The Government Finance Officer Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to Maricopa County, Arizona for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2003. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan, and as a communications 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 Credits Board of Supervisors Andrew Kunasek, Chairman, District 3 Fulton Brock, District 1 Don Stapley, District 2 Max W. Wilson, District 4 Mary Rose Garrido Wilcox, District 5 County Administrative Officer David R. Smith Deputy County Administrator Sandra L. Wilson Deputy Budget Director Chris Bradley Brian G. Hushek Budget Administrator Lee Ann Bohn Office of Management and Budget 301 W Jefferson St, Ste 1070 Phoenix AZ 85003-2143 Phone (602) 506-7280 Fax (602) 506-3063 www.maricopa.gov/budget Cover Photo: Shawn Nau took the photograph on the cover of our Annual Business Strategies at the Spur Cross Ranch Conservation Area, which is operated by the Maricopa County Parks and Recreation department. The flower is a "Desert Marigold" (l. Baileya multiradiata). Copr. 2004 S. Nau/Bokeh Photo Images Maricopa County Mission Statement The mission of Maricopa County is to provide regional leadership and fiscally responsible, necessary public services to its residents so they can enjoy living in healthy and safe communities. Strategic Priorities • Provide regional leadership in critical public policy areas in a fiscally responsible manner. • Minimize the burden on the property taxpayer through rate reductions. • Healthy community and solvent healthcare system. • Safe community through a streamlined, integrated criminal justice system. • Provide regional leadership for a regional transportation system. • Land use will be planned, managed and funded responsibly; Luke AFB will be preserved. • Maricopa County will continue to improve its positive public image based on results achieved. Approved by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors – February 21, 2001 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents Budget at a Glance i vii County Administrative Officer’s Transmittal Letter Econometric and Demographic Trends Impacts from the State of Arizona Managing For Results & Budgeting For Results Property Taxes Capital Improvement Program New Facilities to Open in 2004-05 Detention Operations Other Criminal Justice Issues Mandated Health Care Maricopa Health System Employee Issues and Concerns Conclusions 1 2 2 3 3 5 5 6 6 7 8 9 Executive Summary Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Basis of Presentation Basis of Accounting Basis of Budgeting and Budgetary Control Budget Process Policies and Their Budgetary Impact County Judicial Branch Indigent Representation Disproportionate Share Interfund Loan to Detention Capital Projects Fund (455) General Obligation – Debt Service Fund (312) Economic Development, Non-profits, Agricultural Extension and Accommodation Schools 11 11 12 13 13 20 23 23 23 23 23 23 Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues and Expenditures by Category FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget Consolidated Revenues and Expenditures by Category FY 2003-04 Revised Budget Consolidated Revenues and Expenditures by Category FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Budget Sources of Funds Uses of Funds Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Adopted to FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Budget Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated to FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Budget Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Revised Restated to FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget Consolidated Revenues by Fund Type / Department Consolidated Revenues by Department and Fund Type Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary Comparative Tax Data Levy Limit and Truth-In-Taxation Comparisons Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary Expenditure Limitation Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Department / Fund Consolidated Expenditures by Department and Fund Type Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Object Code i 25 26 27 28 28 29 30 31 35 40 41 61 62 63 73 74 81 82 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Table of Contents Summary Schedules (Continued) General Government Expenditure Summary Appropriated Fund Balance Expenditure Summary Major Maintenance Project Summary Health Care Mandates Revenue and Expenditure Detail Report Results Initiatives Requests Eliminations Summary Transfers In by Fund Transfers Out by Fund Direct Assessment Special Districts Secondary Roll Street Lighting Improvement District Levies Secondary Roll 88 92 95 96 97 100 101 104 108 109 Personnel Plan Introduction Employee Satisfaction and Attrition Human Resources Infrastructure Staff Development Special Corporate Initiatives Compensation and Awards Future Directions for Human Resources Budgeted FTE Summary 115 115 116 118 120 121 122 123 Capital Improvement Program Executive Summary Capital Improvement Projects Capital Projects Budget Operating and Capital Budgets – Their Relationship Intergovernmental and County Improvement Capital Projects Administration Building Renovations Buckeye Hills Shooting Range Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts Comfort Station Improvements Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts Environmental Services Facility Human Services Campus McDowell Mountain Regional Park Competitive Track New Comfort Station Grant McDowell Mountain Regional Park Visitor Center New Administration Services Building Close Out New Administrative Services/Forensic Science Center Parking Garage Northeast Superior Court/Justice Courts Expansion Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts Public Health Clinic San Tan Mountain Regional Park Entry Station Construction Security Building Sheriff's Property and Evidence Facility Southeast Consolidated Justice Courts/Parking Structure Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts Water Storage and Pressure Tank Restoration Detention Capital Projects Detention Facilities Renovations Durango Juvenile Detention/Treatment Center Fourth Avenue Jail ii 127 127 130 131 132 135 137 139 141 143 145 147 149 152 154 155 156 158 160 163 166 168 170 172 174 176 177 179 181 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Table of Contents Capital Improvement Program (Continued) Lower Buckeye Jail Transportation Flood Control District 183 185 314 Debt Service Debt Management Plan Debt Policies 343 358 County At A Glance County Profile County Seal and Flag Economy Population Employment Retail Sales Construction and Real Estate Market Health Care Criminal Justice Legislative Strategies 361 363 364 366 368 369 370 371 373 377 Managing for Results Introduction Why Are We Doing This? Managing for Results System 381 381 382 Financial Forecast Executive Summary General Assumptions Overall Fiscal Position Revenue Expenditures Revenue Assumption Detail Expenditure Assumption Detail Capital Projects General Fund Forecast Detention Fund – Operations Forecast Detention Fund – Capital Projects Forecast Transportation Forecast – Operations and Capital Projects Forecast Flood Control District – Operations Forecast Flood Control District – Capital Projects Forecast Library District Forecast 389 389 389 390 390 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 Mandates Introduction Executive Summary FY 2004-05 Mandates For All Funds FY 2004-05 General Fund Mandates FY 2004-05 Mandates Excluding the General Fund Mandate Study - Summary Schedules 401 401 402 404 406 407 iii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Table of Contents Departmental Budget Schedules Maricopa County Organization Countywide Organization Chart Judicial Branch Judicial Organizational Chart Adult Probation Juvenile Probation Trial Courts Elected Officials Assessor Board of Supervisors Board of Supervisors – District 1 Board of Supervisors – District 2 Board of Supervisors – District 3 Board of Supervisors – District 4 Board of Supervisors – District 5 Clerk of the Superior Court Constables County Attorney Recorder Sheriff Superintendent of Schools Treasurer Appointed Appointed Organizational Chart Animal Care and Control Appropriated Fund Balance Board of Supervisors Clerk Chief Information Officer Communications Community Development Contract Counsel Correctional Health County Administrative Officer County Call Center Elections Eliminations Emergency Management Environmental Services Equipment Services Facilities Management Finance General Government Health Care Delivery System Health Care Mandates Human Resources Human Services Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Internal Audit Legal Advocate Legal Defender Management & Budget Maricopa County Health Plans Materials Management 415 415 417 417 421 435 444 453 458 464 467 469 471 473 475 477 483 487 494 498 506 512 517 517 518 524 526 532 536 539 543 548 555 560 564 569 570 577 586 592 599 605 607 613 624 629 635 639 644 651 657 661 665 iv Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Table of Contents Departmental Budget Schedules (Continued) Medical Examiner Parks & Recreation Planning & Development Public Defender Public Fiduciary Public Health Research & Reporting Risk Management Solid Waste Telecommunications Total Compensation Transportation Special Districts Special Districts Organizational Chart Flood Control District Library District Stadium District 671 676 681 688 696 701 715 718 723 728 733 738 745 745 746 756 761 Attachments Maricopa County’s Mission Statement Maricopa County’s Vision Statements Maricopa County’s Strategic Priorities Budgeting for Results Policy Guidelines Budget Priorities – Maricopa County Budget Priorities – Flood Control District Budget Priorities – Library District Budget Priorities – Special Health Care District Budget Priorities – Stadium District Budget Calendar Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy Funded Position Policy Managing for Results Policy Performance Management Process Policy Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy Minimum Fund Balances for Cashflow Purposes Policy for Administering Grants Indirect Cost Policy for Grant Programs General Government Policy Vehicle Replacement Policy Fund Descriptions FY 2004-05 Revenue Object and Sub-Object Codes FY 2004-05 Expenditure Object and Sub-Object Codes State of Arizona Auditor General Forms 765 765 765 766 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 777 779 781 783 785 787 791 793 795 797 804 805 808 Glossary Terms, Fund Descriptions and Acronyms 817 Acknowledgements Acknowledgements 823 v Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Table of Contents vi Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Budget At A Glance Introduction For the past 11 years, Maricopa County’s Office of Management and Budget has received the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. This award is presented to government entities that meet certain criteria in the presentation of their budget. This “Budget At A Glance” section is designed to provide the layperson with a broad view of the contents included in the FY 2004-05 Maricopa County budget, its processes, issues and anticipated outcomes. Document sections are cited in order to guide the reader to more in-depth information and explanation of the drivers of Maricopa County’s operating budget and capital improvement program. Policy Document Organization-wide Financial and Programmatic Policies and Goals Maricopa County’s long-term organization-wide goals and policies are provided in Maricopa County’s mission statement and strategic priorities found below. Other references are included in the Transmittal Letter, the Executive Summary under Policies & Their Budgetary Impact, the Managing for Results section, the Capital Improvement Program, the Financial Forecast, the Departmental Budget Schedules under mission, goals, issues and mandates, while the actual policies are included in the Attachments section. Maricopa County Mission Statement: The mission of Maricopa County is to provide regional leadership and fiscally responsible, necessary public services to its residents so they can enjoy living in healthy and safe communities. Strategic Priorities: • Provide regional leadership in critical public policy areas in a fiscally responsible manner. • Minimize the burden on the property taxpayer through rate reductions. • Healthy community and solvent healthcare system. • Safe community through a streamlined, integrated criminal justice system. • Provide regional leadership for a regional transportation system. • Land use will be planned, managed and funded responsibly; Luke AFB will be preserved. • Maricopa County will continue to improve its positive public image based on results achieved. Maricopa County’s goals are long-term and address the entire organization, such as the long-term impacts of revenue shortfalls, including the significant drop in recurring state shared sales tax, and long-term financial planning and operations issues. The County’s policies apply to financial matters as well as programmatic (service delivery) concerns over a multi-year time frame, such as the Managing for Results Policy and the Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy, both of which are excerpted below. Managing for Results Policy: All Maricopa County departments will participate in the Maricopa County Managing for Results system and shall comply with this policy. This policy establishes a framework that integrates planning, budgeting, reporting, evaluating and decision making for all Maricopa County departments. This framework is called Managing for Results, a management system that establishes the requirements to fulfill the County’s Mission and Vision of accountability to its citizens. vii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Managing for Results is cyclical and ties performance to all that we do. The Managing for Results cycle is outlined on the chart at left. Planning for Results Decision Making • Future Demand • Vision & Mission • Performance Targets • Strategic - Goals • Adjust Allocations If Required • Operational - Results • Operational/Process Improvement • Family of Measures per Activity Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy: This policy establishes the guidelines for the maintenance and use of any reserve fund balances. The policy provides for budgetary stability, debt reduction and, ultimately, stabilization and reduction of tax rates when possible. During times of economic downturn, the policy may be used to stabilize the general fund until appropriate long-term budgetary adjustments are made. • Employee Performance Plans Evaluating Results • Performance Audit • Employee Evaluations • Resources Consumed Managing For Results • Citizen Survey & Input Reporting Results Deliver Services • Data Verified • Actuals vs. Forecasts • Baselines & Benchmarks • All Customers Included Collect Data Budgeting for Results Further, the purpose of the policy is to demonstrate a commitment to the maintenance and, when possible, reduction of the tax rate while ensuring that Maricopa County remains financially stable and accountable to the citizens. • Demand for Services • Performance Budget • Resource Allocation Short-term Financial and Operational Policies That Guide Budget Development Maricopa County’s short-term financial and operational policies guide the development of the budget for the upcoming year. These policies provide the tools for building a structurally balanced budget, ensuring that the fiduciary obligations as stewards of public monies are met. The policies deal with a wide range of areas that provide financial safeguards and policy direction on such matters as lump sum budgeting, budget development, reserves and tax reduction, and internal charges and indirect cost allocations. These policies may be found in the Transmittal Letter, the Executive Summary under Policies & Their Budgetary Impact, the Managing for Results section, the Capital Budget, the Departmental Budget Schedules under mission, goals, issues and mandates, while the actual policies are included in the Attachments section. Several short-term policies that reflect the financial and operational development of the budget for the upcoming year follow. Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy: The purpose of the Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy is to provide departments with the flexibility in managing their allocated public resources to achieve program results, while upholding accountability for spending within legal appropriations. This policy seeks to strengthen budget accountability and ownership at the department level. The program encourages departmental staff to save resources and be creative in the delivery of services. Departments are held responsible for bottom-line performance and absorb unanticipated cost increases and revenue shortfalls. This approach to budgeting can help the County cope with new fiscal challenges and improve the quality of County services. Vehicle Replacement Policy: The purpose of this Policy is to provide County Departments/Special Districts with guidelines so that existing vehicles can be replaced in a timely and cost-effective manner. Funded Position Policy: The purpose of the Funded Position Policy is to establish guidelines for adding, deleting and changing positions so that all authorized positions are fully funded on an annualized basis, and that any filled or vacant position that becomes unfunded or under-funded is either fully funded or deleted. Goals and Objectives of Organizational Units-Departments Maricopa County’s organizational units consist of 62 departments, including special districts, each of which has a strategic plan that integrates planning with budgeting and performance measurement to achieve Maricopa County’s mission and strategic priorities. Every department has a mission, vision (optional), strategic priorities, issues, programs, activities, and services, all of which may be found in the Departmental Budget Schedules section under mission, goals, issues, key performance measures, and mandates. Some departments have long-term results-oriented goals (descriptions of anticipated accomplishments or results as opposed to descriptions of functions and activities, e.g., recycle 20% of community’s solid waste stream). For example, the Public Defender’s Office has a long-term goal of “maintain cost effectiveness by limiting the percentage of increases in the annual cost per case to no more than the percentage of increase in the overall annual funding of the County’s justice group.” The County Attorney has a goal to “identify and implement viii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance strategies that provide market appropriate salaries for employees, salary advancements commensurate with performance and experience, career development counseling, training and other employee benefits and work/personal life balance issues to reduce turnover,” and to “reduce the percentage of criminal cases open longer than 180 days each year over the next five years while adhering to MCAO policies & procedures, quality standards and attorney ethics.” These goals describe long-term anticipated results. But the majority of County department goals are more short-term in nature due to the demands of regulatory agencies, compliance to new state statutes and court rules, increases in unfunded mandates, and the rapidly changing demographics that affect justice and law enforcement, healthcare and the environment. It is not practical to establish long-term goals in areas where regulations are continually changing. Examples of dramatic regulatory changes include: 3 Arizona Supreme Court issues, i.e., Rule 18 that deals with speedier trials for complex cases, Rule 15 regarding the disclosure of evidence, and The Ring Case, dealing with verdict determination by jurors; the mandated increases in acute healthcare contributions due to Proposition 204, the mandate to increase Maricopa County’s contributions for the Arizona Long Term Care System, expenditure increases for the County court order for the seriously mentally ill population, and the residual from the county’s medical eligibility mandate. All of these will have an immediate impact on the County. Every department within Maricopa County has quantifiable short-term objectives, (e.g., open two new recycling drop-off centers by December xxxx), that are linked to the County’s goals as established in it’s mission and strategic priorities. Through the annual strategic planning process review, every department is required to have goals that are linked to the County’s strategic priorities. This information may be found in the Departmental Budget Schedules section under department mission, goals, issues, key performance measures, and mandates. Examples follow that show the relationship of department goals to the Maricopa County strategic priorities, and a strategic plan sample of the mission, several goals and key results measures for the Facilities Management Department. Maricopa County Strategic Priorities/Goals: • Safe community through a streamlined, integrated criminal justice system. • Healthy community and solvent healthcare system. Department Goals for the Maricopa County Trial Courts: • By June 2005, the Court will provide speedy and fair justice in case processing as follows: 95% of all cases, Superior Court and Justice Courts, shall be disposed in compliance with established trial court and limited jurisdiction court standards. • To prevent delay in judicial decisions, by June 2005, 95% of needs assessments, screenings, and evaluative reports will be made available to judges within guidelines adopted by the court. Department Goals for the department of Health Care Mandates: • By January 1, 2007, reduce average annual litigation judgments/settlements rate by 7% over the 1998 rate. • By January 1, 2007, increase amounts written off by providers in the claims resolution process by 20% of fullbilled charges based on the baseline developed for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors while experiencing no percentage increase in payments. Department Goals for the Medical Examiner: • By 2007 the Office of Medical Examiner will improve service to families and other agencies by completing cases within established time frames of 90% of cases closed within 45 days and 100% of cases closed within 90 days. • By 2007, the Office of Medical Examiner will increase certification of investigative staff by 10% to compliment the cooperative efforts with law enforcement agencies, public health, and county attorney investigating death related cases to insure the safety and welfare of the residents of Maricopa County. Strategic Plan from the Trial Courts: The Mission of the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County and Maricopa County Justice Courts is to provide people with access to a public forum for dispute resolution and court services so citizens can realize ix Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance timely, fair, economical, individualized justice, and to also serve the community by assisting children and families in need. Goals Include: • By June 2005, the Court will provide speedy and fair justice in case processing as follows: 95% of all cases, Superior Court and Justice Courts, shall be disposed in compliance with established trial court and limited jurisdiction court standards. • To prevent delay in judicial decisions, by June 2005, 95% of needs assessments, screenings, and evaluative reports will be made available to judges within guidelines adopted by the court. Example program with key results: Program Name: CASE MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Case Management program is to provide case flow management services to the Superior Court, Juvenile Court, and Justice Courts so they can advance case progress in a timely and efficient manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of criminal cases resolved within established trial court standards. 83 86 83.3 92 Percent of civil cases resolved within established trial court standards. 71 95 93.9 97 Percent of Family Court cases (pre-decree) resolved within established trial court standards. 85 85.5 85.2 93 Percent of Juvenile Dependency cases (pre-finding) resolved within established statutory standards. N/A 88.4 88.1 95 Percent of DUI cases resolved within established limited jurisdiction court standards. 56.7 42.5 48 70 Key Results: FY 2004-05 Budget Priorities And Issues The Transmittal Letter articulates budget priorities and issues for all funds, including significant priority changes from FY 2003-04, and the factors that led to those changes. These priorities and issues are highlighted by headings in the Transmittal Letter, such as the heading: Econometric and Demographic Trends, Impacts from the State of Arizona, Managing For Results & Budgeting For Results, Property Taxes, Capital Improvement Program, New Facilities to Open in 2004-05, Detention Operations, Other Criminal Justice Issues, Mandated Health Care, Maricopa Health System and Employee Issues and Concerns. Fiscal Year 2004-05 budget priorities are provided in the Attachments section. Priorities and issues are also summarized in the first paragraph of the Transmittal Letter. The Budget As A Financial Plan Fund Structure and Appropriations An overview of Maricopa County’s fund structure, including the basis for budgeting and accounting, and all funds appropriated by Maricopa County and their descriptions, may be found in the Executive Summary, Summary Schedules and Attachments sections. Appropriation levels are established on a departmental basis and lapse annually. Transfers during the year from the contingency account to a department’s budget require approval of the Board of Supervisors. Budgeted x Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance amounts are reported as originally adopted or as adjusted by allocations from reserves (contingency) or as amended by authorization from the Board of Supervisors. All funds subject to appropriation are described in the Executive Summary section. Examples of funds appropriated, with their description follow. 100 General Fund — is the County’s primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial resources of the general government, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. 220 Diversion — Pursuant to A.R.S. §13-1811, funds are utilized for the investigation, prosecution and deferred prosecution of bad check cases. 245 Justice Court Special Revenue — Established for the purpose of defraying expenses of justice court services by providing improvements in court technology, operations and facilities to enable the courts to respond quickly to changing statutory and case processing needs. Operations are funded by an $18 user’s charge to be added to the Defensive Driving School Diversion Fee as of March 1, 1998. 267 Criminal Justice Enhancement — The Criminal Justice Enhancement fund accounts for monies that are allocated to county attorneys from the Arizona State Criminal Justice Enhancement fund (ARS 41-2401). The funds are to be used for the purpose of enhancing prosecutorial efforts. Revenues, Expenditures, and Other Financing Sources & Uses The Summary Schedules section provides a single consolidated overview of all resources and expenditures budgeted for all funds, as well as summaries of all major revenues and expenditures by fund, type, category, and department. Maricopa County’s budget is annual, not biennial, therefore summaries of revenues and other resources, and of expenditures are provided for a three-year time span, including the prior year actual, current year budget, estimated current year actual, and proposed budget year. Major Revenue Sources, Trends, and Underlying Assumptions The major revenue sources for all funds are identified below and further described in detail, including charts and tables, in the Summary Schedules section. For major tax-based revenues, economic forecasting models are applied. The following chart lists the major revenue sources for the County and district budgets. MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES • • Property Taxes Licenses and Permits • • Tax Penalties & Interest Grants • Shared Vehicle License Tax • State Shared Sales Tax • • • Payments in Lieu of Taxes Patient Service Revenue Miscellaneous Revenue • • • Other Charges for Services Fines & Forfeits Gain on Fixed Assets • • • • • • Sales Taxes Other Intergovernmental Shared Highway User Revenue Internal Service Charges Interest Earnings Transfers In A sample of the major assumptions underlying the primary property tax levy for the budget year are provided below, including the basis for the estimate and associated trends. The FY 2004-05 budget process began with the update of the 10-year financial forecast, which is based on current economic trends. For major tax-based revenues, economic forecasting models are applied. The forecast predicts slower growth in primary net assessed value; assessed value growth due to market changes and new construction are projected to subside to lower levels beginning in FY 2005-06 due to the delayed impact of the 2001-2002 recession. Estimated growth rates are conservative; market and growth estimates are based on local historical trends. However, assessed value could very well experience lower or no growth if the State Legislature makes further changes in the property tax system. The Board of Supervisors is committed to keeping tax rates affordable for our citizens. Despite the economic recession and only modest recovery, the Board reduced the overall property tax rate by $0.07 in FY 2004-05. The overall tax rate, including the special districts, is now $1.4748 per $100 of assessed valuation. Since fiscal year 1991-92 the rate has been held flat or reduced. xi Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance The FY 2004-05 Budget includes an estimated primary property tax levy (excluding Salt River Project) of $339,882,099, an increase of $31,759,519 (10.3%) from the FY 2003-04 adopted primary levy. This increase is due to 10.3% growth in net assessed value, of which nearly three-fifths is due to new construction. After several years of relatively high growth in net assessed value, forecasts indicate a downward trend in annual growth rates over the next five years. Net assessed values tend to lag behind the general economy. The primary property tax may be used to support any type or level of service within the legal purview of the County. The County also levies secondary property taxes that are levied for a specific purpose, i.e. the Flood Control District and the Library District. State Shared Sales Tax Collections Fiscal Year General Fund 1994-95 $ 215,015,368 1995-96 231,009,128 1996-97 242,352,311 1997-98 257,643,630 1998-99 279,386,536 1999-00 309,009,200 2000-01 322,429,593 2001-02 325,728,202 2002-03 330,260,143 2003-04* 351,066,532 2004-05** 374,939,056 * Projected Actual ** Budget Revenue trends for the FY 2004-05 budget are discussed for each of the major revenue sources and enhanced with graphics. An example is provided next, with full detail, including charts and tables, found in the Summary Schedules sections. Listed at the left are the actual state shared sales tax collections for the last nine fiscal years, projected totals for FY 2003-04 plus the budget for FY 2004-05. State shared sales tax collections have suffered most from the economic recession. Prior to FY 2002-03, state shared sales taxes were budgeted for the upcoming fiscal year at the midpoint between the “pessimistic” and “most likely” forecast scenarios. The FY 2003-04 budget assumed an increase in revenue from this source of 1.6% above FY 2002-03 actual collections. Collections for FY 2003-04 are projected to exceed the budget, ending 6.3% higher than in FY 2002-03. Given continuing economic recovery, the FY 2004-05 budget for the General Fund estimates a 6.8% growth rate; resulting in $23,872,524 of additional State Shared Sales Tax revenue above the FY 2003-04 projected actual collections. Fund Balances for All Funds All fund balances potentially available for appropriation, including those funds carrying a zero balance, changes in fund balances, beginning and ending fund balances, and variance commentary may be found in the Summary Schedules section. Schedules are provided that list fund balance designations, the estimated beginning fund balances, projected revenues, expenditures and appropriated fund balance for the upcoming fiscal year, and resulting estimated fund balances at the end of FY 2004-05. “Beginning Fund Balance” represents resources accumulated within each fund as of the start of the fiscal year, based on actual and projected revenues and expenditures for prior fiscal years. For budgeting purposes, fund balances are Unreserved/Undesignated, which means that estimated unreserved fund balances are reduced by amounts designated for other purposes. The Capital Budget The Capital Projects section specifically includes the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) policy, budgeted capital expenditures, a specific listing by fund of all capital projects for which appropriations are made, and a brief description of each major capital project, an example of which follows. Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Facilities Management Human Services Campus Between 9th Ave & 13th Ave, Madison St & Jackson St 5 Project Description The Human Services Campus is a 150,000 square foot facility which will be an integrated service delivery facility located in downtown Phoenix designated to serve the homeless and the working poor. A group comprised of faithbased, non-profit, private, community, and governmental organizations working together to provide services for xii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance the most needy within the community is completing planning along with starting construction of site work. The total project budget is $24,649,000 and is funded through a $6,996,000 contribution from the County and $17,653,000 in funding from non-county sources. The County’s contribution will cover a portion of the project, which will include a new Public Health Homeless Clinic. The project is scheduled for completion in FY 2005-06. Funding Summary Prior Years Source Fund 422 Intergovernmental Imp. $ 4,500,000 Other Sources 1,067,296 Project Total $ 5,567,296 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 16,596,000 437,081 $ 17,033,081 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 2,048,623 $ 2,048,623 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 16,596,000 2,485,704 $ 19,081,704 Total Project $ 21,096,000 3,553,000 $ 24,649,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 2,496,000 14,537,081 $ 17,033,081 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 2,496,000 16,585,704 $ 19,081,704 Total Project $ 6,996,000 17,653,000 $ 24,649,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 4,500,000 Construction 1,067,296 Project Total $ 5,567,296 $ 2,048,623 $ 2,048,623 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year FY 04-05 Current Facilities Management Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ 37,509 $ Supplies & Services 34,493 Subtotal $ 72,002 $ Total Current Costs $ 72,002 $ - Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 37,509 34,493 72,002 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 72,002 Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ $ 75,017 $ Supplies & Services 177,384 Subtotal $ $ $ 252,401 $ Total Post Construction Costs $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 77,268 182,705 259,973 $ $ $ 79,586 188,186 267,772 $ $ 81,974 193,832 275,806 313,845 742,107 $ 1,055,952 - $ - $ 252,401 $ 259,973 $ 267,772 $ 275,806 $ 1,055,952 72,002 $ - $ 252,401 $ 259,973 $ 267,772 $ 275,806 $ 1,127,954 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Human Services Campus project is to deliver high-quality human services for the homeless and working poor in downtown Phoenix so the cycle of homelessness and poverty can be broken. Strategic Goals Addressed: • Provide regional leadership in critical public policy areas in a fiscally responsible manner and advance the proposed homeless assistance center to the point of assurance of success. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Health Care for the Homeless Strategic Activities Supported: • Primary Care Clinic xiii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Strategic Services Supported: • Examinations • Laboratory tests • Referrals for dental and vision care • Mental health assessments and referrals • Outreach encounters Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of homeless in metropolitan area seen at least once at clinic OUTPUT: Number of homeless seen in metropolitan area DEMAND: Number of homeless in metropolitan area EFFICIENCY: Cost per patient contact FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 32% 50% 50% 4,160 6,500 6,500 13,000 13,000 13,000 $59 $65 $62 Associated Impacts of Capital Spending The Capital Improvement Program section and the Summary Schedules section describe if and to what extent capital improvements or other major capital spending will impact Maricopa County’s current and future operating budget. The focus is on reasonably quantifiable additional costs and savings (direct and indirect), and other service impacts that result from capital spending. Future operating costs related to new facilities constructed or acquired through the CIP are carefully considered before project commitments are made. This is a particularly important budgetary consideration with the new jail and juvenile detention facilities. It is the County’s philosophy and policy that new capital projects will be undertaken only if future operating revenues are reasonably estimated to be sufficient to support associated future operating costs. Operating costs associated with new facilities are budgeted by the user department in conjunction with the Facilities Management Department. Estimated operating costs, as well as anticipated savings in lease costs and operating costs of facilities to be replaced, are factored into the County’s Financial Forecast. xiv Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Some new facilities, particularly jails and juvenile detention centers, will also require significant additional staffing to operate. Additional staffing requirements for operating the FY 2004-05 new facilities follows: NEW FACILITY OPERATING COSTS FY 2004-05 GENERAL FUND PROJECTS Buckeye Hills Shooting Range $ Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts Comfort Station Improvements Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts Environmental Services Facility Human Services Campus McDowell Mountain Regional Park Visitor Center McDowell Track Comfort Station New Administrative Services Building Closeout New Administrative Services Parking Northeast Superior Court/Justice Court Expansion Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts Southeast Consolidated Justice Crts/Parking Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts Public Health Clinic San Tan Mountain Park Improvement Security Building Sheriff's Property & Evidence Warehouse Water Tank Restoration Subtotal General Fund $ $ 3,790 112,474 32,380 350,000 181,734 680,378 $ FY 2005-06 231,501 $ 61,489 (857,438) 43,567 252,401 52,946 (470,449) 388,561 350,000 187,186 239,764 $ FY 2006-07 238,446 $ 126,638 (883,190) 44,448 259,973 54,505 (14,143) 335,853 224,698 397,113 350,000 192,802 1,327,143 $ FY 2007-08 245,600 $ 130,407 (909,716) 45,354 267,772 56,110 (14,568) 10,016 6,711 405,912 350,000 198,586 792,184 $ FY 2008-09 252,967 134,289 (937,037) 46,287 275,806 57,763 (15,005) 10,315 6,913 414,967 350,000 204,544 801,809 DETENTION FUND PROJECTS Detention Facilities Renovations $ $ $ $ $ Durango Juvenile Detention/Treatment Center 4,902,696 5,747,923 5,797,524 5,839,343 5,882,416 Fourth Avenue Jail 14,144,886 24,637,137 24,753,493 24,873,341 24,996,785 Lower Buckeye Jail 15,906,072 27,407,076 27,522,212 27,665,237 27,788,097 Subtotal Detention Fund $ 34,953,654 $ 57,792,136 $ 58,073,229 $ 58,377,921 $ 58,667,298 TOTAL FUNDS $ 35,634,032 $ 58,031,900 $ 59,400,372 $ 59,170,105 $ 59,469,107 This year FMD will take advantage of current major maintenance funds in combination with the dedicated jail sales tax revenue to expand the new LBJ Central Plant. This will allow FMD to provide chilled water and hot water to the existing Durango Campus, providing for a single distribution point of service and operations. This will result in a long-term reduction of staff and operational costs associated with multiple central plant operations. One-time savings are also being achieved through reduced construction costs by not having to build a previously proposed new additional freestanding building. Utility costs will be reduced due to a larger and more efficient operation. There will also be cost avoidance due to not having to replace individual boilers that are at the end of their useful life in many of the existing facilities. xv Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Debt Service A description of Maricopa County’s debt service policies, financial information regarding current debt obligations, including the relationship between current debt levels and legal debt limits, and the effects of existing debt levels on current and future operations is contained in the Debt Service section. The chart below shows the County’s overall net debt: DIRECT AND OVERALL NET DEBT MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITES General Obligation Less: Amount available for Retirement of General Obligation Debt Lease Revenue Bonds Certificate of Participation Capital Leases Direct Net Debt Overlapping Debt (1) Overall Net Debt $ Audited 6/30/02 58,370,000 $ (773,917) 104,355,000 9,804,315 19,442,376 191,197,774 4,901,854,926 5,093,052,700 Population Estimate (2) Full Value of Taxable Property (3) $ Ratios (4) Direct Net Debt Per Capita Overall Net Debt Per Capita $ $ (722,346) 91,558,756 5,808,084 19,414,905 155,574,399 5,216,661,101 5,372,235,500 3,192,125 180,653,046 $ $ 59.90 $ 1,595.51 $ Direct Net Debt As Percentage Of Full Value Property Overall Net Debt As % Of FV Property FV Property Per Capita Audited 6/30/03 39,515,000 $ $ Projected 6/30/04 20,165,000 Projected 6/30/05 $ 0 $ 0 78,031,179 1,672,206 13,600,211 113,468,596 5,331,427,645 5,444,896,241 $ 0 73,200,200 1,446,089 8,073,241 82,713,530 5,448,719,053 5,531,438,583 3,296,250 194,235,322 $ 3,411,619 211,716,501 $ 3,531,026 230,770,986 $ 47.20 $ 33.26 $ 23.35 $ 1,629.80 $ 1,595.99 $ 1,566.44 $ $ $ .1059% .0801% .0536% .0358% 2.82% 2.77% 2.57% 2.40% 56,593.35 $ 58,926.15 $ 62,057.49 $ 65,355.22 The Arizona Constitution, Article 9, Section 8, states that a County may become indebted for an amount not to exceed fifteen percent of taxable property. The following table represents the County’s outstanding general obligation indebtedness with respect to its constitutional general obligation debt limitation. 2002-03 Constitutional General Obligation Bonding Capacity Maricopa County, Arizona 2002-03 Secondary Assessed Valuation 15% of Secondary Assessed Valuation Less: GO Bonded Debt Outstanding Plus: GO Debt Service Fund Balance Unused Fifteen Percent Borrowing Capacity $ 24,457,047,282 $ 3,668,557,092 (39,515,000) 722,346 3,629,764,438 The debt policies include: Administration of Policy, Use of Debt Financing, Method of Sale, Competitive Sale, Negotiated Sale, Use of Bond Insurance, Arbitrage Liability Management, Selection of Professional Services, Continuing Disclosure of County Financial Information, Maturity Structures, Ratings, and Modification of Policies and the Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy that discusses debt incurred. xvi Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Basis of Budgeting The County is required by Arizona law to prepare and adopt a balanced budget annually for the General, Special Revenue, Debt Service, Enterprise and Capital Projects Funds. Arizona law further requires that no expenditure shall be made or liability incurred in excess of the amounts budgeted except as provided by law. The County prepares its budget on the same modified accrual basis of accounting used to record actual revenues and expenditures in the Governmental funds in the fund-based financial statements as detailed in the Executive Summary section. An explanation of the basis of budgeting for all funds is essentially the same as the Basis of Accounting. Appropriation levels are established on a departmental basis and lapse annually. Transfers during the year from the contingency account to a department’s budget require approval of the Board of Supervisors. Budgeted amounts are reported as originally adopted or as adjusted by allocations from reserves (contingency) or as amended by authorization from the Board of Supervisors. The County budgets for Governmental Fund types on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), with the exception of the following types of transactions: • Capital Lease Transactions • Bond Issuance Transactions • Arizona Long-Term Care System Refund Operations Guide Organization Structure Maricopa County’s organizational structure is by department. All programs, activities, and services that comprise those organizational units are fully identified and described in the Departmental Budget Schedules section. Managing for Results Managing for Results provides the tools necessary to determine and apply objective methods that measure progress toward accomplishing the County’s mission and strategic priorities, as well as department program goals and objectives. See the Departmental Budget Schedules section for mission statements, vision (optional), major goals, issues, key programs, activities, services, and mandate details. Planning for Results Through the Planning for Results process of the Managing for Results cycle, performance is measured, which focuses on results and accomplishments. Key performance measures focus on output and efficiency that support services. Services, in turn, support department programs. For more information regarding Planning for Results and the key performance measurements for each department, see the Managing for Results section. xvii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Organization Charts An organization chart for all of Maricopa County government is provided below. Detailed organization charts are provided throughout the Departmental Budget Schedules section, including the one that follows. Maricopa County Citizens Superintendent of Schools Constables (23) County Attorney Board of Supervisors Board of Directors for Flood Control, Library and Stadium Districts Sheriff Clerk of the Court Assessor Treasurer Recorder Elected Appointed County Administrative Officer Clerk of the Board Internal Audit STAR Call Center Elections Deputy County Administrator Legal Defender Contract Counsel Deputy County Administrator Public Defender Health Services Officer Health Care Delivery System* Legal Advocacy Community Services Officer Finance Officer Maricopa Health Plans Integrated Criminal Justice Information Systems Office of Communications Regional Development Services Agency Officer Information Technology Officer Management & Budget Public Health Finance Parks & Recreation Planning & Development Office of the CIO Human Resources Human Services Risk Management Community Development Emergency Management Telecommunications Research & Reporting Medical Examiner Materials Management Public Fiduciary Facilities Management General Government Animal Care & Control Services Library District Equipment Services Health Care Mandates Environmental Services Stadium District Public Works Total Compensation Correctional Health Transportation *The Health Care Delivery System will transition to the Special Health Care District on January 1, 2005 Solid Waste Flood Control District xviii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Arizona Courts in Maricopa County Judges of the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County Superior Court Judges Administrative Advisory Committees Judicial Executive Committee Presiding Judge and Associate Presiding Judge Limited Jurisdiction Advisory Committees Superior Court Bench Juvenile Probation Department Adult Probation Department Trial Courts Administration Justices of the Peace - Operations and Caseflow Management - Budget and Management - Litigant Support Services - Court Human Resources - Judicial Information Systems (JIS) - Community and Media Relations - Training and Development - E-Courts & Electronic Records - Court Security - Law Library - Collections - Alternate Dispute Resolution - Jury Office Personnel A key element in position control is the historical tracking of funded positions and their full-time equivalent (FTE) status. A trend view of FTE levels puts into perspective the prior year’s staffing (and consequently service) funding decisions. The chart below represents a ten-year historical look at the County’s FTE levels. FTE’s reflect the hours budgeted for part-time positions converted to an equal number of full-time positions (based on a standard of 40 hours per week.) xix Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Budgeted FTEs FY 1995-96 FY 1996-97 FY 1997-98 FY 1998-99 FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY2003-04 FY2004-05 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Acutal Acutal Adopted ADULT PROBATION 775.69 851.00 937.00 949.00 1,045.00 1,120.50 1,175.00 1,092.00 1,144.00 1,153.00 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 113.00 120.00 125.00 135.00 130.00 146.00 132.50 140.00 143.60 144.00 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 1.00 ASSESSOR 308.00 297.00 334.00 329.00 325.00 326.00 321.80 322.00 321.00 321.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CLERK 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.80 8.00 7.00 7.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 4.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 CALL CENTER 10.00 20.00 20.00 32.00 33.00 33.00 34.00 33.00 33.00 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 100.00 106.00 70.00 64.00 62.00 67.00 67.00 66.50 62.00 63.00 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 606.04 596.25 589.00 596.00 599.00 620.00 666.00 689.00 695.00 709.95 COMMUNICATIONS 7.50 9.00 8.00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12.00 10.00 11.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 CONSTABLES 28.00 26.00 27.00 29.00 29.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 CONTRACT COUNSEL 8.25 7.25 7.25 7.25 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 133.00 135.78 165.00 177.00 223.00 220.40 263.75 264.78 363.75 380.75 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 11.00 12.00 13.00 15.00 13.00 16.00 18.00 11.33 13.50 12.75 COUNTY ATTORNEY 676.71 737.30 742.00 796.00 831.00 850.00 828.50 917.25 987.55 989.55 ELECTIONS 57.00 57.00 55.00 53.00 54.00 54.00 54.00 54.00 54.00 54.00 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 13.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 229.00 238.60 245.00 272.00 267.00 266.75 283.00 273.50 300.50 308.25 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 64.00 63.00 65.00 60.00 60.00 62.00 63.00 63.00 60.75 60.75 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 219.00 183.40 158.00 158.00 192.00 202.50 235.00 248.25 269.00 301.50 FINANCE 57.00 53.00 49.00 46.00 42.00 36.00 43.00 44.00 42.00 42.00 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 240.00 240.00 241.00 222.00 222.00 222.25 223.00 226.00 225.00 227.00 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 1.00 7.00 7.00 1.00 11.00 9.00 1.00 1.00 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 2,974.75 2,630.50 2,099.00 1,812.00 1,766.00 3,013.25 3,326.01 3,326.01 3,528.29 3,691.44 HEALTH CARE MANDATES 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 46.00 41.00 34.00 31.00 30.00 HEALTH PLANS 378.00 377.50 444.00 361.00 353.00 345.70 357.47 357.47 415.43 357.60 HOUSING 63.00 64.00 63.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 HUMAN RESOURCES 100.00 96.00 81.00 82.00 79.00 81.00 67.25 66.20 51.00 51.00 HUMAN SERVICES 273.00 256.00 286.00 281.00 295.00 287.00 368.00 369.00 436.00 461.00 INDIGENT REPRESENTATION 357.34 349.19 421.00 459.00 446.00 466.25 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO 1.00 14.00 15.00 21.00 19.00 INTERNAL AUDIT 9.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 16.00 15.00 16.00 16.00 15.00 15.00 JUDICIAL MANDATES 36.00 JUSTICE COURTS 236.02 228.75 244.00 294.00 280.00 287.01 300.06 JUVENILE PROBATION 538.00 540.00 589.00 679.00 794.00 784.00 827.50 868.50 919.00 1,012.50 LEGAL ADVOCATE 53.00 60.50 63.50 78.50 LEGAL DEFENDER 69.00 74.75 79.00 96.00 LIBRARY DISTRICT 134.48 126.66 134.00 146.00 143.00 118.00 135.50 135.50 135.50 147.00 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET 23.00 22.00 21.00 22.00 24.00 18.00 22.00 22.00 21.00 21.50 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 53.00 53.00 47.00 38.00 39.00 38.00 39.00 40.00 35.00 35.00 MEDICAL ELIGIBILITY 336.31 337.50 342.00 263.00 298.00 292.50 291.50 MEDICAL EXAMINER 44.00 45.50 47.00 50.00 52.00 54.00 64.00 63.00 66.00 66.00 PARKS & RECREATION 72.89 76.84 77.00 74.00 80.00 86.50 98.46 104.00 87.00 86.50 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 55.00 54.00 66.00 65.00 93.00 108.00 115.00 125.00 159.00 159.00 PUBLIC DEFENDER 433.30 430.30 435.80 466.80 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY 37.00 41.00 37.00 33.00 33.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 34.00 34.00 PUBLIC HEALTH 507.09 503.25 460.00 441.00 479.00 459.24 523.48 534.89 567.60 556.55 RECORDER 65.00 63.00 66.00 65.00 69.00 69.00 71.25 71.25 70.25 70.25 RESEARCH & REPORTING 12.00 14.50 14.00 8.00 7.00 34.50 9.50 6.75 8.75 8.75 RISK MANAGEMENT 12.00 12.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 20.00 19.00 19.00 20.00 SHERIFF 2,053.00 2,108.00 2,188.00 2,235.00 2,428.00 2,482.50 2,465.00 2,487.75 2,731.50 3,214.50 SOLID WASTE 31.00 45.00 19.00 17.00 18.00 18.00 12.00 14.00 13.00 12.00 STADIUM DISTRICT 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 8.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 29.00 28.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 32.00 32.00 SUPERIOR COURT 668.40 677.60 764.00 819.00 873.00 910.20 981.00 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 39.00 42.00 45.00 41.00 42.00 42.00 42.00 43.00 42.00 42.00 TOTAL COMPENSATION 15.00 16.00 24.00 26.00 TRANSPORTATION 500.00 511.00 522.00 512.00 511.00 511.50 504.00 477.75 479.00 479.00 TREASURER 75.00 66.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 57.00 59.50 TRIAL COURTS 1,273.31 1,247.33 1,316.33 Total 13,354.72 13,166.12 13,099.00 12,963.00 13,626.00 15,117.55 15,974.38 15,789.29 16,637.85 17,564.47 Within each department, positions may be budgeted from a variety of funding sources. In general, as discussed earlier in this document, the General Fund covers the bulk of Personnel Services, with monies from Special xx Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Revenue, Capital Project, Enterprise and Internal Service funds covering the rest. A chart is included in the Personnel Plan section detailing this. Countywide staffing from FY 2003-04 to FY 2004-05 increased by 926.6 full-time equivalents (FTE’s), or 5.57%. Significant changes in staffing levels from FY 2002-04 to FY 2003-05, including variance explanations, are provided by department at the end of the Personnel Plan section. Communications Summary information, including an overview of significant budgetary issues, trends, and resource choices, is integrated within the Transmittal Letter. Summary information designed to provide the layperson with a broad view of the contents included in the FY 2004-05 Maricopa County budget, its processes, issues and anticipated outcomes is presented in the Budget At A Glance section. Complete budget summary data, trends and variance commentary, along with an overview of Maricopa County’s fund structure may be found in the Executive Summary, Summary Schedules, Capital Projects, and Financial Forecast sections. Other Planning Processes The Maricopa County budget process is closely tied to the Managing for Results system that integrates strategic planning with budgeting and performance measurement (see the Managing for Results section for details behind this successful planning process). The combination of the budgeting and strategic planning processes, particularly in terms of budgeting to achieve desired results, is referred to as Budgeting for Results. The Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy provides for the control of the budget at the department level. The Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy provides for long-term financial stability and low, sustainable tax rates through responsible use of non-recurring resources, appropriate and minimal use of debt, and maintenance of reserve funds. This policy sets budgetary and financial guidelines regarding the reduction of taxes. The Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy demonstrates a commitment to the maintenance and, when possible, reduction of tax rates while ensuring that Maricopa County remains financially stable and accountable to the citizens. Detail regarding Maricopa County’s other planning processes and their effects upon the budget, including those mentioned above, (i.e., Managing for Results, Budgeting for Results Policy, separate Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy, and the Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy), and the Vehicle Replacement Policy, General Government Policy, Policy for Administering Grants, Performance Management Process, Funded Position Policy, New Position Establishment Policy, Position Funding Policy Guidelines, Requests for Additional Funding (Results Initiative Requests) process, Use of the Jail Excise Tax process, and the Capital Improvement Plan processes may be found in the Executive Summary, Managing for Results, and the Attachments sections. Budget Processes A full description of the process for preparing, reviewing and adopting the budget for the coming fiscal year is provided in the Executive Summary section, including the procedures for amending the budget after adoption. This budget document is also available on the Internet at: http://www.maricopa.gov/budget/default.asp. A separate capital budget process is described in the Capital Improvement Program section. A direct relationship exists between Maricopa County’s capital and operating budgets. Operating cost estimates are the anticipated annual costs to operate facilities and improvements upon completion or acquisition. Capital projects completed generally require additional operating budget resources for upkeep, maintenance, security and other costs associated with additional acreage, mileage or square footage. There are two budget calendars included in this document. There is a Budget Process Timeline that provides a general guideline for developing the budget and supplements the budget process narrative in the Executive Summary section. The actual Budget Calendar used for developing and adopting the FY 2004-05 budget may be found in the Attachments section, along with the Budgeting for Results Policy Guidelines. xxi Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance Communicating with Charts and Graphs Charts/tables and graphs are used throughout the budget document to highlight financial and statistical information. Detailed narrative interpretation is provided when the message conveyed by the charts and graphs are not self-evident. Charts/tables and graphics are integrated with narratives to illustrate essential information throughout this budget document, particularly when communicating policy information, trends and impacts upon the budget. The County At A Glance, Personnel Plan, Mandates, and Departmental Budget Schedules sections contain the most charts/tables and graphs. Revenue and Expenditure Classifications Narrative, tables, schedules, and matrices show the relationship between different revenue and expenditure classifications (e.g., funds, programs, organizational units) in the Summary Schedules section. Maricopa County’s fund structure, or relationship between the County’s functional units and its financial structure is explained in the Executive Summary section, (i.e., the reader is able to learn the relationship between functional units and the entity’s financial structure). Revenue and expenditure information is cross-classified into other formats, which may be found in the Summary Schedules section. Some of these formats include the cross-classification by major revenue classifications across funds, by major objects of expenditure across departments and by funds across departments. Table of Contents A Table of Contents is provided at the beginning of this document. It is very comprehensive for a document of this size and allows the reader to quickly locate information. A sample is provided below. Personnel Plan Introduction Employee Satisfaction and Attrition Human Resources Infrastructure Staff Development Special Corporate Initiatives Compensation and Awards Future Directions for Human Resources Budgeted FTE Summary 111 111 112 114 116 117 118 120 Glossary A glossary is provided in a section at the back of the budget document. The glossary defines technical terms related to finance and accounting as well as terms related to Maricopa County. The glossary is written in simple language, specifically for the non-technical reader. Several examples follow. Demand Measure: A measure of the number of total units of service or product anticipated to be demanded or needed by the customer. Examples include, number of residents eligible for job training or number of building inspection applications received. Personal Services: A category of expenditures within the budget that includes salaries, benefits, temporary help, special pay, overtime, and salary adjustments. Fund: A fund is used to account for revenues and expenditures with a specified purpose. Family of Measures: A set of the four categories of performance measures that are used to measure the performance of an activity. The categories of measure are result, output, demand and efficiency. Acronyms used in this document are defined in the Glossary section, with examples below. GAAP: Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. MCSO: Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. xxii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance ISF (Internal Service Fund): A proprietary fund that accounts for the financing of goods or services provided by one department to other departments on a cost-reimbursement basis like a business. The County and Community It Serves Statistical and supplemental data that describes Maricopa County and the community it serves, including other pertinent background information related to the services provided may be found in the County At A Glance section. This section also provides statistical information that defines the community such as demographics (e.g., population, composition of population, and land area). Supplemental and other pertinent information regarding Maricopa County and the local community and economy (e.g., major industries, employment, building permits issued, healthcare services provided, and maps) are located in the County At A Glance section and Transmittal Letter. The FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Document This document is formatted and printed in such a way as to enhance understanding and utility to the reader’s needs. Page formats are consistent, each showing the current section of the document in the header, the page number at the bottom, and the department name at the top of each page in the Departmental Budget Schedules section. Large bold headings identify what is being presented, and the use of “(Continued)” on the top of pages is added when deemed essential, and, when related information is split between pages. Although this document is large, as is the County it represents, the information presented is vital to a full understanding of Maricopa County, its budget, budget processes, mandates, impacts, and the citizens it serves. The level of detail presented in this document is done so at the request of management, Elected Officials, and the citizens of Maricopa County. This Budget At A Glance section is provided so that the lay reader may quickly obtain a comprehensive understanding of all that is contained herein. The table of contents helps the reader locate information quickly within the document. Charts and graphs are provided throughout the document with sufficient information as to be easily understood by the casual reader. Changes in type sizes and styles are avoided in this document. The entire document utilizes consistent type styles and sizes for headings, body text and graphics, the use of which adds to the overall presentation and comprehension of the data provided. See the County At A Glance, Personnel Plan, Mandates, and Departmental Budget Schedules sections to view the areas containing the most charts and graphs. xxiii Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Budget At A Glance xxiv Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter County Administrative Officer’s Transmittal Letter To: Andrew Kunasek, Chairman, District 3 Fulton Brock, District 1 Don Stapley, District 2 Max W. Wilson, District 4 Mary Rose Garrido Wilcox, District 5 The budget for 2004-05 will be well balanced and will set the stage for greater fiscal stability. The economy is strengthening and our budget will reflect modest spending as we emerge from the recession. Taxpayers will see a real reduction in the property tax rate, as our General Obligation Bonds (GO) is retired, and our County becomes virtually debt-free. The total budget is projected to be $2.570 billion, which is $63.8 million (2.5%) above the 2003-04 adjusted budget. The increase in the operational budget is only 0.2%. The increase is primarily due to the opening of our new adult and juvenile detention facilities and the cost of completing a transfer of the health system to a new Special Health Care District. These increases were offset by capital improvement project (CIP) reductions, which will occur with the near completion of the detention construction projects funded by the voter approved Jail Excise Tax. On December 1, 2003 the Board of Supervisors adopted budget guidelines that were utilized during our budget preparation process for the 2004-05 fiscal year. Again the guidelines followed conservative fiscal approaches, and called for growth only in the most critical areas, including the opening of our new proposition 400 and 404 detention facilities and programs. The Board of Supervisors also directed the Office of Management and Budget to secure funding for compensation of County employees. In November 2003, the voters of Maricopa County passed Proposition 414, to create a Special Health Care District and authorize a property tax of up to $40 million. This will pay for uncompensated care and losses for this community safety net health delivery system. In December 2003 the Board of Supervisors approved the guiding principles for the transition of the health system from a County department to a Special Health Care District. The principles called for the County to have a “clean hand-off” both operationally and financially. The Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Finance, and the Internal Audit department have been working jointly with outside consultants to ensure that this occurs from a financial perspective. Over $50 million has been established in the budget in order to meet the Board’s goal of a fair and equitable financial transition that protects the future viability of the new District. Econometric and Demographic Trends After two consecutive years of very low sales tax revenue growth, Maricopa County is finally beginning to reap the benefits of the economic recovery. The fiscal year 2003-04 budget was based on pessimistic revenue projections for both sales tax (1.6% growth) and vehicle license tax (5.3% growth). The most recent forecast provided by Elliott D. Pollack and Company, our contracted economist, predicts these revenues to exceed budgeted levels by 4.6% and 3.1%, respectively. This equates to an additional $18.9 million in revenue. Similar growth levels are anticipated for fiscal year 2004-05. The pessimistic forecast anticipates sales tax growth of 6.8% and vehicle license tax growth of 5.0%. Maricopa County continues to grow at a rapid pace. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that Maricopa County’s population increased 2.9% (94,349 people) in 2003. The net population increase of 94,349 was surpassed in numbers only by Los Angeles County in 2003. The rising population continues to strain current resources, as new citizens utilize criminal justice, health care, transportation, recreation, social services and other services provided by the County. 1 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter Impacts from the State of Arizona Maricopa County is completing the last leg of a two-year budget negotiated cost shift to the county that was reached in fiscal year 2003-04 with the State of Arizona. The State of Arizona has been suffering from budget deficits for three years running, and as a non-chartered county and arm of State government we are dependent on the State. Maricopa County must get its legislative authority, statutory revisions, and much of its revenue base (through state shared revenues) from the State of Arizona. In fiscal year 2002-03, Maricopa County was asked to absorb approximately $20 million in state cost shifts. In addition to the original $20 million, in fiscal year 2003-04 the state imposed another $32.2 million in additional ongoing costs, bringing the annualized total for fiscal year 2003-04 to over $50 million. One of the shifts for 2004 was the responsibility to fully fund the Adult Probation department, which had been 80% funded by the State of Arizona and 20% funded by Maricopa County in the past. Maricopa County agreed to this cost absorption as a “good government” solution. We encouraged the State to transfer functions, not just costs, so that we could effectively develop and administer the programs we funded. In the past couple of years, the Adult Probation department had suffered from severe funding reductions, including a major reduction in the Intensive Probation program. This had dire consequences down-stream in the state and county inmate/prison population. Maricopa County invested more than our obligation to the State to ensure that the results from Adult Probation would benefit the community, restoring Intensive Probation and granting pay increases to the Probation Officers. The cost of this endeavor was $27.3 million annualized. Overall, Adult Probation’s funded caseload has been increased by 1400 cases, and is providing a safer supervision of probationers and helping to alleviate State prison overcrowding. In fiscal year 2004-05, Maricopa County must contribute $10.5 million, our final payment to the State in our twoyear deal, and continue to fund the $50+ million of program expenses that were shifted in the two prior fiscal years. However, legislative leadership at the State has tentatively agreed to readdress these issues in the 2005 legislative session. Maricopa County will continue to work collaboratively with the state to reach “good government” solutions that bring accountability and results to our taxpayers. Managing For Results & Budgeting For Results For the past four years, Maricopa County has been one of the nation’s local government leaders in Managing and Budgeting for Results. It has become part of our culture, our identity, and is a major part of how we manage our organization. We expect the Managing for Results (MfR) process to become even more valuable as we get better data to utilize, and see results. We are striving to achieve our strategic visions. Decision Making Planning for Results Effective cost accounting is one of the • Future Demand • Vision & Mission most important elements of MfR, and is • Performance Targets • Strategic - Goals the linchpin of Budgeting for Results. • Adjust Allocations If Required • Operational - Results The implementation of the new • Operational/Process Improvement • Family of Measures per Activity Peoplesoft Human Resource Information • Employee Performance Plans Evaluating Results System in January 2004 has helped us improve the tracking of our personnel • Performance Audit costs. That, along with a renewed • Employee Evaluations emphasis on correctly allocating supplies • Resources Consumed and services costs will go a long way • Citizen Survey & Input towards improving our cost accounting accuracy. Accurately reporting the cost Budgeting for Results to provide services allows policy-makers Reporting Results Deliver • Demand for Services and managers to gauge the efficiency of Services • Data Verified • Performance Budget services. Furthermore, aligning program • Actuals vs. Forecasts • Resource Allocation revenues with expenditures by Activity • Baselines & Benchmarks Collect (or Service) provides information useful • All Customers Included Data for determining how well program revenues recover program costs. In 2 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter order to help facilitate this, departments are now required to match revenues received to one of their Programs or Activities. Another one of the areas where we want to make improvements in fiscal year 2004-05 is reevaluation of the utility of all our measures. We have contracted with a performance improvement firm, whose mandate is to develop and report on higher-level measures designed to capture key program results across similar departments. They are also seeking to further refine and define our Administrative Services Program measures. By doing this we will be able to both benchmark our results and provide more relevant and easily understandable information to our citizens. This is a continuously evolving field of endeavor. Other accomplishments include the development of a Budgeting for Results form to be used by departments and OMB for reviewing program budgets that has been pilot-tested in several departments in the development of this budget. The full implementation of employee gain-sharing plans in applicable departments has demonstrated cost-saving and strategic plan achievements. It is still our aim to be one of the first governmental organizations to have true cost accounting to the program and activity level. Property Taxes Property tax rates are the only taxes received by Maricopa County that are set by the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors made it clear to County Administration that they are committed to keeping the overall tax rate low for the good of the County’s economy and taxpayers. The fiscal year 2004-05 budget recommends an overall tax rate reduction of $0.0700 per $100 of assessed valuation, for an overall tax rate of $1.4748. This is the lowest property tax rate for Maricopa County in almost 25 years. The overall rate is made up of the primary rate that funds general governmental activities (such as criminal justice), and two secondary rates. The secondary rates are the Flood Control District and Library District. Prior to fiscal year 2004-05, a third secondary tax was assessed for debt service. The debt service on the 1986 General Obligation (GO) bonds has been repaid in full, and therefore Maricopa County is no longer carrying any secondary property tax rate for debt service. This can be considered a “pay as you go dividend” to county taxpayers. The seven-cent reduction is directly attributed to paying off those bonds. The overall property tax rate has remained the same or decreased since 1991-92; representing over a decade of very conservative tax policies. In addition, Maricopa County’s primary tax rate is extremely low. The graphic below depicts our primary rate as compared to the largest counties in Arizona, and the state average primary property tax rate. Capital Improvement Program Maricopa County is pleased to continue its innovative Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that was begun in FY 1999-00. The CIP plan for the general fund, detention fund, intergovernmental fund, transportation fund, and Flood Control District uses a modified “pay-as-you-go” fiscal policy. In other words, we either have set aside cash or have identified operational savings or we don’t move forward with them. FY 2003-04 was the last year of our 1986 voter-approved debt service funding. Thus, Maricopa County is now General Obligation debt free. In FY 2003-04, $3 million was added to the program for a total Capital Improvement Program of $163 million. Due to uncertainty with the State budget, the County has not been able to add projects to the 5-year program. 3 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter This budget is now down to $140 million as a result of the elimination of the Downtown Development/Property Acquisition project, and the addition of four small capital improvement projects for the Maricopa County Parks and Recreation Department. Further planning will take place during FY 2004-05 in order to develop a solution for the administrative and service delivery space needs. Once defined, this project will allow the County to get out of leased space and into owned space, saving millions of dollars over the useful life of this new building. For FY 2004-05, four new park projects are being included in the Capital Improvement Program. These include comfort station improvements at Usery, McDowell, Estrella and White Tank Mountain Regional Parks, a new comfort station at the McDowell Mountain Regional Park Competitive Track, a visitor center at McDowell Mountain Regional Park, and water storage and pressure tank restoration at both Estrella and White Tank Mountain Regional parks. These projects are being funded through revenues received from the sale of County owned property to the Maricopa County Library District. During FY 2003-04, both the Northeast Consolidated Justice Court and the Northwest Consolidated Justice Court projects were begun. Both of these projects will be funded through lease reversion and operational reengineering with operational budget savings. Other general fund projects that are continuing include: Security Building Improvements, Public Health Clinic and Environmental Services Building, Sheriff’s Property and Evidence Warehouse, and the Human Service Campus, which will be funded through a public/private partnership. The Buckeye Shooting Range has been split into two phases, with the first being the installation of utility infrastructure. The first phase of this project is funded in this budget. The Adult and Juvenile detention facilities are funded from the 1/5 of a cent Jail Excise Tax (sales tax) which was originally approved by the voters in November of 1998, and was again approved for a 20 year extension in November of 2002. The 2004-05 CIP plan for these facilities calls for the three remaining approved projects to reach completion next year. The budget for the final year of construction is $40.2 million. Projects that will be completed and operational include: the 4th Avenue Jail, Lower Buckeye Jail and the Juvenile Detention Facilities at Durango. A new project, Detention Facility Renovations, will be added for FY 2004-05. This project will include renovating the current Madison Street Jail and Towers Jail. This project is slated to be completed in 2008. The Transportation Department’s Capital Improvement Program includes 120 projects and is budgeted for FY 2004-05 at just under $78 million. Maricopa County’s Department of Transportation (McDOT) utilizes a process which involves a Citizen Advisory Committee that assists in prioritization of the projects needed within the unincorporated areas, and on projects of regional importance. The elements that are evaluated in the ranking criteria include: safety, traffic volume, land use, cost and benefit to the community, joint partnerships with cities and towns, and bonus points for a variety of issues. The five-year CIP program for McDOT totals $347.2 million. The Flood Control District also utilizes a citizen advisory board and uses a collaborative approach to planning their 5-year CIP. It relies heavily on the strategic initiatives that have been developed, as well as weaving in the Board of Director’s fiscal policies and procedures. Potential CIP projects are identified through the Area Drainage 4 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter Master Plans developed by the District or by request from other governmental entities. The prioritization process evaluates projects based on the issues outlined below. • Agency priority • Area-wide benefits • Master plan elements • Project cost • Hydrologic significance • Partnership participation • Protection • Operational and maintenance costs • Environmental quality The five-year CIP for the Flood Control District includes 19 projects with a budget of $273.4 million and a fiscal year 2004-05 budget of $52.1 million. New Facilities to Open in 2004-05 Fiscal Year 2004 was a banner year for the opening of new facilities, many of which have been in development and the planning stage for several years. The majority of these projects were part of the detention fund that was discussed above. More facilities are slated to become operational during FY 2004-05. Additional detention facilities will begin opening in the fall of 2004, and include the 4th Avenue Jail, Lower Buckeye Jail, and the Durango Juvenile Detention Facility. These facility openings conclude over seven years of planning by the Citizen Jail Oversight Committee, professional detention staff, national detention experts, and citizens. This is a much welcomed and needed addition to our infrastructure and will significantly reduce over-crowding in our jails. These three new facilities will add 4549 adult beds and 220 juvenile beds to the County’s current inventory. Other new facilities expected to come on-line during FY 2004-05 include: the Public Health Clinic and Environmental Services Building, the Sheriff’s Property and Evidence Warehouse, the Northwest Consolidated Justice Court facility, and the Northeast Superior Court/Consolidated Justice Courts facility. The Security Building improvements, four new Park projects, and the San Tan Mountain Park improvements, approved by the Board during FY 2003-04, will also be completed. All of these new facilities will allow Maricopa County to keep up with the needs of the community through “just in time” building plans. Detention Operations In November 2002, the electorate in Maricopa County approved a twenty-year extension to the 1/5-cent sales tax to support the operations and maintenance of our new detention facilities. Originally, the voter-approved initiative was for nine years or $900 million total collections, whichever occurred first. This extension will ensure that Maricopa County is able to open and operate the muchneeded new structures. Unfortunately, the estimated cost to operate the new facilities will be over $100 million a year. Maricopa County has no more than $290 million available for the next three years until the new 20 year tax extension becomes effective, which should generate just enough to fully 5 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter operate the jails. Until full operational revenue is available in July 2007, the County can only use what is remaining of the $900 million for operations. After the vote was secured in November 2002, County administration acted to procure nationally recognized jailstaffing experts to assist in planning the operations of the new detention facilities. The consultants selected specialize in determining proper staffing for adult, juvenile and correctional health services. The consultant report was made available in June 2003, after the adoption of the 2003-04 budget. Due to funding constraints and the inherent difficulty in hiring the large volume of staff, a phase-in of beds is necessary. For the adult facilities, the consultants recommended a phased-in plan that includes a “baseline” scenario and two “future” scenarios. The baseline scenario includes an increase of 616 positions beginning in FY 2003-04. The baseline scenario will support a population of approximately 8,000 inmates and will further allow the Sheriff’s Office sufficient staff to begin the transition into the new Fourth Avenue Jail, which is slated to open in the Fall of 2004. With the close of FY 2003-04, a total of 303 positions have been funded with the remaining baseline positions funded in the FY 2004-05 budget. The future scenarios involve (1) the renovation of Madison Street Jail and (2) the demolition of Durango Jail, which has been determined to be beyond its useful life. Implementation of the future scenarios will require an additional 713 positions beyond the baseline recommendation and will support an inmate population of 9,400. Beginning in FY 2004-05, implementation of the “Close Madison” scenario will begin. Upon completion of the Madison Street Jail renovation, which is projected in FY 2006-07, the Durango Jail will be closed permanently. For the juvenile facilities, the consultants recommended a net increase of 151 positions to fully staff the Durango and Southeast Juvenile Facilities to support a population of 484 juveniles. Similar to the adult staffing recommendation, the consultant plan calls for both a baseline and future staffing scenario. While the baseline scenario does not involve an overall increase in the number of staff, it does call for a different mix of authorized positions based on a new set of proposed operational assumptions. The future scenario utilizes the same operational considerations as the baseline scenario, however expands the population at both facilities to include a full capacity of 484 beds. With the close of FY 2003-04, a total of 73 positions have been funded with the remaining positions funded in the FY 2004-05 budget. Other Criminal Justice Issues Although the opening of the new detention facilities is the most visible criminal justice issue facing the County in 2004-05, other criminal justice issues being addressed. During fiscal year 2003-04 the Board of Supervisors commissioned the Office of Management and Budget to perform a staffing analysis on the patrol staff within the Sheriff’s Office. This issue had not been addressed countywide since 1995. As a result, an increase of 42 positions was approved for Sheriff’s patrol. This included 35 patrol deputies, 3 detectives, 3 sergeants, and 1 deputy lieutenant. The annualized cost of $2.7 million is included in the 2004-05 budget. These new positions will serve the increased population in unincorporated areas and keep response times within safe limits. Changes in state statutory mandates caused Maricopa County to also analyze and recommend staffing increases for juvenile dependency cases. Maricopa County is responsible for these juvenile family related activities, which ensure the safety and well being of children in our community. This important function affects Superior Court, the Clerk of the Court, and the Indigent Representation departments. A total of $43 million is budgeted in fiscal year 2005 to address the growth in caseload for this population. Another criminal justice initiative that is being addressed in the budget is fully staffing a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) specific court. This court will expand and provide significant efficiencies, allowing Superior Court to expedite this growing caseload in the most effective manner, providing swift justice to those parties involved. The annualized cost of this item is $2.8 million. Other smaller items include the funding of increased security in the justice courts, and increased staffing needs in the County Attorney’s office for initial appearance court (to be addressed between the tentative and final budgets). Mandated Health Care The largest component of the general fund in Maricopa County is Mandated Health Care. Most of these costs are payments to the State of Arizona for programs that they operate and have the Arizona counties assist in funding. 6 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter The County’s contribution to the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) for the state indigent acute care program is expected to be $45.7 million next year. This contribution has increased by less than $100,000 from the current year and is one of the few components that is not growing. The cost of the Arizona Long-Term Care System (ALTCS), however, will jump by $15.2 million. Of this increase $11.8 million is due to the expiration at the end of FY 2003-04 of a temporary increase in the Federal Matching Assistance Percentage, which provided more Federal Funds for each state dollar spent and subsequently more funds to the county. The overall increase also includes $3.4 million for the county share of baseline growth in the ALTCS program. Other state mandates include a court-ordered mandate (Arnold v Sarn) for the seriously mentally ill. The increased cost for this issue next fiscal year is $1.5 million. In addition to the state related health care costs, Maricopa County is also working off a nearly $310 million claims resolution/litigation tail that was incurred when the County was responsible for enrolling indigents onto the AHCCCS membership rolls prior to 2002. If the County were to have significant litigation and binding arbitration losses, it could have a devastating impact on overall County fiscal health. Maricopa County believes that these lawsuits are fully defensible, and will aggressively defend our position and our taxpayers against the hospital systems that have joined this litigation. Other mandated health care functions include public health issues in our community. We are responsible for investigating infectious diseases, bio-terrorism, environmental health concerns, and other related issues. The budget for these public health departments have been left flat, despite a need to increase resources to this vital public function. Federal Homeland Security funding has allowed new staffing for bio-terrorism prevention and response. However, another important concern that continues to need attention is the West Nile Virus. To meet this potential threat, funding was provided during the current year for both the Environmental Services and Public Health Departments. These additional resources were used to expand the County’s capacity for mosquito abatement, disease surveillance and outbreak response. Other issues that will be addressed between the tentative and final budgets in these areas include: air quality studies, mobile food vendor health code enforcement, and the SAIL grant operational transfer to Human Services from the Maricopa Health System. Maricopa Health System As was stated earlier, the Maricopa Health System will be transitioned from a County department to a Special Health Care District during fiscal year 2004-05. The Delivery System is expected to transition in January 2005. In November of 2004, the electorate will choose a specially elected Board of Directors. This new governing body will assume the operational responsibility for the health delivery system and will then develop a budget for fiscal year 2005-06 and set a secondary tax rate to support the system. The members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors serve in the dual role as County Supervisors and the Special Health Care District Board of Directors until the new board is elected. The intent of the State Legislature when approving this district was to have the Board of Supervisors assume this role and be solely responsible for the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the district and the County. Since this vital and important role was given to the Board, the Board of Supervisors has vowed to be fair and equitable to both entities. In December 2003, the Guiding principles were set forth as follows: 1) The transaction must be fair to both County and District. 2) The transition must result in a “clean hand off” of operations to the new District. 3) The transition should be as transparent as possible to employees. Substantial attention has been placed on examining the financial records of the entire health system with the assistance of a new outsourced management team, Financial Resource Group (FRG). This national company is managing the health delivery system and the health care financial sections of the organization as well as other functions. Significant cash reserves have been budgeted in designations and contingency accounts to meet this Board approved goal. The budget for the Health Delivery System for FY2004-05 shows a fiscal turnaround of $30 million from the budget adopted in FY2003-04. This turnaround is a result of improved operational efficiencies, better collections processes, and a bad debt pick-up associated with the county owned health plans. This is a significant change in paradigm for County administration. It was always believed that the health plans were profitable and were 7 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter funding the hospitals losses. However, after closer examination by our health care consultants, it was discovered that the Delivery System was potentially profitable. This will improve the financial outlook for the new special health care district. The health plans, however, are losing money. In October 2002, a new claims adjudication information system was installed. The implementation of this system has been flawed and has created substantial operational and financial issues for the three health plans operated by the County. A restatement of the Incurred but Not Reported (IBNR) and Accounts Payable (A/P) liabilities resulted in significant estimated losses for the fiscal year 2003-04. A general fund subsidy for the plans of $41.25 million will be necessary in FY 2003-04 to cover these losses. FY 200405 will require an $8.5 million operating subsidy for the plans. As added insurance, another $45 million has been set-aside in contingency in this budget. One of the three plans, Senior Select, which is a Medicare choice+ plan has had a membership cap for over a year and has been losing money for several years. The Board of Supervisors is considering options including selling or closing this plan. If this were to occur, it would improve the 2004-05 budget by an estimated $500,000. The County is committed to resolving these issues and is ready to contract with a Third Party Administrator to pay claims. This should allow the health plans to return to solvency within a year, with intent to obtain profitability in subsequent fiscal years or to sell or close the remaining plans. Because of the financial problems within the health plans, these plans should not transition to the special health care district at this time. Employee Issues and Concerns Maricopa County’s employees are at the heart of quality service to the citizens. For the past two years, the County has limited funding for employee issues and so the Board of Supervisors was not able to fund employee annual performance increases. In fiscal year 2004-05, Maricopa County has set aside funding for performance increases and market issues. Most employees should receive a pay increase based on merit. There will also be funding for market increases in those classifications that have very high turnover. Those in the health care discipline have seen very high attrition rates and are going to be addressed first. Employee benefit costs are expected to continue to experience double-digits premium increases. This budget contains funding for increases in the employer contributions for health and dental increases. However, it is anticipated that the employees will be required to pick up a premium increase for the first time in three years. It is important that employee understand the cost of their benefits and contribute to the overall funding of this very valued and significant benefit. In addition to these initiatives, Maricopa County has many supplemental employee programs that encourage cost efficiency and customer service. These programs reward employees for ideas, cost savings, and good service and provide recognition and awards for achievement of Maricopa County principles. The Rewarding Ideas Program gives recognition and monetary awards for identifying and achieving cost savings for the County. Gain 8 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter sharing plans have been developed in a number of departments that, through team achievement, save money and improve service to our citizens. The Peak Performers program provides an opportunity for Directors and Managers to recognize employee through “spot awards”. Nominal gift certificates are given, on the spot, when an employee has provided exceptional customer service or has superior project performance. This is an instant motivator for employees. Finally, Maricopa County provides a Tuition Reimbursement program for the employees who are returning to higher education to enhance their job performance and increase their mobility within Maricopa County government. Our continued support of employees through the programs described above, should allow us to retain and attract high quality and talented public servants to our organization. This budget provides full support of employee programs. Conclusions The Board of Supervisors provides their usual leadership in the development of a fiscally conservative budget. Their policies and strategic direction has given us the framework necessary to achieve a budget, which delivers high-quality services, the lowest overall property tax rate in 25 years, and financial stability for the future. I also want to thank the Maricopa County elected officials, the Presiding Judge of Superior Court and the judicial officers, and the appointed department directors for their continued collaborative spirit during the budget process and throughout the year. Sincerely, David R. Smith County Administrative Officer On July 12, 2004, the Board of Supervisors approved the 2004-05 Final Budget, with changes from the Tentative Budget, including the Flood Control, Library, and Stadium Districts, in the amount of $2,585,202,470. General Fund revenues and expenditures decreased overall, due to the restatement of debt proceeds and payments associated with the Human Services Campus to debt service funds. Debt service fund revenue and expenditures reflect a corresponding increase. Special revenue fund revenues and expenditures increased overall, due primarily to increases in grant and other funding for the Sheriff's Office. Capital project fund revenue decreased due to a reduction in fund transfers, while capital project fund expenditures increased as the result of three new consolidated justice court projects being adding to the CIP. Changes in fund transfers required corresponding changes to the Eliminations budget. The Final Budget expenditures, which are subject to the expenditure limit, do not exceed those in the published estimates adopted by the Board of Supervisors on June 21, 2004. On August 16, 2004, the Board of Supervisors approved the 2004-05 Tax Rates of $1.4748 (consisting of the Primary Tax Rate of $1.2108, the Flood Control District Tax Rate of $0.2119 and the Library District Tax Rate of $0.0521) signifying the third and final action taken in the budget approval process. 