Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Town Board Study Session Budget Meeting 2008-08-08 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 8, 2008 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD PRE-BUDGET STUDY SESSION of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in Room 130 in said Town of Estes Park on the 8th day of August, 2008. Board: Mayor Pinkham, Trustees Blackhurst, Eisenlauer, Ericson, Homeier, Levine and Miller Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Halburnt, Dept. Heads Goehring, Kilsdonk, Joseph, McFarland, Pickering, Smith and Zurn and Town Clerk Williamson Absent: Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Dept. Heads Dorman, and Kufeld Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. Mayor Pinkham reviewed a budget evaluation process and rating scale that could be utilized for each project to determine the service level requirement by the Town (mandated to provide, essential, revenue generator, or expands option) and the sustainability rating (not essential, somewhat important, very important, essential). Discussion followed on how to utilize the matrix. Some members of the Board expressed concern the process would not move the Board forward in developing a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). 2009 POLICY GUIDANCE. Board Priorities / Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Administrator Halburnt provided the Board with a revised CIP that grouped projects by issues including quality of life, requests from the community, requests from Trustees, requests from staff and necessities. The CIP should aid in focusing the budget needs for 2009, create place holders for the following years and give staff time to develop funding mechanisms. Discussion followed: the CIP is a living document that should be adjusted and added to each year, infrastructure projects need to be completed; therefore, the only projects to be evaluated by the Board are the quality of life projects; infrastructure should be funded at a higher level; need to provide staff with general direction (#1 priority – public safety, #2 essential services and infrastructure, #3 revenue generators); the Board is focused on improving infrastructure; when considering infrastructure (brick and mortar), the Board needs to consider the services and maintenance associated with the infrastructure improvements; departments should prioritize the items listed in the CIP. The Board agreed the following are high priorities – Barns including the hockey ice and the parking lot, Transportation, Fairgrounds and Infrastructure identified by Public Works. Target Fund Balances Administrator Halburnt stated the current fund balance for the General Fund is 30% of expenses including transfers, Special Revenue funds are 5% (Museum, CVB, Fire, Senior Center, Community Reinvestment, Open Space Funds) and Enterprise Fund are 25% for L&P and Water 25% plus 2% of fixed assets as necessitated by current bonds. The Catastrophic Loss Fund is required by TABOR to have 3% of the General Fund. The fund had a $2.38 million fund balance at the end of 2007 and is projected to have a balance of $3 million at the end of 2008. The current fund balance exceeds TABOR Town Board Study Session – August 8, 2008 – Page 2 requirements by approximately $1 million and could therefore be used for capital improvements. She stated sales tax driven towns carry healthy fund balances including the following percentages: Siverthorne – 96%, Vail – 58%, Breckenridge – 54%, Aspen - 54%, Steamboat Springs – 48%, and Estes Park - 39%. Staff would recommend a +30% fund balance would have the Town operating in the green, 25% in the yellow and 20% or lower in the red. In general, the Board agrees with staff; however, the Board recommends a 30% – 25% operating in the yellow and once 25% is reached staff would begin to review discretionary expenditures, discuss hiring freezes and cut back costs. - +30% - Green - 30% - 25% - Yellow - 25% - Red Trustee Blackhurst stated the Board should discuss how to spend the approximately 9% of the previous year’s budget that was returned to the General Fund. Community Service Grants Administrator Halburnt stated in prior years the Community Services grant funding has been 5% of the previous year’s sales tax and amounted to $355,000 in 2007. $187,000 was granted to the Estes Park Housing Authority and the other grants were small in comparison. A quick survey shows Estes Park on the upper end of funding for non- profits. Traditionally the grants have been reviewed by two Board members and the Town Administrator. Mayor Pinkham requested Trustee Levine continue to serve on the review team. Mayor Pinkham stated the Mayor’s contingency fund has been utilized in the past to pay for community events. He has continued to fund the requests from previous years but has instructed the groups to apply for Community Service grants during the budget process. Mayor Pinkham called a break at 9:34 a.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:44 a.m. Director Joseph stated in addition to grants the Board has approved substantial fee waivers for non-profits and other agencies within town. For example $70,000 in building permit fees were waived last year for the hospital. A policy was adopted last year to cap fee waivers at $2,500 per request. Staff will provide the Board with a fee waiver report for the past several years. Criteria for Staffing Additions / Deletions Administrator Halburnt stated the Water Department would like to request a part-time water lab technician be moved to full-time due to the new testing regulations. Finance would like to combine two part-time jobs into one full-time job. The impact to the budget would be negligible. The Museum would be adding a part-time position for digitizing photos. This position would be funded through a grant. The Senior Center Program Coordinator would increase from 20 hours to 24 hours due to the increase in rentals of Town facilities. The additional cost in salary would be offset by rental fees collected. Administration would add a Public Information Officer (PIO). Mayor Pinkham stated further discussion should occur as to the scope of responsibility for the PIO position both internally and externally. Trustee Miller agreed and stated the Town needs to be proactive on issues that come forward instead of reactive. Trustee Ericson suggested the Town hire a consultant to write the PIO job description. Trustee Blackhurst expressed the importance of maintaining competitive salaries to retain staff. Administrator Halburnt stated the Town performs a salary survey each year and uses three regional cities (Longmont, Loveland and Fort Collins) and