Tempe Mayor & City Council Hugh Hallman Mayor Shana Ellis P. Ben Arredondo Vice Mayor Council Member Mark Mitchell Joel Navarro Council Member Council Member Onnie Shekerjian Corey Woods Council Member Council Member i This page intentionally left blank. Annual Budget FY 2010/11 Charles W. Meyer City Manager Jerry Hart Financial Services Manager Cecilia Velasco-Robles Tom Mikesell Deputy Financial Services Manager Lead Budget & Finance Analyst Mark Day Adam Williams Senior Budget & Finance Analyst Senior Budget & Finance Analyst Anita Erspamer Executive Assistant About the cover: Photo: Newly Renovated Tempe History Museum The Tempe History Museum was founded by the Tempe Historical Society and opened to the public in 1972. In 1984, the museum became a division of the City of Tempe’s Community Services Department. In 2006, Tempe voters approved a bond issuance that would fund a major renovation of the museum. The new “Tempe History Museum” opened to the public in February 2010. iii This page intentionally left blank. Table of Contents Introduction Budget Award ...................................................................................................................................... City of Tempe Mission Statement ........................................................................................................ Organizational Chart ............................................................................................................................ Budget Message.................................................................................................................................. Tempe Community Profile ................................................................................................................... City Limits ............................................................................................................................................ Other Demographics............................................................................................................................ vii ix xi 1 8 12 13 Budget Overview Budget Overview Contents .................................................................................................................. Budget Policies .................................................................................................................................... Fund Summary .................................................................................................................................... Total Financial Program....................................................................................................................... Financial Program Summary ............................................................................................................... Financial Program Summary for Revenues and Expenditures/Expenses............................................ Budget Process Flowchart ................................................................................................................... Budget Process Summary ................................................................................................................... Components of Total Financial Program.............................................................................................. General Governmental and Enterprise Funds: Ten-Year Fund Balance Trends ................................ Operating Budget Overview................................................................................................................. Citywide Overview ............................................................................................................................... Strategic Issues: Management/Budgeting .......................................................................................... Council Committees and Strategic Issues ........................................................................................... Program Budget Program Budget at a Glance ........................................................................................................ Per Capita Expenditures by Program ........................................................................................... Program by Fund Summary.......................................................................................................... Program by Department Summary ............................................................................................... Residential Cost of Service.................................................................................................................. Personnel Summary: Ten Year History............................................................................................... 17 18 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 30 33 42 43 44 46 47 48 49 50 51 Comprehensive Financial Plan Comprehensive Financial Plan Contents ............................................................................................. Comprehensive Financial Plan Overview ............................................................................................ Forecast Methodology ......................................................................................................................... Forecast and Major Revenue Assumptions ......................................................................................... Financial Overview .............................................................................................................................. Major Expenditure Assumptions and Economic Outlook ..................................................................... General Fund....................................................................................................................................... Transit Fund......................................................................................................................................... Performing Arts Fund........................................................................................................................... Transportation Funds........................................................................................................................... Rio Salado and Community Facilities District (CFD) Funds................................................................. Enterprise Funds ................................................................................................................................. Financial Action Plan ........................................................................................................................... 53 54 56 57 59 60 61 63 65 67 69 71 79 Revenue Information Revenue Information Contents ............................................................................................................ Total Revenue ..................................................................................................................................... Total Revenue by Source .................................................................................................................... Components of Total Revenue ............................................................................................................ Comparative Operating Revenue by Major Source and Fund ............................................................. General Governmental Revenue: Ten Year Historical Trends............................................................ Special Revenue: Ten Year Historical Trends .................................................................................... Enterprise Revenue: Ten Year Historical Trends................................................................................ v 81 82 83 84 85 88 98 103 Performance Budget Performance Budget Contents............................................................................................................. Performance Budget Summary............................................................................................................ Per Capita Performance Budget .......................................................................................................... Performance Benchmarking ................................................................................................................ City Organizational Chart..................................................................................................................... Departments Mayor and Council................................................................................................................. City Manager ......................................................................................................................... City Attorney .......................................................................................................................... City Clerk ............................................................................................................................... City Court .............................................................................................................................. Community Development ...................................................................................................... Community Relations Office .................................................................................................. Community Services.............................................................................................................. Diversity Office ...................................................................................................................... Finance and Technology ....................................................................................................... Fire ........................................................................................................................................ Human Resources................................................................................................................. Internal Audit Office ............................................................................................................... Police..................................................................................................................................... Public Works.......................................................................................................................... 107 108 109 110 111 112 114 116 118 120 122 130 134 142 144 154 162 165 166 172 Capital Improvements Budget Capital Improvements Budget Contents .............................................................................................. Capital Improvements Program Overview ........................................................................................... Capital Budget Impact on the Operating Budget.................................................................................. Significant Non-Routine Capital Project Expenditures by Major Program............................................ Capital Improvements Project Map ...................................................................................................... Capital Improvements Program Summary ........................................................................................... Capital Improvements Program Source of Funds ................................................................................ Capital Budget Strategic Focus ........................................................................................................... Capital Improvements Program Changes in Fund Balances ............................................................... Capital Budget and Debt Policy Statements ........................................................................................ Legal Bonded Debt Limits.................................................................................................................... Long-Term Debt Summary .................................................................................................................. Capital Budget, Debt Service, and Property Tax Rate: Ten Year Historical Trends ............................ Capital Improvements Program Project Listings and Descriptions ...................................................... 187 188 193 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 Schedules and Summaries Schedules and Summaries Contents................................................................................................... Property Tax Ordinance....................................................................................................................... Budget Resolution ............................................................................................................................... Budget Schedules................................................................................................................................ Budget Basis, Units, and Changes ...................................................................................................... Financial Structure and Organization................................................................................................... Personnel Summary ............................................................................................................................ Personnel Schedules ........................................................................................................................... Glossary of Terms ............................................................................................................................... Index .................................................................................................................................................... Office of Management and Budget Staff .............................................................................................. vi 249 250 251 252 258 259 260 261 295 302 306 The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented an Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation to the City of Tempe for its fiscal year beginning July 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 medium. The award is valid for a period of 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. vii This page intentionally left blank. Mission… Tempe creates outstanding value for those we serve through shared visioning, superior services and sustainable practices. We Value… People We appreciate the talents of each person and encourage responsible decision making at the most appropriate level. We recognize the importance of personal and professional development. Creativity We encourage imaginative problem solving, innovation, resourcefulness and responsible risk taking. Quality We provide superior services and are committed to continuous improvement. We are attentive to the changing needs of the people we serve. Integrity We are honest, accountable and trustworthy. Openness We are accessible and work as a team by sharing information, ideas, resources and responsibility. Respect We welcome individual and professional differences and treat everyone with dignity, courtesy and sensitivity. Diversity We promote diversity in the workforce to meet the needs of a diverse community. We recognize that with diversity comes strength. ix This page intentionally left blank. Organizational Chart Residents of Tempe Mayor & City Council City Clerk City Attorney City Manager City Court Brigitta Kuiper brigitta_kuiper@tempe.gov Andrew Ching Charlie Meyer MaryAnne Majestic andrew_ching@tempe.gov charlie_meyer@tempe.gov m_majestic@tempe.gov Police Assistant City Manager Chief of Police Tom Ryff Jeff Kulaga Jeff_Kulaga@tempe.gov tom_ryff@tempe.gov Community Relations Office Fire Fire Chief Mark Simmons Community Relations Manager Shelley Hearn mark_simmons@tempe.gov shelley_hearn@tempe.gov Finance and Technology Diversity Office Finance and Technology Director Ken Jones Diversity Manager Rosa Inchausti ken_jones@tempe.gov rosa_inchausti@tempe.gov Community Development Internal Audit Office Community Development Director Chris Anaradian City Auditor Tom Duensing chris_anaradian@tempe.gov tom_duensing@tempe.gov Public Works Public Works Director Don Bessler don_bessler@tempe.gov Community Services Community Services Director Kathy Berzins kathy_berzins@tempe.gov Human Resources Human Resources Director Renie Broderick renie_broderick@tempe.gov xi This page intentionally left blank. June 10, 2010 To the Honorable Mayor and City Council: Transmitted herein is the City of Tempe’s (City) Fiscal Year (FY) 2010-11 financial program. The City faced some difficult budget choices as a result of a continued decline in revenues during FY 2009-10. Our financial forecasts indicated that, without appropriate action, the General Fund would have a $34 million deficit beginning in FY 201011 with continued projected future deficits. However, the 2010-11 budget approved by the City Council represents a responsible approach to balancing the City’s budget and positioning the City for long-term financial sustainability. Addressing the Challenge In the early fall of 2009, the City Council and staff quickly went to work assessing the severity of the problem and developing budget-balancing priorities and parameters. An inclusive process began, which included community and employee forums held in the late fall of 2009 and early 2010 to explain the problem and gather feedback. Residents and employees were also encouraged to become involved and provide budget balancing suggestions through the City’s website and forums. City Departments were asked to submit combinations of expenditure reductions and revenue enhancements. The City Council then engaged in several challenging sessions to prioritize the budget-balancing options and ultimately produce a balanced FY 2010-11 General Fund Budget while minimizing the number of layoffs, the first in the City’s 115 year history. The residents of the City once again showed their support for our City government by approving a 0.2% temporary addition to the City’s sales tax rate, which allowed for the restoration of $8 million in positions, which translate into restored services to the community. The sales tax rate was increased from 1.8% to 2.0%, and is effective through June 30, 2014. The increase in the sales tax rate helped to minimize the daunting gap between revenues and expenditures. This year’s budget required the City to review our operations and identify operational alternatives to address the extraordinary financial situation. Budget Overview The financial program for FY 2010-11 approximates $420 million and includes monies for both operating and capital purposes. This amount represents an $81 million or 16.2% decrease from the prior year. The decrease is due to reduced capital and operating budgets. As shown in the following table, the operating budget is projected to decrease by $33 million or 8.2%, while the capital budget is reduced by $48 million or 49.9% in the upcoming year. The decrease in both budgets is due to severely limited City revenues and financing options produced by the economic downturn. Additionally, the budget contains $5.3 million of prior year encumbrances that were formally reappropriated in FY 2010-11. Total Financial Program Operating Budget Percent Change FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2010-11 Budget $404,424,453 $371,433,189 (8.2%) $96,310,568 $48,264,755 (49.9%) $500,735,021 $419,697,944 (16.2%) Capital Improvements Budget Percent Change Total Financial Program Percent Change 1 FINANCIAL PROGRAM SUMMARY The graphs below illustrates the relative shares of operating and capital appropriations in FY 2009-10 and FY 201011. Total Financial Program FY 2009-10 $501 (in Millions) Operating Budget $404.4 / 81% FY 2010-11 $420 (in Millions) CIP Budget $96.3 / 19% CIP Budget $48.3 / 12% Operating Budget $371.4 / 88% OPERATING BUDGET The following table presents a summary breakdown of the operating budget by fund. Operating Budget Summary General Fund FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2010-11 Budget Percent Change $185,892,521 $154,811,302 (16.7%) Special Revenue Funds Transportation Transit Rio Salado Performing Arts CDBG/Section 8 15,008,850 68,825,439 2,444,592 9,104,528 12,146,823 11,667,658 64,026,251 1,889,799 8,511,128 16,417,949 (22.3%) (7.0%) (22.7%) (6.5%) 35.2% Debt Service Fund 19,875,542 22,111,500 11.3% Enterprise Funds Water/Wastewater Solid Waste Golf Cemetery 72,489,753 16,081,601 2,178,060 376,744 75,772,343 14,114,556 1,731,353 379,350 4.5% (12.2%) (20.5%) 0.7% $404,424,453 $371,433,189 (8.2%) Total Operating Budget Operating Budget Highlights Following are the major policy decisions contained in the recommended budget: Freeze employee compensation at FY 2008-09 levels resulting in an estimated $4.2 million savings Consolidate the City’s organizational structure from 14 departments to 7 departments and 3 offices Include employee furloughs resulting in $5.0 million in savings Include health care benefit provider change resulting in approximately $2.7 million in savings Eliminate and transfer 125 General Fund positions, resulting in $9.8 in savings Include approximately $1.9 million in additional revenues Reduce departmental non-personnel operating budgets by $4.1 million Include approximately $9.8 million in short term restoration opportunities Deferral of Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) Advanced Funding and Health Reimbursement Account contributions totaling approximately $4.2 million After application of the policy changes, the General Fund reserve is projected to equal 18% of revenues as of June 30, 2011. 2 CAPITAL BUDGET The City’s five-year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) covering FY 2010-11 through FY 2014-15 totals $205.1 million. The first year of the five-year CIP, which is formally adopted by the City Council, totals $48.3 million for FY 2010-11. Capital Improvements Program 2010-11 Funded Program 2013-14 2014-15 Total Five-Year Program 2011-12 $31,046,338 $8,255,001 $11,114,001 $7,218,000 $6,687,000 $64,320,340 Wastewater 12,600,000 15,234,000 25,300,000 12,250,000 17,417,800 82,801,800 Total Enterprise 43,646,338 23,489,001 36,414,001 19,468,000 24,104,800 147,122,140 Transit 446,000 530,000 1,220,000 2,462,000 Rio Salado 327,000 4,480,000 960,000 27,040,000 7,520,000 40,327,000 773,500 5,010,000 2,180,000 29,502,000 7,520,000 44,985,000 Police 800,954 1,053,267 879,604 861,316 900,000 4,585,141 Fire 600,000 600,000 Park Improvements 150,000 150,000 Community Relations 250,000 250,000 Community Services 551,463 Program Additional Needs 2012-13 Enterprise Program Water Special Purpose Program Total Special Purpose 4,658,000 General Purpose Program 234,890 364,140 Community Development Public Works Water Utilities Total General Purpose 1,028,000 194,680 241,048 1,586,221 200,000 1,323,000 1,523,000 535,828 1,563,828 100,000 3,570,417 100,000 1,823,985 1,243,744 1,255,996 2,464,048 10,358,190 Transportation Program Transportation and R.O.W. 275,000 Traffic Signals/Street Lighting Total Transportation Total General/Transportation TOTAL PROGRAM 1,582,400 1,857,400 425,000 350,000 775,000 275,000 425,000 350,000 1,582,400 3,845,417 2,248,985 1,593,744 2,838,396 2,464,048 12,990,590 $48,264,755 $30,747,986 $40,187,745 $51,808,396 $34,088,848 $205,097,730 2,632,400 Capital Budget Highlights The Capital Budget for FY 2010-11 primarily consists of major projects that are already underway or that are ongoing in nature. Due to the impact of the economy on future revenue sources, the five-year CIP contains very few new projects. Instances of new project funding occur primarily in programs with a specialized funding source. The following are some highlights of the Capital Budget: Continued bond funding for required water quality improvements to meet current and future water quality regulations at the South Tempe Water Treatment Plant (STWTP) ($18.7 million) Continued bond funding for the design and construction of a new Environmental Laboratory Facility ($5 million) Continued bond funding for 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant capacity expansion ($12.5 million) Continued bond funding for the Police/City Radio System Replacement ($890,000) Continued bond funding for the Fire Department’s federally mandated radio conversion to 800 Megahertz ($600,000) 3 Continued bond funding to complete the Tempe Public Library renovation ($115,000) Continued pay-as-you-go funding for the Municipal Arts Program ($440,000) Continued pay-as-you-go funding for the repair, replacement and maintenance of various City facilities ($510,000) New federal grant funding to enhance the City’s Energy Conservation Program ($375,000) New federal grant funding for the design and construction of a new section of the Tempe Rio Salado multi-use path system ($446,000) Continued funding to complete repairs to the Town Lake’s downstream dam area as required by Arizona Department of Water Resources ($227,000) Income/Outgo The following pie charts represent the City’s income and outgo. Revenues are grouped by major category, while expenditures are shown by program area and by type of expenditure (such as personal services). Local taxes (e.g., city sales tax and property tax) continue to be the largest City revenue sources, representing 37% of the FY 201011 total revenue budget. Other major revenue sources include user charges (such as water service and solid waste fees), intergovernmental revenue, and bond proceeds. Environmental and Public Safety represent the greatest areas of program appropriation, accounting for 55% of the total financial program in 2010-11. Where the Money Comes From by Source of Funds Other 10% Bonds 10% Local Taxes 36% User Charges 24% Intergovernmental 20% Where the Money Goes by Type of Program General Services 12% Community Services 9% Environmental 32% Transportation 18% Development Services 6% Public Safety 23% 4 Debt Management Plan In addition to the management of existing debt and associated reserves, the City also forecasts future debt within a framework of policy priorities and financial capacity. Current and anticipated capital improvement objectives, available operating revenue, tax base fluctuations, and reserve levels are all evaluated on an ongoing basis to estimate the extent to which the City may issue additional tax supported debt. This active debt management aids in the development of a sustainable debt portfolio and is a key financial practice contributing to the maintenance of the City’s favorable bond ratings. Bond Ratings The City’s bond ratings are further evidence of its financial strength. Tempe’s general obligation bonds are currently rated AAA by Fitch, Aaa by Moody’s, and AAA by Standard & Poor’s. Notable is the recent upgrade in Moody’s rating of the City’s creditworthiness from Aa1 to Aaa. Having solid financial policies, prudent financial management practices and strong financial reserves are principle reasons for these excellent bond ratings. These high ratings translate directly into lower interest rates on the City’s debt. Bond Ratings Fitch AAA Moody’s Aaa Standard & Poor’s AAA Development Activity The City is at the geographic center of the Phoenix-Mesa metropolitan area. As such, the city shares boundaries with four other cities. As a ’land-locked’ city, Tempe’s development profile is different from its neighbors’. Higher density and in-fill development/redevelopment is predominant. Tempe has experienced a modest decline in the median sales price of existing homes. Between second quarter 2009 and second quarter 2010, the median sales price witnessed a 4.2% decline according to data from the Arizona State University Realty Studies, making home ownership in our community more affordable. Tempe is very competitive when compared to neighboring cities in terms of overall economic development activity. The industrial vacancy rate in Tempe as of the second quarter, 2010 is 11%, compared to a region-wide rate of 15.2%. Similarly, office vacancies for Tempe were 17.5%, compared to 21.5% for the region. Finally, retail vacancies were 9.4% and 12.1% for Tempe and the valley, respectively. Significant new private construction projects that were completed in the past fiscal year include: Sea Life Aquarium at Arizona Mills Mall Expansion of Walgreen’s Regional Headquarters Aurora Behavioral Health Care Center During fiscal year 2009-10 city staff facilitated the retention/expansion of 10 businesses which employ over 1,100 people and are a vital part to the local economy. In addition, staff facilitated the addition of 24 new businesses, including high technology firms, manufacturers and advanced business services firms. These new businesses helped add over 1,300 new jobs and nearly $40 million in capital investment to the local economy. MAJOR POLICY CONSIDERATIONS Appropriation choices were made within the context of the City’s Strategic Issues, Council Budget Policy Direction and long-range financial plans. Strategic Issues The City Council updates its strategic issues, goals and objectives on an annual basis to provide more long-range focus to resource allocation choices. The strategic issues, goals and objectives are aligned to current Council and community committees as follows: Community Sustainability Education Partnerships Housing Mill and Lake District Neighborhood Parks Rehabilitation and Maintenance Quality of Life Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development Technology, Economic and Community Development Transportation 6 The goal of each committee is to delineate long-range goals, formulate a cohesive strategy for each of the defined areas, and develop action plans to advance the city toward those strategic goals. Where relevant, departmental goals and objectives are linked to the City Council’s Strategic Issues. Council Budget Policy Direction The following budget policy direction is incorporated within the assumptions of the Comprehensive Financial Plan. Maintain existing service levels to the extent possible Manage financial reserves at sustainable levels Maximize organizational efficiencies Adjust fees to recover City costs CONCLUSION Though the economy continues to provide the City with financial challenges, we expect conditions to improve over the long-term. Through sound management of current resources and continued focus on long-range financial planning, the City will adapt to the current situation and be on a strong foundation for the future. The following proposed budget is committed to the City Council’s policy of preserving Tempe’s quality of life and solid financial position by maintaining sufficient fund balances and reserves, achieving a balanced budget, and making decisions within the context of our long-range financial capacity study and debt management plan. With final budget adoption, I want to thank the Mayor and City Council, residents of Tempe and City staff for their time and effort throughout this budget process. Respectfully submitted, Charles W. Meyer City Manager 7 TEMPE COMMUNITY PROFILE Where is Tempe, Arizona? Date of Incorporation - November 26, 1894 Date Charter Adopted - October 19, 1964 Form of Government - Council - Manager A Brief History of Tempe Following the establishment of Fort McDowell on the eastern edge of central Arizona’s Salt River Valley in 1865, enterprising farmers moved into the area. They dug out the irrigation canals left by the prehistoric Hohokam people and built new ones to carry Salt River water to their fields. Valley farms soon supplied food to Arizona’s military posts and mining towns. The first settlers to move to the Tempe area, south of the Salt River and east of Phoenix, were Hispanic families from southern Arizona. They helped construct the first two irrigation canals, the Kirkland-McKinney Ditch and the San Francisco Canal, and started small farms to the east and west of a large butte (Tempe Butte). In 1872, some of these Mexican settlers founded a town called San Pablo east of Tempe Butte. Another settlement, known as Hayden’s Ferry, developed west of Tempe Butte. Charles Trumbull Hayden, owner of a mercantile and freighting business in Tucson, homesteaded this location in 1870. Within a few years, he had built a store and flourmill, warehouses and blacksmith shops, and a ferry. This community became the trade center for the south side of the Salt River Valley. As more farmers came to settle in the Valley and started raising alfalfa and grains for feeding livestock, the Tempe Irrigating Canal Company provided all of necessary water. With a network of canals that extended several miles south of the river, irrigation water was carried to more than 20,000 acres of prime farmland. Crops of wheat, barley, and oats ensured a steady business for the Hayden Mill. The milled flour was hauled to forts and other settlements throughout the territory. By the 1890s, some farmers started growing new cash crops such as dates and citrus fruits. Both settlements grew quickly and soon formed one community. The town was named Tempe in 1879. “Lord” Darrell Duppa, an Englishman who helped establish Phoenix, is credited with suggesting the name. The sight of the butte and the wide river, and the nearby expanse of green fields, reminded him of the Vale of Tempe in ancient Greece. 8 Government and Organization The City operates under a council-manager form of government. The Mayor is elected for four years and six council members are elected at large on a nonpartisan ballot for staggered four-year terms. The City Council appoints the City Manager who has full responsibility for carrying out Council policies and administering City operations. The City Manager appoints City department heads as specified in the City’s Charter. In 1885, the Arizona legislature selected Tempe as the site for the Territorial Normal School, which trained teachers for Arizona’s schools. Soon, other changes in Tempe promoted the development of the small farming community. The Maricopa and Phoenix Railroad, built in 1887, crossed the Salt River at Tempe, linking the town to the nation’s growing transportation system. The Tempe Land and Improvement Company was formed to sell lots in the booming town. Tempe became one of the most important business and shipping centers for the surrounding agricultural area. Job Growth Workforce age 16+: 97,606 Tempe residents Tempe mean travel time to work: 21 minutes The completion of Roosevelt Dam in 1911 guaranteed enough water to meet the growing needs of Valley farmers. On his way to dedicate the dam, former President Theodore Roosevelt applauded the accomplishments of the people of central Arizona and predicted that their towns would grow to become prosperous cities. Less than a year later, Arizona became the 48th state, and the Salt River Valley was well on its way to becoming the new population center of the Southwest. Tempe was a small agricultural community through most of its history. After World War II, Tempe began growing at a rapid rate as veterans and others moved to the city. The last of the local farms quickly disappeared. Through annexation, the city reached its current boundaries by 1974. Tempe had grown into a modern city. The town’s small teachers college had also grown, and in 1958, the institution became Arizona State University. Quality of Life Special Events More than 150 special events throughout the City annually Tempe Music Festival brings a weekend of world-renowned acts to Tempe Town Lake Tempe’s commercial center along Mill Avenue declined during these years. Prompted by Tempe’s centennial in 1971, Mill Avenue was revitalized into an entertainment and shopping district that attracts people from throughout the Valley. Currently, Tempe is the eighth largest city of the State, with a strong modern economy based on commerce, tourism, and electronics manufacturing. Spring and Fall Festival of the Arts Juried outdoor art shows with more than 300 artists and 300,000 art lovers Insight Bowl and Block Party 150,000 people come for football and New Year’s Eve revelry # of Tempe Residents Employed Industry Professional, Scientific, and Information Services 11,000 Construction 6,254 Manufacturing 7,536 Retail Trade 11,100 Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities and Wholesale 6,600 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 9,000 Education and Health Care 19,665 Arts, Tourism and Hospitality 17,750 Public Administration 15,750 Business Owners 4,129 9 Nelson Fine Arts Center, Ceramics Research Center, Mars Space Flight Facility and Center for Meteorite Studies Among the 30 galleries and museums at ASU New Times 10K State’s largest 10K with 12,000 running along Tempe Town Lake and Mill Avenue Fourth of July Largest celebration in the state; fireworks over Tempe Town Lake draw 100,000 plus Marquee Theatre Popular concerts and new music ASU Gammage Offers Broadway shows and famous speakers Sports Tempe Diablo Stadium Spring Training Baseball home for Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, Sun Devil Football and other Arizona State University sports Minutes away from Phoenix Suns Basketball, Diamondbacks Baseball, Phoenix Coyotes Hockey and Cardinals Football, Ironman Arizona, PF Chang Rock-N-Roll Marathon and many other pro-am sporting events Shopping Tempe Marketplace 175 shops and restaurants with free live music on weekends Parks and Golf Courses 50 parks and sports complexes in 40 square miles, 1,550 acres of park and open space Papago Park is one of the nation’s largest natural parks Town Lake offers five miles of water recreation and park land in Tempe’s downtown Four golf courses, including ASU Karsten, a Pete Dye championship course, and two municipal golf courses: Ken McDonald with 69,996 Rounds of Play and Rolling Hills with 56,513 Rounds of Play Mill Avenue District Historic Mill Avenue offers authentic urban experiences with shops and restaurants Arizona Mills Mall Indoor outlet mall with 175 stores and restaurants, including IMAX and Gameworks Emerald Center Shops and IKEA Home furnishings-based retail corridor Entertainment and Culture Tempe Center for the Arts concerts, plays, gallery shows and special events -Edna Vihel Cultural Center for community art classes -Tempe Improv for nationally known comedians Transportation Network Freeways Six freeways connect Tempe including Loop 202, Loop 101, Interstate 10, I-143, I-153 and US 60. More than 1.1 million cars use Tempe’s freeways daily according to the Maricopa Association of Governments Tempe Historical Museum, Arizona Historical Museum, Pederson House Museum Offer examples of life in Tempe and around the state 10 Education Bus Service Lines run every day, with 15-minute, peak-period service Most routes run until 1 a.m. Monday through Saturday, and until 10 p.m.; Sunday bus service connects with routes in Mesa, Chandler, Scottsdale and Phoenix Free Orbit system uses mini buses to serve residential areas and connect them to shopping centers, major bus routes, schools and businesses Primary and Secondary Education 7 public high schools 4 public middle schools 18 public elementary schools Tempe schools have among the state’s best test scores Private school opportunities exist with Tempe including Preparatory Academy and a variety of parochial and charter schools Arizona State University Tempe is home to the main campus of Arizona State University. There are approximately 56,000 students and 10,336 employees. Bachelors, Masters and Ph.D. programs are available. Areas of specialty include: Barrett Honors College, College of Design, College of Education, Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering, College of Law, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, College of Nursing, College of Public Programs, Division of Undergraduate Academic Services (DUAS), Herberger College of Fine Arts, and the W.P. Carey School of Business. Tempe Town lake Tempe Town Lake is a vibrant destination located adjacent to the City’s downtown Mill Avenue District. The lake’s paths and parks make it a hub of recreation and leisure time in Tempe. More than 100 special events happen annually at the lake, ranging from small runs to major concerts and festivals. The lake has also had a significant economic impact to the City as businesses and hotels enjoy tourist traffic. Light Rail 20-mile line connects Tempe to downtown Phoenix and west Mesa Light rail bridge over Town Lake displays a colorful LCD light show when trains cross Nine Tempe stops include ASU, business districts, Mill Avenue District, Tempe Town Lake, Apache Boulevard and Papago Park Center Bus service connects to light rail stations and creates a seamless valley-wide transit system Demographics of Tempe Population 173,131 With Bachelor’s Degree or higher 38% Bicycling Named a Bicycle Friendly Community by the League of American Bicyclists More than 150 miles of bike paths in Tempe Median Age 29 Median Income (age 25+) $64,557 Median Home Value $267,000 11 City Limits 1999 City Limits 1960 1893 - 1940 Salt River Channel McKellips Rd Salt River Channel Van Buren St S.P. R.R. Curry Rd Sa lt RedCh Mountain Freeway ann River el Rio Salado Pkwy University Dr Apache Blvd Broadway Rd 1970 I-10 Southern Ave Salt 48th St Superstition Freeway River Channel Baseline Rd 1950 Guadalupe Rd Salt River Channel Western Canal Price Rd Warner Rd McClintock Dr Rural Rd Kyrene Rd I-10 Priest Dr Elliot Rd 1980 Ray Rd Salt River Year Area 1893 1.0 Year 1893 0 1/2 1 mile Year Year Area Year 1940 Year 1.8 1.0 1940 1.8 1975 2.6 1980 1950 Area 36 Year 36.0 1.8 1.8 1950 1900 1900 1.8 1.8 1955 1910 1910 1.8 1.8 1960 1960 4.5 1985 198538.5 38.5 17.5 1990 199039.3 39.3 17.5 1920 1920 1.8 1.8 1965 1965 21.7 21.7 1995 199539.8 39.8 1930 1930 1.8 1.8 1970 1970 25.3 25.3 2000 200640.0 40.1 1955 2.6 Year 1975 1894 1894 Scale Year 1980 36.0 36 4.5 12 Channel OTHER DEMOGRAPHICS Population (Census) 2005 2000 1995 1990 1985 1980 1970 1960 1950 Land Use (2010) (%) Interim Census U.S. Census Interim Census U.S. Census Interim Census U.S. Census U.S. Census U.S. Census U.S. Census 165,796 158,625 153,821 142,165 132,942 106,743 63,550 24,897 7,906 Commercial/ Industrial 27% Residential 46% Mixed-Use 11% Civic/ Educational 4% Private and Open Space / Recreation/ Water 12% Building Permits (Calendar Year Data) Number Value ($000) 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 1,067 1,249 1,563 1,744 1,416 173,131 426,439 471,370 545,435 287,539 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1,183 1,303 1,321 1,301 1,497 1,940 253,451 174,689 128,924 189,010 304,881 273,774 1998 1,891 377,958 Elections (2010) Registered voters Primary General 84,629 77,439 Primary General 15,295 28,943 Primary General 18% 37% Voter Turnout % Voting 13 OTHER DEMOGRAPHICS (Continued) School Registration Occupational Composition (%) Tempe Elementary District Tempe Union High School District ASU (Fall 2009) Tempe Campus 12,824 13,150 55,552 Sales and Office Managerial and Professional Service Construction, Extraction, Maintenance Production, Transportation, Material Moving 10,336 3,406 3,331 Farming, Forestry and Fishing Major Employers Arizona State University Wells Fargo Salt River Project Freescale Semiconductor 3,000 Kyrene Elementary US Airways, Inc. Insight Direct Honeywell International JP Morgan Chase City of Tempe 2,860 2,800 2,500 2,000 2,000 1,810 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, Hunting and Mining Construction Manufacturing Wholesale trade Retail trade Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities Information Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, and Rental and Leasing Professional, Scientific, Management, Administrative, and Waste Management Services Educational, Health, and Social Services Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodation, and Food Services Other Services Public Administration Unemployment Rate 2009 115,131 6.7% 2008 118,675 4.2% 2007 118,984 2.8% 2006 115,961 3.0% 2005 109,631 3.5% 2004 105,306 3.8% 2003 101,619 4.5% 0.1 Industrial Composition (%) Employment Trends Employment 29.4 39.7 14.6 6.8 9.4 14 0.1 5.2 11.4 3.7 11.1 5.1 3.6 8.8 12.6 19.4 11.8 3.6 3.6 ECONOMICS City Sales Tax General Transit Performing Arts Total Property Tax Rate Primary Secondary Total Largest Property Taxpayers Arizona Mills LLC Qwest Corporation Arizona Public Service Company Tempe Fountainhead Corporate LLC Fly (CD) LLC/ AWHQ LLC State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Honeywell International, Inc. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. SRPAI & PD Breof BNK 2 Southwest LLC St. Paul Properties Inc. Target Corporation Verizon Wireless Wells Fargo Bank, NA Tempe Marketplace Commerce Associates T-Mobile Bond Rating Fitch Standard and Poor's Moody's SERVICE STATISTICS Police Sworn Personnel Non-Sworn Personnel Total 1.4% .5% .1% 2.0% Avg. Emergency Response Time (min.) Crime Index (CY 2009) Part I Crime Per 1,000 Capita (CY 2009) 0.5176 0.8824 $1.4000 Fire Sworn Personnel Non-Sworn Personnel Total % 2009-10 Net Secondary Assessed Value 1.51% 0.93% 0.80% 0.65% 0.65% 0.58% Fire Stations Avg. Emergency Response Time (min.) Response to emergency medical incidents Total number of calls Solid Waste Residential Accounts Serviced Commercial Accounts Serviced Solid Waste Collected (tons) 0.51% 0.52% 0.45% 0.43% 0.41% 0.41% 0.41% 0.38% 0.35% Water/Wastewater Active Accounts Serviced Water Treated (billions of gallons) Sanitary Sewers (miles) 0.34% AAA AAA Aaa 15 341 152 493 5:31 9,974 57 153 29 182 6 4:20 15,413 18,810 32,882 1,784 137,056 42,107 16.7 549 COMMUNITY COMPARISONS Tempe is part of the greater Phoenix metropolitan area, which is the economic, political, and population center of the state. Popularly referred to as the Valley of the Sun, this area includes a number of adjacent communities with distinct municipal jurisdictions. The following section provides a perspective on the relative populations of the largest cities in the Valley as well as key comparative cost of service data. This information was obtained from city Budget Offices, as well as printed and online budget documents. Population (2005 Mid-Decade Census) Phoenix 1,475,834 Operating Budget (FY 2010-11) Million $ Phoenix 3,000.1 Mesa 448,096 Mesa 893.7 Glendale 242,369 Chandler 523.1 Scottsdale 234,752 Scottsdale 574.6 Chandler 230,845 Glendale 481.6 Gilbert 173,072 Gilbert 402.3 Tempe 165,796 Tempe 371.4 Peoria 138,143 Peoria 315.7 Property Tax (as of July 1, 2010) Phoenix Glendale (per $100 assessed Value) Incorporated City Limits $1.82 1.60 sq. miles Phoenix Scottsdale 515.0 185.0 Peoria 1.44 Peoria 170.5 Tempe 1.40 Mesa 136.9 Chandler 1.18 Chandler 63.3 Gilbert 1.15 Glendale 58.5 Scottsdale 0.90 Gilbert 68.0 Mesa 0.35 Tempe 40.1 Sales Tax (as of July 1, 2010) Glendale 2.20% Phoenix 2.00% Tempe 2.00% Peoria 1.80% Mesa 1.75% Scottsdale 1.65% Chandler 1.50% Gilbert 1.50% 16 Budget Overview The following section provides a summary of the budget including an overview of the Operating and Capital Budgets along with summary budget schedules, historical overview of citywide budget data, debt service, personnel, and fund services. Budget Overview Contents Page Budget Policies ................................................................................................................................................................. 18 Fund Summary.................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Total Financial Program .................................................................................................................................................. 23 Financial Program Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 24 Financial Program Summary for Revenues and Expenditures/Expenses ................................................................... 25 Budget Process Flowchart............................................................................................................................................... 26 Budget Process Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 27 Components of Total Financial Program ........................................................................................................................ 29 General Governmental and Enterprise Funds: Ten Year Fund Balance Trends ........................................................ 30 Operating Budget Overview............................................................................................................................................. 33 Citywide Overview ............................................................................................................................................................ 42 Strategic Issues: Management/Budgeting..................................................................................................................... 43 Council Committees and Strategic Issues...................................................................................................................... 44 Program Budget at a Glance............................................................................................................................................ 46 Per Capita Expenditures by Program.............................................................................................................................. 47 Program by Fund Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 48 Program by Department Summary.................................................................................................................................. 49 Residential Cost of Service.............................................................................................................................................. 50 Personnel Summary: Ten Year History.......................................................................................................................... 51 17 Budget Policies The budgetary policies specified below provide a general framework of goals and objectives for the operating budget, debt management, financial reserves, financial reporting and the capital budget. Strong policies provide a standard against which current budgetary performance can be measured and proposals for future programs evaluated. Operating Budget Policies Current revenue will be sufficient to support current operating expenditures. • Status: FY 2010-11 estimated General Fund operating revenue ($154.8 million) to expenditures ($154.8 million) Ratio 1:1 Financial systems will be maintained to monitor expenditures, revenue and program performance on an ongoing basis. • Status: Ongoing monitoring system with monthly reviews including automated payment and purchase requisition system Revenue and expenditures will be projected for the next five years and will be updated annually. • Status: Projections completed in Comprehensive Financial Plan (2010 Update) Debt Management Policies Long-term debt will not be issued to finance current operations. • Status: None issued to finance current operations Debt Service Reserve will be maintained at a minimum of 8% of total outstanding general governmental debt. • Status: FY 2010-11 17.7% Capital projects financed through the issuance of bonds will be financed for a period not to exceed the expected useful life of the project. • Status: The following debt issues are planned for FY 2010-11 with a 20 year debt amortization period: $1.6 million for police and fire projects; $36.7 million for water and wastewater projects Capital Budget Policies As required by City Charter, a five-year capital improvements program will be developed and updated annually, including anticipated funding sources. • Status: FY 2010-10 Annual CIP budget of $48.3 million adopted representing the first year of a 5-year, $205.1 million CIP program The City will coordinate development of the capital improvements budget with development of the operating budget. Future operating costs associated with new capital improvements will be projected and included in operating budget forecasts. • Status: FY 2010-11 operating and maintenance impact of new capital projects is estimated at $160,000 The City will maintain all its physical assets at a level adequate to protect its capital investment and to minimize future maintenance and replacement costs. • Status: Capital maintenance program approved in Capital Improvements Program budget includes City facilities rehabilitation, local and major street maintenance, and neighborhood park improvements 18 The City will establish an appropriate mix of bonded debt and pay-as-you-go financing in the funding of capital projects. • Status: Sources of Funds ($ Millions) FY 2010-11 General Obligation $38.4 Capital Projects Fund Balance 1.7 Outside Revenue 7.8 Pay-As-You-Go Financing 0.4 Total Sources of Funds $48.3 Financial Reserve Policies The City will continue its healthy financial reserve position. Unreserved fund balance coverage for the General Fund will maintain a range of 20% to 30% of General Fund revenue. • Status: Unreserved Fund Balance FYE 09 Revenue FY 2008-09 Unreserved Fund Balance Coverage $54.0 M $165.1 M 32.7% Estimated Unreserved Fund Balance FYE 10 Revenue FY 2009-10 Unreserved Fund Balance Coverage $27.9 M $146.7 M 19.0% Estimated Unreserved Fund Balance FYE 11 Revenue FY 2010-11 Unreserved Fund Balance Coverage $27.4 M $154.1 M 17.8% 19 The City will maintain an unreserved fund balance of no less than 12 months of anticipated revenue in the Water/Wastewater Fund, and a minimum of 10% and 15% of anticipated revenue in the Solid Waste and Golf funds, respectively. • Status: Unreserved Fund Balance FYE 09 Revenue FY 2008-09 $42.9 M $55.2 M 77.7% 284 Solid Waste $4.6 M $15.4 M 29.9% 109 Golf $0.4 M $1.8 M 22.2% 81 Water/Wastewater Water/Wastewater Solid Waste Golf Water/Wastewater Solid Waste Golf Unreserved Fund Balance Coverage Days Coverage Estimated Unreserved Fund Balance FYE 10 Revenue FY 2009-10 $34.3 M $60.8 M 56.4% 206 $4.3 M $15.0 M 28.7% 105 ($0.04) M $1.7 M 0% 0 Unreserved Fund Balance Coverage Days Coverage Estimated Unreserved Fund Balance FYE 11 Revenue FY 2010-11 $24.6 M $66.5 M 37.0% 135 $5.4 M $15.2 M 35.5% 130 ($0.06) M $1.7 M 0% 0 Unreserved Fund Balance Coverage Days Coverage The Water/Wastewater Unrestricted Fund Balance is projected to fall below the policy goal due to a planned drawdown of retained earnings to finance pay-as-you-go capital improvements projects, and to facilitate the phasing in of new user rate increases which began in 2008. As new rates are phased in, the need to use retained earnings will be eliminated, and the fund balance will gradually build back to a level which will comply with financial policy. Self-insurance reserves shall be maintained at a level which, together with purchased insurance policies, adequately indemnify the City's assets. • Status: FY 2010-11 $8.8 million in self-insurance reserves Financial Reporting Policies The City's accounting and financial reporting systems will be maintained in conformance with current accepted principles and standards of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). • Status: GFOA Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Full disclosure will be provided in the general financial statements and bond presentations. • Status: Notes to the financial statements and official bond statement provide full disclosure An annual audit will be performed by an independent public accounting firm with the subsequent issue of an official annual financial statement. • Status: Unqualified independent audit report 20 Financial Stability Several steps were taken to ensure our continued financial stability. These recommendations, listed under the Financial Action Plan in the Comprehensive Financial Plan, include the following steps: • Prepared the Long-Range Forecast for all funds projecting revenue and expenditures over the next five years. • Developed Financial Policy for long-term financial stability; policy established minimum and maximum General Fund reserve levels to be maintained over the course of the five-year financial planning horizon. • Provide partial funding of the annual required contribution for Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB). • Building on the Benchmarking Program, incorporating recommended benchmarks from the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting program, International City/County Management Association Performance Measures, and citywide internal and external benchmarking programs to assist in public accountability and continuous improvement in the efficiency, quality, and outcomes of work processes and services. • Continue citywide Competitive Analyses to evaluate and improve service delivery while enhancing accountability to the residents. • Strategic Issues Program implemented to identify and prioritize key strategic issues, leading to incorporation of recommended corresponding strategies and goals into the budget process. • Continue Financial Policy Implementation and Monitoring. • Expenditure Control will be directed at slowing growth by means of citywide line item reviews, modified base budget approach, and program sunsetting. • Limit Midyear Adjustments which circumvent the normal budget process and pose a risk to careful longrange financial planning. • Continue efforts in coalition with the League of Arizona Cities and Towns to help Protect State Shared Revenue from legislative changes at the state level. • Review Benefits Program to explore such options as increasing deductibles, requiring greater participant contributions and/or modifying our benefits cafeteria programs. Council Budget Tenets • Continue the modified base budget implemented at the start of the budget process, incorporating historical spending patterns, program cost adjustments, and long-range forecasts in the preparation of budget allocation targets, thereby limiting the rate of budgetary growth. • Continue to evaluate our self-supporting enterprise operations on an annual basis for rate changes. • Continue to re-examine current programs, re-engineering processes and evaluate the competitiveness of City services as necessary. • Continue to identify and address Council’s strategic issues. • Continue periodic budget reviews with the City Council. • Continue examination of current programs by each department for potential sunsetting opportunities. 21 Fund Summary Impact of budget decisions on the City’s financial position: The table below gives the estimated Operating and Capital Improvement unreserved fund balances for the 2010-11 fiscal year. Beginning balances total $167.0 million and the ending fund balances are estimated at $129.9 million. The decreases in fund balances reflect planned drawdowns to address projected budget shortfalls between revenues and expenditures resulting from the continued economic downturn. The fund balance in the General Fund will remain relatively untouched. Fund balances in certain Special Revenue funds (HURF, Performing Arts and Transit) will be applied to assist the operating funds that have also been negatively impacted. Within the Enterprise Funds, the Cemetery and Golf funds have presented significant financial challenges, requiring special attention to attain long-term financial sustainability. The drawdown of fund balance for the operation of the Water/Wastewater Program is consistent with the financial plan and includes expenses for debt, capital outlay, and mandatory environmental compliance. FY 2010-11 Fund General Estimated Fund Balance 6/30/10 $27,929,230 Total Financial Resources $154,088,190 $182,017,420 Revenue Interfund Transfer Budgeted Expenditures Adjusted Financial Resources $154,811,302 $27,206,118 $186,435 8,610,495 In (Out) Estimated Fund Balance 6/30/11 $27,392,553 Special Revenue: HURF/LTAF 9,921,450 CDBG/Section 8 Rio Salado Performing Arts Transit Debt Service 10,356,703 20,278,153 11,667,658 16,417,949 16,417,949 16,417,949 (2,770,000) 5,840,495 973,297 2,117,130 3,090,427 1,889,799 1,207,890 6,000,304 5,796,368 11,796,672 8,511,128 3,285,544 1,207,890 3,285,544 33,783,861 43,837,911 77,621,772 64,026,251 13,595,521 13,595,521 40,589,139 24,951,140 65,540,279 22,111,500 43,428,779 2,770,000 (49,000) 46,149,779 Enterprise: Cemetery Golf Solid Waste Water Utilities TOTAL OPERATING Capital Improvements TOTAL FUNDS (708,323) 144,420 379,350 (943,253) (42,310) 1,711,195 1,668,885 1,731,353 (62,468) 4,282,291 15,189,163 19,471,454 14,114,556 5,356,898 34,339,578 157,068,517 66,510,174 341,120,343 100,849,752 498,188,860 75,772,343 371,433,189 25,077,409 126,755,671 41,494,727 51,405,467 48,264,755 3,140,712 $382,615,070 $549,594,327 $419,697,944 $129,896,383 9,910,740 $166,979,257 (563,903) 22 (943,253) (62,468) 5,356,898 2,956,435 (436,463) (3,255,463) 24,640,946 126,463,905 436,463 (137,435) 3,439,740 $3,392,898 $(3,392,898) $129,903,645 Total Financial Program The Total Financial Program adopted for FY 2010-11 is $420 million, representing a 16% decrease from the FY 2009-10 Total Financial Program. The FY 2010-11 amount includes an Operating Budget of $371.4 million and a $48.3 million Capital Budget. The operating budget decrease of 8% in FY 2010-11 is related to a significant reduction of resources caused by the economic downturn. Changes include reductions in staffing levels, employee furloughs, reduced base budget appropriations, reorganization of city departments, suspension of employee compensation adjustments and other reductions. The 50% decrease in the Capital Budget is also attributed to severely limited revenues and financing options produced by the economy. FY 2010-11 Non-Departmental 2% CDBG/Section 8 Housing 4% Debt Service 19% CIP Budget $48.3 M / 12% Operating Budget $371.4 M / 88% Departmental Operating Budget 75% Total Financial Program FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 $316,918,110 $279,428,016 65,918,781 69,802,500 9,440,739 5,784,724 12,146,823 16,417,949 $404,424,453 $371,433,189 $96,310,568 $48,264,755 $500,735,021 $419,697,944 OPERATING BUDGET Departmental Operating Budget Debt Service Non-Departmental CDBG/Section 8 Housing TOTAL OPERATING BUDGET TOTAL CAPITAL BUDGET TOTAL FINANCIAL PROGRAM 23 Financial Program Summary The following table summarizes the revenues and expenditures for the City's Financial Program. General Governmental Special Revenue Enterprise Capital Budget Total Financial Program Revenues Local Taxes, Licenses & Permits $114,414,128 $114,420,596 Intergovernmental 35,181,557 35,165,037 Charges for Service 11,200,441 11,200,441 Fines and Forfeitures 10,322,095 10,322,095 Other 6,431,161 6,431,161 Interest 1,500,000 1,500,000 Transit 43,837,911 43,837,911 Highway User Revenue 10,356,703 10,356,703 CDBG / Section 8 Housing 16,417,949 16,417,949 Performing Arts Tax 5,796,368 5,796,368 Rio Salado 2,117,130 2,117,130 Water / Wastewater 66,510,174 66,510,174 Solid Waste 15,189,163 15,189,163 1,711,195 1,711,195 Golf Cemetery 144,420 Water / Wastewater G.O. Bonds Tax Supported G.O Bonds Grants Development Fees Other Fund Balances Total Revenues $179,049,382 $78,526,061 $83,554,952 144,420 36,646,338 36,646,338 1,605,954 1,605,954 739,500 739,500 1,000,000 1,000,000 8,272,963 $48,264,755 8,272,963 $389,395,150 Expenditures Public Safety 95,195,482 1,490,954 106,648,145 General Governmental Services 24,093,850 1,378,000 26,082,850 Community Services 25,669,162 701,463 29,685,856 Debt Service 22,111,500 22,111,500 9,066,984 9,066,984 785,824 785,824 Development Services Transportation (Maintenance of Effort) Transit 64,026,251 446,000 73,776,251 Highway User / Transportation 11,667,658 275,000 23,638,347 Performing Arts 8,511,128 8,511,128 10,623,052 10,623,052 CDBG 5,794,897 5,794,897 Rio Salado 1,889,799 Section 8 Housing 327,000 5,115,299 43,646,338 120,458,490 Water / Wastewater 75,772,343 Solid Waste 14,114,556 14,114,556 1,731,353 1,731,353 Golf Cemetery Total Expenditures $176,922,802 $102,512,785 24 379,350 $91,997,602 $48,264,755 379,350 $419,697,944 Financial Program Summary for Revenues and Expenditures/Expenses Total budgeted revenue in the FY 2010-11 Financial Program is approximately $389 million, reflecting a reduction when compared to the prior periods shown. This decrease is due primarily to a smaller Capital Budget in FY 201011 resulting from the City’s decreased bonding capacity. The budgeted expenditures for FY 2010-11 total $419.7 million, representing a reduction from the prior years shown in the table. Total budgeted expenditures have decreased during this period, largely due to the delay or cancellation of capital projects and substantial operating budget reductions; both attributable to, and in response to the economic downturn. The significant differences between total revenue and total expenses where revenues are insufficient to pay for expenditures in the Special Revenue and Enterprise Funds represent drawdowns of fund balances. Revenues Revenues/Sources General Fund Special Revenue Fund Enterprise Fund Debt Service Fund Capital Projects Fund Total FY 2008-09 Actual $165,111,782 77,844,401 72,532,920 25,162,769 168,033,325 $508,685,197 FY 2009-10 % FY 2009-10 % FY 2010-11 % Budget Change Revised Change Budget Change $163,249,924 (1%) $146,276,833 (10%) $154,088,190 5% 108,757,800 40% 70,519,081 (35%) 78,526,061 11% 79,549,537 10% 77,693,237 (2%) 83,554,952 8% 28,147,909 12% 28,147,909 0% 24,961,192 (11%) 96,310,568 (43%) 96,310,568 0% 48,264,755 (50%) $476,015,738 (6%) $418,947,628 (12%) $389,395,150 (7%) Expenditures Expenditures/Uses General Fund Special Revenue Fund Enterprise Fund Debt Service Fund Capital Projects Fund FY 2008-09 Actual $182,361,417 108,301,654 78,304,148 16,988,095 168,033,325 FY 2009-10 % FY 2009-10 % FY 2010-11 % Budget Change Revised Change Budget Change $185,892,521 2% $173,961,630 (6%) $154,811,302 (11%) 107,530,232 0% 99,024,718 (8%) 102,512,785 (4%) 91,126,158 16% 85,998,355 (6%) 91,997,602 7% 19,875,542 17% 19,217,500 (3%) 22,111,500 15% 96,310,568 (43%) 96,310,568 0% 48,264,755 (50%) Total $553,988,639 $500,735,021 (10%) $474,512,771 25 (5%) $419,697,944 (12%) Budget Process Flowchart The following flowchart depicts the City of Tempe’s Annual Budget process and timeline. Review Operating Requests Inform Stakeholders Obtain Input Advise Stakeholders of Outcome Solicit Feedback Develop Annual Departmental Budgets Submit Department Operating Requests Work Study Session Operating Budget Guidelines Prepare Long-range Forecast Models Adopt Tentative Operating Budget Operating Budget Guidelines Identify Strategic Issues Public Hearing Adopt Final Budgets Prepare Debt Management Plan Public Hearing, Levy Property Tax Adopt Tentative CIP Budget CIP Budget Guidelines Work Study Session Develop Annual Departmental CIP Budgets Submit CIP Requests Review CIP Requests … October November December Policy/Strategy Phase January February March April May June ... Review/Development Phase Financial Capacity Phase Budget Outreach Phase II Budget Outreach Phase I Needs Assessment Phase 26 Adoption/Implementation Phase Budget Process Summary Budget Process Overview Budget preparation allows departments the opportunity to reassess goals and objectives and the means for accomplishing them. Even though the budget is heard by the Mayor and Council in the spring and adopted by June 30, its preparation begins at least six months prior with projections of City reserves, revenue, expenditure limit requirements, and financial capacity. It is with this "groundwork" that departmental expenditure requests are made and subsequently reviewed. • Policy/Strategy Phase The Council's goals and directives set the tone for the development of the budget. In fact, shortly after the budget is adopted, the Council meets to identify strategic priorities, issues, and projects impacting the next fiscal year’s budget. The Council identifies key strategic issues that will provide the direction and framework for the budget. It is within this general framework that departmental supplemental funding requests for additional funding are formulated. Aside from the Council's own objectives, the departments identify and discuss their own policy issues with the City Manager. • Financial Capacity Phase Forecasting is an integral part of our decision-making process. Both long-range and short-range projections are prepared. The City's Comprehensive Financial Plan is updated annually to assess our current financial condition and future financial capacity, given our long-range plans and objectives. A five-year financial forecast is prepared for each major fund, projecting both expenditures and revenue. As a part of this phase, alternative scenarios are examined for their fiscal impact on each respective fund. Concurrent with the Comprehensive Financial Plan is the update of the Debt Management Plan, which provides a ten-year view of the City’s debt capacity. This planning process gauges the capacity to incur debt in the upcoming Capital Improvements Program given the City’s Financial Policy guidelines. • Budget Outreach Phases In a two-phase approach, the City interacted with all its stakeholders (residents, employees, businesses and others) to inform them about the extent of the budget issues and to engage them in being part of the solution. The first phase, generally from late October through early December was aimed to inform internal and external stakeholders about the gravity of the FY 2010-11 budget issue and obtain their input on potential solutions. The second phase, from early January through early March, was directed to inform all stakeholders about the City’s proposed solutions and solicit their feedback. Presentations by Budget Office staff at "budget kickoff" meetings include a discussion of citywide goals and objectives, budgeting guidelines for the operating and capital budgets, timelines, an overview of fiscal constraints, and resources available for allocation. The Budget Manual distributed at these meetings is designed to assist the departments in preparing all budget requests and forms. • Needs Assessment Phase The departments have an opportunity to assess current conditions, programs, and needs. Examination of current departmental programs or positions for possible trade-offs, reduction, or elimination is strongly suggested. During this phase, departments are encouraged to thoroughly review all programs and services, assessing their value and priority to the residents of Tempe. Additionally, departments reassess service level standards and workload indicators. They then attempt to provide the "best fit" of resource allocation with service and workload estimates. From this process, they prepare preliminary departmental budgets. • Review/Development Phase Within the framework of the City's financial capacity, Council and City Manager priorities and departmental needs assessments, budget requests are reviewed and a preliminary Citywide operating budget takes shape. The departments initially prepare and submit base budget worksheets reflecting allocation targets. The amount of the allocation is based on the department’s prior year budget. Supplemental requests are evaluated and the budget is presented at various levels: (1) base budget level, and (2) recommended level providing monies to implement new programs or expand existing City programs. • Adoption/Implementation Phase Prior to May 1, the City Manager submits to the Council a proposed operating budget for the fiscal year commencing the following July 1. The operating budget includes proposed expenditures and the means of financing them. 27 The property tax levy must be adopted by the third Monday in August. State law requires cities and towns with property taxes to adopt their tax rates annually. Management control of the budget is maintained by conducting monthly budget performance reviews throughout the fiscal year. They are aimed at examining expenditure patterns, and recommending corrective action to be taken during the year. Additionally, records are maintained to evaluate ongoing programs and services. • Budget Roles and Responsibilities Every employee plays a role in budgeting, be it formulation, preparation, implementation, administration, or evaluation. Ultimately, of course, the department head, through the City Manager, is accountable to the City Council for the performance of departmental personnel in meeting specific objectives within resource allocation limits. Actual budget preparation responsibility can be identified more specifically: 1. The program cost center manager is responsible for (a) preparing cost estimates for the remainder of the current fiscal year; (b) projecting base budget requirements for the next year; and (c) developing other requests that change or revise the program so that it will be more effective, efficient, productive and economical. 2. The department manager and the division administrator are responsible for reviewing, modifying and assembling their cost center data into a departmental request package. Department heads should critically evaluate departmental objectives and prioritize requests. The preparation of budget requests, goals and objectives should coincide with the strategic issues set forth by the Council. 3. Internal Service Areas (Fleet and Information Technology Areas) will contact each department to coordinate the initial needs assessment, cost estimates, and recommendations. Replacement equipment (i.e., vehicles, hardware/software and communication equipment) will be submitted to the Budget Office by the Internal Service areas. Any new equipment required by the departments should reflect the cost estimates and recommendations from the Internal Service areas and be submitted by the departments to the Budget Office. Final review and recommendations for hardware/software and communication equipment will be the result of evaluating priorities within the departmental budget team process. 4. The Budget Manager and Analysts within the Financial Services Department are responsible for (a) preparing short and long-range revenue and expenditure forecasts, (b) assisting departments as requested in the preparation of supplemental requests, (c) analyzing supplemental requests and presenting that analysis to the Budget Team (Department Managers and the Financial and Technology Director), and (d) reviewing the linkage between budget requests and the City’s strategic issues. 5. The Budget Team is responsible for reviewing departmental operating requests within the context of a set of evaluation criteria and preparing a recommended budget for review by the City Manager. 6. The Capital Improvements Program Executive Committee reviews program scopes, cost estimates and funding sources of CIP requests and prepares a recommended CIP budget for review by the City Manager. 7. The City Council is responsible for the review of the City Manager's tentative budget and approval of a final budget. 8. Transfer of Appropriations; at any time during the fiscal year, the City Manager may transfer part or all of any unencumbered appropriation balance among programs within a department, office, or agency (Section 5.08, City of Tempe Charter). 9. Midyear Program/Personnel Adjustment Request; should the need arise for additional personnel or program enhancements during the fiscal year to meet some unforeseen need, a midyear program/personnel request is submitted to the Budget Office for a needs assessment and fiscal impact review. If, after evaluation, the request is approved and involves either additional personnel or the abolition of a position(s), the request is forwarded to either the relevant Council Committee or full Council with recommended action. 10. Budget Transfers; the department should process a budget transfer request form anytime a shortfall is anticipated in a departmental subtotal budget. Budget transfers are not necessary to address a shortfall within summary account groups as long as sufficient monies are available in the subtotal departmental budget. The subtotal budget includes salaries and wages, fringe benefits, materials and supplies, fees and services, travel and other expenses, contributions, and capital outlay, and excludes internal services. Only as a last resort are contingency monies used to fund a shortfall. Alternative courses of action should be sought before contingency monies will be considered. Purchase orders and requisitions will be held until the budget shortfall is addressed. 11. Permission to Exceed Budget; in the event of an emergency, the Council may seek permission from the State Board of Tax Appeals (previously State Tax Commission) to exceed the adopted budget (Section 5.09, City of Tempe Charter). 28 Components of Total Financial Program FY 2010-11 Total Financial Program $419,697,944 Operating Budget $371,433,189 Capital Budget $48,264,755 General Governmental Enterprise Special Revenue General Purpose Enterprise Transportation Special Purpose $176,922,802 $91,997,602 $102,512,785 $3,570,417 $43,646,338 $275,000 $773,000 Public Safety Water/ Wastewater Transit General Governmental Water Streets Transit $275,000 $95,195,482 $75,772,343 $64,026,251 $1,028,000 $31,046,338 ________________________ _______________________ ________________________ _______________________ ________________________ _______________________ Community Services Solid Waste Highway User Police Wastewater Rio Salado $12,600,000 $327,000 $25,669,162 $14,114,556 $11,667,658 $890,954 ________________________ _______________________ ________________________ _______________________ General Services Golf Section 8 Housing Fire $24,093,850 $1,731,353 $10,623,052 $600,000 ________________________ _______________________ ________________________ ______________________ Debt Service Cemetery Performing Arts Community Services $22,111,500 $379,350 $8,511,128 $551,463 ________________________ ________________________ ______________________ Development Services CDBG Community Relations $9,066,984 $5,794,897 $250,000 ________________________ ________________________ _______________________ Transportation (Maintenance of Effort) $785,824 Rio Salado Park Improvements $1,889,799 $150,000 _______________________ Storm Drains $100,000 29 $446,000 General Governmental Funds: Ten Year Fund Balance Trends General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance $ Millions Over the ten year period, unreserved fund balances in the General Fund have exceeded the policy guideline of 20-30% of revenue. At FYE 2010, the General Fund unreserved fund balance is estimated at $27.9 million, which is slightly below the policy threshold. 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 54.0 37.0 35.1 34.5 34.5 37.8 '03 '04 '05 40.9 43.3 44.6 27.9 10.0 0.0 '01 '02 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 Transit Fund Balance $ Millions 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 54.2 49.0 20.0 42.1 40.9 41.8 38.2 29.6 29.3 34.2 33.2 During the late 1990’s, the Transit Fund balance was built up in preparation for the construction and operation of the light rail transit system. Near term draw downs of fund balance have been partially offset by federal reimbursements for light rail construction costs. 10.0 0.0 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 Debt Service Fund Balance $ Millions 50.0 40.0 30.0 40.6 20.0 31.8 10.0 9.3 23.9 13.4 16.0 18.5 12.1 13.5 17.6 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 0.0 '01 '08 '09 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 30 '10 The Debt Service fund balance has grown in recent years due to increased property tax collections from increased property values. There is a two-year lag between property valuations for tax purposes and collections. As such, the impact of the recent real estate recession has not yet been recorded in this fund. Performing Arts Fund Balance $ Millions 20.0 15.0 10.0 14.3 14.3 15.1 14.9 10.9 5.0 9.6 7.1 8.3 6.0 Since the fund’s inception in FY 2001-02, the fund balance steadily grew through FY 2005-06. Beginning in FY 2006-07, the fund has been tapped to cover differences between revenues and expenditures. Use of fund balance for operations during this period is consistent with the original financing plan; however the extent of the draw down exceeds the planned level. 0.0 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 Highway User Revenue/Local Transportation Assistance Fund Balances $ Millions Planned draw downs used to fund street infrastructure projects have contributed to the inconsistent trend in fund balances. The primary revenue source for these funds, state shared revenue, has sharply declined in recent years, leading to a rapid decline in fund balance. 15.0 10.0 11.1 5.0 8.4 8.9 7.3 8.0 11.3 12.8 9.4 8.2 5.0 0.0 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 31 '10 Enterprise Funds: Ten Year Fund Balance Trends Water/Wastewater Fund Unreserved Retained Earnings $ Millions In FY 2005-06 the City began drawing down retained earnings to finance capital improvements. Gradual planned increases to user rates are projected to build the fund balance back to the policy target level of an amount equal to one year of operating revenue. 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 55.7 65.2 59.8 67.5 60.8 65.6 55.6 50.6 20.0 42.9 34.3 10.0 0.0 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 Solid Waste Fund Unreserved Retained Earnings $ Millions 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.9 2.0 4.6 3.9 4.3 3.0 A planned drawdown of unreserved retained earnings began in FY 1999-00, which resulted in the reserve’s reduction to $20,000 in FY 2001-02. Since then, fee increases have been implemented to restore the fund balance to meet the new financial guideline of a minimum of 10% of anticipated revenue. 2.2 1.0 .05 .02 .05 1.1 0.0 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 Golf Unreserved Retained Earnings $ Thousands Expense growth has outpaced revenue growth since FY 1999-00, leading to the decline in reserves. As a result of this ongoing trend, the fund posted negative retained earnings as of FYE 2010. 1,000 800 600 894 400 792 680 605 540 469 200 264 217 0.4 -0.42 0 -200 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 32 '10 Operating Budget Overview The citywide operating budget for FY 2010-11 totals $371.4 million. This operating budget amount represents a decrease of 8.2% from the prior fiscal year. The number of full-time employees for FY 2010-11 totals 1,602 which represents an (8.8)% decrease from the prior year. General Fund appropriations decreased by 16.7%. This reflects funding for retirement and benefit inflationary adjustments. General Fund Fund Structure Description The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City and is used to account for all financial activity not reflected in another fund. Revenue Structure Major revenue sources are: Local Sales Taxes, Intergovernmental Revenue, Charges for Services, Property Taxes, Fines and Forfeitures and All Other. The following table depicts the major revenue sources as a percentage of General Fund revenue. Local Sales Taxes and Intergovernmental revenue represent the two major revenue sources in the General Fund. Together they comprise 70.5% or $108.7 million of the total $154.1 million FY 2010-11 General Fund revenue. • Local Taxes Local Taxes consist of both local sales taxes and transient lodging sales taxes. Combined Local Taxes contribute $72.1 million, or 46.8% of total General Fund revenue. Local sales tax revenue is estimated at $68.6 million in FY 2010-11. Local sales taxes are derived from a 1.4% City sales tax, while the overall tax rate is 2.0%. The remaining 0.6% is restricted to transit and performing arts purposes and is reflected in their respective funds. Major Revenue Sources Local Taxes Intergovernmental All Other Property Tax 7.8% Over half of the sales tax revenue comes from retail sales, with the remainder collected primarily from rental payments, utility and telecommunication payments, restaurant and bar sales and contracting sales. Charges for Service Fines & Forfeitures 7.3% 6.7% FY 2010-11 46.8% 22.8% 8.6% Tempe's single largest revenue source is highly responsive to changes in economic activity. As the national economy has declined from the national downturn, so too has the City’s economy. For FY 2010-11, sales tax collections are estimated to be 20% below the peak level realized in FY 2006-07. Also included in Local Taxes is the Transient Lodging Tax, or Bed Tax, which is set at 5% of hotel/motel lodging sales. This revenue source is estimated at $3.6 million in FY 2010-11. • Intergovernmental Revenue Revenue in this category is derived from three sources of state-levied revenue sharing: state sales tax, state income tax, and vehicle license taxes. Intergovernmental revenue represents $35.2 million or 22.8% of total General Fund revenue in FY 2010-11. The primary allocation basis for state revenue sharing is each city‘s or town’s relative share of the population of all incorporated cities and towns in Arizona. The allocations are based on the most recently completed United States Census. As of the 2005 Mid-Decade Census, Tempe's share of total statewide incorporated population is 3.41%. State sales tax State sales tax distributions are estimated at $12.7 million in FY 2010-11. The size of the overall pool of funding available for distribution is based on state statute, which provides for the allocation of 8.9% of transaction privilege (sales) tax revenue to cities and towns. The total statewide sales tax pool is estimated to be $373.4 million. State income tax Total estimated state-shared income tax revenue to be distributed to Arizona cities and towns is estimated at $473.3 million. Tempe’s share in FY 2010-11 is estimated at $16.1 million. Vehicle license tax The remaining state-shared revenue of $6.2 million is from vehicle license taxes. Of the net revenue collected for the licensing of motor vehicles by a county, 25% is distributed to incorporated towns and cities within the 33 county. Tempe’s share of the vehicle license tax collections is based on its population in relation to the total incorporated population of the county. • All Other Other General Fund revenue sources include Interest Income, Franchise Fees, Licenses and Permits, the Salt River Project Payment In-Lieu of Property Taxes, and other miscellaneous revenue. These sources contribute $13.2 million or 8.6% of General Fund revenue in FY 2010-11. • Property Tax Tempe’s property tax rate is $1.40 per $100 of assessed valuation, consisting of a primary tax rate of $0.52 per $100 of assessed valuation and a secondary tax rate of $0.88 per $100 of assessed valuation. Only the primary levy goes to the General Fund. While there is no restriction on its usage, the primary levy is limited by state law to a 2% annual increase plus any amount generated by new construction. The primary levy is estimated at $12.7 million in FY 2010-11. • Charges for Services Charges for services are budgeted at $11.2 million in FY 2010-11. Of this amount, recreation and social services programs contribute $6.6 million and development-related charges for building and trade permits, planning and zoning fees, and engineering fees account for $4.6 million. By Council policy, recreation and social service programs operate on a full or partial cost recovery basis. • Fines and Forfeitures Fines and Forfeitures represent $10.3 million in FY 2010-11. Traffic Fines represent $2.9 million or 28.3% of total fines collected. Rounding out the fines and forfeiture revenue sources is defensive driving school fees, parking fines, and criminal fines, along with delinquent collections and default penalties. Expenditure Structure The General Fund operating budget for FY 2010-11 totals $154.8 million. Major expenditure categories are: Personal Services, Fees and Services, Materials and Supplies, Capital Outlay, and All Other. The table to the right depicts the major expenditure categories as a percentage of total appropriations. The General Fund consists of all City operations with the exception of Enterprise Fund operations (Water, Solid Waste, Cemetery and Golf), Transportation (LTAF and HURF), Transit, Rio Salado, Performing Arts, Debt Service and CDBG/Section 8. Major Expenditure Categories Personal Services Fees and Services Materials and Supplies Capital Outlay/All Other FY 2010-11 78.3% 16.1% 4.7% 1.0% For FY 2010-11, Personal Services (salaries, wages and benefits) account for $121.2 million or 78.3% of the total General Fund operating budget. The remaining appropriations consist of $24.9 million or 16.1% for Fees and Services, $7.2 million or 4.7% for Materials and Supplies, and 1.0% for Capital Outlay and All Other. • Personal Services Since the majority of City personnel, and major functions of city government, are supported by the General Fund, it is not surprising that salaries and wages represent such a significant proportion of total expenditures. Salaries and wages account for $87.9 million, or 56.8% of the $154.8 million General Fund operating budget for FY 2010-11. Personal Services will continue to represent the major portion of fund expenditures regardless of any policy changes over the next five years. Fringe Benefits represent $33.3 million of the total Personal Services budget for FY 2010-11. • Fees and Services Fees and Services expenditures comprise 16.1% of the FY 2010-11 General Fund appropriation. The largest single portion of this expenditure category is for contracted services, accounting for 26% of total Fees and Services. Utilities (electricity, water, solid waste, and sewer) comprise the second largest share at 21.1% of total Fees and Services. Unlike most of the Fees and Services accounts, utility expenses are expected to increase somewhat higher than inflation. Other major Fees and Services expenditures for FY 2010-11 include software maintenance agreements (9%), equipment rental and repair (7.7%), and county jail costs (9%). • Materials and Supplies Totaling $7.2 million in FY 2010-11, expenditures for Materials and Supplies account for 4.7% of the General Fund operating budget. Of these expenditures, 38.5% is derived from motor vehicle parts, fuels, and lubricants. The remainder is for library books, clothing allowances, general office supplies, minor equipment, and miscellaneous supplies. Increases in Materials and Supplies over the next five years are expected to be driven largely by inflation. 34 • Capital Outlay/All Other Capital Outlay expenditures account for $1.6 million or 1% of the total General Fund operating budget in FY 2010-11. These monies fund new and replacement equipment, of which automobile and truck purchases constitute the largest portion at 83.1% of total Capital Outlay. Other major items in the Capital Outlay category include radios, turf maintenance equipment and computer equipment. Within the All Other category are amounts for contingencies, travel, contributions to community service organizations and the local convention and visitors bureau, and payment to Maricopa County for animal control services. Program Budget Summary The following section describes the allocation of the General Fund for the major functional, or program areas of Tempe city government. The General Fund budget for FY 2010-11 totals $154.8 million, a decrease of 16.7% from the prior year. The General Fund spending reduction is due to efforts to bring ongoing expenditures in line with lower revenue projections. Major Services The General Fund consists of the following major functions: • General Services • Development Services • Public Safety • Community Services • Environmental Health • Maintenance of Effort General Services Program General Services operating appropriations account for 15.6% of the General Fund budget in FY 2010-11. This area includes appropriations for Mayor and Council, City Manager, City Clerk, Human Resources, City Attorney, Fleet Services, Finance and Technology, and other departments. Funding for General Services decreased to $24.1 million in FY 2010-11, a 23.5% decrease from FY 2009-10. Program FY 2010-11 General Services $24,093,850 Public Safety Community Services Development Services Transportation Total 95,195,482 25,669,162 9,066,984 785,824 $154,811,302 Development Services Program Approximately 5.9% of the General Fund operating appropriations are earmarked for Development Services. This program area includes the Community Development department as well as the Public Works Engineering Division. The FY 2010-11 budget represents a $4 million, or 30%,decrease from FY 2009-10. Public Safety Program Public Safety continues to represent the largest appropriations area, accounting for 61.5% or $95.2 million of the General Fund operating budget in FY 2010-11. It includes appropriations for Police, Fire, and City Court. The FY 2010-11 budget represents a $12.5 million, or 12%, decrease from FY 2009-10. Community Services This area consists of all Community Services functions (Recreation, Library, Social Services, Cultural Services, and Historical Museum). Community Services represent 16.6% or $25.7 million of General Fund appropriations for FY 2010-11. Maintenance of Effort This transfer of local revenue funding fulfills a statutory requirement to maintain expenditures for streets with locally generated revenue. This obligation represents $785,824, or less than 1% of General Fund appropriations in FY 2010-11. Special Revenue Funds Transit Fund Fund Structure Description The Transit Fund is a Special Revenue fund established to account for the receipt and expenditure of the City's transit tax and other transit related revenues. Major Services This fund provides the following transit related functions: • Planning and Design 35 • • • • Operations Procurement Debt Service Community Outreach and Marketing Revenue Structure Transit Fund revenue comes primarily from a one half (½) cent City sales tax to fund transit improvements and from various intergovernmental revenues. • Transit Tax On September 10, 1996, the citizens of Tempe voted to approve Proposition 400, which provided for a ½ cent increase in the City sales tax to fund transit improvements. Proposition 400 limited the expenditure of the additional sales tax to improvements such as additional bus routes, alternative fuel buses, bus pullouts, and light rail. For FY 2010-11, the transit tax is expected to generate $25 million in revenue, or 57.1% of total Transit Fund revenue. • Intergovernmental Revenue Intergovernmental revenue represents $15.2 million, or 34.7% of total Transit Fund revenues in FY 2010-11. Expenditure Structure The Transit Fund includes all personnel in Transit Administration, Transit Operations, Transit Store and Bus Stop Maintenance. Major expenditures in the Transit Fund include: Fees and Services, Internal Services, Capital Outlay/All Other, Personal Services and Contingency. The following table depicts the major expenditure categories as a percentage of the total transit budget. Major Expenditure Categories Fees and Services Debt Service Capital Outlay/All Other Personal Services Internal Services FY 2010-11 71.7% 14.9% 6.6% 5.2% 1.6% • Fees and Services The largest expenditure in the Transit Fund is for Fees and Services, which provides funding for local and City of Phoenix transit routes. In FY 2010-11, Fees and Services are estimated to account for $45.9 million or 71.7% of the Transit Fund operating budget. • Debt Service Debt service represents 14.9% of the budget in FY 2010-11. As of June 30, 2010, there is $132.7 million of outstanding excise tax debt supported by Transit Tax revenues. • Capital Outlay/All Other Within this category are budgeted amounts for capital outlay, travel and other contributions. These uses represent 6.6% of the Transit Fund budget in FY 2010-11. • Internal Services Indirect cost allocations to the Transit Fund account for 1.6% or $1,019,970 of the FY 2010-11 budget. This amount represents the Transit Fund’s share of certain administrative costs funded by the General Fund. • Personal Services Personal Services account for 5.2%, or $3.3 million of the total FY 2010-11 budget. Performing Arts Fund Fund Structure Description The Performing Arts Fund is a Special Revenue fund established to account for the receipt and expenditure of the City's Performing Arts tax. Major Services • Operation and maintenance of the Tempe Center for the Arts • Debt service Revenue Structure Performing Arts Fund revenue comes primarily from a one tenth (1/10) cent City sales tax to fund construction and operation of the Tempe Center for the Arts. The remainder is from various cultural and recreational revenues. • Performing Arts Tax In May 2000, the residents of Tempe approved a 1/10 cent increase in the City sales tax to build and operate a performing arts center. For FY 2010-11, the performing arts tax is expected to generate $5.2 million in revenue, or 89.3% of total Performing Arts Fund revenue. 36 • Cultural and Recreational Revenues The primary cultural and recreational revenues generated from the Tempe Center for the Arts are Facility Rental and Facility Commissions revenue, which combined represent 7.6% of total revenue to the fund. Expenditure Structure The Performing Arts Fund includes all personnel in Administration, Facility Management, and TCA Arts Park maintenance. Major expenditures in the Performing Arts Fund include: Debt Service, Personal Services, Fees and Services, Internal Services, and All Other. The table to the right depicts the major expenditure categories as a percentage of the total Performing Arts Fund budget. Major Expenditure Categories Debt Service Personal Services Supplies and Services Internal Services/All Other FY 2010-11 71.2% 18.0% 7.5% 3.3% • Personal Services Personal Services account for 18%, or $1.5 million of the total FY 2010-11 budget. Personal services provide for the operation and maintenance of the Tempe Center for the Arts and the adjacent Arts Park. • Debt Service Debt service represents $6 million or 71.2% of the budget in FY 2010-11. As of June 30, 2010, there is $39.8 million of outstanding excise tax debt supported by Performing Arts Tax revenues. • Supplies and Services Supplies and Services are estimated to account for $637,205 or 7.5% of the Performing Arts Fund operating budget, with nearly half of that amount allocated for facility electricity expenditures. • Internal Services/All Other The remaining budgeted amounts in the Performing Arts fund cover Internal Services allocations to reimburse services provided by the General Fund and a small amount for Travel and Training. Combined, these categories comprise 3.3% of the Performing Arts Fund operating budget. Transportation Fund Fund Structure Description The Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) is a Special Revenue fund that is established to account for the receipt and expenditure of Tempe’s allocation of state-shared Highway User taxes. Major Services • Street Maintenance • Traffic Operations • Street Lighting and Signal Systems Revenue Structure Transportation revenue is derived primarily from state-shared Highway User taxes, which provide 91.3% of revenue in FY 2010-11. A Maintenance of Effort transfer from the General Fund represents the remainder of the revenue. • Highway User Tax State Highway User Tax revenue comes primarily (36.6%) from the $0.18 per gallon fuel tax levied by the state, with the remainder from vehicle license taxes (28.6%), motor carrier fees (3.3%), vehicle registration fees (13.4%), and other transportation-related fees (18%). Estimates for the total pool of HURF revenue to be shared by cities will be $289.6 million in FY 2010-11, with Tempe’s share at $9.5 million. HURF revenue is subject to state policy changes, fuel sales, and population growth, all factors beyond the City’s control. • Maintenance of Effort Transportation derives its remaining revenue from a “Maintenance of Effort” transfer from the General Fund. This transfer of locally-generated funds fulfills the statutory requirement placed on Arizona cities to maintain the expenditure of local revenue for streets at a level computed as an average of local funds expended for any four of the fiscal years 1981-82 through 1985-86. This transfer requirement is budgeted at $785,824 for FY 2010-11. Expenditure Structure Transportation funds include all personnel in the Street Maintenance and Traffic Operations Divisions. Major budgeted expenditures for the Transportation funds include: Personal Services, Internal Services, Materials and Supplies, Fees and Services, Transfers, and All Other. 37 The table below right depicts the major expenditure categories as a percentage of the total budget. • • Personal Services The largest budgeted expenditure in the Transportation Fund is Personal Services, which accounts for 30% or $3.5 million in FY 2010-11 of the total Transportation budget and will likely continue in that range for the next few years. Major Expenditure Categories Personal Services Transfers Internal Services and Utilities Additional expenditure demands in the Transportation funds are for Internal Services. Internal Services Fees and Services Internal Services costs (communications, information systems and vehicle maintenance) represent 16.9% or $2.0 million of the FY 2010-11 Materials and Supplies budget. All Other FY 2010-11 30.0% 26.4% 18.6% 16.9% 5.3% 2.7% The remaining expenditures are for Capital Outlay, Materials and Supplies and Contracted Services. These costs will be driven largely by inflation over the next five years. Debt Service Fund Fund Structure Description A Debt Service Fund is maintained to receive dedicated revenue used to make principal and interest payments on the City’s general obligation debt. Debt service for Special Purpose and Enterprise Program projects is accounted for in the respective funds. Revenue Structure Debt Service Fund revenue is derived from the secondary property tax and interfund transfers. The property tax accounts for 88.8% of the fund’s revenue in FY 2010-11. Revenue from these sources can only be used to retire debt. • Property Tax Debt Service revenue trends are a function of changes in assessed valuation and the City's secondary property tax rate. While changes in assessed valuation represent the effects of the marketplace and assessor methodology, the secondary rate is determined by City policy. The secondary property tax rate for FY 2010-11 year is $0.88 per $100 of assessed valuation and is expected to generate $22.2 million. The City's property tax is levied each year on or before the third Monday in August based on the full cash value of property from the previous January 1 as determined by the Maricopa County Assessor. Additional Debt Service revenue includes $2.8 million transferred from the HURF fund to retire transportation related debt. Expenditure Structure Expenditures in this fund are confined to principal and interest payments on bonded indebtedness. To keep these costs in check, the staff employs a long-range debt management plan, which is updated annually based on population growth, tax base growth, and current levels of general operating costs. Projected outstanding long-term general obligation bonds at June 30, 2010 totaled $477.8 million, including $305.2 million in Water/Wastewater bonds (not repaid by general tax revenue). Community Development Block Grant/Section 8 Housing Funds Fund Structure Description The Community Development Block Grant Fund (CDBG) and the Fiscal Year CDBG Section 8 Section 8 Housing Fund are Special Revenue Funds, established to $2,148,750 $5,427,291 account for the receipt and expenditure of federal grant funding awarded 2001-02 2002-03 2,896,728 7,227,924 to the city for redevelopment projects and rental subsidies for low income residents. 2003-04 2,793,637 8,364,970 2004-05 2,996,729 8,577,743 Major Services 2005-06 5,973,141 7,869,697 • Slum and blight removal (CDBG) • Rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing (CDBG) 2006-07 4,115,572 8,543,758 • Rent and utility subsidies (Section 8) 2007-08 1,577,124 8,784,219 2008-09 1,685,130 10,056,730 Revenue Structure 1,926,196 8,994,784 Both grants are awarded directly to the City from the federal government 2009-10 based on a funding formula which reflects such local factors as the 2010-11 5,794,897 10,623,052 percentage of people living in poverty, unemployment, population, the age of existing housing, and the need for housing. The table above right displays funding awarded to Tempe over the past 10 years. 38 Expenditure Structure Pursuant to federal requirements, most CDBG and Section 8 funding is expended on property rehabilitation and rental subsidies. These items represent 86.6% of the FY 2010-11 budget. Of the remaining budget, 7.5% is earmarked for salaries and benefits and 5.9% is allocated to contingencies and miscellaneous expenses. Enterprise Funds Water/Wastewater Fund Fund Structure Description The Water/Wastewater Fund is a self-supporting enterprise fund used to account for water and wastewater treatment operations, including debt service. It is financed and operated similarly to a private business and intended to recover costs through user charges. Revenue earned, expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriated for capital maintenance, management control, accountability, or other purposes. Major Services This budget provides for: • Water/Wastewater Administration • Water Resource Management • Water Conservation • Water Quality • Transmission & Collection • Technical Services • Wastewater Reclamation • Environmental Services • Utility Customer Services • Irrigation Revenue Structure Water, Irrigation, and Wastewater user fees account for 97.3% or $64.7 million of the $66.5 million in total fund revenue in FY 2010-11. The following table depicts the major revenue categories as a percentage of total revenue. Major Revenue Categories FY 2010-11 Water and Irrigation User Fees 51.8% Wastewater User Fees 45.5% All Other 2.2% Interest Income 1.0% • Water and Irrigation User Fees Water and irrigation user (consumption) fees provide $34.4 million or 51.8% of the total Water/Wastewater Fund revenue in FY 2010-11. This revenue amount reflects an estimated 42,107 accounts for potable water and 861 irrigation water accounts. • Wastewater User Fees Over 39,360 Wastewater Service accounts are estimated to produce $30.3 million or 45.5% of the total fund revenue in FY 2010-11. Residential wastewater charges are largely driven by water consumption in that monthly billings are based upon a three month Winter average consumption. • Interest Income/All Other Cash balances in the Water/Wastewater Fund are expected to generate $671,769 in Interest Income during FY 2010-11. This represents 1% of the fund’s total revenue. Other sources of fund revenue include a loan repayment from the General Fund, land and building rental fees, delinquent payment charges, and miscellaneous fees and charges. Expenditure Structure Total estimated operating expenses for FY 2010-11 are $76.2 million. Debt Service, Personal Services and Wastewater Plant Regional Operating Expenses represent 74.7% of the total operating expenses. The table to the right shows the composition of fund expenses group by major category. • • Major Expense Debt Service Debt Service accounts for 41.9% of total estimated Categories expenses for FY 2010-11, indicative of the capital intensive Debt Service nature of a water/wastewater operation. Personal Services Personal Services Personal Services represent $15 million or All Other 19.7% of Water/Wastewater operating expenses. For FY 2010WW Regional Exp. 11, salaries and wages account for 75.1% of the total Personal Electricity and Water Services budget. Internal Services 39 FY 2010-11 41.9% 19.7% 14.3% 13.1% 6.3% 4.7% • All Other Other major budgeted expenses include chemical supplies, contingencies, water quality testing and contracted services. These expenses represent 14.3% of the budget for FY 2010-11. • Wastewater Plant Regional Operating Expenses Tempe participates in an intergovernmental agreement for the construction, operation, and maintenance of jointly used facilities, including the 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant in Phoenix, Salt River Outfall Sewer and the Southern Avenue Interceptor. The City pays for upgrades based on relative sewage flows and strengths. Expenses associated with the 91st Avenue Plant alone represent $10 million or 13.1% of the FY 2010-11 total. This amount includes carry forward appropriations to cover prior year encumbrances. • Electricity and Water Utilities comprise a major expense within this fund, as substantial electricity and water is required to provide these services. For FY 2010-11, electricity and water are budgeted at $4.8 million, or 6.3% of total expenses. • Internal Services Internal Services costs for information systems, communications, vehicle maintenance, and indirect charges account for $3.6 million or 4.7% of FY 2010-11 Water/Wastewater expenses. Summary Water/Wastewater Fund estimated operating expenses for FY 2010-11 are $76.2 million, which represents an increase of 4.5% over FY 2010-11. After adjusting for the impact of $4.6 million of prior year carry forward encumbrances, the FY 2010-11 appropriation actually decreased by 1.8%. Solid Waste Fund Fund Structure Description The Solid Waste Fund is a self-supporting enterprise fund intended to recover all operating, maintenance, and debt service costs to provide residential, commercial, recycling and roll-off solid waste services. Revenue Structure Revenue in the Solid Waste Fund derives almost exclusively from user fees for residential, recycling, commercial, roll-off, and uncontained solid waste service. These revenues are supplemented by a small amount of interest revenue. The collection and disposal of contained solid waste represents the City's second largest enterprise operation. • Residential Solid Waste User Fees Residential solid waste user fee revenue is expected to generate $8.5 million in FY 2010-11, which equates to 55.8% of the total revenue for this fund. Residential customers pay an average of $19.98 per month and the number of active accounts totals 32,882. • Commercial Solid Waste User Fees Commercial solid waste fees are expected to generate $5.2 million in FY 2010-11 or 34% of the total fund revenue. Collection of commercial solid waste is provided by the City or a licensed collector. The number of active commercial accounts totals 1,784. Expense Structure Solid Waste estimated expenses for FY 2010-11 total $14.1 million. Of the total operating expenses, Personal Services, Internal Services and Landfill Usage Charges comprise 86.4%. Capital Outlay accounts for 9.3%, while the remaining 4.3% is for Materials and Supplies, Utilities, and Miscellaneous Fees and Services. Major Expense Categories Personal Services FY 2010-11 38.6% Landfill Usage Charges Internal Services 25.3% 22.6% • Personal Services As with many labor intensive operations, Capital Outlay/All Other 13.5% Personal Services represent a major expense in the Solid Waste Fund, accounting for $5.5 million or 38.6% of the $14.1 million budget in FY 2010-11. Salaries and wages account for 73.2% of the total personal services budget, with health insurance accounting for 13.8% and the remainder for other fringe benefits. • Landfill Usage Charges Landfill usage charges are estimated at $3.6 million, representing 25.3% of total expenses. Landfill tipping fees are projected to follow expected inflation rates, but environmental compliance requirements could impact these expenses beyond normal inflation. 40 • Internal Services Internal Service charges represent 22.6% or $3.2 million of the FY 2010-11 budget. Internal Service charges consist of data processing, communications, vehicle maintenance and related Internal Services charges. As might be expected in Solid Waste operations, a majority (58.3%) of total internal service costs derive from vehicle operating and maintenance expenses. • Capital Outlay/All Other The Solid Waste budget reflects appropriations of $1.3 million for replacement of solid waste trucks and other equipment, and $603,754 for other miscellaneous operating expenses. Summary The Solid Waste Fund budget of $14.1 million represents a 12.2% decrease from the FY 2009-10 budget. This is primarily due to a $958,926 decrease in capital outlay costs and a $406,406 decrease in landfill usage charges. Revenue in this fund is expected to decrease to $15.2 million, a 4% decrease from FY 2009-10 collections. Golf Fund Fund Structure Description The Golf Fund is a self-supporting enterprise fund that provides for operation of two municipal golf course, with costs recovered through user charges. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance and debt service. Revenue Structure • Greens Fees Greens fees amount to $1.5 million in FY 2010-11, accounting for 85.1% of golf course revenue for the year. Revenue projections are traditionally conservative to reflect the volatility that can result from weather conditions or fee changes. • Pro Shop and Restaurant Revenue Pro shop revenue and restaurant rent is anticipated to generate $254,195 in FY 2010-11. This amount constitutes 14.9% of revenue to the fund. Expenditure Structure Personal Services and Supplies and Services represent the major categories of Golf Fund expenditures. Together they account for 85% of total Golf Fund expenses in FY 2010-11. The remaining expenses include Internal Services, Materials and Supplies, and Capital Outlay. • Personal Services Personal Services account for $785,229 or 45.4% of FY 2010-11 expenses. Major Expenses Categories Personal Services Supplies and Services Internal Services FY 2010-11 45.4% 27.2% 14.4% • Supplies and Services Supplies and Services expenses account for 26% of expenses in FY 2010-11, and primarily fund irrigation water and electricity. • Internal Services Golf operation internal service costs are primarily vehicle maintenance and fuel, and represent $260,851, or 15.1% of budgeted expenses in FY 2010-11. Summary Golf Fund appropriations for FY 2010-11 decreased by $446,707 from FY 2009-10. The bulk of the decrease comes in the personal services category. Cost reduction is necessary to offset declining revenue reflective of the continuing slowdown in the golf industry. 41 Citywide Overview Total Operating Budget and Debt Service Budget Data FY 2008-09 Actual FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2009-10 Revised FY 2010-11 Budget Operating Budget $349,748,188 $384,548,911 $358,952,203 $349,321,689 $2,074 $2,265 $2,114 $2,043 9.2% (6.7%) (3.4%) $16,988,095 $19,875,542 $19,217,500 $22,111,500 $101 $117 $113 $129 16.2% (3.3%) 14.3% Cost Per Capita % Change (cost per capita) Property Tax-Supported Debt Service Cost Per Capita % Change (cost per capita) Total Operating Revenue by Source Source FY 2008-09 Actual FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2009-10 Revised FY 2010-11 Budget General Fund $165,111,782 $163,249,924 $146,276,833 $154,088,190 Debt Service Fund 25,162,769 28,147,909 28,147,909 24,961,192 Transportation/Transit Funds 57,146,387 87,901,299 51,540,604 54,194,614 CDBG/Section 8 Funds 11,741,860 12,146,823 10,920,980 16,417,949 Rio Salado Fund 1,942,502 2,018,601 1,765,861 2,117,130 Performing Arts Fund 7,127,729 6,866,077 6,491,636 5,796,368 Solid Waste Fund 15,439,847 15,828,588 14,989,166 15,189,163 Water/Wastewater Fund 55,180,952 61,572,480 60,844,647 66,510,174 1,820,124 2,001,283 1,715,004 1,711,195 91,997 147,186 144,420 144,420 $340,765,949 $379,880,170 $322,837,060 $341,130,395 Golf Fund Cemetery Fund Total Staffing Summaries Citywide: Full-Time Authorized Positions Source Total Personnel Employees/1,000 Population FY 2008-09 Actual FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2009-10 Revised FY 2010-11 Budget 1,851 1,811 1,757 1,602 11.0 10.7 10.4 9.4 (2.7%) (2.8%) (9.6%) % Change (Employees/1,000 Population) 42 Strategic Issues: Management/Budgeting Purpose The purpose of a Strategic Issues Management/Budgeting program for Tempe is to provide a mechanism for identifying, prioritizing, and managing top priority emerging issues which require interdepartmental coordination and to provide a process for integrating strategic planning and budgeting. The City Council identifies strategic issues (shown on following page) setting the tone at the start of the budget process. The process allows a prioritization of emerging issues, yielding specific priorities and plans which have multiyear operational and budget implications. Strategic Issues Management/Budgeting Process Activity Responsibility Timeframes August Council Summit Identify and prioritize key goals that each Council Committee wants to achieve and see further progress on for the upcoming budget year. Incorporate goals into Council Committee’s work plan. City Council Establish cross-functional teams and/or standing groups to advance each goal identified and develop action plans for each. City Manager Executive Team August Identify and recommend corresponding strategies, action plans, and/or departmental activities to further bring improvement and/or results to goals identified by each committee. Cross-functional Teams September/October Review strategies, action plans, and or departmental activities recommended by the cross-functional team/groups with the Executive Team. Staff Coordinators Executive Team Late October, early November Executive Summit Review strategies/action plans associated with goal with oversight Council Committee for recommendations in conjunction with the Committee’s work plan. City Council Committee Mid/late November Review strategies, action plans, responsibilities, and associated Council Committee work plan with City Council. Staff Coordinator City Council December/January Incorporate approved goals, strategies, and action plans into operating and capital improvements budget program and structure budget requests. Executive Team December/January Consider budget requests from departments (based on goals and action plans). City Council Executive Team February Evaluate status of goals and action plans with management team (midyear review). City Council Executive Team February (midyear review) Evaluate budget requests and allocate budget resources accordingly. Executive Team March/April Conduct public sessions on operating and capital improvements budget program. City Council Executive Team April/May Adopt budget program. City Council June Review results of goals and action plans established for the fiscal year City Council just completed. Begin process anew for the next budget period. Executive Team 43 August Council Summit Council Committees and Strategic Issues Community Sustainability Address environmental programs and capital projects, including: development and application of cost-effective, environmentally sustainable programs, including recycling programs and resource conservation and waste reduction programs, both for city operations and community application; and consideration and development of environmental design standards that are specifically applicable to the arid, relatively warm, climate of Tempe. Education Partnerships Address opportunities to advance the quality and delivery of education. Emphasis includes: facilitate partnering between all educational entities and the City; facilitate development of programs to improve schools and provide life-long learning opportunities; develop and provide City services through school facilities; identify and facilitate resource sharing between all elementary and high schools, Arizona State University, Maricopa Community College District and the City; facilitate ASU's and Maricopa Community College District's participation in education improvement in all Tempe schools; identify and consolidate purchasing and maintenance programs between the City and educational agencies; and identify and facilitate joint facilities development for school-resident. Housing Address housing programs and capital projects. Emphasis includes: designing and undertaking a comprehensive public process to consider options and develop broad support for affordable and workforce housing strategies; creating opportunities for private sector and non-profit participation in affordable and workforce housing efforts; planning, development, coordination and implementation of affordable and workforce housing concepts and programs; and oversight of services targeted at moving individuals and families from homelessness to home ownership. Mill and Lake District Address and "vision" continuing development of the Rio Salado project, Papago Park, and the Mill Avenue District. This encompasses examining redevelopment and stabilization, branding, tourism and identification in and of Tempe's central core, and major redevelopment projects within the central core. Emphasis includes: ASU partnerships to assist in rehabilitation of Sun Devil Stadium; light rail-related real estate development and other development and redevelopment affecting Tempe's central core; efforts to maintain, rehabilitate and preserve Papago Park and its amenities; and work with third-party agencies to create a widely accepted and understood vision of the general Mill & Lake District area. Neighborhood Parks Rehabilitation and Maintenance Address neighborhood park rehabilitation and maintenance efforts. Emphasis includes, with neighborhood participation, oversight of: development, coordination and assessment of neighborhood parks design process; development, coordination and assessment of neighborhood parks master plans; and coordination and assessment of park maintenance programs. Quality of Life Address residential and business neighborhood property enhancement and public safety. Emphasis includes oversight of: development, implementation and assessment of public safety initiatives for neighborhood policing, traffic enforcement to reduce neighborhood speeding and cut-through traffic and enforcement of the loud-party ordinance; enforcement and assessment of commercial property enhancement codes and neighborhood enhancement and rental housing codes; assist ASU's efforts to improve student housing at ASU and address those efforts' impact on neighborhoods; development, implementation and assessment of programs to eradicate graffiti and improve, maintain and reconstruct streets and alleys; development, implementation and assessment of programs to enhance and maintain city and private landscaping requirements; and development and implementation of programs to encourage rehabilitation of neighborhood shopping centers and neighborhoodsupportive business districts. Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development Address opportunities for economic and cultural development, including programs and related capital projects associated with professional, youth and amateur sports and recreation, and arts and cultural opportunities. Emphasis includes development, coordination and assessment of arts programs and services, including programs resulting from partnerships with community and regional organizations, planning, development and implementation of community fundraising for public amenities within the Tempe Papago Park and Lake District; planning, development and completion of capital improvement programs for Historic Museum, Library facilities and Vihel Center; rehabilitation of historic properties; development and implementation of veterans outreach programs and efforts; development of new and improvements to existing regional parks; oversee golf program operations and capital improvement programs for enhancing and stabilizing golf program operation and enhance and expand community use of ASU facilities for youth and amateur sports programs. 44 Technology, Economic and Community Development Address technology application and implementation, economic development issues and opportunities, and community development and redevelopment strategies and efforts. Emphasis includes: expansion of the use and availability of technological enhancements by City Government and Tempe residents and businesses; address strategies to create economic stabilization and revitalization; redevelopment and development services policy formation for recommendation to Council and implementation of council-approved projects; development, implementation and assessment of economic development approaches, projects and proposals; redevelopment of neighborhood commercial centers; and efforts to attract additional hotel and conference facilities. Transportation Address transportation programs and capital projects. Emphasis includes: completion of light rail project; planning, execution and integration of entire city and regional transportation systems; planning, development, coordination and implementation of multi-modal transportation elements; implementation of bus shelter and bus pull-out improvements; in conjunction with Education Partnerships Committee, develop and implement transportation programs directed to assist students in Tempe schools; oversee arterial street and public works programs to reduce citywide and regional traffic congestion and improve traffic flows; monitor activities of Sky Harbor airport and airlines, and seek full compliance with Tempe's adopted program for aircraft overflights. 45 Per Capita Expenditures by Program In FY 2010-11, the total financial program per capita cost is $2,454, representing a 17% decrease from FY 2009-10. In this fiscal year, for every $1 of expenditure, 32¢ is earmarked for Environmental Health, 23¢ for Public Safety, 18¢ for Transportation, and the remainder for General Services, Community Services, and Development Services. In relation to the prior year, there is a sizable decrease in Community Services, primarily due to the completion of the public library renovations and significant reductions to capital improvement funding. Per Capita Spending by Program as a Percent of Total Spending 40% 32% 27% 30% 24% 23% 21% 18% 20% 11% 12% 12% 9% 10% 5% 6% 0% General Services Public Safety Community Services Development Services Environmental Health Transportation FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 Per Capita Expenditures Program General Services FY 2009-10 Percentage of Total FY 2010-11 Percentage of Total $323 11% $287 12% Development Services 159 5% 158 6% Public Safety 703 24% 567 23% Environmental Health 787 27% 778 32% Community Services 350 12% 216 9% Transportation 627 21% 448 18% $2,949 100% $2,454 100% Total Per Capita Expenditures 47 Program By Fund Summary The majority of funding for the City’s three largest program areas, Environmental Health, Public Safety and Transportation, comes from enterprise, special, general and capital revenues. In terms of General Fund revenues, the Public Safety program receives the majority of funding, representing 62% of the General Fund budget. FY 2010-11 Fund General Rio Salado General Services Development Services Public Safety Environmental Community Health Services Transportation $25,669,162 $24,093,850 $9,066,984 $95,195,482 90,892 1,582,552 216,355 HURF Transit Debt Service Performing Arts 554,820 423,233 Solid Waste 583,054 CDBG/Section 8 Housing Capital Improvements TOTAL PROGRAM 11,667,658 63,471,431 64,026,251 22,111,500 8,087,895 8,511,128 1,731,353 1,731,353 14,114,556 14,114,556 75,189,289 75,772,343 16,417,949 16,417,949 Cemetery Total Operating 11,636,258 Public Safety represents the largest program in the General Fund. Golf Water/Wastewater 785,824 $154,811,302 1,889,799 31,400 22,111,500 379,350 47,857,349 27,067,485 1,278,000 $49,135,349 $27,067,485 Total 379,350 95,411,837 89,335,245 35,867,760 75,893,513 371,433,189 1,490,954 43,746,338 1,028,463 721,000 48,264,755 $96,902,791 $133,081,583 $36,896,223 48 $76,614,513 $419,697,944 Program By Department Summary FY 2010-11 Department Mayor and Council City Manager Community Relations City Clerk General Development Services Services Environmental Community Health Services Transportation Total $317,913 $317,913 273,771 273,771 2,919,824 2,919,824 744,628 744,628 City Court Human Resources Public Safety 3,605,850 3,605,850 2,526,736 2,526,736 Public Works spans five of the six program areas. City Attorney 2,909,505 Financial Services 3,350,276 Diversity Program 441,351 441,351 Internal Audit 414,920 414,920 Community Development 2,909,505 2,117,351 5,467,627 24,727,765 1,139,262 25,867,027 Police 66,334,365 66,334,365 Fire 25,471,622 25,471,622 Community Services 401,383 Public Works 6,848,025 1,938,337 TOTAL DEPT 20,746,949 27,067,485 Non-Departmental Debt Service 19,937,284 95,411,837 9,689,476 64,418,427 137,212,159 56,435,245 29,626,760 65,557,689 294,845,965 785,824 5,784,724 9,550,000 69,802,500 31,900,000 Contingency 6,241,000 1,000,000 TOTAL OPERATING 47,857,349 Capital Improvements 1,278,000 TOTAL PROGRAM 54,317,894 4,998,900 22,111,500 20,338,667 $49,135,349 27,067,485 $27,067,485 1,000,000 95,411,837 89,335,245 35,867,760 75,893,513 371,433,189 1,490,954 43,746,338 1,028,463 721,000 48,264,755 $96,902,791 49 $133,081,583 $36,896,223 $76,614,513 $419,697,944 Residential Cost of Service The City maintains three utility services for water, sewer, and solid waste. For FY 2010-11, the City Council has approved an increase in water and sewer rates to be effective November 1, 2010. Rate reviews for each of the utility services will continue annually. Local Taxes Sales Tax Residents voted in favor of supporting a temporary four year increase in the sales tax rate, taking it from 1.8% to 2.0%. The additional two tenths of a percent increase is not applied to food for home consumption and construction contracting, and will expire June 30, 2014. Of the total tax, 1.4% is dedicated to the General Fund, 0.5% is dedicated to the Transit Fund, and 0.1% is devoted to the Visual and Performing Arts. Property Tax The property tax rate for FY 2010-11 will remain at $1.40/$100 assessed valuation. The primary tax rate is $0.52 and the secondary tax rate is $0.88. The primary levy is used to pay for General Fund services such as police, fire, parks, and libraries, while the secondary tax levy is restricted to repay debt on general obligation bonds. Utility Charges for Services Water/Sewer Water and sewer rates were last increased in November 2009. Water rates were increased by 14% and sewer rates increased by 20%. Per Council approval, in the fall of 2010, the residential water rates will increase by 12.5%, while sewer rates will increase by 6.8%. Water and sewer rates are reviewed annually to attain full cost recovery, as customer charges are based on operating and maintenance costs and financing of capital programs. Services provided include water conservation, water quality, transmission and collection, wastewater reclamation, environmental services, customer services and irrigation. Solid Waste In the fall of 2009, the residential service rate increased by 5.0%, while the commercial service charge increased by 3.0%. Although no increases are programmed for this upcoming November, solid waste rates are annually reviewed to fully recover all operating, maintenance and debt service costs to provide residential, commercial, recycling and rolloff refuse services. Average Utility Charges for Services (monthly) 1 Local Taxes 1 Fiscal Year Sales Tax Property Tax Water Sewer Solid Waste 2009-10 1.8% $1.40 $26.47 $19.73 $19.02 2010-11 2.0% $1.40 $30.29 $23.68 $19.98 Charges reflect rates effective July 1, 2010. 50 Personnel Summary: Ten Year History The number of full-time employees for FY 2010-11, excluding full-time equivalents or temporary full-time equivalents, totals 1,602 an 11.5% decrease from FY 2009-10. Total employees per 1,000 population for FY 201011 is estimated at 9.37, a 12.1% decrease from the previous fiscal year. The decrease in the number of personnel is due to budget reductions that required a reduction in the number of employees in the General fund, Golf fund, HURF, Performing Arts and Transit fund. Per 1,000 Population 12 Full-Time Employees 2,000 10 1,500 8 The total number of full-time employees has decreased from 1,722 to 1,602 from 2002 to 2011 for a 7.0% decrease. During that same period the number of employees per 1,000 population decreased by 13.2%. 1,000 500 6 4 2 0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Fiscal Year Full-Time Employees Per 1,000 Population Fiscal Year End Full-Time Employees Employees Per 1,000 Population 2002 1,722 10.80 2003 1,692 10.61 2004 1,643 10.29 2005 1,645 10.10 2006 1,700 10.25 2007 1,734 10.40 2008 1,831 10.93 2009 1,851 10.98 2010 1,811 10.66 2011 1,602 9.37 51 This page intentionally left blank. Comprehensive Financial Plan The following section summarizes the Comprehensive Financial Plan which serves as the cornerstone for the financial action plan and capital and operating budget decision making. It includes long-range forecasts of revenues and expenditures, issues, trends and resource choices for all funds, and debt management program. Comprehensive Financial Plan Contents Page Comprehensive Financial Plan Overview ..................................................................................................................... 54 Forecast Methodology.................................................................................................................................................... 56 Forecast and Major Revenue Assumptions.................................................................................................................. 57 Financial Overview ......................................................................................................................................................... 59 Major Expenditure Assumptions and Economic Outlook ........................................................................................... 60 General Fund................................................................................................................................................................... 61 Transit Fund .................................................................................................................................................................... 63 Performing Arts Fund..................................................................................................................................................... 65 Transportation Funds..................................................................................................................................................... 67 Rio Salado and Community Facilities District (CFD) Funds ....................................................................................... 69 Enterprise Funds Water/Wastewater Fund .............................................................................................................................................. 71 Solid Waste Fund......................................................................................................................................................... 73 Golf Fund ..................................................................................................................................................................... 75 Cemetery Fund ............................................................................................................................................................ 77 Financial Action Plan...................................................................................................................................................... 79 53 Comprehensive Financial Plan Overview Introduction The Comprehensive Financial Plan, first published in March 1991, is a vital component of Tempe’s financial management strategy. Its purpose is to provide a five-year perspective on the financial condition of the City’s major appropriated funds. As a planning tool it provides a long-range context for the City Council to use in making budgetary decisions for the upcoming fiscal year. Financial forecast models are utilized to examine the City's appropriated operating funds and their underlying revenue and expenditure structures for the period of FY 2009-10 through FY 2013-14. These forecast models are presented along with trends, forecasts, and fund balances for each of the funds. It is important to note that the forecast models presented herein were presented to the City Council in January 2010 and provided five-year perspectives that were representative of the City’s projected financial position at that time; prior to the extensive budget balancing measures that were subsequently incorporated in the adopted FY 2010-11 budget. As is stated above, the forecast models provided a long-range context for the City Council to use in making budgetary decisions for the upcoming fiscal year, and as such, the models proved to be instrumental in the decision making process that ensued. Accordingly, the discussion regarding the forecast models presented in this section pertains to financial projections prior to the City’s budget balancing efforts as discussed in the Budget Message. Notably, items such as the residents’ approval of a temporary two tenths of one percent (.02%) increase in the City’s sales tax rate as a budget balancing measure are not included. Major operating funds examined include: Governmental Funds Enterprise Funds General Fund Transit Fund Transportation Fund Performing Arts Fund Rio Salado/Community Facilities District Funds Water/Wastewater Fund Solid Waste Fund Golf Fund Cemetery Fund The City is in the midst of the deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Consequently, the City is facing its most significant financial challenge in the modern era. Nearly all operating funds have been negatively impacted by the economic downturn, with the most serious consequences experienced in the City’s tax-supported funds. In terms of specific funds, the General Fund is projected to experience deficits in FY 2009-10, and the shortfall is expected to continue through the forecast period. Due to continued declining sales tax collections the annual deficit for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12 is estimated at $34 million, while the underlying structural deficit is estimated at $30 million for the forecast period. The Transit Fund is projected to experience annual deficits beginning FY 2009-10 and continuing through the forecast period. The annual deficit for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12 is estimated at $20.5 million, while the underlying structural deficit is estimated at $17.5 million for the forecast period. The Performing Arts Fund is in an operating deficit condition throughout the forecast period. The ongoing annual deficit is now estimated at $3 million. Complete drawdown of fund balance will occur as early as FY 2011-12. A deficit is projected in the Transportation Fund beginning in FY 2008-09 and continuing through the end of the forecast. The structural deficit for this fund is estimated at $3.5 million through the forecast period, with the complete drawdown of all available fund balances projected by FY 2012-13. The Rio Salado/Community Facilities District (CFD) is projected to experience complete drawdown of fund balances by FY 2012-13. The Water/Wastewater Fund is projected to experience operating deficits until FY 2011-12 when surpluses are anticipated through the end of the forecast. Due to projected increases in operating costs along with debt service associated with expansion of the Capital Improvements Program, future rate adjustments will be necessary to ensure full cost recovery. 54 The Solid Waste Fund is projected to be in good condition throughout the forecast period. Projected out-year deficits are primarily due to non-recurring capital expenditures necessary to maintain the fleet of solid waste vehicles to ensure efficient service delivery. The Golf Fund has been experiencing an operating deficit for several years, and given current operations, the forecast is that this trend will continue. It is likely that the fund balance will be fully depleted during the current fiscal year. The Cemetery Fund has experienced an operating deficit since it’s inception in FY 2005-06 and the forecast anticipates continuation of this trend absent corrective action. The fund balance has been depleted and the fund receives intra-fund loans. 55 Forecast Methodology Forecasting used in this report refers to the estimating of the future values of revenue and expenditures. It provides an estimate of how much revenue will be available and the resources required to meet current service levels and programs over the forecast period, along with an understanding of how the total financial program will be affected by the demographic and economic factors driving these forecasts. The value of forecasting lies in estimating whether, given assumptions about local financial policies and economic trends, the City will have sufficient resources to meet the requirements of ongoing, planned, or mandated programs. Forecast models also provide a planning tool for capital projects and/or determining whether bonded indebtedness will be required for capital funding. In short, forecasting provides an estimate of the financial flexibility of the City, as well as insight into tax, revenue, and service options the Council must address. Our forecasting methodology reflects a combination of internal analysis and locally generated consensus forecasts covering such factors as population growth, retail sales, and inflation. Specifically, for the revenue forecasts, we begin with models that include prior year actual collections and project the balance of the current fiscal year based on prior year patterns. For the remaining years of the revenue forecast, we look to external forecasts for guidance on economic trends, Principal among these external sources is participation as a sponsor of the Forecasting Project developed by the University of Arizona Eller College of Economic and Business Research Center. Another key external source is the State Finance Advisory Committee (FAC), which provides a forecast of major state revenue sources on a quarterly basis. Typically, these forecasts cover the state or the metro-Phoenix area as a whole, so adjustments to reflect unique conditions in Tempe are sometimes necessary. In general, we seek to match revenue sources with the economic and/or demographic variables that most directly affect year-to-year changes in those revenues. For example, a revenue such as the City Sales Tax will reflect consensus forecasts related to disposable income growth. Other revenue, such as those from recreation services, are linked to Tempe’s expected population growth. By identifying and utilizing as many revenue-related variables as possible in our forecast, we hope to minimize the risks of overstating or understating revenue that could arise from using only a few variables to forecast all revenue sources. Expenditure growth is most closely linked to three major factors in our models: 1) inflation (including general inflation, fuel and utility inflation, market adjustments to salaries, and changes in benefits costs), 2) City financial policies related to the amount of new funding added each year for new programs and/or the expansion of existing programs as well as including new operational and debt service funding associated with Capital Improvements Program projects, and 3) employee pension contribution rates. As with our revenue forecasts, we consider consensus forecasts related to general inflation (particularly the trends projected). For certain expenditure categories (such as fuel and utilities), we apply inflation factors that reflect the historical rate of price inflation in these categories relative to overall inflation. Amounts for new programs and/or program expansions are assumed to be constant over the forecast period (the same amount is added to each year of the forecast). 56 Forecast and Major Revenue Assumptions Our general approach to forecasting is to apply a conservative philosophy that does not overstate revenue nor understate expenditures. We recognize that economic forecasting is not an exact science and at times relies upon the professional judgment to optimize the accuracy of revenues or expenditures. We attempt to identify as many factors as possible that may contribute to changes in revenue and expenditures. The City’s revenue and expenditure budgets are comprised of many unique elements that respond to a variety of external factors such as population growth, development, inflation, and interest rates. The following provides our assumptions relating to major revenues and expenditures. Tempe Taxable Sales Taxable sales in Tempe rebounded rapidly in the time period following the 2001-03 national downturn in the economy. These increases were from both base growth as well as the addition of new business. As the graph below shows, taxable sales in FY 2006-07 were $7.1 billion, which is 42% higher than the level seen at the lowest point of the economic downturn. Tempe Taxable Sales $ Billions Beginning in FY 2007-08 it became evident that the rapid economic pace would not continue, and was in 8.0 fact largely based on a speculative real estate bubble. Recent taxable sales activity has faltered; in FY 20086.0 09 sales activity is estimated to have fallen to $6.5 billion. This trend is shown in the graph at right. 4.0 7.1 7.1 5.1 5.2 5.0 5.3 5.8 6.6 6.5 5.9 Taxable sales growth has an impact on many funds, as 2.0 the General Fund, Transit Fund, Performing Arts Fund, and Rio Salado Fund each receive their primary 0.0 revenue from this source. The primary categories of 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 01234567890 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 taxable sales (based on FY 2009-10 annual estimates) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 are retail (51%), commercial and residential rent (20%), Fiscal Year utility sales (9%), contracting (7%), and restaurant sales (8%). Overall taxable sales are expected to decline in FY 2010-11 and increase in the out-years as the economy recovers. Population Following the strong population growth period of the late 1970's (5.3%) and the 1980's (2.8%), Tempe has experienced steady but considerably slower growth. This trend is expected to continue, since the City is landlocked with other municipal jurisdictions on all four borders. Given this geographical limit on expansion, population in Tempe is assumed to increase by merely 0.5% per year over the forecast period. Thousands Population is important in the forecasting models for two main reasons. First, it is used to determine growth in revenues from recreation, social services, and criminal justice programs. Second, and of perhaps even greater importance, is the role that population plays in state shared revenue calculations. Tempe Population 180 160 140 120 100 142 80 156 161 107 60 40 154 Population increased from 64,000 in 1970 to 166,000 in 2005 64 20 0 70 19 80 19 90 19 95 19 Fiscal Year 00 20 05 20 Statewide population growth is assumed to average 2.5% per year over the next five years. The disparity between growth in local and state populations is significant since several major revenue categories are dependent upon Tempe’s population as a percentage of the state. Every five years the sharing formula is recalculated and the differences in growth rate inevitably result in Tempe’s share of the total revenue pool decreasing. This impact is seen in FY 2011-12 of the forecast. State Revenues As the base for state shared revenues, state income and sales taxes are also important to City revenues. As with City revenues, State revenue growth in recent years has turned sharply negative. The forecast is for state sales tax revenue growth to rebound beginning in FY 2010-11 consistent with projections from the FAC. Since State Shared Income Tax distributions lag by two years, payments to the City will continue to decline until FY 2012-13. 57 Also of importance are State laws related to revenue, including future rate cuts and changes to the revenue sharing formula. One significant change to revenue distributions was the elimination of distributions of State Lottery receipts to the Local Transportation Assistance Fund. Laws 2010, 7th Special Session Chapter 12 diverted future current and future distributions of Lottery proceeds to the state General Fund. It is impossible to predict the actions of future Legislatures, and therefore the forecast assumes status quo with regard to future state shared revenue calculations. Development/Redevelopment Despite being a landlocked city, new housing and commercial starts have recently been a strong driver of revenue activity in the Building and Trades category. While the regional single family housing market has been poor, construction in Tempe has been focused on condominium, commercial, and hotel activities. These activities have helped maintain a high level of permitting in recent years. Construction is expected to slow considerably in the near-term as a constrained credit market coincides with a forecast of overcapacity in the regional commercial and residential sectors of the real estate market. This trend is expected to depress both building permitting revenue as well as sales taxes on contracting activity. The forecast assumes a severely reduced level of construction activity until FY 2012-13. Building Permits 2,000 1,500 1,84 5 1,000 1 ,4 1 7 1 ,26 1 1 ,31 3 1,14 7 1 ,24 3 1 ,44 2 1 ,37 4 1 ,10 6 9 76 500 Assessed Valuation Arizona public finance statutes provide for two different property tax bases, distinguished by both 0 their allowable use as well as the extent to which 1 2 3 6 4 7 5 0 8 9 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -1 -0 -0 they can grow in successive years. The first is the 00 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 primary, which is the base used for financing current Fiscal Year government operating expenditures in the General Fund, and to a lesser extent, the Rio Salado Fund. This portion of the property tax is limited in the extent to which the levy can grow each year to a level of 2% plus new construction. The other property tax base is the secondary, which is used to generate revenue to pay annual debt service for the City’s general governmental bonded debt. This tax base is statutorily unlimited in terms of annual growth. During the period from FY 1996-97 through FY 2006-07, Tempe’s secondary assessed value growth was 8% on average. Based on information from the Maricopa County Assessor’s Office, secondary valuations are projected to decrease by 35% overall through FY 2012-13. While this does not affect the long range forecast of the City’s operating funds, the decline in taxable value places strict limits on the City’s ability to support additional General Obligation bonds in the Capital Improvements Program at current property tax rates. Interest Rates/Cash Balances Interest revenue is expected to be minimal in most funds, the result of reduced invested funds balances and low short term interest rates. 58 Financial Overview The following financial overview provides a summary of revenue, expenditure, and historical budget trends. The FY 2010-11 budget of $419.7 million provides for a $371.4 million operating budget and a $48.3 million capital budget. The operating budget includes $176.9 million of general governmental operations, $92 million of enterprise operations (Water/Wastewater, Solid Waste, Cemetery, and Golf) and $102.5 million of special revenue operations (Transportation, Transit, Performing Arts, Rio Salado, Redevelopment, and Housing). Total Budget Fiscal Year 2001-02 Operating Budget $234,015,370 Capital Budget $85,541,430 $319,556,800 2002-03 232,846,185 95,318,794 328,164,979 2003-04 247,565,261 117,968,707 365,533,968 2004-05 260,131,518 176,983,222 437,114,740 2005-06 275,297,746 189,971,703 465,269,449 2006-07 314,115,625 196,728,491 510,844,116 2007-08 355,286,706 212,706,469 567,993,171 2008-09 396,439,483 168,033,325 564,472,808 2009-10 404,424,453 96,310,568 500,735,021 2010-11 371,433,189 48,264,755 419,697,944 Total budgeted revenue for FY 2010-11 is $389.4 million, with operating revenue of $341.2 million and the remainder from other capital funding sources. Major funding sources include $179 million in General governmental revenue, $83.6 million of enterprise revenue, and $78.5 million of special revenue. Summary overviews of appropriations and revenue provide a base reference for the fund specific forecast models that 600 follow. A ten-year history of budget trends is depicted in the 500 graph at right. $ Millions Capital Budget Operating Budget 400 300 200 100 0 2 -0 01 0 2 3 -0 02 0 2 4 -0 03 0 2 5 -0 04 0 2 6 -0 05 0 2 7 -0 06 0 2 Fiscal Year 59 8 -0 07 0 2 9 -0 08 0 2 0 -1 09 0 2 1 -1 10 0 2 Major Expenditure Assumptions and Economic Outlook Salaries and Wages On the expenditure side, we have assumed a general freeze on salary and wage adjustments in the period from FY 2010-11 through FY 2011-12 for the purposes of balancing future expenditures with revenue expectations. The City’s normal salary structure allows for 5% annual salary growth within each position’s approved salary range, as well as an annual survey of the market to test the sufficiency of the salary ranges. Resumption of the normal salary adjustment process is not expected to occur until FY 2012-13 in the forecast. Fringe Benefits Health insurance costs are forecasted to increase at a declining rate for the next five years. Market forces, the movement towards managed care, and an excellent claims history allow the City’s health care costs to decline in FY 2010-11, however growth of approximately 8% per year is assumed thereafter. Retiree health care cost will continue to rise as our work force matures and greater percentages of employees retire. Due to recent changes in the retiree health care program, growth in this expenditure category is assumed to be 6% per year. Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) A recent decision by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requires government employers to disclose the cost of OPEB over the active life of the benefiting employees (GASB Statement No. 45). The City of Tempe’s liability arises from retiree healthcare subsidies. An actuarial study was commissioned and the findings were forwarded to a City Council committee for review and recommendations. The forecast assumes phased advanced funding of OPEB costs beginning in FY 2009-10. Retirement Contributions City of Tempe employees are covered by one of four public retirement systems, depending on job type. The annual employer’s portion of the contribution rates differ by retirement system. The four retirement systems, and their associated rate for FY 2010-11 are as follows: Arizona State Retirement System: 9.85% Public Safety Retirement - Fire: 24.21% Public Safety Retirement - Police: 21.87% Elected Officials Retirement: 28% These rates are kept static during the forecast period as each rate is dependent on the investment decisions of the relevant retirement system. Inflation General inflation is expected to fluctuate from 2.2% to 1.9% in the later years of the forecast. Electricity inflation is expected to increase by approximately 5% annually through the forecast period, and motor fuel inflation is expected to be higher in the near term (10.1% in FY 2010-11) and gradually slow in the out years (2.6% by FY 2013-14). Supplemental Limits For this budget forecast, no new programs were authorized, as our focus is to maintain basic services. Capital Improvements Program Operating Budget Impacts An important aspect of the City’s Capital Improvements Program is the identification of operating budget impacts associated with capital projects. Since long-range planning takes place prior to the adoption of the Capital Budget, future impacts of new programs are not included. However, operating impacts for projects approved in prior years’ Capital Budgets are included in the out-years of the forecast. Economic Outlook Following the mild recession in 2001 to 2002, both the local and state economies enjoyed a prolonged robust period. The metropolitan Phoenix area was a national leader in population and job growth, factors that undoubtedly benefited Tempe. That trend reversed sharply in FY 2008-09 as the economic recession gripped the state and local economies. Negative impacts on revenues have been substantial, and are expected to linger into FY 2010-11. Sustained, positive economic growth is not anticipated until FY 2011-12. 60 General Fund: Projected Revenue and Expenditures ($000) 210,000 190,000 170,000 150,000 130,000 110,000 90,000 Actual Projected 70,000 50,000 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 Revenues Revenues ($000) Local Taxes Intergovernmental Bldng & Trades Cultural and Recreation Fines, Fees, & Forfeitures Business Licenses Interest Income Franchise Fees Other Revenue Sources Total Revenues Expenditures ($000) Personal Services Materials and Supplies Fees and Services Travel and Training Non-Departmental/ Loan Repayment Capital Outlay Contingency Transportation Mtnce of Effort Tourism and Convention Bureau Internal Services/Adjustments Total Expenditures Net Operating Surplus/ (Deficit) 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenditures 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Proj Proj. Proj Proj Proj 77,772 86,570 95,863 93,057 84,375 76,360 74,649 79,420 88,329 92,576 36,068 40,946 41,453 45,225 44,048 39,185 35,038 33,746 36,453 38,044 3,459 5,506 5,969 6,479 5,681 3,528 3,760 3,960 4,935 5,203 5,010 4,961 5,294 6,157 6,244 5,506 6,026 6,315 6,596 6,879 6,652 7,288 7,219 8,616 9,201 9,187 9,578 10,048 10,505 10,965 1,185 1,202 1,331 1,333 1,546 1,500 1,564 1,641 1,715 1,790 2,969 4,794 7,437 9,839 4,932 1,790 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,678 1,867 2,693 3,425 3,981 3,927 4,124 4,330 4,546 4,774 3,633 5,418 4,462 4,011 4,991 5,773 5,986 5,289 5,289 5,289 138,425 158,553 171,722 178,143 164,998 146,756 142,225 146,250 159,869 167,020 100,868 109,416 120,972 137,189 147,244 145,980 142,783 145,719 153,232 161,231 6,811 7,866 8,783 9,180 8,646 8,210 7,926 8,100 8,264 8,425 18,521 21,576 21,721 23,598 24,124 26,673 25,972 26,784 27,595 28,501 649 720 824 799 426 620 599 612 625 637 2,269 1,760 2,412 2,653 2,888 3,296 3,058 2,893 2,951 3,008 2,002 0 0 3,116 0 0 4,670 0 1,035 2,721 0 955 4,012 0 786 2,423 0 786 1,600 0 786 1,600 0 786 1,600 0 786 1,600 0 786 2,041 1,892 2,019 2,007 1,802 1,301 1,866 1,926 1,985 2,045 (6,896) (6,511) (6,224) (8,492) (7,034) (7,935) (8,084) (8,262) (8,429) (8,593) 126,265 139,836 156,211 170,611 182,893 181,354 176,506 180,157 188,609 197,639 12,160 18,718 15,511 7,533 (17,895) (34,598) (34,281) (33,908) (28,741) (30,620) 61 General Fund Trend/Forecast At the beginning of the 2000’s, annual operating surpluses started to decline as revenue growth slowed resulting from a national downturn in the economy. In addition, our share of locally distributed state income, sales and vehicle license tax revenue declined in FY 2001-02, due largely to state population growth outpacing that at the local level. This resulted in a brief period of operating deficit in the General Fund in FY 2002-03. From that time and up until FY 2007-08, both the state and local economies experienced robust growth, resulting in operating surpluses in the General Fund as revenue growth outpaced that of expenditures. Due to the state and national recession that began in FY 2007-08, the city’s General Fund is experiencing a sharp reversal of that trend. Local sales taxes are the primary revenue source for the General Fund, and are highly sensitive to economic fluctuations. Projected General Fund local tax revenues for FY 2009-10 are 20% lower than peak collection in FY 2006-07. FY 2010-11 collections are expected to drop by a further 5%. No improvement is expected in this category until FY 2011-12. The next largest source of General Fund revenues is intergovernmental, which is comprised of state sales, income, and vehicle license taxes. As with local sales taxes, each of these categories is sharply negative due to the economic recession. Recovery of state sales and vehicle license taxes is projected to begin in FY 2010-11, however, state income tax distributions are not expected to recover until FY 2012-13 due to a two year lag. In addition to the economic influences on these categories, the effect of the 2010 Census will negatively impact collections in FY 2011-12 as Tempe’s share of the state’s urban population is expected to continue its decline. From an expenditure perspective, growth in employee compensation and benefit costs have traditionally been the largest components of growth. In prior years, the City’s compensation philosophy would adjust the City’s pay structure annually to a level equivalent to the 75th percentile of the regional municipal government sector, and would allow employee salary growth of up to 5% within the salary range structure. In light of the City’s financial situation, annual salary adjustments have been suspended until FY 2012-13 in the forecast, and resume at a 5% pace thereafter. Health care costs for employees are anticipated to decline by 1.6% in FY 2010-11 and grow by approximately 8% per year thereafter. Retiree health care costs are expected to grow by a consistent 6% growth rate during each year of the forecast, due to recent policy changes that cap growth. A series of budget reductions were implemented for FY 2009-10 to address that year’s budget deficit. Furthermore, a series of FY 2010-11 reductions were part of the plan, including the elimination of an additional 61 positions. For planning purposes, the impact of these additional reductions is reflected in the General Fund forecast graph on the preceding page. Unreserved Fund Balance The General Fund's unreserved fund balance has grown from $28.6 million just 11 years ago to $54 million for FYE 2009. It grew in the most recent year due to the addition of a number of reserved amounts to the unreserved balance. Additional budget balancing discussions will be required to maintain the balance within the policy level in future years of the forecast. FYE 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 Unreserved Fund Balance $30,639,891 34,682,895 38,201,087 38,615,537 36,985,072 35,125,797 34,473,270 34,480,754 37,827,259 40,918,804 43,265,309 44,611,435 54,012,203 62 Transit Fund: Projected Revenue and Expenditures ($000) 80,000 70,000 Actual 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 Projected 20,000 10,000 0 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 Revenues 04/05 05/06 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenditures 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Proj. Proj. Proj. Proj. Proj. Revenues ($000) Transit Tax Lottery Transfer In ASU-Flash Transit Interest Income Light-Rail Fares Out of Jurisdiction Svc Revenue PTF Funding Miscellaneous Revenue Total Revenues 2,305 2,519 2,813 2,675 2,756 2,838 922 1,462 888 641 3,376 2,064 807 811 815 819 37,868 42,521 45,684 43,561 48,854 45,698 43,715 45,545 49,545 51,409 Expenditures ($000) Personal Services Materials and Supplies Fees and Services Travel and Training Capital Outlay 1,930 2,294 2,543 3,292 3,841 4,805 4,688 4,745 4,988 5,295 1,781 1,870 2,082 3,251 6,451 5,289 5,389 5,508 5,619 5,728 22,467 19,986 23,231 30,844 39,811 42,950 43,845 45,196 46,487 47,342 17 36 43 29 28 33 34 35 36 36 182 190 140 123 250 35 36 37 37 38 28,848 32,440 34,971 32,450 29,851 26,329 25,012 26,763 30,242 31,754 274 266 257 254 278 233 214 204 194 194 478 496 529 581 603 677 697 718 740 762 1,410 1,320 1,142 960 180 212 212 212 212 212 964 2,519 2,813 2,675 2,756 2,838 5,936 Debt Service 6,536 7,897 8,674 11,298 11,146 11,146 11,486 11,831 11,991 594 4,045 5,518 6,019 8,977 8,970 8,964 8,958 8,957 Internal Svc Chgs/ Adjustments 243 314 310 317 531 565 553 565 576 587 Indirect Cost Allocations 437 696 847 808 650 656 669 683 697 711 Total Expenditures 27,057 25,979 33,241 44,183 57,581 63,311 64,182 65,732 67,398 68,695 Net Operating Surplus/ (Deficit) 10,811 16,542 12,444 (622) (8,727) (17,613) (20,467) (20,187) (17,853) (17,286) 63 Transit Fund Trend/Forecast Since the Transit Tax is a component of the overall City sales tax, the declining trend projected in General Fund sales tax revenue is mirrored in the Transit Fund. Revenues exceed expenditures in the near-term solely due to the receipt of large federal reimbursements for prior years’ capital program spending. The pattern of growth reflected in the expenditure estimates relies upon the 20-Year Transit Business Plan and the assumptions made in that plan regarding the expansion of routes, the acquisition of new buses, and the implementation of a light rail system, and debt service for debt issued in the Capital Improvements Program. Given projected revenue growth and operating profile, the forecast is for the fund to be in a deficit condition beginning in FY 2011-12 and continuing thereafter. In light of this, budget balancing efforts will be pursued for the FY 2010-11 budget and beyond. Unreserved Fund Balance The Transit Fund’s unreserved fund balance has gone from $18.4 million in FY 1997-98 to $54.2 million at the end of FY 2008-09. Receipt of one-time federal reimbursements is the sole reason for balance growth in the near-term. Over the long-term, balances are forecast to decline absent corrective action, due to the structural operating deficit. FYE 98 Unreserved Fund Balance $18,437,544 99 19,946,528 00 20,958,629 01 29,318,960 02 40,943,760 03 48,999,032 04 42,109,647 05 29,567,749 06 41,826,902 07 38,184,626 08 33,240,056 09 54,247,682 64 Performing Arts Fund: Projected Revenue and Expenditures ($000) 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 Projected Actual 1,000 0 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 Revenues 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenditures 04/05 05/06 06/07 Actual Actual Actual 07/08 Actual 08/09 Actual 09/10 Proj. 10/11 Proj. 11/12 Proj. 12/13 Proj. 13/14 Proj. Revenues ($000) Performing Arts Tax 5,768 6,480 7,008 6,820 6,159 5,435 5,176 5,586 6,312 6,627 0 0 0 662 745 548 576 594 614 633 Interest Income 335 574 692 645 224 75 45 18 0 0 Total Revenues 6,103 7,054 7,700 8,127 7,128 6,058 5,796 6,198 6,925 7,261 194 337 545 1,579 1,871 2,148 2,087 2,129 2,234 2,378 Materials and Supplies 16 65 853 797 99 140 142 146 148 151 Fees and Services 54 84 538 754 514 520 539 559 580 602 Facility Revenue Expenditures ($000) Personal Services Travel and Other 5 9 9 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 Capital Outlay 0 158 108 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,572 6,295 6,059 6,014 6,017 6,016 6,026 6,028 6,034 6,055 20 287 123 150 242 287 292 298 304 310 Total Expenditures 3,861 7,235 8,235 9,335 8,746 9,115 9,090 9,164 9,306 9,501 Net Operating Surplus/ (Deficit) 2,243 (180) (535) (1,208) (1,618) (3,057) (3,294) (2,966) (2,381) (2,240) Debt Service Internal Service Charges 65 Performing Arts Fund Trend/Forecast The Performing Arts Fund receives its primary revenue from the Performing Arts Tax. This specific tax, approved in May 2000 and effective January 2001, represented 0.1% of the City’s total 1.8% sales tax. Monies received from this tax are dedicated to the construction and operating expenses of the Tempe Center for the Arts. Since the Performing Arts Tax is a component of the overall City sales tax, the negative growth trend projected in General Fund sales tax revenue is mirrored in the Performing Arts Fund. The other main component of current revenue is facility revenues. Beginning in FY 2007-08 the fund began to receive revenue from programming at the facility. This revenue stream is expected to grow moderately through the end of the forecast period. The expenditure growth pattern reflects the opening of the Tempe Center for the Arts (TCA) in September of 2007. In FY 2005-06, 19 new full-time positions and related capital equipment were added to prepare for the full-time operation of the TCA. These costs represent the operating impacts of this capital project as identified in prior years’ Capital Improvements Programs. An equally significant expenditure item is the annual cost of debt service to amortize the bonds issued to build TCA. As a result of the ongoing expenditure growth and the decline in the sales tax base, the forecast is for ongoing operating deficits. In light of this, efforts will be necessary to adjust expenditures to ensure future fund solvency. Unreserved Fund Balance The Performing Arts Fund’s reserved balance has steadily grown since the fund’s inception in FY 2001-02. This trend was consistent with the fund’s financial plan. Given the new circumstances of the economic recession, the fund balance will be depleted absent corrective action. FYE 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 Unreserved Fund Balance $7,116,094 10,865,891 14,339,689 14,255,302 15,064,184 14,865,175 9,635,775 8,328,983 66 Transportation Funds: Projected Revenue and Expenditures ($000) 16,000 15,000 14,000 13,000 12,000 11,000 10,000 9,000 8,000 Actual Projected 7,000 6,000 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 Revenues 04/05 05/06 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenditures 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Proj. Proj. Proj. Proj. Proj. Revenues ($000) Highway User Revenue Tax 11,533 11,224 11,854 11,387 State Lottery Proceeds Miscellaneous Maintenance of Effort Transfer Lottery Transfer to Transit Total Revenues 9,945 9,219 9,496 9,781 10,074 10,376 821 799 771 762 709 705 648 618 588 558 43 68 10 1 7 36 36 36 36 36 0 870 1,035 955 786 786 786 786 786 786 (274) (266) (257) (254) (278) (233) (214) (204) (194) (184) 12,123 12,694 13,413 12,851 11,169 10,514 10,752 11,017 11,290 11,572 Expenditures ($000) Personal Services Materials and Supplies Fees and Services Travel and Training Capital Outlay Debt Service 3,700 4,107 4,112 4,821 5,081 5,830 5,434 5,539 5,805 6,208 533 513 537 670 583 594 607 620 632 1,682 1,736 1,897 1,901 1,977 2,434 2,530 2,634 2,741 2,853 24 47 26 28 29 29 30 31 467 0 0 189 330 361 140 1,269 1,259 402 325 576 576 2,000 2,000 2,770 2,770 2,770 2,770 2,770 2,770 2,770 2,770 Loan Repayment 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 0 0 0 Internal Service Charges 853 1,036 1,226 1,212 1,354 1,267 1,291 1,320 1,346 1,372 746 1,025 813 692 927 944 965 984 1,003 Indirect Cost Allocations 619 Total Expenditures 9,946 10,670 12,237 12,551 14,147 15,408 14,303 14,189 14,871 15,444 Net Operating Surplus/ (Deficit) 2,177 2,024 1,176 300 (2,978) (4,894) (3,551) (3,172) (3,581) (3,872) 67 Transportation Funds Trend/Forecast The primary revenue source to this fund is the intergovernmental distribution of the Highway User Revenue Tax. This tax derives the bulk of its monies from a per gallon charge on gasoline consumption. Consistent with the state recession, it is expected that gasoline sales will be moderate over the forecast period. Also, as with other intergovernmental revenue, this state shared revenue is distributed based on population. As such Tempe’s share is expected to decline due to our stable population relative to the state as a whole. Deficits are projected in each year of the forecast period. One approach now in place to minimize operating deficits is to cap debt service at payments of $2.7 million for the remainder of the forecast period. Any excess General Obligation debt service requirements beyond this cap will be absorbed by the Debt Service Fund during the fiveyear period. Over the longer term, we will need to monitor the level of General Obligation tax supported debt applied to Transportation projects and the resulting impact on the Debt Service Fund, being aware that opportunities for pay-as-you-go financing of capital projects will be limited. In light of the structural deficit in this fund, budget balancing efforts will be necessary to bring future revenues and expenditures into balance. At the current pace the fund balance will be depleted by FY 2012-13. Unreserved Fund Balance Transportation Fund balances have recovered somewhat from the lows experienced a few years ago. While the unreserved fund balance reached its highest point at FYE 2008, it is likely that the balance will decline drastically in the future in light of the projected operating deficits. FYE 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 Unreserved Fund Balance $3,326,715 4,092,879 5,792,212 7,592,808 8,444,881 9,254,027 7,325,855 8,010,238 11,053,146 9,371,295 11,338,081 12,807,834 8,159,403 68 Rio Salado and Community Facilities District (CFD) Funds ($000) 6,000 5,000 Actual 4,000 3,000 2,000 Projected 1,000 0 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 Revenues 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenditures 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Proj. Proj. Proj. Proj. Proj. Revenues ($000) Sales Tax Property Tax 309 580 797 1,397 1,333 1,176 1,117 1,195 1,351 1,418 68 66 74 122 114 122 127 133 138 144 Transient Lodging Tax 182 219 240 275 247 209 299 309 318 328 Interest Revenue 149 171 200 204 101 130 130 130 130 130 Sale of Real Estate 789 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Revenue 111 128 160 169 147 147 147 147 147 147 CFD Revenue 315 639 579 1,112 882 2,190 2,201 2,212 2,223 2,234 1,923 1,804 2,051 3,279 2,825 3,974 4,022 4,126 4,308 4,402 1,942 2,086 2,061 2,035 2,115 2,194 2,322 Total Revenues Expenditures ($000) Personal Services Materials and Supplies Fees and Services Travel and Training Capital Outlay Internal Service Charges CFD Administrative Credit CFD Operating and Maintenance Total Expenditures Net Operating Surplus/ (Deficit) 589 614 793 17 27 17 83 91 149 152 155 158 161 546 687 828 507 475 648 660 675 689 702 5 2 5 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 245 215 414 343 613 593 604 618 630 642 (396) (419) (414) (1,263) (1,397) (1,445) (1,472) (1,505) (1,535) (1,565) 2,431 2,118 2,042 2,602 2,737 3,195 3,227 3,259 3,292 3,325 3,533 3,244 3,686 4,216 4,608 5,206 5,211 5,322 5,433 5,593 (937) (1,783) (1,232) (1,190) (1,196) (1,125) (1,191) (1,610) (1,441) (1,635) 69 Rio Salado and Community Facilities (CFD) District Funds Trend/Forecast The largest revenue source, tax revenue, is highly responsive to changes in economic activity. The financial health of this fund is dependent on the nature of development in Rio Salado. Urban development will increase tax revenue. Community Facilities District revenue includes assessment collections from property owners and boat permits, concessions, and special event fees. Fund revenues exceed revenues in the forecast period due to interest payments associated with the delayed payment of proceeds from the sale of land in the Rio Salado district. Unreserved Fund Balance The unreserved fund balance reached a high of $5.2 million in FY 1998-99. The variation depicted in the unreserved fund balance is due to planned drawdowns to fund capital and land purchase costs. Although the unreserved fund balance is nearly exhausted, the Rio Salado and Community Facilities District Funds still had a designated fund balance reserve in the General Fund of $3,639,794 for operating and maintenance costs as of June 30, 2009. FYE 98 Unreserved Fund Balance $4,480,474 99 5,220,120 00 1,282,512 01 5,032,088 02 2,062,140 03 0 04 0 05 06 07 08 09 0 467,735 287,458 900,297 1,008,059 70 Water/Wastewater Fund: Projected Revenues and Expenses ($000) 85,000 75,000 Actual 65,000 55,000 45,000 Projected 35,000 25,000 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 Revenues Revenues ($000) Charges for Service-Water Charges for ServiceWastewater Interest Income 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenses 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Proj. Proj. Proj. Proj. Proj. 24,446 26,367 26,714 28,146 29,071 31,469 34,381 38,437 42,771 45,504 16,248 18,025 19,462 20,933 23,330 27,595 30,372 35,381 37,495 39,736 1,506 1,609 2,485 3,355 1,523 681 273 268 335 371 Land and Facility Rental 520 519 520 520 536 520 548 554 561 561 Loan Repayment Other Miscellaneous Revenue Total Revenues 130 114 97 79 60 41 21 0 0 0 550 241 666 254 178 55 55 55 55 56 43,400 46,875 49,943 53,287 54,698 60,360 65,650 74,696 81,218 86,227 Expenses ($000) Personal Services 11,611 12,451 13,265 15,454 15,901 18,158 16,565 16,840 17,618 18,626 Materials and Supplies Fees and Services Travel and Training Debt Service 2,872 2,811 3,565 3,870 4,111 3,616 3,290 3,363 3,431 3,498 10,426 14,334 12,441 12,559 13,072 13,869 14,018 14,288 14,559 14,836 109 124 215 173 148 137 139 142 145 148 10,355 13,200 16,747 22,413 25,867 30,851 34,394 36,493 38,169 40,577 Internal Service Charges 1,609 1,892 2,526 2,208 1,581 2,100 2,139 2,186 2,231 2,274 Indirect Cost Allocations 2,176 1,825 1,516 1,847 2,434 2,146 2,186 2,234 2,279 2,323 Total Expenses Net Operating Surplus / (Deficit) 39,157 46,636 50,275 58,524 63,113 70,877 72,732 75,547 78,432 82,281 4,243 239 (331) (5,237) (8,415) (10,517) (7,082) 71 (851) 2,786 3,946 Water/Wastewater Fund Trend/Forecast The Water/Wastewater Fund is projected to experience an operating deficit in the earlier years of the forecast period, followed by a surplus beginning in FY 2012-13. This is due to a combination of factors. On the expenditure side, utility costs and debt service associated with expansion of the Capital Improvements Program are principal drivers of future cost. On the revenue side, water and sewer service charges are the primary revenue sources. Since the number of customer accounts grows at a very slow pace due to a stable population, the primary mechanism to enhance revenue for the enterprise fund is rate increases. The forecast assumes that rates will be increased in future years as necessary to bring revenues in line with expenses. Unreserved Fund Balance During the early 1990’s there was a drawdown of Water/Wastewater Fund balances resulting from pay-as-you-go financing for infrastructure improvements. The fund balance stands at $42.9 million at FYE 09. FYE 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 Unreserved Fund Balance $36,796,384 41,020,060 55,159,498 56,434,920 55,717,922 59,841,408 58,958,188 58,790,163 60,752,643 65,560,342 55,628,214 50,599,282 42,899,644 72 Solid Waste Fund: Projected Revenue and Expenses ($000) 17,000 15,000 13,000 11,000 9,000 Actual Projected 7,000 5,000 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 Revenues 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenses 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 Actual Actual Actual Actual 08/09 Actual 09/10 Proj. 10/11 Proj. 11/12 Proj. 12/13 Proj. 13/14 Proj. Revenues ($000) Charges for Services 11,839 12,749 13,626 14,456 14,934 14,887 15,087 15,161 15,235 15,310 Sludge Disposal 119 151 62 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 Interest Income 39 83 175 218 106 69 39 41 37 28 328 399 172 232 400 100 100 100 100 100 12,325 13,382 14,035 14,993 15,440 15,056 15,227 15,302 15,372 15,438 Other Revenue Sources Total Revenues Expenses ($000) Personal Services Materials and Supplies Fees and Services Capital Outlay Internal Service/Adjustments Indirect Cost Allocations Total Expenses Net Operating Surplus/ (Deficit) 3,914 4,302 4,611 5,056 5,414 5,933 5,605 5,691 5,960 6,308 206 519 162 203 207 211 216 220 3,258 3,414 3,548 268 146 3,633 3,697 3,770 3,841 3,926 4,012 4,099 725 3,431 1,377 2,183 1,310 1,540 1,876 1,808 2,383 2,370 2,505 2,942 3,167 2,902 2,956 3,010 3,059 3,107 832 790 782 797 815 831 847 11,372 12,408 12,240 16,412 14,607 15,773 14,716 15,192 15,953 16,388 (581) (950) 931 1,559 618 952 617 646 974 1,795 (1,419) 73 833 (717) 511 110 Solid Waste Fund Trend/Forecast With the FY 2000-01 shortfall in this fund, solid waste rates were modified in November 2001 to fully recover the cost of the solid waste operation and replacement obligations. Since then, rate increases have been implemented three out of the past four years, with the increases to industrial, commercial, and residential rates occurring on November 1, 2008 and 2009. These rate increases have kept fund revenues generally in line with fund expenses. Solid waste rates are subject to annual rate reviews to ensure that the fund remains fully self-sufficient and to smooth the effect of potential rate adjustments on the City’s residential and commercial customers. Unreserved Fund Balance There is a $4.6 million fund balance in the Solid Waste Fund at FYE 2009. With environmental mandates always present, this enterprise operation will require as much financial flexibility as possible for contingent compliance driven costs. FYE 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 Unreserved Fund Balance $1,623,386 1,979,294 2,168,155 1,162,872 451,358 20,065 469,027 1,138,305 2,226,136 3,019,582 4,895,596 3,888,080 4,634,470 74 Golf Fund: Projected Revenue and Expenses ($000) 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 Actual Projected 1,200 1,000 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 Revenues 04/05 05/06 06/07 Actual Actual Actual 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenses 07/08 Actual 08/09 Actual 09/10 Proj. 10/11 Proj. 11/12 Proj. 12/13 Proj. 13/14 Proj. Revenues ($000) Greens Fees 1,746 1,750 1,689 1,653 1,562 1,508 1,457 1,407 1,359 1,313 208 221 223 331 252 253 254 255 280 280 Interest Income 14 16 19 14 5 3 0 0 0 0 Other Revenue Sources 50 55 51 65 66 65 65 65 65 65 2,019 2,041 1,983 2,064 1,885 1,829 1,776 1,728 1,704 1,658 1,050 988 1,005 1,098 1,225 1,474 1,183 1,233 1,270 1,339 Materials and Supplies 286 256 249 250 220 223 228 233 237 242 Fees and Services 372 456 307 367 379 400 435 467 501 539 Pro Shop/Restaurant Total Revenues Expenses ($000) Personal Services Capital Outlay 17 59 0 5 56 56 56 56 56 56 Debt Service 148 153 152 2 0 0 6 10 16 22 Internal Service Charges 153 141 148 187 157 165 166 169 173 176 Indirect Cost Allocations 210 188 195 170 139 126 128 131 133 136 Total Expenses 2,236 2,240 2,056 2,078 2,175 2,443 2,201 2,298 2,386 2,510 Net Operating Surplus/ (Deficit) (217) (199) (73) (15) (291) (614) (425) (570) (682) (852) 75 Golf Fund Trend/Forecast Over the forecast period we expect revenue growth to generally follow the historical patterns, although other unpredictable factors such as weather conditions and competition from other courses in the valley may improve or worsen usage of the municipal golf courses. The Golf Fund has been experiencing an operating deficit condition since FY 1999-00. As with the City’s other self-supporting Enterprise operations, annual rate reviews are conducted of the Golf Fund. In addition, due to ongoing operating shortfalls, special attention has been given to operating cost reductions and review of contracts with Golf program vendors to ensure future fund viability. In general, the fund is experiencing growing expenses and flat revenues. As with other funds, budget balancing planning will take place in the coming months to bring expenses in line with revenues. Unreserved Fund Balance After six consecutive years of fund balance losses, the trend was reversed, at least in the short-term. In FY 199596, increased rounds of play bolstered the reserve to over $350,000. Growth in the balance continued through FY 1998-99, at which point weakness in the golf industry combined with rising operating costs resulted in ongoing operating deficits. This balance built in the earlier years has provided some flexibility as solutions for future fund stability are sought. FYE 96 Unreserved Fund Balance $351,158 97 896,542 98 1,397,897 99 1,638,174 00 1,538,156 01 893,591 02 791,701 03 680,101 04 604,703 05 540,158 06 468,457 07 263,853 08 217,821 09 42,449 76 Cemetery Fund: Projected Revenue and Expenses ($000) 500 400 Actual 300 200 100 Projected 0 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 Revenues 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 Expenses 04/05 05/06 06/07 Actual Actual Actual 07/08 Actual 08/09 Actual 09/10 Proj. 10/11 Proj. 11/12 Proj. 12/13 Proj. 13/14 Proj. Revenues ($000) Lot Sales & Burial 0 Lot Care 0 9 6 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 Total Revenues 0 87 109 248 98 144 144 150 156 161 10 12 225 91 136 136 142 148 153 Expenses ($000) Personal Services 0 23 66 106 90 151 151 154 163 172 Materials and Supplies 0 1 1 13 5 22 23 23 24 24 Fees and Services 0 0 1 7 8 7 7 7 8 8 Capital Outlay 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 202 180 177 181 185 184 188 192 195 Internal Service Charges 0 4 1 0 5 5 5 5 5 5 Indirect Cost Allocations 0 17 8 10 9 10 11 11 11 11 Total Expenses 0 248 276 313 298 380 381 388 402 415 Net Operating Surplus/ (Deficit) 0 (161) (167) (65) (199) (236) (236) (239) (247) (254) 77 Cemetery Fund Trend/Forecast The Cemetery Fund was established to operate as a self supporting fund that utilizes revenues from burial lot sales to finance all costs of operation. Since fund inception, sales have continued to fall short of expectations and have not been sufficient to pay for operations. As a result, the fund has not accumulated a balance and is projected to experience annual deficits through the forecast period. Debt service requirements associated with a FY 2004-05 renovation continue to be the fund’s largest annual expense. Unreserved Fund Balance Due to historical annual operating deficits, the Cemetery Fund has not accumulated a fund balance, and annual losses continue to be covered by the General Fund. FYE 06 Unreserved Fund Balance $0 07 0 08 0 09 0 78 Financial Action Plan Recommended Plan of Action costs. This will also help to preserve our sound financial standing and bond ratings. Adoption of the Debt Management Plan has been one of the most significant financial decisions over the last decade. Several recommendations are offered as key elements of a financial action plan, which can be implemented to meet future operating and infrastructure fiscal challenges. Many recommendations are intended to adjust expenditure growth to keep the rate of expenditure growth in line with anticipated revenue growth. Comprehensive Financial Plan The Comprehensive Financial Plan, along with the Debt Management Plan, have served as the cornerstones of the long-term fiscal strength of the City. We recommend a continued update of this financial capacity study to provide a long-term perspective to the policy decisions of today. Budget Balancing Plans Continue to utilize a multi-year approach to bring all City operating funds into stable operating condition, using a combination of revenue and expenditure methods while minimizing impacts on residents to the extent possible. Identify and Limit CIP Operating Budget Impacts In addition to establishing a viable supplemental limit, identifying the operating budget impact of Capital Improvements Program (CIP) projects is a significant factor in achieving control over expenditure growth. We recommend continued efforts to refine the process of identifying these impacts and ensuring that provisions are made in operating budgets for these impacts as CIP projects are approved. Expenditure Control/Supplemental Limits Decreasing personnel growth has the advantage of providing both near-term benefits and long-term expenditure control for the City. The addition of personnel has a greater fiscal impact on a fund than any other type of budget appropriation. Any successful effort to control spending in the General Fund or any of our funds will need to be directed at slowing or decreasing the growth in personnel and associated costs. We recommend a continued annual evaluation of an appropriate General Fund supplemental limit, with consideration given to our long-range revenue and expenditure forecasts and how various supplemental scenarios will affect our long-term financial condition. Financial Policies Continued adherence to our operating budget, debt service, capital expenditure and investment policies, while maintaining ample fund balances and reserves, is the best strategy the City has to ensure its sound fiscal position. These policies require periodic review to strengthen and update as necessary. The point here is to warn against "creative finance" solutions and the underlying impacts these solutions may have on the City in the longer term. Modified Base Budget Plan Continuation of a modified base budget review program is recommended. This entails a review of departmental base budgets, with the size of modifications linked directly to financial forecasts. Modified base budgets incorporate historical spending patterns, price adjustments, and long-range forecasts, thereby limiting budgetary growth within departments. Protect State Shared Revenue It is recommended that we continue our efforts in coalition with the League of Arizona Cities and Towns to protect state shared revenue. They are very likely to continue to be at risk over the next few years. A freeze of state shared revenue or a significant change in distribution methodologies could pose a costly financial risk to General Fund and Transportation Fund revenue. Continue to Limit Midyear Adjustments Even as the City effectively manages supplemental additions through the normal budget process, there is a tendency to circumvent this process for additional midyear appropriations and personnel, often with little or no needs assessment, fiscal impact analysis or prioritization with other budgetary needs. The fiscal impact of these midyear adjustments poses a risk to careful long-range financial planning and should be discouraged except under unusual circumstances where an adjustment is warranted. Economic Development/Redevelopment A further recommendation is to continue improving our economic development and redevelopment efforts to increase property valuation, commercial growth and job growth in the City. Effective decision-making on economic development and redevelopment will require us to evaluate the relative merits of development projects, placing emphasis on those adding the greatest value for Tempe’s residents. Review Benefits Program We recommend that the City explore employee benefit options to ensure that Tempe’s benefits package remains competitive with other valley cities. On the other hand, the City must also explore alternative means of minimizing expected increases in health care costs, both employee and retiree. Adhere to Debt Management Plan Continued commitment to the Debt Management Plan is strongly recommended. Sizing the City's Capital Improvements Program budget to the Debt Management Plan will stabilize per capita outstanding tax-supported debt while lowering annual debt service 79 Rio Salado Financial Plan We recommend the continuation of the Rio Salado Project Financial Plan which addresses operating, maintenance costs and debt service requirements. The City has created a Community Facilities District, a legal entity with assessment and taxing authority, that will provide part of the financial strategy. Transit Plan With voter approval of a dedicated funding source for transit and the expansion of transit services, the City has created a 20-year Transit Business Plan. Also, Transit has developed an extensive benchmarking program in conjunction with the Transit Advisory Committee to evaluate services and assist in longrange planning. Both the Transit Plan and the benchmarking effort are valuable tools in the City’s continued provision of transit service and should be regularly updated. Water/Wastewater Infrastructure Costs Careful financial planning will be required to address the increasing capital costs associated with water infrastructure and sewage treatment, primarily at the regional 91st Avenue Plant. We recommend a financial plan that minimizes sudden spikes in rates and controls expenditure growth. Regular Review of City Fees and Charges Incremental increases in City fees and charges maintain the City’s ability to keep pace with inflation. The City’s long-term revenue outlook should include regular review of all City fees to ensure cost recovery as allowed by Council policy. Program Sunsetting We recommend that the City continue, through the budgetary process, the annual sunset review program. This program facilitates a review of all existing citywide programs, using evaluation criteria to serve as guides in considering the merits of sunsetting an existing program. Strategic Issues Program The Strategic Issues Program provides a link between the City’s budget process (resource allocation) and the long-term goals of the City. The strategic issues are periodically updated and refined. Where relevant, departmental budget requests are linked to the City Council’s Strategic Issues. This gives direction to the budget process and a clearer rationale for resource allocation decisions. We recommend a continuation of this process and further reinforcement of the value in linking budget requests to strategic issues. Benchmarking/Performance Management We recommend that the City continue its efforts in benchmarking and performance management. These activities will provide the City with opportunities to evaluate and improve service delivery while enhancing accountability to the residents. 80 This page intentionally left blank. Revenue Information The following section summarizes assumptions, trends, major influences, restrictions and composition of the City’s revenue sources. Revenue Information Contents Page Total Revenue ................................................................................................................................................................ 82 Total Revenue by Source ............................................................................................................................................... 83 Components of Total Revenue ...................................................................................................................................... 84 Comparative Operating Revenue by Major Source and Fund..................................................................................... 85 General Governmental Revenue: Ten Year Historical Trends City Sales Tax.......................................................................................................................................................... 88 Transient Lodging Tax ............................................................................................................................................. 89 City Property Tax ..................................................................................................................................................... 90 Salt River Project In-Lieu Tax .................................................................................................................................. 91 State Shared Sales Tax ........................................................................................................................................... 92 State Shared Vehicle License Tax ........................................................................................................................... 93 State Shared Income Tax ........................................................................................................................................ 94 Charges for Services/Cultural and Recreational ...................................................................................................... 95 Charges for Services/Development Related ............................................................................................................ 96 Fines and Forfeitures ............................................................................................................................................... 97 Special Revenue: Ten Year Historical Trends Transit Tax ............................................................................................................................................................... 98 Performing Arts Tax ................................................................................................................................................. 99 Highway User Tax.................................................................................................................................................. 100 Local Transportation Assistance Fund ................................................................................................................... 101 Community Development Block Grant/Section 8 Housing Grant ........................................................................... 102 Enterprise Revenue: Ten Year Historical Trends Water/Wastewater User Fees ................................................................................................................................ 103 Solid Waste Fees ................................................................................................................................................... 104 Golf Course Fees ................................................................................................................................................... 105 81 Total Revenue Total revenue for FY 2010-11 is $389.4 million reflecting $341.1 million in operating revenue and $48.3 million from bond proceeds, fund balances and other funding sources. The FY 2010-11 operating revenue total represents a 10.2% decline from FY 2009-10. The decrease in operating revenue sources is primarily in the General Governmental and Transportation/Transit areas and consists largely of lower local taxes and intergovernmental revenues. The decrease in bonding and other funding sources is directly related to the contraction in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget. Future bonding capacity is limited due to decreasing local property values. FY 2010-11 Other 7% Transportation 16% Bonds/ CIP Fund Balances 12% Operating Revenue 88% Enterprise 24% General Governmental 53% TOTAL REVENUE FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2010-11 Budget OPERATING REVENUE General Governmental Local Taxes, Licenses and Permits, and Debt $123,278,328 $114,414,128 Intergovernmental 41,288,113 35,181,557 Charges for Services 10,645,611 11,200,441 Fees, Fines, and Forfeitures 9,880,662 10,322,095 Miscellaneous 6,305,119 7,931,161 87,901,299 54,194,614 6,866,077 5,796,368 12,146,823 16,417,949 2,018,601 2,117,130 79,549,537 83,554,952 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE $379,880,170 $341,130,395 Operating Revenue Per Capita $2,237 $1,995 Bond/Note Proceeds 71,483,357 38,252,292 CIP Other Funding 18,227,211 7,836,500 6,600,000 2,175,963 $476,190,738 $389,395,150 $2,804 $2,277 Transportation/Transit Performing Arts CDBG/Section 8 Housing Rio Salado Special Revenue Enterprise Fund Balances TOTAL REVENUE Total Revenue Per Capita 82 Total Revenue by Source Comparative Revenue by Source FY 2009-10 Budget to FY 2010-11 Budget 40% 30% 20% 33% 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 36% 24% 23% 20% 19% 10% 20% 13% 7% 5% 0% Lo es ax T l ca C er Us es rg a h In ov rg te l ta en nm er Al e th lO r P CI Where the Money Comes From Revenue Source Local Taxes Local Sales Taxes Transit Tax Other Local Taxes Performing Arts User Charges Water/Wastewater Solid Waste Community Services Building/Trades & Planning/Zoning Intergovernmental State Shared Revenue HURF/LTAF CDBG/Section 8 Housing Transit State & Federal All Other Interest Revenue FY 2008-09 Actual FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2010-11 Budget $72,420,831 29,850,942 42,418,263 6,158,761 $75,255,000 29,957,000 45,480,578 6,295,038 $64,050,000 26,328,500 44,379,878 5,868,886 $69,880,072 25,012,100 43,486,953 5,175,519 52,401,240 15,128,312 8,894,469 5,680,740 59,311,760 15,651,109 8,939,723 4,237,152 59,055,545 14,987,166 8,615,228 3,800,025 64,721,072 15,187,163 9,013,199 4,618,357 44,392,852 10,377,467 11,741,860 14,483,180 41,288,113 10,492,410 12,146,823 45,211,283 39,482,581 9,452,066 10,920,980 11,697,608 35,181,557 9,495,879 16,417,949 15,243,919 2,844,495 10,404,407 9,558,931 1,564,864 71,483,357 17,318,630 7,508,581 2,524,504 13,282,361 10,322,095 1,567,696 38,252,292 1,739,500 8,272,963 $419,321,728 $389,395,150 7,078,985 4,751,496 8,990,983 9,484,273 9,200,777 9,880,662 1,546,287 1,497,750 97,414,407 71,483,357 CIP - Outside Revenue 43,754,937 17,318,630 Other Fund Balance 26,863,981 7,508,581 * Includes Federal and State Grants and Residential Development Tax and Fees. Miscellaneous Revenue Fines and Forfeitures Licenses and Permits Bonds/Note Proceeds Total Revenue FY 2009-10 Revised $508,799,274 83 $476,190,738 Components of Total Revenue FY 2010-11 Total Revenue $389,395,150 Operating Budget $341,130,395 Capital Budget $48,264,755 General Governmental Special Revenue Enterprise Bond/Note Proceeds CIP–Outside Revenue Other- Fund Balances $179,049,382 $78,526,061 $83,554,952 $38,252,292 $1,739,500 $8,272,963 Local Taxes/ Licenses & Permits $114,414,128 Transit Water/Wastewater Water/Wastewater G.O. Bonds Grants $43,837,911 $66,510,174 $36,646,338 $739,500 ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ _____________________ ____________________ Intergovernmental Highway User Revenue Solid Waste Tax-Supported General Obligation Bonds $1,605,954 $35,181,557 $10,356,703 $15,189,163 ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ Charges for Services CDBG/ Section 8 Housing Golf $11,200,441 ___________________ Fines and Forfeitures $16,417,949 $1,711,195 ____________________ ____________________ Performing Arts Tax Cemetery $144,420 $10,322,095 $5,796,368 ____________________ ____________________ Other Rio Salado $6,431,161 $2,117,130 ____________________ Interest Development Fees $1,000,000 General Governmental is the largest operating revenue category. It supports basic functions of the City, which include Police, Fire, Community Services, and Community Development. $1,500,000 84 Comparative Operating Revenue by Major Source and Fund Revenue Source FY 2008-09 Actual FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2009-10 Revised FY 2010-11 Budget General Fund Local Taxes City Sales Tax $71,087,636 $74,005,000 $62,700,000 $68,550,872 Primary Property Tax 10,722,600 11,491,000 11,491,000 12,063,972 Transient Lodging Tax 2,564,683 3,000,000 2,168,700 3,559,916 Franchise Fees 3,980,673 3,927,281 3,724,281 3,727,000 88,355,592 92,423,281 80,083,981 87,901,760 13,191,255 13,267,549 12,011,386 12,732,069 24,832,128 21,447,606 21,405,576 16,139,804 6,024,595 81,833 6,275,500 112,000 5,768,161 112,000 6,166,164 127,000 44,176,446 41,102,655 39,297,123 35,165,037 Building & Trades/Planning & Zoning 5,680,740 4,237,152 3,800,025 4,618,357 Cultural and Recreational Registration Fees 4,919,225 5,165,125 4,974,000 5,317,493 Recreation Admission Charges 380,228 367,744 357,964 375,171 Library Fines and Fees 365,824 401,311 401,311 404,000 Other Cultural and Recreation Fees 578,511 474,279 474,779 485,420 Total Cultural and Recreational 6,243,788 6,408,459 6,208,054 6,582,084 Traffic Fines 2,621,375 3,271,338 3,271,338 2,918,181 Criminal Fines 1,153,186 1,213,100 1,213,100 1,231,552 Parking Fines 295,787 343,480 343,480 314,780 5,130,429 5,052,744 4,731,013 5,857,582 9,200,777 9,880,662 9,558,931 10,322,095 1,546,287 1,497,750 1,564,864 1,567,696 Total Local Taxes Intergovernmental Revenue State Sales Tax State Income Tax Vehicle License Tax Other Total Intergovernmental Fines, Fees and Forfeitures Other Fines, Fees and Forfeitures Total Fines, Fees and Forfeitures Business/Non-Business Licenses Other Revenue Sources SRP Payment in Lieu of Taxes 497,571 1,394,846 1,394,846 1,376,393 Interest Income 4,932,446 3,000,000 1,790,340 1,500,000 Other Miscellaneous Revenue and Loan Total Other Revenue 4,524,770 9,954,787 3,305,119 7,699,965 2,578,669 5,763,855 5,054,768 7,931,161 $165,111,782 $163,249,924 $146,276,833 $154,088,190 $23,415,585 $25,192,451 $25,192,451 $22,174,672 185,458 185,458 16,520 2,770,000 2,770,000 2,770,000 $28,147,909 $28,147,909 $24,961,192 Total General Fund Debt Service Fund Secondary Property Tax SRP Payment in Lieu of Taxes 876,393 Other Miscellaneous Revenue 599,472 Intergovernmental 263,041 HURF Debt Transfer Interest Income Total Debt Service Fund 8,278 $25,162,769 85 FY 2008-09 Actual FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2009-10 Revised FY 2010-11 Budget $29,850,942 $29,957,000 $26,328,500 $25,012,100 Lottery Transfer In 277,710 232,795 184,119 ASU-Flash Transit 603,311 676,790 676,790 773,045 Interest Income 179,722 212,386 212,386 212,386 13,602,159 44,301,698 10,836,699 14,470,874 1,463,051 813,220 3,032,220 3,369,506 $45,976,895 $76,193,889 $41,270,714 $43,837,911 $9,945,310 $10,019,765 $9,219,300 $9,495,879 Maintenance of Effort 785,824 1,035,000 785,824 785,824 State Lottery Proceeds 432,157 472,645 232,766 180,000 32,000 75,000 $11,169,492 $11,707,410 $10,269,890 $10,356,703 $1,333,195 $1,250,000 $1,175,900 $1,329,200 Transient Lodging Tax 246,681 300,000 208,600 410,000 Primary Property Tax 114,077 175,000 200,000 175,000 Interest Income 101,405 130,000 95,000 95,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 147,144 163,601 86,361 107,930 $1,942,502 $2,018,601 $1,765,861 $2,117,130 $6,158,761 $6,295,038 $5,868,886 $5,175,519 Interest Income 223,862 182,539 75,000 45,349 Fees and Admission and Miscellaneous 745,106 388,500 547,750 575,500 $7,127,729 $6,866,077 $6,491,636 $5,796,368 $11,741,860 $12,146,823 $10,920,980 $16,417,949 Residential Service $7,911,476 $8,342,352 $8,299,633 $8,473,903 Commercial Service 5,087,128 5,350,437 5,103,364 5,161,680 Roll-Off Service 1,636,116 1,628,320 1,254,169 1,221,580 Recycling 493,592 330,000 330,000 330,000 Interest Income 105,513 77,479 Miscellaneous Revenue 206,022 100,000 2,000 2,000 $15,439,847 $15,828,588 $14,989,166 $15,189,163 Revenue Source Transit Fund Transit Tax Federal and State Funding Miscellaneous Revenue Total Transit Fund Transportation Funds Highway User Revenue Tax Barricading Fees Other Revenue Total Transportation Funds 6,201 Rio Salado Fund City Sales Tax Total Rio Salado Fund Performing Arts Performing Arts Tax Total Performing Arts Total CDBG/Section 8 Housing Funds Solid Waste Fund Total Solid Waste Fund 86 FY 2008-09 Actual FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2009-10 Revised FY 2010-11 Budget $19,737,075 $22,552,173 $21,753,714 $24,500,000 8,468,995 9,555,004 8,956,212 9,120,000 Irrigation 313,108 332,212 304,572 304,572 Other Water Charges 735,161 576,500 596,500 586,500 29,254,339 33,015,889 31,610,998 34,511,072 Sewer Usage 18,396,038 21,236,822 22,266,451 24,200,000 Sewer Service 4,315,838 5,049,049 4,968,096 6,000,000 435,025 10,000 210,000 10,000 23,416,901 26,295,871 27,444,547 30,210,000 1,522,538 1,143,387 671,769 671,769 Land and Facility Rental 536,000 520,000 520,000 520,000 Loan Repayment from General Fund 542,833 542,833 542,833 542,833 Other Miscellaneous Revenue 178,341 54,500 54,500 54,500 $55,180,952 $61,572,480 $60,844,647 $66,510,174 $1,640,684 $1,742,472 $1,545,000 $1,457,000 $172,894 $253,106 $170,004 $254,195 5,221 5,705 Revenue Source Water/Wastewater Fund Charges for Service-Water Water Consumption Water Service Total Charges for Service-Water Charges for Service-Wastewater Other Wastewater Charges Total Charges for Service-Wastewater Interest Income Total Water/Wastewater Fund Golf Fund Greens Fees Pro Shop and Restaurant Revenue Interest Income Other Revenue Sources Total Golf Fund Cemetery Fund Lot & Burial Sales Total Cemetery Fund Total Revenue - All Funds 1,325 $1,820,124 $2,001,283 $1,715,004 $1,711,195 $91,997 $91,997 $147,186 $147,186 $144,420 $144,420 $144,420 $144,420 $340,765,949 $379,880,170 $322,837,060 $341,130,395 87 City Sales Tax Fiscal Year Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est 63,602,106 59,991,774 59,855,000 60,926,575 66,358,662 74,365,297 83,660,885 79,860,938 71,087,636 62,700,000 68,550,872 6.1 (5.7) (0.2) 1.8 8.9 12.1 12.5 (4.5) (11.0) (11.8) 9.3 Restrictions Current General Fund rate of 1.4% can be increased only by electorate. Certain proceeds are pledged as security for bond payments due under various bond security agreements. Revenue from a voterapproved 0.5% portion is dedicated to transit purposes and 0.1% dedicated funding for Performing Arts. In addition, all transaction privilege tax revenue generated in the Rio Salado Enterprise Fund Zone is deposited to the Rio Salado Fund for the operating expenses of the Rio Salado project. Assumptions The City sales tax, known formally as the transaction privilege tax, is derived from a 2.0% tax on a variety of financial transactions, including retail sales, rental payments, contracting sales, utility, telecommunications payments, and hotel/restaurant sales. In FY 1993-94, voters approved a 0.2% increase from 1.0% to 1.2%. In May of 2010 voters approved a temporary 0.2% increase in the sales tax, however, sales of food for home consumption are exempted from the increase. A strong recovery in the period immediately following the 2001-02 recession accounts for the double-digit growth in FY 2005-06 through FY 2006-07. Recent years have seen an unprecedented steep decline in revenues due largely to the effects of the regional housing market downturn and the national and regional recessions. The FY 2010-11 budgeted collection amount includes the voter approved tax rate increase. Major Influences: Taxable Sales, Population, and Consumer Price Index City Sales Tax $ Millions 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 63.6 60.0 59.9 60.9 66.4 74.4 83.7 79.9 71.1 62.7 68.6 t. es t. es 20.0 0.0 1 -0 00 0 2 2 -0 01 0 2 03 20 20 04 30 20 05 40 20 06 50 20 07 60 20 Fiscal Year 88 08 70 20 9 -0 08 0 2 0 -1 09 0 2 1 -1 10 0 2 Transient Lodging Tax Restrictions Rate of 5% can be increased only by electorate. Of the total amount collected, a portion is pledged to the Tempe Convention and Visitors Bureau (TCVB). Excess unrestricted proceeds are deposited into the General Fund, except for bed tax revenue generated within the Rio Salado Enterprise Zone, which is deposited to the Rio Salado Fund for operating costs of the Rio Salado Project. The tax originated in June of 1988 at 2% with half (or 1%) dedicated to TCVB. In FY 2001 voters approved an additional 1% for TCVB, increasing the tax from 2% to 3%. On May 2010 voters approved an increase in the tax rate from 3% to 5%. Beginning with FY 201011 the amount dedicated to TCVB is $2,000,000 with annual inflationary adjustments thereafter. Fiscal Year Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. $1,725,597 1,454,927 1,911,752 2,413,099 2,603,119 2,983,156 3,199,002 3,534,641 2,811,364 2,377,300 3,969,916 6.2 (15.7) 31.4 26.2 7.9 14.6 7.2 10.5 (20.5) (15.4) 67.0 Assumptions The tax is imposed on businesses who charge for lodging for any period of not more than 30 consecutive days. The steep drop in collections in FY 2009 through FY 2010 is due to the impact of the national and state recessions on local tourism. The large increase in revenue projected for FY 2011 is primarily reflective of a voter approved 2% increase rather than an increase in lodging structures or occupants. Major Influences: Economy, Competition from Hotels Located in Neighboring Cities, and Consumer Price Index Transient Lodging Tax $ Millions 5.0 Beginning in 2004 information is on a calendar year basis. 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 67.8%* 4,720 64.5%* 4,632 58.5%* 4,504 65.3%* 5,367 68.7%* 5,367 68.6%* 5,367 70.5%* 5,369 69.1%* 5,179 66.0%* 5,369 54.4%* 5,398 54.4%* 5,398 0.0 00 20 01 2 1 00 -0 2 2 2 00 -0 3 2 3 00 -0 4 04 20 05 2 5 00 -0 6 2 6 00 Fiscal Year *Percent Occupied/Number of Rooms 89 -0 7 2 7 00 -0 8 20 08 09 09 20 10 t. es 20 10 - 11 es t. City Property Tax Restrictions Primary Levy: Limited to annual increase of 2% plus amount generated by new construction. No restriction on usage. Secondary Levy: Restricted for debt service purposes only. No limit on rate. Tax Rate/$100 Primary Secondary Total Percent Assessed Value Tax Levy Tax Levy Amount Change Fiscal Year 2000-01 $1.35 $6,879,783 $11,615,100 $18,494,883 11.7 2001-02 1.35 7,169,352 11,695,228 18,864,580 2.0 2002-03 1.35 7,291,549 12,897,095 20,188,644 7.0 2003-04 1.35 8,313,398 13,059,814 21,373,212 5.9 2004-05 1.35 8,878,734 14,631,500 23,510,234 10.0 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est.* 2010-11 est.* 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 9,287,702 9,822,845 10,057,686 10,836,677 11,691,000 12,238,972 16,430,588 17,693,103 20,781,970 23,415,585 25,192,451 22,174,620 25,718,290 27,515,948 30,839,656 34,252,262 36,883,451 34,413,592 9.4 7.0 12.1 11.1 7.7 (6.7) Assumptions The City’s property tax is based on the assessed value of the property as determined by the Maricopa County Assessor, whose office both bills and collects all property taxes. Historical changes in total revenue collected have been the result of state policy affecting assessed valuations and growth, new development, and appreciation of existing property. The combined primary and secondary property tax rate for FY 2010-11 will total $1.40 per $100 assessed valuation, consisting of $0.52 per $100 of the primary assessed valuation for operating and maintenance costs and $0.88 per $100 of secondary assessed valuation to fund principal and interest payments on bonded indebtedness. The City held the aggregate property tax rate at $1.35 for five fiscal years before increasing it by $0.05 in FY 2005-06 to $1.40. The full amount of the increase was applied to the secondary, with the intent that the additional revenue generated be dedicated to repay debt for capital improvement projects. The proceeds go to different funds. Of the primary levy, $12.06 million goes to the General Fund and $175,000 goes to the Rio Salado Fund, and the entire secondary levy of $22.2 million goes to the Debt Service Fund. Major Influences: Development, Assessor Appraisal Methodology, State Policy, Population Growth, and Policy Regarding Property Tax Rates City Property Tax $ Millions 40.0 30.0 20.0 Secondary Tax Levy 10.0 Primary Tax Levy 0.0 2 01 000 2 -0 01 0 2 *Amounts reflect estimated receipts 3 -0 02 0 2 4 -0 03 0 2 5 -0 04 0 2 6 -0 05 0 2 7 -0 06 0 2 Fiscal Year 90 8 -0 07 0 2 9 -0 08 0 2 10 90 20 t. es 11 01 20 t. es Salt River Project In-Lieu Tax Restrictions Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 $967,193 1,041,291 (12.9) 7.7 2002-03 1,110,403 6.6 2003-04 1,094,665 (1.4) 2004-05 1,522,519 39.1 2005-06 2006-07 1,431,678 1,458,614 (6.0) 1.9 2007-08 1,471,815 0.9 2008-09 1,373,964 (6.6) 2009-10 est. 1,394,846 1.5 2010-11 est. 1,376,393 (1.3) Fiscal Year No restrictions on usage. Assumptions As a government-operated public utility, the Salt River Project pays no franchise or property taxes. In lieu of these taxes, an amount is received from the utility based on a computation involving property location and plant investment. Proceeds from this revenue source are received through Maricopa County in June and December. In past years, monies from this source were deposited into both the General Fund and Debt Service Fund in a manner similar to the property tax. Beginning in FY 2009-10, all proceeds are deposited into the General Fund. Major Influences: Real Property Value and State Statute (assessment ratio) Salt River Project In-Lieu Tax $ Millions 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 25.0%* 1.0 25.0%* 1.0 25.0%* 1.1 25.0%* 1.1 25.0%* 1.5 25.0%* 1.4 25.0%* 1.5 25.0%* 1.4 25.0%* 1.3 25.0%* 1.4 25.0%* 1.4 0.2 0.0 00 20 01 2 1 00 -0 2 02 20 03 2 3 00 -0 4 2 4 00 -0 5 05 20 06 2 6 00 -0 7 07 20 08 2 8 00 -0 9 20 09 Fiscal Year *Percents represent the assessment ratio on SRP real property/In-Lieu Tax revenue 91 - 10 t es . 20 10 1 -1 es t. State Shared Sales Tax Restrictions Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 $13,951,532 12,148,438 12,405,713 3.3 (12.9) 2.1 2003-04 2004-05 13,345,152 14,695,069 7.6 10.1 2005-06 2006-07 16,810,763 15,758,491 14.4 (6.3) 2007-08 2008-09 15,237,310 13,191,255 (3.3) (13.4) 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. 12,011,386 12,732,069 (8.9) 6.0 Fiscal Year No restrictions on usage. Must be expended for a public purpose. Assumptions The state assesses a 6.6% sales tax, of which 0.6% is designated for educational purposes and 1.0% is excluded from revenue sharing as approved at a May 2010 General Election. Cities and towns share in 25% of the remaining collections (estimated at $374 million for FY 2010-11) on the basis of their population in relation to total state population. Prior to 2000, Tempe accounted for 4.5% of the state’s population, but with the 2000 Census Tempe’s share fell to 3.9%. This reduction explains much of the decline in Tempe’s state shared sales tax revenue in FY 2001-02. The share declined again to 3.4% with the 2005 mid-decade Census, but due to the robust state revenue growth the City did not experience a year over year net decrease. The four year decreased revenue beginning in FY 2006-07 is reflective of the state recession. The increase in FY 2010-11 is reflective of state-level economic recovery in sales taxes as projected by the State Finance Advisory Committee. Major Influences: Taxable Sales, Population (relative to state) and State Law State Shared Sales Tax $ Millions 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 312.7* 4.5% 6.0 311.7* 3.9% 316.4* 3.9% 340.5* 3.9% 376.2* 3.9% 461.0* 3.4% 439.1* 3.9% 447* 3.4% 385.7* 3.4% 352.2* 3.4% 374.0* 3.4% 4.0 2.0 0.0 20 -0 00 1 20 01 02 2 2 00 -0 3 2 3 00 -0 4 2 4 00 -0 5 2 500 06 2 6 00 -0 Fiscal Year *Total state shared sales tax revenue pool/City’s share of pool 92 7 2 7 00 8 -0 20 08 09 20 09 0 -1 es t. 20 10 - 11 t. es State Shared Vehicle License Tax Restrictions No restrictions on usage. Must be expended for a public purpose. Fiscal Year Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. $5,632,181 5,233,512 6,247,543 6,428,101 6,791,043 7,527,675 6,870,739 6,655,516 6,024,595 5,768,161 6,166,164 2.5 (7.1) 19.4 2.9 5.6 10.8 (8.7) (3.1) (9.5) (4.3) 6.9 Assumptions Cities and towns receive 25% of the net revenue collected for vehicle licensing within their county. The respective shares are determined by the Cities’ share of population in relation to total incorporated population of the county. The remainder of the revenue collected is shared by schools, counties, and the state. Prior to 2000, Tempe accounted for 4.5% of the state’s population. Based on the 2005 Special Census, this figure declined to 3.4%. The four year decreased revenue beginning in FY 2006-07 is reflective of the state recession. The FY 2010-11 growth is largely due to the low base set in prior years as this revenue amount is below FY 2002-03 levels. Major Influences: Population (relative to State), State Policy and Auto Sales State Shared Vehicle License Tax $ Millions 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 5.6 5.2 6.2 6.4 6.8 7.5 6.9 6.7 6.0 5.8 6.2 2.0 1.0 0.0 2 0 00 -0 1 2 100 02 02 20 -0 3 2 3 00 -0 4 2 400 05 05 20 -0 6 2 6 00 -0 7 07 20 08 2 8 00 -0 9 20 Fiscal Year 93 09 - 10 es t. 10 20 11 t. es State Shared Income Tax Restrictions Amount Percent Change 2000-01 $17,890,338 5.0 2001-02 16,544,791 (7.5) 2002-03 16,882,535 2.0 2003-04 14,303,004 (15.3) 2004-05 14,582,117 2.0 2005-06 16,607,943 13.9 2006-07 18,823,759 13.3 2007-08 23,332,475 24.0 2008-09 24,832,128 6.4 2009-10 est. 21,405,576 (13.8) 2010-11 est. 16,139,804 (24.6) Fiscal Year No restrictions on usage. Must be expended for a public purpose. Assumptions The right to levy income taxes in Arizona is reserved for the state in statute. Amounts distributed are based on actual income tax collections from two years prior to the fiscal year in which the City receives the funds. Under current law, Arizona cities and towns receive 15.0% of the state’s income tax collections from two years prior. The state shared revenue pool is distributed among cities and towns based on the relation of their population to the total population of all incorporated cities and towns in the state. Prior to the 2005 Special Census, Tempe accounted for 3.9% of the state’s urban population, but this share fell to 3.4% for FY 2006-07. Due to a two year lag between the calculation and distribution of revenue sharing amounts, the estimated revenue for FY 2010-11 exhibits a steep decline. This is because the amount is based on economic activity during the low point of the state recession in FY 2008-09. Major Influences: Personal Income, Corporate Net Profits, Population (relative to State) and State Policy State Shared Income Tax $ Millions 26.0 24.0 22.0 20.0 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 15.0%* 396.5 15.8%* 421.9 15.8%* 430.6 15.0%* 365.0 15.0%* 373.1 15.0%* 425.2 15.0%* 551.0 15.0%* 685.3 15.0%* 727.5 15.0%* 628.6 15.0%* 473.3 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 -0 00 20 1 -0 01 20 2 -0 02 0 2 3 -0 03 0 2 4 -0 04 0 2 5 -0 05 0 2 6 -0 06 0 2 7 -0 07 0 2 8 2 0 800 9 20 09 - 10 t es . 20 10 1 -1 es t. Fiscal Year * Percent of state income tax collections distributed to cities and towns/Total state shared tax revenue pool ($ in millions) 94 Charges for Services/Cultural and Recreational Restrictions Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 $4,258,777 4,471,110 11.0 5.0 2002-03 4,699,196 5.1 2003-04 5,113,578 8.8 2004-05 5,009,690 (2.0) 2005-06 4,961,260 (1.0) 2006-07 5,293,236 6.7 2007-08 6,156,998 16.3 2008-09 6,243,788 1.4 2009-10 est. 6,208,054 (0.6) 2010-11 est. 6,582,084 6.0 Fiscal Year No restrictions on usage, but intended to defray costs of recreation and social service programs. Assumptions Revenue in this category is derived from a wide array of recreational activities (such as softball, swimming, and tennis) and social services programs (such as counseling services and after-school programs). By Council policy, many of these activities and services are partially or fully funded through user charges. Fees are based on a targeted percentage for cost recovery of direct program operating costs, including wages and supply costs but exclude facility costs, administration, and capital outlay. The percentage of recovery of direct program costs is classified by user groups as follows: adult programs, 100% cost recovery; youth programs 100% cost recovery, and senior programs, 50% cost recovery; and all Kiwanis Recreation Center classes/programs, 100% cost recovery. The FY 2010-11 amount includes $325,293 in new revenue from new fees and changes to existing resulting from the budget balancing process. Major Influences: Population, Cost Recovery Policy and New Program Development Charges for Services/Recreation and Social Services $ Millions 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.3 4.5 4.7 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.3 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.6 2.0 1.0 0.0 00 20 -0 1 2 100 02 2 200 03 03 20 -0 4 2 4 00 -0 5 05 20 06 06 20 Fiscal Year 95 07 2 7 00 -0 8 08 20 -0 9 0 20 9- 10 t. es 20 10 - 11 es t. Charges for Services/Development Related Restrictions Intended to offset costs related to permitting and planning for residential and commercial development in the City, though there are no restrictions on usage. Fiscal Year Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. $2,730,681 1,993,308 2,450,574 2,642,589 3,458,518 5,506,134 5,969,413 6,479,274 5,680,740 3,800,025 4,618,357 (7.7) (27.0) 22.9 7.8 30.9 59.2 8.4 8.5 (12.3) (33.1) 21.5 Assumptions The annual growth rates shown above reflect the extreme cyclical nature of development. Much of the increase in FY 2002-03 was due to a fee/rate increase. The impact of this increase was moderated in subsequent years in light of slow development activity associated with a landlocked community. This trend reversed itself sharply, as the attractiveness of the Tempe downtown area for development, as well as the construction of Tempe Marketplace, increased permitting activity. The FY 2008-09 decrease is largely the result of large projects working their way out of the construction queue. Activity for FY 2009-10 dropped further due to a tight credit market and regional oversupply in commercial real estate suppressing the demand for new construction. The increase in FY 2010-11 is due largely to rate adjustments. Major Influences: Population, Tax Laws, Economy and Development Charges for Services/Development Related $ Millions 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1,417* $262.3 1,261* $121.2 1,313* $199.6 1,147* $210.3 1,243* $302.2 1,845* $453.6 1,442* $443.6 1,374* $373.6 1,106* $377.0 976* $182.9 1,100* $250.0 0.0 00 20 -0 1 01 20 -0 2 02 20 -0 3 03 20 -0 4 2 0 400 5 2 0 500 6 2 0 600 Fiscal Year * Number of building permits/Valuation ($ in millions) 96 7 2 0 700 8 2 0 800 9 09 20 10 t es . 10 20 11 t es . Fines and Forfeitures Fiscal Year Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. $4,489,939 4,615,379 5,510,475 5,858,482 6,639,189 7,278,191 7,219,330 8,616,319 9,200,777 9,558,931 10,322,095 (4.7) 2.8 19.4 6.3 13.3 9.6 (0.8) 19.4 6.8 3.9 8.0 Restrictions No restrictions on usage. Assumptions The fines and forfeitures revenue to the City derive from fines related to parking, traffic, criminal, animal control, defensive driving school, adult diversion, domestic violence, and false alarms, plus revenue from public defender reimbursements, forfeitures, and boot fees. The FY 2007-08 increase was due to initial implementation of photo radar traffic enforcement. The increase in FY 2010-11 is due to a number of new and revised fines and fees that were adopted as a result of the budget balancing effort. Major Influences: Population, Crime Rate and Internal Policy (Enforcement, Number of Police Officers) Fines and Forfeitures $ Millions 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 4.5 4.6 5.5 5.9 6.6 7.3 7.2 8.6 9.2 9.6 10.3 2.0 0.0 2 0 00 1 -0 2 1 00 -0 2 2 2 00 3 -0 03 20 -0 4 2 05 40 0 2 5 00 6 -0 2 6 00 -0 7 2 7 00 8 -0 2 8 00 9 -0 20 Fiscal Year 97 0 10 9- es t. 20 10 - 11 es t. Transit Tax Restrictions Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 $27,310,246 25,229,927 25,187,121 3.5 (7.6) (0.2) 2003-04 2004-05 26,740,623 28,848,493 6.2 7.9 2005-06 2006-07 32,440,081 34,971,294 12.4 7.8 2007-08 2008-09 32,449,710 29,850,942 (7.2) (8.0) 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. 26,328,000 25,012,100 (11.8) (5.0) Fiscal Year Represents a portion of the City sales tax dedicated by public vote to transit-related purposes, such as bus acquisition and maintenance, connecting bus routes to neighboring cities, bus stop construction, transit planning, and light rail construction. Assumptions The Transit Tax represents 1/2 cent of the 2.0% City Sales Tax. The tax for transit was approved by Tempe voters in September 1996 and became effective January 1, 1997. Although the estimate for FY 2009-10 mirrors our trend for overall City sales tax growth, it does slightly deviate due to nuances resulting from rebates and tax incentives. For FY 2010-11 the growth rate is negative due to depressed activity in contracting tax collections. Major Influences: Taxable Sales, Population and Consumer Price Index Transit Tax $ Millions 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 27.3 25.2 25.2 26.7 28.8 32.4 35.0 32.4 29.9 26.3 25.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 2 0 00 1 -0 2 1 00 2 -0 2 2 00 -0 3 2 3 00 4 -0 2 4 00 5 -0 05 20 -0 6 -0 06 0 2 Fiscal Year 98 7 -0 07 0 2 8 -0 08 20 9 20 09 - 10 es t. 20 10 - 11 es t. Performing Arts Tax Restrictions Amount Percent Change $2,607,541 4,999,984 5,010,392 5,279,580 6,103,402 6,480,218 7,007,790 6,820,193 6,158,761 91.8 0.2 5.4 15.6 6.2 8.1 (2.7) (9.7) Fiscal Year Represents a portion of the City sales tax dedicated by public vote for construction and operation of the Performing Arts Center. 2000-01* 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 *Collections over a six month period 2009-10 est. 5,868,886 (4.7) 2010-11 est. 5,175,519 (11.8) Assumptions The Performing Arts Tax represents 1/10 cent of the 2.0% City Sales Tax. This tax was approved in May 2000 and became effective January 2001. The FY 2010-11 estimate deviates from the trend for overall City sales tax growth, due to the rate increase that only affects collections to the general City Sales Tax. Major Influences: Taxable Sales, Population, and Consumer Price Index Performing Arts Tax $ Millions Performing Arts Tax effective January 1, 2001 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 2.6* 5.0 5.0 5.3 6.1 6.5 7.0 6.8 6.2 5.9 5.2 1.0 0.0 00 20 01 2 1 00 -0 2 2 2 00 -0 3 2 300 04 2 400 05 05 20 -0 6 06 20 Fiscal Year * Collections over a 6 month period 99 -0 7 2 7 00 -0 8 2 800 09 20 09 10 es t. 1 20 0- 11 t. es Highway User Tax Restrictions Fiscal Year Amount Percent Change Proceeds can be used only for street and highway purposes including right-of-way acquisition, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, and payment of debt service on highway and street bonds. 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. $11,213,830 9,853,831 10,285,028 10,981,726 12,492,819 11,222,223 11,854,088 11,387,320 9,945,310 9,219,300 9,495,879 1.6 (12.1) 4.4 6.8 13.8 (10.2) 5.6 (3.9) (12.7) (7.3) 3.0 Assumptions Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) revenue is comprised primarily of a share of the state-imposed tax on fuel (18 cents per gallon), but also includes a portion of vehicle license taxes and other motor carrier permits and fees. Of the statewide total collected HURF revenue, 27.5% is distributed to cities and towns. Half of this pool amount is distributed based on each city’s or town’s percentage share of the statewide total population of all incorporated cities and towns. The remaining one-half is divided into county pools based on each county’s share of statewide fuel sales. Within each county, cities and towns receive an allocation based on their percentage share of total incorporated population in the county. Collections from this tax have lagged in recent years due to the impact of the state recession. Major Influences: Population, State Policy, Economy and Gasoline Sales Highway User Tax $ Millions 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 312.1* 321.8* 344.5* 363.5* 386.1* 418.1* 409.7* 377.7* 364.1* 321.2* 344.7* t. es t. es 2.0 0.0 01 00 20 02 10 20 3 -0 02 0 2 4 -0 03 0 2 5 -0 04 0 2 6 -0 05 0 2 7 -0 06 0 2 8 -0 07 0 2 09 80 20 10 90 20 Fiscal Year * Total State Shared Highway User Tax Revenue Pool distributed to Cities/Towns. 100 11 01 20 Local Transportation Assistance Fund Restrictions Proceeds can be used only for street and highway projects, for any construction or reconstruction in the public rights-of-way as well as transit programs. Fiscal Year Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. $957,785 900,415 870,471 845,814 820,811 798,826 771,039 761,513 709,867 416,885 0 (1.9) (6.0) (3.3) (2.8) (3.0) (2.7) (3.5) (1.2) (6.8) (41.3) (100.0) Assumptions Revenue is derived from the state lottery game and the multi-state Powerball lottery game. By state statute, the state must distribute at least $20.5 million annually to cities and towns from state lottery revenue, up to a maximum total distribution pool of $23 million. Amounts distributed to cities and towns are based on their percentage share of statewide population as determined and updated annually by the state Department of Economic Security. Revenue derived from Powerball may be received only after the state first collects $31 million from Powerball sales. If this threshold is reached, the state will distribute up to a total of $18 million from Powerball revenue, dividing the pool into amounts based on each county’s share of lottery ticket sales. Amounts from these county pools distributed to cities and towns are based on each city’s or town’s share of incorporated population in the county. The lottery state shared pool is adjusted every year by population determined by the Department of Economic Security. Tempe’s declining share of statewide population accounts for the lottery revenue reduction over the past 10 years. Laws 2010, 7th Special Session Chapter 12 diverted current and future distributions of Lottery proceeds to the state General Fund. Major Influences: Population (relative to state) and Lottery Ticket Sales Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ Millions 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.96 0.20 0.90 0.87 0.85 0.82 0.80 0.77 0.76 0.71 0.40 0 0.00 00 20 -0 1 01 20 -0 2 02 20 -0 3 03 20 -0 4 04 20 -0 5 2 0 500 6 2 0 600 Fiscal Year 101 7 2 0 700 8 -0 08 0 2 9 09 20 - 10 es t. 10 20 - 11 es t. Community Development Block Grant/Section 8 Housing Grant Restrictions Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds are awarded by the federal government and may be used only for the rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing and the removal of “slum and blight”. Section 8 Housing Grants, also federal funds, may be used only for rent and utility subsidies for low income persons. Community Development Block Grant Section 8 Housing Grant Fiscal Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. Percent Change Amount $2,967,700 2,148,750 2,896,728 2,793,637 2,996,729 5,973,141 4,115,572 1,577,124 1,685,130 1,926,196 5,794,897 Percent Change Amount $4,985,700 5,427,291 7,227,924 8,364,970 8,577,743 7,869,697 8,543,758 8,784,219 10,056,730 8,994,784 10,623,052 24.2 (27.6) 34.8 (3.6) 7.3 99.3 (31.1) (61.7) 6.8 14.3 200.8 7.8 8.9 33.2 15.7 2.5 (8.3) 8.6 2.8 14.5 (10.6) 18.1 Assumptions Funding levels in both programs are based on a federal formula which reflects local factors such as the percentage of people living in poverty, unemployment, population, age of existing housing, and the need for housing. Major Influences: Federal Policy, Poverty Levels and Population Community Development Block Grant/Section 8 Housing Grant $ Millions Community Development Block Grant Section 8 Housing Grant 18.0 16.0 14.0 5.8 12.0 6.0 10.0 2.8 3.0 8.4 8.6 1.7 4.1 1.9 1.6 2.9 8.0 2.1 3.0 6.0 4.0 7.2 10.6 10.1 8.8 8.5 7.9 9.0 5.4 5.0 2.0 0.0 2 0 00 -0 1 2 02 100 2 03 20 0 2 3 00 -0 4 2 4 00 5 -0 2 5 00 -0 6 06 20 Fiscal Year 102 07 2 7 00 -0 8 2 8 00 -0 9 20 0 10 9- es t. 20 10 - 11 es t. Water/Wastewater User Fees Restrictions Fees can only be used to support the Water/Wastewater enterprise. Fiscal Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. Amount $45,349,960 44,591,306 40,586,501 41,037,476 40,674,305 44,392,262 46,201,943 49,078,726 52,401,239 59,055,545 64,721,072 Percent Change (2.0) (1.7) (9.0) 1.1 (0.9) 9.1 4.1 6.2 6.7 12.7 9.6 Assumptions Water/Wastewater revenue is derived from fees and service charges assessed to residential and commercial customers of the City’s water and wastewater systems. Revenue also includes charges to the City’s residential irrigation customers. Over the past few years, both water and sewer rates have been adjusted to address increased costs resulting from inflation, debt service on capital projects, and environmental regulation compliance. Major Influences: Population, Rate Policy, Water Consumption Patterns and Weather Water/Wastewater User Fees $ Millions 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 45.3 44.6 40.6 41.0 40.7 44.4 46.2 49.1 52.4 59.1 64.7 20.0 10.0 0.0 1 -0 00 0 2 2 -0 01 0 2 03 20 20 04 30 20 05 40 20 06 50 20 07 60 20 Fiscal Year 103 08 70 20 9 -0 08 0 2 0 -1 09 0 2 t. es 1 -1 10 0 2 t. es Solid Waste Fees Restrictions Used to defray costs of providing solid waste collection and disposal service. Fiscal Year Amount Percent Change 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. $9,758,199 10,024,863 10,496,774 11,014,949 12,054,563 13,232,293 14,049,254 14,217,938 14,636,191 14,657,166 14,857,163 (0.8) 2.7 4.7 4.9 9.4 9.8 6.2 1.2 2.9 0.1 1.4 Assumptions The collection and disposal of solid waste constitutes the City’s second largest enterprise operation. Revenue derives from user fees for residential, commercial, roll-off, and uncontained solid waste service. Residential solid waste fees were increased five times starting in FY 1998-99 to address increased landfill and recycling costs. Major Influences: Population, Internal Policy, and Commercial Market/Competition Solid Waste Fees $ Millions 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 9.8 10.0 10.5 11.0 12.1 13.2 14.0 14.2 14.6 14.7 14.9 4.0 2.0 0.0 1 -0 00 0 2 2 -0 01 0 2 3 -0 02 0 2 04 30 20 05 40 20 06 50 20 07 60 20 Fiscal Year 104 08 70 20 09 80 20 0 -1 09 0 2 t. es 1 -1 10 0 2 t. es Golf Course Fees Restrictions Revenue is used to defray costs of operating the Rolling Hills and Ken McDonald golf courses. Rolling Hills Fiscal Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 est. 2010-11 est. Ken McDonald Percent Change Amount $840,000 767,285 806,588 847,844 828,454 903,047 787,787 796,698 726,394 679,660 670,051 Percent Change Amount $1,018,500 1,006,532 1,119,184 1,172,288 1,139,519 1,136,795 1,141,497 1,187,729 1,088,509 1,035,344 1,041,144 (4.8) (8.7) 5.1 5.1 (2.3) 9.0 (12.8) 1.1 (8.8) (6.4) (1.4) (4.0) (1.2) 11.2 4.7 (2.8) (0.2) 0.4 4.1 (8.4) (4.9) 0.6 Assumptions Revenue from greens fees account for nearly 87% of golf course revenue, with the rest coming from lease agreements with the pro shops and restaurant concessionaires. Our projection conservatively assumes essentially flat revenue growth in light of the uncertainty that can result from weather conditions or fee changes, and competition from private courses. Major Influences: Competition from Other Golf Courses, Weather, and City Fee Policy Golf Course Fees $ Millions Rolling Hills 3.0 Ken McDonald 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.0 1 -0 00 0 2 2 -0 01 0 2 3 -0 02 0 2 4 -0 03 0 2 5 -0 04 0 2 6 -0 05 0 2 7 -0 06 0 2 Fiscal Year 105 8 -0 07 0 2 9 -0 08 0 2 0 -1 09 0 2 t. es 1 -1 10 0 2 t. es This page intentionally left blank. Performance Budget The following section includes departmental per capita and aggregate appropriations, goals, objectives, performance indicators, and staffing levels. This section describes activities, services, and functions carried out by organizational units including the measurement of results by unit, objective and fiscal year. Performance Budget Contents Page Performance Budget Summary ................................................................................................................................... 108 Per Capita Performance Budget ................................................................................................................................. 109 Performance Benchmarking ........................................................................................................................................ 110 City Organizational Chart ............................................................................................................................................. 111 Mayor and Council........................................................................................................................................................ 112 City Manager ................................................................................................................................................................. 114 City Attorney ................................................................................................................................................................. 116 City Clerk ....................................................................................................................................................................... 118 City Court....................................................................................................................................................................... 120 Community Development............................................................................................................................................. 122 Administration/Economic Development ................................................................................................................... 124 Building Safety......................................................................................................................................................... 125 Planning................................................................................................................................................................... 126 Housing.................................................................................................................................................................... 128 Community Relations Office ........................................................................................................................................ 130 Administration/Mayor and Council Staff ................................................................................................................... 131 Neighborhood Services............................................................................................................................................ 132 Communication and Media Relations ...................................................................................................................... 133 Community Services .................................................................................................................................................... 134 Administration ......................................................................................................................................................... 135 Arts and Library ....................................................................................................................................................... 136 Recreation Centers and Programs .......................................................................................................................... 138 Social Services ........................................................................................................................................................ 139 Diversity Office.............................................................................................................................................................. 142 Finance and Technology .............................................................................................................................................. 144 Administration .......................................................................................................................................................... 146 Finance .................................................................................................................................................................... 147 Budget/Tax and License .......................................................................................................................................... 149 Information Technology ........................................................................................................................................... 151 Fire ................................................................................................................................................................................. 154 Administration/Fire Prevention................................................................................................................................. 156 Emergency/Medical Services................................................................................................................................... 157 Training/Professional Development ......................................................................................................................... 158 Homeland Security/Special Operations ................................................................................................................... 159 Support Services/Personnel Safety ......................................................................................................................... 160 Human Resources ........................................................................................................................................................ 162 Tempe Learning Center ........................................................................................................................................... 164 Internal Audit Office...................................................................................................................................................... 165 Police ............................................................................................................................................................................. 166 Office of the Chief .................................................................................................................................................... 167 Operations ............................................................................................................................................................... 168 Support Services ..................................................................................................................................................... 170 Organizational Services .......................................................................................................................................... 171 Public Works ................................................................................................................................................................. 172 Administration .......................................................................................................................................................... 174 Engineering.............................................................................................................................................................. 175 Field Operations ...................................................................................................................................................... 177 Transportation.......................................................................................................................................................... 181 Water Utilities........................................................................................................................................................... 184 107 Performance Budget Summary As expected from a service oriented organization, personal services or salaries, wages, and benefits comprise 52% or $154.4 million, the largest share of budgeted departmental expenditures. Department Mayor and Council Personal Services Supplies/ Services/ Contributions Capital Outlay Internal Services Total FY 2010-11 Budget $371,904 $11,981 $(65,972) $317,913 City Manager 545,281 1,650 (273,160) 273,771 City Attorney 2,764,037 91,239 54,229 2,909,505 City Clerk 349,110 370,324 25,194 744,628 City Court 2,586,178 583,594 436,078 3,605,850 Community Development 7,811,821 17,002,940 1,032,766 25,867,027 Community Relations Office 1,968,449 744,747 206,628 2,919,824 14,151,252 3,318,229 2,869,186 20,338,667 330,220 79,374 31,757 441,351 Finance and Technology 12,281,451 11,260,241 37,800 (18,111,865) 5,467,627 Fire 21,057,970 2,753,975 310,700 1,348,977 25,471,622 2,202,918 925,103 390,087 5,540 19,293 414,920 Police 50,945,295 6,210,987 9,178,083 66,334,365 Public Works 36,679,137 91,135,437 3,712,242 5,685,343 137,212,159 154,435,110 134,495,361 4,080,242 1,835,252 294,845,965 Community Services Diversity Office Human Resources Internal Audit Office Total Departmental Debt Service Non-Departmental 197,870 1,116,136 1,000,000 154,632,980 209,768,579 $209,768,579 108 5,784,724 1,000,000 4,080,242 2,951,388 48,264,755 $154,632,980 2,526,736 69,802,500 4,470,718 Capital Improvements Total Financial Program (601,285) 69,802,500 Contingencies Total Operating Budget 19,500 $52,344,997 371,433,189 48,264,755 $2,951,388 $419,697,944 Per Capita Performance Budget The citywide budget for FY 2010-11 totals $419.7 million. This represents a per capita decline of 16.8% compared to the FY 2009-10 citywide budget. The City continues to prioritize the general areas of Public Works and Public Safety accounting for over 78% of the total departmental budgets. FY 2008-09 Actual FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2009-10 Revised FY 2010-11 Budget $2.29 $2.36 $2.23 $1.86 City Manager 2.05 2.00 1.85 1.60 City Attorney 19.51 19.75 19.40 17.01 City Clerk 3.75 5.21 5.09 4.35 City Court 26.62 25.08 23.90 21.09 144.49 148.81 132.60 151.27 24.20 24.76 23.37 17.08 149.04 146.77 135.89 118.94 3.29 3.26 3.17 2.58 36.89 40.13 35.04 31.97 164.98 169.17 153.39 148.96 Human Resources 18.51 18.97 16.15 14.78 Internal Audit Office 3.00 2.96 2.92 2.43 Police 446.50 441.08 432.95 387.92 Public Works 771.82 878.39 807.04 802.41 $1,816.94 $1,928.70 $1,794.99 $1,724.26 326.58 388.19 361.17 407.92 40.78 55.60 54.54 33.83 Department Mayor and Council Community Development Community Relations Office Community Services Diversity Office Finance and Technology Fire Total Departmental Per Capita Debt Service Non-Departmental Contingencies Total Operating Per Capita 9.12 2,184.30 2,381.61 2,210.70 2,172.13 996.46 567.17 567.17 282.25 $3,180.76 $2,948.78 $2,777.87 $2,454.38 Capital Improvements Total Budget Per Capita 5.85 109 Performance Benchmarking In the following Performance Budget Section, the reader will note a number of performance measures, or benchmarks related to each department's statement of its goals and objectives. These benchmarks are part of a benchmarking program throughout Tempe city government. Benchmark measures found in this section reflect a sampling of the more critical measures of department performance and service delivery. This survey allows management to gauge outcomes by identifying resident preferences and satisfaction with city services. The survey also provides an opportunity to benchmark our performance with that of regional and national peers. The results of this survey are reflected in the Performance Budget section of this book. The survey questions were designed to assess the respondents’ ratings regarding their level of satisfaction for each particular service and their rating of relative importance. Improvements will be emphasized in those areas where levels of satisfaction were relatively low and the perceived importance of the service were relatively high. Also, to better understand how well services were delivered, home addresses of respondents were geocoded onto a map. The City has tracked performance indicators for many years as a means of identifying service trends and communicating results to the public. The City made a commitment to develop a benchmarking program modeled after other successful private and public sector efforts. Taking advantage of much work already done on benchmarking nationally, we utilized consensus benchmarks established by several national programs addressing benchmarking, including the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Services Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA) program and the Innovation Group. These elements provided additional insight to enable departments to allocate limited resources to those areas residents deemed important. This renewed focus on outcomes is indicative of the City’s long-term commitment to benchmarking and continuous improvement of our service delivery at the lowest possible cost to residents. Tempe’s benchmarking project began in 1984 with its participation in an experimental program coordinated by the Innovation Group, a nonprofit organization serving local government. Data for Innovation Group suggested benchmarks were gathered for a “test” group of City departments for possible comparisons with other local governments in the Innovation Group benchmark database. In addition, the City formally participated in ICMA’s Comparative Performance Measurement Program. The City continues to refine the benchmarks tracked to include benchmarks developed by national professional organizations, as well as those developed by individual departments. Efforts have focused on establishing a database of historical information on a wide array of benchmarks for most City departments. As a result of discussions with the City's management team and input from departments, we identified the most important 25-30 comparative benchmarks which are italicized and highlighted in blue in associated Departments’ Performance Budget sections. Concurrent with these efforts, a comparative benchmarking program was established with peer cities. The goal was to develop and maintain partnerships with cities having comparable demographic and financial characteristics (i.e., population and operating budget size). Further, our goal was to gather data from the benchmark cities to evaluate Tempe’s performance across critical operational areas. In 2007, a special effort and annual commitment was initiated to enhance the value of performance measurement. To support a renewed emphasis on tracking service outcomes, a consultant was retained to design and administer a resident satisfaction survey. 110 City Organizational Chart Residents of Tempe Mayor and City Council City Clerk City Attorney City Manager City Court Brigitta Kuiper brigitta_kuiper@tempe.gov Andrew Ching Charlie Meyer MaryAnne Majestic andrew_ching@tempe.gov charlie_meyer@tempe.gov m_majestic@tempe.gov Police Assistant City Manager Chief of Police Tom Ryff Jeff Kulaga Jeff_Kulaga@tempe.gov tom_ryff@tempe.gov Community Relations Office Fire Fire Chief Mark Simmons Community Relations Manager Shelley Hearn mark_simmons@tempe.gov shelley_hearn@tempe.gov Finance and Technology Diversity Office Finance and Technology Director Ken Jones Diversity Manager Rosa Inchausti ken_jones@tempe.gov rosa_inchausti@tempe.gov Community Development Internal Audit Office Community Development Director Chris Anaradian City Auditor Tom Duensing chris_anaradian@tempe.gov tom_duensing@tempe.gov Public Works Public Works Director Don Bessler don_bessler@tempe.gov Community Services Community Services Director Kathy Berzins kathy_berzins@tempe.gov Human Resources Human Resources Director Renie Broderick renie_broderick@tempe.gov 111 Mayor and Council Mayor and Council Purpose: To represent residents of the City of Tempe, formulate legislation, and establish City policy. Description: The Mayor and six City Council members are the elected representatives of the residents of Tempe. They are charged with the formulation of public policy to meet community needs. The City Council is responsible for appointing the City Clerk, City Court, City Manager and City Attorney, as well as Board and Commission members. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following change: reduction of $6,000 in funding for miscellaneous supplies Expenditure by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $430,335 $443,532 $429,395 $371,904 Supplies and Services 12,991 19,831 16,601 11,981 Internal Services (56,804) Expenditure Total Authorized Personnel Mayor and Council Total (65,972) $378,900 $317,913 $2.29 $2.36 $2.23 $1.86 2008-09 Actual Perm FTE (67,096) $400,337 Per Capita Full Time 7 (63,026) $386,522 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 7 Full Time 7 7 112 Perm FTE Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 7 7 Perm FTE Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: All Council Committees Goal: To enact policy decisions that maximize overall resident satisfaction with life in the City Objective: To align community investment priorities with the needs of residents by emphasizing improvements in service categories that are of the most benefit to residents, and by targeting limited resources toward services of the highest importance to residents and to those services where residents are least satisfied 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Resident satisfaction with the appearance of the City 85% 86% 85% 85% Resident satisfaction with the image of the City 83% 86% 83% 85% Resident satisfaction with how well the City is planning growth 60% 65% 60% 61% Resident satisfaction with quality of life in the City 85% 88% 85% 86% Resident satisfaction with the feeling of safety in the City 71% 75% 71% 72% Resident satisfaction with the City as a place to live 93% 95% 93% 93% Resident satisfaction with the City as a place to raise children 81% 86% 81% 82% Resident satisfaction with the City as a place to work 80% 85% 80% 81% Resident satisfaction with the City as a place to retire 71% 77% 71% 72% Resident satisfaction with the leadership of elected officials 63% 70% 63% 65% Resident satisfaction with the direction the City is heading 65% 72% 65% 66% Measures* *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey Related Strategic Issue: All Council Committees Goal: To respond to all constituent forms of communication in a timely manner Objective: 1) To respond to 95% of phone calls within 24 hours of receipt; 2) respond to 95% of email inquiries within 72 hours of receipt; 3) respond to 97% of mail/letter inquiries within five working days; 4) respond to 98% of all Council emails within 24 hours of receipt; and 5) respond to 98% of all Council voicemails within 24 hours of receipt 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Calls responded to within 24 hours 95% 95% 95% 95% Email inquiries responded to within 72 hours 95% 95% 95% 95% Mail/letter inquiries responded to within five working days 95% 95% 95% 97% Council Communicator emails responded to within 24 hours of receipt 98% 95% 95% 98% Council Communicator voicemails responded to within 24 hours of receipt 98% 95% 95% 98% Measures 113 City Manager City Manager Purpose: To professionally implement all City Council policy decisions, efficiently direct the City's operations, and create an organizational culture that results in the delivery of excellent municipal services to residents of Tempe. Description: Working with the City’s governing body, the community, and City staff, the City Manager’s Office is to professionally implement all City Council policy decisions and efficiently direct the City’s operations and activities in accordance with sound management principles. These efforts will create an organizational culture which results in the delivery of excellent municipal services to the residents of Tempe. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: reduction of $12,000 for the City Manager and Assistant City Manager annual vehicle allowances reduction of $10,500 in funding for miscellaneous supplies and services and travel addition of a Energy and Grants Project Manager position, which is funded on a temporary basis using federal grants Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $584,838 2009-10 Budget $577,269 2009-10 Revised $571,826 2010-11 Budget $545,281 29,744 32,779 14,250 1,650 Supplies and Services Internal Services (269,469) (270,375) (271,363) (273,160) Expenditure Total $345,113 $339,673 $314,713 $273,771 $2.05 $2.00 $1.85 $1.60 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Full Time Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE Full Time City Manager 3 3 4 Total 3 3 4 Perm FTE Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: All Council Committees Goal: To provide high quality City services to residents of Tempe Objective: To achieve a rating of 90% or greater in resident overall satisfaction with citywide services Measures Satisfaction with overall quality of City services* 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 92% 90%+ 90% 90%+ *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 114 This page intentionally left blank. City Attorney City Attorney Purpose: To facilitate Tempe’s vision through high quality legal services. Description: The City Attorney, appointed by the Mayor and City Council under the City Charter, is legal advisor and attorney for the City. Activities include presentation and defense of the City’s legal interests and rights and prosecution for misdemeanor complaints. The City Attorney also is responsible for attending City Council meetings and serving as legal counsel during such meetings. Services are as follows: (1) support the legislative and administrative processes (ordinances, opinions, litigation, contracts, legal research, liens); (2) present and defend the City’s legal interests and rights before all courts, legislative and administrative tribunals; and (3) prosecute complaints (misdemeanor traffic and criminal, municipal and superior courts). FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of one Senior Executive Assistant position reduction of $16,400 in funding for wages reduction of $6,000 for the City Attorney annual vehicle allowance Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $3,060,143 2009-10 Budget $3,068,014 2009-10 Revised $3,056,110 2010-11 Budget $2,764,037 Materials and Supplies 123,374 139,753 99,271 91,239 Internal Services Expenditure Total 105,870 146,616 138,883 54,229 $3,289,387 $3,354,383 $3,294,264 $2,909,505 $19.51 $19.75 $19.40 $17.01 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel City Attorney Total 2009-10 Revised Full Time 27 Perm FTE 1.75 Temp FTE 0.62 Full Time 24 Perm FTE 1.75 27 1.75 0.62 24 1.75 116 Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 23 23 Perm FTE 1.75 1.75 Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To provide prompt legal services Objective: To achieve a 98% satisfaction rating from departments responding to the Civil Client Satisfaction Survey 2008-09 Actual Measures Departments indicating a positive response to promptness 96% 2009-10 Budget 98% 2009-10 Revised 93% 2010-11 Budget 98% Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To provide excellent customer service Objective: To target 100% satisfaction rating from departments responding to the Civil Client Satisfaction Survey Measures Departments indicating a positive response to courteous and approachable services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 100% 100% 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 100% 100% 100% 100% 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 80% 75% 80% 85% 93% 2010-11 Budget 100% Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To provide prompt disposal of DUI cases Objective: To dispose of 100% of DUI cases within 180 days Measures DUI cases disposed of within 180 days Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To increase victim’s rights satisfaction rating Objective: To achieve an 85% victim’s rights satisfaction rating Measures Victim’s rights satisfaction rating 117 City Clerk City Clerk Purpose: To accurately maintain the legal record of the actions of the City Council and all permanent City records, ensuring the preservation and accessibility of essential information, and to equitably conduct City elections to ensure the integrity of the democratic voting process. Description: The City Clerk, appointed by the Mayor and City Council pursuant to City Charter, serves as the legal custodian of the City’s official records; serves as the Chief Elections Officer of the City; administers Council meetings; and affixes the City Seal on all official documents. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: reduction of $13,000 in funding for advertising reduction of $6,000 for the City Clerk annual vehicle allowance Expenditure by Type 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Personal Services Supplies and Services Internal Services $458,574 133,489 40,076 $462,661 383,399 38,159 $445,389 383,399 35,993 $349,110 370,324 25,194 Expenditure Total $632,139 $884,219 $864,781 $744,628 $3.75 $5.21 $5.09 $4.35 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel City Clerk Total Full Time 4 Perm FTE 4 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 0.58 Full Time 4 0.58 4 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 0.58 Full Time 4 0.58 4 Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.58 0.58 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To keep City personnel and board and commission members informed and up-to-date on open meeting laws requirements, council packet submission requirements, and County regulations regarding recording of documents Objective: To conduct semi-annual training sessions to 25% of City Departments/Public Bodies on open meeting law requirements, proper submission of council agenda packets, and document recording requirements 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures Departments/Public Bodies that were provided training within the year 42% 25% 35% 25% Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To establish and maintain an active continuing program to comply with the Arizona public records disclosure laws Objective: To respond to all public records information requests within two business days, 95% of the time 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures Public records requests responded within 2 days 99% 118 95% 98% 95% This page intentionally left blank. City Court City Court Criminal Civil Purpose: To contribute to the quality of life in our community by fairly and impartially administering justice in the most effective, efficient, and professional manner possible. Description: The City Court is a municipal limited jurisdiction court that deals with criminal misdemeanor, civil traffic cases, code enforcement and zoning violations as well as Orders of Protection and Injunctions Against Harassment. The court includes all judicial, administrative, and staff functions necessary to accomplish the court’s purpose. This includes initial appearances, arraignments, pre-trial conferences, orders to show cause, subpoenas, arrest warrants, jury and non-jury trials, hearings, misdemeanor search warrants and financial services to enforce court orders by collecting fines, fees, surcharges and restitution. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: reduction of $31,201 for Pro-Tem Judges costs transfer of one Court Services Specialist position from the General Fund to grant funds elimination of $6,000 for City Judge annual vehicle allowance Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $3,373,469 2009-10 Budget $3,006,835 2009-10 Revised $2,955,841 2010-11 Budget $2,586,178 636,848 703,594 582,944 583,594 Supplies and Services Internal Services Expenditure Total 479,122 548,745 520,469 436,078 $4,489,439 $4,259,174 $4,059,254 $3,605,850 $26.62 $25.08 $23.90 $21.09 Per Capita Expenditures by Division 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget City Court - Administration $2,268,711 $2,035,851 $2,075,825 $1,848,988 901,093 850,523 792,377 724,253 1,319,635 1,372,800 1,191,052 1,032,609 $4,489,439 $4,259,174 $4,059,254 $3,605,850 Criminal Civil Expenditure Total 120 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Revised Authorized Personnel City Court Full Time 41 Perm FTE 0.65 Temp FTE 4.20 Full Time 38 Total 41 0.65 4.20 38 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 4.06 Full Time 38 4.06 38 Perm FTE Temp FTE 4.06 4.06 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To improve efficiency and effectiveness in the Tempe Municipal Court system’s adjudication process Objective: To achieve a 98% clearance rate of court filings Measures 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Total number of filings 153,183 121,712 102,899 103,000 Total number of dispositions 156,948 119,278 113,444 100,940 102% 98% 110% 98% Clearance ratio Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To improve efficiency and effectiveness in the Tempe Municipal Court system’s collection process Objective: To achieve an 85% collection rate of obligations imposed in a given fiscal year 2008-09 Actual Measures 2009-10 Budget Total obligations imposed N/A* N/A* Total payments processed N/A* N/A* Collection rate N/A* N/A* 2009-10 Revised $12,026,488 $9,908,436** 82% 2010-11 Budget $12,500,000 $10,625,000 85% Notes: *Collection rates not tracked in prior case management system **Payments processed include: restitution owed to victims; surcharges to State of Arizona; surcharges to Maricopa County; and revenue to City 121 Community Development Community Development Economic Development Building Safety Planning Housing Purpose: To serve the community and businesses with processes that are smooth, efficient, predictable, and transparent, and services that are both timely and accurate. Description: The Community Development Department serves the Tempe community by planning, marketing and managing land-use, transportation, housing and economic development opportunities. They work to create wealth and investment in the community by promoting a favorable business environment to attract private capital investment and higher-skill, higher-wage jobs, tax revenues and environmental benefits for the City. Also, they seek to provide a spectrum of housing opportunities for the residents of Tempe. 122 Expenditure by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $10,721,221 $11,503,565 $9,650,016 $7,811,821 11,825,777 11,736,474 11,198,997 16,213,902 30,738 89,225 24,085 19,500 1,203,179 1,353,643 1,277,630 1,032,766 583,706 $24,364,621 586,516 $25,269,423 366,907 $22,517,635 789,038 $25,867,027 $144.49 $148.81 $132.60 $151.27 Capital Outlay Internal Services Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Expenditures by Division Administration/Economic Development 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $6,187,037 $5,788,347 $4,050,461 $3,529,467 Building Safety 3,467,678 3,581,360 2,989,569 2,517,026 Planning 2,916,644 3,607,061 4,525,857 3,303,431 Housing 11,793,262 $24,364,621 12,292,655 $25,269,423 10,951,748 $22,517,635 16,517,103 $25,867,027 Total 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Administration/Economic Development Full Time 18 Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 1.49 Full Time 15 Perm FTE Building Safety 33 2.00 28 Planning 41 6.86 35 0.50 Housing 17 1.60 17 1.60 109 11.95 95 2.10 Total 123 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 1.49 Full Time 12 0.66 24 6.86 30 9.01 Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.49 0.66 2.86 18 1.60 84 1.60 4.01 Administration/Economic Development The Administration Division is responsible for management of all divisions within the department. The Economic Development Division works with prospective businesses, coordinates regional and local entities in attracting quality companies, broadens the Tempe tax base, and encourages educational, cultural and recreational opportunities that make for a well-balanced city and contribute to the quality of life. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of a Department Manager position as part of an organizational consolidation elimination of a Management Assistant position elimination of $24,000 in wages for two intern positions reduction of $20,448 in various base budget line items elimination of $6,000 for Community Development Director annual vehicle allowance Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $3,952,435 2009-10 Budget $3,811,181 2009-10 Revised $2,429,632 2010-11 Budget $1,871,118 Supplies and Services 1,336,320 1,146,997 1,138,705 1,228,437 2,684 18,500 21,867 550,797 464,058 289,343 Capital Outlay Internal Services Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita Authorized Personnel 257,493 344,801 347,611 170,914 172,419 $6,187,037 $5,788,347 $4,050,461 $3,529,467 $36.69 $34.09 $23.85 $20.64 2008-09 Actual Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 2009-10 Revised Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE Administration/Economic Development 18 1.49 15 1.49 12 0.49 Total 18 1.49 15 1.49 12 0.49 Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To expand and diversify the Tempe economy Objective: 1) To promote Tempe as a place to own and operating a small business; and 2) grow the tax base and job market in the community 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 60% N/A 59% 60% 47 50 61 55 Jobs generated by new companies 1,107 1,200 1,374 1,200 New businesses brought to Tempe 18 8 24 12 Successful business retention and expansions 11 10 9 12 Measures Own and operate a small business* Opportunities to retain Tempe businesses * Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 124 Building Safety The Building Safety Division is responsible for helping all of their project partners succeed while protecting public health and safety. They promote sustainable building practices and energy conservation techniques. The division ensures the long term usefulness and safety of all existing and new buildings, thereby maintaining the value of Tempe’s built environment. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of an Administrative Assistant position elimination of a Code Inspector II position elimination of two Building Inspector II positions elimination of a Building Code Complaint Investigator position 2008-09 Actual Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2009-10 Budget $2,940,838 $2,389,007 $2,150,700 94,809 86,493 86,493 73,482 Capital Outlay 1,310 Internal Services Expenditure Total 384,534 554,029 514,069 292,844 $3,467,678 $3,581,360 $2,989,569 $2,517,026 $20.56 $21.09 $17.61 $14.72 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Total 2010-11 Budget $2,987,025 Supplies and Services Authorized Personnel Building Safety 2009-10 Revised Full Time 33 Perm FTE 33 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 2.00 2.00 Full Time 28 Perm FTE 28 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 0.66 Full Time 24 0.66 24 Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.66 0.66 Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To verify through formal plan check and permit processes that plans, specifications, and engineering calculations meet minimum requirements for adopted building codes, ADA, and planning and zoning ordinances Objective: 1) To complete 100% of building inspections within one day of request; 2) process 95% of plan reviews within agreed time frame; 3) complete 95% of preliminary site plan reviews by due date; 4) complete and submit 100% of all city clerk reports on time; 5) serve 100% of customers within five minutes of arrival; and 6) accurately perform front counter activities 95% of the time 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 100% 100% 100% 100% Plan reviews processed within agreed time frame Complete all preliminary site plan reviews by due date 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% Complete and submit all reports to City Clerk on time 100% 100% 100% 100% Customers served within five minutes of arrival 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 95% 95% 95% Measures Building inspections completed within one day of request Accuracy of front counter activities 125 Planning The Planning Division is responsible for administering the development entitlement process, change or adoption of codes, ordinances and neighborhood plans, facilities and signs. This division is also responsible for historical preservation, transportation planning, project coordination and management for large private sector and City owned projects, and receiving and investigating complaints of all alleged City code violations. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of three full-time and one part-time Planner positions elimination of two Code Inspector II positions elimination of an Administrative Assistant II position reduction of $146,000 in funding for the part-time code enforcement team 2008-09 Actual Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services Capital Outlay 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $2,602,267 $3,303,479 $3,700,649 $2,476,831 140,929 151,510 347,654 349,679 147,290 152,072 301,144 175,192 190,071 $2,916,644 $3,607,061 $4,525,857 $3,303,431 $17.30 $21.24 $26.65 $19.32 26,158 Internal Services 1,218 Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Planning Total Full Time 41 41 Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised 286,850 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 6.86 Full Time 35 Perm FTE 0.50 Temp FTE 6.86 Full Time 30 6.86 35 0.50 6.86 30 Perm FTE Temp FTE 2.86 2.86 Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To obtain compliance with City codes that relate to residential nuisances, property enhancements, rental housing and multi-family, commercial and industrial zoning ordinance requirements Objective: 1) To resolve code issues within 33 days or less; 2) close 93% of code enforcement cases received; and 3) achieve a 99% voluntary compliance rate for property owners cited with a code violation 2008-09 Actual Measures 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 34 N/A 33 33 Code enforcement cases received 9,829 N/A 6,331* 6,000* Code enforcement cases closed 9,825 N/A 6,704* 5,580* 92% N/A 93% 93% 63 N/A 47 66 97% N/A 99% 99% Number of days to resolve code violations Percent Closed Cases per inspector per month Code violation voluntary compliance rate * Number of inspectors reduced; reflects merging and carryover of cases from prior year 126 Related Strategic Issue: Housing, Quality of Life Goal: To maintain a desirable environment through proactive and reactive enforcement of residential and commercial property maintenance codes Objective: 1) To maintain a minimum 30/70 ratio between proactive and reactive code responses; 2) minimize the resident level of dissatisfaction with the maintenance of residential property in their neighborhood to less than 16%; and 3) minimize the resident level of dissatisfaction with the responsiveness of code enforcement complaints to less than 24% 2008-09 Actual Measures 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Ratio between proactive and reactive code responses 63/37 N/A 43/57 30/70 Resident dissatisfaction with the maintenance of private property in their neighborhood* 21% <18% 16% <16% Resident dissatisfaction with the responsiveness to code enforcement complaints* 27% <27% 24% <24% *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 127 Housing The Housing Division is responsible for all activities funded from the federal Section 8, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME funds. Services provided include: Section 8 rental assistance, Section 8 Homeownership program, Family Self-Sufficiency program, Homeownership Down Payment Assistance program, homeless resource coordination, Fair Housing activities and the Home Improvement Program. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: funding for one Principal Planner position in the CDBG program Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised $1,179,494 $1,448,067 $1,130,728 $1,313,172 10,253,719 10,351,474 9,626,145 14,562,304 Capital Outlay 2010-11 Budget 586 70,725 1,000 19,500 Internal Services 120,558 183,484 173,074 195,579 Contributions 238,905 238,905 20,801 426,548 $11,793,262 $12,292,655 $10,951,748 $16,517,103 $69.93 $72.39 $64.49 $96.59 Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Housing Total Full Time 17 17 Perm FTE Temp FTE 1.60 1.60 2009-10 Revised Full Time 17 17 Perm FTE 1.60 1.60 Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 18 18 Perm FTE 1.60 1.60 Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: Housing, Quality of Life Goal: To make responsible investments of time, money, and energy that produce a variety of housing opportunities for those most in need while simultaneously strengthening the social, economic, and social character of our neighborhoods Objective: 1) To invest in housing development that allows for maximum long-term affordability while providing alternatives for affordable housing units lost through redevelopment; and 2) increase community partnerships by 20% 2008-09 Actual Measures 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised Decent and affordable owner occupied housing units made available 5 5 5 Decent and affordable owner rehabilitated occupied housing units made available 6 6 5 20% 20% 20% Percent increase in community partnerships 128 2010-11 Budget 5 5 20% This page intentionally left blank. Community Relations Office Community Relations Office Mayor and Council Staff Communication and Media Relations Neighborhood Services Purpose: To serve the community, elected officials and city departments by delivering Tempe’s message and information to the public. Description: The Community Relations Office is comprised of the Mayor and Council’s Office Staff, Neighborhood Services Division, and Communication and Media Relations Division. Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $2,211,924 2009-10 Budget $2,479,230 2009-10 Revised $2,330,144 2010-11 Budget $1,968,449 Supplies and Services 1,496,358 1,322,980 1,257,221 622,404 223,252 248,095 242,264 206,628 149,590 $4,081,124 153,969 $4,204,274 138,518 $3,968,147 122,343 $2,919,824 $24.20 $24.76 $23.37 $17.08 Internal Services Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Community Relations-Administration/ Mayor and Council Staff Neighborhood Services $1,552,909 239,585 $1,591,017 244,356 $1,330,692 240,567 $1,050,753 226,364 Communication and Media Relations 2,288,630 2,368,901 2,396,888 1,642,707 $4,081,124 $4,204,274 $3,968,147 $2,919,824 Expenditures by Division Expenditure Total 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Community Relations-Administration/ Mayor and Council Staff Full Time 10 Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time 0.98 9 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE Full Time 0.98 6 Temp FTE 0.49 Neighborhood Services 2 Communication and Media Relations 6 0.85 14 0.85 14 0.85 18 1.83 25 1.83 22 1.34 Total 2 Perm FTE 130 2 Administration / Mayor and Council Staff The Administration Division coordinates the operations of the Community Relations Department. The Mayor and Council Staff facilitate communication among the public, city staff, other elected entities and the Mayor and Council. Staff support is also provided for Council committees. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of one Senior Council Aide position reducing the division budget by $73,000 elimination of one Customer Relations Specialist position reducing the division budget by $52,000 reduction of reduction of $6,000 for the Community Relations Manager annual vehicle allowance reduction of $83,400 for miscellaneous base budget items reduction of $23,000 for temporary front desk positions Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $1,045,012 2009-10 Budget $1,143,916 2009-10 Revised $925,477 2010-11 Budget $735,071 275,209 212,163 190,579 141,189 89,318 100,969 96,118 67,563 143,370 133,969 118,518 106,930 $1,552,909 $1,591,017 $1,330,692 $1,050,753 $9.21 $9.37 $7.84 $6.14 Supplies and Services Internal Services Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita Authorized Personnel Community Relations-Administration; Mayor and Council Staff Total 2008-09 Actual Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 10 10 0.98 0.98 131 2009-10 Revised Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 9 9 0.98 0.98 2010-11 Budget Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 6 6 0.49 0.49 Neighborhood Services The Neighborhood Services Division is designed to help preserve the integrity of Tempe’s residential areas and to promote a sense of community. It provides technical and informational services to 67 neighborhood associations, more than 100 homeowner associations and 5 affiliate groups. It also supplies clerical support to neighborhood associations. The Neighborhood Services Division’s key job is to maintain clear communication lines between neighborhood groups and City government, focusing on identifying, resolving and preventing neighborhood problems. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following change: reduction of $1,300 in funding for miscellaneous base budget items 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget $226,127 $224,675 223,096 Supplies and Services 5,945 11,815 10,140 8,700 Internal Services 7,513 7,866 7,331 13,393 $239,585 $244,356 $240,567 $226,364 $1.42 $1.44 $1.42 $1.32 Expenditures by Type Personal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Neighborhood Services Full Time 2 Total Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 2 Full Time 2 Perm FTE 2 Temp FTE 204,271 2010-11 Budget Full Time 2 Perm FTE Temp FTE 2 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To preserve and improve neighborhoods in the City of Tempe by encouraging resident participation in decision-making processes Objective: 1) To increase participating households by 1%; 2) strengthen a sense of community by establishing partnerships between neighborhoods and schools, businesses and civic organizations through neighborhood association mailings, a listserv and 95% attendance at neighborhood association meetings; and 3) return resident contacts within 24 hours, 95% of the time Measures Participating households Percent change Grant applications received Neighborhood association mailings 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 36,526 40,000 36,500 37,000 (8.5%) 9.5% (8.8%) 1.3% 42 35 48 35 44,866 40,000 40,000 40,000 Neighborhood association meetings attended (percent of total) 95% 95% 95% 95% Resident contact returned in 24 hours 99% 95% 99% 95% 132 Communication and Media Relations The Communication and Media Relations Division handles all public information and media relations for the City and manages Tempe cable channel 11. It is responsible for keeping the community informed about programs and activities within the City as well as working on Tempe’s image locally, regionally and nationally. Services provided by the division include media relations, graphic design, public relations, audio-visual and government access cable channel coordination. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of one Media Services Producer position reduction of $76,000 for miscellaneous base budget items 2008-09 Actual Expenditures by Type 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Personal Services $940,786 $1,110,639 $1,181,571 $1,029,107 Supplies and Services 1,215,202 1,099,002 1,056,502 472,515 126,421 139,260 138,815 125,672 6,221 20,000 20,000 15,413 $2,288,630 $2,368,901 $2,396,888 $1,642,707 $13.57 $13.95 $14.12 $9.61 Internal Services Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita Authorized Personnel Communication and Media Relations Total Full Time 2008-09 Actual Perm Temp FTE FTE 6 6 0.85 0.85 2009-10 Revised Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 14 14 0.85 0.85 Full Time 2010-11 Budget Perm Temp FTE FTE 14 14 0.85 0.85 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: 1) To keep Tempe residents, the general public, City employees and the media informed about City issues, programs, community events and organizational changes; and 2) position the City positively locally, regionally and nationally Objective: 1) To attain 70% resident satisfaction with the availability of information about City programs and services; 2) provide information to the community through newsletters, brochures, press releases and advertising; 3) design and produce high quality informational publications, promotional items and visual graphics for all City departments that reflect the image of Tempe; and 4) provide the City with high quality audio/visual, media production and Tempe 11 television programming services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Resident satisfaction with the availability of information about City programs and services* 70% 70% 70% 70% Informational pieces provided 100 115 130 115 Tempe 11 electronic program guide accuracy and playback reliability 95% 98% 99% 98% Tempe 11 produced video packages N/A N/A N/A 90 Video-on-Demand access of public meetings within one working day 95% 98% 98% 98% Measures *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 133 Community Services Community Services Recreation Centers and Programs Arts and Library Social Services Purpose: To provide quality Cultural, Recreational, and Social Services to our residents. Description: The Department’s responsibilities include a full range of public library services, historical/cultural enrichment to Tempe residents, and recreational and social service programs. 2008-09 Actual Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $18,229,366 $18,045,802 $16,395,105 $14,151,252 3,750,386 3,629,781 3,585,459 3,307,839 87,849 84,590 84,590 10,390 3,064,620 3,162,546 3,010,539 2,869,186 $25,132,221 $24,922,719 $23,075,693 $20,338,667 $149.04 $146.77 $135.89 $118.94 2008-09 Actual $738,963 2009-10 Budget $631,135 2009-10 Revised $525,087 2010-11 Budget $452,678 Arts and Library 8,404,348 8,671,102 7,662,097 6,490,691 Recreation Centers and Programs 8,241,634 8,216,191 7,959,166 6,665,231 Social Services 7,747,276 7,404,291 6,929,343 6,730,067 $25,132,221 $24,922,719 $23,075,693 $20,338,667 Supplies and Services Contributions Internal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita Expenditures by Division Administration Total 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Full Time 3 Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.52 Full Time 3 Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.52 Full Time 2 Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.52 Arts and Library 58 4.50 31.13 51 2.50 28.68 43 2.00 28.68 Recreation Centers and Programs 46 6.15 82.89 43 2.40 70.76 40 2.25 70.76 Authorized Personnel Administration Social Services Total 40 0.75 66.08 39 0.75 65.73 35 1.25 65.73 147 11.40 180.62 136 5.65 165.69 120 5.50 165.69 134 Administration Community Services Administration is responsible for overall management of the City’s library, cultural, and social services resources. In this role, Administration manages services provided at the Tempe Public Library, the Tempe Historical Museum, the Vihel Cultural Center, and at community events throughout the City. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following change: elimination of a department manager position through departmental consolidation elimination of one Management Assistant position reduction of $20,000 in funding for outside printing reduction of $6,000 for Community Services Director annual vehicle allowance Expenditures by Type 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Personal Services $512,240 $412,750 $314,018 $292,815 90,864 88,803 88,803 63,503 135,859 129,582 122,266 96,360 $738,963 $631,135 $525,087 $452,678 $4.38 $3.72 $3.09 $2.65 Supplies and Services Internal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita Authorized Personnel Administration Total 2008-09 Actual Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 3 0.52 3 0.52 135 2009-10 Revised Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 3 0.52 3 0.52 2010-11 Budget Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 2 0.52 2 0.52 Arts and Library The Arts and Library Division’s mission is to be the premier information portal for the Tempe community. In keeping with this mission, the library provides materials, programs, and services that (1) address popular cultural and social trends and residents’ recreational needs; (2) assist residents in developing their ability to find, evaluate, and use information effectively; (3) assist community members in understanding their own cultural heritage and the cultural heritage of others; (4) address the community’s desire for self-directed personal growth and development opportunities; and (5) address the need to be able to read and perform essential daily tasks. In pursuing these goals, the division provides operations and management of several city facilities, including: the Tempe Historical Museum, the Tempe Center for the Arts, the Peterson House Museum, the Elias Rodriquez House, and the Vihel Center for the Arts. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of one Deputy Department Manager position elimination of one Library Specialist II position elimination of three Administrative Assistant positions elimination of a part time Librarian I position elimination of one Museum Registrar position elimination of one Arts Specialist position elimination of one Box Office Assistant position reduction of $149,300 in funding for library collection materials, and printer and copier supplies The approval of $10,000 in additional recurring supplemental funding was also added for the newly remodeled Tempe History Museum and Museum Store for additional miscellaneous supplies. The additional funding is offset by newly budgeted revenues to be generated from Museum Store sales and Museum Community Room rental. Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $5,731,727 2009-10 Budget $5,831,181 2009-10 Revised $4,931,074 2010-11 Budget $4,013,140 Supplies and Services 1,381,564 1,474,244 1,432,997 1,226,067 Internal Services 1,291,057 1,365,677 1,298,026 1,251,484 $8,404,348 $8,671,102 $7,662,097 $6,490,691 $49.84 $51.06 $45.12 $37.96 Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Arts and Library Total 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Full Time 58 Perm FTE 4.50 Temp FTE 31.13 Full Time 51 Perm FTE 2.50 Temp FTE 28.68 Full Time 43 Perm FTE 2.00 Temp FTE 28.68 58 4.50 31.13 51 2.50 28.68 43 2.00 28.68 136 Related Strategic Issue: Sports, Recreation, Arts & Cultural Development Goal: To provide access to excellent library resources and services that will help community residents of all ages obtain information that meets their educational, professional, and recreational needs Objective: 1) To obtain a 90% or greater satisfaction with the overall quality of library services; and 2) maximize community usage of the library’s collection and electronic research resources 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures (Comparative Benchmark) 81% 91% 87% 90%+ Satisfaction with quality of library services* Library visitors (door count) 1,171,781 1,000,000 1,143,716 960,000 142,418 142,500 147,914 140,600 0% 4% (5%) 1,223,383 1,250,000 1,089174 937,500 2% (13%) (14%) 287,357 171,090 220,751 166,800 Registered borrowers Percent change Circulation Percent change Public Computer Usage (40%) 29% (24%) Library FTE per 1,000 population 0.28 0.27 0.24 0.21 Circulation per capita 7.25 7.36 6.41 5.48 Percent change * Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey Note: The library remodeling project commenced in July 2009. As a result, lower door counts, circulation, and public access computing data is anticipated due to closure of various portions of the library during FY 2010-11. Library operations hours reduced 20% from 70.5 to 56 hours per week. The Library materials budget reduced 25% and Library staff reduced 19.3% (5.5 FTE’s and 2.75 temporary wage positions). Related Strategic Issue: Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development Goal: To provide visitors and volunteers with a quality experience that meets the mission of the Tempe Historical Museum Objective: To attain 90% or greater level of satisfaction by visitors and volunteers with their museum experience 2008-09 Actual Measures 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Quantified levels of satisfaction reported by visitors and volunteers on evaluation forms N/A 90% 90% 90% Objects catalogued N/A 1,000* 1,000 1,000 Visitors to Historical Museum and Peterson House N/A 10,000* 10,000 14,000 *Reduction in amounts due to museum renovation occurring between 2008 and 2010; Peterson House will be closed for regular tours beginning June 28, 2010 Related Strategic Issue: Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development Goal: 1) To provide quality arts programming to the community; 2) facilitate the effective use of arts facilities; and 3) provide a diverse array of arts opportunities Objective: 1) To achieve a 90% or greater level of satisfaction by attendees; 2) increase current program enrollment levels by 7%; and 3) support arts programming through grants funding of arts organizations and schools Measures 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 92% 90% 91% 90%+ 4,000 Satisfaction reported by attendees and participants on evaluation form Program enrollment 4,240 Percent change Grants provided to art organizations and schools $149,954 137 6,000 3,739 (42%) (37%) 7% $150,000 $151,500 $150,000 Recreation Centers and Programs The Recreation Centers and Programs Division provides for Aquatics, the Kiwanis Recreation Center, Special Events, Special Interest and Boating, Youth and Adult Sports, and Adapted Recreation. Services provided by the Recreation Centers and Programs Division are as follows: (1) facilities coordination and scheduling; (2) general recreation; (3) special recreation for retired residents; (4) adapted recreation for special populations; (5) instructional programs; (6) community special events; (7) aquatics maintenance and programming; and (8) youth and adult sports. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: reduction of the base budget by $119,000 for closure of McClintock Pool elimination of one full time and one part time Administrative Assistant position Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised $5,707,492 $5,898,653 $5,693,442 $4,626,526 1,651,233 1,386,526 1,386,827 1,348,184 795,058 846,422 794,307 680,131 87,849 84,590 84,590 10,390 $8,241,632 $8,216,191 $7,959,166 $6,665,231 $48.87 $48.38 $46.87 $38.98 Supplies and Services Internal Services Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 2010-11 Budget Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Recreation Centers and Programs 46 6.15 82.89 43 2.40 70.76 40 2.25 70.76 Total 46 6.15 82.89 43 2.40 70.76 40 2.25 70.76 Authorized Personnel Related Strategic Issue: Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development Goal: To provide quality recreation services to coordinate the effective use of community parks and recreation resources Objective: 1) To achieve a minimum 85% overall resident satisfaction with the quality of City recreation programs; 2) achieve a minimum 75% overall resident satisfaction with City swimming pools and programs; 3) achieve a minimum 75% with the quality of recreation programs for youth; 4) achieve a minimum 75% with the quality of recreation programs for adults; 5) collect fees for programs and services at a level based on a percentage of the total budgeted expenditures for parks and recreation; and 6) maintain and operate recreation programs and facilities at a cost and staffing level, on a per capita basis, that meets the needs of residents 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Resident satisfaction with the quality of recreation programs* 83% 80% 91% 85% Resident satisfaction with City swimming pools and programs* 74% 68% 78% 75% Resident satisfaction with City recreation programs for youth* 72% N/A 75% 75% Resident satisfaction with City recreation programs for adults* 73% N/A 75% 75% $41.54 $40.92 $40.08 $37.79 Operating and Maintenance Cost per capita Recreation Services full-time staff per capita (10,000) Parks and Recreation revenue Revenue vs. expenditures (Recreation) 2.12 1.88 2.12 2.00 $2,694,771 $2,702,023 $2,702,023 $3,024,436 38% 39% 40% 47% *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 138 Social Services The Social Services Division provides a wide array of services for Tempe youth and families. Activities and services are offered to all age groups to promote positive and healthy lifestyles. Services for youth include preschool programs at the Escalante and West Side Multigenerational Centers, Kid Zone before and after school enrichment program, Teen Zone which encourages youth involvement in positive activities and services, and the Youth Employment Program which promotes strong work values and assists youth in exploring career opportunities. Residents of all ages may participate in State Licensed Counseling and/or Crisis Intervention Services. The Diversion/Probation Program provides a constructive program of case management, assessment, counseling and community service to individuals referred from Tempe City Court. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: reduction of $10,000 in funding for community center materials and supplies reduction of $10,000 in funding for wages for the diversion program elimination of one Assistant Recreation Coordinator position elimination of one part time Social Services Counselor II position elimination of one Sr. Social Services Coordinator position elimination of one Administrative Assistant position Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $6,277,906 $5,903,218 $5,456,571 $5,218,771 626,729 680,208 676,832 670,085 Supplies and Services Internal Services Expenditure Total 842,641 820,865 795,940 841,211 $7,747,276 $7,404,291 $6,929,343 $6,730,067 $45.94 $43.60 $40.81 $39.36 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Social Services Total 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Full Time 40 Perm FTE 0.75 Temp FTE 66.08 Full Time 39 Perm FTE 0.75 Temp FTE 65.73 Full Time 35 Perm FTE 1.25 Temp FTE 65.73 40 0.75 66.08 39 0.75 65.73 35 1.25 65.73 139 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life, Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development, Education Partnerships Goal: To provide quality programs that enhance the quality of life of Tempe residents Objective: 1) To achieve a 95% approval rating from customers participating in the Early Education Program; and 2) achieve a 90% approval rating from customers participating in the Summer Camp Program 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Overall customer approval rating for the Escalante Early Education Program 96% 95% 95% 95% Overall customer approval rating for the Escalante Summer Camp Program 88% 90% 93% 90% Measures Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: 1) To provide the residents of Tempe with quality crisis intervention services, support and referral; and 2) provide comprehensive services to victims of crimes occurring in Tempe Objective: To ensure that a minimum of 90% of the clients served respond favorably to the services provided by Care 7 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Victims satisfied with services 90% 90% 95% 90% Care 7 clients reporting satisfaction with services 95% 95% 94% 90% Measures Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life, Technology, Economic and Community Development, Education Partnerships Goal: To continue to provide the highest quality of out of school time, enrichment program to the residents of Tempe through the Kid Zone Enrichment Program Objective: 1) To target a 90% approval rating from customers and the school community who utilize Kid Zone services; and 2) maintain at least an 80% approval rating on the national accreditation evaluation 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Parent evaluation survey results measures indicate “very satisfied” with the Kid Zone Enrichment Program 89% 85% 91% 90% National accreditation evaluation survey results of “very satisfied” with the Kid Zone Enrichment Program 90% 80% 91% 80% Measures Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To redirect offenders into positive community activities by providing assessment, counseling, referral and educational programs Objective: To attain a successful program completion rate of 80% 2008-09 Actual Measures New program participants Successful program completion 140 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 3,613 3,800 4,661 4,661 80% 80% 87% 80% This page intentionally left blank. Diversity Office Diversity Office Purpose: To promote a fair, equitable and accessible work environment for City employees, and provide administrative support to the Human Relations Commission. Description: The Diversity Office coordinates the City’s response to the Diversity Audit, functions as an ombudsman for City employees, provides administrative support to the Human Resources Commission, Tardeada Advisory Board, the Mayor’s Commission on Disability Concerns, and organizes community special events. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: transition of one Administrative Assistant position from full time to part time reduction of $32,000 in funding for events and promotions reduction of $6,000 for the Diversity Manager annual vehicle allowance Expenditures by Type 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Personal Services $413,760 $388,259 $373,966 $330,220 103,730 125,703 124,649 79,374 36,531 40,432 39,921 31,757 $554,021 $554,394 $538,536 $441,351 $3.29 $3.26 $3.17 $2.58 Supplies and Services Internal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Diversity Total Full Time 4 Perm FTE 0.50 4 0.50 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 142 Full Time 3 Perm FTE 0.50 3 0.50 Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 2 Perm FTE 1.00 2 1.00 Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To create a fair and equitable work environment for City of Tempe employees while creating an inclusive community environment through the promotion of diversity Objective: 1) To attain 72% resident satisfaction with overall efforts to promote diversity in the community; 2) minimize the number of EEOC complaints to less than 3 per year; 3) successfully remediate employee safe havens/consultations at least 80% of the time; and 4) successfully remediate community concerns/ consultations for diversity related community issues at least 80% of the time Measures Residents’ satisfaction with overall efforts to promote diversity* EEOC complaints 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 70% 3 72% <3 72% 3 72% <3 Successfully remediate employee safe havens/consultations 85% 80% 70% 70% Successfully remediate community concerns/consultations 95% 80% 80% 80% *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To educate through programming and celebrate through events Tempe’s rich diversity Objective: To attain 95% attendant satisfaction (a rating of above average or higher) with community diversity celebrations Measures Attendants rating events above average or higher 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 95% 95% 95% 95% Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To promote an accessible environment for the City of Tempe workforce and community Objective: 1) To implement one additional program promoting accessibility in the community; 2) to remediate internal and external ADA complaints at least 80% of the time Measures Number of new ADA programs (3) Successfully remediate community concerns/consultations 143 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget N/A 90% 300% 90% 100% 80% 90% 80% Finance and Technology Finance and Technology Finance Budget/ Tax and License Information Technology Purpose: To provide excellent financial management and information technology services with integrity, accountability, superior customer service, and low cost. Description: The Finance and Technology Department provides financial management, technology and operational support to the Mayor and City Council, the City Manager, and City departments. Services provided by the Finance division include accounting, cash management, purchasing, payroll, utility billing and collection, and risk management. The Budget/Tax and License Division provides budgeting, long-range financial planning, sales tax collection and auditing, and business licensing. The Technology division coordinates all of the City's information and telecommunications systems. 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Expenditures by Type Personal Services $14,248,583 $14,588,449 $13,962,861 $12,281,451 Supplies and Services 13,065,171 12,519,906 12,567,805 11,260,241 143,294 5,150 6,336 37,800 Capital Outlay Internal Services Expenditure Total (21,241,679) (20,298,217) (20,586,287) (18,111,865) $6,215,369 $6,815,288 $5,950,715 $5,467,627 $36.89 $40.13 $35.04 $31.97 Per Capita Expenditures by Division 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Administration $202,650 $131,082 $124,691 $113,482 Finance 4,192,100 4,705,881 4,049,911 3,691,644 Budget/Tax and License 1,820,619 1,978,325 1,776,113 1,662,501 * * * * $6,215,369 $6,815,288 $5,950,715 $5,467,627 Information Technology Total *Information Technology costs are fully reimbursed though interactivity credit 144 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Full Time 7 Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time 7 Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time 6 Perm FTE Finance 47 0.50 1.25 46 0.50 0.63 45 0.50 Budget /Tax and License 22 Authorized Personnel Administration Information Technology Total 20 71 147 20 65 0.50 1.25 145 138 61 0.50 0.63 132 0.50 Temp FTE Administration Administration is responsible for the overall management of the department. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: reduction of $6,000 for Finance and Technology Director annual vehicle allowance Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services Internal Services Expenditure Total 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised $1,200,140 $1,053,531 $1,017,882 $893,675 872,710 1,149,585 1,149,163 3,640,566 (1,870,200) (2,072,034) (2,042,354) (4,420,759) $202,650 $131,082 $124,691 $113,482 $1.20 $0.77 $0.73 $0.66 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Administration Total Full Time 7 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time 7 7 Perm FTE Temp FTE 7 2010-11 Budget Full Time 6 Perm FTE Temp FTE 6 Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To ensure the long-term financial success of the City through sound financial management practices Objective: To adhere to a financial management strategy that produces financial results that compare favorably with our peer cities as measured by generally accepted financial indicators 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Actual Budget Revised Budget Administration Fund balance coverage - General Fund General obligation bond rating (Standard & Poor's/Moody’s/Fitch) 32.6% AA+/Aa1/AAA 146 >21% 19% >20% AA+/Aa1/AAA AAA/Aaa/AAA AAA/Aaa/AAA Finance The Finance comprised of Accounting, Risk Management, Procurement, and Customer Services. Operational functions include all finance, accounting, purchasing, loss control and customer service billing operations. Though the main funding source for Financial Services is the General Fund, funding is also provided from the Water/ Wastewater and Risk Management Funds. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: eliminated a part time temporary Accounting Assistant position and a part-time Administrative Assistant II eliminated $70,000 for miscellaneous base budget items Expenditures by Type 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget Personal Services $3,857,827 Supplies and Services 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $4,218,378 $4,030,162 $3,641,701 6,095,128 5,322,039 6,226,223 5,361,565 17,628 750 1,513 33,000 Capital Outlay Internal Services (5,778,487) (4,835,286) (6,207,987) (5,344,622) Expenditure Total $4,192,096 $4,705,881 $4,049,911 $3,691,644 $24.86 $27.71 $23.85 $21.59 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Finance Total Full Time 47 47 Perm FTE 0.50 0.50 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 1.25 1.25 Full Time 46 46 Perm FTE 0.50 0.50 Temp FTE 0.63 0.63 2010-11 Budget Full Time 45 45 Perm FTE 0.50 0.50 Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: 1) To effectively perform accounts payable, payroll, and other accounting functions for City departments; 2) maintain adequate internal controls; 3) adhere to generally accepted accounting principles; and 4) ensure the safety of City investments Objective: To receive positive independent certifications of financial reports 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Unqualified opinion from independent auditor Yes Yes Yes Yes GFOA Certificate of Excellence Yes Yes Yes Yes Measures Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To pay invoices in a timely manner Objective: To enter vouchers for payment within two weeks of the purchase order dispatch date at least 97% of the time Measures Compare the purchase order dispatch date/invoice date 147 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 92% 97% 92% 92% Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To partner with all City departments in the detection, elimination, and control of potential loss exposures to the City Objective: 1) To investigate all Indemnity claims within 7 days; and 2) maximize annual subrogation recovery 2008-09 Actual Measures Claims investigated within 7 days Workers’ Compensation claims 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 100% 100% 100% 100% $2,394,557 $1,000,000 $392,024 $1,000,000 Percent change Subrogation recovery totals 2009-10 Budget 239% (58%) (61%) 155% $206,748 $215,000 $167,316 $200,000 4% (22%) 20% Percent change Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To procure low cost, quality goods and services for City departments, while ensuring that purchases are made in a timely and ethical manner Objective: 1) To procure at least 60% of lower cost items through annual contracts; and 2) maintain 100% compliance with the American Bar Association Model Procurement Code 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 Actual Budget Revised Measures Lower cost purchases made through annual contracts Conformity to American Bar Association Model Procurement Code 2010-11 Budget 49% 50% 55% 60% 100% 100% 100% 100% Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To answer all incoming calls within the industry standard based on American Water Works Association (AWWA) Benchmarking Water Utility Customer Relations Best Practices (AWWA Research Foundation, 2006) Objective: 1) To answer customer calls under the AWWA industry standard of 58 seconds; and 2) maintain the abandoned call rate below the AWWA industry standard of 5.8% 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures Monthly call center reports (average speed answered) Monthly call center reports (abandoned call rate) 148 39 sec. 58 sec. 58 sec. 58 sec. 5% <5.8% <5.8% <5.8% Budget/Tax and License Budget Office responsibilities include preparation of budget documents, comprehensive financial planning, forecasting, capital improvements program, budget monitoring, benchmarking, and special financial studies. Tax and License receives all City sales tax and licensing revenue and is responsible for issuing sales tax licenses and auditing license holders. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of a Specialty License Coordinator position addition of a Tax Auditor II position Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget $1,782,040 69,826 (31,247) Supplies and Services Internal Services Expenditure Total $1,820,619 Per Capita 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $1,940,436 $1,761,924 $1,715,108 98,930 86,830 69,850 (61,041) (72,641) (122,457) $1,978,325 $10.80 Total Full Time 22 Perm FTE $1,662,501 $10.46 $9.72 $11.65 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Budget/Tax and License $1,776,113 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 22 Full Time 20 Perm FTE 20 Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 20 Perm FTE Temp FTE 20 Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To provide quality customer service to all citywide user departments Objective: To achieve a 95% or higher satisfaction with overall service provided by the Budget Office 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 Actual Budget Revised Measures Overall satisfaction with service 91.5% 149 90% 96.8% 2010-11 Budget 95% Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To process returns in an efficient and effective manner Objective: 1) To enter all returns by the second business day of the following month 98% of the time 2008-09 Actual Measures Posting of returns 2009-10 Budget N/A 2009-10 Revised N/A N/A 2010-11 Budget 92% Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To provide taxpayers with timely, professional, and courteous customer service Objective: 1) To receive average ratings of at least 4.0 out of a possible 5 (where 4 is “Good” and 5 is “Excellent”) for Quality of Service attributes in taxpayer surveys administered by Internal Audit 2008-09 Actual Measures 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget New Licenses Helpfulness 4.52 4.00 4.48 4.00 Knowledge 4.54 4.00 4.44 4.00 Timeliness 4.47 4.00 4.47 4.00 Overall Service 4.59 4.00 4.55 4.00 Friendliness/Courtesy 4.51 4.00 4.47 4.00 Compared to Other Cities 4.38 4.00 4.29 4.00 Overall Service 4.72 4.00 4.50 4.00 Timeliness 4.67 4.00 4.53 4.00 Technical Expertise 4.76 4.00 4.44 4.00 Courtesy 4.86 4.00 4.46 4.00 Professionalism 4.78 4.00 4.44 4.00 Helpfulness 4.75 4.00 4.37 4.00 Helpfulness 4.20 4.00 3.67 4.00 Professionalism 4.20 4.00 3.78 4.00 Knowledge 4.00 4.00 3.78 4.00 Timeliness 4.00 4.00 3.67 4.00 Overall Service 4.20 4.00 3.67 4.00 Friendliness/Courtesy 4.40 4.00 3.50 4.00 Auditees General Population Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To administer the tax and license codes in an efficient, fair, and equitable manner Objective: 1) To have less than 5% of audits protested; and 2) have protested assessments upheld 80% of the time Measures 2008-09 Actual Completed audits protested Protested audits upheld as valid 150 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 2% 5% 5% <5% 100% 80% 80% 80% Information Technology Information Technology (IT) is responsible for fostering a partnership with City Departments and optimizing the productivity of the office environment by empowering our employees with state-of-the-art tools and leveraging the City’s investment in information technology. IT provides services that include: shared resources, systems, software, and information processing. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved budget includes the following changes: elimination of one GIS Coordinator position reduction of $260,600 for miscellaneous base budget items reduction of $251,000 for hardware/software maintenance reduction of $50,000 for hardware upgrades and replacements reduction of $117,000 for training and seminars Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $7,408,576 $7,376,104 $6,913,273 $6,030,967 6,027,507 5,949,352 4,696,835 2,188,260 125,667 4,400 4,823 4,800 Capital Outlay Internal Services (13,561,750) Expenditure Total Per Capita* (13,329,856) (11,614,931) (8,224,027) $0 $0 $0 $0 $80.42 $78.50 $68.40 $48.09 *Based on Internal Services expenditure amounts and displayed for informational purposes 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Information Technology Total Full Time 71 Perm FTE Temp FTE 71 2009-10 Revised Full Time 65 65 151 Perm FTE Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 61 61 Perm FTE Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To provide prompt response to computer system problems Objective: 1) To resolve 87% of incoming calls to the Helpdesk within 30 minutes; 2) settle 10% of calls routed to second level support personnel within 4 hours; and 3) resolve 3% of the calls requiring 4 hours or longer to resolve 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Measures Actual Budget Revised Budget Calls resolved within 30 minutes 87% 87% 85% 87% Second level calls resolved within 4 hours Calls requiring longer than 4 hours to resolve 10% 10% 9% 10% 3% 3% 4% 3% Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To minimize system downtime Objective: To average less than 30 milliseconds for PC to server response time during peak traffic load Measures PC to server response time during peak traffic load (milliseconds) 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 28 28 27 28 Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To provide prompt computer response time Objective: To target 99.93% network access availability for voice and data Measures 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Network access availability for voice and data 99.93% 99.93% 99.95% 99.93% 152 This page intentionally left blank. Fire Fire Chief Administration/ Fire Prevention Emergency /Medical Services Training/ Professional Development Homeland Security/Special Operations Support Services/ Personnel Safety Purpose: To provide for the safety and welfare of the public through preservation of life, property, and the environment. Description: The Fire Department consists of Administration and Fire Prevention, Emergency/Medical Services, Training/ Professional Development, Homeland Security/Special Operations, and Support Services/Personnel Safety divisions. The Department’s operational areas include administrative services, fire suppression, emergency management, emergency medical services, hazardous materials control, technical rescue, communications, equipment and facilities maintenance, training, fire prevention and inspection, and public safety education. 2008-09 Actual $21,675,427 2009-10 Budget $22,850,342 2009-10 Revised $21,379,046 2010-11 Budget $21,057,970 2,066,785 2,659,542 2,653,089 2,716,475 16,814 39,500 39,500 37,500 Capital Outlay 2,287,105 1,245,400 240,000 310,700 Internal Services 1,774,796 1,931,988 1,735,456 1,348,977 $27,820,927 $28,726,772 $26,047,091 $25,471,622 $164.98 $169.17 $153.39 $148.96 Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita (Comparative Benchmark) 154 Expenditures by Division Administration/Fire Prevention 2008-09 Actual $3,420,843 2009-10 Budget $3,679,957 2009-10 Revised $3,617,613 2010-11 Budget $3,506,766 Emergency/Medical Services 18,709,103 20,159,100 18,790,329 18,709,266 549,794 471,444 479,298 482,595 Training/Professional Development Homeland Security/Special Operations 524,825 564,040 439,751 410,459 4,616,363 3,852,231 2,720,100 2,362,536 $27,820,928 $28,726,772 $26,047,091 $25,471,622 Support Services/Personnel Safety Total 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Administration/Fire Prevention Full Time 20 Emergency/Medical Services Perm FTE Temp FTE 2009-10 Revised Full Time 20 Perm FTE Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 20 Perm FTE 155 153 150 Training/Professional Development 3 3 3 Homeland Security/Special Operations 3 Support Services/Personnel Safety 5 1.00 5 1.00 5 1.00 186 1.00 184 1.00 181 1.00 Total 3 155 3 Temp FTE Administration/Fire Prevention Administration is responsible for general policy and direction of the department, as delineated in the Five-Year Strategic Plan and Operational Guide, by providing management and leadership for the operating divisions within the Fire Department. Development and administration of the budget, recruitment, member safety and wellness program management are also basic responsibilities of Administration. The goal of Fire Prevention is to prevent loss of life, injury and property loss to fire through the creation, implementation, and management of comprehensive and effective building and fire codes, education programs and fire inspections. Services include: (1) inspection of commercial and industrial properties; (2) response to resident fire hazard complaints; (3) approval of plans for and inspections of new construction; (4) determination of cause and origin of fires; (5) public information office; (6) volunteer program; and (7) public safety education programs. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes: reduction of $28,200 for various base budget line items reduction of $6,000 for elimination of Fire Chief vehicle allowance Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $2,364,173 $2,382,271 $2,453,092 $2,309,052 178,565 370,916 361,559 392,961 Supplies and Services Capital Outlay Internal Services Expenditure Total 878,105 926,770 802,962 804,753 $3,420,843 $3,679,957 $3,617,613 $3,506,766 $20.29 $21.67 $21.30 $20.51 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Administration/Fire Prevention Total Full Time Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 20 20 Full Time Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 20 20 Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE 20 20 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To provide high quality cost efficient fire services Objective: 1) To efficiently manage resources to meet the needs of residents with 8.95 sworn firefighter full-time equivalents (FTE) per 10,000 capita, 1.64 non-firefighter FTE per 10,000 capita, and .15 fire stations per square mile; 2) attain 92% resident satisfaction with the quality of local fire services; and 3) maintain daily minimum firefighter staff level at 42 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Firefighters per capita (10,000) 9.20 9.13 9.13 8.95 Non-Firefighters per capita (10,000) 1.84 1.71 1.71 1.64 Fire Stations per square mile 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 Resident satisfaction with the quality of local fire service* 92% 92% 89% 92% 42 42 42 42 Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Daily minimum firefighter staffing level *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 156 Emergency/Medical Services The goal of Emergency Services is to deliver rapid effective service when fire, medical and other hazardous emergencies occur. These services are extended through the use of seven engine companies and two ladder trucks located at six fire stations throughout the City. Services provided by this division are as follows: (1) respond to and extinguish fires; (2) deliver effective medical and rescue services for injuries, illnesses, and accidents; (3) respond to and control hazardous materials emergencies; (4) conduct company fire prevention inspections; and (5) provide technical rescue services. Also, under the auspices of this section is the dispatch liaison function with the City of Phoenix Fire Dispatch Center. This includes helping to draft and implement policy and coordination of the technical aspect relevant to Tempe. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount included the following changes: elimination of two Firefighter positions elimination of the Medical Transportation Contract Coordinator position 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $17,888,467 $18,964,549 $17,597,728 $17,443,937 Supplies and Services 683,077 1,099,151 1,097,201 1,171,929 Capital Outlay 137,559 95,400 95,400 93,400 $18,709,103 $20,159,100 $18,790,329 $18,709,266 $110.95 $118.72 $110.66 $109.41 Expenditures by Type Personal Services Internal Service Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Authorized Personnel Full Time Full Time Emergency/Medical Services 155 153 150 Total 155 153 150 Perm FTE Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To provide efficient response to fire, medical, hazardous materials, and rescue emergencies Objective: 1) To respond to safe emergency responses under 4:30 minutes; and 2) target 87% resident satisfaction with the quality of local paramedic service 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Actual Budget Revised Budget Average emergency response time in minutes (from call receipt to arrival)* 4:30 4:25 4:20 4:20 Percent of emergency responses taking 5.0 minutes or less 72% 70% 74% 74% Calls per capita (1,000) 111 Percent change Resident satisfaction with the quality of local paramedic service** 86% 110 111 111 (0.9%) 0.9% 0% 87% 85% 87% *Calls do not include alarm processing time **Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 157 Training/Professional Development Training/Professional Development incorporates all categories of departmental training including recruit training, officer development, driver training, and minimum company standards. Incident analysis is another method used to improve the quality of our service by reviewing emergency incidents and applying lessons learned. All promotional and assignment tests are administered through this section. This section also provides oversight and maintenance of Department personnel certifications. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: No change in staffing levels Expenditures by Type 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Personal Services $411,989 $406,394 $414,248 $401,085 137,807 65,050 65,050 81,510 $549,794 $471,444 $479,298 $482,595 $3.26 $2.78 $2.82 $2.82 Supplies and Services Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Training/Professional Development Total Full Time Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 3 3 3 3 3 3 Perm FTE Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To provide training and evaluation standards for all phases of emergency services Objective: 1) To evaluate all Emergency Services Division personnel quarterly for compliance with Tempe Fire Department standards relating to fireground, EMS and special operations procedures while maintaining 100% of completion; and 2) maintain or reduce 22% firefighter injuries 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Measures Actual Budget Revised Budget Companies completing minimum company standards evaluations 100% 100% 100% 100% Annual percentage of firefighter injuries 17% 158 36% 22% 22% Homeland Security/Special Operations Homeland Security/Special Operations involves oversight of development, training, and certification of all special type emergency procedures including hazardous materials and technical rescue (high angle, confined space, swift water, etc.). The Fire Department is charged with management of the City’s emergency preparedness plan for disaster type issues. This includes development and maintenance of the plan, conducting disaster drills, and coordination of disaster preparedness with the County. Also under the auspices of this section is oversight for matters relating to Homeland Security. This includes response to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive incidents. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: No change in staffing levels Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $466,734 $493,793 $364,650 $353,262 Supplies and Services 46,842 57,347 62,201 46,297 Contributions 11,249 12,900 12,900 10,900 $524,825 $564,040 $439,751 $410,459 $3.11 $3.32 $2.59 $2.40 Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Homeland Security/Special Operations Total Full Time Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time 3 3 3 3 3 3 159 Perm FTE Temp FTE Support Services/Personnel Safety Primary responsibilities of Support Services/Personnel Safety include apparatus maintenance, equipment maintenance and repair, apparatus acquisition management, facilities maintenance, maintaining the Department’s communications systems, and writing equipment bid specifications. In addition, the division orders and distributes firefighting supplies to the City’s six fire stations. This division is also responsible for physical training and wellness, safety, recruitment and employment, special events, and promotional testing. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes a $99,000 reduction in the Computer Aid Dispatch contract. 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Expenditures by Type Personal Services $544,067 $603,335 $549,328 $550,634 Supplies and Services 1,032,503 1,093,678 1,093,678 1,050,378 Capital Outlay 2,143,104 1,150,000 144,600 217,300 896,689 1,005,218 932,494 544,224 $4,616,363 $3,852,231 $2,720,100 $2,362,536 $27.38 $22.69 $16.02 $13.82 Internal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Support Services/Personnel Safety Total Full Time 5 Perm FTE 1.00 5 1.00 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time 5 Perm FTE 1.00 5 Temp FTE 1.00 2010-11 Budget Full Time 5 5 Perm FTE 1.00 Temp FTE 1.00 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To conduct progressive maintenance, inspections, service work, and major and minor repairs of all fire apparatus Objective: 1) To maintain preventive maintenance inspections; and 2) target 100% maintenance completion within the preventive maintenance (PM) schedule 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures Preventive maintenance inspections 179 Percent change Completed within PM schedule 56.7% 160 276 276 47.6% 0% 276 0% 100% 100% 100% This page intentionally left blank. Human Resources Human Resources Tempe Learning Center Purpose: To attract, train and retain a diverse workforce that is better able to serve our community and mirrors the community in which we serve. Description: The Human Resources Department is responsible for Administration, Classification/Compensation and Recruitment/ Testing, Employee Benefits and Services, and the Tempe Learning Center (TLC). The department directly and indirectly serves all City departments and their respective employees by attracting and retaining a qualified and diverse work force; administering local, state and federal employment laws; wage and salaries; employee and retiree healthcare benefits; and the deferred compensation program to improve organizational productivity and effectiveness while effectively communicating to employees their rights, responsibilities, benefits, and training opportunities; investigating complaints and grievances; assisting with employee relations issues; and providing mediation services. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: reduction of $18,900 for Retiree Recreation Pass Program reduction of $22,500 for cash bonuses for retiring employees reduction of $20,200 for miscellaneous office expenses reduction of $140,000 for employee Tuition Reimbursements transfer of $150,800 of administrative costs to internal service funds 2008-09 Actual Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $2,579,815 $2,738,447 $2,199,155 $2,202,918 1,061,278 998,132 996,182 925,103 (520,248) (514,537) (453,740) (601,285) $3,121,201 $3,222,042 $2,741,597 $2,526,736 $18.51 $18.97 $16.15 $14.78 Capital Outlay 356 Internal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita Authorized Personnel Human Resources Tempe Learning Center Total Full Time 19 2008-09 Actual Perm Temp FTE FTE 0.50 2009-10 Revised Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 17 4 23 0.50 162 Full Time 17 3 3 20 20 2010-11 Budget Perm Temp FTE FTE Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To strive to retain a stable workforce Objective: To maintain an annual turnover rate of less than 10% Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Employee turnover rate 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 8.6% 9.5% 7.7% 2.5% Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To strive to retain a diverse workforce Objective: To develop and maintain fair and equitable employment practices reflected by the percentage of unsubstantiated allegations and EEOC complaints filed and grievances brought forth 2008-09 Actual Measures 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaints 1 0 3 0 Formal grievances 1 0 1 0 163 Tempe Learning Center The Tempe Learning Center (TLC) supports the City’s mission, values and strategic initiatives through employee training and development. Working closely with the Diversity Steering Committee, the City’s six-sided employee partnership and guided by the Tempe Learning Center Board, TLC ensures that services are inclusive and meet organizational objectives. In order to prepare Tempe employees for the future and to create a learning organization, TLC provides education and career counseling and administers the tuition reimbursement program. TLC also develops and manages a mandatory skills training series for managers and supervisors, educational partnerships for academic degree and vocational/technical certifications, and workshops targeting specific training needs. 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Tempe Learning Center Total Full Time 4 Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time 3 4 Perm FTE Temp FTE 3 2010-11 Budget Full Time 3 Perm FTE Temp FTE 3 Expenditures by Type 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Personal Services $686,863 $855,787 $383,186 $587,145 105,929 77,041 75,091 70,563 Internal Services (204,935) (193,387) (195,326) (137,724) Expenditure Total $587,857 $739,441 $262,951 $519,984 $3.49 $4.35 $1.55 $3.04 Supplies and Services Per Capita Related Strategic Issue: Education Partnerships Goal: To utilize learning to support the City’s mission, values, strategic initiatives and develop a stable, capable workforce Objective: 1) To maintain a 90% knowledge, skills improvement rate among participants; 2) maintain a 90% percent approval rating for consultation services provided; and 3) obtain a 95% successful completion rate for all courses with each education partnership degree program 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Participants who rated improved knowledge, skills and competence as a result of TLC training and development programming 89% 90% 84% 90% Participants who rate TLC consultation services as satisfactory or higher N/A 90% N/A 90% Education partnership participants who successfully completed assigned classes 92% 95% 92% 95% Measures 164 Internal Audit Office Internal Audit Office Purpose: To support management in its efforts to uphold the City’s values and achieve the City’s mission by evaluating operations and encouraging the use of cost-effective internal controls to promote efficient utilization of available resources. Description: Internal Audit is responsible for enhancing the quality of City government, products and services, and providing independent, timely and relevant information concerning the City's programs, activities, and functions. This is accomplished by responding to requests to conduct objective evaluations of departments, divisions, and systems or units thereof. Internal Audit's work is vital in maintaining the general public's trust and confidence that City resources are used effectively and efficiently. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: conversion of one Contract Administrator position to a part time temporary position reduction of $6,000 for the Internal Audit Manager annual vehicle allowance 2008-09 Actual $474,833 Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services Internal Services Expenditure Total Authorized Personnel Internal Audit Total 2010-11 Budget $390,087 8,034 7,060 7,060 5,540 24,978 23,551 19,293 $506,170 $502,431 $495,011 $414,920 $3.00 $2.96 $2.92 $2.43 2008-09 Actual Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised $464,400 23,303 Per Capita Full Time 4 2009-10 Budget $470,393 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time 4 4 Perm FTE Temp FTE 4 2010-11 Budget Full Time 3 3 Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.45 0.45 Related Strategic Issue: Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To achieve the City’s mission by evaluating operations and encouraging the use of cost-effective internal controls Objective: 1) To obtain management acceptance and support for 95% of recommendations; 2) respond to 100% of management’s requests for analytical and investigative assistance; and 3) record all non-procurement contracts in the City’s centralized database within 15 working days from City Council approval of the contract, 95% of the time Measures Support of recommendations 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 100% 95% 95% 95% Response to management’s requests 100% 100% 100% 100% Maintenance of the contract database 100% 95% 95% 95% 165 Police Police Office of the Chief Support Services Operations Organizational Services Purpose: To partner with the residents of Tempe to improve the quality of life in our City by identifying and resolving public safety concerns. Description: The Police Department consists of the following divisions: Office of the Chief, Operations, Support Services, and Organizational Services. The department’s responsibilities include effective and efficient police protection through investigations of criminal offenses, enforcement of state laws and City ordinances, response to resident requests for services, and maintenance of support services. Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2008-09 Actual $59,349,060 2009-10 Budget $58,702,213 2009-10 Revised $57,557,328 2010-11 Budget $50,945,295 5,655,199 6,700,513 5,983,629 6,210,987 Capital Outlay 19,097 Internal Services 10,763 10,270,611 9,497,570 9,967,222 9,178,083 $75,293,967 $74,900,296 $73,518,942 $66,334,365 $446.50 $441.08 $432.95 $387.92 Expenditures by Division Office of the Chief 2008-09 Actual $7,806,641 2009-10 Budget $3,096,499 2009-10 Revised $3,187,429 2010-11 Budget $2,709,117 Operations Expenditure Total Per Capita (Comparative Benchmark) 53,656,438 53,566,314 53,784,590 47,760,650 Support Services 7,253,218 8,927,097 8,484,034 8,230,997 Organizational Services 6,577,670 9,310,386 8,062,889 7,633,601 $75,293,967 $74,900,296 $73,518,942 $66,334,365 Total 2008-09 Actual 403 4.55 394 4.55 342 4.55 Support Services 92 1.00 105 1.00 97 1.00 Organizational Services 60 0.70 56 0.70 49 0.70 575 6.25 562 6.25 493 6.25 Operations Total 20 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Full Time Office of the Chief Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Authorized Personnel Full Time Temp FTE 7 166 Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE 5 Office of the Chief The Police Chief is responsible for the administration and general supervision of all police operations. This office also is charged with the coordination of all investigations and procedures. Services provided by this division are as follows: (1) provide leadership, management and administration for the Police Department; and (2) continually builds partnerships with the residents and the business community. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of Direct Council/Community Liaison (one Sergeant position) elimination of one Administrative Assistant II position reduction of $84,000 to overtime budget reduction of $3,400 for miscellaneous base budget items reduction of $6,000 for Chief of Police annual vehicle allowance Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $1,920,940 $991,555 $945,372 $915,287 Supplies and Services 2,861,704 744,548 17,469 3,428 Internal Services 3,023,997 1,360,396 2,224,588 1,790,402 $7,806,641 $3,096,499 $3,187,429 $2,709,117 $46.29 $18.24 $18.77 $15.84 Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Office of the Chief Total Full Time 20 Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time 7 20 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 7 Full Time 5 Perm FTE Temp FTE 5 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To uphold and enforce the laws of the state and City through professional law enforcement, and maintain the department’s awareness of how the public perceives the department Objective: 1) To maintain a minimum of 80% of resident satisfaction with the overall quality of local police services; 2) maintain O&M cost per capita below $380; and 3) efficiently manage resources to meet the needs of residents with 1.93 sworn full-time equivalents (FTE) per 1,000 capita and .87non-sworn FTE per 1,000 capita 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Actual Budget Revised Budget Overall quality of local police services* Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Cost per Capita 83% 85% 81% 80% $419.88 $365.35 $419.01 $378.18 (13%) 15% (11%) Percent change Sworn FTE’s per Capita (1,000) 1.99 2.04 2.04 1.93 Non-Sworn FTE’s per Capita (1,000) 1.10 1.16 1.10 0.87 *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 167 Operations The Operations Division is comprised of North Patrol, South Patrol, Central City, Traffic, Criminal Investigations, and Special Investigations. Services provided by this division are as follows: (1) respond to requests for service; (2) perform preliminary investigative work at crime scenes; (3) work with the community to address public safety concerns; (4) conduct vehicle patrol to provide visibility in neighborhoods; (5) provide police resources for special or unscheduled events that require additional staffing; (6) provide crime prevention and community education programs to the public, (7) investigate and report incidents of crime; (8) investigate and report motor vehicle accidents; (9) investigate and clear Part 1 and Part II crimes against persons and property; (10) investigate and prevent traffic accidents; (11) develop selective enforcement programs against special or increasing crime problems; and (12) provide specialty services including Mounted and K-9 functions. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of seven Police Officer over hire positions elimination of Administrative Oversight for High Liability Areas (one Commander position) elimination of one Administrative Assistant II position elimination of proactive parking enforcement in neighborhoods (3 Traffic Enforcement Aide positions) elimination of one Patrol Lieutenant position elimination of Park Ranger program (2 park Ranger positions) elimination of 12 Community Service Officer positions elimination of the Crime Prevention Unit (2 Crime Prevention Specialist positions and one Administrative Assistant position) eliminated homeland Defense Bureau (one Commander position) eliminated Internet Crime against Children detective (one Police Officer position) reduced the Mounted Unit (eliminated one Sergeant and one Police Officer position reduction to overtime budget of $384,200 miscellaneous base operating reductions totaling $30,600 Funded one Patrol Officer through Tow Hearing revenues Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $45,407,581 $43,880,035 $44,465,601 $38,833,755 2,130,277 2,902,012 2,924,730 2,634,400 Capital Outlay 360 Internal Services Expenditure Total 6,118,220 6,784,267 6,389,426 6,292,495 $53,656,438 $53,566,314 $53,784,590 $47,760,650 $318.19 $315.45 $316.73 $279.30 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Operations Total Full Time 403 Perm FTE 403 4,833 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 4.55 Full Time 394 4.55 394 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 4.55 Full Time 342 4.55 342 Perm FTE Temp FTE 4.55 4.55 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To effectively respond to requests for Police, Fire, and emergency medical calls Objective: To respond to all accident emergency calls within an average of 5:00 minutes Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Average response time to emergency calls (minutes) 168 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 5:24 5:05 5:17 5:00 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To investigate and clear cases assigned to the Criminal Investigations Division Objective: 1) To effectively manage 157 property cases per investigator; and 2) effectively manage 106 persons cases per investigator 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures Property cases assigned Cases per investigator 2,083 2,210 2,228 149 158 159 157 6.0% 0.6% 1.3% 2,063 2,102 2,098 2,075 115 117 87 106 1.7% 25.6% 21.8% Percent change Persons cases assigned Cases per investigator Percent change 2,197 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: 1) To uphold and enforce the laws through professional law enforcement; and 2) maintain the Department’s awareness of how the public perceives the department Objective: To achieve a clearance rate of 19.1% of Part 1 Property Crimes; and 2) achieve a clearance rate of 44.6% of Part 1 Persons Crimes 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures Part 1 Crimes-Property 9,484 10,913 8,780 9,667 Clearance rate 11% 20.8% 19.1% Park 1 Crimes-Persons 865 911 873 879 Clearance rate Part 1 Crimes per 1,000 capita 59 169 35.7% 46.7% 44.6% 68 55 60 Support Services The Support Services Division is comprised of Communications, Records, Identification, Property, and the Office of Management, Budget and Research. Support Services is responsible for providing comprehensive support services to the entire Police Department. Services provided by this division are as follows: (1) answer all incoming calls and provide 24-hour dispatch service; (2) provide radio communications between the police station and all patrol field units; (3) provide full service police records management services; (4) provide planning and research information; (5) administer departmental operating and capital improvement budgets; (6) gather and report intelligence information; and (7) serve as the central tactical crime analysis and intelligence entity within the department. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: eliminated one Records Section Administrator position converted two Management Assistant II positions into one Senior Budget and Finance Analyst position eliminated three Records Clerk I positions and one Records Clerk II position eliminated one Communications Administrative Supervisor position eliminated one Crime and Intelligence Supervisor position eliminated one Fingerprint Technician position eliminated one Crime Analysis Technician position miscellaneous base operating budget reductions totaling $80,600 2008-09 Actual Expenditures by Type Personal Services 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $6,536,966 $7,908,245 $7,168,193 $6,833,570 154,388 348,769 667,518 886,751 Supplies and Services Capital Outlay 3,273 Internal Services Expenditure Total 558,591 670,083 643,415 510,676 $7,253,218 $8,927,097 $8,484,034 $8,230,997 $43.01 $52.57 $49.96 $48.13 Per Capita Authorized Personnel 4,908 2008-09 Actual Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE 2009-10 Revised Full Perm Temp Time FTE FTE Full Time 2010-11 Budget Perm Temp FTE FTE Support Services 92 1.00 105 1.00 97 1.00 Total 92 1.00 105 1.00 97 1.00 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: 1) To effectively answer "911" requests for Police, Fire, and emergency medical calls; and 2) provide proactive neighborhood programs Objective: 1) To respond to all resident calls for police services; and 2) maintain or increase neighborhoods participating in the Crime Watch program 2008-09 Actual Measures Priority Zero calls answered* 3,650 Percent change Resident calls for police service 92,104 Percent change Neighborhoods with Crime Watch program 332 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 4,227 3,164 2,987 15.8% (25.1%) (5.6%) 114,191 86,074 82,029 24.0% (24.6%) (4.7%) 332 125 125 Percent change 0% (62.3%) 0% * Priority zero calls are residents calls for service that were responded to by patrol and have received a priority designation. They are the highest priority calls that represent life threatening emergencies 170 Organizational Services The Organizational Services Division is comprised of Personnel Services, Detention, and Volunteers in Policing Program. Services provided by this division are as follows: (1) respond to media requests for information; (2) recruit, test, and hire sworn police officers and civilian personnel; (3) provide in-service training programs; (4) investigate internal complaints and serve as liaison with the Tempe Citizens’ Panel for Review of Police Complaints and Use of Force; (5) provide jail and booking service and transport all prisoners to the City Court; (6) audit and compliance; and (7) update and implement organizational policy and procedure. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of 3 Detention Officer positions eliminated the Internal Audit function (one Sergeant position) eliminated one Assistant Chief of Police position eliminated one Administrative Assistant II eliminated a Recruitment and Hiring Unit (Administrative Assistant II and Polygraph Examiner II position) reduced the Training Unit (one Sergeant position) reduced base operating budget by $3,650 Expenditures by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2008-09 Actual $5,483,573 2009-10 Budget $5,922,378 2009-10 Revised $4,978,162 2010-11 Budget $4,362,683 508,830 2,705,184 2,373,912 2,686,408 569,803 682,824 709,793 584,510 $6,577,670 $9,310,386 $8,062,889 $7,633,601 $39.01 $54.83 $47.48 $44.64 Capital Outlay 15,464 Internal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Organizational Services Total Full Time 60 60 Perm FTE 1,022 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 0.70 Full Time 56 0.70 56 171 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 0.70 Full Time 49 0.70 49 Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.70 0.70 Public Works Public Works Engineering Field Operations Transportation Water Utilities Purpose: To build and maintain the City’s infrastructure, and deliver services that are created with and entrusted to us by our community. Description: The Public Works Department consists of Engineering, Field Operations, Transportation and Water Utilities. The Engineering division provides CIP project implementation, utility management, property addressing, right-ofway permitting, project design, and construction management. The Field Operations division is responsible for residential and commercial trash collection and disposal, maintenance and repair service to all City owned buildings, interior cleaning of all City owned buildings and park restrooms, maintaining the City fleet of vehicles and fuel dispensing, chemical spill clean-up, operation of the Household Products Collection Center, maintain all parks, special facilities and golf courses, and operation of the City golf courses. The Transportation division is responsible for transit services, traffic engineering, pavement marking and striping, traffic signal maintenance and construction, street lighting, alley maintenance, street sweeping, pavement management and street repair and construction. The Water Utilities Department is responsible for providing clean, safe drinking water, wastewater treatment and administering a water conservation program. 172 Expenditure by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $44,486,870 2009-10 Budget $45,404,242 2009-10 Revised $40,736,884 2010-11 Budget $36,679,137 Supplies and Services 77,841,754 91,148,212 86,680,988 91,028,953 Capital Outlay 3,873,870 6,494,684 6,370,950 3,712,242 Internal Services 3,783,963 5,931,450 3,073,014 5,685,343 165,751 181,484 181,484 106,484 $130,152,208 $149,160,072 137,043,320 $137,212,159 $771.82 $878.39 $823.35 $802.41 2008-09 Actual $388,244 2009-10 Budget $616,142 2009-10 Revised $570,898 2010-11 Budget $223,055 Contributions Expenditure Total Per Capita Expenditures by Division Administration Engineering 2,622,087 2,333,833 1,919,005 1,580,892 Field Operations 33,130,957 36,138,645 33,443,800 30,786,447 Transportation 60,390,860 72,145,703 65,913,628 64,449,827 Water Utilities 33,620,060 37,925,749 35,195,989 40,171,938 $130,152,208 $149,160,072 $137,043,320 $137,212,159 Total 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Administration Engineering Full Time 3 2009-10 Revised Perm FTE Temp FTE 0.49 Full Time 3 38 Perm FTE 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 0.49 Full Time 2 32 Perm FTE 0.50 Temp FTE 0.49 31 Field Operations 267 1.50 14.73 245 1.50 15.22 216 1.50 18.22 Transportation 107 1.00 3.00 95 1.00 1.00 72 0.50 1.00 Water Utilities 141 0.50 1.47 139 1.00 0.49 148 Total 556 3.00 19.69 514 3.50 17.20 469 2.50 20.20 173 0.49 Administration The Public Works Director has overall responsibility for providing the leadership, management, and administrative support for the Public Works Department. The department is responsible for providing high quality community services necessary to build and maintain the infrastructure of the City of Tempe. These services include engineering, refuse collection, hazardous waste and environmental compliance, park and golf course maintenance, facilities maintenance, custodial, fleet, streets maintenance, transportation and water utilities. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount included the following changes: elimination of 0.50 FTE Executive Assistant reduction of $6,000 for Public Works Director annual vehicle allowance Expenditure by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $424,281 2009-10 Budget $444,482 2009-10 Revised $401,542 2010-11 Budget $355,471 Supplies and Services 33,393 38,713 34,965 100,173 Contributions 85,363 55,618 55,618 5,618 Internal Services (154,793) 77,329 78,773 Expenditure Total $388,244 $616,142 $570,898 $223,055 $2.30 $3.63 $3.36 $1.30 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Administration Total Full Time 3 3 Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE 0.49 Full Time 3 0.49 3 174 Perm FTE (238,207) 2010-11 Budget Temp FTE 0.49 Full Time 2 Perm FTE 0.50 Temp FTE 0.49 0.49 2 0.50 0.49 Engineering The Engineering Division has the primary responsibility of providing engineering, surveying, inspection, testing and contractual services for all improvements constructed within the public rights-of-way. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: transfer of one GIS position to the Water Utilities division transfer funding for 1/2 of an Engineering Infrastructure Manager position to the Water/Wastewater fund 2008-09 Actual $3,593,660 Expenditure by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2009-10 Budget $3,190,172 241,980 329,727 2009-10 Revised $2,868,178 2010-11 Budget $2,310,786 261,377 235,293 Internal Services (1,213,553) (1,186,066) (1,210,550) Expenditure Total $2,622,087 $2,333,833 $1,919,005 $1,580,892 $15.55 $13.74 $11.30 $9.25 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Full Time Perm FTE 2009-10 Revised Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE (965,187) 2010-11 Budget Full Time Engineering 38 32 31 Total 38 32 31 Perm FTE Temp FTE Related Strategic Issue: Community Sustainability, Quality of Life, Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: To efficiently implement the Capital Improvement Program by strategic planning, budgeting, design and construction of capital improvement projects which address recreational, City facilities, public utilities, transportation, and public safety needs Objective: To execute 100% of the construction and/or professional service contracts for budgeted projects within 12 months of the approved funding for the Capital Improvements Program 2008-09 Actual Measures Number of active CIP construction contracts 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 72 70 73 35 Percent of CIP construction contracts executed within 12 months of funding N/A 100% 82% 100% Number of active CIP professional service contracts 250 260 200 100 Percent of CIP professional service contracts executed within 12 months of funding N/A 100% 82% 100% 175 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life, Technology, Economic and Community Development Goal: 1) To ensure that the construction of private developments and related utility work is coordinated with the City’s infrastructure, transportation plan, and quality standards; and 2) ensure compliance with applicable codes and ordinances Objective: 1) To complete civil plan reviews within the schedule time allotment 90% of the time; and 2) complete utility plan reviews within the scheduled time allotment 90% of the time 2008-09 Actual Measures Number of civil plan reviews per engineer Percent of civil plan reviews performed within the schedule time allotment Number of utility plan reviews per plan reviewer Percent of utility plan reviews performed within the schedule time allotment Off-site private development permits issued Utility permits issued 176 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget N/A 300 150 100 78% 90% 81% 90% N/A 400 500 400 65% 90% 78% 90% 475 600 300 200 1,629 1,500 1,550 1,500 Field Operations The Field Operations Division is comprised of Facilities and Custodial, Fleet Maintenance, Parks Services and Solid Waste Services, including hazardous material management. The Facilities and Custodial section provides maintenance, repair service and cleaning for all City owned buildings. The Fleet Maintenance section is responsible for maintaining the City’s motor vehicle and construction equipment. The Parks Services section is responsible for managing and maintaining all of the City’s public parks, sports complexes, golf courses, rights-ofway landscaping, and multi-modal paths. Also, this section is responsible for maintenance of the City owned cemetery. The Solid Waste Services section is responsible for the collection and disposal of solid waste generated from all residential and selected commercial facilities within the City, the City’s recycling efforts, and hazardous materials management. Additionally, the Field Operations Division is responsible for environmental safety and compliance. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following changes: elimination of a Deputy Parks & Recreation Manager position in the General Fund elimination of a P & G Course Supervisor position in the General Fund elimination of two P & G Course Maintenance positions in the General Fund elimination of two Senior Groundskeeper positions in the General Fund elimination of a P & G Mechanic position, three Equipment Operator positions and four Groundskeepers in the Golf Fund elimination of a Groundskeeper position and TCA Maintenance Worker in the Performing Arts Fund elimination of a Building Equipment Tech position elimination of two Pest Control Technician positions elimination of an Admin Asst position elimination of four custodial positions reduction of $100,000 for electricity reduction of $405,000 for vehicles, parts, and fuel elimination of the Parks clean-up contract totaling $205,900 reduction of $22,500 for heating fuel transfer a Custodial Supervisor position from the Transit Fund to the General Fund transfer 0.5 FTE Sr. Management Asst. from the General Fund to the Solid Waste Fund transfer of two Custodians and two Groundskeepers from the General Fund to the Water Fund transfer 50% funding of a P & G Course Supervisor from the Golf Fund to the General Fund transfer funding for a Custodian and Groundskeeper from the General Fund to the Solid Waste Fund transfer funding for a Parks Contract Administrator from the General Fund to the HURF fund transfer 50 % funding of a TCA Maintenance Supervisor from the Performing Arts Fund to the Transit Fund Expenditure by Type Personal Services Supplies and Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised $18,874,306 $18,847,087 $17,115,242 $15,198,957 14,606,965 16,242,856 15,392,915 15,708,088 5,561 17,866 17,866 17,866 2,777,312 4,770,978 4,366,049 2,654,500 (3,133,187) (3,740,142) (3,448,272) (2,792,964) Contributions Capital Outlay Internal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita 2010-11 Budget $33,130,957 $36,138,645 $33,443,800 $30,786,447 $196.47 $212.82 $196.95 $180.04 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Field Operations 267 1.50 14.73 245 1.50 15.22 216 1.50 18.22 Total 267 1.50 14.73 245 1.50 15.22 216 1.50 18.22 Authorized Personnel 177 Related Strategic Issue: Community Sustainability, Quality of Life Goal: To collect and dispose of all contained solid waste generated by residential customers Objective: 1) To provide excellent service to residential customers by effectively and efficiently managing solid waste collected; 2) divert 29% of residential recycling waste stream; 3) attain resident satisfaction rates of 94% for residential trash collection services, 86% for bulk item pick up/removal services, and 90% for recycling services; and 4) attain a resident satisfaction rate of 54% for the condition of alleys 2008-09 Actual Measures (Comparative Benchmark) 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Residential contained/recycling cost per ton $110 $96 $114 $112 Residential recycling diversion rate 29% 29% 28% 29% Residential Contained Solid Waste tons per capita (1,000) 279 312 266 272 Resident satisfaction with residential trash collection services* 92% 94% 91% 94% Resident satisfaction with bulk item pick up/removal services* 82% 86% 81% 86% Resident satisfaction with recycling services* 87% 90% 89% 90% Resident satisfaction with condition of alleys* 46% 52% 54% 54% * Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey Related Strategic Issue: Community Sustainability, Quality of Life Goal: To collect and dispose of solid waste from our commercial customers and multi-family housing units Objective: To provide an efficient and competitive solid waste operation and minimize collection cost per ton to $73 Measures Commercial collection cost per ton 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $72 $61 $77 $73 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To maintain a high level of maintenance and service to ensure that facilities are physically safe and in good condition Objective: 1) To increase by 6% the square footage maintained per FTE per 10 hour shift at a minimum of 121,000 square feet; 2) increase by 7% total square footage maintained per Building Equipment Technician at a minimum of 158,000 square feet; and 3) hold facility maintenance costs per square foot maintained to a maximum of $2.17 Measures Total square feet maintained per FTE1 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 58,323 95,000 114,000 121,000 63% 20% 6% 122,000 147,000 158,000 58% 20% 7% $2.93 $2.15 $2.17 Percent change Total square feet maintained per Building Equipment Technician 77,192 Percent change Operating and Maintenance Cost per square foot maintained 1 1 $3.81 Excludes personnel and facilities budgeted in the Performing Arts and Transit 178 Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To maintain a high level of cleanliness and maintain a sanitary environment for City facilities in an efficient and cost effective manner Objective: 1) To increase by 11% the square footage maintained per FTE per 8 hour shift at a minimum of 31,000 square feet; 2) hold custodial costs per square foot cleaned to a maximum of $1.82; and 3) increase by 9% the total square footage cleaned per custodian at a minimum of 36,000 Measures Total square feet cleaned per FTE1 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 21,421 24,000 28,000 31,000 12% 17% 11% $2.54 $2.35 $1.91 $1.82 24,849 27,000 33,000 36,000 9% 22% 9% Percent change Operating and Maintenance Cost per square foot cleaned1 Total square feet cleaned per custodian Percent change 1 Excludes personnel and facilities budgeted in the Performing Arts and Transit Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To maintain the City’s fleet at the lowest cost and highest quality of service and vehicle condition Objective: To contain the growth in maintenance and repair, fuel, and capital costs as measured by cost per mile 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Actual Budget Revised Budget Cost per mile (maintenance and repair, fuel and capital cost): Police patrol sedans $0.82 $0.81 $0.77 $0.81 Light duty trucks $0.68 $0.70 $0.68 $0.70 Solid Waste trucks $4.89 $4.97 $4.66 $4.97 Note: 2010-11 projections based on expected rise in fuel prices Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life Goal: To utilize personnel resources in an efficient and effective manner Objective: 1) To maximize utilization of fleet mechanic time at a target of 77% productivity; and 2) maintain an optimum vehicle to mechanic ratio 2008-09 Actual Measures Mechanic utilization rate Vehicles per mechanic 179 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 72% 72% 77% 77% 75 75 66 61 Related Strategic Issue: Neighborhood Parks Rehabilitation and Maintenance, Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development Goal: To maintain the City rights-of-way, medians and facility grounds in an attractive and pleasing manner Objective: 1) To achieve 68% overall resident satisfaction with the landscape maintenance along City streets and sidewalks; 2) achieve 60% overall satisfaction with the quality of walking and biking paths; 3) maintain and operate parks and open space at a cost and staffing level, based on acres maintained per full-time employee, that meets the needs of residents, and; 4) manage the landscape contract for the care and maintenance of the City’s rights-of-way, medians and facility grounds 2008-09 Actual Measures Resident satisfaction with the landscape along City streets and sidewalks* Resident satisfaction with the quality of walking and biking paths in the City* Total landscaped areas maintained (sq ft) 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 71% 68% 73% 68% 67% 60% 72% 60% 9,918,322 9,918,322 10,002,553 10,002,553 Number of full-time employees managing landscape maintenance contract (Parks and Recreation, Community Development and Public Works) Total park acres maintained per full-time Parks employee 4 4 4 4 56.9 47.4 56.9 57.4 *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey Related Strategic Issue: Quality of Life, Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development Goal: To provide recreational facilities for leisure opportunities that are accessible, clean, safe and friendly Objective: 1) To achieve 80% overall resident satisfaction with the quality of City parks; 2) achieve 70% overall resident satisfaction with the quality of neighborhood parks; 3) achieve 60% overall resident satisfaction with the City golf courses while maintaining rounds of play at each golf course; 4) achieve 70% overall resident satisfaction with the City’s outdoor fields; and 5) achieve 70% overall resident satisfaction with the quality of City recreation centers 2008-09 Actual Measures (Comparative Benchmark) 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Resident satisfaction with the quality of City parks* 86% 80% 91% 80% Resident satisfaction with the quality of neighborhood parks* 76% 75% 78% 70% Resident satisfaction with City’s golf courses* 63% 60% 71% 60% Resident satisfaction with the City’s outdoor athletic fields* 74% 74% 80% 70% Resident satisfaction with the quality of City recreation centers* 76% 76% 83% 70% Total park and golf course acres Park and golf course acres per capita (10,000) 1,877 111.3 1,877 111.3 1,877 110.5 1,877 109.8 Operating and Maintenance Cost per capita Golf course rounds of play: $63.83 $90.27 $63.17 $56.35 Ken McDonald (18 hole rounds) Percent change 70,634 63,170 (10.6%) 67,102 (3.8%) 64,530 (5%) Rolling Hills (18 hole rounds) 53,215 51,003 48,744 46,306 (4.2%) (8.4%) (5%) Percent change *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 180 Transportation The Transportation Division is responsible for all transportation activities throughout the City. The Transit section provides the following services : (1) sight restriction abatements; (2) traffic engineering studies, designs and plan approvals, (3) plan, coordinate, benchmark and provide transit services; (4) plan and administer bicycle facilities; and (5) maintenance and operation of the light rail transit system. The Streets and Traffic Operations section is responsible for the following work programs: (1) pavement marking and striping; (2) traffic signal maintenance and construction; (3) street lighting; (4) street sign fabrication, installation, and maintenance; (5) bus shelter maintenance; (6) alley reconstruction and maintenance; (7) street sweeping; (8) pavement management; (9) CIP project management/contract administration of annual street maintenance programs, including major and local street renovation and minor concrete improvements; (10) street repair; and (11) rights-of-way maintenance, including graffiti removal and tree trimming. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved budget also includes the following reorganizations: elimination of two Management Assistant positions in the Transit Fund elimination of a 0.5 FTE Financial Services Tech position in the Transit Fund elimination of a ITS Network Engineer in the Transit Fund elimination of three Street Maintenance Equipment Operators in the HURF Fund elimination of a Traffic Engineer Analyst in the HURF Fund elimination of a Traffic Control Barricade Supervisor in the HURF Fund elimination of a Sr. Civil Engineer position in the HURF Fund elimination of an Admin Asst. position in the HURF Fund elimination of a Sr Sign Technician in the HURF Fund elimination of a Traffic Ops Crew Leader in the HURF Fund elimination of a Traffic Signal Services Worker in the HURF Fund elimination of a ITS Coordinator in the HURF Fund elimination of a Underground Utility Coordinator in the HURF Fund elimination of a Streets Maintenance Team Leader in the HURF Fund elimination of a Traffic Signal Services Crew Lead in the HURF Fund elimination of a Sr. Engineering Associate in the HURF Fund elimination of a Streets Superintendant in the HURF Fund elimination of a Transportation Worker position the HURF Fund elimination of a Deputy Manager position in the HURF Fund reclassification of two Transportation Worker positions to Groundskeeper positions transfer one custodial supervisor position from the Transit Fund to the General Fund transfer two Street Maintenance Equipment Operator positions from the HURF Fund to the Solid Waste Fund transfer 50% funding o a TCA Maintenance Supervisor position from the Performing Arts Fund to the Transit Fund transfer 50% funding of a Deputy Manger position from the Transit Fund to the HURF Fund transfer 50% funding of a Deputy Manager position from the HURF fund to the Solid Waste Fund transfer a Principal Planner position from the Transit Fund to the CDBG/Home Fund Expenditure by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual $7,979,613 2009-10 Budget $8,487,708 2009-10 Revised $7,515,134 2010-11 Budget $5,763,422 Supplies and Services 47,978,903 55,839,084 53,699,904 52,327,411 902,702 1,294,000 1,297,136 273,000 3,454,814 6,416,911 3,293,454 6,002,994 Capital Outlay Internal Services Contributions Expenditure Total 74,828 108,000 108,000 83,000 $60,390,860 $72,145,703 $65,913,628 $64,449,827 $358.13 $424.86 $388.16 $376.90 Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Transportation Total 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE 107 1.00 3.00 95 1.00 1.00 72 0.50 1.00 107 1.00 3.00 95 1.00 1.00 72 0.50 1.00 181 Related Strategic Issue: Transportation Goal: To effectively manage and evaluate transit service provided through regional or City contracts funded by a dedicated Tempe transit tax Objective: 1) To efficiently and cost-effectively provide and monitor regional and local fixed route, circulator and Dial-A-Ride service; and 2) increase boardings per vehicle revenue mile (bus) by 10% Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Vehicle revenue miles (bus) 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 7,030,667 7,443,340 6,500,000 6,000,000 $5.56 $5.74 $5.50 $5.60 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.2 0% 11% 10% Operating and Maintenance Cost per vehicle revenue mile (bus) Boardings per vehicle revenue mile (bus) Percent change Related Strategic Issue: Transportation Goal: 1) To attract people to use the transit system; 2) operate a reliable bus system; and 3) operate a reliable Dial-A-Ride system Objective: 1) To increase annual bus boardings by 10%; 2) meet the Dial-A-Ride industry standard of 93% of trips on time (minimum); and 3) meet the industry standard of 90% of bus trips on time (minimum) 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 9,165,971 11,400,000 10,000,000 11,000,000 24% (12%) 10% Measures Annual boardings (bus) Percent change 2010-11 Budget On-time performance (Dial-A-Ride) 93% 95% 93% 93% On-time performance (bus) 90% 90% 90% 90% Related Strategic Issue: Transportation Goal: To provide outstanding customer service to bus and Dial-A-Ride customers Objective: 1) To meet contract standards by limiting bus service complaints to 15 per 100,000 boardings (maximum) and Dial-A-Ride service complaints to 1 per 1,000 boardings (maximum); 2) obtain a 70% resident satisfaction rate for quality of local bus service; and 3) obtain a 70% resident satisfaction rate on the quality of walking and biking paths 2008-09 Actual Measures 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Complaints per 100,000 boardings (bus) 17 15 15 15 Complaints per 1,000 boardings (Dial-A-Ride) 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 Resident satisfaction with the quality of local bus service* 76% 70% 70% 70% Resident satisfaction with the quality of walking and biking paths* 72% 70% 70% 70% *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey Related Strategic Issue: Transportation Goal: To provide adequate illumination of City streets Objective: 1) To respond to a street light outage within three working days 96% of the time; and 2) attain 65% resident satisfaction regarding the adequacy of City street lighting 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget Street light outage calls repaired within three working days 96% 96% 96% 96% Resident satisfaction with the adequacy of City street lighting* 67% 70% 65% 65% Measures 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 182 Related Strategic Issue: Transportation Goal: To improve and ensure the safety and efficiency of the traffic signal system Objective: To respond to emergency signal service calls within 30 minutes, 98% of the time 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 Actual Budget Revised Measures Emergency signal service calls responded to within 30 minutes Preventative maintenance of traffic signal control cabinets (twice annually) 2010-11 Budget 98% 98% 98% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100% Related Strategic Issue: Transportation Goal: To meet environmental, storm water, and air quality requirements Objective: 1) To keep a minimum of 15,652 streets clean and free of dust and debris; and 2) attain a 77% resident satisfaction rate regarding the cleanliness of City streets 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Actual Budget Revised Budget Curb miles swept Resident satisfaction with cleanliness of City streets* 15,652 15,652 15,652 15,652 70% 80% 77% 77% *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey Related Strategic Issue: Transportation Goal: To perform preventive roadway maintenance to extend the life of City streets Objective: 1) To maintain and repair a minimum of 46,000 yards of street surface which includes crack routing, crack sealing, and edge milling; 2) attain an 80% resident satisfaction rate regarding the condition of neighborhood streets; and 3) attain an 80% resident satisfaction rate regarding the overall condition of City streets 2008-09 2009-10 2009-10 2010-11 Actual Budget Revised Budget Measures Square yards repaired 1,626,231 1,325,000 438,917 46,000** Resident satisfaction with the condition of neighborhood streets* 76% 82% 80% 80% Resident satisfaction with overall condition of City streets* 74% 81% 80% 80% *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey **Due to significant reductions in capital improvement program funding Related Strategic Issue: Transportation Goal: To provide well-maintained and visible street signs Objective: To attain an 83% resident satisfaction rate regarding the condition and clarity of street signs Measures 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 78% 83% 83% 83% Resident satisfaction with overall condition and clarity of street signs* *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 183 Water Utilities The Water Utilities Department is responsible for: 1) water quality testing and compliance with all environmental regulation; 2) water conservation efforts; 3) Tempe Town Lake operations and hydrology services; 4) water and wastewater treatment; 5) infrastructure maintenance, and; 6) City-wide GIS mapping. FY 2010-11 Budget Highlights: The approved amount includes the following: • one GIS position transferred from the General Fund to the Water Fund • two Custodial and two Groundskeeper positions transferred from the General Fund to the Water Fund • 1/2 of the budget for an Engineering manager transferred from the General Fund to the Water Fund • elimination of a Water Utilities Manager position • elimination of a Deputy Water Utilities Manager position The approval of additional recurring supplemental funding was also added to the Water/Wastewater Fund as follows: $100,000 for air scrubber chemicals $2,000,000 for additional carbon at the Johnny G. Martinez and South Tempe Water Treatment Plants $250,000 for Kyrene Water Reclamation Facility odor control chemicals FY 2010-11 Capital Budget Operating Impacts: The department also received additional supplemental funding in the amount of $160,000 to cover additional costs for electricity, waste disposal and ultraviolet equipment and supplies in connection with Water Quality projects under the Capital Budget. Expenditure by Type Personal Services 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $13,615,002 $14,434,793 $12,836,788 $13,054,041 Supplies and Services 14,982,460 18,697,832 17,291,827 22,654,448 Capital Outlay 440,697 429,706 707,765 784,742 4,581,901 4,363,418 4,359,609 3,678,707 $33,620,060 $37,925,749 $35,195,989 $40,171,938 $199.37 $223.34 $207.27 $234.92 Internal Services Expenditure Total Per Capita 2008-09 Actual Authorized Personnel Water Utilities Total 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE Full Time Perm FTE Temp FTE 141 0.50 1.47 139 1.00 0.49 148 0.49 141 0.50 1.47 139 1.00 0.49 148 0.49 Related Strategic Issue: Public Safety and Neighborhood Quality of Life Goal: To provide a safe and adequate domestic water supply to all residents in Tempe, while at the same time minimizing cost Objective: 1) To monitor increases in water treatment costs for the Johnny G. Martinez and South Tempe Water Treatment Plants; and 2) maintain an Operating and Maintenance Cost per 1,000 gallons treated under 60 cents Measures (Comparative Benchmark) Total Water Treatment Operating and Maintenance Cost 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget $7,452,135 $7,657,714 $7,851,420 $9,460,826 Number of customer accounts 42,500 42,800 43,300 43,500 Total gallons treated (Million Gallons) 11,832 17,900 17,900 17,900 Operating and Maintenance Cost per 1,000 gallons treated Operating and Maintenance Cost per customer account 184 $0.63 $0.64 $0.44 $0.53 $175.34 $178.92 $181.33 $217.49 Related Strategic Issue: Public Safety and Neighborhood Quality of Life Goal: To provide water of the highest quality to all residents Objective: 1) To target 90% overall resident satisfaction with water service; 2) minimize the number of resident complaints related to water quality to 1% of total customer base in Tempe (1%=420 complaints); and 3) respond to those complaints within 24 hours, 100% of the time Measures 2008-09 Actual Overall resident satisfaction with water service* Taste and odor complaints Hardness complaints Other complaints Response within 24 hours of the complaint 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 91% 90% 85% 90% 14 <420 (1%) 15 <420 (1%) 2 <420 (1%) 7 <420 (1%) 10 <2100 (5%) 22 <2100 (5%) 100% 100% 100% 100% *Measured by the percent of residents that responded with “Very Satisfied” or “Satisfied” in the annual Community Attitude Survey 185 This page intentionally left blank. Capital Improvements Budget The following section covers the City’s Capital Improvements Program, including summary schedules, detailed project descriptions, sources of funds, debt management, and operating budget impacts. Capital Improvements Budget Contents Page Capital Improvements Program Overview ................................................................................................................... 188 Capital Budget Impact on the Operating Budget ........................................................................................................ 193 Significant Non-Routine Capital Project Expenditures by Major Program ............................................................... 197 Capital Improvements Project Map .............................................................................................................................. 198 Capital Improvements Program Summary................................................................................................................... 199 Capital Improvements Program Source of Funds....................................................................................................... 200 Capital Budget Strategic Focus.................................................................................................................................... 201 Capital Improvements Program Changes in Fund Balances ..................................................................................... 202 Capital Budget and Debt Policy Statements................................................................................................................ 203 Legal Bonded Debt Limits............................................................................................................................................. 204 Long-Term Debt Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 205 Capital Budget, Debt Service and Property Tax Rate: Ten Year Historical Trends................................................. 206 Capital Improvements Program Project Listing and Descriptions ............................................................................ 207 Enterprise Program................................................................................................................................................... 207 Water Program .................................................................................................................................................. 208 Wastewater Program ......................................................................................................................................... 217 Special Purpose Program ......................................................................................................................................... 221 Transit Program ................................................................................................................................................. 222 Rio Salado Program .......................................................................................................................................... 226 General Purpose Program ........................................................................................................................................ 229 Police Protection Program ................................................................................................................................. 230 Fire Protection Program..................................................................................................................................... 232 Park Improvements / Recreation Program......................................................................................................... 234 General Governmental Program........................................................................................................................ 236 Transportation Program ............................................................................................................................................ 243 Transportation and Rights-of-Way Improvements Program............................................................................... 244 Traffic Signals and Street Lighting Program ...................................................................................................... 247 187 Capital Improvements Program Overview Pursuant to the Tempe City Charter, the City Manager prepares and submits a Capital Improvements Program (CIP) annually to the Council. The CIP is a five-year financial plan for the acquisition, construction, expansion, or rehabilitation of infrastructure and capital assets. Capital Projects typically have one or more of the following characteristics: (1) expenditures which take place over two or more years, requiring continuing appropriations beyond a single fiscal year; (2) funding with debt because of significant costs to be shared by current and future beneficiaries; (3) creation or revitalization of a fixed asset with a minimum useful life of five years; (4) systematic asset acquisition over an extended period of time; and (5) scheduled replacement or maintenance of specific elements of physical assets. The following are some examples of items that are included within the definition of capital expenditures: • • • • • • • • Construction of new facilities Remodeling or expansion of existing facilities Purchase, improvement, or development of land Operating equipment and machinery for new and expanded facilities Planning and engineering costs related to specific capital improvements Street resurfacing, renovation, or reconstruction Emergency vehicles Information Technology infrastructure Although capital projects are scheduled throughout the five-year plan, only those projects during the first year of the plan are adopted as part of the City's annual budget. The first year of the CIP constitutes the Capital Budget. The remaining years within the CIP serve as a guide for future planning and are subject to annual review and modification in subsequent years. ANNUAL BUDGET PROGRAM SUMMARY As shown in the chart below, the City of Tempe’s Financial Program for FY 2010-11 totals $419.7 million. Of this amount, approximately $48.3 million is for projects included in the Capital Budget. Comparison of FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 Capital Budgets FY 2009-10 Budget FY 2010-11 Budget $31,436,147 $31,046,338 13,350,000 12,600,000 Transit 9,750,000 446,000 Rio Salado 3,225,500 327,000 Police 2,428,800 890,954 Fire 9,023,863 600,000 275,000 0 Park Improvements 8,944,875 150,000 General Governmental 5,905,694 1,929,463 Transportation and R.O.W 9,805,341 275,000 Traffic Signals/Street Lighting 2,165,348 0 $96,310,568 $48,264,755 Capital Program Enterprise Water Wastewater Special Purpose FY 2010-11 Total Financial Program Operating Budget $371.4 Capital Budget Total ($ millions) $ 48.3 $419.7 General Purpose Storm Drains Transportation Total 188 Operating Budget 88% Capital Budget 12% CIP PROCESS In September 2009, the CIP process began with the CIP Coordinating Committee meeting to review and discuss guidelines, budget request forms, and availability of funds. This Committee consisted of City department heads, departmental capital project managers, and Financial Services staff. Based on guidance provided at this meeting, City departments submitted requests for projects to be included in the Capital Improvements Program. After all project submissions were received, a follow-up ‘discovery’ meeting was held in early December 2009 to discuss changes to previously approved projects and to review new project requests. In the ensuing months, Financial Services staff gathered updated local economic data and held meetings with department managers and other key department representatives to begin sizing the 2010-11 CIP. Analysis of the more recent economic data, particularly the negative impact the economic downturn has had on local property values, indicated the City’s capacity to bond finance capital projects in coming years would be severely compromised (discussed in detail below under CIP Financing). This projection required Financial Services and department representatives to make difficult choices regarding CIP project delays and or cancellations. Once project necessities and available resources were thoroughly evaluated, a balanced five-year capital program was recommended to the City Manager. On March 25, 2010, the City Council held a public Special Budget Session to examine the recommended capital program including funding sources, debt service implications, operating budget impacts, and project priorities. Recognizing the limited availability of City revenues and financing options resulting from the economic downturn, the City Council held several subsequent meetings in April and May to further evaluate CIP project priorities. The process culminated with Council adoption of the Capital Improvements Program on June 10th 2010. CAPITAL BUDGET OVERVIEW The Capital Budget consists of the following four program areas: Enterprise, General Purpose, Special Purpose, and Transportation projects. The Enterprise program totals $43.6 million and includes Water and Wastewater projects, which as shown in the table below, account for 90% of the total Capital Budget in FY 2010-11. The General Purpose program includes Police, Fire, Parks, and General Governmental projects and totals $3.6 million. The Special Purpose program includes Transit and Rio Salado projects, and represents $800 thousand or 2%, of funded projects in FY 2010-11. FY 2010-11 CIP by Program $ Millions Enterprise The Transportation program traditionally includes new funding for a variety of street and sidewalk construction, traffic signals, and lighting projects; however, due to reduced financing capacity, the FY 2010-11 program includes only one (1) project which amounts to less than 1% of the Capital Budget. % of Total 43.6 90% General Purpose 3.6 7% Special Purpose .8 2% Transportation .3 1% Total $48.3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FINANCING CIP Funding Source Comparison - Last Five Years As shown in the chart on the left, Tempe's capital program has historically been funded through a combination of bonds and other sources, including payas-you-go financing, outside revenues, grants and capital project fund balances. $160,000 $140,000 $120,000 $100,000 The availability of these various revenue sources and the capacity to use them are principal factors in determining the overall size of each annual Capital Budget and has contributed to the decreasing size of the Capital Budget over the past three years for various reasons. $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $0 ($000 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Other Sources 2009-10 Because FY 2008-09 included the final phase of large appropriations of City transit tax and federal grants as the main funding sources for the completion of the 2010-11 Bonds 189 City’s share of the metropolitan Light Rail system, CIP funding sources other than bonds saw a sharp decline between FY 2008-09 and 2009-10. Bond appropriations between the same two years also decreased as a result of project progress and completions in the Enterprise Program which translated into declining funding requirements. The most significant factor decreasing FY 2010-11 capital funding availability, and the overall size of the Capital Budget, is the steep decline in local property values resulting from the economic downturn. The City estimates property values will have declined 35% over three years as of FY 2010-11. As a result, property tax collections in FY 2010-11 are anticipated to decrease $3 million from FY 2009-10; falling from $25.2 million to $22.2 million. Additionally, due to an approximate two year lag between when property is valued, and when property tax is collected based on that value, annual property tax revenue collections are projected to continue to decrease to approximately $13.5 million in FY 2012-13. Since the majority of property tax revenue the City collects is the source of funding used to pay debt service on bonds, the City’s ability to bond finance new projects under the General Governmental and Transportation Programs in FY 2010-11 is critically diminished. This is the primary reason the FY 2010-11 Capital Budget is 50% smaller than the Capital Budget in FY 2009-10. In contrast, the City maintains the capacity to issue bonds to finance ongoing and new projects under the Enterprise Program because the funding source used to pay debt service on these bonds is revenue collected from user fees for water and wastewater services; not property tax revenue. Of the $38.4 million in general obligation bonds shown in the table to the right, only $1.6 million is appropriated to finance projects under the General Governmental Program; the remainder is for water and wastewater projects. FY 2010-11 Sources of Funds $ Millions % of Total General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund Balance Outside Revenue Pay-as-You-Go Financing Total $38.4 7.8 1.7 .4 $48.3 79% 16% 4% 1% FY 2010-11 Capital Budget funding sources other than bonds total $10 million which is approximately 60% less than were appropriated in FY 2009-10. This year over year decrease is almost solely attributable to reduced receipts and associated appropriations of federal grants and other outside revenue. Due to tremendous economy related Operating Budget problems faced over the last two years, pay-as-you-go financing remains anemic. The FY 2010-11 funding sources are identified in further detail in the Capital Improvements Program Source of Funds table in the Schedules and Summaries section, as well as in the individual project descriptions. CAPITAL BUDGET PROJECT COMPOSITION and HIGHLIGHTS The total 5 year CIP provides for 49 projects within the four major program areas discussed in the CIP Overview. Out of the 49 projects, nine projects totaling $92,803,780 are considered to be significant and non-routine. Three of 32 Projects Account for 50% of the FY 2010-11 Capital Budget The adopted FY 2010-11 Capital Budget provides appropriations for 32 projects; 3 of which are considered significant and non-routine and total $23,894,780. The other 6 major projects are planned for construction in the out years of the 5 year CIP. $120,000 These major projects and associated funding sources are listed separately on page 197 for reference in the Operating Impacts section of this document, and are also listed under their respective program area in the complete CIP project listings and descriptions section. $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 The City considers projects requiring significant non-routine capital expenditures to be projects that are typically “one time” in nature and involve the construction or expansion of new facilities or City infrastructure, or extensive renovation of existing facilities. $40,000 $20,000 $0 ($000) ($000) 2010-11 Capital Budget Significant Non-routine Projects 5 Year CIP All Other Projects All other projects included in the CIP provide for periodic, ongoing or routine expenditures to maintain and repair City’s facilities, water infrastructure, streets, and parks; and for the gradual replacement of various capital assets. 190 Below are project highlights from the Capital Budget for FY 2010-11: Enterprise Program City Water system projects ($31 million) including: • Continued bond funding for required water quality improvements to meet current and future water quality regulations at the South Tempe Water Treatment Plant (STWTP) ($18.7 million) • Continued bond funding for the design and construction of a new Environmental Laboratory Facility ($5 million). City Wastewater system projects ($12.6 million) including: • Continued bond funding for 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant capacity expansion ($12.5 million) General Purpose Program Funding for the City’s Police and Fire Protection Programs ($1.5 million) including: • Continued bond funding for the Police / City Radio System Replacement ($890 thousand) • Continued bond funding for the Fire Department’s federally mandated radio conversion to 800 Megahertz. ($600 thousand) Funding for the General Governmental Program ($1.9 million) including: • Continued bond funding to complete the Tempe Public Library renovation ($115 thousand) • Continued pay-as-you go funding for the Municipal Arts Program ($440 thousand) • Continued pay-as-you go funding for the repair, replacement and maintenance of various City facilities ($510 thousand) • New federal grant funding to enhance the City’s Energy Conservation Program ($375 thousand) Special Purpose Program Funding for the Transit program ($446 thousand) including: • New federal grant funding for the design and construction of a new section of the Tempe Rio Salado multi-use path system ($446 thousand) Funding for the Rio Salado Program ($327 thousand) including: • Continued funding to complete repairs to the Town Lake's downstream dam area as required by Arizona Department of Water Resources ($227 thousand). DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN In addition to the management of existing debt and associated reserves, the City also forecasts future debt within a framework of policy priorities and financial capacity. Current and anticipated capital improvement objectives, available operating revenue, tax base fluctuations, and reserve levels are all evaluated on an ongoing basis to estimate the extent to which the City may issue additional tax supported debt. This active debt management ensures the City can efficiently analyze information such as declining property tax revenues and assess the long term implications for our debt portfolio in order to make proactive decisions about how much new debt capacity is available today. 191 Debt management led to the decision to dramatically reduce the FY 2010-11 Capital Budget as projections indicated our current debt portfolio does not have the capacity to take on new property tax supported debt service. Consequently, in accordance with the City’s debt management projections, the five year Capital Improvements Program allows for only $5.8 million of new property tax supported debt through FY 2014-15. The City will continue to monitor this condition as the economy improves. Fitch Moody’s Standard & Poor’s Debt management is also a key financial practice contributing to the maintenance of the City’s favorable bond ratings. Tempe’s current G.O. bond ratings are shown below. AAA Aaa AAA Notable is the recent May 2010 upgrade in Moody’s rating of the City’s creditworthiness from Aa1 to Aaa. The AAA rating from each rating agency is the highest credit rating possible and is a testament to the City’s prudent financial management practices. CONCLUSION The five-year capital program serves as an excellent guide for future planning. In combination with the debt management plan, the capital program will continue to be carefully composed to ensure the City’s capital needs are met in a timely fashion while ensuring the City maintains financial stability. 192 Capital Budget Impact on the Operating Budget Though the City of Tempe prepares a Capital Budget separate from the Operating Budget, the two budgets are linked. These links include ongoing operating, maintenance and repair costs associated with new or renovated facilities and infrastructure, debt service payments for new debt financed projects, and pay-as-you-go financing from operating revenues. CIP projects also often necessitate the addition of new personnel / positions required to staff or maintain new buildings or outdoor recreational areas. On the other hand, CIP projects may produce new revenue streams in the form of fees paid for the use of new or expanded facilities, or new operating revenue generated from infrastructure enhancements that promote new economic development and activity within the City. As part of each annual CIP development process, departments are asked to identify those capital projects that have an impact on the operating budget, and quantify the impact in terms of operations and maintenance, and / or new revenue. To facilitate this process, and in an effort to ensure accuracy, departments are provided designated staff contacts in relevant partner departments who serve as expert consultants regarding various operating costs that may be associated with a specific project. Examples of these department consultants include a Sr. Civil Engineer, a Deputy Parks and Recreation Director, the Vehicle Fleet Administrator, Facilities Maintenance and Custodial Services Administrators, and an Information Technology Analyst. Through consultation with these personnel, departments identify CIP project operating impacts such as new annual costs associated with building maintenance, electricity, and landscape maintenance. Departments are also provided an annual “Price Guide” which details the price / cost of equipment and associated ongoing usage which may be purchased to support a new CIP project. A few examples of equipment and associated usage costs included in the annual Price Guide are shown to the right. Excerpts From FY 2010-11 Price Guide • Telephones Single Line Telephone $144 Multi-line display phone $595 Base telephone service $240 Long distance calling $132 - $252 $3,004 • Portable Radio (5 year life) Annual maintenance $600 • Personal Computer with 17” monitor $1,100 (4 year life) Annual maintenance $275 $745 • Desk 30” x 60” • Chair, ergonomic, executive • Paving Machine Fuel Annual maintenance • Riding Rotary Lawn Mower Fuel Annual maintenance • Patrol Car Fuel Annual maintenance • Truck, pickup, 3/4 ton Fuel Annual maintenance $545 - $715 $170,000 $1,907 $3,905 $29,700 $1,191 $2,610 $34,000 $5,040 $3,870 $26,500 $1,638 $1,727 CAPITAL BUDGET INCREMENTAL IMPACT ON THE FY 2010-11 OPERATING BUDGET As shown in the diagram below and the table on the following page, the incremental impact of the FY 2010-11 Capital Budget on the Operating Budget totals $3.7 million. Operating CIP Impact Budget $3.7 M $371.4 M Due to the severe adverse impact the economy has had on the City’s Operating Budget, the City continued to engage in extensive Operating Budget balancing efforts throughout FY 2009-10. This process not only coincided with the Capital Budget development process, but had a direct influence on the extent to which additional operating budget impacts from capital projects could be considered. This translated into whether or not a particular capital project could / would be approved based on whether or not it entailed additional operating budget impacts. Capital Budget $48.3 M Just as important in determining which projects would be approved for inclusion in the FY 2010-11 CIP was the negative effect the economy had on property tax revenue collections (as discussed earlier under CIP Financing) and the projected negative impact those declining revenues will have on the City’s ability to bond finance projects. 193 The combination of the stress the economic downturn caused to the City’s Operating Budget, along with reduced property tax revenue projections, resulted in the approval of very few new CIP projects with related operating budget impacts, except under the Enterprise CIP program. As is mentioned earlier, bonds used to finance the Enterprise program, consisting solely of water and wastewater projects, are repaid with user fees collected for water and wastewater services provided by the City; not property tax revenue. Similarly, because the Water Utilities Division of the Public Works Department conducts an annual update to its long range Utilities Rate Study, projected increases to operating and debt service costs are factored into, and paid for with future utility rate increases. Accordingly, as summarized in the chart to the right, with the exception of a relatively small amount of debt service budgeted to support a modest amount of planned property tax supported bonds to pay for new projects under the General Purpose CIP program, all new FY 2010-11 CIP operating impacts are budgeted in the Water / Wastewater Fund (W / WW). Incremental Impact of Capital Budget on Operating Budget FY 2010-11 New Debt Service Enterprise $2,940,600 General Purpose 128,870 New Operations and Maintenance The table below lists the projects with identified FY 2010-11 operating impacts by major CIP Program area. The table also shows that none of the projects are expected to produce new revenues or new expenditure reductions, and do not require new positions. Water / Wastewater Fund New Pay-As-You-Go Financing 160,000 Water / Wastewater Fund Total 436,463 $3,665,933 It is worth noting that there are no Capital Budget appropriations for the Johnny G. Martinez Water Treatment Plant (JGMWTP) Water Quality Upgrades project in FY 2010-11 (please see the complete Project Listings and Descriptions section). This project received just over $9 million in appropriations in FY 2009-10, and due to ongoing project progress, this project is not projected to require additional funding until FY 2011-12. The new FY 2010-11 operating budget appropriations were requested to cover additional costs for electricity, waste disposal and ultraviolet equipment, also associated with ongoing project progress. The South Tempe Water Treatment Plant (STWTP) Improvements project received its first year ($7.3 million) of Capital Budget appropriations in FY 2009-10, and is appropriated an additional $18.7 million in FY 2010-11, and $2.5 million in appropriations are projected for FY 2011-12. The FY 2010-11 operating budget appropriation shown below is provided to address increased electricity costs. Although the JGMWTP and STWTP projects are both considered major and non-routine, the budgeted operating impacts are anticipated to become permanent. Additional projected operating budget impacts associated with these projects are discussed below in the Future Operating Impacts section along with all other capital projects that are anticipated to have impacts on future operating budgets. FY 2010-11 Operating and Maintenance, and Pay-As-You-Go Impacts by CIP Project Program and Project Name Fund Total Cost Enterprise JGMWTP Water Quality Upgrades* W / WW $110,000 STWTP Improvements* Cost Category New Revenue Expenditure Reductions Net Fiscal Effect FTE Supplies and Services - - $110,000 - W / WW 50,000 Supplies and Services - - 50,000 - W / WW 436,463 Supplies and Services - - 436,463 - $0 $0 $596,463 0 General Purpose Municipal Arts program Total Operating Impacts $596,463 *Indicates project designated as significant non-routine. Finally as shown above, it should be noted that while the Municipal Arts Program is a project included under the General Purpose CIP Program, it is funded with Pay-As-You-Go financing from the Water / Wastewater Fund. Per City Council direction, the Water / Wastewater Fund contributes annual funding equal to 1% of the combined total dollar amount of all water and wastewater projects in each new fiscal year’s Capital Budget. As such, the annual contribution is not a recurring, cumulative operating budget impact, but rather is determined by the amount of the annual Enterprise Program Capital Budget. The anticipated future annual Water / Wastewater Fund contributions to the Municipal Arts Program are also shown in the next section. 194 FUTURE OPERATING BUDGET IMPACTS In addition to current year operating budget impacts, future operating costs, savings, and new revenue associated with current and planned projects are identified in the Capital Budget process to aid in long-range planning. Since the City Council only formally adopts Operating and Capital Budgets on an annual basis, the ‘out-year’ impacts represent a forecast based on the current scope of the project and inflation assumptions. As such, they will be subject to revision in future years based on changes in inflation, the scope of the project and Council and community priorities. As shown in the table below, a total of five CIP projects are projected to produce $3 million in operating budget impacts between FY 2011-12 and FY 2014-15. With the exception of the Water / Wastewater Fund annual contribution to the Municipal Arts Program, the operating budget amounts associated with each project represent new incremental recurring / permanent operating costs in addition to the current appropriated budget. Notably, the operating impacts are all projected to occur in the Water / Wastewater Fund, and as mentioned earlier, will be built into and paid for by the City’s water and wastewater user rates. Capital Improvements Plan Net Operating Impact Forecast: FY 2011-12 to FY 2014-15 Program and Project Name Fund Cost Category 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total (285,000) - - (285,000) - 885,000 Enterprise Environmental Laboratory Facility* W / WW Supplies and Services - JGMWTP Water Quality Upgrades* W / WW Supplies and Services - STWTP Security Lighting W / WW Supplies and Services - STWTP Water Quality Improvement* W / WW Supplies and Services - 885,000 10,000 - - 10,000 875,000 250,000 - - 1,125,000 234,890 364,140 General Purpose Municipal Arts program W / WW Supplies and Services Total Operating Impacts 194,680 241,048 1,034,758 $1,109,890 $339,140 $1,079,680 $241,048 $2,769,758 *Indicates project designated as significant non-routine. Among the five projects, three are considered to be significant non-routine projects and are projected to produce 62% or $1.7 million of the total estimated future operating budget impacts. Please see page 197 for a list of all significant non-routine projects and associated funding sources, and the complete CIP Project Listings and Descriptions section for additional project detail. The water quality enhancement projects at the JGMWTP and STWTP are the primary drivers of the future operating budget impacts shown above. The projected operating budget increases will provide for anticipated future requirements for additional chemicals, increasing electricity costs, and additional waste disposal costs all to support the plants’ expanded water treatment operations. As reflected in the table above, the operating budget impacts associated with the construction of the new Environmental Laboratory Facility are estimated to generate a net savings to the Water / Wastewater Fund. Although the current laboratory operating budget will transfer to the new lab once it is complete, water utilities staff estimate annual replacement costs for lab supplies will increase by $15,000 over and above annual costs at the current facility. On the other hand, water utilities staff predict new technology and equipment at the new facility will allow the department to save approximately $300,000 annually because more water testing will be performed “in house” rather than by outside laboratories. As a result, the combined operating impacts associated with the project are expected to decrease the annual operating budget by $285,000. It is worth noting that in FY 2008-09 an additional chemist position was added in anticipation of the new lab. Annual personnel costs associated with that position have been included in the operating budget since then. Lastly, the anticipated operating budget increase for the STWTP Security Lighting project will provide annual funding for additional equipment repair and replacement costs associated with additional lighting structures. 195 CAPITAL BUDGET EXPENDITURES IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES Inherent within the CIP is the fundamental intention to maintain and improve the City’s infrastructure and assets in order to create a positive and livable community environment, and to enhance the City’s organizational ability to deliver services to residents. Ongoing and routine projects such as waterline and street repair, park renovation, and facilities maintenance are basic examples of capital projects that perpetuate the livability of the City. Service impacts associated with significant non-routine capital projects included in the 5 year CIP, which are listed on the following page, are discussed below under their respective major program area. Enterprise Program • The Environmental Laboratory project and Johnny G. Martinez and South Tempe Water Treatment Plant projects will ensure the City’s water quality is treated and tested in compliance with current and future environmental regulation under the U.S. Safe Drinking Water Act. According to the City’s 2009 Community Attitude Survey, the City’s ability to supply reliable, high quality domestic water to its residents resulted in a 85% resident satisfaction rating which is 17% above the national average of 68%. • The Water Quality Enhancements to the Water Transmission Grid is a fourth project under the Enterprise Program which will help to ensure the delivery of safe high quality water to residents. This project will reduce horizontal water main storage that is prone to development of disinfection byproducts. As a result, the length of time between water disinfection and customer use will be shortened, which significantly improves disinfection byproduct levels. Special Purpose Program • I-10 and Alameda Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing - This project will construct a non-motorized, eastwest bicycle and pedestrian bridge over the I-10 Freeway which will essentially connect the Cities of Tempe and Phoenix. The bridge will provide a much-needed link between residential developments and employment destinations by shortening the commute for bicyclists heading to the employment areas, as well as downtown Tempe and Arizona State University. • Town Lake Rubber Dam Replacement - Tempe Town Lake is a major element of the City’s identity, and residents enjoy the many activities and events that take place around the lake throughout the year. Replacement of the lake’s dam(s) represents a major investment in the sustainability of this important attraction and ensures the lake will remain a pleasant and safe leisure opportunity destination for residents into the future. General Purpose Program • Tempe Public Library Renovation - The FY 2010-11 Capital Budget includes the last of three years of funding for this project totaling $8 million. This project will substantially upgrade the library’s computer system which will increase computer availability, speed up resident access to information, and reduce complaints. The renovation also involves the purchase of a new wireless telephone system which will free librarians from service desks and allow them to interact with both telephone and in-house customers in a more efficient manner. The project also included a new children’s library. 196 Significant Non-Routine Capital Project Expenditures by Major Program 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program Project Name Funding Source 2014-15 Environmental Laboratory Facility General Obligation Bonds 5,059,780 540,000 - - - 5,599,780 JGMWTP Water Quality Upgrades General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total - 300,000 300,000 6,080,000 6,080,000 - - 300,000 6,080,000 6,380,000 STWTP Improvements General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund Balance Development Fees Project Total 15,220,000 3,000,000 500,000 18,720,000 1,980,000 500,000 2,480,000 - - - 17,200,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 21,200,000 Excise Tax Bonds - - - 2,107,000 - 2,107,000 Water Quality Enhancements of the Water Transmission Grid General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total - 2,725,000 2,725,000 1,725,000 1,725,000 - - 2,725,000 1,725,000 4,450,000 Southern Avenue Interceptor (SAI) Rehabilitation General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds City of Mesa Project Total - 292,000 292,000 584,000 5,550,000 5,550,000 11,100,000 - - 292,000 5,550,000 5,842,000 11,684,000 23,779,780 6,629,000 18,905,000 2,107,000 - 51,420,780 Enterprise Program Undergrounding of the Water Aqueduct at the JGMWTP Total Enterprise Program Special Purpose Program I-10 and Alameda Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing Town Lake Rubber Dam Replacement Federal Grants Transit Tax Project Total - - - 1,200,000 68,000 1,268,000 - 1,200,000 68,000 1,268,000 Mondrian Agreement - 2,000,000 2,480,000 4,480,000 960,000 960,000 7,040,000 20,000,000 27,040,000 7,520,000 7,520,000 10,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000 - 4,480,000 960,000 28,308,000 7,520,000 41,268,000 Federal Grants Project Total Total Special Purpose Program General Purpose Program Tempe Public Library Renovation Total General Purpose Program Total All Programs General Obligation Bonds 115,000 - - - - 115,000 115,000 - - - - 115,000 23,894,780 11,109,000 19,865,000 30,415,000 7,520,000 92,803,780 The nine significant non-routine projects above account for 45% of the City’s total $205 million five year Capital Improvements Program. Because major non-routine projects often translate into an increase in services required to support new or expanded facilities, or new or expanded City programs, they often translate into increased operations and maintenance costs which impact the City’s Operating Budget. As discussed earlier, the operations and maintenance budget in the City’s Water / Wastewater Fund is estimated to permanently increase by an estimated $1.9 million over the next five years as a result of the first three projects listed above in the Enterprise Program. 197 Capital Improvements Project Map 4 5 6 3 7 8 2 1 Location Project Description 1. South Tempe Water Treatment Plant Improvements 2. Environmental Laboratory Facility 3. Water Line Upgrade / Replacement on Rural Rd. (University - Apache) 4. Rio Salado Multi-use Path: Tempe – Phoenix (Priest Drive to SR 143) 5. Town Lake Downstream Dam Repairs - ADWR 6. Police / City Radio System Replacement 7. Fire Radio Replacement for Conversion to 800 MHZ 8. Tempe Public Library Renovation 198 Capital Improvements Program Summary Program 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program 2014-15 Enterprise Program Water 31,046,338 8,255,001 11,114,001 7,218,000 6,687,000 64,320,340 Wastewater 12,600,000 15,234,000 25,300,000 12,250,000 17,417,800 82,801,800 43,646,338 23,489,001 36,414,001 19,468,000 24,104,800 147,122,140 Total Enterprise Special Purpose Program Transit 446,000 530,000 1,220,000 2,462,000 - 4,658,000 Rio Salado 327,000 4,480,000 960,000 27,040,000 7,520,000 40,327,000 773,000 5,010,000 2,180,000 29,502,000 7,520,000 44,985,000 Police 890,954 1,053,267 879,604 861,316 900,000 4,585,141 Total Special Purpose General Purpose Program Fire 600,000 - - - - 600,000 Park Improvements 150,000 - - - - 150,000 Community Relations 250,000 - - - - 250,000 Community Services 551,463 234,890 364,140 194,680 241,048 1,586,221 - - - 200,000 1,323,000 1,523,000 1,028,000 535,828 - - - 1,563,828 Community Development Public Works Water Utilities Total General Purpose 100,000 - - - - 100,000 3,570,417 1,823,985 1,243,744 1,255,996 2,464,048 10,358,190 Transportation Program Transportation and R.O.W. Traffic Signals / Street Lighting Total Transportation Total General / Transportation TOTAL PROGRAM 275,000 - - 1,582,400 - 1,857,400 - 425,000 350,000 - - 775,000 275,000 425,000 350,000 1,582,400 - 2,632,400 3,845,417 2,248,985 1,593,744 2,838,396 2,464,048 12,990,590 48,264,755 30,747,986 40,187,745 51,808,396 34,088,848 205,097,730 199 Capital Improvements Program Source of Funds Program 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program 2014-15 Enterprise Supported Water/Wastewater General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds 36,646,338 22,197,001 2,400,000 - - 61,243,339 - - 27,464,001 18,468,000 23,104,800 69,036,801 Capital Projects Fund Balance 6,000,000 - - - - 6,000,000 Development Fees 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 5,000,000 43,646,338 292,000 23,489,001 5,550,000 36,414,001 19,468,000 24,104,800 5,842,000 147,122,140 City of Mesa Total Enterprise Supported Special Purpose Transit Capital Project Fund Balance 46,000 - - - - 46,000 400,000 287,000 1,100,000 2,394,000 - 4,181,000 - 243,000 120,000 68,000 - 431,000 446,000 530,000 1,220,000 2,462,000 - 4,658,000 327,000 - - - - 327,000 Mondrian Agreement - 2,000,000 960,000 7,040,000 - 10,000,000 Federal Grants - 2,480,000 - 20,000,000 7,520,000 30,000,000 Total Rio Salado 327,000 4,480,000 960,000 27,040,000 7,520,000 40,327,000 Total Special Purpose 773,000 5,010,000 2,180,000 29,502,000 7,520,000 44,985,000 1,605,954 1,173,267 916,604 90,197 - 3,786,022 2,031,316 Federal Grants Transit Tax Revenues Total Transit Rio Salado Capital Improvements Reserve General Purpose & Transportation General Obligation Bonds Unauthorized G.O. Bonds Capital Projects Fund Balance Capital Improvements Reserve WWW Fund Federal Grants Total General / Transportation TOTAL PROGRAM - - 70,000 1,061,316 900,000 425,000 - - - - 425,000 1,038,500 196,328 - - - 1,234,828 436,463 234,890 364,140 194,680 241,048 1,471,221 339,500 3,845,417 644,500 2,248,985 243,000 1,593,744 1,492,203 2,838,396 1,323,000 2,464,048 4,042,203 12,990,590 48,264,755 30,747,986 40,187,745 51,808,396 34,088,848 205,097,730 200 Capital Budget Strategic Focus The City establishes strategic issues, goals, and objectives to provide long range focus for resource allocation choices. The strategic issues, goals, and objectives are aligned to Council and community committees as follows: • Community Sustainability • Education Partnerships • Housing • Mill & Lake District • Neighborhood Parks Rehabilitation & Maintenance • Quality of Life • Sports, Recreation, Arts & Cultural Development • Technology, Economic & Community Development • Transportation The objective of each strategic committee is to delineate long-range goals, formulate a cohesive strategy for each of the defined areas, and develop action plans to advance the City towards those strategic goals. Detailed descriptions of each committee and their respective strategic focus are presented on page 44. The FY 2010-11 Capital Program organized by strategic issue is shown in the chart. Community Sustainability 90% Quality of Life 4% Technology, Economic & Community Development 3% Sports, Recreation, Arts & Cultural Development 1% Transportation 2% Because of the limiting effect the economy has had on the City’s capital finance options other than in the Enterprise Program, the FY 2010-11 Capital Budget is almost entirely centered on water and wastewater projects. Water and wastewater projects fall under the strategic area of Community Sustainability, and as such they dominate all CIP projects by strategic concentration. This is representative of the City’s continuing reinvestment in water and sewer infrastructure to support new and existing development. The Quality of Life strategic area is mainly represented by projects under the General Governmental Program that address the maintenance and appearance of City facilities and neighborhoods. Continued capital investment in the Police and Fire Departments’ radio systems contribute to the Technology, Economic & Community Development strategic area; and continued pay-as-you-go funding for the Municipal Arts program supports the City’s focus on Sports, Recreation, Arts & Cultural Development. 201 Capital Improvements Changes in Fund Balances Program Enterprise Water/Wastewater Subtotal Enterprise Special Purpose Transit Rio Salado Subtotal Special Purpose General Purpose Police Protection Fire Protection Park Improvements General Governmental Subtotal General Purpose Transportation Transp. & R.O.W. Improvements Traffic Signals/Street Lighting Subtotal Transportation Total Program Estimated Fund Bal. 06-30-10 9,650,700 9,650,700 140,500 (40,300) 100,200 36,490 156,000 (472,450) (279,960) 421,300 Transfers from Other Funds Outside Revenue Bond Proceeds Appropriation Estimated Fund Bal. 06-30-11 - 1,000,000 1,000,000 36,646,338 36,646,338 43,646,338 43,646,338 3,650,700 3,650,700 327,000 327,000 400,000 400,000 - 446,000 327,000 773,000 94,500 (40,300) 54,200 1,474,963 1,474,963 339,500 339,500 890,954 600,000 115,000 1,605,954 890,954 600,000 150,000 1,929,463 3,570,417 36,490 6,000 (472,450) (429,960) - - - 275,000 146,300 18,500 - - - - 18,500 439,800 $9,910,740 $1,801,963 $1,739,500 $38,252,292 275,000 $48,264,755 164,800 $3,439,740 202 Capital Budget and Debt Policy Statements Capital Budget Policy Statement Capital improvement operating budget impacts will be coordinated with the development of the Operating Budget. Future operating, maintenance, and replacement costs will be forecast as part of the City's annual long-range financial capacity study. Estimated costs, potential revenue and funding sources shall be identified prior to any project being submitted for Council approval. A department which anticipates a capital project exceeding its adopted budget shall submit a plan to Council addressing the issue for its prior approval. The City may provide for internal, pay-asyou-go financing for its capital improvement program. Funding may come from fund balance reserves or any other acceptable means of funding. A five-year capital improvements program, as required by City Charter, will be developed and updated annually including anticipated funding sources. In addition, a prior year capital project status report shall be presented to the Council for information purposes when the capital improvements budget is considered. The annual operating budget will provide for the adequate maintenance and the orderly replacement of the capital plant and equipment from current revenue where possible. Debt Policy Statement Authorized debt shall be limited as follows unless authorization is obtained from the City Council to exceed these limits Debt will only be used to finance long-term capital improvements and not be used to finance recurring operating expenses. General obligation bonds shall follow the guidelines established in the Debt Management Plan In accordance with state law, the total value of General Obligation bonds issued for the purposes of water, wastewater, artificial light, open space preserves, parks, playgrounds, and recreational facilities, public safety, law enforcement, fire and emergency services facilities, and streets and transportation facilities cannot exceed 20% of assessed valuation. The City may also issue general obligation bonds for any purpose up to an amount not exceeding 6% of the secondary assessed value. Excise tax bonds shall maintain revenue coverage limits of at least 3 times debt service Improvement District bonds shall not exceed 5% of the City’s secondary assessed valuation Short-term borrowing or lease/ purchase contracts must be budgeted within the Operating Budget Debt term should match the useful life of the capital project funded. Benchmark ratios of per capita debt, debt service to operating revenue, and outstanding debt as a percent of full cash value will be updated regularly and incorporated into the Debt Management Plan. Debt service schedules will be based upon level annual principal and interest payments. Overlapping debt issue shall be included in the City’s financial reports 203 Legal Bonded Debt Limits Under Article 9, Section 8 of the Arizona State Constitution, cities may issue general obligation bonds for purposes of water, wastewater, artificial light, open space preserves, parks, playgrounds and recreational facilities, public safety, law enforcement, fire and emergency services facilities and streets and transportation facilities up to an amount not exceeding 20% of the secondary assessed value. Cities may also issue general obligation bonds for any purpose up to an amount not exceeding 6% of the secondary assessed value. Bonds issued under the 20% limit are subject to authorization by a majority vote at a city bond election. FY 2010-11 Bonded Debt Limits July 1, 2010 FY 2010-11 6% Bond Limit (1) $ Outstanding Bonded Debt-Previously Issued 20% 150,779,728 $ (8,215,000) 502,599,094 (469,627,545) Proposed Bonds to be Sold in FY 2010-11 Water/Wastewater 36,646,338 - Park Improvements - - Public Safety / Law Enforcement - 890,954 Fire and Emergency Services - 600,000 Transportation - - 115,000 - Community Services Debt Margin Available $ (1) 105,803,390 $ 31,480,595 The FY 2010-11 Bond Limit is based upon an estimated secondary assessed value of $2,512,995,468 compared to the FY 2009-10 secondary assessed value of $2,767,488,865. 204 Long-Term Debt Summary Original Authorization Prior Issues 2010-11 Issue Remaining Authorization 2006 Program Water / Wastewater Police Protection Fire Protection Community Services / Park Improvements / Library Streets / Transportation 172,000,000 172,000,000 - - 14,000,000 14,000,000 - - 2,500,000 1,620,000 600,000 280,000 14,000,000 14,000,000 - - 8,000,000 7,765,000 - 235,000 210,500,000 209,385,000 600,000 515,000 113,300,000 52,025,302 36,646,338 24,628,360 Police Protection 10,900,000 5,855,000 890,954 4,154,046 Fire Protection 21,110,000 - - 21,110,000 Community Services / Park Improvements / Library 51,800,000 14,910,000 115,000 36,775,000 Subtotal 2008 Program Water / Wastewater Streets / Transportation / Storm Drains Subtotal TOTAL 44,200,000 75,000 - 44,125,000 241,310,000 72,865,302 37,652,292 130,792,406 $451,810,000 $282,250,302 $38,252,292 $131,307,406 2007 2008 2009 $243,265,000 $282,520,000 $285,735,000 $305,177,545 Long-Term Outstanding Debt Summary June 30 2010 General Obligation Bonds Water / Wastewater Police Protection 29,255,000 32,085,000 43,675,000 49,120,000 Fire Protection 8,855,000 8,695,000 11,010,000 10,785,000 Storm Drains 3,970,000 3,775,000 3,600,000 3,495,000 25,665,000 27,575,000 32,960,000 36,688,500 1,455,000 1,395,000 4,940,000 11,721,500 Park Improvements Library/Museum Streets/Transportation Total G.O. Debt Outstanding 47,300,000 51,550,000 60,080,000 60,855,000 359,765,000 407,595,000 442,000,000 477,842,545 1,220,000 625,000 - - 1,220,000 625,000 - - - - 16,720,000 16,175,000 Tempe Sports Authority Corp. Bonds / COP Certificates of Participation (COP) Total Tempe Sports Authority Corp. Bonds/COP Excise Tax Bonds Water / Wastewater 50,895,000 47,340,000 43,640,000 39,780,000 109,785,000 138,065,000 135,480,000 132,745,000 Rio Salado 33,810,000 32,320,000 30,760,000 29,130,000 General Governmental 23,990,000 23,400,000 29,680,000 28,815,000 2,130,000 2,050,000 1,965,000 1,875,000 $581,595,000 $651,395,000 $700,245,000 $726,362,545 Performing Arts Transit Cemetery Enterprise Total Long-Term Outstanding Debt 205 Capital Budget, Debt Service and Property Tax Rate: Ten Year Historical Trends Fiscal Year Budgeted Capital Improvements Program Outstanding Principal FY End Debt Service Requirements P&I 85,541,430 205,950,000 26,675,235 2001-02 Net Secondary Assessed Value % Change Property in Secondary Tax Rate ($) Assessed Valuation Primary Secondary Total 1,456,361,617 7.4 .53 .82 1.35 2002-03 95,318,794 252,480,000 23,996,164 1,556,492,294 6.9 .52 .83 1.35 2003-04 117,968,707 280,525,000 27,243,978 1,688,452,415 8.5 .55 .80 1.35 2004-05 177,118,222 362,225,000 27,696,707 1,768,877,385 4.8 .53 .82 1.35 2005-06 189,971,703 452,490,000 35,620,916 1,904,426,188 7.7 .52 .88 1.40 2006-07 196,728,491 581,595,000 44,105,855 2,006,703,332 5.4 .52 .88 1.40 2007-08 212,706,469 651,395,000 52,988,091 2,401,898,465 19.7 .51 .89 1.40 2008-09 168,033,325 700,245,000 59,795,499 2,656,948,194 10.6 .51 .89 1.40 2009-10 96,310,568 726,362,545 68,975,861 2,767,488,865 4.2 .49 .91 1.40 2010-11 48,264,755 730,950,082 69,753,500 2,512,995,468 (9.2) .52 .88 1.40 The budgeted CIP reached a historical peak in FY 2007-08 primarily due to increased spending in the Transit Program to fund the City's portion of design and construction of the metropolitan area Light Rail transit system. The FY 2008-09 CIP included the City's final contribution to Light Rail funding as the project was completed in December 2008. While the reduction in the FY 2009-10 CIP is largely due to the decreased spending in the Transit Program, bond appropriations between FYs 2008-09 and 2009-10 also decreased as a result of project progress in the Enterprise program which reduced funding requirements. Severe local property value declines caused by the economic downturn are the principal reason the FY 2010-11 CIP is 50% less than the 2009-10 CIP. The City estimates property values will have declined 35% as of FY 2010-11. Because of an approximate two year lag between when property is valued, and when property tax is collected based on that value, the -9.2% decline in secondary assessed property valuation in FY / Tax Year 2010-11 (shown in the table above) represents the first of three fiscal years in which the City is projecting the property value declines which will negatively impact property tax revenue collections. Collections in FY 2010-11 are anticipated to be approximately $3 million less than the prior year; falling from $25.2 million to $22.2 million. Since revenue collected through the secondary component of the property tax is the source of funding to pay debt service on General Obligation bonds, the City's capacity to issue new property tax supported bonds to finance capital projects is projected to be extremely compromised for several years. On the other hand, the City retains the ability to issue bonds for water and wastewater projects (Enterprise program bonds) because the funding source used to pay these bonds is revenue collected from user fees for water and wastewater services; not property tax revenue. Outstanding Principal includes all forms of City debt, including general obligation, excise, and enterprise supported debt. Assuming minimal property tax supported bond sales in the next few years, and depending on the amount of new bonds issued to finance Enterprise program projects; annual outstanding principal may begin to decline for the first time in twelve years due to the scheduled repayment of existing obligations. Debt Service Appropriations by Fund FY 2010-11 Principal Debt Service Fund Transit Fund Water/Wastewater Fund Performing Arts Fund Cemetery Fund Total Interest Fiscal Agent Fees Total $12,462,500 $9,300,000 $300,000 $22,062,500 2,900,000 5,800,000 850,000 9,550,000 17,600,000 14,000,000 300,000 31,900,000 4,050,000 2,000,000 10,000 6,060,000 91,000 89,000 1,000 181,000 $37,103,500 $31,189,000 $1,461,000 $69,753,500 206 Capital Improvements Program Project Listings and Descriptions Enterprise Program Water and Wastewater projects total $43.6 million in FY 2010-11 and account for 90% of the 2010-11 appropriated CIP budget The Enterprise component of the Capital Improvements Program consists of the Water and Wastewater programs. Combined, they constitute $43.6 million of the $48.3 million Capital Improvements Program for FY 2010-11. The City's Capital Budget for this area is driven largely by federal and state compliance requirements and associated plant capacity expansions. A total of $36.6 million of Water / Wastewater Bonds will be sold to fund these projects in FY 2010-11. These bonds are repaid by user charges for service delivery in both programs. The remaining program funding will come from development fees and fund balances. Major Water Program projects in FY 2010-11 include continued upgrades at the South Tempe Water Treatment Plant (STWTP), the design and construction of a new Environmental Laboratory Facility, and numerous waterline improvements. Funding for continued expansion at the 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant dominates the FY 2010-11 Wastewater Program. 207 2010-11 CIP Projects - Water Program Project Name & Number Distribution System Fittings: 3299999 Funding Source 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total 400,000 400,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 630,000 690,000 1,320,000 Environmental Laboratory Facility: 3203499 General Obligation Bonds 5,059,780 540,000 - - - 5,599,780 HVAC Replacement at all Three Water Wastewater Plants: 3209369 General Obligation Bonds 28,000 51,000 - - - 79,000 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 500,000 750,000 1,250,000 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total - 300,000 300,000 6,080,000 6,080,000 - - 300,000 6,080,000 6,380,000 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total 376,998 376,998 377,001 377,001 377,001 377,001 279,000 279,000 1,855,000 1,855,000 753,999 2,511,001 3,265,000 General Obligation Bonds 875,000 - - - - 875,000 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 - - 200,000 100,000 300,000 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 500,000 750,000 1,250,000 15,220,000 3,000,000 500,000 18,720,000 1,980,000 500,000 2,480,000 - - - 17,200,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 21,200,000 2,378,900 - - - - 2,378,900 - - - 2,107,000 - 2,107,000 General Obligation Bonds Development Fees Excise Tax Bonds Project Total 850,000 850,000 850,000 850,000 500,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 500,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 500,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 1,700,000 1,500,000 8,500,000 11,700,000 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total - 2,725,000 2,725,000 1,725,000 1,725,000 - - 2,725,000 1,725,000 4,450,000 General Obligation Bonds 1,655,660 - - - - 1,655,660 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 204,000 306,000 510,000 31,046,338 208 8,255,001 11,114,001 7,218,000 6,687,000 64,320,340 JGMWTP Capital Equipment Replacement: 3200089 JGMWTP Water Quality Upgrades: 3201099 New Production Wells: 3200019 SCADA Field Site Improvements Phase II: 3202031 Small Meter Replacement Program 2" and under: 3209319 STWTP Capital Equipment Replacement: 3200079 STWTP Improvements: 3203219 General Obligation Bonds Capital Projects Fund Balance Development Fees Project Total STWTP Security Lighting: 3204149 General Obligation Bonds Undergrounding of the Water Aqueduct at the JGMWTP: NA Excise Tax Bonds Water Line Replacement and Repair: 329989 Water Quality Enhancements of the Water Transmission Grid: 3203529 Waterline Upgrade / Replacement Rural Rd. (University - Apache): 3203539 Well Rehabilitation: 3203549 Program Total Distribution System Fittings Project Description Estimated Project Costs This Project provides for the acquisition, assembly and installation of water works infrastructure including meters, valves, fire hydrants and water lines. This project assures that all water distribution appurtenances are maintained and replaced in accordance with all State, Federal and Industry Standards. This will make certain our residents’ health and well being is protected and that we are realizing all possible revenue from our meters. 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $400,000 $0 Other Project Costs $1,320,000 Total $1,320,000 Project Number: 3299999 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $400,000 $230,000 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $230,000 $230,000 $230,000 $1,320,000 Environmental Laboratory Facility Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project involves the design and construction of a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified environmental laboratory facility necessary to continue to analyze the quality of drinking water and reclaimed water supplies as required under federal and state environmental laws, and to ensure the safest possible water supply. Rapidly emerging regulations governing drinking water and reclaimed water supplies have created a nearly 5-fold increase in the last eight years in the number of analyses that Tempe must conduct to ensure compliance with Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act requirements. Technological changes necessary to detect pollutants at much lower concentrations have also increased our laboratory footprint. Legal / Administration $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking Once the lab is fully operational, the department anticipates a recurring operating budget decrease of approximately $300,000 as a result of more water testing performed in house rather than by outside laboratories. The annual operating budget for lab supplies is anticipated to increase by $15,000, for a net operating decrease of $285,000. 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $46,420 Land Acquisition $0 Construction Management $324,940 Furnishings / Equipment $540,000 Construction / Improvement $4,642,000 Geotech / Material Testing $5,059,780 $46,420 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $5,599,780 Project Number: 3203499 Estimated Start Date: 07/01/09 Estimated Completion Date: 06/30/12 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $5,059,780 $540,000 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $5,599,780 209 HVAC Replacement at all three of the Water/Wastewater Facilities Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project replaces City owned air conditioning equipment and carpet located within the three water and wastewater plants that has been identified as being ineffective, inefficient or has exceeded its life span according to the Public Works Facility Maintenance division. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Replacement schedule is as follows: 2009-10: replace 14 air conditioning units and heat pumps at Johnny G. Martinez Water Treatment Plant (JGMWTP), South Tempe Water Treatment Plant (STWTP) and Kyrene Water Reclamation Facility (KWRF). 2010-11: replace 1 heat pump and other equipment at JGMWTP, STWTP & KWRF. 2011-12: replace 8 heat pumps and air conditioning units at JGMWTP, STWTP & KWRF. Design and Engineering $0 $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $79,000 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds Survey / Staking $28,000 $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $79,000 Project Number: 3209369 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/08 Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $28,000 $51,000 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $79,000 $0 JGMWTP Capital Equipment Replacement Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project provides an annual funding mechanism to address equipment failures at the Johnny G. Martinez Water Treatment Plant (JGMWTP) that have not been specifically budgeted. Every year there are unexpected failures of pumps, valves, and other operating equipment due to fatigue, wear, structural failure and many other reasons. Comprehensive preventative maintenance programs and procedures are in place to help minimize equipment failures. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $1,250,000 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $250,000 $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $1,250,000 Project Number: 3200089 Estimated Start Date: Ongoing Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $250,000 $250,000 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,250,000 210 JGMWTP Water Quality Upgrades Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project addresses additional improvements required to meet water quality regulations at the Johnny G. Martinez Water Treatment Plant (JGMWTP). This project includes improvements to solids handling facilities (plate settlers and sludge holding tank), chemical feed systems and sedimentation basin improvements. Treatment alternatives to GAC (Granular Activated Carbon) for control of disinfection byproducts will be studied and implemented. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 To address projected electricity and waste disposal cost increases resulting from additional plant improvements, a recurring $110,000 increase to the plant's Operating Budget was also approved for FY 2010-11. Additional future operating budget impacts are also anticipated to accommodate increased chemical use costs. Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Design and Engineering $300,000 Construction / Improvement $6,030,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $50,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $6,380,000 3201099 Project Number: Estimated Start Date: In Progress Estimated Completion Date: 06/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $300,000 2012-13 $6,080,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $6,380,000 New Production Wells Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project will connect three Salt River Project wells located along the Western Canal and drill and outfit one new City of Tempe well. The SRP wells will be connected during FY's 09-10, 10-11 and 11-12. The new Tempe well will be permitted during FY 12-13 and constructed during FYs 13-14 and 14-15. Legal / Administration These additional wells provide groundwater as a backup supply during drought or plant shut down and for blending to improve water quality for the City of Tempe municipal service area. Design and Engineering $26,000 Land Acquisition $0 $75,000 Permit Fees $480,000 Survey / Staking $26,000 Construction Management $150,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $2,500,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $376,998 $8,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $3,265,000 Project Number: 3200019 Estimated Start Date: Ongoing Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $376,998 $377,001 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $377,001 $279,000 $1,855,000 $3,265,000 211 SCADA Field Site Improvements Phase II Project Description Estimated Project Costs The Water Utilities Department continuously monitors the entire water and wastewater system for storage, flow, pressure, and quality using a network of remote telemetry units at remote facilities throughout the city as well as at the treatment plants. Replacement and upgrades to monitoring and control equipment in the treatment plants have been completed in other projects. To ensure the reliability of the equipment at the field sites (wells, pump stations, metering stations, etc.) and to keep pace with changes in technology, the control systems located at these sites must be replaced. Existing Remote Terminal Units (RTU) and radios at remote Water and Wastewater sites have been in service for over 15 years. Replacement parts are no longer available and technological advancements have rendered our equipment obsolete. As these units fail, we can no longer monitor facilities that include wells, reservoir sites, sanitary sewer metering stations and wastewater pump stations. Phase I of this project covered 8 of the 19 sites that require new equipment. Phase II will replace the RTU's and radio network at the remaining 11 sites. Legal / Administration $0 Permit Fees $15,000 Design and Engineering $50,000 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $10,000 Land Acquisition $875,000 $800,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $875,000 Project Number: 3202031 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/08 12/31/10 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $875,000 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $875,000 Small Meter Replacement Program - 2" and under Project Description Estimated Project Costs This Project provides for the replacement of revenue generating water meters that are 15 years or older. This will help Increase water conservation through accurate metering. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 By replacing these meters the City will realize increased revenue and accurate water accounting from meters that have reached the end of their useful life Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Replace approximately 11,000 small meters that are 15 years or older: Year 1: 5,500 meters Year 2: 5,500 meters Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Ongoing replacement program: Year 3: 850 meters Year 4: 850 meters Year 5: 850 meters 2010-11 Source of Funds Construction / Improvement General Obligation Bonds $100,000 $300,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $300,000 Project Number: 3209319 Estimated Start Date: 07/01/08 Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/13 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $100,000 $100,000 2012-13 $100,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $300,000 212 South Tempe Water Treatment Plant Capital Equipment Replacement Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project provides an annual funding mechanism to address equipment failures at the South Tempe Water Treatment Plant (STWTP) that have not been specifically budgeted. Every year there are unexpected failures of pumps, valves, and other operating equipment due to fatigue, wear, structural failure and many other reasons. Comprehensive preventative maintenance programs and procedures are in place to help minimize equipment failures. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $1,250,000 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $250,000 $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $1,250,000 Project Number: 3200079 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $250,000 $250,000 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,250,000 South Tempe Water Treatment Plant Improvements Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project includes improvements required to replace aging equipment, and to meet current and future water quality regulations. This project includes a comprehensive study of treatment alternatives. Improvements include enhanced coagulation, new powdered activated carbon system, improved coagulant dosing, reservoir chlorine dosing system, additional sludge drying beds, well water discharge structures, reservoir drains and replacement of the finished water pump station. Legal / Administration $400,000 Land Acquisition $0 $200,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $1,100,000 Survey / Staking To address projected electricity cost increases resulting from additional plant improvements, a recurring $50,000 increase to the facility's Operating Budget was also approved for FY 2010-11. Additional future operating budget impacts are also anticipated to accommodate increased chemical use and waste disposal costs. $600,000 Construction Management $1,200,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $17,500,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $15,220,000 Capital Projects Fund Balance $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $3,000,000 Development Fees $200,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Total $500,000 $21,200,000 Project Number: 3203219 Estimated Start Date: Ongoing Estimated Completion Date: 12/31/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $18,720,000 2011-12 $2,480,000 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $21,200,000 213 South Tempe Water Treatment Plant Security Lighting Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project is a continuation of the security improvements as recommended by the assessors who conducted the vulnerability assessment per the Department of Homeland Security. The lighting proposed for this site would be of both free standing poles and wall mounted fixtures that would provide sufficient illumination for deterrence and detection of unauthorized persons. The primary focus of lighting would be along the southern, western and northern perimeters of the site where there is minimal to nonexistent lighting. The southern portion of the property becomes more critical for security lighting with the newly established multi use path along the canal bank immediately adjacent to our property. The wall mounted fixtures would replace and supplement existing lighting on critical structures inside the perimeter. The project would also be replacing metal halide lighting with high pressure sodium. The high pressure sodium is a less intrusive lighting system for the environment. Legal / Administration $0 Permit Fees $39,900 Design and Engineering $50,000 Survey / Staking $21,000 Construction Management $126,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $2,100,000 Geotech / Material Testing Once the project is complete, a recurring $10,000 operating budget increase is anticipated for additional equipment repair and replacement costs. 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $21,000 Land Acquisition $2,378,900 $21,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $2,378,900 Project Number: 3204149 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/10 06/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $2,378,900 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $2,378,900 Undergrounding of Water Aqueduct at the JGMWTP Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project will replace the water aqueduct or flume that supplies raw water to the Johnny G. Martinez Water Treatment Facility with an underground pipe. Legal / Administration $17,000 Land Acquisition The vulnerability assessment of the Water Utilities Department indicated that this piece of infrastructure needed addressing. Recently extensive repairs to the leaking joints in the flume have been performed and the expected life of these repairs is 710 years. The project need should be addressed within this parameter. $0 $33,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $206,000 Survey / Staking $17,000 Construction Management $103,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $1,714,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $17,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $2,107,000 Project Number: NA Estimated Start Date: 07/01/15 Estimated Completion Date: 03/31/17 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $2,107,000 $0 $2,107,000 214 Water Line Replacement and Repair Project Description Estimated Project Costs The Water Utilities Integrated Master Plan identifies most of the specific waterlines that need to be replaced to meet increasing demands. This project provides a recurring funding source to replace water lines that break during normal operation or that have reached their useful life. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $850,000 $11,700,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $11,700,000 Project Number: 3299989 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $850,000 $850,000 2012-13 $2,000,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $11,700,000 Water Quality Enhancements of the Water Transmission Grid Project Description Estimated Project Costs Water quality modeling will be used to evaluate transmission pipe size and flow control strategies necessary for optimizing water quality in the transmission network. Modifications to system main sizes and interconnections are to be made in various locations throughout the distribution system. In some locations new distribution main, valves and fire hydrants are to be constructed. Legal / Administration $50,000 Land Acquisition More stringent water quality parameters relating to disinfection byproducts (DBPs) will become a reality in 2012. One method of DBP control is limiting the time from water disinfection to customer. Many of the City's existing water transmission mains were installed per a water master plan circa 1960. The system demand based on projected planning at that time has not occurred. As a result, in a number of locations transmission lines are significantly larger than required to meet projected flows according to current planning. Eliminating unnecessary volume in the transmission system and / or modifying flow patterns can be a useful means to control the formation of DBPs in the system. $0 Permit Fees $100,000 Design and Engineering $100,000 Survey / Staking $50,000 Construction Management $100,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $4,000,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $50,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $4,450,000 Project Number: 3203529 Estimated Start Date: 04/01/09 Estimated Completion Date: 01/01/12 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $2,725,000 2012-13 $1,725,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $4,450,000 215 Waterline Upgrade / Replacement Rural Rd. (University - Apache) Project Description Estimated Project Costs This water line will replace / upgrade the existing 14 inch cast iron pipe between University and Apache. Approximately 2,600 feet of 16 inch ductile iron pipe will be tied to the 30 inch transmission main at University and Apache. New fire hydrants, gate valves, onsite fire suppression system connections, services / meters, and connections to the distribution system will be included. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $19,480 Construction Management $116,700 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $1,500,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $1,655,660 $19,480 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $1,655,660 Project Number: 3203539 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/09 09/30/10 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $1,655,660 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $1,655,660 Well Rehabilitation Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project involves rehabilitation and major structural repair of City supply wells. Two wells will be selected each year to be inspected by video camera, brushed and redeveloped. This will be on-going, with the goal of rehabilitating each well once every four years. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 $10,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $102,000 $500,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $510,000 Project Number: 3203549 Estimated Start Date: Ongoing Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $102,000 $102,000 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $102,000 $102,000 $102,000 $510,000 216 2010-11 CIP Projects - Wastewater Program 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 Funding Source 91st Avenue WWTP: 3200129 General Obligation Bonds 9,000,000 12,500,000 2,400,000 - - Capital Projects Fund Balance 3,000,000 - - - - 3,000,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,500,000 - - 9,100,000 9,500,000 9,500,000 28,100,000 12,500,000 13,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 57,500,000 100,000 150,000 - - - 250,000 - - 200,000 250,000 250,000 700,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 250,000 950,000 Development Fees Excise Tax Bonds Project Total Kyrene Water Reclamation Plant Equipment Replacement: 3209409 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds Project Total Sewer Line Replacement and Repair: 3299969 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program Project Name & Number 2014-15 23,900,000 General Obligation Bonds - 1,500,000 - - - 1,500,000 Excise Tax Bonds - - 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 6,000,000 Project Total - 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 7,500,000 Sewer Replacement / Upsize - 5th Street Price to Smith: NA Excise Tax Bonds - - - - 2,574,750 2,574,750 Sewer Replacement / Upsize Smith Rd. Apache to University: 3209389 Excise Tax Bonds - - - - 2,593,050 2,593,050 General Obligation Bonds Excise Tax Bonds City of Mesa Project Total - 292,000 292,000 584,000 5,550,000 5,550,000 11,100,000 - - 292,000 5,550,000 5,842,000 11,684,000 12,600,000 15,234,000 25,300,000 12,250,000 17,417,800 82,801,800 Southern Avenue Interceptor (SAI) Rehabilitation: 3200589 Program Total 217 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant Project Description Estimated Project Costs The 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) is a regional treatment facility that is jointly owned by five valley cities and is operated by the City of Phoenix. The 91st Avenue WWTP represents the majority of Tempe's wastewater treatment program. This project represents Tempe's share of all capital activities at the 91st Avenue WWTP including treatment capacity expansion projects, capital equipment replacement, modifications and additions to meet regulatory requirements, process enhancements and also capacity expansion of the jointly owned trunk sewer lines that convey wastewater flows to the plant. The purpose of this project is to provide wastewater treatment and transmission capacities to treat and convey the majority of Tempe's wastewater flows to the 91st Avenue WWTP, including solids discharge from our Kyrene Water Reclamation Facility. Legal / Administration $464,000 Land Acquisition $0 $882,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $5,568,000 Survey / Staking $464,000 Construction Management $3,248,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $46,400,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $9,000,000 Capital Projects Fund Balance $3,000,000 Development Fees $500,000 $474,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $57,500,000 Project Number: 3200129 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $12,500,000 2011-12 $13,000,000 2012-13 $12,000,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $57,500,000 Kyrene Water Reclamation Plant Equipment Replacement Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project provides an annual funding mechanism to address equipment failures that have not been specifically budgeted. Every year there are unexpected failures of pumps, valves, and other operating equipment due to fatigue, wear, and structural failure. Comprehensive preventative maintenance programs and procedures are in place to help minimize equipment failures. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $950,000 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $100,000 $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $950,000 Project Number: 3209409 Estimated Start Date: Ongoing Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $100,000 $150,000 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $950,000 218 Sewer Line Replacement and Repair Project Description Estimated Project Costs The WUD Integrated Master Plan (IMP) identified most of the specific sewer lines that need to be replaced to meet increasing wastewater flows. This project provides a recurring funding source to replace sewer lines that break during normal operation. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $7,500,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $7,500,000 Project Number: 3299969 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $1,500,000 2012-13 $2,000,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $7,500,000 Sewer Replacement / Upsize - 5th Street (Price to Smith) Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project will replace and upsize an estimated 2,650 feet of existing 15 inch sanitary sewer due to insufficient capacity. New sewer will be 18 inches in diameter. The project will alleviate high flow conditions and facilitate Apache Blvd. redevelopment. Legal / Administration $19,875 Land Acquisition $0 $19,875 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $238,500 Survey / Staking $19,875 Construction Management $119,250 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $1,987,500 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $19,875 Utility Relocation Fees $150,000 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $2,574,750 Project Number: NA Estimated Start Date: 07/01/13 Estimated Completion Date: 09/30/14 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $2,574,750 $2,574,750 219 Sewer Replacement / Upsize Smith Rd (Apache to University) Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project will replace and upsize an estimated 2,670 feet of existing 12 to 15 inch sanitary sewer due to insufficient capacity. New sewer will be 18 inches in diameter. The project will alleviate high flow conditions and facilitate Apache Blvd. redevelopment. Legal / Administration $20,025 Land Acquisition $0 $20,025 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $240,300 Survey / Staking $20,025 Construction Management $120,150 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $2,002,500 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $20,025 Utility Relocation Fees $150,000 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $2,593,050 Project Number: 3209389 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/11 09/30/12 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $2,593,050 $2,593,050 $0 Southern Avenue Interceptor (SAI) Rehab Project Description Estimated Project Costs The project entails the rehabilitation of the Southern Avenue Interceptor (SAI) within the limits of the City of Tempe. The SAI is a jointly owned regional sewer that runs through Tempe. A November 2005 engineering study revealed severe corrosion of this unlined concrete sewer line. The study recommended a phased rehabilitation or replacement of this line to protect it from eventual collapse. This project combines all of the phases of the multi-year rehabilitation of the SAI into a single project. Phase I was completed in 2006. Phase II will be completed in the first half of 2010. Phase III is included in this CIP. The project will be jointly funded by both Tempe and the City of Mesa. Legal / Administration $14,000 Land Acquisition $0 $20,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $500,000 Survey / Staking $50,000 Construction Management $700,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $10,000,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $400,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $11,684,000 Project Number: 3200589 Estimated Start Date: Ongoing Estimated Completion Date: 12/31/12 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $584,000 2012-13 $11,100,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $11,684,000 220 Special Purpose Program Transit and Rio Salado projects total $773 thousand in FY 2010-11 and account for 2% of the total 2010-11 appropriated CIP budget The Special Purpose component of the Capital Improvements Program includes the Transit and Rio Salado capital programs. Combined, they account for $773,000 of the $48.3 million Capital Budget for FY 2010-11. As was the case in FY 2009-10, federal grants remain the primary funding source for the Transit Program in FY 2010-11. A Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality grant will be used for the design and construction of a continuation of the Tempe Rio Salado multi-use path system which will extend the regional multi-use path system between the Cities of Tempe and Phoenix. The Rio Salado capital program relates to projects constructed within the special district established around the Tempe Town Lake. The FY 2010-11 budget includes use of the City’s Capital Improvements Reserve for repairs to the Town Lake downstream dam as required by the Arizona Department of Water Resources, and for various ongoing maintenance activities. 221 2010-11 CIP Projects - Transit Program 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Funding Source Hardy Drive Pedestrian Street Improvement: NA Federal Grants - - - 1,194,000 - Transit Tax - - 120,000 - - 120,000 Project Total - - 120,000 1,194,000 - 1,314,000 Federal Grants - - - 1,200,000 - 1,200,000 Transit Tax - - - 68,000 - 68,000 Project Total - - - 1,268,000 - 1,268,000 Federal Grants - 287,000 - - - 287,000 Transit Tax - 123,000 - - - 123,000 Project Total - 410,000 - - - 410,000 400,000 - - - - 400,000 46,000 - - - - 46,000 446,000 - - - - 446,000 1,100,000 I-10 and Alameda Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing: NA Install CCTV monitoring stations - LRT Signal Intersections: NA Rio Salado Multi-use Path: TempePhoenix (Priest Dr to SR 143): 6004139 Federal Grants Capital Projects Fund Balance Project Total University Drive Street Improvement Priest / Mill: NA Program Total 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program Project Name & Number 1,194,000 Federal Grants - - 1,100,000 - - Transit Tax - 120,000 - - - 120,000 Project Total - 120,000 1,100,000 - - 1,220,000 446,000 530,000 1,220,000 2,462,000 - 4,658,000 222 Hardy Drive Street Improvement Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project is approximately one mile in length between Broadway Road and University Drive. The project consists of pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements along a collector street fronted primarily by single family residential units. The proposed project area has a high volume of pedestrian and bicycle travel due to its proximity to ASU, Downtown Tempe, Rio Salado and the high industrial and office employment area south of the project. Legal / Administration Area residents are advocating retaining the neighborhood character of the street to reflect the residential uses on this stretch of road. Project elements include striping for bike lanes, widening of sidewalks and providing bulb-outs at critical intersections, reduction of existing travel lane widths, construction of planted medians, protection from intrusion of commercial truck traffic, improved pedestrian safety, reduction of speed limits, construction of mid-block crossings and providing transit, bicycle and pedestrian amenities. Survey / Staking $10,000 Construction Management $67,000 $10,000 Land Acquisition $0 $18,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $234,000 Furnishings / Equipment 2010-11 Source of Funds $0 Construction / Improvement $950,000 Geotech / Material Testing $10,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications NA $0 Other Project Costs $15,000 Total $1,314,000 NA Project Number: Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 10/01/13 07/31/15 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $120,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $1,194,000 $0 $1,314,000 I-10 Alameda Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project is located at Alameda Drive and the I-10 Freeway. The project will provide a non-motorized bridge over the I-10 Freeway which will provide east-west bicycle and pedestrian connectivity that will link residential developments with employment destinations and regional recreational facilities. The project will also provide a much needed link that will shorten the commute for bicyclists heading to downtown Tempe and ASU. Legal / Administration $9,000 Land Acquisition $0 $17,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $108,000 Survey / Staking Work to be performed includes design and acquisition of ramp easements as needed. The project will be constructed with the I-10 Corridor improvements as programmed in the Regional Transportation Plan. Additional funding for completion of the bridge crossing will be requested from the state and federal government. $9,000 Construction Management $63,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $900,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $9,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $153,000 Total $1,268,000 Project Number: NA Estimated Start Date: 10/01/13 Estimated Completion Date: 12/31/14 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $1,268,000 $0 $1,268,000 223 Install CCTV Monitoring Stations - LRT Signal Intersections Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project will install Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) monitoring at traffic signals along the Tempe portion of the light rail corridor. The project will be used to monitor and adjust signal timing to improve traffic flow along the light rail corridor. 2010-11 Source of Funds Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications NA $0 Other Project Costs $410,000 Total $410,000 NA Project Number: Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/11 06/30/12 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $410,000 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $410,000 Rio Salado Multi-use Path: Tempe-Phoenix (Priest Dr to SR 143) Project Description Estimated Project Costs The Project provides funding for the design and construction of a continuation of the Tempe Rio Salado multi-use path system. This segment would extend from Priest Drive to State Route 143 on the western city limit of Tempe. The path will be on the south bank of the river channel. The project will be completed in concert with a joint project with Phoenix Rio Salado Project. The project will extend the regional multiuse path system between the City of Tempe and Phoenix. Legal / Administration $4,000 Land Acquisition $0 $7,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $42,000 Survey / Staking $4,000 Construction Management $25,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $350,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds Federal Grants $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $400,000 Capital Projects Fund Balance $4,000 Utility Relocation Fees $10,000 Other Project Costs $46,000 $0 Total $446,000 Project Number: 6004139 Estimated Start Date: 10/01/10 Estimated Completion Date: 07/31/12 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $446,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $446,000 224 University Drive Street Improvement - Priest / Mill Project Description Estimated Project Costs The University Drive improvement Project is approximately 1 mile between Mill Ave and Priest Drive. The project consists of designing and constructing pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements along an arterial street. Work could include: acquisition of sidewalk easements as needed; demolition of some existing sidewalk; curb and gutter; construction of new sidewalk; curb ramps, on-street parking areas; installation and relocation of pedestrian scale street lights; and, installation of landscaping and providing transit and pedestrian amenities. Legal / Administration $9,000 Land Acquisition $0 $17,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $226,000 Survey / Staking The goal of the project is to enhance travel options for people of all ages and nonmotorized users including: middle school students, elementary school children, seniors, professionals and college students accessing commercial centers, local parks, downtown Tempe, and ASU. The project fulfills the Tempe General Plan 2030 objective of increasing mode share for non-motorized travel. $9,000 Construction Management $62,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $880,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds $9,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications NA $0 Other Project Costs $8,000 Total $1,220,000 NA Project Number: Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 10/01/12 07/31/14 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $120,000 2012-13 $1,100,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $1,220,000 225 2010-11 CIP Projects - Rio Salado Program Project Name & Number Funding Source Rio Salado Ancillary Projects: 656931A Capital Improvements Reserve Town Lake Dam Replacement: 6503069 Town Lake Downstream Dam RepairsADWR: 6503599 Program Total 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program 2014-15 100,000 - - - - 100,000 - 2,000,000 2,480,000 960,000 Federal Grants 7,040,000 20,000,000 7,520,000 10,000,000 30,000,000 Project Total - 4,480,000 960,000 27,040,000 7,520,000 40,000,000 227,000 - - - - 227,000 327,000 4,480,000 960,000 27,040,000 7,520,000 40,327,000 Mondrian Agreement Capital Improvements Reserve 226 Rio Salado Ancillary Projects Project Description Estimated Project Costs Rio Salado ancillary projects often include new signs, emergency warning system upgrades, tree & vegetation planting, holiday lighting, fencing, damage due to vandalism, and buoy replacement or repair. The project also provides for improvements to the Splash Playground at Tempe Beach Park, as well as any other unforeseen project that becomes necessary at Tempe Town Lake, Tempe Beach Park, and the linear park system. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve $100,000 $100,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $100,000 Project Number: 656931A Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 06/17/99 06/30/14 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $100,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $100,000 Town Lake Dam Replacement Project Description Estimated Project Costs New technology for replacement of the dams has been proposed (pending City Council concurrence and approval). The hybrid technology will allow the use of the existing piers and foundation to replace approximately 840 lineal feet of dam, but may require changes to the mechanical systems. Tempe Town Lake provides the economic benefit for continued growth of the community, and replacement of the dam will help to secure public and private investment in development at Town Lake. Legal / Administration $320,000 Land Acquisition $0 $608,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $3,840,000 Survey / Staking $320,000 Construction Management $2,240,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $32,000,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $320,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $352,000 Total $40,000,000 Project Number: 6503069 Estimated Start Date: 07/01/14 Estimated Completion Date: 12/31/15 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $4,480,000 2012-13 $960,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $27,040,000 $7,520,000 $40,000,000 227 Town Lake Downstream Dam Repairs - ADWR Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project provides funding for repairs to the Town Lake's downstream dam area as required by ADWR (Arizona Department of Water Resources). Dam repairs include replacement of the rip-rap that is placed for scour control, completing some concrete patch work (also an ADWR requirement) and replacing piezometer cables so that groundwater level reading can resume. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $1,500 Design and Engineering $8,500 Survey / Staking $1,000 Construction Management $8,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $200,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve $1,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $227,000 $0 Other Project Costs $7,000 Total $227,000 Project Number: 6503599 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 11/01/09 04/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $227,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $227,000 228 General Purpose Program General Purpose projects total $3.6 million in FY 2010-11 and account for 7% of the 2010-11 appropriated CIP budget The General Purpose component of the Capital Improvements Program includes Police Protection, Fire Protection, Park Improvements, and General Governmental programs. Combined, they constitute $3.6 million of the $48.3 million Capital Improvements Budget for FY 2010-11. A total of $1.6 million in General Obligation bonds will be sold primarily to provide funding for Police and Fire projects. The balance will come from the City’s Capital Improvements Reserve, the Park Improvements capital projects fund balance, and a transfer from the Water / Wastewater fund. Major projects in FY 2010-11 include continued improvements to both the Police and Fire Departments’ radio systems, and under the General Governmental program: continued funding for the renovation of the Tempe Public Library, the Municipal Arts Program, and numerous ongoing facilities repair and replacement programs. Historically, the annual Park Improvements program has been almost completely funded by bonds which are repaid by City property tax revenues. Dramatically declined local property values resulting from the economic downturn are projected to severely decrease property tax revenues for years to come; which has critically diminished the City’s capacity to bond finance capital projects. Consequently, with the exception of a modest use of existing capital projects fund balance, funding for FY 2010-11 Park Improvement capital projects has been delayed. 229 2010-11 CIP Projects - Police Protection Program Project Name & Number Police / City Radio System Replacement : 5501989 Funding Source 2010-11 Funded Program 2011-12 Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5-Year Program General Obligation Bonds Unauthorized G.O Bonds 890,954 - 1,053,267 - 809,604 70,000 861,316 900,000 2,753,825 1,831,316 Project Total 890,954 1,053,267 879,604 861,316 900,000 4,585,141 230 Police / City Radio System Replacement Project Description Estimated Project Costs This ongoing project provides for the replacement of outdated radio equipment for the Police Department and other City radio users, allowing Tempe to participate in the establishment of long-term public safety interoperability in the Phoenix metro area. The Police/City Radio System is an 800Mhz digital trunk system that allows day-to-day, real time communication over a single radio system in partnership with thirteen other agencies. 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $890,954 Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $4,585,141 Other Project Costs $0 Total $4,585,141 Project Number: 5501989 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/10 Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $890,954 2011-12 $1,053,267 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $879,604 $861,316 $900,000 $4,585,141 231 2010-11 CIP Projects - Fire Protection Program Project Name & Number Funding Source Radio Replacement for Conversion to 800 MHz: 566947 General Obligation Bonds 2010-11 Funded Program 600,000 232 Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2011-12 - - - Total 5-Year Program - 600,000 Radio Replacement for Conversion to 800 Megahertz Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project continues the federally mandated radio conversion to 800 MHz. The conversion ensures the Fire Department will remain on track in its partnership with the other metropolitan area cities in the Automatic Aide System. 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $600,000 $600,000 Other Project Costs $0 Total $600,000 566947 Project Number: Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/08 06/30/10 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $600,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $600,000 233 2010-11 CIP Projects - Park Improvements / Recreation Program Project Name & Number Funding Source Neighborhood Park Improvements: 6399829 Capital Projects Fund Balance 2010-11 Funded Program 150,000 234 Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2011-12 - - - Total 5-Year Program - 150,000 Neighborhood Park Improvements Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project provides for the replacement of playground equipment, picnic equipment, fencing, signage, concrete, sand, rubber playground surfacing, electrical/lighting, etc in the various neighborhood parks. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Projects Fund Balance $150,000 $150,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $150,000 Project Number: 6399829 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $150,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $150,000 235 2010-11 CIP Projects - General Governmental Program Project Name & Number Funding Source 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program Community Development El Paso Natural Gas Easement Multiuse Path Improvements Phase III: NA Federal Grants Unauthorized G.O. Bonds Project Total - - - 200,000 200,000 1,323,000 1,323,000 1,323,000 200,000 1,523,000 Capital Improvements Reserve 250,000 - - - - 250,000 Municipal Arts Program: 6699799 Water / Wastewater Fund 436,463 234,890 364,140 194,680 241,048 1,471,221 Tempe Public Library Renovation: 6702499 General Obligation Bonds 115,000 - - - - 115,000 Capital Improvements Reserve 510,000 161,328 - - - 671,328 Federal Grants Capital Improvements Reserve 339,500 35,000 339,500 35,000 - - - 679,000 70,000 Project Total 374,500 374,500 - - - 749,000 Community Relations Maryanne Corder Neighborhood Improvement Program: 676556 Community Services Public Works City Facilities Rehabilitation: 6799779 Energy Conservation Program: 6703659 Historic Properties Preservation: 676809 Capital Improvements Reserve 50,000 - - - - 50,000 HVAC Equipment Replacement: 676873 Capital Improvements Reserve 33,500 - - - - 33,500 Microbial Remediation (Mold, Asbestos Removal): 6709269 Capital Improvements Reserve 30,000 - - - - 30,000 Roof Maintenance Program: 6702519 Capital Improvements Reserve 30,000 - - - - 30,000 Capital Improvements Reserve 100,000 - - - - 100,000 1,929,463 770,718 364,140 394,680 1,564,048 5,023,049 Water Utilities General Purpose Irrigation Improvements: 6704049 Program Total 236 El Paso Natural Gas Easement Multi-use Path Improvements Phase III Project Description Estimated Project Costs The project is a 1/2 mile multi-use path extension of the existing El Paso Gas Easement path from Rural Road to Kiwanis Park. The project will extend the multiuse path system from Price Road to Kiwanis Park, a major regional destination. The project will allow and promote non-motorized access to Kiwanis Park. Legal / Administration The project will provide east-west bicycle and pedestrian connectivity that will link major residential areas with a regional recreational facility. The project will also shorten the commute for bicyclists heading to the Kiwanis Park and also to industrial areas abutting the park, and will also encourage less experienced bike commuters by providing them safer and less congested routes to recreational and employment destinations. Regionally, the project will also allow bike commuters from Chandler, Mesa and Tempe easier access to Tempe. The project will connect at Kiwanis Park to the Western Canal Multi-use Path. Reducing automobile trips will benefit Tempe's and the Valley’s air quality. Design and Engineering $11,000 Land Acquisition $0 $99,000 Permit Fees $200,000 Survey / Staking $11,000 Construction Management $74,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $1,050,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds $11,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications NA $0 Other Project Costs $67,000 Total $1,523,000 NA Project Number: Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/14 06/30/15 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $200,000 $1,323,000 $1,523,000 Maryanne Corder Neighborhood Grant Program Project Description Estimated Project Costs The Neighborhood Grant Program is an annual program that provides funding for small neighborhood initiated projects ($15,000 or less per individual association project and one $50,000 grant). The selection of recipients and the amounts awarded are determined by City Council based on recommendations from staff after a review of requests by neighborhood and homeowners associations. Environmental benefits from projects include turf conversion, energy efficient lighting, drought tolerant planting and recyclable materials used for art pieces. The grant program is a direct investment in neighborhoods. Residents work together collaboratively to identify smaller projects that meet a community need. The program requires extensive community involvement and support in the selection of what project to apply for, so that the project represents the neighborhood's needs and desires. $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve Legal / Administration $250,000 $250,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $250,000 Project Number: 676556 Estimated Start Date: Varies Estimated Completion Date: Varies New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $250,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $250,000 237 Municipal Arts Program Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project provides funding for various Municipal Arts projects as determined by the Municipal Arts Commission and the City Council. The Municipal Arts Program serves to advise the Mayor and City Council on all art and cultural development, encourage arts organizations and artists in their continuing search for artistic excellence in Tempe, and to encourage and support the contribution of cultural diversity to the richness of the community’s artistic life. 2010-11 Source of Funds Water / Wastewater Fund Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $436,463 $0 Other Project Costs $1,471,221 Total $1,471,221 Project Number: 6699799 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $436,463 $234,890 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $364,140 $194,680 $241,048 $1,471,221 Tempe Public Library Renovation Project Description Estimated Project Costs This additional funding for this project will complete the $8 million renovation of the Tempe Public Library which opened to the public in 1989. The completed renovation upgrades the Library's computer network, replaces the furniture and remodels the Library to accommodate new usage patterns and technology. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $115,000 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds General Obligation Bonds $115,000 $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $115,000 Project Number: 6702499 Estimated Start Date: 07/01/06 Estimated Completion Date: 06/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $115,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $115,000 238 City Facilities Rehabilitation Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project rehabilitates and repairs public facilities and related building systems. Rehabilitation and repairs include: fire alarm upgrades and repairs, roof repairs, replacements of floor covering, painting, repair and upgrades to building automation systems, ice machine replacements and general building repairs as needed. As items are replaced with new items that consume less energy and are more efficient therefore reducing carbon footprint and sustaining a more environmentally friendly community. Also, planned maintenance extends the life of equipment and systems therefore reduces costly repairs and building closures. Some of the anticipated projects include floor coverings at the following locations: Fire Station #1, Escalante Center, Senior Citizen Center and Pyle Adult Center. Plans are to upgrade lighting automation at the 525 Building, City Hall garden level offices, Fire Admin Building and at the Library. The Facilities Master Plan will be used to identify and prioritize what particular locations will have ice machines replaced. $0 $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve Legal / Administration Land Acquisition $510,000 $671,328 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $671,328 Project Number: 6799779 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/10 Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $510,000 $161,328 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $671,328 Energy Conservation Program Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project replaces substandard and inefficient lighting systems (replacing T-12 lighting with T-8, LED upgrades), replaces or adds new EMS (Energy Management Systems), and allows for performing building audits and adding programmable thermostats. This program allows staff to review facility needs and determine where we can achieve sustainable savings in energy costs and consumption. This program will be used to provide matching funds of $35,000 each year for two years to obtain grant funding of $679,000 from the EECBG (Energy Efficiency & Conservation Block Grant) Program. The grant funding assists the City in expanding our energy conservation efforts and will be used for HVAC and/or lighting retrofits at the following locations: Kiwanis Rec. Center, North PD building, Pyle Adult Recreation Center, Edna Vihel Arts Facility, City Hall, and Fire Training Center. It is anticipated that there will be a savings of 21,000 kwh over the two year period resulting from the grant funding and the Energy Conservation Program CIP. $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 $749,000 Construction / Improvement $339,500 Capital Improvements Reserve $0 Land Acquisition Furnishings / Equipment 2010-11 Source of Funds Federal Grants Legal / Administration $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $35,000 $0 Total $749,000 Project Number: 6703659 Estimated Start Date: 07/01/10 Estimated Completion Date: 06/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 2011-12 $374,500 $374,500 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $749,000 239 Historic Properties Preservation Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project rehabilitates and repairs aging historic facilities, infrastructure and systems. The scope of the rehabilitation includes roofing repairs / replacements, floor covering, painting, security lighting, repairs/upgrades of building automation systems, fire alarms and damaged equipment. Plans for this next year include adding security lighting to the Hackett and Peterson houses. The preservation of City owned historic properties is essential to prolong the sustainability of historic public properties. Taking a proactive approach to repairs will often reduce future expenditure costs. The Hackett House recently had a new HVAC system added therefore reducing energy consumption and energy costs. The other properties will be reviewed and analyzed during this budget period. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $50,000 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve $50,000 $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $50,000 676809 Project Number: Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/10 06/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $50,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $50,000 HVAC Equipment Replacement Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project replaces air conditioning systems in public facilities that are no longer performing adequately, or are beyond their recommended life cycle and require constant maintenance. It has been determined that there are approximately 140 units that have exceeded their useful life which is 12 years. Some of the facilities where the HVAC systems are planned to be replaced include: Fire Station # 3, Fire station # 5, and Vihel Community Center. By being more proactive in replacing these units, we will be reducing our energy consumption and reduce our carbon footprint. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $33,500 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve $33,500 $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $33,500 Project Number: 676873 Estimated Start Date: 07/01/10 Estimated Completion Date: 06/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $33,500 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $33,500 240 Microbial Remediation (Mold and Asbestos Removal) Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project provides funding to hire trained remediation contractors for mold and asbestos removal as needed and in accordance with state and federal environmental requirements. Remodeling a city facility will require an asbestos assessment before work can commence. In the event of detecting asbestos, specially trained technicians will perform the necessary remediation. If mold has been identified in a work area, a mold assessment and abatement actions will be performed by trained microbial remediation specialists to ensure a healthy environment. 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $30,000 $0 Other Project Costs $30,000 Total $30,000 Project Number: 6709269 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/10 Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $30,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $30,000 Roof Maintenance Program Project Description Estimated Project Costs The scope of this project provides for annual maintenance and ongoing replacement of City facilities roof structures. Proper assessments, maintenance, repairs and replacement of roof structures will prolong performance and usefulness. A comprehensive program will prolong the life-cycle costs while reducing the frequency of leaks and emergency repairs. It is planned that roof replacement projects that will take place in 2010-11 are Diablo Stadium weight room and a portion of Kiwanis Recreation Center. Specific replacement projects are being evaluated in conjunction with the City Facilities Master Plan. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve $30,000 $30,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $30,000 Project Number: 6702519 Estimated Start Date: 07/01/10 Estimated Completion Date: 06/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $30,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $30,000 241 General Purpose Irrigation Improvements Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project provides a recurring funding source to replace and repair irrigation lines due to normal operation and /or that have exceeded their useful life. Environmental benefits of Flood Irrigation Service: The distribution system is gravity fed and does not require power to motors and pumps. Also, unlike domestic tap water, surface water used for flood irrigation requires no pre-treatment prior to delivery, which makes it a much more cost effective resource for flood irrigation. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Improvements Reserve $100,000 $100,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $100,000 Project Number: 6704049 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/08 Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $100,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $100,000 242 Transportation Program Transportation projects total $275 thousand in FY 2010-11 and account for less than 1% of the 2010-11 appropriated CIP budget The Transportation element of the Capital Improvements Program includes all new and ongoing improvements put into service under the City's Transportation and Right-of-Way, and Traffic Signal and Street Lighting programs. Historically, the annual Transportation program has been almost completely funded by bonds which are repaid by City property tax revenues. Dramatically declined local property values resulting from the economic downturn are projected to severely decrease property tax revenues for years to come; which has critically diminished the City’s capacity to bond finance capital projects. Consequently, with the exception of a modest use of existing capital projects fund balance, funding for FY 2010-11 transportation capital projects has been delayed. Projects are planned within the five year program when federal grant subsidies are anticipated. 243 2010-11 CIP Projects - Transportation & R.O.W. Improvements Program Project Name & Number Holdeman Alley Improvement Project: NA North Tempe Alley Improvement: NA Residential Street Surface Treatments: 5499951 Program Total Funding Source 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program General Obligation Bonds Federal Grants - - - 32,102 531,098 - 32,102 531,098 Project Total - - - 563,200 - 563,200 General Obligation Bonds Federal Grants - - - 58,095 - 58,095 - - - 961,105 - 961,105 Project Total - - - 1,019,200 - 1,019,200 275,000 - - - - 275,000 275,000 - - 1,582,400 - 1,857,400 Capital Projects Fund Balance 244 Holdeman Alley Improvement Project Project Description Estimated Project Costs The City of Tempe has an ongoing alley reconstruction / stabilization program which includes removing soil fines and old soil material and replacing with recycled asphalt (RAP) from wall to wall in alleys. This project would stabilize approximately 4.25 miles of alleys in the area from University to Broadway and Priest to Hardy. The primary environmental benefit derived from the project is a reduction in dust emissions due to activity in the alley. The project is approximately 94% federal grant funded. Legal / Administration $5,000 Land Acquisition $0 $9,000 Permit Fees Design and Engineering $54,000 Survey / Staking This project will allow Tempe to continue its stabilization program in order to reduce PM 10 emissions. The Holdeman Neighborhood area was identified in the city's Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funding request through the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) in the Paving Unpaved Road Projects category for its regional proximity to Phoenix and to County air quality monitoring stations in South Scottsdale. Additionally, traffic counts in the northern segment of the area yielded higher than average number of trips per day for alley use. $5,000 Construction Management $32,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $450,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds $5,000 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications NA $0 Other Project Costs $3,200 Total $563,200 NA Project Number: Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 08/01/13 11/30/13 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $563,200 $0 $563,200 North Tempe Alley Improvement Project Description Estimated Project Costs The City of Tempe has an ongoing alley reconstruction/stabilization program which includes removing soil fines and old soil material and replacing with recycled asphalt (RAP) from wall to wall in alleys. This project would stabilize approximately 10.5 miles of alleys in the area from approximately Miller Rd. to Crosscut Canal, Curry Rd. to Continental Dr. The primary environmental benefit derived from the project is a reduction in dust emissions due to activity in the alley. The project is approximately 94% federal grant funded. Legal / Administration $8,000 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $15,000 Design and Engineering $96,000 Survey / Staking Funding this project will allow the city of Tempe to continue its stabilization program in order to reduce PM 10 emissions. The North Tempe Neighborhood area was identified in the City's Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funding request through the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) in the Paving Unpaved Road Projects category for its regional proximity to Phoenix and Scottsdale, and due to the fact that it is very close - approximately 2 miles - to the County's PM-10 air quality monitoring station in South Scottsdale. $8,000 Construction Management $56,000 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $800,000 Geotech / Material Testing 2010-11 Source of Funds NA $8,000 Utility Relocation Fees $25 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $28,175 Total $1,019,200 Project Number: NA Estimated Start Date: 08/01/13 Estimated Completion Date: 11/30/13 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $1,019,200 $0 $1,019,200 245 Residential Street Surface Treatments Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project will provide the ongoing preventative maintenance of local / residential streets throughout the city in accordance with the City's pavement management program. Examples of the various types of treatments include; slurry seal, cape seal, smooth seal, seal coat and crack seal. Allocating funds and effort now will prevent future reconstruction costs that can be 10 times higher than routine maintenance costs. The streets to be maintained in the fiscal year of 2010-11 are bounded by All American Way to McClintock and Baseline to Guadalupe, Guadalupe to the Western Canal and Rural to Price, and Guadalupe to Elliot and Kyrene to Rural. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement 2010-11 Source of Funds Capital Projects Fund Balance $275,000 $275,000 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $0 Total $275,000 Project Number: 5499951 Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing Ongoing New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $275,000 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $275,000 246 2010-11 CIP Projects - Traffic Signals and Street Lighting Program 2010-11 Funded Program Additional Projected Needs 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Funding Source Design and Install Fiber Optic Communications: NA General Obligation Bonds - - 107,000 - - 107,000 Federal Grants - - 243,000 - - 243,000 Project Total - - 350,000 - - 350,000 Video Traffic Detection: NA 2011-12 Total 5-Year Program Project Name & Number General Obligation Bonds - 120,000 - - - 120,000 Federal Grants - 305,000 - - - 305,000 Project Total - 425,000 - - - 425,000 - 425,000 350,000 - - 775,000 Program Total 247 Design and Install Fiber Optic Communications Project Description Estimated Project Costs This project will install fiber optic communications media to each signalized intersection along University from Mill to McClintock utilizing existing fiber conduits. This upgrade will require minimal design and construction due to conduits already being in place and the close proximity of the terminating traffic signal control cabinets to the ADOT fiber optic backbone. As a result, one-quarter of the signal system will be on fiber. Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Utilizing the existing conduits and the state-owned infrastructure will eliminate the need for leased telephone service to the intersections and increase bandwidth to allow for installation of real-time video detection (data gathering) and CCTV monitoring. The City will be able to monitor traffic conditions and adjust traffic signal timing through centralized command and control strategies designed to minimize congestion. Additionally, this project mitigates congestion through enhanced regional multi-agency signal coordination and maximizes the use of existing communications infrastructure. Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 2010-11 Source of Funds Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications NA $0 Other Project Costs $350,000 Total $350,000 NA Project Number: Estimated Start Date: Estimated Completion Date: 07/01/12 06/30/13 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $350,000 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $350,000 Video Traffic Detection Project Description Estimated Project Costs The project will utilize video detection and CCTV monitoring at arterial traffic signals to obtain real-time turning movement count data. The project will be used to monitor and adjust signal timing to improve traffic flow along the city's major travel corridors. 2010-11 Source of Funds NA Legal / Administration $0 Land Acquisition $0 Permit Fees $0 Design and Engineering $0 Survey / Staking $0 Construction Management $0 Furnishings / Equipment $0 Construction / Improvement $0 Geotech / Material Testing $0 Utility Relocation Fees $0 Utility Undergrounding $0 ITD / Telecommunications $0 Other Project Costs $425,000 Total $425,000 Project Number: NA Estimated Start Date: 07/01/10 Estimated Completion Date: 06/30/11 New Appropriations by Fiscal Year 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $425,000 2012-13 $0 2013-14 2014-15 Total 5 Year $0 $0 $425,000 248 Schedules and Summaries This section includes the City’s budget resolution, property tax information, budgetary units, and budget concepts along with personnel schedules and miscellaneous statistical data. Schedules and Summaries Contents Page Property Tax Ordinance ................................................................................................................................................ 250 Budget Resolution ......................................................................................................................................................... 251 Budget Schedules Schedule A-Summary Schedule of Estimated Revenue and Expenditures/Expenses................................................ 252 Schedule B-Summary of Tax Levy and Tax Rate Information .................................................................................... 253 Schedule C-Summary of Revenue Other Than Property Taxes ................................................................................. 254 Schedule D-Summary of Other Financing Sources and Interfund Transfers .............................................................. 256 Schedule E-Summary by Department of Expenditures/Expenses Within Each Fund ................................................. 257 Budget Basis, Units, and Changes............................................................................................................................... 258 Financial Structure and Organization .......................................................................................................................... 259 Personnel Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... 260 Personnel Schedules..................................................................................................................................................... 261 Glossary of Terms ......................................................................................................................................................... 295 Index ............................................................................................................................................................................... 302 OMB Staff........................................................................................................................................................................ 306 249 Property Tax Ordinance ORDINANCE NO. 2010.18 AN ORDINANCE LEVYING SEPARATE AMOUNTS TO BE RAISED FOR PRIMARY AND SECONDARY PROPERTY TAX LEVIES UPON EACH ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100.00) OF THE ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY SUBJECT TO TAXATION WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMPE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2011. PURSUANT to A.R.S. §42-17151, the ordinance levying taxes for Fiscal Year 2010-2011 is required to be adopted on or before the third Monday in August. WHEREAS, the County of Maricopa is the assessing and collecting authority for the City of Tempe. WHEREAS, Tempe City Charter Section 5.11 allows an ordinance necessary in connection with the adoption of the annual budget to be adopted and go into effect upon adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPE, ARIZONA, as follows: Section 1: There is hereby levied on each One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) of the limited assessed value of all property, both real and personal, within the corporate limits of the City of Tempe, except such property as may be by law exempt from taxation, a primary property tax rate, for general and administrative expenses of the City of Tempe. The City of Tempe intends to adopt a primary property tax levy of $12,238,972, resulting in a primary tax rate of $0.5176 per $100 of assessed value. The primary tax levy amount is equal to the maximum allowable levy limit as determined by Maricopa County pursuant to the laws of the state of Arizona. Section 2: In addition to the rate set in Section 1 hereof, there is hereby levied on each One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) of unlimited assessed valuation of all property, both real and personal, within the corporate limits of the City of Tempe, except such property as may be by law exempt from taxation, a secondary property tax rate of $0.8824 per $100 of assessed value. Section 3: The combined tax rate as set forth in Sections 1 and 2 shall equal $1.4000 per one hundred dollars ($100.00) of assessed valuation of all property, real and personal, within the corporate limits of the City of Tempe, except such property as may be by law exempt from taxation. Section 4: Failure by the county officials of Maricopa County, Arizona, to properly return the delinquent list, any irregularity in assessments or omissions in the same, or any irregularity in any proceedings shall not invalidate such proceedings or invalidate any title conveyed by any tax deed; failure or neglect of any officer or officers to timely perform any of the duties assigned to him or them shall not invalidate any proceedings or any deed or sale pursuant thereto, the validity of the assessment or levy of taxes or of the judgment of sale by which the collection of the same may be enforced shall not affect the lien of the City of Tempe upon such property for the delinquent taxes unpaid thereon; overcharge as to part of the taxes or of costs shall not invalidate any proceedings for the collection of taxes or the foreclosure of the lien therefore or a sale of the property under such foreclosure; and all acts of officers de facto shall be valid as if performed by officers de jure. Section 5: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 6: This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. Section 7: The Clerk of the City is directed to transmit a certified copy of this ordinance to the County Assessor and Board of Supervisors of Maricopa County. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPE, ARIZONA, this 24th day of June, 2010. 250 Budget Resolution RESOLUTION 2010.74 A RESOLUTION DETERMINING AND ADOPTING FINAL ESTIMATES OF PROPOSED EXPENDITURES BY THE CITY OF TEMPE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2010, AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2011. DECLARING THAT SUCH SHALL CONSTITUTE THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF TEMPE FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR. WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of Title 42, Sections 17101-17104 inclusive, Arizona Revised Statutes, the City Council did, on May 6, 2010, make an estimate of the amounts required to meet the public expenses for the ensuing year, also an estimate of revenues from sources other than direct taxation, and the amount to be raised by taxation upon real and personal property within the City of Tempe, Arizona, and WHEREAS, in accordance with said sections of said Title, and following due public notice, the Council met on May 6, 2010, at which meeting any taxpayer was entitled to appear and be heard in favor of or against any of the proposed expenditures, and WHEREAS, publication has been duly made as required by law, of said estimates together with a notice that the City Council set a property tax public hearing for June 10, 2010 and set an adoption date of June 24, 2010, to adopt the property tax rate, and WHEREAS, the sums to be raised by primary taxation, as specified therein, do not in the aggregate amount exceed that amount as computed in Title 42, Section 17051, A.R.S., therefore be it RESOLVED, that the said estimates of revenues and expenditures shown on the accompanying schedules as now increased, reduced or changed by the same are hereby adopted as the budget of the City of Tempe, Arizona, for the fiscal year 2010-2011. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TEMPE, ARIZONA, this 10th day of June, 2010. 251 Schedule A Summary Schedule of Estimated Revenue and Expenditures/Expenses Adopted Budgeted Expenditures/ Expenses FY 2009-10 Unaudited Estimated Expenditures/ Expenses FY 2009-10 Estimated Unreserved Fund Balance 7-1-2010 Direct Property Tax Revenue FY 2010-11 $185,892,521 $173,783,438 $27,929,230 $12,063,972 107,530,232 96,222,218 50,678,912 175,000 Debt Service 19,875,542 19,217,500 40,589,139 22,174,672 Capital Projects 96,310,568 96,310,568 3,525,328 Enterprise 91,126,158 85,998,355 37,871,236 $500,735,021 $471,532,079 $160,593,845 Fund General Special Revenue Total $34,413,644 Expenditure Limitation Comparison 2009-10 2010-11 1. Budgeted Expenditures/Expenses $500,735,021 $419,697,944 (203,820,648) (114,440,233) 296,914,373 305,257,711 $296,914,373 $305,257,711 2. Budgeted Expenditures/Expenses Adjusted for Reconciling Items 3. Less: Estimated Exclusions 4. Total Estimated Expenditures/Expenses Subject to Expenditure Limitation 5. Expenditure Limitation Fund General Special Revenue Debt Service Budgeted Revenue Other than Property Taxes 2010-11 $141,837,783 $724,712 78,351,061 7,262 16,520 Capital Projects Enterprise Total Proceeds From Other Financing Sources 2010-11 47,578,292 83,554,952 4,611,941 $303,760,316 $52,922,207 Interfund Transfers 2010-11 In (Out) $186,435 Total Financial Budgeted Resources Expenditures/ Available Expenses 2010-11 2010-11 $182,742,132 $154,811,302 ($2,770,000) 126,442,235 102,512,785 2,770,000 (49,000) 65,501,331 22,111,500 436,463 (137,435) 51,402,648 48,264,755 (436,463) 125,601,666 91,997,602 ($3,392,898) $551,690,012 $419,697,944 $3,392,898 252 Schedule B Summary of Tax Levy and Tax Rate Information FY 2009-10* Estimated FY 2010-11 1. Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy $12,238,972 (A.R.S. 42-17051(A)) 2. Amount Received from Primary Property Taxation in the 2009-10 Fiscal Year in Excess of the Sum of that Year's Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (A.R.S. 42-17102(A)(18)) 3. Property Tax Levy Amounts A. Primary Property Taxes 11,665,890 12,238,972 B. Secondary Property Taxes 25,192,451 22,174,672 $36,858,341 $34,413,644 C. Total Property Tax Levy Amounts 4. Property Taxes Collected A. Primary Property Taxes 1. 2009-10 Levy 11,292,582 2. Prior Years' Levies 116,659 3. Total Primary Property Taxes $11,409,241 B. Secondary Property Taxes 1. 2009-10 Levy 24,386,293 2. Prior Years' Levies 251,925 3. Total Secondary Property Taxes $24,638,218 C. Total Property Taxes Collected $36,047,459 5. Property Tax Rates A. City Tax Rate 1. Primary Property Tax Rate 0.4897 0.5176 2. Secondary Property Tax Rate 0.9103 0.8824 $1.4000 $1.4000 3. Total City Tax Rate * Includes actual property taxes collected as of the date the proposed budget was prepared plus estimated property tax collected for the remainder of the fiscal year. 253 Schedule C Summary by Fund of Revenue Other Than Property Taxes Source of Revenue Budgeted Revenue FY 2009-10 Estimated Revenue FY 2009-10* Budgeted Revenue FY 2010-11 General Fund Local Taxes City Sales Tax $74,005,000 $62,700,000 $68,550,872 Hotel Bed Tax 3,000,000 2,168,700 3,559,916 Franchise Taxes 3,927,281 3,724,281 3,727,000 1,497,750 1,564,864 1,567,696 34,715,155 33,416,962 28,871,873 6,275,500 5,768,161 6,166,164 Charges for Services 10,645,611 10,008,079 11,200,441 Fines and Forfeitures 9,880,662 9,558,931 10,322,095 Interest on Investments 3,000,000 1,790,340 1,500,000 SRP In-Lieu Tax 1,394,846 1,394,846 1,376,393 Miscellaneous Revenue 3,417,119 2,690,669 4,995,333 151,758,924 134,785,833 141,837,783 10,019,765 9,219,300 9,495,879 1,035,000 785,824 785,824 180,000 32,000 75,000 11,234,765 10,037,124 10,356,703 Intergovernmental 472,645 232,766 Total LTAF 472,645 232,766 29,957,000 26,328,500 State Lottery Proceeds 232,794 184,119 ASU-Flash Transit 676,790 676,790 773,045 Interest Earned-Trust Investments 212,386 212,386 212,386 44,301,699 10,836,699 14,470,874 813,220 3,032,220 3,369,506 76,193,889 41,270,714 43,837,911 Licenses and Permits Business Licenses Intergovernmental Revenue State Shared Vehicle License Tax Voluntary Contributions Total General Fund Special Revenue Funds Highway Users Revenue Fund Intergovernmental Maintenance of Effort/Other Barricading Fees Total Highway Users Revenue Fund Local Transportation Assistance Fund (LTAF) Transit Fund Transit Tax Federal and State Funding Miscellaneous Revenue Total Transit Fund 254 25,012,100 Summary by Fund of Revenue Other Than Property Taxes Source of Revenue Budgeted Revenue FY 2009-10 Estimated Revenue FY 2009-10* Budgeted Revenue FY 2010-11 Special Revenue Funds (Continued) Rio Salado Fund City Sales Tax 1,250,000 1,175,900 1,329,200 Hotel Bed Tax 300,000 208,600 410,000 Interest on Investments 130,000 95,000 95,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 163,601 86,361 107,930 1,843,601 1,565,861 1,942,130 6,295,038 5,868,886 5,175,519 Fees and Admissions 351,000 547,750 575,500 Interest on Investments 185,039 75,000 45,349 6,831,077 6,491,636 5,796,368 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) 3,197,782 1,926,196 5,794,897 Section 8 Housing 8,949,041 8,994,784 10,623,052 Total CDBG / Section 8 Funds 12,146,823 10,920,980 16,417,949 Total Special Revenue Funds 108,722,800 70,519,081 78,351,061 185,458 185,458 16,520 2,955,458 185,458 16,520 147,186 144,420 144,420 2,001,283 1,715,004 1,711,195 Water/Wastewater 61,572,480 60,844,647 66,510,174 Solid Waste 15,828,588 14,989,166 15,189,163 79,549,537 77,693,237 83,554,952 $342,986,719 $283,183,609 $303,760,316 Total Rio Salado Fund Performing Arts Performing Arts Tax Total Performing Arts Fund Debt Service Fund Intergovernmental Total Debt Service Fund Enterprise Funds Cemetery Golf Total Enterprise Funds TOTAL ALL FUNDS * Includes actual revenues recognized on the modified accrual basis as of the date the proposed budget was prepared plus estimated revenues for the remainder of the fiscal year. 255 Schedule D Summary by Fund of Other Financing Sources and Interfund Transfers Proceeds From Other Financing Sources FY 2010-11 Fund General Fund $724,712 Interfund Transfers FY 2010-11 In Out $186,4356 Special Revenue Funds Rio Salado Fund 7,262 HURF/LTAF (2,770,000) Total Special Revenue Funds 7,262 Debt Service Fund Capital Projects Funds Bond/Note Proceeds 2,770,000 (49,000) 436,463 (137,435) 436,463 (137,435) 38,252,292 CIP-Other Funding 1,739,500 CIP-Fund Balance Applied 7,586, 500 Total Capital Projects Funds (2,770,000) 47,578,292 Enterprise Funds Water/Wastewater 4,611,941 TOTAL ALL FUNDS $52,922,207 256 (436,463) $3,392,898 $(3,392,898) Schedule E Summary by Department of Expenditures/Expenses Within Each Fund Adopted Budgeted Expenditures/ Expenses FY 2009-10 Expenditure/ Expense Adjustments Approved FY 2009-10 Estimated Expenditures/ Expenses FY 2009-10* $(2,729) (2,046) (54,831) (6,232) (1,147) (1,973) (166,670) 5,586 4,848 (750,323) (603,780) 101,483 (698,005) (193,881) (1,136,455) 3,965,636 $378,900 314,713 2,730,618 538,536 495,011 864,781 4,059,254 2,741,597 2,906,044 3,424,666 9,030,808 73,291,354 26,047,091 20,881,497 16,817,753 9,260,815 $317,913 273,771 2,274,112 441,351 414,920 744,628 3,605,850 2,526,736 2,532,363 3,144,364 7,486,092 66,118,010 25,471,622 18,304,609 15,370,237 5,784,724 Budgeted Expenditures/ Expenses FY 2010-11 General Fund Mayor and Council City Manager Community Relations Diversity Program Internal Audit City Clerk City Court Human Resources City Attorney Financial Services Community Development Police Fire Community Services Public Works-General Non-Departmental Contingencies Total General Fund Special Revenue Funds Highway Users Revenue Fund Transit CDBG Section 8 Housing Rio Salado Performing Arts Total Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Fund Debt Service Total Debt Service Fund Capital Project Funds All Capital Projects Total Capital Project Funds Enterprise Funds Water/Wastewater Golf Cemetery Solid Waste Total Enterprise Funds Total All Funds $400,337 339,673 2,962,104 554,394 502,431 884,219 4,259,174 3,222,042 2,955,464 4,501,411 10,769,312 74,667,301 28,726,772 22,458,966 19,248,182 9,440,739 185,892,521 459,481 173,783,438 154,811,302 15,008,850 68,825,439 3,197,782 8,949,041 2,444,592 9,104,528 107,530,232 (42,488) (63,022) 1,092,621 (4,257) (13,135) (5,638) 964,081 11,393,667 63,071,133 1,926,196 8,994,784 2,016,123 8,820,315 96,222,218 11,667,658 64,026,251 5,794,897 10,623,052 1,889,799 8,511,128 102,512,785 19,875,542 19,875,542 19,217,500 19,217,500 22,111,500 22,111,500 96,310,568 96,310,568 96,310,568 96,310,568 48,264,755 48,264,755 75,772,343 1,731,353 379,350 14,114,556 91,997,602 $419,697,944 72,489,753 2,178,060 376,744 16,081,601 91,126,158 (1,897,010) (7,844) (230) (1,905,084) 68,508,991 1,799,763 348,256 15,341,345 85,998,355 $500,735,021 $(481,522) $471,532,079 * Includes actual expenditures/expenses recognized on the modified accrual basis as of the date the proposed budget was prepared plus estimated expenditures/expenses for the remainder of the fiscal year. 257 Budget Basis, Units, and Changes Accounting/Budgetary Basis The City of Tempe’s operating budget is legally adopted by Council resolution each fiscal year on a modified accrual basis, which is consistent with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). With modified accrual basis, revenue is recognized when it becomes available and measurable and expenditures as they are made. By contrast, Government-wide financial statements in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) must be recorded on a full accrual basis. This is where revenue is recognized as soon as it is earned and expenses are recognized as soon as a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash inflows and outflows. Fund Statements, in the CAFR, are modified accrual basis for the General Fund, Debt Service Fund, Special Revenue Funds, and Capital Project Funds and accrual basis for Proprietary Funds. Budget Units Funds (Fund Accounting) The City's Operating Budget is organized by funds in conformity with GAAP with guidelines established by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for with a separate set of self-balancing accounts. With this account structure, the revenue and expenditures/expenses are budgeted and approved prior to the beginning of each fiscal year by a resolution passed by the City Council. The various funds are grouped by two types, governmental and proprietary. Governmental funds are those through which most governmental functions of the City are financed and include the General Fund, Debt Service Fund, Special Revenue Funds, and Capital Project Funds. Proprietary funds are used to account for the City's organizations and activities which are similar to those often found in the private sector. The Proprietary (Enterprise) Funds include the Water/Wastewater, Solid Waste, Golf and Cemetery Funds. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report includes the combined financial statements of all funds. Programs Presentation of the operating budget is also structured by programs which delineate budget expenditures in terms of broad goals and objectives. Major programs include 1) General Services, 2) Development Services, 3) Public Safety, 4) Environmental Health, 5) Community Services, and 6) Transportation. Programs may transcend specific fund or departmental boundaries in that a program encompasses all associated activities, regardless of fund or department, directed toward the attainment of a general goal or objective. The relationship between programs and funds is presented in summary form in the Budget Summaries section as is their relation to the Departments and Divisions engaged in the pursuit of the respective goals and objectives. Departments Finally, the Performance Budget section of the operating budget illustrates the distribution of budget appropriations along the major organization units of City departments and their divisions. Changes to the Budget Mid-Year Program/Personnel Adjustment Request Should the need arise for additional personnel or program enhancements during the fiscal year to meet some unforeseen need, a mid-year program/personnel request is submitted to the Budget Office for a needs assessment and fiscal impact review. If after evaluation, the request is approved and involves either additional personnel or the abolition of a position(s), the request is forwarded to either the relevant Council Committee or full Council with recommended action. Budget Transfers The department should process a budget transfer request form anytime a shortfall is anticipated in a departmental subtotal budget. Budget transfers are no longer necessary to address a shortfall within summary account groups as long as sufficient monies are available in the subtotal departmental budget. The subtotal budget includes salaries and wages, fringe benefits, materials and supplies, fees and services, travel and other expenses, contributions, and capital outlay, and excludes internal services. Only as a last resort are contingency monies used to fund a shortfall. Alternative courses of action should be sought before contingency monies will be considered. Purchase orders and requisitions will be held until the budget shortfall is addressed. Transfer of Appropriation At any time during the fiscal year, the City Manager may transfer part or all of any unencumbered appropriation balance among programs within a department, office, or agency. Upon written request by the City Manager, the Council may by ordinance transfer part or all of any unencumbered appropriation balance from one department, office, or agency to another (Section 5.08, City of Tempe Charter). Permission to Exceed Budget In the event of an emergency, the Council may seek permission from the State Board of Tax Appeals (previously State Tax Commission) to exceed the adopted budget (Section 5.09, City of Tempe Charter). 258 Financial Structure and Organization Types of Budgeting Two separate budgets are adopted at the aggregate level for both the Operating and Capital Improvements Program and are then presented in program budget, performance and line-item form. The program budget portrays total and per capita expenditures along six broad programs or functions, including General Services, Development Services, Public Safety, Environmental Health, Community Services, and Transportation. This budget information is presented in the Budget Summaries section of the Annual Budget. The performance budget focuses on departmental and divisional goals and objectives. Benchmark and other workload data are collected to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of services. This information is published in the performance budget section of our Annual Budget. Finally, the line-item budget lists dollar amounts budgeted for each cost center and expenditure category and is published separately. Level of Revenue and Expenditure Detail Revenue is presented at several levels within the revenue information section of the Annual Budget. Revenue is given by fund type (General Governmental, Special Revenue, and Enterprise), by revenue category, and by major source. Additionally, all key revenue is addressed in terms of a ten year history, underlying assumptions, and major influences with graphic illustration of the trends to facilitate review of the revenue patterns. Summary schedules of estimated revenue is also presented in the Schedules and Summaries section of the Annual Budget. Expenditures are presented at several levels of detail including information by line-item, organizational unit performance, program, and fund. Line-item detail of expenditures is given in the Annual Line-Item Budget. Performance, program, and fund level expenditure data are presented in the Annual Budget. Relationship Between Budgeting and Accounting This budget is adopted on a basis consistent with GAAP, except for certain items which are adjusted on the City's accounting system at fiscal year end. During the year, the City's accounting system is maintained on the same basis as the adopted budget. This enables departmental budgets to be easily monitored via accounting system reports on a monthly basis. The major differences between this adopted budget and GAAP for governmental funds are: a) encumbrances are recorded as the equivalent of expenditures (budget) as opposed to a reservation of fund balance (GAAP); b) certain revenue and expenditures, not recognized for budgetary purposes are accrued (GAAP); and c) supply inventory and self-insurance contributions are recognized as expenditures for budgetary purposes only. Enterprise Fund differences consist of the following: a) encumbrances are recorded as the equivalent of expenses (budget basis) as opposed to an expense of the following accounting period (GAAP); b) certain items, e.g., principal expense and capital outlay, are recorded as expenditures for budgetary purposes as opposed to adjustments of the appropriate balance sheet accounts (GAAP); and c) depreciation is recorded as an expense (GAAP) and not recognized for budgetary purposes. Fund Structure Governmental Funds Capital Projects Funds: Capital Projects Funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by Proprietary Funds and Trust Funds). Debt Service Fund: Debt Service Funds are set up to receive dedicated revenue used to make principal and interest payments on City debt. They are used to account for the accumulation of resources and the payment of general obligation and special assessment debt principal, interest and related costs, except the debt service accounted for in the Special Revenue Funds and Enterprise Funds. General Fund: The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City. It is used to account for all activities of the City not accounted for in some other fund. Special Revenue Funds: Special Revenue Funds are established to account for legally restricted funding. Our Special Revenue Funds include: Performing Arts, Highway User Revenue, Local Transportation Assistance, Rio Salado, Community Facilities District, Transit, Community Development Block Grant and Housing Assistance. Proprietary Funds Enterprise Funds: Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations including debt service that are: (a) financed and operated in a manner similar to private businesses, where the intent of the government body is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis are financed or recovered primarily through user charges; or (b) where the governing body has determined that periodic determination of revenue earned, expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriate for capital maintenance, public policy, management control, accountability, or other purposes. Our Enterprise Funds include: Water and Wastewater, Solid Waste, Cemetery and Golf. 259 Personnel Summary The number of full-time employees for FY 2010-11 totals 1,818.43 full-time equivalents (FTE), including 1,602 fulltime, 13.85 permanent full-time equivalents, and 202.58 temporary full-time equivalent employees. This total translates to a 10.65% decrease over the 2,035.25 full-time equivalents budgeted in FY 2009-10. Department 2008-09 Actual 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised Full Perm Temp Full Perm Temp Full Perm Temp Full Perm Temp Time FTE Time FTE Time Time FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE 2010-11 Budget Mayor and Council 7 7 7 7 City Manager 3 3 3 4 City Attorney 27 0.62 24 0.58 4 0.58 4 0.58 4 0.58 4.20 40 4.06 38 4.06 38 4.06 109 11.95 101 9.01 95 9.01 84 18 1.83 23 1.83 25 1.83 22 1.34 147 11.40 180.62 144 9.15 165.69 136 5.65 165.69 120 5.50 165.69 City Clerk 4 City Court 41 Community Development Community Relations Community Services Diversity Program 1.75 0.65 4 0.50 Finance and Technology 147 0.50 Fire 186 23 Human Resources Internal Audit 575 Public Works 556 Sub Total Total Personnel 2.60 24 1.75 2.10 1.00 184 1.00 0.50 23 20 20 4 4 3 0.45 6.25 493 6.25 17.20 469 3.00 562 19.69 542 3.50 0.50 184 1.00 6.25 562 17.20 514 3.50 0.63 2 1.00 132 0.50 181 1.00 4.01 0.50 6.25 138 1.60 147 0.63 0.50 1.75 0.50 1.25 3 23 3 4 Police 1.75 FTE 2.50 20.20 1,851 19.30 226.99 1,811 19.00 205.25 1,757 15.00 205.25 1,602 13.85 202.58 2,097.29 2,035.25 260 1,977.25 1,818.43 Personnel Schedules Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget MAYOR & COUNCIL 1110 Mayor Gen 1 1 1 1 Gen 1 1 1 1 Council Member Gen 5 7 5 7 5 7 5 7 City Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 Asst City Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Exec Asst City Admin+ Gen 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 3 3 4 CITY MANAGER Administration Total Full-Time 1231 2010-11 Budget Vice Mayor Mayor & Council Total Full-Time 1210 2009-10 Revised EECBG Energy & Grants Project Mgr Grant (Position is funded through 6-30-12) Total Full-Time City Manager Total Full-Time 1710 CITY ATTORNEY Legal Services City Attorney Gen 1 1 1 1 Dep City Attorney Gen 2 2 2 2 Sr Asst City Attorney Gen 1 1 1 1 Police Legal Advisor Gen 1 1 1 1 Asst City Attorney Gen 9 8 8 8 Paralegal II+ Sr Exec Asst City Admin+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Gen 1 1 1 0 Administrative Support Supvr 1 1 1 1 Paralegal I+ Gen Gen 60% Grants 40% 1 1 1 1 Legal Specialist II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Legal Assistant Gen 5 3 3 3 Paralegal** Gen 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Assistant City Attorney** Gen 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Law Intern* Gen 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 24 21 21 20 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** Total Temp FTE* 3115 City Attorney/Water Sr Asst City Attorney W/WW 1 1 1 1 Asst City Attorney W/WW 1 1 1 1 Legal Specialist II+ W/WW 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 Total Full-Time City Attorney Total Full-Time 27 24 24 23 City Attorney Total Perm FTE** 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 City Attorney Total Temp FTE* 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 261 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget CITY CLERK 1310 City Clerk Gen 1 1 1410 1 1 Gen 1 1 1 1 Executive Assistant Gen 2 2 2 2 COE * Gen City Clerk Total Full-Time 0.58 4 0.58 4 0.58 4 0.58 4 City Clerk Total Temp FTE* 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 CITY COURT Administration/Judicial Division Presiding City Judge Gen 1 1 1 1 Court Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 City Judge Gen 2 2 2 2 Court Commissioner Gen 2 2 2 2 Dep Court Admin Gen 2 2 2 1 Court Svcs Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Court Training Coord Gen 1 0 0 0 Court Interpreter Gen 1 0 0 0 11 9 9 8 Criminal Division Court Svcs Supvr Gen 2 2 1 1 Lead Court Svcs Spec Gen 0 0 0 1 Court Svcs Spec II+ Gen 9 9 9 8 COE* Gen 2.10 1.96 1.96 1.96 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 1412 4720 4730 11 11 10 10 2.10 1.96 1.96 1.96 2 Civil Division Court Svcs Supvr Gen 2 1 1 Lead Court Svcs Spec Gen 1 1 1 0 Court Svcs Spec II+ Gen 16 14 13 13 COE* Gen 2.10 19 2.10 2.10 16 2.10 2.10 15 2.10 2.10 15 2.10 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Grant Grant 0 0.65 0 0.65 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 Grant Grant Grant 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 0 2 1 3 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 4710 2010-11 Budget Dep City Clerk Total Full-Time 1411 2009-10 Revised Court Enhancement Fund Deputy Court Admin Total Full-Time Fill the Gap Fund Court Interpreter Court Interpreter** Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** Local JCEF Court Svcs Supvr Court Svcs Spec II+ Court Training Coord Total Full-Time Dsg Fund 262 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget City Court Total Full-Time 41 40 2710 38 38 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 City Court Total Temp FTE* 4.20 4.06 4.06 4.06 Gen 67% Grants 33% Gen 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 Gen 1 1 1 0 Gen 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Administration Community Development Dir Management Assistant II+ Executive Assistant Total Full-Time Building Safety Building Safety Inspections and Permits Dep Dev Svcs Mgr-Bldg Safe Per Gen 1 1 1 1 Plan Review Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Bldg Inspection Admin Gen 1 1 1 1 Development Project Coord Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Plan Check Engineer+ Gen 6 6 6 6 Sr Bldg Inspector Gen 1 1 1 1 Management Assistant II+ Gen 0 0 0 0 Bldg Code Complaint Invest Gen 1 1 1 0 Plans Examiner Gen 1 1 0 0 Permit Center Supervisor Gen 1 1 1 1 Bldg Inspector II+ Gen 8 7 7 5 Code Inspector II+ Gen 1 1 0 0 4 Development Svcs Spec II+ Gen 6 6 4 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 4 4 4 3 Building Inspector I/II+ * Gen 2.00 0.66 0.66 0.66 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2727 2736 2010-11 Budget City Court Total Perm FTE** Community Development Dir 2721 2009-10 Revised 33 32 28 24 2.00 0.66 0.66 0.66 Code Compliance Code Compliance Code Enforcement Administrator Gen 0 0 0 0 Sr Code Inspector Spec Gen 0 0 1 1 Code Inspector II+ Gen 0 0 5 3 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 0 0 0 0 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 1.00 0 0 5.00 Total Full-Time 0 0 6 4 Total Temp FTE* 0 0 5.00 1.00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 EECBG - IED Code Im Bldg Inspector II+ Grant (Position is funded through 6-30-12) Total Full-Time 2811 Neighborhood Enhancement Code Enforcement Administrator Gen 1 1 0 0 Sr Code Inspector Spec Gen 1 1 0 0 263 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Code Inspector II+ Gen 8 8 0 0 Gen 1 1 0 0 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 11 11 0 0 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 Total Temp FTE* Economic Development Economic Development Admin Community Development Mgr Community Development Mgr Principal Architect Sr Architect+ Gen 67% Grants 33% Gen Gen 1 1 1 1 Gen 1 1 1 1 Technology Development Spec Gen 1 1 1 1 Economic Development Spec Gen 1 1 1 1 Neighbor Enhance Prog Coord Executive Assistant Gen Gen 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 2 1 COE* Gen 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2814 2772 2778 2774 7 7 5 1.00 1.00 0.00 Gen 0.00 1.60 1.60 1.60 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Perm FTE** 0.00 1.60 1.60 1.60 Total Temp FTE* 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 Section 8 Housing Housing Svcs Administrator Grant 1 1 1 1 Housing Svcs Supvr Grant 1 1 1 1 Affordable Housing Rehab Specialist Grant 2 2 2 2 Family Self Sufficiency Spec Grant 1 1 1 1 Housing Services Spec II+ Grant 6 6 6 6 Administrative Assistant II+ Grant 1 1 1 1 12 12 12 12 Grant 1 1 1 1 Grant 1 1 1 1 Grant Grant Grant 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 Grant 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 6 CDBG/Home Housing Services Supvr Housing Svcs Mgmt Accountant Homeless Coordinator Family Self Sufficiency Spec Principal Planner (Funded for FY10/11 only) Administrative Assistant II+ Total Full-Time 2731 8 1.00 Housing Neighborhood Enhancement Homeless Outreach Coordinator** Total Full-Time 2863- 2010-11 Budget Administrative Assistant II+ Total Full-Time 2810 2009-10 Revised Planning Planning Dep Dev Svcs Mgr-Planning Gen 1 1 1 1 Code Enforcement Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 264 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Principal Planner Gen 1 1 1 1 Gen 0 0 1 1 Sr Planner Gen 7 6 4 4 Sr Transportation Planner Gen 0 0 0 1 Planner II+ Gen Gen Gen 4 0.00 0 3 1.00 0 3 0.50 0 0 0.00 1 Gen 1 1 1 1 Code Inspector II+ Gen 3 3 3 2 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 3 2 2 2 COE* Gen 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 Total Full-Time 21 18 17 15 Total Perm FTE** 0.00 1.00 0.50 0.00 Total Temp FTE* 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 Redevelopment Redevelopment/Special Projects Dep Comm Dev Mgr - Redev & Rev 50% Gen 50% Grants 1 0 0 0 Principal Planner Gen 2 2 1 1 Sr Planner Gen 3 3 3 3 Planner II+ Gen 3 3 1 0 9 8 5 4 Total Full-Time 4410 Tempe Town Lake Community Dev - Rio Salado Administration Dep Comm Dev Mgr - Econ Dev Rio 1 1 1 1 Rio Salado Mgr Rio 1 1 1 1 Rio Salado Financial Analyst Rio 1 1 1 1 Sr Planner Rio 1 1 1 1 Administrative Project Coord Rio 1 0 0 0 Community Relations Coord Rio 1 0 0 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Rio 1 1 1 1 COE* Rio 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE * 4413 7 5 5 5 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 Community Dev - Rio Salado Operations Administrative Project Coordinator Rio 0 1 0 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Rio 2 2 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 Total Full-Time 3923 2010-11 Budget Development Svcs Liaison Planner II+** Tech Planner Sr Code Inspector Spec 2812 2009-10 Revised Transportation Planning Planning & Project Review Dep PW Mgr - Light Rail Div Dep PW Mgr - Light Rail Div Transit Gen 67% Transit 33% 0 0 1 0 1 Principal Planner Transit 0 0 2 2 Sr Transportation Planner+ Transit 0 0 3 3 Management Assistant II+ Transit 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 6 Total Full-Time 265 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Community Development Total Full-Time 111 104.00 1219 95.00 84 0.00 2.60 2.10 1.60 Community Development Total Temp FTE* 11.95 9.01 9.01 4.01 COMMUNITY RELATIONS OFFICE Administration Administration Community Relations Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 Mayor's Chief of Staff Gen 1 1 1 0 Asst to the Mayor Gen 0 0 0 1 Sr Exec Asst City Admin+ Gen 2 2 1 0 Sr Mayoral/City Council Aide+ Gen 4 4 3 2 Asst to the City Council Gen 0 0 0 1 Executive Assistant Gen 0 0 0 1 Administrative Assistant I+ Gen 1 1 2 0 Administrative Intern* Gen 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.00 COE* Gen 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 9 9 8 6 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.49 Total Temp FTE* Government Relations Government Relations Dir Gen Total Full-Time 1214 2010-11 Budget Community Development Total Perm FTE* Total Full-Time 1216 2009-10 Revised 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 Communication/Media Relations Communication & Media Relations Comm and Media Relations Dir Gen 1 1 1 1 Media Svcs Admin Gen 1 1 1 1 Community Outreach Mktg Coord II+ Gen 0 1 1 1 Community Relations Coord Gen 2 2 2 2 Management Assistant II Arts 0 1 1 0 Management Assistant II W/WW 0 1 1 0 Media Svcs Producer II+ Gen 2 2 2 1 Media Svcs Producer II+ CIP 0 0 0 1 (Position funded through 6-30-12) Call Center Supervisor Gen 0 1 1 0 Media Services Assistant * Gen 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 Media Services Intern* Gen 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 6 10 10 7 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 1220 Customer Relations Center Customer Relations Supvr Gen 0 0 0 1 Administrative Assistant II Gen 0 0 0 1 Administrative Assistant II W/WW Total Full-Time 3916 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 1 Marketing and Public Information Community Outreach Mktg Supvr Transit 0 0 1 Comm Outreach/Mktg Coord II+ Transit 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 3 Total Full-Time 266 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Rio Salado Marketing 4418 Community Relations Coord Rio Total Full-Time 1215 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 Neighbor Program Dir Gen 1 1 1 Gen 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 Community Relations Total Temp FTE* 18 23 25 22 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.34 1 COMMUNITY SERVICES Administration Administration Community Svcs Dir Gen 85% Arts 15% 1 1 1 Sr Social Svcs Coord+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Management Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 0 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 3 3 3 2 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* Arts and Library Library Dep Comm Svcs Mgr-Library Gen 1 1 1 0 Library Supvr Gen 4 4 3 3 Sr Social Svcs Coord+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Librarian I/II+ Gen 11 11 11 11 Library Ops Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Circulation Svcs Coord Gen 1 1 1 1 Library Spec II+ Gen 9 9 7 5 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 0 Library Asst Gen 5 5 4 4 Librarian I/II+** Gen 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 Library Spec II+** Gen 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Library Assistant** Gen 2.50 2.50 2.00 2.00 Unclassified Temp - Office* Gen 9.84 7.44 7.44 7.44 Total Full-Time 2481 0 Neighborhood Svcs Spec Community Relations Total Full-Time 2440 2010-11 Budget Neighborhood Program Neighborhood Program Total Full-Time 2410 2009-10 Revised 34 34 30 26 Total Perm FTE** 4.00 4.00 2.50 2.00 Total Temp FTE* 9.84 7.44 7.44 7.44 Cultural Services - Administration Dep Comm Svcs Mgr-Cultural Svc Gen 50% Arts 50% 1 1 1 1 Arts Administrator Gen Gen 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 Perfor Arts 1 1 1 1 Arts Coord Arts Coord 267 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 80% Perfor Arts 20% 1 1 Recreation Leader III* Gen 0.95 0.95 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 Gen 6.01 6.01 6.01 6.01 5 5 4 4 7.32 7.32 7.32 7.32 Historical Museum Museum Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Museum Curator+ Gen 4 4 3 3 Museum Registrar Gen 1 1 1 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 0 Museum Aide** Gen 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 Unclassified Temp - Office* Gen 0.70 0.65 0.65 0.65 7 7 6 4 Total Perm FTE** 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 Total Temp FTE* 0.70 0.65 0.65 0.65 Performing Arts - Administration Cultural Facilities Admin Arts 1 1 1 1 Management Assistant II+ Arts 1 0 0 1 Arts Coordinator Arts 4 4 4 4 Arts Specialist Arts 4 4 4 3 Administrative Assistant II+ Arts 1 1 1 0 Box Office Assistant Arts 1 1 1 0 Unclassified Temp* Arts 13.27 13.27 13.27 13.27 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 11 11 9 13.27 13.27 13.27 2 Sr Social Svcs Coord+ Gen 2 2 2 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 1 Social Services/Diversion Social Svcs Supvr Gen 1 1 0 Social Svcs Counselor II+ Gen 3 3 3 3 Social Services Counselor** Gen 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.00 Diversion Counselor* Gen 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 Home Detention Monitor* Gen 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Administrative Assistant+* Gen 0.80 0.43 0.43 0.43 4 0.65 1.40 4 0.65 0.43 3 0.65 0.43 4 0.00 0.43 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** Total Temp FTE* 2457 12 13.27 Social Services Social Services/North Side Multigenl Center Total Full-Time 2451 1 0.95 Gen Total Full-Time 2415 1 0.95 Unclassified Temporary* Total Temp FTE* 3610 2010-11 Budget Recreation Leader IV* Total Full-Time 2484 2009-10 Revised Social Services/KID ZONE Kid Zone Prog Admin Community Svcs Supvr Gen Gen 268 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Sr Social Svcs Coord+ Gen 4 4 Gen 9 7 7 6 Asst Rec Coord (Program Mgr)** Gen 3.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 65.93 58.60 58.60 58.60 20 18 18 17 Total Perm FTE** 3.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 Total Temp FTE* 65.93 58.60 58.60 58.60 5 5 Social Services/Partnerships Social Svcs Supvr Gen 2 2 2 1 Sr Social Svcs Coord+ Gen 2 2 2 2 Social Svcs Counselor II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Crisis Intervention Spec Gen 3 3 3 3 Unclassified Temporary * Gen 7.43 3.60 3.60 3.60 8 8 8 7 7.43 3.60 3.60 3.60 1 Social Services/Administration Dep Comm Svcs Mgr-Soc Svcs Gen 1 1 1 Community Svcs Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 3 3 3 2 Administrative Assistant II+** Gen 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 5 5 5 4 Total Perm FTE** 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 Total Temp FTE* 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Total Full-Time Social Services/Escalante Social Svcs Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Social Svcs Coord+ Gen 4 4 4 3 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Social Services Coordinator** Gen 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Administrative Assistant II+** Gen 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.00 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 7.28 7.28 7.28 7.28 6 6 6 5 Total Perm FTE** 1.50 1.50 0.75 0.75 Total Temp FTE* 7.28 7.28 7.28 7.28 Total Full-Time 2521 4 5 Asst Recreation Coord Total Temp FTE* 2487 4 5 Gen Total Full-Time 2486 2010-11 Budget Social Services Specialist Total Full-Time 2485 2009-10 Revised Recreation Centers and Programs Recreation - Administration Parks & Rec Mgr Gen 1 1 1 0 Dep Parks & Rec Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 P&G Course Supvr Gen 0 0 0 0 Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 1 0 0 0 Sr Recreation Coord+ CIP 0 1 1 1 Sr Mgmt Asst Gen 0 0 0 0 Executive Assistant Gen Asst Recreation Coord Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Gen 2 2 2 1 269 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Unclassified Temporary* Gen 0.22 1.22 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2522 1.22 1.22 1.22 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 Recreation Leader* Gen 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18 3 3 3 3 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18 Senior Adults Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 2 2 2 2 Asst Recreation Coord Gen 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II Gen 1 1 1 1 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 2.87 2.87 2.87 2.87 4 4 4 4 2.87 2.87 2.87 2.87 1 Special Interest and Boating Parks & Rec Admin Gen 1 1 1 Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 2 2 2 2 Recreation Leader III* Gen 1.93 1.93 1.93 1.93 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 4.72 4.72 4.72 4.72 3 3 3 3 6.65 6.65 6.65 6.65 Total Temp FTE* Adult Sports Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 3.84 3.84 3.84 3.84 1 1 1 1 3.84 3.84 3.84 3.84 1 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* Youth Sports Parks & Rec Admin Gen 1 1 1 Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 2 2 2 2 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 3.89 3.89 3.89 3.89 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 3 3 3 3 3.89 3.89 3.89 3.89 Diablo Stadium Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2531 5 0.22 Gen Total Full-Time 2529 7 Gen Total Temp FTE* 2526 1.22 7 Parks & Rec Admin Total Full-Time 2525 1.22 7 Sr Recreation Coord+ Total Temp FTE* 2524 2010-11 Budget Special Events Total Full-Time 2523 2009-10 Revised 1 1 1 1 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 Kiwanis Recreation Center Parks & Rec Admin Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 2 2 2 2 270 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 2 2 2 1 Gen 0.75 0.75 0.75 1.25 Recreation Leader I* Gen 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Recreation Worker* Gen 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 20.29 20.29 20.29 20.29 5 5 5 4 Total Perm FTE** 0.75 0.75 0.75 1.25 Total Temp FTE* 21.54 21.54 21.54 21.54 1.99 1.99 1.99 1.99 1.99 1.99 1.99 1.99 Kiwanis Concessions Unclassified Temporary* Gen Total Temp FTE* 2533 Aquatics Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Swimming Pool Maint Mechanic Gen 1 1 1 1 Swimming Pool Maint Tech Gen 1 1 1 1 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 18.08 16.73 16.73 16.73 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2534 Gen Total Full-Time 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Gen 1 1 1 1 Gen 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 1 1 1 1 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 1 Boating Programs Sr Recreation Coord+ Gen 1 1 1 Asst Recreation Coord Gen 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 1 Community Outreach/Marketing Parks & Rec Admin Gen 1 1 1 Comm Outreach/Mktg Coord II+ Gen 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total Full-Time Rio Salado Special Events Asst Recreation Coord Rio Total Full-Time 4412 3 16.73 Unclassified Temp* Total Full-Time 4411 3 16.73 Sr Recreation Coord+ Total Temp FTE* 2537 3 16.73 Kiwanis Batting Cage Total Full-Time 2536 3 18.08 Adapted Recreation Sr Recreation Coord+ 2535 2010-11 Budget Administrative Assistant II+** Total Full-Time 2532 2009-10 Revised Rio Salado Events Marketing Asst Recreation Coord Rio Total Full-Time 271 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Community Development - Rio Salado Ops 4413 2010-11 Budget Administrative Project Coordinator Rio 0 0 1 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Rio 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 Total Full-Time Community Services Total Full-Time 1212 2009-10 Revised 145 141 136 120 Community Services Total Perm FTE** 11.40 9.15 5.65 5.50 Community Services Total Temp FTE* 180.62 165.69 165.69 165.69 DIVERSITY OFFICE Diversity Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Diversity Spec Gen 1 1 1 1 Diversity Dept Liaison Gen 1 0 0 0 Administrative Assistant II Gen 1 1 1 0 Administrative Assistant II** Gen 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 ADA Compliance Specialist** Gen Diversity Total Full-Time 0.50 4 0.50 3 0.50 3 0.50 2 Diversity Total Perm FTE** 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 FINANCE AND TECHNOLOGY 1810 Financial Services Administration Finance & Tech Dir Gen 1 1 1 1 Executive Assistant Gen 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 Total Full-Time 1812 Budget Dep Financial Svcs Mgr Gen 1 1 1 Lead Budget & Finance Analyst Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Budget & Finance Analyst+ Gen 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 Total Full-Time 1831 Accounting Controller Gen 1 1 1 1 Accounting Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 1 Financial Mgmt Accountant Gen 1 1 1 Payroll Supervisor Gen 1 1 1 1 Accountant Gen 1 1 1 1 Transportation Financial Analyst Transit 0 1 1 1 Payroll Specialist Gen 1 1 1 1 Financial Svcs Tech II+ Gen 4 4 4 4 Accounting Assistant* Gen 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.00 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 1832 10 11 11 11 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.00 Tax and Licensing Tax & License Admin Gen 1 0 0 0 License & Collections Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Tax Audit Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Tax Auditor II+ Gen 5 5 5 6 272 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Rental Property Spec Gen 1 1 Specialty Licenses Coord Gen 1 1 1 0 Gen 1 1 1 1 Revenue Compliance Officer II+ Gen 3 3 3 3 Financial Svcs Tech II+ Gen 4 3 3 3 18 16 16 16 Customer Services Dep Financial Svcs Mgr W/WW 1 1 1 1 Customer Svcs Admin W/WW 1 1 1 1 Customer Svcs Office Supvr W/WW 1 1 1 1 Customer Svcs Field Supvr W/WW 1 1 1 1 Sr Financial Svcs Tech W/WW 1 1 1 1 Financial Svcs Tech II+ W/WW 8 8 8 8 Water Meter Reader II+ W/WW 7 7 7 7 Water Meter Reader I+ W/WW 1 1 1 1 21 21 21 21 Total Full-Time 1851 Central Services/Purchasing Central Svcs Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Procurement Officer Gen 3 3 3 3 Financial Svcs Tech II+ Gen 3 3 3 3 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 0 0 Unclassified Temporary-Office* Gen 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 1852 2621 8 8 7 7 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 Central Services/Duplicating & Supplies Reprographics Supvr Gen 2 2 0 0 Reprographics Operator Gen 1 1 0 0 Distribution Clerk Gen 1 1 0 0 4 4 0 0 Total Full-Time 2613 2010-11 Budget 1 Tax Analyst Total Full-Time 1841 2009-10 Revised 1 Safety & Training Safety & Risk Coord W/WW 0 1 1 1 Industrial Hygienist W/WW 0 1 1 1 Safety & Training Coord W/WW 0 2 2 1 Safety & Training Coord** W/WW 0 0 0 1 Total Full-Time 0 4 4 3 Total Temp FTE* 0 0 0 0 Total Perm FTE** 0 0 0 1 Risk Management Risk Mgr Risk 1 1 1 1 Safety & Risk Coord Risk 1 0 0 0 Risk Mgmt Claims Adjuster Risk 1 1 1 1 Risk Mgmt Spec Risk 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II** Risk 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** 273 4 3 3 3 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Information Technology Administration 1991 IT Mgr Gen 1 1 1 0 Gen 2 2 2 1 Sr Mgmt Asst Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Tech Support Analyst Gen 0 0 0 1 Executive Assistant Gen 1 1 1 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 0 0 0 1 5 5 5 4 Applications Support IT Mgr Gen 0 0 0 1 IT Project Mgr Gen 0 0 0 1 Business Analyst Gen 0 0 0 3 Business Analyst W/WW 0 0 0 1 Sr Programmer Analyst Gen 0 0 0 5 Sr Programmer Analyst W/WW 0 0 0 2 PC Svcs Supvr Gen 1 1 0 0 Sr PC Svcs Conslt Gen 2 1 0 0 PC Svcs Consultant II+ Gen 5 1 0 0 8 3 0 13 Total Full-Time 1993 Network Operations IT Mgr Gen 0 0 0 1 Network Ops Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Enterprise Network Eng Gen 2 2 2 2 Enterprise Network Eng II+ Gen 7 6 5 4 Enterprise Network Tech II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Lead Enterprise Network Tech Gen 1 1 1 1 12 11 10 10 Total Full-Time 1994 Enterprise Applications IT Mgr Gen 0 0 0 1 Applications Dir Gen 1 1 1 0 IT Support Analyst Supvr Gen 1 0 0 0 Business Analyst Gen 7 7 7 2 Business Analyst W/WW 1 1 1 0 IT Project Mgr Gen 2 2 2 1 Database Administrator Gen 3 3 3 3 Webmaster Gen 2 2 2 2 Sr Programmer Analyst Gen 10 10 9 4 Sr Programmer Analyst W/WW 1 1 2 0 Programmer Analyst II+ Gen 4 4 0 0 Programmer Analyst II+ W/WW 1 1 0 0 IT Trng Coord Gen 1 1 1 0 IT Support Analyst II+ Gen 4 0 0 0 Eng GIS Supvr Gen 0 38 1 34 1 29 0 13 1 1 1 1 Total Full-Time 1995 2010-11 Budget Dep IT Mgr Total Full-Time 1992 2009-10 Revised System Administration Systems Admin Supvr Gen 274 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Cost Source Actual Budget Center Position Sr Technical Support Analyst Gen 2 1 1 0 Gen 0 0 1 1 Sr Data Center Support Spec Gen 0 0 0 1 Data Center & Net Ops Supvr Gen 0 0 0 1 Data Center Support Spec Gen 0 0 0 3 Technical Support Analyst II+ Gen 4 4 4 4 7 6 7 11 Training and Automation Sr Data Center Support Spec Gen 1 1 1 0 Data Center Support Spec Gen 3 3 3 0 Production Control Coord Gen 1 1 0 0 Data Center & Net Ops Supvr Gen 1 1 1 0 IT Trng Coord Gen 0 0 0 1 Reprographics Supvr Gen 0 0 0 2 Reprographics Oper Gen 0 0 0 1 Distribution Clerk Gen 0 0 0 1 6 6 5 5 Total Full-Time 1997 Customer Support IT Support Analyst Supvr Gen 0 1 1 1 IT Support Analyst II+ Gen 0 3 3 3 Sr PC Svcs Conslt Gen 0 1 1 1 PC Svcs Consultant II+ Gen 0 4 5 4 0 9 10 9 Total Full-Time 1852 Central Services/Duplicating & Supplies Reprographics Supvr Gen 0 0 2 0 Reprographics Operator Gen 0 0 1 0 Distribution Clerk Gen 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 Total Full-Time 2310 Finance and Information Technology Total Full-Time 147 147 138 132 Finance and Information Technology Total Perm FTE** 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Finance and Information Technology Total Temp FTE* 1.25 0.63 0.63 0.00 FIRE Administration/Fire Prevention Administration Fire Chief Gen 1 1 1 1 Asst Fire Chief Gen 1 2 2 2 Fire Deputy Chief Gen 4 3 3 3 Fire Budget / Finance Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Executive Assistant Gen 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant I/II+ Gen 0 1 1 1 8 9 9 9 Total Full-Time 2330 2010-11 Budget Sr PC Svcs Conslt Total Full-Time 1996 2009-10 Revised Fire Prevention Asst Fire Chief Gen 1 1 1 1 Fire Inspector II+ Gen 8 6 6 6 Fire Education Spec Gen 2 2 2 2 275 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 Total Full-Time 2332 Fire District Total Full-Time 1 1 12 10 10 10 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 Emergency Medical Services Fire Emergency Services Fire Captain Gen 35 33 33 33 Fire Eng Gen 36 36 36 36 74 74 72 145 143 143 141 Firefighter+ Gen 74 (66 Firefighter, Engineer or Captain positions are paramedic assignment) Total Full-Time 2370 Medical Services Fire Deputy Chief Gen 1 1 1 1 Fire Captain Paramedic-Assign Gen 1 1 1 1 EMS Coord Gen 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 Total Full-Time 2374 Ambulance Operations Medical Transp Contract Coord Contract 1 1 1 0 Paramedic Contract 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 1 Total Full-Time 2361 Support Services/Personnel Safety Support Services - Administration Fire Deputy Chief Gen 1 1 1 Fire Svcs Inventory Tech Gen 2 2 2 2 Service Aide ** Gen 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** 2363 3 3 3 3 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 1 Fire Apparatus Maintenance Sr Fire Mechanic Gen 1 1 1 Fire Mechanic Gen 1 1 1 1 Fire Svcs Inventory Tech** Gen 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** 2380 2010-11 Budget Tempe County Island Fire District Fire Inspector II+ 2340 2009-10 Revised 2 2 2 2 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Homeland Security/Special Operations Special Operations Fire Deputy Chief Gen 1 1 1 1 Hazardous Material Prog Spec Gen 1 1 1 1 Fire Captain Paramedic-Assign Gen 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 Total Full-Time 276 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Training/Professional Development Training/Professional Development 2350 Gen 1 1 1 1 Fire Captain Paramedic-Assign Gen 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 Fire Department Total Full-Time 186 184 184 181 Fire Department Total Perm FTE** 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 HUMAN RESOURCES Human Resources -Administration HR Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 Dep HR Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 HR Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Employee Benefits Admin Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr HR Analyst+ 5 5 5 5 Benefits Prog Coord Gen Gen 10% Health 90% 1 1 1 1 HR Spec Gen 3 3 3 3 Executive Assistant Gen 1 1 1 0 HR Tech II+ Gen Gen 5 0 5 0 3 0 3 1 Gen 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 19 17 17 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Administrative Assistant II+ Human Resources Technician I/II+** Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** 1920 Tempe Learning Center Org Development Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Performance Mgmt Designer Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Learning & Org Dev Assoc Gen 2 2 1 1 4 4 3 3 Total Full-Time Human Resources Department Total Full-Time Human Resources Department Total Perm FTE** 1213 INTERNAL AUDIT OFFICE City Auditor 23 23 20 20 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Gen 1 1 1 1 Internal Auditor Gen 2 2 2 2 Contract Administrator Gen Gen 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.45 Contract Administrator* Internal Audit Total Full-Time Internal Audit Total Temp FTE* 2210 2010-11 Budget Fire Deputy Chief Total Full-Time 1911 2009-10 Revised 4 4 0.00 0.00 4 0.00 0.45 3 POLICE Office of the Chief Police Chief Gen 1 1 1 1 Assistant Police Chief Gen 1 1 1 1 Fiscal/Research Administrator Gen 1 0 0 0 Police Plan & Research Supvr Gen Gen Gen 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 Gen 2 0 0 0 Tactical Intel Crime Analyst Supvr Sergeant Management Assistant II+ 277 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Community Affairs Spec Gen 1 1 Police Officer Gen 1 1 Crime Analyst II Gen 4 0 0 0 Gen 1 1 1 1 Alarm Coordinator Gen 1 0 0 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 3 1 1 0 Crime AnalysisTech Gen 1 0 0 0 20 7 7 5 Organizational Services Detention Bureau Detention Admin Gen 1 1 1 1 Detention Section Admin Gen 1 1 1 0 Detention Supervisor Gen 6 6 5 6 Detention Officer+ Gen 24 24 24 21 32 32 31 28 Total Full-Time 2251 Professional Dev Bureau Assistant Police Chief Gen 1 1 1 1 Commander Gen Gen 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 Lieutenant Sergeant Gen 9 9 9 6 Polygraph Examiner II+ Gen 3 3 2 1 Management Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Police Officer Gen 7 7 7 7 Community Affairs Specialist Gen 1 1 1 1 Volunteer Coordinator Gen 1 1 1 1 Police Support Svcs Spec Gen 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 0 0 COE* Gen 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2232 28 26 24 20 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 Support Services Communications Bureau Communications Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Communications Deputy Admin Gen 1 0 0 0 Communications Supervisor Gen 6 7 7 6 Communications Dispatcher II Gen 37 37 37 37 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen Total Full-Time 2233 2010-11 Budget 1 1 Executive Assistant Total Full-Time 2231 2009-10 Revised 1 1 1 1 1 1 46 46 46 45 Records Bureau Technical Svcs Bureau Admin Gen 1 1 1 1 Police Records Section Admin Gen 1 1 1 0 Police Records Supvr Gen 3 3 3 3 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 2 Records Clerk II Gen 17 15 15 15 Records Clerk I Gen 8 8 8 4 COE* Gen 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 278 31 29 29 25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Identification Unit 2235 Gen 1 1 1 1 Identification Technician Gen 5 5 5 5 Fingerprint Technician Gen 2 2 2 1 8 8 8 7 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 HIDTA Police Officer Desig Total Full-Time 2257 Property Unit Property Supervisor Gen 1 1 1 1 Property Technician Gen 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 1 Total Full-Time 2259 Office of Mgmt/Budget/Research Fiscal/Research Administrator Gen 0 1 1 Sr Budget & Finance Analyst Gen 0 0 0 1 Police Plan & Research Supvr Gen 0 1 1 1 Tactical Crim Intel Analyst Suprv Gen 0 1 1 0 Police Officer Gen 0 0 0 1 Management Assistant II+ Gen 0 2 2 0 Police Analyst II+ Gen 0 4 5 5 Alarm Coord Gen 0 1 1 1 Crime Analysis Tech Gen 0 1 1 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 0 2 2 2 0 13 14 12 Total Full-Time 2236 Operations Crime Prevention Unit Sergeant Gen 1 1 0 0 Police Officer Gen 4 4 3 3 Crime Prevention Spec Gen 2 2 2 0 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 0 8 8 6 3 Total Full-Time 2239 Homeland Security Unit Commander Gen 1 1 1 0 Sergeant Gen 1 1 0 0 Police Officer Gen 3 3 0 0 5 5 1 0 Total Full-Time 2241 2010-11 Budget Identification Supervisor Total Full-Time 2246 2009-10 Revised Criminal Investigations Bureau Assistant Police Chief Gen 1 1 1 1 Commander Gen Gen 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 Lieutenant Sergeant Gen 7 7 8 8 Police Officer Gen 41 41 47 47 0 Administrative Support Supvr Gen 1 1 1 Community Service Officer Gen 3 2 2 0 Investigative Assistant Gen 3 2 2 2 279 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 COE* Gen Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2242 60 58 66 61 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 1 Gen 1 1 1 Gen 5 5 5 5 Police Officer Gen 23 23 22 21 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 2 2 2 1 Traffic Enforcement Aide Gen 7 5 5 2 38 36 35 30 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 Special Investigations Bureau Gen Gen Gen 5 5 6 5 Police Officer Gen 23 23 26 25 Police Analyst Gen 1 1 0 0 Investigative Assistant Gen 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 32 32 35 33 Total Full-Time Central City Bureau Commander Gen 1 1 1 1 Lieutenant Gen 0 2 2 1 Sergeant Gen 3 3 3 2 Police Officer Gen 15 15 15 14 Licensing Spec Gen 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 0 21 23 23 19 Total Full-Time Patrol Administration/South Ops Assistant Police Chief Gen 1 1 1 0 Sergeant Gen 1 1 1 3 Lieutenant Gen 2 2 2 2 Police Officer Gen 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 4 4 4 3 Police Reserves* Gen 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 Service Aide* Gen 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 COE* Gen 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 9 9 9 9 3.29 3.29 3.29 3.29 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2272 1 1.26 Lieutenant Commander 2271 2 1.26 Sergeant Lieutenant Sergeant 2248 1.26 2010-11 Budget Traffic Investigations Bureau Total Full-Time 2243 1.26 2009-10 Revised Patrol North Operations Commander Gen 3 3 3 2 Sergeant Gen 24 24 24 24 Lieutenant Gen 5 4 4 4 Police Officer Gen Gen 147 10 147 10 142 10 141 0 189 188 183 171 Community Service Officer Total Full-Time 280 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget City Security Team 2273 Park Ranger Gen Total Full-Time 2274 Gen Total Full-Time Desg Total Full-Time 7 7 0 7 7 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Desg 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 Records Clerk II Desg 0 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant I/II+ Desg 1 1 1 1 3 4 5 6 RICO Desg Fund 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PD - Security Transportation Center Sergeant Transit 1 1 1 1 Security Officer Transit 7 7 7 0 8 8 8 1 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 2 Rio Salado - Sworn Police Officer Rio Total Full-Time Rio Salado - Park Rangers Sergeant Rio 1 1 1 1 Park Ranger Rio 8 8 8 6 9 9 9 7 Total Full-Time 3210 7 7 Desg Total Full-Time 4417 0 0 Police Officer Total Full-Time 4416 2 2 Vehicle Impound Specialist Police Officer - CIB Detective 3913 2 2 Vehicle Impound Total Full-Time 2222 9 9 AZ Post Commander 2209 2010-11 Budget Recruits Police Officer 2201 2009-10 Revised Police Department Total Full-Time 575 562 562 493 Police Department Total Perm FTE** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Police Department Total Temp FTE* 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 PUBLIC WORKS Administration PW Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Mgmt Asst Gen 1 1 1 1 Executive Assistant Gen Gen 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.50 Gen 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 3 3 3 2 Total Perm FTE** 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 Total Temp FTE* 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 Executive Assistant** COE* Total Full-Time 281 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Engineering Engineering/Admin. Support/Contract Admin. 3221 Gen 1 1 1 1 Eng Contract Compl Auditor Transit 1 1 1 1 Eng Services Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Contract Administrator Gen 1 1 1 1 Eng Contract Svcs Spec II+ Gen 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 Engineering/Private Development and Utility Asst City Engineer Gen 1 1 0 0 Sr Civil Engineer+ Gen 2 2 2 2 Eng Permit Inspection Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Util Infrastructure Supvr Gen 1 1 0 0 Sr Eng Associate+ Gen 5 5 5 5 Eng Tech II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 11 11 9 9 Total Full-Time 3223 Engineering/Capital Improvements Principal Civil Engineer Gen 2 2 2 1 Principal Civil Engineer 0 1 1 1 Principal Civil Engineer Transit Gen 50% W/WW 50% 0 0 0 1 Sr Civil Engineer+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Civil Engineer+ W/WW 1 1 1 1 Sr Civil Engineer+ Transit 1 1 1 1 Sr Construction Project Mgr W/WW 1 1 1 1 Sr Eng Associate+ Gen 4 3 3 3 10 10 10 10 Total Full-Time 3225 Engineering/Information & Technical Services Eng Services Administrator Gen 1 0 0 0 Eng GIS Supvr Gen 1 0 0 0 Real Estate Prog Coord Gen 2 2 1 1 GIS Coord Gen 1 1 1 0 Sr Eng Associate+ Gen 1 1 1 2 GIS Analyst+ Gen 2 1 1 0 GIS Analyst+ W/WW 0 1 0 0 Eng Tech II+ Gen 2 2 2 2 Survey Tech II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 11 9 7 6 Total Full-Time 3241 2010-11 Budget Dep PW Mgr-Engineering Total Full-Time 3222 2009-10 Revised Field Operations Field Operations/Facility Maintenance Administration Facility Maint Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Mgmt Asst Gen 1 0 0 0 Fac Maint Supvr Gen 2 2 2 2 Fac Automation Technician Gen 1 1 1 1 Bldg Tech Spec Gen Gen Gen 1 14 0 13 0 12 0 11 1 1 1 1 Bldg Equip Tech II+ Fac Electrician 282 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Gen 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 Building Equipment Technician I/II+ ** Gen 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 22 19 18 17 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 Total Perm FTE** Fleet Services/Fleet Management Fleet Mgr Gen 1 1 1 1 Fleet Analyst Gen 1 1 1 1 Auto Parts Supvr Gen 1 1 1 1 Equip Control Coord Gen 1 1 0 0 Fleet Parts Spec Gen 3 3 3 3 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 0 0 0 Parts Messenger* Gen 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 3262 6 6 0.50 0.50 3 Gen 3 3 3 Sr Fleet Equip Mechanic Gen 3 3 3 3 Equip Mechanic Gen 14 13 13 13 Equip Mechanic SW (position funded by Solid Waste starting January 2010) 0 1 1 1 Fleet Paint & Body Tech Gen 1 1 0 0 Equip Svcs Wkr II Gen 4 4 4 4 25 25 24 24 Field Services/Custodial 1 Custodial Svcs Supt Gen 1 1 1 1 Custodial Supvr Gen 1 3 2 2 Administrative Assistant II+ Gen 1 1 1 0 Custodial Team Leader Gen 1 4 4 2 Custodian Gen 8 30 28 24 Custodian SW 0 0 0 1 12 39 36 30 Field Services/Custodial 2 Custodial Supvr Gen 1 0 0 0 Custodial Team Leader Gen 1 0 0 0 Custodian Gen 7 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 Total Full-Time 3273 7 0.50 Fleet Supvr Total Full-Time 3272 8 0.50 Fleet Services/Fleet Maintenance Total Full-Time 3271 2010-11 Budget Sr Mgmt Asst** Total Full-Time 3261 2009-10 Revised Field Services/Custodial 3 Custodial Supvr Gen 1 0 0 0 Custodial Team Leader Gen 1 0 0 0 Custodian Gen 9 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 Total Full-Time 283 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Field Services/Custodial 4 3274 Custodial Supvr Gen 1 0 0 0 Gen 1 0 0 0 Custodian Gen 9 0 0 0 Custodian* Gen 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Full-Time 0 0.00 Arts 1 1 1 0 TCA Maint Supvr TCA Maint Supvr Arts Arts Arts 50% Transit 50% 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 TCA Maint Worker Arts 6 6 6 5 9 9 9 7 0 Hazardous Material Safety Environmental Hlth & Sfty Supv W/WW 0 1 1 Hazardous Material Safety Spec W/WW 0 1 1 0 HPCC Interns* W/WW 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.00 0 2 2 0 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.00 1 Hazardous Material Safety Environmental Hlth & Sfty Supv Hazardous Material Safety Spec SW 0 0 0 SW 0 0 0 1 HPCC Interns* SW Total Full-Time 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.98 2 Total Temp FTE* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 Field Services/Rolling Hills Golf P & G Course Maint Coord P & G Mechanic Golf Golf Sprinkler Systems Maint. Worker/II+ Golf 1 1 1 1 Equipment Operator II Golf 1 1 1 0 Groundskeeper I/II+ Golf 4 4 4 0 Equipment Operator I Golf 1 1 1 0 Groundskeeper I/II+* Golf 1.07 1.07 1.07 4.07 9 9 9 2 1.07 1.07 1.07 4.07 1 1 1 0 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2512 0 0.00 Bldg Equip Tech II+ Total Temp FTE* 2511 0 0.00 Fac Automation Technician Total Full-Time 3721 11 0.49 TCA Facility Management Total Full-Time 3720 2010-11 Budget Custodial Team Leader Total Temp FTE* 3612 2009-10 Revised Field Services/Ken McDonald Golf P &G Course Supervisor P &G Course Supervisor Golf Gen 50% Golf 50% 0 0 0 1 P & G Course Maint Coord Golf 1 1 1 1 P & G Mechanic Golf 1 1 1 1 Sprinkler System Maint. Worker I/II+ Golf 1 1 1 1 Equipment Operator II Golf 1 1 1 1 Groundskeeper I/II+ Golf 6 6 6 4 284 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Equipment Operator I Golf 1 1 Groundskeeper I/II+* Golf Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2527 12 12 9 1.35 1.35 1.35 Gen 2 2 2 2 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 2 2 2 2 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 Sports Complex Maintenance Sr Groundskeeper Gen 1 1 1 0 Groundskeeper I/II+ Gen 2 2 2 0 3 3 3 0 Parks Maintenance Dep Parks & Rec Mgr Gen 1 1 1 0 Sr Mgmt Asst Gen 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 Diablo Stadium Maintenance P&G Course Supvr Gen 1 1 1 0 P&G Course Maint Coord Gen 1 1 1 1 Sr Groundskeeper Gen 1 1 1 0 Sprinkler Sys Maint Wkr II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 Groundskeeper I/II+ Gen 5 5 5 6 Groundskeeper* Gen 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 9 9 9 8 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 Landscape Maintenance P&G Course Supvr P& G Course Supvr Total Full-Time 2556 12 1.35 Gen Total Full-Time 2555 0 1.35 Sr Recreation Coord+ Total Full-Time 2553 1 1.35 Unclassified Temporary* Total Temp FTE* 2552 1.35 2010-11 Budget Facility Resources Total Full-Time 2551 1.35 2009-10 Revised Gen HURF North Parks P&G Course Supvr Gen 2 2 2 2 P&G Course Maint Coord Gen 3 2 2 1 Parks Fac Maint Wkr II+ Gen 1 1 1 1 P&G Mechanic Gen 1 1 1 1 Sprinkler Sys Maint Wkr II+ Gen 3 3 3 3 Equip Operator II Gen 2 2 2 3 Sr Groundskeeper Gen 1 1 1 0 Pest Control Technician Gen 2 2 0 0 Groundskeeper I/II+ Gen 7 7 2 3 Groundskeeper I/II+ SW 0 0 0 1 Equip Operator I Gen 1 1 0 0 Groundskeeper* Gen 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 285 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Cost Source Actual Budget Center Position Total Full-Time 23 22 Total Temp FTE* 2558 Gen Total Full-Time 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 Gen 1 1 1 1 P&G Course Maint Coord Gen 4 4 3 2 Sr Groundskeeper Gen 1 1 1 1 Equip Operator II Gen 4 4 4 3 Sprinkler Sys Maint Wkr II+ Gen 3 3 3 3 Pest Control Technician Gen 2 2 2 0 Groundskeeper I/II+ Gen 5 5 5 4 Groundskeeper* Gen 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Unclassified Temporary* Gen 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 21 21 20 15 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 Cemetery Administration Executive Assistant Cemetery 1 1 1 1 Groundskeeper I+ Cemetery 1 1 1 1 Executive Assistant** Cemetery 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 2 2 2 2 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0 Tempe Arts Park Sr Groundskeeper Arts 1 1 1 Groundskeeper II+ Arts 1 1 1 1 Unclassified Temporary* Arts 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2 2 2 1 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1 Rio Salado Maintenance P&G Course Maint Coord Rio 1 1 1 Groundskeeper II+ Rio 1 1 1 1 Groundskeeper* Rio 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 2 2 2 2 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Rio Salado - Ent. Zone Administrative Project Coord Rio 0 0 0 1 Groundskeeper I/II+ Rio 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 Total Full-Time 3712 3.42 Gen Total Perm FTE** 4415 3.42 Parks Fac Maint Wkr II+ Total Full-Time 4414 15 3.42 P&G Course Supvr Total Temp FTE* 3611 14 3.42 South Parks Total Full-Time 3310 2010-11 Budget Cemetery Maintenance Groundskeeper II+ 2559 2009-10 Revised Field Services/Solid Waste Support Services Solid Waste Svcs Supt SW 1 1 1 1 Sr Mgmt Asst SW 1 0 0 0 286 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Solid Waste/Recycling Supvr SW 1 1 1 0 SW 3 3 3 3 Administrative Assistant II+ SW 2 2 2 2 Sr Mgmt Asst** SW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 Total Full-Time 1 1 1 1 SW 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 2 Field Services/Solid Waste Commercial Refuse Solid Waste/Recycling Supvr SW 1 1 1 Sr Equip Operator SW 3 3 3 3 Solid Waste Equip Oper II+ SW 14 14 14 14 18 18 18 19 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Field Services/Roll Off Tilt Frame SW Field Services/Solid Waste Support Services Solid Waste Equip Spec SW 4 4 4 4 Wash Bay Attendant** SW 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** SW Total Full-Time 4 4 4 0.50 0.50 0.50 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 Field Services/Solid Waste Uncontained Refuse Solid Waste/Recycling Supvr SW 1 1 1 1 Solid Waste Equip Oper II+ SW 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 Total Full-Time 3813 4 0.50 Solid Waste Ed & Community Outreach Sr Mgmt Asst 3718 6 0.50 SW Total Full-Time 3717 7 0.00 Solid Waste Equip Oper II+ Solid Waste Equip Oper II+ 3716 7 0.00 Solid Waste/Recycling Supvr Total Full-Time 3715 8 0.00 Field Services/Solid Waste Residential Refuse Total Full-Time 3714 2010-11 Budget Solid Waste Inspector Total Perm FTE** 3713 2009-10 Revised Transportation Streets & Traffic Ops/Street Maintenance Street Maintenance Supt HURF 1 1 1 0 Sr Civil Engineer+ HURF 1 1 1 1 Sr Eng Associate+ HURF 1 1 1 0 Streets Supervisor HURF 1 1 1 1 Streets Maint Team Leader HURF 3 3 4 3 Street Maint Equip Operator II HURF 13 13 13 8 Street Maint Equip Operator II SW 2 2 2 4 Equip Operator I W/WW 4 4 4 4 Administrative Assistant II+ HURF 1 1 1 1 27 27 28 22 Total Full-Time 287 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Street & Traffic Operations/Right-of-Way 3814 Streets Maint Team Leader HURF Total Full-Time 3821 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 HURF 1 1 1 0 2 2 2 1 1 Transportation/Studies & Design Traffic Eng HURF 1 1 1 Intelligent Trans System Coord HURF 1 1 1 0 Sr Civil Engineer+ HURF 4 3 3 2 Traffic Control Barricade Supvr HURF 0 1 1 0 Traffic Engineering Analyst HURF 2 2 2 1 Sr Traffic Eng Tech+ HURF 2 2 2 2 Administrative Assistant II+ HURF 1 1 1 0 11 11 11 6 1 Streets & Traffic Operations/Operations Traffic Operations Supt HURF 1 1 1 Sr Sign Tech HURF 1 1 1 0 Traffic Operations Crew Leader HURF 2 2 2 1 Traffic Operations Support Spec HURF 1 1 1 1 Sign Tech HURF 1 1 1 1 Transportation Wkr II+ HURF 4 4 4 3 10 10 10 7 1 Streets & Traffic Operations/Street Lighting Management Assistant II+ HURF 1 1 1 Lighting Systems Coord HURF 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 Streets and Traffic Operations/Signal System Traffic Signal Supervisor HURF 1 1 1 Traffic Signal Svcs Crew Lead HURF 1 1 1 0 Traffic Signal Tech II+ HURF 3 3 3 3 Traffic Signal Tech II+ Transit 1 1 1 1 Traffic Signal Tech Crew Lead Traffic Signal Svcs Wkr II+ HURF 1 1 1 1 HURF 4 4 4 2 Underground Util Coord HURF 1 1 1 0 Unclassified Temporary* HURF 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 12 12 8 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Total Full-Time Total Temp FTE* 3911 0 1 Dep PW Mgr - Admin & Cust Svcs Total Full-Time 3825 1 1 HURF HURF 50%, SW 50% Total Full-Time 3824 1 Dep PW Mgr - Field Ops Dep PW Mgr-Field Ops Total Full-Time 3823 2010-11 Budget Streets & Traffic Operations/Administration Total Full-Time 3822 2009-10 Revised Transportation/Transit Dep PW Mgr-Transit & Transport Dep PW Mgr-Transit & Transport S M tA t Transit Transit 50% HURF 50% T it 288 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Sr Mgmt Asst Transit 0 0 Transportation Financial Anlst Transit 1 0 0 0 Transit 1 1 1 0 Transportation Support Spec Transit 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant II+ Transit 1 1 1 1 Administrative Assistant I/II+ * Transit 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Full-Time 4 1.00 Transit 1 1 1 1 Transit 1 1 1 1 Sr Transportation Planner Transit 0 1 1 0 Sr Transit Operations Coord Transit 1 1 1 1 Transit Operations Coord II+ Transit 2 2 2 2 Bldg Equip Tech II+ Transit 1 1 2 1 Custodian Transit 3 3 3 3 9 10 11 9 Transportation/Transit Store Bldg Equip Tech II+ Transit 2 2 1 2 Lead Transit Store Tech Transit 1 1 1 1 Financial Svcs Tech II+ Transit 1 1 1 1 Custodial Supervisor Transit 0 0 1 0 Custodian Transit 3 3 2 2 Financial Svcs Tech I/II+** Transit 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 7 7 6 6 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 0 Marketing and Public Information Community Outreach Mktg Supvr Transit 1 1 0 Comm Outreach/Mktg Coord II+ Transit 2 2 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 Total Full-Time Transportation/Bus Stop Maintenance Transportation Wkr II+ Transit 5 5 5 Groundskeeper II+ Transit 0 0 0 2 5 5 5 5 Total Full-Time 3921 4 1.00 Transportation Fac Supvr Total Full-Time 3917 4 1.00 Transit Administrator Total Perm FTE** 3916 5 1.00 Transit Operations Total Full-Time 3915 2010-11 Budget 1 Management Assistant II+ Total Temp FTE* 3914 2009-10 Revised 0 CP/EV Light Rail Project Dep PW Mgr - LRT Transit 1 1 0 0 Principal Civil Engineer Transit 1 0 0 0 Sr Mgmt Asst Transit 1 1 1 0 Sr Transportation Planner+ Transit 1 1 0 0 LRT Transportation Planner Transit 1 0 0 0 Management Assistant II+ Transit 1 1 0 0 Sr Traffic Eng Tech+ Transit 1 1 1 1 Traffic Signal Tech II+ Transit 0 0 0 0 7 5 2 1 Total Full-Time 289 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Transportation Systems 3922 1 1 1 Transit 1 1 1 0 2 2 2 1 0 Operations/Transportation Principal Planner Transit 2 2 0 Sr Transportation Planner+ Transit 2 2 0 0 4 4 0 0 Water Utilities Water Utilities - Administration Water Utilities Mgr W/WW 1 1 1 0 Dep Water Util Mgr-Operations W/WW 1 2 2 1 Principal WUD Planning Eng W/WW 1 1 1 0 Water Util Administrator W/WW 1 1 1 1 Planning & Research Analyst^ W/WW 1 1 1 1 WUD Safety & Training Coord W/WW 0 0 0 1 Environment Quality Spec W/WW 1 0 0 0 Management Assistant II+ W/WW 1 0 0 1 Eng Tech II+ W/WW 1 1 1 0 Executive Assistant W/WW 0 1 1 1 Custodian W/WW 0 0 0 1 Custodian W/WW 0 0 0 1 Administrative Assistant II+ W/WW 2 3 3 3 Administrative Assistant II+** W/WW 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 10 11 11 11 Total Perm FTE** 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 Total Temp FTE* 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 COE* Total Full-Time 3003 Water Utilities Warehouse Warehouse Supvr W/WW 1 1 1 1 Water Inventory Svcs Spec W/WW 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 Total Full-Time 3004 Water Utilities Security WUD Security Coordinator W/WW 1 1 1 1 WUD Security Officer W/WW 3 3 3 5 Water Utility Security Guard** W/WW 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 4 4 4 6 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 Total Full-Time Total Perm FTE** 3011 Water Quality - Administration Plant Operations Admin W/WW Total Full-Time 3012 1 Transit ITS Network Engineer Total Full-Time 3002 2010-11 Budget Sr Civil Engineer+ Total Full-Time 3923 2009-10 Revised 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Control Center Operations Control Center Supvr W/WW 1 1 1 1 Instrument & Cntrl Tech (SBP) W/WW 1 1 1 1 290 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Control Center Operator W/WW 4 4 Plant Mechanic+ (SBP) Total Full-Time 3013 4 1 6 6 6 7 1 1 1 1 W/WW 1 1 1 1 Plant Electrician (SBP) W/WW 1 1 1 1 Plant Mechanic+ (SBP) W/WW 2 2 2 1 Plant Operator I/II+ (SBP) W/WW W/WW 8 0 7 1 7 1 7 1 13 13 13 12 South Tempe Water Plant W/WW 1 1 1 1 W/WW 1 1 1 1 Plant Electrician (SBP) W/WW 1 1 1 1 Plant Mechanic+ (SBP) W/WW W/WW W/WW 2 6 0 2 5 1 2 5 1 2 5 1 11 11 11 11 Distribution System Services - Admin Transmission & Collection Admn W/WW 1 1 0 0 Water Distribut & Collect Mgr W/WW 0 0 1 1 CMMS Tech II+ W/WW 0 0 0 4 Administrative Assistant II+ W/WW 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 W/WW W/WW 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 Util Svcs Tech II+ (SBP) W/WW Util Svcs Tech I+ CIP (positions funded through June 30, 2012) Administrative Assistant II+ W/WW Total Full-Time 10 0 10 0 10 0 18 3 Total Full-Time Distribution System Maintenance Util Svcs Supvr Util Svcs Team Leader 1 1 1 0 13 13 13 26 1 7 1 7 1 7 1 7 8 8 8 8 Irrigation Irrigation Supvr Irrigator W/WW W/WW Total Full-Time 3025 4 0 W/WW Plant Operator I/II+ (SBP) 3024 0 Instrument & Cntrl Tech (SBP) Plant Ops & Maint Trainee+ Total Full-Time 3022 0 Plant Team Leader Plant Team Leader Instrument & Cntrl Tech (SBP) 3021 2010-11 Budget Johnny G. Martinez Water Plant Plant Ops & Maint Trainee+ Total Full-Time 3014 W/WW 2009-10 Revised Technical Support Team Principal Civil Eng Management Assistant II+ W/WW 0 0 0 1 W/WW 0 0 0 1 GIS Analyst W/WW 0 0 1 2 GIS Coord W/WW W/WW 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GIS Tech+ CMMS Tech II+ W/WW 4 4 4 0 TV Truck Tech W/WW 2 2 2 2 291 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Underground Util Coord W/WW 2 2 Administrative Assistant II+ W/WW Total Full-Time 3026 11 12 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Administrative Assistant II+ W/WW 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 Environmental Services Environmental Serv Admin W/WW 1 1 1 0 Environmental Program Supvr W/WW 1 1 1 1 Environment Quality Spec W/WW 3 4 4 4 Water Quality Specialist W/WW 1 1 1 0 Cross Connec Control Supvr W/WW 1 1 1 0 Cross Connec Control Inspector W/WW 1 1 1 0 8 9 9 5 Environmental - Wastewater Environmental Compliance Supvr W/WW 1 1 1 1 Cross Connec Control Inspector W/WW 0 0 0 1 Environmental Compl Insp II+ W/WW 7 7 7 5 Environmental Compl Insp I+ W/WW 0 0 0 1 Environmental Tech II+ W/WW 4 4 4 0 Administrative Assistant II+ W/WW 2 2 2 0 14 14 14 8 Environmental Health & Services Environmental Hlth & Sfty Supv W/WW 1 0 0 0 Industrial Hygienist W/WW 1 0 0 0 Hazardous Material Safety Spec W/WW 1 0 0 0 Wtr Util Dept Sfty & Trng Coor W/WW 2 0 0 0 HPCC Interns* W/WW 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 0 0 0 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wastewater Services - Administration SROG Program Admin W/WW Total Full-Time 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 Wastewater Utility Services Util Svcs Team Leader W/WW 3 3 3 Util Svcs Tech II+ (SBP) W/WW 8 8 8 0 11 11 11 0 Total Full-Time 3034 1 11 W/WW Total Temp FTE* 3033 1 W/WW Total Full-Time 3031 2 1 Water Qual Process/Plan Coord Total Full-Time 3029 2 1 Environmental Svcs Mgr Total Full-Time 3028 2010-11 Budget Environmental Administration Total Full-Time 3027 2009-10 Revised Kyrene Water Reclamation Plant Plant Team Leader W/WW 1 1 1 2 Instrument & Cntrl Tech (SBP) W/WW 1 1 1 1 Plant Electrician (SBP) W/WW 1 1 1 0 Plant Mechanic+ (SBP) W/WW 2 2 2 2 292 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 Cost Funding 2008-09 2009-10 Center Position Source Actual Budget Plant Operator+ (SBP) W/WW 2 2 Total Full-Time 3035 Plant Electrician (SBP) Plant Mechanic+ (SBP) W/WW W/WW W/WW Total Full-Time 2 7 7 7 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 Laboratory Supervisor W/WW 1 1 1 1 Chemist II+ W/WW 6 6 6 6 Water Quality Specialist W/WW 0 0 0 1 Environmental Compl Insp II+ W/WW 0 0 0 1 Environmental Tech II+ W/WW 0 0 0 4 Administrative Assistant II+ W/WW 1 1 1 0 8 8 8 13 1 Water Resources - Administration Water Resources Admin W/WW 1 1 1 Water Resources Hydrologist W/WW 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 Total Full-Time 3052 2 7 Laboratory Services - Administration Total Full-Time 3051 2010-11 Budget Field Facilities - Wastewater Plant Team Leader 3041 2009-10 Revised Water Conservation Water Conservation Coord W/WW 1 1 1 1 Water Conservation Spec W/WW 1 1 1 1 Sr Groundskeeper W/WW 0 0 0 1 Groundskeeper I+ W/WW 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 4 Public Works Total Full-Time Public Works Total Perm FTE** Public Works Total Temp FTE* 556 3.00 19.69 542 3.50 17.20 514 3.50 17.20 469 2.50 20.20 Grand Total Full-Time 1,851 1,811 1,757 1,602 Grand Total Perm FTE** 19.30 19.00 15.00 13.85 226.99 205.25 205.25 202.58 Total Full-Time Grand Total Temp FTE* **Permanent Full-Time Equivalent *Temporary Full-Time Equivalent 293 Reflects all personnel changes/reductions approved by City Council through 6/30/2010 2008-09 2009-10 Grant Funded Personnel - Permanent FTE p Funding Source Actual Budget (Included in above totals) City Attorney Victims Rights Grant 0.40 0.40 City Court Fill the GAP Fund 0.65 1.00 Local JCEF City Court 0.00 3.00 City Manager EECBG 0.00 0.00 Community Development Section 8 12.00 12.00 Community Development CDBG/Home 5.50 5.33 Community Development EECBG 0.00 0.00 18.55 21.73 Grand Total 2008-09 Actual Personnel by Fund Permanent FTE positions (Full and Part-Time) General Fund Enterprise Funds Golf Cemetery Solid Waste Water/Wastewater Special Revenue Funds Health Fund HURF Performing Arts Rio Salado/CFD Risk Management Fund Transit Grants/Designated Funds Ambulance Provider AZ Post Capital Improvement Program CDBG/Section 8 Court Enhancement Fund EECBG Fill the Gap Fund HIDTA Local JCEF Percent for the Arts RICO Tempe County Island Fire District Vehicle Impound Victims Rights Grant Grand Total 294 2009-10 Budget 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 0.40 0.40 1.00 3.00 0.00 12.00 5.33 0.00 21.73 1.00 3.00 1.00 12.00 6.33 1.00 24.73 2009-10 Revised 2010-11 Budget 1,400.90 1,348.92 1,287.92 1,167.54 21.00 2.50 71.50 174.50 21.00 2.50 72.50 180.00 21.00 2.50 72.50 180.00 10.50 2.50 79.50 183.00 0.00 58.00 23.65 29.00 4.50 54.00 0.00 58.00 23.65 29.00 3.50 54.00 0.00 58.00 23.65 29.00 3.50 54.00 0.90 38.00 17.15 24.00 3.00 41.83 7.00 0.00 0.00 17.50 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 1.20 1.00 0.00 3.00 0.40 1,870.30 7.00 0.00 1.00 17.33 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 3.00 1.20 1.00 1.00 4.00 0.40 1,830.00 7.00 1.00 1.00 17.33 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.20 1.00 1.00 5.00 0.40 1,772.00 6.00 1.00 5.00 18.33 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.20 1.00 1.00 6.00 0.40 1,615.85 Glossary of Terms Accrual Basis - A basis of accounting in which transactions are recognized at the time they are incurred, as opposed to when cash is received or spent. bonds, to obtain better interest rates and/or bond conditions. Budget - A plan of financial operation for a specified period of time (fiscal year). The annual Budget authorizes, and provides the basis for control of, financial operations during the fiscal year. Adopted Budget - The financial plan of revenue and expenditures for a fiscal year as approved by the governing entity. Capital Budget - A Capital Budget is a separate budget from the operating budget. Items in the CIP are usually construction or renovation projects designed to improve the value of the government assets. Examples of capital improvement projects include new roads, sewer lines, buildings, recreational facilities and large scale remodeling. The City Council receives a separate document that details the CIP costs for the upcoming fiscal year. Annexation - Is the legal merging of some territory into another. A city might annex unincorporated areas or a county might annex other disputed territories. Also used to refer to mergers of countries. Appropriation - An authorization made by the City Council which permits the City to incur obligations to make expenditures for specific purposes. Assessed Valuation - A value that is established for real and personal property for use as a basis for levying property taxes (note: Property values are established by the County). Line-Item Budget - A budget that lists each expenditure category (salary, materials, telephone service, travel, etc.) separately, along with the dollar amount budgeted for each specified category. Asset - Resources owned or held by a government which have monetary value. Available (Undesignated) Fund Balance - Refers to the funds remaining from the prior year which are available for appropriation and expenditure in the current year. Operating Budget - The portion of the budget that pertains to daily operations that provide basic governmental services. The operating budget contains appropriations for such expenditures as personnel, supplies, utilities, materials, travel, and fuel. Balance Sheet - A financial statement showing the assets, liabilities, and net worth of an entity as of a specific date. Performance Budget - A budget that focuses upon departmental goals and objectives rather than line items, programs, or funds. Workload and unit cost data are collected in order to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of services. Typical measures collected might include average emergency response time for fire or cost per man-hour of garbage collection. Balanced Budget - A balanced budget arises when the government entity estimates the same amount of money from revenue collection as it is appropriating for expenditures. Benchmarking - The process of comparing a entities performance against the practices of other leading entities -in or outside of an industry -for the purpose of improving performance. Entities also benchmark internally by tracking and comparing past performance. Program Budget - A budget that focuses upon broad functions or activities of an agency or jurisdiction rather than upon its organizational budget units or object classes of expenditure. The City's programs: (1) General Services; (2) Development Services; (3) Public Safety; (4) Environmental Health; (5) Community Services; and (6) Public Transportation. Bond - A written promise to pay a sum of money on a specific date at a specified interest rate. The interest payments and the repayment of the principal are detailed in a bond ordinance. The most common types of bonds are general obligation, revenue bonds, and special improvement district bonds. These are most frequently used to finance capital projects. Budget Adjustment - A procedure to revise a budget appropriation either by City Council approval through the adoption of a supplemental appropriation ordinance for any interdepartmental or interfund adjustments or by City Manager authorization to adjust appropriations within a departmental budget. Bond Rating - Is the measure of the quality and safety of a bond. It indicates the likelihood that a debt issuer will be able to meet scheduled repayments, and dictates the interest rate paid. Bond Refinancing - The payoff and re-issuance of Budget Calendar - The schedule of key dates or milestones which the City follows in the preparation, 295 Capital Outlay - Expenditures which result in the acquisition of or addition to fixed assets. adoption, and administration of the budget. Budget Document - The instrument used by the budget-making authority to present a comprehensive financial program to the City Council. Cash Basis - A basis of accounting in which transactions are recognized only when cash is increased or decreased. Budget Group - A fun group of hard working employees responsible for budget preparation, benchmarking, forecasting, and financial analysis. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program authorized by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 in place of several community development categorical grant programs. CDBG provides eligible metropolitan cities and urban counties (called "entitlement communities") with annual direct grants that they can use to revitalize neighborhoods, expand affordable housing and economic opportunities, and/or improve community facilities and services, principally to benefit low and moderate income persons. Budget Message - The opening section of the budget which provides the City Council and the public with a general summary of the most important aspects of the budget, changes from the current and previous fiscal years, and recommendations regarding the financial policy for the upcoming period. Budgetary Basis - This refers to the form of accounting utilized throughout the budget process. These generally take one of three forms: GAAP, Cash, Modified Accrual or some type of statutory form budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) except that (a) encumbrances are considered to be an expenditure chargeable to appropriations, (b) no depreciation is budgeted for in enterprise funds, (c) investments in supply inventories and assets restricted for self-insurance purposes are not considered to be appropriable, (d) revenue accruing to sinking funds are not appropriable, and (e) contributions into sinking funds are budgeted, whereas disbursements from sinking funds are not budgeted. Unencumbered appropriations lapse at the close of the fiscal year. Contingency - A budgetary reserve set aside for emergencies or unforeseen expenditures not otherwise budgeted. Cost Center - An organizational budget/operating unit within each City division or department, i.e., Radio Maintenance is a cost center within the Communications Division. Debt Management (Capacity) Plan - The City's basis to evaluate upcoming and future debt financing in relation to the impact the borrowing will have on the City's debt ratios and related to the City's credit position as determined by the major rating agencies. Budgetary Control - The control or management of a governmental unit or enterprise in accordance with an approved budget for the purpose of keeping expenditures within the limitations of authorized appropriations and available revenue. Debt Ratios - Ratios which provide measure of assessing debt load and ability to repay debt which play a part in the determination of credit ratings. They are also used to evaluate the City's debt position over time and against its own standards and policies. The four major debt ratios used by the City are (1) Debt Per Capita; (2) Debt to Full Value; (3) Debt to Personal Income; and (4) Debt Services to Revenue. Capital Budget - The appropriation of bonds or other revenue for improvements to facilities and other infrastructure. Debt Service - The amount of interest and principal that a City must pay each year on net direct long-term debt plus the interest it must pay on direct short-term debt. Capital Expenditures - Expenditures approved in the Capital Budget related to the acquisition, expansion or rehabilitation of an element of the government's physical plant. Direct Debt - The sum of the total bonded debt and any unfunded debt (e.g. short-term notes) of the City for which the City has pledged its "full faith and credit." It does not include the debt of overlapping jurisdictions. Capital Improvements - The acquisition, expansion or rehabilitation of an element of the government's physical plant; sometimes referred to as infrastructure. Capital Improvements Program - A plan for capital expenditures to provide long-lasting physical improvements to be incurred over a period of several future years. Tempe's City Charter requires annual submission of a five-year capital program for City Council approval. Self-Supporting Debt - Debt for which the City has pledged a repayment source separate from its general tax revenue (e.g. water bond repaid from water utility income/special assessment bonds). 296 Outstanding Tax Supported Debt - Direct debt minus self-supporting debt. Debt for which the City has pledged a repayment from its secondary property taxes. Encumbrance - The legal commitment of appropriated funds to purchase an item or service. To encumber funds means to set aside or commit funds for a future expenditure. Overall Net Debt - Net direct debt plus overlapping debt. Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grants (EECBG) - This program supports projects to develop, promote, implement, and manage energy efficiency and conservation projects and programs designed to: reduce fossil fuel emissions; reduce the total energy use of the eligible entities; improve energy efficiency in the transportation, building, and other appropriate sectors; and create and retain jobs. Overlapping Debt - The City's proportionate share of the debt of other local overlapping governmental jurisdictions. The debt is generally apportioned based on relative assessed value. Debt Service Fund Requirements - The amounts of revenue which must be provided for a Debt Service Fund so that all principal and interest payments can be made in full on schedule. Estimated Revenue - The amount of projected revenue to be collected during the fiscal year. Expenditure/Expense - This term refers to the outflow of funds paid for an asset obtained or goods and services obtained. Deficit - The excess of an entity’s liabilities over its assets or the excess of expenditures over revenue during a single accounting period. Fiscal Year - The time period designated by the City signifying the beginning and ending period for recording financial transactions. The City of Tempe has specified July 1 to June 30 as its fiscal year. Department - A major administrative division of the City which indicates overall management responsibility for an operation or a group of related operations within a functional area. Fixed Assets - Assets of long-term character which are intended to continue to be held or used, such as land, buildings, machinery, furniture and other equipment. Department Goal - Specific intended result of a strategy; used interchangeably with objective. The term "goal" is used in a wide variety of ways in planning; e.g. as a strategic result or outcome; an objective, a measure, a target, etc. Franchise Fees - Annual fees paid by utilities (electricity, telephone, cable TV, natural gas) for the use of the city's public rights-of-way, or that are granted a service monopoly that is regulated by the city (garbage collection). The franchise fee is typically a set percentage of gross revenue within the city. Depreciation - Expiration in the service life of capital assets attributable to wear and tear, deterioration, action of the physical elements, inadequacy, or obsolescence. Distinguished Budget Presentation Awards Program - A voluntary awards program administered by the Government Finance Officers Association to encourage governments to prepare effective budget documents. Full Faith and Credit - A pledge of a government’s taxing power to repay debt obligations. Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) - There are three types of classifications: (1) Full-time - works 40 hrs/week (full-time) and is benefitted; (2) Permanent FTE works more than 19.5 hours per week and less than 40 hrs/week, is not seasonal, is not of specific limited duration, and is not for educational training; and (3) Temporary FTE - works less than 40 hrs/week, is seasonal, and is of specific limited duration, or is for educational training. Division - A group of homogeneous cost centers within a department, i.e., all traffic engineering, traffic operations and transit cost centers make up the Transportation Division within the Public Works Department. Effective Measure - Degree to which an activity or initiative is successful in achieving a specified goal. Also, the degree to which activities of a unit achieve the unit's mission or goal. Fund - A set of inter-related accounts to record revenue and expenditures associated with a specific purpose. Fund structure consists of Governmental Funds (e.g., General Fund, Special Revenue Fund, Debt Service Fund), Proprietary Funds, and Fiduciary Funds (See previous section on "Financial Structure and Operations" for complete description of funds). Efficiency Measure - Degree of capability or productivity of a process, such as the number of cases closed per year or tasks accomplished per unit cost. 297 Governmental Funds General Governmental Revenue - The revenue of a government other than those derived from and retained in an enterprise fund. General Governmental revenue include those from the General, Debt Service, and Special Revenue Funds. Capital Projects Fund - Capital Projects Funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by Proprietary Funds and Trust Funds). General Obligation Bonds - Bonds that finance a variety of public projects such as streets, buildings, and improvements; the repayment of these bonds is usually made from secondary property taxes, and these bonds are backed by the "full faith and credit" of the issuing government. Debt Service Fund - Debt Service Funds are set up to receive dedicated revenue used to make principal and interest payments on City debt. They are used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general obligation and special assessment debt principal, interest and related costs, except the debt service accounted for in the Special Revenue Funds, and Enterprise Funds. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) - Uniform minimum standards for financial accounting and recording, encompassing the conventions, rules, and procedures that define accepted accounting principles. General Fund - The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City. It is used to account for all activities of the City not accounted for in some other fund. Goal - A long-term, attainable target for an organization–its vision of the future. Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) - An accounting standards board formed in 1984 by the Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF) to develop accounting standards for state and local governmental entities. Special Revenue Fund - Special Revenue Funds are set up as accounts for Federal or State grants legally restricted to expenditures for specific purposes. Our Special Revenue Funds include the Highway User Fund, the Local Transportation Assistance Fund, the Performing Arts Fund, the Community Development Fund, and the Housing Assistance Fund. Grant - A contribution by the State or Federal government or other organization to support a particular function. Grants may be classified as either categorical or block depending upon the amount of discretion allowed the grantee. Proprietary Funds Enterprise Funds - Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations including debt service (a) that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private businesses - where the intent of the government body is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis is financed or recovered primarily through user charges; or (b) where the governing body has determined that periodic determination of revenue earned, expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriate for capital maintenance, public policy, management control accountability, or other purposes. Our Enterprise Funds include the Water and Wastewater Fund, the Solid Waste Fund, the Cemetery Fund and the Golf Course Fund. Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) - Special revenue fund to account for the receipts and expenditures of highway user monies. Arizona cities/ towns are entitled to receive a portion of the highway user revenue collected by the state. The highway user revenue consist of the gasoline and diesel fuel taxes as well as other transportation related fees. One half of the money is distributed on the basis of the' population of an incorporated city/town as a percentage of the total of all incorporated cities/towns in the state. The remaining half of the money is distributed based on the level of gasoline sales in the county in which the municipality is located and the population of each city or town in the county. Highway user revenue funds may only be used for street and highway purposes. Fund Balance - The difference between revenue and expenditures. The beginning fund balance represents the residual funds brought forward from the previous year (ending balance). HOME - The largest federal block grant to State and local governments designed exclusively to create affordable housing for low income households. Indirect Cost - A cost necessary for the functioning of the organization as a whole, but which cannot be directly assigned, such as administrative support, facility maintenance or custodial services. Furlough - Mandatory time off work with no pay. Used as an alternative to a layoff, employee furloughs can occur when revenue or projected revenue fails to match expenses. Infrastructure - The basic facilities, services, and 298 installations needed for the functioning of a community or society, such as transportation and communications systems, water and power lines, and public institutions including schools, post offices, and prisons. decreases in financial resources only to the extent that they reflect near-term inflows or outflows of cash. Thus, under modified accrual basis of accounting, then, amounts are recognized as revenue when earned, only so long as they are collectible within the period or soon enough afterwards to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. Interfund Transfer - The movement of monies between funds of the same governmental entity. Municipality - An urban district having corporate status and powers of self-government. Intergovernmental Revenue - Funds received from federal, state and other local government sources in the form of grants, shared revenue, and payments in lieu of taxes. Objective - A specific measurable and observable result of an organization's activity which advances the organization toward its goal. Internal Services Charges - The charges to user departments for internal services provided by another government agency, such as data processing, fleet services and communications. Operating Expenses - The cost for personnel, materials and equipment required for a department to function. Liability - Amounts owed for items received, services rendered, expenses incurred, assets acquired, construction performed, and amounts received but not as yet earned. Operating Revenue - Funds that the government receives as income to pay for ongoing operations, including such items as taxes, user fees, interest earnings, and grant revenue. Operating revenue is used to pay for day-to-day services. Local Transportation Assistance Fund (LTAF) Special revenue fund to account for the receipts and expenditures associated with LTAF monies. This state shared revenue is generated by the state lottery. Distribution is based upon the population of the city/ town in relation to the total population of all cities/ towns. Each city/town is entitled to receive a minimum of $10,000. A maximum of $23 million (if that amount is generated by the lottery) is distributed each year to cities/towns. The principal use of these funds is for transportation purposes. Other Post Employment Benefits - in addition to salary, an employee may earn benefits over their years of service that will not be received until after their employment ends. Post-employment benefits other than pensions generally take the form of health insurance and dental, vision, prescription or life insurance benefits provided to eligible retirees. As a group, these are referred to as Other Post-employment Benefits, or OPEB. Levy - To impose taxes for the support of government activities. Pay-As-You-Go Financing - A term used to describe a financial policy by which the capital program is financed from current revenue rather than through borrowing. Line Item Budget - A budget prepared along departmental lines that focuses on what is to be bought. Per Capita - Applies to a unit of population or a person and shows how much each would have if a commodity/expense was divided equally. Long-Term Debt - Debt with a maturity of more than one year after the date of issuance. Performance Budget - A budget wherein expenditures are based primarily upon measurable performance of activities and work programs. Maintenance of Effort - A transfer of General Fund dollars to Transportation to fulfill the statutory requirement placed on cities to maintain the expenditure of local revenue for streets at a level computed as an average of local funds expended for any four of the FY 1981-82 through FY 1985-86. That obligation is calculated at $1,850,705. Performance Indicators - Specific quantitative and qualitative measure of work performed as an objective of the department. Performing Arts Fund - Used to account for the receipts and expenditures of Performing Arts monies. This tax is for the construction and operation of the performing and visual arts center. Mandate - A binding obligation issued from an intergovernmental organization. For example, the state to a county which is bound to follow the instructions of the organization. Personal Services - Expenditures for salaries, wages, and fringe benefits of a government's employees. Modified Accrual Basis - Refers to the accrual basis of accounting, which recognizes increases and 299 Policy - A plan, course of action or guiding principle, designed to set parameters for decisions and actions. Rainy Day Reserve - A long-term reserve in the event of a significant unforeseen event, economic downturn or liability. Prior Year Encumbrances - Obligations from previous years in the form of purchase orders or contracts which are chargeable to an appropriation, and for which a part of the appropriation is reserved. They cease to be encumbrances when the obligations are paid or otherwise terminated. Reserve - An account used to indicate that a portion of a fund's assets are restricted for a specific purpose and is, therefore, not available for general appropriation. Resolution - A special or temporary order of a legislative body requiring less legal formality than an ordinance or statute. Program Budget - A budget which allocates money to the functions or activities of a government rather than to specific items of cost or to specific departments. The City’s program budget is divided into six major programs: Resources - Total amounts available for appropriation including estimated revenue, fund transfers, and beginning balances. (1) General Services consists of: Mayor and Council; City Manager; Internal Audit; Diversity Program; Community Relations; City Clerk; Human Resources; City Attorney; Financial Services; Public Works; Information Technology; and Other Programs. Retained Earnings - An equity account reflecting the accumulated earnings of an enterprise or internal service fund. Revenue - Funds that the government receives as income. It includes such items as tax payments, fees from specific services, receipts from other governments, fines, forfeitures, grants, shared revenue and interest income. (2) Development Services consists of: Development Services, Community Development, and Public Works – Design/Construction/ Landscape maintenance. Revenue Bonds - Bonds usually sold for constructing a project that will produce revenue for the government. That revenue is pledged to pay the principal and interest of the bond. (3) Public Safety consists of: City Court; Police; and Fire. (4) Environmental Health consists of: Water Utilities; Public Works- Solid Waste; and Development Services – Code Enforcement. Revised Budget - A revised budget is a revision of the adopted budget previously submitted and authorized by a governing board. (5) Community Services consists of: Community Services – Recreation/Library/ Social Services; Public Works – Park Maintenance; and Cemetery. Right-of-Way - The land used by a public utility, road, or railroad. Rio Salado - Spanish for Salt River was a project to reintroduce water into a dry riverbed. In 1999, Tempe Town Lake was filled and it extends about 5.5 miles in length and one mile in width. (6) Transportation consists of: Public Works – Transit/Street Maintenance. Property Tax - A levy upon the assessed valuation of the property within the City of Tempe upon each $100 of valuation. Property taxes in Arizona consist of both primary and secondary levies. Rio Salado Community Facilities District Fund Special revenue fund established in 1987, under the laws of the State of Arizona. The purpose is to account for the receipts and expenditures associated with Tempe Town Lake. Primary Property Tax - A statutory limited tax levy which may be imposed for any purpose. Rio Salado Fund - Special revenue fund to account for the receipts and expenditures of miscellaneous monies used to foster the development of Rio Salado. Secondary Property Tax - An unlimited tax levy which may be used only to retire the principal and interest or redemption charges on bond indebtedness. Risk Management - An organization goal to protect a government's assets against accidental loss in the most economical method. Public Forums - A public meeting involving audience discussion. R.O.W. - Abbreviated form, see Right-of-Way. Purpose - A broad statement, in terms of meeting public service needs, that a department is organized to meet. 300 AWWA-American Water Works Association ASU-Arizona State University CAD-Computer Assisted Dispatch CAFR-Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CAP-Central Arizona Project CAWCD-Central Arizona Water Conservation District CCTV-Closed Circuit Television CDBG-Community Development Block Grant CFD-Community Facilities District CIP-Capital Improvement Plan COE-Cooperative Office Education COPS-Community Oriented Policing System CP/EV-Central Phoenix/East Valley DUI-Driving Under the Influence EECBG-Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant EEOC-Equal Employment Opportunity Commission FEVA-Finance, Economy, and Veterans Affairs FTE-Full Time Equivalent FRWS-Field Report Writing System FTA-Federal Transportation Administration FY-Fiscal Year FYE-Fiscal Year Ending GAAP-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles GASB-Governmental Accounting Standards Board GIS-Geographical Information System G.O.-General Obligation HBN-High Tech, Nanotech, Biotech HOME-Home Ownership Made Easier HPCC-Household Products Collection Center HUD-Housing and Urban Development HURF-Highway User Revenue Fund HVAC-Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning ICMA-International City Management Association IMP-Integrated Master Plan ITS-Intelligent Transportation Systems ITD-Information Technology Department JGMWTP-Johnny G. Martinez Water Treatment Plant KWRF-Kyrene Water Reclamation Facility LEED-Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LRT-Light Rail Transit LTAF-Local Transportation Assistance Fund MAG-Maricopa Association of Governments MGD-Million Gallons per Day MMU-Malfunction Management Unit N/A-Not Applicable O&M-Operation and Maintenance OPEB-Other Post Employment Benefits OSHA-Occupational Safety & Health Administration PTF-Priority Transportation Fund RICO-Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations RMS-Records Management System ROW-Right-of-Way RPTA-Regional Public Transportation Authority SAFER-Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response SAI-Southern Avenue Interceptor SCADA-Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition SBP-Skill Based Pay SROG-Sub Regional Operating Group SRP-Salt River Project STWTP-South Tempe Water Treatment Plant TCA-Tempe Center for the Arts WUD-Water Utilities Department Significant Non-Routine Capital Expenditures Expenditures for major projects that are typically “one time” in nature and involve the construction or expansion of new City facilities or City infrastructure, extensive renovation of existing facilities, the purchase of important capital assets, or the acquisition of new technology which will enhance service delivery. Source of Revenue - Revenue are classified according to their source or point of origin. Surplus - An excess of receipts over disbursements. Tax Levy - The resultant product when the tax rate per one hundred dollars is multiplied by the tax base. Taxes - Compulsory charges levied by a government for the purpose of financing services performed for the common benefit of the people. This term does not include specific charges made against particular persons or property for current or permanent benefit, such as special assessments. Transfers In/Out - Amounts transferred from one fund to another to assist in financing the services for the recipient fund. Unauthorized General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds General Obligation Bonds that have not been approved by residents via an election, but that are anticipated to be approved by residents via an election prior to their use as a capital project funding source. Unencumbered Balance - The amount of an appropriation that is neither expended nor encumbered. It is essentially the amount of money still available for future purposes. Unreserved Fund Balance - The portion of a fund's balance that is not restricted for a specific purpose and is available for general appropriation. User Charges - The payment of a fee for direct receipt of a public service by the party who benefits from the service. Workload Indicator - A unit of work to be done (e.g., number of permit applications received, the number of households receiving refuse collection service, or the number of burglaries to be investigated). Acronyms ADA-American with Disabilities Act ADDI-American Dream Down Payment Initiative ADOT-Arizona Department of Transportation ADWR-Arizona Department of Water Resources APS-Arizona Public Service ARC-Annual Retiree Contribution A.R.S.-Arizona Revised Statutes AWA-America West Airlines 301 Index Planning.......................................................... 126 Community Development Block Grant Revenue ......................................................... 102 Community Profile .................................................. 8 Community Relations Office............................... 130 Administration ................................................. 131 Communication and Media Relations ............. 133 Neighborhood Services .................................. 132 Performance Budget....................................... 130 Community Services .......................................... 134 Administration ................................................ 135 Arts and Library .............................................. 136 Performance Budget....................................... 134 Recreation Centers and Programs ................. 138 Social Services................................................... 139 Comparative Operating Revenue by Source........ 85 Comprehensive Financial Plan Assumptions ............................................... 57, 60 Economic Outlook............................................. 60 Enterprise Funds .............................................. 71 Financial Action Plan ........................................ 79 Financial Overview ........................................... 59 General Fund.................................................... 61 Methodology ..................................................... 56 Overview........................................................... 54 Performing Arts................................................. 65 Rio Salado/Community Facilities District Funds ................................................ 69 Transit Fund ..................................................... 63 Transportation Funds........................................ 67 Cost of Services (Residential) .............................. 50 A Acronyms ........................................................... 301 Arts and Library Performance Budget................ 136 Assessed Valuation (Secondary): Ten Year Historical Trends............................. 206 B Bed Tax (Transient Lodging Tax)......................... 89 Benchmarking, Performance...................... 108, 110 Bonded Debt Limits Summary ........................... 204 Budget Basis, Budgetary Units, and Changes to Budget......................................... 258 Budget Message .................................................... 1 Budget Per Capita........................................ 47, 109 Budget Policies .................................................... 18 Budget Process Flowchart ................................... 26 Budget Process Summary ................................... 27 Budget Resolution.............................................. 251 Budget Schedules Estimated Revenue and Expenditures Summary .................................................... 252 Expenditures Within Each Fund Summary ..... 257 Revenue Other Than Property Taxes............. 254 Tax Levy and Tax Rate Information ............... 253 Other Financing Sources and Interfund Transfers Summary .................................... 256 C D Capital Improvements Program Capital Budget Policy ............................... 18, 203 Fund Balances ............................................... 202 Overview .................................................... 188, 3 Project Listing................................................. 207 Project Map .................................................... 198 Relationship Between Operating and Capital Budgets......................................... 193 Source of Funds ............................................. 200 Strategic Focus .............................................. 201 Summary ........................................................ 199 Ten Year Historical Trends............................. 206 Charges for Services Cultural and Recreational ................................. 95 Development Related ....................................... 96 City Attorney Performance Budget..................... 116 City Clerk Performance Budget.......................... 118 City Court Performance Budget ......................... 120 City Limits ............................................................ 12 City Manager Performance Budget.................... 114 Citywide Overview of Operating Budget Debt Service, Revenue and Staffing ................ 42 Community Development................................... 122 Administration/Economic Development .......... 124 Building Safety ............................................... 125 Housing .......................................................... 128 Performance Budget ...................................... 123 Debt Policy ................................................... 18, 203 Debt Service Requirements ............................... 206 Debt Service Ten Year Historical Trends ........... 206 Departmental, Per Capita Performance Budget ............................................................ 109 Departments, Performance Budget City Attorney ................................................... 116 City Clerk ........................................................ 118 City Court........................................................ 120 City Manager .................................................. 114 Community Development ............................... 122 Community Relations Office ........................... 130 Community Services....................................... 134 Diversity Office................................................ 142 Finance and Technology ................................ 144 Fire ................................................................. 154 Human Resources .......................................... 162 Internal Audit Office ........................................ 165 Mayor and Council.......................................... 112 Police.............................................................. 166 Public Works................................................... 172 302 State Shared Income Tax ................................................... 94 Sales Tax ...................................................... 92 Vehicle License Tax ...................................... 93 Transient Lodging Tax ...................................... 89 Glossary of Terms .............................................. 295 Golf Fund Comprehensive Financial Plan ......................... 75 Fund Balances.................................................. 32 Revenue ......................................................... 105 E Engineering Performance Budget ...................... 175 Enterprise Funds.................................................. 71 Revenue Golf Fees .................................................... 105 Solid Waste Fees........................................ 104 Water/Wastewater User Fees................. 32, 20 F H Financial Action Plan ........................................... 79 Financial Program................................................ 23 Financial Program Components........................... 29 Financial Program Summary................................ 24 Financial Reporting Policies................................. 20 Finance and Technology Administration................................................. 146 Budget/Tax and License................................. 149 Finance........................................................... 147 Information Technology .................................. 151 Performance Budget .......................................... 144 Financial Structure and Organization Fund Structure................................................ 259 Relationship Between Budgeting and Accounting .................................................. 259 Types of Budgeting ........................................ 259 Fines and Forfeitures ........................................... 97 Fire Administration/Fire Prevention ...................... 156 Emergency/Medical Services ......................... 157 Homeland Security/Special Operations .......... 159 Performance Budget ...................................... 154 Support Services/Personnel Safety................ 160 Training/Professional Development................ 158 Fund Balances, Unreserved General Fund ............................................. 30, 61 Highway User Revenue Fund..................... 31, 67 Local Transportation Assistance Fund ....... 31, 67 Performing Arts .......................................... 31, 65 Transit Fund ............................................... 30, 63 Fund Structure ................................................... 259 Fund Summary .................................................... 22 Highway User Tax Fund (HURF) Comprehensive Financial Plan ......................... 67 Fund Balances, Unreserved (10 Years)............ 31 Revenue ......................................................... 100 Housing Performance Budget ............................ 128 Human Resources Performance Budget............ 162 I Information Technology Performance Budget....................................... 151 Internal Audit Performance Budget .................... 165 L Local (City Sales Tax) .......................................... 88 Local Transportation Assistance Fund (LTAF) Comprehensive Financial Plan ......................... 67 Fund Balances, Unreserved (10 Years)............ 31 Revenue ......................................................... 101 M Mayor and Council Performance Budget............ 112 Mission Statement..................................................ix N G Needs Assessment Phase ................................... 27 Neighborhood Services Performance Budget .... 132 General Fund Comprehensive Financial Plan......................... 61 Fund Balances, Unreserved (10 Years) ........... 30 General Governmental Revenue Charges for Services Cultural and Recreational ............................. 95 Development Related ................................... 96 City Property Tax.............................................. 90 City Sales Tax .................................................. 88 Fines and Forfeitures ....................................... 97 Salt River Project In-Lieu Tax........................... 91 O Operating Budget Overview ................................. 33 Debt Service Fund ............................................ 38 General Fund.................................................... 33 Golf Fund.......................................................... 41 Performing Arts Fund........................................ 36 Solid Waste Fund ............................................. 40 Transit Fund ..................................................... 35 303 Revenue By Source ......................................................... 83 Charges for Service Cultural and Recreational.............................. 95 Development Related.................................... 96 City Property Tax .............................................. 90 City Sales Tax .................................................. 88 Community Development Block Grant............ 102 Comparative Revenue by Source ..................... 85 Fines and Forfeitures........................................ 97 Golf Course Fees............................................ 105 Highway User Tax .......................................... 100 Local Transportation Assistance Fund............ 101 Performing Arts Fund........................................ 99 Salt River Project In-Lieu Tax ........................... 91 Section 8 Housing Grant................................. 102 Solid Waste Fees............................................ 104 State Shared Income Tax ................................. 94 State Shared Sales Tax.................................... 92 State Shared Vehicle License Tax.................... 93 Total Revenue .................................................. 82 Transient Lodging Tax (Bed Tax) ..................... 89 Transit Tax........................................................ 98 Water/Wastewater User Fees......................... 103 Rio Salado Comprehensive Financial Plan ......................... 69 Transportation Fund ......................................... 37 Water/Wastewater Fund................................... 39 Operating Budget Policies.................................... 18 Operating Revenue.............................................. 85 Organization Chart.................................................xi P Per Capita Expenditures by Program................... 47 Per Capita Performance Budget ........................ 109 Performance Benchmarking............................... 110 Performance Budget Summary.......................... 108 Performance Budget, Departmental Per Capita ...................................................... 109 Performing Arts Comprehensive Financial Plan......................... 65 Fund Balances, Unreserved (10 Years) ........... 31 Personnel Schedules....................................................... 261 Summary by Department................................ 260 Summary by Fund .......................................... 294 Ten-Year History .............................................. 51 Police Office of the Chief........................................... 167 Operations...................................................... 168 Organizational Services.................................. 171 Performance Budget ...................................... 166 Support Services ............................................ 170 Program Budget At a Glance....................................................... 46 Department Summary ...................................... 49 Fund Summary................................................. 48 Per Capita ........................................................ 47 Property Tax Levy and Rate ................................................ 253 Ordinance....................................................... 250 Revenue ........................................................... 90 Ten Year Historical Trends............................... 90 Public Works Administration................................................. 174 Engineering .................................................... 175 Field Operations ............................................. 177 Performance Budget ...................................... 172 Transportation ................................................ 181 Water Utilities ................................................. 184 S Sales Tax, City ..................................................... 88 Salt River Project In-Lieu Tax............................... 91 Solid Waste Fund Comprehensive Financial Plan ......................... 73 Retained Earnings, Unreserved Revenue...................................... 20, 22, 32, 73 Schedule A......................................................... 252 Schedule B......................................................... 253 Schedule C......................................................... 254 Schedule D......................................................... 256 Schedule E......................................................... 257 Section 8 Housing Revenue Trends ............................................. 102 Social Services Performance Budget ................. 139 Special Revenue Community Development Block Grant............ 102 Highway User Revenue Fund ......................... 100 Local Transportation Assistance Fund............ 101 Performing Arts Tax.......................................... 99 Section 8 Housing Grant................................. 102 Transit Tax........................................................ 98 State Shared Revenue Income Tax....................................................... 94 Sales Tax.......................................................... 92 Vehicle License Tax.......................................... 93 Strategic Issues: Goals and Strategy/Action Plan Community Sustainability ................................. 44 Education Partnerships..................................... 44 Housing ............................................................ 44 Mill and Lake District......................................... 44 R Recreation Centers and Programs Performance Budget ...................................... 138 Relationship Between Operating and Capital Budgets .............................................. 193 Reserve Policies .................................................. 19 Retained Earnings, Unreserved Golf Fund.........................................20, 22, 32, 75 Solid Waste Fund ............................20, 22, 32, 73 Water and Wastewater Fund...........20, 22, 32, 71 304 Neighborhood Parks Rehabilitation and Maintenance............................................ 44 Quality of Life ................................................... 44 Sports, Recreation, Arts and Cultural Development ..................................... 44 Technology, Economic, and Community Development .................................................. 45 Transportation .................................................. 45 T Transient Lodging Tax (Bed Tax)......................... 89 Transit Fund Comprehensive Financial Plan......................... 63 Fund Balances, Unreserved ............................. 30 Revenue ........................................................... 98 Transportation Comprehensive Financial Plan......................... 67 Performance Budget ...................................... 181 Revenue Highway User Tax ...................................... 100 Local Transportation Assistance Fund........ 101 Transit Tax.................................................... 98 W Water Utilities Performance Budget ................... 184 Water/Wastewater Fund Comprehensive Financial Plan......................... 71 Retained Earnings, Unreserved ..................................20, 22, 32, 71 Revenue ......................................................... 103 305 Office of Management and Budget Staff Cecilia Velasco-Robles Budget Manager Even though the budget is heard by the Mayor and Council in March and April, its preparation begins months prior, with projections of City funding sources, remaining bond authorization, reserves, revenue, and expenditures. It continues through numerous phases and culminates with adoption in June. We recognize and appreciate that budgeting is an ongoing process of planning, monitoring, problem solving, and customer service throughout the fiscal year. Each year, every effort is made to improve both the budget process and the usefulness of budget documents. Tom Mikesell Lead Budget and Finance Analyst Mark Day Senior Budget and Finance Analyst Adam Williams Senior Budget and Finance Analyst Anita Erspamer Executive Assistant The City of Tempe’s budget documents are available online at: www.tempe.gov/budget If you have any questions, call us at (480) 350-8350 Our mailing address is: City of Tempe Finance and Technology/Budget P.O. Box 5002 Tempe, Arizona 85280 Office of Management and Budget Staff at the Tempe History Museum. 306