9 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Transmittal Letter 10 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary Executive Summary Summary of Significant Accounting Policies The accounting policies of Maricopa County conform to generally accepted accounting principles applicable to governmental units adopted by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). During the year ended June 30, 2002, the County implemented GASB Statement No. 34, as amended by GASB Statement No. 37, which prescribes a new reporting model consisting of both government-wide and fund financial statements. The County also implemented GASB No. 38, which prescribes new and revised note disclosure. A summary of the County’s more significant accounting policies is presented. Basis of Presentation The basic financial statements include both government-wide statements and fund financial statements. The government-wide statements focus on the County as a whole, while the fund financial statements focus on major funds. Each presentation provides valuable information that can be analyzed and compared between years and between governments to enhance the usefulness of the information. Government-wide statements – provide information about the primary government (the County) and its component units. The statements include a statement of net assets and a statement of activities. These statements report the financial activities of the overall government, except for fiduciary activities. They also distinguish between the governmental and business-type activities of the County. Governmental activities generally are financed through taxes and intergovernmental revenues. Business type activities are finances in whole or in part by fees charged to external parties. The statement of activities presents a comparison between direct expenses and program revenues for each function of the County’s governmental activities and segment of its business-type activities. Direct expenses are those that are specifically associated with a program or function and, therefore, are clearly identifiable to a particular function. The County allocates indirect expenses to programs or functions. Program revenues include: • Charges to customers or applicants for goods, services, or privileges provided, • Operating grants and contributions, and • Capital grants and contributions, including special assessments. Revenues that are not classified as program revenues, including internally dedicated resources and all taxes, are reported as general revenues. Generally, the effect of interfund activity has been eliminated from the government-wide financial statements to minimize the double counting of internal activities. However, charges for interfund services provided and used are not eliminated if doing so would distort the direct costs and program revenues reports by the departments concerned. Fund-based financial statements – provide information about the County’s funds, including fiduciary funds and blended component units. Separate statements are presented for the governmental, proprietary, and fiduciary fund categories. The emphasis of fund financial statements is on major governmental and enterprise funds, each displayed in a separate column. All remaining governmental and enterprise funds are aggregated and reported as non-major funds. Fiduciary funds are aggregated and reported by fund type. Proprietary Fund Operating Revenues, such as charges for services, result from transactions associated with the fund’s principal activity in which each party receives and gives up essentially equal values. Non-operating revenues, such as subsidies and investment earnings, result from transactions in which the parties do not exchange equal values. Revenues generated by ancillary activities are also reported as non-operating revenues. The County reports and budgets for the following major governmental funds: The General Fund – is the County’s primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial resources of the general government, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. 11 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary The Transportation Fund – Plans and implements an environmentally balanced multi-model transportation system. Operations are funded through highway user tax. The Flood Control Fund – Provides flood control facilities and regulates floodplains and drainage to prevent flooding of property and endangering the lives of people in Maricopa County. Operations are funded by a secondary tax levy. The Detention Operations Fund – Established under the authority of propositions 400 and 401, which were passed in the General Election of November 3, 1998. These propositions authorized a temporary 1/5 cent sales tax to be used for the construction and operation of adult and juvenile detention facilities. The County Improvement – To account for the debt service on the Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2001, for $124,855,000. Funding is provided by transfers from the General Fund. The Detention Capital Projects Fund – Accounts for the proceeds associated with the temporary 1/5 of one cent Sales Tax approved by voters in the General Election of November 3, 1998. The proceeds are for the construction and operation of adult and juvenile detention facilities. The County Improvement Fund – Accounts for capital projects funded through the issuance of the Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2001, for $124,855,000. The County reports the following major enterprise funds: The Maricopa Health Plan Fund – Is an ambulatory health care plan operated by Maricopa Managed Care System (MMCS). MMCS contracts with the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) which provides monthly capitation revenues based on MCHP plan enrollment. The Health Care Delivery System Fund – The Maricopa Medical Center provides quality, cost competitive health care and health professional education to assure the health security of individuals, families, and the community. The Arizona Long-Term Care System (ALTCS) Fund – Is a managed care, long term care plan operated by Maricopa Managed Care Systems (MMCS). Chronically ill and physically disabled patients receive medical services as a result of an annual contract with AHCCCS. The County reports the following fund types: The internal service funds – account for automotive maintenance and service, telecommunications services, printing and duplicating services, insurance services, self insured employee benefits, and warehouse services provided to County department or to other governments on a cost reimbursement basis. The investment trust fund – accounts for pooled assets held and invested by the County Treasurer on behalf of county departments and other governmental entities. The agency funds – account for assets held by the County as an agent for the State and various local governments, for the property taxes collected and distributed to the State, local school districts, community college districts and special districts. Basis of Accounting The government-wide, proprietary, and fiduciary fund financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred, regardless of when the related cash flows take place. Property taxes are recognized as revenue in the year for which they are levied. Grants and donations are recognized as revenue as soon as all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met. Governmental funds in the fund-based financial statements are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Under this method, revenues are recognized when measurable and available. The County considers all revenues reported in the governmental funds to be available if the revenues are collected within 60 days after year-end. Expenditures are recorded when the related fund liability is incurred, except for principal and interest on general long-term debt, claims and judgments, compensated absences, and landfill closure and postclosure care costs, which are recognized as expenditures to 12 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary the extent they are due and payable. General capital asset acquisitions are reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Proceeds of general long-term debt and acquisitions under capital leases are reported as other financing sources. Under the terms of grant agreements, the County funds certain programs by a combination of grants and general revenues. Therefore, when program expenses are incurred there are both restricted and unrestricted net assets available to finance the program. The County applies grant resources to such programs before using general revenues. The County’s business-type activities and enterprise funds of the County follow FASB statements and Interpretations issued on or before November 30, 1989; Accounting Principles Board Opinions; and Accounting Research Bulletins, unless those pronouncements conflict with GASB pronouncements. Basis of Budgeting and Budgetary Control The County is required by Arizona law to prepare and adopt a balanced budget annually for the General, Special Revenue, Debt Service, Enterprise and Capital Projects Funds. Arizona law further requires that no expenditure shall be made or liability incurred in excess of the amounts budgeted except as provided by law. Appropriation levels are established on a departmental basis and lapse annually. Transfers during the year from the contingency account to a department’s budget require approval of the Board of Supervisors. Budgeted amounts are reported as originally adopted or as adjusted by allocations from reserves (contingency) or as amended by authorization from the Board of Supervisors. The County budgets for Governmental Fund types on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), with the exception of the following types of transactions: • Capital Lease Transactions • Bond Issuance Transactions • Arizona Long-Term Care System Refund The activity in the Sports Authority, Probate Programs, Regional Schools, and Taxpayers’ Information Funds is not specifically budgeted, but is presented as separate funds in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). Budget Process Introduction Maricopa County’s fiscal year begins July 1 and ends the following June 30, coinciding with the State of Arizona’s fiscal calendar. The Maricopa County budget process is closely tied to the strategic planning process, forming a continuous cycle of planning-budgeting-evaluation. The following timeline details the basic budget process. 13 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary Budget Process Timeline Activity* Forecast Strategic Plans Develop BFR Approve BFR Instructions Budget kick-off ISF Estimates Requests 5-Year CIP Submitted Budget Reviews DCA Reviews Presentations Consolidates CAO Presents BOS Approves BOS Adopts Tax Rates Set JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Previous Years Tax Rate Setting *Activity Explanations Forecast 10 Year Financial Forecast developed based on economic trends Strategic Plans Departments update Strategic Plans and draft Results Initiatives due Develop BFR OMB develops Budgeting for Results guidelines Approve BFR Board of Supervisors approve Budgeting for Results guidelines Instructions OMB establishes expenditure levels and prepares budget instructions for departments to use in budget preparation Budget kick-off Budget kick-off meetings held; budget targets, guidelines, policies, and other documentation distributed; training provided ISF Estimates Internal Service Fund (ISF) cost estimates submitted to the OMB Requests Departments prepare budget requests 5-Year CIP 5-Year Capital Improvement Program developed and approved by the Board of Supervisors Submitted Departments submits budget requests Budget Reviews OMB reviews budget requests DCA Reviews The Deputy County Administrator (DCA) reviews appointed departments' budgets and negotiate budgets with Elected Officials and Judicial Branch Presentations Elected Officials and Judicial Branch budget requests presented to the Board of Supervisors Consolidates OMB consolidates the County's Tentative Budget CAO Presents County Administrative Officer presents Tentative Budget to the Board of Supervisors BOS Approves Board of Supervisors approve Tentative Budget BOS Adopts Board of Supervisors adopts the Final Budgets Tax Rates Set Property tax rates are approved by the Board The Annual Budget Process presented below is an example of the general tools that guide the budget process. It is intended to enhance the reader’s understanding of the entire budget process. This overview does not replace the actual FY 2004-05 and FY 2005-06 budget processes that follow, or the actual FY 2004-05 budget calendar provided in the Attachments section of this document. Each year, certain circumstances, such as delays in the State of Arizona’s budget approval process, may impact and alter certain dates. Annual Budget Process Financial Forecast Developed: The annual budget process begins in July of each fiscal year when the Office of Management and Budget develops a financial forecast. The forecast assists in both short and long range financial planning. This forecast provides a conservative estimate of the County’s fiscal condition through the next ten years given realistic economic trends, current Board policies and existing laws. The forecast does not incorporate anticipated policy changes, spending priorities, or proposed new revenue sources. The resulting forecasts include revenues, expenditures and ending fund balances beginning with the current fiscal year for major funds. Strategic Plan Updates: Departments review their strategic plans to ensure that the services they provide are accurately and fully represented in the plan, and that performance measures are meaningful. If necessary, departmental strategic plans are updated. See the Managing for Results section for details behind this process. 14 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary Budgeting for Results Guidelines Developed and Approved: The Office of Management and Budget develops annual budget guidelines for the Board of Supervisors’ approval. These are broad directives that provide guidance to departments regarding base submissions, requests for additional funding, capital project budgeting, and compliance with various Board policies. The Guidelines are influenced by current economic conditions and the financial forecast. Expenditure Levels Established: The Office of Management and Budget develops base-level expenditure targets for each department and fund based on current year appropriations. Adjustments are made for one-time expenses, and annualizations of mid-year budget adjustments. Expenditure levels are right-sized as necessary to ensure that they do not exceed available resources. Budget Instructions Prepared and Disseminated: The Office of Management and Budget prepares budget targets and detailed instructions for departmental budget submissions. Instructions provide methodologies for budgeting revenue, personnel expenses, capital projects, and capital purchases, as well as technical guidance for entering budget requests into the budget system. Budget Kick-Off Meetings Held, and Associated Materials Distributed: The budget season officially begins with Budget Kick-Off Meetings, at which the Office of Management and Budget introduces the budget guidelines for the upcoming year. These meetings address changes to the budget process, as well as introduce the schedule for the budget season. Submission instructions are provided to departments, as is information about recent updates or changes to the budget system. Internal Service Fund Costs Estimates Submitted: The Total Compensation, Materials Management, Equipment Services, Risk Management, and Telecommunications departments provide the Office of Management and Budget with estimates on the cost of services for the upcoming fiscal year. This information is compiled by the Office of Management and Budget, and distributed to departments Count-wide so that they can adequately budget for internal services. Budget Requests Prepared: Departments must submit budget requests for revenue and expenditures that are consistent with the targets provided by the Office of Management and Budget. Any proposed increases to expenditure levels must be submitted as a Results Initiative Request. Departments must submit supporting documentation on revenues and expenditures for each of their distinct funds, and allocate budgets according to elements of their strategic plan. Capital projects funds must also be allocated by specific capital projects. In addition, detailed base budgets and Results Initiative Requests must be entered into the budget system. Five Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Submitted and Approved: Departments involved in capital construction must prepare and submit a five year budget for every project, and indicate how the project contributes to their strategic plan. This information is analyzed and compiled by the Office of Management and Budget, and presented to the Board of Supervisors for their review and approval. Budget Requests Submitted: Departments typically have several weeks during which to develop their requested budget. Base budget requests, Results Initiative Requests, and supporting documentation are submitted to the Office of Management and Budget in both hard copy and electronic form. Draft Results Initiatives Request (RIR) Submitted: RIR’s must be drafted and submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for departments requiring funding above the budget base to support a program, activity and strategic goal identified in the strategic planning process. Results initiatives address mandates, demands for service caused by demographic changes, new programs, or expansion of existing programs. Results initiatives must clearly relate to the department’s mission and be supported by relevant performance measures. Budget Requests Reviewed: The Office of Management and Budget analyzes base budgets and Results Initiative Requests in the context of available resources, Board of Supervisors’ priorities, and performance, as defined by each department’s strategic plan. Budget requests are analyzed at the object-code level for every fund and strategic plan element. All funds must be structurally balanced, and all positions must be fully funded. Deputy County Administrator Reviews and Negotiates Budgets: After analyzing requested budgets, the Office of Management and Budget prepares budget recommendations for the Deputy County Administrator’s review. The Deputy County Administrator reviews and approves budget recommendations for appointed departments, and negotiates with elected officials and Judicial Branch departments to reach budget agreements. 15 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary Budget Requests Presented: Elected officials and the Judicial Branch departments have the opportunity to present their requested budgets to the Board of Supervisors. This provides an opportunity to highlight significant issues, and discuss any Results Initiative Requests that may have been submitted. Tentative Budget Consolidated: Upon finalization of budget recommendations and agreements, the Office of Management and Budget consolidates the budget for the entire County. This includes verifying that all fund transfers are budgeted appropriately, balancing the Eliminations budget, fine-tuning the General Government and Appropriated Fund Balance budgets, verifying that all entries have been made correctly in the budget system, and creating consolidated reports. These tasks culminate in the creation of a tentative budget document. Tentative Budget Presented and Adopted: The Deputy County Administrator presents the tentative budget to the Board of Supervisors, highlighting significant changes in revenues, expenditures, and overall structure. The presentation also includes an overview of issues facing the County, such as changes in benefits or retirement rates, State statutes impacting County operations, and econometric trends. The Board of Supervisors may choose to change the tentative budget, or adopt it as recommended. Public Meetings Held: Each Supervisor may hold a public meeting in their district to elicit citizen feedback on the tentative budget. An overview of the budget is presented by the Office of Management and Budget, followed by a question and answer period. These meetings are advertised in local papers. Final Budget Adopted: The Office of Management and Budget consolidates the final budget, including any changes requested by the Board of Supervisors. The final budget is presented to the Board of Supervisors during a public hearing by the Deputy County Administrator for their adoption. Property Tax Rates Approved: Maricopa County levies primary property taxes based on assessed valuations of personal and real property. Each year the primary tax levy limit is computed by the Assessor’s Office and is confirmed by the State Property Tax Oversight Commission. The County also levies secondary property taxes for specific purposes, namely the Flood Control District and the Library District. Fiscal Year 2004-05 Budget Process The FY 2004-05 budget process began with the update of the 10-year financial forecast, which is based on current economic trends provided to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) by its contracted economist. This became the cornerstone for revenue projections for FY 2004-05. In the Fall of 2000, all County departments developed new strategic plans and performance measures based on a standardized format for use during FY 2001-02 (see Managing For Results Section and Managing For Results Policy in the Attachments section). Very few strategic plan updates were needed during the FY 2004-05 budget planning process. On December 1, 2003, the Board of Supervisors approved the updated budget guidelines (see Budgeting For Results Policy Guidelines in the Attachment section) that incorporated the initiatives found in the Managing For Results Policy. OMB then developed the departmental expenditure levels (budget targets) and the instructions departments would use in developing their budget requests. The budget kick-off meeting was held in December with departments. Budget targets and related instructions were distributed and budget system training was provided to requesting departments. Internal Service Fund (ISF) cost estimates submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) were distributed to departments. The Office of Management and Budget received departmental budget requests beginning in December and reviewed them through the end of March. The Deputy County Administrator (DCA) reviewed the appointed departments’ budgets and began the budget negotiation process with the Elected Officials and the Judicial Branch beginning in mid-March through mid-April. Through early June, the Office of Management and Budget consolidated the County's Tentative Budget which includes maximum expenditure limits. The County Administrative Officer presented the preliminary budget to the Board of Supervisors in late June, and the Board approved it one week later. The Board of Supervisors adopted the final budget on July 12, 2004. The property tax rate, which must cover the expenditure total in the approved annual budget, was set on August 16, 2004. 16 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary Fiscal Year 2005-06 Budget Process The FY 2005-06 budget process will be similar to that of a normal budget year. Beginning in July 2004, an update of the 10-year financial forecast will begin. This process, in conjunction with other revenue forecasting based on economic trends, will be the cornerstone for revenue projections for FY 2005-06. The Office of Management and Budget will begin developing the Budgeting For Results Policy Guidelines (budget guidelines), which the Board of Supervisors will approve by early December 2004. Following this Board action, expenditure budget targets will be developed and budget kick-off meetings will be held with departments. Budget instructions, policies, and necessary documentation will be distributed and training on the budget preparation system will be provided to departments. The Office of Management and Budget will receive departmental budget requests by early February and will review them through mid-March. The Deputy County Administrator (DCA) will then review the appointed departments’ budgets and begin the budget negotiation process with the Elected Official and the Judicial Branch. This process is expected to last through mid-April. Through early May, the Office of Management and Budget will consolidate the County's Tentative Budget, which includes the maximum expenditure limits. The County Administrative Officer will present the preliminary budget to the Board of Supervisors in mid-May, and the Board is slated to approve it a week later. The FY 2005-06 Final Budget is scheduled for adoption by the Board of Supervisors in June 2005. The property tax rates, which must cover the expenditure total in the approved annual budget, are scheduled to be approved by the third Monday in August 2005. Statutory Requirements The Maricopa County budget adoption process is guided by various Arizona statutes. According to A.R.S. §4217101, “On or before the third Monday in July each year the governing body of each county and incorporated city or town shall prepare: 1. A full and complete statement of the political subdivision's financial affairs for the preceding fiscal year. 2. An estimate of the different amounts that will be required to meet the political subdivision's public expense for the current fiscal year entered in the minutes of the governing body and containing the items prescribed by section 42-17102. 3. A summary schedule of estimated expenditures and revenues that shall be: (a) Entered in the minutes of the governing body. (b) Prepared according to forms supplied by the auditor general." A.R.S. §42-17102 states, “A. The annual estimate of expenses of each county, city and town shall include: 1. An estimate of the amount of money required for each item of expenditure necessary for county, city or town purposes. 2. The amounts necessary to pay the interest and principal of outstanding bonds. 3. The items and amounts of each special levy provided by law. 4. An amount for unanticipated contingencies or emergencies. 5. A statement of the receipts for the preceding fiscal year from sources other than direct property taxes. 6. The amounts that are estimated to be received during the current fiscal year from sources other than direct property taxes and voluntary contributions. 7. The amounts that were actually levied and the amounts that were actually collected for county, city or town purposes on the primary and secondary property tax rolls of the preceding fiscal year. 8. The amounts that were collected through primary property taxes and secondary property taxes levied for the years before the preceding fiscal year. 9. The amount that is proposed to be raised by direct property taxation for the current fiscal year for the general fund, bonds, special assessments and district levies. 10. The separate amounts to be raised by primary property tax levies and by secondary property tax levies for the current fiscal year. 11. The amount of voluntary contributions estimated to be received pursuant to section 48-242, based on the information transmitted to the governing body by the department of revenue. 12. The maximum amount that can be raised by primary property tax levies by the county, city or town pursuant to article 2 of this chapter for the current fiscal year. 13. The amount that the county, city or town proposes to raise by secondary property tax levies and the additional amounts, if any, that the county, city or town will levy pursuant to the authority given to the governing body by the voters at an election called pursuant to article 5 of this chapter. 14. The property tax rate for county, city or town purposes for the preceding fiscal year for the primary property tax and the secondary property tax. 15. The estimated property tax rate for county, city or town purposes for the current fiscal year for the primary property tax and the secondary property tax. 16. The expenditure limitation for the preceding fiscal year and the total amount that was proposed to be spent for the preceding fiscal year. 17. The total expenditure limitation for the current fiscal year. 18. The amount of monies received from primary property taxation in the preceding fiscal year in excess of the maximum allowable amount as computed pursuant to article 2 of this 17 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary chapter. B. The estimate shall be fully itemized according to forms supplied by the auditor general showing under separate headings: 1. The amounts that are estimated as required for each department, public office or official. 2. A complete disclosure and statement of the contemplated expenditures for the current fiscal year, showing the amount proposed to be spent from each fund and the total amount of proposed public expense. C. The total of amounts proposed in the estimates to be spent shall not exceed the expenditure limitation established for the county, city or town.” According to A.R.S. §42-17103, “A. The governing body of each county, city or town shall publish the estimates of expenses and a notice of a public hearing and special meeting of the governing body to hear taxpayers and make tax levies at designated times and places. B. The estimates and notice shall be published once a week for at least two consecutive weeks after the estimates are tentatively adopted in the official newspaper of the county, city or town, if there is one, and, if not, in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, city or town. C. If a truth in taxation notice and hearing is required under section 42-17107, the governing body may combine the notice under this section with the truth in taxation notice.” A.R.S. §42-17104 states, “A. The governing body of each county, city or town shall hold a public hearing and special meeting on or before the seventh day before the day on which it levies taxes as stated in the notice under section 42-17103. Any taxpayer may appear and be heard in favor of or against any proposed expenditure or tax levy. B. If a truth in taxation notice and hearing is required under section 42-17107, the governing body may combine the hearing under this section with the truth in taxation hearing.” The budget is adopted per A.R.S. §42-17105, “A. After the hearing on estimates under section 42-17104 is concluded, the governing body shall convene in a special meeting and finally determine and adopt estimates of proposed expenditures for the purposes stated in the published proposal. B. The adopted estimates constitute the budget of the county, city or town for the current fiscal year. C. The total amounts that are proposed to be spent in the budget shall not exceed the total of amounts that were proposed for expenditure in the published estimates.” Beginning with the Fiscal Year 1997-98 budget process, A.R.S. §42-17107, otherwise know as the “Truth in Taxation” legislation went into effect, which states that, “A. On or before July 1, the county assessor shall transmit to the county, city or town an estimate of the total net assessed valuation of the county, city or town, including an estimate of new property that has been added to the tax roll since the previous levy of property taxes in the county, city or town. If the proposed primary property tax levy, excluding amounts that are attributable to new construction, is greater than the amount levied by the county, city or town in the preceding tax year in the county, city or town: 1. The governing body shall publish a notice that meets the following requirements: (a) The notice shall be published twice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, city or town. The first publication shall be at least fourteen but not more than twenty days before the date of the hearing. The second publication shall be at least seven but not more than ten days before the date of the hearing. (b) The notice shall be published in a location other than the classified or legal advertising section of the newspaper in which it is published. (c) The notice shall be at least one-fourth page in size and shall be surrounded by a solid black border at least one-eighth inch in width. (d) The notice shall be in the following form, with the "truth in taxation hearing - notice of tax increase" headline in at least eighteen point type: Truth in Taxation Hearing Notice of Tax Increase In compliance with section 42-17107, Arizona Revised Statutes, __________ (name of county, city or town) is notifying its property taxpayers of __________'s (name of county, city or town) intention to raise its primary property taxes over last year's level. __________ (name of county, city or town) is proposing an increase in primary property taxes of $__________ or _____%. For example, the proposed tax increase will cause __________'s (name of county, city or town) primary property taxes on a $100,000 home to increase from $__________ (total taxes that would be owed without the proposed tax increase) to $__________ (total proposed taxes including the tax increase). This proposed increase is exclusive of increased primary property taxes received from new construction. The increase is also exclusive of any changes that may occur from property tax levies for voter approved bonded indebtedness or budget and tax overrides. All interested citizens are invited to attend the public hearing on the tax increase that is scheduled to be held __________ (date and time) at __________ (location). 18 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary 2. In lieu of publishing the truth in taxation notice, the governing body may mail the truth in taxation notice prescribed by paragraph 1, subdivision (d) to all registered voters in the county, city or town at least ten but not more than twenty days before the date of the hearing on the estimates pursuant to section 42-17104. 3. In addition to publishing the truth in taxation notice under paragraph 1 or mailing the notice under paragraph 2, the governing body shall issue a press release containing the truth in taxation notice. 4. The governing body shall consider a motion to levy the increased property taxes by roll call vote. 5. Within three days after the hearing, the governing body shall mail a copy of the truth in taxation notice, a statement of its publication or mailing and the result of the governing body's vote under paragraph 4 to the property tax oversight commission. 6. The governing body shall hold the truth in taxation hearing on or before the adoption of the county, city or town budget under section 42-17105. B. For purposes of this section, "amount attributable to new construction" means the net assessed valuation of property added to the tax roll since the previous year multiplied by a property tax rate computed by dividing the primary property tax levy of the county, city or town in the preceding year by the estimate of the total net assessed valuation of the county, city or town for the current year, excluding the net assessed valuation attributable to new construction.” Tax rates are set according to A.R.S. §42-17151, which states that, “A. On or before the third Monday in August each year the governing body of each county, city, town, community college district and school district shall: 1. Fix, levy and assess the amount to be raised from primary property taxation and secondary property taxation. This amount, plus all other sources of revenue, as estimated, and unencumbered balances from the preceding fiscal year, shall equal the total of amounts proposed to be spent in the budget for the current fiscal year. 2. Designate the amounts to be levied for each purpose appearing in the adopted budget. 3. Fix and determine a primary property tax rate and a secondary property tax rate, each rounded to four decimal places on each one hundred dollars of taxable property shown by the finally equalized valuations of property, less exemptions, that appear on the tax rolls for the fiscal year and that when extended on those valuations will produce, in the aggregate, the entire amount to be raised by direct taxation for that year. B. The governing body of a county, city, town or community college district shall not fix, levy or assess an amount of primary property taxes in excess of the amount permitted by section 42-17051, subsection A, paragraph 7 or section 42-17005 as determined by the property tax oversight commission. C. Within three days after the final levies are determined for a county, city, town or community college district, the chief county fiscal officer shall notify the property tax oversight commission of the amount of the primary property tax levied.” Budget Adjustment Process Any department requesting an adjustment to its budget must do so via a written request which must be approved by the Board of Supervisors. According to A.R.S. §42-17106, “A. Except as provided in subsection B, a county, city or town shall not: 1. Spend money for a purpose that is not included in its budget. 2. Spend money or incur or create a debt, obligation or liability in a fiscal year in excess of the amount stated for each purpose in the finally adopted budget for that year, except as provided by law, regardless of whether the county, city or town has received at any time, or has on hand, monies or revenue in excess of the amount required to meet expenditures, debts, obligations and liabilities that are incurred under the budget. B. A governing body may transfer monies between budget items if all of the following apply: 1. The monies are available. 2. The transfer is in the public interest and based on a demonstrated need. 3. The transfer does not result in a violation of the limitations prescribed in article IX, sections 19 and 20, Constitution of Arizona. 4. A majority of the members of the governing body votes affirmatively on the transfer at a public meeting.” If approved, the requesting department must prepare and submit a completed budget adjustment per the instructions provided by the Office of Management & Budget for processing. The Office of Management & Budget is responsible for verifying the budget adjustment for accuracy and appropriateness on a timely basis. The Budget Analyst, after appropriate analysis is performed, authorizes the adjustment be made. The Office of Management and Budget is responsible for inputting the budget adjustments into the financial system. The Department of Finance is responsible for the final, electronic, approval of the budget adjustment in the financial system. Programmatic Budgeting Maricopa County has been budgeting based on program since the early 1990’s, but revised that process through the “Managing for Results” initiation. It provides a shift in the focus of financial planning from resource allocation (input) to service results (output). This budgetary policy is a focus which seeks to relate the consumption of 19 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary financial resources to services provided. It allows for the modification of activities based on the prioritization’s of strategic goals and objectives, as defined by departmental strategic plans, and reflects the financial conservatism of our community. A major benefit of activity based budgeting is the ability to track program performance. Department directors develop budget requests based on program priorities. The involvement of service providers in the budget process ensures that priorities remain focused on the delivery of services to the community. By focusing on the service needs of County residents, and by developing strategic plans that take a systematic approach to meeting those needs, Maricopa County is better able to act as a steward of the public funds. Through the Managing for Results initiative, Maricopa County has standardized how it will budget and report financial figures. In FY 2001-02, PAS (Program/Service/Activity) codes were developed to track expenses at this level. Beginning in FY 2002-03, the budget was developed and expenditures were reported utilizing this new standardized PAS codes. Expenditure reporting is then aligned directly with department’s strategic plan programs and performance measures. Policies and Their Budgetary Impact Introduction Since the financial turbulence of FY 1993-94, Maricopa County has reached financial recovery and stability. Over the past few years, a set of systems and policies have been developed and adopted to ensure that the fiduciary obligations as stewards of public monies are met. The policies deal with a wide range of areas that provide financial safeguards and policy direction to the organization on matters such as lump sum budgeting, budget development and reserves and tax reduction. In recent years, many of these policies have been updated to incorporate the new Managing for Results philosophy. A discussion of these policies, which includes their intent and their applicability to the budget process or financial management, is included on the following pages. Copies of all these policies can be found in the Attachments section. Budgeting For Results Accountability Policy Background On June 13, 1994, the Board of Supervisors departed from tradition and approved a tentative budget which called for a lump sum allocation of authorized expenditures for all departments. While budgets are built by identifying expenditures and revenues by distinct categories and programs, budgets are controlled at the department/fund level. This policy is updated and adjusted annually. In May 1997 and later in December 2000, the Board of Supervisors amended this policy in order to meet the challenges of the implementation of a broad-band compensation system and Managing for Results. Funding is allocated to departments on an annual basis. Intent According to A.R.S. §42-17106, the County may not incur expenditures in excess of the amounts appropriated by the Board of Supervisors in the annual budget. The purpose of the Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy is to provide departments with the flexibility in managing their allocated public resources to achieve program results, while upholding accountability for spending within legal appropriations. This policy seeks to strengthen budget accountability and ownership at the department level. The program encourages departmental staff to save resources and be creative in the delivery of services. This approach to budgeting can help the County cope with new fiscal challenges and improve the quality of County Services. Main Provisions Funding is allocated to departments on an annual basis. Departments are required to submit a monthly (calendarized) revenue and expenditure plan. This serves as the basis for the annual appropriations in the financial system. Departments are held responsible for bottom-line performance and absorb unanticipated cost increases and revenue shortfalls. Departments have the authority to adjust their monthly revenue and expenditure budgets, but adjustments are restricted to the same funding source, e.g., General Fund. Once a department exceeds (or is projected to exceed) their budget allotment, full controls may be implemented and the financial system will prevent payments from being generated. 20 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary Personnel costs account for a large portion of the budget. By taking a lump sum approach, adequate funding for all established positions becomes crucial. Therefore, all positions must be fully funded. Any positions not funded in a department’s budget submission are eliminated per the Funded Positions Policy, which was also adopted by the Board in May 1997. (See the Attachments section for a copy of this policy.) Expenditure and revenue variance reviews are conducted with departments on a monthly basis by the Department of Finance. This process includes participation by the Office of Management & Budget to insure accurate estimates, identify savings, and assist in preparing the following year’s budget target. Departments are allowed to retain and carry forward savings achieved by cost cutting that does not decrease service levels within a fiscal year. Any savings with a service level impact must be approved by the Board of Supervisors. Budgeting For Results Policy Guidelines Background Developed each year, these guideline serves as the "umbrella" document for the next year's budget development process. It alludes to, and reinforces points from other policies. Intent Provide policy direction to the departments in the development of their budget submissions. Maricopa County’s budget process provides for responsible management of taxpayers’ resources, while insuring that funds are directed towards achieving results at all levels. Budgetary decisions are based on performance information that describes the cost or efficiency of producing an activity and the results achieved for customers. This is accomplished by structuring the accounting and budgeting systems according to the structure of departments' strategic plans. Main Provisions: General The Board of Supervisors must understand and be aware of all fiscal impacts due to programs needs in order to make sound budgeting decisions. Therefore, specific guidelines were developed addressing several key areas that in the past may or may not have been surfaced. For example, • New programs are not to be instituted without Board of Supervisors approval. • New, unfunded, or underfunded program mandates from the state or federal government must be critically reviewed by the Director or Program Manager to identify fiscal impact and funding solutions. • Full cost recovery is to be attempted for all programs and services. And, • Organizational and financial structural changes are to be made prior to budget kick-off. Revenues Traditionally, User Fees had been inconsistently established. The revenue policy section focuses attention on the adoption and review of those fees and charges. User Fees for all operations will be reviewed and set to attempt to recover up to, but not greater than 100% of costs; market rates and charges for comparable services for similar services will be considered. Expenditures The expenditure section communicates how budget targets are established and what adjustments if any will be made to those targets. Carryover items will not be budgeted without Board of Supervisor approval. Expenditure targets will be based on calendar year end current positions, revised budget supplies and services plus full-year impacts of any adjustments, and revised budget capital outlay. Turnover savings will be applied to submitted budgets based on current turnover rates (which can be negotiated with Office of Management & Budget and approved by the County Administrative Officer.) Internal Service Fund and Cost Allocation This section establishes the process to determine the charges for services and directs the departments to budget (according to those charges) for any discretionary services they may require. The Department of Finance will 21 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary determine and charge the various funds for central service cost activities based on a full cost allocation methodology (and will include the base level service charges from Facilities, Materials, and Telecommunications). Capital Improvements Capital improvement program policy direction provides for the adequate and orderly replacement of facilities and major equipment from current revenue where possible, the funding of the organization’s own maintenance needs, and reviewing and gaining approval on carryover projects prior to the consideration of new requests. Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy Background In August 1996, the Board of Supervisors adopted this policy which established the guidelines for the maintenance and use of any reserve fund balances. Reserve funds are defined as the difference between fund assets and fund liabilities. A reserve fund balance that is determined to exist during any fiscal year will be budgeted for the next fiscal year according to priorities established by this policy. Intent The policy provides for budgetary stability, debt reduction and, ultimately, stabilization and reduction of tax rates when possible. During times of economic downturn, such as an unexpected decrease in revenues or unavoidable increase in expenditures, the policy may be used to stabilize the general fund until appropriate long-term budgetary adjustments are made. However, every attempt will be made to forecast economic changes and manage finances in the new environment without expenditure of reserves or an increase in taxes. Reserves above the base level determined to ensure financial stability should be used to retire debt in advance of maturities. Further, the purpose of the policy is to demonstrate a commitment to the maintenance and, when possible, reduction of the tax rate while ensuring that Maricopa County remains financially stable and accountable to the citizens. Main Provisions: Reserves The Board of Supervisors will maintain an unreserved fund balance for the County. At the close of each fiscal year, the status of the unreserved fund balance and outstanding debt in light of revenue projections and other economic considerations is determined and the County Administrative Officer will recommend to the Board of Supervisors a target unreserved balance for the coming fiscal year. The County Administrative Officer also recommends retention of proceeds from the sale of major County assets in the event of liabilities related to those assets. The County Administrator Officer’s recommendations may include any of the following: • Fiscal stabilization by supplementing revenues during economic downturns. • Reduction of cash flow borrowing. • Funding of one-time capital purchases with cash. • Retiring outstanding long and/or short term debt. • Funding outstanding liabilities associated with major assets that were formerly owned by the County. Tax Reduction The County, will strive to set the county-wide tax rate at current or lower levels, unless otherwise mandated by a vote of the citizenry or legislative enactment. The Board of Supervisors may reduce tax rates when, according to reasonable estimates, the tax reduction is sustainable for the foreseeable future; when the recurring revenue is in excess of the recurring expenditures and the projections of the recurring revenue based on the proposed tax rate (after the tax reduction is made) must at least equal expenditures; when the County's reserve balance is sufficient to ensure against cash-flow borrowing and unexpected economic changes; when attempting to reduce short-term 22 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Executive Summary debt in advance of due dates, therefore, eliminating recurring short term debt; and when possible, attempts have been made to fund one-time capital purchases with cash rather than incurring further debt. County Judicial Branch Starting in FY 2002-03, Adult Probation, Juvenile Probation and Trial Courts are known as the "Judicial Branch", and considered as one appropriation. Any and all appropriations in the "Judicial Branch" appropriation can be moved between any and all “Judicial Branch” departments by Fund, as requested and approved by the Presiding Judge, without any further Board approval. Indigent Representation Starting in FY 2002-03, Contract Counsel, Legal Advocate, Legal Defender and Public Defender are known as "Indigent Representation", and considered as one appropriation. Any and all appropriations in the "Indigent Representation" appropriation can be moved between any and all “Indigent Representation” departments by Fund, as requested and approved by the County Administrative Officer, without any further Board approval. Disproportionate Share Starting in FY 2004-05, the County Administrative Officer may authorize an administrative adjustment to the Disproportionate Share budget once the County is notified of the actual value of this transaction from the State. This adjustment will be offset with corresponding adjustments to the Eliminations budget and, as a result, will have no net impact on the Countywide budget. The Office of Management and Budget is responsible for notifying the Board of Supervisors and the Department of Finance of this adjustment once complete. Interfund Loan to Detention Capital Projects Fund (455) The Board of Supervisors approves and authorizes the use of funds by the Detention Capital Projects Fund, (Fund 455), from the County Improvement Debt Service Fund, (Fund 320). The Debt Service Fund has an unreserved fund balance, which may be used temporarily to cover a projected cash deficiency in the Detention Capital Projects Fund. This transaction will not impact the County’s ability to make future debt service payments. A projected cash flow deficiency in the Detention Capital Projects Fund is due to construction spending occurring at a faster pace than the collection of the Jail Excise Tax. General Obligation - Debt Service Fund (312) Pursuant to ARS 11-275, the Board of Supervisors authorizes the transfer of any monies received in the General Obligation - Debt Service Fund (Fund 312) to be reported in the General Fund (Fund 100). Economic Development, Non-profits, Agricultural Extension and Accommodation Schools A.R.S. §11-254 authorizes the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to appropriate up to a maximum of $1.5 million for contributions to non-profit organizations for economic development activities. A.R.S. §11-254.04 allows the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to appropriate and spend public monies for and in connection with economic development activities. A.R.S. §3-126 authorizes the Board of Supervisors to appropriate funds based on a request submitted to them by the Agricultural Extension Board for extension work that will benefit Maricopa County. The Board of Supervisors is authorized by A.R.S. §15-1001 to appropriate funding for Accommodation Schools. As illustrated in the table below, the FY 2004-05 Budget includes a total of $3,094,776 in funding for these issues. 23 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Agency Supported Greater Phoenix Economic Council Phoenix Chamber of Commerce Greater Phoenix Convention & Visitors Bureau Maricopa County Sports Commission Western Maricopa Enterprise Zone Collaboration for a New Century International Genomics Consortium Total Economic Development Funding Executive Summary Program Economic Development Action Plan Bid Source Program, APTAN Convention & Tourism Destination Marketing Enriching Our Community Through Sports Economic Development Support Improving the standard of living for the community by working with issues concerning children, housing, and health care To put Maricopa County in the forefront of the bio-industry FY 2004-05 Final Budget $ 674,776 165,000 250,000 25,000 15,000 25,000 1,000,000 $ 2,154,776 Central Arizona Shelter Services (CASS) Emergency Shelter Total General Non-Profit Funding $ $ 180,000 180,000 University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Maricopa County Cooperative Extension Total Agricultural Extension Funding $ $ 230,000 230,000 Maricopa County Regional Schools Maricopa County Regional Schools* Total Accommodation School Funding $ $ 530,000 530,000 24 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues and Expenditures by Category FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget CONSOLIDATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS Special Revenue General Fund Capital Projects Debt Service Enterprise Internal Service Sub-Total Unreserved/Undesignated Beginning Fund Balance $ 129,782,461 $ 145,216,234 $ 97,161,780 $ 77,022,166 $ 19,423,268 $ 25,796,699 $ 494,402,608 $ REVENUES PROPERTY TAXES $ 339,882,099 $ TAX PENALTIES & INTEREST 10,857,480 SALES TAXES LICENSES AND PERMITS 1,463,436 GRANTS OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 8,594,302 PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 6,929,684 374,939,056 STATE SHARED SALES TAX STATE SHARED HIGHWAY USER REV STATE SHARED VEHICLE LICENSE 118,057,605 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 21,688,915 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 52,848 FINES & FORFEITS 12,208,033 INTEREST EARNINGS 2,417,347 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 5,822,611 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS PROCEEDS OF FINANCING TRANSFERS IN 133,499,730 Revenues Subtotal $ 1,036,413,146 $ 71,999,041 $ $ $ 5,215,094 112,421,733 29,874,740 150,000 127,742,153 274,389 21,202,798 62,520,114 325,048 88,073,124 8,000,000 42,019,371 1,352,910 5,253,670 2,250,000 1,057,305 2,072,725 2,200,000 753,000 20,834,327 200,000 28,850,000 133,418,891 3,443,111 175,922,832 706,107,847 $ 13,382,594 $ 227,935,935 $ Eliminations - All Funds $ 494,402,608 $ $ 411,881,140 $ $ 411,881,140 10,857,480 10,857,480 117,636,827 117,636,827 31,338,176 31,338,176 5,177,368 133,069,521 133,069,521 87,424,800 1,030,047 181,046,450 181,046,450 7,254,732 7,254,732 374,939,056 374,939,056 88,073,124 88,073,124 126,057,605 126,057,605 50,000 39,364,705 103,122,991 (32,395,291) 70,727,700 50,375,372 50,375,372 (50,375,372) 750,289,544 751,695,302 (90,917,032) 660,778,270 17,461,703 17,461,703 1,452,398 500,000 9,749,775 9,749,775 4,046,466 14,775 33,671,179 33,671,179 200,000 200,000 28,850,000 28,850,000 24,224,170 7,545,007 478,053,741 (478,053,741) 872,664,746 $ 98,829,906 $ 2,955,334,174 $ (651,741,436) $ 2,303,592,738 Total Sources $ 1,166,195,607 $ 851,324,081 $ 110,544,374 $ 304,958,101 $ 892,088,014 $ 124,626,605 $ 3,449,736,782 $ (651,741,436) $ 2,797,995,346 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES $ 344,594,287 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 462,071,850 23,500,719 CAPITAL OUTLAY TRANSFERS OUT 139,339,482 Expenditures Subtotal $ 969,506,338 $ 343,455,784 $ $ 7,883,994 $ 214,950,435 13,469,113 16,898,442 20,527,868 230,072,936 133,905,511 33,118,452 8,166,387 709,210,172 $ 53,646,320 $ 259,592,430 $ Appropriated Beginning Fund Balance $ 196,689,269 $ 95,038,389 $ - $ - $ 201,932,994 $ 7,544,702 $ 905,411,761 $ $ 905,411,761 564,508,353 80,787,496 1,335,787,247 (173,687,695) 1,162,099,552 11,967,178 447,561 303,414,704 303,414,704 942,150 400,602,536 (478,053,741) (77,451,205) 85,130,554 863,539,079 $ 89,721,909 $ 2,945,216,248 $ (651,741,436) $ 2,293,474,812 - $ - $ 291,727,658 $ - $ 291,727,658 Total Uses $ 1,166,195,607 $ 804,248,561 $ 53,646,320 $ 259,592,430 $ 863,539,079 $ 89,721,909 $ 3,236,943,906 $ (651,741,436) $ 2,585,202,470 Unreserved/Undesignated Ending Fund Balance $ - $ 47,075,520 $ 56,898,054 $ 45,365,671 $ 28,548,935 $ 34,904,696 $ 212,792,876 $ - $ 212,792,876 Total Uses and Ending Fund Balance $ 1,166,195,607 $ 851,324,081 $ 110,544,374 $ 304,958,101 $ 892,088,014 $ 124,626,605 $ 3,449,736,782 $ (651,741,436) $ 2,797,995,346 25 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues and Expenditures by Category FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Budget CONSOLIDATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY - FY 2003-04 REVISED RESTATED MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS General Fund Special Revenue Capital Projects Debt Service Enterprise Internal Service Sub-Total Eliminations Unreserved/Undesignated Beginning Fund Balance $ 128,812,426 $ 125,932,844 $ 105,155,625 $ 120,581,264 $ 23,206,180 $ 18,636,952 $ 522,325,291 $ REVENUES PROPERTY TAXES $ 308,122,580 $ TAX PENALTIES & INTEREST 8,000,000 SALES TAXES LICENSES AND PERMITS 428,970 GRANTS OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 8,388,043 PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 6,929,684 STATE SHARED SALES TAX 335,557,376 STATE SHARED HIGHWAY USER REV STATE SHARED VEHICLE LICENSE 109,031,008 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 19,515,310 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 52,848 FINES & FORFEITS 10,838,123 INTEREST EARNINGS 12,008,440 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 3,888,496 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS 50,000 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING TRANSFERS IN 111,126,572 Revenues Subtotal $ 933,937,450 $ 65,470,025 $ 19,234,591 $ $ 100,839,314 5,500,800 28,444,442 132,232,473 59,841,701 18,551,267 325,048 356,173 86,300,000 7,200,000 36,108,344 1,394,471 4,569,820 2,858,799 1,109,338 2,484,202 26,385,526 2,669,000 230,000 847,711 170,102,570 121,718,713 673,544,079 $ 28,798,074 $ 192,432,175 $ - All Funds $ 522,325,291 $ $ 392,827,196 $ $ 392,827,196 8,000,000 8,000,000 106,340,114 106,340,114 28,873,412 28,873,412 4,812,361 137,044,834 137,044,834 105,963,100 1,128,546 193,872,657 193,872,657 7,610,905 7,610,905 335,557,376 335,557,376 86,300,000 86,300,000 116,231,008 116,231,008 (29,476,105) 49,712,553 30,000 23,535,004 79,188,658 47,293,003 (47,293,003) 47,293,003 741,796,483 (73,597,053) 668,199,430 726,568,865 13,780,299 15,407,943 15,407,943 2,854,870 1,185,606 22,501,255 22,501,255 35,100,920 35,100,920 2,143,123 14,775 280,000 280,000 39,194,104 2,374,000 445,363,670 (445,363,670) 881,566,423 $ 89,311,233 $ 2,799,589,434 $ (595,729,831) $ 2,203,859,603 Total Sources $ 1,062,749,876 $ 799,476,923 $ 133,953,699 $ 313,013,439 $ 904,772,603 $ 107,948,185 $ 3,321,914,725 $ (595,729,831) $ 2,726,184,894 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES $ 308,671,435 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 455,851,937 21,396,423 CAPITAL OUTLAY TRANSFERS OUT 136,965,883 Expenditures Subtotal $ 922,885,678 $ 287,567,860 $ $ 9,349,417 $ 8,396,668 185,569,693 20,373,296 34,907,173 304,485,943 119,825,484 110,000 613,336,333 $ 35,017,173 $ 322,232,028 $ Appropriated Beginning Fund Balance $ 135,161,900 $ 106,522,843 $ - $ - $ 193,793,198 $ 8,305,150 $ 807,687,059 $ $ 807,687,059 548,906,945 73,736,447 1,272,461,690 (150,366,161) 1,122,095,529 13,388,037 250,014 394,800,886 394,800,886 125,590,186 2,879,821 385,371,374 (445,363,670) (59,992,296) 881,678,366 $ 85,171,432 $ 2,860,321,010 $ (595,729,831) $ 2,264,591,179 - $ - $ 241,684,743 $ - $ 241,684,743 Total Uses $ 1,058,047,578 $ 719,859,176 $ 35,017,173 $ 322,232,028 $ 881,678,366 $ 85,171,432 $ 3,102,005,753 $ (595,729,831) $ 2,506,275,922 Unreserved/Undesignated Ending Fund Balance $ 4,702,298 $ 79,617,747 $ 98,936,526 $ (9,218,589) $ 23,094,237 $ 22,776,753 $ 219,908,972 $ - $ 219,908,972 Total Uses and Ending Fund Balance $ 1,062,749,876 $ 799,476,923 $ 133,953,699 $ 313,013,439 $ 904,772,603 $ 107,948,185 $ 3,321,914,725 $ (595,729,831) $ 2,726,184,894 26 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues and Expenditures by Category FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Budget CONSOLIDATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY - FY 2003-04 ADOPTED RESTATED MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS Special Revenue General Fund Capital Projects Debt Service Enterprise Internal Service Sub-Total Eliminations Unreserved/Undesignated Beginning Fund Balance $ 126,438,426 $ 125,932,844 $ 105,155,625 $ 120,581,264 $ 23,206,180 $ 18,636,952 $ 519,951,291 $ REVENUES PROPERTY TAXES $ 308,122,580 $ TAX PENALTIES & INTEREST 8,000,000 SALES TAXES LICENSES AND PERMITS 428,970 GRANTS OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 7,610,981 PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 6,929,684 335,557,376 STATE SHARED SALES TAX STATE SHARED HIGHWAY USER REV STATE SHARED VEHICLE LICENSE 109,031,008 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 19,633,244 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 52,848 FINES & FORFEITS 10,838,123 INTEREST EARNINGS 12,008,440 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 3,888,497 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS 50,000 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING TRANSFERS IN 111,088,120 Revenues Subtotal $ 933,239,871 $ $ 62,722,226 $ 21,982,390 $ 5,500,800 100,839,314 27,505,274 129,174,757 20,806,267 59,624,969 356,173 325,048 86,300,000 7,500,000 36,697,892 1,394,471 3,137,558 2,858,799 1,109,338 2,184,202 28,366,581 414,000 230,000 847,711 168,602,570 121,718,713 667,721,005 $ 31,545,873 $ 190,932,175 $ - All Funds $ 519,951,291 $ $ 392,827,196 $ $ 392,827,196 8,000,000 8,000,000 106,340,114 106,340,114 27,934,244 27,934,244 4,525,488 133,700,245 133,700,245 101,760,800 1,014,918 190,817,935 190,817,935 7,610,905 7,610,905 335,557,376 335,557,376 86,300,000 86,300,000 116,531,008 116,531,008 30,000 23,535,004 79,896,140 (16,495,079) 63,401,061 47,407,631 47,407,631 (47,407,631) 13,780,299 741,796,483 (86,578,079) 655,218,404 726,568,865 13,975,681 13,975,681 2,854,870 1,185,606 22,201,255 22,201,255 2,143,123 13,775 34,825,976 34,825,976 280,000 280,000 39,194,104 441,451,218 (441,451,218) 877,077,250 $ 86,937,233 $ 2,787,453,407 $ (591,932,007) $ 2,195,521,400 Total Sources $ 1,059,678,297 $ 793,653,849 $ 136,701,498 $ 311,513,439 $ 900,283,430 $ 105,574,185 $ 3,307,404,698 $ (591,932,007) $ 2,715,472,691 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES $ 303,311,963 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 460,657,361 CAPITAL OUTLAY 21,250,125 TRANSFERS OUT 136,965,883 Expenditures Subtotal $ 922,185,332 $ $ 9,323,953 $ 263,756,082 $ 7,594,105 205,273,293 15,653,920 34,907,173 302,795,665 110,000 119,787,032 604,470,327 $ 35,017,173 $ 319,713,723 $ Appropriated Beginning Fund Balance $ 137,492,965 $ 105,318,257 $ - $ - $ 191,899,816 $ 7,900,770 $ 776,192,584 $ $ 776,192,584 546,310,697 74,093,374 1,293,928,830 (150,480,789) 1,143,448,041 13,388,037 297,474 388,292,394 388,292,394 125,590,186 2,879,821 385,332,922 (441,451,218) (56,118,296) 877,188,736 $ 85,171,439 $ 2,843,746,730 $ (591,932,007) $ 2,251,814,723 - $ - $ 242,811,222 $ - $ 242,811,222 Total Uses $ 1,059,678,297 $ 709,788,584 $ 35,017,173 $ 319,713,723 $ 877,188,736 $ 85,171,439 $ 3,086,557,952 $ (591,932,007) $ 2,494,625,945 Unreserved/Undesignated Ending Fund Balance $ - $ 83,865,265 $ 101,684,325 $ (8,200,284) $ 23,094,694 $ 20,402,746 $ 220,846,746 $ - $ 220,846,746 Total Uses and Ending Fund Balance $ 1,059,678,297 $ 793,653,849 $ 136,701,498 $ 311,513,439 $ 900,283,430 $ 105,574,185 $ 3,307,404,698 $ (591,932,007) $ 2,715,472,691 27 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Sources of Funds Sources of Funds FY 2004-05 $2,585,202,470 Miscellaneous & Interest 1.69% Debt Proceeds 1.12% Fund Balances 10.89% Patient Revenue 25.56% Property Taxes, Penalties & Interest 16.35% Sales Taxes 4.55% Permits, Fees & Fines 4.62% Other Intergovernmental & Grants 12.43% State Shared Sales Taxes 14.50% State Shared Vehicle License Taxes 4.88% Highway User Revenues 3.41% Uses of Funds Uses of Funds FY 2004-05 $2,585,202,470 Culture & Recreation 1.14% Education 0.08% General Government 21.63% Public Safety 24.03% Highways & Streets 5.06% Health, Welfare & Sanitation 48.06% 28 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Adopted to FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Budget FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Adopted Adopted/ $ % Budget Restated Variance Variance Fund General Fund $ Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Funds Capital Projects Funds Enterprise Funds Internal Service Funds Eliminations $ 1,059.7 $ 1,059.7 $ 709.8 709.8 35.0 35.0 319.7 319.7 891.2 877.2 71.2 85.2 (591.9) (591.9) 2,494.6 $ 2,494.6 $ 14.0 (14.0) - 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.57% (19.65%) 0.00% 0.00% Enterprise Funds: $ $ 14.0 Transfer of Health Select from Maricopa Health Plan to Total Compensation; reclassification from Enterprise to Internal Service Fund 14.0 Total Enterprise Fund Variance Internal Service Funds: $ $ (14.0) Transfer of Health Select from Maricopa Health Plan to Total Compensation; reclassification from Enterprise to Internal Service Fund (14.0) Total Internal Service Fund Variance 29 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated to FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Budget FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Adopted/ Revised/ $ % Restated Restated Variance Variance Fund General Fund $ Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Funds Capital Projects Funds Enterprise Funds Internal Service Funds Eliminations $ 1,059.7 $ 1,058.0 $ 709.8 719.9 35.0 35.0 319.7 322.2 877.2 881.7 85.2 85.2 (591.9) (595.7) 2,494.6 $ 2,506.3 $ 1.6 (10.1) (2.5) (4.5) 3.8 (11.6) 0.15% (1.42%) 0.00% (0.79%) (0.51%) 0.00% (0.64%) (0.47%) General Fund: $ $ (0.7) Sheriff's Office IGA's 2.3 Transfer of Expenditure Authority to Special Revenue Funds 1.1 Transfer of Expenditure Authority to Capital Projects Funds (2.4) Transfer of Health Select from MIHS to Total Compensation 1.3 Reduction in expenditure authority for PeopleSoft implementation consistent with available resources 1.6 Total General Fund Variance Special Revenue Funds: $ $ (1.0) Net Change in Elected Official Grants (1.4) Net Change in Appointed Department Grants (2.3) Transfer of Expenditure Authority from General Fund (0.4) Flood Control District Aerial Ortho-Photography (1.2) North Central Library Renovations (1.0) Library Automation System (2.7) Library District Levy Increase (10.1) Total Special Revenue Fund Variance Capital Projects Funds: $ $ (1.1) Transfer of Expenditure Authority from General Fund (0.5) Increase in Spending for San Tan Mountain Regional Park Improvements (0.5) Increase in Spending for Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts (0.5) Increase in Spending for Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts 0.1 Reduction in Transfer from Flood Control District Special Revenue Fund (2.5) Total Capital Projects Fund Variance Enterprise Funds: $ $ (4.2) Increase in Disproportionate Share Revenue (0.3) Homeland Defense Grant (4.5) Total Enterprise Fund Variance Eliminations: $ $ 1.3 Increase in Fund Transfer from General Fund to Capital Projects Fund (0.1) Decrease in Flood Control Fund Transfer 0.2 Increase in Patient Services Transactions 2.4 Transfer of Health Select from MIHS to Total Compensation 3.8 Total Eliminations Variance 30 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Revised Restated to FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget Fund General Fund Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Funds Capital Projects Funds Enterprise Funds Internal Service Funds Eliminations FY 2003-04 Revised/ Restated $ $ FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget 1,058.0 $ 719.9 35.0 322.2 881.7 85.2 (595.7) 2,506.3 $ 1,166.2 $ 804.2 53.6 259.6 863.5 89.7 (651.7) 2,585.2 $ $ Variance Breakdown of Source of Change Non-Recurring - Capital Improvement Programs - Approp. Fund Balance (Net of Fund Transfers) - Primary/General Election Costs - Other Non-Recurring Recurring $ (108.1) (84.4) (18.6) 62.6 18.1 (4.6) 56.0 (78.9) % Variance % Variance (10.2%) (11.7%) (53.2%) 19.4% 2.1% (5.3%) (9.4%) (3.1%) % of Total (68.8) 56.3 (82.1) (2.6) (40.4) (10.2) (78.9) (2.7%) 2.2% (3.3%) (0.1%) (1.6%) (0.4%) (3.1%) 87.1% -71.3% 104.0% 3.3% 51.1% 12.9% 100.0% $ (15.3) (16.1) (12.3) (0.1) (43.8) (0.6%) (0.6%) (0.5%) (0.0%) (1.7%) 150.5% 159.0% 121.3% 0.8% 431.6% (2.0%) (0.0%) (1.9%) 1.6% 0.0% 3.3% 1.0% 492.7% 2.4% 477.1% -386.2% $ (50.0) (0.2) (48.4) 39.2 9.6 83.6 33.7 $ (10.2) (0.4%) 194.1% $ Breakdown of Recurring Increases & Decreases: Mandated or Non-Discretionary Mandated Health Care Employee Health, Dental & Retirement Jail Tax Maintenance of Effort Elected Official Pay Increases $ Variance $ Discretionary Criminal Justice Increases Decreases Based on Add. Non-Gen. Fund Revenue General Government - Contingencies, etc. Health Plans Volume Decreases Health Care Delivery System Volume Decreases All Other Operating Increases & Decreases: 31 -823.5% -237.5% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Revised to FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget (Continued) GENERAL FUND ONLY: Non-Recurring - Approp. Fund Balance - Primary/General Election Costs - Reduction of 8 Hours Recurring $ (49.2) (46.6) (2.6) 1.1 (60.1) (108.1) (4.7%) (4.4%) (0.2%) 0.1% (5.7%) (10.2%) (15.3) 19.2 (10.4) (12.3) (0.1) (18.9) (1.4%) 1.8% (1.0%) (1.2%) (0.0%) (1.8%) $ (1.4) (5.6) (24.5) (8.6) (1.0) (41.1) (0.1%) (0.5%) (2.3%) (0.8%) (0.1%) (3.9%) $ (60.1) (5.7%) $ Breakdown of Recurring Increases & Decreases: Mandated or Non-Discretionary Mandated Health Care Reduction in Dispro Share Payment Employee Health, Dental & Retirement Jail Excise Tax Maintenance of Effort Elected Official Pay Increases $ $ Discretionary Criminal Justice Increases Operating Budget Adjustments General Government - Contingencies, etc. Ann. Impact of Mid-Year Adjustments Parks Trails $ 32 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Revised to FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget (Continued) General Fund: $ $ (9.6) (0.8) (12.3) (2.6) (8.6) 0.1 (6.6) (11.8) 3.1 0.1 1.0 1.1 (0.9) (1.3) (0.3) (2.7) (0.5) (0.4) (0.5) (0.7) (1.2) 19.2 (0.5) 2.4 (0.1) (0.1) (0.3) (0.2) (0.1) (1.0) (0.8) (24.5) (46.7) (108.1) Net Adjustment for Health/Dental Benefit Premiums Retirement Plan Increases Jail Excise Tax Maintenance of Effort-Base Primary/General Election Costs Annualized Impact of Mid-Year Adjustments Internal Service Costs ALTCS Contribution Increase-Base Elimination of ALTCS FMAP Savings AHCCCS Contribution Increase-Base FY 2003-04 Non-Recurring Expenditures Lease Terminations Reduction of 8 Hours Annualization of Desktop PC Replacement West Nile Virus Storm Water Abatement Sheriff Patrol Staff Courts Security Repairs and Maintenance Service Contract Increases New Facility Operating Costs Public Information Office Arnold vs. Sarn Disproportionate Share Reduction Intergovernmental Agreements Competency Restoration Elected Official Pay Increases Diversity Director Clerk of Court Juvenile Dependency County Attorney Initial Appearance Court Constables/Deputy Constables Pay Parks Trails Baselevel Operating Adjustments Other General Government (see schedule) Other Appropriated Fund Balance (see schedule) Total General Fund Variance Special Revenue Funds: $ $ (6.4) (0.3) (6.7) 7.1 (0.5) 1.6 0.7 4.4 (16.5) (4.5) (5.1) 1.9 0.5 (17.2) (0.5) (15.6) (0.4) (3.8) 0.3 (4.8) (23.9) 5.1 (84.4) Net Adjustment for Health/Dental Benefit Premiums Retirement Plan Increases Annualized Impact of Mid-Year Adjustments FY 2003-04 Non-Recurring Expenditures Annualized Impact of FY 2003-04 Inititatives Reductions to Achieve Structural Balance Reduction of 8 Hours Decreased Grant Awards and Carry-Over Detention Operations Increases Increases Based on Revenue Correctional Health Staff, Hospitalization and Pharmacy Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Projects Juvenile Residential Treatment Center New Juvenile and Detention Facilities Inmate Accounting System CIP Fund Transfers North Valley Library Start-Up Fund Balance Expenditures Baselevel Operating Adjustments Payments to State of Arizona General Government (see schedule) Appropriated Fund Balance (see schedule) Total Special Revenue Fund Variance 33 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Reconciliation of Expenditures FY 2003-04 Revised to FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget (Continued) Debt Service Funds: $ $ 21.0 Reduction in Gen. Obligation Bond Debt Service (4.0) Increase in COP Debt Service due to Refinancing (33.0) Transfer from COP Debt Service to General Fund (2.2) Human Services Campus Debt Service Payment (0.4) Increase in Stadium District Debt Service (18.6) Total Debt Service Funds Variance Capital Project Funds: $ $ 79.5 Jail/Juvenile Detention CIP (See CIP Schedule) (18.7) General Government CIP (See CIP Schedule) (0.5) Transportation CIP (See CIP Schedule) 1.9 Flood Control District CIP (See CIP Schedule) 0.4 Completion of Stadium District Capital Projects 62.6 Total Capital Project Funds Variance Enterprise Funds: $ $ 38.3 Maricopa Health Plans (See Commentary) (20.0) Health Care Delivery System (See Commentary) 0.4 Solid Waste Operating Adjustments (0.5) Home Hazardous Waste and Illegal Dumping Programs 18.1 Total Enterprise Funds Variance Internal Service Funds: $ $ (0.2) Net Adjustment for Health/Dental Benefit Premiums (0.7) Annualized Impact of Mid-Year Adjustments (1.0) Increase in Fuel Costs 0.7 Public Information Office (1.6) Benefits Administration (1.4) Increases Based on Revenue (0.3) Baselevel Operating Adjustments (4.6) Total Internal Service Fund Variance Eliminations: $ $ 4.7 Net Increase in Other Fund Transfers (see Schedule) 18.5 Appropriated Fund Balance Transfers 3.8 Increase in Payments to Benefits and Health Select Funds 3.1 Increase in Internal Service Charges (1.5) Reduction in Correctional Health Payments to Health Care Delivery System 17.1 Increase in Payments from Health Plans to Health Care Delivery System 0.8 Employer-paid Health Premiums to Health Select 9.4 Increase in Flood Control District CIP Transfer 0.1 Increase in Stadium District Fund Transfers 56.0 Total Eliminations Variance 34 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues by Fund Type / Department CONSOLIDATED REVENUES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2002-03 Actual Restated ALL FUNDS JUDICIAL BRANCH 110 ADULT PROBATION 800 TRIAL COURTS 270 JUVENILE PROBATION $ FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Revised Restated Proj. Act Restated $ Subtotal $ 37,583,344 25,188,922 15,483,808 78,256,074 ELECTED OFFICIAL 120 ASSESSOR $ 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY 210 ELECTIONS 250 CONSTABLES 360 RECORDER 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 430 TREASURER 500 SHERIFF Subtotal $ 129,189 13,187,446 10,601,807 2,505,092 1,213,402 20,549,302 66,736 4,671 38,511,848 86,769,492 $ APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT $ 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 180 FINANCE 220 HUMAN SERVICES 230 INTERNAL AUDIT 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER 300 PARKS & RECREATION 310 HUMAN RESOURCES 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER 540 LEGAL DEFENDER 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL 600 HEALTH PLANS 640 TRANSPORTATION 670 SOLID WASTE 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 710 COMMUNICATIONS 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 750 RISK MANAGEMENT 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 860 PUBLIC HEALTH 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 980 ELIMINATIONS Subtotal $ $ $ 14,234,945 26,908,827 17,372,172 58,515,944 $ 133,669 12,175,546 10,553,897 2,163,480 1,322,758 13,736,600 153,050 5,686 38,239,414 78,484,100 $ $ $ 14,234,945 26,908,827 17,372,172 58,515,944 $ 133,669 12,175,546 11,762,380 2,163,480 1,322,758 13,736,600 153,050 5,686 38,898,541 80,351,710 $ $ $ FY 2004-05 Requested 13,161,015 26,442,131 16,684,883 56,288,029 $ 145,908 12,387,464 11,976,939 1,806,193 1,517,468 19,357,757 393,695 4,087 39,528,791 87,118,302 $ $ $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 13,824,776 29,163,209 16,848,483 59,836,468 $ 133,669 12,088,723 11,462,380 2,071,000 1,634,880 13,736,600 155,000 5,686 40,578,667 81,866,605 $ $ $ Adopted vs Revised Variance 13,919,776 30,660,924 17,014,483 61,595,183 $ 133,669 12,101,615 11,582,628 2,071,000 1,517,468 15,670,000 155,000 4,000 42,175,770 85,411,150 $ % (315,169) 3,752,097 (357,689) 3,079,239 -2% 14% -2% 5% $ (73,931) (179,752) (92,480) 194,710 1,933,400 1,950 (1,686) 3,277,229 5,059,440 0% -1% -2% -4% 15% 14% 1% -30% 8% 6% 96,852 175,604 (467,938) 2,945,511 (207,944) (210,000) (426,549) 6,337 280,000 7,048,938 (18,788,300) 697,000 105,330,128 40,939,366 884,023 5,429 (90,870) (62,029) (37,880,328) 3,113,255 134,768 47,669,538 (754,229) 1,860,505 (41,452) 1,409,911 1,063,038 (4,934,991) 1,470,858 33,933,683 (48,515,643) 88,020,652 8% 1% -45% 8% 0% -20% -33% -9% 25% 43% 18% -18% 7% 0% 10% 1676% 51% 6% -71% -100% -9% 3% 3% $ 857,834 $ 1,184,956 $ 6,896,915 15,857,672 113,139 1,044,076 32,420,712 35,032,337 875 75 100,344 1,059,386 356,524 567,614 4,292,772 4,569,355 87,400 25,511 1,010,358 650,000 25,230,050 37,506,774 74,414,137 101,813,648 12,376,749 10,678,000 323,482 440,000 970,651,517 1,052,040,731 99,097,238 1,237,500 1,695,323 1,685,570 108,781 98,674 58,131 127,180 62,029 418,159,657 425,927,637 101,371,455 117,239,647 3,620,675 4,085,232 99,455,659 48,663,819 245,251 800,490 1,169,890 1,030,775 9,418,196 8,331,591 23,863,924 26,686,121 15,880,193 12,723,482 9,269,719 7,983,431 38,552,293 48,235,142 16,109,452 18,457,557 323,521,865 362,852,741 (452,467,766) (389,716,225) 1,838,262,742 $ 1,958,982,528 $ 1,184,956 $ 15,857,672 1,044,076 35,032,337 75 1,059,386 627,045 4,569,355 25,511 650,000 39,880,774 101,813,648 10,678,000 440,000 1,049,949,956 2,442,087 1,745,570 98,674 127,180 62,029 428,203,962 117,239,647 4,085,232 48,663,819 800,490 1,030,775 8,331,591 26,686,121 12,723,482 8,005,572 48,131,417 19,459,268 365,065,589 (393,514,049) 1,962,201,247 $ 1,310,279 $ 1,267,004 $ 13,247,986 16,033,276 759,084 10,345,247 35,032,337 39,500,000 1,442 75 462,673 851,442 592,776 627,045 4,856,015 4,123,855 31,849 25,511 925,000 650,000 44,983,079 38,322,260 101,799,609 101,813,648 12,050,537 11,375,000 440,000 440,000 1,074,607,989 1,125,791,141 3,306,869 1,777,893 2,629,593 106,802 104,103 32,907 133,074 62,029 454,488,636 392,473,514 106,637,490 114,399,623 4,543,040 4,420,000 48,663,839 48,663,819 623,611 46,261 1,275,007 1,030,775 8,950,361 10,306,724 26,081,986 26,644,669 13,018,210 12,723,482 8,974,721 9,716,163 44,599,694 43,630,362 19,765,809 20,356,891 410,947,627 398,999,273 (440,185,478) (411,230,371) 2,004,709,680 $ 2,026,275,488 $ 1,281,808 $ 16,033,276 576,138 37,977,848 75 851,442 417,045 4,142,806 31,848 930,000 46,929,712 83,025,348 11,375,000 440,000 1,155,280,084 43,381,453 2,629,593 104,103 36,310 390,323,634 120,352,902 4,220,000 47,669,538 46,261 1,030,775 10,192,096 26,644,669 14,133,393 9,068,610 43,196,426 20,930,126 398,999,272 (442,029,692) 2,050,221,899 $ -94% 0% 22% 0% 11% 13% -10% 8% 9% -12% 4% MARICOPA COUNTY $ 2,003,288,309 $ 2,095,982,572 $ 2,101,068,901 $ 2,148,116,011 $ 2,167,978,561 $ 2,197,228,232 $ 96,159,331 5% 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT $ 75,982,973 $ 75,992,743 $ 76,349,743 $ 71,609,196 $ 87,365,176 $ 78,669,638 $ 2,319,895 3% 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT $ 11,191,646 $ 12,721,129 $ 15,616,003 $ 15,971,336 $ 13,393,175 $ 16,859,270 $ 1,243,267 8% 680 STADIUM DISTRICT $ 10,698,269 $ 10,824,956 $ 10,824,956 $ 10,744,377 $ 10,934,472 $ 10,835,598 $ 10,642 0% MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ 2,101,161,196 $ 2,195,521,400 $ 2,203,859,603 $ 2,246,440,920 $ 2,279,671,384 $ 2,303,592,738 $ 99,733,135 5% 35 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues by Fund Type / Department (Continued) CONSOLIDATED REVENUES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted % GENERAL FUND JUDICIAL BRANCH 800 TRIAL COURTS 270 JUVENILE PROBATION $ Subtotal $ 14,249,057 13,118 14,262,174 $ ELECTED OFFICIAL 120 ASSESSOR $ 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY 210 ELECTIONS 250 CONSTABLES 360 RECORDER 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 430 TREASURER 500 SHERIFF Subtotal $ 129,189 6,314,189 34,130 2,505,092 1,213,402 14,104,651 66,736 4,671 4,231,532 28,603,592 $ APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 180 FINANCE $ 230 INTERNAL AUDIT 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER 310 HUMAN RESOURCES 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER 540 LEGAL DEFENDER 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 710 COMMUNICATIONS 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT Subtotal $ 113,139 875 356,524 87,400 1,010,358 25,351 74,414,137 764,044,385 4,510 58,828 20,300 19,008 1,316,947 3,666 106,751 841,582,178 $ MARICOPA COUNTY $ MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ $ 13,551,699 18,000 13,569,699 $ $ 133,669 5,218,660 34,000 2,163,480 1,322,758 9,003,600 153,050 5,686 4,391,226 22,426,129 $ $ $ 1,044,076 75 360,000 25,511 650,000 15,000 101,813,648 791,642,740 1,237,500 52,000 19,700 116,764 62,029 78,000 127,000 897,244,043 884,447,944 $ 884,447,944 $ $ 13,551,699 18,000 13,569,699 $ $ 133,669 5,218,660 34,000 2,163,480 1,322,758 9,003,600 153,050 5,686 5,050,353 23,085,256 $ $ $ 1,044,076 75 360,000 25,511 650,000 15,000 101,813,648 791,681,192 1,237,500 52,000 19,700 116,764 62,029 78,000 127,000 897,282,495 933,239,871 $ 933,239,871 $ $ 14,888,992 13,687 14,902,679 $ $ 145,908 5,465,521 36,271 1,806,193 1,517,468 13,348,863 393,695 4,087 5,251,145 27,969,151 $ $ $ 759,084 1,442 325,731 31,849 925,000 22,213 101,799,609 804,807,398 2,102,282 38,616 21,233 20,000 78,000 251,091 911,183,548 933,937,450 $ 933,937,450 $ 36 $ 14,142,471 18,000 14,160,471 $ $ 133,669 5,481,440 34,000 2,071,000 1,634,880 9,003,600 155,000 5,686 5,764,587 24,283,862 $ $ $ 10,345,247 75 360,000 25,511 650,000 15,000 101,813,648 848,596,758 52,000 19,700 116,764 62,029 78,000 127,000 962,261,732 954,055,378 $ 954,055,378 $ $ 15,028,261 14,000 15,042,261 $ $ 1,476,562 (4,000) 1,472,562 11% -22% 11% 886,605 17,271 (92,480) 194,710 1,296,400 1,950 (1,686) 798,241 3,101,011 0% 17% 51% -4% 15% 14% 1% -30% 16% 13% -45% 0% -58% 25% 43% 33% -18% 9% 3406% 0% 0% -83% -100% 0% 133,669 6,105,265 51,271 2,071,000 1,517,468 10,300,000 155,000 4,000 5,848,594 26,186,267 $ 576,138 75 150,000 31,848 930,000 20,000 83,025,348 866,773,056 43,381,453 52,000 19,700 20,000 78,000 127,000 995,184,618 $ $ (467,938) (210,000) 6,337 280,000 5,000 (18,788,300) 75,091,864 42,143,953 (96,764) (62,029) 97,902,123 1,000,706,065 $ 1,036,413,146 $ 102,475,696 11% 1,000,706,065 $ 1,036,413,146 $ 102,475,696 11% $ $ $ 0% 11% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues by Fund Type / Department (Continued) CONSOLIDATED REVENUES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2002-03 Actual Restated SPECIAL REVENUE JUDICIAL BRANCH 110 ADULT PROBATION 800 TRIAL COURTS 270 JUVENILE PROBATION $ Subtotal $ 37,583,344 10,939,866 15,470,690 63,993,900 ELECTED OFFICIAL 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT $ 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY 360 RECORDER 500 SHERIFF Subtotal $ 6,873,257 10,567,677 6,444,651 34,280,316 58,165,900 $ APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 220 HUMAN SERVICES 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER 300 PARKS & RECREATION 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER 540 LEGAL DEFENDER 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE 600 HEALTH PLANS 640 TRANSPORTATION 670 SOLID WASTE 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 860 PUBLIC HEALTH 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MARICOPA COUNTY $ $ $ $ $ Subtotal $ 857,834 6,896,915 32,420,712 100,344 4,313,914 12,376,749 323,482 121,901,470 99,092,728 1,636,495 88,481 39,123 1,889,245 93,240,692 3,169,688 9,269,719 38,552,293 16,109,452 442,279,335 $ 564,439,135 FY 2003-04 Revised Restated 14,234,945 13,357,128 17,354,172 44,946,245 $ 6,956,886 10,519,897 4,733,000 33,848,188 56,057,971 $ $ $ $ $ 1,184,956 15,857,672 35,032,337 1,059,386 207,614 4,586,355 10,678,000 440,000 226,011,238 1,633,570 78,974 10,416 1,957,636 96,433,380 3,435,232 7,983,431 48,235,142 18,457,557 473,282,896 $ 574,287,112 FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated 14,234,945 13,357,128 17,354,172 44,946,245 $ 6,956,886 11,728,380 4,733,000 33,848,188 57,266,454 $ $ $ $ $ 1,184,956 15,857,672 35,032,337 1,059,386 267,045 4,586,355 10,678,000 440,000 225,129,810 1,204,587 1,693,570 78,974 10,416 1,957,636 96,433,380 3,435,232 8,005,572 48,131,417 19,459,268 474,645,613 $ 576,858,312 FY 2004-05 Requested 13,161,015 11,553,139 16,671,196 41,385,350 $ 6,921,943 11,940,668 6,008,894 34,277,646 59,149,151 $ $ $ $ $ 1,310,279 13,247,986 35,032,337 462,673 267,045 4,881,015 12,050,537 440,000 226,316,225 1,204,587 1,739,277 85,569 12,907 1,957,636 91,382,865 4,142,749 8,974,721 44,599,694 19,765,809 467,873,911 $ 568,408,412 Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted 13,824,776 15,020,738 16,830,483 45,675,997 $ 6,607,283 11,428,380 4,733,000 34,814,080 57,582,743 $ $ $ $ $ 1,267,004 16,033,276 39,500,000 851,442 267,045 4,140,855 11,375,000 440,000 245,392,786 2,577,593 84,403 16,310 2,149,880 92,953,825 3,770,000 9,716,163 43,630,362 20,356,891 494,522,835 $ 597,781,575 13,919,776 15,632,663 17,000,483 46,552,922 $ 5,996,350 11,531,357 5,370,000 36,327,176 59,224,883 $ $ $ % (315,169) 2,275,535 (353,689) 1,606,677 -2% 17% -2% 4% (960,536) (197,023) 637,000 2,478,988 1,958,429 -14% -2% 13% 7% 3% $ $ 1,281,808 16,033,276 37,977,848 851,442 267,045 4,159,806 11,375,000 440,000 249,177,516 2,577,593 84,403 16,310 98,907,104 3,770,000 9,068,610 43,196,426 20,930,126 500,114,313 $ 96,852 8% 175,604 1% 2,945,511 8% (207,944) -20% 0% (426,549) -9% 697,000 7% 0% 24,047,706 11% (1,204,587) -100% 884,023 52% 5,429 7% 5,894 57% (1,957,636) -100% 2,473,724 3% 334,768 10% 1,063,038 13% (4,934,991) -10% 1,470,858 8% 25,468,700 5% $ 605,892,118 $ 29,033,806 5% 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT $ 75,982,973 $ 75,992,743 $ 76,349,743 $ 71,609,196 $ 87,365,176 $ 78,669,638 $ 2,319,895 3% 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT $ 11,191,646 $ 12,721,129 $ 15,616,003 $ 15,971,336 $ 13,393,175 $ 16,859,270 $ 1,243,267 8% 680 STADIUM DISTRICT $ 4,670,215 $ 4,720,021 $ 4,720,021 $ 4,690,201 $ 4,720,021 $ 4,686,821 $ MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ 656,283,968 $ 667,721,005 $ 673,544,079 $ 660,679,145 $ 703,259,947 $ 706,107,847 $ 37 (33,200) 32,563,768 -1% 5% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues by Fund Type / Department (Continued) CONSOLIDATED REVENUES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted % DEBT SERVICE APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT $ Subtotal $ 23,953,203 23,953,203 $ $ 25,845,073 25,845,073 $ $ 23,097,274 23,097,274 $ $ 23,007,929 23,007,929 $ $ 5,393,111 5,393,111 $ $ 7,867,500 7,867,500 $ $ (15,229,774) -66% (15,229,774) -66% MARICOPA COUNTY $ 23,953,203 $ 25,845,073 $ 23,097,274 $ 23,007,929 $ 5,393,111 $ 7,867,500 $ (15,229,774) -66% 680 STADIUM DISTRICT $ 5,565,801 $ 5,700,800 $ 5,700,800 $ 5,533,745 $ 5,580,768 $ 5,515,094 $ MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ 29,519,004 $ 31,545,873 $ 28,798,074 $ 28,541,674 $ 10,973,879 $ 13,382,594 $ (185,706) -3% (15,415,480) -54% CONSOLIDATED REVENUES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % CAPITAL PROJECTS APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT $ 640 TRANSPORTATION 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Subtotal $ 60,752,459 56,283,784 98,138,712 215,174,955 MARICOPA COUNTY $ 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT $ $ 8,541,680 77,806,267 48,585,819 134,933,766 215,174,955 $ $ 40,772,770 680 STADIUM DISTRICT $ MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ $ $ 10,041,680 77,806,267 48,585,819 136,433,766 134,933,766 $ $ 54,000,000 2,076,165 $ 258,023,890 $ $ $ 20,476,438 72,254,625 48,585,839 141,316,902 136,433,766 $ $ 54,000,000 1,998,409 $ 190,932,175 $ $ $ 26,408,486 78,445,798 48,585,819 153,440,103 141,316,902 $ $ 52,644,000 1,998,409 $ 192,432,175 $ $ $ 31,462,012 83,141,666 47,591,538 162,195,216 153,440,103 $ $ 51,864,000 1,808,088 $ 195,768,990 $ $ $ 21,420,332 5,335,399 (994,281) 25,761,450 213% 7% -2% 19% 162,195,216 $ 25,761,450 19% $ 63,446,899 $ 9,446,899 17% 2,293,820 $ 2,293,820 $ 295,411 15% 207,597,923 $ 227,935,935 $ 35,503,760 18% CONSOLIDATED REVENUES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2004-05 Requested Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted % ENTERPRISE APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 600 HEALTH PLANS $ 670 SOLID WASTE 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM Subtotal $ 416,270,412 450,987 323,521,865 740,243,264 MARICOPA COUNTY $ 740,243,264 MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ 740,243,264 $ $ 423,970,001 650,000 452,457,249 877,077,250 $ 877,077,250 $ 877,077,250 $ $ 426,246,326 650,000 454,670,097 881,566,423 $ 881,566,423 $ 881,566,423 38 $ $ 452,531,000 400,291 481,047,896 933,979,187 $ 933,979,187 $ 933,979,187 $ $ 390,323,634 650,000 481,891,113 872,864,747 $ 872,864,747 $ 872,864,747 $ $ 390,323,634 450,000 481,891,112 872,664,746 $ 872,664,746 $ 872,664,746 $ $ (35,922,692) (200,000) 27,221,015 (8,901,677) -8% -31% 6% -1% $ (8,901,677) -1% $ (8,901,677) -1% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues by Fund Type / Department (Continued) CONSOLIDATED REVENUES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted % INTERNAL SERVICE APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION $ 710 COMMUNICATIONS 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 750 RISK MANAGEMENT 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS Subtotal $ 25,204,699 241,585 1,063,139 9,418,196 23,863,924 15,880,193 75,671,737 MARICOPA COUNTY $ MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ $ $ 37,491,774 800,490 903,775 8,331,591 26,686,121 12,723,482 86,937,233 75,671,737 $ 75,671,737 $ $ $ 39,865,774 800,490 903,775 8,331,591 26,686,121 12,723,482 89,311,233 86,937,233 $ 86,937,233 $ $ $ 44,960,867 623,611 1,023,916 8,950,361 26,081,986 13,018,210 94,658,951 89,311,233 $ 89,311,233 $ $ $ 38,307,260 46,261 903,775 10,306,724 26,644,669 12,723,482 88,932,171 94,658,951 $ 94,658,951 $ $ $ 46,909,712 46,261 903,775 10,192,096 26,644,669 14,133,393 98,829,906 88,932,171 $ 88,932,171 $ $ $ 7,043,938 (754,229) 1,860,505 (41,452) 1,409,911 9,518,673 18% -94% 0% 22% 0% 11% 11% 98,829,906 $ 9,518,673 11% 98,829,906 $ 9,518,673 11% CONSOLIDATED REVENUES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % ELIMINATIONS APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 300 PARKS & RECREATION $ (21,142) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ 640 TRANSPORTATION (48,153,021) (57,000,000) (57,000,000) 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM (89,604,508) (89,604,508) 980 ELIMINATIONS (452,467,766) (389,716,225) (393,514,049) Subtotal $ (500,641,929) $ (536,337,733) $ (540,135,557) $ (25,000) $ (57,000,000) (70,100,269) (440,185,478) (567,310,747) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ (57,000,000) (61,695,868) (82,891,840) (82,891,840) (411,230,371) (442,029,692) (551,139,211) $ (586,634,400) $ 0% (4,695,868) -8% 6,712,668 7% (48,515,643) -12% (46,498,843) -9% MARICOPA COUNTY $ (500,641,929) $ (536,337,733) $ (540,135,557) $ (567,310,747) $ (551,139,211) $ (586,634,400) $ (46,498,843) 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT $ (40,772,770) $ (54,000,000) $ (54,000,000) $ (52,644,000) $ (51,864,000) $ (63,446,899) $ 680 STADIUM DISTRICT $ (1,613,912) $ (1,594,274) $ (1,594,274) $ (1,287,657) $ (1,660,137) $ (1,660,137) $ (65,863) -4% MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ (543,028,611) $ (591,932,007) $ (595,729,831) $ (621,242,404) $ (604,663,348) $ (651,741,436) $ (56,011,605) -9% 39 -9% (9,446,899) -17% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Revenues by Department and Fund Type CONSOLIDATED REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT AND FUND TYPE FY 2004-05 Aopted Special Revenue General Fund JUDICIAL 110 ADULT PROBATION 800 TRIAL COURTS 270 JUVENILE PROBATION $ Subtotal $ $ 13,919,776 $ 15,028,261 15,632,663 14,000 17,000,483 15,042,261 $ 46,552,922 $ - ELECTED 120 ASSESSOR $ 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY 210 ELECTIONS 250 CONSTABLES 360 RECORDER 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 430 TREASURER 500 SHERIFF Subtotal $ 133,669 $ $ 6,105,265 5,996,350 51,271 11,531,357 2,071,000 1,517,468 10,300,000 5,370,000 155,000 4,000 5,848,594 36,327,176 26,186,267 $ 59,224,883 $ - APPOINTED 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT $ $ 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 180 FINANCE 576,138 220 HUMAN SERVICES 230 INTERNAL AUDIT 75 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 150,000 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER 300 PARKS & RECREATION 310 HUMAN RESOURCES 31,848 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY 930,000 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION 20,000 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES 83,025,348 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 866,773,056 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 43,381,453 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER 52,000 19,700 540 LEGAL DEFENDER 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE 20,000 600 HEALTH PLANS 640 TRANSPORTATION 670 SOLID WASTE 78,000 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 710 COMMUNICATIONS 127,000 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 750 RISK MANAGEMENT 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 860 PUBLIC HEALTH 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 980 ELIMINATIONS Subtotal $ 995,184,618 $ Capital Projects Debt Service 1,281,808 $ 16,033,276 37,977,848 851,442 267,045 4,159,806 11,375,000 440,000 249,177,516 2,577,593 84,403 16,310 98,907,104 3,770,000 9,068,610 43,196,426 20,930,126 500,114,313 $ $ - $ $ - $ Enterprise $ $ $ $ - - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 7,867,500 31,462,012 390,323,634 83,141,666 450,000 47,591,538 481,891,112 7,867,500 $ 162,195,216 $ 872,664,746 $ - - Sub-Total $ $ $ $ Eliminations 13,919,776 $ 30,660,924 17,014,483 61,595,183 $ - 133,669 $ 12,101,615 11,582,628 2,071,000 1,517,468 15,670,000 155,000 4,000 42,175,770 85,411,150 $ - Total Funds $ $ $ $ 13,919,776 30,660,924 17,014,483 61,595,183 133,669 12,101,615 11,582,628 2,071,000 1,517,468 15,670,000 155,000 4,000 42,175,770 85,411,150 $ 1,281,808 $ $ 1,281,808 16,033,276 16,033,276 576,138 576,138 37,977,848 37,977,848 75 75 851,442 851,442 417,045 417,045 4,159,806 (17,000) 4,142,806 31,848 31,848 930,000 930,000 46,929,712 46,909,712 46,929,712 83,025,348 83,025,348 11,375,000 11,375,000 440,000 440,000 1,155,280,084 1,155,280,084 43,381,453 43,381,453 2,629,593 2,629,593 104,103 104,103 36,310 36,310 390,323,634 390,323,634 182,048,770 (61,695,868) 120,352,902 4,220,000 4,220,000 47,669,538 47,669,538 46,261 46,261 46,261 903,775 1,030,775 1,030,775 10,192,096 10,192,096 10,192,096 26,644,669 26,644,669 26,644,669 14,133,393 14,133,393 14,133,393 9,068,610 9,068,610 43,196,426 43,196,426 20,930,126 20,930,126 481,891,112 (82,891,840) 398,999,272 (442,029,692) (442,029,692) 98,829,906 $ 2,636,856,299 $ (586,634,400) $ 2,050,221,899 MARICOPA COUNTY $ 1,036,413,146 $ 605,892,118 $ 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT $ - $ 78,669,638 $ - $ 63,446,899 $ - $ - $ 142,116,537 $ 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT $ - $ 16,859,270 $ - $ $ - $ - $ 16,859,270 $ - $ 16,859,270 680 STADIUM DISTRICT $ - $ 2,293,820 $ - $ - $ 12,495,735 $ (1,660,137) $ 10,835,598 MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ 1,036,413,146 $ 706,107,847 $ 13,382,594 $ 227,935,935 $ 872,664,746 $ 98,829,906 $ 2,955,334,174 $ (651,741,436) $ 2,303,592,738 4,686,821 $ 7,867,500 $ 162,195,216 $ 872,664,746 $ 98,829,906 $ 2,783,862,632 $ (586,634,400) $ 2,197,228,232 5,515,094 $ - 40 (63,446,899) $ 78,669,638 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary Maricopa County and the Flood Control, Library, and Stadium Districts collect revenues within the following general categories: • Taxes • Fine & Forfeits • Licenses & Permits • Miscellaneous • Intergovernmental Revenues • Other Financing Sources • Charges for Services Revenues are estimated conservatively for budgetary purposes, because it is preferable to err by underestimating revenues than over-estimating them. For major tax-based revenues, economic forecasting models are applied. The following sections describe the major revenue sources for the County and district budgets, as well as the estimated collections for FY 2004-05. CONSOLIDATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS General Funds REVENUES PROPERTY TAXES $ 339,882,099 $ TAX PENALTIES & INTEREST 10,857,480 SALES TAXES 1,463,436 LICENSES AND PERMITS GRANTS OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 8,594,302 6,929,684 PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 374,939,056 STATE SHARED SALES TAX STATE SHARED HIGHWAY USER REV STATE SHARED VEHICLE LICENSE 118,057,605 21,688,915 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 52,848 12,208,033 FINES & FORFEITS 2,417,347 INTEREST EARNINGS MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 5,822,611 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS PROCEEDS OF FINANCING TRANSFERS IN 133,499,730 Revenues $ 1,036,413,146 $ Special Revenue Debt Service Capital Projects Enterprise 71,999,041 $ $ $ 112,421,733 5,215,094 29,874,740 127,742,153 150,000 274,389 21,202,798 62,520,114 325,048 88,073,124 8,000,000 42,019,371 1,352,910 5,253,670 2,072,725 2,250,000 1,057,305 2,200,000 753,000 20,834,327 200,000 28,850,000 133,418,891 3,443,111 175,922,832 706,107,847 $ 13,382,594 $ 227,935,935 $ Internal Service Sub-Total Eliminations All Funds $ $ 411,881,140 $ $ 411,881,140 10,857,480 10,857,480 117,636,827 117,636,827 31,338,176 31,338,176 5,177,368 133,069,521 133,069,521 87,424,800 1,030,047 181,046,450 181,046,450 7,254,732 7,254,732 374,939,056 374,939,056 88,073,124 88,073,124 126,057,605 126,057,605 50,000 39,364,705 103,122,991 (32,395,291) 70,727,700 50,375,372 50,375,372 (50,375,372) 750,289,544 751,695,302 (90,917,032) 660,778,270 17,461,703 17,461,703 1,452,398 500,000 9,749,775 9,749,775 4,046,466 14,775 33,671,179 33,671,179 200,000 200,000 28,850,000 28,850,000 24,224,170 7,545,007 478,053,741 (478,053,741) 872,664,746 $ 98,829,906 $ 2,955,334,174 $ (651,741,436) $ 2,303,592,738 Taxes Maricopa County and Districts collect both property taxes and special sales taxes. Below is a table summarizing historical tax revenue collections by fund type, followed by a discussion of specific major revenues. Taxes Fiscal General Year Fund 1994-95 $ 182,014,228 1995-96 176,554,624 1996-97 172,143,843 1997-98 184,371,372 1998-99 198,905,506 1999-00 222,975,967 2000-01 239,737,516 2001-02 259,584,026 2002-03 288,869,601 2003-04* 318,841,918 2004-05** 350,739,579 Special Revenue Funds $ 64,355,715 129,829,133 145,750,489 91,239,254 98,611,890 149,751,499 156,127,504 156,318,430 153,280,375 170,733,820 184,420,774 * Projected Actual ** Budget 41 Debt Service $ 2,368,049 20,072,454 23,628,785 22,510,213 22,783,249 21,008,968 24,148,892 21,368,629 24,594,477 24,493,335 5,215,094 Total $ 248,737,992 326,456,211 341,523,117 298,120,839 320,300,645 393,736,434 420,013,912 437,271,085 466,841,008 514,076,425 540,375,447 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Property Taxes Property taxes are imposed on both real and personal property, and are taxed under two systems - primary and secondary. Primary property taxes finance the County’s general operations through its General Fund. Secondary taxes finance operations and capital improvements carried out by the Flood Control and the Library Districts. Prior to FY 2004-05, the County also assessed a secondary tax to finance repayment of outstanding voter-approved General Obligation bonds. These bonds were fully repaid at the end of FY 2003-04. Primary property taxes differ from secondary property taxes in that the rate of growth in the tax base for primary tax purposes is limited, and primary property tax levies are subject to a more stringent constitutional limitation. The primary property tax levy may increase by only 2% per year on property taxed in the prior year. The Board of Supervisors must adopt the property tax levy for all taxing jurisdictions within the County on or before the third Monday in August for the fiscal year that begins on the previous July 1. Real property taxes are paid in arrears in two installments, due November 1 and May 1. Personal property taxes have historically been collected on a different schedule, but collection dates are now being shifted to align with the real property tax collection cycle. This process is projected to be completed by August, 2004. Personal property owners are exempt from Flood Control District taxation. Thus, personal property taxes are levied only for the General Fund (primary), and the Library District (secondary). The following schedule lists the overall primary and secondary net assessed values and tax rates for the last ten fiscal years, plus the assessed values and the preliminary tax rates for FY 2004-05. Preliminary Tax Levy Secondary Primary Fiscal Year 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Net Assessed Value (Thousands) $ 13,302,327 13,493,737 13,975,668 15,006,270 16,017,265 17,463,875 19,362,298 21,355,326 22,955,865 25,447,851 28,070,870 Primary Tax Rate (per $100 N.A.V.) $ 1.2394 1.1580 1.1054 1.1265 1.1472 1.1884 1.1641 1.1832 1.2108 1.2108 1.2108 Net Assessed Value (Thousands) $ 13,521,175 14,119,435 14,343,156 15,723,498 16,813,017 18,676,830 20,877,716 22,913,134 24,457,047 27,477,988 30,066,987 Debt Service Tax Rate (per $100 N.A.V.) $ 0.0032 0.1464 0.1575 0.1364 0.1312 0.1085 0.1152 0.0876 0.0800 0.0700 - Library District Tax Rate (per $100 N.A.V.) $ 0.0417 0.0099 0.0421 0.0421 0.0421 0.0421 0.0421 0.0421 0.0421 0.0521 0.0521 Flood Control Net Assessed Value (Thousands) $ 9,724,304 10,827,837 11,129,482 12,361,851 13,660,618 15,504,112 17,485,890 19,544,069 21,174,169 24,140,629 26,585,248 Flood Control District Tax Rate (per $100 N.A.V.) $ 0.3632 0.3332 0.3425 0.3425 0.3270 0.2858 0.2534 0.2319 0.2119 0.2119 0.2119 Combined Rate $ 1.6475 1.6475 1.6475 1.6475 1.6475 1.6248 1.5748 1.5448 1.5448 1.5448 1.4748 The combined FY 2004-05 property tax rate for Maricopa County and the Library and Flood Control Districts will be reduced to $1.4748 per $100 net assessed value. The primary rate will remain at $1.2108 per $100 net assessed value while the Flood Control District and the Library District rate will remain the same at $0.2119 and $0.5021 per $100 of net assessed value, respectively. The Debt Service rate was eliminated, as the voterapproved General Obligation bonds were fully repaid in FY 2003-04. The FY 2004-05 budget utilized the preliminary rates for all taxes. 