Memorandum
City of Lawrence
City Manager’s Office
|
TO: |
David L. Corliss, City Manager
|
|
FROM: |
Cynthia Wagner, Assistant City Manager Casey Toomay, Budget Manager
|
|
CC: |
Diane Stoddard, Assistant City Manager
|
|
DATE: |
June 17, 2011
|
|
RE: |
Follow Up to City Commission Questions
|
Below is information provided in response to questions by the City Commission relating to budget issues. Updates will be provided as additional information becomes available or additional requests are made.
The following information was presented in the June 7, 2011 City Manager’s Report.
o Comparison of 2011 budgets (assessed valuation, mill levy and local sales taxes) for the top ten largest cities in the State
o League of Kansas Municipalities, “Kansas Tax Rate and Fiscal Data Book” for 2011
o Report from the Finance Director on Sales Tax Collections through May 31, 2011
In order to continue to reduce costs, can we reduce mowing along the levee trail – it seems as though we mow a long way up the trail and several feet out from the trail?
According to the United States Corps of Engineers Operations and Maintenance Manual, grass stand should be kept no shorter than 4 inches or taller than 12 inches. The turf height requirements are in place to ensure that burrowing animals don’t perforate the levee. The entire levee is mowed approximately five times annually in order to comply with Corps requirements. Maintenance for the Kansas River Levee Unit must follow the procedures outlined in the Operations and Maintenance Manual. If the procedures in the maintenance manual are not followed it is possible that during the next annual US Army Corps of Engineers levee inspection the levee could receive a Non-satisfactory rating. This in turn could lead to decertification of the levee which results in higher insurance premiums and mandatory flood insurance.
Confirm the process for state allocation of gas tax funds
All cities receive payments from the state’s Special City County Highway Fund (gas tax) on a per capita basis. Cities in counties with a population greater than 34,000 (except Johnson County) also receive state payments through their county. The city’s share in Douglas County is 90% and is also based upon population. Cities must credit the money in a separate fund for road construction and maintenance.
Provide landfill cost increases as percent of cost increases
The 2012 budget requested by the Public Works Department for the Solid Waste enterprise includes a 2.7% rate increase, generating $242,576.
The primary drivers for increases in expenditures are: fuel and landfill tonnage. The budget estimates a landfill rate per ton increase of 3.5% which represents .6% of the total 2012 request. Fuel cost estimates reflect an increase in this line item 33.5% or 1.4% of the total expenditure request. The total increase in these two line items alone is $221,260.
The City manager’s recommended budget will also include a drop-off glass recycling option estimated at $30,000.
What were the solid waste rate increases in 2011?
The 2011 budget included an increase of $0.70 for residential customers and $1.01 for minimum commercial customers. This reflects an increase of approximately 5%.
What is the current fund balance for other cities
The fund balance policies for General Operating Fund budgets from comparison communities range from 10% to 35%. As shown below, the City of Lawrence falls in the middle with a General Operating Fund balance policy range of 15% to 30%. Olathe, Overland Park, Topeka and Wichita all have a fund balance policy that has a lower range than the City of Lawrence at 10%. Conversely, Shawnee is the only city with a range that is higher than the City of Lawrence at 35%.
|
City |
Range |
Additional Comments |
|
|
Lawrence |
15% |
30% |
|
|
Lenexa |
17% |
25% |
|
|
Manhattan |
n/a |
Not a formal policy |
|
|
Olathe |
10% |
30% |
|
|
Overland Park |
13% |
15% |
End of five year planning period |
|
Salina |
15% |
20% |
|
|
Shawnee |
30% |
35% |
|
|
Topeka |
10% minimum |
|
|
|
Wichita |
10% minimum |
|
|
Provide a history of fund balance
The chart below summarizes fund balance totals and percentage from 2003 to the projected 2011 budget.
|
Year |
Fund Balance |
Percent |
|
2003 |
$ 8,164,583 |
20.16% |
|
2004 |
$ 12,022,924 |
31.64% |
|
2005 |
$ 14,072,880 |
30.66% |
|
2006 |
$ 11,083,748 |
20.48% |
|
2007 |
$ 11,449,526 |
21.61% |
|
2008 |
$ 12,224,367 |
22.17% |
|
2009 |
$ 12,564,947 |
21.14% |
|
2010 Estimated |
$ 12,782,397 |
19.98% |
|
2011 Projected |
$12,743,874 |
19.8% |
The 2006 numbers reflect a planned drawdown of fund balance to fund program improvements which had been deferred in prior budgets. That year, it was estimated that sales tax revenues would grow by 8% and assessed valuations would increase 6%.
Please provide background information on illness/deductible utilization of health insurance to help in understanding employee coverage and potential changes; healthcare options and health insurance fund balance information.
Attached is the healthcare memo and attachments presented for City Commission review.
What do we charge for services relating to special events (KU games, special event/fund raising runs, high school games, parades, etc.)?
Attached is a memo outlining costs and charges relating to special events.
Have we reviewed the benefits of alternative fuel vehicles (see attached article).
Attached is a memo from the Maintenance Garage Supervisor outlining the City’s current alternative fuel fleet and current and previous initiatives to review and implement use of alternative fuels.