strength and the basis for the expectation for future revenues. An important part of a financial plan is the City’s Capital Improvement Program. While the projects affecting 2011-2012 are summarized under Section VII, Capital Budget in this document, the entire Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) is outlined, in detail, in a separate document. Page 55 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Analysis of 2011-2012 Revenues by Source for All Funds The graph below presents the total new revenues that are anticipated to be available to support City programs during 2011 and 2012. The table shows the revenue by source of funds from 2009-2012. The revenues received by the City are derived from a diverse range of sources, and the types of revenues received by each fund vary significantly. $0 $9,000,000 $18,000,000 $27,000,000 $36,000,000 $45,000,000 $54,000,000 $63,000,000 Taxes Charges for Svcs Intergov Miscellaneous Licenses & Permits Fines & Penalties Transfers In Other Sources 2011 Budget 2012 Budget Total All Funds 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Revenues Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Taxes $ 4 4,555,705 $ 43,853,409 $ 44,056,109 $ 4 4,526,950 $ 45,258,715 Charges for Services 52,247,127 5 3,071,850 52,737,463 5 7,984,730 5 9,199,380 Intergovernmental 1 1,401,444 18,992,520 12,013,403 1 8,644,905 1 4,123,505 Miscellaneous 5,493,036 7,517,115 8,144,585 6 ,073,300 4 ,379,200 Licenses & Permits 1,326,875 1,128,800 1,081,000 1 ,129,000 1,129,000 Fines and Penalties 2 ,215,960 2,327,400 2,537,375 2 ,458,500 2,458,500 Transfers In 7 ,439,901 13,998,371 13,585,391 7 ,635,168 4,198,600 Other Sources 28,090,672 57,367,611 57,261,425 1 6,250,100 7 ,075,000 Total Revenues & Other Financing Sources 1 52,770,719 1 98,257,076 191,416,751 1 54,702,653 137,821,900 Beginning Fund Balance 94,577,678 84,668,259 84,669,699 8 8,306,158 43,633,003 TOTAL AVAILABLE RESOURCES $ 247,348,398 $ 282,925,335 $ 276,086,450 $ 2 43,008,811 $ 181,454,903 Page 56 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Charges for Services In the past, the largest source of revenue to the City was taxes collected from businesses and citizens. New initiatives have limited the City’s ability to collect taxes that were available or limited the amount they can be increased. In 2011, Charges for Services will be the largest source of revenue for the City. Charges for Services include user fees for utility services, recreational, planning and building activities and constitute 37.5% in 2011 and 42.9% in 2012 of total new revenue. These charges are primarily collected in the enterprise funds for services provided as stand alone business type activities. Service revenue is also charged to other funds by the Information Services Internal Service fund (IS) to recoup the cost of the technology services and hardware provided to other City departments. The new Facilities Internal Service fund has also increased this revenue source as the fund recoups costs to provide building and facility related support. Tax Revenue The second largest revenue source comes from taxes. These funds have been surpassed by service revenue due to initiatives limiting the collection of taxes by the City. Tax revenue constitutes 28.8% of total new revenue in 2011 and 32.8% in 2012. Almost all of these funds are received in the General Fund to support the ongoing operations of the City. Other tax receipts are in funds that are restricted for defined construction and infrastructure. Intergovernmental Revenue Intergovernmental revenue is primarily Federal and State grants, along with other governmental contributions, and is 12% in 2011 and 14.2% in 2012 of new revenue. This revenue type funds the construction of street projects, grants budgeted in the Local Revitalization fund to construct the downtown promenade project and grants budgeted for the Park Construction fund. Miscellaneous Revenue Miscellaneous revenue includes interest, rents and leases, and Equipment Rental Internal Service fund revenue. The Equipment Rental fund holds City vehicles as an asset and collects annual costs from departments in order to provide for maintenance and replacement of these vehicles. License and Permit Revenue Permit revenue is dependent on the economy as most of this revenue comes from new construction activity. The 2011-2012 biennial budget is based on the economy and construction of new homes being as slow as in the past two years. If the economy and/or construction slow more than currently anticipated, this revenue source may need to be adjusted downward. Fines and Penalties This revenue source has been and is projected to be relatively stable. It includes false alarms, traffic and parking fines. Transfers This revenue source is for transfers between funds and is budgeted at $7.6 million in 2011 and $4.2 million in 2012. Transfers include payments to other funds for debt service, capital construction projects, grant matches and interfund loans. Other Sources Other revenue sources include bonds, contributions and donations, and accounts for 10.5% in 2011 and 5.1% in 2012. 2011 includes $16 million in various funding sources including a Housing and Urban Development (HUD) loan, New Market Tax Credit (NMTC) proceeds, Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) and other sources yet to be identified for construction of the Auburn Community Center at Les Gove Park. Also included under other sources are system development charges in the utility funds. Transfers have been separated in this table as to show actual new revenue. Page 57 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Analysis of 2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures for All Funds The following graph presents the 2011 and 2012 budgeted expenditures of the City by object. $0 $9,000,000 $18,000,000 $27,000,000 $36,000,000 $45,000,000 $54,000,000 $63,000,000 $72,000,000 $81,000,000 Salaries Benefits Supplies Services & Charges Intergov Capital Debt Interfund Payments 2011 Budget 2012 Budget Total Baseline Budget 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries $ 3 1,996,562 $ 3 2,314,590 $ 31,957,090 $ 3 1,652,660 $ 3 2,010,260 Benefits 1 1,931,134 1 2,453,590 12,438,990 1 3,229,890 14,699,770 Supplies 2 ,940,590 4,439,200 4,430,343 3 ,927,400 3,906,090 Services & Charges 2 6,692,145 31,695,105 31,417,555 3 0,628,550 30,840,560 Intergov 2 3,274,269 30,169,170 28,702,190 2 7,984,928 22,653,140 Capital 5 2,432,492 63,626,603 38,365,045 7 9,161,070 27,279,820 Debt 2,365,827 33,739,786 32,788,969 5 ,897,060 5,827,590 Interfund Payments 9,817,773 9,680,110 9,680,110 1 0,894,250 10,704,650 Other Uses 1 ,125,467 ----Designated Fund Balance 8 ,359,045 5,420,665 5,868,579 3 ,342,721 3,188,379 Undesignated Fund Balance 7 6,413,094 59,386,516 80,437,579 3 6,290,282 3 0,344,644 ALL FUNDS TOTAL $ 2 47,348,398 $ 282,925,335 $ 276,086,450 $ 243,008,811 $ 181,454,903 Page 58 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Salaries and Benefits Salaries and Benefits are approximately $44.8 million in 2011 and $46.7 million in 2012. Salaries for 2011 have decreased slightly over the 2010 adjusted budget. With the establishment of the multi-jurisdictional South Correctional Entity (SCORE), the City is eliminating its jail facility. City corrections officers will be terminated from City employment and will be hired by SCORE. Services and Charges The City contracts for professional services as needed. Some examples of these costs include legal expenses, appraisals, surveys and consulting services. Other categories in this object include communications, travel, advertising, rentals, insurance, repairs and maintenance and utility charges. Intergovernmental Charges Transfers between funds are budgeted at $7.6 million in 2011 and $4.2 million in 2012. Transfers include payments to other funds for debt service, capital construction, downtown revitalization, and street project funding. Intergovernmental expenditures also reflect the contractual cost for sewerage to Metro, who provides sewage treatment for Auburn and much of the region. Capital Outlay Approximately $79.2 million has been allocated for capital improvement and projects for 2011 and $27.3 million in 2012. Most of the capital expenses are budgeted in the Utility Funds. The balances of capital expenditures are primarily in the Arterial and Local Street construction funds and the Parks Construction fund. These categories fluctuate from year to year and are dependent on available funding from grants, loans, one-time revenues, and service fees. Interfund Payments Payments to the Internal Service Funds are budgeted at approximately $10.9 million in 2011 and $10.7 million in 2012. These are charges paid for equipment repair and replacement as well as software, hardware, technology, multimedia and facilities services. Other Uses The charges in 2009 are an offset to developer contributions in the Enterprise funds. These charges are not known in advance and therefore not budgeted in subsequent years. Page 59 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan REVENUE ANALYSIS GENERAL FUND The City’s General Fund receives a wide variety of revenue. This section of the budget will discuss the key factors that affect revenue for the next year. General Fund Revenue By Funding Source 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Actual Est Actual Budget Budget Beginning Fund Balances: Designated/Reserved $ 149,725 $ 112,725 $ 1,062,300 $ 290,642 $ 332,000 Undesignated 14,312,996 12,958,366 12,175,551 11,472,713 10,155,938 Total Fund Balances 14,462,721 13,071,091 13,237,851 11,763,355 10,487,938 Taxes: Property Taxes 9,757,999 10,601,791 12,357,309 12,022,340 12,162,565 Sales Tax 16,006,927 13,796,440 14,255,000 14,255,000 14,255,000 Other Tax 13,183,345 14,633,716 12,926,000 13,086,610 13,402,150 Licenses & Permits 1 ,110,722 1,326,875 1,081,000 1,129,000 1 ,129,000 Intergovernmental 5,191,832 5,629,055 3,999,953 3 ,841,685 3,756,285 Charges for Service 2,383,326 1,709,191 1,505,116 1,804,100 1,831,100 Fines 2,059,770 1,911,034 1,911,034 2,237,375 2,208,500 2,208,500 Miscellaneous 1,162,393 664,555 861,076 4 58,200 466,200 Other 8 83,653 2,025,196 2 ,623,616 1 ,058,468 42,000 Total General Fund $ 66,202,687 $ 65,368,944 $ 65,084,296 $ 61,627,258 $ 59,740,738 Page 60 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan General Fund Tax Revenue Current estimates indicate that the City will receive approximately $39.5 million in tax revenue during 2010. Revenues from taxes are anticipated to decrease in 2011 to an estimated $39.4 million. While overall property tax has increased, it has decreased within the General Fund due to more money being allocated to the Local Street fund. It is expected that economic growth will continue to be as slow as it has been in the past two years. Low interest rates have sustained the housing market in the region. Voter initiatives have had a significant financial impact on General Fund revenue. Revenue budgeted for the next biennium is based on the assumption that the economy will be at least as slow as it has been in the past two years. If growth is slower than anticipated, revenues may have to be adjusted downward. Property Taxes Over the past several years voters of the State of Washington have changed the property tax levying process through referenda and initiatives. Referendum 47, passed in 1997, changed the 106% limit to the lesser of six percent or inflation. There was a provision, however, that with a finding of substantial need, a majority plus one vote of the city council could raise revenue to the 106% limit. In 2001, the citizens voted on and passed Initiative 747 (I-747), which limits the increase in property taxes to the lesser of 1% or inflation. New construction, annexations and refund levies are additional. I-747 was declared unconstitutional by the King County Superior court on June 13, 2006. In November 2007, the State Supreme Court decision overturned I-747. Following this decision, the Washington Legislature approved House Bill 2416 reinstating the provisions of I-747 retroactively to 2002, restoring the one percent limit on property tax increases. At this time, the City of Auburn 2011 levy rate is $1.93. Legislation has significantly impacted the City as labor contracts have historically increased at an average rate of 3% and the tax authority that is used in the payment of those contracts is limited to 1%. The assessed property values for 2011 collections are anticipated to decrease approximately 4%. Property taxes constitute 24.1% of total General Fund revenue budgeted for 2011. Sales Tax The City tax rate is 1% (of which the County receives a 15% share) on all retail sales. This leaves a net rate of .85% for the City. Sales tax receipts have fluctuated in Auburn because, historically, a large proportion of the receipts have been derived from construction and auto sales. In addition, Washington State changed from a point of sale collection to a point of delivery collection process in July 2008. It is estimated that the City is losing approximately $2 million per year that has been mitigated by the State. Should the State not be able to mitigate the effect of Streamline Sales Tax to the extent originally discussed, the City may have to reevaluate budgeted sales tax revenue and adjust accordingly. Sales tax remains the largest single source of General Fund revenue for the City and in 2011 will constitute 36.2% of tax revenue and 28.6% of total budgeted revenue. Other Taxes This category includes utility taxes, which are taxes applied to utilities providing services in the City, including Cityowned and private utilities. 29% of utility tax revenue is derived from electric services. Utility taxes, as a whole, have been considered to be very stable from year-to-year, not only in the amount received, but also in terms of consistent growth rates. Interfund utility taxes are charged at 7% on the four major City utilities: Water, Sewer, Storm, and Solid Waste. 1% of this utility tax is dedicated to fund Arterial Street Preservation. Page 61 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan General Fund Tax Revenue $-$4,000,000 $8,000,000 $12,000,000 $16,000,000 $20,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Property Taxes Sales Tax Other Tax Other General Fund Revenue Licenses and Permits License and permit activities are user fees that are derived from various regulatory activities of the City. The bulk of this revenue is derived from building permit activities. Since this activity is dependent on new construction, it can fluctuate greatly depending on the economy, interest rates and available land. New construction had been strong prior to 2008 but has slowed due to the economic downturn. Licenses and permits are projected to be 2.3% of 2011 and 2012 budgeted revenue. Intergovernmental Various state-shared tax revenues, including liquor taxes and liquor profits, dominate this category. These revenues are provided on the basis of a state prescribed formula that is based on population. As such, these revenues tend to be rather predictable and constitute 7.7% of total new revenue in 2011 and 7.6% in 2012. However, since grants are also included in this category, the total amount is variable. State shared revenues have been flat in recent years, largely due to a change in sharing of revenue based on crime rates, and new city incorporations. The increase in this revenue source in 2008 is from the King County Annexation agreement. In addition, this category also receives revenue from the Muckleshoot Tribe which is based on the profits from the Casino. Each year the City negotiates with the Muckleshoot Tribe for the amount to be received. Late in 2005 the State began distributing Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax (MVFT) directly to the General Fund. A portion of the MVFT funds are being transferred out to the Arterial Street fund through operating transfers. Charges for Services This category consists of user fees that are derived from a variety of activities. Revenue from recreational services tends to gradually increase with community growth and demand. Recreational fees support about 50% of the costs of the related services. Arts revenue is similar to grants, and additional revenue may be received, but expenses would offset such revenue. Another relatively large type of fee category is a plan check fee derived from the review of private construction plans. Plan checks are likely to hold steady in 2011 as they follow new construction and permitting activity. Charges for services constitute 3.6% of total 2011 revenue. Page 62 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan General Fund Revenue Licenses, Permits, Intergov, Service $-$1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Licenses & Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Service Fines and Forfeits Fines and forfeits consist mainly of fines from law enforcement related activities. Fines and forfeits are projected to be 4.4% of the 2011 and 4.5% of 2012 total budgeted revenue. Miscellaneous and Other Sources Miscellaneous revenue consists primarily of interest revenue on idle treasurers’ cash and investments. Estimated 2010 revenue has decreased from 2008 due to lower interest rates. Miscellaneous sources of revenue were reduced in 2011 and 2012 due to decline in interest rates and movement of rental revenue to the new facilities internal service fund created in 2009. In 2009 the increase in “Other” reflects a transfer back of excess fund balance that was originally given to the Capital Projects Fund by the General Fund. Increase in revenue in 2010 from 2009 reflects the refinancing of Valley Communications Center Public Development Authority bonds, which the City is contracted to pay 20% of the debt service for 15 years. General Fund Revenue Fines, Misc., Other $-$600,000 $1,200,000 $1,800,000 $2,400,000 $3,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Fines Miscellaneous Other Page 63 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS The City has 11 special revenue funds presented in this budget. These funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources and are legally restricted to expenditures for specific purposes. Special Revenue Funds Revenue By Funding Source 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Actual Est Actual Budget Budget Beginning Fund Balances $ 1 3,124,660 $ 14,463,371 $ 15,184,062 $ 11,422,950 $ 9,317,962 Taxes 3,117,317 3 ,851,680 3,115,800 3,613,000 3,624,000 Intergovernmental 1 ,496,281 1 ,794,725 5,431,150 10,673,100 7 ,716,900 Charges for Services 1,268,048 1 ,700,823 8 57,137 9 26,300 8 89,100 Fines and Penalties 265,948 304,926 300,000 2 50,000 250,000 Miscellaneous 376,596 368,131 2 96,142 5 6,600 59,600 Other Sources 3,026,096 3,473,650 5,630,777 3 ,246,300 7,647,800 Total Revenue $ 2 2,674,946 $ 25,957,306 $ 30,815,068 $ 30,188,250 $ 29,505,362 Special Revenue Funds Intergovernmental and Operating Transfers not Included $-$1,500,000 $3,000,000 $4,500,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Taxes Charges for Services Miscellaneous Taxes The main tax in the Special Revenue funds is a portion of property tax initially collected by a citizen approved Levy Lid Lift. This levy began in 2005 and was approved for six years. Up from $1.5 million in 2010, Council has currently designated $2.0 million ($.25/$1,000 assessed value) of property tax levied to be placed in the Local Street Fund-103 and is restricted to the improvement of local streets. In 2008 the city increased the utility tax rates 1% to support Arterial Street Preservation. Another tax collected is the Business Improvement Assessment (BIA). The City levies a tax on all businesses within the downtown core area. Retail businesses are levied $0.15 per square foot and service businesses are levied $0.15 per square foot, up to a maximum of one thousand square feet. These funds then provide the resources that enable the Auburn Downtown Association to promote the central business area. There are approximately 345,500 square feet of service businesses and 224,100 square feet of retail space assessed annually. The Hotel/Motel Excise Tax is another source of revenue for this group of funds. Levied at 1% of the charges for Page 64 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan lodging at hotels, motels and campgrounds these funds are used to offset the cost of tourism promotion. 2011 -2012 revenues have been budgeted to reflect anticipated collections. Other taxes which may support activities in Special Revenue funds include Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) and Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax (MVFT). However, these funds are receipted into other funds and are accounted for in Special Revenue funds as a transfer in under Other Sources. See discussion below of “Other Sources”. Charges for Service Special Revenue funds’ “charges for services” is derived mainly from the Mitigation Fee fund. This revenue consists of miscellaneous service fees and mitigation fees paid by developers. 2011-2012 are budgeted conservatively as this revenue source fluctuates based on local economic conditions. Miscellaneous Miscellaneous revenue consists primarily of developer contributions and interest income which is budgeted conservatively in 2011 and 2012. Special Revenue Funds Other Sources and Intergovernmental $-$3,000,000 $6,000,000 $9,000,000 $12,000,000 $15,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Other Sources Intergovernmental Other Sources This revenue source is primarily for transfers from other funds to the special revenue funds. Most of the budgeted transfers will be for the continued support of Arterial and Local Street projects identified in the Transportation Improvement Plan. Intergovernmental This funding source has traditionally been the largest of all categories in the Special Revenue Funds. Intergovernmental revenues are grants, entitlements, shared revenues and payments provided by one government to another. These funds include Federal, State and Local grants, state entitlements, and other contributions and donations. A majority of this funding is passed through the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for Arterial Street projects. Fluctuations from year-to-year for this source of revenue can be directly related to project activity since a majority of this revenue is received on a reimbursement basis. The Arterial Street fund is anticipating approximately $10.1 million of state and federal funding for 2011 and 13.2 million from federal, state and local funding in 2012. Major projects include “A” Street NW phase I, West Valley Highway Improvements and M Street Grade Separation. Page 65 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS The City maintains three capital project funds, the Municipal Park Construction Fund, the Capital Improvement Fund and the Local Revitalization Fund. Major non-proprietary capital acquisitions and construction are budgeted in these funds separately from operations. Capital Project Funds Revenue By Funding Source 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Actual Est Actual Budget Budget Beginning Fund Balance $ 9 ,873,331 $ 12,990,033 $ 10,422,361 $ 9 ,501,874 $ 2,592,574 Taxes 2 ,312,405 1 ,672,078 1 ,339,500 1 ,300,000 1,565,000 Intergovernmental 896,498 150,588 1,700,000 3 ,373,900 1 ,494,100 Charges for Service 29,010 22,546 25,000 2 5,000 25,000 Miscellaneous 772,532 311,275 2,956,615 2,055,800 2 17,700 Other Sources 6 ,505,831 26,914,795 34,606,475 16,458,500 3 10,000 Total Revenue $ 20,389,607 $ 42,061,315 $ 51,049,951 $ 32,715,074 $ 6 ,204,374 Capital Project Funds Revenue $-$5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 $35,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Taxes Intergovernmental Other Sources Taxes The City is authorized to levy Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) up to ½% on all real property sales transactions within the City. The City of Auburn levies the allowable ½%. Revenues from this tax must be used for financing capital facilities specified in the City’s Capital Facility Plan. REET is divided into quarter percents. Both the first and second ¼% may be used for: streets, sidewalks, street lighting systems, traffic signals, bridges, domestic water systems, and storm and sanitary sewer systems. In addition, the first ¼% may be used to purchase park and recreational facilities, law enforcement facilities, fire protection facilities, trails, libraries, and administrative and judicial facilities. With the current downturn in the economy REET is budgeted conservatively and held steady from 2009 thru 2012. Page 66 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Intergovernmental The parks construction fund anticipates the receipt of $629,900 in grant revenue for 2011 to complete major park projects and $1.3 million in local funding in 2012. These projects include Auburn Environmental Park and Fenster Levee Setback and the Lea Hill Park replacement. The Local Revitalization fund anticipates $2.5 million in a federal grant in 2011. Other Funding Sources Other funding sources consist of interfund operating transfers in from other funds and bond proceeds. These transfers are used to fund the capital projects to be determined by Council. The 2010 estimated actual includes $23 million in bond proceeds for the purchase of the City Hall Annex and $7 million in bond proceeds for the Local Revitalization project. The 2011 budget includes $652,500 REET1 transfer in for the Auburn Community Center and $366,000 REET1 transfer in for the Activity Center. Transfers in also include a $45,000 transfer from Cumulative Reserve fund for the Auburn Environmental Park. Capital Project Funds Revenue $-$500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Charges for Service Miscellaneous Charges for Services Portions of all adult team sport fees are put into the capital facility program in the Parks Construction Fund-321. These funds are then used to fund park facilities projects to benefit the users of the parks and fields. Miscellaneous Miscellaneous revenue includes interest earnings on idle fund resources and contributions or donations from developers or other organizations for parks projects. Investment income is budgeted conservatively from 2010 thru 2012. The increase in 2010 is $1.8 million in a developer contribution for the City Hall Annex project and budget for a $780,000 contribution from the Boys and Girls Club for the Activity Center project. Page 67 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan ENTERPRISE FUNDS The City presents eight enterprise funds in the budget used for the purpose of accounting for the revenues derived from services provided. The City enterprise funds include the following services: Water, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Drainage, Solid Waste, Golf Course, Airport, Commercial Retail and Cemetery. The next table and graph depicts the amount of revenues received by source. Enterprise Funds Revenue By Funding Source 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Actual Est Actual Budget Budget Beg. Working Capital $ 38,882,577 $ 38,009,989 $ 29,724,741 $ 39,720,169 $ 8 ,843,409 Charges for Services 3 8,937,510 41,390,099 4 2,851,600 4 6,530,980 48,091,580 Other Sources 1 0,932,349 2 ,545,374 23,982,636 1 ,193,300 1 ,134,300 Miscellaneous 2,247,985 1,380,677 1 ,854,400 1,055,300 1,076,900 Intergovernmental 315,566 3 ,626,869 5 28,000 193,000 593,000 Total Revenue $ 91,315,987 $ 86,953,008 $ 98,941,377 $ 88,692,749 $ 5 9,739,189 Enterprise Funds Revenue Revenue $0 $12,500,000 $25,000,000 $37,500,000 $50,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Charges for Services Other Sources Charges for Services This revenue source represents fees charged by the City’s enterprise funds in return for a public service. Over 58% of the City’s enterprise fund charges for service revenue are collected in the sewer and solid waste funds. Approximately 75% of the sewer revenues are related to pass through charges from King County for Metro services, which is for the treatment and disposal of the City of Auburn’s sewage. Solid Waste collection is contracted through Waste Management Disposal Company and Allied Waste Services. Garbage rates are structured in a way that encourages participation in the recycling program. The utility revenues are directly affected by growth factors and rate increases. The City normally reviews the fees charged for utilities on an annual basis to ensure the fees charged cover the costs associated with providing the services. All fees and charges are adopted through the public process of an ordinance. Page 68 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan The Golf Course charges consist of green fees for the 18-hole championship course. With the completion of the new clubhouse in 2007 this fund also collects for lessons, power cart rentals, restaurant, banquet space and pro-shop sales. Golf course revenue has risen slightly over the past few years because of improved marketing plans and renovations of many holes increasing the number of rounds played during the winter months. In 2011 and 2012, revenues are anticipated to decrease due to the economic downturn. Charges for services in the Cemetery fund are for lot sales and retail sales for burial related products. The economic downturn has also affected the revenues projected for this fund in 2011 and 2012. Other Sources This revenue source represents the resources available from Public Works Trust Fund loans (PWTF), developer contributions, bond proceeds, and in 2009, contributions from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. System capital contributions are paid by by the developer during the permitting process and are used for capital improvements. Section VII of this budget summarizes the capital projects budgeted in 2011-2012. For more detailed information refer to the Capital Facilities Plan published as a separate document. Other contributions include non cash developer contributions as they build or improve system assets. In 2010 other sources include $12.1 million revenue bond proceeds in the Water fund, $5.4 million revenue bond proceeds in the Sewer fund and $4.5 million revenue bond proceeds in the Storm fund. Enterprise Funds Revenue $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Miscellaneous Intergovernmental Revenue Miscellaneous Revenues The majority of miscellaneous revenues are comprised of investment income earned on idle cash. This revenue source has decreased since 2008 due to falling interest rates. Airport property rentals make up 58.1% of the Enterprise funds miscellaneous revenue. Completion of new hangars, additional ground leases and improved marketing have increased revenue for the airport. The golf course revenue for cart rentals, banquet space and concessions is anticipated to comprise 28.7% of miscellaneous funds in 2011. Intergovernmental Revenue This revenue consists primarily of grants received in the Airport Fund from the FAA for airport improvements to the taxiways and maintenance of the facility. In 2009 $2.47 million was to fund taxiway design and construction. The Storm Fund also includes intergovernmental revenue of $100,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012 from the Port of Seattle to fund a mitigation project. Page 69 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS The City’s Internal Service Funds are used to budget the financing of goods and services provided by one department of operation to other funds and departments on a cost reimbursement basis. The City has four internal service funds: Insurance, Facilities, Equipment Rental and the Information Services Fund. Internal Service Funds By Funding Source 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Actual Est Actual Budget Budget Beg. Working Capital $ 10,822,684 $ 1 1,518,199 $ 11,673,894 $ 1 1,114,839 $ 7 ,651,259 Charges for Service 4,536,262 7,383,828 7 ,449,610 8,648,350 8 ,312,600 Intergovernmental 181,250 200,207 5 8,800 2 5,820 2 5,820 Miscellaneous & Other 3,170,624 2,679,309 2,085,400 2,352,600 2,464,400 Transfer In 994,500 2 04,100 3 03,600 7 5,000 2 83,500 Total Revenue $ 19,705,320 $ 21,985,643 $ 21,571,304 $ 22,216,609 $ 18,737,579 Internal Service Funds Fund Revenue $0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Charges for Service Intergovernmental Miscellaneous Transfers In Charges for Service The primary revenue source for charges is from Facilities and Information Services. Each department is allocated a portion of the costs for Facilities, Information and Multimedia services which is then paid into the Internal Service fund. The Facilities internal service fund was added in 2009 explaining the sharp increase in this revenue. Miscellaneous Revenue The Equipment Rental fund charges the departments for maintenance and replacement costs of City owned vehicles which is collected in the miscellaneous revenue category. This revenue source also includes Interest revenue which has been budgeted conservatively with the decline in interest rates. In addition, a slight decrease in interest income is projected for the Information Services and Equipment Rental Fund as idle cash and will be spent on projects. Other Sources This revenue source is mainly for Transfers In from other funds. In 2008, transfers of $273,900 were made to the Information Services fund and $720,600 to Equipment Rental fund for increased expenses related to the annexation. Page 70 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan FIDUCIARY FUNDS In the past the City had budgeted three trust funds: the Cemetery Endowed Care Fund; the Fire Relief and Pension Fund; and the Special Parks and Recreation Trust Fund. With the implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement 34, the reporting type and structure of these funds has been changed. The Cemetery Endowed Care fund is now classified as a “Permanent Fund” which is a new fund type under GASB 34. The Special Parks and Recreation Trust Fund is now reported as a part of the general fund. That leaves the City with two fiduciary type funds, the Fire Relief and Pension Fund and an unbudgeted Agency Fund for collection and disbursement of non-City funds. Fiduciary Funds By Funding Source 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Actual Est Actual Budget Budget Beginning Fund Balance $ 2 ,898,968 $ 2 ,940,766 $ 2 ,828,642 $ 2 ,789,842 $ 2 ,732,932 Miscellaneous 1 15,948 1 1,455 23,000 25,000 25,000 Other Sources 56,000 58,000 63,600 65,000 65,000 Total Revenue $ 3,070,916 $ 3 ,010,221 $ 2,915,242 $ 2 ,879,842 $ 2 ,822,932 Fiduciary Funds Revenue $0 $40,000 $80,000 $120,000 $160,000 $200,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Miscellaneous Intergovernmental Miscellaneous Revenue Miscellaneous revenue primarily consists of investment income on idle cash investments which were less than anticipated in 2009 as interest rates decreased from 2008. With the current decline in interest rates, 2010 is estimated to remain low and investment income is budgeted conservatively in 2011 and 2012. Intergovernmental This revenue is from the fire insurance premium tax that is transferred into the Fire Relief and Pension Fund. The City receives this revenue from the State and it is allocated based on the number of firefighters serving the City. The fund is scheduled for another actuarial evaluation during 2011. The General fund receipts this revenue and then transfers the funds into the Fire Relief and Pension Fund. Page 71 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan PERMANENT FUND The City has one permanent fund, the Cemetery Endowed Care fund. This fund is used to account for resources that are legally restricted to the extent that only earnings, and not principal, may be used to support cemetery capital improvements. Permanent Fund By Funding Source 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Actual Est Actual Budget Budget Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,490,350 $ 1,480,396 $ 1,506,362 $ 1,528,962 $ 1,552,162 Charges for Service 5 2,433 40,640 49,000 50,000 50,000 Miscellaneous 52,613 2 5,326 3,900 4,500 4,700 Total Revenue $ 1,595,396 $ 1,546,362 $ 1,559,262 $ 1,583,462 $ 1,606,862 Permanent Fund Revenue $0 $25,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Charges for Service Miscellaneous Charges for Services Funds are collected for future services to be provided by the Cemetery. These funds must be held in a permanent account and are not to be used for any purpose other than the one intended when paid to the City. Miscellaneous Revenue Interest revenue is collected on idle cash in this fund. This revenue may be transferred out to the Cemetery fund to be used for capital projects. Page 72 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan General Fund Six-Year Forecast A six-year forecast of the City’s General Fund follows this summary. The purpose of the forecast is to highlight issues associated with financial policies and budgetary decisions. It is not intended to be a multi-year budget. General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Forecast 2011 -2016 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Taxes $ 39,363,950 $ 39,819,715 $ 4 1,263,391 $ 41,876,133 $ 42,500,703 $ 43,137,014 Total Lic & Per 1,129,000 1,129,000 1,374,700 1,375,400 1,376,100 1,376,800 Total Intergovt 3,841,685 3,756,285 3,312,500 3,361,400 3,411,200 3 ,462,100 Total Chg/Serv 1,804,100 1,831,100 1,830,200 1,854,500 1,879,300 1,904,600 Total Fines 2,208,500 2,208,500 2,229,000 2,249,700 2,270,500 2,291,600 Total Misc Rev 458,200 466,200 472,576 478,980 485,512 492,075 Total Other Rev 1,058,468 42,000 50,000 50,001 50,000 50,001 Total Revenues $ 49,863,903 $ 49,252,800 $ 50,532,367 $ 51,246,114 $ 51,973,315 $ 52,714,190 Mayor & Council $ $ 789,980 $ 786,420 $ 802,100 $ 818,100 $ 834,500 $ 851,200 Community Services 1,092,980 1,102,050 1,124,100 1,146,600 1,169,500 1,192,900 Human Resources 4,031,820 4,133,320 4,216,000 4,300,300 4,386,300 4,474,000 Finance 1,159,740 1,188,550 1 ,212,300 1,236,500 1,261,200 1,286,400 City Attorney 1,659,560 1,702,570 1,736,600 1,771,300 1,806,700 1,842,800 Planning 3,721,770 3,800,330 3,876,300 3,953,800 4,032,900 4,113,600 Jail 6,087,470 4,106,250 4,188,400 4,272,200 4,357,600 4,444,800 Police 19,668,600 20,186,760 20,590,500 21,002,300 21,422,300 21,850,700 Public Works 2,415,200 2,497,000 2,546,900 2,597,800 2,649,800 2,702,800 Parks & Rec 7,279,570 7,392,970 7,540,800 7,691,600 7,845,400 8,002,300 Street 3,183,130 3,279,920 3,345,500 3,412,400 3,480,600 3,550,200 Non-Departmental 4,049,500 4,436,200 4,524,900 4,615,400 4,707,700 4,801,900 Total Expenditures $55,139,320 $54,612,340 $55,704,400 $56,818,300 $57,954,500 $59,113,600 New Rev. Balance (5,275,417) (5,359,540) (5,172,033) (5,572,186) (5,981,185) ( 6,399,410) Residual/Unused Budget 4,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 Revised Fund Bal.* 6,487,938 5,128,398 2,956,365 384,179 (3,597,006) (7,996,416) % Fund Balance 10.53% 8.58% 5.04% 0.67% -6.62% -15.64% Total $ 61,627,258 $ 59,740,738 $ 58,660,765 $ 57,202,479 $ 54,357,494 $ 51,117,184 Key Assumptions: Inflation Rate 1.5% Population Growth Rate 1.0% Estimated Personnel Increases 1.5-2.0% steps, 5% Benefit increase Property Tax Increase 1% , plus new construction * Includes Designated Fund Balance for cash flow purposes and funding employee leave balances at retirement. Page 73 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan $(20,000,000) $-$20,000,000 $40,000,000 $60,000,000 $80,000,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Revenues Total Expenditures Revised Fund Bal.* Revenues and expenditures are projected on the basis of assumed economic relationships. Revenues are forecast on the basis of future economic and demographic factors with little dependence on past trends. Expenditures are forecast based on past trends modified by present and future conditions. Future conditions are based upon a series of complex assumptions. This model has been used to test a large range of assumptions and policy options in the course of developing budget recommendations. The General Fund Revenue and Expenditure forecast reflects a moderate set of assumptions regarding revenues and expenditures. The Auburn economy is cyclical and the City enjoyed a strong economy in the past. However, decreases in the stock market, higher unemployment rates, and unfunded mandates by the County, state and federal government for criminal justice and human services have all had a significant impact on the General Fund budget. Moderate economic growth is reflected in the revenue forecasts through 2016. Property assessed values have increased steadily during previous years at an average of 6.0%. Assessed valuation in 2010 decreased 10.5% overall and 2011 is anticipated to again decrease approximately 4%. In the past, the forecast has relied on increases in assessed value for forecasting. However, with recent legislation and initiative activity, this forecast is relying on a 1% increase for property taxes plus an average factor for new construction. While estimated revenue growth has decreased over the past years, expenditures involving public safety and public services are expected to increase at a greater rate. New commercial development, several large residential developments, and new annexations are a few of the areas expected to increase the demand for public services. Based on the current trends, it is anticipated anticipated that fund balances will continue to decrease over the next few years as revenues subside and expenditures increase. It is necessary to reflect non-departmental costs so that estimated ending fund balances are not overstated. Expenditures in this area generally represent one-time payments or transfers for capital projects, employee retirements or debt service. The Finance Department will continue to study revenue options and enhancements to offset the decline in future revenues. Residual budget is unused budget rolled forward to be utilized in the subsequent year. Forecasting models have been used to assist in fiscal planning for quite some time. Models have allowed analysis of alternative actions in funding programs during the development of the budget. The model accents the continuing need to control the per capita rate of expenditures reflected in the preceding pages. Continued caution will be required to anticipate and manage the effects of current and future legislative actions to avoid service reductions for budgetary reasons. Page 74 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan If current trends continue, fund balance will decrease to 0.67% by the end of 2014. Revenue has been estimated realistically based on anticipated economic growth, planned annexations, and considering the affects of voter initiatives. Should growth remain slower than anticipated, the adverse affect on fund balance may be greater than predicted. Revenues from property taxes are increased at 1% plus the addition of new construction and annexations. Initiative 747 went before the voters in November 2001 and passed. The initiative limits the increase in property taxes to the lesser of 1% or inflation. This initiative has been overturned by the Supreme Court. Following this decision, the Washington Legislature approved House Bill 2416 reinstating the provisions of I-747 retroactively to 2002, restoring the one percent limit on property tax increases. Assessed valuation for the City is expected to decline in 2011. Voters passed the “Save Our Streets” (SOS) levy in November 2004. This was a six-year levy lift for property taxes and all revenue gained from this measure will be dedicated to improve local streets and will not offset the erosion of fund balances in the General Fund. In 2007 the City lost a portion of the property tax levy ($1.50) to the newly formed Valley Regional Fire Authority (VRFA). The fire department broke away from the City and a new taxing authority, the VRFA, was created. With that went the tax base that the City applied the levy lid lift to. Council has identified the portion of the levy that would have been used for the street program and has provided that levy in the 2011 and 2012 budget to continue the program. This analysis reflects the position of the City if no adjustments are made on the expenditure side and other revenue does not grow at a rate necessary to offset the slower growth rate from property taxes. The City is addressing the long-term revenue short fall through concerted efforts with other jurisdictions. At this time, however, the exact adjustments that will be necessary are unknown. As mentioned, the City has taken into account the statewide initiative in forecasting property taxes. The issue that develops when property tax increases are held to 1% is that costs are not. Costs such as employee benefits, negotiated labor contracts, services and supplies continue to increase at a greater rate. Fuel, professional services, and healthcare costs are good examples. The shortfall then has to be made up by increases in sales tax collection and population growth. The City had been able to maintain the existing level of service, in light of legislative action, because the economy was growing at rates sufficient to offset the limits placed on property taxes. Sales tax revenue needs to grow at a rate that will make up the revenues lost from property tax declines. If not, the City will then have to make some different choices in the delivery of basic levels of services. In 2009, due to the economic downturn the City made two reductions in force to reduce labor costs. Total salaries and benefits represent 54.1% of the 2011 General Fund budget. Page 75 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Long-Term Debt Obligations and Debt Capacity Like private citizens, municipalities must sometimes borrow funds to pay for large purchases like capital equipment and capital projects. As in the private world, the ability to borrow depends upon the borrower’s ability to pay the loan back, as indicated by means of credit ratings, potential future earnings, etc. Unlike private citizens and companies, public entities have the additional parameters of statutory limits on borrowing, as measured by set percentages of assessed value and ratios of revenue to operating expense. Debt incurred by a City is generally issued in the form of bonds, similar to promissory notes, which investors buy from the City, with the idea that the City will buy the bonds back at some future date – paying more money than the investor paid for them. There are three types of bonds issued by the City of Auburn, differentiated by the basis of the guarantee of payoff to the investor. General General Obligation or “GO” Bonds are based on the tax base or the assessed value of the municipality. When issuing a GO Bond, the City is pledging its future taxing powers to pay off the debt. GO Bonds can also be issued as a voted “levy” when citizens are willing to pay extra taxes to pay for a particular project. Another less common type of GO Bond is one that is secured by the City’s tax base, but is actually retired from utility revenues. Revenue Bonds are both guaranteed by and retired from specific future revenues (usually fees for a particular service). These are generally issued for utility capital projects, and guaranteed and retired by utility rate revenues. There is no general tax liability for these obligations. Local Improvement District or “LID” Bonds are issued through the formation of local improvement districts to provide specific capital improvements. The City has a LID Guarantee Fund; a reserve fund that guarantees LID Bonds. The City’s outstanding internal LID Bond debt currently amounts amounts to $609,512. L.I.D. Bonds Year Principal Interest Total 2011 $ 3 3,142 $ 30,476 $ 63,618 2012 34,800 28,818 63,618 2013 36,540 27,078 63,618 2014 38,367 25,251 63,618 2015+ 466,663 133,290 5 99,953 Totals $ 609,512 $ 244,913 $ 854,425 General Obligation Bonds A general obligation bond comes in two forms: voted and non-voted. The total indebtedness for general purposes with or without a vote of the people cannot exceed 2.5% of the value of taxable property. Up to 1.5% may be authorized by City Council without a vote and are referred to as Councilmanic Bonds; however, any indebtedness available without a vote is proportionately reduced by any indebtedness with a vote in excess of 1%. The City may also levy, with a vote of the people, up to 5% of taxable property value for utility or open space and park facilities purposes. Any excess will proportionately reduce the margin available for general purposes. Total general obligation debt cannot exceed 7.5% of the value of property. The City debt obligations are well within the statutory limits for debt capacity. The following chart summarizes the City’s current debt obligations by type of debt and legal limit. In 2010, the City issued $31,990,000 of general obligation bonds. The bonds were used for the following purposes: 1) refunding all of the City’s outstanding 1998 Library bonds; 2) to pay for downtown infrastructure improvements which includes utility relocation and upsizing, a Page 76 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan promenade with open plazas, and a new street surface; and 3) to pay for a portion of the cost of acquisition of certain condominium units to provide city office space near City Hall (City Hall Annex). The City issued $5,160,000 of general obligation debt in 2006 to provide funds for the design and construction of a new Golf Course clubhouse and improvements at the Cemetery. The City has also issued $1,655,000 in general obligation debt in 1999 to pay the construction cost of hangars at the Auburn Airport. In 2005 the City refunded $1,375,000 of the 1999 general obligation bonds in order to lower the interest rate. Additional GO debt includes a bond issue from the Valley Communications Center Development Authority in 2000 that was refinanced in 2010, a 2009 bond issue from the SCORE Public Development Authority. The City is contracted to pay 20% of the ValleyCom debt service over a 15-year period. The City is contracted to pay 31% of the SCORE debt service service over a 30-year period. The City currently has an Aa3 rating from Moody’s and an AA rating from Standard & Poor’s. Without With Utility Open Space a Vote a Vote Purposes & Parks 1.50% 1.00% 2.50% 2.50% Total Bonding Capacity $113,164 $75,443 $188,607 $188,607 $565,822 Bonds Outstanding 6 4,817 ---64,817 Net Capacity $48,347 $75,443 $188,607 $188,607 $501,005 (In Thousands) General Obligation Bond Debt Revenue Bonds The City has $23.2 million outstanding utility revenue bonds that are being repaid by revenues from utility funds. This balance includes $21.3 million issued in December 2010 and the remaining balance of $1.9 million of the 2005 utility refunding bonds. In 2005, the City refunded $2,855,000 of the 1997 revenue bonds in order to lower the interest rate. It is estimated the present value savings will be $154,607. In 2010, the City issued $21.3 million in utility revenue bonds. The proceeds from the bond sale together with rate generated working capital will be used to construct new or replace utility infrastructure. In the Water Utility, the proceeds will be used to buy wholesale water contracts, build a new reservoir, replace two booster pump stations, and replace water mains and other water system equipment. In the Sewer Utility, bond proceeds will be used to replace two pump stations, replace damaged sewer pipe, and upgrade pump station control systems. Bond revenues will be used to improve Storm Drainage Utility infrastructure by replacing a pump station, enlarging a flood control pond, and installing new roadway drainage systems. The above projects are detailed in the 2009 comprehensive plan for each respective utility. The City has established a coverage ratio of 1.25 for the utility revenue bonds, where the net utility operating revenues will exceed 1.25 times the maximum annual utility revenue bond debt service cost. The annual debt service payment is paid from the utility user or system development fees. Moody’s has rated the outstanding 2005 utility revenue bonds Aa2. Page 77 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan The following debt payment schedules are for all outstanding debt including utility revenue bonds. Revenue Bonds Year Principal Interest Total Principal Interest Total 2011 $ 290,000 $ 1 ,194,593 $ 1,484,593 $ 1,386,000 $ 3 ,592,121 $ 4,978,121 2012 305,000 1,227,927 1,532,927 1,426,000 3 ,553,389 4,979,389 2013 885,000 1 ,215,727 2,100,727 2,073,650 3,495,405 5,569,055 2014 915,000 1 ,186,077 2 ,101,077 2 ,141,500 3 ,423,436 5,564,936 2015+ 20,825,000 1 1,530,377 3 2,355,377 57,789,700 53,609,156 111,398,856 Total $23,220,000 $16,354,701 $39,574,701 $64,816,850 $67,673,507 $132,490,357 General Obligation Bonds 2011 $ 8 04,212 $ 41,707 $ 8 45,919 2012 8 04,213 38,728 842,941 2013 8 04,213 35,750 8 39,963 2014 8 04,213 32,770 8 36,983 2015+ 7 ,079,173 1 74,013 7 ,253,186 Total $ 10,296,024 $ 3 22,968 $ 10,618,992 Public Works Trust Fund Loan Debt Year Principal Interest Total Page 78 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan General Fund Fiscal Capacity The City utilizes a range of strategies to maintain its fiscal security. Several of the financial policies are based on this strategy. First, the City maintains fund balances sufficient to meet the General Fund cash flow needs and estimated employee retirement cash outs for the current year. This amounts to about 7% to 10% of the General Fund. In good economic times, this fund balance can be budgeted higher than when the economy takes a turn for the worse. This balance serves as the first line of defense against a sudden and significant economic downturn. However, revenues are forecast moderately. This not only provides protection from needing to rely on the fund balance, it has provided a higher fund balance than originally budgeted, augmenting reserves. The City has a Cumulative Reserve Fund for two purposes. First, it allows the City to build funds for needed capital projects without having to rely exclusively on debt. Secondly, it provides long-term stability to City finances as a counter-cyclical balance. Money is put aside in good years (from higher than budgeted reserves), allowing the City a reserve to draw on in years of economic decline. The City also maintains two special purpose reserve funds to adequately meet specific and significant potential contingencies: 1) an insurance fund to augment regular insurance coverage and to provide for independence and/or stability, and 2) a guarantee fund to adequately secure the City’s LID program. Finally, the City has reserved an amount of taxing and other revenue capacities for worse case circumstances. These capacities are: User Fees There are several categories of user fees that could be increased to capture a larger share of associated costs. B&O Tax The City has the ability, but has chosen not to levy a Business and Occupation Tax on gross business receipts. This authority applied conservatively would yield about $1,000,000 per year. At higher rates, as much as $2,000,000 per year could be realistically achieved. Business Licensing Some jurisdictions have used business licensing as a means of generating additional revenues. A very aggressive program could yield as much as $750,000 per year. Page 79 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Fund Balance Trends Following is the fund balance trend for the City’s governmental, fiduciary and permanent funds from 2009 through 2012. Fund Balance 2009-2012 Actual:2009 $ 13,237,852 $ 6 ,020,770 $ 235,548 $ 10,422,361 $ 2 ,828,642 $ 1,506,362 Est Actual: 2010 9,763,355 3,471,220 997,795 9 ,501,874 2,789,842 1,528,962 Budget:2011 6,487,938 1,770,970 1 ,722,600 2,592,574 2,732,932 1,552,162 2012 5,128,398 1,464,470 1,703,200 3,066,174 2,675,482 1,584,562 Fire Relief & Pension Cem. Endowed General Fund Spec. Rev. Debt Service Captial Project Care Fund Balance City of Auburn: 2009-2012 $0 $3,000,000 $6,000,000 $9,000,000 $12,000,000 $15,000,000 $18,000,000 General Fund Spec. Rev. Debt Service Captial Project Fire Relief & Pension Cem. Endowed Care 2009 2010 2011 2012 The General Fund’s ending balance decreased from the 2009 actual amount to 2010 budget because of increased unemployment costs related to the reduction in force in 2009, capital lease payments related to the City Hall Annex and General Fund revenues have not kept pace with the increased costs of services. Fund balance is budgeted to Page 80 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan decrease 33.5% from 2010 to 2011 mainly due to the startup costs associated with the multi-jurisdictional South Correctional Entity. Special Revenue fund balance decreased 18.4% from 2010 to 2011 primarily due to a $2,559,200 budgeted transfer out from the Mitigation fund in 2011 to the Arterial Streets fund for various transportation projects. The Capital Projects fund balance is budgeted to decrease 72.7% in 2011 due mainly from increased capital outlay in the Municipal Park Construction fund for construction of the Activity Center and Community Center and the in Local Revitalization fund for construction of the Promenade project and City Plaza. Debt Service fund balances are budgeted to increase in 2011 due to the issuance of approximately $31 million in new general obligation bonds in 2010. Working Capital Proprietary funds are managed on a different basis than are general governmental services. The amount of expenses required for ongoing operation depends on the amount of activity that will be done next year. Since such activity provides new income to the fund directly in the form of charges for service, there is additional revenue to support those additional expenses. Therefore, the management of these funds is not focused on line items of revenue and expenses, but rather the “bottom line” of whether expenses are supported by revenue. This is measured by the working capital in each fund. In simple terms, “working capital” is similar to fund balance and is the result of all transactions during the year. An increase in working capital indicates that expenses are less than earnings. Since a city cannot make a profit, unlike private sector enterprises, working capital should not grow or decline and expenses and revenues should balance. However, working capital should accumulate to a level sufficient for at least three purposes: Provide cash flow for operations and maintenance Provide a cushion or a contingency for unforeseen needs and emergencies. Provide adequate security for long-term debt. Allow for a capital development program to reduce the need for borrowing. The trend for working capital in each of the City’s proprietary funds is found on the following page. It should be noted that data for 2010-2012 are budget figures while the data for previous years are actual figures. The Water Fund continues with an aggressive capital program and the beginning working capital for the utility decreased slightly in 2010. In 2010, the City completed a rate study for the period of 2009 through 2014. The City Council agreed with the new financial plan and adopted a 6.5% annual rate increase through 2014. The utility requires approximately $12.1 million to complete several capital improvements in 2011 and 2012. The utility will sell $12.1 million in bonds to generate the required revenue to fund the projects. The Sewer Fund ending working capital increased by approximately $1.9 million during the last budget cycle. In 2010, the City completed a rate study for the period period of 2009 through 2014. The City Council agreed with the new financial plan and adopted a 10% annual rate increase through 2014. The utility requires approximately $5.4 million to complete several capital improvements in 2011 and 2012. The utility will sell $5.4 million in bonds to generate the required revenues to fund the projects. Storm Fund ending working capital increased by approximately $3 million during the last budget cycle. Also in 2010, the City completed a rate study for the period of 2009 through 2014. The City Council agreed with the new financial plan and adopted a 5.4% annual rate increase through 2014. The utility requires approximately $4.5 million to complete several capital improvements in 2011 and 2012. The utility will sell $4.5 million in bonds to generate the required revenue to fund the projects. Page 81 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Ending Working Capital in the Water, Sewer and Storm funds will decrease significantly from 2010 through 2011 as revenue bond proceeds are used to fund capital projects. The City entered into a contract for garbage disposal services beginning January 2002. Rates are set to recover the cost of the service and encourage recycling efforts. Increasing costs in contracted services has caused a decrease in Solid Waste’s working capital in recent years. In the past, there has been adequate fund balance so rates have not been increased for residential customers. The City is currently in negotiations with the current garbage contractor. Rates are presented to council during the 4th quarter each year and a decision is made at that time whether to increase rates. The Airport entered into several long-term land leases in 2001 that has resulted in private development and increased revenue from the leases. Since 2004, the City has contracted the Airport to an outside manager. A slight decrease in working capital is projected in 2011 as funds will be used for hangar roof repairs. The Cemetery completed construction of the Mausoleum and Niche Wall project in 2007. Landscaping and irrigation improvements to the Cemetery are ongoing. In 2006, GO Bonds were issued to fund this project. Working capital is projected to decrease in 2011 and 2012 due to conservative revenue forecasts resulting from the economic downturn. The Golf Course completed construction of a Clubhouse in 2007 funded by bond proceeds. The 2011 and 2012 working capital is projected to decrease as a result of conservative revenue forecasts due to the economic downturn and scheduled debt service payments on the bond. The Commercial Retail fund was established in 2003 for the improvement, leasing and management of approximately 14,000 square feet of commercial space in the Auburn Station. The fund accounts for revenue and expenses to redevelop downtown through the creation of retail, office and educational space. space. In 2008, a long term lease for commercial space was entered into with one party who also took over the management of the space. Fund balance for 2009 reflects the change in management of the property. In 2010, the fund was consolidated into the General Fund. Equipment Rental fund working capital is projected to decrease in 2011 as replacement funds are being used and several construction projects are completed. The funds will be used to build a new vehicle bay and storage area. Information Services became an Internal Service fund in 2005. Charges to departments cover the full cost of operations and replacement of equipment. Working capital is expected to decrease in 2011 and 2012 as replacement funds are being used. Facilities became an Internal Service fund in 2009. Charges to departments cover the full cost of operations and maintenance of city owned and operated buildings. Working capital is expected to increase as the city continues to receive revenues from property rentals. Page 82 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Working Capital 2002-2012 Enterprise Funds Actual: 2002 $ 5,464,177 $ 9 ,081,382 $ 4,410,775 $ 3 ,675,900 $ 157,253 $ 3 35,524 $ 316,305 $ -2003 7,215,032 1 0,368,678 4,567,828 3,435,938 298,836 392,475 243,357 191,358 2004 8,554,976 11,903,336 5,111,165 3 ,289,301 3 34,315 425,945 90,114 46,655 2005 8,387,092 1 2,279,506 5 ,755,120 2,886,668 463,237 473,557 264,908 274,017 2006 9,623,966 1 2,399,324 6 ,744,361 2 ,746,031 644,590 609,812 204,408 302,380 2007 10,470,267 14,443,192 7,394,547 3 ,035,185 8 51,386 677,065 562,750 981,156 2008 10,367,027 1 4,585,273 7,896,879 2,695,161 1,011,718 436,368 367,286 650,277 2009 9,715,479 10,751,024 5 ,758,187 1,399,901 937,942 3 16,498 1 95,433 650,277 Est Actual: 2010 19,168,199 10,818,244 7,695,982 8 00,406 708,342 300,328 228,668 -Budget: 2011 2,577,279 3 ,172,444 1 ,842,732 430,736 578,532 146,198 95,488 -2012 1,334,259 1,061,224 1,442,322 33,976 492,302 12,918 29,638 -Water Sewer Storm Solid Waste Airport Cemetery Golf Course Comm Retail Enterprise Funds -Working Capital City of Auburn: 2010-2012 $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 Water Sewer Storm Solid Waste Airport Cemetery Golf Course Comm Retail 2010 2011 2012 Page 83 2011-2012 Biennal Budget Section III: Financial Plan Working Capital 2002-2012 Internal Service Funds Actual: 2002 $ 2,902,440 $ -$ -$ 3 ,671,788 2003 2,716,001 --3 ,907,419 2004 2,693,180 --4,508,076 2005 2,693,799 -1 ,554,454 5 ,149,373 2006 2,742,617 -2,479,575 5,863,063 2007 2,715,518 -2 ,694,910 5 ,412,256 2008 2,481,572 -2,932,485 6,104,142 2009 2,234,469 248,239 3,899,257 5 ,291,929 Est Actual:2010 2,403,069 307,539 3,546,577 4,857,654 Budget: 2011 2,348,069 346,439 2,097,797 2,858,954 2012 2,293,169 456,099 1,441,877 2,833,544 Insurance Facilities Information Services Equipment Rental Internal Service Funds -Working Capital City of Auburn: 2010-2012 $0 $1,500,000 $3,000,000 $4,500,000 $6,000,000 Insurance Facilities Information Services Equipment Rental 2010 2011 2012 Page 84 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Section IV – Operating Budget Page 85 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Page 86 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SECTION IV: OPERATING BUDGET Introduction This section of the budget details the City’s baseline budget. As such, department or fund delineates a complete discussion of City operations. This section also takes a detailed look at departments and divisions by providing both quantitative and qualitative performance measures. This enhanced presentation is designed to focus more attention on the results and direction of City services rather than on line-item allocations. The format of this section has been designed to present the information in an administrative structure beginning with the City Council and Mayor, followed by all funds for which each Department Director is responsible. For example, the Public Works Department will include budgets for Engineering and Street divisions in the General Fund as well as Transportation, Equipment Rental, and Utility Funds. Sections for those funds representing administrative departments or divisions are presented following the baseline budget and include: Department Organizational Chart Each organizational chart identifies the authorized staff positions in the 2011-2012 biennial budgets. The charts specifically identify each division that reports to the Department head. Each employee has a “home” department/division/fund, but may perform work for another department/division/fund. This system is intended to identify all authorized permanent staff positions. Department or Division Mission Statement Each functional department has created its own mission statement that directs objective setting toward achieving the Citywide Vision. Department Overview A description of the programs the department/division(s) are responsible for accomplishing. Accomplishments and Objectives A summary of the progress each department or division made on their objectives during 2009, including general operations and obligation of the fund, and the objectives that the department will undertake in 2011-2012. Baseline Budget by Object For general fund departments and governmental funds, this information is presented in a line object format. This is based on the Washington State Budgeting, Accounting and Reporting System (BARS), which govern the City’s accounting procedures. Data for the proprietary funds is presented in a working capital format, which not only describes the use of these funds, but also examines the fiscal status of the fund itself. This format also summarizes the income associated with the fund. Department Employees A summary of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions is presented with explanations of additions or changes due to department reorganizations. Performance Measures Each department has provided three performance measures that best show the results of their mission and or objectives. Page 87 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Total Baseline Budget 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 31,996,562 32,314,590 31,957,090 31,652,660 32,010,260 Personnel Benefits 11,931,134 12,453,590 12,438,990 13,229,890 14,699,770 Supplies 2,940,590 4,439,200 4,430,343 3,927,400 3,906,090 Services & Charges 26,692,145 31,695,105 31,417,555 30,628,550 30,840,560 Intergovernmental 23,274,269 30,169,170 28,702,190 27,984,928 22,653,140 Capital Outlays 52,432,492 63,626,603 38,365,045 79,161,070 27,279,820 Debt Service: Principal 1,504,520 30,167,686 29,984,374 2,515,900 2,614,600 Debt Service: Interest 861,307 3,572,100 2,804,595 3,381,160 3,212,990 Interfund Payments for Services 9,817,773 9,680,110 9,680,110 10,894,250 10,704,650 Other Uses 1,125,467 0 0 0 0 Designated Fund Balance 8,359,045 5,420,665 5,868,579 3,342,721 3,188,379 Undesignated Fund Balance 76,413,094 59,386,516 80,437,579 36,290,282 30,344,644 ALL FUNDS TOTAL $247,348,398 $282,925,335 $276,086,450 $243,008,811 $181,454,903 2011 Total Baseline Expenditures Intergovernmental 13.8% Interfund Payments for Services 5.4% Capital Outlays 38.9% Salaries & Wages 15.5% Personnel Benefits 6.5% Services & Charges 15.1% Debt Service 2.9% Supplies 1.9% 2012 Total Baseline Expenditures Intergovernmental 15.4% Interfund Payments for Services 7.2% Capital Outlays 18.5% Salaries & Wages 21.6%Personnel Benefits 9.9% Services & Charges 20.9% Debt Service 3.9% Supplies 2.6% Page 88 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 001 Total General Fund 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 21,597,711 21,790,190 21,458,190 21,015,650 21,300,910 Personnel Benefits 7,892,393 8,749,750 8,739,750 8,975,230 10,023,260 Supplies 1,000,828 1,304,800 1,257,543 1,072,730 1,092,450 Services & Charges 7,518,263 9,389,495 9,299,545 9,322,690 9,489,270 Intergovernmental 7,518,890 6,242,077 5,208,077 7,717,970 6,031,950 Capital Outlays 126,769 1,158,336 1,158,336 170,700 15,000 Debt Service: Principal 213,258 1,312,600 1,312,600 176,600 246,500 Debt Service: Interest 159,240 852,000 852,000 215,600 57,600 Interfund Payments for Services 6,103,740 6,034,900 6,034,900 6,472,150 6,355,400 Designated Fund Balance 1,062,300 1,062,300 1,062,300 290,642 332,000 Undesignated Fund Balance 12,175,552 7,753,326 8,701,055 6,197,296 4,796,398 GENERAL FUND TOTAL $65,368,944 $65,649,774 $65,084,296 $61,627,258 $59,740,738 2011 General Fund Expenditures Supplies 1.9% Debt Service 0.7% Services & Charges 16.9% Personnel Benefits 16.3% Salaries & Wages 38.2% Capital Outlays 0.3% Interfund Payments for Services 11.7% Intergovernmental 14.0% 2012 General Fund Expenditures Supplies 2.0% Debt Service 0.6% Services & Charges 17.4% Personnel Benefits 18.4% Salaries & Wages 39.0% Capital Outlays 0.0% Interfund Payments for Services 11.6% Intergovernmental 11.0% Page 89 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Page 90 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Council/Mayor Page 91 Constant F.T.E. for both years when one number is displayed. F.T.E. = Full Time Equivalent (does not include elected Municipal Court Judge) Page 92 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget MAYOR and CITY COUNCIL DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The Mayor and City Council are the legislative body representing the citizens of Auburn and is responsible for developing legislative policies of the City. Guidelines promulgated by the Council in the form of ordinances and resolutions are transmitted to the Mayor for implementation, follow-up and evaluation. The Council develops goals and provides a budget, which gives purpose and direction to City programs and initiatives. Under the direction of the Mayor, as Auburn's Chief Executive Officer, the department is made up of the following divisions: Public Affairs, Economic Development, Government Relations, Community and Humans Services. The Mayor sees that the laws and ordinances of the City are faithfully enforced and has general supervision of the administration of City government and all City interests. In addition, the eight department directors --the City Attorney, Chief of Police, Director of Public Works, Director of Planning, Building & Community, Director of Human Resources, Risk & Property Management, Director of Finance, Director of Information Services and Director of Parks, Arts & Recreation carry out the necessary activities of the City. 2009-2010 Accomplishments 􀂃 Initiated coordinated response to graffiti and gangs with Community Services, Police, Code Enforcement, and Planning 􀂃 Completed over 60 home repair projects for low-income homeowners 􀂃 Initiated a nutrition program for our diverse populations that focuses on healthy food choices and preparation 􀂃 Opened Auburn International Farmer’s Market 􀂃 Implemented Auburn Business Solutions Team to further involve all departments in Economic Development 􀂃 Increased downtown traffic through use of The Auburn Ave Theater 􀂃 Conducted three to five neighborhood meetings per month 􀂃 Created SEARCH in partnership with south county cities to manage emergency housing and affordable housing in South King County 􀂃 Promoted and completed Valley Cities Interlocal Agreement for the Tri-Trail Agreement to connect the Interurban, Foothills and Riverwalk trail systems for a regional trail connection 􀂃 Promoted and formed an Interlocal for the Valley Cities Broadband Development 􀂃 Implemented the Multi-Cultural Roundtable to bring our community together 􀂃 Instituted the Community Services Division to meeting the needs of our diverse community, work closer in the neighborhoods, provide for human service needs 􀂃 Successfully competed and received $3 million Federal Economic Development Agency Grant for downtown redevelopment 􀂃 Successfully worked with the state legislature for over $7 million in incentive financing for downtown redevelopment 􀂃 Completed the first two blocks of the six block downtown redevelopment area with approximately 200,000 square feet of new development 􀂃 Opened the Annex to provide for future city needs and the new Customer Service and Permit Center to provide for the needs of citizens and business 􀂃 Formalized the Green Zone Economic Development Area of the Environmental Park 􀂃 Created the Arterial Streets Task Force that formulated an action plan for future arterial connections 􀂃 Co-authored SCORE to create a south county regional jail for misdemeanants 􀂃 Worked jointly with Green River cities to install a safety barrier on the Green River, conducted community meetings and worked with the federal government on the Howard Hanson Dam Issues 􀂃 Built new components to the Les Gove Community Campus including the Spray Park, Discovery Park and the Activity Center 􀂃 Opened Bothell Park 􀂃 Repaired and resurfaced more than 30 miles of city streets Page 93 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Secured water supply for the future of the city, secure Lake Tapps and completed the historic Lake Tapps Agreement in partnership with the Cities of the Lake and Cascade Water Alliance 􀂃 Created the Citizen’s Transportation, Transit and Trails Committee to work for improvements to our transportation system 􀂃 Reorganized city departments to provide for more efficient service 2011-2012 Objectives 􀂃 Work with Council to implement new Auburn Vision Map 􀂃 Implement an Auburn version of performance based budgeting 􀂃 Continue work for a community ‘One Stop Shop’ for Human Services 􀂃 Implement programs to celebrate Auburn’s diversity 􀂃 Increase joint planning and activities with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 􀂃 Begin planning for new bridges in our annexation areas 􀂃 Work in partnership with Auburn School District to increase our children’s future potential 􀂃 Open Activity Center for teens in Les Gove Community Campus 􀂃 Add Community Center to the Les Gove Community Campus 􀂃 Reduce reliance on property tax by increasing business and its additional sales tax receipts 􀂃 Complete the Promenade Project in downtown 􀂃 Complete four block downtown Catalyst project 􀂃 Add new business development projects for downtown, 15th Streets North and South and North Auburn 􀂃 Find funding solutions for Auburn’s freight corridors 􀂃 Complete the M Street Underpass 􀂃 Complete the A/B Corridor for the first new north south route in recent history 􀂃 Complete and implement recommendations for Urban Task Force 􀂃 Complete and implement recommendations of Bicycle Task Force 􀂃 Continue to enhance relationships focusing on Economic Development with: Green River Community College, Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce, Auburn Downtown Association, etc. 􀂃 Create a Mayor’s Round Table (monthly or quarterly) to bring business leaders from various industries together with city officials to improve business in Auburn 􀂃 Add new kiosk and Amtrak stop at Transit Center 􀂃 Continue to support southeast cities to develop rail transit program to Transit Center 􀂃 Strengthen partnerships in achieving strategic goals of SEARCH to achieve affordable housing goals 􀂃 Create system reporting and accountability of churches, service clubs and partnering philanthropic investment in meeting local needs 􀂃 Continue to increase market awareness of Auburn as a great place to do business 􀂃 Representing citizens of Auburn on city, regional, state and federal level. Page 94 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/11 Council/Mayor 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 355,948 356,900 356,900 361,020 362,570 Personnel Benefits 94,849 101,900 101,900 92,260 100,650 Supplies 7,876 15,200 15,200 16,700 16,700 Services & Charges 61,350 110,400 110,400 110,500 109,900 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 134,504 154,500 154,500 209,500 196,600 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $654,527 $738,900 $738,900 $789,980 $786,420 Department Employees 001 Council-Elected 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Councilmember 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 TOTAL COUNCIL 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 001 Mayor FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Mayor-Elected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Mayor FTE's 5.50 5.75 2.00 2.00 2.00 Community Services FTE's* 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Communication FTE's ** 5.50 4.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 TOTAL MAYOR FTE's 12.00 11.25 9.50 9.50 9.50 * Community Services Division was created in 2010 and reports to the Mayor. ** Communications & Community Relations Division was created in 2005 and reports to the Mayor. 3.0 FTE was moved from Mayor to Community Services in 2010. 1.0 FTE was moved from Communications to Community Services in 2010. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 2.0 FTE -1 Economic Development Manager and 1 Multimedia Manager were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. 0.75 FTE was moved from Planning to Mayor in early 2009 to become a Cultural Diversity Liaison. 1.5 FTE -.5 Council Assistant and 1 Communications Specialist Coordinator were part of the reduction in force in May 2009. 0.25 FTE was moved from Finance to Mayor in early 2010 to make the Cultural Diversity Liaison a full time position. Page 95 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget COMMUNITY SERVICES DIVISION MISSION STATEMENT To initiate and support relevant services that provide effective and responsive programming to meet the essential needs of the residents of Auburn in connecting with their City and the community-at-large. DIVISION OVERVIEW Under the direction of the Mayor, COMMUNITY SERVICES is responsible for the following city efforts: HOUSING & HUMAN SERVICES Community Development Block Grant program (HUD) Human Services grants and support for local non-profits (30+) Neighborhood Matching Grant program Housing Repair program Graffiti Abatement program Emergency Housing program Human Services Committee NEIGHBORHOODS Block Watch program Neighborhood Safety Meetings (Home Owner Associations) National Night Out program Sister Cities Partnership CULTURAL DIVERSITY Multi-Cultural Roundtable Community Services Information Guide Cultural Programs and Services 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Provided housing repair funds to assist low-income homeowners with emergency and minor repairs to their homes 􀂃 Assisted in increasing the number of available transitional housing units available to domestic violence victims and crisis situations 􀂃 Continued development of the strategy and logistics of the Human Services One-Stop Center 􀂃 Promoted continuous community outreach by involving citizens and business in their City government 􀂃 Continued to seek opportunities to partner and work with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 􀂃 Cultural Diversity Liaison hired, started Multicultural Roundtable 􀂃 Developed master list of community contacts, including points of contact for all Auburn Home Owner’s Associations, Block Watches, neighborhood groups, ethnic populations and faith communities 􀂃 Held at least three community meetings/month involving the Mayor and City Dept. representatives 􀂃 Established criteria for neighborhood needs and grant availability for all needs including, but not limited to, neighborhood improvements, traffic calming, art, public safety, infrastructure improvements, etc. Page 96 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to find ways to reach out to Auburn’s diverse communities and involve them in the community at large, i.e. development of a cultural connections program 􀂃 Development of a Welcome Brochure/Packet 􀂃 Begin development of an Auburn Citizens University 􀂃 Continue to develop a housing coalition to address and strategically plan for the transitional and affordable housing goals of the City 􀂃 Continue support and development of the Human Services One-Stop Center 􀂃 Develop an integrated referral and communications source for human services in the City of Auburn 􀂃 Improve the availability of emergency housing for crisis situations of residents 􀂃 Work to develop a short-term diversion center to alleviate the burden of service on emergency responders (Police, Fire, etc.) and the hospital in addressing mental disability and substance abuse Page 97 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Division Budget 001/17 Community & Human 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Services Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 203,104 313,400 313,400 219,540 227,140 Personnel Benefits 65,148 90,400 90,400 93,140 106,110 Supplies 1,105 11,000 11,000 5,500 5,500 Services & Charges 475,587 597,500 597,500 605,800 605,800 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 42,108 58,100 58,100 169,000 157,500 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $787,052 $1,070,400 $1,070,400 $1,092,980 $1,102,050 Page 98 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources whose expenditures are legally restricted. The Community Division of the Mayor’s department is responsible for the budget in the following special revenue funds: ♦ Fund 119-Community Development Block Grant Fund (CDBG) accounts for the activity from this federal grant revenue. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Supported construction of the Valley Cities Landing project 􀂃 Developed beginning infrastructure and operations board for One-Stop Center for social and human services 􀂃 Auburn’s Human Services activities, including management/oversight of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and City human services funding, grants and support for City Human Services Committee 􀂃 Managed the City’s Housing Repair program for lower income households 􀂃 Neighborhood planning efforts to strengthen and enhance preservation, investment and sense of community 􀂃 Supported Supported small businesses with counseling and start-up assistance through the Small Business Assistance Center 􀂃 Supported employment training for low-income residents 􀂃 Provided medical and dental services for low-income residents 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Support development of service enhancements for residents around the Les Gove Community Campus 􀂃 Continue to support development of One-Stop Center for social and human services coordination in Auburn 􀂃 Identify historic property of interest in Auburn for preservation 􀂃 Expand economic development activity within CDBG scope of use 􀂃 Form development group for property acquisition to ensure City transitional housing goals Page 99 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Special Revenue Funds 119 Housing & Community 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Development Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 31,242 33,809 33,809 99,286 66,876 HCDA Grant 572,699 400,900 400,900 450,000 450,000 HCDA Banked funds 0 200,000 200,000 0 0 CDBG-ARRA 0 0 48,877 60,000 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 0 0 10,100 0 0 Total Revenue $603,941 $634,709 $693,686 $609,286 $516,876 Expenditures Salaries & Wages 70,822 88,500 88,500 72,960 70,510 Personnel Benefits 20,730 25,000 25,000 28,140 30,010 Services & Charges 130,783 140,000 140,000 99,500 99,500 Capital Outlays 347,797 340,900 340,900 341,810 239,200 Undesignated Fund Balance 33,809 40,309 99,286 66,876 77,656 Total Expenditures $603,941 $634,709 $693,686 $609,286 $516,876 Page 100 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Human Resources Page 101 FTE = Full-Time Equivalent (does not include elected Municipal Court Judge) Page 102 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget HUMAN RESOURCES AND RISK/PROPERTY MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT MISS ION STATEME N T To provide service and support that meets the needs of our customers by effectively planning and responding to all human resources, risk management, and property-related activities, using value-added tools, processes and services. DEPARTMENT OVERVI EW The Human Resources and Risk/Property Department develops and administers personnel policies, recruits applicants for employment, assists in selecting and hiring employees, administers the compensation system and makes recommendations in employee compensation (including benefits), negotiates and administers labor agreements. The department also represents the City in administrative hearings, develops and conducts management training programs, monitors compliance with applicable state and federal laws and regulations, assists in the management of Court personnel while functioning under the direction of the Judge. Oversees risk management programs, and ensures compliance with the City’s safety program. In addition, the department is responsible for property management, to include rental, leasing, sales, and purchasing of City properties with incumbent contract preparation, review and administration requirements. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Implemented a new on-line application and hiring program (NeoGov) that will allow applicants to apply and forward applications on line, and allow electronic screening by hiring managers 􀂃 Used NeoGov to automatically produce reports that show application trend analysis, allowing the City to recruit more efficiently 􀂃 Developed and presented a monthly City-wide orientation for new employees to receive information about the City, individual departments and customer service training (3 C’s) 􀂃 Rearranged court clerk responsibilities, set up new training program, and updated desk manual 􀂃 Implemented partially state-funded interpreter services program 􀂃 Analyzed and developed risk management benchmarking and performance measures to reduce City exposures and associated costs 􀂃 Placed Electronic Home Monitoring under Probation supervision to increase the number of participants, thus reducing incarceration costs 􀂃 Added a second weekly in-custody calendar to reduce incarceration costs for those inmates awaiting arraignment 􀂃 Prepared and implemented an unpaid furlough plan that minimized the financial impacts on employees to support budget reduction requirements 􀂃 Supported budget reduction program by preparing and implementing a plan to reduce the number of filled City positions, while maintaining the same high level of customer service to citizens 􀂃 Coordinated an Inter-local Agreement with King County Animal Care and Control for animal services through 2012 􀂃 Coordinated City requirements for building the Auburn Professional Plaza (City Hall Annex) and Auburn Regional Medical Center parking garage 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 To develop and present a City-wide orientation for all City employees focusing on internal customer services (service among co-workers) 􀂃 To reduce City-paid medical premium costs 􀂃 To efficiently and effectively transition non-commissioned corrections officers pay, work conditions and benefits to the new South Corrections Entity (SCORE) 􀂃 To minimize municipal court paper files by scanning closed infractions, parking citations and photo enforcement, and move to electronic filings of citations by 2011 Page 103 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 To complete building the Community Center on time and within budget 􀂃 To complete Activity Center on time and within budget 􀂃 To create a web-based individual orientation program that allows new employees to review benefit information prior to their start date 􀂃 Complete remodel of City Hall 􀂃 Negotiate and implement collective bargaining agreements for 2011 thru 2013 􀂃 To efficiently and effectively complete all project management activities that result in successful reduction in energy consumption in City facilities 􀂃 Research and recommend future animal care and control services upon expiration of the agreement with King County Page 104 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/13 Human Resources 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 1,617,927 1,596,430 1,596,430 1,653,420 1,682,710 Personnel Benefits 509,753 545,200 545,200 627,840 700,710 Supplies 14,352 16,900 16,650 17,600 18,180 Services & Charges 945,646 1,221,200 1,221,450 1,252,560 1,281,320 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 425,208 411,700 411,700 480,400 450,400 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $3,512,886 $3,791,430 $3,791,430 $4,031,820 $4,133,320 Department Employees 001 Human Resources FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Judge-Elected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Human Resources FTE's 18.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 Court/Probation FTE's* 21.00 18.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 TOTAL HUMAN RESOURCES FTE's 40.50 25.50 24.50 24.50 24.50 * Does not include 1 elected Judge 1.0 FTE -Recruitment and Employment Manager was frozen as part of the 2009/2010 Budget. 1.0 FTE -Court Clerk I was frozen as part of the 2009/2010 Budget. 2.0 FTE -Court Clerk II positions were frozen in early 2009. 1.0 FTE -Court Commissioner was frozen in 2010. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 1.0 FTE -HR Assistant was part of the reduction in force in May 2009. Page 105 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget The City is responsible for notifying the employee of Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) upon learning of the qualifying incident to meet legal compliance. The more timely the notification, the better the City can manage/minimize time loss for both work related and non-work related injuries/illness. Pay Increase Paperwork Processed Within Two Weeks The Human Resources department is responsible for initiating the paperwork for employee pay increases. This goal focuses on improving the process to ensure paperwork is received by the supervisors no later than two weeks prior to the effective date and pay increases are processed in a timely manner. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -HUMAN RESOURCES, RISK, AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Worker's Compensation Statistics Preventing workplace injuries is the best way to reduce industrial insurance costs. Time loss is one of the major factors that affect industrial insurance rates. Getting employees back to work as soon as possible after an injury helps reduce our premiums. Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) Notification 39 351 42 556 42 601 35 350 0 0 0 0 0 125 250 375 500 625 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Worker's Compensation Statistics L&I Claims Time Loss (Days) 96.6%100% 97.0%100% 98.0%100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0 0.25 0.5 0.751 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal FLMA Notification Rights & Responsibilities sent w/in 5 working days Approval/Disapproval sent w/in 5 working days 96.2% 97.2% 98.0% 98.8% 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 25.0% 50.0% 75.0% 100.0% 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Pay Increase Paperwork Processed Within 2 Weeks % of paperwork to supervisors in 2 weeks Page 106 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget FACILITIES DEPARTMENT MISS ION STATEME N T To provide all City departments and the public with a safe and clean environment, preservation of City owned facilities, provide building support services to each department, provide cost effective property acquisition/disposal and facility construction services. DEPARTMENT OVERVI EW The Facilities Department provides a broad range of services to internal departments. These services include building maintenance, safety, security, custodial, space planning, construction, facility renovation, energy management, management of Graffiti Abatement Program and real estate. Facilities department is responsible for procuring, storing, and distributing supplies and materials for daily operations in a cost effective manner. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Reduced heating and cooling work orders by 10% through improved preventive maintenance, early detection of potential issues, and maintenance focused on long-term problem elimination 􀂃 Increased productivity and reduced facilities costs by implementing a successful quarterly carpet and hard floor program; results tracked in CarteGraph 􀂃 Efficiently and effectively completed all project management activities that resulted in successful construction, within budget and on time, for the Annex and the Airport Parallel Taxiway Improvements 􀂃 Developed and launched the Graffiti Abatement Program 􀂃 Reduced outsourcing of window cleaning by providing training to City employees and appropriate equipment 􀂃 Sold manufactured home on the Smith property 􀂃 Installed two generators at Les Gove 􀂃 Added generator power at the Justice Center for the Courts and Probation 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 To efficiently and effectively complete all project management activities that result in successful construction, within budget and on time, for the Community Center, Activity Center, Auburn Airport Runway Lighting Improvements and the North Hanger Roof Replacement 􀂃 To efficiently and effectively complete all project management activities that result in successful reduction in energy consumption in City facilities 􀂃 To abate and demolish the structures at the Jacobson Tree Farm and the Fields property 􀂃 To repair atrium at City Hall 􀂃 To replace generator at City Hall Page 107 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget FACILITIES FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 348.920 Property Management Services 2,178,888 3,047,510 3,047,510 3,883,300 3,542,100 362.501 Rents Leases 50,322 78,600 78,600 78,600 78,600 362.600 Housing Rents 43,630 42,200 42,200 35,800 35,800 Total Operating Revenue 2,272,840 3,168,310 3,168,310 3,997,700 3,656,500 Operating Expense 548.000.10 Salaries and Wages (598,544) (650,700) (636,300) (666,330) (667,120) 548.000.20 Personnel Benefits (257,979) (216,000) (213,400) (277,570) (307,350) 548.000.30 Supplies (74,137) (105,700) (115,700) (100,490) (105,510) 548.000.40 Services & Charges (1,026,046) (1,617,710) (1,607,710) (1,738,490) (1,619,860) 548.000.50 Intergovernmental 0 (5,700) (5,700) (5,700) (5,700) 548.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services (113,592) (82,200) (82,200) (90,400) (93,000) 548.000.00 Depreciation & Amortization 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Operating Expenses (2,070,298) (2,678,010) (2,661,010) (2,878,980) (2,798,540) Operating Income (Loss) 202,542 490,300 507,300 1,118,720 857,960 Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 2,827 2,000 2,000 1,600 1,700 369.900 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) 2,268 0 0 0 0 395.900 Gain on Sale of Fixed Assets 0 0 0 0 0 Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) 5,095 2,000 2,000 1,600 1,700 Net Income (Loss) 207,637 492,300 509,300 1,120,320 859,660 Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 548.100.01 Depreciation & Amortization 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.83 Debt Service Interest 0 0 0 0 0 Net W/C From Operations 207,637 492,300 509,300 1,120,320 859,660 Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 397.100 Transfer In 0 0 0 0 0 399.000 O ther Sources 34,877 0 0 0 0 Total Resources 34,877 0 0 0 0 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100. Other Uses 5,725 0 0 0 0 597.100.55 Transfer Out 0 (450,000) (450,000) (750,000) (750,000) 590.100.63 Inc in Fixed Assets-Improvements 0 0 0 (106,810) 0 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment 0 0 0 (224,610) 0 590.100.75 Debt Service Principal 0 0 0 0 0 Total Uses 5,725 (450,000) (450,000) (1,081,420) (750,000) Net Change in W/C 248,239 42,300 59,300 38,900 109,660 Beginning W/C 1/1 0 248,239 248,239 307,539 346,439 Ending W/C 12/31 248,239 290,539 307,539 346,439 456,099 Net Change in W/C $ 2 48,239 $ 4 2,300 $ 5 9,300 $ 3 8,900 $ 109,660 Page 108 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 505 Facilities FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Facilities/Property Management FTE's * 0.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 TOTAL FACILITIES FTE's 0.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) * Property Management division became a separate Internal Service fund in 2009. Page 109 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget The Facilities Department will make every possible effort(within budget constraints) to reduce HVAC requests/complaints by 10% each year. The actual number for 2007 is not available. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -FACILITIES DEPARTMENT CarteGraph Work Requests Facilities Maintenance provides 24/7 maintenance for City facilities. Requests are tracked through CarteGraph. Within 24 hours of receiving the work request (Monday-Friday) the customer will receive an email acknowledging receipt and also contacted once request is completed. If there are issues with completing any request in a timely manner, contact will be made with the customer. HVAC Requests/Complaints 662 1,518 1,771 1,550 1,550 1,550 0 450 900 1,350 1,800 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal CarteGraph Work Requests 0 94 89 63 57 35 0 25 50 75 100 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal HVAC Page 110 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Finance Page 111 F.T.E. = Full Time Equivalent Page 112 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget FINANCE DEPARTMENT MISSION STATEMENT The Finance Department supports City efforts by providing quality financial services. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW Major responsibilities include: financial and budgetary policy development; long-term financing and cash management; the functions of utility billing, payroll, purchasing, and accounts payable. The department prepares a comprehensive annual financial report and a biennial budget document. Other duties include providing analytical support, accounting and budget advice to departments and overseeing contracted services of solid waste and airport management. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Completed the 2009-2010 Final Budget and submitted documentation to GFOA for the Distinguished Budget Presentation award 􀂃 Prepared the 2009 and 2010 Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFR’s). Submitted documentation to the GFOA award program to receive the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting 􀂃 Updated the six-year Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Comprehensive Plan 􀂃 Continued to track performance measures to improve efficiency and effectiveness in providing customer service 􀂃 Applied for and received Local Revitalization Financing through the year 2034 􀂃 Issued bonds for City Hall annex and Downtown Local Revitalization Financing Improvements 􀂃 Issued bonds to refinance 1998 Library bonds 􀂃 Created month end financial report providing year to date detail on General Fund revenues and summarizing the City revenues and expenditures 􀂃 Administered FAA grant for new Airport Taxiway & Runway Lighting System 􀂃 Implemented GASB 45 for other post-employment benefits 􀂃 Worked with State Auditor’s office for successful audit engagement 􀂃 Established new internal service fund for facilities and property management 􀂃 Implemented internet-based system to assist Escrow companies in the preparation of closing cost statements 􀂃 Updated Utility Billing Online Bill Pay Service 􀂃 Participated in selection and implementation of new Call Center phones & software 􀂃 Began streamlining workflow business process between M&O and Finance through the implementation of CarteGraph 􀂃 Issued Utility Revenue Bonds 􀂃 Implemented Advanced Budgeting module, which is part of the City’s financial software 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Complete the 2011-2012 Final Budget and submit documentation to GFOA for the Distinguished Budget Presentation award 􀂃 Prepare the 2011 and 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFR’s). Submit documentation to the GFOA award program to receive the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting 􀂃 Update the six-year Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Comprehensive Plan 􀂃 Update and expand the 2011 Revenue Manuals 􀂃 Secure new garbage contract for the City Page 113 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Streamline purchasing, using procurement cards 􀂃 Work with State Auditor’s office for successful audit engagement 􀂃 Upgrade Utility Billing Software from version 6.05 to version 7 with IS Department 􀂃 Work with IS Department to upgrade computer system to facilitate scanning of all utility related documentation and attaching documentation to the account electronically 􀂃 Work with Utility customers to convert more accounts to online bill pay service 􀂃 Implement Tyler Output Processor and Laserfiche Integration 􀂃 Begin new budget process – budgeting for outcome 􀂃 Continue to seek New Market Tax Credit opportunities for Community Center 􀂃 Update Airport Capital Plan 􀂃 Implement electronic payroll time entry system Page 114 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/14 Finance 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 552,232 565,300 565,300 582,170 589,250 Personnel Benefits 190,936 196,500 196,500 226,470 252,900 Supplies 5,048 23,300 20,300 11,000 11,000 Services & Charges 105,355 175,200 158,200 174,100 174,900 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlays 0 24,600 24,600 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 134,704 186,060 186,060 166,000 160,500 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $988,275 $1,170,960 $1,150,960 $1,159,740 $1,188,550 Department Employees 001 Finance FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Finance FTE's 25.00 22.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 TOTAL FINANCE FTE's 25.00 22.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 1.0 FTE -Financial Analyst was part of the reduction in force in May 2009. 2.0 FTE's -2 Meter Readers were moved to the Water Department in 2009. 0.75 FTE -Accounting Assistant was part of the reduction in force in December 2009. 0.25 FTE was moved from Finance to the Mayor in early 2010. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 115 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Days Sales Outstanding “Days Sales Outstanding” is the City’s average collection period, which is now based on a 25 day billing cycle, for all its utilities. This reflects the change to a monthly billing cycle which was implemented in July 2007. It is an important financial indicator because it shows the age, in terms of days, of an organization’s accounts receivable and the average time it takes to turn receivables into cash. It provides insight into the changes that occur within the City’s receivable balance. Experienced a slight upswing in the number of days outstanding, beginning in 2009, due to the economic conditions. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -FINANCE DEPARTMENT Total Utility Department Calls The Utilitiy Billing Department tracks the incoming and outgoing phone activity for the department through Cisco call center software. Using this information, management can determine both individual and overall department performance, the billing cycle relationship compared to peak hours or days in a month, and staff time spent on telephone calls. In the future, management will develop minimum standards for individual performance such as number of calls in a day or the minutes per call that should not be exceeded. Training will be structured to increase the level of customer service and efficiency. In 2007, the City changed to monthly billing in July which resulted in an increase in the number of phone calls. The 2008 annexation of Lea Hill and West Hill also increased the volume of inquiries to the Utility Department. In 2010, the department implemented a new phone system with new reporting software that enhances our ability to monitor this data better. The department goal is to decrease the number of calls as technology improves and customer utilization of web based services such as Online Bill Pay and Webcheck Escrow Services are increased. This technology is currently in place and the staff will continue to promote these services by informing and educating our customers. 44,437 46,500 48,780 44,000 43,000 42,000 0 15000 30000 45000 60000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Utility Department Calls 30 22 23 25 24 23 0 10 20 30 40 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Day Sales Outstanding Page 116 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget This statistic is used to track the productivity of the accounts payable employees, and to insure staffing is at proper levels to meet the City's ongoing legal disbursement commitments. Average Annual Invoices Processed PERFORMANCE MEASURES -FINANCE DEPARTMENT 22,271 24,588 19,917 21,300 22,000 22,000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Average Invoices Processed Page 117 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget NON-DEPARTMENTAL DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW Non-Departmental accounts are used to reflect the General Fund’s ending fund balance, prior year adjustments, the transfer of money between funds, and one-time transactions. Estimated costs for retiring employees are budgeted in this department. During the course of the year, anticipated expenditures will be transferred from the beginning fund balance while revenues will be added. The ending fund balance reflects the target figure for the ending balance. Since the budget will be adopted before the actual current year ending figure is known, the amount has been estimated. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Continued to fund LEOFF retiree medical and long-term care expenses 􀂃 Continued to fund retirement payoffs 􀂃 Continued to provide funding for general citywide services 􀂃 Funded debt payments for Valley Com and Library 􀂃 Supported the Local and Arterial Street funds with MVFT revenue 􀂃 Supported the Redflex program related to traffic calming projects 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to fund LEOFF retiree medical and long-term care expenses 􀂃 Continue to fund retirement payoffs 􀂃 Continue to provide funding for general citywide services 􀂃 Continue to support Neighborhood Improvement Program 􀂃 Fund debt payment for Valley Com and Library 􀂃 Receipt in and distribute state MVFT funds that support the Local and Arterial Street funds 􀂃 Support traffic calming projects with the Redflex Program Page 118 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/98 Non-Departmental 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 69,971 449,680 117,680 589,000 615,700 Personnel Benefits 992,354 1,336,400 1,326,400 1,423,900 1,615,200 Supplies 0 16,500 16,493 0 0 Services & Charges 487,834 588,520 588,520 484,600 527,900 Intergovernmental 3,423,827 2,975,377 2,325,377 1,225,300 1,434,500 Capital Outlays 55,203 1,113,736 1,113,736 155,700 10,000 Debt Service: Principal 175,000 1,274,000 1,274,000 133,200 201,000 Debt Service: Interest 125,974 810,900 810,900 37,800 31,900 Interfund Payments for Services 0 0 0 0 0 Designated Fund Balance 1,062,300 1,062,300 1,062,300 290,642 332,000 Undesignated Fund Balance 12,175,552 7,753,326 8,701,055 6,197,296 4,796,398 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $18,568,015 $17,380,739 $17,336,461 $10,537,438 $9,564,598 Department Employees 001 Nondepartmental FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Nondept FTE's 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL NONDEPT FTE's 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 119 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources whose expenditures are legally restricted. The Finance department is responsible for the budget in the following special revenue funds: ♦ Fund 104-Hotel/Motel Tax Fund was created in 2001 to collect revenues to support tourism activities in Auburn. ♦ Fund 118-The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Fund accounts for money received from the Federal government that can only be used for criminal justice purposes. ♦ Fund 122-The Cumulative Reserve Fund accumulates excess reserves for counter-cyclical purposes (“Rainy Day”) and capital purposes. ♦ Fund 124-Mitigation Fees Fund accounts for fees paid by developers toward the cost of future improvements to City infrastructure, which are required to provide for additional demands generated by new development. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Continued to collect, monitor and distribute legally restricted revenue revenue sources. 􀂃 Utilized grant options and maintained accountability of grant funds. 􀂃 Administered use of mitigation fees to provide for City Infrastructure improvements. 􀂃 Maintained Cumulative Reserve fund to provide stability during economic downturns and capital purposes. 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to collect, monitor and distribute legally restricted revenue sources. 􀂃 Utilize grant options and maintain accountability of grant funds. 􀂃 Administer use of mitigation fees to provide for City Infrastructure improvements. 􀂃 Maintain Cumulative Reserve fund to provide stability during economic downturns and capital purposes. Page 120 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Special Revenue Funds 104 Hotel Motel Tax 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 102,036 100,676 100,676 118,126 15,726 Hotel Motel Tax 70,777 76,000 62,800 60,000 70,000 Services & Charges 1,350 57,640 52,400 46,300 9,100 Investment Income 672 500 250 300 300 Transfers In 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue $174,835 $234,816 $216,126 $224,726 $95,126 Expenditures Services & Charges 74,159 171,380 98,000 209,000 85,000 Undesignated Fund Balance 100,676 63,436 118,126 15,726 10,126 Total Expenditures $174,835 $234,816 $216,126 $224,726 $95,126 118 Justice Assistance Grant 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 28,919 15,418 15,418 16,468 0 Bureau of Justice Assistance 0 10,000 0 0 0 Investment Income 180 100 50 0 0 Transfer In 0 1,000 1,000 0 0 Total Revenue $29,099 $26,518 $16,468 $16,468 $0 Expenditures Salaries & Wages 13,681 11,100 0 0 0 Transfer Out 0 0 0 16,468 0 Undesignated Fund Balance 15,418 15,418 16,468 0 0 Total Expenditures $29,099 $26,518 $16,468 $16,468 $0 Page 121 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Special Revenue Funds 122 Cumulative Reserve 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 5,866,566 5,360,687 5,360,687 5,623,464 5,601,564 Investment Income 37,949 40,000 22,500 23,000 24,000 Transfer In 756,957 650,277 650,277 0 0 Total Revenue $6,661,472 $6,050,964 $6,033,464 $5,646,464 $5,625,564 Expenditures Transfer Out-001 1,300,785 453,500 410,000 44,900 0 Undesignated Fund Balance 5,360,687 5,597,464 5,623,464 5,601,564 5,625,564 Total Expenditures $6,661,472 $6,050,964 $6,033,464 $5,646,464 $5,625,564 124 Mitigation Fees 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Designated Beginning Fund Balance 5,504,961 5,943,886 5,943,886 3,404,420 1,600,220 Undesignated Beginning Fund Balance -36,541 27,708 27,708 40,553 65,553 Transportation Impact Fee 1,377,251 750,000 750,000 800,000 800,000 School Impact Fee 5,428 5,000 5,304 5,000 5,000 Fire Impact Fees 224,623 0 35,433 50,000 50,000 Transfer In-Fire Impact 0 0 0 0 0 Fire Mitigation 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer In-Fire Mitigation 0 0 0 0 0 Traffic Mitigation 0 0 0 0 0 Truck Impact 4,671 5,000 0 5,000 5,000 Parks Impact Fees 87,500 0 14,000 20,000 20,000 Parks Mitigation 0 0 0 0 0 Investment Income 40,402 44,000 7,542 20,000 22,000 Total Revenue $7,208,295 $6,775,594 $6,783,873 $4,344,973 $2,567,773 Expenditures Intergovernmental 98,100 114,000 114,000 50,000 50,000 Transfer Out 1,138,601 3,641,380 3,224,900 2,629,200 1,070,700 Designated Fund Balance 5,943,886 2,943,506 3,404,420 1,600,220 1,354,520 Undesignated Fund Balance 27,708 76,708 40,553 65,553 92,553 Total Expenditures $7,208,295 $6,775,594 $6,783,873 $4,344,973 $2,567,773 Page 122 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Debt Service Funds account for payment of outstanding long-term general obligations of the City. The City has six Debt Service funds; the 1998 Limited Tax General Obligation (LTGO) bond fund, the City Hall Annex bond fund, the Local Revitalization bond fund, Local Improvement District (LID) 350 and 250 and the Local Improvement District (LID) Guarantee fund. The City’s LID Guarantee Fund is used as a source for guaranteeing the redemption and payment of outstanding LID bonds and interest. Its purpose is to provide adequate security in order to maintain top ratings by bond raters. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Made timely payment of principal and interest on outstanding debt issues. 􀂃 Continued accounting for existing LID funds including closing out funds for completed LIDs. 􀂃 Coordinated new LIDs with other City departments. 􀂃 Established new Debt Service funds for LID 350, and for bonds issued related to the City Hall Annex and Local Revitalization. 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Make timely payment of principal and interest on outstanding debt issues. 􀂃 Continue accounting for existing LID funds including closing out funds for completed LIDs. 􀂃 Coordinate new LIDs with other City departments. Page 123 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Debt Service Funds 229 1998 GO Library Bond Debt 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 41,603 37,746 37,746 338,120 339,120 Investment Income 1,083 1,200 600 1,000 1,200 Bond Proceeds of Refund of GO Debt 0 2,301,500 2,306,511 0 0 Transfer In 302,500 299,300 299,300 286,200 286,900 Total Revenue $345,186 $2,639,746 $2,644,157 $625,320 $627,220 Expenditures Services & Charges 0 16,200 0 0 0 Debt Service Principal 205,000 2,445,000 2,235,000 215,000 220,000 Debt Service Interest 102,440 144,600 71,037 71,200 66,900 Undesignated Fund Balance 37,746 33,946 338,120 339,120 340,320 Total Expenditures $345,186 $2,639,746 $2,644,157 $625,320 $627,220 230 City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond Debt 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 0 0 0 Investment Income 0 0 0 0 0 Bond B Subsidy 0 223,400 223,400 406,300 406,300 Transfer In 0 710,800 710,800 1,289,300 1,289,800 Total Revenue $0 $934,200 $934,200 $1,695,600 $1,696,100 Expenditures Debt Service Principal 0 260,000 260,000 475,000 485,000 Debt Service Interest 0 674,200 674,200 1,220,600 1,211,100 Undesignated Fund Balance 0 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures $0 $934,200 $934,200 $1,695,600 $1,696,100 Page 124 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Debt Service Funds 231 Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond Debt 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 0 62,500 62,700 LRF Sales Tax Credit 0 62,500 62,500 250,000 250,000 Investment Income 0 0 0 200 200 Bond D Subsidy 0 72,100 72,100 131,100 131,100 Transfer In 0 253,700 253,700 213,200 214,300 Total Revenue $0 $388,300 $388,300 $657,000 $658,300 Expenditures Debt Service Principal 0 105,000 105,000 195,000 200,000 Debt Service Interest 0 220,800 220,800 399,300 395,400 Undesignated Fund Balance 0 62,500 62,500 62,700 62,900 Total Expenditures $0 $388,300 $388,300 $657,000 $658,300 249 LID Guarantee 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 62,230 52,599 52,599 63,200 52,500 Investment Income 369 300 100 300 500 Transfer In 0 65,801 65,801 0 0 Total Revenue $62,599 $118,700 $118,500 $63,500 $53,000 Expenditures Transfer Out 10,000 54,300 54,300 10,000 10,000 Debt Service Interest 0 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Undesignated Fund Balance 52,599 63,400 63,200 52,500 42,000 Total Expenditures $62,599 $118,700 $118,500 $63,500 $53,000 Page 125 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Debt Service Funds 250 LID #250 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 247 347 447 Investment Income 247 0 100 100 100 Special Assessment Interest & Penalties 30,548 0 29,256 27,900 26,500 Special Assessment Principal 25,825 0 27,116 28,500 29,000 Total Revenue $56,620 $0 $56,719 $56,847 $56,047 Expenditures Special Assessment Principal 25,825 0 27,116 28,500 29,000 Special Assessment Interest 30,548 0 29,256 27,900 26,500 Undesignated Fund Balance 247 0 347 447 547 Total Expenditures $56,620 $0 $56,719 $56,847 $56,047 275 LID #350 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 1,194 0 0 Investment Income 54 0 6 0 0 Special Assessment Interest & Penalties 24 0 1,418 2,600 2,300 Special Assessment Principal 1,116 0 5,456 4,700 4,900 Total Revenue $1,194 $0 $8,074 $7,300 $7,200 Expenditures Special Assessment Principal 0 0 6,572 4,700 4,900 Special Assessment Interest 0 0 1,502 2,600 2,300 Undesignated Fund Balance 1,194 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures $1,194 $0 $8,074 $7,300 $7,200 Page 126 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND The Capital Improvement Fund-328 manages the proceeds of grants, Real Estate Excise Tax (REET), and transfers from other funds. All funds are used for capital projects or major equipment purchases. The Finance department is responsible for the budget in this capital fund. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Provided funding for Traffic Calming Program which successfully completed numerous neighborhood traffic improvements including installing new speed radar signs, school zone flashing beacons, speed cushions and upgraded signing & striping improvements 􀂃 Provided funding for sidewalk improvement program which successfully completed sidewalk and curb access ramp repairs and replacements citywide 􀂃 Provided funding for Traffic Signal Improvements at various intersections citywide 􀂃 Maintained accounting for Downtown revitalization program 􀂃 Provided funding for City Hall Annex Building construction and purchase 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Maintain accounting for Downtown revitalization program 􀂃 Transfer out Real Estate Excise Tax (REET2) funds to support Local and Arterial Streets programs and transfer of REET1 funds for debt services on Annex bonds 􀂃 Provide funding for traffic and sidewalk programs 􀂃 Continue to provide funding for facility improvements Page 127 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Capital Projects Fund 328 Capital Improvement Projects 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 12,705,204 9,770,693 9,770,693 3,792,206 2,390,706 REET 1 779,463 600,000 600,000 600,000 700,000 REET 2 779,463 600,000 600,000 600,000 700,000 Investment Income 140,770 134,100 70,000 65,000 65,000 Grant Revenue 0 73,200 73,200 0 0 Rents Leases & Concessions -5,132 0 0 0 0 Contributions & Donations 25,825 1,805,415 1,805,415 63,700 62,700 Special Assessment 56,129 0 0 0 0 Interfund Loan 0 37,500 37,500 22,300 0 Bond Proceeds 0 22,701,275 22,701,275 0 0 Sales of Fixed Assets 10 0 0 0 0 Capital Lease 24,549,186 0 0 0 0 Transfer In 1,195,158 760,880 635,000 220,000 210,000 Total Revenue $40,226,076 $36,483,063 $36,293,083 $5,363,206 $4,128,406 Expenditures Unrestricted Capital Outlay 434,194 88,000 624,100 20,000 10,000 REET 1 Facilities Improvements 69,763 253,100 253,100 626,500 0 Property Acquisition Acquisition 461,305 150,000 150,000 0 0 Annex Capital Lease 24,549,186 0 0 0 0 City Hall Annex 3,237,805 25,580,053 25,401,977 0 0 Public Works 108,842 379,400 379,400 380,000 220,000 REET 2 Public Works 77,567 198,700 175,000 175,000 175,000 REET 2 Planning 216,275 112,000 112,000 0 0 Debt Service & Issue Costs 0 197,600 197,600 0 0 Unresticted Transfer Out 1,089,425 770,500 770,500 0 0 REET 1 Transfer Out 55,617 2,905,000 2,948,500 1,557,800 539,800 REET 2 Transfer Out 155,404 1,485,200 1,488,700 213,200 214,300 Undesignated Fund Balance 9,770,693 4,363,510 3,792,206 2,390,706 2,969,306 Total Expenditures $40,226,076 $36,483,063 $36,293,083 $5,363,206 $4,128,406 Page 128 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget LOCAL REVITALIZATION FUND Local Revitalization Fund 330 accounts for the City Hall Plaza and the Downtown Promenade project. Funding was established by Senate Bill 5045 and designated the City of Auburn as a demonstration project. Local Revitalization Funding, through the state, provides the City with $250,000 for 25 years to construct infrastructure projects within the designated revitalization boundary. The financing is a credit against the state’s portion of sales/use tax. The goal of Local Revitalization Funding is to stimulate economic growth and future development through the infrastructure improvements completed. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Completed the design, permitting, and began construction of the City Hall Plaza and Expanded Plaza project 􀂃 Completed the demolition of structures within the downtown catalyst area for future redevelopment 􀂃 Completed the grant obligation for the Economic Development Administration funding for the South Division St. Promenade 􀂃 Began Design and permitting of the South Division Street Promenade project 􀂃 Completed the analysis of the potential for additional storm drainage system capacity beneath the City Hall Plaza and within the Promenade project locations to serve other areas of potential Downtown re-development 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Complete the construction of the City Hall Plaza and the Expanded Plaza Project 􀂃 Complete the construction of the South Division Street Promenade Project 􀂃 Complete the construction of additional storm drainage facilities to accommodate some portion of the capacity needed for future re-development in the downtown Page 129 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget LOCAL REVITALIZATION FUND 330 Local Revitalization Fund 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 0 5,335,300 0 Federal Grant 0 3,000,000 456,000 2,544,000 0 Investment Income 0 0 11,000 9,000 0 Bonds Proceeds 0 7,293,000 7,283,700 0 0 Transfer In 0 670,500 670,500 0 0 Total Revenue $0 $10,963,500 $8,421,200 $7,888,300 $0 Expenditures Salaries & Wages 0 0 0 58,600 0 Personnel Benefits 0 0 0 20,500 0 Other Services & Charges 0 90,400 81,000 20,000 0 Capital Outlays 0 10,264,900 3,004,900 7,789,200 0 Undesignated Fund Balance 0 608,200 5,335,300 0 0 Total Expenditures $0 $10,963,500 $8,421,200 $7,888,300 $0 Page 130 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SOLID WASTE UTILITY DIVISION MISSION STATEMENT The Solid Waste Division provides environmentally sound and safe disposal of solid and hazardous waste and provides waste reduction and recycling opportunities to increase public awareness within the City of Auburn. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The City contracts with Waste Management to do collection and recycling, with City staff responsible for overall management and billings. The City also has a franchise agreement with Allied Waste Services in the recently annexed area of Lea Hill and West Hill. The City contracts with King County for disposal of solid waste materials. The Solid Waste Utility Division encourages community participation in Auburn’s solid waste programs by proactively managing and monitoring the daily activities of the solid waste contractors; continually assessing the regulatory and political climate pertaining to solid and hazardous waste collection and disposal, recycling and waste prevention; prevention; and reviewing the adequacy of our annual level of service to meet community needs. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Maintained the residential recycling rate (including yard waste) at 53% by volume 􀂃 Measured the participation rate in residential recycling and maintained an average of 88% 􀂃 Measured the rate of shifting from 30-gallon or higher cans to 10-gallon or 20-gallon cans as a result of residential recycling, and increased to 13% 􀂃 Implemented “Multifamily Recycling Program” and maintained multifamily complexes at 81% recycling participation 􀂃 Promoted commercial recycling and maintained a recycling participation rate of 80% 􀂃 Increased the total diversion rate to 22% 􀂃 Maintained assessment of route checks within 48 hours and 95% response within ten days 􀂃 Worked with the Auburn School District and gave recycling and solid waste presentations to students and continued P.S.E “Powerful Choices” presentations to all Auburn middle schools 􀂃 Provided Natural Yard Care Workshops to the Lea Hill and central neighborhoods 􀂃 Continued to promote reuse by sponsoring an annual “Community Yard Sale” event 􀂃 Continued to promote the “Food Scrap Recycling Program” to residential homes 􀂃 Designed and implemented a “Commercial Food Scrap Recycling Program” for businesses 􀂃 Organized the City’s “Going Green Team” 􀂃 Continued to provide citizens with recycling ability at all City facilities 􀂃 Introduced food scrap recycling at all City facilities 􀂃 Added recycling in 13 parks to make recycling available in all City parks 􀂃 Provided recycling at all City special events in conjunction with the Parks Department 􀂃 Reduced the rise in garbage collected by promoting waste reduction and recycling 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to measure the residential recycling rate and maintain a rate over 50% 􀂃 Continue to measure shifting from 30-gallon cans to 20-gallon and 10-gallon cans, as a result of residential recycling 􀂃 Promote the “Multifamily Recycling Program” and increase the multifamily recycling and participation rates 􀂃 Continue to promote commercial recycling and increase participation rate to an average of 83% 􀂃 Continue to maintain assessment of route checks within 48 hours Page 131 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Continue to provide citizens with recycling ability at all City facilities 􀂃 Continue to maintain recycling at all City special events and all parks in conjunction with the Parks Department 􀂃 Continue to reduce the rise in garbage collected by promoting waste reduction and recycling 􀂃 Prepare to negotiate new solid waste contract in 2011, effective January 2013 Page 132 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 343.750 Garbage Service 8,386,525 8,766,500 8,766,500 9,136,500 9,136,500 343.770 Household Haz. Waste 284,874 282,000 282,000 282,000 282,000 343.780&90 Refuse, City, Excise Tax 927,837 0 0 0 0 Total Operating Revenue 9,599,236 9,048,500 9,048,500 9,418,500 9,418,500 Operating Expense 537.000.10 Salaries and Wages (399,831) (412,900) (412,900) (430,350) (438,510) 537.000.20 Personnel Benefits (146,115) (145,495) (145,495) (174,370) (195,120) 537.000.30 Supplies (32,015) (35,800) (34,100) (39,500) (39,600) 537.000.40 Services & Charges (9,992,028) (8,692,920) (8,681,700) (8,770,250) (8,770,830) 537.000.50 Intergovernmental (284,808) (287,500) (287,500) (282,000) (282,000) 537.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services (144,276) (175,200) (175,200) (187,000) (184,500) 537.000.00 Depreciation & Amortization (20,534) (40,000) (40,000) (21,000) (21,000) Total Operating Expenses (11,019,606) (9,789,815) (9,776,895) (9,904,470) (9,931,560) Operating Income (Loss) (1,420,370) (741,315) (728,395) (485,970) (513,060) Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 12,488 10,000 10,000 2,300 2,300 337.000 Interlocal Grants 87,696 92,720 79,800 93,000 93,000 537.800.80 Interest Expense 0 0 0 0 0 Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) 100,185 102,720 89,800 95,300 95,300 Net Income (Loss) (1,320,185) (638,595) (638,595) (390,670) (417,760) Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 535.801.00 Depreciation & Amortization 20,534 40,000 40,000 21,000 21,000 Net W/C From Operations (1,299,651) (598,595) (598,595) (369,670) (396,760) Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 397.100 Transfer In 0 0 0 0 0 399.000 Other Sources 4,391 0 0 0 0 Total Resources 4,391 0 0 0 0 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100. Other Uses 0 0 0 0 0 597.100.55 Transfer Out 0 (900) (900) 0 0 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 Total Uses 0 (900) (900) 0 0 Net Change in W/C (1,295,260) (599,495) (599,495) (369,670) (396,760) Beginning W/C 1/1 2,695,161 1,399,901 1,399,901 800,406 430,736 Ending W/C 12/31 1,399,901 800,406 800,406 430,736 33,976 Net Change in W/C $ (1,295,260) $ ( 599,495) $ (599,495) $ ( 369,670) $ (396,760) SOLID WASTE FUND Page 133 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 434 Solid Waste FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Solid Waste FTE's 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 TOTAL SOLID WASTE FTE's 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 134 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget We anticipate an increase in recycling by promoting "All-in-One" and "Food Scrap" recycling opportunities to residents and businesses in 2008 -2009. Residential Recycling Participation Percentage With continued outreach and education of the "All-in-One" recycling program, we hope to increase participation. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -SOLID WASTE FUND Tons of Residential & Commercial Garbage Collected The City of Auburn garbage tonnage is increasing in line with the County wide tonnage increases. An increase in recycling diversion slows the growth of the garbage increases. Tons of Recycling & Yard Waste Collected 48,980 43,942 36,432 36,068 0 15,000 30,000 45,000 60,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est Tons of Garbage Collected 10,422 13,333 12,538 12,789 0 3,250 6,500 9,750 13,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est Tons of Recycling & Yard Waste Collected 83% 87% 88% 89% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est Residential Recycling Participation 48,980 43,942 36,432 36,068 36,068 36,789 0 15000 30000 45000 60000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal 10,422 13,333 12,538 12,789 13,045 13,306 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal 83% 87% 88% 89% 90% 90% 0 0.25 0.5 0.751 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Page 135 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget AIRPORT FUND VISION To identify, analyze, develop and implement, value added Airport systems solutions and services. MISSION To provide the citizens and users a quality aviation facility with needed services and products in a safe and secure environment. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The Airport provides hangar and tie-down facilities, which will accommodate over 370 based aircraft. The City has long-term land only leases which provide for private condo type aircraft hangars and one maintenance facility. In addition, there are several businesses operating on the airfield that provide aviation related services to the public and users of the Airport. The City contracts with Airport Management Group, LLC to manage aircraft tie-downs, hangars and facility leases, as well as the daily management, maintenance, and operation of the fuel facility. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Continued implementation of the Airport Business Master Plan 􀂃 Compliance of Airport rules and regulations as adopted, among all airport users 􀂃 Compliance of the Minimum Standards for Commercial Operations at the Airport 􀂃 Competed and installed Airport Information Center and Emergency Contact List 􀂃 Completed construction of the Airport taxiway to meet FAA requirements 􀂃 Completed taxiway lighting and airport signage to meet FAA regulations 􀂃 Replaced lighting in hangar row 2-8 with new high efficient low energy lights 􀂃 Educated, distributed and enforced the Auburn Airport Traffic Pattern to all airport users 􀂃 Assisted the City with the acquisition of the King County Park & Ride 􀂃 Continued to campaign concerning the value of the Airport to citizens and surrounding area 􀂃 Continued to advertise regionally to promote the use of the Auburn Airport as an alternative to Boeing, Renton and Tacoma 􀂃 Continued to pursue State and Federal grant opportunities for continued airport development and improvements 􀂃 Completed a condition assessment of hangar rows 2 through 8 for safety and soundness 􀂃 Replaced 12 deteriorated hangar header beams as a result of condition assessment 􀂃 Cleaned, sealed and painted hangar rows 2-8 to increase useful life 􀂃 Installed an airport video camera which may be viewed through the internet 􀂃 Replaced obsolete fuel terminal on east side with new terminal from west side 􀂃 Began process of FAA Airport Master Plan update 􀂃 Completed Airport Storm Water Drainage inventory (as built) to assist in future development opportunities 􀂃 Completed roofing project for City hangars rows 9 and 10 with single seam roofing system over the existing roof 􀂃 Investigated opportunities for fuel vendors, branded or unbranded aviation fuels 􀂃 Continued to promote Jet fuel installation 􀂃 Repaired, replaced and/or upgraded runway lighting system 􀂃 Repaired, replaced and/or upgraded runway end identification lighting system Page 136 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Update the Airport Business Master Plan 􀂃 Establish program with FAA and/or local investment in land opportunities adjacent to the Airport 􀂃 Continue to promote an RFP for aeronautical business development at the Airport 􀂃 Apply to FAA for replacement of obsolete Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI) with new FAA approved Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) Systems 􀂃 Upgrade and replace limited and obsolete airport security access system 􀂃 Complete perimeter fencing of west side of Airport 􀂃 Crack sealing of airport apron areas 􀂃 Complete FAA Airport Master Plan update 􀂃 Design and publish new updated website for the Airport Page 137 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget AIRPORT FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj. Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 341.930 Airport Security Service 16,845 13,500 13,500 12,500 13,500 344.604 Flowage Fee 11,015 10,400 10,400 10,380 10,380 362.501 Property Leases 202,318 195,000 195,000 200,000 205,000 362.502 Tie Down & Hangar Rent 412,020 435,000 435,000 395,000 402,000 362.503 Fuel Facility Rent 17,365 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 Total Operating Revenue 659,563 671,900 671,900 635,880 648,880 Operating Expense 546.000.10 Salaries and Wages (18,403) (19,100) (19,100) (19,620) (19,700) 546.000.20 Personnel Benefits (3,988) (6,700) (6,700) (4,670) (5,010) 546.000.30 Supplies 0 (2,000) (2,000) (2,000) (2,000) 546.000.40 Services & Charges (400,686) (537,800) (537,800) (454,100) (424,100) 546.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services 0 0 0 0 0 546.800.01 Depreciation & Amortization (224,392) (300,000) (300,000) (218,000) (218,000) Total Operating Expenses (647,469) (865,600) (865,600) (698,390) (668,810) Operating Income (Loss) 12,094 (193,700) (193,700) (62,510) (19,930) Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 7,844 4,000 4,000 3,000 3,000 369.900 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) 11,224 1,000 1,000 500 500 395.100 Gain/Loss Sale of Fixed Assets 0 0 0 0 0 546.100.80 Debt Service Interest (70,963) (64,100) (64,100) (62,800) (58,800) Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) (51,895) (59,100) (59,100) (59,300) (55,300) Net Income (Loss) (39,801) (252,800) (252,800) (121,810) (75,230) Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 535.801.00 Depreciation & Amortization 224,392 300,000 300,000 218,000 218,000 Net W/C From Operations 184,591 47,200 47,200 96,190 142,770 Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 333.201 Federal Aviation Grant 2,439,158 349,800 349,800 0 0 334.*** State Grant 34,877 8,400 8,400 0 0 399.000 Other Sources (9,905) 0 0 0 0 Total Resources 2,464,130 358,200 358,200 0 0 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100.05 Net Change in Restricted Assets 38 0 0 0 0 590.100.11 Inc in Fixed Assets-Benefits 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.21 Inc in Fixed Assets-Salaries 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.65 Inc in Fixed Assets-Construction (2,657,536) (650,000) (550,000) (126,000) (124,000) 590.100.70 Debt Service Principal (65,000) (85,000) (85,000) (100,000) (105,000) Total Uses (2,722,498) (735,000) (635,000) (226,000) (229,000) Net Change in W/C (73,776) (329,600) (229,600) (129,810) (86,230) Beginning W/C 1/1 1,011,718 937,942 937,942 708,342 578,532 Ending W/C 12/31 937,942 608,342 708,342 578,532 492,302 Net Change in W/C $ ( 73,776) $ (329,600) $ (229,600) $ (129,810) $ (86,230) Page 138 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget INSURANCE The Insurance Fund is maintained to pay unemployment insurance claims and to pay for property and liability losses which either falls below the City’s deductible level or for which the City has no coverage. In recent years, there has been a rapid increase in insurance premiums coupled with the decrease in coverage that has caused the City to continually re-evaluate its insurance program. The City currently meets its insurance needs by participating in the Washington Cities Insurance Authority’s Insurance Pool (WCIA). From 1994 through 2009 no contributions have been made to this fund since interest earnings have been sufficient to cover the annual cost of operations. In 2010, inter-fund transfers were made to the insurance fund to offset increased unemployment insurance claims. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Evaluated cost saving measures while maintaining quality insurance coverage 􀂃 Continued to maintain adequate reserves to meet uninsured costs 􀂃 Evaluated policies and procedures to help control loss issues 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to evaluate cost saving measures while maintaining quality insurance coverage 􀂃 Continue to maintain adequate reserves to meet uninsured costs 􀂃 Continue to evaluate policies and procedures to help control loss issues Page 139 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget INSURANCE FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 361.110 Investment Income 11,025 8,000 8,000 3,700 3,800 397.100 Miscellaneous Revenue 0 238,600 238,600 0 0 Total Operating Revenue 11,025 246,600 246,600 3,700 3,800 Operating Expense 517.700.20 Personnel Benefits (252,570) (70,000) (70,000) (55,000) (55,000) 517.700.40 Services & Charges (5,557) (8,000) (8,000) (3,700) (3,700) Total Operating Expenses (258,128) (78,000) (78,000) (58,700) (58,700) Operating Income (Loss) (247,102) 168,600 168,600 (55,000) (54,900) Net Change in W/C (247,102) 168,600 168,600 (55,000) (54,900) Beginning W/C 1/1 2,481,572 2,234,469 2,234,469 2,403,069 2,348,069 Ending W/C 12/31 2,234,469 2,403,069 2,403,069 2,348,069 2,293,169 Net Change in W/C $ (247,102) $ 168,600 $ 168,600 $ (55,000) $ (54,900) Page 140 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget FIDUCIARY FUNDS Fiduciary funds are used to report assets held in a trustee or agency capacity for others and cannot be used to support the City’s own programs. The City has two fiduciary funds. Fund 611-Fire Relief and Pension Fund provides a pension for eligible firefighters. Fund 651-Agency Fund accounts for resources held in a purely custodial capacity; this fund is not budgeted. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Continued to provide pension benefits to eligible firefighters 􀂃 Maximized interest earnings to support the Fire Relief and Pension Fund 􀂃 Provided accountability for custodial funds 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to provide pension benefits to eligible firefighters 􀂃 Maximize interest earnings to support the Fire Relief and Pension Fund 􀂃 Provide accountability for custodial funds Page 141 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Fiduciary Fund 611 Fire Relief & Pension 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 2,940,766 2,828,642 2,828,642 2,789,842 2,732,932 Investment Income 11,455 30,000 23,000 25,000 25,000 Transfer In 58,000 63,600 63,600 65,000 65,000 Total Revenue $3,010,221 $2,922,242 $2,915,242 $2,879,842 $2,822,932 Expenditures Salaries & Wages 171,521 121,400 121,400 139,300 139,460 Personnel Benefits 2,708 4,000 2,000 3,610 3,990 Services & Charges 7,350 4,000 2,000 4,000 4,000 Undesignated Ending Fund Balance 2,828,642 2,792,842 2,789,842 2,732,932 2,675,482 Total Expenditures $3,010,221 $2,922,242 $2,915,242 $2,879,842 $2,822,932 Page 142 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget PERMANENT FUNDS Permanent funds are used to report resources that are legally restricted to the extent that only earnings, and not principal, may be used for purposes that support the City’s programs. The City has one permanent fund; Fund 701-Cemetery Endowed Fund accounts for non-expendable investments held by the City’s trustee. The interest earned on investments can be used only for preservation and capital projects at the cemetery. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Transferred earnings to the Cemetery operating fund for capital improvements 􀂃 Transferred interest earnings to provide payment of debt service should the Cemetery borrow construction funds 􀂃 Provided accountability for resources held in trust by the City 􀂃 Continued to maximize interest earnings 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Transfer earnings to the Cemetery operating fund for capital improvements 􀂃 Transfer interest earnings to provide payment of debt service should the Cemetery borrow construction funds 􀂃 Provide accountability for resources held in trust by the City 􀂃 Continue to maximize interest earnings Page 143 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Permanent Fund 701 Cemetery Endowed Care 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Reserved Fund Balance 1,374,367 1,352,859 1,352,859 1,401,859 1,451,859 Unreserved Fund Balance 106,029 153,503 153,503 127,103 100,303 Charges for Goods and Services 40,640 62,000 49,000 50,000 50,000 Investment Income 25,326 15,000 3,900 4,500 4,700 Total Revenue $1,546,362 $1,583,362 $1,559,262 $1,583,462 $1,606,862 Expenditures Intergovernmental 40,000 30,300 30,300 31,300 22,300 Designated Ending Fund Balance 1,352,859 1,414,859 1,401,859 1,451,859 1,501,859 Undesignated Ending Fund Balance 153,503 138,203 127,103 100,303 82,703 Total Expenditures $1,546,362 $1,583,362 $1,559,262 $1,583,462 $1,606,862 Page 144 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Legal Page 145 F.T.E. = Full Time Equivalent City Attorney Dan Heid 13 F.T.E Legal Assistant (2) Prosecutors (2) Page 146 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget LEGAL DEPARTMENT MISS ION STATEME N T The mission of the legal department is to provide accurate and timely legal advice and information to the City; represent the City with great tenacity and integrity in all civil and criminal litigation; and provide considerate and thoughtful customer service to other departments and the public, both individually and as a whole. DEPARTMENT OVERVI EW This department consists of the Legal Department and the City Clerk’s office. The Legal Department represents the City in all litigation, including civil and criminal misdemeanor cases. The department prepares ordinances, resolutions, petitions, contracts, leases, easements, deeds, notices and other legal documents; and provides legal counsel and advice to the City. The department prosecutes criminal cases in Auburn Municipal Court as well as prosecutes and/or defends civil actions brought by or against the City. Responsibilities of the City Clerk Division include monitoring various legal matters; issuing pet licenses; acting as a central repository for all municipal records; processing insurance claims and requests for public information; processing passport applications, ordinance codification, City Council agendas and minutes, and LEOFF Board agendas and minutes. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Focused on and strived for courteous, prompt and responsible customer service to those with whom we come in contact in our city responsibilities 􀂃 Continued level of customer service by responding to public disclosure requests within five business days 􀂃 Continued work with police department and municipal court to develop procedures to enhance effective pursuit of prosecution cases 􀂃 Provided legal updates to City departments and employees on public records 􀂃 Provided updates and training to the police department on new laws and case decisions to enhance effective prosecution and to assist police on ever-changing legal issues 􀂃 Continued work with City departments to develop procedures to enhance effective representation of legal issues on the City’s behalf 􀂃 Continued work with the court and public defender (and defense bar) to better handle caseload management and streamline court processes to improve public access to the courts and adjudication of cases 􀂃 Worked with the Mayor and the City’s Intergovernmental Services Coordinator, as well as the regional and state participants, to review proposed legislative bills and to develop strategies for and responses to legislative bills to enhance the ability of Auburn and cities in the State to carry out their municipal responsibilities 􀂃 Worked with the police department, attorneys and law enforcement agencies of neighboring communities to address regional criminal justice and law enforcement needs 􀂃 Worked with Information Services and Communication staff to prepare for implementation of automated agenda preparation software 􀂃 Worked with Washington State Regional Archivist to relocate archived records to locations outside the Green River flood threat area 􀂃 Worked with local and regional service providers to address needs of victims of domestic violence 􀂃 Developed and proposed new ordinances for adoption by the City Council to address the ongoing needs of the City and its citizens Page 147 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Apply for Washington State’s Electronic Imaging Systems certification which will allow creation of microfilm from scanned images 􀂃 Implement Agenda Manager program to provide faster agenda preparation and improve work flow 􀂃 Develop and refine prosecution strategies, including standard dispositional recommendations, to approach cases in the municipal court and to enhance prosecution effectiveness 􀂃 Continue working with local and regional service providers to assemble a support network to address needs of victims of domestic violence, including pursuit of the one-stop concept 􀂃 Work with the Mayor, Council and City departments to proactively develop recommended language for updating and amending ordinances and city code sections to assure that the codes are as useful as they can be to meet the needs of the city within the parameters of state law 􀂃 Work with the Mayor, City departments and risk management to develop procedures to enhance effective representation of legal issues on the City’s behalf 􀂃 Continue the level of customer service by responding to public disclosure requests within five business days 􀂃 Continue working with attorneys and city clerks from neighboring cities, as well as municipal associations, to address regional and statewide municipal issues 􀂃 Continue work with the Mayor and the City’s Intergovernmental Services Coordinator, as well as the regional and state participants to develop strategies for legislative bills to enhance the ability of Auburn and cities in the State to carry out their municipal responsibilities 􀂃 Continue work with court and public defender (and defense bar) to better handle caseload management and streamline court processes to improve public access to the courts and adjudication of cases 􀂃 Continue work with police department and municipal court to develop procedures to enhance effective pursuit of prosecution cases 􀂃 Continuing work with local and regional service providers providers to address needs of victims of domestic violence Page 148 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/15 Legal 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 960,118 886,700 886,700 906,470 920,080 Personnel Benefits 291,980 310,300 310,300 299,740 331,240 Supplies 7,457 8,700 8,700 11,200 11,200 Services & Charges 89,219 109,350 109,350 112,150 113,150 Intergovernmental 81,610 127,900 127,900 137,200 137,200 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 245,204 232,100 232,100 192,800 189,700 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $1,675,588 $1,675,050 $1,675,050 $1,659,560 $1,702,570 Department Employees 001 Legal FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Legal FTE's 16.00 14.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 TOTAL LEGAL FTE's 16.00 14.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 2.0 FTE's -1 City Prosecutor and 1 Office Assistant were part of the reduction in force in May 2009. 1.0 FTE -Associate City Attorney was part of the reduction in force in December 2009. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 149 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Minimal increases in the number of ordinances prepared is partially reflective of change in practice whereby only those Council actions which prescribe permanent rules of conduct or government that specifically require adoption by ordinance according to state law are done by ordinance. Other Council actions involving contracts or actions involving special or temporary nature can be accomplished by resolution. Civil Forfeiture Cases Civil forfeiture cases involve property and assets seized by the police department in relation to criminal activity, usually narcotic sales. In addition to any criminal prosecution, each seizure requires that a file be opened and judicial administrative action taken in order to forfeit the seized property to the City. Often the forfeiture of involved property is the primary form of punishment imposed upon the criminal defendant. This graph illustrates the number of forfeiture cases handled by the City Attorney's Office. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -LEGAL DEPARTMENT Public Disclosure Requests -Responded to Within 5 Business Days The graph illustrates the number of public disclosure requests received by the City Clerk's office and the number of those requests responded to within five business days from the receipt of the request. The complexity of the request or the volume of materials requested may affect the response time. Ordinances & Resolutions Prepared 2,7342,354 3,0592,446 3,063 2,446 3,100 2,480 3,130 2,560 3,160 2,690 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Public Disclosure Requests # Requests Respond in 5 Days 84 155 68 149 65 119 62 125 60 127 60 130 0 70 140 210 280 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Ordinances & Resolutions Prepared Ordinances Resolutions 89 139 173 120 135 150 0 50 100 150 200 2007 2008 Est 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Civil Forfeiture Cases Cases Handled Page 150 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Planning Page 151 F.T.E. = Full-Time Equivalent Page 152 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MISSION STATEMENT To serve the Auburn community by providing consistent and high quality customer service and implement the City Council goals in land use planning, protecting the environment, and building safety and efficiency. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The Planning and Development Department is responsible for the following city programs: 􀂃 Formulate and recommend comprehensive goals on planning; ensure compliance with the Growth Management Act 􀂃 Ensure compliance with statutory requirements relative to environmental issues 􀂃 Direct preparation and review of environmental impact statements and technical reports and determine final action on environmental issues 􀂃 Ensure compliance with adopted building codes 􀂃 Act as City’s responsible official for SEPA compliance, Floodplain Administrator, and Shoreline Management Program Manager 􀂃 Ensure code compliance to Auburn City Code Titles 5, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, and 18 18 􀂃 Management of the City’s One Stop Permit Center 􀂃 Administration of the City’s business license program and parking permit program 􀂃 Provide staff to planning commission, downtown redevelopment committee, hearing examiner, and planning and development committees 􀂃 Coordinate with other city departments to ensure City plans and projects are compatible with the comprehensive plan 􀂃 Coordinate with Valley Regional Fire Authority land use and building permit reviews and code enforcement 􀂃 Coordinate with other city departments on provision of services to new development 􀂃 Represent City on regional planning, environmental, economic development, and other policy issues 􀂃 Coordinate with other jurisdictions and agencies to resolve regional issues 􀂃 Develop and maintain the comprehensive plan and special purpose plans 􀂃 Provide leadership on public or private annexations 􀂃 Develop and maintain zoning ordinance 􀂃 Act as liaison to Auburn Chamber of Commerce and Auburn Downtown Association 2009 and 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Received $3 million Economic Development Administration Grant for the South Division Street Promenade project 􀂃 Managed other planning and environmental grants in excess of $1.2 million 􀂃 Completed design of the South Division Street Promenade project 􀂃 Completed design and construction of the City Hall Plaza 􀂃 Facilitated the permitting and construction of the new 89,000 One East Main Professional Plaza and 40,000 Medical Office Building/Parking Garage projects, 210,000 square foot Super Wal-Mart, Mary Olson Farm parking area expansion, new 80,000 square foot Salish Building at Green River Community College, King County Housing Authority major rebuild of Green River Homes; and Activity Center at Les Gove 􀂃 Improved permit process through institution of Fast track review for small project permits, two iteration review for engineering permits, and early coordination efforts with applicants on project reviews 􀂃 Implemented department reorganization into 4 key service areas to enhance customer service, promote staff accountability, and clarify roles and responsibilities 􀂃 Completed Phase 1 of the Subdivision and Zoning Code updates as well as temporary sign code, addressed temporary use permits, and revised conditional/administrative use permits Page 153 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Provided staff support for the repeal of 3 moratoriums consisting of the Multi-family development, floodplain development, and West Hill development 􀂃 Coordinated final plats for Jovita Heights, Auburn 40, Trail Run and Kersey 3 􀂃 Managed construction of bird observation tower at Auburn Environmental Park and Coal Creek stream restoration at Ballard Park 􀂃 Completed Phase 1 environmental site assessment at base of Peasley Canyon in coordination with King County 􀂃 Established an inter-department and urban tree board committee to establish a program to address tree issues within the Auburn community 􀂃 Facilitated adoption of new floodplain regulations 􀂃 Participated in city wide effort to respond to Green River potential flooding as a result of Howard Hanson Dam 􀂃 Coordinated the update of the City’s Shoreline Master Program 􀂃 Coordinated the adoption of the 2009 International Building Codes 􀂃 Participated in the multi-department effort to update and enhance the City’s graffiti program 􀂃 Developed and council adopted Mixed-Use/Multi-Family Design Standards 􀂃 Completed a municipal and community green house gas inventory 2011-2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Construct the South Division Street Promenade project 􀂃 Complete design of Mill Creek, Wetland 5K reach in partnership with the Army Corps of Engineers 􀂃 Construct Fenster Levee Setback Phase 2B and restoration and development elements in the Auburn Environmental Park 􀂃 Update the Auburn Environmental Park Master Plan 􀂃 Work with City Council on climate action planning and policy development 􀂃 Prepare City Environmental Protection Plan 􀂃 Establish quantitative and qualitative performance measures for all department services and functions 􀂃 Complete update of all customer service handouts 􀂃 Complete Phase 2 Code Update and development of a master plan code 􀂃 Develop a site plan review process 􀂃 Continue support of the City’s Economic Development initiatives and programs 􀂃 Participate in multi-department efforts to implement electronic permit processing 􀂃 Begin in 2012 the 7-year major update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan 􀂃 Continue improvements in the provision of building review and inspection services 􀂃 Implement work flow efficiencies for improved code enforcement response times and reduce open case files Page 154 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/17 Planning & 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Development Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 1,859,479 1,782,700 1,782,700 1,847,370 1,872,540 Personnel Benefits 541,239 644,700 644,700 615,650 677,490 Supplies 10,677 23,000 23,000 24,000 33,200 Services & Charges 407,503 481,600 471,600 444,450 516,100 Intergovernmental 104,159 125,000 125,000 243,000 169,000 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 521,404 530,170 530,170 547,300 532,000 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $3,444,461 $3,587,170 $3,577,170 $3,721,770 $3,800,330 Department Employees 001 Planning & Development FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Planning & Community FTE's 34.00 21.00 24.00 24.00 24.00 TOTAL PLANNING FTE's 34.00 21.00 24.00 24.00 24.00 6.0 FTE's were moved from Engineering to Planning in May 2010. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 3.0 FTE's -Building Inspector, Principal Planner and Senior Planner positions were frozen in the 2009/2010 budget. 3.25 FTE's -2 Plans Examiners, 1 Planning Technician, and .25 Building Inspector were frozen in early 2009. 0.75 FTE was moved from Planning to the Mayor in 2009. 3.0 FTE's -1 Senior Planner, 1 Planner, and 1 Development Services Specialist were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. 6.0 FTE's -2 Senior Planners, 1 Assistant Planning Secretary, 1 Graphic Specialist/Planning Technician, 1 Permit Technician, and 1 Code Compliance Officer were part of the reduction in force in May 2009. Page 155 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Efficient Processing of Project Permits The City incorporates a 120-day timeline into its code (ACC Section 14.11.010). With moving from a manual time period tracking to an automated system associated with its permit management software, the City seeks to track and increase the efficiency of project permit processing by reducing the average processing timeframe by five percent each year in the coming biennium. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Number of Building Permits Issued This performance measure shows the number of building permit applications submitted, reviewed for conformance with applicable standards and approved (issued) by the City. The building permit category includes not only authorization of construction of new buildings but additions, and modifications to existing buildings. The level of building permit activity is often cyclical and governed by local economic conditions and trends generalized across the various categories of of construction such as residential, commercial or industrial. The level of building permit activity is an expression of community reinvestment and increasing assessed valuation. Code Enforcement -Cases Opened & Closed This performance measure is indicative of the identification and resolution of code enforcement cases. It shows the volume of new cases that the city has received (opened) and the volume of cases that have been resolved (closed). The performance measure reflects a combination of factors, including identification and resolution of violations by code enforcement staff, the ability to effectively resolve violations and the public’s increasing awareness of the City’s laws and code enforcement services through the filing of complaints. 1,503 546 592 600 600 600 0 250 500 750 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Building Permits Issued 931 951 1,003 1,160 897 1,097 700 800 750 850 750 850 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Cases Opened & & Closed Opened Closed 120 120 120 105 100 100 0 35 70 105 140 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Number of Days in Permit Processing Page 156 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources whose expenditures are legally restricted. The Planning & Development department is responsible for the budget in the following special revenue fund: ♦ Fund 121-Business Improvement Area (BIA) Fund accounts for special assessments received from downtown property owners for downtown promotion and improvements. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Supported Auburn Downtown Association in promotional efforts for the downtown property owners and retailers 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to support the Auburn Downtown Association to promote the central business area Page 157 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Special Revenue Funds 121 Business Improvement Area 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 35,506 45,296 45,296 44,396 43,496 Business Improvement Assessment 52,480 53,000 53,000 53,000 54,000 Investment Income 405 400 100 100 100 Total Revenue $88,391 $98,696 $98,396 $97,496 $97,596 Expenditures Supplies 8,267 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 Services & Charges 34,828 59,300 46,000 46,000 46,000 Undesignated Fund Balance 45,296 31,396 44,396 43,496 43,596 Total Expenditures $88,391 $98,696 $98,396 $97,496 $97,596 Page 158 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget COMMERCIAL RETAIL FUND MISSION STATEMENT Included in the economic development function of the Planning & Community Development Department is the improvement of approximately 14,000 square feet of commercial space in the Auburn Station. The Commercial Retail Fund provides the financial support necessary to implement this function, utilizing public reinvestment in the downtown as a tool to stimulate private sector initiatives to redevelop downtown through the creation of new retail, office and residential space. This fund was closed in 2010 because the city has sublet its rights to the commercial space in the Auburn Station. The assets were moved to the General Fund. Page 159 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget COMMERCIAL RETAIL FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj. Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 343.500 Rents & Leases 0 0 0 0 0 Total Operating Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Operating Expense 538.900.3 0 S u pplies 0 0 0 0 0 538.900.40 Service s & Charges 0 0 0 0 0 538.910.01 Depreciation & Amortization (42,238) (61,000) 0 0 0 Total Operating Expenses (42,238) (61,000) 0 0 0 Operating Income (Loss) (42,238) (61,000) 0 0 0 Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 0 0 0 0 0 Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) 0 0 0 0 0 Net Income (Loss) (42,238) (61,000) 0 0 0 Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 538.911.01 Depreciation & Amortization 42,238 61,000 0 0 0 Net W/C From Operations 0 0 0 0 0 Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 397.100 Transfer In 0 0 0 0 0 399.000 Other Sources 0 790,336 790,336 0 0 Total Resources 0 790,336 790,336 0 0 Uses Other Than Operations Net Change in Restricted Assets 0 0 0 0 0 597.100.55 Operating Transfer Out 0 (1,440,613) (1,440,613) 0 0 Total Uses 0 (1,440,613) (1,440,613) 0 0 Net Change in W/C 0 (650,277) (650,277) 0 0 Beginning W/C 1/1 650,277 650,277 650,277 0 0 Ending W/C 12/31 650,277 0 0 0 0 Net Change in W/C $ 0 $ (650,277) $ (650,277) $ 0 $ 0 Page 160 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Police Page 161 F.T.E. = Full-Time Equivalent Sergeant Detectives (7) Page 162 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SCORE The South Correctional Entity (SCORE) consolidated correctional facility was established by the “Member Cities” of Auburn, Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Renton, SeaTac and Tukwila to provide correctional services within the jurisdiction of the Member Cities for the purpose of detaining arrestees and sentenced offenders in the furtherance of public safety and emergencies. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS • Established SCORE through a “Formation Interlocal Agreement” • SCORE PDA issued $86 million in special obligation bonds for facility development • Track one time start-up costs 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES • Continue to track start up costs and on-going operations expenses Page 163 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/20 Jail-SCORE 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 0 0 0 0 0 Personnel Benefits 0 0 0 0 0 Supplies 0 0 0 0 0 Services & Charges 0 0 0 0 0 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 5,937,470 4,106,250 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service: Interest 0 0 0 150,000 0 Interfund Payments for Services 0 0 0 0 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $6,087,470 $4,106,250 Page 164 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget POLICE DEPARTMENT VISION To be a professional law enforcement agency that is trusted, respected and supported by the citizens of Auburn. MISSION STATEMENT To provide professional policing to our community that allows our citizens to be safe and enjoy a quality of life. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Provided professional Police Services to Six Reporting Districts. All six Districts are staffed 24/7, officers have the responsibility of having a project in their District that targets specific issues. Community Response Team officers continued to develop information and assist all city departments and provide Blockwatch programs in our neighborhoods 􀂃 Prepared timely crime analysis data that assisted officers in the field in the prevention of crime and the detection, and apprehension of persons responsible for crime. Weekly reports go out on crimes stats and detectives route information/probable cause bulletins to the patrol division 􀂃 Continued to perform annual review of workload staffing plans for 2009 and 2010 in order to efficiently identify enforcement trends & staffing needs 􀂃 Continued to expand the use of Photo Safe Red Light Enforcement and Speed Enforcement within the City of Auburn in order to enhance the public safety of our pedestrian and vehicular traffic. In 2009, two school zones were added and surveys throughout the city were completed to identify future intersections that would be appropriate for photo enforcement 􀂃 Continued to expand and direct CRT officer’s toward the Problem Oriented Policing (POP) philosophy. CRT officers continued to provide directed policing, target gangs, handle the Rental Housing Program and Blockwatch presentations 􀂃 Continued to look at alternatives toward reducing costs associated with outside jail services. S.COR.E. is building a facility and may take over the City of Auburn jail operations as soon as January 1, 2011. Negotiations are ongoing with Yakima and a possible contract with Snohomish County is being examined 􀂃 Maintained a response time of less than four minutes to all Priority One calls 􀂃 Spent 230 hours in 2009 and 288 in 2010 verifying the address and residency of registered sex offenders (RSO) funded by a grant through King County Sheriff’s Office 􀂃 Provided professional Police Services for the Special Emphasis Gang Initiative Program funded through a Justice Assistance grant 􀂃 Participated in several coordinated nighttime seat belt patrols funded by a grant received through The Washington Traffic Safety Commission 􀂃 Participated in “Drive Hammered Get Nailed” Multi-jurisdictional DUI Patrols funded by a grant received through The Washington Traffic Safety Commission 􀂃 Provided professional Police Services for the Auto Theft Prevention Grant Program funded through Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs 􀂃 Applied for, and was awarded an equipment grant through the US Department of Justice, Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance (JAG) in the amount of $43,417 􀂃 Applied for, and was awarded a grant (CHRP) through US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) in the amount of $1,290,880 for the retention of 5 commissioned police officers from 2010 – 2012 Page 165 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES • Provide Professional Police Services to Six Reporting Districts in order to ensure that Auburn is a safe and secure place to live and/or have a business • When supported by traffic analysis patterns we will expand the use of Photo Safe Red Light Enforcement and School Zone Speed Enforcement within the City of Auburn to enhance the public safety of our pedestrian and vehicular traffic • Create efficiencies utilizing technology to include implementation of SECTOR (e-ticketing) in our patrol fleet as well as a new Computer Aided Dispatch system • Develop succession plan that includes training and education opportunities for promotions and career development • Improve traffic safety by increasing DUI arrests by 5% • Maintain a response time of less than four minutes to all Priority One calls • Secure grant funding for the 2010/2011 RSO program • Continue to participate in coordinated nighttime seat belt and DUI patrols • Secure grant funding for the 2010/2011 Auto Theft Prevention Grant Program Page 166 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/21 Police 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 10,617,808 10,984,380 10,984,380 10,001,720 10,105,810 Personnel Benefits 3,416,004 3,867,200 3,867,200 3,699,520 4,117,660 Supplies 275,606 400,400 360,400 204,930 212,570 Services & Charges 2,739,711 3,505,625 3,529,625 3,446,030 3,453,420 Intergovernmental 3,788,174 2,837,800 2,453,800 16,500 16,500 Capital Outlays 0 15,000 15,000 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 2,296,715 2,039,810 2,039,810 2,299,900 2,280,800 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $23,134,018 $23,650,215 $23,250,215 $19,668,600 $20,186,760 Department Employees 001 Police FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Police FTE's 151.50 134.50 130.50 117.50 117.50 TOTAL POLICE FTE's 151.50 134.50 130.50 117.50 117.50 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 13.0 FTE's -2 Corrections Supervisors, 11 Corrections Officers are being eliminated in the 2011 budget as a result of the elimination of the City jail and formation of the multi-jurisdictional South Correctional Entity (SCORE). 12.0 FTE's -1 Commander, 2 Sergeants, 1 Detective, 5 Police Officers, 1 Corrections Officer and 2 Police Specialists positions were frozen in the 2009/2010 budget. 4.0 FTE's -2 Police Officers, 1 Police Secretary, and 1 Corrections Officer were frozen in early 2009. 4.0 FTE's -2 Police Officers, 1 Professional Standards Coordinator, and 1 Police Receptionist were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. 1.0 FTE -Crime Analyst was part of the reduction in force in May 2009. Page 167 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources whose expenditures are legally restricted. The Police department is responsible for the budget in the following special revenue fund: ♦ Fund 117-The Drug Forfeiture Fund accounts for drug money that has been forfeited. The expenditure of funds is restricted to drug enforcement activity. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS • Continued to provide a detective position to the Tacoma DEA Task Force. In 2009, TNET (Tahoma Narcotics Enforcement Team) arrested 50 suspects, confiscated 31 pounds of various drugs and received $1,039,120 in forfeited assets. In 2009, Seattle/VNET (Valley Narcotics Enforcement Team) received $782,101 in forfeited assets. In 2010, VNET received the DEA international award for Top Interdiction Group. In addition, they received a separate award for successful large scale marijuana grow investigations • Installed a drying cabinet in the large evidence room in order to process items more efficiently. Completed in December of 2009 • Increased the number of arrests for drug sales by 5%. In 2009, there was a 23% increase in drug arrests and a 22% increase in search warrants 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES • Replace the existing evidence van with a new fully equipped evidence/processing vehicle • Continue to provide a detective position to the Tahoma DEA Task Force and the Seattle/VNET Task Force • Increase the number of arrests for drug sales by 5% • The on-line NARS (Narcotic Activity Reporting System) has been a successful tool. Continue to investigate tips from the public • Continue to train and educate patrol officers in authorizing search warrants related to drug related traffic stops Page 168 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 117 Drug Forfeiture 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 673,890 745,747 745,747 710,547 513,237 Intergovernmental 56,318 0 53,200 46,100 46,100 Investment Income 4,662 5,000 2,500 2,600 2,600 Confiscated/Forfeited Property 304,926 220,000 300,000 250,000 250,000 Total Revenue $1,039,796 $970,747 $1,101,447 $1,009,247 $811,937 Expenditures Salaries & Wages 90,364 100,000 100,000 99,970 99,970 Personnel Benefits 25,790 28,100 28,100 31,450 34,460 Supplies 26,857 34,400 34,400 17,000 17,000 Services & Charges 36,710 68,100 68,100 92,400 98,850 Intergovernmental 0 20,000 0 0 0 Capital Outlay 114,328 149,900 149,900 148,740 0 Interfund Payments for Services 0 10,400 10,400 106,450 47,950 Undesignated Fund Balance 745,747 559,847 710,547 513,237 513,707 Total Expenditures $1,039,796 $970,747 $1,101,447 $1,009,247 $811,937 Page 169 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget The department continues to maintain an excellent response time to priority one calls (Life threatening/serious bodily injury). We will strive to maintain a response time of less than four minutes to all serious incidents. Domestic Violence Incidents The City offers various programs that provide assistance to victims of domestic violence. A dedicated full time DV detective works collaboratively with members of the prosecutor's office, domestic violence advocates and the victim's assistance programs to reduce the cycle of violence. In 2009 we experienced a 6.9% increase in domestic violence cases over 2008. We will continue to work with victims of domestic violence so that they feel comfortable in reporting these often unreported acts of violence. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -POLICE DEPARTMENT Auburn Crime Rankings The 2009 Washington Association of Sheriffs & Police Chiefs (WASPC) annual report showed a 8.3% reduction in Part 1 & Part 2 violent crimes and an 8.8% reduction in Part 1 & 2 property crime in the City of Auburn over 2008. The Auburn Police Department's goal is to continue the current trend of reductions in Part 1 & 2 crimes into 2011 & 2012. Priority One Response Time in Minutes 69.4 56.3 53.5 55.0 56.0 56.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 75.0 100.0 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Crimes per 1,000 Citizens 3.01 2.99 3.17 2.7 4 4 0.0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.0 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Priority One Response Time in Minutes 661 709 758 760 763 766 0 250 500 750 1,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Domestic Violence Incidents Page 170 Public Works Page 171 Utilities Engineer (9) Water Distribution Manager (13) Sewer Division Manager (10) Street Division Manager (11) Construction Manager (5) Survey Supervisor (3) Secretary City Engineer/Assistant Director (108) Traffic Operations Engineer (2) Assistant City Engineer (20) Maintenance & Operations Manager (68) Storm Division Manager (15) Fleet and Warehouse Operations (5) F.T.E. = Full-Time Equivalent M & O Support Manager (1) Office Assistant Project Engineer (2) Traffic Engineer (4) Water Operations Manager (7) Project Engineer (2) Project Engineer Project Engineer Page 172 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MISSION STATEMENT Public Works strives to foster and support quality of life of the community and to promote vigorous economic development through providing reliable and safe public streets and utilities and careful management of new infrastructure constructed by the City and new development. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The Public Works Department is functionally divided into the Administrative Services, Engineering Services & Management, Transportation Planning & Management, and Utility Planning & Management sections located in the Customer Service Center and Equipment Rental, Street, Sewer, Storm, Water Divisions located at the Maintenance & Operations building. The Department is responsible for review, approval and management of the construction of capital improvements for streets and utilities constructed by new development for public dedication and ownership. The Department manages the City’s public works capital improvement program program for design, right-of-way acquisition, construction, and operations and maintenance of city’s infrastructure including utilities and public streets. The Department provides survey services, property and Right of Way records management; and equipment rental and maintenance support for all departments. Public Works is responsible for administering standards for all city-owned utility and street infrastructure construction quality for development and land use throughout the City. The Department also manages city owned utilities to include water, sewer and storm drainage and associated real property assets. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Continued the design & permitting and began property acquisition of A Street NW from 14th NW to 3rd Street NW 􀂃 Completed the final phase of the Auburn Way South Sewer Improvement Project 􀂃 Completed the environmental and began final design and property acquisition of the M Street SE Grade Separation Project 􀂃 Completed construction of street and utility improvements in the Les Gove neighborhood 􀂃 Continued to Implement the Save Our Streets preservation program 􀂃 Implemented a new arterial streets pavement preservation program 􀂃 Worked with Council to complete updates to the City’s Design Standards in coordination with the overall Development Code revision project 􀂃 Completed a complete revision of the Engineering Construction Standards and Standard Details 􀂃 Completed Phase IB of the Intelligent Transportation System and began design on the South Auburn ITS project 􀂃 Completed design of the South Division Promenade project 􀂃 Completed design and construction of the Harvey and 8th Street NE Improvements 􀂃 Completed the replacement of the Peasley Canyon Culvert 􀂃 Completed construction of the 8th and R Street NE and the 4th and F Street SE traffic signals 􀂃 Completed temporary levee protection measures for both the Green River and the Mill Creek basin areas related to the issues with the Howard Hanson Dam 􀂃 Completed the 2007 Gateway Project located at the intersection of M Street SE and Auburn Way south 􀂃 Completed the biennial sidewalk repair and replacement program 􀂃 Completed the construction of the Auburn Way North Pedestrian Crossing in the vicinity of 42nd Street NE 􀂃 Developed & implemented a phased improvement plan for City utilities SCADA System 􀂃 Participated in WSDOT funded preliminary engineering study of the By-Pass options for SR 164 with Corridor Working Group 􀂃 Continued to pursue all options to develop or secure water rights and firm supply 􀂃 Completed implementation of the City Maintenance Management System (CarteGraph) Page 173 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Coordinated with Kent the annexation/de-annexation of boundary ROW’s for public safety and continuity of responsibility 􀂃 Continued to apply for grants & loans to help fund projects programmed in our 6 year Transportation Improvement Plan including successfully securing grants for a new traffic signal, ITS expansion and battery back-up installations 􀂃 Completed annual Traffic Signal safety testing and general maintenance 􀂃 Completed Traffic Signal safety improvements at 37th St NW & West Valley Highway, M ST SE & Auburn Way South and 15th St NW & C St NW 􀂃 Continued monitoring and implementing updates to Traffic Signal intersection timing plans, peak hour coordination plans and special event corridor timing plans 􀂃 Continued coordinating with Auburn schools and updated all School Zone Flashing Beacon timings 􀂃 Completed annual Citywide Traffic Calming Program Improvements 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Complete design, permitting, property acquisition & construction of A Street NW from 14th NW to 3rd Street NW 􀂃 Complete design, property acquisition and construction of the M Street SE Grade Separation Project 􀂃 Complete the decommissioning of the White Mountain Trails and the Rainier Shadows sewer lift stations with the completion of the new Verdana sewer lift station 􀂃 Complete the construction of the South Division Street Promenade Improvements 􀂃 Complete the reconstruction of the Dogwood, Ellingson and White River pump stations 􀂃 Complete the design and construction of the West Valley Highway Improvements between Main Street and SR18 􀂃 Continue to implement the Save Our Streets preservation program 􀂃 Continue to implement the Arterial streets pavement preservation program 􀂃 Complete the implementation of the phased improvement plan for City utilities SCADA System 􀂃 Continue to implement and monitor annual SWIBS Bridge Inspection Program 􀂃 Complete annual Citywide Traffic Counting Program 􀂃 Develop Street Maintenance Utility funding program pending Legislative approval 􀂃 Continue all options to develop or secure water rights and firm supply 􀂃 Complete implementation of the City Maintenance Management System (CarteGraph) 􀂃 Coordinate with Kent the annexation/de-annexation of boundary ROW’s for public safety and continuity of responsibility 􀂃 Work with Mayor & Council on budgeting desired signage improvements recommended by the Bike Task Force 􀂃 Continue to apply for grants and loans to help fund projects programmed in our 6 year Transportation Improvement Plan 􀂃 Complete the biennial sidewalk repair and replacement program 􀂃 Complete annual Traffic Signal safety testing and general maintenance 􀂃 Continue to monitor Traffic Signal safety issues and complete improvements 􀂃 Continue to monitor and implement updates to Traffic Signal intersection timing plans, peak hour coordination plans and special event corridor timing plans 􀂃 Continue coordinating with Auburn schools and update all School Zone Flashing Beacon timings 􀂃 Complete annual Citywide Traffic Calming Program Improvements Page 174 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/32 Engineering 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 1,714,569 1,291,200 1,291,200 1,251,210 1,264,870 Personnel Benefits 550,836 467,300 467,300 457,490 519,980 Supplies 28,834 37,400 37,400 25,650 25,650 Services & Charges 163,300 201,750 135,550 141,500 142,100 Intergovernmental 23,582 16,000 16,000 8,500 8,500 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 703,696 651,560 651,560 530,850 535,900 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $3,184,817 $2,665,210 $2,599,010 $2,415,200 $2,497,000 Department Employees 001 Public Works-Engineering FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Engineering FTE's 63.00 52.00 43.00 43.00 43.00 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS FTE's 63.00 52.00 43.00 43.00 43.00 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 6.0 FTE's -1 Construction Inspectors, 1 Development Review Engineer, 1 Contract Administrator, 1 Engineering Design Technician, 1 Project Engineer and 1 Capital Project Support Clerk were part of the reduction in force in May 2009. 3.0 FTE's -1 Senior Project Engineer, 1 Senior Construction Coordinator, and 1 Administrative Support Supervisor were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. 6.0 FTE's were moved from Engineering to Planning in May 2010. 3.0 FTE's -1 Engineering CAD Manager, 1 Office Manager and 1 Construction Clerk were frozen in the original 2009/2010 budget. 2.0 FTE's -Transportation Manager and Traffic Signal Technician were frozen in early 2009. Page 175 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget STREET DIVISION MISSION STATEMENT The Street Division’s purpose is to provide a safe and efficient transportation system that serves the present and forecasted needs of the Auburn community. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The transportation system is managed by both the Street Division and the Transportation Section of the Engineering Division. The City’s Street Division has over 216 centerline miles of roadways to maintain. Some of the key maintenance duties include pavement patching, crack sealing, roadside vegetation management, snow and ice removal, alley and shoulder grading, street lighting, signs and traffic markings. The Transportation Section is responsible for the key administrative and engineering duties including the Transportation Comprehensive System Planning, traffic signal maintenance and operations, budget management and interaction and regulation of development. They are also responsible for the management of all assets within the public Right of of Way (ROW) as well as the use of them. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Developed a system and improved procedures for maintaining the cities gravel streets and alleys 􀂃 Developed a snow and ice standard operating procedure to include the use of salt brine which is made in-house 􀂃 Continued crack sealing program to prolong the life of local street pavements through-out the city 􀂃 Continued to support the implementation of the City’s traffic calming program 􀂃 Continued implementing annual Pothole Patrol program pavement repairs 􀂃 Completed citywide repairs or replacement of damaged and worn street signs 􀂃 Completed guardrail repairs and roadside safety improvements 􀂃 Completed annual citywide striping and pavement marking program 􀂃 Performed city-wide roadside vegetation management 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to maintain local streets in fair to good condition by crack sealing to increase the life of the street and postpone the need for overlays 􀂃 Develop and implement street sign inventory and minimum reflectivity level maintenance program 􀂃 Develop and implement a standard program for tracking tree related issues in right-of way 􀂃 Refresh striping on public roads and continue to refresh thermoplastic pavement markings and legends as needed 􀂃 Continue to support the implementation of the City’s traffic calming program 􀂃 Continue to familiarize new street light system in newly annexed areas 􀂃 Continue implementing annual Pothole Patrol program pavement repairs 􀂃 Complete citywide repairs or replacement of damaged and worn street signs 􀂃 Continue making guardrail repairs and other roadside safety improvements 􀂃 Complete annual citywide striping and pavement marking program 􀂃 Perform city-wide roadside vegetation management Page 176 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/42 Street 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 867,640 863,800 863,800 875,000 895,820 Personnel Benefits 362,933 318,600 318,600 423,330 475,200 Supplies 151,871 242,000 242,000 230,300 230,300 Services & Charges 800,338 1,050,400 1,050,400 1,030,500 1,042,400 Intergovernmental 97,538 160,000 160,000 150,000 160,000 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 10,000 0 Interfund Payments for Services 480,793 458,700 458,700 464,000 476,200 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $2,761,113 $3,093,500 $3,093,500 $3,183,130 $3,279,920 Department Employees 001 Public Works-Street FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Street FTE's 14.00 13.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS FTE's 14.00 13.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was frozen in the 2009/2010 budget. 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was part of the reduction in force in December 2009. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 177 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources whose expenditures are legally restricted. The Public Works department is responsible for the budget in the following special revenue funds: ♦ Fund 102-Arterial Street Fund accounts for gas tax receipts that are restricted to arterial streets, as well as other funding sources for street capital construction projects. ♦ Fund 103-Local Street Fund created in 2005, budgets a portion of property tax for Local Street repair. ♦ Fund 105-Arterial Street Preservation Fund accounts for a 1% utility tax increase that was adopted by Council in 2008 restricted for Arterial Street repairs. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Completed major update to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan focused on the annexation areas 􀂃 Completed annual improvements under the Save our Streets Program 􀂃 Completed annual improvements under the Arterial Street Preservation Program 􀂃 Implemented the first year of the Annual Bridge Maintenance Project 􀂃 Implemented the Lakeland Hills Transit Shuttle and Community Circulator Transit Service 􀂃 Completed construction on the following capital projects: 1) Intelligent Transportation System (ITS), Phase 1B 2) 8th Street NE & R Street NE Traffic Signal 3) Harvey Rd NE & 8th Street NE Capacity Improvements 4) F Street SE & 4th St SE Traffic Signal 5) A Street SE Pedestrian Improvement 6) Les Gove Neighborhood Street Improvements 7) Auburn Way North Pedestrian Crossing Signal near 42nd Street NE 8) Mary Olson Farm Improvements 9) 37th St SE Pedestrian Connector 10) Auburn –Pacific Trail Phase 2 􀂃 Completed design of the South Division St Promenade project 􀂃 Continued design, permitting and began property acquisition of A Street NW from 14th NW to 3rd Street NW 􀂃 Continued design, completed environmental review and began property acquisition phase of the M Street SE Grade Separation Project 􀂃 Began design on the South Auburn ITS Expansion project 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Develop Street Maintenance Utility funding program 􀂃 Continue to fund Lakeland Hills and Community Circulator Shuttle programs 􀂃 Implement the annual Save our Streets Program 􀂃 Implement the annual Arterial Preservation Program 􀂃 Implement the annual Bridge Maintenance Program 􀂃 Implement years one and two of the Citywide Arterial Bicycle and Safety Improvements Program 􀂃 Implement the biennial Pedestrian Crossing Improvement Program 􀂃 Complete various programmed preliminary studies 􀂃 Complete construction on the following capital projects: 1) West Valley Highway Improvements (SR18 to West Main Street) 2) A Street NW, Phase 1 Improvements (3rd St NW to 10th St NW) 3) South Division Street Promenade Project Page 178 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Begin construction of the M Street SE Grade Separation Project 􀂃 Begin Design on the following capital projects: 1) Auburn Way North & 1st Street NE Signal Improvements 2) S 277th St Widening Project (AWN to Green River Bridge) 3) 124th Ave SE Corridor Improvements 􀂃 Complete Pre-design for M St SE & Auburn Way South Intersection Improvements 􀂃 Continue S 277th Project Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Program Page 179 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Special Revenue Funds 102 Arterial Street 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 1,551,737 1,240,663 1,240,663 383,118 265,018 Federal Grants 858,169 3,060,100 4,133,300 7,387,000 6,005,800 State Funds 266,860 895,500 364,273 2,730,000 0 Interfund & Utility Taxes 0 0 0 0 0 Other Governmental Agency 40,679 4,322,600 230,600 0 1,215,000 Investment Income 14,994 16,000 5,000 4,000 4,000 Contributions & Donations 0 0 0 0 0 Intergovernmental PWTF 921,400 45,000 20,400 0 6,000,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 257,620 240,000 240,000 0 0 Transfer In 1,524,151 5,089,100 4,802,000 3,089,200 1,490,700 Total Revenue $5,435,610 $14,908,963 $11,036,236 $13,593,318 $14,980,518 Expenditures Salaries & Wages 250,903 351,100 351,100 311,500 315,800 Personnel Benefits 84,110 123,000 123,000 108,900 110,500 Services & Charges 100,778 240,000 240,000 220,000 220,000 Transfer Out -105 114,142 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlays 3,544,488 13,000,300 9,751,818 12,548,100 14,023,000 Interfund Payments for Services 63,492 47,600 47,600 52,100 50,300 Debt Service Principal 35,578 137,400 130,400 80,400 80,400 Debt Service Interest 1,456 9,200 9,200 7,300 6,900 Undesignated Fund Balance 1,240,663 1,000,363 383,118 265,018 173,618 Total Expenditures $5,435,610 $14,908,963 $11,036,236 $13,593,318 $14,980,518 Page 180 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Special Revenue Funds 103 Local Street 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 667,394 1,488,606 1,488,606 940,806 1,095,806 Property Taxes 2,200,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 Investment Income 7,574 9,000 6,000 5,000 5,000 Contributions & Donations 0 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer In 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Total Revenue $3,024,968 $3,147,606 $3,144,606 $3,095,806 $3,250,806 Expenditures Salaries & Wages 54,159 76,000 76,000 76,000 78,240 Personnel Benefits 13,145 26,600 26,600 18,130 19,680 Supplies 0 500 500 500 500 Services & Charges 252 300 300 300 300 Capital Outlays 1,455,414 2,091,600 2,091,600 1,892,870 1,889,580 Debt Service Principal 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service Interest 0 0 0 0 0 Interfund Payments for Services 13,392 8,800 8,800 12,200 11,700 Undesignated Fund Balance 1,488,606 943,806 940,806 1,095,806 1,250,806 Total Expenditures $3,024,968 $3,147,606 $3,144,606 $3,095,806 $3,250,806 Page 181 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Special Revenue Funds 105 Arterial Street Preservation 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 0 136,589 136,589 33,589 35,089 Interfund & Utility taxes 1,528,423 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 Federal Grants 0 0 0 0 0 State Funds 0 0 0 0 0 Investment Income 3,357 5,000 2,000 1,500 1,500 Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer In 114,142 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue $1,645,922 $1,641,589 $1,638,589 $1,535,089 $1,536,589 Expenditures Salaries & Wages 51,123 44,500 44,500 21,200 22,000 Personnel Benefits 14,803 15,500 15,500 7,400 7,700 Supplies & Minor Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 Services & Charges 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlays 1,443,407 1,545,000 1,545,000 1,471,400 1,470,300 Int erfund Payments for Services 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service Principal 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service Interest 0 0 0 0 0 Undesignated Fund Balance 136,589 36,589 33,589 35,089 36,589 Total Expenditures $1,645,922 $1,641,589 $1,638,589 $1,535,089 $1,536,589 Page 182 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget WATER UTI L ITY DI V I S ION MISSION STATEMENT Provide for the efficient, environmentally sound and safe management of the existing and future water system within Auburn’s service area. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The Water Utility is responsible for providing potable water to Auburn’s customers that meets or exceeds the regulations and recognized standards of today and into the future by efficiently administering, operating, and maintaining the water supply system. The utility will also continue to enhance its customer service through public education and information. A primary responsibility of the utility is implementing the Comprehensive Water Plan. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Completed the update to the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Water Plan 􀂃 Completed Utility Rate Study 􀂃 Completed construction of the Les Gove Neighborhood Improvements project 􀂃 Developed construction of the Lakeland Hills West (aka Terrace View) Booster Pump Station 􀂃 Completed design and construction of the B Street NW Intertie to Tacoma Pipeline 5 􀂃 Completed design of the Lakeland Hills Booster Pump Station project 􀂃 Completed design of the Well 1 Improvements project 􀂃 Completed design of the 2009 AC Watermain Replacement project 􀂃 Completed SCADA system design to improve communication between facilities and M&O, and to enhance worker safety and security 􀂃 Initiated design of the Lakeland Hills Reservoir 6 project 􀂃 Initiated design of the Academy Booster Pump Station project 􀂃 Initiated design of the Well 4 Improvements project 􀂃 Initiated design of the Green River Pump Station Emergency Power project 􀂃 Initiated facilities evaluation study 􀂃 Initiated design of the Lea Hill PRV Station Improvements project 􀂃 Initiated design of the Deduct Meter Replacement project 􀂃 Continued to implement conservation initiatives such as the toilet rebate program 􀂃 Continued coordination with other programs capital improvement plans 􀂃 Continued to replace undersized pipes for fire flow improvements in conjunction with transportation and utility projects 􀂃 Continued monitoring system losses and fixing leaks when found 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Implement projects and programs identified in the Comprehensive Water Plan 􀂃 Implement the use of CarteGraph as a work order management system and continue to develop SOP’s for updating databases in CarteGraph and GIS and Springbrook 􀂃 Complete construction of Well 1 Improvements project 􀂃 Complete construction of the Lakeland Hills Booster Pump Station project 􀂃 Complete construction of the Green River Pump Station Emergency Power project 􀂃 Complete design and construction of the Lakeland Hills Reservoir 6 project 􀂃 Complete design and construction of the 132nd Ave SE Intertie to Tacoma Pipeline 5 􀂃 Complete design and construction of the Academy Booster Pump Station project 􀂃 Complete design and construction of the Lea Hill PRV Station Improvements project 􀂃 Complete design and construction of the Deduct Meter Replacement project project 􀂃 Complete utility revenue and expense analysis to determine if rate adjustments are needed Page 183 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Continue to upgrade the asset management databases through records evaluation and field investigation 􀂃 Continue planning and preparation for emergencies including potential flooding due to Howard Hanson Dam issues 􀂃 Continue to implement conservation initiatives 􀂃 Continue coordination with other programs capital improvement plans 􀂃 Continue to replace undersized pipes for fire flow improvements in conjunction with transportation and utility projects 􀂃 Continue system improvements by monitoring system losses 􀂃 Review all city properties with Finance & IS to assure each developed property connected to the system has a water billing in Springbrook and that the status of use is accurately reflected as the occupancy status changes to address issues such as foreclosure, fire, meth house, etc. 􀂃 Enhance billing process and policies to ensure consistent revenue collection for the Utilities 􀂃 Engage in regular preventive maintenance activities Page 1 842011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget WATER FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 343.400 Water Sales 8,717,191 9,556,800 9,556,800 10,288,400 10,988,000 343.431 Unmetered Water Sales 26,582 49,300 49,300 31,400 33,500 343.433 Water Application 82,151 106,800 106,800 47,100 50,400 343.440 Payback Admin Fee 0 0 0 41,500 41,500 362.500 Rents & Leases 0 46,000 46,000 0 0 Total Operating Revenue 8,825,924 9,758,900 9,758,900 10,408,400 11,113,400 Operating Expense 534.000.10 Salaries and Wages (2,127,253) (2,238,500) (2,238,500) (2,242,940) (2,276,900) 534.000.20 Personnel Benefits (848,934) (777,100) (777,100) (922,440) (1,030,850) 534.000.30 Supplies (188,196) (498,600) (498,600) (516,900) (521,300) 534.000.40 Services & Charges (2,630,781) (3,542,300) (3,542,300) (3,672,890) (3,916,020) 534.000.50 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 0 0 534.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services (955,508) (929,180) (929,180) (1,051,750) (1,066,100) 534.000.00 Depreciation & Amortization (2,104,554) (2,117,100) (2,117,100) (2,117,000) (2,117,000) Total Operating Expenses (8,855,226) (10,102,780) (10,102,780) (10,523,920) (10,928,170) Operating Income (Loss) (29,302) (343,880) (343,880) (115,520) 185,230 Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 88,079 120,000 120,000 60,000 61,000 369.900 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) 92,604 0 0 0 0 534.100.80 Debt Service Interest (114,306) (790,500) (395,900) (656,400) (667,450) Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) 66,377 (670,500) (275,900) (596,400) (606,450) Net Income (Loss) 37,075 (1,014,380) (619,780) (711,920) (421,220) Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 535.801.00 Depreciation & Amortization 2,104,554 2,117,100 2,117,100 2,117,000 2,117,000 Net W/C From Operations 2,141,629 1,102,720 1,497,320 1,405,080 1,695,780 Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 337.069 Interlocal Grants 0 0 0 0 0 396.101 Contributed Cap-Sys Dev 323,764 450,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 396.102 Contributed Cap-Area Assmts 0 0 0 0 0 396.104 Contributed Cap-Outside Dev 325,978 0 0 0 0 382.200 Revenue Bond Proceeds 0 12,100,000 12,100,000 0 0 397.100 Transfer In 0 0 0 0 0 399.500 Net Change in Restricted Assets 112,561 0 0 0 0 399.000 Other Sources 65,329 0 0 0 0 Total Resources 827,632 12,550,000 12,550,000 450,000 450,000 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100.00 Other Uses (307,478) 0 0 0 0 590.100.11 Inc in Fixed Assets-Salaries/Wages (141,346) (150,400) (150,400) (153,100) (154,700) 590.100.21 Inc in Fixed Assets-Benefits (44,806) (53,900) (53,900) (53,500) (54,200) 597.100.55 Transfer Out (166,100) (58,600) (58,600) (50,000) (50,000) 590.100.63 Inc in Fixed Assets-Improvements (173,268) 0 0 0 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment (20,484) 0 0 (227,000) (55,000) 590.100.65 Inc in Fixed Assets-Construction (2,128,258) (12,377,800) (3,635,900) (17,312,200) (2,413,600) 590.100.70 Debt Service Principal (639,068) (695,800) (695,800) (650,200) (661,300) Total Uses (3,620,808) (13,336,500) (4,594,600) (18,446,000) (3,388,800) Net Change in W/C (651,548) 316,220 9,452,720 (16,590,920) (1,243,020) Beginning W/C 1/1 10,367,027 9,715,479 9,715,479 19,168,199 2,577,279 Ending W/C 12/31 9,715,479 10,031,699 19,168,199 2,577,279 1,334,259 Net Change in W/C $ (651,548) $ 3 16,220 $ 9 ,452,720 $ (16,590,920) $ (1,243,020) Page 185 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 430 Water FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Water FTE's 20.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 TOTAL WATER FTE's 20.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 2.0 FTE's were moved from Finance to Water in 2009. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 186 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget This indicator measures the complaint rates experienced by the utility with individual quantification of those related to customer service and those related to core utility services. This measure is expressed as complaints per 1,000 population. Residential Consumption One of the major goals for the water conservation program is to reduce water consumption per service connection through public education, technical assistance, system measures and incentives. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -WATER FUND System Losses A program was developed to minimize losses in the system which include leak detection and meter testing/replacement. System loss is the amount of water produced less the amount of water sold or authorized for beneficial use. Customer Service Complaints per 1,000 Population 8.7% 8.4% 10.2% 8.5% 8.0% 8.0% 0.0% 3.0% 6.0% 9.0% 12.0% 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal System Losses (Percent of Production) 0.07% 0.06% 0.05% 0.15% 0.15% 0.15% 0.00% 0.05% 0.10% 0.15% 0.20% 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Customer Service Complaint % per 1,000 Customers 205 199 201 210 205 205 0 75 150 225 300 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Consumption -Gallons/Day per Residential Connection Page 187 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SANITARY SEWER UTILITY DIVISION MISSION STATEMENT Provide for efficient, environmentally sound, and safe management of the existing and future sanitary sewer waste needs of the City of Auburn. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW Some of the key administrative and engineering duties include comprehensive system planning, interaction and regulation of development, implementing Capital Improvement Projects, and system budget management. Operational duties include general system maintenance, minor repair and construction, and day-to-day operation. The City is responsible for the collection and transmission of effluent to King County trunk lines. Auburn contracts with King County for effluent treatment and disposal. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Completed and adopted the updated Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan in December, 2009 􀂃 Completed construction on the third phase of the Auburn Way South sanitary sewer replacement program 􀂃 Replaced the Dogwood Pump Station 􀂃 Completed plans for the replacement of the Ellingson Pump station 􀂃 Began the installation of upgrades to the SCADA system 􀂃 Continued to establish the use of Flexidata to manage remote CCTV inspection videos and information 􀂃 Implemented the use of CarteGraph as a work order management systems and continued to develop SOP’s for updating databases for CarteGraph and GIS 􀂃 Continued to implement the fats, oils, and grease (FOG) reduction program 􀂃 Completed utility revenue and expense analysis 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Complete Rainier Shadows and White Mountain Trails Pump Station decommissioning project 􀂃 Complete replacement of the Ellingson Pump Station 􀂃 Continue to upgrade the asset management databases through records evaluation and field investigation 􀂃 Add backup power to four additional pump stations 􀂃 Continue planning and preparation for emergencies including potential flooding due to Howard Hanson Dam 􀂃 Complete manhole ring and cover replacement project 􀂃 Complete 2011-12 repair and replacement project 􀂃 Complete the replacement of the Dogwood Pump Station 􀂃 Review all city properties with Finance & IS to assure each developed property connected to the system has a sewer billing in Springbrook 􀂃 Enhance utility business practices and policies to insure consistent revenue collection for the sewer utility 􀂃 Engage in regular preventive maintenance activities. Page 188 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SEWER FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 343.500 Services 14,902,464 15,337,800 15,337,800 17,570,300 17,978,600 Total Operating Revenue 14,902,464 15,337,800 15,337,800 17,570,300 17,978,600 Operating Expense 535.000.10 Salaries and Wages (1,481,407) (1,524,900) (1,524,900) (1,505,590) (1,524,310) 535.000.20 Personnel Benefits (545,539) (535,700) (535,700) (628,520) (695,290) 535.000.30 Supplies (95,981) (158,100) (158,100) (98,700) (103,800) 535.000.40 Services & Charges (1,727,288) (2,998,400) (2,998,400) (1,939,190) (2,008,900) 535.000.50 Intergovernmental (11,015,596) (11,200,000) (11,200,000) (13,493,390) (13,493,390) 535.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services (677,538) (739,280) (739,280) (788,650) (794,000) 535.000.00 Depreciation & Amortization (1,390,660) (1,102,000) (1,102,000) (1,378,000) (1,378,000) Total Operating Expenses (16,934,009) (18,258,380) (18,258,380) (19,832,040) (19,997,690) Operating Income (Loss) (2,031,545) (2,920,580) (2,920,580) (2,261,740) (2,019,090) Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 137,796 135,000 135,000 36,000 33,000 379.100 MIT Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 369.900 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) 17,048 0 500,000 0 0 535.100.80 Debt Service Interest (21,255) (275,000) (86,400) (273,260) (282,030) Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) 133,589 (140,000) 548,600 (237,260) (249,030) Net Income (Loss) (1,897,956) (3,060,580) (2,371,980) (2,499,000) (2,268,120) Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 535.801.00 Depreciation & Amortization 1,390,660 1,102,000 1,102,000 1,378,000 1,378,000 Net W/C From Operations (507,296) (1,958,580) (1,269,980) (1,121,000) (890,120) Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 382.200 Revenue Bond Proceeds 0 5,400,000 5,400,000 0 0 396.101 Contributed Cap-Sys Dev 583,614 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 396.102 Contributed Cap-Area Assmts 8,763 0 0 0 0 396.104 Contributed Cap-Outside Dev 0 0 0 0 0 397.100 Transfer In 89,425 0 0 0 0 399.500 Increase in Restricted Net Assets 19,235 0 0 0 0 399.000 Other Sources 22,500 0 0 0 0 Total Resources 723,537 5,750,000 5,750,000 350,000 350,000 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100. Other Uses (437,223) 0 0 0 0 590.100.11 Inc in Fixed Assets-Salaries/Wages (154,504) (109,700) (109,700) (151,500) (153,600) 590.100.21 Inc in Fixed Assets-Benefits (50,948) (41,400) (41,400) (53,100) (53,800) 597.100.55 Transfer Out (50,000) (58,200) (58,200) (50,000) (50,000) 590.100.63 Inc in Fixed Assets-Improvements (15,543) (55,400) (57,400) (30,000) 0 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment (20,481) (18,000) (16,000) 0 0 590.100.65 Inc in Fixed Assets-Construction (3,084,999) (6,120,200) (3,886,100) (6,302,000) (1,025,500) 590.100.66 Inc in Fixed Assets-Capital Lease 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.78 Debt Service Principal (236,791) (244,000) (244,000) (288,200) (288,200) Total Uses (4,050,490) (6,646,900) (4,412,800) (6,874,800) (1,571,100) Net Change in W/C (3,834,249) (2,855,480) 67,220 (7,645,800) (2,111,220) Beginning W/C 1/1 14,585,273 10,751,024 10,751,024 10,818,244 3,172,444 Ending W/C 12/31 10,751,024 7,895,544 10,818,244 3,172,444 1,061,224 Net Change in W/C $ ( 3,834,249) $ ( 2,855,480) $ 6 7,220 $ ( 7,645,800) $ ( 2,111,220) Page 189 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 431 Sewer FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Sewer FTE's 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 TOTAL SEWER FTE's 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker II was added in early 2007. 2.0 FTE's -Field Supervisor and Maintenance Worker II were added in 2007. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 190 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Routine inspections and spot repairs of sewer pipe should result in fewer major repairs and reduce incidents of backups or other major problems. Remote inspection provides the important information that determines capital projects in the following year. Manhole Inspections Inspection of manholes gives a quick visual observation of the sewer system function. By increasing inspections, potential sewer blockages, infiltration & inflow and surcharging can be observed. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -SEWER FUND Linear Feet of Sanitary Sewer Pipe Cleaned Pipe cleaning is conducted using a high-pressure sewer jet to scour & remove debris from the inside of the pipelines. Linear Feet of Sanitary Sewer Remotely Inspected 252 237 270 230 300 300 0 100 200 300 400 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Linear Feet Cleaned (Thousands of Feet) 79 155 105 150 160 160 0 75 150 225 300 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Linear Feet Remotely Inspected (Thousands of Feet) 3,243 4,132 4,580 3,028 4,500 4,500 0 1,500 3,000 4,500 6,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Manhole Inspections Page 191 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY DIVISION MISSION STATEMENT Provide environmentally sound and effective management of the surface and shallow ground water in the City of Auburn for the protection and welfare of the public. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW Some of the key administrative and engineering duties include comprehensive system planning, compliance with governmental regulations, interaction and regulation of development applications, development and implementation of capital improvement projects, and system budget management. Key operational duties include general system maintenance, minor repair and construction, and day-to-day operation. The City is responsible for the collection, transmission, treatment, and disposal of surface waters to Mill Creek and the Green and White Rivers. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Completed replacement of the waterfowl control netting for the Auburn Airport detention ponds 􀂃 Completed the update to the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Stormwater Drainage Plan 􀂃 Continued to phase compliance of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II permit elements 􀂃 Adopted a new drainage manual consistent with the (NPDES) Phase II permit requirements, and modified the Auburn City Code and Design and Construction standards to apply 􀂃 Complete the construction of the 2008 Local Storm Drainage Improvement project and completed the design and construction of the 2010 Local Storm Drainage Improvement project 􀂃 Completed the design and construction of Phase I of the AWS conveyance improvement to reduce flooding at the BNRR underpass 􀂃 Implemented initial storm pump station upgrade program recommendation to rebuild the White River storm pump station. Construction began in the fall of 2010 􀂃 Completed the design and construction of the R Street SE thereby routing additional street drainage to the 21st Street SE infiltration facility, away from AWS at the BNRR underpass 􀂃 Completed the design and construction of the Peasely Canyon Road culvert replacement project 􀂃 Began the storm water flow monitoring at key points in drainage system 􀂃 Replaced and/or installed new storm drainage conveyance improvements in support of the Les Gove Neighborhood Improvement project and the Arterial Street and SOS Improvement projects 􀂃 Implemented the use of CarteGraph as a work order management systems and continued to develop SOP’s for updating databases for CarteGraph and GIS 􀂃 Completed utility revenue and expense analysis to determine if rate adjustments are needed 􀂃 Three Utility staff members completed the Low Impact Development Technical Training Program and received certificates of completion 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Install SCADA equipment and communication upgrades at storm facilities 􀂃 Continue to phase compliance of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II permit elements 􀂃 Perform storm water flow monitoring at key points in drainage system 􀂃 Complete the design and construction of the South 296th and Bry’s Cove storm pond improvement 􀂃 Complete the design and construction of Phase 2 of the AWS conveyance improvement to continue the reduction of flooding at the BNRR underpass 􀂃 Install new storm drainage facilities in support of the West Valley Highway Improvement Page 192 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Replace and/or install new storm drainage conveyance improvements in support of the Arterial Street and SOS Improvement projects 􀂃 Continue to upgrade the asset management databases through records evaluation and field investigation 􀂃 Continue planning and preparation for emergencies including potential flooding due to Howard Hanson Dam issues and Flood Control District coordination 􀂃 Review all city properties with Finance & IS to assure each developed property has a storm billing in Springbrook 􀂃 Enhance billing process and policies to ensure consistent revenue collection for the Utilities 􀂃 Engage in regular preventive maintenance activities 􀂃 Cooperate with the Washington State University Integrated Design Experience (IDeX) project in the Auburn Environmental Park District Area Page 193 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget STORM DRAINAGE FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 343.830 Storm Drainage Services 6,000,761 6,289,000 6,289,000 6,777,700 7,140,300 Total Operating Revenue 6,000,761 6,289,000 6,289,000 6,777,700 7,140,300 Operating Expense 535.000.10 Salaries and Wages (1,814,037) (1,793,000) (1,793,000) (1,783,460) (1,805,540) 535.000.20 Personnel Benefits (737,922) (629,025) (629,025) (732,150) (816,560) 535.000.30 Supplies (329,958) (153,200) (153,200) (145,700) (145,800) 535.000.40 Services & Charges (1,037,827) (1,592,400) (1,592,400) (1,529,490) (1,528,500) 535.000.50 Intergovernmental (10,801) (692,700) (692,700) (26,000) (26,000) 535.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services (1,090,045) (1,065,080) (1,065,080) (1,334,350) (1,365,900) 535.000.00 Depreciation & Amortization (1,087,555) (1,033,600) (1,033,600) (1,095,000) (1,095,000) Total Operating Expenses (6,108,145) (6,959,005) (6,959,005) (6,646,150) (6,783,300) Operating Income (Loss) (107,384) (670,005) (670,005) 131,550 357,000 Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 60,479 75,000 75,000 36,000 33,000 369.900 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) (1,113,203) 0 0 0 0 535.100.80 Debt Service Interest (25,120) (307,000) (165,500) (232,200) (237,610) Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) (1,077,844) (232,000) (90,500) (196,200) (204,610) Net Income (Loss) (1,185,228) (902,005) (760,505) (64,650) 152,390 Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 535.801.00 Depreciation & Amortization 1,087,555 1,033,600 1,033,600 1,095,000 1,095,000 Net W/C From Operations (97,673) 131,595 273,095 1,030,350 1,247,390 Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 331.156 Direct Federal Grant 0 90,000 90,000 0 0 337.069 Interlocal Grant 1,019,200 0 0 0 0 396.101 Contributed Cap-Sys Dev 745,606 200,000 200,000 300,000 250,000 396.102 Contributed Cap-Area Assmts 4,535 0 0 0 0 396.104 Contributed Cap-Outside Dev 0 0 0 0 0 382.200 Revenue Bond Proceeds 0 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 0 397.100 Transfer In 0 0 0 0 0 399.500 Inc in Restricted Assets 54,383 0 0 0 0 399.610 Inc in Compensated Absences 86,350 0 0 0 0 337.010 Port of Seattle Interlocal Agrmnt. 0 0 0 100,000 500,000 Total Resources 1,910,075 4,790,000 4,790,000 400,000 750,000 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100.05 Net Change in Restricted Assets (404,945) 0 0 0 0 590.100.11 Inc in Fixed Assets-Salaries/Wages (150,393) (125,000) (125,000) (154,500) (156,400) 590.100.21 Inc in Fixed Assets-Benefits (50,433) (45,800) (45,800) (54,000) (54,700) 597.100.55 Transfer Out (138,000) (162,800) (162,800) (50,000) (50,000) 590.100.61 Inc in Fixed Assets-Land 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment (117,079) 0 0 0 0 590.100.65 Inc in Fixed Assets-Construction (3,018,744) (6,121,700) (2,685,500) (6,949,700) (2,057,400) 590.100.66 Inc in Fixed Assets-Capital Lease 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.70 Debt Service Principal (71,500) (106,200) (106,200) (75,400) (79,300) Total Uses (3,951,094) (6,561,500) (3,125,300) (7,283,600) (2,397,800) Net Change in W/C (2,138,692) (1,639,905) 1,937,795 (5,853,250) (400,410) Beginning W/C 1/1 7,896,879 5,758,187 5,758,187 7,695,982 1,842,732 Ending W/C 12/31 5,758,187 4,118,282 7,695,982 1,842,732 1,442,322 Net Change in W/C $ (2,138,692) $ (1,639,905) $ 1,937,795 $ (5,853,250) $ (400,410) Page 194 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 432 Storm FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Storm FTE's 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 TOTAL STORM FTE's 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was added in the 2009 Budget was frozen in early 2009. 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was added in the 2010 Budget was frozen in December 2009. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 195 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget The fluctuation in this performance measure reflect a reprioritization of existing work forces to meet NPDES requirements to inspect and clean as necessary all catch basins within the City during the remaining permit cycle period. Catch Basin Inspection Initial projected increase due to NPDES requirements to inspect all catch basins within the City during the remaining permit cycle period. Initial permit ends February 2012. The 2012 estimate is based on the anticipated annual average required to meet permit conditions. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -STORM DRAINAGE FUND Tons of Debris Hauled Initial projected increase due to NPDES requirements to inspect and clean, as necessary, all catch basins within the City during the remaining permit cycle period. Initial permit ends February 2012. The 2012 estimate is based on the annual average required to meet permit conditions. Acres of Storm Drainage Ponds Maintained 1,079 1,820 799 1,100 1,300 1,100 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Tons of Debris Hauled 234 275 262 150 150 250 0 100 200 300 400 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Acres of Ponds Maintained 1,494 1,234 1,648 4,064 4,064 2,000 -1,250 2,500 3,750 5,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Catch Basin Inspection Page 196 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget EQUIPMENT RENTAL DIVISION MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Equipment Rental Division is to provide all City departments with a safe and reliable fleet, and the fleet support services that each department needs to perform its mission. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW Equipment Rental is responsible for maintenance, service, acquisition and disposition of the City’s vehicle/equipment fleet. Central Stores is a component of Equipment Rental and is responsible for procuring, storing, and distributing supplies and materiel for many City operations. Central Stores also maintains the City’s fuel storage and access system. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS • Upgraded the central lift to improve equipment rental shop efficiency • Completed VHF radio system upgrade for daily and emergency communication • Completed the installation of CarteGraph for Fleet and Central Stores • Implemented idle reduction ideas to all division • Began converting vehicle emergency lighting to LED to to reduce fuel usage 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue to improve fleet fuel economy 􀂃 Look for ways to extend vehicle life above industry standard 􀂃 Look at innovative and emerging technologies in fleet operations to reduce citywide fleet costs 􀂃 Continue to expand the use of CarteGraph in Equipment Rental and Central Stores 􀂃 Continue developing an overall level of service /customer service plan for Equipment Rental and Central Stores Page 197 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 348.100 Fuel Sales 575,107 500,000 500,000 605,200 635,500 365.100 Interfund Equipment Rental 1,371,014 900,300 900,300 981,700 1,030,800 365.400 Interfund Building Rental 0 0 0 0 0 Total Operating Revenue 1,946,121 1,400,300 1,400,300 1,586,900 1,666,300 Operating Expense 548.000.10 Salaries and Wages (458,476) (366,600) (366,600) (391,980) (397,640) 548.000.20 Personnel Benefits (151,242) (132,975) (132,975) (152,300) (168,490) 548.000.30 Supplies (697,639) (1,207,100) (1,207,100) (966,200) (996,200) 548.000.40 Services & Charges (420,976) (533,800) (533,800) (543,700) (547,900) 548.000.51 Intergovernmental Services 0 0 0 0 0 548.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services (211,590) (185,500) (185,500) (233,500) (213,700) 548.680.01 Depreciation & Amortization (1,034,255) (850,000) (850,000) (1,042,000) (1,042,000) Total Operating Expenses (2,974,180) (3,275,975) (3,275,975) (3,329,680) (3,365,930) Operating Income (Loss) (1,028,059) (1,875,675) (1,875,675) (1,742,780) (1,699,630) Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.100 Investment Income 42,406 35,000 35,000 9,000 10,000 369.900 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) 11,621 0 0 0 0 395.900 Gain on Sale of Fixed Assets (12,790) 0 0 0 0 Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) 41,237 35,000 35,000 9,000 10,000 Net Income (Loss) (986,822) (1,840,675) (1,840,675) (1,733,780) (1,689,630) Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 548.100.01 Depreciation & Amortization 1,034,255 850,000 850,000 1,042,000 1,042,000 Net W/C From Operations 47,434 (990,675) (990,675) (691,780) (647,630) Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 365.110 Vehicle Replacement Revenue 1,053,072 996,800 996,800 1,231,200 1,292,700 365.600 Inc. in Contributions-Other funds 61,445 0 0 0 0 397.100 Transfer In 204,100 65,000 65,000 0 104,250 399.000 Other Sources 3,020 0 0 0 0 Total Resources 1,321,637 1,061,800 1,061,800 1,231,200 1,396,950 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100. Other Uses (18,249) 0 0 0 0 597.100.55 Transfer Out (7,000) (22,400) (22,400) (507,000) (7,000) 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment (1,962,600) (450,000) (450,000) (1,721,120) (417,730) 590.100.65 Inc in Fixed Assets-Construction (193,435) (33,000) (33,000) (310,000) (350,000) Total Uses (2,181,284) (505,400) (505,400) (2,538,120) (774,730) Net Change in W/C (812,213) (434,275) (434,275) (1,998,700) (25,410) Beginning W/C 1/1 6,104,142 5,291,929 5,291,929 4,857,654 2,858,954 Ending W/C 12/31 5,291,929 4,857,654 4,857,654 2,858,954 2,833,544 Net Change in W/C $ ( 812,213) $ (434,275) $ ( 434,275) $ ( 1,998,700) $ (25,410) Page 198 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 550 Equipment Rental FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Equipment Rental FTE's 10.00 8.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 TOTAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL FTE's 10.00 8.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 2.0 FTE's -1 Fleet & Warehouse Manager and 1 Office Assistant were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. 1.0 FTE -Equipment Rental Shop Supervisor added in the original 2009/2010 Budget was eliminated in early 2009.. 2.0 FTE's -1 Maintenance Worker 1 and 1 Custodial Helper were part of the reduction in force in May 2009. Page 199 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Number of Unscheduled Maintenance Services Performed Unscheduled maintenance are repairs that were not planned. The majority of these repairs take place following a Preventative Maintenance inspection, thereby preventing a more costly repair due to system failures. A preventative maintenance service is a systematic inspection and service of vehicles and equipment, completed at predetermined intervals, to detect mechanical problems prior to system failures, resulting in extended lifecycles. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND Vehicle Life Cycle Averages Life cycles are based on industry standards by vehicle type and vehicle use. We have kept our life cycles above industry standards through proactive preventative maintenance, enabling us to get the most from our vehicles with the least investment. Number of Preventative Maintenance Services Performed 7.5 8.0 7.5 8.0 9.0 9.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est. 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Average Vehicle Life Cycles 588 600 588 600 620 640 0 200 400 600 800 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est. 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Maintenance Services Performed 1,142 1,215 1,142 1,215 1,275 1,300 0 350 700 1,050 1,400 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est. 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Unscheduled Maintenance Performed Page 200 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Parks Page 201 F.T.E. = Full-Time Equivalent Page 202 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget PARKS, ARTS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT MISSION STATEMENT Auburn Parks, Arts and Recreation is committed to protecting the City of Auburn’s natural beauty through a vibrant system of parks, open space and trails while enhancing the quality of life for our citizens by providing outstanding recreational and cultural opportunities. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The Parks, Arts and Recreation Department focuses on providing a variety of facilities and programs for residents of all ages and interests including parks, recreation programs, arts and cultural activities, senior center services, a museum, cemetery and golf course. The department works closely with the Auburn School District, Green River Community College, and other cultural and youth serving agencies in Auburn to provide facilities and services to citizens. We continue to focus on providing programs, community events and facilities, protecting our environment, and preserving historical and cultural opportunities in our community. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Increased marketing, usage and revenue for recreation programs 􀂃 Expanded recreation programs and offerings for preschool, youth-aged children, and adults 􀂃 Piloted Classroom Based Heritage Learning Kits with Auburn School District 􀂃 Expanded sponsorship opportunities for special events 􀂃 Constructed parking lot and restrooms at Mary Olson Farm and opened the farm to the public 􀂃 Expanded community use of and programming of the Auburn Ave Theater 􀂃 Reorganized performing art programs to increase attendance 􀂃 Implemented revised 1% for Art Resolution 􀂃 Opened new 32,000 sf Discovery Playground at Les Gove Park 􀂃 Added energy efficient lighting at Game Farm Turf fields 􀂃 Completed White River trail extension 􀂃 Started master planning efforts for Lea Hill Park and Jacobsen Tree Farm 􀂃 Opened Dorothy Bothell Park 􀂃 Opened and expanded Community Garden 􀂃 Named “Playful City USA” 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Expand recreation program offerings in Lakeland Hills community 􀂃 Initiate operations in a new Auburn Activity Center/Gymnasium 􀂃 Complete long-range Public Art plan 􀂃 Expand youth & teen offerings at new activity center /gymnasium 􀂃 Add wheelchair accessible plots at Community Garden 􀂃 Expand youth & adult sports opportunities in the new activity center/gymnasium 􀂃 Preliminary programming for the upcoming community center 􀂃 Construct new Lea Hill park 􀂃 Initiate funding program for Jacobsen Tree Farm 􀂃 Expand before & after school activities with Auburn School District 􀂃 Update Parks, Arts & Recreation Open-Space Six Year Plan Page 203 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Budget 001/33 Parks, Arts 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 & Recreation Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Salaries & Wages 2,778,915 2,699,700 2,699,700 2,728,730 2,764,420 Personnel Benefits 876,361 871,250 871,250 1,015,890 1,126,120 Supplies 498,002 510,400 506,400 525,850 528,150 Services & Charges 1,242,420 1,347,950 1,326,950 1,520,500 1,522,280 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlays 71,566 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Debt Service: Principal 38,258 38,600 38,600 43,400 45,500 Debt Service: Interest 33,266 41,100 41,100 27,800 25,700 Interfund Payments for Services 1,119,404 1,312,200 1,312,200 1,412,400 1,375,800 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $6,658,192 $6,826,200 $6,801,200 $7,279,570 $7,392,970 Department Employees 001 Parks, Art & Recreation FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Parks FTE's 40.00 38.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 TOTAL PARKS, ART & RECREATION FTE's 40.00 38.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 1.0 FTE -Field Supervisor position was frozen in the 2009/2010 budget. 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I was part of the reduction in force in May 2009. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 3.0 FTE's -1 Cultural Arts Manager, 1 Registration Clerk, and 1 Parks Planning & Development Manager were part of the reduction in force in December 2009. Page 204 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Participation in department wide classes and special events continues to grow. A new strategic approach to marketing recreation services is enhancing our ability to reach new customers. Facility Rentals The increasing popularity of the Senior Center, Parks and Recreation Administration Building and other park facilities for weddings, reunions, and community events has increased usage and revenue. The opening of a new Gymnasium will continue to increase both usage and revenue. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -PARKS, ARTS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT Volunteer Hours The Parks, Arts, and Recreation Department relies on volunteers to be youth sports coaches, museum docents, senior center hosts, and to serve in a variety of other positions. As participation in department sponsored programs increases, so does the need for additional volunteers. Classes & Special Events -Number of Participants 45,000 46,000 46,500 47,000 47,500 48,000 0 15,000 30,000 45,000 60,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Volunteer Hours 120,000 122,000 124,000 126,000 131,000 136,000 0 37,500 75,000 112,500 150,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Participation in Classes & Special Events $153,000 $163,000 $166,000 $170,000 $202,000 $205,000 $0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Facility Rental Revenue Page 205 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources whose expenditures are legally restricted. The Parks, Arts & Recreation department is responsible for the budget in the following special revenue fund: ♦ Fund 120-Recreation Trails fund accounts for gas tax funds restricted to trail improvements. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Accounted for Motor Vehicle Fuel tax funds to pay for future trail improvements 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Accumulate funds to provide for trail improvements Page 206 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Special Revenue Fund 120 Recreational Trails 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 37,661 44,977 44,977 8,177 15,377 Investment Income 316 300 100 100 100 Transfer In 7,000 7,100 7,100 7,100 7,100 Total Revenue $44,977 $52,377 $52,177 $15,377 $22,577 Expenditures Transfer Out 0 44,000 44,000 0 0 Undesignated Fund Balance 44,977 8,377 8,177 15,377 22,577 Total Expenditures $44,977 $52,377 $52,177 $15,377 $22,577 Page 207 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget MUNICIPAL PARK CONSTRUCTION FUND The Parks Capital Improvement Fund-321 accumulates a portion of adult recreation fees for capital improvements at city parks. The Parks, Arts & Recreation department is responsible for the budget in this fund. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Developed Master Plan for Jacobson Tree Farm and Auburndale Park II 􀂃 Built parking lot and restrooms at Mary Olson Farm 􀂃 Added new playground suitable for all disabilities and made restroom building at Les Gove Park ADA compliant 􀂃 Added fencing to Brannan Park Fields #4 and new bleachers to #4 􀂃 Completed the White River Trail from Roegner Park to “A” Street 􀂃 Replaced lights at Game Farm Park soccer fields with energy efficient “green” lights 􀂃 Built Dorothy Bothell Park in Lakeland Hills 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Complete Les Gove Community Center, Teen Center and Gymnasium 􀂃 Develop natural habitat at Fenster Park 􀂃 Develop Master Plan for Fulmer Park and acquire land for additional parking 􀂃 Improve parking lot, sidewalks and park amenities at Veteran’s Park 􀂃 Add a new trail to Rotary Park 􀂃 Resurface tennis courts and add a practice wall at Game Farm Park 􀂃 Replace playgrounds at Game Farm Park Page 208 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Capital Projects Fund 321 Municipal Park Construction 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Revenue Beginning Fund Balance 284,829 651,668 651,668 374,368 201,868 Property Taxes 113,152 100,000 139,500 100,000 165,000 Federal Grants 0 210,500 198,400 150,000 79,100 State Grants 143,176 757,700 560,000 44,900 115,000 Interlocal Grants 7,411 396,600 412,400 435,000 0 Intergovernmental Service 0 0 0 200,000 1,300,000 Recreational Classes 22,546 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Investment Income 2,626 2,200 2,200 2,000 2,000 Rentals & Leases 38,840 38,000 38,000 38,000 38,000 Contributions & Donations 16,139 780,000 830,000 0 50,000 New Market Tax Credit 0 0 0 5,102,800 0 HUD 108 Loan 0 0 0 2,000,000 0 Proceeds from Sale (QALICB) 0 0 0 8,000,000 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 36,077 200,000 200,000 1,878,100 0 Transfer In 1,170,441 3,278,500 3,278,500 1,113,400 100,000 Total Revenue $1,835,239 $6,440,168 $6,335,668 $19,463,568 $2,075,968 Expenditures Capital Outlays 1,183,571 6,098,400 5,886,300 19,241,700 1,959,100 Other Services & Charges 0 75,000 75,000 20,000 20,000 Debt Service Principal 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service Interest 0 0 0 0 0 Undesignated Fund Balance 651,668 266,768 374,368 201,868 96,868 Total Expenditures $1,835,239 $6,440,168 $6,335,668 $19,463,568 $2,075,968 Page 209 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget CEMETERY DIVISION MISSION Mountain View Cemetery shall be a sacred place to comfort and strengthen the community through responsible stewardship and compassionate ministry. To fulfill this we will: 1. Be attentive by listening and understanding 2. Be respectful by being courteous, prompt and caring 3. Be professional by maintaining and creating beautiful grounds 4. Be thorough in documenting records 5. Be dedicated to protecting the faith and trust the community has placed in us 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Completed repairs to the Cascadia Columbarium Wall and to the Mausoleum 􀂃 Expanded our advertising efforts in the cremation market 􀂃 Strengthened working relationships with area funeral homes to better serve them 􀂃 Completed construction of a 70 foot water feature and redesign of the landscape in front office and parking areas 􀂃 Repaired roof on lower shop and painted lower shop, mausoleum and office 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Complete development of north burial area “Memory Heights” (450 full size graves) 􀂃 Strengthen after marketing plan 􀂃 Begin expansion of ForestWalk cremation area 􀂃 Improve revenue from plot, niche and marker sales Page 210 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget CEMETERY FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 343.601 Settings 42,476 47,800 47,800 46,500 47,900 343.602 Openings and Closings 189,549 194,300 194,300 215,000 221,500 343.603 Recordings 6,480 6,300 6,300 8,000 8,200 343.604 Liners 61,189 73,500 73,500 78,000 80,300 343.605 Resale Settings 2,630 5,800 5,800 0 0 343.607 Vases 20,322 25,200 25,200 25,500 26,300 343.609 Lot Sales/Niches 225,886 341,300 341,300 330,000 339,900 343.610 Vault Installation 13,430 15,800 15,800 16,000 16,500 343.611 Other 9,830 35,000 35,000 8,500 8,800 343.612 Marker Sales 122,896 168,000 168,000 165,000 169,900 343.620 Interest/Penalties 1,471 5,000 5,000 0 0 Total Operating Revenue 696,159 918,000 918,000 892,500 919,300 Operating Expense 536.000.10 Salaries & Wages (374,768) (458,400) (458,400) (469,870) (477,920) 536.000.20 Personnel Benefits (158,989) (155,570) (155,570) (208,660) (233,060) 536.000.30 Supplies (164,325) (191,000) (191,000) (191,000) (191,000) 536.000.40 Services & Charges (46,078) (71,200) (71,200) (73,800) (75,500) 536.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services (73,500) (53,600) (53,600) (69,300) (66,100) 536.000.00 Depreciation & Amortization (66,648) (92,000) (92,000) (58,000) (58,000) Total Operating Expenses (884,308) (1,021,770) (1,021,770) (1,070,630) (1,101,580) Operating Income (Loss) (188,149) (103,770) (103,770) (178,130) (182,280) Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 2,914 2,300 2,300 1,000 1,000 369.900 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) 3,596 0 0 0 0 536.100.81 Debt Service Interest (21,776) (23,500) (23,500) (22,300) (22,300) Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) (15,266) (21,200) (21,200) (21,300) (21,300) Net Income (Loss) (203,415) (124,970) (124,970) (199,430) (203,580) Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 536.000.01 Depreciation & Amortization 66,648 92,000 92,000 58,000 58,000 Net W/C From Operations (136,767) (32,970) (32,970) (141,430) (145,580) Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 397.100 Transfer In 40,000 30,300 30,300 31,300 22,300 399.000 Other Sources 8,613 0 0 0 0 Total Resources 48,613 30,300 30,300 31,300 22,300 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100.05 Net Change in Restricted Assets (2,844) 0 0 0 0 590.100.61 Inc in Fixed Assets-Land 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment (14,427) (8,000) (8,000) (9,000) 0 590.100.65 Inc in Fixed Assets-Construction (14,444) (5,500) (5,500) (35,000) (10,000) 590.100.71 Debt Service Principal 0 0 0 0 0 Total Uses (31,715) (13,500) (13,500) (44,000) (10,000) Net Change in W/C (119,870) (16,170) (16,170) (154,130) (133,280) Beginning W/C 1/1 436,368 316,498 316,498 300,328 146,198 Ending W/C 12/31 316,498 300,328 300,328 146,198 12,918 Net Change in W/C $ ( 119,870) $ ( 16,170) $ ( 16,170) $ ( 154,130) $ (133,280) Page 211 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 436 Cemetery FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Cemetery FTE's 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 TOTAL CEMETERY FTE's 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 212 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget The recent completion of "ForestWalk" and "Chapel of Memories" has expanded the options for urn placement. As the cremation rates continue to rise it becomes important to offer more placement choices to our cremation families. Revenue From Lot Sales Newly developed property will have to be more creative and supported by local advertising to sustain lot sales. Development that takes advantage of views and allowing more upright monument space will help sales revenue. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -CEMETERY FUND Interments Over the past decade, cremation rates continued to rise. This trend necessitated more options for casket burials. Double depth burial and upright monument plots have proven successful. As development continues, other options will be explored. Inurnments 135 152 113 120 155 160 0 50 100 150 200 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Interments 108 135 115 148 150 160 -50 100 150 200 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Inurnments $242,000 $228,300 $207,767 $230,000 $250,000 $270,000 $0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Lot Sale Revenue Page 213 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget GOLF COURSE DIVISION MISS ION STATEME N T The mission of the Auburn Golf Course is to provide all ages and abilities an affordable, high-quality golf experience. DEPARTMENT OVERVI EW The Auburn Golf Course provides golfing services to over 50,000 golfers a year on a challenging 6,200-yard layout. The course is an enterprise function with greens fee revenue covering all course maintenance, operations expenses, and capital improvements. Staff continues to make improvements each year to improve the playability, drainage, and safety of the course. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Increased our e-mail database by 10% in 2009 and again in 2010 􀂃 Increased men’s & ladies’ club membership by 20% over 2 year period 􀂃 Increased participation in our customer appreciation events by 10% in 2009 and again in 2010 􀂃 Increased the number of tournaments hosted by 5% in 2009 and 10% in 2010 􀂃 Increased number of rounds played by 18% for Winter 2009/2010 􀂃 Increased Pro Shop merchandise sales in 2009 and again in 2010 􀂃 Hosted 2009 Regional Finals for the ESPN National Golf Championship 􀂃 Added 2 additional golf clinics for students with “Intermediate” skills 􀂃 Developed a league for (44) beginner golfers week nights May -August 􀂃 Finished club house and parking lot landscaping 􀂃 Finished drainage system from fourteen fairway, to eleven, to ten retention area 􀂃 Installed a replacement computer for the irrigation pump house 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVES 􀂃 Continue drainage improvements to holes 1, 2, & 10 􀂃 Begin a fairway aeration and topdressing program 􀂃 Continue to grow e-mail database by 10% in 2011 & again in 2012 􀂃 Increase men’s club membership by 10% in 2011 and again in 2012 􀂃 Increase ladies’ club membership by 15% in 2011 and again in 2012 􀂃 Increase outside tournament play by 10% in 2011 and again in 2012 􀂃 Increase total rounds played by 5% in 2011 and again in 2012 􀂃 Increase green fee revenue by 10% in 2011 and by 5% in 2012 􀂃 Increase cart fee revenue by 10% in 2011 and by 5% in 2012 􀂃 Increase merchandise sales revenue by 25% in 2011 and by 15% in 2012 􀂃 Increase participation in our customer appreciation events by 10% in 2011 and again in 2012 􀂃 Develop large amateur golfing event at the course 􀂃 Develop a summer weekly merchant’s league for 120-160 players 􀂃 Develop and implement an e-mail marketing program for 2011/2012 􀂃 Develop a web based pro shop for online sales of merchandise and gift cards 􀂃 Develop an integrated website for club membership and tournament online registrations Page 214 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget GOLF COURSE FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 347.300 Green Fees 1,112,664 1,240,000 1,240,000 1,150,000 1,191,500 347.600 Lessons 2,531 5,000 5,000 7,500 8,000 347.910 Pro Shop Sales 152,356 165,000 165,000 178,000 187,700 347.920 Restaurant & Lounge 26,349 51,000 51,000 51,000 53,600 362.100 Power Cart Rental 257,041 279,000 279,000 272,500 285,400 362.400 Banquet Space 19,503 27,500 27,500 27,500 28,900 362.801 Concessions 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,200 Total Operating Revenue 1,573,444 1,770,500 1,770,500 1,689,500 1,758,300 Operating Expense 576.600.10 Salaries and Wages (549,528) (588,200) (588,200) (604,110) (608,030) 576.600.20 Personnel Benefits (203,040) (195,265) (195,265) (257,120) (285,570) 576.600.30 Supplies (219,973) (276,100) (276,100) (282,100) (288,100) 576.600.40 Services & Charges (215,748) (203,400) (203,400) (203,850) (207,750) 576.600.90 Interfund Payments for Services (175,800) (148,700) (148,700) (176,600) (162,000) 576.600.00 Depreciation & Amortization (334,026) (292,500) (292,500) (341,000) (341,000) Total Operating Expenses (1,698,116) (1,704,165) (1,704,165) (1,864,780) (1,892,450) Operating Income (Loss) (124,672) 66,335 66,335 (175,280) (134,150) Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 3,018 3,600 3,600 500 600 369.400 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) 51,878 0 0 0 0 395.900 Gain on Sale of Fixed Assets 4,626 0 0 0 0 576.600.80 Debt Service Interest (211,642) (210,200) (210,200) (188,700) (177,100) Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) (152,120) (206,600) (206,600) (188,200) (176,500) Net Income (Loss) (276,792) (140,265) (140,265) (363,480) (310,650) Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 534.801.01 Depreciation & Amortization 334,026 292,500 292,500 341,000 341,000 Net W/C From Operations 57,234 152,235 152,235 (22,480) 30,350 Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 347.301 Reserved for Capital 43,795 60,500 60,500 54,200 56,800 382.200 GO Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 397.100 Transfer In 54,070 162,000 162,000 62,000 62,000 399.600 Other Sources (4,226) 0 0 0 0 Total Resources 93,639 222,500 222,500 116,200 118,800 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100.00 Net Change in Restricted Assets 39,510 0 0 0 0 590.100.00 Inc in Fixed Assets-Benefits 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment (144,736) (114,000) (114,000) 0 0 590.100.65 Inc in Fixed Assets-Construction 0 0 0 0 0 590.100.70 Debt Service Principal (217,500) (227,500) (227,500) (226,900) (215,000) Total Uses (322,726) (341,500) (341,500) (226,900) (215,000) Net Change in W/C (171,853) 33,235 33,235 (133,180) (65,850) Beginning W/C 1/1 367,286 195,433 195,433 228,668 95,488 Ending W/C 12/31 195,433 228,668 228,668 95,488 29,638 Net Change in W/C $ ( 171,853) $ 3 3,235 $ 3 3,235 $ (133,180) $ (65,850) Page 215 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 437 Golf Course FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Golf Course FTE's 9.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 TOTAL GOLF COURSE FTE's 9.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 1.0 FTE -Maintenance Worker I position was frozen in the 2009/2010 budget. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Page 216 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget PERFORMANCE MEASURES -GOLF COURSE FUND Number of Winter Rounds Played Winter play November through March makes up approximately 12-15% of our annual green fee revenue. The number of rounds played during this part of the season has increased due to improvements that have made the course drier and more playable during these months. People who play winter golf are a small percentage of people who play summer golf. During the past two winters, this number has been impacted further by a difficult economy and below average weather. Through our special Winter Tournament Series and our E-Mail Marketing Campaigns, we intend to increase our market share of winter golfers by offering competitive rates while spreading the word about our drier conditions. Annual Revenue Facility revenues increased dramatically in 2007 and again in 2008 due to the addition of power cart rentals, pro shop sales, and restaurant concessions. During this same period, green fee revenue increased by $110,00 in 2007 and by an additional $120,000 in 2008. This was due to an increase in rounds played as well as an increase in the green fee rate structure. In order to remain competitive in our local market, rates have been held constant for the 2009 and 2010 seasons. The combination of the difficult economy and below average weather conditions resulted in a decrease of total rounds played over the past two seasons. With the economy beginning to stabilize, average weather conditions, and a slight increase in our rates, revenues should increase significantly over the next two seasons. 10,847 9,393 11,239 11,500 11,750 12,000 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 2007 /08 2008 /09 2009 /10 2010 /11 Goal 2011 /12 Goal 2012 /13 Goal Winter Rounds Played $1,396,000 $1,697,800 $1,617,200 $1,585,000 $1,679,000 $1,750,000 $0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Annual Revenue Page 217 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget During the 2007 & 2008 seasons, rounds played continued to rise to a high just over 56,000 rounds. The economic downturn and below average weather since the beginning of 2009 have caused rounds played to decrease approximately 12% during this period. With improved economic activity and average weather, rounds are expected to return the 2008 level over the next two seasons. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -GOLF COURSE FUND Total Rounds Played Per Year 50,500 56,593 51,754 49,500 52,500 55,500 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Rounds Played Per Year Page 218 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Information Services Page 219 F.T.E. = Full Time Equivalent Director of Information Services Lorrie Rempher 14 F.T.E. Page 220 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget INFORMATION SERVICES MISSION STATEMENT Information Services provides excellent technical services for all internal and external customers. DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW The Information Services Department oversees all technology for the City. This includes computers, telephones, software applications, video conferencing systems, technology in our police and field maintenance vehicles, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Web services and City communication systems. The Information Services Director also coordinates grant activities for the City. 2009 & 2010 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 􀂃 Increased fiber optic opportunities by ensuring that all open roads have conduit installed for future use 􀂃 Expanded fiber optic network to further enhance the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) and other city infrastructure needs. Currently the City owns and maintains over 22 miles of fiber. 􀂃 Continued to work on regional projects to expand broadband infrastructure including securing $150,000 funding for the broadband connection between the Valley at 277th Street and Valley Communications 911 Center 􀂃 Continued to use new and existing fiber and wireless infrastructure to provide more efficient operations and services including outfitting all maintenance crews with laptops to be more efficient in the field with maintenance documentation and work orders 􀂃 Through technology, enhanced communications with Auburn Citizens including new websites for booking golf tee times, crime statistics, downloading project bid documents and pay for business licensing online. Implemented new email communications service for citizens 􀂃 Worked with Valley Cities and Valley Communications to implement the first private fiber connection between a VCC agency and the VCC center for secure communications. 􀂃 Worked with Valley Communications on the plan to implement new computer aided dispatch system including serving as the pilot agency for HAWC (high availability wireless/wired communications network) 􀂃 Continued to enhance the city’s geographic information system (GIS) 􀂃 Supported NPDES requirements and Howard Hanson Dam emergency planning 􀂃 Maintained and upgraded City technology to maintain an efficient and productive work environment that enhances staffs ability to deliver excellent customer service. This included adding a new website content management system for website maintenance and Microsoft Sharepoint for better internal communications between project teams such as the Emergency Management Committee, Economic Development Committee and Grant Writing Committee 􀂃 Added technology for Public Safety including License Plate Recognition program that scans traffic for stolen plates, surveillance cameras for various city properties, conversion to new false alarm monitoring and creation of crime analysis tools 􀂃 Renegotiated cable franchise 􀂃 Provided all technical support for the design, implementation and move into the new City Hall Annex building 2011 & 2012 OBJECTIVE 􀂃 Continue to expand the Valley Cities Network as funding becomes available. 􀂃 Renew technology associated with Cable Television and Council Chambers remodel. 􀂃 Work with the School District and other regional partners to increase partnerships on technology to benefit the community 􀂃 Continue to expand the Intelligent Transportation System and City Wireless systems. 􀂃 Support technology improvements in the downtown redesign Page 221 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget 􀂃 Continue to maintain, upgrade and enhance City technology to maintain an efficient and productive work environment that improves staffs ability to deliver excellent customer service 􀂃 Continue to look for Federal, State and Private funding solutions to enhance City projects and programs (Other People’s Money) 􀂃 Support Auburn Public Safety systems to communicate with Valley Communications 911 System conversion to new technology. 􀂃 Support transition of Auburn Jail to the SCORE facility including researching, recommending and implementing data sharing between Auburn Courts and Public Safety and the SCORE facility. This includes processes such as paperless bookings, video arraignment, file sharing and other daily operational issues. 􀂃 Continue to build the City fiber network completing the north to south backbone for the city fiber network. 􀂃 Enhance security throughout the City by expanding video security systems. Page 222 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 2011-2012 WORKING CAPITAL BUDGET 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Item Actual Adj.Budget Est. Actual Budget Budget Operating Budget Operating Revenue 348.800 Interfund Operating Charges 3,127,712 2,517,600 2,517,600 3,285,250 3,250,400 348.801 Interfund Communications Charges 1,041,000 923,700 923,700 874,600 884,600 348.810 Interfund Equipment Replacement 461,076 460,800 460,800 0 0 338.190 Intergovernmental Service 195,428 24,300 24,300 25,820 25,820 Total Operating Revenue 4,825,216 3,926,400 3,926,400 4,185,670 4,160,820 Operating Expense 518.000.10 Salaries and Wages (1,421,165) (1,294,400) (1,294,400) (1,284,130) (1,303,000) 518.000.20 Personnel Benefits (423,107) (476,710) (476,710) (463,130) (515,170) 518.000.30 Supplies (101,319) (463,000) (494,000) (486,580) (394,830) 518.000.40 Services & Charges (1,281,507) (1,408,300) (1,355,300) (1,665,200) (1,674,580) 518.000.90 Interfund Payments for Services (195,300) (199,670) (199,670) (319,800) (294,000) 518.000.00 Depreciation & Amortization (498,973) (310,000) (310,000) (498,000) (498,000) Total Operating Expenses (3,921,371) (4,152,080) (4,130,080) (4,716,840) (4,679,580) Operating Income (Loss) 903,845 (225,680) (203,680) (531,170) (518,760) Non Operating Revenue (Exp) 361.110 Investment Income 25,466 22,500 22,500 11,000 11,000 369.900 Miscellaneous Revenue (Expense) 3,141 0 0 0 0 Total Non Oper. Rev (Exp) 28,607 22,500 22,500 11,000 11,000 Net Income (Loss) 932,452 (203,180) (181,180) (520,170) (507,760) Add/Deduct Items Not Affecting Working Capital (W/C) 518.801.00 Depreciation & Amortization 498,973 310,000 310,000 498,000 498,000 Net W/C From Operations 1,431,425 106,820 128,820 (22,170) (9,760) Other Resources and Uses Budget Resources Other Than Operations 331.167 Direct Federal Grant 0 255,600 34,500 0 0 397.100 Transfer In 0 0 0 75,000 179,250 399.000 Other Sources (19,212) 0 0 0 0 Total Resources (19,212) 255,600 34,500 75,000 179,250 Uses Other Than Operations 590.100.05 Net Change in Restricted Assets 0 0 0 0 0 597.100.55 Operating Transfers Out (81,000) (29,500) (29,500) (500,000) 0 590.100.64 Inc in Fixed Assets-Equipment (189,845) (628,100) (452,000) (1,001,610) (825,410) 590.100.65 Inc in Fixed Assets-Construction (174,597) (221,500) (34,500) 0 0 Total Uses (445,442) (879,100) (516,000) (1,501,610) (825,410) Net Change in W/C 966,772 (516,680) (352,680) (1,448,780) (655,920) Beginning W/C 1/1 2,932,485 3,899,257 3,899,257 3,546,577 2,097,797 Ending W/C 12/31 3,899,257 3,382,577 3,546,577 2,097,797 1,441,877 Net Change in W/C $ 9 66,772 $ (516,680) $ (352,680) $ (1,448,780) $ (655,920) Page 223 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Department Employees 518 Information Services FTE's 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Information Services FTE's * 18.00 15.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 TOTAL INFORMATION SERVICES FTE's 18.00 15.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 1.0 FTE -Desktop Support was was frozen in 2009. 1.0 FTE -Webmaster was part of the reduction in force in December 2009. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 2.0 FTE's -1 Technical Services Manager and 1 Systems Analyst were part of the reduction in force in May 2009. Page 224 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Information Services researches, recommends and delivers communications systems that enhance our ability to communicate with citizens, customers and each other. Help Desk Requests Information Services provides 24/7 support on City computer systems. Requests for service are tracked through our Help Desk. We strive to respond within 30-minutes during regular business hours of 7am-5pm. Off hours, we provide assistance as soon as possible for emergent issues. PERFORMANCE MEASURES -INFORMATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT Data Systems Supported Information Services supports all technology initiatives in the City. Our goal is to provide technology that will enhance our services and result in efficiencies throughout the City. Voice Systems Supported1,200 783 796 811 900 900 0 375 750 1,125 1,500 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Data Systems Supported 1,100 729 739 674 700 700 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Voice Systems Supported 14,000 13,483 9,165 8,796 8,000 7,000 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Est 2011 Goal 2012 Goal Help Desk Requests Page 225 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section IV: Operating Budget Page 226 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details Section V – Details Page 227 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details Page 228 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details SECTION V: BUDGET DETAILS The following tables, charts and other information is intended to provide further detail and explanation to the summary budget data presented in other sections of this document. Tables and Graphs in Order of Presentation • 2011 Budgeted Revenue by Type, All Funds (Table) • 2011 Budgeted Expenditures by Object, All Funds (Table) • 2012 Budgeted Revenue by Type, All Funds (Table) • 2012 Budgeted Expenditures by Object, All Funds (Table) • Relationship between Fund and City Structure (Table) • 2011 & 2012 – Budgeted Expenditures by Administrative Structure (Table) • 2011 & 2012 – Budgeted Expenditures by Cost Center (Graph) • 2011 & 2012 – Budgeted Expenditures by Cost Center (Table) Page 229 2011-2012 Preliminary Budget Section V: Budget Details 2011 Revenue by Type – All Funds Licenses & Charges for Fines & Taxes Permits Intergov't Services For feitures $ 3 9,363,950 $ 1,129,000 $ 3,841,685 $ 1,804,100 $ 2,208,500 Arterial Street -0 10,117,000 --Local Street 2,000,000 ----Hotel/Motel Tax 60,000 --46,300 -Arterial Street Preservation 1,500,000 ----Drug Forfeiture --46,100 -250,000 Justice Assistance -----Housing & Community Development --510,000 --Recreational Trails -----Business Improvement Area 53,000 ----Cumulative Reserve -----Mitigation Fees ---880,000 -1998 Library Bond -----LID Guarantee -----City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond --406,300 --Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond 250,000 -131,100 --LID #250 -----LID #350 -----Municipal Park Construction 100,000 -829,900 25,000 -Capital Improvements 1 ,200,000 ----Local Revitalization --2,544,000 --Water ---10,408,400 -Sewer ---17,570,300 -Storm Drainage --100,000 6,777,700 -Solid Waste --93,000 9,418,500 -Airport ---22,880 -Cemetery ---892,500 -Golf Course ---1,440,700 -Commercial Retail -----Insurance -----Facilities ---3,883,300 Information Services --25,820 4,159,850 -Equipment Rental ---605,200 -Fire Pension -----Agency Disbursement -----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment ---50,000 -$ 4 4,526,950 $ 1,129,000 $ 18,644,905 $ 57,984,730 $ 2,458,500 Fund GENERAL FUND DEBT SERVICE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS ENTERPRISE FUNDS INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FIDUCIARY FUNDS TOTAL BUDGET Page 230 2011 Revenue by Type – All Funds (continued) Other Interfund Other Financing Beginning Total Revenue Transfers Sources Fund Balance Resources $ 458,200 $ 1,033,468 $ 25,000 $ 1 1,763,355 $ 61,627,258 Arterial Street 4,000 3,089,200 -3 83,118 1 3,593,318 Local Street 5,000 1 50,000 -940,806 3,095,806 Hotel/Motel Tax 300 --118,126 224,726 Arterial Street Preservation 1 ,500 --33,589 1,535,089 Drug Forfeiture 2,600 --710,547 1,009,247 Justice Assistance ---16,468 16,468 Housing & Community Development ---99,286 609,286 Recreational Trails 1 00 7 ,100 -8,177 15,377 Business Improvement Area 1 00 --44,396 97,496 Cumulative Reserve 23,000 --5,623,464 5,646,464 Mitigation Fees 20,000 --3,444,973 4,344,973 1998 Library Bond 1 ,000 286,200 338,120 625,320 LID Guarantee 300 --63,200 63,500 City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond -1,289,300 --1,695,600 Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond 200 213,200 -62,500 657,000 LID #250 56,500 --347 56,847 LID #350 7,300 ---7,300 Municipal Park Construction 1,918,100 1,113,400 15,102,800 374,368 19,463,568 Capital Improvements 128,700 220,000 22,300 3,792,206 5,363,206 Local Revitalization 9,000 --5,335,300 7,888,300 Water 60,000 -450,000 19,168,199 30,086,599 Sewer 36,000 -350,000 1 0,818,244 2 8,774,544 Storm Drainage 36,000 -300,000 7,695,982 14,909,682 Solid Waste 2,300 --800,406 1 0,314,206 Airport 616,500 --708,342 1,347,722 Cemetery 1 ,000 3 1,300 -300,328 1 ,225,128 Golf Course 303,500 62,000 -228,668 2,034,868 Commercial Retail -----Insurance 3,700 --2,403,069 2,406,769 Facilities 116,000 --307,539 4,306,839 Information Services 11,000 75,000 -3,546,577 7,818,247 Equipment Rental 2,221,900 --4,857,654 7,684,754 Fire Pension 25,000 65,000 -2,789,842 2,879,842 Agency Disbursement -----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment 4,500 --1,528,962 1,583,462 $ 6,073,300 $ 7,635,168 $ 16,250,100 $ 88,306,158 $ 2 43,008,811 Fund GENERAL FUND DEBT SERVICE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS ENTERPRISE FUNDS INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FIDUCIARY FUNDS TOTAL BUDGET Page 231 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details 2011 Expenditure by Object – All Funds ( 10,20) (30) (40) (50) (60) Per sonnel Supplies Services Intergov't Capital $ 29,990,880 $ 1,072,730 $ 9,322,690 $ 6,492,670 $ 170,700 Arterial Street 420,400 -220,000 -12,548,100 Local Street 94,130 500 300 -1,892,870 Hotel/Motel Tax --209,000 --Arterial Street Preservation 28,600 ---1,471,400 Drug Forfeiture 131,420 1 7,000 92,400 -148,740 Justice Assistance -----Housing & Community Development 101,100 -99,500 -341,810 Recreational Trails -----Business Improvement Area -8,000 46,000 --Cumulative Reserve -----Mitigation Fees ---50,000 -1998 Library Bond -----LID Guarantee -----City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond -----Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond -----LID #250 -----LID #350 -----Municipal Park Construction --20,000 -19,241,700 Capital Improvements ---1,201,500 Local Revitalization 79,100 -20,000 -7,789,200 Water 3 ,371,980 516,900 3,672,890 -17,539,200 Sewer 2 ,338,710 98,700 1,939,190 13,493,390 6,332,000 Storm Drainage 2,724,110 145,700 1 ,529,490 26,000 6,949,700 Solid Waste 6 04,720 39,500 8,770,250 282,000 -Airport 2 4,290 2,000 454,100 -126,000 Cemetery 678,530 191,000 73,800 -44,000 Golf Course 861,230 282,100 2 03,850 --Commercial Retail -----Insurance 55,000 -3,700 --Facilities 9 43,900 100,490 1 ,738,490 5,700 331,420 Information Services 1 ,747,260 486,580 1,665,200 -1,001,610 Equipment Rental 544,280 9 66,200 5 43,700 -2,031,120 Fire Pension 142,910 -4,000 --Agency Disbursement -----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment -----$ 4 4,882,550 $ 3,927,400 $ 30,628,550 $ 20,349,760 $ 79,161,070 ENTERPRISE FUNDS TOTAL BUDGET INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FIDUCIARY FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS GENERAL FUND Fund Page 232 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details 2011 Expenditure by Object – All Funds (continued) (70,80) (90) Interfund Ending Total Debt Svc Interfund Svcs Transfers Fund Balance Budget $ 392,200 $ 6,472,150 $ 1,225,300 $ 6 ,487,938 $ 61,627,258 Arterial Street 87,700 52,100 -265,018 1 3,593,318 Local Street -12,200 -1,095,806 3,095,806 Hotel/Motel Tax ---15,726 224,726 Arterial Street Preservation ---35,089 1,535,089 Drug Forfeiture -106,450 -513,237 1,009,247 Justice Assistance --16,468 -16,468 Housing & Community Development ---66,876 609,286 Recreational Trails ---15,377 15,377 Business Improvement Area ---43,496 97,496 Cumulative Reserve --44,900 5,601,564 5,646,464 Mitigation Fees --2,629,200 1,665,773 4,344,973 1998 Library Bond 286,200 --339,120 625,320 LID Guarantee 1 ,000 -1 0,000 52,500 63,500 City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond 1,695,600 ---1,695,600 Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond 594,300 --62,700 657,000 LID #250 56,400 --447 56,847 LID #350 7,300 ---7,300 Municipal Park Construction ---201,868 19,463,568 Capital Improvements --1,771,000 2,390,706 5,363,206 Local Revitalization ----7,888,300 Water 1,306,600 1,051,750 50,000 2,577,279 30,086,599 Sewer 561,460 788,650 50,000 3,172,444 2 8,774,544 Storm Drainage 307,600 1,334,350 50,000 1,842,732 14,909,682 Solid Waste -1 87,000 -430,736 1 0,314,206 Airport 162,800 --578,532 1,347,722 Cemetery 22,300 69,300 -1 46,198 1 ,225,128 Golf Course 415,600 176,600 -95,488 2,034,868 Commercial Retail -----Insurance ---2,348,069 2,406,769 Facilities -90,400 750,000 346,439 4,306,839 Information Services -319,800 500,000 2,097,797 7,818,247 Equipment Rental -233,500 507,000 2,858,954 7,684,754 Fire Pension ---2,732,932 2,879,842 Agency Disbursement -----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment --31,300 1 ,552,162 1,583,462 5,897,060 $ 10,894,250 $ 7,635,168 $ 39,633,003 $ 243,008,811 $ FIDUCIARY FUNDS TOTAL BUDGET INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS ENTERPRISE FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE Fund GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Page 233 2011-2012 Preliminary Budget Section V: Budget Details 2012 Revenue by Type – All Funds Licenses & Charges for Fines & Taxes Permits Intergov't Services Forfeitures $ 39,819,715 $ 1,129,000 $ 3,756,285 $ 1 ,831,100 $ 2,208,500 Arterial Street --7,220,800 --Local Street 2,000,000 ----Hotel/Motel Tax 70,000 --9 ,100 -Arterial Street Preservation 1 ,500,000 ----Drug Forfeiture --46,100 -250,000 Justice Assistance -----Housing & Community Development --450,000 --Recreational Trails -----Business Improvement Area 54,000 ----Cumulative Reserve -----Mitigation Fees ---880,000 -1998 Library Bond -----LID Guarantee -----City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond --406,300 -Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond 250,000 -131,100 --LID #250 -----LID #350 -----Municipal Park Construction 165,000 -1,494,100 25,000 -Capital Improvements 1 ,400,000 ----Local Revitalization -----Water ---11,113,400 -Sewer ---1 7,978,600 -Storm Drainage --500,000 7,140,300 -Solid Waste --93,000 9,418,500 -Airport ---23,880 -Cemetery ---919,300 -Golf Course ----1,497,600 -Commercial Retail -----Insurance -----Facilities ---3,542,100 -Information Services --25,820 4,135,000 -Equipment Rental ---6 35,500 -Fire Pension -----Agency Disbursement -----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment ---50,000 -$ 45,258,715 $ 1,129,000 $ 14,123,505 $ 59,199,380 $ 2,458,500 DEBT SERVICE CAPITAL PROJECTS ENTERPRISE FUNDS TOTAL BUDGET INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FIDUCIARY FUNDS SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS GENERAL FUND Fund Page 234 2012 Revenue by Type – All Funds (continued) Other Interfund Other Financing Beginning Total Revenue Transfers Sources Fund Balance Resources $ 466,200 $ 1 7,000 $ 25,000 $ 10,487,938 $ 59,740,738 Arterial Street 4,000 1,490,700 6,000,000 265,018 1 4,980,518 Local Street 5,000 1 50,000 -1,095,806 3,250,806 Hotel/Motel Tax 300 --15,726 95,126 Arterial Street Preservation 1 ,500 --35,089 1,536,589 Drug Forfeiture 2,600 --513,237 8 11,937 Justice Assistance -----Housing & Community Development ---66,876 516,876 Recreational Trails 1 00 7 ,100 -15,377 22,577 Business Improvement Area 1 00 --43,496 97,596 Cumulative Reserve 24,000 --5,601,564 5,625,564 Mitigation Fees 22,000 --1,665,773 2,567,773 1998 Library Bond 1 ,200 286,900 -339,120 627,220 LID Guarantee 500 --52,500 53,000 City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond -1,289,800 --1,696,100 Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond 200 214,300 -62,700 658,300 LID #250 55,600 --447 56,047 LID #350 7,200 ---7,200 Municipal Park Construction 90,000 1 00,000 -201,868 2,075,968 Capital Improvements 127,700 2 10,000 -2,390,706 4,128,406 Local Revitalization -----Water 6 1,000 -450,000 2,577,279 1 4,201,679 Sewer 33,000 -350,000 3,172,444 21,534,044 Storm Drainage 33,000 -250,000 1,842,732 9,766,032 Solid Waste 2,300 --430,736 9,944,536 Airport 628,500 --578,532 1 ,230,912 Cemetery 1 ,000 22,300 -1 46,198 1,088,798 Golf Course 318,100 62,000 -95,488 1 ,973,188 Commercial Retail -----Insurance 3,800 --2,348,069 2,351,869 Facilities 116,100 --346,439 4,004,639 Information Services 11,000 179,250 -2,097,797 6,448,867 Equipment Rental 2,333,500 104,250 -2,858,954 5,932,204 Fire Pension 25,000 65,000 -2,732,932 2,822,932 Agency Disbursement -----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment 4,700 --1 ,552,162 1,606,862 $ 4,379,200 $ 4,198,600 $ 7,075,000 $ 43,633,003 $ 1 81,454,903 DEBT SERVICE CAPITAL PROJECTS FIDUCIARY FUNDS TOTAL BUDGET INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS ENTERPRISE FUNDS Fund GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Page 235 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details 2012 Expenditure by Object – All Funds ( 10,20) (30) (40) (50) (60) Personnel Supplies Services Intergov't Capital $ 31,324,170 $ 1 ,092,450 $ 9,489,270 $ 4,597,450 $ 15,000 Arterial Street 4 26,300 -220,000 -14,023,000 Local Street 9 7,920 500 300 -1 ,889,580 Hotel/Motel Tax --85,000 --Arterial Street Preservation 29,700 ---1,470,300 Drug Forfeiture 134,430 17,000 9 8,850 --Justice Assistance -----Housing & Community Development 100,520 -99,500 -239,200 Recreational Trails -----Business Improvement Area -8,000 46,000 --Cumulative Reserve -----Mitigation Fees ---50,000 -1998 Library Bond -----LID Guarantee -----City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond -----Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond -----LID #250 -----LID #350 -----Municipal Park Construction --20,000 -1,959,100 Capital Improvements ----405,000 Local Revitalization -----Water 3,516,650 521,300 3,916,020 -2,468,600 Sewer 2,427,000 103,800 2,008,900 13,493,390 1,025,500 Storm Drainage 2,833,200 145,800 1,528,500 26,000 2,057,400 Solid Waste 633,630 39,600 8,770,830 282,000 -Airport 24,710 2,000 424,100 -124,000 Cemetery 710,980 191,000 75,500 -10,000 Golf Course 893,600 288,100 2 07,750 --Commercial Retail -----Insurance 55,000 -3,700 --Facilities 974,470 1 05,510 1,619,860 5,700 -Information Services 1,818,170 394,830 1 ,674,580 -825,410 Equipment Rental 566,130 996,200 5 47,900 -767,730 Fire Pension 143,450 -4,000 --Agency Disbursement -----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment -----$ 4 6,710,030 $ 3,906,090 $ 30,840,560 $ 18,454,540 $ 2 7,279,820 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS GENERAL FUND Fund ENTERPRISE FUNDS TOTAL BUDGET INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FIDUCIARY FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE Page 236 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details 2012 Expenditure by Object – All Funds (continued) (70,80) (90) Interfund Ending Total Debt Svc Interfund Svcs Transfers Fund Balance Budget $ 304,100 $ 6,355,400 $ 1,434,500 $ 5,128,398 $ 59,740,738 Arterial Street 87,300 50,300 -1 73,618 1 4,980,518 Local Street -11,700 -1,250,806 3,250,806 Hotel/Motel Tax ---10,126 95,126 Arterial Street Preservation ---36,589 1,536,589 Drug Forfeiture -47,950 -513,707 8 11,937 Justice Assistance -----Housing & Community Development ---77,656 516,876 Recreational Trails ---22,577 22,577 Business Improvement Area ---43,596 97,596 Cumulative Reserve ---5,625,564 5,625,564 Mitigation Fees --1 ,070,700 1,447,073 2,567,773 1998 Library Bond 286,900 --340,320 627,220 LID Guarantee 1 ,000 -1 0,000 42,000 53,000 City Hall Annex 2010 A&B Bond 1,696,100 ---1,696,100 Local Revitalization 2010 C&D Bond 595,400 --62,900 658,300 LID #250 55,500 --547 56,047 LID #350 7,200 ---7,200 Municipal Park Construction ---96,868 2,075,968 Capital Improvements --754,100 2,969,306 4,128,406 Local Revitalization -----Water 1,328,750 1,066,100 50,000 1,334,259 1 4,201,679 Sewer 570,230 794,000 50,000 1 ,061,224 21,534,044 Storm Drainage 3 16,910 1,365,900 50,000 1,442,322 9,766,032 Solid Waste -184,500 -33,976 9,944,536 Airport 163,800 --492,302 1 ,230,912 Cemetery 22,300 6 6,100 -1 2,918 1,088,798 Golf Course 392,100 1 62,000 -29,638 1 ,973,188 Commercial Retail -----Insurance ---2,293,169 2,351,869 Facilities -93,000 750,000 456,099 4,004,639 Information Services -294,000 -1 ,441,877 6,448,867 Equipment Rental -213,700 7,000 2,833,544 5,932,204 Fire Pension ---2,675,482 2,822,932 Agency Disbursement -----PERMANENT FUNDS Cemetery Endowment --22,300 1,584,562 1,606,862 $ 5,827,590 $ 10,704,650 $ 4,198,600 $ 33,533,023 $ 1 81,454,903 Fund GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS FIDUCIARY FUNDS TOTAL BUDGET INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS ENTERPRISE FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE Page 237 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details The table below provides a cross-reference of the relationships between individual funds and City structure. City funds are represented along the horizontal axis of the table while the City structural divisions lie along the vertical axis. Boxes indicate how money from various City funds is allocated to support distinct City administrative divisions. Only those administrative divisions with multiple allocations are illustrated. Relationship between Fund and City Structure Solid Golf Info. Equip. General Water Sewer Storm Waste Airport Cemetery Course Facilities Svcs. Rental Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Human Resources 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Finance 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Legal 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Engineering 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Police 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Parks & Recreation 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Facilities Services 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Information Services 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Equipment Rental 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 􀂊 Page 238 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details Administrative Structure Perhaps the most common way of viewing the organization of the City is by administrative structure. The opposite page presents the budget from this perspective. The administrative structure is based upon the reporting relationships – what people and functions are accountable to which department. The criteria of organizing a City administratively are based on the grouping of specific work tasks or skills into groups with similar or related characteristics. This creates more efficiency, eliminates duplication of effort and allows the diversity of the City to be managed consistently. For example, it is more efficient for the accounts of the City to be handled centrally where trained staff can be provided. Likewise, it is more efficient to share engineering skills than for each utility to have separate engineering staff. The administrative structure of the City consists of the Mayor and nine department heads. The larger departments are are then subdivided into divisions. The nine departments are: Administrative or Support Departments: Mayor and Council Provides overall administration to the entire City. Also includes expenditures related to the operation of the City Council. The Communications division provides central administrative services such as communication, printing and mailing services. The Community Services division provides human services grants for local non profit agencies, neighborhood outreach and cultural diversity programs. This division also administers the City’s Community Development Block Grant. Human Resources This department provides centralized personnel services to all City services, administers the Auburn Municipal Court, and provides risk management services throughout the City. Human Resources also include the Civil Service Division, which applies to Police and Fire services. Property Management oversight is also provided. Finance Provides centralized budgeting and financial reporting services to all City departments. Finance also provides other central administrative services such as billing of City utilities. City Attorney Provides centralized legal and City Clerk services to all City Departments. Information Services Provides oversight for all technology and media production for the City. Line Departments: Planning and Development Planning and Development provides City wide land use planning and environmental protection. The Permitting and Inspections division are also centralized in the Planning department. Public Safety Provides all police, emergency management services and Auburn jail services. Public Works Includes engineering, all utilities, equipment rental and streets. Parks Provides recreational services and maintains park facilities. Parks includes providing senior citizen services and the management of the Cemetery and Golf Course. Costs are allocated to the departments on the facing page. Expenditures are accounted for on the basis of where the authority for the expenditure lies rather than by the fund or function. Page 239 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details Costs by Administrative Structure Costs by Administrative Structure2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 Actual Adj Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Mayor & Council $ 654,527 $ 738,900 $ 738,900 $ 789,980 $ 786,420 Communtiy & Human Svcs 787,052 1,070,400 1,070,400 1,092,980 1,102,050 Comm Devl Block 570,132 594,400 594,400 542,410 439,220 Human Resources 3,512,886 3,791,430 3,791,430 4,031,820 4,133,320 Facilities 2,064,573 2,678,010 2,661,010 3,210,400 2,798,540 Finance Dept 988,275 1,170,960 1,150,960 1,159,740 1,188,550 Solid Waste Utility 10,999,072 9,749,815 9,736,895 9,883,470 9,910,560 Airport 3,216,538 1,364,700 1,264,700 769,190 738,610 City Attorney 1,675,588 1,675,050 1,675,050 1,659,560 1,702,570 Planning & Community Dev Planning 3,444,461 3,587,170 3,577,170 3,721,770 3,800,330 Commercial Retail -----Jail-SCORE ---6,087,470 4,106,250 Police 23,428,067 24,061,115 23,641,115 20,164,610 20,484,990 Public Works Dept: Public Works 3,184,817 2,665,210 2,599,010 2,415,200 2,497,000 Street 2,761,113 3,093,500 3,093,500 3,183,130 3,279,920 Street Construction 7,126,500 17,717,400 14,461,918 16,828,300 18,306,900 Water Utility 10,320,368 2 2,054,080 12,917,580 2 7,459,320 12,817,420 Sewer Utility 19,567,967 2 4,020,080 21,597,380 25,552,100 20,422,820 Storm Drainage Utility 1 0,000,612 12,631,105 9,053,405 13,016,950 8,273,710 Parks Dept: Parks & Recreation Op. 6,658,192 6,826,200 6,801,200 7,279,570 7,392,970 Parks Construction 1,183,571 6,173,400 5,961,300 19,261,700 1,979,100 Cemetery 871,151 966,770 966,770 1,078,930 1,075,880 Golf Course 1,898,457 1,963,365 1,963,365 1,939,380 1,943,550 Total Operations 114,913,919 148,593,060 129,317,458 171,127,980 129,180,680 Other Funds: Non-Departmental 2,236,336 6,239,736 5,247,729 2,824,200 3,001,700 Transfers 7,439,901 13,998,371 13,585,391 7,635,168 4,198,600 Other Special Revenue 229,035 363,780 266,000 313,000 189,000 Debt Service 261,373 3,800,999 3,565,682 2,640,800 2,642,100 Capital Improvements 29,154,937 37,314,153 37,314,153 30,379,077 9,089,800 405,000 Internal Service 8,159,176 7,678,655 7,293,555 9,597,950 8,157,350 Fiduciary/Trust 181,579 129,400 125,400 146,910 147,450 Reserves: General Fund 13,237,852 8,815,626 9,763,355 6,487,938 5,128,398 Airport W/C 937,941 608,342 708,342 578,532 492,302 Utilities W/C 27,624,591 22,845,931 38,482,831 8,023,191 3,871,781 Facilities 248,239 303,539 307,539 346,439 456,099 Information Services 3,899,257 3,382,577 3,546,577 2,097,797 1,441,877 Equipment Rental W/C 5,291,929 4,857,654 4,857,654 2,858,954 2,833,544 Cemetery W/C 316,498 300,328 300,328 146,198 12,918 Golf Course W/C 195,433 228,668 228,668 95,488 29,638 Commercial Retail W/C 650,277 ----Construction Reserves 10,422,361 5,238,478 9,501,874 2,592,574 3,066,174 Other 21,947,761 18,226,038 18,608,990 16,405,892 16,200,292 Total Funds $ 247,348,398 $ 282,925,335 $ 276,086,450 $ 243,008,811 $ 181,454,903 Page 240 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details Departmental Expenditures by Cost Center: General Fund The next table presents a summary of General Fund expenditures by cost center. A cost center identifies specific activities within an administrative unit of the City. Since these cost centers correspond to specific programs operated by the City, this page summarizes the program budgets of the General Fund. The total public safety budget, which includes Police, Jail Court, Probation and Civil Service, is 52.6% of the General Fund. Police services are 35.7% of the General Fund, of which the largest police program is operations. Jail services are 11% of the total General Fund, while Municipal Court, Probation and Civil Services are 5.9%. Parks, Arts and Recreation account for 13.2% of the General Fund with 7.7% dedicated to Recreation and Park Facilities and 1.4% to Senior Services. The remainder of the General Fund is dispersed among a variety of services. Approximately 5.8% is allocated for street maintenance, 4.4% for engineering, and 8.7% for planning, building code administration, permitting, animal control and community & human services. The pie charts below depict General Fund expenditures for 2011 and 2012 by department and cost center. General Fund Expenditures by Cost Center 2011 Jail-SCORE 11.0% Police 35.7% Public Works 4.4% Parks 13.2% Streets 5.8% Non-Dept 7.3% Human Resources 7.4% Mayor/Council 1.4% Finance 2.1% Legal 3.0% Planning 8.7% General Fund Expenditures by Cost Center 2012 Public Works 4.6% Police 37.0% Parks 13.5% Streets 6.0% Non-Dept 8.1% Human Resources 7.6% Finance 2.2% Mayor/Council 1.4% Legal 3.1% Planning 9.0% Jail -SCORE 7.5% Page 241 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section V: Budget Details General Fund-Cost Center 2009 2010 2010 2011 2012 (includes fund balance) Actual Adj. Budget Est Actual Budget Budget Mayor & Council: City Council Operations $ 2 05,164 $ 232,700 $ 232,700 $ 267,530 $ 260,830 Mayor 449,362 5 06,200 5 06,200 522,450 525,590 Total Mayor & Council 654,526 7 38,900 7 38,900 789,980 786,420 Human Resources: Court 1 ,703,244 1 ,824,080 1 ,824,080 1,916,850 1 ,943,370 Probation 1,018,762 1,231,200 1,231,200 1,299,610 1 ,329,030 Administration 7 59,174 686,450 686,450 771,000 7 94,500 Civil Service Comm. 31,706 4 9,700 4 9,700 4 4,360 6 6,420 Total Human Resources 3 ,512,886 3 ,791,430 3 ,791,430 4 ,031,820 4 ,133,320 Finance: Administration 220,819 2 75,500 2 55,500 282,530 289,840 Budget, Accounting, Audit 767,456 895,460 895,460 877,210 898,710 Total Finance 988,275 1,170,960 1,150,960 1,159,740 1,188,550 City Attorney: City Attorney 1,174,704 1,134,400 1,134,400 1,159,680 1,192,900 City Clerk 500,884 5 40,650 5 40,650 499,880 499,880 5 09,670 Total City Attorney 1 ,675,588 1 ,675,050 1 ,675,050 1 ,659,560 1 ,702,570 Planning: Property Management 1 ,995,993 1 ,883,935 1 ,873,935 1,746,310 1 ,845,300 Permits & Inspection 1 ,448,467 1 ,703,235 1 ,703,235 1,774,510 1 ,832,880 Animal Control (1) ---2 00,950 122,150 Community Services 2 60,023 4 33,400 4 33,400 379,570 380,130 Human Services 527,030 6 37,000 6 37,000 713,410 721,920 Total Planning 4,231,513 4,657,570 4,647,570 4 ,814,750 4,902,380 Jail -SCORE: Jail SCORE (2) ---6,087,470 4 ,106,250 ---6,087,470 4 ,106,250 Police: Administration 4 ,014,486 4,330,695 4,330,695 4,291,190 4,264,650 Operations 9 ,841,650 1 0,869,460 1 0,869,460 11,029,360 11,425,400 Investigation 2,375,342 2,607,660 2,607,660 2,514,910 2,606,240 Comm. Programs Unit 614,830 540,710 540,710 636,460 659,850 Support 8 81,358 844,280 844,280 971,380 1,013,960 Jail 5,242,171 4,204,700 3,804,700 6 7,450 6 0,000 Emergency Services 1 64,181 252,710 252,710 157,850 156,660 Total Police 23,134,018 2 3,650,215 2 3,250,215 1 9,668,600 2 0,186,760 Public Works: Engineering 3 ,184,820 2 ,665,210 2 ,599,010 2 ,415,200 2,497,000 Total Public Works 3 ,184,820 2 ,665,210 2 ,599,010 2 ,415,200 2,497,000 Parks: Administration 694,097 681,200 681,200 7 02,090 6 60,340 Senior Citizen Services 720,956 719,300 719,300 788,420 789,130 Recreation & Facilities 4 ,059,431 4 ,106,450 4 ,081,450 4 ,245,010 4,348,930 Special Events 2 44,815 2 54,400 2 54,400 2 92,900 316,710 Theater 2 41,939 377,100 377,100 493,510 496,970 Arts Comm & Museum 696,953 687,750 687,750 757,640 7 80,890 Total Parks 6,658,191 6,826,200 6 ,801,200 7,279,570 7,392,970 Streets: Maintenance & Operations 2 ,251,459 2,595,000 2,595,000 2,704,480 2,790,630 Administration 509,654 4 98,500 4 98,500 478,650 489,290 Total Streets 2 ,761,113 3,093,500 3,093,500 3,183,130 3,279,920 Non-Departmental: Transfers & Misc. 5 ,330,163 8,565,113 7 ,573,106 4,049,500 4,436,200 Ending Fund Balance 13,237,851 8 ,815,626 9,763,355 6,487,938 5 ,128,398 Total Non-Depart. 18,568,014 1 7,380,739 17,336,461 1 0,537,438 9,564,598 Total General Fund $ 65,368,944 $ 65,649,774 $ 65,084,296 $ 6 1,627,258 $ 59,740,738 Notes: (1) Added Animal Control Division under Planning Department in 2011 (2) Added Jail SCORE Department in 2011 Page 242 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Section VI – Program Improvements Page 243 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Page 244 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements SECTION VI: PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS BY CITY DEPARTMENTS This section of the budget presents, in detail, the program improvements that have been recommended by the Mayor and City Council during budget deliberations. These program improvements are presented in a consistent format, which consists of the following: Title The name of the improvement as proposed by the department Priority The priority assigned by the department for each project (e.g. first priority among all public works proposals, not first priority among all city improvements) Cost Estimated cost by the department to implement the program improvement Person Responsible The individual who would be responsible for the improvement’s implementation Department The Department responsible for implementation Description A brief summary of the program improvement Alternatives This portion of the proposal describes potential alternatives to the proposed program or improvement to assist in evaluating the proposal’s merits Advantages of the Proposal The advantages of the proposal relative to the alternatives Implications of Denial A description of what will occur if the proposal is not approved Resources Required and Source of Funds A budget or cost distribution of the proposal by line item or source of revenue The last portion of each proposal (Conclusion) is added after the budget is approved to summarize the manner in which the proposal was approved. Page 245 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements 2011-2012 Program Improvements by Department The following table lists program improvements that have been included in the 2011-2012 budget. The recommended levels of funding are indicated on the table. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS 2011 2012 Department FTE New Program Title Costs Costs GENERAL FUND GF FTE's 0.00 Sub-Total GF FTE'S 0 0 1 Planning Contract Animal Services Coordinator (8,050) (138,850) 2 Police Blackberry Devices Detective Unit 440 440 3 Parks Petpalooza Two-Day Event 16,530 4 Parks Auburn Community Players 26,000 26,000 5 Parks Tree Removal -Pioneer Cemetery 30,000 6 Parks Overlay Trail at Les Gove Park 25,000 7 Parks Elimination of ACTIVE On-line Convenience Fees 26,500 26,500 8 Street Concrete Core Drill 10,000 Total General Fund $84,890 -$44,380 OTHER FUNDS Other Funds FTE's 0.00 Sub-Total Other Fund FTE'S 0 0 2 Police-Fund 117 Blackberry Devices Detective Unit 2,050 9 Police-Fund 117 Spillman Imaging 45,000 9,000 10 Police-Fund 117 Crime Crime Scene Response Van 148,740 35,650 11 Police-Fund 117 Justice Center Video Camera System 49,000 10,000 12 Water Vactor Upgrade 171,000 13 Cemetery Roll Around Cemetery Canopy 9,000 14 Facilities City Hall Generator Replacement 75,000 15 Facilities McKinstry Energy Conservation Audit List 223,940 (47,000) 16 Facilities Jacobsen Tree Farm & Fields Property Structure Demo 73,000 17 Information Services CAD Replacement Project 30,000 30,000 18 Information Services On-line Payroll & HR 19,400 1,780 19 Information Services Automate Report Distribution 48,500 6,800 20 Information Services Electronic Plan Review Program 40,000 40,000 21 Information Services AutoCAD/Civil 3D Upgrade 45,000 22 Information Services Aerial Orthos -Orthophotography 20,000 23 Information Services Additional CarteGraph Licensing 10,000 10,000 24 Information Services Survey GPS Equipment Replacement 25,000 25 Information Services Springbrook .NET Upgrade 65,000 26 Information Services Spillman Superforms Interface with SCORE 50,000 27 27 Information Services Sign Retroreflectometer 12,000 28 Information Services SCORE Communications Interface 25,000 29 Information Services Records Management & Workflow Program Software 63,000 7,200 30 Information Services Phone System Upgrades 50,000 31 Information Services Multimedia Refresh for Council Chambers 75,000 75,000 32 Information Services Golf Course Irrigation Central Computer 38,000 33 Equipment Rental -Street Used Vibratory Roller and Trailer 45,000 Total New FTE's 0.00 Total Other Funds $1,277,630 $358,430 TOTAL GENERAL AND OTHER FUNDS $1,362,520 $314,050 Page 246 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund $ ( 8,050) General fund $ (138,850) Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Other fund: Other fund: Total Revenue: $ (8,050) Total Revenue: $ (138,850) Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages $ 50,390 Wages $ 33,000 Benefits (15%) 7 ,560 Benefits (15%) 4 ,950 Supplies 9 ,000 Supplies 18,000 Minor Equipment 1 ,000 Minor Equipment 1,200 Advertising 1 2,000 Advertising 2 4,000 Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Intergovernmental Service (88,000) Intergovernmental Service (220,000) Vehicle Vehicle Other Other Total Cost: $ (8,050) Total Cost: $ (138,850) Conclusion: Budget has been added to the General Fund for the Animal Services Coordinator in 2011 and 2012 along with budget reductions for a net impact of $8,050 and $138,850 reductions for both years respectively. This Program Improvement request for the 2011-2012 budget cycle will correspond to all but six months of the animal services contract with KC. The substantive efforts of this contract position is to significantly increase the current low licensing percentage within the City and will provide the Mayor/Council with the ability to evaluate future animal services opportunities from a different and more positive financial perspective. Specific tasks, timeframes and performance measures will be established to track efforts and gauge success. For the 2011 budget year, a performance measure of a 10% increase in the current citywide pet licensing percentage is estimated and for the 2012 budget year, a 15% increase is proposed. The proposed performance measures will constitute a 25% increase in the percentage (43%) of licensed pets in the City over the biennial budget period. The pecentage increase in licensed pets will directly correspond to the amount the City is required to pay KC during the contract period because as the percentage of licensed pets increase the City sees a corresponding credit on the costs of services from KC. (8,050) 2011 (138,850) 2012 Contract position (30 hours/week) to coordinate marketing and public education within the City of Auburn to increase the current percentage of licensed dogs and cats -estimated to be approx 18% which is currently funded in the 2010 Budget. This request is funded by additional licensing fees generated by this position and will be credited to the City by King County (KC) in the form of reduced animal control payments. The anticipated net impact to the General Fund is a reduction of $8,050 in 2011 and $138,850 in 2012. The alternative for the City is to rely upon KC's marketing and public education efforts to support increased licensing in the City. As a countywide effort, the City will likely see a lower level of service within the city limits. This approach does not provide the City with direct control over marketing and education efforts, methods, times and messages and limits the City's ability to establish performance measures and track individual and collective performance against City needs and goals. Alternatives: Kevin Snyder Planning Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The City has entered into a 2.5 year contract with KC for the provision of animal control services. The fees for this service are attributed to the percentage of licensed dogs and cats with the result that the higher the licensing percentage the lower the cost of service to the City. The contract Animal Services Coordinator will provide the City with a position that is focused exclusively on significantly increasing this percentage. Cost: Contract Animal Services Coordinator Page 247 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 4 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund $ 440 General fund $ 440 Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Drug Forfeiture fund: 2,050 Drug Forfeiture fund: Total Revenue: $ 2,490 Total Revenue: $ 440 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Minor Equipment $ 2 ,050 Minor Equipment Communication 440 Communication $ 440 Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 2,490 Total Cost: $ 440 REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Ability to receive important information while in the field, increasing officer safety. With today's technology, suspect photos and information is learned at a very rapid pace. It is critical that the investigator in the field receive the information in a timely manner. Cost: Blackberry Devices for Detective Unit Conclusion: $2,050 has been added to the 2011 Drug Forfeiture Fund budget to purchase Blackberry devices for the detective unit. Annual communication charges has been budgeted in the General Fund for 2011 and 2012 . Certain information can be given to investigators via telephone. However, suspect photos and bulletins will require another person to hand deliver them in the field. $2,490 To upgrade the Investigations Unit to BlackBerry devices. The upgrade will affect 10 detectives. The devices will allow detectives to have access to important information in a timely manner. Detectives in the field will have the ability to receive suspect photos sent from the station or another detective. Current yearly recurring costs for the Nextel communication devices are approximately $1,240, this will increase by $440 annually. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Drug Forfeiture Fund and will have a $440 annual net effect on the General Fund Maintain current cell phone plan. Alternatives: Bob Lee Police Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 248 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 4 2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund $ 8 ,000 Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Sponsorship Sponsorship 8 ,530 Total Revenue: $ -Total Revenue: $ 1 6,530 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages-Overtime Wages-Overtime $ 2 ,000 Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies 4 00 Professional Services Professional Services 8 ,500 Rentals & Leases Rentals & Leases 5 ,630 Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ -Total Cost: $ 1 6,530 REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The advantage of hosting a two day event would be to attract more people to the City of Auburn and to expose more of the pet related services to more people. A two-day event could spur hotel stays from vendors who travel to the event from out of the area. The event may also appeal to more sponsors as it has more exposure to more people. Cost: Petpalooza two-day event The event raises awareness of pets, generates visibility of pet-related services in the area and draws people from throughout the region to the City of Auburn. In 2012, staff is proposing to create a two-day event for Petpalooza. Additional expenditures would be required for overnight security for vendors and the park; one day of additional stage entertainment, inflatables and other activities, overtime for Park Maintenance staff; equip. rentals and the potential for a two-day Dock Dogs event which would also need the additional rental of bleachers. It is anticipated that a two-day Petpalooza would attract over 16,000 people to Game Farm Park.This request will be funded by increased sponsorships and will have a $8,000 net effect on the General Fund. Conclusion: $16,530 has been added to the 2012 General Fund budget for the Petpalooza two-day event. We anticipate raising vendor fees slightly and with a two-day event, should be able to attract more event sponsors. Net revenue for Petpalooza in 2010 was $17,835. It is anticipated that in 2012, a two-day event would have a net revenue of $10,000. $16,530 Since it's inception in 2008, Petpalooza has grown into a regional special event. In it's current state, the event includes a registration-based 3K/5K Dog Trot pet/owner fun run, animal-related entertainment, children's activities, unleashed pet contests, a petting zoo, over 150 vendor booths, Skyhoundz Disc Dog Championships, Seattle Fly Dog demonstrations, three agility areas, a pet parade and food concessions. In 2009, Petpalooza was awarded LERN'S Int'l Award for "Best New Program", as well as several awards from WA Festival and Events (WFEA) including a Gold Medal in the Community Service Program category, a Silver Medal for Best Overall Promotion Campaign, and Silver for the bookmark in the specialty print category, and a Gold medal for the t-shirt. Petpalooza could still be hosted as a two-day event and we could remove the Dock Dogs ($6,000) and rental of bleachers ($2,000) for a savings of $8,000 and the two day event could still go forward without this dog related piece. If this piece would be removed, the cost of the two day event would be $8,530. Alternatives: Daryl Faber Parks, Arts & Recreation Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 249 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund $ 2 6,000 General fund $ 26,000 Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Drug Forfeiture fund: Drug Forfeiture fund: Total Revenue: $ 2 6,000 Total Revenue: $ 2 6,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages $ 3 ,000 Wages $ 3 ,000 Benefits (29%) 500 Benefits (29%) 5 00 Supplies 2 ,000 Supplies 2 ,000 Professional Services 1 3,000 Professional Services 1 3,000 Advertising 1 ,000 Advertising 1,000 Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Rentals & Leases 6,000 Rentals & Leases 6,000 Other charges 5 00 Other charges 500 Capital Equipment Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 2 6,000 Total Cost: $ 2 6,000 REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The advantage of funding the ACP in the 2011 & 2012 budget cycle would be to continue to provide this unique unique opportunity for individuals interested in participating locally in performing art opportunities and expanding the offerings at the Auburn Avenue Theater. The excitement and passion generated by the inaugural production of ACP would be carried into further years. Cost: Auburn Community Players Conclusion: $26,000 has been added to the 2011 and 2012 General Fund budget for the Auburn Community Players program. The ACP was conducted on a trial basis at the Auburn Avenue Theater in 2010 and turned out to be a complete success, with ticket sales covering the production costs and hundreds of people supporting the production. If it is not funded in 2011 or 2012, the community would lose the energy created in 2010 by the cast, crew, musicians, and producers who want to see and participate in high quality performances at the Auburn Avenue Theater and audience members who will generate attendance for both ACP performances and other performances at the Auburn Avenue Theater. $26,000 The Cultural Arts Division is proposing to develop the Auburn Community Players (ACP) as a means to enhance and contribute to the cultural life and downtown vitality of Auburn. An active community based theatrical troupe not only brings quality live theater to local audiences, but provides valuable experiences and opportunities for local aspiring actors, musicians and theater professionals. Presenting theater through an out of area travelling troupe, often proves financially over-burdensome, and being able to foster and promote local talent and create a quality theater experience locally is beneficial to all citizens. A regular commitment to partner and support this project would potentially allow two musical plays per year, in spring and fall, and would present 8 shows per play for a total of 16 shows a year. The ACP debuted in 2010 at the Auburn Avenue Theater with their inaugural production of "Into the Woods". This request will be funded by additional ticket sales and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. The alternative alternative would be to fund one production a year at a cost of $12,000, or to not fund any productions by the ACP in 2011 or 2012. Alternatives: Daryl Faber Parks, Arts & Recreation Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 250 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 1 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund $ 30,000 General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Other fund: Other fund: Total Revenue: $ 30,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Professional Services $ 30,000 Professional Services Total Cost: $ 30,000 Total Cost: $ -REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Will prevent potential liability if trees fail and injure someone or cause damage to personal property. Cost: Tree Removal -Pioneer Cemetery Conclusion: $30,000 has been added to the 2011 General Fund budget for tree removal at Pioneer Cemetery. If trees fail, may cause harm to persons or personal property. $30,000 Removal of 8 dangerous trees at Pioneer Cemetery, grind stumps and replace with new 6 inch caliper Maple trees. This request will be funded by the General Fund and will have a $30,000 net effect on the General Fund in 2011. The trees are dangerous and it is no longer a question of "if" they will fail, but "when" they will fail. The trees are approximately 60 feet tall. 40 years ago they were topped which has caused a slow decay from the top down. We have had the trees pruned so that more weight on the trees is on the side of the tree facing into the cemetery and away from Auburn Way North. In the last ten years, two of the trees have failed and fallen on their own, both fell into the cemetery only causing minimal damage and fortunately no injuries or deaths to people. The trees have been rated by the city arborist, as well as an independent arborist, and they are both in agreement that they need to come down as soon as possible. There is only about 3 to 5 inches of hard wood holding these trees upright, the center of the trees are completely rotten from the ground up. The alternative is to leave them standing and hope we get through another two year cycle without having another tree fail. Alternatives: Daryl Faber Parks Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 251 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 3 2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund $ 2 5,000 Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: Information Services fund: Total Revenue: $ -Total Revenue: $ 2 5,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Maintenance Maintenance $ 2 5,000 Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ -Total Cost: $ 2 5,000 REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: We would have a nice, new smooth surface for park users. It would be the final phase of completing construction at the park. Cost: Overlay trail at Les Gove Park Conclusion: $25,000 has been added to the 2012 General Fund budget for the Les Gove Park Trail overlay project. Over time it will cost more to replace as prices increase. $25,000 The existing half mile asphalt trail is 30+ years old and has had a lot of truck traffic on it with all of the different construction in the park in the last 10 years. It would coincide with the opening of the new Community Center and would be the final phase of construction at this park. This request will be funded by the General Fund and will have a $25,000 net effect on the General Fund in 2012. Leave existing trail as is and repair as needed for safety reasons. Alternatives: Daryl Faber Parks, Arts & Recreation Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 252 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 1 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund $ 26,500 General fund $ 2 6,500 Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Other fund: Other fund: Total Revenue: $ 26,500 Total Revenue: $ 26,500 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Communication $ 2 6,500 Communication $ 2 6,500 Total Cost: $ 26,500 Total Cost: $ 26,500 Conclusion: $26,500 has been added to the 2011 and 2012 General Fund budget for the elimination of Active On-line Convenience Fees. With the removal of convenience fees our customers are more likely to use the on-line feature resulting in fewer phone calls and front counter transactions. Feedback we have received from our customers has told us that they do not use the on-line feature because of the fees associated with it. $26,500 Currently, the Parks, Arts & Recreation Dept processes approx. 19,000 transactions annually. Of those transactions, only 2.4% are conducted on-line at Auburn At Play. The customer pays an average convenience fee of $5.57 based on an average transaction amount of $78.00 when registering on-line. This request would eliminate the convenience fee to the customer and the cost of the fee would be incurred by the city. By eliminating the fee to the customer, we believe that on-line registrations would increase to approximately 25% of total registrations, resulting in approx. $4,750 annual online transactions. The cost to the city would be approx. $26,500 (4,750 x $5.57) that it would pay directly to Active, the third party vendor. The Parks, Arts & Recreation Department would increase its fees by $1.40 per transaction to offset this cost to the city resulting in an increase in revenue of approx. $26,500 (19,000 x x $1.40). This request will be funded by increased revenues in the General Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Continue to offer on-line registration with convenience fees with a greater emphasis on advertising this feature. Alternatives: Daryl Faber Parks Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: By increasing on-line transactions to the 25% level, we would experience an equivalent decrease in over the phone and front counter transactions. This would result in the one full-time Registration Clerk being able to respond to phone calls and front desk customers in a more timely manner. In addition, our customers would now have the ability and convenience of registering for a program on-line without having to pay any additional fees, the primary reason is that only 2.4% or our total registrations are currently conducted on-line. Cost: Elimination of ACTIVE On-Line Convenience Fees Page 253 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 1 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund $ 1 0,000 General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Other fund: Other fund: Total Revenue: $ 1 0,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Equipment $ 1 0,000 Equipment Total Cost: $ 1 0,000 Total Cost: $ -Conclusion: $10,000 has been added to the 2011 General Fund budget to purchase a concrete core drill. Risk damaging the sidewalk during a sign installation by either using a jack hammer to dig the hole or from rotohammering the bolts for a bracket. It will take longer to hand dig holes in areas of hard pack and rocks, more specifically the hills around the valley floor. $$10,000 Acquire a machine that can easily core through concrete and auger through hard soils for street sign installation. Currently when new street signs need to be installed in existing sidewalk the hole for the post is jack hammered out risking the possibility of damaging the sidewalk beyond the scope of the hole. The auger system would increase efficiency in digging holes for posts outside the valley floor area where hard pack soil and rocks are likely to be found. The annex area, acquired from the county, has wood posts for street signs that are rotting away and need to be replaced with city standard metal posts. This request will be funded by reducing intergovernmental services for one year to pay for the cost of this equipment and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. There are sign post brackets that can be roto-hammered and bolted into concrete sidewalks. Continue jack-hammering the holes in the sidewalks. Continue hand digging hard packed areas with post hole digger. Alternatives: Dennis Dowdy Public Works -Street Division Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The City's one sign crew will be able to efficiently core a clean cut hole for posts being installed in existing sidewalks, without risking damage to the sidewalk which would add costs for sidewalk repairs. The auger bit will decrease the time it takes to dig a hole on the hills where the ground is extremely hard to dig through. Cost: Concrete Core Drill Page 254 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Drug Forfeiture fund: $ 4 5,000 Drug Forfeiture fund: $ 9,000 Total Revenue: $ 4 5,000 Total Revenue: $ 9 ,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Professional Services $ 9 ,000 Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment $ 4 5,000 Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 4 5,000 Total Cost: $ 9 ,000 Conclusion: $45,000 has been added to the 2011 Drug Forfeiture Fund budget for the Spillman Imaging System. Annual maintenance has been budgeted in 2012. Continue to use Dynamic Imaging Product $45,000 Spillman Imaging to replace Dynamic Imaging product. Spillman has developed an imaging system that is superior in performance to our current Dynamic Imaging product. The imaging system is used by both the PD and Jail staff for booking photos as well as staff photos for security purposes. The Dynamic Imaging Product does not 'mesh" very well with Spillman as it requires extra steps to incorporate photos and offers limited capabilities than the new Spillman Imaging System. Additionally, the Spillman Records Management System (RMS) will require costly upgrades to ensure it continues to work with the Dynamic Imaging System when the Spillman 6 upgrade is completed later in 2010. The Spillman Imaging System will allow a more "seamless" integration and use with our RMS. The proposed annual maintenance fee is consistent with the current annual maintenance fee charged by Dynamic Imaging. Status Quo and less efficiency and effectiveness Alternatives: Bob Lee Police Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The new Spillman Imaging System is designed to work with our Spillman 6.0 upgraded RMS and offers seamless and more efficient and effective use of internal photos for crime solving and administrative uses. The current Dynamic Imaging System is "wieldy" and requires extra steps to enter photos and establish montages, etc. Cost: Spillman Imaging Page 255 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Drug Forfeiture $ 1 48,740 Drug Forfeiture $ 3 5,650 Total Revenue: $ 148,740 Total Revenue: $ 35,650 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Communications Communications $ 6 00 Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle $ 148,740 Vehicle Other Other 3 5,050 Total Cost: $ 148,740 Total Cost: $ 35,650 Conclusion: $148,750 has been added to the 2011 Drug Forfeiture Fund budget to purchase a crime scene response van. Communications and replacement costs have been budgeted in 2012. Currently, the crime scene van is in disrepair and in need of replacement. The value is less than $500 and will not be fixed should any major issue/breakdown occur. The van hauls hundreds of supplies that would have to be removed to dry storage and then re-packed into several cars for major crime scene call-outs. The packing/unpacking and re-packing would be never ending and leads to the duplication of effort by every team member and at every scene the team would assist at. $148,740 The Crime Scene Response Team is in need of a new Crime Scene Response Vehicle. The current vehicle is in disrepair and does not allow for the proper transportation of tools and supplies necessary to process major crime scenes. Currently, the CSRT/Traffic Investigators respond to crime scenes and fatality/serious injury collisions with as many as 10 or more vehicles to handle various responsibilities. This vehicle would enable all the necessary supplies to be stored in one central location, allow for the transporting of numerous CSRT investigators, and also allow for "real time" processing and storage of evidence in a secure, climate controlled, and professionally maintained unit. The current crime scene vehicle is in disrepair and if there is a need for any major repair, M&O will surplus. An improvement in this area would be consistent with our mission 1. Keep the current CSRT van and multiple vehicle response system. 2. Decommission the van altogether and leave the response based on individual/situational needs. 3. Contract with WSP Crime Lab or private vendor for outside services that can be expensive and come with extensive time delays. Alternatives: Bob Lee Police Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Maintains the integrity and chain of custody for our investigations; allows the team to be self-sufficient and saves space, time, staffing and fuel; greater reliability of transportation; increases the professionalism and credibility of our crime scene program with the public; and allows us to assist other agencies on complex crime scenes in a professional manner. This will improve our ability to dedicate a fully staffed team and resources to professional and critical aspects of crime scene processing. The ability to field a team with all the tools needed for any crime scene allows the scene to be processed completely, professionally and accurately, with greater credibility and integrity consistent with the mission and vision statement of the department and City. Cost: Crime Scene Response Van statement to provide professional police services to our citizens by using the latest in modern technology to properly and accurately document and process crime scenes. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Drug Forfeiture Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Page 256 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 3 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Drug Forfeiture fund: $ 4 9,000 Drug Forfeiture fund: $ 10,000 Total Revenue: $ 4 9,000 Total Revenue: $ 1 0,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Professional Services $ 1 0,000 Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment $ 4 9,000 Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 4 9,000 Total Cost: $ 1 0,000 Conclusion: $49,000 has been added to the 2011 Drug Forfeiture Fund budget to purchase the Justice Center video camera system. Annual service fees have been budgeted in 2012. Potential theft of/from vehicles and vandalism to same may occur without the enhanced security. Loss of a good source source of evidence if a crime does occur in the parking lots. $49,000 Replace the current analog camera and software capture program with a high tech megapixel IP Camera Surveillance system. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Drug Forfeiture Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Status Quo Alternatives: Bob Lee Police Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The current system does not provide enough resolution capability to identify suspect faces or license plates. Therefore, it only records crimes without providing crime solving capabilities. The mega pixel IP system will provide enhanced identification capabilities that will enable the police to identify suspects and vehicles that are involved in crimes in the area around the Justice Center. The City is planning to use a similar system in the downtown corridor which will allow the entire system to be linked together for greater effectiveness, efficiency efficiency and crime solving capabilities. Cost: Justice Center Video Camera System Page 257 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 1 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds $ 171,000 Proprietary funds Other fund: Other fund: Total Revenue: $ 171,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle $ 171,000 Vehicle Professional Services Professional Services Total Cost: $ 171,000 Total Cost: $ -Conclusion: $171,000 has been added to the 2011 Water Fund budget for the Vactor upgrade. Purchasing a Hydro-Excavator that is designed for excavation will cut down on vehicle repairs and will be more efficient on projects as they are built stronger and are more durable. Continuing to rely on older vactors will defer an improvement in productivity productivity that is now made feasible by this new type of excavator that is intentionally designed for the purpose of performing emergency trench excavation. $171,000 Our current Vactor is scheduled for replacement in 2011; this request is to upgrade our vactor from a standard duty machine to a hydro excavator which is a heavy duty machine designed to process large abrasive debris (rock) without damage to the suction fan. This feature is not included in a conventional vactor because most users do not attempt to utilize a conventional vactor to dig trenches. The cost for the new machine is approx. $550,000 which is considerably higher than the available $320,000 in the equipment rental fund for this replacement. The additional cost of a hydro excavator will be offset using the following funding sources: Hydro Excavator Price $550,000, Vactor Replace $292,000 Equip. Rental Fund, truck not replaced $87,000 ER&R Fund and $171,000 Water Fund. Purchase a standard duty vactor, which is not designed for excavation excavation tasks and wears out much faster resulting in extensive down time for repairs and reduces work crew production rates. Additionally, the repairs often involve replacing specialized vacuum pump and piping equip which are typically very expensive. Alternatives: Dennis Dowdy Public Works -Water Utility Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Obtain proper type of equip for the type of work intended to be performed. The City's conventional vactors are not designed to excavate trenches, which saves time and often avoids damage to other underground utilities during an emergency repair of water, sewer or storm facilities. A vactor is safer for our crews while exposing an underground utility than with back hoes & shovels due to possible natural gas or energized electrical conduits. We have retained one of the city's oldest vactors for this purpose; however, due to its design it is often in the shop and not 100% available as we would expect the new type of excavator to be. Having a better built excavator will help reduce down time, save money on restoration of other utilities in the trench and on maintenance of the vactor and will be more efficient on jobs. New hydro excavator trucks are built stronger and are designed to be used as trench excavators. Most work will be performed by City utilities when performing emergency trench excavation if it is procured, this will extend the life of our other three conventional vactors by freeing them of this type of work that they are not designed to perform. REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Cost: Vactor Upgrade Page 258 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds $ 9 ,000 Proprietary funds Other fund: Other fund: Total Revenue: $ 9 ,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Other $ 9 ,000 Other Total Cost: $ 9 ,000 Total Cost: $ -REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: We can continue to provide families with quality equipment and service by providing shelter and protection from the elements during graveside services. Cost: Roll around cemetery canopy (shelter) Conclusion: $9,000 has been added to the 2011 Cemetery Fund budget to purchase a roll around canopy. Complaints because of water leaking through the canopy top on caskets and people during wet, rainy days. Old canopy wheels leave marks in turf which requires maintenance. $9,000 19 X 17 canopy on larger wheels to provide shelter during graveside services and protects families from rain, snow and sun. This request will be funded by the Cemetery Endowed Fund and will have zero net effect on the General Fund. Continue to use old canopy which is in ill repair with a leaky roof, rusty broken welds, and small inadequate wheels that damage the turf as we pull them into position for services throughout the cemetery. Alternatives: Daryl Faber Parks -Cemetery Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 259 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund $ 4 2,750 General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Facilities fund: 3 2,250 Facilities fund: Total Revenue: $ 7 5,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment $ 75,000 Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 7 5,000 Total Cost: $ -Conclusion: $75,000 has been added to the 2011 Facilities Fund budget to purchase a new generator for City Hall. The Facilities Fund will receive $42,750 from the General Fund as interfund payment in 2011. Continued unpredictable failure during power outages. Repair issues due to inability to find many controls and switch replacement parts because they are antiquated and cannot be retrofit. $75,000 To replace the over 30-year old generator at City Hall which has received no upgrades during that time. This request will be funded by interfund payments to the Facilities Fund and will have a $42,750 net effect on the General Fund. Continue with "band-aid" fixes and live with unpredictable power outages; some parts are obsolete from the manufacturer and require re-make of the part, which costs a great deal of money. Alternatives: Brenda Heineman Human Resources -Facilities Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: A new piece of equipment with warranties for a period of time and one in which the City can implement a preventive maintenance plan to preserve its life, as well as being able to keep track of maintenance activities and easy availability of necessary replacement parts. Cost: City Hall generator replacement Page 260 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund $ 127,600 General fund $ ( 26,320) Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Other fund: 96,340 Other fund: (20,680) Total Revenue: $ 223,940 Total Revenue: $ (47,000) Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Improvements $ 1 06,810 Improvements Repairs & Maintenance 14,520 Repairs & Maintenance Utilities (47,000) Utilities $ (47,000) Capital Equipment 1 49,610 Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 223,940 Total Cost: $ (47,000) Conclusion: $223,940 has been added to the 2011 Facilities Fund budget for the McKinstry Energy Conservation Audit list program. 