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, 2011-2012 CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Table of Contents CITY OF GLENDALE, ARIZONA FY 2011-12 ANNUAL BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Table of Contents Mayor’s Message Mayor & City Council City Organizational Chart City Management City Council District Map Map of Glendale and Neighboring Communities Financial Organizational Chart Budget Presentation Award How to Make the Most of this Document Budget Calendar Budget Process Page i 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 15 17 20 Budget Message City Manager’s Budget Message 24 Budget Summaries Budget Summary Revenues Expenditures Conclusion 32 47 60 77 Financial Guidelines Five-Year Financial Forecast Financial Plan Financial Policies 78 94 105 Operating Budget Operating Budget Table of Contents 110 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan CIP Table of Contents CIP Ten-Year Plan 274 276 i CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Table of Contents Schedules 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 465 466 471 484 505 506 507 543 580 582 590 591 593 Appendix Miscellaneous Statistics Acronyms Glossary Frequently Asked Questions 598 603 605 609 ii CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Mayor’s Message To the Citizens of Glendale: As citizens of Glendale, we have many reasons to be proud of our remarkable community. Despite challenges presented by the slowed economy, we continue to achieve successes that have made our community an ideal place to live, work and play. As we continue to imagine the bright future of our great city, I’d like to reaffirm some of the key strategic goals my colleagues and I established for the city that will continue to distinguish Glendale locally, nationally and internationally. One community that is fiscally sound… The economic realities of today demand that organizations everywhere find a strategy to balance ever-diminishing resources with ever-increasing demands. Our city has faced unprecedented fiscal challenges outside of our control over the past few years. We have faced these challenges head-on knowing that our track record of fiscal responsibility would serve us through these tough times. Our FY 2012 budget is a balanced budget focused on providing those core services that our citizens deserve and that are the hallmark of our community. Further, this budget reflects our commitment to fiscal responsibility by managing our budget to minimize significant impacts to those we serve while simultaneously nurturing those investments that will enable the city to pursue opportunities as the economy recovers. One community with quality economic development… Our economic development approach is multi-faceted: • • • • Attract and nurture those businesses and investments that bring high quality, well-paying jobs to our community; re-imagine and transform our downtown into a hub for economic activity; retain and recognize our small business community through positive, collaborative relationships; and capitalize on tourism dollars by offering visitors around the world a destination point in our city. This approach has been implemented very successfully in our community. In FY 2011 we welcomed 19 companies into Glendale and celebrated the expansion of three existing companies in our city. Cumulatively, these resulted in the creation or retention of 1,776 jobs in Glendale. We continue to actively support the expansion of our medical and educational partners who provide high-quality jobs in key knowledge-based industries. One such partner is Devry University which located a branch facility in Westgate City Center in 2011. This educational institution will host 500 students in their new location. Midwestern University, now in its 15th year in our city, will add an additional 50 jobs to their bustling campus this year meaning they will soon employ over 600 people. 1 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Mayor’s Message Banner Thunderbird Medical Center now employs more than 3,000 people. This highly regarded acute-care hospital completed an expansion project in 2010, which included the West Valley’s first pediatric intensive care unit. Healthcare careers are in greater demand than ever and we were pleased that Arizona College of Allied Health chose to expand their Glendale location in 2010 in order to meet their growth needs. This nationally accredited post-secondary educational institution provides training in a wide variety of health care professions. This past year included significant gains in our efforts to redevelop our Centerline area. Southwest Ambulance moved its West Valley headquarters into a vacant 18,000 square foot building at 52nd and Glendale Avenues and brought 60 employees to occupy this formerly vacant space. Southwest Ambulance also will set up its dispatch center in the remaining vacant space at the city-owned Promenade at Palmaire in historic Catlin Court. Another very exciting development in Centerline is Artwerks Lateral 58. Held on the first Saturday of each month in the fall and spring, artists gather in downtown Glendale to create, showcase and sell their art. Still in its infancy, Artwerks has already attracted hundreds of visitors to downtown Glendale. While these visitors are enjoying music and art, they also enjoy the shopping and dining options that benefit our valuable local businesses in downtown Glendale. Our economic development efforts didn’t stop with assisting in attracting and expanding businesses. Recognizing how much economic vitality can be bolstered with tourism dollars, we transformed our 10-year-old Visitors Center into a state-sanctioned Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) that enables the entire West Valley to compete with international destinations. The CVB is a visitor’s one-stopshop to learn about the diverse amenities offered within Glendale and surrounding communities. Already it has attracted tourists from around the world for special events, sporting events, and festivals. One community with strong neighborhoods… Over the past year we continued to focus on strengthening and preserving our diverse neighborhoods. I would like to highlight two growing programs that specifically address the needs of our neighborhoods. The “Adopt a Neighborhood Program” is a new, innovative program led by Glendale’s Neighborhood Partnerships Office. This program engages neighbors, local non-profits and faith-based organizations in the rehabilitation of properties within our neighborhoods. Projects have included home painting, lot and yard cleanings, painting address numbers on curbs, and events focused on building volunteer capacity and relationships in the neighborhoods. As faith-based organizations build relationships in these neighborhoods, they also assist individuals with more immediate challenges by providing food and clothing to those in need. This worthwhile program has already engaged over 400 Glendale residents in extensive efforts in four neighborhoods in our city. The second neighborhood effort I would like to highlight is our successful Historic Preservation program. Soon the completion of the Myrtle Avenue Cultural Gateway will be added to its impressive list of restored landmarks. The adobe house and 1930 automobile service station at Grand and Myrtle 2 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Mayor’s Message Avenues will be returned to their original appearance in celebration of the role this property played in Glendale before freeways were constructed. The project is funded through grants from the United States Department of the Interior. In May 2011 we celebrated Historic Preservation Month with events that included our 8th annual Historic Preservation Bus Tour to showcase our rich heritage and treasured landmarks. These two neighborhood initiatives represent just a fraction of the focus we have placed on building a strong city through strong neighborhoods. One community dedicated to public safety… Our top priority is to provide the safest and most secure environment for residents, businesses and visitors. Our police and fire professionals work tirelessly to fulfill that commitment. One innovative project underway is our Police Department’s collaboration with Arizona State University’s Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety for the implementation of a Smart Policing Initiative grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The grant funds are being used for community policing and the implementation of proven problem solving methods to reduce crime and disorder in our community. This initiative allows officers the opportunity to apply creative approaches in addressing challenges in our neighborhoods while working hand-in-hand with community leaders to have the most direct impact in reducing criminal behavior. Just over the past few months, they have developed multifaceted approaches to neighborhood crime problems that include a mix of enforcement, prevention, public education and partnerships. The Glendale Police Department’s innovative approach to policing means that our community can continue to set the standard for cities across the country. Glendale’s Fire Department also continues to contribute to the health and safety of our community through innovative educational programs designed to prevent health-related issues before they arise. The “Healthier Safer Lives” program is their most recent initiative. Glendale Fire Department professionals hold six events per year at various locations, each targeting senior living facilities and facilities with school-aged children. The program includes topics about health and exercise that lead to an improved quality of life for the citizens. Through educational programs like “Healthier Safer Lives,” the Glendale Fire Department hopes to help residents recognize the value of preventative care so that tragedies do not occur. One community with high-quality services… Consistently providing high-quality services is the foundation on which our city government is built. Water, sewer, sanitation and landfill services are the most basic as they are necessary in all households and businesses. Through staff innovations, prudent investments and reduced growth, we will maintain the current rates for all of these services this year. 3 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Mayor’s Message Closing Glendale is more than just a group of people who happen to live in the same city. We are truly one community. We share our challenges, our triumphs and our mutual belief in the greatness of our city. We’ve shown how resilient we are with the challenging economy and we will continue responding positively with whatever challenges tomorrow may bring. The strategic goals upon which our budget is established have enabled us to continue providing those core services that our citizens greatly deserve. We are a safe community with strong neighborhoods and exceptional city services. Moving forward together, our community will continue to be the place that you are proud to call home. Thank you for your confidence and support. Sincerely, Elaine M. Scruggs Mayor 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 City Attorney Craig Tindall City Manager Ed Beasley Director Economic Development Brian Friedman Assistant City Manager Horatio Skeete Boards & Commissions Executive Director Compliance & Asset M gmt Candace M acLeod Executive Director Communications Julie Frisoni Assistant to the M ayor Steve M ethvin Executive Director Human Resources & Risk M gmt Alma Carmicle Executive Director Budget & Financial Services Sherry Schurhammer Executive Director Technology & Innovation Chuck M urphy Executive Director Public Works Stuart Kent Presiding City Judge Elizabeth Finn City Clerk Pam Hanna Director Intergovernmental Programs Brent Stoddard Fire Chief Fire Services M ark Burdick Police Chief Police Services Steve Conrad Council Services Administrator Kristen Krey Deputy City M anager Community Services Cathy Gorham 6 Return to TOC Deputy City M anager Community Development Jim Colson Executive Director Parks, Recreation & Library Services Erik Strunk Executive Director Water Services Craig Johnson Executive Director Transportation Services Jamsheed M ehta CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ City Management CITY MANAGEMENT Mayor ELAINE M. SCRUGGS Councilmembers Department Heads and Directors, cont. Department Heads and Directors, cont. Steven E. Frate Vice Mayor Sherry Schurhammer Budget & Financial Services Chuck Murphy Technology & Innovation Julie Frisoni Communications Jamsheed Mehta Transportation Services Candace MacLeod Compliance & Asset Management Craig Johnson Water Services Sahuaro District Norma Alavarez Ocotillo District Joyce V. Clark Yucca District Yvonne J. Knaack Barrel District H. Philip Lieberman Cactus District Manuel D. Martinez Cholla District Management Staff Ed Beasley City Manager Horatio Skeete Assistant City Manager Department Heads and Directors Craig Tindall City Attorney Pamela Hanna City Clerk Judge Elizabeth Finn Presiding City Judge Jim Colson Development Services Brian Friedman Economic Development Mark Burdick Fire Services Alma Carmicle Human Resources & Risk Management Brent Stoddard Intergovernmental Programs Cathy Gorham Neighborhood & Human Services Erik Strunk Parks, Recreation & Library Services Steven Conrad Police Services Stuart Kent Public Works 7 Return to TOC 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 TOTAL FY 2012 BUDGET $638,000,000 | OPERATING $362,100,087 CAPITAL OUTLAY $144,221,459 | | General Fund Group $170,959,859 | 1000 General Fund $123,525,277 | 1040 DEBT SERVICE $85,109,532 | S pecial Revenue Fund Group $81,429,506 | 1281 Stadium Event Operations $2,967,219 | 1282 | 1300 Home Grant $1,787,501 | 1310 | 1760 Airport Special Revenue $527,326 | 1820 CONTINGENCY $46,568,922 | Enterprise Fund Group $82,078,681 Internal S ervices Fund Group $27,593,307 1980 Streets Construction $6,066 2360 2540 Risk Mgmt Self Insurance $3,068,438 | 2000 Water and Sewer $47,789,682 | 2440 $8,934,049 Arena Event Operations $21,204,142 Neighborhood Stabilization $2,117,897 $1,603,044 Hurf Street Bonds $1,030 T elephone Services $979,324 CamelbackRanch EventOperations $28,852 N'hood Stabilization $3,368,377 Emergency Shelter Grants $98,278 Public Safety Construction $2,000 $14,580,731 1120 Vehicle Replacement $3,029,742 1740 1320 1840 Civic Center C.D.B.G. Grants $766,817 $3,718,764 $18,994,995 2060 Parks Construction $6,857 2500 Pub Housing Budget Activities $12,609,126 PC Replacement $3,511,584 Arena Special Revenue $550,000 Highway User Gas T ax $8,217,576 1842 ARRA Stimulus Grants $2,671,757 2080 Gov't Facilities Construction $2,000 1190 Employee Groups $84,000 1790 Stadium City Sales T ax $1,745,900 1650 T ransportation Grants $768,765 1860 $3,895,053 2100 Economic Dev. Construction $2,000 Arts Commission Fund $127,787 Marketing Self Sust $753,116 T ransportation Sales T ax $11,840,560 1880 Parks & Rec Self Sust $1,073,201 2180 Flood Control Construction $5,213 1240 Court Security/Bonds $583,860 2530 T raining Facility Revenue Fund $1,544,817 1700 Police Special Revenue $14,173,737 1885 Parks & Rec Designated $177,038 2210 T ransportation Capital Project $13,568 1260 2538 Glendale Health Center $54,000 1720 Fire Special Revenue $6,395,637 General Services | 1100 | | 1140 | | 1220 | | Library $247,373 | 1280 Youth Sports Complex $322,000 | 1283 | | 1780 | | 1870 | | | 1311 | | 1340 | | 1660 | | CAP Grant | 1830 | | | RICO Funds | | | Capital Fund Group $38,734 | 2040 | | Landfill $7,099,142 | 2480 Sanitation | | 2560 Workers Comp. Self Insurance $1,407,000 | 2580 Benefits T rust Fund $23,117,869 | | | For a description of major fund sources please refer to the Budget Summary on page 35. You can navigate to the description by clicking the funding source you would like more information about. 10 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Financial Organization Chart TOTAL FY 2012 BUDGET $638,000,000 | OPERATING $362,100,087 | General Fund Group $2,132,357 CAPITAL OUTLAY $144,221,459 DEBT SERVICE $85,109,532 | | S pecial Revenue Fund Group $25,777,848 | General Fund $1,282,357 | 1220 Arts Commission Fund $500,000 | 1740 Civic Center $350,000 | | $272,665 $2,811,252 DIF-Citywide Open Spaces $215,473 Hurf Street Bonds $197,379 2120 Airport Capital Grants $17,448,481 1540 DIF-Parks Dev Zone 1 $39,632 2040 Public Safety Construction $2,415,120 DIF-Parks Dev Zone 2 $138,506 Parks Construction $166,246 1580 DIF-Parks Dev Zone 3 $31,904 2080 Gov't Facilities Construction $1,131,437 1600 DIF-Roadway Improvements $131,958 2100 Economic Dev. Construction $1,746,094 | 1840 Grants | 1500 G.O. Bond Construction Funds $19,200,291 1980 Streets Construction $3,089,699 1650 T ransportation Grants $5,518,115 | Capital Fund Group $59,534,819 Development Impact Fee Funds $830,138 1000 CONTINGENCY $46,568,922 DIF-Libraries | 1520 | | 1560 | | | 2000 | | 2060 | | | 2130 Cultural Facility Construction $104,876 | 2180 Flood Control Construction $10,349,440 11 Return to TOC Enterprise Fund Group $56,776,435 | Other Capital Funds $39,504,390 | 2210 T ransportation Capital Project $39,504,390 2360 Water and Sewer $53,182,149 | 2440 Landfill $1,730,641 | 2480 Sanitation $1,863,645 CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Financial Organization Chart TOTAL FY 2012 BUDGET $638,000,000 | OPERATING $362,100,087 CAPITAL OUTLAY $144,221,459 | DEBT SERVICE $85,109,532 | Debt S ervice Fund Group $58,144,070 Enterprise Fund Group $26,965,462 1900 G.O. Bond Debt Service $24,283,604 2360 | 1920 Water and Sewer $26,965,462 HURF Debt Service $4,706,338 | 1930 PFC Debt Service $380,000 | 1940 M.P.C. Debt Service $21,447,247 | 1970 T ransportation Debt Service $7,326,881 12 Return to TOC CONTINGENCY $46,568,922 CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Financial Organization Chart TOTAL FY 2012 BUDGET $638,000,000 | OPERATING $362,100,087 | CAPITAL OUTLAY $144,221,459 | General Fund Group $334,905 S pecial Revenue Fund Group $14,258,971 1010 1340 Highway User Gas T ax $14,258,971 National Events $334,905 DEBT SERVICE $85,109,532 | | Capital Fund Group $15,876,823 | 1380 DIF-Library Blds $1,738,916 | 1420 | 1600 DIF-Roadway Improvements $1,727,748 | 1620 DIF-Fire Protection Fac $20,909 DIF-General Government $188,255 DIF-Police Facilities $1,159,410 Streets Construction $1,194,418 DIF-Citywide Parks $229,557 Hurf Street Bonds $106,557 1480 DIF-Citywide Recreation Fac $1,189,275 2040 Public Safety Construction $2,272,052 1500 $3,017,482 2060 Parks Construction $176,498 1520 DIF-Citywide Open Spaces $290,606 2100 Economic Dev. Construction $61,531 1540 DIF-Parks Dev Zone 1 $89,062 2130 Cultural Facility Construction $250,750 1560 DIF-Parks Dev Zone 2 $44,477 2140 Open Space/T rail Construction $555,688 1580 DIF-Parks Dev Zone 3 $8,457 2180 Flood Control Construction $1,555,175 | 1440 | 1460 | | DIF-Libraries | | | | | 1980 | 2000 | | | | | | 13 Return to TOC CONTINGENCY $46,568,922 | | Trust Fund Group $5,598,223 Enterprise Fund Group $7,500,000 Internal S ervice Fund Group $3,000,000 2280 Cemetery Perpetual Care $5,598,223 2360 2540 Risk Mgmt Self Insurance $3,000,000 Water and Sewer $5,000,000 | 2440 Landfill $2,000,000 | 2480 Sanitation $500,000 CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Distinguished Budget Presentation Award The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to the City of Glendale, Arizona for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2010. 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. 14 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 2012 budget as well as policy issues and priorities for the fiscal year. It describes significant changes from the FY 2011 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. 15 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, performance measures 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. FY 2012-2021 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. 16 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Calendar FY 2012 BUDGET CALENDAR July 2010 – February 2011 Budget analyzed revenue and expenditure data to determine budget outlook for FY 2012. Discussions with the assistant city manager and other executive management staff occurred during this time regarding numerous balancing options for the FY 2012 capital and operating budgets. September 2010 – January 2011 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 FY 2012-2021 document for City Council review. Preparation of FY 2012 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 was also prepared during this time, with periodic updates to the assistant city manager. November 2010 16 Status report through the first quarter on the FY 2011 General Fund operating budget revenues and expenditures was presented to City Council. 29 FY 2012 operating budget kickoff meeting with the executive leadership team comprised of the assistant city manager, deputy city managers, police and fire chiefs, and City Council appointees. 30 FY 2012 operating budget kickoff meeting with department directors and staff to commence budget input. Input continued through December 23, 2010. December 2010 8 City Council goal review and strategic planning retreat with a presentation of the successes of the city’s Innovate program. City Council affirmed its existing strategic goals. 23 Last day for FY 2012 operating budget input by departments. January 2011 18 Economic update and outlook, as well as status report through five months on the FY 2011 General Fund operating budget revenues and expenditures, were presented to City Council. Overall balancing strategy for the FY 2012 operating budget also was discussed with City Council. 17 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Calendar February 2011 The balancing plan for the FY 2012 general fund operating budget and the FY 2012-2021 capital plan was finalized with the assistant city manager and the executive leadership team. Preparation of the City Council budget workbook for the March 22 and 29 budget workshops commenced. March 2011 1 Status report through seven months on the FY 2011 General Fund operating budget revenues and expenditures was presented to City Council. 14 Delivery of the City Council budget workbook occurred during the week beginning March 14. The workbook contained the city manager’s recommended FY 2012 budget memo, the FY 2012 operating budget document and the preliminary FY 2012-2021 capital improvement plan. 22 1:30 PM – 5:00 PM, budget workshop. 29 1:30 PM – 5:00 PM, budget workshop April 2011 The FY 2012 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 2011 17 The FY 2012 preliminary budget document was delivered to City Council in advance of the May 24 council meeting. 24 City Council adopted a resolution approving the FY 2012 preliminary budget, directing publication of the preliminary budget, giving notice of the June 14 date for the public hearing on the FY 2012 preliminary budget and a separate public hearing on the FY 2012 property tax levy and giving notice of the June 28 date for the adoption of the FY 2012 property tax levy. 26 Publication in The Glendale Star of FY 2012 budget information as required by state statute. June 2011 2 Second publication in The Glendale Star of FY 2012 budget information as required by state statute. 2 The Planning Department presented the FY 2012-2021 CIP to the Planning Commission for review as required by Arizona state law to ensure consistency with the City’s General 18 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Calendar Plan. The Planning Commission sent a letter to the City Council indicating that the FY 2012-2021 CIP is consistent with the Glendale’s General Plan. 14 City Council conducted a public hearing on the FY 2012 property tax levy. City Council conducted a separate public hearing on the FY 2012 budget and convened a special meeting to adopt a resolution approving the FY 2012 budget. 28 City Council adopted an ordinance approving the FY 2012 property tax levy. July 2011 1 Start of FY 2012. September 2011 TBD Clean up ordinance to City Council regarding FY 2011 inter-fund budget transfers. 19 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process FY 2012 BUDGET PROCESS OVERVIEW: The FY 2012 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. Two principal issues for the FY 2012 budget were the ongoing challenges of the economy and the Coyotes National Hockey League team as the main tenant of the city-owned Jobing.com Arena. Both are discussed in detail in the City Manager’s Message in this document. Over the course of several months various balancing options for both the FY 2012 operating budget and the FY 2012-2021 capital improvement plan were evaluated. A final balancing plan was established in February 2011 and resulted in the recommended budget presented to City Council at a series of budget workshops held in March 2011. For more information please see the City Manager’s Message in this document 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 2012 budget, the Council adopted it and thereby set the expenditure limitation for FY 2012. A separate public hearing on the FY 2012 property tax levy was conducted at the same meeting as the final budget adoption. Adoption of the property tax levy occurred two weeks later. The chart below illustrates the broad outline of the FY 2012 budget development process. 20 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process 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, Sanitation and Community Housing Services) 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). 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. 21 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process 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: A new fund was budgeted in FY 2012 within the General Fund Group titled Camelback Ranch Event Ops (Fund 1283). This fund is used to track operational expenditures incurred at the new spring training baseball facility which is home to the Los Angeles Dodgers and Chicago White Sox. Any revenue reimbursement received for city services is recorded in the fund. A General Fund operating transfer will be made to cover all expenditures that exceed the reimbursement received. This fund will function in much the same way as the Stadium Event Operations (Fund 1281) and Arena Event Operations (Fund 1282) that were established to track financial activity at the NFL’s Arizona Cardinals and NHL’s Phoenix Coyotes venues. The Civic Center (Fund 1740) was reclassified from the Special Revenue Fund Group in FY 2011 to the General Fund Group in FY 2012. This change was made due to the level of support received from the General Fund made via annual operating transfers of cash to cover Civic Center expenditures that exceed revenues collected. A $361,497 General Fund transfer was budgeted in FY 2011 and a $406,517 transfer has been budgeted for FY 2012. FY 2011 Civic Center budgeted revenues totaled $387,000, while the FY 2012 revenue budget is $410,300. Another new fund was created within the Special Revenue Fund Group titled Neighborhood Stabilization Program III (Fund 1311). This fund is used to track revenues received from the federal government and any associated expenditures with the federal grant program. This new fund is very similar to the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Fund 1310) that has been included in the city’s budget for many years. A new fund titled P.F.C. Debt Service (Fund 1930) was created within the Debt Service Fund Group to track the principal and interest payments associated with the construction and 22 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Budget Process equipment needed for the Camelback Ranch spring training baseball facility. The Public Facilities Corporation (PFC) is a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Arizona. City Council retains oversight and must approve all debt upon recommendation from the PFC Board of Directors, which consists of four City employees and one private citizen. Although the PFC is a legally separate entity from the City, the PFC is reported as if it is part of the primary government because it sole purpose is to finance and construct public facilities for the City. Debt service for Highway User Fee Revenue (HURF) bonds will continue to be addressed as it was for FY 2010 and FY 2011. 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 FY 2011 and further reduced for FY 2012. Therefore, a portion of HURF debt service will continue to be paid by secondary property tax revenue ($1,353,169), roadway development impact fees ($1 million) and transportation sales tax revenues ($1 million). The remaining $1,353,169 needed for the $4,706,338 debt service payment will be paid for using HURF revenues. 23 Return to TOC Budget Message 2011-2012 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 long-term fiscal strength and sustainability for the community. This outcome is being accomplished 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 during the long and deep recession that hit Arizona particularly hard. As a result, the city’s FY 2012 budget continues to provide resources to maintain high quality, core services and minimizes the impact of budget reductions in other areas of city services. The FY 2012 budget also continues to position ourselves to be proactive and responsive to opportunities that benefit the community. The FY 2012 budget total across all funds is $638 million. The total of $638 million is the third consecutive year of decline from the peak of $925 million in FY 2009. Despite the declines, the overall budget continues to focus on the Mayor and Council’s vision of ‘one community’ and the supporting strategic goals that Council reconsidered at a December 2010 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 FY 2012 budget also continues to reflect the enduring challenges of the post-recession economy. Many expenditure management measures were implemented since FY 2009 while keeping our focus on providing exceptional city services that sustain Council’s strategic goals. While public safety remains a top priority for Council, the represented public safety labor groups have fully participated in helping to balance the budget. They have made reductions in their operating budget, implemented operational efficiencies, absorbed vacancies, and made concessions on labor-related items. 24 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message Discussion – Principal Issues The same two principal issues that had to be addressed for the FY 2011 budget remain for the FY 12 budget. They are explained below. The budget actions taken to address these two principal issues are addressed in the subsequent section. Economic Conditions. One principal issue for the FY 2012 budget continues to be the recession and the impact it had, and continues to have, on the city’s resources to fund services to the community and the city’s capital plan. Arizona was substantially impacted by the recent recession as indicated by the unprecedented decline in property values (discussed later in this message) and 35 consecutive months of year-over-year job losses that just ended in January 2011. As a result, economic recovery is expected to occur over an extended period of time. According to the academic, private and government experts on the Arizona economy, recovery across the state will rely on business growth and investment that translates into improved employment conditions and population growth. These are the traditional drivers of economic growth in Arizona. Also key to Arizona’s recovery is a clearing of the excess inventory of vacant homes and office and retail space that still dominate the Phoenix metropolitan area. The impact of the economic conditions that have prevailed in Arizona for the past few years are most evident in the major sources of operating and capital budget revenue. For the General Fund (GF) operating budget, ongoing revenue collections peaked in FY 2008 at $184.2 million. The FY 2012 projection of $142.6 million is $41.6 million or 22.6% less than the peak. Overall, we expect to collect less in FY 2012 than we received in FY 2005. General Fund Total Ongoing Revenue (excluding one-time revenues) $190.0 $180.0 $170.0 $160.0 $150.0 $140.0 $130.0 $120.0 $110.0 $100.0 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY12 Est Proj 25 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message The two major sources of GF operating budget revenue continue to be city sales taxes and stateshared revenues. The FY 2012 city sales tax projection is $51.9 million, an 18% decline from the peak of $63.6 million in FY 2007. The good news is that we believe the positive sales tax performance since the start of FY 2011 means the erosion in this critical revenue source has leveled off. Despite the recent volatility of gas prices and other essential commodities, we believe price stability will return, as it has in the past. Therefore, the FY 2012 projection of $51.9 million reflects a modest increase of 2.7% from the FY 2011 estimate of $50.5 million. State shared revenue for FY 2012 is expected to be $44.3 million, a 33% decline from the peak of $66.1 million in FY 2008. This is the fourth consecutive year of decline for this critical revenue source. The continued decline is the result of the lagging impact of the economic downturn on income tax receipts and the state’s subsequent distribution of them, as well as population changes reflected in the 2010 Census. Glendale formerly comprised almost 5% of the state’s population; with the 2010 Census figures, Glendale’s population now comprises about 4.5% of the state’s total. That seemingly minor change in population distribution resulted in a loss of $5.4 million in state-shared revenue for Glendale, an amount already incorporated into the budget balancing for FY 2012. On the capital side, Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation has plummeted almost 50% from a high of $2.2 billion in FY 2009, which reflected the real estate market of calendar year 2006, to an estimated low of $1.1 billion in FY 2013 (calendar year 2010 real estate market). The unprecedented valuation decline has resulted in a corresponding dive in secondary property tax revenue, from $29.1 million in FY 2010 to $18 million in FY 2012. Another decline is expected for FY 2013 – to an estimated $15.6 million – based on the preliminary valuation notices sent to property owners in February 2011. City-Owned Jobing.com Arena and the Coyotes Hockey Team. In 2001, the City of Glendale entered into various agreements for the purpose of creating a high-quality, diversified economic engine. The purpose of this economic center was to generate new and sustainable revenue sources to support exceptional city services for the community and to develop a signature destination area for tourism. Offices, hotels, entertainment, retail and restaurant facilities were planned to complement the city-owned Jobing.com Arena. A key tenant of the Jobing.com Arena has been the National Hockey League’s (NHL) Coyotes team. In May 2009, the former owner of the Coyotes hockey team unexpectedly filed for federal bankruptcy protection. During the bankruptcy proceedings, the National Hockey League purchased the assets of the Coyotes but did not assume the arena management, use and lease agreement. Therefore, for the past two years the city has been working with potential buyers of the Coyotes to structure an arrangement that would retain the team in Glendale. City Council established criteria to guide the development of a new arrangement. They include • • Retention of the team for the full length of the lease at the city’s Jobing.com Arena, Retention of existing arena revenues to support the annual debt service requirements for the capital construction of the city’s Jobing.com Arena, and 26 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message • Creation of opportunities for the city to share in new revenue streams that could support exceptional city services to the community and ensure a sustainable future for the city. These criteria were established because the expenses of managing the arena are currently offset with the revenue earned by having the Coyotes as the arena’s main tenant. Further, an independent economic impact study showed that keeping the team for the term of the arena lease and management agreement was valued at between $270 million and $338 million. That is the value to the city today so losing the team to another city would cause significant damage to the Glendale community. In May 2011, the NHL confirmed its intention to keep the team in Glendale by agreeing to an extension of the management agreement between the NHL and the city. This extension of the agreement allows the team to remain in Glendale for the NHL’s 2011-12 season. It also allows the NHL and the city additional time to complete the required agreement with an ownership group that will be committed to retaining the team in Glendale at the Jobing.com Arena. Therefore, the FY 2012 GF operating budget assumes the general terms of the current agreement moving forward will be in place. The most significant is retention of the team as the anchor tenant of Glendale’s Jobing.com Arena. The FY 2012 budget also incorporates the addition of a $20 million arena management fee. Discussion – Actions Taken To Address Principal Issues The budget balancing strategy that was presented to Council as part of the FY 2011 operating budget remains in place. It is important we continue with this strategy until we see sustained growth in retail sales, income taxes and other critical revenue sources because ongoing revenues have not recovered sufficiently to fully support the city’s ongoing operating expenses. While this budget strategy is designed to adapt operations to constrained resources, it also positions the city to be ready for the time when the economy is fully recovered. This budget strategy is marked by a strategic, business-based and phased approach. This budget strategy also sustains core city services as defined by Council’s strategic goals. These core services are health and safety related such as emergency response services provided by the Police and Fire Departments. This strategy also ensures the smooth operation of the overall organization. Finally, to the extent possible, this strategy minimizes the impact to other services provided to the community in recognition of the fact that a municipality is fundamentally a service organization. One critical element of the city’s budget strategy that deserves recognition is the city’s Innovate Initiative. This initiative is directly tied to the budget process and the city’s strategic business model. Employees have been, and continue to be, actively engaged in making business-based recommendations for adjustments that help us in balancing the budget. Operating Budget. I have very good news for employees for FY 2012 regarding furloughs and the pay-related reductions offered by the represented labor groups: these measures will be scaled back by 50%. For FY 2012, furloughs will be at 2.5% (52 hours) and the pay-related reductions for the represented labor groups will be changed accordingly. 27 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message Also for FY 2012, step increases will be implemented for eligible employees in the represented public safety labor groups. The increases are necessary for Glendale to remain competitive for essential public safety-related recruitment and retention efforts. The FY 2012 operating budget includes a mix of ongoing and one-time budget measures, debt refunding and use of the GF fund balance as was done for the FY 2009 and FY 2010 operating budgets. Use of the GF fund balance during challenging economic cycles is a legitimate and widely-used course of action for many state and local governments here in Arizona and across the United States. The City of Glendale established a healthy GF fund balance after the 2001 recession through prudent financial management that resulted in the development of a robust reserve totaling more than $66 million at the end of FY 2008. This was a prudent course of action because that healthy fund balance has enabled the city to continue providing exceptional city services over the past few years and again for FY 2012. The alternative would have been severe ongoing reductions to city services, including core services, to match the $41.6 million or 22.6% decline in GF ongoing revenue sources that was discussed earlier in this message. By the end of FY 2010, the GF fund balance had declined to $38.8 million. The decline in fund balance during the recession led to a downgrade in the city’s bond rating, as has happened with several valley cities given the recession’s deep impact on Arizona. While the city’s bond rating remains strong, the downgrade is a signal that we must begin rebuilding the city’s GF fund balance. Therefore we must make deliberate steps toward a gradual rebuilding of the GF fund balance to a more healthy level. The recommended mix of ongoing and one-time measures results in a balanced budget plan for FY 2012, as required by state statutes. A summary of the mix of GF ongoing and one-time measures for FY 2012 follows. • • • • • • Hold open 64 GF vacancies as they become available. At the time this message was written, 30 GF positions were vacant. $4.7 million in savings. Continuation of phased, sworn positions (22 FTEs) originally put in place for FY 2011. $1.6 million in savings. Continue the furlough program but at one-half the level in place for FY 2011. This means that furloughs will be at 2.5% (52 hours) for FY 2012. All non-represented employees participate in the furlough plan. Also similarly modify the pay-related deferrals for the represented employees. $1.3 million in savings. Five percent (5%) reductions to base budgets plus further reductions to internal service and replacement fund premiums to correspond with the increased number vacancies to be held frozen. $1.8 million in savings. Restructure lease debt and Municipal Property Corporation debt service to take advantage of more favorable repayment terms. $8.6 million in savings. One time revenue related to the amended parking agreement for the mixed use development in the sports and entertainment district that City Council approved in January 2011 plus a contribution from the enterprise funds with the refund of the 28 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message • escrow established to retain the Coyotes team as a primary tenant at the Glendale Arena. This refund makes the funds available for GF use, as a one-time investment, to reduce the amount of transfers from the GF. $17.5 million in one-time revenue. Use GF fund balance to close the remaining between GF operating revenues and expenditures. $9.6 million in GF fund balance. It is very important to note the use of $17.5M in one-time revenue and $9.6 million in fund balance to balance the GF operating budget for FY 2012 in order to avoid drastic reductions to city services for the community. That one-time revenue and use of fund balance is a one-time fix for the $27.1 million gap between GF ongoing revenue and GF ongoing expenditures. This means the gap will have to be addressed for the FY 2013 budget given that it is unlikely revenues will grow sufficiently to close that gap. For the enterprise funds, an annual review of the rates charged for water, sewer, sanitation collection, and landfill disposal services was completed. No rate adjustments will be made for FY 2012. 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). Capital Program. Given Council’s prior direction to keep the secondary property tax rate unchanged, the first five years of the of the G.O. component of FY 2012-21 CIP was restructured to push back into the last five years of the plan all but two projects (plus any carryover from projects underway in the current FY). The two projects retained in the first five years of the G.O. component of the CIP are listed below. • • One is in the Public Safety category and is related to ongoing improvements to the public safety digital communication system. The second project is in the Flood Control category and addresses the cost of a regulatory permit the city is required to maintain. Notable G.O. projects on hold are the completion of the new Municipal Court and the new West Area Library. Both projects are now in the last five years of the FY 2012-21 capital plan. As mentioned briefly earlier in this message, the impact of the steep valuation decline on the city’s secondary property tax revenue stream directly affects the city’s capacity to support debt service on existing General Obligation bonds, as well as support additional debt service for new capital projects. Additional factors affecting the city’s secondary property tax revenue are the following: • • Accelerated reduction in the assessment ratio for commercial properties per recent state statutes, and Reduction of the city’s secondary property tax rate in FY 2008 and FY 2009 29 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message The significantly changed landscape necessitates an evaluation of the city’s secondary property tax rate over the next year. This is especially true if the city is not able to restructure existing General Obligation bond debt service along more favorable terms so annual debt service payments can more closely match the diminished revenue stream. The plan of action for FY 2012 is to evaluate debt restructuring options through this upcoming fall and return to Council with a revised debt management plan and recommended options for Council’s annual retreat. This timeframe allows us to evaluate fully the range of options as well as assess the 2011 real estate market, which will affect the secondary property tax revenue to be received in FY 2014. Given the sustained decline in total water consumption and the number of bills issued, combined with no rate adjustments for FY 2012, the water and sewer capital plan was modified to reflect the following: • • • • The deferral of non-essential growth-related capital projects Ongoing improvements in operational efficiencies to minimize cost increases related to fuel, equipment and electricity Continuation of critical repair, maintenance and replacement of existing capital assets such as underground pipes Continuation of capital projects that ensure compliance with applicable federal, state and county regulations 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 continues to impact this program’s capital plan although significant progress on key projects has been made. Of particular note is the pavement management program that is included in the transportation sales tax capital plan. The pavement management program will be funded at $2 million per FY for FY 2012 through FY 2016, and $10 million for the last five years of the plan. If an opportunity arises to increase this level of funding level through changes to the debt management plan, we will present this information to Council during the year. For FY 2012, two major projects planned are the start of construction for Northern Parkway and Grand Avenue improvements. Northern Parkway is a 12.5 mile high-capacity expressway running west to east, and will be a major transportation corridor across Glendale from the Loop 303 east to Grand Avenue. The first segment, from the Loop 303 to Dysart Road, is set to start construction in the summer of 2011. Grand Avenue improvements will improve traffic flow, enhance safety and improve the overall appearance of the roadway with landscaping, sidewalks, and undergrounding utilities. Other capital projects include design of a transit center in north Glendale, intersection safety improvements at 51st Avenue and Camelback Road, Glendale Airport runway improvements, and several bicycle/pedestrian multiuse pathway projects. The Glendale transportation capital program also has benefitted tremendously from the federal stimulus program. Glendale was approved for over $6 million in federal stimulus funding for capital projects that will help lower ongoing maintenance expenses for roads. Street pavement overlays enhanced the life of the pavement on two arterial streets, Litchfield Road and Glendale Avenue. Also completed were the application of long-term pavement markings on 25 miles of arterial streets and improvements to the existing signal system that reduce the burden on local funds to maintain older equipment prone to breakdowns and emergency repairs. 30 Return to TOC BUDGET MESSAGE City Manager’s Budget Message Conclusion As we progress through FY 2012, we will continue to evalute revenues and expenditures and 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 2012. Even with the ongoing challenges of the economy, 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, 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 2012 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 2012 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, Ed Beasley City Manager 31 Return to TOC Budget Summaries 2011-2012 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 $362.1 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 $144.2 million. The debt service budget is used to repay money borrowed by the city, primarily for capital improvements, and amounts to $85.1 million. The final component of the budget is the contingency appropriation at $46.6 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 $638 million for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012. This represents a decrease of 5.6% from the FY 2011 total budget of $676 million. The decrease is the result of 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 (56.8%) and capital (22.6%) appropriations are the largest components of the FY 2012 budget and account for 79.4% of the total appropriations. Both are discussed on the following pages. City of Glendale Total FY 2012 Appropriations Contingency 7.3% Operating 56.8% Debt Service 13.3% Capital 22.6% 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 2012 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. The feedback from Glendale citizens received last year regarding proposed operating budget reductions via the city web-site, telephone hotline and public meetings in three locations was used again in developing the FY 2012 operating budget. 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 2012. 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 2012 budget was the economy and the impact it was having on the city’s resources to fund services to the community. FY 2012 represents the fourth 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). While city sales tax revenues have stabilized and are projected to have a modest increase, state shared revenues dropped again and Glendale’s percentage share of those revenues also was reduced based upon the latest census figures. As part of the FY 2012 budget development process, departments proposed reductions to their ongoing General Fund base operating budgets for non-salary related items. All departments participated and the proposed reductions equaled 5% of their General Fund operating budgets. Each department head reviewed all the 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, January and February to develop the city manager’s recommended budget. City Council reviewed the city manager’s balanced budget in 33 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary two public, televised workshop sessions held on March 22 and March 29 to discuss the pertinent issues surrounding the FY 2012 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 14, 2011. 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 2012 through FY 2021 and includes over $1.2 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 including pavement preservation, police/fire department communications enhancements 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 2012, $144.2 million in capital investments is planned (figures are rounded): Table 1: Capital Improvements (All Dollars in Millions) Fund Name (Number) Water and Sewer (2360) Transportation Capital Project (2210) Airport Capital Grants (2120) Flood Control Construction (2180) Transportation Grants (1650) Streets Constr. - 1999 Auth (1980) Grants (1840) Public Safety Construction (2040) Sanitation (2480) Economic Dev. Constr-1999 Auth (2100) Landfill (2440) General (1000 & 1740) Gov't Facilities - 1999 Auth (2080) Arts Commission Fund (1220) All Other Projects Total CIP 34 Return to TOC FY 2012 $53.2 $39.5 $17.4 $10.3 $5.5 $3.1 $2.8 $2.4 $1.9 $1.7 $1.7 $1.6 $1.1 $0.5 $1.3 $144.2 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 $638 million for FY 2012. 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, then appropriations from another fund or funds 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 76 separate 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 fund balance will be used to help balance FY 2012 operations as the 35 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary impact of the recession continues to be felt. It was drawn down over FY 2009, FY 2010 and FY 2011 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 until FY 2011 when $335,000 was transferred back into the General Fund. The remaining fund balance has been appropriated as contingency in FY 2012. 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 future upgrades and the potential for unforeseen repairs. 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 40% funding level for FY 2012. 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 computers will not be replaced unless they malfunction. Enterprise Funds contributions remain at the 100% level and replacements continue to be made as scheduled for equipment in FY 2012. 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. 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 2012 revenue is projected to be $97,271 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 any capital related purchases. Court (Fund 1240): The Court Fund revenue is derived 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. The 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 2012 projected beginning balance of $234,112 and projected revenues of $156,900 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), Arena Event Operations (Fund 1282) and Camelback Ranch Event Operations (Fund 1283): These funds were created to track the city’s operational costs associated with events held at the stadium, arena and spring training venues. All public safety, transportation and marketing costs related to football, hockey, baseball, 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 all venues is recorded in the funds. A General Fund operating transfer is made to cover all expenditures that exceed the reimbursement received. 37 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary 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. This fund was reclassified from the special revenue category to the general fund group in FY 2012 because of the level of support provided by the General Fund. A projected transfer from the General Fund of $406,517 will supplement revenues of $410,300 generated from Civic Center activities in FY 2012 to cover operating and capital related expenditures. 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 38 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary contributions from sponsors and collects fees from vendors for these special events, it also is scheduled to receive a transfer of $320,145 from the General Fund to support FY 2012 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 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 2012 projected revenues totaling $69,388 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 39 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary 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 again in FY 2012 in an effort to balance the state’s budget. Therefore, revenue collections normally recorded in this fund will be suspended until FY 2013. 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 a cash basis. 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. 40 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary During the course of FY 2012, the balances for these funds are expected to decline to accommodate planned expenses. Even so, the Police Special Revenue Fund is expected to retain year-end balances equal to approximately 20% of the current year’s projected revenues, and the Fire Special Revenue Fund will retain approximately 8%, which in total exceed the 10% fund balance minimums set per the city’s financial policies. Airport Operating (Fund 1760): This fund was established to track the operating revenues and expenses of the Glendale Municipal Airport. The long-range goal for the airport is to become a self-sustaining 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 General Fund transfer of $60,835 to augment projected revenue collections of $466,491 in FY 2012. 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), Neighborhood Stabilization Program III (Fund 1311), 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 41 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary for sports, aquatics and special interest type classes for which fees are charged. In FY 2012 projected revenues of $1,078,360 will be offset by projected expenditures totaling $1,073,201. 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 payments into the fund to cover major maintenance and restoration costs. The fund balance is projected to decrease from $342,433 to $166,582 in FY 2012 as a result of planned expenditures related to designated facilities. 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 the 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. Staff will be 42 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary reviewing secondary property tax options with Council in the fall in order to ensure that future tax rates are set in accordance with required debt service obligations. See the Capital Improvement Plan section for a more in-depth discussion. Public Facilities Corp (PFC) Bond Debt (Fund 1930): The PFC is a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Arizona to assist the City to finance, construct and equip the Camelback Ranch spring training baseball facility. City Council retains oversight and must approve all PFC debt upon recommendation from the PFC’s Board of Directors, which consists of four City employees and one private citizen. Although the PFC is a legally separate entity from the City, the PFC is reported as if it is part of the primary government because it sole purpose is to finance and construct public facilities for the City. The fund is new in the FY 2012 budget book. Although the Camelback Ranch Facility opened in FY 2010, capitalized interest (i.e. excess bond proceeds) from the initial bond sale were used to make the initial principal and interest payments. The remaining capitalized interest will cover the majority of the FY 2012 debt service payment. However, the remainder of the debt service payment, or $380,000, has been appropriated and it is funded with a transfer from the General Fund. Municipal Property Corp (MPC) Bond Debt (Fund 1940): The MPC is a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Arizona to assist the City in the acquisition and financing of municipal projects and facilities. MPC bonds require City Council approval but 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 the 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 being phased back in for FY 2012. HURF monies will cover $1.35 million and the remaining debt service will be paid by secondary property tax revenue ($1.35 million), transportation special sales tax revenue ($1 million) and roadway development impact fee revenues ($1 million). Given the uncertainty regarding how future HURF revenue will be distributed, these contributions will be monitored closely going forward. 43 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary 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 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 2012. Interest income totaling $22,217 will increase the projected FY 2012 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, 2380, 2400 & 2420): The Water/Sewer Enterprise Fund supports the provision of water and sewer service to Glendale residents and businesses. It is completely self-supported 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 2380 (Water & Sewer bond 44 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary Debt Service) is used to track activity related to revenue bond financings covering capital improvement projects. 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 $56.5 million to $7.9 million (ending fund balance plus contingency appropriation) in FY 2012 because of planned capital expenditures totaling $53.2 million and the debt service requirements associated with revenue bond funded projects totaling $27.0 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. A revenue budget of $79.3 million helps cover the previous expenditures, in addition to the operating budget which accounts for salaries, electricity, chemical treatments, supplies, etc. totaling $47.8 million. 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. 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 $5.9 million to $4.5 million (ending fund balance and contingency appropriation) in FY 2012 as planned expenditures for large capital equipment (i.e., roll-off trucks, front and side-load trucks, loose trash equipment, etc.) will be made using some of the 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 2012 is $307,000. 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 45 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Budget Summary 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 and any contingency appropriation serves as a reserve to cover incurred but not reported claims, as well as a buffer against rising health care costs. 46 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues REVENUES Total revenues available to the city in FY 2012 from all sources are estimated at $452 million, of which $131.2 million or 29% goes into the General Fund (GF). Table 1 shows changes expected in the revenue funds included in the table. Please note that numbers in parentheses denote a projected decrease in revenues in FY 2012 from FY 2011. Table 1: Total Revenues by Fund—FY 2011 vs. 2012 (All Dollars in Thousands) Fund 1000-General 1040-General Services 1100-Telephone Services 1120-Vehicle Replacement 1140-PC Replacement 1240-Court Security/Bonds 1281-Stadium Event Operations 1282-Arena Event Operations 1340-Highway User Gas Tax 1650-Transportation Grants 1660-Transportation Sales Tax 1700-Police Sales Tax 1720-Fire Sales Tax 1740-Civic Center 1770-Zanjero Special Revenue 1780-Arena Special Revenue 1790-Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA 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 2011 Estimate $143,612 $9,087 $990 $2,267 $2,049 $351 $1,055 $274 $13,600 $1,648 $19,214 $11,940 $5,961 $354 $1,249 $4,521 $1,700 $104,500 $8,333 $15,104 $13,108 $2,540 $1,015 $21,897 $386,369 $56,443 $442,812 47 Return to TOC Change FY 11 FY 2012 to FY 12 Projection $131,174 ($12,438) $8,934 ($153) $904 ($86) $1,938 ($329) $1,755 ($294) $351 $0 $905 ($150) $5,278 $5,004 $11,416 ($2,184) $6,465 $4,817 $20,043 $828 $12,262 $322 $6,122 $161 $410 $56 $1,283 $34 $8,502 $3,982 $1,746 $46 $79,323 ($25,177) $8,253 ($80) $15,068 ($36) $13,243 $135 $2,543 $3 $1,018 $3 $21,896 ($1) $360,831 ($25,537) $91,218 $34,775 $452,049 $9,238 BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues General Fund Group General Fund (Fund 1000): Total resources available in FY 2012 to support GF services include the estimated beginning fund balance of $24.8 million and revenues of $131.2 million. The city expects to collect $143.6 million in total GF revenue in FY 2011. Of that amount, $12.6 million is one-time revenue as a result of the amended parking agreement for the mixed use development in the sports and entertainment district that City Council approved in January 2011. Excluding this onetime revenue, total general fund collections for FY 2011 is estimated to be $131 million, relatively flat compared the FY 2012 projected revenue. The average annual growth rate for total ongoing GF revenue was a robust 8% between FY 2002 and FY 2008. This rate was the result of very strong growth in city sales tax and state income tax receipts, with more moderate growth in state sales tax, motor vehicle in lieu fees, and development-related permits and fees. The phenomenal growth Glendale experienced through FY 2008 was the direct result of Council’s strategic goal of one community with quality economic development. The healthy growth meant the city could support and maintain superior city services and contributed to a high quality of life for the Glendale community. From FY 2008 through the end of FY 2011, total GF revenue is expected to experience a decline of almost $40 million or 22%, a clear reflection of the economic challenges brought on by the recession. A return to healthy growth is expected to occur over several years because Arizona was hit particularly hard by the economic downturn. Factors contributing to a long and gradual recovery include constrained job growth, weak personal income growth, weak consumer confidence and a weak real estate market. The two major sources of revenue for the GF continue to be city sales taxes and state-shared revenues. They have comprised between two-thirds and three-fourths of the GF revenue since FY 2002 and are expected to continue to do so for FY 2012. The city’s GF revenue projection is 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 (Excludes Street Funds) Sales Tax 41% Development Fees 2% Property Tax 2% Miscellaneous 11% State Shared 34% Court/Lic./Fees 6% Franchise Fees 4% City Sales Tax: City sales tax represents 40.7% of the GF revenue sources and is Glendale’s largest source of revenue for FY 2012. 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 GF receives 1.2% of the city’s 2.2% sales tax with the City Sales Tax remaining 1.0% designated for public safety 10-Year Fiscal History (0.5%) and transportation (0.5%). Thousands $70,000 The city collected $63.3 million in city sales tax revenue in FY 2007, the highest level of receipts over a ten-year period. In FY 2008, collections began declining with rapid deterioration occuring over the summer and fall of 2008. Since FY 2009, city sales tax receipts have leveled off at the $50 million level, which was last experienced in FY 2004. $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 The estimate for FY 2011 is $50.5 million, or almost even with the FY 2010 actuals. This conservative estimate is based on the assumption that the economy is still relatively weak due to the volatility of gas prices and other essential commodities that tend to lower consumer spending in other areas. The FY 2012 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 49 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues projection is $53.4 million and includes $1.5 million in anticipated revenue from a canvass of city businesses. After excluding the $1.5 million expected from the canvass, the FY 2012 projection is $51.9 million and represents a modest 2.7% increase over the FY 2011 estimate of $50.5 million. State-Shared Revenues: State-shared revenues include state income tax, state sales tax and motor vehicle in-lieu tax. These three revenue sources are shared with all cities and towns throughout the state. The average annual growth rate for the city’s share of state shared revenue was 6% between FY 2002 and FY 2008. However, starting in FY 2009, a decline started and State Shared Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History is expected to continue through Thousands FY 2012. FY 2011 receipts are expected to be $49.8 million $70,000 and a further decline to $43.9 $60,000 million is expected in FY 2012 as a result of the two year lag $50,000 in the distribution of income $40,000 tax receipts and the impact of the 2010 Census. With the FY $30,000 2012 projection of $43.9 $20,000 million, this critical revenue source has shrunk $21.7 $10,000 million or 32.9% since the peak $0 of $66.1 million in FY 2008. '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 MV In-lieu Income Sales The distribution of state sales and income tax revenue is based upon the relation of the city’s population to the total state population while the distribution of motor vehicle in-lieu revenue is based on the city’s population in relation to the total incorporated population of Maricopa County. Prior to the 2010 Census, Glendale was just under 5% of the state’s total population; with the 2010 Census, Glendale is now about 4.5% of the state’s population. While the distribution method is proportional on a per person basis, more mature cities like Glendale typically experience a decrease in their portion of state-shared tax revenues as growing cities tend to receive a greater share of the revenue distribution. The most significant component of state-shared revenue is income tax and it is primarily driven by personal income rather than business income as personal income tax receipts comprise about two-thirds of all Arizona income tax receipts. Income tax revenue distribution to the cities lags by two years. This means the state income tax distribution for FY 2012 will reflect the income tax the state collected in FY 2010, and the state’s 2010 income tax receipts were lower than the 2009 receipts. Glendale’s share of state income tax revenue is expected to decrease 18.2% or $4.3 million from $23.7 million in FY 2011 to $19.3 million in FY 2012. The city last had income tax receipts at the $19 million level in FY 2004. 50 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues State sales tax and motor vehicle in lieu revenues are 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 retail – are used to calculate the distribution amount. The FY 2011 estimate is $17.7 million and is almost even with the FY 2010 actuals. This revenue also is projected to remain essentially flat for FY 2012 at $17.4 million. The city last had state sales tax receipts in the $17 million range in FY 2003. The FY 2012 motor vehicle in lieu tax projection of $7.6 million is 10% less than the $8.5 million estimate for FY 2011 and represents the lowest level in the last ten years for this revenue source. 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. Primary Property Tax: Arizona’s property tax system consists of two tiers. The primary property tax levy has state-mandated maximum limits, and a city can adopt a rate anywhere between $0.0000 and the rate that yield the maximum limit under state law. Primary property tax revenue can be used by a city for Primary Property Tax & SRP In-Lieu any purpose. The primary property tax 10-Year Fiscal History revenue is included in the GF operating Thousands budget. $4,500 $4,000 $3,500 $3,000 $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $500 $0 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 Property Tax '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 SRP In-Lieu The 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. The secondary property tax revenue funds the city’s General Obligation bond portion of the city’s capital improvement plan (CIP). The city primary property tax rate will remain at $0.2252 in FY 2012 although the city expects to lose more than $780,000 because of a 22.6% decline in the primary assessed valuation of existing property. This drop is in addition to the 11% or about $459,000 decline from FY 2010 to FY 2011. Salt River Project (SRP) in-lieu revenue represents the quasi-governmental agency’s payment in lieu of a property tax, which it is exempt from paying. This revenue source amounts to a projected $31,236 for FY 2012 and represents only 1% of the primary property tax and SRP inlieu revenue grouping. Development Fees: Development-related fees include building permits, right-of-way permits, plan check fees, planning and zoning fees, engineering and traffic engineering plan check fees, fire service related development fees and miscellaneous development related fees. These sources essentially reflect a range of activities related to commercial and residential development and 51 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues construction. The city experienced its peak collection of development fees in FY 2008 with $6.1 million in receipts. The FY 2012 projection is $3 million and is flat with the FY 2011 estimate. For the development fees category, the Development Fee Revenue largest revenue source 10-Year Fiscal History in prior years was Thousands building permit fees. Fire Dept CD Fees $7,000 The same is true for FY 2011 and FY 2012 Traffic Eng. $6,000 with just over $1 $5,000 Engineering million expected in each of the two years. $4,000 Rezoning The next largest $3,000 Plan Check source of revenue in $2,000 this category was, and ROW is expected to $1,000 Bdg Permits continue to be, plan $0 check fees. '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 The decline of over 56% from the peak collection in FY 2008 is the result of the sizeable drop off in commercial and residential construction activity across the metropolitan Phoenix area as a result of the recession. 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 to the city are based on gross receipts for the franchised organization. The city anticipates collecting $4.7 million in franchise fee revenues in FY 2012, a modest increase of $520,000 or 12.5% from the FY 2011 estimate. Franchise Fee Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands $5,000 $4,500 $4,000 $3,500 $3,000 $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $500 $0 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 Gas/Elec. 52 Return to TOC '09 '10 '11 Cable '12 BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues License and Fee Revenues: This revenue category Thousands includes business and Recreation professional licenses, $7,000 Rent business regulatory $6,000 Bus/Prof licenses, sales tax Cemetery $5,000 licenses, liquor licenses, Library recreation fees, fire $4,000 Fire department fees not $3,000 related to construction Bus. Lic. development, library Liquor $2,000 fines and fees, cemetery Sales Tax $1,000 fees, and rental income Arena & Stad from the use of city $0 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 facilities. Miscellaneous arena and stadium related fees were included in FY 2004 to FY 2007 and are now accounted for in a separate fund. Stadium security fee was included in FY 2007 only. As a group these sources are expected to generate $5.2 million in FY 2012. These revenues have been relatively flat since FY 2010. License and Fee Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History 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 revenue generated from fines is subject to statutory changes made by the Arizona state legislature and can be affected by changes in traffic enforcement practices. Court revenue is estimated to remain flat at $3.4 million in FY 2012. Court Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands $4,000 $3,500 $3,000 $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $500 $0 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 Other Revenues: This revenue category includes interest earnings, staff and administrative chargebacks, capital lease proceeds (if any), sale of assets (if any) and miscellaneous revenues. The projection calls for FY 2012 revenues of approximately $14.2 million, compared to $23.6 million expected to be generated in FY 2011. FY 2011 includes the $12.6 million in one-time revenue as a result of the amended parking agreement for the mixed use development in the sports and entertainment district that City Council approved in January 2011. 53 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Special Revenue Fund Group: Police and Fire Sales Tax (Funds 1700 & 1720): The source of revenue for these funds is the 0.5% designated sales tax for police and fire services. The sales tax was originally adopted by voters in 1994 at a 0.1% rate. In September 2007 Glendale voters approved an increase to 0.5% effective November 1, 2007. The original one-tenth rate Fire Special Revenue includes food for home 10-Year Fiscal History consumption (e.g., groceries) Thousands while the additional four-tenths $7,000 rate excludes food for home $6,000 consumption. Two-thirds of $5,000 the revenue is allocated to police and one-third to fire. $4,000 $3,000 This revenue is subject to the same fluctuations as the general sales tax although the performance can be somewhat different because 80% of the rate excludes food for home consumption. $2,000 $1,000 $0 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 The FY 2012 projection is $18.4 million with $12.3 million for police and $6.1 million for fire. The FY 2012 projection reflects growth of 2.7% from the FY 2011 estimate of $17.9 million. Police Special Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands $14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 54 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Transportation Sales Tax (Fund 1660): The primary source of this fund’s revenue for operations is sales tax receipts from the designated 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 $19.3 million in FY 2012 as compared to $18.5 million estimated for FY 2011. This is a modest increase of $510,000 or 2.7% excluding the sales tax refund estimated in FY 2011. This revenue source is dedicated to funding various transportation and transit-related projects. Other sources of FY 2012 revenue within the Transportation Sales Tax Fund include $128,000 in transit revenues, $516,432 in grant revenues and $98,137 in interest earnings. In total, transportation sales tax fund revenues are projected to be $20 million in FY 2012 or about $828,000 less than the FY2011 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 2012 budget Transportation Funding Sources continues to exclude the Local Grant Funds Transportation 18% Assistance Fund (LTAF) monies General Fund that the state used 3% to distribute to local governments. Misc. The state 8% eliminated the distribution of this revenue source Transport. with the FY 2011 Tax budget. The City 71% of Glendale had used this revenue to pay for Dial-A- Ride and fixed route bus services. A combination of one-time savings, federal credits, and federal transit operations grant funds were used in FY 2011 and will continue to be used in FY 2012 to avoid significant service cutbacks. A determination of longer-term service options will be made during FY 2012 based on the availability of other funding opportunities and further route evaluations. 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. 55 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues 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, as '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 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 2010 and FY 2011 and again for FY 2012. The Streets Fund received $13.8 million in FY 2010. The city expects to collect about the same amount in revenue for FY 2011. For FY 2012, Glendale’s share of HURF dollars will be reduced by $2.2 million or 16.1% to $11.4 million in total revenue collection. $0 Thousands Airport (Fund 1760): Airport revenues consist of user fees (1.0%), lease proceeds (76.0%), commercial activities and other fees (11%) and a transfer from the GF (12.0%). Airport user fee revenue comes from activities such as transient tie down fees and conference room fees from tenants. The majority of revenue comes from lease activities such as land rental and office rental. Airport User Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History $600 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 Glendale is aggressively pursuing additional airport facility users with '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 an ultimate goal of airport selfsufficiency. Sporting events as well as concerts that are being held at Jobing.com Arena and University of Phoenix Stadium continue to attract corporate jet customers and are expected to provide additional business opportunities for the airport. Revenues for FY 2012 are projected to be $466,491. $0 56 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Enterprise Fund Group Water/Sewer (Funds 2360, 2400 & 2420): In FY 2012, water sales and sewer fees will make up $77.9 million of total revenues for this fund. No bond sale is planned for FY 2012. Development impact fees (DIF) revenue is projected at $700,000 for FY 2012. Other revenue sources totaling about $876,275 include interest earnings and miscellaneous fees and charges. Overall revenues for the Water/Sewer Fund amount to $79.3 million in FY 2012. Water & Sewer Revenues Dev. Fees 1% Water Revenue 59% Sewer Revenue 39% Other Revenue 1% Water & Sewer Revenue 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands $80,000 $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 Sewer Water The city annually hires an independent consulting firm to review the utilities’ financial status and recommend rate adjustments if needed. As a result of the study undertaken during FY 2011, there will not be any rate increases for FY 2012. The median single family customer rate will remain at $61.14 per month. 57 Return to TOC 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 of $18.00 per ton for the use of the city landfill. Glendale residents pay a tipping fee of $15.79 per ton for a load weighing more than one ton in waste material. These internal and residential tipping fees are projected to generate $2.5 million in revenue for the Landfill Fund in FY 2012. City Internal Tipping Fees 10-Year Fiscal History External User Tipping Fees 10-Year Fiscal History Thousands Thousands $4,000 $4,000 $3,500 $3,500 $3,000 $3,000 $2,500 $2,500 $2,000 $2,000 $1,500 $1,500 $1,000 $1,000 $500 $500 $0 $0 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 The tipping fees paid by private haulers, as well as businesses and individuals not located in Glendale, will continue to pay $32.25 per ton in FY 2012. This tipping fee will generate $3.0 million in revenue for the Landfill Fund in FY 2012. The city collected $2.8 million in FY 2010 and is expected to collect $3.0 million in FY 2011. Landfill Revenues Misc. 11% Internal Charges 30% Recycling 22% External Charges 37% 58 Return to TOC In FY 2012, the recycling sales program is projected to bring in $1.8 million. This amount is slightly lower than the actual recycling sales revenue of $1.9 million collected in FY 2010. The decline is mostly related to a decline in the amount of tonnage processed and sold at the recyclables processing facility. BUDGET SUMMARY Revenues Additional miscellaneous revenue comes from interest earnings, DIF’s, chargebacks and other fees, and accounts for $896,000. Total projected revenues for FY 2012 are $8.3 million. Sanitation (Fund 2480): The city annually reviews the five-year Sanitation Revenues financial plan for the Sanitation Commercial Enterprise Fund. This annual 27% evaluation takes into account Residential 70% operating and capital costs, equipment replacement, rate structures and service demands. Budget decisions are largely based on this long-range plan. Landfill fees for the disposal of the solid waste collected from residences and businesses represent a significant Misc. 3% part of the expenses incurred by the sanitation enterprise operation. Consequently, adjustments to landfill rates have a major impact on sanitation rates. Glendale’s residential sanitation rate for FY 2011 is $16.30 and includes weekly trash and recycling collection 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 FY 2012 will remain at $16.30. The FY 2012 total revenues of $15.1 million come primarily from two sources: residential collection fees, projected at $10.5 million, and commercial collection fees, projected at $4.1 million. The residential and commercial collection programs account for 97% of the sanitation revenues. Residential Sanitation Fees 10-Year Fiscal History Valley Sanitation Rates (Based on FY 2010 Published Rates) Thousands $30.00 $12,000 $25.00 $10,000 $20.00 $8,000 59 Return to TOC Mesa Phoenix '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 Tempe Peoria $0 Chandler $0.00 $2,000 Avondale $5.00 Gilbert $4,000 Scottsd… $10.00 Glendale $15.00 $6,000 BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures EXPENDITURES The FY 2012 Operating Budget The FY 2012 operating budget totals $362.1 million, which is an increase of 6.7% ($22.6 million) from the FY 2011 budget of $339.5 million. It is important to note that the FY 2012 general fund group included operating budget decreases totaling $7.1 million that were offset by the addition of a $20 million arena management fee that is new for FY 2012. The special revenue fund group will increase $7.3 million due to federal and state related grant appropriation increases pertaining to the new Neighborhood Stabilization Program III funding, as well as additional planned spending within the Police Sales Tax and RICO funds. The Public Housing budget will increase by $4.1 million within the enterprise group due to additional state funding being provided for community housing services. A comparison of the operating budget fund group changes from FY 2011 to FY 2012 appears below. Operating Budgets by Fund Group ($'s in Thousands) $200,000 $170,960 $158,038 $150,000 $100,000 $74,124 $81,430 $78,546 $82,079 $50,000 $28,732 $27,593 $39 $0 General Special Revenue FY 2011 $39 Capital Enterprise Internal Service FY 2012 The starting point for the FY 2012 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 2012 operating budget within each fund grouping. It also calculates the percentage change for the fund from the FY 2011 operating base budget. Table 2: Comparison of Operating Budgets FY 2011 vs. FY 2012 (All Dollars in Thousands) Fund Name FY 2011 FY 2012 General (1000) Arena Event Operations (1282) General Services (1040) Technology Replacement (1140) Vehicle Replacement (1120) Stadium Event Operations (1281) Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA (1790) Public Safety Training Center (2530) Telephone Services (1100) Civic Center (1740) All Other Funds $130,658 $1,202 $9,081 $3,510 $3,030 $2,965 $1,700 $1,445 $977 $748 $2,722 $158,038 $123,525 $21,204 $8,934 $3,512 $3,030 $2,967 $1,746 $1,545 $979 $767 $2,751 $170,960 -5.5% 1664.4% -1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 2.7% 6.9% 0.2% 2.4% 1.1% 8.2% $17,661 $12,587 $12,203 $8,462 $6,136 $1,324 $3,541 $0 $3,967 $4,184 $4,058 $74,124 $18,995 $14,174 $11,841 $8,218 $6,396 $3,895 $3,719 $3,368 $2,672 $2,118 $6,035 $81,430 7.6% 12.6% -3.0% -2.9% 4.2% 194.1% 5.0% n/a -32.7% -49.4% 48.7% 9.9% $39 $39 0.0% Sub-Total General Fund Group Other Federal and State Grants (1840) Police Sales Tax (1700) Transportation Sales Tax (1660) Highway User Gas Tax (1340) Fire Sales Tax (1720) RICO Funds (1860) C.D.B.G. (1320) N'hood Stabilization Pgm III (1311) ARRA Stimulus Grants (1842) Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm (1310) 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 2011 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 2012 % Change $49,123 $13,893 $8,487 $7,043 $78,546 $47,790 $14,581 $12,609 $7,099 $82,079 -2.7% 4.9% 48.6% 0.8% 4.5% $24,481 $2,844 $1,407 $28,732 $23,118 $3,068 $1,407 $27,593 -5.6% 7.9% 0.0% -4.0% $339,479 $362,100 6.7% The majority of the general fund group’s operating budget expenditures are included in the General (Fund 1000), which encompasses 72% 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 Funds Operating Budgets. The increase in the Arena Event Operations (Fund 1282) operating budget is the direct result of the $20 million arena management fee that was added in FY 2012. In FY 2011, this fund included the operating expenses associated with providing police, fire and transportation related services during events held at Jobing.com Arena. At the time this budget book was produced, a tentative agreement was in place related to the sale of the NHL Coyotes hockey team that included new contractual payments from the city for arena management services. As mentioned previously, the FY 2012 operating budget includes ample grant-related appropriation increases to accommodate the city aggressively pursuing grant opportunities that may arise during the year, or those that have already been awarded to the city. Other Federal and State Grants (Fund 1840), Neighborhood Stabilization Program III (Fund 1311) and C.D.B.G. (Fund 1320) drove a net increase in grant related appropriation totaling $3.5 million within the special revenue group. 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. The Police Sales Tax and RICO fund operating budgets increased $4.2 million to accommodate police related purchases using existing fund balances. 62 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Table 3 includes a tabular comparison of the departmental operating base budgets over the last two fiscal years and calculates the percentage change for the department from the FY 2011 operating base budget. Table 3: Comparison of All Funds Operating Budgets: FY 2011 vs. FY 2012 (All Dollars in Thousands) Department Name Police Services Public Works Water Services Fire Services Human Resources & Risk Mgt Budget & Financial Services N'Hood & Human Svcs Transportation Svcs Parks, Rec & Library Miscellaneous Grants Technology & Innovation Development Services Communications City Court City Attorney Economic Development Mayor & Council City Manager Non-Departmental Compliance & Asset Mgt Intergovt. Programs City Clerk Total Operating Budget FY 2011 FY 2012 $69,622 $46,528 $47,488 $35,779 $30,730 $12,581 $20,188 $17,315 $18,769 $7,275 $7,536 $5,289 $4,565 $4,222 $2,840 $1,802 $1,256 $1,395 $1,964 $938 $722 $676 $339,479 $74,247 $46,647 $45,634 $36,665 $29,623 $28,973 $26,455 $17,704 $17,530 $8,627 $7,248 $4,890 $4,247 $4,040 $2,885 $1,437 $1,424 $1,047 $765 $708 $687 $618 $362,100 % Change 6.6% 0.3% -3.9% 2.5% -3.6% 130.3% 31.0% 2.2% -6.6% 18.6% -3.8% -7.5% -7.0% -4.3% 1.6% -20.2% 13.4% -24.9% -61.0% -24.5% -4.8% -8.5% 6.7% The increase of 130.3% in Financial Services is directly related to the addition of the $20 million arena management fee that was added within the Financial Services Department. The arena management fee is discussed in the City Manager’s Budget Message. The N’Hood & Human Services Department increased by 31% due to additional public housing, neighborhood stabilization and Community Action Program funding scheduled to be received in FY 2012. Lastly, the Non-Departmental area moved $1.1 million worth of electricity and utilities reserve funding to the Transportation Services, Public Works and Parks, Rec & Library Departments that pay for those services directly each year. The Non-Departmental reserve was originally created 63 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures in FY 2010 to cover anticipated electricity and utilities rate increases that were expected to materialize in FY 2011 and beyond. This change resulted in a decrease of 61% year over year. Percentage of Operating Budget by Dept for All Funds N'Hood & Human Svcs 7.3% All Other Depts 8.7% Technology & Innovation 2.0% Fire Services 10.1% Public Works 12.9% Budget & Financial Services 8.0% Human Resources & Risk Mgt 8.2% Police Services 20.5% Transportation Svcs 4.9% Water Services 12.6% Parks, Rec & Library 4.8% The largest operating department, regardless of funding source, is the Police Services, which accounts for $74.2 million or 20.5% of the total operating budget. The Police Department provides police protection and related support services such as 9-1-1 dispatch, short-term detention and community education. It is accredited through the independent Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement. The second largest department is Public Works at $46.6 million, which makes up 12.9% of the total operating budget. This department is made up of Field Operations and Engineering staff. Among the many services that this department provides are the following: • • • • • 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; fuel services, custodial services and graffiti removal; and design and construction management for all city capital projects. The next largest department is Water Services at $45.6 million, which makes up 12.6% of the total operating budget. This department is responsible for treating and distributing potable water that meets all federal and state standards, collecting and treating wastewater in compliance with all regulatory requirements, implementing odor and pest infestation control measures and reading all water meters on a daily basis. Environmental Services provides water conservation programs, 64 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures water quality testing services for the city’s drinking water and reclaimed water services, and long-term water resource planning. Fire Services accounts for $36.7 million or 10.1% of the total operating budget. This department provides fire protection, emergency medical services and natural disaster planning. It also provides core life safety services involving fire suppression, property preservation, basic and advanced life support (paramedics), hazardous and technical response teams, fire code enforcement, fire investigation and child safety car seat installation. It is accredited by the Commission of Fire Accreditation International. Human Resources & Risk Management totals $29.6 million or 8.2% of the total operating budget. The department provides proactive customer service and consultation in the areas of total compensation, organizational development, employee relations and staffing. The Human Resources Department also administers the self insured employee health benefits, risk management and workers’ compensation programs and services. The sixth largest department is Budget & Financial Services. It totals $29 million or 8% of the total operating budget. They provide information to the public, state agencies, bondholders, grantors, auditors, City Council and management. This department is responsible for budget development and management, banking services and investment management, debt management as well as administering the sales tax code. Additional functions include preparation of external financial reports, managing the city payroll and accounts payable processes and maintaining, updating and testing accounting and budget input system changes and upgrades. The next largest department is Neighborhood & Human Services at $26.5 million, which makes up 7.3% of the total operating budget. This department provides direct city services that maintain the quality of life and build stronger neighborhoods for all residents. Some of the services these divisions provide include: • • • addressing the housing needs of over 4,400 Glendale residents by operating three public housing complexes and a Section 8 voucher program; providing affordable housing, housing rehabilitation assistance and emergency home repair for eligible Glendale residents; and administering the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), the Community Action Program (CAP) and other related federal programs. The eight largest department is Transportation Services which totals $17.7 million, and makes up 4.9% of the total operating budget. This department is responsible for transportation planning, traffic engineering, traffic signals, signs, striping, street lighting, transit services and educational program services to meet the transportation needs of the city. This department is also responsible for operating the Glendale Municipal Airport. The airport is a regional general aviation facility that provides hangar facilities, aviation planning, maintenance, safety and educational tours. 65 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures The Parks, Rec & Library Department provides services that are probably the most visible to the public and includes library services and parks, open space and recreational activities for residents. This department accounts for $17.5 million or 4.8% of the total operating budget. The library serves Glendale citizens by providing books, programming, audio-visual materials and electronic resources that inform, educate and entertain residents. The department also offers opportunities to enhance the social, physical, mental and economic health of the community by offering a wide variety of programs and events. They also maintain, protect and manage parks, open spaces, trails and aquatic and recreational facilities located throughout the community. The Technology & Innovation Department expenses round out the top ten departments and this area accounts for another $7.2 million or 2.0% of the operating budget. This department supports the City’s technology infrastructure such as application support, network, data services, email and telephony. In addition, this department supports the enhancement of business processes through the use of the LEAN methodology. The remaining departments in the all other category include: Grants, Development Services, Communications, City Court, City Attorney, Economic Development, Mayor/Council, City Manager, Non-Departmental, Compliance/Asset Management, Intergovernmental Programs and City Clerk (listed in descending order based on the size of their respective operating budget). These departments make up the remaining $31.4 million or 8.7% of the total operating budget. The Operating Budget section in this budget book includes more detailed information on all the departments mentioned in this section. 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, 75% of the FY 2012 operating budget for the General and Streets funds is attributable to wages, salaries and benefits. The FY 2011 General Fund budget included 22 frozen public safety positions. These 22 positions will be frozen for another year in the FY 2012 budget. In addition, staff has identified another 64 General Fund positions that will be frozen in FY 2012. Of the additional 64 positions, only 5 are sworn with the remaining 59 non-sworn. It is important to note that these 86 frozen positions are still included in the Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) counts that appear on the following pages. Only the salary and benefits associated with the frozen positions are removed from the department’s respective operating budgets. This is done because the positions are still authorized by City Council to be filled when the economy and revenue collections improve to the point where it makes business sense to fund the positions once again. Table 4 provides a comparison of staffing levels in recent years for all funds which accounts for all changes in authorized staffing city-wide. The overall staffing level decreased by 4.63 FTE’s due to minimal staffing changes made across six different funds from FY 2011 to FY 2012. 66 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Table 4: Staffing Levels by Fund (Full-Time Equivalents) Fund 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 1,411.76 1,403.76 1,389.76 1,202.26 1,198.88 241.25 242.25 242.25 242.25 242.25 Police Special Revenue-1700 42.00 118.00 118.00 118.00 118.00 Sanitation-2480 75.00 78.00 80.00 80.00 79.00 Highway User Gas Tax-1340 97.00 98.00 90.00 67.00 65.00 Fire Special Revenue-1720 21.00 50.00 50.00 51.00 51.00 Transportation Sales Tax-1660 50.25 50.25 50.25 49.25 49.25 Landfill-2440 43.00 41.00 41.00 44.00 44.00 General Services-1040 42.00 42.00 41.00 37.00 34.00 Pub Housing Budget Activities-2500 25.00 25.00 25.00 24.00 24.00 Training Facility Revenue Fund-2530 12.00 12.00 12.00 10.00 12.00 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 7.00 7.00 Civic Center-1740 7.00 7.00 7.00 6.00 6.00 Airport Special Revenue-1760 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 3.75 General-1000 Water and Sewer-2360/2400/2420 Risk Mgt Self Insurance-2540 Grants-1840 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Court Security/Bonds-1240 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Stadium Event Operations-1281 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Arena Event Operations-1282 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Telephone Services-1100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PC Replacement-1140 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 RICO Funds-1860 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 2,100.51 2,204.51 2,182.51 1,971.01 1,966.38 Total 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 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 67 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures 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. The FY 2010 staffing per COG Authorized Staffing Per 1,000 Population 1,000 increased because the 10-Year Fiscal History 2010 census numbers came in 23,090 less than the previous 10 year’s population figure, in addition, the vacant positions 9 accumulated in all funds were 8 not eliminated from the budget until the following fiscal year. 7 The FY 2011 budget included a decrease in total authorized 6 staffing by 211.5 FTEs across all funds. The majority of the 5 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 staffing decreases related to the elimination of vacant GF positions and city-wide budget reductions. The FY 2012 staffing per 1,000 population remained flat year over year. 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. The total authorized staffing of 1,966.38 FTE positions will serve an estimated population of 12.0 10.4 231,763 at the start of FY 9.9 10.1 2012. This results in a 8.5 8.2 9.0 staffing ratio of 8.48 7.1 employees per 1,000 6.6 6.3 residents in FY 2012. As 6.0 the accompanying graph indicates, Glendale continues to maintain a 3.0 low staff to population ratio compared to Phoenix, Scottsdale and Tempe and does so without sacrificing the quality of services provided to residents. Please note that the ratio for all staffing-per-each-1,000 residents is from FY 2011 adopted budget numbers except for the City of Glendale, which represents the FY 2012 ratio. This is done because the FY 2012 adopted budget numbers for other cities was not known at the time this budget book was published. Phoenix Scottsdale Tempe FY12-COG Mesa Peoria Chandler Avondale Staffing Per 1,000 Population FY 2011 - Valley Cities 68 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures General and Streets Funds Operating Expenditures The total operating budget for FY 2012 is $131.7 million. Police Services, at 36.2% or $47.6 million, is the largest component of the General Fund budget, followed by Fire Services at approximately 18.3% or $24.2 million, Parks, Rec & Library at 10.9% or $14.3 million and finally Public Works at 9.4% or $12.4 million. These four departments comprise 74.8% or $98.5 million of the total General and Streets Funds operating budgets. The remaining 25.2% or $33.2 million of the $131.7 million budget is within the Development Services, Transportation Services, Budget & Financial Services and the All Other categories. The All Other category includes City Court, City Attorney, Technology & Innovation, Communications, Human Resources & Risk Management, Economic Development, Mayor & Council, Neighborhood & Human Services, City Manager, Non-Departmental, Compliance & Asset Management, Intergovernmental Programs, City Clerk and Water Services departments. The accompanying graph displays the General and Streets Funds budgets by department as a percentage of the whole. % of General & Streets Funds Budget by Dept Transportation Services 2.9% All Other Depts 16.2% Police Services 36.2% Public Works 9.4% Parks, Rec & Library 10.9% Budget & Financial Svcs 2.6% Fire Services 18.3% Development Services 3.5% 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 and Transportation Departments. The following table compares the FY 2012 General and Streets Fund operating budgets by department to FY 2011 in tabular form. 69 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures Table 5: General & Streets Funds Operating Budgets By Dept (All Dollars in Thousands) Dept Name Police Services Fire Services Parks, Rec & Library Public Works Development Services Transportation Services Budget & Financial Svcs City Court City Attorney Technology & Innovation Communications Human Resources & Risk Economic Development Mayor & Council N'Hood & Human Services City Manager Non-Departmental Compliance & Asset Mgt Intergovt. Programs City Clerk Water Services Total FY 2011 Budget $47,136 $23,639 $15,112 $13,012 $4,979 $3,748 $7,361 $3,578 $2,840 $3,049 $2,957 $1,912 $1,802 $1,256 $1,019 $1,395 $1,964 $938 $722 $676 $27 $139,120 FY 2012 Budget $47,636 $24,157 $14,331 $12,438 $4,577 $3,783 $3,419 $3,388 $2,885 $2,757 $2,620 $1,946 $1,437 $1,424 $1,092 $1,047 $765 $708 $687 $618 $27 $131,743 % Change 1.1% 2.2% -5.2% -4.4% -8.1% 0.9% -53.6% -5.3% 1.6% -9.6% -11.4% 1.8% -20.2% 13.4% 7.2% -24.9% -61.0% -24.5% -4.8% -8.5% 0.0% -5.3% 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. It is important to note that all departments within the General and Streets Funds participated in FY 2012 base budget reductions. However, changes in departmental staffing levels associated with the FY 2010 FTE reduction exercise that was finalized during the first quarter of FY 2011, coupled with an organizational re-alignment that occurred at the end FY 2011, caused several departments to have shifts in the salary and benefits component of their operating budget from FY 2011 to FY 2012 that effected their year over year percentage changes. The 53.6% decrease in the Financial Services department is a result of decreased staffing and a planned restructuring of existing lease debt. The remaining principal and interest payments were 70 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures spread out over a longer time period resulting in a reduction of $3.8M in principal and interest payments due to be paid in FY 2012. Schedule Eight in the back of the budget book includes all scheduled lease payments planned for the next five years and beyond. The 61% decrease in Non-Departmental is due to the re-allocation of an electricity and utilities reserve budget totaling $1.1M that was moved out of this budget and into Transportation Services, Public Works and Parks, Rec & Library Departments where these expenses are primarily paid from. General and Streets Funds Transfers to Other Funds The General and Streets Funds support 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 $32.3 million is projected to be transferred to other funds in FY 2012. This amount is $19.5 million more than the net GF transfers included in the FY 2011 budget. However, the FY 2011 transfer amount included a one-time offset of $6 million that was transferred into the General Fund. In addition, the transfer from the General Fund to the Arena Event Operations Fund was increased by $15.3 million to cover the arena management fee and other operational expenses. Also included in the $32.3 million transfer is $10.2 million to the Municipal Property Corporation debt service fund to cover 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 $10.2 million is the net amount after accounting for expected revenue per the respective development agreements for the various facilities named above. A total transfer of $2.4 million is projected for the Stadium and Youth Sports Complex funds. $1.4 million will be transferred from the Streets Fund to the Street Debt Service Fund to help pay the principal and interest payments for previously funded HURF bond projects. 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 $320,145 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 $14.2 million will be appropriated from the Police Special Revenue Fund to provide police services. An additional $6.4 million from the Fire Special Revenue Fund is designated to 71 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures provide fire protection and emergency medical services. The Police fund supports 118 authorized 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 Transportation Fund Budget the majority of expenditures totaling $45 Operating million are budgeted for 19.4% capital outlays (including grant funded capital projects), the total operating budget of Debt Svc $12.6 million is used for 11.3% Fixed Route services (public transportation) at $5.2 million and Dial-ARide at $2.4 million. The Capital 69.3% latter program serves physically challenged residents and individuals with special transportation needs. 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 $2.7 million, or 21% of the operating budget, is used for traffic engineering, safety education, traffic mitigation, management oversight and grant related operating appropriation. Debt service payments totaling $7.3 million are budgeted for FY 2012 and represent the final appropriation component. Airport Fund Expenditures The Airport Fund operating budget is $527,326 that is funded by airport revenues of $466,491 with the remaining $60,835 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, and the economy recovers, staff believes the Glendale Airport will attract more corporate jet customers. When these improvements are coupled with uses from professional football, hockey 72 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures and baseball spring training, 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, longterm sources of water from the Salt River Project, the Central Arizona Project (Colorado River water) and groundwater. Although water from these sources is becoming more expensive to obtain and treat, Glendale water rates are reasonable when compared to both local and national standards. Water/Sewer Fund Budget Operations 35.9% Capital 40.0% Cont. 3.8% Debt Service 20.3% The operating budget for this fund is $47.8 million for FY 2012. Almost half of this budget, or $18.6 million, is used to support 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 $20.6 million. The remaining $8.6 million of the operating budget is used for meter maintenance, central system control, water quality testing and information management services. Many significant capital projects are planned for FY 2012 and they account for the $53.2 million in capital expenditures, as well as the corresponding $27 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 2012 is $7.1 million, relatively unchanged from the $7 million in FY 2011. Landfill operations total $3.2 million, the materials recycling facility accounts for $2 million and other recycling at $937,523, all of which accounts for 86.2% of the operating 73 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures budget. The remaining amount, or $977,584, is used for solid waste administration and landfill gas management. The FY 2012 capital budget totals $1.7 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 2012 will be the tenth 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 2012 is $14.6 Sanitation Fund Budget million, which represents a 5% increase from the $13.9 Capital 11% million in FY 2011, but it is in line with the $14.5 Cont. 3% million in FY 2010. Residential curb service includes trash, recycling and loose trash collection and accounts for $10.4 million or 71% of the operating budget. The commercial Operations 86% front-load and roll-off divisions account for another $4.2 million. The FY 2012 capital budget includes $1.9 million for the purchase of side load refuse trucks and replacement pickup trucks, which makes up 11% of the total operating budget. The Sanitation Fund has a $500,000 contingency appropriation to be used at City Council discretion for any unplanned emergencies. 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 $23.1 million for FY 2012. The City of Glendale will contribute $14.2 million to this fund in FY 2012 of which $9.2 million is from the GF employer contributions. Additional revenue in this fund includes employee contributions totaling $4.3 million and retiree contributions totaling $3.4 million. Modest interest earnings projected at $17,588 bring total revenues into the fund to $21.9 million for FY 2012. 74 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures The beginning fund balance is projected to be approximately $2.6 million and the fund is projected to end the year with $1.4 million. This reduction in fund balance is a direct result of management’s decision to keep benefit rates flat year over year by using some fund balance to cover any medical and dental expenditures over the $21.9 million coming into the fund as revenue. The FY 2012 operating budget is $23.1 million, which is a reduction of $5.6 million from the FY 2011 operating budget of $28.7 million. Capital Improvement Plan Expenditures The total capital improvement budget for FY 2012 is $144.2 million, and 91.4% of this amount relates to transportation, public safety, flood control, and water and sewer projects. The $144.2 million includes carryover appropriation from FY 2011 of $94.5 million to complete existing projects and $49.7 million for new projects. This is a decrease of $50.2 million, or 25.8%, compared to the FY 2011 capital improvement budget of $194.4 million. The reduction was primarily driven by a year over year reduction in the new funding included in the FY 2011 capital budget ($97.4 million) versus FY 2012 ($49.7 million) that accounted for $47.7 million of the decrease. A decrease in funding for carryover capital projects of $2.5 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 2012. For more details, please refer to the Capital Improvement Plan section of this document. Percentage of Capital Improvement Plan Projects by Type Trans./ Streets 46% Economic Development 1% Flood Control 7% Other 7% Public Safety 2% Water/Sewer 37% 75 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures 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. The total debt service budget for FY 2012 is $85.1 million, compared to $84.8 million in FY 2011. 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 28% Transportation Revenue Bonds 9% MPC/PFC Bonds 26% Water & Sewer Revenue Bonds 32% HURF Bonds 5% 76 Return to TOC BUDGET SUMMARY Expenditures CONCLUSION This Budget Summary is intended to provide a general overview of the FY 2012 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 77 Return to TOC Financial Guidelines 2011-2012 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. 78 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. 79 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 expenditure 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 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES 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 80 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. 81 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 $221.20 in 2010, an increase of 113.52%. 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% 2010 221.2 1.09% Jan '11 223.1 0.88% Feb '11 224.4 0.57% 1984 - 2010 Total 113.52% 1984 - 2010 Avg 2.97% 2003 - 2010 Total 17.29% 2003 - 2010 Avg 2.29% The average annual inflation rate has been averaging about 2.97% since 1984. From 2003 to 2010, the average inflation rate has been lower, averaging 2.29%. 2009 marked the first time since 1984 that the average inflation rate declined year over year. However, that trend was short lived as 2010 say an increase of 1.09% from 2009. During the first two months of 2011, the inflation factors increased by .88% and .57%, meaning that when the first two months of the year are combined they already surpass the percentage increase we saw in all of 2010. 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 leveled off from the high growth experienced in the 1990s and the early years of the current decade given that the 2005 – 2009 average annual increase was a more moderate 1.39%. In 2010, the census figures 82 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast released for the city were much lower than projected. The current population is estimated at 226,721 which is a 9.24% decrease from the 2009 figure. This loss in population had an adverse impact on our state-shared revenues that are distributed based on a proportion of population. The following table shows the historical and projected population growth and percentage increases for years 1984 through 2016, 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 f * * * * * * Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Population 218,812 224,703 227,763 231,288 233,281 242,369 243,737 246,396 248,745 249,811 226,721 229,468 231,763 234,080 236,421 238,785 241,173 % Increase 5.15% 2.69% 1.36% 1.55% 0.86% 3.90% 0.56% 1.09% 0.95% 0.43% -9.24% 1.21% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% Notes: a 1985 Special Census e 2005 Special Census (September 1) b 1990 Census f 2010 Census c 1995 Special Census - includes Luke AFB * Projected Population Figures d 2000 Census 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. 83 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast 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 2012, no pay increases are included in the forecast. In fact, a two and a half percent reduction in base salary has been included in the forecast through the use of 52 hours of mandatory furlough (equivalent to 6.5 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 2011, an addendum to the two-year Memorandum of Understanding with the police and fire represented groups was reached that identified reductions in step plan deferred compensation. The Police and Fire Departments agreed to eliminate half of their deferred compensation in FY 2012. 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 2012 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 2012 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 84 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast 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. 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. In FY 2012, the GF contributions will be decreased another 10%, bringing the overall GF contribution rate to 40%. 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 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. 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 85 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast 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. Public Facilities Corporation (PFC) debt service associated with the new Camelback Ranch Spring Training Baseball Complex had a significant impact on FY 2013 thru FY 2016 of the forecast period. Capitalized interest was used to make the initial debt services payments after the complex opened. FY 2013 forward will mark the first year that a full payment is required. The payment ranges from $13 million to $18 million each year. 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. All of this meant that revenue growth was unlikely, so the FY 2011 revenue budget was essentially flat year over year. For the local economy, the impact of the current recession is reflected in Glendale’s sales tax collections. Through February 2011, city and state sales tax collections, which comprise over one-half of the current fiscal year’s General Fund (GF) revenue budget, receded to levels last experienced in FY 2005. The good news is that these revenue collections are slightly better than budget through February 2011. This information, coupled with the fact that housing prices have leveled off and national earnings reports of leading companies are starting to turn around, allowed the city to build a modest 2.7% increase in city sales tax collections for FY 2012. 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 86 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast 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 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 income, city property rental income, bond/lease proceeds, staff/admin chargebacks and miscellaneous revenues). General and Streets Funds Summary of Major Revenue Sources In Thousands ($000's) $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 '07 Other '08 Fees '09 HURF '10 '11 Prim Prop Tax '12 '13 State Shared '14 '15 '16 City Sales Tax City Sales Tax City sales tax is “elastic” revenue, meaning it varies directly with the economy. During times of 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. City sales tax receipts comprise 37.4% of the city’s GF revenue budget for FY 2012 (including HURF). This percentage is projected to remain stable for the forecast period, fluctuating between 37.1% and 38.1%. 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. 87 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast The growth rate for city sales tax collections declined from $63.6 million in FY 2007 to $50.6 million in FY 2010, or 20%. The revised FY 2011 city sales tax revenue projection is essentially flat with FY 2010 coming in $50.5 million. However, FY 2012 includes a modest increase of 2.7% with the remaining years in the forecast period fluctuating between 3.5% and 5.1%. 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 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 Actual '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 Projected 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 31.1% or $44.3 million of the city’s GF revenue budget for FY 2012. This is a precipitous drop from the 39.5% level or $64.4 million that was collected in FY 2009. The forecast period assumes a percentage between 31.1% and 33.8% over the forecast period due to a decrease in Glendale’s population figures coupled with increases in population growth of other outlying valley cities. This revenue source is projected to rebound by $4.6 million in FY 2013 and total $48.9 million due primarily to a projected increase in state income tax receipts. The projection for FY 2014 through FY 2016 is for more modest growth averaging $2.1 million per year. 88 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast 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 8.9% between FY 2005 and FY 2008. In the next three fiscal years, the average growth rate decreased by 8.9% (FY 2009 – FY 2011) and is projected to decrease by another 11.1% in FY 2012 before rebounding in FY 2013. 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 average growth rate of 5.7% in FY 2013 - FY 2016 as the national economy rebounds. State-Shared Revenue Summary In Thousands ($000's) 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 '07 '08 '09 '10 Actual '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 Projected 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 GF. 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. 89 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast Primary property tax revenue is a relatively small revenue source for the GF as it comprises only 2.1% of the total, or $2.9 million for FY 2012. This percentage of the total is a slight decrease from the 2.3% rate experienced from FY 2007 to FY 2011. 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 2012, 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 is 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 projection includes a 21% decline in primary property tax revenue for FY 2012, followed by 14% declines in each of FY 2013 and FY 2014. Modest increases in FY 2015 and FY 2016 averaging 3% in primary property tax revenue round out the forecast period. Primary Property Tax Revenue In Thousands ($000's) 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 Actual '12 Projected 90 Return to TOC '13 '14 '15 '16 FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast 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 2011 the city expects to receive $13.6 million in HURF revenue, which is only a 1.3% decrease from FY 2010 but is 18.5% below FY 2008 levels. HURF revenues are projected to decline another 16.1% in FY 2012 and they will comprise 8% or $11.4 million of GF revenue. This amount is expected to grow modestly to $11.8 million by the end of the forecast period. Given the uncertainty about the state’s FY 2012 budget and the state of the economy, we have assumed a 0.8% average growth rate for the remainder 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 $15.9 million in FY 2012, about 11.2% of total GF revenue. By FY 2016, revenue from fees and charges is expected to grow to $17.1 million. FY 2012 revenue is projected to increase by 2.4% over the previous fiscal year, but the average growth rate for the remainder of the forecast period is 1.8%. 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 91 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast 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 operations 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 2012 are $8.9 million and comprise about 60.8% of the “other” revenue category but only 10.2% of all GF revenue. This amount is anticipated to decline by 6.3% in FY 2013 and then grow by an average of 2.7% each year through the forecast period. The remaining $5.7 million or 39.2% of this revenue category is made up of interest, city property 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 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. 92 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Five-Year Forecast 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. 93 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan FINANCIAL PLAN INTRODUCTION The foundation for our FY 2012 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. 94 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 2012, state-shared revenue is expected to be distributed in the same manner used for the FY 2011 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 2012 will reflect the income tax the state collected in FY 2010 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 2012. A more detailed discussion of these other revenue sources and the projection for FY 2012 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 improvement districts. These are discussed in more detail in the Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan section. 95 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan 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 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. 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 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 96 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan 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. 97 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 (8.57:1,000) personnel-related costs account for 77% 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 98 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. 99 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 2012-2021 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 less than 3% of the city’s anticipated General Fund revenues in FY 2012. 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. 100 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. 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 through FY 2008 budgets, this approach was further modified to allow the city sales tax projection to match the previous year growth percentage because this revenue source had performed so strongly. The severe economic downturn between FY 2009 and FY 2011 required city sale tax projections to mirror the negative decline in sales tax receipts that cities and towns were experiencing throughout the nation. With the economic downturn leveling off, the city sales tax projection returned to the approach discussed previously and used from FY 2005 through FY 2008. This approach requires the city to look at the most recent sales tax activity and only build in a growth percentage that matches the way city sales tax revenues are trending for that time period. 101 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan 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 Fund Balance 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. 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’s fund balance. Every fiscal year, a portion of fund balance is established as a General Fund contingency appropriation. A similar contingency appropriation is established each year for other city funds like the 102 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan 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, fund balance 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 fund balance 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 fund balance for future use. City Council policies discourage the routine use of fund balance 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. If fund balances 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 fund balance 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 • • 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. 103 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Plan • • 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. FUND BALANCE POLICY- GENERAL FUND In this policy General Fund refers to the grouping of funds as reported in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) under General Fund and on Schedule One of this budget book. This Fund should maintain a minimum unrestricted fund balance between 5 and 10% of General Fund revenues received less revenues associated with the sporting facilities, certain rental revenues, replacement fund revenues and monies set aside for library, court, art commission, marketing self sustaining and employee groups divisions. As part of the budget resolution, council will annually commit the funding level of the minimum fund balance requirement. Any balance in excess of 10% may be used to support city operations on a one-time basis for such items as capital equipment and building improvements, new construction of city facilities, minimization of prolonged fluctuations relating to the local and national economic condition (i.e. recessions), and unforeseeable and unexpected financial situations (natural disasters, acts of terrorism etc.). If a situation arises where unrestricted fund balance ends the fiscal year with a balance less than the calculated minimum unrestricted fund 105 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Policies balance the deficiency should be replenished in the coming fiscal years, not to exceed a total of five consecutive years, using revenues received and reducing appropriations. ESTABLISHMENT OF FUNDS Delegation of the authority to establish new funds shall rest with the City Manager and designees as they see the need to segregate funds received for particular services or functions that are desired to be tracked separately from the general fund. 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 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 5 to10% 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. 106 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Policies 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: 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 Executive Director for Budget and Finance Services, 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 107 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Policies 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, between 5 and10% 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. 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. 108 Return to TOC FINANCIAL GUIDELINES Financial Policies 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. 109 Return to TOC Operating Budget 2011-2012 CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Operating Budget Table of Contents OPERATING BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS Appointed & Elected Officials Page Mayor & City Council City Attorney City Clerk City Court 112 119 123 129 Budget & Financial Services Finance Lease Payments Management & Budget Grants 135 140 141 147 City Manager City Manager’s Office 148 Communications Marketing and Communications Glendale Civic Center Convention Center, Media Center and Parking Garage 155 161 166 Compliance & Asset Management Compliance & Asset Management 167 Development Services Building Safety Code Compliance Planning Community Development Admin. 172 177 182 187 Economic Development Economic Development Rebates & Incentives 188 194 Fire Services Fire Services 195 110 Return to TOC CITY OF GLENDALE, AZ Operating Budget Table of Contents Human Resources & Risk Management Human Resources Employee Groups Page 201 207 Intergovernmental Programs Intergovernmental Programs 208 Neighborhood & Human Services Neighborhood & Human Services Community Action Program Community Partnerships Neighborhood Improvement Grants 212 217 218 220 Parks, Recreation & Library Services Parks, Recreation & Library Services Library & Arts Parks & Recreation 221 227 228 Police Services Police Services 230 Public Works Field Operations Engineering 237 244 Technology & Innovation Technology & Innovation 250 Transportation Services Transportation Services Transportation Airport 254 258 260 Water Services Utilities Environmental Resources 261 267 Other Non-Departmental 273 111 Return to TOC 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 17 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. The Mayor and Council represent Glendale as members and leaders on numerous city, regional and national organizations and committees. 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 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 One Community With High Quality Services For Citizens 112 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council Accomplishments Fiscally Sound • Reduced the city budget by $266 million over the past three fiscal years through a variety of methods including the evaluation of business practices and implementation of cost savings brought forward through Innovate, an employee program focused on innovation. • Volunteers provided 120,744 hours of service, which, if paid, would be valued at $2.5 million. • Reduced fuel usage by more than 129,300 gallons through measures such as reducing the number of vehicles the city operates, downsizing 200 vehicles from V-8 to 4 cylinder models, including 300 vehicles that operate on E85 fuel, driving fewer miles, piloting the use of hybrid vehicles, creating a motor pool of 21 vehicles, and adhering to a rigorous maintenance schedule. • Received, for the 22nd consecutive year, the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada’s Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Strong Neighborhoods • Engaged citizens by hosting community events such as Community Conversations with Mayor Scruggs, Council District meetings and Legislative Link meetings. • 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. • Continued to support Glendale’s 192 registered neighborhoods and HOAs. • Celebrated “Getting Arizona Involved in Neighborhoods” (GAIN) Night with many of Glendale’s 173 Neighborhood Watch Groups. Public Safety • Glendale Ranked #10 on Forbes “America’s Safest Cities” list. Forbes based their ranking from an analysis of violent crimes and fatal traffic accidents within the larger cities throughout America. • Received $136,960 in federal stimulus funding to enhance the ability of the Police Department to investigate and support the successful prosecution of domestic violence offenders. • Hosted the first Annual Statewide Domestic Violence Training Summit with $41,000 in grant money from the Governor’s Office on Children, Youth and Families. • Glendale became the first municipal police department in the valley to utilize in-car video technology in its full fleet of patrol cars. The dash-mounted cameras capture visual and audio recordings that can prove useful for crime prevention and in investigations. Funding came from a $940,000 federal appropriation in 2008. • 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 Continuous Chest Compressions and personal safety. 113 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council Quality Economic Development • • • • • Filled more than one million square feet of office and industrial space and attracted more than 1,000 jobs in two targeted industries: healthcare and education, in spite of slow economic growth nationwide. Celebrated the opening of DeVry University’s fourth Arizona location at Westgate City Center. The campus occupies approximately 18,000 square feet of space and brings dozens of new professional jobs to the city. Opened the new 51,000 square-foot headquarters of Waterous, one of the world’s leading mobile firefighting equipment manufacturers, in Glendale. Selected by Linamar Solar Systems for its new Power Conversion Unit production facility. Linamar Solar signed a five-year lease for a 76,000 square-foot industrial building in Glendale’s Airpark. Welcomed millions of travelers to the West Valley for sports and entertainment events in Glendale, boosting the economy with tourism dollars. A Vibrant City Center • Transformed the 10-year old Glendale Visitor Center into a state-sanctioned Convention and Visitors Bureau. • Welcomed Southwest Ambulance to Downtown Glendale. Arizona’s largest ambulance provider has chosen Glendale’s Centerline as the location for its West Valley Operations Facility. • Continued to support Glendale’s signature special events which draw 500,000 people per year to the downtown. • Completed the Centerline Walkway Project, a beautifully landscaped walkway between Glendale Avenue and Glenn Drive, complete with seating areas, brick walkways and new lighting funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). • Approved the Glendale Overlay District which helps support businesses in the Centerline District. • Developed Artwerks Lateral 58, a new element of the Glendale Centerline, designed to bring artists to the area and highlight the downtown shops and restaurants while showcasing artists and their work. 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 14 West Valley communities. Advanced the statewide “Luke Forward” campaign to bring the new F-35 joint strike fighter mission to Luke Air Force Base. In its first 12 months, over 20,000 supporters registered on LukeForward.com and nearly $25,000 has been raised to privately underwrite the initiative. 114 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council • • Worked with Fighter Country Partnership to engage the public to participate in the F-35 Environmental Impact Study (EIS) process. As a result, Luke’s first EIS meetings posted a record for the number of written citizen comments submitted in support of the F-35 mission. Mayor Scruggs continued to lobby on behalf of the city for congressional and Pentagon support for bringing the F-35 mission to Luke AFB. High Quality Services for Citizens • Continued the process of updating the Parks and Recreation Master Plan with input from local interest groups, community organizations and businesses, public officials and private citizens. • Renovated and redesigned the sports complex at Sahuaro Ranch Park. Upgrades focused on shade; “green” improvements; and efficiencies in electrical, water and other costs. The design added two multipurpose fields to the original ball field design to support youth soccer, football and other organized activities. The new design increases comfort and capacity of the seating areas for viewing events and the fields are now completely handicapped accessible. Approximately 72,000 games have been played at the complex since it opened in 1986. • Expanded Glendale’s recycling program to include Plastics #1-7. By including Plastics #1-7, the overall amount recycled will increase and the amount of waste going to the landfill will be reduced. • Offered help to Glendale families who were homeless or in danger of losing a safe place to live with an additional $316,132 of funds awarded to the city of Glendale. The federal funds were part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. • For the 16th consecutive year, received a “high performer” rating from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for Glendale’s Community Housing Division. • Continued GO Transportation program efforts which have resulted in expanded transit services, enhanced traffic flow and safety on Glendale streets and at intersections, and further development of bicycle and pedestrian enhancements throughout the city. • Received federal grant funding for transit projects that otherwise may have been cut as fixed route bus service was impacted in all valley cities. • With a Department of Energy grant, completed the conversion to LED lights throughout Glendale. The grant enabled 30 intersections to be converted, making all of Glendale’s 190 signalized intersections equipped with LED lighting. The higher quality lamps will require less maintenance, resulting in fewer lane closures due to repairs. • Received a $1.2 million boost from federal grants awarded to improve air quality and reduce roadway congestion. The grants, which funded the design phase of five projects, expanded the city’s use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) for its traffic network. • Garnered an Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant to expand Glendale’s educational offerings beyond water conservation to other topics of green living. 115 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Mayor and City Council Interesting Facts The Glendale Civic Center broke all attendance records this past year, and once again, was voted one of the best venues in the state for meetings, events, weddings and conferences in the Phoenix Business Journal’s “Ranking Arizona.” Camelback Ranch – Glendale, the home of the Chicago White Sox and Los Angeles Dodgers, was named winner of a 2010 WESTMARC Best of the West Award in the “Attractions, Entertainment & Destinations” category in the West Valley. 116 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Mayor FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual (1000) Office of the Mayor Total - Mayor BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $339,466 $334,216 $334,216 $333,342 0% $339,466 $334,216 $334,216 $333,342 0% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $309,306 $23,512 $323,181 $18,087 $323,181 $18,087 $335,289 $18,087 4% 0% Internal Premiums $3,329 $3,512 $3,512 $3,427 -2% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $3,319 $3,076 ($13,640) $3,076 ($13,640) $2,821 ($26,282) -8% 93% $334,216 $334,216 $333,342 0% Total - Mayor STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Office of the Mayor Total -Mayor $339,466 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 4 4 4 4 0% 4 4 4 4 0% 117 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 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 2010 Actual $72,452 $74,501 FY 2011 Budget $69,187 $94,377 FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $54,162 $79,693 $99,446 $99,213 44% 5% $65,160 $74,685 $59,656 $104,581 40% (1000) Council Office (1000) Ocotillo District $511,669 $66,586 $445,694 $92,131 $445,694 $75,988 $489,998 $99,223 10% 8% (1000) Sahuaro District $76,257 $76,829 $56,923 $99,264 29% (1000) Yucca District $80,694 $69,352 $55,337 $99,258 43% $947,319 $922,255 $827,453 $1,090,983 18% Total - Council Office BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $791,145 $745,504 $745,504 $820,134 10% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $133,082 $12,218 $174,969 $14,858 $80,167 $14,858 $298,933 $14,865 71% 0% Internal Service Charges $10,874 Work Order Credits Total - Council Office $947,319 $10,322 $10,322 $9,764 -5% ($23,398) ($23,398) ($52,713) 125% $922,255 $827,453 $1,090,983 18% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Barrel District 1 1 1 1 0% (1000) Cactus District (1000) Cholla District 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0% 0% (1000) Council Office 7 6 7 7 17% (1000) Ocotillo District (1000) Sahuaro District 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0% 0% STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Yucca District Total -Council Office 1 1 1 1 0% 13 12 13 13 8% 118 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Attorney's Office CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Craig Tindall 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. Department Description: The City Attorney is appointed by the City Council and acts as legal adviser to the city, its officials, departments, as well as boards and commissions on matters that affect the conduct of city business. The City Attorney’s Office represents the city in all legal proceedings and directs the legal services provided by outside counsel. The office also prepares resolutions, ordinances and related legal documents for City Council consideration in order to implement adopted city policy, draft and review all contracts considered by the city, and issue opinions on a variety of municipal matters. The City Attorney’s Office works closely with the Police Department with ongoing training of its officers relating to state and city laws. The office is responsible for prosecuting any misdemeanor violation that occurs within the city limits including violations of Glendale City Code, DUI and domestic violence cases. The office also handles conflict cases for other cities as well as the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Provide high quality, professional and timely legal services to the Mayor, Council and city staff. One community with high quality services for its citizens. Continue to provide excellent legal and procedural guidance to City Council and administrative bodies as needed for city operations. Attend 100% of the meetings or hearings as needed or requested. Develop strong relationships with departments and attend 100% of the meetings or hearings as needed or requested. Time Commitment Goal is an ongoing effort. Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Challenges None. 119 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Attorney's Office Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Work to ensure 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. Goal is an ongoing effort. Time Commitment Expected Challenges Budget constraints. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Through a Governor’s Office of Highway Safety grant, laptops and printers were purchased and wireless hubs installed in the court house for the prosecutors. The equipment made it possible to create plea agreements, receive documents from the Motor Vehicle Division, receive and communicate with the office by e-mail, access the Office JustWare Program and print while anywhere in the courthouse. Consequently, the prosecutors have seen an improvement in their overall management of their cases as well as improvement reduction in the amount of time required by both prosecutors and support staff to complete their duties. 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 its 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 120 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Attorney's Office 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. Budget constraints. Obstacles/Challenges Goal FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Continue to utilize the case management system for the City Prosecutor’s Office along with utilizing 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 Related Council 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. Was the goal met? What were the Attend 100% of the meetings/hearings as needed or requested. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Serve the people of Arizona by assuring the consistent and ethical application of criminal justice. One community committed to public safety. Yes. Obtain 85% conviction rate or plea agreements on misdemeanor charges. None. 121 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual $3,527,908 $2,321,104 (1000) Outside Legal Fees Total - City Attorney BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2011 Budget $0 $2,339,684 FY 2011 Estimate $0 $2,458,342 FY 2012 Budget $0 $2,384,723 Percent Over FY 2011 Budget NA 2% $0 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 0% $5,849,012 $2,839,684 $2,958,342 $2,884,723 2% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $2,190,800 $2,290,892 $2,409,550 $2,461,073 7% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $3,617,525 $32,558 $628,336 $32,802 $628,336 $32,802 $628,336 $30,586 0% -7% Internal Service Charges $8,129 Work Order Credits $8,340 ($120,686) Total - City Attorney STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) City Attorney Total -City Attorney $5,849,012 $2,839,684 $8,340 ($120,686) $2,958,342 $7,818 ($243,090) $2,884,723 -6% 101% 2% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 28 26 27 27 4% 28 26 27 27 4% 122 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure City Clerk's Department CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Pam Hanna Mission Statement: To constantly maintain superior service to the citizens, elected officials and staff by providing an accurate and current legislative record including the Glendale City Code Book; a comprehensive and accessible records management system; a responsible and effective public notification program; an impartial and efficient municipal election, campaign finance, and redistricting process and other public services such as processing public record requests, recording documents, preparing City Council minutes and retaining permanent city records. Department Description: The City Clerk’s Department informs the public regarding: • What the city is planning by publishing and posting meeting agendas and public notices to both the official notice board and City Clerk’s Internet page. • The actions taken at public meetings by preparing the minutes of the City Council meetings and making the minutes of all meetings available. All City Council and other city board minutes are posted on the City Clerk’s Internet page. The City Clerk’s Department manages: • The City Charter and Code Book and makes it available in our office and on the Internet so the public can research and know the laws, processes and regulations of the city. The City Clerk’s staff responds to inquiries regarding public notices, minutes, agendas, ordinances, resolutions, contracts, elections, charter and code book. • The city’s records management program; staff directs the processing, organizing, and storing of all the records. The Records Center is where thousands of records are stored, scanned and/or microfilmed. Public records are made available upon request. The City Clerk’s Department plans and conducts municipal elections protecting our citizens’ right to participate in municipal government. Voter outreach is conducted through in person voter registration and permanent early voter events. Permanent early voting is emphasized for two reasons – it makes voting easier for citizens and voter turnout increases. Voters are also educated about city elections using the webpage, legal notices and press releases to the media. Assistance is also offered to citizens who may wish to run for office. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Successful completion of city charter. State and federal statutes mandate redistricting of the existing six council districts to reflect changes in population and demographics pursuant to the 2010 Decennial Census. One community with high quality services for citizens. 123 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Clerk's Department Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Coordination of interdepartmental Redistricting Committee; coordination of consultants activities; data collection/analysis; development of data base/mapping; scheduling/hosting public meetings; development/ execution of Internet page and citizen outreach plan, and managing submittal process to Maricopa County/Justice Department. City Council and Justice Department approval of 2011 City of Glendale Redistricting Proposal. Anticipated daily time commitment for six months is anticipated as follows: 50% or more for City Clerk; 45% Deputy City Clerk; 35% for Record Supervisor; 20% Management Aide and 6 hours monthly for each of the seven interdepartmental members of the Redistricting Committee. The greatest challenges are the time constraints imposed by the Oct. 1, 2011 submittal deadline to the Justice Department and Maricopa County; this complex process involves input from citizens, city officials, key staff, as well as mandated legal requirements and public meetings. Completion of Parks and Recreation Department Pilot Project group that is conducting an electronic purging of expired documents according to the city’s retention schedules. The goal of this endeavor is to create a reproducible manual that can be used to conduct electronic purges of department files on a regular basis. The long-term goal is to hold an annual Electronic Records Purge Day. One community with high quality services for citizens. A step-by-step electronic purging process is being developed and implemented within the City Clerk’s Department. This electronic purging process will be documented and is the basis of a pilot project in the Parks and Recreation Administration Division. Eligible documents will be identified per the retention schedule. The records will be documented and then electronically purged. This pilot project will demonstrate how a reduction in expired documents can measurably replenish server space and reduce organizational costs, as well as save employee time when searching for information. The pilot project will include training, electronic document identification, and documentation of documents purged. Time spent will be intermittent for three staff members and it is anticipated that it will be completed in a six month timeframe. Additional projects will follow in other departments. 124 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Clerk's Department Expected Challenges The expected challenges are scheduling the time necessary and ensuring all steps are completed. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Searching capabilities were improved by adding an additional field to the electronic record management contract index. Due to the increasing number of requests for contracts and additional questions about the City Council meeting approval dates, the contract process was modified to include this information as an ongoing searchable field at no additional cost to the city. Accomplishments: • Updated the City Clerk Services Manual. The manual is an aid to employees of other departments doing business with the City Clerk’s Department; training on City Clerk’s Services held with the objective of the familiarizing employees with our processes, the services manual, and to answer specific questions. • The 2010 Primary and General Elections were completed, with the approval of the Canvass of Votes by the City Council. Election process includes a myriad of legal, managerial, and intergovernmental processes. • Purge Day was held in January, partnering with Field Operations, Landfill, Material Recovery Facility and Materials Controls. The City Clerk’s Department and 26 departments purged 459 banker boxes or 84 recycle cans, resulting in 17,300 pounds of recycled paper. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Plan and initiate voter outreach events. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, with events occurring in August 2010 at Freshman Orientation Day at ASU West; March 2011 at the Green Festival at the Main Was the goal met? Library; April 2011 at the International Festival at Glendale Community College and West CultureFest at ASU West. All voter outreach events were located within the city hosting regional events held during peak time such as weekend or evening What were the for greatest potential contact; support by three volunteers from the Performance Measures? Mayor’s Youth Advisory Commission and two volunteers from local colleges/universities. Obstacles/Challenges Events were held on nights and weekends and it was a challenge to hold more due to limited staff availability at these times. 125 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Clerk's Department Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Plan and conduct records management classes for the organization. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Two classes were held, one focused on records management and one City Clerk Services class conducted for the organization. Classes were interactive with questions and discussion. The Records Management Class had 17 participants from 12 What were the Performance Measures? departments. The City Clerk Services Class had 53 participants from 19 departments. Due to limited staff time and conflicting meeting times, lower Obstacles/Challenges attendance was noticed at these classes. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Scanned closed court case files to reduce offsite storage fees. Accomplishments: • City Court scanning project resulted in over 8000 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 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 Goal purchases. Limit purge of records to records retained past the retention period and duplicate records. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal 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 outlining Was the goal met? 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. 126 Return to OP Bdgt 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 127 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $379,779 $1,499 $397,551 $137,723 $397,551 $55,108 $372,249 $111,556 $143,981 $140,727 $140,727 $134,634 -4% $525,259 $676,001 $593,386 $618,439 -9% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget -6% -19% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $450,997 $492,954 $492,954 $488,853 -1% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $57,149 $12,849 $194,196 $10,862 $111,581 $10,862 $166,092 $9,139 -14% -16% Internal Service Charges $4,264 Work Order Credits Total - City Clerk $525,259 $3,427 $3,427 $3,203 -7% ($25,438) ($25,438) ($48,848) 92% $676,001 $593,386 $618,439 -9% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) City Clerk 4 4 4 4 0% (1000) Records Management 2 2 2 2 0% 6 6 6 6 0% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Total -City Clerk 128 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court CITY COURT Judge Finn Mission Statement: To provide a forum for prompt, fair and just resolution of cases in a professional, efficient and courteous manner. Department Description: Glendale City Court adjudicates criminal misdemeanors, city code violations, traffic violations, and certain juvenile offenses committed in the city of Glendale. In cases of domestic violence and harassment, the court issues protective orders. The court has the authority to issue search warrants for misdemeanors and felonies. Glendale City Court collaborates with numerous internal and external justice and community agencies to develop and implement programs to reduce recidivism and promote safe communities. Approximately 120,000 customers enter the court each year to conduct business. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Continue to process and adjudicate cases in accordance with state statutes, rules of the Supreme Court and the US Constitution, while maintaining superior customer service. One community with high quality services for citizens. Compile a monthly DUI case aging report to monitor adjudication status. Continually review docket settings to insure sufficient trial and pre trial conference calendar volume levels are maintained. No backlog observed on court calendared cases. Individual case terminations will continue to exceed case filings. This is an ongoing goal requiring daily review by court operations managers and staff as they prepare and disseminate all courtroom calendars. The court strives to maintain high efficiency levels in all business practices despite decreasing staffing levels. Develop additional electronic court forms to reduce costs and maximize staffing resources. One community that is fiscally sound. Use information technology solutions to create new electronic forms and improve existing forms. Decreased duplicating costs. 129 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court Time Commitment Expected Challenges This is an ongoing activity involving review and implementation by court administration and the court’s Systems Analyst. Extensive training on new forms will be conducted with all court clerks to alleviate apprehension and uncertainty with associated changes in policies and procedures. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Glendale City Court has increased the flexibility, frequency, and cost effectiveness of training its staff to meet annual judicial education requirements mandated by the Supreme Court. The court’s Training Coordinator organized a Faculty Skills Development (FSD) Training Team to conduct in-house training courses on a variety of judicial education topics. The FSD Training Team offers at least one training class per month to staff to supplement the court’s ongoing training calendar. During 2010, the Training Coordinator accredited 74 different classes, e-learning opportunities and independent learning modules including 29 on-site courses. Adding to its menu of training opportunities, Glendale City Court serves as a satellite receptor site for statewide broadcast events sponsored by the Arizona Supreme Court and other entities. Accomplishments: • Arizona law enables misdemeanant domestic violence offenders with one prior conviction to be placed on felony-level supervision offered by the Maricopa County Adult Probation Department. In Glendale City Court, a caseload of such defendants is actively supervised in the community by a specialized domestic violence probation officer/surveillance officer team. In late 2010 this probation team assisted the court in developing a monthly review calendar for all second-offense domestic violence offenders. These individuals are summoned to Court for a formal review of their compliance status toward counseling orders and financial sanctions. Noncompliant defendants face added punishment, such as community service and/or incarceration. Since this process was implemented, probation officers report that defendants are more actively engaged in complying with the conditions of their probation directives. • Glendale’s Treatment Court Program for DUI and domestic violence defendants recorded its 5,000th successful graduate this year. For six years, this specialized court has insured offender accountability through frequent judicial oversight and close monitoring of sentencing conditions. Looking forward through fiscal years 2011 and 2012, the court will phase out all DUI cases from the Treatment Court program and instead closely monitor these cases under separate review hearings. The result will be a specialized Treatment Court dedicated solely to monitoring domestic violence defendants. A recent court study on program outcomes and effectiveness of Treatment Court helped initiate this change, which will lead to better allocation of court staffing resources. Treatment Court is a past recipient of the Arizona Supreme Court’s “Justice for a Better Arizona” Achievement Award. 130 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court GOAL UPDATES Goal Increase defendant compliance rates with court financial obligations. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal An automated financial contracts module has been designed and deployed through the Court’s AZTEC Wizard case management system. Phone calls to defendants are now triggered after the first Was the goal met? missed payment. The contracts module is saving staff time through reduced direct contact with the public. Implemented new fines collection strategies to increase defendant What were the Performance Measures? compliance. Comprehensive training and project updates were necessary to insure staff was comfortable with new business practices. Sufficient staffing levels are directly correlated to effectively processing the Obstacles/Challenges volume of revenue-generating phone calls arising from the new contracts module. However, reduced staffing levels have accompanied deployment of the contracts module. Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? 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. • Jail Court calendaring modifications allowed the elimination of inmate transportation to Jail Court each Thursday morning, which achieves direct cost savings for the Police Department’s prisoner maintenance budget. • The Court Jail Efficiencies Committee worked with the City Prosecutors Office to recommend changes in custody policies to save additional jail costs. When automated detention databases reveal a Glendale inmate is also being held in custody from another jurisdiction, that defendant is now released on their own recognizance to insure Glendale does not incur the incarceration costs. The defendant remains in custody on the alternate jurisdiction’s charge. Since June 2010, bookings of 83 Glendale defendants were avoided due to custody holds from other jurisdictions. Had these defendants been booked, a minimum of $15,600 in costs would have been incurred for the first jail day alone. • Jail expenditures paid by the Glendale Police Department to the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office were reduced by more than $214,000 between fiscal years 2009 and 2010, in part due to the work of the Court Jail Efficiencies Committee. 131 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court • Home detention with electronic monitoring and random alcohol testing continues to provide substantial cost savings. During 2010, 305 defendants successfully completed their home detention sentencing requirements for a total of 9,069 days of electronic monitoring in lieu of incarceration. Had these 9,069 days been spent in jail, more than $667,000 would have been incurred in jail costs. All defendants are carefully screened to preclude home detention participation by violent offenders. What were the Reduced jail court operational costs for the city of Glendale. Performance Measures? Proposed legislative bills on home detention require close Obstacles/Challenges monitoring for potential impacts on court and detention operations. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Glendale City Court collaborated with the Police Department to recruit a fulltime, 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. 132 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Court GOAL UPDATES Achieve full compliance to the Arizona Supreme Court’s DUI case processing plan. One community committed to 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 Performance Measures? Defender, police representatives and court administration is 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. Delayed evidence laboratory test results from the Department of Public Safety crime lab and other discovery issues contributed to Obstacles/Challenges case processing delays. Goal 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 implemented What were the Performance Measures? 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 fines. As of Obstacles/Challenges December 2009, we have projected a minor deficit in this account. Staff is currently reviewing options to cover this shortage. Goal 133 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department City Court FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) City Court (1240) Court Security FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $3,868,393 $267,285 $3,578,010 $393,300 $3,578,010 $278,500 $3,387,792 $398,469 -5% 1% (1240) Court Time Payments $23,659 $127,394 $93,765 $128,391 1% (1240) Fill the Gap $58,840 $57,000 $9,000 $57,000 0% $4,218,177 $4,155,704 $3,959,275 $3,971,652 -4% Total - City Court BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $3,512,619 $636,928 $3,682,198 $552,826 $3,682,198 $355,850 $3,492,263 $682,441 Internal Premiums $31,524 $31,940 $31,940 $30,163 -6% Internal Service Charges $37,106 $57,251 $57,798 $43,079 -25% ($276,294) 64% $4,218,177 $4,155,704 Work Order Credits ($168,511) Total - City Court STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) City Court (1240) Court Security $3,971,652 -4% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 48 1 42.75 1 40.75 1 40.75 1 -5% 0% 1 1 1 0% 49 44.75 42.75 42.75 -4% (1240) Court Time Payments Total -City Court ($168,511) $3,959,275 -5% 23% 134 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Finance Budget & Financial Services Finance Management & Budget FINANCE Diane Goke Mission Statement: The Finance Department’s mission is to provide responsible financial management and exemplary customer services with integrity. Department Description: The Finance Department’s main responsibilities are debt management, banking services, investment management, and financial analysis for the city. Finance also provides financial information to the public, state agencies, bond holders, grantors, auditors, city management, and the City Council. The Accounting Services Division prepares external financial reports, manages the city payroll process, pays vendors, and provides financial management consulting to departments. The License/Collection Division administers the sales tax code to ensure compliance and is responsible for the collection of accounts receivable. The Customer Service Office bill customers for utility services, processes cash receipts and provides overall customer service to citizens. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Eliminate routine paper checks. One community that is fiscally sound. Promote and advocate the benefits of e-payments, electronically paid payroll. Direct measure in staff hours used to print, fold, stuff, dispense, mail and follow-up on paper checks. Measurement in cost savings of postage, envelops, check forms, and banking hours spent on reconciliation of payroll checks. This goal could be implemented within a few months. 135 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Finance Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges If not mandated by management the process will be difficult to achieve. Those employees that currently remain on paper checks are those most resistant to utilizing other methods of receiving their paychecks. Implement an automated sales tax filing process that is available online. One community that is fiscally sound. Implement an electronic sales tax system, set up taxpayer registration and log-in, publicize the service and engage in other taxpayer education efforts. Reduced volume of mail, walk-in customers and number of sales tax returns and payments processed manually. The goal requires an ongoing effort, but the first year will focus on attaining 25% of taxpayer participation. Earning taxpayer trust and willingness to participate; unforeseen technical issues that come with electronic system implementations. Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Transition outlying departments to a more self-sufficient centralized cashiering process. One community that is fiscally sound. Create and promote a pilot program of one outlying department recording their deposits via central cashier system. Pilot department will enter daily receipts saving transportation time of paperwork to city hall. Time Commitment Six months. Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Challenges Training resources and time due to limited staff. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Due to enhanced functionality in the cities new municipal billing system, customers’ final bills are processed at an expedited rate enabling them to receive their deposit refund weeks earlier compared to the cities previous municipal billing system. Accomplishments: • On February 7, 2011 the Sales Tax Division implemented a new sales tax system-“Tax Mantra.” Tax Mantra provides effective, flexible management of the city’s current and 136 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Finance • future tax and licensing needs. Special features include E-Tax an electronic online tax return service for customer, and I-Capture which takes a visual scan of information and converts it into electronic data. Benefits of Tax Mantra include: integration of ecommerce capabilities like online license applications, online tax return filing, customer account detail self-management, and online tax return payments. Tax Mantra also allows for payments of other system balances, dynamic query and reporting capabilities for management, integration with other city database systems, daily postings to the general ledger, data mining capabilities, document management and ADA compliance. Successfully cross trained Accounts Payable and Cashiering staff so they have the skills and knowledge to be utilized at high peak times between the two business units. High peak times constitute heavy lobby traffic in the customer service lobby and/or Lockbox for Utility and Sales Tax payments. High peak times in the accounts payable constitute seasonal peak periods during fiscal year end and annual reporting in January. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Compile financial information to produce an approved Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). One community that is fiscally sound. Goal was met. City received the GFOA Certificate of Achievement. Implementing the Governmental Accounting Standards Board’s new pronouncements for accounting for intangible assets. To document and complete an implementation plan for the Government Accounting Standards Boards (GASB) Statement No. 54. One community that is fiscally sound. On track to meeting the goal by fiscal year end 6/30/2011. Completion of an implementation plan that meets or exceeds the GASB standards. None. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The Accounting Services 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. 137 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Finance 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 Goal Related Council Goal 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. Yes. The billing system was implemented and reduced the number 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. Was the goal met? Goal Related Council Goal Compile financial information to produce an award winning approved CAFR. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes. Was the goal met? Received the GFOA Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in What were the Performance Measures? Financial Reporting. Obstacles/Challenges None. 138 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Finance FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual (1000) Accounting Services (1000) Finance Administration $865,271 $497,667 (1000) L.I.D. Administration (1000) License/Collection (1282) Arena Management Fee (1780) Arena Renewal and Replacement FY 2011 Budget $912,836 $394,610 FY 2011 Estimate $912,836 $498,438 FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $848,492 $531,275 -7% 35% $0 $9,000 $9,000 $0 -100% $869,194 $0 $805,900 $0 $805,900 $0 $665,368 $20,000,000 -17% NA $332,000 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 (1790) AZSTA - Stadium Tax Refund $1,627,000 $1,700,000 $1,700,000 $1,745,900 3% (2360) Customer Service Office $2,318,790 $2,659,473 $2,598,968 $2,963,088 11% $6,509,922 $7,031,819 $7,075,142 $27,304,123 288% Total - Finance BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits Total - Finance FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 0% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $3,799,768 $2,736,431 $4,100,628 $3,092,321 $4,205,456 $3,030,816 $4,111,403 $23,393,660 $67,926 $74,922 $74,922 $87,901 17% $32,466 ($126,669) $49,107 ($285,159) $49,107 ($285,159) $37,418 ($326,259) -24% 14% $6,509,922 $7,031,819 $7,075,142 $27,304,123 0% 657% 288% STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Accounting Services (1000) Finance Administration 19 8 16 4 15 6 15 6 -6% 50% -18% (1000) License/Collection (2360) Customer Service Office Total -Finance 11 8.5 7 7 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 0% 73.5 64 63.5 63.5 -1% 139 Return to OP Bdgt 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 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $85,568 $1,717,724 $129,687 $4,236,574 $129,687 $4,236,574 $90,000 $403,075 -31% -90% $259,910 $160,000 $160,000 $199,687 25% (1980) 1980 Advisor Fees (2000) 2000 Advisor Fees $1,599 $0 $6,066 $1,030 $6,066 $1,030 $6,066 $1,030 0% 0% (2040) 2040 Advisor Fees $1,219 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 0% (2060) 2060 Advisor Fees $430 $6,857 $6,857 $6,857 0% (2080) 2080 Advisor Fees (2100) 2100 Advisor Fees $324 $290 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 0% 0% (2180) 2180 Advisor Fees $4,484 $5,213 $5,213 $5,213 0% (2210) 2210 Advisor Fees (2360) 2360 Advisor Fees $10,756 $1,410 $13,568 $3,289 $13,568 $3,289 $13,568 $3,289 0% 0% (2400) 2400 Advisor Fees $3,075 $17,222 $4,722 $17,222 0% (2420) 2420 Advisor Fees $824 $17,514 $5,014 $17,514 0% $2,087,613 $4,603,020 $4,578,020 $769,521 -83% Total - Lease Pmts/OtherFees BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Supplies and Contracts Total - Lease Pmts/OtherFees FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $2,087,613 $4,603,020 $4,578,020 $769,521 -83% $2,087,613 $4,603,020 $4,578,020 $769,521 -83% 140 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget MANAGEMENT & BUDGET Sherry Schurhammer Mission Statement: Management and 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. Department Description: The Management and Budget Department provides internal budget guidance and support services to all of the 34 departments within the city. Budget spearheads the budget planning and implementation process for the city as a whole, presents budget related information to the public in a clear and understandable way, and provides professional expertise to Mayor and Council on financial management decisions. The department provides citizens with information that is key to understanding the goals and priorities of the city. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities 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. • Prepare the annual Council workshop materials relating to the 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. • Maintain an open and responsive relationship with management, Council, and departments in order to anticipate information needs. 141 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget • Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Monthly expenditure and revenue reports are evaluated and follow up with departments occurs as needed. The FY 2012 operating and capital budgets and quarterly reports to Mayor and Council presented accurately and in a timely manner. • Positive recognition from GFOA on annual budget book. This goal reflects an ongoing time commitment from the Management and Budget department. Preparation of budget information is a consistent requirement of this department. Interpreting and presenting budget information in a way that is understandable can be challenging especially when dealing with complex budgetary issues. Leverage software technology systems that minimize manual processes, improve the accuracy and breadth of data collected, and enhance the evaluation and analysis of budget related data. One community that is fiscally sound. • Participate in the HRMS implementation and testing project scheduled for FY 2012 with an emphasis of improving the salary forecasting data used for the salary forecast model. • Continue participating on the core team for TALIS (the new sales tax and license software system) implementation to ensure the integrity of newly developed sales tax revenue reports as further system enhancements are implemented. The new sales tax revenue reports are expected to improve significantly the breadth of data collected and analyzed for comparing revenue performance to the budget as well as revenue forecasts. • Continue exploring and implementing improvements to the Business Intelligence (BI) system to enhance the budget to actual reports that departments use. • Work with departments to explore technology- based solutions to eliminate shadow systems and improve the analysis of budget related data. • Minimize “shadow systems” used for budget data in city departments. • Minimize manual processes and reduce potential errors due to the multiple entry of data or missing data. • Enhance the capabilities of software technology systems 142 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget Time Commitment Expected Challenges to improve the evaluation and analysis of budget-related data. This goal reflects an ongoing time commitment from the Management and Budget Department. Limited resources, implementation challenges, and unforeseen impacts all present potential challenges. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Cross trained two individuals in Management and Budget to assist the Finance department during the department’s off peak time. These staff members specifically focused on analysis related to a residential rental canvas of the city. This creative use of staff helped mitigate reduced staffing levels in Finance, provided development opportunities for Management and Budget staff and generated $15,318 of residential rental tax bills that were past due. It also created a potential future rental tax of $7,003 annually from the 25 audited rental properties. • Created enhanced BI reports for expenditure to budget data that improves the evaluation and analytic tools for departments across the city. This innovation allows departments to drill down into expenditure data details immediately as opposed to opening a new screen and sifting through volumes of data to see their particular expenditure details. This enhancement has made it much easier for departments to view and analyze their expenditure and budget data. Accomplishments: • Received the GFOA Distinguished Budget Award for the FY 2011 budget document by achieving the highest rating in accordance with award criteria. Received outstanding ratings from GFOA for sections within the budget document related to the book as a policy document, a financial plan, an operations guide and a communications device. 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. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes. • Monthly expenditure and revenue reports were consistently completed in a timely and accurate manner. What were the • The FY 2011 recommended operating and capital budgets and Performance Measures? quarterly reports to Mayor and Council were presented accurately and in a timely manner. Was the goal met? 143 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget • Obstacles/Challenges The FY 2011 annual budget book received the GFOA’s Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. None. 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 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. GOAL UPDATES • 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. 144 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Management & Budget One community that is fiscally sound. Yes. • 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 management. What were the 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 Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Actively participate in the development, testing and implementation of a new sales tax and business license reporting system. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? • 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 What were the team that is evaluating current processes to develop a new Performance Measures? database system that maximizes customization and minimizes manual processes. • The new system is scheduled to be implemented and fully operational by October 2010. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 145 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Management & Budget FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Budget & Research (1000) Grants Administration (1840) Grant Match Funds - Mgt & Bdgt Total - Management & Budget BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual $636,466 $142,038 FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate $646,768 $65,164 $646,768 $65,164 FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $622,329 $58,653 -4% -10% $57,271 $0 $0 $0 NA $835,775 $711,932 $711,932 $680,982 -4% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $755,673 $709,218 $709,218 $721,164 2% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $66,664 $10,703 $28,206 $7,539 $28,206 $7,539 $22,037 $7,066 -22% -6% Internal Service Charges $2,735 Work Order Credits Total - Management & Budget STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Budget & Research (1000) Grants Administration Total -Management & Budget $835,775 $4,936 $4,936 $4,700 -5% ($37,967) ($37,967) ($73,985) 95% $711,932 $711,932 $680,982 -4% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 0% 6 6 6 6 1.5 1 1 1 0% 7.5 7 7 7 0% 146 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Grants FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual (1840) DV Pilot Project Grant (1840) Miscellaneous Grants FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $161,630 $596,802 $66,606 $7,274,833 $66,606 $5,490,730 $68,219 $8,626,542 $0 $986,000 $180,000 $806,000 -18% $0 $731 $35,000 $172,519 $2,401 $8,882 $87,599 $162,906 150% -6% -68% (1842) ARWRF Facility UV System Imp (1842) Build Safe Engy Prog Enhance (1842) Energy Matters Public Educat (1842) Main Library Lighting 2% 19% $0 $431,831 $295,000 $136,831 $2,813 $234,150 $13,311 $218,026 -7% $0 $0 $88,000 $140,000 $56,000 $65,000 $32,000 $75,000 -64% -46% (1842) Traffic Signal LED Conversion $41,210 $84,000 $0 $42,790 -49% (1842) WebPortal (1842) Well 43 Variable Drive Retrofi $0 $0 $55,000 $97,500 $0 $22,500 $0 $75,000 -100% -23% $803,186 $9,665,439 $6,200,430 $10,330,913 (1842) Program Manager (1842) Public Safety/Court Lighting (1842) Sports Courts Lighting Retrofi Total - Grants BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $132,506 $489,441 $220,712 $466,844 Supplies and Contracts $671,018 $9,178,983 $5,982,703 $9,865,570 Work Order Credits ($338) Total - Grants $803,186 ($2,985) $9,665,439 ($2,985) $6,200,430 ($1,501) $10,330,913 7% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget -5% 7% -50% 7% STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget (1840) DV Pilot Project Grant 1 1 1 1 0% 1 1 1 1 0% Total -Grants 147 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE Ed Beasley 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. Department Description: The City Manager’s Office is responsible for seeking policy direction from Council and preparing recommendations for Council action in accordance with established strategic goals and key objectives; ensuring effective and efficient internal operations citywide; and establishing value-added programs and services for the citizens of Glendale. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Expand the INNOVATE program to include community outreach and communication, integration of technology, and continued employee education on LEAN methodology. One community with high quality services for citizens. • Continue utilizing Glendale University as a channel for communicating about INNOVATE. • Create a public access Internet page with INNOVATE information. • Utilize LEAN events to examine processes prior to implementation of new business systems citywide. • Continue to conduct annual recruitment and training and provide LEAN demonstrations to all departments. Educate Glendale citizens on the efforts that employees are making to ensure fiscal accountability and sustainability; ensure that funding spent on technology is effective; and ensure that all employees have an understanding of the INNOVATE program and toolkit. It is expected that these activities will be completed within the fiscal year. Ensuring appropriate resources are available to devote to these activities and enlisting continued support for the organizational culture change. 148 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Manager's Office Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Utilize the INNOVATE program to examine the internal Council Agenda preparation process to create a simplified and more efficient process for departments to submit items for Council agendas; and, decrease the level of difficulty in producing the final agenda. One community with high quality services for citizens. • Participate in a LEAN event. • Review and consider INNOVATE team recommendations. • Communicate impacts with affected parties. • Provide appropriate training and implement changes. • Create a process that reduces the amount of staff time necessary to submit an agenda item to the City Manager’s Office. • Eliminate duplication of work. • Reduce the quantity of printed materials necessary in the process. • Improve the quality of the final product for Council and citizens. • Create a simplified process that supports internal crosstraining efforts. Because this project will impact all departments within the organization, the City Council, and citizens, it is expected to require 4-6 months for complete implementation. Effectively communicating changes to the impacted stakeholders and enlisting their support. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Discontinued the practice of numbering Council Agenda items to accommodate the ability to add or remove items as needed without creating the need to re-number all items. This change has provided greater flexibility in the preparation process and reduced the amount of staff time required to accommodate unanticipated changes. Accomplishments: • Successfully executed a unique City Council retreat where line level employees made presentations on innovative solutions that have been implemented in their areas. This event was very informative and provided an opportunity to share a story with the City Council and the community about the importance of nurturing an innovative culture, as well as the simplistic nature of finding ways to work smarter and save money. 149 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Manager's Office • Continued to maintain value-added services and amenities for Glendale citizens despite the economic downturn by absorbing internal vacancies, being creative in service delivery, and capitalizing on opportunities to realign resources and services. GOAL UPDATES Encourage organizational change by empowering employees to utilize the INNOVATE program (LEAN methodology) for Goal streamlining everyday business practices to increase operational efficiency and explore new business concepts. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Under the new leadership structure with Chair and Co-Chair positions, the INNOVATE team implemented new program enhancements, recruited and trained new members, planned and Was the goal met? coordinated the Council Retreat presentations, and continued to take on several new projects. Implemented five program enhancements, trained 11 new team What were the members, received positive feedback on the Council Retreat Performance Measures? presentations, and took on 11 new projects. Retaining INNOVATE team members has been a challenge due to the fact that many employees are absorbing duties of other positions Obstacles/Challenges and have found it difficult to remain actively engaged on the team. Implement Council policy direction related to protecting and promoting the economic development and vitality of our community and safeguarding current economic investments. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal This is an ongoing goal, staff has worked continuously throughout the year to retain key tenants and bring new tenants to Glendale to Was the goal met? support economic vitality. A total of 1,085 new jobs have been located in Glendale through six What were the Performance Measures? employer expansion projects and three new business locates. The economic downturn has created challenges as well as ensuring the community has a good understanding of the city’s investment in Obstacles/Challenges strategic development and the losses that could result if we discontinue pursuing the protection of those investments. Goal 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. 150 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure City Manager's Office • 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 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 2011 What were the budget which incorporated public input sessions and was presented Performance Measures? 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 changes Obstacles/Challenges 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 What were the coordinated and hosted a new program called “Diversity Dialogue” Performance Measures? 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 multi-generational communications. Finding fun and exciting ways to ensure that employees engage in Obstacles/Challenges active participation of developing organizational diversity. Goal 151 Return to OP Bdgt 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 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $1,072,710 $959,252 $959,252 $895,124 -7% $1,072,710 $959,252 $959,252 $895,124 -7% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $963,793 $87,854 $852,046 $138,466 $852,046 $138,466 $859,242 $114,574 1% -17% Internal Premiums $8,967 $9,894 $9,894 $7,335 -26% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $4,459 $7,637 $5,068 $5,068 $2,543 -50% ($46,222) ($46,222) ($88,570) 92% $1,072,710 $959,252 $959,252 $895,124 -7% Work Order Credits Total - City Manager STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) City Manager Total -City Manager FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 9 7 7 7 0% 9 7 7 7 0% 152 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 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 2010 Actual (1000) Administration Services Admin. Total -Admin Svcs Admin. FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $435,786 $349,858 $152,316 -65% $443,943 $435,786 $349,858 $152,316 -65% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $436,314 $4,837 $448,383 $7,088 $343,555 $25,988 $144,459 $15,453 $2,444 $3,316 $3,316 $4,264 29% $895 ($23,896) $895 ($23,896) $2,645 ($14,505) 196% -39% $435,786 $349,858 $152,316 -65% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2011 Estimate $443,943 Internal Premiums Total - Admin Svcs Admin. FY 2011 Budget $348 $443,943 -68% 118% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 4 4 2 2 -50% 4 4 2 2 -50% 153 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget $221,567 FY 2011 Estimate $0 FY 2012 Budget $0 Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $0 NA $221,567 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $213,230 $3,398 Internal Premiums $2,676 Internal Service Charges Total - Fac & Fin Mgmt STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Facilities & Financial Mgmt Total -Fac & Fin Mgmt $2,263 $221,567 FY 2010 Actual 2 2 154 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Marketing/Communications Communications Marketing Glendale Civic Center MARKETING/COMMUNICATIONS Julie Frisoni Mission Statement: To develop and implement marketing and public relations programs, resident communications and visitor services that promote Glendale and ensure the city’s key messages are delivered to target audiences in an accurate, timely and cost-effective manner. Department Description: The Marketing/Communications Department consists of nine divisions, including the Public Relations Office, Special Events, Tourism and the new Glendale Convention & Visitors Bureau (CVB), Glendale 11, Glendale Media Center Operations, Web Services, Creative Services, Glendale Civic Center and Administration. Marketing/Communications produces and oversees Glendale’s print and electronic communications with the public and the media, as well as develops communication strategies and marketing campaigns that enhance the city’s image. The city’s special events, produced in this department, draw about a half million visitors to downtown Glendale annually. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Develop new strategic partnerships that can help crosspromote the city’s events and CVB efforts. Potential partners include the Centerline Arts Community; other Valley cities and CVBs; businesses in the Sports & Entertainment District and historic downtown Glendale; Camelback Ranch Glendale; Arrowhead Mall and the education community. One community with quality economic development. One community with high quality services for citizens. Partner with other businesses and community groups to raise awareness or increase exposure on city campaigns, events and CVB activities. Use partner databases to reach larger audiences and coordinate joint events. 155 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Marketing/Communications Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Additional dollars or in-kind trade from partners for joint events valued at $100,000; three joint familiarization media tours in support of tourism; at least five regional stories in the Arizona Republic for increased exposure. This is an ongoing effort of the Public Relations Office, CVB and Special Events; staff is committed to daily outreach. Coverage in some travel publications involve high expenses - a partnership can leverage some of these costs. City use of partners’ databases or social media could be limited. Attracting new events to the area is a high priority goal for the Office of Special Events this year. One community with a vibrant city center. One community with high quality services for citizens. These efforts require event research not only of the other cities, facilities and promoters in the region, but also of cities elsewhere in the state and country. We are looking to find events and activities that have the potential to be successful in such areas as the Historic Downtown, Westgate City Center and Camelback Ranch Glendale. We are also looking for promoters who are having success elsewhere with a particular format or event program that would consider relocating or adding one of their event productions to Glendale. The goal is attracting at least three new events to the city this year. At least two staff members will devote several hours weekly researching events and outreach to promoters. We compete with other locations, cities and facilities everyday to become the preferred site and/or partner in hosting new or relocated events in our city. Challenges include the limited budgets of festival producers and less willingness to expand events to new locations. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • A paid parking program was initiated for the first time at the two downtown garages during Glendale festivals. This process was conceptualized from an idea generated by the Marketing Department to generate revenue for the city’s General Fund and implemented by the Office of Special Events. 156 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Marketing/Communications • The department continues to expand the use of digital and social media in a variety of ways. Examples include the CVB use of Twitter and Facebook, downloadable brochures, e-newsletters and collateral; Glendale 11’s establishment of a secure online File Transfer Protocol site that allows media and clients to download video material 24/7 via a digital address provided by the city at minimal cost, and the Web Division’s use of special url’s that enable more accurate tracking of online advertising performance without paying for additional statistical reporting. Accomplishments: • The Marketing Department leveraged the 2011 Bowl Games for $2.2 million worth of local, regional and national media coverage on a budget of $7,500. • Glendale’s signature events won 6 national awards from the International Festivals and Events Association for Special Events and Glendale 11 programming. These awards are the highest recognition in festivals around the world, competing against such events as the Rose Bowl and the Kentucky Derby. • Glendale 11 and the web team developed a special live streaming video feed of the BCS championship game day, the Glitter & Glow Festival and the Chocolate Affaire; this allowed anyone with access to the Internet to click on what’s happening in Glendale to see live video of these special events. GOAL UPDATES Transition the Glendale Visitors Center into a new Glendale CVB to enhance tourism marketing efforts. One community with quality economic development. Related Council Goal The transition formally took place on July 1, 2010. Was the goal met? The Glendale CVB membership drive is underway and on track What were the Performance Measures? with a goal of 100 members for the first year. The tight economy has business and CVB partners also facing Obstacles/Challenges limited budgets. Goal Develop partnerships with businesses to maintain the quality of city festivals. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal The Office of Special Events has established new partnerships with businesses such as ABC15, Bookmans, Music & Arts and Arizona Catering which have increased publicity, advertising and exposure, Was the goal met? as well as enhanced our programming and onsite interactive offerings to attendees and the city’s attractiveness as a festival destination. Special Events increased the dollar value of the TV promotional schedule and the TV website value; included live studio interview What were the Performance Measures? segments before every event; planned remote weather broadcasts at each event and greatly enhanced publicity from the new TV partner Goal 157 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Marketing/Communications Obstacles/Challenges ABC15. The division also procured new budget relieving trade support from Music & Arts on sheet music and related items; new budget relieving programming and kids craft support from Bookmans and a new cooking demonstration program from Arizona Catering at the Civic Center was provided at no cost to the department. Although many businesses are reticent to take on new marketing costs, which can provide the department with budget relief, the department was fortunate in what it was able to accomplish this year. The department feels strongly that this is due in great part to the city of Glendale’s reputation as a major festival producer. This, combined with a strong history of attendance while providing great marketing value via community relations and branding exposure, is still a strong incentive for some of these partners to work with city festivals. 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 mostattended, highest-grossing entertainment event in the history of University of Phoenix Stadium. The event attracted 72,219 fans, about 1,000 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 yearGoal 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 six partners to more than 150 partners What were the from the West Valley. Representatives include hoteliers, Performance Measures? restaurateurs, meeting planners, venues and attractions. 158 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Marketing/Communications Obstacles/Challenges Continuing outreach to the entire West Valley and implementing a comprehensive print advertising campaign with limited funds. Maintain level of users for city’s three websites and continue cross promoting sites. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Visitor numbers were maintained as major sports and entertainment district events and news items played a large role in cross promoting What were the the city’s three websites. In addition, the Arizona Cardinals run to Performance Measures? the Super Bowl attracted a tremendous amount of visitors to the city’s websites. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 159 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $0 $716,250 $208,812 $707,169 $211,414 $707,169 $188,922 $666,655 -10% -6% $310,474 $304,676 $304,676 $277,840 -9% $1,053,346 $40,481 $934,636 $0 $987,264 $0 $853,849 $0 -9% NA (1000) Tourism $420,205 $335,747 $283,119 $215,385 -36% (1281) Mkt'g - Stadium Events $166,668 $106,500 $106,500 $106,500 0% (1870) Audio/Visual - Self Sust. (1870) Chocolate Affaire $0 $110,987 $31,118 $104,000 $31,118 $104,000 $0 $104,000 -100% 0% (1000) Marketing (1000) Special Events Prod. Support (1870) Convention & Visitors Bureau $0 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 0% (1870) Enchanted Evening (1870) Glitter and Glow $81,280 $83,263 $44,700 $95,500 $44,700 $45,500 $75,818 $94,000 70% -2% (1870) Glitter Spectacular $120,397 $99,000 $99,000 $99,000 0% (1870) Glitters Light $152,000 $155,798 $155,798 $155,798 0% (1870) Jazz Festival (1870) Other Special Events $183,231 $127,405 $158,000 $30,000 $158,000 $30,000 $158,000 $30,000 0% 0% NA (1870) Summer Band $1,506 $0 $1,500 $1,500 (1870) Tourism - Souvenir Program $2,967 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 0% $3,570,460 $3,350,656 $3,304,758 $3,062,267 -9% Total - Marketing and Comm. BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $2,211,254 $1,230,746 $2,384,707 $941,322 $2,382,732 $892,797 $2,200,166 $941,230 -8% 0% Internal Premiums $82,621 $135,168 $135,168 $117,038 -13% Internal Service Charges $45,839 $14,081 $18,683 $16,300 16% ($124,622) ($124,622) ($212,467) 70% Work Order Credits Total - Marketing and Comm. $3,570,460 $3,350,656 $3,304,758 $3,062,267 -9% STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Audio/Visual (1000) Cable Communications 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 0% 0% -6% (1000) City-Wide Special Events 4 4 3.75 3.75 (1000) Marketing 14 10 10 10 0% (1000) Tourism 3.5 3.5 2.5 2.5 -29% 28.5 26.5 25.25 25.25 -5% Total -Marketing and Comm. 160 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Civic Center GLENDALE CIVIC CENTER Julie Frisoni Mission Statement: The Civic Center will provide high-quality meeting, event, banquet facilities and services to encourage local economic growth and promote a positive identity for the city of Glendale. Department Description: The Glendale Civic Center provides top-quality meeting, event, banquet facilities and services for Glendale’s growing population and the entire West Valley. Located in historic Downtown Glendale, the Civic Center has served more than one million attendees since our opening. The Civic Center fulfills its mission by providing superb guest services, products and facilities. In addition, the Civic Center maintains a high degree of fiscal responsibility that benefits not only the city, but the entire community. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Increase facility usage and revenue at the Glendale Civic Center. One community that is fiscally sound. One community with a vibrant city center. Increase the Civic Center’s identity through the Internet, cable programming, increased facility tours, sales collateral and face-to-face marketing at community and citywide functions. The Center will continue with our new e-blasts on a bimonthly basis to advertise specials and increase market awareness. Increase involvement with the Convention and Visitors Bureau and the Glendale Chamber of Commerce. Increase marketing opportunities by working with the Civic Center’s new caterer for in-house client receptions and other potential marketing and advertising sources. Increase facility usage by 2% and increase the Civic Center’s revenue production by 3% over FY 2011. This goal will be achieved through the efforts of the Civic Center staff throughout the fiscal year. This is a daily function of Civic Center staff and will be worked on accordingly. Economy-related issues, especially in the hospitality industry, have been challenging. The Civic Center staff will assess market trends and adjust efforts accordingly. 161 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Civic Center Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges The Civic Center has two revenue opportunities through technology services. The Audio/Visual (A/V) Division is now positioned to be a full time in-house audio team for all clients. This will assist clients with all A/V needs, create revenue and make the Civic Center a one-stop shop for rental needs. The second revenue opportunity is to use newly installed electronic reader boards to sell advertising. These high quality television monitors are located in public areas of the facility. They are viewed as directional signage and have the capability to offer advertising as well. We will promote this capability to local downtown businesses. Advertisers taking advantage of the opportunity will be showcased to attendees during Civic Center events throughout the year. One community that is fiscally sound. Working to expand menu items of A/V services for clients. Also, work with the Convention and Visitors Bureau to create an advertising program to sell the new electronic reader boards. By the end of the fiscal year, we look to the A/V Division to increase revenue by 20% from the previous year. For the electronic reader boards, we aim to solicit, at minimum, 15 downtown merchants to purchase the new advertising opportunity. This goal will be achieved through the efforts of the Civic Center staff in conjunction with the Convention and Visitors Bureau throughout the fiscal year. As with the entire business community, market conditions will affect the success of this goal. 162 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Civic Center FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Due to the downturn in the economy, businesses have been cutting back on just about everything, but most obviously on holiday functions for their staff. During the 2010 holiday season, the Glendale Civic Center in conjunction with its caterer, Arizona Catering, hosted its first annual Dine and Glitter Holiday Celebration. This event was marketed to businesses throughout the West Valley by utilizing the Civic Center and the Glendale Chamber of Commerce databases. We were successful in attracting five businesses owners and 150 of their employees. This function coincided with the Glendale Glitters celebration and for its first year it was considered a success. We partnered this event with this existing downtown attraction as added value to the businesses and their attendees. Accomplishments: • The Civic Center was rated in the top five meeting and convention centers in the entire state of Arizona through a business poll conducted by Arizona Business Magazine. • Wedding Wire named the Civic Center one of the top venues in the state as part of its 2011 Bride’s Choice Awards. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Increase facility usage and overcome obstacles set forth by the downturn in local and state economies. One community that is fiscally sound. One community with a vibrant city center. Yes. Increased attendance at the Civic Center by an estimated 23,000 What were the people (a 50% increase over last year) and increased event days by Performance Measures? 7% over the previous year. The current economy has resulted in some clients having to scale Obstacles/Challenges back their events due to their organizational budget restrictions. Was the goal met? Goal Related Council Goal Promote and sell the Civic Center’s new A/V capabilities to clients. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes. Was the goal met? What were the Increased A/V revenue by 25% over FY 2010. Performance Measures? Some clients have pulled back or forgone A/V due to the tight Obstacles/Challenges economy and restricted budgets. 163 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Glendale Civic Center FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • Now that the city’s A/V 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 A/V needs. This new addition allows the city to be the exclusive A/V 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 topnotch, high-end A/V 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. Related Council Goal One community with a vibrant city center. No, attendance at the Civic Center stayed the same from FY 2009 to FY 2010. Event days at the Civic Center are at about 90% of where they were What were the last year. The staff also increased the client database by 3% over Performance Measures? last year. Economy related issues especially in the hospitality industry have been challenging. The Civic Center staff is working hard to increase Obstacles/Challenges business in conjunction with the caterer, Fabulous Food. Was the goal met? 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 in What were the Performance Measures? client evaluations surveys for 2010. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 164 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $840,701 $748,497 $748,497 $766,817 2% $840,701 $748,497 $748,497 $766,817 2% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $625,425 $188,616 $553,721 $185,936 $553,721 $185,936 $562,736 $185,140 Internal Premiums $12,388 $12,910 $12,910 $12,024 -7% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $14,272 $14,151 ($18,221) $14,151 ($18,221) $16,422 ($9,505) 16% -48% $840,701 $748,497 $748,497 Total - Civic Center STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1740) Civic Center Total -Civic Center $766,817 2% 0% 2% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 7 6 6 6 0% 7 6 6 6 0% 165 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 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 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $221,114 $143,026 $316,256 $149,346 $316,256 $149,346 $274,515 $142,988 -13% -4% $364,140 $465,602 $465,602 $417,503 -10% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $98,391 $102,477 $102,477 $102,680 0% Supplies and Contracts $146,739 $186,774 $186,774 $178,496 -4% Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges $107,314 $11,696 $165,373 $16,380 $165,373 $16,380 $130,729 $16,005 -21% -2% $364,140 $465,602 Work Order Credits Total - Conv./Media/Parking STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Media Center Operations Total -Conv./Media/Parking ($5,402) ($5,402) $465,602 ($10,407) 93% $417,503 -10% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1 1 1 1 0% 1 1 1 1 0% 166 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Compliance and Asset Management Compliance & Asset Management City Auditor Materials Control Materials Management COMPLIANCE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT Candace MacLeod Mission Statement: • To conduct independent, objective assurance and consulting activities that add value and improve operations. • To augment the effectiveness of the tax dollar in the purchase of materials and services within the requirements of city code and state law. • To assist city departments with efficient and cost-effective warehousing, inventory control and disposal of surplus assets. Department Description: Compliance and Asset Management improves the effectiveness of risk management, control and governance processes by: • Providing audit and consulting services to city departments to identify and minimize business risks, maximize efficiencies, improve internal controls and strengthen accountability to Glendale’s citizens. • Working with city departments to ensure the procurement of goods and services is completed in a manner that is compliant with city code and state statutes. • Providing logistical support to departments by procuring and maintaining a secure, justin-time inventory of supplies for all city departments. • Selling surplus city assets at the best available price. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Allocate audit resources to the areas that pose the greatest risk to the city. One community that is fiscally sound. Develop a risk-based audit plan with focus on improved business processes. A quarterly risk-based audit plan with focus on improved business processes. 167 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Compliance and Asset Management Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Ongoing review and adjustment of audit plan based on business risk. None. Ensure city assets are adequately safeguarded. One community that is fiscally sound. Centralize the ordering and storage of city assets under Materials Control. Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Assets are properly tracked and controlled. Time Commitment Ongoing process to ensure that assets are transferred to Materials Control. Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges None. Ensure the procurement code is current. One community that is fiscally sound. Update the procurement code to reflect changes that have occurred. Procurement code is current. Ongoing. Resources. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Utilized audit software tools to effectively facilitate audit testing procedures. • Streamlined procurement forms and processes to enhance communication and access to information. • Centralized storage of utilities and janitorial inventory under Materials Control. Accomplishments: • Completed 10 performance and information technology audits and follow-ups and four contract audits. • Performed 13 special projects at the request of management. • Maintained over 200 contracts with an estimated value in excess of $60 million. • Generated revenue from the sale of surplus assets. 168 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Compliance and Asset Management GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges 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 regulations. None. Allocate audit 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 processes. None. Reduce the manual processes through increased use of PeopleSoft functionalities. Improve employee skill sets in using PeopleSoft functions. One community that is fiscally sound. Yes. The revision of the procurement code has been deferred until completion of the FY 2011 budget development process and implementation of a PeopleSoft upgrade. Resources. 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, 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. 169 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Compliance and Asset Management GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges 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 processes. 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 regulations. None. 170 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Compliance & Asset Mgt FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) City Auditor (1000) Materials Control Warehouse (1000) Materials Management Total - Compliance & Asset Mgt BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $280,047 $358,043 $254,348 $295,037 $254,348 $295,037 $265,196 $279,552 $603,384 $388,224 $388,224 $163,126 -58% $1,241,474 $937,609 $937,609 $707,874 -25% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 4% -5% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $1,194,682 $929,263 $929,263 $728,531 -22% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $16,540 $18,038 $25,705 $20,888 $25,705 $20,888 $26,773 $17,064 4% -18% Internal Service Charges $12,214 -13% Work Order Credits Total - Compliance & Asset Mgt STAFFING BY PROGRAM $1,241,474 FY 2010 Actual $11,616 $11,616 $10,162 ($49,863) ($49,863) ($74,656) 50% $937,609 $937,609 $707,874 -25% FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) City Auditor 4.5 2 2.5 2.5 25% (1000) Materials Control Warehouse (1000) Materials Management 5.75 5 4.75 4 4.75 2 4.75 2 0% -50% 15.25 10.75 9.25 9.25 -14% Total -Compliance & Asset Mgt 171 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Building Safety Development Services Building Safety Code Compliance Planning BUILDING SAFETY Deborah Mazoyer 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. Department Description: The Building Safety Department is the central resource for building construction, code information, plan review, permit issuance and building construction inspection. The department consists of the building inspection, plan review, development services center and cross connection control divisions. Our core purpose is to protect the lives and safety of Glendale residents through the implementation of building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical codes. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Administer and enforce construction codes and development regulations that produce a safe, durable, efficient, accessible, and sustainable built environment. One community with high quality services for citizens. Implement customer service enhancements at the public counter by offering services to improve responsiveness to our development customers. Review times for plans and applications will be reduced by 40%. Time Commitment Implementation goal is June 30th, 2011. Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Challenges Goal Time commitment for cross training of staff. Administer and enforce construction codes and development regulations that produce a safe, durable, efficient, accessible, and sustainable built environment. 172 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Building Safety Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) One community with high quality services for citizens. Analyze and develop code amendments towards the adoption of the 2012 International Energy Code. Have staff fully trained on the new energy code and procedures. Time Commitment Staff trained and code ready to adopt by June 30th, 2011. Related Council Goal Activities Expected Challenges Challenge to provide training for staff has been overcome by financial resources provided by an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • The department is currently involved with the Innovate Team on several processes. The certificate of occupancy process at the completion of a development project is one of the most complex as it involves over six departments. The goal is to make this process easier and less complex for both internal staff and the development customer. • Building Safety and Development Services Center have created classes that are being offered to the public to assist in understanding the permit process and why permits are necessary. Three classes are currently being offered: Permits 101, Solar Installations, and How to Build a Patio Cover. We have partnered with Home Depot to provide the patio cover class at their store. These classes have become popular with citizens who anticipate building a project, or simply have questions about why permits are necessary. • The group home process has been completed through the Innovate Team and is currently being implemented. Coordination of city requirements with outside agencies has become simplified and will actually save at least one trip to city hall for each applicant. Accomplishments: • Plans were approved and inspections continue for a 40,000 square foot school for WestMEC which will bring new education opportunities and jobs near the Glendale Municipal Airport. West-MEC’s new facility will provide training for individuals who wish to enter the airframe-power maintenance program and fulfill FAA licensing requirements. • Building Safety worked with the Police Department and has been successful in bringing over 15 businesses and residences into compliance with city regulations or in abating properties that were not able to be secured from entry. • Development Services has implemented a new phone system allowing staff to spend more time directly assisting customers at the counter and achieving a $400 per month cost savings. 173 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Building Safety GOAL UPDATES Provide responsive, proactive, efficient, consistent and costeffective service. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Monitoring and tracking progress on unsafe and damaged buildings continues to be an ongoing process. Quarterly status reports of all cases were reported to the Assistant Director. Additionally, a Was the goal met? database was maintained for Council and management to obtain status of cases as needed. Staff provides quarterly reports on status of all cases to Assistant Director and Assistant Deputy City Manager. Plus, maintain What were the Performance Measures? database for communicating regularly to Council and management of case workload and status of cases. On several occasions it was difficult to indentify and contact the resident’s legal owner, which prolonged the process. Also, due to Obstacles/Challenges the economy, several cases were not able to be abated in a timely manner due to the lack of resources of the property owner. Goal 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 Implementation of improvements in customer service at the public counter by cross training in other departments has enabled staff to Was the goal met? exceed the goal of reviewing over 20% of over-the-counter plans throughout the year. 20% of all over-the-counter plans will be reviewed through the oneWhat were the Performance Measures? stop shop by January 2011. Even with a reduction in staffing at the public counter, we were able to exceed this goal by continuing to cross train all staff in different Obstacles/Challenges areas of our department. 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 174 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Building Safety 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. • The Building Safety Department met the challenge of bringing many new economic development projects to fruition including Advanced Health Care, Phoenix Heart and Humana. • Streamlined the record retrieval system which included scanning over 67,000 permits and other permit related documents. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Publish departmental newsletter to increase public and customer awareness of development processes and requirements. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Publish newsletter quarterly, with each manager and supervisor What were the Performance Measures? submitting one article per newsletter. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Encourage and facilitate staff’s continued education and training to effectively and efficiently perform their duties. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Develop internal training programs for interpretation of codes and What were the Performance Measures? development regulations. Obstacles/Challenges None. 175 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Building Safety FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Building Safety (1000) Development Services Center (2400) Cross Connection Control Total - Building Safety BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits FY 2010 Actual $2,665,919 $568,993 FY 2011 Budget $1,980,628 $444,676 FY 2011 Estimate $1,979,628 $444,676 FY 2012 Budget $1,895,038 $425,102 Percent Over FY 2011 Budget -4% -4% $212,090 $220,067 $261,067 $225,125 2% $3,447,002 $2,645,371 $2,685,371 $2,545,265 -4% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $3,276,649 $2,532,664 $2,616,573 $2,566,247 Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $46,918 $66,052 $119,497 $64,111 $83,157 $64,111 $110,421 $50,443 -8% -21% Internal Service Charges $57,383 Work Order Credits Total - Building Safety STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Building Safety (1000) Development Services Center (2400) Cross Connection Control Total -Building Safety $3,447,002 1% $60,757 $53,188 $54,545 -10% ($131,658) ($131,658) ($236,391) 80% $2,645,371 $2,685,371 $2,545,265 -4% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 26 21 21 21 0% 10 2.75 6 2.75 6 2.75 6 2.75 0% 0% 38.75 29.75 29.75 29.75 0% 176 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Code Compliance CODE COMPLIANCE Sam McAllen Mission Statement: To maintain established community standards that preserve and promote the health, safety and living environment of the community and neighborhoods. Department Description: Code Compliance is responsible for enforcing multiple city codes that promote safe, clean, and healthy living environments for our community and neighborhoods. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Provide proactive code enforcement services in residential neighborhoods that promote a safe, clean, and healthy living environment for our community and neighborhoods. One community with strong neighborhoods. Conduct proactive code enforcement services in residential neighborhoods with the objective of eliminating code violations and preventing the negative impact of blight, deterioration, and unsafe conditions. Code Compliance staff will generate 10,000 proactive code compliance cases. This is an ongoing citywide effort that will continue throughout the year to proactively identify and address code violations while reducing the need for residents to report code violations. Staff may be challenged to conduct proactive inspections during times of significant increases in reports of code violations, such as during periods of significant vegetation growth following substantial precipitation. Maintain community standards that promote a safe, clean, and healthy living environment through prompt and effective response to citizen’s calls for service. One community with strong neighborhoods. Conduct responsive code enforcement services to ensure compliance with city codes and ordinances that eliminate unsafe conditions and prevent the deterioration of residential neighborhoods. Code Compliance adopted the goal of responding to 95% of citizen’s calls for service within 2 business days. 177 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Code Compliance Time Commitment Expected Challenges This is an ongoing citywide effort to provide prompt and efficient service to all residents of Glendale. Staff will be challenged to accomplish this goal due to current staffing levels and unavailability of staff due to mandatory furloughs and reduced weekday availability as Code Compliance inspectors are required to take time off due to providing weekend coverage. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • The Code Compliance Department is responsible for enforcing illegal sign violations including managing the removal of illegal signs that create visual blight along the city’s rights of way. For the past few years this has been accomplished by utilizing a combination of paid inspection staff and volunteers to remove illegal signs. With the reduction of inspection staff due to budget constraints, the task has become more difficult to accomplish. The use of volunteers to remove illegal signs was increased in an effort to maintain a safe, clean and appealing streetscape. This was accomplished by increasing the number of hours and days that volunteers work removing illegal signs. This increase in volunteer work time has allowed Code Compliance inspection staff the ability to concentrate on identifying and eliminating unsafe conditions and code violations within residential neighborhoods. Accomplishments: • Code Compliance staff and volunteers continued to remove the visual blight created by illegal temporary signs on the city’s right-of-way. A total of 12,936 signs have been removed from city right-of-way through February 2011. • Code Compliance Supervisor Jim Trammel and Code Compliance volunteers were featured in a News Channel 3 broadcast (November 18, 2010) highlighting the Department’s illegal sign enforcement and removal efforts. • Code Compliance utilized Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) funds to identify and eliminate blighted conditions within Glendale neighborhoods. CDBG funds were used to abate violations on 67 vacant and foreclosed properties at a cost of $9,234 through February 2011. • The Code Compliance Department contacted all political campaigns participating in the 2010 Primary and General Elections and informed them of Glendale’s political sign code and legal political sign posting requirements. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Provide proactive code enforcement services in residential neighborhoods that promote a safe, clean, and healthy living environment for the community. One community with strong neighborhoods. 178 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Code Compliance This goal is on track to be successfully completed. Through February 2011, Code Compliance staff has proactively generated 7,822 cases. Code Compliance staff will proactively generate 10,000 code What were the Performance Measures? compliance cases. No challenges encountered. Obstacles/Challenges Was the goal met? Maintain community standards that promote a safe, clean, and healthy living environment through prompt and effective response to Goal resident calls for service. One community with strong neighborhoods. Related Council Goal This goal has not been met. As of the end of February 2011, Code Compliance staff has responded to 91% of resident calls for service Was the goal met? within two business days. To ensure prompt response to calls for service Code Compliance What were the adopted the goal of responding to 95% of calls from citizens within Performance Measures? two business days. The primary obstacle contributing to this goal not being accomplished is the lack of inspection staff available to respond to resident calls on weekdays. This reduction is the result of less Obstacles/Challenges inspection staff, mandatory furloughs, and reduced weekday availability as Code Compliance inspectors are required to take time off on weekdays after they have provided weekend coverage. 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 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 operating budget. 179 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Code Compliance 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 blight conditions in residential neighborhoods. GOAL UPDATES Provide an increased level of proactive services in residential 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 quarter. Was the goal met? 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 the Obstacles/Challenges key challenge to meeting this goal. Goal 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 What were the neighborhood specific city code information. Performance Measures? • Update the department’s website and printed materials to include bilingual information. None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 180 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $1,468,073 $1,368,354 $1,368,354 $1,295,976 -5% $1,468,073 $1,368,354 $1,368,354 $1,295,976 -5% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $1,335,273 $48,599 $1,300,025 $56,866 $1,300,025 $56,866 $1,299,776 $51,108 0% -10% Internal Premiums $30,306 $32,064 $32,064 $25,808 -20% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $53,895 $47,478 ($68,079) $47,478 ($68,079) $50,107 ($130,823) 6% 92% Total - Code Compliance STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Code Compliance Total -Code Compliance $1,468,073 $1,368,354 $1,368,354 $1,295,976 -5% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 21.5 19 19 19 0% 21.5 19 19 19 0% 181 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Planning PLANNING Jon Froke Mission Statement: The Glendale Planning Department provides professional quality customer 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. • Facilitate decision making through Glendale’s Boards & Commissions. • Administer adopted regulations and guidelines in a fair and impartial manner. • Manage the general plan, 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. Department Description: The Planning Department has three major functions: long range planning and research, current planning, and planning administration. All three major functions provide service to internal and external customers to service the community. The long range planning and research function is responsible for the long-range physical General Plan, special studies, research, quarterly population estimates, 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 minor 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, group homes and custom home reviews and geographic information systems and mapping services. The department has a secondary function which is administration. This function is just as valuable as the three major functions as it also provides service to internal and external customers to service the community. The administration function prepares staff reports and ensures compliance for City Council, the Planning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission and Board of Adjustment Workshops and public hearings. This function also ensures proper advertising and notification processes are complete and in conformance with state open meeting laws. The administrative support function manages the departmental budget, request for service inquiries and provides staff support for City Council, the Planning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission and Board of Adjustment public workshops and public hearings. 182 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Planning FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Maintaining superior customer service to internal and external customers. One community with high quality service for citizens. Staff will need to be flexible and creative in making sound decisions. Management will need to continue keeping staff informed of managerial decisions that may impact future decision making. Maintain customer satisfaction at 90% good, excellent, or greater. The expected outcome is an ongoing effort as the department belief is we are a world class Planning Department. The goal will continue to be challenging because the department is operating with limited staff while the work demand varies day-to-day. Modify planning tools to meet current demands for city development. One community with strong neighborhoods. • Adopt an updated zoning ordinance. • Implementation of the Glendale Centerline Initiative. • Adopt updated commercial and industrial design expectations. Adoption of these three documents. Staff will have to commit to the goal on an ongoing basis. There will need to be research, draft document reviews and revisions, and conduct neighborhood meetings and the required public hearings. Staff anticipates that all updates can be completed within this fiscal year. Anticipated challenges may include adjustments to the schedule. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • The Group Home application process was shortened by reducing the number of steps from 40 to 30, a 25% reduction. Also, by training the Development Services Center staff to assist with the processing of applications, a reduction in the review time went from 2 to 3 days to only 24 hours. 183 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Planning Accomplishments: • Adopted a text amendment to enact reasonable zoning regulations to regulate medical marijuana, as permitted by the voter approved Proposition 203. • Revamped the Historic Preservation Program in a manner that allows it to continue to be an asset to Glendale. Obtained funding to complete the rehabilitation of the Myrtle Avenue Cultural Gateway. GOAL UPDATES Goal Redevelopment of the Glendale Centerline. One community with a vibrant city center. No. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Adoption of the Glendale Centerline Overlay District. Performance Measures? The time frame for Glendale Centerline process. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Support the City Council Sustainability Committee. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Increase public understanding of Glendale Centerline Overlay, add What were the additional historic resources to the National Register, and complete Performance Measures? all annexation requests by property owners. The time frame for the process was a challenge. Obstacles/Challenges 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. No. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Adoption of the Glendale Centerline Overlay Ordinance. Performance Measures? The timeframe for Glendale Centerline process. Obstacles/Challenges 184 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Planning Enhance the General Plan and Historic Preservation by planning for the future and preserving the past. One community with a vibrant city center. Related Council Goal 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 complete Performance Measures? all annexation requests by property owners. None, except the timeframe. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 185 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual Total - Planning FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $543,780 $383,846 $512,837 $135,149 $512,837 $135,149 $323,844 $126,988 $350,565 $341,167 $340,167 $323,524 -5% $1,278,191 $989,153 $988,153 $774,356 -22% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget -37% -6% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $1,285,572 $956,780 $956,780 $782,372 -18% $37,051 $17,710 $58,336 $16,757 $57,336 $16,757 $57,200 $12,361 -2% -26% -35% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits FY 2011 Budget $4,544 $4,149 $4,149 $2,694 ($66,686) ($46,869) ($46,869) ($80,271) 71% $989,153 $988,153 $774,356 -22% $1,278,191 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Current Planning 10 6 4 4 -33% (1000) Long-Range Planning & Research (1000) Planning Administration 4 5 2 3 2 3 2 3 0% 0% 19 11 9 9 -18% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Total -Planning 186 Return to OP Bdgt TOC 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 2010 Actual (1000) CD Deputy City Manager Total -Community Dev Admin FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $195,964 $195,964 $186,405 -5% $164,257 $195,964 $195,964 $186,405 -5% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $161,717 $1,013 $199,313 $5,756 $199,313 $5,756 $199,681 $6,194 $1,179 $1,602 $1,602 $1,075 -33% $173 ($10,880) $173 ($10,880) $170 ($20,715) -2% 90% $195,964 $195,964 $186,405 -5% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2011 Estimate $164,257 Internal Premiums Total - Community Dev Admin FY 2011 Budget $348 $164,257 0% 8% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1 1 1 1 0% 1 1 1 1 0% 187 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Economic Development ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Brian Friedman 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. Department Description: • The mission of the Economic Development Department is to make a positive contribution to the economic base of the city by building relationships with the business community to collaboratively direct business attraction, redevelopment, business retention and expansion, to meet the goals of the City Council and city management as we continually work to enhance the quality of life for Glendale residents and improve city vitality by facilitating the creation of quality jobs. • The Economic Development Department directs programs to attract and retain businesses that create quality jobs, increase the tax base, improve land values and enhance city vitality. • The department works to grow the city’s economy and capitalize on Glendale’s success at building a destination for entertainment, sports and tourism by assisting in the development of quality employment centers that will solidify Glendale’s economic position in the Valley. • The department coordinates with both internal and external partners to preserve a business-friendly climate and enhance the quality of life for the residents of Glendale. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Attract targeted industries and businesses to Glendale. One community with quality economic development. Business Attraction Program: Working with our partners, the Arizona Commerce Authority and the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, as well as developers and corporate real estate professionals, the department provides information and hosts site visits detailing the advantages of locating in Glendale to those types of industries and companies that are looking for a site for their operations. The department targets the following broad categories of industries: • Advanced business services • Advanced technology 188 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Economic Development • • • • • • • Financial and insurance Engineering and architectural Healthcare Aviation Airpark related industries, including light manufacturing and distribution Sustainable industries Entertainment and tourism The Department approaches the Attraction Program in four ways: • Recruitment: The Department targets specific industry clusters that are a fit with Glendale. We reach out directly to those industries and send information packets detailing the advantages of locating in Glendale. Potential targets are determined through a variety of rationale including; but not limited to, analysis, relationships, and growth industries. • Relationship Building: Strong relationships bring leads. The Department continues to increase contact with the development community, particularly those Arizona developers and real estate brokers that may not be familiar with the West Valley and specifically Glendale. Relationships are also maintained and strengthened with other departments in city government, the Glendale Chamber of Commerce, economic development organizations throughout the state and country, and partners such as Glendale Community College, Arizona State University and Maricopa Workforce Connections to increase our attractiveness as an employment center. • Research and Analysis: The department maintains the building and land inventory database listing available buildings of at least 10,000 square feet and/or vacant land of at least three acres. This information is available on the Glendale Prospector posted on our website and also through the Arizona Prospector website, which is a statewide list of available buildings and sites. This database is updated regularly so as to have the most 189 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Economic Development current information about available selected sites that can be shared with clients looking for sites within Glendale. The Department also conducts an analysis of major projects to ensure that each project is financially sound and enhances the city’s tax base. • Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Marketing and Promotion to “C” level executives and site selectors The department takes advantage of unique sporting and cultural opportunities as they may occur to market Glendale as a great place to locate a business. The department researches and identifies specific companies to contact and take advantage of the publicity garnered by these events. The department will locate 5 companies and create 500 jobs. This is an ongoing effort. Attracting industry to Glendale creates new jobs, increases revenue to the city and improves the quality of life for city residents. The continued national economic downturn has limited the number of companies looking to expand or relocate. Assist existing Glendale businesses through a proactive Business Retention and Expansion Program. One community with quality economic development. • Business Retention and Expansion: The Department has partnered with the Glendale Chamber of Commerce, Glendale Community College and ASU West to initiate a customized program to contact specific employers in the city for the purpose of developing relationships, identifying issues related to doing business in Glendale, discussing potential plans for expansion within the city, and providing additional resources necessary for a profitable venture. Specifically, the department will continue to: • Contact a wide variety of employers in Glendale • Develop a survey to gather consistent information to identify specific trends or patterns • Arrange to meet with local executives to determine if issues exist or programs can be offered to assist in making the company even more successful. Reach out to 30 existing Glendale businesses. 190 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Economic Development Time Commitment Expected Challenges This is an ongoing program and one of the more important department programs. The continued economic downturn has caused many companies to put potential expansion programs on hold until the economy shows a sustained recovery. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Department staff has been actively involved in the Innovate Program resulting in the creation of new and innovative revenue sources. • The department participated in the evaluation of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program with the Community Partnerships and Planning Departments. Accomplishments: • Located five new companies and assisted in the retention or expansion of seven existing companies resulting in the creation of 1,450 jobs so far this fiscal year. • Working with the broker community, the department has assisted in the absorption of 954,976 square feet of office and industrial space so far this fiscal year. GOAL UPDATES Goal Attract targeted industries and businesses to Glendale. One community with quality economic development. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Creation of 500 jobs. Performance Measures? A sluggish economy has curtailed some new site location decisions. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Continue with our proactive Business Retention and Expansion Program, while utilizing relationships with educational institutions. One community with quality economic development. Yes, six companies have expanded resulting in the creation of 852 jobs for Glendale residents. What were the Reach out to 30 existing Glendale companies. Performance Measures? The economic recovery has slowed some expansions. Obstacles/Challenges 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. 191 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Economic Development 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 resulted 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 progress Obstacles/Challenges towards its economic development goals despite the current economic conditions. Implement a comprehensive proactive business retention and expansion program. One community with quality economic development. Related Council Goal Yes, the department met its goal by providing networking and training opportunities for businesses visited and has resolved Was the goal met? 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. Reduced staffing and cutbacks at various companies has impacted availability for representatives to meet with the department. Obstacles/Challenges Flexibility and persistent, courteous contact by the department has overcome scheduling conflicts. Goal 192 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Economic Development FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Business Development (1000) Downtown Beaut. & Promotion $0 $239,693 $500,000 $266,453 $3,000,000 $266,453 $468,583 $242,095 -6% -9% (1000) Economic Development $741,568 $630,068 $711,613 $626,736 -1% $20,898 $0 $0 $0 NA $1,002,159 $1,396,521 $3,978,066 $1,337,414 -4% (1280) YSC - Econ. Dev. Total - Economic Development BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums FY 2010 Actual (1000) Downtown Beaut. & Promotion (1000) Economic Development Total -Economic Development FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $729,700 $685,171 $729,700 $3,266,716 $753,310 $632,360 3% -8% $13,419 $12,176 $12,176 $11,354 -7% $7,614 $7,488 $7,488 $7,194 -4% ($38,014) ($38,014) ($66,804) 76% Work Order Credits STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2011 Estimate $724,537 $256,589 Internal Service Charges Total - Economic Development FY 2011 Budget $1,002,159 $1,396,521 $3,978,066 $1,337,414 -4% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 4 6 4 5 4 5 4 5 0% 0% 10 9 9 9 0% 193 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Rebates & Incentives FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Rebates & Incentives (1000) Redevelopment Land Acquisition Total - Rebates & Incentives BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Supplies and Contracts Total - Rebates & Incentives FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $475,555 $23,000 $320,000 $85,416 $50,000 $2,871 $100,000 $0 -69% -100% $498,555 $405,416 $52,871 $100,000 -75% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $498,555 $405,416 $52,871 $100,000 -75% $498,555 $405,416 $52,871 $100,000 -75% 194 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Fire Services FIRE SERVICES Chief Mark Burdick Mission Statement: Fast - Caring - Innovative - Professional Department Description: The Glendale Fire Department provides Fire, Rescue, and Emergency Medical Services to the citizens of Glendale. Within the scope of our work are five core interactive services including: • Fire Prevention and Education (Public Education, Inspections, Investigations, Code Adoption) • Fire Suppression (Firefighting) • Emergency Medical Services (Advanced Life Support and Basic Life Support) • Special Operations (Hazardous Materials and Technical Rescue) • Crisis Response (Social Services) The Glendale Fire Department utilizes the Automatic Aid System, intergovernmental agreements with surrounding agencies, public/private partnerships, and our highly skilled and dedicated staff to guarantee high quality services to those in our community. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Strive to increase public education and outreach. One community committed to public safety. • Implement more pro-active fire and life safety educational programs. These programs could include: Car Seat Safety, Preschool HeadStart, Fire Pals, Youth Setter Intervention, Teen CERT, CERT/Citizen’s Academy, and the Safety Educator Program. • Expand the “Healthier Safer Lives” program to more retirement communities and schools. • Strengthen and support the Fire Department’s volunteer programs. Indirectly reduce the number of medical emergencies, injuries and fires in Glendale by increasing citizen education on safety related issues. This goal involves an ongoing time commitment. Efforts to educate the public in order to prevent loss of life and property is a continuous goal of the Fire Department. 195 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Fire Services Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges An adequate volunteer pool is critical to the success of our educational programs. Maintaining and recruiting volunteers is an ongoing challenge. Safety Educators and Fire Cadets will need to be used to augment these programs. Enhance response times. One community committed to public safety. • Ensure that emergency responding personnel are staffed in the field and deployable, without diminishing service delivery. • Properly train and certify emergency medical technicians and paramedics. • Maintain apparatus and equipment to reduce delays in emergency response. The department’s service level objectives for response times are: • 90% of the time - Arrive on-scene in six minutes or less for the arrival of the first arriving engine company at a fire suppression incident and/or eight minutes or less arrival of a full first alarm assignment at a fire suppression incident. • 90% of the time - Arrive on-scene in six minutes or less for the arrival of a unit with first responder or higher-level capability at an emergency medical incident. • 90% of the time - Arrive on-scene in eight minutes or less for the arrival of an advanced life support unit at an emergency medical incident, where this service is provided by the fire department. This is an ongoing effort as the Fire Department consistently works to improve response times. Budget constraints and workload on existing administrative staff will be a challenge. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Glendale Fire Department took over the responsibility of Infectious Control for its members. Prior to July 1, 2010 Phoenix Fire Department was providing the service. Estimated savings to Glendale Fire Department is $5,000 - $10,000 annually. 196 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Fire Services Accomplishments: • Adopted the 2009 International Fire Code. The adoption of current model codes helps ensure that Glendale is a safe community by utilizing the most current fire code. • Glendale Fire Department transitioned to the 700-800 megahertz radio system for nonhazard zone emergencies. This enhances communications with Automatic Aid fire department participants. GOAL UPDATES 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 has implemented a continuous quality improvement plan for EMS in accordance with Arizona Department Was the goal met? of Health Services rule R9-25-206. At minimum, review the following categories of pre-hospital patient encounter forms to ensure fire department personnel follow established protocols and procedures: • 5% of all patient refusals, trauma, and medical incidents; What were the • 100% of all code arrests, cerebral vascular accidents (CVA), and Performance Measures? acute coronary syndrome (ACS) Develop a process to implement corrective action when review of cases indicates a lapse in following pre-hospital protocols and/or procedures. Shortage in staff has created challenges in meeting minimum Obstacles/Challenges reviews. Provide fast, effective emergency response to our community through proper support and deployment of staffing, apparatus and Goal equipment. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. In 2010, a Glendale unit capable of providing AED arrived on scene in less than 6-minutes travel time, 93% of the time for all ALS Was the goal met? and BLS incidents. The Glendale Fire Department’s service level objective for first arriving unit at an emergency medical incident: • 90 percent of all code three, 911 emergent incidents, the first unit will arrive on the scene in less than six minutes (travel What were the time). Performance Measures? • Advanced Life Support (ALS) units shall arrive on scene within eight minutes (travel time), 90 percent of the time. However, we strive to meet the National Fire Protection Association Standard 1710 travel time of four minutes. Yes, reduced funding creates challenges in staffing units. Obstacles/Challenges 197 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Fire Services 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 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 re-deployed 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 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 ensure What were the Performance Measures? compliance and maintaining accredited status. None. Obstacles/Challenges 198 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $745,827 $476,109 $751,491 $492,393 $751,491 $492,393 $736,989 $484,004 -2% -2% $1,796,215 $1,637,270 $1,637,270 $1,605,998 -2% $10,910 $866,913 $19,250 $824,255 $19,250 $824,255 $15,250 $812,173 -21% -1% -14% $44,166 $56,983 $56,983 $48,983 $17,937,365 $17,312,530 $17,312,530 $17,785,340 3% $2,395,316 $25,313 $1,937,224 $16,293 $1,865,224 $16,293 $2,070,956 $16,293 7% 0% $22,679 $13,656 $13,656 $13,656 0% (1000) PS Training Ctr - Fire (1281) Fire - Fiesta Bowl Event $619,583 $52,991 $577,227 $159,942 $577,227 $138,872 $567,227 $159,942 -2% 0% (1281) Stadium - Fire Event Staffing $246,992 $229,886 $229,886 $229,886 0% (1282) Arena - Fire Event Staffing $152,602 $300,008 $300,008 $301,041 0% $11,659 $34,604 $0 $0 $0 $21,070 $0 $28,852 NA NA (1282) Westgate - Fire Event Staffing (1283) CBRanch - Fire Event Staffing (1720) Fire - Special Revenue Fund $4,850,264 $6,135,642 $7,335,642 $6,395,637 4% (1840) Grant Approp - Fire Dept (1842) PSSP Fire OT Grant $562,753 $0 $4,500,000 $0 $4,500,000 $0 $4,500,000 $75,000 0% NA (2530) PS Training Ops - Fire $739,341 $760,451 $730,451 $763,314 0% (2538) Glendale Health Center $32,859 $54,000 $54,000 $54,000 0% $31,624,461 $35,778,501 $36,876,501 $36,664,541 2% Total - Fire Department 199 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Fire Department BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $26,500,866 $3,605,221 $27,837,822 $7,068,344 $29,037,822 $7,020,327 $28,679,286 $7,161,620 Internal Premiums $555,379 $798,613 $744,630 $612,827 -23% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $957,995 $5,000 $938,024 $938,024 $922,702 $122,562 -2% ($834,456) -3% $31,624,461 $35,778,501 $36,876,501 $36,664,541 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO) 4 4 4 4 0% (1000) Ambulance Services 2 2 2 2 0% (1000) Fire Administration (1000) Fire Marshal's Office 17.5 12 13 10 14 10 14 10 8% 0% (1000) Fire Operations Work Order Credits Total - Fire Department STAFFING BY PROGRAM ($864,302) ($864,302) Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 3% 1% 2% 195 188 188 188 0% (1000) Fire Resource Management 6 4 5 5 25% (1282) Arena - Fire Event Staffing (1720) Fire - Special Revenue Fund 1 50 1 51 1 51 1 51 0% 0% (2530) PS Training Ops - Fire Total -Fire Department 6 6 6 6 0% 293.5 279 281 281 1% 200 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Human Resources & Risk Management HUMAN RESOURCES & RISK MANAGEMENT Alma Carmicle Mission Statement: Collaborate and partner with our internal and external customers to develop a diverse workforce committed to delivering the highest quality of service. 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/safety. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Implement an online applicant system to improve the applicant experience when applying for a city position and to improve internal application processing. One community with high quality services for citizens. Research and evaluate a potential online applicant system that can be integrated with the Human Resources Management System (HRMS). Implement an online applicant system by June 2012. It is estimated the process will require staffing resources from IT and HR. The research, evaluation and implementation will take 10 months. Coordination and implementation of the web based application process. Expand online training to include mandatory anti-harassment training. One community that is fiscally sound. Develop anti-harassment training materials for city employees to be accessed from the employees’ work stations. All city employees will be able to take the mandatory antiharassment training for FY 2012 by March 2012. The online training will minimize workplace disruption by allowing staff to take the training from their workstations when it best fits their work schedule. It will take and estimated 3 months to develop the online antiharassment training materials. Employees will be given two months to complete the training. 201 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Human Resources & Risk Management Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Resource availability to develop the online materials. Improve the health of the city’s health plan participants and reduce healthcare costs by offering health education and wellness activities that support positive lifestyle changes. One community that is fiscally sound. Provide convenient, onsite, health education programs conducted by health care professionals with experience in treating and preventing the chronic health conditions prevalent in the city’s health plan participants. Improve the health of participants in the city’s health plan and reduce healthcare costs by increasing participation level to at least 50% of employee population and extending wellness activities to retirees and dependents. Between July 1 and the April 2012 Wellness Fairs (where we can measure the outcome of our activities by improved health risk assessment scores.) Support from managers and supervisors to enable staff to participate in these programs given the staffing challenges caused by a reduced workforce. Resistance from employees/retirees in participating in improving their own well-being unless they are provided with a significant financial incentive. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Successfully implemented online training for mandatory ethics training for all city employees. All city staff completed the online training. The greatest benefit was the ability of staff to complete the training as time permitted rather than attending scheduled sessions. • Implemented a Wellness Brown Bag Series for employees and retirees. This six-part series focused on the importance of nutrition to improve overall health. Employees and retirees attended these sessions. Outside presenters offered their insights on developing healthy living styles that incorporate good nutrition habits. Participants have requested more onsite wellness-focused sessions. • Implemented a Financial Planning Series in partnership with International City/County Management Association-Retirement Corporation. The workshops focused on educating employees on their financial wellness and preparing for the future. Workshops were held each month and the expertise of certified financial planners and retirement plan specialists were shared with employees on the topics of smart saving, managing credit and debt, strategies to save for retirement, retirement accounts, 202 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Human Resources & Risk Management • women’s financial health, and estate planning. Feedback from participants has been very positive and participants have shared additional topics for future sessions. The program will continue next fiscal year with additional topics. Implemented a Higher Education Series in partnership with several local colleges and universities. At these lunch hour sessions, university staff shared their expertise, tools and tips with employees who are deciding to return to school or are currently finishing a program. Topic areas included finding scholarships and grants, advancing career goals through higher education, overcoming emotional barriers of returning to school, and time management. Many participants shared they have renewed their commitment to higher education by beginning a new program or have since found scholarships to assist with current enrollment through the help of these sessions. The program will run again in the next fiscal year with additional topics and school partnerships. Accomplishments: • The city received Mature Worker Friendly Certification by the Governor's Advisory Council on Aging and the Arizona Department of Commerce. The Mature Worker Friendly Employer Certification provides special recognition to employers that commit to creating a workplace environment that values experience and skills that mature workers exhibit, and also assists employers in attracting and retaining those mature workers. The Mature Worker Friendly Certification complements Glendale’s recognition by the Association for the Advancement of Retired Persons (AARP) as one of fifty Best Employers for Workers Over 50 nationally. Glendale was the only municipality in the nation and the only organization in Arizona to win the AARP award. • Conducted basic computer skills training for city staff. Approximately 75 employees attended one of the four half day sessions to become familiar with the city’s technology and technology-related policies. Participants found the sessions to be beneficial. Future sessions are being planned. • The cost of the city’s risk in FY 2011 was 1.06%, well below the public entity industry average of 2.0%. The Risk Management/Safety Division continues to provide safety training and education opportunities for management, supervisors and employees. These sessions help keep managers, supervisors and employees mindful of safety as they perform their work. • Conducted a request for proposal for the dental and vision benefits provided to employees and retirees that resulted in significant rate reductions and enhanced benefits. The rate reductions included: a 5% reduction for the PPO dental plan; a 15% reduction for the employee rate for the HMO dental plan and a 11.4% reduction to the vision plan. The negotiations included maintaining the reduced rates for multiple years. 203 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Human Resources & Risk Management GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges 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. Yes, the city has contracted with a 3rd party to begin administering the city’s benefits program for retirees effective July 2011. The department will save about 20 hours per month by not processing payments, allowing more time on core business processes. Effectively communicating the changes to retirees. What were the Performance Measures? 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. Yes, a citywide reorganization was completed in March 2011. The ability of departments to continue to meet service needs through appropriate job alignment and staff placement Obstacles/Challenges Communicating and managing the change organizationally. Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? 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. 204 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Human Resources & Risk Management • The cost of the city’s risk in FY 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 Implementation of the program by June 2010. Performance Measures? Budget reductions to both the IT and the HR departments. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 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 Was the goal met? 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. Completed a 6 month pilot program with Administrative Services What were the staff by March 2010 and compiled feedback to enhance the Performance Measures? program for citywide rollout. Related Council Goal Obstacles/Challenges Feedback from mentees and mentors identified time and current workload as the major challenges they encountered in participating and completing their development action plans. 205 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Human Resources FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Benefits (1000) Compensation $157,462 $458,703 $119,411 $459,828 $119,411 $459,828 $144,941 $374,781 (1000) Employee Relations $187,638 $176,717 $176,717 $166,386 -6% (1000) Employment Services (1000) Human Resources Administration $364,411 $669,751 $254,417 $631,007 $254,417 $630,007 $315,455 $563,541 24% -11% (1000) Organizational Development $317,580 $68,291 $68,291 $259,189 280% (1000) Risk Management/Safety $569,743 $202,525 $202,525 $121,547 -40% $2,569,174 $1,249,428 $2,844,278 $1,407,000 $2,844,278 $1,407,000 $3,068,438 $1,407,000 $22,954,668 $24,481,185 $23,111,564 $23,117,869 -6% $29,498,558 $30,644,659 $29,274,038 $29,539,147 -4% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget (2540) Risk Mgmt Trust Fund (2560) Worker's Compensation (2580) Benefit Programs Total - Human Resources BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES 21% -18% 8% 0% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $2,477,412 $2,033,844 $2,033,844 $2,303,058 13% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $26,970,400 $39,715 $28,758,325 $33,507 $27,387,704 $33,507 $27,398,179 $24,847 -5% -26% -15% Internal Service Charges $11,031 Work Order Credits Total - Human Resources $13,173 $13,173 $11,180 ($194,190) ($194,190) ($198,117) 2% $29,498,558 $30,644,659 $29,274,038 $29,539,147 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget (1000) Benefits 2.75 1.25 2 2 60% (1000) Compensation (1000) Employee Relations 5.5 2.75 6 2 4.75 2 4.75 2 -21% 0% (1000) Employment Services 4 3 4 4 33% (1000) Human Resources Administration 6 5 5 5 0% (1000) Organizational Development (1000) Risk Management/Safety 3 6 1 2 3 1 3 1 200% -50% 1 3.75 3.75 275% 30 21.25 25.5 25.5 20% STAFFING BY PROGRAM (2540) Risk Mgmt Trust Fund Total -Human Resources 206 Return to OP Bdgt TOC -4% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Employee Groups FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1190) Diversity Committee (1190) GEMS (1190) Glendale Hispanic Network FY 2010 Actual $48,957 $29,091 BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Supplies and Contracts Total - Employee Groups FY 2011 Estimate $54,909 $0 $40,559 $0 $167 $0 $0 $30,000 $78,215 $84,909 (1190) Holiday Event Total - Employee Groups FY 2011 Budget FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $54,000 $0 -2% NA $14,350 $0 NA $0 $30,000 0% $54,909 $84,000 -1% FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $78,215 $84,909 $54,909 $84,000 -1% $78,215 $84,909 $54,909 $84,000 -1% 207 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Intergovernmental Programs INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS Brent Stoddard 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. 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 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. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) 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, congressman, 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. The time commitment for this goal is ongoing. Large state and federal budget deficits. Identify opportunities through the state and regional transportation agencies to keep on schedule or to accelerate the design and construction of transportation facilities and services critical to Glendale. One community with high quality services for citizens. Actively work with Glendale, state and regional agency staff to ensure that the funding committed for Glendale projects continues. Look for creative strategies to secure funding to accelerate projects and services as appropriate. Reducing Glendale’s financial commitment to projects and moving forward additional projects currently delayed. 208 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Intergovernmental Programs Time Commitment Expected Challenges The time commitment for this goal is ongoing. Large Prop. 400 funding deficits. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Reduced the subscription level for the legislative tracking database saving over $1,000. • Instituted policy of double sided printing for large legislative bills, reducing paper usage significantly. Accomplishments: • Successful in getting annexation legislation passed by the state legislature to protect the City of Glendale. • Successful in getting Maricopa Association of Governments to approve funding for the Northern Traffic Interchange saving Glendale approximately $10 million and increasing the Loop 101 HOV lane budget by $9 million to accommodate future construction of HOV ramps at Maryland Avenue. • Secured a $150,000 public safety grant from the Governor’s Public Safety Stabilization Program (ARRA funding). • Successfully negotiated new Regional Public Transportation Authority Transit Life Cycle Program Policies that were most beneficial to Glendale totaling $37 million in services. GOAL UPDATES 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. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? We were successful in getting annexation legislation passed by the state legislature to protect the City of Glendale. We successfully What were the stopped many bills that would have had devastating financial Performance Measures? impacts on Glendale. We were successful in protecting the state shared revenue streams from the budget cuts at the legislature. The legislature introduced an overwhelming amount of anti-city Obstacles/Challenges legislation. Goal Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? 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. Yes. 209 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Intergovernmental Programs Contacted and met with all of the Congressional offices in the What were the greater metropolitan area. Advocated for Glendale’s priorities, Performance Measures? resulting in the introduction of federal legislation to assist Glendale. The Congress put a one-year moratorium on earmarks and non Obstacles/Challenges discretionary spending. FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The department continued the process of assigning a key liaison for each department, a 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 ARRA 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 budget Performance Measures? deficit. The Arizona State Legislature swept the lottery money in LTAF to assist in their budget deficit. Staff is working to get the program and Obstacles/Challenges funding restored. 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 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 210 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $710,731 $721,549 $721,549 $686,721 -5% $710,731 $721,549 $721,549 $686,721 -5% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $385,594 $319,861 $426,547 $312,595 $426,547 $312,595 $427,410 $296,926 0% -5% Internal Premiums $4,082 $3,723 $3,723 $4,533 22% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $1,194 $1,266 ($22,582) $1,266 ($22,582) $1,171 ($43,319) -8% 92% $721,549 $721,549 $686,721 -5% Total - Intergovt. Programs STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Intergovernmental Programs Total -Intergovt. Programs $710,731 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 4 4 4 4 0% 4 4 4 4 0% 211 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Neighborhood & Human Services Neighborhood & Human Services Community Action Program Community Partnerships NEIGHBORHOOD & HUMAN SERVICES Cathy Gorham Mission Statement: Connecting people through the power of community. Department Description: The Neighborhood & Human Services Department consists of four divisions, all of which partner with the community to ensure neighborhoods, low-to-moderate income families, and individuals, have the resources they need for a quality of life that includes self-sufficiency, safe and decent housing, and connections to services provided by other non-profit agencies as necessary. 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 Program (CDBG) and other related federal programs. The Community Housing Division is responsible for addressing the housing needs of over 4,400 Glendale residents by operating three public housing complexes and a Section 8 voucher program. The Community Action Program administers the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program that provide utility payment assistance, rental assistance, and other homeless prevention services. The Neighborhood Partnership Office provides direct services to registered neighborhood associations throughout the city and is also responsible for the administration of Glendale University, the Homeowners’ Association Training Academy, the Community Mediation Program, and the Community Volunteer Program. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Continue neighborhood revitalization efforts using NSP 3 funding to improve affordable housing options for working families. One community with strong neighborhoods. Acquire vacant foreclosed residential property for rehabilitation and reselling. Leverage funds from the private and non profit sectors. 212 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Neighborhood & Human Services Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges At least 15 properties will be rehabilitated and resold, depending on the market. These rehabilitated properties will provide more affordable housing options for residents. This grant to be administered and managed by existing staff, with the actual property acquisition and rehabilitation to be carried out by non-profit partners over a two-year time frame. Market conditions and federal budget reductions. Maintain the financial stability of both housing programs, Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and Conventional Public Housing, while assisting the maximum number of families allowed by federal budget constraints. One community that is fiscally sound. Continue to lease 155 public housing apartments to receive ongoing rental income. To the extent allowed by the federal budget, partner with local landlords to maintain the availability of housing that is decent, safe, and affordable for low-and very low-income Glendale residents through the Section 8 voucher program. Maintain public housing vacancy rates at HUD requirement of 3% or less. Maintain Section 8 voucher usage based on available federal program funding levels. The goal is an ongoing effort as the need for rental assistance has no time limit. The programs provide monthly rental assistance for as long as the family’s needs require, and they are eligible. Federal budget reductions related to the administrative fee for Section 8 vouchers. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • In the area of environmental review, Community Revitalization staff enacted a programmatic agreement with the State Historic Preservation Office, reducing approval turnaround from 60 days to two weeks. The clearance process was further streamlined and enhanced to identify any deficiencies in the process. • Through the city’s Innovate LEAN process, we reviewed procedural guidelines used by Housing Assistance Representatives and streamlined the incoming paper-flow process. A second LEAN process streamlined client intake procedures for the Community Action Program resulting in improved customer service and a step-by-step model for a new software application that meets state requirements. 213 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Neighborhood & Human Services Accomplishments: • Community Housing Division was designated as a high-performer for the 18th consecutive fiscal year. • The Neighborhood Partnership Division’s Adopt-A-Neighborhood program matched faith based organizations with four challenged neighborhoods resulting in long-term relationships with focused volunteer and community service projects. • Administered and assisted with processing $914,122 in Homeless Prevention Rapid Rehousing (HPRP) funds well ahead of the federal deadline. This performance was taken into account when the State of Arizona decided to provide the Community Action Program with an additional $316,000 in HPRP funding in March 2011. • Through the first three quarters of FY 2011, 66 community volunteer projects were completed by 2,280 volunteers at a value of $188,700. GOAL UPDATES 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 non-profits in developing Goal senior housing, and to administer homeless prevention funds for utility assistance and rapid rehousing. One community with strong neighborhoods. Related Council Goal The mitigation of foreclosures continues with funds being used to purchase, rehabilitate, and resell properties. The first allocation of homeless prevention funds was expended by the Community Was the goal met? Action Program and two partner nonprofits within one year. Two other non-profits have completed designs for two new senior housing complexes on vacant/blighted property. Out of 29 houses purchased and rehabilitated with federal funding, it is anticipated that we (all partners combined) will sell at least 18 What were the Performance Measures? houses by June 30, 2011. The full $914,122 in homeless prevention funds assisted 1,391 people. Mortgage qualification of customers and competing with private Obstacles/Challenges investors on the purchase of homes. Maintain the financial stability of the Community Housing Division. One community with high quality services for residents. Related Council Goal Yes, staff has continued to manage the programs efficiently. Was the goal met? The payment of more than $7 million to Glendale landlords for housing assistance payments. What were the Performance Measures? Capital Funds received were used to improve the quality of housing available through the public housing program. Federal budget reductions coupled with an increase in rental payments due to the economic downturn may reduce the number Obstacles/Challenges of families that will receive assistance. Goal 214 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Neighborhood & Human Services 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. A reduction in budget for programming. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? 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. 215 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Neighborhood & Human Services To allocate the federal appropriations in the mandated time frame What were the Performance Measures? and to complete all the reporting requirements. Economic downturn impacted number of qualified first time Obstacles/Challenges homebuyers. 216 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Comm. Action Program FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) CAP Local Match (1820) ACAA HEAF Program $121,797 $0 $129,280 $0 $129,280 $10,136 $129,859 $10,136 0% NA (1820) ACAA SRP Assistance $0 $0 $59,441 $59,441 NA (1820) ACAA SW Gas Assistance (1820) ACAA URRD Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,000 $36,732 $5,000 $36,732 NA NA (1820) Case Mgmt-LIHEAP Voucher $0 $0 $805,544 $790,705 NA (1820) Case Mgmt-NHN Voucher $0 $0 $3,135 $3,135 NA (1820) Case Mgmt-Qwest Admin (1820) Case Mgmt-TANF Admin $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,919 ($12,475) $3,919 $179,549 NA NA (1820) Case Mgmt-TANF Voucher $0 $0 $45,000 $45,000 NA (1820) Case Mgt-LIHEAP A16 Admin (1820) Case Mgt-LIHEAP Administration $0 $0 $0 $0 $56,647 $51,568 $56,647 $51,568 NA NA (1820) CM-LIHEAP Admin Contingency $0 $0 $5,341 $5,341 NA (1820) CM-LIHEAP Voucher Contigency $0 $0 $90,718 $90,718 NA $389,388 $0 $412,557 $0 $412,557 $189,494 $0 $265,153 -100% NA $511,185 $541,837 $1,892,037 $1,732,903 220% (1820) Community Action Program (CAP) (1820) Community Svcs Block Grant-Adm Total - Comm. Action Program BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $359,981 $417,868 $817,654 $664,091 59% Supplies and Contracts $121,948 $117,486 $1,185,375 $1,172,718 898% $5,522 $16,374 $3,548 $16,633 $3,548 $16,633 $3,480 $16,980 ($13,698) ($131,173) ($124,366) Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $7,360 Work Order Credits Total - Comm. Action Program STAFFING BY PROGRAM $511,185 $0 $541,837 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget 7 7 7 7 (1820) Case Mgmt-TANF Admin (1820) Community Action Program (CAP) (1820) Community Svcs Block Grant-Adm Total -Comm. Action Program -2% 2% 217 Return to OP Bdgt TOC $1,892,037 $1,732,903 FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 7 7 808% 220% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 0% City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Comm. Partnerships FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Community Revitalization (1000) Neighborhood Partnership FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget $403,342 $494,445 $334,195 $364,615 (1300) HOME Program $1,116,060 (1310) NSP Programs (1311) NSP III $2,237,449 $0 (1320) CDBG Programs (1830) Emergency Shelter Grant (1842) CDBG-R (1842) Homeless Prevention HPRP (2500) Community Housing Total - Comm. Partnerships BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $334,195 $364,615 $507,275 $455,321 52% 25% $1,660,797 $568,296 $1,787,501 8% $4,184,112 $0 $2,066,215 $0 $2,117,897 $3,368,377 -49% NA $2,254,658 $3,540,617 $1,816,988 $3,718,764 5% $65,203 $98,278 $98,278 $98,278 0% $390,772 $550,108 $140,000 $646,272 $147,049 $364,015 $60,000 $0 -57% -100% $14,604,880 $8,487,034 $12,587,034 $12,609,126 49% $22,116,917 $19,455,920 $18,346,685 $24,722,539 27% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $2,568,635 $2,877,746 $3,130,351 $3,665,689 27% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $18,580,917 $100,978 $16,296,550 $102,177 $14,936,710 $102,177 $20,831,081 $101,058 28% -1% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital Work Order Credits Total - Comm. Partnerships $35,596 $36,972 $34,972 $33,232 -10% $949,861 $250,000 $250,000 $224,126 -10% ($119,070) ($107,525) ($107,525) ($132,647) 23% $22,116,917 $19,455,920 $18,346,685 $24,722,539 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Community Revitalization (1000) Neighborhood Partnership 2 5.5 2 4 3 5.5 3 5.5 50% 38% (1320) CDBG Programs 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 0% 25 24 24 24 0% 41.25 38.75 41.25 41.25 6% STAFFING BY PROGRAM (2500) Community Housing Total -Comm. Partnerships 218 Return to OP Bdgt TOC 27% 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 2010 Actual $190,714 $190,714 $308,017 $190,714 $190,714 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate $301,002 $5,046 $193,879 $6,647 $193,879 $6,647 $1,622 $896 $896 Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $347 $308,017 $172 ($10,880) $172 ($10,880) $190,714 $190,714 STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget (1000) Comm. Services Admin. 2 1 2 1 Total -Comm. Services Adm FY 2011 Estimate $308,017 Internal Premiums Total - Comm. Services Adm FY 2011 Budget 219 Return to OP Bdgt TOC FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $0 -100% FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 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 Supplies and Contracts Operating Capital Total - Neighborhood Imp Gr FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget $267,700 FY 2011 Estimate $0 FY 2012 Budget $0 Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $0 NA $267,700 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget $149,422 $118,278 $267,700 220 Return to OP Bdgt TOC FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Parks, Recreation & Library Services Parks, Recreation and Library Services Library & Arts Parks & Recreation PARKS, RECREATION & LIBRARY SERVICES Erik Strunk Mission Statement: The mission of the Parks, Recreation and Library Services Department is two fold: • 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. • To empower our community by providing equitable access to information, technology, cultural, educational and life-enhancing materials and services, including a commitment to the public arts. Department Description: The parks and recreation system offers opportunities to enhance the social, physical, mental and economic health of the community through a variety of diverse programs. The system maintains, protects and manages public parks, open spaces, trails and aquatic and recreational facilities located throughout the community. The public library system serves the needs of Glendale citizens by providing books, programming, audio/visual materials and electronic resources that inform, educate and entertain residents. The arts program administers the city’s Public Art and Performing Arts Partnership Program. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities As a result of new federal regulation requirements, the Parks & Recreation Department must conduct a comprehensive assessment of the existing conditions of all parks and facilities related to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The assessment will identify the physical obstacles, describe the methods to make the facilities accessible, provide a schedule for making the access modifications and indicate what department is responsible for the implementation of the plan. One community with high quality services for citizens. Work cooperatively with Field Operations and Engineering 221 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks, Recreation & Library Services Departments to engage a consultant to assess all parks, recreation centers, and facility accessibility to ensure compliance with the new federal regulations. Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Complete an assessment by March 12, 2012. Eight months to engage the consultant; provide onsite support and accept final plan recommendations. Lack of funding. Implement technology strategies that increase efficiency, service and responsiveness to the community so that library users will be able to access digital resources and information through a reliable, up-to-date technical infrastructure. One community with high quality services for citizens. • Maintain a robust and reliable system for delivering information resources and library system services. • Improve our library’s online presence to better position the library as a local information provider. • Continuously survey the evolving technology landscape for appropriate applications and prudently pilot new technologies. • Replace the aging integrated library system as funding and/or other opportunities become available. • Streamline the library’s network by purchasing a more robust server to replace four aging servers in order to provide uninterrupted services to the community. • Increase bandwidth from 20 to 30 mbps in order to support staff and public needs in FY 2012. • When annually surveyed, 80% of library users will indicate knowledge of library’s web presence. • Library users will be surveyed semi annually to determine community technology interests, needs and trends. • Investigate funding options for replacing aging integrated library system. This goal is ongoing. Technology continues to evolve and the department must evolve with it. Some of the expected outcomes are currently being accomplished; however, others must be phased over the next several years. Budgetary constraints continue to be a challenge; however, we will continue to apply for appropriate grant opportunities, phase projects when appropriate, and continue to seek creative and innovative solutions. 222 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks, Recreation & Library Services FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Parks maintenance staff designed new “no spin” toilet paper dispensers for use in parks with restroom facilities. This has created a savings in the use of toilet paper, reduced travel time needed to service restrooms, and provides parks maintenance staff with more time to maintain the city’s parks and recreational sites for our residents. • The library staff examined the steps taken from the time a patron returns an item to the library to the moment it is placed on a cart to be re-shelved. Results of the analysis included the elimination of eight steps, with an estimated savings of 7,287 staff hours annually. This savings has resulted in the provision of additional direct services that benefit all library system patrons. Accomplishments: • A $3.2 million renovation of the Sahuaro Ranch Sports Complex was completed in April 2011. The renovation included replacing the entire sprinkler irrigation system, new athletic field lighting, new infield soil and outfield turf, new fencing and backstops, additional spectator shade, enhanced landscaping, additional pedestrian walkways, and an entirely new facility drainage plan. • The library secured a $59,216 Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) grant from the Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records Agency. The “Read and Play With Me at Glendale Public Libraries” grant provides funding to help parents and caregivers become their children’s first and most important teachers, with the aim of better preparing children for the formal learning environment. • Vehicles assigned to crew leaders in the parks system are now equipped with laptop computers. This has allowed them to be in the field more frequently and respond to citizen concerns in a more efficient manner. The computers are equipped with aerial photography which provides instant access to park topography and infrastructure data. Data can be exchanged between staff and/or citizens instantly, resulting in immediate and more detailed responses. • The library implemented a new online payment system to allow patrons to pay their fines and fees by credit card. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Complete the Parks and Recreation Master Plan update. One community with strong neighborhoods. Yes, on March 7, 2011, the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission unanimously approved the updated master plan recommendations and motioned to forward the plan to the City Council for its approval and adoption. Complete a Parks Master Plan update by December 2010. Coordination and quality control with consultants. 223 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks, Recreation & Library Services Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Was the goal met? Cont. What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Department actively supports and contributes to the Community Services Group hybrid action teams. One community committed to public safety. Partially, patrons have reported an 80% satisfactory rating for security on the library’s annual survey. However, security personnel were present for only 66% of documented incident reports to date. Patrons rate an 80% satisfactory rating for security on the library’s annual survey; security guards are present when 80% of the recorded incidents occur. Availability of security staff when incidents are taking place. Actively support and contribute to connecting people, with the power of community. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes, library and parks staff participated in various outreach efforts throughout the year and partnered with a number of community organizations and agencies. Examples would include: the United Way for family story times at Velma Teague, HeadStart, West Valley Cancer Connection for Community Outreach, participating in an outreach event at Clavelito Park for public housing residents, partnering in the “My Community” calendar, Culture Pass (and the participating organizations such as Phoenix Art Museum, Arizona Science Center, etc.); Glendale Convention and Visitors’ Bureau—along with downtown businesses—for the Mother’s Day Celebration and book drive. Various Parks and Recreation staff members participated in developing new neighborhood outreach strategies; researching alternative funding sources; and created and distributed a new quarterly “My Community” publication for Glendale residents. Department staff attended over 15 civic, school and community forums in Glendale and elsewhere in the Valley and collaborated with 10 community organizations agencies to assist them to achieve their goals. Sufficient staffing continues to poses a challenge when implementing outreach programs for the community. 224 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks, Recreation & Library Services FISCAL YEAR 2010 Area of Innovation: • The Parks & Recreation 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 in downtown. Eight different egg hunts were scheduled throughout the morning for various age groups. 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. • $431,831 in stimulus funding was secured through the Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) to update the Main Library’s outdated and inefficient 23-year old fluorescent lighting system. It is estimated that the change to new 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. Accomplishments: • The Library & Arts Department completed an analysis of its organizational structure and core services. A reorganization of the department was completed to reflect financial realities and the current and future needs of the community and department. For example, the library had 12.5 retirements and a 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. • 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 Division for Earth Day and 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. • The library secured a $54,882 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. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Complete the Parks and Recreation Master Plan update. One community with strong neighborhoods. 225 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Parks, Recreation & Library Services Updating will continue in FY 2011. 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 Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Obtain national agency accreditation with the Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies. 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 full Obstacles/Challenges time employees participated in the process. GOAL UPDATES To provide Glendale residents with the information they need on a broad array of topics related to work, school and personal life 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. After much trial and error, it was determined that the centralized calling system was not beneficial to our patrons and was Obstacles/Challenges discontinued. Goal 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 What were the Commission. Additionally, the Public Safety Memorial was Performance Measures? completed and dedicated on January 4, 2011. 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 has been assigned to the Arts Maintenance Division on a part-time basis to carry out the arts program. Goal 226 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $121,832 $7,135,861 $31,763 $6,044,112 $31,763 $6,044,112 $30,302 $5,655,581 -5% -6% $40,518 $127,787 $127,787 $127,787 0% $44,645 $128,726 $142,223 $105,150 $142,223 $105,150 $142,223 $105,150 0% 0% $92,169 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 0% $7,563,751 $7,001,035 $7,001,035 $6,611,043 -6% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $6,038,163 $5,225,252 $5,225,252 $5,135,564 Supplies and Contracts $1,329,851 $1,832,696 $1,832,696 $1,779,023 -3% $127,617 $68,120 $147,633 $56,315 $147,633 $56,315 $121,746 $52,350 -18% -7% ($477,640) 83% $7,563,751 $7,001,035 Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits ($260,861) Total - Library & Arts STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Arts Maintenance - Admin. (1000) Library Total -Library & Arts FY 2010 Actual ($260,861) $7,001,035 $6,611,043 -2% -6% FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 86.76 69.26 70.13 70.13 1% 87.76 69.26 70.13 70.13 1% 1 227 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Parks & Recreation FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Adult Center (1000) Aquatics $373,567 $373,503 $485,907 $221,959 $485,907 $221,959 $484,688 $218,251 0% -2% (1000) Audio/Visual $211,025 $0 $0 $0 NA $942 $1,429,426 $0 $1,562,987 $0 $1,562,987 $0 $1,426,274 NA -9% (1000) Glendale Community Center $174,166 $136,070 $136,070 $129,873 -5% (1000) Historic Sahuaro Ranch $315,483 $242,300 $242,300 $231,126 -5% (1000) Marketing - Parks & Rec (1000) Park Irrigation $175,387 $281,613 $146,670 $252,116 $146,670 $252,116 $139,706 $242,779 -5% -4% (1000) Park Rangers $260,145 $265,687 $265,687 $259,807 -2% (1000) Parks & Recreation Admin. (1000) Parks CIP & Planning $243,139 $298,995 $240,308 $180,341 $240,308 $180,341 $139,186 $174,510 -42% -3% (1000) Copper Canyon HS Youth Dev Prg (1000) Foothills Recreation Center (1000) Parks Maintenance $3,725,971 $3,254,902 $3,326,902 $3,208,114 -1% (1000) Pool Maintenance $257,481 $196,824 $196,824 $187,553 -5% (1000) Recreation Support Services (1000) Special Events and Programs $933,309 $184,745 $840,636 $94,157 $838,034 $94,157 $793,122 $86,276 -6% -8% (1000) Sports and Health $316,697 $403,116 $403,116 $392,850 -3% (1000) Youth and Teen (1280) YSC - Parks & Rec $418,610 $246,571 $512,548 $262,000 $512,548 $262,000 $530,707 $262,000 4% 0% (1840) Grant Approp - Parks & Rec $63,876 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 0% (1880) Adult Center Self Sustaining $149,973 $135,000 $135,000 $117,000 -13% (1880) Aquatic Self Sustaining (1880) Glendale Community Center $81,695 $861 $92,919 $5,000 $92,919 $5,000 $90,001 $5,000 -3% 0% (1880) Rec Self Sust-Administration $17,296 $15,000 $15,000 $15,360 2% $18,806 $233,355 $0 $272,748 $0 $272,748 $0 $254,893 NA -7% (1880) Rec Self Sust-Audio/Visual (1880) Rec Self Sust-Foothills Rec (1880) Recreation Self-Sustaining (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) Dedicate A Tree $0 $0 $0 $15,000 NA $62,077 $73,363 $73,363 $34,999 -52% $179,865 $303,547 $249,922 $326,735 $249,922 $326,735 $228,364 $312,584 -9% -4% $7,080 $19,000 $19,000 $19,000 0% $54,802 $5,161 $20,000 $19,000 $20,000 $19,000 $20,000 $19,000 0% 0% $238 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 0% (1885) Desert Gardens Park $2,938 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 0% (1885) Desert Mirage Park (1885) Desert Valley Park $0 $1,555 $7,000 $2,000 $7,000 $2,000 $7,000 $2,000 0% 0% (1885) Discovery Park $0 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 0% $19,958 $116 $44,038 $0 $44,038 $0 $44,038 $0 0% NA (1885) GESD ES Ballfields $0 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 0% (1885) Ironwood HS Light $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 0% $4,082 $0 $30,200 $4,800 $30,200 $4,800 $30,200 $4,800 0% 0% $11,428,056 $11,196,253 $11,265,651 $10,707,061 -4% (1885) Elsie McCarthy Pk. Maint (1885) GCC Pool Repair (1885) Ironwood Pool Repair (1885) O'Neil Park Maintenance Total - Parks & Recreation 228 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Parks & Recreation BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $7,157,510 $3,724,091 $6,846,982 $4,044,704 $6,850,917 $4,112,976 $6,575,527 $4,014,809 -4% -1% Internal Premiums $212,407 $212,253 $212,253 $193,470 -9% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $351,767 $30,282 $368,355 $365,546 $369,181 0% ($445,926) 62% Work Order Credits Total - Parks & Recreation ($48,001) ($276,041) ($276,041) $11,428,056 $11,196,253 $11,265,651 $10,707,061 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Adult Center 6 8 8 8 0% (1000) Aquatics 1 1 1 1 0% (1000) Audio/Visual (1000) Foothills Recreation Center 2 10 8 7.75 7.75 -3% (1000) Glendale Community Center 3 2 2 2 0% (1000) Historic Sahuaro Ranch 3 3 3 3 0% (1000) Marketing - Parks & Rec (1000) Park Irrigation 1 4 1.75 3 1.75 3 1.75 3 0% 0% (1000) Park Rangers 5 3 3 3 0% (1000) Parks & Recreation Admin. (1000) Parks CIP & Planning 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 -50% 0% (1000) Parks Maintenance 27 23 20 20 -13% (1000) Pool Maintenance 3 2 2 2 0% (1000) Recreation Support Services (1000) Special Events and Programs 8 2 6 1 6 1 6 1 0% 0% STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Sports and Health (1000) Youth and Teen (1880) Rec Self Sust-Foothills Rec 5 5 5 5 0% 8.25 6.5 1 6.75 1 6.75 1 4% 0% 0% (1880) Sports Self Sustaining (1880) Youth and Teen Self Sustaining Total -Parks & Recreation -4% 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 0% 98.25 84.25 80.25 80.25 -5% 229 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Police Services POLICE SERVICES Chief Steve Conrad Mission Statement: The mission of the Glendale Police Department is to protect the lives and property of the people we serve. Department Description: The Glendale Police Department is committed to preventing crime, maintaining order, and providing support to numerous events held within the city. 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. Emphasis is placed on progressive, innovative techniques and emerging technologies in order to accomplish our mission. A partnership with our citizens and consistent engagement of our community allow us to formulate policing strategies that are critical to our mission. The Glendale Police Department provides 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. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Enhance response to crime. One community focused on public safety. • Identify and arrest more repeat offenders. • Enhance victim services and communications. • Target and attack crime in “hotspots” through analysis of patterns and trends. Reduce Part I crimes by 5%. Part I crimes are those crimes that involve murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft auto theft and arson. This goal involves an ongoing time commitment. Efforts to reduce crime are a constant goal in order to improve the lives of the public. Economic conditions require the evaluation and implementation of more efficient and effective crime prevention and control strategies. Enhance community outreach. 230 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Police Services Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges One community focused on public safety • Increase promotion of Neighborhood Watch Groups • Increase direct contact with citizens and organized citizen groups. • Conduct Citizen Customer Service Survey • Improve Volunteer Program participation. Increase citizen contacts through increased programming and increased participation. This goal involves an ongoing time commitment. The Glendale Police promote the Community Policing philosophy that seeks to actively involve the community in the development and application of strategies to address public safety issues. Strained resources may adversely impact the ability to dedicate desired time to outreach efforts in order to respond to priority calls for service. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Smart Policing Initiative – Partnering with the ASU’s Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety with a grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) the department used community policing problem solving methods to target and reduce crime and disorder. Multifaceted approaches addressed neighborhood crime problems resulting in significant crime reductions. • Restructured Approach to Investigations – A Night Detective Squad was created to enhance response to high profile crimes after hours. Property Crime detectives were assigned to the Patrol Divisions to improve coordination with patrol officers. • External Partnerships - The Criminal Investigations Division is in the process of developing a formal ongoing partnership with the Federal Bureau of Investigations, the U.S. Secret Service, and the U.S. Marshals Service to aide in the enhanced service to victims of crime within Glendale. • In-Car Video Cameras – A COPS Office grant enabled the installation of in-car video cameras in department patrol vehicles enhancing officer safety, accountability, and prosecutions. Accomplishments: • Glendale was recognized as one of the Top 10 Safest Cities in America by Forbes Magazine based on violent crime rates and fatal traffic accidents. Violent crime (murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault) declined 14% in 2010. Three of four categories of property crime (burglary, auto theft and arson) declined 15.6%. • The Department secured three grants to assist funding replacement of the current 231 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Police Services • CAD/RMS hardware and software which are over 20 years old. Officers now have more access to information through the newly activated access to the Justice Web Interface, COPLINK and WISE-Net. Patrol Commanders continue to meet regularly with citizen groups who act in an advisory capacity providing information and input on community concerns. Patrol Divisions host quarterly meetings with citizens to discuss crime trends and provide crime prevention options. GOAL UPDATES Goal Enhance response to crime. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Violent crimes (murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assaults) What were the declined 14% in 2010. Property crime of burglary, stolen vehicles Performance Measures? and arson are down by at total of 15.6%. Economic conditions required organizational and procedural Obstacles/Challenges changes in order to maintain services. Goal Enhance community outreach. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? Thirty seven new Neighborhood Watch groups were formed and department personnel significantly increased public contacts through What were the Performance Measures? meetings and presentations. Citizens contributed more then 12,000 hours of service to the department. Finding new and innovative ways to engage and involve the public. Obstacles/Challenges 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 232 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Police Services 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 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 Enhance response to crime. One community focused on public safety. Yes. Related Council Goal 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 Enhance community outreach. One community focused on public safety. Related Council Goal Yes. Was the goal met? At least 16 new Neighborhood Watch programs were initiated in What were the Performance Measures? 2009. None. Obstacles/Challenges 233 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Police Department FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget (1000) Central Patrol Bureau (1000) Crime Investigations $10,566,204 $8,205,705 $10,515,737 $8,267,040 $10,515,737 $8,267,040 $10,712,033 $8,487,109 (1000) Foothills Patrol Bureau $10,022,820 $9,724,831 $9,724,831 $10,480,476 8% (1000) PD - Communications (1000) PD - Detention $2,483,382 $2,064,559 $2,364,899 $1,339,259 $2,364,899 $1,339,259 $2,255,017 $1,097,144 -5% -18% (1000) PD - Emergency Management Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 2% 3% $0 $798,161 $798,161 $737,610 -8% (1000) PD - Fiscal Management $1,386,464 $2,568,104 $2,568,104 $2,839,755 11% (1000) PD - Special Operations (1000) PD - Tow Administration $4,770,310 $103,795 $4,241,005 $61,063 $4,241,005 $61,063 $4,460,707 $44,128 5% -28% (1000) Police Administration $2,800,306 $2,838,805 $2,838,805 $2,377,837 -16% (1000) Police Legal Services (1000) Police Personnel Management $206,738 $2,619,168 $145,530 $2,359,090 $26,872 $2,359,090 $4,467 $2,232,275 -97% -5% (1000) Police Support Services $1,869,290 $1,335,121 $1,335,121 $1,330,181 0% (1000) PS Training Ctr - Police $619,583 $577,227 $577,227 $577,227 0% $268,125 $1,501,860 $401,268 $1,341,354 $401,268 $1,341,354 $401,268 $1,343,947 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 (1842) JAG Recovery Act (1842) PSSP Police OT Grant (1842) Stop Violence - Women (1860) Federal RICO (1860) State RICO (2530) PS Training Ops - Police Total - Police Department $495,334 $836,831 $836,831 $838,135 0% $9,433,739 $2,032,316 $12,586,512 $4,500,000 $12,586,512 $4,500,000 $14,173,737 $4,500,000 13% 0% $76,201 $102,667 $102,667 $104,752 2% $114,309 $117,206 $117,206 $95,482 -19% $0 $0 $740,863 $0 $0 $0 $740,863 $75,000 0% NA $52,219 $115,978 $0 $84,742 -27% $26 $1,208,209 $225,000 $1,099,389 $225,000 $1,099,389 $225,000 $3,670,053 0% 234% $309,425 $331,162 $331,162 $326,041 -2% $63,210,087 $69,534,102 $68,558,603 $74,214,986 7% 234 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Police Department BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $52,013,657 $7,556,217 $53,224,454 $12,348,928 $53,105,796 $11,227,087 $58,201,898 $14,341,705 Internal Premiums $2,011,231 $2,403,323 $2,403,323 $2,201,890 -8% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $1,886,957 $115,146 $2,382,238 $102,074 $2,382,238 $367,074 $2,147,695 $429,786 -10% 321% Work Order Credits ($3,107,988) 235% $69,534,102 $68,558,603 $74,214,986 7% STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Central Patrol Bureau 120 120 118 118 -2% (1000) Crime Investigations 85 83 85 85 2% 116 35.5 110 32.5 115 30.5 115 30.5 5% -6% 13 10 9 9 -10% 6 6 6 0% (1000) Foothills Patrol Bureau (1000) PD - Communications (1000) PD - Detention (1000) PD - Emergency Management ($926,915) ($926,915) 9% 16% $63,210,087 Total - Police Department ($373,121) Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) PD - Special Operations (1000) PD - Tow Administration 44 1 38 1 39 1 39 1 3% 0% (1000) Police Administration 26 19 21 21 11% (1000) Police Legal Services (1000) Police Personnel Management 2 29 1 25 24 24 -4% 31.5 19.5 24.5 24.5 26% 2 2 2 2 0% 1 118 1 118 1 118 1 118 0% 0% 1 1 1 1 0% 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 0% 0% (1000) Police Support Services (1281) Stadium - PD Event Staffing (1282) Arena-PD Event Staffing (1700) Patrol - Special Revenue Fund (1840) Victim Rights - PD (1840) VOCA (1860) State RICO (2530) PS Training Ops - Police Total -Police Department 2 2 2 2 0% 628.5 590.5 598.5 598.5 1% 235 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual $661,429 $120,573 FY 2010 Actual $524,203 Supplies and Contracts $221,337 Total - Homeland Security STAFFING BY PROGRAM $0 $0 FY 2012 Budget $0 $0 Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $0 $0 NA NA FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $6,413 $30,049 $782,002 FY 2010 Actual (1000) Emergency Operations Ctr (EOC) 6 (1000) Homeland Security Admin. 