HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1996/05/29
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETINGIWORKSHOP OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Wednesday, May 29, 1996 Council Chambers
6:10p.m. Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers Alevy, Rindone, and Mayor Pro Tem Moot
ABSENT: Councilmember Padilla and Mayor Horton
ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager, and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
MSC (Moot/Rindone to excuse Mayor Horton who was home recovering from surgery. Motion approved 3-0-2.
MSC (Rindone/Alevy) to excuse Councilman Padilla whose absence was work-related. Motion approved 3-0-2.
Councilman Rindone requested the City Manager survey the Council for additional dates for budget hearings in case
it is needed.
BUSINESS
2. BUDGET OVERVIEW
Mayor Pro Tem Moot turned the meeting over to the City Manager.
City Manager Goss stated that this year's budget is in three volumes instead of two. One volume called, Goals and
Objectives, wbicb ties into the new approacb taken by the City Council to get into a Performance Based Budget.
He pointed out that one of the efforts this year was to focus on getting more city staff involved in the preparation
of the budget. In most of the departmental budget statements, there is a statement as to what that particular
department did in terms of budget preparation. He bighlighted two departments: (1) the Library which had done
an excellent job over tbe past three or four years since they have had to produce more service by taking on a couple
of additional libraries, the EastLake Library and the South Chula Vista Library. They have had to reorganize and
tighten up; every employee either full-time, part-time and the Library Board was involved in the process in
determining how to cut their budget by 10 percent. (2) In Public Works/Engineering about thirty employees were
broken up into various teams and went through a process and came up with different recommendations which were
useful to the management of the department in making recommendations of cuts to the City Manager's Office and
also developing something like 38 different budget revenue ideas. He commended departmental staffs who went
through a process like tbis with the employees.
John Lockwood, ex-city manager of San Diego, came in on a gratis basis and went through a one-day workshop
with department beads without anyone from tbe Manager's office present. There was also an Ad Hoc Employees
Committee tbat looked at revenue ideas.
Councilman Rindone stated tbat Council bad just received the Goals and Objectives and wanted to know bow these
interfaced in the process?
Mr. Goss said the Goals and Objectives came first because they are what Council heard when Department Heads
__~M" __ _._._....,_.____.___. --..-.. ---,.--,------.------ ,----- - - ____~_"'_____. . . ._.______..... 0'0 ..._______._'____
·
Minutes
May 29, 1996
Page 2
made presentations to the Council during January and February. Council will not be walking through tbese again.
Mr. Goss presented the total" All Funds" Budget whicb included the general fund, the redevelopment agency, the
sewer funds, transit funds, development impact fees, assessment districts is proposed to be reduced from $106
million to $100 million. The Operating Budget is proposed to be $56 million. He used overbeads in making his
presentation of projected revenues and expenditures (a copy of whicb is on file in the City Clerk's Office).
In presenting the "Comparison of Proposed General Fund to Proposed Reserve Balance, " Councilman Rindone asked
if tbe League of Cities bad a recommended guideline for reserves?
Mr. Goss responded no. That question bas been asked over the years. He was not aware of any standards by the
League unless there bas been something whicb bas been added recently. Various cities have different perspectives.
The City of E1 C.yon bas cut over 100 positions and yet their reserves are still at the $5 or $6 million level for a
smaller budget than ours. On tbe other band, John Lockwood, former city manager of San Diego, felt that no city
budget needed reserves of more tban $1 million including the City of San Diego. He stated they operated quite
comfortably with $ I million reserves. These reflect totally different approaches on reserves.
Councilman Alevy asked if there was a rougb median of percentage of reserves? Or, is there a way to find out?
Mr. Goss replied that you could get an average. We have looked at these in past years, and they vary widely.
There is not a common practice. The main tbing is that you bave to identify what the reserve is for. Mainly, it
is a cushion which does several things: first, its a revenue source in terms of interest income; 2) its a cushion when
the revenue estimates were wrong, and 3) it gives the city council tlexibility to address unanticipated issues which
come up during the course of the year. Mr. Goss stated that when he first came to the City, the reserves were
about the same as they are now.
Councilman Rindone asked what was the reason that we would continue to project property sales through Year 2001.