2012 budget for utilities have been reduced by the anticipated cost savings from this program. The City will be replacing equipment/equipment/systems at the end of their useful life with no return on investment. The City will continue to repair equipment/systems in a "band-aid" fashion as they breakdown. In addition, the longer the City waits to make full upgrades/complete repairs the more labor and equipment costs will become, ultimately costing more than currently projected. There also is a loss of potential funding/grant/rebate incentives from PSE; PSE estimates up to $100,000. $223,940 Complete correcting the items listed on the Facility Improvement List identified during the facilities audit conducted by McKinstry with the purpose of increasing the life of a system/piece of equipment and/or reducing utility costs. The estimated cost is $273,923 excluding sales tax. These include control upgrade (City Hall), lighting upgrade (City Hall), demand controlled ventilation (Justice Center), air handler unit set back (Justice Center), re-commissioning (Justice Center), off hours timers for HVAC and override control for a portion of City Hall. This request will be funded by interfund payments to the Facilities Fund and will have a $127,600 net effect on the General Fund in 2011 and reduction of $26,300 net effect on the General Fund in 2012. Reject the project; complete only selected portions of the audit; complete selected portions of the audit checklist each of the two years of the budget, where possible. Alternatives: Brenda Heineman Human Resources -Facilities Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Completion of the projects will increase the life of the equipment and lower utility costs (going green and focusing on the Resource Conservation Project in which the City is partnering with PSE and WSU). This is a self-paying project with an estimated average of 10.6% return on investment over 11.7 years. In addition, there is a potential savings from a $54,000 contribution for the Auburn Police Department for the work on the Justice Center; money available from cp0716 for City Hall and grants and rebates/incentives from PSE. Completion of portions of the audit check list each year, where possible, might increase the overall cost of the project, but reduces the budget impact each year. Cost: McKinstry Energy Conservation Audit List Page 261 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 8 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Facilities fund: $ 73,000 Facilities fund: Total Revenue: $ 73,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Maintenance $ 73,000 Maintenance Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 73,000 Total Cost: $ -REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Combining projects will reduce cost of performing demolition one location at a time. Reduce the time and cost of City maintenance staff from performing weekly checks and re-boarding the properties due to vandalism. Eliminate/minimize trespassing on the property (inside the structures) and and reduce risk of injury to the trespassers. Eliminate potential illegal dumping and "tagging" of the structures. Cost: Jacobsen Tree Farm & Fields Property Structure Demo Conclusion: $73,000 has been added to the 2011 Facilities Fund budget for the Jacobsen Tree Farm and Fields Property Structure demolition. Increased cost by not combining projects. Continue to use valuable staff time to perform weekly checks and re-boarding the properties due to vandalism. Continued trespassing on the property (inside the structures) and risk of injury to the trespassers. Continued illegal dumping and the cost of cleanup and "tagging" of the structures. $73,000 Demolition of two houses and out buildings on the Jacobsen Tree Farm property and one house and detached garage on the Fields Property. Reject the project. Phase the demolition over the two year budget cycle. Alternatives: Brenda Heineman Human Resources -Facilities Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 262 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services $ 3 0,000 Information Services $ 30,000 Total Revenue: $ 3 0,000 Total Revenue: $ 3 0,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Other $ 3 0,000 Other $ 3 0,000 Total Cost: $ 3 0,000 Total Cost: $ 3 0,000 Conclusion: $30,000 has been added to the 2011 & 2012 Information Services Fund budget for the Computer Aided Dispatch replacement project. If we do not do this it will slow down the time it takes to create and report on cases. It will require staff to hand enter the case data from officers hand written notes. This would require additional staff in the Police Records Management section to enter data into the Spillman Police Records Management System which creates state and federally mandated criminal justice reporting and statistics. $30,000 ValleyCom is replacing their aging CAD (Computer-Aided Dispatch) system with one from a different vendor called Tiburon. The City will need an interface built to receive data from the new CAD system and populate into our RMS (Records Management System). In addition, there will be AVL (Automatic Vehicle Locator) systems installed in patrol cars that will help to automate unit routing to enhance response times by sending the closest available vehicle to the incident. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. The records staff could go back to the procedures of the 1980's and hand enter each case manually but this would be very time consuming and detail and accuracy would be lost. CAD system enhancements such as automated routing could be turned off for Auburn increasing our response times and our cost of service. Alternatives: Lorrie Rempher Information Services Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The advantage of the interface is when an officer finishes the report in the field, the case data is automatically sent to our RMS system from ValleyCom and there is no need to enter the data manually. The officer or records personnel can then look up and modify the case immediately without having to wait for manual data entry. Faster, more efficient response for public safety. Cost: CAD Replacement Project Page 263 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services $ 1 9,400 Information Services $ 1,780 Total Revenue: $ 1 9,400 Total Revenue: $ 1 ,780 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Minor Equipment $ 1 ,100 Minor Equipment Professional Services 5 ,300 Professional Services Repairs & Maintenance 1 ,800 Repairs & Maintenance $ 1,780 Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Capital Equipment 1 1,200 Capital Equipment Vehicle Vehicle Other Other Total Cost: $ 1 9,400 Total Cost: $ 1 ,780 REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Provide easy self-service access for employees to view their personal payroll and human resource information which reduces work load in Human Resources and Payroll by no longer needing to provide copies of this information to meet employee requests. Electronic time sheets changes duplicative entry (once on paper and once for computer entry) to single entry (once for computer entry). Time consuming batch balancing currently required by paper time sheets would also be eliminated. Cost: On-line Payroll & HR Conclusion: $19,400 has been added to the 2011 Information Services Fund budget for the On-line Payroll and Human Resources system. Annual maintenance has been budgeted in 2012. Possible work load efficiencies will be foregone. $19,400 Allow employee time entry via web data entry. Using a phased in approach, payroll time entry can be shifted from a paper time sheet system with centralized time entry data input to an electronic time entry system where each employee can enter their own payroll activity. This system also allows access through a web page for an employee to view their own various human resource and payroll related information. The employee can view or reprint tax withholding information, current and past pay check stub information, employee leave usage, etc. Supervisors can view their employees' leave usage information while access to the other employee personal information is blocked. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Remain with the current paper based system. Alternatives: Shelley Coleman Finance Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 264 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: $ 48,500 Information Services fund: $ 6,800 Total Revenue: $ 48,500 Total Revenue: $ 6,800 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Minor Equipment $ 1,100 Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Professional Services 2,600 Furniture Annual Maintenance 6 ,800 Annual Maintenance $ 6 ,800 Software 3 8,000 Software Total Cost: $ 48,500 Total Cost: $ 6,800 Conclusion: $48,500 has been added to the 2011 Information Services Fund budget to automate report distribution and laserfische intergration. Annual maintenance has been budgeted in 2012. Continue status quo use of man-hours, storage space, more time consuming access to historical information. $48,500 financial analysis and promotes availability of accurate, more extensive information. Time and money spent on manual boxing, filing, managing and disposing of archive is avoided. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Continue current paper based distribution and filing processes and no purchase of any decision package components. There are three components in this package which can be purchased/approved separately: 1. Laser fiche attachment (documents stored in Laserfiche/view in Eden) integration $16,500 software; $2,900 annual maintenance, 2. TOP Laserfiche Output (report archive copies stored automatically in Laserfiche) $2,800 software; $500 annual maintenance, 3. Tyler TOP Output Eden (reports such as purchase orders, direct deposit stubs, etc. can be pre-set for distribution to printers or e-mail) $18,700 software; $1,300 training; $1,300 consulting; $3,400 annual maintenance. Alternatives: Shelley Coleman Finance Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Save man hours as manual paper processes are transformed into faster and more efficient handling—thus enhancing how staff manages, generates, stores, and delivers forms and reports. Actual paper handling is reduced, thereby lowering overhead to print, fax, e-mail, fold, stuff, and physically mail documents. A Laserfiche permanent archive report can be created automatically at the same time a regular Eden processing report is created. Readily provide information for past years without additional man hours for retrieving information from archives. If Laserfiche becomes certified by the State Archivist then this purchase can reduce the amount of hard copy archive storage space, boxes, and man-hours required to maintain state mandated information storage/retrieval. It can also assist in automation of document retrieval for public record requests if documents are electronically stored. Immediate availability of information enhances financial analysis and promotes availability of accurate, more extensive information for decision making. Time and money spent on manual boxing, filing, managing and disposing of archive records are avoided. Cost: Automate Report Distrib/Laserfiche Integration TOP software provides an automated paperless distribution system that reduces printing and mailing costs of Eden financial information. Eden/Laserfiche interface allows for electronic archival/retrieval of scanned documents without adding to the Eden financial database. For example, batch processed forms such as paychecks can be sent off to multiple recipients in multiple fashions. When running checks, each individual employee could have their delivery preference set to hardcopy printer and/or email. Copies of payroll stubs could automatically be stored in Laserfiche with easy electronic retrieval months later to provide copies per employee requests. Purchase orders could be sent electronically to user areas (and/or vendors) rather than printing centrally in Finance, sorting and interoffice delivery to various user departments. Permanent invoice and other record retention information for fixed assets could be stored electronically for the life of the asset in Laserfiche. Information from adjusting journal entries could be available in current and future years with a click of a button rather than going to find a manual copy in a file cabinet or archive box. Immediate availability of information enhances Page 265 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services $ 40,000 Information Services $ 40,000 Total Revenue: $ 40,000 Total Revenue: $ 40,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Other $ 40,000 Other $ 4 0,000 Total Cost: $ 40,000 Total Cost: $ 40,000 Conclusion: $40,000 has been added to the 2011 & 2012 Information Services Fund budget for the Electronic Plan Review program. Economic recovery and increased business activity may increase plan submittals that with current staffing and resource levels may lead to longer review times impacting customer costs and time. $40,000 Electronic Plan Review software to allow electronic submittal of plans for applications to the City and also allows development review staff to review plans electronically. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Continue current hard copy plan submittal and review process that is cumbersome and costly and less efficient for staff and clients. Alternatives: Kevin Snyder Planning Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Provides an Economic Development tool to be marketed as an advantage over competing adjacent jurisdictions, eliminates time associated with printing, fewer trips to Permit Center for clients, no waiting in line, parallel reviews and immediate access for all reviewers. So far other jurisdictions (such as Mercer Island WA, Bend OR, Osceola County FL) have reported significant cost and environmental savings including but not limited to: 450 pounds of hydrocarbons from the air, $10,000 in fuel costs savings savings to customers, over 3,000 pounds of Carbon Monoxide from being released, and 75 trees from being harvested for paper. REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: To provide an easy, efficient way to allow the public to submit plans for review and corrections, while maintaining short turnaround times and improving efficiency of revisions and inter-departmental reviews. Reviewers are easily able to make notes or revision requests with the built-in markup tools, then send notice to the submitter to come view their corrections online and upload their own revised drawings. Departmental reviewers can also attach direct links to their corrections for the project. The submitter gets this same form with direct links to the pages needing revision. When the Project is complete, the submitter is given access to download and print from the ‘Finals’ folder. Fast, efficient way to provide plan submittals, reviews, and permit issuance, 25% reduction in plan review time, reduces/eliminates paper waste waste (GREEN!), ensures authenticity of altered documents, maintains consistent revision history, customizable eForms & Workflows, allows self-serve access 24/7 to submitters’ own plans while securing everyone else’s, and improves archiving. Cost: Electronic Plan Review Program Page 266 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 3 2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: Information Services fund: $ 4 5,000 Total Revenue: $ -Total Revenue: $ 4 5,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Professional Services Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment $ 4 5,000 Total Cost: $ -Total Cost: $ 4 5,000 Conclusion: $45,000 has been added to the 2012 Information Services Fund budget to upgrade the AutoCAD and Civil 3D software. Not upgrading in 2012 will increase the cost of a future upgrade to approximately $92,000. Each additional year the upgrade is prolonged, the costs will increase. $45,000 Upgrade the existing AutoCAD and Civil 3D software to current versions in 2012. This software is used primarily by Public Works but is also used by Planning & Development, Facilities, Parks & Recreation, and Information Services departments in the completion of capital project design and mapping. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund Continue with the current versions and upgrade at a later date. An upgrade after April 2012 will increase the cost of the upgrade from $45,000 to approximately $92,000. Alternatives: Dennis Dowdy Public Works -Engineering Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Upgrading the software in 2012 takes advantage of a price discount that will not be available to the City after April 2012. Upgrading the software also allows staff to more easily work with our consultants and other agencies as their software is upgraded. Cost: AutoCAD/Civil 3D Upgrade Page 267 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 3 2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: Information Services fund: $ 20,000 Total Revenue: $ -Total Revenue: $ 2 0,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Professional Services Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment $ 2 0,000 Total Cost: $ -Total Cost: $ 2 0,000 REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: With the advancement of orthophotography and technology, the City can acquire better imagery and data with newer orthophotography. Cost: Aerial Orthos -Orthophotography Conclusion: $20,000 has been added to the 2012 Information Services Fund budget to purchase Aerial orthophotography. Maps and data are made from old 2007 images. If we do not update the orthophotography, the construction and infrastructure (road) changes are not current causing extra verification work in the field. $20,000 Aerial orthophotography is an image of Auburn that is created from an airplane flyover of the City. GIS, Utilities and Public Safety use this in map making, data analysis, presentation materials, and as a control point in data entry. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Continue to use the imagery taken in 2007. Alternatives: Lorrie Rempher Information Services Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 268 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 4 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: $ 1 0,000 Information Services fund: $ 10,000 Total Revenue: $ 10,000 Total Revenue: $ 10,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment $ 10,000 Capital Equipment $ 10,000 Total Cost: $ 10,000 Total Cost: $ 10,000 Conclusion: $10,000 has been added to the 2011 and 2012 Information Services Fund budget to purchase additional CarteGraph Licensing Users may have to wait until a license is free when they need to get into the system. We will not be able to expand the system to include signs, lights, etc. $10,000 Every time a user goes into CarteGraph they check out a license. The City owns 42 CarteGraph licenses, meaning 42 people can be in the system at the same time. As we bring additional staff online using CarteGraph, integrate CarteGraph with other City applications and find more uses for the system, we need additional licenses. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Do not add additional licenses, leaving our current license level at 42 concurrent users at one time. Alternatives: Lorrie Rempher Information Services Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: More users can be in the system at the same time and eliminate the need to print work orders and other materials. Cost: Additional CarteGraph Licensing Page 269 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 4 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: $ 2 5,000 Information Services fund: Total Revenue: $ 25,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment $ 2 5,000 Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 25,000 Total Cost: $ -Conclusion: $25,000 has been added to the 2011 Information Services Fund budget for the Survey GPS Equipment Replacement. If the GPS equipment is not replaced, the City will not realize the efficiency gain by having the GPS equipment more readily available through out a normal work day. In addition, as the GPS equipment continues to age, equipment failure becomes more likely. $25,000 The replacement of the existing Survey GPS Equipment to protect against equipment failure and allow additional efficiencies in work performance and staff time. The GPS equipment is nearly 7 years old and is relied upon to provide survey grade positions for many types of survey control on multiple city projects each week. Since the original purchase of the existing equipment, GPS technology has continued to advance and now includes the ability to use additional satellites through the Russian Glonass system in addition to the US Satellite system. The use of the existing GPS equipment is hindered during certain times of the year and certain times of the day due to the lack of a sufficient number of satellites to reference to. New equipment will have the ability to access the Glonass system providing additional satellites reducing the times when the GPS equipment can not be used due to insufficient satellite information. Continue with the existing equipment and run time consuming conventional terrestrial surveys when GPS equipment is not available. Alternatives: Dennis Dowdy Public Works -Engineering Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Increase in the duration of time that the GPS equipment can be used reducing staff time needed to complete tasks in areas where existing survey control is non-existent. Improves reliability of the equipment and allows the City to take advantage of new technology. Cost: Survey GPS Equipment Replacement In addition, the City uses the Washington State Reference Network operated by the City of Seattle who has recently completed upgrades to their system to incorporate the Glonass information. The City can not make use of this information with the existing equipment. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Page 270 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 4 2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: Information Services fund: $ 6 5,000 Total Revenue: $ -Total Revenue: $ 65,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment $ 65,000 Total Cost: $ -Total Cost: $ 65,000 Conclusion: $65,000 has been added to the 2012 Information Services Fund budget for the Springbrook .NET upgrade. Do nothing. At some point the system will cease to work and we will not be able to bill for utility services. $65,000 Upgrade our current utility software to the latest version that was rewritten in Microsoft .NET technologies. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Stay on this version of software without support and service from our vendor. Alternatives: Lorrie Rempher Information Services Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Use features of the system that have been enhanced by using new (Microsoft .NET) technology. This will enhance customer service and allow more flexibility in customer care. Cost: Springbrook .NET upgrade Page 271 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: $ 5 0,000 Information Services fund: Total Revenue: $ 5 0,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment $ 5 0,000 Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 5 0,000 Total Cost: $ -REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The booking information would be waiting for them at both the Jail and SCORE facilities from a single electronic entry using the King County eSuperforms. Cost: Spillman Superforms Interface with SCORE Conclusion: $50,000 has been added to the 2011 Information Services Fund budget for the Spillman Superforms Interface with SCORE. It would require additional staff on both ends to hand enter in the booking information for each facility. $50,000 An interface between the SCORE Jail booking system and our Jail system which will automate the flow of data between the Valley Communications 911 center that takes the initial call, our Police Records System that tracks the offense and officer interaction and the SCORE jail booking system where the individual will ultimately be held. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Manually enter the data three separate times (CAD, Spillman Records Management, SCORE Jail) to accommodate all three systems that need to have the data for reporting and tracking purposes. Alternatives: Lorrie Rempher Information Services Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 272 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2 2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: Information Services fund: $ 1 2,000 Total Revenue: $ -Total Revenue: $ 1 2,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Professional Services Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment $ 1 2,000 Total Cost: $ -Total Cost: $ 1 2,000 Conclusion: $12,000 has been added to the 2012 Information Services Fund budget to implement the Sign Retroreflectometer program. Continue to visually inspect signs which is the most subjective method and will require overtime funding for night time inspections. $12,000 Handheld equipment that can be used to check check retro reflectivity of traffic signs and inventory them into a database. The Manual on Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) has established minimum levels of retro reflectivity that must be maintained for signs. We have until 2012 to implement a sign assessment and management program to maintain signs at or above minimum specified levels. Retroreflectometers are capable of evaluating levels of retro reflectivity and providing sign management capabilities that are compatible with City of Auburn software. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Continue subjective visual inspections using control signs for comparisons and implementing a program to inventory signs in the field using other handheld equipment such as computer tablets. Alternatives: Dennis Dowdy Public Works -Street Division Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Will get accurate information of levels of retro reflectivity in one reading, eliminating the subjectivity from visual inspections. Inspections can be done during the day, eliminating the need for overtime to complete the night inspections. Capable of GPS mapping for inventory management which can be done simultaneously with each reading and will put us in compliance with national requirements. Cost: Sign Retroreflectometer Page 273 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: $ 2 5,000 Information Services fund: Total Revenue: $ 2 5,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Hardware & Software $ 2 5,000 Hardware & Software Total Cost: $ 2 5,000 Total Cost: $ -REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Allow for seamless transition of court/jail interaction upon opening of SCORE. Allow efficiency of court operations. Allow a more timely process. Cost: SCORE Communications Interface Conclusion: $25,000 has been added to the 2011 Information Services Fund budget for the SCORE Communications Interface. If this decision package is not approved the municipal court will not be able to operate within the configuration of the SCORE /IT plan . $25,000 The new South Corrections Entity (SCORE) is being designed as a state of the art, high tech, paperless facility. Therefore, some electronic adjustments (hardware and software) are needed for the court to interface with SCORE. Information Services estimates the costs to be $25,000, although total requirements are not yet known. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. There appear to be few alternatives since the decision has been made as to the SCORE configuration. Paperwork could be transported by vehicle through out the day from the Court to SCORE. Faxing might be a consideration, but does not fit into the high tech, paperless IT vision. Alternatives: Lorrie Rempher Information Services Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 274 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services $ 6 3,000 Information Services $ 7 ,200 Total Revenue: $ 6 3,000 Total Revenue: $ 7 ,200 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Other $ 6 3,000 Other $ 7 ,200 Total Cost: $ 6 3,000 Total Cost: $ 7 ,200 Conclusion: $63,000 has been added to the 2011 Information Services Fund budget for the Records Management & Workflow Program software. Annual maintenance has been budgeted in 2012. More staff time retrieving records from off-site records locations. There is no ability to reduce facilities expenses and the cost of off-site storage of of paper records. There is an increased potential for loss of paper records during disaster, such as flooding. Potential for increased discovery costs. $63,000 Purchase and implement electronic record management software to meet the standards set by WA State for electronic imaging systems that may legally be used for recording, producing, reproducing, maintaining, and storing public records and allow the early destruction of source paper documents after digitization. The City uses Laserfiche software for electronic document imaging; but conversion to an imaging system does not automatically authorize the destruction of the source documents for which images have been created. In order to receive WA State certification of the City's electronic imaging system, the City will need to upgrade our current system with Laserfiche Records Management module and Workflow. State certification will allow electronic images to serve as primary record copies. To obtain certification, the City must be able to perform the same essential records management functions with the electronic images as are performed with paper records. Per WAC 434-663-705, the system used to store and access the imaged records must allow Continue with existing practice of retaining paper records/documents for the full retention period per the WA State Local Government Records Retention Schedule. Alternatives: Dan Heid Legal -City Clerk Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Provide improved access and better control over the records. Currently, staff must manually retrieve records from active records storage or non-active records in the archives. Enable staff to conduct record searches and retrieve records from their desktops and will improve the identification of records that no longer have retention value and ensure their legal destruction in a timely manner. The project will provide: 1) Decreased physical storage space requirement 2) More efficient retrieval of records electronically 3) Ensure that the City is meeting the legal requirements for authenticity and retention of public records. 4) Improve access to records/information for internal/external customers. 5) Improve use of current Laserfiche Records Mgmt system 6) In case of disaster, electronic storage ensures records will be protected 7) Minimize discovery costs (Failure to meet public disclosure requirements) resulting in penalties of up to $100 per document per day 8) Meets the requirements of the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement as endorsed by the 73rd annual US Conference of Mayors meeting and ratified by City of Auburn Council. Cost: Records Management & Workflow Program Software classification by record series, ensure their proper retention and transfer or disposal per approved schedules, and protect from unauthorized access to the records. Laserfiche Records Management module includes an audit trail feature to ensure the continued authenticity of the records, by keeping a record of the circumstances of their creation, alteration and disposition. Laserfiche Workflow enables the abilities such as approvals or routing based on conditions retaining to the record series. Workflow transforms the static Laserfiche repository into a dynamic content management solution that ensures the records processes are performed consistently and efficiently. Once a record series has been approved and certified by the State, the City can image the documents and paper copies of that record series can be destroyed. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Page 275 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services $ 50,000 Information Services Total Revenue: $ 50,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Other $ 50,000 Other Total Cost: $ 50,000 Total Cost: $ -Conclusion: $50,000 has been added to the 2011 Information Services Fund budget for phone system upgrades. State Law requires that we have a 911 locator service associated with our in-house phone system. If we do not implement this system or spend equivalent funding to upgrade the existing system which has less flexibility, we will be out of compliance. As phone systems become more tightly integrated with computer systems, we risk not being able to implement efficiencies in communications and office productivity tools that will enhance our ability to support the citizens of Auburn. $50,000 Implementation of Cisco's Emergency Responder and Unity Connection for voicemail services and 911 location information. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Stay on existing systems Alternatives: Lorrie Rempher Information Services Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: In addition to Unity, we will need to upgrade to Emergency Responder for 911 location services. The current system, Intrado, is nearing end of life. Additionally, Emergency Responder which is required by State law for 911 location services, will greatly improve system management thus reducing man-hours needed for maintenance and updates. Emergency Responder, in conjunction with CallManager and Cisco's network infrastructure, will allow us to build intelligence into the desk phones so they will recognize when they've been moved to a new zone and will automatically update 911 information. This eliminates the need for staff to manually update 911 information with the current system Intrado. REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The City of Auburn is in the process of converting all desk phones to Cisco's VoIP solution. By end of 2010 we will have completed over 50% of system upgrades city-wide. We will continue this process in 2011 and as part of this upgrade to Cisco phones we will also need to implement the associated voicemail system which includes other features that can significantly enhance voice services and worker productivity such as one-number reach (a single number for cellular/wifi/desk phones), voicemail integration in email, fax in/out of mailbox, etc. Cost: Phone System Upgrades Page 276 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2011-2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services $ 7 5,000 Information Services $ 75,000 Total Revenue: $ 75,000 Total Revenue: $ 75,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Other $ 75,000 Other $ 75,000 Total Cost: $ 75,000 Total Cost: $ 75,000 Conclusion: $75,000 has been added to the 2011 & 2012 Information Services Fund budget for the Multimedia refresh of Council Chambers project. If we do not upgrade the equipment as requested, we cannot provide the room coverage and broadcast quality that presents Auburn's government and public functions in the best possible light. The existing systems are now more than seven years old and have started to fail. $75,000 Move existing AV equipment, and incorporate some equipment upgrades to support new floor plan during City Hall remodel project. In year two, we will work to expand systems to allow for filming of committee and special meetings and events. This request will be funded by a transfer out from the General Fund from the new Comcast franchise user fee (.35 per customer per month) to the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Move and re-use existing equipment with no upgrades which will result in lower quality government access cable television services to citizens. Do not expand broadcast capabilities. Alternatives: Lorrie Rempher Information Services Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: The City Hall remodel project calls for significant changes in the Council Chambers to increase square footage, increased audience seating, incorporate a Council recess room, moves and increases the layout of the Mayor & Council bench and staff seating areas. This will require moving the AV control room and equipment to accommodate the new space. Given the significant increase in the size of the room; and the new seating arrangements, it will be important to upgrade some existing AV equipment to support these changes. New cameras, projection equipment, sound equipment, and audio/video inputs will need to be installed to ensure we have the capability to record & broadcast meetings and events in the Council Chambers with the best possible sound and image quality. The system upgrades will also allow us to integrate the TV21 broadcasts into the control equipment. Cost: Multimedia Refresh for Council Chambers Page 277 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 2 2012 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Information Services fund: Information Services fund: $ 38,000 Total Revenue: $ -Total Revenue: $ 3 8,000 Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Furniture Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment Capital Equipment $ 3 8,000 Total Cost: $ -Total Cost: $ 3 8,000 REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Will save one to two hours of programming each time the weather changes. Will be able to change programs to proper settings with a push of a key. Will be able to operate the irrigation system on site or remote during weather changes. Cost: Irrigation Central Computer Conclusion: $38,000 has been added to the 2012 Information Services Fund budget to purchase the irrigation central computer system. Manual operations will continue. $38,000 A central computer that programs the satellite controllers for the irrigation system. This request will be funded by fund balance in the Information Services Fund and will have a zero net effect on the General Fund. Continue to manually input weather data in each satellite (23) through-out the course as the weather changes. Alternatives: Daryl Faber Parks -Golf Course Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 278 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Program Title: Priority #: For Year: 3 2011 Contact Person: Department Name: 2011 Cost of Improvement 2012 Cost of Improvement Revenue Source: Revenue Source: General fund General fund Proprietary funds Proprietary funds Equipment Rental fund: $ 4 5,000 Equipment Rental fund: Total Revenue: $ 4 5,000 Total Revenue: $ -Expenditures: Expenditures: Pay Grade/Step Pay Grade/Step Wages Wages Benefits (29%) Benefits (29%) Supplies Supplies Phone Phone Cell phone Cell phone Computer ($2,500) Computer ($2,500) Furniture Professional Services Vehicle Vehicle Capital Equipment $ 4 5,000 Capital Equipment Total Cost: $ 4 5,000 Total Cost: $ -REQUEST FOR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT Description of Improvement: Our street crews will have the correct piece of equipment for the task at hand improving not only the efficiency of the task, but saving fuel to haul a single roller back and forth between sites. Our ability to execute a paving and grading job concurrently will be more productive. Cost: Used Vibratory Roller and Trailer Conclusion: $45,000 has been added to the 2011 Equipment Rental Fund budget to purchase a used Vibratory Roller and Trailer. Possible lower level of service and inefficient time driving equipment from one jobsite to another; or operating one of the two tasks (paving vs. grading). $45,000 Acquire a "used" vibratory roller for compaction during grading operations in lieu of "new" equipment. Currently the street division relies on a single asphalt roller to compact gravel surfaces after grading alleys, roads and shoulders. Generally asphalt paving and grading occur at the same time during favorable weather. This creates a challenge juggling one piece of equipment between two concurrent operations. This improvement would also provide the right piece of equipment for gravel surfaces, preventing higher wear on a roller designed for asphalt as well as improve the efficiency of each crew dispatched to perform concurrent tasks requiring compaction. Continue transporting the existing roller between various jobs which is an inefficient way to utilize resources. Rent a roller which is costly and may sit idle due to weather conditions. Alternatives: Dennis Dowdy Public Works -Street Division Implications of Denial: Advantages of Approval: Page 279 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VI: Program Improvements Page 280 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Section VII – Capital Budget Page 281 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 282 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning SECTION VII: CAPITAL PLANNING, PROGRAMMING AND BUDGETING The capital budget authorizes and provides the basis of control of expenditures for the acquisition of significant city assets and construction of all capital facilities. This section describes and summarizes the 2011-2012 budget for capital outlays, which are expenditures resulting in the acquisition of or addition to existing capital assets. Capital assets are defined as land, improvements to land, easements, buildings, building improvements, vehicles, machinery, equipment, infrastructure, and all other tangible or intangible assets that are used in operations and that have initial useful lives extending beyond a single reporting period. The City of Auburn maintains a comprehensive six-year Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) which is updated annually and incorporates the capital facility improvements in the City’s biennial budget process. It is considered a companion document to the budget document. document. This section of the budget summarizes the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) showing capital projects budgeted for 2011 and 2012 along with the capital facilities plan for these projects in the following four years. Projects are listed in the following seven sections: Transportation projects, Water Utility projects, Sanitary Sewer projects, Storm Drainage projects, Parks and Recreation projects, General Municipal projects, Community Improvements, and Other Proprietary Fund projects. Each section includes a map highlighting the general location of significant projects, a brief discussion of the projects budgeted for 2011 and 2012, a six-year summary of projects showing the cost and funding source, and two graphs – one showing a comparison of revenue sources for 2011 vs. 2012, and another showing the projected six-year expenditure level. For more detail, reference should be made to the Capital Facilities Plan (2011 – 2016) that is printed as a separate document. It contains an executive summary along with three chapters. Chapter One explains the purpose of the CFP, statutory requirements, and methodology. Chapter Two outlines the Goals and Policies related to the provision of capital facilities. Chapter Three outlines the proposed capital projects, which include the financing plan and reconciliation of project capacity to level of service (LOS) standards. Following the financing plan are individual worksheets showing the project detail. For reconciliation purposes, it is important to note that in many instances the total project cost will include amounts allocated for salaries, benefits and interfund charges. Each worksheet, in addition to the project financing, includes a project description, progress summary, and impact on future operating budgets once the project is completed. Page 283 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning 2011 /2012 Capital Budget: The following tables summarize the capital facility expenditures and planned funding sources in this budget. The tables outlining individual projects are all shown in thousands. Total FUNDING SOURCES -2011 Fund Federal State Local Other Sources (in thousands) Balance Sources Sources Sources REET Sources By Fund Transportation Projects $ 3 80 $ 7 ,387 $ 2 ,730 $ -$ -$ 6 ,059 $ 16,556 Water Projects 8 ,293 ----10,532 18,825 Sewer Projects 2 ,348 ----4 ,720 7 ,068 Storm Drainage Projects 3 ,458 ----4,008 7 ,466 Parks and Recreation Projects 218 150 4 5 4 35 1 ,019 17,376 19,242 General Municipal Projects and Community Improvements 500 2 ,605 -8 5 1,554 5 ,544 10,288 Other Proprietary Fund Projects 1 61 -----1 61 Total Funding by Source $ 15,358 $ 1 0,142 $ 2 ,775 $ 5 20 $ 2 ,573 $ 4 8,239 $ 7 9,606 EXPENDITURES -2011 Transportation Projects $ 16,556,200 Water Projects 18,825,400 Sewer Projects 7,068,060 Storm Drainage Projects 7 7 ,465,800 Parks and Recreation Projects 1 9,241,700 General Municipal Projects and Community Improvements 10,288,000 Other Proprietary Fund Projects 1 61,000 Total Capital Projects $ 79,606,160 Total FUNDING SOURCES -2012 Fund Federal State Local Other Funding (in thousands) Balance Sources Sources Sources REET Sources By Fund Transportation Projects $ 3 55 $ 6,006 $ -$ -$ -$ 11,676 $ 18,037 Water Projects 3,951 -----3,951 Sewer Projects 1 ,613 ----190 1,803 Storm Drainage Projects 1,885 ----700 2 ,585 Parks and Recreation Projects 150 7 9 1 15 --1 ,615 1,959 General Municipal Projects and Community Improvements 380 ---9 29 210 1 ,519 Other Proprietary Fund Projects 134 -----134 Total Funding by Source $ 8 ,469 $ 6 ,085 $ 1 15 $ -$ 9 29 $ 14,390 $ 2 9,988 EXPENDITURES -2012 Transportation Projects $ 18,036,600 Water Projects 3,951,250 Sewer Projects 1 ,803,130 Storm Drainage Projects 2,585,410 Parks and Recreation Projects 1 ,959,100 General Municipal Projects and Community Improvements 1,519,100 Other Proprietary Fund Projects 134,000 Total Capital Projects $ 2 9,988,590 CAPITAL PROJECTS SUMMARY 2011 2012 Page 284 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 285 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 286 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Transportation Projects Twenty-five capital projects totaling $16,556,200 are budgeted for 2011 and fourteen capital projects totaling $18,036,600 are budgeted for 2012. The significant projects include the following: • The “A” Street NW, Phase 1 Project ($6,868,500 in 2011) will construct a multi-lane arterial from 3rd Street NW to 14th Street NW. This project will improve mobility and is tied to corridor development. It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and contributes to the completion of a North-South arterial corridor. (See Map – “C”) • The “M” Street Grade Separation Project ($2,115,000 in 2011 and $12,985,000 in 2012) will construct a grade separation railroad crossing of “M” Street SE at the BNSF Stampede Pass. (See Map – “D”) • The South 277th Auburn Way North to Green River Bridge Project ($276,500 in 2012) includes major widening on S. 277th St, including the addition of three lanes, one westbound and two eastbound, a Class 1 trail, storm, sewer and water improvements. The project length is nine-tenths of a mile. The final configuration will include three lanes eastbound and two lanes westbound. (See Map – “A”) • The Auburn Way South Corridor Improvements, Phase 1 Project ($160,000 in 2011 and $680,800 in 2012) will construct pedestrian improvements along Auburn Way South between Dogwood St SE and Fir St SE that are consistent with WSDOT’s SR-164 Route Development Plan. This project includes sidewalk improvements, access management, a mid-block pedestrian crossing, construction of a u-turn wedge at Fir St SE and street lighting. (See Map – “E”) • The West Valley Highway Improvements Project ($3,315,000 2011) includes widening the roadway to accommodate a two way left turn lane, installation of a traffic median, adding curb, gutter and storm drainage, repair failing roadway surface, installing sidewalk along east side of the roadway, illumination for bicycle usage and the installation of a new traffic signal and improvements at the intersection of West Main Street and West Valley Highway. (See Map – “B”) • The Citywide Bicycle & Safety Improvements Project ($100,000 in both 2011 and 2012) is an annual level of effort project focused on funding bicycle and safety improvements on classified roadways. Projects are prioritized annually based upon field studies. • The “Save our Streets” (SOS) Program ($2,000,000 in both 2011 and 2012) will consist of a number of different contracts focused on the preservation of local streets (unclassified streets) within the City. These contracts will include work such as crack sealing, asphalt patching, pre-leveling, and thin asphalt overlays. • The Annual Arterial Street Preservation Program ($1,400,000 in both 2011 and 2012) will consist of regular pavement maintenance and/or rehabilitation of various classified streets citywide that may include overlays, rebuilds, spot repairs, or a combination of these. Page 287 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 2 77 -Federal (Grants) 3 ,128 6 ,652 6 ,652 State -Traffic Impact Fees 7 09 217 217 REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 4,114 6,869 -----6,869 Capital Costs: Design 1 ,376 2 54 2 54 Right of Way 2,648 -Construction 9 0 6,615 6,615 Subtotal 4,114 6,869 -----6,869 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $25,830 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 40 60 1 00 Federal (Grants) 1 20 621 741 State -Traffic Impact Fees -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal -160 681 ----841 Capital Costs: Design 157 6 163 Right of Way 3 3 Construction 6 75 6 75 Subtotal -160 681 ----841 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2013 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 150 -Federal (Grants) 8 73 615 5 ,385 6 ,000 State -Traffic Impact Fees 2 ,441 1 ,500 661 2 ,161 Traffic Mitigation Fees 6 60 REET 1 ,140 -Other (Other Agencies) 235 6 ,939 1 ,800 8 ,739 Subtotal 5,499 2,115 1 2,985 1,800 ---16,900 Capital Costs: Design 2,181 2 48 2 48 Right of Way 3 ,318 1,252 1,252 Construction 615 12,985 1 ,800 15,400 Subtotal 5,499 2,115 1 2,985 1,800 ---16,900 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $21,827 This project will construct pedestrian improvements along Auburn Way South between Dogwood St SE and Fir St SE that are consistent with WSDOT's SR-164 Route Development Plan. This project includes sidewalk improvements, access management, a mid-block pedestrian crossing, construction construction of a u-turn wedge at Fir St SE and street lighting. Project No: c201a0 (TIP#5) Project Name: Auburn Way South Corridor Improvements, Phase 1 Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#2) Project Name: A Street NW, Phase 1 (3rd St NW to 14th St NW Project No: c207a0 (TIP#1) Construct a multi-lane arterial from 3rd St. NW to 14th St. NW. This project will improve mobility and is tied to corridor development. It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and contributes to the completion of a north/south arterial corridor. The project length is approximately three-quarters of a mile. The City purchased ROW from the northern property owner. If the property develops, some or a portion of those funds may be reimbursed to the City (total cost was $251,000). Project Name: M Street Grade Separation (3rd St SE to 8th St SE) Construction of a grade separated railroad crossing of M St SE at the BNSF Stampede Pass tracks. Page 288 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Project No: c222a0 (TIP#6) Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2014 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 19 -Federal (Grants) 1 ,500 1,500 State -Traffic Impact Fees -REET -Other (Port of Seattle) 2 76 804 1,080 Subtotal 19 -2 76 804 1,500 --2,580 Capital Costs: Design 18 2 76 204 4 80 Right of Way 1 350 3 50 Construction 250 1,500 1,750 Subtotal 19 -2 76 804 1,500 --2,580 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $27,250 Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#8) Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2013 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund -Federal (Grants) 2,119 2 ,119 State -Traffic Impact Fees 2 5 7 5 162 1 69 4 06 REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 2 5 7 5 162 2,288 ---2,525 Capital Costs: Design 2 5 7 5 162 2 37 Right of Way -Construction 2,288 2 ,288 Subtotal 2 5 7 5 162 2,288 ---2,525 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2015 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund -Federal (Grants) 2 25 8 98 1 ,123 State -Traffic Impact Fees 50 50 1 03 2 03 REET -Other Sources -Subtotal -5 0 --2 75 1,000 -1,325 Capital Costs: Design 50 7 5 125 Right of Way 200 200 Construction 1,000 1,000 Subtotal -5 0 --2 75 1,000 -1,325 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $1,500 Project Name: South 277th (AWN to Green River Bridge) Project Name: A Street NW, Phase 2 (W. Main to 3rd St. NW) This project includes major widening on S. 277th Street, including the addition of three lanes, one westbound and two eastbound, plus a Class 1 trail. The project length is nine-tenths of a mile. The final configuration will include three lanes eastbound and two lanes westbound. Construct a multi-lane arterial from W. Main to 3rd St. NW. This project will connect A Street NW, Phase 1 to the Sound Transit Station and the Central Business District. This project may end up being funded in all or part by developers. The project length is one fifth of a mile. This project will construct a complete 4 lane street section on M St NE between E Main St and 4th St NE. Project Name: M Street NE (E. Main St. to 4th St. NE) Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#11) Page 289 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Project No: cp1004 (TIP#13) Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 1 1 Federal (Grants) 6 93 -Traffic Impact Fees 1 10 -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 803 1 -----1 Capital Costs: Design 41 -Right of Way -Construction 7 63 1 1 Subtotal 803 1 -----1 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $5,000 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 5 5 5 5 Federal (Grants) 2 70 -State 2 ,730 2 ,730 Traffic Impact Fees 2 5 5 30 5 30 Traffic Mitigation Fees 7 5 -REET 9 5 -Other Sources -Subtotal 465 3,315 -----3,315 Capital Costs: Design 410 1 17 1 17 Right of Way 5 5 -Construction 3,198 3,198 Subtotal 465 3,315 ------3,315 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 8 6 8 6 Federal (Grants) -PWFT 1 ,527 -Traffic Impact Fees 291 8 8 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 6 4 35 REET -Other (Other Funds) 310 -Subtotal 2 ,128 8 8 8 7 87 8 7 8 6 8 6 521 Capital Costs: Design 3 26 -Right of Way 196 -Construction 1,519 -Long Term Debt 8 6 8 8 8 7 87 8 7 8 6 8 6 521 Subtotal 2 ,128 8 8 8 7 87 8 7 8 6 8 6 521 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Harvey Rd. & 8th St. NE Intersection Improvements The S Auburn ITS Expansion project includes connecting and providing new ITS infrastructure on 15th St SW, C St SW and A St SE. It also includes 6th St SE, A St SE and 41st St SE, (Ellingson Road). This ITS expansion will be accomplished through existing conduits recently installed under capital improvement projects, and with wireless line of sight options. With this extension and additional equipment the project adds an additional 14 signals to the existing central signal system and brings back new cameras along three heavily congested corridors. Project Name: South Auburn Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Expansion This project will widen the roadway to accommodate an extension of the two way left turn lane, add curb & gutter, storm drainage, repair failing roadway surface; install sidewalk on one side of the roadway; install city standard street lighting, improve bicycle accommodations, and install a new traffic signal at the intersection of W Main St and W Valley Highway. This project will improve the capacity, safety, and driving comfort of the corridor as well as reduce the amount of time maintenance staff spends doing temporary repairs. Project Name: West Valley Hwy Improvements (SR18 to West Main Street) Project No: cp0916 (TIP#14) Project was completed in 2010. Ongoing budget is for PWTFL debt payments. Project No: cp0611 (TIP#17) Page 290 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 3 97 1 1 Federal (Grants) 2 50 -PWFT -Traffic Impact Fees -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 647 1 -----1 Capital Costs: Design 2 04 -Right of Way 3 -Construction 4 40 1 1 Subtotal 647 1 -----1 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $6,600 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2013 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 20 1 30 1 50 Federal (Grants) 4 50 4 50 PWFT -Traffic Impact Fees -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal --2 0 580 ---6 00 Capital Costs: Design 20 80 100 Right of Way 50 50 Construction 450 4 50 Subtotal --2 0 580 ---6 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2013 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 2 5 7 5 7 5 Federal (Grants) 765 7 65 State -Traffic Mitigation Fees 1 35 135 Other Sources -Subtotal 2 5 7 5 -900 ---9 75 Capital Costs: Design 2 5 7 5 7 5 Right of Way 1 00 100 Construction 800 800 Subtotal 2 5 7 5 -900 ---9 75 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: 8th St and R St NE Traffic Signal Project No: cp0701 (TIP#18) Project was completed in 2010. Ongoing budget is for PWTFL debt payments. Project Name: Auburn Way North /1st St NE Signal Improvements Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#19) This project will construct a new complete traffic signal with controller cabinet and battery backup along with necessary intersection improvements. Construct a westbound to northbound right turn pocket at the intersection of Auburn Way S and M St SE. This project would would also improve the turning radius at this same corner allowing drivers to make a safe right turn on red (after stopping and yielding to oncoming vehicles). Currently the intersection geometry has necessitated the City placing a legal restriction on this movement. Project Name: Auburn Way South and M St SE Intersection Improvements Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#20) Page 291 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 7 1 1 Federal (Grants) 1 11 -State -Traffic Mitigation -REET 8 -Other (Other Agencies) 3 6 -Subtotal 162 1 -----1 Capital Costs: Design 31 -Right of Way -Construction 131 1 1 Subtotal 162 1 -----1 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 1 1 Federal (Grants) 3 97 -State -Traffic Mitigation -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 397 1 -----1 Capital Costs: Design 6 0 -Right of Way -Construction 337 1 1 Subtotal 397 1 -----1 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $6,600 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 1 0 1 0 Federal (Grants) -State -Traffic Mitigation -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal -10 -----10 Capital Costs: Design 10 10 Right of Way -Construction -Subtotal -10 -----10 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: F Street SE & 4th Street SE Traffic Signal Project No: cp0914 (TIP#25) The project will connect to the Phase 1 improvements constructed in Auburn in 2007. This project will construct a 10-foot wide non-motorized trail on Skinner Road from Ellingson Road SW to approximately 2nd Ave NE. A striped bike lane will be constructed on Skinner Road from approximately 2nd Ave NE to 3rd Ave SE. This project will sign 2nd Ave SE and Alder Lane as bike routes. A 5-foot wide trail will be constructed on 3rd Ave SE from Alder Lane to Pacific Trail. Project Name: Auburn Pacific Trail, Phase 2 2 (Skinner Rd to 3rd Ave) Project No: c507b0 (TIP#22) This project includes the construction of a new traffic signal at the intersection of 4th St SE and F St SE. Intersection improvements will include crosswalks and pedestrian signals. This project was selected based on accident history, traffic volumes, and pedestrian flow patterns. Project Name: 41st Street SE and A Street SE Access Management Study Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#27) Study the area from 37th St SE to the White River on A St SE including 41st St SE from D St SE to C St SE. The study should review the safety and access needs of the traveling public and the adjacent properties. Page 292 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund -50 50 5 0 50 50 50 300 Federal (Grants) -State -Traffic Mitigation -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal -5 0 5 0 50 5 0 5 0 5 0 3 00 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 50 50 50 50 50 50 300 Subtotal -5 0 5 0 50 5 0 5 0 5 0 3 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2013 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 2 04 2 5 2 5 2 5 7 5 Federal (Grants) -State -Traffic Mitigation -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 204 2 5 2 5 25 ---7 5 Capital Costs: Design 152 15 15 1 5 4 5 Right of Way -Construction 5 2 10 10 1 0 30 Subtotal 204 2 5 2 5 25 ---7 5 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 100 1 00 1 00 1 00 300 Federal (Grants) -State -Local -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 100 -100 -100 -100 3 00 Capital Costs: Design 10 10 10 10 30 Right of Way -Construction 9 0 90 90 90 2 70 Subtotal 100 -100 -100 -100 3 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: c410a0 (TIP#29) Wetland mitigation for the 277th St Grade Separation project. Project Name: Annual Bridge Preservation Project Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#28) This is an annual level of effort project used to fund bridge improvements as identified by the city's annual bridge inspection program. Project Name: South 277th Wetland Mitigation Project Name: Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Program Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#30) This is a bi-annual level of effort project used to fund small pedestrian safety studies and improvement projects. This project provides for pedestrian safety studies and improvements at various locations citywide. Projects are prioritized annually based on safety issues and pedestrian demands. Page 293 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 19 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 600 Federal (Grants) -State -Local -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 19 100 100 100 100 100 100 6 00 Capital Costs: Design 19 10 10 1 0 10 10 10 60 Right of Way -Construction 90 90 90 90 90 90 5 40 Subtotal 19 100 100 100 100 100 100 6 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2014 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund -Federal (Grants) 1 25 1,565 1,690 State -Traffic Impact Fees 50 2 5 185 2 60 REET -Other Sources -Subtotal --5 0 150 1,750 --1,950 Capital Costs: Design 50 1 50 200 Right of Way 2 50 2 50 Construction 1,500 1,500 Subtotal --5 0 150 1,750 --1,950 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 2 3 3 Federal (Grants) -State -Traffic Impact Fees -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 2 3 -----3 Capital Costs: Design 2 3 3 Right of Way -Construction -Subtotal 2 3 -----3 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Citywide Arterial Bicycle & Safety Improvements Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#31) Project Name: 104th Ave SE & Green River Road Study Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#46) This project will fund a pre-design study to determine the right of way, environmental and construction requirements for intersection safety improvements. This safety project scope will include sight distance improvements, constructing turn lanes, channelization, environmental mitigation, mitigation, signage and clear zone improvements. This project will fund the design, right of way acquisition, and construction of a 4-lane section with bicycle and pedestrian facilities on 124th Ave SE between SE 318th St and SE 312th St. Project Name: 124th Ave SE Corridor Improvements, Phase 1 Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#40) This is an annual level of effort project focused on funding bicycle and safety improvements on classified roadways. Projects are prioritized annually based upon field studies. Project was previously called "Citywide Roadway Safety Infrastructure Improvements. Page 294 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 5 5 Federal (Grants) -State -Local -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal -5 -----5 Capital Costs: Design 5 5 Right of Way -Construction -Subtotal -5 -----5 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 2 8 8 Federal (Grants) -State -Traffic Impact Fees -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 2 8 -----8 Capital Costs: Design 2 8 8 Right of Way -Construction -Subtotal 2 8 -----8 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 1 4 4 Federal (Grants) -State -Traffic Impact Fees -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 1 4 -----4 Capital Costs: Design 1 4 4 Right of Way -Construction -Subtotal 1 4 -----4 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Downtown to Les Gove Non-Motorized Improvements Study Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#48) This project provides funding to complete a study of the 2nd St SE & F St SE corridor between Les Gove Park and Downtown Auburn. Improvements may include pavement reconstruction, sidewalks, access ramps, signal modifications and route signing. This project provides funding for completing a study to add bicycle and pedestrian facilities on S 316th St from east of Evergreen Heights Elementary to 51st Ave S. Project Name: S 316th Street Bicycle & Pedestrian Improvement Study Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#49) This project will fund a study to determine the feasibility, scope and cost of low impact roadway, bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the Environmental Park area. Included in this study scope is a connection between Clay St NW and Western St NW. Project Name: Environmental Park Roadway Improvements Study Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#47) Page 295 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund 1 1 Federal (Grants) 124 -State -Traffic Impact Fees -REET -Other Sources -Subtotal 124 1 -----1 Capital Costs: Design 3 6 -Right of Way -Construction 8 8 1 1 Subtotal 124 1 -----1 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund -Federal (Grants) -State -Traffic Impact Fees 1 00 1 00 REET -Other Sources -Subtotal -100 -----100 Capital Costs: Design 100 100 Right of Way -Construction -Subtotal -100 -----100 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Street Fund -Property Tax -Utility Tax 1,505 1 ,400 1,400 1 ,400 1,400 1,400 1 ,400 8 ,400 REET2 -Other Sources -Subtotal 1 ,505 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 8,400 Capital Costs: Design 8 5 50 50 50 50 50 50 300 Right of Way -Construction 1,420 1,350 1,350 1 ,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 8,100 Subtotal 1 ,505 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 8,400 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: cpxxxx (TIP#54) This project will study improvements to the Kersey Way SE corridor from the White River Bridge to the southern city limits. The study will develop the scope and costs for horizontal/vertical geometric roadway improvements, roadside hazard mitigation, street lighting and non-motorized trail construction. The project length is approximately two miles. Project Name: Kersey Way Study Project Name: 37th Street SE & R St SE SE Pedestrian Connector Project No: cp0803 (TIP#53) Project No: various (TIP#35) Description: Implement regular pavement maintenance and/or rehabilitation of various classified streets citywide. These projects may include overlays, rebuilds, spot repairs, or a combination these. It is anticipated that this program will be funded through bond proceeds that will be repaid by the 1% utility tax that was adopted by Council in 2008. This project will construct a pedestrian connection between 37th ST SE & R St providing a link between south Auburn and the White River Trail and Game Farm Park. Project Name: Annual Arterial Street Preservation Page 296 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Street Fund -Property Tax -Utility Tax 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 600 REET2 -Other Sources -Subtotal -100 100 100 100 100 100 6 00 Capital Costs: Design 10 10 1 0 10 10 10 60 Right of Way -Construction 90 90 90 90 90 90 5 40 Subtotal -100 100 100 100 100 100 6 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Street Fund 7 04 -Property Tax 5 ,405 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 12,000 Utility Tax -REET2 -Other -Subtotal 6 ,109 2 ,000 2 ,000 2,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 12,000 Capital Costs: Design 6 46 180 180 1 80 180 180 180 1,080 Right of Way -Construction 5,463 1,820 1,820 1 ,820 1,820 1,820 1,820 10,920 Subtotal 6 ,109 2 ,000 2 ,000 2,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 12,000 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Arterial Street Fund (Fund 102) 1,204 3 80 3 55 3 05 2 50 1 50 3 36 1,776 Local Street Fund (Fund 103) 7 04 -------Street Preservation (Fund 105) --------Federal (Grants) 5 ,847 7 ,387 6 ,006 3,459 3 ,290 8 98 -2 1,040 State -2 ,730 -----2 ,730 REET 1 ,243 -------PWTFL 1 ,527 -------Property Tax (Fund 103) 5 ,405 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000 12,000 Utility Tax (Fund 105) 1,505 1,500 1,500 1 ,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 9 ,000 Other (Funds 430, 431, 432) 310 -------Other (Other Agencies) 271 -7,215 2,604 ---9,818 Other (Traffic Mitigation Fees) 7 35 --1 35 ---135 Other (Traffic Impact Fees) 3 ,600 2 ,559 9 60 2 81 3 22 189 -4 ,311 Subtotal 2 2,351 1 6,556 1 8,036 10,284 7,362 4,736 3,836 60,810 Capital Costs: Design 5 ,651 1,370 7 89 699 3 35 2 50 2 60 3 ,703 Right of Way 6 ,221 1,255 -5 00 4 50 --2 ,205 Construction 1 0,393 13,843 1 7,160 8,998 6 ,490 4 ,400 3 ,490 54,381 Long Term Debt 8 6 8 8 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 6 8 6 521 Subtotal 2 2,351 1 6,556 1 8,036 10,284 7,362 4,736 3,836 60,810 * Amounts shown in thousands This program was created after passage of Proposition 1 on the November '04 ballot, setting the City's property tax levy limits and creating a dedicated local street fund to be used solely for local street improvements. The program will focus on the preservation of local streets (unclassified streets) within the City of Auburn. The work will include crack sealing, asphalt patching, pre-leveling, asphalt overlays and roadway reconstruction. The property tax levy lift may also be used to repay bonds should they be utilized to fund this program. Project No: various (TIP#36) Implement regular maintenance of various classified streets by sealing newly formed cracks. Sealing the cracks will prolong the life of the pavement by stopping water from draining into the subbase of the road. Project Name: Local Street Improvement Program Project No: various (TIP#37) Project Name: Annual Arterial Crack Seal Program TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS and FUNDING SOURCES -TRANSPORTATION Page 297 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning $0 $1,750 $3,500 $5,250 $7,000 Fund Balance Federal Grants State Grants Property Tax Utility Tax Traffic Impact Fees Other Local Agencies Transportation Projects 2011 /2012 Revenue Sources (in thousands) 2012 2011 Transportation Projects Projected Capital Expenditures (in thousands) $0 $6,000 $12,000 $18,000 $24,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 298 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 299 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 300 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Water Utility Projects Seventeen capital projects totaling $18,825,400 and Long-term debt totaling $1,306,600 are budgeted for 2011 and seven capital projects totaling $3,951,250 and Long-term debt totaling $1,328,750 are budgeted for 2012. The significant projects include the following: • The Well 1 Improvements Project ($1,400,000 in 2011 and $1,300,000 in 2012) will provide hydro geologic evaluation of existing well conditions, rehabilitation or re-drilling of the well to maximum well production, and construction of building improvements to house chlorine disinfection equipment and an emergency generator. (See Map – “B”) • The Intertie Infrastructure Project ($490,000 in 2011) will construct two intertie infrastructures required for purchased water and for long term emergency interties. • The Water Supply Charges Project ($3,000,000 in 2011) will provide funding to purchase water from adjacent purveyors to meet projected demand. • The Lakeland Hills Hills Reservoir 6 Project ($2,500,000 in 2011) will construct a second reservoir in the Lakeland Hills area to meet peak hour demand and fire protection. (See Map – “E”) • The Lakeland Hills Booster Pump Station Project ($2,032,000 in 2011) will construct a new booster pump station to replace the Janssen’s Addition pump station, to meet fire flow demands and provide emergency power. (See Map – “D”) • The Academy Booster Pump Station Project ($2,800,000 in 2011) will construct a new booster pump station to replace the Janssen’s Addition pump station, to meet fire flow demands and provide emergency power. (See Map – “C”) • The Well 4 and Intertie Pump Station Improvements ($700,000 in 2012) will construct a new building at the Well 4 site to house a diesel-fueled standby generator, new hypochlorite disinfection equipment, and restroom facilities. • The SCADA Upgrades Project ($2,034,900 in 2011 and $350,000 in 2012) will upgrade the existing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system, also known as the Telemetry system, to replace obsolete components and allow for control of the water utilities facilities. • The Fulmer Well Field Improvements Project ($400,000 in 2011 and $600,000 in 2012) will conduct an evaluation of the wells 2, 6 and 7 facilities and the Fulmer Field Corrosion Control Treatment Facility to assess the supply and treatment capacity of the existing facilities and infrastructure. The evaluation will include an assessment of individual and total well supply capacities, a review of the treatment facility operating and control parameters, and recommendations for facility and control improvements based on the evaluation. (See Map – “A”) • The Deduct Meter Replacement Project ($300,000 in 2011) will replace meters, associated piping and surface restoration at high volume services where domestic water is currently used for irrigation purposes. • The A Street NW Corridor Project ($350,000 in 2011) will construct water system improvements in conjunction with the new arterial street corridor corridor of A Street NW between 14th Street NW and 3rd Street NW. (See Map – “F”) • The 2009 AC Main Replacement Project ($1,020,000 in 2011) will replace existing asbestos cement water main with ductile iron pipe and associated appurtenances in the Lea Hill service area. Page 301 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 1 21 1,400 1,300 2 ,700 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 121 1,400 1,300 ----2,700 Capital Costs: Design 1 21 200 200 Right of Way 100 100 Construction -1,200 1,200 2 ,400 Subtotal 121 1,400 1,300 ----2,700 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 600 4 90 4 90 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 6 00 4 90 -----4 90 Capital Costs: Design 105 80 80 Right of Way -Construction 4 95 410 410 Subtotal 6 00 4 90 -----4 90 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund -Bond Proceeds 3 ,000 3 ,000 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -3 ,000 -----3 ,000 Capital Costs: Water Supply Charges 3 ,000 3 ,000 Right of Way -Construction -Subtotal -3 ,000 -----3 ,000 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Construction of two intertie infrastructures required for purchased water and for long term emergency interties. Project Name: Intertie Infrastructure Project No: cp1011 Project Name: Water Supply Charges Project No: cpxxxx Financing to purchase water from adjacent purveyors to meet projected demand. Project Name: Well 1 Improvements Hydrogeologic evaluation of existing well conditions, rehabilitation or re-drilling of the well to maximum well production, and construction of building improvements to house chlorine disinfection equipment and an emergency generator. Project No: cp0915 Page 302 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 2 15 -Bond Proceeds 2 ,500 2 ,500 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 215 2,500 -----2,500 Capital Costs: Design 215 142 142 Right of Way -Construction 2 ,358 2 ,358 Subtotal 215 2,500 -----2,500 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 3 49 -Bond Proceeds 300 2 ,032 2 ,032 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 6 49 2,032 -----2,032 Capital Costs: Design 3 94 -Right of Way -Construction 2 55 2 ,032 2 ,032 Subtotal 6 49 2,032 -----2,032 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 3 14 2 ,300 2 ,300 Bond Proceeds 500 500 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 314 2,800 -----2,800 Capital Costs: Design 314 300 300 Right of Way -Construction 2 ,500 2 ,500 Subtotal 314 2,800 -----2,800 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Construct a second reservoir in the Lakeland Hills area to meet peak hour demand and fire demand. Project Name: Lakeland Hills Reservoir 6 Project No: cp1006 Project No: cp0909 Construct a new Lakeland Hills station to replace the Janssen's Addition pump station, to meet fire flow demands and provide emergency power. Project Name: Lakeland Hills Booster Pump Station Project Name: Academy Booster Pump Station Project No: cp0909 Construct a new Academy station to replace the Janssen's Addition pump station, to meet fire flow demands and provide emergency power. Page 303 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 7 700 700 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 7 7 00 -----7 00 Capital Costs: Design 7 100 100 Right of Way -Construction 600 600 Subtotal 7 7 00 -----7 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 50 1 00 1 00 2 00 200 200 200 1 ,000 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 5 0 100 100 200 2 00 2 00 2 00 1,000 Capital Costs: Design 50 15 15 20 20 20 20 1 10 Right of Way -Construction -8 5 8 5 1 80 180 180 180 8 90 Subtotal 5 0 100 100 200 2 00 2 00 2 00 1,000 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 3 6 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 5 1 41 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 3 6 2 2 2 2 23 2 4 2 5 2 5 141 Capital Costs: Design 3 6 -Right of Way -Construction 2 2 2 2 23 2 4 2 5 2 5 1 41 Subtotal 3 6 2 2 2 2 23 2 4 2 5 2 5 141 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Water Resources Protection Program Project No: c10130 Implement strategies identified in the Wellhead Protection Program to protect City water sources. Project Name: Well 4 and Intertie Pump Station Improvements Project Name: Street Utility Improvements Project No: cpxxxx Water main improvements in coordination with SOS and general arterial street improvements. Project No: c512a0 Construct a new building at the Well 4 site to house a diesel-fueled standby generator, new hypochlorite disinfection equipment, and restroom facilities accessible from inside and outside the building. Determine the cost and feasibility of installing standby power to the Lea Hill Booster Pump Station. Page 304 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 50 50 5 6 5 8 60 6 2 3 36 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -5 0 5 0 56 5 8 6 0 6 2 3 36 Capital Costs: Design 10 10 9 10 10 1 1 60 Right of Way -Construction 40 40 47 4 8 50 51 2 76 Subtotal -5 0 5 0 56 5 8 6 0 6 2 3 36 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 371 8 85 3 50 1,235 Bond Proceeds 1 ,150 1 ,150 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 371 2,035 3 50 ----2,385 Capital Costs: Design 139 -Right of Way -Construction 2 32 2 ,035 3 50 2 ,385 Subtotal 371 2,035 3 50 ----2,385 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 400 600 1 ,000 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -4 00 6 00 ----1,000 Capital Costs: Design 100 100 Right of Way -Construction 300 600 900 Subtotal -4 00 6 00 ----1,000 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: c524a0 Upgrade the existing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system, also known as the Telemetry system, to replace obsolete components and allow for control of the water utility facilities. Project Name: Fulmer Well Field Improvements Project No: cpxxxx Conduct an evaluation of the Wells 2, 6 and 7 facilities and the Fulmer Field Corrosion Control Treatment Facility to assess the supply and treatment capacity of the existing facilities and infrastructure. The evaluation will include an assessment assessment of individual and total well supply capacities, a review of the treatment facility operating and control parameters, and recommendations for facility and control improvements based on the evaluation. Project Name: Annual Reservoir Repair & Replacement Program Project No: cpxxxx Perform reservoir maintenance such evaluation of facility condition and installation sample ports and seismic isolation valves on inlet/outlet piping. Project Name: SCADA Upgrades Page 305 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 1 20 1 20 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -120 -----120 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 120 120 Subtotal -120 -----120 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund -200 200 400 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -2 00 2 00 ----4 00 Capital Costs: Design -70 70 Right of Way -Construction -130 200 3 30 Subtotal -2 00 2 00 ----4 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund -300 300 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -3 00 -----3 00 Capital Costs: Design -50 50 Right of Way -Construction -2 50 2 50 Subtotal -3 00 -----3 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: cpxxxx Replace meters, associated piping and surface restoration at high volume services where domestic water is currently used for irrigation purposes. Project No: cpxxxx Replace pressure reducing valve stations in the Lea Hill area. Project Name: Lea Hill PRV Station Improvements Project Name: Deduct Meter Replacement Project Project Name: M Street Grade Separation Project No: c201a0 Construct distribution system improvements identified in the 2009 Comprehensive Water Plan Capital Improvements Program in conjunction with the M Street Grade Separation project. Page 306 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 50 3 50 3 50 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 5 0 3 50 -----3 50 Capital Costs: Design 50 -Right of Way -Construction 3 50 3 50 Subtotal 5 0 3 50 -----3 50 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 6 7 20 20 Bond Proceeds 1 ,000 1 ,000 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 6 7 1,020 -----1,020 Capital Costs: Design 6 7 -Right of Way -Construction 1,020 1,020 Subtotal 6 7 1,020 -----1,020 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 1,307 1,329 1 ,400 1,396 1,393 1,390 8,215 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 1,307 1,329 1,400 1,396 1,393 1,390 8,215 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Long-term Debt Service 1,307 1,329 1 ,400 1,396 1,393 1,390 8,215 Subtotal 1,307 1,329 1,400 1,396 1,393 1,390 8,215 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: Construct water system improvements in conjunction with the new arterial street corridor of A Street NW between 14th Street NW and 3rd Street NW. 2009 AC Main Replacement Project No: cp0920 Replace existing asbestos cement water main with ductile iron pipe and associated appurtenances along streets in the Lea Hill service area. Project Name: Water Long-term Debt Service Construct water system improvements in conjunction with the new arterial street corridor of A Street NW between 14th Street NW and 3rd Street NW. Project Name: A Street NW Corridor Project No: c207a0 Page 307 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 2,180 8 ,644 3,951 1 ,679 1,678 1,678 1,677 19,307 Bond Proceeds 300 1 0,182 -----1 0,182 State --------Local --------REET --------Other --------Subtotal 2,480 1 8,826 3,951 1,679 1,678 1,678 1,677 29,489 Capital Costs: Design 1,498 1,067 2 5 2 9 30 30 3 1 1 ,212 Water Supply Charges -3 ,000 -----3 ,000 Right of Way --1 00 ----100 Construction 9 82 13,452 2 ,497 2 50 2 52 2 55 2 56 16,962 Long-term Debt Service -1,307 1,329 1 ,400 1,396 1,393 1,390 8,215 Subtotal 2,480 1 8,826 3,951 1,679 1,678 1,678 1,677 29,489 * Amounts shown in thousands TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS and FUNDING SOURCES -WATER Page 308 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning $0 $3,750 $7,500 $11,250 $15,000 Bond Proceeds Working Capital Water Utility Projects 2011 /2012 Revenue Sources (in thousands) 2012 2011 Water Utility Projects Projected Capital Expenditures (in thousands) $0 $2,500 $5,000 $7,500 $10,000 $12,500 $15,000 $17,500 $20,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 309 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 310 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Sanitary Sewer Projects Seven capital projects totaling $6,506,600 and Long-term debt totaling $561,460 are budgeted for 2011 and four capital projects totaling $1,232,900 and Long-term debt totaling $570,230 are budgeted for 2012. The significant projects include the following: • The Sanitary Sewer Replacement Program ($1,020,100 in 2011 and $590,100 in 2012) is an annual program for the repair and replacement of broken sewer mains and facilities. Additionally, system improvements which enhance the ability to maintain services are included. • The Street Utility Improvements Project ($115,000 in both 2011 and 2012) will replace sewer lines in coordination with SOS and arterial street improvements. • The Power Generators Project ($318,300 in 2011 and $327,800 in 2012) will provide back-up power for all sewer pump stations. • The Lea Hill Pump Station Decommissioning Project ($469,700 in 2011) will allow two existing wastewater pump stations to be decommissioned. • The SCADA Upgrade Project ($1,000,000 in 2011 and $200,000 in 2012) will upgrade the existing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA), also known as the Telemetry system, to replace obsolete components. • The Ellingson and Dogwood Pump Station Replacement Projects ($2,798,400 in 2011) will replace the Ellingson and Dogwood Pump Stations. (See Map – “B” Ellingson and “A” Dogwood) • The 2009-2010 Sanitary Sewer Repair & Replacement Project ($785,100 in 2011) will replace or repair existing sewer lines and manholes that are identified as defective. The projects include small project sites located throughout the City’s sewer service area. Page 311 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 2 ,379 1 ,020 5 90 1,891 2 ,724 1,480 1 ,680 9 ,385 Federal -Bond Proceeds -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 2,379 1,020 5 90 1 ,891 2,724 1,480 1,680 9,385 Capital Costs: Design 4 34 198 8 8 284 4 08 2 22 2 52 1,452 Right of Way -Construction 1,945 8 22 5 02 1 ,607 2,316 1,258 1,428 7 ,933 Subtotal 2,379 1,020 5 90 1 ,891 2,724 1,480 1,680 9,385 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 200 1 15 1 15 115 1 15 1 15 1 15 6 90 Federal -Bond Proceeds -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 2 00 115 115 115 115 115 115 6 90 Capital Costs: Design Design 30 15 15 1 5 15 15 15 90 Right of Way -Construction 170 100 100 1 00 100 100 100 600 Subtotal 2 00 115 115 115 115 115 115 6 90 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2013 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 3 09 3 18 3 28 338 9 84 Federal -Bond Proceeds -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 3 09 318 3 28 338 ---9 84 Capital Costs: Design 50 50 50 50 150 Right of Way 50 50 50 50 150 Construction 2 09 218 2 28 238 6 84 Subtotal 3 09 318 3 28 338 ---9 84 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $ offset by increased customer base The purpose of this program is to systematically install backup power for all of Auburn's sewer pump stations. Installation at individual stations may be separate projects, may be in conjunction with other upgrades to the pump station, or may be included with another another City project. Project Name: Sanitary Sewer Repair & Replacement Repair and replace broken sewer mains and other facilities. These lines will be identified through television inspection and routine cleaning. This particular program includes proposed projects which do not have an approved Project Management Plan, or are not associated with the SOS or other transportation improvements. Anticipated projects include bi-annual, stand-alone, repair and replacement projects for sewer lines which are broken, misaligned, "bellied" or otherwise require an inordinate amount of maintenance effort or present a risk of backup or trench failure. Additionally, system improvements which enhance the ability to maintain service are included here. Project No: cpxxxx Project Name: Street Utility Improvements Project No: cpxxxx Sewer line replacement in coordination with SOS and Arterial improvements. Project Name: Power Generators Project No: cpxxxx Page 312 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 8 92 80 80 Federal -Bond Proceeds 3 90 3 90 Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 8 92 4 70 -----4 70 Capital Costs: Design 61 -Right of Way -Construction 831 4 70 4 70 Subtotal 8 92 4 70 -----4 70 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 6 70 1 0 1 0 Federal -Bond Proceeds 1 ,000 1 90 1 ,190 Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 6 70 1,000 2 00 ----1,200 Capital Costs: Design 431 -Right of Way -Construction 2 39 1,000 200 1,200 Subtotal 6 70 1,000 2 00 ----1,200 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 1 ,908 2 30 2 30 Federal -Bond Proceeds 2 ,568 2 ,568 Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 1,908 2,798 -----2,798 Capital Costs: Design 1,026 -Right of Way 50 -Construction 8 32 2 ,798 2 ,798 Subtotal 1,908 2,798 -----2,798 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: cp0724 & cp0756 This project allows two existing City wastewater pump stations (Rainier Shadows and White Mountain Trails) to be decommissioned. Phase 1 (CP0724) is complete and extended gravity sewer lines from the existing pump stations towards the Verdana Pump Station. Phase 2 (CP0756) will complete the connections to the Verdana Pump Station and decommission the Rainier Shadows and White Mountain Trails pump stations. The Verdana Pump Station has been designed to pump sewage from the two existing stations as well as the new Verdana (aka "Bridges") development. Project No: cp0817 Project to replace the Ellingson and Dogwood Pump Stations. Project Name: SCADA System Upgrades Project No: c524a0 The Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA also known as the "Telemetry" system) is in need of upgrading. The existing system, based on an independent SCADA Assessment Study and the vulnerability study, has numerous obsolete components and does not allow control of the Sewer and Storm Utility stations. The new system will utilize an open architecture so the City is no longer reliant on one vendor for repairs and maintenance. Project Name: Ellingson & Dogwood Pump Station Replacement Project Name: Lea Hill Pump Station Decommissioning Page 313 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 1 15 2 3 2 3 Federal -Bond Proceeds 7 62 7 62 Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 115 7 85 -----7 85 Capital Costs: Design 1 15 3 5 3 5 Right of Way -Construction 7 50 7 50 Subtotal 115 7 85 -----7 85 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 3 08 5 62 5 70 727 7 25 7 24 7 23 4 ,031 Federal -Bond Proceeds -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 3 08 5 62 5 70 727 7 25 7 24 7 23 4,031 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Long-term Debt 3 08 5 62 5 70 727 7 25 7 24 7 23 4,031 Subtotal 3 08 5 62 5 70 727 7 25 7 24 7 23 4,031 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 6,781 2 ,348 1 ,613 3 ,071 3 ,564 2,319 2,518 15,433 Federal --------Bond Proceeds -4 ,720 1 90 ----4 ,910 Local --------REET --------Other --------Subtotal 6,781 7,068 1,803 3,071 3,564 2,319 2,518 20,343 Capital Costs: Design 2,147 2 98 153 349 4 23 2 37 2 67 1,727 Right of Way 1 00 50 50 5 0 ---150 Construction 4 ,226 6,158 1,030 1 ,945 2,416 1,358 1,528 14,435 Long-term Debt 3 08 5 62 5 70 727 7 25 7 24 7 23 4,031 Subtotal 6,781 7,068 1,803 3,071 3,564 2,319 2,518 20,343 * Amounts shown in thousands Project Name: 2009 -2010 Sanitary Sewer & Replacement Replace or repair existing sewer main lines and manholes that are identified as defective. The project includes small project sites located throughout the City's sewer service area. TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS and FUNDING SOURCES -SEWER Project Name: Sewer Long-term Debt Service cpxxxx cpxxxx Funding allcoated to pay for long-term debt 2011 through 2016 includes; PW-04-691-001 Auburn Way South Sanitary Sewer Replacement ($684,300), PW-06962-003 Auburn Way South Sanitary Replacement ($1,155,600 and 2010 Bond Revenue ($2,190,850). cp0921 Page 314 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 Working Capital Bond Proceeds Sanitary Sewer Projects 2011 /2012 Revenue Sources (in thousands) 2011 2012 Sanitary Sewer Projects Projected Capital Expenditures (in thousands) $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 315 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 316 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Storm Drainage Projects Ten capital projects totaling $7,158,200 and Long-term Debt totaling $307,600 are budgeted for 2011 and six capital projects totaling $2,268,500 and Long-term Debt totaling $316,910 are budgeted for 2012. The most significant projects are as follows: • The S 296th Street Pond Expansion, Phase 1 & 2 Project ($600,000 in 2011) will include phase 1 -to expand the current detention capacity from 4 ac-ft to 8 ac-ft of storage and phase 2 – to further expand the capacity to 15 ac-ft of storage. (See Map – “A”) • The Port of Seattle Mitigation Project ($100,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012) will include future I Street NE improvements. • The SCADA Upgrades Project ($458,000 in 2011 and $200,000 in 2012) will upgrade the existing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system; also known as the Telemetry system, to replace obsolete components. • The White River Storm Pump Station Replacement Project ($2,650,000 in 2011) consists of replacing the existing stormwater pump station to address structural and safety concerns. (See Map – “F”) • The Pipeline Repair and Replacement Project ($650,000 in 2011 and 2012) will include projects identified as those requiring replacement of existing infrastructure. These projects support street repairs and other utility replacement programs requiring coordination. • The Auburn Way S Flooding, Phase 1 & 2 Project ($1,638,000 in 2011) will construct conveyance improvements to 17th Street SE as part of the Metro Realignment project. The project will replace conveyance line from A Street SE to K Street SE and add an additional 7 ac-ft of storage within the existing A Street SE detention pond. (See Map – “E”) • The Street Utility Improvements Project ($112,200 in 2011 and $118,500 in 2012) will include storm drainage conveyance improvements in coordination with SOS and arterial street improvements. • The West Valley Highway Improvements Project ($800,000 in 2011) consists of storm drainage improvements improvements associated with the West Valley Highway street project. (See Map – “C”) • The Mill Creek Wetland 5K Restoration Project ($750,000 in 2012) is a restoration project that includes invasive species removal, stream channel restoration for improved conveyance and habitat, and native plantings along Mill Creek between Main Street and stream crossing at SR 167. (See Map – “B”) Page 317 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2015 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 7 4 600 1,171 1 ,771 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 7 4 6 00 ---1 ,171 -1,771 Capital Costs: Design 7 4 100 100 Right of Way 150 150 Construction 600 921 1,521 Subtotal 7 4 6 00 ---1 ,171 -1,771 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2014 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 4 4 1 00 4 45 5 45 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 4 4 100 --4 45 --5 45 Capital Costs: Design 4 4 7 5 7 5 Right of Way -Construction 100 3 70 4 70 Subtotal 4 4 100 --4 45 --5 45 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund -Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other (Other Agency) 100 500 600 Subtotal -100 5 00 ----6 00 Capital Costs: Design 100 100 Right of Way -Construction 500 500 Subtotal -100 5 00 ----6 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: S 296th Street Pond Expansion, Phase 1 & 2 Phase I of this project will expand the current detention capacity from 4 ac-ft to 8 ac-ft of storage. Phase II will further expand the capacity to 15 ac-ft of storage. Project No: cp1013 Phase I of this project will expand the current detention capacity from 0 ac-ft to 1 ac-ft of storage. Phase II will further expand the capacity to 2.3 ac-ft of storage. Project Name: Bry's Cove Expansion, Phase 1 & 2 Project No: cp1013 Project Name: Port of Seattle Mitigation Project Project No: cpxxxx cpxxxx Unidentified Project for future I St NE Improvement. Project initiated through Port of Seattle agreement. Page 318 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 1 02 -Bond Proceeds 4 58 200 6 58 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 102 4 58 2 00 ----6 58 Capital Costs: Design 102 -Right of Way -Construction 4 58 200 6 58 Subtotal 102 4 58 2 00 ----6 58 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 5 56 -Bond Proceeds 2 ,650 2 ,650 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 5 56 2,650 -----2,650 Capital Costs: Design 5 56 -Right of Way -Construction 2 ,650 2 ,650 Subtotal 5 56 2,650 -----2,650 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 6 80 6 50 6 50 4 50 4 64 4 78 4 92 3,184 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 6 80 6 50 6 50 450 4 64 4 78 4 92 3,184 Capital Costs: Design 318 100 100 50 50 50 50 400 Right of Way -Construction 3 62 5 50 5 50 400 414 4 28 4 42 2 ,784 Subtotal 6 80 6 50 6 50 450 4 64 4 78 4 92 3,184 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: SCADA System Upgrades Project No: c524a0 The Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA also known as the "Telemetry" system) is in need of upgrading. The existing system, based on an independent SCADA Assessment Study and the vulnerability study, has numerous obsolete components and does not allow control of the Sewer and Storm Utility stations. The new system will utilize an open architecture so the City is no longer reliant on one vendor for repairs and maintenance. Project Name: Pipeline Repair & Replacement Program Project No: cpxxxx Project Name: White River Pump Station Replacement Project No: cp0817 The existing storm water pumping station built in 1981, is in need of replacement. A recent conditions assessment of all five storm water pumping stations indicates that this building is in very poor condition and should be demolished. The current pumping capacity is marginal to meet the pumping demand. Long term maintenance issues such as pump replacement/servicing, electrical deficiencies and lack of potable water service can be addressed through construction of a new station. Projects identified as those requiring replacement of existing infrastructure. These projects support street repairs and other utility replacement programs, requiring coordination. Page 319 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 4 84 1,638 1,638 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 4 84 1,638 -----1,638 Capital Costs: Design 7 3 2 46 2 46 Right of Way -Construction 4 11 1,392 1,392 Subtotal 4 84 1,638 -----1,638 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 2 50 1 12 1 19 225 2 32 2 39 2 46 1 ,173 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 2 50 112 119 225 2 32 2 39 2 46 1,173 Capital Costs: Design 50 2 5 2 5 50 50 50 50 2 50 Right of Way -Construction 200 8 7 9 4 1 75 182 189 196 9 23 Subtotal 2 50 112 119 225 2 32 2 39 2 46 1,173 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund --Bond Proceeds 800 800 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -8 00 -----8 00 Capital Costs: Design 100 100 Right of Way -Construction 700 700 Subtotal -8 00 -----8 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Street Utility Improvements Project No: cpxxxx Storm drainage conveyance improvements in coordination with Arterial and SOS improvements. Approximately 10,780 linear feet in 2009 -2010. Project Name: West Valley Highway Improvements Storm Drainage improvements associated with Street project. Project No: cp0916 Project Name: Auburn Way South Flooding, Phase 1 & 2 Project No: cpxxxx Construct conveyance improvement to 17th Street SE as part of Metro realignment project. Replace existing conveyance line from A Street SE to K Street SE and add an additional 7 ac-ft of storage within the existing A Street SE detention pond. Page 320 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 50 50 1 00 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -5 0 5 0 ----100 Capital Costs: Design 50 50 100 Right of Way -Construction -Subtotal -5 0 5 0 ----100 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 7 50 7 50 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal --7 50 ----7 50 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 7 50 7 50 Subtotal --7 50 ----7 50 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 3 08 317 3 51 351 3 51 351 2 ,029 Bond Proceeds -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -3 08 317 351 351 351 351 2,029 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Long-term Debt 3 08 317 3 51 351 351 351 2 ,029 Subtotal -3 08 317 351 351 351 351 2,029 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Storm Long-term Debt Service Project Name: Brannan Park Pump Station Relocation Project No: cpxxxx Relocation of the existing Brannan Park Pump Station and treatment swale to accommodate the Reddington Levee Relocation project by King County. The project will include rerouting of conveyance facilities to route to the relocated pump station on the Christa Ministries property. Funding allocated to pay for long-term debt 2011 -2016 is as follows: 2005 Bond Revenue $582,060 2010 Revenue Bond $1,446,600 Project Name: Mill Creek Wetland 5K Restoration Project No: cpxxxx Stream restoration project that includes invasive species removal, stream channel restoration for improved conveyance and habitat, and native plantings along Mill Creek between Main Street and stream crossing at SR 167. Project includes design evaluation and potential capacity improvements at the 15th Street NW road culvert for Mill Creek. Project No: cpxxxx Page 321 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Storm Drainage Fund 2 ,190 3 ,458 1,886 1 ,026 1,492 2 ,239 1 ,089 11,190 Bond Proceeds -3 ,908 200 ----4 ,108 State --------Local --------REET --------Other -1 00 500 ----600 Subtotal 2,190 7,466 2,586 1,026 1,492 2,239 1,089 1 5,898 Capital Costs: Design 1 ,217 621 175 1 00 175 200 1 00 1 ,371 Right of Way -----1 50 -150 Construction 9 73 6 ,537 2 ,094 575 9 66 1,538 6 38 12,348 Long-Term Debt -3 08 317 3 51 351 351 351 2 ,029 Subtotal 2,190 7,466 2,586 1,026 1,492 2,239 1,089 1 5,898 * Amounts shown in thousands TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS and FUNDING SOURCES -STORM DRAINAGE Page 322 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning $0 $1,250 $2,500 $3,750 $5,000 Working Capital Bond Proceeds Other (Other Agency) Storm Drainage 2011 /2012 Revenue Sources (in thousands) 2012 2011 Storm Drainage Projects Projected Capital Expenditures (in thousands) $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 323 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 324 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Parks and Recreation Projects Fifteen projects totaling $19,241,700 are budgeted for 2011 and eight capital projects totaling $1,959,100 are budgeted for 2012. The most significant projects include following: • The Auburn Community Center ($17,633,400 in 2011) will construct a new 20,100 s.f. Community Center and associated site improvements at Les Gove Park. (See Map – “D”) • The Auburn Activity Center ($366,000 in 2011) will construct a new 10,000 s.f. Activity Center and associated site improvements to the existing Parks and Administration Building at the Les Gove Park Campus. (See Map – “C”) • The Game Farm Park Project ($87,500 in 2011 and 100,000 in 2012) will include the demolition of 10 poles and lights at the soccer fields to be replaced with six new poles and green lights. (See Map – “E”) • The Fenster Levee Setback, Phase2B Project ($275,000 in 2011 and 79,100 in 2012) will construct approximately 880 feet of levee setback along the left bank of the Green River at the City’s Fenster Nature Park property. The project is intended to improve fish habitat and create additional flood storage capacity. (See Map – “B”) • The Lea Hill Park Replacement Project ($200,000 in 2011 and 1,300,000 in 2012)) will replace the existing park to meet the needs of the Lea Hill Community. (See Map – “A”) Page 325 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund -Federal -State 1 30 -Other Local Agencies 1 30 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 600 REET -Other -Subtotal 2 60 100 100 100 100 100 100 6 00 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 2 60 100 100 1 00 100 100 100 600 Subtotal 2 60 100 100 100 100 100 100 6 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2013 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 2 5 5 0 7 5 Federal -State -Local 1 00 1 00 REET -Other (Park Impact) 20 20 Subtotal -125 -70 ---195 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 125 70 195 Subtotal -125 -70 ---195 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $6,000 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2013 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 20 3 0 50 Federal -State -Local 70 70 REET -Other -Subtotal -9 0 -30 ---120 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 90 30 120 Subtotal -9 0 -30 ---120 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $10,000 Repair trail throughout park, develop reforestation plan. Project Name: Isaac Evans Park Project No: cpxxxx Project Name: Park Acquisitions/Development Land acquisitions to occur based on demand and deficiencies including trails and corridors. 2009 budget includes purchase of Fenster 1b project (Smith property) adjacent to Fenster 1a. This parcel is critical for proper levee setback hydraulic functions. Project No: cpxxxx Project Name: Fulmer Park Improvements Project No: cpxxxx Develop Master Plan for additional parking and park amenities on land exchanged with the Water Utility, and construct planned improvements. Page 326 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total HUD 108 Loan 2 ,000 2 ,000 NMTC 5 ,102 5,102 REET 9 7 6 53 6 53 Local -Other (Proceeds from QALICB) 8 ,000 8 ,000 Other (Solid Waste Fees) 1 ,000 -Other (TBD) 1,878 1,878 Subtotal 1,097 1 7,633 -----1 7,633 Capital Costs: Design 1,092 2,519 2,519 Property Acquisition 8 ,000 8 ,000 Construction 5 7 ,114 7 ,114 Subtotal 1,097 1 7,633 -----1 7,633 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $200,000 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund -Federal -State -Local -Bond Proceeds REET 3,185 3 66 3 66 Other Boys & Girls Club) 7 80 -Subtotal 3,965 3 66 -----3 66 Capital Costs: Design 1,074 7 6 7 6 Property Acquisition 2 65 -Construction 2 ,626 2 90 2 90 Subtotal 3,965 3 66 -----3 66 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $101,000 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 50 50 1 00 Federal -State -Local -REET -Other (Park Impact & Mitigation) -Subtotal -5 0 5 0 ----100 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 50 50 100 Subtotal -5 0 5 0 ----100 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Auburn Community Center Project No: cp0925 Construction of a new 20,100 s.f. Community Center facility and associated site improvements at Les Gove Park campus. The project includes 3,500 s.f. of administrative space of the Parks Department and numerous public meeting and activity spaces. All funding will go into an investment fund controlled by a community development entity and all funds will be drawn from that fund as the project is constructed. Project Name: Auburn Activity Center Project No: cp1015 Construction of a new 10,000 s.f. Activity Center/Gymnasium addition and associated site improvements to the existing Parks and Administration Building at the Les Gove Park Campus. Project includes life safety upgrades and a replacement roof at the existing 7,000 s.f. facility. Project Name: Veteran's Park Improvements, Phase 1 & 2 Project No: cpxxxx Phase 1 (2009): Add new concrete pathways along parking lot and overlay existing parking lot. This project is referred to in the Parks, Arts and Recreation Plan. Phase 2 (2010): Replace existing concrete paths, add a climbing toy with safety surfacing, upgrade spray pool or expand playground, improve irrigation coverage, selective tree removal and turf renovation. Page 327 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund -Federal -State 5 27 4 5 4 5 Local -REET -Cumulative Reserve Fund 5 27 4 5 4 5 Other -Subtotal 1,054 9 0 -----9 0 Capital Costs: Design 104 10 10 Right of Way 6 50 -Construction 300 80 80 Subtotal 1,054 9 0 -----9 0 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 2 8 30 30 Federal -State -Local -REET -Other 2 5 -Subtotal 5 3 3 0 -----3 0 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 5 3 30 30 Subtotal 5 3 3 0 -----3 0 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $6,000 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 6 8 200 200 Federal 1 00 1 00 State -Local -REET -Other (Park Impact) 50 100 50 50 2 50 Subtotal 6 8 5 0 100 50 3 00 5 0 -5 50 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 6 8 50 100 50 300 50 5 50 Subtotal 6 8 5 0 100 50 3 00 5 0 -5 50 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: cp0807 Based on completed Master Plan, coordinate improvements with neighborhood and Rotary Club of Auburn to add walking path (2011), new playground, irrigation, landscaping and signage to Rotary Park (2008). Project Name: Misc. Parks Improvements Project Name: Auburn Environmental Park Project No: c412a0 The Auburn Environmental Park (AEP) project seeks to create vegetated natural open space within an urbanized area, which will provide many mutual benefits. The park will provide provide opportunities for local economic development, water quality improvement, storm water detention, flood control, fish and wildlife enhancement, visual resources, public education, and passive recreation, including walking trails and bird viewing amenities. Improvement activities include the construction of surface trails and elevated boardwalks, educational signage, and wetland habitat restoration. Project Name: Rotary Park Improvements Minor park improvements including shelters, roofs, playgrounds, irrigation and restrooms as denoted in the Parks Master Plan. Project No: cpxxxx Page 328 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 201 Funding Sources: 013 1-16 Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 3 2 1 3 1 00 8 0 193 Federal 1 98 -State -Local 7 5 7 5 Bond Proceeds REET -Other -Subtotal 2 30 8 8 100 80 ---2 68 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 2 30 8 8 100 80 2 68 Subtotal 2 30 8 8 100 80 ---2 68 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 201 Funding Sources: 012 1-16 Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 TotalMunicipal Parks Constr. Fund -Federal -State 6 5 6 5 Other Local Agencies -REET -Other (Prop Levy 2) 6 5 6 5 Subtotal --130 ----130 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 130 130 Subtotal --130 ----130 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 201 Funding Sources: 2012 1-16 Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 2 5 2 5 Federal -State 50 50 Local -REET -Other (Other Agency) 50 50 Subtotal -2 5 100 ----125 Capital Costs: Design 2 5 2 5 Right of Way -Construction 100 100 Subtotal -2 5 100 ----125 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $2,000 Develop a Master Plan for the Park in 2011; install an irrigation system, new play structure and improve signage in 2012. Project Name: Game Farm Park Project No: cp1001 ARRA Energy Grant (2010) for Demolition of 10 poles and lights at the soccer fields to be replaced with six new poles and green lights. KC Sports Grant (2011) for Tennis court and miscellaneous improvements. Project(s) is programmed in the 2005 adopted six-year Parks Improv Youth ement Plan. Project No: cpxxxx This project requires trail system maintenance, play structure replacement and riverbank stabilization. Project Name: Auburdale Park Project Name: Roegner Park Project No: cpxxxx Page 329 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 1 0 50 50 Federal 1 0 -State -Local 50 50 REET -Other -Subtotal 2 0 100 -----100 Capital Costs: Design 20 -Right of Way -Construction 100 100 Subtotal 2 0 100 -----100 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $2,000 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund -Federal 1 50 1 50 7 9 2 29 State -Local 1 25 125 REET -Other 3 5 -Subtotal 185 2 75 7 9 ----3 54 Capital Costs: Design 7 5 2 5 2 5 Right of Way -Construction 1 10 2 50 7 9 3 29 Subtotal 185 2 75 7 9 ----3 54 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund -Federal -State -Local -REET -Other (Other Agency) 200 1,300 1,500 Subtotal -2 00 1,300 ----1,500 Capital Costs: Design 200 200 Right of Way -Construction 1,300 1,300 Subtotal -2 00 1,300 ----1,500 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $6,000 Project Name: Auburndale Park II Project No: cpxxxx In coordination with the Community and Green River Community College, design and construct a new community park to meet the needs of the Lea Hill Community. This park will replace the existing Lea Hill Park. Project Name: Fenster Levee Setback Project No: cpxxxx Project to construct approximately 880 feet of levee setback along the left bank of the Green River at the City's Fenster Nature Park property. This project is intended to improve fish habitat and create additional flood storage capacity. Project Name: Lea Hill Park Replacement Project No: cp1014 Develop a Master Plan in 2010; improve the existing trail system and install signage and play structure. Page 330 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 5 5 Federal -State -Local 1 5 1 5 REET -Other -Subtotal -2 0 -----2 0 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 20 20 Subtotal -2 0 -----2 0 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Municipal Parks Constr. Fund 138 218 1 50 1 60 200 --7 28 Cumulative Reserve Fund 5 27 4 5 -----4 5 Federal 3 58 1 50 7 9 -1 00 --3 29 Local -4 35 -----4 35 State 6 57 4 5 1 15 ----1 60 Other (Park Impact & Mitigation) -50 1 00 7 0 -50 -2 70 Other (Local Agencies) 9 10 300 1,450 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 2,150 REET 3 ,282 1 ,019 -----1 ,019 Bond Proceeds --------Other 1 ,060 16,980 6 5 ----17,045 Subtotal 6,932 1 9,242 1,959 330 4 00 150 100 22,181 Capital Costs: Design 2 ,365 2 ,855 -----2 ,855 Property Acquisition 2 65 8 ,000 -----8 ,000 Right of Way 6 50 -------Construction 3 ,652 8 ,387 1,959 3 30 400 1 50 1 00 11,326 Subtotal 6,932 1 9,242 1,959 330 4 00 150 100 22,181 * Amounts shown in thousands Project No: cpxxxx TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS and FUNDING SOURCES -MUNICIPAL PARKS Project Name: Game Farm Park Tennis Court Improvements Project to repair root damage, replace chain link fence, add practice wall and resurface courts. Page 331 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning $0 $1,500 $3,000 $4,500 $6,000 $7,500 $9,000 $10,500 $12,000 Municipal Parks Fund Cumm Reserve Fund Federal & State Grants Other Local Agencies REET Park Impact & Mitigation Other Parks & Recreation Projects 2011 /2012 Revenue Sources (in thousands) 2012 2011 Parks & Recreation Projects Projected Capital Expenditures (in thousands) -$500 $1,500 $3,500 $5,500 $7,500 $9,500 $11,500 $13,500 $15,500 $17,500 $19,500 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 332 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 333 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 334 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning General Municipal and Community Improvement Projects Eight Community Improvement Projects totaling $8,812,200 and Long-term Debt totaling $213,200 are budgeted for 2011 and five projects totaling $415,000 and Long-term debt totaling $214,300 are budgeted for 2012. Three General Municipal Building Projects totaling $936,500 and Long-term Debt totaling $539,300 are budgeted for 2011 and two projects totaling $350,000 and Long-term Debt totaling $539,800 are budgeted for 2012. The “Community Improvement Projects” include the following: • The Annual Sidewalk Improvements Project ($180,000 in 2011 and $20,000 in 2012) is a program for sidewalk repair and improvements throughout the City. • The Traffic Calming Improvements Project ($200,000 in both 2011 and 2012) will use various treatments to slow and reduce traffic in residential areas. • The Traffic Signal Improvements Project ($175,000 in both 2011 and 2012) is a program for signal equipment and intersection improvements. • The City Hall Plaza Project ($585,800 in 2011) is for the redevelopment of the City Hall Plaza into a Town Center Plaza for the area which will provide a public square with improved aesthetics for people to gather. (See Map – “B”) • The Downtown Promenade Improvements Project ($7,282,500 in 2011) will fund the design, coordination, permitting and construction of downtown Promenade improvements. The Project includes water, sewer, storm and roadway improvements of Division Street between Main Street and 3rd Street SW/SE. (See Map – “C”) • The Mohawks Plastics Site Mitigation Project ($20,000 in 2011 and $10,000 in 2012) consists of developing a wetland mitigation plan and conducting construction within the Goedecke South Property in order to compensate for wetland loss on the Mohawk Plastics property. (See Map – “A”) • Local Revitalization Debt Service ($213,200 in 2011 and $214,300 in 2012) for GO Bonds issued for the Downtown Promenade Improvements. • The Citywide Wayfinding Signage Project ($61,000 in 2011) will install vehicular guidance signs throughout the City that provide direction to common city destinations. The project will also install kiosks in the downtown area to provide directions guidance for pedestrians. • The Mill Creek Restoration Project ($94,700 in 2011 and $10,000 in 2012) is a restoration project that includes invasive species removal, stream channel restoration for improved conveyance and habitat, and native plantings along Mill Creek. Project includes design evaluation and potential capacity improvements at the 15th Street NW road culvert for Mill Creek. The “General Municipal Building Projects” include the following: • Construction of an M&O Vehicle Bay and Storage Building ($60,000 in 2011 and $100,000 2012) (See Map – “D”) • Construction of a Vehicle Maintenance Bay ($250,000 in 2011 and 2012) (See Map – “E”) • City Hall HVAC System Upgrade Project ($626,500 in 2011) • City Hall Annex Debt Service ($539,300 in 2011 and $539,300 in 2012) Page 335 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Improvement Fund 328 2 25 1 80 20 1 80 20 1 80 20 600 Federal -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 2 25 180 2 0 180 2 0 180 2 0 6 00 Capital Costs: Design 10 2 1 0 2 10 2 3 6 Right of Way -Construction 2 25 170 18 1 70 18 170 18 5 64 Subtotal 2 25 180 2 0 180 2 0 180 2 0 6 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund -Federal -State -Local -REET -Other (Redflex) 6 43 200 200 200 200 200 200 1,200 Subtotal 6 43 2 00 2 00 200 2 00 2 00 2 00 1,200 Capital Costs: Design 6 7 20 20 20 20 20 20 120 Right of Way -Construction 5 76 180 180 1 80 180 180 180 1,080 Subtotal 6 43 2 00 2 00 200 2 00 2 00 2 00 1,200 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund -Federal -State -Local -REET 1 75 1 75 175 1 75 175 175 1 75 1,050 Other -Subtotal 175 175 175 175 175 175 175 1,050 Capital Costs: Design 10 10 10 1 0 10 10 10 60 Right of Way -Construction 165 165 165 1 65 165 165 165 9 90 Subtotal 175 175 175 175 175 175 175 1,050 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Annual Sidewalk Improvements Project will fund sidewalk improvements to a variety of locations throughout the city. A sidewalk inventory was completed in 2004. Annual projects are selected based upon criteria such as: gap closure, safe walking routes to schools, completion of downtown pedestrian corridor or "linkage", connectivity to transit services, ADA requirements, and "Save our Streets" (SOS) project locations. Project No: cpxxxx Project Name: Traffic Calming Improvements This project includes procuring and installing traffic signal equipment upgrades for existing signals as well as safety/capacity improvements for existing and/or new signals. The City uses accident and traffic count data to identify intersections in need if improvements. Project No: cpxxxx The City's Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program was adopted by City Council in November of 2005. Staff receives complaints from citizens and then gathers data to confirm that a speeding issue and/or cut through traffic issue is present. This money is for physical improvements to the streets once all other options have been exhausted. Physical improvements may include items such as lighting, signing, striping, speed humps, speed tables, chicanes, traffic circles, and median treatments. Project Name: Traffic Signal Improvements Project No: cpxxxx Page 336 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Local Revitalization Fund 330 6 89 -Federal -State -Local -REET -Other (GO Bond) 1 ,215 5 86 5 86 Subtotal 1,904 5 86 -----5 86 Capital Costs: Design 3 88 -Right of Way -Construction 1 ,516 5 86 5 86 Subtotal 1,904 5 86 -----5 86 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Local Revitalization Fund 330 -Federal 4 56 2 ,544 2 ,544 State -Local -REET -Other (GO Bond) 7 44 4 ,739 4 ,739 Subtotal 1,200 7,283 -----7,283 Capital Costs: Design 1,200 1 31 1 31 Right of Way -Construction 7,152 7,152 Subtotal 1,200 7,283 -----7,283 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund -Federal -State -Local -REET 1 76 -Other (Traffic Impact) 4 55 20 10 1 0 10 10 40 100 Subtotal 631 2 0 10 1 0 10 10 4 0 100 Capital Costs: Design 148 -Right of Way -Construction 4 83 20 10 1 0 10 10 40 100 Subtotal 631 2 0 10 1 0 10 10 4 0 100 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: cp0767 The project consists of developing a wetland mitigation plan and conducting construction within the Goedecke South Property owned by the Sewer Utility in order to compensate for approximately 1.6-acre wetland loss on the Mohawk Plastics property (Parcel # 1321049056). The project was approved under an existing agreement approved by Resolution No. 4196, June 2007. Project Name: Mohawks Plastic Site Mitigation Project Project No: cpxxxx The redevelopment of the City Hall Plaza into a Town Center Plaza for the area which will provide a public square with improved aesthetics for people to gather. Project Name: Downtown Promenade Improvements Project No: cpxxxx This project will fund the design, coordination, permitting and construction of Downtown Promenade improvements. Project includes storm, sewer, water and roadway improvements of Division Street between Main St and 3rd St SW/SE. Project Name: City Hall Plaza Page 337 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund -Federal -State -Local -REET 2 54 2 13 214 2 13 217 137 1 35 1 ,129 Other -Subtotal 2 54 213 214 213 217 137 135 1,129 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Long-Term Debt Service 2 54 213 214 2 13 217 137 135 1 ,129 Subtotal 2 54 213 214 213 217 137 135 1,129 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund (Non-Deptl) 3 7 -Federal 3 4 6 1 6 1 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 71 61 -----61 Capital Costs: Design 3 2 -Right of Way -Construction 3 9 61 61 Subtotal 71 61 -----61 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund (Non-Dept) 1 0 1 0 20 Federal 1 15 8 5 8 5 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 115 9 5 10 ----105 Capital Costs: Design 1 15 3 3 6 Right of Way -Construction 9 2 7 9 9 Subtotal 115 9 5 10 ----105 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 To pay debt service costs on GO bonds issued for the Downtown Promenade Improvements. Local Revitalization financing is a credit on the State's portion of sales tax that the City will receive over the next 25 years. Project Name: Mill Creek Restoration Project No: cp0716 Stream restoration project that includes invasive species removal, stream channel restoration for improved conveyance and habitat, and native plantings along Mill Creek between Main Street and stream crossing at SR 167. Project includes design evaluation and potential capacity improvements at the 15th Street NW road culvert for Mill Creek. Project Name: Citywide Wayfinding Signage Project No: cp0616 The Citywide Wayfinding Signage project has installed vehicular guidance signs throughout the City that provide direction to common city destinations. The project will also install kiosks in the downtown area to provide directional guidance for pedestrians. Project Name: Local Revitalization Project No: cpxxxx Page 338 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Equipment Rental Fund 40 60 1 00 1 60 Federal -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 4 0 6 0 100 ----160 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 40 60 100 160 Subtotal 4 0 6 0 100 ----160 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: YES Anticipated Year of Completion: 2012 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Equipment Rental Fund 2 50 2 50 500 Federal -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal -2 50 2 50 ----5 00 Capital Costs: Design 2 5 2 5 Right of Way -Construction 2 25 2 50 4 75 Subtotal -2 50 2 50 ----5 00 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund -Federal -State -Local -REET 7 4 6 26 6 26 Other -Subtotal 7 4 6 26 -----6 26 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 7 4 6 26 6 26 Subtotal 7 4 6 26 -----6 26 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project No: cp0710 Add additional vehicle bay at Equipment Rental shop for heavy equipment and large vehicles to improve efficiency and remove choke points. Adding a large vehicle bay with a maintenance pit will enable us to perform inspections and maintenance on more than one large vehicle at a time, and while loaded with product, i.e. sand, water, debris, sewage. Currently several hours of work have to be undone and then repeated due to our limitations. Not only is this counterproductive, but it can be catastrophic during critical operations. Project Name: City Hall HVAC System Upgrade Project No: cp0716 Design and implementation of upgrades to the City Hall heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system. Improvements will allow for upgrades to the controls, air distribution and air handling components. It will also provide a systematic, phased implementation plan that can be put in place over the next several years. Project Name: M&O Vehicle Bay and Storage Project No: cp0711 Add three insulated vehicle bays for Vactor storage to provide year-round protection. These vehicles hold large quantities of water on board at all times enabling them to be immediately dispatched in the event of an emergency. This requires them to be protected from freezing temperatures. Draining their large tanks each day would cause a dispatch delay while refilling, that could result in extraordinary damage to public and private property in an emergency situation. Enclose existing bays to provide necessary weather protection for street sweepers, sanding, and snow plow equipment . Construct storage shed to facilitate removal of portable containers, improving space utilization and traffic flow throughout M&O. Project Name: ER&R Vehicle Maintenance Bay Page 339 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund -Federal -State -Local -REET 7 11 5 39 5 40 5 40 5 40 3 52 3 48 2 ,859 Other -Subtotal 711 5 39 5 40 540 5 40 3 52 3 48 2,859 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Long-Term Debt Service 7 11 5 39 5 40 540 5 40 3 52 3 48 2 ,859 Subtotal 711 5 39 5 40 540 5 40 3 52 3 48 2,859 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund 98 3 7 1 0 1 0 ----20 Capital Improvements Fund 328 2 25 1 80 20 1 80 20 1 80 20 600 Local Revitalization Fund 330 6 89 -------Equipment Rental Fund 550 40 3 10 3 50 ----6 60 Federal 6 05 2 ,690 -----2 ,690 State --------Local --------REET 1 ,390 1,553 9 29 928 9 32 6 64 6 58 5 ,664 Other 3 ,057 5 ,545 2 10 2 10 2 10 2 10 2 40 6 ,625 Subtotal 6,043 1 0,288 1,519 1 ,318 1,162 1,054 918 1 6,259 Capital Costs: Design 1,960 1 99 3 5 4 0 3 2 40 3 2 3 78 Right of Way --------Construction 4 ,083 10,089 1,484 1 ,278 1 ,130 1 ,014 8 86 1 5,881 Long-Term Debt Service 9 65 7 52 7 54 753 7 57 4 89 4 83 3 ,988 Subtotal 6,043 1 0,288 1,519 1 ,318 1,162 1,054 918 1 6,259 * Amounts shown in thousands Project No: cpxxxx To Pay debt service costs on Go bonds issued for the City Hall Annex. Project Name: City Hall Annex Debt Service TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS and FUNDING SOURCES -GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL PROJECTS Page 340 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning $0 $750 $1,500 $2,250 $3,000 $3,750 $4,500 $5,250 $6,000 General Fund Capital Imp Fund Equip. Rental Fund Federal Grants REET Other General Municipal & Community Projects 2011 /2012 Revenue Sources (in thousands) 2012 2011 General Municipal & Community Improvement Projects Projected Capital Expenditures (in thousands) -$500 $500 $1,500 $2,500 $3,500 $4,500 $5,500 $6,500 $7,500 $8,500 $9,500 $10,500 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 341 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Page 342 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Other Proprietary Fund Projects Airport Fund: (See Map – “A”) Three capital projects totaling $126,000 are budgeted for 2011 and one capital project totaling $124,000 is budgeted for 2010. The Airport Projects included in the following: • Airport Security ($5,000 in 2011) • Hanger Repair ($50,000 in 2011) • General Repair and Maintenance projects ($71,000 in 2011 and $124,000 in 2012) Cemetery Fund: (See Map – “B”) One capital project for general facility repair and maintenance totaling $35,000 is budgeted for 2011 and $10,000 for 2012. Golf Course Fund: • There is no capital projects currently planned for 2011/2012. Page 343 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Airport Fund 5 5 5 Federal -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 5 5 -----5 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 5 5 5 Subtotal 5 5 -----5 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: 2011 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Airport Fund 50 50 50 Federal -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 5 0 5 0 -----5 0 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 50 50 50 Subtotal 5 0 5 0 -----5 0 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $6,000 Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Airport Fund 1 20 7 1 124 9 9 9 9 231 Federal 1 66 166 166 1 66 6 64 State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 120 71 124 175 175 175 175 8 95 Capital Costs: Design 12 10 8 1 8 18 18 18 90 Right of Way -Construction 108 61 1 16 1 57 157 157 157 8 05 Subtotal 120 71 124 175 175 175 175 8 95 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Project Name: Airport Security Projects Increased security has been identified as one of the highest priority needs for the airport in the 2005 Development Plan. Project No: cp0713 Project Name: Hangar Header Beam Evaluation, Repair and Replacement Various Airport projects will be identified and prioritized on an annual basis as grant funding is secured. Project No: cp0717 Evaluate and structurally test suspected failing header beams on hangars 2 through 8. Once the headers are identified, they will be prioritized and scheduled for replacement. Following evaluation, repair and/or replacement will begin. Those beams in the worst condition will be repaired and/or replaced first, proceeding with less critical repairs. Project Name: General Repairs and Maintenance Project No: cpxxxx Page 344 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Airport Fund 1 75 126 124 9 9 9 9 2 86 Federal ---1 66 166 1 66 1 66 6 64 State --------Local --------REET --------Other --------Subtotal 175 126 124 175 175 175 175 9 50 Capital Costs: Design 1 2 1 0 8 1 8 1 8 1 8 1 8 90 Right of Way --------Construction 163 1 16 1 16 1 57 157 1 57 1 57 8 60 Subtotal 175 126 124 175 175 175 175 9 50 * Amounts shown in thousands TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS and FUNDING SOURCES -AIRPORT Capacity Project: NO Anticipated Year of Completion: Beyond 2016 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Cemetery Fund 20 3 5 1 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 15 Federal -State -Local -REET -Other -Subtotal 2 0 3 5 10 40 10 10 10 115 Capital Costs: Design -Right of Way -Construction 20 3 5 10 40 10 10 10 1 15 Subtotal 2 0 3 5 10 40 10 10 10 115 Anticipated Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Annual Maintenance Cost): $0 Prior Budget Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2011-16 Funding Sources: Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Cemetery Fund 20 3 5 1 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 15 Federal --------State --------Local --------REET --------Other (Bond Proceeds) --------Subtotal 2 0 3 5 10 40 10 10 10 115 Capital Costs: Design --------Right of Way --------Construction 20 3 5 1 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 15 Subtotal 2 0 3 5 10 40 10 10 10 115 * Amounts shown in thousands TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS and FUNDING SOURCES -CEMETERY Project Name: Cemetery Facilities -General Repair & Maintenance Project No: cp436a New Development (2011) -35K for Memory Heights new development, rock wall and expansion of ForestWalk. Repairs and Maintenance (2013) 30K Failed storm drainage system. (2012 -2016) -Columbarium niche caps 10K Page 345 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VII: Capital Planning $0 $50 $100 $150 $200 Airport Fund Cemetery Fund Other Proprietary Fund Projects 2011 /2012 Revenue Sources (in thousands) 2011 2012 Other Proprietary Fund Projects Projected Capital Expenditures (in thousands) $0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 346 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Section VIII – Appendices Page 347 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Page 348 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices APPENDIX A POSITION SALARY SCHEDULE The following pages in this appendix detail the compensation ranges for all City of Auburn employees, both affiliated and non-affiliated. The amounts listed include only base salaries, excluding benefits such as retirement, health insurance, etc. Minimum Maximum Mayor N/A $123,964.32 Council members N/A $11,700.00 Deputy Mayor N/A $16,500.00 Municipal Court Judge N/A $141,708.00 Elected Officials Minimum Maximum City Attorney $115,918.56 $142,493.52 Finance Director $115,918.56 $142,493.52 Information Services Director $115,918.56 $142,493.52 Human Resources/Risk Management Director $115,918.56 $142,493.52 Parks, Art and Recreation Director $115,918.56 $142,493.52 Planning and Building Director $115,918.56 $142,493.52 Police Chief N/A $146,500.08 Public Works Director $115,918.56 $142,493.52 Department Directors Page 349 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices POSITION SALARY SCHEDULE Auburn Police Department The police department has both affiliated and unaffiliated positions. The charts on this page represent the positions organized by the bargaining units. Wages reflected here are base wages only and do not include longevity, education or other premiums. Contract periods are listed below each chart. All unaffiliated positions under the direction of the Chief of Public Safety are included with all of the City’s unaffiliated positions later in this appendix. Minimum Maximum Police Commander N/A $111,266.40 Commanders Contract Period: January 2008 – December 2010 with 2 year roll over Memorandum of Understanding for 2011 – 2012. Minimum Maximum Police Officer $57,641.52 $72,890.40 Police Sergeant N/A $84,843.84 Commissioned Contract Period: January 2008 – December 2010 New collective bargaining agreement has not been negotiated at publication of this budget. The figures contained herein are 2010 salaries that will be continued in 2011 until a new collective bargaining agreement has been reached. Minimum Maximum Evidence/Identification Technician $46,238.64 $57,046.56 Parking Control Attendant $37,730.16 $47,532.24 Police Services Specialist $39,426.96 $49,668.72 Police Services Supervisor $46,476.72 $57,340.56 Non-Commissioned Contract Period: January 2008 – December 2010 with 2 year roll over Memorandum of Understanding for 2011 – 2012. Page 350 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices POSITION SALARY SCHEDULE Other affiliated positions within the City are represented by Teamster Local No. 117. As with some of the nonaffiliated positions, the positions classified below may have positions in more than one department. Minimum Maximum Building Technician $49,163.28 $64,695.60 Electrician $51,086.40 $67,226.40 Maintenance Specialist $52,364.16 $59,986.56 Maintenance Worker I $41,965.20 $51,376.32 Maintenance Worker II $49,604.88 $57,124.56 Mechanic $52,364.16 $59,986.56 Meter Reader $37,729.44 $46,192.08 Outside Workers Contract Period: January 2008 – December 2010 with 2 year roll over Memorandum of Understanding for 2011 – 2012. Minimum Maximum Custodian $35,515.20 $41,865.12 Custodian Lead $40,842.48 $48,144.96 Court Clerk I $37,889.04 $45,993.84 Court Clerk II $42,937.44 $51,183.12 Court Clerk Lead $49,443.60 $58,938.48 Court Collections Clerk $42,937.44 $51,183.12 Courthouse Clerical and Custodian Unit Contract Period: January 2008 – December 2010 with 2 year roll over Memorandum of Understanding for 2011 – 2012. Page 351 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices POSITION SALARY SCHEDULE Minimum Maximum Accountant $52,632.00 $64,728.72 Accounting Assistant $39,983.28 $48,921.84 Accounting Specialist $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Administrative Services & Business Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Arts & Events Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Arts Coordinator $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Assistant Chief of Police N/A $128,627.20 Assistant Chief of Police N/A $127,344.00 Assistant City Attorney $90,737.28 $111,539.52 Building Division Manager $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Building Inspector $58,317.36 $71,685.60 Cemetery Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 City Clerk $63,339.36 $77,861.28 City Engineer/Asst Public Works Director $104,549.04 $128,517.60 City Prosecutor $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Civil Engineer -Utilities $70,713.60 $86,924.64 Codes Compliance Officer $58,317.36 $71,685.60 Community Service Crew Leader (PT) $25,896.00 $31,836.48 Community Services Manager $79,071.60 $97,200.00 Construction Inspector $58,317.36 $71,685.60 Construction Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Contract Administration Specialist $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Court & Probation Services Administrator $73,471.92 $90,314.40 Court & Probation Services Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Curator of Collections (PT) $23,826.40 $29,286.40 Curator of Education $52,632.00 $64,728.72 Customer Care Representative -Utilities $39,983.28 $48,921.84 Customer Care Supervisor -Utilities $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Department Secretary $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Deputy City Clerk $52,632.00 $64,728.72 Desktop Support Specialist $54,736.80 $67,286.64 Development Administration Specialist $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Development Engineer $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Development Review Engineer $70,713.60 $86,924.64 Development Services Manager $90,737.28 $111,539.52 Domestic Violence Victim Advocate $52,632.00 $64,728.72 Emergency Preparedness Manager $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Employee Relations & Compensation Manager $90,737.28 $111,539.52 Engineering Aide $54,736.80 $67,286.64 Engineering Design Tech $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Engineering Survey Tech $54,736.80 $67,286.64 Environmental Planner $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Environmental Protection Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Non-Affiliated Employees Page 352 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices POSITION SALARY SCHEDULE Minimum Maximum Executive Assistant to the Mayor $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Facilities Manager $73,471.92 $90,314.40 Facilities Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Financial Analyst $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Financial Planning Manager $90,737.28 $111,539.52 Financial Services Manager $104,549.04 $128,517.60 GIS & Data Integration Manager $70,713.60 $86,924.64 GIS & Database Specialist $54,736.80 $67,286.64 Golf Operations Assistant $39,983.28 $48,921.84 Golf Professional $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Government Relations Manager $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Greens Superintendent $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Human Resources Assistant $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Human Resources Coordinator $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Lead City Prosecutor $73,471.92 $90,314.40 Legal Assistant $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Maintenance & Operations Manager $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Maintenance & Operations Support Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Multimedia Assistant (PT) $18,075.20 $22,027.20 Multimedia Video Technician $54,736.80 $67,286.64 Museum Director $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Neighborhood Programs Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Network Administrator $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Network Communications Engineer $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Network Engineer $70,713.60 $86,924.64 Office Assistant $39,983.28 $48,921.84 Paralegal $52,632.00 $64,728.72 Parks Maintenance Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Payroll & Accounting Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Payroll Specialist $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Permit Technician $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Planner $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Planning Manager $79,071.60 $97,200.00 Plans Examiner $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Police Records Manager $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Principal Planner $73,471.92 $90,314.40 Probation Assistant $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Probation Counselor $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Program Specialist $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Project Assistant $43,158.96 $53,054.40 Project/Construction Manager $79,071.60 $97,200.00 Project Engineer $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Project Surveyor $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Non-Affiliated Employees (cont.) Page 353 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices POSITION SALARY SCHEDULE Minimum Maximum Public Affairs Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Records Clerk $43,158.96 $53,054.40 Recreation Program Coordinator $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Recreation Programs Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Registration Clerk/Office Assistant $39,983.28 $48,921.84 Risk Manager $90,737.28 $111,539.52 Sanitary Sewer Utility Engineer $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Senior Accountant $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Senior Center Assistant (PT) $18,075.20 $22,027.20 Senior Center Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Senior Construction Coordinator $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Senior Planner $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Sewer Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Sewer/Storm Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Solid Waste Customer Care Specialist $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Solid Waste & Recycling Coordinator $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Special Events Coordinator $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Storm Drainage Technician $58,317.36 $71,685.60 Storm Drainage Utility Engineer $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Storm Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Street Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Street Systems Engineer (SOS) $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Street/Vegetation Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Support Clerk $39,983.28 $48,921.84 Survey Party Chief $58,317.36 $71,685.60 Survey Supervisor $73,471.92 $90,314.40 Systems Analyst $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Teen Coordinator $58,317.12 $71,685.60 Theater Operations Specialist $47,649.39 $58,574.60 Traffic Engineer $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Traffic Operations Engineer $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Traffic Operations Technician $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Traffic Signal Technician $58,317.36 $71,685.60 Transportation Planner $70,713.60 $86,924.64 Transportation Planner/Grants Manager $70,713.60 $86,924.64 Utilities & Accounting Services Manager $79,071.60 $97,200.00 Utilities Engineer $90,737.28 $111,539.52 Utilities Technician $47,649.36 $58,574.40 Vegetation Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Water Distribution Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Water Manager $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Water Operations Supervisor $63,339.36 $77,861.28 Water Quality Program Coordinator $67,994.16 $83,581.20 Non-Affiliated Employees (cont.) Page 354 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices POSITION SALARY SCHEDULE Minimum Maximum Water Resources Technician $58,317.36 $71,685.60 Water Utility Engineer $80,653.20 $99,144.00 Web Specialist $58,317.36 $71,685.60 Non-Affiliated Employees (cont.) Page 355 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Page 356 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices History of Auburn The city of Auburn, located 20 miles south of Seattle, was home to some of the earliest white settlers in King County. Nestled in a fertile river valley, Auburn has been both a farm community and a center of business and industry for more than 150 years. Auburn is located near the original confluence of the Green and White rivers, both of which contain runoff water from the Cascade Mountain range. The valley was originally the home of the Skopamish, Smalhkamish, and Stkamish Indian tribes. The first white men in the region were explorers and Auburn Hardware Store, 1915, White River Valley Museum traders who arrived in the 1830s. Settlers first came to the valley in the 1850s. On October 27, 1855, an Indian ambush killed nine people, including women and children. In November, a military unit led by Lieutenant William Slaughter camped near what is now present-day Auburn. On December 4, 1855, a group of Indians attacked, killing Lt. Slaughter Slaughter and two other men. A new treaty was written which provided the establishment of the Muckleshoot reservation, which is the only Indian reservation now within the boundaries of King County. The White River tribes collectively became known as the Muckleshoot tribe. White settlers, the Neely and Ballard families began returning to the area. In 1891, the town of Slaughter incorporated. Although many older citizens considered the town’s name as a memorial, many newer residents understandably felt uncomfortable with it. Within two years, the town was renamed Auburn, taken from the first line of Oliver Goldsmith’s poem, The Deserted Village: “Sweet Auburn! Loveliest village of the plain.” Auburn had been a bustling center for hop farming until 1890 when the crops were destroyed by aphids. After that, the farms were mostly dairy farms and berry farms. Nevertheless, flooding was still a problem for Auburn farmers up until the Howard Hanson Dam was built in 1962. This dam on the Green River, along with the Mud Mountain Dam on the White River, provided controlled river management, which left the valley nearly flood-free. Another impetus to Auburn’s growth was the railroad. The Northern Pacific Railroad put a rail line through town in 1883, but it was the Seattle-Tacoma Interurban line that allowed easy access to both cities starting in 1902. The Interurban allowed farmers to get their product to the markets within hours after harvest. The railroad, along with better roads, caused many new companies to set up business in Auburn, among them the Borden Condensery (which made Borden’s Condensed Milk) and the Northern Clay Company. Auburn grew through the twentieth century like many American towns. The 1920s were prosperous for citizens, but the Great Depression of the 1930s left many in need. World War II brought great hardship to many local Japanese farmers when they were moved to internment camps and their land taken from them. At the same time, local boys were sent to fight in the Pacific, and some died in battle. The postwar era was prosperous to Auburn, bringing more businesses and a community college to the city. In 1963, The Boeing Company built a large facility to mill sheet metal skin for jet airliners. As time went on, many farms disappeared as the land was converted to industrial use. In the 1990s, a large super-mall was built in the valley, enticing consumers from all over the Puget Sound region. Auburn has made the transition from small farms to large industries, but much of the city’s history remains. A monument in the memory of Lieutenant Slaughter, erected in 1918, still stands in a local park. The Neely Mansion, built by the son of a pioneer in 1891, has been refurbished and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Auburn’s downtown still maintains a “Main Street U.S.A” appearance. Sources: Clarence B. Bagley, History of King County (Chicago: S. J. Clarke Publishing Co, 1929) Vol. 1, 712-727. Also see: Josephine Emmons Vine, Auburn – A Look Down Main Street (City of Auburn, 1990). Page 357 3572011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices About Auburn For over 100 years the city of Auburn has been providing visitors and residents with the opportunity to discover why this town is like no other. Auburn is the land of two rivers, home to two nations and spread across two counties. Located between Seattle and Tacoma in the shadow of Mt. Rainier, Auburn is the perfect place to work, play and spend a lifetime. It is a warm, embracing community where people still stop to say hello. Auburn is a community rich in history where you’ll find new businesses mingling with old and a historic downtown getting acquainted with a new, modern facade. Auburn is strategically close to Seattle and Tacoma Auburn is centrally located between Seattle and Tacoma in the heart of the Green River Valley with easy access to the best of both cities. Auburn is a quick 30 minute drive to all Seattle has to offer and more, and a 20 minute drive to Tacoma. Amenities like Pike Place Market, Benaroya Hall, Seattle Art Museum and Tacoma Chihuly Museum of Glass are all within easy reach. Sustainable Business Prices Auburn, with its close proximity and all the advantages of Seattle and Tacoma, still has sustainable business prices. And although there is an influx of people into the Auburn community, housing prices are still affordable. Mt. Rainier and Outdoor Lifestyle Auburn is about one hour from Mt. Rainier, Crystal Mountain and Snoqualmie Ski Area. It is also home to several biking and walking trails, including the White and Green River trails and the Interurban Trail. Auburn has approximately 30 parks of all sizes for the whole family to enjoy. There are three golf courses in Auburn: the Auburn Golf Course, Washington National Golf Club, and Jade Green Golf Course & Driving Range. Education Auburn has reason to be proud of its schools. They pride themselves in providing an excellent education that produces students who have a love of learning and a sense of responsibility. Auburn boasts over two dozen elementary, middle, and high schools, each one unique, but all offering a supportive learning environment designed to foster each student’s natural abilities. Green River Community College, the city’s “Harvard on the Hill,” provides the serious student a quiet, natural environment in which to study. This is a community that puts learning and education first. Urban Transportation Take the Sounder Train to Seattle. Avoid the traffic and rest, read or log onto your laptop as you take the 20 minute ride from Auburn to Seattle to work, shop, or do business. Sound Transit recently added another train and has seven morning and seven evening trains traveling from Auburn into Seattle and back. Eventually, there will be nine trains in the morning and nine in the evening. With South King County’s rapid growth, morning trains from Seattle to Auburn will be added soon. Sense of Community in Historic Downtown Come establish a sense of community in one of the oldest cities in the state of Washington. With unique architecture, combined with historic preservation and renovations, Auburn has retained the look and feel of a real downtown. Auburn’s unique historic downtown still provides a gathering place for numerous events. Page 358 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices ARTS AND CULTURE City of Auburn Arts Commission Founded in 1985, the City of Auburn Arts Commission fosters cultural and economic growth in Auburn through its various arts and education programs, including a growing public art collection, the City Hall Gallery and the Cheryl Sallee Gallery at the Senior Activity Center featuring emerging regional artists, and the popular BRAVO Performing Arts Series, presenting national and internationally acclaimed touring shows, from dance, theatre and music to amazing circus acts and children’s shows. Auburn Symphony Orchestra Auburn’s professional symphony includes 65-70 orchestra members, and has received wide press coverage for its superb performances. Auburn’s symphony ranks second only to the Seattle Symphony. The Auburn Symphony Orchestra is conducted by internationally known Stewart Kershaw, former music director of Pacific Northwest Ballet. He has conducted at the Seattle Opera House for the last twenty seasons. For more information visit www.auburnsymphony.org Auburn Performing Arts Center The Performing Arts Center is an eleven-hundred seat state-of-the-art venue conveniently located in downtown Auburn. The facility has been named in publication listings of the top acoustical halls for music performance in the nation. Auburn Avenue Theater For over 30 years, the Auburn Avenue Theater has presented a diversity of live performances, including Broadway musicals, mystery theater, children's theater, and concerts. The Douglas family, producers of the fine dinner theater featured at the Auburn Avenue Theater for over 20 years, leased the venue to the City of Auburn to continue operating as a performing arts space. In 2007, The City of Auburn reopened the venue, expanding this timehonored tradition of live, quality performing arts, variety entertainment, children's shows, dance and music, right in the heart of downtown. The theater building itself is over 80-years-old, however, the first structure to occupy the property over 100 years ago was a carriage house for horses. When the automobile replaced horses as the major mode of transportation, the building was entirely reconstructed as the city's bus depot. New owners converted it to a movie house in the 1940s and continued operating it as such until the mid-70s, when it underwent yet another conversion, this time as a performing arts theater venue. Since then, The Auburn Avenue Theater has presented 27 seasons of dinner theater, the last of its kind in Western Washington. White River Valley Museum The White River Valley Museum is a partnership with the City of Auburn and combines history and culture to create an exciting and educational experience for visitors. Museum collections focus on local Puget Sound history, Northwest Indian culture, Japanese immigration and the Northern Pacific Railroad. The White River Valley Museum is working with the City of Auburn to restore Mary Olson Farm, the most intact 1880s family farm in King County. It opened in late 2009 as a living history and environmental learning site. The farm is a King County Landmark and on the National Register of Historic Places. Significant features include an 1897 barn, a 1902 farmhouse and two salmon runs in Olson Creek. For more information visit www.wrvmuseum.org Page 359 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices WHAT’S HAPPENING IN AUBURN Year ‘Round White River Valley Museum Exhibits open Wednesday through Sunday, 12:00 to 4:00 pm. Call 253 288-7433 www.wrvmuseum.org Teen Late Night Call 253-931-3043 for dates, times and locations BRAVO Performing Arts Series September -April Auburn Performing Arts Center Call 253-931-3043 for full schedule Avenue Kids Auburn Avenue Theater Call 253-931-3043 for full schedule Comedy Night at The Ave Auburn Avenue Theater Call 253-931-3043 for full schedule Auburn Symphony Orchestra Call 253-939-8509 for concert information JANUARY Miss Auburn Scholarship Show www.missauburn.org Largest local program of Miss America in the United States. Uniquely Auburn Last Sunday of January, 2 p.m. Auburn Performing Arts Center 206-349-3061 Stories, Entertainment, Art & Poetry Show, Free Dinner FEBRUARY Daddy Daughter Date Night Senior Activity Center Call 253-931-3043 for dates and times MARCH Auburn Senior Activity Center Rummage Sale Call 253-931-3016 for dates, times or to donate APRIL City of Auburn Residential Garage Sale Call 253-931-3048 for dates, times and participation information Community Volunteer Luncheon Auburn Senior Activity Center Call 253-931-3016 for dates, times and registration information Mountainview Cemetery Sunrise Service Easter morning Call 253-931-3028 for more information MAY Tamba Kent-Auburn Sister City Dinner-Dance-Auction Auburn Senior Center Annual fundraiser for the Sister City Committee. Call 253-931-3099 for more information Auburn’s Clean Sweep A perfect opportunity to give back to your community Call 253-931-3043 for more information Auburn’s Memorial Day Service Mountainview Cemetery Call 253-931-3028 for time and more information Petpalooza Auburn’s award-winning pet-friendly event Call 253-931-3043 for dates, times and information JUNE Senior Fishing Day Mill Pond The Senior Center is hosting a Senior Fishing Derby along with the Green River Steelhead Trout Club. Call 253-931-3016 for date, times and information KidsDay Les Gove Park Day after last day of school for Auburn School District Children’s summer kickoff celebration includes entertainment, information fair, arts and crafts and other fun activities. Call 253-931-3043 for date, time and more information Page 360 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices JULY Fourth of July Festival Les Gove Park 253-931-3043 Come out and enjoy Auburn’s 4th of July Festival! Activities include a kid’s parade, games and crafts as well as bingo, a vintage car show, book sale, and free Museum admission for everyone. Summer Fun in Auburn’s Parks – call 253-931-3043 for more details Kids SummerStage, Les Gove Park, Wednesdays at 12 p.m., July – August Summer Sounds & Cinema, various parks, music begins at 7 p.m., movie at dusk Hooked on History Kids Program, Free, White River Valley Museum, 10:30 to 11:30 –call 253-288-7433 AUGUST Auburn Good Ol’ Days Downtown Auburn and various locations 253-939-3389 The annual Auburn Good Ol’ Days Festival is a community celebration that feature art, music, crafts, bocce, parade, food, entertainment, railroad display, a fun run, all-school class reunion, car show, Young Uns Square, boat display and model airplanes. SEPTEMBER Disaster Preparedness Fair Les Gove Park The City of Auburn Emergency Emergency Preparedness Division hosts this fun and informative fair to assist in educating citizens on preparing for emergencies. Call 253-876-1925 for more information Hops & Crops Festival Mary Olson Farm Call 253-288-7433 for more information OCTOBER Auburn’s S’more Than You Imagined Festival Game Farm Wilderness Park Enjoy an evening of storytelling, s’mores, and entertainment around a campfire. Call 253-931-3043 for more information Harvest Masquerade Ball Dinner and dancing fundraiser to support the educational programs at the While River Valley Museum. Call 253-288-7433 or www.wrvmuseum.org for more information Page 361 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Halloween Harvest Festival and Downtown Trick or Treating Washington Elementary and downtown Auburn Come out and celebrate with games and activities at Washington Elementary School. Then trick or treat at the shops in downtown Auburn. Call 253-931-3043 for more information NOVEMBER Auburn’s Veterans Day Observance & Parade Main Street Auburn’s annual Veterans Day observance features one of the largest sanctioned Veterans Day parade west of the Mississippi along with a static display exhibit, a luncheon, military display and flyover followed by one of the state’s largest marching band competitions. Call 253-931-3043 for more information Auburn Senior Activity Center Thanksgiving Dinner Call 253-931-3016 for more information DECEMBER Santa Parade/City Hall Tree Lighting Main St., City Hall Plaza and B St. Plaza 253-931-3043 A fun-filled parade celebrating the holidays. Parade on Main Street, immediately followed by the Tree Lighting Ceremony at City Hall. The The Optimist Santa House opens immediately following the tree lighting. Breakfast with Santa Auburn Senior Activity Center Join Santa and his elves for breakfast and special holiday entertainment. Call 253-931-3016 for registration information Auburn Senior Activity Center Holiday Dinner Call 253-931-3016 Tree of Giving Program November -December Trees with stockings at Auburn City Hall and various locations around Auburn. Gift giving for the disadvantaged and disabled in the community. Call 253-931-3043 for more information Page 362 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Pictured left to right (front row): Nancy Backus, Pete Lewis, Mayor; Sue Singer, Deputy Mayor. (back row): Virginia Haugen, Rich Wagner, Lynn Norman, John Partridge, Bill Peloza. Elected Official Local Involvement Regional/National Involvement Mayor Pete Lewis Chair of Valley Regional Fire Authority Board, Valley Communications Center and Auburn Noon Lions Club US Conference of Mayor's Standing Committees: Transportation Communications and Tourism, Arts, Parks & Entertainment, Suburban Cities Association PIC member, PRSC Executive Board & Operations Board, Green River Flood Control District, South King County Transportation Committee, Chair of King County Regional Policy Committee & Caucus Chair, Pierce County Cities & Towns, Chair Association of Washington Cities Sub Committee on Transportation, SCORE, SEARCH & Valley Cities Deputy Mayor Sue Singer Deputy Mayor, Chair of Committee of the Whole, Vice Chair of Committee on Committees, Vice Chair Municipal Services, Member of Downtown Redevelopment, Chair of Auburn Tourism Board, Lodging Tax Advisory Board, Soroptimist International of Auburn Puget Sound Regional Council Economic Development District Policy Board, Transportation Priorities Task Force, Alternate to South King County Transportation Committee Councilmember Nancy Backus Chair of Finance Committee, Vice Chair Planning & Community Development Committee, Vice Chair of Downtown Redevelopment Committee and Member of Committee on Committees, Valley Regional Fire Authority Board and President of the Miss Auburn Scholarship Program NLC Finance, Administration & Governmental Relations (FAIR) Policy Committee, Pierce County Regional Council, JDA (Joint Determining Authority) Pierce County Councilmember Virginia Haugen Public Works Committee, LEOFF Board Councilmember Lynn Norman Chair Planning & Community Development Committee, Vice Chair Finance Committee, Chair of Downtown Redevelopment Committee, Community Center Committee, LEOFF Board, President of GRCC Foundation, Secretary of the Pediatric Interim Care Center (PICC) and Trillium Board Puget Sound Regional Council’s Growth Management Policy Board and Transportation Prioritization Committee; JDA (Joint Determining Authority) Pierce County Councilmember John Partridge Planning & Community Development Committee, Municipal Services, Auburn Noons Lions Club, Sons of Italy chapter Regional Law, Safety and Justice Committee Councilmember Bill Peloza Chair of Municipal Services Committee, Vice Chair of Public Works, Les Gove Community Campus, Auburn Farmer’s Market representative, Auburn Airport Advisory Board, Auburn Rotary Club, Sons of Italy chapter King County’s Metropolitan Regional Water Quality Caucus Chair, Solid Waste Advisory Committee, Water Pollution Abatement and Green/Duwamish & Central Puget Sound Watershed (WIRA 9) and Watershed Ecosystem Forum Co-Chair, National League of Cities, Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Steering Committee, KC Flood Control District Councilmember Rich Wagner Chair of Public Works Committee, Finance Committee, Chair of Les Gove Community Campus Committee, Chair of Council Operations, Valley Regional Fire Authority, Arts Commission Pierce County Puyallup River Watershed, Regional Access & Mobility Project (RAMP), Lake Tapps Task Force, King County Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee, JDA (Joint Determining Authority) Pierce County The Mayor and the Auburn City Councilmembers are serving locally, regionally and nationally in the following organizations: Page 363 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Peter B. Lewis, Mayor 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001-4998 Web Page: www.auburnwa.gov City of Auburn Council Meetings & Member Information City Council meetings are held the first and third Mondays of each month at 7:30 pm in the City of Auburn Council Chambers, 25 West Main. If Monday is a holiday, the meeting is then held Tuesday. Term Pos Expires # MAYOR 12/31/2013 Peter B. Lewis plewis@auburnwa.gov (253) 833-2409 CITY COUNCIL 12/31/2013 6 Rich Wagner rwagner@auburnwa.gov (253) 261-3263 12/31/2011 1 Sue Singer ssinger@auburnwa.gov (253) 939-6180 12/31/2013 4 Nancy Backus nbackus@auburnwa.gov (253) 887-1292 12/31/2011 3 Bill Peloza bpeloza@auburnwa.gov (253) 939-1478 12/31/2011 7 Lynn Norman lnorman@auburnwa.gov (253) 833-4991 12/31/2011 5 Virginia Haugen vhaugen@auburnwa.gov (253) 261-1991 12/31/2013 2 John Partridge jpartridge@auburnwa.gov (253) 804-8671 Councilmembers are listed in order of tenure. Name E-Mail Address Home Phone Sue Singer is the Mayor Pro Tem and alternate to all Council Committees. Councilmembers are listed above in order of tenure. Sue Singer is the Deputy Mayor and alternate to all Council Committees. Auburn City Council Standing Committees Committee Meeting Time Members Date & Location Finance 6:00 p.m. *Nancy Backus Rm 1, 2nd Fl, City Hall Annex **Lynn Norman 1st & 3rd Monday Rich Wagner of Each Month Municipal Services *Bill Peloza Conference Room #3, City Hall 3:30 p.m. **Sue Singer 2nd & 4th Monday John Partridge of Each Month Planning & Community Development *Lynn Norman Rm 2, 2nd Fl, City Hall Annex 5:00 p.m. **Nancy Backus 2nd & 4th Monday John Partridge of Each Month Public Works *Rich Wagner Rm 2, 2nd Fl, City Hall Annex 3:30 p.m. **Bill Peloza 1st & 3rd Monday Virginia Haugen of Each Month Page 364 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Les Gove Community Campus Committee *Rich Wagner As needed/called by the Chair ** Lynn Norman Bill Peloza Downtown Redevelopment Committee *Lynn Norman Rm 2, 2nd Fl, City Hall Annex 4:00 p.m. **Nancy Backus 2nd & 4th Tuesday Sue Singer of Each Month Council Operations Committee *Rich Wagner As needed/called by the Chair **Sue Singer Nancy Backus * Chairman **Vice Chairman Page 365 2011-2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices WHO TO CALL City Government: Mayor’s Office 253-931-3041 City Attorney’s Office 253-931-3030 Communications & Community Relations 253-931-4009 Finance Department 253-931-3033 Human Resources and Risk Management 253-931-3040 Information Services 253-804-5078 Parks, Arts and Recreation 253-931-3043 Planning, Building and Community 253-931-3090 Public Works 253-931-3010 Public Safety Fire Department(Valley Regional Fire Authority) 253-931-3060 Municipal Court 253-931-3076 Police Department 253-931-3080 Detention Facility 253-931-3085 City Resources Airport 253-333-6821 Cemetery 253-931-3028 Golf Course 253-833-2350 Museum 253-288-7433 Senior Center 253-931-3016 Community Resources: Auburn Chamber of Commerce 253-833-0700 Auburn Downtown Association 253-939-3982 Auburn School District 253-931-4900 Animal Control 206-296-7387 Drivers’ Licensing 253-931-3940 Employment Security 253-833-0102 Food Bank 253-833-8925 General Services Administration 253-931-7000 King County Justice Center Kent Location 206-205-2501 King County Tax Assessor 206-296-7300 Language Line 1-800-823-1786 Library 253-931-3018 Post Office 253-333-1377 Puget Sound Energy 1-888-225-5773 Waste Management (Residential) 253-833-3333 SuperMall 253-833-9500 Vehicle Registration 253-833-9696 Voter Registration 206-296-8683 Page 366 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices COMMUNITY STATISTICS This section of the budget contains a synopsis of data regarding the Auburn community. This data is presented both to provide background information to the reader and to add insight to some of the budget goals and policies addressed in this document. Date of Incorporation June 13, 1891 Form of Government Mayor-Council Type of Government Non-Charter Code City Population 68,270 Rank in Size -Washington State 14th Assessed Valuation $7,809,499,809 Area 29.83 Square Miles Auburn Median Age 36 Years Old Registered Voters 31,043 Miles of Streets 598 Miles Number of Stations (4 in Auburn, 1 in Pacific) 6 Number of Commissioned Fire Fighting Personnel 107 Number of Non-Commissioned Personnel 13 Total Number of Personnel and Firefighters 120 Fire Responses 246 Emergency Medical Service Responses 6,799 All Other Responses 2,203 Total Number of Responses 9,248 Number of Stations/Precincts 2 Number of Commissioned Police Personnel 100 Number of Non-Commissioned Personnel 30 Total Number of Personnel and Officers 130 Number of Calls for Service (2010 estimated) 73,000 WATER SERVICE Basic Service Charge $9.71/Month Commodity Rate: 0-7 $1.93/ccf 7.01-15 $2.36/ccf 15.01-9999 $2.67/ccf Total Water Customers 13,372 Gallons of Water Produced 2,788,042,000 Average Daily Consumption 7.64 million Gallons Miles of Water Main 267 Miles 2010 INFORMATION FIRE PROTECTION Beginning January 1, 2007, the Valley Regional Fire Authority began providing fire protection services for the Cities of Auburn, Algona and Pacific. POLICE PROTECTION 2010 Utility Rates: Reduced rates for low-income senior citizens and disabled persons available. Page 367 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices City Sewer -Single Family Residence $12.15/Month Metro Sewer -Single Family Residence $31.90/Month Total Sanitary Sewer Customers 13,531 Sanitary Sewers 189 Miles Single Family Residence $14.18/Month Number of Accounts 16,252 Storm Pipes 226 Miles 1 can (32 gal)/week, curbside $11.30/Month Number of Residential Accounts 14,403 BUSINESS LICENSES Fee per Year $50 Business Licenses Issued 3,584 VALUE OF BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN 2010 $46,716,673 Developed Park Acreage 251 Total Park Acreage 602 Number of Developed Parks 36 Number of Cemetery Interments 280 Number of Rounds Played (Golf Course) 55,220 Athletic Teams 439 Recreation Activities 3,457 Senior Center Visits 41,350 Cultural Arts & Major Special Events 101 Audience Served by Cultural Arts & Major Special Events 79,222 Museum Audience Served 12,570 State 6.50% King County Metro 0.60% Transit and Traffic Congestion (effective 4/1/01) 0.30% RTA (effective 4/1/09) 0.90% City of Auburn Local Option 1.00% City of Auburn Local Option-Criminal Justice 0.10% King County Option 0.10% TOTAL SALES TAX RATE 9.50% ____________________________________________ Sources: City of Auburn GIS, Finance, Building, Fire, Police, Parks & Recreation Departments, King & Pierce County Elections Office, and WA State Office of Financial Management PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE SALES TAX RATE: SEWER STORM SOLID WASTE (Contracted Services) Page 368 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices 0 15,000 30,000 45,000 60,000 75,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Population, Housing and School Enrollment Population Housing Units Enrollment 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 School Enrollment (1) 14,185 14,519 14,716 14,589 14,482 Rate of Unemployment (2) 4.9% 4.5% 5.7% 8.4% 8.7% Population (3) 48,955 50,470 67,005 67,485 68,270 Housing Units (4) One Unit 9,402 9,625 14,186 14,235 14,333 Two or More 8,943 9,623 10,375 10,391 10,426 Mobile Home or Special 2,377 2,382 2,761 2,782 2,794 Total Housing Units 20,722 21,630 27,322 27,408 27,553 Source: (1) Auburn School District No. 48 (2) U.S. Department of Labor (3) WA State Office of Financial Management (4) WA State Office of Financial Management Population, Housing and School Enrollment Trends Page 369 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 (Thousands) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Retail Tax Collections Wholesaling Contracting Services Retail Trade Automotive Manufacturing Other Business Transportation Sales Tax Collections by Sector (in thousands) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 8 74 8 99 8 73 781 7 52 3,428 3,643 3 ,255 2,559 2 ,553 5 94 615 521 358 3 89 3 44 378 3 60 352 3 54 3 16 306 3 23 228 2 36 551 5 30 4 83 3 52 315 9 41 974 8 72 833 801 7 53 1,170 1,062 676 7 43 7,802 8,515 7,749 6,140 6 ,142 2,779 3,128 3,107 2,867 3 ,310 2,453 2,240 1,647 1,368 1 ,322 486 625 643 383 411 2 6 23 76 31 2 9 2,571 2,943 2,306 1,073 1 ,180 73 143 72 46 1 28 $ 1 6,189 $ 17,617 $ 15,600 $ 11,909 $ 12,522 Source: Retail Trade Auto & Gas General Merchandise Building Material Food Stores Apparel Furniture & Electronics Contracting Non-Store Retailers Miscellaneous Retail Trade Retail Trade Grand Total Services Manufacturing Transportation Wholesaling Other Business City of Auburn Finance Department Actual receipts Jan-Dec Page 370 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices 0 20,000,000 40,000,000 60,000,000 80,000,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Construction Activity By Value Commercial Residential Building Permits and Construction Values Year Permits Value Permits Value 2006 41 45,723,019 284 60,659,482 2007 32 24,421,841 351 65,743,944 2008 40 22,886,856 165 27,048,110 2009 36 46,743,035 124 23,227,980 2010 18 8,386,343 206 38,330,330 Source: City of Auburn Building Division Commercial Building Residential Building Page 371 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices $2.87 $13.05 $2.73 $12.23 $1.48 $11.26 $1.49 $10.97 $1.82 $12.60 $0.00 $3.00 $6.00 $9.00 $12.00 $15.00 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 PROPERTY TAX LEVY AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION (King County portion of Auburn) City of Auburn Auburn School District King County Ferry District Washington State Port of Seattle Valley Regional Fire Authority(VRFA)* Library Emergency Medical Services Property Tax Levy 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ % City of Auburn $ 2.87 $ 2.73 $ 1.48 $ 1.49 $ 1.82 $ 0.34 23% Auburn School District 5.37 4.95 4.41 4.38 5.09 0.71 16% King County 1.33 1.29 1.21 1.10 1.28 0.19 17% Ferry District --0.055 0.05 0.003 -0.047 100% Washington State 2.50 2.32 2.13 1.96 2.22 0.26 13% Port of Seattle 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.20 0.22 0.02 9% Valley Regional Fire Authority(VRFA)* n/a n/a 1.00 1 .11 1.18 0.07 6% Library 0.53 0.50 0.45 0.42 0.49 0.07 16% Emergency Medical Services 0.22 0.21 0.30 0.27 0.30 0.03 9% Total Levy Rate $ 13.05 $ 12.23 $ 1 1.26 $ 10.97 $ 12.60 $ 1.63 15% Auburn % to Total Levy 21.99% 22.32% 13.15% 13.55% 14.47% Demographic Information (King & Pierce County) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ % Assessed Valuation(in 000's) $ 5 ,099,795 $ 5 ,759,528 $ 6 ,526,967 $ 8,713,853 $ 7,809,500 $ (904,353) -10% Average Homeowner Assessed Value $ 2 17,100 $ 230,300 $ 259,000 $ 213,900 $ 202,600 $ (11,300) -5% City Tax on an Average Home $ 6 22 $ 6 29 $ 3 84 $ 317 $ 301 $ (17) -5% Population 4 8,955 50,470 67,005 6 7,485 68,270 785 1% Add'l Population from Annexation 6 0 15,748 0 0 0 School Enrollment 1 4,185 14,519 N/A 1 4,716 14,589 14,482 ( 107) -1% CPI-W/Seattle, Annual growth rate 3.7% 3.8% 4.5% 0.4% 0.8% 0.4% 100% IPD/Implicit Price Deflator 3.4% 2.1% 4.5% -0.8% 1.5% 2.4% 281% Change * Valley Regional Fire Authority was created 1/1/2007. Prior to 2007, Fire Services were funded from a portion of the City Property Tax. This figure does not include the Fire Benefit Service Charge. This charge varies depending on residence type, square footage, etc. A 2000 square foot single family residence pays $215.14 in 2008. Change Page 372 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices $2.87 $12.94 $2.73 $11.80 $1.48 $10.65 $1.49 $10.66 $1.82 $11.96 $0.00 $3.00 $6.00 $9.00 $12.00 $15.00 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 PROPERTY TAX LEVY AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION (Pierce County portion of Auburn) City of Auburn Auburn School District Pierce County Washington State Port of Tacoma Valley Regional Fire Authority(VRFA)* Library Emergency Medical Services Property Tax Levy 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ % City of Auburn $ 2.87 $ 2.73 $ 1.48 $ 1.49 $ 1.82 $ 0.34 23% Auburn School District 5.37 4.95 4.41 4.38 5.09 0.71 16% Pierce County 1.38 1.18 1.08 1.08 1.16 0.08 7% Washington State 2.64 2.29 2.07 2.02 2.07 0.04 2% Port of Tacoma 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.00 1% Valley Regional Fire Authority(VRFA)* n/a n/a 1.00 1 .11 1.18 0.07 6% Library 0.49 0.46 0.42 0.40 0.46 0.07 17% Emergency Medical Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 n/a Total Levy Rate $ 12.94 $ 1 1.80 $ 10.65 $ 10.66 $ 1 1.96 $ 1 .31 12% Auburn % to Total Levy 22.18% 23.14% 13.90% 13.95% 15.24% Demographic Information (King & Pierce County) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ % Assessed Valuation(in 000's) $ 5 ,099,795 $ 5 ,759,528 $ 6 ,526,967 $ 8,713,853 $ 7,809,500 $ (904,353) -10% Average Homeowner Assessed Value $ 2 17,100 $ 230,300 $ 259,000 $ 213,900 $ 202,600 $ (11,300) -5% City Tax on an Average Home $ 6 22 $ 6 29 $ 3 84 $ 318 $ 3 69 $ 51 16% Population 4 8,955 50,470 67,005 6 7,485 68,270 785 1% Add'l Population from Annexation 6 0 15,748 0 0 0 School Enrollment 1 4,185 14,519 N/A 1 4,716 14,589 14,482 ( 107) -1% CPI-W/Seattle, Annual growth rate 3.7% 3.8% 4.5% 0.4% 0.8% 0.4% 100% IPD/Implicit Price Deflator 3.4% 2.1% 4.5% -0.8% 1.5% 2.4% 281% Change Change * Valley Regional Fire Authority was created 1/1/2007. Prior to 2007, Fire Services were funded from a portion of the City Property Tax. This figure does not include the Fire Benefit Service Charge. This charge varies depending on residence type, square footage, etc. A 2000 square foot single family Page 373 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices APPENDIX C GLOSSARY OF TERMS This glossary identifies terms used in this budget. Accounting terms are defined in general, non-technical terms. For more precise definitions of these terms, the reader should refer to the State BARS manual. Account A record of additions, deletions, and balances of individual assets, liabilities, equity, revenues and expenses. Accrual Basis Refers to the accounting of revenues and expenditures on the basis of when they are incurred or committed, rather than when they are made or received. All funds except the governmental funds are accounted on this basis and the governmental funds are accounted on a modified accrual basis. Administrative or Support Departments Refers to the organizational units or departments that primarily provide services to other departments or divisions. These departments include: • Mayor and Council: Provides overall administration to the entire City. Also includes expenses related to the operation of the Council. • Human Resources: Provides centralized personnel services to all City services. Also includes Civil Service which applies to Police and Fire Services. • Finance: Provides centralized financial services to all City departments. Also provides a variety of other central administrative service including printing, data processing, and billing of City utilities. • City Attorney: Provides centralized legal services to all City services. Appropriation Legal authorization granted by ordinance of the City Council that approves budgets for individual funds. Arbitrage The interest revenue earned in excess of interest costs from the investment of proceeds from the sale of bonds. Federal law requires that earnings over a certain rate be repaid to the federal government and is called arbitrage rebate. Assessed Valuation A valuation set upon real estate or other property by a government (King County or Pierce County Tax Assessor) as a basis for levying taxes. B & O Tax Business and Occupation tax is a gross receipts tax levied on businesses. It is based on the value of products, gross proceeds of sales or gross income of the business. Balanced Budget A budget is considered balanced when the fund's total resources of beginning fund balance, revenues and other financing sources is equal to the total of expenditures, other financing uses and ending fund balance. BARS Budgeting, Accounting & Reporting System (BARS); refers to the accounting rules established by the State Auditor’s Office. Page 374 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Baseline Budget The baseline budget consists of budget proposals that would be sufficient to maintain the operation of programs that had been previously, in earlier budgets, authorized. Bond A written promise to pay a specified sum of money, called the face value or principal amount, at a specified date or dates in the future, called the maturity date(s), together with periodic interest at a specified rate. The difference between a note and a bond is that the latter runs for a longer period of time and requires greater legal formality. Budget Amendment The method used to make revisions to the adopted budget. Adjustments are made via an ordinance approved by the city council. Capital Assets Land, improvements to land, easements, buildings, building improvements, vehicles, machinery, equipment, infrastructure, and all other tangible or intangible assets that are used in operations and that have initial useful lives extending beyond a single reporting period and a cost of $5,000 or greater. Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) A plan that studies the manner in which the capital needs of the City can be met and establishes policies and management programs to address those needs. A published six-year plan document is one element of the comprehensive plan required by Washington’s Growth Management Act. Capital facilities generally have long useful lives, significant costs and tend not to be mobile. Capital Expenditures Expenditures that result in the acquisition of, or addition to, capital assets. Capital Project Construction Funds A type of fund which accounts for major general government construction projects financed by long-term general obligations. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) A grant received annually by the City from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. While included in the budget for accounting purposes, specific allocation of these funds occurs in a separate process. Comprehensive Plan A long-range policy adopted by the City to guide decisions affecting the community’s physical development. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Consumer Price Index measures a price change for a constant market basket of goods and services from one period to the next within the same city (or in the Nation). The CPI is not a true cost of living index and should not be used for place-to-place comparisons. Councilmanic Bonds General Obligation bonds authorized by the City Council. Current Expense Fund See General Fund Debt Service Interest and principal payments on debt. Page 375 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Debt Service Funds A type of fund that accounts for the payment of outstanding long-term general obligations of the City. Department Refers to an organizational unit. In Auburn, it refers to eight such units: Mayor & Council, Human Resources Department, Finance Department, Legal Department (or City Attorney), Planning and Community Development, Police Department, Public Works Department, and Parks and Recreation Department (see administrative and line departments for descriptions). May be composed of one or more organizational units referred to as Divisions. (This term may also be found to include Divisions which previously were Departments although now should be divisions. There are two such units that are budgeted as though they were departments; the Library and Street Departments). Depreciation (1) Expiration in the service life of capital assets. (2) The portion of the cost of a capital asset that is charged as an expense during a particular period. Division Refers to an organizational unit below that of Department. All of the proprietary funds are administered as a Division, although sometimes referred to as Departments because of their status as such in a previous administration. Enterprise Funds A type of proprietary fund which contains activities which are operated in a manner similar to private businesses In Auburn, the Enterprise Funds account for the City’s utilities, the Cemetery, the Golf Course, and the Airport. Endangered Species Act (ESA) The Endangered Species Act provides for the designation and protection of invertebrates, wildlife, fish and plant species that are in danger of becoming extinct and mandate conservation of the ecosystems in which endangered species depend. Expenditures The cost of goods or services that use current assets. When accounts are kept on the accrual or modified accrual basis, expenditures are recognized at the time the goods are delivered or services rendered. Full-Time Equivalent Position (FTE) Refers to budgeted employee positions based on the number of hours for each position. A full-time position is 1.00 FTE and equals 2080 hours per year and a .50 position is 1040 hours. Fund A self-balancing group of accounts which includes both revenues and expenditures. Fund Balance The difference between assets and liabilities reported in a governmental fund. Fund balances are either designated or undesignated. Designated: Funds that have been dedicated to a particular purpose. Undesignated: The remaining un-appropriated balance of the fund after accounting for the designated funds. Fiduciary Funds A group of funds which accounts for funds held by the City as a trustee. GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Principles are standards used for accounting and reporting for both private industry and governments. Page 376 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices General Fund A specific fund which accounts tax supported activities of the City and other types of activities not elsewhere accounted. In the City budget, this fund is divided into departments. Sometimes it may be referred to as the Current Expense Fund. The General Fund is a Governmental Fund. General Obligations (Debt) Refers to a type of debt that is secured by means of the tax base of the City or obligations against which the full faith and credit of the City was pledged. Includes debt incurred by three different circumstances: 1) Debt incurred by the vote of the people and retired by means of a separate property tax levy, 2) debt approved by the City Council to be retired out of the proceeds of the regular levy (referred to as either councilmanic bonds or an inside levy), and 3) debt, which while secured by taxing authority, is retired by means of other revenue. Governmental Fund Types A group of funds that account the activities of the City that are are of a governmental character, as distinguished from activities which are of a business character. Indirect Charges or Cost Allocation Refers to the process of accounting costs between funds Usually applied to determining the costs of administrative services provided to Non-General Fund divisions Inside Levy The dedication of a portion of the regular property tax levy to retire council-manic bonds. Interfund Payments Expenditures made to other funds for services rendered. Internal Service Funds A type of proprietary fund that accounts for goods and services that are provided as internal services of the City. Internal service funds include the equipment rental, information services, facilities, and insurance funds. Line Departments Line departments are those that provide services directly to the public and consist of the following departments: • Planning and Community Development: Includes several divisions and a special activity; Planning, Airport, Building, and Community Development Block Grant. • Police: Provides all Police Services, including the jail. • Public Works: Consists of several divisions or services, including engineering, all utilities, equipment rental and streets. • Parks: Provides recreational services and maintains park facilities. Includes senior services and the management of the cemetery and golf course. Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) A LID is a legal mechanism that finances specific capital improvements which benefit specific properties. A LID places a special assessment against the benefited property to repay debt incurred to finance the improvements. METRO (Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle) Conveyance, treatment and disposal of all sanitary sewage collected within the Auburn sanitary sewer service area is provided by King County based on a contract signed in 1974 with Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. The County and Metro consolidated effective January 1, 1994. The County now performs the services formerly performed by Metro. The county has assumed all obligations and contracts with Metro. Page 377 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Mill The property tax rate that is based on the valuation of property. A tax rate of one mill produces $1 of taxes on each $1,000 of property valuation. Mission Statement A declaration of a unit or of the overall organization’s goal or purpose The City of Auburn’s Mission Statement can be found immediately following the Table of Contents in the Final Budget document. Mitigation Fees Fees paid by developers to equitably share the cost of infrastructure improvements required for supporting the development project. Modified Accrual Basis of Accounting Refers to the method of accounting in which (a) revenues are recognized in the accounting period of which they become available and measurable and (b) expenditures are recognized in the accounting period in which the fund liability is incurred, if measurable, except for un-matured interest on general long-term debt and certain similar accrued obligations, which should be recognized when due. Object (as defined by the State Auditor’s BARS manual) As used in expenditure classification, this term applies to the type of item purchased or the service obtained (as distinguished from the results obtained from expenditures). Examples are personal services, contractual services, and materials and supplies. Potential Annexation Area (PAA) Those currently unincorporated areas the city intends to annex within the 20-year time frame in the Comprehensive Plan. Program Improvements Program improvements are a type of budgetary action which consists of new initiatives or substantial changes to existing programs. Proprietary Funds A group of funds which account for the activities of the City which are of a proprietary or “business” character. Public Safety A term used to identify Police services. Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF) A state program that makes available low-interest loans to help local governments with public works projects. Regular Levy The portion of the property tax that supports the General Fund. Revenue Refers to income from all sources, i.e. property taxes, fines and fees, permits, etc. Revenue Bonds Bonds that are retired by means of revenue, usually a proprietary fund. In a strict sense, these bonds are not secured by the tax base of the full faith and credit of the City, although sometimes general obligation bonds which are being retired by revenue may be referred inaccurately to as revenue bonds. While the full faith and credit of the City is not pledged as security, the revenue of a utility often is. Page 378 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Special Assessments An assessment similar to a tax (but legally distinct and is separately billed), applied to property participating in a Local Improvement District (LID) to retire the LID debt. Special Levy Separate property tax levies authorized by the voters for specific purposes. Special Revenue A type of governmental fund that accounts for the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are legally restricted for expenditures. Tax Base The wealth of the community available to be taxed by various forms of City taxes; commonly thought of as the assessed value of the community. Working Capital Working Capital is generally defined as current assets minus current liabilities. Working capital measures how much in liquid assets less short-term obligations is available to be used for budgeted expenditures. LIST OF ACRONYMS ADA Auburn Downtown Association BARS Budgeting, Accounting & Reporting System (BARS); refers to the accounting rules established by the State Auditor’s Office. CFP Capital Facilities Plan CPI Consumer Price Index EIS Environmental Impact Study ESA The Endangered Species Act FTE Full-Time Equivalent Position GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Principles GMA Growth Management Act LED Light Emitting Diode (street signals) Page 379 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices LEOFF Washington's Law Enforcement Officers' and Fire Fighters' Retirement System LID Local Improvement District MIT Muckleshoot Indian Tribe NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System PAA Potential Annexation Area PERS Washington’s Public Employees’ Retirement System PWTF Public Works Trust Fund RTID Regional Transportation Improvement District SOS Save Our Streets program TIP Transportation Improvement Program UTGO Unlimited tax general obligation bonds WRIA Water Resources Inventory Area Page 380 2011 -2012 Biennial Budget Section VIII: Appendices Page 381 DOCUMENT AND FINANCIAL DATA PREPARED BY: Shelley R. Coleman Finance Director Martin Chaw Financial Planning Manager Consuelo Rogel Financial Analyst Michelle Surdez Senior Accountant-Budget Evelyn McOsker Finance Secretary LEGAL PROCEDURES: Danielle Daskam City Clerk COVER DESIGN: KPG, Inc. PROJECT: South Division Street Promenade Project The South Division Street Promenade project involves the reconstruction of South Division Street including roadway pavement utilizing pervious concrete, wider sidewalks, landscaping, pedestrian lighting, utility infrastructure upgrades, and urban streetscape design creating a pedestrian promenade. The project is being funded through a three million dollar Economic Development Administration grant and five million dollars by Local Revitalization Funding through the State of Washington. Page 382