Budget Committee Presentation


Published on

Budget Committee Presentation

Published in: Economy & Finance, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Madam Mayor, Members of Council, and the Public: Tonight we are presenting the City of Duluth’s FY 2001 Proposed Budget. The key participants are generally the departments and the elected officials. The department heads are responsible for building the technical aspects of the budget. The elected officials, on the other hand, give staff policy direction twice. First, through the annual Strategic Planning Conference, and then later during the working sessions of the budget. The citizens give us feedback all through the year, and more specifically during the Public Hearing. Everyone has the opportunity to participate--the elected officials set policy as representatives of the community; the staff provides practical, technical and professional input for the best administration of that policy. We have proivded the Budget At A Glance reference document for the Public. The Mayor and council have a draft document that the slides I am presenting tonight will reference. It contains the Revenues and Expenditures for FY 2001. The final presentation document will be completed no later than 60 days following approval of the Budget. The presentation document not only will include Revenues and Expenditures, but it also will contain Department goals, objectives, and performance measurements.
  • Budget Committee Presentation

    1. 1. Citizens Budget Committee FY2010 Budget City of Duluth
    2. 2. Agenda March 26, 2009 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. I. Welcome and Recap of Last Weeks Meeting (Slide depicting our projections of Revenue and Expenses for the FY10 Budget. Slide of sample PDP to see that everyone understands what they are looking at)   II. “Big Picture” Solutions (Don’t get bogged down in details of budgets but concentrate on big picture of what is City’s goal. Do we want to maintain current service levels? What are we will to do without or willing to pay for?)   III. Introduction of City Department Heads Public Works- Director Audrey Turner Courts- Judge Charles Barrett Police Department- Chief Randy Belcher Planning Department- Director Cliff Cross (Each department director will provide an overview of their department and the actions that they have taken to reduce expenses and still maintain service. They will answer any questions that might have been unclear on their department’s budgets)    IV. Overview “Capital Improvement” Budget. What is the Capital Improvement Budget, where does funding come from? Can expenses be cut by cutting projects? ( Presentation of Projects. Due to the shortage of General Revenue to meet Administrative Cost for the past 6 years Capital projects are funded almost entirely by SPLOST funds or Grants that can only be used for Capital projects and no Administrative costs. The only Capital projects that will be shown will be those involving the use of General Fund Revenues.)    V. What is the City’s Recommended Solution? ( After forming the Citizens Budget Committee and addressing the many questions and listening to the suggestions staff has begun to focus more precisely on ways to balance the budget and has put its ideas down. It is up to the Budget Committee if they want to look at these ideas at this point or wait until the Committee has formed its own ideas and present those) Optional Slide.    VII. Homework: Continue to study Department Budgets and other information presented in preparation for presentations from remaining City Departments: Public Information/Marketing, Parks, Business Office
    3. 3. FY 2010 Budget Summary FY2010 Budgeted General Fund Revenues ($1,728,371.28 less than 2009) 15,000,000.00 FY2010 Budgeted Expenditure Total ($703,840 less than 2009 and reflects City Department cuts of $714,550) 17,362,120.00 Projected General Fund Revenue Shortfall 2,362,120.00
    4. 4. Program Description Package (PDP) Example
    5. 5. Program Description Package (PDP) Example
    6. 6. Program Description Package (PDP) Example
    7. 7. Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Example
    8. 8. Department Review <ul><li>Public Works Department </li></ul><ul><li>Staff of 14 Full Time and 3 Part Time </li></ul><ul><li>Department Director: Audrey Turner </li></ul>
    9. 9. Department Review <ul><li>Courts Department </li></ul><ul><li>Staff of 8 Full Time and 2 Part Time </li></ul><ul><li>Judge and Court Administrator: Charles Barrett </li></ul>
    10. 10. Courts
    11. 11. Courts
    12. 12. Department Review <ul><li>Police Department </li></ul><ul><li>Staff of 58 Sworn Officers and 15 Non Sworn Employees </li></ul><ul><li>Police Chief: Randy Belcher </li></ul>
    13. 13. Department Review <ul><li>Planning Department </li></ul><ul><li>Staff of 8 Full Time </li></ul><ul><li>Planning Director: Cliff Cross </li></ul>
    14. 14. What is a Capital Improvement Project? Five Year Capital Improvement Program The City has established a five year capital improvement program which identifies capital projects to be funded during the next five years. The program identifies each proposed capital project to be undertaken, the year in which it will be started or acquired, the amount expected to be expended on the project each year, and the proposed method of financing these expenditures. This program shall be approved each year by the Mayor and Council. The capital improvement budget represents the first year of the capital improvement program (the current year of the budget). The capital budget is the government’s annual appropriation for capital spending and is legally adopted by the Mayor and Council. The capital budget authorizes specific projects and appropriates specific funding for those projects. The capital budget, not the capital improvement program, provides legal authority to proceed with specific projects. Projects listed in the capital improvement program for year other than 2008 (the out years of 2009-2012) are not authorized until the annual budget for those years is legally adopted. The out years serve only as a guide for future planning. Definition of a Capital Improvement The classification of a project as a Capital Improvement is based on the project’s cost and frequency of funding. A Capital Improvement project is relatively costly and funded infrequently. Capital Improvement project will typically meet at least one of the following criteria: 1. The cost to purchase is high (generally $5,000.00 or more), 2. The purchase does not recur annually, 3. The useful life is long (generally 3 years or more), 4. The purchased item will become part of the City’s fixed asset inventory. The typical fixed asset will have a useful life of at least three years and cost at least $5,000.00. Major equipment (expensive and long useful life), new property (buildings, land, parks), facility improvements, public improvement projects (road and park improvements, sidewalk/bikeway/path projects, etc.) and vehicle replacements are some examples of what is considered a Capital Improvement.
    15. 15. What is a Capital Improvement Project? Capital Projects Considerations and Ranking The projects are separated into two sections, non-competing and ranked competing projects. Non-competing projects are funded 100% by outside funds such as grant money. If these funds do not materialize, the projects will drop out of the budget. The competing projects are ranked numerous times by the City Administrator, the City Clerk, and the Chief of Police. The Mayor and Council consider these employees’ rankings and then conduct their own ranking in budget work sessions. The list of projects is always much larger at the beginning of the budget cycle and is later pared down to meet the absolute minimum realistic needs and available revenue. Funds available for CIPs are determined by the operations budget and revenue projections. Revenues in excess of the operations budget are dedicated to CIP projects. Items that fall below the available funding line are dropped and often reappear to compete in the following year’s iterations. The following criteria are used by the Mayor, Council and Department heads to rank competing capital projects. 1. Most directly benefit the community. 2. Support all departments. 3. Yield the highest return-on-investment. 4. Maintain the department heads’ rankings. 5. Are the least costly, when project rankings are tied.
    16. 16. Capital Improvement Projects Department Summary
    17. 17. Capital Improvement Projects Department Summary
    18. 18. Capital Improvement Projects
    19. 19. Capital Improvement Projects
    20. 20. Capital Improvement Projects
    21. 21. Capital Improvement Projects
    22. 22. Capital Improvement Projects
    23. 23. Capital Improvement Projects
    24. 24. Rogers Bridge Bikeway
    25. 25. Western Gwinnett Bikeway
    26. 26. Davenport and Irvindale Sidewalks
    27. 27. Hospital Road Connector
    28. 28. SR 120 Sidewalks
    29. 29. Capital Improvement Projects Overview CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WITH GENERAL REVENUE FUNDS   City Gen. Funds Grant SPLOST   Western Gwinnett Bikeway $225,000 $2,328,016 $592,177    Duluth Sidewalks (Davenport & $ 75,000 $1,834,000 $459,000 Irvindale)    Rogers Bridge Bikeway $ 41,176 $ 372,000 $ 95,000    Hospital Road Connector $183,962 $1,785,902 $341,000 Hudgens Park Restroom $100,000 $ 0 $271,925    SR 120 Sidewalks $227,000 $ 496,000 $ 21,000   TOTAL $852,138 $6,815,918 $1,780,102
    30. 30. Staff Recommendations to Balance Budget 2010 Budget Summary FY2010 Budgeted General Fund Revenues $15,000,000 ($1,728,371 less than the FY2009 Budget) FY2010 Budgeted Expenditure Total $17,362,120 ($703,840 less than the 2009 Budget and Reflects City Dept., cuts of $714,550) Projected General Fund Revenue Shortfall $2,362,120 Measures to Balance Budget Freeze on hiring (Cont. holding vacant positions) $ 250,000 Insurance Benefit Savings $ 20,000 Unobligated Reserve Funds $ 338,144 Substitution of 2009 SPLOST funds for Obligated General Funds for Capital Projects $ 852,138 Increase of Property Taxes 1.25 mills $1,250,000 $2,710,282 Projected Shortfall $2,362,120 Budget Cuts and Revenue $2,710,282 Balance with some additional for Margin for Error And funds already spent $ 348,162