Once a property sale bas occurred within a particular fiscal year, that should be reflected so we will know the net
ending balance for the aggregate of the five redevelopment agency funds are. He could see where you would
project this if there were additional property sales, but to carry it forth without property sales for all the years
henceforth just to show the aggregate difference between no property sales at all and increasing in the other, he did
not feel this was vital information.
Mr. Goss responded that the way he read this chart is that in 1996/97 if all of the property sales occur, then you
are showing a balance of somewhat over $2 million. What they are saying is that we have on the RDA side got
to a balance between revenues and expenditures and that would then build upon the surplus in 96/97 in each of the
following years.
Councilman Rindone stated that wbat would be meaningful to him to better understand is for the projected year what
property sales will occur from RDA properties in FY 96/97; what would also be benelicial are those that might
occur in this fiscal year. We need to look at wbat properties we have to choose from because the changes as to
wbat we want to sell or might not sell can vary. Understanding what sales would transpire for the coming fiscal
year that staff could safety conclude would be in that fiscal year along with revenue and expenditures is a reasonable
starting point, and then any other projected sales that might occur to project out is good information; but to continue
this over a period of time, is meaningless.
Councilman Moot asked bow much in total of one-time revenues are we using to balance the general fund budget
as proposed?
Mr. Goss stated about $1.2 million. The redevelopment budget is balanced without one-time revenues. However,
since the general fund is paying so much for certificates of participation, there is an escalating obligation of
redevelopment to the general fund.
Minutes
May 29, 1996
Page 3
Mr. Goss stated that there are a number of Level One cuts which are changes from deleting a little over the
equivalent of 9 full-time positions in each of the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Library Departments. He
stated that there are a lot of Undesirable Cuts such as reduction in parks maintenance capability, going to a volunteer
effort in the Crime Prevention Bureau, recommendations to reduce by 12 hours per week at the main library. There
has been a lot of down sizing in the Parks and Recreation Department and in Engineering. There has been an effort
to do a lot of restructuring and reorganization in tenns of management at different leveJs in order to reduce our
costs. There were 21 positions deleted in this current year and another 28 or 29 positions is proposed for next year.
It looks like in this coming year, there will be two or possibly three layoffs that might be required: one the
bookstore manager at the Nature Center and the other one of the Management Assistants.
Councilman Moot asked for a clarification tbat the reduction in positions are not being accomplished primarily by
layoffs but by not filling existing positions.
Mr. Goss responded tbat there are full-time positions that we are deleting by attrition except for the possibility of
two or maybe three layoffs. Secondly, there are hourly employees and there are cut backs in those positions.
Normally, there is such a constant flux and turnover of hourly employees that in most cases a department can
manage that when a person who wants to continue working can just by following the wave which occurs at the
hourly level. There is a potential for layoffs for hourly, but it is not a likely possibility.
Mr. Goss pointed out tbe Level Two cuts are what he calls the "Macro" level of cuts which would be consolidating
various departments. None of which are recommended at this point, but is somdhing which Council may want to
look at. If Council wanted to pursue them, it would probably take about a year to evaluate and implement.
Councilman Moot asked how one could save money by such consolidations?
Mr. Goss replied usually it is done by eliminating managers and mid-manager positions. There may be some other
efficiencies sucb as inspection work that is done in Building and Housing and in Fire that may have some overlap
or where they can be complementary. We have been trying to do this without merging tbe departments. Atone
time, we bad a Public Safety Director wbo was both the Police Chief and tbe Fire Chief. We also combined
dispatch between police and fire. Actually, we have a partially combined, although minimally, police and fire
department because of the dispatcb function. In some jurisdictions, they have dispatch for fire and dispatch for
police; they are separate operations. There can be some savings with those kinds of consolidations.
Councilman Rindone stated that this city has done tbat by combining the Police Chief and the Fire Chief. We found
out tbat was highly unsuccessful. By looking at past history, we don't need to move in those directions.
Councilman Moot stated tbat there was one consolidation which would make sense: the Otay Rancb Project being
consolidated into tbe Planning Department. He has always been confused as to why they have been kept separate.
Mr. Goss stated tbat this was the plan which was approved about three years ago by the City Council to set them
aside as a separate process which is explained in the Planning Department commentary. The idea was that we did
not fee' it was a regular project. There were a number of other issues such as sphere of influence, ~exation, and
in excess of thirty different studies which had to be done in connection with the County. The thought was to get
that process through the first SPA. After all of those have been completed, then we would fold this back into the
Planning Department.
Councilman Moot asked if this was something which We Were trying to accomplish this year'!
Mr. Goss responded yes. Probably toward the second half of next tiscal year when all the material gets done.
Councilman Alevy bad a problem witb streamlining. The perception to the average citizen is going to be that we
are downsizing the efficiency and tbe service provided by the government if we do that. If the purpose is to
"-.--_..~.__._--_.- ........------.--- -
-------. ..-.------.-..-----.....,. ,. . -,._---, --------_..._+-_..~-_..- -'~'---
Minutes
May 29, 1996
Page 4
eliminate certain levels of management by attrition or otherwise, what you are asking is more from the managers
who are still with the city. If we are asking more of our managers and workers, we need to stay focused in duties
and what a department does, rather tban asking a manager to take on more responsibility but also being involved
in another area. He felt that was too much of a stretch. If we do eliminate people, we need to do it within the
parameters of wbat already works. He was not in favor of merging departments to the point it affects the efficiency
of the government or the perception of the people.
Mr. Goss stated that the Level Three cuts include such things as: closing Fire Station 6, turn the Nature Center
over to the Port District, contract library services with the County. and close Lauderbach Community Center.
eliminate.
Mr. Goss stated that on the Revenue side, Levell revenues are what the proposed budget is predicated on. Level
2 revenues include some ideas sucb as establisbing a fee for businesses applying for special use permits in
redevelopment areas. Currently, if you go outside the redevelopment area, you apply for and pay a fee for a
conditional use permit but within the redevelopment area. you do not. However, within the redevelopment area you
are trying to promote business activity, so that may be a reason for waiving those fees. But, we may be at a point
where we need to look at those fees. It is an idea, but the proposed budget is not predicated upon it. Another
suggestion is to enforce the storm drain ordinance by enforcing existing fines, or place a surcharge on buildings that
have been vacant for more than six months, which can help fund the graftiti program.
Councilman Rindone stated he would be in support of placing a surcharge on buildings vacant for more than six
months, especially on those with out-of-town landlords. How far have we looked into this?
Mr. Goss replied that we don't have any revenue projections. At this point, it was just a concept thinking that it
could encourage people to try to bring someone into the vacant building, or if it goes into more than six months,
we could use this as a revenue source for graffiti.
For the Level 3 or "Ugly" revenues, Mr. Goss stated that these would include such things as establishment of a city-
wide fire benefit district and a median assessment district; increasing the utility permit fees to the full cost of street
wear and tear and resurface; increasing tbe property transfer tax; establishing a city-wide lighting district; and
collect the remaining .5 % (which bas never been collected) on the utility users tax which was originally set up at
5.5 % but bas been collected at 5 %.
Mr. Goss concluded by stating tbat there was an article in the Union-Tribune on May 28 basically stating that there
were millions in funds for police that may go unused. We may be able to get,$25,OOO per year for three years for
six additional police officers. The problem is in getting the match. In the past, we got part of the match from
Block Grant funds. In the article, the Sheriffs office and the San Diego Police Chief stated that they may not have
the matching funds for that; we may not either, but we will work on it.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Th~re weœ none.
.
OTHER BUSINESS
City Mana1!er's Reoort(s). None
Mayor's Renort(s). None
Council Reoort(s).
.
Minutes
May 29, 1996
Page 5
Councilman Rindone asked about the other negotiations which were going on if the costs were consummated and
was it projected in tbe budget?
M r. Goss responded it was not.
Councilman Rindone asked if Council could get an estimate for that and an update on the time line as to when it
would be coming to Council.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned to tbe next regularly scheduled meeting on June 4, 1996 at 4:00 p.m..
Respectfully submitted,
-ßu~~ ( {2jJ:¿CJ
Beverly A. Authelet, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
----.....- .__,..._......_.._..._ ____, - ___'-0__'" -'~--- -+-- --.'"_.__....._--.---"~--_.._....---_.._..~--~----_..-.."