three resort towns (Avon, Frisco and Steamboat Springs). Town Board Study Session – August 8, 2008 – Page 3 LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT (LMD) Trustee Homeier stated the relationship between the LMD and the CVB should be kept separate. Any presentation by the Town Board should relate to the benefits of an LMD and not the role/relationship of the CVB and the LMD. The LMD Board would determine the relationship with the CVB and not the Town. The Town should not connect the CVB to the LMD because it proposes too many questions that can not be answered. The petitioners are the ones that own the LMD and are asking for the formation of the LMD and the lodging tax. Trustee Blackhurst stated the Town initiated the petition; and therefore, the Town is responsible for the issue. Questions have arisen with regard to the relationship with the CVB and need to be addressed. The CVB funding is a separate issue; however, the Town will continue to fund the department. The intent of the LMD and the tax is to replace the approximately $800,000 the Town spends on marketing and use those funds for infrastructure improvements. The Board needs to continue to market the LMD as it has been presented. The Board was in agreement with comments made by Trustee Blackhurst. Trustee Homeier left the meeting at 10:00 a.m. and Director Smith arrived. Administrator Halburnt stated if the LMD passes this November the Town will reinvest money spent on marketing on infrastructure improvements and funding of the CVB for the next five years would not be included in the Intergovenmental Agreement with the County for the formation of the LMD. GREEN ESTES PARK Director Goehring presented options for the Board to consider during the upcoming budget to be a greener organization. The Town could purchase enough wind energy to place all Town General Fund facilities on wind energy at a cost of approximately $30,000, L&P for $3,300 and Water for $8,500; however, the purchase would be a 20 year commitment and would likely double by 2010. The L&P department has also developed a static-cling sticker to be displayed by current and future renewable energy users to display in their homes, cars or businesses. He suggested the Town place a 1,000 watt wind turbine and a 1,000 watt solar display at the hydroplant at a cost of $25,000 to provide the citizens and visitors a demonstration of what the two systems might yield in the valley. He stated the holiday lights placed along Elkhorn Avenue could be replaced with LED lights for a cost of $40,000 and could be left up year-round. Administrator Halburnt stated this is one of the Town Board goals and would also be a good way to communicate to the community and visitors that Estes Park is a green town. Discussion followed: Trustee Levine is in favor of green alternatives, stating there would be a cost; Trustee Miller stated a policy should be developed to build new Town facilities to LEED standards in the future; Mayor Pinkham stated as one of the four owners of PRPA, a coal burning utility, greener options would send the right message and address future needs; concern was raised on the two demonstration methods meeting the Development Code and the location should be more public (Museum); the LED lights are not worth the additional cost to have lighting year-round; year-round lighting on sheep island would be preferred if one color of light could be used. POTENTIAL REVENUE SOURCES Administrator Halburnt reviewed potential revenue sources including a temporary tax to provide funding for deferred infrastructure improvements, impact fees, charging for dispatch services, stormwater fee and a higher mil levy for second homeowners. Temporary Tax – the Board expressed the need to focus on the LMD prior to considering an additional tax. EPURA has the ability to bond for long range projects and should be utilized when possible. Staff should investigate other mechanism or Town Board Study Session – August 8, 2008 – Page 4 funding sources to complete projects. The survey completed for the new barns at Stanley Fairgrounds indicated citizens do not want a new tax. Impact Fees – Fees would be collected on new development through a building permit to be utilized for transportation, drainage and improving Town streets. Director Zurn stated the Town needs to address infrastructure improvements to support growth and whether the current taxpayers or the developer are going to pay for the improvements. Water tap fees are impact fees that offset the cost of improvements to the Town’s water system. There are no impact fees for the transportation system at this time. Director Joseph stated the lack of impact fees have caused an inadequacy in the Town’s infrastructure and placed the burden of upgrades to systems on the last developer. The Board stated this item needs further discussion and should not be considered at this time. Dispatch Services – Currently the Town is providing dispatch services at no cost to the following entities: - Glen Haven Fire – $809 - Ambulance – $33,059 - Estes Park Fire – $8,938 - Utiliites – 1734 - RMNP – 385 - Police – 280,000 Administrator Halburnt stated the Town has an MOU with RMNP that expires at the end of the year and staff would like to add the cost of the dispatch services to the new agreement. The agreement with the ambulance district agrees not to charge the Town for services related to testing. The Board does not support charging for dispatch services citing alienation from other agencies, public perception and the need to continue to develop good will and cooperation with other entities. Stormwater Fee – Director Zurn has reviewed the potential of adding a fee to water bills for stormwater drainage improvements. He stated the Clean Water Act is becoming tougher and the Town could be placed in a Phase 2 by the State that would require the Town to address the issue immediately. The Board requested staff look into the issue further and possibly form a stormwater utility. Higher Mil Levy Fee for 2nd Homeowners – This has been discussed by staff and would require additional research to determine implementation. The Board instructed staff to eliminate this option citing the difficulty in determining second homeownership. MISCELLANEOUS The Trustees requested an additional work session to discuss the CIP and to provide input on the new ranking sheets provided by staff. Staff would provide the Board with the new rating sheets including the ratings from the first survey completed by the Board. Administrator Halburnt has instructed Department Heads to budget flat for 2009. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 11:10 a.m. Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk