CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Book Navigation Tips BUDGET BOOK NAVIGATION TIPS There are a number of ways to navigate through the budget book. Listed below are the three easiest options: 1. Both the Annual Budget Book Table of Contents and the CIP Table of Contents contain links to all sections of the book. To go directly to the section you would like to see, simply click on the section name or page number directly in either of the table of contents. If at any time you would like to return to the table of contents, click on Return to TOC located at the bottom of each page. Note that if within the CIP, clicking on Return to CIP TOC will take you back to the CIP table of contents. 2. Click on the Bookmarks tab to the left of the window to view all of the bookmarked pages; the format is similar to the table of contents. To expand a subsection, click the “+”. To go to a section you would like to see, simply click on the section name. 3. At the bottom of the window enter the page number you would like to go to and press enter, you will be taken directly to that page. The “◄” and “►” buttons take you back and forward one page at a time. The “▐◄” and “►▌” take you to the first and last page of the document, respectively. Proceed to TOC City of Glendale, Arizona Annual Budget, 2010-2011 CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Table of Contents CITY OF GLENDALE, ARIZONA FY 2010-11 ANNUAL BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Table of Contents Mayor’s Message Budget Presentation Award Mayor & City Council City Organizational Chart City Management City Council District Map Map of Glendale and Neighboring Communities Financial Organizational Chart How to Make the Most of this Document Budget Calendar Budget Process Page i 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 18 Budget Message City Manager’s Budget Message 23 Budget Summaries Budget Summary Revenues Expenditures Conclusion 32 46 60 76 Financial Guidelines Five-Year Financial Forecast Financial Plan Financial Policies 77 93 105 Operating Budget Appointed & Elected Officials Mayor & City Council City Attorney City Clerk City Court 109 116 120 124 i CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Table of Contents Administrative Services Page 130 131 135 136 140 141 145 Administrative Services Administration Finance Lease Payments Human Resources Employee Groups Information Technology Management & Budget Community Development Community Development Administration Building Safety Economic Development Rebates & Incentives Airport Engineering Planning 152 153 158 162 163 165 170 Community Services Community Services Administration Code Compliance Community Partnerships Neighborhood Improvement Grants Library & Arts Parks and Recreation 175 176 181 186 187 192 Internal Services City Auditor City Manager’s Office Community Action Program Intergovernmental Programs Glendale Civic Center Marketing and Communications Convention Center, Media Center and Parking Garage Facilities & Financial Mgt Administration 198 202 206 207 211 215 219 220 Public Safety Glendale Fire Department Glendale Police Department Homeland Security 221 227 233 ii CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Table of Contents Public Works Page 234 235 240 245 251 Public Works Administration Environmental Resources Field Operations Transportation Utilities Other Grants Non-Departmental 256 257 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan CIP Table of Contents CIP Ten-Year Plan 258 260 Schedule Why Include Schedules? Schedule 1: Fund Balance Analysis by Category; by Fund Schedule 2: Operating Revenues by Category; by Fund Schedule 3: Operating Budgets by Program and Fund Schedule 4: Transfers Between Funds Schedule 5: Expenditure Limitation and Property Tax Rate Schedule 6: Authorized Staffing Schedule 7: Long Term Debt Service Summary; by Detail Schedule 8: Scheduled Lease Payments Schedule 9: Internal Service Premiums Schedule 10: General Staff and Administrative Service Charges Schedule 11: Operating Capital List Schedule 12: Carryover Savings Budgets 488 489 494 507 526 527 528 564 599 602 610 611 613 Appendix Miscellaneous Statistics Acronyms Glossary Frequently Asked Questions 618 621 623 627 iii CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Mayor’s Message To the Citizens of Glendale: June 18, 2010, marks Glendale’s 100th year as an incorporated city in Arizona. Our city’s 100th birthday is a tremendous opportunity for all of us to honor the past, celebrate the present and imagine the future of our great city. This milestone also represents the culmination of a profound transformation of our great city since its incorporation in 1910 as a farming community on the outskirts of Phoenix. That transformation occurred because of our community’s shared vision about how we could make Glendale the best possible place, and then turning that vision into reality. That shared vision reflected a strategic plan to bring quality economic development to the city. It also included a commitment to strengthening Glendale’s tourism amenities so that the hospitality industry would function as a spring board for • increased private sector investments, • more jobs for our residents, and • an increased tax base to help maintain exceptional city services for the community. What began as community dialogue among our residents, businesses, education partners, private-sector partners, civic leaders, and others has resulted in Glendale’s impressive emergence as a destination city known nationally and internationally. Long before Jobing.com Arena, Westgate, University of Phoenix Stadium or Camelback Ranch became part of our daily vocabulary, our elected officials, civic leaders, and other public officials were identifying the capital investments in infrastructure that would be needed to support the quality economic development we wanted to attract to Glendale. Infrastructure investments are the funds needed to construct water and sewer facilities, streets and roadway improvements, flood control facilities, public safety buildings and important quality-of-life assets such as parks, trails and libraries. Key to understanding Glendale’s ability to diversify its economic base, withstand the current economic challenges, and retain high bond ratings is the magnitude of our capital investments in infrastructure. For cities, making investments in critical infrastructure is part of the capital accumulation required for economic development. Quality economic development is essential for a community interested in sustaining a high quality of life and exceptional city services for its residents and businesses. It is through quality economic development that a city is able to improve the economic and social wellbeing of the community. Over the course of Glendale’s 100 years as a city, elected and civic leaders have sought to prepare our city for opportunities by developing long-range goals and identifying community investments that put plans into action. To implement ambitious plans, funding is always needed and, in Arizona, funding authorization must come from voters through bond elections. Our residents and business partners 1 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Mayor’s Message deserve so much credit for our city’s accomplishments and successes because of their firm support for the long-range plans and community investments. Recent evidence of this strong support is the voters’ approval of $411.5 million in bond requests in November 1999 and an additional $218 million in May 2007. The variety of capital improvement projects authorized in those bond elections were the products of our community’s ideas, dreams, and needs as expressed during visioning sessions. It was at those meetings that our residential and business communities voiced pride about building community pride, creating an identity of our own and attracting more businesses that bring quality jobs to the community. The capital infrastructure investments completed between 2000 and 2009 total more than $950 million! This magnitude of investment clearly affirms our city’s obligation to ensure the essential service needs of our community always will be met. This investment also demonstrates our city’s respect for improving our neighborhoods and preserving important historic buildings. Among some of the key outcomes from these infrastructure investments are the following: • Our water treatment capacity has expanded from 54 million gallons per day to 95 million gallons per day. • Our wastewater treatment capacity has nearly tripled from 4.3 million gallons per day to 11.5 million gallons per day. • More than 190 traffic signals, of which 63% is connected to the city’s traffic management center, operate citywide to ensure the smooth functioning of our critical roadways so all of us can travel efficiently and arrive safely at our intended destination. • A state-of-the art public safety training facility, emergency operations center, and police and fire stations were constructed and are fully operational to ensure the city provides the highest quality public safety services to the community. • New or substantially renovated park and recreation facilities were completed that represent the important quality of life assets that our citizens value. These facilities include the new Glendale Adult Center, the Foothills Recreation and Aquatic Center, the Foothills Library, the Rose Lane Aquatic Center, and the Western Area Regional Park. Overall, these capital investments benefit everyone now and will continue to serve those who will come to Glendale in the future. To you, our residents, this equates to a better quality of life; to our businesses and future partners, this means greater opportunities for even more success. It is because of these capital infrastructure investments that we have been able to seize opportunities to strengthen our economy by changing from a reliance on residential growth as an economic base to a more diversified foundation sustained by destination and employment centers. Some recent economic successes include Humana’s decision to open a new mail-order pharmacy facility in Glendale. The company will relocate 300 employees to the new Glendale facility and 2 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Mayor’s Message expects to add as many as 150 new positions by the end of 2011. Humana will occupy three-story, open-space offices at the 91 Glendale Corporate Center, which is now full with this relocation. This key relocate enhances Glendale’s line-up of corporate partners and strengthens the city’s impressive listing of health industry institutions. Another recent economic success is the location of a satellite facility for DeVry University at Glendale’s Westgate City Center. The school will be located in about 18,000 square feet of office/retail space that will serve approximately 500 students at both the graduate and undergraduate level. This addition enhances Glendale’s standing as the West Valley leader in higher education opportunities and complements Glendale’s Thunderbird School of Global Management, Midwestern University, Glendale Community College and the Arizona College of Allied Health. Other economic successes include the visitors drawn to our community to participate in the many entertainment options that take place in Glendale. For example, our 27th Annual Glendale Jazz and Blues Festival in April 2010 attracted more than 45,000 visitors. In fact, Glendale’s four signature festivals in the downtown area have attracted more than 400,000 visitors since November 2009. Camelback Ranch, Glendale’s new baseball spring training facility, experienced a record-breaking 206,437 visitors in spring 2010. Finally, the very popular Wrestlemania XXVI brought over 72,000 fans from all 50 states and 26 countries. We cannot overlook the importance of Luke Air Force Base (AFB) to Glendale’s economic health. Luke currently is the largest active duty F-16 training base in the world. Luke AFB alone contributes more than 8,000 jobs and $2.17 billion annually to the state’s economy. Strengthening Luke’s presence in the community more than merits the resources Glendale dedicates to retaining this important economic engine. Overall, there is no doubt that Glendale is both progressive and aggressive in maintaining the quality of our existing facilities and services. Your well-being and satisfaction with our city is City Council’s paramount goal. To continue meeting this goal, we must remain fiscally sound and we have stated that as one of our strategic goals. As we commemorate Glendale’s centennial by honoring the past, celebrating the present and imagining the future of our great city, we pledge our continued commitment to making Glendale a “city of choice, not chance” for all residents and businesses. Thank you for your confidence and support. Sincerely, Elaine M. Scruggs Mayor 3 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Distinguished Budget Presentation Award The Government Finance Officers Association of the United State and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award, with special recognition for the presentation of capital information, to the City of Glendale, Arizona for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2009. In order to receive this award, a government 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 device. This 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. 4 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Mayor & City Council MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL 5 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ City Organizational Chart CITY ORGANIZATIONAL CHART CITIZENS OF GLENDALE Mayor & Council Boards & Commissions Mgmt Asst To the City Manager Jean Moreno Marketing & Communications Julie Frisoni Intergovernmental City Auditor Candace MacLeod Programs Director Brent Stoddard Ethics Program Contract Management Deputy City Manager Public Works Ken Reedy City Court Judge Elizabeth Finn City Manager Ed Beasley City Clerk Pam Hanna Community Action Program Administrator Rebecca Daniel Assistant City Manager Pam Kavanaugh Assistant to the Mayor Steven Methvin Deputy City Manager Administrative Services Horatio Skeete City Attorney Craig Tindall Police Chief Steve Conrad Fire Chief Mark Burdick Council Services Administrator Kristen Krey Deputy City Manager Community Services Cathy Gorham Deputy City Manager Community Development Jim Colson Field Operations Stuart Kent Finance Diane Goke Interim Director Parks & Recreation Rebecca Benna Building Safety Deborah Mazoyer Utilities Roger Bailey Management & Budget Sherry Schurhammer Library & Arts Sue Komernicky Planning Jon Froke Transportation Jamsheed Mehta Human Resources Alma Carmicle Code Compliance Sam McAllen Economic Development Brian Friedman Environmental Resources Doug Kukino Information Technology Chuck Murphy Community Partnerships Erik Strunk Engineering Larry Broyles Airport Division Judy Skeen 6 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ City Management CITY MANAGEMENT Mayor ELAINE M. SCRUGGS Councilmembers Manuel D. Martinez Vice Mayor Cholla District Joyce V. Clark Yucca District Steven E. Frate Sahuaro District David M. Goulet Ocotillo District Yvonne J. Knaack Barrel District H. Philip Lieberman Cactus District Management Staff Ed Beasley City Manager Department Heads and Directors Department Heads and Directors, cont. Craig Tindall City Attorney Erik Strunk Community Partnership Pamela Hanna City Clerk Sue Komernicky Library Judge Elizabeth Finn Rebecca Benna Parks & Recreation Presiding City Judge Diane Goke – Interim Finance Candace MacLeod Alma Carmicle Human Resources Brent Stoddard Intergovernmental Programs Chuck Murphy Information Technology Julie Frisoni Marketing & Communications Sherry Schurhammer Management and Budget Judy Skeen Airport Division Pam Kavanaugh Assistant City Manager Deborah Mazoyer Building Safety Horatio Skeete Deputy City Manager Administrative Services Jim Colson Deputy City Manager Community Development Cathy Gorham Deputy City Manager Community Services Brian Friedman Economic Development Larry Broyles City Engineer Jon Froke Planning Sam McAllen Code Compliance Kenneth A. Reedy Deputy City Manager Public Works 7 Return to TOC City Auditor Mark Burdick Fire Chief Steven Conrad Police Chief Doug Kukino Environmental Resources Stuart Kent Field Operations Jamsheed Mehta Transportation Roger Bailey Utilities CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Glendale District Boundaries GLENDALE COUNCIL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES 8 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Map of Glendale & Neighboring Communities MAP OF GLENDALE AND NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES 9 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Financial Organization Chart 10 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Financial Organization Chart For a description of major fund sources please refer to the Budget Summary on page 32. You can navigate to the description by clicking the funding source you would like more information about. 11 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ How to Make the Most of this Document HOW TO MAKE THE MOST OF THIS DOCUMENT This budget document serves two primary but distinct purposes. One purpose is to present the City Council and the public with a clear picture of the services the city provides and of the policy alternatives that are available. The other purpose is to provide city management with a financial and operating plan that adheres to the city’s financial policies. It also communicates the vision of the City Council and leadership team for the City of Glendale and presents the financial and organizational operations for each of the City’s departments. In an effort to assist users in navigating through this document, the following guide is provided. The document begins with the mayor’s message that is addressed to the citizens of Glendale. As such, it provides a strategic overview of the city’s infrastructure investments that would be of most interest to Glendale’s citizens. A financial organization chart follows this message and provides a high level look at the operating, capital, debt service and contingency budgets. The budget calendar and a description of the budget process will help the user understand the time and effort that the City puts into developing a balance budget. Budget Message The city manager’s budget message articulates the balancing strategy used to develop the FY 2011 budget as well as policy issues and priorities for the fiscal year. It describes significant changes from the FY 2010 budget and the factors that led to those changes. It also outlines key components of the upcoming budget and discusses underlying administrative practices that support the city’s organizational goals. Budget Summaries The budget summary offers an overview of the city’s finances and examines the following areas: • The budget components, process and budget amendment policy • Financial and operational summaries for all major funds • Historical trends for revenues, expenditures and staffing Financial Guidelines This section offers an overview of the City’s financial planning practices including the following: • The Five-Year Forecast provides the long-range financial outlook for city operations with details on how the revenue and expenditure projections are established, • The Financial Plan discusses short- and long-term strategies that comprise the city’s approach to financial planning, and • The Financial Policies that form the framework and guidelines for overall fiscal planning and management. 12 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ How to Make the Most of this Document Operating Budget This section provides a closer look at the various functions of each department. Each department has provided a description of its core job functions, goals and objectives for the upcoming year, as well as recent accomplishments and other relevant statistics. The budget summaries include both historical and current year financial data for programs and services offered by the department. They also include a summary of the type of expenditures incurred by the department as well as trends on authorized staffing. 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) The CIP section outlines all infrastructure improvements and additions and their respective funding sources, along with estimates for the associated operating impacts of each capital project. It starts with a narrative summary and is followed by detailed information such as funding source, project number and project description for both capital and operating costs by year for the first five years of the plan. In addition, the CIP includes five additional “out years” for future planning and discussion purposes. Schedules This is the heart of the budget document as an operating and financial plan. These schedules summarize the City’s financial activities in a comprehensive, financial format. Appendix This section includes some key city statistics regarding population, household income, occupational distribution, school enrollment and much, much more. You can also find information on the number of parks, libraries, fire and police stations. A glossary of important financial and budgetary terms that are used throughout the City’s budget document and a “frequently asked questions” section, which helps address many of the most important aspects regarding the budget document, is also included. 13 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Calendar FY 2011 BUDGET CALENDAR July 2009 – August 2009 Budget staff began analyzing balancing options for FY 2011 and started discussions with executive management regarding the various options. September 2009 thru January 2010 Capital improvement plan (CIP) budget preparation. This process involved input by departments; the review of project budgets and operating and maintenance budgets by engineering, budget and facilities management staff; the prioritization of projects based on City Council’s strategic priorities and financial constraints; a discussion of various financing options by the CIP finance team; and preparation of the Preliminary CIP 20112020 document for City Council review. Preparation of operating budget items such as premiums for workers compensation insurance, risk management insurance, vehicle replacement, technology replacement, phone services, and indirect cost allocation. Analysis of revenue trends also prepared during this time, with periodic updates to executives in the City Manager’s Office. September 2009 29 Memo from the City Manager’s Office to the deputy city managers and public safety chiefs regarding instructions for identifying three levels of program and service adjustments for the FY 2011 general fund operating budget. The three levels of reductions were 10%, 15% and 20%. Responses were due to the Management and Budget Department by October 23, 2009. October 2009 Management began the meet and confer process after receiving initial proposals from both public safety labor unions. Meetings and discussions between union representatives and members of the negotiation team regarding the proposals continued over the next several months. The city’s negotiation team consisted of the city manager, assistant city manager, human resources director, management and budget director, and their respective ancillary staff members. 28 City manager’s meeting with the deputy city managers, public safety chiefs, human resources director and the staff of the Management and Budget Department to discuss the proposed program and service adjustments that were submitted in response to the September 29, 2009 memo. The city manager directed the public safety chiefs to modify their reductions at the 10% level so they exclude any proposed adjustments to sworn staffing. He also directed the deputy city managers for the other departments to reevaluate their proposed 15% and 20% reductions. 14 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Calendar November 2009 3 Memo from the City Manager’s Office to the deputy city managers and public safety chiefs regarding modifications to the proposed program and service adjustments that were submitted in October and reviewed at the October 28, 2009 meeting. Responses were due to the Management and Budget Department by November 23, 2009. December 2009 2 City Council goal review and strategic planning retreat. An economic update was provided to council. This update included an estimate of the additional shortfall expected for the FY 2011 general fund operating budget as well as the estimated impact of the region’s real estate market on the council-adopted CIP. Council was apprised of the development of proposed program and service adjustments to the FY 2011 general fund operating budget. 7 Operating budget kickoff meeting and departments began the FY 2011 budget input. Input continued through December 23. 17 City manager’s meeting with the deputy city managers, public safety chiefs, human resources director and the staff of the Management and Budget Department to discuss the modified reductions that were submitted in response to the November 3, 2009 memo. A proposed balancing plan for the FY 2011 general fund operating budget was also presented. This plan included the elimination of frozen general fund vacancies, the continuation of the existing furlough program for all city employees except those in the represented groups, general fund revenue enhancement opportunities and the proposed general fund operating program and service adjustments that had been under discussion since October 2009. The city manager provided direction regarding the revenue enhancement opportunities and potential additional opportunities for generating savings in the operating budget. 23 Last day for FY 2011 budget input by departments January 2010 20 City manager’s meeting with the deputy city managers, public safety chiefs, human resources director and the staff of the Management and Budget Department to discuss the follow up items from the December 17, 2009 meeting. Balancing plan for the FY 2011 general fund operating budget was finalized in preparation for the February 16, 2010 workshop presentation to City Council. February 2010 16 The balancing strategy for the FY 2011 general fund operating budget was presented to City Council. This meeting also presented City Council with the schedule for three public meetings to solicit feedback on the proposed service and program adjustments to the FY 2011 general fund operating budget. 15 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Calendar 19 City’s website for the upcoming public meetings on the budget went live and included a document that summarized the $14.7 million in proposed program and service adjustments to the FY 2011 general fund operating budget. The website also included a method for citizens to provide feedback via the website to the proposed program and service adjustments. A telephone hotline to solicit constituent feedback also became operational. As a result of the open relationship that has been established through the Organizational Cooperative Process (OCP), each union’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was completed. As they have done in previous years, members of these organizations stepped up to help the city deal with the current budget situation. Between the two groups, they contributed over $1.8 million in deferral of pay and benefits to assist with balancing the current FY 2011 budget while ensuring that their issues will be considered in future years. Both the Glendale Chapter of the United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association – Local 493 and the Glendale Police Officer’s Coalition took the final draft MOU to their respective membership where each voted to approve the terms for FY 2011 and FY 2012. March 2010 3, 4, 8 Three public meetings to solicit feedback on the proposed service and program adjustments to the FY 2011 general fund operating budget. 11 Last day for submission via the city’s website or the telephone hotline of public comments on the proposed program and service adjustments. 18 Delivery of the city manager’s recommended FY 2011 operating budget document and the preliminary FY 2011-2020 CIP document to City Council for discussion at the upcoming budget workshops. 23 1:30 PM – 5:00 PM, budget workshop. 30 1:00 PM – 5:00 PM, budget workshop April 2010 The FY 2011 budget document was prepared. This included preparation of all schedules such as fund balance analyses, summary of revenues, operating budgets by program and fund, debt service schedules, transfers between funds, summary of property tax levy and tax rate, departmental narratives, budget message, etc. May 2010 18 The FY 2011 preliminary budget document was delivered to City Council in advance of the May 25 council meeting. 25 City Council adopted a resolution approving the FY 2011 preliminary budget, directing publication of the preliminary budget, giving notice of the June 8 date for the public hearing on the FY 2011 preliminary budget and a separate public hearing on the FY 2011 16 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Calendar property tax levy and giving notice of the June 23 date for the adoption of the FY 2011 property tax levy. 27 Publication in The Glendale Star of FY 2011 budget information as required by state statute. June 2010 3 Second publication in The Glendale Star of FY 2011 budget information as required by state statute. 3 The Planning Department presented the FY 2011-2020 CIP to the Planning Commission for review as required by Arizona state law to ensure consistency with the City’s General Plan. The Planning Commission sent a letter to the City Council indicating that the FY 2011-2020 CIP is consistent with the Glendale’s General Plan. 8 City Council conducted a public hearing on the FY 2011 property tax levy. City Council conducted a separate public hearing on the FY 2011 budget and convened a special meeting to adopt a resolution approving the FY 2011 budget. 22 City Council adopted an ordinance approving the FY 2011 property tax levy. July 2010 1 Start of FY 2011. September 2010 TBD Clean up ordinance to City Council regarding FY 2010 inter-fund budget transfers. 17 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process FY 2011 BUDGET PROCESS OVERVIEW: The FY 2011 operating and capital budgets are based on council’s continued vision of ‘one community’ and the supporting strategic goals that Council reaffirmed at a December 2009 retreat: • • • • • • • One community that is fiscally sound, One community with strong neighborhoods, One community committed to public safety, One community with quality economic development, One community with a vibrant city center, One community with an active partnership with Luke Air Force Base, and One community with high quality services for citizens. The principal issue for FY 2011 continued to be the recession and the impact it has on the city’s resources to fund services to the community as well as the city’s CIP. Prior to mid-FY 2009, Glendale had revenue growth to address rising demand for city services and cost increases related to service delivery. The city’s major ongoing revenue sources, sales taxes and state-shared revenues, began to decline significantly in FY 2009 as the effects of the recession reverberated across the country. The decline continued into early FY 2010, although at a slower pace, and leveled off by mid-year. However, demand for city services has remained steady and, in several areas, grown. Development of balancing options for the FY 2011 budget began in July 2009. Executive management reviewed various reduction alternatives during the summer and early fall and these reviews resulted in the city manager providing direction to develop program and service adjustments for the FY 2011 operating budget. The Management and Budget Department provided each deputy city manager and chief with varying target reduction levels to meet in identifying service delivery adjustments. For a more in-depth discussion of the budget strategy for FY 2011, please see the City Manager’s Budget Message. The city manager directed departments to focus on retention of core services, as defined by City Council’s strategic goals, when they developed program and service adjustments for consideration. He also directed staff to minimize the impact of service and program adjustments on our residents and businesses. The Innovate Initiative that was commenced in FY 2009 was tied into this effort because it is directly related to the budget development process and the city’s strategic business model. Staff was challenged to use creativity and innovation in building a business case for departmental service delivery adjustments. These messages were conveyed to the city’s deputy city managers, department heads and budget experts through a variety of meetings that executive staff led. After several executive management reviews of the proposed adjustments, a balanced operating budget was developed for City Council’s consideration. The recommended operating budget included the following elements: 18 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process • • • • • elimination of vacant positions; continuation of the same furlough program that was implemented on a mandatory basis for FY 2010 for all non-represented employees; continuation of pay-related adjustments to the labor agreements for the represented employees; implementation of revenue enhancement opportunities; and implementation of proposed service and program adjustments totaling $14.7 million. Public safety provided reductions that equated to 10% of their respective operating budgets once vacant positions were included. All other departments provided reductions that equated to 10% to 27% of their respective operating budgets once vacant positions were included. A public document outlining the proposed service and program adjustments was prepared and released to the public in mid-February. This document was the basis for three (3) public meetings that occurred in early March to solicit feedback on the proposed service and program adjustments to the FY 2011 general fund operating budget. In working with departments to develop the FY 2011 operating budget in light of the proposed program and service adjustments, the Management and Budget Department continued to use the “base budget” approach. However, this approach was modified as explained in the next paragraph. Under normal circumstances, the base budgeting approach means that divisions are allocated a target base expenditure amount to support all ongoing operations for the upcoming fiscal year. Allocations are based on the prior year ongoing appropriation for that division, with any one-time funds in the current fiscal year’s budget excluded from the target base budget for the upcoming fiscal year. In addition, departments are encouraged to shift allocations for nonsalary items within the target base amount if needed. All salary and benefit related items are calculated and established separately by the Management and Budget Department. The base budget approach was modified because the recession required two different ongoing budget reductions to departments’ operating budgets prior to the development of the FY 2011 operating budget. While the base budget cuts were not made to the Police and Fire Department operating budgets in FY 2009 and FY 2010, their spending was reduced to match decreases in public safety sales tax revenues. A final balancing meeting with executive leadership occurred in January. Decisions at this meeting resulted in the recommended budget presented to City Council at a series of budget workshops held in February and March. At the conclusion of these budget workshops, the proposed budget was presented to Council for tentative adoption and then, two weeks later, for final adoption. The budget was transmitted to the general public in the form of public hearing notices. These notices included summary budget information, including the date for the public hearing on the property tax levy, as required by Arizona state law. After completing the public hearing for the final FY 2011 budget, the Council adopted it and thereby set the expenditure limitation for FY 2011. A separate public hearing on the FY 2011 property tax levy was conducted at the same meeting as the final budget adoption. 19 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process Adoption of the property tax levy occurred two weeks later. The chart below illustrates the broad outline of the FY 2011 budget development process. Revenue Collections Analyzed. Prelim FY 2011 Operating Budget Developed. Capital Requests Prepared Adoption of Tentative Budget and Setting Date f or Budget Adoption and Property Tax Levy Public Hearing 5/25/10 Budget Staf f Compilation And Analysis 07/01/09 - 1/20/10 Public Hearing Adopt Final Budget 6/08/10 City Manager and Leadership Team Review 08/01/09 - 1/20/10 Public Hearing Property Tax Levy 6/08/10 Adoption of Levy 6/22/10 Council Budget Workshop Sessions 2/16/10 - 3/30/10 VARIATIONS IN BUDGETING METHODS: The budgets of general government type funds, such as the General Fund, Public Safety Special Revenue Fund, Streets Fund and Transportation Fund are prepared on a modified accrual basis. This means that unpaid financial obligations, such as outstanding purchase orders, are immediately reflected as encumbrances when the cost is estimated, although the items may not have been received yet. However, in most cases revenue is recognized only after it is measurable and actually available. Beginning with FY 1996, sales tax revenues were recorded in the period in which they were due to the city. This changed in FY 2008 and sales tax revenue is now recorded to the month it is collected. Enterprise funds (Water/Sewer, Landfill and Sanitation) are prepared using the full accrual method. Enterprise funds also recognize expenditures as encumbered when a commitment is made (e.g., through a purchase order). Revenues, on the other hand, are recognized when they are obligated to the city (for example, water user fees are recognized as revenue when service is provided). 20 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process Purchase orders for goods and services received prior to the end of the current fiscal year will be eligible for payment for a period of days following the close of the fiscal year. However, encumbrances for all other purchase orders will automatically lapse. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) presents the status of the city's finances on the basis of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Since FY 2002, the CAFR has been prepared in compliance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 requirements. The CAFR shows fund expenditures and revenues on both a GAAP basis and budget basis for comparison purposes. In most cases, this conforms to the way the city prepares its budget with the following exceptions: a. Compensated absences liabilities that are expected to be liquidated with expendable available financial resources are accrued as earned by employees on a GAAP basis as opposed to being expended when paid on a budget basis. b. Principal payments on long-term debt within the enterprise funds are applied to the outstanding liability on a GAAP basis as opposed to being expended when paid on a budget basis. c. Capital outlays within the enterprise funds are recorded as assets on a GAAP basis and expended on a budget basis. d. Inventory is expensed at the time it is used. e. Depreciation expense is not budgeted as an expense. ACCOUNTING CHANGES: Two funds were eliminated during FY 2009, the Cable Communications (Fund 1160) and the Training Facility (Fund 2533). The Cable Communications Fund was previously used to track the revenues and expenditures associated with the rental of city owned cable communications equipment, including a cable van to outside parties. This fund was closed out during FY 2009 and will not have any budgeted activity going forward. Any remaining activities associated with the fund have been combined with the Convention/Media/Parking Facility budget in the General Fund. (This fund will be removed from our financial reports and schedules with the adoption of the FY 2012 budget.) The Training Facility Debt Service (Fund 2533) was used to track the capital construction contributions made by the partners that helped pay for the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center. This facility was built with capital contributions from the City of Glendale (74.8%), Maricopa County Community College District (8.2%), City of Surprise (6.6%), City of Peoria (6.5%), City of Avondale (3.9%) and the federal government. Since the city issued a combination of general obligation and MPC bonds to build the entire facility, these cash contributions were used during FY 2009 to help pay the outstanding MPC debt service associated with the facility. This fund will be removed from our financial reports and schedules with the adoption of the FY 2011 budget. 21 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process Debt service for Highway User Fee Revenue (HURF) bonds will continue to be addressed as it was for FY 2010. The City has outstanding HURF bonds for street projects that are backed by a pledge of the HURF monies the city receives from the state. The state reduced the amount of HURF revenue that is distributed to cities for FY 2010 and that reduction will continue for FY 2011. Therefore, HURF debt service will continue to be paid by secondary property tax revenue ($2.7 million), roadway development impact fees ($1 million) and transportation sales tax revenues ($1 million). One new fund was created since the adoption of the FY 2010 budget in June 2009. Fund 1842 was created to account for all activity related to grant funds allocated to the City of Glendale as part of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), the federal stimulus package. It appears in the Special Revenue Fund Group in Schedule 1. The GASB Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions, is expected to be incorporated into the FY 2011 CAFR. Once it is implemented into the CAFR, the Annual Budget Book will be modified accordingly. 22 Return to TOC Budget Message 2010-2011 BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message Honorable Mayor and Council: While the current economic environment has presented its share of challenges for local and state government, the City of Glendale continues to look towards the future with optimism, flexibility and resilience. Vision, innovation, partnerships, and dedicated employees continue to play a central role in making the city’s future efforts rewarding and successful despite the difficult economy. This outlook is a result of City Council’s continued focus on enhancing fiscal strength through quality economic development and the continuation of strategic investments that build upon those made over the last several years. This outlook also is the result of the strategic management of constrained city resources. Consequently, the city’s FY 2011 budget continues to provide resources to maintain high quality, core services while moving forward with efforts that ensure a positive, sustainable future. The FY 2011 operating and capital budgets are based on Council’s continued vision of ‘one community’ and the supporting strategic goals that Council reconsidered at a December 2009 retreat: • • • • • • • One community that is fiscally sound, One community with strong neighborhoods, One community committed to public safety, One community with quality economic development, One community with a vibrant city center, One community with an active partnership with Luke Air Force Base, and One community with high quality services for citizens. Also, the FY 2011 budget continues to reflect the enduring challenges of today’s economy. We have implemented many expenditure management measures since the start of FY 2009 while keeping our focus on providing core services that sustain Council’s strategic goals. As an example, a top priority for Council is public safety and those core services have been spared from implementing the level of reductions other departments have realized. The bottom line is that regardless of whether the economy is growing or contracting, City Council’s strategic goals continue to form the foundation and guide the development of the city’s annual budget. Discussion Economic Conditions. The principal issue for FY 2011 continues to be the recession and the impact it has on the city’s resources to fund services to the community and the city’s capital plan. The encouraging news is the decline in General Fund (GF) revenue collections has leveled off since the start of FY 2010. In fact, the third quarter of FY 2010 GF revenue collections showed a 23 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message modest increase over the prior two quarters. Nevertheless, the fact that revenues stabilized at much lower levels than we anticipated when this recession started is a moderating influence on the encouraging news. This fact foretells a restrained climb back to the robust economic energy we witnessed only a few short years ago. GF (including Streets Fund) ongoing revenue collections reached its peak in FY 2008 at $184.2 million. Since then collections have declined almost $40 million, or 22%, when compared to the FY 2011 projection of $144.4 million (excludes new revenue opportunities). As the chart below illustrates, the FY 2011 GF (including Streets Fund) revenue projection is comparable to the amount collected in FY 2005. City sales taxes and state-shared revenues continue to be the two major sources for the GF. They have comprised between two-thirds and three-fourths of the GF ongoing revenue since FY 2002 and are expected to continue to do so for FY 2011. Of the two sources, city sales tax is the single largest revenue source for the GF; in FY 2007 city sales tax receipts reached $63.6 million but since then collections have receded 21% to an expected $50.5 million in FY 2011. State-shared revenue has experienced a similar level of decline. Three sources comprise stateshared revenue with income tax being the largest component. Glendale’s portion of state shared revenue peaked in FY 2008 at $66.1 million. The FY 2011 projection of $49.8 million reflects a 24 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message 25% drop in state income tax revenue to be distributed to Glendale, from $31.3 million to $23.6 million. On the capital side, property tax revenues have similarly declined as a result of the constrained real estate market that dominates the Phoenix metropolitan area. The Maricopa County Assessor’s Office announced that the median value of single family residential properties across the entire county dropped an astonishing 44% over three consecutive years. And, for the first time in several decades, the median value of commercial properties declined – a surprising 24% in one year. For the future, the big unknown is whether property values have stabilized in the Phoenix metropolitan area. Sales data from the first few months of calendar year 2010 show a leveling off of prices, but that encouraging sign is tentative given the unknown supply of properties in foreclosure but not yet on the market. The outstanding question for the longer-term outlook is the length of time over which a recovery will occur. The consensus among experts on the Arizona economy is that the state has entered the recovery phase, albeit on tentative footing. A return to normal levels of economic activity is expected to take place over at least a few years because Arizona was hit particularly hard by the recession. Factors contributing to a gradual recovery in Arizona include constrained job growth, weak personal income growth, weak consumer confidence and the lingering effects of a very challenging real estate market. Therefore, Arizona economic experts do not expect a return to normal growth until at least FY 2012 or later. Given this outlook, the city’s operating and capital budgets required longer-term modifications to address the expectation of constrained revenue sources for the next few years. The strategy for addressing this situation is discussed below. Budget Balancing Strategy. The budget strategy for FY 2011 is built around a strategic, business-based and service-based approach that will be implemented in phases over several months. This approach includes a mix of ongoing and one-time budget measures that result in a balanced budget. The phased budget strategy is appropriate for a service organization like the city because it takes us through a series of steps that are designed to attain a fiscally responsible budget while not severely diminishing the valuable services we provide to the community. This budget strategy also sustains core city services as defined by City Council strategic goals. These core services are health and safety related such as emergency response services provided by the Police and Fire Departments. This strategy was confirmed by input from citizens through three communitywide public meetings that were held to solicit feedback on the proposed service and program adjustments. Overall, this approach represents the measures needed now to address: • The short-term outlook for matching expenses to constrained resources and 25 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message • The long-term outlook for ensuring the city has business delivery systems that enable us to be responsive when the economy turns around. In preparing the FY 2011 budget, staff was challenged to use creativity and innovation in building a business case for departmental service delivery adjustments. The direction provided to the departments was to focus on core services, as defined by City Council’s strategic goals, and to minimize the impact on our residents and businesses. The Innovate Initiative that was commenced in FY 2009 was tied into this effort because it is directly related to the budget development process and the city’s strategic business model. Departments and individual employees have been, and continue to be, actively engaged in making business-based recommendations to adjust existing processes and bring forward new business concepts to bolster revenue. These business-based recommendations have helped us prepare a balanced budget. This strategy will result in Glendale being strongly positioned for the future. For example, Glendale has remained at the forefront in bringing high quality economic development. One recent project includes the Humana Pharmacy Solutions announcement to fill the Glendale 91 class A office space. Another new economic development project is DeVry University. Its new location at the Westgate City Center is its fourth Arizona location, bringing dozens of new professional jobs to the city. This addition enhances Glendale’s standing as the West Valley leader in higher education opportunities as both undergraduate and graduate degree programs will be offered at the Glendale location. Further, the National Hockey League’s Coyotes team that is the anchor tenant at the Jobing.com Arena, the centerpiece of the city’s sports and entertainment district, is very close to resolution. Keeping the Coyotes in Glendale for the remainder of their lease at Jobing.com Arena has been a priority to ensuring the future sustainability of Glendale’s sports and entertainment district. At the time this message was developed, the National Hockey League was evaluating an offer to purchase the Coyotes hockey team. The offer protects the City’s investment in the sports and entertainment district by keeping the team in Glendale, not using taxpayer dollars, not impacting current revenue streams and ensuring the city has the ability to share in any new revenue opportunities. FY 2011 Operating Budget. The budget strategy includes several expenditure reduction steps totaling $31.6 million. They are briefly explained below. Eliminate 100.5 existing vacancies in the GF that were created as a result of freezing positions that became open due to the retirement program initiated in the spring of 2009 as well as normal attrition during the FY 2009 and FY 2010. These vacancies exclude sworn positions in public safety. $7.3 million in savings. Continue the same furlough program that was initially implemented on a voluntary basis during FY 2009. The City of Glendale employees deserve recognition and praise for offering to take a 26 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message 5% pay reduction (furloughs) to help the city balance its FY 2010 budget. They stepped forward again to say they wanted to continue this program for FY 2011 to help balance the budget. All non-represented employees participate in the furlough plan. $3 million in savings. Similarly, the City of Glendale’s represented employees deserve recognition and praise for continuing the mutually agreed upon adjustments to their labor agreements that were implemented in FY 2010. As a result of the open relationship that has been established through the Organizational Cooperative Process (OCP), each union’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was completed. As they have done in previous years, members of these organizations stepped up to help the City deal with the current budget situation. Between the two groups, they contributed over $1.8 million in deferral of pay and benefits for FY 2011 while ensuring that their issues will be considered in future years. Both the Glendale Chapter of the United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association – Local 493 and the Glendale Police Officer’s Coalition took the final draft MOU to their respective membership where each voted to approve the terms for FY 2011 and FY 2012. $0.6 million in net savings. Another measure is a reinvestment of other fund balances and involves investing restricted funds in higher-yielding government obligations. This allows the reinvested funds to earn higher rates of interest in a low-interest earnings market while reducing interest expenses on lease debt obligations paid out of the operating budget. $6 million in savings. Implement business-based reductions as a result of additional program and service adjustments. Public safety provided reductions that equate to 10% of their respective operating budgets once vacant positions are included. All other departments provided reductions that equate to 10% to 27% of their respective operating budgets once vacant positions are included. $14.7 million in savings. The program and service adjustments were developed after an extensive evaluation of operations that included an in-depth evaluation of the needs of residents in light of core services as defined by City Council strategic goals, the demand for services and the resources available to support the operating costs of those services. Specifically, • Programs that were not paying for themselves or achieving the targeted contributing rates were evaluated for reduction or elimination. • Services for which demand had diminished, and an uptick in demand is not expected for the next fiscal year or so, were identified for adjustment. • Hours of operation for some facilities were evaluated for adjustment during slower times of the day. • Activities offered by other organizations in the community were evaluated for elimination and low-use and/or high cost facilities were evaluated for closure. A total of 133 FTEs have been identified as part of the program and service adjustments and they represent $9.5 million of the $14.7 million in savings. Some of those positions are already vacant and will be eliminated. Twenty-two of the positions will be phased in as revenue 27 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message recovers (20 in police and 2 in fire). As for remaining positions, a variety of factors are being finalized at the time this message was written. These factors are part of the phased process and include: • Attrition – the normal turnover that could result in possible additional vacancies, • Retirement – there are employees who are currently eligible to retire and should they do so over the next few months that could result in additional vacancies, and • Organizational realignment – adjustments to our day-to-day business practices will be needed to combine resources, put into use innovative services and find proactive solutions to our economic challenges. In conjunction with the expenditure reduction measures are efforts to enhance revenue opportunities to improve cost recovery and to pursue innovative means for seeking additional revenue sources. The revenue enhancement measures total $2.9 million of new revenue expected for FY 2011. A few examples of these opportunities include the following: • Adjustment of fees charged for wireless facilities (e.g., cell phone towers placed on city property) to reflect the fees charged by other valley cities; • Adjustment of liquor license fees to reflect the level and type of fees charged by other valley cities; • Implementation of a premium parking fee for use of the city’s covered parking garages during the city’s special events held in the downtown area; and • Implementation of a transaction fee for pawn shops and second-hand stores to reflect the cost of complying with state requirements to report all transactions to local police and to reflect the fees charged by other valley cities. As we have done in the past several years, an annual review of the rates charged for water, sewer, sanitation collection, and landfill disposal services was completed. These annual reviews of the enterprise funds are done to ensure incoming revenues are sufficient to support operating and capital expenditures for those individual operations. Other fees, such as those charged for plan review and building inspections, are adjusted periodically per the consumer price index (CPI). As a result of these reviews, water and sewer rates will be adjusted for FY 2011 and some of the community development fees will be restructured during FY 2011. Sanitation rates will remain unchanged while landfill fees charged to city departments will be modified. Capital Program. The principal issue for the capital budget also is the economy and the impact it has on the city’s resources to fund capital assets. Glendale’s General Obligation (G.O.) capital program is funded with secondary property tax revenues, with development impact fees playing a strong supporting role for growth-related projects. Both revenue sources have been significantly constrained as a result of the economic downturn with a corresponding impact on the capital plan. 28 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message The Maricopa County Assessor’s Office announced in February 2010 that single family residential properties across the county have experienced three consecutive years of valuation declines. In Glendale, residential values have fallen over 50% since the 2006 peak. The Assessor’s Office also announced that commercial properties experienced a decline in every city in the county, something that has not happened in decades. For Glendale commercial properties, values declined 27% in one year. Based on the most recent valuation figures from the county, Glendale’s secondary AV is expected to decline another 14% in FY 2012. This sizable decline follows two consecutive declines of 3% in FY 2010 and 18% in FY 2011. Overall, the decline in Glendale property values equates to a loss of almost one-third of the city’s secondary assessed valuation – from a peak of $2.19 billion in FY 2009 to a projected amount of $1.51 billion for FY 2012. Given the sizeable decline in secondary AV expected for FY 2012, property tax revenue to pay secondary property tax-funded debt service will be insufficient if corrective actions to the current plan (adopted as part of the FY 2010 budget) were not taken. As a result of this information, the new 10-year capital plan reflects the remaining portion of the new Municipal Court project moving to FY 2015, and the West Area Library moving from FY 2014 to FY 2015. It is important to understand that the city did not build a capital improvement program based on any expectations of a windfall in projected property tax revenue because of rising property values in 2005, 2006 and 2007. In fact, at that time, the capital plan’s growth projections for secondary assessed valuation were very conservative at a 3% - 4% growth rate. This conservative assumption is in contrast to the 10 year [1997 – 2007] average annual growth rate of 8.7% in Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation. It should be noted that several energy efficiency capital projects are moving forward as a result of a $2.3 million allocation through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act’s (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant. This grant funding will allow for capital projects to be completed that otherwise may not be completed for several years. Some of the projects to be completed include: • Replacement of outdated lighting systems at the public safety/court facility, the main library and sport courts in the city’s parks with energy efficient lighting systems; • An upgrade to the ultraviolet disinfection system at the Arrowhead Wastewater Reclamation Facility; • Completion of the LED conversion program for the remaining 30 (of 190) signalized intersections; and • Expansion of the existing environmental education program to include energy efficiency. For the water and sewer capital program, the economy has impacted the timing of capital projects. Water usage had averaged 14.7 billion gallons from FY 2006 through FY 2008. During FY 2009, the total number of bills issued declined by approximately 18,500 from the prior year and water usage decreased 8% to 13.5 billion gallons. Both of these declines are viewed as the result of the 29 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message economy given business closures and the rising number of vacant residential units. In addition, conservation efforts appear to be playing a contributing role in the decline in usage. Given these trends, capital projects were deferred to later years except for improvements to the Arrowhead Wastewater Reclamation Facility. The Glendale Onboard transportation capital program is primarily supported by the designated sales tax for transportation, with federal, state and regional transportation funds used for some projects. As expected, the economy has impacted this program’s capital plan. The FY 2011 program focuses on the Northern Avenue Parkway and the New River Multi-Use Pathway. The Northern Avenue Parkway project is the largest project and is now in final design with construction anticipated to start in FY 2012. The parkway will provide a high capacity arterial roadway initially connecting West Valley travelers from the Loop 303 to the Loop 101 and eventually to Grand Avenue. The pavement overlay program for arterials, collector and residential streets received $35 million through the G.O. program from FY 2008 through FY 2010. The overlay program will continue in FY 2011 with unspent project funds from FY 2010. However, no new funds will be allocated in FY 2011 to these projects. Glendale will benefit tremendously using ARRA funds on transportation projects. Examples of some projects now underway include the improvements being made at the Loop 101 and Union Hills Drive interchange and the alleyway/pedestrian improvements in downtown Glendale. ARRA funds have made it possible to use 100% federal monies for these projects, allowing us to re-direct our local transportation funds to other projects in these times of revenue shortfalls. Glendale also has been approved for over $6 million in ARRA funding for capital projects that will help lower our ongoing maintenance expenses. Street pavement overlays will enhance the life of the pavement on two arterial streets, Litchfield Road and Glendale Avenue. ARRA monies will also be targeted for long-term pavement markings on 25 miles of arterial streets, and to improve the existing signal system with new equipment that will reduce the burden on local funds to maintain older equipment prone to breakdowns and emergency repairs. Conclusion As we progress through FY 2011, we will continue to employ fiscally conservative spending practices. We also will continue to monitor expenditures and revenues during the course of the fiscal year to ensure we are on the path the Council has charted for the city. We will continue providing quarterly reports to Council on the performance of the General Fund and the designated sales tax funds. These reports will keep you apprised of how revenues and expenditures are doing when compared with the revenue and expenditure budgets established for FY 2011. Even with the program and service adjustments included in the FY 2011 budget, employees will remain focused on implementing City Council’s strategic goals. The provision of exceptional city services will continue as will collaborative, innovative efforts to: • Strengthen neighborhoods, 30 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message • • • • Ensure Glendale is a safe community, Retain and attract quality economic development opportunities, Foster sustainable downtown development, and Continue the dedicated partnership with Luke Air Force Base. It is important to thank employees for their active participation in and valuable contributions to the development of the FY 2011 budget. As a service organization focused on providing exceptional services to the community, the employees remain the city’s most critical resource. In closing, I believe the FY 2011 budget is a plan that provides resources to maintain core city services while moving forward with strategies that ensure a positive, sustainable future. I continue to be confident that the Mayor and Council’s vision will ensure an outstanding quality of life for the Glendale community and further enhance our position as a world-class destination city. Sincerely, 31 Return to TOC Budget Summaries 2010-2011 BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary BUDGET SUMMARY The annual budget for the City of Glendale is divided into four major components that include all appropriations for the city and are explained below. The operating budget finances the day-today provision of city services and totals $339.5 million. The capital improvement budget funds the construction of city facilities, such as police/fire stations and libraries, in addition to the construction of roads, public amenities and other infrastructure throughout the city. This year the capital improvement budget totals $194.4 million. The debt service budget is used to repay money borrowed by the city, primarily for capital improvements, and amounts to $84.8 million. The final component of the budget is the contingency appropriation at $57.3 million. This appropriation is made up of fund reserves and is available to cover emergency expenses, revenue shortages or capital project acceleration should they arise during the fiscal year. The total budget, including all four components, is $676 million for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011. This represents a decrease of 12.8% from the FY 2010 total budget of $775 million. The decrease is the result of ongoing operating budget reductions, expiration of one-time funding provided in FY 2010 and capital budget reductions that were implemented to address reduced revenue sources because of the recession. As you can see from the graph below, the operating (50.2%) and capital (28.8%) appropriations are the largest components of the FY 2011 budget and account for 79% of the total appropriations. Both are discussed on the following pages. City of Glendale Total FY 2011 Appropriations Contingency 8.5% Operating 50.2% Debt Service 12.5% Capital 28.8% 32 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary A summary of the city’s major revenues and expenditures, including other financing sources and uses, provides an overview of the total resources budgeted by the organization. This summary is located in the Schedules section of this book and is titled Schedule One by Category. Operating Budget The development of Glendale’s FY 2011 budget was an open process designed to reflect the needs and desires of the community. Throughout the year, the Mayor, City Council and city staff obtained input from the community through neighborhood meetings, citizen boards and commissions, surveys and other contacts with individuals and groups. In addition, Glendale citizens had three ways to provide input and feedback regarding proposed operating budget reductions: 1) online through the city web-site; 2) a telephone hotline where people could leave messages; and 3) public meetings in three locations. During the fall of 2010, staff updated the city’s Five-Year Financial Forecast. The forecast allows various budget scenarios to be tested for their effect on the city’s financial condition on a long-range basis. At the same time, the city’s CIP Management Team began the process of updating the Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan. In December, City Council conducted a goals-setting retreat to update its strategic goals and key objectives. City Council’s strategic goals did not change from the previous year. In December, the Management and Budget Department kicked off the budget input process for FY 2011. This meeting provided an assessment of current economic trends, the revenue outlook for the upcoming fiscal year and the city manager’s direction for the development of a balanced budget. The principal issue to address in developing the FY 2011 budget was the economy and the impact it was having on the city’s resources to fund services to the community. FY 2011 represents the third straight year that revenue resources have shrunk for the General Fund while demand for city services has remained steady or increased in some areas (e.g., code compliance). As part of the FY 2011 budget development process, departments proposed reductions to their ongoing General Fund base operating budgets for all salary and non-salary related items. The Police, Fire and Homeland Security Departments, in addition to the Elected/Appointed Officials Group, provided reductions equal to 10% of their General Fund operating budgets. All other city departments provided reductions equal to 18% to 27% of their General Fund operating budgets. Each group’s deputy city manager reviewed all proposed reductions to ensure core services, particularly those related to health and safety, as defined by City Council strategic goals, would continue to be provided. For a more in-depth discussion about the reductions, see the City Manager’s Budget Message. The entire management team met in October, December and January to develop the city manager’s recommended budget. City Council reviewed the city manager’s balanced budget in two public, televised workshop sessions held on March 23 and March 30. Approximately 16 33 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary hours of public meetings and workshop hearings were held to discuss the pertinent issues surrounding the FY 2011 operating, capital and debt service budgets. The proposed budget, as revised by City Council, became the preliminary budget. It was published and made available for further public review prior to the public hearing and formal adoption of the final budget on June 8, 2010. See the Budget Calendar for more details about the timing of various steps in the budget development and adoption process. Capital Improvement Plan Budget The city annually updates the Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which is now based on FY 2011 through FY 2020 and includes over $1.5 billion in projects. The first year of the plan is the only year appropriated by Council. The remaining nine years are for planning purposes and funding is not guaranteed to occur in the year planned. The final decision to fund a project is made by City Council. Projects include renovations to city buildings, street improvements, rehabilitation and renovation of existing parks and recreation facilities, and upgrades to water treatment and wastewater collection facilities. The CIP Management Team includes staff from the Engineering, Management and Budget, Field Operations and Finance Departments. This team reviewed all CIP projects for their construction costs and their projected impact on the operating budget. Projects with high operating costs may be deferred to ensure the city can absorb the operating impact once the facility opens. For FY 2011, $194.4 million in capital investments is planned (figures are rounded): Table 1: Capital Improvements (All Dollars in Millions) Fund Name (Number) Transportation Capital Project (2210) Water and Sewer (2360) Flood Control Construction (2180) Public Safety Construction (2040) Transportation Grants (1650) Gov't Facilities - 1999 Auth (2080) Parks Construction (2060) Other Federal and State Grants (1840) Streets Constr. - 1999 Auth (1980) Airport Capital Grants (2120) Landfill (2440) Economic Dev. Constr-1999 Auth (2100) General (1000) Sanitation (2480) All Other Projects Total CIP 34 Return to TOC FY 2011 $88.9 $55.9 $19.7 $4.3 $3.6 $3.2 $3.1 $2.8 $2.4 $2.0 $1.9 $1.8 $1.3 $1.3 $2.2 $194.4 BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary Refer to the Capital Improvement Plan section for more detailed information regarding the projects included in these categories, as well as the funding sources available for each. Amending the Budget Once the City Council adopts the annual budget, total expenditures cannot exceed the final appropriation of $676 million for FY 2011. However, with City Council’s formal approval, the city can adjust the total appropriations within the funds provided that the budget remains in balance. This means that if one fund’s total appropriation is increased, other fund’s appropriations must be reduced by an equal amount. Inter-fund transfers are approved by City Council as part of the normal course of city business when various council communications detailing pending construction awards, grant awards or professional service agreements are presented at public meetings. Inter-fund transfers that did not come forward in a formal council communication are summarized by the Management and Budget Department and presented to City Council after the end of the fiscal year via the annual clean-up ordinance. The City Charter gives the city manager the authority to approve transfers of appropriations within the same fund without City Council approval. These types of budget transfer requests are typically reviewed by the relevant operating managers and the Management and Budget Department staff before being sent to executive management for final approval. Line item changes within the same department do not require such approvals. All administrative budget transfers are documented by the Management and Budget Department and tracked in the city’s computerized financial system. Fund Descriptions The City of Glendale uses fund accounting to track revenues and expenditures. Some funds, such as the Streets Fund, are required by state legislation. Others were adopted by the city to track and document revenues and expenditures related to specific operations. The city has seven main categories of funds: general, special revenue, debt service, capital, trust, enterprise and internal service. These categories are used to track the activity of over 75 funds. For example, enterprise funds are expected to be self-supporting through revenue for the services provided. For these funds, the city charges a fee for a specific service, such as sanitation collection, just like any other business would do. General Fund Group: General (Fund 1000): The General Fund includes all sources of revenue the city receives that are not designated for a specific purpose. General Fund revenue may be used by the City Council for any legal public purpose. Most city departments receive at least some support from the General Fund. The entire amount of the ending fund balance, after accounting for operating and capital expenditures and transfers, was appropriated as contingency appropriation that can be 35 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary used only as directed by Council during the fiscal year. The fund balance is expected to decline more than 10% as the impact of the recession continues to be felt. It was drawn down over FY 2009 and FY 2010 as a cushion to the impact of the recession on this fund’s primary revenue sources. National Events (Fund 1010): The National Events Fund was established in FY 2005 to track General Fund cash that was set aside by City Council to pay for community improvements and operations associated with the initial Fiesta Bowl, the 2007 Bowl Championship Series college football game and Super Bowl 2008. The cash reserves were augmented by the collection of fees associated with these events, including parking and shuttle revenue. With the successful completion of the Super Bowl event in February 2008, the remaining fund balance was retained in the fund and has been appropriated as contingency in FY 2011 until City Council provides direction on future uses of these funds. General Services (Fund 1040) and Telephone (Fund 1100): The General Services and Telephone Funds are used to track income and expenses of the internal services provided to city departments. The General Services Fund specifically covers vehicle maintenance needs and fuel purchased for city vehicles. The Telephone Fund covers expenses related to phone lines, circuits, T1 lines, VPN access, long distance, etc. City departments pay for these services on an actual usage basis. These charges go into each fund as revenues that support the cost of providing the services. Both funds generally carry only a small fund balance because the rate structures are designed to recover only actual costs. Small annual surpluses may occur from time to time, but these are generally returned to city departments when rates are established for the following year. An exception to this general practice has occurred with the Telephone Fund. A fund balance has been allowed to accrue in anticipation of a future upgrade to the city’s telephone system. Vehicle (Fund 1120) and Technology Replacement (Fund 1140): These replacement funds were designed to allow the city to accumulate the money needed to replace at regular intervals the city’s fleet of cars, trucks and other rolling stock and its personal computers, servers and other technology-related equipment. Typically each department pays annually into each fund based on the amount of equipment in its inventory, the expected life span of the equipment in use and any residual value of the equipment. Replacement equipment is then purchased according to the established replacement schedule and paid for out of the appropriate replacement fund. Fund balances in both fluctuate from year to year according to the replacement schedules. In fact, the balances for both of these funds are expected to decline as a result of scheduled equipment replacements. To help address soft economic conditions, the General Fund contributions to both funds were reduced to the 50% level for FY 2011. To account for this reduction in funding, the city’s fleet of cars was reduced, a motor pool was created, the useful lives of non-public safety General Fund equipment were extended and computer monitors will not be replaced unless they malfunction. Enterprise Funds contributions remain at the 100% level and replacements continue to be made as scheduled for FY 2011. 36 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary Employee Groups (Fund 1190): This fund was created to track activity related to employee groups such as the Glendale’s Exceptional Municipal Staff (GEMS). GEMS plans, organizes and sponsors events such as the annual holiday employee luncheon, conducts fund raising activities for local non-profits and plans periodic social events to provide a setting for informal networking outside of the work environment, with the assistance of various planning committees and employee volunteers. Inflows to the fund include vending machine revenues generated by employee purchases as well as outside donations and sponsorships. The General Fund also supports this fund each year with a transfer not to exceed $37,909. Arts Commission (Fund 1220): One percent (1%) of city construction projects included in the Capital Improvement Program is deposited quarterly into the municipal arts fund. The funds are used to administer the city’s public art and performing arts program. Expenditures from the fund are recommended by the Glendale Arts Commission through its annual art projects plan and are subject to approval by the city council. FY 2011 revenue is projected to be $119,748 due to a planned slowdown in construction activity. However, a projected beginning fund balance of $1.4 million will be used to fund operations and provide for ample contingency appropriation. Court (Fund 1240): The Court Fund’s revenue derives from two primary sources: a security surcharge paid by persons convicted of traffic or misdemeanor offenses in City Court, and time payment fees charged to persons who choose to pay their fines in installments. Security surcharge revenue must be used for security services and facility improvements at the City Court. The time payment fee revenue may be used for activities or costs associated with collecting fines. These revenues and any associated expenditures are tracked in this fund. Library (Fund 1260): This fund is used to track revenues from book sales at our Main, Foothills and Velma Teague branches. Other library fines and fees revenue is included in the General Fund. The FY 2011 projected revenues of $225,695 will be offset by budgeted expenditures for book purchases and some temporary/hourly labor costs made from the fund totaling $247,373. Youth Sports Complex (Fund 1280): The Glendale Youth Sports Complex is adjacent to the University of Phoenix Stadium. It features five sports fields that were developed to fill a community need for additional youth facilities in the west valley. The complex also provides additional parking to the stadium. Expenditures related to the operations and maintenance of the facility is offset primarily by a General Fund operating transfer that is supplemented by some rental revenue generated through the use of the fields. Stadium (Fund 1281) and Arena Event Operations (Fund 1282): These funds were created to track the city’s operational costs associated with events held at the stadium and arena venues. All public safety, transportation and marketing costs related to football, hockey, concerts, trade shows and other events held at these venues are recorded in the corresponding event operations fund. Revenue reimbursement for city services paid by the operations management company for both venues is recorded in the funds. A General Fund operating transfer is made to cover any expenditures that exceed the reimbursement received. 37 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary Zanjero Special Revenue (Fund 1770): This fund is used to track the revenue generated by the Zanjero development just north of Westgate on Glendale Avenue. The Zanjero development is a 158-acre mixed-use project that is planned to include residential, office, retail and hotels. This site is anchored by Cabela's, the world’s foremost outfitter of outdoor gear. Revenues collected in the fund are transferred to the MPC debt service fund and are used to pay the debt service related to infrastructure improvements that the city completed for this development. The designated sales taxes for public safety and transportation that are generated at facilities in the Zanjero development are deposited to the appropriate designated sales tax fund. Arena Special Revenue (Fund 1780): The Arena Special Revenue Fund tracks the revenues generated from Jobing.com Arena events and the surrounding Westgate City Center. The Arena Special Revenue Fund also tracks the operating expenditures associated with the arena renewal and replacement agreement that helps ensure the arena stays modernized. Revenue collected in the fund includes Phoenix Coyote team fees, parking fees and sales taxes. There is a transfer from this fund to the MPC debt service fund to pay the debt service related to the construction costs associated with the arena. The designated sales taxes for public safety and transportation that are generated at the Arena and Westgate City Center are deposited to the appropriate designated sales tax fund. Westgate City Center opened in November 2006 and already includes 2.8 million square feet of retail, lodging, restaurants, entertainment and office uses. Jobing.com Arena is home to the National Hockey League’s Phoenix Coyotes and also serves as a first-class venue for concerts, trade shows and other events. Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA (Fund 1790): This fund was created to track specific University of Phoenix Stadium revenues that are refunded to the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority (AZSTA) in accordance with signed development, construction and operating agreements. All revenues collected in this clearing house type fund are subsequently disbursed to the AZSTA. The designated sales taxes for public safety and transportation that are generated at the University of Phoenix stadium are deposited to the appropriate designated sales tax fund. Marketing Self-Sustaining (Fund 1870): This fund tracks the collection and use of revenues related to special events put on by the city’s Marketing Department. Examples include vendor rental fees and city costs for downtown special events such as the Jazz N’ Blues Festival, Glendale Glitters and the Chocolate Affaire. Although the Marketing Department receives contributions from sponsors and collects fees from vendors for these special events, it also receives a transfer of $640,290 from the General Fund each year to support special events. Public Safety Training Center (Fund 2530): All revenues and expenditures associated with the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center are tracked in this fund. The facility was built with capital contributions from the City of Glendale (74.8%), Maricopa County Community College District (8.2%), City of Surprise (6.6%), City of Peoria (6.5%), City of Avondale (3.9%) and the federal government. The training center provides fire and police departments with the tools required to train new firefighters and conduct continuing education and training for fire and 38 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary police personnel. Facility management operating costs are shared proportionately with the police and fire partners based upon the initial capital contribution. In addition, direct operating costs incurred by the Police and Fire Departments are shared with the partners of those respective disciplines/departments. Glendale Health Center (Fund 2538): The Glendale Health Center is located within the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center. The center is staffed by contractual medical professionals and is fully equipped with the testing equipment, exam rooms, x-ray machines, and other medical equipment required to perform public safety personnel physical examinations on a fee-for-service basis. The onsite contractual staff is required to perform medical examinations, bill and collect for all services rendered at the center, and remit negotiated fees for each medical examination performed to the City of Glendale and the Glendale Health Center. Revenues and associated operating expenses are tracked in this fund. Although the center will derive a large portion of its business from existing Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center partners, it is also open to outside organizations that are in need of the more extensive testing requirements associated with public safety personnel physical examinations. FY 2011 projected revenues totaling $105,000 will be offset by operating expenditures of $54,000. Any excess revenues at year end will remain in fund balance and can be used to offset future costs associated with the repair and replacement of medical equipment. Special Revenue Fund Group: Streets (Fund 1340): The Streets Fund is used to track Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) monies that the State of Arizona distributes to cities, towns and counties. This revenue source is commonly referred to as the gasoline tax although there are several additional transportationrelated fees that comprise this revenue, including a portion of vehicle license taxes. Overall, much of this revenue source is based on the volume of fuel sold rather than the price of fuel. There is a state constitutional restriction on the use of HURF revenues; they must be used solely for street and highway purposes such as maintenance, repair, reconstruction and roadside development. In Glendale, the Streets Fund supports street cleaning and maintenance, traffic signs and signals, street lighting and other street-related activities. Any remaining fund balance is appropriated as contingency appropriation that can be used only as directed by Council during the fiscal year. Local Transportation Assistance (Fund 1640): The Local Transportation Assistance Fund (LTAF) is used to receive state lottery funds distributed to the cities based on population. These funds must be used for transportation purposes including transit programs. Glendale transfers 100% of its LTAF funds into the Transportation Sales Tax Fund. The state legislature suspended LTAF distributions to cities and towns for FY 2011 in an effort to balance the state’s budget. Therefore, revenue collections normally recorded in this fund will be suspended until FY 2012. 39 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary Transportation Sales Tax (Fund 1660): The Transportation Sales Tax Fund supports transportation services in Glendale. The fund is primarily supported by designated sales tax revenue received from Proposition 402 (0.5%). In 2001 Glendale voters approved a one-half cent adjustment to the city sales tax rate to fund a comprehensive package of transportation projects including expansion of public transit service, intersection improvements to reduce congestion and other street-related services. 100% of the revenues and operating expenditures are accounted for in this fund. A separate Transportation Construction Fund exists to track transportation related capital expenditures that are paid for by the designated sales tax. Typically, the city will issue revenue bonds to fund transportation capital projects and deposit the bond proceeds into the Transportation Construction Fund. Debt service payments are then funded with the revenues collected in the Transportation Fund. Each year the Transportation Fund transfers cash into the Transportation Debt Service Fund to cover debt payments. Transfers also can be made from the Transportation Fund to the Transportation Construction Fund to fund capital project construction on cash basis. Reduced revenue collections, the critical safety-related and public transit related operations that this fund addresses, and ongoing debt service payments related to a prior bond issuance, mean that this fund’s balance is expected to decline more than 10% over the course of FY 2011. Police (Fund 1700) and Fire Special Revenue (Fund 1720): In 1994, Glendale voters passed a citizens’ initiative that increased the local sales tax by 0.1% to add police and fire personnel and related equipment. In September 2007, Glendale voters passed a separate initiative that increased the local sales tax by another 0.4%, bringing the total public safety tax rate to 0.5%, effective November 1, 2007. Both taxes specified that two-thirds of the revenue would go to police operations and one-third to fire operations. The original tax (0.1%) included all grocery related food sales but the new tax (0.4%) excludes all grocery related food sales. Both taxes specifically prohibit supplanting existing general fund budgets with the sales tax revenue. The number of authorized positions within the designated sales taxes increased from 42 to 118 for the Police Department, and from 22 to 51 for the Fire Department since the tax rate adjustment became effective on November 1, 2007. The designated sales tax also covers the associated vehicles, equipment and supplies needed to outfit the additional staffing. The Police and Fire Revenue Funds are used to track these revenues and expenditures to ensure compliance with all rules and regulations outlined in the ordinance. During the course of FY 2011, the balances for these funds are expected to decline more than 10% to accommodate planned expenses. Even so, these funds are expected to retain year-end balances equal to approximately 10% of the current year’s projected revenues per the city’s financial policies. Civic Center (Fund 1740): The Civic Center Fund was created to track revenues and expenses for the downtown facility that contains over 33,000 square feet of meeting and event space. The Civic Center can host as many as 60,000 people at as many as 250 events including weddings, trade shows and conventions in any given fiscal year. A projected transfer from the General Fund of $361,497 will supplement revenues of $387,000 generated from Civic Center activities 40 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary in FY 2011 to cover operating and capital related expenditures. It is the city’s goal for the Civic Center to be a self-sustaining operation in the future. Airport Operating (Fund 1760): This fund was established to track the operating revenues and expenses of the Glendale Municipal Airport. Currently, the Airport Fund receives a transfer from the General Fund and maintains a year-end fund balance equal to approximately 10% of the current year’s projected revenues. The long-range goal for the airport is to become a selfsustaining operation, at which time the Airport Fund will become an enterprise fund. The airport has already attracted more commercial business traffic with the development of Westgate, the Jobing.com Arena, University of Phoenix Stadium and Camelback Ranch (spring training baseball facility). The Airport Fund is projected to receive a transfer of $31,716 from the General Fund to augment projected revenue collections of $507,222 in FY 2011. Grant Funds: The city created a number of individual funds to track grants received from various federal, state and county sources. Individual funds allow the city to comply with the specific financial and reporting requirements of each grantor agency. Separate funds are used to track revenues received from the federal government and any associated expenditures with the HOME Grant (Fund 1300), Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Fund 1310), Community Development Block Grant (Fund 1320) and Emergency Shelter Grant (Fund 1830). Another fund tracks the Community Action Program (Fund 1820) grant funds received from Maricopa County. A Transportation Grant (Fund 1650) fund is used to track grant activity for projects covered by the Glendale Onboard transportation program and a fund titled Airport Capital Grants (Fund 2120) is used for any grant related project involving the city airport. The three-year federal stimulus grants that were started in FY 2010 are tracked within a fund titled ARRA (American Recovery and Reform Act) Stimulus Grants (Fund 1842). Most other grants are tracked through the Other State and Local Grants Fund (Fund 1840). These grant funds come in on a reimbursement basis, so these funds typically do not carry a fund balance from year to year unless a specified grant award is expended over multiple fiscal years. RICO (Fund 1860): Federal anti-racketeering laws permit law enforcement agencies to seize and sell property and proceeds acquired by individuals as a result of their involvement in certain types of criminal activities such as the sale of illegal drugs. The city’s RICO Fund tracks the revenue generated from such seizures as governed by the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Expenditures backed by this revenue source must be made for purposes that improve public safety or crime prevention programs and cannot be used to supplant existing funding for law enforcement purposes. Parks & Recreation Self-Sustaining (Fund 1880): This fund tracks the collection and use of revenues related to self-sustaining programs administered by the Parks & Recreation Department for sports, aquatics and special interest type classes for which fees are charged. In FY 2011 projected revenues of $1,115,000 will be offset by projected expenditures totaling $1,170,687. 41 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary Parks & Recreation Designated (Fund 1885): The Parks and Recreation Department has agreements with several local school districts to cover the maintenance of city pools located on school property and jointly owned city/school district parks. The school districts and the city make annual payments into the fund to cover major maintenance and restoration costs. This fund also includes a separate division used to track the costs associated with the maintenance of the Elsie McCarthy Park in accordance with a generous donation made by a private party and designated for this purpose only. Debt Service Fund Group: Bond financing is a primary source used to finance long-term capital projects and infrastructure. The City’s debt management plan is an important tool for one of the main financing sources of the CIP. Outstanding debt, debt limitations, voter authorization and cash flow projections are reviewed as part of the capital budgeting process, while the annual debt service payments are incorporated into the debt service budget. Depending on the need and the type of project being financed, several different types of bonds are available to the City. Separate funds are used to track payments made on the city’s outstanding debt obligations. Each type of debt (General Obligation, Revenue Bonds and Municipal Property Corporation) is tracked separately. Fund balances fluctuate according to established debt payment schedules. The city’s debt policies and long-range debt management plans are described in detail in the Capital Improvement Plan section of this document and the associated debt schedules that show the principal and interest payments by year are included in the Schedules section. General Obligation (G.O.) Bond Debt (Fund 1900): G.O. bonds require voter authorization and are backed by the taxing authority of the City. These bonds finance projects that City Council select as part of the budget process every year. Arizona law limits the amount of G.O. bonds the City can have outstanding based on the secondary assessed valuation of both commercial and residential property located within the city limits. Financing for the following types of projects are limited to 20% of the city’s secondary assessed valuation: parks and recreation, open space and trails, flood control, water and sewer, streets and transportation, and public safety. Financing for general government, economic development, libraries and cultural and historic projects is limited to 6% of the secondary assessed valuation. Secondary property tax revenue is recorded directly into this fund and used to pay G.O. bond debt. The balance in this fund has grown over time as the timing of bond issuances and the commencement of capital construction occurred later than originally planned. This fund balance will be used to address the shortfall between the revenue generated from the secondary property tax rate and the annual debt service requirements for the next 5 fiscal years. Even with the planned draw down in fund balance, the capital plan maintains a fund balance through FY 2015 that exceeds the required minimum. See the Capital Improvement Plan section for a more indepth discussion. 42 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary Municipal Property Corp (MPC) Bond Debt (Fund 1940): MPC bonds do not require voter authorization. These bonds are backed by the city’s excise taxes. For some MPC issuances, the excise tax revenue generated at the location where improvements were funded with MPC bonds is used to offset the respective debt service payment (e.g., Jobing.com Arena and the Zanjero development). The amount of MPC bonds that can be issued is limited by the city’s ability to repay the bonds. These bonds often have restrictive covenants requiring a reserve of pledged revenues equal to some multiple of the maximum debt service payment on the bonds. Street (Fund 1920) and Transportation Revenue Bond Debt (Fund 1970): The Transportation Revenue Bond Debt Fund is for the payment of debt service on revenue bonds used to finance projects that are backed by designated city sales tax for transportation. This type of bond does not require voter authorization. Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) bonds were used for street projects that are backed by a pledge of the HURF monies the city receives from the state. Street capital projects financed with HURF monies require voter authorization. Coverage of HURF debt service with HURF monies is not planned for FY 2011 given the uncertainty regarding how the FY 2011 revenue will be distributed. Instead, HURF debt service will be paid by secondary property tax revenue ($2.7 million), transportation special sales tax revenue ($1 million) and roadway development impact fee revenues ($1 million). Capital Fund Group: Construction funds account for financial resources used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities and equipment. They are based on the type of general obligation bonds and other types of long-term financing that the city issues. Considerable detail on planned capital projects, their potential operating impacts on the General Fund, Enterprise Funds, debt policies and tax implications are included in the Capital Improvement Plan section of this document. Any remaining fund balances in the capital construction funds are appropriated to contingency to cover unanticipated project costs or the unanticipated acceleration of key projects. Development impact fees are another major source of funds used for constructing major city infrastructure. These are based on the type of development impact fees the city collects from developers to address the city’s capital costs associated with accommodating growth. Separate funds are used to track the collection of fees associated with the construction of libraries, fire and police facilities, parks, roadway improvements, etc. Further information about these types of funds is included in the Capital Improvement Plan section of this document. Trust Fund Group: Cemetery Perpetual (Fund 2280): The purpose of this fund is to provide future monies sufficient to pay all or a portion of the operational and maintenance expenses of the Glendale Memorial Park Cemetery when operations no longer produce revenue. All revenues from sales 43 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary of lots, headstones, domes, appurtenances and services provided through the operation of the cemetery are deposited to the city’s General Fund. However, fund balance invested pursuant to the city investment policy and their related investment earnings accumulate in the perpetual care fund. Although monies may be withdrawn from the fund for cemetery expansion and improvements, none are budgeted in FY 2011. Interest income totaling $44,500 will increase the projected FY 2011 ending fund balance to $5.6 million of which the entire amount is appropriated as contingency and can only be used pursuant to the perpetual care fund ordinance. Enterprise Fund Group: Water/Sewer (Funds 2360, 2400 & 2420): The Water/Sewer Enterprise Fund supports the provision of water and sewer service to Glendale residents and businesses. It is completely selfsupported through water sales, sewer user fees and other related user fees. The fund receives no tax revenue and pays an annual contribution to the General Fund for administrative support services such as personnel, finance and legal services that General Fund departments provide. If the General Fund departments did not provide these services, the enterprise fund would have to contract with outside vendors to receive the services. All revenues and expenditures associated solely with providing water services to citizens and businesses in Glendale is captured in Fund 2400 (Water). All activity associated solely with providing sewer services is recorded in Fund 2420 (Sewer). Fund 2360 (Water/Sewer) is used to capture any expenditures that are incurred on behalf of both water and sewer operations. For example, administration costs associated with providing oversight to both operations, as well as the expenses associated with the customer service division of the Finance Department, which handles the billing accounts for both water and sewer operations, is recorded in Fund 2360. The Water/Sewer Enterprise Fund balance is expected to decrease from $36.1 million to $4.5 million in FY 2011 because of planned capital expenditures totaling $55.9 million and the debt service requirements associated with revenue bond funded projects totaling $25.3 million. Examples of capital projects include groundwater treatment plant improvements, water reclamation facility improvements, system security enhancements, as well as planned line replacements and extensions. Landfill (Fund 2440): The Landfill Enterprise Fund supports the operation of the Glendale Landfill. City departments, and all private haulers pay tipping fees (based on tonnage disposed) to use the city’s landfill. Non-city customers pay higher tipping fees. City Code requires that any excess of budgeted revenues over budgeted expenditures be reserved each year for major landfill improvements, major equipment purchases and the eventual closure costs. The city's successful recycling program has helped to extend the life of the landfill and contribute to our community’s effort to improve the environment. The Landfill fund balance at the beginning of FY 2011 is projected to be $26.5 million and $6 million of this fund balance will be reinvested in conjunction with a new reinvestment strategy with the General Fund in an effort to obtain a higher rate of return. The investment and interest 44 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary amounts will be recorded over three fiscal years starting in FY 2013. In addition, $1.9 million of planned capital expenditures and $2 million set aside for contingency appropriation will decrease the fund balance to $17.6 million. Sanitation (Fund 2480): This fund supports refuse collection and disposal services to homes and businesses in the city. It is supported through monthly charges paid by sanitation customers. The divisions in the Sanitation Enterprise Fund pay the Landfill Fund to dispose of solid waste at the landfill. The fund balance is expected to decrease from about $4.2 million to $3.5 million in FY 2011 as planned expenditures for large capital equipment (i.e., roll-off trucks, front and sideload trucks, loose trash equipment, etc.) totaling $1.3 million will be made using fund balance. Community Housing Services (Fund 2500): The Housing Fund supports Glendale’s public housing program that is part of the Community Partnerships Department. The fund is almost entirely financed by federal housing revenue/grants but it also receives a yearly transfer from the General Fund to help cover personnel administrative expenses. The scheduled transfer for FY 2011 is $306,609. Internal Service Fund Group: Risk Management (Fund 2540) and Workers’ Compensation (Fund 2560): The Risk Management and Workers’ Compensation Trust Funds support the provision of liability insurance and worker’s compensation coverage for the city. Income to the funds comes from premiums charged to each city department based upon a number of factors including the number of employees, job classifications, size of operating budget, actual claims history, etc. The funds are used to pay claims against the city and to cover premiums for certain types of outside insurance coverage. Benefits Trust (Fund 2580): The Benefits Trust Fund was created in FY 2001. An actuarial study of health insurance funding recommended the creation of a separate fund would be the best way to develop reserves to meet future cost increases for health-related insurance. During the course of the year, employer and employee contributions for medical, dental and vision insurance are deposited into this fund. Income to the fund comes from premiums charged to each city department based upon employee coverage elections made each year during open enrollment (employer portion). The fund also receives contributions from employees, both current and retired. Premium payments to insurance carriers and related claims expenses are made directly from the fund. The ending fund balance serves as a reserve to cover incurred but not reported claims, as well as a buffer against rising health care costs. 45 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues REVENUES Total revenues available to the city in FY 2011 from all sources are estimated at $503 million, of which $133.8 million or 26.6% goes into the General Fund. Table 1 shows changes expected in the revenue funds included in the table. Please note that numbers in parentheses denote a decrease in revenues in FY 2011 from FY 2010. Table 1: Total Revenues by Fund—FY 2010 vs. 2011 (All Dollars in Thousands) Fund 1000-General 1040-General Services 1100-Telephone Services 1120-Vehicle Replacement 1140-PC Replacement 1240-Court Security/Bonds 1260-Library 1340-Highway User Gas Tax 1640-Local Transp. Assistance 1650-Transportation Grants 1660-Transportation Sales Tax 1700-Police Sales Tax 1720-Fire Sales Tax 1740-Civic Center 1760-Airport Special Revenue 1780-Arena Special Revenue 1880-Parks & Recreation Self Sust 2360-Water and Sewer 2440-Landfill 2480-Sanitation 2500-Pub Housing Budget Activities 2540-Risk Management Self Insurance 2560-Workers Comp. Self Insurance 2580-Benefits Trust Fund Total Operating Capital and Other Revenue Grand Total FY 2010 Estimate $135,397 $10,486 $1,007 $2,451 $2,034 $354 $222 $13,200 $600 $1,346 $20,053 $11,808 $5,854 $340 $477 $8,068 $1,118 $80,978 $7,977 $15,122 $8,919 $2,571 $41 $23,314 $353,739 $109,464 $463,203 46 Return to TOC FY 2011 Change FY 10 Projection to FY 11 $133,818 ($1,579) $9,081 ($1,405) $990 ($17) $2,356 ($95) $2,083 $49 $354 $0 $222 $0 $13,500 $300 $0 ($600) $3,613 $2,266 $19,494 ($560) $11,976 $168 $5,936 $82 $387 $47 $507 $30 $6,845 ($1,223) $1,115 ($3) $103,798 $22,819 $7,963 ($14) $15,022 ($100) $9,008 $89 $2,580 $9 $1,025 $985 $22,043 ($1,271) $373,717 $19,978 $129,247 $19,783 $502,964 $39,761 BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues General Fund Group General Fund (Fund 1000): Total resources available in FY 2011 to support General Fund services include the estimated beginning fund balance of $16.9 million and revenues of $133.8 million. Of that $133.8 million, $2.9 million is related to the revenue enhancement opportunities that the city will implement for FY 2011. These revenue enhancement measures are explained below and are categorized by adjustments to existing fees and implementation of new fees. The following list includes only those items where revenue is expected in FY 2011. Adjust Existing Fees and Account for Additional Revenue from Existing Sources: • Adjust fees charged for wireless facilities like cell phone towers placed on city property to reflect the fees charged by other valley cities. • Adjust liquor license fees to reflect the level and type of fees charged by other valley cities with additional revenue expected in FY 2011. Council approved the fee adjustments in April 2010. • Account for revenue from additional electronic billboard sites per the December 2009 license agreements plus three new license agreements for fiber and gas lines, all of which Council approved during FY 2010. Implement New Fees to Help Recover Costs • Implement a transaction fee for pawn shops and second hand stores to reflect the cost of complying with state requirements to report all transactions to local police and to reflect the fees charged by other valley cities. Council approved the fee adjustment in June 2010. • Implement a premium parking fee for use of the city’s covered parking garages during the city’s special events held in the downtown area. • Implement a fee for fire prevention inspection services provided by the staff of the Fire Marshal’s Office. These revenue enhancement measures are an extension of the strategic, business –based budget strategy. In this case, the focus is on recovering revenue for services already provided to the community and at a level that reflects the current market in the valley. The anticipated additional revenue totals $2.9 million and includes $1.5 million in one-time revenue. See Table 2 for more information. 47 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Table 2 – GF Revenue Enhancement Opportunities Electronic Billboards FY 2011 Ongoing $480,000 Fiber and Gas Lines License Agreements Wireless Tower Contracts $66,901 $210,200 Liquor Licenses (including special events) $171,300 Premium Parking, City Special Events $100,310 Pawn Shop/Secondhand Store Transaction Fees $148,500 Fire Prevention Inspection Services $240,837 TOTAL $1,418,048 FY 2011 One-Time $1,500,000 $1,500,000 City sales taxes and state-shared revenues continue to be the two major sources for the General Fund. They have comprised between two-thirds and three-fourths of the General Fund ongoing revenue since FY 2002 and are expected to continue to do so for FY 2011. Of the two sources, city sales tax is the single largest revenue source for the General Fund. State-shared revenue includes state sales taxes, state income taxes and motor vehicle licensing fees. Of the three, income tax is the largest component. The city anticipates collecting $1.6 million, or 1.2%, less in FY 2011 than FY 2010 for GF revenue (after accounting for the previously described revenue enhancement measures). A 25% decline in income tax revenue is expected to be partially offset by the revenue enhancements discussed above as well as modest growth in city and state sales taxes. The consensus among experts on the Arizona economy is that the state has begun recovering from the recession. A return to normal levels of growth, however, is expected to take a few years because Arizona was hit particularly hard by the economic downturn. Factors contributing to a gradual recovery include constrained job growth, weak personal income growth, weak consumer confidence and a weak real estate market. Overall, a return to normal growth is not expected until FY 2012 or later. The city’s General Fund revenue projections are based on many factors including the following: • historic trend data; • projected changes in state and local population, disposable personal income, retail sales and inflation; • economic forecasts of state and local economic activity provided by experts on the Arizona economy; • economic forecasts of overall national economic activity; and • statistical analyses. 48 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Summary of General Fund Revenue (Fund 1000) Sales Tax 38% Development Fees 2% Property Tax 3% Miscellaneous 10% Court/Lic./Fees 7% State Shared 37% Franchise Fees 3% City Sales Tax: City sales tax represents 37.7% of the General Fund’s revenue sources and continues to be Glendale’s largest source of revenue. The majority of sales tax revenues are derived from retail businesses (approximately 51% of total city sales tax collections). Other major classes of sales tax activity include transportation, communications and utilities, rental businesses and restaurants and bars. The General Fund receives 1.2% of the city’s 2.2% sales tax with the remaining portion dedicated to designated sales taxes for public safety and City Sales Tax transportation. 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands The average annual growth rate for city sales $70,000 tax collections was 7% between FY 2002 and $60,000 FY 2007. Beginning in FY 2008, city sales $50,000 tax receipts have retreated to a level last experienced in FY 2004. The FY 2011 $40,000 projection of $50.5 million reflects modest $30,000 growth over the $49.2 million expected in FY $20,000 2010. Nevertheless, the FY 2011 projection reflects a $13.1 million or 20.6% drop since $10,000 the peak of $63.6 million in FY 2007. $0 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 49 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues State-Shared Revenues: State-shared revenues include state income tax, state sales tax, and motor vehicle in-lieu fees. These three revenue sources are shared with all cities and towns throughout the state. In previous years, these three sources combined comprised the largest State Shared Revenue component of General Fund 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands revenue. However, the trend is expected to change in FY 2011 as $70,000 the city experiences a 25% drop in the state income tax revenue to $60,000 be distributed to Glendale (see below for explanation). $50,000 The distribution formula for state sales and income tax revenue is based upon the relation of the $30,000 city’s population to the total state $20,000 population. Under this distribution method, mature cities $10,000 reaching build-out will see their portion of state-shared tax $0 revenues decrease as rapidly '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 growing cities receive a greater MV In-lieu Income Sales share of the revenue distribution. The motor vehicle in-lieu distribution is based on the city’s population in relation to the total incorporated population of Maricopa County. The State of Arizona’s Department of Revenue collects and distributes these revenue sources to cities and towns. $40,000 The most significant component of state- shared revenue is income tax. This source is primarily driven by personal income growth. Income tax revenue distribution to the cities lags by two years. This means the state income tax receipts for FY 2011 will reflect the income tax the state collected in FY 2009. Glendale’s share of state income tax revenue is expected to decrease 25% or $7.7 million in FY 2011, from $31.3 million to $23.6 million. This decline is a result of a 25% decline in the state’s income tax collections in FY 2009 when compared to FY 2008. The $23.6 million expected in FY 2011 is just a few hundred thousand more than the amount the city received in FY 2006. State sales tax is distributed to cities and towns based on current year collections. State sales tax distribution is based on a formula by which varying percentages of different types of sales taxes – such as use tax – are used to calculate the distribution amount. As with the city sales tax revenue source, modest growth is expected to occur during FY 2011. The FY 2011 state sales tax revenue projection of $17.7 million reflects a small increase over the FY 2010 estimate of $16.8 million. The city last received sales tax revenue in the $17 million range in FY 2003. 50 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues The FY 2011 motor vehicle in lieu tax projection of $8.5 million is just $300,000 more than the $8.2 million estimate for FY 2010. The city last saw this revenue source dip to about $8.5 million in FY 2003. This revenue is based on fees collected for the licensing of vehicles, with the value of the vehicle used as the basis for the license cost. The average annual growth rate for state shared revenue collections was 6% between FY 2002 and FY 2008. However, starting in FY 2009, a decline started and is expected to stretch for at least three consecutive years due to the two-year lag in income tax revenue distribution. The FY 2011 projection reflects an amount that is comparable to the FY 2003 distribution. Primary Property Tax & SRP In-Lieu 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands $4,500 $4,000 $3,500 $3,000 $2,500 $2,000 Primary Property Tax: Arizona’s property tax system consists of two tiers. The primary property tax levy has statemandated maximum limits, but it can be used by a city for any purpose. The primary property tax and SRP In-Lieu revenues are included in the General Fund’s operating budget. $1,500 The secondary property tax revenue can be used only to pay $500 the principal, interest and $0 redemption charges on bonded '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 indebtedness or other lawful longterm obligations that are issued or incurred for a specific capital purpose. The secondary property tax revenue funds the city’s General Obligation bond portion of the city’s capital improvement plan. $1,000 While the General Fund operating budget includes only the primary property tax revenue, Glendale’s primary property tax rate takes into account how the secondary assessed valuation (AV) has been and will continue to be impacted by the plummeting value of residential and commercial property. The city primary property tax rate will remain at $0.2252 in FY 2011 although the city expects to see a $459,229 decline in revenue from FY 2010 because the primary assessed valuation of existing property declined 12.5%. The city anticipates collection of $31,236 in SRP In-Lieu revenue in FY 2011. 51 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Development Fees: Development-related Development Fee Revenue fees include building 10-Year Fiscal History permits, right-of-way Thousands permits, plan check fees, planning and zoning $7,000 fees, engineering and Traffic Eng. $6,000 traffic engineering plan Engineering check fees, fire service $5,000 related development fees, Rezoning $4,000 and miscellaneous Plan Check development related fees. $3,000 These revenue sources ROW $2,000 reflect activity in the construction sector. The Bdg Permits $1,000 city experienced its peak $0 construction growth in '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 FY 2008, collecting $6.9 million in development fee revenues. Construction work has slowed significantly since then. For FY 2010, the city expects to collect $2.8 million, a 58.5% decline from FY 2008. For FY 2011, the city projects to collect $3.1 million, a modest increase from FY 2010 that is due to a 1.4% increase in fees related to large commercial tenant improvement projects. Franchise Fees: Franchise fees are paid to the city by the electric, gas and cable companies operating within the city. These fees increase in response to rate increases by the various utilities and, to a lesser extent, population growth. In all cases, the fees due Franchise Fee Revenue to the city are based on gross 10-Year Fiscal History receipts for the franchised Thousands organization. The city anticipates collecting $4.2 $4,500 million in franchise fees $4,000 revenues in FY 2011, down $3,500 slightly from its peak $4.5 $3,000 million collection in FY 2008. $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $500 $0 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 Gas/Elec. 52 Return to TOC '08 '09 Cable '10 '11 BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues License and Fee Revenues: This revenue category includes business and professional licenses, business regulatory licenses, sales tax License and Fee Revenue licenses, liquor 10-Year Fiscal History licenses, recreation Thousands fees, fire department Rent $7,000 fees not related to Bus/Prof construction $6,000 Cemetery development, library $5,000 Library fines and fees, Fire $4,000 cemetery fees, and Rec. rental income from $3,000 Bus. Lic. the use of city $2,000 Liquor facilities. Sales Tax $1,000 Miscellaneous arena Arena related fees were $0 included in FY 2004 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 and FY 2005. As a group these sources are expected to generate $5.9 million in FY 2011. These revenues were relatively flat at $6.0 million for FY 2008 and 2009 and then dipped to $5.4 million in FY 2010. This category will see some fee adjustments for FY 2011 and therefore an increase in revenue. Court Revenues: The Glendale City Court collects fines for parking and traffic violations, and civil and misdemeanor criminal cases. Traffic fines represent the largest portion of court revenues. The amount of revenue generated from fines can be affected by changes in the level of traffic enforcement that occurs. Court revenue is estimated to remain flat at Court Revenue $3.4 million in FY 2011. 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands Other Revenues: This revenue category includes interest earnings, staff and $4,000 administrative chargebacks, capital lease $3,500 proceeds, sale of assets and $3,000 miscellaneous revenues. The projection calls for FY 2011 revenues of $2,500 approximately $13.2 million, a $2.9 $2,000 million or 28.6% increase from FY 2010 $1,500 estimate. The increase is attributable to $1,000 one-time revenue expected from the $500 additional electronic billboard sites per $0 the December 2009 license agreement '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 that was identified as part of the revenue enhancement opportunities for FY 2011. 53 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Special Revenue Fund Group: Police and Fire Sales Tax (Funds 1700 and 1720): The source of revenue for these funds is the 0.5% special sales tax designated for Police and Fire services. The tax was originally adopted by voters in 1994. In September 2007 Glendale voters approved an increase to the public safety sales tax effective November 1, 2007. As a result, the rate was adjusted from onetenth of one cent to one-half of one cent. The original one-tenth rate includes food for home consumption while the additional four-tenths rate excludes food for home consumption. Twothirds of the revenue is allocated to police and one-third to fire. This revenue is subject to the same fluctuations as the general sales tax and has declined since the rate was adjusted because of the recession. The city expects to collect $17.7 million in public safety sales tax revenue in FY 2010, with $11.8 million for Police and $5.9 million for Fire. A modest increase of $250,000 is expected for FY 2011. Police Special Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands $14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 Fire Special Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands $7,000 $6,000 $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 54 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Streets (Fund 1340): The source of this fund’s revenue is the state’s Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF). HURF is commonly called the gasoline tax although there are several additional transportation-related fees that comprise this revenue source, including a portion of vehicle license taxes. Overall, much of this revenue source is based on the volume of fuel sold rather than the price of fuel. The state distributes the revenue based on a complex distribution formula that spreads a portion of the money across the state solely on the basis of population while the remaining money flows to those areas with the highest gasoline and other fuel sales. This revenue must be accounted for separately and used only for eligible street and highway purposes. HURF Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands $18,000 $16,000 $14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 HURF collections are affected by the general health of the economy, '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 as well as the vigor of specific industries such as tourism and trucking. The Arizona state legislature has made formula modifications from time to time that have affected Glendale’s share of HURF dollars. In fact, the Arizona Legislature reduced the amount of funds allocated to cities for FY 2009 and FY 2010 and again for FY 2011. The Streets Fund received $14.6 million in FY 2009. The city expects to collect $13.2 million in FY 2010, which is $1.4 million or 9.6% less than FY 2009. The FY 2011 projection is $13.5 million. $0 Thousands Airport (Fund 1760): Airport revenues consist of user fees (90.0%), lease proceeds (2.0%) and a transfer from the General Fund (8.0%). Airport user fee revenue comes from a combination of terminal space rentals, land leases, fuel-related fees, tie-down and hangar fees and other aviation-related fees. The city has achieved a 100% building lease rate for the last few years. Airport User Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History $600 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 Glendale is now aggressively pursuing additional airport facility users with an ultimate goal of airport self-sufficiency. Sporting events as well as concerts that are being held at Jobing.com Arena and University of Phoenix Stadium continues to 55 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues attract corporate jet customers and is expected to provide additional business opportunities for the airport. Revenues for FY 2011 are projected to be $507,222. Transportation Sales Tax (Fund 1660): The primary source of this fund’s revenue for operations is sales tax receipts from the transportation sales tax (0.5%) that voters approved in 2001. This dedicated sales tax funds the Glendale Onboard (GO) Transportation Program, and is expected to generate an estimated $18.6 million in FY 2010 as well in FY 2011. This revenue source is dedicated to funding various transportation and transit-related projects. The GO Program is developed with guidance from the Citizen’s Transportation Oversight Commission. Other sources of FY 2011 revenue within the Transportation Sales Tax Fund include $128,000 in transit revenues, $565,566 in anticipated grant revenues and $150,000 in interest earnings. In total, transportation sales tax fund revenues are projected to be $19.5 million in FY 2011 about $560,000 less than the FY2010 estimated revenue. This fund is supplemented with $900,000 from the General Fund, as required by the 2001 election, to help sustain the delivery of transportation services The state’s FY 2011 budget includes the elimination of Local Transportation Assistance Fund (LTAF) (Fund 1640) monies that the state distributes to local governments. The City of Glendale has used this revenue to pay for Dial-A- Ride and fixed route bus services. A combination of some one-time savings, federal credits, and federal transit operations grant funds will be used in FY 2011 to avoid adjustments to transit services. A determination of longer-term service options will be made during FY 2011 based on the availability of other funding opportunities and further route evaluations. Transportation Funding Sources Grant Funds General Fund 9% 4% Misc. 10% Transport. Tax 77% 56 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Enterprise Fund Group Water/Sewer (Funds 2360, 2400 & 2420): In FY 2011, water sales and sewer fees will make up $81.7 million of total revenues for this fund. Bond proceeds will yield an additional $20.0 million and development impact fees (DIF) $700,000. Other revenue sources totaling Water & Sewer Revenues about $1.4 million include interest earnings and miscellaneous fees and charges. Bond Overall revenues for the Water/Sewer Fund Proceeds amount to $103.8 million in FY 2011. 19% Dev. Fees 1% The city annually hires an independent consulting firm to review the utilities’ Sewer financial status and recommend rate Revenue adjustments if needed. As a result of the 30% study undertaken during FY 2010, water and sewer fee adjustments effective July Water 2010 will result in a 12% increase in Revenue 49% revenues. These adjustments were Other Revenue recommended because of the cost of 1% essential capital improvements in the face of declining revenue. The total number of bills issued by the city had declined by approximately 18,500 from the prior year and water usage decreased 8% to 13.5 billion gallons. Both of these declines are viewed as the result of the economy given business closures and the rising number of vacant residential units. In addition, conservation efforts appear to be playing a contributing role in the decline in usage. Water & Sewer Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History Based on the city’s block rate Thousands structure, the adjustments will have a smaller impact on those using less water. The cumulative impact on the median single family customer will be an increase of $6.86, or just over a 12.0% increase, from $54.28 to $61.14 per month. These increases are necessary to ensure the funding for the continuation of high quality services and essential capital projects. $90,000 $80,000 $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 Sewer 57 Return to TOC '07 '08 Water '09 '10 '11 BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Landfill (Fund 2440): The city annually reviews the five-year financial plan for the Landfill Enterprise Fund. This annual evaluation takes into account operating and capital costs, equipment replacement, rate structures and service demands. Budget decisions are largely based on this long-range plan. Glendale city departments are charged an internal rate for the use of the city landfill. The current internal tipping fee of $15.79 per ton is also charged to Glendale residents and businesses that bring loads to the landfill for disposal. The internal tipping fee will increase to $18 per ton for FY 2011. This internal tipping fee is projected to generate $2.1 million in revenue for the Landfill Fund in FY 2011. City Internal Tipping Fees 10-Year Fiscal History External User Tipping Fees 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands Thousands $4,000 $4,500 $3,500 $4,000 $3,000 $3,500 $3,000 $2,500 $2,500 $2,000 $2,000 $1,500 $1,500 $1,000 $1,000 $500 $500 $0 $0 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 The tipping fees paid by private haulers, as well as businesses and individuals not located in Glendale, will continue to be $32.25 per ton in FY2011. This tipping fee will generate $2.7 million in revenue for the Landfill Fund in FY 2011. The city collected $3.3 million in FY 2009 and is expected to collect $3.0 million in FY2010. In FY 2011, the recycling sales program is projected to bring in $1.8 million. This is approximately $1.2 million or 40% less than the $3 million collected in FY 2008. The decline is mostly related to the lower market Landfill Revenues price for recycling materials. Misc. 16% Internal Charges 27% Recycling 23% External Charges 34% 58 Return to TOC Additional miscellaneous revenue comes from interest earnings, development fees, chargebacks and other fees, and accounts for $1.3 million. Total projected revenues for FY 2011 are $8.0 million. BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Sanitation (Fund 2480): The city annually reviews the five-year financial plan for the Sanitation Enterprise Fund. This annual evaluation takes into account operating and capital costs, equipment replacement, rate structures and service demands. Budget decisions are largely based on this long-range plan. Sanitation Revenues Landfill fees for the disposal of the solid waste collected from residences and businesses represent a significant part of the expenses incurred by the Commercial Residential 28% sanitation enterprise operation. 69% Consequently, adjustments to landfill rates have a major impact on sanitation rates. Glendale’s residential sanitation rate for FY 2010 was $16.30 and includes weekly trash and recycling collection Misc. 3% as well as monthly loose trash collection. The last rate change occurred in January 2005. Due to a healthy fund balance maintained by the fund and significantly lower equipment repair and replacement costs, the sanitation rate for FY2011 will remain at $16.30. The FY 2011 revenues of $15.0 million come primarily from two sources: residential collection fees, projected at $10.4 million, and commercial collection fees, projected at $4.1 million. The residential and commercial collection programs account for approximately 97% of the sanitation revenues. Thousands Residential Sanitation Fees 10-Year Fiscal History Valley Sanitation Rates (Based on FY 2010 Published Rates) $30.00 $12,000 $25.00 $10,000 $20.00 $8,000 $15.00 $6,000 $10.00 $4,000 $5.00 59 Return to TOC Phoenix Mesa Avondale Tempe Gilbert Chandler '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 Scottsdale Peoria $0 Glendale $0.00 $2,000 BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures EXPENDITURES The FY 2011 Operating Budget The FY 2011 operating budget totals $339.5 million, which is a decrease of 0.5% ($1.8 million) from the FY 2010 budget of $341.3 million. It is important to note that FY 2011 operating budget decreases totaling $16.7 million in the general fund group were offset by a $14.1 million increase in the special revenue fund group. The special revenue fund group includes federal and state related grant fund appropriation increases pertaining to the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, Community Development Block Grants, American Recovery and Reform Act and other grants. A comparison of the operating budget fund group changes from FY 2010 to FY 2011 appears below. Operating Budgets by Fund Group ($'s in Thousands) $200,000 $173,958 $157,289 $150,000 $100,000 $77,873 $74,872 $78,546 $60,752 $50,000 $28,648 $28,732 $38 $39 $0 General Special Revenue FY 2010 Capital Enterprise Internal Service FY 2011 The starting point for the FY 2011 operating base budget is the current fiscal year’s ongoing base budget. It continues to focus on the Mayor and Council strategic goals and will carry on the process of transforming the vision of one community into reality. The operating budget also reflects the constrained and challenging economic conditions that the nation currently faces. Several expenditure management measures and budget reductions have been incorporated into the balanced operating budget and are discussed in detail in the section of this book titled City Manager’s Budget Message. These measures were implemented while keeping our focus on providing key services that sustain Council’s strategic goals while we manage the current economic downturn. 60 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Operating Budget Summary In most cases, Glendale’s fund structure coincides with the city’s organizational and program structure. Table 2 shows the year over year changes in the operating budgets for some of the City’s largest operating funds. It is sorted in descending order based upon the size of the FY 2011 operating budget within each fund grouping. It also calculates the percentage change for the fund from the FY 2010 operating base budget. Table 2: Comparison of Operating Budgets FY 2010 vs. FY 2011 (All Dollars in Thousands) Fund Name FY 2010 FY 2011 General (1000) General Services (1040) Technology Replacement (1140) Vehicle Replacement (1120) Stadium Event Operations (1281) Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA (1790) Public Safety Training Center (2530) Arena Event Operations (1282) Telephone Services (1100) Marketing Self Sust (1870) All Other Funds $145,495 $10,494 $3,508 $3,030 $3,022 $1,700 $1,767 $1,201 $1,014 $697 $2,031 $173,958 $130,658 $9,081 $3,510 $3,030 $2,965 $1,700 $1,445 $1,202 $977 $753 $1,969 $157,289 -10.2% -13.5% 0.1% 0.0% -1.9% 0.0% -18.2% 0.1% -3.6% 8.1% -3.1% -9.6% $12,651 $11,985 $12,639 $9,614 $5,692 $0 $0 $2,124 $1,586 $1,324 $3,136 $60,752 $17,661 $12,587 $12,203 $8,462 $6,136 $4,184 $3,967 $3,541 $1,661 $1,324 $3,146 $74,872 39.6% 5.0% -3.4% -12.0% 7.8% n/a n/a 66.7% 4.7% 0.0% 0.3% 23.2% $38 $39 2.7% Sub-Total General Fund Group Other Federal and State Grants (1840) Police Special Revenue (1700) Transportation Sales Tax (1660) Highway User Gas Tax (1340) Fire Special Revenue (1720) Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm (1310) ARRA Stimulus Grants (1842) C.D.B.G. (1320) Home Grant (1300) RICO Funds (1860) All Other Funds Sub-Total Special Rev Fund Group Sub-Total Capital Fund Group 61 Return to TOC % Change BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Fund Name FY 2010 Water/Sewer (2360/2400/2420) Sanitation (2480) Pub Housing Budget Activities (2500) Landfill (2440) Sub-Total Enterprise Fund Group Benefits Trust Fund (2580) Risk Management Self Insurance (2540) Workers Comp. Self Insurance (2560) Sub-Total Internal Svc Fund Group Grand Total: Operating Budget FY 2011 % Change $48,163 $14,462 $8,365 $6,883 $77,873 $49,123 $13,893 $8,487 $7,043 $78,546 2.0% -3.9% 1.5% 2.3% 0.9% $24,481 $2,760 $1,407 $28,648 $24,481 $2,844 $1,407 $28,732 0.0% 3.1% 0.0% 0.3% $341,269 $339,479 -0.5% The majority of the general fund group’s operating budget expenditures are included in the General (Fund 1000), which encompasses 83% of that group’s total operating budget. This fund, along with the Highway User Gas Tax (Fund 1340) that is part of the special revenue group, were the main focus of the City Council budget workshop presentations and are often collectively referred to as the “General and Streets Fund” operating budget for the city. These two funds are discussed in more detail in the following pages starting with Table 3: Comparison of General and Streets Fund Operating Budgets. Some of the other funds with year over year variances that exceeded 10% include the General Services Fund (1040) which decreased by $1.4 million (-13.5%). One million of this amount relates to a reduced motor fuel budget that is in line with current pricing and representative of a smaller city fleet. In addition, wages/salaries/benefits decreased by $270,788 in accordance with budget reductions made in conjunction with the General and Streets Fund reductions exercise. The Public Safety Training Center (2530) saw reductions of $321,337 which is indicative of the reduced levels of hiring expected by west valley cities during the economic downturn. As mentioned previously, the FY 2011 operating budget includes ample grant-related appropriation increases to accommodate the city aggressively pursuing grant opportunities that may arise during the year. Other Federal and State Grants (1840), Neighborhood Stabilization (1310), ARRA Stimulus Grants (1842) and C.D.B.G. (1320) saw a total increase in appropriation totaling $14.6 million. It is important to note that the city only pursues grant opportunities that are in line with council goals and objectives and that make strong financial business sense. Grant appropriation cannot be spent unless the city applies for and actually receives the corresponding grant monies. Table 3 includes a tabular comparison of the largest General & Streets Fund departmental operating base budgets over the last two fiscal years and calculates the percentage change for the department from the FY 2010 operating base budget. 62 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Table 3: Comparison of General and Streets Funds Operating Budgets: FY 2010 vs. FY 2011 (All Dollars in Thousands) Department Name Police Department Fire Department Field Operations Parks & Recreation Library & Arts Lease Pmts/OtherFees Transportation City Court Info. Technology City Attorney Marketing and Comm. Engineering Building Safety Finance Non-Departmental Human Resources Economic Development Management & Budget Code Compliance Planning All Other Funds Total General and Streets Funds FY 2010 FY 2011 $50,881 $25,985 $12,126 $10,453 $7,268 $1,861 $4,326 $3,987 $3,376 $2,444 $2,687 $3,333 $3,087 $2,623 $1,832 $2,786 $885 $1,515 $1,576 $1,524 $10,555 $155,110 $47,136 $23,639 $10,381 $9,037 $6,076 $4,526 $3,748 $3,578 $3,049 $2,840 $2,491 $2,433 $2,425 $2,122 $1,964 $1,912 $1,397 $1,395 $1,368 $989 $6,614 $139,120 % Change -7.4% -9.0% -14.4% -13.5% -16.4% 143.2% -13.4% -10.3% -9.7% 16.2% -7.3% -27.0% -21.4% -19.1% 7.2% -31.4% 57.8% -7.9% -13.2% -35.1% -37.3% -10.3% The reductions above are consistent with the city’s budget strategy for steering the city through the rest of the economic downturn and will continue to keep the city ready for the eventual economic turnaround. This strategy and the specific reductions are discussed extensively in the City Manager’s Budget Message. The Lease Pmts/Other Fees department reflects an increase in scheduled principal and interest payments from $1.8 million to $4.5 million that will be made in conjunction with previously approved debt obligations. Schedule Eight in the back of the budget book includes all scheduled lease payments planned for the next five years and beyond. The City Attorney and Economic Development departments participated in the budget reduction exercises just like all other city departments, but their reductions were offset by a re-alignment of $500,000 in base budget funding that was added into each of their respective budgets to pay for costs related to outside legal fees and the pursuit of business development opportunities. 63 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Percentage of Operating Budget by Group for All Funds Grants 2.8% Public Safety 31.0% Public Works 31.5% Non‐Dept 0.6% Comm. Dev. 2.5% Appointed & Elected Officials 2.6% Internal Svcs. 2.1% Admin. Svcs. 15.2% Comm. Svcs. 11.6% The largest operating group, regardless of funding source, is Public Works, which accounts for $107.0 million or 31.5% of the total operating budget. This group includes the Utilities, Field Operations, Transportation and Environmental Resources departments. Among the many services that these departments provide are the following: • • • • • • water/sewer treatment and transmission services; solid waste collection and disposal services and processing of recyclable products; building and equipment maintenance services for city vehicles and facilities; street and right-of-way maintenance; transportation planning, traffic engineering, traffic signs and striping, street lighting and transit services; and water conservation programs, water quality testing services for the city’s drinking water and reclaimed water services, and long-term water resource planning. The second largest group is Public Safety at $105.3 million, which makes up 31.0% of the total operating budget. Services provided by this group include: • • • • police and fire protection; emergency medical services; related support services such as 9-1-1 dispatch, short-term detention, and community education; and development of plans for responding to natural disasters and other types of emergencies. 64 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Glendale’s Police Department is accredited through the independent Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement and the Fire Department is accredited by the Commission of Fire Accreditation International. The Administrative Services Group accounts for $51.7 million or 15.2% of the total operating budget. Departments within this group include Human Resources, Information Technology, Finance and Management & Budget, as well as specialty departments to account for and track lease payments and fees and employee groups. Some of the services these departments provide include: • • • • • • personnel services related to recruiting, hiring and training staff; information systems development and management; financial accounting, payroll services and revenue collection services; budget development and management; procurement and warehouse services; and grants development and oversight services. The Community Services Group provides services that are probably the most visible to the public and includes the following departments: Community Partnerships, Parks & Recreation, Library & Arts and Code Compliance, as well as specialty departments that address Neighborhood Improvement Grants and Residential Infill Housing. The services include: • • • • • citizen education and neighborhood partnership programs; rental assistance and housing services for eligible applicants under the Section 8 and Low Rent Public Housing programs, which are federally funded; parks, open space and recreational activities for residents; library services; and responsive and proactive inspections and subsequent case resolution to protect neighborhoods from the negative impact of blight and deterioration. This group accounts for 11.6% of the total operating budget, or $39.2 million. The Appointed and Elected Officials Group is made up of departments whose department heads are appointed by the Mayor and Council or are elected to office. The group accounts for 2.6% or $8.9 million of the operating budget and includes the operation of the Mayor’s Office, City Council Office, City Clerk’s Office, City Attorney’s Office and the City Court. The Community Development Group represents 2.5% or $8.6 million of the total operating budget. Departments in this group include Building Safety, Engineering, Economic Development, Planning and the Airport and specialty departments to account for rebate/incentive programs. Some of the services these departments provide include: • • the issuance of building permits and provision of inspection services related to new construction; design and construction management for all city capital projects; 65 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures • • programs to attract and retain businesses that create jobs, increase the tax base, improve land values and enhance central city vitality; and long range planning, current planning and zoning administration related to proposed land uses. The Internal Services Group includes those operations reporting directly to the city manager or assistant city manager. These departments account for 2.1% or $7 million of the total operating budget. They include Marketing and Communications, City Manager’s Office, Community Action Program, Intergovernmental Programs and City Auditor. Departments in this group include the Civic Center in downtown Glendale and the Convention Center / Media Center / Parking Garage. Some of the services these departments provide include the following: • • • • competitively priced meeting space and related services for business, social and other special events; the production and oversight of Glendale’s print and electronic communications; coordination of the city’s dealings with federal, state and other local governments; and audit and consulting services to management. This group also is responsible for positioning and marketing the Glendale Media Center, which includes the city’s cable television Channel 11, for both the local and national media. This facility was developed in conjunction with the Renaissance Hotel, Spa and Conference Center in the Westgate area. Non-departmental expenses include annual dues for citywide membership agencies like the National League of Cities and Maricopa Association of Government, as well as unemployment insurance payments, and long-term disability payments. Non-Departmental expenses total $2.0 million or 0.6% of the total operating budget. The Miscellaneous Grant expenses account for another $9.7 million or 2.8% of the operating budget. However, $7.3 million of this amount includes grant reserve appropriation that can be used only to the extent that the city successfully obtains federal or state grant funded monies during the fiscal year. Staffing and Personnel Issues As with any service organization, personnel costs are a significant part of the total operating budget of the city. In fact, 72% of the FY 2011 operating budget for the General and Streets funds is attributable to wages, salaries and benefits. The FY 2011 budget includes permanent staffing reductions of 100.5 FTE’s related to vacant positions being eliminated from the General and Streets funds. In addition, another 133 FTE’s were submitted as base budget reductions within the General and Streets funds. 96 of those FTE’s were permanent reductions, 14 were transferred to other funds and the remaining will be 66 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures held vacant. Table 4 provides a comparison of staffing levels in recent years for all funds which accounts for all changes in authorized staffing city-wide. Table 4: Staffing Levels by Fund (Full-Time Equivalents) Fund 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 1,388.76 1,411.76 1,403.76 1,389.76 1,202.26 220.25 241.25 242.25 242.25 242.25 Police Special Revenue-1700 33.00 42.00 118.00 118.00 118.00 Sanitation-2480 70.00 75.00 78.00 80.00 80.00 Highway User Gas Tax-1340 97.00 97.00 98.00 90.00 67.00 Fire Special Revenue-1720 18.00 21.00 50.00 50.00 51.00 Transportation Sales Tax-1660 49.25 50.25 50.25 50.25 49.25 Landfill-2440 42.00 43.00 41.00 41.00 44.00 General Services-1040 42.00 42.00 42.00 41.00 37.00 Pub Housing Budget Activities-2500 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 24.00 Public Safety Training Center-2530 4.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 10.00 C.D.B.G.-1320 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 CAP Grant-1820 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 Parks & Recreation Self Sust-1880 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 Civic Center-1740 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 6.00 Airport Operating-1760 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Other Federal & State Grants-1840 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 Court Security/Bonds-1240 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 Stadium Event Operations-1281 2.00 2.00 2.00 Arena Event Operations-1282 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 General-1000 Water and Sewer-2360/2400/2420 Telephone Services-1100 1.00 Technology Replacement-1140 Risk Mgt Self Insurance-2540 All Other Total 1.00 4.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 2,031.51 2,100.51 2,204.51 2,182.51 1,971.01 The city has historically taken a conservative approach to adding new positions and expanding its service delivery system to ensure that basic services can be sustained regardless of revenue 67 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures and expense fluctuations. Therefore, staff increases are typically closely tied to population growth. However, severe economic downturns can impact staffing levels given the fact that a high percentage of overall operating costs are staffing related. Glendale is not immune to reductions in force. City-wide authorized staffing experienced ten straight years of modest growth before staffing reductions were implemented in FY 2010 and FY 2011. 9 8 7 6 5 4 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 10 '11 Staffing Per 1,000 Population FY 2010 - Valley Cities 12.0 6.8 7.8 8.1 Mesa 6.6 7.7 FY11-COG 9.0 Peoria 10.2 Chandler 10.8 10.8 6.0 Scottsdale Tempe 3.0 Phoenix The total authorized staffing of 1,971.01 FTE positions will serve an estimated population of 251,809 by July 2010. This results in a staffing ratio of 7.82 employees per 1,000 residents in FY 2011. As the accompanying graph indicates, Glendale continues to maintain a low staff to population ratio compared to Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, and Mesa, and does so without sacrificing the quality of services provided to residents. COG Authorized Staffing Per 1,000 Population 10-Year Fiscal History Avondale The FY 2011 budget shows a decrease in total authorized staffing by 211.5 full-time equivalents (FTEs) across all funds. The majority of the staffing decreases relate to the elimination of vacant General Fund positions and city-wide budget reductions mentioned previously and as outlined in the City Manager’s Budget Message. Schedule 6, found in the Schedules section of this document, provides detail on the city’s authorized staffing by position for all departments and funding sources. Please note that the ratio for all staffing-per-each-1,000 residents is from FY 2010 except for the City of Glendale, which represents the FY 2011 ratio. 68 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures General Fund Operating Expenditures Included in the General Fund total is the Streets Fund. The total operating budget for FY 2011 is $139.1 million. Public Safety, at 50.9% or $70.8 million, is the largest component of the General Fund budget, followed by Community Services at approximately 12.5% or $17.4 million and Public Works at 10.4% or $14.4 million. These three groups comprise 73.7% or $102.6 million of the total operating budget. The remaining 26.2% or $36.5 million of the $139.1 million budget is within the Administrative Services, Elected & Appointed Officials, Community Development, Internal Services and Non-Departmental Groups. The accompanying graph displays the General and Streets Fund budgets by group as a percentage of the whole. Percentage of General Fund Budget by Group Comm Dev. 5.6% Appointed Officials 6.0% Public Works 10.3% Comm. Services 12.5% Admin. Services 9.7% Internal Svcs. 3.6% Public Safety 50.9% Non-Dept 1.4% All street-related costs eligible for the Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) allocation are budgeted as expenses of the Streets Fund and are included in the Public Works group. The following table compares the FY 2011 General and Streets Fund operating budgets by group to FY 2010 in tabular form. 69 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Table 5: General Fund Budget By Group Comparison (All Dollars in Thousands) Group Public Safety Community Services Public Works Administrative Svcs Appointed Officials Community Dev. Internal Services Non-Departmental Total FY 2010 Budget $77,670 $20,806 $16,688 $12,604 $8,591 $10,481 $6,436 $1,832 $155,110 FY 2011 Budget $70,774 $17,370 $14,354 $13,441 $8,350 $7,845 $5,021 $1,964 $139,120 FY 2011 % of Total 50.9% 12.5% 10.3% 9.7% 6.0% 5.6% 3.6% 1.4% 100.0% General Fund Transfers to Other Funds The General Fund supports a number of other funds within the city. The amount of support can vary from year to year based on projected revenue for the supported funds as well as debt service schedules. A net transfer amount of $12.7 million is projected to be transferred to other funds in FY 2011. This amount is $3 million less than the net GF transfers included in the FY 2010 budget. The largest of these transfers is $13.8 million to the Municipal Property Corporation debt service fund to address principal and interest payments related to several capital projects such as the Glendale Media Center and Expo Hall, Convention Center and Parking Garage in the west area, infrastructure for the Zanjero development, the Jobing.com Arena and a portion of the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center. The $13.8 million is the net amount after accounting for expected revenue per the respective development agreements for the various facilities named above. The $13.8 million is $2.1 million more than the FY 2010 budget of $11.7 million. A total transfer of $2.7 million is projected for the Stadium, Youth Sports Complex and Arena Operations funds. Another $900,000 will go to the Transportation Fund and is done annually per the 2001 election approving the transportation sales tax. A transfer of $640,290 will be made to the Marketing Special Events Fund to support the special events held in downtown Glendale. Other transfers will go to the Civic Center, Airport, Housing, Employee Group and various other grant funds. Transfers between funds are detailed in Schedule 4 of the Schedules section of this document. Police and Fire Sales Tax Fund Expenditures These fund resources are designated to support the salaries of additional police officers and firefighters, as well as the equipment and services needed to support those positions. A total of $12.6 million will be appropriated from the Police Special Revenue Fund to provide police 70 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures services. An additional $6.1 million from the Fire Special Revenue Fund is designated to provide fire protection and emergency medical services. The Police fund supports 118 police staffing positions while the Fire fund supports 51 fire staffing positions. Transportation Fund Expenditures The Transportation Fund includes operating, capital and debt service expenses related to providing a range of transportation services in accordance with the ballot initiative that Glendale voters approved in a 2001 election. Although the majority of expenditures totaling $92.6 million are budgeted for capital outlays, the total operating Transportation Fund Budget budget of $12.2 million is used for Fixed Route Operating services (public 10% transportation) at $5.7 Cont. million and Dial-A-Ride at 6% $2.4 million. The latter program serves physically challenged residents and individuals with special Capital Debt Svc transportation needs. 78% 6% The Transportation Program Management division includes funding for the streetlight maintenance contract and program audit services, as well as various other items and has a total budget of $2.3 million. The remaining $1.9 million, or 15% of the operating budget, is used for traffic engineering, safety education, traffic mitigation and management oversight. Debt service payments totaling $7.3 million are budgeted for FY 2011 and a contingency appropriation of $7.4 million is supported by fund balance and will be used at the discretion of Council for any emergencies or if the opportunity arises for the acceleration of capital projects. Airport Fund Expenditures The Airport Fund operating budget is $538,916 that is funded by airport revenues of $507,222 with the remainder covered through a transfer from the General Fund. Much of these appropriations fund daily operations at the airport, including fulfilling FAA safety regulations. Continuing efforts to develop more revenue sources, coupled with prudent cost control measures, have brought the airport much closer to self-sufficiency when comparing revenue sources generated and actual expenditures. Once runway and facility improvements are completed, staff believes the Glendale Airport will attract more corporate jet customers. When these improvements are coupled with uses from professional football, hockey, baseball spring training 71 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures and the soon to be completed USA Basketball Headquarters facility, as well as other major national events occurring in Glendale, the city’s airport is expected to be a fully self-sustaining transportation hub for the West Valley. Water/Sewer Fund Expenditures In Arizona’s desert environment, water treatment and delivery is one of the most essential services the city provides. Glendale is fortunate to have reliable, long-term sources of water from the Salt River Project, the Central Arizona Project (Colorado River water) and groundwater. Although water from these sources Water/Sewer Fund Budget is becoming more expensive to obtain and Operations treat, Glendale water rates 25% Capital are reasonable when 57% compared to both local and national standards. The operating budget for this fund is $49.1 million for FY 2011. Almost half Debt of this budget, or $20 Service million, is used to support 13% the Oasis Water Campus; the Cholla and Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plants; the West Area and Arrowhead Wastewater Treatment Plants; and the regional sewer treatment facility that the City of Phoenix operates through the Sub-Regional Operating Group (SROG). In addition, water distribution, wastewater collection, customer service and utilities administration costs make up another $20.4 million. The remaining $8.7 million of the operating budget is used for meter maintenance, central system control, water quality testing and information management services. Cont. 5% Many significant capital projects are planned for FY 2011 and they account for the $55.9 million in capital expenditures, as well as the corresponding $25.3 million in debt service payments required for those capital projects. The Capital Improvement Plan of this book includes project descriptions and detailed cost estimates for all planned water and sewer capital projects. A $5 million contingency appropriation is supported by fund balance and will be used at the direction of City Council for any unplanned emergencies or if any capital construction projects get ahead of schedule. Landfill Fund Expenditures The total operating budget for FY 2011 is $7 million, relatively unchanged from the $6.9 million in FY 2010. Landfill operations total $2.9 million, the materials recycling facility accounts for 72 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures $2.2 million and other recycling at $940,620, all of which accounts for 86.5% of the operating budget. The remaining amount, or $951,855, is used for solid waste administration and landfill gas management. The FY 2011 capital budget totals $1.9 million and the Landfill Fund also has a $2.0 million contingency appropriation to be used at City Council discretion for any unplanned emergencies. FY 2011 will be the ninth full year of operation for the recycling program, which includes the recycling education and inspection programs and the full cost of the materials recycling facility. Recycling accomplishes a number of objectives such as improving the environment, extending the useful life of Glendale’s landfill, and generating revenue from the sale of reusable materials. Sanitation Fund Expenditures The total operating budget for FY 2011 is $13.9 million, which represents a 4% decrease from the $14.5 million in FY 2010. Residential curb service includes trash, recycling and loose trash collection and accounts for $9.5 million or 68% of the operating budget. The commercial frontload and roll-off divisions account for another $4.4 million. The FY 2011 capital budget includes $1.3 million for the purchase of side load refuse trucks and replacement pickup trucks. Benefits Trust Fund Expenditures The Benefits Trust Fund is used to track city and employee health care contribution payments and to pay health insurance policy premiums for employees and retirees. The fund currently administers the medical, dental, life insurance and vision plans and coverage for both premiums and claims related expenses. The fund has an operating budget of $24.5 million for FY 2011. The City of Glendale will contribute $14.1 million to this fund in FY 2011 of which $9.2 million is from the GF. The $14.1 million is $1.3 million less than the FY 2010 contribution of $15.4 million, of which $10.5 million was from the GF. The beginning fund balance is projected to be approximately $2.6 million and the fund is projected to end the year with $113,328. This reduction in fund balance is a direct result of management’s decision to keep the operating budget flat year over year instead of reducing it to account for a decreasing workforce and the frozen/retirement vacancies. This conservative approach will allow the fund to cover any unfavorable fluctuations in medical and dental claims throughout FY 2011. If these claims do not materialize during FY 2011, then any unused portion of the operating budget will remain in the fund balance at year end. Capital Improvement Plan Expenditures The total capital improvement budget for FY 2011 is $194.4 million, and 91.3% of this amount relates to transportation, public safety, flood control, and water and sewer projects. The $194.4 million includes carryover appropriation from FY 2010 of $96.7 million to complete existing projects and $97.7 million for new projects. This is a decrease of $97.2 million, or 33.3%, 73 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures compared to the FY 2010 capital improvement budget of $291.6 million. The reduction was primarily driven by a year over year reduction in the carryover funding included in the FY 2010 capital budget ($180.2 million) versus FY 2011 ($96.7 million) that accounted for $83.5 million of the decrease. A decrease in funding for new capital projects of $13.7 million accounted for the remaining year over year reduction. The graph below shows the percentage of capital improvement plan projects by type and as a percentage of the whole. The graph includes new funding and carryover for FY 2011. For more details, please refer to the Capital Improvement Plan section of this document. Percentage of Capital Improvement Plan Projects by Type Trans./ Streets 50% Economic Development 1% Flood Control 10% Other 6% Parks/Open Spaces 2% Public Safety 2% Water/Sewer 29% Debt Service Expenditures The City has used debt financing for a number of years to finance most capital projects. The amount of debt incurred must be compatible with the City’s goals pertaining to the capital program, the financial plan and the operating budget. The Government Finance Officers Association recommends local governments develop a formal comprehensive debt management plan. The City maintains a formal Debt Management Plan, which is a separate document that the Finance Department develops in conjunction with the Management and Budget Department. The Debt Management Plan is designed to manage the issuance of the city’s debt obligations in order to maintain the City’s ability to incur debt and other long-term obligations at favorable interest rates for capital improvements, facilities and equipment beneficial to the city and necessary for essential services. This section is not intended to review the City’s total debt position. That discussion is found in the Debt Management Plan. 74 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures The total debt service budget for FY 2011 is $84.8 million, compared to $80.6 million in FY 2010. This represents an increase of 5.2% or $4.2 million that was driven in part by the scheduled principal and interest payments related to Municipal Property Corporation debt issuances for capital projects like the Glendale Media Center and Expo Hall, Convention Center and Parking Garage in the west area, infrastructure for the Zanjero development, the Jobing.com Arena and a portion of the Public Safety Training Facility. The accompanying graph illustrates how the debt service budget is divided among different types of debt service categories. For a discussion about these debt service categories, please see the Financing the Capital Improvement Plan section in this budget document. Debt Service Budget G.O. Bonds 30% G.O. Bonds w/ DIF 1% MPC Bonds 25% Transportation Revenue Bonds 9% HURF Bonds 5% Water & Sewer Revenue Bonds 30% 75 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Conclusion CONCLUSION This Budget Summary is intended to provide a general overview of the FY 2011 budget document and to highlight some of the more significant program changes and policy issues addressed in the budget document. The sections that follow the Budget Summary section provide more detailed information about the city’s organizational structure, its goals and objectives, and operating budgets for each city department. Documents comprising the foundation for Glendale’s annual budgeting process have been included in this budget document as well. The Financial Plan and Financial Policies documents identify and explain the strategies used to meet and stabilize city revenues and expenses, and ensure the continuity and reliability of basic services. The Five-Year Forecast addresses the long-term financial projection for city revenues and expenditures. In addition, the city continues to implement of the business-based approach to providing and evaluating city services. Accompanying this approach are departmental business plans that were initiated in FY 2004 and continue to be based on the City Council’s strategic priorities. In future city budgets, the Mayor and Council’s vision for the community will continue to be outlined and then translated into specific actions and programs through departmental business plans. This will then guide the budget process to ensure the Council goals are achieved through each dollar spent by the city. The long-range blueprint for the financing and construction of large projects is contained in the Capital Improvement Plan. The Schedules section contains detailed information about the City of Glendale's fund accounting system, operating revenues and expenditures, debt service and authorized staffing levels. A Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) guide is included in the appendix to help clarify the words and phrases that may have specialized meaning when applied to municipal government budgeting practices. This FAQ document is a good primer for those who wish to brush up on their financial terminology or want to find parallels between their own personal budgets and the city’s overall budget. The City of Glendale publishes several other documents that may be of interest and assistance in understanding city operations. These include the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Debt Management Plan, available from the Finance Department; the Glendale General Plan, which was overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2002 and is available from the Planning Department; and the Glendale Annual Report distributed by the Marketing Department. Questions, comments or observations regarding this Annual Budget document should be directed in writing to: City of Glendale Management and Budget Department 6829 North 58th Drive, Suite 200 Glendale, Arizona 85301 Phone: (623) 930-2264 Fax: (623) 915-2694 Email: aweathersby@glendaleaz.com 76 Return to TOC Financial Guidelines 2010-2011 FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast FIVE-YEAR FORECAST INTRODUCTION Glendale’s annual and long range budgeting process is shaped and guided by the three key foundation documents contained within the Annual Budget. They are the City of Glendale’s Five-Year Forecast, Financial Plan and Financial Policies. Together these documents help the City Council ensure that, regardless of changing economic times, city government has the financial stability and economic resources it needs to provide essential services and maintain Glendale’s high quality of life in future years. This section focuses on the General Fund (GF) given the extent of GF operations. Nevertheless, much of what is discussed in this section also applies to city operations that are not directly supported by GF revenues, such as the enterprise and special revenue fund operations. WHY DO WE DO FORECASTS? Forecasting is such an automatic part of our lives that most of us do it every day without giving the process much conscious thought. For example, if you drive to work, you will make many assumptions and predictions about how various factors will affect the length of time it will take to make the trip. These activities are the most basic elements of the forecasting process. From past experience, you can reasonably predict how long the trip takes under normal circumstances assuming you drive at the legal speed limit and meet all traffic requirements such as red lights and stop signs. You might adjust your travel forecast and leave home a little earlier on Mondays when traffic is usually heavier, or if it is raining, or you have to pick up a co-worker on that particular day. You might factor in some extra time for unanticipated but common events such as a traffic accident, a closed freeway lane on your route or other events that might slow your progress and increase your travel time. Once you are on the road, you will be continually fine-tuning your forecast. As you drive you might look ahead to the short-term future, checking the progress of the cars in front of you, and periodically changing traffic lanes to stay on your projected schedule. You might also look a little further into the future, to the next traffic light or the freeway on-ramp. If the access ramp looks too congested, you might decide to alter your route to avoid a possible freeway backup. Continuous monitoring and fine-tuning adjustments are also characteristic of the budget forecasting process. If past experiences, assumptions and predictions regarding future events were reasonably accurate, resulting in a reliable forecast, you should expect to arrive at work on time. However, even with the best information and forecasting tools, there may be rough spots in the road—those unknown or uncontrollable variables that can never be predicted in advance. For instance, your actual versus forecast results will be very different if, when you try to start your car in the morning, you discover the battery is dead. 77 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast Forecasting our individual, daily routines is relatively simple. However, forecasting becomes increasingly difficult as goals and objectives become more varied and complex, and less reliable as the forecast period lengthens. The number of and potential for unpredictable events and uncontrollable variables also becomes much greater. For example, it is harder to forecast for a vacation next year than to forecast your daily trip to work. It is harder still to plan for that vacation in a way that will not have a negative effect on other, longer-range objectives, such as saving enough money to purchase a home in five years. Most cities go through this type of forecasting process on a much grander scale, using more sophisticated tools to evaluate their current status in relation to their short and long-range goals and objectives. They also make predictions about how future events and circumstances will or may affect their financial stability. THE CITY’S FORECAST The Five-Year Forecast is guided by City Council’s continued vision of ‘one community’ and the supporting strategic goals and key objectives. The Management and Budget Department updates the forecast each year to adjust for changes in national and local economic conditions and trends, changes in Council priorities and policies, and other variables that might affect the city’s ability to provide needed services and maintain its financial integrity in future years. Consequently, the Five-Year Forecast identifies the direction in which the city is headed based on information known at the time it is updated for the annual budget document. The forecasting process is continuous, with fine-tuning adjustments made each year as part of the normal budgeting process. Forecasting is one of the most powerful tools we have available to help us make informed decisions, based on available information, to ensure the city’s future vitality and economic stability. Shifts in demographics, economic conditions, and societal values impact how the city operates. This is especially notable in growing communities such as Glendale, where the City must continually assess its ability to support existing services and address new service needs well into the future. By evaluating important trends and economic conditions included in long-range forecasting models, the City is better able to gauge its ability to provide essential services over an extended period of time. LONG RANGE FORECASTING MODELS In order to provide the most accurate and timely data, the Management and Budget Department uses a long-range forecasting model for the GF. The model is updated and refined each year before the city’s annual budgeting process begins. Similar forecasts and rate setting models are used for the enterprise funds. These models are used to calculate the likely financial effects of changing internal and external conditions on the city’s fund balances over a five-year period. 78 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast The GF financial projection in the upcoming five-year period is based on a number of meaningful economic and demographic factors, as well as a series of assumptions about expected operational needs. The local economic outlook is largely based on expert forecasts from economists at the Economic & Business Research Program at the University of Arizona, JP Morgan Chase Economy Outlook Center, the L. William Seidman Research Institute at Arizona State University and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee at the State of Arizona. Glendale’s forecasting model is made up of three primary components: the revenue module, the cost module and the fund summary module. Whenever new data is entered into each module, the modeling program generates updated fiscal projections. The enterprise fund models include many of the same components. However, because an enterprise fund is a self-contained business unit, these models incorporate all capital costs, debt service requirements, fixed asset information and customer data for the specific funds. Glendale’s forecasting models enable staff to provide City Council and executive leadership with the results of “what-if” scenarios. These “what-if” scenarios in the revenue and cost modules help generate estimates with likely short-term and long-term financial consequences and overall fund balances. As with all financial models, the projections are defined by the specific criteria and assumptions used and the respective limitations associated with both. Nevertheless, the city’s forecasting models have been successfully used to explore questions such as: • • • How will current national and local economies affect the city's operating budget and fund balances? Can a new service or program that will increase our ongoing costs be added to the operating budget without jeopardizing basic service levels in future years? What long-term costs are associated with changes in employee pay and benefit-related policies? HOW ARE COSTS AND REVENUES ESTIMATED? In order to achieve the most reasonable projections for anticipated revenues and expenditures, income and expense categories are analyzed using the most appropriate methodology for each category. Management and budget staff considers all applicable limitations and requirements in projecting each individual revenue and expense source. One or more of the following factors may play an important role in developing revenue and expenditure forecasts. Legal or Mandated Requirements Some revenue and expense categories are defined by specific legal requirements or restrictions. For example, state statutes place restrictions on the primary property tax levy—the total amount collected—and therefore affects the primary property tax rate charged on property in Glendale. Department Staff Estimates Management and budget staff asks departments to identify key future staffing needs to accommodate population growth and related equipment costs that will affect the operating budget over the next five years. A strong emphasis is placed on the operating impacts associated 79 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast with new capital projects scheduled to come on line over the forecast period. The experience and expertise of department managers also are crucial for accurately projecting expected revenues from sources such as inspection fees, building permits and court fees. Statistical Analysis Linear regression and other statistical methods are used to refine prediction results. For example, regression analysis showed that historical data on Arizona per capita disposable income is a reliable indicator for projecting city sales tax revenues. Staff uses other factors such as Glendale population growth, Arizona’s rate of growth in employment, inflation for urban areas of the western United States (the Consumer Price Index or CPI), growth in Glendale’s primary assessed valuation and Glendale’s actual collections for various revenue sources over the past 5-10 years. Causally Related Formulas Specific city revenues and expenses are directly affected by demographic and economic factors such as local population growth and commercial and residential development. For example, population growth is almost always accompanied by an increase in city and state sales tax revenue, as well as an increased demand for services and additional infrastructure improvements. Balanced Budget Requirement Arizona state law and Glendale city financial policies require that each annual city budget be a balanced budget. This means that within the forecast period expenditures cannot exceed unrestricted revenue resources. Furthermore, city policy recommends the maintenance of a specific level of contingency appropriation—equal to 10% of the city’s GF revenue budget for the upcoming fiscal year—and the funds to back that appropriation, for emergencies and unanticipated expenses. This requirement provides the city with a cushion to offset unexpected shortfalls in revenue caused by an economic downturn, or other unexpected events, that may occur in any given year. GF EXPENDITURE FORECAST In order to develop a comprehensive Five-Year Forecast, assumptions must be made about a number of complex and often uncontrollable cost and revenue variables. These assumptions include, but are not limited to, the present and future condition of the economy, population growth rates and changes in federal, state and local policies that may affect municipal operations. In addition, the ongoing costs of prior commitments to provide services, and the ongoing costs for new capital facilities under construction, must be considered. The quality and reliability of the long-range forecast are largely dependent upon the accuracy of the cost and revenue assumptions used in the forecast. This section and the following section (GF Revenue Forecast) provide explanations of the key assumptions employed in the current GF forecasting model, as well as the key issues that underlie the GF forecast. 80 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast INFLATION RATES Inflation has a major impact on all city revenues and expenditures. Salaries, supplies, equipment and contracted services are all subject to inflationary pressures. Therefore, the cumulative effects of general inflation are considered in the forecasting process. Because good historical data is available, and the Western Region Consumer Price Index for Urban Users (CPI-U) is adjusted for regional influences, the forecast model relies on this source of inflation data. The CPI-U assesses consumer patterns by judging the cost of a theoretical “market basket” of goods using a specific base year and comparing it with future years. In terms of real purchasing power, $103.60 in goods purchased in 1984 would cost approximately $218.80 in 2009, an increase of 111.22%. The following table shows the historical percentage increase in the CPI-U since 1984 as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. CPI - Urban Users (Western Region) Year 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Index 103.6 108.0 110.5 114.3 119.0 124.6 131.5 137.3 142.0 146.2 149.6 % Increase Base Year 4.25% 2.31% 3.44% 4.11% 4.71% 5.54% 4.41% 3.42% 2.96% 2.33% Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Index 153.5 157.6 161.4 164.4 168.9 174.8 181.2 184.7 188.6 193.0 198.9 % Increase 2.61% 2.67% 2.41% 1.86% 2.74% 3.49% 3.66% 1.93% 2.11% 2.33% 3.06% Year Index % Increase 2006 205.7 3.42% 2007 212.2 3.17% 2008 219.6 3.49% 2009 218.8 -0.38% Jan '10 220.0 0.53% Feb '10 220.2 0.09% Mar '10 220.8 0.29% 1984 - 2009 Total 111.22% 1984 - 2009 Avg 3.04% 2003 - 2009 Total 16.02% 2003 - 2009 Avg 2.46% The average annual inflation rate has been averaging about 3.04% since 1984. From 2003 to 2009, the average inflation rate has been lower, averaging 2.46%. In addition, 2009 marks the first time since 1984 that the average inflation rate declined year over year. During the first three months of 2010, the inflation factors increased but have remained stable at 220.0, 220.2 and 220.8. These numbers correlate to a 0.30% average monthly increase in the first quarter of 2010 from where we ended the year in 2009. POPULATION CHANGES Arizona experienced rapid population growth over the past two decades. Glendale’s population was no exception as it almost doubled over 20 years, from 117,348 residents in 1984, to approximately 233,281 residents in 2004—a 99% increase. Population growth appears to be leveling off from the high growth experienced in the 1990s and the early years of the current 81 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast decade given that the 2005 – 2009 average annual increase was a more moderate 1.39%. The current population is estimated at 251,809. The following table shows the historical and projected population growth and percentage increases for years 1984 through 2015, measured as of the beginning of the fiscal year. The data included in the table was supplied by the Glendale Planning Department. City of Glendale Population at Start of Fiscal Year Year 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 a b c Population 117,348 122,392 127,486 132,581 137,675 142,769 148,134 151,558 155,916 161,688 168,874 182,615 186,500 191,612 196,820 208,095 % Increase 4.49% 4.30% 4.16% 4.00% 3.84% 3.70% 3.76% 2.31% 2.88% 3.70% 4.44% 8.14% 2.13% 2.74% 2.72% 5.73% d e * * * * * * Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Population 218,812 224,703 227,763 231,288 233,281 242,369 243,737 246,396 248,745 249,811 251,809 253,823 255,853 257,899 259,962 262,041 % Increase 5.15% 2.69% 1.36% 1.55% 0.86% 3.90% 0.56% 1.09% 0.95% 0.43% 0.80% 0.80% 0.80% 0.80% 0.80% 0.80% Notes: a 1985 Special Census d 2000 Census b 1990 Census e 2005 Special Census (September 1) c 1995 Special Census - includes Luke AFB * Projected Population Figures All population counts and estimates from 1995 forward include Luke AFB EMPLOYEE SALARY ADJUSTMENTS The forecasting models are normally programmed to include pay range or “market” adjustments for city employees. With the guidance of the Human Resources Department, Council sets a target of providing a pay range adjustment that is based on a market survey of other Valley cities and therefore may vary depending on whether a job classification is below market, at market or above market. Prior to the implementation of this practice a few years ago, the pay range adjustment was tied solely to the consumer price index and the western region inflation rate. Pay range adjustments and merit increases are not automatically given to non-step plan employees. Council must specifically approve merit and/or pay range adjustments for non-step plan employees for the upcoming fiscal year as part of the budget development process. Both increases are also based on the city’s ability to pay in any given year. For FY 2011, no pay increases are included in the forecast. In addition, a five percent reduction in base salary has 82 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast been included in the forecast through the use of 104 hours of mandatory furlough (equivalent to 13 eight-hour work days) as recommended by management and approved by Council. For FY 2006, City Council approved new pay plans for both police and fire sworn personnel to ensure we obtain the most highly qualified staff to provide public safety services to our residential and business communities. They are called “step plans” and apply to sworn positions not classified as managerial. These pay plans are based upon years of service, or steps, and merit increases are automatic as the employee completes each year of service within the city. In addition, public safety personnel representatives meet with the city manager each year to discuss other employment issues. Any changes in employee compensation derived from these meetings are incorporated into the annual budget through an agreed upon memorandum of understanding. During the course of FY 2010, an addendum to the two-year Memorandum of Understanding with the police and fire represented groups was reached that identified reductions in step plan compensation. The Fire Department agreed to eliminate deferred compensation and uniform allowance and the Police Department will forego their scheduled step increase and eliminate deferred compensation in FY 2011. These measures were made in good faith by the respective departments in working together with the city manager and were a key component in the FY 2011 balanced budget. In addition, the city’s performance management system works on the basis of merit increases, typically in 4% or 5% increments, for those who receive “meets” or “exceeds expectations” on their respective annual performance evaluations. As mentioned previously, these increases are not included in the FY 2011 budget nor are they included in the Five-Year Forecast. However, in normal years employees that fall into these categories would receive a merit increase based upon their performance evaluation. As in previous years, if an employee “does not meet expectations” that employee would not receive a merit increase. This methodology covers all employees not included in the public safety step plans. EXPECTED CHANGES TO EXPENDITURES The identification of issues and concerns that will affect the overall cost of providing the high quality services that our citizens have come to expect is a critical part of the forecasting process. For example, residential and commercial growth and aging infrastructure are critical cost factors that warrant careful consideration during the forecasting process. New residential and commercial development and the maintenance of existing infrastructure will continue to challenge our ability to expand, sustain and improve existing levels of service in future years. The City of Glendale approved an increase in the dedicated Public Safety Sales Tax from 1/10th of one cent to one-half of one cent in order to accelerate the enhancement of public safety services for the community. This new tax was approved by the voters in September 2007 and became effective November 2007. Public safety is using this funding to implement their needs assessments as additional funds from the tax become available. In addition to these funds, the GF will continue to support public safety operations based upon Council direction. 83 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast The GF Five-Year Forecast includes funding for planned expenditure increases related to public safety compensation increases and it accounts for $1.3 million of ongoing funding needs in FY 2012 rising to $5.0 million in FY 2015. The operating and maintenance costs associated with the capital improvement plan comprise another significant portion of the expenses included over the forecast period. The forecast includes $2.0 million in FY 2015 to account for a planned city court building that will come on line. The forecast also assumes that the furlough program and concessions of represented employees will cease in FY 2012. The remaining components of the Five-Year Forecast are discussed in the following sections. VEHICLE/TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT FUNDS These replacement funds were designed to allow the city to replace outdated, or worn out equipment at regular intervals. The Field Operations and Information Technology Departments are the administrators of the vehicle and technology replacement programs, respectively. Due to the economic downturn that began in late 2001, GF contributions to these funds were halted for seven months in FY 2003, and for all of FY 2004, for a total of nineteen months. (The enterprise funds continued to pay into these replacement funds at the 100% level and continued to receive regularly scheduled replacements.) GF contributions were phased in as follows: • • • • at the 50% level in FY 2005 (half in ongoing funds and half in one-time funds), at the 75% in FY 2006 (50% ongoing and 25% one-time), and at the 100% in FY 2007 (75% ongoing and 25% one-time), and at the 100% in FY 2008 (75% ongoing and 25% one-time). However, for FY 2009, the funding level was once again lowered to 75% (50% ongoing and 25% one-time) and the FY 2010 and FY 2011 GF contributions will remain at the 50% ongoing level. This reduction in the GF contribution level was needed to fund other critical items identified in the city manager’s recommended balanced budget such as electric rate increases. Other measures that have been implemented regarding the replacement funds include the following: • • • Non-public safety technology, vehicles and equipment will have their useful lives extended where appropriate until the 100% GF contribution level can be built back into the budget. A city-wide motor pool was developed that required departments with vehicles that had low mileage or utilization to be returned for city-wide use on a first come, first serve, sign-in and sign-out basis. The technology replacement fund will only replace the computer monitors when they break or malfunction as monitors will no longer be replaced automatically with the scheduled replacement of the computer central processing unit. 84 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast The forecast period assumes that funding to restore the GF back to 100% funding levels will occur from FY 2012 thru FY 2015 in equal, phased increments. Therefore, the technology replacement rates are projected to increase by $350,000 each year starting in FY 2012, and ending at $1.4 million of ongoing funding by FY 2015. The vehicle replacement rates are projected to increase by $250,000 each year starting in FY 2012, and ending at $1.0 million of ongoing funding by FY 2015. DEBT SERVICE OBLIGATIONS The forecast includes the scheduled increases and decreases in capital lease debt service payments associated with capital equipment and land purchases. The capital lease debt service payments are included in the departmental operating budgets. Refer to Schedule 8 at the back of this budget book for a complete listing of the capital lease debt service for the city’s various funds. The forecast also includes changes in existing, long-term Municipal Property Corporation (MPC) debt service financings associated with the new regional public safety training facility, infrastructure improvements for the Zanjero development, and the new convention center/media center/parking garage facilities at the Westgate development. Refer to Schedule 7 for a detailed listing of the current principal and interest payments related to the City’s existing debt service agreements at the time the annual budget document was produced. GENERAL FUND REVENUE FORECAST The local and national economy has changed significantly over the past year. In the spring of 2008 we knew the housing market was in flux as a new equilibrium point between buyers and sellers was being established. Credit also had tightened for consumers and, to some extent, the business community. Business investment had slowed but not stopped. While these conditions were present, they were not pervasive and had not significantly impacted Glendale’s sales tax collections. These national conditions deteriorated rapidly during the summer and fall of 2008 and continued into 2009 as the credit markets froze for consumers and businesses resulting in a precipitous decline in business investment and consumer spending. Then the ranks of the unemployed began to grow and have continued to swell into the spring of 2010. For the local economy, the impact of the current recession is reflected in Glendale’s sales tax collections. Through March 2010, city and state sales tax collections, which comprise nearly onehalf of the current fiscal year’s General Fund (GF) revenue budget, receded to levels last experienced in FY 2005. All of this means that revenue growth in FY 2011 is unlikely. However, the FY 2011 revenue projection does include some new revenue generation items that will offset most of the 85 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast anticipated decrease in city sales taxes. These new revenue sources include increasing fees charged for wireless facilities like cell phone towers placed on city property, liquor license fees, fire inspection fees and electronic billboard revenue. Therefore, ongoing revenues are projected to only decrease slightly (0.86%) in FY 2011 before rebounding for the remainder of the forecast period with the overall expected rate of growth fluctuating between 3.85% and 6.77% per year during that time. The following graph provides historical data as well as projections for the major revenues sources of the GF. The graph also includes highway user revenues fees, commonly known as HURF monies. The graph illustrates the relative importance of city sales tax and state-shared revenues in comparison to our overall GF revenue base. These main revenue sources have comprised between two-thirds and three-fourths of the GF ongoing revenue since FY 2002, and they are expected to continue to do so for foreseeable future. The other notable GF revenue sources include HURF revenues, various fees (municipal court, user fees and charges for city services like building inspections, plan reviews, recreation classes, etc.), the primary property tax and a category called “other” (interest, city rental income, staff/admin charge-backs, etc.). The graph below is followed by a brief discussion about some of the major components of GF revenues. General and Streets Funds Summary of Major Revenue Sources In Thousands ($000's) $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 '06 Other '07 Fees '08 HURF '09 '10 Prim Prop Tax '11 '12 State Shared '13 '14 '15 City Sales Tax City Sales Tax City sales tax is “elastic” revenue, meaning it varies directly with the economy. During economic expansion, elastic tax revenues increase, due to higher levels of consumer spending. During an economic downturn, the opposite is true and tax revenue levels decline. 86 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast City sales tax receipts comprise 34.3% of the city’s GF revenue budget for FY 2011. This percentage has been relatively stable since FY 2006 and is projected to remain stable for the forecast period, fluctuating between 33.4% and 35.1%. City sales tax for the forecast period is projected using a combination of econometric modeling and formula calculations. The Management and Budget Department obtains its initial projection from a linear regression model, using state disposable personal income as a primary variable. The resulting figures are modified to account for other key variables directly related to the city. For example, since increased employment is usually accompanied by a rise in consumer and business purchasing volume and therefore increased sales tax revenue, Maricopa County’s fiveyear employment growth estimate is incorporated into the city’s sales tax forecasting model. The growth rate for city sales tax collections was 13.8% in FY 2006 and 6.5% in FY 2007. However, the FY 2008 rate declined by 3.6% and FY 2009 declined by another 15.8%. The revised FY 2010 city sales tax revenue projection assumes another decline of 4.7%. However, FY 2011 includes a modest increase of 2.6% with the remaining years in the forecast period fluctuating between 2.9% and 7.3%. This expectation is based on the continued expansion of Glendale’s sports, entertainment, office and retail destination area, and the continued attraction of diverse job growth industries to the city. It also is based on the expected growth in Arizona’s population and disposable personal income as projected by various experts on the Arizona economy. The graph below provides a historical look at city sales tax revenue, as well as the projected revenues for city sales tax over the forecast period. City Sales Tax Revenue In Thousands ($000's) 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 Actual '11 Projected 87 Return to TOC '12 '13 '14 '15 FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast State-Shared Revenue Cities and towns in Arizona are beneficiaries of a state-shared revenue program that distributes state-collected revenues to Arizona municipalities. State-shared revenues in this document specifically refer to state sales tax, state income tax and motor vehicle in-lieu receipts. State shared revenue receipts comprise about 33.8% or $49.8 million of the city’s GF revenue budget for FY 2011. This is a precipitous drop from the 37.9% level or $56.3 million that was projected in FY 2010. The forecast period assumes this percentage will return to more normal levels over the forecast period and remain stable at approximately 37%. This revenue source is projected to rebound by $8.7 million in FY 2012 and total $58.6 million. The projection for FY 2013 through FY 2015 is for more modest growth averaging $2.5 million per year. The forecast for each state revenue source is developed separately and compared to the state’s forecast for these revenue sources. State income tax projections are based on a trend forecast and adjusted for the revenue actually collected by the state as its distribution to the cities lags by two years. Forecasts done by Arizona economists, who use projected state personal income growth as a key variable, are also considered in the development of our projections. State sales tax estimates are based on a model similar to the city sales tax forecast. The forecast model assumes that the motor vehicle in-lieu will increase at its historic rate. The average annual growth rate for state shared revenue collections was 10% between FY 2006 and FY 2008. The growth rate decreased by 2.5% in FY 2009 and is projected to decrease by another 12.5% in FY 2010 and 11.5% in FY 2011 before rebounding in FY 2012. State-shared revenues are directly affected by the economic climate as well as legislative changes such as income tax rate reductions and/or adjustments to distribution formulas – both of which have occurred over the last several years. The forecast assumes an annual growth rate of about 7.5% in FY 2012 through FY 2015 as the national economy rebounds. State-Shared Revenue Summary In Thousands ($000's) 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 Actual '11 Projected 88 Return to TOC '12 '13 '14 '15 FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast Property Tax Arizona’s property tax levy consists of two tiers. The primary property tax levy has statemandated maximum limits, but it can be used by a city for any lawful purpose. It is the primary property tax revenue that is included in the General Fund. The secondary property tax is an unlimited levy that can be used only to pay the principal, interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness or other lawful long-term obligations that are issued or incurred for a specific capital purpose. Primary property tax revenue is a relatively small revenue source for the GF as it comprises only 2.6% of the total, or $3.8 million for FY 2011. This percentage of the total is a slight increase from the 2.3% rate experienced from FY 2006 to FY 2010. The city’s property tax projection must consider the rate of growth in assessed valuation, the assessment ratios for different types of property, and the components of growth associated with new properties as well as appreciation of existing properties. Property tax revenue can be challenging to predict because of the number and types of variables that affect this revenue source such as exemptions and assessment ratios, both of which are set by the Arizona Legislature. Nevertheless, the driving force in forecasting property tax revenue is the assessed valuation of property. For FY 2011, Glendale’s total property tax will remain unchanged at $1.5951. This rate is made up of the primary property tax rate of $0.2252 and the secondary property tax rate of $1.3699. The secondary property tax rate in not included in the GF revenue forecast. The Management and Budget Department analyzes historical property tax data to arrive at reasonable assumptions about long-range trends in assessed valuation. Despite Glendale’s historical growth in assessed valuation of the past several years, we know the current imbalance between supply and demand in the housing industry will take some time to right itself. Our Primary Property Tax Revenue In Thousands ($000's) 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 Actual '11 Projected 89 Return to TOC '12 '13 '14 '15 FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast projection includes an 8.2% decline in property tax revenue for FY 2011 and a conservative 3% to 4% average growth in primary property tax revenue for the remaining forecast periods. Highway User Revenue Fees (HURF) This source is commonly referred to as the gasoline tax although there are several additional transportation-related fees that comprise this revenue, including a portion of vehicle license taxes. Overall, much of this revenue source is based on the volume of fuel sold rather than the price of fuel. The Arizona state constitution restricts the use of HURF revenue to street and highway purposes such as right-of-way acquisition, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, and the payment of the interest and principal on HURF bonds. In the past, the Arizona Legislature has altered, and may in the future alter, (1) the type and/or rate of taxes, fees and charges to be deposited into the Arizona Highway Revenue Fund and (2) the allocation of such monies among the Arizona Department of Transportation, Arizona cities and counties and other purposes. In fact, the Arizona Legislature reduced the amount of funds allocated to cities for FY 2009. In FY 2010 the city expects to receive $13.2 million in HURF revenue, which is a 9.5% decrease from FY 2009 and is 20.9% below FY 2008. Given the uncertainty about the state’s FY 2011 budget and the state of the economy, we have assumed a 2.2% average growth rate for the forecast period. HURF revenues comprise about 9.2% or $13.5 million of GF revenue in FY 2011. This amount is expected to grow modestly to $14.7 million by the end of the forecast period. This conservative forecast is based on the assumption that consumers will continue to change their driving habits to smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles and to greater use of public transit as the price of fuel continues to escalate. Fees and Charges This category covers a variety of city fees and charges for city services such as building permits, right-of-way permits, construction plan check reviews, barricade fees, business and sales tax licenses, liquor licenses, fire fees, park and recreation fees, court fees and fines, library fees and fines, and fees related to planning and zoning issues. This category also includes revenues from cable, gas and electric franchise fees, income from the rental of city facilities, cemetery services and the miscellaneous category. Total projected fees and charges are expected to be $16.1 million in FY 2011, about 11% of total GF revenue. By FY 2015, revenue from fees and charges is expected to grow to $17.6 million. FY 2011 revenue is projected to increase by 7.6% over the previous fiscal year, but the average growth rate for the remainder of the forecast period is 2.2%. 90 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast Other Revenue This category includes interest income, capital lease proceeds, city rental income, general staff and administrative service charges and other miscellaneous or one time revenues, like the sale of land. Staff and administrative chargeback revenues comprise the largest component of the other revenue category. Departments whose operations are supported by the General Fund, such as the Finance, Human Resources, City Attorney, Management and Budget and Facilities Management Division of Field Operations, provide services to the city’s water/sewer, sanitation and landfill enterprise funds as well as the self-supporting Transportation Fund (supported by the transportation sales tax). These are services that enterprise fund operations would have to pay outside contractors to provide if city departments did not provide them. Consequently, each of the identified operation is required to pay its fair share of the cost for these services, which are called general staff and administrative service charges. The Management and Budget Department established these charges based on an indirect cost allocation model that uses various accepted allocation methods and is updated annually. The charges are applied against enterprise fund’s operating budget in equal amounts (i.e. 1/12) each month. The City Auditor’s Office reviewed the cost allocation model during FY 2005 to assess the validity and reasonableness of the model and determined it was a reasonable method to allocate GF costs. During FY 2009, the model was again evaluated but by an outside firm that performs audits of public sector entities. The FY 2009 evaluation found the model to be a reasonable and valid method for allocating GF costs, as well as a generally accepted budget and financing practice that cities and other government agencies commonly use. The total general staff and administrative service charges for FY 2011 are $7.9 million and comprise about 58.3% of the “other” revenue category but only 5.3% of all GF revenue. This amount is anticipated to grow by an average of 4.5% each year through the forecast period. The remaining $5.6 million or 41.7% of this revenue category is made up of interest, rental and miscellaneous income. NET REVENUES & EXPENSES The final step in completing the Five-Year Forecast is the comparison of the net effects of the projected revenues and expenses on the General and Streets Fund balances. Over the five-year period of this forecast, the city’s operating and capital budgets are balanced. However, due to the national economic downturn that we are experiencing the initial two years in the five-year forecast rely heavily on a combination of the use of fund balance reserves and cost reduction/cost saving measures to balance the budget. The city is well aware that use of remaining fund balance to maintain an ongoing program would significantly alter the long-range forecast and have a lasting impact on the capacity of the city to 91 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast maintain projected levels of services in a balanced budget environment. Therefore, management and Council have pledged that future incremental ongoing revenues that come to the city as we exit the economic downturn will be used to cover existing ongoing base budget needs and the replenishment of fund balances/reserves before being applied to other areas. CONCLUSION Long-range forecasting and modeling are powerful management and decision-making tools. A key objective in long-range forecasting is to estimate the future consequences of past and present decisions. The Five-Year Forecast process reminds us to lift our eyes from the road directly ahead, cast a glance in the rear-view mirror to see where we have been and take a look through the windshield into the future to assess where we are going. The current Five-Year Forecast indicates that if we continue to exercise fiscal discretion and restraint, examine carefully any projects that entail ongoing expenses, practice prudent fiscal management and remain conservative in our financial and strategic planning, we can continue to achieve the following: • • • • Accomplish City Council’s strategic goals and objectives set for the budget year; Maintain our quality of service commitments to Glendale residents in future years; Ensure the city’s capacity to meet its future growth and infrastructure needs even in times of national economic uncertainty; and Balance our annual budgets while retaining adequate contingency reserves. In order to go significantly beyond the commitments outlined earlier in this section, the city would have to increase its revenue base by adding new revenue sources or experience betterthan-anticipated economic performance, and/or decrease its operating expenses by reducing or curtailing programs and services that the city currently provides. 92 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan FINANCIAL PLAN INTRODUCTION The foundation for our FY 2011 operating and capital budgets reflects Council’s vision of ‘one community.’ That foundation is supported by additional strategic goals and key objectives, as discussed in the Mayor’s and City Manager’s budget messages, including the continuation of fiscally sound financial management practices. Glendale’s Financial Plan addresses the critical issues that must be addressed with each fiscal year’s budget, as well as the strategies that are used to sustain Council’s strategic goals while accommodating fluctuations in the economy. It is critical for a local government to respond quickly and comprehensively to changes in the political and economic environment so that city services are not compromised. The City of Glendale engages in financial planning in order to avoid curtailing basic services or delaying needed infrastructure improvements when revenue sources are adversely affected. The following discussion highlights the principal issues facing the city (operating budget constraints) and the long-term and short-term key strategies for addressing the changing economic and political environment in which we operate. OPERATING BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS Operating Revenue Considerations A city’s ability to generate additional revenue from existing sources, or create new revenue sources, is limited by social and economic conditions, state statutes, City Council policies and public sentiment. Municipal tax rates and bonding (borrowing) capacity also are limited by state law and require citizen support and/or voter approval. In addition, some revenues are legally restricted and therefore must be used for specific purposes. Examples of special-purpose revenues include public safety and transportation sales tax revenues, highway user revenue fees (HURF), water, sewer, landfill, and sanitation user fees and development impact fees. The General Fund covers costs for essential city services like police, fire, parks/recreation, library services and neighborhood preservation, as well as critical support functions like financial and budget management services, human resources and legal services. Many city departments must rely exclusively on General Fund revenues to finance their operating costs, whereas others receive a lesser amount of General Fund financial support. The city’s primary ongoing General Fund revenue sources are state-shared revenues and city sales taxes. These sources typically account for approximately two-thirds to three-fourths of the city’s ongoing General Fund revenue budget. State-shared revenues and local sales tax revenues can be sensitive to changes in national, regional and local economic conditions. When the state and local economies are healthy, state-shared and city sales tax revenues normally increase. When the economy enters a downward cycle or recessionary period, these revenue sources could decline, although that is not always the case. 93 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan State-shared revenues are comprised of state income tax and state sales tax revenues, as well as state motor vehicle licensing revenue. The state of Arizona distributes to incorporated towns and cities a portion of these state receipts based on each entity’s population in proportion to the state’s total population of incorporated areas. State-shared revenue is subject to fluctuation due to changes in the economic environment, as well as the political environment, as evidenced by prior legislative discussions to modify the amount of state-shared income tax revenue to be distributed to municipalities. For FY 2011, state-shared revenue is expected to be distributed in the same manner used for the FY 2010 distributions. For the most part, past reductions in state-shared revenue allocations have been the result of negotiations between the state and the cities. In addition, past reductions occurred with state income tax revenue that provided Glendale and other cities sufficient time to plan for the reduction. Income tax revenue distribution to the cities lags by two years. This means the state income tax receipts for FY 2011 will reflect the income tax the state collected in FY 2009 In planning for next fiscal year’s collection of state-shared revenue, Glendale took a prudent approach and assumed a decrease based on forecasts by experts on the Arizona economy, which is consistent with the national economic outlook at the time the budget was prepared. Other sources of city revenue, such as property taxes, franchise fees, and development permits and fees, are also subject to external economic and political factors. For example, property tax revenues are dependent on total assessed valuation, appreciation of existing property, and the amount and type of new construction, as well as the property tax rate approved by Glendale’s City Council. State limits on property tax rates also constrain the use of this revenue source for General Fund operations. Therefore, we took a prudent approach to projecting these other revenues for FY 2011. A more detailed discussion of these other revenue sources and the projection for FY 2011 is found in the Budget Revenue Summary section. Population Growth Arizona has experienced phenomenal growth in the past few decades. It is consistently rated in the top tier of the states experiencing the highest levels of growth in the nation. Growth in population is often accompanied by job growth, which is often a reflection of a healthy local and regional economy. A growing population tends to fuel consumer spending as homes are purchased, and consumer goods for those homes are bought. In addition, the state-shared revenues discussed in the previous section are based on a city’s population in comparison to the total population, so there is an unintended incentive to encourage population growth in order to receive more state-shared revenue. Nevertheless, growth is often a double-edged sword. Rapid and prolonged population growth places a great deal of strain on existing resources. This kind of population growth can make it difficult for the city to maintain current levels of services, repair and replace existing infrastructure as it ages and finance future growth-related needs. The city employs various financing strategies and mechanisms to equitably apportion the costs of growth among various sectors of the community, as well as among current and future Glendale residents. The financing strategies include bond financing, development impact fee assessments, and the creation of 94 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan improvement districts. These are discussed in more detail in the Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan section. Large, expensive projects like recreation facilities, libraries, water and sewer treatment facilities, and public safety facilities require a long-term commitment of resources for ongoing operating costs of these new facilities. For these kinds of projects, the city staggers the opening of them in order to adequately absorb the additional operating costs that come with their operation. Also, Glendale prefers to use conservative population estimates in its planning process to ensure the revenues needed to operate the facility are available when the project is completed. When unusual growth occurs, the city has several short-term, rapid-impact strategies it can employ to accelerate the provision of services and/or infrastructure development. Routine Operating Expenses The cost associated with many routine operating necessities, such as utilities, are continuing to rise. While Glendale has taken a proactive approach to minimizing the impact of such cost increases, some level of cost escalation is inevitable in order to maintain a high level of service for the Glendale community. In developing the FY 2011 operating budget, these routine operating cost increases were at the top of the list of items that had to be addressed before allocating funds for other purposes. Expenses related to water and sewer service for city facilities including the municipal complex, libraries, public safety buildings and park facilities have all increased. In addition, electricity and natural gas expenditures increased from $1.6M in FY 2005 to a projected $2.5M in FY 2009. About $1.1M was reallocated on an ongoing basis beginning in FY 2010 to address the rising cost of electricity and other utilities. Capital Expense Considerations Large capital improvement projects take many years to plan, finance and complete. Funds for these projects often will be needed long before the number of residents moving into the area can support the construction costs although it might be several more years before population growth is sufficient to generate the revenue needed for ongoing operating expenses. Under virtually any population growth scenario, traditional bond financing and development impact fee revenues would be hard pressed to keep up with the normal demand for new or expanded streets, storm sewers, fire stations and other facilities. To meet the need for the construction of new capital facilities, Glendale has pursued some unique partnering arrangements to cover the capital costs. For example, Glendale partnered with the cities of Avondale, Surprise, and Peoria, as well as the Maricopa County Community College District, to enhance the function and value of the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Facility that opened in FY 2007. The facility currently trains new fire recruits and both police and fire personnel conduct advanced training exercises for the protection of our growing communities. The four partner agencies signed formal, written commitments to share the costs of construction and operations. Another example of partnership in capital construction is found with the Youth Sports Field facilities just to the east of Glendale’s professional sports facilities, the University of Phoenix 95 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan Stadium and Jobing.com Arena. Both the Fiesta Bowl college football organization and the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority contributed funds to the construction of this project. Glendale also continues partnering opportunities with local school districts in the construction of parks, playgrounds and sports facilities adjacent to school facilities. Glendale also assesses development impact fees for commercial and residential construction. These fees are used to supplement property tax revenues for the construction of public safety facilities, parks and recreation facilities, libraries and other capital projects. By using this approach, the city takes steps to ensure that new developments pay their fair share for the costs associated with the city services needed to support such developments. Finally, Glendale pursues grant funds to enhance capital projects. Recent examples include state of Arizona Heritage Funds and federal Bureau of Reclamation dollars for parks, trails and open space projects. As a result of these outside grant dollars, the planned capital projects were accelerated and/or expanded to provide better facilities for the Glendale community. Administering a Sound Financial Plan If a prolonged economic downturn occurs, and annual revenues cannot support the cost of essential services and infrastructure development, the city’s options might include: • • • Increasing revenues from existing sources such as sales and property taxes or creating new taxing sources; Delaying future growth-related infrastructure development; Reducing operating expenses by cutting budgets for city services. The purpose of a financial plan is to minimize those times when a city must resort to the above alternatives, except in the most extreme circumstances. It also should include short-term financial strategies that are useful in responding to unanticipated budgetary needs of short duration, such as single-year revenue and expense anomalies, damage caused by weather emergencies, or unexpected population growth spurts. While developing the city’s financial plan, it is important to keep the following caveats in mind: • • • • It is almost impossible to pinpoint service demands and their costs for the distant future; The reliability of all predictions will decrease in direct proportion to the increase in the length of the time period involved; It is not prudent to make predictions using only a single variable, such as population growth, when other factors, such as economic conditions, play an important role in future events; and It is important to design short- and long-term strategies that are flexible enough to meet a broad range of possible outcomes. 96 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan LONG-TERM STRATEGIES Adjusting Staff Levels Although Glendale has one of the Valley’s lowest ratios of city authorized staff positions to population (7.83:1,000) personnel-related costs account for 75% of the city’s General Fund operating expenses. The adjustment of staffing levels is an ineffective method for addressing short-term budget deficits because it requires lead-time to implement effectively and it may adversely affect the city’s ability to maintain quality services. However, downsizing, when combined with other strategies, can be an effective method of dealing with prolonged economic slowdowns. The City of Glendale’s leadership team carefully reviews every new position request. When a new position is needed to provide new or expanded services, both the initial (one-time) and ongoing costs associated with providing and maintaining the service must be included with the position request. These procedures help ensure that added services and positions will be sustainable in future years. Alternatives to Permanent Staff Increases The selective use of temporary and contract workers is one of several useful alternatives to meeting predictable but time-limited workload increases without adding regular status employees. It is important to have a definitive policy that limits the length of time a position can be filled by a temporary employee. It also is important to closely monitor the time limit to ensure compliance with the policy. One example of the selective use of temporary employees deals with the staffing of polling sites during city elections. The city’s equalization strategy dictates that the predictable costs for these workers be budgeted as an ongoing operating expense spread evenly between election and nonelection years. Another example of the selective use of contract employees is the establishment of contract positions for building inspections services at the construction sites for the intense development at Westgate. These contract positions expired once the construction activity was materially complete. In some cases, contracting for outside services can be less expensive than adding permanent staff to provide selected city services. A further advantage is that it is faster and easier to vary contract amounts on a year-to-year basis than it is to manipulate permanent staffing levels and overhead costs for equipment and building space. For these reasons, Glendale has placed increasing emphasis on negotiating service contracts for areas like parks landscape maintenance, custodial cleaning of city facilities, and specialized legal work. Equalizing Predictable Expenses Two additional strategies the city uses to moderate peaks in ongoing expenses are • the spreading of routine periodic expenses over multiple budget years; and 97 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan • the pre-funding of replacement equipment such as vehicles and technology equipment (e.g., PCs, servers, etc.) through a rental rate structure that spreads the cost of the replacement over several years. As noted earlier in this discussion, the City Clerk’s Office accrues half of the next election cost in the non-election year to reduce biennial election expense peaks. This amount is carried over and added to an equal amount that is budgeted in the actual election year. Although election expenses will continue to rise as our voter population increases, this practice of dividing known costs across several years substantially levels out the expense curve for scheduled elections. As a result of this approach, the need for one-time election appropriations every two years has been eliminated, leaving only special election expenses, such as bond elections—which occur infrequently—to the one-time budgeting process. Prior to the implementation of the technology and vehicle replacement programs, the city’s ability to replace city vehicles and technological equipment cycled up and down with the local economy. In lean years, urgently needed replacement equipment was purchased at the expense of capital projects or the operating budget. Then, when economic conditions improved, the city would engage in massive “catch-up” efforts. To eliminate this problem, the replacement funds were designed to allow the city to replace outdated, or worn out equipment at regular intervals. Two replacement fund line items were added to each department’s annual operating budget to accrue funds for vehicle and technology replacements, respectively. Experience has shown that many vehicles are not replaced as originally scheduled because of low mileage or good maintenance history, and we expect that experience will continue into the future. In these cases, we extend the useful life of the vehicle. Nevertheless, we closely monitor this replacement fund to ensure that it provides sufficient funds to replace essential vehicles and equipment as needed. The technology replacement fund balance not only covers the systematic replacement of desktop computers, but also annual software licensing costs for a wide range of software used in city operations, virus and security maintenance costs, citywide data storage, database servers, and cable/video equipment and presentation systems. As is the case with the vehicle replacement fund, experience has shown that the useful life of some technology equipment can be extended and thus the fund accumulates a level of reserve funding which is used for emergency replacements and/or upgrades to existing inventory. Capital Improvement Plan Development Conservative population and revenue growth projections are used for long-range capital planning to determine when, where, and how capital projects will be implemented because most large capital construction projects permanently increase the city’s ongoing operating costs for staff, maintenance, repair, utilities, etc. For example, the operating budget impact of the Foothills Library and the Downtown Civic Center, both of which opened in the 1990s, were carefully considered prior to initiation of these projects to ensure revenue growth would cover the increased operating costs. Glendale also analyzes the long-term financial projections of debt service costs prior to every bond sale. 98 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan Major capital projects can be planned, scheduled, and financed in ways that will not deplete needed resources from the annual operating budget or require an increase in Glendale’s secondary property tax. Short-term financial strategies, such as various financing instruments or the acceleration or deceleration of project schedules, can help us meet unusual population growth or service demands. The introduction to Glendale’s 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan provides an explanation of the capital project process. Property Tax Stabilization For over a decade, Council policy has been to stabilize the property tax rate and structure at reasonable levels so that property tax revenue is sufficient to meet long-term, foreseeable revenue needs without requiring intermittent adjustments. Capital improvement projects are planned, financed and scheduled for implementation so that the secondary property tax rate can remain relatively stable over the coming decade. Arizona’s property tax levy consists of two tiers. The primary property tax levy has statemandated maximum limits, but it can be used by a city for any lawful purpose. The primary property tax revenue is included in the General Fund. However, because Glendale has minimized its use of the primary property tax levy, this revenue source is expected to be only 3% of the city’s anticipated General Fund revenues in FY 2011. The secondary property tax is an unlimited levy that can be used only to retire the principal and interest on a municipality’s General Obligation bond debt. This revenue source provides more ‘bang for the buck’ because it can be leveraged to borrow more funds to pay for capital projects. Therefore, the secondary property tax levy is optimized in relation to the primary property tax levy. Although many cities in other parts of the country use the property tax rate to make short-term operating budget adjustments, changes in Glendale’s tax structure or rates are viewed as longterm financial strategies. Arizona’s tax limitation statute, the relatively minor role of primary property tax revenue on Glendale’s operating budget, and the city’s property tax stabilization policy combine to make property tax adjustment an ineffective short-term strategic tool. As a practical matter, it might take up to a year for a property tax change to be implemented and longer to produce a significant increase in revenues. Growth in the tax base and changes in the assessed valuation rate determined by the county often have a larger impact on the level of revenues raised through property taxation. Given these facts, increasing Glendale’s property tax rate is a more appropriate alternative for addressing a chronic structural imbalance between revenues and expenses than for balancing a single year’s operating budget. For example, when the city reaches full build-out much less revenue will be generated from new tax base growth. If this decrease were not accompanied by sufficient growth in assessed valuation or offset by increases in other revenues or a reduction in operating expenses, a serious imbalance might occur that might trigger a property tax increase. 99 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan As noted above, secondary property taxes are used to repay voter-authorized General Obligation bond debt. With efficient scheduling of bond sales and capital projects, the Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan is designed to keep the secondary property tax rate level. Changes in capital construction schedules, interest rates and several other variables might necessitate a property tax rate adjustment over the longer term; however, most of these situations can be addressed by finetuning the primary tax rate and directing the flow of interest earnings on bond proceeds between construction and debt service funds. While Glendale’s total property tax rate remained unchanged at $1.72 per $100 of assessed valuation from FY 2001 to FY 2007, the city adjusted the two components of the overall property tax rate. Specifically, the city continued to lower the primary property tax rate and increase the secondary property tax rate so that all assessed valuation growth due to appreciation (versus new construction) is shifted to the secondary property tax rate. By doing so, the city remained in compliance with the state’s Truth in Taxation law. In FY 2007, Glendale received approximately $23.1 million in property tax revenue from the $1.72 total property tax rate. The primary property tax amount totaled approximately $3.7 million and the remaining $19.4 million came from the secondary rate. The combined property tax rate for FY 2009 was lowered to $1.5951 per $100 of assessed valuation. It generated $4.0 million from the primary property tax rate and $28.9 million from the secondary property tax rate. The property tax rate will remain unchanged in FY 2011 at $1.5951. The rate is expected to generate a total of $27.8 million, $3.8 million from the primary property tax and $24.0 million from the secondary property tax. The graph at the right shows a 10-year history of both the primary and secondary property tax rate assessed by the City of Glendale. Property Tax Rates 10-Year Fiscal History (Per $100 of Assessed Valuation) $2.0000 $1.7500 $1.5000 $1.2500 $1.0000 $0.7500 $0.5000 $0.2500 $0.0000 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 Primary 100 Return to TOC '07 '08 Secondary '09 '10 '11 FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES The following short-term financial strategies play an important role in: (1) maintaining the delicate year-to-year equilibrium between revenues and expenses; (2) responding to temporary changes in economic conditions; and/or (3) absorbing or avoiding anticipated revenue shortfalls. Sales Tax Stabilization Sales tax revenues fluctuate and are subject to sudden economic changes like a sudden downturn in the economy, as occurred after September 11, 2001. Prior to FY 2004, Glendale’s stabilization policy required the use of the actual amount of sales tax revenue collected in the prior twelve months as its sales tax revenue base estimate for developing the next year’s operating budget, with no growth rate factor for budgeting purposes. This conservative approach to estimating sales tax revenue minimized the likelihood that annual budgeted operating expenses would significantly exceed actual sales tax revenues in any given year. In fact, actual receipts usually were higher than the prior year because tax revenue increases were attributable to growth in the tax base (i.e. population growth). When actual receipts exceeded the base estimate, excess revenue was applied to the operating capital budget or used to increase the city’s GF fund balance. For the FY 2004 budget, a different approach was taken to establishing the FY 2004 revenue budget for city sales tax receipts. The FY 2004 revenue budget for city sales taxes included a full year of estimated sales tax receipts from new development that was expected to open by the start of FY 2004 or shortly after the start of the fiscal year. This approach was taken to avoid severely impacting service levels as a result of sluggish growth in state shared revenues. For the FY 2005 - FY 2008 budgets, this approach was further modified because this revenue source had performed so strongly in recent years, as shown in the chart below. Fiscal Year City Sales Tax Receipts Percent Change From Prior FY 2001-02 $41.4M -- 2002-03 $43.5 M 5.1% 2003-04 $49.8 M 14.5% 2004-05 $52.5 M 5.4% 2005-06 $59.7 M 13.7% 2006-07 $63.6 M 6.5% 2007-08 $61.3M (3.6%) 2008-09 $51.6 M (15.8%) 2009-10 Est. $49.2 M (4.7%) 2010-11 Proj. $50.5 M 2.6% 101 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan The average annual growth rate for city sales tax collections was 7% between FY 2002 and FY 2008. However, FY 2009 collections dropped 15.8% as the national economy hit a severe downturn. FY 2010 is expected to decline by another 4.7%. For FY 2011 this revenue source is expected to increase slightly. Operating Capital Management Operating capital is often referred to as "pay-as-you-go" capital because projects and equipment in this category are funded directly from operating revenues. Operating capital is used to pay for • • • building maintenance and replacement items such as air conditioners, roofing, and floor furnishings, specialized equipment not in the vehicle replacement program, such as sanitation trucks and street resurfacing vehicles, and selected routine infrastructure maintenance activities such as the street resurfacing program. In addition, the initial purchase of a vehicle is funded with operating capital. For example, if a new inspector position is approved for the Building Safety Department, that inspector will need a vehicle. The initial purchase of the new vehicle for the new inspector position is funded with operating capital because it is an addition to the city’s fleet (versus a replacement). Subsequent replacement of that vehicle is then funded through the vehicle replacement program. U U Unlike personnel costs, it is relatively fast and easy to make adjustments to operating equipment budgets without reducing the city’s service capacity or quality. Adjustments to the rate at which operating capital is spent can function as an effective short-term shock absorber to level out temporary revenue fluctuations. Glendale residents will not be materially affected if city fleet vehicle replacements are delayed or accelerated in a single budget year, as long as the replacement program continues and repair and maintenance costs for these vehicles are not unreasonable. For example, delaying a portion of the street resurfacing program in one year does not have major negative consequences if the program is accelerated in the following year. An ongoing, stable revenue source is much less critical for operating capital than it is for maintaining service levels for police, fire and emergency services. It is important to keep in mind that maintaining adequate operating capital levels and adjusting the rate of capital spending minimizes the need to reduce the operating budget or deplete other fund resources. When possible, operating capital budgets are restored before any new programs or employees are added to the ongoing budget. Building and Maintaining Adequate Contingency Reserves By law, Arizona cities are required to prepare and operate under a City Council-approved balanced budget that must be filed annually with the state’s Auditor General. City government is prohibited from spending more than the total amount appropriated in its annual budget document. This limitation raises several interesting questions about how the city can successfully maintain an annually balanced budget in years when General Fund revenue deficits or surpluses occur. 102 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan General Fund revenue surpluses accrued in one year can be reserved and used to offset revenue deficits that might occur in a subsequent year. The accounting mechanism Glendale uses to reserve General Fund surplus revenues is referred to as the General Fund contingency reserve, which is part of the General Fund’s fund balance. Every fiscal year, the contingency reserve is established as a General Fund contingency appropriation. A similar contingency appropriation is established each year for other city funds like the enterprise operations (e.g., sanitation fund and landfill fund). This mechanism enables the city to meet the legal constraints of a balanced annual budget and provides a source to address emergencies and other unanticipated expenses. Like operating capital, contingency reserves can function as a financial shock absorber to smooth out short-term revenue and expense fluctuations. When sluggish economic conditions result in lower-than-projected revenues, a portion of contingency dollars can be allocated to cover budgeted operating expenses. When the economy is healthy, and revenues are higher than predicted for annual budgeting purposes, the excess revenues can be added to the contingency reserves for future use. City Council policies discourage the routine use of contingency reserves to support long-term or ongoing expenses in the operating budget. The City’s financial policy requires the city’s contingency appropriation be equal to 10% of General Fund revenues. The policy prohibits the contingency appropriation falling below 4% for any reason. If reserves are used for one-time projects, restoring them becomes the highest budgeting priority after assuring that adequate operating funds are available to support essential services and infrastructure needs. The sales tax stabilization strategy produces a domino-like effect that supports the city’s ability to maintain adequate contingency reserves during times of high revenue growth. Conservative revenue estimates result in conservative annual budget estimates. Conservative budget estimates limit growth in non-essential operations, and this practice permits a portion of the excess sales tax revenue to be allocated to contingency reserves. These reserves can offset drops in other revenue tax sources, such as building permits, or augment sales tax revenue when unpredictable downturns occur. Once reserves reach the 10% of revenues target level, any further amounts are usually added to the operating capital budget. Fund-related financial information is summarized in Schedule One, which is entitled Fund Balance Analysis. Detailed descriptions of each fund in Glendale’s financial system, including the General Fund, enterprise funds and special revenue funds, are contained in the Budget Summary section of this document. CONCLUSION During the economic downturn that began in late 2001 and continued through early 2003, Glendale employed some of the short-term strategies outlined in the previous sections. By FY 2006, it was clear that the economy had rebounded. The record setting growth that we experienced during this time ended during FY 2008. In order to deal with this most recent slowdown in the economy, we have continued to follow many of the cost-saving measures that were implemented in FY 2003, including 103 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan • • • • No transfers of salary savings to operating budgets except in very limited instances. Non public-safety staffing positions are reviewed by upper management to make sure they still are serving current business needs and demands as they become vacant before the recruitment process actually begins for those positions. No unbudgeted carryover savings – all carryover will be returned to the General Fund Capital projects are reviewed for all operating and maintenance costs impacting the General Fund These strategies, coupled with prudent budgeting practices, allowed Glendale to deal with the recent economic downturn without severely hampering current services and programs. Continuation of these strategies will see us through the future. 104 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Policies FINANCIAL POLICIES The financial policies establish the framework for overall fiscal planning and management and set forth guidelines for both current activities and long-range planning. These policies are reviewed annually to ensure the highest standards of fiscal management. The City Manager and the leadership team have the primary role of reviewing financial actions and providing guidance on financial issues to the City Council. OVERALL GOALS The overall financial goals underlying these policies are: 1. Fiscal Conservatism: To ensure that the city is in a solid financial condition at all times. This can be defined as: A. Cash Solvency - the ability to pay existing bills B. Budgetary Solvency - the ability to balance the budget (all operating, capital and debt service expenditures should be covered by the appropriate revenue sources and meet all statutory requirements prior to the beginning of the year) C. Long Run Solvency - the ability to pay future bills D. Service Level Solvency - the ability to provide needed and desired services 2. Flexibility: To ensure that the city is in a position to respond to changes in the economy or new service challenges without an undue amount of financial stress. 3. Adherence to the Highest Accounting and Management Practices: To comply with the Government Finance Officers' Association (GFOA) standards for financial reporting and budgeting, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board and other professional standards. OPERATING BUDGET 1. Ongoing operating costs should be supported by ongoing, stable revenue sources. This protects the city from fluctuating service levels and avoids crises when one-time revenues are reduced or removed. Some corollaries to this policy are: A. Fund balance should be used only for one-time expenditures, such as capital equipment and building improvements, or contingency appropriations and related purposes. B. Ongoing maintenance costs such as vehicle repair and maintenance, building maintenance, and swimming pool replastering should be financed through operating revenues, rather than through the issuance of debt. C. Fluctuating federal and state grants should not be used to fund ongoing programs. 2. Revenues from growth or development should be targeted to costs related to development, or invested in improvements that will benefit future residents or make future 105 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Policies service provision efficient. While it is tempting to use growth-related revenue to support current operations, doing so can lead to a crisis when the growth rate decreases. This policy implies a commitment to identifying the portions of the city's revenue stream that result from growth. 3. General Fund appropriations, including sales tax funds, should include a contingency appropriation equal to at least 10% of projected revenues for the upcoming fiscal year. This contingency appropriation essentially serves as the City’s revenue stabilization account (i.e., rainy day account). As such, it can help to minimize the impact of prolonged fluctuations in sales tax revenues, which is the revenue source most sensitive to changes in the economy. It also can be used to mitigate the negative effects of unforeseeable and unexpected financial situations. 4. Enterprise Funds should include a sufficient unappropriated fund balance to absorb fluctuations in annual revenue. Enterprise funds should also be charged directly for overhead services whenever possible, rather than using an indirect cost allocation. These services include expenses related to employee fringe benefits, risk management and workers compensation insurance costs, telephone charges, and technology and vehicle replacement charges. Provisions should also be made for interdepartmental charges for services such as solid waste collection and disposal, as well as vehicle maintenance and repair. 5. Replacement of vehicles and technological equipment will be done through the Vehicle Replacement and Technology Replacement Funds. A rental rate structure will be established annually to provide sufficient funds for replacement of covered equipment. New equipment added to the existing fleet should be paid initially with operating capital by the requesting department. In addition, a corresponding rental rate payment for the new equipment should be included within the requesting department’s operating budget on an ongoing basis. The Field Operations Department should review all vehicle-related purchases and the Information Technology Department all technology related purchases. 6. A financial forecasting model should be maintained to test the ability of the city to absorb operating costs due to capital improvements, and to react to changes in the economy or service demands. This forecast should cover at least five years and be updated annually. 7. Salary policy and structure should emphasize the provision of predictable salary increases, sustainable over time, that serve to recognize and reward the contributions of experienced and well-trained staff. To this end, the merit pay policy provides for merit increases of up to 6% annually to qualified employees based on the city's ability to pay. To reflect increases related to market pay range adjustments and inflation, Council sets a target that is based on a Human Resources market survey of other Valley cities and therefore will vary depending on whether the majority of city job classifications are below market, at market or above market. 8. Laws and policies related to limitations on revenue sources should be explicitly addressed in the budget process. These include: 106 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Policies A. One-third of annual Local Transportation Assistance Funds (LTAF) must be devoted to transit (Regional Public Transportation Authority). B. No more than one-half of the prior year's Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) can be used for debt service (A.R.S. 48-689). C. The city must maintain its level of General Fund support in street maintenance and operations, as provided by state law. 9. Debt Management A. Short-term borrowing or lease/purchase contracts should be considered for financing major operating capital equipment when the Finance and Management & Budget Directors, along with the city's financial advisors, determines that this is in the city's best financial interest. Lease/purchase decisions should have the concurrence of the appropriate operating manager. B. Short-term debt should not exceed 5% of revenue or 20% of total debt. The short-term debt for the city is documented in Schedule 8 of this budget book. C. Long-term debt. The City will maintain a secondary property tax rate to support existing and future property tax supported debt. The City should maintain a general obligation debt service fund balance of at least 10% of next year's property tax supported debt service. The long-term debt for the city is documented in Schedule 7 of this budget book. 10. Budget Amendment Policies A. Total fund appropriation changes must be approved by the City Council. These amendments must also comply with the city's Alternative Expenditure Limitation. In order to provide flexibility, 10% of the total General Fund revenue budget for the upcoming fiscal year should be set aside as a contingency appropriation as long as this contingency is backed by available fund balances. B. Uses of contingency appropriations must be specifically approved by the City Council. C. Shifts in appropriations within fund totals may be done administratively on the authority of the City Manager. In most cases the City Manager will request City Council concurrence with these changes since the item prompting the change will usually go to the City Council (e.g., award of contract, addition of staff, contract change order). Procedures for appropriations transfers and delegation of budget responsibility will be set by the City Manager. Inter-fund transfers must be specifically approved by City Council. Any inter-fund transfer that was not approved by City Council during the fiscal year (e.g., council communication for award of contract, contract change order) shall be included on the fiscal year end Clean-Up Ordinance to be approved by City Council. 107 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Policies D. Salary savings transfers must be approved by the city manager and are prohibited during the first 6 months of any given fiscal year. However, in the event of an extenuating circumstance, the city manager may override this policy and authorize a salary savings transfer during the first 6 months of the fiscal year. 11. A Budgetary Control System will be maintained to ensure compliance with the adopted budget. Quarterly budget status reports will be presented to, and reviewed by the City Council to ensure that the city finances are on track with the adopted budget. 12. Revenue Policies A. Diversified and stable revenues will be maintained to ensure fiscal health and absorb short-run fluctuations in any one revenue source. B. User fees for all operations will be examined annually to ensure that fees cover direct and indirect costs of service. Rate adjustments for enterprise operations will be based on five-year enterprise fund plans and/or other comprehensive rate studies. C. Development fees for one-time capital expenses attributable to new development will be reviewed periodically to ensure that fees match development-related expenses. CAPITAL BUDGET 1. A long-range capital improvement plan should be prepared and updated each year. The first five years of the 10-year plan should identify projects that can be completed with identified funding sources, with only the first year of the plan actually appropriated. This 10-year plan may include unfunded projects in the last five years of the plan as placeholders that carry out the city's long-term strategic and general plans. All projects are assessed annually regarding their necessity, priority, compatibility with Council goals, long-range plans of various departments and the City’s financing capabilities. 2. When planning capital projects, each department must estimate the associated impact on the city's operating budget. Examples include any associated staffing, utilities, water, landscape, building and equipment maintenance, computer/vehicle ongoing replacement, insurance costs, etc. 3. Amendments to capital appropriations fall under the same guidelines as changes to the operating budget noted above, with one exception: any project change exceeding $50,000 should receive specific City Council approval. This approval may accompany a recommendation for award of contract, change order or other City Council action. While this approval is not a strict legal requirement, it keeps the City Council informed on capital project activity and funding, and ensures that revisions of project priorities and scope of a project are in line with Council expectations. 108 Return to TOC Operating Budget 2010-2011 City of Glendale Municipal Building APPOINTED & ELECTED OFFICIALS Office of the Mayor Council Office City Attorney City Clerk City Court Council Chambers in Downtown City of Glendale Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL The Mayor and City Council constitute the elected legislative and policy making body of the city. The Mayor is elected at-large every four years. Council members also are elected to fouryear terms from one of six electoral districts in Glendale. One of the highest priorities of the Mayor and Council is to involve the public in their decision making process. They regularly appoint citizens to 18 advisory boards and commissions and often form public committees to address specific citywide issues. The Mayor and Council each become involved in the support and economic development of Glendale’s six districts. The Mayor hosts numerous community events throughout the year. Councilmembers host meetings in their districts or meet with small groups of citizens throughout the year to resolve local issues. These meetings ensure citizens are informed on projects in and around their homes and businesses and give the Mayor and Council input and feedback from their constituents. The Mayor and Council also communicate with citizens through electronic media such as Web sites, electronic bulletins and programming on Glendale 11, the city’s cable station. City staff that support the Mayor and Council work closely with constituents to resolve any issues or questions they have about city programs and services. The Mayor and City Council determines strategic goals that guide the future vision and policy direction for the city. City Council Strategic Goals Our Vision for Glendale: “One Community” • • • • • • • One Community With Strong Neighborhoods One Community Committed To Public Safety One Community With Quality Economic Development One Community With A Vibrant City Center One Community With An Active Partnership With Luke Air Force Base One Community With High Quality Services For Citizens One Community That Is Fiscally Sound 109 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council Accomplishments Strong Neighborhoods • Engaged citizens by hosting community events such as Community Conversations with Mayor Scruggs, Council District meetings, Legislative Link meetings and special district events. • Recognized neighborhood leaders, community volunteers and businesses that have contributed to their community and improved the quality of the city’s neighborhoods with Glendale’s annual Spark Awards. • Allocated $1.5 million of the city’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds to help finance homebuyer activities through down payment and closing cost assistance to those interested in purchasing a foreclosed home in Glendale neighborhoods hardest hit by residential foreclosures. • Made pedestrian lighting and sidewalk enhancements in the historic Floralcroft neighborhood. Improvements were paid for by $240,000 in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. • Continued to support Glendale’s 202 registered neighborhoods and HOAs. Public Safety • Opened a new location for fire station 151 at 6851 N. 52nd Avenue. This station replaced Glendale’s oldest active station built in 1969. • Received re-accreditation for the Glendale Police Department from the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. • Supported the Glendale Police and Fire Departments in their community education and prevention efforts. Departments held dozens of community events covering identity theft prevention, children’s safety, auto theft prevention, fire prevention, hands only CPR and personal safety. • Received a federal appropriation of $1 million dollars to replace outdated dispatch and record management operating systems for the Glendale Police Department. • Received a national award for innovation from the National Association of Volunteer Programs in Local Government for the Fire Department’s Crisis Response Program. • Received a $400,000 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) grant from the Department of Justice. Held a Statewide DV Training Summit at the Glendale Civic Center featuring nationally recognized speakers and local/state experts on domestic violence. Quality Economic Development • Continued to bring high profile events, such as the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl, WrestleMania XXVI and top concerts to Glendale’s Sports and Entertainment District. • Chosen by DeVry University as its fourth Arizona location, occupying approximately 18,000 square feet, bringing dozens of new professional jobs to the city. • Improved health and medical industry presence in the city with the addition of Humana’s new mail-order pharmacy facility, Advanced Healthcare of Glendale’s new location, and the expansion of Midwestern University’s Glendale Campus. 110 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council • • • Voted to support a bid to host Super Bowl XLVIII. In 2008, the Super Bowl generated a record $500 million to the economy and attracted 100,000 visitors to our state. Recognized by Arizona Commercial Real Estate Magazine, earning an honorable mention for best public project in Arizona for Camelback Ranch Glendale. The facility received the Ballpark Digest Editors Choice awards in 2009 as well. Offered a one-time city sales tax amnesty program to assist business owners during challenging economic times. A Vibrant City Center • Received ARRA funds to finance an alleyway/pedestrian improvement project near downtown Glendale’s oldest businesses. • Supported Glendale’s signature special events which draw 500,000 people per year to the downtown. • Invited residents, business owners and others to learn about the latest plans for Glendale’s Centerline Project at a Community Open House. An Active Partnership with Luke Air Force Base • Continued to administer the state and federal consulting/lobbying contract for the West Valley Partners, a group of 13 West Valley communities. • Partnered to secure a $1.7 million federal appropriation for the Barry M. Goldwater Range, which brings the three-year appropriation total to nearly $12 million. • The city kicked-off a statewide “Luke Forward” campaign to bring the new F-35 joint strike fighter mission to Luke Air Force Base. Mayor Scruggs announced the campaign with Governor Jan Brewer and numerous West Valley elected leaders. In just under six months nearly 20,000 supporters registered on LukeForward.com and over $23,000 has been raised to privately underwrite the initiative. • Worked with Fighter Country Partnership to engage the public in the first phase of the F35 Environmental Impact Study process. As a result, Luke’s EIS meetings posted a record for the number of written citizen comments submitted in support of the F-35 mission at Luke. • Mayor Scruggs led a GPEC delegation to Washington DC to lobby for congressional and Pentagon support for bringing the F-35 mission to Luke AFB. The 60 person delegation included Governor Jan Brewer, Attorney General Terry Goddard, 7 Arizona mayors and numerous top business leaders. High Quality Services for Citizens • • Formed the Glendale City Council Sustainability Committee to research, conduct outreach, discuss, analyze and recommend a unifying course of action entailing three core areas of environmental responsibility, social responsibility and economic responsibility. Earned national agency accreditation from the Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA) for the Glendale Parks and Recreation Department, the 80th agency in the country and internationally to have this accreditation. 111 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council • • • • • • • Continued GO Transportation program efforts which have resulted in expanded transit services, enhanced traffic flow and safety on Glendale streets and at intersections, as well as further development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities throughout the city. Implemented a new utility billing system that will feature upgraded enhancements, including more online services, to customers. Opened a new ramada complex at Glendale’s Western Area Regional Park. Won a WESTMARC Best of the West award for the Grand Canal Linear Park and Trail. Sought public input through the first public workshop and a citizen survey to begin the process of updating the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Awarded $35,500 in Performing Arts Grants supporting 11 performing arts projects throughout Glendale. Implemented new online and on demand video library on the city’s website – a new alternative for residents without cable access to watch Glendale 11 programming. Fiscally Sound • Approved the budget planning and implementation process, closing a $14 million budget shortfall caused by the widespread economic downturn. Measures included employee furloughs with commensurate pay reductions, hiring freezes, realignment and reorganization, evaluation of business practices, implementation of cost saving ideas and departmental budget reductions. Citizen participation was a key element in the process. • Earned an Aa2 rating from Moody's Investors Service and an AA rating from Standard and Poor’s, the industry leaders in credit ratings and financial reporting, strong bond ratings in this challenging economic climate. • Supported citywide efforts to get an accurate count on the 2010 Census; data collected is used to distribute more than $400 billion in federal funds each year and to make decisions about what community services to provide. • Voted to purchase the remainder of Glendale’s lease on the youth sports complex near the University of Phoenix Stadium saving the city $4.5 million, and lowering the total cost to $11.5 million. • Recognized Glendale’s 1,400 volunteers who provide service to the city in the amount of more than $2.5 million. Interesting Facts • The city of Glendale received an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) in the amount of $2.32 million, to implement new energy-efficient lighting and other projects in city facilities and create an education campaign for residents. • Throughout the year the city of Glendale honored its centennial, June 18, 2010, with a variety of projects, events and activities. • The city of Glendale was named by AARP to its 2009 list of Best Employers for Workers Over 50. The city joined an impressive list of 50 honorees around the country and is the only city organization nationwide that has made the list. 112 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council • • • Nineteen nonprofit agencies that provide essential services to Glendale’s most vulnerable children, families and elderly residents received $224,500 in grants from money donated through Glendale’s From The Heart program. The Glendale Civic Center ranked No. 4 in Ranking Arizona’s “The Best of Arizona Business 2010” and received the “Brides Choice Award” for 2010. The Myrtle Avenue cultural entryway at Grand Avenue, The Circles of Time by Howard Meehan was recognized with the 2009 Year in Review Award at the Americans for the Arts Convention. 113 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Mayor FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual (1000) Office of the Mayor Total - Mayor BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $343,218 $361,551 $361,551 $334,216 -8% $343,218 $361,551 $361,551 $334,216 -8% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $312,295 $23,389 $321,540 $41,920 $321,540 $41,920 $323,181 $18,087 Internal Premiums $4,168 $3,399 $3,399 $3,512 3% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $3,366 $3,319 ($8,627) $3,319 ($8,627) $3,076 ($13,640) -7% 58% $334,216 -8% Total - Mayor STAFFING BY PROGRAM Office of the Mayor Total -Mayor $343,218 $361,551 $361,551 1% -57% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 4 4 4 4 0% 4 4 4 4 0% 114 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Council Office FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Barrel District (1000) Cactus District (1000) Cholla District FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $85,099 $75,518 $99,063 $98,830 $82,053 $92,093 FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $69,187 $94,377 -30% -5% $70,398 $104,436 $112,574 $74,685 -28% (1000) Council Office (1000) Ocotillo District $542,379 $92,456 $529,246 $98,084 $529,246 $76,508 $445,694 $92,131 -16% -6% (1000) Sahuaro District $80,046 $99,106 $74,390 $76,829 -22% (1000) Yucca District $91,123 $98,966 $83,966 $69,352 -30% $1,037,019 $1,127,731 $1,050,830 $922,255 -18% Total - Council Office BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $794,704 $813,526 $813,526 $745,504 -8% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $205,859 $16,664 $309,166 $12,446 $232,265 $12,446 $174,969 $14,858 -43% 19% $11,309 $11,494 $11,494 $10,322 -10% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital Work Order Credits $8,483 ($18,901) Total - Council Office $1,037,019 $1,127,731 ($18,901) $1,050,830 ($23,398) 24% $922,255 -18% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Barrel District Cactus District 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0% 0% Cholla District 1 1 1 1 0% Council Office Ocotillo District 7 1 7 1 7 1 6 1 -14% 0% Sahuaro District 1 1 1 1 0% Yucca District 1 1 1 1 0% 13 13 13 12 -8% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Total -Council Office 115 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Attorney's Office CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Craig Tindall Department Description: The City Attorney’s Office is the city’s in-house legal department. The civil division attorneys and staff provide legal advice and guidance related to city governance, operations and transactions. The criminal division of the City Attorney’s Office handles prosecution of city code violations and misdemeanor violations of state law within Glendale, as well as all appeals from City Court to Superior Court. Interesting Department Fact: In 1964, the Maricopa County Bar Association established the Lawyer Referral Service. They handle over 100,000 calls every year from people seeking legal advice. For more information, please call (602) 257-4434. Mission Statement: Provide the highest level of legal services to the city and its officials by adhering to professional standards, garnering strong understanding of city operations and incorporating all relevant information into the legal advice and guidance provided. To serve the people of Arizona by prosecuting violations of the city code and misdemeanor violations of state law in an ethical manner in order to assure that justice is done. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Provide high-quality, professional and timely legal services to the Mayor, City Council and city staff. One community with high quality services for citizens. Continue to provide excellent legal and procedural guidance to City Council and administrative bodies as needed for city operations. Develop strong relationships with departments and attend 100% of the meetings or hearings as needed or requested. Serve the people of Arizona by assuring the consistent and ethical application of criminal justice. One community committed to public safety. Continue to aggressively prosecute city code and state law misdemeanor violations. Obtain 80% conviction rate or plea agreements on misdemeanor charges. When appropriate, facilitate resolution of cases by mediation and successful completion of diversion programs. 116 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Attorney's Office FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Continue to utilize the case management system for the City Prosecutor’s Office along with using law student interns. Accomplishments: • Continued to represent the city in litigation brought by third parties. • Vigorously prosecuted all city code violations and misdemeanor violations of state law that are supported by probable cause and ensure that justice is served. GOAL UPDATES Goal Provide high quality, professional and timely legal services to the Mayor, City Council and city staff. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Attend 100% of the meetings/hearings as needed or requested. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges Serve the people of Arizona by assuring the consistent and ethical application of criminal justice. One community committed to public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Obtain 85% conviction rate or plea agreements on misdemeanor What were the Performance Measures? charges. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Implementation of the case management system for the City Prosecutor’s Office during the past year addresses the need to effectively provide the highest level of service by leveraging technology to maximize the city’s resources. Accomplishments: • Continued to represent the city in litigation brought by third parties. • Vigorously prosecuted all city code violations and misdemeanor violations of state law that are supported by probable cause and ensure that justice is served. 117 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Attorney's Office GOAL UPDATES Goal Provide high quality, professional and timely legal services to the Mayor, City Council and city staff. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Attend 100% of the meetings/hearings as needed or requested. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges Serve the people of Arizona by assuring the consistent and ethical application of criminal justice. One community focused on public safety for citizens and visitors. Related Council Goal Continue to aggressively prosecute City Code and state law Was the goal met? misdemeanor violations. Obtain 80% conviction rate including verdicts and plea What were the Performance Measures? agreements on misdemeanor charges. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 118 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department City Attorney FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Attorney-Spec Proj Fees/Costs (1000) City Attorney FY 2009 Actual $1,267,693 $2,434,219 (1000) Outside Legal Fees Total - City Attorney BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $0 $2,443,546 $2,400,000 $2,443,546 FY 2011 Budget $0 $2,339,684 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 NA $2,443,546 $4,843,546 $2,839,684 16% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $2,314,775 $2,474,741 $2,474,741 $2,290,892 Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $1,341,179 $38,248 $127,403 $34,878 $2,527,403 $34,878 $628,336 $32,802 Internal Service Charges $7,710 Work Order Credits $7,197 ($200,673) STAFFING BY PROGRAM City Attorney Total -City Attorney NA -4% $3,701,912 Wages/Salaries/Benefits Total - City Attorney Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $3,701,912 $2,443,546 $7,197 ($200,673) $4,843,546 $8,340 ($120,686) $2,839,684 Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -7% 393% -6% 16% -40% 16% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 28 28 28 26 -7% 28 28 28 26 -7% 119 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure City Clerk's Department CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Pam Hanna Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The City Clerk's Department is responsible for: The first official seal for the city of preserving permanent documents and retaining Glendale was adopted in 1910 and other public documents as required by state statute; featured a sugar beet. coordinating citywide records management and training; improving the retention and access to public records through technology; conducting municipal elections and receiving campaign finance filings; preparing and maintaining the official record of City Council meetings; coordinating the publishing and posting of the city’s public notices; digitally recording official documents and codifying ordinances to be included in the Municipal Code and accessible through enhanced multimedia options. Mission Statement: To constantly maintain superior service to the citizens, elected officials and staff by providing an accurate and current legislative record including the City Code Book; a comprehensive and accessible records management system; a responsible and effective public notification program; an impartial and efficient municipal election and campaign finance process and other public services such as processing public record requests, recording documents, preparing City Council minutes and retaining permanent city records. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Plan and initiate voter outreach events. One community with high quality services for citizens. Plan and initiate voter outreach events at city libraries, community centers, colleges and universities prior to the Primary Election on August 24, 2010. Emphasis will be placed on the importance of participating in local elections. Voter registration and permanent early voter forms will be distributed before the election on August 24, 2010. Plan and conduct records management classes for the organization. One community with high quality services for citizens. 120 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Clerk's Department Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) One class with two distinct record management modules will be completed each fiscal year. Record Control Officers for every city department attend to learn new and updated information regarding record management and maintaining legal compliance with applicable laws. Information presented will be available on the intranet page for future reference. Minimum of one class with two modules will be completed each fiscal year. Information presented in the classes will be placed on the intranet page within 10 days of the class. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Scanned closed court case files to reduce offsite storage fees. Accomplishments: • City Court scanning project resulted in over 8,000 case files being available through scanning software. • Voter outreach was conducted at 11 different sites including libraries, colleges, universities, shopping centers and city community centers. Voters were given information about registering, changing addresses and signing up for the permanent early voter list. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Per Arizona State record schedules, reduce the volume of records maintained on servers and drives; recapture storage space to extend the life of servers and postpone additional server and hard drive purchases. Limit purge of records to records retained past the retention period and duplicate records. One community with high quality services for citizens. The City Clerk’s Department as a pilot project, created a step-bystep purging process for electronic files. Documentation was created and forwarded to the Information Technology Department Was the goal met? outlining the process used and issues identified. Deleted 1,600 files, 55 folders, and 1 KB of memory. 30% reduction in organizational electronic records stored on city What were the Performance Measures? servers and hard drives. Determining the value of electronic records when located in more Obstacles/Challenges than one searchable area. 121 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Clerk's Department Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? The City Clerk Department will plan and conduct organizational records management training in various subject modules. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, two classes were offered on January 20, 2010. Topics included records management, retention, purging and using scanning and retention software. Information was posted on the city’s intranet site to inform departments of the services, training and information available from the City Clerk department. What were the A minimum of two classes offered annually. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Organizational purge of electronic records per Arizona State Statute retention schedule. Accomplishments: • Successfully completed request for information process for the purchase of an organizational electronic management system. • Successfully completed bid process for city’s legal advertising. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Convert paper based municipal records to electronic media. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, a successful electronic record management system was established in the Building Safety Department. Independent department preparation, indexing and scanning of What were the Performance Measures? building permits. Tri-folded building permits make preparation time consuming. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Conduct a September 2008 primary election and, if necessary, a November 2008 general election. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, successfully planned and conducted the 2008 primary election. What were the Met all legal requirements. Performance Measures? Various changes in election laws and processes. Obstacles/Challenges 122 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department City Clerk FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) City Clerk (1000) Elections (1000) Records Management Total - City Clerk BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $396,742 $60,354 $392,796 $108,819 $392,796 $2,237 $397,551 $137,723 1% 27% $185,963 $169,853 $169,853 $140,727 -17% $643,059 $671,468 $564,886 $676,001 1% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $486,506 $477,445 $477,445 $492,954 3% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $134,430 $17,870 $193,223 $13,700 $86,641 $13,700 $194,196 $10,862 1% -21% Internal Service Charges $4,253 Work Order Credits Total - City Clerk $643,059 $4,264 $4,264 $3,427 -20% ($17,164) ($17,164) ($25,438) 48% $671,468 $564,886 $676,001 1% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget City Clerk 4 4 4 4 0% Records Management 2 2 2 2 0% 6 6 6 6 0% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Total -City Clerk 123 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court CITY COURT Judge Finn Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: Glendale City Court adjudicates criminal Glendale City Court operates jail misdemeanors, city code violations, traffic court seven days per week, 365 days violations and certain juvenile offenses committed per year. in the city of Glendale. In cases of domestic violence and harassment, the court issues protective orders. In felony matters, the court has the authority to issue search warrants. Mission Statement: To provide a forum for prompt, fair and just resolution of cases in a professional, efficient and courteous manner. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Increase defendant compliance rates with court financial obligations. One community that is fiscally sound. Implement new fine collection strategies to increase defendant compliance. Fewer failure to pay warrants issued and increased collections of fines. Increase the operational efficiency of jail court services and reduce jail court costs. One community committed to public safety. One community that is fiscally sound. Convene a multi-departmental jail efficiencies workgroup to identify processes for reducing jail costs while preserving public safety. Reduced jail court operational costs for the city of Glendale. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Glendale City Court is collaborating with the Police Department to recruit a fulltime, 124 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court grant funded Protective Order Service Coordinator. This unique position will work with five other area courts and their police agencies to increase the rates of successful protective order service in the West Valley, thus enhancing the safety and wellbeing of domestic violence victims. The Protective Order Service Coordinator is one of several domestic violence services and program enhancements funded by a $400,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice. Accomplishments: • Glendale’s Treatment Court for DUI and domestic violence defendants recorded its 4,200th program graduate this year. For six years, this specialized court has insured offender accountability through frequent judicial status hearings and close monitoring of counseling and other sentencing conditions. Noncompliant participants receive swift consequences such as additional jail time or community restitution. Treatment Court is a past recipient of the Arizona Supreme Court’s “Justice for a Better Arizona” achievement award. • The Court has expanded its community restitution program to include projects with the city’s Community Partnerships Department and the Housing Assistance Program. Community restitution projects to aid nonprofit agencies are a common sanction imposed on noncompliant Treatment Court participants. These defendants are now performing landscaping, painting, alley cleanup and other services at public housing sites, in addition to community restitution projects at several nonprofit agencies in Glendale. During FY 2010 more than 600 community restitution project orders were issued in Treatment Court that will help to improve the quality of life in Glendale’s neighborhoods. GOAL UPDATES Achieve full compliance to the Arizona Supreme Court’s DUI case processing plan. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal This goal was met as it pertained to resolving active DUI cases Was the goal met? within 180 days of filing. During the first quarter of FY 2010, Glendale City Court resolved 80% of its active DUI cases within 120 days and 91% of its active DUI cases within 180 days. During the second quarter, the Court resolved 81% of its active DUI cases within 120 days and 92% of its active DUI cases within 180 days. A Caseflow Management Committee comprised of city judges, the city prosecutor, a public What were the defender, police representatives and court qdministration is Performance Measures? chaired by the deputy court administrator. The Committee is tasked with reviewing the DUI Case Processing Plan to insure that the Court maintains high DUI case resolution levels. As part of a bigger task, the committee identifies trends and necessary changes that must be made in the Court calendar to enhance the processing of all cases. Goal 125 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court Obstacles/Challenges Delayed evidence laboratory test results from the Department of Public Safety crime lab and other discovery issues contributed to case processing delays. Achieve budgetary self-sufficiency for court security costs and some court improvements through an increased court improvement fee. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? The special revenue account currently provides for the expenses of contracted court security, a full-time Glendale Police Officer designated as the Courts Security Officer and a contract Systems Analyst. In October 2009, a new security contract was What were the Performance Measures? implemented with CBI Security Services. The new contract has achieved monthly savings of $7,717 resulting in an annual savings of approximately $93,000. These savings will help contribute to the overall goal of self-sufficiency related to security costs. Revenues to this account have not met earlier projections. This could be a result of reduced filings seen this past fiscal year as well as an increase in the inability for defendants to pay their Obstacles/Challenges fines. As of December 2009, we have projected a minor deficit in this account. Staff is currently reviewing options to cover this shortage. Goal FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Court collaboration with the Marketing and Police Departments has resulted in a potential cost savings of $11,000 annually, added convenience for customers and “greener” environmental sensitivity. Recent legislation required the court to pay for informational pamphlets to traffic violators listing fines and driver’s education information. Previously, driver’s education schools provided this information at no cost. The collaborating departments created an electronic traffic ticket information brochure that is now posted online. A searchable PDF formatted document is included on the city’s website and allows customer access to traffic information at any time. Additionally, the information can be updated whenever necessary, allowing for a real‐time change online rather than weeks of implementing and replacing printed pamphlets. Environmental savings will be realized by eliminating the printing of about 25,000 pamphlets each year. Accomplishments: • Glendale City Court received two grant awards from the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety to expand the electronic citation pilot project in partnership with the 126 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court • Police Department. The first award of $30,000 helped procure an additional seven handheld electronic citation devices added to the five devices already deployed by patrol officers. The fully automated ticketing devices allow officers to select dropdown menus to complete citation data which reduces handwritten mistakes and increases efficiency in processing these cases in court. The electronic ticketing devices also produce traffic citations much more quickly than standard handwritten methods. Research also identifies enhanced safety outcomes for officers who use these devices. The second grant award of $12,000 will help achieve electronic transfer of the citation data directly into the police and court case management systems. City court instituted twice-monthly settlement conferences as an innovative way to reduce the costs and inconvenience of preparing for jury trials that do not proceed to trial. Settlement conferences were created to explore all available options to resolve cases pending a jury trial date two days prior to the actual jury trial date. The Presiding Judge assists prosecutors and defense attorneys to identify the reasons a case is set for trial. She frequently makes suggestions on plea agreement offers the defendant may consider in lieu of proceeding to trial. This process has greatly reduced the associated inconvenience and costs for jurors, witnesses and other court parties. It also reduces the trend of increasing jury trials that had occurred over the past two years. This alternative form of mediation has been very successful in achieving reductions in cases proceeding to jury trial. In FY 2008, 11 jury trials were conducted at the court. However, through the first nine months of FY 2009, only two cases have required a jury trial. This change in business practices was achieved with existing resources and with no additional expenses. GOAL UPDATES Achieve capital improvements that facilitate the highest quality delivery of services to court customers. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal In May 2008, a request for qualifications was advertised and sent to contracting and design firms. On August 26, 2008, the City Council awarded a contract to D.L. Withers Construction LLC, for the design and construction of the new City Court Complex. The city is using the design-build process for the project. D.L. Withers Construction is teaming up with the design firm of Dick & Was the goal met? Fritsche Design Group to perform this work. The Presiding Judge and court administrative staff met twice weekly throughout the year with the design-build team and the International Facilities Group to address and coordinate all design and programming elements in the new courthouse. Construction request for proposal for the new court building to be published by May 2008. Collaborate regularly with architectural What were the consultants on the new court building to review and identify Performance Measures? design and programming elements that accommodate superior customer service. Goal 127 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court Obstacles/Challenges Due to adverse economic conditions, city management and the City Council are still evaluating whether the construction should continue, be slowed down or stopped. Goal Identify innovative ways to reduce operating costs. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Reductions in the police detention prisoner maintenance budget as What were the Performance Measures? a result of home detention orders. None. Obstacles/Challenges 128 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department City Court FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) City Court (1240) Court Security FY 2009 Actual Total - City Court BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $4,320,503 $298,729 $3,986,853 $393,120 $3,986,853 $281,763 $3,578,010 $393,300 -10% 0% 51% (1240) Court Time Payments (1240) Fill the Gap FY 2010 Budget $0 $84,627 $84,627 $127,394 $53,923 $57,000 $57,000 $57,000 0% $4,673,155 $4,521,600 $4,410,243 $4,155,704 -8% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $3,806,113 $765,314 $4,039,889 $607,970 $3,941,514 $599,190 $3,682,198 $552,826 -9% -9% Internal Premiums $49,880 $34,287 $34,287 $31,940 -7% Internal Service Charges $51,848 $60,487 $56,285 $57,251 -5% ($221,033) ($221,033) ($168,511) -24% Work Order Credits Total - City Court STAFFING BY PROGRAM City Court Court Security $4,673,155 $4,521,600 $4,410,243 $4,155,704 -8% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 50 1 48 1 48 1 42.75 1 -11% 0% 51 49 49 44.75 Court Time Payments 1 Total -City Court 129 Return to TOC -9% Materials Control Warehouse ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Administrative Services Admin. Finance and Lease Payments Human Resources Employee Groups Information Technology Management & Budget Information Technology Server Room City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Admin Svcs Admin. FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Administration Services Admin. Total - Admin Svcs Admin. BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual Administration Services Admin. Total -Admin Svcs Admin. FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $443,677 $443,677 $435,786 -2% $445,877 $443,677 $443,677 $435,786 -2% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $437,361 $5,481 $446,964 $8,860 $446,964 $8,860 $448,383 $7,088 $2,753 $2,514 $2,514 $3,316 32% $348 ($15,009) $348 ($15,009) $895 ($23,896) 157% 59% $443,677 $443,677 $435,786 -2% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Estimate $445,877 Internal Premiums Total - Admin Svcs Admin. FY 2010 Budget $282 $445,877 0% -20% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 4 4 4 4 0% 4 4 4 4 0% 130 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Finance FINANCE Interim Director Diane Goke Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Finance Department provides information to Enrolled 5,678 utility customers for the public, state agencies, bondholders, grantors, electronic billing, which eliminated auditors, City Council and management. Finance the printing of 68,136 statements a administration is responsible for debt management, year. banking services, investment management and special financial analysis. The Accounting Division prepares external financial reports; manages the city payroll and accounts payable processes; maintains, updates and tests accounting systems changes; accounts for financial transactions such as capital assets, debt service, and grants as well as providing financial information management to departments. The tax and licensing division administers the sales tax code to ensure compliance, and is responsible for collection of accounts receivable. The billing services and customer relations divisions bills customers for municipal services, processes cash receipts and responds to various city inquiries. Mission Statement: The Finance Department’s mission is to provide responsible stewardship of public funds through timely and compliant financial management and exceptional customer service while supporting city leadership goals. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Compile the information to produce an approved Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). One community that is fiscally sound. An internally prepared CAFR will be audited by the external auditors and submitted for review to the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for a certificate in excellence in financial reporting. Receive a Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting from the GFOA for the CAFR ending June 30, 2011. To document and complete an implementation plan for the Government Accounting Standards Boards (GASB) Statement No. 54. One community that is fiscally sound. 131 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Finance Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Accounting staff will review the current governmental fund balance definitions and account types and make the necessary internal reconfiguration of accounts as required by Statement No. 54. The city general ledger will meet the new fund balance definitions and account structures as defined in Statement No. 54. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The Accounting Division offered SurePay as a payment option to retirees for their health insurance payments. This option automated the system and created efficiencies in the division. Accomplishments: • Created the ability to log utility field service orders electronically, which provided realtime updates for customer service inquiries. • Provided customers with new tools on the utility billing website that enables them to view their utility bills and water usage in text and graphical formats. GOAL UPDATES To educate citizens in the use of the new utility billing system scheduled for implementation in summer of 2009. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. The billing system was implemented and reduced the number Was the goal met? of customers receiving bills through the mail. Reduced the number of utility bills mailed to customers and the What were the number of calls handled by staff by 5% in the first six months of Performance Measures? implementation. Economic conditions, such as home foreclosures increased the Obstacles/Challenges number of calls. Goal Compile the information to produce an award winning approved CAFR. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Received the GFOA Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in What were the Performance Measures? Financial Reporting. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 132 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Finance FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Elimination of hardcopy timesheets through implementation of the time and labor module of the PeopleSoft software program. Once implementation is complete in June 2009, all timesheet information will be submitted electronically. Accomplishments: • Qualifying for Government Finance Officers Association yearly award for the CAFR. • Miscellaneous receivables staff provided city departments with a structured billing and reporting process. GOAL UPDATES Goal Increase customer usage of the automatic utility bill pay option. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Conduct a survey of utility customers. Performance Measures? A survey was delayed until the new billing system had been in Obstacles/Challenges place for six months. Goal Compile the information to produce an approved CAFR. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Posting of the CAFR on the Internet for downloading and/or What were the reviewing by citizens, staff and other interested parties. Received Performance Measures? the GFOA Certificate of Achievement. None. Obstacles/Challenges 133 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Finance FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual (1000) Accounting Services (1000) Finance Administration $960,995 $818,132 (1000) L.I.D. Administration (1000) License/Collection (1000) Regulatory & Communication FY 2010 Budget $958,732 $810,717 FY 2010 Estimate $958,732 $810,717 FY 2011 Budget $912,836 $394,610 Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -5% -51% $9,000 $9,000 $9,000 $9,000 0% $922,453 $135 $844,432 $0 $844,432 $0 $805,900 $0 -5% NA (1780) Arena Renewal and Replacement $0 $332,000 $332,000 $550,000 66% (1790) AZSTA - Stadium Tax Refund $1,525,658 $1,700,000 $1,613,997 $1,700,000 0% (2360) Customer Service Office $2,368,751 $2,484,306 $2,484,306 $2,659,473 7% $6,605,124 $7,139,187 $7,053,184 $7,031,819 -2% Total - Finance BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits Total - Finance STAFFING BY PROGRAM Accounting Services Finance Administration License/Collection Customer Service Office Total -Finance FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $4,481,451 $2,127,457 $4,880,558 $2,851,757 $4,880,558 $2,765,754 $4,100,628 $3,092,321 $83,578 $76,320 $76,320 $74,922 -2% $40,764 ($128,126) $43,772 ($713,220) $43,772 ($713,220) $49,107 ($285,159) 12% -60% $6,605,124 $7,139,187 $7,053,184 $7,031,819 -16% 8% -2% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 19 9 19 8 19 8 16 4 -16% -50% -23% 10 11 11 8.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 0% 73.5 73.5 73.5 64 -13% 134 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Lease Pmts/OtherFees FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) 1000 Advisor Fees (1000) Lease Payments (1000) Merchant Fees (1980) 1980 Advisor Fees (2000) 2000 Advisor Fees FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $89,414 $2,133,655 $130,687 $1,570,143 $129,687 $1,570,143 $129,687 $4,236,574 $255,452 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $3,063 $1,427 $7,066 $6,030 $6,066 $1,030 $6,066 $1,030 Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -1% 170% 0% -14% -83% (2040) 2040 Advisor Fees $0 $0 $2,000 $2,000 NA (2060) 2060 Advisor Fees $1,460 $7,857 $6,857 $6,857 -13% (2080) 2080 Advisor Fees (2100) 2100 Advisor Fees $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 NA NA (2180) 2180 Advisor Fees $3,701 $3,213 $5,213 $5,213 62% (2210) 2210 Advisor Fees (2360) 2360 Advisor Fees $17,819 $2,755 $13,568 $3,289 $13,568 $3,289 $13,568 $3,289 0% 0% (2400) 2400 Advisor Fees $10,417 $17,222 $17,222 $17,222 0% (2420) 2420 Advisor Fees $4,089 $17,514 $17,514 $17,514 $2,523,252 $1,936,589 $1,936,589 $4,603,020 Total - Lease Pmts/OtherFees BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Supplies and Contracts Total - Lease Pmts/OtherFees FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 0% 138% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $2,523,252 $1,936,589 $1,936,589 $4,603,020 138% $2,523,252 $1,936,589 $1,936,589 $4,603,020 138% 135 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Human Resources & Risk Management HUMAN RESOURCES & RISK MANAGEMENT Alma Carmicle Department Description: The Glendale Human Resources Department provides proactive, innovative and quality customer service and consultation in the areas of total compensation, organizational development, employee relations, staffing and risk management and safety. Mission Statement: Collaborate and partner with our internal and external customers to develop a diverse workforce committed to delivering the highest quality of service. Interesting Department Fact: The H1N1 virus had a minimal impact on city services this year due to the department taking proactive steps in educating and equipping employees and supervisors on flu prevention and offering flu vaccines. Employee sick leave this year was relatively unchanged when compared with the city’s four year sick leave average. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Research the cost and implementation requirements of outsourcing the administration of the city’s benefits program for active employees and retirees to determine feasibility. One community that is fiscally sound. Outsource Benefits Billing. Reduced staffing requires that the department look to outsource the services we currently perform for billing, revenue recovery, reconciliation of accounts for active and retired employees. Complete cost/benefit assessment by April 2011. Review jobs and work closely with departments to ensure internal staffing meets the needs of the new city structure. One community with high quality services for citizens. Review and revise job descriptions/classifications to address the needs of the restructured organization. Work with departments to ensure appropriate placement of staff within revised jobs to maximize the services provided to the community. Ability of departments to continue to meet service needs through appropriate job alignment and staff placement. 136 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Human Resources & Risk Management FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Successful implementation of the city’s first benefits dependant eligibility audit. This innovation involved an audit of all dependants enrolled in the city’s health plans to determine eligibility for coverage. This will result in significant, ongoing cost savings to the city and enable the city to meet its fiduciary obligations as a health plan administrator. • Successful implementation of e-Profile, a systems improvement that reduces administrative efforts in the review and updating of employee profile data and improves the quality of data as employees can now easily view their profile information and update accordingly. Accomplishments: • Successful development and implementation of the city’s employee furlough process. • A “Brown Bag Series for Supervisors” was established by the Human Resources Department designed to provide supervisors with a refresher on human resources policies and practices, and how to apply them in the everyday management of their work groups. • The cost of the city’s risk in 2010 was 1.19% which was once again well below the public entity industry average of 2.0% . GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Implement the PeopleSoft talent acquisition manager and candidate gateway program. One community with high quality services for citizens. No, due to the city’s budget reduction the technology allowing us to complete this goal was eliminated. What were the Implementtation of the program by June 2010. Performance Measures? Budget reductions to both the IT and the HR departments. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Offer employees mentoring opportunities to develop internal talent and to enhance the sharing of organizational knowledge. One community that is fiscally sound. This goal was met through the completion of the pilot program that ran September 2009 to March 2010. Employees from the Administrative Services Group participated and shared feedback throughout the program as to their progress and challenges. Each participant noted professional growth and meaningful application of new knowledge and relationships to the workplace. 137 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Human Resources & Risk Management Completed a six month pilot program with Administrative What were the Services staff by March 2010 and compiled feedback to enhance Performance Measures? the program for citywide rollout. Feedback from mentees and mentors identified time and current workload as the major challenges they encountered in Obstacles/Challenges participating and completing their development action plans. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Implemented the PeopleSoft time and labor system that will enhance time reporting, record keeping and data analysis. One of the key benefits of the new time and labor system is the ability to record, track and analyze time worked at more detailed levels. Accomplishments: • Developed and implemented a monthly open workshop series open to all employees that provides professional development opportunities. This series is outside the GLAD program and courses include: career development, time management, grant writing, effective communication, interviewing skills, marketing and communications, understanding benefits and compensation for supervisors, and budgeting basics for supervisors. For the first time, employees could enroll online for the open workshops. • Expanded the safety training of employees, customizing many programs to meet the specific needs of the departments. GOAL UPDATES Goal Maintain cost of risk of the city below industry average. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Cost of risk was .92% which is well below public entity industry What were the Performance Measures? average of 2.0%. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Mitigate health plan cost increases by providing employees with incentives to improve their health. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Maintain medical premium increases below the industry average. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges 138 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Human Resources FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget (1000) Benefits (1000) Compensation $226,705 $449,126 $236,589 $435,993 $236,589 $435,993 $119,411 $459,828 -50% 5% (1000) Employee Relations $214,435 $218,532 $218,532 $176,717 -19% (1000) Employment Services (1000) Human Resources Administration $381,083 $760,835 $373,839 $603,204 $373,839 $603,204 $254,417 $631,007 -32% 5% (1000) Organizational Development $380,548 $398,713 $398,713 $68,291 -83% (1000) Risk Management/Safety $598,600 $518,865 $518,865 $202,525 -61% $1,515,185 $1,348,582 $2,760,000 $1,407,000 $2,760,000 $1,407,000 $2,844,278 $1,407,000 $22,555,304 $24,481,185 $24,481,185 $24,481,185 0% $28,430,403 $31,433,920 $31,433,920 $30,644,659 -3% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget (2540) Risk Mgmt Trust Fund (2560) Worker's Compensation (2580) Benefit Programs Total - Human Resources BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES 3% 0% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $2,650,584 $2,669,180 $2,669,180 $2,033,844 -24% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $25,716,638 $53,015 $29,001,714 $41,232 $29,001,714 $41,232 $28,758,325 $33,507 -1% -19% Internal Service Charges $10,166 Work Order Credits Total - Human Resources STAFFING BY PROGRAM Benefits $12,579 $12,579 $13,173 5% ($290,785) ($290,785) ($194,190) -33% $28,430,403 $31,433,920 $31,433,920 $30,644,659 -3% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 3 2.75 2.75 1.25 -55% Compensation Employee Relations 5.5 2.75 5.5 2.75 5.5 2.75 6 2 9% -27% Employment Services 3.75 4 4 3 -25% Human Resources Administration 6 6 6 5 -17% Organizational Development Risk Management/Safety 3 6 3 6 3 6 1 2 -67% -67% 30 30 30 21.25 Risk Mgmt Trust Fund Total -Human Resources 1 139 Return to TOC -29% City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Employee Groups FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate (1190) Diversity Committee (1190) GEMS $44,821 $40,190 (1190) Glendale Hispanic Network $26,451 $0 (1190) Holiday Event $27,607 $30,000 $139,069 $84,909 $84,909 Total - Employee Groups BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Supplies and Contracts Total - Employee Groups FY 2009 Actual $54,909 $0 FY 2010 Budget $54,909 $0 FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $54,909 $0 0% NA $0 $0 NA $30,000 $30,000 0% $84,909 0% FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $139,069 $84,909 $84,909 $84,909 0% $139,069 $84,909 $84,909 $84,909 0% 140 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Information Technology INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Chuck Murphy Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: Information Technology is responsible for local and The city has 50 terabytes of data, wide area network computer system management which could hold 12,500,500 digital and operations; application systems analysis, photos, 50,000,000 books or 2,400 design, programming and support; data DVD movies. communications; end-user PC integration and support; geographical information systems (GIS) services; Internet and intranet support; management of the Technology Replacement Fund, information security, and citywide telephone analysis and communications. Mission Statement: Provide maximum value to the city through the implementation of agile and cost effective solutions that improve service, reduce costs and leverage information across city departments. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Explore and evaluate productivity solutions i.e. Microsoft Office, Open Office, etc. One community that is fiscally sound. Meet with vendors to evaluate solutions, develop evaluation process, test solutions, and give recommendations to IT management and the ASG Deputy City Manager. Select solution by 6/30/11. Evaluate data back-up and email archiving solutions. One community that is fiscally sound. Meet with vendors to evaluate solutions, test solutions, and give recommendation(s) to IT management. Select solution by 7/30/10. 141 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Information Technology FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • An employee resources portal was developed to give employees easy access to information when they are away from the office. Access to myHR, webmail, the employee phone book, phone list of essential numbers, and instructions such as Virtual Private Network (VPN), voicemail, and the telephone user guide are included in the portal. Accomplishments: • IT has several accomplishments in FY 2010. Some of these include implementation of new antivirus software, completion of a telephone system upgrade, PeopleSoft Financials Upgrade, development of an online application for tax amnesty and email system upgrade. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Support the Finance Department and city with the selection and implementation of a new sales tax system. One community that is fiscally sound. Partially, IT has supported and continues to support the implementation of a new sales tax system, which is slated to go Was the goal met? live in Fall 2010. Attend all meetings; provide information and leadership for IT’s involvement in the project. What were the Performance Measures? Installation and configuration of hardware, operating system and database software that meets the service levels defined by Finance. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Balancing resources with other projects and day-to-day operations. Deliver additional functionality to PeopleSoft’s ePay module. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes, employees have been able to see their paychecks online since December 2009. What were the Completed implementation by 12/31/09. Performance Measures? Supporting time and labor post go-live demands and other Obstacles/Challenges PeopleSoft requests. 142 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Information Technology FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • PC monitors will not be replaced when computers are, which will save the city $180,000 from March 2009 – June 2010. Accomplishments: • The IT Department has been heavily involved with the PeopleSoft time and labor project, which will be completed in June 2009. • IT’s disaster recovery plan was developed and successfully tested in FY 2009. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Select a vendor to conduct a comprehensive security audit. Once the audit is completed, findings will be used to enhance and expand existing security capability. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Deliver recommendation for vendor to the Administrative Service What were the Deputy City Manager by July 31, 2008. Performance Measures? Complete security audit. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? None. Enhancement of fire suppression system to provide additional protection for infrastructure areas. One community with high quality services for citizens. In process, consultants are currently completing the data center evaluation. What were the Completion of project. Performance Measures? Before proceeding with the installation of the fire suppression system, the data center will be evaluated to determine if any other modifications are necessary for it to meet the needs of the city. Obstacles/Challenges Solidifying a contract with the evaluation vendor took longer than expected. The evaluation is in progress and next steps will be identified and prioritized. 143 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Info. Technology FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget (1000) Information Technology (1100) Telephones $3,541,259 $956,780 $3,375,954 $1,014,119 $3,374,470 $1,340,579 $3,048,826 $977,252 (1140) Technology Replacement $2,209,843 $3,508,037 $3,508,037 $3,510,103 0% $6,707,882 $7,898,110 $8,223,086 $7,536,181 -5% Total - Info. Technology BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget -10% -4% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $2,873,037 $2,937,772 $2,937,772 $2,602,378 -11% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $2,962,431 $324,624 $4,144,687 $633,125 $4,469,663 $633,125 $3,620,078 $638,879 -13% 1% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $16,506 $14,935 $14,935 $15,519 4% $531,284 $337,847 $337,847 $797,583 136% ($138,256) -19% $6,707,882 $7,898,110 Work Order Credits Total - Info. Technology STAFFING BY PROGRAM Information Technology Telephones Technology Replacement Total -Info. Technology ($170,256) ($170,256) $8,223,086 $7,536,181 -5% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 29 1 29 1 29 1 25 1 -14% 0% 1 1 1 1 0% 31 31 31 27 -13% 144 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget MANAGEMENT & BUDGET Sherry Schurhammer Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Management & Budget Department provides a The Purchasing and Warehouse range of services that helps ensure prudent fiscal Divisions moved from the Finance management of city resources. Specifically, the Department to the Management and four divisions of the department provide the Budget Department during FY 2010. services identified in the following bullet points: • The Budget and Research Division conducts independent, objective analyses of expenditures and revenues, as well as expenditure and revenue forecasts, in monitoring the budget for the current fiscal year and developing the budget for the next fiscal year. • The Purchasing Division works with departments to ensure the procurement of goods and services is completed in a manner that is compliant with city and state statutes. • The Warehouse Division provides logistical support to departments by procuring and maintaining a secure, just-in-time inventory of supplies for all city departments, selling surplus city assets at the best available price, and recycling metals and other materials to reduce disposal costs and generate revenue for the city. • The Grants Administration Division is responsible for coordinating the city’s efforts to identify and obtain alternative funding for priority projects that advance the mission, goals and objectives established by the City Council and executive management. This work includes establishing a database for the city’s grant applications and awards and managing federal stimulus funds. Mission Statement: Management & Budget helps the city to accomplish its financial management objectives by: • promoting integrity and public accountability in the budget planning and implementation process; • increasing public trust in the city’s fiscal planning and implementation efforts by presenting information in a clear and understandable manner • improving the efficiency and effectiveness of citywide business processes to ensure prudent fiscal management of the city’s resources. • assisting city departments with cost effective and efficient services in warehousing, inventory, the disposal of surplus city assets and other logistical support services; and • augmenting the effectiveness of the tax dollar in the purchase of materials and services within the requirements of city code and state law. 145 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Collect, analyze and provide accurate and useful information to city departments, city management and the Mayor and City Council as it relates to the city budget. One community that is fiscally sound. • • • • Activities Prepare annual council workshop materials on the upcoming FY's operating and capital budgets. Prepare reports on capital related budget items, such as capital budget financial options and property tax rate options, as needed. Work with individual departments on rate studies for the enterprise funds and other departments that are supported in whole or in part by fees. Continue to work with departments to implement process improvements related to budgeting and financial reporting. • Implementation of a new sales tax and license system began in FY 2010 and will be completed during FY 2011. An analyst from the Budget and Research Division is assigned to the sales tax and license core team and will function as a power user of the system once it is implemented. The expected outcomes are the elimination of manual processes and duplicate data entry for the tax and license staff and the development and implementation of meaningful reports that can be used for revenue analysis and forecasting in the Management and Budget Department. • Phase II of the business intelligence (BI) technology project will continue in FY 2011. Phase II will include work by the professional authors in the Budget and Research Division to create additional, customized reports that supplement the existing financial information. The BI team also wants to add other non-financial business data such as public safety’s calls for service information to enhance business performance management. The expected outcome is more accurate analysis of complex data for financial business decisions. 146 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget • Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) • • • Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Review monthly expenditure and revenue reports that the Finance Department produces and follow up with departments with expenditure anomalies. Presentation of quarterly reports at council workshops in a timely, understandable and organized manner. Preparation of council budget workshop materials in a timely and accurate manner. Improved processes that result in the production of financial data and improved access to financial data for departments. Purchasing and Warehouse Divisions: Reduce the manual processes through increased use of PeopleSoft functionalities. Improve employee skill sets in using Peoplesoft functions. One community that is fiscally sound. Revise the procurement code based on the American Bar Association’s Model Procurement Code. The revision of the procurement code has been deferred until completion of the FY 2011 budget development process and implementation of a PeopleSoft upgrade. The former will result in citywide reductions that will impact purchasing activity levels and the latter may result in improved functionality and decreased manual steps for users. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The BI tool was rolled out in FY 2010 with the completion of Phase I. Considerable time was spent during FY 2010 by Administrative Services Group staff to ensure that this daily extraction of financial information was accurate and summarized correctly in all aspects of the BI application. The BI tool allows users to view the interactive dashboards, graphs and reports and provides the ability to drill up, down and through different layers of financial data. In addition, staff in the Budget and Research Division has been trained to modify dashboards and create additional financial reports that can be pushed out to consumer license holders in other departments. See below for two examples of additional financial reports that have been or are in the process of being created through the BI tool. • Budget and Research Division staff developed a CIP report on expenditure versus budget activity that replaced a report that was manually produced on a monthly basis and provided only a snapshot of activity at that one point in time. The new CIP report in BI is updated daily and can be drilled down to the detail expenditure level activity by project. • As of May 2010, Budget and Research Division staff is developing a BI report that would provide a fund balance analysis, including budget and expenditure activity, for a 147 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget variety of special revenue funds. This report will be updated daily. This report is intended to replace the reports that staff currently produces manually on a quarterly basis. Accomplishments: • Received the GFOA Distinguished Budget Award for the FY 2010 budget document by achieving the highest rating in accordance with award criteria. Also received special recognition from GFOA for the CIP section of the FY 2010 budget document. Received outstanding ratings from GFOA for sections within the budget document relating to the book as a policy document, a financial plan, an operations guide and a communications device. • Incorporated the Utilities Department and Fire Department’s (customer owned) inventory into the city’s secure warehouse for more effective management of resources from the purchase to the use of the materials. GOAL UPDATES Collect, analyze and provide accurate and useful information to city departments, city management and the Mayor and City Council as it relates to the city budget. Goal Produce an accurate, reliable annual budget document that meets the financial objectives of the city. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? • The FY 2010 annual budget book was presented the Government Finance Officers Association’s Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for exemplary budget documentation, with special recognition of the capital budget. • Monthly expenditure and revenue reports were completed on time and disseminated to city departments and city What were the management. Performance Measures? • Quarterly expenditure and revenue reports were completed on time and presented to city council. • The recommended FY 2011 operating and capital budgets were completed on time and presented to City Council over the course of two budget workshops in March 2010. Adoption of these plans occurred in June 2010. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Actively participate in the development, testing and implementation of a new sales tax and business license reporting system. One community that is fiscally sound. 148 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Yes. • • • Obstacles/Challenges A contract for the development and implementation of a new sales tax and license system was awarded in November 2009. A senior analyst from the budget division serves on the core team that is evaluating current processes to develop a new database system that maximizes customization and minimizes manual processes. The new system is scheduled to be implemented and fully operational by October 2010. None. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • In the past, projects in the capital improvement program were presented by funding source with no differentiation between projects focused on existing facilities in need of rehabilitation and/or repair and those that result in new capital assets. For the FY 2010 budget book, the capital improvement program will continue to be shown by construction fund, but within each fund there will be a differentiation between ‘New Assets’ and ‘Existing Asset,’ with two subcategories under existing assets – replacement and improvement. Accomplishments: • During FY 2009, budget staff led a cross functional team of Administrative Services Group employees that worked with an external consultant to develop a BI tool that is used to provide PeopleSoft financial information (budget and actual) in a user friendly, graphical and tabular interface that maintains existing hardcopy report generation capabilities. BI, with its customized “dashboard” type interface, will be systematically rolled out to departmental groups during the summer of 2009 for use and evaluation before moving on to Phase II. Phase II will build upon the PeopleSoft financial data that is automatically uploaded each day in BI by incorporating qualitative and quantitative data from other city systems (i.e. Sales Tax System, Municipal Billing, Fire Computer Aided Dispatch, etc.) GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Collect, analyze and provide accurate and useful information to city departments, city management and the Mayor and City Council as it relates to the city budget. Produce an accurate, reliable annual budget document that meets the financial objectives of the city. One community that is fiscally sound. 149 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget Was the goal met? Yes. • • What were the Performance Measures? • • • Obstacles/Challenges The FY 2009 annual budget book was presented the Government Finance Officers Association’s Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for exemplary budget documentation, with special recognition of capital information. Monthly expenditure and revenue reports were completed on time and disseminated to city departments and city management. Quarterly expenditure and revenue reports were completed on time and presented to city council. An evaluation by an external consultant of the city’s indirect cost allocation model was completed on time and recommendations for improvement were incorporated into the model that calculated the FY 2010 rates. The recommended FY 2010 operating and capital budgets were completed on time and presented to City Council over the course of four budget workshops in March and April 2009. Adoption of these plans will occur in June 2009. None. Provide a centralized grants coordination function to ensure grant match funding and future funding when grants are received. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? A plan was developed and implemented regarding the maximum use of the grants administrator position to ensure the department is What were the Performance Measures? fully involved in grant applications that are in accordance with the city’s grant policies. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 150 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Management & Budget FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget (1000) Budget & Research (1000) Grants Administration $632,796 $147,099 $657,852 $62,423 $648,468 $59,091 $646,768 $65,164 (1000) Purchasing $487,333 $427,575 $427,375 $388,224 -9% (1000) Warehouse (1840) Grant Match Funds - Mgt & Bdgt $359,063 $104,191 $367,459 $99,114 $367,459 $99,114 $295,037 $0 -20% -100% $1,730,482 $1,614,423 $1,601,507 $1,395,193 -14% Total - Management & Budget BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget -2% 4% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,563,404 $1,616,456 $1,616,456 $1,383,699 -14% $126,511 $151,252 $136,916 $45,620 -70% Internal Premiums $28,339 $24,905 $24,905 $24,288 -2% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $12,228 $13,417 ($191,607) $14,837 ($191,607) $15,657 ($74,071) 17% -61% Supplies and Contracts Total - Management & Budget STAFFING BY PROGRAM Budget & Research Grants Administration $1,730,482 FY 2009 Actual $1,614,423 FY 2010 Budget $1,601,507 $1,395,193 FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget -14% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 6 6 6 6 0% 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 -33% -20% Purchasing 5 5 5 4 Warehouse 5.75 5.75 5.75 4.75 -17% 18.25 18.25 18.25 15.75 -14% Total -Management & Budget 151 Return to TOC Humana Healthcare COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development Administration Building Safety Economic Development Airport Engineering Planning City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Community Dev Admin FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) CD Deputy City Manager Total - Community Dev Admin BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual CD Deputy City Manager Total -Community Dev Admin FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $178,543 $178,543 $195,964 10% $178,340 $178,543 $178,543 $195,964 10% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $154,975 $21,134 $170,751 $6,247 $170,751 $6,247 $199,313 $5,756 $1,881 $1,197 $1,197 $1,602 34% $350 $348 $348 $173 ($10,880) -50% $178,340 $178,543 $178,543 $195,964 10% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Estimate $178,340 Internal Premiums Total - Community Dev Admin FY 2010 Budget 17% -8% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1 1 1 1 0% 1 1 1 1 0% 152 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Building Safety BUILDING SAFETY Deborah Mazoyer Department Description: The Building Safety Department ensures that the minimum building standards are met to safeguard life, health, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, occupancy, location and maintenance of all buildings and structures in Glendale. The department is the central resource for development, construction and code information, plan review, permit issuance and construction inspection. Interesting Department Fact: Photovoltaic systems are beginning to gain popularity as evidenced by the installation now going in at Deer Valley High School. It has been determined that this system will generate over 1,000,000 watts of power from sunlight. It is the largest privately owned system in the United States to date. Once installed, the system could deliver this amount of energy for the next 20-30 years. Mission Statement: The Building Safety Department is a team of professionals dedicated to providing exceptional customer service and through the spirit of cooperation and partnership with our citizens and development customers, we ensure a safer and stronger community. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Provide responsive, proactive, efficient, consistent and costeffective service. One community with high quality services for citizens. Monitor and track progress on unsafe and damaged buildings and proactively communicate with City Council members on progress of cases in their districts. Provide quarterly report on status of all cases to Assistant Director and Assistant Deputy City Manager. Plus, maintain database for communicating regularly to Council and management of case workload and status of cases. Administer and enforce construction codes and development regulations that produce a safe, durable, efficient and accessible built environment. One community with high quality services for citizens. Implement customer service enhancements at the public counter by continued cross training in the Transportation Department, and establish a cross training program with the Engineering and Utilities Departments. 153 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Building Safety Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) 20% of all over-the-counter plans will be reviewed through the onestop shop by January 2011. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Implementation of first online permitting process to obtain permits for the replacement of water heaters. This aids the customer in complying with codes as adopted by the city of Glendale and eliminates the need for them to come to City Hall which in turn saves them time. This practice also frees up parking spaces in our garage, cuts down on fuel consumption, vehicle wear and tear, traffic and pollution. • Adjustments have been made to our printing procedures for the issuance of permits and certificates of occupancy. Discontinuing the printing of one copy of each of these forms has saved time, money and wear and tear on our equipment. Both of these innovative ideas have provided ”green” contributions to our everyday business. Accomplishments: • Completion of several large projects has taken place during this past year. Banner Thunderbird Hospital opened its new wing to patients and the renovation work to back fill the original hospital continues. Midwestern University completed several exciting large projects this past year including the optometry and dental clinics. • This year, several building inspectors have cross trained in the Fire Marshall’s Office and a plan technician cross trained in the Transportation Department. This cross training brings new skills and awareness to the Building Safety Department and strengthens relationships between departments. • Building Safety Department met the challenge of bringing many new economic development projects to fruition including Advanced Health Care, Phoenix Heart and Humana. • Streamlined record retrieval system which included scanning over 67,000 permits and other permit related documents. GOAL UPDATES Administer and enforce construction codes and development regulations that produce a safe, durable, efficient and accessible Goal built environment. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Publish departmental newsletter to increase public and customer Was the goal met? awareness of development processes and requirements. Publish newsletter quarterly, with each manager and supervisor What were the Performance Measures? submitting one article per newsletter. None. Obstacles/Challenges 154 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Building Safety Provide responsive, proactive, efficient, consistent and costeffective service. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Encourage and facilitate staff’s continued education and training Was the goal met? to effectively and efficiently perform their duties. Develop internal training programs for interpretation of codes and What were the development regulations. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Fee Collection Improvement: • In FY 2009 we implemented an important change in the way we collect plan review fees for civil/land development reviews to ensure that we are collecting all fees that are owed from our development customers. Previously, we waited until the department had completed a first review to determine the fee (fees are determined by the number of sheets reviewed) and then the Development Services Center would collect the fees at the time of re-submittal of the second review. Some projects were never resubmitted, and we were forced to bill the customer. Several of these customers had to be referred to collections. Now we collect a plan review deposit for reviews upon first submittal as we do for other Building Safety plan review fees. Accomplishments: • Simplified process for solar installations: We revised our process to encourage permits of solar water heaters and photovoltaic systems. A point of contact has been established in plan review to work with customers to obtain solar permits as quickly as possible. Information on the requirements for installation have been added to our website and the city’s green website. • Reduction in process time for sign permits: The Development Services Center reduced the turnaround time for sign permits. New procedures and cross-trained staff now allow 98% of all sign permits to be issued at the counter, replacing a five-day process. GOAL UPDATES Administer and enforce construction codes and development regulations that produce a safe, durable, efficient and accessible Goal built environment. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Revise development handouts to reflect changes in building codes. What were the Performance Measures? Incorporate the most critical ones on our department’s website. None. Obstacles/Challenges 155 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Building Safety Use technological advances to make customer interaction with the Building Safety Department more efficient and convenient. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Scan 25% of permits, certificates of occupancy and special What were the Performance Measures? inspection certificates by March 1, 2009. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 156 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Building Safety FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Building Safety (1000) Development Services Center FY 2009 Actual $2,477,402 $618,173 FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $2,414,339 $673,056 $2,413,566 $672,971 FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,980,628 $444,676 -18% -34% (1000) Westgate-Bldg Safety Rvw/Insp. $828,685 $0 $0 $0 NA (2400) Cross Connection Control $220,324 $221,184 $221,099 $220,067 -1% $4,144,584 $3,308,579 $3,307,636 $2,645,371 Total - Building Safety BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $3,865,175 $73,523 $3,164,974 $124,667 $3,164,938 $123,760 $2,532,664 $119,497 -20% -4% $134,365 $73,382 $73,382 $64,111 -13% $71,521 $62,142 $62,142 $60,757 -2% ($116,586) ($116,586) ($131,658) 13% Work Order Credits Total - Building Safety FY 2010 Budget -20% $4,144,584 $3,308,579 $3,307,636 $2,645,371 -20% STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Building Safety Development Services Center 26 10 26 10 26 10 21 6 -19% -40% Westgate-Bldg Safety Rvw/Insp. Cross Connection Control Total -Building Safety 12 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 0% 50.75 38.75 38.75 29.75 -23% 157 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Economic Development ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Brian Friedman Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Economic Development Department directs The Economic Development programs to attract and retain businesses that create Department has assisted in facilitating jobs, increase the tax base, improve land values and or retaining over 2,400 new or enhance central city vitality. The department existing jobs in Glendale since FY strives to provide high quality service and 2008. encourage well managed growth in the city of Glendale. It is dedicated to maximizing customer service to enhance the city’s business friendly environment. The department is committed to working with development partners in order to promote high quality projects, economic development opportunities and attraction and retention of businesses and employers. Mission Statement: The Economic Development Department’s mission is to create high quality jobs, develop financially sound projects that increase the city’s tax base and enhance underperforming properties to increase the quality of life for current businesses and the community. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Attract targeted industries and businesses to Glendale. Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) One community with quality economic development. Recruit new businesses through relationship building, keeping apprised of property lease expirations and industry trends. Recruitment of new businesses will result in additional jobs to the city and generate tax revenue. Goal Continue with our proactive business retention and expansion program, while utilizing relationships with educational institutions. Related Council Goal Activities Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) One community with quality economic development. Companies will once again be visited in Glendale’s business community to offer educational and networking assistance. At least 30 companies will be visited during the fiscal year with partners Glendale Community College, Arizona State University West and the Glendale Chamber of Commerce. 158 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Economic Development FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Participation of staff on the Innovate Committee has resulted in a plan to lease space to cellular phone providers for the placement of cell towers to generate additional revenue for the city. Accomplishments: • Attracting Humana Healthcare to the city resulted in a fully leased office building at 91 Glendale containing more than 630 new offices and workstations. • Locating DeVry University’s new West Valley campus with 500 students and 80 faculty enhances Glendale dominance as the city of choice for quality educational facilities. • Conair’s purchase of the former KB Toys building was the largest industrial purchase in the Valley in the past 18 months and adds 350 new jobs to Glendale. • More than 390 additional jobs were retained or created as part of business expansion in Glendale; a direct result of the department’s established relationships in the business community. GOAL UPDATES Goal Attract new industrial and office businesses to Glendale. One community with quality economic development. Related Council Goal Yes, 12 businesses opened offices or facilities in Glendale during Was the goal met? FY 2010. The department’s aggressive approach in attracting new business to Glendale has reulted in the creation of 1,298 jobs. Conair’s What were the Performance Measures? expansion was the largest in the Phoenix metropolitan statistical area in calendar year 2009. Economic recession has discouraged businesses from making major moves or expansions. Glendale has made significant Obstacles/Challenges progress towards its economic development goals despite the current economic conditions. Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Implement a comprehensive proactive business retention and expansion program. One community with quality economic development. Yes, the department met its goal by providing networking and training opportunities for businesses visited and has resolved numerous requests by our valued local businesses. An additional 30 businesses have been visited as a part of the What were the Performance Measures? business retention and expansion program. 159 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Economic Development Obstacles/Challenges Reduced staffing and cutbacks at various companies has impacted availability for representatives to meet with the department. Flexibility and persistent, courteous contact by the department has overcome scheduling conflicts. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Glendale Prospector is now on the Economic Development website for 24/7 accessibility of information about commercial sites and buildings available in Glendale. Accomplishments: • Implemented a comprehensive business retention and expansion program and began meeting with existing Glendale companies. • Met with all major education and medical institutions in Glendale and established a relationship of mutual collaboration and greater understanding. GOAL UPDATES Goal Attract new high wage businesses within targeted industries. One community with quality economic development. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Ten locates or expansions and/or 500 net new jobs. Performance Measures? Economic downturn caused a decrease in number of businesses looking for new locations or attempting any expansion. The five companies that announced plans to move to Glendale or expand Obstacles/Challenges operations in Glendale estimate they will create more than 800 new jobs in Glendale. Work with existing businesses to protect the existing job base and identify opportunities for expansion. One community with quality economic development. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Meet with and foster relationships with at least 30 Glendale What were the Performance Measures? businesses. The Economic Development Department made contact with over 60 companies. Due to economic conditions none of our existing Obstacles/Challenges companies are considering major changes in their business operations or considering any expansions at this time. Goal 160 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Economic Development FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget (1000) Business Development (1000) Downtown Beaut. & Promotion $0 $331,539 $0 $267,475 $0 $367,471 $500,000 $266,453 (1000) Economic Development $690,958 $617,251 $709,225 $630,068 (1280) YSC - Econ. Dev. $360,597 $323,051 $323,051 $0 $1,383,094 $1,207,777 $1,399,747 $1,396,521 Total - Economic Development BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 2% -100% 16% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $695,725 $662,030 $812,501 $539,906 $812,497 $731,880 $729,700 $685,171 -10% 27% $16,185 $12,977 $12,977 $12,176 -6% $9,154 $6,876 $6,876 $7,488 9% ($38,014) -77% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits Total - Economic Development FY 2010 Budget NA 0% ($164,483) $1,383,094 $1,207,777 ($164,483) $1,399,747 $1,396,521 16% STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Downtown Beaut. & Promotion Economic Development 4 7 4 6 4 6 4 5 0% -17% 11 10 10 9 -10% Total -Economic Development 161 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Rebates & Incentives FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Rebates & Incentives (1000) Redevelopment Land Acquisition (1000) Visual Improvement Program Total - Rebates & Incentives BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Supplies and Contracts Operating Capital Total - Rebates & Incentives FY 2009 Actual $895,946 $978,165 FY 2010 Budget $1,023,400 $340,590 FY 2010 Estimate $1,023,400 $23,000 FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $320,000 $85,416 -69% -75% $222,644 $109,065 $0 $0 -100% $2,096,755 $1,473,055 $1,046,400 $405,416 -72% FY 2009 Actual $1,359,358 FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,473,055 $1,046,400 $405,416 -72% $1,473,055 $1,046,400 $405,416 -72% $737,397 $2,096,755 162 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Airport AIRPORT Judy Skeen Department Description: The Glendale Municipal Airport is a regional general aviation facility that provides hangar facilities, Fixed Base Operator (FBO), aviation planning, maintenance, safety and educational tours. Interesting Department Fact: The airport is within 1.5 miles of three major entertainment venues – Jobing.com Arena, University of Phoenix Stadium, and Camelback Ranch-Glendale Spring Training Facility. In addition, it is near two major freeways in the West Valley for easy vehicle access. Mission Statement: The Glendale Municipal Airport’s mission is to represent the city of Glendale in a professional, responsible, and businesslike manner while serving the best interests of all of the citizens of Glendale. The Airport will promote aviation to the highest levels of safety, efficiency, and in a fiscally responsible manner and will also preserve the quality of life recognizing a partnership exists between residential and general aviation interests. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Update the airport rules and regulations. One community with high quality services for citizens. Work with stakeholders and interested citizens to define the updated rules and regulations in a document that is meaningful for stakeholders and airport users. Adoption of the updated rules and regulations will be used by the airport staff for better enforcement and stakeholder commitment. Promote new development and the expansion of existing aviation businesses in and around the airport. One community with quality economic development. Be a willing and active partner in aviation related development in and around the airport that stimulates new private investment, quality jobs for Glendale residents and new tax revenue for the city of Glendale. Increase in operations and tenant base toward sustainability. 163 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Airport FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual (1760) Airport Operations Total - Airport BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $617,901 $552,968 $552,968 $538,916 -3% $617,901 $552,968 $552,968 $538,916 -3% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $393,578 $158,604 $362,733 $151,427 $363,333 $150,827 $345,673 $147,941 -5% -2% Internal Premiums $27,468 $22,131 $22,131 $30,015 36% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $37,289 $962 $32,855 $32,855 $30,784 -6% ($16,178) ($16,178) ($15,497) -4% $617,901 $552,968 $552,968 $538,916 -3% Work Order Credits Total - Airport STAFFING BY PROGRAM Airport Operations Total -Airport FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 5 5 5 5 0% 5 5 5 5 0% 164 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Engineering ENGINEERING Larry Broyles Department Description: The Engineering Department provides design and construction management, survey, construction inspection and materials testing services for public works projects constructed within the city. The department also provides various private development related services that include engineering plan reviews, property management, landscaping plan review and inspection, mapping, records and floodplain ordinance administration. Interesting Department Fact: The Engineering Department completed over 50 miles of improvements in FY 2010 including; 16.7 miles of street, 12.4 miles of storm drain, 7 miles of raw water line, 9.5 miles of water line and 5 miles of sewer line improvements. Mission Statement: To be recognized as an important resource in developing and designing capital projects, reviewing and inspecting private development and maintaining accurate mapping and property records to successfully meet the needs of our community. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Provide a capital improvement program that assures accurate information, optimizes available resources and provides needed projects for our community. One community with high quality services for citizens. Manage public relations for capital projects; Provide procurement and engineering management services; Increase public awareness of the city’s capital projects status. Complete 90% of the neighborhood meetings with a 90% satisfaction rating, Complete 90% of the projects with an 85% and above satisfaction rating from our department’s clients and Complete 91% of the project updates for the website within the first (5) days of every month. Ensure all private development projects constructed within Glendale are reviewed in a timely manner. One community with high quality services for citizens. Provide plan review services and provide testing services. 165 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Engineering Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Complete 90% of plan reviews within established timelines (20 working days) and Complete 90% of scheduled inspections within 48 hours. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Project control group in coordination with the administrative support staff developed a new engineering payment review process. This new process has reduced the time of payment review from 10-12 days to 5-7 days. It also encouraged the Finance Department to review their process and reduce the time it takes to process payments. • The CIP Division developed a new process to monitor and ensure that on a monthly basis, our clients and project managers are updated on warranty schedules for each of their completed projects. This new process has increased the communication between the client and the project manager before the warranty expires and gives the opportunity for the client to participate in the final inspection. • Project control group developed a new process to monitor and ensure that on a monthly basis, we will review the status of the purcahse orders. On completed projects and coordinate the closure of those purchase orders. This new process has significantly reduced the time and amount of funds encumbered on complete projects. • The Engineering Department took the initiative to assess the possibility of providing in-house consultant services. This new approach, financially, has reduced the total cost of the project design and construction administration by using in-house staff for select engineering tasks. Accomplishments: • Among the several dozen capital projects this department completed the relocation of Fire Station No. 151, the downtown pedestrian enhancements project, the 67th Avenue Thunderbird Paseo Park restoration, 59th Avenue Melinda to Pinnacle Peak Road and the landfill gas system expansion. GOAL UPDATES Provide a capital improvement program (CIP) that assures accurate information, optimizes available resources and provides Goal needed projects for our community. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Completed 91% of the projects with 85% and above satisfaction What were the Performance Measures? rating from our department’s clients. None. Obstacles/Challenges 166 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Engineering Ensure all private development projects constructed within Glendale are reviewed in a timely manner. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Complete 90% of plan reviews within established timelines (20 What were the working days) and complete 90% of scheduled testing services Performance Measures? inspections within 48 hrs. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The engineering project manager’s manual was prepared as an aid to provide continuity in the successful completion of all CIP projects. To reduce costs of printing and improve timeliness of and access to the manual, it is now available via a secure network. • Previously, our customers (residents, client departments, management team, contractors, utilities companies, etc.) would follow the same procedures for the procurement of consulting services regardless of the value of the project. This resulted in delays, and in some cases, the cancellation of projects due to grant requirements. • After a comprehensive review and evaluation, the CIP Division decided to develop, implement and monitor a new method of procurement. This new method included establishing a list of 14 consultants qualified to provide services in the areas of general civil engineering, water/wastewater and transportation. By using this on-call consultants list, the time to procure consulting services was reduced by six to nine weeks. • The former versions of the professional services agreement and construction manager at risk contracts allowed consultants to easily change the wording and use a “lump sum” pay basis. Much time was spent in getting the consultants to show their cost break out and in revising the consultant edits to a contract acceptable to the city. • The CIP Division, in cooperation with the City Attorney’s Office, created two new “time and materials” contracts. Consultants complete the contracts by filling in the blanks. The consultants also create exhibits for the contracts and enter these into a “boiler plate” as well. The new contracts can be quickly checked by the project managers for changes and for the time and materials cost breakdown. The time devoted to editing contracts has been shortened by as much as two weeks. • The Land Development Division decreased the city’s exposure to unfinished public infrastructure associated with private development by requiring performance bonds on all major improvements in the public right-of-way or public utility easements. • A significant portion of private development in the city is required to improve the adjacent public roadway and/or extend public water and sewer lines to service the development. If a developer begins these improvements and then cannot finish them for one reason or another, the city can use the bonded funds to finish the 167 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Engineering improvements. Often times these unfinished improvements could pose a significant risk to public health and safety and become a public eyesore. Requiring performance bonds on public infrastructure required to be constructed by private developers will ensure that the improvements are completed in a timely and satisfactory manner at no cost to the city. Accomplishments: • Among the several dozen capital projects this department completed are the Camelback Ranch Spring Training Facility, 51st Avenue intersection improvements, Grand Avenue access improvements and Catlin Court beautification. GOAL UPDATES Provide a CIP that assures accurate information, optimizes available resources and provides needed projects for our Goal community. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Complete 90% of the projects with 85% and above satisfaction What were the Performance Measures? rating from our department’s clients. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Ensure all private development projects constructed within Glendale are reviewed in a timely manner. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Complete 90% of plan reviews within established timelines (20 What were the working days) and complete 90% of scheduled testing services Performance Measures? inspections within 48 hrs. None. Obstacles/Challenges Was the goal met? 168 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Engineering FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) BofA Bank Building (1000) CIP Administration FY 2009 Actual $485,870 $602,635 (1000) CIP Design FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $256,579 $659,816 $256,579 $659,816 FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $256,579 $274,490 0% -58% $1,616 $0 $0 $0 (1000) Construction Inspection (1000) Engineering Administration $642,423 $525,388 $618,217 $618,732 $614,807 $618,569 $382,291 $553,251 (1000) Land Development Division $492,614 $490,751 $490,751 $483,917 -1% (1000) Mapping and Records $193,820 $174,301 $174,301 $101,869 -42% (1000) Materials Testing (1000) Promenade at Palmaire $227,565 $71,682 $237,894 $56,400 $237,041 $56,400 $181,996 $56,400 -23% 0% (1000) Real Estate Services $148,949 $0 $0 $0 (1000) Utility Inspection (1660) Transportation Engineering Pgm $231,418 $108,871 $220,798 $113,277 $220,798 $0 $142,281 $0 -36% -100% $3,732,851 $3,446,765 $3,329,062 $2,433,074 -29% Total - Engineering BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget NA -38% -11% NA Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $3,564,869 $3,800,978 $3,690,748 $2,612,283 -31% Supplies and Contracts $695,812 $503,062 $491,879 $468,049 -7% Internal Premiums $113,390 $85,131 $83,549 $80,713 -5% $72,020 ($799,991) -8% -22% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits Total - Engineering $78,900 ($720,120) $3,732,851 $78,291 ($1,020,697) $78,291 ($1,015,405) $3,446,765 $3,329,062 $2,433,074 -29% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget CIP Administration 15 15 15 9 -40% Construction Inspection 7 7 7 4 -43% Engineering Administration 5 7 7 5 -29% Land Development Division Mapping and Records 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 1 0% -50% Materials Testing 3 3 3 2 -33% Real Estate Services Utility Inspection 2 3 3 3 2 -33% Transportation Engineering Pgm 1 1 1 43 43 43 28 -35% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Total -Engineering 169 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Planning PLANNING Jon Froke Department Description: The Planning Department has three major functions, long range planning and research, current planning and zoning administration. Interesting Department Fact: Glendale will celebrate the 100th year of incorporation on June 18, 2010. The Long Range Planning and Research Division is responsible for the long-range physical General Plan, special studies, research, quarterly population estimates, geographic information systems and mapping services, annexation analysis and application processing. In addition, the division administers the Historic Preservation Ordinance and the related program, coordinates preparation of national and local register nominations and staffs the Historic Preservation Commission. The current planning and zoning administration function manages the review of land use applications including General Plan amendments, rezoning requests, conditional use permits, preliminary and final plats, residential and commercial reviews, variance requests, group home review, appeals, zoning administrative review and relief requests, commercial tenant improvements, special events, liquor licenses, business license reviews and custom home reviews. The Planning Administration Division prepares staff reports for City Council, the planning commission, the Historic Preservation Commission and Board of Adjustment public hearings and workshops. This function also ensures proper advertising and notification processes are complete and in conformance with state open meeting laws. The administrative division also manages the departmental budget and compliance with the Citizen Participation Ordinance, request for service (RFS) inquiries and provides staff support for City Council, the planning commission, the Historic Preservation Commission and Board of Adjustment public hearings and workshops. Mission Statement: The Glendale Planning Department provides professional quality service in a friendly and responsive manner. The mission includes: • • • • • Assist elected and appointed officials in planning for future land use, development and redevelopment in harmony with community values. Facilitate community involvement in the decision making process. Administer adopted regulations and guidelines in a fair and impartial manner. Manage the zoning, subdivision and design review process efficiently. Resolve to the best of our ability the inevitable issues and conflicts associated with changing land use and development. 170 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Planning FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Redevelopment of the Glendale Centerline. One community with a vibrant city center. Assist Economic Development and other departments in the redevelopment of Glendale Centerline, process major and minor General Plan amendments to implement the Glendale Center line redevelopment plan, prepare and process the Glendale Centerline Overlay District for adoption, and update the Zoning Ordinance for Glendale Centerline implementation. Redevelopment plan report for the Glendale Centerline, adoption of Glendale Centerline Overlay District, and approval of flexible Commercial and Industrial Design expectations for Glendale Centerline. Support the City Council Sustainability Committee. One community with high quality services for citizens. Include Energy Element in the 2012 General Plan Update. Preparation of Energy Element draft. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Provide all development team comments to the applicant prior to the pre-application meeting. Accomplishments: • Prepared the Glendale Centerline Overlay District Ordinance. • Prepared the Zoning Ordinance Update. GOAL UPDATES Goal Redevelopment of the Glendale Centerline. One community with a vibrant city center. Related Council Goal No. Was the goal met? What were the Adoption of the Glendale Centerline Overlay Ordinance. Performance Measures? 171 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Planning Obstacles/Challenges Goal Timeframe for Glendale Centerline process. Enhance the General Plan and Historic Preservation by planning for the future and preserving the past. One community with a vibrant city center. One community with strong neighborhoods. Yes. Was the goal met? Increase public understanding of Glendale Centerline Overlay, add What were the additional historic resources to the National Register, and Performance Measures? complete all annexation requests by property owners. None, except the timeframe. Obstacles/Challenges Related Council Goal FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Case file conversion from paper to GIS allows for quick retrieval from the desktop. • Change to staff report by improving the format and content of reports. • PowerPoint presentation for all cases having a public hearing. • Electronic transmission of correspondence to customers, commissions and boards. • Turned department vehicles over to motor pool. • Limit notification of cases to within 300 feet of the property. • Succession planning implemented for historic preservation and county development review of strip annex area. Accomplishments: • Reduced development application processing to public hearing from 6-12 months to 90 days. • Listed Myrtle Avenue Historic District on the National Register of Historic Places. GOAL UPDATES Goal Improve department efficiency and effectiveness. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, website done, Zoning Ordinance scheduled for completion Was the goal met? and interdepartmental coordination improved. Complete update of the Planning Department website by 06/30/09, What were the complete Zoning Ordinance Update by 06/30/09, and increase Performance Measures? inter-departmental coordination. Challenge to meet deadlines of Deputy City Manager assignments, Obstacles/Challenges all were met. Related Council Goal 172 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Planning Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Plan for the future and preserve the past. One community with high quality services for citizens. Ongoing. Process all annexation request- completed, process all major plan What were the amendments- completed, and complete update of City Center Performance Measures? Master Plan (CCMP)- subject to Glendale Centerline results. Obstacles/Challenges Waiting for completion of Glendale Centerline project for CCMP update. 173 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Planning FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Current Planning (1000) Long-Range Planning & Research (1000) Planning Administration Total - Planning BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums FY 2009 Actual $714,393 $358,736 FY 2010 Budget $695,251 $352,321 FY 2011 Budget $695,251 $352,321 $512,837 $135,149 Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -26% -62% $454,826 $476,645 $476,645 $341,167 -28% $1,527,955 $1,524,217 $1,524,217 $989,153 -35% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,460,477 $1,654,284 $1,654,284 $956,780 -42% $34,490 $27,927 $70,261 $18,044 $70,261 $18,044 $58,336 $16,757 -17% -7% Internal Service Charges $5,061 Work Order Credits $4,544 ($222,916) Total - Planning FY 2010 Estimate $1,527,955 $1,524,217 $4,544 ($222,916) $1,524,217 $4,149 -9% ($46,869) -79% $989,153 -35% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Current Planning 10 10 10 6 -40% Long-Range Planning & Research Planning Administration 4 5 4 5 4 5 2 3 -50% -40% 19 19 19 11 -42% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Total -Planning 174 Return to TOC Velma Teague Library COMMUNITY SERVICES Community Services Admin. Code Compliance Community Partnerships Neighborhood Improvement Grants Library & Arts Parks & Recreation Parks & Recreation’s Glendoberfest Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Comm. Services Adm FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Comm. Services Admin. Total - Comm. Services Adm BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual Comm. Services Admin. Total -Comm. Services Adm FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $166,123 $166,123 $190,714 15% $269,897 $166,123 $166,123 $190,714 15% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $261,119 $6,440 $263,604 $7,811 $263,604 $7,811 $193,879 $6,647 -26% -15% $2,056 $1,657 $1,657 $896 -46% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Estimate $269,897 Internal Premiums Total - Comm. Services Adm FY 2010 Budget $282 $269,897 $347 ($107,296) $347 ($107,296) $172 ($10,880) -50% -90% $166,123 $166,123 $190,714 15% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 2 2 2 1 -50% 2 2 2 1 -50% 175 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Code Compliance CODE COMPLIANCE Sam McAllen Department Description: Code Compliance is responsible for ensuring compliance with various city codes that promote public health and safety, eliminate conditions that contribute to blight and deterioration and preserve the quality of life in neighborhoods. Mission Statement: To maintain established community standards that preserve and promote the health, safety and living environment of the community and neighborhoods. Interesting Department Fact: During the first three quarters of FY 2010, Code Compliance volunteer staff provided over 536 hours of service performing office duties, inspecting vacant parcels, and removing over 4,600 illegal signs from the city rights-of-way. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Maintain community standards that promote a clean, safe, and healthy living environment through prompt and effective response to citizens’ calls for service. One community with high quality services for citizens. Conduct responsive code enforcement services to ensure compliance with city codes and ordinances that prevent the deterioration of residential neighborhoods. Respond to calls for service within two business days of receiving the call 95% of the time. Provide proactive code enforcement services in residential neighborhoods that promote a clean, safe and healthy living environment for the community. One community with strong neighborhoods. Conduct proactive code enforcement services in residential neighborhoods with the objective of identifying and eliminating code violations and preventing the negative impact of blight, deterioration and unsafe conditions. Proactively generate 55% of all code compliance cases. 176 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Code Compliance FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The Code Compliance Department has been able to maintain a high level of service delivery to residential neighborhoods by applying for grant funds that can be used to eliminate blight and deterioration. The department applied for and received Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds that are being used to identify and eliminate code violations in low to moderate income neighborhoods. The CDBG funds are being used in a partnership with the Community Partnerships Department to share the cost of an inspector who conducts proactive code inspections in designated residential neighborhoods. These proactive inspections serve to identify and eliminate code violations that contribute to blight and deterioration of the impacted residential neighborhoods. The CDBG funds are also being used to abate code violations on vacant foreclosed properties that are creating blighted or deteriorated conditions within residential neighborhoods. When foreclosed properties become vacant, the properties deteriorate resulting in city code violations such as overgrown vegetation, trash and debris, broken windows and doors, and graffiti. These blighted conditions are detrimental to the public’s health, safety, and property values and negatively impact the livability of the affected neighborhoods. Obtaining CDBG funds helps fund the abatement of many more city code violations that would otherwise be addressed using only the department’s budgeted general funds. Accomplishments: • The department has been extremely busy throughout the city managing over 12,000 cases through the end of March 2010. Code Compliance staff has been working very hard to provide prompt and effective customer service by proactively initiating 69% of all cases handled this fiscal year. • The department applied for and was awarded a CDBG for over $76,000 to identify and eliminate code violations at vacant properties that are creating unsafe slum and blighting conditions in residential neighborhoods. GOAL UPDATES Goal Provide an increased level of proactive services in neighborhoods. One community with strong neighborhoods. Related Council Goal Partially, the major part of this goal is on track to be met by generating over 8,900 proactive code cases through the third Was the goal met? quarter. However, only 536 volunteer hours have been accumulated, so the goal has not been completely met. Generate 10,000 new proactive code cases citywide, and maintain What were the sufficient volunteer staff to provide a minimum of 1,500 hours of Performance Measures? volunteer service. Recruiting and maintaining sufficient volunteer services has been Obstacles/Challenges the key challenge to meeting this goal. 177 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Code Compliance Increase community awareness of city codes and enforcement procedures. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes, this goal had been met by the continued participation in Glendale University and several neighborhood programs as well as having updated the department’s website with more current and Was the goal met? bilingual information. Additionally, a property maintenance brochure has been updated to include bilingual information. Continue to participate in Glendale University. Participate in six neighborhood programs to provide neighborhood What were the specific city code information. Performance Measures? Update the department’s website and printed materials to include bilingual information. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • During FY 2009 the department reorganized inspector assignments and modified work assignments in an effort to better serve the citizens of Glendale. Prior to this reorganization, inspectors were assigned to work either as code compliance specialists (assigned to enforce specific violation types including commercial property, building without permits, home occupations, residential rental, and Neighborhood Focus Program) or as residential inspectors assigned to one of five geographic areas of the city that varied in size from 6 to 17 square miles. On October 1, 2008, 10 inspectors were assigned to work in one of 10 geographic areas located throughout the city. These 10 geographic areas were much smaller than those used before the reorganization, which allow the inspectors to focus on proactive inspections and become familiar with the neighborhoods in which they work. The smaller areas provide an increased efficiency, reducing the time inspectors needed to travel throughout the city, which provides more time for education and enforcement. Along with the new inspection areas, three inspectors remained focused on education and enforcement related to commercial businesses, residential rental properties and the Neighborhood Focus Program. The implementation of smaller inspection areas and modified work assignments is improving the Code Compliance Department’s ability to identify and eliminate code violations throughout the city in a proactive and timely manner. Accomplishments: • The volunteer program continues to be expanded with the addition of two new volunteers. The new volunteers assist office staff with filing and other office related duties that have significantly increased with the increase in code cases. • In March 2009, the City Council unanimously approved amending City Code Chapter 178 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Code Compliance 13, Article II related to civil code enforcement. This amendment streamlines the enforcement process and will bring forth quicker resolution to neighborhoods affected by non-compliant properties. Training has been conducted for inspection staff and procedures coordinated with the Prosecutor’s Office and City Court to provide a smooth and efficient transition. GOAL UPDATES Protect mature residential neighborhoods from the negative impact of blight and deterioration. One community with strong neighborhoods. Related Council Goal The benchmarks for this goal have not been met. The average inspection rotation timeframe in Neighborhood Focus Program (NFP) areas was not reduced but has been maintained at the Was the goal met? previous year's level. Additionally, the number of property maintenance cases within NFP areas have decreased from the previous fiscal year's levels. Reduce the average inspection rotation timeframe in NFP areas by 20%. What were the Performance Measures? Increase property maintenance cases within NFP areas by 20% from the previous fiscal year. Code Compliance encountered a challenge in meeting this goal due to a department reorganization of inspection staff that reduced staff assigned to conduct NFP inspections. Although these Obstacles/Challenges objectives were not met, it is expected that the reorganization will result in a significant increase in proactive inspections throughout the city that will have a positive impact on NFP areas. Goal Maintain community standards that promote a clean, safe and healthy living environment. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Partially, the goal of responding to calls for service within two business days at least 95% of the time is not being met as the current response rate is achieved 93% of the time. The goal to Was the goal met? resolve 80% of the cases within 30 days is being met as code is currently resolving 81% of its cases within 30 days. Respond within two business days 95% of the time, and resolve What were the Performance Measures? 80% of code cases within 30 days. Code Compliance has been challenged to respond to calls for service within two business days at a rate of 95% because the department’s current weekend coverage schedule is rotated among Obstacles/Challenges inspection staff and requires that they be off work some weekdays to compensate for the time they provided weekend inspection services. Goal 179 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Code Compliance FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Code Compliance Total - Code Compliance BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,625,403 $1,576,174 $1,576,174 $1,368,354 -13% $1,625,403 $1,576,174 $1,576,174 $1,368,354 -13% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,442,213 $87,533 $1,466,772 $81,616 $1,466,772 $81,616 $1,300,025 $56,866 Internal Premiums $40,579 $31,405 $31,405 $32,064 2% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $55,078 $54,336 ($57,955) $54,336 ($57,955) $47,478 ($68,079) -13% 17% Total - Code Compliance STAFFING BY PROGRAM Code Compliance Total -Code Compliance $1,625,403 $1,576,174 $1,576,174 $1,368,354 -11% -30% -13% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 21.5 21.5 21.5 19 -12% 21.5 21.5 21.5 19 -12% 180 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Community Partnerships COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS Erik Strunk Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Community Partnerships Department consists In 2009, the department received of three divisions that provide direct city services, approximately $7.9 million in federal maintain the quality of life and build stronger funds for the construction of various neighborhoods for all residents. The Community public improvements projects, to Housing division is responsible for addressing the prevent homelessness and to assist housing needs of over 4,400 Glendale residents by with foreclosed property. operating three public housing complexes and a Section 8 voucher program. The Community Revitalization division provides affordable housing, housing rehabilitation assistance and emergency home repair for eligible Glendale residents. It also administers the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and other related federal programs. The Neighborhood Partnership office is responsible for the administration of Glendale University, the Homeowners’ Association Training Academy, the Neighborhood Improvement Small Grants Program, the Community Mediation Program, the Community Volunteer Program and provides direct services to nearly 200 different registered neighborhood associations. Mission Statement: Connecting people through the power of community. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Utilize our allocation of federal funds to assist the community in mitigating the impact of foreclosures, to increase the number of first-time homebuyers, to partner with nonprofits in developing senior housing, and to administer homeless prevention funds for utility assistance and rapid re-housing. One community with strong neighborhoods. Creation and implementation of the Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program to provide rent and utility assistance to Glendale residents; the construction of neighborhood improvements in the Floralcroft and East Catlin Court neighborhoods; award construction funding to Habitat for Humanity’s “Palmaire Court;” oversight and reporting of federal funds; various partnerships with nonprofits to acquire foreclosed properties and rehabilitate them. Continue to revitalize Glendale neighborhoods while meeting all federal deadlines and reporting requirements. 181 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Community Partnerships Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Maintain the financial stability of the Community Housing Division. One community with high quality services for residents. Continue to monitor assistance payments made on behalf of our 3,909 Section 8 voucher clients and low-income individuals who lease one of our 155 public housing units. Maintain the agency’s official designation as a “high-performer” for public housing for the 16th year in a row. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The Community Partnerships Department partnered with the Community Action Program and two nonprofit organizations to develop a new program to distribute $914,122 in federal stimulus funds to assist eligible Glendale residents with rental and utility payment assistance. Accomplishments: • The Neighborhood Partnership Office successfully coordinated the construction of 16 neighborhood improvement projects and provided services to 202 registered neighborhoods. • The Community Revitalization Division leveraged $2.8 million in Neighborhood Stabilization Funds to bring in $13.2 million for the construction of 97 new, senior only housing that will be built over the next two years. • The Community Housing Division used $454,325 in federal stimulus funds to modernize 50 of its public housing rental units. GOAL UPDATES Increase civic participation and maintain strong communication with residents to provide them with information about programs and services that will improve their quality of life. One community with strong neighborhoods. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Received 16 applications from neighborhoods for both our small and community connection grants Registered 202 neighborhood groups What were the Maintained an active database of over 500 different groups to Performance Measures? assist with our Community Volunteer Program Implemented version 2.0 of the Neighborhood Information System. Goal 182 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Community Partnerships Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? A reduction in budget for programming. Use federal stimulus funds to assist residents in mitigating the impact of foreclosures, assist first time homebuyers, develop senior housing, provide funds for utility assistance and rapid rehousing. One community with high quality services for residents. Yes, provided Habitat for Humanity Central Arizona $1 million and Chicanos Por La Causa with $1.2 million to purchase and rehabilitate foreclosed properties with Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds; provided $300,000 in HOME funds for a new, 28unit development called “Glendale Lofts;” assisted with the construction of a new Habitat for Humanity 11-home subdivision in central Glendale. To allocate the federal appropriations in the mandated time frame What were the Performance Measures? and to complete all the reporting requirements. Obstacles/Challenges Economic downturn impacted number of qualified first time homebuyers. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Seeing a dramatic increase in the level of foreclosures and abandoned homes, the Community Partnerships Department implemented an action plan to assist residents and neighborhoods in addressing the impact in neighborhoods of foreclosed and abandoned homes. Accomplishments: • The Community Partnerships Department provided funding resources to assist the Code Compliance Department with its “Clean and Lien” initiative to remove weeds and other debris from vacant properties. • The department participated in and/or sponsored five educational activities to assist Glendale residents facing foreclosure. • The department subscribed to an online database to provide up-to-date and daily information to all city departments impacted by foreclosures\abandoned homes. • The department applied for and received $6.2 million in Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds to provide neighborhoods and eligible residents with resources to address the foreclosure issue. 183 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Community Partnerships GOAL UPDATES Goal Implement revitalization efforts to assist single-family homeowners, qualified neighborhoods and developers in improving housing options for low to moderate income residents. One community with strong neighborhoods. The department assisted Habitat for Humanity Central Arizona in the completion of the first Platinum Leed certified affordable family home in Arizona; design review of a new 11-unit single family subdivision that received approval to begin construction; Was the goal met? funded the creation of the city’s first community land bank; and facilitated the review and approval of the 28-unit “Glendale Lofts,” that will also begin construction in the fall of 2009. Add additional, affordable single-family units to the Glendale housing stock. Through our partnership with Habitat for What were the Performance Measures? Humanity, over the past decade, we have added more than 40 units to the city. Obtaining ownership rights to land at a reasonable price. Obstacles/Challenges Related Council Goal Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Maintain a registered neighborhood database of at least 200 neighborhood associations with the city. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, staff in the Neighborhood Partnership Office made direct contact with residents in 10 new neighborhood areas and assisted them in becoming registered with the city. There are now 200 registered neighborhood groups in the city. What were the At least 200 registered neighborhoods with the city. Performance Measures? Resources and apathy. Obstacles/Challenges 184 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Comm. Partnerships FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget (1000) Community Revitalization (1000) Neighborhood Partnership $453,963 $506,771 $417,609 $510,549 (1300) HOME Program $451,811 (1310) NSP Programs (1320) CDBG Programs $8,588 $2,274,925 $74,569 $97,881 $97,997 $98,278 0% $0 $0 $457,820 $140,000 NA $0 $1,610,887 $0 $8,364,912 $267,850 $10,903,598 $646,272 $8,487,034 NA 1% $5,381,514 $13,100,164 $16,035,226 $19,455,920 49% FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget (1830) Emergency Shelter Grant (1842) CDBG-R (1842) Homeless Prevention HPRP (2500) Community Housing Total - Comm. Partnerships BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual $417,609 $510,549 $334,195 $364,615 -20% -29% $1,585,573 $619,776 $1,660,797 5% $0 $2,123,640 $2,000,000 $760,027 $4,184,112 $3,540,617 NA 67% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $2,636,987 $3,112,072 $3,333,816 $2,877,746 -8% Supplies and Contracts $2,614,737 $10,079,854 $12,793,172 $16,296,550 62% $106,008 $40,114 $99,213 $43,621 $99,213 $43,621 $102,177 $36,972 3% -15% $252,271 $252,271 $250,000 -1% ($16,332) ($486,867) ($486,867) ($107,525) -78% Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Operating Capital Work Order Credits Total - Comm. Partnerships STAFFING BY PROGRAM $5,381,514 FY 2009 Actual $13,100,164 $16,035,226 $19,455,920 FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 49% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Community Revitalization 2 2 2 2 0% Neighborhood Partnership CDBG Programs 5.5 8.75 5.5 8.75 5.5 8.75 4 8.75 -27% 0% Community Housing Total -Comm. Partnerships 25 25 25 24 -4% 41.25 41.25 41.25 38.75 -6% 185 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Neighborhood Imp Gr FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Neighborhood Improvement Grant Total - Neighborhood Imp Gr BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $616,904 $415,000 $323,644 $616,904 $415,000 $323,644 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $21,685 $232,633 $350,000 Operating Capital $362,586 $65,000 $65,000 $616,904 $415,000 $323,644 Total - Neighborhood Imp Gr 186 Return to TOC $258,644 FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $0 FY 2011 Budget -100% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Library & Arts LIBRARY & ARTS Sue Komernicky Department Description: The Library serves the needs of Glendale citizens by providing books, programming, audio-visual materials and electronic resources that inform, educate and entertain residents. The Arts Maintenance Administration administers the city’s Public Art and Performing Arts grant programs. Interesting Department Fact: 1.46 million people walked through the doors of the Glendale Public Librarys in FY 2009. That is the approximate population of San Antonio, Texas—the 7th largest city in the United States. Mission Statement: Glendale Public Library provides information, programs and services that promote lifelong learning, literacy and the love of reading to enrich the quality of life of Glendale residents. The city of Glendale is committed to a Public Art Program that brings meaningful art to citizens and celebrates both diversity and commonality in Glendale. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) To provide a safe and secure environment to citizens while they are using the library. One community committed to public safety. Provide security services all hours that the libraries are open to the public. Potential incidents are avoided due to the visible presence of security. Any incidents that do occur are handled expeditiously and effectively. Patrons evaluate the safety of the facilities through the Library’s annual survey with a positive response rate of 85% and above. To participate in community outreach activities alongside the other departments in the Community Services Group, and collaborate with local community organizations and agencies. One community with strong neighborhoods. The Library will participate in civic, school and community forums in Glendale and elsewhere in the Valley. The Library will increase awareness and participation in library programs and events. 187 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Library & Arts FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • $431,831 in stimulus funding has been secured through the Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) to update the Main Library’s outdated and inefficient 23-year old fluorescent lighting system. Replacement parts for the existing lighting are no longer being manufactured. It is estimated that the change to T-8 fluorescent lamps and new electronic ballasts will save the city $14,352 annually in electricity costs, equivalent to 29,410 watts. The conversion will also result in a 20% reduction of CO2 emissions. This project had previously been included in the last five years of the city’s Capital Improvement Program. Accomplishments: • The Library & Arts Department completed a comprehensive reorganization as a result of the retirements of 13.5 professional level FTEs, and the additional loss of 17 temporary employees. Library staff members were shifted between departments and, in some cases, transferred to other branches in order to ensure a continued balance of services at all facilities and in all departments. Most regular staff members have taken on additional responsibilities as a result of the reduction in staff. • Secured a $54,882 Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) grant from the Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records Agency. The “Glendale Public Library Recession Response” grant provided funding for Library staff to hold classes aimed at assisting job seekers, those facing bankruptcy and foreclosure, and residents dealing with the stress that accompanies these types of situations. Funds were used to purchase computers to be used in job searching, computer training, applying for unemployment benefits and résumé writing. The grant also paid for instructors for topic-related classes, library materials and marketing materials to support the project. GOAL UPDATES To provide Glendale residents with the information they need on a broad array of topics related to work, school and personal life Goal using new customer service philosophies and technologies. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? The Library website provides cardholders 24/7 access to electronic books and databases, catalog searching, holds and renewals, What were the calendar and program information, and e-librarian services. In Performance Measures? addition, the Library implemented a centralized calling system as a means to streamline customer telephone services. There were a few minor technological glitches in getting the Obstacles/Challenges telephone system underway, but it is now operational. 188 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Library & Arts Consider the city’s public art collection as a financial investment and asset that will appreciate in value. One community with quality economic development. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Several new quality pieces were purchased this year by the Arts Commission. Additionally, the Public Safety Memorial is nearing What were the Performance Measures? completion, and planning is underway for its unveiling in fall 2010. The Arts Coordinator retired at the end of FY 2009 and was not replaced. Additionally, two of the three part-time employees resigned to pursue other opportunities, leaving one part-time Obstacles/Challenges employee and a Library staff member who have been assigned to the Arts Maintenance Division on a part-time basis to carry out the Arts program. Goal FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The Library developed and implemented a new customer service policy and training model, called “Off Your Seat and On Your Feet.” Staff rove the public floor areas where patrons have the greatest point of need. A Welcome Pod was installed at Main Library as part of the program. The Welcome Pod stands near the front door and patrons are immediately greeted and directed to the resources they seek. • Summer Arts Camp registration is now promoted online through a recent partnership with the Parks and Recreation Program. Accomplishments: • The Library installed SelfCheck machines with Fines & Fees software at all three library facilities. • The Library completed the West Branch Library design process, including reviews of technology setup, building layout, electrical systems and more. • In June 2009, a new half-hour arts and culture cable program will be aired on Channel 11. The program also promotes arts and culture programs through the city’s website and a monthly e-newsletter. Glendale’s arts were featured in public service announcements aired on commercial television during 2008 and 2009. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Library and Arts representatives will participate in community outreach activities. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. 189 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Library & Arts Library and Arts representatives will attend 30 civic, school and What were the Performance Measures? community forums in Glendale and elsewhere in the Valley. Attrition of staff posed some challenges between staffing service Obstacles/Challenges desks and participating in outreach programs. Sponsor arts and culture programs for residents and visitors in all parts of the city. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Sponsor at least one or more temporary art projects for one major What were the Performance Measures? event or festival each year. Due to economic conditions, performing arts grants have been Obstacles/Challenges reduced. Goal 190 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Library & Arts FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Arts Maintenance - Admin. (1000) Library (1220) Arts Maintenance (1260) Library Book Fund (1260) Library Special Revenue (1840) Grant Approp - Library Total - Library & Arts BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $146,012 $8,153,906 $86,641 $7,181,646 $86,641 $7,181,646 $31,763 $6,044,112 -63% -16% $61,198 $127,787 $127,787 $127,787 0% $105,782 $181,131 $142,223 $105,150 $142,223 $105,150 $142,223 $105,150 0% 0% $139,901 $500,000 $500,000 $550,000 10% $8,787,930 $8,143,447 $8,143,447 $7,001,035 -14% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $6,977,114 $6,778,382 $6,779,382 $5,225,252 -23% Supplies and Contracts $1,564,419 $1,993,715 $1,992,715 $1,832,696 -8% $174,924 $71,473 $139,127 $66,861 $139,127 $66,861 $147,633 $56,315 6% -16% $8,787,930 $8,143,447 Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits ($834,638) Total - Library & Arts STAFFING BY PROGRAM Arts Maintenance - Admin. Library Total -Library & Arts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget ($834,638) $8,143,447 FY 2010 Estimate ($260,861) $7,001,035 FY 2011 Budget -69% -14% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 1 1 1 86.76 86.76 86.76 69.26 -20% 87.76 87.76 87.76 69.26 -21% 191 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks & Recreation PARKS & RECREATION Rebecca Benna Department Description: The Parks and Recreation Department offers opportunities to enhance the social, physical, mental and economic health of the community. Glendale citizens – from toddler to senior adult – have the opportunity to participate in a wide variety of programs and events. The department maintains, protects and manages parks, open spaces, trails and aquatic and recreational facilities located throughout the community. Interesting Department Fact: The Parks and Recreation Department maintains over 13,000 trees in 92 parks and retention areas. The commitment to this vital resource has resulted in the city being designated as a “Tree City USA” for 14 consecutive years. Mission Statement: To provide safe, high quality parks, open space and recreational facilities that encourage residents, businesses and visitors to live, invest and play in the community. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Complete the Parks and Recreation Master Plan update. One community with strong neighborhoods. Obtain community involvement through community meetings, surveys, and focus groups. Complete organizational and financial analysis, write plan, make presentation to Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission and to City Council. Obtain approval from City Council. Complete Master Plan update by December 2010. Department actively supports and contributes to the Community Services Group hybrid action teams. One community with high quality services for citizens. Activities Various Parks and Recreation staff actively participate on each of the four Community Services Group hybrid action teams. Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Parks and Recreation staff contributes to establishing and meeting the Community Services Group hybrid goals by November 2010. 192 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks & Recreation FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The department partnered with the Glendale Office of Tourism and the downtown business community to host the first Eggventure in historic downtown Glendale. Over 4,000 participants enjoyed a nostalgic hometown atmosphere as they searched for over 20,000 candy-filled eggs along the tree-lined brick sidewalks that lead to the quaint shops and charming bungalows in the historic area. Eight different egg hunts were scheduled throughout the morning for various age groups. Fifteen Catlin Court businesses allowed the eggs to be hidden and dispersed in the front yards of their shops. Participating businesses and partners assisted with the hunts and offered unique activities and craft projects for all to enjoy. The event brought thousands of visitors to downtown Glendale. The first 500 families received a special goody bag filled with brochures and other promotional specials available during the Eggventure and to bring visitors back in the future. Accomplishments: • Completed an analysis of the department organizational structure and core services. Reorganized the department to reflect financial realities and the current and future needs of the community and department. • The department made a concerted effort this year to coordinate and participate with other city departments and outside agencies on neighborhood and community outreach activities. Staff assisted Marketing’s Special Events Division in developing and conducting programs for children at Glendale Glitters and coordinated with the Fire and Police Departments to obtain gifts for the Glendale Community Center holiday event. Staff also served on the planning committee with the Water Conservation Department for Earth Day, worked with the student government at Copper Canyon High School to conduct a community fair with the goal of generating community involvement in the school. Glendale Adult Center staff made presentations to the Kiwanis Club and Glendale Women's Club to discuss Parks and Recreation programs and services. A presentation was also made to the Glendale Disability Commission on the department's adaptive programming. GOAL UPDATES Goal Complete the Parks and Recreation Master Plan update. One community with strong neighborhoods. Updating will continue in FY 2011. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Complete the update of the master plan by June 30, 2010 Performance Measures? Addressing budget-related issues. Obstacles/Challenges 193 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks & Recreation Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Obtain national agency accreditation with the Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA). One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, the department met 100% of the 155 standards reviewed for accreditation. A 100% rating has only been achieved by a few agencies. What were the Obtain agency accreditation by October 2009. Performance Measures? The process was time consuming, but highly rewarding. All fullObstacles/Challenges time employees participated in the process. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The department has obtained federal grants over the past three years to renovate the trail system at Thunderbird Conservation Park. A trail crew utilizing manual techniques completed a total of seven miles of reconditioned trails over the first two years. This year, the department hosted a mechanized trail building workshop for trail managers throughout the state. Thunderbird Conservation Park served as the demonstration site for the first mechanized trail building project in the state of Arizona. Using the mechanized techniques, over 13 miles of trails were renovated compared to the average 3.5 miles completed per year using manual techniques. The cost per mile was reduced from $17,000 to $4,300. Accomplishments: • The department worked with Arizona State University to complete a community wide inventory of parks and recreation facilities and services. This included both City of Glendale and public, private and non-profit facilities and services located within one mile of the city limits. This inventory is a critical step in the master plan process in that it accounts for current inventory and helps identify gaps in service. • As part of the Sahuaro Ranch Park Improvement Project, the 600-seat picnic pavilion received a renovation. The pavilion is reserved 950 times annually, accommodating over 30,000 patrons. The renovation included new roofing, lattice, paint, electrical upgrades, enhanced lighting and` refinishing of 81 thirty-year old redwood picnic tables. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Begin Parks and Recreation Master Plan update process. One community with strong neighborhoods. Yes. 194 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks & Recreation Obtain city council direction by June 30, 2009. Develop a process What were the Performance Measures? to solicit public input on revising the master plan. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal None. Complete internal self-assessment for agency accreditation with the Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Was the goal met? What were the Complete self-assessment by June 30, 2009. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges 195 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Parks & Recreation FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget (1000) Adult Center (1000) Aquatics $376,930 $483,471 $378,161 $377,766 $376,600 $377,425 $485,907 $221,959 28% -41% (1000) Audio/Visual $231,138 $214,695 $214,151 $0 -100% $36,708 $1,642,598 $0 $1,664,699 $0 $1,664,662 $0 $1,562,987 NA -6% (1000) Glendale Community Center $212,098 $208,969 $208,969 $136,070 -35% (1000) Historic Sahuaro Ranch $274,653 $307,803 $307,803 $242,300 -21% (1000) Marketing - Parks & Rec (1000) Park Irrigation $131,889 $350,283 $121,961 $272,580 $121,961 $272,580 $146,670 $252,116 20% -8% (1000) Park Rangers $399,093 $419,997 $419,997 $265,687 -37% (1000) Parks & Recreation Admin. (1000) Parks CIP & Planning $248,682 $310,877 $244,722 $302,396 $244,722 $302,396 $240,308 $180,341 -2% -40% $3,709,080 $3,514,210 $3,521,248 $3,254,902 -7% $286,173 $247,399 $247,143 $196,824 -20% $1,008,931 $202,369 $1,010,831 $199,214 $1,002,988 $199,203 $840,636 $94,157 -17% -53% (1000) Sports and Health $529,842 $362,380 $362,380 $403,116 11% (1000) Youth and Teen (1280) YSC - Parks & Rec $602,822 $227,539 $604,968 $262,000 $604,968 $262,000 $512,548 $262,000 -15% 0% (1840) Grant Approp - Parks & Rec $50,200 $500,000 $500,000 $550,000 (1840) Youth Football Hub Grant $39,217 $32,211 $32,211 $0 (1880) Adult Center Self Sustaining (1880) Aquatic Self Sustaining $127,743 $51,345 $95,000 $67,919 $95,000 $67,919 $135,000 $92,919 (1880) Glendale Community Center $1,478 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 0% (1880) Rec Self Sust-Administration (1880) Rec Self Sust-Audio/Visual $9,267 $3,318 $20,000 $21,118 $20,000 $31,883 $15,000 $0 -25% -100% $166,259 $197,598 $197,598 $272,748 38% $42,317 $89,213 $73,363 $73,363 -18% $175,642 $376,692 $215,067 $353,100 $215,068 $353,100 $249,922 $326,735 16% -7% (1000) Copper Canyon HS Youth Dev Prg (1000) Foothills Recreation Center (1000) Parks Maintenance (1000) Pool Maintenance (1000) Recreation Support Services (1000) Special Events and Programs (1880) Rec Self Sust-Foothills Rec (1880) Spec Events & Prgm Self Sust (1880) Sports Self Sustaining (1880) Youth and Teen Self Sustaining (1885) Apollo Pool Repair (1885) Cactus Pool Repair (1885) Cardinal Pool Repair (1885) Copper Canyon Ballfield Lights 10% -100% 42% 37% $13,762 $10,000 $10,000 $19,000 90% $146,343 $2,935 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $20,000 $19,000 100% 90% -100% $0 $9,000 $9,000 $0 $229 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 0% $0 $0 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 0% 0% $24 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 0% $0 $22,272 $7,000 $44,038 $7,000 $44,038 $7,000 $44,038 0% 0% $4,279 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 0% (1885) Ironwood HS Light (1885) Ironwood Pool Repair $0 $6,793 $5,000 $35,000 $5,000 $35,000 $5,000 $30,200 0% -14% (1885) Kellis Ballfield Lights $0 $9,000 $9,000 $0 -100% (1885) O'Neil Park Maintenance $0 $0 $0 $4,800 $12,505,291 $12,488,015 $12,479,376 $11,196,253 (1885) Dedicate A Tree (1885) Desert Gardens Park (1885) Desert Mirage Park (1885) Desert Valley Park (1885) Discovery Park (1885) Elsie McCarthy Pk. Maint (1885) GCC Pool Repair (1885) GESD ES Ballfields Total - Parks & Recreation 196 Return to TOC -100% NA -10% City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Parks & Recreation BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $8,302,422 $3,454,659 $8,191,161 $4,232,997 $8,195,999 $4,227,363 $6,846,982 $4,044,704 -16% -4% Internal Premiums $326,908 $255,672 $255,672 $212,253 -17% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $377,490 $138,075 $381,940 $374,097 $368,355 -4% Work Order Credits Total - Parks & Recreation ($94,263) ($573,755) ($573,755) ($276,041) -52% $12,505,291 $12,488,015 $12,479,376 $11,196,253 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Adult Center 6 6 6 8 33% Aquatics 1 1 1 1 0% 2 0.75 2 2 Foothills Recreation Center 10 10 10 8 -20% Glendale Community Center 3 3 3 2 -33% Historic Sahuaro Ranch Marketing - Parks & Rec 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1.75 0% 75% Park Irrigation 4 4 4 3 -25% Park Rangers Parks & Recreation Admin. 4 2 5 2 5 2 3 2 -40% 0% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Audio/Visual Copper Canyon HS Youth Dev Prg -10% Parks CIP & Planning 3 3 3 2 -33% Parks Maintenance 28 27 27 23 -15% Pool Maintenance Recreation Support Services 3 8 3 8 3 8 2 6 -33% -25% Special Events and Programs 2 2 2 1 -50% 5 7.5 5 8.25 5 8.25 5 6.5 0% -21% Sports and Health Youth and Teen Youth Football Hub Grant 1 Rec Self Sust-Foothills Rec Sports Self Sustaining Youth and Teen Self Sustaining Total -Parks & Recreation 1 5 5 5 1 5 0% 99.25 98.25 98.25 84.25 -14% 197 Return to TOC Glendale Civic Center INTERNAL SERVICES City Auditor City Manager’s Office Glendale Civic Center Community Action Program Intergovernmental Programs Marketing and Communications Convention Center, Media Center & Parking Garage Jobing.com Arena Mission and Performance Measure City Auditor's Office CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE Candace MacLeod Department Description: The City Auditor’s Office provides audit and consulting services to management. These services help the city accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control and governance processes. Interesting Department Fact: City management concurred or partially concurred with over 97% of the audit recommendations made in FY 2010. Mission Statement: To conduct independent, objective assurance and consulting activities that add value and improve operations. These activities are conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Consider the effectiveness of the city’s safety and security practices. One community that is fiscally sound. Audit Plan: Risk based audit plan incorporates safety and security concerns. Every audit includes an assessment of compliance with laws and regulations. Allocate audit resources to the areas that pose the greatest risk to the city. One community that is fiscally sound. Audit Plan: Develop a risk based audit plan with focus on improved business processes. Quarterly risk based audit plan with focus on improved business processes. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Audit continued to look for opportunities to increase efficiency and reduce costs by moving to a paperless environment. Work papers, reports and surveys are created, 198 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Auditor's Office distributed and retained electronically. An increase in online training has allowed staff to obtain required professional education hours at a reduced cost. Accomplishments: • During FY 2010, 7 performance audits, 5 information technology audits, 15 special projects and 5 contract audits were completed. • Audit staff serves on three committees and attended four city sponsored events. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Allocate resources to the areas that pose the greatest risk to the city. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes. Quarterly risk based audit plan with focus on improved business What were the Performance Measures? processes. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? None. Consider the effectiveness of the city’s safety and security practices. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes. Every audit includes an assessment of compliance with laws and What were the Performance Measures? regulations. Obstacles/Challenges None. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Audit recognizes the need to continue to look for opportunities to efficiently and effectively accomplish daily tasks with fewer resources. To address this issue, staffing needs were assessed and resulted in one FTE administrative position being replaced with a part-time position. The continued distribution of electronic reports and maintaining electronic working papers has helped in reaching budgetary goals. As the demand for transparency in reporting to the public increases, so does the need for monitoring high risk areas. Audit continues to implement its continuous auditing program as a method for monitoring contract management and procurement card purchases. 199 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Auditor's Office Accomplishments: • During FY 2009 14 audits and 12 special engagements were completed. Each activity included an assessment of compliance with city policies and procedures. • The risk based audit plan was modified to accommodate new risks and changes in the business environment. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Allocate audit resources to areas that pose the greatest risk to the city. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes. Risk based plan with focus on improved controls and business processes. None. Consider the effectiveness of the city’s safety and security practices. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes, 26 audits and special engagements were completed during the first six months of FY 2009. Each activity included an Was the goal met? assessment of compliance with city policies and procedures. Every audit includes an assessment of compliance with laws and What were the Performance Measures? regulations. None. Obstacles/Challenges 200 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department City Auditor FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) City Auditor Total - City Auditor BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $356,138 $361,958 $361,958 $254,348 -30% $356,138 $361,958 $361,958 $254,348 -30% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $339,773 $10,277 $438,958 $10,127 $438,958 $10,127 $254,782 $8,291 Internal Premiums $4,855 $4,222 $4,222 $4,139 -2% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $1,233 $1,001 ($92,350) $1,001 ($92,350) $895 ($13,759) -11% -85% $361,958 $361,958 $254,348 -30% Total - City Auditor STAFFING BY PROGRAM City Auditor Total -City Auditor $356,138 -42% -18% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 4.5 4.5 4.5 2 -56% 4.5 4.5 4.5 2 -56% 201 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE Ed Beasley Department Description: The City Manager’s Office is responsible for providing policy advice to the City Council and to ensure City Council goals are implemented and met through administration of the day-to-day operations of the city. Interesting Department Fact: The City Manager’s Office revised and expanded the Innovate Program by offering training to new core team members who will work throughout the organization in FY 2011 to share the Lean methodology for examining business practices and new business concepts. Mission Statement: To enhance the quality of life for Glendale residents by providing collaborative and supportive leadership for the organization as it implements City Council policy and goals in the provision of valued services to the community. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Encourage organizational change by empowering employees to utilize the Innovate Program (Lean methodology) for streamlining everyday business practices to increase operational efficiency and explore new business concepts. One community with high quality services for citizens. Continue to promote the Innovate program through enhanced communication and intranet updates, and, provide training opportunities for team members. Quantify and report on Innovate Lean events and new business concepts to identify cost savings and value added benefits of the program. Implement the provisions of any Memorandum of Understanding with the new owners of the NHL Coyotes. One community that is fiscally sound. Work with our business partners to complete the necessary revisions to the Arena Management Use and Lease Agreement; form the Community Facilities District or other financial mechanism; and present final agreements to City Council for approval. Successfully implement all provisions related to those agreements. 202 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Manager's Office FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • This year’s United Way Committee, overseen by the City Manager’s Office, implemented a fun and successful organizational campaign while minimizing expenditures to less than $500 by promoting creative events like the Chili Cook-off. • Worked with our community partners to “package” organizational memberships and activities so that Glendale has an opportunity to maintain the same level of visibility within the community while reducing costs associated with those activities. Accomplishments: • Negotiated Memorandums of Understanding with potential buyers of the NHL Coyotes to purchase the team to keep it in Glendale and provided updates to Council in both executive session and public voting meetings. • Coordinated three successful public budget input meetings to gather citizen feedback on proposed General Fund reductions and presented the findings of those meetings to City Council as part of the budget process. GOAL UPDATES Provide leadership and accountability for the organization through vigilant oversight of the city’s budget during economic downturn. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Timely review and distribution of quarterly reports aided in the appropriate decision making related to mid-year adjustments; staffing and programmatic changes, and preparation for the FY What were the 2011 budget which incorporated public input sessions and was Performance Measures? presented to and accepted by Council in two public workshops. This year, departments were challenged to identify new revenue generating opportunities to help reduce operational impacts. Ensuring the basis for evaluating staffing and programmatic Obstacles/Challenges changes were best practices and sound business decisions. Goal Develop, support and implement business processes and initiatives that foster diversity. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? The rollout of the new diversity core competency is complete and all positions at the supervisory level and above will be evaluated on this new component. Additionally, this year the Diversity Committee coordinated and hosted a new program called What were the Performance Measures? “Diversity Dialogue” that addressed a wide array of topics including presentations about unique positions within the city, such as a profile of our military personnel, and exploring multigenerational communications. Goal 203 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Manager's Office Obstacles/Challenges Finding fun and exciting ways to ensure that employees engage in active participation of developing organizational diversity. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The City Manager’s Office placed an emphasis on business practice changes and revived the Strategic Initiatives Group with aggressive marketing and outreach to the organization. • Staff was reduced by one FTE position and the office was able to maintain level of service provided to organization. Accomplishments: • Revived the Strategic Initiatives Group by launching “Innovate” with a focus on encouraging business practice changes in the organization. • Successfully opened Camelback Ranch on March 1, 2009 for the Chicago White Sox and Los Angeles Dodgers spring training season. The 2009 season was one of most successful spring training seasons for both the White Sox and the Dodgers. GOAL UPDATES Provide leadership, vision and accountability for the organization as economic development and redevelopment opportunities Goal surface and require City Council action. One community with quality economic development. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? In December 2008, ASU students working on the Centerline What were the Project presented their findings and recommendations to City Performance Measures? Council. Maintaining the momentum of the project given the current Obstacles/Challenges economic downturn. Develop, support and implement business processes and initiatives that foster diversity. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? A Diversity Administrator was hired and a Diversity Committee Chair was named. Also, as of July 1, 2009, diversity will be What were the Performance Measures? included as a core competency for supervisors and above in the organization. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 204 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department City Manager FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) City Manager Total - City Manager BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums FY 2009 Actual STAFFING BY PROGRAM City Manager Total -City Manager FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,236,446 $1,058,561 $1,058,561 $959,252 -9% $1,236,446 $1,058,561 $1,058,561 $959,252 -9% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,084,465 $136,004 $1,108,730 $160,061 $1,108,730 $160,061 $852,046 $138,466 $11,328 $9,264 $9,264 $9,894 7% $5,068 ($46,222) 14% -79% $959,252 -9% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits Total - City Manager FY 2010 Budget $4,649 $1,236,446 $4,459 ($223,953) $1,058,561 $4,459 ($223,953) $1,058,561 -23% -13% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 9 9 9 7 -22% 9 9 9 7 -22% 205 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Comm. Action Program FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) CAP Local Match (1820) Community Action Program (CAP) Total - Comm. Action Program BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $111,573 $365,290 $133,308 $390,527 $133,308 $390,527 $129,280 $412,557 -3% 6% $476,863 $523,835 $523,835 $541,837 3% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $358,064 $418,792 $418,792 $417,868 Supplies and Contracts $110,244 $118,051 $118,051 $117,486 0% $5,878 $2,677 $5,522 $18,122 $5,522 $18,122 $3,548 $16,633 -36% -8% ($36,652) ($36,652) ($13,698) -63% $476,863 $523,835 $523,835 $541,837 3% Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits Total - Comm. Action Program STAFFING BY PROGRAM Community Action Program (CAP) Total -Comm. Action Program 0% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 7 7 7 7 0% 7 7 7 7 0% 206 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Intergovernmental Programs INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS Brent Stoddard Department Description: The Intergovernmental Programs Department (IGP) coordinates the city’s dealings with federal, state and other local governments and fosters constructive links between the city and these entities. The IGP Department keeps the Mayor and City Council informed about intergovernmental issues and often represents the city’s interests in these matters. In addition, IGP handles special projects as assigned by the Mayor, Council and city management. Interesting Department Fact: The city of Glendale is currently represented in the United States Congress by two Arizona Senators, elected to six-year terms (staggered) and two Congressional Representatives elected to two-year terms. Mission Statement: The mission of the Intergovernmental Programs Department is to develop, represent and advocate the city’s legislative policy decisions by consistently and effectively interacting with other governmental and non-governmental entities. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Successfully advocate the city's position on issues at the Arizona Legislature, United States Congress and other governmental bodies. One community with high quality services for citizens Work with legislators, the governor's office, board of supervisors, congressional representatives, other elected officials and local and regional decision making bodies to advocate for and against issues which impact Glendale residents. Successful implementation of the city’s legislative agenda. Increase federal issues the IGP Department becomes involved with and is actively engaged in at the federal level. One community with high quality services for citizens. Actively work with Congress and agencies to assure issues arising at the federal level promote the quality of life for Glendale residents and businesses through beneficial legislation, grant opportunities and regulatory revisions. 207 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Intergovernmental Programs Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Administer a federal program that assures full participation in federal issues of all types to enhance the quality of life for Glendale residents and businesses. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The department continued the process of assigning a key liaison for each department practice that has provided for more thorough and responsive engagement on issues of potential impact to the city. • The department is cross training all liaisons in each of the department functions to provide seamless customer support to internal and external customers. • The department has transitioned to electronic review of legislation preventing the printing of over 1,300 bills that would have totaled several thousand pages. Accomplishments: • The department was successful in bringing in over $1 million in federal appropriations to the city which advanced several capital projects such as maintaining city infrastructure. • The department was successful in assisting the Grants Division obtain over $18 million in federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act stimulus funding. GOAL UPDATES Successfully advocate the city's position on issues at the legislature, congress and other governmental bodies. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Protecting the core state shared revenue streams at the 15% What were the distribution level even in the midst of a $3.7 billion statewide Performance Measures? budget deficit. The Arizona State Legislature swept the lottery money in LTAF to assist in their budget deficit. Staff is working to get the program Obstacles/Challenges and funding restored. Goal Educate Glendale citizens on the legislative process and encourage their active involvement on issues of importance to the city. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes, a two session Neighborhood Legislative Link Program was Was the goal met? implemented. Positive feedback from residents on the implementation of the What were the Performance Measures? program. Some sessions were eliminated due to ongoing budget reductions. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 208 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Intergovernmental Programs FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The department continued the practice of assigning a key liaison for each department practice that has provided for more thorough and responsive engagement on issues of potential impact to the city. • We participated in audio conferences relating to opportunities for federal funding and, as a result, reduced travel expense. • Communicated with employees and Glendale residents through weekly legislative updates. Accomplishments: • Citizen participation at “Neighborhood Day” at the legislature and citizen participation in the Neighborhood Legislative Link Program. • Preserved state shared revenue distributions at the 15% distribution level. • Protected the mission of Luke Air Force Base through local and federal efforts. • Elevated Glendale federal priorities and issues with members of congress, the Arizona delegation and the administration through continued use of federal representation. GOAL UPDATES Successfully advocate the city's position on issues at the State Legislature, congress and other governmental bodies. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Advocating for or against legislation that could affect the city in a What were the Performance Measures? positive or negative way. Negotiating compromises with competing interest groups were a Obstacles/Challenges challenge. Goal Educate Glendale residents on the legislative process and encourage their active involvement on issues of importance to the city. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes, a six session Neighborhood Legislative Link Program was Was the goal met? implemented. Positive feedback from residents on the implementation of the What were the Performance Measures? program. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 209 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Intergovt. Programs FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Intergovernmental Programs Total - Intergovt. Programs BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $702,599 $475,837 $500,992 $721,549 52% $702,599 $475,837 $500,992 $721,549 52% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $380,420 $316,018 $396,803 $89,169 $396,803 $114,324 $426,547 $312,595 7% 251% Internal Premiums $4,928 $4,152 $4,152 $3,723 -10% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $1,233 $1,194 ($15,481) $1,194 ($15,481) $1,266 ($22,582) 6% 46% $475,837 $500,992 $721,549 52% Total - Intergovt. Programs STAFFING BY PROGRAM Intergovernmental Programs Total -Intergovt. Programs $702,599 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 4 4 4 4 0% 4 4 4 4 0% 210 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Civic Center GLENDALE CIVIC CENTER Julie Frisoni Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Civic Center provides competitively priced The Glendale Civic Center has been event space and services for businesses, social ranked one of the top five facilities of gatherings and the community. The ability to its size for the past five years by provide state-of-the-art conference support and Arizona Business Magazine. technology has an appeal to business groups and associations looking for a full-service conference center. The Civic Center serves as a hospitality venue that introduces residents and nonresidents to downtown Glendale, which produces a positive economic impact for our city. Mission Statement: The Civic Center will provide high-quality meeting and banquet facilities and service to encourage local economic growth and promote a positive identity for the city of Glendale. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Increase facility usage and overcome obstacles set forth by downturn in local and state economies. One community that is fiscally sound and that has a vibrant city center. Increase the Civic Center’s identity through the internet, cable programming, increased facility tours, sales collateral and face-toface marketing at community and citywide functions. Increase/restore the center’s revenue production in FY 2011 to meet and exceed FY 2010’s goal by 3%. Goal Promote and sell the Civic Center’s new audio-visual capabilities to clients. Goal Related Council Goal Activities Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) One community that is fiscally sound. Promote the facility’s in-house audio-visual services during sales calls, site tours, social networking, in the center’s electronic newsletter and in all new marketing materials. Integrate the audiovisual team into the Civic Center sales process. Allow the audiovisual staff to sell their service to clients to help create new revenue for the facility. Anticipate an increase of 10% in audio-visual revenue. 211 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Civic Center FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Now that the city’s audio-visual staff has joined the Civic Center team, the facility is now a “one-stop shop” for clients. Before clients had to outsource, or use an outside vendor if the Civic Center could not meet their audio-visual needs. This new addition allows the city to be the exclusive audio-visual provider for the Civic Center. This is not only convenient for guests but has also created a new revenue stream for the Civic Center. Providing top-notch, high-end audio-visual services also keeps the Civic Center competitive with other meeting facilities across the Valley. Accomplishments: • WeddingWire named the Civic Center one of the top venues in the state as part of its 2010 Bride's Choice Awards. • Held the first annual Glendale Civic Center Car Show in March 2010. • Worked with Glendale 11 to create a promotional video tour that highlights the Glendale Civic Center and why it is the place to book your event. It is available to view online. • Glendale Civic Center was featured on the Glendale 11 program - Glendale A-Z. An extensive photo shoot of the facility was completed that will be used in all future print, online, promotional and collateral pieces to highlight and market the facility. GOAL UPDATES Goal Increase facility usage of the Civic Center. One community with a vibrant city center. Related Council Goal Attendance at the Civic Center stayed the same from FY 2009 to Was the goal met? FY 2010. Event days at the Civic Center are at about 90% of where they What were the were last year. The staff also increased the client database by 3% Performance Measures? over last year. Economy related issues especially in the hospitality industry have been challenging. The Civic Center staff is working hard to Obstacles/Challenges increase business in conjunction with the caterer, Fabulous Food. Maintain a high level of customer satisfaction demonstrated through customer service evaluations. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? The Civic Center has maintained a 98% customer approval rating What were the Performance Measures? in client evaluations surveys for 2010. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 212 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Civic Center FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The Civic Center is working through Human Resources to promote the ASU West Intern Development Program. The program is budget-friendly by using non-paid interns. The program provides hands-on training and education to those studying recreation and tourism management. The program has been a complement to the Civic Center’s service and sales efforts. Accomplishments: • Over 600 hours of comprehensive sales coordination assistance, at no expense, was achieved through the Civic Center’s volunteer intern program. • The Civic Center was rated one of the top 10 meeting and convention centers in the entire state of Arizona through a business poll conducted by Arizona Business Magazine. GOAL UPDATES Goal Increase patron attendance at the Glendale Civic Center and grow the potential client database. One community with a vibrant city center. Attendance at the Civic Center stayed the same from FY 2008 to Was the goal met? FY 2009 and staff increased the client database by 5%. An increase in facility usage and client database over the prior What were the Performance Measures? year. Economic conditions have caused a slow-down in the meeting industry. The current economy has resulted in some clients Obstacles/Challenges having to scale back, reduce or cancel events due to their organizational budget restrictions. Related Council Goal Goal Maintain a high level of customer satisfaction demonstrated through customer service evaluations. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Client evaluation surveys. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges 213 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Civic Center FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1740) Civic Center Total - Civic Center BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $850,677 $853,241 $853,241 $748,497 -12% $850,677 $853,241 $853,241 $748,497 -12% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $665,831 $153,244 $669,894 $176,042 $669,894 $176,042 $553,721 $185,936 -17% 6% Internal Premiums $16,836 $13,780 $13,780 $12,910 -6% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $14,766 $13,999 ($20,474) $13,999 ($20,474) $14,151 ($18,221) 1% -11% $850,677 $853,241 $853,241 $748,497 -12% Total - Civic Center STAFFING BY PROGRAM Civic Center Total -Civic Center FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 7 7 7 6 -14% 7 7 7 6 -14% 214 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Marketing/Communications MARKETING/COMMUNICATIONS Julie Frisoni Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Marketing/Communications Department The city’s website, glendaleaz.com, consists of seven divisions, including attracted nearly 2 million visits from administration, creative services, Glendale 11, July 1, 2009 - Jan. 31, 2010. public relations, special events, tourism and web services. The department is responsible for keeping community stakeholders regularly informed of Glendale programs, services and activities through the city’s print and electronic communications. The department also develops and implements communications programs and marketing campaigns that enhance the city’s image. The city’s signature festivals, which are produced by department personnel, attract approximately 500,000 visitors to downtown Glendale annually. In addition, the department manages the Glendale Media Center at Westgate City Center. Mission Statement: To develop and implement marketing and public relations programs, resident communications and visitors services that promote Glendale and ensure the city’s key messages are delivered to target audiences in an accurate, timely and cost-effective manner. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Transition the Glendale Visitors Center into a new Glendale Convention & Visitors Bureau (CVB) to enhance tourism marketing efforts. One community with quality economic development Develop a membership and fee structure; increase the number of sales leads in both the leisure travel and convention markets; and implement a membership drive to solicit and attract members. Open the CVB in the summer of 2010. Develop partnerships with businesses to maintain quality of city festivals. One community with a vibrant city center. Work with the Economic Development Department to identify new sponsor leads, develop/implement best industry practices and meet personally with new potential sponsors. Secure cash and sponsorships to offset production costs of the city’s signature festivals. 215 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Marketing/Communications FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • In an effort to reduce paper and ink cartridge costs, the creative services division now emails project “proofs,” such as brochures, flyers and logo designs, to client departments in PDF format, rather than print a hard copy as was done in the past. Accomplishments: • The public relations office developed and implemented centennial-themed promotions and events throughout the year in recognition of Glendale’s 100th anniversary. • Marketing/Communications served as the liaison between the city and World Wrestling Entertainment in coordinating logistical support and city services for Wrestlemania XXVI. The event, which was held March 28, 2010, was the bestattended, highest-grossing entertainment event in the history of University of Phoenix Stadium. The event attracted 72,219 fans, about one thousand more than attended Super Bowl XLII in the same building. GOAL UPDATES Increase membership in the West Valley Events Coalition. This group was recently formed to position the region as a preferred Goal year-round destination for conventions, meetings and major events. One community with quality economic development. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? The coalition has grown from 6 partners to more than 150 partners What were the from the West Valley. Representatives include hoteliers, Performance Measures? restaurateurs, meeting planners, venues and attractions. Obstacles/Challenges Continuing outreach to the entire West Valley and implementing a comprehensive print advertising campaign with limited funds. Goal Maintain level of users for city’s three websites and continue cross promoting sites. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Visitor numbers were maintained as major sports and entertainment district events and news items played a large role in What were the cross promoting the city’s three websites. In addition, the Arizona Performance Measures? Cardinals run to the Super Bowl attracted a tremendous amount of visitors to the city’s websites. None. Obstacles/Challenges Related Council Goal Was the goal met? 216 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Marketing/Communications FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • Marketing/Communications expanded its marketing toolbox to include “social media” as a way to market city events and activities through popular websites on the Internet. The department recently launched a web page on Facebook.com that allows users of this social networking site to join the Glendale group and find shortcut links to important city information. Accomplishments: • Marketing/Communications received two Gold Pinnacle Awards for the “Best Commemorative Poster” that was created for Glendale’s 25th Annual Gibson Jazz & Blues Festival and for “Best Press/Media Kit” created for the festival. Both the poster and media kit were produced by the department’s special events, creative services and public information employees. The Gold Pinnacle Awards are the highest honor bestowed by the International Festival and Events Association. • Glendale 11 the city’s cable station won a prestigious Emmy Award in the politics/government program category for “Glendale’s Got Game.” The entry was a compilation of three shows that featured the city’s preparations for Super Bowl XLII, as well as the week’s events leading up to the big game. The TV shows were created and produced by the station’s team of eight employees. GOAL UPDATES Promote the Glendale Media Center to external media outlets and production companies. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? The facility was used extensively by media outlets during the Fiesta Bowl and the Arizona Cardinals 2008 NFC Championship What were the Performance Measures? football games, as well as during the NCAA Men’s Basketball West Region tournament in March. Budget cutbacks among media outlets have reduced or eliminated the amount of travel and production staff the media are sending to Obstacles/Challenges cover these large sporting events. Goal Goal Position Glendale as a premiere destination with Valley residents and out-of-state visitors. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Maintain festival attendance from last year’s attendance record. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges 217 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Marketing and Comm. FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Audio/Visual (1000) Cable Communications (1000) City-Wide Special Events FY 2009 Actual $0 $762,724 FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $0 $732,223 FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $0 $732,223 $208,812 $707,169 NA -3% $319,545 $313,098 $313,098 $304,676 -3% $1,326,935 $50,823 $1,180,221 $46,804 $1,180,496 $46,804 $934,636 $0 -21% -100% (1000) Tourism $424,924 $414,518 $414,243 $335,747 -19% (1281) Mkt'g - Stadium Events $153,743 $169,000 $169,000 $106,500 -37% (1870) 4th of July (1870) Audio/Visual - Self Sust. $49,724 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,118 NA NA (1000) Marketing (1000) Special Events Prod. Support (1870) Chocolate Affaire $132,344 $104,000 $104,000 $104,000 0% (1870) Convention & Visitors Bureau (1870) Enchanted Evening $0 $87,097 $0 $44,700 $0 $44,700 $30,000 $44,700 NA 0% (1870) Fiesta Glendale $40,172 $0 $0 $0 NA (1870) Glitter and Glow $93,376 $95,500 $95,500 $95,500 0% (1870) Glitter Spectacular (1870) Glitters Light $140,223 $179,184 $99,000 $155,798 $99,000 $155,798 $99,000 $155,798 0% 0% (1870) Jazz Festival $162,132 $158,000 $158,000 $158,000 0% $94,262 $96,353 $30,000 $0 $30,000 $0 $30,000 $0 0% NA (1870) Other Special Events (1870) That Thursday Thing (1870) Tourism - Souvenir Program Total - Marketing and Comm. BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES $46,513 $10,000 $10,000 $5,000 -50% $4,160,074 $3,552,862 $3,552,862 $3,350,656 -6% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $2,370,802 $2,621,552 $2,636,561 $2,384,707 -9% Supplies and Contracts $1,619,757 $1,066,815 $1,051,806 $941,322 -12% $110,695 $58,820 $78,583 $51,982 $78,583 $51,982 $135,168 $14,081 72% -73% ($124,622) -53% $4,160,074 $3,552,862 Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits Total - Marketing and Comm. ($266,070) ($266,070) $3,552,862 $3,350,656 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate Cable Communications 7 7 7 7 0% City-Wide Special Events Marketing 4 13 4 14 4 14 4 10 0% -29% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Audio/Visual Tourism Total -Marketing and Comm. FY 2011 Budget -6% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0% 27.5 28.5 28.5 26.5 -7% 218 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Conv./Media/Parking FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Convention/Media/Parking (1000) Media Center Operations Total - Conv./Media/Parking BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges FY 2009 Actual STAFFING BY PROGRAM Media Center Operations Total -Conv./Media/Parking FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,191,568 $170,308 $1,375,841 $167,221 $275,841 $167,221 $316,256 $149,346 -77% -11% $1,361,876 $1,543,062 $443,062 $465,602 -70% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $99,442 $102,171 $102,171 $102,477 0% $1,011,201 $1,321,834 $221,834 $186,774 -86% $248,221 $3,012 $107,582 $14,696 $107,582 $14,696 $165,373 $16,380 54% 11% $1,361,876 $1,543,062 Work Order Credits Total - Conv./Media/Parking FY 2010 Budget ($3,221) ($3,221) $443,062 ($5,402) $465,602 68% -70% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1 1 1 1 0% 1 1 1 1 0% 219 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Fac & Fin Mgmt FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Facilities & Financial Mgmt Total - Fac & Fin Mgmt BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $329,298 $176,902 $176,902 $329,298 $176,902 $176,902 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $319,017 $4,541 $278,565 $6,514 $278,565 $6,514 Internal Premiums $3,473 $2,711 $2,711 Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $2,267 Total - Fac & Fin Mgmt STAFFING BY PROGRAM Facilities & Financial Mgmt Total -Fac & Fin Mgmt $329,298 $2,263 ($113,151) $2,263 ($113,151) $176,902 $176,902 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate 2 2 2 2 2 2 220 Return to TOC FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $0 -100% FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Glendale Fire Dept. PUBLIC SAFETY Glendale Fire Department Glendale Police Department Glendale Police Officers Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Fire Department GLENDALE FIRE DEPARTMENT Chief Mark Burdick Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Glendale Fire Department provides core life In 2009, a roster of approximately 60 safety services through the following volunteers contributed 19,623 hours divisions/programs: fire suppression and property to the Crisis Response Program, with preservation; basic and advanced life support an estimated value of $397,356. (paramedics); hazardous & technical response teams; bicycle medic team; child safety car seat installation; fire code enforcement; fire investigation; urban survival instructors; S.W.A.T paramedics; disaster management programs; alternative response; juvenile fire setter program and community education. Mission Statement: Fast - Caring - Innovative - Professional FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Improve our internal and external customer service through continuous assessment, progressive management and quality personnel practices. One community focused on public safety. Implement and conduct a quality improvement plan for emergency medical services in accordance with Arizona Department of Health Services Rule R9-25-206. At a minimum, review various categories of pre-hospital patient encounters to assure that both pre-hospital and base hospital personnel followed established protocols and base hospital procedures. Implement a process and documentation procedure to develop a corrective action plan when review of cases indicates a lapse in following protocol or procedure. Provide fast, effective emergency response to our community through proper support and deployment of staffing, apparatus and equipment. One community focused on public safety. Provide and maintain two-person peak-time medic units, when possible, to help reduce response times, improve reliability of paramedic engine and ladder companies. 221 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Fire Department Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) M155 will be staffed 50 percent of the time. The Glendale Fire Department’s service level objective for first arriving unit at an emergency medical incident is: for 90% of all code three, 911 emergent incidents, the first unit will arrive on the scene in less than six minutes (travel time). Advanced Life Support (ALS) units shall arrive on scene within eight minutes (travel time), 90% of the time. However, we strive to meet the National Fire Protection Association Standard 1710 travel time of four minutes. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Through an effective labor/management process, a third ladder truck has been deployed by utilizing existing resources, providing the city with an alternative fire suppression vehicle. Emergency medical services were also enhanced as the department has converted its three ladder trucks into Advanced Life Support (ALS) units, and staffing them with paramedics. This simple service improvement will increase the department’s ALS response capability by 20%. The department also embarked on a year-long study to re-evaluate its deployment plan, and set about redistributing apparatus to improve response capability and coverage throughout the city. The redistribution is based on the analysis of incident data and emergency response travel times collected for each square mile in Glendale, not only has that resulted in the above-mentioned ladder truck conversion, the command officers have also been redeployed to provide better coverage to the city. The department will continue to evaluate the effect of these changes to ensure optimal coverage and efficiency throughout the city. Accomplishments: • In July, Fire Station 151 opened for business in its new location at 52nd Avenue and Lamar, providing emergency responders more immediate access to arterial streets in the busy downtown area. • Six emergency response vehicles were replaced, providing the community with continually reliable, mechanically sound equipment. New vehicles include two ladder trucks, two ladder tenders, two engine pumpers and one hazardous materials truck. GOAL UPDATES Reduce the impact of pain and suffering within our community through crisis intervention and response. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. In 2009, the department’s two crisis response units were Was the goal met? dispatched a total of 2,677 incidents. Ensure an adequate pool of volunteers to provide capability to What were the Performance Measures? respond to a minimum of 1,000 calls per year. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 222 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Fire Department Improve our internal and external customer service through continuous assessment, progressive management and quality Goal personnel practices. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. The department’s 2009 Annual Compliance Report was unanimously accepted by the Commission on Fire Accreditation Was the goal met? International. Report annually to the Center for Public Safety Excellence to What were the Performance Measures? ensure compliance and maintaining accredited status. None. Obstacles/Challenges FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The Glendale Fire Department has been actively involved in providing training on a new CPR method called continuous chest compressions (CCC). This new method has proven successful with survival rates in cardiac arrest patients. Glendale Fire has been featured in local and national media due to our continued efforts in CCC. Accomplishments: • A successful partnership with Daisy Mountain Fire and Scottsdale Healthcare allowed for the opening of the health center at the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center. The scheduling and performing of physicals began in April 2009. • Completed an IGA with the University of Arizona to participate in the RAMPART study that has the potential of doing the following: • Raise the standard of care for the citizens, • Enhance training for our paramedics, • Provide a link between Glendale Fire and the National Institutes of Health, • Provide care for the public at no cost to Glendale, and • Provide training for our paramedics at no cost to Glendale GOAL UPDATES Reduce the loss of life within the community through pro-active public education programs. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Provide education to 10% of the city population over two years What were the Performance Measures? and reduce 911 calls by .5% in the first year and 1% in year two. We met the education measurement by providing proactive public education to 10.6% of Glendale’s population. 911 calls increased Obstacles/Challenges slightly this year, therefore, the reduction of 911 calls by 0.5% was not met. Goal 223 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Fire Department Goal Prepare for catastrophic events and minimize risk to our community. One community focused on public safety. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Conduct one CERT class per year. Performance Measures? Securing grant funding and purchasing the equipment needed to provide the training. Also, due to the age of the grant, staff was Obstacles/Challenges required to rewrite the grant to fit the needs of today’s program in order to purchase the required equipment. 224 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Fire Department FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO) (1000) Ambulance Services (1000) Fire Administration (1000) Fire Community Services (1000) Fire Marshal's Office (1000) Fire Medical Services & Health (1000) Fire Operations (1000) Fire Resource Management (1000) Fire Special Operations (1000) Fire Training FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $729,781 $450,099 $766,930 $511,976 $766,930 $511,976 $751,491 $492,393 -2% -4% $2,109,180 $1,970,176 $1,970,176 $1,637,270 -17% $59,991 $993,905 $19,250 $1,092,857 $19,250 $1,092,857 $19,250 $824,255 0% -25% -34% $74,522 $86,479 $86,135 $56,983 $18,097,109 $18,260,976 $18,270,256 $17,312,530 -5% $2,519,277 $24,013 $2,502,839 $25,907 $2,502,839 $25,907 $1,937,224 $16,293 -23% -37% $91,063 $38,694 $38,694 $13,656 -65% (1000) PS Training Ctr - Fire (1281) Fire - Fiesta Bowl Event $610,272 $89,782 $709,310 $159,942 $709,310 $159,942 $577,227 $159,942 -19% 0% (1281) Stadium - Fire Event Staffing $274,228 $229,886 $229,886 $229,886 0% (1282) Arena - Fire Event Staffing $204,719 $299,456 $299,456 $300,008 0% $5,191,114 $944,174 $5,692,430 $2,925,000 $5,682,085 $2,925,000 $6,135,642 $4,500,000 8% 54% $798,305 $864,824 $834,824 $760,451 -12% $5,907 $54,000 $54,000 $54,000 0% $33,267,441 $36,210,932 $36,179,523 $35,778,501 -1% (1720) Fire - Special Revenue Fund (1840) Grant Approp - Fire Dept (2530) PS Training Ops - Fire (2538) Glendale Health Center Total - Fire Department 225 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Fire Department BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $27,054,363 $4,291,838 $29,473,629 $6,120,941 $29,472,220 $6,090,941 $27,837,822 $7,068,344 Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Operating Capital Work Order Credits Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -6% 15% $919,365 $737,555 $737,555 $798,613 8% $1,057,327 $50,553 $1,164,793 $1,164,793 $938,024 -19% ($864,302) -33% ($1,285,986) ($1,285,986) $33,267,441 $36,210,932 $36,179,523 $35,778,501 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO) 4 4 4 4 0% Ambulance Services 2 2 2 2 0% 13.5 5 17.5 17.5 13 -26% -17% Total - Fire Department STAFFING BY PROGRAM Fire Administration Fire Community Services ($106,005) -1% Fire Life Safety Services Adm. 1 Fire Marshal's Office 12 12 12 10 Fire Medical Services & Health Fire Operations 3 186 195 195 188 -4% Fire Resource Management 7 6 6 4 -33% Fire Training Arena - Fire Event Staffing 3 1 1 1 1 0% Fire - Special Revenue Fund 50 50 50 51 2% PS Training Ops - Fire 6 6 6 6 0% 293.5 293.5 293.5 279 -5% Total -Fire Department 226 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Police Department GLENDALE POLICE DEPARTMENT Chief Steve Conrad Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The year was filled with many challenges for the Despite a high unemployment rate, Glendale Police Department and its members. The overall crime fell 7.6% in 2009 in greatest economic crisis since the Depression Glendale (UCR Part I Offenses). affected every single person and profoundly impacted our ability to provide the wide range of services identified in our mission. Nevertheless, the department persevered due greatly to the dedication and diligence of talented and loyal employees. In an environment of unprecedented challenges, the Glendale Police Department is committed to its focus on preventing crime and maintaining order, while supporting numerous major events. Despite the obvious financial limitations, the organization continues to emphasize the development of professional knowledge and leadership skills within our ranks and retain exemplary men and women who reflect our community. A progressive mindset encourages one and all to seek innovative techniques and emerging technologies in order to accomplish our mission. Community participation in formulating police strategies is critical to success. The department strives to provide the most effective possible response to law enforcement emergencies, neighborhood problems and the enforcement of traffic laws, ensuring that Glendale continues to be a desirable place to live, raise a family, educate, recreate and do business. Everything done, collectively or individually, is done in accordance with department values and objectives. Mission Statement: The mission of the Glendale Police Department is to protect the lives and property of the people we serve. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Enhance response to crime. One community focused on public safety. • Improved response to victims, their needs and access to services • Increase communications with victims regarding case status • Focus enforcement efforts on reducing repeat victimization and Hot Spots Reduce Part I crimes by 5%. 227 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Police Department Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Enhance community outreach. One community focused on public safety. • Increase in promotion of neighborhood watch groups • Creation of business watch program • Conduct citizen customer service survey • Improve volunteer program Increase the citizen contacts through increased programming and increased participation. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The department works diligently to provide up-to-date technology and equipment. During 2009, federal grant funding was obtained for an in-car video camera recording system that will be installed in the coming months. A number of projects were implemented to provide new access to databases of information; the Justice Web Interface provides improved access to ACIC, NLETS, NCIC and other criminal justice databases at unusual locations such as field surveillance locations, the DUI van and the stadium. Glendale joined Phoenix COPLINK – an analytical program providing central data warehouse enabling agencies to easily combine crime and intelligence data quickly. New police radios provide access to other jurisdictions such as Phoenix, Tolleson, Tempe, Goodyear, and many other channels throughout the Valley and the region as well as national talk channels. These combined enhancements bring vast amounts of information to the police officer and enables them to address crime more effectively. Accomplishments: • Overall UCR Part 1 Crime fell 7.6% in 2009 in Glendale. Violent Crime (Homicide, Rape, Robbery and Aggravated Assault) is down 13.7%; it has not been this low since 1996. Property Crime (Burglary, Theft, and Auto Theft) is down 7% which returns us to 2007 levels. Priority 1, 3, 4 and 5 Calls for Service were at their lowest in 14 years. We had a second year of significant reductions in traffic collisions-the lowest in 10 years. 2009 saw 1,126 fewer victims of crime in our community compared to 2008. • Volunteers provide great value to the department and contributed over 15,000 hours of time in support of our programs. This is the equivalent of about eight full time employees. Our dedicated group of 144 active volunteers (a 64% increase over 2008) provided assistance in a variety of areas including the license plate reader program, parking enforcement, sky watch, advanced officer training, and others. We made expansion of the reserve officer program a goal in 2009, intending to double the size of the program which stood at eight officers. Seven new reserve officers started with the department in February 2010. Once trained, this cadre of sworn volunteers will serve 228 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Police Department in patrol, to help ensure our staffing levels remain high. Explorer Post 2469, the longest standing post in Arizona, is comprised of 33 young people who strive to someday become police officers. During 2009 explorers contributed 4,333 hours of service to department and community events. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Enhance response to crime. One community focused on public safety. Yes. Was the goal met? What were the Larceny-theft showed a 7.1% decline Performance Measures? The vacancy rate increased from 5.3% in 2008 to 7.8% in 2009 making it a challenge to maintain adequate response to citizen Obstacles/Challenges requests for service. Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Enhance community outreach. One community focused on public safety. Yes. At least 16 new Neighborhood Watch programs were initiated in What were the Performance Measures? 2009. Obstacles/Challenges None. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Accomplishments: • In 2008, violent crime was down in Glendale by almost 15% as compared to 2007. A significant reduction in aggravated assaults, which were down over 28%, was responsible for the decrease in violent crime. Burglaries were down over 4% and auto thefts were down almost 22%. • Through the use of zone deployment, response times to all calls for service were reduced significantly. Under zone deployment, patrol officers are assigned to one of four patrol zones and patrol sergeants work with their officers to manage calls for service assigned to their zones. This approach facilitates problem solving, provides a concentration of personnel in neighborhoods experiencing higher crime level, and allows significant flexibility in deploying patrol resources to address emerging crime trends. This approach resulted in reduced respond times and an increased level of officer safety. 229 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Police Department GOAL UPDATES Goal Reduce Part I violent crime by 10 percent. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? What were the Part I violent crime decreased almost 15% compared to 2007. Performance Measures? Robberies, which are included in the Part I violent crime category, Obstacles/Challenges increased even though overall violent crime total decreased. Goal Related Council Goal Review internal practices for quality and effectiveness within the department. One community focused on high quality services for citizens. Yes. Was the goal met? What were the Prepare work flow studies of practices and process. Performance Measures? The number one obstacle was the lack of staffing to continue the Obstacles/Challenges project. 230 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Police Department FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget (1000) Central Patrol Bureau (1000) Crime Investigations $11,092,747 $8,559,441 $11,351,409 $8,457,862 $11,351,409 $8,457,862 $10,515,737 $8,267,040 -7% -2% (1000) Foothills Patrol Bureau $10,440,962 $10,685,898 $10,685,898 $9,724,831 -9% (1000) PD - Communications (1000) PD - Detention $2,419,250 $2,324,437 $2,482,401 $2,284,386 $2,482,401 $2,284,386 $2,364,899 $1,339,259 -5% -41% (1000) PD - Emergency Management Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $0 $0 $0 $798,161 NA (1000) PD - Fiscal Management $1,614,917 $1,874,647 $1,874,647 $2,568,104 37% (1000) PD - Special Operations (1000) PD - Tow Administration $4,990,116 $102,532 $4,453,733 $61,346 $4,453,733 $61,346 $4,241,005 $61,063 -5% 0% (1000) Police Administration $3,658,384 $3,467,476 $3,467,476 $2,838,805 -18% (1000) Police Legal Services (1000) Police Personnel Management $300,545 $2,146,690 $250,072 $2,595,905 $250,072 $2,595,905 $145,530 $2,359,090 -42% -9% (1000) Police Support Services $2,912,141 $2,206,873 $2,206,873 $1,335,121 -40% (1000) PS Training Ctr - Police $610,272 $709,310 $709,310 $577,227 -19% $311,870 $1,511,451 $401,268 $1,336,109 $401,268 $1,336,109 $401,268 $1,341,354 0% 0% (1281) PD - Fiesta Bowl Event (1281) Stadium - PD Event Staffing (1282) Arena-PD Event Staffing (1700) Patrol - Special Revenue Fund (1840) Grant Approp - Police Dept (1840) Victim Rights - PD (1840) VOCA 2003-113 (1842) JAG Recovery Act (1842) Stop Violence - Women (1860) Federal RICO (1860) State RICO (2530) PS Training Ops - Police Total - Police Department $518,786 $836,672 $836,672 $836,831 0% $10,185,467 $2,130,507 $11,985,031 $3,400,000 $11,985,031 $3,400,000 $12,586,512 $4,500,000 5% 32% $80,097 $100,688 $100,688 $102,667 2% $101,468 $106,983 $106,983 $117,206 10% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,982 $740,863 $115,978 NA NA 0% $4,230 $225,000 $225,000 $225,000 $1,501,886 $298,893 $1,099,312 $412,869 $1,099,312 $412,869 $1,099,389 $331,162 0% -20% $67,817,089 $70,785,250 $70,806,232 $69,534,102 -2% 231 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Police Department BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $54,408,383 $8,523,403 $57,246,107 $10,516,374 $57,246,107 $10,520,576 $53,224,454 $12,348,928 Internal Premiums $3,042,133 $2,396,919 $2,396,919 $2,403,323 0% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $2,052,662 $571,410 $2,549,266 $256,378 $2,549,266 $273,158 $2,382,238 $102,074 -7% -60% Work Order Credits ($2,179,794) ($2,179,794) $70,785,250 $70,806,232 $69,534,102 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Central Patrol Bureau 128.5 120 120 120 0% Crime Investigations 80 85 85 83 -2% 106.5 34.5 116 35.5 116 35.5 110 32.5 -5% -8% 13 13 13 10 -23% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Foothills Patrol Bureau PD - Communications PD - Detention PD - Emergency Management ($926,915) -7% 17% $67,817,089 Total - Police Department ($780,902) Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -57% -2% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 6 PD - Special Operations PD - Tow Administration 48 1 44 1 44 1 38 1 -14% 0% Police Administration 22 26 26 19 -27% Police Legal Services Police Personnel Management 4 21 2 29 2 29 1 25 -50% -14% 44.5 31.5 31.5 19.5 -38% 2 2 2 2 0% 1 118 1 118 1 118 1 118 0% 0% 1 1 1 0% 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 0% 0% Police Support Services Stadium - PD Event Staffing Arena-PD Event Staffing Patrol - Special Revenue Fund Victim Rights - PD VOCA 2003-113 State RICO 2 0.5 PS Training Ops - Police Total -Police Department 2 2 2 2 0% 628.5 628.5 628.5 590.5 -6% 232 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Homeland Security FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Emergency Operations Ctr (EOC) (1000) Homeland Security Admin. Total - Homeland Security BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate $740,999 $125,564 $681,241 $121,942 $681,241 $121,942 $866,563 $803,183 $803,183 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate Wages/Salaries/Benefits $546,163 $572,003 $572,003 Supplies and Contracts $268,911 $298,185 $298,185 $8,644 $35,417 $8,366 $31,164 $8,366 $31,164 ($106,535) ($106,535) $803,183 $803,183 Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $866,563 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate Emergency Operations Ctr (EOC) 6 6 6 Homeland Security Admin. 1 1 1 7 7 7 STAFFING BY PROGRAM Total -Homeland Security Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $0 $0 -100% -100% FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $7,428 Work Order Credits Total - Homeland Security FY 2011 Budget 233 Return to TOC Wastewater Collection Truck PUBLIC WORKS Public Works Administration Environmental Resources Field Operations Transportation Utilities Glendale Landfill gas to energy facility City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Public Works Admin. FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Public Works Administration Total - Public Works Admin. BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $204,370 $203,137 $203,137 $198,125 -2% $204,370 $203,137 $203,137 $198,125 -2% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $197,059 $4,558 $200,866 $6,347 $200,866 $6,347 $201,564 $5,026 Internal Premiums $1,559 $1,231 $1,231 $1,266 3% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $1,194 $1,250 ($6,557) $1,250 ($6,557) $1,267 ($10,998) 1% 68% $198,125 -2% Total - Public Works Admin. $204,370 $203,137 $203,137 0% -21% STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Public Works Administration 1 1 1 1 0% 1 1 1 1 0% Total -Public Works Admin. 234 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES Doug Kukino Department Description: The Environmental Resources Department provides policy analysis and planning services to elected officials, city leadership and departments on issues pertaining to water resources, water quality, air quality and environmental management/ compliance. The department assists the city in conducting its operations in an environmentally responsible manner and creates an organizational culture that strives for excellence in environmental stewardship and performance. Interesting Department Fact: In order to create a culture of environmental stewardship and performance, the Environmental Resources Department held classes on environmental awareness, dust control, storm water practices, water conservation, and water resources planning. Over 375 city employees from over 12 departments attended a training session in 2010. Mission Statement: The department’s mission is to ensure the city has sufficient water resources for sustainable development and is a leader in environmental stewardship. The environmental division’s mission is to establish and implement an environmental management system that assists the city to operate in an environmentally responsible manner. The water conservation office’s mission is to develop a progressive and comprehensive water conservation program that promotes efficient water use by providing the information and inspiration needed to save water. The water quality laboratory’s mission is to protect public health and the environment by testing and documenting the quality of drinking and reclaimed water, and reporting the results to regulatory agencies and the public. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) To ensure that the city has sustainable water resources to meet current and future demand. One community with high quality services for citizens. Continue to work with the Arizona Department of Water Resources to obtain a new Assured Water Supply Designation. For the city to obtain a new Water Supply Designation from the Arizona Department of Water Resources. The new Assured Water Supply Designation demonstrates that the city has adequate water resources to meet current and future water demands and will allow development to continue to occur in the city. 235 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) To create an organizational culture that strives from high-level and continual improvement in environmental stewardship and performance. One community with high quality services for citizens. Work with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality to obtain a new municipal separate storm water sewer system permit; prepare a storm water ordinance and obtain Council approval; and continue to coordinate the full implementation of the permit with other city departments. For the city to obtain a new municipal separate storm water sewer system permit from the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and to administer the approval of a new city storm water ordinance. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Revenue generation. The Environmental Resources Department initiated the sale of 9,950 acre-feet of long-term stored water credits to the Central Arizona Project which generated nearly $1.3 million dollars in proceeds. The sale did not negatively impact the city’s ability to maintain its 100-year Assured Water Supply Designation. Accomplishments: • The Environmental Resources Department administered the city’s approval of a new long-term effluent sales agreement between the Sub-Regional Operating Group partners, of which Glendale is a member, and the Palo Verde Nuclear Generation Station partners. Glendale expects its effluent sales revenue (from the 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant) to increase from $350,000 today up to $1 million in each of the first four years of the agreement. • Prepared a white paper on Green Buildings and Solar Power for the Council Sustainability Subcommittee. Expanding public information and outreach on energy and sustainability to the public and business community through the city’s Green website. Obtained federal energy block grant funds through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to establish an energy efficiency outreach and education program. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal To ensure that the city has sustainable water resources to meet current and future demand. One community with high quality services for citizens. 236 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources Yes, partially. Prepared the 2010 Glendale water supply/demand plan taking into consideration: 1) water supplies/rights; 2) water production (treatment plants and wells) infrastructure; 3) operating Was the goal met? costs; 4) expected water demand; 5) water quality; and 6) legal and regulatory requirements. To provide high quality water, satisfying customer water demand, in a cost effective manner. By temporarily increasing reliance on What were the Performance Measures? water from wells, the city is expected to save up to $750,000 in operational cost in calendar year 2010. Due to heavy seasonal rainfall, the water supply/demand plan could not be fully implemented. The city scaled back the amount Obstacles/Challenges of water it recovered from groundwater wells, which resulted in reduced anticipated savings in operational costs. To protect public health and the environment by testing, documenting and reporting the quality of drinking water and Goal reclaimed water. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. The Water Quality Laboratory maintained all necessary state laboratory certifications necessary for operations and collected and analyzed over 14,000 water samples to ensure the quality and safety of Glendale drinking water. The Water Quality Laboratory completed and submitted all required compliance-related water Was the goal met? quality reports to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality on time with no significant errors. The Glendale Water Quality Annual Report was prepared and distributed to residents and businesses in May 2010. Provide timely and accurate analysis of Glendale’s drinking water. Maintain all necessary state laboratory certifications to continue What were the operations. Perform over 95% of water quality tests using inPerformance Measures? house chemists. Ensure that the Utilities Department receives timely and accurate water quality information. Due to budgetary constraints, the Water Quality Laboratory worked with the Utilities Department to identify water quality tests that are not required by law/regulation and could be Obstacles/Challenges temporarily discontinued. The Laboratory continued to perform all water quality tests that are required by federal and state laws/regulations. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The Environmental Resources Department began implementation of an environmental 237 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources management system compliance database with email notification. The system allows the department to improve its oversight of city departments pertaining to environmental requirements. The system will assist city departments in managing their environmental responsibilities through improved understanding, communications and technology. Accomplishments: • Completion of the White Mountain Apache Tribe water settlement that was approved by City Council in February 2009. • The city’s environmental management system compliance database became operational in February 2009. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal To ensure that the city has sustainable water resources to meet current and future demand. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Was the goal met? Preparation of a complete and accurate application by the What were the Performance Measures? December 2008 deadline. Completion of the Arizona Department of Water Resources’ Hydrologic Model that is used to evaluate impacts on the aquifer has been delayed, which in turn will delay the approval of Obstacles/Challenges Glendale’s new Assured Water Supply Designation. This will not immediately impact the city’s ability to approve development within its water service area. To create an organizational culture that strives for high-level and continual improvement in environmental stewardship and Goal performance. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Partially, the city is waiting on the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality to issue a new storm water permit to the city. In anticipation of receiving the permit, the department has Was the goal met? worked with a number of city departments to manage, plan and coordinate in order to be prepared to implement the measures required by the new permit. Obtaining the new storm water permit and to comply with the What were the Performance Measures? permit requirements using a multi-departmental team approach. A number of departments are directly involved in storm water management and compliance. Planning, coordination and implementation activities are time consuming. Compliance with Obstacles/Challenges the new and more stringent storm water requirements will be done with no increase to the budgets of implementing departments. 238 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Env. Resources FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) HazMat Incidence Response (2360) Environmental Resources (2360) Water Quality (2400) Water Conservation Total - Env. Resources BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $28,621 $515,171 $33,556 $527,446 $20,000 $511,984 $26,845 $524,231 $1,041,501 $1,165,662 $1,045,662 $1,162,187 $254,625 $320,750 $271,676 $320,901 0% $1,839,918 $2,047,414 $1,849,322 $2,034,164 -1% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget -20% -1% 0% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $1,352,045 $453,837 $1,387,124 $667,182 $1,387,124 $471,902 $1,397,426 $654,331 1% -2% Internal Premiums $20,215 $22,430 $22,430 $22,335 0% Internal Service Charges $13,821 $21,161 $18,349 $22,013 4% ($50,483) ($50,483) ($61,941) 23% Work Order Credits Total - Env. Resources STAFFING BY PROGRAM Environmental Resources Water Quality Water Conservation Total -Env. Resources $1,839,918 $2,047,414 $1,849,322 $2,034,164 -1% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget 5 10 5 10 5 10 5 10 0% 0% 2 2 2 2 0% 17 17 17 17 0% 239 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Field Operations FIELD OPERATIONS Stuart Kent Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Field Operations Department consists of six In January 2010 Glendale dedicated a operating divisions and several “sub-divisions” that 2.8 megawatt methane gas to energy have key operational functions within the primary plant at the Glendale landfill. The divisions. The equipment management division has facility will generate enough four sub-divisions consisting of fleet maintenance electricity to provide power to the and repairs, fuel services, parts acquisitions and equivalent of 750 homes. vehicle replacement. The streets division consists of street maintenance and repairs, right-of-waymaintenance, graffiti removal, and cemetery operations. Sanitation collection has five service functions consisting of commercial roll-off and frontload services, residential curbside and recycling services and monthly residential loose trash services, which includes street sweeping. The department also has sanitation disposal services consisting of a city owned and operated landfill operation, a materials recovery facility and gas management systems. The department’s facilities management division consists of citywide facility maintenance and repairs and custodial services. The department also has an administrative division that supports all the billing and customer service calls associated with the departmental service functions. Mission Statement: The Field Operations Department mission focuses on providing services in support of the City Council’s strategic goals and key objectives of providing high quality services for citizens. The department accomplishes its mission by incorporating the city manager’s strategic priorities of coordinating exceptional service delivery through an integrated approach, maintaining and building quality infrastructure throughout the city and striving to enhance the quality of life for Glendale residents. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Reduce contamination received by recycling facility. One community for high quality services for citizens. Enhanced inspection services, expanding contact with residents to clarify what is acceptable in the recycling program, and increase training for staff working at recycling facility to maximize efficiency. Reduce contamination by 2%. 240 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Field Operations Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Complete an audit of the vehicle replacement fund to evaluate sustainability and financial health. One community that is fiscally sound. Equipment management staff will work with Budget staff to refine replacement schedules and modify contribution rates as necessary. Accurate information to determine future replacement cycles and appropriate contribution rates. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • By consolidating our vehicle maintenance staff from two shifts to one shift we will save $40,000 annually in electricity costs and we have enhanced service for customers during the week and on weekends. Accomplishments: • Completion of the landfill gas to energy project allows for renewable methane gas to be used to generate electricity and the city will receive $50,000 annually through the agreement. • Development of a motor pool program that allowed overall fleet reduction of 80 vehicles while providing access to vehicles to departments that had intermittent need to operate vehicles. Results in reduced capital replacement cost of $1.2 million over next seven years. GOAL UPDATES Complete a comprehensive needs analysis and cost evaluation associated with proposed improvements including reconfiguration Goal of landfill entrance roadway (Phase II) and relocation of the scale house and administrative facilities. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Design of the new entrance feature completed in April 2010, Was the goal met? construction expected to be completed December 2010. Could the design improve safety for entrance and exiting site, What were the Performance Measures? incorporate needs of GRPSTC to access signal. Staging of work was critical to keep operation running through construction period. Design took longer than anticipated thereby Obstacles/Challenges delaying completion. Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Integrate motor pool vehicles into equipment management operations in order to reduce fleet operational cost by elimination of cost inefficient, low usage vehicles within the city. One community that is fiscally sound. Over 80 vehicles eliminated resulting in operational and 241 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Field Operations maintenance savings and over $1.2 million in capital replacement cost over next seven years. Vehicles were turned in, motor pool developed for City Hall and What were the Field Operations areas. Other departments completed similar Performance Measures? reductions on take home vehicles and staff cars Identifying unique vehicles that may be specialized and working Obstacles/Challenges on how such vehicles can be shared. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The facilities management plumbers redesigned the park’s drinking fountains to stop debris from entering the underground piping, and added a powder coat of paint. This reduces the amount of time spent clearing a plugged drain and prolongs the life of the fountains. Accomplishments: • Streets division implemented a multi departmental process to manage large pavement overlay projects with an emphasis on coordinated participation from inception to completion. • Billing for the MRF is now conducted weekly and terms have been changed from the standard net 30 to net 15 days for receiving payment. This has not only minimized the potential for bad debt, but revenue collection by the City of Glendale occurs on a timelier basis. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Provide efficient preventive maintenance for City assets including City vehicles and equipment. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Was the goal met? Preventive maintenance compliance increased from 85% to 90% What were the Performance Measures? completion rate within 30 days. Outdated software and departments not turning vehicles in on time Obstacles/Challenges after receiving preventive maintenance (PM) notices. Goal Related Council Goal To reduce recycling contamination by 2% for the fiscal year. One community with high quality services for citizens. No. Was the goal met? Recycling waste stream is audited semi-annually to measure the What were the Performance Measures? recycling contamination rate. Recycling contamination has increased as the economy has worsened and as home owners/tenants use recycling containers for Obstacles/Challenges refuse as they vacate residences. 242 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Field Operations FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Cemetery (1000) Custodial Services (1000) Downtown Parking Garage FY 2009 Actual $215,130 $1,233,399 FY 2010 Budget $235,540 $1,159,853 FY 2010 Estimate $235,540 $1,159,853 FY 2011 Budget $233,250 $1,043,615 Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -1% -10% $73,277 $102,859 $102,859 $102,859 $4,488,379 $1,060,946 $4,018,649 $1,021,331 $4,018,649 $1,021,331 $3,361,963 $627,170 $246,976 $293,588 $293,588 $292,797 $5,236 $5,113 $5,113 $5,113 (1040) Equipment Management (1040) Fuel Services $4,176,985 $2,924,178 $4,271,346 $4,303,176 $4,264,152 $4,302,703 $3,959,223 $3,303,176 -7% -23% (1040) Parts Store Operations $1,558,073 $1,919,344 $1,919,344 $1,818,371 -5% (1120) Equipment Replacement (1280) YSC - Facilities Mgt. $2,239,824 $45,792 $3,029,741 $65,000 $3,029,741 $65,000 $3,029,741 $65,000 0% 0% (1000) Facilities Management (1000) Field Operations Admin. (1000) Graffiti Removal (1000) Manistee Ranch Maintenance 0% -16% -39% 0% 0% (1282) Arena - ROW Maintenance $37,607 $49,966 $49,966 $49,966 (1340) Right-of-Way Maintenance $2,298,096 $2,246,258 $2,246,258 $2,026,279 -10% (1340) Street Cleaning (1340) Street Maintenance $505,552 $3,338,672 $198,725 $2,843,822 $198,725 $2,843,822 $0 $2,687,943 -100% -5% (2440) Gas Management System 0% $100,873 $171,900 $140,400 $169,400 -1% $3,087,233 $1,916,556 $3,055,594 $2,135,602 $2,828,322 $2,016,588 $2,926,869 $2,223,685 -4% 4% (2440) Recycling $712,487 $959,015 $944,012 $940,620 -2% (2440) Solid Waste Admin $604,693 $561,345 $583,003 $782,455 39% (2480) Curb Service (2480) Residential-Loose Trash Collec $6,877,784 $2,494,293 $7,068,599 $2,689,099 $6,843,307 $2,449,818 $6,960,004 $2,500,010 -2% -7% (2480) Sanitation Frontload $3,384,015 $3,702,069 $3,392,359 $3,493,979 -6% $865,914 $586,763 $1,002,520 $488,921 $859,520 $488,921 $939,201 $353,664 -6% -28% $45,078,733 $47,598,975 $46,302,894 $43,896,353 -8% (2440) Landfill (2440) MRF Operations (2480) Sanitation Roll-off (2530) PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Total - Field Operations 243 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Field Operations BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $16,864,498 $15,087,850 $17,084,856 $17,479,640 $17,084,853 $17,344,894 $15,400,117 $15,733,834 -10% -10% Internal Premiums $1,100,158 $936,679 $936,679 $806,039 -14% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $9,844,398 $2,213,960 $10,652,477 $2,884,741 $9,491,145 $2,884,741 $9,736,704 $2,884,741 -9% 0% Work Order Credits Total - Field Operations STAFFING BY PROGRAM ($1,439,418) ($1,439,418) $45,078,733 ($32,131) $47,598,975 $46,302,894 $43,896,353 ($665,082) FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget -54% -8% Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Cemetery 2 2 2 2 0% Custodial Services 20 20 20 18 -10% Facilities Management Field Operations Admin. 21 8 21 8 21 8 17 2 -19% -75% Graffiti Removal 4 4 4 3 -25% Equipment Management 41 40 40 36 -10% Parts Store Operations Right-of-Way Maintenance 1 17 1 16 1 16 1 13 0% -19% Street Cleaning 5 3 3 Street Maintenance Landfill 40 19 35 19 35 19 28 19 -20% 0% MRF Operations 11 11 11 11 0% Recycling 6 6 6 6 0% Solid Waste Admin Curb Service 5 40 5 40 5 40 8 40 60% 0% Residential-Loose Trash Collec 18 20 20 21 5% Sanitation Frontload Sanitation Roll-off 15 5 15 5 15 5 15 4 0% -20% PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Total -Field Operations 4 4 4 2 -50% 282 275 275 246 -11% 244 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Transportation TRANSPORTATION Jamsheed Mehta Department Description: The Transportation Department provides transportation planning, traffic engineering, traffic signals, signs, striping, street lighting, transit services and educational program services to meet the transportation needs of the City of Glendale. Mission Statement: To ensure the safe, efficient transportation of people and goods in the City of Glendale. Interesting Department Fact: During FY 2010 Transportation was able to secure and leverage $20 million in federal, state, and regional funds to improve the city’s intersections, roadways, bike paths and pedestrian walkways. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Enhance regional highway connectivity in Glendale’s future growth areas. One community with quality economic development. Finalizing the environmental assessment for Northern Parkway with ADOT and FHWA; coordinating with ADOT the traffic interchange connection between Northern Parkway and the Loop 303; and recommending landscaping and aesthetic enhancements along Loop 303 in Glendale. Coordinate the design and secure funding for corridor preservation to ensure the timely design and construction of Northern Parkway and the Loop 303 project. Explore revenue generating options and purse new funding sources through grants and other potential revenue generating options to offset shortfalls in Transit funding from local and state revenue sources. One community that is fiscally sound. Review and pursue federal grants, additional stimulus funding, and other revenue sources such as advertising. Grant and advertising opportunities are identified, and grant applications are completed for potential new funding to assist with capital improvement projects and operating costs. 245 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Transportation FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Traffic Systems Management took on the responsibility for designing the traffic signal and intelligent transportation stimulus package projects in-house using existing staff expertise. This activity included the preparation of construction plans, specifications, and estimates, along with obtaining the utility and right-of-way clearances from federal and state agencies. By utilizing city staff rather than a consultant, the Transportation Department was able to maximize the amount of ARRA funding available for construction improvements. Accomplishments: • Glendale Urban Shuttle also known as GUS Bus will have over 116,000 riders this year. This is a 110% increase from the 55,000 riders we had in 2003 when GUS service was fully implemented. • With the installation of 58 additional traffic monitoring cameras this year, real time traffic monitoring will significantly improve the city’s ability to better manage event and day to day traffic. Currently there are 30 traffic cameras bringing the total to 88 through-out the city. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? To leverage and utilize American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) stimulus funding for Transportation Projects for the best interest of the city and that meet ARRA requirements. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, funding was secured to make up for the loss of local funds for pavement management, street markings, modernizing traffic signals, and enhancing traffic management communications. These funds not only reduced local costs but also extended the department’s plan for the expansion of services that would not have been feasible without this funding. What were the Timely delivery of design and environmental clearances. Performance Measures? Very tight time constraints imposed by the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), ADOT, and the FHWA made it extremely challenging to complete designs and environmental Obstacles/Challenges clearances for 77 signalized intersections, and 25 miles of roadway. Goal Related Council Goal Improve access control and beautification along Grand Avenue. One community with high quality services for citizens. 246 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Transportation Considerable progress has been made and several properties have been secured providing the necessary right-of-way. Timely acquisition of several properties and coordination between property owners and ADOT officials to sustain viable economic What were the Performance Measures? activities along Grand Avenue while also managing effective access control. This is a very large project impacting multiple property owners. Coordinating between parties with competing priorities is a Obstacles/Challenges lengthy process. Was the goal met? FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The Signs and Markings Division implemented a new process to make use of the scrap metal in old and worn signs. In addition to refurbishing old and faded signs for reuse to save costs, Signs and Markings is receiving recycling reimbursement money for scrap aluminum from signs that cannot be reused. By recycling, Transportation receives a credit on signs cleaned and sent back. This has resulted in cost savings of 30% to 50% on cleaned signs that are returned for reuse. Accomplishments: • Transportation was able to secure and leverage over $2.8 million in federal, state and regional funds to improve the city’s intersections, roadways, bike paths and pedestrian walkways. • The city’s streetlight system is averaging less than 1% in streetlight outages and has hit a new record and all time low of .39% this year. GOAL UPDATES Goal Update the city’s Transportation Master Plan One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, the Citizens Transportation Oversight Commission approved Was the goal met? the plan. Final elements of the Transportation Master Plan were updated to include: current and future conditions; policy guidelines; What were the roadways; transit facilities and routes and alternative modes. The Performance Measures? final review was conducted by a multi-department team with members of the Citizens Transportation Oversight Commission. None. Obstacles/Challenges Related Council Goal 247 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Transportation Optimize the city’s ROAM streetlight and work order management system to minimize streetlight outages and maintain Goal a cost effective street lighting program. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? The streetlight management section continues to average a less than 1% rate of streetlight outages. Staff has optimized the use of What were the Performance Measures? the work order management system to more efficiently manage the city’s streetlight system resulting in cost effectiveness. None. Obstacles/Challenges 248 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Transportation FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1010) Transp - Stadium Mgmt Plan (1281) Stadium - Transportation Ops. FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $0 $620,100 $0 $645,734 $30,000 $645,734 $0 $645,734 NA 0% (1281) Transp - Fiesta Bowl Event $77,335 $79,942 $79,942 $79,942 0% (1282) Arena - Transportation Ops. (1340) Signs & Markings $11,299 $869,097 $15,000 $744,747 $15,000 $744,747 $15,000 $707,617 0% -5% $1,556,373 $1,177,980 $1,177,980 $1,093,283 -7% $299,986 $300,375 $300,375 $301,709 0% $1,217,084 $483,396 $1,078,656 $476,937 $1,078,656 $476,937 $903,017 $369,166 -16% -23% $553,800 $544,210 $544,210 $373,165 -31% $24,952 $30,836 $2,729 $65,310 $2,729 $65,310 $0 $8,105 -100% -88% (1660) Dial-A-Ride $2,461,809 $2,392,864 $2,392,864 $2,391,129 0% (1660) Fixed Route $5,237,647 $5,705,941 $5,205,941 $5,675,488 -1% (1660) Intelligent Transportation Sys (1660) Red Light Enforcement $591,295 $168,530 $706,440 $131,550 $706,440 $131,550 $590,944 $0 -16% -100% (1660) Traffic Mitigation $161,279 $518,529 $268,529 $578,348 12% (1660) Transit Management (1660) Transportation CIP O&M $309,177 $90,861 $323,206 $113,893 $323,121 $113,893 $322,741 $113,893 0% 0% -15% (1340) Street Light Management (1340) Traffic Design and Development (1340) Traffic Signals (1340) Traffic Studies (1340) Transportation Administration (1340) Transportation Planning (1660) Demand Management (1660) Transportation Education (1660) Transportation Program Mgmt Total - Transportation $202,625 $262,905 $262,905 $223,934 $1,913,526 $2,305,228 $2,305,228 $2,298,887 0% $16,881,007 $17,592,176 $16,872,091 $16,692,102 -5% 249 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Transportation BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Operating Capital Work Order Credits FY 2009 Actual $5,986,629 $8,842,914 $6,445,915 $9,846,963 FY 2010 Estimate $6,472,094 $9,097,427 FY 2011 Budget $5,631,821 $9,317,080 Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -13% -5% $461,325 $417,569 $417,569 $418,673 0% $1,578,222 $16,619 $1,748,935 $1,752,207 $1,692,723 -3% ($4,702) Total - Transportation FY 2010 Budget ($867,206) ($867,206) ($368,195) -58% $16,881,007 $17,592,176 $16,872,091 $16,692,102 FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Signs & Markings 10 10 10 8 -20% Street Light Management 2 2 2 Traffic Design and Development Traffic Signals 3 10 3 10 3 10 3 7 0% -30% Traffic Studies 5 5 5 4 -20% Transportation Administration 5 5 5 4 -20% 1 35.25 1 35.25 1 35.25 34.25 -3% Intelligent Transportation Sys 5 5 5 4 -20% Traffic Mitigation Transit Management 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 0% 0% Transportation Education 1 1 1 1 0% Transportation Program Mgmt 3 3 3 5 67% 85.25 85.25 85.25 75.25 -12% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Transportation Planning Dial-A-Ride Total -Transportation 250 Return to TOC -5% Mission and Performance Measure Utilities UTILITIES Roger Bailey Department Description: Interesting Department Fact: The Utilities Department serves more than 250,000 The department is responsible for the people within the City of Glendale. It is generation of over 720,000 accurate responsible for treating and distributing potable utility bills per year. water that meets all federal and state drinking water standards, collecting and treating the city’s wastewater in compliance with all regulatory requirements, implementing odor and roach infestation control measures and reading all water meters on a monthly basis. The department receives no revenues from sales or property taxes, but operates solely on funds from rates and service charges. In accordance with city policy, these funds are administered in an enterprise account. Mission Statement: To provide safe and reliable water and wastewater services to its citizens; comply with all environmental and health standards; anticipate and respond to emergencies in a timely, appropriate manner and accommodate growth and new demand within the city. FISCAL YEAR 2011 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Goal Complete the construction phase of the 10 MGD groundwater treatment plant located at the Oasis Water Campus. This facility will augment existing water supplies and help meet demands during peak demand events and periods of canal outages due to scheduled maintenance. This includes hiring a construction manager, a principal contractor, and construction manager at risk for pre-construction and the onset of construction. One community with high quality services for citizens. Continue construction of the Oasis Groundwater Treatment Facility to allow nitrate removal from offsite groundwater sources. Completion of the Oasis Groundwater Treatment Facility by November 2011. Complete the improvements to the Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility ultraviolet (UV) disinfectant system. This project will replace the existing Trojan medium pressure UV systems with energy efficient low pressure UV disinfection systems to reduce operating costs and enhance UV system disinfection performance. 251 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Utilities Related Council Goal Activities Desired Outcomes (Perf. Measures) One community with high quality services for citizens. Begin design and construction of the UV system improvements to reduce energy consumption and improve UV system performance. Completion of UV System Improvements Design by June 2011. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Utilities completed a critical business practice change entailing the use of a paperless work order system. This important business practice change improves response time to a customer generated work order, reduces reliance on paper records, and improves the overall record keeping of the department. Accomplishments: • The department implemented numerous cost-reducing measures in order to minimize the need for, and magnitude of, a rate increase. • The department updated and completed its annual rate study. GOAL UPDATES Begin the construction phase of the 10 million gallon per day (MGD) groundwater treatment plant located at the Oasis Water Goal Campus. This facility will augment existing water supplies and help meet peak demands. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Construction of some of the key components of the overall project were commenced and completed. The project is ongoing Was the goal met? and will be completed in FY 2011. Completion of the groundwater treatment plant construction by What were the Performance Measures? November 2011. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Develop a master plan for the West Area Water Reclamation Facility. The study will examine the wastewater demands, evaluate conveyance or treatment alternatives, Environmental Protection Agency regulations, water resources/conservation issues, effluent recharge locations, and the interplay of wastewater treatment with Sub-Regional Operating Group partnership of the Westgate area, 91st to 115th avenues. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. A final report has been submitted by the consulting engineer. 252 Return to TOC Mission and Performance Measure Utilities What were the Completion of the report during FY 2010. Performance Measures? Constantly changing landuse plans complicated the study effort Obstacles/Challenges but were resolved in a timely manner. FISCAL YEAR 2009 Area of Innovation: • The implementation of a new automated utility billing system wherein customers can manage their accounts online, including access to historical data, multiple page billing, the automated mobile dispatch system and e-billing services. Accomplishments: • The city continues to upgrade and construct additional odor control systems at strategic locations throughout the system. The Utilities Department is also continuing to pursue a comprehensive sewer cleaning program and establishing chemical injection stations in various areas of the collection system. This has helped to protect the system from corrosion and reduce odors. • Replaced 3.1 miles of water distribution lines down the Glendale corridor thereby providing the downtown business district with new water service lines. GOAL UPDATES Complete the design phase and begin the construction phase of the 10 MGD groundwater treatment plant located at the Oasis Water Goal Campus. This facility will augment existing water supplies and help meet peak demands. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal The design phase of the plant has been completed and the Was the goal met? construction phase is being implemented. Provided design for the new 10 MGD groundwater treatment plant What were the Performance Measures? located at the Oasis Water Campus by May 2009. None. Obstacles/Challenges Begin implementation of the Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility treatment process upgrades project, including replacement of the disinfection system, in order to Goal continue to meet the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and permit requirements for A+ quality effluent. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? The project was split into two parts and many of the critical What were the improvements have been completed and the balance is still under Performance Measures? design. None. Obstacles/Challenges 253 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Utilities FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (2360) Arrowhead Reclamation Plant (2360) Information Management FY 2009 Actual $2,013,049 $993,167 FY 2010 Budget $2,081,276 $1,017,114 FY 2010 Estimate $2,081,276 $1,017,114 FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $2,176,656 $1,097,575 5% 8% (2360) Property Management $104,571 $87,000 $87,000 $87,000 0% (2360) Public Service Representatives (2360) Safety Administration $266,625 $85,724 $285,490 $46,755 $285,490 $46,755 $286,629 $122,107 0% 161% (2360) System Security $524,511 $667,087 $667,087 $667,683 0% (2360) Utilities Administration $6,510,377 $6,334,223 $6,334,223 $6,343,982 0% (2360) West Area Plant (2400) Central System Control $3,258,635 $999,995 $3,703,322 $1,319,606 $3,703,322 $1,319,606 $3,699,346 $1,415,952 0% 7% (2400) Central System Maintenance (2400) Cholla Treatment Plant (2400) Customer Service - Field (2400) Irrigation $434,064 $631,652 $631,652 $758,316 20% $3,201,427 $1,024,982 $3,694,169 $1,058,891 $3,694,169 $1,058,891 $3,681,059 $1,082,739 0% 2% $179,786 $194,016 $194,016 $193,583 0% (2400) Meter Maintenance $1,030,532 $1,348,593 $1,348,593 $1,348,944 0% (2400) Oasis Water Campus (2400) Pyramid Peak Plant $2,544,889 $1,718,090 $4,220,690 $1,631,850 $4,220,690 $1,631,850 $4,277,656 $1,627,555 1% 0% (2400) Raw Water Usage $2,475,310 $3,482,182 $3,482,182 $3,482,182 0% (2400) Water Distribution (2420) Pretreatment Program $3,056,645 $523,268 $3,374,450 $535,124 $3,374,450 $535,124 $3,536,368 $533,992 5% 0% (2420) SROG (91st Ave) Plant $3,360,611 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 0% (2420) Wastewater Collection $2,665,617 $3,191,798 $3,191,798 $3,278,968 3% $36,971,875 $43,405,288 $43,405,288 $44,198,292 2% Total - Utilities 254 Return to TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Utilities BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $12,976,842 $17,465,241 $13,796,986 $24,188,439 $13,785,265 $24,205,791 $13,458,255 $24,415,625 -2% 1% Internal Premiums $1,121,767 $1,181,253 $1,181,253 $1,196,456 1% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $5,337,213 $70,812 $5,582,226 $5,576,595 $5,591,004 $39,000 0% ($1,343,616) ($1,343,616) $36,971,875 $43,405,288 $43,405,288 $44,198,292 STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Arrowhead Reclamation Plant 13 13 13 13 0% Information Management 6 6 6 6 0% Public Service Representatives Safety Administration 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 0% 0% Work Order Credits Total - Utilities ($502,048) Percent Over FY 2010 Budget -63% 2% System Security 8 8 8 8 0% Utilities Administration 10 10 10 10 0% West Area Plant Central System Control 14 9 14 9 14 9 14 9 0% 0% Central System Maintenance 6 6 6 6 0% Cholla Treatment Plant Customer Service - Field 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 0% 0% Irrigation 1 1 1 1 0% Meter Maintenance 11 11 11 11 0% Oasis Water Campus Pyramid Peak Plant 15 10 15 10 15 10 15 10 0% 0% Water Distribution 30 30 30 30 0% Pretreatment Program Wastewater Collection 6 19 6 19 6 19 6 19 0% 0% 187 187 187 187 0% Total -Utilities 255 Return to TOC WrestleMania XXVI at University of Phoenix Stadium OTHER Grants Non-Departmental Mural in Sahuaro Ranch by Martin Moreno City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Grants FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2009 Actual (1840) DV Pilot Project Grant (1840) Miscellaneous Grants FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $98,601 $260,412 $66,431 $4,920,853 $69,416 $4,917,868 $66,606 $7,274,833 0% 48% (1842) ARWRF Facility UV System Imp $0 $0 $0 $986,000 NA (1842) Build Safe Engy Prog Enhance (1842) Energy Matters Public Educat $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,000 $172,519 NA NA (1842) Main Library Lighting $0 $0 $0 $431,831 NA (1842) Program Manager $0 $0 $0 $234,150 NA (1842) Public Safety/Court Lighting (1842) Sports Courts Lighting Retrofi $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $88,000 $140,000 NA NA (1842) Traffic Signal LED Conversion $0 $0 $0 $84,000 NA (1842) WebPortal (1842) Well 43 Variable Drive Retrofi $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 $97,500 NA NA $359,013 $4,987,284 $4,987,284 $9,665,439 94% Total - Grants BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $101,135 $219,416 $219,416 $489,441 123% Supplies and Contracts $257,878 $4,770,853 $4,767,868 $9,178,983 92% Work Order Credits ($2,985) Total - Grants STAFFING BY PROGRAM DV Pilot Project Grant Total -Grants $359,013 $4,987,284 ($2,985) $4,987,284 $9,665,439 0% 94% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1 1 1 1 0% 1 1 1 1 0% 256 Return to TOC Percent Over FY 2010 Budget City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Non-Departmental FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Fund 1000 Non-Dept Total - Non-Departmental BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Total - Non-Departmental FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $591,612 $1,831,773 $2,089,140 $1,963,824 7% $591,612 $1,831,773 $2,089,140 $1,963,824 7% FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Percent Over FY 2010 Budget $258,705 $332,907 $293,281 $1,538,492 $330,509 $1,758,631 $313,937 $1,649,887 7% 7% $591,612 $1,831,773 $2,089,140 $1,963,824 7% 257 Return to TOC Capital Improvement Plan 2010-2011 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CIP Table of Contents CIP TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Contents 258 Introduction 260 Financing the CIP 265 Impact of the CIP on the Operating Budget 283 Summary by Type of Project 285 Summary of All Capital Projects by Funding Type 286 FUND SUMMARIES BOND CONSTRUCTION FUNDS Street/Parking 1980 – Street/Parking Bonds 2000 – HURF/Street Bonds 287 288 289 293 Open Space & Trails 2140 – Open Space/Trails Construction 296 297 Parks 2060 – Parks Construction 304 305 Library 2160 – Library Construction 326 327 Public Safety 2040 – Public Safety Construction 330 331 Government Facilities 2080 – Government Facilities Construction 342 343 Cultural Facilities/Historical Preservation 2130 – Cultural Facility Construction 349 350 Economic Development 2100 – Economic Development Construction 352 353 Flood Control 2180 – Flood Control Construction 356 357 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUNDS Roadway Improvements 1600 – DIF – Roadway Improvements Open Space 1520 – DIF – Citywide Open Space 258 Return to TOC 364 365 366 369 370 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Table of Contents Page Parks & Recreation 1460 – DIF – Citywide Parks 1480 – DIF – Citywide Rec Facility 1540 – DIF – Park Dev Zone 1 1560 – DIF – Park Dev Zone 2 1580 – DIF – Park Dev Zone 3 373 374 376 378 380 382 Library 1380 – DIF – Library Buildings 1500 – DIF – Libraries 384 385 387 Public Safety 1440 – DIF-Police Dept Facilities 1420 – DIF-Fire Protection Facilities 389 390 392 General Government 1620 – DIF – General Government 394 395 ENTERPRISE AND OTHER FUNDS Water & Sewer 2360 – Water & Sewer 2400 – Water 2420 – Sewer 397 398 399 405 418 Transportation 2210 – Transportation Construction 1650 – Transportation Grants 1340 – HURF/Streets Fund 428 429 443 446 Sanitation 2480 – Sanitation 449 450 Landfill 2440 – Landfill 454 455 Airport Capital Grants 2120 – Airport Capital Grants 463 464 Other Capital Project Funds 1840 – Other Federal and State Grants 1000 – General Fund 1740 – Civic Center 2150 – Technology Infrastructure 1220 – Arts Commission 469 470 472 478 482 486 259 Return to TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Introduction INTRODUCTION What are Capital Improvements? The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a ten-year roadmap for creating, maintaining and paying for Glendale’s present and future infrastructure needs. The CIP outlines project costs, funding sources and estimated future operating costs associated with each capital improvement. The plan is designed to ensure that capital improvements will be made when and where they are needed, and that the City will have the funds to pay for and maintain them. Capital improvement projects are non-routine capital expenditures that generally cost more than $50,000 and result in the purchase of equipment, acquisition of land, design and construction of new assets, or the renovation, rehabilitation or expansion of existing capital assets. Capital projects usually have an expected useful life of at least five years. Capital improvements make up the bricks and mortar, or infrastructure that all cities must have in place to provide essential services to current residents and support new growth and development. They also are designed to prevent the deterioration of the city’s existing infrastructure, and respond to and anticipate the future growth of the city. A wide range of projects comprise capital improvements as illustrated by the examples below: • • • • • • • • • fire and police stations; libraries, court facilities and office buildings; parks, trails, open space, pools, recreation centers and other related facilities; water and wastewater treatment plants, transmission pipes, storage facilities and pump stations; roads, bridges, traffic signals and other traffic control devices including fiber optic infrastructure needed for the operation of intelligent transportation systems; landscape beautification projects; computer software and hardware systems other than personal computers and printers; flood control drainage channels, storm drains and retention basins; and major equipment purchases such as landfill compactors, street sweepers and sanitation trucks. Growing municipalities such as Glendale face a special set of complex problems. These cities need to build new roads, add public amenities such as parks and expand public safety services to accommodate new residential and non-residential development. They also must simultaneously maintain, replace, rehabilitate and/or upgrade existing capital assets such as roads, parks, buildings and underground pipes for the water and sewer system. Glendale has kept pace with its rapid growth through many new public assets. Glendale also has completed many capital projects that involved renovating, rehabilitating or expanding existing infrastructure or buildings. Notable projects completed since 2000 include the following: 260 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Introduction 2010 2010 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2006 2006 2006 2005 2004 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 Bicentennial Park Renovations Butler Park Renovations Relocation of Fire Station 151 Catlin Court Alleyway Project Replacement of Billing System for City Services Storm Drain Improvements – 59th Avenue and 67th Avenue Sahuaro Ranch Park Picnic Pavilion Renovations Trail Renovations at Thunderbird Conservation Park Oasis Water Treatment Plant Cholla Water Treatment Plant Process Improvements Park and Ride Facility at 99th and Glendale Avenues Downtown Parking Garage Grand Avenue Improvements Downtown Campus Foothills Recreation & Aquatic Center Emergency Operations Center Convention Center/Media Center/Parking Garage Field Operations Complex Fire Station 159 Rose Lane Pool Restoration 99th Avenue Metering Station Improvements New Adult Center Facility Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant – Solids Handling Expansion Jobing.com Arena Manistee Land Redevelopment Tourism Visitor Center Arrowhead Wastewater Plant Expansion Paying for Capital Improvements In many respects, the city planning process for selecting, scheduling and financing capital improvements parallels the way an individual might plan for buying a new house or car. This process entails an assessment of many valid competing needs, a determination of priorities, an evaluation of costs and financing options and an establishment of realistic completion timeframes. The analysis process involves many familiar questions. • • • • • • Do I need a new home or car or just “want” one? Can I wait another year or two? Are there other alternatives such as remodeling, using public transit or carpooling? What other purchases will I need to forego? What can I afford and how can I pay for it? Do I need outside financing and what will it cost? 261 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Introduction If the purchase plan moves forward, a decision must be made about the down payment. A good planner might have started a replacement fund a few years ago in anticipation of the need. Other cash sources might include a savings account or a rainy day emergency fund. The city, just like most families, needs to find longer-term financing to cover certain costs for capital improvements. Repayment of the loan might require cutting other expenses like eating at restaurants or increasing income by taking a second part-time job. An unanticipated inheritance may speed up the timetable; a negative event, such as a flood or unanticipated medical expense, might delay the plan. Similarly, most large capital improvements cannot be financed solely from a single year’s revenue stream or by simply increasing income or decreasing expenses. For a more detailed discussion about this issue see the “Impacts of the CIP on the Operating Budget.” Guidelines and Policies Used in Developing the CIP City Council’s strategic goals and key objectives and the city’s financial policies provide the broad parameters for development of the annual capital plan. Additional considerations include the following: • Does a project support City Council’s strategic goals? • Does a project qualify as a capital project, i.e., cost more than $50,000 and have an expected useful life of at least five years? • Does a project satisfactorily address all federal, state and city legal and financial requirements? • Does a project support the city's favorable investment ratings and financial integrity? • Does a project support the city’s goal of ensuring all geographic areas of the city have comparable quality in the types of services that are defined in the Public Facilities section of the General Plan? • Does a project prevent the deterioration of the city’s existing infrastructure, and respond to and anticipate future growth in the city? • Does a project encourage and sustain quality economic development? • Can a project be financed through growth in the tax base or development fees, when possible, if constructed in response to residential or commercial development? • Is a project responsive to the needs of residents and businesses within the constraints of reasonable taxes and fees? • Does a project leverage funds provided by other units of government (e.g., Maricopa County Flood Control District, Arizona Department of Transportation, etc) where appropriate? Master plans also help determine which projects should be included in the CIP and the timeframes in which the projects should be completed. For example, the Parks and Recreation Master Plan’s guidelines for neighborhood parks include one acre of park land per 1,000 residents. When population growth causes an area to exceed this threshold, that neighborhood will rise on the capital plan’s priority list for park development. The Water & Sewer Master 262 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Introduction Plan, Parks Master Plan, Storm Water Master Plan, GO Transportation Plan and five-year plans for landfill and solid waste collection services also provide valuable guidance in the preparation of the CIP. Economic forecasts also are a critical source of information and guidance throughout the capital planning process. The forecasts assess external factors such as whether the local economy is growing or contracting, population growth, inflation for construction materials, the value of land, and other variables that may affect the city’s ability to finance needed services and capital projects. Glendale’s Annual CIP Development Process In conjunction with the annual budgeting process, the Management and Budget Department coordinates the citywide process of revising and updating the city’s capital plan. City staff members from all departments participate in an extensive review of projects in the existing plan and the identification of new projects for inclusion in the CIP. The City Council’s commitment to the needs and desires of Glendale’s citizens is a critical factor considered during the capital planning process, as well as compliance with legal limits and financial resources. The first year of the plan is the only year appropriated by Council. The remaining nine years are for planning purposes and funding is not guaranteed to occur in the year planned. City Council makes the final decision about whether and when to fund a project. Once projects are selected for inclusion in the capital plan, decisions must be made about which projects should be recommended for inclusion in the first five years of the plan. Determining how and when to schedule projects is a complicated process. It must take into account City Council’s strategic goals as well as all of the variables that affect the city’s ability to generate the funds to pay for these projects without jeopardizing its ability to provide routine, ongoing services and one-time or emergency services when needed. Prior to Council’s consideration of the proposed CIP, the Finance and Management & Budget Departments evaluate various debt-related issues to ensure the proposed expenditures meet all debt coverage requirements as discussed in the city’s Debt Management Plan. The Finance Department periodically updates the Debt Management Plan to include the most recent debt issuances. The City Council reviews the recommended CIP during the spring budget workshops. Council also considers citizen requests and considers the recommendations of staff before making the final decision about which projects should be included in which years of the CIP. 263 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Introduction Citizen Involvement in the CIP Process The CIP is an important financial, planning and public communication tool. It gives residents and businesses a clear and concrete view of the city's long-term direction for capital improvements and a better understanding of the city’s ongoing needs for stable revenue sources to fund large or multi-year capital projects. Input into the annual CIP updating process is obtained from citizens who serve on many different city boards and commissions, as well from individual citizens through the public hearing and comment process. Through these public input venues, residents and businesses have alerted staff about infrastructure development and renovation needs, important quality-of-life enhancements, and environmental and historic preservation issues that should be addressed in the capital plan. Citizens have additional opportunities for input when participating in committees that consider voter authorization proposals. There have been two bond elections since 1999. One occurred in November 1999 when Glendale voters approved 100% of the $411.5 million in bond requests. In 2006, City Council established an Ad-Hoc Citizens Bond Election Committee to consider whether additional bond authorization was needed to complete the Council approved CIP. On May 15, 2007, voters approved $218 million of the $270 million in bond requests. We encourage and welcome your comments and suggestions for improving Glendale’s annual CIP. Please share your thoughts, concerns and suggestions with the city staff in the Management and Budget Department. 264 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP FINANCING THE CIP Introduction The financial projections used to develop the CIP are based on staff’s best prediction of future real estate values, construction costs, interest rates, and other relevant variables. These financial projections are jointly developed by the Management & Budget, Finance, and Engineering Departments, in conjunction with the Deputy City Manager for Administrative Services. They are updated annually to reflect changes in the economic environment. As with prior FY capital programs, the first five years of the plan are financially balanced. This means the plan • • • • complies with the state’s constitutional debt limits; complies with the available voter authorization required for municipal bonds; balances the use of incoming revenue streams with the use of fund balance, while maintaining a fund balance that exceeds the required minimum of 10% of the prior year’s debt service; and identifies the source of revenue to finance various projects. Financial and legal constraints make it impossible for the city to fund every project on its priority list. For example, it is not possible for the city to fund concurrently several large-scale projects that have significant operating budget impacts. Also, revenues used to pay the debt service are not limitless. Therefore, implementation timetables are established to stagger projects over time based on Council’s strategic goals and the estimated financial resources expected for the future. Limited staff resources to undertake new capital projects also must be considered. Capital projects can consume significant time to manage effectively, and project managers in the departments typically manage several capital projects concurrently. The city also must coordinate the timing of many of its capital projects with federal, state, county and municipal governments and outside entities. For example, street improvements are coordinated with utility companies, when possible, to minimize the amount of new street surface that must be cut to lay new or replacement utility and fiber optic lines. Also, flood control capital improvements are coordinated with the Maricopa County Flood Control District to maximize matching funds that the district makes available for eligible projects. The availability of unanticipated financing, such as federal or state transportation grants or Arizona Heritage Fund grants, may cause the city to accelerate or delay a particular project. In addition, a scheduled project may be delayed in order to take advantage of an unusual onetime opportunity such as the receipt of non-governmental grant monies. All of these issues are discussed in more detail in the following material. 265 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Debt Management Plan A critical element of financing capital projects is the ability to manage within available resources the overall debt incurred for past projects while including new debt for future projects. Glendale has a formal Debt Management Plan (DMP) that is produced as a separate document from the annual budget book. For the purposes of this discussion, portions of the DMP issued in May 2006 are reflected below. (An update to the 2006 DMP was under development at the time this budget document was created in April 2010.) The purpose of the city’s DMP is to manage the issuance of the city’s debt obligations within the city’s financial policies, the legal framework governing municipal debt and the bond covenants established for prior issuances. This plan also includes an assessment of the city’s ability to incur additional debt and other long-term obligations within these same limits at favorable interest rates. Analysis of the city’s debt position is important as planned future capital projects could result in the need for additional capital financing. Decisions regarding the use of debt will be based in part on the long-term needs of the city, the limitations identified above and the amount of cash that can be dedicated in a given fiscal year to capital outlay. Glendale believes that a disciplined, systematic approach to debt management will allow the city to maintain its excellent credit rating. The city’s chief financial officer has instituted a conservative plan of finance for the city’s capital projects. The main objectives of that plan are: • • • • • evaluate all possible funding mechanisms to insure the city receives the best possible terms and conditions; use debt structures that match the useful lives of the projects being financed or fall within accepted maturity guidelines; use revenue-based bond issuances where feasible, e.g. water and sewer revenue bonds, transportation sales tax revenue bonds and highway user fee revenue fee (HURF) bonds; use excise tax-secured bond financing when appropriate; and finance the majority of the remaining projects with general obligation bonds that are supported by the city’s secondary property tax revenue. Furthermore, the DMP states that the city’s direct net tax-supported debt should be maintained at a level considered manageable by the rating agencies given current economic conditions. Measures of economic conditions include per capita income for Glendale residents and the assessed valuation of property within the city’s corporate limits. Within the context of the DMP, the ten-year CIP is developed with identified funding sources for each CIP project. For example, a street project might be funded through one or more of the following financing sources: HURF bonds, general obligation (G.O.) bonds, federal or state grants, local improvement district funding (LIDs), development impact fees (DIFs) or Glendale’s dedicated transportation sales tax. In many cases, a large or multi-year project will be financed using a mix of these funding sources. 266 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds G.O. bonds are direct and general obligations of the city. Glendale uses G.O. bonds to fund most large-scale capital improvements other than water, sewer, sanitation and landfill projects. These bonds are backed by "the full faith and credit" of the city. Arizona State law mandates the separation of city property taxes into two components, the primary tax levy and the secondary tax levy. A municipality’s secondary property tax revenue can be used only to pay the principal, interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness or other lawful long-term obligations that are issued or incurred for a specific capital purpose. In contrast, primary property tax revenue may be used for any lawful purpose. It is preferable for water and sewer (utilities) revenues to pay for water/sewer G.O. bond debt if this type of financing is used instead of revenue bonds. However, if adequate utility revenue is not available, the city can fall back on secondary property tax revenue for water/sewer G.O. bond debt. General Obligation Debt Limitations Arizona’s State Constitution limits G.O. bonded indebtedness to 6% or 20% of the city's total secondary assessed valuation. With this approach, a municipality’s capacity to issue additional G.O. debt will grow as assessed valuation increases and as outstanding G.O. bonds are retired. If secondary assessed valuation declines, then the city’s G.O. debt limitations will decrease. The debt limitation – commonly called “bond capacity” and “debt capacity” – figures do not represent the amount of G.O. debt that could be supported by the city’s current and projected secondary property tax revenue. G.O. projects in the 20% category are • • • • Water, sewer, storm sewers (flood control facilities) and artificial light when controlled by the municipality; Open space preserves, parks, playgrounds and recreational facilities; Public safety, law enforcement, fire and emergency services facilities; and Streets and transportation facilities. G.O. projects in the 6% category are • • • • Economic development, Historic preservation and cultural facilities, General government facilities, and Libraries. Previously, the 6% constitutional limitation applied to public safety, streets and transportation facilities, but Arizona voters changed this in the November 2006 election with the passage of Proposition 104. 267 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-1 reflects the city’s G.O. bond debt limitation as of December 31, 2009. Debt outstanding prior to the passage of Proposition 104 for public safety, streets/parking and transportation facilities is reflected in the 6% category and in the 20% category thereafter. The amount of debt outstanding excludes debt service fund balances. Table 2-1 Constitutional Debt Limitation (All Dollars in Thousands) General Municipal Purpose Bonds 6% Limitation1 Water, Sewer, Flood Control, Light, Parks and Open Space $127,854 20% Limitation1,2 $426,181 Less Direct Bonded Debt to be Outstanding $35,300 Less Direct Bonded Debt to be Outstanding $199,455 Unused 6% Borrowing Capacity $92,554 Unused 20% Borrowing Capacity $226,726 1 2 Based on 2010 secondary assessed value of $2,130,907,407 Public safety, streets/parking & transportation facilities debt prior to Prop. 104 is included in 6% category Table 2-2 shows the city’s bond capacity under the state’s constitutional debt limits after accounting for existing bond issuances that are outstanding. Changes between fiscal years in the “Outstanding Debt” columns are the result of outstanding bonds being paid down. The columns labeled “Projected Capacity Before New Debt” show the amount of additional G.O. bonds that could be sold without violating the state constitutional limits. Note that the “Projected Capacity Before New Debt” figures do not reflect the amount of G.O. debt that could be supported by the city’s current and projected secondary property tax revenue. The FY 2011 secondary assessed valuation figure in Table 2-2 reflects an 18% decline in secondary assessed valuation from FY 2010. The FY 2012 figure reflects an additional 14% decline from FY 2011. (The FY 2012 figure is a projection based on the preliminary valuation notices that the county assessor’s office mailed to property owners in February 2010.) These significant declines are the result of the unprecedented real estate market that dominates urban areas of the southwestern United States. In Maricopa County, where Glendale is located, the median value of single family residential properties dropped an astonishing 44% over three consecutive years. And, for the first time in several decades, the median value of commercial properties declined a surprising 24% in one year. These declines in secondary assessed valuation result in lower debt limitation figures (column A) in FY 2011 through FY 2015 than those shown in Table 2-1 (above). 268 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-2 Projected G.O. Debt Capacity Before New Debt (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Projected1 Secondary Assessed Value $1,753,569 $1,508,070 $1,508,070 $1,523,150 $1,584,076 Limitation (A) 6% $105,214 $90,484 $90,484 $91,389 $95,045 Outstanding Debt (B) 2 20% 6% 20% $350,714 $25,650 $193,775 $301,614 $16,960 $185,285 $301,614 $11,905 $172,495 $304,630 $7,465 $158,355 $316,815 $2,880 $143,570 Projected Capacity Before New Debt (A-B) 6% 20% $79,564 $156,939 $73,524 $116,329 $78,579 $129,119 $83,924 $146,275 $92,165 $173,245 1 FY 2011 figure reflects actual secondary assessed valuation. Outstanding debt refers to the debt on the principal balance only. 2 Table 2-3 shows the anticipated bond sales planned for future years that would be needed for the 6% and 20% categories in order to implement future CIP projects. Table 2-3 Projected Bond Sales (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 New Bond Sale 6% $0 $0 $0 $1,760 $17,096 20% $0 $0 $2,005 $1,920 $33,660 Table 2-4, on the next page, expands upon Table 2-2 by showing the remaining debt capacity after accounting for the anticipated debt service (principal only) on the projected bond sales shown above in Table 2-3. 269 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-4 Projected G.O. Debt Capacity After New Debt (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 1 New Debt1 on Planned Future Sales (B) Projected Capacity Before New Debt (A) 6% $79,564 $73,524 $78,579 $83,924 $92,165 20% $156,939 $116,329 $129,119 $146,275 $173,245 6% $0 $0 $0 $1,760 $18,776 20% $0 $0 $2,005 $3,834 $37,311 Projected Remaining Capacity (A-B) 6% $79,564 $73,524 $78,579 $82,164 $73,389 20% $156,939 $116,329 $127,114 $142,441 $135,935 New debt refers to the debt on the principal balance only. Assessed Valuation In FY 2009, secondary assessed valuation peaked at just under $2.2 billion, with commercial valuation comprising 33% of the total and residential comprising 67% of the total. In FY 2010, Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation was approximately $2.1 billion, a 3% decline from FY 2009. Commercial properties comprised 37% of the FY 2010 total while residential property comprised 63% of the total. For FY 2011, Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation is $1.75 billion, an 18% decline from FY 2010. Approximately 54.7% of the FY 2011 valuation is attributable to residential property while 40.2 % is attributable to commercial property. The remaining 5.1% includes, but is not limited to vacant land, agriculture, railroad and historical property. As noted previously in this CIP section, the unprecedented real estate market that dominates the Phoenix metropolitan area is expected to result in a third year of valuation decline with an additional 14% drop in FY 2012. The FY 2012 estimate is based on the preliminary valuation notices that the county assessor’s office mailed to property owners in February 2010 which reflect the 2009 real estate market. Three consecutive years of declines represent a significant change for Glendale’s assessed valuation given that Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation more than doubled between FY 2004 and FY 2009. This growth was the result of the quality economic development investments the city made over the last several years. With the latest assessed valuation information, the decline in Glendale property values equates to a loss of almost one-third of the city’s secondary assessed valuation – from a peak at just under $2.2 billion in FY 2009 to a projected $1.5 billion for FY 2012. 270 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP For the long-term future, we are assuming no change in FY 2013 with conservative growth starting at 1% for FY 2014 and increasing to 4% in FY 2015. We believe these are very conservative growth assumptions. The average annual growth rate in Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation was 8.7% for the 10 year period of 1997 – 2007 – representing the real estate markets of calendar years 1994 through 2004 – prior to the big run up in property values. The following chart provides a graphical view of Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation changes between FY 2001 and FY 2011 as well as the projected valuations for FY 2012 through FY 2020. The news about a third consecutive decline in secondary assessed valuation prompted changes to the capital plan. Modifications were required because property tax revenue to pay additional general obligation bond debt service would be insufficient in future years had corrective actions not been taken. Therefore, the G.O. component of the FY 2011 – 20 CIP reflects the following changes from the plan adopted as part of the FY 2010 budget: construction of the new Municipal Court facility was moved from FY 2011 to FY 2015, and construction of the new West Area Library building was moved from FY 2014 to FY 2015. 271 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Capital Plan Implications for Secondary Property Tax Rate Capital projects are staged over time so new debt is issued for projects as existing debt is paid off and/or as new development and property appreciation increase the tax base. Bonds are typically paid back over 10 to 15 years by taxpayers or ratepayers as the improvement is used. Therefore, the use of municipal bonds partially fulfills the Council’s objective of having future users pay their fair share of the cost of improvements from which they will benefit. Table 2-5 (below) summarizes annual debt service requirements for planned future G.O. bond issuances. You will see that the secondary assessed valuation figures reflect the declines discussed previously in this capital section. Table 2-5 General Obligation Property Tax Bonds (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Secondary Assessed Valuation $1,753,569 $1,508,070 $1,508,070 $1,523,150 $1,584,076 Estimated Secondary Property Tax Rev.1 $24,022 $20,659 $20,659 $20,866 $21,700 Existing Debt Service2 $29,447 $28,099 $26,760 $26,961 $27,255 Less Proposed Contributions Debt From Other Service Funds ($1,760) $0 ($1,461) $0 ($1,469) $0 ($1,471) $196 ($1,461) $557 Total Debt Service $27,687 $26,638 $25,291 $25,687 $26,351 1 2 Assumes the secondary property tax rate of $1.3699 remains unchanged through FY 2015 Existing debt service includes transfers of $4.7M in FY 2010 and $1.4M in FY 2011 for HURF debt service The estimated secondary property tax rate assumes no change from the $1.3699 that will be adopted for FY 2011. This is in contrast to prior capital plans that assumed a portion of the primary property tax rate would move to the secondary rate each fiscal year, with the total rate remaining unchanged. This change in assumption was required because the economic downturn is having an adverse impact on primary property tax revenue that is used in the operating budget. Given the city’s financial policy regarding property tax rate stabilization, no changes are assumed to either the secondary or primary property tax rates. Table 2-5 also reflects the contributions expected from other funds to help pay the annual G.O. debt service. (Details about these contributions are provided in Table 2-6, G.O Debt Service Contributions from Other Funds.) The contributions from other funds will help address the shortfall between the revenue generated from the secondary property tax rate and the annual debt service requirements. The remaining shortfall will be covered by fund balance within the General Obligation Bond Debt Fund. Even with the planned draw down in G.O. debt service 272 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP fund balance, the plan maintains a fund balance through FY 2015 that exceeds the required minimum of 10% of the prior year’s debt service. The current G.O. debt is documented in Schedule 7 of this budget book. Table 2-6 (below) is new. It provides detailed information about the contributions from other funds that are planned for the payment of G.O. debt service. Contributions from development impact fee (DIF) fund balances will be used to pay debt service for projects eligible for the identified impact fees. For example, the fire and police DIF contributions in FY 2011 will be used to pay for the debt service on the joint public safety facility located at Maryland and 83rd Avenues. The recreation facility DIF contributions in FY 2011 through 2015 will be used to pay part of the debt service on the Foothills Recreation and Aquatic Center. Table 2-6 G.O. Debt Service Contributions from Other Funds (All Dollar in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Fund 1380 Water/Sewer $1,253 $1,253 $1,261 $1,262 $1,251 DIF Contributions Fund 1420 Fund 1440 Fund 1480 Total Fire Police Rec Fac. Contributions $161 $214 $132 $1,760 $0 $0 $209 $1,461 $0 $0 $209 $1,469 $0 $0 $209 $1,471 $0 $0 $210 $1,461 Voter Authorization Under Arizona State law, cities can obtain long-term financing through the use of G.O. bonds only with the approval of voters. On November 2, 1999, the City Council placed on the ballot a variety of proposed capital improvements recommended by the Citizen Bond Election Committee and the Management Team, resulting in voters approving all $411.5 million of bonds requested. In 2006, City Council established an Ad-Hoc Citizens Bond Election Committee to consider whether additional authorization was needed to support the Council approved FY 2007-16 CIP. On May 15, 2007, voters approved $218 million of the $270 million bond request recommended by the 2006 Ad-Hoc Citizen Bond Election Committee. The time between a bond election varies depending on how much the voters approve in a given election and how many capital projects are initiated. Bond sale proceeds must be used for the purposes specified in the bond authorization election. Remaining bond funds in one bond category may not be used to fund projects in another bond category. 273 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-7 shows the projected remaining voter authorization for G.O. bonds by authorization category. The remaining authorization numbers reflect unused authorization from the October 1981, March 1987, November 1999 and May 2007 bond elections. Table 2-7 Projected Remaining G.O. Bond Voter Authorization (All Dollars in Thousands) Category Public Safety FY 20101 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $104,473 $104,473 $104,473 $103,043 $103,043 $69,383 Landfill $15,540 $15,540 $15,540 $15,540 $15,540 $15,540 Library $17,096 $17,096 $17,096 $17,096 $17,096 $0 Streets/Parking2,3 $67,238 $67,238 $67,238 $67,238 $67,238 $67,238 Cultural/Historical2 $13,721 $13,721 $13,721 $13,721 $13,721 $13,721 $6,750 $6,750 $6,750 $6,750 $6,750 $6,750 $32,627 $32,627 $32,627 $32,627 $32,627 $32,627 Govt. Facilities $30,200 $30,200 $30,200 $30,200 $28,795 $28,795 Open Space/Trails $50,525 $50,525 $50,525 $50,525 $50,525 $50,525 Parks $14,637 $14,637 $14,637 $14,637 $12,717 $12,717 Flood Control $10,032 $10,032 $10,032 $10,032 $10,032 $10,032 Transit 2 Econ. Development 2 1 Remaining authorization as of June 30, 2010 Bonds can be issued as G. O. Bonds, Revenue Bonds or both. 3 Streets/Parking voter authorization can be used for Street Revenue Bonds that are repaid with HURF revenue 2 Revenue Bonds The City of Glendale can currently make use of four types of revenue bonds: HURF, transportation, water/sewer (utilities) and landfill. The principal and interest on these bonds will be paid from future revenue derived from state highway user revenue fees, the city’s transportation sales tax, and user fees for water, sewer and landfill services. Although revenue bonds may incur slightly higher interest costs than G.O. bonds, revenue bonds do not affect the city's debt limitation. However revenue bonds do require voter authorization unless an alternative form of financing is chosen. Street Revenue Bonds: The State of Arizona shares with cities a portion of the revenues it collects from highway user fees. This revenue is tracked in the Streets Fund (Fund 1340) and is known as HURF revenue. The Arizona State Constitution restricts the use of HURF revenue to street and highway purposes such as right-of-way acquisition, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair and the payment of the interest and principal on HURF bonds. 274 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP HURF often is called the gas tax even though there are several other transportation-related fees, including a portion of the vehicle license tax, that comprise this revenue source. Much of this revenue source is based on the volume of fuel sold rather than the price of fuel. In the past, the Arizona Legislature has altered, and may in the future alter, (1) the type and/or rate of taxes, fees and charges to be deposited into the Arizona Highway Revenue Fund and (2) the allocation of such monies among the Arizona Department of Transportation, Arizona cities and counties and other purposes. In fact, the Arizona Legislature reduced the amount of funds allocated to cities for FY 2009, FY 2010 and FY 2011. It is expected that this change to the amount distributed to cities will continue for the future. HURF bond-funded projects require voter authorization (either HURF voter authorization or streets/parking G.O. voter authorization) but do not affect the city's debt limitation. By state law, when a city sells this type of bond, the maximum projected annual total debt service payment cannot exceed one-half of the previous year’s revenue allocation. Because of the volatility of highway user revenues, the City Council directed staff to cap the street bond debt service to total highway user revenue ratio slightly below the state limit of .50. The city’s target for CIP purposes is to remain at or near a .45 debt service to revenue ratio. Table 2-8 summarizes the debt service to revenue ratio for HURF bonds. The current HURF debt service is documented in Schedule 7. There are no HURF bond sales planned for FY 2011 through FY 2015. The HURF revenue figures assume the state will continue with the reduced distribution approach in place in FY 2009 through FY 2011. Consequently, the city of Glendale will use HURF revenue only to pay street operating costs in FY 2011. Annual HURF debt service will be paid by contributions from the roadway development impact fee fund, the transportation sales tax fund and the general obligation debt service fund balance. Table 2-8 Street Revenue Bonds (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Highway User Tax Revenues* $13,200 $13,500 $13,500 $13,500 $13,500 $13,500 Existing Proposed Debt Debt Service Service $4,709 $0 $4,700 $0 $4,706 $0 $4,709 $0 $4,696 $0 $1,958 $0 Total Debt Service $4,709 $4,700 $4,706 $4,709 $4,696 $1,958 * FY 2010 estimated revenue; FY 2011-2015 projected revenues 275 Return to CIP TOC Annual Coverage N/A 2.87 2.87 2.87 2.87 6.89 Debt Service to Prev. Year Revenue % N/A 36% 35% 35% 35% 15% 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Transportation Sales Tax Revenue Bonds: On November 6, 2001, Glendale held a special election where voters passed a new half-cent sales tax to fund a new transportation plan. The transportation plan was created to improve service for all modes of transportation, including public transit, motorized vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian and aviation. Of the 13,019 ballots cast for this proposition, 64% were in favor and 36% were in opposition. By their votes, Glendale residents indicated that having transportation choices and being connected to regional activities and employment centers were important to maintaining Glendale’s high quality of life. Everyone who shops in Glendale pays the half-cent sales tax, which became effective January 1, 2002. The revenues are dedicated to funding the implementation of the Glendale Onboard! (GO) Transportation Plan. The sales tax will fund about 78% of the plan and about 12% will come from federal, state and regional sources. The remaining 10% will come from other sources such as fare box revenues and the general fund. The sales tax has no termination date because it will be used for future transit operating costs that are ongoing. The transportation capital and operating budgets are balanced yearly. Table 2-9 displays proposed revenue bond sales to support capital projects in the transportation sales tax program. The table summarizes annual revenue expected from the designated sales tax, future bond sale amounts, the corresponding debt service, and the resulting coverage ratio. The minimum debt coverage ratio that was established for the FY 2008 transportation sales tax revenue bond issuance is 2.0. Please see the Glendale Onboard Annual Report for more information. Table 2-9 Transportation Revenue Bonds (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Transportation Sales Tax Revenue $18,500 $19,244 $20,645 $22,086 $22,729 Bond Sales $24,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Existing Debt Service $7,328 $7,327 $7,326 $7,326 $7,326 Proposed Debt Service $1,789 $1,789 $1,789 $1,789 $1,789 Total Debt Service $9,117 $9,116 $9,115 $9,115 $9,115 Annual Coverage 2.03 2.11 2.26 2.42 2.49 Water/Sewer Revenue Bonds: The city can sell bonds that pledge water/sewer utility revenues as payment for bond debt service. Water/sewer revenue bond sales are limited by Ordinance 1323 New Series (adopted in 1984) and Ordinance 1784 New Series (adopted in 1993). Glendale’s bond covenant states that net utility revenue (i.e. revenues less operating costs) will be at least 1.2 times the maximum debt service due in any succeeding fiscal year; this is the bond debt service coverage ratio. Adjustments in net revenue may be made in some circumstances; 276 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP restatement of debt service on variable rate and certain other types of debt is permitted; and refunding and compound interest bonds may be issued under different tests. In December 2003, the city entered into a trust agreement and issued subordinate lien obligations. Subordinate lien obligations are not bonds; they are junior and subordinate to the lien on water/sewer system revenues from existing city revenue bonds. Obligations offer the city the ability to take advantage of historically low interest rates at a time when adequate bond authorization is unavailable. Table 2-10 displays projected water/sewer bond sales and coverage ratios. FY 2011-15 CIP projects for the water and sewer system will be funded with one of the financing sources described above. The current water/sewer debt is documented in Schedule 7 of this budget book. Table 2-10 Water/Sewer Planned Bonds & Coverage Ratios (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year Bond Sales FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $20,000 $8,500 $21,500 $43,000 $49,000 Annual Coverage Ratio 1.32 1.46 1.54 1.54 1.53 Landfill Revenue Bonds: Landfill revenue bonds fund environmental improvements required by federal and state law as well as improvements relating to constructing, extending, improving and repairing the Glendale Municipal Landfill. Users of the Glendale Municipal Landfill include both outside haulers and the city’s residential and commercial solid waste operations. Landfill CIP projects will be funded from operating revenues over the next few years. The voter authorization for landfill revenue bonds as of June 30, 2010, was $15.5 million. Other Capital Financing Options Local Improvement District Bonds: Local improvement districts (LIDs) are legally designated geographic areas in which a majority of the affected property owners agree to pay for one or more capital improvements through a supplemental assessment. This financing approach ties the repayment of debt to those property owners who most directly benefit from the improvements financed. The city’s most recent LID was formed in 1993 to finance the construction of improvements on Bell Road, from 67th Avenue to 83rd Avenue, and the Arrowhead Mall area. 277 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP There are several financial and practical constraints that can limit the formation of such districts. While LID bonds are not subject to specific debt limits, LID debt appears in the city's financial statements as an obligation of the city, and therefore can affect the city’s bond ratings. In addition, it may be difficult to obtain the consent of the number of property owners needed to create a LID. Residential property owners and business property owners in the same area may have different concerns, priorities and financial assets. Finally, a LID usually is not a viable option in lower-income areas. For capital plan purposes, it is assumed that any new LIDs either will be fully funded by private property owners or the city’s financial participation will be limited to a small “general city contribution” for the share of improvements that benefits property owners outside the district. The formation of a LID can affect the CIP positively by accelerating the completion of a capital improvement already in the CIP or negatively by delaying other scheduled projects in order to finance the city’s LID contribution. Municipal Property Corporation Bonds: A city may form a Municipal Property Corporation (MPC) to finance a large capital project. An MPC is a non-profit organization over which the city exercises oversight authority, including the appointment of its governing board. This mechanism allows the city to finance a needed capital improvement and then purchase the improvement from the corporation over a period of years. In order for the MPC to market the bonds, a city will typically pledge unrestricted excise taxes. Unrestricted excise taxes are generally all excise, transaction privilege, franchise and income taxes. In fact, MPC debt service is paid with General Fund operating dollars and this is a serious limitation of this financing option. (The General Fund operating budget contribution is reflected as a transfer from the General Fund to the MPC debt service fund in Schedule 4 of this document). While the city has potential MPC bond capacity, a large issuance of MPC bonds could place a significant strain on the overall General Fund operating budget. Before entering into a purchase agreement with the MPC, the city also will pledge that actual annual excise tax collections will be at least three times the maximum annual debt service payment for all senior MPC bonds. The city has formed and entered into agreements to sell MPC bonds to fund several construction projects, including the following: • • • • • Glendale Municipal Office Complex, Jobing.com Arena, Glendale Media Center and Expo Hall, Convention Center and Parking Garage adjacent to the Westgate development in west Glendale, a portion of the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Facility, and infrastructure for the Zanjero development. Table 2-11 shows the current amount of MPC principal debt outstanding as of July 1, 2010. It is anticipated that the debt service on these obligations will be paid by the undesignated portion of city sales tax receipts from the projects that benefit from the capital improvements, with any shortfalls addressed by the General Fund transfer. The current MPC debt is documented in Schedule 7 of this budget book. 278 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-11 Outstanding Municipal Property Bonds (as of July 1, 2010) Year Issued Principal Balance Outstanding MPC Bonds - Arena Tax Exempt 2003A $45,730,000 MPC Bonds - Arena Taxable 2003B $96,370,000 MPC Bonds - Refund Imp Dist 2004A $6,860,000 MPC Bonds – Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Facility/Zanjero 2006A $29,620,000 MPC Bonds – Media Center/Convention Center/Parking Garage 2008A $32,315,000 MPC Bonds – Media Center/Convention Center/Parking Garage 2008B $51,285,000 MPC Bonds – Media Center/Convention Center/Parking Garage 2008C $7,435,000 AMFP Series 14 - Arena 2002 $5,055,000 AMFP Refunding Series 16 - Arena 2003 $7,250,000 Issue TOTAL $281,920,000 Lease Financing: Lease financing provides long-term financing for the purchase of equipment or other capital improvements and does not affect the city’s G.O. bond capacity and does not require voter approval. In a lease transaction, the asset being financed can include new capital needs, assets under existing lease agreements or, in some cases, equipment purchased in the past for which the government or municipal unit would prefer to be reimbursed and paid over time. Title to the asset is transferred to the city at the end of the lease term. Table 2-12 reflects the total outstanding balance of capital leases and notes under contract by the city. The complete lease/note debt is documented in Schedule 8 of this budget book. 279 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-12 Outstanding Capital Leases (as of July 1, 2010) Lease Financing Year Issued Original Amount LaSalle Lease Equipment Lease Hickman/Motorola Lease Equipment Lease Equipment Lease Equipment Lease 2000 2003 2003 2006 2007 2009 $24,614,627 $1,240,330 $10,800,000 $1,370,300 $1,368,800 $1,189,365 Total Lease Financing Notes2 Northern Crossing Note Total Note Financing Total Balance Outstanding1 $264,910 $29,836 $7,670,000 $303,612 $722,044 $999,508 Year Matures 2011 2011 2012 2011 2016 2014 $9,989,910 2002 $14,500,000 Grant Total $4,870,416 $4,870,416 2013 $14,860,326 1 Includes principal and interest. Excludes Wastewater Management Authority of Arizona loan agreements which are included in the outstanding water and sewer revenue bonded debt. 2 Grants: The majority of Glendale’s grants for capital projects come from the federal or state government. There are two major types of grants. Open, competitive grant programs usually offer a great deal of latitude in developing a proposal and grants are awarded through a competitive review process. The existing Arizona Heritage Fund grants for parks and historic preservation capital projects are an example of competitive grants. Entitlement or categorical grants are allocated to qualified governmental entities based on a formula basis (e.g., by population, income levels, etc.). Entitlement funds must be used for a specific grantor-defined purpose. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) are considered entitlement grants and typically must benefit low-moderate income residents. A new entitlement grant was awarded to the city during FY 2010 that will move forward several energy efficiency capital projects are moving forward. Specifically, Glendale is the recipient of a $2.3 million allocation through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act’s (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant. This grant funding will allow for capital projects to be completed that otherwise may not be completed for several years. Some of the capital projects to be completed include: 280 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP • replacement of outdated lighting systems at the public safety/court facility, the main library and sport courts in the city’s parks with energy efficient lighting systems; • an upgrade to the ultraviolet disinfection system at the Arrowhead Wastewater Reclamation Facility; and • completion of the LED conversion program for the remaining 30 (of 190) signalized intersections. It is important to note that most federal and state grant programs, with the exception of some public housing programs, require the applicant to contribute to the cost of the project. The required contribution, referred to as local match, can vary from 5% to 75%. Federal Transportation Administration grants for public transit improvements and Federal Aviation Administration grants for airport projects are examples of capital improvement grants for which local matching requirements will come from the city’s operating budget and/or the city’s transportation sales tax. Many federal and state grant programs specifically prohibit the applicant from using other government grants as match, and require that the match be cash rather than donated services. Therefore, matching funds usually come from General Fund department operating budgets, G.O. bonds or development impact fees. There is always a possibility that some of the grant-funded projects will be delayed or not completed if government grants fail to materialize. CIP projects adversely affected by changes in the availability of grants may be postponed until the needed grant funds are acquired, the project is modified to reduce costs, or the project is funded using alternative means. Operating Budget - Pay-As-You-Go: Many capital improvements and purchases of large pieces of equipment are included in the operating budget on a pay-as-you-go basis. The city’s FY 2010 operating budget also provides for the maintenance of capital assets and expenses associated with the growth and depreciation of city facilities and equipment. A vehicle replacement fund for most city vehicles, including police patrol cars, and a technology replacement fund for desktop computers, servers, optical scanning equipment, and other related technology are included in the operating budget. Typically, each department pays annually into each fund based on the equipment in its inventory and the expected life span and value of the equipment. Specialized vehicles such as street sweepers, and recurring maintenance costs such as asphalt repairs and sealcoating, are also funded from the operating budget. Some capital improvements are paid for on a cash basis in order to avoid the interest costs incurred with other financing mechanisms. 281 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Other Financing Alternatives The City of Glendale’s ongoing challenge to balance the service and infrastructure needs of its current residents with those of its future residents is not unique. Every city that experiences prolonged periods of growth is looking for ways to more equitably distribute the cost of capital improvements based on usage levels and derived benefit. Forming New Utilities: Some cities form a utility to finance and maintain infrastructure for a specific purpose. Examples include streetlights and storm sewers. Rates for these services might be set according to the expected level of facility usage. For example, monthly storm sewer billing rates could be set according to the amount of runoff typically generated by different types and sizes of property. One advantage of usage-based rates is that some of the cost burden is redistributed from the lowend user (i.e. the residential sector) to the high-end user (i.e. the commercial sector). For example, a shopping center generates more runoff per acre than a residential dwelling, and would pay a proportionately higher storm water utility bill. Currently, the city does not use this method. Community Facilities Districts: Community facilities districts (CFDs), enabled by the Arizona Legislature, can provide another mechanism for targeting the funding of capital improvements to the specific area or population that benefits from the improvement. The CFD is conceptually similar to LID’s, but a CFD is given much broader authority in the type of tax or fee implemented and the use of the revenue. As an example, a CFD can levy a tax or fee for the ongoing maintenance of a capital improvement. Currently, the city does not have any CFDs established. 282 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CIP Operating Impact IMPACT OF THE CIP ON THE OPERATING BUDGET Glendale’s operating budget is directly affected by the CIP. Almost every new capital improvement entails ongoing expenses for routine operation, repair and maintenance upon completion or acquisition. Also, many new capital facilities require the addition of new positions. Existing city facilities and equipment that were once considered state-of-the-art will require rehabilitation, renovation or upgrades to accommodate new uses and/or address safety and structural improvements. Older facilities usually involve higher maintenance and repair costs as well. Pay-as-you-go capital projects, grant-matching funds and lease/purchase capital expenses also come directly from the operating budget. The costs of future operations and maintenance for new CIP projects are estimated by each department based on a detailed set of cost guidelines that is provided to all departments each year. These guidelines are updated annually in conjunction with the various departments that are experts on different types of operating costs. For instance, the FY 2011 – 2020 CIP reflects the following estimated operating cost for capital projects: • • • • • • • • • between $2.06 and $3.21 per sq ft annually for electrical and gas costs in a building; between $2.00 and $3.00 per sq ft annually for building maintenance, including HVAC, plumbing, electrical and structural repairs; $2.07 per sq ft annually for custodial services; $0.157 per sq ft annually for building water usage; $341.26 per month for refuse (two 6 yard containers picked up three times a week); $639.00 for insurance for each new General Fund FTE; $0.18 for landscape maintenance; Vehicles annual replacement contributions, maintenance and fuel costs: o ½-Ton Pickup: $1,967 annual replacement cost, $0.18/$0.20 per mile maintenance/gas; o Mid-Size Sedan: $2,700 annual replacement cost, $0.17/$0.13 per mile maintenance/gas; Technology annual replacement contributions: o Desktop Computer: $540.00; o Laptop Computer: $640.00; o Color Printer: $1,053.00. CIP projects involving land acquisitions in anticipation of future needs also increase operating budget costs. Vacant parcels can mean maintenance costs related to fencing, security, weed control, etc., until the land is needed for new parks, libraries, water treatment facilities, etc. However, even with these costs, it often is more cost effective to purchase land before an area has been fully developed. Operating costs are carefully considered in deciding which projects move forward in the CIP because it is not possible for the city to fund concurrently several large-scale projects that have significant operating budget impacts. Therefore, implementation timetables are established that stagger projects over time. 283 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CIP Operating Impact Council reviews operating and maintenance costs associated with capital projects scheduled to come on-line in the upcoming fiscal year during the annual spring budget workshops. If operating and maintenance costs have been identified in a project the departments are required to either absorb the additional costs or submit a supplemental request to receive funding. Supplemental requests for CIP operating and maintenance costs are balanced against other requests for additional funding. Many improvements make a positive contribution to the fiscal well being of the city. Capital projects such as redevelopment of under-performing or under-used areas of the city, and the infrastructure expansion needed to support new development, help promote the economic development and growth that generates additional operating revenues. These new revenue sources provide the funding needed to maintain, improve and expand the city’s infrastructure. The table below summarizes the projected cumulative impact of the CIP on the city’s operating budget for the upcoming four years, by category. Detailed operating cost estimates are included in the project detail section of the CIP. If applicable, each project contains an operating and maintenance description, as well as a projection for the operating costs for the first five years and a five-year aggregate estimate for the second five years for personnel, supplies, utilities, insurance, etc. In most instances an inflation rate of 3% is figured into the ongoing operating and maintenance costs each year. Operating Impact by CIP Project Type (All Dollars in Thousands) Project Type FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $712 $801 $1,204 $849 $462 $508 $528 $544 $38 $40 $41 $43 $10 $13 $26 $17 $347 $357 $505 $520 Landfill Sanitation Projects $0 $0 $22 $119 Economic Development Projects $6 $6 $6 $6 $13 $264 $318 $327 $1,588 $1,989 $2,650 $2,425 Water & Sewer Projects Transportation Sales Tax Projects All Other Transportation Projects (DIF, HURF & Streets) Park Projects Public Safety Projects Other Projects TOTAL Operating Impact 284 Return to CIP TOC 2011-2020 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Summary SUMMARY BY TYPE OF PROJECT Glendale’s CIP contains a wide range of projects that make up a well-rounded, long-range program for municipal improvements. One of the most useful ways to view the CIP and understand its components is to group projects into similar types or categories. Since city revenue sources are often limited to specific categories (e.g., streets, water/sewer utility) and bonds are authorized by major categories (e.g., public safety, parks), this approach is also helpful when evaluating bond issues. The graph below shows new FY 2011 CIP project funding by major category type, excluding grant appropriation and carryover. FY 2011 NEW CIP PROJECT FUNDING BY TYPE (excludes carryover and grant appropriation) The following section includes a summary of all capital projects by fund. A narrative description of the major CIP categories precedes the project detail sheets for each project. Each detail sheet contains a project identification number and name, a short project description, the anticipated funding source, projected costs for each of the first five years (including carryover funding from the previous years CIP, if applicable), a five-year aggregate estimate for the second five years and the operating impact, if any. The operating impact section remains expanded to show how much will be spent on personnel, supplies, utilities, insurance, etc. along with a description of the operating impact. New projects are identified with an asterisk --*-- in the project’s title for the detailed description of each project. Projects that do not have funding in the first year are assigned a “T” (temporary) number until design or construction begins. 285 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Summary of ALL Capital Projects by Funding Type Fund # - Name Carryover BOND CONSTRUCTION FUNDS 1980 - Street/Parking Bonds 2000 - HURF/Street Bonds 2140 - Open Space/Trails 2060 - Parks 2160 - Library Construction 2040 - Public Safety 2080 - Government Facilities 2130 - Cultural Facility 2100 - Economic Development 2180 - Flood Control Sub-Total DIF FUNDS 1600 - DIF-Roadway Imp. 1520 - DIF-Citywide Open Space 1460 - DIF-Citywide Parks FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 2,246,066 160,000 0 0 0 0 20,608,255 218,510 0 0 0 0 0 12,076,659 400,027 0 0 0 0 0 50,137,037 3,060,849 0 0 0 1,982,127 0 146,744,535 0 0 0 0 0 16,865,423 22,508,091 1,967,623 2,302,215 410,000 2,601,040 410,000 32,298,759 89,167,280 3,228,794 0 0 0 1,602,651 0 14,670,646 130,576 0 0 0 0 0 17,733,107 0 1,800,000 0 0 0 0 91,554,271 19,586,267 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 43,141,182 $30,838,712 $4,423,140 $570,925 $2,761,965 $4,155,703 $49,325,107 $508,341,063 331,443 0 0 22,064 0 366,408 1,766,178 33,128 138,345 44,000 46,216 44,000 46,350 85,140 0 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 0 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 1540 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 1 1560 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 2 39,632 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 123,506 0 15,000 7,816 5,600 2,350 5,140 1580 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 3 1480 - DIF-Citywide Rec Fac. 26,905 0 19,999 7,516 6,000 2,350 5,140 1380 - DIF-Library Buildings 0 0 0 0 0 1,608,951 0 1500 - DIF-Libraries 1440 - DIF-Police Dept Fac. 0 200,000 200,000 213,265 200,000 2,167,169 530,769 0 0 0 10,919 0 11,584 25,329 1420 - DIF-Fire Protection Fac. 0 0 0 11,480 0 12,179 26,627 1620 - DIF-General Government 0 0 0 12,799 0 13,578 29,687 $554,614 $338,345 $278,999 $338,723 $255,600 $4,237,969 $2,489,430 1,994,367 3,850,002 4,000,000 4,867,094 19,011,991 27,039,695 20,480,560 11,341,252 26,496,203 9,054,973 23,421,024 22,741,203 24,762,819 140,056,651 4,548,696 7,686,865 8,150,861 9,084,853 18,413,635 16,199,003 61,623,224 43,424,963 45,499,756 13,112,354 21,367,058 15,300,505 14,833,431 121,393,599 1,637,487 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,645,785 Sub-Total ENTERPRISE/OTHER FUNDS 2360 - Water & Sewer 2400 - Water 2420 - Sewer 2210 - Transportation Construction 1650 - Transportation Grants 1340 - HURF/Streets Fund 2480 - Sanitation 0 1,288,888 1,863,645 1,289,787 3,202,986 2,798,000 15,215,861 1,339,352 522,275 965,756 2,478,578 15,940,811 5,011,013 17,491,222 37,261 1,950,000 495,000 15,320,000 1,082,000 13,207,000 0 815,252 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 540,271 802,858 802,858 802,858 100,000 100,000 5,630,443 1740 - Civic Center 0 0 1,868,340 2,518,638 0 0 23,661,114 2150 - Technology Infrastructure 1220 - Arts Commission 0 0 985,200 636,000 655,000 165,000 23,161,665 0 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,750,000 Sub-Total $65,678,901 $92,596,847 $45,798,987 $86,285,890 $100,948,131 $108,615,961 $452,110,124 Grand Total Total FY 2011 Funding $97,072,227 $97,358,332 $194,430,559 $46,648,911 $89,386,578 $105,359,434 $162,179,037 $962,940,617 2440 - Landfill 2120 - Airport Capital Grants 1840 - Other Grants 1000 - General Fund 286 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Bond Construction C n Funds BOND D CONST TRUCTIION FUN NDS Bond connstruction fu unds are usedd to account for financiaal resources to t be used foor the acquissition or constrruction of cap pital projects in the city’’s council-appproved CIP P using generral obligation bonds annd HURF rev venue bonds. Beginningg balances arre based on prior p bond isssuance procceeds that havee been receiv ved but not yet y expendedd. Additionaal bond saless during the specified years, estimatedd investmentt and interest income, annd expected grant/IGA g reevenues incrrease the beginning balances. Project expeenses includding carryoveer and operaating expensees (e.g. advissor fees) reduuce the beginning balancces. Renovatioons at Bicentenn nial Park at 71st and a Missouri Avvenues Fund # - Name N Carryovver FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY Y 2014 FY Y 2015 FYs 16-20 1 2,246,0066 160,000 0 0 0 0 20,6088,255 2000-HUR RF/Street Bondss 218,5510 0 0 0 0 0 12,0766,659 2140-Openn Space/Trails 400,0027 0 0 0 0 0 50,1377,037 3,060,8849 0 0 0 1,9982,127 0 146,7444,535 0 0 0 0 0 16,8665,423 22,5088,091 2040-Publlic Safety 1,967,6623 2,302,215 410,000 2,601,040 4 410,000 32,298,759 89,1677,280 2080-Govvernment Facilitiies 3,228,7794 0 0 0 1,6602,651 0 14,6700,646 130,5576 0 0 0 0 0 17,7333,107 0 1,800,000 0 0 0 0 91,5544,271 19,586,2267 160,925 160,925 160,925 1 160,925 160,925 43,141,182 30,838,7712 4,423,140 570,925 2,761,965 4,1155,703 49,325,107 508,341,063 1980-Streeet/Parking Bond ds 2060-Parkk 2160-Librrary 2130-Culttural Facility 2100-Econnomic Developm ment 2180-Floood Control Totaal Bond Funds 287 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Street/Parrking - Construction Funds STREE ET/PARK KING C CONSTRU UCTION FUNDS F This cateegory includees projects thhat are fundeed with Genneral Obligattion street coonstruction bonds b and Highhway User Revenue R Fee (HURF) moonies. In FY 20011, carryoveer funding iss available foor street scalllop, street beautification b n and petition lighting projects p wheere needed, as a well as a number n of sttreet improvement projeccts along 67th Avenue. With the exception of $160,000 for the Petition Lighting Prrogram Projeect in FY 2011, no new funding fu will be introduceed to the Streeet and Parkking Construuctions Fundss due to the continuedd drop in seccondary asseessed valuatiion. Prooject Name: 67thh Ave/Cactus to ACDC A Fun nding Source: G.O. G Bond Fun nd #: 1980 Prooject #: 68118 288 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1980 - Street/Parking Bonds Category: 20% Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $4,444,989 $2,034,480 $2,039,363 $2,047,929 $2,060,216 $2,072,577 0 0 0 0 0 18,510,000 1,623 8,138 14,276 20,479 20,602 51,172 1,623 8,138 14,276 20,479 20,602 18,561,172 6,066 3,255 5,710 8,192 8,241 20,469 6,066 3,255 5,710 8,192 8,241 20,469 Revenue Bond Proceeds G.O. Bond Investment Revenue Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 68103 Street Scallop 68104 Street Beautification 68117 67th Ave. Camelback to Grand Sub-Total - Existing Assets 1,222,622 0 0 0 0 0 9,711,345 758,842 0 0 0 0 0 6,444,410 85,705 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,067,169 0 0 0 0 0 16,155,755 178,897 160,000 0 0 0 0 1,440,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,012,500 178,897 2,246,066 160,000 160,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,452,500 20,608,255 $2,039,363 $2,047,929 $2,060,216 $2,072,577 $5,025 New Assets 68102 Petition Lighting Program T1232 95th Ave Camelback to Missouri Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 2,406,066 $2,034,480 *New Project 289 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1980 - Street/Parking Bonds Category: 20% Project: 68103 - Street Scallop (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The Scallop Street Program is used to complete street improvements to reduce traffic accidents, enhance traffic flow, provide safety to adjacent pedestrian traffic and to mitigate property flooding. Projects are selected based on need and available funding from a scallop street inventory maintained by the Engineering Department. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,567,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $219,316 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,670 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $719,359 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,711,345 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $1,222,622 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,222,622 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,711,345 O and M will be determined when the project is closer to construction. Project: 68104 - Street Beautification (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The Street Beautification Program is used to complete landscaping improvements that were not required of the developer at the time of development. The objective of the program is to create an aesthetically pleasing landscape continuity, citywide, along the arterial street system. Improvements include construction of sidewalks, multi-use paths, improvements to handicap accessibility, benches, planting of trees, shrubs and ground cover. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,107,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $156,340 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $61,070 $6,444,410 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $758,842 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,444,410 O and M based upon standard formula for water and maintenance for 307,500 sq ft of landscaped area. Operating Costs: Landscape Water $0 $758,842 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 290 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $182,579 $97,490 $280,069 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1980 - Street/Parking Bonds Category: 20% Project: 68117 - 67th Ave. Camelback to Grand (I) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $85,705 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,705 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 68102 - Petition Lighting Program (N) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Construct street improvements on 67th Avenue from Camelback to Grand Avenue. Project includes underground conversion of utilities, curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This project installs additional street lighting in areas that have been determined to be inadequate. Infill street lighting requests are initiated by residents and requires approval of affected residents. This is an annual ongoing project. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Construction Engineering Charges Arts Contingency FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $141,633 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,274,697 $5,099 $0 $0 $0 $0 $45,889 $1,416 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,747 $11,852 $0 $0 $0 $0 $106,667 $1,440,000 Sub-Total New Funding $160,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 Carryover $178,897 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $338,897 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,440,000 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M identified provides for 40 requested street lights per year. Supplies cover photo control cost, electricity for a 150-watt light is $74 per year, estimated maintenance for a light is $26 per year, including Remote Operations Asset Management monitoring. Supplemental budget request will be made as new streetlights are added to the system. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr $4,944 $5,092 $5,245 $5,402 $5,564 $76,971 Utilities $6,407 $6,920 $7,474 $8,072 $8,314 $135,729 $2,411 $16,289 $246,050 Equip. Maint. TOTAL $2,142 $2,207 $2,273 $2,341 $13,493 $14,219 $14,992 $15,815 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 291 Return to CIP TOC $33,350 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1980 - Street/Parking Bonds Category: 20% Project: T1232 - 95th Ave Camelback to Missouri (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Land Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This project is to acquire right-of-way, move utilities, design and construct a half street roadway, with curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, street lighting and underground overhead utilities between Camelback Road North to Missouri Avenue Project previously referred to as 95th Avenue Camelbk to Bethany Home Rd. FY 2011 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $700,000 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $600,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,500 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,012,500 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 292 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2000 - HURF/Street Bonds Category: HURF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $323,318 $106,006 $107,066 $108,672 $110,845 $113,505 2,228 1,060 1,606 2,173 2,660 2,724 0 0 0 0 0 11,965,000 2,228 1,060 1,606 2,173 2,660 11,967,724 1,030 0 0 0 0 0 1,030 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Interest Income Revenue Bond Proceeds Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 68900 67th Ave/Cactus to ACDC 164,191 0 0 0 0 0 0 54,319 0 0 0 0 0 0 68913 99th Widening-Camelbck-Northrn 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,154,767 T2710 67th Ave Glendale to Frier 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,921,892 218,510 218,510 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,076,659 12,076,659 $107,066 $108,672 $110,845 $113,505 $4,570 68909 67th Ave-Camelback to Grand Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 218,510 $106,006 *New Project 293 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2000 - HURF/Street Bonds Category: HURF Project: 68900 - 67th Ave/Cactus to ACDC (I) Project Description: Project will widen 67th Avenue to four through lanes and a continuous left turn lane. Construction will include curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lighting, underground utility conversion and landscaping. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: HURF Bonds Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $164,191 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $164,191 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O and M grounds costs are for landscape maintenance. Utility and Equipment maintenance costs are for power and electricity for approximately 40 street lights. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Utilities $5,150 $5,305 $5,464 $5,628 $5,797 $31,702 Landscape $2,060 $2,122 $2,186 $2,252 $7,210 $7,427 $7,650 $7,880 $2,320 $8,117 $44,387 TOTAL Project: 68909 - 67th Ave-Camelback to Grand (I) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $54,319 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $54,319 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 68913 - 99th Widening-Camelbck-Northrn (I) Project Description: HURF Bonds Funding Source: Construct street improvements on 67th Avenue from Camelback to Grand Avenue. The Transportation Sales Tax will fund design and construction of 67th Avenue at Camelback Road & Glendale Avenue. Capital Costs: Operating Description: $12,685 HURF Bonds Funding Source: Complete street improvements on 99th Avenue from Camelback to Northern as infill as the property develops. Improvements include curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, landscaping and a bridge widening over the Grand Canal. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $735,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,675,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $157,817 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $81,585 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $468,615 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,154,767 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Estimated 132 street lights ($125 ea/yr). Landscaping will be maintained by the commercial development adjacent to the roadway. Operating Costs: Utilities TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 294 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $101,554 $101,554 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2000 - HURF/Street Bonds Category: HURF Project: T2710 - 67th Ave Glendale to Frier (I) Project Description: HURF Bonds Funding Source: Construct street improvements on 67th Avenue from Glendale Avenue to Frier Drive. This project will widen 67th Avenue, add curb and gutter, sidewalks, street lights, and landscaping. Project will also underground overhead 12kV power lines, move 69kV power poles and underground Salt River Project (SRP) irrigation ditches. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Land $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $129,553 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,011,697 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $125,292 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,117 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $512,733 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,921,892 TOTAL Operating Description: Utility costs are for 42 street lights. Landscape and water costs are for approximately 50,000 sq ft of landscaping. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,387 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $28,525 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 295 Return to CIP TOC $15,232 $75,144 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Opeen Space & Trails T - Con nstruction Fu und OP PEN SPA ACE & TRAILS T C CONSTR RUCTION FUND This cateegory enablees the city to acquire landd for the preservation off open space and to consttruct multi-usee trails and liinear parks. FY 2011 inncludes carryyover funds for continueed improvem ment and renovvation of thee 55 acre Thuunderbird Paaseo Park. Examples E off the work too be completed include laandscape, signage and trrail improvements, and replacement r of trees andd equipment located inn the linear park. p Projject Name: Thunderbird Paseo Park P Developmeent Funding Source: G.O. G Bond Fund #: 2140 Projject #: 70000 296 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2140 - Open Space/Trails Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 20% FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $920,551 $520,884 $522,134 $524,327 $527,473 $530,638 0 0 0 0 0 49,600,000 360 2,084 3,655 5,243 5,275 13,106 360 2,084 3,655 5,243 5,275 49,613,106 0 834 1,462 2,097 2,110 5,242 0 834 1,462 2,097 2,110 5,242 Revenue Bond Proceeds G.O. Bond Investment Revenue Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 70000 Thunderbird Paseo Park Develop 70002 Grand Canal Linear/Reg. Dev. T1630 Thunderbird Park Improvements 400,027 0 0 0 0 0 1,790,686 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,374,048 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,140,477 400,027 0 0 0 0 0 15,305,211 70003 City-Wide Trails System 0 0 0 0 0 0 24,749,095 70005 West Valley Multi-Modal Corrid 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,390,698 T1600 Multi-Use Bridge at 51st Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 431,362 T1610 WARP - Trail System 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,893,271 T1761 New River Bike Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 367,400 0 400,027 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34,831,826 50,137,037 $522,134 $524,327 $527,473 $530,638 $1,465 Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 400,027 $520,884 *New Project 297 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2140 - Open Space/Trails Construction Category: 20% Project: 70000 - Thunderbird Paseo Park Develop (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Park improvements and renovations to maintain this 55 acre linear park. This includes tree replacement and additions, improvements to landscaping, signage replacements, trail asphalt overlay, pedestrian/equestrian bridges, installation of emergency call stations and replacement of equipment located in the linear park. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $380,435 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,086,956 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $46,565 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,870 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $90,217 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $132,643 $1,790,686 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $400,027 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $400,027 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,790,686 O and M expenses would vary based upon the specific type of future landscape improvements that are implemented. The staffing example is for PT assistance calculated at $10.00 per hour X 2 employees at 19 hours a week each, plus inflation. Supplies & Contracts are at $601 per acre X 50 acres plus inflation. Equipment Maintenance expenses are for regular servicing of emergency call stations. A landscape water rate is calculated at $0.0495 per sq ft for 10 acres. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Staffing Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 Insurance $0 $0 $0 Landscape TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 298 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $122,166 $182,067 $0 $0 $44,962 $0 $0 $0 $0 $136,688 $488,920 $3,037 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2140 - Open Space/Trails Construction Category: 20% Project: 70002 - Grand Canal Linear/Reg. Dev. (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Continued design, develop and enhancement of the Grand Canal Linear Park and trail from 75th Avenue to New River, and New River to Northern Avenue. Improvements would include enhanced trail segments and amenities to meet the growing demand for multi-use pathways, and align and connect the City's trail system with existing or future trails of adjacent communities or agencies, including Maricopa Association of Governments and Valley Forward. Past development projects along the Grand Canal included a partnership with the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC). There is currently an IGA in place with the Flood Control District of Maricopa County for the future trail development from SR101 to New River to Northern Avenue. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,901,621 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,433,202 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $203,848 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $54,332 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $68,245 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $620,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,374,048 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes one Service Worker II at $51,655 (FY2011 salary range). Supplies and contracts include $601 per acre x 20 acres. Utilities include maintenance of the lighting and other building maintenance related to a 1,000 sq ft restroom/storage. Building maintenance includes electrical maintenance of 50 low-level security lights in the neighborhood and community nodes. Building Maintenance includes four light poles at $144. PC/Vehicle Replacement includes $1,967 annually for a pick up truck, 5,000 miles x $0.18 for maintenance, and 5,000 miles x $0.20 for fuel. Landscape includes maintenance at $.0927 per sq ft x 871, 200 sq ft(area of trail system), and landscape water $.0495 sq ft x 871,200 sq ft. Water includes building water usage at $.157 per sq ft x 1000 sq ft. Refuse includes one container at $2,048 annually. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $327,461 $76,206 $12,680 $27,894 $3,654 $4,057 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,800 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $785,350 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 299 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $995 $12,599 $1,274,696 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2140 - Open Space/Trails Construction Category: 20% Project: T1630 - Thunderbird Park Improvements (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Based on the Thunderbird Conservation Park Master Plan recommendations, items to be addressed include 1) continued repair and maintenance of trails; 2) removal of invasive plant species and revegetation of the park with native plants; 3) repair and upgrade existing park elements (ramadas, restrooms); 4) remove park elements (ramadas and restrooms)from wash located at 59th Avenue that will allow for restoration of the wildlife corridor and vegetation; and 5) installation of new park elements such as ramadas, restrooms and Ranger/Visitor building. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,141,304 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,260,869 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $137,374 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $81,440 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32,609 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,565 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $467,316 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,140,477 TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing is a Service Worker II at $52,941 with benefits plus inflation, Supplies/Contracts is ramada cleaning contract at $3,000 per ramada (23) per year. Utilities at $2.06 sq ft X 2,000 sq ft plus inflation. Building Maintenance at $2.00 X 2,000 sq ft and 10 light poles at $144 each; insurance for new staff at $628 per yr; vehicle purchase and maintenance for 1/2 ton pickup; landscape maintenance at $601 per acre X 5 acres; building water $46 per month; refuse at $4,092 per year. Operating Costs: Staffing Supplies/Contr FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $308,250 $404,226 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,025 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,675 Insurance PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape $0 $0 $0 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 300 Return to CIP TOC $0 $3,657 $31,128 $0 $0 $15,025 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,214 $23,825 $839,025 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2140 - Open Space/Trails Construction Category: 20% Project: 70003 - City-Wide Trails System (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This fund will implement recommendations for open space acquisition, trailhead land purchases, pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian paths and trails and connectivity between areas of interest citywide that accommodates future growth and user demands. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,696,250 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,275,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $640,828 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $122,000 $162,750 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,001 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,833,266 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,749,095 TOTAL Operating Description: Specific scope will determine the additional operations and maintenance costs which could include utilities for additional lighting and signage maintenance, contracts for cleaning trails and rest nodes, landscape maintenance, water costs, and building maintenance for repairs and maintenance of drinking fountains and walkway lights. Staffing is a Service Worker II position with benefits. Other operating calculations have been based on 50 acres. Proposed 150 walkway lights at $144 each, utilities at $1,191 per acre plus inflation, supplies/contracts at $601 per acre plus inflation, landscape maintenance at $0.0927 per square foot, landscape water at $0.0495 square foot. plus inflation, vehicle replacement is for a compact pickup with maintenance. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $185,788 $346,423 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $96,564 Equip. Maint. PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,600 $31,984 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,039,787 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,550,012 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 301 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $272,646 $555,220 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2140 - Open Space/Trails Construction Category: 20% Project: 70005 - West Valley Multi-Modal Corrid (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Multi-modal trail system along New River and Agua Fria River Corridor as per the Maricopa Association of Governments West Valley Rivers Trails Plan. The trail system will link with other trails in and around the City of Glendale connecting parks and other recreation facilities. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $540,555 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,544,414 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $58,196 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,444 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $177,089 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,390,698 TOTAL Operating Description: Supplies and contracts include $601x 10 acres. Building maintenance costs include 34 low-level security lights for rest nodes and trail at $75 per light and $13 per lamp for bulb replacement. Landscape includes maintenance of approximately 435,600 sq ft x $.0927per sq ft, water at $.0495 per sq ft x 435,600 sq ft, and ramada cleaning/maintenance at $4,000 per ramada x three ramadas. Water includes park without restroom (three drinking fountains) x $66.42 annually. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,097 $18,968 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $468,749 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $527,077 TOTAL Project: T1600 - Multi-Use Bridge at 51st Ave. (N) Project Description: Funding Source: $1,263 General Obligation Bonds Pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian bridge to cross Arizona Canal on the south-west side of Thunderbird Paseo Linear Park and 51st Avenue to the south side of Cactus Road, to link neighborhoods to the Thunderbird Paseo Linear Park and Regional Sun Circle Trail. This bridge would be about 1/4 mile west of the Sunnyside Bridge and separated by 51st Avenue. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $73,551 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $294,206 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,690 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,020 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,942 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,953 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $431,362 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Supplies/Contract to clean, inspect and make any repairs to the bridge that are needed on an annual basis computed at $55.50 a linear foot. Building Maintenance is $2.00 sq ft X bridge surface (840 sq ft). Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,953 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32,353 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 302 Return to CIP TOC $8,400 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2140 - Open Space/Trails Construction Category: 20% Project: T1610 - WARP - Trail System (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Develop and enhance approximately 2.5 miles of meandering trail system within the western area regional park. This project will link the existing Grand Canal Linear Park Trail and eliminate the need of crossing surface streets. Develop an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible concrete trail, ramadas, landscape, irrigation, drinking fountain, picnic tables, park benches, and small rest nodes that service parks users as well as Grand Canal Linear Park and trail users. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,467,688 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,193,396 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $167,801 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $41,934 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $510,613 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $419,339 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,893,271 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. Operating and maintenance costs are included in the Western Area Regional Park (2060-70532) operation budget. Project: T1761 - New River Bike Trail (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construct a 1,500-foot long multiuse path from an existing pathway just north of the Paraiso Drive alignment to Hillcrest Boulevard. The project will complete a safe and convenient, off-street connection from Pinnacle Peak Road to existing Hillcrest Road and 75th Avenue bike routes. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Land $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $40,000 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,024 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,185 $13,476 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,215 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $367,400 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M associated with 7-foot wide landscaped area along a 12,200-foot long multi-use pathway. Operating Costs: Utilities Landscape TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 303 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $14,618 $29,230 $43,848 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN P Parks - Con nstruction Fu und P PARKS C CONSTR RUCTION FUND Park projjects are trad ditionally funnded by a coombination of o park G.O. bonds and development d t impact feees. Due to the t continueed drop in seecondary assessed valuattion, the Parkks Constructtion Fund willl not receivee new fundinng until FY 2014. 2 Howeever, there iss carryover funding f available for the reedevelopmen nt, renovatioon and improovement of existing e parkks and relatedd facilities. Examples of this worrk include reenovation, reeplacement or o expansionn of ramada areas, a shade structures, playgroun nd facilities, sports courtts, ball fieldss, turf and lanndscaping, irrigation hting and lanndscaping. systems, security ligh Project Name: Parks Capital Equipmennt Fundingg Source: G.O. Bond Fund #:: 2060 Project #: 70541 Project Nam me: Parks Redev velopment Funding Soource: G.O. Bon nd Fund #: 20660 Project #: 70500 7 Picture Notte: Butler Park 304 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $3,948,651 $882,178 $884,295 $888,009 $831,023 $836,009 0 0 0 1,920,000 0 145,900,000 1,233 3,529 6,190 8,569 8,310 20,687 1,233 3,529 6,190 1,928,569 8,310 145,920,687 6,857 1,412 2,476 3,428 3,324 8,275 6,857 1,412 2,476 3,428 3,324 8,275 Revenue Bond Proceeds^ G.O. Bond Investment Revenue Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 70502 Orangewood Community Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,600,558 70503 Rose Lane Rec. Center Developm 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,351,531 70506 63rd & Northern Park Dev. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,200,423 70509 Manistee Ranch Development 0 0 0 0 0 0 173,801 70510 Park Enhancements 74,909 0 0 0 248,322 0 8,235,444 70512 Facilities Renovation 21,744 0 0 0 231,015 0 2,725,608 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,819,952 181,277 0 0 0 0 0 2,906,148 70514 O'Neil Center Expansion 70515 T-Bird Park Improvements 70520 Sahuaro Ranch Park Improv. 1,920,100 0 0 0 0 0 0 70523 79th/Orangewood 0 0 0 0 0 0 991,746 70532 Western Area Regional Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 14,738,305 70535 Paseo Racquet Center Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,347,698 11,665 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,412,937 490,423 0 0 0 1,502,790 0 26,046,679 70504 Foothills Center Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,896,837 70526 Soccer Lights 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,282,998 97,000 0 0 0 0 0 500,000 131,021 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,269,958 2,928,139 0 0 0 1,982,127 0 109,500,623 132,710 0 0 0 0 0 0 70527 West Area Pool 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,487,209 70528 Family Recreation Center-West 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,284,065 70540 Grounds & Facilities Imprvmnts T1710 Adult Center Expansion Replacement of Existing Assets 70500 Parks Redevelopment 70541 Parks Capital Equipment 70542 Parks Master Plan T1712 Aquatic Facility Restoration Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 70525 Barnyard Additions 305 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2060 - Parks Construction 70531 Sahuaro Ranch Visitor Ctr. Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Category: 20% FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,472,638 132,710 3,060,849 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,982,127 0 0 37,243,912 146,744,535 $884,295 $888,009 $831,023 $836,009 $3,886 Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 3,060,849 $882,178 *New Project ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. 306 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70502 - Orangewood Community Park (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Continued development of the 40+ acre Orangewood Community Park at 71st and Orangewood Avenues. This phase includes the construction of additional lighted multi-use fields, bleachers, new restroom, control building, final half street improvements, and other park amenities that are typically associated with community parks. Once completed, the multi-use complex will feature soccer/football fields, sports lights, restroom, playground, picnic facility, parking, and sport courts w/lights. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $510,390 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,400,608 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $108,940 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $72,353 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,006 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,001 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $340,260 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,600,558 TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing - 1 Service Worker II at $51,654 per position (includes benefits) and one Building Maintenance Worker at $56,942 (includes benefits). Supplies/Contracts include $601 per acre x 20 acres. Utilities includes $2.25 per sq ft x 2,000 sq ft for the control building electrical cost. Building Maintenance costs include lights for three soccer fields x $16,000 per field, and three soccer fields x $3,166 per field for lamp replacement. Forty additional low level security lights will be maintained x $75 per fixture, $13 for lamp replacement per fixture, $4.60 per sq ft to maintain the plumbing in 800 sq ft restroom, HVAC and maintenance is $2.50 per sq ft x 1,200 sq ft control building, $2.07 per sq ft x 1,200 sq ft control building for custodial service, and $3.60 per sq ft for plumbing maintenance of the control building. Insurance is $610 per new employee. Electrical includes security monitoring system at $600 per year. PC/Vehicle Replacement includes a $1,967 per year for vehicle replacement fund, 8,000 miles x $.018 for maintenance cost, and 8,000 miles x $.020 for fuel cost. Computer replacement for a lap top at $640, printer replacement $1053. Landscape is calculated at 871,200 sq ft x .0927 and landscape water at 871,200 sq ft x .0495. Water is calculated at 2000 sq ft x $.157. Refuse includes a 6-yard container x 3 pick-ups per week. Landscape operating costs are based on 871,200 sq ft x $0.0927and landscape water is based on 871,200 sq ft x $0.495. Refuse is calculated at $2,047 per container annually x 2 containers Operating Costs: Staffing Supplies/Contr FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $688,431 $76,206 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $28,525 Bldg. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $455,340 $7,736 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,799 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $41,237 Refuse TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 307 Return to CIP TOC $0 $785,350 $1,991 $0 $0 $2,113,819 $25,204 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70503 - Rose Lane Rec. Center Developm (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Renovation and expansion of the existing community center from 5,000 sq ft to 35,000 sq ft. Conversion of existing recreation building into a multi-purpose recreation center as recommended in the 2002 Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Renovations include parking, gymnasium, infrastructure, flooring, equipment, kitchen, activity rooms, meeting rooms, and furnishings. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,221,750 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,208,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397,364 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $115,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,080 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $930,800 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,132,808 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $53,729 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,351,531 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes staffing two Senior Recreation Coordinator - $76,246, one Clerical staff - $47,487, three Recreation Programmers - $53,868, one Service Worker II - $51,654, and one Service Worker III - $58,672 (all FTE positions include benefits), and 5 PT Rec. Leader II's at $45,905 each. Supplies and Contracts at 30,000 sq ft x $2.25. Utilities includes electricity at $2.25 per sq ft x 30,000 sq ft. Building maintenance includes HVAC at $2.50 per sq ft x 30,000 sq ft, custodial services at $2.07 per sq ft x 30,000 sq ft, and plumbing maintenance at $4.60 per sq ft x 30,000 sq ft. Insurance is $610 x the number of staff. Fire alarm is $600 per year. PC/Vehicle replacement includes $1,967 per vehicle (truck) for fuel costs, 8,000 miles x $0.18 for maintenance, 8,000 miles x $0.20 for fuel costs, PC replacement cost of eight computers x $664, and 8 printers x $1,053 per year. Building water is 30,000 sq ft x $0.157. Refuse is based on a two 6-yard container x 3 pick-ups per week at $2,047 each. Operating Costs: Staffing Supplies/Contr FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $2,859,506 $427,904 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $427,904 Bldg. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,692,554 $61,874 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,799 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $112,896 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 308 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $29,860 $25,198 $5,641,495 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70506 - 63rd & Northern Park Dev. (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Proposed improvements include completing park construction to include a looped concrete pathway/trail, restroom, native grass, landscaping and low flow crossing. Phase I of the community park included playground, ramada, open turf area, parking, landscaping and meandering multi-use path. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $89,944 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,823,082 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $53,564 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $52,608 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,231 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $162,994 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,200,423 TOTAL Operating Description: Supplies and Contracts: $601 x 30 acres for supplies and contracts and $6,600 for restroom cleaning. Utilities: $2.25 x 800 sq ft for restroom electricity. Building Maintenance includes electrical for 40 additional low-level security lights at $75 per light and $13 for lamp replacement x 40 lamps and plumbing at $4.60 x 800 sq ft. Since most of the area will be designed with native grasses, the cost of maintaining the facility will be less than a typical community park. As a result, Landscape Maintenance and Landscape Water are calculated at half the normal rate. Landscape Maintenance is 1,306,800 sq ft x $0.04635 per sq ft, landscape water is 1,306,800 sq ft x $0.02475 per sq ft . Water would include 800 sq ft restroom x $0.157 per sq ft, and one drinking fountain x $60.39 each. Refuse include one container for the entire site at $2,047 Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $151,591 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,405 $44,314 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $589,010 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 Refuse TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,599 $817,717 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 309 Return to CIP TOC $8,798 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70509 - Manistee Ranch Development (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Enhance various aspects of the historical area that would improve the aesthetics and functionality of Manistee Ranch Historical site. This may include additional lighting, enhanced pathways, and/or landscape improvements. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,840 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $125,600 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,231 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,256 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,874 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $173,801 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Additional low level security includes 30 low level security lights x $75, and $13 per light for bulb replacement. Operating Costs: Bldg. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 310 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $16,734 $16,734 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70510 - Park Enhancements (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Ongoing park enhancements are vital in the City's effort to improve and enhance park functionality and appeal. Staff continually assesses park amenities and infrastructure, and strives to meet the demands park users place on park land. Park enhancements focus on a variety of elements and amenities within the existing park setting, and can be urgent in nature or planned. Typical park enhancements include new sport courts, resurface sport courts, additional low-level security lighting, picnic areas, adding or replacing picnic benches, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) play surface for playgrounds, shade structures, landscape, and other amenities added to existing park sites. Ongoing enhancements typically address service gaps in the level of service requirements outlined in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $20,505 $0 $1,046,797 Construction $0 $0 $0 $198,595 $0 $5,978,652 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $6,044 $0 $200,473 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $2,798 $0 $89,702 Arts $0 $0 $0 $1,986 $0 $59,787 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $18,394 $0 $610,033 $0 $0 $0 $248,322 $0 $8,235,444 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $74,909 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $74,909 $0 $0 $248,322 $0 $8,235,444 In most cases, park enhancements will have little or no impact on the O and M. In fact, in many cases the enhancements allow for a more efficient operation of infrastructure and amenities. O and M will be impacted when additional amenities are introduced to the park, such as ramadas, additional low level lighting, etc. Supplies/contracts include $601 x 4 acre. Building Maintenance includes an average of 10 additional low level security lighting x $75 for electricity, and $13 per lamp for replacement. Landscape maintenance $0.0927 per x 43,560 sq ft, and landscape water at $0.0495 per sq ft x 43,560 sq ft. O and M in FY2015-2019 was calculated by using the same formula x 5 years. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,242 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $2,706 $15,242 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $990 $2,787 $0 $1,020 $5,579 $5,574 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,267 Landscape TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,971 $10,667 $7,180 $10,987 $39,262 $120,166 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 311 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70512 - Facilities Renovation (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Renovations address planned and/or unexpected restoration improvements at existing park and recreation buildings, centers, ball field complex sites, group ramada pavilions, restrooms and tennis and golf complexes. Funds are used citywide to provide ongoing renovation to existing facilities. The specific facilities that receive assistance from this fund are targeted through an ongoing assessment and feedback from citizens and staff. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $196,555 $0 $2,220,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $5,637 $0 $69,481 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $5,856 $0 $66,144 Arts $0 $0 $0 $1,966 $0 $22,200 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $21,001 $0 $247,783 $2,725,608 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $231,015 $0 $21,744 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,744 $0 $0 $231,015 $0 $2,725,608 New O and M expenses are not usually encountered with restoration activities. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 312 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70514 - O'Neil Center Expansion (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The O'Neil Recreation Center expansion includes an additional 10,000 sq ft to accommodate the growing participation and need for recreation programming, which is supported by attendance and participation levels. This improvement is identified in the 2002 Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $952,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,720,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $117,131 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $67,932 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,200 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $272,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $628,689 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,819,952 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing includes one Senior Recreation Coordinator $76,245 (benefits included) and five part-time Recreation Leaders at $45,000 annually. Utilities includes additional electrical for 10,000 sq ft x $2.25 per sq ft. Building Maintenance includes $2.50 per sq ft for operating and maintaining an additional 10,000 sq ft for HVAC, custodial service is $2.07 per sq ft x 10,000 sq ft, and plumbing maintenance is $4.60 per sq ft x $10,000 sq ft. Insurance is $970 x 1 additional staff. Electrical includes $2,400 annually for a fire alarm. PC/Vehicle Replacement includes three laptops x $640 and three color printers x $1053. Landscape maintenance and landscape water will not be impacted by the project expansion. Water include building water at $0.157 per sq ft x 10,000 sq ft. Refuse includes 6-yard container x 3 pick-ups per week at $2,047 Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $768,618 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $117,281 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 313 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $0 $142,635 $564,390 $5,970 $15,217 $0 $31,278 $9,954 $0 $0 $1,667,942 $12,599 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70515 - T-Bird Park Improvements (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Continue to implement the conservation park's Master Plan recommendations that include trail repairs and improvements, removal of invasive plant species and revegetation, signage upgrades, repairs or replacements to existing ramadas, picnic tables, grills, restrooms and other infrastructure. This funding also addresses the continuation of revegetation, as well as the installation of new park elements, such as a ranger and information facility, trail head improvements, ramadas and parking lot improvements. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $646,739 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,847,826 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $73,910 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,478 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $264,195 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,906,148 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $181,277 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $181,277 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,906,148 Improvements have O and M impact for two new 750 square feet restrooms with contracted cleaning at $2.00 per sq ft and associated utilities and supplies and a 1,500 sq ft Ranger/Information building. Improvements will require a Service Worker II at $52,940 with benefits, a Ranger with benefits at $50,736, contracted labor assistance at $25,000 per year, supplies are $20,000 a year; utilities at $2.06 per sq ft X 3,000 sq ft = $6,180; building maintenance at $2.00 X 3,000 sq ft = $6,000; equipment maintenance is for two added pole lights at $288 annually; insurance is for 2 new employees at $970 per person; refuse $341 per month, ramada cleaning at $3,000 each X 5 new ramadas, building water $46 per month; equipment replacement is a computer, printer purchase and their replacement cost. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $135,000 $35,983 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,935 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Insurance PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Project: 70520 - Sahuaro Ranch Park Improv. (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: $0 $0 $643,380 $1,440 $7,313 $10,183 $0 $36,717 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,750 $23,825 $931,526 General Obligation Bonds Renovation of aging infrastructure and amenities at regional sports complex and park. Examples of improvements will include new fencing , irrigation, scoreboards, park entry monuments, walkways, etc. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $1,920,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,920,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 314 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70523 - 79th/Orangewood (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Completes the development of a 10-acre neighborhood/school joint use park to serve a one-mile radius as per Glendale Elementary School District and Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Improvements include a looped pathway, low-level security lighting, ramadas, and landscape. Phase I development included approximately six acres, leaving approximately 3 to 4 undeveloped acres. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $220,690 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $630,544 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,141 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,603 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,305 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $73,463 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $991,746 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Supplies and contracts include three acres x $602 per acre. Park area lighting includes $88 per pole x 20 poles. Landscape maintenance include 130,680 sq ft x .0927 and landscape water includes 130,680 sq ft x .0495. Operating Costs: Staffing Bldg. Maint. Landscape TOTAL FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2014 $11,435 $11,155 $0 $0 $140,391 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 315 Return to CIP TOC FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 * New Project FY 2015 $0 $0 $117,801 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70532 - Western Area Regional Park (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Phased development of an 88 acre regional park and municipal campus. Include construction of an urban lake, turf and landscaping improvements, feeder stream through the park, irrigation adjacent to lake and stream, ramadas and picnic areas, sport courts, playground areas, baseball/softball complex, soccer fields, trail connections, and infrastructure for this phase. Developing the park amenities and infrastructure for this phase will help meet the recommended guidelines proposed in the park site master plan and the 2002 Parks and Recreation Department Master Plan. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,760,149 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,101,496 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $358,770 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $115,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $101,015 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,010,149 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,091,726 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,738,305 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes the addition of two Service Worker II's at $51,654 each (including benefits). Supplies and contracts include $601 x 50 acres. Utilities includes $2.25 per sq ft x 2000 sq ft control building in the softball complex. Building Maintenance includes $2.50 per sq ft for a 2,000 sq ft building, $4.60 per sq ft for the 2.000 sq ft building, $750 per sports court x two sport courts, $133 per court for light maintenance, $16,000 per sports field for lighting x 6, 3,166 for lamp replacement x 6, $75 per low-level security light x 250, $13 per low-level security light lamp replacement. Insurance reflects $970 per person. PC/Vehicle replacement includes $3,000 per phone x 6, $640 per lap top x 3, $1,053 per printer x 3, $1,967 for 1/2 ton pick up replacement charges, 8,000 miles x $0.18 for maintenance costs, 8,000 miles x $0.20 for fuel charges. Of the 50 + acres to be completed, approximately 34 acres (1,481,040 sq ft ) will be landscaped. The remaining 16 acres will be hardscape. Landscape maintenance includes 1,481,040 sq ft x $0.0927 and landscape water 1,481,040 sq ft x $0.016335 (SRP water). Building water at $0.157 per sq ft x 2,000. Refuse include five containers located throughout the park at $2,047 per year. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $190,496 $28,525 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $941,442 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $91,285 $11,940 $0 $0 $654,916 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $172,862 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,087,104 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 316 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $1,991 $62,994 $3,243,555 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70535 - Paseo Racquet Center Park (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The project includes installation of 12,500 sq ft of spectator seating at the Paseo ball fields, partial removal of landscape, addition of concrete surfacing, improvements to the lighting system and the restroom and concessions building, necessary maintenance repairs to the racquet center that include court resurfacing, lighting, fencing and building restoration and improvements per the approved agreement with lessee. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $760,870 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,173,913 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $88,198 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,739 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $247,978 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,347,698 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 70540 - Grounds & Facilities Imprvmnts (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Grounds and facility improvements at Glen Lakes and Desert Mirage, Glendale's two municipal golf courses. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $11,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 317 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: T1710 - Adult Center Expansion (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Improvements to the 17,000 sq ft of unfinished interior space on the 2nd level of the Adult Center. Expansion will help meet the needs for additional programming to accommodate anticipated future growth in use of the facility. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,909,950 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,457,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $235,308 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $107,853 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $54,570 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $700,034 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $855,722 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,412,937 TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing includes 1 Senior Recreation Coordinator at $78,240 including benefits, 1 Recreation Programmer at $55,218 including benefits, 1 FTE Office Support Supervisor at $71,618 including benefits, 1 Custodian with benefits at $42,981, (2)19 hour Recreation Programmers at $55,218 with benefits. Supplies and contracts include $2.00 per sq ft x 17,000 sq ft. Utilities include the cost of electricity at $2.15 x 17,000 sq ft. Building Maintenance includes HVAC maintenance at $2.00 x 17,000 sq ft; custodial services at $2.07; Insurance is 5 employees x $628 plus inflation, per employee. Electrical is $100 additional monthly security monitoring; PC/Vehicle Replacement includes purchase of 5 PC's at $2,168 each and 3 color printers at $4,211 each. Replacement costs are $540 per yr. for computers and $1,053 for printers. Building water is $0.157 per sq ft x 17,000 sq ft . All are factored at 3% inflation per year. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,765,826 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $197,966 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 Electrical PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Water TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 318 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $0 $212,813 $603,557 $30,916 $19,161 $0 $7,200 $61,449 $0 $0 $2,914,428 $15,540 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70500 - Parks Redevelopment (R) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This project is designed as a proactive focus for revitalizing parks currently in the City's inventory that are beginning or have shown signs of deteriorating infrastructure, amenities, and/or landscape. The purpose of the redevelopment process is to heighten or restore the overall functionality of the park for the users, while at the same time enhancing the operating efficiency. As in the past, staff identify strategies that are designed to revive the park’s existing strengths and develop new or enhanced functions of the park. Development strategies, service gaps and needs are identified and addressed during the design and construction phase. Depending on the park category, location, size, and level of service, each requires a distinct level of funding to address an assortment of services or operational improvements. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $271,958 $0 $6,011,989 Construction $0 $0 $0 $1,062,738 $0 $17,177,113 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $39,509 $0 $641,062 $115,360 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $6,640 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $10,627 $0 $171,771 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $111,318 $0 $1,929,384 $26,046,679 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $1,502,790 $0 $490,423 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $490,423 $0 $0 $1,502,790 $0 $26,046,679 Supplies and contracts are based on 10 acres x $601 per acre. Building Maintenance includes an additional 30, low-level park lighting at $88 per pole. Landscape maintenance costs are calculated at 435,600 sq ft x $.0927 and landscape water is calculated at 435,600 sq ft x $.0495. Water would include the addition of 40 drinking fountains at $66 each. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 319 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $38,097 $23,070 $392,664 $16,734 $470,565 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70504 - Foothills Center Restoration (R) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Replacement of recreation center equipment and renovation of the facility. Replacement of fitness room equipment, existing audio/visual equipment, carpeting, room dividers, window blinds and other items due to normal wear and tear. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $189,625 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $758,500 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $44,852 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,500 $40,769 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,585 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $634,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $140,506 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,896,837 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 70526 - Soccer Lights (R) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Renovation or replacement of existing sports lights that have illumination depreciation or no longer meet the acceptable and/or safe levels of illumination. This will also fund installation of additional athletic field lighting in the City to address user demand. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $700,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $79,781 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $428,217 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,282,998 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M cost is based on six multi-use fields with new lighting. Building maintenance costs include electrical at $16,000 per field and lamp replacement at $3,166 per field. $3,000 for sinking fund for repair and renovation per IGA. Operating Costs: Bldg. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 320 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $781,628 $781,628 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70541 - Parks Capital Equipment (R) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Replace old, outdated equipment such as mowers, trailers, utility vehicles, ball field preperation machines and pick-up trucks that are inefficient for parks and maintenance of city green spaces. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,500 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $487,500 $500,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $97,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $97,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Equipment Maintenance expenses are for 5 years of maintenance expenses for 2 mowers, 2 trailers, 2 ball field prep. machines and 2 pick-up trucks. Vehicle Replacement amount accounts for all eight pieces of equipment amortized over 10 years and budgeted for 5 years. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,939 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $243,500 $344,439 Project: 70542 - Parks Master Plan (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: The city seeks an updated Parks and Recreation Master Plan document that is concise, performance measurement based, user friendly and visionary with regards to the health and vibrancy of the city, its commercial areas and its neighborhoods. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $131,021 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $131,021 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: T1712 - Aquatic Facility Restoration (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The renovation and restoration of existing swimming pools. There are eight pools that require annual attention. Typical repair projects at each pool include replastering of the water vessels, patching and repairs to the pool decking, replacement of shade canopies, pool pumps and other equipment, and compliance requirements with Maricopa County Environmental Services Health Code. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,350,822 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,650,207 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $181,672 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $46,502 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $948,255 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,269,958 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 321 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70525 - Barnyard Additions (N) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Purchase, construction and installation of a 1,200 sq ft prefabricated building to be placed in the historical area of Sahuaro Ranch Park. The primary function of the climate controlled building is to store historic museum collections and artifacts. It will also be use for special events, retreats and corporate meetings. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $132,710 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $132,710 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 If the structure is equipped with HVAC and electrical outlets, the O and M includes $2.50 x 1,200 sq ft for HVAC and $2.25 x 1,200 sq ft for electrical use. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Bldg. Maint. $3,000 $3,090 $3,183 $3,278 $3,377 $18,464 Electrical $2,700 $2,781 $2,864 $2,950 $5,700 $5,871 $6,047 $6,228 $3,039 $6,416 $35,082 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 322 Return to CIP TOC $16,618 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70527 - West Area Pool (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construction of a new aquatic center to accommodate growth in the western area of the city. Design and construction of a zero depth swimming pool with children's play features, 25 yard competitive swimming pool, dive well, waterslides, action river, lighting, decking, a bath house and a parking lot. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,116,595 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,149,660 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $255,287 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,840 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,497 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $776,830 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,487,209 TOTAL Operating Description: FTE Programmer = $53,868. FTE Service Worker III = 58,672. Hourly staffing = $210,472, 1 pool manager @ $6,883, 2 assistant pool managers @ $6,024, 3 cashiers @ $3,619, 36 lifeguards @ $5,019. Water = $10,000,Pool Maintenance = $10,000. Pool Chemicals = $18,000. Landscape Maintenance= 111,111 sq ft x .18 = $20,000. Electricity = $33,949. Natural Gas = $45,000. Maintenance = $14,853. Aquatic Supplies = $27,741, Line Supplies = $70,800, Equipment Repair & Fuel = $9,500, Vehicle Replacement = $1,967 for a 1/2 ton pick up, two PC's x $540, 2 new PC's, $1,500 for 2 new telephone lines, $1,500 x 1 new fax line, access to the city network. Computer applications that are needed are consistent with other Recreation centers, including Microsoft applications & Rectrac. Operating Costs: Staffing Supplies/Contr FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $2,549,461 $998,766 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $355,175 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $117,229 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Electrical $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $74,987 $11,940 $0 $0 $267,953 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,633 $157,857 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $78,929 Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,651,708 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 323 Return to CIP TOC $23,778 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70528 - Family Recreation Center-West (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Development of a multi-generation recreation center that targets a diverse demographic. The construction of the 70,000 sq ft family recreation center would provide a gymnasium, multi-purpose rooms, activity areas and exercise centers. Equipment furnishings include estimated costs for furnishing a recreation facility and exercise room amenities, such as fitness equipment, tables, chairs, and audio/visual equipment. Project addresses the Parks and Recreation Master Plan recommendation to develop a multi-generation recreation centers that target a diverse demographic. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,271,175 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,060,500 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $615,184 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $260,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $122,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150,605 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,506,050 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,298,551 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,284,065 TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing includes one Recreation Manager - $83,343, one Office Support Supervisor - $61,257, three Senior Recreation Coordinator - $69,808, two Clerical staff - $47,487, three Recreation Programmers - $53,868, one Service Worker II - $51,654, and one Service Worker III - $58,672, two Building Maintenance Workers at $58,672 (all FTE positions include benefits), and 10 PT Rec. Programmer's at $20,328 each. Supplies/Contracts include $2.25 sq ft x 70,000 sq ft facility. Utilities include $2.25 sq ft for electricity x 70,000 sq ft. Building maintenance includes HVAC at $2.50 sq ft x 70,000 sq ft, custodial services are $2.07 per sq ft x 70,000, plumbing costs are $4.60 per sq ft x 70,000 sq ft. Insurance includes $970 x 14 employees. Electrical includes fire alarm system at $150 per month, which includes the monitoring subscription dedicated phone lines. PC/Vehicle replacement includes vehicle replacement at $1,967 x 3, maintenance cost at 8,000 miles per vehicle x 3 x .18 per mile , fuel cost at 8,000 miles per vehicle 3 x .20 per mile. PC replacement cost of $540 x 8 per year and printer at $1053 x 8 per year. Landscape maintenance and water costs are located in project 206070532. Refuse includes two 6-yard containers x 3 pick-ups per week @ $2047. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 Insurance Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 Water $0 $0 $0 Refuse TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 324 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $5,633,142 $0 $998,451 $998,451 $0 $0 $4,042,165 $0 $0 $0 $0 $83,581 $11,405 $0 $0 $160,465 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,198 $12,020,499 $67,641 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2060 - Parks Construction Category: 20% Project: 70531 - Sahuaro Ranch Visitor Ctr. (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construction of a visitor center that will serve as a customer service point of contact for the Sahuaro Ranch Park historical area and information for the rest of the park areas. Building will include display areas, meeting rooms, restrooms and display areas. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $158,182 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $925,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,830 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75,000 $43,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,250 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $133,876 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,472,638 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing includes one Office Support Supervisor at $62,256 and (benefits included) and two part-time hourly staff at $15,000 each annually. Supplies and contracts include $2.25 per sq ft x 5,000 sq ft. Utilities include the cost for electricity at $2.25 per sq ft x 5,000. Building Maintenance includes maintenance of the HVAC at $2.50 per sq ft x 5,000 sq ft, custodial services at $2.07 per sq ft x 5,000 sq ft, and plumbing at $4.60 per sq ft x 5,000 sq ft. Insurance is $970 x per staff member. Electrical includes $10,000 security alarm system and $10,000 for fire alarm system. PC/Vehicle Replacement includes three computer lap tops x $640 three printers x $1,053, $3,000 for telephones (6), $1,500 for wireless service, and $75,000 audio and visual. Landscape maintenance and landscape water preexisting, consequently, the new facility would not incur new landscape water and landscape maintenance O and M expenses. Water includes building water usage at 5,000 sq ft x .157 per sq ft. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,970 Electrical PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $126,786 $58,956 $0 $0 $1,206,363 Water TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 325 Return to CIP TOC $0 $584,845 $71,318 $71,318 $282,195 $4,975 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Liibrary - Con nstruction Fu und LIBRARY C CONSTR RUCTION FUND The conttinued declin ne in Glendale’s secondaary assessed required thee Western Arrea Library originallyy planned fo or FY 2009 and a FY 20100 to remain inn the fifth yeear of the CIIP plan in FY Y 2015. Thhe renovatio on of the threee existing liibrary facilitiies is planneed for the lasst five years of the capitaal program. Project Naame: Int. Renovation-Main, VT T, FH Funding Soource: G.O. Bon nd Fund #: 21660 Project #: T2810 T Picture Noote: Foothills Branch B Library above, a Main Librrary Below 326 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2160 - Library Construction Category: 6% FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $230,577 Bond Proceeds^ 0 0 0 0 17,096,000 22,275,000 G.O. Bond Investment Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 5,702 0 0 0 0 17,096,000 22,280,702 0 0 0 0 0 2,281 0 0 0 0 0 2,281 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets T2810 Int. Renovation-Main, VT, FH 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,270,716 T2812 Expansion-Library Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,237,375 Sub-Total - Existing Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,508,091 74000 West Branch Library 0 0 0 0 0 16,865,423 0 Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,865,423 16,865,423 0 22,508,091 $0 $0 $0 $230,577 $907 New Assets Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 0 $0 *New Project ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. 327 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2160 - Library Construction Category: 6% Project: T2810 - Int. Renovation-Main, VT, FH (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This project includes renovating and updating interior spaces at Velma Teague, Foothills and the Main Library, including shelving, tables, chairs and other furnishings. It also includes upgrading the security camera systems at the libraries. This upgrade would provide for a greater number of cameras both inside and outside of the facilities and will provide higher quality images than currently available with our existing equipment. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,279 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,931,150 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $41,287 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,270,716 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: T2812 - Expansion-Library Facilities (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This request is for expansion of space for meeting rooms, technical services, youth, adult services and the lobby of the Main Library. Also includes adding meeting room space at the Velma Teague Branch. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,775,242 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $244,381 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $97,752 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,237,375 Arts TOTAL Operating Description: Includes added electricity for expanded areas and staffing for additional programming. Staffing includes one additional Librarian I at Main, two additional Librarian I's at Velma Teague and four part-time temporary employees. Operating Costs: Staffing Utilities TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 328 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $232,275 $49,198 $281,473 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2160 - Library Construction Category: 6% Project: 74000 - West Branch Library (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This request is for funding to construct and furnish a branch library to serve the western portion of the city. This includes the design and construction of a 33,500-sq-ft facility on approximately 7 acres of land at the Western Area Regional Facility site at 83rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road. This project is being funded by a combination of Library Bonds and Development Impact Fees. The total project cost is estimated at $20,427,470 in FY 2015. A total of $16,865,423 in bonds will be needed for this project. The remaining funding is budgeted using carryover from Development Impact Fee accounts 1380-74250 ($1,608,951) and 1500-74750 ($1,953,096). The design of the building is complete and has been paid from DIF Account 1380-74250. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,108,413 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $411,352 $0 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $440,000 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $135,000 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $131,084 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,533,220 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $106,354 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,865,423 $0 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: New staffing includes a branch manager, two Librarian IIIs, 7 Librarian I's, a Library Operations Supervisor, 4 Library Assistant IIIs, a Library Assistant II, a Library Assistant I, 2.5 Public Service Assistants, 0.5 Courier, 0.5 Office Assistant, a PC Support Specialist II, a Security Officer and a Building Maintenance Worker for the Facilities Management Department that must be added to support the additional building. Additionally, a building maintenance truck will be provided for the Building Maintenance Worker. The operating budget also includes books, periodicals, electronic resources, supplies and contracts (including contracted custodial services), a library vehicle, professional development, equipment maintenance, building maintenance, utilities and insurance. Operating Costs: Staffing Supplies/Contr FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $9,493,747 $2,965,602 $571,129 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $599,534 $86,160 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $656,385 Landscape Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,493 $55,595 $0 $0 $14,965,724 Refuse TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 329 Return to CIP TOC $484,532 $9,547 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Public Saafety – Consstruction Fu unds PUBLIIC SAFE ETY C CONSTRU UCTION FUNDS F Public saafety projectss are fundedd by a combinnation of puublic safety general g obliggation bonds and developm ment impact fees. This section s highllights the G.O O. projects funded f in Fuund 2040 forr the Fire, Poliice and City Court Depaartments. A majoriity of new an nd carryoverr funding forr FY 2011 will w be used for f the annuaal upgrade off the Police Deepartment’s communicaations system m and for thee purchase off new radios in order forr the Fire Department to meet m Federal Communicaations Comm mission requuirements. Funding F is also o its serviceeable life. Due D to availablee for the purcchase of a uttility truck thhat has reachhed the end of the continnued drop in n secondary assessed valluation, fundding for the City C Court Building, B whhich was prevviously sched duled for com mpletion in FY F 2012, haas been deferrred until FY Y 2015. Phaase II of the Western Publicc Safety Traaining Facilitty is included in the last five years of o the CIP. Project Name: N Training Facility Phase III Funding Source: G.O. Bond B Fund #: 2040 2 Project #: # T5370 330 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $5,685,923 $1,415,874 $1,008,780 $415,725 $6,989 $1,372,356 Bond Proceeds^ 0 0 2,005,000 0 33,660,000 76,680,000 Intergovernmental Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 11,114,239 1,789 4,843 4,975 2,107 6,876 6,858 1,789 4,843 2,009,975 2,107 33,666,876 87,801,097 2,000 1,937 1,990 843 2,750 2,743 2,000 1,937 1,990 843 2,750 2,743 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Investment Income Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 75012 Police Digital Comm. System 1,027,698 1,303,250 410,000 410,000 410,000 410,000 17,425,000 939,925 276,750 0 0 0 0 1,778,478 75034 Engine & Ladder Replacement 0 0 0 2,191,040 0 0 1,747,215 75036 Replace Utility Truck 0 722,215 0 0 0 0 0 T2520 Infor & Imaging Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 717,500 T5320 EOC Equipment Replacement 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,175,310 T5400 Replace 1 Brush Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 471,090 T5430 Specialty Delivery Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 216,952 T5450 30 Heart Monitors 0 0 0 0 0 0 799,500 T5537 Fire Facility Assessment 0 0 0 0 0 0 768,750 T5539 *Replacement of Airpacks 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,543,110 1,967,623 2,302,215 410,000 2,601,040 410,000 410,000 30,642,905 75020 City Court Building 0 0 0 0 0 31,888,759 0 T5370 Training Facility Phase II 0 0 0 0 0 0 38,517,431 T5380 Purchase HazMat Vehicle 0 0 0 0 0 0 881,167 T5440 3000 Gallon Fuel Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 174,250 T5535 Warehouse Facility Fire RMS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,068,000 T5536 Fire Station - Western Area 0 0 0 0 0 0 17,883,527 0 1,967,623 0 2,302,215 0 410,000 0 2,601,040 0 410,000 31,888,759 32,298,759 58,524,375 89,167,280 $1,008,780 $415,725 $6,989 $1,372,356 $3,430 Replacement of Existing Assets 75024 800MHz Comm Equip Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 4,269,838 $1,415,874 *New Project ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. 331 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: 75012 - Police Digital Comm. System (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This project is designed to fund upgrades to the Digital Communications (radio) System used by the police, transportation, sanitation, airport, public works and utilities departments. The upgrade ensures the digital radio system used by Glendale Police, and other city departments, is operating at peak performance for mission critical use. This project upgrades the Glendale system to an identical platform the City of Phoenix is currently upgrading to, ensuring continued interoperability. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $3,250 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $425,000 $1,300,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $17,000,000 Sub-Total New Funding $1,303,250 $410,000 $410,000 $410,000 $410,000 $17,425,000 FY 2011 Carryover $1,027,698 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,330,948 $410,000 $410,000 $410,000 $410,000 $17,425,000 Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Maintenance costs on hardware/software. The costs associated with equipment maintenance includes the additional fees of $125,000 per year (including a 3% inflation rate) for the software subscription agreement which upgrades the actual software that operates the handheld and mobile radios and was covered in the past by the initial warranty and system upgrade. This will not be covered starting in 2007. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 $231,750 $238,703 $245,864 $225,000 $231,750 $238,703 $245,864 Project: 75024 - 800MHz Comm Equip (R) Project Description: FY 2014 $225,000 Funding Source: FY 2015 $253,239 $253,239 FYs 16-20 $1,125,000 $1,125,000 General Obligation Bonds Purchase 800 MHz radios for the Phoenix Regional Wireless Network in order to meet Federal Communications Commission requirements for Public Safety radio transmissions. The 800 MHz fire system is scheduled for full implementation valley wide in 2010. Currently, the Glendale Fire Department is required to use the 800 MHz system for all stadium and arena events. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges Equipment FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $6,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,378 $270,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,735,100 $1,778,478 Sub-Total New Funding $276,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 Carryover $939,925 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,216,675 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,778,478 TOTAL Operating Description: Network fees will cost $49 per month per radio. O and M costs shown in FY's 2011-2013 are for 190 radios. Cost shown in FY's 2014-2020 is for a total of 440 radios. The department will submit a supplemental in the future for the additional O and M. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Supplies/Contr $111,720 $115,072 $118,524 $258,720 TOTAL $111,720 $115,072 $118,524 $258,720 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 332 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $266,482 $266,482 FYs 16-20 $1,457,231 $1,457,231 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: 75034 - Engine & Ladder Replacement (R) Project Description: To maximize the safe use of Emergency Code 3 Apparatus the fire department's replacement plan indicates that front line engines be replaced at seven years or 100,000 miles and be moved into a reserve status. Ladder trucks after 15 years or 100,000 miles. The department will maintain a reserve fleet of one reserve truck for every two front line. This CIP request is for a continuous plan for replacement of the department's Code 3 Apparatus. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2013 FYs 16-20 $0 $42,615 $0 $2,137,600 $0 $0 $1,704,600 $0 $2,191,040 $0 $0 $1,747,215 Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Replace a nine year old utility truck. This is a specialized vehicle used in the fire service primarily for: 1) Exterior lighting tower; 2) Mobile fresh breathing air station; 3) Mobile rehabilitation and re-hydration unit; 4) Electricity for fans and lights inside buildings. This vehicle is used for the delivery of electric power, both for exterior lighting needs and interior electrical needs, on fire and emergency calls. It is also used to refill firefighter's self-contained breathing apparatus on all calls requiring self-contained air use, and also provides for firefighter rehabilitation and re-hydration on all events that require administration of water and fluids to sustain firefighters. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $17,615 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $704,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $722,215 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O and M was eliminated from this project as the old utility truck will be auctioned off per staff. Project: T2520 - Infor & Imaging Systems (R) Project Description: FY 2015 $0 No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. Finance Charges Operating Description: FY 2014 $53,440 Project: 75036 - Replace Utility Truck (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This project will replace the obsolete digital system utilized for crime scene documentation and other digital documentation. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,500 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $700,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $717,500 TOTAL Operating Description: This project will entail establishing a maintenance agreement with a vendor to provide updated software, hardware and IT technical support on a contract basis for several years. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 333 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $300,000 $300,000 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: T5320 - EOC Equipment Replacement (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: The city's Hirsch Security System, Blackberry Enterprise Service, city's Geographical Information Systems (GIS), Regional Training Center Wireless Access Control System, Emergency Management System Software, Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Interoperable Communications System, Fire Department Meeting Room Management (MRM) Systems, Weather System, and Public Safety Critical Infrastructure Protection System are all resident on EOC servers and equipment. This project will fund the replacement of telecommunication, audio/visual, computer infrastructure, data storage, radios and other equipment in the City EOC that will enable the continued operation of these and future technology based systems. The average life of technology based EOC systems is approximately four years due to improvements in technology and overall use. The EOC will be nine years old in 2016. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $126,227 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,049,083 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,175,310 TOTAL Operating Description: This project will replace existing equipment and systems at the EOC. This equipment will be placed in the technology replacement fund at a cost of $1,233,828 annually, or $5,175,310 over the four year replacement cycle. The equipment replaced includes 117 computers and associated software; 123-17" monitors; 32 radios (UHF/VHF/800 MHz) and antennae; 72 headsets; 11-52" LCD monitors; 10-40" LCD monitors; 21-20" LCD monitors; 36 servers associated software and equipment racks; 57 video servers associated software and equipment racks; 15 network switches; 3 routers; 12-67" video cubes associated controllers and software; 7 dual zone net clocks; video teleconferencing systems; 4 sound systems; 3 weather stations; the data storage system; wireless control access system; 5 Wi-Fi touch panel control devices; the security system; the emergency management software; the EOC radio interoperability system; video surveillance system including 6 control points; and the structured cabling to support all of these systems. Operating Costs: FY 2011 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 Project: T5400 - Replace 1 Brush Truck (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $5,175,310 $5,175,310 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Replace a brush truck vehicle that will have reached the end of its lifespan. This type of vehicle provides fire suppression off-road when dealing with brush fires requiring a specialized 4-wheel drive or a "brush truck" unit. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,490 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $459,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $471,090 No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 334 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: T5430 - Specialty Delivery Truck (R) Project Description: Purchase of a specialty delivery truck to replace a smaller vehicle that does not meet the departments needs. This vehicle carries emergency medical and various fire fighting supplies. This vehicle is used as a mobile storage for supplies that are delivered to the fire stations on a daily and or weekly basis and for large scale medical or fire emergencies. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $5,292 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $211,660 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $216,952 Funding Source: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL General Obligation Bonds FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $780,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $799,500 O and M includes the on-going annual maintenance cost of $20,000 and 2 batteries per unit x 5 years. O and M calculated with 3% inflation per future years. The department will submit a supplemental in the future for the additional O and M. Operating Costs: FY 2011 Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T5537 - Fire Facility Assessment (R) Capital Costs: FYs 16-20 $0 Purchase of 30 cardiac monitors. The life span is difficult to gauge as wear and tear is a factor that plays into how long these units last. These monitors are used multiple times daily. 80% of calls for service relate to emergency medical incidents. Capital Costs: Project Description: FY 2015 $0 No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. Finance Charges Operating Description: FY 2014 $0 Project: T5450 - 30 Heart Monitors (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $180,081 $180,081 General Obligation Bonds A comprehensive facility condition assessment (FCA) for the four Glendale Fire Stations that are over 20 years old (FS152, FS153, FS154 and FS155). An FCA will provide detailed data to support a capital renewal and deferred maintenance program. The FCA will assist facility administrators to identify, estimate and prioritize existing deferred maintenance and predict capital renewal requirements. Accurate information about the condition of facilities and building systems forms the foundation for ensuring smooth operations today and planning for future needs. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,750 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $750,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $768,750 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 335 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: T5539* - Replacement of Airpacks (R) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Replacement of outdated self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBAs) or air packs. By the year 2016, 150 air packs will be outdated and in need of replacement. The useful life span of SCBAs is 7-10 years. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,637 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,505,473 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,543,110 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes maintenance and repair at $25,000 annually and an additional $36,000 (once every 5 years) for 2 hydro tests on 300 bottles at $60.00 per bottle that is performed every 5 Years. The current SCBA budget is $17,291 and does not cover the O and M identified; an additional $44,000 is necessary plus an additional 5 years has been added for fiscal years 2016 through 2020 and 3% for inflation totaling $226,600. The $25,000 for annual maintenance and repair will be needed the year after purchase. The department will submit a supplemental request for the additional O and M identified. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 336 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $226,600 $226,600 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: 75020 - City Court Building (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construction will resume on the city court building in FY 2015. As of the end of December 2009, the structure was built to ground level. When completed the building is expected to be approximately 90,000 net square feet and include 10 courtrooms. There is the possibility of additional costs due to the delay in construction. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $25,351,714 $0 $0 $791,603 $0 $0 $2,235,868 $0 $0 $89,645 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $253,517 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,166,412 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,888,759 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes a Building Maintenance Worker, two Custodians, a Day Porter and three Detention Officers. Other items include, utilities and electricity, security, building and elevator maintenance, parking lot sweeping and custodial supplies. There are $185,900 in one-time expenses in FY 2016 including one-time purchases of vehicles and other essential supplies. The O and M related to opening the new facility does not include current grant-funded and one-time funded staff and operational costs. These costs total $501,973. Also, it is estimated that an additional 13 court positions will be needed starting in 2016 and these are estimated to cost an additional $1,132,447. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,283,985 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,271,344 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $73,968 Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $81,221 Electrical PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 337 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $290,069 $394,495 $1,740,432 $29,370 $43,111 $60,643 $35,355 $6,303,993 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: T5370 - Training Facility Phase II (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Phase II of the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center will include shared site improvements such as landscaping, street lighting, earthwork, utility modifications, retaining walls, parking lots, etc. Shared buildings for police and fire will include classrooms, administrative offices, break room, lockers, showers and a maintenance and tire shop. Police specific buildings and props will include a shoot house, rubberized running track and an obstacle course. Fire specific building and props will include a mock strip mall, single family house, big box store, semi-truck prop and additional natural gas burn props. The Phase II cost estimate were provided by LEA Architects, LLC and was last revised on 02/05/2008. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,937,655 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,376,550 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $961,520 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $124,410 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $293,766 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $587,531 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,501,585 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $734,414 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,517,431 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes salaries and benefits for 1 Battalion Chief, 2 Captains, 1 Secretary, 1 Records Technician and 1 Custodian. No additional staffing is needed for police. Equipment maintenance $2,152,805 for 1st five years (Per year costs PD Training Equip. $88,860 - one time, PD vehicle O and M $17,530, computers and workstations $33,100 one time, PD training equipment and supplies $129,139, PD tuition and lab fees $2,595 x 100, FD items $14,000). Supplies and contracts also includes a three year maintenance contract at $72,000 for driving simulator. Utilities includes an estimate received from architect. Building maintenance 99,515 sq ft x $0.35 x 5 years. Landscape maintenance and water usage is calculated at 10 acres (438,600 x 0.18 per sq ft x 5 years); building water usage 99,515 sq ft x 0.151 x 5 years; and refuse is calculated using two 6 yard containers on site with pick up three days per week ($341.26 x 12 x 5 years). A supplemental will be submitted in the future for the additional O and M. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,178,950 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,697 $411,102 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $174,151 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,289,490 Insurance PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape $0 $0 $0 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 338 Return to CIP TOC $0 $192,133 $34,095 $0 $0 $394,740 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75,134 $20,476 $4,897,968 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: T5380 - Purchase HazMat Vehicle (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,492 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $859,675 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $881,167 O and M includes shop and fuel $17,000 annually based on average cost of current truck, radio fees $49 per month x 2, CAD charges $4,338 annually. Vehicle replacement was not included as this piece of apparatus will be replaced as needed through future CIP requests. O and M calculated with 3% inflation per future years. Operating Costs: FY 2011 Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T5440 - 3000 Gallon Fuel Truck (N) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Purchase of a second HazMat vehicle for the hazardous materials team to have as a back-up in the event that the current vehicle is out of service for maintenance or deployed in-kind to another city. This second support truck will ensure continued service to the citizens of Glendale. Finance Charges Operating Description: Funding Source: Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $126,699 $126,699 General Obligation Bonds Purchase of a 3,000 gallon fuel truck for the fire department to adequately prepare for disasters of all types. It would fill a resource need during disasters such as: fuel shortages and would provide the ability to refuel at long fire scenes that require pumping all day and all night, such as the Sanderson Ford Fire, Bio Lab Fire, Ice Plant Fire, etc. Other uses include: filling station generator fuel tanks; rolling electrical black outs of APS and SRP modifications and/or repair of transformers underground utilities, deployment of Urban Search and Rescue Team can be anywhere in the state, the team typically will deploy in a disaster area that has no power. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,250 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $170,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $174,250 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes shop and fuel of $7,000 based on cost for similar size vehicle. Radio fees $49 per month x 1. O and M calculated with 3% inflation per future years. Vehicle Replacement Funds were not included as this piece of apparatus will be replaced as needed through future CIP projects. The department will submit a supplemental prior to the completion of the project. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 339 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $42,702 $42,702 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: T5535 - Warehouse Facility Fire RMS (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The fire department has grown in size over the years to nine stations and a training center. Fire Support Services handles all logistical needs for the fire department and is in need of a secured building that can provide adequate covered space to park two to four spare fully outfitted reserve fire trucks. This project is to construct a 20,000 sq ft metal warehouse to store fire equipment and station emergency medical supplies. The current 12,000 sq ft facility has been in use since 1992 and the fire department has been forced to utilize several remote locations to store various amounts of equipment. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,068,000 Engineering Charges TOTAL Operating Description: O and M estimates made based on CIP training manual FY 2011-2020. Utilities calculated at $2.06 sq ft x 5 years. Maintenance at $2.25 sq ft; water at $0.157 sq ft, both x 5 years. Landscaping calculated for 20,000 sq ft at $0.18 x 5 years. Refuse based on one 6 yard container with pick up three times per week at $170.63 per month x 5 years. PC purchase $2,168 x 6 and one printer at $2,123 and replacement estimated at $540 x 6 for desktops and $531 for printer replacement. Electrical includes maintenance for security alarm, fire alarm and phones. The facilities main function is a warehouse and custodial services will not be needed. The department will submit a supplemental prior to completion of the project. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,202 $18,000 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,700 Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $562,890 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 340 Return to CIP TOC $0 $206,000 $231,751 $65,000 $10,237 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2040 - Public Safety Construction Category: 20% Project: T5536 - Fire Station - Western Area (N) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Design and construction of a 15,000 sq ft, four bay fire station, with firefighter quarters for 18 personnel, furniture, fixtures, equipment, office space and storage. Equipment includes one engine. This facility will respond to the surrounding residential and Westgate area between Northern Avenue and Camelback Road, west of Loop 101. This fire station would house a fire pumper 24/7 initially, with further expansion of ladders and medic units as growth demands. Formally referred to as Fire Station - 99th and Maryland. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,395,800 $2,007,090 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,522,600 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $364,996 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $156,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $115,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $95,226 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,601,040 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,625,775 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,883,527 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes 12 Firefighters, 3 Captains, 3 Engineer and .5 FTE Building Maintenance Worker. Also includes promotions, training, medic pay, station supplies, station and equipment maintenance, grounds maintenance, insurance and one time cost in the amount of $486,895 to recruit, test, hire and to send 18 firefighters to the training academy and six to medic school. Utilities, building maintenance, supplies and custodial for 15,000 sq ft of space. Technology replacement includes purchase of five computers and two printers = $15,213 plus network replacement at $1,600 for a total of $16,813; PC and printer replacement = $12,852 and ongoing cost for telephone/voice at $4,000 per year for a total of $16,582 x 5 years = $82,910. Landscaping estimated at $0.18 per sq ft plus 3% inflation for future years. Water estimated at $0.157 per sq ft plus 3% inflation for future years. Refuse estimated at $342.26 x 12 months with escalator. The department will submit a supplemental in the future for the additional O and M. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,449 Insurance Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,634 $24,515 $0 $2,460,770 $543,865 $118,965 $169,949 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $99,723 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,618 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 341 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $14,494 $25,204 $3,501,186 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Goverrnment Faccilities - Con nstruction Fu und GOV VERNME ENT FAC CILITIE ES C CONSTR RUCTION FUND FY 2011 will see thee continuation of the salees tax and liccense system m replacemennt project annd the m and a rehabilittation of roofing, floorinng, electrical//lighting, heeating and airrrepair, maintenance conditionning systemss and wall cooverings in existing e builddings with carryover c froom FY 2010.. Funds alsso will be ussed to modify fy existing reestrooms to ensure e they are a compliannt with the Americanns with Disaabilities Act. The Goverrnment Facillity Construcction Fund will w not receiive new fundding until FY Y 2014 due to t the continnued decline in secondaryy assessed valuation. v N City Halll Parking Garagee Project Name: Funding Source: G.O. Bond B 2 Fund #: 2080 Project #: # T1160 342 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2080 - Government Facilities Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 6% FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $3,230,005 $0 $0 $0 $157,821 $158,768 0 0 0 1,760,000 0 14,510,000 789 0 0 787 1,578 3,922 789 0 0 1,760,787 1,578 14,513,922 2,000 0 0 315 631 1,569 2,000 0 0 315 631 1,569 Revenue Bond Proceeds G.O. Bond Investment Revenue Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 77505 Environmental (ADA Compliance) 101,035 0 0 0 0 0 0 77503 Exterior Closure (Roofing) 241,399 0 0 0 286,191 0 685,754 77504 City Hall - HVAC System 322,415 0 0 0 0 0 5,432,824 77507 Interior Finishes (Flooring) 293,347 0 0 0 225,984 0 1,710,301 60,209 0 0 0 104,803 0 1,011,250 77509 Mechanical Upgrades 212,149 0 0 0 733,804 0 1,673,821 77510 Electrical/Lighting Upgrades 102,098 0 0 0 127,682 0 1,296,680 28,998 0 0 0 124,187 0 1,028,217 1,530,596 0 0 0 0 0 0 336,548 0 0 0 0 0 0 T1160 City Hall Parking Garage 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,831,799 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 3,228,794 3,228,794 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,602,651 1,602,651 0 0 14,670,646 14,670,646 $0 $0 $157,821 $158,768 $475 Replacement of Existing Assets 77508 Interior Finishes (Paint) 77512 Exterior Closure (Paint) 77513 Sales Tax System 77514 Civic Ctr Storage Fac Repair Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 3,228,794 $0 *New Project 343 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2080 - Government Facilities Construction Category: 6% Project: 77505 - Environmental (ADA Compliance) (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: An independent study of 37 of the oldest city properties was conducted and as a result of that study it was determined that the most critical need was to insure that there are sufficient ADA compliant restrooms for the public and city employees. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $101,035 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $101,035 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 77503 - Exterior Closure (Roofing) (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Make citywide roofing upgrades that would require a total of $971,945 in FY 2014 and FY 2016 to improve the condition of several facilities and extend the useful life of the infrastructure. There will be a total of approximately 89 different roofing related projects completed on all city buildings over a 10 year period. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $25,000 $0 $42,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $6,463 $0 $10,450 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $2,750 $0 $4,620 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $230,779 $0 $577,887 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $21,199 $0 $50,797 $0 $0 $0 $286,191 $0 $685,754 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $241,399 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $241,399 $0 $0 $286,191 $0 $685,754 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 344 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2080 - Government Facilities Construction Category: 6% Project: 77504 - City Hall - HVAC System (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The existing heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) system at City Hall has reached its capacity with the current occupancy and use of the building that has exceeded the original design. These replacements and upgrades will improve indoor air quality and provide a new HVAC system life capacity for an additional 20+ years. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,346,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $123,487 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,460 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,429,446 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $402,431 $5,432,824 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $322,415 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $322,415 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,432,824 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 77507 - Interior Finishes (Flooring) (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Make citywide interior flooring replacements and upgrades that would require a total of $1,632,856 over the next ten years to improve the condition age of several facilities and extend the useful life of the infrastructure. There will be a total of approximately 100 different flooring related projects completed on all city buildings over a 10year period. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $5,104 $0 $34,722 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $192,140 $0 $1,548,890 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $16,740 $0 $126,689 $1,710,301 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $225,984 $0 $293,347 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $293,347 $0 $0 $225,984 $0 $1,710,301 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 345 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2080 - Government Facilities Construction Category: 6% Project: 77508 - Interior Finishes (Paint) (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Make citywide interior paint and wall covering replacements and upgrades that would require a total of $1,116,053 over a 10-year period to improve the condition of several facilities and extend the useful life of the infrastructure. There will be a total of approximately 142 paint/wall covering related projects completed on all city buildings in FY's 2014-2018. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $80,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $2,578 $0 $22,470 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $1,100 $0 $8,800 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $91,125 $0 $899,980 $0 $0 $0 $104,803 $0 $1,011,250 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $60,209 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,209 $0 $0 $104,803 $0 $1,011,250 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 77509 - Mechanical Upgrades (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The citywide mechanical replacement and upgrades would require a total of $2,407,625 in FYs 2014 - 2017 to improve the conditional age of several facilities and extend the useful life of the infrastructure. There will be a total of nine heating-ventilating-air conditioning (HVAC) mechanical related projects completed on different city buildings over a four year period. Some of the major projects include; replacing all the HVAC equipment at the Glendale Airport in FY 2014, replacing the cooling tower drive motor at the Main Library and the heat pumps at Fire Station 154 in FY 2014. Activities in FY 2016 will include renovation of the mechanical systems at Velma Teague Library and Public Safety Building. FY 2017 include Operations Center and Public Safety Building. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $68,000 $0 $45,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $16,593 $0 $4,640 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $6,619 $0 $4,381 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $588,236 $0 $1,495,813 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $54,356 $0 $123,987 $0 $0 $0 $733,804 $0 $1,673,821 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $212,149 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $212,149 $0 $0 $733,804 $0 $1,673,821 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 346 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2080 - Government Facilities Construction Category: 6% Project: 77510 - Electrical/Lighting Upgrades (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds The replacements and upgrades to the lighting and electrical systems would require a total of $906,654 over a multi-year program to improve the electrical and lighting systems of several facilities. These upgrades will considerably reduce the consumption of electricity usage citywide, with an anticipated return on investment savings in less than three years. Improvements are scheduled during FY 2014 for O'Neil, Rose Lane, community center recreation buildings, Apollo, Glendale, GCC, Cactus older pool buildings, and Fire Stations 152, 153, 154 and 155 that will initially include the replacement of old coil and core light fixture ballasts with energy efficient electronic ones and the replacement of the fluorescent lamps with higher efficient ones. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $170,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $2,895 $0 $29,217 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $611 $0 $10,389 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $104,718 $0 $991,024 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $9,458 $0 $96,050 $0 $0 $0 $127,682 $0 $1,296,680 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $102,098 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $102,098 $0 $0 $127,682 $0 $1,296,680 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 77512 - Exterior Closure (Paint) (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Make citywide painting related replacements and upgrades that would require a total of $1,152,404over a several year period to improve the condition of several facilities and extend the useful life of the infrastructure. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $45,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $5,754 $0 $11,313 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $1,100 $0 $4,950 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $98,134 $0 $890,790 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $9,199 $0 $76,164 $1,028,217 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $124,187 $0 $28,998 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $28,998 $0 $0 $124,187 $0 $1,028,217 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 347 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2080 - Government Facilities Construction Category: 6% Project: 77513 - Sales Tax System (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Purchase of a new software application system which tracks revenue for the city. The system being replaced is 20+ years old and runs on hardware and operating systems which are no longer cost effective to support. This is the Fund 2080 portion of the project. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $1,530,596 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Refer to PAYGO Project No. 1000-81055 for O and M impact. Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This project will provide necessary repairs and restoration to the Civic Center storage facility. Damages were caused by a leaking water line, resulting in slab settlement and wall cracking. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $336,548 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $336,548 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: T1160 - City Hall Parking Garage (R) Project Description: FY 2014 $1,530,596 Project: 77514 - Civic Ctr Storage Fac Repair (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds As part of the emergency garage repair in FY 2009, the structural engineer provided additional maintenance recommendations for the remainder of the garage related to replacement or repair of synthetic cushions. Over the past 25 years, this expansion and contraction has pushed out of place many of the synthetic cushions on which the 366 concrete beams are seated causing the concrete to wear against the bare concrete causing considerable deterioration. Also, there are four locations that have significant deterioration that will require extra maintenance and repair before the deterioration becomes more costly. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,100,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $392,110 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $135,689 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,831,799 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 348 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Culturaal Facility/H Historical Prreservation – Constructiion Fund C CULTUR RAL FACILITY/H HISTORIICAL PR RESERVA ATION C CONSTR RUCTION FUND This geneeral obligation category will fund thhe continuation of repair and rehabiliitation work for two histooric propertiees in Glendaale, the Carriiage House at a Sahuaro Ranch R and the Morcomb Adobe House. H The work w includees installing roofs and otther buildingg features to preserve thee historic integrity of th he properties, and in thee case of the Sahuaro Rannch project the t Carriagee House will be made ADA A compllaint. In the last five yeaars of the proogram, consttruction of a performinng arts centeer for commuunity theaterr groups, sm mall venue cooncerts, films and other performaances is plan nned. o Ranch Carriagee House Project Name: Sahuaro Fundingg Source: G. O. Bond Fund #:: 2130 Project #: 84308 349 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2130 - Cultural Facility Construction Category: 6% FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $368,267 $237,691 $238,262 $239,263 $240,699 $242,143 Bond Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 13,055,000 G.O. Bond Investment Revenue 0 951 1,668 2,393 2,407 5,986 Intergovernmental Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 4,433,277 0 951 1,668 2,393 2,407 17,494,263 0 380 667 957 963 2,394 0 380 667 957 963 2,394 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 84307 Morcomb Property 84308 Sahuaro Ranch Carriage House Sub-Total - Existing Assets 108,759 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,817 0 0 0 0 0 0 130,576 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17,733,107 0 130,576 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17,733,107 17,733,107 $238,262 $239,263 $240,699 $242,143 $905 New Assets 84300 Cultural Arts Facility Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 130,576 $237,691 *New Project 350 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2130 - Cultural Facility Construction Category: 6% Project: 84307 - Morcomb Property (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Restoration of the historic 1936 Morcomb Adobe House located at 6024 West Myrtle Avenue and listed on the National Register. The project is part of the Myrtle Avenue Cultural Entryway. Project will consist of lead and asbestos abatement and restoration of the historical house. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $108,759 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Renovation of the existing public restroom at the historic area of Sahuaro Ranch Park in order to be Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant. Also includes repairs to fixtures, plumbing, electrical and painting. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $21,817 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,817 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 84300 - Cultural Arts Facility (N) Project Description: FY 2014 $108,759 Project: 84308 - Sahuaro Ranch Carriage House (I) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construction of a cultural arts facility in Glendale was identified in the 1999 Bond Election. Budget estimates are based on a 30,150-square-foot building, equipment and furniture. Glendale Community College (GCC) developed a prospectus in February 2005, which was updated in September 2008. The goal is to provide access to art and art programs for residents of Glendale and the surrounding area. GCC is committed to raising 25% of the capital costs for construction and will provide all O and M costs for this project. GCC's contribution to the construction of this project would reduce the $17,733,107 cost by $4,433,277 for a total city cost of $13,299,830. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,692,050 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,236,994 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $440,984 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $213,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $82,370 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,391,875 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,612,101 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,971,233 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,733,107 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: All O and M costs will be covered by Glendale Community College. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 351 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Econom mic Developpment – Con nstruction Fu und ECO ONOMIC C DEVEL LOPMEN NT C CONSTR RUCTION FUND This geneeral obligation bond cateegory includdes $1.8 milllion for econnomic develoopment capittal projects in i FY 2011. These fundds are intended for the puurchase of laand for redevvelopment, thhe upgrade and a repair off older infrastructure andd new develoopment infraastructure. The T overall goal g of the ecoonomic deveelopment cappital projects is to attract high qualitty economic developmennt projects that t create or retain welll-paying jobss in Glendalee, enhance thhe city’s finaancial stability and attracct new capittal investmennt. Due to thhe continuedd decline in Glendale’s G secondary assessed valuation, additional a funnding for ecoonomic deveelopment rellated projectts will be deferred to the last fiive year of thhe plan. Project Name: Loop P L 303 Infrasttructure F Funding Sourcee: G.O. Bond F Fund #: 2100 P Project #: 84406 6 352 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2100 - Economic Development Construction Category: 6% FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $1,841,598 $39,598 $39,693 $39,860 $40,099 $40,340 Bond Proceeds^ 0 0 0 0 0 91,515,000 G.O. Bond Investment Revenue 0 158 278 399 401 1,035 0 158 278 399 401 91,516,035 2,000 63 111 160 160 414 2,000 63 111 160 160 414 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 84401 Downtown Redevelopment 0 450,000 0 0 0 0 25,625,000 0 450,000 0 0 0 0 25,625,000 84400 Downtown Land Acquisition 0 900,000 0 0 0 0 23,062,500 84406 Loop 303 Infrastructure 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,966,771 84407 New Development Infrastructure 0 450,000 0 0 0 0 36,900,000 Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 1,350,000 1,800,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65,929,271 91,554,271 $39,693 $39,860 $40,099 $40,340 $1,690 Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 1,800,000 $39,598 *New Project ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. 353 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2100 - Economic Development Construction Category: 6% Project: 84401 - Downtown Redevelopment (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Redevelopment of infrastructure that needs to be upgraded or repaired to encourage private investment in redevelopment of the downtown area. Use funds to assist in any aspect of redevelopment. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Land Construction FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,000,000 $407,760 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $11,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $625,000 Engineering Charges $26,912 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,078 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,625,000 Arts TOTAL Operating Description: Land acquisition only. Acquired land would be offered to developers for purchase and development as desired within scope of a development agreement. O and M costs would be included within the scope of a development agreement but estimating for weed control and maintenance in outer years and a supplemental request will likely be submitted at a later point in time. Operating Costs: Landscape TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 $3,090 $3,183 $3,278 $3,377 $3,090 $3,183 $3,278 $3,377 Project: 84400 - Downtown Land Acquisition (N) Project Description: FY 2014 Funding Source: FY 2015 $3,478 $3,478 FYs 16-20 $19,016 $19,016 General Obligation Bonds Districts affected include Ocotillo and Cactus. Purchase of underperforming properties in the City Center Master Plan area which can be assembled and re-marketed to businesses and establishments that desire to locate in the downtown redevelopment area. Funding will also cover associated costs of appraisals, environmental assessments, title searches, demolitions, etc. The city will undertake requests for proposals to identify and negotiate development agreements. Continue implementation of the City Center Master Plan. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Land $752,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 Construction FYs 16-20 $22,500,000 $111,881 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $22,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $562,500 Engineering Charges $12,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,119 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,062,500 Arts TOTAL Operating Description: Minimal O and M associated with this project related to land acquisition only for weed control maintenance, which would be absorbed by operating and maintenance budget. Acquired land would be offered to developer for purchase and development as desired by city within scope of a development agreement. Estimating for weed control and maintenance, etc Operating Costs: Landscape TOTAL FY 2011 $2,311 $2,311 FY 2012 FY 2013 $2,380 $2,380 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 354 Return to CIP TOC $2,452 $2,452 FY 2014 $2,525 $2,525 FY 2015 $2,601 $2,601 FYs 16-20 $14,222 $14,222 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2100 - Economic Development Construction Category: 6% Project: 84406 - Loop 303 Infrastructure (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construction of new infrastructure and other development costs for new retail or mixed-use development near Loop 303 in fulfillment of development agreement. As development along the Loop 101 continues, the Loop 303 area is becoming the hot spot for new development within the city. Attracting high quality development projects requires infrastructure already be in place. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,143,603 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $148,150 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,907 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $41,436 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $866,675 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $181,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,966,771 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. If needed for weed control, etc., a supplemental would be submitted at a later time. Project: 84407 - New Development Infrastructure (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Land Finance Charges TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Funding to provide new infrastructure to recruit and encourage new high quality private development citywide. The city incurs infrastructure and development costs as new economic development projects occur. Funds are needed to assist with infrastructure costs to support major development projects which will generate new revenues and economic benefits for the city as a tool to recruit high quality employers to the city. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $438,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,000,000 $11,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000 $450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,900,000 O and M costs would be included within the scope of a development agreement. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 355 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Flood Coontrol – Con nstruction Fu und FLOOD D CONTR ROL C CONSTR RUCTION FUND FY 2011 projects incclude the com mpletion of several s storm m drain projeects includinng 67th Avennue between Peoria and the t Arizona Canal Diverrsion Channeel (ACDC), Northern N Avvenue betweeen 47th and 63 6 rd Avenuees, and Cameelback Roadd between 599th and 75th Avenues A which is part off the Bethany Home Outfaall Channel Project. P Withh the excepttion of the onngoing AZD DES Permit Project, no n new fund ding is includded in the firrst five yearss of the CIP plan p due to the t continueed decline inn Glendale’ss secondary assessed valluation. The AZDES Perrmit Project ensures thatt the city remaains compliaant with the requirements r s of a permitt obtained unnder the Clean Water Acct. Projectt Name: Northerrn Ave. SD-47th to 63rd Fundin ng Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: # 2180 Projectt #: 79008 356 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 2180 - Flood Control Construction Category: 20% Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $21,376,020 $2,129,492 $1,973,485 $1,820,511 $1,670,026 $1,518,639 0 0 0 0 0 33,970,000 5,877 8,196 13,251 17,400 15,896 37,527 0 0 0 0 0 7,635,000 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 505,877 8,196 13,251 17,400 15,896 41,642,527 5,213 3,278 5,300 6,960 6,358 15,011 5,213 3,278 5,300 6,960 6,358 15,011 Revenue Bond Proceeds^ G.O. Bond Investment Revenue Intergovernmental Revenue Miscellaneous Rev. Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Advisor Fees Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 79004 Local Drainage Problems 568,286 0 0 0 0 0 5,293,992 79005 Collector Drains 574,137 0 0 0 0 0 4,189,724 79006 AZDES Permit 444,363 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 804,625 79010 Storm Water Master Plan 661,406 0 0 0 0 0 843,750 Sub-Total - Existing Assets 2,248,192 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 11,132,091 4,996,272 0 0 0 0 0 0 79001 Bethany Home 58th - 51st 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,014,601 79002 67th Ave/Peoria to ACDC 871,516 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,684,359 79008 Northern Ave. SD- 47th to 63rd 11,447,287 0 0 0 0 0 0 79013 Bethany Home, 79th-67th (SD) 23,000 0 0 0 0 0 10,608,840 T2910 Bethany Home, 67th-58th (SD) 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,060,445 T2940 Greenway Drain - 51st-59th 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,684,074 T2941 *67th Ave Frier - Orangewood SD 0 0 0 0 0 0 428,879 T2942 *47th Ave SD Harmont - Northern 0 0 0 0 0 0 304,009 T2943 *Myrtle Avene Drainage Imp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 223,884 17,338,075 19,586,267 0 160,925 0 160,925 0 160,925 0 160,925 0 160,925 32,009,091 43,141,182 $1,973,485 $1,820,511 $1,670,026 $1,518,639 $4,973 Replacement of Existing Assets New Assets 79000 Bethany Home Outfall Channel 79007 Greenway Drain - 59th-67th Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 19,747,192 $2,129,492 *New Project ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. 357 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2180 - Flood Control Construction Category: 20% Project: 79004 - Local Drainage Problems (I) Project Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construct localized storm drain improvements to mitigate drainage or flooding problems. This is an ongoing program that typical addresses drainage problems in older neighborhoods, residential areas, and extend existing storm drain systems. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,715 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,993 $5,293,992 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $568,286 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $568,286 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,293,992 Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. Project: 79005 - Collector Drains (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: $5,099,284 Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Ongoing program to construct storm drain improvements on collector streets to mitigate drainage and flooding problems. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $51,724 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $98,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,189,724 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $574,137 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $574,137 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,189,724 Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 358 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2180 - Flood Control Construction Category: 20% Project: 79006 - AZDES Permit (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: In 1999, the City of Glendale obtained a permit under the Clean Water Act for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The permit requires monitoring of storm water flows and preparation of annual reports. This funding will insure that the city can continue to meet the requirements of the permit and avoid fines up to $25,000 per day. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $3,925 $3,925 $3,925 $3,925 $3,925 $19,625 $157,000 $157,000 $157,000 $157,000 $157,000 $785,000 $160,925 $160,925 $160,925 $160,925 $160,925 $804,625 $444,363 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $605,288 $160,925 $160,925 $160,925 $160,925 $804,625 O and M of storm water monitoring will be done by the United States Geological Survey agency through an IGA requiring annual payments. Project: 79010 - Storm Water Master Plan (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Develop a citywide master plan to determine the adequacy of existing facilities and prioritize new facilities. Project will include detailed aerial mapping and hydrologic modeling to determine storm water flows and volumes. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,750 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $825,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $843,750 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $661,406 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $661,406 $0 $0 $0 $0 $843,750 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 79000 - Bethany Home Outfall Channel (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds This is the last phase of the Bethany Home Outfall Channel project with the Flood Control District of Maricopa County. The portions of the outfall channel between the Loop 101 and 83rd Avenue are complete and the storm drain piping between 83rd and 75th avenues along the Grand Canal are complete. This phase will complete the storm drain in Camelback Road from 75th to 59th avenues. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $4,996,272 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,996,272 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. The outfall channel will be maintained by the flood control district. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 359 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2180 - Flood Control Construction Category: 20% Project: 79001 - Bethany Home 58th - 51st (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construct a storm drain along Bethany Home Road between 51st and 58th Avenues including mainline pipe, catch basins and appurtenances. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $112,551 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $79,550 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $400,000 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $82,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,014,601 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M will not occur until project is actually constructed in the future. Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. Project: 79002 - 67th Ave/Peoria to ACDC (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Construct a storm drain on 67th Avenue from Peoria to the Arizona Canal Diversion Channel to include mainline piping, catch basins and appurtenances. Through an IGA, 50% of the storm drain cost will be shared with the Flood Control District of Maricopa Co FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $871,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $871,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. Project: 79007 - Greenway Drain - 59th-67th (N) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construct a storm drain at Greenway Road from 59th to 67th Avenues. Project includes catch basins and appurtenances. This project will intercept storm water flows east of 67th Avenue. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,640,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $89,869 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $58,090 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26,400 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $370,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,684,359 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 360 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2180 - Flood Control Construction Category: 20% Project: 79008 - Northern Ave. SD- 47th to 63rd (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Construct a storm drain on Northern Avenue from the basin at 63rd Avenue to approximately 47th Avenue, and a raw 24" water line from 51st Avenue to 63rd Avenue. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $11,447,287 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,447,287 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. Project: 79013 - Bethany Home, 79th-67th (SD) (N) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construct storm drain pipe, inlets, and other appurtenances in Bethany Home Road from 79th Avenue to 67th Avenue. Carryover in FY 2011 is for the design of the 71st to 79th Avenue portion of the project. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $600,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,500 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $90,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $785,840 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,608,840 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $23,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,608,840 Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. Project: T2910 - Bethany Home, 67th-58th (SD) (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construct a storm drain in Bethany Home Road from 67th to 58th Avenues. Construction costs to be shared with Maricopa County Flood Control District (50%). Project will include storm drain pipe, catch basins and appurtenances. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,000,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $597,070 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $110,875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,060,445 TOTAL Operating Description: Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 361 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2180 - Flood Control Construction Category: 20% Project: T2940 - Greenway Drain - 51st-59th (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Construct a storm drain in Greenway Road between 51st and 59th Avenues to include mainline piping, catch basins, and appurtenances. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,630,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $89,869 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $57,905 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $380,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,684,074 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. Project: T2941* - 67th Ave Frier - Orangewood SD (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Design and construct 800 feet of storm drain in 67th Avenue between Frier Drive and Orangewood Avenue. Project will extend an existing drainage system. Projects includes the installation of four catch basins, two manholes, and connector pipes. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $350,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,750 $17,640 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,500 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,989 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $428,879 TOTAL Operating Description: Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 362 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2180 - Flood Control Construction Category: 20% Project: T2942* - 47th Ave SD Harmont - Northern (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Project will design and construct storm drain trunk line, laterals, catch basins, man holes and appurtenances in 47th Avenue from Harmont Drive to Northern Avenue. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,250 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,740 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,519 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $304,009 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. Project: T2943* - Myrtle Avene Drainage Imp. (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Project to construct a small drainage system in 59th Avenue from Myrtle Avenue to Glenn Drive, and a concrete valley gutter and apron at the intersection of Myrtle Avenue and 55th Avenue. This will extend an existing drainage system, and mitigate some street flooding issues. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,500 $11,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,800 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,584 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $223,884 TOTAL Operating Description: Storm drain pipe requires little or no maintenance and in most cases will reduce existing maintenance because storm water does not pond in the street or other public facility. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 363 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Devellopment Imppact Fee Fu unds DEVELO D OPMENT T IMPAC CT FEE FUNDS F Impact feees are one-ttime chargess to developeers that are used u to offseet a city’s cappital costs resulting from new development d . Developerrs pay develoopment impaact fees wheen they consttruct new residdential and commercial c d developmen nts. These feees are desiggned to coverr a city’s increasedd costs for prroviding new w or expandeed infrastruccture in the following f cattegories: roadway improvemen nts, open spaace and traills, parks, librraries, policee, fire, generral governmeent, solid wasste services and a water/seewer. In thiss section youu will find seeparate DIF fund summaaries for each of these cateegories with the exceptioon of solid waste w servicees and water//sewer whichh are included in the Enterrprise/Other Fund sectionn of the Cappital Improveement Plan. Planningg and zoning informationn, such as antticipated poppulation growth and exppected densitty of residentiaal and comm mercial devellopment, is the t foundatioon for impacct fee revenuue estimates.. Given thiis informatio on, the city then t estimatees the amounnt of impact fee revenuee available too pay for growtth-related caapital projectts. During FY F 2010 the Arizona Staate Legislaturre extended a moratorium m that prohiibits increasiing developm ment impact fees throughh June 30, 20012. Startinng in FY 2013, you will see s that fundding is set asidde for an upd date to the city’s existingg fees. Neighb borhood joint-usse park at 79th Avenue and Orangewood Fund # - Name Carryyover FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 F 2014 FY FY 2015 FYs 166-20 3331,443 0 0 22,064 0 3666,408 1,7666,178 3 33,128 138,345 44,000 46,216 44,000 466,350 85,140 1460-DIF F-Citywide Park ks 0 0 0 2,216 0 2 2,350 5,140 1480-DIF F-Citywide Rec Fac. F 0 0 0 2,216 0 2 2,350 5,140 1540-DIF F-Park Dev Zonee 1 3 39,632 0 0 2,216 0 2 2,350 5,140 1560-DIF F-Park Dev Zonee 2 1223,506 0 15,000 7,816 5,600 2 2,350 5,140 1580-DIF F-Park Dev Zonee 3 1600-DIF F-Roadway Imp.. 1520-DIF F-Citywide Open n Space 2 26,905 0 19,999 7,516 6,000 2 2,350 5,140 1380-DIF F-Library Buildings 0 0 0 0 0 1,6088,951 0 1500-DIF F-Libraries 0 200,000 200,000 213,265 200,000 2,1677,169 530,769 1440-DIF F-Police Dept Faac. 0 0 0 10,919 0 11,584 25,329 1420-DIF F-Fire Protect Faac. 0 0 0 11,480 0 122,179 26,627 1620-DIF F-General Goverrnment 0 0 0 12,799 0 133,578 29,687 5554,614 338,345 278,999 338,723 255,600 4,2377,969 2,489,430 T Total DIF Funds 364 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Roadwaay Improvem ments - DIF F ROA ADWAY IMPROV I VEMENT TS DIIF FUND This cateegory includees developm ment impact fees f paid by developers for roadwayy improvemeents that are needed n becau use of new residential annd commerciial developm ments withinn city limits. Continuinng in FY 2011 roadway improvemennt impact fee revenue inn the amountt of $1 millioon per year will w cover a portion of debt d service for f growth related HURF F projects. The T last plannned contributtion is FY 20 014. d Carryoveer will be avaailable for development agreements involving arrterial streetts and intersectiion that may y include impprovements to t curbs/guttters, sidewallks, street ligghts, traffic signals annd landscapiing. Howevver, due to thhe severe slowdown in reesidential annd commercial developm ment, new fu unding originnally set asidde for these types t of development aggreements haas been defeerred until FY F 2015. Project Name: Dev. Agreee. - Signals Funding Soource: DIF Fund #: 1600 6 Project #: 67803 365 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1600 - DIF-Roadway Improvements Category: DIF FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $3,205,494 $2,207,367 $1,540,450 $852,206 $181,611 $141,394 314,437 314,437 316,009 319,169 322,361 1,619,864 18,879 18,646 17,811 10,236 3,830 8,190 333,316 333,083 333,820 329,405 326,191 1,628,054 Transfer Out** 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 0 Total Non-Capital Expenses: 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 0 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 67802 Dev. Agree. - Arterials 140,000 0 0 0 0 171,500 857,500 0 0 0 22,064 0 23,408 51,178 140,000 0 0 22,064 0 194,908 908,678 67803 Dev. Agree. - Signals 191,443 0 0 0 0 171,500 857,500 Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 191,443 331,443 0 0 0 0 0 22,064 0 0 171,500 366,408 857,500 1,766,178 $1,540,450 $852,206 $181,611 $141,394 $3,270 Replacement of Existing Assets 67809 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 331,443 $2,207,367 *New Project **DIF Roadway Improvement contribution for HURF debt payment. 366 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1600 - DIF-Roadway Improvements Category: DIF Project: 67802 - Dev. Agree. - Arterials (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 $0 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 Capital Costs: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $171,500 $857,500 $857,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $171,500 $140,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $140,000 $0 $0 $0 $171,500 $857,500 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Funding Source: Development Impact Fees The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the roadway improvements portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2014 $0 Project: 67809 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Development Impact Fees This program is to fund partial street improvements agreed to in development agreements for Arterial streets as an incentive to the developer. Some of the improvements could include pavement widening, curb and gutter, sidewalks, landscaping, and street lights. Miscellaneous/Other Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $22,064 $0 $23,408 $51,178 $0 $0 $22,064 $0 $23,408 $51,178 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 367 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1600 - DIF-Roadway Improvements Category: DIF Project: 67803 - Dev. Agree. - Signals (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Development Impact Fees Fees charged to developers are used to improve intersections that have experienced increased vehicular traffic generated by new development. This project provides for the installation or upgrades of traffic signals and Intelligent Transportation Systems equipment at various locations throughout the city. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Land $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 FY 2015 $6,018 FYs 16-20 $30,088 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,531 $52,654 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $137,563 $687,814 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,310 $16,548 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,376 $6,878 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,702 $63,518 $857,500 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $171,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $191,443 $0 $0 $0 $171,500 $857,500 O and M costs are for the electricity and maintenance of new traffic signal installations. Supplemental budget request will be made as new equipment is added to the system. Operating Costs: Utilities Equip. Maint. $0 $191,443 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $10,800 $5,400 $11,124 $5,562 $11,457 $5,729 $11,801 $5,901 $16,200 $16,686 $17,186 $17,702 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 368 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $12,155 $6,078 $18,233 FYs 16-20 $66,471 $33,234 $99,705 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Open Space Sp – DIF F OPE EN SPAC CE DIIF FUND This cateegory includees developm ment impact fees f paid by developers for new or expanded e infrastruccture related d to open spaace and multiuse trails thhat are needeed because of new resideential developm ments within n city limits. For FY 2011, 2 carryov ver funding will be usedd for trail/waalkway improovements to accommodaate increasedd use by residents from new n and/or growing g residential deveelopments. New N fundingg is availablee for similar improvemennts specificaally for Discoovery and Paasadena Parkks. Projeect Name: Disco overy Park Sourcce: DIF Fund d #: 1520 Projeect #: 70453 Project Nam me: Pasadena Paark Source: DIF F Fund #: 15220 Project #: 70454 7 369 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1520 - DIF-Citywide Open Space Category: DIF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $322,090 $168,148 $141,510 $113,089 $87,130 $58,730 15,821 15,821 15,900 16,059 16,220 81,506 1,710 1,541 1,895 1,982 1,730 6,830 17,531 17,362 17,795 18,041 17,950 88,336 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 70452 Park Improvements - City Wide 33,128 0 0 0 0 0 0 70453 Discovery Park 0 92,966 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 35,000 70454 Pasadena Park 0 45,379 23,000 23,000 23,000 23,000 45,000 0 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 33,128 33,128 138,345 138,345 44,000 44,000 46,216 46,216 44,000 44,000 46,350 46,350 85,140 85,140 $141,510 $113,089 $87,130 $58,730 $61,926 Replacement of Existing Assets 70450 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 171,473 $168,148 *New Project 370 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1520 - DIF-Citywide Open Space Category: DIF Project: 70452 - Park Improvements - City Wide (I) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 $33,128 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Funding Source: FY 2011 Engineering Charges Arts Contingency TOTAL Construction Engineering Charges Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Development Impact Fees FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $80,000 $18,071 $18,071 $18,071 $18,071 $30,118 $5,280 $1,193 $1,193 $1,193 $1,193 $1,988 $800 $181 $181 $181 $181 $301 $6,886 $1,555 $1,555 $1,555 $1,555 $2,593 $92,966 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $35,000 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 70454 - Pasadena Park (I) Capital Costs: FYs 16-20 The project will create new amenities and infrastructure related to open space. The most likely improvement includes additional trails in the park and trail connections to the adjacent neighborhoods. Other improvements may include picnic ramadas, shaded rest areas, drinking fountains, enhanced open play areas, playground or exercise equipment, and other trail amenities and site improvements that address growth within the city. Capital Costs: Project Description: FY 2015 No additional O and M is needed. Construction Operating Description: FY 2014 $33,128 Project: 70453 - Discovery Park (I) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Develop and update parks citywide to accommodate growth per the Parks and Recreation 2002 Master Plan. Funding will be used to develop facilities and parks to accommodate increased use by residents from new or growing residential developments. Examples of improvements may include playgrounds, ball fields, ramadas, etc. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: Funding Source: Development Impact Fees The project will create new amenities and infrastructure related to open space. The most likely improvement includes connections to adjacent sidewalks in the park and trail connections to the current and future neighborhoods. Other improvements may include picnic ramadas, shaded rest areas, drinking fountains, enhanced open play areas, playground or exercise equipment, and other trail amenities and site improvements that address growth within the City. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $39,050 $19,792 $19,792 $19,792 $19,792 $38,724 $2,577 $1,306 $1,306 $1,306 $1,306 $2,556 $391 $198 $198 $198 $198 $387 $3,361 $1,704 $1,704 $1,704 $1,704 $3,333 $45,379 $23,000 $23,000 $23,000 $23,000 $45,000 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 371 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1520 - DIF-Citywide Open Space Category: DIF Project: 70450 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the citywide open space and trails portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Development Impact Fees FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 372 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Parks & Recreation n – DIF PA ARKS & RECRE EATION DIF F FUNDS This cateegory includees developm ment impact fees f paid by developers for new or expanded e parrk infrastruccture that is needed becaause of new residential r d development ts within cityy limits. The majoority of park k impact fee revenue r is reestricted for use in speciific areas, as defined beloow: • • • • • DIF Citywidee Parks: D D Citywidee Rec Fac: DIF D Parks Deev Zone 1: DIF D Parks Deev Zone 2: DIF D Parks Deev Zone 3: DIF Eligible for use E u citywide. E Eligible for use u citywide on recreatioon facilities. R Restricted to areas west of o 75th Avennue, south off Greenway Road. R R Restricted to areas east of o 75th Avenuue, south of Greenway Road. R R Restricted to areas north of Greenwaay Road. In FY 20011, the DIF Citywide Recreation Faacility Fund will w begin coovering a poortion of the debt service payments p attrributed to grrowth for thee Foothills Recreation R annd Aquatic Center. C Also in FY F 2011, carrryover fundding will be used u for: thee completionn of a neighborhood, joinnt-use th park at 79 Avenue and a Orangew wood to servve residents within w a one-mile radiuss per the Parkk’s 2002 Maaster Plan in Zone 1; grow wth related improvemen i nts to Paseo Linear L Park in Zone 2; and a the additiion of kiosks at Thunderrbird Conserrvation Park in Zone 3. Due to thhe severe slo owdown in reesidential deevelopment, new fundingg is not expeected in FY 2011. Thhese funds will w be reasseessed next fiiscal year to determine iff project funnding can be added to the CIP plan n. Projeect Name: Thunderbird Park Kioosks Sourcce: DIF Fund d #: 1580 Projeect #: 73704 373 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1460 - DIF-Citywide Parks Category: DIF FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $154,605 $162,396 $170,738 $177,835 $188,245 $197,320 Development Impact Fees 6,685 6,685 6,718 6,785 6,853 34,436 Interest Income 1,106 1,657 2,595 3,625 4,572 25,435 7,791 8,342 9,313 10,410 11,425 59,871 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Total Revenue: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 72502 DIF Update 0 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,216 2,216 0 0 2,350 2,350 5,140 5,140 $170,738 $177,835 $188,245 $197,320 $252,051 Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 0 $162,396 *New Project 374 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1460 - DIF-Citywide Parks Category: DIF Project: 72502 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the citywide parks portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Development Impact Fees FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 375 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1480 - DIF-Citywide Rec Facility Category: DIF FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $1,435,761 $1,320,883 $1,131,373 $943,176 $757,886 $568,790 Development Impact Fees 7,058 7,058 7,093 7,164 7,236 36,361 Interest Income 9,615 12,200 15,443 16,842 15,731 32,505 16,673 19,258 22,536 24,006 22,967 68,866 Bond Interest** 63,649 61,017 55,108 48,971 42,157 81,160 Bond Principal** 67,902 147,751 153,409 160,325 167,556 545,862 131,551 208,768 208,517 209,296 209,713 627,022 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 72801 DIF Update 0 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,216 2,216 0 0 2,350 2,350 5,140 5,140 $1,131,373 $943,176 $757,886 $568,790 $5,494 Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 0 $1,320,883 *New Project **Debt payment for bond sales for Foothills Recreation & Aquatic Center (2004). 376 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1480 - DIF-Citywide Rec Facility Category: DIF Project: 72801 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the citywide recreation facilities portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Development Impact Fees FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 377 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1540 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 1 Category: DIF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $84,160 $47,416 $50,331 $51,313 $54,829 $56,287 2,429 2,429 2,441 2,465 2,490 12,512 459 486 757 1,051 1,318 7,195 2,888 2,915 3,198 3,516 3,808 19,707 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 73104 79th Ave & Orangewood 39,632 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 39,632 39,632 0 0 0 0 2,216 2,216 0 0 2,350 2,350 5,140 5,140 $50,331 $51,313 $54,829 $56,287 $70,854 Replacement of Existing Assets 73102 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 39,632 $47,416 *New Project 378 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1540 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 1 Category: DIF Project: 73104 - 79th Ave & Orangewood (I) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Phased development of a 10 acre joint-use neighborhood park that will include pathway, park lighting, ramadas, landscape and irrigation. Additional funding to support this project is included in park project 2060-70523. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $39,632 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,632 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Additional O and M would include 15 additional low-level security lights and $1.44 per sq ft for landscape maintenance and water. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,122 $48,246 Project: 73102 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Development Impact Fees The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the neighborhood parks zone 1 portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: $8,124 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 379 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1560 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 2 Category: DIF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $163,196 $41,619 $28,181 $21,959 $17,988 $17,301 1,215 1,215 1,221 1,233 1,245 6,256 714 347 373 396 418 2,145 1,929 1,562 1,594 1,629 1,663 8,401 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 73400 Park Improvements/Enhance 105,506 0 0 0 0 0 0 73404 Paseo Linear Park Additions 18,000 0 15,000 5,600 5,600 0 0 0 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 123,506 123,506 0 0 15,000 15,000 7,816 7,816 5,600 5,600 2,350 2,350 5,140 5,140 $28,181 $21,959 $17,988 $17,301 $20,562 Replacement of Existing Assets 73403 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 123,506 $41,619 *New Project 380 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1560 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 2 Category: DIF Project: 73400 - Park Improvements/Enhance (I) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $105,506 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $105,506 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 73404 - Paseo Linear Park Additions (I) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Parks Master Plan action strategies to develop, enhance and improve parks between Greenway Road and Olive Avenue. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: Funding Source: Development Impact Fees Improvements consist of accommodating community growth by adding active recreation elements, such as additional biking features, playground equipment, shade structures or sports courts and ball fields that are growth related in Paseo Linear Park. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Contingency $0 $1,111 $415 $415 $0 $0 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $13,889 $5,185 $5,185 $0 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $15,000 $5,600 $5,600 $0 $18,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,000 $15,000 $5,600 $5,600 $0 $0 Building Maintenance expenses are for routine cellular tower testing/repairs and periodic shade cloth replacement. Operating Costs: FY 2011 Bldg. Maint. TOTAL $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $3,090 $3,090 $4,728 $4,728 Project: 73403 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: $6,273 $6,273 Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $35,332 $35,332 Development Impact Fees The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the neighborhood parks zone 2 portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2014 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 381 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1580 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 3 Category: DIF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $51,666 $27,292 $9,733 $4,591 $936 $921 2,256 2,256 2,267 2,290 2,313 11,623 275 184 107 55 22 500 2,531 2,440 2,374 2,345 2,335 12,123 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 73700 Park Enhancements/Ren 6,905 0 0 0 0 0 0 73704 Thunderbird Park Kiosks 20,000 0 19,999 5,300 6,000 0 0 0 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 5,140 26,905 26,905 0 0 19,999 19,999 7,516 7,516 6,000 6,000 2,350 2,350 5,140 5,140 $9,733 $4,591 $936 $921 $7,904 Replacement of Existing Assets 73702 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 26,905 $27,292 *New Project 382 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1580 - DIF-Park Dev Zone 3 Category: DIF Project: 73700 - Park Enhancements/Ren (I) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $6,905 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,905 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 73704 - Thunderbird Park Kiosks (I) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Growth related enhancements to parks in Park Zone 3 (north of Greenway Road). Current plans are to make growth related enhancements to Thunderbird Conservation Park. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: Funding Source: Development Impact Fees Increased usage of Thunderbird Conservation Park due to growth is requiring the construction of trail head informational kiosks in the park. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Contingency $0 $1,481 $393 $444 $0 $0 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $18,518 $4,907 $5,556 $0 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $19,999 $5,300 $6,000 $0 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $19,999 $5,300 $6,000 $0 $0 O and M costs with this project are for replacement of kiosk bulletin board covers and shade cloth. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Supplies/Contr $0 $1,350 $1,850 $2,350 TOTAL $0 $1,350 $1,850 $2,350 Project: 73702 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $13,236 $13,236 Development Impact Fees The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the neighborhood parks zone 3 portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 $0 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 383 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Library – DIF D LIBRARY DIF F FUNDS This cateegory includees developm ment impact fees f paid by developers for new or expanded e library infrastruccture that is needed becaause of new residential r d development ts within cityy limits. Impact feees in this caategory are used u annuallyy for the purrchase of addditional libraary materialss due to residenntial growth. A portion of the designn and constrruction of a new n branch library in thee western area a of Glendale, which is now plannned for FY 2015, 2 will bee covered wiith developm ment impact feee revenue. Funding hass also been set s aside for the DIF studdy to update the city’s developm ment impact fees startingg in FY 20133. Project Name:: Library Books – Pop. Growth Funding Sourcce: DIF Fund #: 1500 Project #: 74751 384 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1380 - DIF-Library Buildings Category: DIF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $1,725,048 $1,737,123 $1,754,494 $1,780,811 $1,816,427 $231,763 12,075 17,371 26,317 35,616 24,287 27,810 12,075 17,371 26,317 35,616 24,287 27,810 Revenue Interest Income Total Revenue: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding New Assets 74250 West Branch Library 0 0 0 0 0 1,608,951 0 Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,608,951 1,608,951 0 0 $1,754,494 $1,780,811 $1,816,427 $231,763 $259,573 Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 0 $1,737,123 *New Project 385 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1380 - DIF-Library Buildings Category: DIF Project: 74250 - West Branch Library (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Development Impact Fees Design and construction of a 33,500-sq-ft facility on approximately 7 acres of land at the Western Area Regional Facility site. Necessary equipment for the operation of the library includes a 3M Security System, gates, self checks, Radio Frequency Identification Technology, a fire alarm system and a burglar alarm with motion sensor and cameras. Construction is planned to begin in July 2015. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,313,132 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,316 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,503 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,608,951 $0 Arts TOTAL Operating Description: Refer to Library Project No. 2160-74000 for O and M impact. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 386 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1500 - DIF-Libraries Category: DIF FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $3,274,291 $3,107,199 $2,947,975 $2,788,114 $2,652,795 $534,337 Development Impact Fees 10,651 10,651 10,704 10,811 10,919 54,868 Interest Income 22,257 30,125 42,700 53,870 37,792 35,565 32,908 40,776 53,404 64,681 48,711 90,433 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Total Revenue: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 74752 DIF Update 0 0 0 13,265 0 14,073 30,769 0 0 0 13,265 0 14,073 30,769 74750 West Branch Library/Books 0 0 0 0 0 1,953,096 0 74751 Library Books - Pop. Growth 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 500,000 Sub-Total - New Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 213,265 200,000 200,000 2,153,096 2,167,169 500,000 530,769 $2,947,975 $2,788,114 $2,652,795 $534,337 $94,001 Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 200,000 $3,107,199 *New Project 387 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1500 - DIF-Libraries Category: DIF Project: 74752 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the library portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $13,265 $0 $14,073 $30,769 $0 $0 $13,265 $0 $14,073 $30,769 No O and M is needed. Project: 74750 - West Branch Library/Books (N) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: Development Impact Fees Request is for funding to construct a branch library and to purchase materials to serve the western portion of the city. Design and construction of a 33,500-sq-ft facility on approximately 7 acres of land at the Western Area Regional Facility site. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $334,606 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,493,290 $0 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,267 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,933 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,953,096 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: Refer to Library Project No. 2160-74000 for O and M impact. Project: 74751 - Library Books - Pop. Growth (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Development Impact Fees Request is for funds to continue the phased-in approach of increasing the number of library books related to the growth of the city. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $500,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $500,000 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 388 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Public Safety S - DIF F PUBLIIC SAFE ETY DIF F FUNDS This cateegory includees developm ment impact fees f paid by developers for new or expanded e pubblic safety inffrastructure that t is needeed because of o new resideential and coommercial deevelopmentss within city limits. Police FY 2011 will be the last l year imppact fee reveenue will hellp cover the debt servicee related to thhe constructtion of the po olice portionn of the Gateeway Public Safety Facillity at 6261 North N 83rd Avenue in i the westerrn area of Gllendale. Theere are curreently no plannned projectss in this category. Fire FY 2011 will be the last l year imppact fee reveenue will hellp cover debbt service relaated to the constructtion of the fiire portion of the Gatewaay Public Saafety Facilityy at 6261 Noorth 83rd Aveenue in the weestern area of Glendale. Due to thhe severe slo owdown in reesidential annd commerciial developm ment, the funnding originaally appropriaated for the Fire F Station 151 Relocattion Project was w reducedd in FY 20100 in order to guaranteee the debt seervice paymeent could be made in FY Y 2011. For this reason, no new projects are plannned for this fund. f Debt Serrvice: Gateway Public P Safety Facility Funding Source: DIF Fund #’ss: 1420 & 1440 389 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1440 - DIF-Police Dept Facilities Category: DIF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $1,238,890 $1,091,459 $1,160,933 $1,226,344 $1,310,607 $1,390,791 58,268 58,268 58,559 59,145 59,736 300,173 8,128 11,206 17,771 25,118 32,032 183,385 66,396 69,474 76,330 84,263 91,768 483,558 8,224 0 0 0 0 0 205,603 0 0 0 0 0 213,827 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Bond Interest** Bond Principal** Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 77300 DIF Update 0 0 0 10,919 0 11,584 25,329 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,919 10,919 0 0 11,584 11,584 25,329 25,329 $1,160,933 $1,226,344 $1,310,607 $1,390,791 $1,849,020 Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 0 $1,091,459 *New Project **Debt payment for bond sales for West Public Safety Building (2003). 390 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1440 - DIF-Police Dept Facilities Category: DIF Project: 77300 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the police facilities portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Development Impact Fees FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $10,919 $0 $11,584 $25,329 $0 $0 $10,919 $0 $11,584 $25,329 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 391 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1420 - DIF-Fire Protection Facilities Category: DIF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $100,841 $18,713 $98,057 $167,712 $251,815 $327,250 78,763 78,763 79,157 79,949 80,748 405,759 417 581 1,978 4,154 6,866 62,020 79,180 79,344 81,135 84,103 87,614 467,779 6,204 0 0 0 0 0 155,104 0 0 0 0 0 161,308 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Non-Capital Expenses Bond Interest** Bond Principal** Total Non-Capital Expenses: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 77001 DIF Update 0 0 0 11,480 0 12,179 26,627 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,480 11,480 0 0 12,179 12,179 26,627 26,627 $98,057 $167,712 $251,815 $327,250 $768,402 Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 0 $18,713 *New Project **Debt payment for bond sales for West Public Safety Building (2003). 392 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1420 - DIF-Fire Protection Facilities Category: DIF Project: 77001 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the fire facilities portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Development Impact Fees FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $11,480 $0 $12,179 $26,627 $0 $0 $11,480 $0 $12,179 $26,627 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 393 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN G General Govvernment - DIF D GENERAL GOVER RNMENT T DIIF FUND This cateegory includees developm ment impact fees f paid by developers for new or expanded e genneral governm ment infrastru ucture that arre needed beecause of new w residentiall and commeercial developm ments within n city limits. Due to thhe slowdown n in residentiial and comm mercial deveelopment, the General Government G D DIF Fund wass only able to t cover a poortion of the last lease puurchase paym ment in FY 2010 2 for the land for the fuuture City Co ourt Buildingg along Glenndale Avenuue. Because of the resultting low funnd balance and a no projected increase in developpment, no proojects are cuurrently fundded under thee General Government G t DIF Fund. Project Name: N Land for City Court Building Funding Source: DIF Fund #: 1620 Project #: # 77752 Note: Thhe last lease purcchase payment was w in FY 2010. 394 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Fund and Project Summary 1620 - DIF-General Government Category: DIF Estimated Beginning Balance: FY 2011: FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: $1,372 $174,316 $349,252 $516,088 $703,084 $885,011 172,331 172,331 173,193 174,925 176,674 887,787 613 2,605 6,442 12,071 18,831 157,685 172,944 174,936 179,635 186,996 195,505 1,045,472 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Capital Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 77753 DIF Update 0 0 0 12,799 0 13,578 29,687 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Capital Project Expenses: 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,799 12,799 0 0 13,578 13,578 29,687 29,687 $349,252 $516,088 $703,084 $885,011 $1,900,796 Total FY 2011 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 0 $174,316 *New Project 395 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1620 - DIF-General Government Category: DIF Project: 77753 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: The Development Impact Fee (DIF) Report should be updated every two years to adjust the fees based on current level of service for additional infrastructure needs related to new growth throughout the city. This is the general government portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2011 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Development Impact Fees FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $12,799 $0 $13,578 $29,687 $0 $0 $12,799 $0 $13,578 $29,687 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 396 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Enterprrise and Oth her Funds ENTER RPRISE AND A OT THER FU UNDS This cateegory of fund ds captures the t capital exxpenses for the t enterprisse funds (waater/sewer, landfill and a sanitation n), the desiggnated sales tax t fund for the GO trannsportation capital prograam, the fund designated for f transportation capitall grants from m federal, staate and countty governmeent agencies,, and a few other o funds set s up for speecific purposes such as airport a and civic c center capital neeeds. The Geneeral Fund represents the city’s pay-aas-you-go prrogram (PAY YGO). The Technology Infrastruccture Fund was w establishhed to addresss the capitaal needs of major m technollogy systemss that are critical to city operations suchh as the PeopleSoft finanncial managgement system m. Both thee PAYGO and Techno ology Infrastrructure Fundd are fundedd with GF opperating dollaars. The Arts Commissio on Fund repreesents the prrogram fundded by the onne percent foor the arts program that the city y administerss. One perceent of the connstruction coosts of each capital projeect are allocaated for this program. Fire F S Station 1 151 Note: Because these funds includee both operatinng divisions annd CIP projectss, the fund suummaries are liimited to the prroject expenses only. Fund # - Namee Carryoverr FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 1,994,3677 3,850,002 4,000,000 4,867,094 19,011,991 27,039,695 2 20,480,560 2400-Water 11,341,2522 26,496,203 9,054,973 23,421,024 22,741,203 24,762,819 1440,056,651 2420-Sewer 4,548,6966 7,686,865 8,150,861 9,084,853 18,413,635 16,199,003 6 61,623,224 43,424,9633 45,499,756 13,112,354 21,367,058 15,300,505 14,833,431 1221,393,599 1,637,4877 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 2360-Water & Sewer S 2210-Transportaation Construction 1650-Transportaation Grants 1340-HURF/Strreet Fund 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,645,785 2480-Sanitationn 0 1,288,888 1,863,645 1,289,787 3,202,986 2,798,000 15,215,861 1,339,3522 522,275 965,756 2,478,578 15,940,811 5,011,013 17,491,222 2440-Landfill 2120-Airport Caapital Grants 37,261 1,950,000 495,000 15,320,000 1,082,000 13,207,000 0 1840-Other Graants 815,2522 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 1000-General Fund 540,271 802,858 802,858 802,858 100,000 100,000 5,630,443 1740-Civic Cennter 0 0 1,868,340 2,518,638 0 0 2 23,661,114 2150-Technologgy Infrastructuree 0 0 985,200 636,000 655,000 165,000 2 23,161,665 1220-Arts Comm mission 0 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,750,000 65,678,901 92,596,847 45,798,987 86,285,890 1 100,948,131 108,615,961 4552,110,124 Total Enterprrise/Other Fundss 397 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Water & Sewer - En nterprise Fu unds WATER R & SEW WER ENTERP PRISE FU UNDS Water annd sewer cap pital projects account forr the second largest portion of the cappital improvem ment plan affter the GO Transportatio T on capital prrogram. Theese projects will w be funded from watter/sewer fun nd revenues.. The FY 20011-2020 budget reflectss recommenddations from m the Red Oakk rate study completed c inn 2010. The combbined Waterr/Sewer Fundd (2360) refflects continuued funding in FY 2011 for the implemenntation of a new utility billing b system m and the exxpansion andd enhancemeent of the citty’s water recclamation faccilities, the West W Area Water W Reclam mation Facility and the Arrowhead A Water Reeclamation Facility. F FY 2011 for the Watter Fund (24000) reflects continued c annd new fundding for the Zone Z 4 Groundw water Treatm ment Plant thaat will proviide capacity of 10 million gallons peer day (MGD D) for the drinkking water sy ystem. FY 2011 2 also inccludes fundinng for citywide water linne replacemeent and extennsions wheree needed, Chholla Water Treatment Plant P processs improvemeents and a waater line crosssing at the New N River. In FY 20011, the Sew wer Fund (24220) projects include carrryover and new n funding for sewer linne replacem ment and exteension, as weell as new fuunding for thhe continuedd expansion of o the 91st Avenue Wastewater W Treatment Plan P co-owneed by the Citty of Phoeniix and other valley citiess. This projject will expand the facillity’s treatm ment capacityy from 153 MGD M to 250 MGD. W Campus Projecct Name: Oasis Water Fundin ng Source: Reveenue Bond Fund #: # 2400 Projecct #: 61003 398 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 2360 - Water & Sewer Category: Revenue FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 60002 Addtl. Recharge Capacity 127,721 0 0 0 0 0 0 60007 Arrwhd Wtr Reclam Fac Imps 913,908 3,750,001 4,000,000 2,598,975 2,664,566 0 0 835,947 0 0 0 0 0 0 60001 Water Quality Instruments 0 0 0 0 0 57,189 685,000 60009 *West Area WRF Service Wtr Sys. 0 100,001 0 0 0 0 0 T2250 WAWRF Clarifier Replacement 0 0 0 0 277,770 0 0 T2270 WAWRF Fine Screen Replacement 0 0 0 0 752,950 0 0 T2280 WAWRF Odor Control Replacement 0 0 0 0 1,081,700 0 0 T2282 *Lab Data Management System 0 0 0 0 0 300,000 0 T2283 *Computerized Maint. Mgmt Sys. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 T2284 *Radio Phase IV Equipment 0 0 0 0 800,000 0 800,000 1,877,576 3,850,002 4,000,000 2,598,975 5,576,986 357,189 3,485,000 116,791 0 0 2,268,119 13,435,005 26,682,506 16,995,560 116,791 0 0 2,268,119 13,435,005 26,682,506 16,995,560 $1,994,367 $3,850,002 $4,000,000 $4,867,094 $19,011,991 $27,039,695 $20,480,560 Replacement of Existing Assets 60000 Utility Billing System Repl. Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 60008 WAWRF Phase IV Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $5,844,369 * New Project 399 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2360 - Water & Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 60002 - Addtl. Recharge Capacity (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Provide contingency recharge capacity for the Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility in order to comply with Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance (CMOM). Prevent possible sanitary sewer overflows due to loss of discharge pathway to Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: Design FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $127,721 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,721 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 60007 - Arrwhd Wtr Reclam Fac Imps (I) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues To ensure reliable and safe treatment of wastewater in the Arrowhead area and meet upcoming regulatory requirements, the treatment plant processes will be upgraded. This project will replace the aging sand filters and ultra violet light disinfection system at the Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility. This project will also include civil, mechanical, and electrical improvements. These improvements will enable the plant to consistently meet the A+ effluent water quality requirements and help assure personnel safety by meeting Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $600,400 $60,000 $600,118 $0 $0 $0 $2,551,969 $3,288,800 $1,586,451 $2,235,804 $0 $0 Finance Charges $49,794 $61,318 $34,524 $35,314 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $33,187 $35,255 $23,020 $23,538 $0 $0 Arts $25,520 $32,888 $15,865 $22,358 $0 $0 Construction Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $489,131 $521,739 $338,997 $347,552 $0 $0 $3,750,001 $4,000,000 $2,598,975 $2,664,566 $0 $0 $913,908 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,663,909 $4,000,000 $2,598,975 $2,664,566 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 60000 - Utility Billing System Repl. (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Replacement and implementation of a new utility billing system. The cost includes software, professional services and fees, and annual service and maintenance. The new Utility billing system was implemented in Fiscal Year 2010. Remaining funding of project is for final payment to outside vendors. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $835,947 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $835,947 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 400 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2360 - Water & Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 60001 - Water Quality Instruments (R) Project Description: Funding a replacement program for the major analytical instrumentation at the City's Water Quality Laboratory. Highly sensitive and precise analytical instrumentation is required for the regulatory analysis of the city's water. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $57,189 $685,000 $0 $0 $0 $57,189 $685,000 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 60009* - West Area WRF Service Wtr Sys. (R) Construction FYs 16-20 $0 Supplies/Contr Capital Costs: FY 2015 Replacement of water quality testing instruments with more sensitive detectors results in additional ongoing maintenance costs. Because of the initial warranties on each instrument, these operating impacts are expected to begin the year following instrument replacement. Operating Costs: Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $153,868 $153,868 Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project will include replacement of the existing 2 in. galvanized service water lines at the West Area Water Reclamation Facility. Numerous areas of the pipeline system had leaks indicating severe pipeline corrosion. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $75,893 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $1,198 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $9,107 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: $759 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,044 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,001 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: T2250 - WAWRF Clarifier Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: $0 Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This request is to repair and replace the clarifier mechanical drive units and associated equipment at the West Area Water Reclamation Facility in three of the six clarifiers. These structures are mechanical in nature with equipment that includes heavy drive motors, pulleys, chains, bearings and scrapers, all of which will wear out over time. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $30,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $11,270 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $34,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $277,770 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 401 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2360 - Water & Sewer Category: Revenue Project: T2270 - WAWRF Fine Screen Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The West Area Water Reclamation Facility fine screens are mechanical devices that remove solid materials from the influent flows. These devices are subject to wear and tear and need to be replaced approximately every 1520 years. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $580,000 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $29,400 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $5,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $87,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $752,950 $0 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: T2280 - WAWRF Odor Control Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The West Area Water Reclamation Facility Odor Control System is required to meet air quality regulatory standards and prevent odor complaints from nearby property owners. The odor control system will require replacement due to ordinary operating conditions. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $800,000 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $38,700 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $8,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $135,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,081,700 $0 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: T2282* - Lab Data Management System (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: IT/Phone/Security TOTAL Operating Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Purchase of an information management system for Water Quality Laboratory data. Funding for this project transferred from Water Quality Lab Instrumentation project 2360-60001. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 No additional O and M is expected since this is the replacement of an existing system. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 402 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2360 - Water & Sewer Category: Revenue Project: T2283* - Computerized Maint. Mgmt Sys. (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The City of Glendale Utilities Department utilizes Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS), to reduce administrative cost associated with the operation and maintenance of the city's water and wastewater treatment, distribution and collection systems. The CMMS software is dependent on both computer hardware and its operating system. After seven years, this computer hardware and operating system are not expected to support the current version of CMMS. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,637,913 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,873 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $58,965 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,379 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $260,870 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: T2284* - Radio Phase IV Equipment (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project includes the replacement of the existing microwave radio equipment. The radios are used for wide area networking of the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. The microwave radio equipment installed under the Radio Phase III project has a supportable and operational life span of approximately five years. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $654,900 $0 $654,900 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $10,203 $0 $10,203 $24,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $24,000 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $6,549 $0 $6,549 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $104,348 $0 $104,348 $0 $0 $0 $800,000 $0 $800,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 403 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2360 - Water & Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 60008 - WAWRF Phase IV (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will include design and construction of treatment system improvements and expansion at the West Area Water Reclamation Facility (WAWRF) to treat increasing wastewater flows from the developing areas along the Loop 101 alignment and other projected area growth. The plant improvements and expansion have been identified in the West Area Water Reclamation Facility Phase V Master Plan conducted by the Damon S. Williams Associates(DSWA) team in 2009. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $1,890,000 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $11,380,000 $22,540,000 $14,350,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $30,000 $145,000 $350,000 $230,000 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $45,000 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $7,277 $43,813 $86,779 $55,248 Arts $0 $0 $0 $113,800 $225,400 $143,500 Contingency $0 $0 $295,842 $1,752,392 $3,480,327 $2,216,812 $0 $0 $2,268,119 $13,435,005 $26,682,506 $16,995,560 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $116,791 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $116,791 $0 $2,268,119 $13,435,005 $26,682,506 $16,995,560 Expanded facility will require two new plant operators and one new plant electrician starting in FY 2016 at $68,000 including benefits per year. Other treatment expenses prorated with existing facility expenses. Plant capacity will increase resulting in increases in (1) supplies (chemicals) $200,000; (2) utilities of $300,000; (3) equipment maintenance $66,000. No new telephones, PC's or vehicles will be required. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $824,000 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,236,000 Equip. Maint. TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 404 Return to CIP TOC $840,478 $271,921 $3,172,399 FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 2400 - Water Category: Revenue FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 61023 Water System Security 275,317 0 0 0 2,519,715 0 0 61024 Cholla Water Plant Process Imp 0 900,000 0 0 0 0 0 61036 Zn4 Groundwater Trtment Plant 9,316,690 19,975,575 1,002,539 7,505,990 0 0 10,000,915 61040 Loop 101 Wells & Piping 0 0 0 1,927,380 0 0 9,679,120 61041 Additional Recharge Capacity 0 100,000 0 3,500,000 3,500,000 3,350,000 1,000,000 T3540 WTPs Chlorine Gas Elimination 0 0 0 0 3,493,499 4,244,851 0 T3552 Additional Water Supply 0 0 0 0 6,597,500 3,581,123 49,988,750 0 296,074 0 0 0 1,508,301 2,457,972 Replacement of Existing Assets 61001 Fire Hydrant Replacement 61012 Irrigation 0 0 0 0 0 227,288 720,252 167,000 1,498,571 3,147,887 3,294,721 3,448,618 2,168,090 22,332,808 61015 Outer Loop Effluent Line 0 0 0 0 69,000 1,610,000 2,603,422 61043 Pyramid Pk WTP Train #1 Equip 0 0 791,670 4,917,950 0 0 0 T3550 Hillcrest Ranch Booster Rehab 0 0 0 0 552,775 0 0 9,759,007 22,770,220 4,942,096 21,146,041 20,181,107 16,689,653 98,783,239 305,215 0 0 0 0 0 0 61009 Drinking Water Well Head Trmt 0 0 0 0 887,225 887,225 0 61019 Storage and Recovery Well 0 0 0 0 745,453 1,770,000 2,235,475 61020 West Area Reuse Pipelines 20,000 0 0 0 0 836,986 1,325,224 1,257,030 0 0 0 0 0 0 61027 Water Line Extension 0 1,518,983 1,518,983 1,518,983 0 500,421 1,569,183 61029 Regional GAC Plant 0 0 0 0 0 1,042,000 1,800,000 61038 Loop 101 Water Treatment 0 828,000 792,000 756,000 0 1,999,527 33,014,585 61044 *New River Waterline Crossing 0 1,379,000 0 0 0 0 0 T3480 95th A Wtr Trn Ln Orgewd to G 0 0 1,462,100 0 0 0 0 T3510 Orngewood Ave Wtr Trans Mn 0 0 339,794 0 827,418 1,037,007 1,103,945 T3554 Zone 3 Transmission Pipelines 0 0 0 0 100,000 0 0 T3555 *Fiber Optic Cable - Reservoir 0 0 0 0 0 0 225,000 1,582,245 3,725,983 4,112,877 2,274,983 2,560,096 8,073,166 41,273,412 $11,341,252 $26,496,203 $9,054,973 $23,421,024 $22,741,203 61013 Line Replacement & Extension Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 61003 Oasis Water Campus 61021 N River/Agua Fria Storage Proj Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $37,837,455 * New Project 405 Return to CIP TOC $24,762,819 $140,056,651 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61023 - Water System Security (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Installation of additional or new equipment to provide greater security to the city's water source supply, treatment plants and distribution system. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $117,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $2,065,000 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $33,000 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $55,000 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $20,650 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $229,065 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,519,715 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $275,317 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $275,317 $0 $0 $2,519,715 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 61024 - Cholla Water Plant Process Imp (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Construction Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will include improvements at Cholla Water Treatment Plant to meet the regulatory requirements. The work to be performed during the current 10-year CIP will include installation of new variable frequency drive system, odor control, soil stabilization, solids handling facility repair and improvements, and reservoir lining rehabilitation or replacement. FY 2011 $700,000 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $0 Finance Charges $12,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $39,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $141,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 406 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61036 - Zn4 Groundwater Trtment Plant (I) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues An expansion of the Zone 4 Water Treatment Plant intended to treat 10 million gallons per day (MGD) of groundwater to remove nitrates and other contaminants. This facility will provide needed drinking water when surface water plants are off-line during canal dry-ups. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Design Construction Finance Charges Engineering Charges Arts Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $1,400,000 $0 $1,100,000 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $15,500,000 $850,000 $5,250,000 $0 $0 $6,980,000 $250,000 $10,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $114,000 $65,065 $3,273 $24,448 $0 $0 $32,648 $155,000 $8,500 $52,500 $0 $0 $69,800 $2,605,510 $130,766 $979,042 $0 $0 $1,304,467 $19,975,575 $1,002,539 $7,505,990 $0 $0 $10,000,915 $9,316,690 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,292,265 $1,002,539 $7,505,990 $0 $0 $10,000,915 This is an expansion of the Zone 4 Water Treatment Plant to give it the capability to treat groundwater therefore only new costs will be for staff, chemicals and utilities. FTE = Three plant operators @ $71,500 per year. Chemical, utilities, and maintenance cost are based on actual cost during a pilot study to treat groundwater. A supplemental will be submitted in the future for the additional O and M costs. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $214,500 $220,935 $227,563 $234,390 $1,281,740 Supplies/Contr $0 $360,600 $371,418 $382,561 $2,154,758 Utilities Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $54,636 $50,000 $56,275 $51,500 $57,963 $0 $394,037 $59,702 Insurance TOTAL $0 $6,409 $6,601 $6,799 $0 $686,145 $706,729 $674,886 Project: 61040 - Loop 101 Wells & Piping (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: $0 $326,476 $290,069 $7,003 $695,132 $4,091,340 $38,297 Water & Sewer Revenues Rehabilitate existing wells in Zone 4 to supply raw water to the Loop 101 Ground Water Treatment Plant (GWTP). These improvements are needed in order to meet the growing potable water demand in this area of the city, and also to meet water quality regulations. These improvements are identified in the revised Utilities Water Master Plan completed by Black and Veatch. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $140,000 $0 $0 $960,000 Construction $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 $0 $7,200,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $22,900 $0 $0 $125,100 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $15,480 $0 $0 $77,020 Arts $0 $0 $15,000 $0 $0 $72,000 Contingency $0 $0 $234,000 $0 $0 $1,245,000 $0 $0 $1,927,380 $0 $0 $9,679,120 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 407 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61041 - Additional Recharge Capacity (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $100,000 FY 2012 $0 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,350,000 $1,000,000 $100,000 $0 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,350,000 $1,000,000 Additional operating and maintenance cost projections for purchased additional capacity. Costs based upon operation and maintenance contract services for existing facilities. Operating Costs: Supplies/Contr TOTAL FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $58,417 $58,417 Project: T3540 - WTPs Chlorine Gas Elimination (I) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues To purchase or develop additional recharge capacity/options for the underground storage of the City's reclaimed water and surface water supplies. Additional recharge capacity/options are needed to ensure the City is able to store projected increases in reclaimed water produced at the City's West Area Water Reclamation Facility; and to efficiently manage the City's available surface water supplies. This project replaces project 2400-T3556. Miscellaneous/Other Operating Description: Funding Source: $60,170 $60,170 Funding Source: FY 2015 $61,975 $61,975 FYs 16-20 $338,903 $338,903 Water & Sewer Revenues This project includes the design and construction for the removal of the on-site storage and use of chlorine gas for disinfection of the drinking water. The chlorine gas will be replaced with on-site generation of sodium hypochlorite as the disinfection chemical for two water treatment plants. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $730,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $2,200,000 $3,550,000 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $44,000 $55,000 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $41,825 $50,675 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $22,000 $35,500 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $455,674 $553,676 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,493,499 $4,244,851 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: Additional annual cost for supplies and electricity are $20,000 and $15,000 respectively. Costs are based on engineering studies. A supplemental will be submitted in the future. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $15,000 $15,450 $84,483 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $112,652 $0 $0 $0 $35,000 $20,600 $36,050 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 408 Return to CIP TOC $197,135 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: T3552 - Additional Water Supply (I) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Acquisition and development of renewable water supplies to meet increasing demand for water, maintain city's designation of assured water supply, and to minimize drought impacts on Glendale water system customers. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $97,500 $52,923 $738,750 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $6,500,000 $3,528,200 $49,250,000 $0 $0 $0 $6,597,500 $3,581,123 $49,988,750 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M is based upon projected delivery and treatment costs relating to the additional water supply. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $380,000 TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $380,000 Project: 61001 - Fire Hydrant Replacement (R) Project Description: FY 2011 Construction Engineering Charges Arts Contingency TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: $2,140,336 $2,140,336 Water & Sewer Revenues FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $265,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,350,000 $2,200,000 $6,493 $0 $0 $0 $33,075 $53,900 $2,650 $0 $0 $0 $13,500 $22,000 $21,931 $0 $0 $0 $111,726 $182,072 $296,074 $0 $0 $0 $1,508,301 $2,457,972 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 61012 - Irrigation (R) Project Description: $0 $0 FYs 16-20 This project consists of funding a replacement program for approximately 800 existing fire hydrants. To date, 285 fire hydrants have been replaced. The replacement of existing fire hydrants is primarily driven by the inability to obtain parts as the fire hydrant becomes inoperable. The new fire hydrant installations are based on an internal study that identified areas that currently do not meet city and industry spacing guidelines. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2015 Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Irrigation pipelines and irrigation structures, in the downtown flood irrigation system will be rehabilitated or replaced to stop existing irrigation leaks. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $684,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,288 $29,412 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $6,840 $0 $0 $0 $0 $227,288 $720,252 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 409 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61013 - Line Replacement & Extension (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The Water Distribution System Evaluation Study conducted by CH2M-Hill identified the segments of water lines to be rehabilitated and/or replaced. In addition, the city Utilities Department has also identified the water lines that are in need of rehabilitation and/or replacement based on historic repair and maintenance records. This project will include water line rehabilitation and/or replacement to ensure effective water distribution system operations and regulatory compliance. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $470,000 $0 $0 $0 $650,000 $2,000,000 Construction $800,000 $2,660,000 $2,780,000 $2,910,000 $1,190,000 $16,890,000 $20,000 $40,000 $46,000 $48,000 $26,000 $285,000 Finance Charges Engineering Charges $5,105 $10,693 $11,175 $11,698 $7,396 $75,933 Arts $8,000 $26,600 $27,800 $29,100 $11,900 $168,900 $195,466 $410,594 $429,746 $449,820 $282,794 $2,912,975 $1,498,571 $3,147,887 $3,294,721 $3,448,618 $2,168,090 $22,332,808 Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $167,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,665,571 $3,147,887 $3,294,721 $3,448,618 $2,168,090 $22,332,808 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 61015 - Outer Loop Effluent Line (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility (ARWRF) effluent transmission line have been in service since the late 1980s. This effluent transmission line is essential for conveying and disposal of the effluent from the ARWRF. This project will include effluent line inspection, evaluation and rehabilitation, if needed, to ensure effluent transmission system integrity and reliability. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $58,910 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,340,000 $2,170,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,810 $32,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $1,090 $24,790 $40,145 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,400 $21,700 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $9,000 $210,000 $339,577 $0 $0 $0 $69,000 $1,610,000 $2,603,422 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 410 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61043 - Pyramid Pk WTP Train #1 Equip (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will include equipment replacement and rehabilitation at the Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant related to Train No. 1 and other equipment in the original plant. The original equipment will be approximately 23 years old. Based on the existing IGA between Glendale and Peoria, this cost will be split between the two cities with Peoria being responsible for approximately 23% of the project costs. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2014 $0 $9,900 $61,500 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $16,170 $100,450 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $6,600 $41,000 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $99,000 $615,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $791,670 $4,917,950 $0 $0 $0 Capital Costs: $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: T3550 - Hillcrest Ranch Booster Rehab (R) Project Description: $0 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges Operating Description: $4,100,000 FY 2015 $0 TOTAL $660,000 FY 2013 Construction Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This drinking water booster station went out of service in 1998 when the drinking water reservoir went online at the Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant (PPWTP). To serve as an emergency back-up supply of water pressure for the Zone 3 Water Pressure Zone, the pumps and electrical controls will be replaced or rehabilitated if possible. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $25,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $450,000 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $23,275 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $4,500 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $552,775 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 61003 - Oasis Water Campus (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues A "Comprehensive Water Facilities Planning and Design" plan has been prepared and the design is complete for the new 10 million gallon per day (MGD) surface water treatment plant that will serve mainly western Glendale with fresh drinking water. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $305,215 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $305,215 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 411 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61009 - Drinking Water Well Head Trmt (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will include design of a new Zone 4 wellhead treatment system to remove nitrates and arsenic from groundwater to meet the federal drinking water standards. This new wellhead treatment system was recommended in the Groundwater Master Plan in 2008 in order to meet the future growth demand in the west areas of the city. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Design FY 2012 $0 FY 2013 $0 FY 2014 $0 $750,000 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $750,000 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $21,500 $21,500 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $115,725 $115,725 $0 $0 $0 $0 $887,225 $887,225 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 61019 - Storage and Recovery Well (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The project is a long term project to install one or more groundwater recharge and recovery wells for the purpose of recharging effluent and/or "recovering" recharge credits by pumping groundwater. The recovered groundwater will be pumped to the Arrowhead amenities customers. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $626,779 $300,000 $300,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,177,200 $1,564,800 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $9,846 $22,830 $28,944 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $11,595 $27,328 $34,499 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,772 $15,648 $0 $0 $0 $97,233 $230,870 $291,584 $0 $0 $0 $745,453 $1,770,000 $2,235,475 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: O and M is for three years of chemicals and equipment maintenance based on pilot studies. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $144,200 Utilities Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $103,000 $46,350 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 412 Return to CIP TOC $293,550 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61020 - West Area Reuse Pipelines (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Malcolm Pirnie prepared a water reuse master plan for the reuse of effluent from the West Area Water Reclamation Facility. This plan was completed in May 2003. Reuse pipelines projects will be developed and scheduled as required per the reuse master plan. Extensions of the effluent line to serve new lakes are also included. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $540,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $261,000 $1,260,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,000 $19,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,376 $33,624 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,610 $12,600 $1,325,224 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $836,986 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $836,986 $1,325,224 Pipeline maintenance will be required on 3.5 miles of existing pipeline, and following the new construction warranty period, annual maintenance will begin on the new pipelines. Annual maintenance includes instrument and control work on the telemetry, mechanical work on the valves and transmission piping, and repair of transmission system in the event of deterioration or breakage. One new WRF Plant Operator will be required to work off-site at lake intake structures, recharge outfall structures and water delivery locations. Cost of operator with benefits is $75,080 year for three years. Operating Costs: Staffing $0 $20,000 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 61021 - N River/Agua Fria Storage Proj (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2014 Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $231,999 $231,999 Water & Sewer Revenues To acquire a 20% ownership in the New River/Agua Fria Underground Storage Facility administered by the Salt River Project. The city has physically expanded the West Area Water Reclamation Facility and needs additional recharge capacity to accommodate (store) the effluent processed at the expanded facility. The new regional underground storage facility is located in the vicinity of 107th Avenue and Bethany Home Road. The stored effluent will be used to meet Glendale's long-term water demands and maintain compliance with the state groundwater code. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $1,257,030 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,257,030 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 413 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61027 - Water Line Extension (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Installation of water lines to extend the city's water transmission and distribution systems. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $0 $100,000 $0 $1,120,000 $1,120,000 $1,120,000 $0 $317,000 $1,300,000 Finance Charges $18,400 $18,400 $18,400 $0 $8,000 $29,750 Engineering Charges $21,255 $21,255 $21,255 $0 $6,979 $21,757 Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: $11,200 $11,200 $11,200 $0 $3,170 $13,000 $198,128 $198,128 $198,128 $0 $65,272 $204,676 $1,518,983 $1,518,983 $1,518,983 $0 $500,421 $1,569,183 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 61029 - Regional GAC Plant (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will include co-ownership of a regional granular activated carbon (GAC) regeneration plant. The City of Glendale ownership will not exceed 5% of the project. The total project cost was estimated to be $56 million. The GAC has a life expectancy of 6 to 24 months and must be replaced with either new GAC or regenerated GAC. The cost for new GAC is approximately $1.23 per pound and $0.76 per pound for regenerated GAC. The GAC regeneration will result in a 30% or greater savings in O and M costs. The project pay-back will be 3-5 years from the O and M savings. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,000 $27,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,027,000 $1,773,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,042,000 $1,800,000 There are no direct O and M costs to the City of Glendale related to this project. All O and M costs will be included in the cost of GAC regeneration. Regeneration costs are based on a per pound rate and will include any ongoing project O and M costs. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 414 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: 61038 - Loop 101 Water Treatment (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Land Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Design and build a 10 million gallon per day (MGD) groundwater treatment plant and storage reservoir in Zone 4. The treatment plant is needed in order to meet the potable water demand of this growing area of the city. The 11.7 acres of land is located at 99th Avenue and Northern. Land was purchased in FY 2009 with payments in FY 2009 and FY 2010 with the remaining payments to be spread over three fiscal years. A groundwater treatment plant and reservoir booster station will be designed and constructed in FY’s 2015 through 2019. This facility is identified in the revised Utilities Water Master Plan. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $828,000 $792,000 $756,000 $0 $0 $0 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,705,000 $3,000,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $29,100,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,500 $500,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,527 $123,585 Arts TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 $291,000 $828,000 $792,000 $756,000 $0 $1,999,527 $33,014,585 O and M impact will be determined when project is closer to completion as operations are expected to begin in FY 2020. Project: 61044* - New River Waterline Crossing (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Construction Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues In order to meet the new federal disinfection by-product requirements for the city’s water distribution system in 2012, a connection between Zone 1 and Zone 4 will be provided. The purpose of the project is to enhance water quality within the distribution system and improve operations flexibility. This project will include installation of a new 16-inch water line crossing the New River to connect the existing 16-inch waterline along Bethany Homes Road with the existing 12-inch waterline at the Airport. FY 2011 FY 2012 $1,122,180 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $0 Finance Charges $17,728 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $48,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $11,222 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $179,870 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,379,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 415 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: T3480 - 95th A Wtr Trn Ln Orgewd to G (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Installation of a new 16 in. diameter water transmission main which will improve water distribution within Water Pressure Zone 4. This new water line will be located within 95th Avenue between Orangewood Avenue to Glendale Avenue. The source water will come from the Oasis Water Campus. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $1,110,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $18,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $43,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $11,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,462,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: Preventative maintenance and future regulations Distribution Management Operation and Maintenance(DMOM) are the driving factor for the O and M adjustments. Although the project design is only half of a mile of main it is estimated $7,000 per year is necessary beginning in FY 2014. A supplemental will be submitted in the future. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $7,000 TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $7,000 Project: T3510 - Orngewood Ave Wtr Trans Mn (N) Project Description: Funding Source: FY 2015 $7,210 $7,210 FYs 16-20 $39,424 $39,424 Water & Sewer Revenues A new 16 in. water transmission main which will improve water distribution within Water Pressure Zone 4. This new water line will be located within Orangewood Avenue from 99th Avenue west to 105th Avenue. The source water will be the Oasis Water Campus. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $735,000 $919,000 $980,000 Finance Charges $0 $9,000 $0 $10,000 $14,775 $14,000 Engineering Charges $0 $5,624 $0 $13,778 $17,227 $18,371 Arts $0 $0 $0 $7,350 $9,190 $9,800 $0 $25,170 $0 $61,290 $76,815 $81,774 $0 $339,794 $0 $827,418 $1,037,007 $1,103,945 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Due to the complexity of the line, additional maintenance costs are necessary in the out years. In addition to the preventative maintenance costs, future Distribution Management Operation and Maintenance(DMOM) are a driving factor for the increased maintenance costs. Although the project design is for .75 miles of main it is estimated an additional $10,000 is necessary for maintenance costs beginning in FY 2015. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 416 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $51,500 $51,500 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2400 - Water Category: Revenue Project: T3554 - Zone 3 Transmission Pipelines (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Complete a study report to determine the alignment and site of one or two transmission mains for Water Zone 3. The line is intended to improve the pressure distribution within this service area. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: T3555* - Fiber Optic Cable - Reservoir (N) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project includes the installation of fiber optic cables at Thunderbird Reservoir and Zone 4 Reservoir. A study conducted by city staff indicates that optic cables are the least expensive long term solution for wide area network communications at Thunderbird and Zone 4 Reservoirs. Currently there is a T1 data line that is being leased from Qwest. The new cables will help to monitor the numerous security cameras at the reservoirs and also provide a more reliable access for the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $179,035 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,827 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,790 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,348 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $225,000 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 417 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 63007 Sewer 99th Ave. W. Water Meter 0 0 0 0 0 595,322 7,112,553 63010 91st Ave. Construction 0 3,045,000 1,522,500 1,522,500 512,000 1,015,000 14,210,000 63014 67th & 83rd Ave SLS Mode 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,856,513 63020 Security Enhance Wastewtr Ops 0 0 0 0 3,002,882 4,004,393 0 63023 City Wide Sewer Odor Control 0 0 0 0 0 769,244 1,112,719 T3613 *GL03 Meter Station Relocation 0 0 0 300,001 2,199,999 0 0 63003 99th Ave Interceptor Line 0 710,500 710,500 2,030,000 2,030,000 2,030,000 3,755,500 63006 Arrowhead Sewer Lines 0 0 0 0 0 1,719,575 2,035,490 Replacement of Existing Assets 63013 67th Ave. Lift Station 598,436 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,862,539 1,897,765 3,315,050 3,315,050 3,435,170 3,435,170 16,580,998 63018 Camelback Swr Rehab 15,619 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 63021 Sweetwater & 55th Ave SLS 72,102 499,734 1,500,050 0 0 0 0 4,548,696 7,152,999 7,048,100 7,167,551 11,180,051 13,568,704 49,663,773 63000 67th-115th, Northern-C'Back 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,715,500 63008 Sewers for Areas on Septic Sys 0 231,787 241,900 253,937 441,380 441,380 878,180 63015 CMOM Implementation 0 0 0 574,000 0 0 0 63017 Sewer Line Extension 0 302,079 321,276 237,982 404,569 401,284 980,526 T3610 Bethany Hme Rd Interceptor 0 0 0 351,383 1,787,635 1,787,635 0 T3611 Glendale Ave 93rd-99th Ave 0 0 539,585 0 0 0 385,245 T3612 *Influent Pump Sta. (RSPS) Imp. 0 0 0 500,000 4,600,000 0 0 0 533,866 1,102,761 1,917,302 7,233,584 2,630,299 11,959,451 $4,548,696 $7,686,865 $8,150,861 $9,084,853 $18,413,635 $16,199,003 $61,623,224 63016 Sewer Line Replacement Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $12,235,561 * New Project 418 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63007 - Sewer 99th Ave. W. Water Meter (I) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues In agreement with the multi-city Sub-Regional Operating Group organization, all the SROG cities will construct or refurbish sewage metering stations in their jurisdiction, to assure accurate monitoring and personnel safety while maintaining these metering structures feeding the jointly owned 91st Avenue Waste Water Treatment Plant. The metering stations are located on 99th Avenue south of Camelback Road and south of Northern Avenue. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $5,950,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,500 $90,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,171 $85,329 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000 $59,500 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,651 $927,724 $0 $0 $0 $0 $595,322 $7,112,553 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes service and replacement of automatic sampling units, miscellaneous telemetry and flow recording equipment at the metering stations on a periodic basis. No data connectivity or telephones are required. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 63010 - 91st Ave. Construction (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $25,751 $128,753 $154,504 Water & Sewer Revenues This project consists of continuing improvements and expansion of the 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant co-owned by the City of Phoenix and the Sub-Regional Operating Group (SROG), of which Glendale is a member. It is an ongoing venture to expand the treatment plant from 153 million gallons per day (MGD) to 250 MGD. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $45,000 $22,500 $22,500 $12,000 $15,000 $210,000 $3,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $14,000,000 $3,045,000 $1,522,500 $1,522,500 $512,000 $1,015,000 $14,210,000 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 419 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63014 - 67th & 83rd Ave SLS Mode (I) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This sewage lift station (SLS) located at 67th Avenue and Beardsley Road will need to be rehabilitated and later expanded to assure system reliability, adequate pumping capacity and regulatory compliance. The redesign will include more efficient odor control and larger capacity pumps. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $700,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,375,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $61,125 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75,388 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $33,750 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $611,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,856,513 TOTAL Operating Description: Supplies include two activated carbon replacement cycles for the odor control system at $5,000 each in three year cycles. Utilities will increase by $2,500 per year due to pump capacity increase. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,300 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,600 TOTAL Project: 63020 - Security Enhance Wastewtr Ops (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: $10,300 Water & Sewer Revenues Add security enhancements to the water reclamation facilities, the various effluent recharge facilities and the various sewer lift stations to achieve compliance with pending regulations which will be set in place by the Federal Homeland Security in the near future. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $2,525,000 $3,500,000 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $52,500 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $39,643 $52,857 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $25,250 $35,000 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $272,989 $364,036 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,002,882 $4,004,393 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 420 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63023 - City Wide Sewer Odor Control (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will add permanent hydrogen peroxide chemical dosing stations to various sewer lines for odor control and control of hydrogen sulfide gas. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $575,000 $975,000 $26,813 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,563 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,750 $9,750 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $69,931 $101,156 $0 $0 $0 $0 $769,244 $1,112,719 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: T3613* - GL03 Meter Station Relocation (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The existing Meter Station GL03 is located within the 99th Avenue Alignment. This project will include GL03 meter station relocation to the existing influent pump station site located on the northeast corner of Camelback Road and 99th Avenue. The project will also upgrade the meter station to meet the Sub-Regional Operating Group (SROG) standards. FY 2011 FY 2012 Design $0 $0 Construction $0 Finance Charges $0 Engineering Charges $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $250,272 $255,466 $0 $0 $0 $1,564,875 $0 $0 $0 $3,950 $28,701 $0 $0 $0 $6,648 $48,352 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $15,649 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $39,131 $286,956 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,001 $2,199,999 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 63003 - 99th Ave Interceptor Line (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The Sewer Condition Assessment Study conducted by Project Engineering Consultants in 2005 recommended that the 99th Avenue sewer line be repaired or rehabilitated. This project will include rehabilitation of Glendale’s portion of the 99th Avenue sewer line; Glendale currently owns 70% of the 99th Avenue Sewer Line. Pipe lining will be replaced and the corroded manhole structures will be rehabilitated. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $10,500 $10,500 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $55,500 $700,000 $700,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,700,000 $710,500 $710,500 $2,030,000 $2,030,000 $2,030,000 $3,755,500 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 421 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63006 - Arrowhead Sewer Lines (R) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The replacement or rehabilitation of various wastewater collection lines in the Arrowhead Ranch area will improve sewer flow conditions and reduce sewer odors. This work was identified in a report completed by the consulting firm, Damon Williams and Associates. The work will be done in phases. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $350,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,150,000 $1,770,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,000 $30,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,750 $32,745 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,500 $17,700 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $156,325 $185,045 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,719,575 $2,035,490 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 63013 - 67th Ave. Lift Station (R) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $598,436 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $598,436 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Increase in power costs for an odor control system will require additional funding. However, the annual maintenance costs will not experience an increase (except inflation) until 2011 due to the new construction warranty and the new hours for the equipment. Equipment maintenance includes replacement of odor control media and service to pumps and associated valves. Cost is based on historical data. New O and M will be absorbed by department. Operating Costs: Utilities Water & Sewer Revenues The material condition of this Sewage Lift Station (SLS) has deteriorated and requires equipment upgrades in order to assure system remains fully functional and does not violate regulations. The station is essential to satisfy Capacity Management Operation and Maintenance (CMOM). Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $5,000 $5,150 $5,305 $5,464 $5,000 $5,150 $5,305 $5,464 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 422 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $5,628 $5,628 FYs 16-20 $30,774 $30,774 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63016 - Sewer Line Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Finance Charges Engineering Charges Arts Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Replacement and/or rehabilitation of existing sanitary sewer lines and manholes as identified by the Sewer Evaluation Study prepared by HDR Engineers and to be completed by Camp, Dresser and McKee (CDM) Engineers. Projects will be developed as funds are available. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $1,300,000 $2,800,000 $2,800,000 $2,900,000 $2,900,000 $13,000,000 $30,000 $42,000 $42,000 $45,000 $45,000 $225,000 $7,230 $12,652 $12,652 $13,104 $13,104 $63,259 $13,000 $28,000 $28,000 $29,000 $29,000 $130,000 $247,535 $432,398 $432,398 $448,066 $448,066 $2,162,739 Sub-Total New Funding $1,897,765 $3,315,050 $3,315,050 $3,435,170 $3,435,170 $16,580,998 FY 2011 Carryover $3,862,539 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,760,304 $3,315,050 $3,315,050 $3,435,170 $3,435,170 $16,580,998 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 63018 - Camelback Swr Rehab (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Construction Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will include sewer and manhole rehabilitation or replacement in the area of Camelback Road and 75th Avenue. The 75th Avenue and Camelback Road Sewer and Manhole Rehabilitation Study conducted by CDM in 2008 identified the sewer segments and manholes that need to be rehabilitated or replaced. FY 2011 FY 2012 $810,000 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $0 Finance Charges $11,865 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $39,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $130,435 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $15,619 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,015,619 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 423 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63021 - Sweetwater & 55th Ave SLS (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Finance Charges Engineering Charges Arts Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: The material condition of the sewage lift station (SLS) at Sweetwater and 55th Avenue has deteriorated and requires equipment upgrades in order to assure system reliability, adequate capacity and public safety. The station is essential to satisfy capacity management operation and maintenance. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $416,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,236,040 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,186 $22,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,465 $33,991 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,360 $0 $0 $0 $0 $65,183 $195,659 $0 $0 $0 $0 $499,734 $1,500,050 $0 $0 $0 $0 $72,102 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $571,836 $1,500,050 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 63000 - 67th-115th, Northern-C'Back (N) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Installation of new sewer lines to relieve existing sewer mains as identified by Hennings, Durham, and Richardson (HDR) Sewer Depth Study of December 2000. These projects will provide deeper outfall sewers for development in the area and will relieve or replace existing sewers that have inadequate slope. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $123,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $70,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,230,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,715,500 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 424 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63008 - Sewers for Areas on Septic Sys (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will include Installation of sewers in the areas currently on septic systems. This is a citizen driven program in which citizens must request that their area (subdivision, neighborhood, street, etc.) be served by the city sewer. As of September 2007, five projects had been funded through this program. No other areas have officially met the requirements for projects to go forward. The five projects that were funded and are now complete are Cortez Sewer, Hidden Manor, Rancho Del Higo, Orangewood West and Cinnabar. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Design Construction Finance Charges FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $142,000 $200,000 $210,000 $365,000 $365,000 $725,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,100 $5,400 $5,400 $12,000 $19,385 Engineering Charges $5,134 $5,348 $5,615 $9,759 $9,759 Arts $1,420 $2,000 $2,100 $3,650 $3,650 $7,250 $30,233 $31,552 $33,122 $57,571 $57,571 $114,545 $231,787 $241,900 $253,937 $441,380 $441,380 $878,180 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Sewer maintenance required for sewers installed through this program is estimated at approximately $10,000 per mile of sewer per year. Department will absorb new O and M. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Supplies/Contr $10,000 $20,300 $30,909 $41,866 TOTAL $10,000 $20,300 $30,909 $41,866 Project: 63015 - CMOM Implementation (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2015 $43,122 $43,122 FYs 16-20 $360,500 $360,500 Water & Sewer Revenues The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has mandated a new Capacity Management Operations and Maintenance (CMOM) program for the sanitary sewer systems nationwide. The proposed program will assist in protecting the sanitary sewer system. Phase 1 and 2 have been completed. Phase 3 will update the administrative program in FY 2013. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $574,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $574,000 $0 $0 $0 Consultants will conduct the GPS survey of the manhole covers. No additional maintenance is expected. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 425 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63017 - Sewer Line Extension (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues This project will include sewer line extensions at various locations to meet projected demand. These extensions will transfer wastewater from new developments. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $24,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $230,000 $270,000 $200,000 $340,000 $337,240 $725,000 $20,381 Engineering Charges $6,277 $6,670 $4,941 $8,399 $8,331 Arts $2,300 $2,700 $2,000 $3,400 $3,372 $7,250 $39,402 $41,906 $31,041 $52,770 $52,341 $127,895 $302,079 $321,276 $237,982 $404,569 $401,284 $980,526 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: T3610 - Bethany Hme Rd Interceptor (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Installation of an interceptor sewer along the Bethany Home Road alignment from 83rd to 95th Avenue. The interceptor is designed to intercept flows from the existing sewers in 83rd and 91st Avenues that had to be altered due to construction of the Bethany Home Outfall Channel. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $1,490,000 $1,490,000 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $22,000 $22,000 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $5,550 $27,565 $27,565 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $14,900 $14,900 $0 $0 $0 $45,833 $233,170 $233,170 $0 $0 $0 $351,383 $1,787,635 $1,787,635 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 426 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2420 - Sewer Category: Revenue Project: T3611 - Glendale Ave 93rd-99th Ave (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Improvements are required in order to handle the additional wastewater flows generated by growth near Loop 101 and Glendale Avenue. Improvements include the design and construction of a parallel relief sewer on Glendale Avenue from 93rd to 99th Avenue. The relief sewer will be constructed in two phases. These proposed improvements were identified in the sewer collection study recently completed by Camp, Dresser, and McKee (CDM). FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $35,000 Construction $0 $395,000 $0 $0 $0 $280,000 Finance Charges $0 $6,500 $0 $0 $0 $4,900 Engineering Charges $0 $19,135 $0 $0 $0 $13,545 Arts $0 $3,950 $0 $0 $0 $2,800 Contingency $0 $65,000 $0 $0 $0 $49,000 $0 $539,585 $0 $0 $0 $385,245 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: T3612* - Influent Pump Sta. (RSPS) Imp. (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The new screening system will improve West Area Water Reclamation Facility operations and reduce the maintenance effort required for the waste activated sludge pumps at the plant. The new screening system will include mechanical bar screens, washer compactor conveyor system with dumpster storage area, a building and odor control system. This project will include an enclosed self cleaning bar screen and ancillary system. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $420,000 $430,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $6,819 $3,404,500 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $60,517 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $7,896 $70,938 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $68 $34,045 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $65,217 $600,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $4,600,000 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 427 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN Transportation – Other Fu unds TRANSPORTAT TION This cateegory includees projects funded fu with revenue r bonnds backed by b the half-ceent transporttation sales tax approved by y Glendale voters v in 20001. The halff-cent sales taax will fundd improvemeent projects for f all modes of transporrtation incluuding transit, street, bicyccle, pedestriaan and aviattion (Fund 22210). This caategory also includes a separate s fundd for any transportation related r grantts (Fund 16650) and projjects coveredd by the Streeet Fund (Fuund 1340). Over the next few yeears, transit projects p paidd from the haalf-cent saless tax will incclude projectts related too bus servicees, a transit center c and prreliminary liight rail studdies. The street element of the Transsportation Pllan emphasizzes improvements at maj ajor intersecttions as well as improvem ments and en nhancementss along majoor streets. A majority off FY 2011 fuunding is for the Northernn Avenue Sup per Street Prroject that will w create ann east-west coorridor betw ween Grand Avenue and a the Loop p 303. Other projects annd programs in the Transsportation Pllan include closing thhe gaps in th he bicycle syystem, enhanncing pedestrrian facilities in activity centers and supportinng capital im mprovementss at the airpoort. The Trannsportation Grants G Fund (Fund 1650)) was establiished to accoommodate grants g for cappital projects from f federall and state goovernment agencies. a Theese are openn, competitivve grant programss. Grant pro ojects are buddgeted in Fuund 1650 upoon notificatioon that the city c has receiived approval for grant fu unding. Trannsportation projects p in which w the cityy applies for reimbursem ment in a futurre year are budgeted in thhe transportaation sales taax construction fund andd any reimbursements are credited c to thhe transportaation sales taax constructiion fund as grant g revenuue when recceived. S Fund (Fund ( 1340) will cover the t replacem ment In the lasst five years of the capitaal plan, the Street and/or neew purchase of a numberr of street maintenance m r related equippment includding a concreete mixer truuck, asphalt roller, r asphaalt paving maachine, wateer truck and right-of-way r y rearload truuck Projecct Name: Old Ro oma Alley Ped Project P Fundin ng Source: Tran nsportation Grannts Fund #: # 1650 Projecct #: 67511 428 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 65005 Smart Traffic Signals 1,318,806 731,349 0 731,349 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 824,244 65007 Grand Ave Access Enhancements 5,238,973 0 0 0 0 0 0 65008 Intersection Improvements 1,337,896 0 0 0 0 0 0 201,661 116,937 110,661 115,085 119,692 123,763 683,632 11,221,584 39,014,637 4,508,053 4,654,564 4,810,492 3,960,601 19,017,241 65022 PE & Oversight for Transp. Pkg 1,157,517 1,215,260 527,875 545,031 563,289 0 0 65043 Bethany Home: 59th to 67th Saf 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,010,972 15,761 0 0 0 0 0 0 65072 Expanded Safety Program 849,121 106,399 109,963 113,703 117,624 121,741 649,727 65073 Old Roma Alley Ped Project 139,421 0 0 0 0 0 0 65081 Collector/Residential Overlay 5,376,947 0 0 0 0 0 0 65082 Arterial Overlay 5,552,860 0 0 0 0 0 0 497,345 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 282,659 65004 Buses/Vans 645,882 247,104 246,267 295,493 296,638 306,724 1,678,244 65014 Transit Support Capital 266,214 163,430 168,334 173,300 173,972 179,888 993,652 15,636 0 0 0 0 0 0 146,954 151,651 156,574 161,735 167,145 0 0 33,982,578 41,746,767 5,827,727 6,790,260 6,248,852 4,692,717 25,140,371 65017 Rail System 1,443,824 1,075,840 1,108,115 5,335,709 8,986,380 9,614,056 93,243,228 65030 Multi-Use Pathway Grand Canal 1,157,055 0 0 0 0 0 0 93,610 0 0 0 0 0 0 65048 Loop 101 North Park & Ride Lot 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,010,000 65054 63rd Ave @ Loop 101-Bike Ove 188,538 0 0 0 0 0 0 65062 Glendale Sports Facilities Sgn 905,744 565,654 0 0 0 0 0 3,031,126 1,791,455 0 0 0 0 0 27,180 0 0 0 0 0 0 65006 Bus Pullouts 65013 Bus Stops and Shelters 65016 Northern Ave Super Street 65060 Street Scallops 65086 51st Avenue HES Projects T7404 Maryland Ave Bike Rte Spot Imp Replacement of Existing Assets 65044 Airport - Tower and Radio Upgr 65083 Speed Cushions Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 65033 Northern Ave Pkwy Prelim. 65063 New River - Multi-use Pathway 65070 Union Hills/Skunk Cr. Path 65078 Airport Matching Funds 65080 Arrowhead Mall Transit Center 65087 Downtown Park-and-Ride Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: 0 116,510 21,060 391,685 65,273 526,658 0 2,595,308 101,758 1,679,895 3,074,702 0 0 0 0 101,772 4,475,557 5,774,702 0 0 2,000,000 9,442,385 3,752,989 7,284,627 14,576,798 9,051,653 10,140,714 96,253,228 $43,424,963 $45,499,756 $13,112,354 $21,367,058 $15,300,505 $88,924,719 * New Project 429 Return to CIP TOC $14,833,431 $121,393,599 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65005 - Smart Traffic Signals (I) Project Description: Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax A smart traffic signal system will be implemented that includes more left turn arrows, roadway sensors and fiber optic connections to a control center to make traffic signals more responsive. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Construction FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $688,802 $0 $688,802 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $10,862 $0 $10,862 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $24,797 $0 $24,797 $0 $0 $0 $6,888 $0 $6,888 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $731,349 $0 $731,349 $0 $0 $1,318,806 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,050,155 $0 $731,349 $0 $0 $0 O and M costs associated with electricity for new signal heads, cameras and communication equipment as well as maintenance of fiber optic connections. Supplemental budget request will be made as new equipment is added to the system. Operating Costs: Utilities Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $3,824 $3,939 $4,057 $4,179 $4,304 $23,540 $24,608 $25,346 $26,106 $26,890 $151,453 $28,432 $29,285 $30,163 $31,069 $27,697 $32,001 Project: 65006 - Bus Pullouts (I) Project Description: FY 2014 Funding Source: $174,993 Half Cent Sales Tax Bus pull-outs to relieve congestion, improve air quality, and provide traffic and pedestrian safety. Bus pull-outs will be provided at major intersections where there are bus route extensions and new bus routes. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Land $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $105,298 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,241 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $662,298 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,384 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,400 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,623 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $824,244 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M associated with maintenance of landscaping around bus pullouts. Operating Costs: Landscape TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 430 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $3,589 $3,589 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65007 - Grand Ave Access Enhancements (I) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Water TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $5,238,973 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,238,973 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $179,373 $184,754 $190,297 $196,006 $201,886 $1,103,995 $89,686 $92,377 $95,148 $98,002 $269,059 $277,131 $285,445 $294,008 $100,942 $302,828 $1,655,986 Project: 65008 - Intersection Improvements (I) Project Description: FY 2014 O and M is associated with landscaping maintenance and water. Supplemental budget request will be made when the project is close to completion. Operating Costs: Landscape Half Cent Sales Tax This project will construct street improvements for local access along Grand Avenue including changes in access control and beautification. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: Funding Source: $551,991 Half Cent Sales Tax This project provides for the design and construction of intersection improvements for capacity, safety and access as identified on an ongoing basis. Turning lanes, median barriers, lane extensions, right-of-way, utility relocations and pave access points are examples of the type of construction this project will fund. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $1,337,896 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,337,896 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 431 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65013 - Bus Stops and Shelters (I) Project Description: Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax Bus shelters, with shade and seating, will be provided where bus transfers occur and at other high-demand locations. Benches will be provided at other bus stops as needed. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Design FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $9,500 $9,500 $9,500 $9,500 $9,500 $47,500 $92,140 $86,689 $90,531 $94,532 $98,067 $546,624 Finance Charges $1,754 $1,660 $1,726 $1,795 $1,856 $10,254 Engineering Charges $3,960 $3,748 $3,898 $4,054 $4,191 $23,149 $921 $867 $905 $945 $981 $5,466 Construction Arts Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $8,662 $8,197 $8,525 $8,866 $9,168 $50,639 $116,937 $110,661 $115,085 $119,692 $123,763 $683,632 $201,661 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $318,598 $110,661 $115,085 $119,692 $123,763 $683,632 O and M associated with the maintenance of bus shelters. Supplemental budget requests will be made as new bus stops are added. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 $10,609 $10,927 $11,255 $10,300 $10,609 $10,927 $11,255 Project: 65016 - Northern Ave Super Street (I) Project Description: Funding Source: FY 2015 $11,593 $11,593 FYs 16-20 $63,390 $63,390 Half Cent Sales Tax Per IGA, right-of-way acquisition and construction of the Northern Parkway corridor alignment between Loop 303 and Grand Avenue is targeted for completion by FY 2026. When completed the Northern Parkway will have six through lanes and grade separations at major arterials. It will be a partially accessed controlled facility with access limited to major roadways. Costs for this project are shared between the region at 70% and local agencies at 30%. The project cost in FY 2011 is $29.0 million for the region and $10.0 million for Glendale. The project cost between FY 2011 and FY 2020 is $44.8 million for the region and $31.2 million for Glendale. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Land Finance Charges Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2014 $10,300 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $38,429,417 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $585,220 $67,621 $69,818 $72,157 $59,409 $285,259 $0 $4,440,432 $4,584,746 $4,738,335 $3,901,192 $18,731,982 $39,014,637 $4,508,053 $4,654,564 $4,810,492 $3,960,601 $19,017,241 $11,221,584 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,236,221 $4,508,053 $4,654,564 $4,810,492 $3,960,601 $19,017,241 O and M costs are for landscape, water, electrical and other maintenance based on current design. Supplemental budget requests will be made when project phases are close to completion. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Utilities $0 $0 $3,631 $3,740 $3,852 $21,067 Landscape $0 $0 $18,806 $19,370 $109,105 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,402 $31,839 $9,684 $32,794 $19,951 $9,975 $33,778 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 432 Return to CIP TOC $54,544 $184,716 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65022 - PE & Oversight for Transp. Pkg (I) Project Description: Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax Professional engineering for preparation of design concepts, and administration of right-of-way purchase for roadway, bicycle, pedestrian and transit projects. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $18,229 $7,918 $8,175 $8,449 $0 $0 $1,197,031 $519,957 $536,856 $554,840 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding $1,215,260 $527,875 $545,031 $563,289 $0 $0 FY 2011 Carryover $1,157,517 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,372,777 $527,875 $545,031 $563,289 $0 $0 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 65043 - Bethany Home: 59th to 67th Saf (I) Project Description: Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax Install lighting improvements and median island for bicyclist and pedestrian safety on Bethany Home Road between 59th and 67th Avenues. This project has Federal Hazard Elimination System (HES) funds administered by Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT). The money programmed here is for design, construction administration, ADOT review fees and match HES funds. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $165,900 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $710,244 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,165 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,674 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,102 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $74,887 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,010,972 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: O and M is for landscape street lights in the median. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 65060 - Street Scallops (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $21,995 $1,556 $23,551 Half Cent Sales Tax A planned program to widen collector streets to city standards in areas where sections remain unimproved. Includes curb, gutter, sidewalk and street lighting. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $15,761 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,761 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 433 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65072 - Expanded Safety Program (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Contingency Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax Provide traffic safety improvements along city streets to improve the safety of motorists. Examples are safety mitigation at bridge crossing (blunt ends), lighting, signing, striping, pedestrian and bicyclist safety improvements, discontinuous roadway sections (drop-offs), and access management. FY 2011 FY 2012 $1,596 FY 2013 $1,649 FY 2014 $1,706 $1,764 FY 2015 $1,859 FYs 16-20 $9,746 $7,881 $8,145 $8,422 $8,713 $9,018 $48,128 $96,922 $100,169 $103,575 $107,147 $110,864 $591,853 Sub-Total New Funding $106,399 $109,963 $113,703 $117,624 $121,741 $649,727 FY 2011 Carryover $849,121 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $955,520 $109,963 $113,703 $117,624 $121,741 $649,727 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 65073 - Old Roma Alley Ped Project (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: This project will improve the alley between 57th Drive and 58th Avenue, from Glendale Avenue to Glenn Drive. Federal funds are available to cover most of the project cost. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $139,421 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $139,421 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 65081 - Collector/Residential Overlay (I) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax To fund pavement maintenance programs for the residential street network to maximize the life of the pavement. This may include activities ranging from surface treatments to rubberized asphalt overlays. Pavement maintenance and rehabilitation activities are recommended to properly address the needs of each individual street segment using data gathered in the development of the pavement management program. Streets are selected and scheduled within the limits of the available funding. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $5,376,947 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,376,947 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 434 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65082 - Arterial Overlay (I) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $5,552,860 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax This project provides for intersection capacity and safety improvements at the intersections of 51st Avenue and Camelback Road and 51st Avenue and Northern Avenue. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2014 $5,552,860 Project: 65086 - 51st Avenue HES Projects (I) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax To fund pavement maintenance programs for the arterial street network to maximize the life of the pavement. This may include activities ranging from surface treatments to heavy, full depth paving and rubberized asphalt overlays. Pavement maintenance and rehabilitation activities are recommended to properly address the needs of each individual street segment using data gathered in the development of the pavement management program. Streets are selected and scheduled within the available funding. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $497,345 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $497,345 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O and M costs are for landscape maintenance. Supplemental budget request will be made when the project is close to completion. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Utilities $128 $132 $136 $140 $144 $786 Landscape TOTAL $254 $382 $262 $394 $270 $406 $278 $418 $286 $430 $1,566 $2,352 Project: T7404 - Maryland Ave Bike Rte Spot Imp (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax The project will add additional asphalt for bike lanes where Maryland Avenue is too narrow and build short multiuse path segments to tie Maryland Avenue into existing pathways in Discovery Park. Overall, the project would add 1,776 feet of bikeway improvements to make Maryland Avenue a more continuous bike route from 43rd Avenue to 91st Avenue at the Glendale sports complex. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $245,454 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,240 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,027 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,938 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $282,659 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 435 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65004 - Buses/Vans (R) Project Description: Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax This project replaces worn out buses and vans. Buses will be purchased to expand circulator service based on transit service needs that will be identified in the updated Transportation Plan. The buses are replaced every four years and exceed the mileage recommended for replacement. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $3,707 $3,694 $4,432 $4,450 $4,601 $25,174 $225,093 $224,331 $269,173 $270,215 $279,403 $1,528,756 $18,304 $18,242 $21,888 $21,973 $22,720 $124,314 Sub-Total New Funding $247,104 $246,267 $295,493 $296,638 $306,724 $1,678,244 FY 2011 Carryover $645,882 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $892,986 $246,267 $295,493 $296,638 $306,724 $1,678,244 Equipment Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: O and M associated with vehicle maintenance for circulator and shuttle. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2011 $52,736 $52,736 FY 2012 $54,318 $54,318 FY 2013 $55,948 $55,948 Project: 65014 - Transit Support Capital (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Equipment Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL TOTAL Funding Source: $59,355 $59,355 FYs 16-20 $324,579 $324,579 Half Cent Sales Tax FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $2,451 $2,525 $2,600 $2,610 $2,698 $14,905 $148,873 $153,340 $157,863 $158,475 $163,865 $905,143 $12,106 $12,469 $12,837 $12,887 $13,325 $73,604 $163,430 $168,334 $173,300 $173,972 $179,888 $993,652 $266,214 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $429,644 $168,334 $173,300 $173,972 $179,888 $993,652 O and M is for equipment and vehicle maintenance costs. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. $57,626 $57,626 FY 2015 To continue delivery of transit services, replacement capital expenditures are needed including computer equipment, support vehicles and radio systems. Because of past federal funding sources for these items, Transit has not contributed to replacement funds for vehicles or computers. Finance Charges Operating Description: FY 2014 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $4,917 $5,065 $5,217 $5,373 $4,917 $5,065 $5,217 $5,373 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 436 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $5,534 $5,534 FYs 16-20 $30,261 $30,261 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65044 - Airport - Tower and Radio Upgr (R) Project Description: This grant is to replace radio communication equipment in the tower that is very old and outdated. Included in this grant is the replacement of the runway precision approach path indicator (PAPI) lighting at both ends of the runway. The amount programmed Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $15,636 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,636 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 65083 - Speed Cushions (R) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: This project will remove and replace existing modified speed humps with speed cushions and add mitigation devices where warranted. Replacing modified speed humps and constructing new mitigation devices will help address the current backlog of neighborhoods qualifying for traffic mitigation. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Construction FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $128,386 $132,553 $136,923 $141,503 $0 $0 Finance Charges $2,275 $2,349 $2,426 $2,507 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $8,473 $8,748 $9,037 $9,339 $0 $0 Arts $1,284 $1,326 $1,369 $1,415 $0 $0 Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $11,233 $11,598 $11,980 $12,381 $0 $0 $151,651 $156,574 $161,735 $167,145 $0 $0 $146,954 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,605 $156,574 $161,735 $167,145 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 65017 - Rail System (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Planning studies, design, right-of-way acquisition and construction of light rail facility to be located on an alignment to be determined. Federal and regional grants will fund 60% of the project. Current cost estimates are based on regional plans prepared by METRO. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $16,138 $16,622 $80,036 $134,796 $144,211 $1,398,648 Contingency $79,692 $82,083 $395,238 $665,658 $712,152 $6,906,906 $980,010 $1,009,410 $4,860,435 $8,185,926 $8,757,693 $84,937,674 $1,075,840 $1,108,115 $5,335,709 $8,986,380 $9,614,056 $93,243,228 Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $1,443,824 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,519,664 $1,108,115 $5,335,709 $8,986,380 $9,614,056 $93,243,228 O and M costs will be requested for inclusion after completion of the project in FY 2020. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 437 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65030 - Multi-Use Pathway Grand Canal (N) Project Description: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $1,157,055 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $13,267 $13,665 $14,075 $14,497 Landscape Refuse $18,046 $8,199 $18,587 $8,445 $19,145 $8,698 $19,719 $8,959 $39,512 $40,697 $41,918 $43,175 Project: 65033 - Northern Ave Pkwy Prelim. (N) Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FYs 16-20 O and M associated with the maintenance of benches, drinking fountain, trash receptacles, lighting, and 30-foot wide landscaped area along a 6,300-foot long multi-use pathway. Operating Costs: Project Description: FY 2015 $1,157,055 Utilities TOTAL Half Cent Sales Tax Construct a multi-use path from just east of the Loop 101 Freeway to New River. The project will provide a safe and convenient, off-street facility for bicyclists and pedestrians that extends the existing Grand Canal Linear Park path to the future New River Pathway. Additional federal funds have also been awarded towards this project. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: Funding Source: FY 2015 $14,932 $20,311 $9,228 $44,471 FYs 16-20 $81,651 $111,068 $50,465 $243,184 Half Cent Sales Tax Right-of-way acquisition of property within the Northern Parkway corridor alignment. This will provide local matching funds for construction by 2011. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $93,610 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $93,610 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 438 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65048 - Loop 101 North Park & Ride Lot (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax This project includes site selection and land acquisition to enhance transit ridership in the north Glendale area. Select site, acquire land, design and construct park-and-ride lot to be utilized for existing transit routes and future bus rapid transit routes. The lot will consist of parking spaces, lighting, landscaped islands, and periphery landscaping. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $911,883 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,150 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $152 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $74,815 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,010,000 TOTAL Operating Description: There are no direct O and M costs to the City of Glendale related to this project. The facility to be maintained by other parties. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,659 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $151,286 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Project: 65054 - 63rd Ave @ Loop 101-Bike Ove (N) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Construct an overpass at the Loop 101 near 63rd Avenue for safe bicycle and pedestrian crossing over Loop 101. The amount programmed in FY 2011 is Glendale's match. Design of the project is complete and ADOT will administer construction of the project. Glendale will contract with a consultant to provide post design services. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: $160,945 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $188,538 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $188,538 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Bi-annual bridge inspection at $1,500 a year. A supplemental budget request will be made in a future year. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Supplies/Contr $0 $1,500 $1,545 $1,591 TOTAL $0 $1,500 $1,545 $1,591 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 439 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $1,639 $1,639 FYs 16-20 $8,963 $8,963 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65062 - Glendale Sports Facilities Sgn (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax This project includes design, purchase and installation of full matrix arterial street Dynamic Message Signs and lane control signs around the Glendale Sports Facilities in addition to the communications connections of the signs to the central control system. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges Equipment Contingency FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $8,485 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $515,269 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $41,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding $565,654 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 Carryover $905,744 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,471,398 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M for this project is for electrical costs of the message signs. Equipment maintenance costs from FY 2014 for the expected life is ten years and significant maintenance costs at $5,000 per year after five years of installation. Supplemental budget request will be made when project is close to completion. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Supplies/Contr $1,030 $1,061 $1,093 $1,126 $1,160 Utilities $1,030 $1,061 $1,093 $1,126 $1,160 $6,340 $0 $0 $0 $5,000 $28,160 $2,060 $2,122 $2,186 $7,252 $5,150 $7,470 Equip. Maint. TOTAL Project: 65063 - New River - Multi-use Pathway (N) Project Description: Funding Source: $6,340 $40,840 Half Cent Sales Tax Construct a multiuse path from the Bethany Home Road alignment to Northern Avenue. The project will provide a safe and convenient, off-street facility for bicyclists and pedestrians that is part of the regional West Valley Rivers Multimodal Corridor Master Plan. Federal funds have been awarded to this project. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Construction FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $1,560,118 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $26,872 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $56,164 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $15,601 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $132,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding $1,791,455 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 Carryover $3,031,126 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,822,581 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: O and M associated with 17-foot wide landscaped area along a 12,200-foot long multiuse pathway. Supplemental budget request will be made when the project is close to completion. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Landscape $0 $20,397 $21,009 $21,639 $22,288 $121,883 Water $0 $10,198 $10,504 $10,819 $0 $30,595 $31,513 $32,458 $11,144 $33,432 $182,820 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 440 Return to CIP TOC $60,937 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65070 - Union Hills/Skunk Cr. Path (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Construct a 10-foot wide, concrete multiuse path under the Union Hills Drive bridge at Skunk Creek. The project will connect existing segments of the Skunk Creek multiuse path on each side of Union Hills Drive allowing pathway users a safer crossing of Union Hills Drive. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: Land FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $27,180 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax This project provides matching funds for Glendale Airport projects as identified by Airport staff. Funding covers 100% of engineering and art related charges and 2.5% of all other capital costs. Refer to the Airport Capital Fund 2120 for detailed information related to the airport projects. FY 2011 $0 Design FY 2014 $27,180 Project: 65078 - Airport Matching Funds (N) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax FY 2012 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $365,625 $0 FY 2015 $0 FYs 16-20 $0 $5,214 $586 $586 $2,449 $41,621 $0 Construction $43,727 $4,365 $4,365 $18,276 $284,215 $0 Engineering Charges $66,072 $8,516 $8,516 $37,916 $193,516 $0 Arts Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: $437 $44 $44 $183 $2,842 $0 $1,060 $7,549 $12,549 $6,449 $4,464 $0 $116,510 $21,060 $391,685 $65,273 $526,658 $0 Refer to the Airport Capital Fund 2120 projects for O and M impact. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 441 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2210 - Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65080 - Arrowhead Mall Transit Center (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: This project will construct a transit center at Arrowhead Mall to serve the needs of transit passengers from multiple bus routes. The transit center will include benches, canopies, lights, trash cans, a transit information center, security building and other amenities to provide a comfortable location for transit riders. FY 2011 Land FY 2012 $0 $1,530,260 $90,914 $0 Finance Charges Engineering Charges Design FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Finance Charges Engineering Charges Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,720,400 $0 $0 $0 $1,527 $25,198 $46,121 $0 $0 $0 $1,779 $0 $53,221 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,204 $0 $0 $0 $7,538 $124,437 $227,756 $0 $0 $0 $0 $101,758 $1,679,895 $3,074,702 $0 $0 $2,595,308 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,697,066 $1,679,895 $3,074,702 $0 $0 $0 There are no direct O and M costs to the City of Glendale related to this project. The facility to be maintained by other parties. Project: 65087 - Downtown Park-and-Ride (N) Project Description: FY 2014 $0 Arts Sub-Total New Funding FY 2013 $0 Construction Contingency Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax This project includes site selection, land acquisition, design and construction of a paved, landscaped parking area. This park-and-ride will enhance transit ridership in central and north Glendale area. The project cost between FY 2010 and FY 2018 is $4,856,369 for the region and $7,495,662 for Glendale. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $91,752 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,995,393 $5,155,157 $0 $0 $1,814,829 $1,527 $67,133 $86,621 $0 $0 $0 $954 $41,554 $53,616 $0 $0 $18,875 $0 $39,954 $51,552 $0 $0 $18,148 $7,539 $331,523 $427,756 $0 $0 $148,148 $101,772 $4,475,557 $5,774,702 $0 $0 $2,000,000 There are no direct O and M costs to the City of Glendale related to this project. The facility to be maintained by other parties. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 442 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 1650 - Transportation Grants Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 67511 Old Roma Alley Ped Project 16,370 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,458 0 0 0 0 0 0 34,798 0 0 0 0 0 0 59,626 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 Replacement of Existing Assets 67502 Buses/Vans (Grant) 67519 FTA Grant X080 Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 67505 Grant Appropriation - Capital 67526 DS Multiuse Path: Grand Canal 190,774 0 0 0 0 0 0 67527 DS Multiuse Path: New River 407,287 0 0 0 0 0 0 53,194 0 0 0 0 0 0 926,606 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,577,861 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 $1,637,487 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 67528 DS Multiuse Path: Maryland Ave 67529 FTA Grant X096 Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $3,637,487 * New Project 443 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1650 - Transportation Grants Category: Other Project: 67511 - Old Roma Alley Ped Project (I) Project Description: Design and construct alley improvements between 57th Drive and 58th Avenue, from Glendale Avenue to Glenn Drive. Match funds will be provided by Fund 2210. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 $16,370 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $8,458 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. These are replacement buses and require no additional O and M funding to maintain. The O and M for these buses is part of Transportation Department operating budget. Grants Funding Source: Replacement of five Dial-A-Ride buses and two Gus the Bus buses. Includes the reimbursement of maintenance expenses and an upgrade of the computer dispatch system. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $34,798 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,798 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 67505 - Grant Appropriation - Capital (N) Project Description: FY 2014 $8,458 Project: 67519 - FTA Grant X080 (R) FY 2011 Carryover Grants Funding Source: FY 2011 TOTAL Capital Costs: FYs 16-20 Replacement of worn out buses with purchase of new buses. FY 2011 Carryover Project Description: FY 2015 No additional O and M is needed. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2014 $16,370 Project: 67502 - Buses/Vans (Grant) (R) Project Description: Grants Funding Source: Grants Funding Source: This represents reserve appropriation only for unanticipated grant opportunities that may arise during the fiscal year. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 No additional O and M is needed. Project reflects appropriation only. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 444 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1650 - Transportation Grants Category: Other Project: 67526 - DS Multiuse Path: Grand Canal (N) Project Description: The project is to provide for the design of a multi-use pathway along the Grand Canal from east of Loop 101 to east bank of New River. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 $190,774 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 $407,287 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Operating Description: Grants Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $53,194 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $53,194 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No O and M associated with this design project. Project: 67529 - FTA Grant X096 (N) TOTAL FYs 16-20 $407,287 FY 2011 TOTAL FY 2011 Carryover FY 2015 This project provides for the design of a bike lane along Maryland Avenue from 67th Avenue to 69th Avenue, a multi-use path along Maryland Avenue east of 75th Avenue, and a multi-use path along the Maryland Avenue alignment in the Discovery Park from west of 75th Lane to 77th Drive. FY 2011 Carryover Capital Costs: FY 2014 No O and M associated with this design project. Capital Costs: Project Description: Grants Funding Source: Project: 67528 - DS Multiuse Path: Maryland Ave (N) Operating Description: FYs 16-20 This project provides for the design of a multiuse pathway along the New River east bank from Northern Avenue to Grand Canal. FY 2011 Carryover Project Description: FY 2015 No O and M associated with this design project. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2014 $190,774 Project: 67527 - DS Multiuse Path: New River (N) Project Description: Grants Funding Source: Grants Funding Source: Federal Transit Administration grant for replacement bus puchases, computer purchases, and preventative maintenance reimbursement. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $926,606 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $926,606 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 445 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 1340 - HURF/Streets Fund Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets T0003 Replacement of Streets Equipmt 0 0 0 0 0 0 530,200 T0010 Right of Way Rearload Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 258,500 Sub-Total - Existing Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 788,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 857,085 0 0 0 0 0 0 857,085 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,645,785 New Assets T0005 Growth in Streets Equipment Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $0 * New Project 446 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1340 - HURF/Streets Fund Category: Other Project: T0003 - Replacement of Streets Equipmt (R) Project Description: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $530,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $530,200 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $295,713 $295,713 Highway User Revenue Fund Replacement of the existing right-of-way compactor truck which is not in the vehicle replacement fund with a new rearload truck. This right-of-way truck was purchased in 1979 and has exceeded its useful life. Funding is included to add this truck to the Vehicle Replacement Fund. The truck works with the right-of-way crews in the disposal of tree trimmings and other landscaping that is maintained by the Glendale staff. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $258,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $258,500 Because this new truck will replace an existing truck, funding is already available for Equipment Maintenance. Vehicle Replacement funds are included in FY14 at $30,615 annually inflated at 4% so this truck can be added to the vehicle replacement schedule with a 10-year life. Operating Costs: PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FY 2015 $0 Project: T0010 - Right of Way Rearload Truck (R) Operating Description: FY 2014 Equipment replacement costs are included in FY14 at $48,200 annually inflated at 4% with a 10-year life. Because this is replacement equipment, operating cost are already in the budget and are not needed here. Operating Costs: Project Description: Highway User Revenue Fund Replace four pieces of equipment that are not in the vehicle replacement program and add this equipment to the vehicle replacement program when purchased. The following four pieces of equipment will be purchased in FY 2016 and then added to the vehicle replacement fund: one concrete mixer truck at a cost of $223,300; an asphalt roller at a cost of $88,000; an asphalt paving machine at a cost of $121,000; and a water truck at a cost of $97,900. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 447 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $187,851 $187,851 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1340 - HURF/Streets Fund Category: Other Project: T0005 - Growth in Streets Equipment (N) Project Description: Highway User Revenue Fund This is a request to purchase six new pieces of equipment for street maintenance based on projections for continued growth and expectations of deterioration due to aging of the street, curb, gutter and sidewalk network. The Planning Department estimates 60-70 miles of streets may be added during the next seven to nine years. With the City's rapid and continued growth, these additional resources will allow current service levels for the public to be maintained. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $857,085 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $857,085 Staffing includes salary and benefits for 4 Service Worker II's at an annual cost of $67,823 each, 2 Service Worker III's at an annual cost of $77,064, 1 Equipment Operator at an annual cost of $68,750 and 1 Crew Leader at an annual cost of $80,456. Line supplies for the first year are projected to be $174,900 for the new crews with the cost for supplies projected to inflate at 4% per year. Equipment maintenance charges and fuel costs total $23,585 for the first year. Insurance cost is based on the current average cost ($2,354) per employee times seven for Fund 1340. The vehicle replacement charges ($62,845) cover five vehicles over a 10-year lifecycle, with a 4% annual inflation adjustment. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,873,123 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $947,314 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Insurance PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 448 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $117,925 $107,614 $340,390 $4,386,366 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Sanitattion - Enterp prise Fund SAN NITATIO ON ENTER RPRISE FU UND The Saniitation Fund capital proggram includees the replaceement of roll-off trucks, frontload truucks, sideload trucks, rear load trucks, container deelivery truckks, pickup truucks and varrious refuse containerrs that have reached r the end of their serviceable lives. In FY Y 2011 fundiing will be used u to replacee five sidelo oad refuse truucks, a contaainer replaceement deliveery truck andd a pick-up trruck. The plan also includees a new Sannitation Office Trailer inn FY 2014. Project Namee: Frontloader Trucks T - 17820 Fund #: 24800 Project #: 780002 Project Name: Rolloff Trucks - 17810 Fund #:: 2480 Project #: 78001 Project Name: Commercial P C Truucks - 17820 F Fund #: 2480 P Project #: 780022 449 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 2480 - Sanitation Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 78001 Rolloff Trucks - 17810 0 0 0 60,900 62,727 428,000 258,000 78002 Frontloader Trucks - 17820 0 0 0 515,000 265,000 280,000 1,770,000 78003 Sideload Refuse Trucks - 17830 0 1,225,000 1,820,000 550,000 1,740,000 1,220,000 8,640,000 78004 Loose Trash Equipment - 17840 0 0 0 113,887 617,759 870,000 4,257,415 78005 Repl Pickup Trucks -Sanitation 0 63,888 43,645 50,000 0 0 290,446 Sub-Total - Existing Assets 0 1,288,888 1,863,645 1,289,787 2,685,486 2,798,000 15,215,861 0 0 0 0 517,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 517,500 0 0 $0 $1,288,888 $1,863,645 $1,289,787 $3,202,986 $2,798,000 $15,215,861 New Assets T2411 Sanitation Office Trailer Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $1,288,888 * New Project 450 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2480 - Sanitation Category: Other Project: 78001 - Rolloff Trucks - 17810 (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Replacement of three roll-off trucks and containers over a 10-year period. Roll-off trucks are used to service the 20 and 40 cubic yard dumpsters seen on construction sites and used in clean up projects. Service life of roll-off trucks is projected to be nine years. None of this equipment is in the city's vehicle replacement fund. In FY 2013 ten 40-yard containers will be purchased at a cost of $6,000 each. In FY 2014 ten 40-yard containers will be purchased at a cost of $6,180 each. In FY 2015, two replacement trucks will be purchased at a cost of $214,000, replacing a truck that has reached its serviceable life purchased back in FY 2006. In FY 2017,one replacement truck will be purchased at a cost of $258,000, replacing one older truck purchased in FY 2008. FY 2011 FY 2012 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $900 $927 $16,316 $4,670 $0 $60,000 $61,800 $411,684 $253,330 $0 $60,900 $62,727 $428,000 $258,000 No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. Project: 78002 - Frontloader Trucks - 17820 (R) Project Description: Sanitation Revenues Funding Source: Sanitation Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of 10 commercial frontload refuse trucks, a commercial sideload refuse truck and a container delivery truck over a 10-year period that are expected to have reached the end of their service life. These trucks typically service businesses and restaurants. Service life is projected to be six years except the delivery truck which is projected at 10 years. These trucks are not in the city's Vehicle Replacement Fund. In FY 2013 replace a frontload truck at a cost of $250,000 and a sideload truck at a cost of $ 265,000. In FY 2014 replace a frontload truck at a cost of $ 265,000. In FY 2015 replace a frontload truck at a cost of $280,000. In FY 2016 replace three trucks at a cost of $295,000 each. In FY 2017 replace a truck and a at a cost of $295,000. In FY 2018 replace a truck at a cost of $295,000. In FY 2019 replace a truck for $295,000. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $9,860 $5,388 $5,765 $45,831 Equipment $0 $0 $505,140 $259,612 $274,235 $1,724,169 $0 $0 $515,000 $265,000 $280,000 $1,770,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. Project: 78003 - Sideload Refuse Trucks - 17830 (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Sanitation Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of 51 sideload refuse trucks over a 10-year period. Service life is projected at six years for newly purchased equipment. These vehicles are not in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. In FY 2011 replace five trucks at a cost of $245,000 each. In FY 2012 replace seven trucks at a cost $260,000 each. In FY 2013 replace two trucks at a cost of $275,000 each. In FY 2014 replace six trucks at a cost of $290,000 each. In FY 2015 replace four trucks at a cost of $305,000 each. In FY 2016 replace five trucks at a cost of $320,000 each. In FY 2017 replace six trucks at a cost of $320,000 each. In FY 2018 replace seven trucks at a cost of $320,00 each. In FY 2019 replace three trucks at a cost of $320,000 each. In FY 2020 replace six trucks at a cost of $320,000 each. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $21,000 $31,563 $9,650 $30,978 $22,096 $166,952 $1,204,000 $1,788,437 $540,350 $1,709,022 $1,197,904 $8,473,048 $1,225,000 $1,820,000 $550,000 $1,740,000 $1,220,000 $8,640,000 No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 451 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2480 - Sanitation Category: Other Project: 78004 - Loose Trash Equipment - 17840 (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Sanitation Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of loose trash rearload trucks, tractors and sweepers that have reached the end of their service life. Service life for rearload trucks, tractors and sweepers is about eight years. In FY 2013, replace a tractor at a cost of $113,887. In FY 2014 replace a rearload truck at a cost of $275,000, a tractor at a cost of $121,859 and a sweeper at a cost $ 220,900. In FY 2015 replace three rearload trucks at a cost of $290,000 each. In FY 2016 replace two reaload trucks at a cost of $305,000 each, two tractors at a cost of $137,455 each and two sweepers at a cost of $ 261,035 each. In FY 2017 replace a rearload truck at a cost of 305,000, a tractor at a cost of $147,077 and two sweepers at a cost of $ 279,307 each. In FY 2018 replace two rearload trucks at a cost of $305,000 each and a tractor at a cost of $157,372. In FY 2020 replace three rearload trucks at a cost of $305,000 and a tractor at a cost of $157,372. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $1,683 $9,326 $14,766 $63,425 Equipment $0 $0 $112,204 $608,433 $855,234 $4,193,990 $0 $0 $113,887 $617,759 $870,000 $4,257,415 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. Project: 78005 - Repl Pickup Trucks -Sanitation (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Sanitation Revenues Funding Source: These pickups will replace aging pickup trucks over a 10-year period. FY 2011, a replacement pick up truck at a cost of $23,888 and a replacement container delivery truck at a cost of $40,000. FY 2012, a replacement container delivery truck at a cost of $43,645. FY 2013, a replacement mechanic's truck at a cost of $50,000. FY 2016, two replacement pick-up trucks at a cost of $33,505 each. FY 2017, four replacement pick-up trucks at a cost $38,359 each. In FY 2018, a replacement mechanic's truck at a cost of $70,000. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $957 $645 $645 $0 $0 $5,827 $62,931 $43,000 $49,355 $0 $0 $284,619 $63,888 $43,645 $50,000 $0 $0 $290,446 No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 452 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2480 - Sanitation Category: Other Project: T2411 - Sanitation Office Trailer (N) Project Description: Funding Source: Sanitation Revenues Currently, sanitation staff works out of a mobile trailer office. Over the years, growth in sanitation operations and reorganizational structure has created maximum capacity within the trailer. There are currently 80 employees in the sanitation division and the office environment is very tight. Anticipated growth in operational demand over the next five years would require a larger replacement trailer. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $7,500 $0 $0 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $517,500 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: Annual software and storage charges, telephone charges will be needed. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $1,000 $1,030 $5,632 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $112,649 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000 $22,000 $20,600 $1,030 $22,660 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 453 Return to CIP TOC $5,632 $123,913 2011-20220 CAPITAL L IMPROVE EMENT PL LAN L Landfill - Enterprise E Fu und LA ANDFILL L ENTER RPRISE FU UND FY 2011 will see thee continuation of variouss improvemeents to the Gllendale Munnicipal Landfill M Recovery Facillity (MRF), including thhe replacemeent of equipm ment that hass and the Materials reached the t end of th heir useful liffe such as foorklifts and a water pull tractor. t An entrance siggnal into the landfill l is alsso expected to t be compleeted during the t fiscal year. Starting in i FY 2013 are a projects that will layy the groundw work for thee closing of the t south areea of the Glenddale Landfill and preparing the northh expansion area for futuure waste cell developmeent as identiffied in Landffill Development Plan (O October 20001). Projecct Name: LF Waater Pull Tractor Replace Fund #: # 2440 Projecct #: 78522 454 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 2440 - Landfill Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 78518 MRF Process Line Improvements 0 0 0 650,000 0 0 0 T2371 *Scalehouse & Road Relocation 0 0 52,900 774,015 0 0 0 0 30,000 27,000 0 0 66,050 0 Replacement of Existing Assets 78506 Landfill Repl Pickup Truck 78509 MRF Forklifts 32,600 0 30,000 0 31,800 32,700 69,900 78511 Landfill Compactor Replacement 0 0 0 952,160 0 0 1,054,504 78512 Fuel Tanker Replacement 0 0 0 0 0 0 255,780 78514 Sanitation Insp Trucks - 17740 0 0 0 0 59,406 31,783 208,808 78520 Landfill Bulldozer Replacement 0 0 0 0 1,250,480 0 1,187,550 78521 MRF Loader Replacement 0 0 0 0 0 0 243,600 78522 LF Water Pull Tractor Replace 0 492,275 0 0 0 0 657,416 T2360 Landfill Motor Grader Replace 0 0 289,275 0 0 0 0 T2370 Landfill Auger Scraper Replace 0 0 0 0 1,436,225 0 0 32,600 522,275 399,175 2,376,175 2,777,911 130,533 3,677,558 78503 Landfill Closure (South) 0 0 0 0 0 256,296 9,141,306 78505 LF Phase Construction (North) 0 0 0 0 102,518 4,624,184 4,672,358 78507 Landfill Soil Excavation 0 0 0 102,403 13,060,382 0 0 78508 Landfill Stormwater Drainage 0 0 566,581 0 0 0 0 1,306,752 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,306,752 0 566,581 102,403 13,162,900 4,880,480 13,813,664 $1,339,352 $522,275 $965,756 $2,478,578 $15,940,811 $5,011,013 $17,491,222 Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 78519 Landfill Entrance Signal Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $1,861,627 * New Project 455 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2440 - Landfill Category: Other Project: 78518 - MRF Process Line Improvements (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Improvements to the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) processing line equipment to increase the overall efficiency of the 10-year old recyclables processing system. Modifications will include consolidation of the two fiber lines and an automated container sorting line. The fiber line consolidation and automated container sorting line will increase production throughput, separation quality and reduce operating costs related to manual labor needs. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $650,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $650,000 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed due to process line modifications at current amount of incoming tonnage. Project: T2371* - Scalehouse & Road Relocation (I) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Project provides for roadway improvements to the internal entrance roadway and relocation of the scale house to be in closer proximity to the North area filling operations. The scale house is currently located in an area where waste will be placed prior to closing the south area of the landfill. Revised waste capacity calculations include filling in the current scale house location, and it will take approximately one year to fill this permitted air space. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $50,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $675,201 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $750 $10,878 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $2,150 $31,184 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $6,752 $0 $0 $0 $0 $52,900 $774,015 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: Additional O and M will be absorbed by the department; however, none is anticipated at this time. Project: 78506 - Landfill Repl Pickup Truck (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: The landfill currently has five pickup trucks in its equipment fleet, in which four trucks will require replacement during this 10-year Capital Improvement Plan. Two pickup trucks will reach the end of their serviceable life in FY 2011 and FY 2012, and replacement will occur in FY 2015 for the other two trucks. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. The pick up trucks at the landfill are used by the landfill inspector, crew leader, supervisor and the spotters who direct traffic on the site, and assist in litter collection. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $30,000 $27,000 $0 $0 $66,050 $0 $30,000 $27,000 $0 $0 $66,050 $0 No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 456 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2440 - Landfill Category: Other Project: 78509 - MRF Forklifts (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: The Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) currently has a total of four forklifts in its fleet used for a variety of heavy lifting purposes including loading, unloading, and transporting recyclable bales. This project includes the replacement of three forklifts reaching the end of their serviceable lives in FY 2012, FY 2014, and FY 2015 as well as replacement of forklifts that will be due for replacement during the second five years. The MRF forklifts have an estimated service life of approximately seven years, although replacement schedules may be adjusted depending on hours of use. MRF vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. FY 2011 Equipment Sub-Total New Funding FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $30,000 $0 $31,800 $32,700 $69,900 $69,900 $0 $30,000 $0 $31,800 $32,700 $32,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32,600 $30,000 $0 $31,800 $32,700 $69,900 No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78511 - Landfill Compactor Replacement (R) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of landfill compactors that will reach the end of their serviceable lives in FY 2013 and FY 2016. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund but instead are debt financed at the time of acquisition. The compactor is an essential piece of equipment used on a daily basis for proper placement and compaction of solid waste into the landfill. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $14,072 $0 $0 $15,584 Equipment $0 $0 $938,088 $0 $0 $1,038,920 $0 $0 $952,160 $0 $0 $1,054,504 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78512 - Fuel Tanker Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of a landfill fuel tanker that is expected to reach the end of its serviceable life in FY 2018. The current fuel tanker was purchased in 2008 and is anticipated to be replaced in ten years. Landfill equipment is not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. The fuel tanker truck refuels the diesel equipment on the site so as to maximize efficiency of the equipment around the landfill. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,780 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $252,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $255,780 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 457 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2440 - Landfill Category: Other Project: 78514 - Sanitation Insp Trucks - 17740 (R) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Sanitation Inspectors enforce the regulations related to refuse collection, recycling collection and loose trash services. They contact residents to respond to questions and educate residents on proper procedures for services. Demand for the work inspection staff performs is anticipated to grow as housing increases. Purchase of nine replacement pickups over a 10-year period including one additional truck in FY 2015 due to growth. Service life is projected to be approximately seven years for newly purchased equipment. FY 2014, two replacement trucks costing a projected $29,703 each. In addition, a new inspector and truck will be needed in FY 2015 at a projected cost of $31,783. FY 2016, four replacement trucks at a cost of $34,008 each. In FY 2017, a replacement truck at a cost of $36,388. In FY 2018, a replacement truck at a cost of $36,388. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $878 $470 $3,020 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $58,528 $31,313 $205,788 $0 $0 $0 $59,406 $31,783 $208,808 TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing includes salary and benefits. In FY 2015 a new inspector is planned at a projected cost of $69,133. Equipment Maintenance costs are included for an inspector one new growth truck based on shop information. Insurance cost is based on the current average cost ($3,390) per employee for insurance for Fund 2480. Vehicle replacement costs are based on an seven- year life. Also a supplement will be submitted for 2015 for the new inspector position Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 78520 - Landfill Bulldozer Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $71,204 $18,261 $389,373 $3,494 $99,859 $19,107 $3,500 $96,459 $527,478 $19,139 Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of two landfill bulldozers that will reach the end of their serviceable life in FY 2014 (Model D-9) and FY 2019 (Model D-8). Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. Bulldozers are used at the landfill primarily to push garbage into position so the compactors can crush the debris to maximize compaction. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $18,480 $0 $17,550 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $1,232,000 $0 $1,170,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,250,480 $0 $1,187,550 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 458 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2440 - Landfill Category: Other Project: 78521 - MRF Loader Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Replacement of loader used to move recyclables from truck tipping floor to Materials Recovery Facility processing line. The current loader was purchased in FY 2009, and this unit will be due for replacement in 2019. MRF vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $240,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $243,600 No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of 6,500 gallon water pull tractor that is expected to reach the end of its serviceable life in FY 2011 and again in FY 2020. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. This machine is critical to reducing dust and staying compliant with the existing air quality permit. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $7,275 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,716 $485,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $647,700 $492,275 $0 $0 $0 $0 $657,416 No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: T2360 - Landfill Motor Grader Replace (R) Project Description: FY 2014 $0 Project: 78522 - LF Water Pull Tractor Replace (R) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of motor grader that is expected to reach the end of its serviceable life in FY 2012. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. The motor grader is used to establish and maintain the temporary roads on the active portion of the landfill. FY 2011 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $4,275 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $285,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $289,275 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 459 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2440 - Landfill Category: Other Project: T2370 - Landfill Auger Scraper Replace (R) Project Description: Replacement of the auger scraper in FY 2014, which is at the end of its serviceable life. It will be 11 years old with 15,000 to 17,000 hours. The scraper is used to remove dirt from the earth that is used for daily and intermittent cover of the refuse at the landfill. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $21,225 $0 $0 $0 $1,415,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,436,225 $0 $0 No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78503 - Landfill Closure (South) (N) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Closure of south areas of landfill after permitted air space is completely filled with waste. Completed landfills are required by federal and state law to have a final cover system design and constructed. It is projected that the 140 acres in the south half of the landfill will reach approved filling capacity during FY 2015. Closure will take place during FY 2016. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $250,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,583,027 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,750 $132,495 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,546 $89,954 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,830 $0 $0 $0 $0 $256,296 $9,141,306 TOTAL Operating Description: Annual cost for post-closure landscape maintenance, methane gas management and ongoing environmental monitoring after site is closed. Operating Costs: Landscape TOTAL FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 460 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $220,554 $220,554 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2440 - Landfill Category: Other Project: 78505 - LF Phase Construction (North) (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: This project is required for the development of the northern portion of the landfill and includes phased installation of liner and leachate collection system. It is anticipated that the north portion of the landfill will be accepting waste in FY 2015-16. Funds identified in FY 2014 ($102,518) will be used for engineering design, and funds in FY 2015 ($4,624,184) will pay for construction of North Phase 1a. Funds identified in the second five years (4,672,358) will pay for development of North Phase 1b, which will need to be constructed in 2017. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,368,000 $4,318,400 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $1,500 $67,020 $64,776 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $1,018 $45,484 $45,998 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,680 $43,184 $0 $0 $0 $102,518 $4,624,184 $4,672,358 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 78507 - Landfill Soil Excavation (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Project provides for excavation of Phase 1 in the north expansion area to prepare for future waste cell development. It includes excavation of approximately one-third of the north expansion area, removal of berm located between north area and Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) as well as utility relocation due to berm removal, and construction of screening berm along eastern boundary as an interim soil storage area. Excavation of the remaining two-thirds will occur as part of future landfill phase construction. FY 2011 FY 2012 Design $0 $0 Construction $0 Finance Charges $0 Engineering Charges Arts TOTAL Operating Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $100,000 $0 $0 $12,531,498 $0 $0 $0 $1,500 $189,472 $0 $0 $0 $0 $903 $114,097 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $125,315 $0 $0 $0 $0 $102,403 $13,060,382 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 461 Return to CIP TOC $0 FYs 16-20 $100,000 $0 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2440 - Landfill Category: Other Project: 78508 - Landfill Stormwater Drainage (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Construction of a series of storm water diversion devices that are necessary to minimize erosion of the landfill final cover surface. A total of 16 storm water drainage devices (down drains) are included in the original landfill design. This project provides for the installation of six down drains on the eastern and southern portions of the landfill, which are anticipated to reach final grade in early 2012. Installation of the remaining down drains will be completed during the south area closure project. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Construction $0 $451,584 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $6,774 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $29,805 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $4,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $73,902 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $566,581 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: Repairs to drains will be completed by staff on site, no additional contractual maintenance is anticipated until south area closure is completed. Project: 78519 - Landfill Entrance Signal (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Project provides for the design and construction of a new traffic signal and reconfiguration of the Glendale Municipal Landfill entrance (115th Avenue alignment). This project will also include a connection to the adjacent Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center just north of this intersection. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $1,306,752 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,306,752 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 462 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Airportt Capital Gra ants AIRP PORT CA APITAL L GRANT TS During thhe next decaade, the Glenndale Airportt will continnue to grow in i response to t the busineess and recreeational need ds of Glendaale and Westt Valley residdents. Like most municipal airportss, Glendalee’s airport relies heavily on federal and state grannts to accom mplish capitall improvemeents. Typicallyy, ninety-sev ven and one half percentt of the cost of o these impprovements is grant-fundded (95% fedderal and 2.5 5% state). Thhe city’s maatch of two and a one half percent will come from the voter-appproved, half--cent sales trransportationn tax. The use of o FY 2011 airport a capittal funding iss contingent on the city receiving r Feederal Aviatiion Administtration grantts. The city will pursue grant g fundinng for projects related to a security upgrade, pavement maintenance m and blast fennce removall. The Toweer and Radioo Upgrade Prroject is also exxpected to bee completed during the fiscal f year. Project Name: Airportt – Tower & Raddio Upgrade Fundin ng Source: FAA A & ADOT Grannts/Transportatioon Half-Cent Salles Tax Fund #: # 2120 Project #: 79503 463 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 2120 - Airport Capital Grants Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 79504 Airport-Security Upgrade 0 1,462,500 0 0 0 0 0 79515 Airport-Pavement Maintenance 0 195,000 195,000 195,000 195,000 195,000 0 79516 Airport-RSA Remove Blast Fence 0 292,500 0 0 0 0 0 37,261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 300,000 0 0 0 37,261 1,950,000 195,000 495,000 195,000 195,000 0 T1460 Runway Land Purchase 0 0 0 14,625,000 0 0 0 T1461 Airport-EA Land Acq. 36 Acres 0 0 200,000 0 0 0 0 T1462 Airport-Capacity Study 0 0 100,000 0 0 0 0 T1463 Airport-EA East TWY, NW Ramp 0 0 0 0 250,000 0 0 T1467 Airport-EA RSA Improvements 0 0 0 200,000 0 0 0 T1469 Airport-Eastside Taxiway 0 0 0 0 0 5,812,000 0 T1470 Airport-EMAS Taxiway Pvmt 0 0 0 0 637,000 0 0 T1471 Airport-EMAS Design/Constr 0 0 0 0 0 7,200,000 0 0 0 300,000 14,825,000 887,000 13,012,000 0 $37,261 $1,950,000 $495,000 $15,320,000 $1,082,000 $13,207,000 $0 Replacement of Existing Assets 79503 Airport - Tower & Radio Upgrad 79511 Airport-Master Plan Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $1,987,261 * New Project 464 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2120 - Airport Capital Grants Category: Other Project: 79504 - Airport-Security Upgrade (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: This is an FAA and ADOT funded project to acquire and install perimeter security equipment. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: Design Construction Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,279,687 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,563 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,462,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Grants/City Match Funding Source: Runway and taxiway pavement maintenance is needed when cracks and deterioration occurs. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $22,864 $22,864 $22,864 $22,864 $22,864 $0 $170,231 $170,231 $170,231 $170,231 $170,231 $0 $1,905 $1,905 $1,905 $1,905 $1,905 $0 $195,000 $195,000 $195,000 $195,000 $195,000 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Grants/City Match Funding Source: Remove the blast fences in the runway safety area (RSA) at the end of runway 19. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $34,223 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $255,420 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,857 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $292,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 79503 - Airport - Tower & Radio Upgrad (R) Project Description: FY 2015 $0 Project: 79516 - Airport-RSA Remove Blast Fence (I) Project Description: FY 2014 $146,250 Project: 79515 - Airport-Pavement Maintenance (I) Project Description: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Grants/City Match Funding Source: This grant is to replace outdated radio communication equipment in the tower. Included in this grant is the replacement of the runway precision approach path indicator lighting at both ends of the runway. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $37,261 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,261 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 465 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2120 - Airport Capital Grants Category: Other Project: 79511 - Airport-Master Plan (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: The Airport Master Plan was updated in 2008 and is a document that guides the airport with future development, grant funding of capital improvements and forecasts aircraft operations. The FAA recommends updates to the master plan every 5-10 years. FY 2011 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: TOTAL Operating Description: FYs 16-20 $14,625,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,625,000 $0 $0 $0 Grants/City Match Funding Source: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: T1462 - Airport-Capacity Study (N) Miscellaneous/Other FY 2015 $0 Environmental assessment on the acquisition of 36 acres to protect the runway safety area off the end of runway 19. TOTAL Project Description: FY 2014 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Miscellaneous/Other Operating Description: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Project: T1461 - Airport-EA Land Acq. 36 Acres (N) Capital Costs: FYs 16-20 Acquire 36 acres of land north of approach to runway 19 for runway protection zone. TOTAL Project Description: FY 2015 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Land Operating Description: FY 2014 $0 Project: T1460 - Runway Land Purchase (N) Project Description: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Grants/City Match Funding Source: The capacity study is a joint study between the City of Glendale and John F. Long to determine if there is a need for a second runway. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 466 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2120 - Airport Capital Grants Category: Other Project: T1463 - Airport-EA East TWY, NW Ramp (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Environmental assessment (EA) required for the construction of an eastside taxiway and NW ramp for future aviation development on the eastside of the airport property. FY 2011 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $0 Grants/City Match Funding Source: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: T1469 - Airport-Eastside Taxiway (N) Capital Costs: FYs 16-20 Environmental assessment (EA) for runway safety area (RSA) improvements. TOTAL Project Description: FY 2015 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Miscellaneous/Other Operating Description: FY 2014 $0 Project: T1467 - Airport-EA RSA Improvements (N) Project Description: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Build eastside taxiway and ramps for future expansion of airport facilities that are needed for future growth of forecasted aviation. The taxiway and ramps are for movement of aircraft to hangars and support services. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $845,200 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,910,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $56,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,812,000 $0 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: T1470 - Airport-EMAS Taxiway Pvmt (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Design and pave taxiway on runway 01 for Engineered Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS) product. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $74,529 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $556,450 $0 $0 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $6,021 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $637,000 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 467 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2120 - Airport Capital Grants Category: Other Project: T1471 - Airport-EMAS Design/Constr (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Design and construct Engineered Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS) at runway's 01 and 19 in the runway safety areas to stop aircraft that are in an emergency situation and have run out of runway length. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $796,200 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,283,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,200,000 $0 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 468 Return to CIP TOC 2011-20020 CAPITA AL IMPROV VEMENT PLAN P Other Capital C Project Funds OTHER R CAPITA AL PROJJECT FU UNDS Other Federal F an nd State Grants G The majoority of Glen ndale’s grantts for capitall projects com me from the federal or state governm ment. The grannts in this cattegory are oppen and com mpetitive. Thhe CIP grantt reserve apppropriation representts a contingeency approprriation for unnanticipated grant opporrtunities thatt may arise during thhe fiscal yearr. Generaal Fund General Fund F projectts that are tyypically referrred to as payy-as-you-goo (PAYGO) projects p are funded with w General Fund operatting dollars. Therefore they t are balaanced againsst base budgeet operationns, vehicle an nd technologgy replacem ment premium ms, supplemeental requestts and possibble salary inccreases. Civic Center C Projects in i this category are conssidered PAY YGO projectss and are funnded with Geeneral Fund operatingg dollars. A renovation project p is inccluded in FY Y 2012 and FY F 2013 to create c anotheer “signaturre feature” an nd increase the t functionnal space avaailable at the facility. A Civic Center 10 Year Resstoration pro oject has been pushed baack to FY 2012; this project will utiliize $300,0000 that was set-aaside per Citty Council diirection in FY 2007. Technoology Infra astructuree In FY 20008 a new fu und was addeed to the Genneral Fund PAYGO P cateegory. New informationn technologgy projects are a included in the last five fi years of the capital plan, p as well as funding for f PeopleSooft enhancem ments in FY’’s 2012-20155. The Strattegic Initiativ ves Group (SIG) submittted projects in this categgory. SIG, with w representtatives from all city depaartments, waas initiated too provide a viable, v consoolidated requuest for inform mation techn nology infrasstructure. SIIG compiledd a list of infformation tecchnology needs that meett three criterria: (1) directt customer service beneffits to citizenns; (2) creatiion of efficiencies in operattions and cosst savings; and a (3) technnology that iss crucial to operations o ussing the current number of o employeess. Arts Coommission n The Munnicipal Art Fund promotees the creativve use of artt in public pllaces. One percent p of the cost assoociated with each e public constructionn project is set aside for the t purchasee and maintenaance of publiic art. The Glendale G Artts Commissiion was form med to selectt works of arrt to be comm missioned or purchased thhrough the Municipal M Arrts Fund. Thhis fund has been used too purchasee the award-w winning bricck sculpture, “Tribute to Firefighters,” at Fire Staation 157, annd the Veterrans Memoriial, located on o the east siide of the Main M Library and other arrt pieces in various loocations. 469 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 1840 - Other Federal and State Grants Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 80012 Bike & Ped/Skunk Creek @BellRd Sub-Total - Existing Assets 476,100 0 0 0 0 0 0 476,100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 339,152 0 0 0 0 0 0 339,152 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 $815,252 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 New Assets 80013 CIP Grant Reserve Approp 80028 43rd Ave/Peoria Ped Rest Area Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $2,815,252 * New Project 470 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1840 - Other Federal and State Grants Category: Other Project: 80012 - Bike & Ped/Skunk Creek @BellRd (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: This project will widen the existing bridge over Skunk Creek, to provide pedestrian and bicycle access. 95% of this project is funded by a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality grant with 5% city matching funds ($25,650). The city match is budgeted in project FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $476,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Grants Funding Source: This represents a contingency appropriation amount for unanticipated grant opportunities that may arise during the fiscal year. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 No additional O and M is needed. Project reflects appropriation only. Project: 80028 - 43rd Ave/Peoria Ped Rest Area (N) Project Description: FY 2014 $476,100 Project: 80013 - CIP Grant Reserve Approp (N) Project Description: Grants Funding Source: Grants Funding Source: Construction of a pedestrian rest area between Gateway Plaza and Paseo Linear Park. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $339,152 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $339,152 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 471 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 1000 - General Fund Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 81052 Grand Canal Linear Park 2,882 0 0 0 0 0 0 81056 Fire Suppression System 24,872 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 336,178 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 500,000 T4620 Resurface Library Parking Lots Replacement of Existing Assets 81013 Bldg. Maintenance Reserve 81055 Sales Tax System 512,517 0 0 0 0 0 0 T4730 Fuel Sites Equipment Upgrade 0 0 0 0 0 0 212,565 T4734 Ballistic Vests 0 0 0 0 0 0 196,800 T4735 GIS Enterprise Network System 0 0 0 0 0 0 415,300 540,271 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 1,660,843 81014 Property Acquisition 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,800,000 81057 Repayment to State Aviation 0 702,858 702,858 702,858 0 0 0 T4731 Call Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 750,000 T4736 City Fiber Optic Study 0 0 0 0 0 0 419,600 0 702,858 702,858 702,858 0 0 3,969,600 $540,271 $802,858 $802,858 $802,858 $100,000 $100,000 $5,630,443 Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $1,343,129 * New Project 472 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1000 - General Fund Category: Other Project: 81052 - Grand Canal Linear Park (I) Project Description: Stabilize the trail segment that extends from north to south side of the Bethany Home Road bridge. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2011 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 $2,882 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 Supplies/Contr TOTAL FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $24,872 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,872 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 $1,236 $1,236 FY 2012 FY 2013 $1,273 $1,273 FY 2014 $1,311 $1,311 Project: T4620 - Resurface Library Parking Lots (I) $1,350 $1,350 FY 2015 $1,391 $1,391 FYs 16-20 $7,608 $7,608 General Fund Funding Source: Repave and seal the asphalt parking lot at the Main Library and slurry seal the parking lot at the Foothills Branch Library. Main Library's parking lot has deteriorated to the point that complete demolition of the existing asphalt is recommended. This consists of paving the site with 3 inches of new asphalt. A heavy grade slurry seal is recommended as soon as possible for the Foothills Branch Library in order to preserve the life span of the asphalt, which, with proper maintenance, should reach 20-30 years. (Main Library's parking lot is 22 years old and is a priority). Capital Costs: FY 2011 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $336,178 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $336,178 O and M is required for asphalt maintenance. The industry standard for asphalt maintenance is to seal every 2-3 years. Maintenance includes crack sealing and restriping of parking lots. By FY 2017, maintenance on Main's lot would cost $18,311 and Foothills would be $23,253. And in FY 2020, the cost would be $22,889 for Main and $29,067 for Foothills. Operating Costs: TOTAL FY 2014 Annual maintenance fee for quarterly system checks, cleaning of smoke detectors and routine maintenance. Operating Costs: Bldg. Maint. General Fund Funding Source: FY 2011 TOTAL Operating Description: FYs 16-20 Modify and update the existing smoke detection and pre-application sprinkler systems with a new gaseous suppression system for the four technology equipment locations in the Public Safety Administration Building which currently have equipment replacement. FY 2011 Carryover Project Description: FY 2015 No additional O and M is need since this is an existing trail. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2014 $2,882 Project: 81056 - Fire Suppression System (I) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 473 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $93,520 $93,520 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1000 - General Fund Category: Other Project: 81013 - Bldg. Maintenance Reserve (R) Project Description: This project is intended to be a reserve account to support an emergency replacement of building components. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 $100,000 $100,000 $500,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $500,000 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $512,517 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $512,517 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $160,000 $164,800 $0 $0 $160,000 $164,800 Project: T4730 - Fuel Sites Equipment Upgrade (R) Capital Costs: FY 2014 A software maintenance contract will expire after FY 2012. O and M is needed to cover the software maintenance starting in FY 2013. The Finance Department will submit a supplemental request in the future for the additional O and M. Operating Costs: Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: FY 2011 TOTAL TOTAL FYs 16-20 $100,000 Purchase of a new software application system which tracks revenue for the city. The system being replaced is 20+ years old and runs on hardware and operating systems which are no longer cost effective to support. This is the PAYGO portion of the project. FY 2011 Carryover Equip. Maint. FY 2015 $100,000 This funding is held in reserve to support long term projects and is therefore not subject to O and M costs because the maintenance of replacement items have generally been included in the operating budget. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2014 $100,000 Project: 81055 - Sales Tax System (R) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: FY 2015 $169,744 $169,744 FYs 16-20 $928,225 $928,225 General Fund Funding Source: Replacement of fuel dispensing equipment that has reached its maximum useful life, install fuel monitoring and tank leak detection systems, and replace the fuel tracking system for the city’s three fueling sites. Completion of this project will ensure equipment is working properly and improve customer service. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $90,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $82,405 $10,450 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,810 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $212,565 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M cost as new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. No annual maintenance is required, if repairs are required vendors will be paid through existing budgets. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 474 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1000 - General Fund Category: Other Project: T4734 - Ballistic Vests (R) Project Description: Replacement of ballistic vests (sized per individual) throughout the fire department for sworn personnel. Fire personnel respond to a variety of dangerous situations such as; shootings, stabbings, domestic disputes, drug labs and generally violent patients. Our policy states that fire personnel wear their vest on any of the above dispatched emergencies for their safety. Purchase of 246 vests at $800 each, based on current number of sworn staff. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $196,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $196,800 FY 2011 TOTAL Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 Operating Description: FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $415,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $415,300 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 81014 - Property Acquisition (N) TOTAL FY 2014 $0 FY 2011 TOTAL Land General Fund Funding Source: Due to the enterprise nature of the GIS technology system, it is imperative to provide funding for the Technology Replacement Fund (TRF). This will allow for the “banking” of replacement funds for the equipment and decreases the need to request capital funds to replace the system every four to six years. Additionally, specific licenses are required for each computer application and system hardware to operate. The licenses are annually renewed and the term used for this renewal is “annual maintenance". There are four "annual maintenance" licenses per server and the cost of each varies. PC/Vehicle Replacement Capital Costs: FYs 16-20 The city’s reliance on GIS technology has grown at a faster rate than the current technology infrastructure can handle. In the last year alone, data collected and stored has tripled in size. COG GIS has evolved from a decentralized team of individuals providing maps, to the creation of an enterprise database with "location-based" information. This year, due to the need for expanded data storage space and faster processing speeds, existing equipment located at the EOC has been used to meet increased system demands. The equipment’s life expectancy ends in four years. This short term solution manages growth without putting an additional funding burden on the city’s general fund. In FY 2013 it is expected that the equipment used for GIS will no longer be functioning. Without a replacement system, city departments can expect delays in data updates and poor workflow for field and customer service workers, leading to slower service and less efficient means of completing work tasks. IT/Phone/Security Project Description: FY 2015 No additional O and M is needed. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2014 $0 Project: T4735 - GIS Enterprise Network System (R) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $458,500 $458,500 General Fund Funding Source: Funds appropriated for acquisition of real property to meet specific Council goals. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,800,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,800,000 No additional O and M can be identified until the city is closer to acquiring the properties. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 475 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1000 - General Fund Category: Other Project: 81057 - Repayment to State Aviation (N) Project Description: In 1997, the City of Glendale received a total of $2,473,714 in grant funds from the State Aviation Fund for the purchase of land adjacent to the Glendale Municipal Airport. Because the land is included in the property being used by the Spring Training Facility and will not be used for airport specific purposes, the city must repay ADOT. Adjusting those 1997 grant funds to 2007 figures was done by using a Phoenix-Mesa Consumer Price index, determining a balance of $3,131,294 is due for repayment to ADOT. The city will pay that principal amount over a period of five years (through FY 2013) with equal bi-annual payments of $351,429 for a total of $702,858 annually. During that time, the unpaid principal will earn interest at the 5-year U.S. Treasury T-Bill annual interest rate of 4.31%, which was effective September 21, 2007. Total repayment amount will be $3,514,291.10. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Land TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $702,858 $702,858 $702,858 $0 $0 $0 $702,858 $702,858 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. General Fund Funding Source: The Customer Call Center, operating with a customer relationship management (CRM) application, will provide citizens with a "one-stop" call to report violations, request information, initiate work requests, etc. The center and CRM software will provide elected officials and leadership with valid statistical data to ensure organizational capital, operating and information technology investments are aligned with business plans and Council strategic priorities. An increased efficiency of service provision and resource deployment based upon documented, reliable data collection and trend analysis is anticipated. In addition all internal service work requests will be accommodated by the CRM application. Capital Costs: FY 2011 IT/Phone/Security TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2014 $702,858 Project: T4731 - Call Center (N) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $750,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $750,000 Supplies/Contracts: staff training @ $35,000/yr.; annual software maintenance @ $100,000/yr.; language services @ $24,000/yr.; consultant services @ $150,000 first year; office supplies @ $20,000/yr. Personnel include = 3 IT support FTE's, 9 call specialists, 1 lead, 1 supervisor, 1 Sr. Management Assistant, 2 field representatives, 1 Office Assistant and 1 manager. Personnel costs include estimated benefits for each position. EOC staff have determined that the operating cost for the EOC O and M budget can accommodate the addition of 19 staff. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,151,160 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,490,030 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 476 Return to CIP TOC $338,870 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1000 - General Fund Category: Other Project: T4736 - City Fiber Optic Study (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Engineering Charges TOTAL Operating Description: General Fund Funding Source: The existing city owned fiber optic infrastructure is nearing capacity and currently does not extend to several city facilities. The purpose of this study is to review the existing fiber cable and conduit capacity and then make recommendations for future planning. This study will create a road map for Information Technology and Intelligent Transportation to follow as the city continues to expand its voice and data communications. This study will evaluate the existing infrastructure to determine capacity and usage and provide recommendations on improving current design and usage. This study would also recommend and produce a long term plan to provide redundancy to critical city locations and to connect all city buildings to the fiber infrastructure. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $419,600 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 477 Return to CIP TOC $400,000 FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 1740 - Civic Center Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 84551 Civic Center Renovation 0 0 1,568,340 2,518,638 0 0 0 T0350 Civic Center Expansion 0 0 0 0 0 0 23,661,114 0 0 300,000 0 0 0 0 Replacement of Existing Assets T0351 Civic Center 10 Yr Restoration Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: 0 0 1,868,340 2,518,638 0 0 23,661,114 $0 $0 $1,868,340 $2,518,638 $0 $0 $23,661,114 $0 * New Project 478 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1740 - Civic Center Category: Other Project: 84551 - Civic Center Renovation (I) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: This enhancement would create another signature feature at the Glendale Civic Center. The east courtyard would be converted into more meeting room space with sky lighting. This project also involves renovating and developing the grass (open space), south of the civic center, into functional use space that can be booked for private events. The renovations to the Civic Center will enhance amenities, provide more pre-function space, attract clients and allow the facility to remain competitive within the surrounding marketplace. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $756,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $577,334 $1,910,666 $0 $0 $0 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $35,000 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $24,667 $35,347 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $5,773 $19,107 $0 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $130,000 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $204,566 $328,518 $0 $0 $0 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,568,340 $2,518,638 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: One FTE Service Worker III position to help maintain the facility and provide additional supervision for event setup and audio/visual technical expertise for the renovated space and a secretary position would be added in FY2014 to assist with office support needs and increased events and bookings. A supplemental will be submitted for FY2013 for O and M expenses. Supplies - $0.75 per sq ft and $3,000 for ongoing supplies/contracts. Utilities - $2.80 per sq ft, Electrical - $1,800 annually; Building Maintenance - $2.00 per sq ft; Equipment Maintenance - $0.40 per sq ft. Civic Center currently has a company that maintains the landscaping in the areas addressed in this request, so no new funding is needed for landscaping or refuse. Building water usage - $0.143 per sq ft. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $46,748 $88,150 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,750 $14,000 $6,953 $14,420 $14,853 $39,160 $81,220 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $10,000 $10,300 $10,609 $58,014 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $2,000 $2,060 Electrical Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,800 $715 $1,854 $736 $2,122 $1,910 $0 $0 $82,013 $124,473 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 479 Return to CIP TOC $90,795 $7,161 $759 $128,209 $496,502 $11,603 $10,443 $4,148 $701,090 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1740 - Civic Center Category: Other Project: T0350 - Civic Center Expansion (I) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: Expansion of the Civic Center to meet the demand for additional meeting and event space as the West Valley continues to grow. The Civic Center opened in 1999 and in order to stay competitive and attract clientele it is essential that the facility offer a high quality product, provide outstanding amenities and have the flexibility to meet the needs of its clients. It is also essential that the facility expand to meet the demands of the community and attract new clients. A feasibility study should be conducted prior to the expansion in order to determine the needs of the facility and the surrounding area. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,300,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,320,000 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $119,682 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $163,200 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,086,232 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $72,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,661,114 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes 2 full time event coordinators, 1 building maintenance worker, 1 full time service workers and 10 part time (19 hours per week) temporary setup/custodial staff and insurance for staff. Four computers and a printer. Supplies, utilities, building maintenance, equipment maintenance for 40,000 sq ft of facility space. Insurance is based on the recommended guideline of $865 per person. Electrical costs include a fire panel and building security/monitoring service. Landscape maintenance and water for 5,000 sq ft of landscape and refuse (two 6 yard containers). Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $402,431 $0 $108,355 $92,700 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,480 Insurance Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,455 $105,063 $35,020 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,165 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,810 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 480 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $2,161 $10,300 $814,940 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1740 - Civic Center Category: Other Project: T0351 - Civic Center 10 Yr Restoration (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: General Fund Funding Source: The Civic Center's restoration fund will be used to replace and upgrade high cost depreciable items that have been in operation and use at the facility for over the past 10 years. Crucial items such as carpet, acoustical air walls in the ballroom and the replacement of aging audio equipment and speakers for the house sound system are the essential items needing restoration. The restoration is needed to ensure that the Civic Center remains a competitive, desirable, high quality event venue and is considered essential to the continued success of the facility. Recommendation for the planning and funding for the replacement of these high cost items was discussed in a City Council Budget Workshop in 2007. Beginning in FY 2007, $100,000 has been allocated each year to help fund the restoration costs. The project will be funded with the Civic Center Fund 1740 balance of $400,000. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 481 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 2150 - Technology Infrastructure Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets T7010 Event Management Center Upgrad 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,325,000 T7071 PeopleSoft Phase 2 Enhancement 0 0 985,200 636,000 655,000 165,000 0 T7030 Project/Permit Tracking System 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500,000 T7050 Facility Audio/Visual Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,820,000 T7072 Library Technology Upgrades 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,296,040 Sub-Total - Existing Assets 0 0 985,200 636,000 655,000 165,000 6,941,040 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,220,625 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,220,625 $0 $0 $985,200 $636,000 $655,000 $165,000 $23,161,665 Replacement of Existing Assets New Assets T7000 City Fiber Optic Communication Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: $0 * New Project 482 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2150 - Technology Infrastructure Category: Other Project: T7010 - Event Management Center Upgrad (I) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: The city acquired the Mobile Command Center (MCC) in 2000 and opened the Traffic Management Center (TMC) in 2004 to improve the city’s management of incidents, events and day-to-day traffic. Signal system management software along with audio visual and communications equipment within these two centers needs to be upgraded to enhance system functionality and coordination between the two departments and with the emergency operations center. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,000 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,325,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. This project replaces and upgrades the existing system. O and M of this system is currently funded in the Transportation Department operating budget. Project: T7071 - PeopleSoft Phase 2 Enhancement (I) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: This request is for funding a multi-year plan (FY 2011 to FY 2014) to improve and to streamline everyday business functions. The projects in this request have a maximum return on investment of 18 months. The plan includes simplifying and further automating manual, duplicative processes in order to improve service delivery for residents and other customers and providing leadership project and program based reports to manage limited resources better. Over the past 10 years, staff has focused on maintaining and upgrading the system and has had minimal time available to develop and enhance unused functionality. A cross-departmental team has developed a multi-year implementation plan to address this situation and leverage the city's sizeable investment in the city's core human resource and financial systems. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 IT/Phone/Security $0 $880,200 $601,000 $590,000 $155,000 Equipment $0 $80,000 $10,000 $40,000 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $985,200 $636,000 $655,000 $165,000 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: $0 There is not any additional annual maintenance for the software. Departments will submit a supplemental for the replacement costs. Operating Costs: PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FY 2011 $0 $0 FY 2012 $12,000 $12,000 FY 2013 $20,360 $20,360 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 483 Return to CIP TOC FY 2014 $26,971 $26,971 FY 2015 $27,780 $27,780 FYs 16-20 $151,913 $151,913 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2150 - Technology Infrastructure Category: Other Project: T7030 - Project/Permit Tracking System (R) Project Description: The current project/permit system provides automated tracking of all construction projects and city assets. It is also used as a computerized maintenance management system for the city. The system is used by the Building Safety, Planning, Transportation, Utilities, Sanitation, Fire, Engineering, Code Compliance and Economic Development departments. Funding is requested to replace or upgrade the current system. We are not sure the current company will support the current system in a couple of years since the original company was sold. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: General Fund Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500,000 The $137,916 is required for the ongoing service and maintenance agreement associated with the software purchase. Staffing is for a Project/Permit Coordinator. This FTE would provide much needed ongoing technical assistance and support to the nine departments using the system. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $468,470 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $137,916 Insurance TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,806 $619,192 Project: T7050 - Facility Audio/Visual Systems (R) Project Description: The replacement of audio/visual equipment utilized in Community Services Departments that are not currently in the city's Technology Replacement Fund. These systems are approaching or have surpassed their expected useful life. The systems in question include the audio systems: at Sahuaro Ranch Park, Foothills ball fields, six city pools, the main and Foothills libraries; the AV and lighting systems at: the Adult Center, City Hall Complex to include the Council Chambers and Amphitheater; and security camera systems at the two skate courts. Capital Costs: FY 2011 Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,820,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,820,000 Total payments for the five year period to the Technology Replacement Fund. Assumes capital cost will be equally spread over the five year period and a six-year life cycle for the equipment. $1,820,000/5 = $364,000 * 16.67% = $60,678 paid into replacement fund in year one. This doubles in year two ($121,357) triples in year three ($182,036), quadruples in year four ($242,715), quintuples in year five ($303,394) for a total of $910,182 over the five year period. Operating Costs: PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL General Fund Funding Source: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 484 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $910,182 $910,182 FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 2150 - Technology Infrastructure Category: Other Project: T7072 - Library Technology Upgrades (R) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: Replacement of the Integrated Library System (ILS) and procurement of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology will ensure that the library's resources can catch up and remain current with library technology. The ILS is vital to the operation of all library services, integrating the holdings catalog, materials purchases, circulation and patron information. The current platform has reached its "end of life" and the vendor has completely ceased development of our current software product. RFID will complement the ILS and consists of tagging all materials, which are read by the check-out machines and the security gates. The benefit of RFID is that items can be checked out and checked in all at once, rather than the current "one at a time" system, resulting in improved customer service and productivity. The expected life of an ILS is five years. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,611 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,264,429 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,296,040 TOTAL Operating Description: Includes maintenance costs ($94,216), replacement fund costs ($37,631), RFID tags and smart cards ($53,200). Operating Costs: Supplies/Contr Equip. Maint. FY 2011 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $53,200 $94,216 $0 $0 $185,047 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T7000 - City Fiber Optic Communication (N) Project Description: FY 2014 $0 $0 $37,631 General Fund Funding Source: Installation of conduit and fiber optic cable on arterial streets and some minor streets to connect city facilities and signal system to support traffic operations, city business and security MESH network. Completing the planned network will eliminate monthly lease fees, improving network speeds, remote control of signals, cameras and message signs. Capital Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000,000 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $395,625 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,770,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,220,625 Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: O and M costs associated with electricity ($4,000) for fiber optic communications equipment as well as the maintenance ($44,000) for fiber and the fiber connections per year. The costs above are for FY 2017 through FY 2020 in inflated dollars. Operating Costs: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 485 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 FYs 16-20 $20,582 $226,397 $246,979 FY 2011 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects By Fund and Project Number 1220 - Arts Commission Category: Other FY 2011: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FYs 16-20: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 84650 Art Commission Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2011 Funding: 0 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,750,000 0 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,750,000 $0 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,750,000 $500,000 * New Project 486 Return to CIP TOC FY 2011-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Capital Project Expenses Detail 1220 - Arts Commission Category: Other Project: 84650 - Art Commission (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Plan Funding Source: City Council Ordinance No. 1226 created a Municipal Art Fund which provides for the purchase of works of art for public places. The Arts Commission selects the art work that will be purchased and/or commissioned. FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 16-20 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,750,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,750,000 Maintenance and restoration of the public art collection is funded in the operating budget. No additional O and M is required. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 487 Return to CIP TOC Schedules 2010-2011 CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Schedules SCHEDULES The budget schedules summarize the City’s financial activities in a comprehensive, numeric format. They are intended to give the reader a glance at the city's financial situation. Schedule 1 is the most comprehensive schedule, offering a summary of all pertinent financial information for all the City’s funds. The reader can readily determine the starting and ending fund balances, transfers in and out, revenues and operating, capital and debt service expenditures for each fund. The remaining schedules provide in-depth detail of budgetary information which is necessary for the smooth operation of the city. All the schedules serve as handy reference materials to City of Glendale employees and to the public. This section includes detailed analyses and reports for the following areas: • Schedule 1 by Category includes major sources of inflows & outflows by category • Schedule 1 by Fund is a summary of the inflows and outflows by fund • Schedule 2 by Category is a multi-year look at revenues all funds combined • Schedule 2 by Fund is a multi-year look at revenues by individual fund • Schedule 3 is a multi-year look at operating expenditures • Schedule 4 is a summary of scheduled inter-fund transfers for the upcoming fiscal year • Schedule 5 is an analysis of the City’s current and proposed property tax levy & rate • Schedule 6 is a multi-year listing of departmental authorized staffing by position • Schedule 7 - Summary is a multi-year look at the long-term debt service obligations • Schedule 7 - Detail is a look at each individual long-term debt service obligation • Schedule 8 is a multi-year look at payment requirements for capital leases • Schedule 9 is a listing of internal services premiums by fund and department • Schedule 10 is a listing of general staff and administrative service charges • Schedule 11 lists department’s operating capital budgets • Schedule 12 lists any carryover savings budgeted by fund and department 488 Return to TOC Schedule One by CATEGORY FY 2011 Fund Balance Analysis (All Dollars in Thousands) General Revenues and Other Sources Charges for services Fines And forfeitures Interest Income Intergovernmental Licenses and permits Miscellaneous Other Financing Sources Self insurance premiums Taxes revenue Transfer In Total Expenditures Administrative Svcs Appointed Officials Capital Outlay Community Dev. Community Services Contingency Debt Service Internal Services Miscellaneous Grants Non-Departmental Public Safety Public Works Transfer Out Total Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues over Expenses Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Trust Special Revenue Enterprise Internal Service Capital Debt Service Total $34,488 $3,836 $1,037 $50,734 $9,029 $4,204 $0 $0 $59,228 $9,308 $0 $0 $45 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,640 $0 $287 $51,598 $0 $2,497 $0 $0 $36,562 $1,351 $103,097 $0 $1,151 $9,008 $0 $2,526 $20,000 $0 $0 $307 $0 $0 $120 $0 $0 $40 $0 $25,492 $0 $0 $0 $0 $125 $0 $670 $36,300 $24,000 $0 $0 $7,653 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,057 $0 $0 $24,180 $33,336 $139,225 $3,836 $2,763 $111,340 $9,699 $46,624 $44,000 $25,492 $119,970 $51,954 $171,863 $45 $93,934 $136,089 $25,651 $68,747 $58,572 $554,902 $20,263 $8,928 $1,843 $7,845 $18,007 $4,583 $0 $5,881 $0 $1,964 $75,189 $19,212 $26,273 $189,988 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,608 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,608 $0 $0 $8,440 $539 $12,718 $19,122 $0 $1,161 $9,665 $0 $30,123 $20,666 $15,981 $118,415 $2,697 $0 $59,068 $220 $8,487 $7,500 $25,307 $0 $0 $0 $0 $67,142 $6,000 $176,421 $28,732 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,732 $39 $0 $125,080 $0 $0 $17,471 $507 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000 $144,096 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $58,993 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,700 $61,693 $51,732 $8,928 $194,431 $8,604 $39,212 $57,285 $84,806 $7,042 $9,665 $1,964 $105,313 $107,019 $51,954 $727,954 ($18,124) ($5,564) ($24,481) ($40,332) ($164,337) ($75,349) ($3,121) ($173,052) $25,570 $5,564 $32,769 $67,615 $10,867 $75,349 $29,874 $247,609 $7,446 $0 $8,289 $27,284 $27,284 $0 $26,753 $74,558 489 Return to TOC Schedule One by FUND FY 2011 Fund Balance Analysis y (All Dollars in Thousands) Beginning Fu d Bal. Fund Bal. Projected Reve ues Revenues Transfers I In Transfers O t Out O attio s Operations Ope General Fund Group: 1000 1010 1040 1100 1120 1140 1190 1220 1240 1260 1280 1281 1282 1770 1780 1790 1870 2530 2538 General G l Fund d National Events General Services Telephone Services Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Employee Groups Arts At C Commission i i Court Fund Library Lib y Youth Sports Complex Stadium Event Operations Arena Event Operations Zanjero Special Revenue Arena Special Revenue Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA Marketing M k ti Self-Sustaining S lf S t i i Public Safety Training Center Glendale Gl d l Health H lth Center C t Sub-Total General Fund Group: $13 $ $13,893 ,893 $661 $0 $399 $5,680 $2 191 $2,191 $90 $1 448 $1,448 $274 $233 $ $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $499 $156 $47 $25 570 $25,570 $133 $ $133,818 ,818 $0 $9,081 $990 $2,247 $2 122 $2,122 $73 $120 $354 $226 $ $25 $ $1,262 $551 $1,249 $6 845 $6,845 $1,700 $283 $1,505 $105 $162 555 $162,555 $6 $ $6,000 ,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12 $0 $0 $0 $ $302 $1,703 $ $651 $0 $0 $0 $640 $0 $0 $9 308 $9,308 ($18,729) ($18, 29)) ($ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $ $0 ($1,249) ($6 295) ($6,295) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($26 273) ($26,273) ($130,658) ($130,6 8)) ($ $0 ($9,081) ($977) ($3,030) ($3 510) ($3,510) ($85) ( ($128) ) ($578) ($247)) ($ ($327) ($2,965) $ ($1 202) ($1,202) $0 ($550) ($1,700) ($753) ($1,445) ( ($54) ) ($157 289) ($157,289) $497 $0 $815 $6,712 $0 $195 $15 162 $15,162 $2,279 $1,206 $1,206 $300 $ $51 $0 $0 $49 $0 $4 790 $4,790 $277 $437 $0 $32 $ $32,769 ,769 $1,164 $1 164 $4,184 $2 725 $2,725 $13,500 $0 $3,613 $19 494 $19,494 $11,976 $5,936 $5,936 $387 $ $507 $355 $98 $20 428 $20,428 $3,967 $1 146 $1,146 $1,115 $2 $1 987 $1,987 $92 $ $92,583 ,583 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900 $0 $0 $361 $ $32 $58 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1 $ $1,351 ,351 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($15 981)) (($15,981) $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($15 ($ ($15,981) ,981)) ($1,661) ($1 661) ($4,184) ($3 541) ($3,541) ($8,462) $0 $0 ($12 203)) (($12,203) ($12,587) ($6,136)) (($6,136) ($748) ($539) $ ($413) ($98) ($17 661) ($17,661) ($3,967) ($1 324) ($1,324) ($1,171) (($177)) $0 ($74 ($ ($74,872) ,872)) S i lR Special Revenue F Fund dG Group: 1300 1310 1320 1340 1640 1650 1660 1700 1720 1740 1760 1820 1830 1840 1842 1860 1880 1885 2120 HOME Grant Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm Community Dvpmt Block Grant HURF/Streets Fund Local Transp. Transp Assistance Transportation Grants Transportation T p t ti Sales S l Tax T Police Sales Tax Fire Fi Sales S l Tax T Civic Center Airport Operating CAP Grant Emergency Shelter Grants Other Federal and State Grants ARRA Stimulus Grants RICO Parks & Rec Self-Sustaining Parks P k &R Rec D Designated ig t d Airport Capital Grants S b T lS Sub-Total Special p i lR Rev F Fund dG Group: p 490 Return to TOC Schedule One by FUND FY 2011 Fund Balance Analysis y (All Dollars in Thousands) Capital O tlay Outlay Out Debt Se vice S Service Total C tti ge cy A Contingency Co Appropriation pp op iattio Ending Fund F u d Bal. Bal. General Fund Group:, continued 1000 1010 1040 1100 1120 1140 1190 1220 1240 1260 1280 1281 1282 1770 1780 1790 1870 2530 2538 General G l Fund d National Events General Services Telephone Services Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Employee Groups Arts At C Commission i i Court Fund Library Lib y Youth Sports Complex Stadium Event Operations Arena Event Operations Zanjero Special Revenue Arena Special Revenue Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA Marketing M k ti Self-Sustaining S lf S t i i Public Safety Training Center Glendale Gl d l Health H lth Center C t Sub-Total General Fund Group: ($1 ($ ($1,343) ,343)) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 (($500)) $0 $0 $ $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1 843) ($1,843) $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($ ($2 ($2,982) ,982)) ($661) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 (($940)) $0 $0 $ $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($4 583) ($4,583) ($134 ($ ($134,982) ,982)) ($661) ($9,081) ($977) ($3,030) ($3 510) ($3,510) ($85) ($1 568)) (($1,568) ($578) ($247)) ($ ($327) ($2,965) $ ($1 202) ($1,202) $0 ($550) ($1,700) ($753) ($1,445) (($54)) ($163 715) ($163,715) $0 $ $0 $0 $412 $4,897 $803 $90 $0 $50 $211 $ $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $668 $216 $98 $7 446 $7,446 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($3,637) $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 ($2 815) ($2,815) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1 987) ($1,987) ($8 ($ ($8,440) ,440)) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 ($11,750) $0 $0 ($7 372)) (($7,372) $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($19 ($ ($19,122) ,122)) ($1,661) ($1 661) ($4,184) ($3 541) ($3,541) ($20,212) $0 ($3,637) ($19 575)) (($19,575) ($12,587) ($6,136)) (($6,136) ($748) ($539) $ ($413) ($98) ($20 477) ($20,477) ($3,967) ($1 324) ($1,324) ($1,171) (($177)) ($1 987) ($1,987) ($102 ($ ($102,434) ,434)) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $170 $0 $1,668 $1,006 $1,006 $300 $51 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $4 611 $4,611 $221 $262 $0 $8 $ $8,289 ,289 S i lR Special Revenue F Fund dG Group:, continued i d 1300 1310 1320 1340 1640 1650 1660 1700 1720 1740 1760 1820 1830 1840 1842 1860 1880 1885 2120 HOME Grant Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm Community Dvpmt Block Grant HURF/Streets Fund Local Transp. Transp Assistance Transportation Grants Transportation T p t ti Sales S l Tax T Police Sales Tax Fire Fi Sales S l Tax T Civic Center Airport Operating CAP Grant Emergency Shelter Grants Other Federal and State Grants ARRA Stimulus Grants RICO Parks & Rec Self-Sustaining Parks P k &R Rec D Designated ig t d Airport Capital Grants S b T lS Sub-Total Special p i lR Rev F Fund dG Group: p 491 Return to TOC Schedule One by FUND FY 2011 Fund Balance Analysis y (All Dollars in Thousands) Beginning Fu d Bal. Fund Bal. Projected Reve ues Revenues Transfers I In Transfers O t Out O attio s Operations Ope Debt Service Fund Group: 1900 1920 1940 1970 General G l Obli Obligation g i Bond d Debt b HURF Debt Service M.P.C. Debt Service Transportation Bond Debt Sub-Total Sub Total Debt Svc Fund Group: $26 $ $26,878 ,8 8 $53 $2,944 $0 $29,874 $24 $ $24,180 ,180 $0 $1,057 $0 $25,236 $0 $ $4,700 $4 700 $21,307 $7 328 $7,328 $33,336 ($2 ($ ($2,700) , 00)) $0 $0 $0 ($2,700) $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1 725 $1,725 $0 $101 $ $1 239 $1,239 $ $155 $1 436 $1,436 $3,274 $322 $84 $163 $52 $3,205 $3,205 $1 $4 $ $4,445 ,44 $325 $5,686 $3 949 $3,949 $3,230 $1 842 $1,842 $368 $921 $0 $21,376 $21,376 $21 451 $21,451 $ $75,349 $0 $12 $0 $79 $ $66 $ $8 $17 $33 $18 $3 $2 $3 $333 $173 $2 $ $2 $2 $1 $1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $506 $59 834 $59,834 $ $61,094 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7 653 $7,653 $ $7,653 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,000)) (($1,000) $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,000) $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($6) ($ ) ($1) ($2) ($7) ($2) ($2) $0 $0 $0 (($5)) ($14) ($39) $ $5,564 $45 $0 $36,070 $36 ,070 $26 519 $26,519 $4,181 $4,181 $ $845 $67,615 $103,789 $103 ,789 $7 963 $7,963 $15,022 $15,022 $ $9 008 $9,008 $135,783 $0 $0 $0 $ $307 $307 $6,801 $1 514 $1,514 $2,552 $10 867 $10,867 $2,583 $1 025 $1,025 $22,043 $25 651 $25,651 $0 $0 $0 $0 $247 609 $247,609 $502 948 $502,948 $51 954 $51,954 Capital p Fund Group: p 1270 1380 1400 1420 1440 1460 1480 1500 1520 1540 1560 1580 1600 1620 1980 2000 2040 2060 2080 2100 2130 2140 2160 2180 2210 General Fund Rev Obligations DIFDIF Lib Library yB Buildings ildi g DIF- Library Books DIFDIF Fire Fi Protection P i Facilities F ili i DIF- Police Dept Facilities DIFDIF Citywide Parks DIFDIF Citywide Rec Facility DIF- Libraries DIF DIFDIF Citywide Open Space DIF- Park Dev Zone 1 DIFDIF P Park kD Dev Z Zone 2 DIF- Park Dev Zone 3 DIFDIF R Roadway d y IImprovements p t DIF-General Government Street/Parking S / ki g Bonds d HURF/Street Bonds Public Safety Construction Parks Construction Gov'tt Facilities Construction Gov Economic Dev. Dev Construction Cultural Facility Construction Open Op Space/Trails Sp /T il C Construction t ti Library Construction Flood Fl d Control C l Construction C i Transportation Construction Sub-Total Sub Total Capital Fund Group: Trust Fund Group: 2280 Cemetery Perpetual Care $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Group: 2360+ 2440 2480 2500 Water W t andd Sewer S Landfill Sanitation S i i Community Housing Services Sub-Total Sub Total Enterprise Fund Group: $0 ($6,000) ($6 000) $0 $ $0 ($6,000) ($49,123)) (($49,123) ($7 043) ($7,043) ($13,893)) ($13,893) ($ ($8 487) ($8,487) ($78,546) Internal Service Fund Group: 2540 2560 2580 Risk Management Self Ins. Worker's Comp Self Ins. Ins Benefits Trust S b T t l IInternal Sub-Total t lS Svc F Fund dG Group: p TOTAL 492 Return to TOC $0 $0 $0 $0 ($51 954) ($51,954) ($2,844) ($1 407) ($1,407) ($24,481) ($28 732)) (($28,732) ($339 479) ($339,479) Schedule One by FUND FY 2011 Fund Balance Analysis y (All Dollars in Thousands) Capital O tlay Outlay Out Debt Se vice S Service Total C tti ge cy A Contingency Co Appropriation pp op iattio Ending Fund F u d Bal. Bal. Debt Service Fund Group: Group:, continued 1900 1920 1940 1970 General G l Obli Obligation g i Bond d Debt b HURF Debt Service M.P.C. Debt Service Transportation Bond Debt Sub-Total Sub Total Debt Svc Fund Group: $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($ ($2 ($25,657) ,6 ) ($4 700) ($4,700) ($21,307) ($7 328) ($7,328) ($58,993) $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($ ($2 ($25,657) ,6 ) ($4 700) ($4,700) ($21,307) ($7 328) ($7,328) ($58,993) $22 $ $22,700 , 00 $53 $4,000 $0 $26,753 $0 ($1 737)) (($1,737) $0 ($19)) ($ ($1 091) ($1,091) ($162) $ ($1 321) ($1,321) ($3,107) ($168) ($47) ($42) ($27) ($2,207)) (($2,207) ($174) ($2 ($ ($2,034) ,034)) ($107) ($1,416) ($882) $0 ($40) ($238) (($521)) $0 ($2,129)) (($2,129) $0 ($17,471) $ $0 ($1 737)) (($1,737) $0 ($180)) ($ ($1 305) ($1,305) ($162) $ ($1 452) ($1,452) ($3,307) ($340) ($87) ($165) ($54) ($2,539)) (($2,539) ($174) ($4 ($ ($4,447) ,44 ) ($327) ($5,688) ($3 950) ($3,950) ($3,231) ($1 842) ($1,842) ($368) (($921)) $0 ($21,882)) (($21,882) ($88 938) ($88,938) ($143,096) $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ ($5,608) ($5,608) $0 ( ,000)) ($5 ($5,000) ($2 000) ($2,000) ($500)) ($ $0 ($7,500) ($135,347)) (($135,347) ($10 905) ($10,905) ($15,682)) ($15,682) ($ ($8 487) ($8,487) ($170,421) $4,512 $4,512 $17,578 $17 578 $3,521 $3,521 $ $1 673 $1,673 $27,284 ($3,000) $0 $0 ($3 000)) (($3,000) ($5,844) ($1 407) ($1,407) ($24,481) ($31 732)) (($31,732) $3,540 $1 133 $1,133 $113 $4 786 $4,786 ($57 285) ($57,285) ($676 000) ($676,000) $74 558 $74,558 Capital p Fund Group: Group:, p continued 1270 1380 1400 1420 1440 1460 1480 1500 1520 1540 1560 1580 1600 1620 1980 2000 2040 2060 2080 2100 2130 2140 2160 2180 2210 General Fund Rev Obligations DIFDIF Lib Library yB Buildings ildi g DIF- Library Books DIFDIF Fire Fi Protection P i Facilities F ili i DIF- Police Dept Facilities DIFDIF Citywide Parks DIFDIF Citywide Rec Facility DIF- Libraries DIF DIFDIF Citywide Open Space DIF- Park Dev Zone 1 DIFDIF P Park kD Dev Z Zone 2 DIF- Park Dev Zone 3 DIFDIF R Roadway d y IImprovements p t DIF-General Government Street/Parking S / ki g Bonds d HURF/Street Bonds Public Safety Construction Parks Construction Gov'tt Facilities Construction Gov Economic Dev. Dev Construction Cultural Facility Construction Open Op Space/Trails Sp /T il C Construction t ti Library Construction Flood Fl d Control C l Construction C i Transportation Construction Sub-Total Sub Total Capital Fund Group: $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $ $0 $0 ($200) ($171) ($40) ($124) ($27) (($331)) $0 ($2 ($ ($2,406) ,406)) ($219) ($4,270) ($3 061) ($3,061) ($3,229) ($1 800) ($1,800) ($131) (($400)) $0 ($19,747)) (($19,747) ($88 925) ($88,925) ($125,080) $ $0 $0 $0 ($161)) ($ ($214) $ $0 ($132) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($507) $ Trust Fund Group: Group:, continued 2280 Cemetery Perpetual Care $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Group:, continued 2360+ 2440 2480 2500 Water W t andd Sewer S Landfill Sanitation S i i Community Housing Services Sub-Total Sub Total Enterprise Fund Group: ($55,917)) (($55,917) ($1 862) ($1,862) ($1,289)) ($1,289) ($ $0 ($59,068) ($25,307)) (($25,307) $0 $0 $ $0 ($25,307) Internal Service Fund Group: Group:, continued 2540 2560 2580 Risk Management Self Ins. Worker's Comp Self Ins. Ins Benefits Trust S b T t l IInternal Sub-Total t lS Svc F Fund dG Group: p TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 ($194 431) ($194,431) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($84 806) ($84,806) 493 Return to TOC Schedule Two by CATEGORY Summary of Revenues (Includes All Funds) Description City Sales Tax Water Revenues Miscellaneous Grants FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $104,410,787 $96,665,004 $89,733,786 $92,034,905 $36,086,311 $37,846,238 $43,503,105 $50,321,791 $7,446,136 $9,653,433 $13,493,573 $45,900,041 $13,388,449 $10,819,461 $29,248,557 $45,740,298 $47,999,534 $44,000,000 Bond Proceeds $180,330,757 Sewer Revenue $24,774,420 $26,384,046 $29,051,305 $31,335,935 Property Tax $28,383,145 $32,892,547 $33,374,669 $27,746,286 State Income Tax $34,108,595 $36,266,804 $31,304,188 $23,650,000 Internal Charges $22,087,939 $21,997,477 $20,422,245 $19,953,620 State Shared Sales Tax $22,237,444 $19,320,873 $16,800,000 $17,695,800 City Contributions $13,233,083 $11,431,341 $15,374,083 $14,102,505 Highway User Revenues $16,646,907 $14,538,909 $13,200,000 $13,500,000 Residential Sanitiation $9,548,630 $10,254,367 $10,406,000 $10,406,000 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu $9,729,724 $8,807,506 $8,220,000 $8,500,000 Staff & Adm Chargebacks $8,586,610 $8,547,115 $8,412,357 $8,404,382 Arena Fees $4,224,018 $635,464 $6,919,120 $5,366,964 Employee Contributions $4,907,055 $5,245,169 $5,100,000 $5,100,000 Court Revenue $4,061,361 $3,639,953 $3,674,997 $3,672,758 Commercial Sanitation Frontload $3,536,846 $3,684,277 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Recreation Revenue $3,327,381 $3,587,397 $2,917,129 $3,070,382 Retiree Contributions $2,815,358 $2,928,023 $2,800,001 $2,800,001 $14,207,696 $7,728,635 $2,310,471 $2,763,019 Tipping Fees $3,563,906 $3,316,166 $2,997,310 $2,721,780 Gas/Electric Franchise Fees $2,830,463 $2,747,641 $2,208,000 $2,500,000 Fire Department Other Fees $1,838,025 $1,763,721 $1,952,869 $2,243,719 Recycling Sales $2,998,884 $1,593,052 $1,780,015 $1,826,800 Cable Franchise Fees $1,644,625 $1,580,942 $1,600,000 $1,675,000 Partner Revenue $3,726,706 $1,929,564 $1,790,513 $1,505,277 Security Revenue $782,429 $998,811 $945,384 $1,302,004 Building Permits $2,679,909 $1,232,972 $1,000,000 $1,050,000 State Forfeitures $1,030,393 $1,883,634 $3,251,075 $1,000,000 Plan Check Fees $1,630,923 $888,174 $700,000 $735,000 Development Impact Fees $6,080,485 $1,497,100 $819,395 $669,914 $608,227 $570,599 $614,911 $614,911 Interest Sales Tax Licenses 494 Return to TOC Schedule Two by CATEGORY Summary of Revenues (Includes All Funds) Description FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Commercial Sanitation Rolloff $821,647 $658,226 $650,000 $600,000 Right-of-Way Permits $509,358 $335,702 $459,374 $549,244 $3,026,720 $1,233,930 $500,000 $500,000 Airport Fees $502,753 $525,128 $467,868 $495,818 City Property Rental $776,898 $724,194 $577,176 $485,459 Library Fines/Fees $613,608 $584,439 $471,879 $461,879 Fire Dept CD Fees $484,639 $317,330 $351,362 $360,361 Liquor Licenses $180,907 $190,514 $183,489 $354,789 Lease Proceeds $215,536 $12,006 Sewer Development Impact Fees $848,067 $398,283 $200,000 $200,000 SRP In-Lieu $188,847 $172,420 $188,742 $188,742 Cemetery Revenue $234,461 $272,909 $185,000 $185,000 Planning/Zoning $450,263 $337,058 $136,000 $142,800 Transit Revenue $136,761 $130,635 $125,473 $128,000 Bus./Prof. Licenses $116,133 $116,726 $120,113 $120,113 $2,100 $105,000 $105,000 Water Development Impact Fees Health Care Revenue $210,200 Engineering Plan Check Revenue $739,040 $285,371 $97,353 $102,221 Miscellaneous CD Fees $298,591 $138,360 $90,000 $90,000 $80,969 $92,284 $83,880 $83,880 Miscellaneous Bin Service $142,540 $79,652 $40,000 $40,000 Outside City Commercial $204,852 $184,955 $32,000 $32,000 Traffic Engineering Plan Check $114,132 $60,812 $30,000 $25,000 Development Impact Fees $110,862 $18,348 $22,500 $25,000 Equipment Rental $38,555 $23,814 $22,366 $22,000 Facility Rental Income $34,719 $25,872 $14,797 $18,000 Federal Forfeitures $48,805 $94,362 $28,187 $10,000 $8,568 $3,276 $3,700 $3,700 $1,117,962 $1,040,568 $600,000 $609,539,820 $400,935,689 $463,210,851 Business Licenses Sanitation Development Impact Fee LTAF - Lottery Grand Total : 495 Return to TOC $502,948,298 Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual City Sales Tax $61,305,792 $51,613,389 $49,200,000 $50,500,000 State Income Tax $34,108,595 $36,266,804 $31,304,188 $23,650,000 State Shared Sales Tax $22,237,444 $19,320,873 $16,800,000 $17,695,800 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu $9,729,724 $8,807,506 $8,220,000 $8,500,000 Staff & Adm Chargebacks $7,986,000 $8,007,000 $7,862,000 $7,862,000 Miscellaneous $3,005,591 $2,037,178 $1,651,976 $4,185,669 Property Tax $3,876,679 $3,985,091 $4,183,368 $3,724,139 Court Revenue $3,723,280 $3,324,696 $3,356,508 $3,356,508 Gas/Electric Franchise Fees $2,830,463 $2,747,641 $2,208,000 $2,500,000 Fire Department Other Fees $1,838,025 $1,763,721 $1,952,869 $2,243,719 Recreation Revenue $1,920,278 $2,213,454 $1,547,227 $1,675,482 Cable Franchise Fees $1,644,625 $1,580,942 $1,600,000 $1,675,000 Building Permits $2,679,909 $1,232,972 $1,000,000 $1,050,000 Interest $4,113,523 $1,384,130 $740,000 $930,000 Plan Check Fees $1,630,923 $888,174 $700,000 $735,000 Sales Tax Licenses $608,227 $570,599 $614,911 $614,911 Right-of-Way Permits $509,358 $335,702 $459,374 $549,244 City Property Rental $667,634 $630,456 $438,076 $425,219 Fire Dept CD Fees $484,639 $317,330 $351,362 $360,361 Liquor Licenses $180,907 $190,514 $183,489 $354,789 Library Fines/Fees $330,432 $317,100 $250,000 $240,000 Lease Proceeds $195,374 Cemetery Revenue $234,461 $272,909 $185,000 $185,000 Planning/Zoning $450,263 $337,058 $136,000 $142,800 Bus./Prof. Licenses $116,133 $116,726 $120,113 $120,113 Engineering Plan Check Revenue $739,040 $285,371 $97,353 $102,221 Miscellaneous CD Fees $298,591 $138,360 $90,000 $90,000 Business Licenses $80,969 $92,284 $83,880 $83,880 SRP In-Lieu $31,253 $26,288 $31,236 $31,236 $114,132 $60,812 $30,000 $25,000 $167,672,264 $148,865,080 $135,396,930 $133,818,291 $9,625,691 $9,625,691 $10,486,199 $9,080,770 $9,625,691 $9,625,691 $10,486,199 $9,080,770 Fund Description FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget GENERAL FUND GROUP 1000 - General Traffic Engineering Plan Check Fund Total - General: $210,200 1010 - National Events Miscellaneous Fund Total - National Events: $96,460 $96,460 1040 - General Services Internal Charges Fund Total - General Services: 496 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1100 - Telephone Services Internal Charges $855,844 $1,108,794 $1,007,113 $990,447 $855,844 $1,108,794 $1,007,113 $990,447 $2,986,534 $2,789,875 $2,111,805 $1,998,392 Miscellaneous $305,661 $290,088 $291,000 $200,000 Interest $195,097 $127,327 $48,130 $48,600 $3,487,292 $3,207,290 $2,450,935 $2,246,992 $2,114,512 $2,150,917 $1,958,641 $2,067,999 $157,402 $86,015 $30,780 $31,000 $32,557 $13,339 $44,973 $23,080 $2,304,471 $2,250,271 $2,034,394 $2,122,079 $128,586 $84,614 $73,000 $73,000 $128,586 $84,614 $73,000 $73,000 Miscellaneous $505,925 $620,853 $183,589 $95,248 Interest $137,515 $71,691 $24,500 $24,500 $643,440 $692,544 $208,089 $119,748 Court Revenue $329,750 $282,707 $316,250 $316,250 Miscellaneous $39,722 $41,993 $35,050 $35,050 Interest $12,913 $7,124 $2,500 $2,500 $382,385 $331,824 $353,800 $353,800 $283,176 $267,339 $221,879 $221,879 $50 $39 $3,816 $3,816 $283,226 $267,378 $225,695 $225,695 $17,330 $34,963 $25,000 $25,000 $17,330 $34,963 $25,000 $25,000 Fund Total - Telephone Services: 1120 - Vehicle Replacement Internal Charges Fund Total - Vehicle Replacement: 1140 - Technology Replacement Internal Charges Interest Miscellaneous Fund Total - Technology Replacement 1160 - Cable Communications Miscellaneous Equipment Rental Fund Total - Cable Communications: $5,500 $275 $5,775 1190 - Employee Groups Miscellaneous Fund Total - Employee Groups: 1220 - Arts Commission Fund Total - Arts Commission: 1240 - Court Security/Bonds Fund Total - Court Security/Bonds: 1260 - Library Library Fines/Fees Miscellaneous Fund Total - Library: 1280 - Youth Sports Complex Recreation Revenue Fund Total - Youth Sports Complex: 497 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1281 - Stadium Event Operations Security Revenue $736,365 $963,829 $905,384 $1,262,004 $736,365 $963,829 $905,384 $1,262,004 $510,312 $14,305 $828,295 $550,718 $510,312 $14,305 $828,295 $550,718 City Sales Tax $738,651 $1,197,609 $1,230,292 $1,249,016 Miscellaneous $79,599 $818,250 $1,197,609 $1,230,292 $1,249,016 Arena Fees $3,713,706 $621,159 $6,090,825 $4,816,246 City Sales Tax $1,459,402 $2,627,860 $1,971,829 $2,023,889 Miscellaneous $10,798 $610,389 $5,000 $5,000 $5,183,906 $3,859,408 $8,067,654 $6,845,135 $1,298,038 $1,485,806 $1,019,665 $1,700,000 $1,298,038 $1,485,806 $1,019,665 $1,700,000 $490,073 $379,251 $331,944 $280,000 $302 $2,500 $379,251 $332,246 $282,500 $1,836,564 $1,579,413 $1,790,513 $1,505,277 $670 $12,226 $1,837,234 $1,591,639 $1,790,513 $1,505,277 $2,100 $105,000 $105,000 $2,100 $105,000 $105,000 $175,962,396 $166,540,204 $162,555,472 $537,156 $409,864 $1,034,335 $1,164,005 $537,156 $409,864 $1,034,335 $1,164,005 Fund Total - Stadium Event Operatio 1282 - Arena Event Operations Arena Fees Fund Total - Arena Event Operations: 1770 - Zanjero Special Revenue Fund Total - Zanjero Special Revenue 1780 - Arena Special Revenue Fund Total - Arena Special Revenue: 1790 - Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA City Sales Tax Fund Total - Stadium City Sales Tax - 1870 - Marketing Self Sust Miscellaneous Recreation Revenue Fund Total - Marketing Self Sust: $490,073 2530 - Public Safety Training Center Partner Revenue Recreation Revenue Fund Total - Public Safety Training C 2538 - Glendale Health Center Health Care Revenue Fund Total - Glendale Health Center: TOTAL-GENERAL FUND GROUP $196,376,942 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND GROUP 1300 - Home Grant Grants Fund Total - Home Grant: 498 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1310 - Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm Grants $8,588 $2,000,000 $4,184,112 $8,588 $2,000,000 $4,184,112 $3,431,952 $2,303,992 $1,568,710 $2,725,181 $3,431,952 $2,303,992 $1,568,710 $2,725,181 $16,646,907 $14,538,909 $13,200,000 $13,500,000 $13,500,000 Fund Total - Neighborhood Stabilizati 1320 - C.D.B.G. Grants Fund Total - C.D.B.G.: 1340 - Highway User Gas Tax Highway User Revenues Miscellaneous Fund Total - Highway User Gas Tax: $79,052 $16,646,907 $14,617,961 $13,200,000 $1,117,962 $1,040,568 $600,000 $1,117,962 $1,040,568 $600,000 1640 - Local Transp. Assistance LTAF - Lottery Fund Total - Local Transp. Assistance 1650 - Transportation Grants Miscellaneous Grants $2,000,000 $3,134,395 $974,638 $1,346,279 $1,612,659 $3,134,395 $974,638 $1,346,279 $3,612,659 $23,672,386 $20,874,856 $18,650,000 $18,650,000 Grants $550,088 $566,106 $602,672 $565,566 Interest $637,591 $594,420 $191,445 $150,000 Transit Revenue $136,761 $130,635 $125,473 $128,000 Miscellaneous $63,847 $1,012,006 $481,637 Court Revenue $8,331 $32,550 $2,239 $25,069,004 $23,210,573 $20,053,466 $19,493,566 $10,624,059 $12,582,277 $11,808,000 $11,976,000 $10,624,059 $12,582,277 $11,808,000 $11,976,000 $5,312,459 $6,283,207 $5,854,000 $5,936,000 $5,312,459 $6,283,207 $5,854,000 $5,936,000 Recreation Revenue $335,705 $251,757 $226,500 $251,800 Miscellaneous $167,911 $123,544 $76,385 $95,200 Equipment Rental $38,280 $23,814 $22,366 $22,000 Facility Rental Income $34,719 $25,872 $14,797 $18,000 Fund Total - Transportation Grants: 1660 - Transportation Sales Tax City Sales Tax Fund Total - Transportation Sales Ta 1700 - Police Sales Tax City Sales Tax Fund Total - Police Sales Tax: 1720 - Fire Sales Tax City Sales Tax Fund Total - Fire Sales Tax: 1740 - Civic Center 499 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2008 Actual Fund Total - Civic Center: FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $576,615 $424,987 $340,048 $387,000 $502,753 $525,128 $467,868 $495,818 Miscellaneous $2,309 $1,044 $8,870 $11,404 Lease Proceeds $12,024 $12,006 $517,086 $538,178 $476,738 $507,222 Miscellaneous $287,329 $242,047 $355,000 $355,000 Fund Total - CAP Grant: $287,329 $242,047 $355,000 $355,000 $98,551 $74,569 $97,997 $98,278 $98,551 $74,569 $97,997 $98,278 $3,761,818 $4,304,876 $12,592,309 $20,427,961 $3,761,818 $4,304,876 $12,592,309 $20,427,961 $746,652 $3,967,113 $746,652 $3,967,113 1760 - Airport Operating Airport Fees Fund Total - Airport Operating: 1820 - CAP Grant 1830 - Emergency Shelter Grants Grants Fund Total - Emergency Shelter Gran 1840 - Other Federal and State Grants Grants Fund Total - Other Federal and State 1842 - ARRA Stimulus Grants Grants Fund Total - ARRA Stimulus Grants: 1860 - RICO Funds State Forfeitures $1,030,393 $1,883,634 $3,251,075 $1,000,000 $110,323 $86,668 $134,300 $135,500 $48,805 $94,362 $28,187 $10,000 $1,189,521 $2,064,664 $3,413,562 $1,145,500 $1,026,422 $1,117,500 $1,115,000 $1,026,891 $1,117,500 $1,115,000 $8,445 $4,056 $1,000 $1,000 $76,572 $48,575 $600 $600 $85,017 $52,631 $1,600 $1,600 $85,895 $448,009 $340,631 $1,987,261 $85,895 $448,009 $340,631 $1,987,261 Interest Federal Forfeitures Fund Total - RICO Funds: 1880 - Parks & Recreation Self Sust Recreation Revenue $972,021 Miscellaneous Fund Total - Parks & Recreation Self ($78) $971,943 $469 1885 - Parks & Recreation Designated Interest Recreation Revenue Fund Total - Parks & Recreation Desi 2120 - Airport Capital Grants Grants Fund Total - Airport Capital Grants: 500 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual TOTAL-SPECIAL REVENUE FUND GROUP $73,447,669 FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $70,608,520 $76,946,827 $92,583,458 DEBT SERVICE FUND GROUP 1900 - G.O. Bond Debt Service Property Tax $24,506,466 $28,907,456 $29,191,301 $24,022,147 SRP In-Lieu $157,594 $146,132 $157,506 $157,506 $24,664,060 $29,053,588 $29,348,807 $24,179,653 $1,056,678 $1,056,678 Fund Total - G.O. Bond Debt Service: 1940 - M.P.C. Debt Service Miscellaneous Interest Bond Proceeds $96,083 $16,453 $3,783,213 $3,879,296 $16,453 $1,056,678 $1,056,678 $28,543,356 $29,070,041 $30,405,485 $25,236,331 Interest $225,164 $24,773 Bond Proceeds $420,000 Fund Total - M.P.C. Debt Service: TOTAL-DEBT SERVICE FUND GROUP CAPITAL FUND GROUP 1270 - G.F. Revenue Oblgs Fund Total - G.F. Revenue Oblgs: $645,164 $24,773 $119,359 $49,672 $12,534 $12,075 $119,359 $49,672 $12,534 $12,075 1380 - DIF-Library Blds Interest Fund Total - DIF-Library Blds: 1400 - DIF-Library Book Development Impact Fees $42,840 Interest $8,946 $2,669 $8,946 $45,509 $588,923 $110,072 $84,167 $78,763 $48,837 $25,567 $3,668 $417 $637,760 $135,639 $87,835 $79,180 $517,264 $128,273 $61,489 $58,268 $84,182 $42,289 $10,773 $8,128 $601,446 $170,562 $72,262 $66,396 Fund Total - DIF-Library Book: 1420 - DIF-Fire Protection Facilities Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Fire Protection Faci 1440 - DIF-Police Facilities Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Police Facilities: 501 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1460 - DIF-Citywide Parks Development Impact Fees $38,582 $41,898 $21,770 $6,685 Interest $33,933 $2,429 $925 $1,106 $72,515 $44,327 $22,695 $7,791 Interest $55,420 $30,489 $7,132 $9,615 Development Impact Fees $41,410 $44,970 $23,132 $7,058 $96,830 $75,459 $30,264 $16,673 $133,942 $72,414 $22,399 $22,257 $69,252 $23,634 $34,630 $10,651 $203,194 $96,048 $57,029 $32,908 $110,033 $102,267 $52,138 $15,821 $5,691 $4,712 $1,894 $1,710 $115,724 $106,979 $54,032 $17,531 $6,593 $3,123 $4,858 $2,429 $18,523 $3,122 $538 $459 $25,116 $6,245 $5,396 $2,888 Development Impact Fees $27,321 $2,776 $10,073 $1,215 Interest $22,505 $4,003 $1,019 $714 $49,826 $6,779 $11,092 $1,929 Development Impact Fees $8,665 $32,204 $5,205 $2,256 Interest $3,963 $633 $326 $275 $12,628 $32,837 $5,531 $2,531 $3,355,630 $725,298 $337,437 $314,437 $407,863 $121,621 $29,659 $18,879 $3,763,493 $846,919 $367,096 $333,316 $1,316,812 $239,745 $184,496 $172,331 $95,440 $27,920 $1,412,252 $267,665 Fund Total - DIF-Citywide Parks: 1480 - DIF-Citywide Recreation Fac Fund Total - DIF-Citywide Recreation 1500 - DIF-Libraries Interest Development Impact Fees Fund Total - DIF-Libraries: 1520 - DIF-Citywide Open Spaces Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Citywide Open Spac 1540 - DIF-Parks Dev Zone 1 Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Parks Dev Zone 1: 1560 - DIF-Parks Dev Zone 2 Fund Total - DIF-Parks Dev Zone 2: 1580 - DIF-Parks Dev Zone 3 Fund Total - DIF-Parks Dev Zone 3: 1600 - DIF-Roadway Improvements Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Roadway Improvem 1620 - DIF-General Government Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-General Governmen 502 Return to TOC $613 $184,496 $172,944 Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1980 - Streets Constr. - 1999 Auth Interest $433,097 $182,488 Miscellaneous Fund Total - Streets Constr. - 1999 Au $3,286 $1,623 $77,898 $433,097 $182,488 $81,184 $1,623 $414,989 $39,080 $3,896 $2,228 2000 - HURF/Street Bonds Interest Miscellaneous Fund Total - HURF/Street Bonds: $3 $105,574 $414,992 $39,080 $469,065 $108,841 $109,470 $2,228 2040 - Public Safety Construction Interest $1,789 Bond Proceeds $12,302,816 Miscellaneous $8,879 Fund Total - Public Safety Constructi $469,065 $108,841 $12,311,695 $1,789 $273,830 $31,989 $276 $1,233 2060 - Parks Construction Interest Bond Proceeds Miscellaneous Fund Total - Parks Construction: $8,967,053 $1,086 $274,916 $3,339 $31,989 $8,970,668 $1,233 2080 - Gov't Facilities - 1999 Auth Interest $4,916 ($654) $789 Bond Proceeds $4,526,035 Miscellaneous $1,716 Fund Total - Gov't Facilities - 1999 Au $4,916 ($654) $4,527,751 $789 2100 - Economic Dev. Constr-1999 Auth Bond Proceeds $1,785,408 Miscellaneous $1,323 Interest Fund Total - Economic Dev. Constr-1 $326 $1,786,731 $326 2140 - Open Space/Trails Constr-99 Au Interest Fund Total - Open Space/Trails Const $26,521 ($481) $799 $360 $26,521 ($481) $799 $360 $7,523,801 $500,000 2160 - Library Construction Interest Fund Total - Library Construction: $155 $155 2180 - Flood Control Construction Miscellaneous $538,732 503 Return to TOC $2,392,322 Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description Interest FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual $394,335 $206,881 Bond Proceeds Fund Total - Flood Control Construct FY 2010 Estimate $4,905 FY 2011 Budget $5,877 $14,078,222 $933,067 $2,599,203 $21,606,928 $505,877 $2,065 $35,800,000 2210 - Transportation Capital Project Miscellaneous Bond Proceeds Interest Fund Total - Transportation Capital $111,063,499 $24,000,000 $649,086 $1,344,938 $42,670 $34,425 $111,712,585 $1,344,938 $44,735 $59,834,425 2536 - Training Facility Capital Proj Partner Revenue $1,890,142 $350,151 $1,890,142 $350,151 $123,924,035 $6,564,968 $50,350,223 $61,094,486 $228,359 $121,772 $44,400 $44,500 $228,359 $121,772 $44,400 $44,500 $228,359 $121,772 $44,400 $44,500 Water Revenues $36,086,311 $37,846,238 $43,503,105 $50,321,791 Sewer Revenue $24,774,420 $26,384,046 $29,051,305 $31,335,935 Bond Proceeds $65,064,045 $6,340,000 $20,000,000 Miscellaneous $1,438,530 $1,329,371 $562,060 $622,896 Interest $2,709,333 $1,874,000 $506,755 $579,985 Water Development Impact Fees $3,026,720 $1,233,930 $500,000 $500,000 Sewer Development Impact Fees $848,067 $398,283 $200,000 $200,000 Staff & Adm Chargebacks $173,000 $176,000 $176,000 $168,000 City Property Rental $109,264 $93,738 $139,100 $60,240 $134,249,844 $69,335,606 $80,978,325 $103,788,847 $3,563,906 $3,316,166 $2,997,310 $2,721,780 Fund Total - Training Facility Capital TOTAL-CAPITAL FUND GROUP TRUST FUND GROUP 2280 - Cemetery Perpetual Care Interest Fund Total - Cemetery Perpetual Car TOTAL-TRUST FUND GROUP ENTERPRISE FUND GROUP 2360 - Water and Sewer Lease Proceeds $8,138 Grants $7,211 Recreation Revenue $4,805 Fund Total - Water and Sewer: 2440 - Landfill Tipping Fees 504 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget Internal Charges $2,434,399 $2,305,179 $2,169,550 $2,131,660 Recycling Sales $2,991,565 $1,590,580 $1,780,000 $1,826,800 Interest $993,812 $565,481 $250,000 $500,000 Miscellaneous $164,089 $166,789 $431,000 $431,000 Staff & Adm Chargebacks $385,490 $316,758 $327,000 $327,000 Development Impact Fees $110,862 $18,348 $22,500 $25,000 $10,644,123 $8,279,301 $7,977,360 $7,963,240 Residential Sanitiation $9,548,630 $10,254,367 $10,406,000 $10,406,000 Commercial Sanitation Frontload $3,536,846 $3,684,277 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Commercial Sanitation Rolloff $821,647 $658,226 $650,000 $600,000 Internal Charges $266,654 $196,383 $200,000 $200,000 $70,793 $204,160 $172,000 $122,000 $200,420 $94,058 $71,362 $71,362 Staff & Adm Chargebacks $42,120 $47,357 $47,357 $47,382 Miscellaneous Bin Service $142,540 $79,652 $40,000 $40,000 Outside City Commercial $204,852 $184,955 $32,000 $32,000 Sanitation Development Impact Fe $8,568 $3,276 $3,700 $3,700 Recycling Sales $7,319 $2,472 $15 $14,850,389 $15,409,183 $15,122,434 $15,022,444 $1,781,383 $1,728,819 $8,918,972 $9,008,162 Fund Total - Pub Housing Budget Act $1,781,383 $1,728,819 $8,918,972 $9,008,162 TOTAL-ENTERPRISE FUND GROUP $161,525,739 $94,752,909 $112,997,091 $135,782,693 $2,812,791 $2,828,000 $2,488,937 $2,499,892 $183,737 $152,481 $62,500 $63,000 $23,032 $17,491 $20,000 $20,000 $2,997,972 $2,571,437 $2,582,892 Fund Total - Landfill: 2480 - Sanitation Miscellaneous Interest Fund Total - Sanitation: 2500 - Pub Housing Budget Activities Grants INTERNAL SERVICE FUND GROUP 2540 - Risk Management Self Insurance Internal Charges Interest Security Revenue Miscellaneous Fund Total - Risk Management Self I $4,303 $3,023,863 2560 - Workers Comp. Self Insurance Internal Charges $991,514 $992,638 Interest $194,337 $65,073 $20,700 $21,000 $23,032 $17,491 $20,000 $20,000 $1,208,883 $1,075,202 $40,700 $1,025,460 Security Revenue Fund Total - Workers Comp. Self Ins 505 Return to TOC $984,460 Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Actual $13,233,083 $11,431,341 $15,374,083 $14,102,505 Employee Contributions $4,907,055 $5,245,169 $5,100,000 $5,100,000 Retiree Contributions $2,815,358 $2,928,023 $2,800,001 $2,800,001 $298,718 $152,491 $35,400 $35,500 $6,760 $24,885 $5,000 $5,000 $21,260,974 $19,781,909 $23,314,484 $22,043,006 TOTAL-INTERNAL SERVICE FUND GROUP $25,493,720 $23,855,083 $25,926,621 $25,651,358 $400,935,689 $463,210,851 $502,948,298 Fund Description FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 2580 - Benefits Trust Fund City Contributions Interest Miscellaneous Fund Total - Benefits Trust Fund: TOTAL - ALL REVENUE : $609,539,820 506 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $445,877 $443,677 $443,677 $435,786 Finance 11310 Finance Administration 11320 Accounting Services 11330 L.I.D. Administration 11340 License/Collection 11350 Regulatory & Communication Dept. Total - Finance $818,132 $960,995 $9,000 $922,453 $135 $2,710,715 $810,717 $958,732 $9,000 $844,432 $810,717 $958,732 $9,000 $844,432 $394,610 $912,836 $9,000 $805,900 $2,622,881 $2,622,881 $2,122,346 Human Resources 11010 Risk Management/Safety 11020 Benefits 11030 Human Resources Administration 11040 Employment Services 11050 Employee Relations 11060 Compensation 11070 Organizational Development Dept. Total - Human Resources $598,600 $226,705 $760,835 $381,083 $214,435 $449,126 $380,548 $3,011,332 $518,865 $236,589 $603,204 $373,839 $218,532 $435,993 $398,713 $2,785,735 $518,865 $236,589 $603,204 $373,839 $218,532 $435,993 $398,713 $2,785,735 $202,525 $119,411 $631,007 $254,417 $176,717 $459,828 $68,291 $1,912,196 Info. Technology 11510 Information Technology $3,541,259 $3,375,954 $3,374,470 $3,048,826 Lease Pmts/OtherFees 11380 Lease Payments 11390 Merchant Fees 89800 1000 Advisor Fees Dept. Total - Lease Pmts/OtherFees $2,133,655 $255,452 $89,414 $2,478,521 $1,570,143 $160,000 $130,687 $1,860,830 $1,570,143 $160,000 $129,687 $1,859,830 $4,236,574 $160,000 $129,687 $4,526,261 Management & Budget 11360 Purchasing 11370 Warehouse 11610 Budget & Research 11620 Grants Administration Dept. Total - Management & Budget $487,333 $359,063 $632,796 $147,099 $1,626,291 $427,575 $367,459 $657,852 $62,423 $1,515,309 $427,375 $367,459 $648,468 $59,091 $1,502,393 $388,224 $295,037 $646,768 $65,164 $1,395,193 $13,813,995 $12,604,386 $12,588,986 $13,440,608 $2,434,219 $2,443,546 $2,443,546 $2,339,684 $500,000 $1,267,693 $3,701,912 $2,443,546 $2,400,000 $4,843,546 $2,839,684 $396,742 $392,796 $392,796 $397,551 Program Name GENERAL FUND GROUP 1000 - GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Admin Svcs Admin. 11210 Administration Services Admin. Group Total - ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS: APPOINTED OFFICIALS GROUP City Attorney 10610 City Attorney 10615 Outside Legal Fees 10620 Attorney-Spec Proj Fees/Costs Dept. Total - City Attorney City Clerk 10210 City Clerk 507 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $185,963 $60,354 $643,059 $169,853 $108,819 $671,468 $169,853 $2,237 $564,886 $140,727 $137,723 $676,001 City Court 10410 City Court $4,320,503 $3,986,853 $3,986,853 $3,578,010 Council Office 10110 Council Office 10120 Cholla District 10130 Barrel District 10140 Sahuaro District 10150 Cactus District 10160 Yucca District 10170 Ocotillo District Dept. Total - Council Office $542,379 $70,398 $85,099 $80,046 $75,518 $91,123 $92,456 $1,037,019 $529,246 $104,436 $99,063 $99,106 $98,830 $98,966 $98,084 $1,127,731 $529,246 $112,574 $82,053 $74,390 $92,093 $83,966 $76,508 $1,050,830 $445,694 $74,685 $69,187 $76,829 $94,377 $69,352 $92,131 $922,255 Mayor 10010 Office of the Mayor $343,218 $361,551 $361,551 $334,216 Group Total - APPOINTED OFFICIALS: $10,045,711 $8,591,149 $10,807,666 $8,350,166 COMMUNITY DEV. GROUP Building Safety 15610 Building Safety 15620 Development Services Center 15630 Westgate-Bldg Safety Rvw/Insp. Dept. Total - Building Safety $2,477,402 $618,173 $828,685 $3,924,260 $2,414,339 $673,056 $2,413,566 $672,971 $1,980,628 $444,676 $3,087,395 $3,086,537 $2,425,304 $178,340 $178,543 $178,543 $195,964 Program Name 10220 Records Management 10240 Elections Dept. Total - City Clerk Community Dev Admin 15510 CD Deputy City Manager Economic Development 16010 Economic Development 16025 Business Development 16040 Downtown Beaut. & Promotion Dept. Total - Economic Development $690,958 $617,251 $709,225 $331,539 $1,022,497 $267,475 $884,726 $367,471 $1,076,696 $630,068 $500,000 $266,453 $1,396,521 Engineering 13710 BofA Bank Building 13715 Promenade at Palmaire 13720 Engineering Administration 13730 CIP Administration 13740 CIP Design 13760 Real Estate Services 13770 Mapping and Records 13780 Land Development Division 13790 Construction Inspection 13800 Materials Testing 13820 Utility Inspection Dept. Total - Engineering $485,870 $71,682 $525,388 $602,635 $1,616 $148,949 $193,820 $492,614 $642,423 $227,565 $231,418 $3,623,980 $256,579 $56,400 $618,732 $659,816 $256,579 $56,400 $618,569 $659,816 $256,579 $56,400 $553,251 $274,490 $174,301 $490,751 $618,217 $237,894 $220,798 $3,333,488 $174,301 $490,751 $614,807 $237,041 $220,798 $3,329,062 $101,869 $483,917 $382,291 $181,996 $142,281 $2,433,074 Planning 508 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 15910 Planning Administration 15930 Current Planning 15940 Long-Range Planning & Research Dept. Total - Planning $454,826 $714,393 $358,736 $1,527,955 $476,645 $695,251 $352,321 $1,524,217 $476,645 $695,251 $352,321 $1,524,217 $341,167 $512,837 $135,149 $989,153 Rebates & Incentives 16210 Rebates & Incentives 16220 Visual Improvement Program 16230 Redevelopment Land Acquisition Dept. Total - Rebates & Incentives $895,946 $222,644 $978,165 $2,096,755 $1,023,400 $109,065 $340,590 $1,473,055 $1,023,400 $320,000 $23,000 $1,046,400 $85,416 $405,416 Group Total - COMMUNITY DEV.: $12,373,787 $10,481,424 $10,241,455 $7,845,432 COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Code Compliance 14410 Code Compliance $1,625,403 $1,576,174 $1,576,174 $1,368,354 Comm. Partnerships 15010 Community Revitalization 15015 Neighborhood Partnership Dept. Total - Comm. Partnerships $453,963 $506,771 $960,734 $417,609 $510,549 $928,158 $417,609 $510,549 $928,158 $334,195 $364,615 $698,810 Comm. Services Adm 14510 Comm. Services Admin. $269,897 $166,123 $166,123 $190,714 $8,153,906 $146,012 $8,299,918 $7,181,646 $86,641 $7,268,287 $7,181,646 $86,641 $7,268,287 $6,044,112 $31,763 $6,075,875 Neighborhood Imp Gr 15120 Neighborhood Improvement Grant $616,904 $415,000 $323,644 Parks & Recreation 13010 Pool Maintenance 13020 Park Irrigation 13030 Parks CIP & Planning 13040 Parks Maintenance 14610 Parks & Recreation Admin. 14620 Glendale Community Center 14630 Recreation Support Services 14640 Adult Center 14650 Youth and Teen 14660 Special Events and Programs 14670 Sports and Health 14680 Aquatics 14690 Audio/Visual 14700 Marketing - Parks & Rec 14710 Park Rangers 14720 Foothills Recreation Center 14740 Copper Canyon HS Youth Dev Pr 14760 Historic Sahuaro Ranch $286,173 $350,283 $310,877 $3,709,080 $248,682 $212,098 $1,008,931 $376,930 $602,822 $202,369 $529,842 $483,471 $231,138 $131,889 $399,093 $1,642,598 $36,708 $274,653 $247,399 $272,580 $302,396 $3,514,210 $244,722 $208,969 $1,010,831 $378,161 $604,968 $199,214 $362,380 $377,766 $214,695 $121,961 $419,997 $1,664,699 $247,143 $272,580 $302,396 $3,521,248 $244,722 $208,969 $1,002,988 $376,600 $604,968 $199,203 $362,380 $377,425 $214,151 $121,961 $419,997 $1,664,662 $146,670 $265,687 $1,562,987 $307,803 $307,803 $242,300 Program Name Library & Arts 15220 Library 15230 Arts Maintenance - Admin. Dept. Total - Library & Arts 509 Return to TOC $196,824 $252,116 $180,341 $3,254,902 $240,308 $136,070 $840,636 $485,907 $512,548 $94,157 $403,116 $221,959 Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $11,037,637 $10,452,751 $10,449,196 $9,036,528 $22,810,493 $20,806,493 $20,711,582 $17,370,281 FAC & FIN MGMT GROUP Fac & Fin Mgmt 11220 Facilities & Financial Mgmt $329,298 $176,902 $176,902 INTERNAL SERVICES GROUP City Auditor 10710 City Auditor $356,138 $361,958 $361,958 $254,348 $1,236,446 $1,058,561 $1,058,561 $959,252 $111,573 $133,308 $133,308 $129,280 $1,191,568 $170,308 $1,361,876 $1,375,841 $167,221 $1,543,062 $275,841 $167,221 $443,062 $316,256 $149,346 $465,602 $702,599 $475,837 $500,992 $721,549 $1,326,935 $424,924 $50,823 $319,545 $1,180,221 $414,518 $46,804 $313,098 $1,180,496 $414,243 $46,804 $313,098 $762,724 $2,884,951 $732,223 $2,686,864 $732,223 $2,686,864 $934,636 $335,747 $0 $304,676 $208,812 $707,169 $2,491,040 $6,653,583 $6,259,590 $5,184,745 $5,021,071 $591,612 $1,831,773 $2,089,140 $1,963,824 $2,109,180 $24,013 $18,097,109 $2,519,277 $91,063 $74,522 $993,905 $59,991 $1,970,176 $25,907 $18,260,976 $2,502,839 $38,694 $86,479 $1,092,857 $19,250 $1,970,176 $25,907 $18,270,256 $2,502,839 $38,694 $86,135 $1,092,857 $19,250 $1,637,270 $16,293 $17,312,530 $1,937,224 $13,656 $56,983 $824,255 $19,250 Program Name Dept. Total - Parks & Recreation Group Total - COMMUNITY SERVICES: City Manager 10310 City Manager Comm. Action Program 14420 CAP Local Match Conv./Media/Parking 10890 Convention/Media/Parking 10891 Media Center Operations Dept. Total - Conv./Media/Parking Intergovt. Programs 10910 Intergovernmental Programs Marketing and Comm. 10810 Marketing 10820 Tourism 10830 Special Events Prod. Support 14110 City-Wide Special Events 14115 Audio/Visual 14120 Cable Communications Dept. Total - Marketing and Comm. Group Total - INTERNAL SERVICES: NON-DEPARTMENTAL GROUP Non-Departmental 11801 Fund 1000 Non-Dept PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Fire Department 12410 Fire Administration 12421 Fire Special Operations 12422 Fire Operations 12433 Fire Resource Management 12434 Fire Training 12436 Fire Medical Services & Health 12441 Fire Marshal's Office 12444 Fire Community Services 510 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $450,099 $729,781 $610,272 $25,759,212 $511,976 $766,930 $709,310 $25,985,394 $511,976 $766,930 $709,310 $25,994,330 $492,393 $751,491 $577,227 $23,638,572 $125,564 $740,999 $866,563 $121,942 $681,241 $803,183 $121,942 $681,241 $803,183 $300,545 $3,658,384 $11,092,747 $8,559,441 $2,146,690 $10,440,962 $2,912,141 $1,614,917 $102,532 $2,324,437 $2,419,250 $610,272 $4,990,116 $250,072 $3,467,476 $11,351,409 $8,457,862 $2,595,905 $10,685,898 $2,206,873 $1,874,647 $61,346 $2,284,386 $2,482,401 $709,310 $4,453,733 $250,072 $3,467,476 $11,351,409 $8,457,862 $2,595,905 $10,685,898 $2,206,873 $1,874,647 $61,346 $2,284,386 $2,482,401 $709,310 $4,453,733 $51,172,434 $50,881,318 $50,881,318 $145,530 $2,838,805 $10,515,737 $8,267,040 $2,359,090 $9,724,831 $1,335,121 $2,568,104 $61,063 $1,339,259 $2,364,899 $577,227 $4,241,005 $798,161 $47,135,872 $77,798,209 $77,669,895 $77,678,831 $70,774,444 $28,621 $33,556 $20,000 $26,845 Field Operations 13410 Field Operations Admin. 13420 Cemetery 13430 Manistee Ranch Maintenance 13440 Graffiti Removal 13450 Facilities Management 13460 Custodial Services 13461 Downtown Parking Garage Dept. Total - Field Operations $1,060,946 $215,130 $5,236 $246,976 $4,488,379 $1,233,399 $73,277 $7,323,343 $1,021,331 $235,540 $5,113 $293,588 $4,018,649 $1,159,853 $102,859 $6,836,933 $1,021,331 $235,540 $5,113 $293,588 $4,018,649 $1,159,853 $102,859 $6,836,933 $627,170 $233,250 $5,113 $292,797 $3,361,963 $1,043,615 $102,859 $5,666,767 Public Works Admin. 13310 Public Works Administration $204,370 $203,137 $203,137 $198,125 $7,556,334 $7,073,626 $7,060,070 $5,891,737 $151,973,022 $145,495,238 $146,539,377 $130,657,563 Program Name 12491 Ambulance Services 12492 Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO) 12521 PS Training Ctr - Fire Dept. Total - Fire Department Homeland Security 12810 Homeland Security Admin. 12820 Emergency Operations Ctr (EOC) Dept. Total - Homeland Security Police Department 12110 Police Legal Services 12120 Police Administration 12130 Central Patrol Bureau 12150 Crime Investigations 12160 Police Personnel Management 12170 Foothills Patrol Bureau 12180 Police Support Services 12210 PD - Fiscal Management 12215 PD - Tow Administration 12220 PD - Detention 12230 PD - Communications 12232 PS Training Ctr - Police 12233 PD - Special Operations 12235 PD - Emergency Management Dept. Total - Police Department Group Total - PUBLIC SAFETY: PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Env. Resources 12910 HazMat Incidence Response Group Total - PUBLIC WORKS: Fund Total - GENERAL: 511 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual Program Name FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget 1010 - NATIONAL EVENTS PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Transportation 16365 Transp - Stadium Mgmt Plan $30,000 Fund Total - NATIONAL EVENTS: $30,000 1040 - GENERAL SERVICES PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 13510 Equipment Management 13520 Fuel Services 13530 Parts Store Operations Dept. Total - Field Operations $4,176,985 $2,924,178 $1,558,073 $8,659,236 $4,271,346 $4,303,176 $1,919,344 $10,493,866 $4,264,152 $4,302,703 $1,919,344 $10,486,199 $3,959,223 $3,303,176 $1,818,371 $9,080,770 Fund Total - GENERAL SERVICES: $8,659,236 $10,493,866 $10,486,199 $9,080,770 ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Info. Technology 11520 Telephones $956,780 $1,014,119 $1,340,579 $977,252 Fund Total - TELEPHONE SERVICES: $956,780 $1,014,119 $1,340,579 $977,252 $2,239,824 $3,029,741 $3,029,741 $3,029,741 $2,239,824 $3,029,741 $3,029,741 $3,029,741 $2,209,843 $3,508,037 $3,508,037 $3,510,103 $2,209,843 $3,508,037 $3,508,037 $3,510,103 1100 - TELEPHONE SERVICES 1120 - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 13610 Equipment Replacement Fund Total - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT: 1140 - TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Info. Technology 11530 Technology Replacement Fund Total - TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT: 1190 - EMPLOYEE GROUPS ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Employee Groups 11110 GEMS $40,190 512 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $44,821 $26,451 $27,607 $139,069 $54,909 $54,909 $54,909 $30,000 $84,909 $30,000 $84,909 $30,000 $84,909 $139,069 $84,909 $84,909 $84,909 $61,198 $127,787 $127,787 $127,787 $61,198 $127,787 $127,787 $127,787 $298,729 $53,923 $352,652 $393,120 $84,627 $57,000 $534,747 $281,763 $84,627 $57,000 $423,390 $393,300 $127,394 $57,000 $577,694 $352,652 $534,747 $423,390 $577,694 $105,782 $181,131 $286,913 $142,223 $105,150 $247,373 $142,223 $105,150 $247,373 $142,223 $105,150 $247,373 $286,913 $247,373 $247,373 $247,373 COMMUNITY DEV. GROUP Economic Development 16110 YSC - Econ. Dev. $360,597 $323,051 $323,051 COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Parks & Recreation 13290 YSC - Parks & Rec $227,539 $262,000 $262,000 Program Name 11120 Diversity Committee 11130 Glendale Hispanic Network 11140 Holiday Event Dept. Total - Employee Groups Fund Total - EMPLOYEE GROUPS: 1220 - ARTS COMMISSION COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Library & Arts 15310 Arts Maintenance Fund Total - ARTS COMMISSION: 1240 - COURT SECURITY/BONDS APPOINTED OFFICIALS GROUP City Court 10510 Court Security 10520 Court Time Payments 10530 Fill the Gap Dept. Total - City Court Fund Total - COURT SECURITY/BONDS: 1260 - LIBRARY COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Library & Arts 15410 Library Book Fund 15420 Library Special Revenue Dept. Total - Library & Arts Fund Total - LIBRARY: 1280 - YOUTH SPORTS COMPLEX 513 Return to TOC $262,000 Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $45,792 $65,000 $65,000 $65,000 $633,928 $650,051 $650,051 $327,000 INTERNAL SERVICES GROUP Marketing and Comm. 10840 Mkt'g - Stadium Events $153,743 $169,000 $169,000 $106,500 PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Fire Department 12515 Fire - Fiesta Bowl Event 12520 Stadium - Fire Event Staffing Dept. Total - Fire Department $89,782 $274,228 $364,010 $159,942 $229,886 $389,828 $159,942 $229,886 $389,828 $159,942 $229,886 $389,828 $1,511,451 $311,870 $1,823,321 $1,336,109 $401,268 $1,737,377 $1,336,109 $401,268 $1,737,377 $1,341,354 $401,268 $1,742,622 $2,187,331 $2,127,205 $2,127,205 $2,132,450 $620,100 $77,335 $697,435 $645,734 $79,942 $725,676 $645,734 $79,942 $725,676 $645,734 $79,942 $725,676 $3,038,509 $3,021,881 $3,021,881 $2,964,626 PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Fire Department 12490 Arena - Fire Event Staffing $204,719 $299,456 $299,456 $300,008 Police Department 12190 Arena-PD Event Staffing $518,786 $836,672 $836,672 $836,831 Group Total - PUBLIC SAFETY: $723,505 $1,136,128 $1,136,128 $1,136,839 PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 16740 Arena - ROW Maintenance $37,607 $49,966 $49,966 $49,966 Transportation 16830 Arena - Transportation Ops. $11,299 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Program Name PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 13470 YSC - Facilities Mgt. Fund Total - YOUTH SPORTS COMPLEX: 1281 - STADIUM EVENT OPERATIONS Police Department 12231 Stadium - PD Event Staffing 12234 PD - Fiesta Bowl Event Dept. Total - Police Department Group Total - PUBLIC SAFETY: PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Transportation 16840 Stadium - Transportation Ops. 16845 Transp - Fiesta Bowl Event Dept. Total - Transportation Fund Total - STADIUM EVENT OPERATIONS: 1282 - ARENA EVENT OPERATIONS 514 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name Group Total - PUBLIC WORKS: Fund Total - ARENA EVENT OPERATIONS: FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $48,906 $64,966 $64,966 $64,966 $772,411 $1,201,094 $1,201,094 $1,201,805 $332,000 $332,000 $550,000 $332,000 $332,000 $550,000 $1,525,658 $1,700,000 $1,613,997 $1,700,000 $1,525,658 $1,700,000 $1,613,997 $1,700,000 $46,513 $10,000 $10,000 $31,118 $5,000 $30,000 1780 - ARENA SPECIAL REVENUE ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Finance 11420 Arena Renewal and Replacement Fund Total - ARENA SPECIAL REVENUE: 1790 - STADIUM CITY SALES TAX - AZSTA ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Finance 11400 AZSTA - Stadium Tax Refund Fund Total - STADIUM CITY SALES TAX - AZSTA: 1870 - MARKETING SELF SUST INTERNAL SERVICES GROUP Marketing and Comm. 14301 Audio/Visual - Self Sust. 14310 Tourism - Souvenir Program 14311 Convention & Visitors Bureau 14320 4th of July 14321 Glitter Spectacular 14322 Enchanted Evening 14323 Glitter and Glow 14324 Chocolate Affaire 14325 Jazz Festival 14326 Glitters Light 14327 Other Special Events 14329 Fiesta Glendale 14330 That Thursday Thing Dept. Total - Marketing and Comm. $49,724 $140,223 $87,097 $93,376 $132,344 $162,132 $179,184 $94,262 $40,172 $96,353 $1,121,380 $99,000 $44,700 $95,500 $104,000 $158,000 $155,798 $30,000 $0 $99,000 $44,700 $95,500 $104,000 $158,000 $155,798 $30,000 $99,000 $44,700 $95,500 $104,000 $158,000 $155,798 $30,000 $696,998 $696,998 $753,116 Fund Total - MARKETING SELF SUST: $1,121,380 $696,998 $696,998 $753,116 $798,305 $864,824 $834,824 $760,451 $298,893 $412,869 $412,869 $331,162 2530 - PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING CENTER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Fire Department 12590 PS Training Ops - Fire Police Department 12390 PS Training Ops - Police 515 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $1,097,198 $1,277,693 $1,247,693 $1,091,613 $586,763 $488,921 $488,921 $353,664 $1,683,961 $1,766,614 $1,736,614 $1,445,277 $5,907 $54,000 $54,000 $54,000 $5,907 $54,000 $54,000 $54,000 $175,660,291 $173,958,455 $175,124,027 $157,289,016 $451,811 $1,585,573 $619,776 $1,660,797 $451,811 $1,585,573 $619,776 $1,660,797 $8,588 $2,000,000 $4,184,112 $8,588 $2,000,000 $4,184,112 Program Name Group Total - PUBLIC SAFETY: PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 13480 PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Fund Total - PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING CENTER: 2538 - GLENDALE HEALTH CENTER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Fire Department 12711 Glendale Health Center Fund Total - GLENDALE HEALTH CENTER: TOTAL - GENERAL FUND GROUP SPECIAL REVENUE FUND GROUP 1300 - HOME GRANT COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Comm. Partnerships 30001 HOME Program Fund Total - HOME GRANT: 1310 - NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PGM COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Comm. Partnerships 30900 NSP Programs Fund Total - NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PGM: 1320 - C.D.B.G. COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Comm. Partnerships 31001 CDBG Programs Fund Total - C.D.B.G.: $2,274,925 $2,123,640 $760,027 $3,540,617 $2,274,925 $2,123,640 $760,027 $3,540,617 516 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $2,298,096 $3,338,672 $505,552 $6,142,320 $2,246,258 $2,843,822 $198,725 $5,288,805 $2,246,258 $2,843,822 $198,725 $5,288,805 $2,026,279 $2,687,943 $0 $4,714,222 $1,217,084 $869,097 $553,800 $1,556,373 $24,952 $483,396 $299,986 $5,004,688 $1,078,656 $744,747 $544,210 $1,177,980 $2,729 $476,937 $300,375 $4,325,634 $1,078,656 $744,747 $544,210 $1,177,980 $2,729 $476,937 $300,375 $4,325,634 $903,017 $707,617 $373,165 $1,093,283 $369,166 $301,709 $3,747,957 $11,147,008 $9,614,439 $9,614,439 $8,462,179 $11,147,008 $9,614,439 $9,614,439 $8,462,179 $108,871 $113,277 $1,913,526 $202,625 $309,177 $2,461,809 $5,237,647 $30,836 $591,295 $161,279 $90,861 $168,530 $11,167,585 $2,305,228 $262,905 $323,206 $2,392,864 $5,705,941 $65,310 $706,440 $518,529 $113,893 $131,550 $12,525,866 $2,305,228 $262,905 $323,121 $2,392,864 $5,205,941 $65,310 $706,440 $268,529 $113,893 $131,550 $11,775,781 $2,298,887 $223,934 $322,741 $2,391,129 $5,675,488 $8,105 $590,944 $578,348 $113,893 $12,203,469 $11,276,456 $12,639,143 $11,276,456 $12,639,143 $11,775,781 $12,203,469 $10,185,467 $11,985,031 $11,985,031 $12,586,512 1340 - HIGHWAY USER GAS TAX PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 16710 Right-of-Way Maintenance 16720 Street Maintenance 16730 Street Cleaning Dept. Total - Field Operations Transportation 16810 Traffic Signals 16820 Signs & Markings 16910 Transportation Administration 16920 Street Light Management 16930 Transportation Planning 16940 Traffic Studies 16950 Traffic Design and Development Dept. Total - Transportation Group Total - PUBLIC WORKS: Fund Total - HIGHWAY USER GAS TAX: 1660 - TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Engineering 16310 Transportation Engineering Pgm Transportation 16510 Transportation Program Mgmt 16520 Transportation Education 16525 Transit Management 16530 Dial-A-Ride 16540 Fixed Route 16550 Demand Management 16570 Intelligent Transportation Sys 16580 Traffic Mitigation 16590 Transportation CIP O&M 16600 Red Light Enforcement Dept. Total - Transportation Group Total - PUBLIC WORKS: Fund Total - TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX: 1700 - POLICE SALES TAX PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Police Department 12310 Patrol - Special Revenue Fund 517 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $10,185,467 $11,985,031 $11,985,031 $12,586,512 $5,191,114 $5,692,430 $5,682,085 $6,135,642 $5,191,114 $5,692,430 $5,682,085 $6,135,642 $850,677 $853,241 $853,241 $748,497 $850,677 $853,241 $853,241 $748,497 $617,901 $552,968 $552,968 $538,916 $617,901 $552,968 $552,968 $538,916 $365,290 $390,527 $390,527 $412,557 $365,290 $390,527 $390,527 $412,557 $74,569 $97,881 $97,997 $98,278 $74,569 $97,881 $97,997 $98,278 $99,114 $99,114 $0 Program Name Fund Total - POLICE SALES TAX: 1720 - FIRE SALES TAX PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Fire Department 12610 Fire - Special Revenue Fund Fund Total - FIRE SALES TAX: 1740 - CIVIC CENTER INTERNAL SERVICES GROUP Civic Center 11710 Civic Center Fund Total - CIVIC CENTER: 1760 - AIRPORT OPERATING COMMUNITY DEV. GROUP Airport 16410 Airport Operations Fund Total - AIRPORT OPERATING: 1820 - CAP GRANT INTERNAL SERVICES GROUP Comm. Action Program 32040 Community Action Program (CAP Fund Total - CAP GRANT: 1830 - EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANTS COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Comm. Partnerships 31905 Emergency Shelter Grant Fund Total - EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANTS: 1840 - OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE GRANTS ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Management & Budget 32010 Grant Match Funds - Mgt & Bdgt $104,191 518 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Library & Arts 36006 Grant Approp - Library $139,901 $500,000 $500,000 $550,000 Parks & Recreation 35004 Grant Approp - Parks & Rec 35008 Youth Football Hub Grant Dept. Total - Parks & Recreation $50,200 $39,217 $89,417 $500,000 $32,211 $532,211 $500,000 $32,211 $532,211 $550,000 $550,000 Group Total - COMMUNITY SERVICES: $229,318 $1,032,211 $1,032,211 $1,100,000 MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS GROUP Grants 32118 Miscellaneous Grants 32136 DV Pilot Project Grant Dept. Total - Grants $260,412 $98,601 $359,013 $4,920,853 $66,431 $4,987,284 $4,917,868 $69,416 $4,987,284 $7,274,833 $66,606 $7,341,439 PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Fire Department 34001 Grant Approp - Fire Dept $944,174 $2,925,000 $2,925,000 $4,500,000 $80,097 $101,468 $2,130,507 $2,312,072 $100,688 $106,983 $3,400,000 $3,607,671 $100,688 $106,983 $3,400,000 $3,607,671 $102,667 $117,206 $4,500,000 $4,719,873 $3,256,246 $6,532,671 $6,532,671 $9,219,873 Fund Total - OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE GRANTS: $3,948,768 $12,651,280 $12,651,280 $17,661,312 $267,850 $457,820 $725,670 $646,272 $140,000 $786,272 Program Name Police Department 33002 Victim Rights - PD 33018 VOCA 2003-113 33021 Grant Approp - Police Dept Dept. Total - Police Department Group Total - PUBLIC SAFETY: 1842 - ARRA STIMULUS GRANTS COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Comm. Partnerships 37020 Homeless Prevention HPRP 37021 CDBG-R Dept. Total - Comm. Partnerships MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS GROUP Grants 37060 ARWRF Facility UV System Imp 37061 Well 43 Variable Drive Retrofi 37062 Public Safety/Court Lighting 37063 Sports Courts Lighting Retrofi 37064 Main Library Lighting 37065 Build Safe Engy Prog Enhance 37066 Traffic Signal LED Conversion 37067 Energy Matters Public Educat $986,000 $97,500 $88,000 $140,000 $431,831 $35,000 $84,000 $172,519 519 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate 37068 Program Manager 37069 WebPortal Dept. Total - Grants FY 2011 Budget $234,150 $55,000 $2,324,000 PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Police Department 37001 Stop Violence - Women 37002 JAG Recovery Act Dept. Total - Police Department $20,982 Fund Total - ARRA STIMULUS GRANTS: $20,982 $115,978 $740,863 $856,841 $746,652 $3,967,113 1860 - RICO FUNDS PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP Police Department 32020 Federal RICO 32030 State RICO Dept. Total - Police Department Fund Total - RICO FUNDS: $4,230 $1,501,886 $1,506,116 $225,000 $1,099,312 $1,324,312 $225,000 $1,099,312 $1,324,312 $225,000 $1,099,389 $1,324,389 $1,506,116 $1,324,312 $1,324,312 $1,324,389 $9,267 $127,743 $166,259 $175,642 $376,692 $42,317 $3,318 $51,345 $0 $1,478 $954,061 $20,000 $95,000 $197,598 $215,067 $353,100 $89,213 $21,118 $67,919 $0 $5,000 $1,064,015 $20,000 $95,000 $197,598 $215,068 $353,100 $73,363 $31,883 $67,919 $0 $5,000 $1,058,931 $15,000 $135,000 $272,748 $249,922 $326,735 $73,363 $92,919 $0 $5,000 $1,170,687 $954,061 $1,064,015 $1,058,931 $1,170,687 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 1880 - PARKS & RECREATION SELF SUST COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Parks & Recreation 14820 Rec Self Sust-Administration 14825 Adult Center Self Sustaining 14830 Rec Self Sust-Foothills Rec 14840 Sports Self Sustaining 14850 Youth and Teen Self Sustaining 14860 Spec Events & Prgm Self Sust 14870 Rec Self Sust-Audio/Visual 14890 Aquatic Self Sustaining 14891 GESD-Reimb Division 14892 Glendale Community Center Dept. Total - Parks & Recreation Fund Total - PARKS & RECREATION SELF SUST: 1885 - PARKS & RECREATION DESIGNATED COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Parks & Recreation 13110 O'Neil Park Maintenance 13120 Apollo Pool Repair 13130 Cardinal Pool Repair 13140 Cactus Pool Repair 13150 GCC Pool Repair $13,762 $2,935 $146,343 $4,279 520 Return to TOC $4,800 $19,000 $19,000 $20,000 Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $6,793 $229 $24 $35,000 $5,000 $2,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $9,000 $9,000 $5,000 $44,038 $177,038 $30,200 $5,000 $2,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $22,272 $196,637 $35,000 $5,000 $2,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $9,000 $9,000 $5,000 $44,038 $177,038 $5,000 $44,038 $177,038 $196,637 $177,038 $177,038 $177,038 $49,049,388 $60,751,518 $60,290,085 $74,872,115 $3,063 $7,066 $6,066 $6,066 $3,063 $7,066 $6,066 $6,066 ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89807 2000 Advisor Fees $1,427 $6,030 $1,030 $1,030 Fund Total - HURF/STREET BONDS: $1,427 $6,030 $1,030 $1,030 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $6,857 $6,857 Program Name 13160 Ironwood Pool Repair 13170 Dedicate A Tree 13180 Desert Valley Park 13190 GESD ES Ballfields 13210 Desert Mirage Park 13220 Desert Gardens Park 13230 Discovery Park 13231 Kellis Ballfield Lights 13232 Copper Canyon Ballfield Lights 13234 Ironwood HS Light 13235 Elsie McCarthy Pk. Maint Dept. Total - Parks & Recreation Fund Total - PARKS & RECREATION DESIGNATED: TOTAL - SPECIAL REVENUE FUND GROUP CAPITAL FUND GROUP 1980 - STREETS CONSTR. - 1999 AUTH ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89802 1980 Advisor Fees Fund Total - STREETS CONSTR. - 1999 AUTH: 2000 - HURF/STREET BONDS 2040 - PUBLIC SAFETY CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89806 2040 Advisor Fees Fund Total - PUBLIC SAFETY CONSTRUCTION: 2060 - PARKS CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89804 2060 Advisor Fees $1,460 521 Return to TOC $7,857 Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name Fund Total - PARKS CONSTRUCTION: FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $1,460 $7,857 $6,857 $6,857 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 2080 - GOV'T FACILITIES - 1999 AUTH ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89814 2080 Advisor Fees Fund Total - GOV'T FACILITIES - 1999 AUTH: 2100 - ECONOMIC DEV. CONSTR-1999 AUTH ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89815 2100 Advisor Fees Fund Total - ECONOMIC DEV. CONSTR-1999 AUTH: 2180 - FLOOD CONTROL CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89808 2180 Advisor Fees Fund Total - FLOOD CONTROL CONSTRUCTION: $3,701 $3,213 $5,213 $5,213 $3,701 $3,213 $5,213 $5,213 $17,819 $13,568 $13,568 $13,568 $17,819 $13,568 $13,568 $13,568 $27,470 $37,734 $38,734 $38,734 $2,368,751 $2,484,306 $2,484,306 $2,659,473 $2,755 $3,289 $3,289 $3,289 2210 - TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECT ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89813 2210 Advisor Fees Fund Total - TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECT: TOTAL - CAPITAL FUND GROUP ENTERPRISE FUND GROUP 2360 - WATER AND SEWER ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Finance 17020 Customer Service Office Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89805 2360 Advisor Fees 522 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $10,417 $4,089 $17,261 $17,222 $17,514 $38,025 $17,222 $17,514 $38,025 $17,222 $17,514 $38,025 $2,386,012 $2,522,331 $2,522,331 $2,697,498 COMMUNITY DEV. GROUP Building Safety 17510 Cross Connection Control $220,324 $221,184 $221,099 $220,067 PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Env. Resources 17010 Environmental Resources 17410 Water Conservation 17420 Water Quality Dept. Total - Env. Resources $515,171 $254,625 $1,041,501 $1,811,297 $527,446 $320,750 $1,165,662 $2,013,858 $511,984 $271,676 $1,045,662 $1,829,322 $524,231 $320,901 $1,162,187 $2,007,319 $6,510,377 $85,724 $993,167 $266,625 $524,511 $104,571 $2,013,049 $3,258,635 $1,024,982 $179,786 $2,475,310 $999,995 $1,718,090 $3,201,427 $434,064 $3,056,645 $1,030,532 $2,544,889 $523,268 $3,360,611 $2,665,617 $36,971,875 $6,334,223 $46,755 $1,017,114 $285,490 $667,087 $87,000 $2,081,276 $3,703,322 $1,058,891 $194,016 $3,482,182 $1,319,606 $1,631,850 $3,694,169 $631,652 $3,374,450 $1,348,593 $4,220,690 $535,124 $4,500,000 $3,191,798 $43,405,288 $6,334,223 $46,755 $1,017,114 $285,490 $667,087 $87,000 $2,081,276 $3,703,322 $1,058,891 $194,016 $3,482,182 $1,319,606 $1,631,850 $3,694,169 $631,652 $3,374,450 $1,348,593 $4,220,690 $535,124 $4,500,000 $3,191,798 $43,405,288 $6,343,982 $122,107 $1,097,575 $286,629 $667,683 $87,000 $2,176,656 $3,699,346 $1,082,739 $193,583 $3,482,182 $1,415,952 $1,627,555 $3,681,059 $758,316 $3,536,368 $1,348,944 $4,277,656 $533,992 $4,500,000 $3,278,968 $44,198,292 Group Total - PUBLIC WORKS: $38,783,172 $45,419,146 $45,234,610 $46,205,611 Fund Total - WATER AND SEWER: $41,389,508 $48,162,661 $47,978,040 $49,123,176 $3,087,233 $100,873 $604,693 $3,055,594 $171,900 $561,345 $2,828,322 $140,400 $583,003 $2,926,869 $169,400 $782,455 Program Name 89809 2400 Advisor Fees 89810 2420 Advisor Fees Dept. Total - Lease Pmts/OtherFees Group Total - ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS: Utilities 17110 Utilities Administration 17115 Safety Administration 17120 Information Management 17130 Public Service Representatives 17140 System Security 17150 Property Management 17160 Arrowhead Reclamation Plant 17170 West Area Plant 17210 Customer Service - Field 17220 Irrigation 17230 Raw Water Usage 17240 Central System Control 17250 Pyramid Peak Plant 17260 Cholla Treatment Plant 17280 Central System Maintenance 17290 Water Distribution 17300 Meter Maintenance 17310 Oasis Water Campus 17610 Pretreatment Program 17620 SROG (91st Ave) Plant 17630 Wastewater Collection Dept. Total - Utilities 2440 - LANDFILL PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 17710 Landfill 17720 Gas Management System 17730 Solid Waste Admin 523 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget $712,487 $1,916,556 $6,421,842 $959,015 $2,135,602 $6,883,456 $944,012 $2,016,588 $6,512,325 $940,620 $2,223,685 $7,043,029 $6,421,842 $6,883,456 $6,512,325 $7,043,029 $865,914 $3,384,015 $6,877,784 $2,494,293 $13,622,006 $1,002,520 $3,702,069 $7,068,599 $2,689,099 $14,462,287 $859,520 $3,392,359 $6,843,307 $2,449,818 $13,545,004 $939,201 $3,493,979 $6,960,004 $2,500,010 $13,893,194 $13,622,006 $14,462,287 $13,545,004 $13,893,194 $1,610,887 $8,364,912 $10,903,598 $8,487,034 $1,610,887 $8,364,912 $10,903,598 $8,487,034 $63,044,243 $77,873,316 $78,938,967 $78,546,433 $1,515,185 $2,760,000 $2,760,000 $2,844,278 Fund Total - RISK MANAGEMENT SELF INSURANCE: $1,515,185 $2,760,000 $2,760,000 $2,844,278 $1,348,582 $1,407,000 $1,407,000 $1,407,000 $1,348,582 $1,407,000 $1,407,000 $1,407,000 Program Name 17740 Recycling 17750 MRF Operations Dept. Total - Field Operations Fund Total - LANDFILL: 2480 - SANITATION PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 17810 Sanitation Roll-off 17820 Sanitation Frontload 17830 Curb Service 17840 Residential-Loose Trash Collec Dept. Total - Field Operations Fund Total - SANITATION: 2500 - PUB HOUSING BUDGET ACTIVITIES COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Comm. Partnerships 17910 Community Housing Fund Total - PUB HOUSING BUDGET ACTIVITIES: TOTAL - ENTERPRISE FUND GROUP INTERNAL SERVICE FUND GROUP 2540 - RISK MANAGEMENT SELF INSURANCE ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Human Resources 18010 Risk Mgmt Trust Fund 2560 - WORKERS COMP. SELF INSURANCE ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Human Resources 18110 Worker's Compensation Fund Total - WORKERS COMP. SELF INSURANCE: 524 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Budget FY 2010 Estimate FY 2011 Budget ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS GROUP Human Resources 18210 Benefit Programs $22,555,304 $24,481,185 $24,481,185 $24,481,185 Fund Total - BENEFITS TRUST FUND: $22,555,304 $24,481,185 $24,481,185 $24,481,185 $25,419,071 $28,648,185 $28,648,185 $28,732,463 $313,200,463 $341,269,208 $343,039,998 $339,478,761 Program Name 2580 - BENEFITS TRUST FUND TOTAL - INTERNAL SERVICE FUND GROUP TOTAL - OPERATING BUDGET 525 Return to TOC Schedule Four FY 2011 Transfers Between Funds D ll iin Thousands) Th d) (All Dollars T 1000 General Fund R 1600 - DIF Roadwayy Imp'ss Imp A N ** 1640 LTAF S F E R F * 1780 1660 p Arena Spec Transport. Transport Rev R O * 1770 j Zanjero Spec Rev M O 1900 - G G.O. Bond Debt 1000 - General Fund F d 1190 Employee Groups 2440 Landfill Fund $6,000 $6 000 Total In: $6,000 $12 $12 * 1280 - Youth Sports p Complex $302 $302 T * 1281 R S Stadium d u Event ve Ops. Ops $1,703 $1,703 R A * 1282 - Arena Event E t Ops. O $651 $651 A N 1660 Transportation T t ti $$900 $$900 N S * 1740 - Civic C t Center $361 $36 $361 $36 S F * 1760 Oper Airport Oper. $$32 $$32 F E * 1820 - CAP Grants $58 $58 E R 1870 - Mkt'g Mkt g Self-Sust. Self Sust $ $640 $640 R T 1920 - HURF Bond Debt T * 1940 - MPC Debt O 1970 - Transp. Debt * 2210 Transp. p Constr. $$0 $ , $1,000 $ , $1,000 $ , $2,700 $13,763 $ , 2500 - Comm Comm. Housing $307 $ Total Out: $18,729 $18 729 $6,295 $ , , $4,700 $1,249 $ , $21,307 , T $7,328 $ ,328 $7,328 $ ,32 O $7,653 $7,653 $7,653 $7,653 $307 $1,000 $1 000 T $0 R A N $15,981 $15 981 S F $6,295 $6 295 E R $1,249 $1 249 F R $2,700 $2 700 O $6,000 $6 000 $51,954 $51 954 M revenues, expenses expenses, grant opportunities opportunities, etc etc. * Actual transfer amounts will vary based on actual revenues state s budget budget.. ** LTAF distributions were suspended by the Arizona State Legislature in FY 2011 in an effort to balance the state's 526 Return to TOC Schedule Five Expenditure Limitation and Summary of Tax Levy and Tax Rate Information Expenditure Limitation Voter Approved Expenditure Limitation Estimated Expenditures Estimated Amount of Exclusions Total Estimated Expenditures Subject to Limitation 1. Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (ARS 42-17051.A) 2009-10 Fiscal Year $538,125,195 $775,000,000 ($287,093,633) $487,906,367 Estimated 2010-11 Fiscal Year $547,475,967 $676,000,000 ($227,271,294) $448,728,706 $4,532,085 $4,701,477 $4,183,368 $29,191,301 $33,374,669 $3,724,139 $24,022,147 $27,746,286 2. Amount Received from Primary Property Taxation in the 2004-05 Fiscal Year in Excess of the Sum of that Year's Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (ARS 42-302.C.14) plus Amount of Escaped Taxes Collected (ARS 42-17005) 3. Property Tax Levy Amounts A. Primary Property Taxes B. Secondary Property Taxes C. Total Property Tax Levy Amounts 4. Property Taxes Collected* A. Primary Property Taxes 1. 2009-10 Levy 2. Prior Years' Levies 3. Total Primary Property Taxes B. Secondary Property Taxes 1. 2009-10 Levy 2. Prior Years' Levies 3. Total Secondary Property Taxes $4,099,701 $83,667 $4,183,368 $28,607,475 $583,826 $29,191,301 5. Property Tax Rates A. City of Glendale Tax Rate 1. Primary Property Tax Rate 2. Secondary Property Tax Rate Total Glendale Tax Rate B. Special Assessment District Tax Rates Secondary property tax rates - as of the date the proposed budget was prepared, Glendale was operating no special assessment districts for which secondary property taxes are levied. 6. Truth In Taxation Calculation A. Current Primary Net Assessed Valuation of Property Subject to Taxation in Prior Year B. Current Primary Net Assessed Valuation C. New Property Subject to Taxation D. Change in Primary Net Assessed Valuation Due to New Property E. Maxmimum Truth in Taxation Tax Levy F. Amount Over/(Under) Truth in Taxation Tax Levy $0.2252/$100 $1.3699/$100 $1.5951/$100 $0.2252/$100 $1.3699/$100 $1.5951/$100 $1,626,195,211 $1,653,702,774 $27,507,563 1.7% $4,254,131 ($529,992) * Includes actual property taxes collected as of the date the proposed budget was prepared plus estimated property tax collections for the remainder of the year. 527 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Mayor - 111 10010 Office of the Mayor Asst to the Mayor Exec Administrative Asst Exec Administrative Asst II Mayor Mgmt Aide Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Mayor Total: Council Office - 112 10110 Council Office Council Asst Council Srvcs Admin Exec Administrative Asst Secretary Sr Secretary Program Total: 10120 Cholla District Council Member Vice Mayor 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 10130 Barrel District Council Member Vice Mayor 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 7 2 7 7 7 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1 13 1 13 1 13 1 13 1 12 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 Program Total: City Clerk - 121 10210 City Clerk City Clerk Dep City Clerk Mgmt Aide Secretary Sr Secretary 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1000 10140 Sahuaro District Council Member 10150 Cactus District Council Member 10160 Yucca District Council Member 10170 Ocotillo District Council Member Council Office Total: FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Program Total: 528 Return to TOC 1 1 4 1 4 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title City Clerk - 121 10220 Records Management Mgmt Aide Office Asst Records Mgmt Asst Records Supv Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 8 1 1 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 1 9 1 7 8 8 9 9 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 Program Total: 4 4 0.5 4.5 0.5 4.5 2 City Auditor Total: 4 4 4.5 4.5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 City Clerk Total: City Manager - 131 10310 City Manager Asst City Mgr City Manager City Mgr Relations Dir Exec Administrative Asst Mgmt Asst Mgmt Asst II Mgmt Asst to the City Mgr Special Projects Admin Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 City Manager Total: City Auditor - 132 10710 City Auditor Asst City Auditor City Auditor Internal Auditor Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Intergovt. Programs - 133 10910 Intergovernmental Programs Dep Intergov Programs Dir Intergov Programs Admin Intergov Programs Dir Legislative Coordinator Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Intergovt. Programs Total: 529 Return to TOC 2 1 2 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Env. Resources - 135 17010 Environmental Resources Environmental Program Mgr Environmental Resource Dir Sr Secretary Program Total: Fund FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 2360 2360 2360 2 1 1 4 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 17410 Water Conservation Environmental Program Mgr Water Conservation Spec Program Total: 2400 2400 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 17420 Water Quality Chemist Environmental Program Mgr Laboratory Tech Water Quality Data Coord Water Quality Lab Mgr Program Total: 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 5 1 3 1 1 11 5 5 5 5 3 1 1 10 3 1 1 10 3 1 1 10 3 1 1 10 17 17 17 17 17 Env. Resources Total: City Court - 141 10410 City Court Account Spec II Accountant I City Judge Coll Rep Court Accounting Supv Court Admin Court Clerk I Court Clerk II Court Clerk III Court Hearing Officer Court Interpreter Court Supv Dep Court Admin Judicial Asst Police Officer Presiding City Judge Sr Secretary 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 10510 Court Security Police Officer 10520 Court Time Payments Court Clerk II City Court Total: 1240 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 6 24 3 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 50 2 1 1 1 4 26 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 50 2 1 1 1 3 27 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 50 2 1 1 1 3 25 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 48 2 1 1 1 3 23.2 2 1 1.75 1 1 2 1 0.8 42.75 1 1 1 1 1 49 1 44.75 1240 51 530 Return to TOC 51 51 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title City Attorney - 151 10610 City Attorney Asst City Attorney Asst City Prosecutor City Attorney City Prosecutor Dep City Attorney Exec Legal Asst Legal Asst Mgmt Asst to the City Attorney Secretary Sr Asst City Prosecutor Sr Secretary Victim Assistance Caseworker Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 City Attorney Total: Marketing and Comm. - 154 10810 Marketing Asst Dep City Mgr Comm Dir Creative Designer Creative Services Mgr Dep Comm Dir Economic Development Admin Exec Comm Dir Marketing & Comm Admin Marketing & Comm Coord Marketing & Comm Mgr Mgmt Asst Sr Marketing & Comm Mgr Sr Secretary Web Content Program Mgr Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 10820 Tourism Customer Assistance Rep Dep Comm Dir Tourism Coordinator Tourism Manager Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 14110 City-Wide Special Events Special Events Coord Special Events Division Mgr Special Events Program Manager Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 531 Return to TOC FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 3 7 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 5 1 27 3 7 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 5 1 27 3 8 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 3 9 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 7 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 5 1 28 5 1 28 5 1 26 27 27 28 28 26 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 12 1 1 1 1 1 2 12 1 1 1 1 1 2 13 1 1 1 2 1 2 14 1 1 1 2 10 0.5 1 1 1 3.5 0.5 1 1 1 3.5 0.5 1 1 1 3.5 0.5 1 1 1 3.5 0.5 1 1 1 3.5 1 2 3 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Marketing and Comm. - 154 14115 Audio/Visual Audio/Visual Coordinator Audio/Visual Network Spec Program Total: 14120 Cable Communications Cable Media Administrator Media Production Spec Television Exec Prod/Anchor Television Producer/Host Video Production Coord Program Total: Fund FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1000 1000 1 1 2 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Marketing and Comm.Total: Conv./Media/Parking - 155 10890 Convention/Media/Parking Chief Broadcast Engineer 10891 Media Center Operations Chief Broadcast Engineer Conv./Media/Parking Total: Comm. Action Program - 171 32040 Community Action Program (CAP) Community Action Program Admin Community Eligibility Rep Community Eligibility Spec Customer Assistance Rep Mgmt Aide Office Asst Program Total: 11020 Benefits Employee Benefits Rep HR Generalist Occupational Health Nurse Sr HR Analyst Program Total: 1 1 1 1 1 4 7 1 1 4 7 1 1 4 7 1 1 4 7 25.5 26.5 27.5 28.5 26.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.5 2 1 1 0.5 7 1 1.5 2 1 1 0.5 7 1 1.5 2 1 1 0.5 7 1 2.5 1 1 1 0.5 7 1 2.5 1 1 1 0.5 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1.75 1.75 2 1.75 1 1 3.75 1 1 3.75 1 3 1 2.75 1000 1820 1820 1820 1820 1820 1820 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 532 Return to TOC 1 4 1 1 7 1 1000 Comm. Action ProgramTotal: Human Resources - 191 11010 Risk Management/Safety Employee Safety Specialist Loss Control Supervisor Occupational Health Nurse Risk Mgr Risk Mgmt Claims Analyst Worker's Comp Claims Analyst Program Total: 1 1 1 2 0.25 1 1.25 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Human Resources - 191 11030 Human Resources Administration Asst HR Dir Dep HR Dir HR & Risk Mgmt Dir HR Generalist HR Program Coord HR Tech Mgmt Asst Sr HR Analyst Sr HR Technology Analyst Program Total: 11040 Employment Services HR Analyst HR Generalist HR Program Coord HR Program Mgr HR Spec HR Tech Sr HR Analyst Program Total: 11050 Employee Relations HR Analyst HR Generalist HR Program Mgr HR Tech Sr HR Analyst Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 11060 Compensation Dep HR Dir HR Analyst HR Program Mgr HR Tech HRMS Analyst Mgmt Asst Sr HR Tech 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 11070 Organizational Development Dep HR Dir HR Analyst HR Generalist HR Program Mgr Sr HR Analyst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 18010 Risk Mgmt Trust Fund Risk Mgmt Claims Analyst Human Resources Total: 2540 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 2 1 1 1 1 0.75 1 2 0.75 0.75 1 2 6.75 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 6 1 7.5 1 2 1 6 2 2 2 0.75 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.75 4 3 1 5 2.5 1 5.5 1 1 0.75 1 5.75 1 1 1 2 1 1 0.75 3 2 2.75 1 0.75 1 2.75 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2.5 1 2.5 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 5.5 5.5 6 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 30 1 21.25 1 2 30 533 Return to TOC 1 1 2 30 30 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fac & Fin Mgmt - 210 11220 Facilities & Financial Mgmt Dep City Mgr Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: Fund FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1000 1000 Fac & Fin Mgmt Total: Admin Svcs Admin. - 220 11210 Administration Services Admin. Dep City Mgr Exec Administrative Asst Exec Administrative Asst II Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 Admin Svcs Admin.Total: Finance - 221 11310 Finance Administration Account Spec Dep Finance Dir Finance Dir/CFO Financial Administrative Coord Mgmt Asst Office Support Supv Secretary Sr Secretary Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 11320 Accounting Services Account Spec Account Spec II Accountant I Accountant II Accounting Mgr Office Support Supv Payroll & Accts Payable Supv Payroll Spec Secretary Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 11340 License/Collection Account Spec Billing & Compliance Spec Coll Rep Reg Licensing & Compl Analyst Sr Applications Analyst Sr Billing & Compliance Spec Tax & License Mgr Tax Auditor Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 534 Return to TOC 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 8 1 1 4 2 5 5 2 3 2 4 4 2 1 1 19 19 16 1 2 1 2 1 3 10 1 3 1 2 1 3 11 1 2 1 0.5 1 3 8.5 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 2 2 4 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 7 2 1 7 2 1 9 4 4 3 5 5 2 1 1 2 1 21 5 5 2 1 1 2 1 21 5 5 2 1 1 2 0.5 1 1 0.5 1 1 1 2 1 3 9.5 1 2 1 3 9.5 1 4 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Finance - 221 11350 Regulatory & Communication Regulatory Licensing Analyst 17020 Customer Service Office Account Spec Account Spec II Billing & Compliance Spec Billing Supv Business Equip Tech Cashier Coll Rep Customer Relations Supv Duplicating Coord Office Asst Revenue Recovery Supv Secretary Sr Account Spec Sr Customer Assistance Rep Program Total: Fund 1000 1 1 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 1 4 7 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 1 1 4 7 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 1 1 4 7 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 1 5 2.5 35.5 5 2.5 35.5 74 Finance Total: Info. Technology - 231 11510 Information Technology Applications Analyst Assoc Sys Admin Chief Info Technology Officer Computer Ops Supv Database Admin Dep Chief Info Tech Officer Help Desk Support Spec Help Desk Supv Info Technology Project Mgr Info Technology Mgr Info Technology Project Mgr Mgmt Aide Network Engineer Sr Applications Analyst Sr GIS Analyst Sr Network Engineer Sr Sys Admin Sr Sys Analyst Sys Admin Sys Analyst Program Total: 11520 Telephones Voice Comms Admin 11530 Technology Replacement Mgmt Aide Info. Technology Total: FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1100 1 4 7 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 4 7 1 2 6 3 1 1 5 2.5 35.5 1 1 5 2.5 35.5 1 1 5 2.5 35.5 74 73.5 73.5 64 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 6 28 4 7 28 3 6 29 3 6 29 3 5 25 1 1 1 1 1 29 1 30 1 31 1 31 1 27 1140 535 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Management & Budget - 241 11360 Purchasing Contract Analyst Contract Spec Materials Mgr 1000 1000 1000 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 1 4 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 2.75 1 1 5.75 1 2.75 1 1 5.75 1 2.75 1 1 5.75 1 2.75 1 1 5.75 2.75 1 1 4.75 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 2 6 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 1000 1000 1000 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 Program Total: 11370 Warehouse Materials Control Asst Materials Control Spec Materials Logistics Mgr Secretary Program Total: 11610 Budget & Research Asst Budget Dir Budget Analyst Budget Coord Budget Dir Sr Budget Analyst Program Total: 11620 Grants Administration Grants Admin Secretary Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: Management & Budget Total: Police Department - 312 12110 Police Legal Services Police Officer Police Sergeant Public Safety Staff Attorney Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 536 Return to TOC FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 3 1 1 1 1 2 6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 18.25 18.25 18.25 18.25 15.75 2 3 1 1 3 1 4 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Police Department - 312 12120 Police Administration Asst Police Chief Asst Police Dir Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Police Chief Police Commander Police Crime/Stats Analyst Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Plan & Research Analyst Police Sergeant Police Tech Srvcs Mgr Secretary Sr Secretary Victim Assistance Caseworker Program Total: 12130 Central Patrol Bureau Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Office Support Supv Police Aide Police Commander Police Community Srvcs Officer Police Crime Prevention Spec Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Officer (Assignment) Police Records Tech Police Sergeant Police Volunteer Coord Secretary Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 537 Return to TOC FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 4 2 3 1 3 1 5 2 1 2 1 5 1 1 4 3 22 26 19 1 1 1 1 3 5 139 2 3 4 108 3 3 105.5 1 1 3 5 96 5 101 18 14 1 1 134 14 1 1 128.5 1 12 13 1 120 120 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 4 1 1 15 1 1 1 4 3 1 178 1 1 11 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Police Department - 312 12150 Crime Investigations Asst Police Chief Mgmt Aide Police Commander Police Crime/Stats Analyst Police Crisis Srvcs Coord Police Identification Supv Police Identification Tech Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Officer (Assignment) Police Sergeant Police Tech Srvcs Bureau Admin Sr Secretary Victim Assistance Caseworker Victim Assistance Supv Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 12160 Police Personnel Management Police Commander Police Crisis Srvcs Coord Police Hiring Coord Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Officer (Assignment) Police Sergeant Police Tech Srvcs Mgr Police Volunteer Coord Secur Officer Secur Srvcs Coord Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 12170 Foothills Patrol Bureau Police Commander Police Crime Prevention Spec Police Crime/Stats Analyst Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Sergeant Secretary Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 538 Return to TOC FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 3 3 5 2 45 2 6 1 1 2 1 72 2 5 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 6 3 58 1 5 3 57 9 9 5 4 48 1 7 1 1 2 5 3 56 1 7 1 3 1 3 1 2 81 80 85 83 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 6 1 3 1 12 14 5 2 4 1 2 1 9 1 2 4 1 14 4 1 19 4 1 21 5 1 1 4 1 29 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 4 92 13 1 114 5 90 13 1 113 5 84.5 12 1 106.5 4 95 12 1 116 1 3 1 25 1 1 4 92 11 1 110 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Police Department - 312 12180 Police Support Services Customer Assistance Rep Police Comm Spec Police Comm Supv Police Comm Sys Spec Police Comm Sys Tech Police Community Srvcs Officer Police Detention Officer Police Hiring Coord Police Identification Supv Police Identification Tech Police Officer Police Ops Mgr Police Polygraph Examiner Police Property/Evid Custodian Police Records Tech Police Sergeant Police Support Srvcs Supv Police Tech Srvcs Bureau Admin Police Tech Srvcs Mgr Property Room Supv Public Safety Tech Srvcs Admin Secretary Sr Secretary Srvc Worker III (Fleet) Sys Analyst Program Total: 12190 Arena-PD Event Staffing Public Safety Events Scheduler Public Safety Events Scheduler Program Total: 12215 PD - Tow Administration Mgmt Aide 12220 PD - Detention Police Detention Officer Police Support Srvcs Supv Police Tech Srvcs Mgr Program Total: 12230 PD - Communications Comm Sys Tech Police Comm Spec Police Comm Supv Police Comm Sys Spec Police Comm Sys Tech Police Ops Mgr Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1282 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 30 4 1 1 9 9 1 1 8.25 1 8 1 1 1 1 10 14 1 1 3 16.5 1 5 1 3 15.5 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 105 3 1 1 61.75 1 1 1 1 1 1 539 Return to TOC 8 1 1 4 3 15.5 1 2 1 1 1 3 14.5 3 12.5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 44.5 31.5 19.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 3 1 12 9 3 1 13 9 3 1 13 6 3 1 10 23.25 4 1 1 1 30.25 26.5 5 1 1 1 34.5 1 27.5 5 1 1 24.5 5 1 1 35.5 1 32.5 1 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 9 2.5 1 1000 1000 1000 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Police Department - 312 12231 Stadium - PD Event Staffing Mgmt Aide Police Support Srvcs Supv Public Safety Events Scheduler Mgmt Aide Public Safety Events Scheduler Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1281 1281 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 1 2 12233 PD - Special Operations Mgmt Aide Police Aide Police Commander Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Officer (Assignment) Police Sergeant Police Support Srvcs Supv Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 12235 PD - Emergency Management Asst Homeland Security Dir Building Maintenance Worker Emergency Srvcs Coord Homeland Security Dir Mgmt Aide Sys Admin Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 540 Return to TOC 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 24 1 9 1 42 4 1 4 27 1 10 1 48 4 1 3 25 1 9 1 44 1 1 2 1 3 24 1 9 38 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Police Department - 312 12310 Patrol - Special Revenue Fund Computer Ops Supv Database Admin Info Technology Mgr Info Technology Project Mgr Legal Asst Mgmt Aide Police Aide Police Comm Spec Police Detention Officer Police Hiring Coord Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Officer Trainee Police Records Tech Police Sergeant Police Support Srvcs Supv Police Tech Srvcs Mgr Programs Admin Secretary Secur Officer Sr HR Analyst Victim Assistance Caseworker Program Total: 12390 PS Training Ops - Police Police Lieutenant Secur Officer Program Total: 32030 State RICO Secretary 33002 Victim Rights - PD Victim Assistance Caseworker 33018 VOCA 2003-113 Victim Assistance Caseworker Police Department Total: Fund 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 4 6 4 6 1 1 6 3 10 9 23 32 1 75 3 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 10 9 1 1 75 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 10 9 1 1 74 1 3 4 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 118 1 118 33 42 1 1 1 118 2530 2530 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1860 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 1 628.5 1 590.5 1840 1840 541 Return to TOC 2 543.5 2 557.5 2 628.5 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fire Department - 331 12410 Fire Administration Asst Fire Chief Dep Fire Chief (40 hrs) Dept Accting & Budget Mgr Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Budget & Project Mgr Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (52 Hrs) Fire Chief Fire Comm Outreach Coord Fire Finance/Budget Coord Fire Mgmt Analyst Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Programs Admin Secretary Sr HR Analyst Sr Secretary Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 2 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 3.5 4.5 13.5 1 0.5 17.5 12415 Fire Admin Services Fire Finance/Budget Coord Mgmt Aide Program Total: 1000 1000 1 1 2 1 1 2 12420 Fire Life Safety Services Adm. Asst Fire Chief Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Crisis Response Vol Coord Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 1 12421 Fire Special Operations Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Sr HR Analyst Program Total: 1000 1000 1 1 2 1 1 12422 Fire Operations Dep Fire Chief (52 hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (52 Hrs) Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (52 Hrs) Fire Comm Outreach Coord Fire Crisis Response Vol Coord Fire Engineer (40 Hrs) Fire Engineer (52 Hrs) Fire Fighter (40 Hrs) Fire Fighter (52 Hrs) Programs Admin Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 3 1 4 3 5 49 49 1 49 1 1 3 4 5 2 49 1 1 42 43 44 46 94 94 83 84 189 192 186 195 542 Return to TOC 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 13 3 5 8 44 1 1 3 43 4 75 1 188 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fire Department - 331 12430 Fire Logistical Services Adm. Asst Fire Chief 12433 Fire Resource Management Dep Fire Chief (40 hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (52 Hrs) Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Fire Engineer (52 Hrs) Mgmt Asst Programs Admin Public Safety Tech Srvcs Admin Srvc Worker I Srvc Worker II Sys Analyst Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 1 1000 1000 1000 12436 Fire Medical Services & Health Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (52 Hrs) Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (52 Hrs) Fire Engineer (52 Hrs) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 12437 Fire Assessment & Planning Fire Budget & Project Mgr Mgmt Asst II Program Total: 1000 1000 12441 Fire Marshal's Office Asst Fire Marshal Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (52 Hrs) Fire Insp I Fire Insp II Fire Marshal Fire Protection Engineer I Mgmt Aide Plans Examiner Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 12444 Fire Community Services Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Comm Outreach Coord Fire Fighter (52 Hrs) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 7 3 1 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 4 2 1 1 2 543 Return to TOC 2 1 4 12434 Fire Training Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (52 Hrs) Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Program Total: 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 4 2 4 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 12 1 1 1 12 1 1 12 1 1 10 1 1 3 1 4 2 2 1 5 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fire Department - 331 12490 Arena - Fire Event Staffing Secretary Secretary Program Total: 12491 Ambulance Services Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (52 Hrs) Secretary Sr Secretary Fund 1000 1282 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 12590 PS Training Ops - Fire Dep Fire Chief (40 hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Secretary Srvc Worker II Program Total: 2530 2530 2530 2530 2530 2530 2530 12610 Fire - Special Revenue Fund Applications Analyst Comm Sys Tech Customer Assistance Rep Emergency Srvcs Coord Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (52 Hrs) Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (52 Hrs) Fire Crisis Response Vol Coord Fire Dept Staff Counselor Fire EMS Coordinator Fire Engineer (52 Hrs) Fire Fighter (40 Hrs) Fire Fighter (52 Hrs) Fire Insp I Fire Insp II Fire Protection Engineer II Mgmt Aide Secretary Shop Maint Coord Srvc Worker III Program Total: 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 1720 3334 Logistical Services Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 2 544 Return to TOC 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 2 6 1 3 1 4 4 4 14 17 23 1 18 1000 1 1 1 21 1 2 1 1 2 50 1 1 1 2 5 1 3 1 1 4 23 1 1 2 1 1 1 50 1 1 1 1 5 2 1 1 4 3 26 1 2 1 1 51 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fire Department - 331 3336 Fire Office Systems Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Program Total: 3338 Fire Information/Technology Sys Analyst 3341 Fire Marshal - Code Developmnt Fire Marshal 3362 Fire Community Relations Fire Comm Outreach Coord Fire Department Total: Fire Department - 333 12492 Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO) Fire Fighter (52 Hrs) Mgmt Aide Program Total: Fund FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1000 1000 1 1 2 1000 1 1000 1 1000 2 251.5 263.5 1000 1000 Fire Department Total: Homeland Security - 341 12810 Homeland Security Admin. Homeland Security Dir 12820 Emergency Operations Ctr (EOC) Asst Homeland Security Dir Building Maintenance Worker Emergency Srvcs Coord Info Technology Manager Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Operations & Training Officer Secretary Sys Admin Sys Analyst Program Total: 275 3 1 4 3 1 4 3 1 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 6 1 1 6 7 7 7 7 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 2 1000 1000 Comm. Services AdmTotal: Parks & Recreation - 421 13010 Pool Maintenance Srvc Worker III (Parks) 289.5 1000 Homeland Security Total: Comm. Services Adm - 411 14510 Comm. Services Admin. Dep City Mgr Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: 289.5 1000 545 Return to TOC 2 1 1 6 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Parks & Recreation - 421 13020 Park Irrigation Crewleader (Parks) Srvc Worker II (Parks) Srvc Worker III (Parks) 1000 1000 1000 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 2 3 13030 Parks CIP & Planning Dep Parks & Rec Dir Parks & Rec Projects Coord Parks Supv Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 3 2 13040 Parks Maintenance Crewleader (Parks) Dep Parks & Rec Dir Landscape Gard/Horticulturist Park Mgr Parks & Rec Projects Coord Parks Supv Playground Equip Srvc Worker Secretary Sr Heavy Equip Srvc Worker Srvc Worker I (Parks) Srvc Worker II (Parks) Srvc Worker III (Parks) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 3 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 4 9 4 28 2 1 1 4 9 4 28 2 1 1 2 1 1 13 3 27 10 5 23 13050 Parks North District Crewleader (Parks) Dep Parks & Rec Dir Parks & Rec Projects Coord Parks Supv Playground Equip Srvc Worker Sr Heavy Equip Srvc Worker Srvc Worker II (Parks) Srvc Worker III (Parks) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 12 14610 Parks & Recreation Admin. Parks & Rec Dir Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Rec Coord Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 14620 Glendale Community Center Rec Coord Rec Programmer Sr Rec Coord Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 2 Program Total: 546 Return to TOC FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 3 18 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Parks & Recreation - 421 14630 Recreation Support Services Mgmt Asst Office Support Supv Rec Accounts Coord Secretary Sr Secretary Srvc Worker II (Parks) Support Srvc Supv Program Total: 14640 Adult Center Rec Coord Rec Mgr Secretary Srvc Worker I (Parks) Srvc Worker II (Parks) Support Srvc Supv Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 14670 Sports and Health Dep Parks & Rec Dir Park Mgr Rec Coord Rec Mgr Srvc Worker II (Parks) 1 1 3 1 1 1 8 1 3 1 1 1 8 1 3 1 1 1 8 1 3 1 6 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 6 6 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 6 1 9 1 1 4.5 1 7.5 1 1 4.5 1 7.5 1 5.25 2 8.25 1 4.5 1 6.5 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1.75 2 5.75 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Program Total: 14700 Marketing - Parks & Rec Mgmt Asst Rec Programmer Program Total: 1 6 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 14680 Aquatics Sr Rec Coord 14690 Audio/Visual Audio/Visual Coordinator Audio/Visual Network Spec Program Total: 1 6 Program Total: 14660 Special Events and Programs Rec Coord Rec Mgr Rec Programmer Sr Rec Coord Program Total: 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 8 2 1 8 Program Total: 14650 Youth and Teen Rec Coord Rec Mgr Rec Programmer Sr Rec Coord FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 547 Return to TOC 1 0.75 1.75 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Parks & Recreation - 421 14710 Park Rangers Park Mgr Park Ranger Park Ranger Supv Srvc Worker III (Parks) 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 14740 Copper Canyon HS Youth Dev Prg Rec Programmer 14760 Historic Sahuaro Ranch Rec Coord Rec Programmer Sr Rec Coord Program Total: 14830 Rec Self Sust-Foothills Rec Rec Coord 14840 Sports Self Sustaining Rec Coord 14850 Youth and Teen Self Sustaining Rec Programmer 35008 Youth Football Hub Grant Rec Coord Parks & Recreation Total: Parks & Recreation - 422 14720 Foothills Recreation Center Building Maintenance Worker Office Support Supv Rec Mgr Rec Programmer Secretary Sr Rec Coord Srvc Worker I (Bldg Maint) Srvc Worker II (Parks) Program Total: 3 1 4 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 3 1 3 1 3 3 4 4 1 5 3 0.75 0.75 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 3 2 3 1880 1 1880 1 1880 5 5 5 5 5 88.75 1 89.25 1 89.25 88.25 76.25 1840 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Parks & Recreation Total: Civic Center - 431 11710 Civic Center Civic Center Event Coord Civic Center Mgr Civic Center Ops Coord Secretary Srvc Worker III (Bldg Maint) Program Total: FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 Civic Center Total: 548 Return to TOC 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 10 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 10 1 10 1 10 1 8 10 10 10 10 8 3 1 1 1 1 7 3 1 1 1 1 7 3 1 1 1 1 7 3 1 1 1 1 7 3 1 1 1 6 7 7 7 7 6 2 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Comm. Partnerships - 441 15010 Community Revitalization Revitalization Admin Revitalization Grants Supv Program Total: Fund FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 0.5 1 3 0.5 1 3 1 2 1 5 1 5.5 1 5.5 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 9 1 3 1 10 1 3 1 10 1 1 1 1 2 1 10 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 25 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 25 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 25 2 2 1 1 25 2 1 1 1 24 Program Total: 1 0.75 4 1 1 1 8.75 1 0.75 4 1 1 1 8.75 1 0.75 4 1 1 1 8.75 1 0.75 4 1 1 1 8.75 1 0.75 4 1 1 1 8.75 Comm. PartnershipsTotal: 40.75 41.25 41.25 41.25 38.75 15015 Neighborhood Partnership Community Volunteer Coord Mgmt Aide Neighborhood Partnership Admin Neighborhood Srvcs Coord Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Program Total: 15025 Mega Events - N'Hood/Volunteer Rec Programmer 17910 Community Housing Account Spec Account Spec II Accountant I Bldg Maint Leader Bldg Maint Supv Building Maintenance Worker Community Partnerships Dir Housing Assistance Rep Housing Maint Srvcs Mgr Housing Srvcs Admin Housing Supv Mgmt Asst Secretary Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Srvc Worker I (Bldg Maint) Program Total: 31001 CDBG Programs Account Spec II Mgmt Asst Revitalization Coord Revitalization Supv Secretary Sr Secretary 1000 1000 1 1 2 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 2 1 5 1000 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 1320 1320 1320 1320 1320 1320 Library & Arts - 452 15210 Historic Sahuaro Ranch Arts & Cultural Admin 1 1000 549 Return to TOC 0.5 1 1 1 3 1 9 1 1 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Library & Arts - 452 15220 Library Account Spec Computer Ops Supv Courier Creative Designer Librarian I Librarian II Librarian III Librarian IV Library Asst I Library Asst II Library Asst III Library Circulation Clerk Library Dir Library Graphics Coord Library Mgr Library Ops Supv Library Technology Coord Library Technology Supv Mgmt Asst Office Asst PC Support Specialist II Public Service Asst Secretary Program Total: 15230 Arts Maintenance - Admin. Arts & Cultural Admin 15310 Arts Maintenance Arts & Cultural Admin Library & Arts Total: Grants - 470 32123 Domestic Violence Grant Mgmt Asst 32136 DV Pilot Project Grant Mgmt Asst Grants Total: Community Dev Admin - 511 15510 CD Deputy City Manager Dep City Mgr Exec Administrative Asst Exec Administrative Asst II Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 1 1 5.5 21.75 6 3 5 13.25 11.26 1 2 1 1 1 3.5 21.25 6 4 3 3 13.75 11.26 1 5 5 5 5 2.5 21.25 6 4 3 3 13.75 11.26 1 1 6 5 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1.5 22.25 6 4 3 3 13.75 11.26 1 1 6 4 2 1 1 3 3 3 86.76 86.76 86.76 86.76 1 1 1 1 88.76 87.76 87.76 87.76 69.26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1220 1840 1840 1000 1000 1000 1000 Community Dev AdminTotal: 550 Return to TOC 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 3.5 16.25 3 4 4 1.63 13.25 2 2.63 1 69.26 1 1 5 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 1 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Building Safety - 521 15610 Building Safety Asst Bldg Safety Dir Asst Dep City Mgr Bldg Insp Bldg Insp Spec Bldg Safety Dir Plans Examiner Secretary Sr Bldg Insp Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Plans Examiner Sr Secretary Structural Plans Examiner Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 15620 Development Services Center Bldg Safety Mgr Customer Assistance Rep Development Plans Tech Development Srvcs Rep Development Srvcs Supv Sr Development Srvcs Rep Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 15630 Westgate-Bldg Safety Rvw/Insp. Bldg Insp Spec Development Plans Tech Plans Examiner Sr Bldg Insp Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 15710 Stadium - Development Services Bldg Insp Spec 17510 Cross Connection Control Bldg Insp Cross Connection Control Spec Secretary Sr Bldg Insp Program Total: 1 1 1 1 9 4 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 1 26 4 8 1 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 26 4 7 1 3 1 5 1 1 1 1 26 4 7 1 3 1 5 1 1 1 1 26 1 2 2 4 1 1 2 2 4 1 10 10 1 2 2 2 1 2 10 1 2 2 2 1 2 10 2 6 9 11 2 1 1 15 9 1 1 1 12 1 1 1 1 2.75 0.75 1 2.75 0.75 1 2.75 0.75 1 2.75 0.75 1 2.75 51.75 53.75 50.75 38.75 29.75 1 2 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 1 3 5 1 3 5 2 3 1 10 1280 3 2400 2400 2400 2400 1 1 0.75 Building Safety Total: Planning - 531 15910 Planning Administration Planning Dir Secretary Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Program Total: FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1000 1000 1000 1000 551 Return to TOC 1 1 4 4 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 21 1 2 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Planning - 531 15920 Zoning Admin & Tech. Assist. Assoc Planner Planner Sr Planner Zoning Admin Program Total: 15930 Current Planning Assoc Planner Dep Planning Dir Landscape Architect Planner Principal Planner Sr Planner Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 4 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 3 3 9 1 1 3 1 2 8 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 3 Program Total: 15940 Long-Range Planning & Research Dep Planning Dir Planner Planning Tech Sr Planner Program Total: Planning Total: Economic Development - 540 16010 Economic Development Economic Development Admin Economic Development Dir Mgmt Asst Sr Marketing & Comm Mgr Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: 16040 Downtown Beaut. & Promotion Secur Officer Srvc Worker II Program Total: FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 10 2 2 4 10 2 2 2 6 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 2 21 21 19 19 11 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 3 1 6 6 7 6 1 5 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 4 10 11 10 9 1000 1000 Economic DevelopmentTotal: 6 552 Return to TOC 2 1 1 1 5 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Code Compliance - 550 14410 Code Compliance Asst Code Compliance Dir Code Compliance Dir Code Compliance Supv Code Insp I Code Insp II Code Insp III Mgmt Asst Secretary Sr Secretary Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 2.5 1 19.5 1 1 2 7 4 2 1 2.5 1 21.5 1 1 2 6 5 2 1 2.5 1 21.5 1 1 2 4 3 6 1 2.5 1 21.5 1 1 2 2 7 2 1 2 1 19 19.5 21.5 21.5 21.5 19 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 8 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 8 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 8 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 8 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 3 2 2 16 1 21 2 2 16 1 21 2 2 16 1 21 2 2 16 1 21 2 1 14 Code Compliance Total: Public Works Admin. - 611 13310 Public Works Administration Dep City Mgr Public Works Admin.Total: Field Operations - 620 13410 Field Operations Admin. Account Spec II Dep Field Ops Dir Dispatcher/Router Field Ops Admin Supv Field Ops Dir Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Program Total: 13420 Cemetery Crewleader (Parks) Srvc Worker II (Parks) Srvc Worker III (Parks) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 13440 Graffiti Removal Srvc Worker II Srvc Worker II (Airport) Srvc Worker II (Streets) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 13450 Facilities Management Bldg Maint Leader Bldg Maint Supv Building Maintenance Worker Facilities Mgmt Supt Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 553 Return to TOC 1 1 2 7 4 1 1 17 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Field Operations - 620 13460 Custodial Services Custodial Supv Custodian Custodian Lead 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 2 14 4 20 2 14 4 20 1 15 4 20 1 15 4 20 1 13 4 18 1 3 4 1 3 4 1 3 4 2 2 13480 PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Building Maintenance Worker Custodian Program Total: 2530 2530 13510 Equipment Management Buyer I Equip Mechanic I Equip Mechanic II Equip Mechanic Spec Equip Mgmt Supt Fleet Sys Coord Fleet Tire Spec Paint & Body Spec Shop Maint Coord Shop Supv Srvc Worker I Srvc Writer Welder\Fabricator Program Total: 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1040 1 2 10 16 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 10 16 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 5 10 17 1 1 1 5 9 16 1 1 1 4 9 15 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 41 1 2 41 1 1 41 2 2 1 1 1 40 1 36 1040 1 1 1 1 1 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 2 2 1 1 8 4 1 17 2 1 1 8 3 1 16 2 1 1 7 6 1 17 2 1 1 8 4 1 17 13 7 1 1 7 1 1 7 1 1 1 7 2 1 1 5 2 1 1 1 8 18 1 3 40 1 8 18 1 3 40 9 17 1 3 40 6 14 1 3 35 5 11 1 2 28 13530 Parts Store Operations Buyer II 16710 Right-of-Way Maintenance Crewleader (Streets) Engineering Insp II PC Oper Service Worker III (Streets) Srvc Worker II (Streets) Streets Supv Program Total: 16720 Street Maintenance Crewleader (Streets) Engineering Insp II Heavy Equip Oper Mgmt Asst PC Oper Service Worker III (Streets) Srvc Worker II (Streets) Streets Supt Streets Supv Program Total: 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 554 Return to TOC 7 3 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Field Operations - 620 16730 Street Cleaning Equipment Operator (Streets) Service Worker III (Streets) Program Total: Fund FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1340 1340 4 1 5 4 1 5 4 1 5 2 1 3 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 1 1 5 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 18 1 1 1 2 2 4 19 1 1 2 2 4 19 1 1 2 2 4 19 1 2 1 2 4 19 3 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 5 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 2440 2440 2440 1 4 1 6 1 4 1 6 1 4 1 6 1 4 1 6 1 4 1 6 17750 MRF Operations Account Spec II Crewleader (Sanitation) Equip Mechanic I Equip Mechanic II Sanitation Supv Srvc Worker I Srvc Worker I (Sanitation) Srvc Worker II Srvc Worker II (Landfill) Program Total: 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 11 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 11 17810 Sanitation Roll-off Account Spec II Equip Operator (Sanitation) Program Total: 2480 2480 3 3 4 4 1 4 5 1 4 5 1 3 4 17710 Landfill Crewleader (Landfill) Landfill Insp Landfill Oper Landfill Supv Mgmt Asst PC Oper Sr Equip Mechanic Special Srvc Worker I Srvc Worker I (Landfill) Srvc Worker II (Landfill) Weigh Scale Oper Program Total: 17730 Solid Waste Admin Account Spec II Dep Field Ops Dir Field Ops Admin Supv Landfill Supt Sanitation Supt Sr Budget Analyst Sr Secretary 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 2440 Program Total: 17740 Recycling Recycling Coord Sanitation Insp Sr Sanitation Insp Program Total: 555 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Field Operations - 620 17820 Sanitation Frontload Account Spec II Commercial Sanitation Insp Crewleader (Sanitation) Equip Operator (Sanitation) Mgmt Asst Sr Mgmt Asst Srvc Worker III (Sanitation) Program Total: Fund 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 17830 Curb Service Crewleader (Sanitation) Equip Mechanic I Equip Operator Equip Operator (Sanitation) Sanitation Supv Srvc Worker I (Sanitation) Srvc Worker II (Sanitation) Program Total: 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 17840 Residential-Loose Trash Collec Crewleader (Sanitation) Equip Operator (Sanitation) Equipment Operator (Streets) Sanitation Insp Sanitation Supv Service Worker III (Streets) Program Total: 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 Field Operations Total: Engineering - 631 13720 Engineering Administration City Engineer Engineering Project Coord Engineering Project Mgr Mgmt Asst Property Agent Property Mgr Sr Secretary Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 556 Return to TOC FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 1 9 1 1 1 9 1 1 1 9 1 13 1 2 15 1 2 15 1 2 15 2 1 2 32 1 2 2 2 31 1 2 2 2 31 1 2 2 2 31 1 2 40 2 40 2 40 2 40 12 1 15 1 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15 2 1 1 14 18 18 20 1 15 2 1 1 1 21 270 280 282 275 246 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 4 2 5 1 1 1 1 2 7 1 1 9 1 1 1 9 1 1 13 2 1 2 32 1 1 1 40 1 1 5 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Engineering - 631 13730 CIP Administration Assoc Civil Engineer Asst City Engineer Engineering Project Mgr Engineering Tech II Landscape Architect Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Principal Engineer Programs Admin Sr Civil Engineer Sr Engineering Tech Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 10 4 1 9 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 15 15 9 1 2 1 2 1 2 13740 CIP Design Engineering & Design Supv Engineering Tech II Sr Engineering Tech Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 13750 CIP Construction Engineering Project Mgr Sr Civil Engineer Program Total: 1000 1000 2 1 3 2 1 3 1000 1000 2 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 2 13770 Mapping and Records Engineering Tech II Sr Engineering Tech Program Total: 1000 1000 2 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 13780 Land Development Division Asst City Engineer Mgmt Aide Sr Civil Engineer Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 2 4 1 1 3 5 1 1 3 5 1 1 3 5 1 1 3 5 13790 Construction Inspection Construction Engineering Supv Engineering Insp II Engineering Project Mgr Sr Engineering Insp Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 3 1 3 1 3 3 7 3 7 3 7 3 1 3 7 1 1 2 4 1000 1000 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 2 13760 Real Estate Services Property Agent Property Mgr Program Total: 13800 Materials Testing Materials Tech Sr Materials Tech Program Total: 557 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Engineering - 631 13820 Utility Inspection Engineering Insp II Engineering Utility Coord Program Total: 16310 Transportation Engineering Pgm Principal Engineer Sr Civil Engineer Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1660 1660 Engineering Total: Transportation - 632 16510 Transportation Program Mgmt Dep Trans Dir Planning Mgr Secretary Trans Coord Trans Dir Trans Planner Program Total: 16520 Transportation Education Sr. Trans Analyst Trans Coord Program Total: 16525 Transit Management Mgmt Aide Sr Secretary Transit Administrator Transit Mgr 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 45 45 43 43 28 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Program Total: 558 Return to TOC 2 1 Program Total: 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 2 1 1660 1660 1660 1660 16530 Dial-A-Ride Dispatcher/Router Lead Transit Oper Lead Transit Rep Programs Admin Secretary Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Transit Administrator Transit Coord Transit Mgr Transit Oper Transit Supv 2 1 3 6.5 1 1 1 1 1 24.75 3 39.25 6.5 6 1 1 1 1 2 2 17.75 1 39.25 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 4 6.5 7 5.5 8 5.5 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 16.75 1 35.25 16.75 1 35.25 16.75 1 34.25 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Transportation - 632 16570 Intelligent Transportation Sys Intelligent Trans Sys Analyst Intelligent Trans Sys Mgr Intelligent Trans Sys Tech Principal Engineer Principal Traffic Engineer Traffic Signal Tech II Program Total: Fund 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 5 1 1 5 1 5 4 1660 1 1 1 1 1 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1 1 1 2 3 2 10 1 1 1 2 3 2 10 1 1 1 2 3 2 10 1 1 1 2 3 2 10 1 16820 Signs & Markings Crewleader (Streets) Service Worker III (Streets) Sign Fabricator Srvc Worker II (Streets) Traffic Signs & Markings Supv Program Total: 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 2 1 1 5 1 10 2 1 1 5 1 10 2 1 1 5 1 10 2 1 1 5 1 10 5 1 8 16910 Transportation Administration Intelligent Trans Sys Tech Mgmt Aide Secretary Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Trans Dir Program Total: 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 5 1 1 16920 Street Light Management Traffic Engineer II Traffic Engineering Spec Traffic Lighting Mgr Program Total: 1340 1340 1340 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 16930 Transportation Planning Trans Coord Trans Planner Program Total: 1340 1340 1 1 1 1 1 1 16580 Traffic Mitigation Traffic Engineer I 16810 Traffic Signals Traffic Ops Electronic Tech Traffic Ops Supt Traffic Signal Supv Traffic Signal Tech I Traffic Signal Tech II Traffic Signal Tech III Program Total: 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 559 Return to TOC 1 1 2 2 7 1 1 4 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Transportation - 632 16940 Traffic Studies Principal Engineer Principal Traffic Engineer Traffic Education Program Mgr Traffic Engineering Tech Trans Planning Mgr Program Total: 16950 Traffic Design and Development Dep Trans Dir Sr Traffic Engineering Spec Traffic Engineering Spec Traffic Engineering Tech Program Total: Fund 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 Transportation Total: Airport - 633 16410 Airport Operations Airport Administrator Crewleader (Airport) Sr Secretary Srvc Worker II (Airport) Program Total: 1760 1760 1760 1760 Airport Total: Utilities - 641 17110 Utilities Administration Account Spec Dep Utilities Dir Dept Accting & Budget Mgr Mgmt Aide Secretary Sr Civil Engineer Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Utilities Dir Program Total: 17115 Safety Administration Security Systems Tech Sr Mgmt Asst Util Safety Spec Program Total: 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 5 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 3 3 3 83.25 84.25 85.25 85.25 75.25 1 1 1 2 5 1 1 1 2 5 1 1 1 2 5 1 1 1 2 5 1 1 1 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 9 2 1 1 1 1 8 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 560 Return to TOC 1 1 1 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Utilities - 641 17120 Information Management GIS Coord PC Support Specialist II Sys Admin Utilities Network Engineer Utilities Technology Mgr Utility Data Coord Program Total: 17130 Public Service Representatives Public Srvc Rep 17140 System Security Secur Officer Sr Mgmt Asst Util Safety Spec Util Safety/Security Coor Utilities Secur Supt Program Total: Fund 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 6 1 2 1 1 6 1 2 1 1 6 1 2 1 1 6 1 2 1 1 6 2360 4 4 4 4 4 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 1 5 5 5 1 5 1 1 2 2 1 8 1 1 1 8 1 1 8 1 1 8 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 7 1 12 7 1 13 7 1 13 7 1 13 2 1 1 1 7 1 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 14 8 1 1 14 8 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 6 1 14 14 14 1 12 15 1 1 1 12 15 1 1 1 12 15 1 1 1 12 15 1 1 1 12 15 1 1 1 1 1 17160 Arrowhead Reclamation Plant Plant Maint Mechanic II Sr Plant Instrument Tech Sr Water Reclam Facility Oper Water Reclam Facility Oper I Water Reclam Facility Oper II Water Reclam Facility Supv Program Total: 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 17170 West Area Plant Plant Instrument Tech II Sr Plant Instrument Tech Sr Plant Maint Mechanic Sr Water Reclam Facility Oper Utility Ops Supt Water Reclam Facility Oper I Water Reclam Facility Oper II Water Reclam Facility Supv Water Reclam Supt Program Total: 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 17210 Customer Service - Field Lead Water Srvc Rep Utilities Supv Utility Ops Supt Water Srvc Rep Program Total: 2400 2400 2400 2400 17220 Irrigation Crewleader (Water) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 2400 561 Return to TOC 1 1 2 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Utilities - 641 17240 Central System Control HR Generalist HR Program Mgr Sr HR Analyst Sr Water Plant Oper Util Safety/Security Coor Utility Ops Supt Water Control Room Oper Water Plant Operator II Water Plant Ops Supv Water Treatment Supt Program Total: Fund 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 9 5 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 1 1 9 9 9 1 1 1 7 10 1 1 1 7 10 1 1 2 5 9 17250 Pyramid Peak Plant Sr Plant Instrument Tech Sr Plant Maint Mechanic Sr Water Plant Oper Water Plant Operator II Program Total: 2400 2400 2400 2400 1 1 1 7 10 1 1 1 6 9 1 1 1 7 10 17260 Cholla Treatment Plant Plant Instrument Tech II Plant Maint Mechanic II Sr Plant Instrument Tech Sr Water Plant Oper Water Plant Operator II Program Total: 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 9 1 6 9 2 5 9 1 1 2 5 9 5 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 2 17 9 30 1 2 2 16 9 30 1 2 2 16 9 30 1 2 2 16 9 30 1 2 2 16 9 30 17270 Major Maintenance Water Plant Ops Supv 17280 Central System Maintenance Plant Instrument Tech I Plant Instrument Tech II Sr Plant Instrument Tech Sr Plant Maint Mechanic Srvc Worker II (Water) Water Plant Ops Supv Program Total: 17290 Water Distribution Lead Water Srvc Rep Sr Utility Sys Tech Utilities Supv Utility Sys Tech I Utility Sys Tech II 2400 1 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 1 1 1 1 1 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 Program Total: 562 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Utilities - 641 17300 Meter Maintenance Sr Utility Sys Tech Utilities Supv Utility Locator Utility Sys Tech I Utility Sys Tech II 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 Program Total: 17310 Oasis Water Campus Building Maintenance Worker Custodian Plant Instrument Tech II Public Srvc Rep Sr Plant Instrument Tech Sr Plant Maint Mechanic Sr Water Plant Oper Srvc Worker II (Water) Water Plant Operator II Water Plant Ops Supv Program Total: 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 17610 Pretreatment Program Pretreatment Insp Pretreatment Officer Pretreatment Program Mgr Sr Pretreatment Insp Program Total: 2420 2420 2420 2420 17630 Wastewater Collection Dep Utilities Dir PC Oper Sr Utility Sys Tech Utilities Supv Utility Ops Supt Utility Sys Tech I Utility Sys Tech II Program Total: 2420 2420 2420 2420 2420 2420 2420 Utilities Total: Grand Total FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 1 1 4 4 1 11 1 1 4 3 2 11 1 1 4 3 2 11 1 1 4 3 2 11 1 1 4 3 2 11 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 2 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 2 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 2 15 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 6 3 6 3 6 3 6 1 3 6 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 9 5 19 9 5 20 1 1 1 1 10 5 19 1 1 1 1 9 6 19 1 1 1 1 9 6 19 165 186 187 187 187 1 2,031.51 2,100.51 2,204.51 2,182.51 1,971.01 563 Return to TOC Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service FY 2010-11 Bond Description Date of Issue Principal Interest Other Fees Total Excise Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1940) MPC Bonds - Series 2003A - Arena Tax Exempt MPC Bonds - Series 2003B - Arena Taxable MPC Bonds - Series 2004A - Refund Imp Dist MPC Bonds - Series 2006A - GRPSTC/Zanjero MPC Bonds - Series 2008A - H/Conv/Media (Tax Exempt) MPC Bonds - Series 2008B - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) MPC Bonds - Series 2008C - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) AMFP Series 14 - Arena AMFP Refunding Series 16 - Arena Sub-Total Excise Tax Funded Debt 6/1/2003 6/1/2003 5/1/2004 6/1/2006 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/28/2002 7/31/2003 1,330,000 305,000 1,565,000 1,250,000 95,000 210,000 1,785,000 6,540,000 2,117,881 5,280,722 343,000 1,494,025 1,465,106 3,087,508 348,527 259,763 340,750 14,737,281 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 3,452,881 5,590,722 1,913,000 2,744,025 1,565,106 3,302,508 2,138,527 259,763 340,750 21,307,281 6/1/2002 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 1,600,000 3,245,000 2,235,000 1,210,000 1,720,000 1,625,000 3,385,000 1,270,000 16,290,000 1,162,750 1,314,400 1,057,100 247,275 1,040,331 453,250 2,334,450 1,929,428 9,538,984 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 335,000 2,767,750 4,564,400 3,297,100 1,462,275 2,765,331 2,083,250 5,724,450 3,199,428 300,000 26,163,984 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 3/17/2010 1/1/2001 890,000 2,595,000 3,455,000 1,700,000 2,385,000 248,928 824,854 12,098,782 361,150 3,972,750 3,716,031 2,032,438 2,675,588 199,393 183,449 13,140,798 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 67,000 1,253,150 6,572,750 7,176,031 3,737,438 5,060,588 448,321 1,058,303 25,306,580 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 2,350,000 1,540,000 3,890,000 373,163 427,025 800,188 5,000 5,000 10,000 2,728,163 1,972,025 4,700,188 Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2002 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (1 of 2) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2004 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2005 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006A General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006B General Obligation Bonds - Series 2007 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2009B General Obligation Bond Arbitrage (1) Sub-Total Property Tax Funded Debt Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 2380) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (2 of 2) Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2003 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2006 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2007 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2008 WIFA 2010 WIFA 2001 Sub-Total Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt Street/HURF Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 1920) HURF Revenue Bonds - Refunding Series 2004 HURF Revenue Bonds - Series 2006 Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Western Loop 101 Public Facilites Corp (Fund 1930) 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008C Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Transp. Sales Tax Rev Funded Debt (Fund 1970) Transportation Sales Tax Obligations Bond Sub-Total Trans S/Tax Bond Debt Service Total Debt Service Payments (All Funds) 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/16/2007 - - 2,780,000 2,780,000 4,548,081 4,548,081 41,598,782 42,765,332 (1) note, arbitrage is subject to change each year based on calc's performed by consultants. 564 Return to TOC - 442,000 - 7,328,081 7,328,081 84,806,114 Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service FY 2011-12 Bond Description Date of Issue Principal Interest Other Fees Total Excise Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1940) MPC Bonds - Series 2003A - Arena Tax Exempt MPC Bonds - Series 2003B - Arena Taxable MPC Bonds - Series 2004A - Refund Imp Dist MPC Bonds - Series 2006A - GRPSTC/Zanjero MPC Bonds - Series 2008A - H/Conv/Media (Tax Exempt) MPC Bonds - Series 2008B - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) MPC Bonds - Series 2008C - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) AMFP Series 14 - Arena AMFP Refunding Series 16 - Arena Sub-Total Excise Tax Funded Debt 6/1/2003 6/1/2003 5/1/2004 6/1/2006 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/28/2002 7/31/2003 1,390,000 390,000 1,665,000 1,315,000 470,000 1,730,000 6,960,000 2,077,981 5,268,735 264,750 1,431,525 1,462,256 3,076,071 270,416 259,763 340,750 14,452,246 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 3,472,981 5,663,735 1,934,750 2,746,525 1,467,256 3,551,071 2,005,416 259,763 340,750 21,442,246 6/1/2002 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 1,660,000 3,360,000 2,350,000 1,250,000 1,785,000 1,715,000 3,520,000 1,280,000 16,920,000 1,098,750 1,184,600 970,494 203,413 971,531 372,000 2,190,588 1,910,378 8,901,753 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 335,000 2,763,750 4,549,600 3,325,494 1,458,413 2,761,531 2,092,000 5,715,588 3,190,378 300,000 26,156,753 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 3/17/2010 1/1/2001 925,000 2,725,000 3,590,000 1,775,000 2,455,000 256,757 856,067 12,582,823 325,550 3,843,000 3,577,831 1,960,188 2,604,038 191,564 164,609 12,666,780 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 67,000 1,252,550 6,573,000 7,172,831 3,740,188 5,059,038 448,321 1,070,676 25,316,603 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 2,435,000 1,605,000 4,040,000 290,913 365,425 656,338 5,000 5,000 10,000 2,730,913 1,975,425 4,706,338 8,913,913 3,077,875 1,018,875 13,010,663 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 8,918,913 3,082,875 1,023,875 13,025,663 2,890,000 2,890,000 4,436,881 4,436,881 - 7,326,881 7,326,881 43,392,823 54,124,660 Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2002 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (1 of 2) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2004 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2005 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006A General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006B General Obligation Bonds - Series 2007 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2009B General Obligation Bond Arbitrage (1) Sub-Total Property Tax Funded Debt Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 2380) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (2 of 2) Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2003 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2006 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2007 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2008 WIFA 2010 WIFA 2001 Sub-Total Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt Street/HURF Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 1920) HURF Revenue Bonds - Refunding Series 2004 HURF Revenue Bonds - Series 2006 Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Western Loop 101 Public Facilites Corp (Fund 1930) 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008C Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Transp. Sales Tax Rev Funded Debt (Fund 1970) Transportation Sales Tax Obligations Bond Sub-Total Trans S/Tax Bond Debt Service Total Debt Service Payments (All Funds) 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/16/2007 - (1) note, arbitrage is subject to change each year based on calc's performed by consultants. 565 Return to TOC 457,000 97,974,484 Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service FY 2012-13 Bond Description Date of Issue Principal Interest Other Fees Total Excise Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1940) MPC Bonds - Series 2003A - Arena Tax Exempt MPC Bonds - Series 2003B - Arena Taxable MPC Bonds - Series 2004A - Refund Imp Dist MPC Bonds - Series 2006A - GRPSTC/Zanjero MPC Bonds - Series 2008A - H/Conv/Media (Tax Exempt) MPC Bonds - Series 2008B - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) MPC Bonds - Series 2008C - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) AMFP Series 14 - Arena AMFP Refunding Series 16 - Arena Sub-Total Excise Tax Funded Debt 6/1/2003 6/1/2003 5/1/2004 6/1/2006 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/28/2002 7/31/2003 1,375,000 480,000 1,765,000 1,380,000 740,000 1,570,000 7,310,000 2,034,544 5,252,745 181,500 1,365,775 1,462,256 3,050,475 190,905 259,763 340,750 14,138,712 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 3,414,544 5,737,745 1,951,500 2,745,775 1,467,256 3,795,475 1,765,905 259,763 340,750 21,478,712 6/1/2002 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 1,730,000 3,530,000 2,440,000 1,295,000 1,850,000 1,810,000 3,660,000 1,295,000 17,610,000 1,032,350 1,050,200 876,494 158,100 882,281 286,250 2,040,988 1,881,578 8,208,240 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 335,000 2,767,350 4,585,200 3,321,494 1,458,100 2,737,281 2,101,250 5,705,988 3,176,578 300,000 26,153,240 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 3/17/2010 1/1/2001 970,000 2,830,000 3,745,000 1,840,000 2,540,000 264,832 888,460 13,078,292 288,550 3,734,000 3,434,231 1,884,750 2,518,113 183,489 145,057 12,188,190 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 67,000 1,260,550 6,569,000 7,184,231 3,729,750 5,058,113 448,321 1,083,517 25,333,482 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 2,525,000 1,670,000 4,195,000 202,644 301,225 503,869 5,000 5,000 10,000 2,732,644 1,976,225 4,708,869 8,913,913 3,077,875 1,018,875 13,010,663 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 8,918,913 3,082,875 1,023,875 13,025,663 3,005,000 3,005,000 4,321,281 4,321,281 - 7,326,281 7,326,281 45,198,292 52,370,954 Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2002 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (1 of 2) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2004 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2005 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006A General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006B General Obligation Bonds - Series 2007 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2009B General Obligation Bond Arbitrage (1) Sub-Total Property Tax Funded Debt Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 2380) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (2 of 2) Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2003 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2006 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2007 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2008 WIFA 2010 WIFA 2001 Sub-Total Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt Street/HURF Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 1920) HURF Revenue Bonds - Refunding Series 2004 HURF Revenue Bonds - Series 2006 Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Western Loop 101 Public Facilites Corp (Fund 1930) 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008C Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Transp. Sales Tax Rev Funded Debt (Fund 1970) Transportation Sales Tax Obligations Bond Sub-Total Trans S/Tax Bond Debt Service Total Debt Service Payments (All Funds) 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/16/2007 - (1) note, arbitrage is subject to change each year based on calc's performed by consultants. 566 Return to TOC 457,000 98,026,246 Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service FY 2013-14 Bond Description Date of Issue Principal Interest Other Fees Total Excise Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1940) MPC Bonds - Series 2003A - Arena Tax Exempt MPC Bonds - Series 2003B - Arena Taxable MPC Bonds - Series 2004A - Refund Imp Dist MPC Bonds - Series 2006A - GRPSTC/Zanjero MPC Bonds - Series 2008A - H/Conv/Media (Tax Exempt) MPC Bonds - Series 2008B - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) MPC Bonds - Series 2008C - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) AMFP Series 14 - Arena AMFP Refunding Series 16 - Arena Sub-Total Excise Tax Funded Debt 6/1/2003 6/1/2003 5/1/2004 6/1/2006 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/28/2002 7/31/2003 1,395,000 575,000 1,865,000 1,450,000 1,030,000 1,350,000 7,665,000 1,991,575 5,232,441 93,250 1,296,775 1,462,256 3,010,174 115,922 259,763 340,750 13,802,906 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 3,391,575 5,812,441 1,963,250 2,746,775 1,467,256 4,045,174 1,470,922 259,763 340,750 21,497,906 6/1/2002 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 1,800,000 3,705,000 2,550,000 1,345,000 1,925,000 1,905,000 3,805,000 1,315,000 18,350,000 960,988 873,700 778,894 107,919 808,281 195,750 1,885,438 1,849,203 7,460,171 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 335,000 2,765,988 4,583,700 3,333,894 1,457,919 2,738,281 2,105,750 5,695,438 3,164,203 300,000 26,145,171 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 3/17/2010 1/1/2001 1,020,000 2,975,000 3,925,000 1,930,000 2,630,000 273,161 922,080 13,675,240 240,050 3,592,500 3,237,619 1,806,550 2,429,213 175,160 124,764 11,605,856 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 67,000 1,262,050 6,572,500 7,167,619 3,741,550 5,059,213 448,321 1,096,844 25,348,096 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 2,620,000 1,735,000 4,355,000 104,800 226,075 330,875 5,000 5,000 10,000 2,729,800 1,966,075 4,695,875 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 2,940,000 2,940,000 8,913,913 3,077,875 1,018,875 13,010,663 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 8,918,913 3,082,875 3,963,875 15,965,663 10/16/2007 3,125,000 3,125,000 4,201,081 4,201,081 - 7,326,081 7,326,081 50,110,240 50,411,552 Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2002 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (1 of 2) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2004 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2005 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006A General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006B General Obligation Bonds - Series 2007 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2009B General Obligation Bond Arbitrage (1) Sub-Total Property Tax Funded Debt Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 2380) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (2 of 2) Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2003 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2006 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2007 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2008 WIFA 2010 WIFA 2001 Sub-Total Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt Street/HURF Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 1920) HURF Revenue Bonds - Refunding Series 2004 HURF Revenue Bonds - Series 2006 Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Western Loop 101 Public Facilites Corp (Fund 1930) 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008C Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Transp. Sales Tax Rev Funded Debt (Fund 1970) Transportation Sales Tax Obligations Bond Sub-Total Trans S/Tax Bond Debt Service Total Debt Service Payments (All Funds) (1) note, arbitrage is subject to change each year based on calc's performed by consultants. 567 Return to TOC 457,000 100,978,792 Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service FY 2015 - Beyond Bond Description Date of Issue Other Fees Total Principal Interest 6/1/2003 6/1/2003 5/1/2004 6/1/2006 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/28/2002 7/31/2003 40,240,000 94,620,000 24,225,000 32,220,000 48,835,000 1,000,000 5,055,000 7,250,000 253,445,000 20,842,313 63,223,134 8,730,300 16,057,306 36,788,726 50,190 4,560,919 6,644,625 156,897,513 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 61,087,313 157,848,134 32,960,300 48,282,306 85,628,726 1,055,190 9,615,919 13,894,625 410,372,513 6/1/2002 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 17,935,000 16,370,000 14,615,000 1,395,000 15,985,000 2,010,000 37,155,000 36,490,000 141,955,000 4,178,400 1,566,050 2,112,506 55,800 3,004,194 100,500 8,287,550 17,960,230 37,265,230 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 335,000 22,118,400 17,941,050 16,732,506 1,455,800 18,994,194 2,115,500 45,447,550 54,450,230 300,000 179,555,230 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 3/17/2010 1/1/2001 4,495,000 68,875,000 65,285,000 35,305,000 50,930,000 5,296,323 4,540,459 234,726,782 429,950 29,825,250 20,750,600 13,218,525 19,907,213 1,428,490 291,520 85,851,547 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 67,000 4,926,950 98,705,250 86,040,600 48,528,525 70,837,213 6,724,813 4,881,979 320,645,330 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 3,700,000 3,700,000 223,800 223,800 5,000 5,000 3,928,800 3,928,800 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 137,495,000 48,670,000 10,645,000 196,810,000 154,498,500 53,919,138 1,255,875 209,673,513 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 291,998,500 102,594,138 11,905,875 406,498,513 10/16/2007 88,015,000 88,015,000 43,886,525 43,886,525 - 131,901,525 131,901,525 918,651,782 533,798,128 Excise Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1940) MPC Bonds - Series 2003A - Arena Tax Exempt MPC Bonds - Series 2003B - Arena Taxable MPC Bonds - Series 2004A - Refund Imp Dist MPC Bonds - Series 2006A - GRPSTC/Zanjero MPC Bonds - Series 2008A - H/Conv/Media (Tax Exempt) MPC Bonds - Series 2008B - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) MPC Bonds - Series 2008C - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) AMFP Series 14 - Arena AMFP Refunding Series 16 - Arena Sub-Total Excise Tax Funded Debt Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2002 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (1 of 2) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2004 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2005 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006A General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006B General Obligation Bonds - Series 2007 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2009B General Obligation Bond Arbitrage (1) Sub-Total Property Tax Funded Debt Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 2380) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (2 of 2) Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2003 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2006 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2007 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2008 WIFA 2010 WIFA 2001 Sub-Total Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt Street/HURF Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 1920) HURF Revenue Bonds - Refunding Series 2004 HURF Revenue Bonds - Series 2006 Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Western Loop 101 Public Facilites Corp (Fund 1930) 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008C Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Transp. Sales Tax Rev Funded Debt (Fund 1970) Transportation Sales Tax Obligations Bond Sub-Total Trans S/Tax Bond Debt Service Total Debt Service Payments (All Funds) (1) note, arbitrage is subject to change each year based on calc's performed by consultants. 568 Return to TOC 452,000 1,452,901,910 Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service Grand Totals Bond Description Date of Issue Other Fees Total Principal Interest 6/1/2003 6/1/2003 5/1/2004 6/1/2006 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/1/2008 6/28/2002 7/31/2003 45,730,000 96,370,000 6,860,000 29,620,000 32,315,000 51,285,000 7,435,000 5,055,000 7,250,000 281,920,000 29,064,294 84,257,777 882,500 14,318,400 21,909,181 49,012,954 975,959 5,599,969 8,007,625 214,028,658 25,000 25,000 20,000 5,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 150,000 74,819,294 180,652,777 7,762,500 43,943,400 54,249,181 100,322,954 8,435,959 10,654,969 15,257,625 496,098,658 6/1/2002 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 24,725,000 30,210,000 24,190,000 6,495,000 23,265,000 9,065,000 51,525,000 41,650,000 211,125,000 8,433,238 5,988,950 5,795,488 772,506 6,706,619 1,407,750 16,739,013 25,530,815 71,374,378 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 1,500,000 1,675,000 33,183,238 36,223,950 30,010,488 7,292,506 29,996,619 10,497,750 68,289,013 67,180,815 1,500,000 284,174,378 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 3/17/2010 1/1/2001 8,300,000 80,000,000 80,000,000 42,550,000 60,940,000 6,340,000 8,031,920 286,161,920 1,645,250 44,967,500 34,716,313 20,902,450 30,134,163 2,178,097 909,399 135,453,171 10,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 250,000 335,000 9,955,250 124,992,500 114,741,313 63,477,450 91,074,163 8,518,097 9,191,320 421,950,092 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 9,930,000 10,250,000 20,180,000 971,519 1,543,550 2,515,069 20,000 25,000 45,000 10,921,519 11,818,550 22,740,069 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 137,495,000 48,670,000 13,585,000 199,750,000 181,240,238 63,152,763 4,312,500 248,705,500 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,000 318,755,238 111,842,763 17,917,500 448,515,500 10/16/2007 99,815,000 99,815,000 61,393,850 61,393,850 - 161,208,850 161,208,850 1,098,951,920 733,470,626 Excise Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1940) MPC Bonds - Series 2003A - Arena Tax Exempt MPC Bonds - Series 2003B - Arena Taxable MPC Bonds - Series 2004A - Refund Imp Dist MPC Bonds - Series 2006A - GRPSTC/Zanjero MPC Bonds - Series 2008A - H/Conv/Media (Tax Exempt) MPC Bonds - Series 2008B - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) MPC Bonds - Series 2008C - H/Conv/Media (Taxable) AMFP Series 14 - Arena AMFP Refunding Series 16 - Arena Sub-Total Excise Tax Funded Debt Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2002 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (1 of 2) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2004 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2005 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006A General Obligation Bonds - Series 2006B General Obligation Bonds - Series 2007 General Obligation Bonds - Series 2009B General Obligation Bond Arbitrage (1) Sub-Total Property Tax Funded Debt Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 2380) General Obligation Bonds - Series 2003 (2 of 2) Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2003 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2006 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2007 Subordinate Lien W&S Rev Bonds - Series 2008 WIFA 2010 WIFA 2001 Sub-Total Water & Sewer Revenue Funded Debt Street/HURF Revenue Funded Debt (Fund 1920) HURF Revenue Bonds - Refunding Series 2004 HURF Revenue Bonds - Series 2006 Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Western Loop 101 Public Facilites Corp (Fund 1930) 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Exercise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008C Sub-Total Street Revenue Funded Debt Transp. Sales Tax Rev Funded Debt (Fund 1970) Transportation Sales Tax Obligations Bond Sub-Total Trans S/Tax Bond Debt Service Total Debt Service Payments (All Funds) (1) note, arbitrage is subject to change each year based on calc's performed by consultants. 569 Return to TOC 2,265,000 1,834,687,546 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $49,940,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2003A – Arena Tax Exempt Date: June 1, 2003, maturing in 2033. Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2003. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 2.500% to 5.000% Purpose: The Series 2003A (taxable) bonds were issued to pay for the cost of constructing, equipping and furnishing the arena complex and related facilities, including parking and other public infrastructure. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020 ‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2033 Total Principal 4,210,000 1,330,000 1,390,000 1,375,000 1,395,000 9,640,000 10,395,000 8,735,000 11,470,000 49,940,000 570 Return to TOC Interest 11,047,406 2,117,881 2,077,981 2,034,544 1,991,575 8,846,875 6,213,938 4,289,750 1,491,750 40,111,700 Total 15,257,406 3,447,881 3,467,981 3,409,544 3,386,575 18,486,875 16,608,938 13,024,750 12,961,750 90,051,700 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $97,040,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2003B – Arena Taxable Date: June 1, 2003, maturing in 2033. Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2003. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 2.380% to 5.580% Purpose: The Series 2003B (tax‐exempt) bonds were issued to pay for the cost of constructing, equipping and furnishing the arena complex and related facilities, including parking and other public infrastructure. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2033 Total Principal 670,000 305,000 390,000 480,000 575,000 9,940,000 22,280,000 36,830,000 25,570,000 97,040,000 571 Return to TOC Interest 26,482,200 5,280,722 5,268,735 5,252,745 5,232,441 25,313,181 21,450,069 13,385,304 3,074,580 110,739,976 Total 27,152,200 5,585,722 5,658,735 5,732,745 5,807,441 35,253,181 43,730,069 50,215,304 28,644,580 207,779,976 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $10,880,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2004A – Refund Imp Dist Date: May 1, 2004, maturing in 2014. Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2005. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 2.000% to 5.000% Purpose: The Series 2004A bonds were issued to pay for the refunding of the City of Glendale Special Improvement District No. 57 Bonds and the City of Glendale Special Improvement District No. 59 Bonds. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Principal 4,020,000 1,565,000 1,665,000 1,765,000 1,865,000 10,880,000 572 Return to TOC Interest 1,976,850 343,000 264,750 181,500 93,250 2,859,350 Total 5,996,850 1,908,000 1,929,750 1,946,500 1,958,250 13,739,350 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $33,250,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A – GRPSTC/Zanjero Date: June, 1, 2006, maturing in 2026. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2007. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 4.000% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The Series 2006A bonds were issued to pay for a portion of the cost of developing, constructing and equipping a public safety training facility and constructing infrastructure improvement within the City of Glendale. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2026 Total Principal 3,630,000 1,250,000 1,315,000 1,380,000 1,450,000 8,410,000 10,730,000 5,085,000 33,250,000 573 Return to TOC Interest 4,397,757 1,494,025 1,431,525 1,365,775 1,296,775 5,321,375 2,998,375 410,550 18,716,157 Total 8,027,757 2,744,025 2,746,525 2,745,775 2,746,775 13,731,375 13,728,375 5,495,550 51,966,157 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $32,315,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2008A – H/Conv/Media (Tax‐Exempt) Date: June 1, 2008, maturing in 2032. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2009. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 3.000% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The Series 2008A (tax‐exempt) bonds were issued to refund and redeem the Corporation’s outstanding Subordinate Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2006B. The Series 2006B bonds were used to design, acquire, construct and equip conference center and related media and parking garage facilities for the City (Conference Center Project). Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior Years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2032 Total Principal ‐ 95,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ 5,990,000 8,635,000 10,880,000 6,715,000 32,315,000 574 Return to TOC Interest 2,197,659 1,465,106 1,462,256 1,462,256 1,462,256 6,939,880 5,417,952 3,135,630 563,852 24,106,847 Total 2,197,659 1,560,106 1,462,256 1,462,256 1,462,256 12,929,880 14,052,952 14,015,630 7,278,852 56,421,847 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $52,780,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2008B – H/Conv/Media (Taxable) Date: June 1, 2008, maturing in 2033. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2009. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 5.446% to 6.157% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The Series 2008B (taxable) bonds were issued to refund and redeem the Corporation’s outstanding Subordinate Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2006B. The Series 2006B bonds were used to design, acquire, construct and equip conference center and related media and parking garage facilities for the City (Conference Center Project). Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2033 Total Principal 1,495,000 210,000 470,000 740,000 1,030,000 7,495,000 9,935,000 13,400,000 18,005,000 52,780,000 575 Return to TOC Interest 4,675,510 3,087,508 3,076,071 3,050,475 3,010,174 13,995,980 11,542,722 8,114,568 3,135,457 53,688,465 Total 6,170,510 3,297,508 3,546,071 3,790,475 4,040,174 21,490,980 21,477,722 21,514,568 21,140,457 106,468,465 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $9,140,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2008C – H/Conv/Media (Taxable) Date: June 1, 2008, maturing in 2015. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2009. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 3.958% to 5.019% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The Series 2008C (taxable) bonds were issued to refund and redeem the Corporation’s outstanding Subordinate Excise Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2006C. The Series 2006C bonds were used to design, acquire, construct and equip conference center and related media and parking garage facilities for the City (Conference Center Project). Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Principal 1,705,000 1,785,000 1,730,000 1,570,000 1,350,000 1,000,000 9,140,000 576 Return to TOC Interest 416,011 348,527 270,416 190,905 115,922 50,190 1,391,971 Total 2,121,011 2,133,527 2,000,416 1,760,905 1,465,922 1,050,190 10,531,971 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $5,055,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Refunding Certificate of Participation – AMFP Series 14 ‐ Arena Date: June 28, 2002, maturing in 2033. Interest: Semi‐annual each February and August, commencing February 1, 2003. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 5.000% to 5.375% Purpose: The refunding certificate of participations were issued to refund and retire prior years outstanding Refunding Certificate of Participations and to pay a portion of the costs of constructing, equipping, furnishing and otherwise providing for an approximately 17,500‐seat multipurpose arena facility and related infrastructure. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2033 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 910,000 4,145,000 5,055,000 577 Return to TOC Interest 1,428,694 259,763 259,763 259,763 259,763 1,298,813 1,298,813 1,298,813 534,597 6,898,779 Total 1,428,694 259,763 259,763 259,763 259,763 1,298,813 1,298,813 2,208,813 4,679,597 11,953,779 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $7,250,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Municipal Property Corporation Refunding Certificate of Participation – AMFP Refunding Series 16 ‐ Arena Date: July 31, 2003, maturing in 2033. Interest: Semi‐annual each February and August, commencing February 1, 2004. Interest accrues at rate of 4.7000% Purpose: The refunding certificates of participations were issued to refund and retire prior years outstanding Refunding Certificate of Participations. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2033 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 7,250,000 7,250,000 578 Return to TOC Interest 1,703,750 340,750 340,750 340,750 340,750 1,703,750 1,703,750 1,703,750 1,533,375 9,711,375 Total 1,703,750 340,750 340,750 340,750 340,750 1,703,750 1,703,750 1,703,750 8,783,375 16,961,375 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $40,235,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2002 Date: June 1, 2002, maturing in 2023. Interest: Semiannual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2003. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 2.500% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aa2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to refund 1996 bonds and to pay for the costs of acquisition, improvement and equipment of a variety of projects relating to flood control, parks, streets/traffic/parking, water feature and multipurpose recreational facility. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2023 Total Principal 15,510,000 1,600,000 1,660,000 1,730,000 1,800,000 10,400,000 7,535,000 40,235,000 579 Return to TOC Interest 11,532,434 1,162,750 1,098,750 1,032,350 960,988 3,431,688 746,713 19,965,672 Total 27,042,434 2,762,750 2,758,750 2,762,350 2,760,988 13,831,688 8,281,713 60,200,672 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $66,400,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003 Date: April 1, 2003, maturing in 2018. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2003. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 1.500% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aa2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to pay for the costs of acquisition, improvement and equipment of a variety of projects relating to government facility, maintenance facilities, public safety, streets/parking, flood control, open space/trails, parks and recreation and water and sewer. $13,875,000 is related to water and sewer fund and is included in the debt service amount listed. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2018 Total Principal 27,890,000 4,135,000 4,285,000 4,500,000 4,725,000 20,865,000 66,400,000 580 Return to TOC Interest 15,831,585 1,675,550 1,510,150 1,338,750 1,113,750 1,996,000 23,465,785 Total 43,721,585 5,810,550 5,795,150 5,838,750 5,838,750 22,861,000 89,865,785 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $36,645,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2004 Date: June 1, 2004, maturing in 2019. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2005. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 3.000% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aa2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to pay for the costs of acquisition, improvement and equipment of a variety of projects relating to government facility, maintenance facilities, public safety, streets/parking, flood control, open space/trails, parks and recreation. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2014‐2019 Total Principal 12,455,000 2,235,000 2,350,000 2,440,000 2,550,000 14,615,000 36,645,000 581 Return to TOC Interest 7,870,206 1,057,100 970,494 876,494 778,894 2,112,506 13,665,694 Total 20,325,206 3,292,100 3,320,494 3,316,494 3,328,894 16,727,506 50,310,694 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $11,960,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2005 Date: June 1, 2005, maturing in 2015. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2006. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 3.500% to 4.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aa2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to pay for the costs of acquisition, improvement and equipment of a variety of projects relating to cultural/historic projects, economic development and public safety. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Principal 5,465,000 1,210,000 1,250,000 1,295,000 1,345,000 1,395,000 11,960,000 582 Return to TOC Interest 1,868,006 247,275 203,413 158,100 107,919 55,799 2,640,511 Total 7,333,006 1,457,275 1,453,413 1,453,100 1,452,919 1,450,799 14,600,511 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $29,365,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2006A Date: June 1, 2006, maturing in 2021. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2007. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 4.000% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aa2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to pay for the costs of acquisition, improvement and equipment of a variety of projects relating to streets/parking, parks, public safety and flood control. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2021 Total Principal 6,100,000 1,720,000 1,785,000 1,850,000 1,925,000 10,880,000 5,105,000 29,365,000 583 Return to TOC Interest 5,004,612 1,040,331 971,531 882,281 808,281 2,650,256 353,939 11,711,232 Total 11,104,612 2,760,331 2,756,531 2,732,281 2,733,281 13,530,256 5,458,939 41,076,232 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $9,065,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2006B Date: June 1, 2006, maturing in 2015. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2007. Interest accrues at rate of 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aa2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to advance refund the 2011‐2015 maturities of the City of Glendale General Obligation Bonds Series June 2000. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Principal ‐ 1,625,000 1,715,000 1,810,000 1,905,000 2,010,000 9,065,000 584 Return to TOC Interest 1,887,283 453,250 372,000 286,250 195,747 100,500 3,295,030 Total 1,887,283 2,078,250 2,087,000 2,096,250 2,100,747 2,110,500 12,360,030 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $61,000,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2007 Date: June 26, 2007, maturing in 2022. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2008. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 4.000% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aa2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to pay for the costs of acquisition, improvement and equipment of a variety of projects relating to streets/parking, public safety, flood control and government facilities. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2022 Total Principal 9,475,000 3,385,000 3,520,000 3,660,000 3,805,000 21,565,000 15,590,000 61,000,000 585 Return to TOC Interest 7,685,039 2,334,450 2,190,588 2,040,988 1,885,438 6,809,775 1,477,775 24,424,052 Total 17,160,039 5,719,450 5,710,588 5,700,988 5,690,438 28,374,775 17,067,775 85,424,052 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $41,650,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2009B (Taxable Direct‐Pay Build America Bond) Date: Dec 8, 2009, maturing in 2028. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2010. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 1.500% to 5.625% Rating: Moody’s “Aa2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to pay for the costs of acquisition, improvement and equipment of a variety of projects relating to economic development, government facilities, public safety, flood control, and parks & recreation. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030 Total Principal ‐ 1,270,000 1,280,000 1,295,000 1,315,000 9,130,000 11,145,000 13,250,000 2,965,000 41,650,000 586 Return to TOC Interest 1,012,949 1,929,428 1,910,378 1,881,578 1,849,202 8,423,570 6,217,670 3,148,506 170,488 26,543,769 Total 1,012,949 3,199,428 3,190,378 3,176,578 3,164,202 17,553,570 17,362,670 16,398,506 3,135,488 68,193,769 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $80,000,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Subordinate Lien Water & Sewer Revenue Obligations, Series 2003 Date: December 1, 2003, maturing in 2028. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2004. Interest accrues at rate of 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The proceeds of the obligations were used to pay for the expansion of the existing West Area Water Reclamation Facility, payments for the City’s share of upgrades to and expansion of the 91st Avenue Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, replacement and rehabilitation of water lines throughout the system, a water resource master plan and water treatment plant design, design and construction of facilities at the Cholla Water Treatment Plant to meet solids handling regulations and land purchase for a water plant. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2028 Total Principal ‐ 2,595,000 2,725,000 2,830,000 2,975,000 17,255,000 24,335,000 27,285,000 80,000,000 587 Return to TOC Interest 19,863,750 3,972,750 3,843,000 3,734,000 3,592,500 15,577,500 10,753,750 3,494,000 64,831,250 Total 19,863,750 6,567,750 6,568,000 6,564,000 6,567,500 32,832,500 35,088,750 30,779,000 144,831,250 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $80,000,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Subordinate Lien Water & Sewer Revenue Obligations, Series 2006 Date: February 7, 2006, maturing in 2026. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2006. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 4.000% to 5.250% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The proceeds of the obligations were used to pay for the City’s share of upgrades to, and expansion of, the 91st Avenue Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, replacement and rehabilitation of water lines throughout the system, water resource master plan and water treatment plant design, design and construction of facilities at the Cholla Water Treatment Plant to meet solids handling regulations and construction of a water treatment plant. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2026 Total Principal ‐ 3,455,000 3,590,000 3,745,000 3,925,000 22,905,000 28,950,000 13,430,000 80,000,000 588 Return to TOC Interest 16,133,769 3,716,031 3,577,831 3,434,231 3,237,619 12,938,131 6,899,194 913,275 50,850,081 Total 16,133,769 7,171,031 7,167,831 7,179,231 7,162,619 35,843,131 35,849,194 14,343,275 130,850,081 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $44,500,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Subordinate Lien Water & Sewer Revenue Obligations, Series 2007 Date: June 15, 2007, maturing in 2027. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2008. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 4.250% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The proceeds of the obligations were used to pay for the City’s share of upgrades to, and expansion of, the 91st Avenue Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, replacement and rehabilitation of water lines throughout the system, water resource master plan and water treatment plant design, design and construction of upgrades at the Cholla Water Treatment Plant to meet federal regulations, construction of water treatment plants and associated transmission lines and design and construction of upgrades at the wastewater treatment plants to meet federal regulations. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2027 Total Principal 1,950,000 1,700,000 1,775,000 1,840,000 1,930,000 11,095,000 14,010,000 10,200,000 44,500,000 589 Return to TOC Interest 6,289,116 2,032,438 1,960,188 1,884,750 1,806,550 7,568,615 4,653,313 996,588 27,191,557 Total 8,239,116 3,732,438 3,735,188 3,724,750 3,736,550 18,663,615 18,663,313 11,196,588 71,691,557 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $65,500,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Subordinate Lien Water & Sewer Revenue Obligations, Series 2008 Date: February 1, 2008, maturing in 2028. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2008. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 3.000% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The proceeds of the obligations were used to pay for the City’s share of upgrades to, and expansion of, the 91st Avenue Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, replacement and rehabilitation of water lines throughout the system, water resource master plan and water treatment plant design, design and construction of upgrades at the Cholla Water Treatment Plant to meet federal regulations, construction of water treatment plants and associated transmission lines and design and construction of upgrades at the wastewater treatment plants to meet federal regulations. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2028 Total Principal 4,560,000 2,385,000 2,455,000 2,540,000 2,630,000 14,780,000 18,210,000 17,940,000 65,500,000 590 Return to TOC Interest 5,557,426 2,675,588 2,604,038 2,518,113 2,429,213 10,516,538 7,093,175 2,297,500 35,691,588 Total 10,117,426 5,060,588 5,059,038 5,058,113 5,059,213 25,296,538 25,303,175 20,237,500 101,191,588 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $14,543,766 City of Glendale, Arizona Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds Series 2001 (WIFA Loan) (Water Infrastructure Funding Authority) Date: Closing date January 2001. Maturing in 2019 Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2005. Interest accrues at rate of 3.784% Purpose: The proceeds from this obligation were used to pay for Cholla Water Treatment Plant expansion. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2019‐2022 Total Principal 3,816,044 824,854 856,067 888,460 922,080 4,540,459 ‐ 11,847,965 591 Return to TOC Interest 2,956,648 183,449 164,609 145,057 124,764 291,520 ‐ 3,866,048 Total 6,772,693 1,008,303 1,020,676 1,033,517 1,046,844 4,831,979 ‐ 15,714,012 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service City of Glendale, Arizona Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds Series 2010 (WIFA Loan) (Water Infrastructure Funding Authority) Date: Closing date March 19, 2010. Maturing in 2029 Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2010. Interest accrues at rate of 3.145% Purpose: The proceeds will be used for planning and design of the 2nd phase of ground water treatment at the Oasis facility. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 Total Principal ‐ 248,928 256,757 264,832 273,161 1,500,200 1,751,419 2,044,703 6,340,000 592 Return to TOC Interest 56,495 199,394 191,564 183,490 175,160 741,406 490,188 196,898 2,234,595 Total 56,495 448,322 448,321 448,322 448,321 2,241,606 2,241,607 2,241,601 8,574,595 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $14,655,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Street and Highway User Revenue and Refunding Bonds, Series 2004 Date: June 1, 2004, maturing in 2014. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2005. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 2.500% to 4.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The bonds were used to finance the improvement, construction, reconstruction, acquisition of right‐of‐way or maintenance of streets and highways of the City including certain traffic control devices and to refund portions of the City’s outstanding highway revenue bonds. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Principal 4,725,000 2,350,000 2,435,000 2,525,000 2,620,000 14,655,000 593 Return to TOC Interest 2,637,946 373,163 290,913 202,644 104,800 3,609,464 Total 7,362,946 2,723,163 2,725,913 2,727,644 2,724,800 18,264,464 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $15,745,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Street and Highway User Revenue Bonds, Series 2006 Date: April 11, 2006, maturing in 2016. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing January 1, 2007. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 4.000% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s “AAA” Purpose: The bonds were issued to finance the improvement, construction, acquisition of right‐of‐way or maintenance of streets and highways of the City including a bridge and noise walls. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2016 Total Principal 5,495,000 1,540,000 1,605,000 1,670,000 1,735,000 3,700,000 15,745,000 594 Return to TOC Interest 2,424,694 427,025 365,425 301,225 226,075 223,800 3,968,244 Total 7,919,694 1,967,025 1,970,425 1,971,225 1,961,075 3,923,800 19,713,244 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $137,495,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Western Loop 101 Public Facilities Corp, Series 2008A Date: October 1, 2008, maturing in 2038. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2009. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 6.000% to 7.000% Rating: Moody’s “A2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: Most of the proceeds were deposited to the acquisition and construction project related to the design and construction of a new Major League Baseball spring training stadium and related facilities. The remaining proceeds were used toward capitalized interest on 2008 bond issuance and issuance costs. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2034 2035‐2038 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 7,240,000 14,500,000 23,365,000 37,015,000 55,375,000 137,495,000 595 Return to TOC Interest ‐ ‐ 8,913,913 8,913,913 8,913,913 44,166,652 40,710,465 35,480,615 25,227,015 8,913,751 181,240,237 Total ‐ ‐ 8,913,913 8,913,913 8,913,913 51,406,652 55,210,465 58,845,615 62,242,015 64,288,751 318,735,237 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $48,670,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Western Loop 101 Public Facilities Corp, Series 2008B Date: October 1, 2008, maturing in 2038. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2009. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 5.000% to 7.000% Rating: Moody’s “A2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: Most of the proceeds were deposited to the acquisition and construction project related to the design and construction of a new Major League Baseball spring training stadium and related facilities. The remaining proceeds were used toward capitalized interest on 2008 bond issuance and issuance costs. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2034 2035‐2038 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,555,000 5,130,000 8,265,000 13,110,000 19,610,000 48,670,000 596 Return to TOC Interest ‐ ‐ 3,077,875 3,077,875 3,077,875 15,267,538 14,137,240 12,423,764 8,933,725 3,156,871 63,152,763 Total ‐ ‐ 3,077,875 3,077,875 3,077,875 17,822,538 19,267,240 20,688,764 22,043,725 22,766,871 111,822,763 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $13,585,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Western Loop 101 Public Facilities Corp, Series 2008C Date: October 1, 2008, maturing in 2017. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2009. Interest accrues at rates of 7.500% Rating: Moody’s “A2” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: Most of the proceeds were deposited into a revenue stabilization fund to be used toward interest payments of Series A and B. The remainder was used toward the design and construction of a new Major League Baseball spring training stadium and related facilities, and for capitalized interest on 2008 bond issuance costs. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,940,000 10,645,000 13,585,000 597 Return to TOC Interest ‐ ‐ 1,018,875 1,018,875 1,018,875 1,255,875 4,312,500 Total ‐ ‐ 1,018,875 1,018,875 3,958,875 11,900,875 17,897,500 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $109,110,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Transportation Excise Tax Revenue Obligations, Series 2007 Date: October 16, 2007, maturing in 2032. Rating: Moody’s: “Aaa” Standard and Poor’s : “AAA” Interest: Semiannual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2008. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 4.000% to 5.000% Purpose: The proceeds were used to construct transportation projects including design, construction and right‐of‐way acquisitions. Most of the funding was used to construct street projects such as roadway widening and intersections improvements. Funding was also used to construct transit stops, bicycle connections, park and ride lots and airport projects. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015‐2019 2020‐2024 2025‐2029 2030‐2032 Total Principal 9,295,000 2,780,000 2,890,000 3,005,000 3,125,000 17,825,000 22,110,000 27,940,000 20,140,000 109,110,000 598 Return to TOC Interest 12,692,216 4,548,081 4,436,882 4,321,281 4,201,082 18,811,910 14,530,348 8,705,130 1,839,150 74,086,080 Total 21,987,216 7,328,081 7,326,882 7,326,281 7,326,082 36,636,910 36,640,348 36,645,130 21,979,150 183,196,080 Schedule Eight Scheduled Lease Payments Lease Desc. & Account 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 1,055,555 318,750 1,374,305 1,611,111 205,417 1,816,528 1,611,111 68,472 1,679,583 Northern Crossing * 1000-11380-560400 1000-11380-560600 Total 2013-14 2014-15 Beyond 15 - - - Remodeling Office Space - '00 LaSalle Lease 1000-11380-560400 113,619 1000-11380-560600 2,374 Total 115,993 - - - - - Sound Walls-'00 LaSalle Lease 1000-11380-560400 1000-11380-560600 Total 126,613 2,646 129,259 - - - - - Fire Trucks & Equipment -'03 BofA Lease 1000-11380-560400 29,452 1000-11380-560600 384 Total 29,836 - - - - - 63,872 13,309 77,181 66,303 10,879 77,181 68,826 8,356 77,181 71,445 5,736 77,181 48,286 3,259 51,545 50,123 1,422 51,545 2,000,000 510,000 2,510,000 4,800,000 360,000 5,160,000 - - - - Fire Trucks & Equipment - '07 Lease 1000-11380-560400 1000-11380-560600 Total Hickman - '03 BofA Lease * 1000-11380-560400 1000-11380-560600 Total Interfund borrowing - Landfill Fund 1000-11380-560400 1000-11380-560600 Total - - 2,029,375 105,701 2,135,076 2,070,337 64,737 2,135,074 6,546 726 7,272 1,778 40 1,818 2,214,073 Parks & Rec Copier - De Lage Landen Public Finance LLC 1000-14700-560400 5,010 5,727 1000-14700-560600 2,262 1,545 Total 7,272 7,272 4,243,846 7,060,981 3,899,112 Library Copier - '09 Kansas State Bank 1260-15410-560400 4,744 1260-15410-560600 1,351 Total 6,095 5,158 938 6,095 5,607 488 6,095 1000 - General Fund Total: * Variable Rate Lease 599 Return to TOC - 2,112,125 22,951 2,135,076 2,186,621 - 51,545 - Schedule Eight Scheduled Lease Payments Lease Desc. & Account 1260 - Library Fund Total: 2010-11 2011-12 2013-14 2014-15 Beyond 15 6,095 6,095 - - - One (1) Roll-off Truck - '06 Banc of America Lease 2480-17810-560400 26,152 2480-17810-560600 730 Total 26,882 - - - - - Sideloader Refuse Truck -'06 Banc of America Lease 2480-17820-560400 43,915 2480-17820-560600 1,226 Total 45,141 - - - - - - - - - - - Frontload Truck - '07 Lease 2480-17820-560400 2480-17820-560600 Total 6,095 2012-13 44,454 3,001 47,455 46,146 1,309 47,455 Three (3) Frontloaders - '09 Lease (Interfund Borrowing) 2480-17820-560400 145,424 148,156 2480-17820-560600 10,511 7,779 Total 155,935 155,935 150,939 4,996 155,935 153,775 2,160 155,935 Three (3 ) Sideloader Refuse Trucks -'06 Banc of America Lease 2480-17830-560400 127,591 2480-17830-560600 3,561 Total 131,152 - - - - - Two (2) Sideloader Refuse Trucks - '07 Lease 2480-17830-560400 84,762 2480-17830-560600 5,721 Total 90,483 87,988 2,496 90,484 - - - - Sideloader -'09 Lease (Interfund Borrowing) 2480-17830-560400 41,824 2480-17830-560600 3,023 Total 44,847 42,610 2,237 44,847 43,410 1,437 44,847 44,226 621 44,847 - - Two (2) Rearloader Refuse Trucks - '06 Banc of America Lease 2480-17840-560400 72,269 2480-17840-560600 2,017 Total 74,286 - - - - - Two (2) Case 570 Mxt Tractor/Loader - '06 Banc of America Lease 2480-17840-560400 25,441 2480-17840-560600 710 Total 26,151 - - - - - * Variable Rate Lease 600 Return to TOC Schedule Eight Scheduled Lease Payments Lease Desc. & Account Tractor - '07 Lease 2480-17840-560400 2480-17840-560600 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Beyond 15 16,090 1,086 17,176 16,702 474 17,176 - - - - Rearloader - '09 Lease (Interfund Borrowing) 2480-17840-560400 45,785 2480-17840-560600 3,310 Total 49,095 46,646 2,449 49,095 47,522 1,573 49,095 48,415 680 49,095 - - Environmental Sweeper - '00 LaSalle Lease 2480-17840-560400 19,256 2480-17840-560600 402 Total 19,658 - - - - - - - Total 2480 - Sanitation Fund Total: Grand Total: * Variable Rate Lease 728,261 404,992 249,877 249,877 4,978,202 7,472,069 4,155,085 2,463,950 601 Return to TOC 2,186,621 51,545 Schedule Nine Internal Service Premiums Note: The following amounts provide for departmental participation in the city's self insurance fund, workers' compensation fund, vehicle and technology replacement programs and telephone fund. The rates are approved by the Budget Office based on computer models established for each fund. Monthly amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department during the fiscal year. Fund Name Dept / Program Name Workers' Insurance Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone 1000 - General Marketing and Comm. Audio/Visual PD - Emergency Management Mayor Office of the Mayor Council Office Cactus District Cholla District Council Office Ocotillo District Sahuaro District Yucca District City Clerk City Clerk Elections Records Management City Manager City Manager City Auditor City Auditor Intergovt. Programs Intergovernmental Programs City Court City Court City Attorney City Attorney Marketing and Comm. Cable Communications City-Wide Special Events Marketing Tourism Conv./Media/Parking Convention/Media/Parking Media Center Operations Comm. Action Program CAP Local Match Human Resources Benefits Compensation Employee Relations Employment Services $3,529 $64 $1,590 $38,813 $4,797 $27,716 $1,791 $68 $1,653 $3,076 $1,449 $1,449 $3,258 $1,811 $1,449 $906 $5,712 $2,218 $6,928 $1,863 $252 $870 $653 $3,758 $34 $3,432 $5,484 $291 $4,119 $5,068 $1,911 $43 $2,185 $895 $2,056 $68 $1,599 $1,266 $20,679 $1,534 $7,915 $19,731 $19,269 $2,148 $11,385 $8,340 $3,365 $3,271 $6,118 $1,794 $216 $96 $239 $742 $51,800 $2,290 $5,692 $1,769 $1,083 $5,736 $5,262 $3,185 $626 $292 $153,269 $8,001 $14,380 $3,239 $15,833 $309 $1,204 $2,321 $1,162 $1,820 $1,812 $3,806 $0 $34 $102 $316 $663 602 Return to TOC $219 $270 $3,427 Schedule Nine Internal Service Premiums Note: The following amounts provide for departmental participation in the city's self insurance fund, workers' compensation fund, vehicle and technology replacement programs and telephone fund. The rates are approved by the Budget Office based on computer models established for each fund. Monthly amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department during the fiscal year. Fund Name Dept / Program Name Human Resources Human Resources Administration Organizational Development Risk Management/Safety Admin Svcs Admin. Administration Services Admin. Finance Accounting Services Finance Administration License/Collection Purchasing Warehouse Info. Technology Information Technology Management & Budget Budget & Research Grants Administration Police Department PD - Fiscal Management Police Administration Police Support Services Fire Department Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO) Ambulance Services Fire Administration Fire Marshal's Office Fire Medical Services & Health Fire Operations Fire Resource Management Comm. Services Adm Comm. Services Admin. Parks & Recreation Adult Center Aquatics Foothills Recreation Center Glendale Community Center Historic Sahuaro Ranch Marketing - Parks & Rec Park Irrigation Park Rangers Parks & Recreation Admin. Parks CIP & Planning Workers' Insurance Compensation Vehicle Replacement $2,828 $1,639 $3,489 $102 $51 $360 $1,981 $68 $6,752 $3,785 $4,579 $2,182 $2,613 $455 $2,048 $1,282 $94 $3,116 $1,240 $14,732 $2,985 $2,953 $502 $102 $26 $914,311 $301,039 Technology Replacement Telephone $13,539 $270 $1,110 $10,323 $1,267 $895 $3,634 $10,387 $6,654 $2,920 $2,190 $7,600 $3,249 $1,814 $2,167 $2,936 $617,154 $12,946 $3,416 $540 $1,618 $173 $2,008 $184,654 $545,879 $160,292 $182,055 $1,128 $403 $3,136 $2,406 $53,983 $135,645 $3,249 $862 $6,285 $1,428 $2,218 $2,408 $1,551 $175,346 $39,258 $34 $6,747 $2,868 $4,144 $1,156 $937 $200 $1,244 $2,066 $34 $51 603 Return to TOC $99,759 $172 $4,713 $540 $11,247 $593 $300 $300 $840 $1,080 $2,193 $7,973 $13,207 Schedule Nine Internal Service Premiums Note: The following amounts provide for departmental participation in the city's self insurance fund, workers' compensation fund, vehicle and technology replacement programs and telephone fund. The rates are approved by the Budget Office based on computer models established for each fund. Monthly amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department during the fiscal year. Fund Name Dept / Program Name Parks & Recreation Parks Maintenance Pool Maintenance Recreation Support Services Sports and Health Youth and Teen Comm. Partnerships Community Revitalization Neighborhood Partnership Library & Arts Arts Maintenance - Admin. Library Community Dev Admin CD Deputy City Manager Building Safety Building Safety Development Services Center Planning Current Planning Long-Range Planning & Research Planning Administration Economic Development Downtown Beaut. & Promotion Economic Development Code Compliance Code Compliance Public Works Admin. Public Works Administration Field Operations Cemetery Custodial Services Downtown Parking Garage Facilities Management Field Operations Admin. Graffiti Removal Engineering CIP Administration Construction Inspection Engineering Administration Land Development Division Mapping and Records Materials Testing Workers' Insurance Compensation $18,695 $1,899 $47,416 Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone $8,849 $863 $1,087 $981 $3,455 $26,172 $1,080 $25,944 $16,657 $1,444 $2,494 $3,567 $103 $1,620 $759 $5,023 $2,992 $3,254 $2,536 $439 $43,892 $688 $9,384 $1,999 $89,554 $50,077 $652 $17 $933 $173 $13,597 $3,943 $5,766 $828 $13,634 $5,460 $8,371 $8,820 $3,995 $1,770 $2,296 $170 $68 $85 $1,620 $1,154 $5,599 $1,445 $534 $2,170 $1,573 $2,860 $1,168 $102 $1,575 $570 $4,328 $1,988 $9,841 $1,032 $13,439 $7,752 $5,064 $709 $17 $540 $1,267 $1,022 $8,030 $238 $15,332 $4,273 $2,359 $581 $9,973 $2,902 $10,744 $18,663 $136 $2,348 $18,671 $284 $5,051 $123 $85 $34 $2,068 $3,192 $7,856 $29,766 604 Return to TOC $44,697 $4,114 $15,716 $3,650 $1,920 $2,522 $2,964 $27,714 $25,899 $8,326 $404 $5,005 $8,277 $3,198 $9,793 $4,261 $2,415 $4,554 Schedule Nine Internal Service Premiums Note: The following amounts provide for departmental participation in the city's self insurance fund, workers' compensation fund, vehicle and technology replacement programs and telephone fund. The rates are approved by the Budget Office based on computer models established for each fund. Monthly amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department during the fiscal year. Workers' Insurance Compensation Fund Name Dept / Program Name Engineering Utility Inspection Total General Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone $2,068 $2,561 $1,466,279 $568,231 $876,487 $1,461,793 $650,443 $36,045 $21,547 $24,065 $732 $5,650 $7,779 $24,797 $5,650 $7,779 1040 - General Services Field Operations Equipment Management Fuel Services Parts Store Operations Total General Services $17 $36,045 $21,564 $1,038 $17 $1,038 $17 1100 - Telephone Services Info. Technology Telephones Total Telephone Services 1140 - Technology Replacement Info. Technology Technology Replacement $17 $173 Total Technology Replacement $17 $173 1220 - Arts Commission Library & Arts Arts Maintenance Total Arts Commission $72 $1,605 $72 $1,605 1281 - Stadium Event Operations Marketing and Comm. Mkt'g - Stadium Events Police Department PD - Fiesta Bowl Event Stadium - PD Event Staffing Fire Department Fire - Fiesta Bowl Event Stadium - Fire Event Staffing Transportation Stadium - Transportation Ops. Transp - Fiesta Bowl Event Total Stadium Event Operations $15,070 $929 $3,570 $362 $6,510 $370 $532 $4,795 $594 $25,860 $6,872 605 Return to TOC Schedule Nine Internal Service Premiums Note: The following amounts provide for departmental participation in the city's self insurance fund, workers' compensation fund, vehicle and technology replacement programs and telephone fund. The rates are approved by the Budget Office based on computer models established for each fund. Monthly amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department during the fiscal year. Fund Name Dept / Program Name Workers' Insurance Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone 1282 - Arena Event Operations Police Department Arena-PD Event Staffing Fire Department Arena - Fire Event Staffing Field Operations Arena - ROW Maintenance Transportation Arena - Transportation Ops. Total Arena Event Operations $2,175 $17 $932 $106 $371 $111 $3,589 $123 $50,224 $66,567 $23,445 $34,375 $24,222 $74,684 $540 $9,157 $15,511 $10,670 $4,806 $56,407 $7,834 $85,862 $10,275 $706 $1,396 $12,376 $85 $821 $27,054 $675 $1,759 $20,351 $2,677 $851 $297,881 $83,479 $72,395 $15,442 $1,458 $17 $68 $256 $223 1340 - Highway User Gas Tax Field Operations Right-of-Way Maintenance Street Maintenance Transportation Signs & Markings Street Light Management Traffic Design and Development Traffic Signals Traffic Studies Transportation Administration Total Highway User Gas Tax $1,742 $1,666 $8,860 $8,004 $151,422 $22,816 $8,004 $19,809 $3,610 $16,832 $19,208 $4,156 1660 - Transportation Sales Tax Transportation Dial-A-Ride Intelligent Transportation Sys Traffic Mitigation Transit Management Transportation Education Transportation Program Mgmt Total Transportation Sales Tax $72,395 $3,970 $4,566 $2,143 $17,464 $23,779 $27,151 $23,364 $75,259 $136,470 $46,164 $40,486 $75,259 $136,470 $46,164 $40,486 1700 - Police Sales Tax Police Department Patrol - Special Revenue Fund Total Police Sales Tax 606 Return to TOC Schedule Nine Internal Service Premiums Note: The following amounts provide for departmental participation in the city's self insurance fund, workers' compensation fund, vehicle and technology replacement programs and telephone fund. The rates are approved by the Budget Office based on computer models established for each fund. Monthly amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department during the fiscal year. Fund Name Dept / Program Name Workers' Insurance Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone 1720 - Fire Sales Tax Fire Department Fire - Special Revenue Fund $36,492 $43,837 $9,814 $24,940 $36,492 $43,837 $9,814 $24,940 $3,645 $1,346 $1,350 $6,569 $11,051 $3,645 $1,346 $1,350 $6,569 $11,051 $24,165 $1,310 $2,713 $1,827 $16,373 $24,165 $1,310 $2,713 $1,827 $16,373 Total Fire Sales Tax 1740 - Civic Center Civic Center Civic Center Total Civic Center 1760 - Airport Operating Airport Airport Operations Total Airport Operating 1860 - RICO Funds Police Department State RICO $133,724 Total RICO Funds $133,724 1870 - Marketing Self Sust Marketing and Comm. Audio/Visual - Self Sust. Total Marketing Self Sust $23 $23 1880 - Parks & Recreation Self Sust Parks & Recreation Adult Center Self Sustaining Rec Self Sust-Foothills Rec Spec Events & Prgm Self Sust Sports Self Sustaining Youth and Teen Self Sustaining $309 $308 $105 $244 $1,966 Total Parks & Recreation Self S $2,932 $1,080 $1,080 2360 - Water and Sewer Env. Resources Environmental Resources Water Quality Finance Customer Service Office $85 $2,736 $8,617 $4,002 $1,531 607 Return to TOC $3,750 $895 $997 $32,207 $28,758 Schedule Nine Internal Service Premiums Note: The following amounts provide for departmental participation in the city's self insurance fund, workers' compensation fund, vehicle and technology replacement programs and telephone fund. The rates are approved by the Budget Office based on computer models established for each fund. Monthly amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department during the fiscal year. Fund Name Dept / Program Name Utilities Arrowhead Reclamation Plant Information Management Public Service Representatives Safety Administration System Security Utilities Administration West Area Plant Total Water and Sewer Workers' Insurance Compensation $306,850 $306,850 Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone $4,673 $475 $1,418 $17 $1,511 $856 $3,724 $10,185 $7,793 $12,310 $2,569 $5,911 $8,455 $14,802 $1,210 $278,606 $19,497 $72,173 $329,939 $134,092 $2,387 $1,718 $3,042 $534 $575 $3,452 $1,140 $534 $2,566 $1,434 $4,508 $10,358 $283 $3,803 $3,743 $6,954 $15,897 $6,123 $13,342 $3,801 $25,945 $2,661 $21,508 $15,889 $6,883 $178,387 $52,508 $279,709 $9,582 $1,701 $6,615 $15,128 $167,456 $540 $8,316 $182,584 $540 $540 $103,442 $13,626 2400 - Water Env. Resources Water Conservation Building Safety Cross Connection Control Utilities Central System Control Central System Maintenance Cholla Treatment Plant Customer Service - Field Irrigation Meter Maintenance Oasis Water Campus Pyramid Peak Plant Water Distribution Total Water $1,080 $4,320 $1,068 2420 - Sewer Utilities Pretreatment Program Wastewater Collection Total Sewer 2440 - Landfill Field Operations Landfill MRF Operations Recycling Solid Waste Admin Total Landfill $41,805 $11,283 $4,573 $3,422 $1,143 $13,910 $10,368 $2,160 $2,883 $4,166 $3,439 $722 $1,537 $41,805 $20,421 $29,321 $9,864 608 Return to TOC Schedule Nine Internal Service Premiums Note: The following amounts provide for departmental participation in the city's self insurance fund, workers' compensation fund, vehicle and technology replacement programs and telephone fund. The rates are approved by the Budget Office based on computer models established for each fund. Monthly amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department during the fiscal year. Fund Name Dept / Program Name Workers' Insurance Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone 2480 - Sanitation Field Operations Curb Service Residential-Loose Trash Collec Sanitation Frontload Sanitation Roll-off Total Sanitation $65,802 $29,987 $42,873 $11,105 $25,207 $11,381 $23,727 $3,338 $1,620 $1,620 $1,620 $1,814 $149,767 $63,653 $10,997 $4,860 $2,348 $54,795 $2,016 $14,991 $12,373 $54,795 $2,016 $14,991 $12,373 $1,642 $607 $29,674 $10,421 $19,681 $13,103 $1,084 $9,167 $83,718 $38,649 $960 $1,157 $4,518 $15,705 $2,848 $43,359 $94,139 $58,330 $10,997 $534 2500 - Pub Housing Budget Activities Comm. Partnerships Community Housing Total Pub Housing Budget Activ 2530 - Public Safety Training Center Police Department PS Training Ops - Police Fire Department PS Training Ops - Fire Field Operations PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Total Public Safety Training Ce 2538 - Glendale Health Center Fire Department Glendale Health Center $73 $2,776 $2,132 Total Glendale Health Center $73 $2,776 $2,132 $2,067,999 $990,447 FY 2011 Total Internal Service Premiums: $2,499,892 $984,460 609 Return to TOC $1,998,392 Schedule Ten General Staff and Administrative Service Charges Note: The following schedule identifies the general staff and administrative charges which are direct expenses of the enterprise and certain special revenue funds but incurred in other funds. The charges are established by the Budget Office based on the indirect cost allocation model which utilizes various generally accepted allocation methods. Annual amounts should be charged against departmental operating budgets by the Finance Department at the beginning of each fiscal year. Charges for Customer Service are paid to the Water/Sewer Fund and charges for Solid Waste Adminstration are paid to the Landfill Fund. Fund Name Dept Program Name General Fund Indirect Customer Service Solid Waste Administration Sanitation F/L 1660 - Transportation Sales Tax Transportation Program Mgmt $1,017,000 $1,017,000 2360 - Water and Sewer Utilities Administration $4,394,000 $4,394,000 $47,382 $47,382 2440 - Landfill Gas Management System Landfill MRF Operations Recycling Solid Waste Admin $6,000 $404,000 $357,000 $125,000 $87,000 $979,000 $52,000 $4,000 $56,000 2480 - Sanitation Curb Service Residential-Loose Trash Collec Sanitation Frontload Sanitation Roll-off FY 2011 Total General Staff / Admin Charges: $713,000 $261,000 $362,000 $136,000 $1,472,000 $55,000 $112,000 $160,000 $57,000 $81,000 $29,000 $327,000 $7,862,000 $168,000 $327,000 $57,000 610 Return to TOC $47,382 Schedule Eleven Operating Capital List Fund Dept / Program Name Status Item Description FY 2011 Budget 1120 - Vehicle Replacement Field Operations Equipment Replacement (13610) Base Scheduled Vehicle/Equip Repl's Base Unscheduled Repl's - Approp. Equipment Replacement $2,294,433 $590,308 $2,884,741 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT TOTAL .................................................... $2,884,741 1140 - Technology Replacement Info. Technology Technology Replacement (11530) Base Scheduled Technology Repl's TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT TOTAL ......................................... $797,583 $797,583 1842 - ARRA Stimulus Grants Police Department Stop Violence - Women (37001) Carryover Equipment ARRA STIMULUS GRANTS TOTAL ................................................... $2,074 $2,074 1860 - RICO Funds Police Department Federal RICO (32020) Base Equipment RICO FUNDS TOTAL .............................................................................. $100,000 $100,000 2360 - Water and Sewer Utilities Arrowhead Reclamation Plant (17160) Base Equipment Water Distribution (17290) Base Equipment WATER AND SEWER TOTAL .............................................................. 611 Return to TOC $9,000 $30,000 $39,000 Schedule Eleven Operating Capital List Fund Dept / Program Name Status Item Description FY 2011 Budget 2500 - Pub Housing Budget Activities Comm. Partnerships Community Housing (17910) Base Misc Cap Projects PUB HOUSING BUDGET ACTIVITIES TOTAL ................................ Grand Total: 612 Return to TOC $250,000 $250,000 $4,073,398 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2011 Budget 1000 - General Council Office Barrel District (10130) Small Capital Projects $2,500 Cactus District (10150) Small Capital Projects $10,000 Cholla District (10120) Small Capital Projects $2,500 Ocotillo District (10170) Small Capital Projects $10,000 Sahuaro District (10140) Small Capital Projects $10,000 City Clerk Elections (10240) County Fees, Postage, etc $86,815 Election Supplies Adverstising $15,327 $4,440 Elections $106,582 Non-Departmental Fund 1000 Non-Dept (11801) Unbudgeted Carryover Reserve $200,000 Rebates & Incentives Redevelopment Land Acquisition (16230) Prof & Cont - Re-Dev Land Acq GENERAL TOTAL .............................................................................................. 613 Return to TOC $85,416 $426,998 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2011 Budget 1300 - Home Grant Comm. Partnerships HOME Program (30001) Habitat For Humanity Acq/ Rehab - CSA 30006 $278,424 $200,618 Habitat for Humanity - Acq $189,334 Downpayment Assistance Replacement Housing - 30008 $130,901 $87,051 Housing Rehabilitation $41,708 Newtown CDC Newtown Community $37,761 $965,797 HOME Program HOME GRANT TOTAL ...................................................................................... $965,797 1320 - C.D.B.G. Comm. Partnerships CDBG Programs (31001) Housing Re-hab Subs $474,196 L/M Replacement Housing Public Facilities Improvement $341,638 $198,905 Housing Projects $119,672 Rehab Slum/Blight Code Compliance/Neigh.Preserv $84,209 $74,939 Public Facilities slum/Blight $32,195 Lead Base Paint Clean & Lien $27,577 $10,282 CDBG Programs C.D.B.G. TOTAL .................................................................................................. $1,363,613 $1,363,613 1660 - Transportation Sales Tax Transportation Fixed Route (16540) Bus Service and Maintenance $500,000 Traffic Mitigation (16580) Intersection Safety Imp $250,000 TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX TOTAL ..................................................... 614 Return to TOC $750,000 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2011 Budget 1842 - ARRA Stimulus Grants Comm. Partnerships CDBG-R (37021) Visual Improvement Program $140,000 Homeless Prevention HPRP (37020) HPRP Processing Reimb. Salary $632,416 $10,706 Professional Dev. $2,500 Office supplies Advertising $350 $300 Homeless Prevention HPRP $646,272 JAG Recovery Act (37002) Professional and Contractual $740,863 Stop Violence - Women (37001) Professional Development $113,904 Equipment $2,074 Stop Violence - Women 615 Return to TOC $115,978 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2011 Budget Grants ARWRF Facility UV System Imp (37060) Professional and Contractual $986,000 Build Safe Engy Prog Enhance (37065) Professional and Contractual $35,000 Energy Matters Public Educat (37067) Line Supplies $128,819 Temporary Pay Professional and Contractual $33,163 $8,000 Social Security - City Share $2,056 ER-Medicare Exp $481 Energy Matters Public Educat $172,519 Main Library Lighting (37064) Professional and Contractual $431,831 Program Manager (37068) Authorized Salaries Allocated Retirement Expense $199,276 $19,629 Social Security - City Share $12,355 ER-Medicare Exp $2,890 $234,150 Program Manager Public Safety/Court Lighting (37062) Professional and Contractual $88,000 Sports Courts Lighting Retrofi (37063) Professional and Contractual $140,000 Traffic Signal LED Conversion (37066) Equipment Less $5,000/Unit $84,000 WebPortal (37069) Professional and Contractual $55,000 Well 43 Variable Drive Retrofi (37061) Professional and Contractual $97,500 ARRA STIMULUS GRANTS TOTAL ............................................................... 616 Return to TOC $3,967,113 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2011 Budget 2530 - Public Safety Training Center Fire Department PS Training Ops - Fire (12590) Dept. Contingency $30,000 PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING CENTER TOTAL ........................................... Grand Total: 617 Return to TOC $30,000 $7,503,521 Appendix 2010-2011 APPENDIX Miscellaneous Statistics MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS FROM 2006-08 est. AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY POPULATION DISTRIBUTION: SCHOOL ENROLLMENT: Age 5 years & Under 5 to 9 years 10 to 14 years 15 to 19 years 20 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 59 years 60 to 64 years 65 to 74 years 75 to 84 years 85 years & over Total # 21,011 18,384 18,007 17,919 17,245 35,729 32,502 32,703 13,890 8,909 9,611 6,275 3,193 235,378 % 8.93% 7.81% 7.65% 7.61% 7.33% 15.18% 13.81% 13.89% 5.90% 3.78% 4.08% 2.67% 1.36% - Population 3 yrs & older Enrolled in School Nursery school, preschool Kindergarten Elementary school (grades 1-8) High school (grades 9-12) College or graduate school EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Education Population 25 years and over Less than 9th grade 9th to 12th grade, no diploma High school graduate (or equivalent) Some college, no degree Associate's degree Bachelor's degree Graduate or professional degree Median age: 32.1 Sex Male Female # 118,141 117,237 % 50.19% 49.81% INCOME AND BENEFITS (2007 INFLATION-ADJUSTED $'s): Households in Range Income Total Households Less than $10,000 $10,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 or more Enrolled # % 65,406 3,083 4.71% 4,187 6.40% 28,012 42.83% 15,589 23.83% 14,535 22.22% # % 76,262 4,910 3,857 7,426 8,717 11,218 15,506 10,035 9,667 3,031 1,895 6.44% 5.06% 9.74% 11.43% 14.71% 20.33% 13.16% 12.68% 3.97% 2.48% M edian household income: $52,083 M ean household income: $66,864 Percent w/ bachelor's degree or higher: Percent of high school graduates w/ some college or an associate's degree: Percent of all other: Attained # % 142,812 11,777 8.2% 15,593 10.9% 40,030 28.0% 37,333 26.1% 11,244 7.9% 18,135 12.7% 8,700 6.1% 26,835 18.8% 88,607 27,370 62.0% 19.2% OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION: Occupation Employed (Age 16 & over) M anagement/Professional Service Sales and office Farming/fishing/forestry Construction/maintenance Prod./transport/M aterial M oving M edian M onthly Owner Cost w/ M ortgage: $1,502 M edian Value of Owner Occupied Units: $236,000 Per capita income: $23,351 618 Return to TOC Employed # % 110,467 30,552 27.66% 18,431 16.68% 30,686 27.78% 297 0.27% 16,843 15.25% 13,658 12.36% APPENDIX Miscellaneous Statistics MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS Year Founded: 1892 Date of Incorporation: June 18, 1910 Form of Government: Council/City Manager County: Maricopa City Authorized Staffing as of July 1, 2010: Full-Time &Part-Time, Permanent 1,971.01 Elections: Number of votes cast: September 2008 Primary Elec. (9/08) 18,620 Citywide Special Bond Elec. (9/07) 10,005 Elevation: 1,152 Ft. Top Five Glendale Employers: U.S. Air Force-Luke (Military/Civil) Banner Health System Wal-Mart (FT & PT) Glendale Union High School District City of Glendale 6,000 2,900 2,020 2,008 1,971 Annexed Area in Sq. Miles: Year 1910 1910-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total 1 15 39 49 54 54 54 54 56 57 58 58 58 58 59 Population: 1970 36,228 1980 97,172 1985 (Special Census) 122,392 1990 (Census) 148,134 1995* (Special Census) 182,615 2000 (Census) 218,812 2001 224,703 2002 227,763 2003 231,288 2004 233,281 2005 (Census Survey) 242,369 2006 243,737 2007 246,396 2008 248,745 2009 249,811 2010 (Estimate) 251,809 * All population numbers 1995 and after include the population of Luke AFB. Percentage of registered voters voting in: September 2008 Primary Elec. (9/07) 20.89% Public Safety Sales Tax Elec. (9/07) 11.76% Building Permits: Value of Buildings $333,138,095 $292,105,521 $287,722,622 $219,539,420 $327,352,955 $359,027,305 $546,094,645 $445,703,739 $582,249,673 $452,658,952 $324,754,646 $115,410,350 Number Fiscal Year 1999 8,561 2000 7,925 2001 6,944 2002 5,439 2003 6,299 2004 4,819 2005 6,980 2006 6,844 2007 6,185 2008 6,883 2009 5,289 2010* 3,776 *Through March of 2010. Fire Protection (for CY 2009): Number of Stations 90% of the time Units arrived On-scene Number of Calls EMS Fire Miscellaneous Special Operations Total Calls Fire FTE’s (FY 2010) 9 5:35 Min 31,106 5,077 2,199 911 39,293 293.5 (240 sworn) Police Protection (for CY 2009): Number of Stations 3 Calls Processed* 459,361 Vehicular Patrol Units** 114 Number of Reserves 8 *Includes incoming, outgoing and 911 calls **Marked by lights/sirens & uniformed patrol officers Police FTE’s (FY 2010) 619 Return to TOC 628.5 (451 sworn) APPENDIX Miscellaneous Statistics City Court Offenses Processed (for FY 2009): DUI 1,994 Serious Traffic 583 Other Criminal Traffic 4,134 Civil Traffic 28,523 Non-Traffic Misdemeanor 8,138 Total Citations Issued 43,372 Protective Orders 2,919 Parks and Recreation (as of April 2010): Number of Neighborhood Parks 55 Community Parks 9 Sports Complexes 4 Total Park Acreage 2,195 Playgrounds 89 Ramadas 146 Tennis Courts 38 Racquetball Courts 58 Basketball Courts 55 Volleyball Courts 44 Soccer/Football Fields 55 Softball Fields 54 Swimming Pools 6 Splash Pads 2 Dog Parks 3 Skate Parks 2 Reservable Ramadas 45 Area Lights 1,491 Park Benches 542 Drinking Fountains 139 Barbeques 252 Picnic Tables 716 Miles of Trails 34 Linear Feet of Multiuse Walkways 92,892 Transportation (as of May 2010): Miles of Streets Maintained Arterial Secondary (1/2 Mile Streets) Collector (1/4 Miles Streets) Local Alleys Unpaved Total 98.5 64.0 91.0 464.5 18.3 0.0 736.3 Water Utilities (for CY 2009): Number of Active Customers* 61,059 Miles of System (lines) 997 Annual Consumption 14,818 M Gal Avg. gallons/user/month 20.2 K Gal Avg. gallons/user/year 243 K Gal Available Storage Capacity 67 M Gal Avg. Treatment Plan Capacities Cholla 30.0 MGD Pyramid Peak 48.0 MGD Oasis 12.5 MGD Avg. Daily Water Produced 53.6 M Gal Wastewater Utilities (for CY 2009): Number of Active Customers* 56,667 Miles of Collection Lines 710 Treatment Plant Capacities WAWRF 11.5 MGD Arrowhead 4.5 MGD SROG 9.0 MGD Annual Wastewater Treated 13.2 B Gal *Active Customers as of April 2010 Sanitation (FY through May 2009): Number of Customers 52,000 Landfill & MRF (FY through April 2009): Number of Customer Transactions 115,498 Tonnage Processed Residential 124,846 Commercial 56,026 Recycle 14,866 Total 195,738 Sources: Various City of Glendale Department Records U.S. Census 620 Return to TOC APPENDIX Acronyms ACRONYMS A ACDC ADA ADOT AFB ARRA AMFP AWRF AZSTA Arizona Canal Diversion Channel Americans with Disabilities Act Arizona Department of Transportation Air Force Base American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Arizona Municipal Financing Program Arrowhead Water Reclamation Facility Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority BofA Bank of America B C CAFR CAP CD CDBG CFD CIP CPI CPI-U CY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Community Action Program Community Development Community Development Block Grant Community Facilities Districts Capital Improvement Plan Consumer Price Index Consumer Price Index for Urban Users Calendar Year D DIF DMP Development Impact Fees Debt Management Plan E EMS EOC EECBG Emergency Medical Services Emergency Operations Center Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant FAA FBO FT FTA FTE FY Federal Aviation Administration Fixed Base Operator Full Time Federal Transit Administration Full Time Equivalent Fiscal Year F G GAAP GCC GEMS GF Generally Accepted Accounting Principles Glendale Community College Glendale’s Exceptional Municipal Staff General Fund 621 Return to TOC APPENDIX Acronyms GFOA GIS G.O. GO Government Finance Officers Association Geographic Information System General Obligation Glendale Onboard H HALO HR HUD HURF Helicopter Air-medical and Logistical Operations Human Resources Department of Housing and Urban Development Highway User Revenue Fund I IGA IGP IT Intergovernmental Agreement Intergovernmental Programs Department Information Technology LID LTAF Local Improvement Districts Local Transportation Assistance Fund MGD MOU MPC MRF Million Gallons per Day Memorandum of Understanding Municipal Property Corporation Material Recovery Facility L M N NHL National Hockey League O O and M OCP OSHA Operational and Maintenance Organizational Cooperative Process Occupational Safety and Health Administration P PAYGO PC Pay-As-You-Go Capital Personal Computer R RICO Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations S SROG SRP Sub-Regional Operating Group Salt River Project V VOCA Victims of Crime Act WAWRF WIFA WRF WTP Western Area Water Reclamation Facility Water Infrastructure Finance Authority Water Reclamation Facility Water Treatment Plant W 622 Return to TOC APPENDIX Glossary GLENDALE BUDGET DOCUMENT GLOSSARY The City of Glendale designed the Annual Budget to offer citizens and staff an understandable and meaningful budget document. This glossary provides assistance to those unfamiliar with budgeting terms and specific terms related to the Glendale financial planning process. A maintain service levels for each program as authorized by the City Council. ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING: The most commonly used accounting method, which reports income when earned and expenses when incurred, as opposed to cash basis accounting, which reports income when received and expenses when paid. BOND: A municipality will issue this debt instrument and agree to repay the face amount of the bond on the designated maturity date. Bonds are primarily used to finance capital projects. ADOPTION: A formal action taken by the City Council which sets the spending limits for the fiscal year. General Obligation (GO) Bond: This type of bond is secured by the full faith, credit, and taxing power of the municipality. APPROPRIATION: An authorization made by the City Council which permits the city to incur obligations and expend resources. Revenue Bond: This type of bond is secured by the revenues from a specific source such as gas taxes or water revenues. ASSESSED VALUATION: A valuation placed upon real estate or other property by the county assessor and the state as a basis for levying taxes. B BALANCED BUDGET: Arizona law (Title 42 Arizona Revised Statutes) requires the City Council to annually adopt a balanced budget by purpose of public expense. The city charter also requires an annual balanced budget. The charter specifically states that “the total amounts in the budget proposed for expenditure shall not exceed the total amounts proposed for expenditure in the published estimates. BASE BUDGET: Ongoing expenses for personnel, contractual services, and the replacement of supplies and equipment to C CAPITAL BUDGET: The appropriation of bonds or operating revenue for improvements to city facilities which may include buildings, streets, water/sewer lines and parks. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: Non-routine capital expenditures that generally cost more than $50,000 resulting in the purchase of equipment, construction, renovation or acquisition of land, infrastructure and/or buildings with an expected useful life of at least five years. Capital improvement projects are designed to prevent the deterioration of the city's existing infrastructure, and respond to and anticipate the future growth of the city. 623 Return to TOC APPENDIX Glossary CARRYOVER: Year-end savings that can be carried forward to cover any one-time expenses such as supplies, equipment, or special contracts. D DEBT RATIO: Total debt divided by total assets. Used by finance and budget staff to assess fiscal health, internal controls, etc. DEBT SERVICE: Principal and interest payments on outstanding bonds. F FISCAL YEAR (FY): The period designated by the city for the beginning and ending of financial transactions. The fiscal year for the City of Glendale begins July 1 and ends June 30. DEPRECIATION: The decline in the value of an asset due to general wear and tear or obsolescence. FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE): A position converted to the decimal equivalent of a full-time position based on 2,080 hours per year. For example, a part-time typist working for 20 hours per week would be equivalent to a 0.5 FTE (20 hours times 52 weeks divided by 2,080 hours). DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: Fees requiring new development to cover the increased cost to the city of providing new infrastructure when they construct new residential and commercial developments. E ENCUMBRANCE: The formal accounting recognition of commitments to expend resources in the future. FUND: A fiscal and accounting entity with a self-balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources. FUND BALANCE: A balance or carry over that occurs when actual revenues exceed budgeted revenues and/or when actual expenditures are less than budgeted expenditures. ENTERPRISE FUND: Funds that are accounted for in a manner similar to a private business. Enterprise funds are intended to be self-sufficient with all costs supported primarily by user fees. The city maintains three enterprise funds: water/sewer, landfill and sanitation. G EXPENDITURE: Represents a decrease in fund resources. EXPENDITURE LIMITATION: An amendment to the Arizona State Constitution which limits annual expenditures of all municipalities. The Economic Estimates Commission uses actual payments of local revenues for FY 1980 as the base limit and adjusts annually for population growth and inflation. All municipalities have the option of Home Rule that requires voters to approve a four-year expenditure limit based on revenues received. Glendale citizens have approved the Home Rule Option since the inception of the expenditure limitation. GENERAL FUND: Primary operating fund of the city. It exists to account for the resources devoted to finance the services traditionally associated with local government. Included in these services are police and fire protection, street and right of way maintenance, parks and recreation, planning and economic development, 624 Return to TOC APPENDIX Glossary telephone expense, reproduction costs, postage and vehicle maintenance. general administration of the city, and any other activity for which a special fund has not been created. GOAL: A general and timeless statement created with a purpose based on the needs of the community. GROUP: Administrative groups that consist of a number of departments and divisions that provide services. These groups include Administrative Services, Community Development, Public Works and Public Safety. OPERATING BUDGET: The day-to-day costs of delivering city services. P PAY-AS-YOU-GO (PAYGO) CAPITAL PROJECTS: Capital projects funded by General Fund operating revenues. PERFORMANCE MEASURES: Measurement of service performance indicators that reflect the amount of money spent on services and the resulting outcomes at a specific level of services provided. I INFRASTRUCTURE: Facilities that support the continuance and growth of a community. Examples include roads, water lines, sewers, public buildings, parks and airports. L LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID): LID’s are legally designated geographic areas in which a majority of the affected property owners agree to pay for one or more capital improvements through a special assessment. O OBJECTIVE: A measurable output that an organization strives to achieve within a designated time frame. The achievement of the objective advances an organization toward a corresponding goal. PERMANENT BASE ADJUSTMENT: An adjustment to the expenditure limitation base established by the Economics Estimate Commission (see expenditure limitation) which requires voter approval. The Glendale voters approved a permanent base adjust in the spring of 2000 which became effective with the FY 2003 budget year. PRODUCTIVITY: A measurement of the increase/decrease of city services output compared to the per unit input cost invested. PROGRAM: A group of related activities performed by one or more organizational units for the purpose of accomplishing a city responsibility. PROPERTY TAX: The total property tax levied by a municipality. Arizona’s municipal property tax system is divided into a primary and secondary tax rate. OPERATING AND MAINENANCE (O & M) COSTS: The day-to-day operating and maintenance costs of a municipality. These costs include personnel, gas, electric utility bills, Primary Tax: Arizona statute limits the primary property tax levy amount and municipalities may use this tax for any purpose. Secondary Rate: Arizona statute does not limit the secondary tax levy amount 625 Return to TOC APPENDIX Glossary directed at attaining council goals or meeting increased service needs. and municipalities may only use this levy to retire the principal and interest or redemption charges on bond debt. T R RESOURCES: Total amounts available for appropriation including estimated revenues, fund transfers and beginning fund balances. REVENUE: Financial resources received from taxes, user charges and other levels of government. Actual vs. Budgeted: Difference between the amount projected (budgeted) in revenues or expenditures at the beginning of the fiscal year and the actual receipts or expenses which are incurred by the end of the fiscal year. S SECONDARY PROPERTY TAX: A tax levy restricted to the payment of principal and interest on general obligation bonds. SERVICE LEASE: A leesor maintains and services an asset under a service lease. SPECIAL REVENUE FUND: A fund that accounts for receipts from revenue sources that have been earmarked for specific activities and related expenditures. TAX LEVY: The total amount of the general property taxes collected for purposes specified in the Tax Levy Ordinance. TAX RATE: The amount of tax levied for each $100 of assessed valuation. TRANSFER: Movement of resources between two funds. Example: An interfund transfer would include the transfer of operating resources from the General Fund to an Enterprise Fund. U USER CHARGES: The payment of a fee in direct receipt of a public service by the party who benefits from the service. W WORKLOAD INDICATORS: Statistical information that indicates the demands for services within a given department or division. Workload indicators are a type of performance measure utilized by departments or divisions to assess its level of service. STATE-SHARED REVENUE: Includes the city’s portion of state sales tax revenues, state income tax receipts and Motor Vehicle In-Lieu taxes. SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET ALLOWANCE: This allowance provides additional personnel, equipment and related expenses which enhance the service level of a program. Supplemental increases are 626 Return to TOC APPENDIX Frequently Asked Questions FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS The City of Glendale designed the Annual Budget to offer citizens and staff an understandable and meaningful budget document. This guide will provide assistance to those unfamiliar with Glendale's budgeting and financial planning processes. What is a “Fiscal Year (FY)” and when does it begin and end? The City of Glendale and State of Arizona follow a Fiscal Year (FY) that starts July 1 and ends June 30. A Fiscal Year is the period designated by the city for the beginning and ending of financial transactions or a budget cycle. The “2011 Annual Budget” or “Fiscal Year 2010-11 (FY 2011)” refers to the period that begins July 1, 2010 and concludes on June 30, 2011. What does it mean to, “adopt the budget?” Budget adoption is a formal action taken by the City Council that sets the city’s priorities and spending limits for the upcoming fiscal year. The FY 2011 budget will be formally adopted by the City Council at a public meeting in June 2010, though city staff has been preparing the budget for months in advance. How do I get involved or learn about the budget before it’s adopted? At any time of the year citizens can view the city’s budget online, in city libraries or at City Hall. Residents can discuss it with neighbors, city staff or Council Members. In addition, the City Council has several special Budget Workshops every March and/or April that citizens can attend, watch on KGLN cable channel 11 or borrow on videotape from Glendale’s libraries. What is meant by “budget appropriation?” Budget appropriation refers to authorizations made by the City Council that permit the city to incur obligations and expend resources. When the City Council appropriates funds, they are saying the community should, for example, spend its money on public safety, or make investments that improve the quality of life in Glendale. The city cannot spend money unless it is appropriated, and this ensures the public’s money is spent according to the public’s needs as expressed by the democratically elected City Council. What are municipal bonds? A municipality, such as the City of Glendale, will sell (issue) bonds primarily to finance capital projects. This is similar to a family taking out a mortgage in order to finance a house. Just like a family, the city has basic necessities (infrastructure) like roads and office buildings, but usually does not have cash available for such major purchases. Municipal bonds are like loans that help make large, important purchases affordable. Bonds also effectively spread out the costs of major projects across their useful life, so all those citizens who utilize them can help pay for them. What is the difference between the capital budget and the operating budget? The capital budget, or Capital Improvement Plan, is an appropriation of bonds or operating revenue for improvements to city facilities that may include buildings, parks, streets and water/sewer lines. The operating budget covers the costs of the city’s day-to-day operations, such as employee salaries, supplies and contracts. What is carryover? Carryover refers to year-end savings that can be carried forward into the next fiscal year to cover any one-time expenses such as supplies, equipment or special contracts 627 Return to TOC APPENDIX Frequently Asked Questions that were budgeted for but not purchased (or paid for) in the previous fiscal year. For example, if a piece of equipment was ordered in June (the last month in a fiscal year) but not received until July (the start of the next fiscal year), then the “savings” from the previous budget year could be used to purchase the equipment in the next budget year using carryover appropriation. What is a debt ratio? The debt ratio is total debt divided by total assets. This is one measurement of fiscal health. If the city, or a family, owes substantially more money than the value of the things it owns or its ability to generate revenue, a dangerous financial situation exists. The lower the debt ratio, the better interest rates the city can receive when it wants to sell more bonds to finance additional capital improvements for Glendale. What is debt service? A family’s debt service is the payments they make on loans, such as a mortgage and credit cards. Principal and interest payments on outstanding bonds are referred to as debt service. Just like a family cannot skip on mortgage or credit card payments, the city must always keep up on its debt service, so this will always be a part of the city’s budget. What is an encumbrance? An encumbrance refers to the formal accounting recognition of commitments to expend resources in the future. For example, when a purchase order is issued for equipment, that funding is encumbered until delivery. Once the equipment is received, the invoice is paid and the encumbrance becomes an expense. What is an expenditure? Expenditures represent a decrease in fund resources or, stated simply, a recorded expense. What is an expenditure limitation or permanent base adjustment? Arizona municipalities can only spend funds up to a level specified by the State or local voters via Home Rule (see Glendale’s City Charter at http://www.municode.com/resources/gateway.asp?pid=13944&sid=3). This is meant to ensure local government budgets are balanced. Glendale’s voters approved Home Rule that required voters to approve a four-year expenditure limit based on actual revenues the city has received. However, in the spring of 2000, Glendale voters approved a permanent base adjustment, eliminating the need for further expenditure limitation elections. What is a full-time equivalent position (FTE)? An FTE (1.0 FTE) refers to one or more employees working 40 hours per week, or 2,080 hours per year. For example, a part-time employee working 20 hours per week would be considered a 0.5 FTE. Two part-time employees each working 20 hours per week would be considered 1.0 FTE. What is the definition of a budget fund? Glendale currently has 100 budget funds to help keep track of and focus resources. These include the General Fund, Transportation Fund, Sanitation Fund and Water/Sewer Fund, to name just a few. A family might use several funds, too, in order to help manage their finances and determine how close they are to reaching certain goals. For instance, a family might have a children’s college fund, a retirement fund, vacation fund and household expenses fund (such as an IRA, savings and checking account). A budget fund, then, is a fiscal and accounting entity with a self-balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources. Glendale uses separate funds in order to correctly and legally track revenues and expenditures associated with that particular fund to aid with various financial reporting requirements. 628 Return to TOC APPENDIX Frequently Asked Questions What is a fund balance? Fund balance refers to the remainder or carryover that occurs when actual revenues exceed budgeted revenues and/or when actual expenditures are less than budgeted expenditures at the end of the fiscal year (June 30). If the city budgets (plans to spend) $15.0 million on roads next year, but only spends $14.0 million, the leftover $1.0 million would essentially become fund balance. What does the word "group" in Glendale's budget mean? Every department belongs to an administrative group led by a Deputy City Manager, City Manager or Assistant City Manager. These groups include Administrative Services, Appointed & Elected Officials, Community Development, Community Services, Internal Services, Public Safety and Public Works. What are infrastructure and capital improvements? Infrastructure and capital improvements refer to facilities that need to be in place in order to support the basic needs of residents and businesses in the community. Examples include roads, water lines, sewers, public buildings, parks and airports. What are strategic priorities and benchmarks? Why does Glendale use them? Strategic Priorities, developed by the City Council, are statements of community values that direct the city's operations and help demonstrate progress towards a shared vision. City staff uses these priorities to assist in program development, creating annual budget requests and building department business plans. Benchmarks are established for each activity listed in business plans and represent a desired level of performance that demonstrates the efficient use of city resources to do the most good. City staff measures actual performance throughout the year, makes comparisons to established benchmarks, determines the causes for deviation and evaluates alternative courses of action. What exactly is a “program” in the city budget? A program is a group of related activities performed by one or more organizational units for the purpose of accomplishing a city responsibility. For example, one program in the Field Operations Department is Street Cleaning. Based on staff’s assessment of costs and needs, the desires of citizens and the priorities of the City Council, the Field Operations Department is budgeted a set amount of money to accomplish street cleaning. What is “assessed valuation” and how does it relate to my taxes and the city’s budget? Each year the Maricopa County Assessor’s Office determines the value of all property within the county, including city buildings and individual homes. These assessment values are then used as a basis for levying property taxes. The City of Glendale charges $1.5951 in property tax per $100 of assessed valuation ($0.2252 primary rate and $1.3699 secondary rate). How much does the city receive from my property tax bill and how is it used? Primary Property tax revenue represents 3% of the city’s General Fund revenue, which is estimated at $3.7 million in this year’s budget. Secondary Property Tax, used to pay off General Obligation bonds, will generate approximately $24 million in FY 2011. The City of Glendale is one of several entities that receive a portion of the property taxes residents pay, with school districts typically receiving the majority. Each year the Glendale City Council levies the property tax one week after final budget adoption. 629 Return to TOC APPENDIX Frequently Asked Questions Primary Tax: Arizona law limits the primary property tax levy amount and municipalities may use revenue from this tax for any lawful purpose. Glendale’s FY 2011 primary property tax rate of $0.2252 per $100 of assessed valuation is used for General Fund operations. Secondary Tax: Arizona does not limit the secondary tax levy amount and municipalities may only use this levy to retire the principal and interest or redemption charges on bond debt. Glendale’s FY 2011 secondary tax rate of $1.3699 per $100 of assessed valuation is used to pay debt service on General Obligation bonds. Where does the city’s revenue come from? Glendale's revenue comes from a variety of sources, including sales tax, property tax, user charges and other levels of government. What is state-shared revenue? The state of Arizona shares a portion of its tax revenues (from sales, income and motor vehicle in-lieu taxes) with Arizona cities and towns. This funding is divided among the cities and towns using population formulas supplied by state law. These state-shared revenues comprise a large portion of most city and town budgets, including 37% of Glendale's General Fund (Fund 1000). State-shared revenue enables local governments to continue providing basic services, such as police and fire protection, without burdening the residents with additional local taxes. Since cities and towns are not equally wealthy, state shared revenue is of great assistance, especially to cities with lesser wealth or greater service needs. Because state-shared revenue distribution is a specified percentage of state revenue collections, as state revenue declines, city revenue declines. Consequently, in difficult economic times, cities 'feel the pinch' just as the State does. What is meant by “supplemental increase?” When a department cannot support its increased service needs or lacks the necessary resources required within their budget, the department will submit a request for a supplemental increase of funding. This allowance provides funding for additional personnel, equipment and related expenses that enhance the service level of a program. What is a budget transfer? A budget transfer moves budget appropriation between programs or funds. Transfers within funds may be done on the City Manager's authority; the City Manager is appointed by the City Council to act as the city’s chief executive officer. Transfers between funds require City Council approval. What are user charges? User charges are fees paid in direct receipt of a public service by the party who benefits from the service. Fees paid for recreation classes or leagues that citizens elect to sign up for and participate are examples of user charges. City of Glendale Management and Budget Department 6829 North 58th Drive, Suite 200 Glendale, Arizona 85301 Phone: (623) 930-2264 Fax: (623) 915-2694 Email: aweathersby@glendaleaz.com 630 Return to TOC City of Glendale Management & Budget Department 5850 West Glendale Avenue Glendale, Arizona 85301 623-930-2264