1 Total -Homeland Security FY 2011 Estimate $782,002 Wages/Salaries/Benefits Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges FY 2011 Budget 7 236 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Field Operations Public Works Field Operations Engineering FIELD OPERATIONS Stuart Kent Mission Statement: A partnership of employees and community working together to create a better quality of life for Glendale. Department Description: The Field Operations Department provides essential services that directly impact the community and provides support to other departments within the organization. The department’s core functions include: Solid Waste Collection for residential and commercial customers, curbside recycling for single-family homes, household hazardous waste pick-up, residential loose trash collection and street sweeping. Solid waste disposal services are provided at the Glendale Municipal Landfill and Materials Recovery Facility. Street Maintenance functions include street and concrete repair, right-of-way beautification, and graffiti removal, as well as burial services at the Glendale Memorial Cemetery. Equipment Management maintains a fleet of over 1,200 city vehicles allowing police, fire, streets, sanitation, utilities and other city services to be provided to the community. Facilities Management maintains over 102 buildings totaling approximately 1.8 million gross square feet so that customers and city employees can conduct business in a clean and professional setting. Administrative services provides leadership and professional support to the department’s internal operations, and interacts with City Council, city departments, the community, and other governmental agencies and public entities. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Increase fleet fuel efficiency. One community that is fiscally sound. Perform preventative maintenance on schedule. Maintain proper tire pressures. Improve on fuel reporting accuracy. Reduce vehicle idling time. Increase use of Motor Pool operations. Purchase new fuel efficient vehicles. 237 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Field Operations Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment 5% reduction in total fuel used resulting in approximately 37,000 gallons saved annually. Ongoing - goal requires work throughout the year and will be evaluated monthly. Maintaining fuel reporting accuracy with older fuel dispensing and tracking equipment that requires regular monitoring and adjustment. Educating fleet vehicle users to encourage support of ongoing fleet fuel reduction initiatives. Reduce costs of solid waste collection operations without compromising the high level of service provided. One community with high quality services for citizens. Analyze routes using tools such as GPS technology and the Landfill scale system to determine efficiency of routing and customer distribution throughout the city. Supervisors and superintendent will review internal operational reports, expenditures, and customer comments to evaluate progress toward the goal. By maximizing route efficiencies and eliminating redundancies, the division can realize potential savings in fuel, labor and equipment O and M. This will be an ongoing effort and should continue even after the initial changes are made to ensure that the division is reaching maximum savings potential. Equipment operators will need to learn new routes and new business practices. Manage the city’s pavement infrastructure through ongoing maintenance and repair of up to twenty-one miles of collector/residential streets. One community with high-quality services for citizens. Complete all localized asphalt repairs, the sealing of surface cracks and the application of a full width surface treatment. Complete preparation and surface treatment of up to twentyone miles of collector/residential streets. Surface treatments extend the useful life of roadways and provide a smooth surface for motorists. The surface treatment and all of the preparatory activities are expected to be completed by the end of the fiscal year. As an ongoing effort, some activities are performed in a given year in preparation for projects taking place the following year. 238 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Field Operations Expected Challenges Coordination of staff and contractor activities to provide a timely and minimally intrusive service for the residents. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • As a result of the Innovate Process, the Equipment Management Division consolidated the vehicle replacement fund database with the fleet management system to eliminate a need to enter duplicate information in multiple systems. The change reduces the time needed to process new vehicles and the possibility of input errors. • Solid Waste Collection is utilizing GPS technology on the sanitation fleet to achieve operational efficiencies and cost savings. • Effective April 4, 2011, the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) expanded the list of accepted recyclable items to include any plastic that is marked as a 1-7. The MRF is able to add plastics # 3-7 to the processing line without making any modifications to the existing equipment. This change in business practice will allow residents to place more recyclable items into their cans and save valuable landfill space. Accomplishments: • Equipment Management effectively maintained the city fleet with a 20% reduction in shop staffing. Fleet vehicle availably remained high and annual fleet maintenance costs were reduced by over $300,000. Additionally, the division fully implemented the operation of 22 Motor Pool vehicles at two locations. The establishment of the Motor Pool was instrumental in allowing departments to turn in over 100 vehicles as part of ongoing budget reductions. • New technology has allowed for improved sanitation fleet management resulting in fewer miles driven, increased customer service and overall fuel savings. This new technology has contributed to a 4% decrease in miles driven and 7% less fuel being used. Essentially, sanitation has been able to service the same community driving approximately 50,000 fewer miles and using 30,000 fewer gallons of gas through identified route efficiencies and revised collection practices. The technology has also allowed for fewer missed containers and streets during collections, resulting in fewer customer complaints. Operational improvements have contributed to a fuel cost savings of approximately $96,000. • In November 2010, the landfill entrance signalization project was completed at the MRF. The improvement allows traffic to safely enter the landfill with a deceleration lane and a safe exit from the landfill with a traffic signal. • Streets Maintenance completed the asphalt overlay of a small group of residential streets using CDBG. GOAL UPDATES Goal Reduce contamination received by recycling facility. 239 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Field Operations Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges One community for high quality services for citizens. No. Recycling contamination rate is reviewed each month in conjunction with MRF processing operations. Recycling contamination has seemed to increase in conjunction with the current economic conditions as homeowners/tenants use recycling containers for refuse as they vacate residences. Complete an audit of the vehicle replacement fund to evaluate sustainability and financial health. Goal One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Performance Measures? Obstacles/Challenges Goal is on hold pending funding availability. Review recommendations of audit report. Funding is not available for the foreseeable future. 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 Goal Related Council Goal Complete a comprehensive needs analysis and cost evaluation associated with proposed improvements including reconfiguration of landfill entrance roadway (Phase II) and relocation of the scale house and administrative facilities. One community with high quality services for citizens. 240 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Field Operations Design of the new entrance feature completed in April 2010, 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. 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. Related Council Goal Over 80 vehicles eliminated resulting in operational and maintenance savings and over $1.2 million in capital replacement Was the goal met? 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. Goal 241 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual $207,580 $1,130,293 FY 2011 Budget $233,250 $1,043,615 FY 2011 Estimate $233,250 $1,043,615 FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $221,401 $890,900 -5% -15% $80,639 $102,859 $102,859 $82,859 -19% $4,538,627 $1,030,030 $3,361,963 $627,170 $3,361,963 $627,170 $3,774,973 $610,971 12% -3% $236,002 $292,797 $292,797 $234,496 -20% $4,908 $5,113 $5,113 $5,113 0% (1040) Equipment Management (1040) Fuel Services $3,812,363 $2,740,215 $3,959,223 $3,303,176 $3,993,158 $3,269,241 $3,810,623 $3,303,029 -4% 0% (1040) Parts Store Operations $1,375,625 $1,818,371 $1,818,371 $1,820,397 0% (1120) Equipment Replacement (1280) YSC - Facilities Mgt. $1,762,518 $52,485 $3,029,741 $65,000 $2,959,741 $65,000 $3,029,742 $60,000 0% -8% 0% (1000) Facilities Management (1000) Field Operations Admin. (1000) Graffiti Removal (1000) Manistee Ranch Maintenance (1282) Arena - ROW Maintenance $35,574 $49,966 $49,966 $49,966 (1340) Right-of-Way Maintenance $2,294,458 $2,026,279 $2,116,279 $2,084,123 3% (1340) Street Cleaning (1340) Street Maintenance $141,603 $2,850,276 $0 $2,687,943 $0 $2,597,943 $0 $2,350,017 NA -13% (2440) Gas Management System $139,306 $169,400 $169,400 $169,400 0% $4,079,685 $1,800,754 $2,926,869 $2,223,685 $3,121,513 $1,764,571 $3,162,699 $2,021,336 8% -9% (2440) Recycling $772,004 $940,620 $904,328 $937,523 0% (2440) Solid Waste Admin $578,055 $782,455 $787,207 $808,184 3% (2480) Curb Service (2480) Residential-Loose Trash Collec $6,624,900 $2,402,881 $6,960,004 $2,500,010 $6,960,004 $2,551,090 $7,548,223 $2,802,234 8% 12% (2480) Sanitation Frontload $3,132,858 $3,493,979 $3,493,979 $3,435,176 -2% $713,495 $513,955 $939,201 $353,664 $863,893 $353,664 $795,098 $455,462 -15% 29% $43,051,089 $43,896,353 $43,506,115 $44,463,945 (2440) Landfill (2440) MRF Operations (2480) Sanitation Roll-off (2530) PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Total - Field Operations 242 Return to OP Bdgt TOC 1% City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Field Operations BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $15,888,979 $15,637,452 $15,400,117 $15,733,834 $15,376,778 $15,443,074 $14,960,539 $15,630,328 Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Operating Capital Work Order Credits Total - Field Operations STAFFING BY PROGRAM Percent Over FY 2011 Budget -3% -1% $754,618 $806,039 $806,039 $789,517 -2% $9,043,192 $1,734,211 $9,736,704 $2,884,741 $9,660,565 $2,884,741 $10,787,974 $2,954,742 11% 2% ($7,363) ($665,082) ($665,082) ($659,155) $43,051,089 $43,896,353 $43,506,115 $44,463,945 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget -1% 1% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Cemetery 2 2 2 2 0% (1000) Custodial Services 20 18 15 15 -17% (1000) Facilities Management (1000) Field Operations Admin. 21 8 17 2 16 2 16 2 -6% 0% (1000) Graffiti Removal 4 3 3 3 0% (1040) Equipment Management 40 36 33 33 -8% (1040) Parts Store Operations (1340) Right-of-Way Maintenance 1 16 1 13 1 13 1 13 0% 0% (1340) Street Cleaning 3 (1340) Street Maintenance (2440) Landfill 35 19 28 19 27 19 27 19 -4% 0% (2440) MRF Operations 11 11 11 11 0% (2440) Recycling 6 6 6 6 0% (2440) Solid Waste Admin (2480) Curb Service 5 40 8 40 8 40 8 40 0% 0% (2480) Residential-Loose Trash Collec 20 21 21 21 0% (2480) Sanitation Frontload (2480) Sanitation Roll-off 15 5 15 4 15 3 15 3 0% -25% (2530) PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Total -Field Operations 4 2 4 4 100% 275 246 239 239 -3% 243 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Engineering ENGINEERING Larry Broyles 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. Department Description: The Engineering Department ensures citizen safety and high quality of life by providing properly designed, constructed and inspected public facilities and right-of-way infrastructure. In addition, Engineering supports other city departments when undertaking capital improvement projects. The Engineering Department also oversees the city-adopted National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which provides flood insurance to property owners which protects them against flood losses through the Community Rating System (CRS) program. The Engineering Department enforces the floodplain management ordinances and annually certifies our compliance with the credited activities required to maintain a healthy CRS rating. The Engineering Department is also responsible for maintaining records of all of the city’s property, mapping of all of our infrastructure, and drawings of all of the city facilities. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Deliver a capital improvement program that provides accurate information, optimizes available resources, and provides needed projects for our community. One community with high quality services for citizens. • Procure and manage engineering and construction consultant services for all city departments for the city’s capital and operating projects. • Provide engineering design services for various capital projects. • Provide engineering inspections services for various capital projects. • Provide monthly project updates to department clients and to citizens through website. • Complete 90% of the projects with an 85% and above satisfaction rating from the clients. • Complete 91% of the project updates for the website within the first five (5) days of every month. The goal is an ongoing effort; the completion of a project depends on the scope of work and it varies from three months to three years per project. 244 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Engineering Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges The current reduction of personnel and capital resources could impact the timely delivery of the goal. Ensure all private development projects constructed within Glendale are reviewed in a timely manner (plan review within 20 working days and material inspection within 48 hours). One community with high quality services for citizens. • Provide plan review for drainage, grading, and right of way construction plans that come to the city for review. • Provide material testing services of soils, concrete, aggregate and asphalt. • Complete 90% of plan reviews within established timelines (20 working days) • Complete 90% of scheduled inspections within 48 hours. This goal is an ongoing effort, the Engineering Department receives applications for plan reviews and material testing services year around. The Engineering Department does not expect any challenges while working towards this goal. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • The Engineering Department took the initiative to assess the possibility of providing inhouse construction inspection services to the city’s capital projects and also to other government agencies’ capital projects. This new approach, has reduced the total cost of the project construction administration by using in-house staff for select capital projects. Right now, the department is providing construction inspections services to approximately ten of the city’s capital projects and three other governments’ agencies capital projects. • The Engineering Department in conjunction with the Utilities Department is now utilizing “trenchless” technology in the rehabilitation of the city’s wastewater infrastructure. Previously when sewer lines began to deteriorate they would need to be dug up and replaced. Pipe lining technologies have now been developed to essentially create a new pipe within the existing pipe eliminating the need to dig up and replace the old pipe. Utilizing this type of rehabilitation is faster, minimizes disruptions to traffic, and limits service outages to residents. • The Engineering Department is participating in two Innovate projects: certificate of occupancy process and procurement realignment. These projects are still ongoing. 245 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Engineering Accomplishments: • This fiscal year, the Engineering Department completed several capital projects including: Northern Ave. Storm Drain and Raw Waterline (47th Ave. – 63rd); Bell Rd. Rubberized Asphalt Overlay (59th-70th); Glendale Municipal Landfill Traffic Signal, Glendale Avenue Overlay (51st-66th); Glendale Avenue Drainage Improvements, Centerline Project; Lamar and Cholla Vista Housing; O’Neil Park Improvements; Fire Station Ventilation System; some facilities renovation projects; Multiuse Skunk Creek/Union Hill project; Main Library Lighting Study and Improvements project; 2010 Pool Upgrades and Repairs; 65th Ave. Maryland, Tuckey and McClellan Rd. project; Bethany Home Outfall/Storm Drain (Camelback Ave. 75th-59th Ave.). GOAL UPDATES Provide a capital improvement program that assures accurate information, optimizes available resources and provides needed Goal projects for our community. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. We completed approximately 25 projects. 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 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 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 246 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Engineering • • 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 purchase 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: • During FY 2010 the Engineering Department completed several projects including the construction of the Catlin Court Alley; street improvements on the 59th Avenue Melinda to Pinnacle Peak Road; intersection improvements on 67th Olive to Bell Rd. ; relocation of Fire Station No. 151; downtown pedestrian enhancements project; 67th Avenue Thunderbird Paseo Park restoration; landfill gas system expansion; construction of Cholla Telemetry/Radio Telemetry; Arterial Street Overlay/Pavement Management project; widening of 95th Ave. Glendale to Cabela; Western Area Regional Park; Glenn Drive Improvements 57th Ave. to 57th Drive and Sahuaro Ranch Historic Area Restrooms improvements. GOAL UPDATES Provide a capital improvement program that assures accurate information, optimizes available resources and provides needed Goal 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 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 247 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Engineering FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) BofA Bank Building (1000) CIP Administration $305,358 $607,589 $256,579 $274,490 $256,579 $274,490 $256,579 $229,987 0% -16% (1000) Construction Inspection $552,304 $382,291 $382,291 $412,707 8% (1000) Engineering Administration (1000) Land Development Division $601,494 $468,433 $553,251 $483,917 $552,251 $483,917 $584,296 $306,881 6% -37% (1000) Mapping and Records $181,003 $101,869 $101,869 $96,327 -5% (1000) Materials Testing $190,789 $181,996 $181,996 $225,901 24% (1000) Promenade at Palmaire (1000) Utility Inspection $57,781 $222,986 $56,400 $142,281 $56,400 $142,281 $56,400 $13,622 0% -90% $3,187,737 $2,433,074 $2,432,074 $2,182,700 -10% Total - Engineering BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $3,231,750 $2,612,283 $2,612,283 $2,502,804 $489,177 $468,049 $467,049 $454,980 -3% $75,391 $55,253 $80,713 $72,020 $80,713 $72,020 $64,200 $52,357 -20% -27% ($663,834) Total - Engineering FY 2011 Budget $3,187,737 ($799,991) $2,433,074 ($799,991) $2,432,074 ($891,641) $2,182,700 -4% 11% -10% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget (1000) CIP Administration 15 9 9 9 0% (1000) Construction Inspection 7 4 5 5 25% (1000) Engineering Administration (1000) Land Development Division 7 5 5 5 6 3 6 3 20% -40% (1000) Mapping and Records 2 1 1 1 0% (1000) Materials Testing 3 2 3 3 50% (1000) Utility Inspection (1660) Transportation Engineering Pgm 3 1 2 43 28 27 27 -4% STAFFING BY PROGRAM Total -Engineering 248 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 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 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate $198,962 $198,125 $198,125 $198,962 $198,125 $198,125 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate $195,815 $665 $201,564 $5,026 $201,564 $5,026 Internal Premiums $1,232 $1,266 $1,266 Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $1,250 $1,267 ($10,998) $1,267 ($10,998) $198,125 $198,125 Total - Public Works Admin. STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1000) Public Works Administration Total -Public Works Admin. $198,962 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget 1 1 1 1 249 Return to OP Bdgt TOC FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $0 -100% FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Technology & Innovation TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION Chuck Murphy 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. Department Description: The Information Technology Department (ITD) supports the City’s technology infrastructure such as application support, network, data services, email, and telephony. ITD also supports the enhancement of business processes through the use of the LEAN methodology blended with the appropriate application of technology. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Support the Police Department with the implementation of a new records management and computer aided dispatch system. One community committed to public safety. • Provide IT technical resources according to project plans. • Provide support with contract negotiations and review. • Complete contract review by 10/31/2011. • Complete other tasks in accordance with projects timelines and due dates. This is a very large project that will require extensive resources. Since it is in the initial stages, the project time line has not been established. The project integrates with several existing applications that will require significant technical resources that have yet to be identified. Develop 2013-2017 Information Technology Strategic Plan. One community that is fiscally sound. • Work with departments to understand new business processes resulting from reorganization and LEAN. • Blend emerging technology trends with City operations to effectively enhance service provision. • Incorporate the Innovate program into the plan. 250 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Technology & Innovation Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Complete research for plan by June 30, 2012. The time commitment is substantial as departments are expected to revamp business processes concurrent with the ITD plan development. Since technology changes so quickly, it is always a challenge to develop a multi-year plan that is not quickly obsolete. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • Service Desk staff have been replacing faulty capacitors as opposed to replacing expensive mother boards. This has saved the City approximately $29,000. Accomplishments: • Supported the Finance Department with the sales tax system implementation. • Partnered with the Police Department with the development of an RFP for their new computer aided dispatch and records management systems. GOAL UPDATES Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? Explore and evaluate productivity solutions (i.e. Microsoft Office, Open Office, etc). One community that is fiscally sound. IT met with Google and Microsoft in regards to their product offerings. Due to product release dates being delayed, the selection process will continue into early summer. What were the Select new solution by June 30, 2011. Performance Measures? Microsoft has new product offerings, which will not be available until summer 2011. This has made it difficult to make a final Obstacles/Challenges decision. Goal Evaluate data back-up and email archiving solutions. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes, new solutions were selected. Was the goal met? The annual savings by making this change is approximately What were the Performance Measures? $69,000. No obstacles or changes. Obstacles/Challenges 251 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Technology & Innovation 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 Support the Finance Department and city with the selection and implementation of a new sales tax system. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Partially, IT has supported and continues to support the implementation of a new sales tax system, which is slated to go live Was the goal met? in Fall 2010. • Attend all meetings; provide information and leadership for IT’s involvement in the project. What were the • Installation and configuration of hardware, operating system and Performance Measures? database software that meets the service levels defined by Finance. Balancing resources with other projects and day-to-day operations. Obstacles/Challenges Goal Goal Related Council Goal Was the goal met? 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. 252 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Info. Technology FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Information Technology (1100) Telephones $3,520,751 $1,278,946 $3,048,826 $977,252 $3,048,826 $977,252 $2,757,188 $979,324 (1140) Technology Replacement $1,365,233 $3,510,103 $2,208,764 $3,511,584 0% $6,164,930 $7,536,181 $6,234,842 $7,248,096 -4% Total - Info. Technology BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget -10% 0% Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $2,930,928 $2,602,378 $2,602,378 $2,553,253 -2% Supplies and Contracts Internal Premiums $2,490,630 $629,835 $3,620,078 $638,879 $2,900,630 $638,879 $3,609,721 $499,863 0% -22% -9% Internal Service Charges $14,077 $15,519 $15,519 $14,108 Operating Capital $99,460 $797,583 $215,692 $803,687 1% ($138,256) ($138,256) ($232,536) 68% Work Order Credits Total - Info. Technology $6,164,930 $7,536,181 $6,234,842 $7,248,096 -4% STAFFING BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) Information Technology (1100) Telephones 29 1 25 1 25 1 25 1 0% 0% (1140) Technology Replacement Total -Info. Technology 1 1 1 1 0% 31 27 27 27 0% 253 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Transportation Transportation Services Transportation Airport TRANSPORTATION Jamsheed Mehta Mission Statement: To ensure the safe, efficient transportation of people and goods in the City of Glendale. Department Description: Transportation Services plans, programs, funds, designs, constructs, maintains and manages programs and projects for all modes of transportation including, aviation, streets and highways, pedestrians, bicycles, and transit services. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Successfully coordinate final design and construction of major roadway projects in Glendale to include Northern Parkway and the Loop 303. One community with quality economic development. Design plans for Northern Parkway and Loop 303 are near completion with construction to start in FY 2012. Staff will partner and work with Arizona Department of Transportation and Maricopa County Department of Transportation to ensure design and construction coordination is consistent with Glendale standards for those portions of the projects that are in Glendale. Agreements for ongoing operating and maintenance are reviewed and complete. Design and construction standards are to Glendale specifications. These high priority projects will be constructed over several years. These are large multi-year projects requiring coordination between state, regional, and local agencies with competing priorities. 254 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Transportation Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges Successfully lead ten federally funded traffic signal/intelligent transportation system and safety projects through the federal-aid process. Projects include new communication lines to traffic signals, real-time traffic monitoring cameras, electronic message signs in downtown, and pedestrian- countdown signal heads. One community with high quality services for citizens. Coordination with the Arizona Department of Transportation to complete utility, right-of-way, and environmental clearances, prepare project specifications, design approvals, and project agreements. Improved signal coordination, quicker incident response to traffic congestion, and advanced driver information. These projects will take approximately two years to complete. The projects are in various stages of completion and the Arizona Department of Transportation is implementing new guidelines and requirements for procurement projects that are federally funded. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • To provide enhanced driver information to the public traveling to and from the Sports and Entertainment District, electronic message signs are used around the arena and stadium during most of the events. In FY 2011, the electronic message signs have been used to display 250 messages for a total of 1,286 hours. Accomplishments: • Over $48.7 million from federal, state, and regional sources was programmed or expended to improve the city’s intersections, roadways, bike paths, pedestrian walkways, and transit services. • Transportation’s efforts in receiving the environmental assessment approval by the Federal Highway Administration for the Northern Parkway project cleared the way for committed federal funding of over $221 million to the project. 255 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Transportation GOAL UPDATES Enhance regional highway connectivity in Glendale’s future growth areas. One community with quality economic development. Related Council Goal Yes-Planned improvements for the Loop 303, Northern Parkway, Grand Avenue, and ongoing improvements of the Loop 101 have been designed and are near or are under construction. Extending Was the goal met? these transportation corridors into undeveloped areas will not only provide access to new business and commercial areas but will also attract private-sector investment along these growth corridors. Integrating the design of multiple projects that would ensure What were the Performance Measures? connectivity between all highways and Glendale’s growth areas. Challenges included coordinating with multiple agencies at the federal, state, and regional levels to ensure design coordination, Obstacles/Challenges and securing funding in light of budget reductions at all levels of government. Goal Explore revenue generating options and pursue new funding sources through grants and other potential revenue generating Goal options to offset shortfalls in Transit funding from local and state revenue sources. One community that is fiscally sound. Related Council Goal Yes-Two grants known as New Freedom and Job Access Reverse Commute totaling $1.5 million were received. With the loss of state funds in December 2009 and regional funds in 2010 transit Was the goal met? schedules and routes would have been significantly impacted. Staff aggressively pursued federal discretionary grants, and award of these two grants prevented immediate service cuts. To research and secure grant funding, and explore other revenue What were the Performance Measures? generating options. The grant selection process is highly competitive and only a few Obstacles/Challenges cities in Maricopa County were awarded these funds. 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 256 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure 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 Obstacles/Challenges challenging to complete designs and environmental clearances for 77 signalized intersections, and 25 miles of roadway. Goal Improve access control and beautification along Grand Avenue. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Considerable progress has been made and several properties have Was the goal met? 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 lengthy Obstacles/Challenges process. 257 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Transportation FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1010) Transp - Stadium Mgmt Plan (1281) Stadium - Transportation Ops. FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $21,320 $643,436 $0 $645,734 $0 $645,734 $0 $645,734 NA 0% (1281) Transp - Fiesta Bowl Event $78,983 $79,942 $79,942 $79,942 0% (1282) Arena - Transportation Ops. (1340) Signs & Markings $11,370 $698,602 $15,000 $707,617 $15,000 $707,617 $15,000 $646,465 0% -9% $1,640,955 $1,093,283 $1,093,283 $1,403,390 28% $292,293 $301,709 $301,709 $290,717 -4% $1,052,189 $410,766 $903,017 $369,166 $903,017 $369,166 $800,256 $345,690 -11% -6% (1340) Transportation Administration $373,594 $373,165 $373,165 $296,918 -20% (1340) Transportation Planning (1650) Grant Approp - Transportation $2,178 $0 $0 $0 $0 $768,765 $0 $768,765 NA NA (1340) Street Light Management (1340) Traffic Design and Development (1340) Traffic Signals (1340) Traffic Studies (1650) HSIP Ped Countdown Signals (1660) Demand Management (1660) Dial-A-Ride (1660) Fixed Route (1660) Intelligent Transportation Sys (1660) Red Light Enforcement (1660) Traffic Mitigation (1660) Transit Management (1660) Transportation CIP O&M (1660) Transportation Education (1660) Transportation Program Mgmt (1842) FTA AZ-96-X002 (1842) Old Roma Alley ARRA Grant Total - Transportation $0 $0 $55,200 $0 $32,091 $8,105 $42,000 $42,000 NA $2,390,040 $4,502,347 $2,391,129 $5,675,488 $2,391,129 $4,875,488 $2,449,479 $5,175,488 $433,478 $590,944 $590,944 $600,342 2% $23,781 $90,293 $0 $578,348 $0 $328,348 $0 $580,336 NA 0% $322,534 $322,741 $322,741 $339,875 5% $91,734 $113,893 $113,893 $113,893 0% $180,310 $2,026,866 $223,934 $2,298,887 $223,934 $2,297,587 $226,075 $2,313,072 1% 1% NA 418% 2% -9% $74,874 $0 $0 $0 $159,776 $0 $457,656 $0 NA $15,553,810 $16,692,102 $16,956,318 $17,133,437 3% 258 Return to OP Bdgt 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 2010 Actual $5,800,825 $7,616,640 $5,631,821 $9,317,080 FY 2011 Estimate $5,950,272 $8,804,293 FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $5,871,007 $9,495,660 4% 2% $375,417 $418,673 $418,673 $404,534 -3% $1,686,654 $152,966 $1,692,723 $1,721,726 $429,549 $1,741,584 3% ($78,692) Total - Transportation FY 2011 Budget ($368,195) ($368,195) ($379,348) 3% $15,553,810 $16,692,102 $16,956,318 $17,133,437 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1340) Signs & Markings 10 8 8 8 0% (1340) Street Light Management 2 (1340) Traffic Design and Development (1340) Traffic Signals 3 10 3 7 3 7 3 7 0% 0% (1340) Traffic Studies 5 4 4 4 0% (1340) Transportation Administration 5 4 3 3 -25% 1 35.25 34.25 34.25 34.25 0% (1660) Intelligent Transportation Sys 5 4 4 4 0% (1660) Traffic Mitigation (1660) Transit Management 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 0% 0% (1660) Transportation Education 1 1 1 1 0% (1660) Transportation Program Mgmt 3 5 5 5 0% 85.25 75.25 74.25 74.25 -1% STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1340) Transportation Planning (1660) Dial-A-Ride Total -Transportation 259 Return to OP Bdgt TOC 3% City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Airport FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual (1760) Airport Operations Total - Airport BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $621,749 $538,916 $538,916 $527,326 -2% $621,749 $538,916 $538,916 $527,326 -2% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $395,229 $166,635 $345,673 $147,941 $345,673 $147,941 $317,908 $147,941 -8% 0% Internal Premiums $20,914 $30,015 $30,015 $38,218 27% Internal Service Charges Work Order Credits $38,971 $30,784 ($15,497) $30,784 ($15,497) $30,365 ($7,106) -1% -54% $621,749 $538,916 $538,916 Total - Airport STAFFING BY PROGRAM (1760) Airport Operations Total -Airport $527,326 -2% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 5 5 5 5 0% 5 5 5 5 0% 260 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Mission and Performance Measure Utilities Water Services Utilities Environmental Resources UTILITIES Craig Johnson 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. Department Description: The Utilities Department serves more than 225,000 people within the City of Glendale. The Department is responsible for treating and distributing potable water that meets all federal and state drinking water standards, collection 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. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Complete the sewer rehabilitation and replacement project to meet the federal and state regulatory requirements. The sewer system will be rehabilitated using state-of- the-art trenchless technologies to reduce construction costs. One community with high quality services for citizens. The project includes both design and construction phases. Currently, the project is under construction phase. Completion of sewer rehabilitation and replacement by October 2011. Time Commitment It is an ongoing project and the time commitment is 100%. Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Challenges None. 261 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Utilities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) 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. One community with high quality services for citizens. The project includes design and construction phases. Currently, the project is under design phase. Completion of UV replacement construction by November 2012. Time Commitment It is an ongoing project and the time commitment is 100%. Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Challenges None. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • A water production optimization program was implemented which resulted in approximately $600,000 annual cost savings in 2011. The Utilities and Environmental Resources Departments was instrumental in generating additional revenues, including amendment of the SROG effluent agreement with the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station which resulted in $0.5 million additional annual revenue in FY 2011. • Cost savings of $200,000 in meter replacement in FY 2011 was achieved through the implementation of new procedures for changing out meters. Accomplishments: • The Department received the most prestigious Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies Platinum Award for utilities performance excellence in FY 2011. Since 2004, the only cities in Arizona to receive this award have been Tucson Water and the City of Glendale. • The Department also implemented an annual fire hydrant maintenance program to meet the Insurance Services Office (ISO) requirements and to ensure the existing public fire protection is available to individual property owners. This program has helped lower home owner insurance costs within the city. 262 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Utilities GOAL UPDATES 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 preconstruction and the onset of construction. One community with high quality services for citizens. Yes. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the The project will be completed by May 2011. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges Goal 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. One community with high quality services for citizens. It is anticipated to meet the goal after project completion. Related Council Goal Was the goal met? What were the Completion of UV replacement project by November 2012. Performance Measures? None. Obstacles/Challenges 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. 263 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Utilities 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 and Was the goal met? 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 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. Was the goal met? What were the Completion of the report during FY 2010. Performance Measures? Constantly changing landuse plans complicated the study effort but Obstacles/Challenges were resolved in a timely manner. 264 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Utilities FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (2360) Arrowhead Reclamation Plant (2360) Information Management (2360) Property Management (2360) Public Service Representatives (2360) Safety Administration (2360) System Security FY 2010 Actual $1,985,990 $920,288 FY 2011 Budget $2,176,656 $1,097,575 FY 2011 Estimate $2,046,656 $1,097,575 FY 2012 Budget $2,106,685 $1,071,445 Percent Over FY 2011 Budget -3% -2% $94,306 $87,000 $87,000 $87,000 0% $232,975 $26,575 $286,629 $122,107 $266,629 $107,107 $221,824 $0 -23% -100% 16% $486,631 $667,683 $617,683 $771,316 (2360) Utilities Administration $8,243,375 $6,343,982 $6,301,682 $6,433,504 1% (2360) West Area Plant (2400) Central System Control $3,474,060 $1,004,554 $3,699,346 $1,415,952 $3,438,346 $1,165,952 $3,560,668 $1,312,765 -4% -7% (2400) Central System Maintenance (2400) Cholla Treatment Plant (2400) Customer Service - Field $369,176 $758,316 $708,316 $706,057 -7% $3,221,671 $954,716 $3,681,059 $1,082,739 $3,181,059 $1,082,739 $3,459,182 $1,186,886 -6% 10% (2400) Irrigation $187,923 $193,583 $188,583 $195,269 (2400) Meter Maintenance $669,091 $1,348,944 $1,113,944 $1,208,990 -10% (2400) Oasis Water Campus (2400) Pyramid Peak Plant $3,113,823 $1,780,221 $4,277,656 $1,627,555 $3,827,656 $1,607,555 $4,104,326 $1,712,457 -4% 5% (2400) Raw Water Usage $3,144,952 $3,482,182 $3,482,182 $3,382,182 -3% (2400) Water Distribution (2420) 99th Avenue Interceptor $3,105,131 $309,613 $3,536,368 $0 $3,366,368 $200,000 $3,424,134 $200,000 -3% NA (2420) Pretreatment Program (2420) SROG (91st Ave) Plant (2420) Wastewater Collection Total - Utilities 1% $475,754 $533,992 $532,992 $526,731 -1% $2,547,780 $4,500,000 $3,400,000 $3,700,000 -18% $2,354,389 $3,278,968 $3,044,468 $3,182,901 -3% $38,702,994 $44,198,292 $40,864,492 $42,554,322 -4% 265 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Utilities BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts $11,829,113 $20,559,946 $13,458,255 $24,415,625 $13,437,877 $21,102,302 $13,415,240 $22,715,085 Internal Premiums $1,093,829 $1,196,456 $1,196,456 $1,214,903 2% Internal Service Charges Operating Capital $5,213,976 $6,130 $5,591,004 $39,000 $5,591,004 $38,901 $5,440,756 $23,687 -3% -39% $38,702,994 $44,198,292 $40,864,492 $42,554,322 FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (2360) Arrowhead Reclamation Plant 13 13 13 13 0% (2360) Information Management 6 6 6 6 0% (2360) Public Service Representatives (2360) Safety Administration 4 1 4 1 3 3 -25% Work Order Credits ($502,048) Total - Utilities STAFFING BY PROGRAM ($502,048) ($255,349) Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 0% -7% -49% -4% (2360) System Security 8 8 10 10 25% (2360) Utilities Administration 10 10 10 10 0% (2360) West Area Plant (2400) Central System Control 14 9 14 9 14 9 14 9 0% 0% (2400) Central System Maintenance 6 6 6 6 0% (2400) Cholla Treatment Plant (2400) Customer Service - Field 9 15 9 15 8 16 8 16 -11% 7% (2400) Irrigation 1 1 1 1 0% (2400) Meter Maintenance 11 11 11 11 0% (2400) Oasis Water Campus (2400) Pyramid Peak Plant 15 10 15 10 15 11 15 11 0% 10% (2400) Water Distribution 30 30 29 29 -3% (2420) Pretreatment Program (2420) Wastewater Collection 6 19 6 19 6 19 6 19 0% 0% 187 187 187 187 0% Total -Utilities 266 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES Doug Kukino 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 establishes and implements an environmental management system that assists the city to operate in an environmentally responsible manner. The Office of Conservation and Sustainable Living provides programs to inform and educate our residents, businesses, and neighborhood communities about good environmental practices. The Water Quality Laboratory protects 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. Department Description: The Environmental Resources Department provides policy analysis and planning services to city leadership and departments on issues pertaining to water resources, water quality, conservation, air quality, and environmental management. The department assists the city in conducting its operations in an environmentally responsible manner and creating organizational culture that strives for excellence in environmental stewardship and performance. FISCAL YEAR 2012 GOALS Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) To create an organizational culture that strives for high-level and continual improvement in environmental stewardship and performance. One community with high quality services for citizens. Prepare a written Storm Water Management Plan by August 27, 2011. Involve several city departments in the planning process. Proper implementation of the plan will also involve several city departments. The Stormwater Management Plan needs to be implemented and comply with the city’s new storm water permit. The plan will include procedures, processes, measures and programs to maintain storm water basins and pipes; inspect commercial, industrial and construction activities; provide public education, assure spill planning and response; perform stormwater quality monitoring; provide employee training; assure illicit discharge detection and enforcement; and provide program management and evaluation. 267 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources Time Commitment Expected Challenges Goal Related Council Goal Activities Expected Outcomes (Perf. Measures) Time Commitment Expected Challenges The plan is being completed by existing staff and will take several months to prepare. The plan will also need to be periodically updated as needed. Implementation of the plan is an ongoing commitment. Annual reports describing accomplishments are also required by the State of Arizona. The plan is complex and implementation will involve commitments by, and resources from, several city departments, including Utilities, Field Operations, Fire, Engineering, Parks and Recreation, Code Compliance and Environmental Resources. To ensure that the city has sustainable water resources to meet current and future demand. One community with high quality services for citizens. A Water Production Plan for 2012 will be prepared by October 2011, jointly by Environmental Resources and Utilities departments. The 2012 Water Production Plan will build on the optimization concepts implemented in FY 2011. The possibility of exchanging reclaimed water for Central Arizona Project water in the amount of approximately 5,000 acre-feet is being explored for FY 2012. If successful, the exchange is expected to result in savings of up to $750,000 in FY 2012. In order for the water exchange to occur, the city will need to obtain approvals from the Central Arizona Project and the Arizona Department of Water Resources. This process is expected to take several months. If successful, the city intends to seek water exchanges in future years, as appropriate. Obtaining necessary approvals will require approvals from two external agencies/organizations. The city will need to provide documentation supporting its request for the water exchange. FISCAL YEAR 2011 Area of Innovation: • The Environmental Resources Department negotiated an alternative way to meet the City’s regional air quality commitments while saving the city money. To control dust, the city will use asphalt millings to improve 10 curb miles of unpaved (road) shoulders instead of paving. The use of asphalt millings has an equivalent air quality benefit as paving, and the city saves $413,000. • The Department is utilizing the city’s Innovate program to assess the city’s current multidepartmental approach to implementing and complying with the new municipal separate storm sewer system permit that was issued to Glendale by the state of Arizona. The goal 268 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources is to identify new practices to most effectively use existing staff to implement and comply with the stormwater permit requirements. The Innovate assessment is being conducted in FY 2011 and recommendations are expected in FY 2012. Accomplishments: • The Environmental Resources Department partnered with the Utilities Department to prepare the 2011 Glendale water supply/production plan. The plan integrates water resources/supplies with water infrastructure (water treatment plants and wells) to optimize water production and to reduce operating costs by as much as $1.2 million in FY 2011. GOAL UPDATES To ensure that the city has sustainable water resources to meet current and future demand. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal Yes. The City received a new Designation of Assured Water Supply demonstrating sufficient water resources to meet both current water Was the goal met? demand and the water demand of plats reasonably projected to be approved through the year 2025. Obtain a new Designation of Assured Water Supply for the City’s What were the water service area from the Arizona Department of Water Performance Measures? Resources. The process to obtain a new Designation of Assured Water Supply took longer than the city expected due to the extensive State of Obstacles/Challenges Arizona review and approval process. Goal Goal Related Council Goal 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. Yes. The city received a new municipal separate storm sewer system permit from the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality in 2010. Was the goal met? The city has also developed a draft storm water ordinance and administrative procedures for program implementation. Council will be asked to adopt the ordinance in FY 2011. Obtain a new municipal separate storm sewer system permit from What were the the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and Performance Measures? administer/implement the program requirements. The process to obtain a new storm water permit took longer than the city expected due to the extensive State of Arizona permit development and approval process. Securing the permit required Obstacles/Challenges coordination, communication, and involvement from several city departments. 269 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources 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 To ensure that the city has sustainable water resources to meet current and future demand. One community with high quality services for citizens. Related Council Goal 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 water What were the Performance Measures? 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 of water Obstacles/Challenges it recovered from groundwater wells, which resulted in reduced anticipated savings in operational costs. Goal Goal To protect public health and the environment by testing, documenting and reporting the quality of drinking water and reclaimed water. 270 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Mission and Performance Measure Environmental Resources One community with high quality services for citizens. 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 in-house Performance Measures? 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 temporarily Obstacles/Challenges discontinued. The Laboratory continued to perform all water quality tests that are required by federal and state laws/regulations. Related Council Goal 271 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Env. Resources FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget (1000) HazMat Incidence Response (2360) Environmental Resources $12,581 $508,393 $26,845 $524,231 $26,845 $517,342 $26,845 $537,929 0% 3% (2360) Water Quality $968,381 $1,162,187 $1,108,775 $1,155,382 -1% (2400) Water Conservation $245,596 $320,901 $294,429 $315,811 -2% $1,734,951 $2,034,164 $1,947,391 $2,035,967 0% Total - Env. Resources BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES Wages/Salaries/Benefits Supplies and Contracts FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $1,302,622 $398,811 $1,397,426 $654,331 $1,397,426 $567,558 $1,387,136 $634,070 -1% -3% Internal Premiums $18,747 $22,335 $22,335 $21,844 -2% Internal Service Charges $14,771 $22,013 $22,013 $21,660 -2% ($61,941) ($61,941) ($28,743) -54% Work Order Credits Total - Env. Resources STAFFING BY PROGRAM (2360) Environmental Resources (2360) Water Quality (2400) Water Conservation Total -Env. Resources $1,734,951 $2,034,164 $1,947,391 $2,035,967 0% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget 5 10 5 10 5 10 5 10 0% 0% 2 2 2 2 0% 17 17 17 17 0% 272 Return to OP Bdgt TOC City of Glendale Budget Summary by Department Non-Departmental FUND NUMBER / BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1000) Fund 1000 Non-Dept (2360) Fund 2360 Non-Dept Total - Non-Departmental BUDGET BY CATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURES FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget $558,487 $0 $1,963,824 $0 ($339,641) $3,463,778 $765,358 $0 -61% NA $558,487 $1,963,824 $3,124,137 $765,358 -61% FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Percent Over FY 2011 Budget Wages/Salaries/Benefits $348,293 $313,937 $313,937 $315,000 0% Supplies and Contracts $210,194 $1,649,887 $2,810,200 $450,358 -73% $558,487 $1,963,824 $3,124,137 $765,358 -61% Total - Non-Departmental 273 Return to OP Bdgt TOC Capital Improvement Plan 2011-2012 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CIP Table of Contents CIP TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Contents 274 Introduction 276 Financing the CIP 281 Impact of the CIP on the Operating Budget 299 Summary by Type of Project 301 Summary of All Capital Projects by Funding Type 302 FUND SUMMARIES BOND CONSTRUCTION FUNDS Street/Parking 1980 – Street/Parking Bonds 303 304 305 Open Space & Trails 2140 – Open Space/Trails Construction 308 309 Parks 2060 – Parks Construction 315 316 Library 2160 – Library Construction 334 335 Public Safety 2040 – Public Safety Construction 337 338 Government Facilities 2080 – Government Facilities Construction 348 349 Cultural Facilities/Historical Preservation 2130 – Cultural Facility Construction 354 355 Economic Development 2100 – Economic Development Construction 357 358 Flood Control 2180 – Flood Control Construction 361 362 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUNDS Roadway Improvements 1600 – DIF – Roadway Improvements Open Space 1520 – DIF – Citywide Open Space 274 Return to TOC 368 369 370 372 373 2012-2021 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 3 375 376 377 378 379 381 Library 1380 – DIF – Library Buildings 1500 – DIF – Libraries 383 384 385 Public Safety 1440 – DIF-Police Dept Facilities 1420 – DIF-Fire Protection Facilities 387 388 389 General Government 1620 – DIF – General Government 390 391 ENTERPRISE AND OTHER FUNDS Water & Sewer 2360 – Water & Sewer 2400 – Water 2420 – Sewer 392 393 394 399 411 Transportation 2210 – Transportation Construction 2000 – HURF/Street Bonds 1340 – HURF/Streets Fund 1650 – Transportation Grants 418 419 428 432 434 Sanitation 2480 – Sanitation 436 437 Landfill 2440 – Landfill 440 441 Airport Capital Grants 2120 – Airport Capital Grants 447 448 Other Capital Project Funds 1840 – Other Federal and State Grants 1000 – General Fund 1740 – Civic Center 2150 – Technology Infrastructure 1220 – Arts Commission 452 453 455 458 460 464 275 Return to TOC 2012-2021 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 2001 include the following: 276 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Introduction 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 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 Sahuaro Ranch Park Improvements Landfill Entrance Signal O’Neil Park Renovations Marshall Ranch Trail Improvements Thunderbird Park Parking Lot Improvements 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 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? 277 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Introduction • 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? 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? • Does a project respond to and, if possible, 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? 278 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Introduction 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 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. 279 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 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. 280 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 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 Budget and Finance Department and Engineering Department, in conjunction with the Assistant City Manager. They are updated annually to reflect changes in the economic environment. Although only the first year of the plan is appropriated, the first three 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. 281 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 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 are reflected below. 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 essential 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 mentioned above and discussed in more detail in the material following this section, 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 has instituted a conservative plan of finance for 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) Glendale’s dedicated transportation sales tax, or Glendale’s general fund excise taxes. In many cases, a large or multi-year project will be financed using a mix of these funding sources. 282 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 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, landfill and many transportation-related 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, which the city has experienced beginning with FY 2010, 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. 283 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-1 reflects the city’s G.O. bond debt limitation as of December 31, 2010. 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 $105,214 20% Limitation1,2 $350,714 Less Direct Bonded Debt to be Outstanding $25,639 Less Direct Bonded Debt to be Outstanding $193,221 Unused 6% Borrowing Capacity $79,575 Unused 20% Borrowing Capacity $157,493 1 2 Based on 2011 secondary assessed value of $1,753,569,411 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 Remaining Capacity” show the amount of additional G.O. bonds that could be sold without violating the state constitutional limits. Note that the “Projected Remaining Capacity” 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 2012 secondary assessed valuation figure in Table 2-2 shows a 25% decline in secondary assessed valuation from the prior FY and reflects the 2009 real estate market. The FY 2012 valuation figure is the final figure from the Maricopa County Assessor’s Office. The FY 2013 figure reflects an additional 14% decline from FY 2012 and is a projection based on the preliminary valuation notices that the county assessor’s office mailed to property owners in February 2011. These significant valuation 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 49% over four consecutive years. Preliminary data from the Maricopa County Assessor’s Office also indicate that the median value of commercial property continues to decline. The median full cash value of commercial property is down 40% since 2009. 284 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP These declines in secondary assessed valuation result in lower debt limitation figures (column A) in FY 2012 through FY 2016 than those shown in Table 2-1 (above). The decline in property valuation significantly limits the city’s ability to take on new debt. For this reason, no new general obligation bond sales are planned in the first five years of the capital plan. Therefore the table simply reflects the impact of outstanding debt on the city’s borrowing capacity. The remaining borrowing capacity is shown in the last column of Table 2-2 below. Table 2-2 Projected G.O. Debt Capacity Before New Debt (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 1 Projected1 Secondary Assessed Value $1,313,558 $1,124,799 $1,043,983 $1,043,983 $1,096,182 Limitation (A) 6% $78,813 $67,488 $62,639 $62,639 $65,771 Outstanding Debt2 (B) Projected Remaining Capacity (A-B) 20% 6% 20% 6% $262,712 $16,960 $184,720 $61,853 $224,960 $12,645 $172,850 $54,843 $208,797 $8,205 $160,440 $54,434 $208,797 $2,880 $149,425 $59,759 $219,236 $0 $132,235 $65,771 20% $77,992 $52,110 $48,357 $59,372 $87,001 FY 2012 figure reflects actual secondary assessed valuation. Outstanding debt refers to the debt on the principal balance only. 2 Assessed Valuation In FY 2009, secondary assessed valuation peaked at just under $2.2 billion, a 20% increase from FY 2008 and on top of a 33% increase from FY 2007 to FY 2008. The FY 2009 valuation reflected the 2006 real estate market. The FY 2009 secondary assessed valuation reflected commercial valuation comprising 29% of the total, residential comprising 67% and the remaining 4% included, but was not limited to vacant land, agriculture, railroad and historical property. In FY 2010, Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation was approximately $2.1 billion, a 3% decline from the prior FY. The FY 2010 valuation reflected the 2007 real estate market when property valuations began to slip. Commercial properties comprised 34% of the FY 2010 total, residential property comprised 62% and the remaining 4% included, but was not limited to vacant land, agriculture, railroad and historical property. Glendale’s FY 2011 secondary assessed valuation was approximately $1.8 billion, an 18% decline from the prior FY. The FY 2011 valuation reflected the 2008 real estate market when property valuations tumbled downward at an accelerated pace. 285 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP For FY 2012, Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation is $1.3 billion, a 25% decline from the prior FY. The FY 2012 valuation reflects the 2009 real estate market when property values experienced the most significant plunge. Approximately 56% of the FY 2012 valuation is attributable to residential property, 40% is attributable to commercial property and the remaining 4% includes, but is not limited to vacant land, agriculture, railroad and historical property. A fourth consecutive year of valuation decline – an additional 14% – is expected with the FY 2013 valuation. The FY 2013 estimate is based on the preliminary valuation notices that the county assessor’s office mailed to property owners in February 2011 and reflects the 2010 real estate market. These astonishing declines are in contrast to the fact 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. However, the latest assessed valuation information means the decline in Glendale property values equates to a loss of almost one-half of the city’s secondary assessed valuation – from a peak at just under $2.2 billion in FY 2009 to a projected $1.1 billion for FY 2013. For the future, we are assuming a fifth year of decline (7%) in FY 2014, a bottoming out with no change in FY 2015 and conservative growth between 4% and 5% starting in FY 2016. We believe these are very conservative valuation 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 run up in property values. The following chart provides a graphical view of Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation changes between FY 2002 and FY 2012 as well as the projected valuations for FY 2013 through FY 2021. 286 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP The impact of the steep valuation decline on the city’s secondary property tax revenue stream directly affects the city’s capacity to support debt service on existing G.O. bonds, as well as the city’s ability to support additional debt service for new capital projects. The impact and the city’s plan to address the impact are discussed in the next section. Capital Plan Implications for Secondary Property Tax Rate Table 2-3 (below) summarizes annual debt service requirements for existing bonds outstanding. No new G.O. bond issuances are shown per the previous discussion for Table 2-2. You will see that the secondary assessed valuation figures reflect the declines discussed previously in this capital section. The estimated secondary property tax rate assumes no change from the $1.3699 that will be adopted for FY 2012. 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 2-3 also reflects the Build America Bond (BAB) subsidy related to the G.O. bonds sold in 2010 and the DIF Citywide Recreation Facilities Fund (Fund 1480) debt service contributions related to the Foothills Recreation and Aquatic Center which was funded with proceeds from the 2004 G.O. bond sale. The BAB subsidy and DIF debt service contributions directly reduce the debt service to be covered by secondary property tax revenue and will help address the shortfall between the annual debt service requirements and secondary property tax revenue. The current G.O. debt is documented in Schedule 7 of this budget book. Table 2-3 General Obligation Property Tax Bonds (All Dollars in Thousands with Exception of Tax Rate) Fiscal Year FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 Estimated Less Build Less Secondary Existing Proposed Total Secondary America Fund 1480 Assessed Debt Debt Debt Property DIF 2 Bond (BAB) Valuation Service Service 1 Service Tax Rev. Subsidy Contribution $1,313,558 $17,994_ $25,337 ($669)_ ($209)_ $0_ $24,459 $1,124,799 $15,409_ $23,971 ($659)_ ($209)_ $0_ $23,104 $1,043,983 $14,302_ $22,735 ($647)_ ($209)_ $0_ $21,878 $1,043,983 $14,302_ $25,773 ($633)_ ($210)_ $0_ $24,930 $1,096,182 $15,017_ $23,644 ($618)_ ($211)_ $0_ $22,815 _ _ _ _ _ 1 Assumes the secondary property tax rate of $1.3699 remains unchanged through FY 2016 2 Existing debt service includes a transfer of $1.4M in FY 2012 for HURF debt service 287 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Existing G.O. debt service addresses bonds issued over the last several years to pay for numerous capital projects such as the Emergency Operations Center, Public Safety Training Facility, the downtown parking garage, fire stations 159 and 151, the Glendale Adult Center, the Foothills Recreation and Aquatic Center, the Rose Lane Pool Aquatic Center, various flood control projects such as the Bethany Home Outfall Channel, and the downtown plaza and civic center annex. Table 2-3 clearly illustrates the gap between estimated secondary property tax revenue and G.O. debt service on existing bonds once the BAB subsidy and impact fee contribution are taken into account. Significantly less revenue is projected to come in to pay debt service on existing G.O. bonds, let alone to fund any new projects, as a result of the: • • • Unprecedented decline in assessed valuation across the real estate market Reduction in the assessment ratio for commercial properties per state statutes Reduction of the city’s secondary property tax rate in FY 2008 and FY 2009 Given Council’s prior direction to keep the secondary property tax rate unchanged, the first five years of the G.O. component of the CIP had to be restructured to push back into the last five years of the plan all but two projects (plus any carryover from projects currently underway). The two projects retained in the first five years of the G.O. component of the CIP are listed below. • • One is in the Public Safety category and is related to ongoing improvements to the public safety digital communication system. The second project is in the Flood Control category and addresses the cost of a regulatory permit the city is required to maintain. Notable G.O. projects on hold are the completion of the new Municipal Court and the West Area Library. Both of these projects were in FY 2015 in the adopted FY 2011 – 2020 CIP (FY 2011 budget book); they are now in the last five years of the capital plan. The significantly changed landscape will necessitate an evaluation of the city’s secondary property tax rate over the next year. This is especially true if the city is not able to restructure existing G.O. bond debt service along more favorable terms so annual debt service payments can more closely match the diminished revenue stream. If this declining trend in property values continues beyond next year, as projected, the city will have to consider a change to the way it assesses secondary property tax to maintain a fiscally sound plan to protect our bond rating for the future. One concept staff will evaluate over the summer and fall is the one used by many valley communities today. That approach is based on establishing a rate based on the funds needed to service outstanding debt issuances, the capital needs of the city and the minimum fund balance needed to maintain a fiscally sound plan. The plan of action is to evaluate debt restructuring options through this upcoming fall and return to Council with a revised DMP and recommended options for Council’s annual retreat. This timeframe allows staff to evaluate fully the range of options as well as assess the 2011 real estate market, which will affect the secondary property tax revenue to be received in FY 2014. 288 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP 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. Table 2-4 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 2-4 Projected Remaining G.O. Bond Voter Authorization (All Dollars in Thousands) Category FY 20111 Public Safety $104,473 $104,473 $104,473 $104,473 $104,473 $104,473 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 $15,540 $15,540 $15,540 $15,540 $15,540 $15,540 $17,096 $17,096 $17,096 $17,096 $17,096 $17,096 Streets/Parking $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 $30,200 $30,200 $30,200 $30,200 $30,200 $30,200 Open Space/Trails $50,525 $50,525 $50,525 $50,525 $50,525 $50,525 Parks $14,637 $14,637 $14,637 $14,637 $14,637 $14,637 Flood Control $10,522 $10,522 $10,522 $10,522 $10,522 $10,522 Landfill Library 2,3 2 Transit Econ. Development Govt. Facilities 2 1 Remaining authorization as of June 30, 2011 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 2 289 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP 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. 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 in FY 2009 through FY 2012. 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 2-5 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 2012 through FY 2016. The HURF revenue figures assume the state will continue with the reduced distribution approach in place in FY 2009 through FY 2012. Consequently, HURF revenue will cover only $1.4M of the HURF debt service, while the remaining revenue will be used to pay street operating costs in FY 2012. The remaining $3.3M in 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. 290 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-5 Street Revenue Bonds (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 Highway User Tax Revenues* $13,600 $11,416 $11,507 $11,599 $11,692 $11,785 Existing Proposed Debt Debt Service Service $4,700 $0 $4,706 $0 $4,709 $0 $4,696 $0 $1,958 $0 $1,977 $0 Total Debt Service $4,700 $4,706 $4,709 $4,696 $1,958 $1,977 Annual Coverage N/A 2.43 2.44 2.47 5.97 5.96 Debt Service to Prev. Year Revenue % N/A 35% 41% 41% 17% 17% * FY 2011 estimated revenue; FY 2012-2016 projected revenues 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 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 2-6 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. 291 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-6 Transportation Revenue Bonds (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 Transportation Sales Tax Revenue $19,200 $19,717 $20,407 $21,332 $22,414 Bond Sales $13,000 $0 $0 $11,000 $0 Existing Debt Service $7,327 $7,326 $7,326 $7,326 $7,326 Proposed Debt Service $969 $969 $969 $1,789 $1,789 Total Debt Service $8,296 $8,295 $8,295 $9,115 $9,115 Annual Coverage 2.31 2.38 2.46 2.34 2.46 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; 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 2-7 displays projected water/sewer bond sales and coverage ratios. FY 2012-16 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 2-7 Water/Sewer Planned Bonds & Coverage Ratios (All Dollars in Thousands) Fiscal Year FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 Bond Sales $0 $9,000 $0 $10,000 $36,500 292 Return to CIP TOC Annual Coverage Ratio 1.24 1.31 1.43 1.52 1.49 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP The FY 2012 rate recommendation for the water/sewer enterprise fund is for no change to the rates currently in effect. This recommendation is based on the annual update of the individual rate models for each of the enterprise funds that are used to develop a balanced capital plan for each operation. This rate recommendation is the result of: • • • • The deferral of non-essential growth-related capital projects Continuation of critical repair, maintenance and replacement of existing capital assets such as underground pipes Continuation of capital projects that ensure compliance with applicable federal, state and county regulations Ongoing improvements in operational efficiencies to minimize cost increases related to fuel, equipment and electricity. 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, 2011, 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. 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. 293 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP 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 2-8 shows the current amount of MPC principal debt outstanding as of July 1, 2011. 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. 294 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-8 Outstanding Municipal Property Bonds (as of July 1, 2010) Year Issued Principal Balance Outstanding MPC Bonds - Arena Tax Exempt 2003A $44,400,000 MPC Bonds - Arena Taxable 2003B $96,065,000 MPC Bonds - Refund Imp Dist 2004A $5,295,000 MPC Bonds – Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Facility/Zanjero 2006A $28,370,000 MPC Bonds – Media Center/Convention Center/Parking Garage 2008A $32,220,000 MPC Bonds - Media Center/Convention Center/Parking Garage 2008B $51,075,000 MPC Bonds - Media Center/Convention Center/Parking Garage 2008C $5,650,000 AMFP Series 14 - Arena 2002 $5,055,000 AMFP Refunding Series 16 - Arena 2003 $7,250,000 Issue TOTAL $275,380,000 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 2-9 reflects the expected FY 2012 payments for capital leases and notes under contract by the city. It should be noted that the Hickman/Motorola lease and Northern Crossing note are being restructured at the time this document was prepared. The new financing schedules for those obligations will be reflected in the FY 2013 budget book. The complete lease/note debt is documented in Schedule 8 of this budget book. 295 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP Table 2-9 Outstanding Capital Leases (as of July 1, 2011) Lease Financing Hickman/Motorola Lease Equipment Lease Equipment Lease Total Lease Financing Notes Northern Crossing Note Total Note Financing Year Issued Original Amount FY 2012 Scheduled Lease Payment1 2003 2007 2009 $10,800,000 $1,368,800 $1,189,365 $360,000 $165,994 $249,877 $775,871 2002 $14,500,000 $32,196 $32,196 $808,067 Grant Total 1 Includes principal, interest and expected savings from lease/note restructuring. 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 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. Specifically, Glendale is the recipient of a $2.3 million allocation through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act’s 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 already completed or under construction at the time this document was prepared 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; and completion of the LED conversion program for the remaining 30 (of 190) signalized intersections. 296 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP 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 2012 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. 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 297 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Financing the CIP 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. 298 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 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 additional ongoing expenses for routine operation, repair and maintenance upon completion or acquisition that must be incorporated into the operating budget. 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. PAYGO capital projects, grantmatching 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 2012 – 2021 CIP reflects the following estimated operating cost for capital projects: • • • • • • • between $2.01 and $3.39 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 heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC), plumbing, electrical and structural repairs; $1.62 per sq ft annually for custodial services; $0.195 per sq ft annually for building water usage; $341.26 per month for refuse (two 6 yard containers picked up three times a week); Vehicle annual replacement contributions, maintenance and fuel costs: o ½-Ton Pickup: $2,050 annual replacement cost, $0.17/$0.22 per mile maintenance/gas; o Mid-Size Sedan: $2,785 annual replacement cost, $0.17/$0.14 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 typically have an operating budget impact because of new 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 additional 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. 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 299 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CIP Operating Impact 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 over the next 10 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 many instances an inflation rate of 3% is figured into the ongoing operating and maintenance costs each year. Until such time that supplemental requests are again being considered, departments have been directed to either defer projects to a later year or absorb additional costs into their current operating budget. Operating Impact by CIP Project Type Project Type S/A S Water & Sewer Projects A S Transportation Sales Tax Projects A All Other Transportation Projects S (DIF, HURF & Streets) A S Park Projects A S Library Projects A S Public Safety Projects A S Landfill Sanitation Projects A S Economic Development Projects A S Other Projects A S TOTAL Operating Impact A FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY's 2017-21 20,000 57,732 7,658,035 17,000 17,510 18,035 18,576 101,583 129,316 151,702 167,847 184,824 1,210,434 270 278 286 295 1,613 7,540 7,766 26,232 27,019 9,679,423 7,320 18,359,569 58,334 9,023,866 19,116,323 22,000 22,660 23,340 348,184 3,278 3,377 3,478 3,582 19,586 5,563 2,452 2,525 2,601 2,679 14,649 169,149 174,223 179,450 184,833 7,716,031 2,000 2,060 2,122 2,186 2,252 484,565 $0 $309,283 $337,068 $397,007 $457,990 $72,783,267 $14,883 $21,782 $44,435 $45,768 $47,142 $1,008,928 TOTAL $14,883 $331,065 $381,503 $442,775 $505,132 $73,792,195 S = Department plans on submitting a supplemental request; A = Department plans to absorb operating costs 300 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 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 2012 CIP project funding by major category type, excluding grant appropriation and carryover. FY 2012 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. 301 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012 - 2021 Capital Improvement Plan Summary of ALL Capital Projects by Funding Type Fund # - Name Carryover BOND CONSTRUCTION FUNDS 1980 - Street/Parking Bonds 2140 - Open Space/Trails 2060 - Parks 2160 - Library 2040 - Public Safety 2080 - Government Facilities FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 3,089,699 0 0 0 0 0 19,968,255 0 0 0 0 0 0 41,783,157 166,246 0 0 0 0 0 157,278,448 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,609,148 2,251,879 163,241 237,397 82,835 212,766 84,394 111,245,173 1,131,437 0 0 0 0 0 16,133,689 104,876 0 0 0 0 0 19,071,972 1,746,094 0 0 0 0 0 91,554,271 10,188,515 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 40,233,735 $18,678,746 $324,166 $398,322 $243,760 $373,691 $245,319 $532,877,848 DIF FUNDS 1600 - Roadway Improvements 131,958 0 22,064 0 194,908 171,500 1,766,178 1520 - Citywide Open Space 171,473 44,000 46,216 44,000 46,350 0 85,140 1460 - Citywide Parks 1480 - Citywide Rec Facility 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 0 5,140 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 0 5,140 2130 - Cultural Facility 2100 - Economic Development 2180 - Flood Control Sub-Total 1540 - Park Dev Zone 1 39,632 0 2,216 0 2,350 0 5,140 1560 - Park Dev Zone 2 1580 - Park Dev Zone 3 123,506 15,000 7,816 5,600 2,350 0 5,140 11,905 19,999 7,516 6,000 2,350 0 5,140 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,609,288 72,665 200,000 213,265 200,000 214,073 200,000 2,484,259 1440 - Police Dept Facilities 1420 - Fire Protection Facilities 0 0 10,919 0 11,584 0 25,329 0 0 11,480 0 12,179 0 26,627 1620 - General Government 0 0 12,799 0 13,578 0 29,687 $551,139 $278,999 $338,723 $255,600 $504,422 $371,500 $6,052,208 1380 - Library Buildings 1500 - Libraries Sub-Total ENTERPRISE/OTHER FUNDS 2360 - Water & Sewer 2400 - Water 2420 - Sewer 2210 - Transportation Construction 2000 - HURF/Street Bonds 1340 - HURF/Streets Fund 1650 - Transportation Grants 2480 - Sanitation 4,427,688 7,250,000 750,000 2,580,720 4,389,700 9,792,030 53,921,823 27,914,867 4,177,000 3,661,000 4,469,000 7,418,090 14,088,384 90,769,536 4,494,114 4,918,480 5,984,973 6,378,552 16,394,116 26,773,149 39,911,243 31,183,100 8,321,290 8,608,921 8,581,328 8,438,738 4,580,989 22,985,155 197,379 0 0 0 0 0 12,076,659 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,677,285 3,518,115 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 0 1,863,645 1,299,787 3,140,259 2,738,000 3,778,990 12,723,434 492,901 1,237,740 2,018,202 15,350,131 5,953,730 9,379,879 7,983,017 1,755,000 15,693,481 150,000 525,000 3,146,000 8,550,000 0 811,252 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 529,498 752,859 752,859 50,000 50,000 50,000 4,281,360 1740 - Civic Center 0 350,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 4,145,734 2150 - Technology Infrastructure 1220 - Arts Commission 0 0 1,097,200 0 0 0 28,491,879 0 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,750,000 Sub-Total $75,323,914 $49,064,495 $28,872,942 $45,624,990 $53,078,374 $81,543,421 $300,717,125 Grand Total Total FY 2012 Funding $94,553,799 $49,667,660 $144,221,459 $29,609,987 $46,124,350 $53,956,487 $82,160,240 $839,647,181 2440 - Landfill 2120 - Airport Capital Grants 1840 - Other Federal & State Grants 1000 - General Fund 302 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Bond Construction Funds BOND CONSTRUCTION FUNDS Bond construction funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of capital projects in the city’s council-approved CIP using general obligation bonds and HURF revenue bonds. Beginning balances are based on prior bond issuance proceeds that have been received but not yet expended. Additional bond sales during the specified years, estimated investment and interest income, and expected grant/IGA revenues increase the beginning balances. Project expenses including carryover and operating expenses (e.g. advisor fees) reduce the beginning balances. Sahuaro Ranch Park Improvements Fund # - Name Carryover FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 3,089,699 0 0 0 0 0 19,968,255 0 0 0 0 0 0 41,783,157 166,246 0 0 0 0 0 157,278,448 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,609,148 2040-Public Safety 2,251,879 163,241 237,397 82,835 212,766 84,394 111,245,173 2080-Government Facilities 1,131,437 0 0 0 0 0 16,133,689 1980-Street/Parking Bonds 2140-Open Space/Trails 2060-Park 2160-Library 2130-Cultural Facility 2100-Economic Development 2180-Flood Control Total Bond Funds 104,876 0 0 0 0 0 19,071,972 1,746,094 0 0 0 0 0 91,554,271 10,188,515 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 160,925 40,233,735 $18,678,746 $324,166 $398,322 $243,760 $373,691 $245,319 $532,877,848 303 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Street/Parking - Construction Funds STREET/PARKING CONSTRUCTION FUNDS This category includes projects that are funded with General Obligation street/parking construction bonds. In FY 2012, carryover funding is available for street scallop, street beautification and petition lighting projects where needed. Funds are also available for additional tenant improvements to the Promenade on Palmaire Avenue within the Glendale downtown parking garage structure. There is no new funding included in the first five years of the capital improvement plan for the Street and Parking Construction Fund due to the continued drop in secondary assessed valuation. Project Name: Promenade Parking/Tenant Imps Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 1980 Project #: 68120 304 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1980-Street/Parking Bonds Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 20% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $4,287,748 $1,194,418 $1,195,320 $1,196,222 $1,197,123 $1,198,025 0 2,435 2,435 0 1,061 1,061 0 1,061 1,061 0 1,061 1,061 0 1,061 1,061 18,775,000 2,653 18,777,653 6,066 6,066 159 159 159 159 159 159 159 159 398 398 Revenue Bond Proceeds Investment Income Total Revenue: Operating Expenses Advisor Fees Total Operating Expenses: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 68103 Street Scallop 68104 Street Beautification 68117 67th Ave. Camelback to Grand 68120 Promenade Parking/Tenant Imps Sub-Total - Existing Assets 1,200,597 718,310 83,419 800,059 2,802,385 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 9,711,345 6,444,410 0 0 16,155,755 287,314 0 287,314 3,089,699 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 800,000 3,012,500 3,812,500 19,968,255 $1,195,320 $1,196,222 $1,197,123 $1,198,025 $7,024 New Assets 68102 Petition Lighting Program T1232 95th Ave Camelback to Missouri Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 3,089,699 $1,194,418 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1980-Street/Parking Bonds Category: 20% Project: 68103 - Street Scallop (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $1,200,597 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200,597 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,711,345 O and M costs are not expected for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 305 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1980-Street/Parking Bonds Project: 68104 - Street Beautification (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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, multiuse paths, improvements to handicap accessibility, benches, planting of trees, shrubs and ground cover. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,444,410 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,444,410 Additional O and M will be needed starting in FY 2019. O and M based on the standard formula for water and maintenance for 307,500 sq ft of landscaped area. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Landscape TOTAL $718,310 $718,310 FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 68117 - 67th Ave. Camelback to Grand (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $257,166 $257,166 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construct street improvements on 67th Avenue from Camelback to Grand Avenue. Project includes underground conversion of utilities, curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $83,419 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $83,419 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 68120 - Promenade Parking/Tenant Imps (I) Project Description: FY 2015 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: The project will provide basic and specialized tenant improvements of approximately 10,000 sq ft at the Promenade on Palmaire Avenue within the Glendale downtown parking garage structure. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $800,059 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $800,059 $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 306 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1980-Street/Parking Bonds Project: 68102 - Petition Lighting Program (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $700,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,600 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $53,400 $800,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $287,314 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $287,314 $0 $0 $0 $0 $800,000 O and M identified provides for 40 requested street lights per year. Supplies cover photo control cost, electricity for a 150watt light is $90 per year, estimated maintenance for a light is $21 per year, including Remote Operations Asset Management monitoring. A supplemental budget request will be made as new streetlights are added to the system. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Supplies/Contr $3,200 $3,296 $3,395 $3,497 $3,602 $19,695 Utilities $3,600 $3,708 $3,819 $3,934 $22,157 Equip. Maint. TOTAL $520 $7,320 $536 $7,540 $552 $7,766 $568 $7,999 $4,052 $585 $8,239 Project: T1232 - 95th Ave Camelback to Missouri (N) Project Description: $3,200 $45,052 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: This project is to acquire right-of-way, move utilities, design and construct roadway, with curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, street lighting and underground overhead utilities between Camelback Road North to Missouri Avenue. Project was previously referred to as 95th Avenue Camelback to Bethany Home Rd. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,012,500 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Landscape O and M based on 13,200 square feet of landscaping for a 1/4 mile of street improvements for five years. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Landscape TOTAL $700,000 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $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 FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $14,520 $14,520 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Open Space & Trails - Construction Fund OPEN SPACE & TRAILS CONSTRUCTION FUND This category enables the city to acquire land for the preservation of open space and to construct multiuse trails and linear parks. There is no new funding included in the first five years of the capital improvement plan for the Open Space & Trails Construction Fund due to the continued drop in secondary assessed valuation. Project Name: Sahuaro Ranch Park Improv. Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 2140 Project #: 70006 Picture Note: Project was completed during FY 2011 308 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2140-Open Space/Trails Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 20% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $555,688 $555,688 $555,688 $555,688 $555,688 $555,688 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41,230,000 41,230,000 Revenue Bond Proceeds Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 70000 Thunderbird Paseo Park Develop T1630 Thunderbird Park Improvements Sub-Total - Existing Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,998,656 5,113,101 7,111,757 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24,590,946 2,390,698 429,085 6,893,271 367,400 34,671,400 41,783,157 $555,688 $555,688 $555,688 $555,688 $2,531 New Assets 70003 City-Wide Trails System 70005 West Valley Multi-Modal Corrid T1600 Multi-Use Bridge at 51st Ave. T1610 WARP - Trail System T1761 New River Bike Trail Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 0 $555,688 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 309 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2140-Open Space/Trails Construction Project: 70000 - Thunderbird Paseo Park Develop (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 and replacement of equipment located in the linear park. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $423,475 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,209,928 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,954 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $44,919 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,099 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $90,217 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $178,064 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,998,656 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M expenses would vary based upon the specific type of future landscape improvements that are implemented. Supplies and contracts calculated at $601 per acre X 50 acres plus inflation. A landscape water rate is calculated at $0.0495 per sq ft for 10 acres. All calculations are for 31 months of operation. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,616 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $68,566 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 310 Return to CIP TOC $95,558 $165,740 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2140-Open Space/Trails Construction Project: T1630 - Thunderbird Park Improvements (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Based on the Thunderbird Conservation Park Master Plan recommendations, items to be addressed include the continued repair and maintenance of trails, removal of invasive plant species and re-vegetation of the park with native plants, repair and upgrading of existing park elements (ramadas, restrooms) and the removal of various park elements (ramadas and restrooms) from the wash located at 59th Avenue. The removal of ramadas in the 59th Avenue wash area will allow for restoration of the wildlife corridor and vegetation. The installation of new park elements such as ramadas, restrooms and a Ranger/Visitor building are also within the scope of this project. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $100,062 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $81,440 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32,609 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,501 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $467,316 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,113,101 TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing is a Service Worker II at $51,732 with benefits and inflation, a Park Ranger at $49,601 with benefits and inflation; Supplies/Contracts is ramada cleaning contract at $3,000 per ramada (23) per year. Utilities at $2.06 sq ft X 3,000 sq ft plus inflation. Building Maintenance at $1.62 X 3,000 sq ft and 10 light poles at $150 each plus $21 bulb replacement annually; insurance for new staff at $824 per yr; vehicle maintenance/replacement for compact pickup, computer and printer; landscape maintenance at $601 per acre X 5 acres; building water $0.195 per sq ft (3,000); refuse at $341.26 per month plus inflation. Operations are calculated for 36 months. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $374,207 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $339,742 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,086 PC/Vehicle Replacement Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,059 $11,097 $0 $22,822 $24,225 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,161 Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,122 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 311 Return to CIP TOC $814,521 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2140-Open Space/Trails Construction Project: 70003 - City-Wide Trails System (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: This fund will implement recommendations for open space acquisition, trailhead land purchases, construction of pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian paths and trails and connectivity between areas of interest citywide that accommodates future growth and user demands. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $482,175 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $122,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $162,750 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,505 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,833,266 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,590,946 TOTAL Operating Description: Specific scope will determine the additional O and M costs which could include utilities for additional lighting (260 poles X $150 per pole) 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 light bulb replacement at $21 each per year. Staffing is a Service Worker II position at $14.08 per hour plus benefits. Other operating calculations have been based on 50 acres. Supplies/contracts at $601 per acre plus inflation, landscape maintenance at $0.22 per sq ft, landscape water at $0.0495 sq ft. plus inflation, vehicle replacement is for a compact pickup with maintenance. All calculations are for 26 months of operation. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Staffing Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $112,619 $80,145 $0 $0 $104,015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,562 $9,641 $0 $5,294 $0 $0 $0 $553,777 $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 312 Return to CIP TOC $0 FYs 17-21 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FY 2016 $287,538 $1,167,591 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2140-Open Space/Trails Construction Project: 70005 - West Valley Multi-Modal Corrid (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Multimodal 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, and serve new and existing residents. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $177,089 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,390,698 Contingency 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. Operating Costs: Supplies/Contr Bldg. Maint. FY 2012 $0 $0 Landscape TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $110,847 $18,415 $0 $0 $590,929 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T1600 - Multi-Use Bridge at 51st Ave. (N) Project Description: FY 2015 $461,667 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 that will link neighborhoods to the Thunderbird Paseo Linear Park and Regional Sun Circle Trail. This bridge would be 1/4 mile west of the Sunnyside Bridge and separated by 51st Avenue. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $73,551 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $294,206 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,413 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,020 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,942 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,953 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $429,085 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 times 70 feet. Building Maintenance for safety inspections is $2.00 sq ft X bridge surface (840 sq ft). Calculations are based on 36 months of operation. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Supplies/Contr Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 313 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $14,347 $6,204 $20,551 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2140-Open Space/Trails Construction Project: T1610 - WARP - Trail System (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Develop and enhance approximately 2.5 miles of meandering trail system within the Western Area Regional Park. This project will connect the existing link under Bethany Home Road to the existing Grand Canal Linear Park Trail. 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 future and existing park users as well as Grand Canal Linear Park and trail users. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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: Refer to Parks Project No. 2060-70532 for O and M impact. Project: T1761 - New River Bike Trail (N) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construct a 1,500-foot long multiuse path from an existing pathway just north of the Paraiso Drive alignment to Hillcrest Boulevard, including a bridge over the drainage channel just north of the Paraiso Drive alignment. 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $25,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,024 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,185 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,476 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 1,500-foot long multi-use pathway. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,330 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,140 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 314 Return to CIP TOC $13,470 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Parks - Construction Fund PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND Park projects are traditionally funded by a combination of park G.O. bonds and development impact fees. Due to the continued drop in secondary assessed valuation, the Parks Construction Fund is not expected to receive new funding until after the first five years of the capital improvement plan. However, there is carryover funding available for the redevelopment, renovation and improvement of existing parks and related facilities. Examples of this work include renovation, replacement or expansion of ramada areas, shade structures, playground facilities, sports courts, ball fields, turf and landscaping, irrigation systems, security lighting and landscaping. Project Name: Parks Enhancements Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 2060 Project #: 70510 Picture Note: O’Neil Park 315 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2060-Parks Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 20% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $347,826 $176,498 $177,683 $178,961 $180,243 $181,620 0 1,760 15 1,775 0 1,185 0 1,185 0 1,278 0 1,278 0 1,282 0 1,282 0 1,377 0 1,377 157,095,000 3,442 0 157,098,442 6,857 6,857 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Bond Proceeds^ Interest Income Investment Income Total Revenue: Operating Expenses Advisor Fees Total Operating Expenses: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 70502 Orangewood Community Park 70503 Rose Lane Rec. Center Developm 70506 63rd & Northern Park Dev. 70509 Manistee Ranch Development 70510 Park Enhancements 70514 O'Neil Center Expansion 70515 T-Bird Park Improvements 70523 79th/Orangewood 70532 Western Area Regional Park 70535 Paseo Racquet Center Park 70540 Grounds & Facilities Imprvmnts T1710 Adult Center Expansion T1714 *O'Neil Park Splash Pad 0 0 0 0 12,134 0 0 0 0 0 9,665 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 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,600,558 16,351,531 2,200,423 173,801 8,483,766 4,819,952 2,888,882 991,746 14,738,305 4,453,631 200,000 9,361,181 748,965 106,518 4,942 0 22,810 10,177 0 0 166,246 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27,549,469 9,530,345 3,282,998 500,000 0 7,269,958 1,889,025 120,034,536 0 0 0 0 166,246 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 10,487,209 25,284,065 1,472,638 37,243,912 157,278,448 $177,683 $178,961 $180,243 $181,620 $1,614 Replacement of Existing Assets 70500 Parks Redevelopment 70512 Facilities Renovation 70526 Multiuse Sports Field Lighting 70541 Parks Capital Equipment 70542 Parks Master Plan Update T1712 Aquatic Facility Restoration T1713 Foothills Center Restoration Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 70527 West Area Pool 70528 Family Recreation Center-West 70531 Sahuaro Ranch Visitor Ctr. Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 166,246 $176,498 ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 316 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70502 - Orangewood Community Park (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Continued development of the 40+ acre Orangewood Community Park at 71st and Orangewood Avenues. This phase includes the construction of additional lighted multiuse fields, bleachers, a restroom, control building, final half-street improvements, and other park amenities that are typically associated with community parks. Once completed, the multiuse complex will also feature soccer/football fields, sports lights, playground, picnic facility, parking, and sport courts with lights. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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: Additional O and M would be needed starting in FY 2018. Staffing includes a Service Worker II at $51,732 (includes benefits) and a Building Maintenance Worker at $58,782 (includes benefits). Supplies/Contracts include $601 per acre x 20 acres. Utilities includes $2.70 per sq ft x 2,000 sq ft for the control building electrical cost. Building maintenance costs include lights ($16,000 per field) and lamp replacement ($3,166 per field) for three soccer fields, 40 additional low level security lights will be maintained at $75 per fixture and $13 for lamp replacement per fixture, $4.60 per sq ft to maintain the plumbing in 800 sq ft restroom, heating, ventilating and air conditioning (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 $4.60 per sq ft for plumbing maintenance of the control building. Equipment maintenance includes maintenance costs ($0.22 per mile) and fuel ($0.17 per mile) for 1/2 ton pickup truck driven 8,000 miles per year. Insurance is $813 per new employee. Electrical includes security monitoring system at $600 per year. Vehicle replacement includes $2,050 per year for the 1/2 ton pickup and technology replacement includes $640 per year for a laptop and $1,053 per year for a printer. Landscape is calculated at 871,200 sq ft x .0927 and landscape water at 871,200 sq ft x .0495. Water is calculated at 2,000 sq ft x $.195. Refuse includes a 6-yard container x 3 pick-ups per week. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $552,069 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,046 $26,976 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $459,693 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,586 Insurance Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,123 $2,997 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,698 Landscape Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $618,862 $1,948 $0 $0 $1,785,449 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 317 Return to CIP TOC $20,451 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70503 - Rose Lane Rec. Center Developm (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 multipurpose 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 2 Senior Recreation Coordinator - $76,246, 1 Clerical staff - $47,487, 3 Recreation Programmers - $53,868, a Service Worker II - $51,654, and a 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 $2.70. Utilities includes electricity at $2.70 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 $1.62 per sq ft x 30,000 sq ft, and plumbing maintenance at $4.60 per sq ft x 30,000 sq ft. Insurance is $824 x the number of staff. Fire alarm is $600 per year. PC/Vehicle replacement includes $20,500 per vehicle (truck) for fuel costs, 8,000 miles x $0.17 for maintenance, 8,000 miles x $0.22 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 $0.195 Refuse is based on a two 6-yard container x 3 pick-ups per week at $2,047 each. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $149,560 Bldg. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $483,024 $7,607 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,108 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,908 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 318 Return to CIP TOC $0 FYs 17-21 Staffing Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $883,587 $149,560 $10,801 $7,559 $1,727,714 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70506 - 63rd & Northern Park Dev. (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Proposed improvements include completing park construction to include a looped concrete pathway/trail, a restroom, native grass, landscaping and low flow crossing. Phase I of the community park included a playground, a ramada, open turf area, parking, a dog park, landscaping and meandering multiuse paths. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $162,994 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,200,423 Contingency 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 $0.195 per sq ft, and a drinking fountain at $60.39. Refuse includes one container for the entire site at $2,047 per year. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $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 Project: 70509 - Manistee Ranch Development (I) Project Description: FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $6,582 $0 $8,124 $26,588 $0 $0 $343,113 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $797 $7,559 $392,763 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Enhance various aspects of the historical area that would improve the aesthetics and functionality of Manistee Ranch Historical park site. This may include additional lighting, enhanced pathways, and/or landscape improvements. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,874 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $173,801 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 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 319 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $16,249 $16,249 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70510 - Park Enhancements (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 strive to meet the demands park users place on park land and facilities. 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, additional low-level security lighting, picnic areas, picnic benches, 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,067,302 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,177,247 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $206,517 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $61,773 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $628,427 $8,483,766 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Landscape TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,134 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,483,766 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. The additional O and M will be absorbed by the department. Operating Costs: Supplies/Contr Bldg. Maint. $0 $12,134 FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2015 $0 $0 $14,796 $5,416 $0 $0 $58,334 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 320 Return to CIP TOC FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 * New Project FY 2016 $38,122 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70514 - O'Neil Center Expansion (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $628,689 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,819,952 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 $2.70 per sq ft. Building Maintenance includes $2.70 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 $824 for additional fulltime 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 includes building water at $0.195 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $136,512 $2,536 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,385 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 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 321 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $0 $373,116 $84,627 $84,627 $6,398 $6,001 $6,299 $707,501 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70515 - T-Bird Park Improvements (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Continue to implement the Conservation Park Master Plan recommendations and improvements, removal of invasive plant species and re-vegetation, signage upgrades, repairs or replacements to existing ramadas, picnic tables, grills, restrooms and other infrastructure. This funding also addresses the continuation of re-vegetation, as well as the installation of new park elements, such as trail head improvements, ramadas and parking lot improvements. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $646,739 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,847,826 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $56,644 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,478 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $264,195 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,888,882 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Improvements have O and M impact for two new 750 square feet restrooms with 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 $1.62 X 3,000 sq ft = $4,860 annually; equipment maintenance is for two added pole lights at $300 annually; insurance is for 2 new employees at $824 per person; ramada cleaning at $3,000 each at five new ramadas, building water at $0.195 sq ft or $49 per month; equipment replacement is a computer, printer purchase and their replacement cost. Calculations are based on a 34 month operating period. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $115,479 $20,390 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,035 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $989 $5,437 $0 $0 $375,519 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,943 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,431 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 322 Return to CIP TOC $1,930 $563,153 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70523 - 79th/Orangewood (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 Glendale Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Improvements include a looped pathway, lowlevel security lighting, ramadas, and landscape. Phase I development included approximately six acres, leaving approximately 3 to 4 undeveloped acres. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $73,463 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $991,746 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: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. Landscape $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 323 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $11,115 $10,832 $114,386 $136,333 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70532 - Western Area Regional Park (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Phased development of an 88 acre regional park and municipal campus. Includes 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 remaining 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $2.70 per sq ft x 2000 sq ft control building in the softball complex. Equipment Maintenance includes 110 light poles x $171 each for electricity and lamp replacement. Building Maintenance includes $2.70 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 $824 per person. PC/Vehicle replacement includes $3,000 per phone x 6, $640 per lap top x 3, $1,053 per printer x 3, $2,050 for 1/2 ton pick up replacement charges, 8,000 miles x $0.17 for maintenance costs, 8,000 miles x $0.22 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 $0.195 per sq ft x 2,000. Refuse includes five containers located throughout the park at $2,047 per year. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $635,834 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $184,950 $33,851 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $943,904 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $115,771 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 324 Return to CIP TOC $0 $10,143 $173,865 $0 $0 $993,899 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,400 $62,994 $3,157,611 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70535 - Paseo Racquet Center Park (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: The park project has two components: Paseo Sports Complex and Paseo Racquet Center, both of which are in this park. The Sports Complex work would include installation of 12,500 sq ft of spectator seating, addition of concrete surfacing, replacement of the lighting system, restroom and concessions building. At the Paseo Racquet Center, necessary maintenance repairs include court overlays, court resurfacing, lighting, fencing and building restoration and improvements per the pending new agreement with lessee. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,005,416 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,872,616 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $87,326 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,744 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $28,726 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $387,803 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,453,631 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: These capital improvements are to existing facilities and will likely decrease O and M expenses. Project: 70540 - Grounds & Facilities Imprvmnts (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Renovate and enhance golf course grounds and infrastructure at Glendale's Glen Lakes and Desert Mirage golf courses. Improvements will include modifying or enhancing greens, tees, fairways, cart paths, irrigation system, lakes, driving range, parking lot, and pro-shop for both municipal golf courses. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $9,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 No additional O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 325 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: T1710 - Adult Center Expansion (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Improvements to the 17,000 sq ft of unfinished interior space on the second level of the Adult Center. Expansion will help meet the needs of present center users and will also accommodate the additional programs needed for the growing number of seniors in the city and the increasing adult center attendance. The expansion could include meeting rooms, relocated billiards room, aerobics, specialty crafts and programmer offices. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $183,552 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 $9,361,181 TOTAL Operating Description: Staffing includes 1 Senior Recreation Coordinator at $72,275 including benefits, 1 Recreation Programmer at $51,554 including benefits, 1 FTE Office Support Supervisor at $58,394 including benefits, 1 Custodian with benefits at $47,025, 219 hour Recreation Programmers at $55,218 with benefits. Supplies and contracts include $2.70 per sq ft x 17,000 sq ft. Utilities include the cost of electricity at $2.70 x 17,000 sq ft. Building Maintenance includes HVAC maintenance at $2.50 x 17,000 sq ft; Insurance is 5 employees x $824 plus inflation, per employee. Electrical is $100 additional monthly security monitoring; building water is $0.195 per sq ft x 17,000 sq ft . All are factored for inflation and calculated for 27 months of operation. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $787,867 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,126 Utilities Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,126 $117,710 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,329 Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,411 Electrical 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 326 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $3,324 $1,492 $1,190,385 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: T1714* - O'Neil Park Splash Pad (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Demolition of an existing pool site and construction of a 15,000 - 20,000 sq ft splash pad. The new splash pad would include state-of-the-art themed spray components, concrete pad with a synthetic aquatic service, shade structures, controlled access points, outdoor lighting, and a re-circulating pump station to conserve water. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $169,050 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $483,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,685 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,400 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,830 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $48,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $748,965 TOTAL Operating Description: Supplies and Contracts includes chemicals for water treatment at $.23 per sq ft, Building maintenance accounts for 10 low level lighting for night use at $188 x 10, and water accounts for the evaporation of the re-circulating water at $.06 per square foot. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Project: 70500 - Parks Redevelopment (R) Project Description: FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $8,370 $4,210 $2,277 $14,857 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: This project is designed as a proactive focus for revitalizing parks currently in the city's inventory that 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,283,947 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,239,851 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $680,571 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $122,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $182,398 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,040,702 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,549,469 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $106,518 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $106,518 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,549,469 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. These parks are currently maintained, so staff doesn't project additional landscape maintenance or water costs. Water would include the addition of 40 drinking fountains at $66 each. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,249 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,249 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 327 Return to CIP TOC $36,990 $69,488 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70512 - Facilities Renovation (R) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Renovations address planned and/or unexpected restoration improvements and infrastructure replacement 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. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,093,137 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $186,870 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,931 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $849,407 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,530,345 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $4,942 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,942 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,530,345 New O and M expenses are not usually encountered with restoration activities. Project: 70526 - Multiuse Sports Field Lighting (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Renovation or replacement of existing sports lights that have illumination depreciation or nor longer meet current illumination standards. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $428,217 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,282,998 Contingency 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 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $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 FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $818,556 $818,556 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70541 - Parks Capital Equipment (R) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Purchase new and replace old, outdated equipment such as mowers, trailers, utility vehicles, ball field preparation machines and pick-up trucks that have outlasted their effective life span for use at parks and maintenance of city green spaces and grounds. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,500 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $487,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $22,810 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,810 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 PC/Vehicle Replacement includes maintenance for 5 mowers, 5 trailers, 5 ball field prep. machines and 2 pick-up trucks. Equipment maintenance is $75 per hour x 20 (# of visits) x pieces of equipment. Two pick up trucks at $2,050, $.17 per mile for maintenance costs x 8,000 miles, and $.22 per mile x 8,000 miles for fuel costs. The remaining equipment will calculated as the equivalent as one vehicle, which is one truck at $2,050, $.17 per mile for maintenance costs x 8,000 miles, and $.22 per mile x 8,000 miles for fuel costs. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 70542 - Parks Master Plan Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $138,482 $127,280 $265,762 General Obligation Bonds 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. The scheduled update is required to meet agency accreditation standards. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $10,177 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,177 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: T1712 - Aquatic Facility Restoration (R) Project Description: FY 2016 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: The renovation and restoration of existing swimming pools. The aquatic facilities 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 to ensure continued compliance with all federal, state and county health code requirements. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $948,255 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,269,958 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 329 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: T1713 - Foothills Center Restoration (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Replacement of recreation center equipment that had a useful life of 5-7 years 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. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $189,625 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $758,500 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,040 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,500 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,769 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 $1,889,025 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 330 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70527 - West Area Pool (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Design and 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, 50 yard competitive swimming pool with heat, dive well with heat, waterslides, wave in a box feature, lighting, decking, a bath house with classroom and a parking lot. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $776,830 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,487,209 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Fulltime staffing includes a Programmer at $44,271 and a Crew Leader at $50,145. Insurance is included for the two fulltime staff. Hourly staffing includes a summer Pool Manager, two Assistant Pool Managers, Lifeguards, Water Safety Instructors and Cashiers at $250,000 annually. Supplies include chemicals ($25,000), programming supplies ($30,000) and Red Cross supplies ($1,000). Utilities include electricity ($35,000) and natural gas ($40,000). Building maintenance includes lighting maintenance ($1,536) and custodial service, HVAC maintenance and plumbing for 5,650 sq ft. Equipment maintenance includes $15,000 for pool pump, filters and other pool equipment maintenance based on current costs at Rose Lane and Foothills aquatic centers. Electrical includes operations and maintenance for fire alarm monitoring, a security system and camera ($5,000). Technology replacement contributions are for four desktop computers and vehicle replacement contributions are for ½ ton pickup truck. Maintenance for 56,500 sq ft of landscape. Building water for a 5,650 sq ft building and pool water estimated at $15,000 per year. Refuse includes service of two 6-yard containers three times a week. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $140,000 $187,500 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,910 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,500 $5,370 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,500 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape Water $0 $0 $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 331 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $861,040 $10,525 $0 $31,075 $40,253 $0 $0 $1,463,911 $10,238 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70528 - Family Recreation Center-West (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Development of a multi-generational 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-generational recreation center that target a diverse demographic. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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: Additional O and M calculated for 21 months beginning in September 2019. Staffing levels are based on a seven day per week operation and includes a Recreation Manager, a Office Support Supervisor, 3 Senior Recreation Coordinators, 2 Secretaries, 3 Recreation Programmers, a Service Worker II, a Service Worker III, 2 Building Maintenance Workers, and 10 PT Recreation Programmers (benefits included for FTE's only). Supplies/Contracts include $2.70 sq ft x 70,000 sq ft facility. Utilities include $2.70 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 at $1.62 per sq ft x 70,000, plumbing costs at $4.60 per sq ft x 70,000 sq ft. Equipment maintenance includes vehicle maintenance ($0.17 per mile) and fuel ($0.22 per mile) for three 1/2 ton pickup trucks driven 8,000 miles annually. Insurance includes $786 x 19 employees. Electrical includes fire alarm system at $150 per month, which includes the monitoring subscription dedicated phone lines. Vehicle replacement includes vehicle replacement at $2,050 x 3. Technology replacement includes $540 x 8 desktop computers and a network printer at $1,053 per year. Landscape maintenance and water costs are included in project 2060-70532. Building water is calculated at $0.195 x 70,000 sq ft. Refuse includes two 6-yard containers x 3 pick-ups per week at $2,047 annually. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500,847 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $426,167 $426,167 $1,376,361 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Insurance Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $33,674 $4,059 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,983 Water Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,779 $9,234 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 332 Return to CIP TOC $21,105 $4,854,376 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2060-Parks Construction Project: 70531 - Sahuaro Ranch Visitor Ctr. (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,000 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 $2.70 per sq ft x 5,000 sq ft. Utilities include the cost for electricity at $2.70 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 $1.62 per sq ft x 5,000 sq ft, and plumbing at $4.60 per sq ft x 5,000 sq ft. Insurance is $824 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. 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 .195 per sq ft. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $567,812 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $83,089 Utilities Bldg. 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 333 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $0 $83,089 $268,347 $5,072 $0 $123,095 $58,956 $0 $0 $1,195,461 $6,001 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Library - Construction Fund LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION FUND The continued decline in Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation required the Western Area Library originally planned for FY 2009 and FY 2010 to be pushed to the last five years of the capital improvement plan joining the renovation project for the three existing city libraries. Project Name: Int. Renovation-Main, VT, FH Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 2160 Project #: T2810 Picture Note: Foothills Branch Library above, Main Library Below 334 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2160-Library Construction Category: 6% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,610,000 35,610,000 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Bond Proceeds^ Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets T2810 Int. Renovation-Main, VT, FH Sub-Total - Existing Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,579,433 12,579,433 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23,029,715 23,029,715 35,609,148 $0 $0 $0 $0 $852 New Assets 74000 West Branch Library Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 0 $0 Estimated Ending Balance: ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. PROJECT DETAIL: 2160-Library Construction Category: 6% Project: T2810 - Int. Renovation-Main, VT, FH (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,692 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,289,085 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,579,433 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 335 Return to CIP TOC $246,656 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2160-Library Construction Project: 74000 - West Branch Library (N) Project Description: Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 $26,592,494 in FY 2017. A total of $23,029,715 in general obligation bonds will be needed for this project with the remaining cost covered by DIF. The design of the building was completed in 2009, and was paid from DIF Account 1380-74250. By 2017, it is anticipated that considerable redesign may be necessary. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,549,996 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,974,202 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $561,718 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $440,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $101,862 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $149,742 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,221,001 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,801,194 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,230,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,029,715 TOTAL Operating Description: Additional O and M would be needed starting in September 2018. Staffing includes the salary and benefits for a branch manager, 2 Librarian III's, 7 Librarian I's, a Library Operations Supervisor, 4 Library Assistant III's, 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 addition of this building. Staffing also includes eight 19-hour pages and two 19-hour Information Services Assistants. 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. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $291,623 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $360,839 $51,857 $395,056 $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 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 336 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $5,730,470 $1,784,895 $343,743 $26,176 $33,461 $5,746 $9,023,866 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Public Safety – Construction Funds PUBLIC SAFETY CONSTRUCTION FUNDS Public safety projects are funded by a combination of public safety general obligation bonds and development impact fees. This section highlights the G.O. projects funded in Fund 2040 for the Fire, Police and City Court Departments. Carryover and new funding within the Public Safety Communication System project will be utilized to complete the necessary steps in order for the Police and Fire Departments to join the Regional Wireless Cooperative (RWC). The Fire Department also has carryover funding available for the purchase of radios that are interoperable with the radios currently used by the RWC. All remaining carryover will be used to complete equipping fire vehicles with the necessary apparatus. Due to the continued drop in secondary assessed valuation, funding for the City Court Building, which was previously scheduled for completion in FY 2012, has been deferred until the last five years of the capital improvement plan, joining Phase II of the Western Public Safety Training Facility. Project Name: PS Digital Comm. System Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 2040 Project #: 75012 337 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2040-Public Safety Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 20% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $4,683,078 $2,272,052 $2,036,383 $1,954,820 $1,742,609 $1,658,879 0 5,907 0 187 6,094 0 1,728 0 0 1,728 0 1,272 0 0 1,272 0 555 0 0 555 0 664 0 0 664 98,475,000 1,659 11,114,239 0 109,590,898 2,000 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Bond Proceeds Interest Income Intergovernmental Revenue Investment Income Total Revenue: Operating Expenses Advisor Fees Total Operating Expenses: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 75012 PS Digital Comm. System 698,539 163,241 237,397 82,835 212,766 84,394 868,309 1,263,671 0 76,768 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,038,978 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163,241 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 237,397 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82,835 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 212,766 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84,394 1,937,128 3,938,255 0 735,420 4,800,612 916,199 799,500 768,750 1,543,110 16,307,283 0 212,901 0 0 0 212,901 2,251,879 0 0 0 0 0 0 163,241 0 0 0 0 0 0 237,397 0 0 0 0 0 0 82,835 0 0 0 0 0 0 212,766 0 0 0 0 0 0 84,394 43,005,399 0 38,532,554 489,819 12,910,118 94,937,890 111,245,173 $2,036,383 $1,954,820 $1,742,609 $1,658,879 $4,603 Replacement of Existing Assets 75024 800MHz Comm Equip 75034 Engine & Ladder Replacement 75036 Replace Utility Truck T2520 Infor & Imaging Systems T5320 EOC Equipment Replacement T5380 Replace HazMat Vehicle T5450 30 Heart Monitors T5537 Fire Facility Assessment T5539 Replacement of Airpacks Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 75020 City Court Building 75035 Fire Ladder Truck & Tender T5370 Training Facility Phase II T5400 Purchase Type 3 Brush Truck T5536 Fire Station - Western Area Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 2,415,120 $2,272,052 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 338 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: 75012 - PS Digital Comm. System (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: This project helps fund the city's share of membership in the Regional Wireless Cooperative (RWC) digital communications system (two-way radio). Fees associated with this membership cover the operational and maintenance costs on a per radio basis as well as special assessment fees. Membership in the RWC provides for enhanced service, redundancy and increased coverage for all city departments. Most importantly, interoperability not only within city departments but also valley wide partners is greatly increased. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $3,265 $4,748 $1,657 $4,255 $1,688 $19,157 IT/Phone/Security $73,530 $79,775 $81,178 $81,939 $82,706 $429,983 Miscellaneous/Other $86,446 $152,874 $0 $126,572 $0 $419,169 Sub-Total New Funding $163,241 $237,397 $82,835 $212,766 $84,394 $868,309 FY 2012 Carryover $698,539 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $861,780 $237,397 $82,835 $212,766 $84,394 $868,309 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. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 Equip. Maint. TOTAL $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 75024 - 800MHz Comm Equip (R) Project Description: FY 2015 FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $1,432,986 $1,432,986 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Replacement and/or upgrade of existing 800 MHz radios for the Regional Wireless Cooperative to ensure the department continues to meet Federal Communications Commission requirements for Public Safety radio transmissions as mandated. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $28,628 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,908,500 $1,937,128 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,263,671 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,263,671 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,937,128 O and M includes network fees annually at $49 per month, per radio for 275 radios x five years. The department will submit a supplemental in the future for the additional O and M. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 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 339 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $808,500 $808,500 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: 75034 - Engine & Ladder Replacement (R) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 in an effort to be compliant with the National Fire Protection Association Standards for emergency apparatus. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $96,055 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,842,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,938,255 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. Project: 75036 - Replace Utility Truck (R) Project Description: Replacement of 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 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $76,768 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $76,768 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T2520 - Infor & Imaging Systems (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: This project will replace the digital system utilized for crime scene documentation and other digital documentation. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,420 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $721,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $735,420 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. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 340 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $309,000 $309,000 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: T5320 - EOC Equipment Replacement (R) Project Description: Category: 20% 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 Systems, Weather System, and Public Safety Critical Infrastructure Protection System all reside on the 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. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $94,130 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,706,482 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,800,612 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 $1,176,620 annually, or $4,706,482 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 and microphones; 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. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T5380 - Replace HazMat Vehicle (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2015 FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $4,706,482 $4,706,482 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Replacement of a HazMat vehicle for the hazardous materials team. The current truck will have served its useful life of 10 years in FY 2019. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,540 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $902,659 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $916,199 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed since the Hazmat truck will be replacing the current vehicle. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 341 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: T5450 - 30 Heart Monitors (R) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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. Emergency medical incidents account for 80% of all calls for service. New technology also plays a part in how long we can continue to use older equipment. Currently, the department’s heart monitors are adequate through FY 2017, at which time they are expected to reach the end of their useful life. Heart monitors are considered a capital expenditure due to the type of equipment requiring to be updated all at the same time; which cannot be phased in when replaced. Personnel must all be able to train and work on the same type, make and model of equipment. The department will continue to seek alternative funding mechanisms such as grants as they become available. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,500 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $780,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $799,500 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M for the heart monitors would be needed starting in FY 2019. O and M includes the ongoing annual maintenance cost of $20,000 for all units and two batteries a year ($200 per battery) for each unit. O and M calculated with 3% inflation per year. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T5537 - Fire Facility Assessment (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2015 $0 FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $121,645 $121,645 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 342 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: T5539 - Replacement of Airpacks (R) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Replacement of self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBAs) or air packs. The current supply is in compliance with National Fire Protection Association Standards through FY 2017. In FY 2017, 150 air packs will be outdated and in need of replacement. The useful life span of SCBAs is 7-10 years. Airpacks are considered a capital expenditure due to the type of equipment requiring to be updated all at the same time; which cannot be phased in when replaced. Personnel must all be able to train and work on the same type, make and model of equipment. The department will continue to seek alternative funding mechanisms such as grants as they become available. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $74,545 is necessary. The $25,000 for annual maintenance and repair will be needed the year after purchase. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 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 343 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $74,545 $74,545 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: 75020 - City Court Building (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construction will resume on the city court building in FY 2017. 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,742,010 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,613,404 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $791,603 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,235,868 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $139,968 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $316,134 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,166,412 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,005,399 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: O and M would be needed starting in FY 2019 and 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 $213,800 in one-time expenses in FY 2019 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 $577,269. O and M costs for additional court positions will also be needed starting in the year the building is occupied. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 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 Electrical $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 Landscape Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Refuse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Project: 75035 - Fire Ladder Truck & Tender (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $1,453,002 $693,971 $184,533 $250,966 $0 $47,056 $51,671 $0 $0 $1,107,210 $0 $0 $0 $18,684 $0 $27,426 $38,579 $0 $0 $3,895,590 $22,492 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: A fully equipped ladder truck and ladder tender vehicle. Furnishings to accommodate additional ladder company in existing station. Over 50% of structure fires occur in central Glendale which has numerous multi-residential structures and contains the city's industrial area. Based on current growth, call volume and demand for the ladder services this equipment and company will be located at FS151. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $212,901 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $212,901 $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 344 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: T5370 - Training Facility Phase II (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,123 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 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $734,414 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,532,554 TOTAL Operating Description: Additional O and M would be needed starting in December 2019. Staffing 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 is $439,392 annually; PD vehicle O and M $17,530, (Per year costs PD Training Equip. $88,860 one time, workstations $17,877one 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. Landscape maintenance and water usage is calculated at 10 acres (438,600 x 0.22 per sq ft); building water usage 99,515 sq ft x 0.195; and refuse is calculated using two 6 yard containers on site with pick up three days per week ($341.26 x 12). A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,183 Equip. Maint. Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $708,886 $26,781 $0 $0 $0 $860,678 $268,807 $172,874 PC/Vehicle Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,771 Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $195,854 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 345 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $39,659 $8,369 $2,424,862 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: T5400 - Purchase Type 3 Brush Truck (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Purchase a Type 3 brush truck vehicle. Thunderbird Park, the Agua Fria and Skunk Creek create off-road firefighting equipment needs. 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. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,239 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $482,580 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $489,819 TOTAL Operating Description: O and M includes shop and fuel of $7,000 annually and radio fees at $49 per month annually. Vehicle Replacement Funds were not included as this piece of apparatus will be replaced as needed through future CIP projects. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 346 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $7,588 $7,588 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2040-Public Safety Construction Project: T5536 - Fire Station - Western Area (N) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 areas between Northern Avenue and Camelback Road and 83rd to 115th Avenues. 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,613,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,020,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $365,803 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $156,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,200 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,601,040 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,625,775 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,910,118 TOTAL Operating Description: $2,395,800 Additional O and M would be needed starting in March of 2019. Staffing includes the salary and benefits for 12 Firefighters, 3 Captains, 3 Engineers and .5 FTE Building Maintenance Worker. Also includes promotions, training, medic pay, station supplies, station and equipment maintenance, telephone charges, grounds maintenance, insurance and onetime 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 services for 15,000 sq ft of space. PC replacement contributions for network replacement at $1,600 and PC and printer replacement = $3,753. Landscaping estimated at $0.22 per sq ft. Water estimated at $0.195 per sq ft. Refuse estimated at $342.26 x 12 months. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 $0 FYs 17-21 Staffing Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $146,398 Bldg. Maint. Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $434,875 $57,327 $36,165 $0 $3,844,622 $697,886 Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement Landscape $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,421 Refuse TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,824 $5,335,125 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 347 Return to CIP TOC $0 $72,695 $15,411 $9,501 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Government Facilities - Construction Fund GOVERNMENT FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION FUND Carryover in FY 2012 is available for the completion of the sales tax and license system replacement project and the repair, maintenance and/or replacement of roofing, electrical/ lighting and mechanical systems. The Government Facility Construction Fund will not receive new funding until the last five years of the capital improvement plan due to the continued decline in secondary assessed valuation. Project Name: City Hall Parking Garage Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 2080 Project #: T1160 348 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2080-Government Facilities Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 6% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $1,132,337 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 1,092 8 1,100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,135,000 0 0 16,135,000 2,000 2,000 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 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 921,858 5,432,824 1,966,111 1,051,101 2,315,858 1,276,474 1,114,471 0 0 1,831,799 223,193 16,133,689 16,133,689 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,311 Revenue Bond Proceeds Interest Income Investment Income Total Revenue: Operating Expenses Advisor Fees Total Operating Expenses: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 77503 Exterior Closure (Roofing) 77504 City Hall - HVAC System 77507 Interior Finishes (Flooring) 77508 Interior Finishes (Paint) 77509 Mechanical Upgrades 77510 Electrical/Lighting Upgrades 77512 Exterior Closure (Paint) 77513 Sales Tax System 77514 Civic Ctr Storage Fac Repair T1160 City Hall Parking Garage T4730 Fuel Sites Equipment Upgrade Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 709,659 0 0 0 212,149 93,965 0 27,363 88,301 0 0 1,131,437 1,131,437 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,131,437 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 349 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2080-Government Facilities Construction Project: 77503 - Exterior Closure (Roofing) (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Citywide roofing upgrades will require a total of $921,858 in FY 2017 to improve the condition of several facilities and extend the useful life of the infrastructure. There will be over 80 different roofing-related projects needed on all city buildings over a 10 year period. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,913 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,913 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,370 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $808,666 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,996 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $921,858 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $709,659 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $709,659 $0 $0 $0 $0 $921,858 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 77504 - City Hall - HVAC System (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: The existing HVAC system at Glendale City Hall is projected to reach its capacity with the future occupancy and use of the building, which will exceed the original design in the next 10 years. These replacements and upgrades will improve indoor air quality and provide a new HVAC system life capacity of an additional 20+ years. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,432,824 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 77507 - Interior Finishes (Flooring) (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Make citywide interior flooring replacements and upgrades that would require a total of $1,966,111 over a ten year period 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 the 10-year period. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,826 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,826 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,741,030 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $143,429 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,966,111 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 350 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2080-Government Facilities Construction Project: 77508 - Interior Finishes (Paint) (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Make citywide interior paint and wall covering replacements and upgrades that would require a total of $1,051,101 over a 10-year period to improve the condition of several facilities and extend the useful life of the infrastructure. There are over 142 paint/wall covering related projects needed on all city buildings. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,048 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,048 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,900 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $991,105 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,051,101 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 77509 - Mechanical Upgrades (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Citywide mechanical replacement and upgrades would require a total of $2,315,858 to improve the mechanical systems of several facilities, as well as extend the useful life of the infrastructure. There will be a total of nine HVAC mechanical related projects completed on different city buildings. Major projects include: replacing all the HVAC equipment and adding capacity to cool the data center for the entire city located at the Public Safety Building, replacing the cooling tower drive motor at the Main Library, replacing the heat pumps at Fire Station 154 and renovating the mechanical systems at the Operations Center. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,233 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,233 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,000 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,084,049 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $178,343 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,315,858 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $212,149 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $212,149 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,315,858 No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 351 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2080-Government Facilities Construction Project: 77510 - Electrical/Lighting Upgrades (R) Project Description: Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: The replacement and upgrade of lighting and electrical systems in city buildings is estimated to cost a total of $1,276,474 over several years. These upgrades are expected to reduce the consumption of electricity usage citywide, with an anticipated return on investment savings in less than three years. Improvements are needed for the O'Neil and Rose Lane community center recreation buildings, Fire Stations 152, 153, 154 and 155; and the Apollo, Glendale and Cactus pool buildings. This project will 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. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32,112 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32,112 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,000 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,095,742 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $105,508 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,276,474 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $93,965 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $93,965 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,276,474 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 77512 - Exterior Closure (Paint) (R) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Citywide painting related replacements and upgrades that would require a total of $1,114,471 over a several year period to improve the condition of several facilities and extend the useful life of the infrastructure. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,067 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,067 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,050 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $988,924 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,363 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,114,471 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 77513 - Sales Tax System (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: General Obligation Bonds 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $27,363 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,363 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Refer to PAYGO Project No. 1000-81055 for O and M impact. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 352 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2080-Government Facilities Construction Project: 77514 - Civic Ctr Storage Fac Repair (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $88,301 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $88,301 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: T1160 - City Hall Parking Garage (R) Project Description: Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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, the natural expansion and contraction of the structure's elements have pushed out of place many of the synthetic cushions on which the 366 concrete beams are seated. This has caused the concrete to wear against 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 for this project. Project: T4730 - Fuel Sites Equipment Upgrade (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: This project reflects the replacement of all city of Glendale fuel dispensing equipment that will reach their maximum useful life over the next ten years. The project includes installation of new fuel monitoring and tank leak detection systems and replacement of the fuel tracking system at the city’s three fueling sites. Completion of this project will ensure reporting accuracy, equipment stability and integrity, and improved customer service. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,250 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $94,500 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $86,525 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,973 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $945 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $223,193 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is required since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. No annual maintenance is required, if repairs are required vendors will be paid through existing budgets. Contributions to the Technology Replacement Fund are being made for the hardware currently being used and no additional hardware would be needed at this time. The software is a one-time purchase and the yearly license agreement will be paid through the departments existing budget. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 353 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Cultural Facility/Historical Preservation – Construction Fund CULTURAL FACILITY/HISTORICAL PRESERVATION CONSTRUCTION FUND This general obligation category will fund the continuation of repair and rehabilitation work at the Morcomb property. Work will include restoration of both the historic house and gas station in order to preserve the historic integrity of the property. In conjecture with Maricopa Community Colleges, a Cultural Arts Facility is planned in the last five years of the CIP which would host community theater groups, small venue concerts, films and other performances. Project Name: Sahuaro Ranch Carriage House Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 2130 Project #: 84308 354 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2130-Cultural Facility Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 6% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $355,626 $250,750 $250,750 $250,750 $250,750 $250,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14,120,000 4,704,748 18,824,748 Revenue Bond Proceeds^ Intergovernmental Revenue Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 84307 Morcomb Property 104,876 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104,876 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 252,980 252,980 0 0 104,876 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18,818,992 18,818,992 19,071,972 $250,750 $250,750 $250,750 $250,750 $3,526 Replacement of Existing Assets 84308 Sahuaro Ranch Carriage House Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 84300 Cultural Arts Facility Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 104,876 $250,750 Estimated Ending Balance: ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. PROJECT DETAIL: 2130-Cultural Facility Construction Project: 84307 - Morcomb Property (I) Project Description: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $104,876 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $104,876 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Property will be owned by the City of Glendale. Field Operations and Parks & Recreation will maintain the buildings and landscaping. No occupancy of either building is contemplated. The additional O and M will be absorbed by the department. Operating Costs: Bldg. Maint. Landscape General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Restoration of the historic 1936 Morcomb Adobe House and the historic Morcomb Service Station located at 6040 West Myrtle Avenue and listed on the National Register. The project is part of the Myrtle Avenue Cultural Entryway. The project will consist of restoration of the historic house and historic gas station. This project will complete the Cultural Entryway. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Category: 6% FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $1,000 $1,000 $1,030 $1,030 $1,061 $1,061 $1,093 $1,093 $2,000 $2,060 $2,122 $2,186 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 355 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $1,126 $1,126 $2,252 FYs 17-21 $6,155 $6,155 $12,310 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2130-Cultural Facility Construction Project: 84308 - Sahuaro Ranch Carriage House (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Repair and replace the interior wood siding with the intent being to restore the weather tightness of the structure. Repair the deteriorating parts of the bay window. Replace the metal flashing at the roof of the bay and install flooring with materials that meet ADA and historical standards. Replace all electrical infrastructure and prepare and re-paint all previously painted interior surfaces, FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $46,200 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $132,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,960 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,320 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $252,980 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 84300 - Cultural Arts Facility (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construction of a cultural arts facility in Glendale was identified in the 1999 Bond Election. Budget estimates are based on a 30,150 sq ft 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 $18,818,992 cost by $4,704,748 for a total city cost of $14,114,244. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,554,026 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,154,360 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $369,000 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $158,687 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $115,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $101,544 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,015,436 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,320,067 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,030,872 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,818,992 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 356 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Economic Development – Construction Fund ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION FUND This general obligation bond category includes $1.7 million in carryover for economic development capital projects in FY 2012. These funds are intended for the purchase of land for redevelopment, the upgrade and repair of older infrastructure and new development infrastructure. The overall goal of the economic development capital projects is to attract high quality economic development projects that create or retain well-paying jobs in Glendale, enhance the city’s financial stability and attract new capital investment. Due to the continued decline in Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation, additional funding for economic development related projects will be deferred to the last five years of the plan. Project Name: Loop 303 Infrastructure Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 2100 Project #: 84406 357 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2100-Economic Development Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 6% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $1,804,329 $61,531 $61,877 $62,256 $62,635 $63,047 0 5,251 45 5,296 0 346 0 346 0 378 0 378 0 379 0 379 0 412 0 412 91,495,000 1,030 0 91,496,030 2,000 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Bond Proceeds^ Interest Income Investment Income Total Revenue: Operating Expenses Advisor Fees Total Operating Expenses: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 84401 Downtown Redevelopment Sub-Total - Existing Assets 450,000 450,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,625,000 25,625,000 846,094 0 450,000 1,296,094 1,746,094 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23,062,500 5,966,771 36,900,000 65,929,271 91,554,271 $61,877 $62,256 $62,635 $63,047 $4,806 New Assets 84400 Downtown Land Acquisition 84406 Loop 303 Infrastructure 84407 New Development Infrastructure Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 1,746,094 $61,531 Estimated Ending Balance: ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. PROJECT DETAIL: 2100-Economic Development Construction Project: 84401 - Downtown Redevelopment (I) Project Description: Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $625,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,625,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: TOTAL $450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,625,000 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 or absorbed by the carryover portion of projects in FYs 2012-2016. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Landscape $25,000,000 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $3,183 $3,278 $3,377 $3,478 $3,183 $3,278 $3,377 $3,478 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 358 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $3,582 $3,582 FYs 17-21 $19,586 $19,586 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2100-Economic Development Construction Project: 84400 - Downtown Land Acquisition (N) Project Description: Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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, spurring economic growth. 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $562,500 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,250 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $737,750 $23,062,500 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $846,094 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $846,094 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,062,500 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. Estimation for weed control and maintenance is just over $2,000 per year for FYs 2012-2016. The additional O and M will be absorbed by the department. Operating Costs: Landscape FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2015 $2,380 $2,452 $2,525 $2,601 $2,380 $2,452 $2,525 $2,601 Project: 84406 - Loop 303 Infrastructure (N) Project Description: $21,500,000 FY 2016 $2,679 $2,679 FYs 17-21 $14,649 $14,649 General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 to spur economic growth, requires infrastructure to be in place. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $181,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,966,771 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. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 359 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2100-Economic Development Construction Project: 84407 - New Development Infrastructure (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Land Category: 6% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 FY 2015 $0 FY 2016 $0 FYs 17-21 $10,000,000 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,728,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $122,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 $36,900,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $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 360 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Flood Control – Construction Fund FLOOD CONTROL CONSTRUCTION FUND FY 2012 projects include the completion of several storm drain projects including 67th Avenue between Peoria and the Arizona Canal Diversion Channel (ACDC), Northern Avenue between 47th and 63rd Avenues, and Camelback Road between 59th and 75th Avenues which is part of the Bethany Home Outfall Channel Project. With the exception of the ongoing AZDES Permit Project, no new funding is included in the first five years of the CIP plan due to the continued decline in Glendale’s secondary assessed valuation. The AZDES Permit Project ensures that the city remains compliant with the requirements of a permit obtained under the Clean Water Act. Project Name: Bethany Home Outfall Channel Funding Source: G.O. Bond Fund #: 2180 Project #: 79000 361 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2180-Flood Control Construction Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: 20% FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $11,877,203 $1,555,175 $1,401,360 $1,247,450 $1,092,706 $937,635 0 30,981 0 1,644 32,625 0 6,803 0 362 7,164 0 6,739 0 324 7,063 0 5,938 0 286 6,224 0 5,643 0 248 5,891 30,750,000 14,108 8,535,000 621 39,299,729 5,213 5,213 54 54 49 49 43 43 37 37 93 93 Revenue Bond Proceeds^ Interest Income Intergovernmental Revenue Investment Income Total Revenue: Operating Expenses Advisor Fees Total Operating Expenses: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 79004 Local Drainage Problems 79005 Collector Drains 79006 AZDES Permit T2944 *51st Ave. SD; Northern - Olive 1,054,710 558,130 465,907 0 0 0 160,925 0 0 0 160,925 0 0 0 160,925 0 0 0 160,925 0 0 0 160,925 0 5,293,992 0 804,625 2,077,840 98,695 2,177,442 0 160,925 0 160,925 0 160,925 0 160,925 0 160,925 843,750 9,020,207 3,441,598 0 371,516 0 4,197,959 0 0 0 8,011,073 10,188,515 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160,925 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160,925 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160,925 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160,925 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160,925 0 5,014,601 0 3,684,359 0 10,608,840 8,221,654 3,684,074 31,213,528 40,233,735 $1,401,360 $1,247,450 $1,092,706 $937,635 $3,536 Replacement of Existing Assets 79010 Storm Water Master Plan Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 79000 Bethany Home Outfall Channel 79001 Bethany Home 58th - 51st 79002 67th Ave/Peoria to ACDC 79007 Greenway Drain - 59th to 67th 79008 Northern Ave. SD- 47th to 63rd 79013 Bethany Home, 79th-67th (SD) T2910 Bethany Home, 67th-58th (SD) T2940 Greenway Drain - 51st-59th Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: Estimated Ending Balance: 10,349,440 $1,555,175 ^Will require additional voter authorization in last 5 years of the plan. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 362 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2180-Flood Control Construction Project: 79004 - Local Drainage Problems (I) Project Description: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construct localized storm drain improvements to mitigate drainage and/or flooding problems. This is an ongoing program that typically addresses drainage problems in older neighborhoods, residential areas, and extend existing storm drain systems. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,293,992 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $1,054,710 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,054,710 $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: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Finance Charges Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $558,130 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $558,130 $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: 79006 - AZDES Permit (I) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Ongoing program to construct storm drain improvements on collector streets to mitigate drainage and flooding problems. Capital Costs: Operating Description: $5,099,284 General Obligation Bonds 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $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 $465,907 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $626,832 $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. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 363 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2180-Flood Control Construction Project: T2944* - 51st Ave. SD; Northern - Olive (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Project will construct a 42" storm drain pipe, inlets, and other appurtenances in 51st Avenue between Northern Avenue and Olive Avenue. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,700,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $41,340 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $49,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $170,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,077,840 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: The storm drain will not require O and M. Project: 79010 - Storm Water Master Plan (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Update a citywide master plan completed in 2011 to determine the adequacy of existing facilities and prioritize new facilities. Project will include new drainage facilities, detailed aerial mapping and hydrologic modeling to determine storm water flows and volumes. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,750 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $825,000 $843,750 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $98,695 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $98,695 $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 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $3,441,598 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,441,598 $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 364 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2180-Flood Control Construction Project: 79001 - Bethany Home 58th - 51st (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construct a storm drain along Bethany Home Road between 51st and 58th Avenues including mainline pipe, catch basins and appurtenances. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: 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 County. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $371,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $371,516 $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 to 67th (N) Project Description: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $370,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,684,359 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 365 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2180-Flood Control Construction Project: 79008 - Northern Ave. SD- 47th to 63rd (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $4,197,959 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,197,959 $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: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construct storm drain pipe, inlets, and other appurtenances in Bethany Home Road from 79th Avenue to 67th Avenue. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 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: T2910 - Bethany Home, 67th-58th (SD) (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construct a storm drain in Bethany Home Road from 67th to 58th Avenues. Construction costs are to be shared with Maricopa County Flood Control District (50%) per an existing Intergovernmental agreement. Project will include storm drain pipe, catch basins and appurtenances. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $161,209 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 $8,221,654 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 366 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2180-Flood Control Construction Project: T2940 - Greenway Drain - 51st-59th (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: 20% General Obligation Bonds Funding Source: Construct a storm drain in Greenway Road between 51st and 59th Avenues to include mainline piping, catch basins, and appurtenances. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 367 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Development Impact Fee Funds DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUNDS Impact fees are one-time charges to developers that are used to offset a city’s capital costs resulting from new development. Developers pay development impact fees when they construct new residential and commercial developments. These fees are designed to cover a city’s increased costs for providing new or expanded infrastructure in the following categories: roadway improvements, open space and trails, parks, libraries, police, fire, general government, solid waste services and water/sewer. In this section you will find separate DIF fund summaries for each of these categories with the exception of solid waste services and water/sewer which are included in the Enterprise/Other Fund section of the Capital Improvement Plan. Planning and zoning information, such as anticipated population growth and expected density of residential and commercial development, is the foundation for impact fee revenue estimates. Given this information, the city then estimates the amount of impact fee revenue available to pay for growth-related capital projects. In normal economic conditions a number of DIF funded projects would be included in the capital plan to supplement the growth related portion of projects funded with other resources. However with the drastic decline in secondary assessed value, most G. O. bond funded projects have either been removed or deferred to the last five years of the plan. Since DIF revenue alone often is not sufficient to fund 100% of the cost of growth-related projects, the current plan is to evaluate options over the next year as staff continues to identify appropriate uses for DIF revenue. Late in FY 2011 Senate Bill 1525 was signed into law. The new law changes how development impact fees will be administered and places heavier restrictions on how DIF revenue can be used. Staff will work to evaluate how the new law will affect the current capital plan and incorporate into the capital plan the new DIF framework by August 1, 2014 as required by the law. Fund # - Name Carryover FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 1600-Roadway Improvements 131,958 0 22,064 0 194,908 171,500 1,766,178 1520-Citywide Open Space 171,473 44,000 46,216 44,000 46,350 0 85,140 1460-Citywide Parks 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 0 5,140 1480-Citywide Rec Facility 0 0 2,216 0 2,350 0 5,140 1540-Park Dev Zone 1 39,632 0 2,216 0 2,350 0 5,140 1560-Park Dev Zone 2 123,506 15,000 7,816 5,600 2,350 0 5,140 1580-Park Dev Zone 3 11,905 19,999 7,516 6,000 2,350 0 5,140 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,609,288 1380-Library Buildings 1500-Libraries 72,665 200,000 213,265 200,000 214,073 200,000 2,484259 1440-Police Dept Facilities 0 0 10,919 0 11,584 0 25,329 1420-Fire Protect Facilities 0 0 11,480 0 12,179 0 26,627 1620-General Government 0 0 12,799 0 13,578 0 29,687 $551,139 $278,999 $338,723 $255,600 $504,422 $371,500 $6,052,208 Total DIF Funds 368 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Roadway Improvements - DIF ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS DIF FUND This category includes development impact fees paid by developers for roadway improvements that are needed because of new residential and commercial developments within city limits. Continuing through FY 2014, the DIF-Roadway Improvement Fund will contribute $1M per year to cover a portion of debt service associated with growth related HURF projects. Carryover will be available for development agreements involving arterial streets and intersection such as improvements to curbs/gutters, sidewalks, street lights, traffic signals and landscaping. However, due to the slowdown in residential and commercial development, no new funding is anticipated for these types of development agreements until FY 2015. Any remaining funds collected in prior FYs are set aside for the HURF debt service contributions and future DIF updates. Project Name: Dev. Agree. - Signals Funding Source: DIF Fund #: 1600 Project #: 67803 369 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1600-DIF-Roadway Improvements Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $2,575,366 $1,727,748 $987,071 $267,561 $354,046 $467,518 272,699 11,641 284,340 274,062 7,325 281,387 276,803 3,688 280,491 279,571 1,822 281,393 282,367 2,605 284,972 1,404,844 5,210 1,410,054 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Operating Expenses Transfer Out** Total Operating Expenses: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 67802 Dev. Agree. - Arterials 65,110 0 0 0 0 0 857,500 0 65,110 0 0 22,064 22,064 0 0 23,408 23,408 0 0 51,178 908,678 66,848 66,848 131,958 0 0 0 0 0 22,064 0 0 0 171,500 171,500 194,908 171,500 171,500 171,500 857,500 857,500 1,766,178 $987,071 $267,561 $354,046 $467,518 $111,394 Replacement of Existing Assets 67809 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 67803 Dev. Agree. - Signals Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 131,958 $1,727,748 Estimated Ending Balance: **DIF Roadway Improvement contribution for HURF debt payment. PROJECT DETAIL: 1600-DIF-Roadway Improvements Project: 67802 - Dev. Agree. - Arterials (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF Development Impact Fees Funding Source: 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 to accommodate growth. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $857,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $857,500 $65,110 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $65,110 $0 $0 $0 $0 $857,500 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 370 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1600-DIF-Roadway Improvements Project: 67809 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: 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. Capital Costs: FY 2012 TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $22,064 $0 $23,408 $0 $51,178 $0 $22,064 $0 $23,408 $0 $51,178 No O and M is needed. Project: 67803 - Dev. Agree. - Signals (N) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: Miscellaneous/Other Operating Description: Category: DIF Development Impact Fees Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Land $0 $0 $0 $6,018 $6,018 Design $0 $0 $0 $10,531 $10,531 $30,088 $52,654 Construction $0 $0 $0 $137,563 $137,563 $687,814 $30,714 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $6,143 $6,143 Arts $0 $0 $0 $1,376 $1,376 $6,878 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $9,869 $9,869 $49,352 $0 $0 $0 $171,500 $171,500 $857,500 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $66,848 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $66,848 $0 $0 $171,500 $171,500 $857,500 O and M costs are for the electricity and maintenance of new traffic signal installations. A supplemental budget request will be made as new equipment is added to the system. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $12,155 $12,520 $68,465 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $6,078 $34,231 $0 $0 $0 $18,233 $6,260 $18,780 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 371 Return to CIP TOC $102,696 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Open Space – DIF OPEN SPACE DIF FUND This category includes development impact fees paid by developers for new or expanded infrastructure related to open space and multiuse trails that are needed as a result of new residential developments within city limits. For FY 2012, carryover funding will be used for trail/walkway improvements to accommodate increased use by residents from new and/or growing residential developments. Funding also is available for similar improvements specifically for Discovery and Pasadena Parks. Project Name: Discovery Park Source: DIF Fund #: 1520 Project #: 70453 Project Name: Pasadena Park Source: DIF Fund #: 1520 Project #: 70454 372 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1520-DIF-Citywide Open Space Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $419,629 $290,606 $331,069 $374,957 $417,562 $507,932 84,903 1,547 86,450 85,328 1,351 86,679 86,181 1,707 87,888 87,043 1,911 88,954 87,913 2,457 90,370 437,391 9,828 447,219 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 70452 Park Improvements - City Wide 70453 Discovery Park 70454 Pasadena Park 33,128 92,966 45,379 0 21,000 23,000 0 21,000 23,000 0 21,000 23,000 0 21,000 23,000 0 0 0 0 35,000 45,000 0 171,473 171,473 0 44,000 44,000 2,216 46,216 46,216 0 44,000 44,000 2,350 46,350 46,350 0 0 0 5,140 85,140 85,140 $331,069 $374,957 $417,562 $507,932 $870,011 Replacement of Existing Assets 70450 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 215,473 $290,606 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1520-DIF-Citywide Open Space Project: 70452 - Park Improvements - City Wide (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF Development Impact Fees Funding Source: 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. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $33,128 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $33,128 $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 373 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1520-DIF-Citywide Open Space Project: 70453 - Discovery Park (I) Project Description: Category: DIF Development Impact Fees Funding Source: The project will create new amenities and infrastructure related to open space. Potential improvements include 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: FY 2012 Construction FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $18,071 $18,071 $18,071 $18,071 $0 $30,118 $1,193 $1,193 $1,193 $1,193 $0 $1,988 $181 $181 $181 $181 $0 $301 $1,555 $1,555 $1,555 $1,555 $0 $2,593 Sub-Total New Funding $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $0 $35,000 FY 2012 Carryover $92,966 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $113,966 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $0 $35,000 Engineering Charges Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 70454 - Pasadena Park (I) Project Description: 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 or additions 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: FY 2012 Construction Engineering Charges Arts Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $19,792 $19,792 $19,792 $0 $38,724 $1,306 $1,306 $1,306 $1,306 $0 $2,556 $198 $198 $198 $198 $0 $387 $1,704 $1,704 $1,704 $1,704 $0 $3,333 $23,000 $23,000 $23,000 $23,000 $0 $45,000 $45,379 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $68,379 $23,000 $23,000 $23,000 $0 $45,000 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Development Impact Fees 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 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 $19,792 Project: 70450 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 374 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Parks & Recreation – DIF PARKS & RECREATION DIF FUNDS This category includes development impact fees paid by developers for new or expanded park infrastructure that is needed because of new residential developments within city limits. The majority of park impact fee revenue is restricted for use in specific areas, as defined below: • • • • • DIF Citywide Parks: DIF Citywide Rec Fac: DIF Parks Dev Zone 1: DIF Parks Dev Zone 2: DIF Parks Dev Zone 3: Eligible for use citywide. Eligible for use citywide on recreation facilities. Restricted to areas west of 75th Avenue, south of Greenway Road. Restricted to areas east of 75th Avenue, south of Greenway Road. Restricted to areas north of Greenway Road. Continuing through FY 2019, the existing funds in the DIF-Citywide Recreation Facility Fund will cover a portion of the debt service payments attributed to growth for the Foothills Recreation and Aquatic Center. Also in FY 2012, carryover funding will be used for: the completion of a neighborhood, joint-use park at 79th Avenue and Orangewood to serve residents within a one-mile radius per the Park’s 2002 Master Plan in Zone 1; growth related improvements to Paseo Linear Park in Zone 2; and the addition of kiosks at Thunderbird Conservation Park in Zone 3. Project Name: Thunderbird Park Kiosks Source: DIF Fund #: 1580 Project #: 73704 375 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1460-DIF-Citywide Parks Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $193,863 $229,557 $263,360 $300,020 $334,853 $372,742 34,762 932 35,694 34,936 1,083 36,019 35,285 1,375 36,660 35,638 1,546 37,184 35,994 1,895 37,889 179,081 7,578 186,659 2,216 2,216 2,216 0 0 0 2,350 2,350 2,350 0 0 0 5,140 5,140 5,140 $263,360 $300,020 $334,853 $372,742 $554,261 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 72502 DIF Update 0 0 0 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: 0 0 0 Total FY 2012 Funding: 0 $229,557 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1460-DIF-Citywide Parks Category: DIF Project: 72502 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: 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 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 376 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1480-DIF-Citywide Rec Facility Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $1,354,120 $1,189,275 $1,022,315 $857,322 $689,498 $523,000 37,310 6,613 43,923 37,497 6,276 43,773 37,872 6,430 44,302 38,251 5,989 44,240 38,634 5,843 44,477 192,211 11,686 203,897 61,017 147,751 208,768 55,108 153,409 208,517 48,971 160,325 209,296 42,157 167,556 209,713 35,246 175,729 210,975 55,415 575,600 631,015 2,216 2,216 2,216 0 0 0 2,350 2,350 2,350 0 0 0 5,140 5,140 5,140 $1,022,315 $857,322 $689,498 $523,000 $90,742 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Operating Expenses Bond Interest** Bond Principal** Total Operating Expenses: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 72801 DIF Update 0 0 0 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: 0 0 0 Total FY 2012 Funding: 0 $1,189,275 Estimated Ending Balance: **Debt payment for bond sales for Foothills Recreation & Aquatic Center (2004). PROJECT DETAIL: 1480-DIF-Citywide Rec Facility Project: 72801 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Development Impact Fees 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 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $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 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1540-DIF-Park Dev Zone 1 Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $108,479 $89,062 $107,156 $127,807 $146,404 $167,727 19,779 436 20,215 19,878 432 20,310 20,077 574 20,651 20,278 669 20,947 20,481 842 21,323 101,897 3,369 105,266 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 73104 79th Ave & Orangewood 39,632 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39,632 39,632 0 0 0 2,216 2,216 2,216 0 0 0 2,350 2,350 2,350 0 0 0 5,140 5,140 5,140 $107,156 $127,807 $146,404 $167,727 $267,853 Replacement of Existing Assets 73102 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 39,632 $89,062 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1540-DIF-Park Dev Zone 1 Category: DIF Project: 73104 - 79th Ave & Orangewood (I) Project Description: Final phase for 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. The school and the joint-use park were constructed to address the growth in the area and the increasing student enrollment taking place in the neighboring schools in the Glendale Elementary School District. The service area where the joint-use park was constructed is still without a neighborhood ramada and concrete walkways. The ramada, concrete pathway, and surrounding ground stabilization is highest priority. The closest ramada is outside the one mile service radius for this park. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $39,632 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Ramada cleaning would simply be incorporated into the park maintenance routine. Development Impact Fees 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 neighborhood parks zone 1 portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 $39,632 Project: 73102 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 378 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1560-DIF-Park Dev Zone 2 Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $173,002 $44,477 $46,400 $50,671 $58,318 $68,488 9,485 496 9,981 9,532 207 9,739 9,627 245 9,872 9,723 274 9,997 9,820 349 10,169 48,858 1,398 50,256 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 73400 Park Improvements/Enhance 73404 Paseo Linear Park Additions 105,506 18,000 0 15,000 0 5,600 0 5,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123,506 123,506 0 15,000 15,000 2,216 7,816 7,816 0 5,600 5,600 2,350 2,350 2,350 0 0 0 5,140 5,140 5,140 $46,400 $50,671 $58,318 $68,488 $113,604 Replacement of Existing Assets 73403 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 138,506 $44,477 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1560-DIF-Park Dev Zone 2 Category: DIF Project: 73400 - Park Improvements/Enhance (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: The currrent Parks and Recreation Master Plan identifies action strategies to develop, enhance and improve parks between Greenway Road and Olive Avenue, and 51st Avenue and 73rd Avenue, that have been impacted by community growth. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Contingency Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $105,506 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $105,506 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for these projects. Project: 73404 - Paseo Linear Park Additions (I) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: Additional amenities consist of accommodating community growth by adding active recreation elements, such as playground equipment, shade structures or exercise equipment stations that are growth related into Paseo Linear Park. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $1,111 $415 $415 $0 $0 $0 $13,889 $5,185 $5,185 $0 $0 $0 $15,000 $5,600 $5,600 $0 $0 $0 $18,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $33,000 $5,600 $5,600 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 379 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1560-DIF-Park Dev Zone 2 Project: 73403 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Development Impact Fees 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 neighborhood parks zone 2 portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 380 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1580-DIF-Park Dev Zone 3 Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $38,379 $8,457 $3,458 $0 $217 $2,810 1,851 131 1,982 2,517 0 2,517 2,542 0 2,542 2,567 0 2,567 2,593 0 2,593 12,899 4 12,903 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 73700 Park Enhancements/Ren 73704 Thunderbird Park Kiosks 6,905 5,000 0 19,999 0 5,300 0 6,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,905 11,905 0 19,999 19,999 2,216 7,516 7,516 0 6,000 6,000 2,350 2,350 2,350 0 0 0 5,140 5,140 5,140 $3,458 $0 $217 $2,810 $10,573 Replacement of Existing Assets 73702 DIF Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 31,904 $8,457 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1580-DIF-Park Dev Zone 3 Category: DIF Project: 73700 - Park Enhancements/Ren (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: 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 or other Zone 3 parks when funds become available. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Contingency Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $6,905 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,905 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for these projects. Project: 73704 - Thunderbird Park Kiosks (I) Project Description: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: Increased usage of Thunderbird Conservation Park due to growth is requiring the construction of trail head informational kiosks in the park. Kiosks will provide trail users with information about wildlife in the park, maintenance notifications and trail lengths/difficulty/elevations. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $1,481 $393 $444 $0 $0 $0 $18,518 $4,907 $5,556 $0 $0 $0 $19,999 $5,300 $6,000 $0 $0 $0 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,999 $5,300 $6,000 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 381 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1580-DIF-Park Dev Zone 3 Project: 73702 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Development Impact Fees 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 neighborhood parks zone 3 portion of the cost to update the report. FY 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 $0 $2,216 $0 $2,350 $0 $5,140 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 382 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Library – DIF LIBRARY DIF FUNDS This category includes development impact fees paid by developers for new or expanded library infrastructure that is needed due to new residential developments within city limits. Impact fees in this category are used annually for the purchase of additional library materials due to residential growth. A portion of the design and construction of a new branch library in the western area of Glendale, which is now planned for the last five years of the capital plan, will be covered with development impact fee revenue. DIF funds will also be allocated to conduct a biennial study in order to update the city’s development impact fees starting in FY 2013. Project Name: Library Books – Pop. Growth Funding Source: DIF Fund #: 1500 Project #: 74751 383 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1380-DIF-Library Buildings Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $1,730,860 $1,738,916 $1,746,991 $1,755,958 $1,764,948 $1,774,844 8,056 8,056 8,075 8,075 8,967 8,967 8,990 8,990 9,896 9,896 19,791 19,791 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,609,288 1,609,288 1,609,288 $1,746,991 $1,755,958 $1,764,948 $1,774,844 $185,347 Revenue Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding New Assets 74250 West Branch Library 0 0 0 Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: 0 0 0 Total FY 2012 Funding: 0 $1,738,916 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1380-DIF-Library Buildings Category: DIF Project: 74250 - West Branch Library (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Development Impact Fees Funding Source: Design and construction of a 33,500 sq ft facility on approximately 7 acres of land at the Western Area Regional Facility site near 83rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road. Necessary equipment for the operation of the library includes a 3M theft detection system, gates, self checks, radio frequency identification technology, a fire alarm system and a burglar alarm with motion sensor and cameras. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,313,132 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $284,032 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,284 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,840 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,609,288 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 384 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1500-DIF-Libraries Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $3,220,771 $3,017,482 $2,873,045 $2,743,171 $2,599,061 $2,470,130 55,146 14,230 69,376 55,422 13,406 68,828 55,976 14,150 70,126 56,536 13,426 69,962 57,101 13,969 71,070 284,093 27,937 312,030 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 74752 DIF Update 0 0 0 0 13,265 13,265 0 0 14,073 14,073 0 0 30,769 30,769 0 72,665 72,665 72,665 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 0 200,000 200,000 213,265 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 0 200,000 200,000 214,073 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,953,490 500,000 2,453,490 2,484,259 $2,873,045 $2,743,171 $2,599,061 $2,470,130 $297,901 Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 74750 West Branch Library/Books 74751 Library Books - Pop. Growth Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 272,665 $3,017,482 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1500-DIF-Libraries Category: DIF Project: 74752 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: 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 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $13,265 $0 $14,073 $0 $30,769 $0 $13,265 $0 $14,073 $0 $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 Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $334,606 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,532,703 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,854 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,327 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,953,490 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 385 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1500-DIF-Libraries Project: 74751 - Library Books - Pop. Growth (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF Development Impact Fees Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $500,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $500,000 $72,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $272,665 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $500,000 No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 386 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Public Safety - DIF PUBLIC SAFETY DIF FUNDS This category includes development impact fees paid by developers for new or expanded public safety infrastructure that is needed because of new residential and commercial developments within city limits. FY 2011 was the last year that the Police and Fire DIF funds contributed to the debt service payments for the growth related aspect of the Gateway Public Safety Facility at 6261 North 83rd Avenue in the western area of Glendale. Funding is set aside for the biennial development impact fee update. No other projects are planned at this time although potential eligible uses of the remaining fund balance will be evaluated over the next FY. Debt Service: Gateway Public Safety Facility Funding Source: DIF Fund #’s: 1420 & 1440 387 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1440-DIF-Police Dept Facilities Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $1,107,168 $1,159,410 $1,201,188 $1,255,189 $1,298,326 $1,354,436 46,534 5,708 52,242 46,767 5,930 52,697 47,235 6,766 54,001 47,707 7,014 54,721 48,184 7,926 56,110 48,666 31,704 80,370 10,919 10,919 10,919 0 0 0 11,584 11,584 11,584 0 0 0 25,329 25,329 25,329 $1,201,188 $1,255,189 $1,298,326 $1,354,436 $1,409,477 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 77300 DIF Update 0 0 0 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: 0 0 0 Total FY 2012 Funding: 0 $1,159,410 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1440-DIF-Police Dept Facilities Project: 77300 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Development Impact Fees 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 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $10,919 $0 $11,584 $0 $25,329 $0 $10,919 $0 $11,584 $0 $25,329 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 388 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1420-DIF-Fire Protection Facilities Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $0 $20,909 $31,127 $53,525 $64,417 $88,260 20,909 0 20,909 21,014 684 21,698 21,224 1,174 22,398 21,436 1,635 23,071 21,650 2,193 23,843 107,716 8,771 116,487 11,480 11,480 11,480 0 0 0 12,179 12,179 12,179 0 0 0 26,627 26,627 26,627 $31,127 $53,525 $64,417 $88,260 $178,120 Estimated Beginning Balance: Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 77001 DIF Update 0 0 0 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: 0 0 0 Total FY 2012 Funding: 0 $20,909 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1420-DIF-Fire Protection Facilities Project: 77001 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Development Impact Fees 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 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $11,480 $0 $12,179 $0 $26,627 $0 $11,480 $0 $12,179 $0 $26,627 No O and M is needed. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 389 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN General Government - DIF GENERAL GOVERNMENT DIF FUND This category includes development impact fees paid by developers for new or expanded general government infrastructure that are needed because of new residential and commercial developments within city limits. Due to the slowdown in residential and commercial development, the General Government DIF Fund was only able to cover a portion of the last lease purchase payment in FY 2010 for the land for the future City Court Building along Glendale Avenue. Because of the resulting low fund balance and no projected increase in development, with the exception of biennial development impact fee update, no projects are currently identified under the General Government DIF Fund. Staff will evaluate how to best utilize available funds during preparation for the FY 2013-2022 Capital Improvement Plan. Project Name: Land for City Court Building Funding Source: DIF Fund #: 1620 Project #: 77752 Note: The last lease purchase payment was in FY 2010. 390 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1620-DIF-General Government Estimated Beginning Balance: Category: DIF FY 2012: FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: $93,865 $188,255 $270,363 $366,421 $449,948 $548,359 94,320 70 94,390 94,792 115 94,907 95,740 318 96,058 96,697 408 97,105 97,664 748 98,412 485,902 2,991 488,893 12,799 12,799 12,799 0 0 0 13,578 13,578 13,578 0 0 0 29,687 29,687 29,687 $270,363 $366,421 $449,948 $548,359 $1,007,565 Revenue Development Impact Fees Interest Income Total Revenue: Project Expenses Carryover New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 77753 DIF Update 0 0 0 Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: 0 0 0 Total FY 2012 Funding: 0 $188,255 Estimated Ending Balance: PROJECT DETAIL: 1620-DIF-General Government Project: 77753 - DIF Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Development Impact Fees 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 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Category: DIF FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $12,799 $0 $13,578 $0 $29,687 $0 $12,799 $0 $13,578 $0 $29,687 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 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Enterprise and Other Funds ENTERPRISE AND OTHER FUNDS This category of funds captures the capital expenses for the enterprise funds (water/sewer, landfill and sanitation), the designated sales tax fund for the GO transportation capital program, the fund designated for transportation capital grants from federal, the HURF bond fund, state and county government agencies, and a few other funds set up for specific purposes such as airport and civic center capital needs. The General Fund represents the city’s pay-as-you-go program (PAYGO). The Technology Infrastructure Fund was established to address the capital needs of major technology systems that are critical to city operations such as the PeopleSoft financial management system. Both the PAYGO and Technology Infrastructure Fund are funded with GF operating dollars. The Arts Commission Fund represents the program funded by the one percent for the arts program that the city administers. One percent of the construction costs of each capital project are allocated for this program. Glendale Public Safety Memorial Note: Because these funds include both operating divisions and CIP projects, the fund summaries are limited to the project expenses only. Fund # - Name Carryover FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 4,427,688 7,250,000 750,000 2,580,720 4,389,700 9,792,030 53,921,823 2400-Water 27,914,867 4,177,000 3,661,000 4,469,000 7,418,090 14,088,384 90,769,536 2420-Sewer 4,494,114 4,918,480 5,984,973 6,378,552 16,394,116 26,773,149 39,911,243 31,183,100 8,321,290 8,608,921 8,581,328 8,438,738 4,580,989 22,985,155 197,379 0 0 0 0 0 12,076,659 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,677,285 3,518,115 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 0 1,863,645 1,299,787 3,140,259 2,738,000 3,778,990 12,723,434 2360-Water & Sewer 2210-Transportation Construction 2000-HURF/Street Bonds 1340 - HURF/Streets Fund 1650-Transportation Grants 2480-Sanitation 2440-Landfill 492,901 1,237,740 2,018,202 15,350,131 5,953,730 9,379,879 7,983,017 1,755,000 15,693,481 150,000 525,000 3,146,000 8,550,000 0 1840-Other Federal & State Grants 811,252 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 1000-General Fund 529,498 752,859 752,859 50,000 50,000 50,000 4,281,360 1740-Civic Center 0 350,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 4,145,734 2150-Technology Infrastructure 0 0 1,097,200 0 0 0 28,491,879 1220-Arts Commission 0 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,750,000 2120-Airport Capital Grants Total Enterprise/Other Funds $75,323,914 $49,064,495 $28,872,942 $45,624,990 $53,078,374 $81,543,421 $300,717,125 392 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Water & Sewer - Enterprise Funds WATER & SEWER ENTERPRISE FUNDS Water and sewer capital projects account for the largest portion of the current capital improvement plan. These projects will be funded from water/sewer fund revenues. The FY 2012-2021 budget reflects recommendations from the Red Oak rate study completed in 2011. The combined Water/Sewer Fund (2360) reflects continued and new funding in FY 2012 for the expansion and enhancement of the city’s water reclamation facilities, the West Area Water Reclamation Facility and the Arrowhead Water Reclamation Facility. FY 2012 for the Water Fund (2400) reflects carryover funding for the Zone 4 Groundwater Treatment Plant that will provide capacity of 10 million gallons per day (MGD) for the drinking water system. FY 2012 also includes funding for citywide water line replacement and extensions where needed, Cholla Water Treatment Plant process improvements and the completion of a water line crossing at the New River. In FY 2012, the Sewer Fund (2420) projects include carryover and new funding for sewer line replacement and/or rehabilitation, as well as new funding for the continued expansion of the 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plan co-owned by the City of Phoenix and other valley cities. This project will expand the facility’s treatment capacity from 153 MGD to 250 MGD. Project Name: Oasis Water Campus Funding Source: Revenue Bond Fund #: 2400 Project #: 61003 393 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2360-Water & Sewer FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Revenue FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 60007 Arrwhd Wtr Reclam Fac Imps 4,283,654 6,500,000 750,000 750,000 3,000,000 5,000,000 0 0 100,001 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,383,655 0 100,000 0 0 0 300,000 0 0 6,900,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750,000 0 0 277,770 752,950 0 0 0 800,000 2,580,720 58,000 0 0 0 1,081,700 0 125,000 0 4,264,700 350,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,000,000 0 8,350,000 335,000 0 0 0 0 0 5,000,000 800,000 6,135,000 44,033 44,033 350,000 350,000 0 0 0 0 125,000 125,000 1,442,030 1,442,030 47,786,823 47,786,823 $4,427,688 $7,250,000 $750,000 $2,580,720 $4,389,700 $9,792,030 $53,921,823 Replacement of Existing Assets 60001 Water Quality Instruments 60009 West Area WRF Service Wtr Sys. T2250 WAWRF Clarifier Replacement T2270 WAWRF Fine Screen Replacement T2280 WAWRF Odor Control Replacement T2282 Lab Data Management System T2283 Computerized Maint. Mgmt Sys. T2284 Radio Phase IV Equipment Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 60008 WAWRF Phase IV Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $11,677,688 PROJECT DETAIL: 2360-Water & Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 60007 - Arrwhd Wtr Reclam Fac Imps (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: 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 ultraviolet 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $650,000 $140,000 $300,000 $800,000 $500,000 $0 $5,100,000 $521,000 $365,000 $1,830,000 $3,880,000 $0 Finance Charges $86,250 $9,915 $9,975 $39,450 $65,700 $0 Engineering Charges $46,944 $5,396 $5,429 $21,472 $35,759 $0 Construction Arts $51,000 $5,210 $3,650 $18,300 $38,800 $0 $565,806 $68,479 $65,946 $290,778 $479,741 $0 Sub-Total New Funding $6,500,000 $750,000 $750,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 FY 2012 Carryover $4,283,654 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,783,654 $750,000 $750,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 394 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2360-Water & Sewer Project: 60001 - Water Quality Instruments (R) Project Description: FY 2012 Equipment TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Construction Engineering Charges Arts Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $58,000 $350,000 $335,000 $0 $0 $58,000 $350,000 $335,000 FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2015 FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $55,725 $55,725 Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project will include replacement of the existing 2 inch galvanized water lines at the West Area Water Reclamation Facility. Numerous areas of the pipeline system have leaks indicating pipeline corrosion. Leaks currently have temporary repairs done by Utilities staff. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $82,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,840 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $820 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,340 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,001 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,001 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T2250 - WAWRF Clarifier Replacement (R) Project Description: FY 2016 $0 Project: 60009 - West Area WRF Service Wtr Sys. (R) Project Description: 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. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Supplies/Contr TOTAL Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project reflects 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: Operating Description: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project will repair or replace the clarifier mechanical drive units and associated equipment at the West Area Water Reclamation Facility in three of the six clarifiers. The heavy drive motors, pulleys, chains, bearings and scrapers are subject to wear and tear and need to be replaced periodically. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $30,000 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $11,270 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $34,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $277,770 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 395 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2360-Water & Sewer Project: T2270 - WAWRF Fine Screen Replacement (R) Project Description: Category: Revenue 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 periodically. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $580,000 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $29,400 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $5,800 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $87,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $752,950 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T2280 - WAWRF Odor Control Replacement (R) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The West Area Water Reclamation Facility Odor Control System is required to meet air quality regulatory standards and minimize/prevent odor complaints. Elements of the odor control system will require rehabilitation or replacement due to normal wear and tear. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $839,000 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $40,377 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $8,390 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $93,933 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,081,700 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T2282 - Lab Data Management System (R) Project Description: Purchase of a new information management system to replace an outdated data system. The new information system will interface directly with laboratory instrumentation, integrate quality control processes, eliminate duplicate and manual data entry, and automate regulatory reporting. Capital Costs: FY 2012 IT/Phone/Security TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Additional O and M expenses are related to software license renewals/updates and system configuration hardware requirements. The additional O and M will be absorbed by the department. Operating Costs: Supplies/Contr TOTAL Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 $17,000 $17,000 FY 2014 $17,510 $17,510 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 396 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $18,035 $18,035 FY 2016 $18,576 $18,576 FYs 17-21 $101,583 $101,583 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2360-Water & Sewer Project: T2283 - Computerized Maint. Mgmt Sys. (R) Project Description: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The city of Glendale Utilities Department utilizes a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) to track data regarding the operation and maintenance of the city's water and wastewater treatment, distribution and collection systems. This database system eliminates manual record keeping. The CMMS software is dependent on both computer hardware and the operating system. By FY 2015, the computer hardware and operating system are not expected to support the current version of CMMS. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $112,550 $130,000 $400,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,465,000 $4,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,300 $66,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $1,465 $33,772 $57,263 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,650 $40,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $10,985 $307,278 $436,737 $0 $0 $0 $125,000 $3,000,000 $5,000,000 TOTAL Operating Description: A current position will need to be reclassified once the project begins as staff will be providing a higher level of software support services. $20,000 annually will cover the reclassified position's additional salary and salary related benefits. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Supplies/Contr TOTAL FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T2284 - Radio Phase IV Equipment (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2015 $20,000 $20,000 FY 2016 $20,600 $20,600 FYs 17-21 $112,649 $112,649 Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project includes the replacement of the existing microwave radio equipment that is a critical component for the 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Construction $0 $0 $700,000 $0 $0 $700,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $25,200 $0 $0 $25,200 Arts $0 $0 $7,000 $0 $0 $7,000 Contingency $0 $0 $67,800 $0 $0 $67,800 $0 $0 $800,000 $0 $0 $800,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 397 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2360-Water & Sewer Project: 60008 - WAWRF Phase IV (N) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The funding request for FY 2012 reflects treatment system improvements to address corrosion of various steel elements in the building. The funding request for FY 2015 and beyond includes an engineering assessment, design and construction of additional treatment system improvements and capacity expansion to address the expected increase in wastewater flows from the developing areas along the Loop 101 and west area. The plant improvements and expansion were identified in the West Area Water Reclamation Facility Phase V Master Plan conducted by the Damon S. Williams Associates team in 2009. Capital Costs: FY 2012 Design Construction Finance Charges Engineering Charges Arts Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Category: Revenue FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $113,500 $1,290,000 $3,900,000 $315,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,350 $643,500 $1,213 $0 $0 $437 $4,966 $165,165 $3,150 $0 $0 $0 $0 $390,000 $30,637 $0 $0 $11,063 $127,714 $3,688,158 $350,000 $0 $0 $125,000 $1,442,030 $47,786,823 $44,033 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $394,033 $0 $0 $125,000 $1,442,030 $47,786,823 Addional O and M would be needed starting in FY 2020. An expanded facility is estimated to require two new plant operators and one new plant electrician once construction nears completion. Other additional operating expenses are projected as a result of increases in supplies (chemicals), utilities and equipment maintenance. No new telephones, PC's or vehicles will be required. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $410,881 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $514,309 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. Insurance $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 398 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $771,463 $169,722 $12,660 $1,879,035 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2400-Water FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Revenue FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 61023 Water System Security 61024 Cholla Water Plant Process Imp 61036 Zn4 Groundwater Trtment Plant 61040 Loop 101 Wells & Piping T3540 WTPs Chlorine Gas Elimination T3555 Fiber Optic Cable at Reservoir T3558 *Thunderbird Reservoir Misc. Im T3559 *SRP Well Imp (67 Ave/Myrtle) T3560 *Citywide Meter Vault Imp 281,215 1,186,806 20,794,830 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400,000 0 0 0 0 180,000 280,000 125,000 0 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 125,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,000,000 0 3,500,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,200,000 0 300,000 0 0 2,519,715 0 17,500,000 1,900,000 0 225,000 0 0 0 296,074 0 1,120,645 0 0 0 0 23,679,570 300,000 0 700,000 0 100,000 0 0 2,085,000 0 0 2,000,000 0 100,000 0 180,000 2,905,000 0 0 3,000,000 69,000 100,000 0 0 3,169,000 300,000 200,000 2,168,090 0 150,000 0 0 7,318,090 300,000 200,000 3,500,157 0 2,250,000 552,775 0 11,302,932 300,000 400,000 13,347,369 4,200,000 3,000,000 0 0 43,392,084 222,686 0 0 0 1,257,030 1,472,297 0 0 1,283,284 0 0 0 4,235,297 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 792,000 1,300,000 0 0 0 2,092,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 756,000 0 0 0 0 756,000 0 0 0 0 1,300,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,300,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100,000 0 0 100,000 0 0 745,453 0 0 1,989,999 0 0 0 0 0 50,000 2,785,452 0 1,774,450 4,005,475 500,000 0 4,500,000 100,000 26,499,527 0 0 9,998,000 0 47,377,452 $27,914,867 $4,177,000 $3,661,000 $4,469,000 $7,418,090 $14,088,384 $90,769,536 Replacement of Existing Assets 61001 Fire Hydrant Replacement 61012 Citywide Irrigation System 61013 Water Line Replacement 61015 Outer Loop Effluent Line 61043 Pyramid Pk WTP Train #1 Equip T3550 Hillcrest Ranch Booster Rehab T3557 *Zone 4 Reservoir Misc Imp Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 61003 Oasis Water Campus 61009 Drinking Water Well Head Trmt 61019 Storage and Recovery Well 61020 West Area Reuse Pipelines 61021 N River/Agua Fria Storage Proj 61027 Water Line Extension 61029 Regional GAC Plant 61038 Loop 101 Water Treatment 61044 New River Waterline Crossing T3510 Orangewood Water Trans Main T3552 Additional Water Supply T3561 *Northern Ave PRV Station Reloc Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $32,091,867 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 399 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: 61023 - Water System Security (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Installation of equipment to further enhance security of the city's water supply, treatment plants and distribution system. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $117,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,065,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $33,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,650 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $229,065 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,519,715 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $281,215 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $281,215 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,519,715 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 61024 - Cholla Water Plant Process Imp (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Engineering Charges Arts Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project will include improvements at Cholla Water Treatment Plant to meet new regulatory requirements. The improvements include the installation of new variable frequency drive systems, odor control, soil stabilization, solids handling facility repair and improvements, and reservoir lining rehabilitation or replacement. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $70,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $275,000 $330,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,835 $18,490 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,750 $3,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,415 $48,210 $0 $0 $0 $0 $400,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,186,806 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,586,806 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 400 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: 61036 - Zn4 Groundwater Trtment Plant (I) Project Description: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This 10 MGD Groundwater Treatment Plant was identified in the Black & Veatch "Comprehensive Water Facilities Planning and Design" report of September 2003 as a key water supply component to provide additional water during plant outages such as canal dry-ups and to help meet peak water demands. This project will include additional conveyance pipeline, a supply well, and brine disposal ponds. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $80,000 $0 $1,400,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $810,000 $0 $14,060,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $13,350 $0 $231,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $6,260 $0 $108,740 Arts $0 $0 $0 $8,100 $0 $140,600 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $82,290 $0 $1,559,660 $17,500,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $20,794,830 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,794,830 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $17,500,000 This is an expansion of treatment capacity for the Zone 4 Water Treatment Plant between FY's 2015 and 2021. Therefore the new O and M costs reflect the need for additional staff, chemicals and utilities. FTE = Three plant operators @ $71,500 per year. Chemical, utilities, and maintenance costs are based on actual costs 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,219,401 $336,270 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,771 Insurance TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,446 $4,214,080 Project: 61040 - Loop 101 Wells & Piping (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: $0 $0 $1,320,192 Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Rehabilitate existing wells in Zone 4 to supply raw water to the projected Loop 101 Ground Water Treatment Plant (see the Loop 101 Water Treatment Project # 61038). These improvements will be needed to meet the potable water demand at build out for this area of the city and to also meet water quality regulations. These improvements are identified in the revised Utilities Water Master Plan completed by Black and Veatch. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $140,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,510,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,750 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $45,375 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $164,775 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,900,000 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 401 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: T3540 - WTPs Chlorine Gas Elimination (I) Project Description: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project includes the design and construction of a chlorine gas elimination system as well as the removal of the current onsite storage system for chlorine gas, which is the current disinfection method for potable water. The chlorine gas will be replaced with equipment that will provide onsite generation of sodium hypochlorite as the disinfection chemical for Pyramid Peak and Cholla Water Treatment Plants. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $730,000 $730,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $2,370,000 $2,970,000 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $43,950 $55,500 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $42,169 $50,331 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $23,700 $29,700 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $290,181 $364,469 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,500,000 $4,200,000 $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 budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T3555 - Fiber Optic Cable at Reservoir (I) Project Description: FY 2016 $15,913 $21,219 $37,132 FYs 17-21 $87,017 $116,032 $203,049 Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The installation of fiber optic cables at Thunderbird Reservoir and Zone 4 Reservoir. A recent assessment recommends fiber optic cables as the least expensive, long-term solution for wide area network communications at Thunderbird and Zone 4 Reservoirs to replace the T1 data line that currently is being leased from Qwest. The new fiber optic cables will permit remote monitoring of the numerous security cameras at the reservoirs and also provide more reliable access for the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $225,000 Arts TOTAL Operating Description: Starting in FY 2020, O and M will include technology replacement contributions of $2,000 per year. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 402 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $2,000 $2,000 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: T3558* - Thunderbird Reservoir Misc. Im (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The requested funding addresses an engineering study to evaluate alternatives for enhancing water quality during the hot summer months for water stored at the Thunderbird Reservoir. Once the study is completed, design and construction of the recommended improvements are projected to proceed in FY 2016. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $73,000 $0 $0 $0 $35,000 $0 Construction $80,000 $0 $0 $0 $221,000 $0 Engineering Charges Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: $7,497 $0 $0 $0 $12,544 $0 $800 $0 $0 $0 $2,210 $0 $18,703 $0 $0 $0 $29,246 $0 $180,000 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T3559* - SRP Well Imp (67 Ave/Myrtle) (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Engineering Charges Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: The project will include the rehabilitation of the Salt River Project well at 67th and Myrtle Avenues to reduce nitrate levels to meet new drinking water standards. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Construction FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $45,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $198,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,907 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,980 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,113 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $280,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T3560* - Citywide Meter Vault Imp (I) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Based on a field condition assessment conducted by staff, modifications to large meter vaults are recommended to enhance safe entry. The meter vault covers will be replaced with spring-torsion type covers per the city’s design standards and meter vaults will be retrofitted or replaced as needed. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $106,000 $106,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $6,996 $6,996 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $1,060 $1,060 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,944 $10,944 $0 $0 $0 $0 $125,000 $125,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 403 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: 61001 - Fire Hydrant Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Construction Engineering Charges Arts Contingency Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project funds a replacement program for approximately 800 existing fire hydrants. To date, 285 fire hydrants have been replaced. The existing fire hydrants need to be replaced due to age and lack of replacement parts. The new fire hydrants will be installed to meet the city and industry spacing guidelines. In addition, the new fire hydrants will be accessible for routine maintenance to ensure fire system integrity. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $262,000 $0 $0 $262,000 $262,000 $262,000 $12,000 $0 $0 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $2,620 $0 $0 $2,620 $2,620 $2,620 $23,380 $0 $0 $23,380 $23,380 $23,380 $300,000 Sub-Total New Funding $300,000 $0 $0 $300,000 $300,000 FY 2012 Carryover $296,074 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $596,074 $0 $0 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 61012 - Citywide Irrigation System (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Irrigation pipelines and related irrigation structure in the city owned portion of the flood irrigation system will be rehabilitated or replaced. FY 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $200,000 $400,000 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $200,000 $400,000 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 61013 - Water Line Replacement (R) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $138,000 $200,000 $330,000 $250,000 $330,000 $1,850,000 Construction $490,000 $1,550,800 $2,330,400 $1,600,000 $2,730,000 $9,800,000 $174,750 Finance Charges $0 $26,262 $39,906 $27,750 $45,900 Engineering Charges $3,547 $9,889 $15,027 $10,449 $17,284 $65,803 Arts $4,900 $15,508 $23,304 $16,000 $27,300 $98,000 Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $63,553 $197,541 $261,363 $263,891 $349,673 $1,358,816 $700,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,168,090 $3,500,157 $13,347,369 $1,120,645 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,820,645 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,168,090 $3,500,157 $13,347,369 No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 404 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: 61015 - Outer Loop Effluent Line (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility (ARWRF) effluent transmission line has been in service since the late 1980's. 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 applicable rehabilitation to ensure effluent transmission system integrity and reliability. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $59,989 $0 $0 $600,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,075,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55,125 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $1,110 $0 $0 $67,987 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,750 Contingency $0 $0 $7,901 $0 $0 $371,138 $0 $0 $69,000 $0 $0 $4,200,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 61043 - Pyramid Pk WTP Train #1 Equip (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Construction Finance Charges Engineering Charges Arts Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: This project will include equipment improvements and rehabilitation (FY's 2012 through 2014), an engineering assessment (FY 2015) and equipment replacement (FY 2016 and beyond) at the Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant related to Train No. 1 and other related equipment. The original equipment will be approximately 23 years old and will be at the end of its useful life. Based on the existing Intergovernmental Agreement (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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $89,500 $89,500 $10,000 $14,000 $550,000 $550,000 $0 $0 $79,000 $120,000 $1,430,000 $2,100,000 $39,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,700 $1,645 $1,645 $1,636 $2,463 $36,397 $48,713 $0 $0 $790 $1,200 $14,300 $21,000 $8,855 $8,855 $8,574 $12,337 $189,603 $240,537 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $150,000 $2,250,000 $3,000,000 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T3550 - Hillcrest Ranch Booster Rehab (R) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The pump equipment at the Hillcrest Ranch booster station will be rebuilt or serviced to ensure the station operates effectively and efficiently. This booster station will provide an emergency back up supply of water pressure for the Zone 3 Water Pressure Zone. Zone 3 is in the northernmost part of the city. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $450,000 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,275 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,500 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $552,775 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 405 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: T3557* - Zone 4 Reservoir Misc Imp (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Based on an assessment of valve conditions at the Zone 4 reservoir, the existing sleeve valve and ancillaries require replacement to ensure a continued reliable water supply to citizens. The requested funding will address the design and construction costs associated with this project. The Zone 4 reservoir supplies water to the west area of the city. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $45,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $106,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $11,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $1,060 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $16,940 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 61003 - Oasis Water Campus (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: A "Comprehensive Water Facilities Planning and Design" plan has been prepared and the design is complete for the new 10 MGD surface water treatment plant that will serve mainly western Glendale with fresh drinking water. Carryover funding will be used to cover expenses that may not materialize until after June 30, 2011. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $222,686 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $222,686 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 61009 - Drinking Water Well Head Trmt (N) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project will include the design of a new Zone 4 wellhead treatment system to remove nitrates and arsenic from groundwater to meet federal drinking water standards. This new wellhead treatment system was recommended in the Groundwater Master Plan in 2008 in order to meet the projected growth in the west areas of the city. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $140,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,400,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,100 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $154,350 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,774,450 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 406 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: 61019 - Storage and Recovery Well (N) Project Description: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The project will result in the installation of 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 area customers. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $500,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 $3,300,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,750 $57,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,025 $70,300 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,500 $33,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $72,178 $45,175 $0 $0 $0 $0 $745,453 $4,005,475 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Beginning in FY 2019, additional O and M expenses are related to chemicals and maintenance based on pilot studies. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $148,526 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $106,090 Equip. Maint. TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: 61020 - West Area Reuse Pipelines (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: $47,741 $302,357 Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: New water reuse pipeline projects will be developed and constructed based on a master plan for the reuse of effluent from the West Area Water Reclamation Facility that was completed in May 2003. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $345,000 $21,805 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,450 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,745 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 61021 - N River/Agua Fria Storage Proj (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: To acquire a 20% ownership in the New River/Agua Fria Underground Storage Facility administered by the Salt River Project. The additional recharge capacity developed through this project will accommodate the effluent produced at the recently expanded West Area Water Reclamation Facility. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,257,030 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,257,030 $0 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 407 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: 61027 - Water Line Extension (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water line extensions are installed where needed to extend the city's water transmission and distribution systems to meet projected demand from future development. Projects funded from this account typically involve city participation in pipeline over sizing and other distribution piping extensions as needed to accommodate projected growth. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $600,000 $700,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,150,000 $3,250,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $26,100 $59,250 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $28,399 $64,101 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,500 $32,500 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $174,000 $394,149 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,989,999 $4,500,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $1,472,297 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,472,297 $0 $0 $0 $1,989,999 $4,500,000 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 61029 - Regional GAC Plant (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The city currently pays $1.00 per pound for granular activated carbon (GAC) regeneration at the Oasis Water Campus and Cholla Water Treatment Plant. An evaluation will be conducted to determine whether the city should pursue the purchase of a share of a regional GAC plant to possibly reduce costs for the city. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $82,900 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,119 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,981 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 TOTAL Operating Description: 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 408 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: 61038 - Loop 101 Water Treatment (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Land Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The city is projected to build a 10 MGD groundwater treatment plant and storage reservoir in Zone 4 to meet the expected potable water demand at build out of the west area of the city. The 11.7 acres of land is located at 99th and Northern Avenues. The land was purchased in FY 2009 with payments from FY 2009 through FY 2013. The funding request for the last five years of the plan reflects the estimated cost of design and construction for the facility. This facility is identified in the revised Glendale Water Master Plan. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $792,000 $756,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $520,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,150,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $355,050 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $122,000 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $231,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,120,977 $792,000 $756,000 $0 $0 $0 $26,499,527 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: The additional O and M expense will be determined when the project is closer to completion as operations are not expected to begin until FY 2021. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Project: 61044 - New River Waterline Crossing (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: A new water line will be installed to connect Zone 1 (south central part of the city) and Zone 4 (western part of the city) to enhance water quality in the west area of the city. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $198,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Construction $910,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $18,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $43,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $9,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $121,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 Carryover $1,283,284 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,583,284 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T3510 - Orangewood Water Trans Main (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project includes the installation of a new water transmission main within Orangewood Avenue from 99th Avenue west to 105th Avenue to convey water from Oasis Water Campus to the west area of the city. This new water transmission main was recommended in the Black & Veatch "Comprehensive Water Facilities Planning and Design" report dated September 2003. A study will be conducted and the results will be presented to the city, construction is expected to begin sometime after FY 2021. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $83,000 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $9,130 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,870 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 409 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2400-Water Project: T3552 - Additional Water Supply (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $148,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,850,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,998,000 O and M includes projected payment to Central Arizona Water Conservation District for water delivery costs and city treatment costs relating to the additional water supply. Starting in FY 2020, O and M costs are projected to be $365,000 per year. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T3561* - Northern Ave PRV Station Reloc (N) Capital Costs: FY 2016 $0 Supplies/Contr Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: 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. The $9,998,000 represents the cost of acquiring a 100-year lease of water rights per the White Mountain Apache Tribe Water Settlement in FY 2019. Finance Charges Operating Description: Category: Revenue FY 2016 $0 $0 Funding Source: FYs 17-21 $730,000 $730,000 Water & Sewer Revenues The city needs to relocate the pressure reducing valve (PRV) station on Northern Avenue. to provide more operational flexibility and better access to conduct maintenance work, meet safety requirements, and increase sustainability of chlorine residual. The relocation of the PRV station will assist the city in meeting the federal and state regulation of disinfection byproduct products such as trihalomethanes formation. A preliminary engineering study will be conducted and recommendations will be presented to the city for construction after FY 2021. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $41,000 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,510 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,490 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 410 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2420-Sewer FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Revenue FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 63006 Arrowhead Sewer Lines 0 0 0 0 1,500,000 0 0 1,500,000 0 0 525,000 0 1,719,575 700,000 770,000 2,035,490 3,000,000 1,112,000 0 11,210,000 0 0 2,952,397 1,000,001 0 0 3,952,398 0 3,209,935 0 0 208,545 4,918,480 650,000 3,313,609 0 0 521,364 5,984,973 700,000 3,432,188 0 1,000,000 521,364 6,178,552 2,100,000 3,432,188 0 999,784 521,364 10,242,911 2,100,000 3,500,000 0 0 521,364 12,268,854 0 16,565,998 0 0 0 27,775,998 0 0 231,787 0 309,929 0 0 0 0 541,716 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 4,551,205 600,000 0 100,000 400,000 0 0 0 500,000 6,151,205 5,164,295 3,800,000 0 0 400,000 0 0 540,000 4,600,000 14,504,295 0 0 0 0 800,000 7,000,000 3,950,000 385,245 0 12,135,245 $4,494,114 $4,918,480 $5,984,973 $6,378,552 $16,394,116 $26,773,149 $39,911,243 63010 91st Ave. Construction 63023 City Wide Sewer Odor Control Replacement of Existing Assets 63003 99th Ave Interceptor Line 63016 Sewer Line Replacement 63018 Camelback Swr Rehab 63021 Sweetwater & 55th Ave SLS T3614 *Citywide Manhole Rehab Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 63000 67th-115th, Northern-C'Back 63007 Sewer 99th Ave. W. Water Meter 63008 Sewers for Areas on Septic Sys 63015 CMOM Implementation 63017 Sewer Line Extension 63020 Security Enhance Wastewtr Ops T3610 Bethany Hme Rd Interceptor T3611 Glendale Ave 93rd-99th Ave T3612 Influent Pump Sta (RSPS) Imp Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $9,412,594 PROJECT DETAIL: 2420-Sewer Category: Revenue Project: 63006 - Arrowhead Sewer Lines (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Replacement or rehabilitation of various wastewater collection lines in the Arrowhead Ranch area to 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. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $350,000 $480,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $1,158,000 $1,300,000 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $22,620 $26,700 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $27,898 $32,930 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $11,580 $13,000 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $149,477 $182,860 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,719,575 $2,035,490 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 411 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2420-Sewer Project: 63010 - 91st Ave. Construction (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project consists of continuing improvements and expansion of the Regional 91st Ave Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) of which Glendale is part owner as member of the Sub-Regional Operating Group (SROG). SROG consists of Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix, Tempe and Scottsdale. The last 91st Ave WWTP expansion decommissioned one of the oldest sections of the facility and replaced that section with new biological treatment, enlarged blowers and new clarifiers. This large regional plant requires improvements that are usually addressed in "Five Year Plans" referred to as a Unified Projects generally identified as UP10 or UP15 for example referring to the year the project will be completed. The next Unified Project is projected to be UP20 since UP15 was delayed due to budgetary constraints. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $20,000 $20,000 $12,000 $10,000 $40,000 $210,000 $1,480,000 $1,480,000 $513,000 $690,000 $2,960,000 $11,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $525,000 $700,000 $3,000,000 $11,210,000 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 63023 - City Wide Sewer Odor Control (I) Project Description: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Addition of permanent hydrogen peroxide chemical dosing stations to various sewer lines for odor control and control of hydrogen sulfide gas. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $575,000 $975,000 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $18,563 $26,813 Arts $0 $0 $0 $5,750 $9,750 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $70,687 $100,437 $0 $0 $0 $0 $770,000 $1,112,000 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 63003 - 99th Ave Interceptor Line (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $31,034 $31,034 $0 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $650,000 $700,000 $2,068,966 $2,068,966 $0 $0 $650,000 $700,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $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 412 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2420-Sewer Project: 63016 - Sewer Line Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Replacement and/or rehabilitation of existing sanitary sewer lines and manholes as identified by the Sewer Evaluation Study prepared by Henningson, Durham and Richardson Engineers and to be completed by Camp, Dresser and McKee Engineers. Projects will be developed as funds are available. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $270,000 $280,000 $290,000 $290,000 $300,000 $1,000,000 $2,430,000 $2,520,000 $2,610,000 $2,610,000 $2,700,000 $13,000,000 Finance Charges $40,500 $42,000 $43,500 $43,500 $45,000 $210,000 Engineering Charges $11,640 $12,071 $12,502 $12,502 $12,933 $60,353 Arts $24,300 $25,200 $26,100 $26,100 $27,000 $130,000 Construction Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $433,495 $434,338 $450,086 $450,086 $415,067 $2,165,645 $3,209,935 $3,313,609 $3,432,188 $3,432,188 $3,500,000 $16,565,998 $2,952,397 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,162,332 $3,313,609 $3,432,188 $3,432,188 $3,500,000 $16,565,998 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 63018 - Camelback Swr Rehab (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: 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 Camp,Dresser, and McKee in 2008 identified the sewer segments and manholes that need to be rehabilitated or replaced. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $1,000,001 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,001 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 63021 - Sweetwater & 55th Ave SLS (R) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The sewage lift station (SLS) at Sweetwater and 55th Avenue requires equipment upgrades in order to ensure continued system reliability, sufficient treatment capacity and public health. This project includes the design and construction of new flow metering equipment and odor control elements as well as the replacement or rehabilitation of the station's equipment including pumps, valves, piping, and electrical system elements. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $769,000 $781,000 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $13,035 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $23,898 $24,228 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $7,690 $7,810 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $86,377 $86,746 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $999,784 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 413 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2420-Sewer Project: T3614* - Citywide Manhole Rehab (R) Project Description: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The requested funding will be used to rehabilitate existing sewer manholes that have reached the end of their expected life as identified in the 2008 Sewer Master Plan and Evaluation by Camp, Dresser, and McKee. Capital Costs: FY 2012 Construction FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $200,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $0 Engineering Charges $6,545 $16,364 $16,364 $16,364 $16,364 $0 Arts $2,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $208,545 $521,364 $521,364 $521,364 $521,364 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 63000 - 67th-115th, Northern-C'Back (N) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Installation of new sewer lines to improve existing sewer mains as identified by the Hennings, Durham, and Richardson West Area 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. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $550,000 $550,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $3,460,000 $4,000,000 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $61,650 $68,250 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $43,332 $49,168 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $34,600 $40,000 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $401,623 $456,877 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,551,205 $5,164,295 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 63007 - Sewer 99th Ave. W. Water Meter (N) Project Description: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The existing Meter Station, GL03, is located within the 99th Avenue Alignment. This project will include relocation of the GL03 meter station 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 SROG standards. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $315,000 $278,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $218,600 $3,065,000 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $62,068 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $9,872 $61,845 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $2,186 $30,650 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $54,342 $302,437 $0 $0 $0 $0 $600,000 $3,800,000 $0 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. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26,524 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $132,616 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 414 Return to CIP TOC $159,140 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2420-Sewer Project: 63008 - Sewers for Areas on Septic Sys (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: 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 system. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $30,000 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $140,000 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $11,000 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $1,400 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $17,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $231,787 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $231,787 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 63015 - CMOM Implementation (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: The United States Environmental Protection Agency 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 program in FY 2015. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $82,900 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $9,119 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,981 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 63017 - Sewer Line Extension (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: This project will include sewer line extensions at various locations to meet projected demand. These extensions will transfer wastewater from new developments. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Construction $0 $0 $0 $351,000 $351,000 $700,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $12,636 $12,636 $25,200 Arts $0 $0 $0 $3,510 $3,510 $7,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $32,854 $32,854 $67,800 $800,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $400,000 $400,000 $309,929 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $309,929 $0 $0 $400,000 $400,000 $800,000 No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 415 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2420-Sewer Project: 63020 - Security Enhance Wastewtr Ops (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Revenue Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: Add security enhancements to the water reclamation facilities, the various effluent recharge facilities and sewer lift stations. These improvements will enable the city staff to more closely monitor water reclamation and domestic water remote locations such as the raw sewage pumping station and the numerous sewage lift stations in the system. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,000,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,500 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $247,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,000,000 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: T3610 - Bethany Hme Rd Interceptor (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Water & Sewer Revenues Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $720,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,740,000 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $51,900 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $64,010 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $346,690 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,950,000 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: T3611 - Glendale Ave 93rd-99th Ave (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues Improvements will be needed to handle the additional wastewater flows generated by projected growth at build-out in the west area of the city. 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 completed by Camp, Dresser, and McKee. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $35,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $422,000 $300,000 $14,405 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,296 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,220 $3,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,484 $32,840 $0 $0 $0 $0 $540,000 $385,245 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 416 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2420-Sewer Project: T3612 - Influent Pump Sta (RSPS) Imp (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Revenue Funding Source: Water & Sewer Revenues The requested funding is for a new screening system that is expected to reduce maintenance efforts required for the waste activated sludge pumps at the West Area Water Reclamation Facility. The new screening system will include mechanical bar screens, a 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $423,000 $430,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $9,819 $3,600,000 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $59,910 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $8,007 $74,555 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $98 $36,000 $0 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $59,076 $399,535 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $4,600,000 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 417 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Transportation – Other Funds TRANSPORTATION This category includes projects funded with revenue bonds backed by the half-cent transportation sales tax approved by Glendale voters in 2001. The half-cent sales tax will fund improvement projects for all modes of transportation including transit, street, bicycle, pedestrian and aviation (Fund 2210). This category also includes projects covered by HURF revenue bonds (2000), the Street Fund (Fund 1340) and transportation related grants (Fund 1650). Over the next few years, transit projects paid from the half-cent sales tax will include projects related to bus services, a transit center and preliminary light rail studies. The street element of the Transportation Plan emphasizes improvements at major intersections as well as improvements and enhancements along major streets. A majority of FY 2012 funding is for the Northern Avenue Super Street Project that will create an east-west corridor between Grand Avenue and the Loop 303. Other projects and programs in the Transportation Plan include enhancing the bicycle system, traffic mitigation and providing matching funds for airport capital grants. Carryover funding is available in the HURF bond fund to complete street improvements on 67th Avenue from Camelback to Grand Avenue. Two additional street improvement projects are included in the last five years of the capital improvement plan. In the last five years of the capital plan, the Street Fund (Fund 1340) will cover the replacement and/or new purchase of a number of street maintenance related equipment including a concrete mixer truck, asphalt roller, asphalt paving machine, water truck and right-of-way rearload truck. The Transportation Grants Fund (Fund 1650) was established to accommodate grants for capital projects from federal and state government agencies. These are open, competitive grant programs. Grant projects are budgeted in Fund 1650 upon notification that the city has received approval for grant funding. Transportation projects in which the city applies for reimbursement in a future year are budgeted in the transportation sales tax construction fund and any reimbursements are credited to the transportation sales tax construction fund as grant revenue when received. A number of transportation grant projects have carryover funding in FY 2012 included grant funding for the design of the transit center at Arrowhead. Project Name: 63rd Ave @ Loop 101-Bike Overpass Funding Source: Transportation Half-Cent Sales Tax Fund #: 2210 Project #: 65054 418 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 65005 Smart Traffic Signals 65007 Grand Ave Access Enhancements 65008 Intersection Improvements 65013 Bus Stops and Shelters 65016 Northern Ave Super Street 65022 PE & Oversight for Transp. Pkg 65072 Expanded Safety Program 65086 51st Avenue HES Projects 65088 Downtown Alley Improvements T7404 Maryland Ave Bike Rte Spot Imp T7405 *Pavement Management 1,981,031 3,213,914 1,284,422 100,000 11,813,412 1,427,461 933,563 501,182 129,913 0 675,009 0 0 0 0 5,102,395 508,501 105,556 0 0 0 2,000,000 127,913 0 0 109,712 5,204,443 518,670 109,147 0 0 143,961 2,000,000 0 0 0 112,944 5,324,144 530,599 112,911 0 0 0 2,000,000 0 0 0 115,769 5,457,248 0 115,734 0 0 0 2,000,000 0 0 0 118,895 1,675,646 0 118,858 0 0 0 2,000,000 750,000 0 0 647,614 3,042,396 0 1,195,133 0 0 0 10,000,000 100,000 50,000 298,605 22,508,512 100,000 50,000 0 7,866,452 100,000 75,000 156,575 8,545,421 150,000 100,000 161,735 8,492,333 200,000 125,000 167,145 8,180,896 250,000 150,000 0 4,313,399 1,579,903 939,649 0 18,154,695 0 2,469,664 1,157,055 11,666 470,000 2,400,000 166,203 2,000,000 8,674,588 0 50,850 0 0 0 0 403,988 0 454,838 0 52,587 0 0 0 0 10,913 0 63,500 0 53,060 0 0 0 0 35,935 0 88,995 0 54,387 0 0 0 0 203,455 0 257,842 0 55,855 0 0 0 0 211,735 0 267,590 1,146,730 3,677,578 0 0 0 0 6,152 0 4,830,460 $31,183,100 $8,321,290 $8,608,921 $8,581,328 $8,438,738 $4,580,989 $22,985,155 Replacement of Existing Assets 65004 Buses/Vans 65014 Transit Support Capital 65083 Speed Cushions Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 65006 Bus Pullouts 65017 Rail System 65030 Multi-Use Pathway Grand Canal 65054 63rd Ave @ Loop 101-Bike Ove 65062 Glendale Sports Facilities Sgn 65063 New River - Multi-use Pathway 65078 Airport Matching Funds 65080 Bell/101 Park&Ride/Transit Ctr Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $39,504,390 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 419 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65005 - Smart Traffic Signals (I) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $1,919 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $6,396 $0 $0 $0 $0 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $119,598 $0 $0 $0 $738,750 $750,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $127,913 $0 $0 $0 $1,981,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,981,031 $127,913 $0 $0 $0 $750,000 O and M costs associated with electricity for new signal heads, cameras and communication equipment as well as maintenance of fiber optic connections. O and M for this project will be identified once federal funds have been secured and the scope of the project is available. Project: 65007 - Grand Ave Access Enhancements (I) Project Description: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Operating Description: FY 2015 $0 $24,665 $25,405 $26,167 $0 $24,665 $25,405 $26,167 Project: 65008 - Intersection Improvements (I) TOTAL FYs 17-21 $3,213,914 TOTAL FY 2012 Carryover FY 2016 $3,213,914 Landscape Capital Costs: FY 2015 O and M is associated with 112,113 sq ft of landscape maintenance and irrigation water. A supplemental budget request will be made when the project is close to completion. Operating Costs: Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: This project provides enhanced access control along Grand Avenue and includes beautification and sidewalks. Capital Costs: Operating Description: $11,250 FY 2016 $26,952 $26,952 FYs 17-21 $147,385 $147,385 Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $1,284,422 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,284,422 $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 420 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65013 - Bus Stops and Shelters (I) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $9,402 $9,679 $9,921 $10,189 $55,499 Construction $0 $85,613 $88,136 $90,340 $92,779 $505,359 Finance Charges $0 $1,643 $1,691 $1,734 $1,780 $9,698 Engineering Charges $0 $4,086 $4,206 $4,311 $4,428 $24,117 Arts $0 $856 $881 $903 $928 $5,054 Contingency $0 $8,112 $8,351 $8,560 $8,791 $47,887 $647,614 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $109,712 $112,944 $115,769 $118,895 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $109,712 $112,944 $115,769 $118,895 $647,614 O and M associated with the maintenance of each new bus shelter as they become completed. Supplemental budget requests will be made as new bus stops are added. Operating Costs: FY 2012 Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $10,927 $22,510 $34,779 $0 $10,927 $22,510 $34,779 Project: 65016 - Northern Ave Super Street (I) Project Description: FY 2016 $47,764 $47,764 FYs 17-21 $460,929 $460,929 Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Per Intergovernmental Agreement, 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. Costs for this project are shared between the region at 70% ($221 million) and local agencies at 30%. Glendale's portion of local funding is $39 million. Other jurisdictions involved include Maricopa County, Peoria, and El Mirage. Capital Costs: FY 2012 Land Finance Charges Contingency Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,566,729 $76,540 $78,071 $79,866 $81,863 $25,135 $2,844,640 $45,636 $255,120 $260,222 $266,207 $272,862 $83,782 $152,120 $4,770,735 $4,866,150 $4,978,071 $5,102,523 $0 $0 $5,102,395 $5,204,443 $5,324,144 $5,457,248 $1,675,646 $3,042,396 $11,813,412 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,915,807 $5,204,443 $5,324,144 $5,457,248 $1,675,646 $3,042,396 O and M costs are for landscape, water, electrical and other maintenance based on current design. Supplemental budget requests will be made when each project phase is close to completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Utilities $0 $3,631 $3,740 $3,852 $3,968 $21,699 Landscape $0 $18,806 $19,370 $19,951 $112,378 $0 $22,437 $23,110 $23,803 $20,550 $24,518 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 421 Return to CIP TOC $134,077 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65022 - PE & Oversight for Transp. Pkg (I) Project Description: Professional engineering for preparation of design concepts, and administration of right-of-way purchase for roadway, bicycle, pedestrian and transit projects. Capital Costs: FY 2012 Finance Charges Contingency Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $7,628 $7,780 $7,959 $0 $0 $25,425 $25,934 $26,530 $0 $0 $0 $475,448 $484,956 $496,110 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $508,501 $518,670 $530,599 $0 $0 $1,427,461 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,935,962 $518,670 $530,599 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 65072 - Expanded Safety Program (I) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: 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. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $1,582 $1,638 $1,694 $1,736 $1,783 Contingency $5,278 $5,457 $5,646 $5,787 $5,943 $59,757 $98,696 $102,052 $105,571 $108,211 $111,132 $1,117,448 $105,556 $109,147 $112,911 $115,734 $118,858 $1,195,133 Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $933,563 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,039,119 $109,147 $112,911 $115,734 $118,858 $1,195,133 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 65086 - 51st Avenue HES Projects (I) Project Description: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $501,182 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $501,182 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O and M costs are for landscape maintenance. A supplemental budget request will be made when the project is close to completion. Operating Costs: Landscape TOTAL Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Hazard Elimination Safety projects provide for intersection capacity and safety improvements at the intersections of 51st Avenue and Camelback Road and 51st Avenue and Northern Avenue. Projects include right turn lanes, bus bays and shelters, modifications to traffic signals and street lights and landscaping. Capital Costs: Operating Description: $17,928 FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $270 $270 $278 $278 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 422 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $286 $286 FY 2016 $295 $295 FYs 17-21 $1,613 $1,613 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65088 - Downtown Alley Improvements (I) Project Description: Design and construct transformation of existing service alley into a safe environment for pedestrian circulation and limited vehicular traffic. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $129,913 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $129,913 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 Electrical Landscape FY 2013 $0 $0 Water TOTAL FY 2014 $2,738 $2,500 $2,820 $2,575 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $2,905 $2,652 $2,992 $2,732 $16,361 $14,939 $1,311 $7,035 $38,471 $0 $1,200 $1,236 $1,273 $0 $6,438 $6,631 $6,830 Project: T7404 - Maryland Ave Bike Rte Spot Imp (I) Capital Costs: FY 2015 O and M includes $2,438 for the maintenance of 10 pedestrian lights, $1,200 for water, $300 for landscape maintenance by an outside company, $2,200 for downtown beautification crew maintenance and $300 for electricity. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: $7,171 Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Construction $0 $122,102 $0 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $1,440 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $12,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $1,221 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $7,198 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $143,961 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: T7405* - Pavement Management (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Construction Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Pavement maintenance programs maximizing the life of the street network. This may include activities ranging from surface preparation, repairs and 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. Carryover funding from the Collector/Residential Overlay Project and Arterial Overlay Project are included in this project. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $1,962,709 $1,962,709 $1,962,709 $1,962,709 $1,962,709 Engineering Charges $17,664 $17,664 $17,664 $17,664 $17,664 $88,322 Arts $19,627 $19,627 $19,627 $19,627 $19,627 $98,135 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 $675,009 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,675,009 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 423 Return to CIP TOC $9,813,543 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65004 - Buses/Vans (R) Project Description: This project replaces buses and vans for local circulators and Dial-A-Ride service. The buses are replaced every four years or when mileage exceeds recommended limits. Capital Costs: FY 2012 Finance Charges Equipment Contingency Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 $1,500 $1,500 $2,250 $3,000 $3,750 $23,699 $93,500 $140,250 $187,000 $233,750 $1,437,711 $5,000 $5,000 $7,500 $10,000 $12,500 $118,493 $100,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $1,579,903 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $1,579,903 Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: FY 2012 Contingency Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $750 $1,125 $1,500 $1,875 $2,250 $2,500 $3,750 $5,000 $6,250 $7,500 $46,982 $46,750 $70,125 $93,500 $116,875 $140,250 $878,572 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $125,000 $150,000 $939,649 $14,095 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $75,000 $100,000 $125,000 $150,000 $939,649 No additional O and M is required for this project. Project: 65083 - Speed Cushions (R) Capital Costs: FYs 17-21 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. Capital Costs: Project Description: FY 2016 No O and M associated with replacement vehicle maintenance for circulator and shuttle. Finance Charges Operating Description: FY 2015 $93,500 Project: 65014 - Transit Support Capital (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. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Construction $0 $132,553 $136,923 $141,503 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $2,349 $2,426 $2,507 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $8,749 $9,037 $9,339 $0 $0 Arts $0 $1,326 $1,369 $1,415 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $11,598 $11,980 $12,381 $0 $0 $0 $156,575 $161,735 $167,145 $0 $0 $298,605 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,605 $156,575 $161,735 $167,145 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover 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 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65006 - Bus Pullouts (N) Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: Bus pull-outs to relieve congestion, improve air quality, and provide traffic and pedestrian safety. Bus pullouts will be provided at major intersections where there are bus route extensions and new bus routes. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $172,009 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $660,516 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,202 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,799 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,605 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $57,336 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,254 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,146,730 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed. Project: 65017 - Rail System (N) Project Description: FY 2012 Finance Charges Contingency Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $778 $796 $816 $838 $55,166 $87 $1,809 $2,264 $3,571 $5,017 $183,879 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $3,438,533 $50,850 $52,587 $53,060 $54,387 $55,855 $3,677,578 $2,469,664 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,520,514 $52,587 $53,060 $54,387 $55,855 $3,677,578 FY 2012 TOTAL Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $1,157,055 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,157,055 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O and M associated with the maintenance of trash receptacles and 30 foot wide landscaped area along a 6,300 foot long multiuse pathway. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: TOTAL FYs 17-21 Construct a multiuse 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. FY 2012 Carryover Landscape Refuse FY 2016 O and M costs will be requested for inclusion after completion of the project in FY 2026. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2015 $763 Project: 65030 - Multi-Use Pathway Grand Canal (N) Project Description: 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. Costs below reflect Glendale's fees to Metro and Alternatives Analysis studies in later years. Capital Costs: Operating Description: $172,009 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $41,580 $8,698 $42,827 $8,959 $44,112 $9,228 $0 $50,278 $51,786 $53,340 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 425 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $45,436 $9,505 $54,941 FYs 17-21 $248,460 $51,979 $300,439 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65054 - 63rd Ave @ Loop 101-Bike Ove (N) Project Description: Construct an overpass at the Loop 101 near 63rd Avenue for safe bicycle and pedestrian crossing over Loop 101. The amount programmed is Glendale's match and post design services cost. Design of the project is complete and the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) is administering the construction of the project. Glendale has contracted with a consultant to provide post design services. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $11,666 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $1,545 $1,591 $1,639 TOTAL $0 $1,545 $1,591 $1,639 Project: 65062 - Glendale Sports Facilities Sgn (N) FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Supplies/Contr Utilities TOTAL $9,232 $9,232 Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $470,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $1,126 $1,126 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $1,160 $1,160 $1,194 $1,194 $6,531 $6,530 $5,304 $7,692 $42,066 $0 $0 $5,000 $5,150 $0 $0 $7,252 $7,470 Project: 65063 - New River - Multi-use Pathway (N) $29,005 Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $2,400,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,400,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O and M associated with 8 foot wide landscaped area along a 12,200 foot long multiuse pathway. A supplemental budget request will be made when the project is close to completion. Operating Costs: TOTAL FYs 17-21 $470,000 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. Landscape $1,688 $1,688 O and M for this project is for electrical costs of the message signs. Equipment maintenance costs for the expected life is ten years and significant maintenance costs at $5,000 per year after five years of installation. A supplemental budget request will be made when project is close to completion. Operating Costs: Operating Description: FY 2016 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 traffic control system. Capital Costs: Project Description: FYs 17-21 O and M includes bi-annual bridge inspections. A request for supplemental budget will be made in a future year and current costs will be absorbed by the Transportation budget. Operating Costs: Operating Description: FY 2016 $11,666 Supplies/Contr Project Description: Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $21,009 $21,639 $22,288 $0 $21,009 $21,639 $22,288 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 426 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $22,957 $22,957 FYs 17-21 $125,538 $125,538 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2210-Transportation Construction Category: Transportation Project: 65078 - Airport Matching Funds (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Land Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $375,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Design $3,601 $0 $3,650 $57,268 $8,341 $0 Construction $6,916 $3,561 $4,155 $13,058 $192,718 $0 Finance Charges $6,060 $164 $539 $3,052 $3,176 $92 Engineering Charges $6,125 $7,146 $22,460 $121,900 $0 $6,060 $0 Arts Miscellaneous/Other Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $36 $42 $131 $1,927 $0 $6,250 $0 $5,000 $6,250 $7,500 $0 $403,988 $10,913 $35,935 $203,455 $211,735 $6,152 $166,203 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $570,191 $10,913 $35,935 $203,455 $211,735 $6,152 This project provides local match funds for the capital project. Refer to the Airport Capital Fund 2120 projects for O and M impact. Project: 65080 - Bell/101 Park&Ride/Transit Ctr (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 Half Cent Sales Tax Funding Source: This project will construct a transit center and a park-and-ride facility in the Bell Rd and Loop 101 area to serve the needs of transit passengers from multiple bus routes including express service. Federal funds have been secured for this project. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $2,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $0 $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. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 427 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1650-Transportation Grants FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 67530 Fiber & Conduit - DMS 67531 Fiber & Conduit for ITS 67534 ITS Strategic Plan 67536 FTA AZ-90-X103 Grant 67537 FTA X006 Predisign ArrowheadTC 67538 FTA 0203 Design ArrowheadTC Sub-Total - Existing Assets 135,000 140,000 290,000 571,909 635,896 840,366 2,613,171 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 136,994 187,714 69,069 511,167 904,944 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 10,000,000 0 0 0 0 10,000,000 $3,518,115 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 New Assets 67505 CIP Transport. Grant Reserve 67526 DS Multiuse Path: Grand Canal 67527 DS Multiuse Path: New River 67528 DS Multiuse Path: Maryland Ave 67529 FTA Grant X096 Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $5,518,115 PROJECT DETAIL: 1650-Transportation Grants Category: Other Project: 67530 - Fiber & Conduit - DMS (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: This project will complete the design of fiber, conduit, and cameras along Peoria Ave between 43rd and 67th avenues. Additionally four message signs will be designed for 59th and Glendale avenues leading into downtown Glendale. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $135,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $135,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 This is a design project. There are no operating costs associated with the design. Operating funds will be identified during the construction stage of the project. Project: 67531 - Fiber & Conduit for ITS (R) Project Description: Grants Funding Source: Grants Funding Source: This project will complete the design of fiber, conduit, and cameras along Cactus, Thunderbird, and Greenway Roads. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $140,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $140,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 This is a design project. There are no operating costs associated with the design. Operating funds will be identified during the construction stage of the project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 428 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1650-Transportation Grants Project: 67534 - ITS Strategic Plan (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: This project will complete a citywide Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Strategic Plan that is consistent with federal, state, and regional plans. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $290,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 This is a project to develop a study. There are not any operating costs associated with the study development. Grants Funding Source: The grant includes funds for the replacement of three Dial-A-Ride buses and funds for the maintenance of Transit's bus fleet. The Regional Public Transportation Authority will reimburse the city for the local match portion of the bus purchase. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $571,909 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $571,909 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Grants Funding Source: North Glendale is currently served by multiple routes including two express routes, three local routes and one rural connector. These routes provide regional service to the northwest valley. Many of the routes start/end in the area of Loop 101 and Bell Road. This project will provide the predesign for a centralized facility for routes serving the area to provide transit patron parking, and to promote improved bus flow and accessibility for patrons using the routes serving the area FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $635,896 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $635,896 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 This project is for pre-design of the transit center. O and M costs will be identified during the design of the project. Project: 67538 - FTA 0203 Design ArrowheadTC (R) Project Description: FY 2015 $290,000 Project: 67537 - FTA X006 Predisign ArrowheadTC (R) Project Description: Grants Funding Source: Project: 67536 - FTA AZ-90-X103 Grant (R) Project Description: Category: Other Grants Funding Source: North Glendale is currently served by multiple routes including two express routes, three local routes and one rural connector. These routes provide regional service to the northwest valley. Many of the routes start/end in the area of Loop 101 and Bell Road. This project will provide the predesign for a centralized facility for routes serving the area to provide transit patron parking, and to promote improved bus flow and accessibility for patrons using the routes serving the area. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $840,366 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $840,366 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O and M costs will be identified during the design of the transit center project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 429 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1650-Transportation Grants Project: 67505 - CIP Transport. Grant Reserve (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: This represents reserve appropriation for unanticipated transportation related grant opportunities that may arise during the fiscal year. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $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 $10,000,000 No additional O and M is needed. Grants Funding Source: The project is to provide for the design of a multiuse pathway along the Grand Canal from east of Loop 101 to east bank of New River. Once complete, the pathway should connect the existing Grand Canal multiuse pathway to the future New River multiuse pathway. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $136,994 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $136,994 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No O and M is associated with this design project. Grants Funding Source: This project provides for the design of a multiuse pathway along the New River east bank from Northern Avenue to Grand Canal. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $187,714 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $187,714 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No O and M is associated with this design project. Project: 67528 - DS Multiuse Path: Maryland Ave (N) Project Description: FY 2015 $2,000,000 Project: 67527 - DS Multiuse Path: New River (N) Project Description: Grants Funding Source: Project: 67526 - DS Multiuse Path: Grand Canal (N) Project Description: Category: Other Grants Funding Source: This project provides for the design of a bike lane along Maryland Avenue from 67th Avenue to 69th Avenue, a multiuse path along Maryland Avenue east of 75th Avenue, and a multiuse path along the Maryland Avenue alignment in the Discovery Park from west of 75th Lane to 77th Drive. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $69,069 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $69,069 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No O and M is associated with this design project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 430 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1650-Transportation Grants Project: 67529 - FTA Grant X096 (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: Category: Other Grants Funding Source: Federal Transit Administration grant for replacement bus purchases, computer purchases, and preventative maintenance reimbursement. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $511,167 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $511,167 $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 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2000-HURF/Street Bonds FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: HURF FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 68909 67th Ave-Camelback to Grand 68913 99th Widening-Camelbck-Northrn T2710 67th Ave Glendale to Frier Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: 197,379 0 0 197,379 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,154,767 6,921,892 12,076,659 $197,379 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,076,659 Total FY 2012 Funding: $197,379 PROJECT DETAIL: 2000-HURF/Street Bonds Category: HURF Project: 68909 - 67th Ave-Camelback to Grand (I) Project Description: 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 and Glendale Avenue. Project includes underground conversion of utilities, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and landscaping. Medians to be constructed in future years after storm drain is constructed. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $197,379 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $197,379 $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: HURF Bonds Funding Source: Complete street improvements on 99th Avenue from Camelback Road to Northern Avenue as infill as the property develops. Improvements include curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, landscaping and a bridge widening over the Grand Canal. Also included will be the piping of an existing SRP irrigation ditch and the underground conversion of the existing utilities. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 ($171 ea/yr) for 2 1/2 years. Landscaping will be maintained by the commercial development adjacent to the roadway. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Utilities TOTAL FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 432 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $56,430 $56,430 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2000-HURF/Street Bonds Project: T2710 - 67th Ave Glendale to Frier (I) Project Description: Category: HURF 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Land $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $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 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $512,733 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,921,892 Contingency TOTAL Operating Description: Estimate based on two years of Operation and Maintenance. Utility costs are for 42 street lights. Landscape and water costs are for approximately 50,000 sq ft of landscaping. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Utilities Landscape TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $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 433 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $18,468 $28,287 $46,755 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1340-HURF/Streets Fund FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets T0003 Replacement of Streets Equipmt T0010 Right of Way Rearload Truck Sub-Total - Existing Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 530,200 290,000 820,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 857,085 857,085 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,677,285 New Assets T0005 Additional Streets Equipment Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $0 PROJECT DETAIL: 1340-HURF/Streets Fund Category: Other Project: T0003 - Replacement of Streets Equipmt (R) Project Description: 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 2017 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: FY 2012 Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Highway User Revenue Fund Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $530,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $530,200 Additional staffing will be required to replace staff lost due to budget reductions in order to support these operations. 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 each, 1 Equipment Operator at an annual cost of $68,750 and 1 Crew Leader at an annual cost of $80,456. Line supplies are projected to be $250,000 annually for cost of supplies for the new crew. Equipment replacement costs are included starting in FY 2017 at $39,765 annually with a 10-year life. Additional equipment maintenance related O and M is not needed since this is replacement equipment. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,873,130 Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,250,000 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 434 Return to CIP TOC $0 $0 $18,832 $198,825 $4,340,787 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1340-HURF/Streets Fund Project: T0010 - Right of Way Rearload Truck (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 Operating Costs: TOTAL FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $290,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $290,000 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T0005 - Additional Streets Equipment (N) FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $145,000 $145,000 Highway User Revenue Fund Funding Source: This is a request to purchase six new pieces of equipment for street maintenance based expectations of deterioration due to aging of the street, curb, gutter and sidewalk network. Capital Costs: FY 2012 Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 $0 Because this new truck will replace an existing truck, funding is already available for equipment maintenance. The O and M figure of $145,000 represents the first five years (FY's 2017 though 2021) of vehicle replacement contributions required from adding the equipment to the Vehicle Replacement Fund based on a replacement cost of $290,000 and a 10-year life. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. PC/Vehicle Replacement Project Description: Highway User Revenue Fund Funding Source: Replacement of the existing right-of-way rear-loading compactor truck, which is not currently in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. After replacement, the truck will be added to the Vehicle Replacement Fund. The truck is utilized by right-of-way crews in the disposal of tree trimmings and other landscaping debris. Equipment Operating Description: Category: Other FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $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 each, 1 Equipment Operator at an annual cost of $68,750 and 1 Crew Leader at an annual cost of $80,456. Line supplies are projected to be $250,000 annually for the cost of supplies for the new crew. Equipment maintenance charges and fuel costs total $23,585 annually. Insurance cost is calculated for eight employees at the current average cost of $2,354 per employee for Fund 1340. Equipment replacement costs are included starting in FY 2017 at $64,281 annually with a 10-year life. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing Supplies/Contr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,959,317 $1,250,000 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $121,463 Insurance $0 $0 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $321,405 $4,671,017 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 435 Return to CIP TOC $18,832 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Sanitation - Enterprise Fund SANITATION ENTERPRISE FUND The Sanitation Fund capital program includes the replacement of roll-off trucks, frontload trucks, sideload trucks, rear load trucks, container delivery trucks, pickup trucks and various refuse containers that have reached the end of their serviceable lives. In FY 2012 funding will be used to replace seven residential sideload refuse trucks and a residential container delivery truck. The plan also includes a new sanitation office trailer in FY 2014. Project Name: Frontloader Trucks - 17820 Fund #: 2480 Project #: 78002 Project Name: Rolloff Trucks - 17810 Fund #: 2480 Project #: 78001 Project Name: Commercial Trucks - 17820 Fund #: 2480 Project #: 78002 436 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2480-Sanitation FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Replacement of Existing Assets 78001 Rolloff Trucks-Commercial 78002 Frontload Trucks-Commercial 78003 Sideload Trucks-Residential 78004 Loose Trash Equip.-Residential 78005 Repl Pickup Trucks-Sanitation Sub-Total - Existing Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,820,000 0 43,645 1,863,645 60,900 525,000 550,000 113,887 50,000 1,299,787 0 265,000 1,740,000 617,759 0 2,622,759 428,000 280,000 1,160,000 870,000 0 2,738,000 0 885,000 1,450,000 1,376,980 67,010 3,778,990 258,000 1,577,000 7,540,000 3,138,434 210,000 12,723,434 0 0 0 0 0 0 517,500 517,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $1,863,645 $1,299,787 $3,140,259 $2,738,000 $3,778,990 $12,723,434 New Assets T2411 Sanitation Office Trailer Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $1,863,645 PROJECT DETAIL: 2480-Sanitation Category: Other Project: 78001 - Rolloff Trucks-Commercial (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Sanitation Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of three rolloff trucks and containers over a 10-year period. Roll-off trucks are used to service the 20 and 40 cubic yard dumpsters used at construction sites and for clean up projects. The 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 2015, two replacement trucks will be purchased at a cost of $214,000 to replace trucks purchased in FY 2004. In FY 2017, one replacement truck will be purchased at a cost of $258,000 to replace a truck purchased in FY 2008. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $900 $0 $16,316 $0 $4,670 Equipment $0 $60,000 $0 $411,684 $0 $253,330 $0 $60,900 $0 $428,000 $0 $258,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. Project: 78002 - Frontload Trucks-Commercial (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Sanitation Revenues Replacement of 10 commercial frontload refuse trucks, a commercial sideload refuse truck and a commercial container delivery truck over a 10-year period. 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 one frontload truck for $250,000 and one sideloader for $275,000. In FY 2014, replace one frontload truck for $265,000. In FY 2015, replace one frontload truck for $280,000. In FY 2016, replace three frontload trucks for $295,000 each. In FY 2017, replace one frontload truck for $295,000. In FY 2018, replace one frontload truck for $295,000. In FY 2019, replace one frontload truck for $295,000. In FY 2020, replace one frontload truck at a cost of $295.000, a sideload truck for $290,000 and a commercial container truck for $107,000. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $9,860 $5,388 $5,765 $18,507 $44,855 Equipment $0 $515,140 $259,612 $274,235 $866,493 $1,532,145 $0 $525,000 $265,000 $280,000 $885,000 $1,577,000 TOTAL Operating Description: 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 437 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2480-Sanitation Project: 78003 - Sideload Trucks-Residential (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Funding Source: Capital Costs: Sanitation Revenues Replacement of 50 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 2012 replace seven trucks at a cost of $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 $290,000 each. In FY 2016 replace five trucks at a cost of $290,000 each. In FY 2017 replace six trucks at a cost of $290,000 each. In FY 2018 replace seven trucks at a cost of $290,000 each. In FY 2019 replace three trucks at a cost of $ 290,000 each. In FY 2020 replace six trucks at a cost of $290,000 each. In FY 2021 replace four trucks at a cost of $290,000 each. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $31,563 $9,650 $30,978 $23,106 $30,845 $181,112 $1,788,437 $540,350 $1,709,022 $1,136,894 $1,419,155 $7,358,888 $1,820,000 $550,000 $1,740,000 $1,160,000 $1,450,000 $7,540,000 No additional O and M is needed since this is the replacement of existing equipment. Project: 78004 - Loose Trash Equip.-Residential (R) Project Description: Category: Other Funding Source: Sanitation Revenues Replacement of loose trash rearload trucks, tractors and sweepers that are expected to reach 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 rearload trucks at a cost of $290,000 each, two tractors at a cost of $137,455 each and two sweepers at a cost of $261,035 each. In FY 2017 replace two rearload truck at a cost of $290,000 each, a tractor at a cost of $137,455 and two sweepers at a cost of $279,307 each. In FY 2018 replace two rearload trucks at a cost of $290,000 each and a tractor at a cost of $137,455. In FY 2020 replace three rearload trucks at a cost of $290,000 and a tractor at a cost of $137,455. In 2021 replace a tractor at a cost of $137,455. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $1,683 $9,326 $14,766 $18,898 $63,425 Equipment $0 $112,204 $608,433 $855,234 $1,358,082 $3,075,009 $0 $113,887 $617,759 $870,000 $1,376,980 $3,138,434 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: Funding Source: Sanitation Revenues These pickups will replace aging pickup trucks over a 10-year period. FY 2012, a replacement residential 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 pickup trucks at a cost of $33,505 each. FY 2017, four replacement pickup trucks at a cost of $35,000 each. In FY 2018, a replacement mechanic's truck at a cost of $70,000. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $645 $645 $0 $0 $1,005 $5,827 $43,000 $49,355 $0 $0 $66,005 $204,173 $43,645 $50,000 $0 $0 $67,010 $210,000 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 438 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2480-Sanitation Project: T2411 - Sanitation Office Trailer (N) Project Description: Currently, sanitation staff works out of a mobile trailer office. There are currently 80 employees in the sanitation division and the office environment is very tight. Currently, managers must identify alternative meeting / training space for staff or break the staff into smaller groups for meetings and training. A larger replacement trailer is needed to effectively meet the current operational demand, and allow for sufficient staff meeting/training space. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 $0 $0 IT/Phone/Security $0 Equipment $0 $0 TOTAL FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $7,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $517,500 $0 $0 $0 Additional O and M will be incurred for phone service, computers and related software, and printers. The additional O and M will be absorbed by the department. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Electrical $0 $0 $1,000 $1,030 PC/Vehicle Replacement Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $1,000 $20,600 $1,030 $0 $0 $22,000 $22,660 TOTAL Sanitation Revenues Funding Source: Finance Charges Operating Description: Category: Other * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 439 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $1,061 $21,218 $1,061 $23,340 FYs 17-21 $5,801 $116,028 $5,801 $127,630 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Landfill - Enterprise Fund LANDFILL ENTERPRISE FUND FY 2012 will see the replacement of a number of Glendale Municipal Landfill and Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) equipment including forklifts and a bulldozer. Starting in FY 2013 are projects that will lay the groundwork for the closing of the south area of the Glendale Landfill and preparing the north expansion area for future waste cell development as identified in Landfill Development Plan (October 2001). It is projected that the 140 acres in the south half of the landfill will reach approved filling capacity by FY 2015. In preparation for the closing of the south end of the landfill, new funding is also available in FY 2012 for the initial design to move the scalehouse closer to the north end. Project Name: Landfill Entrance Signal Fund #: 2440 Project #: 78519 Picture Note: Project was completed during FY 2011 440 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2440-Landfill FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 78518 MRF Process Line Improvements 0 0 0 52,900 0 929,943 659,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 492,901 0 0 492,901 26,800 30,000 0 0 0 1,128,040 0 0 0 0 1,237,740 130,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 289,275 0 1,349,218 0 31,827 0 0 59,406 0 0 0 0 1,436,225 2,187,208 29,300 32,781 1,010,145 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,072,226 0 0 0 0 136,032 0 0 0 0 0 136,032 124,331 72,000 1,054,504 255,780 70,000 1,187,550 228,019 624,063 0 0 3,616,247 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102,403 566,581 668,984 0 102,541 13,060,382 0 13,162,923 256,296 4,625,208 0 0 4,881,504 9,141,306 102,541 0 0 9,243,847 0 4,366,770 0 0 4,366,770 $492,901 $1,237,740 $2,018,202 $15,350,131 $5,953,730 $9,379,879 $7,983,017 T2371 Scalehouse & Road Relocation Replacement of Existing Assets 78506 Landfill Repl Pickup Truck 78509 MRF Forklifts 78511 Landfill Compactor Replacement 78512 Fuel Tanker Replacement 78514 Sanitation Insp Trucks - 17740 78520 Landfill Bulldozer Replacement 78521 MRF Loader Replacement 78522 LF Water Pull Tractor Replace T2360 Landfill Motor Grader Replace T2370 Landfill Auger Scraper Replace Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 78503 Landfill Closure (South) 78505 LF Phase Construction (North) 78507 Landfill Soil Excavation 78508 Landfill Stormwater Drainage Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $1,730,641 PROJECT DETAIL: 2440-Landfill Category: Other Project: 78518 - MRF Process Line Improvements (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Improvements to the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) processing line equipment to enhance the overall efficiency of the 10-year old recyclables processing system. Modifications are expected to 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $9,750 $0 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $650,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $659,750 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed due to process line modifications at current amount of incoming tonnage. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 441 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2440-Landfill Project: T2371 - Scalehouse & Road Relocation (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Construction Finance Charges Engineering Charges Arts TOTAL FY 2013 $50,000 $50,000 FY 2014 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $821,201 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,068 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,150 $37,462 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,212 $0 $0 $0 $0 $52,900 $929,943 $0 $0 $0 $0 Landfill Revenues Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $26,800 $130,000 $0 $29,300 $0 $124,331 $26,800 $130,000 $0 $29,300 $0 $124,331 No additional O and M is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78509 - MRF Forklifts (R) Equipment FYs 17-21 $0 FY 2012 TOTAL Capital Costs: $0 Landfill currently has six pickup trucks in its equipment fleet that will require replacement over the next ten years. Pickup trucks are used by the landfill inspector, mechanic, crew leader, supervisor, and field employees. Three trucks will reach the end of their serviceable life in FY 2012, FY 2013, and FY 2015. The vehicle due for replacement in 2013 is the mechanic's truck, which is a heavy duty truck outfitted with an 11 foot crane, heavy duty tool boxes, air compressor, and a gas welder. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. Project also includes the replacement of three trucks reaching the end of their service life during the second five years. The replacement amounts and years are as follows (with 3% inflation adjustment): Flat bed with Tommy Lift ($52,221) and pickup truck with Tommy Lift ($36,076) in FY 2019, and pickup truck ($36,034) in 2021. Equipment Project Description: FY 2016 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2015 $750 Project: 78506 - Landfill Repl Pickup Truck (R) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Project provides for roadway improvements to the internal entrance roadway and relocation of the scale house to be closer to the north area. The scale house is currently located 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. Design Operating Description: Category: Other Landfill Revenues Funding Source: The 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 that are expected to reach 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. Replacement of forklifts in the second five years is scheduled to occur in FY 2018 and FY 2019 at an approximate cost of $36,000 per piece of equipment. The MRF forklifts have an estimated service life of approximately seven years, although replacement schedules may be adjusted depending on hours of use and wear. MRF vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $30,000 $0 $31,827 $32,781 $0 $72,000 $30,000 $0 $31,827 $32,781 $0 $72,000 No additional O and M is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 442 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2440-Landfill Project: 78511 - Landfill Compactor Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Equipment TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital Costs: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $14,928 $0 $15,584 $0 $995,217 $0 $1,038,920 $0 $1,010,145 $0 $1,054,504 No additional O and M is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78512 - Fuel Tanker Replacement (R) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of landfill compactors that will reach the end of their serviceable lives in FY 2015 and FY 2017. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. Instead the equipment is purchased with cash or financed through bonds at the time of acquisition. The compactors are essential pieces of equipment used on a daily basis for proper placement and compaction of solid waste into the landfill. Finance Charges Operating Description: Category: Other 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 after ten years of daily use. Landfill equipment is not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. The fuel tanker truck refuels the diesel equipment on the site to maximize equipment operating time and efficiency. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78514 - Sanitation Insp Trucks - 17740 (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Funding Source: Landfill Revenues 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. Purchase of eight replacement pickups over a 10-year period. Service life is projected to be approximately seven years. In FY 2014, two replacement trucks costing a projected $29,703 each. In FY 2016, four replacement trucks at a cost of $34,008 each. In FY 2017, a replacement truck at a cost of $35,000. In FY 2018, one replacement truck at a cost of $35,000. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $878 $0 $2,040 $1,050 Equipment $0 $0 $58,528 $0 $133,992 $68,950 $0 $0 $59,406 $0 $136,032 $70,000 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 443 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2440-Landfill Project: 78520 - Landfill Bulldozer Replacement (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Finance Charges Equipment TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Project includes the replacement of the landfill bulldozers at the end of their serviceable life and on an appropriate replacement schedule based on current usage and wear. One bulldozer (Model D-9) will reach the end of its serviceable life in FY 2012, and the other bulldozer (Model D-8) will need replacement in FY 2019. 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $16,670 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,550 $1,111,370 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,170,000 $1,128,040 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,187,550 No additional O and M is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78521 - MRF Loader Replacement (R) Project Description: Category: Other Landfill Revenues Funding Source: 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 FY 2019. MRF vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,420 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $224,599 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $228,019 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78522 - LF Water Pull Tractor Replace (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of water pull tractor that is expected to reach the end of its serviceable life in FY 2020. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. Instead the equipment is purchased with cash or financed through bonds at the time of acquisition. This machine is critical to reducing dust and maintaining compliance with the existing air quality permit. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,222 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $614,841 $624,063 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $492,901 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $492,901 $0 $0 $0 $0 $624,063 No additional O and M is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 444 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2440-Landfill Project: T2360 - Landfill Motor Grader Replace (R) Project Description: Category: Other Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of the motor grader that is expected to reach the end of its serviceable life in FY 2013. Landfill vehicles and equipment are not included in the Vehicle Replacement Fund. Instead they are debt financed. The motor grader is used to establish and maintain the temporary roads on the active portion of the landfill. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $4,275 $0 $0 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $285,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $289,275 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: T2370 - Landfill Auger Scraper Replace (R) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Replacement of the auger scraper in FY 2014 when the equipment is expected to be at the end of its serviceable life. Based on current usage, this piece of equipment 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. Instead they are debt financed. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $21,225 $0 $0 $0 Equipment $0 $0 $1,415,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,436,225 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed since new equipment will replace aging existing equipment. Project: 78503 - Landfill Closure (South) (N) Project Description: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: Closure of the south area of the landfill after the permitted air space is completely filled with waste. Completed landfills are required by federal and state law to have a final cover system designed 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $250,000 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,583,027 $0 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $3,750 $132,495 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $2,546 $89,954 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,830 $0 $0 $0 $0 $256,296 $9,141,306 $0 Arts TOTAL Operating Description: Annual cost for post-closure landscape maintenance, methane gas management and ongoing environmental monitoring after site is closed. The additional O and M will be absorbed by the department. Operating Costs: Landscape TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 445 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $220,554 $220,554 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2440-Landfill Project: 78505 - LF Phase Construction (North) (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Other 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 begin accepting waste during FY 2016. Funds identified in FY 2014 ($102,541) will be used for engineering design. Funds in FY 2015 ($4,625,208) will pay for construction of North Phase 1a. Funds identified in FY 2016 ($102,541) will be used for engineering design of North Phase 1b. Funds identified in FY 2017 ($4,366,770) will pay for development of North Phase 1b, which will need to be constructed in FY 2017. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $4,368,000 $0 $4,118,400 Finance Charges $0 $0 $1,500 $67,020 $1,500 $63,276 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $1,041 $46,508 $1,041 $43,910 Arts $0 $0 $0 $43,680 $0 $41,184 $0 $0 $102,541 $4,625,208 $102,541 $4,366,770 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is required for this project Project: 78507 - Landfill Soil Excavation (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Landfill Revenues Funding Source: This project provides for excavation of Phase 1 in the north expansion area to prepare for future landfill cell development. It includes excavation of approximately one-third of the north expansion area, removal of berm located between the north area and the MRF as well as utility relocation due to berm removal, and construction of a screening berm along the eastern boundary as an interim soil storage area. Excavation of the remaining two-thirds will occur as part of future landfill phase construction. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $100,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $12,531,498 $0 $0 $0 Finance Charges $0 $1,500 $189,472 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $903 $114,097 $0 $0 $0 Arts $0 $0 $125,315 $0 $0 $0 $0 $102,403 $13,060,382 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. 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's 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 2013. Installation of the remaining down drains will be completed during the south area closure project. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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: Additional O and M will be required only after the landfill's south area closure has been completed and is included in the O and M costs under the Landfill Closure (South) Project #78503. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 446 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Airport Capital Grants AIRPORT CAPITAL GRANTS During the next decade, the Glendale Airport will continue to grow in response to the business and recreational needs of Glendale and West Valley residents. Like most municipal airports, Glendale’s airport relies heavily on federal and state grants to accomplish capital improvements. Typically, ninety-seven and one half percent of the cost of these improvements is grant-funded (95% federal and 2.5% state). The city’s match of two and one half percent will come from the voter-approved, half-cent sales transportation tax. The use of FY 2012 airport capital funding is contingent on the city receiving Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grants. The city will pursue grant funding for projects related to a security upgrade, pavement maintenance, removal of a blast fence, a land purchase and a capacity study. Project Name: Airport-Master Plan Update Funding Source: FAA & ADOT Grants/Transportation Half-Cent Sales Tax Fund #: 2120 Project #: 79511 447 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2120-Airport Capital Grants FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 79504 Airport-Security Upgrade 79515 Airport-Pavement Maintenance 79516 Airport-RSA Remove Blast Fence 1,462,500 0 292,500 0 100,000 343,481 0 150,000 0 150,000 175,000 0 1,700,000 550,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,755,000 0 443,481 0 150,000 0 325,000 0 2,250,000 300,000 300,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,000,000 200,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 0 15,250,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 0 0 0 200,000 0 0 0 250,000 0 0 70,000 576,000 896,000 0 0 0 0 0 350,000 700,000 7,200,000 8,250,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $1,755,000 $15,693,481 $150,000 $525,000 $3,146,000 $8,550,000 $0 Replacement of Existing Assets 79511 Airport-Master Plan Update Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets T1460 Runway Land Purchase T1461 Airport-EA Land Acq. 36 Acres T1462 Airport-Capacity Study T1463 Airport-EA East TWY, NW Ramp T1467 Airport-EA RSA Improvements T1469 Airport-Eastside Taxiway T1470 Airport-EMAS Taxiway Pavement T1471 Airport-EMAS Design/Constr Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $17,448,481 PROJECT DETAIL: 2120-Airport Capital Grants Category: Other Project: 79504 - Airport-Security Upgrade (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Grants/City Match Funding Source: This is an FAA and ADOT funded project to acquire and install perimeter security equipment. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $145,985 $1,654,502 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $4,015 $45,498 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 $1,700,000 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL Operating Description: $1,462,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,462,500 $0 $150,000 $1,700,000 $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 448 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2120-Airport Capital Grants Project: 79515 - Airport-Pavement Maintenance (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Design FY 2012 Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Design Construction Engineering Charges Arts FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $142,450 $166,192 $522,317 $0 $0 $4,123 $6,125 $7,146 $22,460 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,425 $1,662 $5,223 $0 $0 $100,000 $150,000 $175,000 $550,000 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: 79516 - Airport-RSA Remove Blast Fence (I) Project Description: FY 2015 $95,877 Arts TOTAL Grants/City Match Funding Source: Runway and taxiway pavement maintenance is needed when cracks and deterioration occurs on existing asphalt. Construction Engineering Charges Category: Other Grants/City Match Funding Source: The FAA runway safety action group has identified the moving of the blast fences in the runway safety area (RSA) at the end of Runway 19 due to a safety hazard. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $48,149 $0 $0 $0 $0 $276,650 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,915 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,767 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sub-Total New Funding $343,481 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 Carryover $292,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $635,981 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: 79511 - Airport-Master Plan Update (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: The Airport Master Plan was updated in 2009 and guides the future development of the airport, identifies grant funding opportunities for capital improvements and forecasts aircraft operations. The FAA recommends updates to the master plan every 5-10 years. FY 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Land TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T1460 - Runway Land Purchase (N) Project Description: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Acquire 36 acres of land north of approach to Runway 19 for runway protection zone for the safety of landing aircraft. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $15,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,000,000 $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 449 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2120-Airport Capital Grants Project: T1461 - Airport-EA Land Acq. 36 Acres (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: An environmental assessment (EA), survey, and appraisal are required on the acquisition of 36 acres of land to protect the runway safety area off the end of Runway 19 for landing aircraft. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Grants/City Match Funding Source: An environmental assessment (EA) is required prior to the construction of an eastside taxiway (TWY) and northwest (NW) ramp for future aviation development on the eastside of the airport property. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Project: T1467 - Airport-EA RSA Improvements (N) Project Description: FY 2015 $200,000 Project: T1463 - Airport-EA East TWY, NW Ramp (N) Project Description: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Project: T1462 - Airport-Capacity Study (N) Project Description: Category: Other Grants/City Match Funding Source: An environmental assessment (EA) is required prior to making improvements to the runway safety area (RSA). The improvements of Engineered Materials Arresting Systems at each end of the runway is for overrun of aircraft. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $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 450 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2120-Airport Capital Grants Project: T1469 - Airport-Eastside Taxiway (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Other Grants/City Match Funding Source: Pending an environmental assessment design only for an 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $333,651 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,349 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $350,000 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: T1470 - Airport-EMAS Taxiway Pavement (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: Grants/City Match Funding Source: Design and pave taxiway on Runway 01 for Engineered Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS) product for the safety of aircraft over running the runway end. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $67,114 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $664,767 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $2,886 $28,585 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,648 $0 $0 $0 $0 $70,000 $700,000 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: No additional O and M is required for this project. 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $569,086 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,043,974 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $6,914 $85,586 $0 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $70,440 $0 $0 $0 $0 $576,000 $7,200,000 $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 451 Return to CIP TOC 2012-2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Other Capital Project Funds OTHER CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS Other Federal and State Grants The majority of Glendale’s grants for capital projects come from the federal or state government. The grants in this category are open and competitive. The CIP grant reserve appropriation represents a contingency appropriation for unanticipated grant opportunities that may arise during the fiscal year. General Fund General Fund projects that are typically referred to as pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) projects are funded with General Fund operating dollars. Therefore they are typically balanced against base budget operations, vehicle and technology replacement premiums, supplemental requests and possible salary increases. Civic Center Projects in this category are considered PAYGO projects and are funded with General Fund operating dollars. A Civic Center 10 Year Restoration project is included in FY 2012; this project will utilize $300,000 that was set-aside per City Council direction in FY 2007. A Civic Center Maintenance Reserve project has also been added to the capital plan with a budget of $50,000 annually for emergency repairs and/or replacement of Civic Center specific equipment. Technology Infrastructure In FY 2008 a new fund was added to the General Fund PAYGO category. New Information Technology projects are included in the last five years of the capital plan, as well as funding for PeopleSoft enhancements in FY 2013. The Strategic Initiatives Group (SIG) submitted projects in this category. SIG, with representatives from all city departments, was initiated to provide a viable, consolidated request for information technology infrastructure. SIG compiled a list of information technology needs that meet three criteria: (1) direct customer service benefits to citizens; (2) creation of efficiencies in operations and cost savings; and (3) technology that is crucial to operations using the current number of employees. Arts Commission The Municipal Art Fund promotes the creative use of art in public places. One percent of the cost associated with each public construction project is set aside for the purchase and maintenance of public art. The Glendale Arts Commission was formed to select works of art to be commissioned or purchased through the Municipal Arts Fund. This fund has been used to purchase the recently dedicated Glendale Public Safety Memorial located in the Glendale Civic Center Plaza and the award-winning brick sculpture, “Tribute to Firefighters,” at Fire Station 157, as well as other art pieces in various locations within the city. 452 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1840-Other Federal and State Grants FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 80012 Bike & Ped/Skunk Creek @BellRd Sub-Total - Existing Assets 472,100 472,100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 339,152 339,152 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 10,000,000 0 10,000,000 $811,252 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 New Assets 80013 CIP Grant Reserve 80028 43rd Ave/Peoria Ped Rest Area Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $2,811,252 PROJECT DETAIL: 1840-Other Federal and State Grants Project: 80012 - Bike & Ped/Skunk Creek @BellRd (I) Project Description: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $472,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $472,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed. Project: 80013 - CIP Grant Reserve (N) Project Description: Grants Funding Source: This project connects the exiting sidewalk to the multiuse pathway, and provides a dry-crossing of Skunk Creek on the south side of Bell Road. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Category: Other Grants Funding Source: This represents reserve appropriation for unanticipated grant opportunities that may arise during the fiscal year. FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $2,000,000 FY 2012 $2,000,000 FY 2013 $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 453 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1840-Other Federal and State Grants Project: 80028 - 43rd Ave/Peoria Ped Rest Area (N) Project Description: FY 2012 FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $339,152 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $339,152 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Supplies/Contracts are $601 for annual supplies and a landscape contract for $2,000. Building maintenance is for six park area pole lights at $150 each for maintenance and electricity, $21 each for lamp replacement and $20 per month for electrical meter and delivery charges. Landscape is for 22,801 sq ft of in-house landscape maintenance and drip irrigation water/repairs at $0.22 per sq ft = $5,016. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Supplies/Contr $0 $2,679 $2,759 $2,842 Bldg. Maint. Landscape $0 $0 $1,304 $5,166 $1,343 $5,321 $1,383 $5,481 $0 $9,149 $9,423 $9,706 TOTAL Grants Funding Source: Construction of a bus stop and trail/pedestrian rest area on the northwest corner of 43rd Avenue and Peoria Avenue. The plaza will be used by bus riders as well as hikers, cyclists and equestrian traffic on the historic Sun Circle Trail system accessing the Thunderbird Paseo Linear Park. The project site is 22,801 sq ft. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Category: Other * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 454 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $2,927 $1,425 $5,646 $9,998 FYs 17-21 $16,008 $7,792 $30,872 $54,672 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1000-General Fund FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets T4620 Resurface Library Parking Lots 0 0 0 0 0 0 396,460 50,000 479,498 0 529,498 50,000 0 0 50,000 50,000 0 0 50,000 50,000 0 0 50,000 50,000 0 0 50,000 50,000 0 0 50,000 250,000 0 415,300 1,061,760 0 0 0 0 0 702,859 0 702,859 0 702,859 0 702,859 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,800,000 0 419,600 3,219,600 $529,498 $752,859 $752,859 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $4,281,360 Replacement of Existing Assets 81013 Bldg. Maintenance Reserve 81055 Sales Tax System T4735 GIS Enterprise System Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets 81014 Property Acquisition 81057 Repayment to State Aviation T4736 City Fiber Optic Study Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $1,282,357 PROJECT DETAIL: 1000-General Fund Category: Other Project: T4620 - Resurface Library Parking Lots (I) Project Description: 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 23 years old and is a priority.) Capital Costs: FY 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $396,460 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $396,460 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. In FY 2020, the maintenance cost would be $22,889 for Main and $29,067 for Foothills. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Bldg. Maint. General Fund Funding Source: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 455 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $51,956 $51,956 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1000-General Fund Project: 81013 - Bldg. Maintenance Reserve (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 Sub-Total New Funding FY 2012 Carryover TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $50,000 $50,000 $250,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $250,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $250,000 General Fund Funding Source: FY 2012 TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $479,498 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $479,498 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 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: FY 2012 Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $160,000 $164,800 $169,744 $0 $160,000 $164,800 $169,744 Project: T4735 - GIS Enterprise System (R) FY 2016 $174,835 $174,835 FYs 17-21 $956,072 $956,072 General Fund Funding Source: The city’s reliance on Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has grown at a faster rate than the current technology infrastructure can handle. In the last year alone, GIS data storage has tripled in size. City of Glendale GIS has evolved from a decentralized team of individuals providing maps, to the creation of an enterprise database with "location-based" information. Due to the need for expanded data storage space and faster processing speeds, existing equipment located at the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) has been used to meet increased system demands. This short term solution manages growth without putting an additional burden on the city’s general fund. In FY 2013 it is expected that the equipment will not meet standard vendor and operational requirements needed to support core GIS functions within the enterprise system. Without a replacement system, city departments could experience delays in data updates and reduced workflow for field and customer service workers, leading to slower service. Capital Costs: FY 2012 IT/Phone/Security TOTAL Operating Description: FYs 17-21 $50,000 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 2012 Carryover Project Description: FY 2016 $50,000 No additional O and M is needed for this project. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2015 $50,000 Project: 81055 - Sales Tax System (R) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: This project is intended to support emergency replacements and repairs of building components for city owned buildings. Miscellaneous/Other Operating Description: Category: Other FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $415,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $415,300 Presently, the GIS System is not in the Technology Replacement Fund (TRF) as are other enterprise systems. It is imperative that contributions be made to the TRF due to the enterprise nature of the GIS system. The GIS System requires replacement every four to six years to maintain support status. O and M will also cover annual licenses. The additional O and M will be absorbed by the department. Operating Costs: PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FY 2012 $0 $0 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 456 Return to CIP TOC FY 2015 $0 $0 FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $472,255 $472,255 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1000-General Fund Project: 81014 - Property Acquisition (N) Project Description: Capital Costs: FY 2012 TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 Capital Costs: Land TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $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. General Fund Funding Source: 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. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $702,859 $702,859 $0 $0 $0 $0 $702,859 $702,859 $0 $0 $0 $0 No additional O and M is needed at this time. Project: T4736 - City Fiber Optic Study (N) Project Description: FY 2015 $0 Project: 81057 - Repayment to State Aviation (N) Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: Funds appropriated for acquisition of real property to meet specific council goals. Land Operating Description: Category: Other 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $419,600 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 457 Return to CIP TOC $400,000 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1740-Civic Center FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets 84551 Civic Center Renovation 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,895,734 0 0 0 50,000 300,000 350,000 50,000 0 50,000 50,000 0 50,000 50,000 0 50,000 50,000 0 50,000 250,000 0 4,145,734 $0 $350,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $4,145,734 Replacement of Existing Assets 84554 Civic Ctr. Maintenance Reserve T0351 Civic Center 10 Yr Restoration Sub-Total - Existing Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $350,000 PROJECT 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. This 5,000 square foot renovation 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Design $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $756,000 Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,488,000 IT/Phone/Security $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,000 Engineering Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,014 Arts $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,880 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $130,000 Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $341,840 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,895,734 TOTAL Operating Description: Additional O and M will be needed starting in FY 2018. Staffing includes one Service Worker III position to help maintain the facility and provide additional supervision for event set-up as well as audio/visual technical expertise for the renovated space and one secretary to assist with office support needs and increased events and bookings. Supplies at $0.75 per sq ft and $3,000 for ongoing supplies/contracts, utilities at $2.80 per sq ft, electrical at $1,800 annually, building maintenance at $2.00 per sq ft, equipment maintenance at $0.40 per sq ft and building water usage at $0.143 per sq ft for 5,000 sq ft of expanded Civic Center space. The 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. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Staffing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $531,296 Supplies/Contr Utilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $33,719 $69,937 $49,955 Bldg. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Equip. Maint. $0 $0 $0 $0 Insurance Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Water $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 458 Return to CIP TOC $9,991 $0 $6,069 $8,992 $0 $0 $713,531 $3,572 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 1740-Civic Center Project: 84554 - Civic Ctr. Maintenance Reserve (R) Project Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: Capital Costs: Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL Operating Description: General Fund Funding Source: The Civic Center's maintenance reserve is used for the facility's extensive repairs and upgrades, as well as the replacement of furniture, fixtures, and equipment. The reserve will ensure that the Civic Center remains a competitive and high quality event venue and it is essential to the continued success of the facility. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $250,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $250,000 No additional O and M is needed. Project: T0351 - Civic Center 10 Yr Restoration (R) Project Description: Category: Other 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 the past 11 years. This funding is for the replacement of crucial items such as carpet, acoustical air walls in the ballroom, banquet chairs, and audio visual systems. 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 2006. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $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 459 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 2150-Technology Infrastructure FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding Existing Assets Improvement of Existing Assets T7010 Event Management Center Upgrad T7071 PeopleSoft Phase 2 Enhancement 0 0 0 0 0 1,097,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,325,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,097,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500,000 1,820,000 1,126,254 5,500,000 12,271,254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,220,625 16,220,625 $0 $0 $1,097,200 $0 $0 $0 $28,491,879 Replacement of Existing Assets T7030 Project/Permit Tracking System T7050 Facility Audio/Visual Systems T7072 Library Technology Upgrades T7073 *City Phone System Replacement Sub-Total - Existing Assets New Assets T7000 City Fiber Optic Communication Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: $0 PROJECT DETAIL: 2150-Technology Infrastructure Project: T7010 - Event Management Center Upgrad (I) Project Description: Capital Costs: Category: Other General Fund Funding Source: The city acquired the Mobile Command Center in 2000 and opened the Traffic Management Center 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 Police Department, Traffic Management Center, and the EOC. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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: Capital Costs: General Fund Funding Source: This request is for funding to cover the consulting cost of upgrading PeopleSoft's Human Capital Management module. An upgrade of the module is required since the current module will no longer be supported by the software vendor. Creating efficient and functional government requires improving the use of technology across and within departments. In order to do this, PeopleSoft modules must be kept up to date. FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 IT/Phone/Security $0 $997,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contingency $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,097,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL Operating Description: Annual maintenance for the software is already being paid for as well as the PC maintenance so there are no additional O and M for this project. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 460 Return to CIP TOC FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2150-Technology Infrastructure Project: T7030 - Project/Permit Tracking System (R) Project Description: FY 2012 Miscellaneous/Other TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500,000 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 Project: T7050 - Facility Audio/Visual Systems (R) FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $99,994 $137,916 $237,910 General Fund Funding Source: The replacement of citywide audio/visual (A/V) equipment that is not currently in the city's Technology Replacement Fund. Although the serviceable life for a number of the identified systems have been extended beyond their expected life cycle, all systems continue to function properly and will be monitored by staff. The systems identified for future replacement include: the Sahuaro Ranch ball complex, the Foothills ball complex, four city pools, the amphitheater outdoor lighting systems, Council Chamber lighting system, Audio/Visual equipment in the City Hall Complex, the Main Library A/V and lighting systems, the Adult Center’s audio, lighting and security systems, the Foothills Library, and the security camera systems at the Foothills Skate Court and WARP X-Court. Capital Costs: FY 2012 Equipment TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,820,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,820,000 Total payments for the six year period to the Technology Replacement Fund. Assumes capital cost will be equally spread over the six year period and a six-year life cycle for the equipment. $1,820,000/6 = $303,333 * 16.67% = $50,566 paid into replacement fund in year one. This doubles in year two ($101,132) triples in year three ($151,698), quadruples in year four ($202,264), quintuples in year five ($252,830), sextuples in year six ($303,396). The total for FY's 2017 though 2021 is $758,490. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FYs 17-21 The $137,916 is required for the ongoing service and maintenance agreement associated with the software purchase. Staffing is for a Database Administrator. This FTE would provide much needed ongoing technical assistance and support to the nine departments using the system. The current system maintenance costs are $43,000 per year, with increases of approx 2% per year. The requirements for the new system are in addition to this current cost. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Operating Description: FY 2016 $0 Staffing Supplies/Contr Project Description: General Fund Funding Source: 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. The city's current system is supported by Infor which is not expected to continue support indefinitely. Funding is requested to replace or upgrade the current system with a web-based system before the current system becomes obsolete. Capital Costs: Operating Description: Category: Other FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 461 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $758,490 $758,490 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2150-Technology Infrastructure Project: T7072 - Library Technology Upgrades (R) Project Description: Category: Other 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. 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. Capital Costs: FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 Finance Charges $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,470 Miscellaneous/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,098,784 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,126,254 TOTAL Operating Description: Includes annual maintenance costs ($63,287), replacement fund costs ($76,890) and RFID tags ($23,065). A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Supplies/Contr Equip. Maint. FY 2012 $0 $0 PC/Vehicle Replacement TOTAL FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $115,325 $316,435 $0 $0 $816,210 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $384,450 General Fund Funding Source: FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,500,000 O and M is currently paid for from the Telephone Services Fund, an estimated $100,000 annually may be need for additional O and M costs starting in FY 2017. Software updates at an estimated cost of $300,000 are also included and may be needed every two to three years. A supplemental will be submitted once the telephone system has been replaced. Operating Costs: TOTAL $0 $0 $0 FY 2012 IT/Phone/Security Equip. Maint. FYs 17-21 The current telephone switch will be out of production support in 2016, consequently service and parts will no longer be available. The current vendor Nortel was purchased by Avaya in 2010, the Nortel product the city currently owns will be discontinued in 2016. The telephone switch handles all calls coming into the city and will have a direct impact on every department. Because this is a technology project, scope and cost could change significantly as the actual replacement date approaches. Costs provided at this time are only budgetary for planning purposes. Capital Costs: Operating Description: FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 Project: T7073* - City Phone System Replacement (R) Project Description: FY 2015 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 462 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan PROJECT DETAIL: 2150-Technology Infrastructure Project: T7000 - City Fiber Optic Communication (N) Project Description: Category: Other 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 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 Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,770,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,220,625 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 2019 through FY 2021 in inflated dollars. A supplemental budget request will be submitted once the project is near completion. Operating Costs: Utilities Equip. Maint. TOTAL FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 $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 463 Return to CIP TOC FY 2016 $0 $0 $0 FYs 17-21 $21,199 $233,189 $254,388 FY 2012-2021 Capital Improvement Plan FUND SUMMARY: 1220-Arts Commission FY 2012: Capital Project Expenses Carryover Category: Other FY 2013: FY 2014: FY 2015: FY 2016: FYs 17-21: New Funding New Assets 84650 Arts Commission Sub-Total - New Assets Total Project Expenses: Total FY 2012 Funding: 0 0 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,750,000 1,750,000 $0 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,750,000 $500,000 PROJECT DETAIL: 1220-Arts Commission Category: Other Project: 84650 - Arts Commission (N) 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 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FYs 17-21 $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. * New Project N=New Asset, R=Replacement of Existing Asset, I=Improvement of Existing Asset 464 Return to CIP TOC Schedules 2011-2012 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 465 Return to TOC Schedule One by CATEGORY FY 2012 Fund Balance Analysis (All Dollars in Thousands) General Trust Special Revenue Enterprise Internal Service Capital Debt Service Total 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 $35,481 $3,771 $857 $44,913 $9,339 $9,473 $0 $0 $61,447 $19,007 $0 $0 $22 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,174 $0 $193 $69,827 $0 $2,863 $0 $0 $37,684 $1,019 $99,925 $0 $286 $9,143 $82 $6,220 $230 $0 $0 $307 $0 $0 $42 $0 $0 $53 $0 $25,363 $0 $0 $0 $0 $115 $0 $678 $0 $13,000 $0 $0 $7,467 $1,057 $0 $669 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,144 $32,064 $137,636 $3,771 $2,183 $123,883 $10,099 $18,609 $13,230 $25,363 $117,275 $59,864 $184,287 $22 $112,759 $116,194 $25,457 $21,260 $51,934 $511,913 $2,132 $84 $0 $20,108 $335 $0 $27,179 $0 $0 $22,296 $76,722 $23,780 $0 $791 $0 $40,155 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,598 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,778 $12,694 $0 $25,717 $14,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,624 $177 $0 $8,218 $0 $17,147 $56,776 $0 $12,609 $0 $7,500 $26,965 $0 $0 $7,099 $0 $0 $0 $14,581 $0 $47,790 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000 $0 $0 $27,593 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $59,535 $0 $0 $22 $15,877 $0 $9 $0 $0 $0 $2 $5 $0 $1 $0 $1,209 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $58,144 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,353 $144,221 $12,778 $12,609 $45,847 $46,569 $85,110 $27,188 $27,593 $7,099 $22,296 $111,347 $23,962 $14,581 $9,009 $47,790 $59,864 $213,582 $5,598 $138,613 $173,321 $30,593 $76,659 $59,497 $697,864 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues over Expenses ($29,295) ($5,576) ($25,854) ($57,127) ($5,136) ($55,400) Beginning Fund Balance $39,533 $5,576 $35,692 $83,411 $8,344 $55,400 $22,651 $250,606 Ending Fund Balance $10,238 $0 $9,837 $26,284 $3,208 $0 $15,087 $64,655 Total Expenditures Capital Outlay Community Environment Community Housing Community Services Contingency Debt Service General Government Internal Services Landfill Other Public Safety Public Works Sanitation Street Maintenance Water and Sewer Transfer Out Total 466 Return to TOC ($7,563) ($185,951) Schedule One by FUND FY 2012 Fund Balance Analysis (All Dollars in Thousands) Beginning Fund Bal. Projected Revenues Transfers In Transfers Out Operations General Fund Group: 1000 1010 1040 1100 1120 1140 1190 1220 1240 1260 1280 1281 1282 1283 1740 1770 1780 1790 1870 2530 2538 General Fund National Events General Services Telephone Services Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Employee Groups Arts Commission Court Fund Library Youth Sports Complex Stadium Event Operations Arena Event Operations CamelbackRanch EventOps Civic Center Zanjero Special Revenue Arena Special Revenue Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA Marketing Self-Sustaining Public Safety Training Center Glendale Health Center Sub-Total General Fund Group: $24,819 $335 $0 $147 $6,356 $4,190 $131 $1,386 $344 $234 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300 $0 $0 $488 $614 $161 $28 $39,533 $131,174 $0 $8,934 $904 $1,938 $1,755 $60 $97 $351 $157 $30 $905 $5,278 $29 $410 $1,283 $8,502 $1,746 $237 $1,421 $69 $165,280 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $292 $2,062 $15,926 $0 $407 $0 $0 $0 $320 $0 $0 $19,007 ($30,920) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,283) ($7,952) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($40,155) ($123,525) $0 ($8,934) ($979) ($3,030) ($3,512) ($84) ($128) ($584) ($247) ($322) ($2,967) ($21,204) ($29) ($767) $0 ($550) ($1,746) ($753) ($1,545) ($54) ($170,960) $250 $1,218 $0 $7 $12,741 $0 $0 $10,929 $4,315 $770 $0 $121 $0 $187 $0 $4,774 $38 $342 $0 $35,692 $1,538 $900 $3,368 $3,726 $11,416 $0 $6,465 $20,043 $12,262 $6,122 $466 $1,543 $98 $21,750 $2,672 $844 $1,078 $1 $17,448 $111,740 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900 $0 $0 $61 $58 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,019 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,353) $0 $0 ($15,794) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($17,147) ($1,788) ($2,118) ($3,368) ($3,719) ($8,218) $0 ($769) ($11,841) ($14,174) ($6,396) ($527) ($1,603) ($98) ($18,995) ($2,672) ($3,895) ($1,073) ($177) $0 ($81,430) Special Revenue Fund Group: 1300 1310 1311 1320 1340 1640 1650 1660 1700 1720 1760 1820 1830 1840 1842 1860 1880 1885 2120 HOME Grant Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm N'hood Stabilization Pgm III Community Dvpmt Block Grant HURF/Streets Fund Local Transp. Assistance Transportation Grants Transportation Sales Tax Police Sales Tax Fire Sales Tax Airport Operating CAP Grant Emergency Shelter Grants Other Federal and State Grants ARRA Stimulus Grants RICO Parks & Rec Self-Sustaining Parks & Rec Designated Airport Capital Grants Sub-Total Special Rev Fund Group: 467 Return to TOC Schedule One by FUND FY 2012 Fund Balance Analysis (All Dollars in Thousands) Capital Outlay Debt Service Total Contingency Appropriation Ending Fund Bal. General Fund Group:, continued 1000 1010 1040 1100 1120 1140 1190 1220 1240 1260 1280 1281 1282 1283 1740 1770 1780 1790 1870 2530 2538 General Fund National Events General Services Telephone Services Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Employee Groups Arts Commission Court Fund Library Youth Sports Complex Stadium Event Operations Arena Event Operations CamelbackRanch EventOps Civic Center Zanjero Special Revenue Arena Special Revenue Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA Marketing Self-Sustaining Public Safety Training Center Glendale Health Center Sub-Total General Fund Group: ($1,282) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($500) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($350) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($2,132) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($335) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($335) ($124,808) ($335) ($8,934) ($979) ($3,030) ($3,512) ($84) ($628) ($584) ($247) ($322) ($2,967) ($21,204) ($29) ($1,117) $0 ($550) ($1,746) ($753) ($1,545) ($54) ($173,427) $265 $0 $0 $72 $5,264 $2,432 $107 $856 $111 $144 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $488 $418 $37 $44 $10,238 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($5,518) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($2,811) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($17,448) ($25,778) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($14,259) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($14,259) ($1,788) ($2,118) ($3,368) ($3,719) ($22,477) $0 ($6,287) ($11,841) ($14,174) ($6,396) ($527) ($1,603) ($98) ($21,806) ($2,672) ($3,895) ($1,073) ($177) ($17,448) ($121,466) $0 $0 $0 $13 $327 $0 $178 $4,238 $2,403 $496 $0 $119 $0 $131 $0 $1,723 $43 $167 $0 $9,837 Special Revenue Fund Group:, continued 1300 1310 1311 1320 1340 1640 1650 1660 1700 1720 1760 1820 1830 1840 1842 1860 1880 1885 2120 HOME Grant Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm N'hood Stabilization Pgm III Community Dvpmt Block Grant HURF/Streets Fund Local Transp. Assistance Transportation Grants Transportation Sales Tax Police Sales Tax Fire Sales Tax Airport Operating CAP Grant Emergency Shelter Grants Other Federal and State Grants ARRA Stimulus Grants RICO Parks & Rec Self-Sustaining Parks & Rec Designated Airport Capital Grants Sub-Total Special Rev Fund Group: 468 Return to TOC Schedule One by FUND FY 2012 Fund Balance Analysis (All Dollars in Thousands) Beginning Fund Bal. Projected Revenues Transfers In Transfers Out Operations Debt Service Fund Group: 1900 1920 1930 1940 1970 General Obligation Bond Debt HURF Debt Service P.F.C. Debt Service M.P.C. Debt Service Transportation Bond Debt Sub-Total Debt Svc Fund Group: $21,116 $0 $0 $1,534 $0 $22,651 $18,813 $0 $0 $1,057 $0 $19,870 $209 $4,706 $380 $19,442 $7,327 $32,064 ($1,353) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,353) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,731 $0 $0 $1,107 $194 $1,354 $3,221 $420 $108 $173 $38 $2,575 $94 $4,288 $304 $4,683 $348 $1,132 $1,804 $356 $556 $0 $11,877 $19,036 $55,400 $8 $0 $21 $52 $36 $44 $69 $86 $20 $10 $2 $284 $94 $2 $1 $6 $2 $1 $5 $0 $0 $0 $33 $13,015 $13,793 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,467 $7,467 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($209) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,209) $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) $5,576 $22 $0 $0 $56,464 $20,249 $5,869 $828 $83,411 $79,323 $8,253 $15,068 $13,243 $115,887 $0 $0 $0 $307 $307 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($47,790) ($7,099) ($14,581) ($12,609) ($82,079) $4,477 $1,284 $2,584 $8,344 $2,543 $1,018 $21,896 $25,457 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($3,068) ($1,407) ($23,118) ($27,593) $250,606 $452,049 $59,864 Capital Fund Group: 1380 1400 1420 1440 1460 1480 1500 1520 1540 1560 1580 1600 1620 1980 2000 2040 2060 2080 2100 2130 2140 2160 2180 2210 DIF- Library Buildings DIF- Library Books DIF- Fire Protection Facilities DIF- Police Dept Facilities DIF- Citywide Parks DIF- Citywide Rec Facility DIF- Libraries DIF- Citywide Open Space DIF- Park Dev Zone 1 DIF- Park Dev Zone 2 DIF- Park Dev Zone 3 DIF- Roadway Improvements DIF-General Government Street/Parking Bonds HURF/Street Bonds Public Safety Construction Parks Construction Gov't Facilities Construction Economic Dev. Construction Cultural Facility Construction Open Space/Trails Construction Library Construction Flood Control Construction Transportation Construction Sub-Total Capital Fund Group: Trust Fund Group: 2280 Cemetery Perpetual Care $0 Enterprise Fund Group: 2360+ 2440 2480 2500 Water and Sewer Landfill Sanitation Community Housing Services Sub-Total Enterprise Fund Group: Internal Service Fund Group: 2540 2560 2580 Risk Management Self Ins. Worker's Comp Self Ins. Benefits Trust Sub-Total Internal Svc Fund Group: TOTAL 469 Return to TOC ($59,864) ($362,100) Schedule One by FUND FY 2012 Fund Balance Analysis (All Dollars in Thousands) Capital Outlay Debt Service Total Contingency Appropriation Ending Fund Bal. Debt Service Fund Group:, continued 1900 1920 1930 1940 1970 General Obligation Bond Debt HURF Debt Service P.F.C. Debt Service M.P.C. Debt Service Transportation Bond Debt Sub-Total Debt Svc Fund Group: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($24,284) ($4,706) ($380) ($21,447) ($7,327) ($58,144) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($24,284) ($4,706) ($380) ($21,447) ($7,327) ($58,144) $14,501 $0 $0 $586 $0 $15,087 Capital Fund Group:, continued 1380 1400 1420 1440 1460 1480 1500 1520 1540 1560 1580 1600 1620 1980 2000 2040 2060 2080 2100 2130 2140 2160 2180 2210 DIF- Library Buildings DIF- Library Books DIF- Fire Protection Facilities DIF- Police Dept Facilities DIF- Citywide Parks DIF- Citywide Rec Facility DIF- Libraries DIF- Citywide Open Space DIF- Park Dev Zone 1 DIF- Park Dev Zone 2 DIF- Park Dev Zone 3 DIF- Roadway Improvements DIF-General Government Street/Parking Bonds HURF/Street Bonds Public Safety Construction Parks Construction Gov't Facilities Construction Economic Dev. Construction Cultural Facility Construction Open Space/Trails Construction Library Construction Flood Control Construction Transportation Construction Sub-Total Capital Fund Group: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($273) ($215) ($40) ($139) ($32) ($132) $0 ($3,090) ($197) ($2,415) ($166) ($1,131) ($1,746) ($105) $0 $0 ($10,349) ($39,504) ($59,535) $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 ($1,739) $0 ($21) ($1,159) ($230) ($1,189) ($3,017) ($291) ($89) ($44) ($8) ($1,728) ($188) ($1,194) ($107) ($2,272) ($176) $0 ($62) ($251) ($556) $0 ($1,555) $0 ($15,877) ($1,739) $0 ($21) ($1,159) ($230) ($1,189) ($3,290) ($506) ($129) ($183) ($40) ($1,860) ($188) ($4,290) ($305) ($4,689) ($350) ($1,133) ($1,810) ($356) ($556) $0 ($11,910) ($39,518) ($75,450) $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 ($5,598) ($5,598) $0 ($5,000) ($2,000) ($500) $0 ($7,500) ($132,937) ($10,830) ($16,944) ($12,609) ($173,321) $2,850 $17,672 $3,993 $1,769 $26,284 ($3,000) $0 $0 ($3,000) ($6,068) ($1,407) ($23,118) ($30,593) $952 $894 $1,362 $3,208 ($46,569) ($638,000) $64,655 Trust Fund Group:, continued 2280 Cemetery Perpetual Care $0 Enterprise Fund Group:, continued 2360+ 2440 2480 2500 Water and Sewer Landfill Sanitation Community Housing Services Sub-Total Enterprise Fund Group: ($53,182) ($1,731) ($1,864) $0 ($56,776) ($26,965) $0 $0 $0 ($26,965) Internal Service Fund Group:, continued 2540 2560 2580 Risk Management Self Ins. Worker's Comp Self Ins. Benefits Trust Sub-Total Internal Svc Fund Group: TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 ($144,221) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($85,110) 470 Return to TOC Schedule Two by CATEGORY Summary of Revenues (Includes All Funds) Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget City Sales Tax $96,665,004 $92,717,126 $91,910,098 $96,156,234 Grants $18,516,108 $22,650,788 $34,370,717 $65,324,215 Water Revenues $37,846,238 $42,393,912 $46,983,270 $46,740,078 Sewer Revenue $26,384,046 $28,662,682 $31,038,331 $31,006,477 Property Tax $32,892,547 $33,311,218 $27,746,286 $20,937,987 Internal Charges $21,997,477 $17,972,244 $20,254,261 $19,389,893 State Income Tax $36,266,804 $31,292,382 $23,650,000 $19,336,210 Miscellaneous $11,695,296 $22,050,448 $22,275,085 $18,812,143 State Shared Sales Tax $19,320,873 $17,786,351 $17,695,800 $17,352,894 City Contributions $11,431,341 $14,273,336 $14,102,505 $14,166,532 $41,659,534 $25,000,000 $13,000,000 Bond Proceeds Highway User Revenues $14,538,909 $13,774,184 $13,600,000 $11,415,534 Residential Sanitiation $10,254,367 $10,299,381 $10,512,000 $10,512,000 Staff & Adm Chargebacks $8,547,115 $8,404,382 $8,404,357 $9,422,382 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu $8,807,506 $8,129,455 $8,500,000 $7,645,685 $635,464 $5,414,384 $2,449,894 $6,381,072 Employee Contributions $5,245,169 $5,102,408 $4,366,620 $4,291,971 Court Revenue $3,639,953 $3,819,749 $3,672,850 $3,672,758 Commercial Sanitation Frontload $3,684,277 $3,561,214 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Retiree Contributions $2,928,023 $3,269,747 $3,411,159 $3,419,695 Tipping Fees $3,316,166 $2,758,555 $3,034,610 $3,034,610 Gas/Electric Franchise Fees $2,747,641 $2,717,704 $2,500,000 $2,920,000 Recreation Revenue $2,623,762 $2,508,271 $2,202,025 $2,318,575 Interest $7,728,635 $2,812,315 $2,230,709 $2,163,120 Fire Department Other Fees $1,763,721 $1,998,343 $2,243,719 $1,974,100 $989,507 $2,373,639 $1,841,447 $1,868,450 Recycling Sales $1,593,052 $1,915,090 $1,900,000 $1,820,000 Cable Franchise Fees $1,580,942 $1,468,703 $1,675,000 $1,775,000 Partner Revenue $1,929,564 $1,872,109 $1,419,989 $1,419,989 Building Permits $1,232,972 $990,838 $1,050,000 $1,050,000 Security Revenue $998,811 $939,371 $1,103,339 $957,806 State Forfeitures $1,883,634 $3,618,044 $750,000 $750,000 Plan Check Fees $888,174 $598,611 $735,000 $735,000 $1,497,100 $1,093,288 $701,794 $677,698 Arena Fees Facility Rental Income Development Impact Fees 471 Return to TOC Schedule Two by CATEGORY Summary of Revenues (Includes All Funds) Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Right-of-Way Permits $335,702 $594,175 $584,487 $622,000 Commercial Sanitation Rolloff $658,226 $667,608 $600,000 $600,000 Sales Tax Licenses $570,599 $585,970 $614,911 $590,000 City Property Rental $724,194 $544,001 $485,459 $521,933 $1,233,930 $708,368 $500,000 $500,000 Airport Fees $525,128 $505,416 $465,486 $465,486 Library Fines/Fees $584,439 $488,922 $342,700 $342,700 Fire Dept CD Fees $317,330 $360,079 $360,361 $306,824 $3,481,777 $250,000 $250,000 $12,006 $1,526,154 $210,200 $210,200 Sewer Development Impact Fees $398,283 $231,582 $200,000 $200,000 Liquor Licenses $190,514 $169,396 $200,000 $200,000 Planning/Zoning $337,058 $186,604 $142,800 $182,400 SRP In-Lieu $172,420 $199,892 $181,236 $181,236 Cemetery Revenue $272,909 $163,309 $135,000 $140,000 Business Licenses $92,284 $78,828 $83,880 $140,000 Transit Revenue $130,635 $129,626 $131,669 $128,000 Bus./Prof. Licenses $116,726 $108,740 $120,113 $110,000 Miscellaneous CD Fees $138,360 $123,659 $65,000 $85,000 Engineering Plan Check Revenue $285,371 $122,222 $82,035 $82,000 $2,100 $56,328 $62,825 $69,388 $79,652 $105,066 $40,000 $40,000 $28,674 $27,000 $28,852 Water Development Impact Fees Loan Proceeds Lease Proceeds Health Care Revenue Miscellaneous Bin Service Camelback Ranch Rev - Fire Outside City Commercial $184,955 $17,423 $28,000 $28,000 Development Impact Fees $18,348 $18,866 $27,000 $27,000 Equipment Rental $23,814 $24,061 $22,000 $26,400 Traffic Engineering Plan Check $60,812 $29,247 $15,000 $20,000 $3,276 $3,864 $3,700 $3,700 $1,040,568 $599,909 $94,362 $28,187 $410,674,199 $466,097,759 $442,811,727 $452,049,227 Sanitation Development Impact Fe LTAF - Lottery Federal Forfeitures Grand Total : 472 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual City Sales Tax $51,613,389 $50,540,466 $50,500,000 $53,365,000 State Income Tax $36,266,804 $31,292,382 $23,650,000 $19,336,210 State Shared Sales Tax $19,320,873 $17,786,351 $17,695,800 $17,352,894 Staff & Adm Chargebacks $8,007,000 $7,862,000 $7,862,000 $8,862,000 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu $8,807,506 $8,129,455 $8,500,000 $7,645,685 Miscellaneous $2,037,178 $2,388,329 $14,723,951 $4,234,550 Court Revenue $3,324,696 $3,477,494 $3,356,508 $3,356,508 Property Tax $3,985,091 $4,170,237 $3,724,139 $2,943,561 Gas/Electric Franchise Fees $2,747,641 $2,717,704 $2,500,000 $2,920,000 Fire Department Other Fees $1,763,721 $1,998,343 $2,243,719 $1,974,100 Cable Franchise Fees $1,580,942 $1,468,703 $1,675,000 $1,775,000 Recreation Revenue $1,501,576 $1,404,981 $1,271,800 $1,317,600 Building Permits $1,232,972 $990,838 $1,050,000 $1,050,000 Interest $1,384,130 $1,224,698 $750,000 $812,926 Plan Check Fees $888,174 $598,611 $735,000 $735,000 Right-of-Way Permits $335,702 $593,237 $584,487 $622,000 Sales Tax Licenses $570,599 $585,970 $614,911 $590,000 City Property Rental $630,456 $460,459 $425,219 $461,693 Fire Dept CD Fees $317,330 $360,079 $360,361 $306,824 $325,335 $210,200 $210,200 Fund Description FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget GENERAL FUND GROUP 1000 - General Lease Proceeds Liquor Licenses $190,514 $169,396 $200,000 $200,000 Library Fines/Fees $317,100 $251,980 $187,000 $187,000 Planning/Zoning $337,058 $186,604 $142,800 $182,400 Cemetery Revenue $272,909 $163,309 $135,000 $140,000 Business Licenses $92,284 $78,828 $83,880 $140,000 Facility Rental Income $711,878 $107,281 $117,216 $124,792 Bus./Prof. Licenses $116,726 $108,740 $120,113 $110,000 Miscellaneous CD Fees $138,360 $123,659 $65,000 $85,000 Engineering Plan Check Revenue $285,371 $122,222 $82,035 $82,000 SRP In-Lieu $26,288 $28,221 $31,236 $31,236 Traffic Engineering Plan Check $60,812 $29,247 $15,000 $20,000 Equipment Rental Fund Total - General: $25 $148,865,080 $139,745,184 $143,612,375 $131,174,179 $9,625,691 $7,922,392 $9,086,586 $8,934,049 $9,625,691 $7,922,392 $9,086,586 $8,934,049 1040 - General Services Internal Charges Fund Total - General Services: 473 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1100 - Telephone Services Internal Charges $1,108,794 $1,007,113 $990,447 $904,272 $1,108,794 $1,007,113 $990,447 $904,272 $2,789,875 $2,116,483 $1,996,860 $1,666,562 Miscellaneous $290,088 $389,277 $250,000 $250,000 Interest $127,327 $39,563 $19,960 $21,416 $3,207,290 $2,545,323 $2,266,820 $1,937,978 $2,150,917 $1,978,370 $2,014,016 $1,718,550 Miscellaneous $13,339 $46,484 $20,000 $20,000 Interest $86,015 $25,248 $14,869 $15,954 $2,250,271 $2,050,102 $2,048,885 $1,754,504 $84,614 $75,054 $60,000 $60,000 $84,614 $75,054 $60,000 $60,000 $620,853 $214,157 $71,932 $91,187 $71,691 $17,881 $5,671 $6,084 $692,544 $232,038 $77,603 $97,271 Court Revenue $282,707 $340,016 $316,250 $316,250 Miscellaneous $41,993 $37,463 $35,050 $35,050 $7,124 $2,256 $115 $123 $331,824 $379,735 $351,415 $351,423 $267,339 $236,942 $155,700 $155,700 $39 $6,477 $1,219 $1,200 $267,378 $243,419 $156,919 $156,900 $34,963 $36,164 $30,000 $30,000 $34,963 $36,164 $30,000 $30,000 $963,829 $882,406 $1,054,807 $905,056 $1,054,807 $905,056 Fund Total - Telephone Services: 1120 - Vehicle Replacement Internal Charges Fund Total - Vehicle Replacement: 1140 - PC Replacement Internal Charges Fund Total - PC Replacement: 1190 - Employee Groups Miscellaneous Fund Total - Employee Groups: 1220 - Arts Commission Fund Miscellaneous Interest Fund Total - Arts Commission Fund: 1240 - Court Security/Bonds Interest 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: 1281 - Stadium Event Operations Security Revenue Miscellaneous Fund Total - Stadium Event Operatio $375 $963,829 474 Return to TOC $882,781 Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1282 - Arena Event Operations Miscellaneous Arena Fees $5,000,000 $14,305 $959,910 $273,648 $277,866 $14,305 $959,910 $273,648 $5,277,866 Camelback Ranch Rev - Fire $28,674 $27,000 $28,852 Fund Total - CamelbackRanch Event $28,674 $27,000 $28,852 Fund Total - Arena Event Operations: 1283 - CamelbackRanch EventOperations 1740 - Civic Center Facility Rental Income $277,629 $234,000 $275,108 $290,000 Miscellaneous $123,544 $106,541 $53,800 $92,650 $23,814 $24,036 $22,000 $26,400 $689 $3,500 $1,250 $424,987 $365,266 $354,408 $410,300 $1,197,609 $1,213,365 $1,249,016 $1,282,739 $1,197,609 $1,213,365 $1,249,016 $1,282,739 $621,159 $4,454,474 $2,176,246 $6,103,206 $2,627,860 $2,053,856 $2,023,889 $2,078,535 $320,545 $320,545 $320,545 Equipment Rental Recreation Revenue Fund Total - Civic Center: 1770 - Zanjero Special Revenue City Sales Tax Fund Total - Zanjero Special Revenue 1780 - Arena Special Revenue Arena Fees City Sales Tax Facility Rental Income Miscellaneous Fund Total - Arena Special Revenue: $610,389 $2,845 $3,859,408 $6,831,720 $4,520,680 $8,502,286 $1,485,806 $1,520,432 $1,700,000 $1,745,900 $1,485,806 $1,520,432 $1,700,000 $1,745,900 $379,251 $409,328 $269,000 $236,500 $379,251 $409,328 $269,000 $236,500 $1,609,495 $1,419,989 $1,419,989 $6,657 $847 $847 $1,591,639 $1,616,152 $1,420,836 $1,420,836 $2,100 $56,328 $62,825 $69,388 $2,100 $56,328 $62,825 $69,388 1790 - Stadium City Sales Tax - AZSTA City Sales Tax Fund Total - Stadium City Sales Tax - 1870 - Marketing Self Sust Miscellaneous Fund Total - Marketing Self Sust: 2530 - Training Facility Revenue Fund Partner Revenue $1,579,413 Miscellaneous Recreation Revenue Fund Total - Training Facility Revenu $12,226 2538 - Glendale Health Center Health Care Revenue Fund Total - Glendale Health Center: 475 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget TOTAL-GENERAL FUND GROUP $176,387,383 $168,120,480 $169,613,270 $165,280,299 $409,864 $1,111,412 $740,375 $1,537,838 $409,864 $1,111,412 $740,375 $1,537,838 $2,237,448 $3,140,344 $613,553 $143,405 $286,810 $3,283,749 $900,363 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND GROUP 1300 - Home Grant Grants Fund Total - Home Grant: 1310 - Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm Grants $8,588 Miscellaneous Fund Total - Neighborhood Stabilizati $2,237,448 $8,588 1311 - N'hood Stabilization Pgm III Grants $3,368,377 $3,368,377 Fund Total - N'hood Stabilization Pg 1320 - C.D.B.G. Grants $2,303,992 $2,224,039 $1,803,154 $3,711,668 $30,617 $13,834 $13,834 $2,303,992 $2,254,656 $1,816,988 $3,725,502 $14,538,909 $13,774,184 $13,600,000 $11,415,534 $79,052 $1,643 $14,617,961 $13,775,827 $13,600,000 $11,415,534 $1,040,568 $599,909 $1,040,568 $599,909 $974,638 $1,200,877 $1,647,698 $4,464,547 Miscellaneous Fund Total - C.D.B.G.: 1340 - Highway User Gas Tax Highway User Revenues Miscellaneous Fund Total - Highway User Gas Tax: 1640 - Local Transp. Assistance LTAF - Lottery Fund Total - Local Transp. Assistance 1650 - Transportation Grants Grants Miscellaneous $2,000,000 $974,638 $1,200,877 $1,647,698 $6,464,547 $20,874,856 $19,488,267 $18,536,453 $19,300,000 Grants $566,106 $708,238 $454,465 $516,432 Transit Revenue $130,635 $129,626 $131,669 $128,000 Interest $594,420 $167,644 $91,466 $98,137 Court Revenue $32,550 $2,239 $92 Miscellaneous $1,012,006 $482,170 $5 $23,210,573 $20,978,184 $19,214,150 Fund Total - Transportation Grants: 1660 - Transportation Sales Tax City Sales Tax Fund Total - Transportation Sales Ta 476 Return to TOC $20,042,569 Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual $12,582,277 $11,939,794 $11,939,794 $12,262,168 $12,582,277 $11,939,794 $11,939,794 $12,262,168 $6,283,207 $5,960,946 $5,960,946 $6,121,892 $6,283,207 $5,960,946 $5,960,946 $6,121,892 $525,128 $505,416 $465,486 $465,486 Miscellaneous $1,044 $8,310 $1,005 $1,005 Lease Proceeds $12,006 $11,454 $538,178 $525,180 $466,491 $466,491 Miscellaneous $242,047 $334,295 $1,825,000 $1,542,675 Fund Total - CAP Grant: $242,047 $334,295 $1,825,000 $1,542,675 $74,569 $65,203 $98,278 $98,278 $74,569 $65,203 $98,278 $98,278 $4,304,876 $3,894,170 $15,865,252 $21,750,000 $4,304,876 $3,894,170 $15,865,252 $21,750,000 $1,174,353 $1,612,989 $2,671,757 $1,271,325 $1,612,989 $2,671,757 $1,883,634 $3,618,044 $750,000 $750,000 Interest $86,668 $122,301 $87,670 $94,067 Federal Forfeitures $94,362 $28,187 $3,768,562 $837,670 $844,067 $1,065,987 $896,125 $969,125 $96,160 $71,900 $76,435 $469 $25,946 $12,300 $32,800 $1,026,891 $1,188,093 $980,325 $1,078,360 Fund Description FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1700 - Police Special Revenue City Sales Tax Fund Total - Police Special Revenue: 1720 - Fire Special Revenue City Sales Tax Fund Total - Fire Special Revenue: 1760 - Airport Special Revenue Airport Fees Fund Total - Airport Special Revenue: 1820 - CAP Grant 1830 - Emergency Shelter Grants Grants Fund Total - Emergency Shelter Gran 1840 - Grants Grants Fund Total - Grants: 1842 - ARRA Stimulus Grants Grants Miscellaneous $96,972 Fund Total - ARRA Stimulus Grants: 1860 - RICO Funds State Forfeitures Miscellaneous Fund Total - RICO Funds: $30 $2,064,664 1880 - Parks & Recreation Self Sust Recreation Revenue $1,026,422 Facility Rental Income Miscellaneous Fund Total - Parks & Recreation Self 477 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1885 - Parks & Recreation Designated Recreation Revenue Interest Fund Total - Parks & Recreation Desi $48,575 $450 $600 $600 $4,056 $1,052 $547 $587 $52,631 $1,502 $1,147 $1,187 $448,009 $355,511 2120 - Airport Capital Grants Grants Interest $17,448,481 $2 $1 $0 $448,009 $355,513 $1 $17,448,481 TOTAL-SPECIAL REVENUE FUND GROUP $70,183,533 $71,462,896 $79,890,853 $111,740,086 $29,140,981 $24,022,147 $17,994,426 $354,536 $675,310 $668,632 $146,132 $171,671 $150,000 $150,000 $29,053,588 $29,667,188 $24,847,457 $18,813,058 $1,609,762 $1,056,678 $1,056,678 Fund Total - Airport Capital Grants: DEBT SERVICE FUND GROUP 1900 - G.O. Bond Debt Service Property Tax $28,907,456 Interest SRP In-Lieu Fund Total - G.O. Bond Debt Service: 1940 - M.P.C. Debt Service Facility Rental Income Miscellaneous Interest Fund Total - M.P.C. Debt Service: TOTAL-DEBT SERVICE FUND GROUP $88,570 $16,453 $1 $16,453 $1,698,333 $1,056,678 $1,056,678 $29,070,041 $31,365,521 $25,904,135 $19,869,736 $24,773 $187 $24,773 $187 $49,672 $11,170 $7,176 $8,056 $49,672 $11,170 $7,176 $8,056 CAPITAL FUND GROUP 1270 - G.F. Revenue Oblgs Interest Fund Total - G.F. Revenue Oblgs: 1380 - DIF-Library Blds Interest Fund Total - DIF-Library Blds: 1400 - DIF-Library Book Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Library Book: $42,840 $2,669 $45,509 478 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1420 - DIF-Fire Protection Facilities Development Impact Fees $110,072 $100,735 $45,005 $20,909 $25,567 $2,981 $485 $0 $135,639 $103,716 $45,490 $20,909 $128,273 $92,096 $46,534 $46,534 $42,289 $10,332 $5,405 $5,708 $170,562 $102,428 $51,939 $52,242 $41,898 $25,590 $34,762 $34,762 $2,429 $912 $689 $932 $44,327 $26,502 $35,451 $35,694 Development Impact Fees $44,970 $27,642 $37,310 $37,310 Interest $30,489 $9,186 $6,036 $6,613 $75,459 $36,828 $43,346 $43,923 Development Impact Fees $23,634 $40,690 $55,146 $55,146 Interest $72,414 $21,623 $13,385 $14,230 $96,048 $62,313 $68,531 $69,376 $102,267 $63,334 $84,903 $84,903 $4,712 $1,879 $1,455 $1,547 $106,979 $65,213 $86,358 $86,450 Development Impact Fees $3,123 $9,022 $19,779 $19,779 Interest $3,122 $528 $386 $436 $6,245 $9,550 $20,165 $20,215 Development Impact Fees $2,776 $9,726 $9,485 $9,485 Interest $4,003 $1,003 $684 $496 $6,779 $10,729 $10,169 $9,981 $32,204 $4,858 $1,851 $1,851 $633 $319 $216 $131 $32,837 $5,177 $2,067 $1,982 Interest Fund Total - DIF-Fire Protection Faci 1440 - DIF-Police Facilities Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Police Facilities: 1460 - DIF-Citywide Parks Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Citywide Parks: 1480 - DIF-Citywide Recreation Fac Fund Total - DIF-Citywide Recreation 1500 - DIF-Libraries 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 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 Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-Parks Dev Zone 3: 479 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1600 - DIF-Roadway Improvements Development Impact Fees $725,298 $494,038 $272,699 $272,699 Interest $121,621 $28,991 $14,653 $11,641 $846,919 $523,029 $287,352 $284,340 $239,745 $225,557 $94,320 $94,320 $0 $70 Fund Total - DIF-Roadway Improvem 1620 - DIF-General Government Development Impact Fees Interest Fund Total - DIF-General Governmen $27,920 ($688) $267,665 $224,869 $94,320 $94,390 $182,488 $31,851 $5,940 $2,435 1980 - Streets Constr. - 1999 Auth Interest Miscellaneous Fund Total - Streets Constr. - 1999 Au $77,898 $182,488 $109,749 $5,940 $2,435 $39,080 $4,210 $1,426 $1,038 2000 - Hurf Street Bonds Interest Miscellaneous Fund Total - Hurf Street Bonds: $105,574 $39,080 $109,784 $1,426 $1,038 $108,841 ($14,059) $24,683 $6,094 $24,683 $6,094 $12,120 $1,775 $12,120 $1,775 $1,199 $1,100 $1,199 $1,100 $9,471 $5,296 $9,471 $5,296 2040 - Public Safety Construction Interest Bond Proceeds $12,302,816 Miscellaneous $8,879 Fund Total - Public Safety Constructi $108,841 $12,297,636 2060 - Parks Construction Interest $31,989 ($5,392) Bond Proceeds $8,967,053 Miscellaneous $3,339 Fund Total - Parks Construction: $31,989 $8,965,000 2080 - Gov't Facilities - 1999 Auth Interest ($654) ($531) Bond Proceeds $4,526,035 Miscellaneous $1,716 Fund Total - Gov't Facilities - 1999 Au ($654) $4,527,220 2100 - Economic Dev. Constr-1999 Auth Interest ($4,429) Bond Proceeds $1,785,408 Miscellaneous $13,208 $1,794,187 Fund Total - Economic Dev. Constr-1 480 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 2140 - Open Space/Trails Constr-99 Au Interest Fund Total - Open Space/Trails Const ($481) $799 ($481) $799 2180 - Flood Control Construction Interest $206,881 Bond Proceeds Miscellaneous Fund Total - Flood Control Construct $540 $68,707 $32,625 $68,707 $32,625 $14,078,222 $2,392,322 $7,523,801 $2,599,203 $21,602,563 2210 - Transportation Capital Project Bond Proceeds Interest $13,000,000 $1,344,938 $45,203 Miscellaneous Fund Total - Transportation Capital $10,000 $15,000 $10,000 $13,015,000 $2,065 $47,268 $1,344,938 2536 - Training Facility Capital Proj Partner Revenue $350,151 $262,614 $350,151 $262,614 $6,564,968 $50,898,531 $885,910 $13,792,921 $121,772 $35,829 $20,707 $22,217 $121,772 $35,829 $20,707 $22,217 $121,772 $35,829 $20,707 $22,217 Water Revenues $37,846,238 $42,393,912 $46,983,270 $46,740,078 Sewer Revenue $26,384,046 $28,662,682 $31,038,331 $31,006,477 Miscellaneous $1,329,371 $4,106,249 $399,737 $623,035 Water Development Impact Fees $1,233,930 $708,368 $500,000 $500,000 Sewer Development Impact Fees $398,283 $231,582 $200,000 $200,000 $1,874,000 $409,810 $150,000 $111,000 $176,000 $168,000 $168,000 $82,000 $93,738 $83,542 $60,240 $60,240 $25,000,000 $0 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 Interest Staff & Adm Chargebacks City Property Rental Bond Proceeds Loan Proceeds $3,231,900 481 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual Facility Rental Income FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $5,891 Grants $500 $69,335,606 $80,002,436 $104,499,578 $79,322,830 Tipping Fees $3,316,166 $2,758,555 $3,034,610 $3,034,610 Internal Charges $2,305,179 $2,191,865 $2,502,000 $2,502,000 Recycling Sales $1,590,580 $1,915,090 $1,900,000 $1,820,000 $316,758 $327,000 $327,000 $431,000 $249,877 $250,000 $250,000 Fund Total - Water and Sewer: 2440 - Landfill Staff & Adm Chargebacks Loan Proceeds Interest $565,481 $157,210 $120,000 $120,000 Miscellaneous $166,789 $122,456 $172,000 $68,000 $18,348 $18,866 $27,000 $27,000 $8,279,301 $7,740,919 $8,332,610 $8,252,610 $10,254,367 $10,299,381 $10,512,000 $10,512,000 $3,684,277 $3,561,214 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Commercial Sanitation Rolloff $658,226 $667,608 $600,000 $600,000 Internal Charges $196,383 $158,495 $180,000 $180,000 Miscellaneous $204,160 $216,406 $122,000 $122,000 Staff & Adm Chargebacks $47,357 $47,382 $47,357 $47,382 Miscellaneous Bin Service $79,652 $105,066 $40,000 $40,000 Development Impact Fees Fund Total - Landfill: 2480 - Sanitation Residential Sanitiation Commercial Sanitation Frontload Interest Outside City Commercial $94,058 $12,687 $71,362 $35,000 $184,955 $17,423 $28,000 $28,000 $3,276 $3,864 $3,700 $3,700 $16,278,891 $15,104,419 $15,068,082 Sanitation Development Impact Fe Lease Proceeds $1,189,365 Recycling Sales Fund Total - Sanitation: $2,472 $15,409,183 2500 - Pub Housing Budget Activities Grants $9,425,466 $9,679,037 $9,008,162 $9,143,284 Miscellaneous $2,041,863 $4,869,760 $4,100,000 $4,100,000 Fund Total - Pub Housing Budget Act $11,467,329 $14,548,797 $13,108,162 $13,243,284 TOTAL-ENTERPRISE FUND GROUP $104,491,419 $118,571,043 $141,044,769 $115,886,806 $2,828,000 $2,488,937 $2,499,892 $2,500,000 $17,491 $28,483 $24,266 $26,375 $152,481 $47,020 $15,943 $17,106 INTERNAL SERVICE FUND GROUP 2540 - Risk Management Self Insurance Internal Charges Security Revenue Interest 482 Return to TOC Schedule Two by FUND Summary of Revenues Fund Description Fund Total - Risk Management Self I FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual $2,997,972 $2,564,440 FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $2,540,101 $2,543,481 $984,460 $984,460 2560 - Workers Comp. Self Insurance Internal Charges $992,638 Security Revenue $17,491 $28,482 $24,266 $26,375 Interest $65,073 $15,537 $6,580 $7,060 $1,075,202 $44,019 $1,015,306 $1,017,895 Fund Total - Workers Comp. Self Ins 2580 - Benefits Trust Fund City Contributions $11,431,341 $14,273,336 $14,102,505 $14,166,532 Employee Contributions $5,245,169 $5,102,408 $4,366,620 $4,291,971 Retiree Contributions $2,928,023 $3,269,747 $3,411,159 $3,419,695 $152,491 $32,425 $16,392 $17,588 $24,885 $247,557 Interest Miscellaneous Internal Charges $108,589 Right-of-Way Permits $938 $19,781,909 $23,035,000 $21,896,676 $21,895,786 TOTAL-INTERNAL SERVICE FUND GROUP $23,855,083 $25,643,459 $25,452,083 $25,457,162 $466,097,759 $442,811,727 $452,049,227 Fund Total - Benefits Trust Fund: TOTAL - ALL REVENUE : $410,674,199 483 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1000 - GENERAL BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Finance 11310 Finance Administration 11320 Accounting Services 11330 L.I.D. Administration 11340 License/Collection Dept. Total - Finance Lease Pmts/OtherFees 11380 Lease Payments 11390 Merchant Fees 89800 1000 Advisor Fees Dept. Total - Lease Pmts/OtherFees Management & Budget 11610 Budget & Research 11620 Grants Administration Dept. Total - Management & Budget Group Total - BUDGET & FIN. SVCS: CITY ATTORNEY GROUP City Attorney 10610 City Attorney 10615 Outside Legal Fees 10620 Attorney-Spec Proj Fees/Costs Dept. Total - City Attorney CITY CLERK GROUP City Clerk 10210 City Clerk 10220 Records Management 10240 Elections Dept. Total - City Clerk CITY COURT GROUP City Court 10410 City Court CITY MANAGER GROUP Admin Svcs Admin. 11210 Administration Services Admin. City Manager 10310 City Manager $497,667 $865,271 $869,194 $2,232,132 $394,610 $912,836 $9,000 $805,900 $2,122,346 $498,438 $912,836 $9,000 $805,900 $2,226,174 $665,368 $2,045,135 $1,717,724 $259,910 $85,568 $2,063,202 $4,236,574 $160,000 $129,687 $4,526,261 $4,236,574 $160,000 $129,687 $4,526,261 $403,075 $199,687 $90,000 $692,762 $636,466 $142,038 $778,504 $646,768 $65,164 $711,932 $646,768 $65,164 $711,932 $622,329 $58,653 $680,982 $5,073,838 $7,360,539 $7,464,367 $3,418,879 $2,321,104 $2,339,684 $500,000 $2,458,342 $500,000 $2,384,723 $500,000 $3,527,908 $5,849,012 $2,839,684 $2,958,342 $2,884,723 $379,779 $143,981 $1,499 $525,259 $397,551 $140,727 $137,723 $676,001 $397,551 $140,727 $55,108 $593,386 $372,249 $134,634 $111,556 $618,439 $3,868,393 $3,578,010 $3,578,010 $3,387,792 $443,943 $435,786 $349,858 $152,316 $1,072,710 $959,252 $959,252 $895,124 484 Return to TOC $531,275 $848,492 Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $1,516,653 $1,395,038 $1,309,110 $1,047,440 $221,114 $143,026 $364,140 $316,256 $149,346 $465,602 $316,256 $149,346 $465,602 $274,515 $142,988 $417,503 $1,053,346 $420,205 $40,481 $310,474 $987,264 $283,119 $0 $304,676 $211,414 $707,169 $2,493,642 $853,849 $215,385 $716,250 $2,540,756 $934,636 $335,747 $0 $304,676 $208,812 $707,169 $2,491,040 $277,840 $188,922 $666,655 $2,202,651 Group Total - COMMUNICATIONS: $2,904,896 $2,956,642 $2,959,244 $2,620,154 COMPLIANCE&ASSET MGT GROUP Compliance & Asset Mgt 10710 City Auditor 11360 Materials Management 11370 Materials Control Warehouse Dept. Total - Compliance & Asset Mgt $280,047 $603,384 $358,043 $1,241,474 $254,348 $388,224 $295,037 $937,609 $254,348 $388,224 $295,037 $937,609 $265,196 $163,126 $279,552 $707,874 DEVELOPMENT SVCS GROUP Building Safety 15610 Building Safety 15620 Development Services Center Dept. Total - Building Safety $2,665,919 $568,993 $3,234,912 $1,980,628 $444,676 $2,425,304 $1,979,628 $444,676 $2,424,304 $1,895,038 $425,102 $2,320,140 $1,468,073 $1,368,354 $1,368,354 $1,295,976 $164,257 $195,964 $195,964 $186,405 $350,565 $543,780 $383,846 $1,278,191 $341,167 $512,837 $135,149 $989,153 $340,167 $512,837 $135,149 $988,153 $323,524 $323,844 $126,988 $774,356 $6,145,433 $4,978,775 $4,976,775 $4,576,877 $741,568 $630,068 $500,000 $266,453 $711,613 $3,000,000 $266,453 $626,736 $468,583 $242,095 Group Total - CITY MANAGER: COMMUNICATIONS GROUP Conv./Media/Parking 10890 Convention/Media/Parking 10891 Media Center Operations Dept. Total - Conv./Media/Parking 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. Code Compliance 14410 Code Compliance Community Dev Admin 15510 CD Deputy City Manager Planning 15910 Planning Administration 15930 Current Planning 15940 Long-Range Planning & Research Dept. Total - Planning Group Total - DEVELOPMENT SVCS: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP Economic Development 16010 Economic Development 16025 Business Development 16040 Downtown Beaut. & Promotion $239,693 485 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Economic Development Dept. Total - Economic Development $981,261 $1,396,521 $3,978,066 $1,337,414 Rebates & Incentives 16210 Rebates & Incentives 16230 Redevelopment Land Acquisition Dept. Total - Rebates & Incentives $475,555 $23,000 $498,555 $320,000 $85,416 $405,416 $50,000 $2,871 $52,871 $100,000 $1,479,816 $1,801,937 $4,030,937 $1,437,414 Group Total - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: FAC & FIN MGMT GROUP Fac & Fin Mgmt 11220 Facilities & Financial Mgmt $100,000 $221,567 FIRE SERVICES 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 12491 Ambulance Services 12492 Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO 12521 PS Training Ctr - Fire Dept. Total - Fire Department $1,796,215 $25,313 $17,937,365 $2,395,316 $22,679 $44,166 $866,913 $10,910 $476,109 $745,827 $619,583 $24,940,396 $1,637,270 $16,293 $17,312,530 $1,937,224 $13,656 $56,983 $824,255 $19,250 $492,393 $751,491 $577,227 $23,638,572 $1,637,270 $16,293 $17,312,530 $1,865,224 $13,656 $56,983 $824,255 $19,250 $492,393 $751,491 $577,227 $23,566,572 $1,605,998 $16,293 $17,785,340 $2,070,956 $13,656 $48,983 $812,173 $15,250 $484,004 $736,989 $567,227 $24,156,869 HR & RISK MGT GROUP 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 $569,743 $157,462 $669,751 $364,411 $187,638 $458,703 $317,580 $2,725,288 $202,525 $119,411 $631,007 $254,417 $176,717 $459,828 $68,291 $1,912,196 $202,525 $119,411 $630,007 $254,417 $176,717 $459,828 $68,291 $1,911,196 $121,547 $144,941 $563,541 $315,455 $166,386 $374,781 $259,189 $1,945,840 INTERGOVT. PROGRAMS GROUP Intergovt. Programs 10910 Intergovernmental Programs $710,731 $721,549 $721,549 $686,721 MAYOR & COUNCIL GROUP Council Office 10110 Council Office 10120 Cholla District $511,669 $65,160 $445,694 $74,685 $445,694 $59,656 $489,998 $104,581 486 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Council Office 10130 Barrel District 10140 Sahuaro District 10150 Cactus District 10160 Yucca District 10170 Ocotillo District Dept. Total - Council Office $72,452 $76,257 $74,501 $80,694 $66,586 $947,319 $69,187 $76,829 $94,377 $69,352 $92,131 $922,255 $54,162 $56,923 $79,693 $55,337 $75,988 $827,453 $99,446 $99,264 $99,213 $99,258 $99,223 $1,090,983 Mayor 10010 Office of the Mayor $339,466 $334,216 $334,216 $333,342 $1,286,785 $1,256,471 $1,161,669 $1,424,325 N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Action Program 14420 CAP Local Match $121,797 $129,280 $129,280 $129,859 Comm. Partnerships 15010 Community Revitalization 15015 Neighborhood Partnership Dept. Total - Comm. Partnerships $403,342 $494,445 $897,787 $334,195 $364,615 $698,810 $334,195 $364,615 $698,810 $507,275 $455,321 $962,596 Comm. Services Adm 14510 Comm. Services Admin. $308,017 $190,714 $190,714 Neighborhood Imp Gr 15120 Neighborhood Improvement Gran $267,700 $1,595,301 $1,018,804 $1,018,804 $558,487 $1,963,824 $7,135,861 $121,832 $7,257,693 $6,044,112 $31,763 $6,075,875 $6,044,112 $31,763 $6,075,875 $5,655,581 $30,302 $5,685,883 $257,481 $281,613 $298,995 $3,725,971 $243,139 $174,166 $933,309 $373,567 $418,610 $184,745 $196,824 $252,116 $180,341 $3,254,902 $240,308 $136,070 $840,636 $485,907 $512,548 $94,157 $196,824 $252,116 $180,341 $3,326,902 $240,308 $136,070 $838,034 $485,907 $512,548 $94,157 $187,553 $242,779 $174,510 $3,208,114 $139,186 $129,873 $793,122 $484,688 $530,707 $86,276 Group Total - MAYOR & COUNCIL: Group Total - N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS: NON-DEPARTMENTAL GROUP Non-Departmental 11801 Fund 1000 Non-Dept PARKS, REC & LIBRARY GROUP Library & Arts 15220 Library 15230 Arts Maintenance - Admin. Dept. Total - Library & Arts 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 487 Return to TOC ($339,641) $1,092,455 $765,358 Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual Parks & Recreation 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 Dept. Total - Parks & Recreation $316,697 $373,503 $211,025 $175,387 $260,145 $1,429,426 $942 $315,483 $9,974,204 Group Total - PARKS, REC & LIBRARY: $17,231,897 POLICE SERVICES GROUP 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 FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $403,116 $221,959 $403,116 $221,959 $392,850 $218,251 $146,670 $265,687 $1,562,987 $146,670 $265,687 $1,562,987 $139,706 $259,807 $1,426,274 $242,300 $9,036,528 $242,300 $9,105,926 $231,126 $8,644,822 $15,112,403 $15,181,801 $14,330,705 $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 $26,872 $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 $47,017,214 $4,467 $2,377,837 $10,712,033 $8,487,109 $2,232,275 $10,480,476 $1,330,181 $2,839,755 $44,128 $1,097,144 $2,255,017 $577,227 $4,460,707 $737,610 $47,635,966 $120,573 $661,429 $782,002 $206,738 $2,800,306 $10,566,204 $8,205,705 $2,619,168 $10,022,820 $1,869,290 $1,386,464 $103,795 $2,064,559 $2,483,382 $619,583 $4,770,310 $47,718,324 Group Total - POLICE SERVICES: $48,500,326 PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Engineering 13710 BofA Bank Building 13715 Promenade at Palmaire 13720 Engineering Administration 13730 CIP Administration 13770 Mapping and Records 13780 Land Development Division 13790 Construction Inspection 13800 Materials Testing 13820 Utility Inspection Dept. Total - Engineering $305,358 $57,781 $601,494 $607,589 $181,003 $468,433 $552,304 $190,789 $222,986 $3,187,737 $256,579 $56,400 $553,251 $274,490 $101,869 $483,917 $382,291 $181,996 $142,281 $2,433,074 $256,579 $56,400 $552,251 $274,490 $101,869 $483,917 $382,291 $181,996 $142,281 $2,432,074 $256,579 $56,400 $584,296 $229,987 $96,327 $306,881 $412,707 $225,901 $13,622 $2,182,700 $1,030,030 $627,170 $627,170 $610,971 Field Operations 13410 Field Operations Admin. 488 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Field Operations 13420 Cemetery 13430 Manistee Ranch Maintenance 13440 Graffiti Removal 13450 Facilities Management 13460 Custodial Services 13461 Downtown Parking Garage Dept. Total - Field Operations $207,580 $4,908 $236,002 $4,538,627 $1,130,293 $80,639 $7,228,079 $233,250 $5,113 $292,797 $3,361,963 $1,043,615 $102,859 $5,666,767 $233,250 $5,113 $292,797 $3,361,963 $1,043,615 $102,859 $5,666,767 Public Works Admin. 13310 Public Works Administration $198,962 $198,125 $198,125 Group Total - PUBLIC WORKS: $10,614,778 $8,297,966 $8,296,966 $8,003,413 TECH. & INNOVATION GROUP Info. Technology 11510 Information Technology $3,520,751 $3,048,826 $3,048,826 $2,757,188 $12,581 $26,845 $26,845 $26,845 $140,523,662 $140,523,662 $130,657,563 $130,419,581 $123,525,277 WATER SERVICES GROUP Env. Resources 12910 HazMat Incidence Response Fund Total - GENERAL: $221,401 $5,113 $234,496 $3,774,973 $890,900 $82,859 $5,820,713 1010 - NATIONAL EVENTS TRANSPORTATION SVCS GROUP Transportation 16365 Transp - Stadium Mgmt Plan Fund Total - NATIONAL EVENTS: $21,320 $21,320 $21,320 PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 13510 Equipment Management 13520 Fuel Services 13530 Parts Store Operations Dept. Total - Field Operations $3,812,363 $2,740,215 $1,375,625 $7,928,203 $3,959,223 $3,303,176 $1,818,371 $9,080,770 $3,993,158 $3,269,241 $1,818,371 $9,080,770 $3,810,623 $3,303,029 $1,820,397 $8,934,049 Fund Total - GENERAL SERVICES: $7,928,203 $7,928,203 $9,080,770 $9,080,770 $8,934,049 $1,278,946 $977,252 $977,252 $979,324 1040 - GENERAL SERVICES 1100 - TELEPHONE SERVICES TECH. & INNOVATION GROUP Info. Technology 11520 Telephones 489 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget Info. Technology Fund Total - TELEPHONE SERVICES: $1,278,946 $1,278,946 $977,252 $977,252 $979,324 $1,762,518 $3,029,741 $2,959,741 $3,029,742 $1,762,518 $1,762,518 $3,029,741 $2,959,741 $3,029,742 $1,365,233 $3,510,103 $2,208,764 $3,511,584 $1,365,233 $1,365,233 $3,510,103 $2,208,764 $3,511,584 $29,091 $48,957 $167 $54,909 $40,559 $14,350 $54,000 1120 - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 13610 Equipment Replacement Fund Total - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT: 1140 - PC REPLACEMENT TECH. & INNOVATION GROUP Info. Technology 11530 Technology Replacement Fund Total - PC REPLACEMENT: 1190 - EMPLOYEE GROUPS HR & RISK MGT GROUP Employee Groups 11110 GEMS 11120 Diversity Committee 11130 Glendale Hispanic Network 11140 Holiday Event Dept. Total - Employee Groups Fund Total - EMPLOYEE GROUPS: $78,215 $30,000 $84,909 $54,909 $30,000 $84,000 $78,215 $78,215 $84,909 $54,909 $84,000 $40,518 $127,787 $127,787 $127,787 $40,518 $127,787 $40,518 $127,787 $127,787 $267,285 $23,659 $393,300 $127,394 $278,500 $93,765 $398,469 $128,391 1220 - ARTS COMMISSION FUND PARKS, REC & LIBRARY GROUP Library & Arts 15310 Arts Maintenance Fund Total - ARTS COMMISSION FUND: 1240 - COURT SECURITY/BONDS CITY COURT GROUP City Court 10510 Court Security 10520 Court Time Payments 490 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual City Court 10530 Fill the Gap Dept. Total - City Court Fund Total - COURT SECURITY/BONDS: FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $58,840 $349,784 $57,000 $577,694 $9,000 $381,265 $57,000 $583,860 $349,784 $349,784 $577,694 $381,265 $583,860 $44,645 $128,726 $173,371 $142,223 $105,150 $247,373 $142,223 $105,150 $247,373 $142,223 $105,150 $247,373 $173,371 $173,371 $247,373 $247,373 $247,373 $246,571 $262,000 $262,000 $262,000 $52,485 $65,000 $65,000 $60,000 $319,954 $319,954 $327,000 $327,000 $322,000 1260 - LIBRARY PARKS, REC & LIBRARY GROUP Library & Arts 15410 Library Book Fund 15420 Library Special Revenue Dept. Total - Library & Arts Fund Total - LIBRARY: 1280 - YOUTH SPORTS COMPLEX ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP Economic Development 16110 YSC - Econ. Dev. PARKS, REC & LIBRARY GROUP Parks & Recreation 13290 YSC - Parks & Rec PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 13470 YSC - Facilities Mgt. Fund Total - YOUTH SPORTS COMPLEX: $20,898 1281 - STADIUM EVENT OPERATIONS COMMUNICATIONS GROUP Marketing and Comm. 10840 Mkt'g - Stadium Events $166,668 $106,500 $106,500 $106,500 FIRE SERVICES GROUP Fire Department 12515 Fire - Fiesta Bowl Event 12520 Stadium - Fire Event Staffing Dept. Total - Fire Department $52,991 $246,992 $299,983 $159,942 $229,886 $389,828 $138,872 $229,886 $368,758 $159,942 $229,886 $389,828 491 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual POLICE SERVICES GROUP Police Department 12231 Stadium - PD Event Staffing 12234 PD - Fiesta Bowl Event Dept. Total - Police Department TRANSPORTATION SVCS GROUP Transportation 16840 Stadium - Transportation Ops. 16845 Transp - Fiesta Bowl Event Dept. Total - Transportation Fund Total - STADIUM EVENT OPERATIONS: FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $1,501,860 $268,125 $1,769,985 $1,341,354 $401,268 $1,742,622 $1,341,354 $401,268 $1,742,622 $1,343,947 $401,268 $1,745,215 $643,436 $78,983 $722,419 $645,734 $79,942 $725,676 $645,734 $79,942 $725,676 $645,734 $79,942 $725,676 $2,959,055 $2,959,055 $2,964,626 $2,943,556 $2,967,219 1282 - ARENA EVENT OPERATIONS BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Finance 11415 Arena Management Fee $20,000,000 FIRE SERVICES GROUP Fire Department 12489 Westgate - Fire Event Staffing 12490 Arena - Fire Event Staffing Dept. Total - Fire Department $11,659 $152,602 $164,261 $300,008 $300,008 $300,008 $300,008 $301,041 $301,041 POLICE SERVICES GROUP Police Department 12190 Arena-PD Event Staffing $495,334 $836,831 $836,831 $838,135 PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 16740 Arena - ROW Maintenance $35,574 $49,966 $49,966 $49,966 TRANSPORTATION SVCS GROUP Transportation 16830 Arena - Transportation Ops. $11,370 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $706,539 $1,201,805 $706,539 $1,201,805 $21,204,142 Fund Total - ARENA EVENT OPERATIONS: 492 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1283 - CAMELBACKRANCH EVENTOPERATIONS FIRE SERVICES GROUP Fire Department 12485 CBRanch - Fire Event Staffing Fund Total - CAMELBACKRANCH EVENTOPER $34,604 $21,070 $28,852 $34,604 $34,604 $21,070 $28,852 $1,116,060 $1,660,797 $568,296 $1,787,501 $1,116,060 $1,116,060 $1,660,797 $568,296 $1,787,501 $2,237,449 $4,184,112 $2,066,215 $2,117,897 Fund Total - NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION $2,237,449 $2,237,449 $4,184,112 $2,066,215 $2,117,897 1300 - HOME GRANT N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Partnerships 30001 HOME Program Fund Total - HOME GRANT: 1310 - NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PGM N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Partnerships 30900 NSP Programs 1311 - N'HOOD STABILIZATION PGM III N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Partnerships 30910 NSP III $3,368,377 Fund Total - N'HOOD STABILIZATION PGM III: $3,368,377 1320 - C.D.B.G. N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Partnerships 31001 CDBG Programs Fund Total - C.D.B.G.: $2,254,658 $3,540,617 $1,816,988 $3,718,764 $2,254,658 $2,254,658 $3,540,617 $1,816,988 $3,718,764 $2,294,458 $2,850,276 $2,026,279 $2,687,943 $2,116,279 $2,597,943 $2,084,123 $2,350,017 1340 - HIGHWAY USER GAS TAX PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 16710 Right-of-Way Maintenance 16720 Street Maintenance 493 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name Field Operations 16730 Street Cleaning Dept. Total - Field Operations FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $141,603 $5,286,337 $0 $4,714,222 $0 $4,714,222 $4,434,140 TRANSPORTATION SVCS GROUP 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 $1,052,189 $698,602 $373,594 $1,640,955 $2,178 $410,766 $292,293 $4,470,577 $903,017 $707,617 $373,165 $1,093,283 $903,017 $707,617 $373,165 $1,093,283 $800,256 $646,465 $296,918 $1,403,390 $369,166 $301,709 $3,747,957 $369,166 $301,709 $3,747,957 $345,690 $290,717 $3,783,436 Fund Total - HIGHWAY USER GAS TAX: $9,756,914 $9,756,914 $8,462,179 $8,462,179 $8,217,576 $768,765 $55,200 $823,965 $768,765 $823,965 $768,765 1650 - TRANSPORTATION GRANTS TRANSPORTATION SVCS GROUP Transportation 37200 Grant Approp - Transportation 37206 HSIP Ped Countdown Signals Dept. Total - Transportation Fund Total - TRANSPORTATION GRANTS: $768,765 1660 - TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX TRANSPORTATION SVCS GROUP 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 $2,026,866 $180,310 $322,534 $2,390,040 $4,502,347 $32,091 $433,478 $90,293 $91,734 $23,781 $10,093,474 $2,298,887 $223,934 $322,741 $2,391,129 $5,675,488 $8,105 $590,944 $578,348 $113,893 $2,297,587 $223,934 $322,741 $2,391,129 $4,875,488 $42,000 $590,944 $328,348 $113,893 $2,313,072 $226,075 $339,875 $2,449,479 $5,175,488 $42,000 $600,342 $580,336 $113,893 $12,203,469 $11,186,064 $11,840,560 Fund Total - TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX: $10,093,474 $10,093,474 $12,203,469 $11,186,064 $11,840,560 494 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1700 - POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE POLICE SERVICES GROUP Police Department 12310 Patrol - Special Revenue Fund $9,433,739 $12,586,512 $12,586,512 $14,173,737 $9,433,739 $12,586,512 $9,433,739 $12,586,512 $14,173,737 FIRE SERVICES GROUP Fire Department 12610 Fire - Special Revenue Fund $4,850,264 $6,135,642 $7,335,642 $6,395,637 Fund Total - FIRE SPECIAL REVENUE: $4,850,264 $4,850,264 $6,135,642 $7,335,642 $6,395,637 $840,701 $748,497 $748,497 $766,817 $840,701 $840,701 $748,497 $748,497 $766,817 $621,749 $538,916 $538,916 $527,326 $621,749 $621,749 $538,916 $538,916 $527,326 $332,000 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 $332,000 $332,000 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 $1,700,000 $1,700,000 $1,745,900 Fund Total - POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE: 1720 - FIRE SPECIAL REVENUE 1740 - CIVIC CENTER COMMUNICATIONS GROUP Civic Center 11710 Civic Center Fund Total - CIVIC CENTER: 1760 - AIRPORT SPECIAL REVENUE TRANSPORTATION SVCS GROUP Airport 16410 Airport Operations Fund Total - AIRPORT SPECIAL REVENUE: 1780 - ARENA SPECIAL REVENUE BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Finance 11420 Arena Renewal and Replacement Fund Total - ARENA SPECIAL REVENUE: 1790 - STADIUM CITY SALES TAX - AZSTA BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Finance 11400 AZSTA - Stadium Tax Refund $1,627,000 495 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate Fund Total - STADIUM CITY SALES TAX - AZST $1,627,000 $1,700,000 $1,627,000 FY 2012 Budget $1,700,000 $1,745,900 $0 $790,705 $90,718 $51,568 $56,647 $5,341 $45,000 $179,549 $3,135 $3,919 $265,153 $10,136 $5,000 $36,732 $59,441 $1,603,044 1820 - CAP GRANT N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Action Program 32040 Community Action Program (CA 32050 Case Mgmt-LIHEAP Voucher 32051 CM-LIHEAP Voucher Contigenc 32052 Case Mgt-LIHEAP Administratio 32053 Case Mgt-LIHEAP A16 Admin 32054 CM-LIHEAP Admin Contingency 32055 Case Mgmt-TANF Voucher 32056 Case Mgmt-TANF Admin 32057 Case Mgmt-NHN Voucher 32058 Case Mgmt-Qwest Admin 32060 Community Svcs Block Grant-Ad 32070 ACAA HEAF Program 32071 ACAA SW Gas Assistance 32072 ACAA URRD Program 32073 ACAA SRP Assistance Dept. Total - Comm. Action Program $389,388 $412,557 $389,388 $412,557 $412,557 $805,544 $90,718 $51,568 $56,647 $5,341 $45,000 ($12,475) $3,135 $3,919 $189,494 $10,136 $5,000 $36,732 $59,441 $1,762,757 $389,388 $389,388 $412,557 $1,762,757 $1,603,044 $65,203 $98,278 $98,278 $98,278 $65,203 $65,203 $98,278 $98,278 $98,278 $57,271 $0 $0 CITY COURT GROUP Grants 32136 DV Pilot Project Grant $161,630 $66,606 $66,606 $68,219 FIRE SERVICES GROUP Fire Department 34001 Grant Approp - Fire Dept $562,753 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 Fund Total - CAP GRANT: 1830 - EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANTS N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Partnerships 31905 Emergency Shelter Grant Fund Total - EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANTS: 1840 - GRANTS BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Management & Budget 32010 Grant Match Funds - Mgt & Bdgt 496 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS GROUP Grants 32118 Miscellaneous Grants FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $596,802 $7,274,833 $5,490,730 $8,626,542 PARKS, REC & LIBRARY GROUP Library & Arts 36006 Grant Approp - Library $92,169 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 Parks & Recreation 35004 Grant Approp - Parks & Rec $63,876 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 $156,045 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 $76,201 $114,309 $2,032,316 $2,222,826 $102,667 $117,206 $4,500,000 $4,719,873 $102,667 $117,206 $4,500,000 $4,719,873 $104,752 $95,482 $4,500,000 $4,700,234 $3,757,327 $17,661,312 $3,757,327 $15,877,209 $18,994,995 $2,813 $234,150 $13,311 $218,026 $35,000 $55,000 $90,000 $2,401 $87,599 $2,401 $87,599 Group Total - PARKS, REC & LIBRARY: POLICE SERVICES GROUP Police Department 33002 Victim Rights - PD 33018 VOCA 33021 Grant Approp - Police Dept Dept. Total - Police Department Fund Total - GRANTS: 1842 - ARRA STIMULUS GRANTS BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Grants 37068 Program Manager DEVELOPMENT SVCS GROUP Grants 37065 Build Safe Engy Prog Enhance 37069 WebPortal Dept. Total - Grants FIRE SERVICES GROUP Fire Department 37110 PSSP Fire OT Grant N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Partnerships 37020 Homeless Prevention HPRP 37021 CDBG-R Dept. Total - Comm. Partnerships $75,000 $550,108 $390,772 $940,880 497 Return to TOC $646,272 $140,000 $786,272 $364,015 $147,049 $511,064 $60,000 $60,000 Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name PARKS, REC & LIBRARY GROUP Grants 37063 Sports Courts Lighting Retrofi 37064 Main Library Lighting 37070 AzPAC Project AZ ARRA BTOP Dept. Total - Grants FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate $0 $0 POLICE SERVICES GROUP Grants 37062 Public Safety/Court Lighting Police Department 37000 PSSP Police OT Grant 37001 Stop Violence - Women 37002 JAG Recovery Act Dept. Total - Police Department $52,219 $52,219 TRANSPORTATION SVCS GROUP Grants 37066 Traffic Signal LED Conversion $41,210 Transportation 37090 Old Roma Alley ARRA Grant 37091 FTA AZ-96-X002 Dept. Total - Transportation $159,776 $74,874 $234,650 Group Total - TRANSPORTATION SVCS: WATER SERVICES GROUP Grants 37060 ARWRF Facility UV System Imp 37061 Well 43 Variable Drive Retrofi 37067 Energy Matters Public Educat Dept. Total - Grants Fund Total - ARRA STIMULUS GRANTS: FY 2012 Budget $140,000 $431,831 $65,000 $295,000 $75,000 $136,831 $571,831 $360,000 $211,831 $88,000 $56,000 $32,000 $115,978 $740,863 $856,841 $0 $0 $75,000 $84,742 $740,863 $900,605 $944,841 $56,000 $932,605 $84,000 $0 $42,790 $457,656 $457,656 $275,860 $84,000 $42,790 $731 $731 $986,000 $97,500 $172,519 $1,256,019 $180,000 $22,500 $8,882 $211,382 $806,000 $75,000 $162,906 $1,043,906 $1,272,503 $1,272,503 $3,967,113 $1,611,814 $2,671,757 $26 $1,208,209 $1,208,235 $225,000 $1,099,389 $1,324,389 $225,000 $1,099,389 $1,324,389 $225,000 $3,670,053 $3,895,053 $1,208,235 $1,208,235 $1,324,389 $1,324,389 $3,895,053 1860 - RICO FUNDS POLICE SERVICES GROUP Police Department 32020 Federal RICO 32030 State RICO Dept. Total - Police Department Fund Total - RICO FUNDS: 498 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 1870 - MARKETING SELF SUST COMMUNICATIONS GROUP Marketing and Comm. 14301 Audio/Visual - Self Sust. 14310 Tourism - Souvenir Program 14311 Convention & Visitors Bureau 14321 Glitter Spectacular 14322 Enchanted Evening 14323 Glitter and Glow 14324 Chocolate Affaire 14325 Jazz Festival 14326 Glitters Light 14327 Other Special Events 14328 Summer Band Dept. Total - Marketing and Comm. $120,397 $81,280 $83,263 $110,987 $183,231 $152,000 $127,405 $1,506 $863,036 Fund Total - MARKETING SELF SUST: $863,036 $2,967 $31,118 $5,000 $30,000 $99,000 $44,700 $95,500 $104,000 $158,000 $155,798 $30,000 $753,116 $31,118 $5,000 $30,000 $99,000 $44,700 $45,500 $104,000 $158,000 $155,798 $30,000 $1,500 $704,616 $0 $5,000 $30,000 $99,000 $75,818 $94,000 $104,000 $158,000 $155,798 $30,000 $1,500 $753,116 $863,036 $753,116 $704,616 $753,116 1880 - PARKS & RECREATION SELF SUST PARKS, REC & LIBRARY GROUP Parks & Recreation 14810 Recreation Self-Sustaining 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 $17,296 $149,973 $233,355 $179,865 $303,547 $62,077 $18,806 $81,695 $0 $861 $1,047,475 $15,000 $135,000 $272,748 $249,922 $326,735 $73,363 $15,000 $135,000 $272,748 $249,922 $326,735 $73,363 $15,000 $15,360 $117,000 $254,893 $228,364 $312,584 $34,999 $92,919 $0 $5,000 $1,170,687 $92,919 $0 $5,000 $1,170,687 $90,001 $0 $5,000 $1,073,201 Fund Total - PARKS & RECREATION SELF SUST$1,047,475 $1,047,475 $1,170,687 $1,170,687 $1,073,201 $4,800 $19,000 $19,000 $20,000 $4,800 $19,000 $19,000 $20,000 $4,800 $19,000 $19,000 $20,000 $30,200 $5,000 $2,000 $30,200 $5,000 $2,000 $30,200 $5,000 $2,000 1885 - PARKS & RECREATION DESIGNATED PARKS, REC & LIBRARY GROUP Parks & Recreation 13110 O'Neil Park Maintenance 13120 Apollo Pool Repair 13130 Cardinal Pool Repair 13140 Cactus Pool Repair 13150 GCC Pool Repair 13160 Ironwood Pool Repair 13170 Dedicate A Tree 13180 Desert Valley Park $7,080 $5,161 $54,802 $116 $4,082 $238 $1,555 499 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual Parks & Recreation 13190 GESD ES Ballfields 13210 Desert Mirage Park 13220 Desert Gardens Park 13230 Discovery Park 13234 Ironwood HS Light 13235 Elsie McCarthy Pk. Maint Dept. Total - Parks & Recreation FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $19,958 $95,930 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $5,000 $44,038 $177,038 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $5,000 $44,038 $177,038 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $5,000 $44,038 $177,038 $95,930 $177,038 $95,930 $177,038 $177,038 $1,599 $6,066 $6,066 $6,066 $1,599 $1,599 $6,066 $6,066 $6,066 BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89807 2000 Advisor Fees $1,030 $1,030 $1,030 Fund Total - HURF STREET BONDS: $1,030 $1,030 $1,030 $1,219 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $1,219 $1,219 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $430 $6,857 $6,857 $6,857 $430 $6,857 $430 $6,857 $6,857 Fund Total - PARKS & RECREATION DESIGNAT $2,938 1980 - STREETS CONSTR. - 1999 AUTH BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89802 1980 Advisor Fees Fund Total - STREETS CONSTR. - 1999 AUTH: 2000 - HURF STREET BONDS 2040 - PUBLIC SAFETY CONSTRUCTION BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89806 2040 Advisor Fees Fund Total - PUBLIC SAFETY CONSTRUCTION: 2060 - PARKS CONSTRUCTION BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89804 2060 Advisor Fees Fund Total - PARKS CONSTRUCTION: 500 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 2080 - GOV'T FACILITIES - 1999 AUTH BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89814 2080 Advisor Fees $324 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $324 $2,000 $324 $2,000 $2,000 $290 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $290 $2,000 $290 $2,000 $2,000 $4,484 $5,213 $5,213 $5,213 $4,484 $4,484 $5,213 $5,213 $5,213 $10,756 $13,568 $13,568 $13,568 $10,756 $10,756 $13,568 $13,568 $13,568 $2,318,790 $2,659,473 $2,598,968 $2,963,088 $1,410 $3,075 $824 $5,309 $3,289 $17,222 $17,514 $38,025 $3,289 $4,722 $5,014 $13,025 $3,289 $17,222 $17,514 $38,025 $2,324,099 $2,697,498 $2,611,993 $3,001,113 Fund Total - GOV'T FACILITIES - 1999 AUTH: 2100 - ECONOMIC DEV. CONSTR-1999 AUTH BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89815 2100 Advisor Fees Fund Total - ECONOMIC DEV. CONSTR-1999 AU 2180 - FLOOD CONTROL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89808 2180 Advisor Fees Fund Total - FLOOD CONTROL CONSTRUCTIO 2210 - TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89813 2210 Advisor Fees Fund Total - TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJ 2360 - WATER AND SEWER BUDGET & FIN. SVCS GROUP Finance 17020 Customer Service Office Lease Pmts/OtherFees 89805 2360 Advisor Fees 89809 2400 Advisor Fees 89810 2420 Advisor Fees Dept. Total - Lease Pmts/OtherFees Group Total - BUDGET & FIN. SVCS: 501 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name DEVELOPMENT SVCS GROUP Building Safety 17510 Cross Connection Control FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate $212,090 $220,067 NON-DEPARTMENTAL GROUP Non-Departmental 11809 Fund 2360 Non-Dept WATER SERVICES GROUP Env. Resources 17010 Environmental Resources 17410 Water Conservation 17420 Water Quality Dept. Total - Env. Resources 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 17625 99th Avenue Interceptor 17630 Wastewater Collection Dept. Total - Utilities Group Total - WATER SERVICES: Fund Total - WATER AND SEWER: $261,067 FY 2012 Budget $225,125 $3,463,778 $508,393 $245,596 $968,381 $1,722,370 $524,231 $320,901 $1,162,187 $2,007,319 $517,342 $294,429 $1,108,775 $1,920,546 $537,929 $315,811 $1,155,382 $2,009,122 $8,243,375 $26,575 $920,288 $232,975 $486,631 $94,306 $1,985,990 $3,474,060 $954,716 $187,923 $3,144,952 $1,004,554 $1,780,221 $3,221,671 $369,176 $3,105,131 $669,091 $3,113,823 $475,754 $2,547,780 $309,613 $2,354,389 $38,702,994 $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 $6,301,682 $107,107 $1,097,575 $266,629 $617,683 $87,000 $2,046,656 $3,438,346 $1,082,739 $188,583 $3,482,182 $1,165,952 $1,607,555 $3,181,059 $708,316 $3,366,368 $1,113,944 $3,827,656 $532,992 $3,400,000 $200,000 $3,044,468 $40,864,492 $6,433,504 $0 $1,071,445 $221,824 $771,316 $87,000 $2,106,685 $3,560,668 $1,186,886 $195,269 $3,382,182 $1,312,765 $1,712,457 $3,459,182 $706,057 $3,424,134 $1,208,990 $4,104,326 $526,731 $3,700,000 $200,000 $3,182,901 $42,554,322 $40,425,364 $46,205,611 $42,785,038 $44,563,444 $42,961,553 $42,961,553 $49,123,176 $49,121,876 $47,789,682 $4,079,685 $139,306 $2,926,869 $169,400 $3,121,513 $169,400 $3,162,699 $169,400 2440 - LANDFILL PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 17710 Landfill 17720 Gas Management System 502 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name Field Operations 17730 Solid Waste Admin 17740 Recycling 17750 MRF Operations Dept. Total - Field Operations FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget $578,055 $772,004 $1,800,754 $7,369,804 $782,455 $940,620 $2,223,685 $7,043,029 $787,207 $904,328 $1,764,571 $6,747,019 $808,184 $937,523 $2,021,336 $7,099,142 $7,369,804 $7,369,804 $7,043,029 $6,747,019 $7,099,142 $713,495 $3,132,858 $6,624,900 $2,402,881 $12,874,134 $939,201 $3,493,979 $6,960,004 $2,500,010 $13,893,194 $863,893 $3,493,979 $6,960,004 $2,551,090 $13,868,966 $795,098 $3,435,176 $7,548,223 $2,802,234 $14,580,731 $12,874,134 $12,874,134 $13,893,194 $13,868,966 $14,580,731 $14,604,880 $8,487,034 $12,587,034 $12,609,126 Fund Total - PUB HOUSING BUDGET ACTIVITIE $14,604,880 $14,604,880 $8,487,034 $12,587,034 $12,609,126 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 N'HOOD & HUMAN SVCS GROUP Comm. Partnerships 17910 Community Housing 2530 - TRAINING FACILITY REVENUE FUND FIRE SERVICES GROUP Fire Department 12590 PS Training Ops - Fire $739,341 $760,451 $730,451 $763,314 POLICE SERVICES GROUP Police Department 12390 PS Training Ops - Police $309,425 $331,162 $331,162 $326,041 PUBLIC WORKS GROUP Field Operations 13480 PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. $513,955 $353,664 $353,664 $455,462 Fund Total - TRAINING FACILITY REVENUE FU$1,562,721 $1,562,721 $1,445,277 $1,415,277 $1,544,817 503 Return to TOC Schedule Three Operating Budget by Program and Fund Program Name FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Budget FY 2011 Estimate FY 2012 Budget 2538 - GLENDALE HEALTH CENTER FIRE SERVICES GROUP Fire Department 12711 Glendale Health Center $32,859 $54,000 $54,000 $54,000 $32,859 $32,859 $54,000 $54,000 $54,000 $2,569,174 $2,844,278 $2,844,278 $3,068,438 Fund Total - RISK MANAGEMENT SELF INSURA$2,569,174 $2,569,174 $2,844,278 $2,844,278 $3,068,438 $1,249,428 $1,407,000 $1,407,000 $1,407,000 Fund Total - WORKERS COMP. SELF INSURANC$1,249,428 $1,249,428 $1,407,000 $1,407,000 $1,407,000 $22,954,668 $24,481,185 $23,111,564 $23,117,869 $22,954,668 $22,954,668 $24,481,185 $23,111,564 $23,117,869 $315,603,350 $339,478,761 $333,256,683 $362,100,087 $315,603,350 $339,478,761 $333,256,683 $362,100,087 Fund Total - GLENDALE HEALTH CENTER: 2540 - RISK MANAGEMENT SELF INSURANCE HR & RISK MGT GROUP Human Resources 18010 Risk Mgmt Trust Fund 2560 - WORKERS COMP. SELF INSURANCE HR & RISK MGT GROUP Human Resources 18110 Worker's Compensation 2580 - BENEFITS TRUST FUND HR & RISK MGT GROUP Human Resources 18210 Benefit Programs Fund Total - BENEFITS TRUST FUND: TOTAL - TOTAL - OPERATING BUDGET 504 Return to TOC Schedule Four FY 2012 Transfers Between Funds (All Dollars in Thousands) T 1000 General Fund 1340 Highway Use Rev Fund R A 1600 - DIF Roadway Imp's N S F ** 1640 LTAF E 1660 Transport. R F R * 1780 Arena Spec Rev O M * 1770 Zanjero Spec Rev 1900 - G.O. Bond Debt 1480 - DIF Citywide Rec Facility Total In: * 1280 - Youth Sports Complex $292 $292 * 1281 Stadium Event Ops. $2,062 $2,062 T * 1282 - Arena Event Ops. $15,926 $15,926 T R 1660 Transportation $900 $900 R A * 1740 - Civic Center $407 $407 A N * 1760 Airport Oper. $61 $61 N S * 1820 - CAP Grants $58 $58 S F 1870 - Mkt'g Self-Sust. $320 $320 F E 1900 - G.O. Bond Det $209 E R 1920 - HURF Bond Debt $4,706 R $0 $209 $1,353 * 1930 - PFC Debt $380 T * 1940 - MPC Debt $10,207 O 1970 - Transp. Debt * 2210 Transp. Constr. 2500 - Comm. Housing $307 Total Out: $30,920 $1,000 $1,000 $1,353 $380 $7,952 $1,283 $19,442 T $7,327 $7,327 O $7,467 $7,467 $307 $1,353 $1,000 T R A $0 N S $15,794 F E $7,952 R F $1,283 R O $1,353 $209 $59,864 M * Actual transfer amounts will vary based on actual revenues, expenses, grant opportunities, etc. ** LTAF distributions were suspended by the Arizona State Legislature in FY 2011 and again in FY 2012 in an effort to balance the state's budget. 505 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) 2010-11 Fiscal Year $547,475,967 $676,000,000 ($227,271,294) $448,728,706 Estimated 2011-12 Fiscal Year $503,458,845 $638,000,000 ($218,302,009) $419,697,991 $4,701,477 $4,896,349 $3,724,139 $24,022,147 $27,746,286 $2,943,561 $17,994,426 $20,937,987 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. 2010-11 Levy 2. Prior Years' Levies 3. Total Primary Property Taxes B. Secondary Property Taxes 1. 2010-11 Levy 2. Prior Years' Levies 3. Total Secondary Property Taxes $3,649,656 $74,483 $3,724,139 $23,541,704 $480,443 $24,022,147 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. Maximum 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 $1,280,157,028 $1,307,087,287 $26,930,259 2.1% $3,802,483 ($858,922) * 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. 506 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 II Mayor Mgmt Aide Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 2 7 7 7 6 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 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 10140 Sahuaro District Council Member Vice Mayor 1 1 1 1 4 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 12 1 13 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 Council Office Total: City Clerk - 121 10210 City Clerk City Clerk Dep City Clerk Mgmt Aide Secretary Sr Secretary 1 1 1 1 1 Program Total: 10150 Cactus District Council Member 10160 Yucca District Council Member 10170 Ocotillo District Council Member FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Program Total: 507 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title City Clerk - 121 10220 Records Management Records Mgmt Asst Records Supv Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 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 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 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 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 1 9 1 7 1 7 8 9 9 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Program Total: 4 0.5 4.5 0.5 4.5 2 0.5 2.5 City Auditor Total: 4 4.5 4.5 2 2.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 3 1 1 5 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: Env. Resources - 135 17010 Environmental Resources Environmental Program Mgr Environmental Resource Dir Sr Secretary Program Total: 2360 2360 2360 508 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Env. Resources - 135 17410 Water Conservation Environmental Program Mgr Water Conservation Spec Program Total: 17420 Water Quality Chemist Laboratory Tech Water Quality Data Coord Water Quality Lab Mgr Program Total: Fund 2400 2400 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2360 2360 2360 2360 5 3 1 1 10 5 3 1 1 10 5 3 1 1 10 5 3 1 1 10 5 3 1 1 10 17 17 17 17 17 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 2 1 1 1 4 26 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 50 1 2 1 1 1 3 27 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 50 1 2 1 1 1 3 25 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 48 1 2 1 1 1 3 23.2 2 1 1.75 1 2 1 1 1 3 23.2 2 1 1.75 1 1 2 1 0.8 42.75 1 1 1 0.8 40.75 1240 1 1 1 1 1 49 1 44.75 1 42.75 Env. Resources Total: City Court - 141 10410 City Court Account Spec II 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 Program Total: 10510 Court Security Police Officer 10520 Court Time Payments Court Clerk II City Court Total: FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1240 51 509 Return to TOC 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 Public Safety Staff 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 1000 City Attorney Total: Marketing and Comm. - 154 10810 Marketing Asst Dep City Mgr Comm Dir Creative Designer Creative Services Mgr Customer Assistance Rep Dep Comm Dir Economic Development Admin Exec Comm Dir 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 CVB Mgr Dep Comm Dir Tourism Coordinator Tourism Manager Program Total: 1000 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 510 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 3 7 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 8 1 2 2 1 2 1 3 9 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 7 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 5 1 27 2 2 2 2 7 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 5 1 28 5 1 28 5 1 26 5 1 27 27 28 28 26 27 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 12 1 1 1 1 1 2 13 1 1 1 2 1 2 14 1 2 10 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 1 3.5 1 1 1 3.5 1 1 1 3.5 1 1 1 3.5 2.5 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 0.75 1 2 3.75 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 10 0.5 1 1 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 1000 1000 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: FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1000 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 7 1 1 4 7 1 1 4 7 7 7 26.5 27.5 28.5 26.5 25.25 1 1 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 2.5 1 1 1 0.5 7 1 2.5 1 1 1 0.5 7 1 1000 1820 1820 1820 1820 1820 1820 1 1 2 32056 Case Mgmt-TANF Admin Community Eligibility Rep Community Eligibility Spec Program Total: 1820 1820 2.5 1 3.5 32060 Community Svcs Block Grant-Adm Community Action Program Admin Customer Assistance Rep Mgmt Aide Office Asst Program Total: 1820 1820 1820 1820 1 1 1 0.5 3.5 Comm. Action Program Total: 7 511 Return to TOC 7 7 7 7 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title 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: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 11020 Benefits Employee Benefits Rep HR Generalist Occupational Health Nurse Sr Customer Assistance Rep Sr HR Analyst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 11030 Human Resources Administration Asst HR Dir Dep HR Dir HR & Risk Mgmt Dir HR Coord HR Generalist HR Program Coord HR Tech HR Technology Analyst Mgmt Asst Sr HR Analyst Sr HR Technology Analyst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 11040 Employment Services HR Admin HR Analyst HR Coord HR Generalist HR Program Coord HR Program Mgr HR Spec HR Tech Sr HR Analyst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 11050 Employee Relations HR Admin HR Analyst HR Generalist HR Program Mgr HR Tech Sr HR Analyst 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 512 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1.75 2 1.75 1 1 1 2 1 0.25 1 1 1 1 1 3.75 1 3 1 2.75 1.25 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 0.75 1 2 7.5 1 2 1 6 1 2 1 6 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 0.75 1 5.75 0.75 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.75 4 3 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 2 2.75 1 0.75 1 2.75 1 1 1 2 2 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Human Resources - 191 11060 Compensation Dep HR Dir HR Admin HR Analyst HR Coord HR Program Mgr HR Tech Mgmt Asst Sr Customer Assistance Rep Sr HR Tech Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 11070 Organizational Development Dep HR Dir Employee Devel Coord HR Generalist HR Program Mgr Sr HR Analyst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 18010 Risk Mgmt Trust Fund Occ Health & Wellness Nurse Risk & Safety Analyst Risk Mgmt Claims Analyst Program Total: 2540 2540 2540 Human Resources Total: Fac & Fin Mgmt - 210 11220 Facilities & Financial Mgmt Dep City Mgr Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 513 Return to TOC 1 2.5 1 1 2.5 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 0.75 1 4 5.5 5.5 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 2 6 4.75 1 1 1 1 1 3 0.75 3 1 1 3.75 21.25 25.5 30 30 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 4 2 4 4 4 1000 1000 Admin Svcs Admin. Total: 1 1 1 30 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 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: 1 1 1 1 2 2 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Finance - 221 11310 Finance Administration Account Spec Dep Finance Dir Finance Dir Finance Dir/CFO Financial Administrative Coord Mgmt Asst Office Support Supv Revenue Admin Secretary Sr Secretary Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 7 2 1 9 2 1 8 1 4 6 4 3 5 5 2 1 1 2 1 21 5 5 2 1 1 2 4 2 5 5 2 3 2 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 2 1 1 1 19 19 16 15 1 2 1 2 1 3 10 1 3 1 2 1 3 11 1 2 1 0.5 1 3 8.5 1 2 1 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 0.5 1 1 1000 1 514 Return to TOC 2 1 1 1 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: 11350 Regulatory & Communication Regulatory Licensing Analyst 1 2 1 2 1 3 9.5 1 2 7 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Finance - 221 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 Reg Licensing & Compl Analyst Revenue Recovery Supv Secretary Sr Account Spec Sr Billing & Compliance Spec Sr Customer Assistance Rep Program Total: Fund 2360 2360 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 4 7 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 1 4 7 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 4 7 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 1 5 5 1 1 5 1 1 5 2.5 35.5 2.5 35.5 2.5 35.5 2.5 35.5 4 2 2.5 35.5 74 73.5 73.5 64 63.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 2 1 4 2 1 3 1 4 4 7 28 1 1 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 6 29 1 1 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 6 29 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 25 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 25 1100 1 1 1 1 1 1140 1 30 1 31 1 31 1 27 1 27 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 Mgr Info Technology Project Mgr Mgmt Aide Network Engineer Sr Applications Analyst Sr GIS Analyst Sr Network Engineer Sr Sys Admin Sys Admin Sys Analyst Program Total: 11520 Telephones Voice Comms Admin 11530 Technology Replacement Mgmt Aide Info. Technology Total: FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 515 Return to TOC 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 9 1 2 6 2 1 1 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 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 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 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 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: 12120 Police Administration Asst Police Chief Asst Police Dir Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Police Chief Police Crime/Stats Analyst Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Plan & Research Analyst Police Sergeant Police Support Srvcs Supv Police Tech Srvcs Mgr Sr Secretary Victim Assistance Caseworker Program Total: FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 516 Return to TOC 3 2 1 4 2 2.75 1 1 4.75 2.75 1 1 4.75 1 1 1 1 2 6 1 1 1 1 2 6 1 1 13.75 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 18.25 18.25 18.25 15.75 3 2 1 1 4 1 1 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 11 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 4 2 1 2 2 3 1 3 1 3 1 5 3 1 3 1 1 2 1 5 1 4 1 4 2 2 1 2 4 1 3 3 22 26 19 21 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Police Department - 312 12130 Central Patrol Bureau Mgmt Asst Police Aide Police Commander Police Community Srvcs Officer Police Crime Prevention Spec Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Records Tech Police Sergeant Police Volunteer Coord Secretary Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 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 Program Total: 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 517 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 1 3 4 108 3 3 105.5 14 1 1 134 14 1 1 128.5 1 120 3 1 2 5 1 3 1 1 1 3 5 96 1 12 1 1 5 101 3 5 94 13 15 120 118 3 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 6 3 58 1 5 3 57 1 5 3 60 9 9 9 5 4 48 1 7 1 1 2 81 5 3 56 1 7 1 3 80 1 3 85 1 2 83 1 2 85 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 6 1 3 1 12 14 14 5 1 1 4 1 29 5 4 1 3 1 25 1 3 1 24 1 9 1 2 4 1 19 4 1 21 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Police Department - 312 12170 Foothills Patrol Bureau Police Commander Police Community Srvcs Officer Police Crime Prevention Spec Police Crime/Stats Analyst Police Lieutenant Police Officer Police Sergeant Secretary Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 12180 Police Support Services Customer Assistance Rep Police Comm Spec Police Comm Supv Police Community Srvcs Officer Police Detention Officer Police Hiring Coord Police Identification Supv Police Identification Tech Police Officer 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 Sr Secretary Srvc Worker III (Fleet) Sys Analyst Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 12190 Arena-PD Event Staffing Public Safety Events Scheduler Public Safety Events Scheduler Program Total: 1000 1282 12215 PD - Tow Administration Mgmt Aide 12220 PD - Detention Police Detention Officer Police Support Srvcs Supv Police Tech Srvcs Mgr Program Total: FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 3 3 3 5 90 13 1 113 5 84.5 12 1 106.5 4 95 12 1 116 1 8.25 1 8 1 1 1 1 10 1 3 15.5 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 61.75 1000 518 Return to TOC 1 4 92 11 1 110 1 1 3 1 4 92 12 1 115 1 9 8 5 1 1 4 3 15.5 1 2 1 1 1 3 14.5 3 12.5 3 11.5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 44.5 31.5 19.5 24.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 3 1 13 9 3 1 13 6 3 1 10 6 2 1 9 1 1 1 1000 1000 1000 1 8 3 1 12 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Police Department - 312 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 12231 Stadium - PD Event Staffing Mgmt Aide Public Safety Events Scheduler Mgmt Aide Public Safety Events Scheduler Program Total: 1000 1000 1281 1281 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 Mgmt Admin Emergency Srvcs Coord Homeland Security Dir Mgmt Aide Police Ops Mgr Sys Admin Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 519 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 27.5 5 1 1 24.5 5 1 1 23.5 4 1 1 35.5 1 32.5 1 30.5 2 1 1 2 1 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 3 24 1 9 1 3 26 1 8 38 39 23.25 4 1 1 1 30.25 26.5 5 1 1 1 34.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 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 Mgmt Asst 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 Sys 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 1700 1700 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 6 4 6 3 10 9 32 1 75 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 10 9 1 1 75 1 10 9 1 1 74 1 3 4 1 1 1 1 2 5 2 1 9 8 1 1 74 1 3 4 2 1 1 1 1 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 42 1 118 1 118 1 118 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 1 628.5 1 590.5 1 598.5 1840 1840 520 Return to TOC 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 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 0.5 0.5 1 1000 1000 1 1 2 12420 Fire Life Safety Services Adm. Asst Fire Chief Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Program Total: 1000 1000 2 1 3 1000 1 521 Return to TOC 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 4.5 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 2 2 1 1 1 12415 Fire Admin Services Fire Finance/Budget Coord Mgmt Aide Program Total: 12421 Fire Special Operations Sr HR Analyst 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: 2 1 3 3 1 13.5 1 0.5 17.5 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 13 14 3 3 1 4 1 51 1 1 1 46 4 74 1 188 1 1 1 4 3 5 49 1 49 1 1 3 4 5 2 49 1 1 43 44 46 94 83 84 192 186 195 5 8 44 1 1 3 43 4 75 1 188 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fire Department - 331 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 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 7 1 2 3 12434 Fire Training Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (52 Hrs) Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 2 4 12436 Fire Medical Services & Health Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Battalion Chief (52 Hrs) Fire Captain (52 Hrs) Fire Engineer (52 Hrs) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 2 12437 Fire Assessment & Planning Fire Budget & Project Mgr 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: 2 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 1 5 2 1 3 1 3 1000 1 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 2 4 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 2 4 1 3 3 1 2 5 1 1 1 1 12 1 1 1 12 1 1 12 1 1 10 1 10 1 3 2 2 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 12444 Fire Community Services Fire Battalion Chief (40 Hrs) Fire Comm Outreach Coord Fire Fighter (52 Hrs) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 12490 Arena - Fire Event Staffing Secretary Secretary Program Total: 1000 1282 4 1 1 522 Return to TOC 1 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Fire Department - 331 12491 Ambulance Services Fire Captain (40 Hrs) Fire Captain (52 Hrs) Secretary Sr Secretary 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 Fire Department Total: Fire Department - 333 12492 Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO) Fire Fighter (52 Hrs) Mgmt Aide Program Total: 1000 1000 Fire Department Total: 523 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 2 6 1 3 1 4 4 17 23 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 3 1 1 4 23 1 1 1 5 2 1 1 4 3 26 2 1 5 2 1 1 4 1 27 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 50 2 2 21 1 2 1 1 2 50 1 1 51 1 1 51 263.5 289.5 289.5 275 277 3 1 4 3 1 4 3 1 4 3 1 4 4 4 4 4 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title 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 Mgmt Aide Operations & Training Officer Sys Admin Sys Analyst Program Total: Fund FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1000 1 1 1 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 2 1 1 7 7 7 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1000 3 3 3 2 2 1000 1000 1000 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 13030 Parks CIP & Planning Dep Parks & Rec Dir Parks & Rec Projects Coord Program Total: 1000 1000 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 2 2 13040 Parks Maintenance Crewleader (Parks) Dep Parks & Rec Dir Landscape Gard/Horticulturist Park Mgr 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 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 9 4 28 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 9 4 28 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 13 3 27 10 5 23 8 4 20 Homeland Security Total: Comm. Services Adm - 411 14510 Comm. Services Admin. Dep City Mgr Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: 1000 1000 Comm. Services Adm Total: Parks & Recreation - 421 13010 Pool Maintenance Srvc Worker III (Parks) 13020 Park Irrigation Crewleader (Parks) Srvc Worker II (Parks) Srvc Worker III (Parks) Program Total: 524 Return to TOC 6 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Parks & Recreation - 421 14610 Parks & Recreation Admin. Parks & Rec Dir Sr Mgmt Asst Program Total: Fund 1000 1000 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 14620 Glendale Community Center Rec Programmer Sr Rec Coord Program Total: 1000 1000 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 14630 Recreation Support Services Mgmt Asst Rec Accounts Coord Secretary Sr Secretary Srvc Worker II (Parks) Support Srvc Supv Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 3 1 1 1 8 1 1 3 1 1 1 8 1 1 3 1 1 1 8 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 6 6 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 6 6 6 2 1 8 2 1 8 1000 1000 1000 1000 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 1 3.75 2 6.75 1000 1000 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 14640 Adult Center Rec Coord Rec Mgr Secretary Srvc Worker I (Parks) Srvc Worker II (Parks) Support Srvc Supv 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 14650 Youth and Teen Rec Coord Rec Mgr Rec Programmer Sr Rec Coord Program Total: 14660 Special Events and Programs Rec Coord Rec Mgr Program Total: 14670 Sports and Health Dep Parks & Rec Dir Park Mgr Rec Coord Rec Mgr Srvc Worker II (Parks) Program Total: 14680 Aquatics Sr Rec Coord 1000 525 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Parks & Recreation - 421 14690 Audio/Visual Audio/Visual Coordinator Audio/Visual Network Spec Program Total: 14700 Marketing - Parks & Rec Mgmt Asst Rec Programmer Program Total: 14710 Park Rangers Park Mgr Park Ranger Srvc Worker III (Parks) Fund 1000 1000 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1000 1000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 4 4 1 3 1 5 0.75 0.75 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 0.75 1.75 1 0.75 1.75 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 2 3 1880 1 1 1880 1 1 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 II (Parks) Program Total: FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1000 1000 1000 1000 1880 5 5 5 5 5 1840 1 89.25 1 89.25 88.25 76.25 72.5 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 10 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 10 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 10 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2.75 2 1 8 1 1 7.75 10 10 10 8 7.75 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Parks & Recreation Total: 526 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Civic Center - 431 11710 Civic Center Civic Center Event Coord Civic Center Mgr Civic Center Ops Coord Mgmt Aide Secretary Srvc Worker III (Bldg Maint) Program Total: Fund 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 Civic Center Total: Comm. Partnerships - 441 15010 Community Revitalization Dep City Mgr Revitalization Admin Revitalization Grants Supv Program Total: 15015 Neighborhood Partnership Mgmt Aide Neighborhood Partnership Admin Neighborhood Srvcs Coord Sr Secretary Program Total: 15025 Mega Events - N'Hood/Volunteer Rec Programmer 17910 Community Housing Account Spec II Accountant I Bldg Maint Leader Bldg Maint Supv Building Maintenance Worker Community Partnerships Dir Housing Assistance Rep Housing Srvcs Admin Housing Supv Mgmt Asst Secretary Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Srvc Worker I (Bldg Maint) Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 7 1 1 7 1 1 6 1 6 7 7 7 6 6 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 5 0.5 1 3 1 5.5 0.5 1 3 1 5.5 1 2 1 4 0.5 1 3 1 5.5 1000 0.5 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 9 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 25 1 3 1 10 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 25 1 3 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 10 1 1 2 2 1 1 25 2 1 1 1 24 527 Return to TOC 1 1 1 2 1 10 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 24 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Comm. Partnerships - 441 31001 CDBG Programs Account Spec II Mgmt Asst Revitalization Coord Revitalization Supv Secretary Sr Secretary 1320 1320 1320 1320 1320 1320 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 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. Partnerships Total: 41.25 41.25 41.25 38.75 41.25 2 1 1 1 3.5 21.25 6 4 3 3 13.75 11.26 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 18.75 3 4 4 1.63 13.25 1 1 3 1 1 3 1.5 22.25 6 4 3 3 13.75 11.26 1 1 6 4 2 1 1 3 3.5 16.25 3 4 4 1.63 13.25 5 5 2.5 21.25 6 4 3 3 13.75 11.26 1 1 6 5 86.76 86.76 86.76 1 1 5 4 2 1 1 2 2.63 1 69.26 1 1 4 4 1 1 1 2 6.5 1 70.13 1 87.76 1 87.76 1 87.76 69.26 70.13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 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 PC Support Specialist II Public Service Asst Secretary Program Total: 15230 Arts Maintenance - Admin. Arts & Cultural Admin Library & Arts Total: Grants - 470 32123 Domestic Violence Grant Mgmt Asst 32136 DV Pilot Project Grant Mgmt Asst Grants Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1840 1 1840 1 528 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title 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 Community Dev Admin Total: 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: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 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 1 4 4 1 1 3 4 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 21 2 1 5 1 1 1 1 21 1 2 2 4 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 10 1 1 2 1 2 2 10 1 2 2 2 1 2 10 2 6 1 6 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 11 2 1 1 15 9 1 1 1 12 17510 Cross Connection Control Bldg Insp Secretary Sr Bldg Insp Program Total: 2400 2400 2400 1 0.75 1 2.75 1 0.75 1 2.75 1 0.75 1 2.75 1 0.75 1 2.75 1 0.75 1 2.75 53.75 50.75 38.75 29.75 29.75 Building Safety Total: 529 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Planning - 531 15910 Planning Administration Planning Dir Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Program Total: 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 1 1 3 5 1000 1000 1000 1000 2 1 1 1 5 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Program Total: 15940 Long-Range Planning & Research Dep Planning Dir Planner Planning Tech Sr Planner Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 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 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Economic Development Total: 530 Return to TOC 1 1 2 3 2 3 2 2 4 10 2 2 2 6 1 1 2 4 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 2 1 1 2 21 19 19 11 9 3 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 3 1 3 1 6 7 6 1 5 1 5 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 4 10 11 10 9 9 1 1 3 1 2 8 1 1 1 3 5 1 1 3 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 10 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 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 1 1 2 3 6 2 1 2 1 19 21.5 21.5 21.5 19 19 1000 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 1 2 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 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 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 531 Return to TOC 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 2 2 16 1 21 2 2 16 1 21 2 2 16 1 21 2 1 14 1 2 13 17 16 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Field Operations - 620 13460 Custodial Services Custodial Supv Custodian Custodian Lead 1000 1000 1000 2 14 4 20 1 15 4 20 1 15 4 20 1 13 4 18 1 10 4 15 13480 PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Building Maintenance Worker Custodian Program Total: 2530 2530 1 3 4 1 3 4 1 3 4 2 2 1 3 4 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 5 10 17 1 1 1 5 9 16 1 1 1 4 9 15 1 1 3 9 14 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 41 1 1 41 2 2 1 1 1 40 1 36 33 1040 1 1 1 1 1 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 2 1 1 8 4 1 17 2 1 1 8 4 1 17 2 1 1 8 3 1 16 2 1 2 7 3 13 7 3 1 13 7 1 1 7 1 1 1 7 2 1 1 5 2 1 1 5 2 1 1 9 17 1 3 40 6 14 1 3 35 5 11 1 2 28 6 9 1 2 27 Program Total: 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 532 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 8 18 1 3 40 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 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1340 1340 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 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 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 1 2 1 2 4 19 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 5 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 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) Engineering Insp II 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 2440 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 11 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 11 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 11 17810 Sanitation Roll-off Account Spec II Equip Operator (Sanitation) Program Total: 2480 2480 4 4 1 4 5 1 4 5 1 3 4 1 2 3 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: 533 Return to TOC 2 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) Custodian Equip Mechanic I Equip Operator Equip Operator (Sanitation) Sanitation Supv Srvc Worker II (Sanitation) Program Total: 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 17840 Residential-Loose Trash Collec Building Maintenance Worker Crewleader (Sanitation) Equip Operator (Sanitation) Equipment Operator (Streets) Sanitation Insp Sanitation Supv Service Worker III (Streets) Program Total: 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 2480 Field Operations Total: Engineering - 631 13720 Engineering Administration City Engineer Engineering Project Coord Engineering Project Mgr Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Property Agent Property Mgr Sr Secretary Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 534 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 9 1 1 1 9 1 1 1 9 1 1 1 9 1 13 1 2 15 1 2 15 1 2 15 1 2 15 2 2 2 2 1 2 32 1 2 40 2 2 31 1 2 40 2 2 31 1 2 40 2 2 31 1 2 40 2 1 2 2 30 1 2 40 1 15 1 15 1 1 1 1 1 15 2 1 1 18 18 20 1 15 2 1 1 1 21 1 1 14 2 1 1 1 21 280 282 275 246 239 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 6 1 1 9 1 1 1 2 4 2 5 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Engineering - 631 13730 CIP Administration Assoc Civil Engineer Asst City Engineer Engineering Insp II 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 1000 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 1 4 1 9 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 15 15 9 9 1 13740 CIP Design Engineering & Design Supv Engineering Tech II Sr Engineering Tech Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 2 4 13750 CIP Construction Engineering Project Mgr Sr Civil Engineer Program Total: 1000 1000 2 1 3 1000 1000 2 1 3 1 1 2 13770 Mapping and Records Engineering Tech II Sr Engineering Tech Program Total: 1000 1000 2 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 13780 Land Development Division Asst City Engineer Mgmt Aide Sr Civil Engineer Program Total: 1000 1000 1000 1 1 3 5 1 1 3 5 1 1 3 5 1 1 3 5 1 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 3 7 3 7 3 1 3 7 1 1 2 4 2 1 2 5 13760 Real Estate Services Property Agent Property Mgr Program Total: 535 Return to TOC 2 3 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Engineering - 631 13800 Materials Testing Materials Tech Sr Materials Tech 1000 1000 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 2 13820 Utility Inspection Engineering Insp II Engineering Utility Coord Program Total: 1000 1000 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 16310 Transportation Engineering Pgm Principal Engineer Sr Civil Engineer Program Total: 1660 1660 1 1 1 1 1 45 43 43 28 27 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 5 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 2 4 Program Total: Engineering Total: Transportation - 632 16510 Transportation Program Mgmt Dep Trans Dir Planning Mgr Secretary Sr Secretary Trans Dir Trans Planner Program Total: 16520 Transportation Education Sr. Trans Analyst Trans Coord Program Total: 16525 Transit Management Mgmt Aide Sr Secretary Trans Planner Transit Administrator Transit Mgr 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 Program Total: 536 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 2 1 3 2 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 4 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Fund Transportation - 632 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 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 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: 16820 Signs & Markings Crewleader (Streets) Service Worker III (Streets) Sign Fabricator Srvc Worker II (Streets) Traffic Signs & Markings Supv Program Total: 6.5 6 5.5 8 5.5 5.5 8 1 1 8 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 16.75 1 35.25 16.75 1 35.25 16.75 1 34.25 16.75 1 34.25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 5 1 5 4 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 1 2 2 7 1 1 2 2 7 1340 1340 1340 1340 1340 2 1 1 5 1 10 2 1 1 5 1 10 2 1 1 5 1 10 1 1 1 1 5 1 8 5 1 8 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 1660 537 Return to TOC 1 1 1 1 2 2 17.75 1 39.25 6.5 7 1 1 Program Total: 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: FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Transportation - 632 16910 Transportation Administration Intelligent Trans Sys Tech Mgmt Aide Mgmt Asst Secretary Sr Mgmt Asst Sr Secretary Trans Dir Program Total: 16920 Street Light Management Traffic Engineer II Traffic Engineering Spec Traffic Lighting Mgr Program Total: 16930 Transportation Planning Trans Planner 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 1340 1340 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: 538 Return to TOC FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 2 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 2 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 84.25 85.25 85.25 75.25 74.25 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 2 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title 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: Fund 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 2 1 1 1 1 8 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 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 17115 Safety Administration Security Systems Tech Sr Mgmt Asst Util Safety Spec Program Total: 2360 2360 2360 17120 Information Management GIS Coord Sys Admin Utilities Network Engineer Utilities Technology Mgr Utility Data Coord Program Total: 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 1 1 2 1 1 6 1 1 2 1 1 6 1 1 2 1 1 6 1 1 2 1 1 6 1 1 2 1 1 6 2360 4 4 4 4 3 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 5 5 5 5 1 1 6 1 1 2 1 8 1 1 1 8 1 1 8 1 1 8 1 1 10 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 7 1 13 7 1 13 7 1 13 2 1 1 1 7 1 13 2 1 1 1 7 1 13 17130 Public Service Representatives Public Srvc Rep 17140 System Security Secur Officer Security Systems Tech Sr Mgmt Asst Util Safety Spec Util Safety/Security Coor Utilities Secur Supt Program Total: 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 539 Return to TOC 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Utilities - 641 17170 West Area Plant PC Oper 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: 17210 Customer Service - Field Lead Water Srvc Rep Sr Applications Analyst Utilities Supv Utility Ops Supt Water Srvc Rep Program Total: 17220 Irrigation Crewleader (Water) 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 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2360 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 1 1 14 8 1 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 6 1 14 14 14 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 15 1 1 12 15 1 1 12 15 1 1 12 15 2 1 1 1 11 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 1 1 1 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 7 10 1 1 1 7 10 1 1 1 8 11 1 1 2 5 9 1 1 2 5 9 1 1 2 4 8 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 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 6 9 2 5 9 540 Return to TOC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Utilities - 641 17280 Central System Maintenance 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 Public Srvc Rep Secretary Sr Utility Sys Tech Utilities Supv Utility Sys Tech I Utility Sys Tech II Fund FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 1 1 1 6 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 2 16 9 30 2 2 16 9 30 2 2 16 9 30 2 2 16 9 30 1 1 2 2 12 11 29 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 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 1 4 3 2 11 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 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 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 2 15 17610 Pretreatment Program Pretreatment Insp Pretreatment Officer Pretreatment Program Mgr Sr Pretreatment Insp Program Total: 2420 2420 2420 2420 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 3 6 3 6 3 6 1 3 6 1 3 6 Program Total: 17300 Meter Maintenance Sr Utility Sys Tech Utilities Supv Utility Locator Utility Sys Tech I Utility Sys Tech II Program Total: 541 Return to TOC Schedule Six Authorized Staffing Dept Program Name Position Title Utilities - 641 17630 Wastewater Collection Dep Utilities Dir PC Oper Sr Utility Sys Tech Srvc Worker I Utilities Supv Utility Ops Supt Utility Sys Tech I Utility Sys Tech II Program Total: Fund 2420 2420 2420 2420 2420 2420 2420 2420 Utilities Total: Grand Total FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 5 20 1 1 10 5 19 1 1 9 6 19 1 1 9 6 19 1 1 1 1 1 8 6 19 186 187 187 187 187 1 2,100.51 2,204.51 2,182.51 1,971.01 1,966.38 542 Return to TOC 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 5,000 35,000 3,472,981 5,663,735 1,934,750 2,751,525 1,467,256 3,551,071 2,005,416 259,763 340,750 21,447,246 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 11/30/2010 3,360,000 2,350,000 1,250,000 1,785,000 1,715,000 3,520,000 1,280,000 15,260,000 397,600 970,494 203,413 971,531 372,000 2,190,588 1,910,378 1,667,600 8,683,603 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 340,000 3,762,600 3,325,494 1,458,413 2,761,531 2,092,000 5,715,588 3,195,378 1,672,600 300,000 24,283,603 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 11/30/2010 1/1/2001 3/17/2010 925,000 2,725,000 3,590,000 1,775,000 2,455,000 856,067 256,757 12,582,823 325,550 3,843,000 3,577,831 1,960,188 2,604,038 1,638,858 164,609 191,564 14,305,637 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 77,000 1,252,550 6,573,000 7,172,831 3,740,188 5,064,038 1,643,858 1,070,676 448,321 26,965,461 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 4,706,338 380,000 380,000 - 380,000 380,000 2,890,000 2,890,000 4,436,881 4,436,881 - 7,326,881 7,326,881 41,732,823 42,914,705 Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) 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 Bonds - Series 2010 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 W&S Revenue Obligations, Series 2010 WIFA 2001 WIFA 2010 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 Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Excise 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. 543 Return to TOC 462,000 85,109,528 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 5,000 35,000 3,414,544 5,737,745 1,951,500 2,750,775 1,467,256 3,795,475 1,765,905 259,763 340,750 21,483,712 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 11/30/2010 3,530,000 2,440,000 1,295,000 1,850,000 1,810,000 3,660,000 1,295,000 15,880,000 263,200 876,494 158,100 882,281 286,250 2,040,988 1,881,578 1,667,600 8,056,490 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 335,000 3,798,200 3,321,494 1,458,100 2,737,281 2,101,250 5,705,988 3,176,578 1,672,600 300,000 24,271,490 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 11/30/2010 1/1/2001 3/17/2010 970,000 2,830,000 3,745,000 1,840,000 2,540,000 888,460 264,832 13,078,292 288,550 3,734,000 3,434,231 1,884,750 2,518,113 1,638,858 145,057 183,489 13,827,047 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 77,000 1,260,550 6,569,000 7,184,231 3,729,750 5,063,113 1,643,858 1,083,517 448,321 26,982,339 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 43,468,292 53,858,062 Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) 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 Bonds - Series 2010 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 W&S Revenue Obligations, Series 2010 WIFA 2001 WIFA 2010 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 Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Excise 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. 544 Return to TOC 472,000 97,798,354 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 5,000 35,000 3,391,575 5,812,441 1,963,250 2,751,775 1,467,256 4,045,174 1,470,922 259,763 340,750 21,502,906 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 11/30/2010 2,550,000 1,345,000 1,925,000 1,905,000 3,805,000 1,315,000 2,475,000 15,320,000 86,700 778,894 107,919 808,281 195,750 1,885,438 1,849,203 1,667,600 7,379,784 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 340,000 91,700 3,333,894 1,457,919 2,738,281 2,105,750 5,695,438 3,169,203 4,147,600 300,000 23,039,784 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 11/30/2010 1/1/2001 3/17/2010 1,020,000 2,975,000 3,925,000 1,930,000 2,630,000 922,080 273,161 13,675,240 240,050 3,592,500 3,237,619 1,806,550 2,429,213 1,638,858 124,764 175,160 13,244,713 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 5,000 82,000 1,262,050 6,572,500 7,167,619 3,741,550 5,064,213 1,643,858 1,096,844 453,321 27,001,954 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 47,080,240 51,970,022 Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) 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 Bonds - Series 2010 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 W&S Revenue Obligations, Series 2010 WIFA 2001 WIFA 2010 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 Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Excise 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. 545 Return to TOC 482,000 99,532,262 Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service FY 2014-15 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 1,410,000 700,000 1,520,000 240,000 1,345,000 1,000,000 6,215,000 1,935,775 5,202,081 1,224,275 1,462,256 2,954,081 50,190 259,763 340,750 13,429,170 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 3,350,775 5,907,081 2,749,275 1,707,256 4,304,081 1,055,190 259,763 340,750 19,674,170 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 11/30/2010 2,665,000 1,395,000 2,000,000 2,010,000 3,960,000 1,335,000 5,645,000 19,010,000 86,700 670,519 55,800 712,031 100,500 1,723,725 1,809,753 1,568,600 6,727,628 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 300,000 340,000 91,700 3,340,519 1,455,800 2,717,031 2,115,500 5,688,725 3,149,753 7,218,600 300,000 26,077,628 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 11/30/2010 1/1/2001 3/17/2010 1,060,000 3,120,000 4,140,000 2,010,000 2,730,000 956,971 281,752 14,298,723 189,050 3,443,750 3,031,556 1,722,113 2,330,588 1,638,858 103,704 166,569 12,626,187 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 5,000 82,000 1,251,050 6,568,750 7,176,556 3,737,113 5,065,588 1,643,858 1,110,675 453,321 27,006,910 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 1,805,000 1,805,000 148,000 148,000 5,000 5,000 10,000 5,000 1,958,000 1,963,000 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 4,975,000 4,975,000 8,913,913 3,077,875 798,375 12,790,163 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 8,918,913 3,082,875 5,778,375 17,780,163 10/16/2007 3,250,000 3,250,000 4,076,081 4,076,081 - 7,326,081 7,326,081 49,553,723 49,797,229 Property Tax Funded Debt (Fund 1900) 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 Bonds - Series 2010 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 W&S Revenue Obligations, Series 2010 WIFA 2001 WIFA 2010 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 Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Excise 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. 546 Return to TOC 477,000 99,827,951 Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service FY 2016 - 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 38,830,000 93,920,000 22,705,000 31,980,000 47,490,000 5,055,000 7,250,000 247,230,000 18,906,538 58,021,053 7,506,025 14,595,050 33,834,646 4,301,156 6,303,875 143,468,343 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 40,000 57,741,538 151,946,053 30,216,025 46,580,050 81,329,646 5,000 9,361,156 13,558,875 390,738,343 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 11/30/2010 4,335,000 11,950,000 13,985,000 33,195,000 35,155,000 30,180,000 128,800,000 260,100 1,441,988 2,292,163 6,563,825 16,150,478 4,869,100 31,577,653 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 35,000 300,000 370,000 4,600,100 13,396,988 5,000 16,282,163 5,000 39,763,825 51,310,478 35,084,100 300,000 160,747,653 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 11/30/2010 1/1/2001 3/17/2010 3,435,000 65,755,000 61,145,000 33,295,000 48,200,000 25,685,000 3,583,488 5,014,572 246,113,060 240,900 26,381,500 17,719,044 11,496,413 17,576,625 22,243,278 187,816 1,261,921 97,107,495 2,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 172,000 3,677,900 92,141,500 78,869,044 44,796,413 65,781,625 47,978,278 3,821,304 6,326,492 343,392,555 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 1,895,000 1,895,000 75,800 75,800 5,000 5,000 1,975,800 1,975,800 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 137,495,000 48,670,000 5,670,000 191,835,000 145,584,588 50,841,263 457,500 196,883,350 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 283,084,588 99,516,263 6,132,500 388,733,350 10/16/2007 84,765,000 84,765,000 39,810,444 39,810,444 - 124,575,444 124,575,444 900,638,060 508,923,084 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 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 Bonds - Series 2010 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 W&S Revenue Obligations, Series 2010 WIFA 2001 WIFA 2010 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 Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Excise 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. 547 Return to TOC 602,000 1,410,163,144 Schedule Seven - SUMMARY Long Term Debt Service Grand Totals (Remaining Payments) 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 44,400,000 96,065,000 5,295,000 28,370,000 32,220,000 51,075,000 5,650,000 5,055,000 7,250,000 275,380,000 26,946,413 78,977,055 539,500 12,824,375 20,444,075 45,925,446 627,432 5,340,206 7,666,875 199,291,377 25,000 25,000 15,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 5,000 5,000 175,000 71,371,413 175,067,055 5,849,500 41,219,375 52,689,075 97,025,446 6,302,432 10,400,206 14,921,875 474,846,377 4/1/2003 6/1/2004 6/1/2005 6/1/2006 6/1/2006 6/26/2007 12/22/2009 11/30/2010 11,225,000 21,955,000 5,285,000 21,545,000 7,440,000 48,140,000 40,380,000 38,300,000 194,270,000 1,094,300 4,738,388 525,231 5,666,288 954,500 14,404,563 23,601,388 11,440,500 62,425,156 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 1,500,000 1,700,000 12,344,300 26,718,388 5,835,231 27,236,288 8,419,500 62,569,563 64,001,388 49,795,500 1,500,000 258,420,156 4/1/2003 12/1/2003 2/7/2006 6/15/2007 2/1/2008 11/30/2010 1/1/2001 3/17/2010 7,410,000 77,405,000 76,545,000 40,850,000 58,555,000 25,685,000 7,207,066 6,091,072 299,748,138 1,284,100 40,994,750 31,000,281 18,870,013 27,458,575 28,798,708 725,950 1,978,704 151,111,080 10,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 70,000 250,000 60,000 490,000 8,704,100 118,424,750 107,570,281 59,745,013 86,038,575 54,553,708 8,183,016 8,129,776 451,349,219 6/1/2004 4/11/2006 7,580,000 8,710,000 16,290,000 598,356 1,116,525 1,714,881 20,000 25,000 45,000 8,198,356 9,851,525 18,049,881 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 10/1/2008 137,495,000 48,670,000 13,585,000 199,750,000 172,706,325 60,074,888 3,293,625 236,074,837 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,000 310,221,325 108,764,888 16,898,625 435,884,837 10/16/2007 97,035,000 97,035,000 56,845,769 56,845,769 - 153,880,769 153,880,769 1,082,473,138 707,463,101 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 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 Bonds - Series 2010 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 W&S Revenue Obligations, Series 2010 WIFA 2001 WIFA 2010 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 Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008A 3rd Lien Excise Tax Revenue Bonds - Tax exempt 2008B 3rd Lien Excise 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. 548 Return to TOC 2,470,000 1,792,431,239 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021 ‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2033 Total Principal 5,540,000 1,390,000 1,375,000 1,395,000 1,410,000 10,650,000 9,430,000 9,870,000 8,880,000 49,940,000 549 Return to TOC Interest 13,165,287 2,077,981 2,034,544 1,991,575 1,935,775 8,364,875 5,770,413 3,853,000 918,250 40,111,700 Total 18,705,287 3,467,981 3,409,544 3,386,575 3,345,775 19,014,875 15,200,413 13,723,000 9,798,250 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2033 Total Principal 975,000 390,000 480,000 575,000 700,000 12,530,000 25,750,000 37,605,000 18,035,000 97,040,000 550 Return to TOC Interest 31,762,922 5,268,735 5,252,745 5,232,441 5,202,081 24,788,349 16,772,820 14,812,110 1,647,774 110,739,977 Total 32,737,922 5,658,735 5,732,745 5,807,441 5,902,081 37,318,349 42,522,820 52,417,110 19,682,774 207,779,977 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 2012 2013 2014 Total Principal 5,585,000 1,665,000 1,765,000 1,865,000 10,880,000 551 Return to TOC Interest 2,319,850 264,750 181,500 93,250 2,859,350 Total 7,904,850 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026 Total Principal 4,880,000 1,315,000 1,380,000 1,450,000 1,520,000 8,830,000 11,270,000 2,605,000 33,250,000 552 Return to TOC Interest 5,891,782 1,431,525 1,365,775 1,296,775 1,224,275 4,900,875 2,461,875 143,275 18,716,157 Total 10,771,782 2,746,525 2,745,775 2,746,775 2,744,275 13,730,875 13,731,875 2,748,275 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2032 Total Principal 95,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ 240,000 7,340,000 9,015,000 11,410,000 4,215,000 32,315,000 553 Return to TOC Interest 3,662,765 1,462,256 1,462,256 1,462,256 1,462,256 6,700,280 5,029,522 2,603,580 261,676 24,106,847 Total 3,757,765 1,462,256 1,462,256 1,462,256 14,040,280 14,044,522 14,013,580 4,476,676 54,719,591 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 Years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2033 Total Principal 1,705,000 470,000 740,000 1,030,000 1,345,000 7,905,000 10,550,000 14,225,000 14,810,000 52,780,000 554 Return to TOC Interest 7,763,020 3,076,071 3,050,475 3,010,174 2,954,081 13,577,360 10,938,972 7,291,426 2,026,886 53,688,465 Total 9,468,020 3,546,071 3,790,475 4,040,174 4,299,081 21,482,360 21,488,972 21,516,426 16,836,886 106,468,465 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 Years 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Principal 3,490,000 1,730,000 1,570,000 1,350,000 1,000,000 9,140,000 555 Return to TOC Interest 764,538 270,416 190,905 115,922 50,190 1,391,971 Total 4,254,538 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2033 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 910,000 960,000 3,185,000 5,055,000 556 Return to TOC Interest 1,558,576 259,763 259,763 259,763 259,763 1,298,813 1,298,813 1,274,356 429,175 6,898,782 Total 1,558,576 259,763 259,763 259,763 259,763 1,298,813 2,208,813 2,234,356 3,614,175 11,953,782 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2033 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 7,250,000 7,250,000 557 Return to TOC Interest 2,044,500 340,750 340,750 340,750 340,750 1,703,750 1,703,750 1,703,750 1,192,625 9,711,375 Total 2,044,500 340,750 340,750 340,750 340,750 1,703,750 1,703,750 1,703,750 8,442,625 16,961,375 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $66,400,000 (Original Issuance) City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003 (1 of 2) 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, and parks and recreation. $3,875,000 is related to Water and Sewer Fund (Refer to General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003, Water and Sewer (2 of 2). In November 2010, the General Obligation Refunding Bonds Series 2010 was issued for the purpose of refunding a portion of the 2014‐ 2017 maturities of the City of Glendale G.O. Bonds Series 2003. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2018 Total Principal 41,300,000 3,360,000 3,530,000 ‐ ‐ 4,335,000 52,525,000 558 Return to TOC Interest 18,477,148 397,600 263,200 86,700 86,700 260,100 19,571,448 Total 59,777,148 3,757,600 3,793,200 86,700 86,700 4,595,100 72,096,448 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2019 Total Principal 14,690,000 2,350,000 2,440,000 2,550,000 2,665,000 11,950,000 36,645,000 559 Return to TOC Interest 8,927,306 970,494 876,494 778,894 670,519 1,441,988 13,665,694 Total 23,617,306 3,320,494 3,316,494 3,328,894 3,335,519 13,391,988 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Principal 6,675,000 1,250,000 1,295,000 1,345,000 1,395,000 11,960,000 560 Return to TOC Interest 2,115,281 203,413 158,100 107,919 55,799 2,640,511 Total 8,790,281 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021 Total Principal 7,820,000 1,785,000 1,850,000 1,925,000 2,000,000 11,370,000 2,615,000 29,365,000 561 Return to TOC Interest 6,044,943 971,531 882,281 808,281 712,031 2,171,219 120,945 11,711,232 Total 13,864,943 2,756,531 2,732,281 2,733,281 2,712,031 13,541,219 2,735,945 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Principal 1,625,000 1,715,000 1,810,000 1,905,000 2,010,000 9,065,000 562 Return to TOC Interest 2,340,533 372,000 286,250 195,747 100,500 3,295,030 Total 3,965,533 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2022 Total Principal 12,860,000 3,520,000 3,660,000 3,805,000 3,960,000 22,550,000 10,645,000 61,000,000 563 Return to TOC Interest 10,019,489 2,190,588 2,040,988 1,885,438 1,723,725 5,813,575 750,250 24,424,052 Total 22,879,489 5,710,588 5,700,988 5,690,438 5,683,725 28,363,575 11,395,250 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 Total Principal 1,270,000 1,280,000 1,295,000 1,315,000 1,335,000 9,885,000 11,515,000 13,755,000 41,650,000 564 Return to TOC Interest 2,942,377 1,910,378 1,881,578 1,849,202 1,809,752 8,057,094 5,684,420 2,408,968 26,543,769 Total 4,212,377 3,190,378 3,176,578 3,164,202 3,144,752 17,942,094 17,199,420 16,163,968 68,193,769 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $38,300,000 City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2010 Date: Nov 30, 2010, maturing in 2022. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2011. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 2.000% to 5.000% Rating: Moody’s “Aa1” Standard and Poor’s “AA” Purpose: The bond proceeds were used to advance refund the 2012‐2022maturities of the City of Glendale General Obligation Refunding Bonds Series 2002 and the 2014‐ 2017 maturities of General Obligation Bonds Series 2003. The proceeds were also used to pay for the issuance costs of the refunding project. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2022 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,475,000 5,645,000 23,600,000 6,580,000 38,300,000 Interest 977,399 1,667,600 1,667,600 1,667,600 1,568,600 4,439,000 430,100 12,417,899 565 Return to TOC Total 977,399 1,667,600 1,667,600 4,142,600 7,213,600 28,039,000 7,010,100 50,717,899 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $66,400,000 (Original Issuance) City of Glendale, Arizona General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003 (2 of 2) 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 water and sewer. $52,525,000 of the total proceed is for regular General Obligation Bonds (Refer to General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003 (1 of 2) Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2018 Total Principal 6,465,000 925,000 970,000 1,020,000 1,060,000 3,435,000 13,875,000 Interest 2,610,237 325,550 288,550 240,050 189,050 240,900 3,894,337 566 Return to TOC Total 9,075,237 1,250,550 1,258,550 1,260,050 1,249,050 3,675,900 17,769,337 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2028 Total Principal 2,595,000 2,725,000 2,830,000 2,975,000 3,120,000 18,120,000 26,680,000 20,955,000 80,000,000 567 Return to TOC Interest 23,836,500 3,843,000 3,734,000 3,592,500 3,443,750 14,714,750 9,537,000 2,129,750 64,831,250 Total 26,431,500 6,568,000 6,564,000 6,567,500 6,563,750 32,834,750 36,217,000 23,084,750 144,831,250 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026 Total Principal 3,455,000 3,590,000 3,745,000 3,925,000 4,140,000 24,060,000 30,220,000 6,865,000 80,000,000 568 Return to TOC Interest 19,849,800 3,577,831 3,434,231 3,237,619 3,031,556 11,782,531 5,627,588 308,925 50,850,081 Total 23,304,800 7,167,831 7,179,231 7,162,619 7,171,556 35,842,531 35,847,588 7,173,925 130,850,081 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2027 Total Principal 3,650,000 1,775,000 1,840,000 1,930,000 2,010,000 11,620,000 14,710,000 6,965,000 44,500,000 569 Return to TOC Interest 8,321,554 1,960,188 1,884,750 1,806,550 1,722,113 7,043,615 3,952,813 499,975 27,191,557 Total 11,971,554 3,735,188 3,724,750 3,736,550 3,732,113 18,663,615 18,662,813 7,464,975 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2028 Total Principal 6,945,000 2,455,000 2,540,000 2,630,000 2,730,000 19,535,000 14,885,000 13,780,000 65,500,000 570 Return to TOC Interest 8,233,014 2,604,038 2,518,113 2,429,213 2,330,588 9,921,350 6,254,775 1,400,500 35,691,589 Total 15,178,014 5,059,038 5,058,113 5,059,213 5,060,588 29,456,350 21,139,775 15,180,500 101,191,589 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $25,685,000 City of Glendale, Arizona Subordinate Lien Water and Sewer Revenue Obligations Series 2010A (Taxable Direct Pay Build America Bonds) Date: November 30, 2011, maturing in 2030. Interest: Semi‐annual each January and July, commencing July 1, 2011. Interest accrues at rates ranging from 6.200% to 6.550% Rating: Moody’s “Aa3” Standard and Poor’s “AA+” Purpose: The proceeds of the obligations were used for various improvement and extensions of the system which are contained in the City’s water and sewer Capital Improvement Plan, including, without limitation, (a) payments for the City’s share of upgrades to and the expansion of the 91st Avenue Regional Wastewater Treatment Plan, (b) replacement and rehabilitation of water lines throughout the System, (c) various water treatment plant improvements and construction of associated transmissions lines and (d) design and construction of upgrades at the wastewater treatment plants to meet federal regulations. Debt Service: Fiscal Year Prior years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 25,685,000 25,685,000 571 Return to TOC Interest 960,853 1,638,858 1,638,858 1,638,558 1,638,858 8,194,288 8,194,288 5,854,703 29,759,260 Total 960,853 1,638,858 1,638,858 1,638,558 1,638,858 8,194,288 8,194,288 31,539,703 55,444,260 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2019 Total Principal 4,640,898 856,067 888,460 922,080 956,971 3,583,488 11,847,964 572 Return to TOC Interest 3,140,097 164,609 145,057 124,764 103,704 187,816 3,866,048 Total 7,780,996 1,020,676 1,033,517 1,046,844 1,060,675 3,771,304 15,714,012 Schedule Seven – DETAIL Long-Term Debt Service $6,340,000 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2029 Total Principal 248,928 256,757 264,832 273,161 281,752 1,547,381 1,806,501 1,660,688 6,340,000 573 Return to TOC Interest 255,889 191,564 183,490 175,160 166,570 694,224 435,106 132,592 2,234,595 Total 504,817 448,321 448,322 448,321 448,322 2,241,605 2,241,607 1,793,280 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 2012 2013 2014 Total Principal 7,075,000 2,435,000 2,525,000 2,620,000 14,655,000 574 Return to TOC Interest 3,011,109 290,913 202,644 104,800 3,609,465 Total 10,086,109 2,725,913 2,727,644 2,724,800 18,264,465 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Principal 7,035,000 1,605,000 1,670,000 1,735,000 1,805,000 1,895,000 15,745,000 575 Return to TOC Interest 2,851,719 365,425 301,225 226,075 148,000 75,800 3,968,244 Total 9,886,719 1,970,425 1,971,225 1,961,075 1,953,000 1,970,800 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: Prior years 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2035 2036‐2038 Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 9,980,000 14,710,000 26,695,000 43,350,000 42,760,000 137,495,000 576 Return to TOC 32,329,108 380,000 8,913,913 8,913,913 8,913,913 43,732,265 39,847,315 33,845,065 22,707,140 5,452,813 205,035,445 32,329,108 380,000 8,913,913 8,913,913 8,913,913 53,712,265 54,557,315 60,540,065 66,057,140 48,212,813 342,530,445 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2035 2036‐2039 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,555,000 5,130,000 8,265,000 13,110,000 19,610,000 48,670,000 577 Return to TOC Interest 11,294,091 ‐ 3,077,875 3,077,875 3,077,875 15,131,826 13,839,415 11,897,551 8,041,225 1,931,251 71,368,984 Total 11,294,091 ‐ 3,077,875 3,077,875 3,077,875 17,686,826 18,969,415 20,162,551 21,151,225 21,541,251 120,038,984 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2017 Total Principal ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,940,000 4,975,000 5,670,000 13,585,000 578 Return to TOC Interest 3,738,705 ‐ 1,018,875 1,018,875 798,375 457,500 7,032,330 Total 3,738,705 ‐ 1,018,875 3,958,875 5,773,375 6,127,500 20,617,330 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016‐2020 2021‐2025 2026‐2030 2031‐2032 Total Principal 12,075,000 2,890,000 3,005,000 3,125,000 3,250,000 18,645,000 23,095,000 22,885,000 20,140,000 109,110,000 579 Return to TOC Interest 17,240,297 4,436,882 4,321,281 4,201,082 4,076,082 17,992,310 13,546,442 6,432,554 1,839,150 74,086,080 Total 29,315,297 7,326,882 7,326,281 7,326,082 7,326,082 36,637,310 36,641,442 29,317,554 21,979,150 183,196,080 Schedule Eight Scheduled Lease Payments Lease Desc. & Account 2011-12 2012-13 Northern Crossing * 1000-11380-560400 1,611,111 1000-11380-560600 205,417 Savings from Lease Restructuring ** (1,784,332) Total 32,196 Fire Trucks & Equipment - '07 Lease 1000-11380-560400 1000-11380-560600 Savings from Lease Restructuring ** Total 66,303 10,879 (66,303) 10,879 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 - - - 68,826 8,356 71,445 5,736 48,286 3,259 50,123 1,422 77,181 77,181 51,545 51,545 - - - - - - - - 1,611,111 68,472 1,679,583 Hickman - '03 BofA Lease * 1000-11380-560400 4,800,000 1000-11380-560600 360,000 Savings from Lease Restructuring ** (4,800,000) Total 360,000 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 Parks & Rec Copier - De Lage Landen Public Finance LLC 1000-14700-560400 5,727 6,546 1000-14700-560600 1,545 726 Total 7,272 7,272 1,778 40 1,818 - - 3,899,112 Library Copier - '09 Kansas State Bank 1260-15410-560400 1260-15410-560600 Total 5,158 938 6,095 5,607 488 6,095 - - - 1260 - Library Fund Total: 6,095 6,095 - - - - - - - - - Frontload Truck - '07 Lease 2480-17820-560400 2480-17820-560600 Total 46,146 1,309 47,455 Three (3) Frontloaders - '09 Lease (Interfund Borrowing) 2480-17820-560400 148,156 150,939 2480-17820-560600 7,779 4,996 Total 155,935 155,935 580 Return to TOC 153,775 2,160 155,935 2,186,621 - 410,347 1000 - General Fund Total: 2,214,073 2,112,125 22,951 2,135,076 51,545 Schedule Eight Scheduled Lease Payments Lease Desc. & Account 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Two (2) Sideloader Refuse Trucks - '07 Lease 2480-17830-560400 87,988 2480-17830-560600 2,496 Total 90,484 - - - - Sideloader -'09 Lease (Interfund Borrowing) 2480-17830-560400 42,610 2480-17830-560600 2,237 Total 44,847 43,410 1,437 44,847 44,226 621 44,847 - - - - - - Rearloader - '09 Lease (Interfund Borrowing) 2480-17840-560400 46,646 2480-17840-560600 2,449 Total 49,095 47,522 1,573 49,095 48,415 680 49,095 - - 2480 - Sanitation Fund Total: 404,992 249,877 249,877 - - Grand Total: * Variable Rate Lease 821,434 4,155,085 2,463,950 Tractor - '07 Lease 2480-17840-560400 2480-17840-560600 Total 16,702 474 17,176 2,186,621 ** Savings expected to be recognized in FY2012 from restructuring these leases. New debt service schedules for Northern Crossing and Fire Truck and Equipment are not yet available. 581 Return to TOC 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 Dept / Program Name Name Insurance Workers' 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 Compliance & Asset Mgt 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 $1,067 $70 $415 $1,922 $72 $1,538 $31,003 $1,433 $2,821 $1,461 $1,310 $3,065 $1,637 $1,473 $818 $5,563 $3,760 $5,542 $2,084 $350 $894 $451 $2,564 $49 $2,747 $4,317 $126 $2,892 $2,543 $1,183 $17 $1,265 $862 $2,908 $72 $1,553 $1,171 $20,562 $1,560 $6,592 $16,138 $20,264 $544 $9,778 $7,818 $3,676 $2,873 $6,181 $1,792 $172 $81 $181 $652 $42,272 $1,832 $4,418 $1,415 $1,020 $4,280 $4,898 $805 $648 $312 $2,930 $128,964 $329 $639 $2,778 $986 $1,451 $1,449 $3,203 $14,005 $3,151 $23 $108 $292 $631 582 Return to TOC $175 $216 $16,480 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 Dept / Program Name Name Human Resources Human Resources Administration Organizational Development Risk Management/Safety Admin Svcs Admin. Administration Services Admin. Finance Accounting Services Finance Administration License/Collection Materials Control Warehouse Materials Management Info. Technology Information Technology Management & Budget Budget & Research Grants Administration Police Department PD - Fiscal Management Fire Department Air-Med & Logistics Ops (HALO) Ambulance Services Fire Administration Fire Marshal's Office Fire Medical Services & Health Fire Operations Fire Resource Management 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 Parks Maintenance Pool Maintenance Recreation Support Services Special Events and Programs Insurance Workers' Compensation $2,946 $442 $1,051 $328 $18 $284 $2,953 $81 $6,611 $2,076 $4,329 $2,438 $2,060 $421 $1,947 $1,210 $3,251 $72 $14,458 $2,526 $3,254 $434 $108 $18 $892,812 $304,177 $1,486 $455 $3,019 $2,882 $247 $152,233 $3,547 $189,035 $6,170 $1,421 $9,853 $1,737 $1,138 $18,237 $1,684 $47,700 $7,193 $1,950 $5,041 $887 $761 $199 $994 $1,851 $36 $53 $6,909 $702 $299 $364 583 Return to TOC Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone $9,751 $216 $888 $8,830 $1,230 $2,645 $992 $2,906 $8,838 $7,338 $1,752 $2,120 $6,080 $3,146 $2,089 $1,171 $2,348 $479,369 $11,619 $2,820 $432 $1,385 $170 $424,121 $151,012 $158,028 $56,511 $30,358 $94,269 $3,986 $432 $8,754 $690 $240 $9,605 $1,606 $18,388 $19,965 $12,055 $672 $648 $1,322 $1,596 $13,758 $216 $38,492 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 Dept / Program Name Name Parks & Recreation 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 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 Utility Inspection Total General Insurance Workers' Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement $1,006 $2,910 Telephone $3,771 $2,139 $2,000 $69 $81 $1,296 $556 $4,394 $2,394 $3,240 $2,410 $81 $40,901 $230 $5,910 $1,732 $71,287 $46,112 $767 $18 $290 $170 $12,573 $2,740 $4,540 $111 $10,977 $4,152 $6,552 $7,712 $2,913 $880 $1,672 $108 $36 $54 $1,728 $923 $4,047 $862 $170 $1,662 $1,750 $2,943 $1,249 $90 $1,260 $456 $3,606 $1,694 $9,700 $957 $8,885 $6,266 $4,607 $1,130 $7,804 $262 $33,493 $2,132 $2,317 $570 $14,072 $2,321 $8,369 $1,536 $18,869 $36 $1,190 $20,603 $912 $3,071 $90 $90 $18 $1,481 $1,481 $3,422 $3,707 $1,931 $2,048 $6,948 $633 $3,389 $5,293 $3,001 $765 $255 $574,386 $602,501 $1,112,331 $25,665 $1,449,973 584 Return to TOC $10,209 $3,299 $1,370 $2,371 $23,669 $22,107 $3,408 $7,049 $4,130 $573,803 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 Dept / Program Name Name Insurance Workers' Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone 1040 - General Services Field Operations Equipment Management Fuel Services Parts Store Operations Total General Services $35,362 $20,563 $20,722 $585 $5,530 $7,209 $21,307 $5,530 $7,209 $18 $35,362 $20,581 $1,126 $18 $1,126 $18 1100 - Telephone Services Info. Technology Telephones Total Telephone Services 1140 - PC Replacement Info. Technology Technology Replacement Total PC Replacement $18 $189 $18 $189 1220 - Arts Commission Fund Library & Arts Arts Maintenance $1,605 Total Arts Commission Fund $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 $14,885 $1,021 $3,949 $403 $6,554 $407 $585 $5,046 $625 $26,518 $6,957 $2,398 $18 1282 - Arena Event Operations Police Department Arena-PD Event Staffing 585 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 Dept / Program Name Name Fire Department Arena - Fire Event Staffing Field Operations Arena - ROW Maintenance Transportation Arena - Transportation Ops. Total Arena Event Operations Insurance $1,031 Workers' Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone $18 $390 $117 $3,936 $36 $50,473 $55,494 $21,318 $28,485 $25,212 $88,198 $432 $7,996 $14,468 $8,759 $5,595 $56,133 $7,202 $84,921 $7,920 $681 $1,499 $11,273 $72 $856 $21,642 $540 $1,406 $16,280 $2,142 $283,045 $71,423 $75,619 $16,989 $599 $795 $18 $72 $284 $235 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 $1,394 $1,333 $6,700 $6,212 $18,536 $6,212 $6,295 $18,731 $19,809 $17,872 $4,232 $3,970 $3,770 $1,603 $18,992 $23,779 $29,540 $22,963 $76,044 $106,030 $46,127 $37,691 $76,044 $106,030 $46,127 $37,691 $41,071 $14,127 $9,487 $26,186 $155,420 1660 - Transportation Sales Tax Transportation Dial-A-Ride Fixed Route Intelligent Transportation Sys Traffic Mitigation Transit Management Transportation Education Transportation Program Mgmt Total Transportation Sales Tax $75,619 1700 - Police Special Revenue Police Department Patrol - Special Revenue Fund Total Police Special Revenue 1720 - Fire Special Revenue Fire Department Fire - Special Revenue Fund 586 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 Dept / Program Name Name Insurance Total Fire Special Revenue Workers' Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone $41,071 $14,127 $9,487 $26,186 $3,513 $1,013 $1,350 $6,148 $12,422 $3,513 $1,013 $1,350 $6,148 $12,422 $33,820 $229 $2,072 $2,097 $15,954 $33,820 $229 $2,072 $2,097 $15,954 1740 - Civic Center Civic Center Civic Center Total Civic Center 1760 - Airport Special Revenue Airport Airport Operations Total Airport Special Revenue 1860 - RICO Funds Police Department State RICO $141,622 Total RICO Funds $141,622 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 $334 $333 $113 $264 $2,124 Total Parks & Recreation Self S $3,168 $540 $540 2360 - Water and Sewer Env. Resources Environmental Resources Water Quality Finance Customer Service Office Utilities Arrowhead Reclamation Plant Information Management Public Service Representatives System Security Utilities Administration West Area Plant Total Water and Sewer $90 $2,857 $3,982 $326,148 $326,148 $3,750 $958 $1,034 $50,157 $27,131 $8,617 $4,096 $322 $1,097 $1,633 $187 $3,164 $10,185 $7,592 $12,310 $10,290 $8,455 $14,802 $1,210 $267,934 $17,428 $72,251 $337,217 587 Return to TOC $540 $105,375 $13,626 $134,498 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 Dept / Program Name Name Insurance Workers' Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone 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 $2,290 $1,638 $2,602 $581 $664 $3,337 $1,140 $581 $2,406 $1,321 $3,703 $11,908 $261 $3,381 $3,557 $8,105 $16,947 $5,593 $13,342 $3,801 $25,945 $2,661 $21,508 $15,889 $6,883 $187,024 $54,543 $287,621 $8,602 $1,564 $6,965 $15,128 $168,020 $540 $8,529 $183,148 $540 $540 $4,320 $1,162 2420 - Sewer Utilities Pretreatment Program Wastewater Collection Total Sewer 2440 - Landfill Field Operations Landfill MRF Operations Recycling Solid Waste Admin Total Landfill $45,729 $10,402 $4,713 $3,760 $1,340 $9,890 $3,844 $2,160 $2,883 $5,308 $3,483 $755 $581 $45,729 $20,215 $18,777 $10,127 $71,714 $28,953 $32,473 $8,748 $25,026 $13,878 $23,205 $2,982 $1,620 $1,620 $6,045 $581 $1,882 $141,888 $65,091 $9,285 $2,463 2480 - Sanitation Field Operations Curb Service Residential-Loose Trash Collec Sanitation Frontload Sanitation Roll-off Total Sanitation 588 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 Dept / Program Name Name Insurance Workers' Compensation Vehicle Replacement Technology Replacement Telephone 2500 - Pub Housing Budget Activities Comm. Partnerships Community Housing Total Pub Housing Budget Activ $58,267 $2,128 $15,601 $12,133 $58,267 $2,128 $15,601 $12,133 $1,470 $653 $31,563 $11,501 $17,213 $12,749 $1,295 $3,652 $82,823 $33,985 $759 $624 $4,518 $14,978 $2,572 $39,733 $94,324 $51,198 2530 - Training Facility Revenue Fund Police Department PS Training Ops - Police Fire Department PS Training Ops - Fire Field Operations PS Training Ops - Fac. Mgmt. Total Training Facility Revenue 2538 - Glendale Health Center Fire Department Glendale Health Center $78 $5,731 $2,195 Total Glendale Health Center $78 $5,731 $2,195 $1,718,550 $904,272 2540 - Risk Management Self Insurance Human Resources Risk Mgmt Trust Fund $18 Total Risk Management Self Ins FY 2012 Total Internal Service Premiums: $18 $2,500,000 $984,460 589 Return to TOC $1,666,562 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 $25,000 $3,000 $28,000 2480 - Sanitation Curb Service Residential-Loose Trash Collec Sanitation Frontload Sanitation Roll-off FY 2012 Total General Staff / Admin Charges: $1,445,000 $529,000 $362,000 $136,000 $2,472,000 $27,000 $27,000 $54,000 $216,000 $78,000 $108,000 $29,000 $431,000 $8,862,000 $82,000 $431,000 590 Return to TOC $47,382 Schedule Eleven Operating Capital List Fund Dept / Program Name Status Item Description FY 2012 Budget 1000 - General Fire Department Fire Resource Management (12433) Base Equipment (Refurbish Pumper) GENERAL TOTAL .................................................................................. $98,050 $98,050 1120 - Vehicle Replacement Field Operations Equipment Replacement (13610) Base Base Base Base Base Base Base Base Base Police Dept. - 57 Vehicles Field Operations - 7 Vehicles Utilities - 4 Vehicles Unscheduled Repl's - Approp. Fire Department - 2 Vehicles Transportation - 2 Vehicles Parks & Rec - 3 Vehicles MC Warehouse - 1 Vehicle Engineering - 1 Vehicle Equipment Replacement $1,643,788 $287,418 $274,497 $274,227 $181,129 $119,720 $104,841 $39,456 $29,666 $2,954,742 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT TOTAL ................................................... $2,954,742 1140 - PC Replacement Info. Technology Technology Replacement (11530) Base Mobile Data Terminals Base Servers Base Phone Systems Base Multiplexer Costs Technology Replacement PC REPLACEMENT TOTAL ................................................................. $346,977 $310,905 $134,929 $10,876 $803,687 $803,687 1720 - Fire Special Revenue Fire Department Fire - Special Revenue Fund (12610) Base Equipment (Refurbish Pumper) FIRE SPECIAL REVENUE TOTAL ..................................................... 591 Return to TOC $24,512 $24,512 Schedule Eleven Operating Capital List Fund Dept / Program Name Status Item Description FY 2012 Budget 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 $100,000 Base Base Equipment Improve Other Than Bldgs State RICO $232,712 $95,000 $327,712 RICO FUNDS TOTAL ............................................................................. $427,712 State RICO (32030) 2360 - Water and Sewer Utilities Arrowhead Reclamation Plant (17160) Base Equipment Water Distribution (17290) Base Equipment WATER AND SEWER TOTAL .............................................................. $9,000 $14,687 $23,687 2500 - Pub Housing Budget Activities Comm. Partnerships Community Housing (17910) Base Misc Cap Projects PUB HOUSING BUDGET ACTIVITIES TOTAL ............................... Grand Total: 592 Return to TOC $224,126 $224,126 $4,558,590 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2012 Budget 1000 - General Council Office Barrel District (10130) Small Capital Projects $15,000 Cactus District (10150) Small Capital Projects $15,000 Cholla District (10120) Small Capital Projects $15,000 Ocotillo District (10170) Small Capital Projects $15,000 Sahuaro District (10140) Small Capital Projects $15,000 Yucca District (10160) Small Capital Projects $15,000 City Clerk Elections (10240) County Election Services $82,615 Non-Departmental Fund 1000 Non-Dept (11801) Unbudgeted Carryover Reserve GENERAL TOTAL .............................................................................................. $100,000 $272,615 1300 - Home Grant Comm. Partnerships HOME Program (30001) Habitat For Humanity Housing Rehabilitation $624,524 $249,735 Newtown CDC Newtown Community HOME Program HOME GRANT TOTAL ..................................................................................... 593 Return to TOC $218,242 $1,092,501 $1,092,501 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2012 Budget 1310 - Neighborhood Stabilization Pgm Comm. Partnerships NSP Programs (30900) Professional & Contractual Salary $1,941,647 $150,000 Allocated Retirement Expense Social Security - City Share ER-Medicare Exp $14,775 $9,300 $2,175 NSP Programs NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PGM TOTAL .................................... $2,117,897 $2,117,897 1311 - N'hood Stabilization Pgm III Comm. Partnerships NSP III (30910) Professional & Contractual Pay Reimb-Salary $300,000 $50,000 $350,000 NSP III N'HOOD STABILIZATION PGM III TOTAL ................................................ $350,000 1320 - C.D.B.G. Comm. Partnerships CDBG Programs (31001) Housing Rehab. Sub. Public Facilities Improvement $589,133 $334,391 Housing Projects $239,409 Rehab Slum/Blight Public Facilities Slum/Blight $178,238 $65,260 Code Compliance/Neigh.Preserv $50,454 Administration Housing Rehab. (Clean & Lien) $36,576 $30,055 Unprogrammed Funds Lead Base Paint Hazard Reduct $3,789 $3,276 $1,530,581 CDBG Programs C.D.B.G. TOTAL .................................................................................................. $1,530,581 1660 - Transportation Sales Tax Transportation Traffic Mitigation (16580) Intersection/Ped Safety Imp $250,000 TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX TOTAL .................................................... 594 Return to TOC $250,000 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2012 Budget 1842 - ARRA Stimulus Grants Comm. Partnerships CDBG-R (37021) CDBG-R Visual Improvement JAG Recovery Act (37002) Professional and Contractual $60,000 $740,863 PSSP Fire OT Grant (37110) Overtime $62,443 Fire Retirement Exp $11,652 ER-Medicare Exp $905 PSSP Fire OT Grant $75,000 PSSP Police OT Grant (37000) Overtime Police Retirement Exp $58,185 $12,364 Social Security - City Share $3,607 ER-Medicare Exp $844 PSSP Police OT Grant Stop Violence - Women (37001) Professional and Contractual Equipment Stop Violence - Women 595 Return to TOC $75,000 $82,668 $2,074 $84,742 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2012 Budget Grants ARWRF Facility UV System Imp (37060) Professional and Contractual $806,000 Build Safe Engy Prog Enhance (37065) Professional and Contractual $87,599 Energy Matters Public Educat (37067) Line Supplies $120,858 Temporary Pay Professional And Contractual $27,030 $12,950 Social Security - City Share $1,676 ER-Medicare Exp $392 Energy Matters Public Educat $162,906 Main Library Lighting (37064) Professional and Contractual $136,831 Program Manager (37068) Authorized Salaries $184,144 Allocated Retirement Expense $19,795 Social Security - City Share ER-Medicare Exp $11,417 $2,670 $218,026 Program Manager Public Safety/Court Lighting (37062) Professional and Contractual $32,000 Sports Courts Lighting Retrofi (37063) Professional and Contractual $75,000 Traffic Signal LED Conversion (37066) Equipment Less $5,000/Unit $42,790 Well 43 Variable Drive Retrofi (37061) Professional and Contractual $75,000 ARRA STIMULUS GRANTS TOTAL .............................................................. 596 Return to TOC $2,671,757 Schedule Twelve Operating Carryover Savings Budgets Fund Dept / Program / Item Description FY 2012 Budget 2530 - Training Facility Revenue Fund Fire Department PS Training Ops - Fire (12590) Dept Cont. / Emergency Repairs TRAINING FACILITY REVENUE FUND TOTAL ....................................... Grand Total: 597 Return to TOC $30,000 $30,000 $8,315,351 Appendix 2011-2012 APPENDIX Miscellaneous Statistics MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS FROM 2005-09 est. AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY SCHOOL ENROLLMENT: POPULATION DISTRIBUTION: 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 # 22,284 19,450 19,121 19,197 18,518 38,324 35,105 32,620 13,964 10,400 10,113 7,058 3,301 249,455 % 8.93% 7.80% 7.67% 7.70% 7.42% 15.36% 14.07% 13.08% 5.60% 4.17% 4.05% 2.83% 1.32% - 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 High School graduate High school graduate (or equivalent) Some college, or Associate's degree Bachelor's degree or higher Median age: 31.9 Sex Male Female # 124,641 124,814 Enrolled # % 71,910 3,521 4.90% 4,066 5.65% 30,565 42.50% 16,371 22.77% 17,387 24.18% Percent w/ bachelor's degree or higher: Percent of high school graduates w/ some college or an associate's degree: Percent of all other: % 49.97% 50.03% Attained # % 130,413 21,643 16.6% 34,927 26.8% 46,721 35.8% 27,122 20.8% 27,122 20.8% 81,648 21,643 62.6% 16.6% INCOME AND BENEFITS (2009 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 # 80,943 5,272 3,860 8,342 8,918 12,056 16,862 10,374 10,337 2,956 1,966 OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION: % 6.51% 4.77% 10.31% 11.02% 14.89% 20.83% 12.82% 12.77% 3.65% 2.43% 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 household income: $52,447 M ean household income: $65,769 598 Return to TOC Employed # % 114,587 33,895 29.58% 18,791 16.40% 32,583 28.44% 209 0.18% 15,714 13.71% 13,395 11.69% APPENDIX Miscellaneous Statistics MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS FROM 2005-09 est. AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY The following two pages show the information from the previous page in chart form. 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 2009 Population Distribution Age in Years 2009 School Enrollment 40,000 30,565 30,000 20,000 10,000 16,371 3,521 17,387 4,066 0 Nursery school, Kindergarten Elementary High school preschool school (grades (grades 9-12) 1-8) 599 Return to TOC College or graduate school APPENDIX Miscellaneous Statistics MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS FROM 2005-09 est. AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY 2009 Income and Benefits 20,000 16,862 16,000 12,056 12,000 8,000 4,000 8,342 5,272 8,918 10,374 10,337 3,860 2,956 1,966 0 in Thousands 140,000 2009 Educational Attainment 130,413 Population 25 years and over 120,000 Less than High School graduate 100,000 High school graduate (or equivalent) 80,000 60,000 34,927 40,000 20,000 21,643 Some college, or Associate's degree 46,721 27,122 0 600 Return to TOC Bachelor's degree or higher APPENDIX Miscellaneous Statistics CITY STATISTICS Year Founded: 1892 Date of Incorporation: June 18, 1910 Form of Government: Council/City Manager County: Maricopa 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 2,866 2,025 2,008 1,966 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 2011 Total 1 15 39 49 54 54 54 54 56 57 58 58 58 58 59 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 2010 (Census) 226,721 2011 (Estimate) 229,468 * All population numbers 1995 and after include the population of Luke AFB. City Authorized Staffing as of July 1, 2011: Full-Time &Part-Time, Permanent 1,966.38 Elections: Number of votes cast: August 2010 Primary Elec. (8/10) 14,526 (3 districts) November 2010 General Elec. (11/10) 14,052 (2 District runoff elec.) Percentage of registered voters voting in: August 2010 Primary Elec. (08/10) 28.63% November 2010 General Elec. (11/10) 47.67% 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 $158,860,414 $80,918,265 Fiscal Year Number 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 5,184 2011* 4,104 *Through March of 2011. Fire Protection (for CY 2010): 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 2011) 9 5:43 Min 34,960 5,253 2,409 809 43,431 281 (240 sworn) Police Protection (for CY 2010): Number of Stations 3 Calls Processed* 452,237 Vehicular Patrol Units** 116 Number of Reserves 16 *Includes incoming, outgoing and 911 calls **Marked by lights/sirens & uniformed patrol officers Police FTE’s (FY 2011) 601 Return to TOC 553.5 (407 sworn) APPENDIX Miscellaneous Statistics City Court Offenses Processed (for FY 2011): DUI 2,114 Serious Traffic 441 Other Criminal Traffic 6,348 Civil Traffic 28,498 Non-Traffic Misdemeanor 7,789 Total Citations Issued 45,190 Protective Orders 2,643 Parks and Recreation (as of April 2011): Number of Neighborhood Parks 55 Community Parks 9 Sports Complexes 4 Total Park Acreage 2,188.5 Playgrounds 97 Ramadas 144 Tennis Courts 38 Racquetball Courts 49 Basketball Courts 55 Volleyball Courts 44 Soccer/Football Fields 55 Softball Fields 54 Swimming Pools 2 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 41 Linear Feet of Multiuse Walkways 92,892 Transportation (as of May 2011): Miles of Streets Maintained Arterial Secondary (1/2 Mile Streets) Collector (1/4 Miles Streets) Local Alleys Unpaved Total 103 64 151 464 20 0.0 802 Water Utilities (for CY 2010): Number of Active Customers* 59,435 Miles of System (lines) 997 Annual Consumption 13,460 M Gal Avg. gallons/user/month 18.37 K Gal Avg. gallons/user/year 220.4 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 2010): Number of Active Customers 56,000 Miles of Collection Lines 710 Treatment Plant Capacities WAWRF 11.5 MGD Arrowhead 4.5 MGD SROG 13.2 MGD Annual Wastewater Treated 6.9 B Gal Sanitation (FY through May 2011): Number of Customers 52,500 Landfill & MRF (FY through March 2011): Number of Customer Transactions 120,409 Tonnage Processed Residential 135,269 Commercial 56,471 Recycle 11,290 Total 203.030 Sources: Various City of Glendale Department Records U.S. Census 602 Return to TOC APPENDIX Acronyms ACRONYMS A ACDC ADA ADOT AFB ARRA AMFP A/V 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 Audio/Visual Arrowhead Water Reclamation Facility Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority BofA Bank of America B C CAFR CAP CD CDBG CFD CIP CPI CPI-U CVB 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 Convention & Visitors Bureau Calendar Year DIF DMP Development Impact Fees Debt Management Plan EMS EOC EECBG Emergency Medical Services Emergency Operations Center Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant FAA FT FTA FTE FY Federal Aviation Administration Full Time Federal Transit Administration Full Time Equivalent Fiscal Year D E F G GAAP GCC GEMS GF Generally Accepted Accounting Principles Glendale Community College Glendale’s Exceptional Municipal Staff General Fund 603 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 OSHA Operational and Maintenance Occupational Safety and Health Administration P PAYGO PC Pay-As-You-Go Capital Personal Computer R RICO Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations SROG SRP Sub-Regional Operating Group Salt River Project VOCA Victims of Crime Act S V W WAWRF WIFA WRF WTP Western Area Water Reclamation Facility Water Infrastructure Finance Authority Water Reclamation Facility Water Treatment Plant 604 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. 605 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. 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. 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). 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, general administration of the city, and any 606 Return to TOC APPENDIX Glossary other activity for which a special fund has not been created. OPERATING BUDGET: The day-to-day costs of delivering city services. GOAL: A general and timeless statement created with a purpose based on the needs of the community. P PAY-AS-YOU-GO (PAYGO) CAPITAL PROJECTS: Capital projects funded by General Fund operating revenues. 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. 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, telephone expense, reproduction costs, postage and vehicle maintenance. 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 and municipalities may only use this 607 Return to TOC APPENDIX Glossary levy to retire the principal and interest or redemption charges on bond debt. 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 SALARY SAVINGS TRANSFER: A transfer of savings from salary & benefit accounts to non-salary, operational accounts like office supplies, equipment maintenance, etc. Normal employee turnover, retirements and terminations can create salary savings situations. 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. SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET ALLOWANCE: This allowance provides additional personnel, equipment and related expenses which enhance the service level of a program. Supplemental increases are directed at attaining council goals or meeting increased service needs. T 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. 608 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 “2012 Annual Budget” or “Fiscal Year 2011-12 (FY 2012)” refers to the period that begins July 1, 2011 and concludes on June 30, 2012. 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 2012 budget will be formally adopted by the City Council at a public meeting in June 2011, 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 609 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. 610 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 an Executive Director, Department Director, City Manager or Assistant City Manager. These groups include Appointed & Elected Officials, Budget & Financial Services, City Manager, Communications, Compliance & Asset Management, Development Services, Economic Development, Human Resources & Risk Management, Intergovernmental Programs, Parks, Recreation & Library Services, Neighborhood & Human Services, Public Safety, Public Works, Technology & Innovation, Transportation Services and Water Services. 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 $2.9 million in this year’s budget. Secondary Property Tax, used to pay off General Obligation 611 Return to TOC APPENDIX Frequently Asked Questions bonds, will generate approximately $17.9 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. 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 31.1% 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 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 612 Return to TOC City of Glendale Management & Budget Department 5850 West Glendale Avenue Glendale, Arizona 85301 623-930-2264 | www.GlendaleAZ.com