42 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) The following table depicts the primary and secondary property tax levies for the last ten fiscal years, plus the preliminary levies for FY 2004-05: Primary Fiscal Year General Fund 1994-95 $ 164,865,317 1995-96 156,257,472 1996-97 154,487,036 1997-98 169,045,638 1998-99 183,750,071 1999-00 207,540,697 2000-01 225,396,514 2001-02 252,676,223 2002-03 276,640,863 2003-04 * 308,122,580 2004-05 ** 339,882,099 Preliminary Tax Levy Secondary Flood Control District Debt Service $ 428,377 $ 35,318,672 20,670,863 36,078,354 22,590,472 38,118,477 21,446,852 42,339,342 22,058,679 44,670,223 20,264,361 44,310,754 24,037,880 45,042,553 20,071,906 45,322,696 19,354,444 44,165,629 19,234,591 51,153,993 56,334,141 Library District $ 5,638,330 1,397,824 6,038,469 6,619,593 7,078,280 7,862,946 8,586,315 9,646,430 10,182,607 14,316,032 15,664,900 $ Total 206,250,696 214,404,513 221,234,454 239,451,425 257,557,253 279,978,758 303,063,262 327,717,255 350,343,543 392,827,196 411,881,140 * Projected Actual ** Budget Note: Excludes SRP, Payments in Lieu of Taxes The FY 2004-05 Budget includes an estimated primary property tax levy (excluding Salt River Project) of $339,882,099 an increase of $31,759,519 (10.31%) from the FY 2003-04 adopted primary levy. The increase is due to the growth in net assessed value, of which nearly three- fifths is a result of new construction. The remaining change in net assessed value is on existing property, which is partly attributable to the impact of biannual property valuation by the County Assessor. Because of biannual assessment, this year’s increase in net assessed value partly reflects increases that would have been realized last year if properties had been re-valued annually. Net assessed values tend to lag behind the general economy. After several years of relatively high growth in net assessed value, forecasts indicate a downward trend in annual growth rates over the next several years. For further information, refer to the “Comparative Tax Data” schedule, as well as the Levy Limit and Truth in Taxation comparisons. Property Taxes (General Fund) $308,122,580 $308,122,580 $339,882,099 $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL 43 FY 05 BUDGET Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Tax Penalties & Interest The County Treasurer collects penalties and interest on repayment of delinquent property taxes, and proceeds are deposited to the General Fund. Collections fluctuate and are difficult to accurately forecast, so it is prudent to budget this revenue conservatively. FY 2003-04 projections are higher than the budget for the same period. The FY 2004-05 budget is a conservative estimate based on historical collection trends. Special Sales Taxes The County and Stadium District levy special sales taxes for specific purposes. These special sales taxes are collected by the State of Arizona and transmitted to the County Treasurer monthly. The two current special sales taxes are the Jail Excise Tax and the Stadium District car rental surcharge. The Stadium District has authority to levy a surcharge on rental cars to help fund Cactus League stadium construction in Maricopa County. In addition, in 1994-95 the State Legislature allowed the Stadium District to collect a special 0.25% sales tax for construction on Bank One Ballpark. Fiscal Jail Excise Year Tax 1994-95 NA 1995-96 NA 1996-97 NA 1997-98 NA 1998-99 $ 41,477,224 1999-00 91,984,716 2000-01 97,752,375 2001-02 98,177,716 2002-03 98,932,138 2003-04* 105,263,795 2004-05** 112,421,733 Stadium District Car Rental Surcharge $ 4,408,888 4,818,487 5,326,147 5,443,369 5,400,000 5,722,238 5,637,184 5,536,163 5,240,032 5,258,744 5,215,094 Stadium District Major League Baseball $ 18,883,297 87,061,064 96,058,302 35,997,339 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Total $ 23,292,185 91,879,551 101,384,449 41,440,708 46,877,224 97,706,954 103,389,559 103,713,879 104,172,171 110,522,539 117,636,827 * Projected Actual ** Budget In November 1998, Maricopa County voters approved a short-term new Jail Excise Tax to fund construction and operation of adult and juvenile detention facilities. Tax authority began in January 1999 and was to expire after nine years or collections of $900 million. In November 2002, Maricopa County voters approved an extension of the Jail Excise Tax for an additional twenty years. Total budgeted revenue from the Jail Excise Tax is $112,421,733 in FY 2004-05, an increase of $7,157,938 (6.8%) from what is projected for FY 2003-04. Jail Excise Tax revenue is budgeted based on the pessimistic forecast due to continuing economic uncertainty. 44 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Jail Excise Tax Forecasts "Pessimistic Scenario" "Most Likely" Scenario Total Total Annual % Cumulative % Cumulative Collections Chg. Collections Annual Collections Chg. Collections Fiscal Year 2003-04 $ 105,263,795 6.4% $ 533,591,355 $ 105,758,456 6.9% $ 534,086,026 2004-05 112,421,733 6.8% 646,013,088 113,373,065 7.2% 647,459,091 2005-06 118,042,820 5.0% 764,055,908 121,309,179 7.0% 768,768,270 2006-07 123,354,747 4.5% 887,410,655 128,102,493 5.6% 896,870,763 2007-08 128,905,710 4.5% 1,016,316,365 135,275,232 5.6% 1,032,146,996 2008-09 134,706,467 4.5% 1,151,022,832 142,851,702 5.6% 1,174,998,698 2009-10 140,768,258 4.5% 1,291,791,090 150,851,397 5.6% 1,325,850,095 2010-11 147,102,830 4.5% 1,438,893,920 159,299,075 5.6% 1,485,149,170 2011-12 153,722,457 4.5% 1,592,616,377 168,219,824 5.6% 1,653,368,994 160,639,968 4.5% 1,753,256,346 177,640,134 5.6% 1,831,009,127 2012-13 Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Licenses and Permits Maricopa County and the Flood Control District collect revenue from a variety of licenses and permits that they issue through various County departments. Rates for licenses and permits are approved by the Board of Supervisors, unless otherwise set forth in State statutes. The revenue generated from licenses and permits is generally used to offset the cost of issuing the permits. Examples of licenses and permits include building permits, marriage licenses, dog licenses, and environmental health permits. Listed next are the actual licenses and permit revenues recorded for the last nine fiscal years, along with projected actual collections for totals FY 2003-04 and estimated revenues for FY 2004-05. Fiscal Year 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04* 2004-05** Licenses & Permits Revenues Special Revenue General Fund Fund Total $ 1,927,793 $ 13,012,399 $ 14,940,192 2,340,983 10,074,284 12,415,267 2,380,622 10,944,271 13,324,933 2,248,372 12,634,283 14,882,655 2,839,905 14,227,608 17,067,513 271,025 21,915,996 22,187,021 501,811 23,186,962 23,688,773 415,821 25,690,472 26,106,293 52,000 28,140,973 28,192,973 1,112,378 30,318,710 31,431,088 1,463,436 29,874,740 31,338,176 * Projected Actual ** Budget 45 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) General Fund license and permit revenues include license fees paid by cable television companies for operation in unincorporated areas which are being aggressively developed. Prior to FY 1999-00, Planning and Development fees were deposited in the General Fund. Licenses and Permits General Fund Department General Government General Government Sheriff Total General Government Licenses and Permits FY 2003-04 Budget $50,000 325,000 53,970 $428,970 FY 2004-05 Budget $50,000 1,357,500 55,936 $1,463,436 Description Liquor Licenses Cable Television Franchise Fees Pawnshop & Peddler's Licenses Note: Cable Television Franchise Fees were misbooked to another object code in prior years. Major sources of Special Revenue Fund license and permit revenue include Planning and Development fees, environmental health permits, and air quality permits. Licenses & Permits Revenue (General Fund) $428,970 $1,112,378 $1,463,436 $1,600,000 $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET Intergovernmental Revenues Intergovernmental revenues are amounts received by the County and districts from other government or public entities, and includes payments in lieu of taxes, state shared revenues, grants, and payments required by intergovernmental agreements (IGA’s). Intergovernmental revenues come from a variety of sources, including the Federal government, local cities and the State of Arizona. Included in the intergovernmental classification are grant revenues that typically carry restrictions on how they may be expended. Listed below are the actual intergovernmental and grant revenues recorded for the last nine fiscal years prior to FY 2003-04, projected actual collections for FY 2003-04, and the amounts budgeted for FY 2004-05. In FY 2004-05, grant revenue in Special Revenue Funds is increasing with the largest increase in the Human Services Department. 46 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Intergovernmental Revenues Fiscal Year 1994-95 $ 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04* 2004-05** Special Revenue Funds General Fund Internal Service Funds Enterprise Funds Capital Projects Funds 336,493,569 $ 101,096,826 $ 4,495,155 $ 458,113 $ 312,660,997 73,921,706 6,506,520 340,111,217 79,444,270 342,821,757 167,199,736 13,010,680 380,989,403 230,206,978 402,400,291 282,270,743 421,036,415 279,008,462 8,093,439 34,434 439,548,553 287,759,808 93,391,643 873,340 448,286,595 273,365,950 18,083,284 572,940 479,974,693 272,574,454 111,310,171 957,586 508,520,647 286,660,439 92,602,168 1,030,047 939,223 $ 87,061,064 96,058,302 42,238,451 1,335,329 859,370 278,259 12,784,358 5,435,884 11,612,028 21,352,798 Debt Service Total 278,425 $ 443,761,311 277,295 480,427,582 279,935 515,893,724 262,793 565,533,417 612,531,710 685,530,404 708,451,009 399,224 834,756,926 354,342 746,098,995 338,324 876,767,256 274,389 910,440,488 * Projected Actual ** Budget Notes: Includes Intergovernmental, Grant and Shared Taxes Historical data prior to FY 1997-98 for General Fund and Debt Service included Indirect Cost Recovery. Payments in Lieu of Taxes Payments in lieu of taxes are collected from the Salt River Project (SRP) and the federal government. SRP values have declined in recent years due to changes in tax laws and in the electric utility industry. Although it is a public entity, SRP estimates its net assessed value and makes payments in lieu of property taxes to each taxing jurisdiction based on its property tax rates. At the time of budget preparation, it was estimated that the FY 200405 Payments in Lieu of Taxes would remain the same as the FY 2003-04 budget amount of $6,929,684. Please refer to the Comparative Tax Data schedule for additional information on the SRP Payments in Lieu of Taxes. Payments in Lieu of Taxes (General Fund) $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,390,681 $5,390,681 $1,539,003 $1,539,003 $5,390,681 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,539,003 $1,000,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED Federal FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL Salt River Project 47 FY 05 BUDGET Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) State Shared Sales Taxes Maricopa County does not have legal authority to levy a general-purpose sales tax. However, the County does receive a portion of the State of Arizona's Transaction Privilege Tax collections, which are deposited in the General Fund. The State collects transaction privilege taxes on 30 types of business activities, at rates ranging from .516 to 6.05 percent. A portion of each of these taxes, ranging from 0 to 80 percent, is allocated to a pool for distribution to the cities, counties and state. Of this pool, 40.51 percent is allocated to Arizona counties. Prior to FY 1994-95, the counties' distribution was determined using a calculation that combined assessed valuation and location of actual sales tax receipts (point of sale). Beginning with FY 1994-95, the state began using a new allocation procedure. The new procedure distributes the funds determined from the larger of two different calculations: a) 50% based on point of sale + 50% based on assessed valuation; or b) 50% based on point of sale + 50% based on population. Also, as of FY 1994-95, counties receive a portion of an additional 2.43 percent of the State's share of receipts, distributed using a 50% point of sale + 50% population basis method. Listed below are the actual state shared sales tax collections for the last nine fiscal years, projected totals for FY 2003-04 plus the budget for FY 2004-05. State shared sales tax collections have suffered most from the economic recession. Prior to FY 2002-03, state shared sales taxes were budgeted for the upcoming fiscal year at the midpoint between the “pessimistic” and “most likely” forecast scenarios. The FY 2003-04 budget assumed an increase in revenue from this source of 1.6% above FY 2002-03 actual collections. Collections for FY 2003-04 are projected to exceed the budget, ending 6.3% higher than in FY 2002-03. Given continuing economic recovery, the FY 2004-05 budget for the General Fund estimates a 6.8% growth rate; resulting in $23,872,524 of additional State Shared Sales Tax revenue above the FY 2003-04 projected actual collections. State Shared Sales Tax Collections Fiscal Year General Fund 1994-95 $ 215,015,368 1995-96 231,009,128 1996-97 242,352,311 1997-98 257,643,630 1998-99 279,386,536 1999-00 309,009,200 2000-01 322,429,593 2001-02 325,728,202 2002-03 330,260,143 2003-04* 351,066,532 2004-05** 374,939,056 * Projected Actual ** Budget 48 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) State Shared Sales Tax $351,066,532 $335,557,376 $374,939,056 $350,000,000 $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET The 10-year forecast for state shared sales tax revenue is shown in the following table. While annual growth rates will recover as the economy improves, they are not anticipated to reach the levels seen prior to FY 2001-02. State Shared Sales Tax Forecast Fiscal Year "Pessimistic Scenario" "Most Likely" Scenario Annual % Annual % Collections Chg. Collections Chg. 2003-04 $ 351,066,532 6.3% $ 352,717,832 2004-05 374,939,056 6.8% 379,171,670 2005-06 393,686,008 5.0% 405,713,687 2006-07 411,401,879 4.5% 428,433,653 2007-08 429,914,963 4.5% 452,425,938 2008-09 449,261,137 4.5% 477,761,790 2009-10 469,477,888 4.5% 504,513,450 2010-11 490,604,393 4.5% 532,769,372 2011-12 512,681,591 4.5% 562,604,456 2012-13 535,752,262 4.5% 594,110,306 Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Co. 6.8% 7.5% 7.0% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% State Shared Vehicle License Taxes The State of Arizona levies vehicle license taxes (VLT) annually on all vehicles, based upon their estimated value. The Vehicle License Tax is essentially a personal property tax levied by the state on cars and trucks. VLT revenue is shared with counties and cities, and a portion is also deposited in the Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF), which is in turn also shared with local governments. VLT is paid as part of the annual auto license renewal process, billed and payable during the month in which the vehicle was first registered. Following is a table showing actual and projected vehicle license tax collections from FY 1994-95 to FY 2004-05. 49 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) State Shared Vehicle License Tax Fiscal General Year Fund 1994-95 $ 49,672,153 1995-96 53,421,417 1996-97 64,600,858 1997-98 67,164,259 1998-99 81,053,747 1999-00 88,147,523 2000-01 93,389,137 2001-02 99,372,045 2002-03 103,532,057 2003-04* 112,435,814 2004-05** 118,057,605 * Projected Actual ** Budget Prior to FY 2001-02, VLT was budgeted at the midpoint between the “pessimistic” and “most likely” forecasts, but has since been budgeted at the pessimistic level due to uncertainties about the impact of biennial collection. In FY 2003-04, VLT collections have been strong, and projected actual revenue is anticipated to exceed budget by 3.12%. State Shared Vehicle License Tax (General Fund) $112,435,814 $109,031,008 $118,057,605 $130,000,000 $110,000,000 $90,000,000 $70,000,000 $50,000,000 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET Based on the pessimistic forecast of 5.0% growth, the FY 2004-05 budget assumes a $5.6 million increase in Vehicle License Tax revenue above the FY 2003-04 projected actual collections. 50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) State Shared Vehicle License Tax Forecast Fiscal Year "Pessimistic Scenario" "Most Likely" Scenario Annual % Annual % Collections Chg. Collections Chg. 2003-04 $ 112,435,814 8.6% $ 112,746,410 2004-05 118,057,605 5.0% 120,638,659 2005-06 112,779,909 4.0% 127,876,978 2006-07 127,691,105 4.0% 136,828,367 2007-08 132,798,749 4.0% 146,406,352 2008-09 138,110,699 4.0% 156,654,797 2009-10 143,635,127 4.0% 167,620,633 2010-11 149,380,532 4.0% 179,354,077 2011-12 155,355,754 4.0% 191,908,863 2012-13 161,569,984 4.0% 205,342,483 Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Co. 8.9% 7.0% 6.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% State Shared Highway User Revenues The State of Arizona collects highway user revenue, principally from a $0.18 per gallon tax on the motor fuel sold within the state. The primary purpose of the highway user revenue is to fund construction and maintenance of streets and highways. The State distributes these highway user funds in approximately the following proportions: 50 percent to the State Highway Fund, 30 percent to cities and towns and 20 percent to counties. The highway user revenues distributed to the counties are allocated based upon fuel sales and estimated consumption as well as population. Maricopa County highway user revenue funds (HURF) are deposited in the Transportation Operations Fund to support the Maricopa County Department of Transportation. Listed below are the actual collections of the highway user revenues for the last nine fiscal years, Projected totals for FY 2003-04, and the budget for FY 2004-05. Fiscal Year 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04* 2004-05** State Shared Highway User Revenues $ 63,227,494 68,763,760 73,249,850 67,408,288 72,392,313 77,317,632 78,243,269 78,285,212 82,153,375 80,489,274 88,073,124 * Projected Actual ** Budget 51 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Other Intergovernmental Revenue Other Intergovernmental Revenues include a variety of payments from other jurisdictions, usually as required by Intergovernmental Agreements (IGA’s) with the County or districts. The following chart shows overall revenue activity for the General Fund. Other Intergovernmental (General Fund) $8,388,043 $9,542,663 $8,594,302 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET Detail of FY 2004-05 General Fund Other Intergovernmental Revenue is shown in the following table. Most of the increase is due to reimbursements from the State for costs associated with the primary and general elections and reimbursement of Justice of the Peace salaries. Sheriff’s reimbursement of patrol services accounts for another major portion of the increase in FY 2004-05. Other Intergovernmental Revenue General Fund FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 Budget Budget Description Department Contract Counsel $ 62,029 $ State Grand Jury Reimbursements County Attorney 15,000 Legal Services to Housing Authority Elections 2,145,980 2,050,000 Election Services Finance 88,136 Housing Authority Reimbursements General Government 249,772 249,773 Shared State Lottery Sales Juvenile Probation 9,999 5,999 Reimbursement from U.S. Marshals for housing of federal juvenile prisoners Legal Defender 19,700 State Grand Jury Reimbursements Legal Advocate 116,764 20,000 State Grand Jury Reimbursements Medical Examiner 60,000 60,000 IGAs with Yavapai County for laboratory services Public Defender 50,400 44,000 State Grand Jury Reimbursements Sheriff’s Office 4,423,616 5,207,358 Patrol Services, Social Security Administration pay for inmate information Superintendent of Schools 118,050 120,000 National Forest Fees for Schools Trial Courts 1,063,297 802,472 IGA with City of El Mirage for use of court space; State Reimbursement for JP Salaries and IGA Revenue from Gila Bend for Lease Space Total $8,388,043 $8,594,302 52 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Charges for Services Maricopa County charges fees for various services. County policy is to fully recover the cost for providing services. When setting fees, care is exercised in establishing charges for services so that they do not unfairly discriminate against those most in need of services. The County Board of Supervisors approves all fee schedules, unless fees are specifically set forth in state statute. Charges for service are also levied internally within Maricopa County government for internal services provided by one County department to another department, but are eliminated within the overall County budget. Examples of charges for services to the public include court-filing fees, kennel fees, landfill charges, park entrance fees, vital statistic document fees, probation service fees, and patient service charges. Examples of internal charges for services include motor pool charges and long distance telephone charges. Listed below are the revenues recorded for the last eight fiscal years, projected revenue for FY 2003-04, and the budget amount for FY 2004-05 for other charges for service, internal service charges, patient service charges, and fines and fees. Charges for Service Special Debt Capital Fiscal General Revenue Service Projects Enterprise Year Fund Funds Fund Funds Funds 1995-96 $ 25,416,938 $ 21,659,510 $ 527,225 $ 89,650 $ 466,685,704 1996-97 21,498,899 22,713,435 302,898 64,018 459,442,809 1997-98 23,285,414 30,598,649 180,180 231,215 465,456,904 1998-99 23,282,041 33,636,546 352,643 16,630 498,120,261 1999-00 20,744,303 40,987,616 280,976 13,389 545,219,766 2000-01 22,344,319 43,365,082 125,432 1,526 582,350,811 2001-02 23,066,442 32,432,540 577,445,943 2002-03 25,932,256 36,564,318 695,504,915 2003-04* 24,760,918 39,394,133 759,848,481 2004-05** 21,741,763 43,372,281 750,339,544 Internal Service Funds $ 71,231,729 85,204,601 66,587,939 70,147,479 87,758,508 47,269,363 48,199,803 73,435,665 90,749,607 89,740,077 Elimination Fund Total $ $585,610,756 589,226,660 586,340,301 625,555,600 695,004,558 695,456,533 (138,734,084) 542,410,644 (74,326,480) 757,110,673 (156,606,546) 758,146,592 (173,687,695) 731,505,970 * Projected Actual ** Budget Includes Fees, Charges for Service and Patient Revenue Patient Charges Patient Charges and Patient Care – Revenue Allowances Special Internal Fiscal General Revenue Enterprise Service Capital Projects Year Fund Funds Funds Funds Funds Eliminations Total 1997-98 $2,444,637 $ 532,007 $ 323,663,351 $ $ $ (54,232,273) $ 272,408,322 1998-99 647,580 602,542 508,799,795 (40,707,215) 469,342,702 1999-00 87,872 1,060,650 584,897,791 (47,811,146) 538,106,404 2000-01 101,118 1,242,215 187,203,802 188,547,135 2001-02 66,046 1,228,270 577,401,082 (91,278,716) 487,416,682 2002-03 49,448 1,142,428 695,449,087 12,424,568 (5,248,439) 703,817,091 2003-04* 35,858 1,470,027 759,599,041 13,780,299 (81,091,484) 693,793,741 2004-05** 52,848 1,352,910 750,289,544 (90,917,032) 660,778,270 * Projected Actual ** Budget 53 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) In the General Fund, the residual long-term care program generates patient service revenues. The long-term care residual population will decline because no new patients are enrolled in the program. Patient Charges (General Fund) $35,858 $52,848 FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET $52,848 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 2004-05 Patient Charges Summary General Fund Department Health Care Mandates Total General Fund Patient Charges FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 Budget Budget Description $52,848 $52,848 LTC Share of Cost $52,848 $52,848 Internal Service Charges Internal service charges are established each budget season. The internal service fee rates are intended to recover from the appropriate user the full cost of the services provided. Internal charges for services are recorded in the Internal Service Funds. The largest increase in both the FY 2003-04 and FY 2004-05 budgets was for Risk Management charges, where the industry is experiencing double digit increases as it recovers from 9/11 and issues related to the current economy. Fiscal Year 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04* 2004-05** Internal Service Funds $ 126,851,818 71,231,729 82,204,601 24,354,392 26,769,664 40,522,322 41,710,416 41,443,255 48,426,383 48,332,015 50,375,372 * Projected Actual ** Budget 54 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Other Charges for Services Actual collections of Other Charges for Service are anticipated to exceed budget in FY 2003-04 by $13.2 million. The change in the administration of the Pharmacy benefit offered by the County to employees was a contributing factor last year and continues to be this year. Prior to January 2003, the pharmacy benefit was purchased through a commercial insurance carrier. In January 2003, the County began to self-insure this benefit and the revenues and expenditures associated with the administration of this program are now in an Internal Service Fund. In addition, a change in administration of Health Select through Total Compensation is also driving the increase in Other Charges for Services. FY 2004-05 General Fund Other Charges for Services are budgeted conservatively and are anticipated to increase $2,153,605 above the FY 2003-04 budget. Other Charges for Services (General Fund) $19,515,310 $24,725,060 $21,688,915 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET The table below identifies the various sources of revenue. While most of the charges will remain constant as compared to the FY 2003-04 budget, the Recorder charges reflect a notable increase. This is a result an increase in the number of documents filed as a result of refinancing due to the current favorable mortgage rates. The FY 2004-05 budget is a conservative representation of the anticipated Recorder fees. Their FY 2003-04 actual fees are projected to be in excess of $10 million. The other notable increase is in Trial Courts. FY 2003-04 revenue is projected approximately 30% greater than budgeted. FY 2004-05 revenue was budgeted consistent with the current year projections. The increase in revenue is due to a handful of fee increases that were implemented towards the end of FY 2002-03 and the beginning of FY 2003-04. 55 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) FY 2004-05 Other Charges for Service Summary General Fund Department Clerk of the Superior Court Constables General Government Human Resources Juvenile Probation FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 Description 3,910,001 $ 3,914,000 Filing Fees 1,322,758 1,517,468 Writ & Restitution Collection Fees 2,000,000 2,000,000 Tax Sale Fees and Cable TV Franchise Fees 24,211 26,640 Garnishments, Copies and Lost Bus Card Fees 8,001 8,001 Miscellaneous Charges and Indian Ward Custody Reimbursements 300,000 90,000 Cremation Certificate Fees and Transport Fees 1,600 8,000 Miscellaneous Charges 19,700 State Reimbusements for Defense Services 650,000 930,000 Fiduciary Fees and Probate Fees 8,000,000 8,962,170 Document Recording Fees 451,087 465,500 Other Tax Sales Fees and Various Civil Fees 35,000 35,000 Garnishment & Support Processing Fees 20,000 COBRA Administration 5,686 4,000 Miscellaneous Charges 2,787,266 3,708,136 Defensive Driving Fees and Other Miscellaneous Court Fees; Civil Trial Jury Fees $ 19,515,310 $ 21,688,915 $ Medical Examiner Public Defender Legal Defender Public Fiduciary Recorder Sheriff Superintendent of Schools Total Compensation Treasurer Trial Courts Total Other Charges for Service Fines and Forfeits Through statutory and enforcement authority, Maricopa County collects various fines such as citations, court fines, and library fines. Fines & Forfeits Special Fiscal General Revenue Year Fund Funds Total 1995-96 $ 8,608,556 $ 1,254,251 $ 9,862,807 1996-97 9,552,255 1,947,305 11,499,560 1997-98 10,552,336 1,908,335 12,460,671 1998-99 10,954,594 2,472,263 13,426,857 1999-00 10,871,790 3,711,582 14,583,372 2000-01 11,989,817 2,918,598 14,908,415 2001-02 12,886,929 3,458,507 16,345,436 2002-03 11,940,884 4,390,695 16,331,579 2003-04* 11,560,128 4,359,148 15,919,277 2004-05** 12,208,033 5,253,670 17,461,703 * Projected Actual ** Budget In the General Fund, the Trial Courts and the Elections Department collect fines and forfeits. Based on collections through March, the forecasted revenue is expected to exceed budget in FY 2003-04. The FY 2004-05 budget anticipates General Fund Fines and Forfeits above the FY 2003-04 budget and projected actual collections. 56 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Fines and Forfeits (General Fund) $10,838,123 $11,560,128 $12,208,033 $12,500,000 $10,000,000 $7,500,000 $5,000,000 $2,500,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET The largest source of General Fund fine revenue is the Trial Courts, which comprises 82.2% of the total Fines and Forfeits in the General Fund. The budgeted Fines and Forfeits for the Clerk of the Superior Court are anticipated to increase in FY 2004-05 from the FY 2003-04 budget. In FY 2003-04 the County was required to return to the State 75% of any revenue above the FY 2002-03 level. This will no longer be required in FY 2004-05. The table below summarizes the sources of General Fund Fines and Forfeits. FY 2004-05 Fines and Forfeits Summary General Fund Department Clerk of the Superior Court Elections Sheriff Trial Courts Total General Fund Fines and Forefeits FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 Budget Budget $ 1,277,294 $ 2,165,000 2,500 6,000 1,400 9,558,329 10,035,633 $ 10,838,123 $ 12,208,033 Description Superior Court Fines Campaign Finance Penalty Fees Civil Sanctions and Traffic Fines Traffic and Misdemeanor Fines Miscellaneous Revenue Maricopa County classifies miscellaneous revenues as any revenues that do not fall within a more specific revenue category. Examples of miscellaneous revenues include concessions, sales of copies, interest earnings, building rental, pay phone receipts, insurance recoveries, food sales, land sales, map sales, and equipment rental as well as sales of fixed assets, and bond proceeds. Listed below are the miscellaneous revenues, other than sales of fixed assets and bond proceeds, recorded for the last nine fiscal years, projected amounts for FY 2003-04, plus the budget for FY 2004-05. Miscellaneous revenues are recorded in all of the fund types. 57 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Fiscal Year 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04* 2004-05** Special General Revenue Fund Funds $ 22,290,356 $ 11,745,466 22,698,183 13,368,020 12,052,384 19,343,464 10,170,063 32,181,062 12,514,416 24,642,605 13,968,176 25,334,749 20,448,749 38,295,643 16,376,321 33,229,869 11,657,516 37,321,397 6,366,488 21,324,901 8,239,958 22,907,052 Miscellaneous Revenue Internal Debt Capital Enterprise Service Service Projects Funds Funds Funds Funds $ 77,468,996 $ 2,974,265 $ 772,308 $ 1,395,661 5,249,093 104,646 1,075,861 1,287,867 5,221,705 741,659 622,445 10,056,965 1,292,308 269,866 524,591 100,241,220 78,878,826 2,594,804 400,000 407,093 21,320,726 941,625 400,000 1,325,000 26,279,616 2,344,981 4,927,850 113,020,718 8,543,553 2,230,495 5,913,617 12,369,884 4,857,068 1,672,982 3,193,710 5,994,977 6,196,365 598,512 2,862,304 12,625,200 5,498,864 514,775 4,450,000 1,810,305 $ Total 116,647,052 43,783,670 48,038,622 144,679,110 119,437,744 63,290,276 205,317,557 78,663,739 64,697,649 49,973,771 43,420,954 * Projected Actual ** Budget Miscellaneous Revenue (General Fund) $15,896,936 $6,366,488 $8,239,958 $18,000,000 $15,000,000 $12,000,000 $9,000,000 $6,000,000 $3,000,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET As in prior years, the largest single component of miscellaneous revenues in the General Fund is interest income, which is budgeted at $2.4 million in FY 2004-05. This is substantially less than the FY 2003-04 budget. However, it is consistent with the current rate of return. 58 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) FY 2004-05 Miscellaneous Revenue General Fund Department Appropriated Fund Balance Assessor Clerk of the Superior Court County Attorney Elections Facilities Management Finance General Government Human Resources Internal Audit Materials Management Recorder Sheriff Trial Courts Total General Fund Miscellaneous Revenue FY 2003-04 $ 1,237,500 133,669 31,366 34,000 15,000 78,000 955,940 12,000,000 1,300 75 127,000 1,003,600 121,680 142,807 $ 15,881,937 FY 2004-05 $ 2,810,000 133,669 26,265 36,271 15,000 78,000 576,138 2,494,082 5,208 75 127,000 1,337,830 118,400 482,020 $ 8,239,958 Description NACO Revenue Sale of Maps, Copies, Etc. Sale of Copies & Bad Check Fees, Interest Fees to Private Defense for Discovery Information Sale of Copies and Maps Parking fees Security Building Rental Interest Income Sale of Copies, W-2 fees Sale of Instructional Videos Vendor Rebates & Copy Sales Micrographics & Photocopy Sales Sale of Copies and Reimbursement for ID Cards Sale of Copies Gain/Loss on Fixed Assets No Gains or Loss from Fixed Assets are projected in the General Fund for FY 2003-04. It is not anticipated that any gains or losses will be realized in FY 2004-05 therefore no revenue has been budgeted in this area. Gain/Loss on Fixed Assets (General Fund) $50,000 $0 $0 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL FY 05 BUDGET Other Financing Sources Other Financing Sources include Proceeds of Financing (debt) and Fund Transfers In. No Proceeds of Financing are budgeted for FY 2004-05. 59 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Revenue Sources and Variance Commentary (Continued) Fund Transfers In Details on Fund Transfers In and Out are included later in this document. For the General Fund, Fund Transfers In to the General Fund include Central Service Allocation charges to non-General Fund departments and the reimbursement from the Health Care Delivery System for the Disproportionate Share match payment to the State of Arizona. For further information, refer to the “Transfer In by Fund” schedule. Transfers In (General Fund) $111,126,572 $111,438,854 $133,499,730 $125,000,000 $100,000,000 $75,000,000 $50,000,000 $25,000,000 $0 FY 04 REVISED FY 04 PROJ ACTUAL 60 FY 05 BUDGET Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Comparative Tax Data Maricopa County levies primary property taxes based on assessed valuations of personal and real property. The primary tax levy is limited by A.R.S. §42-17051. Each year the primary tax levy limit is computed by the Assessor’s Office and is confirmed by the State Property Tax Oversight Commission. The primary property tax may be used to support any type or level of service within the legal purview of the County, and therefore is the major revenue source for the County General Fund. The County also levies secondary property taxes that are levied for a specific purpose, i.e. the Flood Control District, Library District and Debt Service. FY 2004-05 PRELIMINARY PROPERTY TAX LEVY Primary, Debt Service, Flood Control District and Library District Levies Description Salt River Proj. Effective Assessed Value Assessed Value Total Assessed Value w/SRP Revenue from 1-cent Levy Tax Rates Property Tax Levy SRP Payments in Lieu (PILT)* Total Tax Levy & PILT MARICOPA COUNTY PRIMARY: FY 2004-05 Preliminary $ 28,070,870,413 $ 445,216,494 $ 28,516,086,907 $ FY 2003-04 Final 25,447,850,971 445,216,494 25,893,067,465 Variance $ 2,623,019,442 $ $ 2,623,019,442 $ 2,851,609 $ 2,589,307 262,302 1.2108 $ 339,882,099 $ 1.2108 308,122,580 $0.0000 $ 31,759,519 $ 5,390,681 $ 345,272,780 5,390,681 313,513,261 $ 31,759,519 MARICOPA COUNTY DEBT SERVICE SECONDARY: FY 2004-05 Preliminary $ 30,066,986,670 $ 445,216,494 $ 30,512,203,164 $ FY 2003-04 Final 27,477,987,528 445,216,494 27,923,204,022 Variance $ 2,588,999,142 $ $ 2,588,999,142 $ 3,051,220 $ 2,792,320 258,900 $ $ 0.0700 19,234,591 ($0.0700) $ (19,234,591) $ $ 311,652 19,546,243 (311,652) $ (19,546,243) FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT: FY 2004-05 Preliminary $ 26,585,248,023 $ 64,942,150 $ 26,650,190,173 $ FY 2003-04 Final 24,140,629,062 64,942,150 24,205,571,212 Variance $ 2,444,618,961 $ $ 2,444,618,961 $ 2,665,019 $ 2,420,557 244,462 0.2119 $ 56,334,141 $ 0.2119 51,153,993 $0.0000 $ 5,180,148 $ 137,612 $ 56,471,753 137,612 51,291,605 $ 5,180,148 LIBRARY DISTRICT: FY 2004-05 Preliminary FY 2003-04 Final Variance 3,051,220 $ 2,792,320 258,900 0.0521 $ 15,664,900 $ 0.0521 14,316,032 $0.0000 $ 1,348,868 $ 187,436 $ 15,852,336 187,436 14,503,468 $ 1,348,868 $ 1.4748 $ 411,881,140 $ 1.5448 392,827,196 (0.0700) $ 19,053,944 $ -4.4% 6.3% 5,715,729 $ 417,596,869 6,027,381 398,854,577 (311,652) $ 18,742,292 -4.7% 6.1% $ 30,066,986,670 $ 445,216,494 $ 30,512,203,164 $ 27,477,987,528 445,216,494 27,923,204,022 $ 2,588,999,142 $ $ 2,588,999,142 $ GRAND TOTALS: FY 2004-05 Preliminary FY 2003-04 Final Variance $ * Note: Budgeted payments in lieu of taxes also include anticipated payments from the Bureau of Land Management, not reflected in this chart. 61 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Levy Limit and Truth-In-Taxation Comparisons PRELIMINARY LEVY VS. FY 2004-05 LIMIT FY 2004-05 Adjusted Allowable Levy Limit Maximum Rate $ 346,394,541 $ 1.2340 FY 2004-05 Preliminary Primary Levy (excluding SRP): Primary Levy Rate $ 339,882,099 $ 1.2108 Amount Under/(Over) Limit: $ $ 6,512,442 0.0232 PRELIMINARY FY 2004-05 LEVY VS. TRUTH-IN-TAXATION LEVY Current NAV Subject to Taxation in Prior Year FY 2003-04 Primary Levy FY 2004-05 Truth-in-Taxation Rate FY 2004-05 Current Net Assessed Value FY 2004-05 Truth-in-Taxation Levy $ 26,518,686,554 $ 308,122,580 $ 1.1619 $ 28,070,870,413 $ 326,155,443 FY 2004-05 Preliminary Primary Levy (excluding SRP) FY 2004-05 Preliminary Primary Rate $ $ 339,882,099 1.2108 Amount Under/(Over) Truth-in-Taxation Levy Amount Under/(Over) Truth-in-Taxation Rate $ $ (13,726,656) (0.0489) Truth-in-Taxation Assessment on a $100,000 Home: Recommended Primary Levy on a $100,000 Home: (Increase)/Decrease $ $ $ 116.19 121.08 (4.89) -4.2% Impact of Overall Rate on a $100,000 home: FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 Net Impact on Taxpayer $ $ $ 154.48 147.48 7.00 4.5% 62 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary The following schedule lists the estimated beginning fund balances, projected revenues, expenditures and appropriated fund balance for the upcoming fiscal year, and resulting estimated fund balances at the end of FY 2004-05. “Beginning fund balance” represents resources accumulated within each fund as of the start of the fiscal year, based on actual and projected revenues and expenditures for prior fiscal years. For budgeting purposes, fund balances are “Unreserved/Undesignated”, which means that estimated unreserved fund balances are reduced by amounts designated for other purposes. Fund designations are explained in greater detail later in this section. A list of fund balance designations is provided in the following section. The process for estimating all beginning fund balances for FY 2004-05 begins with audited actual fund balance information at the end of FY 2002-03, as presented in the Maricopa County Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). For governmental funds, which include the General Fund as well as special revenue, debt service and capital project funds, the “unreserved fund balance” is used. For proprietary funds, “expendable fund balance” is calculated as: • Current assets less amounts held for contractual obligations less current liabilities. This measure provides a more accurate estimation of the resources that can be appropriated from these types of funds than “unreserved fund equity”, which includes the net value of property, plant, and equipment as well as long-term liabilities. A number of grant funds reflect negative unreserved/undesignated beginning fund balances as a result of recent changes in Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) financial reporting requirements disallowing the inclusion of revenues received after 60 days following the end of the fiscal year. The Department of Finance and the Office of Management and Budget are working with affected departments to improve upon their financial reporting practices, and to ensure that annual expenditures remain within authorized grant awards and that any reimbursements due from the federal government are received in a timely manner Several funds are projected to have deficit fund balances at the end of FY 2004-05, as follows: Detention Operations (Fund 255) & Capital Projects (Fund 455) The Detention Operations and Capital Projects funds are used to account for proceeds of the Jail Excise Tax (approved by County voters in 1998) that are applied toward the jail and juvenile detention operations and capital improvement program, respectively. The original Jail Excise Tax will expire after nine years or $900 million in collections, after which the Jail Excise Tax extension as approved by voters in 2002 will take effect. As previously anticipated, during FY 2003-04 spending will exceed forecasted tax collections, but the shortfall will be made up in the following fiscal year as the capital projects are completed. As a result, the Capital Projects Fund will end FY 2003-04 in a deficit. The deficit will be covered primarily by an interfund loan from the County Improvement Debt Fund (320), which has an accumulated balance from transfers from the General Fund that is sufficient to cover full repayment of the debt issue, but most of which will not be required until after FY 2004-05. The remaining portion of the deficit will be covered by a designation in the General Fund (see Fund Designations). Interest charges will be assessed from the Detention Capital Projects fund. The Detention Operation Fund beginning fund balance for FY 2004-05 is expected to be far greater than that of FY 2003-04, due primarily to reductions in one-time expenses associated with the opening of new detention facilities. Alternately, the Capital Projects beginning fund balance for FY 2004-05 is expected to be far less than that of FY 2003-04, due to the final stages of capital construction. 63 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) Healthcare Delivery System (Fund 535) The Healthcare Delivery System beginning fund balance for FY 2004-05 is expected to be much higher than that of FY 2003-04, due primarily to corrections in reported accounts receivable. Health Plan (Fund 541) Long Term Care Plan (Fund 551) Senior Select Plan (Fund 566) These three funds have estimated beginning expendable fund balances at or near zero. During FY 2003-04, each fund went into deficit due to an upward correction in reported liabilities for health care services. These deficits are being offset in FY 2003-04 by fund transfers from the General Fund, and projected losses in the Health Plan and Senior Select Plan funds will receive additional transfers in FY 2004-05 to offset additional projected losses. Refer to the “Fund Transfers” schedule for further detail. The Health Plan Fund is projected to have a small deficit expendable fund balance at the end of FY 2004-05, but this deficit is expected to be eliminated through a reduction in contractual reserve requirements due to projected declines in plan memberships. The significant year-to-year variances in beginning fund balances is a direct result of the reported liability corrections. Equipment Services (Fund 654) The existing budget deficit is due to various management and business process deficiencies. In FY 2003-04 OMB and Equipment Services engaged the services of Eclipse Consulting to assist in identifying business process improvements. It is OMB’s recommendation to hold implementation of these recommendations until the consultant’s study is completed and final recommendations are available. At that time, OMB and Equipment Services will work together on various proposals to address the budget deficit. The FY 2004-05 budget includes measures to partially address the negative fund balance. Non-Major Funds A year-to-year comparison of aggregated non-major fund beginning fund balances shows a variance of only 1.8%, which indicates relative stability in these funds. 64 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE 201 ADULT PROBATION FEES 203 SHERIFF DONATIONS 204 JUSTICE CT JUDICIAL ENHANCEMNT 205 COURT DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL 207 PALO VERDE 208 JUDICIAL ENHANCEMENT 209 PUBLIC DEFENDER TRAINING 210 WASTE MANAGEMENT 211 ADULT PROBATION GRANTS 212 SHERIFF JAIL ENHANCEMENT FUND 213 COUNTY ATTORNEY RICO 214 SHERIFF RICO FUND 215 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 216 CLERK OF THE COURT GRANTS 217 CDBG, HOUSING TRUST 218 CLERK OF COURT FILL THE GAP 219 COUNTY ATTORNEY GRANTS 220 DIVERSION 221 COUNTY ATTORNEY FILL THE GAP 222 HUMAN SERVICES GRANTS 223 TRANSPORTATION GRANTS 224 MEDICAL EXAMINER GRANT FUND 225 SPUR CROSS RANCH CONSERVATION 226 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FEES 227 JUVENILE COURT GRANTS 228 JUVENILE COURT SPECIAL FEES 229 JUVENILE RESTITUTION FUND 230 PARKS & REC. GRANTS 232 TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS 233 PUBLIC DEFENDER GRANTS 235 DEL WEBB SPECIAL FUND 236 RECORDER'S SURCHARGE 238 SUPERIOR COURT GRANTS 239 PARKS SOUVENIR FUND 240 LAKE PLEASANT RECREATION SVCS 241 PARKS ENHANCEMENT FUND 242 LIBRARY DISTRICT GRANTS 243 PARKS DONATIONS FUND 244 LIBRARY DISTRICT 245 JUSTICE COURTS SPECIAL REVENUE 246 JUSTICE COURTS GRANTS 249 GENERAL GOVERNMENT GRANTS 250 CACTUS LEAGUE OPERATIONS 251 SHERIFF GRANTS 252 INMATE SERVICES 253 BALLPARK OPERATIONS 254 INMATE HEALTH SERVICES 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS 256 PROBATE FEES 257 CONCILIATION COURT FEES 258 COURT AUTOMATED SERVICES 259 SUPERIOR COURT SPECIAL REVENUE 260 RESEARCH & REPORTING 261 LAW LIBRARY FEES Unreserved/ Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Undesignated Revenues and Expenditures and Appropriated Fund Ending Fund Beginning Balance Transfers In Transfers Out Balance Balance $ 129,782,461 $ 1,036,413,146 $ 1,166,195,607 $ 196,689,269 $ - $ 2,956,021 $ 28,811 2,047,154 102,839 191,033 1,165,643 72,370 459,832 (188,585) 311,563 (388,105) (59,489) 370,258 (454,008) 1,033,413 970,514 (3,437,761) 216,230 167,916 15,985,718 (975,499) 1,017,941 89,196 10,142 15,769,847 (119,573) 466,779 7,601,204 (59,472) 26,254 1,350,878 1,813,134 (27,960) 1,246,560 2,158,824 1,352,874 (1,959,119) 2,359,825 (615,691) 6,341,660 4,783,593 129,453 59,615,792 121,871 227,337 306,379 1,687,686 209,163 347,438 8,300,000 $ 16,400 608,704 1,098,925 258,628 1,101,192 465,464 72,000 5,619,776 395,000 1,300,000 1,100,000 1,023,180 1,326,528 16,033,276 1,427,544 5,827,233 1,000,000 1,266,624 37,977,848 250,000 267,045 410,500 11,200,000 15,722,058 1,000,000 10,000 57,470 98,657,104 384,712 175,000 5,370,000 1,356,000 52,000 1,383,951 2,095,885 25,000 160,000 16,834,270 2,062,052 209,584 3,396,892 169,000 3,992,275 9,411,744 4,517,821 179,715 266,949,566 392,000 1,554,010 689,000 4,989,262 440,000 810,700 65 8,300,000 $ 16,400 608,704 1,098,925 287,138 1,665,055 465,464 527,069 5,619,776 395,000 1,300,000 1,100,000 1,096,223 1,326,528 16,033,276 1,427,544 5,827,233 1,000,000 2,023,143 37,977,848 250,000 267,045 410,500 10,947,590 15,722,058 1,000,000 50,000 67,470 114,426,951 384,717 162,358 5,608,218 1,356,000 52,000 1,500,951 2,236,340 25,000 236,253 16,320,796 2,062,052 209,584 10,896,891 109,318 3,992,275 9,911,744 3,469,685 309,168 327,981,273 392,000 1,554,010 689,000 4,989,262 440,000 810,700 $ 95,038,389 - 2,956,021 28,811 2,047,154 102,839 162,523 601,780 72,370 4,763 (188,585) 238,520 (388,105) (59,489) 370,258 (454,008) 1,033,413 213,995 (3,437,761) 216,230 167,916 16,238,128 (975,499) 1,017,941 49,196 142 (119,578) 479,421 7,362,986 (59,472) 26,254 1,233,878 1,672,679 (27,960) 1,170,307 2,672,298 1,352,874 (9,459,118) 2,419,507 (615,691) 5,841,660 5,831,729 (1,415,915) 121,871 227,337 306,379 1,687,686 209,163 347,438 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Beginning Balance Revenues and Transfers In Expenditures and Transfers Out Unreserved/ Undesignated Ending Fund Balance Appropriated Fund Balance SPECIAL REVENUE (Continued) 262 PUBLIC DEFENDER FILL THE GAP 263 LEGAL DEFENDER FILL THE GAP 264 SUPERIOR COURT FILL THE GAP 265 PUBLIC HEALTH FEES 266 CHECK ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 267 CRIM JUSTICE ENHANCEMENT 268 VICTIM COMP AND ASSISTANCE 269 VICTIM COMP RESTITUTION INT 270 CHILD SUPPORT ENHANCEMENT 271 EXPEDITED CHILD SUPPORT 273 VICTIM LOCATION 274 CLERK OF THE COURT EDMS 275 JUVENILE PROBATION DIVERSION 276 SPOUSAL MAINT ENF ENHANCEMENT 280 OLD COURTHOUSE RESTORATION 281 CHILDREN'S ISSUES EDUCATION 282 DOM REL MEDIATION EDUCATION 290 WASTE TIRE 292 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH GRANT 504 AIR QUALITY FEES 505 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GRANT 506 ENVIRONMTL SVCS ENV HEALTH 532 PUBLIC HEALTH GRANTS 572 ANIMAL CONTROL LICENSE/SHELTER 573 ANIMAL CONTROL GRANTS 574 ANIMAL CONTROL FIELD OPERATION 748 JUROR IMPROVEMENT 991 FLOOD CONTROL SPECIAL REVENUE DEBT SERVICE 320 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DEBT 370 STADIUM DIST DEBT SERIES02 DEBT SERVICE 234 TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECT 422 INTERGOVERNMENTAL CAP PROJ 435 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT FUND 440 CRIMINAL JUSTICE CAPITAL PROJECTS 445 GENERAL FUND CTY IMPROV 450 LONG TERM PROJECT RESERVE 455 DETENTION CAPITAL PROJECTS 990 FLOOD CONTROL CAPITAL PROJECTS CAPITAL PROJECTS ENTERPRISE 535 HEALTHCARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 541 HEALTH PLAN 551 LONG TERM CARE PLAN 566 SENIOR SELECT PLAN 580 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ENTERPRISE $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 229,302 8,843 133,228 492,599 151,262 186,578 100,082 449,402 119,953 263,327 79,559 350,538 401,566 42,768 8,748 160,089 148,071 6,019,051 (97,946) 617,807 (2,697,514) 345,321 (1,580,823) 8,892 8,584 20,903 84,359 12,333,801 145,216,234 $ 1,784,130 44,000 1,525,690 3,418,618 700,000 1,361,500 36,000 40,000 45,000 425,661 16,161 1,400,000 268,425 95,000 10,000 110,000 176,000 3,770,000 842,542 5,900,000 4,635,284 10,394,842 39,777,808 5,754,716 468,857 2,845,037 200,000 78,669,638 706,107,847 $ 1,784,130 44,000 1,525,690 3,419,643 700,000 1,361,500 126,000 465,000 100,000 425,661 36,568 1,400,000 268,425 95,000 10,000 110,000 176,000 3,419,169 842,542 6,324,064 4,635,284 10,340,833 39,777,808 5,504,069 468,857 2,748,344 200,000 91,003,439 804,248,561 $ 88,123,663 $ 9,038,117 97,161,780 $ 7,867,500 $ 5,515,094 13,382,594 $ 48,131,226 $ 5,515,094 53,646,320 $ - $ 16,388,770 $ 7,862,215 46,644,534 39,016,426 9,558,988 (42,448,767) 77,022,166 $ 83,141,666 $ 15,888,390 456,039 14,750,000 367,583 2,293,820 47,591,538 63,446,899 227,935,935 $ 77,959,051 $ 21,095,594 38,557,198 29,738,675 3,000 40,162,409 52,076,503 259,592,430 $ - $ 12,748,263 $ 29,027 137,688 81,000 6,427,290 19,423,268 $ 481,891,112 $ 124,610,139 215,887,444 49,826,051 450,000 872,664,746 $ 474,412,270 $ 124,659,416 213,681,088 49,793,052 993,253 863,539,079 $ - $ 66 95,038,389 $ $ $ $ 229,302 8,843 133,228 491,574 151,262 186,578 10,082 24,402 64,953 263,327 59,152 350,538 401,566 42,768 8,748 160,089 148,071 6,369,882 (97,946) 193,743 (2,697,514) 399,330 (1,580,822) 259,539 8,584 117,596 84,359 47,075,521 47,859,937 9,038,117 56,898,054 21,571,385 2,655,011 8,543,375 14,750,000 9,645,334 11,849,808 (35,019,638) 11,370,396 45,365,671 20,227,105 (20,250) 2,344,044 113,999 5,884,037 28,548,935 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Beginning Balance INTERNAL SERVICE 652 HS SELF-INSURED TRUST FUND 654 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 673 REPROGRAPHICS 675 RISK MANAGEMENT 681 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 685 BENEFITS TRUST INTERNAL SERVICE $ ELIMINATIONS $ ALL FUNDS $ $ Revenues and Transfers In 4,190,976 $ (1,259,341) 859,115 14,618,515 2,856,585 4,530,849 25,796,699 $ Expenditures and Transfers Out Unreserved/ Undesignated Ending Fund Balance Appropriated Fund Balance 18,850,490 $ 10,192,096 903,775 26,644,669 14,179,654 28,059,222 98,829,906 $ 16,831,359 $ 9,751,777 832,015 26,070,716 13,702,696 22,533,346 89,721,909 $ - $ $ (651,741,436) $ (651,741,436) $ - $ 494,402,609 $ 2,303,592,738 $ 2,585,202,470 $ - 67 $ 291,727,658 $ 6,210,107 (819,022) 930,875 15,192,468 3,333,543 10,056,725 34,904,696 212,792,877 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) YEAR-TO-YEAR COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED FUND BALANCES GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE 201 ADULT PROBATION FEES 203 SHERIFF DONATIONS 204 JUSTICE CT JUDICIAL ENHANCEMNT 205 COURT DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL 207 PALO VERDE 208 JUDICIAL ENHANCEMENT 209 PUBLIC DEFENDER TRAINING 210 WASTE MANAGEMENT 211 ADULT PROBATION GRANTS 213 COUNTY ATTORNEY RICO 215 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 216 CLERK OF THE COURT GRANTS 217 CDBG, HOUSING TRUST 218 CLERK OF COURT FILL THE GAP 219 COUNTY ATTORNEY GRANTS 220 DIVERSION 221 COUNTY ATTORNEY FILL THE GAP 222 HUMAN SERVICES GRANTS 223 TRANSPORTATION GRANTS 224 MEDICAL EXAMINER GRANT FUND 225 SPUR CROSS RANCH CONSERVATION 226 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FEES 227 JUVENILE COURT GRANTS 228 JUVENILE COURT SPECIAL FEES 229 JUVENILE RESTITUTION FUND 230 PARKS & REC. GRANTS 232 TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS 233 PUBLIC DEFENDER GRANTS 235 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT GRANTS 236 RECORDER'S SURCHARGE 238 SUPERIOR COURT GRANTS 239 PARKS SOUVENIR FUND 240 LAKE PLEASANT RECREATION SVCS 241 PARKS ENHANCEMENT FUND 242 LIBRARY DISTRICT GRANTS 243 PARKS DONATIONS FUND 244 LIBRARY DISTRICT 245 JUSTICE COURT ENHANCEMENT 246 JUSTICE COURTS GRANTS 248 SAIL GRANTS 249 GENERAL GOVERNMENT GRANTS 250 CACTUS LEAGUE OPERATIONS 251 SHERIFF GRANTS 252 INMATE SERVICES 253 BALLPARK OPERATIONS 254 INMATE HEALTH SERVICES 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS 256 PROBATE FEES 257 CONCILIATION COURT FEES 258 COURT AUTOMATED SERVICES 259 SUPERIOR COURT SPECIAL REVENUE 260 RESEARCH & REPORTING FY 2003-04 Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Beginning Balance $ 126,438,426 FY 2004-05 Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Beginning Balance $ 129,782,461 $ $ 2,998,791 21,742 1,240,914 168,488 142,034 1,037,268 20,812 3,601,692 254,241 206,407 1,303,133 1,246,394 172,490 13,154,538 735,746 19,653 214,500 27,085,695 308,513 4,232,701 24,086 1,568,112 1,452,560 741,865 930,156 632,851 2,401,425 3,477,082 4,654,929 30,300 31,815,108 34,197 160,719 152,590 1,070,741 144,201 68 $ 2,956,021 $ 28,811 2,047,154 102,839 191,033 1,165,643 72,370 459,832 (188,585) 311,563 (388,105) (59,489) 370,258 (454,008) 1,033,413 970,514 (3,437,761) 216,230 167,916 15,985,718 (975,499) 1,017,941 89,196 10,142 15,769,847 (119,573) 466,779 7,601,204 (59,472) 26,254 1,350,878 1,813,134 (27,960) 1,246,560 2,158,824 1,352,874 (1,959,119) 2,359,825 (615,691) 6,341,660 4,783,593 129,453 59,615,792 121,871 227,337 306,379 1,687,686 209,163 Variance 3,344,035 (42,770) 7,069 806,240 (65,649) 48,999 128,375 51,558 (3,141,860) (188,585) 57,322 (388,105) (59,489) 163,851 (454,008) (269,720) (275,881) (3,437,761) 216,230 (4,574) 2,831,180 (975,499) 282,195 69,543 (204,358) (11,315,848) (119,573) 158,266 3,368,503 (59,472) 2,168 (217,234) 360,574 (27,960) 504,695 1,228,668 720,023 (1,959,119) (41,600) (615,691) 2,864,578 128,665 99,153 27,800,684 87,674 66,618 153,789 616,945 64,962 % Variance 2.6% -1.4% 32.5% 65.0% -39.0% 34.5% 12.4% 247.7% -87.2% 22.5% 79.4% -20.7% -22.1% -2.7% 21.5% 38.4% 353.9% -95.3% -41.8% 51.3% 79.6% 9.0% -13.9% 24.8% 68.0% 132.1% 113.8% -1.7% 82.4% 2.8% 327.2% 87.4% 256.4% 41.4% 100.8% 57.6% 45.0% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) YEAR-TO-YEAR COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED FUND BALANCES FY 2003-04 Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Beginning Balance FY 2004-05 Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Beginning Balance SPECIAL REVENUE (Continued) 261 LAW LIBRARY FEES 262 PUBLIC DEFENDER FILL THE GAP 263 LEGAL DEFENDER FILL THE GAP 264 SUPERIOR COURT FILL THE GAP 265 PUBLIC HEALTH FEES 266 CHECK ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 267 CRIM JUSTICE ENHANCEMENT 268 VICTIM COMP AND ASSISTANCE 269 VICTIM COMP RESTITUTION INT 270 CHILD SUPPORT ENHANCEMENT 271 EXPEDITED CHILD SUPPORT 272 CHILD SUPPORT AUTOMATION 273 VICTIM LOCATION 274 CLERK OF THE COURT EDMS 275 JUVENILE PROBATION DIVERSION 276 SPOUSAL MAINT ENF ENHANCEMENT 280 OLD COURTHOUSE RESTORATION 281 CHILDREN'S ISSUES EDUCATION 282 DOM REL MEDIATION EDUCATION 290 WASTE TIRE 292 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH GRANT 504 AIR QUALITY FEES 505 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GRANT 506 ENVIRONMTL SVCS ENV HEALTH 532 PUBLIC HEALTH GRANTS 572 ANIMAL CONTROL LICENSE/SHELTER 573 ANIMAL CONTROL GRANTS 574 ANIMAL CONTROL FIELD OPERATION 748 JUROR IMPROVEMENT 991 FLOOD CONTROL SPECIAL REVENUE $ 136,847 240,310 1,311,324 256,865 370,072 85,387 12,896 80,000 218,531 18,691 68,530 269,986 367,967 34,615 8,714 95,683 227,682 5,278,775 2,993,834 1,398,843 115,462 216,825 65,752 4,602,581 125,932,846 DEBT SERVICE 312 BOND-DEBT SERVICE $ 320 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DEBT 370 STADIUM DIST DEBT SERIES02 DEBT SERVICE $ 96,720,643 8,434,982 105,155,625 CAPITAL PROJECTS 234 TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECT $ 410 BALLPARK CONSTRUCTION 422 INTERGOVERNMENTAL CAP PROJ 435 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT FUND 445 GENERAL FUND COUNTY IMPROV 450 LONG TERM PROJECT RESERVE 455 DETENTION CAPITAL PROJECTS 990 FLOOD CONTROL CAPITAL PROJECTS CAPITAL PROJECTS $ 7,513,699 $ 1,969 21,374,678 44,917,291 35,300,000 7,776,317 (587,190) 4,284,500 120,581,264 $ 69 $ $ $ Variance 347,438 229,302 8,843 133,228 492,599 151,262 186,578 100,082 449,402 119,953 263,327 79,559 350,538 401,566 42,768 8,748 160,089 148,071 6,019,051 (97,946) 617,807 (2,697,514) 345,321 (1,580,823) 8,892 8,584 20,903 84,359 12,333,801 145,216,234 $ 88,123,663 9,038,117 97,161,780 $ 210,591 229,302 8,843 (107,082) (818,725) (105,603) (183,495) 14,695 436,506 39,953 44,796 (18,691) 11,029 80,552 33,599 8,153 34 64,406 (79,611) 740,276 (97,946) (2,376,027) (2,697,514) (1,053,522) (1,580,823) (106,570) 8,584 (195,922) 18,607 7,731,220 19,283,389 % Variance 153.9% -44.6% -62.4% -41.1% -49.6% 17.2% 3384.8% 49.9% 20.5% -100.0% 16.1% 29.8% 9.1% 23.6% 0.4% 67.3% -35.0% 14.0% -79.4% -75.3% -92.3% -90.4% 28.3% 168.0% 15.3% $ (8,596,980) 603,135 (7,993,845) -8.9% 7.2% -7.6% 16,388,770 $ 7,862,215 46,644,534 39,016,426 9,558,988 (42,448,767) 77,022,166 $ 8,875,071 (1,969) (13,512,463) 1,727,243 3,716,426 1,782,671 (41,861,577) (4,284,500) (43,559,097) 118.1% -100.0% -63.2% 3.8% 10.5% 22.9% 7129.1% -100.0% -36.1% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) YEAR-TO-YEAR COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED FUND BALANCES FY 2003-04 Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Beginning Balance FY 2004-05 Initial Unreserved/ Undesignated Beginning Balance ENTERPRISE 535 HEALTHCARE DELIVERY SYSTEM $ 541 HEALTH PLAN 551 LONG TERM CARE PLAN 561 HEALTH SELECT 566 SENIOR SELECT PLAN 580 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ENTERPRISE $ (10,323,312) $ 2,164,459 15,880,975 1,521,589 (6,340,025) 12,156,423 15,060,109 $ INTERNAL SERVICE 652 HS SELF-INSURED TRUST FUND $ 654 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 673 REPROGRAPHICS 675 RISK MANAGEMENT 681 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 685 BENEFITS TRUST INTERNAL SERVICE $ (624,811) 722,674 11,760,024 2,073,357 3,327,425 18,636,952 $ - 12,748,263 29,027 137,688 81,000 6,427,290 19,423,268 % Variance Variance $ $ 23,071,575 (2,135,432) (15,743,287) (1,521,589) 6,421,025 (5,729,133) 4,363,159 -223.5% -98.7% -99.1% -100.0% -101.3% -47.1% 29.0% 4,190,976 $ (1,259,341) 859,115 14,618,515 2,856,585 4,530,849 25,796,699 $ 4,190,976 (634,530) 136,441 2,858,491 783,228 1,203,424 8,538,030 101.6% 18.9% 24.3% 37.8% 36.2% 45.8% ELIMINATIONS $ ALL FUNDS $ 511,805,221 $ 494,402,609 $ (16,024,329) -3.1% NON-MAJOR FUNDS $ 204,778,821 $ 199,769,948 $ (3,630,590) -1.8% $ - $ - Note: Major funds include the General Fund, Detention Operations Fund, Bond Debt Service Fund, County Improvement Debt Fund, county Improvement Fund, Detention Capital Projects Fund, Healthcare Delivery System Fund, Health Plan Fund, and Long Term Care Plan Fund. All other funds are categorized as non-major. 70 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) Fund Designations The following schedule lists amounts designated within the estimated balances of various funds. Designations are the County’s and Districts’ self-imposed limitations on financial resources that would otherwise be available for use. The major fund balance designation is for budget stabilization. For the County General Fund, this includes an amount designated to cover cash shortfalls during the fiscal year due to the property tax collection cycle. Budget stabilization amounts related to cash flow due to the property tax collection cycle are designated for the Flood Control and Library District operating funds, which are supported by their own secondary property tax levies. Amounts are also designated in Public Health and Environmental Services Special Revenue funds for capital improvement projects spending that will not occur until after FY 2004-05 71 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Beginning Fund Balance and Variance Commentary (Continued) FY 2004-05 Fund Balance Designations Fund/Designation General Fund (Fund 100) Budget Stabilization: Cash Flow/Property Tax Cash Flow/Jail Tax Delivery System Accounts Receivable MIHS Potential Losses Budget Stabilization Fund FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 (Inc.)/Dec. $ 99,441,505 $ 80,619,104 $ 5,000,000 5,000,000 13,000,000 40,000,000 74,226,339 $ 157,441,505 $ 159,845,443 $ 18,822,401 (1) (2) 13,000,000 (3) 40,000,000 (4) (74,226,339) (8) (2,403,938) Flood Control District (Fund 991) Budget Stabilization: Cash Flow/Property Tax $ 15,207,157 $ 11,880,471 $ 3,326,686 (1) Library District (Fund 244) Budget Stabilization: Cash Flow/Property Tax $ 3,118,634 $ 1,443,926 $ 1,674,708 (1) Public Health Fees (Fund 265) Future Capital Projects $ - $ 700,000 $ (700,000) (5) Air Quality Fees (Fund 504) Future Capital Projects $ - $ 2,400,000 $ (2,400,000) (5) Environmental Health (Fund 506) Future Capital Projects $ - $ 2,200,000 $ (2,200,000) (5) Animal Care and Control License/Shelter (Fund 572) Future Capital Projects $ - $ 100,000 $ (100,000) (5) Animal Care and Control Field Operations (Fund 574) Future Capital Projects $ - $ 70,000 $ (70,000) (5) Maricopa Health Plan (Fund 541) Equity Requirement $ 7,154,850 $ 6,772,650 $ 382,200 (6) Long Term Care Plan (Fund 551) Equity Requirement $ 14,592,000 $ 13,632,000 $ 960,000 (6) Health Care Delivery System (Fund 535) Certificates of Participation $ 2,125,647 $ - $ 2,125,647 (7) (1) Based on estimate provided by the Department of Finance of the amount needed to eliminate the need for Tax Anticipation Notes or other forms of short-term borrowing to finance current operations. (2) Based on estimate provided by the Department of Finance of the amount needed to cover the balance between the projected shortfall in the Detention Capital Projects Fund (455) and the amount of the interfund loan from the County Improvement Debt Fund (320) to the Detention Capital Projects Fund. (3) Amount needed to cover Maricopa Health Care Delivery System losses due to a potential write-down of accounts receivable, under worstcase projections. (4) Amount needed to subsidize potential operating losses in the Maricopa Integrated Health System due to uncertainty associated with this business. (5) Amount needed to fund "pay as you go" capital projects benefiting these departments, in addition to amounts already on hand from Certificates of Participation, for which funds for repayment are reserved in the County Improvement Debt Fund (Fund 320). (6) Amount needed to cover State-mandated cash reserve requirements based on membership levels. (7) Amount needed to cover Certificates of Participation related to capital improvement projects; fully repaid in FY 2003-04. (8) This reserve has been established to be utilized for economic downturns or unexpected financial losses. 72 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Expenditure Limitation Maricopa County expenditures are subject to limitation according to Article 9, Section 20 of the Arizona Constitution. The expenditure limitation is calculated annually by the Economic Estimates Commission based on Maricopa County’s actual expenditures in FY 1979-80, with base adjustments approved by County voters or by the Legislature. The Commission increases the base to reflect changes in population and in inflation, as measured by the Gross Domestic Product Price Deflator. The normal annual expenditure limitation for Maricopa County will be further adjusted for FY 2004-05 for Disproportionate Share payments to the Maricopa Medical Center. Expenditures from “local revenues” are subject to limitation. Generally, local revenues include taxes, fees, and fines assessed by the County, but exclude revenues from intergovernmental payments, grants, proceeds of debt, and interest earnings. Maricopa County’s expenditures subject to limitation are certified by the State Auditor General, and published in an annual expenditure limitation report. When actual expenditures subject to limitation are less than the limitation, the excess capacity can be carried forward to future fiscal years. For this reason, actual expenditures are reported as $1 less than the limitation. Expenditure Limitation FY 2004-05 Expenditure Limitation Est. Adjustment for Disproportionate Share Payments FY 2004-05 Adjusted Limitation $ $ $ 881,571,257 (82,972,500) 798,598,757 FY 2004-05 Expenditures Subject to Limitation $ 798,598,756 Expenditures (Over)/Under Limitation $ 1 73 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Department / Fund CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2002-03 Actual Restated ALL FUNDS JUDICIAL BRANCH 110 ADULT PROBATION 800 TRIAL COURTS 270 JUVENILE PROBATION $ FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % Subtotal $ 51,861,860 $ 67,328,230 41,067,677 160,257,766 $ 50,253,239 $ 70,477,101 46,000,012 166,730,352 $ 57,729,015 $ 70,896,261 49,436,354 178,061,630 $ 56,270,953 $ 68,498,707 46,472,860 171,242,520 $ 58,736,563 $ 71,623,207 55,247,992 185,607,762 $ 59,588,673 $ 76,901,306 53,670,391 190,160,370 $ (1,859,658) (6,005,045) (4,234,037) (12,098,740) -3% -8% -9% -7% ELECTED OFFICIAL 010 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 $ 020 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 030 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 040 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 050 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 120 ASSESSOR 140 CALL CENTER 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY 210 ELECTIONS 250 CONSTABLES 360 RECORDER 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 430 TREASURER 500 SHERIFF Subtotal $ 223,083 $ 219,261 201,460 167,835 235,558 14,410,210 1,226,882 27,772,221 52,965,291 9,946,135 1,570,538 6,289,811 1,657,474 3,527,577 136,060,176 256,473,513 $ 224,756 $ 224,756 224,756 224,756 224,756 14,765,952 1,325,517 28,968,365 54,982,195 8,219,888 1,613,814 6,264,142 1,847,755 3,707,669 141,768,797 264,587,874 $ 237,953 $ 237,948 237,951 237,952 237,951 15,532,747 1,390,857 30,248,699 60,874,437 8,369,155 1,742,822 6,350,873 1,948,291 3,878,662 158,986,584 290,512,882 $ 215,305 $ 212,802 221,151 178,425 237,508 15,027,602 1,295,035 30,173,325 61,445,055 8,314,425 1,738,764 6,233,670 1,803,804 3,750,623 156,150,504 286,997,998 $ 242,175 $ 242,175 242,175 242,175 242,175 15,733,001 1,286,597 30,580,538 61,331,800 10,985,928 1,696,030 7,653,754 1,969,670 3,826,694 175,286,718 311,561,605 $ 249,676 $ 249,676 249,676 249,676 249,676 15,808,896 1,298,676 29,816,829 63,083,084 10,494,469 1,780,046 7,599,401 1,984,742 3,952,730 182,699,513 319,766,766 $ (11,723) (11,728) (11,725) (11,724) (11,725) (276,149) 92,181 431,870 (2,208,647) (2,125,314) (37,224) (1,248,528) (36,451) (74,068) (23,712,929) (29,253,884) -5% -5% -5% -5% -5% -2% 7% 1% -4% -25% -2% -20% -2% -2% -15% -10% APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 060 CLERK OF THE BOARD $ 463,725 $ 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 882,516 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6,956,402 180 FINANCE 2,059,490 200 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 1,141,794 220 HUMAN SERVICES 34,879,825 230 INTERNAL AUDIT 999,418 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 30,320,760 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER 3,775,258 300 PARKS & RECREATION 8,803,311 310 HUMAN RESOURCES 3,567,932 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY 1,809,172 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION 25,151,519 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES 287,592,124 410 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 5,195,832 420 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO 2,996,769 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 7,686,397 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING 337,558 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 241,364,383 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 156,310,347 490 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET 1,543,165 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER 28,183,495 540 LEGAL DEFENDER 4,835,514 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE 4,226,064 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL 11,210,498 600 HEALTH PLANS 405,419,785 640 TRANSPORTATION 102,844,285 670 SOLID WASTE 4,304,372 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 187,830,636 710 COMMUNICATIONS 555,182 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 2,147,600 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 9,533,935 750 RISK MANAGEMENT 18,397,198 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 13,599,154 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 9,627,051 860 PUBLIC HEALTH 46,673,247 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 20,817,730 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 336,278,321 980 ELIMINATIONS (452,467,766) Subtotal $ 1,577,853,994 $ 450,169 $ 474,308 $ 441,821 $ 478,788 $ 1,504,551 1,508,235 1,112,801 1,546,568 15,857,672 15,857,672 13,247,987 16,033,276 2,360,213 2,501,408 2,395,163 2,521,941 1,246,200 1,305,815 1,195,893 1,305,646 36,171,317 35,979,350 35,979,543 40,445,707 958,022 1,020,033 960,939 1,037,182 32,505,268 36,034,313 43,352,149 38,778,803 4,088,817 4,370,644 4,455,037 4,395,105 6,656,963 6,283,872 5,706,324 6,468,147 2,741,834 2,896,403 2,536,443 2,926,844 1,841,113 1,939,353 1,951,355 1,974,589 39,566,532 39,920,925 42,287,173 40,896,913 335,995,954 336,090,369 325,384,308 354,602,806 4,877,950 5,143,523 4,901,652 5,208,429 7,236,337 7,352,090 5,505,472 5,435,481 8,210,846 10,503,917 8,784,407 11,109,948 440,000 440,001 354,178 440,000 373,277,563 329,810,686 239,295,207 411,976,592 242,811,219 241,684,743 137,987,993 211,168,946 1,644,001 1,735,903 1,717,643 1,762,186 29,245,360 31,005,084 30,312,702 33,677,667 5,507,320 5,804,478 6,102,759 5,870,546 4,736,165 4,984,493 5,489,859 6,399,647 9,354,848 9,382,945 11,947,700 9,384,406 426,080,691 428,357,024 470,423,884 390,283,436 126,095,364 126,095,357 103,314,400 126,993,639 4,335,232 4,335,567 3,275,930 4,335,232 133,772,312 135,732,122 116,154,098 73,094,306 772,076 772,068 721,996 788,403 2,079,713 2,160,047 2,076,306 2,195,842 8,171,022 8,171,031 8,976,364 9,870,428 25,609,802 25,609,795 25,562,088 26,162,580 12,214,470 12,214,472 12,170,398 12,246,524 8,265,910 8,288,049 8,425,433 9,533,640 55,008,134 55,234,971 51,253,093 51,039,877 18,834,516 19,871,118 19,465,113 21,416,533 362,561,173 364,774,142 396,022,123 391,520,430 (389,716,225) (393,514,049) (440,185,478) (411,230,371) 1,963,370,424 $ 1,932,132,276 $ 1,711,062,259 $ 1,924,096,661 $ 478,788 $ 1,538,989 16,033,276 2,532,036 1,358,665 39,764,880 1,035,910 40,974,419 4,456,694 5,757,830 2,872,815 1,983,422 42,014,184 321,129,985 5,208,429 5,435,481 11,109,948 440,000 449,168,082 291,727,658 1,762,186 33,677,672 7,105,584 6,399,647 9,384,406 388,133,556 130,940,134 4,412,422 61,547,395 754,229 2,186,857 9,751,777 26,070,716 13,656,435 9,106,379 49,787,818 22,670,093 391,520,430 (442,029,692) 1,971,859,535 $ MARICOPA COUNTY $ 1,994,585,273 $ 2,394,688,650 $ 2,400,706,789 $ 2,169,302,777 $ 2,421,266,028 $ 2,481,786,671 $ (81,079,882) 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT $ 61,739,374 $ 79,805,243 $ 80,482,259 $ 80,463,083 $ 80,402,802 $ 79,633,043 $ 849,216 1% 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT $ 12,613,960 $ 12,612,786 $ 17,567,615 $ 17,834,213 $ 12,886,090 $ 16,345,796 $ 1,221,819 7% 680 STADIUM DISTRICT $ 5,980,379 $ 7,519,263 $ 7,519,259 $ 8,719,323 $ 6,996,960 $ 7,436,960 $ 82,299 1% MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ 2,074,918,986 $ 2,494,625,942 $ 2,506,275,922 $ 2,276,319,396 $ 2,521,551,880 $ 2,585,202,470 $ (78,926,548) -3% 74 (4,480) -1% (30,754) -2% (175,604) -1% (30,628) -1% (52,850) -4% (3,785,530) -11% (15,877) -2% (4,940,106) -14% (86,050) -2% 526,042 8% 23,588 1% (44,069) -2% (2,093,259) -5% 14,960,384 4% (64,906) -1% 1,916,609 26% (606,031) -6% 1 0% (119,357,396) -36% (50,042,915) -21% (26,283) -2% (2,672,588) -9% (1,301,106) -22% (1,415,154) -28% (1,461) 0% 40,223,468 9% (4,844,777) -4% (76,855) -2% (125,757,153) -196% 17,839 2% (26,810) -1% (1,580,746) -19% (460,921) -2% (1,441,963) -12% (818,330) -10% 5,447,153 10% (2,798,975) -14% (26,746,288) -7% 48,515,643 12% (39,727,259) -2% -3% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Department / Fund (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURES BY FUND TYPE/DEPARTMENT FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % GENERAL FUND JUDICIAL BRANCH 110 ADULT PROBATION 800 TRIAL COURTS 270 JUVENILE PROBATION $ Subtotal $ 14,189,400 $ 57,759,735 10,854,061 82,803,196 $ 36,018,294 $ 58,826,583 11,440,037 106,284,914 $ 43,494,075 $ 59,245,737 11,650,849 114,390,661 $ 42,776,501 $ 58,804,078 11,361,812 112,942,392 $ 44,911,787 $ 59,935,171 11,859,510 116,706,468 $ 45,668,897 $ 61,268,643 11,832,089 118,769,629 $ (2,174,822) (2,022,906) (181,240) (4,378,968) -5% -3% -2% -4% ELECTED OFFICIAL 010 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 $ 020 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 030 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 040 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 050 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 120 ASSESSOR 140 CALL CENTER 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY 210 ELECTIONS 250 CONSTABLES 360 RECORDER 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 430 TREASURER 500 SHERIFF Subtotal $ 223,083 $ 219,261 201,460 167,835 235,558 14,410,210 1,226,882 20,685,068 43,097,110 9,946,135 1,570,538 1,821,529 1,657,474 3,527,577 36,902,806 135,892,527 $ 224,756 $ 224,756 224,756 224,756 224,756 14,765,952 1,325,517 21,246,744 43,850,402 8,219,888 1,613,814 1,859,996 1,847,755 3,707,669 37,273,015 136,834,532 $ 237,953 $ 237,948 237,951 237,952 237,951 15,532,747 1,390,857 22,527,084 48,519,525 8,369,155 1,742,822 1,946,732 1,948,291 3,878,662 41,674,094 148,719,724 $ 215,305 $ 212,802 221,151 178,425 237,508 15,027,602 1,295,035 23,218,005 48,918,105 8,314,425 1,738,764 2,065,171 1,803,804 3,750,623 41,722,147 148,918,874 $ 242,175 $ 242,175 242,175 242,175 242,175 15,733,001 1,286,597 23,356,509 49,903,420 10,985,928 1,696,030 1,983,682 1,969,670 3,826,694 43,119,415 155,071,821 $ 249,676 $ 249,676 249,676 249,676 249,676 15,808,896 1,298,676 23,181,209 50,280,208 10,494,469 1,780,046 1,991,183 1,984,742 3,952,730 47,355,136 159,375,675 $ (11,723) (11,728) (11,725) (11,724) (11,725) (276,149) 92,181 (654,125) (1,760,683) (2,125,314) (37,224) (44,451) (36,451) (74,068) (5,681,042) (10,655,951) -5% -5% -5% -5% -5% -2% 7% -3% -4% -25% -2% -2% -2% -2% -14% -7% APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 060 CLERK OF THE BOARD $ 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 180 FINANCE 200 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 220 HUMAN SERVICES 230 INTERNAL AUDIT 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER 300 PARKS & RECREATION 310 HUMAN RESOURCES 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES 410 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 490 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER 540 LEGAL DEFENDER 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 710 COMMUNICATIONS 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 860 PUBLIC HEALTH 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Subtotal $ 463,725 $ 65,898 2,059,490 1,141,794 1,267,078 999,418 4,972,451 3,775,258 1,661,961 3,567,932 1,809,172 911,655 287,592,124 5,195,832 165,636,279 53,247,779 1,543,165 26,625,006 4,763,050 4,212,527 11,210,498 18,714,434 331,078 1,327,975 304,041 6,336,976 666,054 610,402,650 $ 450,169 $ 152,182 2,360,213 1,246,200 1,138,980 958,022 5,500,000 3,881,203 1,487,694 2,741,834 1,841,113 1,945,819 335,995,954 4,877,950 241,528,949 137,492,963 1,644,001 27,611,790 5,428,346 4,725,749 9,354,848 15,347,116 51,635 1,244,722 304,041 6,493,512 753,844 816,558,849 $ 474,308 $ 155,350 2,501,408 1,305,815 947,206 1,020,033 5,500,000 4,103,599 1,114,583 2,896,403 1,939,353 2,300,212 336,090,369 5,143,523 217,904,996 135,161,900 1,735,903 29,111,498 5,725,502 4,974,077 9,382,945 16,154,673 51,635 1,325,059 304,041 6,824,063 788,739 794,937,193 $ 441,821 $ 109,579 2,395,163 1,195,893 947,206 960,939 7,537,604 4,187,992 1,110,668 2,536,443 1,951,355 3,093,896 325,384,308 4,901,652 174,901,281 80,467,417 1,717,643 28,612,320 6,024,137 5,476,952 11,947,700 16,291,772 46,275 1,292,653 304,041 6,764,022 788,298 691,389,032 $ 478,788 $ 155,628 2,521,941 1,305,646 945,707 1,037,182 4,500,000 4,128,060 2,141,039 2,926,844 1,974,589 2,589,653 354,602,806 5,208,429 221,934,718 148,311,150 1,762,186 31,100,074 5,786,143 6,383,337 9,384,406 16,594,284 7,124 1,359,479 315,189 6,871,319 1,279,890 835,605,611 $ 478,788 $ 155,628 2,532,036 1,358,665 1,787,032 1,035,910 3,461,426 4,189,649 1,271,316 2,872,815 1,983,422 2,649,479 321,129,985 5,208,429 257,853,500 196,689,269 1,762,186 31,100,074 7,021,181 6,383,337 9,384,406 17,333,572 707,968 1,354,842 385,109 6,590,367 1,369,912 888,050,303 $ (4,480) -1% (278) 0% (30,628) -1% (52,850) -4% (839,826) -89% (15,877) -2% 2,038,574 37% (86,050) -2% (156,733) -14% 23,588 1% (44,069) -2% (349,267) -15% 14,960,384 4% (64,906) -1% (39,948,504) -18% (61,527,369) -46% (26,283) -2% (1,988,576) -7% (1,295,679) -23% (1,409,260) -28% (1,461) 0% (1,178,899) -7% (656,333) -1271% (29,783) -2% (81,068) -27% 233,696 3% (581,173) -74% (93,113,110) -12% MARICOPA COUNTY $ 829,098,372 $ 1,059,678,295 $ 1,058,047,578 $ 953,250,298 $ 1,107,383,900 $ 1,166,195,607 $ (108,148,029) -10% MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ 829,098,372 $ 1,059,678,295 $ 1,058,047,578 $ 953,250,298 $ 1,107,383,900 $ 1,166,195,607 $ (108,148,029) -10% 75 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Department / Fund (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURES BY FUND TYPE / DEPARTMENT / FUND FY 2003-04 Actual FY 2003-04 Adopted FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Restated Restated SPECIAL REVENUE JUDICIAL BRANCH 110 ADULT PROBATION 201 ADULT PROBATION FEES 211 ADULT PROBATION GRANTS Dept Total 270 JUVENILE PROBATION 227 JUVENILE PROBATION GRANTS 228 JUVENILE PROBATION SPECIAL FEE 229 JUVENILE RESTITUTION FUND 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS 275 JUVENILE PROBATION DIVERSION Dept Total 800 TRIAL COURTS 204 JUSTICE CT JUDICIAL ENHANCEMNT 208 JUDICIAL ENHANCEMENT 238 SUPERIOR COURT GRANTS 245 JUSTICE COURTS SPECIAL REVENUE 246 JUSTICE COURTS GRANTS 256 PROBATE FEES 257 CONCILIATION COURT FEES 258 COURT AUTOMATED SERVICES 259 SUPERIOR COURT SPECIAL REVENUE 261 LAW LIBRARY FEES 264 SUPERIOR COURT FILL THE GAP 271 EXPEDITED CHILD SUPPORT 276 SPOUSAL MAINT ENF ENHANCEMENT 280 OLD COURTHOUSE RESTORATION 281 CHILDREN'S ISSUES EDUCATION 282 DOM REL MEDIATION EDUCATION 748 JUROR IMPROVEMENT Dept Total JUDICIAL BRANCH TOTAL ELECTED OFFICIAL 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 205 COURT DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL 208 JUDICIAL ENHANCEMENT 216 CLERK OF THE COURT GRANTS 218 CLERK OF COURT FILL THE GAP 258 COURT AUTOMATED SERVICES 270 CHILD SUPPORT ENHANCEMENT 271 EXPEDITED CHILD SUPPORT 272 CHILD SUPPORT AUTOMATION 273 VICTIM LOCATION 274 CLERK OF THE COURT EDMS 276 SPOUSAL MAINT ENF ENHANCEMENT Dept Total 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY 213 COUNTY ATTORNEY RICO 219 COUNTY ATTORNEY GRANTS 220 DIVERSION 221 COUNTY ATTORNEY FILL THE GAP 266 CHECK ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM 267 CRIM JUSTICE ENHANCEMENT 268 VICTIM COMP AND ASSISTANCE 269 VICTIM COMP RESTITUTION INT Dept Total 360 RECORDER 236 RECORDER'S SURCHARGE Dept Total 500 SHERIFF 203 SHERIFF DONATIONS 212 SHERIFF RICO FUND 214 SHERIFF JAIL ENHANCEMENT FUND 251 SHERIFF GRANTS 252 INMATE SERVICES 254 INMATE HEALTH SERVICES 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS Dept Total ELECTED OFFICIAL TOTAL $ FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % $ 7,779,854 $ 29,892,605 37,672,459 $ 8,205,000 $ 6,029,945 14,234,945 $ 8,204,990 $ 6,029,950 14,234,940 $ 7,845,772 $ 5,648,680 13,494,452 $ 8,205,000 $ 5,619,776 13,824,776 $ 8,300,000 $ 5,619,776 13,919,776 $ (95,010) 410,174 315,164 -1% 7% 2% $ 14,819,815 778,399 1,144 13,924,652 183,486 29,707,495 $ 16,245,747 946,528 10,000 16,307,877 268,425 33,778,577 $ 16,245,757 946,534 10,000 19,533,392 268,425 37,004,108 $ 15,327,371 902,069 49,215 17,906,909 220,231 34,405,795 $ 15,722,058 830,000 10,000 25,772,927 268,425 42,603,410 $ 15,722,058 1,000,000 50,000 24,405,284 268,425 41,445,767 $ 523,699 (53,466) (40,000) (4,871,892) (4,441,659) 3% -6% -400% -25% 0% -12% 95,404 $ 104,593 1,218,937 463,836 115,928 407,797 1,364,303 460,076 2,837,972 788,435 1,375,369 18,869 315,326 1,649 9,568,495 $ 76,948,449 $ 610,011 $ 600,000 1,356,000 466,234 179,320 388,576 1,552,010 531,729 3,206,996 800,000 1,525,690 10,000 52,950 171,002 200,000 11,650,518 $ 59,664,040 $ 610,012 $ 600,000 1,356,002 466,234 179,320 388,579 1,552,009 531,735 3,206,992 800,000 1,525,688 10,000 52,951 171,002 200,000 11,650,524 $ 62,889,572 $ 282,582 $ 330,435 1,312,231 140,556 384,608 1,360,480 474,869 3,152,506 657,792 1,367,564 46,242 169,691 15,072 9,694,628 $ 57,594,875 $ 608,704 $ 600,000 1,356,000 466,234 179,320 388,576 1,552,010 531,729 3,245,821 800,000 1,525,690 10,000 52,950 171,002 200,000 11,688,036 $ 68,116,222 $ 608,704 $ 600,000 1,356,000 2,062,052 209,584 392,000 1,554,010 508,000 4,989,262 810,700 1,525,690 425,661 95,000 10,000 110,000 176,000 200,000 15,632,663 $ 70,998,206 $ 1,308 2 (1,595,818) (30,264) (3,421) (2,001) 23,735 (1,782,270) (10,700) (2) (425,661) (95,000) (57,049) (4,998) (3,982,139) (8,108,634) 0% 0% 0% -342% -17% -1% 0% 4% -56% -1% 0% 1,221,632 $ 609,072 1,080,220 2,151,298 135,220 15,587 396,328 9,941 15,126 1,408,266 44,462 7,087,153 $ 1,128,725 $ 1,001,380 1,450,000 1,886,855 181,000 125,000 399,569 18,691 35,401 1,400,000 95,000 7,721,621 $ 1,128,730 $ 1,001,380 1,450,001 1,886,849 181,000 125,000 399,563 18,691 35,400 1,400,006 94,995 7,721,615 $ 1,034,463 $ 887,172 1,450,000 1,377,544 181,000 105,711 399,569 24,154 11,530 1,399,999 84,177 6,955,320 $ 1,148,925 $ 991,599 1,416,800 1,427,544 181,000 100,000 425,661 37,500 1,400,000 95,000 7,224,029 $ 1,098,925 $ 1,065,055 1,326,528 1,427,544 181,000 100,000 36,568 1,400,000 6,635,620 $ 29,805 (63,675) 123,473 459,305 25,000 399,563 18,691 (1,168) 6 94,995 1,085,995 3% -6% 9% 24% 0% 20% 100% 100% -3% 0% 100% 14% $ 602,149 $ 5,147,993 943,232 782,929 679,162 1,500,921 63,184 148,610 9,868,180 $ 1,300,000 $ 5,263,576 1,000,000 1,576,624 502,197 1,361,500 75,000 52,896 11,131,793 $ 1,300,000 $ 5,989,799 999,994 1,576,624 699,099 1,361,500 75,000 352,896 12,354,912 $ 1,300,000 $ 6,659,380 949,954 1,423,993 685,882 1,238,371 61,400 207,970 12,526,950 $ 1,300,000 $ 5,989,799 750,000 1,266,624 684,457 1,361,500 36,000 40,000 11,428,380 $ 1,300,000 $ 5,827,233 1,000,000 2,023,143 700,000 1,361,500 126,000 465,000 12,802,876 $ 162,566 (6) (446,519) (901) (51,000) (112,104) (447,964) 0% 3% 0% -28% 0% 0% -68% -32% -4% $ $ 4,468,282 $ 4,468,282 $ 4,404,146 $ 4,404,146 $ 4,404,141 $ 4,404,141 $ 4,168,499 $ 4,168,499 $ 5,670,072 $ 5,670,072 $ 5,608,218 $ 5,608,218 $ (1,204,077) (1,204,077) -27% -27% $ 3,537 $ 5,612,952 7,194,446 124,323 84,662,143 97,597,400 $ 119,021,016 $ 16,400 $ 5,454,116 9,806,758 50,840 87,462,297 102,790,411 $ 126,047,971 $ 16,400 $ 5,454,442 9,806,763 50,840 100,278,674 115,607,119 $ 140,087,787 $ 4,710 $ 5,417,033 6,933,475 22,964 100,572,464 112,950,646 $ 136,601,415 $ 16,400 $ 3,974,179 9,741,010 50,840 116,654,189 130,436,618 $ 154,759,099 $ 16,400 $ 395,000 1,100,000 3,992,275 9,911,744 309,168 118,754,447 134,479,034 $ 159,525,748 $ (395,000) (1,100,000) 1,462,167 (104,981) (258,328) (18,475,773) (18,871,915) (19,437,961) 0% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 76 0% -108% -3% 0% -34% -13% 27% -1% -508% -18% -501% -14% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Department / Fund (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURES BY FUND TYPE / DEPARTMENT / FUND FY 2003-04 Actual FY 2003-04 Adopted FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Restated Restated SPECIAL REVENUE (Continued) APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 207 PALO VERDE 215 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 217 CDBG, HOUSING TRUST 220 HUMAN SERVICES 222 HUMAN SERVICES GRANTS FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated FY 2004-05 Requested Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted % Dept Total $ 163,209 $ 653,409 816,618 $ 286,424 $ 1,065,945 1,352,369 $ 286,447 $ 1,066,438 1,352,885 $ 258,748 $ 744,475 1,003,222 $ 286,447 $ 1,104,493 1,390,940 $ 287,138 $ 1,096,223 1,383,361 $ (691) (29,785) (30,476) 0% -3% -2% $ Dept Total $ 6,956,402 $ 6,956,402 $ 15,857,672 $ 15,857,672 $ 15,857,672 $ 15,857,672 $ 13,247,987 $ 13,247,987 $ 16,033,276 $ 16,033,276 $ 16,033,276 $ 16,033,276 $ (175,604) (175,604) -1% -1% $ Dept Total $ 33,612,747 $ 33,612,747 $ 35,032,337 $ 35,032,337 $ 35,032,144 $ 35,032,144 $ 35,032,337 $ 35,032,337 $ 39,500,000 $ 39,500,000 $ 37,977,848 $ 37,977,848 $ (2,945,704) (2,945,704) -8% -8% $ 25,092,631 $ 134,075 25,226,706 $ 25,798,283 $ 1,050,486 26,848,769 $ 29,315,544 $ 1,062,026 30,377,570 $ 35,206,425 $ 452,029 35,658,454 $ 33,225,545 $ 842,542 34,068,087 $ 36,512,414 $ 842,542 37,354,956 $ (7,196,870) 219,484 (6,977,386) -25% 21% -23% $ 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS 292 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH GRANT Dept Total 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER 224 MEDICAL EXAMINER GRANT FUND Dept Total 300 PARKS & RECREATION 225 SPUR CROSS RANCH CONSERVATION 230 PARKS & REC. GRANTS 239 PARKS SOUVENIR FUND 240 LAKE PLEASANT RECREATION SVCS 241 PARKS ENHANCEMENT FUND 243 PARKS DONATIONS FUND Dept Total 420 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS Dept Total 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 226 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FEES 235 DEL WEBB SPECIAL FUND Dept Total 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING 260 RESEARCH & REPORTING Dept Total 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 210 WASTE MANAGEMENT 249 GENERAL GOVERNMENT GRANTS 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS Dept Total 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS Dept Total 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER 209 PUBLIC DEFENDER TRAINING 233 PUBLIC DEFENDER GRANTS 262 PUBLIC DEFENDER FILL THE GAP Dept Total 540 LEGAL DEFENDER 209 PUBLIC DEFENDER TRAINING 263 LEGAL DEFENDER FILL THE GAP Dept Total 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE 209 PUBLIC DEFENDER TRAINING 233 PUBLIC DEFENDER GRANTS Dept Total 600 HEALTH PLANS 248 SAIL GRANTS Dept Total $ $ $ - $ $ 207,614 $ 207,614 $ 267,045 $ 267,045 $ 267,045 $ 267,045 $ 267,045 $ 267,045 $ 267,045 $ 267,045 $ $ $ 313,542 $ 191,259 47,486 4,358,466 2,224,498 27,241 7,162,492 $ 417,714 $ 388,470 52,000 1,824,950 2,266,882 236,253 5,186,269 $ 417,716 $ 388,470 52,000 1,824,946 2,266,904 236,253 5,186,289 $ 439,300 $ 260,470 53,749 1,623,055 2,192,734 51,349 4,620,657 $ 410,500 $ 67,470 52,000 1,482,000 2,095,885 236,253 4,344,108 $ 410,500 $ 67,470 52,000 1,500,951 2,236,340 236,253 4,503,514 $ 7,216 321,000 323,995 30,564 682,775 2% 83% 0% 18% 1% 0% 13% $ $ 2,996,769 $ 2,996,769 $ 7,236,337 $ 7,236,337 $ 7,352,090 $ 7,352,090 $ 5,505,472 $ 5,505,472 $ 5,435,481 $ 5,435,481 $ 5,435,481 $ 5,435,481 $ 1,916,609 1,916,609 26% 26% $ $ 7,574,711 $ 111,685 7,686,397 $ 8,065,871 $ 144,975 8,210,846 $ 10,358,953 $ 144,964 10,503,917 $ 8,662,414 $ 121,992 8,784,407 $ 10,947,590 $ 162,358 11,109,948 $ 10,947,590 $ 162,358 11,109,948 $ (588,637) (17,394) (606,031) -6% -12% -6% $ $ 337,558 $ 337,558 $ 440,000 $ 440,000 $ 440,001 $ 440,001 $ 354,178 $ 354,178 $ 440,000 $ 440,000 $ 440,000 $ 440,000 $ 1 1 0% 0% $ $ 7,114 $ 18,044,306 3,592,800 21,644,220 $ 479,899 $ 4,003,472 30,592,268 35,075,639 $ 479,899 $ 2,388,649 9,788,103 12,656,651 $ 30,485 $ 2,313,649 2,810,190 5,154,324 $ 513,519 $ 4,000,000 54,038,504 58,552,023 $ 527,069 $ 10,896,891 42,367,929 53,791,889 $ (47,170) (8,508,242) (32,579,826) (41,135,238) -10% -356% -333% -325% $ $ 103,062,568 $ 103,062,568 $ 105,318,256 $ 105,318,256 $ 106,522,843 $ 106,522,843 $ 57,520,576 $ 57,520,576 $ 62,857,796 $ 62,857,796 $ 95,038,389 $ 95,038,389 $ 11,484,454 11,484,454 11% 11% $ 334,948 $ 373,658 849,883 1,558,489 $ 330,808 $ 397,974 904,788 1,633,570 $ 330,806 $ 397,973 1,164,807 1,893,586 $ 330,808 $ 373,658 995,916 1,700,382 $ 413,751 $ 379,712 1,784,130 2,577,593 $ 413,751 $ 379,717 1,784,130 2,577,598 $ (82,945) 18,256 (619,323) (684,012) -25% 5% -53% -36% 38,424 $ 34,040 72,463 $ 36,000 $ 42,974 78,974 $ 36,000 $ 42,976 78,976 $ 36,000 $ 42,622 78,622 $ 40,403 $ 44,000 84,403 $ 40,403 $ 44,000 84,403 $ (4,403) (1,024) (5,427) -12% -2% -7% $ 13,537 $ 13,537 $ 10,416 $ 10,416 $ 10,416 $ 10,416 $ 12,907 $ 12,907 $ 11,310 $ 5,000 16,310 $ 11,310 $ 5,000 16,310 $ (894) (5,000) (5,894) -57% $ $ 1,889,242 $ 1,889,242 $ 1,957,636 $ 1,957,636 $ 1,957,637 $ 1,957,637 $ 1,957,636 $ 1,957,636 $ 2,149,880 $ 2,149,880 $ 1,957,637 1,957,637 100% 100% $ $ $ $ 77 - $ $ - 0% 0% -9% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Department / Fund (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURES BY FUND TYPE / DEPARTMENT / FUND FY 2003-04 Actual FY 2003-04 Adopted FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Restated Restated SPECIAL REVENUE (Continued) 640 TRANSPORTATION 223 TRANSPORTATION GRANTS 232 TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS Dept Total 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT 242 LIBRARY DISTRICT GRANTS 244 LIBRARY DISTRICT Dept Total 670 SOLID WASTE 290 WASTE TIRE Dept Total 680 STADIUM DISTRICT 250 CACTUS LEAGUE OPERATIONS 253 BALLPARK OPERATIONS Dept Total 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 989 FLOOD CONTROL GRANTS 991 FLOOD CONTROL Dept Total 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS Dept Total 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 572 ANIMAL CONTROL LICENSE/SHELTER 573 ANIMAL CONTROL GRANTS 574 ANIMAL CONTROL FIELD OPERATION Dept Total 860 PUBLIC HEALTH 265 PUBLIC HEALTH FEES 532 PUBLIC HEALTH GRANTS Dept Total 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 504 AIR QUALITY FEES 505 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GRANT 506 ENVIRONMTL SVCS ENV HEALTH Dept Total APPOINTED DEPARTMENT TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE TOTAL DEBT SERVICE APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 312 BOND-DEBT SERVICE 320 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DEBT $ FY 2004-05 Requested Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted % 681,981 $ 94,031,541 94,713,523 $ 350,000 $ 105,288,136 105,638,136 $ 350,000 $ 105,288,129 105,638,129 $ 150,000 $ 104,298,546 104,448,546 $ 250,000 $ 105,784,588 106,034,588 $ 250,000 $ 114,426,951 114,676,951 $ 100,000 (9,138,822) (9,038,822) 29% -9% -9% $ 156,263 $ 12,457,697 12,613,960 $ 25,000 $ 12,587,786 12,612,786 $ 25,000 $ 17,542,615 17,567,615 $ 104,116 $ 17,730,097 17,834,213 $ 25,000 $ 12,861,090 12,886,090 $ 25,000 $ 16,320,796 16,345,796 $ 1,221,819 1,221,819 0% 7% 7% $ $ 2,679,089 $ 2,679,089 $ 3,435,232 $ 3,435,232 $ 3,435,238 $ 3,435,238 $ 2,615,542 $ 2,615,542 $ 3,435,232 $ 3,435,232 $ 3,419,169 $ 3,419,169 $ 16,069 16,069 0% 0% $ 30,513 $ 3,525,523 3,556,036 $ 109,371 $ 3,471,937 3,581,308 $ 109,371 $ 3,471,933 3,581,304 $ 84,028 $ 4,415,018 4,499,046 $ 109,318 $ 3,469,686 3,579,003 $ 109,318 $ 3,469,685 3,579,003 $ 53 2,248 2,301 0% 0% 0% $ 61,739,374 61,739,374 $ $ 79,805,243 79,805,243 $ 357,000 $ 80,183,259 80,540,259 $ 357,000 $ 80,106,083 80,463,083 $ $ 80,402,802 80,402,802 $ $ 91,003,439 91,003,439 $ 357,000 (10,820,180) (10,463,180) 100% -13% -13% $ $ 1,152,255 $ 1,152,255 $ 1,140,147 $ 1,140,147 $ 5,930,694 $ 5,930,694 $ 5,467,329 $ 5,467,329 $ (4,315,074) (4,315,074) -374% -374% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - $ 6,962,517 $ 90,000 2,270,493 9,323,010 $ 5,381,750 $ 348,256 2,231,863 7,961,869 $ 5,381,749 $ 370,401 2,231,858 7,984,008 $ 5,381,750 $ 337,981 2,401,661 8,121,391 $ 5,679,717 $ 468,857 3,069,877 9,218,451 $ 5,504,069 $ 468,857 2,748,344 8,721,270 $ (122,320) (98,456) (516,486) (737,262) -2% -27% -23% -9% 3,055,722 $ 37,280,550 40,336,272 $ 3,689,365 $ 44,825,257 48,514,622 $ 3,689,369 $ 44,721,539 48,410,908 $ 3,540,503 $ 40,948,568 44,489,070 $ 3,489,351 $ 40,679,207 44,168,558 $ 3,419,643 $ 39,777,808 43,197,451 $ 269,726 4,943,731 5,213,457 7% 11% 11% $ $ $ (866,518) (378,764) (972,520) (2,217,802) (56,842,790) (84,389,385) -16% -9% -10% -12% -11% -12% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Dept Total $ 680 STADIUM DISTRICT 370 STADIUM DIST DEBT SERIES02 FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated $ Dept Total $ APPOINTED DEPARTMENT TOTAL $ DEBT SERVICE TOTAL $ 6,575,631 3,629,472 9,946,573 20,151,676 458,149,146 654,118,611 $ $ $ $ $ $ - 5,457,543 3,893,983 8,729,146 18,080,672 524,076,572 709,788,583 $ $ $ $ 5,457,546 4,256,520 9,368,313 19,082,379 516,881,817 719,859,176 $ $ $ $ 5,541,724 3,698,298 9,436,794 18,676,816 453,186,061 647,382,350 $ $ $ $ 5,762,975 4,746,035 9,627,633 20,136,643 524,618,951 747,494,272 $ $ $ $ 6,324,064 4,635,284 10,340,833 21,300,181 573,724,607 804,248,561 $ 21,347,350 $ 18,293,455 39,640,805 $ 20,971,600 $ 8,920,479 29,892,079 $ 20,971,600 $ 8,920,479 29,892,079 $ 21,283,882 $ 8,920,479 30,204,361 $ 20,971,600 $ 9,725,181 30,696,781 $ $ 48,131,226 48,131,226 $ 20,971,600 (39,210,747) (18,239,147) 100% -440% -61% 3,945,548 3,945,548 43,586,353 43,586,353 5,125,094 5,125,094 35,017,173 35,017,173 5,125,094 5,125,094 35,017,173 35,017,173 5,153,999 5,153,999 35,358,360 35,358,360 5,075,094 5,075,094 35,771,875 35,771,875 5,515,094 5,515,094 53,646,320 53,646,320 (390,000) (390,000) (18,629,147) (18,629,147) -8% -8% -53% -53% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 78 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Department / Fund (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURES BY FUND TYPE / DEPARTMENT / FUND FY 2003-04 Actual FY 2003-04 Adopted FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Restated Restated CAPITAL PROJECTS JUDICIAL BRANCH 270 JUVENILE PROBATION 455 DETENTION CAPITAL PROJECTS Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted % 781,398 $ 781,398 $ 781,398 $ 781,397 $ 781,397 $ 781,397 $ 705,253 $ 705,253 $ 705,253 $ 785,072 $ 785,072 $ 785,072 $ 392,535 $ 392,535 $ 392,535 $ 388,862 388,862 388,862 50% 50% 50% 1,559,970 $ 1,559,970 $ 1,559,970 $ 1,705,371 $ 1,705,371 $ 1,705,371 $ 1,705,371 $ 1,705,371 $ 1,705,371 $ 1,477,710 $ 1,477,710 $ 1,477,710 $ 1,730,685 $ 1,730,685 $ 1,730,685 $ 865,343 $ 865,343 $ 865,343 $ 840,028 840,028 840,028 49% 49% 49% 121,603 $ 121,603 $ 156,499 $ 156,499 $ 156,743 $ 156,743 $ 156,091 $ 156,091 $ 210,716 $ 210,716 $ 158,037 $ 158,037 $ (1,294) (1,294) -1% -1% 20,900,213 $ 22,029,606 23,851,077 66,780,896 $ 21,976,277 $ 22,029,606 25,351,077 69,356,960 $ 17,317,948 $ 6,101,545 5,615,747 29,035,240 $ 12,084,637 $ 36,417,100 52,291,333 100,793,070 $ 21,095,594 $ 38,557,198 29,738,675 89,391,467 $ -17% -29% $ $ 56,283,783 $ 56,283,783 $ 77,457,228 $ 77,457,228 $ 77,457,228 $ 77,457,228 $ 55,865,855 $ 55,865,855 $ 77,959,051 $ 77,959,051 $ 77,959,051 $ 77,959,051 $ 880,683 (16,527,592) (4,387,598) (20,034,507) (501,823) (501,823) 4% -75% $ 5,701,608 $ 7,528,149 1,213,321 14,443,078 $ $ $ 90,207 $ 2,500 92,707 $ 404,135 $ 3,000 407,135 $ 404,135 $ 3,000 407,135 $ 351,435 $ 2,500 353,935 $ $ 3,000 3,000 $ $ 3,000 3,000 $ 404,135 404,135 100% 0% 99% $ $ 40,772,770 $ 40,772,770 $ 54,000,000 $ 54,000,000 $ 53,942,000 $ 53,942,000 $ 52,644,000 $ 52,644,000 $ 51,864,000 $ 51,864,000 $ 52,076,503 $ 52,076,503 $ 1,865,497 1,865,497 3% 3% $ $ $ $ 79,678,700 79,678,700 61,410,708 62,639,598 67% 67% 19% 19% ELECTED OFFICIAL 500 SHERIFF 455 DETENTION CAPITAL PROJECTS $ Dept Total $ ELECTED OFFICIAL TOTAL $ $ Dept Total $ 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 422 INTERGOVERNMENTAL CAP PROJ 435 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT FUND 440 CRIMINAL JUSTICE CAP PROJECTS 445 GENERAL FUND CTY IMPROV Dept Total 640 TRANSPORTATION 234 TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECT Dept Total 680 STADIUM DISTRICT 410 BALLPARK CONSTRUCTION 450 LONG TERM PROJECT RESERVE Dept Total 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 990 FLOOD CONTROL CAPITAL PROJECTS Dept Total 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 455 DETENTION CAPITAL PROJECTS Dept Total APPOINTED DEPARTMENT TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL FY 2004-05 Requested 506,121 $ 506,121 $ 506,121 $ $ Dept Total $ JUDICIAL BRANCH TOTAL $ APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 455 DETENTION CAPITAL PROJECTS FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated $ $ $ $ $ 169,116,202 169,116,202 280,830,143 282,896,234 $ Dept Total $ 109,073,671 $ 231,778,247 62,538,161 140,463 403,530,543 $ 130,451,694 $ 237,600,567 56,070,794 424,123,055 $ 130,451,694 $ 237,600,567 58,347,120 6 426,399,387 $ 140,268,616 $ 264,655,632 63,542,000 468,466,248 $ 124,659,416 $ 213,681,088 49,793,052 388,133,556 $ 124,659,416 $ 213,681,088 49,793,052 388,133,556 $ 5,792,278 23,919,479 8,554,068 6 38,265,831 4% 10% 15% 100% 9% $ $ 1,625,283 $ 1,625,283 $ 900,000 $ 900,000 $ 900,329 $ 900,329 $ 660,388 $ 660,388 $ 900,000 $ 900,000 $ 993,253 $ 993,253 $ (92,924) (92,924) -10% -10% (20,033,620) (20,033,620) 18,139,287 18,139,287 -4% -4% 2% 2% ENTERPRISE APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 600 HEALTH PLANS 541 HEALTH PLAN 551 LONG TERM CARE PLAN 566 SENIOR SELECT PLAN 570 HEALTH PLAN ADMINISTRATION 670 SOLID WASTE 580 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Dept Total 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 535 HEALTHCARE DELIVERY SYSTEM Dept Total APPOINTED DEPARTMENT TOTAL ENTERPRISE TOTAL $ $ $ $ 336,278,321 336,278,321 741,434,147 741,434,147 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 118,425,196 118,425,196 317,226,954 319,713,723 452,165,681 452,165,681 877,188,736 877,188,736 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 118,425,194 118,425,194 319,745,260 322,232,028 454,378,650 454,378,650 881,678,366 881,678,366 79 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 98,722,179 98,722,179 236,777,300 238,960,263 466,122,392 466,122,392 935,249,028 935,249,028 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 50,569,328 50,569,328 281,399,165 283,914,922 474,412,270 474,412,270 863,445,826 863,445,826 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 38,746,494 38,746,494 258,334,552 259,592,430 -1% -1% 474,412,270 474,412,270 863,539,079 863,539,079 $ $ $ $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Department / Fund (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURES BY FUND TYPE / DEPARTMENT / FUND FY 2003-04 Actual FY 2003-04 Adopted FY 2003-04 Revised Restated Restated Restated INTERNAL SERVICE APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION 652 HS SELF-INSURED TRUST FUND 685 BENEFITS TRUST 710 COMMUNICATIONS 681 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 673 REPROGRAPHICS 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 654 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 750 RISK MANAGEMENT 675 RISK MANAGEMENT $ 680 STADIUM DISTRICT 900 ELIMINATIONS Adopted vs Revised Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted % Dept Total $ 13,985,709 $ 23,635,004 37,620,713 $ 13,985,709 $ 23,635,004 37,620,713 $ 18,039,794 $ 21,153,483 39,193,277 $ 14,672,256 $ 23,635,004 38,307,260 $ 16,831,359 $ 22,533,346 39,364,705 $ (2,845,650) 1,101,658 (1,743,992) -20% 5% -5% $ Dept Total $ 224,104 $ 224,104 $ 720,441 $ 720,441 $ 720,433 $ 720,433 $ 675,721 $ 675,721 $ 781,279 $ 781,279 $ 46,261 $ 46,261 $ 674,172 674,172 94% 94% $ Dept Total $ 819,625 $ 819,625 $ 834,991 $ 834,991 $ 834,988 $ 834,988 $ 783,653 $ 783,653 $ 836,363 $ 836,363 $ 832,015 $ 832,015 $ 2,973 2,973 0% 0% $ Dept Total $ 9,533,935 $ 9,533,935 $ 8,171,022 $ 8,171,022 $ 8,171,031 $ 8,171,031 $ 8,976,364 $ 8,976,364 $ 9,870,428 $ 9,870,428 $ 9,751,777 $ 9,751,777 $ (1,580,746) (1,580,746) -19% -19% $ Dept Total $ 18,397,198 $ 18,397,198 $ 25,609,802 $ 25,609,802 $ 25,609,795 $ 25,609,795 $ 25,562,088 $ 25,562,088 $ 26,162,580 $ 26,162,580 $ 26,070,716 $ 26,070,716 $ (460,921) (460,921) -2% -2% 13,599,154 13,599,154 66,813,879 66,813,879 12,214,470 12,214,470 85,171,439 85,171,439 12,214,472 12,214,472 85,171,432 85,171,432 12,170,398 12,170,398 87,361,502 87,361,502 12,246,524 12,246,524 88,204,434 88,204,434 13,656,435 13,656,435 89,721,909 89,721,909 (1,441,963) (1,441,963) (4,550,477) (4,550,477) -12% -12% -5% -5% $ Dept Total $ APPOINTED DEPARTMENT TOTAL $ INTERNAL SERVICE TOTAL $ 640 TRANSPORTATION 900 ELIMINATIONS FY 2004-05 Requested 10,583,350 $ 13,656,513 24,239,863 $ 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 681 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ELIMINATIONS APPOINTED DEPARTMENT 300 PARKS & RECREATION 900 ELIMINATIONS FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Dept Total $ (21,142) $ (21,142) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ (25,000) $ (25,000) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ (17,000) $ $ Dept Total $ (48,153,021) $ (48,153,021) $ (57,000,000) $ (57,000,000) $ (57,000,000) $ (57,000,000) $ (57,000,000) $ (57,000,000) $ (57,000,000) $ (57,000,000) $ (61,695,868) $ (61,695,868) $ 4,695,868 4,695,868 8% 8% $ Dept Total $ (1,613,912) $ (1,613,912) $ (1,594,274) $ (1,594,274) $ (1,594,274) $ (1,594,274) $ (1,287,657) $ (1,287,657) $ (1,660,137) $ (1,660,137) $ (1,660,137) $ (1,660,137) $ 65,863 65,863 4% 4% $ $ (40,772,770) $ (40,772,770) $ (54,000,000) $ (54,000,000) $ (54,000,000) $ (54,000,000) $ (52,644,000) $ (52,644,000) $ (51,864,000) $ (51,864,000) $ (63,446,899) $ (63,446,899) $ 9,446,899 9,446,899 17% 17% (6,712,668) 48,515,643 41,802,975 56,011,605 56,011,605 -7% 12% 9% 9% 9% 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 900 ELIMINATIONS Dept Total 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 900 ELIMINATIONS 900 ELIMINATIONS Dept Total APPOINTED DEPARTMENT TOTAL ELIMINATIONS TOTAL $ $ $ $ (452,467,766) (452,467,766) (543,028,611) (543,028,611) $ $ $ $ (89,604,508) (389,716,225) (479,320,733) (591,932,007) (591,932,007) $ $ $ $ (89,604,508) (393,514,049) (483,118,557) (595,729,831) (595,729,831) 80 $ $ $ $ (70,100,269) (440,185,478) (510,285,747) (621,242,404) (621,242,404) $ $ $ $ (82,891,840) (411,230,371) (494,122,211) (604,663,348) (604,663,348) $ $ $ $ (82,891,840) (442,029,692) (524,921,532) (651,741,436) (651,741,436) $ $ $ $ - 0% 0% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Department and Fund Type CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT AND FUND TYPE FY 2004-05 Aopted Special Revenue General Fund JUDICIAL 110 ADULT PROBATION 800 TRIAL COURTS 270 JUVENILE PROBATION Capital Projects Debt Serivce $ 45,668,897 $ 13,919,776 $ 61,268,643 15,632,663 11,832,089 41,445,767 Subtotal $ 118,769,629 $ 70,998,206 $ - $ ELECTED 010 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 $ 249,676 $ $ 020 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 249,676 030 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 249,676 040 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 249,676 050 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 249,676 120 ASSESSOR 15,808,896 1,298,676 140 CALL CENTER 6,635,620 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 23,181,209 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY 50,280,208 12,802,876 210 ELECTIONS 10,494,469 250 CONSTABLES 1,780,046 360 RECORDER 1,991,183 5,608,218 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 1,984,742 430 TREASURER 3,952,730 500 SHERIFF 47,355,136 134,479,034 Subtotal $ 159,375,675 $ 159,525,748 $ - $ APPOINTED 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT $ 155,628 $ 060 CLERK OF THE BOARD 478,788 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 180 FINANCE 2,532,036 200 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 1,358,665 220 HUMAN SERVICES 1,787,032 230 INTERNAL AUDIT 1,035,910 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 3,461,426 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER 4,189,649 300 PARKS & RECREATION 1,271,316 310 HUMAN RESOURCES 2,872,815 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY 1,983,422 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION 2,649,479 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES 321,129,985 410 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 5,208,429 420 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 257,853,500 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 196,689,269 490 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET 1,762,186 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER 31,100,074 540 LEGAL DEFENDER 7,021,181 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE 6,383,337 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL 9,384,406 600 HEALTH PLANS 640 TRANSPORTATION 670 SOLID WASTE 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 17,333,572 710 COMMUNICATIONS 707,968 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 1,354,842 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 750 RISK MANAGEMENT 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 385,109 860 PUBLIC HEALTH 6,590,367 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1,369,912 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 980 ELIMINATIONS Subtotal $ 888,050,303 $ $ $ 1,383,361 $ $ 16,033,276 37,977,848 37,354,956 267,045 4,503,514 5,435,481 11,109,948 440,000 53,791,889 48,131,226 95,038,389 2,577,598 84,403 16,310 114,676,951 3,419,169 5,467,329 8,721,270 43,197,451 21,300,181 462,796,369 $ 48,131,226 $ Internal Service Enterprise $ 392,535 392,535 $ - $ $ 865,343 865,343 $ - $ $ $ $ $ 158,037 89,391,467 388,133,556 77,959,051 993,253 38,746,494 474,412,270 206,255,049 $ 863,539,079 $ Sub-Total Eliminations All Funds - $ 59,588,673 $ 76,901,306 53,670,391 $ 190,160,370 $ - $ - $ - $ 249,676 $ 249,676 249,676 249,676 249,676 15,808,896 1,298,676 29,816,829 63,083,084 10,494,469 1,780,046 7,599,401 1,984,742 3,952,730 182,699,513 $ 319,766,766 $ 59,588,673 76,901,306 53,670,391 $ 190,160,370 249,676 249,676 249,676 249,676 249,676 15,808,896 1,298,676 29,816,829 63,083,084 10,494,469 1,780,046 7,599,401 1,984,742 3,952,730 182,699,513 $ 319,766,766 $ 1,538,989 $ $ 1,538,989 478,788 478,788 16,033,276 16,033,276 2,532,036 2,532,036 1,358,665 1,358,665 39,764,880 39,764,880 1,035,910 1,035,910 40,974,419 40,974,419 4,456,694 4,456,694 5,774,830 (17,000) 5,757,830 2,872,815 2,872,815 1,983,422 1,983,422 39,364,705 42,014,184 42,014,184 321,129,985 321,129,985 5,208,429 5,208,429 5,435,481 5,435,481 11,109,948 11,109,948 440,000 440,000 449,168,082 449,168,082 291,727,658 291,727,658 1,762,186 1,762,186 33,677,672 33,677,672 7,105,584 7,105,584 6,399,647 6,399,647 9,384,406 9,384,406 388,133,556 388,133,556 192,636,002 (61,695,868) 130,940,134 4,412,422 4,412,422 61,547,395 61,547,395 46,261 754,229 754,229 832,015 2,186,857 2,186,857 9,751,777 9,751,777 9,751,777 26,070,716 26,070,716 26,070,716 13,656,435 13,656,435 13,656,435 9,106,379 9,106,379 49,787,818 49,787,818 22,670,093 22,670,093 474,412,270 (82,891,840) 391,520,430 (442,029,692) (442,029,692) 89,721,909 $ 2,558,493,935 $ (586,634,400) $ 1,971,859,535 MARICOPA COUNTY $ 1,166,195,607 $ 693,320,323 $ 48,131,226 $ 207,512,927 $ 863,539,079 $ 89,721,909 $ 3,068,421,071 $ (586,634,400) $ 2,481,786,671 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT $ - $ 91,003,439 $ - $ 52,076,503 $ - $ - $ 143,079,942 $ 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT $ - $ 16,345,796 $ - $ $ - $ - $ 16,345,796 $ - $ 16,345,796 680 STADIUM DISTRICT $ - $ 3,000 $ - $ - $ 9,097,097 $ (1,660,137) $ 7,436,960 MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS $ 1,166,195,607 $ 804,248,561 $ 53,646,320 $ 259,592,430 $ 863,539,079 $ 89,721,909 $ 3,236,943,906 $ (651,741,436) $ 2,585,202,470 3,579,003 $ 5,515,094 $ 81 - (63,446,899) $ 79,633,043 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Object Code CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURE BY FUND TYPE /OBJECT MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Actual Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated Proj. Act Restated ALL FUNDS PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 640,752 1% (3,491,994) -6% (56,385) -2% (4,081,890) -50% 0% 0% (556,293) -1% (42,550,295) -19% (37,558,623) -13% (1,523,267) -6% (9,352,670) -40% (1,382,292) 0% 5,220,342 1333% 376,258 5% (1,633,296) -30% 16,797,388 11% (4,886,322) -23% 1,340,853 60% (29,000) -9% 0% 0% (82,262,904) -7% 45,782,500 $ 215,920,338 9,847,511 8,482,363 104,351,793 52,109,257 436,493,762 $ 595,692,937 $ 6,860,288 16,481,060 160,199,194 8,462,013 (61,537,462) 46,298,734 772,456,765 $ 34,709,531 $ 147,485,852 8,734,118 10,786,946 96,024,168 43,926,082 (357,031) 359,437 341,669,103 $ 11,072,969 68,434,486 1,113,393 (2,304,583) 8,327,625 8,183,175 94,824,659 24% 32% 11% -27% 8% 16% 0% 0% 22% All Funds Total $ 2,074,918,986 $ 2,494,625,942 $ 2,506,275,922 $ 2,276,319,396 $ 2,521,551,880 $ 2,585,202,470 $ (78,926,548) -3% 82 32,724,272 $ 140,954,558 15,479,398 8,064,064 70,668,223 49,212,088 317,102,602 $ 644,130,293 $ 7,158,427 13,628,618 189,089,371 6,540,053 (51,972,501) 48,874,904 857,449,164 $ % SUPPLIES & SERVICES 59,409,543 $ 60,355,572 $ 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 53,744,377 $ 54,412,186 $ 60,996,324 $ 57,678,855 $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 59,969,550 56,321,641 60,844,345 64,242,240 64,243,412 64,336,339 803 FUEL 2,998,691 2,951,461 2,933,351 3,158,076 2,905,146 2,989,736 4,237,540 12,174,708 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 9,853,092 7,385,766 8,092,818 11,592,627 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT (619,876) (23,411) (24,400) (19,608) (2,138,293) (1,792,097) 2,084,470 1,712,343 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 619,876 23,411 24,400 19,608 39,982,827 40,841,069 810 LEGAL SERVICES 24,628,110 40,139,125 40,284,776 33,203,513 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 269,053,860 203,202,362 219,188,873 302,229,471 263,115,774 261,739,168 812 OTHER SERVICES 121,843,300 355,098,905 299,688,923 124,374,043 359,529,714 337,247,546 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 22,171,223 22,974,694 23,482,385 24,345,322 23,814,268 25,005,651 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 30,548,919 22,730,652 23,112,811 22,259,562 32,708,669 32,465,481 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 286,388,745 326,407,750 323,448,830 321,903,258 336,205,477 324,831,122 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES (23,750,567) (2,944,193) (391,510) (3,302,173) (6,162,940) (5,611,852) 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 6,647,198 7,723,263 8,028,659 7,774,449 7,835,082 7,652,401 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 5,417,763 5,557,482 5,395,422 7,548,493 7,204,782 7,028,717 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 182,750,440 156,448,563 156,434,686 187,189,686 140,257,555 139,637,298 850 UTILITIES 20,136,476 22,242,981 21,574,831 21,520,612 26,407,738 26,461,153 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 1,198,361 2,215,630 2,216,380 735,994 5,206,523 875,527 865 DEPRECIATION 14,537,075 306,000 306,000 306,000 335,000 335,000 (38,991) (88,678) (124,142) (3,262,064) (4,222,450) 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT (9,725,111) 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 9,725,111 38,991 88,678 124,142 3,127,921 3,838,374 880 TRANSFERS OUT (55,423,864) (0) (67,666,347) Sub Total $ 1,032,712,751 $ 1,283,174,268 $ 1,255,637,902 $ 1,186,760,028 $ 1,299,381,798 $ 1,337,900,806 $ 54,383,447 $ 212,780,370 8,753,553 7,604,948 94,733,966 52,002,806 430,259,090 $ 614,776,476 $ 6,410,128 14,846,836 167,165,776 19,607,792 (53,627,663) 44,964,913 814,144,257 $ Adopted vs Revised Variance (33,839,372) -6% (1,120,016) -17% 795,213 5% (24,564,020) -15% (28,468,961) -145% 3,781,030 7% (8,072,177) -18% (91,488,304) -11% 29,790,135 $ 194,416,522 3,719,815 7,186,845 50,180,646 55,673,262 340,967,226 $ 572,355,682 $ 6,373,979 14,179,843 155,403,559 40,877,603 (72,236,199) 64,238,117 781,192,584 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 648,615,848 $ 7,530,144 14,051,623 191,729,796 48,076,753 (57,408,693) 53,037,090 905,632,561 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE 955 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION OUT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ 550,423,757 $ 7,103,507 14,562,536 125,866,878 7,773,373 (30,131,594) 25,640,552 701,239,009 $ FY 2004-05 Requested 34,971,236 $ 185,881,584 3,009,611 10,163,946 91,359,080 39,307,078 (298,334) 326,718 364,720,919 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Object Code (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURE BY FUND TYPE /OBJECT MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Actual Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % GENERAL FUND PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 216,145,579 $ 3,295,943 1,576,220 48,498,264 1,677,159 (22,509,674) 2,121,723 250,805,213 $ 219,359,708 $ 2,379,100 1,598,838 61,795,437 24,682,131 (25,323,703) 23,820,452 308,311,963 $ 253,940,956 $ 2,502,230 1,623,179 69,030,307 10,403,088 (25,878,445) 3,507,318 315,128,633 $ 250,017,139 $ 3,163,843 1,939,949 65,941,169 2,033,908 (39,404,709) 16,900,597 300,591,895 $ 256,033,568 $ 3,363,304 1,700,579 75,448,678 2,000,109 (23,416,547) 2,630,018 317,759,708 $ 261,567,621 $ 3,662,388 2,101,603 77,867,400 20,113,725 (24,792,748) 4,295,098 344,815,087 $ (7,626,665) (1,160,158) (478,424) (8,837,093) (9,710,637) (1,085,697) (787,780) (29,686,454) -3% -46% -29% -13% -93% -4% -22% -9% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 14,571,209 $ 499,765 1,342,400 897,091 19,536,534 2,154,613 15,942,327 9,609,714 12,192,292 275,290,694 19,104 2,712,627 3,268,627 303,369 9,245,820 190,737,330 558,323,515 $ 8,290,731 $ 475,331 1,065,292 91,075 36,510,160 7,180,369 131,841,699 10,095,078 6,883,153 308,302,642 17,910,562 3,260,694 3,122,116 517,196 11,276,749 144,498,360 691,321,207 $ 14,867,955 $ 473,331 1,083,847 449,434 36,718,295 7,223,472 114,475,138 10,231,621 7,485,123 305,905,903 18,178,412 3,116,804 2,950,351 548,196 11,358,003 148,372,360 683,438,243 $ 12,149,776 $ 569,096 1,259,565 501,497 27,608,159 7,232,295 24,006,154 10,381,264 8,213,830 306,464,325 17,701,575 2,970,782 3,791,133 382,415 11,162,269 189,622,360 624,016,495 $ 10,106,279 $ 519,731 1,208,872 151,687 (1,048,770) 36,015,936 10,475,653 150,706,476 10,668,937 14,289,853 318,870,837 15,767,908 3,278,237 3,826,566 563,369 11,351,288 (2,313,274) 165,994,671 750,434,256 $ 9,989,154 $ 533,086 1,360,060 188,187 (1,065,603) 3,877 36,096,664 7,554,554 183,444,607 11,884,805 14,383,645 299,900,807 17,796,807 3,251,214 3,797,657 563,369 7,057,920 (2,313,274) 19,717 169,199,149 763,646,402 $ 4,878,801 (59,755) (276,213) 261,247 621,631 (331,082) (68,969,469) (1,653,185) (6,898,522) 6,005,096 381,605 (134,410) (847,307) (15,173) 4,300,083 (20,826,789) (80,208,159) 33% -13% -25% 58% 0% 0% 2% -5% -60% -16% -92% 2% 2% -4% -29% -3% 38% 0% 0% -14% -12% CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE 955 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION OUT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ $ 7,414,533 611,652 3,437,379 8,506,081 19,969,645 $ 30,000,000 $ 16,349,713 3,322,484 10,372,928 60,045,125 $ 29,000,000 $ 16,554,992 30,000 3,519,632 10,376,078 59,480,702 $ 6,105,562 $ 9,585,668 621,307 3,703,872 8,625,498 28,641,907 $ 20,952,236 $ 10,622,380 61,019 3,689,484 4,148,150 (283,334) 39,189,935 $ 20,980,531 $ 14,005,014 71,795 3,497,284 19,459,961 (283,334) 2,867 57,734,118 $ Fund Total $ 829,098,372 $ 1,059,678,295 $ 1,058,047,578 $ 83 953,250,298 $ 1,107,383,900 $ 1,166,195,607 $ 8,019,469 28% 2,549,978 15% (41,795) -139% 22,348 1% (9,083,883) -88% 0% 0% 1,746,584 3% (108,148,029) -10% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Object Code (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURE BY FUND TYPE /OBJECT MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % SPECIAL REVENUE PERSONAL SERVICES $ 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 191,604,967 $ 3,715,886 3,660,353 47,280,271 2,746,285 (7,126,556) 18,383,572 260,264,779 $ 207,383,223 $ 3,894,126 2,724,180 56,704,631 6,072,846 (35,096,678) 22,073,754 263,756,082 $ 207,168,420 $ 3,832,588 3,015,934 59,883,511 3,370,683 (13,423,775) 23,720,499 287,567,860 $ 190,442,609 $ 3,621,231 5,505,020 56,741,198 3,260,431 (10,644,435) 24,782,102 273,708,156 $ 226,728,170 $ 3,721,774 2,647,263 72,919,563 3,592,870 (13,939,239) 25,081,611 320,752,011 $ 226,978,375 $ 3,809,407 2,705,194 73,500,917 27,015,954 (17,578,980) 27,024,917 343,455,784 $ (19,809,955) -10% 23,181 1% 310,740 10% (13,617,406) -23% (23,645,271) -701% 4,155,205 31% (3,304,418) -14% (55,887,924) -19% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 25,679,645 $ 13,697,509 1,526,076 2,725,070 (20,233) 20,233 1,709,001 10,940,111 54,192,183 7,293,725 10,724,470 10,844,459 14,929,295 3,177,022 1,104,502 130,770 1,722,250 29,694 (236,765) 236,765 217,832,284 378,258,066 $ 34,050,760 $ 8,880,976 1,773,423 1,669,477 (23,411) 23,411 712,710 10,691,053 144,225,387 7,565,975 8,291,899 17,892,718 16,831,136 3,461,242 1,021,415 211,915 1,737,644 (38,991) 38,991 168,372,851 427,390,581 $ 34,115,098 $ 13,404,162 1,758,752 1,982,949 (24,400) 24,400 650,226 10,764,722 117,840,800 8,201,558 8,092,729 17,325,818 18,950,870 3,954,553 1,035,620 166,038 2,002,072 750 (88,678) 88,678 168,411,303 408,658,020 $ 26,864,628 $ 14,090,670 1,772,006 2,565,682 (19,608) 19,608 1,695,355 18,069,708 64,713,750 7,964,142 7,325,756 15,200,823 17,959,274 4,093,968 1,269,350 102,429 2,072,446 (124,142) 124,142 166,656,686 352,416,673 $ 26,298,729 14,271,047 1,568,760 1,918,006 (1,089,523) 2,084,470 747,860 10,123,162 164,879,670 7,412,951 10,577,247 17,102,354 17,265,415 3,926,754 1,547,600 178,127 7,010,475 (948,790) 3,127,921 117,227,999 405,230,235 $ 27,572,100 14,350,619 1,507,162 4,885,110 (726,494) 1,708,466 1,525,374 12,901,447 116,370,222 7,455,827 10,282,111 24,698,029 17,339,571 3,784,943 1,402,444 48,889 11,360,985 (1,909,176) 3,818,657 181,497,049 439,873,335 $ 6,542,998 19% (946,457) -7% 251,590 14% (2,902,161) -146% 0% 0% (875,148) -135% (2,136,725) -20% 1,470,578 1% 745,731 9% (2,189,382) -27% (7,372,211) -43% 1,611,299 9% 169,610 4% (366,824) -35% 117,149 71% (9,358,913) -467% 750 100% 0% 0% (13,085,746) -8% (31,215,315) -8% CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE 955 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION OUT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ (4,136) $ 6,838,611 3,102,593 3,729,410 1,929,288 15,595,767 $ $ 8,253,617 2,545,177 4,238,864 870,896 2,733,366 18,641,920 $ 1,540,000 $ 9,945,575 3,470,908 4,942,731 900,229 2,833,853 23,633,296 $ 1,543,600 $ 4,154,673 6,979,637 4,364,060 172,357 4,043,194 21,257,521 $ $ 8,860,548 2,862,680 6,274,462 3,207,902 (15,000) 321,435 21,512,027 $ $ 7,255,846 2,994,653 7,068,662 3,322,691 (73,697) 351,287 20,919,442 $ 1,540,000 2,689,729 476,255 (2,125,931) 900,229 (488,838) 2,713,854 100% 27% 14% -43% 100% -17% 0% 0% 11% Fund Total $ 654,118,611 $ 709,788,583 $ 719,859,176 $ 647,382,350 $ 747,494,272 $ 804,248,561 $ (84,389,385) -12% 84 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Object Code (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURE BY FUND TYPE /OBJECT MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Actual Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % DEBT SERVICE SUPPLIES & SERVICES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ - $ $ 110,000 110,000 $ $ 110,000 110,000 $ $ 522,282 522,282 $ 4,330,996 $ 110,000 4,440,996 $ $ 33,118,452 33,118,452 $ (33,008,452) (33,008,452) -30008% -30008% $ Sub Total $ 43,586,353 $ 43,586,353 $ 34,907,173 $ 34,907,173 $ 34,907,173 $ 34,907,173 $ 34,836,078 $ 34,836,078 $ 31,330,879 $ 31,330,879 $ 20,527,868 $ 20,527,868 $ 14,379,305 14,379,305 41% 41% Fund Total $ 43,586,353 $ 35,017,173 $ 35,017,173 $ 35,358,360 $ 35,771,875 $ 53,646,320 $ (18,629,147) -53% Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURE BY FUND TYPE /OBJECT MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS FY 2002-03 Actual Restated FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % CAPITAL PROJECTS PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 3,460,073 $ 28,967 10,923 668,079 5,926 4,578,516 8,752,484 $ 2,319,915 $ 24,173 27,240 456,775 (722,286) 7,218,136 9,323,953 $ 2,296,205 $ 2,978 27,240 503,123 (854,764) 7,374,635 9,349,417 $ 3,998,249 $ 13,415 27,923 602,243 6,530 (346,874) 4,074,907 8,376,393 $ 1,666,446 $ 27,240 429,040 (720,037) 7,305,944 8,708,633 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES $ 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 127,800 $ 3,420 84,051 (1,620) 11,895,968 134,750 19 1,500,672 4,914 113 224,916 13,975,003 $ 308,654 $ 15,494 21,500 19,397 5,591,500 285,405 1,283,955 56,600 2,000 9,600 7,594,105 $ 294,380 $ 7,500 23,026 19,397 6,414,747 285,405 39,833 1,283,955 16,825 2,000 9,600 8,396,668 $ 104,570 $ 163 3,001 23,438 6,188,742 147,472 82,377 1,228,547 8,704 351 5,306 7,792,672 $ 311,626 $ 6,000 16,843,511 93,387 39,833 837,818 14,600 1,000 9,600 300,884 18,458,259 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 29,794,271 $ 180,163,378 5,570 19,780 50,180,646 5,100 260,168,746 $ 24,383,447 $ 184,544,040 93,863,070 5,108 302,795,665 $ 15,242,500 $ 185,786,771 103,451,564 5,108 304,485,943 $ 25,075,110 $ 127,214,217 70,495,866 6,004 222,791,197 $ 14,019,000 $ 151,362,398 91,359,080 7,552 256,748,030 $ 13,729,000 $ 120,315,992 96,024,168 3,776 230,072,936 $ 1,513,500 65,470,779 7,427,396 1,332 74,413,007 7% 26% 24% Fund Total $ 282,896,234 $ 319,713,723 $ 322,232,028 $ 238,960,263 $ 283,914,922 $ 259,592,430 $ 62,639,598 19% 85 907,387 $ 13,620 243,530 (1,140,287) 7,859,744 7,883,994 $ 1,388,818 60% 2,978 100% 13,620 50% 259,593 52% 285,523 33% (485,109) -7% 1,465,423 16% 102,074 $ 192,306 1,500 6,000 23,026 19,397 12,458,390 (6,043,643) 50,026 235,379 30,957 8,876 811,420 472,535 8,373 8,452 500 1,500 5,873 3,727 8,166,387 (8,166,387) 21,635,500 $ (13,238,832) 65% 80% 100% 100% -94% 82% 22% 37% 50% 75% 39% -158% 10% 35% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Object Code (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURE BY FUND TYPE /OBJECT MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Actual Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % ENTERPRISE PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 133,921,781 $ 20,378 9,204,668 28,147,537 3,294,074 (495,364) 1,192 174,094,265 $ 137,615,003 $ 40,000 9,697,509 34,917,126 10,109,766 (11,069,675) 10,590,087 191,899,816 $ 145,358,323 $ 33,983 10,075,615 36,089,860 5,806,927 (13,398,283) 9,826,773 193,793,198 $ 145,457,312 $ 27,106 8,897,638 35,326,932 3,103,385 (11,069,047) 181,743,326 $ 153,605,049 $ 35,000 9,148,830 38,432,737 912,115 (13,896,678) 13,763,770 202,000,823 $ 153,581,886 $ 20,000 9,126,500 38,425,401 912,115 (13,896,678) 13,763,770 201,932,994 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 865 DEPRECIATION 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 6,910,228 $ 45,772,232 74,306 6,006,603 (599,643) 67 264,426,556 30,760,148 3,439,389 5,284,450 32,556 6,588,614 690,782 1,030,563 182,316,301 4,171,477 1,113,782 14,537,075 (9,488,346) 2,633,153 565,700,293 $ 6,974,773 $ 46,878,215 69,683 5,129,723 245,170,089 42,435,284 3,254,903 5,528,495 37,390 6,790,130 861,491 1,374,208 175,060,741 4,346,246 2,215,630 125,590,186 671,717,187 $ 6,965,510 $ 46,879,733 64,683 5,164,512 245,230,133 44,726,385 3,254,903 5,531,937 37,390 6,841,552 862,509 1,375,208 175,061,741 4,346,522 2,215,630 125,590,186 674,148,534 $ 12,852,770 $ 49,495,185 102,866 8,042,470 322,782,916 13,976,250 4,348,155 4,520,868 16,871 6,500,747 639,079 2,453,129 207,159,000 4,441,691 735,994 106,900,624 744,968,615 $ 16,406,324 $ 49,452,634 103,455 2,129,808 288,089,153 17,412,508 4,090,271 5,508,824 8,266 7,212,787 540,260 1,820,591 162,725,774 4,473,658 875,527 85,099,985 645,949,825 $ 16,406,324 $ 49,452,634 103,455 5,657,808 288,577,172 17,578,609 4,090,271 5,485,856 8,266 7,203,787 539,640 1,820,591 162,234,755 4,473,658 875,527 85,130,554 649,638,907 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ $ 276 1,639,313 1,639,589 $ 3,615,000 $ 6,146,383 20,000 3,790,350 13,571,733 $ 3,615,000 $ 6,311,284 20,000 3,790,350 13,736,634 $ $ 7,023,000 1,514,087 8,537,087 $ 15,018,258 $ 53,412 418,225 5,283 15,495,178 $ 5,891,000 $ 5,652,670 418,225 5,283 11,967,178 $ (2,276,000) 658,614 20,000 3,372,125 1,769,456 -63% 10% 100% 89% 0% 13% Fund Total $ 741,434,147 $ 877,188,736 $ 881,678,366 $ 935,249,028 $ 863,445,826 $ 863,539,079 $ 18,139,287 2% 86 (8,223,563) 13,983 949,115 (2,335,541) 4,894,812 498,395 (3,936,997) (8,139,796) -6% 41% 9% -6% 84% 4% -40% -4% (9,440,814) -136% (2,572,901) -5% (38,772) -60% (493,296) -10% 0% (43,347,039) -18% 27,147,776 61% (835,368) -26% 46,081 1% 29,124 78% (362,235) -5% 322,869 37% (445,383) -32% 12,826,986 7% (127,136) -3% 1,340,103 60% 0% 40,459,632 32% 24,509,627 4% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Consolidated Expenditures by Fund Type / Object Code (Continued) CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURE BY FUND TYPE /OBJECT MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Actual Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % INTERNAL SERVICE PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 5,291,358 $ 42,333 110,372 1,272,728 49,928 555,549 7,322,268 $ 5,677,833 $ 36,580 132,076 1,529,590 12,860 (23,857) 535,688 7,900,770 $ 6,012,572 $ 38,349 104,868 1,658,975 27,094 (72,396) 535,688 8,305,150 $ 5,777,629 $ 34,693 110,529 1,587,653 57,759 (72,396) 541,128 8,036,996 $ 6,097,060 $ 38,349 104,706 1,859,354 34,959 93,561 8,227,989 $ 5,580,579 $ 38,349 104,706 1,692,548 34,959 93,561 7,544,702 $ 431,993 162 (33,573) (7,865) (72,396) 442,127 760,448 7% 0% 0% -2% -29% -100% 83% 9% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 865 DEPRECIATION 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 6,455,494 $ 45 52,490 140,277 599,643 3,384,128 5,324,035 21,157,649 1,693,645 2,347,688 221,036 1,641,796 61,853 13,959 4,996,929 54,886 9,488,346 1,850,584 59,484,485 $ 4,787,268 $ 87,119 27,569 473,991 2,896,858 10,398,620 44,486,061 1,773,333 2,027,105 175,000 1,647,655 83,236 37,743 13,074 4,872,742 306,000 2,879,821 76,973,195 $ 4,753,381 $ 87,119 18,569 472,897 2,896,858 26,208,315 29,712,879 1,508,898 1,963,189 179,719 1,646,704 77,968 32,243 13,074 3,858,634 306,000 2,879,821 76,616,268 $ 5,707,110 $ 87,126 20,638 459,540 3,900,000 28,514,202 28,926,795 1,504,289 2,116,730 221,239 1,639,699 61,917 34,530 13,074 3,838,900 306,000 933,906 78,285,695 $ 6,286,585 $ 18,059 38,039 3,219,031 35,105,010 24,156,481 1,548,722 2,292,912 224,020 1,718,593 75,231 9,025 3,562,717 335,000 942,150 79,531,575 $ 6,285,920 $ 17,559 1,443,603 3,219,031 36,284,066 23,920,255 1,524,722 2,282,912 224,020 1,611,935 68,231 7,525 3,562,717 335,000 942,150 81,729,646 $ (1,532,539) 87,119 1,010 (970,706) (322,173) (10,075,751) 5,792,624 (15,824) (319,723) (44,301) 34,769 9,737 24,718 13,074 295,917 (29,000) 1,937,671 (5,113,378) -32% 100% 5% -205% 0% -11% -38% 19% -1% -16% -25% 2% 12% 77% 100% 8% CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ $ 7,126 7,126 $ 18,000 $ 61,993 23,600 193,881 297,474 $ 18,000 $ 35,319 196,695 250,014 $ $ 855,453 (3,868) 187,226 1,038,811 $ 18,000 $ 32,500 200,000 194,370 444,870 $ 18,000 $ 15,000 221,000 193,561 447,561 $ 20,319 (221,000) 3,134 (197,547) 0% 58% 2% -79% Fund Total $ 66,813,879 $ 85,171,439 $ 85,171,432 $ 87,361,502 $ 88,204,434 $ 89,721,909 $ (4,550,477) -5% -9% 0% 67% -7% CONSOLIDATED EXPENDITURE BY FUND TYPE /OBJECT MARICOPA COUNTY & DISTRICTS FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Actual Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated Proj. Act Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance % ELIMINATIONS SUPPLIES & SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES $ 812 OTHER SERVICES 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ (13,791,455) $ (12,104,976) (48,430,049) (468,702,131) (543,028,611) $ (70,237,769) $ (13,481,026) (47,407,631) (19,354,363) (441,451,218) (591,932,007) $ (70,237,769) $ (13,481,026) (47,293,003) (19,354,363) (445,363,670) (595,729,831) $ (74,369,650) $ (13,437,649) (48,332,015) (20,467,232) (464,635,858) (621,242,404) $ (80,677,204) $ (14,468,932) (48,965,461) (23,209,715) (437,342,036) (604,663,348) $ (83,578,071) $ (16,524,537) (50,375,372) (23,209,715) (478,053,741) (651,741,436) $ 13,340,302 3,043,511 3,082,369 3,855,352 32,690,071 56,011,605 19% 23% 7% 20% 7% 9% Fund Total $ (543,028,611) $ (591,932,007) $ (595,729,831) $ (621,242,404) $ (604,663,348) $ (651,741,436) $ 56,011,605 9% 87 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules General Government Expenditure Summary Description FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs.Revised Variance General Fund (100) 4711 - General Contingency General Contingency 4711 - Reserved Items County Contribution Employee Initiatives Health/Dental Premium Increase (unallocated) Contract Counsel Reserve Compensation Reserve Debt Financing New. Admin Service Building Public Fiduciary Computer Software Retirement Contribution Increase (unallocated) Rule 15 Rule 8 Sheriff Overtime Technology Reserve Unfunded Liabilities Subtotal 4712 - Other General Fund Programs Article V Procurement Base-Level Internal Service Charges Board NW Regional Service Charges Board Resolution (9/11 Reward Fund) Citizens Tax Education County Contribution Customer Satisfaction Survey Desktop PC Replacement Program Emergency Management: Disaster Fund Human Resources Peak Performers Internet Subscription Service Jail Excise Tax Maintenance of Effort (MOE) PIO Position Real Estate Evaluation, Acquisition & Divestiture Security Bldg. Revenue Income Tax Sheriff: MCNNET Grant Match State Property Acquisition Expenses Utilities Vehicle Replacement Subtotal 4716 - Debt Service/Cap. Lease Arbitrage Admin. Fee Financial Advisor Bond Attorney 3.85m COP (P&I) 16.8m COP 30m COP (P&I) Smartzone NW Court Lease Subtotal 4721 - Dues and Memberships National Assoc. of Counties Arizona Assoc. of Counties Maricopa Assoc. of Government County Supervisors Assoc. Subtotal $ 19,597,200 $ 17,677,534 $ - $ 25,000,000 $ $ 5,402,800 $ 9,808,284 3,836,414 400,000 7,644,738 500,000 4,700,000 300,000 2,000,000 11,981,323 66,170,759 $ $ 1,101,228 400,000 34,493 4,700,000 300,000 10,547,219 34,760,474 $ - $ 15,000 $ 15,361,488 5,280 10,000 200,000 100,000 50,000 100,000 120,866,924 7,500 10,707,736 3,322,484 150,746,412 $ 15,000 $ 15,312,949 5,280 10,000 200,000 5,402,800 100,000 2,000,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 120,866,924 48,539 7,500 90,462 119,158 10,686,648 3,322,484 158,437,744 $ 25,000 $ 15,000 60,000 40,000 120,100 4,043,900 1,500,000 500,000 6,304,000 $ 25,000 $ 15,000 60,000 40,000 120,100 4,043,900 1,500,000 500,000 6,304,000 $ 25,000 $ 15,000 60,000 40,000 120,100 4,043,900 1,500,000 500,000 6,304,000 $ 25,000 $ 15,000 60,000 40,000 2,425,734 2,565,734 $ 120,100 (2,425,734) 4,043,900 1,500,000 500,000 3,738,266 43,094 $ 49,642 47,724 108,235 248,695 $ 43,094 $ 49,642 47,724 108,235 248,695 $ 41,307 $ 49,642 41,474 104,033 236,456 $ 45,248 $ 52,124 42,487 113,647 253,506 $ (2,154) (2,482) 5,237 (5,412) (4,811) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 88 (7,322,466) $ 4,140,428 5,000,000 18,000,000 14,355,927 14,000 300,000 2,000,000 5,018,200 $ 73,828,555 $ (3,039,200) (5,000,000) (18,000,000) (14,355,927) 400,000 (14,000) 34,493 4,700,000 (2,000,000) 5,529,019 (39,068,081) $ 5,000 $ 15,312,949 15,312,949 5,280 5,280 10,000 200,000 200,000 5,402,800 5,402,800 100,000 100,000 376,009 50,000 325,000 100,000 50,000 120,866,924 133,176,891 48,539 133,025 7,500 7,500 58,273 119,158 10,308,971 6,453,764 3,322,484 3,130,284 156,228,887 $ 164,362,493 $ 10,000 2,000,000 (225,000) 50,000 (12,309,967) 48,539 (133,025) 90,462 119,158 4,232,884 192,200 (5,924,749) - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules General Government Expenditure Summary (Continued) Description General Fund (100) (continued) 4722 - Taxes and Assessments City of Phx. Downtown Mun. Serv. Dist. FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs.Revised Variance $ Subtotal $ 106,480 $ 106,480 $ 106,480 $ 106,480 $ 104,822 $ 104,822 $ $ 111,804 $ 106,480 (5,324) 4724 - Consultants Unallocated $ Employee Sat./Exit Survey Highground Chairman's Fund Elliott Pollack & Co. Internal Audit Research and Reporting Director Records Center Manager General Government Administration Office of Communications Position Maximus (Executive Search) Risk Management Unemployment Charges Real Estate Evaluation, Acquisition & Divestiture OMB Compensation Analyst Economic Development Payroll Security Building HP Consulting CCC Homeless Campus Coordinator Executive Search Subtotal $ 1,810,615 $ 120,000 90,000 20,000 85,000 318,787 85,000 89,613 59,000 5,099 2,683,114 $ 1,510,503 $ 120,000 120,000 20,000 85,000 318,787 85,000 89,613 59,000 30,000 5,099 95,000 10,112 230,000 2,778,114 $ $ 120,000 120,000 20,000 85,000 318,787 85,000 59,000 30,000 5,099 95,000 10,112 230,000 1,177,998 $ 1,405,823 $ 120,000 120,000 20,000 85,000 318,787 87,871 62,576 10,112 2,980 6,500 46,837 100,000 2,386,486 $ 104,680 (2,871) 89,613 (3,576) 30,000 5,099 95,000 (2,980) (6,500) (46,837) 130,000 391,628 Subtotal $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ Subtotal $ 7,154,713 $ 7,154,713 $ 3,697,737 $ 6,230,146 $ Subtotal $ 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,075,799 $ 1,300,000 $ - Subtotal $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 4,372 $ 500,000 $ - Subtotal $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ - 4726 - Tuition Reimbursement - 4732 - Major Maintenance 924,567 4741 - Tax Appeal Cases 4742 - Judgments 4743 - Outside Legal Counsel 89 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules General Government Expenditure Summary (Continued) FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Revised Restated Description General Fund (100) (continued) FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs.Revised Variance 4771 - Burial of Indigents Subtotal $ 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 203,880 $ 400,000 $ - Subtotal $ 2,154,776 $ 2,154,776 $ 2,107,330 $ 2,154,776 $ - Subtotal $ 530,000 $ 530,000 $ 530,000 $ 530,000 $ - Subtotal $ 230,000 $ 230,000 $ 230,000 $ 230,000 $ - Total General Fund $ 241,528,949 $ 217,904,996 $ 47,290 $ 71,464 76,931 75,666 51,802 100,000 56,746 479,899 $ 47,290 $ 71,464 76,931 75,666 51,802 100,000 56,746 479,899 $ Subtotal $ 4,003,472 $ 4,003,472 $ 2,388,649 $ 2,388,649 $ $ 5,000,000 $ 3,788,488 $ - $ 10,000,000 $ $ 2,840,168 $ 150,000 18,000,000 25,990,168 $ $ 150,000 1,247,515 5,186,003 $ - $ $ 500,000 500,000 $ $ 500,000 500,000 $ 4774 - Non-Profit Funding 4775 - Accommodation Schools 4776 - Cooperative Extentsion Waste Management Fund (210) 4751 - Dist. 1 Unincorp. Area Comm. Proj. 4752 - Dist. 2 Unincorp. Area Comm. Proj. 4753 - Dist. 3 Unincorp. Area Comm. Proj. 4754 - Dist. 4 Unincorp. Area Comm. Proj. 4755 - Dist. 5 Unincorp. Area Comm. Proj. 4757 - Illegal Dumping Program 4758 - Mobile Comm. Council Requests $ Subtotal $ General Government Grants Fund (249) Potential Fee Increases Compensation Reserve Internal Audit Grant Courts Fee Increases Detention Fund (255) 4711 - Contingency Detention Fund Operating 4711 - Reserved Items Compensation Reserve Health/Dental Premium Increase (unallocated) Sheriff Overtime Sheriff Vehicles New Facility Operating Costs $ Subtotal $ 4712 - Other Programs Utilities Vehicle Replacement Sheriff Recruiting Expense $ Subtotal $ 90 174,901,281 $ 257,853,500 $ 4,485 $ 1,000 15,000 10,000 30,485 $ (39,948,504) 70,336 $ 98,995 103,462 103,197 64,333 30,000 56,746 527,069 $ (23,046) (27,531) (26,531) (27,531) (12,531) 70,000 (47,170) 2,405,577 $ 1,866,891 $ 7,500,000 30,000 1,500,000 2,313,649 $ 10,896,891 $ 521,758 (7,500,000) (30,000) (1,500,000) (8,508,242) 3,712,826 $ 1,657,788 150,000 981,667 16,544,838 $ 33,047,119 $ $ 500,000 500,000 $ 4,302,510 $ 412,200 500,000 5,214,710 $ (6,211,512) (3,712,826) (1,657,788) (981,667) (15,297,323) (27,861,116) (4,302,510) (412,200) (4,714,710) Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules General Government Expenditure Summary (Continued) FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Revised Restated Description Detention Fund (255) (continued) FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs.Revised Variance 4732 - Major Maintenance Subtotal $ 4,102,100 $ 4,102,100 $ 2,310,190 $ 4,106,100 $ (4,000) Total Detention Fund $ 30,592,268 $ 9,788,103 $ 2,810,190 $ 42,367,929 $ (32,579,826) Bond Debt Service Fund (312) 4710 - Debt Service $ 20,971,600 $ 20,971,600 $ County Improvement Debt Fund (320) 4710 - County Improvement Debt $ 8,920,479 $ Subtotal $ 21,283,882 $ - $ 20,971,600 8,920,479 $ 8,920,479 $ 48,131,226 $ (39,210,747) 20,900,213 $ 21,976,277 $ 17,317,948 $ 21,095,594 $ 880,683 Subtotal $ 22,029,606 $ 22,029,606 $ 6,101,545 $ 38,557,198 $ (16,527,592) Subtotal $ 23,851,077 $ 25,351,077 $ 5,615,747 $ 29,738,675 $ (4,387,598) Total All Funds $ 373,277,563 $ 329,810,686 $ 239,295,207 $ 449,168,082 $ (119,357,396) Intergovernmental Capital Projects Fund (422) 4713 - Intergovernmental Capital Projects County Improvement Fund (435) 4713 - Capital Projects Capital Improvements (445) 4713 - Capital Projects 91 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Appropriated Fund Balance Expenditure Summary Description FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Proj. Adopted Restated Revised Restated Act. Restated FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance General Fund (100) 4811 - Contingencies General Contingencies 4811 - Reserved Items CIP Contingency Performance Incentive Health Care Consultant Reserve Materials Management E-Procurement Relocations/New Facility Start-Up Technology Projects Parks Trails $ 36,054,537 $ 26,484,825 $ - $ 27,603,548 $ (1,118,723) $ 10,633,619 $ 5,000,000 640,000 1,500,000 3,000,000 56,828,156 $ 8,387,555 $ 5,000,000 640,000 1,500,000 2,966,000 44,978,380 $ - $ $ 8,321,300 $ 1,500,000 1,500,000 10,000,000 1,000,000 49,924,848 $ 66,255 5,000,000 (1,500,000) 640,000 (7,034,000) (1,000,000) (4,946,468) $ 50,000 18,000,000 6,704,666 829,209 21,100 624,433 728,436 382,190 53,180 27,393,214 $ $ 50,000 500,000 84,000 3,000,000 200,000 5,000 34,000 2,374,000 18,000,000 6,704,666 829,209 21,100 624,433 728,436 13,371 75,000 10,747 88,518 382,190 17,901 33,742,571 $ $ 50,000 1,750,000 27,500,000 12,000,000 1,672,381 500,000 500,000 130,000 84,000 1,618,771 5,000 34,000 2,374,000 3,335,571 638,812 65,000 10,000 331,250 13,371 55,000 10,747 134,740 88,518 143,253 208,190 53,252,604 $ 1,000,000 $ 119,424 11,826,270 1,100,000 7,750,000 45,000,000 5,525,876 2,019,131 1,827,619 500,000 20,000,000 3,369,095 528,665 614,433 397,186 20,000 624,854 231,600 174,000 56,809 1,000,000 500,000 850,000 37,650 105,072,612 $ (1,000,000) 50,000 (119,424) (11,826,270) (1,100,000) (7,750,000) (45,000,000) (5,525,876) (2,019,131) (1,827,619) (500,000) 500,000 84,000 3,000,000 (20,000,000) 200,000 5,000 34,000 2,374,000 18,000,000 3,335,571 300,544 21,100 10,000 331,250 13,371 55,000 10,747 (624,854) (231,600) 88,518 208,190 (38,908) (1,000,000) (500,000) (850,000) (37,650) (71,330,041) Subtotal $ 4812-Other Programs West Nile Virus Communications: Video Prod. Equip. Adult Probation: North Central Lease Delivery System Operating Subsidy Health Plans Operating Subsidy 541 ALTCS Operating Subsidy 551 Senior Select Operating Subsidy 566 Health Plans Potential Losses Benefits Trust Reserve Health Select Reserve Health Care District Consultant ASRS Contributions Not Withheld Courts Master Plan Clerk of the Superior Court Financial System Study Environmental Services – Vector Control Vehicles Special Health Care District Election Unfunded Liabilities Check Enforcement Program Reserve Declaration of Independence Road Trip County Attorney Software Establish Employee Health Plan Reserve Financial System Upgrades Pre-Paid Enterprise Software License 2004 NACO Conference Finance: Info Advantage Carryover Sheriff Central Service Complex Voice System Sheriff: Records Management System Sheriff: Boathouse Grant Match (Canyon and Saguaro Lakes) Sheriff: Boating Safety Aid Stn/Education Ctr Grant Match Sheriff: Wants and Warrants RMS Module Grant Match Sheriff: Helicopter Engine Repair Sheriff: Patrol Staffing Equip/Supplies County Contribution: Mid-Decade Special Census Survey Gainsharing Program Awards United Behavioral Health Payment Maricopa Regional Trails Staffing and Operations Parks & Rec.:Guadalupe Road Bridge Grant Match Special Health Care District Transition Compensation Project CIO Chambers Lease Clerk of the Court: Dependency Growth Start-up Equipment $ Subtotal $ 92 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Appropriated Fund Balance Expenditure Summary (Continued) Description General Fund (100) (Continued) 4813-Infrastructure/CIP Administration Building Tenant Improvements Black Canyon Tenant Improvement Buckeye Hills Regional Park Public Shooting Range Design Master Plans Property Acqusition Transfer to Intergovernmental Capital Projects (422) Transfer to General Fund County Improvement (445) Purchase of 32nd St. & Van Buren Property Purchase of State Black Canyon Building FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Proj. Adopted Restated Revised Restated Act. Restated $ Adopted vs Revised Variance $ 25,200,000 7,532,477 3,000,000 1,800,000 37,532,477 $ 3,800,000 $ 24,200,000 9,032,477 3,000,000 1,800,000 41,832,477 $ 273,665 $ 1,338,388 9,032,477 3,000,000 1,800,000 15,444,530 $ 2,330,000 $ 300,000 90,000 500,000 20,980,531 1,638,390 51,000 25,889,921 $ 1,470,000 (300,000) (90,000) (500,000) 3,219,469 (1,638,390) 9,032,477 2,949,000 1,800,000 15,942,556 Subtotal $ 21,492 $ 6,922,624 6,944,116 $ 21,492 $ 5,586,701 5,608,193 $ 21,492 $ 14,588 1,200,000 3,686,701 4,922,781 $ $ 36,020 511,000 805,000 1,900,000 3,252,020 21,492 (36,020) (511,000) (805,000) 3,686,701 2,356,173 $ Subtotal $ - - - $ $ 100,000 $ 100,000 (100,000) (100,000) Subtotal $ 8,795,000 $ 9,000,279 $ 6,847,502 $ 12,449,868 $ (3,449,589) Total General Fund $ 137,492,963 $ 135,161,900 $ 80,467,417 $ 196,689,269 $ (61,527,369) Subtotal $ 4814-Technology Projects Material Management E-Procurement County Attorney - County Counsel Case Management System Constables: licensing software and hardware Schools New Financial System HR Imaging System HR System Upgrades (The Eagle Project) 4824-Consultants Financial Consultant FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ $ $ $ 4832-Major Maintenance 93 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Appropriated Fund Balance Expenditure Summary (Continued) FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Proj. Adopted Restated Revised Restated Act. Restated Description FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted vs Revised Variance Detention Fund (255) 4811 - Contingencies General Contingencies $ 5,000,000 $ 6,059,445 $ - $ 33,272,410 $ 5,734,506 44,006,916 $ 19,120,836 $ 441,000 1,204,587 26,825,868 $ - Subtotal $ 472,750 $ 30,000 8,279,771 450,000 505,000 48,585,819 58,323,340 $ 472,750 $ 30,000 8,279,771 461,866 3,624,964 12,227,548 50,000 450,000 97,231 505,000 280,000 200,000 13,888 829,731 328,407 48,585,819 272,000 76,708,975 $ $ 8,109 452,595 2,390,806 3,344,044 99,826 69,000 32,348 191,192 280,000 197,450 13,888 785,559 21,967 48,585,819 272,000 56,744,603 $ 472,750 $ 21,891 8,279,771 1,507,368 8,883,504 381,000 64,883 2,341,360 1,515,135 313,808 2,550 44,172 306,440 47,591,538 71,726,170 $ 8,109 461,866 2,117,596 3,344,044 50,000 69,000 32,348 (2,341,360) (1,515,135) 191,192 280,000 197,450 13,888 785,559 21,967 994,281 272,000 4,982,805 Subtotal $ 2,988,000 $ 2,988,000 $ 775,973 $ 5,250,716 $ (2,262,716) Total Detention Fund $ 105,318,256 $ 106,522,843 $ 57,520,576 $ 95,038,389 $ 11,484,454 Total All Funds $ 242,811,219 $ 241,684,743 $ 137,987,993 $ 291,727,658 $ (50,042,915) 4811 - Reserved Items New Facility Start-Up Sheriff: Jail Surveillance System Reserved Contingency, Jail Projects Subtotal $ 4812-Other Programs Sheriff: Records Management System Sheriff: New Jail Pre-Booking System Sheriff: Central Service Complex Voice System Sheriff’s Office: Estrella Support Video Visitation System Sheriff: Jail Surveillance System Sheriff's Office New Detention Facility Start-up Durango Jail: Temporary Bunk Beds Relocations Correctional Health: Secured Network Correctional Health: New Facility Start Up Costs Correctional Health: New Facility Pharmacy Equipment Telecom: Durango Juvenile Court and Detention Telecom: Durango Facilities Management Telecom: Durango Parks Building Telecom: Residential Treatment Center Telecom: Adult Facilities Data Equipment Telecom: Mesa Juvenile Court & Detention Detention Fund Transfer New Facility Start-Up Expense-FMD $ $ $ 6,415,916 $ 10,000,000 441,000 1,204,587 18,061,503 (356,471) 9,120,836 8,764,365 4832-Major Maintenance 94 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Major Maintenance Project Summary YEAR 1 FY 2004-05 YEAR 2 FY 2005-06 YEAR 3 FY 2006-07 YEAR 4 FY 2007-08 YEAR 5 FY 2008-09 5-YEAR TOTAL 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Ongoing Major Maintenance General Fund (Fund 100) Annual County-wide Maintenance Programs $ Administration Building Infrastructure Improvements Adult Probation Day Reporting Center Infrastructure Improvements MCSO/Substation Infrastructure Improvements Clerk of Court Improvements (Jackson St) Durango Courts Building Infrastructure Improvements Central Courts Building Infrastructure Improvements Old Courthouse Buliding Improvements Program FEES Code Compliance Reserve MCSO/Substation Improvements Non Project Subtotal General Fund Projects (Fund 100) $ 3,600,000 $ 100,000 34,000 33,000 150,000 100,000 210,000 170,146 1,180,000 330,000 33,000 290,000 6,230,146 $ 5,000,000 $ 1,000,000 1,080,000 330,000 7,410,000 $ 5,000,000 $ 1,080,000 330,000 6,410,000 $ 5,000,000 $ 1,080,000 330,000 6,410,000 $ 5,000,000 $ 1,080,000 330,000 6,410,000 $ 23,600,000 100,000 34,000 33,000 150,000 100,000 210,000 1,170,146 5,500,000 1,650,000 33,000 290,000 32,870,146 Detention Fund (Fund 255) Annual Detention Facilities Maintenance Programs $ Durango Juvenile Probation Building Infrastructure Improvements Durango Jail Building Infrastructure Improvements Code Compliance Reserve Towers Jail Building Infrastructure Improvements Subtotal Detention Fund Projects (Fund 255) $ 1,400,000 $ 525,000 480,000 400,800 1,300,300 4,106,100 $ 1,800,000 $ 500,000 400,800 400,000 3,100,800 $ 2,200,000 $ 500,000 400,800 400,000 3,500,800 $ 2,600,000 $ 400,800 3,000,800 $ 3,000,000 $ 400,800 3,400,800 $ 11,000,000 525,000 1,480,000 2,004,000 2,100,300 17,109,300 TOTAL - 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT $ 10,336,246 $ 10,510,800 $ 9,910,800 $ 9,410,800 $ 9,810,800 $ 49,979,446 330,000 $ 125,000 130,000 200,000 120,000 1,718,000 35,279 3,910,000 650,000 250,000 230,000 3,581,589 500,000 140,000 530,000 12,449,868 $ 1,150,000 $ 100,000 1,000,000 500,000 4,850,000 1,575,000 40,000 350,000 500,000 250,000 500,000 35,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 12,850,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 100,000 750,000 500,000 5,000,000 2,000,000 100,000 750,000 250,000 500,000 1,000,000 500,000 12,450,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 100,000 500,000 500,000 5,000,000 2,000,000 100,000 750,000 250,000 500,000 1,000,000 500,000 12,200,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 100,000 250,000 500,000 5,000,000 2,000,000 100,000 500,000 250,000 500,000 1,000,000 500,000 11,700,000 $ 4,480,000 525,000 130,000 200,000 120,000 4,218,000 2,000,000 35,279 23,760,000 650,000 7,575,000 250,000 340,000 2,580,000 1,250,000 250,000 5,581,589 35,000 4,500,000 140,000 3,030,000 61,649,868 Durango Complex Infrastructure Improvements $ Durango Juvenile Probation Building Infrastructure Improvements Durango Jail Building Infrastructure Improvements Estrella Jail Improvements SE Juvenile Detention Improvements Towers Jail Improvements Subtotal Detention Fund Projects (Fund 255) $ 1,163,000 $ 150,000 1,229,716 1,508,000 900,000 300,000 5,250,716 $ $ 1,000,000 250,000 1,500,000 300,000 1,500,000 4,550,000 $ $ 500,000 250,000 1,500,000 750,000 1,500,000 4,500,000 $ $ 500,000 1,500,000 500,000 1,500,000 4,000,000 $ $ 500,000 1,500,000 500,000 1,500,000 4,000,000 $ 1,163,000 2,650,000 1,729,716 7,508,000 2,950,000 6,300,000 22,300,716 TOTAL - 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE $ 17,700,584 $ 17,400,000 $ 16,950,000 $ 16,200,000 $ 15,700,000 $ 83,950,584 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE Ongoing Major Maintenance General Fund (Fund 100) Administration Building Improvements $ Adult Probation - Black Canyon Improvements Adult Probation - Durango Bartlett Lake Improvements Blue Point Building Infrastructure Improvements Durango Complex Infrastructure Improvements Durango Courts Building Infrastructure Improvements Estrella Campground Design East Courts Building Infrastructure Improvements Emergency Services Administration Improvements Central Courts Building Infrastructure Improvements Lake Pleasant Improvements Northwest Regional Center Old Court House Building Improvements S.E. MCSO Substation Infrastructure Improvement S.E. Regional Infrastructure Improvement Security Center Building Infrastructure Improvements Southport Probation Offices West Court Building Infrastructure Improvements West Mesa Justice Court Non Project Subtotal General Fund Projects (Fund 100) $ Detention Fund (Fund 255) 95 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Health Care Mandates Revenue and Expenditure Detail Report Description Department 390 General Fund (100) Revenues Disproportionate Share Refund Disproportionate Indigent Compensation Long Term Residual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated Revised Vs Adopted Variance FY 2004-05 Adopted $ 101,760,800 $ 52,848 101,760,800 $ 52,848 101,760,800 $ 2,951 35,858 82,972,500 $ 52,848 18,788,300 - Total General Fund Revenue $ 101,813,648 $ 101,813,648 $ 101,799,609 $ 83,025,348 $ 18,788,300 Expenditures Administration $ 2,164,311 $ 2,166,855 $ 3,179,806 $ 2,548,142 $ (381,287) Pre-AHCCCS Liability Management $ 1,417,187 $ 1,467,285 $ 1,272,620 $ 1,520,096 $ (52,811) ALTCS Contribution $ 110,407,500 $ 110,407,460 $ 110,407,460 $ 125,610,000 $ (15,202,540) AHCCCS Contribution $ 45,477,486 $ 45,669,938 $ 45,669,938 $ 45,741,085 $ (71,147) Mental Health Arnold v. Sarn $ General Mental Health IGA/Non-SMI Mental Health Orders Mental Health Testimony Subtotal $ 28,500,000 $ 5,099,404 50,000 220,000 33,869,404 $ 28,500,000 $ 5,099,404 50,000 220,000 33,869,404 $ 28,399,999 $ 5,018,459 36,470 288,865 33,743,793 $ 30,010,500 $ 5,099,404 50,000 220,000 35,379,904 $ (1,510,500) (1,510,500) MMC Teaching Program Subsidy $ 3,547,900 $ 3,547,900 $ 3,547,900 $ 3,547,900 $ Disproportionate Share Match $ 101,760,800 $ 101,760,800 $ 101,760,800 $ 82,972,500 $ Public Health TB Hospitalization $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 456,623 $ 500,000 $ Sail Grant Matching Funds (3) $ 679,789 $ 679,789 $ 679,789 $ - Long Term Care Residual $ 180,463 $ 180,463 $ 193,389 $ 180,463 $ Disproportionate Indigent Compensation $ 24,164,844 $ 24,014,205 $ 12,645,920 $ 23,129,895 $ MIHS Operating Subsidy (1) $ 11,826,270 $ 11,826,270 $ 11,826,270 $ Total General Fund Expenditures $ 335,995,954 $ 336,090,369 $ 325,384,308 $ (1) For FY 2004-05, Funding Transferred to Appropriated Fund Balance (2) Correctional Health Claims and Restoration to Competency have been moved to Correctional Health Services (3) SAIL Grant Matching Funds have been moved to Human Services. 96 - $ 18,788,300 679,789 884,310 $ 11,826,270 321,129,985 $ 14,960,384 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Results Initiatives Requests Summary RESULTS INITIATIVES REQUESTS FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2005-06 (Ongoing) FY 2004-05 Adopted FY 2005-06 (Ongoing) ALL FUNDS 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH Baseline Staffing 270 JUVENILE PROBATION Durango Facility Staffing $ SUB TOTAL $ 1,674,672 $ 1,674,672 $ 1,615,108 $ 1,674,672 $ 1,615,108 $ 1,674,672 $ 1,748,720 1,748,720 $ SUB TOTAL $ 4,468,365 $ 4,468,365 $ 4,403,564 $ 3,587,756 $ 4,403,564 $ 3,587,756 $ 4,403,564 4,403,564 300 PARKS & RECREATION Maricopa Regional Trails Staffing and Operations SUB TOTAL 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Durango Juvenile Facility Lower Buckeye Jail MCSO Vehicles 4th Avenue Jail SUB TOTAL 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE Maricopa Regional Trails Staffing and Operations SUB TOTAL 500 SHERIFF Baseline Staffing SUB TOTAL 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Durango Juvenile Facility Lower Buckeye Jail NE Superior Court/Justice Court Expansion Property & Evidence Warehouse Public Health Clinic 4th Avenue Jail SUB TOTAL 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Air Quality Study Mobile Food Inspections Storm Water Abatement West Nile Virus SUB TOTAL $ $ 179,045 $ 179,045 $ $ $ 580,840 $ 2,581,340 981,667 2,006,700 6,150,547 $ $ $ - $ $ 4,677,496 $ 4,677,496 $ 4,680,496 $ 3,606,946 $ 4,680,496 $ 3,606,946 $ 4,680,496 4,680,496 $ 794,494 $ 2,021,635 88,694 110,254 54,900 1,746,524 4,816,501 $ 650,994 $ 728,162 $ 1,734,635 1,955,302 235,415 88,694 81,554 110,254 228,881 54,900 1,488,224 1,418,714 4,419,703 $ 4,356,026 $ 650,994 1,734,635 235,415 81,554 228,881 1,488,224 4,419,703 $ $ $ TOTAL INITIATIVES $ $ $ $ 332,673 147,667 480,340 $ - $ $ - $ $ 580,840 $ 580,840 $ 2,581,340 2,581,340 981,667 981,667 2,006,700 2,006,700 6,150,547 $ 6,150,547 $ - $ $ $ 292,423 292,423 $ 174,000 $ 174,000 $ 300,000 $ 283,108 583,108 $ 580,840 2,581,340 981,667 2,006,700 6,150,547 - 195,508 195,508 22,446,966 $ 21,561,841 $ 20,133,055 $ 21,598,538 97 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Results Initiatives Requests Summary (Continued) RESULTS INITIATIVES REQUESTS FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2005-06 (Ongoing) FY 2004-05 Adopted FY 2005-06 (Ongoing) GENERAL FUND 300 PARKS & RECREATION Maricopa Regional Trails Staffing and Operations SUB TOTAL 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE Maricopa Regional Trails Staffing and Operations SUB TOTAL 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT NE Superior Court/Justice Court Expansion Property & Evidence Warehouse Public Health Clinic SUB TOTAL 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Storm Water Abatement West Nile Virus SUB TOTAL $ $ 179,045 $ 179,045 $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - - $ $ 174,000 $ 174,000 $ - $ 88,694 $ 110,254 54,900 253,848 $ 235,415 $ 81,554 228,881 545,850 $ 88,694 $ 110,254 54,900 253,848 $ $ 332,673 $ 147,667 480,340 $ 292,423 $ 292,423 $ - TOTAL INITIATIVES $ 913,233 $ 838,273 $ 427,848 $ $ $ 98 $ $ $ $ 235,415 81,554 228,881 545,850 545,850 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Results Initiatives Requests Summary (Continued) RESULTS INITIATIVES REQUESTS FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2005-06 (Ongoing) FY 2004-05 Adopted FY 2005-06 (Ongoing) SPECIAL REVENUE 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH Baseline Staffing 270 JUVENILE PROBATION Durango Facility Staffing 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Durango Juvenile Facility Lower Buckeye Jail MCSO Vehicles 4th Avenue Jail 500 SHERIFF Baseline Staffing 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Durango Juvenile Facility Lower Buckeye Jail 4th Avenue Jail $ SUB TOTAL $ 1,674,672 $ 1,674,672 $ 1,615,108 $ 1,674,672 $ 1,615,108 $ 1,674,672 $ 1,748,720 1,748,720 $ SUB TOTAL $ 4,468,365 $ 4,468,365 $ 4,403,564 $ 3,587,756 $ 4,403,564 $ 3,587,756 $ 4,403,564 4,403,564 $ SUB TOTAL $ 580,840 $ 2,581,340 981,667 2,006,700 6,150,547 $ 580,840 $ 580,840 $ 2,581,340 2,581,340 981,667 981,667 2,006,700 2,006,700 6,150,547 $ 6,150,547 $ 580,840 2,581,340 981,667 2,006,700 6,150,547 $ SUB TOTAL $ 4,677,496 $ 4,677,496 $ 4,680,496 $ 3,606,946 $ 4,680,496 $ 3,606,946 $ 4,680,496 4,680,496 $ 794,494 $ 2,021,635 1,746,524 4,562,653 $ 650,994 $ 728,162 $ 1,734,635 1,955,302 1,488,224 1,418,714 3,873,853 $ 4,102,178 $ 650,994 1,734,635 1,488,224 3,873,853 SUB TOTAL $ 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Air Quality Study Mobile Food Inspections $ - SUB TOTAL $ TOTAL INITIATIVES $ $ $ - $ $ 300,000 $ 283,108 583,108 $ 195,508 195,508 21,533,733 $ 20,723,568 $ 19,705,207 $ 21,052,688 99 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Eliminations Summary Eliminations are included in the budget to offset amounts budgeted as expenditures in one fund that are associated with offsetting revenues and expenditures in another fund. Interdepartmental charges from the Reprographics (print shop) fund to various County departments are one example. Departments pay the print shop for services, and these costs are included in departments’ budgeted expenditures, supported by revenues from sources external to the County. The print shop, in turn, budgets these payments as revenue, along with expenditures related to the cost of providing printing services. The expenditure and revenue is therefore budgeted twice within the overall budget. Budgeting eliminations removes these duplicated revenues and expenditures from the budget as a whole in order to provide a more accurate picture of total expenditures and revenues. The following schedule lists the various items that are eliminated in the budget: FY 2003-04 Adopted Restated DESCRIPTION Maricopa County: Fund Transfers (see schedule) FY 2003-04 Revised Restated FY 2003-04 Proj. Act. Restated $ 385,856,944 $ 389,769,396 $ 413,080,201 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted Variance Rev./Adopted 412,946,705 $ % 23,177,309 5.9% Payments from Departments to Benefits Trust Fund for EmployerPaid Health & Dental Premiums 15,495,079 15,495,079 14,202,021 16,370,754 875,675 5.7% Internal Service Charges 47,407,631 47,293,003 48,332,015 50,375,372 3,082,369 6.5% Payments from Correctional Health to Health System 5,500,000 5,500,000 7,537,604 3,961,426 (1,538,574) -28.0% Payments from Health Care Mandates to Health System for Public Health TB Hospitalization 500,000 500,000 456,623 500,000 Payments from Maricopa Health Plans to Health System for Patient Services and Attendant Care 65,784,574 65,784,574 70,100,269 82,891,840 17,107,266 26.0% Payments from Departments to Health Select Self-Insured Trust Fund for Employer Health Premiums 12,981,026 12,981,026 12,981,026 16,024,537 3,043,511 23.4% 2,812,479 2,812,479 2,996,988 3,563,766 751,287 26.7% Payments from Health Select to Health System for Patient Services and Attendant Care Subtotal Maricopa County $ 536,337,733 $ 540,135,557 $ 569,686,747 $ Flood Control District: Capital Projects Fund Transfer 586,634,400 $ 46,498,843 0.0% 54,000,000 $ 52,644,000 $ 63,446,899 $ 9,446,899 17.5% 1,594,274 $ 1,287,657 $ 1,660,137 $ 65,863 4.1% Total Maricopa County & Districts $ 591,932,007 $ 595,729,831 $ 623,618,404 $ 651,741,436 $ 56,011,605 9.4% Stadium District: Cap. Projects, Debt Service Fund Tansfers $ 54,000,000 $ - $ 1,594,274 $ 100 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Transfers In by Fund TRANSFERS BY FUND Transfers In GENERAL FUND Dispro. Share Match Reimbursement Central Service Allocation Transfer from General Fund County Improvement Transfer from General Obligation Bond Fund Transfer from County Improvement Debt Fund SPECIAL REVENUE 236 RECORDER'S SURCHARGE Transfer from General Fund County Improvement FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 ADOPTED REVISED FY 2003-04 PROJ. RESTATED RESTATED ACT. RESTATED 111,438,854 $ $ 111,088,120 $ 111,126,572 $ 101,760,800 101,760,800 101,760,800 9,327,320 9,365,772 9,365,772 312,282 - $ FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 133,499,730 82,972,500 9,955,777 7,563,001 33,008,452 121,718,713 $ - 121,718,713 $ - 121,826,713 $ - 133,418,891 70,000 70,000 241 PARKS ENHANCEMENT FUND Transfer from Parks Souvenir Fund $ 17,000 $ 17,000 17,000 $ 17,000 25,000 $ 25,000 17,000 17,000 248 SAIL GRANTS SAIL Grant Match from General Fund $ 679,789 $ 679,789 679,789 $ 679,789 679,789 $ 679,789 - 250 CACTUS LEAGUE OPERATIONS Transfer from Stadium District Debt Service $ 110,000 $ 110,000 110,000 $ 110,000 210,000 $ 210,000 110,000 110,000.00 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS Jail Excise Tax Maintenance of Effort $ 120,866,924 $ 120,866,924 120,866,924 $ 120,866,924 120,866,924 $ 120,866,924 133,176,891 133,176,891 265 PUBLIC HEALTH FEES Vital Statistics $ 45,000 $ 45,000 121,718,713 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 121,718,713 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 121,826,713 $ 45,000 45,000 133,418,891 $ 847,711 847,711 $ 847,711 847,711 847,711 $ 847,711 847,711 847,711 $ 847,711 3,443,111 - 320 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DEBT $ COPS and Capital Lease Refinancing DEBT SERVICE $ $ 847,711 $ $ 847,711 $ $ 847,711 $ 3,443,111 3,443,111 3,443,111 SPECIAL REVENUE $ DEBT SERVICE 312 BOND-DEBT SERVICE Central Service Allocation 101 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Transfers In by Fund (Continued) CAPITAL PROJECTS 234 TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECT Transfer from Transportaiton Operating Fund FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 ADOPTED REVISED FY 2003-04 PROJ. RESTATED RESTATED ACT. RESTATED 168,602,570 170,102,570 171,524,410 $ 57,000,000 $ 57,000,000 $ 57,000,000 $ 57,000,000 57,000,000 57,000,000 422 INTERGOVERNMENTAL CAP PROJ Transfer from General Fund $ - $ - $ - 435 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT FUND Transfer from Health Care Delivery System $ - $ - $ 3,184,457 $ 3,184,457 - 445 GENERAL FUND CTY IMPROV Transfer from General Fund Project Reserve $ 7,532,477 $ 7,532,477 9,032,477 $ 9,032,477 9,032,477 $ 9,032,477 - 450 LONG TERM PROJECT RESERVE Transfer from MLB Operations Fund $ 1,484,274 $ 1,484,274 1,484,274 $ 1,484,274 1,077,657 $ 1,077,657 1,550,137 1,550,137 455 DETENTION CAPITAL PROJECTS Transfer from Detention Operations Fund $ 48,585,819 $ 48,585,819 48,585,819 $ 48,585,819 48,585,819 $ 48,585,819 47,591,538 47,591,538 990 FLOOD CONTROL CAPITAL PROJECTS $ Transfer from Flood Control Operating Fund CAPITAL PROJECTS $ 54,000,000 $ 54,000,000 168,602,570 $ 54,000,000 $ 54,000,000 170,102,570 $ 52,644,000 $ 52,644,000 171,524,410 $ 63,446,899 63,446,899 175,922,832 39,194,104 31,675,281 $ 11,826,270 3,547,900 8,021,763 6,333,433 1,945,915 39,194,104 29,398,956 $ 11,826,270 3,547,900 5,745,438 6,333,433 1,945,915 56,624,170 15,374,170 $ 11,826,270 3,547,900 - 24,224,170 15,374,170 11,826,270 3,547,900 1,100,000 1,100,000 ENTERPRISE 535 HEALTHCARE DELIVERY SYSTEM Operating Subsidy from General Fund Teaching Program Subsidy from General Fund Transfer from ALTCS Fund Transfer from Health Plan Fund Transfer from Non-AHCCCS Health Plans $ $ FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 175,922,832 61,695,868 61,695,868 1,638,390 1,638,390 541 HEALTH PLAN Transfer from General Fund to Cover Deficit $ - $ - $ 1,750,000 $ 1,750,000 551 LONG TERM CARE PLAN Transfer from General Fund to Cover Deficit $ - $ - $ 27,500,000 $ 27,500,000 9,795,148 $ 9,795,148 39,194,104 $ 12,000,000 $ 12,000,000 56,624,170 $ 7,750,000 7,750,000 24,224,170 2,374,000 $ - 2,374,000 $ - 7,545,007 2,019,131 2,019,131 2,374,000 $ 2,374,000 2,374,000 $ 2,374,000 $ 2,374,000 2,374,000 $ 5,525,876 5,525,876 7,545,007 566 SENIOR SELECT PLAN $ Transfer from ALTCS Fund Transfer from General Fund to Cover Deficit ENTERPRISE $ INTERNAL SERVICE 652 HS SELF-INSURED TRUST FUND Transfer from General Fund for Reserves 7,518,823 $ 7,518,823 39,194,104 $ $ - 685 BENEFITS TRUST $ Transfer from General Fund Transfer from General Fund for Reserves INTERNAL SERVICE $ - 102 $ $ $ - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Transfers In by Fund (Continued) FY 2003-04 ADOPTED RESTATED ELIMINATIONS Maricopa County Flood Control District Library District Stadium District $ (441,451,218) $ (385,856,944) (54,000,000) (1,594,274) 103 FY 2003-04 REVISED RESTATED FY 2003-04 PROJ. ACT. RESTATED (445,363,670) $ (389,769,396) (54,000,000) (1,594,274) (464,635,858) $ (410,704,201) (52,644,000) (1,287,657) FY 2004-05 ADOPTED (478,053,741) (412,946,705) (63,446,899) (1,660,137) Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Transfers Out by Fund TRANSFERS BY FUND Transfers Out GENERAL FUND Jail Excise Tax Maintenance of Effort Transfer to General Fund County Improvement Health Care Delivery System Operating Subsidy Health Care Delivery System Teaching Program Subsidy SAIL Grant Match Public Health Vital Statistics Transfer to Health Select Transfer to Health Plans to Cover Deficit Transfer to ALTCS to Cover Deficit Transfer to Senior Select to Cover Deficit General Govn't COPS/Capital Lease Refinancing MCSO COPS/Capital Lease Refinancing Medical Examiner COPS/Capital Lease Refinancing Transfer to Benefits Trust Fund for Reserves Transfer to Health Select Fund for Reserves Transfer to Intergov. Capital Projects SPECIAL REVENUE 207 PALO VERDE Central Service Allocation - General Fund FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 REVISED FY 2003-04 PROJ. ADOPTED RESTATED ACT RESTATED RESTATED $ 144,498,360 $ 148,372,360 $ 189,622,360 120,866,924 120,866,924 120,866,924 7,532,477 9,032,477 9,032,477 11,826,270 11,826,270 11,826,270 3,547,900 3,547,900 3,547,900 679,789 679,789 679,789 45,000 45,000 45,000 2,374,000 2,374,000 1,750,000 27,500,000 12,000,000 - $ 168,372,851 $ - 215 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ - 217 CDBG, HOUSING TRUST Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 21,225 $ 21,225 222 HUMAN SERVICES GRANTS Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 226 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FEES Central Service Allocation - General Fund Central Service Allocation - Debt Service 21,225 $ 21,225 21,225 $ 21,225 26,824 26,824 319,802 $ 319,802 358,254 $ 358,254 358,254 $ 358,254 744,223 744,223 $ 254,112 $ 233,538 20,574 254,112 $ 233,538 20,574 254,112 $ 233,538 20,574 295,744 295,744 - 232 TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS Central Service Allocation - General Fund Central Service Allocation - Debt Service Transportation CIP Transfer $ 59,006,719 $ 1,835,655 171,064 57,000,000 59,006,719 $ 1,835,655 171,064 57,000,000 59,006,719 $ 1,835,655 171,064 57,000,000 63,091,909 1,396,041 61,695,868 235 DEL WEBB SPECIAL FUND Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 239 PARKS SOUVENIR FUND Transfer to Parks Enhancement Fund $ 17,000 $ 17,000 240 LAKE PLEASANT RECREATION SVCS Central Service Allocation - Debt Service $ 244 LIBRARY DISTRICT Central Service Allocation - General Fund Central Service Allocation - Debt Service $ 104 - $ $ - 181,497,049 20,527 20,527 58,642 58,642 $ - 166,656,686 $ $ - $ 168,411,303 $ - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 169,199,149 133,176,891 11,826,270 3,547,900 45,000 1,100,000 7,750,000 2,425,734 108,571 35,386 5,525,876 2,019,131 1,638,390 - $ 6,543 6,543 17,000 $ 17,000 25,000 $ 25,000 17,000 17,000 60,366 $ 60,366 60,366 $ 60,366 60,366 $ 60,366 - 681,388 $ 680,066 1,322 681,388 $ 680,066 1,322 681,388 $ 680,066 1,322 706,043 706,043 - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Transfers Out by Fund (Continued) FY 2003-04 REVISED RESTATED FY 2003-04 ADOPTED RESTATED SPECIAL REVENUE (Continued) 250 CACTUS LEAGUE OPERATIONS Central Service Allocation - General Fund FY 2003-04 PROJ. ACT RESTATED FY 2004-05 ADOPTED $ 14,803 $ 14,803 14,803 $ 14,803 14,803 $ 14,803 441 441 253 BALLPARK OPERATIONS Central Service Allocation - General Fund Transfer to B.O.B. Long Term Reserve $ 1,505,724 $ 21,450 1,484,274 1,505,724 $ 21,450 1,484,274 1,099,107 $ 21,450 1,077,657 1,584,437 34,300 1,550,137 255 DETENTION OPERATIONS Transfer to Detention Capital Projects $ 48,585,819 $ 48,585,819 48,585,819 $ 48,585,819 48,585,819 $ 48,585,819 47,591,538 47,591,538 260 RESEARCH & REPORTING Central Service Allocation - General Fund Central Service Allocation - Debt Service $ 33,125 $ 32,604 521 33,125 $ 32,604 521 33,125 $ 32,604 521 31,636 31,636 - 265 PUBLIC HEALTH FEES Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 164,238 $ 164,238 164,238 $ 164,238 164,238 $ 164,238 264,333 264,333 290 WASTE TIRE Central Service Allocation - General Fund Central Service Allocation - Debt Service $ 146,117 $ 23,001 123,116 146,117 $ 23,001 123,116 146,117 $ 23,001 123,116 39,654 39,654 - 504 AIR QUALITY FEES Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 293,938 $ 293,938 293,938 $ 293,938 293,938 $ 293,938 181,440 181,440 505 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GRANT Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ - - - $ 54,410 54,410 506 ENVIRONMTL SVCS ENV HEALTH Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 293,938 $ 293,938 293,938 $ 293,938 293,938 $ 293,938 328,286 328,286 532 PUBLIC HEALTH GRANTS Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 1,249,820 $ 1,249,820 1,249,820 $ 1,249,820 1,249,820 $ 1,249,820 1,468,012 1,468,012 572 ANIMAL CONTROL LICENSE/SHELTER Central Service Allocation - General Fund Central Service Allocation - Debt Service $ 347,268 $ 345,564 1,704 347,268 $ 345,564 1,704 347,268 $ 345,564 1,704 407,297 407,297 - 574 ANIMAL CONTROL FIELD OPERATION Central Service Allocation - General Fund Central Service Allocation - Debt Service $ 241,322 $ 240,138 1,184 241,322 $ 240,138 1,184 241,322 $ 240,138 1,184 199,544 199,544 - 991 FLOOD CONTROL $ Central Service Allocation - General Fund Flood Control CIP Transfer SPECIAL REVENUE $ 55,136,127 $ 1,136,127 54,000,000 168,372,851 $ 55,136,127 $ 1,136,127 54,000,000 168,411,303 $ 53,780,127 $ 1,136,127 52,644,000 166,656,686 $ 64,378,566 931,667 63,446,899 181,497,049 105 $ $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Transfers Out by Fund (Continued) DEBT SERVICE 312 BOND-DEBT SERVICE Transfer to General Fund 320 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DEBT Transfer to General Fund FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 ADOPTED REVISED FY 2003-04 PROJ. FY 2004-05 RESTATED RESTATED ACT RESTATED ADOPTED 110,000 110,000 522,282 33,118,452 $ $ $ 312,282 $ 312,282 $ - 370 STADIUM DIST DEBT SERIES02 $ Transfer to Stadium District Special Revenue Fund DEBT SERVICE $ CAPITAL PROJECTS 234 TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECT Central Service Allocation - General Fund 445 GENERAL FUND CTY IMPROV Transfer to General Fund Transfer to Recorder Surcharge $ $ - $ - $ 33,008,452 33,008,452 110,000 $ 110,000 110,000 $ 110,000 $ 110,000 110,000 $ 210,000 $ 210,000 522,282 $ 110,000 110,000 33,118,452 - - - 8,166,387 320,883 320,883 $ $ $ $ - $ - $ - $ 7,633,001 7,563,001 70,000 990 FLOOD CONTROL CAPITAL PROJECTS $ Central Service Allocation - General Fund CAPITAL PROJECTS $ - $ - $ - $ $ 212,503 212,503 8,166,387 ENTERPRISE 535 HEALTHCARE DELIVERY SYSTEM Dispro. Share Reimb. - General Fund Central Service Allocation - General Fund Central Service Allocation - Debt Service MIHS COPS/Capital Lease Refinancing Transfer to County Improvement Fund $ $ $ 125,590,186 103,269,097 $ 101,760,800 1,040,437 467,860 - 125,590,186 103,269,097 $ 101,760,800 1,040,437 467,860 - 106,900,624 106,453,554 $ 101,760,800 1,040,437 467,860 3,184,457 85,130,554 84,993,416 82,972,500 1,176,424 844,492 - 541 HEALTH PLAN Central Service Allocation - General Fund Transfer to Medical Center $ 6,395,128 $ 61,695 6,333,433 6,395,128 $ 61,695 6,333,433 61,695 $ 61,695 - 15,686 15,686 - 551 LONG TERM CARE PLAN Central Service Allocation - General Fund Transfer to Medical Center Transfer to Senior Select $ 15,867,041 $ 326,455 8,021,763 7,518,823 15,867,041 $ 326,455 5,745,438 9,795,148 326,455 $ 326,455 - 49,541 49,541 - 566 SENIOR SELECT PLAN Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 27,920 $ 27,920 27,920 $ 27,920 27,920 $ 27,920 3,329 3,329 580 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT $ Central Service Allocation - General Fund Solid Waste COPS/Capital Lease Refinancing ENTERPRISE $ 31,000 $ 31,000 125,590,186 $ 31,000 $ 31,000 125,590,186 $ 31,000 $ 31,000 106,900,624 $ 68,582 39,654 28,928 85,130,554 106 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Transfers Out by Fund (Continued) INTERNAL SERVICE 652 HS SELF-INSURED TRUST FUND Central Service Allocation - General Fund Transfer to MIHS FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 REVISED FY 2003-04 PROJ. FY 2004-05 ADOPTED RESTATED ACT RESTATED ADOPTED RESTATED 2,879,821 2,879,821 933,906 942,150 $ 1,950,968 $ 1,950,968 $ 5,053 $ 5,053 5,053 5,053 1,945,915 1,945,915 - 654 EQUIPMENT SERVICES Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 482,105 $ 482,105 482,105 $ 482,105 482,105 $ 482,105 480,618 480,618 673 REPROGRAPHICS Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 39,559 $ 39,559 39,559 $ 39,559 39,559 $ 39,559 34,130 34,130 675 RISK MANAGEMENT Central Service Allocation - General Fund $ 122,626 $ 122,626 122,626 $ 122,626 122,626 $ 122,626 114,652 114,652 681 TELECOMMUNICATIONS $ Central Service Allocation - General Fund INTERNAL SERVICE $ 284,563 $ 284,563 2,879,821 $ 284,563 $ 284,563 2,879,821 $ 284,563 $ 284,563 933,906 $ 312,750 312,750 942,150 (441,451,218) $ (385,856,944) (54,000,000) (1,594,274) (445,363,670) $ (389,769,396) (54,000,000) (1,594,274) (464,635,858) $ (410,704,201) (52,644,000) (1,287,657) (478,053,741) (412,946,705) (63,446,899) (1,660,137) ELIMINATIONS Maricopa County Flood Control District Library District Stadium District $ 107 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Direct Assessment Special Districts Secondary Roll MARICOPA COUNTY DIRECT ASSESSMENT SPECIAL DISTRICTS SECONDARY ROLL FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 DIST. NO. DISTRICT NAME Grandview Manor Fairview Lane ESTIMATED 2004-05 LESS 2004-05 2003-04 EXPENDITURES BUDGET AVAILABLE DIRECT LEVY PURPOSE BUDGET 2003-04 REQUEST FUNDS ASSESSMENT Bond Interest $ 2,804 $ 2,804 $ 955 $ - $ 955 Bond redemption 14,448 14,448 21,213 21,213 $ 17,252 $ 17,252 $ 22,168 $ - $ 22,168 Bond Interest Bond redemption $ $ East Fairview Lane Bond Interest Bond redemption $ $ White Fence Farms Bond Interest Bond redemption $ $ 104th Place/University Dr. Bond Interest Bond redemption $ $ Queen Creek Water Improv Bond Interest Bond redemption $ $ Central Ave Bond Interest Bond redemption $ $ Billings Street Bond Interest Bond redemption $ $ Marquerite Drive Bond Interest Bond redemption $ 129th Avenue 14th Street 192nd Ave. Beautiful Arizona Estates Circle City Community Park Desert Foothills North Eagle Peak Estrella Dells Mallory Queen Creek Water Improv West Phoenix Estates 10 General General General General General General General General General General General 1,420 3,308 4,728 3,514 8,508 12,022 2,046 4,482 6,528 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 4,370 6,402 10,772 $ 10,283 10,283 $ 341 341 $ $ $ $ 4,079 6,067 10,146 $ $ 123 1,172 2,522 27,792 13,800 15,340 1,843 74,828 1,096 40,000 10,125 $ 261,987 $ 28530 28531 28548 28547 28795 28546 28535 28529 28533 28793 28539 585 688 1,273 108 585 688 1,273 1,420 3,308 4,728 3,514 8,508 12,022 2,046 4,482 6,528 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 4,370 6,402 10,772 $ 10,283 10,283 $ 341 341 $ $ $ $ 4,079 6,067 10,146 $ $ 123 1,172 2,522 27,792 13,800 15,340 1,843 74,828 1,096 40,000 10,125 $ 261,987 $ 544 216 760 907 3,505 4,412 3,111 460 3,571 1,441 3,842 5,283 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 3,468 5,471 8,939 $ 7,228 23,631 30,859 $ 256 486 742 $ $ $ $ 3,534 6,067 9,601 $ $ 123 1,172 2,522 13,800 15,340 74,828 21,000 10,125 $ 225,245 $ - $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - $ - $ - $ $ $ $ 544 216 760 907 3,505 4,412 3,111 460 3,571 1,441 3,842 5,283 3,468 5,471 8,939 7,228 23,631 30,859 256 486 742 - $ $ - $ 123 1,172 2,522 13,800 15,340 74,828 21,000 10,125 $ - $ 225,245 $ $ 3,534 6,067 9,601 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Street Lighting Improvement District Levies Secondary Roll DIST # 13001 13003 13005 13010 13051 13056 13057 13059 13069 13070 13072 13075 13078 13079 13103 13107 13109 13121 13122 13128 13132 13147 13169 13176 13177 13178 13184 13188 13191 13203 13210 13219 13220 13221 13223 13226 13228 13247 13248 13263 13264 13268 13271 13281 13287 13288 13290 13291 13298 13303 13310 13311 13312 13315 13316 MARICOPA COUNTY STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Estimated TAX YEAR DIRECT 2004 2003-04 2004-05 TAX NET ASSESSED DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET LEVY VALUATION Sun City 38B $ 2,486 $ 2,449 $ 2,131 $ 724,350 Sunrise Unit 5 Ph 2 2,160 2,160 2,160 873,530 Golden West 2 7,891 7,961 8,357 1,797,490 Empire Gardens 2 966 975 1,027 213,500 Towne Meadows 17,451 17,589 18,497 7,181,339 The Vineyards of Mesa 8,697 8,772 9,203 1,829,700 Clark Acres 706 715 765 266,080 Country Meadows 9 15,119 14,897 15,423 2,214,400 Sun Lakes 09 2,236 2,256 2,370 770,450 Camelot Golf Club Est. 1 3,942 3,972 4,241 925,295 Desert Sands Golf & CC 3 5,201 5,250 5,598 874,320 Litchfield Park 19 4,038 3,980 4,302 1,794,100 Sunrise Meadows 1 195 197 0 5,767,778 Estate Ranchos 886 893 943 445,750 Desert Foothills Est 5 3,634 3,663 3,950 1,344,398 Desert Foothills Est 6 4,743 4,784 5,161 1,419,830 Apache Wells Mobile P 3A 1,952 1,966 2,092 208,720 Desert Sands Golf & CC 4 9,183 8,776 9,104 1,757,798 Sun Lakes 07 3,159 3,184 3,357 943,880 Litchfield Park 17 3,283 3,235 3,508 792,350 Valencia Village 6,264 6,137 6,392 1,432,989 Superstition View #1 3,235 3,260 3,435 533,600 Sun Lakes 22 3,982 4,012 4,213 3,480,580 Villa Royale 586 590 625 736,931 Coronado Acres 571 577 609 217,050 Sun Lakes 10 7,039 7,091 7,466 2,958,273 Hopeville 1,066 1,049 1,055 177,631 Sun Lakes 21 10,318 10,395 10,932 5,015,914 Dreamland Villa-19 770 775 811 335,950 Sun Lakes 19 4,862 4,905 5,161 2,311,850 Crestview Manor 770 775 956 192,800 Sun Lakes 12 7,174 7,227 7,603 2,430,333 Sun Lakes 14 5,850 5,893 6,189 2,119,250 Sun Lakes 16 &16A 9,247 9,322 9,795 3,209,600 Sun Lakes 18 12,470 12,594 13,229 4,137,530 Sun Lakes 11 & 11A 1,313 1,323 1,392 1,079,450 Crimson Cove 1,733 1,745 1,824 174,157 Sun City 57 8,970 8,845 10,036 1,645,150 Apache Wells Mobile P 3B 2,924 2,945 3,142 627,960 Sun City 10 20,456 20,185 22,059 3,950,889 Sun Lakes 03A 1,812 1,827 1,918 463,350 Sun Lakes 08 3,085 3,114 3,274 671,350 Mesquite Trails 3,391 3,419 3,587 697,831 Sun City 10A 19,111 18,846 20,380 3,552,100 Empire Gardens 3 976 983 1,034 223,050 Empire Gardens 4 1,134 1,144 1,199 249,350 Sun Lakes 15 5,534 5,575 5,857 2,249,200 Sun City 50A 3,272 3,225 3,224 448,150 Sun City West 675,685 720,000 701,001 189,777,858 Sun Lakes 17 10,137 10,213 10,328 3,376,300 Casa Mia 2A 1,911 1,930 2,051 421,500 Pomeroy Estates 2,194 2,221 2,351 558,470 Rio Vista West 2 553 563 597 268,280 Apache Wells Mobile P 6 2,496 2,520 2,684 512,147 Sun City 44 15,008 15,789 15,611 2,469,680 109 Estimated 2004 TAX RATE $ 0.2942 0.2473 0.4913 0.5133 0.2859 0.5704 0.3146 0.7779 0.2985 0.4787 0.5631 0.2175 0.0000 0.2181 0.3166 0.4026 0.8681 0.4835 0.3365 0.4407 0.4701 0.7144 0.1173 0.0783 0.2903 0.2500 0.5810 0.2075 0.2042 0.2133 0.4896 0.2926 0.2875 0.3022 0.3189 0.1201 1.0071 0.5218 0.4156 0.4583 0.4137 0.4428 0.5623 0.4767 0.5017 0.4993 0.2524 0.6750 0.3545 0.2879 0.5497 0.4622 0.2169 0.4210 0.5776 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Street Lighting Improvement District Levies Secondary Roll (Continued) DIST # 13325 13326 13329 13330 13331 13335 13343 13346 13348 13349 13351 13352 13354 13356 13357 13358 13359 13361 13362 13363 13364 13371 13372 13374 13375 13376 13383 13386 13392 13393 13394 13395 13396 13397 13401 13402 13404 13417 13418 13419 13420 13421 13422 13423 13424 13432 13433 13434 13437 13438 13439 13440 13441 13444 13446 13447 13448 DESCRIPTION Queen Creek Plaza Rio Vista West Desert Saguaro Estates 1 Sun City 45 Sun City 46 Casa Mia 2B Knott Manor Circle City Desert Saguaro Estates 2 Sun City 47 Sun City 38 Mesa East Sun City 49 Desert Sands Golf & CC 6 Desert Sands Golf & CC 7 Sun City 38A Velda Rose Estates East 5 Sun Lakes 04 Sun Lakes 05 Sun Lakes 06 Sun City 48 Oasis Verde Sun City 15D Sun City 51 Sun City 52 Sun City 50 Sun City West Expansion Litchfield Park 18 Sun City 41 Sun City 53 Sun City 54 Sun City 55 Desert Skies 2 Sun City 56 Sun City 33 Rancho Del Sol 2 Sun City 17E F&G Western Ranchettes AZ Skies Mobile Est E2 Sun City 35 Az Skies Mobil Estates Sun City 28A Velda Rose Estates East 3 Velda Rose Estates East 4 Linda Vista Sun City 17H Sun Lakes 01 Sun Lakes 02 Granite Reef Vista Park Sun City 34 Sun City 34A Sun City 35A Sun City 36 Velda Rose Estates East 2 Apache Wells Mobil P 1&2 Apache Cntry Club Est. 5 Apache Wells Mobile P 4B 2003-04 BUDGET 1,733 4,602 3,657 11,712 7,944 2,343 1,765 2,853 1,540 16,633 2,563 18,665 16,949 2,292 3,904 2,613 2,255 5,775 11,243 9,245 13,043 6,434 4,233 10,646 11,050 6,706 128,969 3,579 10,017 26,309 16,380 17,244 1,906 3,874 19,944 2,887 8,233 2,869 2,887 24,180 3,657 2,153 940 1,315 3,453 3,542 5,679 5,945 810 3,372 16,127 14,641 5,268 1,508 13,265 3,904 953 2004-05 BUDGET 2,063 4,677 3,683 12,341 7,840 2,359 1,781 2,811 1,551 17,764 2,535 18,838 18,788 2,315 3,932 2,581 2,279 5,816 11,339 9,318 14,076 6,491 4,177 11,863 10,897 7,433 135,000 3,527 9,872 25,943 16,152 17,016 1,926 3,821 19,717 2,908 8,126 2,892 2,908 23,910 3,683 2,124 950 1,329 3,486 3,494 5,733 5,990 816 3,334 15,895 15,581 5,205 1,523 13,435 3,932 963 110 Estimated TAX YEAR DIRECT 2004 TAX NET ASSESSED LEVY VALUATION 1,823 309,150 4,923 760,880 3,880 530,550 12,211 2,193,850 8,438 1,747,132 2,524 644,000 1,855 228,850 3,250 1,389,073 1,627 443,900 17,172 2,986,887 2,514 275,500 20,006 3,279,286 17,277 3,533,900 2,477 512,421 4,166 628,339 2,568 286,900 2,399 533,000 6,110 2,349,958 11,917 2,602,432 9,790 3,086,875 13,359 3,416,985 6,827 1,156,150 4,390 345,179 11,006 2,219,175 12,535 2,407,436 6,806 1,719,900 133,627 34,549,301 3,838 1,136,900 10,490 1,754,000 29,797 6,714,819 18,846 3,781,709 19,336 3,313,600 2,030 386,550 4,149 865,912 21,977 3,641,650 3,063 1,326,530 8,594 2,219,925 3,036 615,570 3,058 236,918 26,791 4,377,625 3,950 424,584 2,280 666,700 990 266,600 1,394 194,800 3,695 568,800 3,596 755,725 6,033 1,101,295 6,297 1,124,066 858 197,950 3,597 741,900 18,053 3,428,241 15,178 3,058,200 5,602 3,494,545 1,594 342,250 14,314 2,474,193 4,145 1,588,800 1,021 198,900 Estimated 2004 TAX RATE 0.7485 0.6616 0.7965 0.5454 0.4309 0.4634 0.7599 0.2072 0.4046 0.5450 0.8370 0.5365 0.4851 0.4567 0.6271 0.7421 0.3899 0.2496 0.4977 0.3033 0.3958 0.6665 1.0279 0.4988 0.4270 0.3772 0.3597 0.3179 0.5143 0.3743 0.4039 0.4593 0.5552 0.4288 0.4789 0.2377 0.3473 0.5298 1.0983 0.5019 0.7702 0.2763 0.3571 0.6591 0.7101 0.4459 0.5958 0.6095 0.4451 0.4177 0.4280 0.4677 0.1584 0.4374 0.4601 0.2518 0.4419 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Street Lighting Improvement District Levies Secondary Roll (Continued) DIST # 13449 13450 13451 13452 13453 13454 13455 13456 13459 13460 13463 13465 13478 13485 13486 13487 13488 13490 13492 13494 13495 13496 13499 13510 13801 13802 13810 13812 13813 13816 13817 13820 13821 13825 13827 13830 13836 13837 13838 13839 13840 13844 13848 13849 13850 13851 13853 13855 13859 13862 13863 13864 13865 13868 13869 13870 13872 DESCRIPTION Caballeros Haciendas Casa Mia Desert Skies Dreamland Villa 16 Dreamland Villa 17 Linda Vista 2 Lucy T. Homesites 2 Luke Field Homes McAfee Mobile Manor Rancho Grande Tres Sun Lakes 03 Western Ranchettes 2 La Casa Bonita Sun City 32A Sun City 31A Sun City 39 Sun City 40 Brentwood Acres Desert Sands Golf & CC 8 Sun City 37 Sun City 42 Sun City 43 Sun City 28B Camelot Golf Club Est. 2 Scottsdale Estates 01 Scottsdale Highlands 1 Melville 1 Scottsdale Estates 04 Scottsdale Highlands 2 Scottsdale Estates 02 Cavalier Hidden Village Scottsdale Estates 03 Mesa Country Club Park Scottsdale Estates 05 Trail West Dreamland Villa Scottsdale Cntry Acres Cox Heights 1 Cox Heights 2 Dreamland Villa 02 Esquire Villa 1 Scottsdale Estates 07 Scottsdale Estates 06 Scottsdale Estates 08 Scottsdale Estates 09 Cox Hghts 3 & Scot Est 12 Glenmar Dreamland Villa 03 Town & Country Scottsdale Country Place at Chandler Scottsdale Highlands 4 Trail West 2 Scottsdale Estates 16 J & O Frontier Place McCormick Estates 1 Dreamland Villa 04 2003-04 BUDGET 1,212 5,765 1,525 9,809 2,976 2,911 2,815 7,225 1,517 6,437 9,259 2,851 1,240 16,326 21,960 9,293 5,452 1,540 4,888 13,049 8,568 16,425 2,510 3,331 4,765 1,723 5,458 12,451 1,904 4,999 5,963 1,528 6,763 3,059 10,180 1,523 1,705 3,627 3,441 9,573 2,487 4,969 10,505 10,668 6,915 4,412 8,781 1,879 4,860 2,031 6,427 1,169 1,909 5,726 2,407 1,447 2,148 2004-05 BUDGET 1,224 5,835 1,541 9,906 3,010 2,945 2,859 7,119 1,539 6,502 9,339 2,876 1,258 16,158 21,712 9,179 5,395 1,551 4,128 14,015 8,460 17,388 2,475 3,355 4,500 1,740 5,514 12,580 1,924 5,052 6,024 1,543 6,831 3,089 10,286 1,539 1,721 3,664 3,475 9,674 2,509 5,019 10,610 10,774 6,988 4,453 8,870 1,899 4,904 2,051 6,526 1,182 1,928 5,784 2,432 1,463 2,165 111 Estimated TAX YEAR DIRECT 2004 TAX NET ASSESSED LEVY VALUATION 1,291 382,200 6,216 992,950 1,616 265,250 10,404 2,133,330 3,169 677,800 3,093 581,150 3,038 628,982 7,460 646,168 1,617 326,939 6,829 1,639,585 9,521 1,574,197 3,022 557,000 1,319 169,920 18,399 3,753,974 24,998 4,007,456 9,574 3,392,956 5,659 1,835,550 1,635 282,950 4,850 1,152,250 13,502 2,153,954 8,850 1,271,591 17,009 2,791,450 2,702 408,350 3,584 1,311,925 5,063 1,645,496 1,835 820,650 5,792 1,741,200 13,209 4,158,950 2,025 735,100 5,363 1,926,620 6,325 2,042,187 1,625 1,306,700 7,170 3,060,600 3,250 668,200 10,840 4,221,486 1,621 674,400 1,808 290,650 3,850 1,647,400 3,664 1,456,450 10,154 3,107,450 2,635 1,384,129 5,267 895,775 11,149 3,809,770 11,311 4,014,624 7,331 2,885,226 4,675 1,481,850 9,320 3,935,300 1,998 417,250 5,155 883,400 2,153 756,300 6,848 1,934,340 1,235 481,550 2,024 868,000 6,068 1,841,450 2,548 1,030,862 1,533 338,236 2,272 435,300 Estimated 2004 TAX RATE 0.3108 0.6408 0.6221 0.4364 0.4283 0.5604 0.4841 1.0883 0.4530 0.4496 0.6694 0.6189 0.8274 0.4367 0.5203 0.2807 0.2627 0.5436 0.3526 0.5797 0.6343 0.5652 0.5160 0.2778 0.2684 0.2301 0.3417 0.3369 0.2851 0.2918 0.3146 0.1336 0.2453 0.5093 0.2699 0.2537 0.6221 0.2397 0.2670 0.3425 0.1688 0.6454 0.3142 0.2882 0.2663 0.3310 0.2458 0.5035 0.5582 0.2927 0.4009 0.2826 0.2406 0.3567 0.2461 0.4822 0.5068 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Street Lighting Improvement District Levies Secondary Roll (Continued) DIST # 13874 13875 13876 13879 13882 13884 13885 13886 13888 13890 13896 13901 13908 13909 13911 13912 13913 13916 13917 13919 13921 13922 13923 13924 13925 13926 13927 13928 13929 13930 13931 13932 13933 13934 13935 13936 13937 13938 13939 13940 13941 13942 13943 13944 13950 13951 13952 13953 13954 13955 13962 13964 13965 13966 13967 13968 13969 DESCRIPTION Hallcraft 1 Hallcraft 2 Hallcraft 3 Apache Cntry Club Est. 1 Scottsdale Cntry Acres 2 Mereway Manor Cox Heights 7 Cox Heights 6 Cox Heights 4 Dreamland Villa 05 Scottsdale Highlands 5 Velda Rose Estates 1 Apache Cntry Club Est. 3 Dreamland Villa 06 Velda Rose Estates 2 Velda Rose Estates 3 Holiday Gardens 1 Sun City 06 Sun City 05 Dreamland Villa 07 Dreamland Villa 08 Velda Rose Cntry Club Add Sun City 06C Sun City 06D Sun City 06G Sun City 07 Sun City 08 Sun City 09 Velda Rose Estates 4 Dreamland Villa 09 Sun City 11 Sun City 12 Sun City 15 Sun City 17 Sun City 01 Velda Rose Gardens Dreamland Villa 10 Sun City 15B Sun City 18 & 18A Sun City 17A Sun City 17B & 17C Sun City 19 & 20 Dreamland Villa 11 Sun City 23 Sun City 21 & 21A Dreamland Villa 12 Sun City 11A Sun City 15C Sun City 22 & 22A Apache Wells Mobile P 5 Velda Rose Estates East Sun City 14 Sun City 22B Sun City 25 Sun City 25A Sun City 27 Sun City 30 2003-04 BUDGET 25,526 15,379 10,686 7,065 5,965 5,155 1,718 1,147 4,198 5,468 1,523 1,127 10,728 3,874 1,705 1,879 160 34,349 14,431 6,014 4,150 2,420 26,057 23,930 10,355 9,060 10,865 8,880 1,879 5,830 37,024 28,079 3,282 3,852 251,127 3,625 5,450 4,732 28,618 2,459 7,087 31,846 7,902 17,632 28,209 6,591 9,386 10,572 25,461 2,503 3,382 5,151 7,968 32,542 17,357 8,571 32,617 2004-05 BUDGET 25,777 15,535 10,794 7,137 6,027 5,207 1,736 1,158 4,241 5,523 1,539 1,139 10,833 3,911 1,721 1,899 165 33,906 14,041 6,077 4,195 2,445 25,750 23,636 10,224 8,946 10,741 8,486 1,899 5,891 36,573 27,723 3,240 3,805 248,360 3,663 5,507 4,675 28,288 2,430 6,999 31,459 7,984 17,416 27,885 6,658 9,270 10,446 25,242 2,533 3,418 5,090 7,871 32,133 17,146 8,471 32,238 112 Estimated TAX YEAR DIRECT 2004 TAX NET ASSESSED LEVY VALUATION 27,050 9,194,970 16,311 5,384,650 11,334 7,568,000 7,500 2,177,724 6,336 2,402,350 5,481 2,223,038 1,844 656,060 1,215 447,500 4,457 1,771,400 5,811 1,020,600 1,617 466,650 1,201 218,350 11,389 3,323,750 4,113 956,973 1,809 271,350 1,998 534,950 0 463,450 35,467 4,936,700 14,795 2,791,004 6,385 1,286,300 4,403 1,020,171 2,567 300,200 26,750 4,183,746 24,716 3,582,437 10,929 1,961,716 9,767 1,819,973 11,525 2,195,895 9,329 1,497,950 1,998 485,700 6,187 1,246,050 39,471 6,016,173 29,490 4,172,231 3,421 1,075,828 3,840 512,950 268,880 30,588,619 3,836 445,541 5,784 1,157,950 4,774 977,725 29,980 4,814,325 2,463 375,650 7,368 1,437,600 33,457 5,200,458 8,389 1,667,282 18,460 2,664,916 30,329 4,695,906 6,990 1,317,500 10,029 1,113,050 11,022 3,045,750 26,985 3,127,329 2,681 331,712 3,595 496,450 5,277 533,600 8,432 2,564,245 34,873 6,301,236 18,495 3,244,850 9,643 1,789,600 37,131 5,646,675 Estimated 2004 TAX RATE 0.3044 0.3190 0.1550 0.3415 0.2749 0.2513 0.3081 0.2954 0.2597 0.5161 0.3757 0.5166 0.3369 0.4112 0.6328 0.3619 0.0000 0.6399 0.4959 0.4555 0.4025 0.9174 0.5896 0.5942 0.4669 0.4600 0.4691 0.4955 0.3755 0.4440 0.5925 0.6310 0.2757 0.6763 0.7919 0.7589 0.4515 0.4473 0.5309 0.6109 0.4510 0.5415 0.4752 0.5736 0.5381 0.4661 0.7917 0.3620 0.7424 0.6412 0.6603 0.8358 0.3155 0.4625 0.4759 0.4352 0.5305 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules Street Lighting Improvement District Levies Secondary Roll (Continued) DIST # 13970 13972 13973 13974 13978 13985 13986 13989 13990 13991 13992 13993 13994 13995 13999 23076 23137 23145 23176 23189 23254 23255 23324 23344 23352 23353 23360 23375 23399 2003-04 BUDGET 18,825 7,837 12,632 5,727 2,487 6,835 15,921 13,617 12,468 3,080 6,757 2,922 11,287 8,273 4,480 2,527 12,284 1,838 6,920 324,000 1,005 3,758 74,019 22,499 1,347 7,097 10,856 8,661 16,784 DESCRIPTION Sun City 16 Apache Wells Mobile P 3 Dreamland Villa 14 Apache Wells Mobile P 4 Apache Wells Mobile P 4A Sun City 24 Sun City 26 Sun City 26A Sun City 31 Suburban Ranchettes Sun City 24B Sun City 28 Sun City 32 Dreamland Villa 15 Sun City 24C Pinnacle Ranch at 83rd Ave Country Meadows 10 Litchfield Vista Views II Crystal Manor Anthem I Cloud Creek Ranch Citrus Point SCW Expansion 17 Dreaming Summit 1,2a,2b Sun Lakes Unit 41 Wigwam Creek N.Ph.1 Dreaming Summit 3 Russell Ranch Ph 1 Wigwam Creek South Litchfield Vista Views IIIA&B $ 13435 Az Skies Mobile Est. W 2 23104 Litchfield Vista Views 3,319,614 $ 1,893 1,641 2004-05 BUDGET 18,611 7,916 12,759 5,786 2,511 6,748 15,749 13,447 12,329 3,102 6,668 2,884 12,432 8,360 4,437 2,489 12,102 1,810 6,983 384,000 1,025 3,699 76,200 30,000 1,680 10,200 15,600 4,800 30,000 696 $ 3,398,732 $ 113 1,908 1,680 Estimated TAX YEAR DIRECT 2004 TAX NET ASSESSED LEVY VALUATION 19,666 7,777,704 8,398 1,420,673 13,406 3,316,605 6,181 1,667,253 2,680 579,183 7,298 1,924,650 16,954 3,654,849 14,403 1,947,130 13,244 2,279,600 2,894 1,140,780 7,185 2,521,877 3,089 727,600 11,959 2,233,100 8,766 1,911,672 4,787 1,585,425 2,540 1,088,900 12,484 2,773,100 1,889 992,650 7,433 1,012,950 400,568 42,813,748 624 323,610 3,559 3,095,970 76,673 15,085,567 34,965 15,793,310 3,475 642,011 15,278 4,630,800 24,553 8,095,940 13,714 1,730,970 35,999 18,030,869 1,160 $ 3,528,260 $ 2,385 2,100 2004 SQUARE FOOTAGE 314,226 1,351,641 Estimated 2004 TAX RATE 0.2629 0.4829 0.3771 0.2983 0.3947 0.3289 0.3997 0.6392 0.4973 0.2798 0.2271 0.3800 0.5589 0.4212 0.2576 0.2427 0.5133 0.1945 0.8101 1.0653 0.2281 0.1338 0.4649 0.2423 0.3911 0.3510 0.3116 0.3873 0.3008 $ 0.7590 0.1554 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Summary Schedules 114 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan Personnel Plan Introduction The mission of Human Resources is to provide strategic direction, state-of-the-art infrastructure support, customer service excellence, and a healthy workplace environment for County Departments, Employees and the Residents we service. Our vision is to become an “Employer of Choice,” we will work and create cost efficient services for the residents of Maricopa County. Human Resources will re-engineer its business practices and policies. Employee Satisfaction and Attrition Maricopa County Employee Satisfaction Surveys provide management with critical information necessary to recruit and retain productive employees. Valuable experience is lost when employee separations increase. This results in costly recruitment and training, while adversely impacting customer confidence. As evidenced in the chart below, employee satisfaction remained relatively constant during the past five years. Maricopa County Employee Satisfaction FY04 FY03 FY02 FY01 FY00 2 3 4 5 6 7 Scores Above 5 =Positive Strongly Agree = 8 Scores Below 5 = Negative Strongly Disagree = 2 8 Another key metric is the rate of attrition. Since 2000, the Maricopa County attrition trend has continued to improve. Maricopa County vs. State of Arizona Attrition 20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% State of Arizona data source is the Arizona Department of Administration Human Resources System 2004 Annual Report. 2000 2001 Maricopa County 2002 2003 2004 State of Arizona 115 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan Human Resources Infrastructure On December 22, 2003, Maricopa County implemented PeopleSoft, a new Human Resources Information System. The PeopleSoft system reduces manual human resources processes by integrating the key human resource functions such as: payroll, records, recruiting/staffing, benefits management, timekeeping, employee development, and employee/manager self-service functionality with each other. The most important benefits of PeopleSoft are the ability of managers and employees to access to real-time integrated data and the elimination of manual Human Resources processes. Maricopa County Human Resources is currently in the planning stages of an Employee Records Automation Project. This project will revolutionize how Maricopa County maintains employee personnel files by creating a paperless electronic database that will meet all statutory requirements for record keeping and maintenance. Position Control Throughout the year, departmental staffing needs change. These changes are handled through the Position Management process. This process requires that departments submit detailed requests to add, delete or change positions with full funding identified by source. Total Compensation verifies the position description, market range information, and position attributes (such as whether the position is classified or unclassified) while Budget Analysts verify that all authorized positions are fully funded on an annualized basis and that the positions are consistent with approved staffing plans. Once approved, the position changes are entered into the PeopleSoft position database. Another key element in position control is the historical tracking of funded positions and their full-time equivalent (FTE) status. A trend view of FTE levels puts into perspective the prior year’s staff (and consequently service) funding decisions. The chart below represents a ten-year historical look at the County’s FTE levels, summarized for the Judicial and Elected Offices, Appointed Departments and Special Districts. FTE Staffing Levels Department Judicial Elected Appointed Special District FY 1995-96 FY 1996-97 FY 1997-98 FY 1998-99 FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY2004-05 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Adopted 2,218.11 2,297.35 2,534.00 2,741.00 2,992.00 3,101.71 3,283.56 3,233.81 3,310.33 3,481.83 3,859.75 3,938.55 4,058.00 4,160.00 4,393.00 4,490.50 4,494.05 4,628.25 4,941.30 5,443.75 6,895.38 6,556.56 6,125.00 5,687.00 5,868.00 7,181.09 7,834.27 7,561.73 8,021.72 8,259.89 381.48 373.66 382.00 375.00 373.00 344.25 362.50 365.50 364.50 379.00 Total 13,354.72 13,166.12 13,099.00 12,963.00 13,626.00 15,117.55 15,974.38 15,789.29 16,637.85 17,564.47 Human Resources Employment Services Activity The purpose of the Employment Services Activity is to provide recruitment, staffing and personnel processing services for County departments to attract and maintain and highly qualified and diverse workforce. Requisitions for Vacant Positions With the implementation of PeopleSoft on December 22, 2003, Human Resources now requires that only one position control number be assigned to each requisition to maintain full position management. During FY 2003-04 there was a significant increase in the number of requisitions received. A major contributing factor to this increase was the approval of a large number of new positions for the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office new 4th Avenue Jail. Human Resources processed 4,093 requisitions for various positions within Maricopa County. The “total number of requisitions” does not necessarily reflect the number of vacancies at Maricopa County. From July 2003 to December 2003, departments and agencies were able to list multiple vacancies or position control 116 Number of Requisition for Vacant Positions Received 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan numbers on requisitions. Applications Received The number of applications increased by 19% from FY 2002-03 to FY 2003-04. For the first time at Maricopa County candidates applying for open competitive recruitments were able to submit applications electronically via Maricopa County’s Human Resources website (http://www.maricopa.gov/human_resources). During this period, 17,795 applications were submitted online. During the Total Applications Received second quarter of FY 2004-05, Maricopa County plans to go live with a specialized module for recruiting and selection called eRecruit. The eRecruit module will allow 50,000 internal and external candidates to view all job postings 45,000 and apply for all positions directly over the Internet or 40,000 35,000 Intranet. The eRecruit module will eliminate the need for 30,000 paper applications, allowing candidates to enter their own 25,000 information into the system. By having electronic 20,000 candidate information and data, Human Resources will be 15,000 able to electronically disseminate recruiting information to 10,000 hiring managers throughout the Maricopa County. 5,000 Candidate information will also flow through the 0 PeopleSoft system at time of hire, eliminating the doubleFY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 data-entry that existed with previous HRIS programs at Maricopa County. Number of Written Examinations Conducted Departments and agencies have an obligation to select the most highly qualified candidates to fill vacancies. When applications are received for open recruitments, each one must be evaluated for minimum qualifications Number of Candidates Admitted and preferred knowledge, skills, and abilities. As part of for Written Examinations the application assessment, Human Resources may administer examinations, including written assessments in 3,500 the form of multiple choice exams, or performance exams 3,000 to measure a candidate’s keyboarding ability, shorthand 2,500 speed, etc. 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 These assessments allow Human Resources to create a pool of qualified candidates, ranked by their scores on the specific examinations. Included in these assessments are examinations for Juvenile and Adult Probation Officers, Clerical/Office Administrator assessments, and promotional exams for Law Enforcement or Trial Courts employees. Overall, written examinations increased by 26% from FY 2002-03 to FY 2003-04. Workforce Administration The new PeopleSoft system allows Maricopa County the ability to automate its payroll and benefits administration, as well as time-entry processes for all departments. Group timekeepers are able to enter daily time directly into PeopleSoft. In July 2004, additional PeopleSoft functionality was released to County users, including Employee Self Service and Manager Self Service. Employee Self Service functions allow employees to access their personal information, biographical data, view current and previous pay slips, and make applicable changes to their benefits. These changes are made directly in the PeopleSoft system, eliminating much of the paper that previously flowed through Human Resources. The Manager Self Service function grants managers viewing 117 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan access to their employees’ information, including contact information, leave accrual balances, and compensation histories. Maricopa County is moving forward with additional rollouts of PeopleSoft modules. Employees and managers will be able to control competencies, professional licenses, as well as track education and training through the ePerformance module. Managers will also be able to initiate and complete the Performance Management Process (PMP) through the ePerformance module; thus, allowing Maricopa County to automate its PMP and performance evaluation process. PeopleSoft is customized to produce full position control so that only approved budgeted positions can be filled through the recruitment process. This feature ensures that all positions are fully-funded on an annualized basis. Staff Development Human Resources’ Staff Development unit provides a variety of leadership and competency development opportunities for employees that allow them to improve their job performance and enhance their careers within Maricopa County. The EDGE Program In January 2004, Human Resources changed the way it trains supervisors and managers by implementing the new EDGE Program (Executive Development Opportunities for Government Employees). The Executive Development Program provides ninety-six hours of training over a twelve-month period for management staff. The Executive Development Program focuses on: visionary leadership, budget/fiscal development, critical and strategic planning, inspiring and motivating staff, fundamentals of public service and accountability, creating and managing a diverse workforce, and techniques for improving oral/written communications. The Leadership School targets employees who show potential for supervision and upward mobility through program activities spanning a six-month period and delivering forty-eight hours of curricula. The Leadership School focus is to develop supervisors interpersonal skills, conflict resolution techniques, principles of supervision, understanding and supervising a diverse workforce, budget/fiscal accountability and how to present oral presentations. The EDGE Program is committed to partnering with Maricopa County leadership and other public/private leaders as it develops and sustains the peak performance of a diverse, professional and qualified workforce. The EDGE Program was designed using a competency based learning model and will provide the tools that leaders need to develop skill sets for motivating, coaching, evaluating and recommending career and succession plans for employees. This enhanced learning environment will allow Maricopa County to recognize and meet the needs of its customers and citizens. The Leadership School graduated its first school on June 8, 2004 with twenty-eight supervisors. Every supervisor who graduated from the school indicated this program had a tremendous impact on their career development and growth. The first Executive Development School will graduate its first class in December 2004. At the mid-way point 100% of students in the Executive Development School have assessed themselves as having improved tremendously in the eight competency areas of: visionary leadership, inspiring staff, critical thinking writing, speaking, delegating, communicating with staff, and communicating with upper management. Adjunct Faculty Program Adjunct Faculty include: managers, supervisors, and subject matter experts that are used extensively to deliver classes related to Maricopa County business practices and to facilitate the internationally known Achieve/Global classes on communication, leadership, and customer service topics. Extensive use of the Adjunct Faculty in is a cost-effective method of service delivery for training and staff development. 118 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan Competency Based Classes The 2004 Employee Course Catalog offers 252 competency-based courses. In addition to the Catalog, classes were marketed to the organization through monthly calendars, the Learning Resource Network (LRN), and via email. Using the online Student Center, employees also access and view directly all class offerings and selfregister. Staff Development coordinated or provided delivery 915 instructor-led classes to 4,412 County employees. On-line Classes Online classes continue to be the fastest growing program On-Line Class Usage in Staff Development. In FY 1999-00 there were only 19 on-line classes. In FY 2003-04 there were 3,225 on-line classes. The infrastructure for online classes has been 3,500 carefully crafted over the last two years. Currently, 3,000 employees can choose from over fifty online learning 2,500 modules. On-line classes constitute over 25% of attendance in County classes. These classes are tracked 2,000 by the County’s Learning Management System and on 1,500 employees’ official County training transcript. Online 1,000 classes offer a good alternative to employees who cannot attend classroom training during the standard workweek, 500 and will continue to be a strategy for rolling-out curriculum 0 on countywide initiatives quickly and cost-effectively. OnFY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 line classes are tailored to meet specific goals, competencies and organizational issues to enhance employee efficiency. Subject Matter Experts, County supervisors and managers assist in developing curriculum for on-line courses and make the process for learning accessible to many employees. On-Site Classes Maricopa County’s Staff Development offers an opportunity for County employees to pursue degree programs after work at on-site locations. Bachelors and Masters level Public Administration courses are currently available. Plans to facilitate onsite AA Degree programs and/or college-level certificate programs are in the planning and development stages. These degree programs provide employees an opportunity to get an education that will help their careers and promote excellence in public service. Employee Course Catalog In 2003, Human Resources published its Employee Course Catalog for the first time on an annual cycle. Switching to an annual cycle saved Maricopa County close to $5,000 dollars in publication expenses. In 2004, Human Resources continued this business practice and published its 2004 catalog on an annual cycle. Human Resources publishes monthly training calendars that are sent to County departments listing specific dates, times, locations of all training classes. These classes are also marketed through the Learning Resource Network for designated target audiences. Classes are organized using the Learning Management System according to skill building competencies. In FY 2003-04, 4,412 employees attended at least one of the 915 classes selected from 252 different course topics using on-line registration provided through the Learning Management System. Tuition Reimbursement Tuition Reimbursement is one of the many benefits offered to Maricopa County employees. Through this program, employees are able to complete job-related degree and certificate programs. Human Resources is working on revising the current tuition reimbursement policy to include two reimbursement options. The first option will remain as the traditional tuition reimbursement process currently in place. The second will be an educational assistance option. This option will allow employees to enroll in classes, such as electives, that are required to 119 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan obtain a degree but not covered under the current tuition reimbursement program. The current policy only allows employees to take classes that are related to their job. In FY 2003-04, Maricopa County paid $1,153,306 in tuition reimbursement for 565 employees who completed 1,832 classes. Amount of Tuition Reimbursement Paid Number of Employees Participating in Tuition Reimbursement 600 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 500 $800,000 400 $600,000 300 $400,000 200 $200,000 100 $0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 0 FY04 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 Special Corporate Initiatives Trip Reduction Program (Commute Options) In 1988 the Arizona Legislature passed the Air Quality Bill (A.R.S. 49-581 et seq.) to meet the Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards for carbon monoxide. Arizona’s Air Quality Bill mandated a Trip Reduction program for employers and schools located in Maricopa County. To ensure compliance, Maricopa County passed an ordinance that required employers/schools with 100 or more employees and/or driving-age students to implement a Trip Reduction Program. However, the original County ordinance has been revised twice, and now requires employer/schools that have 50 employees and/or driving-age students, who report to a work/school site, at least three times a week or six months per year, to have a Trip Reduction Program. The Human Resources Department is responsible for the coordinating the Trip Reduction Program for all of Maricopa County’s Departments. The responsibilities include distributing and processing Trip Reduction Program surveys; providing incentives/prizes through monthly drawings; communicating program information and air quality advisories; training departmental Trip Reduction Program representatives; providing subsidies to employees; promoting alternative modes of transportation such as busing, vanpooling, carpooling, biking, teleworking, rideshare matching, and compressed work week schedules. The goal of the program is to reduce single occupant vehicle trips and/or miles traveled to a work site. Maricopa County employees are eligible to receive 100% bus subsidies or a $56 per month per employee vanpool subsidy. Maricopa County also offers a free taxi service for employees who participate in the TRP and at times may need an emergency ride home program. Utilization of the subsidy program averages 3,500 employees per month for the bus card program and 22 vanpools. The subsidy program provides and estimated $415,000 in benefits annually. This past year, Human Resources partnered with Valley Metro and hosted a two-day TRP coordinators training for all departmental TRP coordinators. Human Resources also coordinated Maricopa County’s participation in the 7th Annual Clean Air Campaign: Bike to Work on April 21, 2004. Twenty-nine Maricopa County employees rode their bikes to work totaling over 650 miles. Combined Charitable Campaign Staff Development coordinated the 2004 Maricopa County Combined Charitable Campaign (CCC). Staff Development provided the training to all CCC representatives and organized the CCC kick-off at the Dodge Theater. The kick-off had a record 500+ Maricopa County employees in attendance and featured the Phoenix 120 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan Sun’s Gorilla and several celebrity basketball players, such as Connie Hawkins, who competed against David Smith, County Administrative Office. Staff Development also coordinates the CCC intranet web page with the Office of the Chief Information Officer. Special events such as Casual Day, Craft Fair, Softball, Bowling, and Golf tournaments are additional fundraising activities for the CCC. Staff Development serves as a collection point for pledge cards and cash from Special Events. The 2004 CCC raised $405,000, which represents a 15% increase from the 2003 CCC. One important program in the CCC is the Employees Assisting and Supporting Employees (EASE). The EASE program is a contingency fund that is used to assist Maricopa County employees with unanticipated financial emergency situations. The EASE fund is designed to offer an alternative to eligible participants if other sources of financial aid are unavailable for emergency health or human services, such as housing, utilities, and food. Compensation and Awards Gainsharing Initiative Maricopa County continued the Gainsharing Initiative in FY 2004. This initiative offers County and Judicial Branch/Special District employees the opportunity to share in the benefits derived from their efforts to enhance revenues and improve efficiencies, while increasing service quality. The fiscal results of these programs are currently being evaluated. Several of these programs will continue into FY 2005 with additional programs being implemented. Salary Advancements Number of Salary Advancements Processed Salary advancements – described in the Maricopa County Employee Compensation Plan – are defined in part as “(A)n increase in an employee’s base rate to a higher base rate as the result of any process other than a recruitment process…”. In effect, this is the term used to describe permanent increases to an employee’s salary based on market adjustments, performance, time-in-service-recognition and/or other “permanent” changes to their base salary. 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 Maricopa County officials recognize the value of having a competent, satisfied, trained and dedicated work force available to conduct the County’s business. At the same time, a sluggish economy and the residual effects of September 11, 2001, have resulted in a tremendous reduction in funds available for salary advancements. 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 For the first time in several years, County officials have been able to set aside funds to cover a comprehensive Pay for Performance Plan. Employees who did not receive performance increases in the prior fiscal year are eligible for up to 6% of their base salary. Employees who received a performance increase in this period are eligible for up to 3% of their base salary. The increase will be distributed based on employee performances. Employee Health Initiatives Program Maricopa County continues to be able to offer a competitive benefits program to active, benefit-eligible employees and their families. This program enhances benefit choices and provides flexibility to balance payroll deductions for benefit premiums against sixteen health care coverage options. To accomplish this, ‘consumerism’ and ‘costsharing’ of health care expenses have been introduced to encourage using the most appropriate place of service when seeking medical care and choosing the most cost-effective prescription drugs. 121 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan To remain very competitive compared to other Arizona public sector entities, changes will be made to the texture, structure, shape and means by which this program is financed and delivered to Maricopa County employees and their families. Market Range Salary Issues Attracting competent, qualified applicants to vacant County positions and retaining skilled, trained and experienced current employees is a goal of Maricopa County. In FY 2004-05, funds have been set aside to cover market adjustments/increases for certain high demand/low inventory positions. Limited funding for market increases means that not all positions will be considered for market adjustments but to the greatest extent possible, all County jobs, functions and operations, will be looked at to determine where to best focus the limited market adjustment monies to allow the County to remain a competitive employer. Future Directions for Human Resources The next fiscal year will be an exciting time for Human Resources at Maricopa County. The final implementation phases for PeopleSoft will be completed. A decision on Maricopa County’s Learning Management System will be finalized. The Diversity program will have completed its first fiscal year. The Executive and Leadership Schools will have completed several classes and those graduates will be poised to take on challenging roles throughout Maricopa County. Human Resources will be implementing a new program to incorporate Maricopa County’s Managing for Results program in the training curricula. A concentrated effort will be directed toward continuing to add more onsite college degree/certificate programs, especially an Associate of Arts programs for entry-level employees. Human Resources is reviewing and updating its technology and infrastructure to include computers in our main lobby so applicants can apply for jobs on-line and on-site. Human Resources will continue to expand its outreach efforts into diverse communities to recruit the sharpest and best talent reflective of the citizenry we serve. To accomplish this Human Resources must make its presence known to established associations and institutions with constituents interested in advancing their careers at Maricopa County. Maricopa County will also strive to make all of its job postings and applications bi-lingual. It is the goal of Human Resources to make Maricopa County an “Employer of Choice!” Over the next three years, Human Resources will focus on the following strategic goals: • By January 2006, Human Resources will require 100% of County employees to have either direct deposit or utilize a pay card to eliminate the use of live checks. • By May 2006, Human Resources will develop metrics to monitor the implementation of Maricopa County’s diversity plan. • By September 2006, Human Resources will develop a written succession plan for managers and directors that identify the leadership roles and associated skills necessary for upward mobility in County departments. • By September 2006, Human Resources will achieve a rating of 80% satisfaction level or higher from their customers. • By December 2006, Human Resources will complete a review and revision of all Human Resources policies to ensure legal compliance and compatibility with technology needs. • By July 2006, Human Resources will develop and implement a PeopleSoft training plan for all decentralized Human Resources Liaisons, Supervisors and Managers to update them on PeopleSoft system capability. • By July 2007, Human Resources will eliminate hard copy personnel files and tuition reimbursement application forms. 122 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan Budgeted FTE Summary In order to more accurately follow past staffing and human resource allocation decisions by program, a ten-year history of full-time equivalents by department is presented in the chart below. FTEs reflect the hours budgeted for part-time positions converted to an equal number of full-time positions (based on a standard of 40 hours per week.) Budgeted FTEs FY 1995-96 FY 1996-97 FY 1997-98 FY 1998-99 FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Acutal Actual Actual ADULT PROBATION 775.69 851.00 937.00 949.00 1,045.00 1,120.50 1,175.00 1,092.00 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL 113.00 120.00 125.00 135.00 130.00 146.00 132.50 140.00 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 1.00 ASSESSOR 308.00 297.00 334.00 329.00 325.00 326.00 321.80 322.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CLERK 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.80 8.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 4.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.50 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 CALL CENTER 10.00 20.00 20.00 32.00 33.00 33.00 34.00 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 100.00 106.00 70.00 64.00 62.00 67.00 67.00 66.50 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 606.04 596.25 589.00 596.00 599.00 620.00 666.00 689.00 COMMUNICATIONS 7.50 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12.00 10.00 11.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 CONSTABLES 28.00 26.00 27.00 29.00 29.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 CONTRACT COUNSEL 8.25 7.25 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH 133.00 135.78 165.00 177.00 223.00 220.40 263.75 264.78 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 11.00 12.00 13.00 15.00 13.00 16.00 18.00 11.33 COUNTY ATTORNEY 676.71 737.30 742.00 796.00 831.00 850.00 828.50 917.25 ELECTIONS 57.00 57.00 55.00 53.00 54.00 54.00 54.00 54.00 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 13.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 229.00 238.60 245.00 272.00 267.00 266.75 283.00 273.50 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 64.00 63.00 65.00 60.00 60.00 62.00 63.00 63.00 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 219.00 183.40 158.00 158.00 192.00 202.50 235.00 248.25 FINANCE 57.00 53.00 49.00 46.00 42.00 36.00 43.00 44.00 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 240.00 240.00 241.00 222.00 222.00 222.25 223.00 226.00 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 1.00 7.00 7.00 1.00 11.00 9.00 1.00 1.00 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM 2,974.75 2,630.50 2,099.00 1,812.00 1,766.00 3,013.25 3,326.01 3,326.01 HEALTH CARE MANDATES 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 46.00 41.00 34.00 HEALTH PLANS 378.00 377.50 444.00 361.00 353.00 345.70 357.47 357.47 HOUSING 63.00 64.00 63.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 HUMAN RESOURCES 100.00 96.00 81.00 82.00 79.00 81.00 67.25 66.20 HUMAN SERVICES 273.00 256.00 286.00 281.00 295.00 287.00 368.00 369.00 INDIGENT REPRESENTATION 357.34 349.19 421.00 459.00 446.00 466.25 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO 1.00 14.00 15.00 INTERNAL AUDIT 9.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 16.00 15.00 16.00 16.00 JUDICIAL MANDATES 36.00 JUSTICE COURTS 236.02 228.75 244.00 294.00 280.00 287.01 300.06 JUVENILE PROBATION 538.00 540.00 589.00 679.00 794.00 784.00 827.50 868.50 LEGAL ADVOCATE 53.00 60.50 LEGAL DEFENDER 69.00 74.75 LIBRARY DISTRICT 134.48 126.66 134.00 146.00 143.00 118.00 135.50 135.50 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET 23.00 22.00 21.00 22.00 24.00 18.00 22.00 22.00 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT 53.00 53.00 47.00 38.00 39.00 38.00 39.00 40.00 MEDICAL ELIGIBILITY 336.31 337.50 342.00 263.00 298.00 292.50 291.50 MEDICAL EXAMINER 44.00 45.50 47.00 50.00 52.00 54.00 64.00 63.00 PARKS & RECREATION 72.89 76.84 77.00 74.00 80.00 86.50 98.46 104.00 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 55.00 54.00 66.00 65.00 93.00 108.00 115.00 125.00 PUBLIC DEFENDER 433.30 430.30 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY 37.00 41.00 37.00 33.00 33.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 PUBLIC HEALTH 507.09 503.25 460.00 441.00 479.00 459.24 523.48 534.89 RECORDER 65.00 63.00 66.00 65.00 69.00 69.00 71.25 71.25 RESEARCH & REPORTING 12.00 14.50 14.00 8.00 7.00 34.50 9.50 6.75 RISK MANAGEMENT 12.00 12.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 20.00 19.00 SHERIFF 2,053.00 2,108.00 2,188.00 2,235.00 2,428.00 2,482.50 2,465.00 2,487.75 SOLID W ASTE 31.00 45.00 19.00 17.00 18.00 18.00 12.00 14.00 STADIUM DISTRICT 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 8.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 29.00 28.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 SUPERIOR COURT 668.40 677.60 764.00 819.00 873.00 910.20 981.00 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 39.00 42.00 45.00 41.00 42.00 42.00 42.00 43.00 TOTAL COMPENSATION 15.00 16.00 TRANSPORTATION 500.00 511.00 522.00 512.00 511.00 511.50 504.00 477.75 TREASURER 75.00 66.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 64.00 TRIAL COURTS 1,273.31 Total 13,354.72 13,166.12 13,099.00 12,963.00 13,626.00 15,117.55 15,974.38 15,789.29 123 FY2003-04 Acutal 1,144.00 143.60 321.00 7.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 4.00 3.50 33.00 62.00 695.00 9.00 10.00 30.00 7.25 363.75 13.50 987.55 54.00 15.00 300.50 60.75 269.00 42.00 225.00 3,528.29 31.00 415.43 51.00 436.00 21.00 15.00 919.00 63.50 79.00 135.50 21.00 35.00 66.00 87.00 159.00 435.80 34.00 567.60 70.25 8.75 19.00 2,731.50 13.00 4.00 32.00 42.00 24.00 479.00 57.00 1,247.33 16,637.85 FY2004-05 Adopted 1,153.00 144.00 321.00 7.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 4.00 3.50 33.00 63.00 709.95 8.00 10.00 30.00 7.25 380.75 12.75 989.55 54.00 15.00 308.25 60.75 301.50 42.00 227.00 3,691.44 30.00 357.60 51.00 461.00 19.00 15.00 1,012.50 78.50 96.00 147.00 21.50 35.00 66.00 86.50 159.00 466.80 34.00 556.55 70.25 8.75 20.00 3,214.50 12.00 5.00 32.00 42.00 26.00 479.00 59.50 1,316.33 17,564.47 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan Within each department, positions may be budgeted from a variety of funding sources. In general, as discussed earlier in this document, the General Fund and Special Revenue Fund cover the bulk of Personnel Services, with monies from Capital Project, Enterprise and Internal Service funds covering the rest. The following chart displays this breakdown. FTE DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDING SOURCE - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED BUDGETED FTE DEPARTMENT ADULT PROBATION ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE ASSESSOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 CALL CENTER CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER CLERK OF THE BOARD CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONSTABLES CONTRACT COUNSEL CORRECTIONAL HEALTH COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER COUNTY ATTORNEY ELECTIONS ELIMINATIONS EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT SERVICES FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FINANCE FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT GENERAL GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM HEALTH CARE MANDATES HEALTH PLANS HUMAN RESOURCES HUMAN SERVICES INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO INTERNAL AUDIT JUVENILE PROBATION LEGAL ADVOCATE LEGAL DEFENDER LIBRARY DISTRICT MANAGEMENT & BUDGET MATERIALS MANAGEMENT MEDICAL EXAMINER PARKS & RECREATION PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC FIDUCIARY PUBLIC HEALTH RECORDER RESEARCH & REPORTING RISK MANAGEMENT SHERIFF SOLID WASTE STADIUM DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOTAL COMPENSATION TRANSPORTATION TREASURER TRIAL COURTS Total Departments 2 GENERAL FUND 886.30 321.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 4.00 3.50 33.00 63.00 7.00 565.69 8.00 30.00 7.25 18.00 12.75 841.10 54.00 2.00 16.00 237.58 42.00 30.00 51.00 15.00 218.00 78.50 95.50 21.50 24.00 63.00 16.50 443.50 34.00 86.92 44.25 974.00 32.00 26.00 59.50 1,130.83 6,605.67 3 SPECIAL REVENUE 266.70 144.00 144.26 10.00 358.75 148.45 13.00 292.25 63.92 227.00 461.00 19.00 785.50 0.50 147.00 3.00 70.00 159.00 23.30 469.63 26.00 8.75 2,214.50 6.50 5.00 479.00 185.50 6,731.51 124 4 DEBT SERVICE - 5 CAPITAL PROJECTS 4.00 9.00 26.00 39.00 6 ENTERPRISE 3,691.44 357.60 5.50 4,054.54 7 INTERNAL SERVICE 60.75 11.00 20.00 42.00 133.75 9 TOTAL FUNDS 1,153.00 144.00 321.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 4.00 3.50 33.00 63.00 7.00 709.95 8.00 10.00 30.00 7.25 380.75 12.75 989.55 54.00 15.00 308.25 60.75 301.50 42.00 227.00 3,691.44 30.00 357.60 51.00 461.00 19.00 15.00 1,012.50 78.50 96.00 147.00 21.50 35.00 66.00 86.50 159.00 466.80 34.00 556.55 70.25 8.75 20.00 3,214.50 12.00 5.00 32.00 42.00 26.00 479.00 59.50 1,316.33 17,564.47 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan Countywide staffing from FY 2003-04 to FY 2004-05 increased by 921.62 full-time equivalents (FTE’s), or 5.54%. Significant changes in staffing levels from FY 2003-04 to FY 2004-05 are provided in the commentary below. Significant Staffing Variances Adult Probation – Net increase is due to administrative and support staff being transferred to Trial Courts and the restoration of staff that was previously reduced due to State funding reduction in January 2003. Clerk of the Superior Court – Net increase is a result of a decrease due to low fund revenue in the Documental Retrieval Fund, an increase in the Judicial Enhancement Fund to support software development for Electronic Document Management System, and an increase in the Grants Fund for non-specific grant activities. Correctional Health – Increase is due to staffing of new detention facilities. Facilities Management – Increase is due to staffing of new detention facilities. Health Care Delivery System – Increase is due to re-allocation of staff from the health plans to the delivery system for IT services, social work services, and communication services. There is an additional increase related to out patient volume projected increases. Maricopa County Health Plans – Decrease is due to re-allocation of IT staff to Delivery System, Human Services and Out-sourcing of Claims Payment. Human Services –Increase is due to staffing the SAIL Grant that was transferred from the Maricopa County Health Plans. Juvenile Probation – Increase is due to staffing of new facilities. Legal Advocate – Increase is due to additional Capital cases and Dependency cases. Legal Defender – Increase is due to additional Capital cases and Dependency cases. Library District – Increase is due to staffing a new library. Public Defender – Increase is due to staff for a new Felony DUI unit. Public Health – Decrease is due to the elimination of the Tobacco Use Education and Prevention Grant and the decreased personnel funding in various other grants. Sheriff – Increase is due to staffing of new detention facilities and new patrol staff, as well as increased staffing in the Correctional Health Help Desk and increased staffing due to intergovernmental agreement with local towns. Trial Courts – Increase is due to the transfer of HR/Payroll staff from Juvenile and Adult Probation, an increase of Court Security and Juvenile Dependency Court Staffing, as well as an increase associated with the increase in fee revenue. 125 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Personnel Plan 126 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Capital Improvement Program Executive Summary The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a plan that identifies capital projects to be completed over the next five years. The CIP outlines funding sources, project costs, and future operating costs associated with each capital improvement. Because these projects typically span more than one fiscal year, the plan is updated annually to track existing projects, to identify new projects, and to update funding estimates and forecasts. Capital Improvement Projects A Capital Improvement Project is defined by County policy as a non-recurring project costing more than $150,000, resulting in the construction, renovation, or acquisition of land, infrastructure and/or building(s) with an expected useful life of many years. The most common examples include the purchase of land and buildings as well as construction of buildings, roads, and flood control improvements. Sources of funding for Capital Improvement Projects include voter-approved bonds, voter-authorized taxes, other forms of long-term financing such as Certificates of Participation (COPs), operating funds, contributions from other public and private entities, and grants. The CIP spans a five-year period beginning with Fiscal Year 2004-05 and ending Fiscal Year 2008-09. The total anticipated cost for projects presented in the FY 2004-05 CIP is $827.3 million with the largest amount of planned spending, $252.0 million, in FY 2004-05 (see table below). CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2004-05 through FY 2008-09 ALL FUNDS Maricopa County, Flood Control District, and Transportation $251,956,430 $187,727,604 $143,287,000 $130,108,000 $114,193,000 FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 127 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program The largest portion of expenditures for the County’s five-year Capital Improvement Program is the Department of Transportation with 42.0% of the total. Flood Control District Projects are next with 33.0%, followed by the Detention Capital Fund with 12.1%. The County Improvement Fund (COPs) comprises 5.8% of the total expenditures, and the General Fund County Improvement Fund follows with 3.8% of the CIP. The remainder of the five-year program is funded by the Intergovernmental Capital Projects Fund with 3.3% of the total. FY 2004-05 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Distinction by Fund General Fund County Improvement (Fund 445) 3.8% Intergovernmental Capital Projects (Fund 422) 3.3% County Improvement Fund (Fund 435) 5.8% Detention Capital Fund (Fund 455) 12.1% Transportation (Fund 234) 42.0% Flood Control District (Fund 990) 33.0% 128 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program It should be noted that over the five-year period, the cost of a project and its projected completion date could vary from the initial plan due to changes in Board priorities, greater than anticipated costs, unforeseen events, and/or changes in funding assumptions. The following table highlights significant changes from the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program. FY 2004-05 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Five-Year Total by Fund FIVE-YEAR TOTAL FY 2003-04 through FY 2004-05 through FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 (Increase)/ Decrease CIP Allocation by Fund General Fund General Fund County Improvement Fund (445) $ County Improvement Fund (435) Intergovernmental Capital Projects Fund Subtotal General Fund $ 39,476,122 $ 45,406,376 21,400,213 106,282,711 $ 31,706,524 $ 47,877,429 26,920,594 106,504,547 $ 7,769,598 (2,471,053) (5,520,381) (221,836) Special Revenue Detention Fund $ Transportation Capital Projects Fund Subtotal Special Revenue $ 117,361,689 $ 332,594,242 449,955,931 $ 100,162,410 $ 347,211,574 447,373,984 $ 17,199,279 (14,617,332) 2,581,947 Maricopa County Total $ 556,238,642 $ 553,878,531 $ 2,360,111 Special Districts Flood Control District Capital Projects Fund $ Special Districts Total $ 269,500,000 $ 269,500,000 $ 273,393,503 $ 273,393,503 $ (3,893,503) (3,893,503) Total: County plus Districts $ 825,738,642 $ 827,272,034 $ (1,533,392) General Funded Capital Improvement Program History $250 $238 $200 $160 Millions In FY 2001-02, Maricopa County developed a Capital Improve Program budget in the amount of $238 million. This program was very aggressive and was to be funded through projected General Fund cash accumulation using a pay-as-you-go philosophy. Unfortunately, with the volatility of the economy, this program budget has been reduced over the past few years to $140 million. The chart to the right shows the history. $163 $140 $150 $100 $50 $0 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 Note: Fund 435 and Fund 445 combined. 129 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Capital Projects Budget The capital projects budget is the first year of the CIP. The recommended FY 2004-05 Maricopa County and Special Districts’ capital project budget is $251.9 million and is comprised of projects for which funding has been clearly identified for the duration of the projects. Total budgeted expenditures by fund source compared with FY 2003-04 expenditures are shown in the table below. CAPITAL BUDGET BY FUND Fund FY 03-04 Adopted FY 03-04 Revised FY 03-04 Projected FY 04-05 Recommended General Fund General Fund County Improvement Fund (445) $ County Improvement Fund (435) Intergovernmental Capital Projects Fund Subtotal General Fund $ 23,470,673 $ 22,029,606 20,397,669 65,897,948 $ 25,270,673 $ 22,029,606 21,473,733 68,774,012 $ 5,615,747 $ 6,101,545 17,317,948 29,035,240 $ 22,105,674 38,557,198 21,095,594 81,758,466 Special Revenue Funds Detention Fund $ Transportation Capital Projects Fund Subtotal Special Revenue $ 118,425,196 $ 77,457,228 195,882,424 $ 118,425,194 $ 77,457,228 195,882,422 $ 98,722,178 $ 55,865,855 154,588,033 $ 40,162,410 77,959,051 118,121,461 Maricopa County Total $ 261,780,372 $ 264,656,434 $ 183,623,273 $ 199,879,927 Special Districts Flood Control District Capital Projects Fund $ Special Districts Total $ 54,000,000 $ 54,000,000 $ 53,942,000 $ 53,942,000 $ 52,644,000 $ 52,644,000 $ 52,076,503 52,076,503 Total: County plus Districts $ 315,780,372 $ 318,598,434 $ 236,267,273 $ 251,956,430 130 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Operating & Capital Budgets – Their Relationship A direct relationship exists between Maricopa County’s capital and operating budgets. Operating cost estimates are the anticipated annual costs to operate facilities and improvements upon completion or acquisition. Completed capital projects generally require additional operating budget resources for upkeep, maintenance, security, and other costs associated with additional acreage, mileage, or square footage. Future operating costs related to new facilities constructed or acquired through the CIP are carefully considered before project commitments are made. This is a particularly important budgetary consideration with the new jail and juvenile detention facilities. It is the County’s philosophy and policy that new capital projects will be undertaken only if future operating revenues are reasonably estimated to be sufficient to support associated future operating costs. Operating costs associated with new facilities are budgeted by the user department in conjunction with the Facilities Management Department. Estimated operating costs, as well as anticipated savings in lease costs and operating costs of facilities to be replaced, are factored into the County’s ten-year financial forecast. The estimated annual operating costs for the new general fund and detention facilities include utility costs, housekeeping staff, general maintenance commodities, e.g., janitorial supplies, and miscellaneous contract costs, e.g., janitorial contracts. The following table illustrates the estimated ongoing operating costs associated with the new facilities constructed or acquired through the CIP. NEW FACILITY OPERATING COSTS FY 2004-05 GENERAL FUND PROJECTS Buckeye Hills Shooting Range $ Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts Comfort Station Improvements Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts Environmental Services Facility Human Services Campus McDowell Mountain Regional Park Visitor Center McDowell Track Comfort Station New Administrative Services Building Closeout New Administrative Services Parking Northeast Superior Court/Justice Court Expansion Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts Southeast Consolidated Justice Crts/Parking Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts Public Health Clinic San Tan Mountain Park Improvement Security Building Sheriff's Property & Evidence Warehouse Water Tank Restoration Subtotal General Fund $ $ 3,790 112,474 32,380 350,000 181,734 680,378 $ FY 2005-06 231,501 $ 61,489 (857,438) 43,567 252,401 52,946 (470,449) 388,561 350,000 187,186 239,764 $ FY 2006-07 238,446 $ 126,638 (883,190) 44,448 259,973 54,505 (14,143) 335,853 224,698 397,113 350,000 192,802 1,327,143 $ FY 2007-08 245,600 $ 130,407 (909,716) 45,354 267,772 56,110 (14,568) 10,016 6,711 405,912 350,000 198,586 792,184 $ FY 2008-09 252,967 134,289 (937,037) 46,287 275,806 57,763 (15,005) 10,315 6,913 414,967 350,000 204,544 801,809 DETENTION FUND PROJECTS Detention Facilities Renovations $ $ $ $ $ Durango Juvenile Detention/Treatment Center 4,902,696 5,747,923 5,797,524 5,839,343 5,882,416 Fourth Avenue Jail 14,144,886 24,637,137 24,753,493 24,873,341 24,996,785 Lower Buckeye Jail 15,906,072 27,407,076 27,522,212 27,665,237 27,788,097 Subtotal Detention Fund $ 34,953,654 $ 57,792,136 $ 58,073,229 $ 58,377,921 $ 58,667,298 TOTAL FUNDS $ 35,634,032 $ 58,031,900 $ 59,400,372 $ 59,170,105 $ 59,469,107 131 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Intergovernmental and County Improvement Capital Projects General Fund and Special Revenue Funds Summary In general, capital projects are budgeted separately from the operating budget in a series of capital project funds. During FY 1999-2000, the Board adopted a new policy (A1920), which may be found online at www.maricopa.gov/budget/policies/pdf/a1920.pdf, establishing a formal review and approval process for Capital Improvement Program project requests, excluding the Transportation Department and the Flood Control District, which have previously established processes for capital improvement plans. This policy requires each department to submit to the Facilities Review Committee (FRC) proposals for potential projects that may be undertaken during the next five-year period, regardless of the source of funds or building delivery method. The FRC is comprised of the Facilities Management Director, senior representatives from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), representatives from the Judicial Branch and elected offices, and the Chief Financial Officer. The committee also includes an elected official and an at-large representative, both of whom are committee appointees. The process begins with the FRC approving instructions to be used for Capital Improvement Program project requests for the coming year. The instructions are typically provided no later than June 30th. By September 1 of each year, departmental requests need to be submitted to the FRC using the Justification Approval Request format. Departmental requests are not considered without an approved facilities master plan. There are five phases in the Capital Budget and Planning Process: 1. Justification 2. Concept 3. Design 4. Construction 5. Occupancy There are specific requirements for each phase as outlined in the aforementioned policy. Recommended projects are entered into the CIP in the latter portion of the concept phase and before the design phase. The new policy has resulted in more consistency and efficiency in capital project planning and implementation. It also ensures that projects are congruent with Countywide, long-term goals and initiatives. 132 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Project Detail A total of seven (7) capital projects are identified and recommended to the Board for support from the Intergovernmental Capital Project Fund (Fund 422). A total of seven (7) capital projects are identified and recommended to the Board for support from the County Improvements Fund (Fund 435). A total of twelve (12) projects are identified and recommended to the Board for support from the General Fund (Fund 445) by the Facilities Review Committee in the proposed CIP. The recommended projects are as follows. 422 INTERGOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS Prior Years New Projects McDowell Track Comfort Station $ Southeast Consolidated Justice Courts/Parking Structure Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts Subtotal $ - $ FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 $ $ 500,000 500,000 $ - $ - $ $ - TOTAL FUND 422 $ 22,819,546 $ 21,095,594 $ 5,825,000 $ - $ 50,000 $ 100,000 $ 2,410,000 2,815,000 50,000 $ 5,325,000 $ FY 2007-08 - Continuing Projects Buckeye Hills Shooting Range (Infrastructure) Buckeye Hills Shooting Range (Shooting Range) Environmental Services Facility Human Services Campus Sheriff's Property & Evidence Warehouse Project Reserve Completed Projects Elections Facility Sheriff's Training Facility Northeast Regional Center West Regional Center FY 2004-05 $ 71,610 $ 1,428,390 $ 322,838 2,180,000 4,500,000 16,596,000 6,500,000 306,547 534,657 Subtotal $ 11,394,448 $ 21,045,594 $ $ 3,081,284 $ 3,666,301 2,000,000 2,677,513 Subtotal $ 11,425,098 $ 435 COUNTY IMPROVEMENT FUND Prior Years New Projects Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts $ Southeast Consolidated Justice Courts/Parking Structure Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts Subtotal $ - - $ $ FY 2004-05 FY 2005-06 $ 3,100,000 8,000,000 2,000,000 $ 13,100,000 $ 2,000,000 2,965,000 3,935,000 $ 8,900,000 $ FY 2006-07 $ $ 1,428,390 $ 500,000 2,180,000 16,596,000 306,547 534,657 $ 21,545,594 $ 1,500,000 500,000 2,502,838 21,096,000 6,806,547 534,657 32,940,042 $ $ 3,081,284 3,666,301 2,000,000 2,677,513 11,425,098 $ 26,920,594 $ 49,740,140 $ - FY 2007-08 $ $ TOTAL FUND 435 $ 71,953,593 $ 38,557,198 $ 9,320,231 $ - 133 - - - $ 150,000 2,410,000 2,815,000 5,375,000 $ $ - $ 150,000 $ 2,410,000 2,815,000 $ 5,375,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - FY 2008-09 $ $ - $ $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 5-YR TOTAL (FY 2005-09) $ 5,100,000 10,965,000 5,935,000 $ 22,000,000 $ $ $ - - - $ TOTAL PROJECT $ $ - - - $ 5-YR TOTAL (FY 2005-09) - - $ 420,231 420,231 $ $ 1,000,000 $ 12,285,363 18,670,640 12,384,465 1,701,041 132,687 254,124 46,226 2,134,980 1,251,187 9,208,484 661,941 $ 59,731,138 $ $ $ $ $ 8,822,455 $ 911,917 $ 7,829,769 6,500,000 3,400,000 9,627,100 588,412 $ 12,222,455 $ 25,457,198 $ - - - Continuing Projects New Administrative Services/Forensic Science Ctr. Parking Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts Public Health Clinic Project Reserve Subtotal Completed Projects Downtown Development/Property Acquisition New Administrative Services Building Closeout Medical Examiner/Forensic Science Facility Clerk of the Court Service Center Relocation of Scottsdale Justice Courts Mesa Justice Court Facility Regional Land Acquisition Tempe Co-Located Justice Courts Facilities Management Building Cost of Issuance Security Building Security Building Project (CAFR Adjustment) Subtotal $ $ FY 2008-09 TOTAL PROJECT $ $ 5,100,000 10,965,000 5,935,000 22,000,000 911,917 $ 8,250,000 6,500,000 9,627,100 588,412 $ 25,877,429 $ 9,734,372 8,250,000 6,500,000 13,027,100 588,412 38,099,884 $ $ 1,000,000 12,285,363 18,670,640 12,384,465 1,701,041 132,687 254,124 46,226 2,134,980 1,251,187 9,208,484 661,941 59,731,138 $ 47,877,429 $ 119,831,022 $ - $ $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Project Detail (Continued) 445 GENERAL FUND COUNTY IMPROVEMENT FUND New Projects Southeast Consolidated Justice Courts/Parking Structure Comfort Station Improvements McDowell Track Comfort Station McDowell Mountain Regional Park Visitor Center Water Tank Restoration Subtotal Continuing Projects Administration Building Renovations Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts New Administrative Services Building Closeout Northeast Superior Court/Justice Court Expansion Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts San Tan Mountain Park Improvement Security Building Star Call Center/R&R Buildout Project Reserve Subtotal Prior Years $ $ - FY 2004-05 $ $ FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 $ 6,125,000 $ 493,250 475,850 80,900 202,000 50,000 826,150 $ 6,600,850 $ $ $ - FY 2008-09 $ 5-YR TOTAL (FY 2005-09) TOTAL PROJECT $ - $ 6,125,000 $ 969,100 80,900 202,000 50,000 $ 7,427,000 $ 6,125,000 969,100 80,900 202,000 50,000 7,427,000 3,000,000 500,000 2,985,352 16,600,000 800,000 648,000 5,321,059 1,481,000 20,128 31,355,539 $ $ 331,867 168,133 2,410,352 575,000 2,000,000 14,600,000 300,000 500,000 52,796 595,204 500,000 4,821,059 1,411,000 70,000 20,128 $ 7,006,015 $ 21,349,524 $ - $ 1,800,000 $ 1,200,000 $ $ 1,800,000 $ 1,200,000 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ 168,133 575,000 14,600,000 500,000 595,204 4,821,059 70,000 20,128 $ 24,349,524 $ $ - $ $ $ - $ $ 468,000 893,930 3,698,967 224,045 2,486,612 130,632 213,916 11,000 950,000 235,276 9,312,378 TOTAL FUND 445 $ 16,318,393 $ 22,175,674 $ 6,600,850 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,200,000 $ - $ 31,776,524 $ 48,094,917 Completed Projects Downtown Development/Property Acquisition New Administration Building Parking Spur Cross Ranch Medical Examiner/Forensic Science Facility Clerk of the Court Service Center Relocation of Scottsdale Justice Courts Facilities Management Building Southeast Regional Property Acquisition Land Acquisition near Lake Pleasant Justice Courts Consolidation $ - FY 2007-08 468,000 $ 893,930 3,698,967 224,045 2,486,612 130,632 213,916 11,000 950,000 235,276 Subtotal $ 9,312,378 $ - $ $ $ - $ $ - $ - In Fund 445, the Star Call Center/R&R Buildout project is funded in FY 2004-05 for a reimbursement to the Recorder Surcharge Fund 236, which provided a one-time contribution for capital construction of the project. This is not a true capital expenditure as the project construction is completed, but is a transfer to the Recorder using excess project funds as the project was completed under budget. 134 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Administration Building Renovations 301 W Jefferson St 5 Project Description This project will allow for tenant improvements of the current Administration Building after the construction and occupancy of the new Citizens Service Center in downtown Phoenix. The purpose of the project will be to maximize the occupancy of the facility for County departments. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Years FY 04-05 General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ - $ - $ - $ 1,800,000 $ 1,200,000 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 Project Total $ - $ - $ - $ 1,800,000 $ 1,200,000 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Construction $ Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ - $ Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project - $ - $ 1,800,000 $ 1,200,000 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 - $ - $ 1,800,000 $ 1,200,000 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 Operating Cost Summary No additional operating costs will be incurred. Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Administration Building Renovations project is to provide renovations to the building that will serve the needs of the new occupants. Strategic Goals Addressed: • By 2005, the Department will design and construct all Capital projects as approved and assigned by the appropriate authority on schedule, within budget and in cooperation with the customer while meeting the goals of the County. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Building Renovation and Minor Construction Strategic Activities Supported: • Construction Strategic Services Supported • Construction documents 135 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Administration Building Renovations Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of construction delivered within or less than the project construction budget OUTPUT: Number of construction projects completed DEMAND: Number of construction projects scheduled EFFICIENCY: Average construction cost per square foot FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 100% 100% 100% 33 75 150 65 150 150 $2 $100 $160 136 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Buckeye Hills Shooting Range Buckeye Hills Recreation Area 5 Project Description This project involves two phases of construction. The first phase will cover infrastructure improvements for the general site and is estimated at $1,500,000. The second phase includes the construction of a regional facility for the Sheriff’s Office and other regional law enforcement agencies for firearms training and certification. Phase two is estimated at $4,500,000. The possibility of grant funding is being explored. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Years FY 04-05 Intergovernmental Cap Proj (422) $ 71,610 $ 1,428,390 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,428,390 $ 1,500,000 Non-County Source 500,000 500,000 500,000 Project Total $ 71,610 $ 1,428,390 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,928,390 $ 2,000,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 71,610 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 71,610 Construction 1,428,390 500,000 1,928,390 1,928,390 Project Total $ 71,610 $ 1,428,390 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,928,390 $ 2,000,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Supplies & Services Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ Subtotal $ 28,635 $ 28,635 $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ 28,635 28,635 Total Current Costs $ 28,635 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 28,635 Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ $ 36,249 $ 37,336 $ 38,457 $ 39,610 $ Supplies & Services 195,252 201,110 207,143 213,357 Subtotal $ $ $ 231,501 $ 238,446 $ 245,600 $ 252,967 $ 151,652 816,862 968,514 Total Post Construction Costs $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ - $ 231,501 $ 238,446 $ 245,600 $ 252,967 $ 968,514 28,635 $ - $ 231,501 $ 238,446 $ 245,600 $ 252,967 $ 997,149 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Buckeye Hills project is to provide a new park infrastructure for Parks and Recreation, to serve the training needs of the Sheriff’s Office, and to accommodate private development near the old location. 137 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Buckeye Hills Shooting Range Strategic Goals Addressed: • We will increase community involvement and awareness through improved marketing and education programs in order to increase park attendance, revenues, and funding. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Park Education and Recreation Strategic Activities Supported: • Community resources Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of park user satisfaction as related to facilities OUTPUT: Number of architectural and design consultant contracts managed DEMAND: Expected number of new structure/facility requests per year EFFICIENCY: Cost per new structure/facility constructed FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 89% 89% Not Available 6 6 Not Available Not Available 10 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 138 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts City of Chandler 1 Project Description The project will include the design and construction of the Maricopa County Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts. The Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts project will provide a single facility to house the Chandler Court and an unassigned court for a future precinct. The work consists of approximately 26,500 square feet of two courts, judicial suites, and administrative space. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source County Improvement Fund (435) $ - $ 3,100,000 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 $ 5,100,000 - $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 $ 5,100,000 Project Total $ - $ 3,100,000 $ 2,000,000 $ Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Project Total $ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project FY 04-05 - $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000 $ 75,000 3,025,000 2,000,000 5,025,000 5,025,000 - $ 3,100,000 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 $ 5,100,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ $ 6,364 $ 13,080 $ 13,443 $ 13,816 $ 46,703 Supplies & Services 55,125 113,558 116,964 120,473 406,120 Subtotal $ $ $ 61,489 $ 126,638 $ 130,407 $ 134,289 $ 452,823 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ 61,489 $ 126,638 $ 130,407 $ 134,289 $ 452,823 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ - $ 61,489 $ 126,638 $ 130,407 $ 134,289 $ 452,823 Managing for Results Purpose Statement The purpose of the Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts project is to construct a new facility that meets the requirements for a consolidated Justice Court to serve County residents so that Justice Court functions are provided in an efficient manner. Strategic Goals Addressed • The public will experience increased access to the court system through improved affordability, convenience and understanding of court processes, while maintaining the efficiency and quality of court services. Strategic Plan Programs Supported • Case Management 139 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Chandler Consolidated Justice Courts (Continued) Strategic Activities Supported • Justice Court Case Flow Management Strategic Services Supported • Active case management Performance Measures User department did not provide measures. 140 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Parks and Recreation Comfort Station Improvements Multiple Park Locations 1,2,4 & 5 Project Description The MCPRD Visitor Study, September 2003, conducted by Arizona State University Department of Recreation Management and Tourism, states that restrooms are the highest amenity requested by those surveyed. Comfort station improvements will include site planning, engineering, and construction of five new comfort stations. The old comfort stations will be demolished and new comfort stations built. MCPRD’s comfort stations are literally coming apart, are a danger to the public, are a maintenance and operation nuisance, and are a cost-consuming problem to the staff and park system. Adding new comfort stations to the park system will reduce the maintenance costs and more importantly attract more visitors to the parks. The construction cost is estimated to be $870,000 and the engineering cost is estimated at $99,100. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ - $ 493,250 $ 475,850 $ Project Total $ - $ 493,250 $ 475,850 $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 5-Year Total FY 08-09 Total Project $ - $ 969,100 $ 969,100 $ - $ 969,100 $ 969,100 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Site Planning & Engineering $ Construction Project Total $ - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 $ 58,250 $ 40,850 $ 435,000 435,000 $ 493,250 $ 475,850 $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 5-Year Total FY 08-09 Total Project $ $ 99,100 $ 99,100 870,000 870,000 $ $ 969,100 $ 969,100 Operating Cost Summary As these are all replacement restrooms, there are no additional operating costs. The construction project itself will not require additional personnel for implementation. Managing for Results Purpose Statement The purpose of the Comfort Station Improvements Construction Project is to build five new comfort stations at 4 MCPRD’s parks for the Maricopa County citizens and out of town visitors so that they may have a pleasant outdoor experience and return to the parks. • Direct purpose: Customers will visit and will return to our parks and increase MCPRD‘s revenue, which is 80% revenue based. • Direct customer: Maricopa County taxpayers, out of town visitors, and visitors at Usery, McDowell, Estrella, and White Tank Mountain Regional Parks. • Direct result: Customers will return and enjoy the parks and this is measured the MCPRD Visitor Study. 141 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Comfort Station Improvements Strategic Goals Addressed: • We will increase community involvement and awareness through improved marketing and education programs in order to increase park attendance, revenues and funding. • By July 2006 we will identify and fund the additional needed facilities and operational costs for each park for the next five years. • Parks and Recreation will become non-reliant on the general fund, without reduction in our current funding level and without a reduction in customer satisfaction as assessed by an independent party. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Park Support Program Strategic Activities Supported: • Maintenance and Development Strategic Services Supported: • Utilities • Clean Facilities • Remodeled Structures/Improvements Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of park user satisfaction as related to facilities OUTPUT: Number of architectural and design consultant contracts managed DEMAND: Expected number of new structure/facility requests per year EFFICIENCY: Cost per new structure/facility constructed FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 89% 89% Not Available 6 6 Not Available Not Available 10 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 142 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts Between 6th Ave & 7th Ave, Jackson St & Madison St 5 Project Description The project will include the design and construction of the Maricopa County Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts. The Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts project will provide a single facility to house the East Phoenix # 1 Court, South Phoenix Court, Central Phoenix Court, West Phoenix Court, and East Phoenix # 2 Court. The facility consists of approximately 45,000 square feet of five courts, judicial suites, and administrative space, on a single level. The project is scheduled for completion in FY 2005-06. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Years FY 04-05 General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ 331,867 $ 168,133 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 168,133 $ 500,000 County Improvement Fund (435) 7,829,769 420,231 8,250,000 8,250,000 Project Total $ 331,867 $ 7,997,902 $ 420,231 $ - $ - $ - $ 8,418,133 $ 8,750,000 Project Cost Summary Construction Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 331,867 $ 7,997,902 $ 420,231 $ - $ - $ - $ 8,418,133 $ 8,750,000 Project Total $ 331,867 $ 7,997,902 $ 420,231 $ - $ - $ - $ 8,418,133 $ 8,750,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year FY 04-05 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ $ - Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ (293,800) $ (302,614) $ (311,692) $ (321,043) $ (1,229,149) (740,985) (763,214) (786,111) (809,694) (3,100,004) $ (1,034,785) $ (1,065,828) $ (1,097,803) $ (1,130,737) $ (4,329,153) Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ $ 20,547 $ Supplies & Services 156,800 Subtotal $ $ $ 177,347 $ 21,134 $ 161,504 182,638 $ 21,738 $ 166,349 188,087 $ 22,360 $ 171,340 193,700 $ 85,779 655,993 741,772 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ (857,438) $ (883,190) $ (909,716) $ (937,037) $ (3,587,381) TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ - $ (857,438) $ (883,190) $ (909,716) $ (937,037) $ (3,587,381) Managing for Results Purpose Statement The purpose of the Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts Project is to construct a new facility that meets the requirements for a consolidated Justice Court to serve County residents so that Justice Court functions are provided in an efficient manner. 143 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Downtown Consolidated Justice Courts Managing for Results Strategic Goals Addressed: • The public will experience increased access to the court system through improved affordability, convenience and understanding of court processes, while maintaining the efficiency and quality of court services. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Case Management Strategic Activities Supported: • Justice Court Case Flow Management Strategic Services Supported: • Active case management Performance Measures: User department did not provide measures. 144 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Environmental Services Facility 16th St and Roosevelt St 5 Project Description This project is an approximately 5,100 square foot facility, which has been incorporated into the Public Health Clinic project. The purpose of the Environmental Services Facility project is to improve delivery of services to the public and to provide County workers with a safe, space-effective, and operationally efficient environment. The site is located at Roosevelt and 16th Streets near the current Environmental Services site, which is ideal for airmonitoring equipment currently in use and is ½ mile south of the freeway and close to other downtown facilities. The mobile food inspection component of the project provides a safe access site for both large and small vehicles. The project is scheduled to be complete in FY 2004-05. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Source Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Intergovernmental Cap Proj (422) $ 322,838 $ 2,180,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,180,000 $ 2,502,838 Project Total $ 322,838 $ 2,180,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,180,000 $ 2,502,838 Project Cost Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Years FY 04-05 Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ Construction 222,838 2,180,000 2,180,000 Project Total $ 322,838 $ 2,180,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,180,000 $ Total Project 100,000 2,402,838 2,502,838 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 990,070 $ 1,228,439 $ 1,253,008 $ 1,278,068 $ 1,303,629 $ 1,329,702 $ 7,382,916 163,600 163,600 195,400 163,600 163,600 163,600 1,013,400 36,000 36,000 Subtotal $ 1,153,670 $ 1,392,039 $ 1,484,408 $ 1,441,668 $ 1,467,229 $ 1,493,302 $ 8,432,316 Total Current Costs $ 1,153,670 $ 1,392,039 $ 1,484,408 $ 1,441,668 $ 1,467,229 $ 1,493,302 $ 8,432,316 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ $ Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ 473 $ 3,317 3,790 $ 3,763 $ 39,804 43,567 $ 3,876 $ 40,572 44,448 $ 3,992 $ 41,362 45,354 $ 4,112 $ 42,175 46,287 $ 16,216 167,230 183,446 3,790 $ 43,567 $ 44,448 $ 45,354 $ 46,287 $ 183,446 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 1,153,670 $ 1,395,829 $ 1,527,975 $ 1,486,116 $ 1,512,583 $ 1,539,589 $ 8,615,762 145 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Environmental Services Facility Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Environmental Services Facility Project is to construct a new facility that meets the requirements for Environmental Services to serve County residents so functions are provided in an efficient manner. Strategic Goals Addressed: • Manage department programs to meet the increasing demand for essential environmental services resulting from Maricopa County growth. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Environmental Health Services Strategic Activities Supported: • Specialized Activities Strategic Services Supported: • Foodborne and waterborne illness investigations Performance Measures: User department did not provide measures. 146 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Human Services Campus Between 9th Ave & 13th Ave, Madison St & Jackson St 5 Project Description The Human Services Campus is a 150,000 square foot facility which will be an integrated service delivery facility located in downtown Phoenix designated to serve the homeless and the working poor. A group comprised of faithbased, non-profit, private, community, and governmental organizations working together to provide services for the most needy within the community is completing planning along with starting construction of site work. The total project budget is $24,649,000 and is funded through a $6,996,000 contribution from the County and $17,653,000 in funding from non-county sources. The County’s contribution will cover a portion of the project, which will include a new Public Health Homeless Clinic. The project is scheduled for completion in FY 2005-06. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 Fund 422 Intergovernmental Imp. $ 4,500,000 $ 16,596,000 $ $ Other Sources 1,067,296 437,081 2,048,623 Project Total $ 5,567,296 $ 17,033,081 $ 2,048,623 $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total Total Project $ 16,596,000 $ 21,096,000 2,485,704 3,553,000 $ 19,081,704 $ 24,649,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 4,500,000 $ 2,496,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,496,000 $ 6,996,000 Construction 1,067,296 14,537,081 2,048,623 16,585,704 17,653,000 - $ - $ - $ 19,081,704 $24,649,000 Project Total $ 5,567,296 $17,033,081 $ 2,048,623 $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year FY 04-05 Current Facilities Management Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ 37,509 $ Supplies & Services 34,493 Subtotal $ 72,002 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 37,509 34,493 72,002 Total Current Costs $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 72,002 72,002 $ - Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ $ 75,017 $ Supplies & Services 177,384 Subtotal $ $ $ 252,401 $ Total Post Construction Costs $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project 77,268 $ 79,586 $ 182,705 188,186 259,973 $ 267,772 $ 81,974 $ 313,845 193,832 742,107 275,806 $ 1,055,952 $ - $ 252,401 $ 259,973 $ 267,772 $ 275,806 $ 1,055,952 72,002 $ - $ 252,401 $ 259,973 $ 267,772 $ 275,806 $ 1,127,954 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Human Services Campus project is to deliver high-quality human services for the homeless and working poor in downtown Phoenix so the cycle of homelessness and poverty can be broken. 147 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Human Services Campus Strategic Goals Addressed: • Provide regional leadership in critical public policy areas in a fiscally responsible manner and advance the proposed homeless assistance center to the point of assurance of success. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Health Care for the Homeless Strategic Activities Supported: • Primary Care Clinic Strategic Services Supported: • Examinations • Laboratory tests • Referrals for dental and vision care • Mental health assessments and referrals • Outreach encounters Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of homeless in metropolitan area seen at least once at clinic OUTPUT: Number of homeless seen in metropolitan area DEMAND: Number of homeless in metropolitan area EFFICIENCY: Cost per patient contact FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 32% 50% 50% 4,160 6,500 6,500 13,000 13,000 13,000 $59 $65 $62 148 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Parks and Recreation McDowell Mountain Regional Park Competitive Track New Comfort Station Grant McDowell Mountain Regional Park 2 Project Description The MCPRD Visitor Study, September 2003, conducted by Arizona State University Department of Recreation Management and Tourism, states that restrooms are the highest amenity requested by those surveyed. Also, the study shows that 58.1% McDowell Park visitors come to mountain bike. This project is a grant project and MCPRD staff, as a partial grant match, will provide site adaptation design and construction administration. The comfort station construction will include building a new comfort station with showers. Adding a new comfort station to the McDowell competitive track will provide new opportunities for more local and national events, such as mountain biking races, and increased day use activity by allowing visitors to come early, ride, and then shower before going to work thus increasing revenue. The grant request is for $150,000. MCPRD will match 50% of the funds with $69,100 in labor value and $80,900 in monetary contribution. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 AZ State Parks Grant $ - $ 50,000 $ 100,000 $ General Fund Imp Fund (445) - $ 80,900 Project Total $ - $ 130,900 $ 100,000 $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 5-Year Total FY 08-09 Total Project $ - $ 150,000 $ 150,000 - $ 80,900 $ 80,900 $ - $ 230,900 $ 230,900 The $80,900 is budgeted within the request from the $1.54 million sale of land to the Library District. The $150,000 is projected to be received from an Arizona State Parks’ grant. The matching labor costs are incorporated in the normal operating budget of the Parks Enhancement fund. MCPRD will be responsible for the continued operating costs. Project Cost Summary Prior Years MCPRD Monetary Grant Match ASP Grant Project Total $ - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project 80,900 80,900 80,900 50,000 100,000 150,000 150,000 $ 130,900 $100,000 $ $ $ $ 230,900 $ 230,900 It is estimated that site planning, engineering, and construction of the septic system will occur in FY04-05. It is also anticipated that construction costs would carryover into FY05-06. 149 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program McDowell Mountain Regional Park Competitive Track New Comfort Station Grant Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Supplies & Services Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 197,126 $ 201,307 $ 201,307 $ 201,307 $ 201,307 $ 201,307 $ 1,203,661 38,132 49,346 51,813 52,850 53,906 54,985 301,032 Subtotal $ 235,258 $ 250,653 $ 253,120 $ 254,157 $ 255,213 $ 256,292 $ 1,504,693 Total Current Costs $ 235,258 $ 250,653 $ 253,120 $ 254,157 $ 255,213 $ 256,292 $ 1,504,693 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 235,258 $ 250,653 $ 253,120 $ 254,157 $ 255,213 $ 256,292 $ 1,504,693 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the project is to build a new comfort station at McDowell Mountain Regional Park for the park visitors, Maricopa County citizens, and out of town visitors so that they may have a pleasant outdoor experience and return to the parks. • Direct purpose: Customers will visit and return to McDowell Regional Park and increase MCPRD‘s revenue, which is 80% revenue based. (58.1% McDowell visitors come to mountain bike, MCPRD Visitor Study, 2003). • Direct customer: Maricopa County taxpayers, out of town visitors, and visitors at McDowell Mountain Regional Park. • Direct result: Customers will return and enjoy the parks and this is measured the MCPRD Visitor Study. Strategic Goals Addressed: • We will increase community involvement and awareness through improved marketing and education programs in order to increase park attendance, revenues and funding. • By July 2006 we will identify and fund the additional needed facilities and operational costs for each park for the next five years. • Parks and Recreation will become non-reliant on the general fund, without reduction in our current funding level and without a reduction in customer satisfaction as assessed by an independent party. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Park Support Program Strategic Activities Supported: • Maintenance and Development Strategic Services Supported: • New Structures 150 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program McDowell Mountain Regional Park Competitive Track New Comfort Station Grant Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of park user satisfaction as related to facilities OUTPUT: Number of construction contracts managed DEMAND: Expected number of new structure/facility requests per year EFFICIENCY: Cost per new structure/facility constructed FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 89% 89% Not Available 2 2 Not Available Not Available 10 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 151 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Parks and Recreation McDowell Mountain Regional Park Visitor Center McDowell Mountain Regional Park 2 Project Description McDowell Park needs a visitor center with public restrooms based on public demand. The visitor center would also increase revenues by providing a contact point for the public with staff and volunteers on duty. Currently, the park administration staff shares a crowded metal building with the maintenance staff and equipment, and the building is hidden 5 miles into the park. The proposed visitor center site will be located less than 1/4 mile from the entry of the park on McDowell Mountain Park Road and is conveniently sited across the road from the competitive track. Facilities Management donated the modular building, which is approximately 64’ x 41’ with 9 offices and a large open area, that will be used as a visitor center. It will lend itself nicely to park visitors as they enter and are greeted in the customer service and retail area. The park staff may host interpretative programs and the history, vegetation, wildlife, and cultural resources information of McDowell Mountain Regional Park will be displayed. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 Source General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ - $ 202,000 $ - $ Project Total $ - $ 202,000 $ - $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 5-Year Total FY 08-09 Total Project $ - $ 202,000 $ 202,000 $ - $ 202,000 $ 202,000 The $202,000 is budgeted within the request from the $1.54 million sale of land to the Library District. There are no outside sources, and MCPRD will be responsible for the continued operating costs. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Design & Installation $ Project Total $ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 - $ 202,000 $ - $ - $ 202,000 $ - $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 5-Year Total FY 08-09 Total Project $ - $ 202,000 $ 202,000 $ - $ 202,000 $ 202,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Supplies & Services Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 197,126 $ 201,307 $ 201,307 $ 201,307 $ 201,307 $ 201,307 $ 1,203,661 38,132 49,346 51,813 52,850 53,906 54,985 301,032 Subtotal $ 235,258 $ 250,653 $ 253,120 $ 254,157 $ 255,213 $ 256,292 $ 1,504,693 Total Current Costs $ 235,258 $ 250,653 $ 253,120 $ 254,157 $ 255,213 $ 256,292 $ 1,504,693 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 235,258 $ 250,653 $ 253,120 $ 254,157 $ 255,213 $ 256,292 $ 1,504,693 152 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program McDowell Mountain Regional Park Visitor Center Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the project is to build a new comfort station at McDowell Mountain Regional Park for the park visitors, Maricopa County citizens, and out of town visitors so that they may have a pleasant outdoor experience and return to the parks. • Direct purpose: Customers will visit and return to McDowell Regional Park and increase MCPRD‘s revenue, which is 80% revenue based. (58.1% McDowell visitors come to mountain bike, MCPRD Visitor Study, 2003). • Direct customer: Maricopa County taxpayers, out of town visitors, and visitors at McDowell Mountain Regional Park. • Direct result: Customers will return and enjoy the parks and this is measured the MCPRD Visitor Study. Strategic Goals Addressed: • We will increase community involvement and awareness through improved marketing and education programs in order to increase park attendance, revenues and funding. • By July 2006 we will identify and fund the additional needed facilities and operational costs for each park for the next five years. • Parks and Recreation will become non-reliant on the general fund, without reduction in our current funding level and without a reduction in customer satisfaction as assessed by an independent party. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Park Support Program Strategic Activities Supported: • Maintenance and Development Strategic Services Supported: • New Structures Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of park user satisfaction as related to facilities OUTPUT: Number of construction contracts managed DEMAND: Expected number of new structure/facility requests per year EFFICIENCY: Cost per new structure/facility constructed FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 89% 89% Not Available 2 2 Not Available Not Available 10 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 153 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management New Administration Services Building Close Out Jefferson St and Madison St 5 Project Description Funding will be used for the close out of the street improvements on Jackson Street as outlined in the Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Phoenix. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Years FY 04-05 General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ 2,410,352 $ 575,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 575,000 $ 2,985,352 Project Total $ 2,410,352 $ 575,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 575,000 $ 2,985,352 Project Cost Summary Construction Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Years FY 04-05 $ 2,410,352 $ 575,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 575,000 $ 2,985,352 Project Total $ 2,410,352 $ 575,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 575,000 $ 2,985,352 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the project is to provide funding for the close out of the improvements. Strategic Goals Addressed: • By 2005, the Department will design and construct all Capital projects as approved and assigned by the appropriate authority on schedule, within budget, and in cooperation with the customer while meeting the goals of the County. Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of construction delivered within or less than the project construction budget OUTPUT: Number of construction projects completed DEMAND: Number of construction projects scheduled EFFICIENCY: Average construction cost per square foot FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 100% 100% 100% 33 75 150 65 150 150 $2 $100 $160 154 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management New Administrative Services/Forensic Science Center Parking Garage 7th Ave and Jefferson St 5 Project Description This project consists of an 8-level, 985-space parking structure. Downtown administrative services have 903 dedicated parking spaces and the Forensic Science Center has 82 spaces. Funding Summary Source County Improvements (Fund 435) $ Project Total $ Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Years 8,822,455 $ 911,917 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 911,917 $ 9,734,372 - $ - $ - $ - $ 911,917 $ 9,734,372 8,822,455 $ 911,917 $ Project Cost Summary Construction $ Project Total $ Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project 8,822,455 $ 911,917 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 911,917 $ 9,734,372 - $ - $ - $ - $ 911,917 $ 9,734,372 8,822,455 $ 911,917 $ Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. Managing for Results User department did not provide information. 155 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Northeast Superior Court/Justice Courts Expansion Union Hills and 40th St 3 Project Description The Northeast Superior Court Project will be Phase I of what is planned to eventually become the Northeast Regional Center for Maricopa County. The facility will house 12 Superior Court courtrooms including court administration and support space in approximately 73,500 square feet. Four new Justice Courts are also included in the building with required support space. The Northeast Consolidated Justice Courts project will provide a single facility to house the Northeast Phoenix Courts, Northwest Phoenix Courts, Scottsdale Courts, and a Northeast growth precinct. The total building square footage is 104,900. The project is scheduled to be complete in FY 2004-05. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ 2,000,000 $ 14,600,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 14,600,000 $ 16,600,000 Intergovernmental Cap Proj (422) 2,000,000 2,000,000 Project Total $ 4,000,000 $ 14,600,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 14,600,000 $ 18,600,000 Project Cost Summary Construction Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Years $ 4,000,000 $ 14,600,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 14,600,000 $ 18,600,000 Project Total $ 4,000,000 $ 14,600,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 14,600,000 $ 18,600,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year FY 04-05 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ $ - Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ (119,400) $ (122,982) $ (126,671) $ (130,472) $ (499,525) (277,549) (285,875) (294,452) (303,285) (1,161,161) $ (396,949) $ (408,857) $ (421,123) $ (433,757) $ (1,660,686) Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ 10,024 $ 40,095 $ 41,268 $ 42,476 $ 43,720 $ 177,583 Supplies & Services 102,450 409,800 422,094 434,757 447,800 1,816,901 Subtotal $ $ 112,474 $ 449,895 $ 463,362 $ 477,233 $ 491,520 $ 1,994,484 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ 112,474 $ 52,946 $ 54,505 $ 56,110 $ 57,763 $ 333,798 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ 112,474 $ 52,946 $ 54,505 $ 56,110 $ 57,763 $ 333,798 156 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Northeast Superior Court/Justice Courts Expansion Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Northeast Superior Court/Justice Courts Expansion project is to provide cost efficient expansion space for the Superior Court and consolidated space for Justice Courts so that they may provide best in class services to Maricopa County residents. Strategic Goals Addressed: • The public will experience increased access to the court system through improved affordability, convenience and understanding of court processes, while maintaining the efficiency and quality of court services. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Case Management Strategic Activities Supported: • Justice Court Case Flow Management Strategic Services Supported: • Active case management Performance Measures: User department did not provide measures. 157 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts Tierra Buena Blvd & Statler Blvd, City of Surprise 4 Project Description The project will include the design and construction of the Maricopa County Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts. The Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts project will provide a single facility to house the Peoria Court, North Valley Court, Glendale Court, and Wickenburg Court. The facility consists of approximately 36,000 square feet, with four courts, judicial suites, and administrative space. The project is scheduled to be complete in FY 2005-06. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Years FY 04-05 General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ 300,000 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ 800,000 County Improvement Fund (435) 6,500,000 - $ 6,500,000 $ 6,500,000 Project Total $ 300,000 $ 7,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,000,000 $ 7,300,000 Project Cost Summary Construction Prior Years $ 300,000 Project Total $ 300,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 7,000,000 $ 7,000,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ - Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 7,000,000 $ 7,000,000 Total Project $ 7,300,000 $ 7,300,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ $ $ (174,400) $ (179,632) $ (185,021) $ (190,572) $ (729,625) Supplies & Services (473,396) (487,598) (502,226) (517,293) (1,980,513) $ $ (647,796) $ (667,230) $ (687,247) $ (707,865) $ (2,710,138) Subtotal $ Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ $ 20,547 $ 21,134 $ Supplies & Services 156,800 161,504 $ $ 177,347 $ 182,638 $ Subtotal $ 21,738 $ 22,360 $ 166,349 171,340 188,087 $ 193,700 $ 85,779 655,993 741,772 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ (470,449) $ (484,592) $ (499,160) $ (514,165) $ (1,968,366) TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ - $ (470,449) $ (484,592) $ (499,160) $ (514,165) $ (1,968,366) 158 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Northwest Consolidated Justice Courts Project is to construct a new facility that meets the requirements for a consolidated Justice Court to serve County residents so Justice Court functions are provided in an efficient manner. Strategic Goals Addressed: • The public will experience increased access to the court system through improved affordability, convenience and understanding of court processes, while maintaining the efficiency and quality of court services. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Case Management Strategic Activities Supported: • Justice Court Case Flow Management Strategic Services Supported: • Active case management Performance Measures: User department did not provide measures. 159 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Public Health Clinic 16th St and Roosevelt St 5 Project Description The Clinic will replace an aging clinical facility for Public Health. The site is located near the current public health facility, which is ½ mile south of the freeway and in close proximity to other downtown facilities. Client visits to the Public Health Clinic are high volume year-round, peaking June through September for childhood immunizations. The building will be approximately 53,500 square feet, which includes 5,100 square feet for the Environmental Services Facility (under a separate project). The facility also includes approximately 200 underground parking spaces. The project is scheduled to be complete in FY 2004-05. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Years FY 04-05 County Improvement Fund (435) $ 3,400,000 $ 9,627,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 9,627,100 $ 13,027,100 Project Total $ 3,400,000 $ 9,627,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 9,627,100 $ 13,027,100 Project Cost Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 1,400,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,400,000 Construction 2,000,000 9,627,100 9,627,100 11,627,100 Project Total $ 3,400,000 $ 9,627,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 9,627,100 $ 13,027,100 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Sevices Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 5,276,597 $ 5,072,351 $ 5,325,969 $ 5,592,267 $ 5,871,880 $ 6,165,474 $ 33,304,538 2,929,734 3,105,401 3,260,671 3,423,705 3,594,890 3,774,634 20,089,035 7,696 10,796 11,336 11,903 12,498 13,123 67,352 Subtotal $ 8,214,027 $ 8,188,548 $ 8,597,976 $ 9,027,875 $ 9,479,268 $ 9,953,231 $ 53,460,925 Current Facilities Management Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Sevices $ 78,238 $ Supplies & Services 188,019 Subtotal $ 266,257 $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ 78,238 188,019 266,257 Total Current Costs $ 8,480,284 $ 8,188,548 $ 8,597,976 $ 9,027,875 $ 9,479,268 $ 9,953,231 $ 53,727,182 Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Sevices $ $ 8,880 $ 106,561 $ Supplies & Services 23,500 282,000 Subtotal $ $ 32,380 $ 388,561 $ Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ 32,380 $ 388,561 $ 109,758 $ 287,355 397,113 $ 113,051 $ 292,861 405,912 $ 116,443 $ 454,693 298,524 1,184,240 414,967 $ 1,638,933 397,113 $ 405,912 $ 414,967 $ 1,638,933 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 8,480,284 $ 8,220,928 $ 8,986,537 $ 9,424,988 $ 9,885,180 $ 10,368,198 $ 55,366,115 160 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Public Health Clinic Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Public Health Clinic Project is to construct a new facility that meets the requirements for the Public Health Department to serve County residents so functions are provided in an efficient manner. Strategic Goals Addressed: • Manage department programs to meet the increasing demand for essential Public Health services resulting from Maricopa County growth. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Primary Care Clinic • HIV/HCV Services • Immunization Services • Infectious Disease Control and Treatment Strategic Activities Supported: • Primary Care Clinic • Jail Work Release Examinations • HIV Counseling and Testing • Public Health Laboratory • Adult Immunizations • Public Health Pharmacy • Hansen’s Disease Services • • Infectious Disease Control for Refugees Sexually Transmitted Disease Testing and Treatment • Tuberculosis Services Strategic Services Supported: • Examinations • Adult immunizations • Laboratory tests • Foreign travel immunizations • Referrals for dental and vision care • Jail work release screenings • Mental health assessments and referrals • Pharmacy services • Outreach encounters • STD testing and treatment • HIV tests and diagnoses • Tuberculosis clinic service 161 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Public Health Clinic Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of clients who said their HIV test result was explained clearly and simply OUTPUT: Number of clients receiving pretest counseling DEMAND: Number of people needing HIV tests EFFICIENCY: Average time spent per client (includes travel, paperwork, and time spent directly with client) in hours RESULT: Percent of clients receiving adult immunizations OUTPUT: Number of clients served DEMAND: Number of people calling to request service EFFICIENCY: Number of clients per hour per nurse FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 100% 95% 97% 2,627 6,000 5,700 2,627 6,000 5,700 1.5 1.5 1.5 36% 58% 50% 1,125 3,500 3,500 3,151 6,000 7,000 1.2 1.1 2.5 162 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Parks and Recreation San Tan Mountain Regional Park Entry Station Construction San Tan Mountain Regional Park 1 Project Description The MCPRD Visitor Study, September 2003, conducted by Arizona State University Department of Recreation Management and Tourism, states that restrooms are the highest amenity requested by those surveyed. San Tan Park was not specifically surveyed; nonetheless, MCPRD recently completed a San Tan Mountain Regional Park Master Plan, which included an extensive public participation plan where public input was obtained from East Valley, Maricopa County, and Pinal County residents. As shown in the master plan, San Tan Park visitors’ highest priorities are public restrooms with water and an entry station. Pinal County, City of Chandler, City of Mesa, Town of Gilbert, and Town of Queen Creek all support the master plan and the development it proposes. The entry station construction will include building one new entry station with public restrooms, employee offices, a contact station, park host structures, and a multipurpose room. No amenities currently exist. Adding a new entry station to the San Tan Park will provide new opportunities such as increased day use activity by allowing visitors to have a sense of arrival and park contact with staff thus increasing revenue. Currently, San Tan Park is a burden to the general fund and MCPRD, and the entry station will promote visitation to the park and make it easier for staff and park hosts to collect entry fees; therefore, decreasing the burden to Maricopa County taxpayers. The Board of Supervisors allocated $500,000 for the design, building construction, site infrastructure, and furnishings of San Tan entry station. An additional $148,000 is required for construction of the project. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ 52,796 $ 595,204 $ $ $ $ $ 595,204 $ 648,000 Project Total $ 52,796 $ 595,204 $ $ $ $ $ 595,204 $ 648,000 $500,000 originated from the Maricopa County General Fund in FY03-04. Of that $52,796 has been expended for the design and it is anticipated that we will request carryover of the remaining $447,204. The additional $148,000 required for the construction project is being requested from the funds set aside in General Government from the sale of land to the Maricopa County Library District. There are no outside sources. MCPRD will be responsible for the continued operating costs. Project Cost Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Design and Engineering $ 52,796 $ 25,000 $ $ $ $ $ 25,000 $ 77,796 Construction 570,204 570,204 570,204 $ $ $ $ 595,204 $ 648,000 Project Total $ 52,796 $ 595,204 $ 163 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program San Tan Mountain Regional Park Entry Station Construction Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Supplies & Services Capital Outlay $ Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Subtotal $ 167,795 $ 151,186 $ 151,186 $ 151,186 $ 151,186 $ 151,186 $ 923,725 18,300 20,432 20,432 20,840 21,257 21,682 122,943 331,196 10,000 341,196 517,291 $ 181,618 $ 171,618 $ 172,026 $ 172,443 $ 172,868 $ 1,387,864 Total Current Costs $ 517,291 $ 181,618 $ 171,618 $ 172,026 $ 172,443 $ 172,868 $ 1,387,864 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 517,291 $ 181,618 $ 171,618 $ 172,026 $ 172,443 $ 172,868 $ 1,387,864 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the San Tan entry station is to build an entry station with public restrooms at San Tan Mountain Regional Park for the park visitors, Maricopa County and Pinal County citizens, and out of town visitors so that they may have a safe and meaningful outdoor experience and return to the parks. • Direct purpose: Customers will visit and return to San Tan Mountain Regional Park and increase MCPRD‘s revenue, which is 80% revenue based. (San Tan visitors come to enjoy equestrian, hiking and biking trails, STMRP Master Plan, 2003). • Direct customer: Maricopa County taxpayers, Pinal County residents, East Valley residents, out of town visitors, and San Tan Mountain Regional Park visitors. • Direct result: Customers will return and enjoy the parks, and the MCPRD Visitor Study measures this. Strategic Goals Addressed: • We will increase community involvement and awareness through improved marketing and education programs in order to increase park attendance, revenues and funding. • By July 2006 we will identify and fund the additional needed facilities and operational costs for each park for the next five years. • Parks and Recreation will become non-reliant on the general fund, without reduction in our current funding level and without a reduction in customer satisfaction as assessed by an independent party. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Park Support Program Strategic Activities Supported: • Maintenance and Development Strategic Services Supported: • New structures • Improvement projects 164 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program San Tan Mountain Regional Park Entry Station Construction Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of park user satisfaction as related to facilities OUTPUT: Number of construction contracts managed DEMAND: Expected number of new structure/facility requests per year EFFICIENCY: Cost per new structure/facility constructed FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 89% 89% Not Available 2 2 Not Available Not Available 10 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 165 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Security Building 234 N Central Ave 5 Project Description This project includes tenant improvements within the Security Building that are necessary to modify the current vacant space for future occupancy by County tenants. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Years FY 04-05 General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ 500,000 $ 4,821,059 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 4,821,059 $ 5,321,059 County Improvement Fund (435) 9,870,425 9,870,425 - $ - $ - $ - $ 4,821,059 $ 15,191,484 Project Total $ 10,370,425 $ 4,821,059 $ Project Cost Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Years FY 04-05 Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 8,856,189 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 8,856,189 Construction 1,514,236 4,821,059 4,821,059 6,335,295 - $ - $ - $ - $ 4,821,059 $ 15,191,484 Project Total $ 10,370,425 $ 4,821,059 $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Supplies & Services $ $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,750,000 Subtotal $ $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,750,000 Total Post Construction Costs $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS - $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,750,000 - $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,750,000 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Security Building Tenant Improvement project is to create/modify existing space for County departments so they can achieve their mission in a cost effective and efficient manner. Strategic Goals Addressed: • By 2005, the Department will design and construct all Capital projects as approved and assigned by the appropriate authority on schedule, within budget and in cooperation with the customer while meeting the goals of the County. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Building Renovation and Minor Construction 166 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Security Building Strategic Activities Supported: • Construction Strategic Services Supported: • Construction documents Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of construction delivered within or less than the project construction budget OUTPUT: Number of construction projects completed DEMAND: Number of construction projects scheduled EFFICIENCY: Average construction cost per square foot FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 100% 100% 100% 33 75 150 65 150 150 $2 $100 $160 167 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Sheriff’s Property and Evidence Facility Durango Complex, 35th Ave and Lower Buckeye Rd 5 Project Description The Property and Evidence Storage Division holds all crime scene evidence for all County cases. This is also where the personal property of convicted persons is held until their release or they are otherwise no longer in the County’s system. The new facility is being built on the Durango Campus, integrated with the Durango Master Plan. The new Property and Evidence Storage facility will comprise approximately 51,500 square feet including administrative offices, evidence storage, cooler and freezer storage, a money vault, a drug vault, a gun/ammunition room, processing areas, night drop, viewing rooms, and staff support functions. Additionally, there will be parking for staff, public, and the night drop off. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Intergovernmental Cap Proj (422) $ 6,500,000 $ 306,547 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 306,547 $ 6,806,547 - $ - $ - $ - $ 306,547 $ 6,806,547 Project Total $ 6,500,000 $ 306,547 $ Project Cost Summary Construction Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 $ 6,050,000 $ 306,547 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ Project Total $ 6,500,000 $ 306,547 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 5-Year Total Total Project 306,547 $ 6,356,547 306,547 $ 6,806,547 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ 47,834 $ 49,269 $ 50,747 $ 52,270 $ 53,838 $ 253,958 Supplies & Services 133,900 137,917 142,055 146,316 150,706 710,894 Subtotal $ $ 181,734 $ 187,186 $ 192,802 $ 198,586 $ 204,544 $ 964,852 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ 181,734 $ 187,186 $ 192,802 $ 198,586 $ 204,544 $ 964,852 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ 181,734 $ 187,186 $ 192,802 $ 198,586 $ 204,544 $ 964,852 Managing for Results Strategic Goals Addressed: • The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will always meet constitutional standards for care, custody, and control of inmates as well as a safe environment for staff. 168 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Sheriff’s Property and Evidence Facility Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of inmates properly processed OUTPUT: Number of inmates processed DEMAND: Number of inmates expected to be received EFFICIENCY: Cost per inmate per day FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 100% 100% 100% 59,409 118,818 124,759 59,409 118,818 124,759 Not Available $46 Not Available 169 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Southeast Consolidated Justice Courts/Parking Structure City of Mesa 2 Project Description The project will include the design and construction of the Maricopa County Southeast Consolidated Justice Courts. The project will provide a single 36,000 square foot facility to house the North Mesa, East Mesa, West Mesa, and South Mesa/Gilbert Justice Courts. The project will also include the design and construction of a 1000space parking structure to support both the Consolidated Justice Courts and the Maricopa County Superior Court. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Source Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project General Fund Imp Fund (445) $ - $ - $ 6,125,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 6,125,000 $ 6,125,000 County Improvement Fund (435) 8,000,000 2,965,000 10,965,000 10,965,000 Intergovernmental Cap Proj (422) 2,410,000 2,410,000 2,410,000 Project Total $ - $ 8,000,000 $ 11,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 19,500,000 $ 19,500,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Project Total $ - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 $ 1,000,000 $ $ 7,000,000 11,500,000 $ 8,000,000 $ 11,500,000 $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - $ $ 5-Year Total 1,000,000 $ 18,500,000 19,500,000 $ Total Project 1,000,000 18,500,000 19,500,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ $ $ 39,953 $ 41,092 $ 42,264 $ 123,309 Supplies & Services 295,900 304,777 313,920 $ 914,597 Subtotal $ $ $ $ 335,853 $ 345,869 $ 356,184 $ 1,037,906 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ - $ 335,853 $ 345,869 $ 356,184 $ 1,037,906 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ - $ - $ 335,853 $ 345,869 $ 356,184 $ 1,037,906 Managing for Results Purpose Statement The purpose of the Southeast Consolidated Justice Courts and Parking Structure project is to construct a new facility that meets the requirements for a consolidated Justice Court to serve County residents so that Justice Court functions are provided in an efficient manner. Strategic Goals Addressed • The public will experience increased access to the court system through improved affordability, convenience and understanding of court processes, while maintaining the efficiency and quality of court services. 170 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Southeast Consolidated Justice Courts Strategic Plan Programs Supported • Case Management Strategic Activities Supported • Justice Court Case Flow Management Strategic Services Supported • Active case management Performance Measures User department did not provide measures 171 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts City of Mesa 2 Project Description The project will include the design and construction of the Maricopa County Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts. The project will provide a single 46,000 square foot facility to house the Buckeye, Gila Bend, Maryvale, and Tolleson Justice Courts, as well as providing for a future precinct. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Source Years FY 04-05 County Improvement Fund (435) $ - $ 2,000,000 $ 3,935,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 5,935,000 $ 5,935,000 Intergovernmental Cap Proj (422) 2,815,000 2,815,000 2,815,000 Project Total $ - $ 2,000,000 $ 6,750,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 8,750,000 $ 8,750,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Project Total $ - Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 $ 500,000 $ $ 1,500,000 6,750,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 6,750,000 $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total Total Project $ 500,000 $ 500,000 8,250,000 8,250,000 $ 8,750,000 $ 8,750,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Services $ $ $ $ 20,698 $ 21,289 $ 21,898 $ 63,885 Supplies & Services 204,000 210,120 216,424 $ 630,544 Subtotal $ $ $ $ 224,698 $ 231,409 $ 238,322 $ 694,429 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ - $ 224,698 $ 231,409 $ 238,322 $ 694,429 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ - $ - $ 224,698 $ 231,409 $ 238,322 $ 694,429 Managing for Results Purpose Statement The purpose of the Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts project is to construct a new facility that meets the requirements for a consolidated Justice Court to serve County residents so that Justice Court functions are provided in an efficient manner. Strategic Goals Addressed • The public will experience increased access to the court system through improved affordability, convenience and understanding of court processes, while maintaining the efficiency and quality of court services. 172 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Southwest Consolidated Justice Courts Strategic Plan Programs Supported • Case Management Strategic Activities Supported • Justice Court Case Flow Management Strategic Services Supported • Active case management Performance Measures User department did not provide measures 173 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Parks and Recreation Water Storage and Pressure Tank Restoration Estrella Mountain Regional Park and White Tank Mountain Regional Park 4&5 Project Description In September and October of 2003, Carollo Engineers inspected the water reservoir and pressure tanks at Usery, McDowell, Estrella, and White Tank. The Water Reservoir and Pressure Tank Report on Findings and Recommendations as prepared by Carollo Engineers states that repairs are required within the next year for the Estrella pressure tank and White Tank water storage and pressure tank. Repairs include sandblasting and recoating the interior, and power washing and recoating the exterior. The importance of inspecting and restoring the interior of the tanks is to provide a safe public water system for our staff and visitors and to meet Arizona Department of Environmental Quality regulations. The restoration costs are estimated at $50,000. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Source Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Parks Enhacement Fund (241) $ 30,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 30,000 General Fund Imp Fund (445) 50,000 50,000 50,000 Project Total $ 30,000 $ 50,000 $ $ $ $ $ 50,000 $ 80,000 The $50,000 for restoration is budgeted within the request from the $1.54 million sale of land to the Library District. There are no outside sources. MCPRD will be responsible for the continued operating costs. Project Cost Summary Inspection Restoration Prior Year Year 1 Year 2 FY03-04 FY 04-05 FY 05-06 $ 30,000 $ - $ - $ 50,000 Project Total $ 30,000 $ 50,000 $ - Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 5-Year Total FY 08-09 Total Project $ - $ - $ 30,000 - $ 50,000 50,000 $ - $ 50,000 $ 80,000 Operating Cost Summary There are no operating costs associated with the restoration contract. The contract will be managed by in-house existing design staff. Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the water tank restoration is to repair a water pressure tank at Estrella Mountain Regional Park and repair a water storage and pressure tank at White Tank Mountain Regional Park for the park visitors, Maricopa County, and out of town visitors so that they may have a safe and meaningful outdoor experience and return to the parks. • Direct purpose: Customers will visit and return to Estrella Mountain and White Tank Mountain Regional Park and increase MCPRD‘s revenue, which is 80% revenue based. • Direct customer: Maricopa County taxpayers, out of town visitors, and Estrella Mountain & White Tank Mountain Regional Park visitors. • Direct result: Customers will return and enjoy the parks, and the MCPRD Visitor Study measures this. 174 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Water Storage and Pressure Tank Restoration Strategic Goals Addressed: • We will increase community involvement and awareness through improved marketing and education programs in order to increase park attendance, revenues and funding. • By July 2006 we will identify and fund the additional needed facilities and operational costs for each park for the next five years. • Parks and Recreation will become non-reliant on the general fund, without reduction in our current funding level and without a reduction in customer satisfaction as assessed by an independent party. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Park Support Program Strategic Plan Activities Supported: • Maintenance and Development Strategic Plan Services Supported: • Utilities • Facility Repair • Clean Facilities Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of park user satisfaction as related to facilities OUTPUT: Number of construction contracts managed DEMAND: Expected number of new structure/facility requests per year EFFICIENCY: Cost per new structure/facility constructed FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 89% 89% Not Available 2 2 Not Available Not Available 10 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 175 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Detention Capital Projects Summary Criminal Justice Facilities Capital Improvement Projects for adult jails and juvenile detention total $100.2 million, 12.8% of the new five-year CIP. These projects are funded by a sales tax increase approved by voters in November 1998. The programming phase, based on the Jail Master Plan, was finalized in July 1999, and the design phase was completed in 2001. The construction closeout phase for three projects continues into 2005 and includes completion of all work and closeout of contracts. In addition to the Facilities Review Committee (FRC) process, a Citizens’ Jail Oversight Committee (CJOC) reviews projects funded by the Jail Excise Tax. In 1997, a nine-member Citizens Advisory Committee on Jail Planning was appointed by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, the County Attorney, the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, and the Sheriff for the purpose of conducting a criminal justice system Master Plan. The Committee selected a nationally recognized jailplanning consultant to assist in studying the subject of the Committee’s charge. RNL Design, in association with Chinn Planning, Inc. and Liebert & Associates, was contracted by Maricopa County to complete a needs assessment and master plan of the adult and juvenile criminal justice detention system. The Committee met on 15 occasions from March 21, 1997 to November 13, 1997. Meetings were conducted in each of the Board Districts. In the fall of 1997, RNL Design completed its final report, “The Maricopa County Report on Jail Planning”, dated November 12, 1997. This comprehensive planning effort covered 15 years in the future and identified some $1.4 billion in needs. The Committee then used this report as the basis for four hearings conducted throughout the County. The final report of the Committee, the “Citizens Advisory Committee Report on Jail Planning”, dated November 18, 1997 is based on the Executive Summary of the consultants’ final report. The consultants gave the Committee permission to revise the Executive Summary to reflect the Committee’s conclusions and recommendations. The Committee made certain changes and modifications to the consultants work, which are reflected in its Final Report and in the budget figures attached to its Final Report. The consultants’ work is contained in Volumes 1-5 of the Committee’s Final Report, which constitutes the Maricopa County Criminal Justice System Master Plan. Project Detail A total of four (4) capital projects are identified and recommended to the Board for support from the Detention Fund by the Facilities Review Committee in the proposed CIP. The recommended projects are noted in the table below. 455 DETENTION CAPITAL PROJECTS New Projects Detention Facilities Renovations Prior Years $ Subtotal $ Continuing Projects Fourth Avenue Jail Durango Juvenile Detention/Treatment Center Lower Buckeye Jail Subtotal Completed Projects FMD Operations and Maintenance Building MCSO Training Facility Mesa Juvenile Detention Center Southeast Regional Courtroom Buildout Other Completed Projects Subtotal $ $ $ $ TOTAL FUND 455 $ FY 2004-05 - FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 $ 15,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ $ 15,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 5-YR TOTAL (FY 2005-09) TOTAL PROJECT - $ $ 75,000,000 $ 75,000,000 75,000,000 $ 75,000,000 - $ 4,072,920 $ 146,445,305 13,427,891 93,383,017 7,661,599 230,687,583 25,162,410 $ 470,515,905 $ $ - $ 494,558,554 $ 40,162,410 $ 30,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ - $ 100,162,410 $ 594,720,964 142,372,385 $ 4,072,920 $ 79,955,126 13,427,891 223,025,984 7,661,599 445,353,495 $ 25,162,410 $ 4,710,164 $ 9,114,831 23,580,062 427,601 11,372,401 49,205,059 $ - $ $ 176 - $ - $ $ $ - $ - $ $ $ - $ - $ $ $ - $ $ 4,710,164 9,114,831 23,580,062 427,601 11,372,401 49,205,059 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Detention Facilities Renovations Various Various Project Description This project is for the remodel, renovation, and/or demolition of existing adult detention facilities. The Madison Street and Towers Jails will be remodeled and renovated. The Durango Jail will be demolished, and planning for a replacement facility will begin. Funding Summary Prior Years Source Jail Tax Fund (455) $ - $ Project Total $ - $ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project 15,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ - $75,000,000 $ 75,000,000 15,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ - $75,000,000 $ 75,000,000 Project Cost Summary Construction Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project Years FY 04-05 $ $15,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ $ 75,000,000 $75,000,000 Project Total $ - $15,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ - $ 75,000,000 $75,000,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Detention Facilities Renovations project is to renovate existing Maricopa County Jail Facilities for the general population so that the increased number of inmates processed through the judicial system can be detained in a controlled, secure, and safe environment as required by law. Strategic Goals Addressed: • The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will always meet constitutional standards for care, custody and control of inmates as well as a safe environment for staff. Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Custody Management Program Strategic Activities Supported: • • • • Detention Management Activity Inmate Processing Activity Mandated Inmate Programs and Services Activity New Detention Facilities Transition Activity 177 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Detention Facilities Renovations Strategic Services Supported: • • • • • • • • • Proactive Detention Management Strategies Inmate Intakes Inmate Classifications New Facilities Transition Plans New Facilities Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment Acquisitions Reactive Detention Management Strategies Inmate Releases Mandated Inmate Services New Facilities Transition Facilitations Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of inmates properly processed OUTPUT: Number of inmates processed DEMAND: Number of inmates expected to be received EFFICIENCY: Cost per inmate per day FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 100% 100% 100% 59,409 118,818 124,759 59,409 118,818 124,759 Not Available $46 Not Available 178 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Durango Juvenile Detention/Treatment Center South of Durango St, between 27th Ave and 35th Ave 5 Project Description The approximately 270,000 square feet project contains 220 beds, 12 new courts with judicial suites and associated office space for support staff and related functions. A residential treatment facility located at the corner of Durango and 35th Avenue totaling approximately 28,000 square foot contains 48 beds. Construction began in 2001 and completes in 2004. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 Source Jail Tax Fund (455) $ 79,955,126 $ 13,427,891 $ Project Total $ 79,955,126 $ 13,427,891 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total Total Project $13,427,891 $ 93,383,017 $13,427,891 $ 93,383,017 Project Cost Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 79,955,126 $ 13,427,891 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 13,427,891 $ 93,383,017 Project Total $ 79,955,126 $ 13,427,891 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 13,427,891 $ 93,383,017 Construction Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Sevices $ $ 3,366,864 $ 4,247,472 $ 4,247,472 $ 4,247,472 $ 4,247,472 $ 20,356,752 Supplies & Services 83,748 18,948 18,948 18,948 18,948 159,540 Capital Outlay 137,145 137,145 137,145 137,145 137,145 685,723 Subtotal $ $ 3,587,756 $ 4,403,565 $ 4,403,565 $ 4,403,565 $ 4,403,565 $ 21,202,015 Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Sevices $ $ 334,340 $ 334,340 $ 353,640 $ 364,249 $ 375,177 $ 1,761,746 Supplies & Services 980,600 1,010,018 1,040,319 1,071,529 1,103,674 5,206,140 Subtotal $ $ 1,314,940 $ 1,344,358 $ 1,393,959 $ 1,435,778 $ 1,478,851 $ 6,967,886 Total Post Construction Costs $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS - $ 4,902,696 $ 5,747,923 $ 5,797,524 $ 5,839,342 $ 5,882,416 $ 28,169,901 - $ 4,902,696 $ 5,747,923 $ 5,797,524 $ 5,839,342 $ 5,882,416 $ 28,169,901 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Juvenile Facility project is to expand the number of beds available in detention for juveniles awaiting a court hearing or as a disposition alternative for judicial officers so juveniles can become responsible citizens and public safety is enhanced. Strategic Goals Addressed: • None 179 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Durango Juvenile Detention/Treatment Center Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Detention Program Strategic Activities Supported: • Juvenile Programming • Juvenile Custody Strategic Services Supported: • Anger management class • High impact program • Personal necessities • Behavior assessments • Incident reports • Suicide risk assessments Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of detainees requiring class I Incident Reports OUTPUT: Number of detainees requiring class I Incident Reports DEMAND: Number of juveniles anticipated to be provided custody EFFICIENCY: Daily cost of providing custody FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 3% 3% Not Available 156 300 Not Available 4,956 10,000 Not Available $116.75 $116.75 Not Available 180 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Fourth Avenue Jail 4th Ave and Madison St 5 Project Description This project will result in an approximately 560,000 square foot mid-rise building in downtown Phoenix that will consist of a basement, ground level and three levels with mezzanines. The jail will accommodate 2,100 maximum custody pre-trial jail beds, an intake-processing center, two initial appearance courtrooms, two early disposition courtrooms and administrative support space. A tunnel system will connect the new facility with the existing Madison Street Jail and Courts. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 Source Jail Tax Fund (455) $142,372,385 $ 4,072,920 $ Project Total $142,372,385 $ 4,072,920 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total Total Project $ 4,072,920 $ 146,445,305 $ 4,072,920 $ 146,445,305 Project Cost Summary Construction Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 142,372,385 $ 4,072,920 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 4,072,920 $ 146,445,305 - $ - $ - $ - $ 4,072,920 $ 146,445,305 Project Total $ 142,372,385 $ 4,072,920 $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Year FY 04-05 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Sevices $ $ 9,444,296 $ 18,888,592 $ 18,888,592 $ 18,888,592 $ 18,888,592 $ 84,998,664 Supplies & Services 934,985 1,869,971 1,869,971 1,869,971 1,869,971 8,414,868 Subtotal $ $ 10,379,281 $ 20,758,563 $ 20,758,563 $ 20,758,563 $ 20,758,563 $ 93,413,532 Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Sevices $ 70,353 $ 1,108,655 $ 1,141,915 $ 1,176,172 $ 1,211,457 $ 1,247,801 $ 5,956,353 Supplies & Services 340,368 $ 2,656,950 2,736,659 2,818,758 2,903,321 2,990,421 14,446,477 Subtotal $ 410,721 $ 3,765,605 $ 3,878,574 $ 3,994,930 $ 4,114,778 $ 4,238,222 $ 20,402,830 Total Post Construction Costs $ 410,721 $ 14,144,886 $ 24,637,137 $ 24,753,493 $ 24,873,341 $ 24,996,785 $ 113,816,362 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 410,721 $ 14,144,886 $ 24,637,137 $ 24,753,493 $ 24,873,341 $ 24,996,785 $ 113,816,362 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Fourth Avenue Jail project is to expand Maricopa County Jail Facilities for the general population so that the increased number of inmates processed through the judicial system can be detained in a controlled, secure, and safe environment as required by law. Strategic Goals Addressed: • The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will always meet constitutional standards for care, custody and control of inmates as well as a safe environment for staff. 181 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Fourth Avenue Jail Strategic Plan Program Supported: • Custody Management Program Strategic Activities Supported: • Detention Management Activity • Inmate Processing Activity • Mandated Inmate Programs and Services Activity • New Detention Facilities Transition Activity Strategic Services Supported: • Proactive detention management strategies • Inmate intakes • Inmate classifications • Reactive detention management strategies • Inmate releases • Mandated inmate services Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of inmates properly processed OUTPUT: Number of inmates processed DEMAND: Number of inmates expected to be received EFFICIENCY: Cost per inmate per day FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 100% 100% 100% 59,409 118,818 124,759 59,409 118,818 124,759 Not Available $46 Not Available 182 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Facilities Management Lower Buckeye Jail Lower Buckeye Rd, East of 35th Ave 5 Project Description The Lower Buckeye Jail contains 2,449 beds including maximum custody adult beds, minimum custody adult beds, remanded juvenile beds, psychiatric beds, and infirmary beds. The Lower Buckeye Jail also includes intake, jail command offices, Correctional Health Services offices, a central infirmary and pharmacy, and Central Services (laundry, stores, warehouse/food factory and central plant). Construction began in 2001 and completes in 2004. Funding Summary Prior Year 1 Year 2 Source Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 Jail Tax Fund (455) $223,025,984 $ 7,661,599 $ Project Total $223,025,984 $ 7,661,599 $ - Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ - Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total Total Project $ 7,661,599 $ 230,687,583 $ 7,661,599 $ 230,687,583 Project Cost Summary Construction Prior Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5-Year Total Years FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 223,025,984 $ 7,661,599 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,661,599 $ 230,687,583 - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,661,599 $ 230,687,583 Project Total $ 223,025,984 $ 7,661,599 $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year FY 04-05 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Sevices $ $ 10,341,006 $ Supplies & Services 1,023,760 Subtotal $ $ 11,364,766 $ Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project 20,682,011 $ 20,682,011 $ 20,682,011 $ 20,682,011 $ 93,069,050 2,047,519 2,047,519 2,047,519 2,047,519 9,213,836 22,729,530 $ 22,729,530 $ 22,729,530 $ 22,729,530 $ 102,282,886 Post Construction/Facilities Management Department Operating Costs (If Necessary) Personal Sevices $ 65,468 $ 1,190,921 $ 1,226,649 $ 1,238,259 $ 1,274,651 $ 1,287,679 $ 6,283,627 Supplies & Services 3,350,385 3,450,897 3,554,423 3,661,056 3,770,888 17,787,649 Subtotal $ 65,468 $ 4,541,306 $ 4,677,546 $ 4,792,682 $ 4,935,707 $ 5,058,567 $ 24,071,276 Total Post Construction Costs $ 65,468 $ 15,906,072 $ 27,407,076 $ 27,522,212 $ 27,665,237 $ 27,788,097 $ 126,354,162 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 65,468 $ 15,906,072 $ 27,407,076 $ 27,522,212 $ 27,665,237 $ 27,788,097 $ 126,354,162 Managing for Results Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Lower Buckeye Jail project is to expand Maricopa County Jail Facilities for the general population so the increased number of inmates processed through the judicial system can be detained in a controlled, secure, and safe environment as required by law. Strategic Goals Addressed: • The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will always meet constitutional standards for care, custody and control of inmates as well as a safe environment for staff. 183 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Lower Buckeye Jail Strategic Plan Programs Supported: • Custody Management Program Strategic Activities Supported: • Detention Management Activity • Inmate Processing Activity • Mandated Inmate Programs and Services Activity • New Detention Facilities Transition Activity Strategic Services Supported: • Proactive detention management strategies • Inmate intakes • Inmate classifications • Reactive detention management strategies • Inmate releases • Mandated inmate services • New facilities transition facilitations Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of inmates properly processed OUTPUT: Number of inmates processed DEMAND: Number of inmates expected to be received EFFICIENCY: Cost per inmate per day FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 100% 100% 100% 59,409 118,818 124,759 59,409 118,818 124,759 Not Available $46 Not Available 184 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Transportation Summary The Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) employs a separate planning procedure than those utilized by the County at large. These include intergovernmental agency collaboration and prioritization based on an established list of ranking criteria for designated types of projects. Ranking criteria used by the Department of Transportation for roadway improvements include: • Safety • Land use, regional travel usage and environmental factors • Traffic volume compared to capacity of roadway • Cost/benefit ratio • Joint sponsorship • Bonus points for intelligent transportation systems, alternative mode and environmental enhancements Separate ranking systems exist for evaluating potential bridges, channel upgrades, bicycle, pedestrian and other multi-modal improvements. MCDOT annually develops a five-year Transportation Improvements Program (TIP), which is approved by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (BOS). This annual approval authorizes expenditures by MCDOT for making transportation improvements to roadways and bridges, acquiring right-of-way, developing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and implementing the County’s Bicycle Plan. MCDOT staff, representatives from cities and towns, and the general public recommend projects for inclusion in the TIP. A multi-divisional MCDOT review group annually ranks the proposed projects according to adopted criteria using an extensive prioritization process. Funding from all available sources is then matched against the proposed projects. The highest rated and most beneficial projects are subsequently recommended to the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) for consideration and public review. The BOS makes the final decision regarding projects to be included in the TIP. MCDOT funds the TIP through several resources. The primary source is the Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF). The County must spend these funds only on transportation-related items. In addition, the County occasionally receives funds from several federal agencies, such as the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA). Other funding sources arise through partnerships with local jurisdictions, federal, state agencies or private corporations. 185 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Project Detail A total of 120 capital projects are identified and recommended to the Board from MCDOT. The recommended projects are as follows: PRIOR YEARS TRANSPORTATION CAP. PROJECTS (FUND 234) 7TH ST:CAREFREEHWY-DESERT HILLS $ 51ST AVE: BROADWAY - BASELINE 1,933,000 51ST AVE: S/ELLIOT-DOBBINS 1,299,000 51ST AVE: SANTA CRUZ-GRIC BDRY 67TH AVE: PINNACLE P - HAPPY V 2,000 75TH AVE: MC 85 - VAN BUREN 790,000 83RD AVE: NORTHERN OLIVE 581,000 87TH AVE: DEER VLY - WILLIAMS 81,000 115TH AVE BRIDGE AT GILA RIVER 3,000 ALMA SCH:MCLELLAN - MCKELLIPS 481,000 ALMA SCH:N BRDG GRD CTRL STRC 143,000 ALMA SCHOOL AT CHAMPAGNE/HALLEY 8,000 AZTECH SMART CORRIDORS 2,663,000 BASELINE: 7TH AVE - 43RD AVE 27,314,000 BELL RD AT R H JOHNSON 81,000 BELL RD: SR 303 -L101 ITS IMP 227,000 BELL RD:SR303L /GRAND AV (ITS) BETHANY HOME RD AT DYSART RD BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT SERVICES 30,000 BROWN RD: ELLSWORTH - CRISMON 86,000 BUSH HWY: USERY - STEWART MTN CANDIDATE ASSESSMENT REPORTS 298,000 CAREFREE HWY: 7 AV - CAVE CRK 1,479,000 CAVE CRK: LONE MT - CRFREE HWY 5,574,000 CHAND HGTS AT SANOKI WASH 85,000 CHAND HGTS: CULVER AT E CANAL 72,000 CHANDLER HTS RD AT 124TH ST CONTRACT OVERLAY FY04 703,000 DEER VALLEY RD: 83RD - 91ST AV 11,000 EL MIRAGE : BEARDSLEY - LP 303 2,020,000 EL MIRAGE : BELL - BEARDSLEY 1,838,000 EL MIRAGE:NORTH'N/BELL ELLSWORTH GERMAN - BASELINE 5,252,006 ELLSWORTH RD: HUNT HWY - RIGGS ELLSWORTH: UIV - MCLELLAN 1,517,000 FIRE STAAT 11TH AV GDACS:GEOD DNSIF/CADAST SRVYS 4,505,000 GENERAL CIVIL ENGINEERING 361,000 GILBERT RD:MCDOWELL - SR 87 8,070,000 GLBRT RD: WARNER - WATER TANK 3,000 GREENWAY RD AT SR303 L303: BETHANY HM - GLENDALE 1,000 L303: CACTUS - WADELL 1,000 L303: CAMELBACK - BETHANY HM 1,000 L303: GREENWAY RD TO BELL 1,000 L303: INDIAN SCH - CAMELBACK L303: WADDELL - GREENWAY 1,000 LAVEEN AREA CONVEYANCE CHANNEL 500,000 LINDSAY RD:WILLIAMS FLD TO RAY 1,000 LOW VOLUME ROADS PROGRAM LOWER BUCKEYE RD AT 67TH AVE LP 303 : INDIAN SCH -CLEARVIEW 3,138,936 MC 85 AT MILLER RD MC 85 EXT: SR 85 TO TURNER RD MC 85: 107TH AVE - 91ST AVE 205,000 MC 85: 91ST AVE - 75TH AVE 41,000 MC 85: COTTON LN-ESTRELLA PKWY 1,340,000 MC 85: ESTREALL PKWY -LITCHFLD 1,136,000 MC85 AT AGUA FRIA/BRIDGE SCOUR 2,015,000 MC85: JACKRABBIT - PERRYVILLE MC85: PERRYVILLE - COTTON LN MC85: SR85/75TH AV - FY 2004-05 $ 5,000 120,000 75,000 20,000 5,000 215,000 2,000 2,360,000 2,707,000 170,000 50,000 1,000 10,000 1,120,000 5,000 220,500 15,000 1,000 225,000 300,000 1,275,000 1,000 80,000 643,000 92,000 220,000 80,000 5,000 5,000 245,000 12,152,580 2,431,000 2,900 2,250,000 230,000 9,305,512 5,000 709,700 4,000 1,000 4,000 1,000 4,000 1,000 500,000 1,627,500 20,000 126,400 205,000 5,000 368,826 935,000 10,000 1,000 2,830,000 35,000 1,000 1,000 320,000 FY 2005-06 $ 470,000 2,946,000 955,000 20,000 2,670,000 710,000 635,000 2,000 1,088,000 5,000 300,000 1,000 30,000 10,000 135,000 10,285,000 170,000 3,560,000 63,250 250,000 3,500,000 201,000 310,000 1,000 310,000 1,000 330,000 1,000 3,020,000 297,000 270,000 2,032,212 30,000 6,820,000 3,000 1,000 1,000 - 186 FY 2006-07 $ 5,000 2,540,000 2,000 389,000 300,000 1,000 3,500,000 2,510,000 345,000 2,510,000 325,000 2,510,000 325,000 3,020,000 5,810,000 2,620,000 705,000 440,000 440,000 - FY 2007-08 $ 2,000 300,000 4,000,000 2,240,000 20,000 2,240,000 20,000 2,240,000 30,000 3,020,000 3,110,000 8,130,000 3,360,000 - FY 2008-09 $ 350,000 4,000,000 3,020,000 920,000 - 5-YR TOTAL (FY 2005-09) $ 470,000 2,946,000 960,000 120,000 95,000 2,695,000 3,255,000 850,000 8,000 2,360,000 3,795,000 170,000 50,000 1,000 10,000 1,120,000 399,000 220,500 15,000 1,000 225,000 1,550,000 1,275,000 3,000 110,000 653,000 227,000 220,000 80,000 5,000 5,000 245,000 22,437,580 170,000 5,991,000 66,150 2,500,000 15,230,000 9,305,512 206,000 709,700 5,064,000 367,000 5,064,000 347,000 5,084,000 357,000 500,000 1,627,500 12,100,000 423,400 205,000 275,000 2,401,038 10,805,000 17,580,000 4,069,000 2,830,000 35,000 442,000 442,000 320,000 TOTAL PROJECT $ 470,000 4,879,000 2,259,000 120,000 97,000 3,485,000 3,836,000 931,000 11,000 2,841,000 3,938,000 178,000 2,713,000 27,315,000 91,000 1,347,000 399,000 220,500 45,000 87,000 225,000 1,848,000 2,754,000 5,577,000 195,000 725,000 227,000 923,000 91,000 2,025,000 1,843,000 245,000 27,689,586 170,000 7,508,000 66,150 7,005,000 15,591,000 17,375,512 209,000 709,700 5,065,000 368,000 5,065,000 348,000 5,084,000 358,000 1,000,000 1,628,500 12,100,000 423,400 3,343,936 275,000 2,401,038 11,010,000 17,621,000 5,409,000 3,966,000 2,050,000 442,000 442,000 320,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies PRIOR TRANSPORTATION CAP. PROJECTS (FUND 234) Continued YEARS MCDOWELL: ALMA SCHOOL - SR87 MCDOWELL: SHOULDERS WIDENING 43,000 MCKELLIPS RD BRIDGE AT SALT RIV 757,000 MCQUEEN RD: QUEEN CK - PECOS 3,184,000 MERIDIAN RD: HUNT/BASELINE CS 255,000 MISSOURI AVE AT DYSART RD MONTEREY AVE AT POWER RD NORTHEAST MAINTENANCE FACILITY NORTHERN AVE AT 107TH AVE NORTHERN: 95TH AVE - 71ST AVE 14,068,000 OCOTILLO RD: POWER/ALMA SCH CS 181,000 OLD US 80 AT HASSYAMPA/SCOUR 324,000 PM10 (PH 2) NW AREA (GRP1) 1,169,000 PM10 (PH 2) NW AREA (GRP2) 586,000 PM10 PROGRAM 241,000 PM10: (PH3) NE AREA 437,000 PM10: (PH3) SE AREA 1,403,000 PM10: (PH3) SW AREA 765,000 PM10: (PH4) IN NORTH VALLEY 96,000 PM10: (PH4) IN SE VALLEY 96,000 PM10: (PH4) IN SW VALLEY PM10: 12TH ST, CIR MTN - TNF 19,000 PM10: BOX BAR & NEEDLE ROCK 46,000 PM10: CIR MTN: 13TH AVE - NR 3,000 PM10: MCNEIL: 35TH - 31ST AVE 3,000 PM10: SADDLE MTN: N RIV - 12TH 19,000 PNCL PK: LK PLEASNT - 83RD AVE 47,100 POWER RD: ELLIOT TO GUADALUPE POWER RD: GUADALUPE - BSELINE 1,230,000 POWER RD: WILLIAMS FIELD - RAY 188,000 PREVIOUS YEAR'S PROJECTS PROJECT RESERVES ACCOUNT PROP MGMT/PRIOR YEARS PROJECTS 65,000 QUEEN CR:CULVRT AT EASTRN CNL 980,000 QUEEN CRK RD: AZ AVE - MCQUEEN 784,000 RAY RD LINDSAY - GREENFIELD RIGGS RD AT SR347 RIGGS RD: 1-10 PRICE 1,730,000 RIGGS RD: AZ AVE-GILBERT RD RIO SALADO: L303 - 7TH AVE FS 11,000 RITTENHOUSE RD AT ELLSWORTH RD ROW IN-FILL/ROAD INVENTORY SYS 10,302,000 SIGNAL MODERNIZATION 1,707,000 SMALL CITIES ASSIST PROG 1,675,000 SPECIAL PROJECTS SR303 SAFETY IMPR:IND SCH-CLRV SUN CITY ASPHALT RECONST FY04 433,000 SUN CITY MILL & OVERLAY: PH 1 SUN CITY MILL & OVERLAY: PH 2 SUN CITY MILL & OVERLAY: PH 3 SUN CITY MILL & OVERLAY: PH 4 SUN VALLEY PKWY CORRIDOR STUDY TIP DEVELOPMENT UNALLOCATED FORCE ACCOUNT UTIL LOCATING ANNUAL CONTRACT 37,000 VAL VISTA: THOMAS TO SOUTHERN WARRANTED TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS WILLIAMS FLD AT HIGLEY 270,000 WILLIAMS FLD: GILBERT -LINDSAY 37,000 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION FUND 234 $ 158,077,042 Capital Improvement Program FY 2004-05 320,000 10,000 1,000 4,270,000 80,000 220,500 220,500 110,000 260,750 10,000 68,000 1,315,000 31,000 31,000 500,000 200,000 31,000 400,000 735,000 735,000 735,000 1,105,000 5,000 5,000 405,000 75,000 5,000 10,000 350,000 6,185,883 50,000 5,000 305,000 2,000 191,000 505,000 4,500,000 60,000 24,000 3,502,000 320,000 300,000 1,000,000 1,020,000 220,000 300,000 1,000,000 539,500 50,000 500,000 736,000 40,000 $ 77,959,051 FY 2005-06 1,320,000 253,750 1,550,000 585,000 585,000 585,000 400,000 455,000 255,000 3,051,000 350,000 6,000,000 50,000 710,000 552,000 116,500 270,000 10,500,000 320,000 300,000 1,000,000 210,000 3,120,000 1,000,000 1,430,811 50,000 1,000,000 482,000 $ 77,934,523 187 FY 2006-07 150,000 450,000 5,775,000 350,000 16,000,000 50,000 310,000 10,500,000 300,000 1,000,000 3,520,000 1,000,000 1,994,000 50,000 401,000 1,000,000 20,000 $ 71,167,000 FY 2007-08 150,000 350,000 12,500,000 50,000 3,470,000 5,500,000 300,000 1,000,000 2,220,000 1,000,000 2,026,000 1,000,000 $ 58,278,000 FY 2008-09 150,000 350,000 45,000,000 50,000 300,000 1,000,000 1,920,000 1,000,000 2,813,000 1,000,000 $ 61,873,000 5-YR TOTAL (FY 2005-09) 320,000 1,330,000 1,000 4,270,000 80,000 220,500 220,500 110,000 514,500 10,000 68,000 1,315,000 31,000 31,000 2,500,000 200,000 31,000 400,000 1,320,000 1,320,000 1,320,000 400,000 1,105,000 460,000 260,000 405,000 75,000 450,000 8,831,000 10,000 1,750,000 85,685,883 250,000 5,000 4,795,000 554,000 307,500 505,000 4,500,000 60,000 294,000 30,002,000 640,000 1,500,000 5,000,000 1,230,000 220,000 3,120,000 3,520,000 2,220,000 1,920,000 300,000 5,000,000 8,803,311 150,000 401,000 4,500,000 736,000 542,000 $ 347,211,574 TOTAL PROJECT 320,000 1,373,000 758,000 7,454,000 335,000 220,500 220,500 110,000 514,500 14,078,000 249,000 1,639,000 1,200,000 617,000 2,741,000 637,000 1,434,000 1,165,000 1,416,000 1,416,000 1,320,000 419,000 1,151,000 463,000 263,000 424,000 122,100 450,000 10,061,000 198,000 1,750,000 85,685,883 315,000 985,000 5,579,000 554,000 307,500 2,235,000 4,500,000 71,000 294,000 40,304,000 2,347,000 3,175,000 5,000,000 1,230,000 653,000 3,120,000 3,520,000 2,220,000 1,920,000 300,000 5,000,000 8,803,311 187,000 401,000 4,500,000 1,006,000 579,000 $ 505,288,616 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Managing for Results The Transportation Department submitted the following Managing for Results information for all FY 2004-05 Transportation projects. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the following projects is to identify design and construct road improvements that are smoother, safer and more economical to travel. Strategic Goals Addressed: • By 2005, MCDOT will reduce the accident rate on county-maintained roadways by 5%, reduce travel delays by 5% and improve operational effectiveness through the application of appropriate traffic management solutions, which include regional coordination, and the deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies. • MCDOT will reduce Maricopa County’s documented unmet transportation needs every year of the next five years through innovative operational and financial strategies. • By 2006, MCDOT will align strategies and structures to: o Support the Regional Transportation Plan and develop and operate key regional projects, o Integrate transportation, land use, and the environment, and o Proactively address growth and development issues in Maricopa County through public/private cooperation. Strategic Plan Program Supported: • Build Roadways and Bridges Strategic Activity Supported: • TIP Management Strategic Services Supported: • Preliminary engineering studies • Design plans, specifications, estimates, supporting documents Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent projects completed as planned OUTPUT: Number of projects completed that were planned to be completed DEMAND: Number of projects planned to be completed EFFICIENCY: Cost of program management per project FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement Not Available 100% 80% Not Available 14 15 Not Available 14 20 Not Available $34,214 $9,091 188 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Strategic Plan Program Supported: • Build Roadways and Bridges Strategic Activities Supported: • Right-of-way Acquisition • TIP Management Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of land rights acquired by bid date within budget OUTPUT: Number of land rights acquired DEMAND: Number of land rights acquisitions anticipated EFFICIENCY: Cost per land rights acquired FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement Not Available 95% 95% Not Available 600 Not Available 600 600 Not Available $1,300 $1,300 FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 60% 100% 80% 7 10 15 5 10 20 $288,028 $250,000 $145,000 Strategic Plan Program Supported: • Build Roadways and Bridges Strategic Activities Supported: • Design Strategic Services Supported: • Preliminary engineering studies • Design plans, specifications, estimates, supporting documents Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of land rights acquired by bid date within budget OUTPUT: Number of land rights acquired DEMAND: Number of land rights acquisitions anticipated EFFICIENCY: Cost per land rights acquired 189 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Strategic Plan Program Supported: • Build Roadways and Bridges Strategic Activities Supported: • Design • Environmental Clearance • Right-of-way Acquisition • TIP Management • Utility Relocation • Dust Mitigation Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent Particulate Matter (PM10) roads that have been paved per County Air Quality regulations OUTPUT: Number of miles of PM-10 roads paved DEMAND: Number of miles of PM-10 roads that require paving EFFICIENCY: Cost per lane mile of new or improved roadway construction FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 82% 80% 80% 4.6 18 23 6 23 23 $79,304 $175,000 $192,125 Strategic Plan Program Supported: • Build Roadways and Bridges Strategic Activities Supported: • Design • Environmental Clearance • Right-of-way Acquisition • Roadway Construction • Utility Relocation • TIP Management Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent of lane miles completed that were planned for new or improved roadway construction OUTPUT: Number of lane miles of new or improved roads constructed DEMAND: Number of lane miles planned for new or improved roadway construction EFFICIENCY: Cost per lane mile of new or improved roadway construction FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 60% 70% 80% 13 25 22 22 36 27 $437,348 $450,000 $195,125 190 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Strategic Plan Program Supported: • Support Transportation Systems Strategic Activities Supported: • Planning and Programming Strategic Services Supported: • Corridor studies Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent dollar value of investments with benefit-cost ratios greater than 2.0 and/or meets safety, congestion, regulatory and other criteria. OUTPUT: Number of dollars in TIP invested with benefit-cost ratio greater than 2.0 and/or meets safety, congestion regulatory and other criteria DEMAND: Total costs of all projects in the TIP EFFICIENCY: Cost of planning/programming dollars per dollar of investment with benefit-cost ratios greater than 2.0 and/or meets safety, congestion, regulatory and/or other established criteria FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 91% 88% 88% Not Available $68,933,025 $68,933,025 Not Available $78,176,461 $78,176,461 2.33 2.57 2.57 Strategic Plan Program Supported: • Manage Traffic Strategic Activities Supported: • Traffic Engineering Strategic Services Supported: • Safety programs • Signing solutions • Signal solutions • Traffic engineering information 191 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Performance Measures: Measure RESULT: Percent reduction in accidents per intersection or roadway segment OUTPUT: Number of safety improvements projects DEMAND: Number of safety improvements projects identified EFFICIENCY: Average cost of safety improvement projects as compared to the average total safety improvement project cost FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement 80% 70% 85% 28 25 15 35 49 44 0.17 0.17 0.24 192 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 7th Street: Carefree Hwy to Desert Hills Dr 3 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a design concept report so that right-of-way and roadway needs can be identified and planned, and accurate cost estimates can be made for increasing the capacity and safety of the roadway. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ - Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 450,000 20,000 $ 470,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 450,000 20,000 $ 470,000 Total Project $ 450,000 20,000 $ 470,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 193 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 51st Ave: Baseline to South of Broadway 5 Project Description The purpose of this project is to widen the road with two additional through lanes and a center left-turn lane. The City of Phoenix is the lead agency with the County contributing $2,945,000 toward construction. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 1,165,000 Construction 532,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 236,000 Project Total $ 1,933,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ 2,945,000 1,000 $ 2,946,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - Operating Cost Summary The City of Phoenix has annexed the roadway and will assume maintenance of the roadway. 194 $ 2,945,000 1,000 $ 2,946,000 Total Project $ 1,165,000 3,477,000 237,000 $ 4,879,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 51st Ave: Santa Cruz Rd to GRIC Boundary, Corridor Study 5 Project Description The purpose of this corridor study is to examine current and proposed development along the corridor in order to identify the type of roadway improvements required. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 100,000 20,000 $ 120,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Operating Cost Summary No annual operating costs are associated with a corridor study. 195 Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 100,000 20,000 $ 120,000 Total Project $ 100,000 20,000 $ 120,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 51st Ave: South of Elliot to Dobbins 5 Project Description This project will widen 51st Avenue from a two-lane major arterial to a three-lane major arterial by the addition of a continuous left-turn lane, beginning south of Elliot Road to south of Dobbins. Development is planned adjacent to the project, which may require change to the design. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 748,000 Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 551,000 Project Total $ 1,299,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 950,000 5,000 955,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 950,000 10,000 960,000 Total Project $ 748,000 950,000 561,000 $ 2,259,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 196 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 67th Ave: Pinnacle Peak to Happy Valley Rd 4 Project Description The purpose of this project was to develop a design concept report to establish design parameters for widening the roadway for the traveling public so that right-of-way and roadway needs can be identified and planned, and accurate cost estimates can be made for increasing the capacity and safety of the roadway. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 2,000 2,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 70,000 5,000 $ 75,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 20,000 20,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 70,000 25,000 $ 95,000 Total Project $ 70,000 27,000 $ 97,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 197 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 75th Ave: MC 85 to Van Buren 5 Project Description This project will result in a completed design for the reconstruction of 75th Avenue from two lanes to five lanes including a continuous left-turn lane. It also includes utility relocations and upgrades to the Southern Pacific Railroad crossing. The City of Phoenix will construct a storm sewer along 75th Avenue and has requested to assume project lead. The County’s portion of the project will be a cash contribution of $2,650,000 in FY 2005-06. Once completed, maintenance responsibilities will be turned over to Phoenix. Funding Summary This project will be 70% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 30% funded by partnership contributions. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 657,000 133,000 790,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 20,000 20,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 2,650,000 20,000 $ 2,670,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 5,000 5,000 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ 2,650,000 45,000 $ 2,695,000 Total Project $ 657,000 2,650,000 178,000 $ 3,485,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 . 198 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 83rd Ave: Northern Ave to Olive 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to widen 83rd Avenue from two travel lanes to four travel lanes with a center left turn lane to reduce congestion and increase safety. Construction is contingent upon finalization of an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Peoria for financial participation in construction and assuming maintenance responsibilities for 83rd Avenue. The City of Peoria is expected to assume maintenance responsibilities once the project is completed. Funding Summary This project will be funded 55% from Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 45% from partnership contributions. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 333,000 41,000 207,000 581,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 700,000 10,000 710,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 20,000 2,500,000 20,000 $ 2,540,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 20,000 3,200,000 35,000 $ 3,255,000 Total Project $ 353,000 3,241,000 242,000 $ 3,836,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 199 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 87th Ave Channel: Deer Valley to Williams 4 Project Description The original intent of this project was to pave the road for dust mitigation and make drainage improvements for the traveling public and area residents so that safety will be improved and dust problems will be reduced. The required drainage improvements exceed the available budget for this project. Efforts are underway to build a partnership with the Maricopa County Flood Control District to address area drainage. Funding Summary The County’s portion of project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Other funding is subject to the formation of a funding partnership with the Flood Control District and any other interested parties. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 50,000 31,000 81,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 105,000 100,000 10,000 $ 215,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 625,000 10,000 635,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 105,000 725,000 20,000 $ 850,000 Total Project $ 155,000 725,000 51,000 $ 931,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 200 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation 115th Ave Bridge at Gila River 5 Project Description The purpose of this project is to monitor intergovernmental agreement compliance of annual deferred payments from the State of Arizona and the City of Avondale. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 3,000 3,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 2,000 2,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 2,000 2,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 201 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ 2,000 2,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ 2,000 2,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 8,000 8,000 Total Project $ $ 11,000 11,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Alma School Rd at Champagne/Halley 1 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be funded from Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 8,000 8,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 150,000 20,000 170,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 150,000 20,000 170,000 Total Project $ $ 150,000 28,000 178,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 202 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Alma School Rd: McLellan to McKellips 1&2 Project Description This project will widen the south bridge over the Salt River on Alma School Road from McLellan Road to the north bridge. This project will consist of an expansion and overhaul of an existing structure. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 376,000 105,000 481,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 364,000 1,972,000 24,000 $ 2,360,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 364,000 1,972,000 24,000 $ 2,360,000 Total Project $ 740,000 1,972,000 129,000 $ 2,841,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 203 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Alma School Rd: North Bridge Grade Control Structure 2 Project Description The project will redesign the existing grade control structure, which is needed to protect the Alma School Road Bridge foundations from floodwater eroding the soil. This project will involve the replacement of an existing structure and, when complete, will enhance the safety of county citizens by reducing the risk of serious injury or death caused by the existing grade control structure. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 99,000 44,000 143,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 105,000 2,597,000 5,000 $ 2,707,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,083,000 5,000 $ 1,088,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 105,000 3,680,000 10,000 $ 3,795,000 Total Project $ 204,000 3,680,000 54,000 $ 3,938,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 204 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation AzTech Smart Corridors All Project Description The purpose of this project is to install an Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) “Smart Instrumentation” for ten arterial corridors. The project will involve design of vehicle detection systems (VDS), closed circuit TV (CCTV), and changeable message signs (CMS) and communications along the ten smart corridors. Funding Summary This project will be 10% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 90% by Federal funds. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 370,000 Construction 2,194,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 99,000 Project Total $ 2,663,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 50,000 50,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 50,000 50,000 Total Project $ 370,000 2,244,000 99,000 $ 2,713,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 205 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Baseline Rd: 7th Ave to 43rd Ave 5 Project Description The purpose of this project is to monitor intergovernmental agreement compliance of annual deferred payments from the City of Phoenix for cost sharing in the roadway as constructed in FY 2001-02. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 4,321,000 Construction 22,266,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 727,000 Project Total $ 27,314,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Total Project $ 4,322,000 22,266,000 727,000 $ 27,315,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 206 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Bell Rd at R. H. Johnson 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to design a dedicated right-turn lane and other safety improvements for the traveling public so that an effective roadway design will be developed in order to reduce congestion and increase safety. The City of Surprise has annexed this portion of Bell Road. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 15,000 66,000 81,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 10,000 10,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Operating Cost Summary The City of Surprise is responsible for maintenance of this portion of Bell Rd. 207 Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 10,000 10,000 Total Project $ 15,000 76,000 $ 91,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Bell Rd: Grand Ave to Loop 101 ITS 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to install an Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) “Smart Instrumentation”. The project will involve the design of vehicle detection systems (VDS), closed circuit TV (CCTV), and changeable message signs (CMS) and communications. Funding Summary This project will be 15% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF), 13% funded by Peoria, 13% by Surprise, and 59% by Federal funds. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 222,000 5,000 227,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 40,000 1,070,000 10,000 $ 1,120,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 40,000 1,070,000 10,000 $ 1,120,000 Total Project $ 262,000 1,070,000 15,000 $ 1,347,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 208 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Bell Rd: Loop 303 to Grand Ave ITS 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to design an Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) “Smart Instrumentation”. The project will involve the design of vehicle detection systems (VDS), closed circuit TV (CCTV) and changeable message sign (CMS) and communications. Funding Summary This project will be funded 22% from Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 80% from Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 379,000 10,000 $ 389,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 379,000 20,000 $ 399,000 Total Project $ 379,000 20,000 $ 399,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 15,600 Supplies & Services 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 19,200 Subtotal $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 34,800 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 34,800 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing etc with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 209 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Bethany Home Rd at Dysart Rd 4 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded from Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 50% funded by a developer. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Total Project $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing, etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 210 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Biological Assessment Services All Project Description The purpose of this program is to supply biological assessment services for projects as needed so that projects will not be delayed or result in increased costs. Funding Summary This program will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 30,000 30,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 10,000 5,000 $ 15,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 211 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 10,000 5,000 $ 15,000 Total Project $ 40,000 5,000 $ 45,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Brown Rd: Ellsworth to Crismon 2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to complete the design for widening the road from two to four lanes. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 50,000 36,000 86,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 1,000 1,000 Total Project $ 50,000 37,000 $ 87,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 212 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Bush Hwy: Usury Pass Rd to Stewart Mountain Dam Rd 2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to widen the road to add bicycle lanes for the traveling public. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 200,000 25,000 $ 225,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 200,000 25,000 $ 225,000 Total Project $ 200,000 25,000 $ 225,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 213 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Candidate Assessment Reports All Project Description The purpose of this project is to reserve monies for initial assessments of potential projects so that sufficient information is developed to make further program development decisions. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 298,000 298,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable 214 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 5-Year Total $ 1,550,000 $ 1,550,000 Total Project $ 1,848,000 $ 1,848,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Carefree Highway: 7th Ave to Cave Creek Rd 3 Project Description The purpose of this project is to repair failing pavement for the traveling public and area residents so that they will have a safer commute. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction 1,400,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 79,000 Project Total $ 1,479,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,200,000 75,000 $ 1,275,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ Total Project 1,200,000 75,000 $ 1,275,000 $ 2,600,000 154,000 $ 2,754,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 215 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Cave Creek Rd: Lone Mountain to Carefree Hwy 3 Project Description The purpose of this project is to monitor intergovernmental agreement compliance of annual deferred payments from the Town of Cave Creek. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 811,000 Construction 4,761,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 2,000 Project Total $ 5,574,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Operating Cost Summary The City of Phoenix is responsible for maintenance. 216 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 3,000 3,000 Total Project $ 811,000 4,761,000 5,000 $ 5,577,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation CDBG: Small Cities Transportation Assistance Program (SCTAP) All Project Description The purpose of this project is to provide transportation project funding to smaller cities and towns in Maricopa County in order to provide a seamless transportation system between jurisdictions. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction 1,675,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 1,675,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 300,000 300,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 300,000 300,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 217 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ 300,000 300,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ 300,000 300,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 300,000 300,000 5-Year Total $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Total Project $ 3,175,000 $ 3,175,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Chandler Heights Rd at 124th St 1 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 22,000 60,000 10,000 $ 92,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 125,000 10,000 135,000 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 22,000 185,000 20,000 $ 227,000 Total Project $ 22,000 185,000 20,000 $ 227,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 218 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Chandler Heights Rd at Sanoki Wash 1 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a project design for building a five-lane bridge over Sanoki Wash, replacing the existing un-bridged (dip) crossing for the traveling public. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 12,000 73,000 85,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 80,000 80,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 30,000 30,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 110,000 110,000 Total Project $ 12,000 183,000 $ 195,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 219 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Chandler Heights Rd: Culvert at Eastern Canal 1 Project Description The purpose of this project is to replace the existing, inadequate pipe with a wider box culvert to allow future widening of the road. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 3,000 10,000 59,000 72,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 626,000 17,000 643,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 10,000 626,000 17,000 $ 653,000 Total Project $ 13,000 636,000 76,000 $ 725,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 220 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Contract Overlay All Project Description The purpose of this project is to resurface failing pavement for the traveling public so that they will have a safer commute. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 650,000 53,000 703,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 200,000 20,000 220,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 200,000 20,000 220,000 Total Project $ $ 850,000 73,000 923,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 221 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Deer Valley Rd: 83rd Ave to 91st Ave 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a design concept report to study the widening of the road for project designers and the traveling public. This project is adjacent to an area being studied by the Flood Control District. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 11,000 11,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 70,000 10,000 $ 80,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 70,000 10,000 $ 80,000 Total Project $ 70,000 21,000 $ 91,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 222 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation El Mirage Rd: Beardsley Rd to Loop 303 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to design and acquire right-of-way for a new four-lane road and to establish future roadway needs. This project will result in the construction of a new four-lane road between Beardsley Road and the future Loop 303 and includes intersection and drainage improvements. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and developer contributions. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 1,881,000 Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 139,000 Project Total $ 2,020,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 223 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 5,000 5,000 Total Project $ 1,881,000 144,000 $ 2,025,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation El Mirage Rd: Bell Rd to Beardsley Rd 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to design a new four-lane road and establish future roadways needs. This project will result in the construction of a new four-lane road to meet projected traffic demands. Signals will be installed on El Mirage Road at Beardsley Road. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and developer contributions. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 1,700,000 Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 138,000 Project Total $ 1,838,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 5,000 5,000 Total Project $ 1,700,000 143,000 $ 1,843,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 224 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation El Mirage Rd: Northern to Bell, Corridor Study 4 Project Description The purpose of this corridor study is to examine current and proposed development along the corridor in order to identify the type of roadway improvements required and when they will be required for future programming and planning. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 225,000 20,000 $ 245,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Operating Cost Summary No annual operating costs are associated with a corridor study. 225 Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 225,000 20,000 $ 245,000 Total Project $ 225,000 20,000 $ 245,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Ellsworth Rd: Germann to Baseline 1&2 Project Description This project will reconstruct and widen the existing two-lane road to provide four travel lanes with a raised median. The west half of the roadway between Pecos Road and the Powerline Floodway will be constructed with a third travel lane in the southbound direction. Other improvements include box culverts, a storm drain system, landscaping and two fully signalized intersections (one at Elliot Road and one at Germann Road). Funding Summary This project will be 60% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 40% funded by partnerships with the City of Mesa and the Maricopa County Flood Control District. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 3,379,000 Construction 1,252,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 621,006 Project Total $ 5,252,006 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 122,000 12,005,580 25,000 $ 12,152,580 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 10,250,000 35,000 $ 10,285,000 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 122,000 22,255,580 60,000 $ 22,437,580 Total Project $ 3,501,000 23,507,580 681,006 $ 27,689,586 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3* FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ - $ - $ 4,235 400 $ 4,235 400 $ 4,235 400 $ - $ - $ - $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 12,705 1,200 13,905 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 13,905 - $ - 226 $ - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Ellsworth Rd: Hunt Hwy to Riggs Road 2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a design concept report so that right-or-way and roadway needs can be identified and planned, and accurate cost estimates can be made for increasing the capacity and safety of the roadway. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ - Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 150,000 20,000 $ 170,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 150,000 20,000 $ 170,000 Total Project $ 150,000 20,000 $ 170,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 227 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Ellsworth Rd: University to McLellan 2 Project Description This project will reconstruct and widen the existing two-lane road to provide four travel lanes (two in each direction) with a raised center median. Selected segments fronting new residential development will be constructed with a third travel lane in either the north or southbound direction, as appropriate. Additional improvements include a traffic signal at Brown Road, a storm drain system, street lighting, curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping. One-quarter mile of Adobe Road will also be constructed. Funding Summary This project will be 57% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 43% funded by the City of Mesa. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 815,000 Construction 421,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 281,000 Project Total $ 1,517,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 86,000 2,335,000 10,000 $ 2,431,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 3,550,000 10,000 $ 3,560,000 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 86,000 5,885,000 20,000 $ 5,991,000 Total Project $ 901,000 6,306,000 301,000 $ 7,508,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3* FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ - $ - $ 4,235 400 $ 4,235 400 $ 4,235 400 $ - $ - $ - $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 12,705 1,200 13,905 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 13,905 - $ - 228 $ - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Fire Station at 111th Ave 4 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be 70% funded from Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 30% funded by the City of Phoenix Fire Department. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 900 2,000 $ 2,900 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 56,250 7,000 63,250 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 900 56,250 9,000 $ 66,150 Total Project $ 900 56,250 9,000 $ 66,150 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 229 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation GDACS: Geodetic Densification and Cadastral Surveys All Project Description The purpose of this project is to provide more and better land survey points and a more accurate land survey system in Maricopa County for county, city, town, state and private surveyors. Funding Summary This project will be 78% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 22% funded by other sources. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction 3,765,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 740,000 Project Total $ 4,505,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 2,000,000 250,000 $ 2,250,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 250,000 250,000 Operating Cost Summary Not available. 230 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ 2,000,000 500,000 $ 2,500,000 Total Project $ 5,765,000 1,240,000 $ 7,005,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation General Civil Engineering All Project Description The purpose of this reserve fund is to reserve monies for hiring on-call civil engineering consultants for MCDOT project designers. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 361,000 361,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 230,000 $ 230,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,500,000 $ 3,500,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 231 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 3,500,000 $ 3,500,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 4,000,000 $ 4,000,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 4,000,000 $ 4,000,000 5-Year Total $ 15,230,000 $ 15,230,000 Total Project $ 15,591,000 $ 15,591,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Gilbert Rd: McDowell Rd to SR 87 w/ LWC 2 Project Description This project will result in the widening of Gilbert Road from McDowell Road to State Route 87. The roadway is to be built to the “Road of Regional Significance” standard, which is seven lanes with a curbed median or continuous two way left-turn lane. This project includes a low-water crossing over the Salt River and a sound wall along McDowell Road. It includes the future purchase of right-of-way along Gilbert Road. Funding Summary This project will be 90% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds, 4% by an IGA partner, and 6% by Federal funds. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 6,800,000 Construction 516,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 754,000 Project Total $ 8,070,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 425,000 8,695,512 185,000 $ 9,305,512 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 425,000 8,695,512 185,000 $ 9,305,512 Total Project $ 7,225,000 9,211,512 939,000 $ 17,375,512 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 232 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Gilbert Rd: Warner Rd to Water Tank 2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to widen Gilbert Road north of Warner and eliminate scalloped sections of roadway that reduce the travel lanes to just one lane. The Town of Gilbert is the lead on this project. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 3,000 3,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 200,000 1,000 201,000 Operating Cost Summary The Town of Gilbert maintains the roadway. 233 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 200,000 6,000 206,000 Total Project $ $ 200,000 9,000 209,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Greenway Rd at Loop 303 4 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded from Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 50% funded by the Town of Surprise. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 58,700 564,000 87,000 $ 709,700 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 58,700 564,000 87,000 $ 709,700 Total Project $ 58,700 564,000 87,000 $ 709,700 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing, etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 234 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Laveen Area Conveyance Channel 5 Project Description The purpose of this project is to correct drainage problems at 51st Avenue and Baseline Road. This is a joint project through an intergovernmental agreement with the Flood Control District. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 500,000 500,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 500,000 500,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - Operating Cost Summary The Flood Control District will maintain the channel. 235 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 500,000 500,000 Total Project $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Lindsay Rd: Williams Field Rd to Ray Rd 1 Project Description This project will construct a five-lane section to ease congestion and increase traffic safety. This project involves the expansion and overhaul of an existing structure. The Town of Gilbert is the lead on this project. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 50% funded by the Town of Gilbert. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 1,000 1,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,625,500 2,000 $ 1,627,500 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ Total Project 1,625,500 2,000 $ 1,627,500 $ 1,625,500 3,000 $ 1,628,500 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 236 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Loop 303 Safety Improvements: Indian School to Clearview 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to design safety improvements for this existing two-lane roadway. Many accidents have occurred on this higher speed roadway, including many fatalities. Proposed improvements may include widening to four-lanes and certain intersection improvements. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,000,000 20,000 $ 1,020,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 200,000 10,000 $ 210,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 1,200,000 30,000 $ 1,230,000 Total Project $ 1,200,000 30,000 $ 1,230,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 237 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Loop 303: Bethany Home Rd to Glendale Ave 4 Project Description The project will widen the existing two-lane roadway into a four-lane divided highway with at-grade, signalized intersections when warranted. Loop 303 is included in the Regional Transportation Plan, which if passed, will affect the timing of this project and shift responsibility for construction to the Arizona Department of Transportation. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 1,000 1,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 4,000 4,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 290,000 20,000 $ 310,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 2,000,000 500,000 10,000 $ 2,510,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 2,200,000 40,000 $ 2,240,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 2,290,000 2,700,000 74,000 $ 5,064,000 Total Project $ 2,290,000 2,700,000 75,000 $ 5,065,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 238 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Loop 303: Cactus Rd to Waddell Rd 4 Project Description The project will design plans for widening the existing two-lane roadway into a four-lane, divided highway with atgrade, signalized intersections when warranted. Loop 303 is included in the Regional Transportation Plan, which if passed, will affect the timing of this project and shift responsibility for construction to the Arizona Department of Transportation. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 1,000 1,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000 1,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 300,000 45,000 $ 345,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 10,000 10,000 $ 20,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 310,000 57,000 $ 367,000 Total Project $ 310,000 58,000 $ 368,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 239 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Loop 303: Camelback Rd to Bethany Home Rd 4 Project Description The project will widen the existing two-lane roadway into a four-lane divided highway with at-grade, signalized intersections when warranted. Loop 303 is included in the Regional Transportation Plan, which if passed, will affect the timing of this project and shift responsibility for construction to the Arizona Department of Transportation. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 1,000 1,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 4,000 4,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 290,000 20,000 $ 310,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 2,000,000 500,000 10,000 $ 2,510,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 2,200,000 40,000 $ 2,240,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 2,290,000 2,700,000 74,000 $ 5,064,000 Total Project $ 2,290,000 2,700,000 75,000 $ 5,065,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 240 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Loop 303: Greenway Rd to Bell Rd 4 Project Description The project is to design plans for the widening of the existing two-lane roadway into a four-lane divided highway with at-grade, signalized intersections when warranted. Loop 303 is included in the Regional Transportation Plan, which if passed, will affect the timing of this project and shift responsibility for construction to the Arizona Department of Transportation. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 1,000 1,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000 1,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 300,000 25,000 $ 325,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 10,000 10,000 $ 20,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 310,000 37,000 $ 347,000 Total Project $ 310,000 38,000 $ 348,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 241 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Loop 303: Indian School Rd to Camelback Rd 4 Project Description The project will widen the existing two-lane roadway into a four-lane, divided highway with at-grade, signalized intersections when warranted. Loop 303 is included in the Regional Transportation Plan, which if passed, will affect the timing of this project and shift responsibility for construction to the Arizona Department of Transportation. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 4,000 4,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 290,000 40,000 $ 330,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 2,000,000 500,000 10,000 $ 2,510,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 2,200,000 40,000 $ 2,240,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 2,290,000 2,700,000 94,000 $ 5,084,000 Total Project $ 2,290,000 2,700,000 94,000 $ 5,084,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 242 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Loop 303: Indian School to Clearview 4 Project Description This purpose of this project is to prepare a design concept report to establish design parameters for the construction of an interim, four-lane divided highway as the first phase of the six-lane divided urban freeway. Loop 303 is included in the Regional Transportation Plan, which if passed, will affect the timing of this project and shift responsibility for construction to the Arizona Department of Transportation. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 2,709,936 Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 429,000 Project Total $ 3,138,936 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 200,000 5,000 $ 205,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 200,000 5,000 $ 205,000 Total Project $ 2,909,936 434,000 $ 3,343,936 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 243 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Loop 303: Waddell Rd to Greenway Rd 4 Project Description The project is to design plans for the widening of the existing two-lane roadway into a four-lane divided highway with at-grade, signalized intersections when warranted. Loop 303 is included in the Regional Transportation Plan, which if passed, will affect the timing of this project and shift responsibility for construction to the Arizona Department of Transportation. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 1,000 1,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000 1,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 300,000 25,000 $ 325,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 10,000 20,000 $ 30,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 310,000 47,000 $ 357,000 Total Project $ 310,000 48,000 $ 358,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 244 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Low Volume Roads Program All Project Description The purpose of this project is to pave roads outside of the PM 10 Non-Attainment area for dust mitigation and to make drainage improvements. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 20,000 20,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,000,000 20,000 $ 3,020,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 3,000,000 20,000 $ 3,020,000 $ 3,000,000 20,000 $ 3,020,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 5-Year Total $ Total Project 3,000,000 20,000 $ 3,020,000 12,000,000 100,000 $ 12,100,000 $ 12,000,000 100,000 $ 12,100,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 245 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Lower Buckeye Rd at 67th Ave 5 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 24,400 80,000 22,000 $ 126,400 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 275,000 22,000 297,000 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 24,400 355,000 44,000 $ 423,400 Total Project $ 24,400 355,000 44,000 $ 423,400 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing, etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 246 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85 at Agua Fria/Bridge Scour 5 Project Description The purpose of this project is to repair the pier cap (support) that has failed causing partial closure of the bridge and to provide 100-year scour protection for the existing bridge to prevent damage during severe flooding. This project will result in increased safety and a reduction in the chances of the bridge falling during flood events. Funding Summary This project will be 59% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 41% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 113,000 Construction 1,765,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 137,000 Project Total $ 2,015,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 30,000 5,000 35,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 30,000 5,000 35,000 Total Project $ 113,000 1,795,000 142,000 $ 2,050,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 247 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85 at Miller Rd 4 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 50% funded by the Town of Buckeye. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 4,000 1,000 $ 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 250,000 20,000 270,000 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 4,000 250,000 21,000 $ 275,000 Total Project $ 4,000 250,000 21,000 $ 275,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 248 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85 Extension: SR 85 to Turner Rd 4 Project Description The intent of this project is to construct a new, two-lane paved road so local traffic can traverse between MC 85 and Old US 80. Presently, the traveling public and area residents use SR 85 to interconnect between these two roadways. ADOT has plans to improve SR 85 to a higher speed, multi-lane, controlled access facility and desires to have this slower moving, local traffic rerouted. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) with ADOT reimbursing the county for all costs. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 308,826 60,000 $ 368,826 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 858,620 1,142,903 30,689 $ 2,032,212 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 1,167,446 1,142,903 90,689 $ 2,401,038 Total Project $ 1,167,446 1,142,903 90,689 $ 2,401,038 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 249 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85: Cotton Lane to Estrella Pkwy 4 Project Description This project will result in the widening of the MC 85 from a two-lane arterial roadway to four lanes with a continuous left-turn lane and bike lane. This project involves the expansion of an existing structure. Funding Summary This project will be 73% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 27% funded by the Town of Goodyear. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 1,110,000 Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 230,000 Project Total $ 1,340,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,000 3,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 700,000 5,000 705,000 3,330,000 30,000 $ 3,360,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 5-Year Total - $ 4,030,000 39,000 $ 4,069,000 Total Project $ 1,110,000 4,030,000 269,000 $ 5,409,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 250 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85: Estrella Parkway to Litchfield Rd 4 Project Description This project will result in the widening of the road from two to four lanes with a continuous left-turn lane. Funding Summary This project will be 83% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 17% funded by an IGA partner. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 847,000 Construction 14,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 275,000 Project Total $ 1,136,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 2,775,000 55,000 $ 2,830,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - 2,775,000 55,000 $ 2,830,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ Total Project $ 847,000 2,789,000 330,000 $ 3,966,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 251 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85: Jackrabbit Trail to Perryville Rd 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a design concept report to study the widening of the road so right-of-way and roadway needs can be identified and planned, and accurate cost estimates can be made for increasing the capacity and safety of the roadway. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000 1,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 40,000 40,000 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 42,000 42,000 Total Project $ $ 42,000 42,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 252 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85: Perryville to Cotton Lane 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a design concept report to study the widening of the road so right-of-way and roadway needs can be identified and planned, and accurate cost estimates can be made for increasing the capacity and safety of the roadway. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000 1,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 400,000 40,000 $ 440,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 400,000 42,000 $ 442,000 Total Project $ 400,000 42,000 $ 442,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 253 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85: SR 85 to 75th Ave, Corridor Study Update 4&5 Project Description The purpose of this corridor study is to examine current and proposed development along the corridor in order to identify the type of roadway improvements required and when they will be required for future programming and planning. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 300,000 20,000 $ 320,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Operating Cost Summary No annual operating costs are associated with a corridor study. 254 Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 300,000 20,000 $ 320,000 Total Project $ 300,000 20,000 $ 320,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85: 91st Ave to 75th Ave 5 Project Description The project will design and construct a four-lane roadway with a raised center median. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 2,000 39,000 41,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 10,000 10,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 6,800,000 20,000 $ 6,820,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 2,600,000 20,000 $ 2,620,000 $ 8,100,000 30,000 $ 8,130,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 6,800,000 10,700,000 80,000 $ 17,580,000 Total Project $ 6,802,000 10,700,000 119,000 $ 17,621,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 255 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation MC 85: 107th Ave to 91st Ave 5 Project Description This project will design and construct a four-lane roadway with a raised center median. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 174,000 31,000 205,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 900,000 35,000 $ 935,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 30,000 30,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 5,800,000 10,000 $ 5,810,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 3,090,000 20,000 $ 3,110,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 920,000 920,000 $ 5-Year Total $ 6,700,000 4,010,000 95,000 $ 10,805,000 Total Project $ 6,874,000 4,010,000 126,000 $ 11,010,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 256 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation McDowell Mountain Rd: Shoulders Widening 2 Project Description This project consists of widening the existing pavement by five feet on each side of the roadway from the Fountain Hills City Limits to Forest Road to create room for bicycle lanes. Funding Summary This project will be 47% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 53% funded by partnership contributions. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 43,000 43,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 10,000 10,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,260,000 60,000 $ 1,320,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ Total Project 1,260,000 70,000 $ 1,330,000 $ 1,260,000 113,000 $ 1,373,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 257 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation McDowell Rd: Alma School to SR 87 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to design the widening of this existing two-lane roadway to four lanes. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 300,000 20,000 $ 320,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 300,000 20,000 $ 320,000 Total Project $ 300,000 20,000 $ 320,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 258 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation McKellips Rd Bridge at Salt River 2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to prepare design plans for the construction of a bridge across the Salt River. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 660,000 97,000 757,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 1,000 1,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 1,000 1,000 Total Project $ 660,000 98,000 $ 758,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 259 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation McQueen Rd: Queen Creek to Pecos 1 Project Description This project will result in the reconstruction and widening of the existing road from two to four travel lanes and provide a flush median. The City of Chandler is the lead agency on this project. Funding Summary This project will be 73% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 27% funded by the City of Chandler. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 2,420,000 Construction 500,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 264,000 Project Total $ 3,184,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 4,200,000 70,000 $ 4,270,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ 4,200,000 70,000 $ 4,270,000 Total Project $ 2,420,000 4,700,000 334,000 $ 7,454,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 260 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Meridian Rd: Hunt Hwy to Baseline, Corridor Study 1&2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a corridor study report to investigate the widening of the road so right-ofway and roadway needs can be identified and planned, and future improvements can be identified for increasing the capacity and safety of the roadway. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 230,000 25,000 255,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 75,000 5,000 $ 80,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 75,000 5,000 $ 80,000 Total Project $ 305,000 30,000 $ 335,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 261 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Missouri Ave at Dysart Rd 4 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 50% funded by a developer. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Total Project $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing, etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 262 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Monterey Ave at Power Rd 2 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 25% funded by each of the cities of Gilbert and Mesa. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Total Project $ 3,000 187,500 30,000 $ 220,500 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 263 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Northeast Maintenance Facility 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to acquire property and begin design for the new Northeast Maintenance facility. Del Webb will transfer to the Department of Transportation 8.3 acres for use as a maintenance facility as part of the development stipulations for Anthem. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 100,000 10,000 110,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 100,000 10,000 110,000 Total Project $ $ 100,000 10,000 110,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Estimated annual cost to maintain Personal Sevices Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Year 1* FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ - $ 15,000 500 $ 15,000 500 $ 15,000 500 $ 15,000 500 $ 15,000 500 $ Subtotal $ - $ 15,500 $ 15,500 $ 15,500 $ 15,500 $ 15,500 $ 75,000 2,500 77,500 $ 15,500 $ 15,500 $ 15,500 $ 15,500 $ 15,500 $ 77,500 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - 264 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Northern Ave: 95th Ave to 71st Ave 4 Project Description This project resulted in the construction of five travel lanes, including a continuous left-turn lane with curb and gutter, and storm drains on Northern Avenue. Construction is complete. The project remains in the capital program to collect charges associated with on-going litigation with the construction contractor over the quality of work and materials provided. Funding Summary This project was 64% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) with the remaining funded by the City of Peoria (10%), City of Glendale (3%) and the Maricopa County Flood Control District (23%). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 669,000 Construction 12,815,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 584,000 Project Total $ 14,068,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 10,000 10,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 10,000 10,000 Total Project $ 669,000 12,815,000 594,000 $ 14,078,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 265 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Northern Ave at 107th Ave 4 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 25% each by the cities of Glendale and Peoria. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 7,000 218,750 35,000 $ 260,750 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 218,750 35,000 253,750 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 7,000 437,500 70,000 $ 514,500 Total Project $ 7,000 437,500 70,000 $ 514,500 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 266 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Ocotillo Rd: Power Rd to Alma School Rd, Corridor Study 2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a corridor study report to investigate the widening of the road so right-ofway and roadway needs can be identified and planned, and future improvements can be identified for increasing the capacity and safety of the roadway. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 160,000 21,000 181,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 50,000 18,000 $ 68,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 50,000 18,000 $ 68,000 Total Project $ 210,000 39,000 $ 249,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 267 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Old US 80 at Hassayampa, Scour 5 Project Description The purpose of this project is to provide 100-year scour protection for the bridge in order to prevent damage during severe flooding. This project involves the overhaul of an existing structure. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 19,000 145,000 160,000 324,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,243,000 72,000 $ 1,315,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ 1,243,000 72,000 $ 1,315,000 Total Project $ 19,000 1,388,000 232,000 $ 1,639,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 268 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Pinnacle Peak Rd: Lake Pleasant to 83rd Ave 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to develop a design concept report so right-of-way and roadway needs can be identified and planned, and accurate cost estimates can be made for increasing the capacity and safety of the roadway. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 20,100 27,000 47,100 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 70,000 5,000 $ 75,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 70,000 5,000 $ 75,000 Total Project $ 90,100 32,000 $ 122,100 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 269 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10 Program All Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This reserve fund project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 31,000 210,000 241,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 300,000 200,000 500,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,400,000 150,000 $ 1,550,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 270 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ 150,000 150,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ 150,000 150,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 150,000 150,000 5-Year Total $ 1,700,000 800,000 $ 2,500,000 Total Project $ 1,731,000 1,010,000 $ 2,741,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: 12th Street: Circle Mountain to Tonto National Forest 3 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 19,000 19,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ 375,000 25,000 400,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 375,000 25,000 400,000 Total Project $ $ 375,000 44,000 419,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 271 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Phase Two in Northwest Area (1) 4 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 160,000 Construction 980,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 29,000 Project Total $ 1,169,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 30,000 1,000 31,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 30,000 1,000 31,000 Total Project $ 160,000 1,010,000 30,000 $ 1,200,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 272 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Phase Two in Northwest Area (2) 4 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 199,000 356,000 31,000 586,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 30,000 1,000 31,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 30,000 1,000 31,000 Total Project $ 199,000 386,000 32,000 $ 617,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 273 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Phase Three in Northeast Area 4 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 229,000 180,000 28,000 437,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 195,000 5,000 200,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 195,000 5,000 200,000 Total Project $ 229,000 375,000 33,000 $ 637,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 274 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Phase Three in Southeast Area 2 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 260,000 Construction 1,050,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 93,000 Project Total $ 1,403,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 30,000 1,000 31,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 30,000 1,000 31,000 Total Project $ 260,000 1,080,000 94,000 $ 1,434,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 275 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Phase Three in Southwest Area 4 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 238,000 429,000 98,000 765,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 390,000 10,000 400,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 390,000 10,000 400,000 Total Project $ 238,000 819,000 108,000 $ 1,165,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 276 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Phase Four in North Valley 3 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 75,000 21,000 96,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 150,000 575,000 10,000 $ 735,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 575,000 10,000 585,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 150,000 1,150,000 20,000 $ 1,320,000 Total Project $ 225,000 1,150,000 41,000 $ 1,416,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 277 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Phase Four in Southeast Valley 1 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 75,000 21,000 96,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 150,000 575,000 10,000 $ 735,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 575,000 10,000 585,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 150,000 1,150,000 20,000 $ 1,320,000 Total Project $ 225,000 1,150,000 41,000 $ 1,416,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 278 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Phase Four in Southwest Valley 5 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 150,000 575,000 10,000 $ 735,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 575,000 10,000 585,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 150,000 1,150,000 20,000 $ 1,320,000 Total Project $ 150,000 1,150,000 20,000 $ 1,320,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 279 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Box Bar and Needle Rock 2 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 12,000 34,000 46,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,095,000 10,000 $ 1,105,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ 1,095,000 10,000 $ 1,105,000 Total Project $ 12,000 1,095,000 44,000 $ 1,151,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 280 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Circle Mountain, 13th Ave to New River Rd 3 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 3,000 3,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 450,000 5,000 455,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 450,000 10,000 460,000 Total Project $ $ 450,000 13,000 463,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 281 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: McNeil, 35th Ave to 31st Ave 5 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 3,000 3,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 250,000 5,000 255,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 250,000 10,000 260,000 Total Project $ $ 250,000 13,000 263,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 If dust palliatives are selected as the dust preventative measure these costs will increase. 282 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation PM 10: Saddle Mountain, New River to 12th St 3 Project Description The purpose of this program is to comply with federal regulations mandating the reduction of dust on dirt roads within the PM 10 area. As individual projects are identified for dust control and added to the capital program, funds are transferred to those projects. Funding Summary This project will be 62% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 38% funded by Federal monies. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 19,000 19,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 400,000 5,000 405,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 400,000 5,000 405,000 Total Project $ $ 400,000 24,000 424,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 283 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Power Rd: Elliot Rd to Guadalupe Rd 1&2 Project Description This is a project to improve Power Road to meet City of Mesa standards. The City of Mesa is the lead agency. Maricopa County will participate under an intergovernmental agreement (IGA). Participation will be financial and costs will be those that would equate to MCDOT standard improvements. This project will result in the widening of the road to six through-lanes with a continuous center-turn lane. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - Operating Cost Summary The City of Mesa will maintain the road. 284 $ $ 450,000 450,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 450,000 450,000 Total Project $ $ 450,000 450,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Power Rd: Guadalupe Rd to Baseline Rd 2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to widen Power Road between Guadalupe Road and Baseline Road to six travel lanes with a raised center median. Funding Summary This project will be 63% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 37% funded by partnership contributions. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 685,000 Construction 332,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 213,000 Project Total $ 1,230,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,046,000 5,000 $ 3,051,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 5,750,000 25,000 $ 5,775,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 3,046,000 5,750,000 35,000 $ 8,831,000 Total Project $ 3,731,000 6,082,000 248,000 $ 10,061,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 285 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Power Rd: Williams Field Rd to Ray Rd 1&2 Project Description The purpose of this project is to complete a design concept report for roadway improvements in order to reduce congestion and increase safety. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 141,000 47,000 188,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Total Project $ 151,000 47,000 $ 198,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 286 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Previous Year’s Projects All Project Description The purpose of this reserve account is to pay for project-related expenses that occurred in the previous fiscal year. This includes utility relocations, right-of-way, and construction charges. Funding Summary This reserve account will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 350,000 350,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 350,000 350,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 287 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ 350,000 350,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ 350,000 350,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 350,000 350,000 5-Year Total $ 1,750,000 $ 1,750,000 Total Project $ 1,750,000 $ 1,750,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Project Reserves All Project Description The purpose of this program is to reserve monies to cover unanticipated project cost increases. Funding Summary This program will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ 6,120,883 $ 6,120,883 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 6,000,000 $ 6,000,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 288 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 16,000,000 $ 16,000,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 12,500,000 $ 12,500,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 45,000,000 $ 45,000,000 5-Year Total $ 85,620,883 $ 85,620,883 Total Project $ 85,620,883 $ 85,620,883 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Property Management on Prior Years CIP Projects All Project Description The purpose of this reserve fund is to pay for land acquisition related expenses that occurred in previous fiscal years. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 65,000 65,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 289 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 5-Year Total $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Total Project $ 315,000 $ 315,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Queen Creek Rd: Culvert at Eastern Canal 1 Project Description This project will replace the existing inadequate pipe with a wider box culvert to allow future widening of the road and to increase the water flow capacity of the RWCD Canal (Eastern Canal) Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 5,000 870,000 105,000 980,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 5,000 5,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 5,000 5,000 Total Project $ 5,000 870,000 110,000 $ 985,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 290 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Queen Creek Rd: Arizona Ave to McQueen 1 Project Description This project will result in the widening of Queen Creek Road from four to six lanes. Funding Summary This project will be 43% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 57% funded by the City of Chandler. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 659,000 125,000 784,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 300,000 5,000 $ 305,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 700,000 10,000 710,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 300,000 10,000 310,000 3,430,000 40,000 $ 3,470,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 300,000 4,430,000 65,000 $ 4,795,000 Total Project $ 959,000 4,430,000 190,000 $ 5,579,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 291 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Ray Rd: Lindsay to Greenfield 1&2 Project Description This project will result in the widening of the roadway from two to four lanes. The Town of Gilbert is the lead agency on this project. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds and 50% funded by the Town of Gilbert. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 2,000 2,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 550,000 2,000 552,000 Operating Cost Summary The Town of Gilbert maintains the roadway. 292 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 550,000 4,000 554,000 Total Project $ $ 550,000 4,000 554,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Riggs Rd at SR 347 5 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be funded from Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 3,500 170,000 17,500 $ 191,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 99,000 17,500 116,500 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 3,500 269,000 35,000 $ 307,500 Total Project $ 3,500 269,000 35,000 $ 307,500 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing, etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 293 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Riggs Rd: Arizona Ave to Gilbert Rd 1 Project Description This project will result in the widening of Riggs Road from two to six lanes. The City of Chandler is the lead agency on this project. The project is scheduled to go to bid in the late spring of 2004. The City of Chandler has agreed to accept payment at the start of the FY 2004-05 fiscal year to insure that funds are available in the event there is a delay in the bid date. Funding Summary This project will be 50% funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 50% funded by the City of Chandler. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ Total Project 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 The County maintains approximately 1-1/4 miles of the 3-mile project. 294 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Riggs Rd: Interstate 10 to Price Rd 5 Project Description This project will result in the widening of the existing two-lane roadway to include two travel lanes in each direction with a continuous left-turn lane. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 192,000 Construction 1,200,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 338,000 Project Total $ 1,730,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 500,000 5,000 505,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 500,000 5,000 505,000 Total Project $ 192,000 1,700,000 343,000 $ 2,235,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 295 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Right of Way In-fill on Road Inventory System All Project Description The purpose of this program is to obtain fee title on existing roads so the traveling public has continued access to the existing roadway system. Funding Summary This program will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 7,350,000 Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 2,952,000 Project Total $ 10,302,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 3,000,000 502,000 $ 3,502,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 10,000,000 500,000 $ 10,500,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 296 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 10,000,000 500,000 $ 10,500,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 5,000,000 500,000 $ 5,500,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 28,000,000 2,002,000 $ 30,002,000 Total Project $ 35,350,000 4,954,000 $ 40,304,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Rio Salado: Loop 303 to 7th Ave Feasibility Study 4&5 Project Description The purpose of this project is to complete a feasibility study that will examine the creation of the Rio Salado Parkway from Loop 303 to 7th Ave. Right-of-way and roadway needs will be identified and planned, and accurate cost estimates will be made to increase the capacity and safety of the roadway. The Rio Salado Parkway is intended to be the I-10 reliever shown in the Regional Transportation Plan. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 11,000 11,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 60,000 60,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 297 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 60,000 60,000 Total Project $ $ 71,000 71,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Rittenhouse Rd at Ellsworth Rd 1 Project Description This project will install traffic signals at the intersection to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve traffic flow. Funding Summary This project will be 93% funded from Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) and 7% funding from the Town of Queen Creek. Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 4,000 20,000 $ 24,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 250,000 20,000 270,000 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 4,000 250,000 40,000 $ 294,000 Total Project $ 4,000 250,000 40,000 $ 294,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Signalized intersections require periodic maintenance to replace light bulbs, clean or replace lenses, repaint striping, adjust timing, etc. Routine maintenance begins in the year following construction with materials being the largest portion (55%) of the annual cost. 298 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Signal Modernization All Project Description The purpose of this project is to upgrade the software and hardware on county traffic signals to ensure more efficient flows of traffic and to reduce travel costs. The upgraded hardware allows signal timing changes to be made from a Traffic Control Center rather than on-site manual adjustments. This allows real-time traffic management. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 55,000 Construction 1,518,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 134,000 Project Total $ 1,707,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 15,000 300,000 5,000 $ 320,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 15,000 300,000 5,000 $ 320,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 30,000 600,000 10,000 $ 640,000 Total Project $ 85,000 2,118,000 144,000 $ 2,347,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Year FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Project Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 15,600 Supplies & Services 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 19,200 Subtotal $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 34,800 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ Each signalized intersection requires periodic maintenance to replace bulbs, clean lenses, etc. 299 5,800 $ 34,800 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Special Projects All Project Description The purpose of this program is to reserve monies for special needs projects recommended by the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) so the department can take advantage of project and cost-sharing opportunities that may not be available in the future. Funding Summary This program will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 300 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 5-Year Total $ 5,000,000 $ 5,000,000 Total Project $ 5,000,000 $ 5,000,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Sun City Asphalt Reconstruction 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to repair failing pavement for the traveling public and area residents so they will have a safer commute. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 400,000 33,000 433,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 200,000 20,000 220,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ $ 200,000 20,000 220,000 Total Project $ $ 600,000 53,000 653,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 301 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Sun City Mill and Overlay: Phase 1 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to mill (remove the existing asphalt surface) and overlay (replace with new asphalt) to rehabilitate the existing deteriorated pavement. The developer constructed many of the roads in Sun City 35 to 40 years ago. Maintenance efforts have increased in frequency over the last decade, and rehabilitation has become necessary. This is the first of four phases to accomplish it. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ 3,100,000 20,000 $ 3,120,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ Total Project 3,100,000 20,000 $ 3,120,000 $ 3,100,000 20,000 $ 3,120,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 302 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Sun City Mill and Overlay: Phase 2 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to mill (remove the existing asphalt surface) and overlay (replace with new asphalt) to rehabilitate the existing deteriorated pavement. The developer constructed many of the roads in Sun City 35 to 40 years ago. Maintenance efforts have increased in frequency over the last decade, and rehabilitation has become necessary. This is the second of four phases to accomplish it. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ 3,500,000 20,000 $ 3,520,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ Total Project 3,500,000 20,000 $ 3,520,000 $ 3,500,000 20,000 $ 3,520,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 303 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Sun City Mill and Overlay: Phase 3 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to mill (remove the existing asphalt surface) and overlay (replace with new asphalt) to rehabilitate the existing deteriorated pavement. The developer constructed many of the roads in Sun City 35 to 40 years ago. Maintenance efforts have increased in frequency over the last decade, and rehabilitation has become necessary. This is the third of four phases to accomplish it. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - 2,200,000 20,000 $ 2,220,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 5-Year Total - $ $ Total Project 2,200,000 20,000 $ 2,220,000 $ 2,200,000 20,000 $ 2,220,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 304 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Sun City Mill and Overlay: Phase 4 4 Project Description The purpose of this project is to mill (remove the existing asphalt surface) and overlay (replace with new asphalt) to rehabilitate the existing deteriorated pavement. The developer constructed many of the roads in Sun City 35 to 40 years ago. Maintenance efforts have increased in frequency over the last decade, and rehabilitation has become necessary. This is the final phase of the project. Funding Summary The project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total $ Total Project 1,900,000 20,000 $ 1,920,000 1,900,000 20,000 $ 1,920,000 $ 1,900,000 20,000 $ 1,920,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 305 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Sun Valley Parkway Corridor Study 4 Project Description The purpose of this corridor study is to examine current and proposed development along the corridor in order to identify the type of roadway improvements required. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Operating Cost Summary No annual operating costs are associated with a corridor study. 306 Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Total Project $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation TIP Program Management All Project Description The purpose of this program is to provide for overall management of the five-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) including budget monitoring and schedule support. Funding Summary This program will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 200,000 800,000 $ 1,000,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 307 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 5-Year Total $ 200,000 4,800,000 $ 5,000,000 Total Project $ 200,000 4,800,000 $ 5,000,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Unallocated Force Account All Project Description The purpose of this account is to reserve monies to cover unallocated or unanticipated labor costs incurred to keep projects on schedule and ensure completion. Funding Summary This unallocated force account will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 539,500 539,500 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,430,811 $ 1,430,811 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 308 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,994,000 $ 1,994,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,026,000 $ 2,026,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 2,813,000 $ 2,813,000 5-Year Total $ 8,803,311 $ 8,803,311 Total Project $ 8,803,311 $ 8,803,311 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Utility Locating (Pothole) Annual Contract All Project Description The purpose of this program is to supply utility-locating services for MCDOT projects so damages to unidentified utilities will not cause projects to be delayed or costs increased. Funding Summary This program will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 37,000 37,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 50,000 50,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 50,000 50,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 309 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ 50,000 50,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 150,000 150,000 Total Project $ $ 187,000 187,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Val Vista Rd: Thomas to Southern Canal 2 Project Description This is a project to improve Val Vista Road to meet City of Mesa standards. The City of Mesa is the lead agency. Maricopa County will participate under an intergovernmental agreement. Participation will be financial and costs will be those that would equate to MCDOT standard improvements. This project will result in the widening of the road to four through-lanes with a continuous center-turn lane. Funding Summary This County’s portion of the project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - Operating Cost Summary The City of Mesa will maintain the road. 310 $ $ 400,000 1,000 401,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ 5-Year Total - $ $ 400,000 1,000 401,000 Total Project $ $ 400,000 1,000 401,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Warranted Traffic Improvements All Project Description The purpose of this program is to reserve funds for safety projects that are immediately needed. As a safety project is identified, funds are allocated to that project by Board action. Funding Summary This program will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ $ 500,000 500,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Operating Cost Summary Not applicable. 311 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 5-Year Total $ 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 Total Project $ 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Williams Field Rd at Higley Rd 1 Project Description This project will widen Williams Field Road at the Higley Road intersection and upgrade signals at the intersection. The project will also include the installation of curb on the south side of Williams Field Road to control parking in the vicinity of the intersection. Utilities will be relocated, and a drainage basin will be installed to address intersection drainage issues. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 98,000 172,000 270,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 14,000 682,000 40,000 $ 736,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 14,000 682,000 40,000 $ 736,000 Total Project $ 112,000 682,000 212,000 $ 1,006,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Avg cost per year to maintain signalized intersection Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ - - $ 312 Year 2* FY 05-06 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 2,600 $ 3,200 5,800 $ 10,400 12,800 23,200 - $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 5,800 $ 23,200 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Transportation Williams Field Rd: Gilbert to Lindsay 1 Project Description This is a design project for the reconstruct and widening of the existing four-lane roadway to provide either six travel lanes with a raised center median or four travel lanes with a raised center median and a frontage road in each direction. Additional improvements include curb, gutter, sidewalk, a storm drain system, widening of the Eastern Canal Bridge and a traffic signal at the Lindsay Road intersection. Funding Summary This project will be funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 37,000 37,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 40,000 40,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 462,000 20,000 $ 482,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 20,000 20,000 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total $ 462,000 80,000 $ 542,000 Total Project $ 462,000 117,000 $ 579,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Operating Cost Summary Current Year Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Avg cost per mile to maintain project Personal Sevices $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 4,235 $ 400 4,635 $ 25,410 2,400 27,810 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 $ 27,810 313 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Summary The Flood Control District employs a separate planning procedure than those utilized by the County at large. The procedure includes intergovernmental agency collaboration and prioritization based on an established list of ranking criteria for designated types of projects. The Flood Control District project ranking criteria follows: • Submitting agency priority • Master Plan Element • Hydrologic/hydraulic significance • Level of protection • Area protected • Environmental quality • Area-wide benefits • Total projected cost • Level of partner(s) participation • Operational and maintenance costs • Operational and maintenance responsibility The Prioritization Procedure used by the Flood Control District is a multi-step decision process intended to implement previously approved fiscal policies from the District’s Strategic Plan. Potential CIP projects are identified primarily through agency requests and/or the Area Drainage Master Studies/Area Drainage Master Plans (ADMS/ADMP) and flood plain delineation of other District programs. As ADMPs are completed and adopted, it is anticipated that a significant number of future CIP project requests will be generated through this program. Input received annually concerning project priorities coming from these, or other plans, as well as other potential projects, will continue to be sought and prioritized on a County-wide basis using this procedure. The Flood Control District utilizes its CIP prioritization procedure to limit future structural maintenance responsibility to only those projects that are multi-jurisdictional and regional in nature and involve main watercourses. The Flood Control District’s proposed CIP is consistent with the District’s ten-year financial forecast. 314 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program Project Detail A total of 19 capital projects are identified and recommended to the Board by the Flood Control District. The recommended projects are as follows: FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT CAPITAL PROJECTS (FUND 990) BUCKEYE #1 CITY OF CHANDLER CITY OF SCOTTSDALE DURANGO ADMP EAST MARICOPA FLOODWAY EAST MESA ADMP GLENDALE/PEORIA ADMP MARYVALE ADMP MCMICKEN DAM METRO ADMP PARADISE VLY, SCOTTSDALE,PHX QUEEN CREEK ADMP S. PHOENIX DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT SALT/GILA RIVER SKUNK CREEK/NEW RIVER SPOOK HILL ADMP TOWN OF GUADALUPE WHITE TANKS ADMP WHITE TANKS DAM #4 PROJECT RESERVES (FLOOD) NON-PROJECT (CENTRAL SERVICE CHARGES) TOTAL FUND 990 $ PRIOR YEARS FY 2004-05 FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 20,000 5,224,000 638,000 47,000 20,000 5,336,000 3,160,000 26,738,000 4,650,000 9,881,000 6,448,000 2,275,000 2,365,000 29,596,000 3,848,000 783,000 2,201,000 337,000 2,330,000 176,000 1,776,000 2,123,000 1,819,000 10,443,000 6,882,000 71,000 1,100,000 990,000 4,809,000 7,470,000 150,000 2,883,000 9,709,000 9,228,000 30,000 390,000 212,503 131,009,741 $ 52,076,503 30,000 660,000 4,610,000 3,590,000 4,913,000 4,790,000 11,535,000 830,000 1,140,000 1,224,000 40,000 1,140,000 1,100,000 2,660,000 550,000 13,695,000 150,000 5,390,000 58,047,000 310,000 680,000 2,390,000 4,210,000 3,140,000 4,200,000 9,425,000 20,000 4,190,000 3,630,000 40,000 3,320,000 13,645,000 3,670,000 2,450,000 55,320,000 1,020,000 1,100,000 4,150,000 7,590,000 6,180,000 2,495,000 5,480,000 520,000 6,940,000 2,640,000 30,000 3,180,000 375,000 8,860,000 3,150,000 1,920,000 55,630,000 FY 2008-09 9,300,000 2,080,000 4,250,000 7,800,000 4,180,000 4,150,000 3,500,000 1,060,000 60,000 30,000 4,170,000 375,000 10,960,000 405,000 52,320,000 5-YR TOTAL (FY 2005-09) 10,680,000 638,000 4,540,000 18,560,000 27,840,000 24,861,000 18,000,000 33,788,000 3,031,000 5,070,000 3,000,000 12,989,000 14,352,000 2,300,000 7,469,000 11,370,000 750,000 56,388,000 7,000,000 10,555,000 212,503 273,393,503 TOTAL PROJECT 10,680,000 5,862,000 4,587,000 23,896,000 54,578,000 34,742,000 20,275,000 63,384,000 3,814,000 5,407,000 3,176,000 15,112,000 24,795,000 2,371,000 8,459,000 18,840,000 3,633,000 66,097,000 7,000,000 10,555,000 212,503 387,475,503 Performance Measures Measure RESULT: Percent of structural projects on the current 5-Year Capital Project Plan that are completed in the current fiscal year OUTPUT: Number of structural projects on the current 5-Year Capital Project Plan that are completed in the current fiscal year DEMAND: Total number of structural projects on the current 5-Year Capital Project Plan EFFICIENCY: Cost per structural project completed in the current fiscal year FY 2003-04 YTD Actual FY 2003-04 Estimated FY 2004-05 Estimated with Capital Improvement Not Available 13% Not Available Not Available 5 Not Available Not Available 40 Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 315 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Buckeye #1 - Dam Rehabilitation North of Interstate 10, Hassayampa River to Oglesby Rd 4 Project Description Buckeye Flood Retarding Structure #1 (Buckeye FRS #1), operated and maintained by the District, requires corrective action to bring the structure into compliance with dam safety standards and requirements. The District has completed Phase I Assessments for Buckeye FRS #1. Buckeye FRS #1 has been determined to be eligible for federal funding assistance under Public Law 106-472, The Small Watershed Amendment. The District will initiate planning and pre-design efforts for the project in Fiscal Year 2004-05. Funding Summary Prior Years District $ Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 310,000 $ 310,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,020,000 $ 1,020,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 9,300,000 $ 9,300,000 5-Year Total $ 10,680,000 $ 10,680,000 Total Project $ 10,680,000 $ 10,680,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ 20,000 20,000 $ Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 30,000 30,000 $ Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 250,000 60,000 $ 310,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 900,000 120,000 $ 1,020,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 5-Year Total $ 250,000 9,900,000 530,000 $ 10,680,000 9,000,000 300,000 9,300,000 Total Project $ 250,000 9,900,000 530,000 $ 10,680,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Supplies & Services $ Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Subtotal $ 50,000 $ 45,000 95,000 $ 50,000 $ 45,000 95,000 $ 50,000 $ 45,000 95,000 $ 50,000 $ 45,000 95,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 180,000 380,000 Total Current Costs $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ - $ - $ 380,000 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ - $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ 45,000 95,000 $ 50,000 $ 45,000 95,000 $ 100,000 90,000 190,000 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 190,000 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 570,000 316 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District City of Chandler Alma School Rd/Ray Rd - Multiple Locations 1 Project Description The City of Chandler’s central area was developed prior to the implementation of required drainage standards. The City of Chandler previously developed and implemented a storm water master plan for the central area to include storm drains, basins and pump stations. The City updated the plan and has requested that the District cooperate and cost share the modification and enhancement of the existing facilities to provide a 100-year level of protection and a regional outfall for the system. The City is the lead agency for design, rights of way acquisition, utility relocation, construction, construction management, and operation and maintenance of the system. The District’s role is to participate in the consultant selection process, pre-construction meetings, provide technical assistance, and review the design and construction phases for the Project. Four improvement projects have been identified that would help the City accomplish its goal of alleviating the flooding problems in Chandler’s central area. Total project cost is estimated at approximately $ 12.2 million with the District’s contribution capped at $ 6.1 million. This project will be completed in FY 2005. Phase 1 – Ivanhoe and Erie Storm Drains - Complete Phase 2 – Arrowhead Pump Station and Force Main - Complete Phase 3 – Galveston Basin and Erie Drains – Complete Phase 4 – Denver Basin Pump Station and Hartford Force Main - Under Design Funding Summary District $ Project Total $ Prior Years 5,224,000 5,224,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 638,000 $ 638,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total 638,000 638,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 5,862,000 5,862,000 Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 277,000 4,719,000 228,000 5,224,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 608,000 30,000 638,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ Operating Cost Summary The completed project will be owned and operated by Chandler, at no cost to the District. 317 5-Year Total - $ $ 608,000 30,000 638,000 $ $ Total Project 277,000 5,327,000 258,000 5,862,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District City of Scottsdale Central Scottsdale 1&2 Project Description The storm water conveyance system within the Granite Reef Wash drainage area has insufficient capacity to collect and convey major storm events, in particular, the 100-year flood event as defined in the FEMA Flood Insurance Study for the City of Scottsdale. Additionally, the wash does not have an adequate outfall to the Salt River though the Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community land south of McKellips Road. The drainage problems within the study area were quantified and drainage alternatives were developed in the Granite Reef Wash Drainage Master Plan Part 1. Phase 2 of the project, would recommend a final drainage master plan that will mitigate the flooding hazards within the watershed, and, if feasible, remove the existing FEMA designated floodplain. The recommended plan will then be considered for design and construction in the future. Funding Summary District Scottsdale $ Project Total $ Prior Years 47,000 47,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 360,000 300,000 $ 660,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 380,000 300,000 $ 680,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 600,000 500,000 $ 1,100,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 1,080,000 1,000,000 $ 2,080,000 5-Year Total 2,440,000 2,100,000 4,540,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 2,487,000 2,100,000 4,587,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 47,000 47,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ 20,000 20,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 600,000 60,000 $ 660,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 600,000 80,000 $ 680,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,000,000 100,000 $ 1,100,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 2,000,000 80,000 $ 2,080,000 $ $ 5-Year Total 4,200,000 340,000 4,540,000 $ $ Operating Cost Summary The project will not be completed within the five-year period; therefore no operating costs are anticipated. 318 Total Project 4,200,000 387,000 4,587,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Durango Area Drainage Master Plan Avondale/Tolleson/Phoenix 5 Project Description 75th Avenue Storm Drain/Durango Regional Conveyance Channel The 75th Avenue Storm Drain and Durango Regional Conveyance Channel Project (DRCC) is the first phase of providing the area with a regional stormwater outfall to the Salt River. The DRCC project was identified in the Durango Area Drainage Master Plan as a solution for a portion of the identified flooding hazards within the study area. This project consists of combining a portion of Regional DRCC project with a proposed storm drain along 75th Avenue. The project will include detention basins, channels and the storm drain along 75th Avenue from approximately Van Buren Street to south of Broadway Road, outfalling into the Salt River. These improvements will reduce the flooding hazards and remove approximately 71 structures from an identified floodplain. Durango Area Drainage Master Plan The Durango Area Drainage Master Plan (ADMP) has been completed. The watershed area includes approximately 68 square miles extending from I-10 on the north to the Salt River on the south, and from approximately 27th Avenue on the east to the Agua Fria River on the west. The area is experiencing rapid urbanization of a previously agricultural land use. The ADMP updated the watershed hydrology, identified existing and potential future drainage problems and defined effective drainage solutions to collect, convey and safely discharge the stormwater. The ADMP identified regional drainage features amounting to an estimated cost of $130 million. Some of the recommended facilities are being incorporated into private developments that are being constructed. Other municipal features will require cooperative agreements between the Flood Control District and the local municipalities before they can be implemented. The funds included in the District’s proposed CIP are for funding for these future projects, contingent on approved project agreements. It is anticipated that the municipal project partners will assume operations and maintenance of the new facilities. Funding Summary District $ Phoenix Not Defined Project Total $ Prior Years 3,699,000 1,638,000 5,337,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,610,000 1,550,000 $ 3,160,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,110,000 1,500,000 $ 4,610,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,265,000 1,125,000 $ 2,390,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,150,000 2,000,000 $ 4,150,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 2,250,000 2,000,000 $ 4,250,000 5-Year Total $ 10,385,000 4,175,000 4,000,000 $ 18,560,000 Total Project $ 14,084,000 5,813,000 4,000,000 $ 23,897,000 Years 4 and 5 include future projects whose partners are not yet defined. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 4,915,000 422,000 5,337,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,300,000 1,780,000 80,000 $ 3,160,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 4,440,000 170,000 $ 4,610,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 2,250,000 140,000 $ 2,390,000 Operating Cost Summary The City of Phoenix will operate and maintain the completed project. 319 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 4,000,000 150,000 $ 4,150,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 4,000,000 250,000 $ 4,250,000 5-Year Total $ 9,300,000 8,470,000 790,000 $ 18,560,000 $ $ Total Project 14,215,000 8,470,000 1,212,000 23,897,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District East Maricopa Floodway (EMF) East Maricopa Floodway - Multiple Locations 1 Project Description East Maricopa Floodway (EMF) Capacity Mitigation The District has completed the East Maricopa Floodway (EMF) Mitigation Study. The study identified several drainage and flooding problems along the EMF. The project consists of a design analysis to identify breakout locations along the EMF channel. The analysis has been completed for the EMF downstream of the Rittenhouse Basin location (south of Williams Field Road). It was found that the breakouts were very limited in extent and fully contained within the District rights-of-way. An analysis of the upper reaches of the EMF channel will now be undertaken to identify any breakout locations that extend beyond the District rights-of-way limits along the channel. Modifications to the top of the channel banks, by placement of fill material, will be accomplished based on the breakout locations identified in the analysis. East Maricopa Floodway (EMF) Rittenhouse and Chandler Heights Basins The District has completed the East Maricopa Floodway (EMF) Mitigation Study. The study identified several drainage and flooding problems along the EMF. The study proposed to mitigate the problem by constructing two large, off-line detention basins. The Chandler Heights Basin is planned as an off line basin to mitigate flows from the Sonoqui Wash, Queen Creek Wash, and the EMF. Rittenhouse Basin is also planned as an off line basin to mitigate flows from the Rittenhouse Channel and the EMF. The District is negotiating an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Town of Gilbert for the Town’s recreational use of the basins. The project consists of a pre-design, and a final design to include preparation of construction documents and engineer’s estimates. The design cost is currently estimated at $2 million. The construction cost is estimated to be $44 million. Because of the size of the basins and because of the cost, construction will be phased over a number of years with completion of both basins scheduled for Fiscal Year 2009-10. The first phase of construction, improvements to the EMF channel and construction of the south portion of the Chandler Heights Basin is to begin in late Fiscal Year 2003-04. EMF Modifications - Chandler Heights to Riggs Road This project includes modifications of the channel form along the west side of the EMF just south of Chandler Heights Road and along both sides of the channel just north of Riggs Road. The project is a retrofit of the facility to provide a demonstration project for enhancement of aesthetic and multi-use opportunities of the District’s facility, promoting public acceptance and use. The project will also enhance the value of the District’s property and proposes to identify and plat a portion of associated property for future sale at auction. Funding Summary District Prior Years $ 26,738,000 Project Total $ 26,738,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 4,650,000 $ 4,650,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,590,000 $ 3,590,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 4,210,000 $ 4,210,000 320 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 7,590,000 $ 7,590,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 7,800,000 $ 7,800,000 5-Year Total $ 27,840,000 $ 27,840,000 Total Project $ 54,578,000 $ 54,578,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program East Maricopa Floodway (EMF) Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 25,908,000 Construction 204,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 626,000 Project Total $ 26,738,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 4,420,000 230,000 $ 4,650,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,390,000 200,000 $ 3,590,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 4,000,000 210,000 $ 4,210,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 7,290,000 300,000 $ 7,590,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 5-Year Total 7,500,000 300,000 7,800,000 $ 26,600,000 1,240,000 $ 27,840,000 Total Project $ 25,908,000 26,804,000 1,866,000 $ 54,578,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project $ Subtotal $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 20,000 20,000 Total Current Costs $ 20,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 20,000 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ - $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ - $ 50,000 $ 10,000 60,000 $ 50,000 $ 20,000 70,000 $ 50,000 $ 20,000 70,000 $ 50,000 $ 20,000 70,000 $ 50,000 $ 20,000 70,000 $ 250,000 90,000 340,000 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ 60,000 $ 70,000 $ 70,000 $ 70,000 $ 70,000 $ 340,000 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 20,000 $ 60,000 $ 70,000 $ 70,000 $ 70,000 $ 70,000 $ 360,000 321 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District East Mesa Area Drainage Master Plan Mesa - Multiple Locations 1 Project Description Elliot Basin and Channel The Elliot Basin and Channel is a project that is identified in the East Mesa Area Drainage Master Plan. The East Mesa ADMP identifies drainage problems and develops solutions for a storm water collection and basin system for eastern Maricopa County including portions of the City of Mesa, the Town of Gilbert, the Town of Queen Creek, and unincorporated Maricopa County. The Elliot Road Channel component of the project extends along Elliot Road from the 104th Street alignment to the East Maricopa Floodway. A large diameter storm drain collects storm flow from the Siphon Draw Wash and extends west along Elliot Road, day-lighting west of Ellsworth Road into natural washes. These improvements have been constructed. The remaining features are a channel, extending from Ellsworth Road to the future San Tan Freeway, and a channel along the Crismon Road Alignment, from Paloma Avenue to Elliot Road. Mesa, MCDOT and the District have cooperated on the completed features and will share in the costs of the remaining project. Ellsworth Channel This project includes construction of a flood control channel to mitigate existing and future flooding along Ellsworth Road from south of Germann Road, adjacent to General Motors Proving Ground and Williams Gateway Airport. Flooding occurs frequently at five dip crossings on the existing roadway. The channel project will be constructed in conjunction with MCDOT’s upgrades to Ellsworth Road from Germann Road to 1/3 mile south of Guadalupe Road, and will provide drainage for the road and capacity for the future 100-year flood. The design for the roadway upgrades and channel is scheduled to be complete by August 2004, and the project is scheduled to be under construction by October 2004. Siphon Draw Drainage Improvements This project is the final element of the recommended plan for the East Mesa ADMP for the area south of the Superstition Freeway and north of Warner Road. This project involves a channel along Meridian Road to intercept flow entering Maricopa County from Pinal County and also a detention basin constructed east of Meridian Road to intercept Siphon Draw. The basin will help to decrease flows to the overall system. The City of Mesa is a project partner with the District. Funding Summary District MCDOT Mesa $ Project Total $ Prior Years 5,292,000 1,377,000 3,212,000 9,881,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 4,306,000 152,000 1,990,000 $ 6,448,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,575,000 1,338,000 $ 4,913,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,640,000 1,500,000 $ 3,140,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 3,180,000 3,000,000 $ 6,180,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 2,180,000 2,000,000 $ 4,180,000 $ $ 5-Year Total 14,881,000 152,000 9,828,000 24,861,000 $ $ Total Project 20,173,000 1,529,000 13,040,000 34,742,000 Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 2,212,000 7,254,000 415,000 9,881,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 3,465,000 2,823,000 160,000 $ 6,448,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 2,780,000 1,993,000 140,000 $ 4,913,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 3,000,000 140,000 $ 3,140,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 6,000,000 180,000 $ 6,180,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 4,000,000 180,000 4,180,000 Operating Cost Summary It is anticipated that the City of Mesa will operate and maintain the completed project. 322 5-Year Total $ 6,245,000 17,816,000 800,000 $ 24,861,000 Total Project $ 8,457,000 25,070,000 1,215,000 $ 34,742,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Glendale/Peoria Area Drainage Master Plan North Peoria and Glendale - Multiple Locations 4 Project Description Glendale/Peoria ADMP Update Projects The District and the Cities of Glendale and Peoria completed the Glendale/Peoria ADMP Update study to identify existing and future drainage and flooding problems in the watershed, and to develop cost-effective solutions to alleviate those problems. The ADMP Update study includes preliminary design plans for a recommended 9-Phase Improvement Projects program consisting of channel improvements, detention basins, open channel conveyances, storm drains, and other storm water collection and disposal systems that provide 100-year protection for the 85-square mile watershed. The estimated total cost for the multi-year Improvement projects program is $34.3M with several potential cost-sharing partners. The Peoria City Council and the District Board of Directors have both adopted the recommendations of the study. Rose Garden Lane The proposed Rose Garden Lane Channel will provide 100-year level of protection. The Rose Garden Lane Channel consists of an open channel on the north side of Rose Garden Lane (one-half mile north of Beardsley Road) from approximately Lake Pleasant Parkway to the Agua Fria River, with underground box culverts at road crossings. River, south of Rose Garden Lane. The Rose Garden Lane Channel is a high priority recommendation of the Glendale/Peoria ADMP and ranks as a high priority flood control project for Peoria. Peoria submitted the project to the District for consideration in its Fiscal Year 2002-03 Capital Improvements Program Prioritization Procedure process. The City of Peoria will be the lead agency for this project. There is a 50% cost sharing with the District for the project. The estimated cost for the project is $3.8 million, which includes the design, utility relocations, construction and construction management. Design commenced in Fiscal Year 2003-04 and construction is scheduled to start in Fiscal Year 2005-06. Peoria is the lead agency for this project. 83rd Avenue/Pinnacle Peak Road Drainage Improvements The 83rd Avenue/Pinnacle Peak Road Improvements were recommended as Phase 2 and part of Phase 3 of the program. The Improvements collect 100-year flows from the north and convey them south on 83rd Avenue from Calle Lejos to an existing channel at Williams Road. The Improvements include a north and south basin (at Calle Lejos and Pinnacle Peak Road, respectively), and open channels and/or storm drains connecting and bringing them to the outfall at 83rd Avenue and Williams Road. The City of Peoria submitted the 83rd Avenue/Pinnacle Peak Road Drainage Improvement projects to the District during the Fiscal Year 2002-03 Prioritization Procedure. There is a 50% cost sharing between the District and Peoria for the project. The estimated cost for the project is $9.2 million, which includes the design, utility relocations, construction and construction management. Design is slated to commence in Fiscal Year 2003-04 and construction in Fiscal Year 2005-06. Peoria has acquired the basin at 83rd Avenue/Pinnacle Peak Road and will receive a credit towards its construction cost-share for half of the rights-of-way cost. 323 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Glendale/Peoria Area Drainage Master Plan 67th Avenue Storm Drain The 67th Avenue Storm Drain project has been proposed by the City of Glendale and will provide 10-year storm drainage protection for a three square mile area lying within jurisdictional boundaries of both the cities of Glendale and Peoria. The project will consist of drainage pipes and catch basins and will be constructed in rights-of-way provided by Glendale. The outfalls for the project were constructed by the District along Cactus Road and Olive Avenue and are presently owned and operated by the City of Peoria. The District is contributing 50% of the project costs. The estimated cost for the project is $3 million, which includes the design, land acquisition, utility relocations, construction and construction management. Glendale is the lead agency for the design and construction of the project, and will own, operate and maintain the completed project. Funding Summary District $ Glendale Peoria/others Project Total $ Prior Years 1,939,000 186,000 150,000 2,275,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,565,000 800,000 $ 2,365,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 3,465,000 1,325,000 $ 4,790,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 2,450,000 1,750,000 $ 4,200,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,995,000 500,000 $ 2,495,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 2,150,000 2,000,000 $ 4,150,000 $ $ 5-Year Total 11,625,000 6,375,000 18,000,000 $ $ Total Project 13,564,000 186,000 6,525,000 20,275,000 It is anticipated that Peoria and the District will equally cost-share several of the projects. Additional ADMP project partners include the Cities of Glendale and Phoenix. Project partners will typically bear responsibility for operation and maintenance costs. Multiple projects will be developed in the future from this ADMP, and funding in years 4 and 5 reflect future projects to be initiated within the next five years. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 1,897,000 252,000 126,000 2,275,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 2,215,000 150,000 $ 2,365,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 600,000 4,050,000 150,000 $ 4,800,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 225,000 5,160,000 220,000 $ 5,605,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,000,000 80,000 $ 1,080,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 4,000,000 150,000 4,150,000 Operating Cost Summary It is anticipated that each municipality will maintain projects constructed in their jurisdiction. 324 5-Year Total $ 4,040,000 13,210,000 750,000 $ 18,000,000 Total Project $ 5,937,000 13,462,000 876,000 $ 20,275,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District South Phoenix Drainage Improvement South Phoenix - Multiple Locations 5 Project Description This project includes the design and construction of a conveyance channel capable of containing a 100-year flood event in the vicinity of the existing Maricopa Drain from 43rd Avenue to the Salt River for a length of approximately 5.8 miles. A flood detention basin at 43rd Avenue and Southern Avenue will mitigate peak flood flow getting to the conveyance channel. Based on previous evaluations of flood hazard within this area, significant floodwater from large storm events pond along the existing Maricopa Drain. This project will reduce the potential flood hazard. This project consists of channel excavation, road crossings, drop structures, tiling and filling in the existing Maricopa Drain, and construction of concrete low-flow channel. Construction for the Project began in August 2003 and is schedule to be completed in February 2005. Landscaping will be completed by mid-2005. Laveen Area Conveyance Channel Water Production Well A well will be constructed and tested within the LACC right-of-way, to provide irrigation water for the channel and basin landscaping. The District will turn the well over to the City of Phoenix with the channel and basin upon completion of the project. Laveen Area Conveyance Channel Landscape and Irrigation The well facility will be constructed, including pumps, storage tank and walls. The irrigation system will be installed for the channel and basin and connected to the well. The channel and basin slopes and invert will be turfed, and trees will be planted in the basin site. A concrete maintenance path will be constructed for the basin, and landscaping materials will be added at the top of the basin. The channel will be used as a linear park and trail system, and the basin will be used for a park with soccer fields. The City of Phoenix will own, operate, and maintain both facilities. 23rd Avenue and Roeser Road Basin and Storm Drain The South Phoenix/Laveen Drainage Improvement Project Preliminary Design Report was prepared in July 1997. Conceptual plans for the recommended alternative storm water collection and conveyance system infrastructure needs for this project area were developed. The study identified recommended plans with a series of projects to provide drainage infrastructure and flooding protection for a 26 square-mile watershed. The improvement projects consist of storm drains, detention basins, and open channel conveyances. A number of the projects have been completed or are in process. The 23rd Avenue and Roeser Basin and Storm Drain is the next priority project for the City of Phoenix. The City of Phoenix will serve as the lead agency for the Project and will share project costs equally with the District. The 23rd Avenue and Roeser Road project is estimated to cost $4.1 million and the City will be the lead agency for rights-of-way acquisition, design, construction, as well as own, operate and maintain the completed project capable of collecting and conveying the 100-year storm event. The District will provide construction management services. The basin will be located in the vicinity of 23rd Avenue and Roeser Road and the storm drain will be constructed along Roeser Road to the west and north along 27th Avenue to an existing City of Phoenix storm drain at 27th Avenue and Broadway Roads. Design is slated to commence in FY3/04 and construction in FY 05/06. 325 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program South Phoenix Drainage Improvement South Phoenix Detention Basins Residents in the South Phoenix area have been flooded during relatively minor storm events, including those considered to be less than 10-year storms. The South Phoenix Drainage Improvement Project will provide protection from a 100-year flood event to residences and developing farmland within the City of Phoenix. The project will be built in phases to maximize the potential for cost sharing with other agencies. The 100-year protection will be in place once all of the phases are completed. The South Phoenix Detention Basins are located at the intersections of 43rd Avenue and Baseline Road, and 27th Avenue and South Mountain Avenue. Preliminary designs have been prepared for each of the detention basins. The Basins were submitted by the City of Phoenix in the 1999 Prioritization Procedure, and approved by the Prioritization Committee. The City of Phoenix does not have funding in their current bond program for this project. The proposed schedule assumes that the City of Phoenix is able to appropriate funds for this project. The goal is for the District to contribute approximately 50% of the project cost of the South Phoenix Drainage Improvements. The District acquired the basin sites when Baseline Road was widened and the Baseline Road Storm Drain was constructed. Funding Summary City of Phoenix $ District MCDOT Project Total $ Prior Years 5,400,000 6,673,000 500,000 12,573,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 3,656,000 2,726,000 500,000 $ 6,882,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 100,000 1,040,000 $ 1,140,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,350,000 2,280,000 $ 3,630,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,250,000 1,390,000 $ 2,640,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 60,000 60,000 $ 5-Year Total 6,356,000 7,496,000 500,000 14,352,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 11,756,000 14,169,000 1,000,000 26,925,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ 3,094,000 Construction 8,675,000 Other Costs-Force Acct Labor 804,000 Project Total $ 12,573,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 462,000 6,150,000 270,000 $ 6,882,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 200,000 750,000 190,000 $ 1,140,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 200,000 3,250,000 180,000 $ 3,630,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 2,500,000 140,000 $ 2,640,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 60,000 60,000 5-Year Total $ 862,000 12,650,000 840,000 $ 14,352,000 Operating Cost Summary The City of Phoenix plans to provide operation and maintenance for the completed projects. 326 Total Project $ 3,956,000 21,325,000 1,644,000 $ 26,925,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Maryvale Area Drainage Master Plan Grand Canal from Loop 101 to 63rd Ave 4&5 Project Description Bethany Home Outfall Channel The Bethany Home Road Outfall Channel project includes a linear basin and channel along the Grand Canal extending westerly from 63rd Avenue to the New River. The project will have a 100-year capacity removing approximately 745 structures from the floodplain. The channel alignment (Phase I and II) is in Phoenix, Glendale, and unincorporated Maricopa County. Portions of the channel are being used as a trail corridor and linear park. Phase I of the project has been completed by ADOT, with District participation. Phase I extends west from the Agua Fria Freeway to the New River following the Bethany Home Road Alignment. ADOT increased the size of their channel to accommodate additional flows from the Maryvale area. Phase II of the project will include a channel from the Agua Fria Freeway alignment to 73rd Avenue and an earthen, linear, on-line detention basin from 67th Avenue to 73rd Avenue. The ADMP also recommends ten-year capacity storm drains, located within Bethany Home Road and Camelback Road, extending from 59th Avenue to the Outfall Channel. Preliminary estimates indicate that the cost to construct this 100-year channel and 10-year storm drains is approximately $67 million. The cost share for the project is approximately 50% District, and 25% each for the Cities of Glendale and Phoenix. The first reach of the project (Loop 101 to 83rd Avenue) is being constructed, with completion scheduled for early 2004. Design and construction of the remainder or the improvements will be phased over several years, with completion anticipated in 2009. 26th Avenue/Verde Lane Basin The 26th Avenue/Verde Lane flooding issues were studied as part of the Maryvale ADMP. This project will construct a basin at 26th Avenue and Verde Lane and a berm along the southern side of the Verde Basin. Presently this area experiences severe flooding during moderate to heavy rainfalls. Approximately 100 homes are subject to flooding. The 26th Avenue and Verde Basin is second priority for the City of Phoenix. The level of protection will be for the 100-year storm not including any overtopping of the Grand Canal. A berm included as part of this project will protect the area from overtopping flows from the Canal. The City of Phoenix will be the lead agency. The cost of the 26th Avenue and Verde Lane Basin project including design, land acquisition and construction is estimated at $10.4 million. The project cost will be shared equally by the District and the City of Phoenix. Funding Summary Prior Years ADOT $ 584,000 District 15,772,000 Glendale 7,361,000 Phoenix 5,879,000 Project Total $ 29,596,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 491,000 1,673,000 1,684,000 $ 3,848,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 8,018,000 2,136,000 1,381,000 $ 11,535,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 5,063,000 1,771,000 2,591,000 $ 9,425,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 4,260,000 610,000 610,000 $ 5,480,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 640,000 1,430,000 1,430,000 3,500,000 $ 5-Year Total $ 18,472,000 7,620,000 7,696,000 $ 33,788,000 Total Project $ 584,000 34,244,000 14,981,000 13,575,000 $ 63,384,000 Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 18,297,000 10,522,000 777,000 29,596,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,498,000 2,130,000 220,000 $ 3,848,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 100,000 11,125,000 310,000 $ 11,535,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 350,000 8,835,000 240,000 $ 9,425,000 327 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 330,000 5,000,000 150,000 $ 5,480,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 3,300,000 200,000 3,500,000 5-Year Total $ 2,278,000 30,390,000 1,120,000 $ 33,788,000 $ $ Total Project 20,575,000 40,912,000 1,897,000 63,384,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Maryvale Area Drainage Master Plan Operating Cost Summary The Cities of Glendale and Phoenix will operate and maintain the constructed facility. 328 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District McMicken Dam - Fissure Risk Zone Remediation East of White Tank Park and North of Olive Ave 4 Project Description McMicken Dam, originally called the Trilby Wash Detention Basin Dam, was built in the mid-1950’s to provide emergency flood protection from a 259 square mile drainage area upstream of Luke Air Force Base, the Litchfield Park Naval Air Facility, and adjacent agricultural areas. Extensive repairs to the dam were completed in the mid-1980s to address severe embankment cracking. During the repairs, studies detected the presence of earth fissures near the south end of the dam, he said. Additional studies have recently been conducted to further characterize the earth fissures near the dam. The results of these additional studies indicate earth fissures and conditions sufficient for earth fissure development exist adjacent to the south end of McMicken Dam. The District analyzed 23 alternative designs before selecting a preferred alternative that isolates the fissure risk zone and its associated 0.6 square mile drainage area from McMicken Dam. The selected alternative mitigates impacts associated with an earth fissure. The selected alternative also includes a basin to replace the isolated section of McMicken Dam found to be within the fissure risk zone. The basin will contain flows up to the 500-year storm event or approximately 50 to 70 acre-feet. Construction is scheduled to begin in January of 2005. In addition, the Maricopa Regional Trail Corridor is located within the project area. The project will be fully compatible with the future design and construction of the trail by others. Funding Summary District $ Project Total $ Prior Years 783,000 783,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 2,201,000 $ 2,201,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 830,000 $ 830,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - 5-Year Total 3,031,000 3,031,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 3,814,000 3,814,000 Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 595,000 188,000 783,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 531,000 1,570,000 100,000 $ 2,201,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 750,000 80,000 830,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ 329 Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ $ 5-Year Total 531,000 2,320,000 180,000 3,031,000 $ $ Total Project 1,126,000 2,320,000 368,000 3,814,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program McMicken Dam - Fissure Risk Zone Remediation Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Supplies & Services $ Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Subtotal $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ 65,000 65,000 65,000 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 120,000 195,000 315,000 Total Current Costs $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 315,000 - $ - $ - $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ 65,000 65,000 65,000 - $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 120,000 195,000 315,000 - $ - $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 315,000 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 $ 630,000 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ - $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ - $ Total Post Construction Costs $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ - $ 330 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Metro Area Drainage Master Plan 24th Ave and Camelback Rd 3 Project Description 24th Avenue/Camelback Basin A Drainage Study was prepared by the City of Phoenix to identify the extent of flooding problems, evaluate alternative facilities to minimize flooding, and establish a recommended plan to provide flood protection and public safety of the local residents and adjacent businesses, in the vicinity of 24th Avenue and Camelback Road. The study recommends construction of four basins and associated storm drains to collect and dispose of the floodwater. The basins are located at the Grand Canal, Camelback Road, at Washington Park and at Northern Avenue. It is proposed that the basins be constructed in phases with the basin and storm drain in the vicinity of 24th Avenue and Camelback Road constructed in Phase 1. The basins are designed to contain runoff from a 100year flood. Repetitive flooding in the vicinity of 24th Avenue and Camelback Road resulted in the City of Phoenix identifying this area as one of their top 20 drainage issues. In July 1999, Phoenix submitted the project to the District’s CIP Prioritization Procedure for FY 2000-01. Phoenix will be the lead agency for this project. The estimated cost for the project is $7.2 million, which includes the design, utility relocations, construction and construction management. The project cost will be shared equally between the District and the City. Design is slated to commence in Fiscal Year 2003-04 and construction in FY 05/06. Funding Summary District $ Project Total $ Prior Years 337,000 337,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 2,330,000 $ 2,330,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,140,000 $ 1,140,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 520,000 $ 520,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 1,060,000 $ 1,060,000 5-Year Total 5,070,000 5,070,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 5,407,000 5,407,000 Potential cost-sharing with the City of Phoenix contributing 50% and the Flood Control District contributing 50% from the Flood Control District Capital Projects Fund (Fund 990). Funding amounts in the funding summary reflect only the District’s cost share. Phoenix will be the lead agency for this project. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 220,000 117,000 337,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,070,000 1,210,000 50,000 $ 2,330,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,100,000 40,000 $ 1,140,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ 20,000 20,000 Operating Cost Summary The City of Phoenix will operate and maintain the completed project. 331 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 500,000 20,000 $ 520,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 1,000,000 60,000 $ 1,060,000 $ $ 5-Year Total 2,570,000 2,310,000 190,000 5,070,000 $ $ Total Project 2,790,000 2,310,000 307,000 5,407,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Paradise Valley, Scottsdale, Phoenix Paradise Valley, Scottsdale, and Phoenix - Multiple Locations 2 Project Description 71st Street Channel and Storm Drain Project This project includes the design of an open channel and storm drain system to convey storm water from Sunnyside Drive to south of Cholla Road. There is an existing open channel along this alignment, which is under capacity. This project was identified in the Scottsdale Road Corridor Drainage Master Plan (DMP) as one of the recommended projects. The proposed improvements include new 72” and 84” storm drain within the street rightsof-way and drainage easement and an open channel replaced in-kind to provide a total combined 10-year level of protection. Since most of the project will be within dedicated drainage easements and roadway rights-of-way, no major cost is anticipated for rights-of-way acquisition. Installation of an emergency spillway within the Cactus and Mescal Basins, providing a 100-yr level of protection is also included in this project. The construction plans are being prepared by utilizing District internal staff. Scottsdale Road Drainage Channel Improvements This project was also identified in the Scottsdale Road Corridor DMP as one of the recommended project improvements. The project scope includes improving an existing earthen drainage channel from Thunderbird Road to Sweetwater Avenue. The proposed improvement includes replacing an open channel with a closed system such as pipe and/or box culvert. The City and the District entered into an intergovernmental agreement for the design and construction of this channel with City’s Scottsdale Road Improvement Project. The City will be the lead agency for this project. The improvements will be designed to convey up to 10-yr flows. According to the intergovernmental agreement with the City, the total cost of both of these projects will be cost shared 50/50 between the City and the District. Scottsdale will be the lead agency for some features and the District for others. Funding Summary Prior Years Scottsdale District $ Project Total $ 176,000 176,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 461,000 1,315,000 $ 1,776,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 462,000 762,000 $ 1,224,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total 923,000 2,077,000 3,000,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 923,000 2,253,000 3,176,000 Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 132,000 44,000 176,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 32,000 1,624,000 120,000 $ 1,776,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,124,000 100,000 $ 1,224,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Operating Cost Summary The City of Scottsdale will operate and maintain the completed project. 332 Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ $ 5-Year Total 32,000 2,748,000 220,000 3,000,000 $ $ Total Project 164,000 2,748,000 264,000 3,176,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Queen Creek Area Drainage Master Plan Town of Queen Creek 1 Project Description Queen Creek Channel (Hawes to Power) The Town of Queen Creek is the lead agency for design, rights-of-way acquisition, utility relocation, construction, construction management, and will own, operate and maintain the completed project. The District shall review and approve the design and the construction documents prior to bid. The total cost of the project is estimated at $6.0 million with District’s contribution limited to $2.42 million. The design and land acquisition was completed in Fiscal Year 2003-04, with construction scheduled to begin in the same year The project includes channelization of Queen Creek Wash from Hawes Road to Power Road. The Project consists of channel construction and improvement of the Sossaman Road Bridge Crossing. The District shall also approve any future landscape amenities to assure hydraulic conveyance within the Project. Queen Creek Channel (Recker – Higley) The Town of Gilbert has proposed improvements to Queen Creek Wash from Recker to Higley Roads. Improvements have already been made to the wash upstream of Recker Road, and are already designed for the wash downstream of Higley Road as part of the District’s EMF Basins project. The District is proposed to be the lead agency for design, utility relocation, construction, and construction management. The Town will be the lead agency for rights-of-way acquisition and will own, operate and maintain the completed project. The proposed improvements are to replace the existing wash with a natural desert vegetated 100-year, 24-hour capacity channel. The total cost of the project, excluding force, is estimated to be $2,4000,000 and will be shared equally between the District and the Town. Sonoqui Wash Channelization Project The purpose of this project is to design, construct, operate, and maintain a conveyance channel capable of containing a 100-year storm event within the existing natural alignment of Sonoqui Wash from Chandler Heights Road westerly to the confluence with Queen Creek Wash west of Higley Road. The Sonoqui Wash Channelization (Queen Creek Wash to Chandler Heights Road) is proposed as a 3.5 mile long, approximately 200 feet wide, trapezoidal earth channel paralleling the proposed Ocotillo Road alignment from approximately Chandler Heights Road to the Queen Creek Wash west of Higley. It is anticipated that minimal rights-of-way will be acquired due to land dedication and that private development will eventually construct part of the channel fronting their development. The Towns of Gilbert and Queen Creek will operate and maintain the channel once constructed. Funding Summary District $ Gilbert Queen Creek Project Total $ Prior Years 1,878,000 245,000 2,123,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,324,000 125,000 370,000 $ 1,819,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 2,190,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 $ 4,190,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 3,590,000 2,275,000 1,075,000 $ 6,940,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ $ $ 5-Year Total 7,144,000 3,400,000 2,445,000 12,989,000 Total Project $ 9,022,000 3,645,000 2,445,000 $ 15,112,000 Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 957,810 906,000 258,824 2,122,634 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 544,000 1,155,000 120,000 $ 1,819,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ $ 40,000 40,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 4,000,000 190,000 $ 4,190,000 333 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 6,700,000 240,000 $ 6,940,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total $ 544,000 11,855,000 590,000 $ 12,989,000 $ $ Total Project 1,501,810 12,761,000 848,824 15,111,634 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program Queen Creek Area Drainage Master Plan Operating Cost Summary Queen Creek is the lead agency for design, rights-of-way acquisition, utility relocation, construction, construction management and operation and maintenance of the Queen Creek Wash project. The District is the lead agency for the Sonoqui Wash project and each town will operate and maintain the completed project in their respective jurisdiction. 334 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Salt/Gila River - Tres Rios Salt & Gila Rivers from 83rd Ave to the Agua Fria River 5 Project Description The Tres Rios project is a federal project sponsored by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. The local sponsor is the City of Phoenix. The Flood Control District is participating in the project elements associated with flood control. This includes the design and construction of a north bank levee along the Salt and Gila Rivers from about 91st Avenue to the Agua Fria River. The District is not funding riverine habitat restoration elements including open water marshes, wetlands, and riparian corridors. The District and the City have reached a tentative agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Upon approval of the MOU, the District and the City will work together to develop an Intergovernmental Agreement to identify what the District’s participation will be in the project. Funding Summary District $ Project Total $ Prior Years 71,000 71,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,100,000 $ 1,100,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,100,000 $ 1,100,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 5-Year Total 2,300,000 2,300,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 2,371,000 2,371,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ 71,000 71,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 1,000,000 100,000 $ 1,100,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,000,000 100,000 $ 1,100,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 40,000 40,000 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 30,000 30,000 $ Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 5-Year Total 30,000 30,000 $ $ Total Project 2,000,000 300,000 2,300,000 $ $ $ 2,000,000 371,000 2,371,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Sevices Supplies & Services $ Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Subtotal $ 15,000 $ 5,000 20,000 $ 15,000 $ 5,000 20,000 $ 15,000 $ 5,000 20,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 45,000 15,000 60,000 Total Current Costs $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Sevices $ - $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 5,000 30,000 $ 25,000 $ 5,000 30,000 $ 25,000 $ 5,000 30,000 $ 75,000 15,000 90,000 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ - $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 90,000 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 150,000 The operation and maintenance of the project will be the responsibility of the City. The IGA will identify the District as the responsible party for the operation and maintenance of the north bank levee. The District currently maintains the Holly Acres levee. It will be extended by this project and will be operated and maintained by the District in the future. 335 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Skunk Creek/New River New River, Grand Ave to Bell Rd 4 Project Description The Middle New River Watercourse Master Plan (MNRWCMP) study undertaken by the District identified projects to improve the conveyance capacity and provide bank protection along the New River. One of the recommended project areas is the reach of New River from Grand Avenue north to the Skunk Creek confluence with New River. Recommended improvements include channelization and bank protection for approximately 2 miles of New River, and an 800-foot reach on the west side of New River south of Bell Road. The City of Peoria will be a project partner. The City and the District are property owners along and within the New River alignment. An intergovernmental agreement has been entered with the City for design of the project. Further analysis of the recommendations and development of an intergovernmental agreement for construction, operation and maintenance is necessary as the project moves forward. This is the last reach of the New River that has not been improved consistent with the Corps of Engineers’ Phoenix, Arizona and Vicinity including New River project. The project was requested by the City of Peoria. Funding Summary Peoria District $ Project Total $ Prior Years 321,000 669,000 990,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 2,089,000 2,720,000 $ 4,809,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 1,965,000 695,000 $ 2,660,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - $ 5-Year Total 4,054,000 3,415,000 7,469,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 4,375,000 4,084,000 8,459,000 Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 930,000 60,000 990,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 49,000 4,640,000 120,000 $ 4,809,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 2,560,000 100,000 $ 2,660,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ Year 5 FY 08-09 - $ $ - Operating Cost Summary The City of Peoria will operate and maintain the completed project at no cost to the District. 336 $ $ 5-Year Total 49,000 7,200,000 220,000 7,469,000 $ $ Total Project 979,000 7,200,000 280,000 8,459,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Spook Hill Area Drainage Master Plan Northeast Mesa and Maricopa County 2 Project Description The purpose of the Spook Hill Area Drainage Master Plan was to update and expand the existing Spook Hill Area Drainage Master Study conducted in 1987. The Spook Hill area in the East Mesa currently does not have the flood control and drainage facilities in place to handle its regional flood problems. The approximate watershed area is 16 square miles. The study produced a recommended alternative to resolve the current flooding problems. The plan has been adopted by the City of Mesa City Council and Flood Control District Board of Directors. The total proposed project implementation cost including design, rights of way acquisition, and construction cost is estimated at $34.0 Million. Completion of all of the elements of the plan will be beyond Fiscal Year 2008-09. Funding Summary Prior Years Mesa District $ Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 7,470,000 7,470,000 $ $ 150,000 150,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 300,000 250,000 $ 550,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,600,000 1,720,000 $ 3,320,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 1,500,000 1,680,000 $ 3,180,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 2,000,000 2,170,000 $ 4,170,000 $ $ 5-Year Total 5,400,000 5,970,000 11,370,000 $ $ Total Project 5,400,000 13,440,000 18,840,000 Based on future IGAs, it is anticipated that the District and the City of Mesa will equally share the cost of the identified basin, channel and storm drain projects. Multiple projects will be developed in the future from this ADMP and funding in years 4 and 5 reflect future storm drain and channel projects to be initiated during the next 5 years. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 7,287,000 183,000 7,470,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 100,000 50,000 $ 150,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 500,000 50,000 $ 550,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 3,200,000 120,000 $ 3,320,000 Operating Cost Summary City of Mesa will operate and maintain the project. 337 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 3,000,000 180,000 $ 3,180,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 4,000,000 170,000 4,170,000 5-Year Total $ 600,000 10,200,000 570,000 $ 11,370,000 Total Project $ 7,887,000 10,200,000 753,000 $ 18,840,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District Town of Guadalupe City of Tempe 1 Project Description This project consists of a 10 cfs pump station component of the Guadalupe Drainage Improvement Project to be designed and constructed at a later date by the City of Tempe. This project is to be equally cost shared between the District and the City. The City will be the lead for design, rights-of-way, and construction. Funding Summary District $ Project Total $ Prior Years 2,883,000 2,883,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ - Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 375,000 $ 375,000 5-Year Total 375,000 375,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 3,258,000 3,258,000 Tempe and the District have agreed to cost share the project 50/50; the estimated cost for each is $375,000. Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 68,000 2,507,000 308,000 2,883,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ $ Year 2 FY 05-06 - $ $ Year 3 FY 06-07 - $ $ Year 4 FY 07-08 - $ $ 375,000 375,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ Operating Cost Summary The City of Tempe will assume operation and maintenance responsibilities in the future. 338 5-Year Total - $ $ 375,000 375,000 $ $ Total Project 68,000 2,882,000 308,000 3,258,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District White Tanks Area Drainage Master Plan East of Agua Fria River - Multiple Locations 4 Project Description White Tanks FRS #3 Modifications White Tanks Flood Retarding Structure #3 (White Tanks FRS #3), operated and maintained by the District, requires corrective action to bring the structure into compliance with dam safety standards and requirements. The District completed several interim corrective measures at the dam during the spring of 2002. The District has filed an application with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for federal funding assistance under the new federal program for dam rehabilitation (Public Law 106-472) for this project. White Tanks Flood Retarding Structure (FRS) #3 North Inlet Channel The Project will prevent breakouts from the Beardsley Canal Wash across the Beardsley Canal, north of Olive Avenue to the White Tanks FRS #3. The Project will provide flood protection to more than 100 homes adjacent to and downstream of the Beardsley Canal, reduce the floodplain by more than 300 acres, and also prevent erosion of the canal banks. West Cactus Road Detention Basin and Channels The Project provides a regional outfall for the Cities of Surprise and El Mirage to convey 100-year flood flows to the Agua Fria River through developed areas of the cities. The project features will include a channel and a basin. This is a joint project between the District and the City of El Mirage. The City will be the lead for acquisition of rights-of-way, and the District will provide for design and construction management services. The project costs will be shared equally between the District and the City. Reems Road Channel The project includes the construction of a channel along Reems Road from Peoria Avenue south to near Northern Avenue, discharging to the Falcon Dunes Golf Course. The project also includes a detention basin adjacent to the channel. The channel with basin will convey the 100-year storm event. Reems Road currently carries a majority of the stormwater within the roadway prism; however, large flows overtop and breakout of the existing farm berms adjacent to the roadway and flow across farmland in a southwesterly direction. The project will provide 100-year protection to the surrounding area as well as protecting Reems Road and three connecting roadways, the City of Surprise’s wastewater treatment plant, and various utilities. The City of Surprise will be responsible for funding and constructing the Reems Road Channel north of Peoria Avenue to Greenway Road. Bullard Wash Phase 2 Bullard Wash is included within the Loop 303 Corridor/White Tanks Area Drainage Master Plan (ADMP), which recommends improvements be made to the wash. Phase I of the Bullard Wash Improvements Project, from the Gila River to Lower Buckeye Road, was constructed as a previous District/City of Goodyear project. Phase II includes an earthen/greenbelt channel along the Bullard Wash alignment from Lower Buckeye Road to McDowell Road. The project will channelize the floodplain north of the Phoenix-Goodyear Airport. It will reduce the floodplain width and protect the Phoenix-Goodyear Airport and nearby development from flooding The District has entered an intergovernmental agreement with the City for design of the project, and design of the project from Lower Buckeye Road to I-10 is underway. An intergovernmental agreement with the City has been prepared for construction of the project. 339 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Project Name: Capital Improvement Program White Tanks Area Drainage Master Plan Loop 303 Corridor/White Tanks Area Drainage Master Plan (ADMP) Update The Loop 303 Corridor/White Tanks Area Drainage Master Plan ( ADMP) Update will be completed by the end of Fiscal Year 2003-04. The watershed area includes approximately 208 square miles extending from McMicken Dam on the north to the Gila River on the south, and from White Tank Mountains on the west to the Agua Fria River on the east. The ADMP identified regional drainage features amounting to an estimated cost of $400 million. Some of the recommended facilities are being incorporated into private developments that are being constructed. Other municipal features will require cooperative agreements between the Flood Control District and the local municipalities before they can be implemented. Funding Summary Prior Years 8,528,000 1,181,000 9,709,000 District $ El Mirage Federal (tentative) Goodyear Maricopa Water District Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 4,728,000 4,000,000 500,000 $ 9,228,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 2,610,000 200,000 9,125,000 1,760,000 $ 13,695,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 7,590,000 200,000 2,375,000 1,760,000 1,720,000 $ 13,645,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 6,600,000 500,000 1,760,000 $ 8,860,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ 7,890,000 1,000,000 2,070,000 $ 10,960,000 5-Year Total $ 29,418,000 1,900,000 15,500,000 7,350,000 2,220,000 $ 56,388,000 Total Project $ 37,946,000 1,900,000 15,500,000 8,531,000 2,220,000 $ 66,097,000 Project Cost Summary Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Prior Years 8,723,000 441,000 545,000 9,709,000 Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 4,643,000 4,155,000 430,000 $ 9,228,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 400,000 12,815,000 480,000 $ 13,695,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 1,150,000 11,915,000 580,000 $ 13,645,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 750,000 7,630,000 480,000 $ 8,860,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ 5-Year Total $ 6,943,000 46,855,000 2,590,000 $ 56,388,000 10,340,000 620,000 10,960,000 $ $ Total Project 15,666,000 47,296,000 3,135,000 66,097,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Supplies & Services $ Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Subtotal $ 7,000 $ 5,000 12,000 $ 7,000 $ 5,000 12,000 $ 7,000 $ 5,000 12,000 $ 7,000 $ 5,000 12,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 28,000 20,000 48,000 Total Current Costs $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ - $ - $ 48,000 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ - $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 30,000 $ 10,000 40,000 $ 47,000 $ 20,000 67,000 $ 47,000 $ 20,000 67,000 $ 124,000 50,000 174,000 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ - $ 40,000 $ 67,000 $ 67,000 $ 174,000 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 52,000 $ 67,000 $ 67,000 $ 222,000 340 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing Department: Project Name: Project Location: Supervisor District: Capital Improvement Program Flood Control District White Tanks Dam #4 South of Interstate 10, Tuthill Rd to Jackrabbit Trail 4 Project Description White Tanks Flood Retarding Structure #4 (White Tanks FRS #4), operated and maintained by the District, requires corrective action to bring the structure into compliance with dam safety standards and requirements. The District has completed Phase I Assessments for White Tanks FRS #4, which has been determined to be eligible for federal funding assistance under Public Law 106-472, The Small Watershed Amendment. The District will initiate planning and pre-design efforts for the project in Fiscal Year 2004-05. Funding Summary Prior Years District $ Project Total $ - Year 1 FY 04-05 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 3,670,000 $ 3,670,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 3,150,000 $ 3,150,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ $ - 5-Year Total 7,000,000 7,000,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 7,000,000 7,000,000 Project Cost Summary Prior Years Programming/Design/Land/ROW $ Construction Other Costs-Force Acct Labor Project Total $ Year 1 FY 04-05 - $ 30,000 30,000 $ Year 2 FY 05-06 $ 100,000 50,000 $ 150,000 Year 3 FY 06-07 $ 550,000 3,000,000 120,000 $ 3,670,000 Year 4 FY 07-08 $ 3,000,000 150,000 $ 3,150,000 Year 5 FY 08-09 $ - $ 5-Year Total 650,000 6,000,000 350,000 7,000,000 $ $ $ $ Total Project 650,000 6,000,000 350,000 7,000,000 Operating Cost Summary Current Year Current Operating Costs Personal Services Supplies & Services $ Year 1 FY 04-05 Year 2 FY 05-06 Year 3 FY 06-07 Year 4 FY 07-08 Year 5 FY 08-09 Total Project Subtotal $ 15,000 $ 20,000 35,000 $ 15,000 $ 20,000 35,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 30,000 40,000 70,000 Total Current Costs $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 70,000 Post Construction/Managing Department Operating Costs Personal Services $ - $ Supplies & Services Subtotal $ - $ - $ - $ 15,000 $ 20,000 35,000 $ 15,000 $ 20,000 35,000 $ 15,000 $ 20,000 35,000 $ 15,000 $ 20,000 35,000 $ 60,000 80,000 140,000 Total Post Construction Costs $ - $ - $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 140,000 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 210,000 341 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Capital Improvement Program 342 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service Debt Service Debt Management Plan Introduction To Debt A comprehensive debt plan should be developed by all jurisdictions intending to issue debt. The purpose of Maricopa County’s debt management plan is to set forth the parameters for issuing debt, to manage the debt portfolio and provide guidance to decision makers regarding the timing and purposes for which debt may be issued. Provisions of the debt plan must be compatible with the County’s goals pertaining to the capital program and budget, the financial plan, and the operating budget. A debt plan should strike an appropriate balance between establishing limits on the debt program and providing sufficient flexibility to enable the County to respond to unforeseen circumstances and new opportunities that may benefit the County. This document is not intended to review the County’s total financial position. It is a study of the County’s debt position, as growth in the County could result in an increased need for capital financing. Revenues, as well as needs should drive the County’s debt issuance program. Decisions regarding the use of debt will be based in part on the long-term needs of the County and the amount of equity (cash) dedicated in a given fiscal year to capital outlay. A disciplined, systematic approach to debt management should allow the County to enhance its credit ratings. The information contained herein reflects the current debt status of Maricopa County for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. The tables have been compiled by the Department of Finance. Portions of this Debt Management Plan are contained in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. A copy of the CAFR can be viewed at: http://www.maricopa.gov/finance. Current Debt Situation It is recognized that all debt, regardless of the source of revenue pledged for repayment, represents some sort of cost to taxpayers or ratepayers. Therefore, all types of County debt/obligations are considered herein. While lease-secured and certificate of participation obligations may not be debt under strict legal definitions, they still require future appropriations, and are a fixed charge. These lease payments and most security analysts when calculating an issuer’s debt ratios add other non-bond obligations as defacto debt. Debt Issuance History The County has used debt financing for many years to finance capital projects. The following chart illustrates the amount of debt, as well as, categories of outstanding debt for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. 343 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service LONG-TERM LIABILITIES All Categories of Debt (3) Maricopa County, Arizona As of June 30, 2003 1999 GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITES: Bonds, loans, and other payables: General obligation bonds Lease revenue bonds Stadium District revenue bonds (1 & 2) Stadium District debt with governmental commitment (1) Special assessment debt with governmental commitment (1) Housing department bonds Housing department loans Certificates of Participation Capital leases Total Governmental activities BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITES: Bonds and other payables: Lease revenue bonds Certificates of participation Capital leases Installment purchase agreements Total Business-type activities $ 2000 Year Ending June 30 2001 2002 119,045,000 0 $ 99,910,000 0 29,749,685 $ 2003 79,595,000 104,355,000 $ 58,370,000 104,355,000 $ 39,515,000 91,558,756 25,504,259 28,658,512 58,225,000 57,225,000 31,075,000 29,125,000 27,935,000 0 0 $ 996,939 110,090 2,085,653 20,667,686 17,633,952 221,364,005 729,448 95,975 1,976,984 17,222,210 18,121,511 $ 192,685,387 589,431 81,862 1,861,500 13,575,118 14,225,356 $ 270,876,779 458,977 64,925 1,754,922 9,804,315 19,442,376 $ 252,475,515 368,573 50,811 1,641,310 5,808,084 19,414,904 $ 215,582,438 $ 0 1,058,574 1,125,158 0 2,183,732 0 5,666,171 608,794 0 $ 6,274,965 20,500,000 11,824,853 229,159 3,023,111 35,577,123 20,500,000 11,768,519 0 2,607,815 $ 34,876,334 17,986,244 10,940,368 0 2,350,524 $ 31,277,136 $ Notes: (1) Does not represent an obligation of the County. (2) Stadium District contractual obligation of $7,888,888 has been excluded from the above schedule for fiscal year 2003. (3) Long-term liabilities excludes claims and judgments payable, reported and incurred but not reported claims, and liabilities for closure and postclosure costs. Financing Alternatives The County should evaluate all potential funding sources before considering which method of financing may be the most appropriate. Sources of funding may include: current revenues and fund balances; intergovernmental grants from federal, state or other sources; state revolving funds or loan pools; private sector contributions through impact fees or public/private partnerships; and leasing. There are many sources of funding, depending on the type of debt to be incurred and the length of time for repayment. Short-term financing is defined as debt maturing not later than one year after the date of its issuance. There are basically three reasons for using short-term debt: • A vehicle to deal with temporary cash flow difficulties. This arises when cash receipts do not follow the same pattern as cash outlays. • To handle unexpected costs resulting from natural emergencies or other significant unexpected events. • In anticipation of issuing a long-term bond for capital financing. This form of financing offers an opportunity to borrow for short periods until the true, final costs of a project are known. Pay-As-You-Go Financing This method means that capital projects are paid for from the government’s current revenue base. The County does not issue bonds and does not have to repay the borrowings over time. 344 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service There are several advantages to this method. For example, pay-as-you-go financing will save the amount of interest which otherwise would be paid on bonds issued to finance the program. The government is not encumbered by as much debt service when economic conditions deteriorate due to normal business cycles. Since contributions can be reduced in a given budget year, pay-as-you-go contributions provide greater budgetary flexibility than does a debt issue. The jurisdiction’s long-term debt capacity is preserved for the future. Finally, lower debt ratios may have a positive effect upon the jurisdiction’s credit rating. Relying on current revenues to finance capital improvements also presents several disadvantages. Exclusive reliance upon pay-as-you-go funds for capital improvements means that existing residents are obliged to pay for improvements that will benefit new residents who relocate to the area after the expenditure is made. If the jurisdiction is forced to finance the expenditure within a single budget, the large capital outlay required for some projects may result in an onerous tax burden. The County must be careful to ensure that the use of current revenues for capital projects does not diminish its availability to respond to emergencies. Grants Government grants stem from a variety of sources, but the majority of grant revenues for capital projects come from the federal and state governments. Often they require a County matching contribution. Most grants require an application from the County, identifying specific improvements or equipment that will be purchased with the grant money. Short-Term Borrowing (Notes) Tax Anticipation Notes (TAN’s) are notes issued in anticipation of the collection of taxes, as referenced in the Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.), Title 35, Chapter 3, Article 3.1. They provide operating funds to meet regular payroll and other operating expenses. During the fiscal year when tax payments are received, sufficient sums are used to retire the note. The timing of the note sale, the note’s due date, and repayment of funds are all components of cash flow and cash management analysis. The County last issued a TAN in August 1995 for $40 million, which matured on July 31, 1996. The TAN was retired and the County has not needed to issue additional TAN’s. Lines and Letter of Credit – Where their use is judged by the Chief Financial Officer to be prudent and advantageous to the County, the County has the power to enter into agreements with commercial banks or other financial entities for purposes of acquiring lines or letters of credit. The Board of Supervisors must approve any agreement with financial institutions for the acquisition of lines or letters of credit. On July 1, 2001, the County entered into a $35,000,000 municipal revolving line of credit with an interest rate of 65% of the bank’s prime rate and a maturity date of June 30, 2004. Outstanding principal and interest is due on June 30 of each year. During fiscal year 2003, the County had not borrowed against the line of credit. On August 2, 2002, the County entered into a $8,334,722 irrevocable standby letter of credit issued to the Industrial Commission of Arizona for unfunded workers’ compensation claims. The irrevocable standby letter of credit matured on July 1, 2003. The letter of credit was reserved against the municipal revolving line of credit. During fiscal year 2003, the letter of credit had not been drawn upon. The irrevocable standby letter of credit was renewed to July 1, 2004 for $9,058,610. General Obligation Bonds (GO) Bond security is the taxing power of the state or local government, as referenced in the A.R.S., Title 35, Chapter 3, Article 3, for new GO bonds and Title 35, Chapter 3, Article 4 for refunding bonds. An issuer selling a GO bond secured by its full faith and credit attaches to that issue its broadest pledge. This makes the security of these bonds very high. The full faith and credit backing of a GO bond includes the pledge of all general revenues, unless specifically limited, as well as, the legal means to raise tax rates to cover debt service. The public entity is authorized to levy property taxes or to draw from other unrestricted revenue streams such as sales or income taxes to pay the bond’s principal and interest. Interest rates on these bonds are generally the lowest of any public securities due to this superior security. Prior to issuance, Arizona GO bonds must have a majority vote approval from the residents of the County. 345 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service Revenue Bonds Revenue bonds are long-term debt instruments retired by specific dedicated revenues. Often these revenues are generated by the project funded out of debt proceeds. Revenue bonds are designed to be self-supporting through user fees or other special revenues. The general taxing powers of the jurisdiction are not pledged. The debt created through the issuance of revenue bonds is to be repaid by the earnings from the operations of a revenue producing enterprise, from special taxes, or from contract leases or rental agreements. County revenue bonds do not burden the constitutional or statutory debt limitation placed on the County because they are not backed by the full faith and credit of the issuer. The underlying security is the only revenue stream pledged to pay the bond principal and interest. Special Assessment Bonds Special Assessment Bonds are issued to districts that are within a legally designated geographic area located within the County, which through the consent of the affected property owners, pay for basic infrastructure and public improvements to the area through a supplemental assessment. This financing approach achieves the objective of tying the repayment of debt to those property owners who most directly benefit from the improvements financed. Certificates of Participation (COP) COP’s represent proportionate interests in semiannual lease payments. Participation in the lease is sold in the capital markets. The County’s obligation to make lease payments is subject to annual appropriations being made by the County for that purpose. Rating agencies typically give COP issues a grade below that of General Obligation Bonds. A.R.S., Title 11, Chapter 2, Article 4, §11-251, Paragraph 46, provides for a maximum repayment term of twenty five years for the purchase or improvement of real property. Lease-Purchase Lease-Purchase financing provides long-term financing through a lease (with a mandatory purchase provision). This method does not constitute indebtedness under a state or local government’s constitutional debt limit and does not require voter approval. In a lease-purchase transaction, the asset being financed can include new capital asset needs or assets under existing lease agreements. Installment Purchase Agreement Same as a lease purchase agreement with the exception that the County takes title to the property up front. Debt Limit The Arizona Constitution, Article 9, Section 8, states that a County may become indebted for an amount not to exceed fifteen percent of taxable property. 346 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service The following table represents the County’s outstanding general obligation indebtedness with respect to its constitutional general obligation debt limitation. 2002-03 Constitutional General Obligation Bonding Capacity Maricopa County, Arizona 2002-03 Secondary Assessed Valuation 15% of Secondary Assessed Valuation Less: GO Bonded Debt Outstanding Plus: GO Debt Service Fund Balance Unused Fifteen Percent Borrowing Capacity $ 24,457,047,282 $ 3,668,557,092 (39,515,000) 722,346 3,629,764,438 Rating Agency Analysis An independent assessment of the relative credit worthiness of municipal securities is provided by rating agencies. They furnish letter grades that convey each company’s assessment of the ability and willingness of a borrower to repay its debt in full and on time. Credit ratings issued by these agencies are a major function in determining the cost of borrowed funds in the municipal bond market. Moody’s Investors Service, Standard and Poor’s Corporation, and Fitch Ratings are the three major rating agencies that rate municipal debt. The rating agencies provide a rating assessment of credit worthiness for Maricopa County. There are five primary factors that comprise their ratings: • Economic conditions – stability of trends, • Debt-history of County – debt and debt position, • Governmental/administration – organizational structure of the County, • Financial performance – current financial status and the history of financial reports, • Debt Management – debt policies, including long-term planning. Each of the rating agencies has their own method of assigning a rating on the ability and willingness of a borrower to repay in full and on time. Issuers must pay a fee for the opportunity to have one or more rating agencies rate the proposed debt issuance. The following shows how the ratings reflect creditworthiness, ranging from very strong securities to speculative and default situations. Examples of the rating systems are: BOND RATINGS Explanation of corporate/municipal bond ratings Premium quality High quality Medium quality Medium grade, lower quality Predominantly speculative Speculative, low grade Poor to default Highest speculation Lowest quality, no interest RATING AGENCIES In default, in arrears Questionable value Fitch Moody’s AAA AA A BBB BB B CCC CC C DDD DD D Aaa Aa A Baa Ba B Caa Ca C Standard & Poor’s AAA AA A BBB BB B CCC CC C DDD DD D Fitch and Standard & Poor’s may use “+” or “-” to modify ratings while Moody’s may use numerical modifiers such as 1 (highest), 2, or 3. 347 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service History of Debt Rating On November 11, 2003, Maricopa County received a bond rating upgrade from AA to AA+ from Fitch Ratings. Fitch Ratings Press Release dated November 11, 2003, states that the bond rating “upgrades are based on the imminent transfer of the county’s health care delivery system to a separate voter-approved special health district with its own property tax levy. The upgrades also reflect continued financial improvement despite slower growth in the county’s predominant revenue source, a record of continued economic growth and diversification, successful fiscal reforms, and the county’s very modest debt profile.” The following illustrates a history of the County’s various debt ratings. Type of Debt General Obligation Fitch AA+ AA AA Date Rating Assigned 11/11/03 12/4/01 4/5/00 Stadium District Revenue Bonds Moody's Aa3 Aa3 A-1 A-2 A Aa Aa-1 Aa Aaa (1) Date Rating Assigned 12/6/01 5/26/00 11/6/98 3/17/97 6/13/94 7/26/93 8/21/81 12/6/72 Standard & Poor's A+ A AA Date Rating Assigned 4/11/97 5/27/94 6/2/76 AAA (1) (1) Bonds are insured, no underlying rating. Ratio Analysis Rating analysts compare direct net debt to the population in order to measure the size or magnitude of the County’s debt. This ratio is referred to as the Direct Net Debt Per Capita Ratio. The same ratio is applied to all debt within the County which includes School Districts, Cities and Towns, and Special Districts. This ratio is referred to as the Overall Net Debt Per Capita Ratio. The taxable value of the County is a measure of the County’s wealth. It also reflects the capacity of the County’s ability to service current and future debt. The ratio of Direct Net Debt as a percentage of Full Value (FV) Property is the comparison of direct net debt to the County's taxable value. The same ratio is applied to all debt within the County and is referred to as the Overall Net Debt as a percentage of Full Value Property. The Full Value Property Per Capita ratio represents the per capita value of taxable property in the County. An explanation of how each ratio is calculated is included in the notes. There are an infinite number of ratios, which could be calculated to measure the County’s debt burden. This analysis focuses on commonly used ratios instead of creating customized ones. 348 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service DIRECT AND OVERALL NET DEBT MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITES General Obligation Less: Amount available for Retirement of General Obligation Debt Lease Revenue Bonds Certificate of Participation Capital Leases Direct Net Debt Overlapping Debt (1) Overall Net Debt $ Audited 6/30/02 58,370,000 $ (773,917) 104,355,000 9,804,315 19,442,376 191,197,774 4,901,854,926 5,093,052,700 Population Estimate (2) Full Value of Taxable Property (3) $ Ratios (4) Direct Net Debt Per Capita Overall Net Debt Per Capita $ $ (722,346) 91,558,756 5,808,084 19,414,905 155,574,399 5,216,661,101 5,372,235,500 3,192,125 180,653,046 $ $ 59.90 $ 1,595.51 $ Direct Net Debt As Percentage Of Full Value Property Overall Net Debt As % Of FV Property FV Property Per Capita Audited 6/30/03 39,515,000 $ $ Projected 6/30/04 20,165,000 Projected 6/30/05 $ 0 $ 0 78,031,179 1,672,206 13,600,211 113,468,596 5,331,427,645 5,444,896,241 $ 0 73,200,200 1,446,089 8,073,241 82,713,530 5,448,719,053 5,531,438,583 3,296,250 194,235,322 $ 3,411,619 211,716,501 $ 3,531,026 230,770,986 $ 47.20 $ 33.26 $ 23.35 $ 1,629.80 $ 1,595.99 $ 1,566.44 $ $ $ .1059% .0801% .0536% .0358% 2.82% 2.77% 2.57% 2.40% 56,593.35 $ 58,926.15 $ 62,057.49 $ 65,355.22 Notes: (1) Projected overlapping debt for 2004 and 2005 was based on a rounded average over three years of 2.2% . (2) Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security. Projection for 2004 and 2005 was based on a 3.50% estimated annual growth rate. (3) Taxable Property Estimates: 2003 provided by the Assessor’s Office; 2004 and 2005 based on 9% estimated annual growth; amounts are in billions (000’s omitted). (4) Summary of Debt Ratios: • Direct net debt per capita = Direct net debt/Population • Overall net debt per capita = Overall net debt/Population • Direct net debt as a percentage of full value property (FV) = Direct net debt/FV property • Overall net debt a percentage of FV property = Overall net debt/FV property • FV property per capita = FV property/Population The following section of the Debt Management Plan contains information on the obligations of Maricopa County by debt type. General Obligation Bonds Long-term General Obligation Bonds shall be issued to finance significant capital improvements for purposes set forth by voters in bond elections. Interest rates on these bonds are generally the lowest of any public securities. Prior to issuance, Arizona GO Bonds must have a majority vote approval from the residents of the County. General Obligation Bonds currently outstanding were the result of the 1986 general election where the voters authorized the County to issue long term debt. The resulting proceeds from the sale of the bonds were used for the purpose of making improvements in the County which included Criminal and Civil Courts Facilities, Juvenile 349 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service Court – Juvenile Treatment and Detention Facilities, Law Enforcement and Public Safety, Regional Park Improvements, Environmental Protection, Sanitary Landfill, Public Health Facilities, Infrastructure, Communication Improvements, etc. Legal Debt Margin – County indebtedness pertaining to general obligation bonds may not exceed six percent of the value of the County’s taxable property ascertained by the last assessment. However, with voter approval, the County may become indebted for an amount not to exceed 15 percent of such taxable property. At June 30, 2003, the County net general obligation debt was $38,792,654, (0.16% of taxable property), while the 6 percent limit was $1,467,422,837 and the 15 percent limit was $3,668,557,092. The following tables and chart illustrate the existing debt service for the outstanding general obligation bonded debt currently paid by ad valorem taxes. DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS TO MATURITY General Obligation Bonds Maricopa County, Arizona As of June 30, 2003 Year Ending June 30 2004 2005 TOTAL Principal 19,350,000 20,165,000 39,515,000 $ $ $ $ Interest 1,401,975 403,300 1,805,275 $ $ Debt Service 20,751,975 20,568,300 41,320,275 SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OUTSTANDING BY ISSUE As of June 30, 2003 Bond Issue 1986 Bond Issue – Series D (1993) 1992 Bond Issue – Refunding 1992 Bond Issue – Refunding 2001 Bond Issue – Refunding TOTAL $ $ DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS General Obligation Bonds Interest Principal $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 2004 2005 350 Amount 1,000,000 250,000 18,100,000 20,165,000 39,515,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service Lease Revenue Bonds On June 1, 2001, Maricopa County Public Finance Corporation issued $124,855,000 of Lease Revenue Bonds to pay for the acquisition, construction and equipment for the Public Service Building, Forensic Science Center, Superior Court Customer Service Center, parking garages and related projects. Under the terms of the bond indentures the Corporation received the proceeds to construct and purchase these assets and the County will make lease payments to extinguish the debt. Lease payments will equal the aggregate amount of principal and interest due at the date. Upon the final lease payment, the title to the assets will transfer to the County. The County’s obligation to make lease payments will be subject to and dependent upon annual appropriations being made by the County. Year Ending June 30 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 – 13 2014 – 16 Total $ $ DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS TO MATURITY Lease Revenue Bonds Maricopa County, Arizona As of June 30, 2003 Governmental Activities Business-Type Activities Principal Interest Principal Interest 13,527,577 $ 4,427,689 $ 2,657,423 $ 869,796 4,830,979 4,976,498 949,021 781,162 5,069,185 3,738,459 995,815 734,401 5,336,644 3,477,122 1,048,356 683,063 5,633,356 3,221,620 1,106,644 632,871 32,780,451 11,293,438 6,439,549 2,218,535 24,380,564 2,038,383 4,789,436 400,430 91,558,756 $ 32,173,209 $ 17,986,244 $ 6,320,258 On December 3, 2003, the Maricopa County Public Finance Corporation issued Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2003, of $16,880,000 (par value) with an interest rate ranging from 2.5% to 4% and maturing on July 1, 2012. The proceeds were used to advance refund the 2000 certificates of participation principal of $4,103,000, 1996 certificates of participation principal of $1,576,452, 1994 certificates of participation principal of $3,815,000, 1993 certificates of participation principal of $580,000, and several capital leases aggregating $11,104,817. The bonds were issued at a premium of $457,156 and debt service reserve accounts previously established totaling $4,461,354 was used for the advance refunding and to pay cost of issuance expense. Stadium District The Stadium District was formed through action of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors in September 1991 pursuant to the A.R.S., Title 48, Chapter 26. The Stadium District has two purposes: • To oversee the operation and maintenance of Bank One Ballpark, a major league baseball stadium, and • Enhance and promote major league baseball spring training in the County through the development of new, and the improvement of, existing baseball training facilities. To accomplish this purpose, the Stadium District possesses the statutory authority to issue special obligation bonds to provide financial assistance for the development and improvement of baseball training facilities located within the County. Ten major league baseball teams hold spring training in Arizona as part of the Cactus League: California Angels, Chicago Cubs, Colorado Rockies, Milwaukee Brewers, Oakland Athletics, San Diego Padres, San Francisco Giants, Seattle Mariners, Chicago White Sox and Arizona Diamondbacks. The Stadium District Revenue Bonds are special obligations of the District. The bonds are payable solely from pledged revenues, consisting of car rental surcharges levied and collected by the District pursuant to A.R.S., Title 48, Chapter 26, Article 2, §48-4234. Under the statute, the District may set the surcharge at $2.50 on each lease or rental of a motor vehicle licensed for hire, for less than one year, and designed to carry fewer than 15 passengers, regardless of whether such vehicle is licensed in the State of Arizona. The District Board of Directors initially levied a surcharge at a rate of $1.50 beginning in January 1992. The District Board of Directors increased the surcharge to $2.50, the maximum amount permitted by statute, in January 1993. The bonds do not constitute a debt or a pledge of the faith or credit of Maricopa County, the State of Arizona, or any other political subdivision. 351 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service The payment of the bonds is enforceable solely out of the pledged revenues and no owner shall have any right to compel any exercise of taxing power of the District, except for surcharges. The following tables illustrate the existing debt service for the outstanding Stadium District Revenue Bonds. DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS TO MATURITY Stadium District Revenue Bonds Maricopa County, Arizona As of June 30, 2003 Year Ending June 30 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 – 13 2014 – 18 2019 TOTAL Principal $ 2,000,000 2,490,000 2,685,000 2,820,000 2,960,000 17,085,000 22,040,000 5,145,000 $ 57,225,000 Total Debt Service $ 4,912,094 5,352,094 5,422,592 5,423,345 5,422,344 27,101,144 27,100,562 5,421,544 $ 86,155,719 Interest $ 2,912,094 2,862,094 2,737,592 2,603,345 2,462,344 10,016,144 5,060,562 276,544 $ 28,930,719 SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OUTSTANDING BY ISSUE As of June 30, 2003 Bond Issue Total Stadium District Revenue Bonds, Series 2002 $ Amount 57,225,000 DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS Stadium District Revenue Bonds $6,000,000 Interest Principal $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 $0 2004 $1,000,000 Special Assessment Districts A Special Assessment District (Improvement District) process begins with the circulation of a petition. The petition must be signed by either a majority of the persons owning real property or by the owners of fifty-one percent or more of the real property within the limits of the proposed district. With the approval of the petition by the Board of Supervisors, a new improvement district is established. County Improvement Districts are further described in A.R.S., Title 48, Chapter 6, Article 1. 352 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service With the Board of Supervisors acting as the Board of Directors for each district, approval of an engineer, and the approval of plans, specifications and cost estimates soon follow. Each of these early phases of the improvement district process contains regulations for public notification through posting of the property, publication in the local newspaper, and the set up of a protest period. Once the Board approves the awarding of the bid, construction follows. Since the residents pay these improvements, an assessment is levied against each property owner. Depending on the type of improvement, some assessments are carried on the property tax roll, while others are collected through the Improvement District Office. If the property owners are unable to prepay the improvement assessment within 30 days after the completion of the work, bonds are sold for the balance of the construction amount. The bonds are collateralized by properties within the district. The receivable is held by the Improvement District, and billed on a semi-annual basis. In cases of a delinquent payment of an assessment, the lien including penalty and interest may be sold at a public auction. If there is no purchaser for the lien, the District (not the County) will assume, as a general obligation, the amount of the assessment and interest accruing thereon. The following table illustrates the outstanding principal amount by issue for the Special Assessment District Bonds. SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OUTSTANDING BY ISSUE As of June 30, 2003 Bond Issue Grandview Manor Queen Creek Water Fairview Lane East Fairview Lane White Fence Farms 104th Place/University Drive Central Avenue Billings Street Marquerite Drive TOTAL $ $ Amount 36,747 85,500 6,843 15,399 43,299 22,410 103,545 3,439 51,391 368,573 Housing Department These bonds are due annually in varying principal and interest amounts, and are payable from Federal government subsidies. The following illustrates the debt service for the outstanding Public Housing bonds, which are payable from Federal government subsidies. 353 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS TO MATURITY Housing Department Bonds Maricopa County, Arizona As of June 30, 2003 Year Ending June 30 2004 2005 2006 TOTAL Principal $ 16,937 16,937 16,937 $ 50,811 Interest $ $ 1,641 985 328 2,954 Total Debt Service $ 18,578 17,922 17,265 $ 53,765 DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS Housing Department Bonds $20,000 Interest Principal $15,000 $10,000 2006 2005 $0 2004 $5,000 DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS TO MATURITY Housing Department Loans Payable Maricopa County, Arizona As of June 30, 2003 Year Ending June 30 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 TOTAL Principal $ 121,110 128,829 137,606 146,688 156,369 166,518 177,680 189,407 201,908 215,195 $ 1,641,310 Interest $ 106,326 100,608 91,831 82,749 73,067 62,919 51,756 40,029 27,529 14,242 $ 651,056 Total Debt Service $ 227,436 229,437 229,437 229,437 229,436 229,437 229,436 229,436 229,437 229,437 $ 2,292,366 The Housing Department loans payable at June 30, 2003, consisted of the following outstanding notes. The Department sold notes to the Federal Financing Bank. These notes will be repaid through Federal government subsidies. 354 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS Housing Department Loans Payable $250,000 Interest Principal $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 $0 2004 $50,000 Certificates of Participation Certificates of Participation represent proportionate interests in semiannual lease payments. The County’s obligation to make lease payments is subject to annual appropriations being made by the County for that purpose. On August 1, 1993, Maricopa County issued $3,850,000 of Certificates of Participation to assist in the acquisition, construction and equipping of the County’s West Mesa Justice Court and Northwest Regional Probation Center facilities. Additionally, the proceeds were used for an advance refunding of the Certificates of Participation Series 1989 and to prepay land purchase agreements the County had previously executed with the State of Arizona. On August 1, 1994, Maricopa County Public Finance Corporation issued $30,000,000 of Certificates of Participation to assist in the acquisition of the County’s Southeast Juvenile Court and Detention Center and its adult detention facility know as the Estrella Jail Complex. On August 1, 1996, Maricopa County Public Finance Corporation issued $2,500,000 of Certificates of Participation to pay for the cost of a building for Maricopa County Regional School District 509. On February 1, 2000, Maricopa County Public Finance Corporation issued $5,300,000 of Certificates of Participation to pay for the cost of construction for the Avondale Family Health Center. On November 1, 2000, Maricopa County Public Finance Corporation issued $6,975,000 of Certificates of Participation to pay for the cost of construction for the Desert Vista Health Center. The following illustrates the debt service for the outstanding Certificates of Participation. 355 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Year Ending June 30 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 -13 2014 -16 Total Debt Service DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS TO MATURITY Certificates of Participation Maricopa County, Arizona As of June 30, 2003 Governmental Activities Business-Type Activities Principal Interest Principal Interest $ 4,135,878 $ 346,381 $ 872,375 $ 570,518 226,117 100,004 878,534 523,171 239,743 86,952 927,942 474,847 254,056 73,025 975,350 423,441 272,698 58,172 1,030,167 368,931 679,592 86,206 4,426,000 1,001,885 1,830,000 153,335 $ 5,808,084 $ 750,740 $ 10,940,368 $ 3,516,128 SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OUTSTANDING BY ISSUE As of June 30, 2003 Certificate of Participation Issues Series 1993 Certificates of Participation Series 1994 Certificates of Participation Series 1996 Certificates of Participation Series 2000 Certificates of Participation Series 2000 Certificates of Participation TOTAL $ $ Amount 580,000 3,815,000 1,576,452 4,567,000 6,210,000 16,748,452 Capital Leases (Lease-Purchase Obligations) Maricopa County uses lease-purchase financing to expand its borrowing power. This financing technique provides long-term financing through a lease (with a mandatory purchase provision). Lease-purchase agreements use nonappropriation clauses to avoid being classified as long term debt, which might be subject to State legal restrictions. This clause allows the government to terminate the lease without penalty. However, because it is not likely that the County would be willing to forego the property, lease-purchase agreements are considered longterm obligations for policy planning purposes, regardless of the legal structure. The County maintains several capital leases, with four leases accounting for the majority of the balance. The departments and leased equipment include General Government SmartZone radio system, a Sheriff’s helicopter, Facilities Management energy savings retrofit and Superior Court modular building. The security for lease-purchase financing is the lease payments made by the County and, where legally permitted, also the asset being financed. The following schedule shows all outstanding capital leases as of June 30, 2003. Capital Leases Governmental Activities Maricopa County, Arizona Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 – 12 Total minimum lease payments Less: Amount representing interest Present value of net minimum lease payments $ $ 356 6,518,200 6,012,142 3,872,617 1,126,952 1,056,727 2,964,438 21,551,076 (2,136,171) 19,414,905 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service Installment Purchase Contracts Payable The County has entered into installment purchase contracts payable for the acquisition of medical equipment used in the Medical Center Fund (Business-type Activities), at a total purchase price of $3,514,605. The future minimum payments required under the contracts at June 30, 2003, are as follows. Installment Purchase Contracts Payable Business-Type Activities Maricopa County, Arizona Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total minimum lease payments Less: Amount representing interest Present value of net minimum lease payments $ $ 357 600,641 638,026 575,986 555,306 241,739 2,611,698 (261,174) 2,350,524 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service Debt Policies Regular, updated debt policies can be an important tool to ensure the use of the County’s resources to meet its commitments to provide needed services to the citizens of Maricopa County and to maintain sound financial practices. Administration of Policy The Chief Administrative Officer is the Chief Executive of the County. With the exception of those responsibilities specifically assigned by state statute to the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Administrative Officer is ultimately responsible for the approval of any form of County borrowing. The Chief Financial Officer coordinates the administration and issuance of debt, as designated by the Chief Administrative Officer. The Chief Financial Officer is also responsible for attestation of disclosure and other bond related documents. References to the “Chief Administrative Officer or his designee” in bond documents are hereinafter assumed to assign the Chief Financial Officer as the “designee” for administration of this policy. Use of Debt Financing Debt financing includes General Obligation Bonds, Revenue Bonds, Certificates of Participation, Lease/Purchase agreements, and other obligations permitted to be issued or incurred under Arizona law. Method of Sale Debt issues of the County may be sold by competitive, negotiated, or private placement sale methods unless otherwise limited by state law. The selected method of sale will be the option which is expected to result in the lowest cost and most favorable terms given the financial structure used, market conditions, and prior experience. Competitive Sale The County will use the competitive sale method unless there are compelling reasons which indicate that a negotiated sale or private placement would have a more favorable result due to prevailing conditions in the market, a financing structure which requires special premarketing efforts, or factors are present that are expected to result in an insufficient number or competitive bids. Advantages of using a competitive sale is that the issuer is getting the lowest net interest cost on that day time and all parties are given an equal opportunity, but timing is very inflexible. Negotiated Sale When determined appropriate, the County may elect to sell its debt obligations through a negotiated sale. Such determination may be made on an issue by issue basis, for a series of issues, or for part or all of a specific financing program. Negotiated underwriting may be considered upon recommendation of the Chief Financial Officer. Advantages of a negotiated sale is that timing is extremely flexible, the size of the issue can be easily changed at last minute and the issuer has influence over the underwriter selection and bond distribution. Use of Bond Insurance This is an insurance policy purchased by an issuer or an underwriter for either an entire issue or specific maturities. It will guarantee the payment of principal and interest, which in turn provides a higher credit rating and thus a lower borrowing cost for an issuer. The present value of the estimated debt service savings from insurance should be at least equal to or greater than the insurance premium when insurance is purchased directly by the County. The bond insurance company will usually be chosen based on an estimate of the greatest net present value insurance benefit (present value of debt service savings less insurance premium). 358 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service Arbitrage Liability Management Arbitrage is defined as the practice of simultaneously buying and selling an item in different markets in order to profit from a spread in prices or yields resulting from market conditions. Arbitrage profits are made by selling tax-exempt bonds and investing the proceeds in higher-yielding taxable securities, when referencing municipal bonds. Municipal issuers are allowed to make arbitrage profits under certain restricted conditions. The sale of tax-exempt bonds primarily for the purpose for making arbitrage profits is prohibited by Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Debt Management Division of the Department of Finance shall establish a system of record keeping and reporting to meet the arbitrage rebate compliance requirements of the federal tax code. This will include tracking investment earnings on bond proceeds, using outside experts to assist in calculating rebate payments, preparing returns, and making payments in a timely manner in order to preserve the tax exempt status of the County’s outstanding debt issues. Additionally, general financial reporting and certification requirements embodied in bond covenants will be monitored to ensure that all covenants are met. The County will structure its financing in such a way as to reduce or eliminate future Arbitrage Rebate liability, wherever feasible. Selection of Professional Services The Chief Financial Officer shall be responsible for establishing a solicitation and selection process for securing professional services that are required to develop and implement the County’s debt program. Goals of the solicitation and selection process shall include encouraging participation from qualified service providers, both local and national, and securing services at competitive prices. Bond Counsel – To render opinions on the validity, enforceability and tax exempt status of the debt and related legal matters, and to prepare the necessary resolutions, agreements and other documents. Financial Advisor – To advise on the structuring of obligations to be issued, inform the County of various options, advise the County as to how choices will impact the marketability of County obligations and provide other services as defined by contract. To ensure independence, the financial advisor will not bid on nor underwrite any County debt issues. Competitive proposals will be taken periodically for services to be provided over a period of one year with annual renewal options. Other professional services will be retained, when required, including managing underwriters, credit agencies, escrow agents, trustees, printers, and others. These services will be procured when in the best interest of the County by a competitive selection process. Continuing Disclosure of County Financial Information Annual financial statements and other pertinent credit information, including the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), will be provided by the County upon request. A copy of the CAFR can be viewed from the Maricopa County home page at: http://www.maricopa.gov/finance/. All material that has a pertinent bearing on County finances will be provided to the agencies that maintain a rating on County securities. The Chief Financial Officer shall be responsible for providing ongoing disclosure information to established national information repositories and for maintaining compliance with disclosure standards dictated by state and national regulatory bodies. Copies of official statements for future issuance’s of its bonds will be available through the following recognized municipal repositories: 359 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Debt Service Bloomberg Municipal Repositories 100 Business Park Drive Skillman, NJ 08558 Phone: (609) 279-3225 Fax: (609) 279-5962 Email: Munis@Bloomberg.com DPC Data Inc. One Executive Drive Fort Lee, NJ 07024 Phone: (201) 346-0701 Fax: (201) 947-0107 Email: nrmsir@dpcdata.com FT Interactive Data Attn: NRMSIR 100 Williams Street New York, NY 10038 Phone (212) 771-6999 Fax: (212) 771-7390 Email: NRMSIR@FTID.com Standard & Poor’s Security Evaluations, Inc 55 Water Street – 45th Floor New York, NY 10041 Phone: (212) 438-4595 Fax: (212) 438-3975 Email: nrmsir_repository@sandp.com The Securities and Exchange Commission released final “continuing disclosure” rules (the “Rules”) for municipal bond issues on November 10, 1994, (amended existing Rule 15c2-12). The Rules, which in general were effective on July 3, 1995, impact nearly every issuer of municipal securities. The stated purpose of the Rules is to deter fraud and manipulation in the municipal securities market by prohibiting the underwriting and subsequent recommendation of securities for which adequate information is not available. No underwriter can purchase or sell bonds in an offering of more than $1,000,000 after July 3, 1995, unless it has reasonably determined that an issuer has undertaken to provide to the public information repositories on a continuing basis both annual financial information and notices of specified material events affecting the issuer or its securities. This is applicable unless an exemption applies. The County intends to fully comply with the “continuing disclosure” rules. Maturity Structures Principal payment schedules should not extend beyond the economic life of the project or equipment financed. The structure of debt issued by the County should be to provide for either level principal or level debt service. Except in select instances, deferring the repayment of principal should be avoided. Ratings The County’s goal is to maintain or improve its bond ratings. To that end, prudent financial management policies will be adhered to in all areas. The Chief Financial Officer shall be responsible for maintaining relationships with the rating agencies that currently assign ratings to the County’s various debt obligations. The County will maintain a line of communication with the rating agencies informing them of major financial events in the County as they occur. Full disclosure of operations will be made to the bond rating agencies. County staff, with the assistance of the financial advisor and bond counsel, will prepare the necessary materials for presentation to the rating agencies. A personal meeting with representatives of the rating agencies will be scheduled every few years or whenever a major project is initiated. Modification to Policies These policies will be reviewed annually and significant changes may be made with the approval of the County Administrative Officer. Significant policy changes will be presented to the Board of Supervisors for approval. 360 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance County At A Glance County Profile Maricopa County was created in 1871 from Yavapai and Pima Counties. It was named after the Maricopa Indian Tribe, which is known to have inhabited the area as early at 1775. Maricopa was the fifth county formed in Arizona. Today, more than half of the state’s population resides in Maricopa County. In addition, Indian Reservations make-up 5% of the total land ownership while individuals and corporations own 29%, the Bureau of Land Management 28%, the U.S. Forest Services 11%, the State of Arizona 11%, leaving the remaining 16% publicly owned land. Maricopa County Profile Population Population 3,389,260 4th Most Populous County in the US Population Larger than 21 States Land Mass 9,203 Square Miles 14th Largest County in Land Size in the US Larger than 7 States United States of America State of Arizona Nation’s Largest Regional Park System Over 120,000 Acres Maricopa County Maricopa County’s total size of 9,224 square miles is comprised of 6,996 square miles are unincorporated and 2,228 incorporated square miles. The County measures 132 miles from east to west and 103 miles from north to south. Within the boundaries are 9,126 square miles of land and 98 square miles of water, making it the 14th largest county in size in the United States. In addition, Maricopa County is larger than seven states (Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey and Rhode Island) and the District of Columbia. Maricopa County faces many challenges as one of the fastest growing counties in the nation with a population of over 3.3 million. These challenges are inferred in Maricopa County’s mission, to provide regional leadership and fiscally responsible, necessary public services to its residents so they can enjoy living in healthy and safe communities. Maricopa County is Arizona’s largest local government; it operates without powers of self government. Maricopa County houses the State Capital of Arizona. The State Legislature represents a key external factor whose actions greatly influence County finances and operations in five major areas: State shared revenues; State budget; Tax law changes; Mandates and County powers. The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors is the governing body for the county. Each member represents one of the Maricopa County five supervisorial districts, which are divided Supervisor District Map geographically and by population to include a District 4 mix of urban and rural constituencies. District 3 Buckeye District 2 Phoenix Members are elected to four-year terms and El Mirage Apache Junction Glendale may serve an unlimited number of terms. A Carefree Litchfield Park County Administrative Officer, appointed by Cave Creek Peoria Fountain Hills the Board of Supervisors, is responsible for Surprise Gilbert the administration of Maricopa County. Wickenburg Mesa Paradise Valley Scottsdale Youngtown District 5 Avondale Gila Bend Goodyear Guadalupe Tolleson District 1 Chandler Queen Creek Tempe 361 As demonstrated on the Maricopa County Supervisorial District Map at the left, Maricopa County has five supervisorial district and twenty-five incorporated municipalities. Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance In addition, the table below lists each supervisorial district of Maricopa County, the Board member, or Supervisor, population of each district, and incorporated municipalities. Overlapping of some district boundaries occurs. The County’s boundaries have not changed since 1881. District 2 District 3 District 4 Andrew Kunasek Max Wilson Don Stapley 609,493 607,783 629,606 Apache Junction* Phoenix Buckeye Carefree El Mirage Cave Creek Glendale Fountain Hills Litchfield Park Gilbert Peoria* Mesa Surprise Paradise Valley Wickenburg Scottsdale Youngtown ° The population listed is information from the 2000 U.S. Census. * The boundaries of this municipality crosses Maricopa County boundaries into another county. Supervisor Population° Incorporated Municipalities District 1 Fulton Brock 597,949 Chandler Queen Creek* Tempe Arizona County Population Distribution Pima Pinal Yavapai Mohave Yuma Cochise Coconino Navajo Apache Gila Santa Cruz Graham La Paz Greenlee District 5 Mary Rose Wilcox 627,318 Avondale Gila Bend Goodyear Guadalupe Tolleson Maricopa County has the largest population of the 15 counties in the State of Arizona. Additionally, Maricopa County houses the largest city in the state, the City of Phoenix, and 28 additional cities within the County’s outer boundaries. Collectively, the cities of Maricopa County make up what is known as the Valley of the Sun. Maricopa County enjoys an average annual daily temperature of 72 degrees with 300 days of sunshine per year. Rainfall averages only 7.6 inches per year. The monthly average temperatures and precipitation are listed below. Maricopa Avg Temp (F) Avg Max Temp (F) Avg Min Temp (F) Avg Rain (Inches) Jan 53.5 65.7 41.4 0.82 Maricopa County Monthly Average Tempatures and Precipitation Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 57.6 62.3 69.9 78.6 87.8 92.9 91.2 85.7 70.4 75.5 84.1 93.2 102.8 105.2 103.4 98.6 44.8 49.1 55.6 64.0 72.9 80.6 79.0 72.7 0.68 0.89 0.27 0.14 0.11 0.89 1.02 0.72 Oct 74.5 88.2 60.8 0.62 Nov 61.8 75.0 48.5 0.61 Dec 54.0 66.4 41.6 0.89 Maricopa County offers a broad range of community and cultural facilities and activities. Professional sports prosper in Maricopa County. Teams include the Arizona Cardinals (National Football League); Arizona Diamondbacks (National Baseball League); Arizona Rattlers (Arena Football League), the Arizona Sting (National Lacrosse League), the Phoenix Coyotes (National Hockey League), the Phoenix Mercury (Women’s National Basketball Association); and the Phoenix Suns (National Basketball Association). Maricopa County is home to many other professionals sports and events including outdoor soccer, and thoroughbred and greyhound racing. In addition, college fans can enjoy a variety of inter-collegiate athletics. There are also golf tournaments sanctioned by the Professional Gold Association, Ladies Professional Golf Association and the Senior Professional Golf Association, such as the Phoenix Open. Maricopa County is home to the Phoenix International Raceway where residents and visitors can witness a variety of NASCAR races. 362 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Maricopa County owns Bank One Ballpark, home to the 2001 World Series Major League Baseball team the Arizona Diamondbacks. The spring training baseball parks, located within the boundaries of Maricopa County, provide the majority of the Major League spring training games for Arizona’s Cactus League. In addition, the City of Glendale will be home to the new Cardinal Football Stadium, currently under construction and expected to open 2006. Maricopa County is also home to the nation’s largest regional parks system measuring over 120,000 acres. There are 26 major hospitals within the County including the Maricopa Medical Center that offers the only regional burn center in the State of Arizona. Maricopa County’s Library District offers 3 Regional Libraries, 11 branch libraries, a bookmobile, outreach services and books-by-mail for the homebound and visually impaired. There are nine community colleges and 13 colleges and universities within the boundaries of Maricopa County. County Seal and Flag Maricopa County Seal 1871 Banner Maricopa County Established February 14, 1871 Scales Legal Services Tree, Horse & Rider Parks & Recreation The current County Seal was redesigned and adopted in 2001. When the seal was updated, great care was taken to maintain many of the key elements of the old seal while taking the opportunity to update and improve. The colors used in the seal reflect our unique desert environment. Arizona State Flower Saguaro Cactus Blossom The seal contains icons that are relevant to Maricopa County. The Saguaro Cactus is indigenous to the area and is found throughout Maricopa County. The Saguaro Cactus Blossom, which is the State Flower, blooms in the spring. The Scales of Justice refer to our legal system and law enforcement. Our health services are represented by the Caduceus and the Scenic Highway scene represents our public works departments. Lastly, the tree, horse and rider represent our Parks and Recreation facilities that can Scenic Highway Land, Roads & Flood Control Caduceus Health Services be found throughout the County. The County flag is divided into three main color blocks: red, yellow and blue. The Seal of Maricopa County is emblazoned on a block of red, symbolizing the striking beauty of the sunrises and sunsets and the desert flowers and the energy and lifeblood commitment of so many citizens who have built and continue to build Maricopa County, thereby safeguarding it for future generations. Maricopa County Flag The central golden band signifies the great abundance of what gives the Valley of the Sun its moniker. It also represents one of the first stimulants to local commerce – the gold mines of the Wickenburg area that brought settlers into the area and led to the creation of the original concept of a county called Maricopa. It symbolizes the continuing prosperity of Maricopa County, which truly is the “golden corridor” of economic growth for the State of Arizona. The blue field represents the infinite blue skies that embrace the county nearly every day of the year, and the waters of the rivers, lakes and canals, which have made our desert lush with vegetation and ripe with recreation. It represents the dreams of all who have come here and those who have gone before us, leaving their mark for others to see. In the blue field are five stars. They represent the five groups of Yuman-speaking Native Americans—the “Maricopa” for whom the county is named. They represent the five influxes of diversified peoples: Native Americans, Europeans, Hispanics, Americans, and the people of all other nationalities. Together, we have 363 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance created a cultural dynamic in the Sonoran desert in which heritage and future are symbiotic. The five stars also represent the five supervisory districts into which the County is divided. This flag is a banner for the people of Maricopa County – a prosperous, environmentally beautiful community where everyone can aspire to their full potential. Economy After more than two years of declining interest rates, jobs, and production, Maricopa County’s economy is beginning to improve, although somewhat slowly. Short of some catastrophic event such as a large-scale terrorism attach on U.S. soil, the Maricopa County economy is expected to perform nicely for the next several quarters. The combination of fiscal and monetary incentives, along with low interest rates, has properly supported the economy through its weak stages. Although the current recovery is expected to be moderate by industry standards, inflation is not expected to place a significant threat. Maricopa County Actual/Forecast Local economist Elliott D. Pollack, states factors that affect the County’s current economic condition include population, employment, personal income and retail sales. The growth of these indicators is shown in the chart at the right. Population continues to grow at a steady pace while local employment increased significantly in 2004 and retail sales showed a considerable increase, which is expected to continue throughout 2005. 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% Percent Change 2.0% 0.0% According to the Department of Economic Security, employment will grow by more than 3.5% in 2004, which equates to more than 80,000 jobs and represents the strongest job performance since 2000. High productivity may hinder job growth in the shortterm, but in the long-term employment and wages will increase and Maricopa County’s economy will certainly benefit. -2.0% Population Employment Personal Income Retail Sales Maricopa County Employment Actual/Forecast 2% 3.1% 2.7% 1.5% 1% 0% FY 2000 1.3% FY 2001 1.1% . FY 2002 FY 2003 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 3.1% 1.3% 3.5% -0.3% 3.0% 2.7% 2.9% 2.0% 3.0% 1.1% 5.3% 8.2% 3.2% 3.1% 6.7% 8.0% 3.3% 4.1% 7.2% 7.5% Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Maricopa County’s employment numbers are improving as shown in the chart at the left. This improvement creates disposable income and additional spending power for the consumer. Maricopa County’s tourism industry, which the County depends heavily upon, appears to be improving along with the economy. Leisure and hospitality employment is up 6.0% since the end of the recession in November 2001. Workforce figures reveal that Arizona’s economy continued to grow at a pace of 2.4% over the same period one year earlier according to the Department of Economic Security. 4% 3% 4.0% FY 2004 Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Co. 364 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Arizona Population & Employment Distribution The Arizona State University Center for Business Research reports that Maricopa County’s annual population grew more in the last year than in the prior year, due primarily to migration. The chart at the right compares the current population distribution to that of employment in the State of Arizona by largest counties. The two largest counties in the state are Maricopa County (encompassing the greater Phoenix area) and Pima County (encompassing the greater Tucson area). Real gross domestic product (GDP) represents the output of goods and services produced by labor and property in the United States. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, GDP increased by 4.5% and 3.3% in the first and second quarters in Population Distribution 4% Pima County 16% 1% 0% 2000 Maricopa County 71% Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security 4.7% 3.0% 1.9% 2% Maricopa County 64% 2004, respectively, outperforming the preliminary estimate of 2.8%. The major contributors to the increase in real GDP were nonresidential fixed investment, personal consumption expenditures (PCE), residential fixed investment, private inventory investment, exports, and government spending. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased. The chart at the left demonstrates the impact that the events of September 11, 2001 combined with a national recession had on real GDP, and the improvement of the economy in the years following. 3.7% 3% Balance of State 14% Pima County 15% U.S. Real Gross Domestic Product 5% Employment Distribution Balance of State 20% 0.8% . Other qualities of Maricopa County that contributed to improving the economy include quality of life, cost of living, a skilled work force, good universities and a Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Co. favorable business climate. Phoenix, the largest city within Maricopa County, and the State of Arizona, was ranked as one of the top 10 cities in the 6th annual “America’s 50 Hottest Cities” report, published in the January 2004 issue of Expansion Management magazine. The International Genomics Consortium and the Transnational Genomics Research Institute (TGEN) are evidence of Maricopa County’s leadership in bioscience, and will provide a base of expertise and knowledge that will enhance the area’s ability to develop and attract bioscience related companies. In addition, the new Arizona State University-Capital Center campus, being build downtown, will enhance downtown and the businesses, located there. 2001 2002 2003 2004 365 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Population According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Maricopa County’s estimated population as of July 1, 2003 stands at 3,389,260. Of the 3,141 counties in the nation, Maricopa County ranks 4th in population. Maricopa County’s population exceeds the population of 21 states and the District of Columbia. 61 percent of Arizona’s population resides in Maricopa County. Maricopa County Top six counties in population gains July 1, 2002 - July 1, 2003 53 6 As reported by the U.S. Census Bureau, Maricopa County was first in the nation, among large population counties, in gaining residents from July 2002 to July 2003. The chart at the right illustrates the top six counties in population gains. 1 2 1. Maricopa According to a statewide economic study prepared by Eller College of Business & Public Administration at the University of Arizona, annual population and employment growth is expected to be 3.3% – 3.4% and 4.0% – 4.6%, respectively. The state’s employment to population ration will continue to increase. 3.4 million 94,349 2.8% 2. Harris, TX 3.6 million 54,935 1.5% 3. Orange, CA 3.0 million 31,606 1.1% 4. Miami-Dade 2.3 million 24,648 1.1% 5. Los Angeles 9.9 million 103,270 1.0% 6. San Diego 2.9 million 26,199 0.9% 4 Source: U.S. Census Bureau Incremental Population Growth Comparison 3.5% The chart at the right compares Maricopa County’s incremental population growth to that of Arizona and the United States. Populaction growth in Maricopa County is expected to continue to outpace that of Arizona and the nation as a whole. Maricopa County gained 101,619 citizens in the past year, reflecting a 2.9% increase in population. Incremental Growth 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% Maricopa County’s actual population, including 0.0% projections through the year 2013, are displayed on 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% United States the chart at the left. Population projections are based 2.9% 2.8% 2.7% 2.9% 2.8% 2.7% 2.7% 2.7% Arizona on estimated births, deaths and net migration. The 3.0% 2.9% 2.9% 3.1% 3.3% 3.0% 2.9% Maricopa County 3.1% County’s growth reflects a national trend of population Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Arizona Department of Economic Security, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. shifts to the Sunbelt states. Employment opportunity is the most significant migration driver in Maricopa County. According to the economic consulting firm, Elliott D. Pollack & Company, the number of births in Maricopa County is expected to rise due to the increase in net migration, which is projected to rise over the next 10 years due to the increases in the national population and changes in the age structure of the population. 3,943 3,864 3,787 3,633 3,710 3,557 3,481 3,405 3,330 3,254 3,179 3,104 3,029 2,954 Maricopa County Population Projections Thousands 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security 366 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Maricopa County Migration Trends Net migration, as used within this document, represents the sum of the number of people moving into Maricopa County and those moving out of the County. Migration flows to and from Maricopa County are primarily with other U.S. states, mainly California and other neighboring states, or more distant but populous states such as New York and Illinois. Births Net Change Thousands 100 80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Source: University of Arizona, Arizona Department of Economic Security, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Maricopa County Population by Age 2000 Net Migration 120 As provided on the chart below, the largest portion of our current population lies in the 25-34 and 35-44 age groups. Significant growth is projected in the 35-44 and the 45-54 age groups by 2010. Such trends must be considered in the County’s long range financial forecast, as average citizen age may impact revenues (through changes in consumer spending patterns) and expenditures (as a result of services needs). 1990 Deaths 140 Data from the U.S. Census Bureau, shown in the table below, indicates that growth in the Hispanic/Latino population was significantly higher than that of other ethnic groups from 2001 to 2002 2010 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 04y r 5- s 9 10 yrs -1 4 15 yrs -1 9 20 yrs -2 4 25 yr -3 s 4y 35 r -4 s 4 45 yrs -5 4 55 yr -5 s 9y 60 r -6 s 4 65 yr -7 s 4 75 yrs -8 4y 85 rs + yr s 0 Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. RACE White Persons Persons of Hispanic or Latino Origin Other Origins Black or African American Persons Asian Persons American Indian and Alaska Native Persons JULY 1, 2001 63.4% 20.4% 9.8% 3.1% 1.8% 1.5% 367 JULY 1, 2002 64.1% 27.1% 1.2% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% INCREASE/ DECREASE 1.1% 33.0% -8.8% 16.0% 28.0% 6.7% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Employment Non-Farm Wage & Salary Employment Maricopa County makes up 68.9% of the state’s employment base. According to the July 2004 edition of the University of Arizona’s Economic Outlook, between 2003 and 2004, the percent of increase for non-farm employment in Maricopa County was 4.0%. The State of Arizona’s increase during that same time was 3.9%. (Percent Distribution) Maricopa County Other Services Edu & Health Svcs Professional & Business Services Financial Activities Information Trade, Transportation & Utilities Manufacturing Construction Natural Resources & Mining 0% 35,420 13,095 11,300 Honeywell 10,005 Intel Corp 9,500 Wells Fargo & Co 9,500 15% 20% 25% Employers with more than 9,000 employees working within Maricopa County are listed on the chart at left. 10,950 Wal-Mart AZ State Univ 10% According to Elliott D. Pollack & Company, Maricopa County government is the 2nd largest employer in Maricopa County. Maricopa County employment figures are based upon actual number of regular employees. However, as of January 1, 2005, the Maricopa Medical Center will belong to a new Special Health Care District. When that transition takes place, approximately 3,700 jobs will also move to the District. 13,482 City of Phoenix 5% Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Arizona Department of Economic Security, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Maricopa County Major Employers State of Arizona United States Leisure & Hospitality The chart at right compares the composition of Maricopa County’s non-farm wage and salary employment to that of Arizona and the United States. The largest proportion is in Trade, Transportation, and Utilities, at 19.4% in the United States, 19.2% in Arizona and 20.1% in Maricopa County. The smallest proportion is in Natural Resources and Mining, at 0.4% in the United States, 0.3% in Arizona, and 0.1% in Maricopa County. Maricopa County Arizona Government 9,500 US Postal Service 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 Source: Elliot D. Pollack & Co The trends in population and employment growth, shown at the right, continue to increase, although at a slower rate than that of a decade ago. Maricopa County Population & Employment Growth 4,500 Thousands 4,000 3,500 Population Trend 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 Employment Trend 1,000 Employment Growth 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 0 2000 500 Population Growth Source: Elliot D. Pollack & Co 368 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Personal Income Percent Change Actual/Forecast According to the University of Arizona Economic Outlook, in. 2004, higher productivity allowed companies to provide employees with real wage increases in 2004, as reflected in the chart at the left. Real compensation rose by 2.0% last year, creating additional consumer spending power which helped to fuel the economic recovery. 5% 4% 2004 2005 3.3% 3% 5.3% 5.7% 6% 7.7% 7% 7.2% 8% 7.3% 9% 8.9% 10% 2% 1% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2006 Source: University of Arizona, Economic Outlook Unemployment Comparison United States Arizona Since May 2003, Maricopa County’s unemployment rate has fluctuated between 5.3% and 3.8%, as illustrated on the chart at the left. According to local economists, Arizona and Maricopa County‘s job market is recovering, and local unemployment rates continue to be lower than national levels. The Department of Economic Security recently updated the economic forecast for 2004, and shows a job growth estimate of 2.63%, which equates to 41,500 more jobs. Maricopa County 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% M ay -0 Ju 3 n03 Ju l0 Au 3 g0 Se 3 p0 O 3 ct -0 3 N ov -0 3 D ec -0 Ja 3 n0 Fe 4 b04 M ar -0 Ap 4 r04 M ay -0 Ju 4 n04 Ju l0 Au 4 g04 0.0% Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security Retail Sales Maricopa County Aggregate Annual Retail Sales Retail Sales Actual/Forecast Retail Sales Trendline $50 $45 $40 Millions Maricopa County’s retail sales continue to increase at a greater rate than that of Arizona as a whole. Maricopa County’s retail sales represent nearly 70% of total retail sales in the state. Aggregate annual retail sales for Maricopa County are provided in the chart at the right. The year-over-year retail sales growth trend line shows moderate growth through FY 2007-08. $35 $31.1 $33.7 $36.4 $39.1 $41.3 $43.6 $46.0 $30 $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 Source: Elliot D. Pollack & Co 369 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Construction and Real Estate Market Maricopa County residents continue to benefit from low interest rates and affordable housing. Maricopa County is part of the Arizona Affordable Housing Profile which determines the affordability of housing and identifies efforts undertaken to produce new affordable units by community, county and statewide. One of the objectives in the housing profile is to identify the “affordability gap” for the State. The “gap” is the difference between the number of households within each income range and the number of housing units affordable to the households. It typically occurs at the lower end of the income range where there are more households than affordable units. For these households to find housing in the community, they must invest more than 28% of their income in shelter. For the first quarter in 2002, the Housing Opportunity Index indicates that Phoenix-Mesa is at 75.4% of the share of homes affordable for median income of $57,900 which is ranked 89th compared to other cities in the United States. Single Family Homes Median Prices As indicated in the chart at the left, the median price of single-family homes (resale and new) have increased by $6,787 since last year, an average of $1,697 per quarter. Home sales continued to grow as well. The increase in single-family home sales may be due to the continually low interest rates and the relative ease of obtaining a mortgage. “The boom is continuing for single-family housing…” according to Elliott D. Pollack & Company. For Calendar Year 2002 Resale New $165 $147 $160 $145 $155 $144 $100 $158 $150 $140 Thousands $200 $50 $0 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Source: Elliot D. Pollack & Co Maricopa County’s housing permits continue to increase at record levels. As indicated on the chart below, of the 74,030 single-family housing units authorized in Arizona during FY 2003-04, 46,382 or 63% were authorized for Maricopa County. 5,289 County units or nearly 11% of Maricopa County’s total single-family housing units were authorized for unincorporated areas. Single Family Housing Units Authorized This is a 13% increase of single-family units authorized for Maricopa County from last year. Recent numbers also show that Maricopa County still has a strong forward momentum in home sales, housing starts and house prices. Elliott D. Pollack and Company states, “After a record year in 2003, single family permit are expected to decline only very modestly in 2004 and 2005. Thus, both years would still be very strong years by any historical standard.” Arizona Maricopa County Total Maricopa County Unincorporated 80,000 74,030 70,000 58,647 60,000 50,000 40,000 49,266 33,934 51,258 48,963 46,382 32,790 32,812 36,875 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 3,795 FY 99-00 3,181 FY 00-01 4,725 FY 01-02 5,302 FY 02-03 5,289 FY 03-04 Source: Elliot D. Pollack & Co 370 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Maricopa County Multi-Family Market Inventory Multi-Family housing inventory grew by 1.2% during 2003, and the vacancy rate of 9.6% for 2003 is a 1.0% increase from last year. Vacancy rates are expected to continue to grow, remaining in the mid 9% range at the end of 2005 as indicated by Elliott D. Pollack and Company. Between 1994 and 2003 multi-family unit inventories have increased by 23% and vacancy rates have increased by 5.3%. The chart at the left shows the growth pattern. According to Grubb & Ellis Annual Report, mortgage rates were at record lows in 2003 but started to rise toward the end of the year. If interest rates continue to rise during 2004, the number of first-time buyers will decrease, increasing the demand for multi-family housing. % Vacant 350,000 12% 300,000 10% 250,000 8% 200,000 6% 150,000 4% 100,000 2% 50,000 0 0% Maricopa County Office Market 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Source: Elliot D. Pollack & Co The office market will benefit from a recovery in vacancy rates in the years to come. As stated by Elliott D. Pollack & Company, absorption actually exceeded new supply in 2003, as indicated in the chart at the right and is projected to do the same in 2004 and 2005. Currently, the vacancy rate is 18.3%, however, the vacancy rate is expected to drop to 17% by the end of 2005 mainly due to two years of relatively modest construction. Year Inventory New Supply Absorption 1999 % Vacant 49,897,228 4,181,330 3,632,354 10.0% 2000 52,456,482 2,618,765 3,068,284 9.9% 2001 57,480,257 4,460,813 1,535,151 16.0% 2002 59,785,848 2,282,876 707,037 18.8% 2003 60,111,965 368,684 1,245,156 18.3% Health Care In November 2003, the citizens of Maricopa County Source: Elliot D. Pollack & Co approved the creation of a new Special Health Care District. While the Board of Supervisors created the new district in January 2004, the Healthcare Delivery System will not be transitioned to the district until January 2005, after the election of a new Board of Directors. In January 2004, the Board of Supervisors selected Financial Resource Group (FRG) to manage the Delivery System and the Health Plans. FY 2004 was marked with significant involvement of the County to ensure a smooth transition of the Delivery System to the new District. The Health Care Delivery System’s FY 2004-05 budget assumes the continuation of all current programs and services, although small changes are projected in the demand for services provided. Maricopa Medical Center – Health Care Delivery System For nearly 125 years, Maricopa Medical Center (MMC) has been serving the health care needs of the community. From its modest roots in 1877 as a “pest house” providing care to tuberculosis patients, MMC has remained constant in its mission in the community – to provide quality health care in an environment of cultural sensitivity and compassion. MMC’s network includes a Level 1 academic hospital, eleven family health care clinics located throughout the Valley, over 250 physicians, and 3,500 employees. MMC serves everyone that walks through its doors with an emergent situation, regardless of lack of health insurance or socioeconomic situation. In fiscal year 2004, MMC provided approximately $737 million of health care services for the community, including nearly $95 million of uncompensated care. MMC provides an extensive range of unique specialized services for the community. Among these are the costly services associated with trauma care, burn care, neonatal and pediatric intensive care, high-risk obstetric services, health care for the correctional population, and behavioral health care. MMC is the only provider of intensive burn care in the state and regional Southwest, one of only five Level I trauma centers in the country, and one of only three neonatal intensive care units in the community, and the largest provider of inpatient behavior 371 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance health care for the Valley. MMC also plays a significant role in the Valley for patients with HIV/AIDS through its specialized clinic. The chart at left shows a synopsis of the care and services we provided to our community. Maricopa Integrated Health System Care & Services Provided FY 2004 20,520 Inpatients 290,000 Outpatients 58,000 Adult Emergency Patients 23,000 Pediatric Emergency Patients MMC also offers a separate pediatric emergency department staffed by board-certified pediatric emergency physicians, open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The expansion of the Comprehensive Health Care Center that was completed in 2001 significantly enhanced the delivery of women’s and pediatric services, dialysis, pharmacy, laboratory, internal medicine and medicine subspecialties, medical oncology, antepartum testing, ophthalmology, optical shop, dental, ear/nose/throat, surgery, radiology, cardiac rehabilitation, orthopedics, breast center and rehabilitation services. 4,835 Births 3,000 Burn Patients 1,000 Orthopedic Patients 1,231,476 Pathology Tests 52,203 General Radiology Services 387 Average Daily Census MMC also plays a significant role in teaching and shaping the future physicians of our community. The delivery system has the largest medical teaching program in Maricopa County, and second only to the University of Arizona statewide. Approximately 200 residents from across the country participate in the coveted graduate medical education programs, and third-and fourth-year medical student electives also are available through each clinical department. Health Plans The primary concern in determining the timeline for transferring the Health Plans to the District is to ensure that the Health Plans are financially stable and solvent. The financial stability of the Health Plans has been difficult to determine given the issues associated with the OAO system. The OAO system was implemented in October 2002, to replace the then current claims payment system. The impact of the failed system implementation and the inability of OAO to meet the Health Plans operational issues have created significant financial reporting and operational issues. The most serious issue has been the inability of the Health Plans to pay its claims on a timely basis, and as a result properly calculate the amount to record for its Incurred But Not Reported (IBNR). Additionally, it appears that IBNR had been understated prior to OAO implementation. Consequently, IBNR was increased for all the Health Plans by $37.6 million during FY 2003-04 to reflect the lowend of the Deloitte Consulting estimate. An additional $45 million is reserved in the General Fund for FY 2004-05, to reflect the high-end of the Deloitte Consulting estimate. The inability of the Health Plans to pay its claims on a timely and accurate basis due to the OAO issues has also caused regulatory problems. AHCCCS has imposed a $500,000 sanction related to the OAO payment issues and imposed a cap on Auto-enrollees to the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) Acute Care Plan. The Health Plans are comprised of the following specific Plans. All Plans will continue to provide the same level of services and programs unless otherwise noted below: The Maricopa Health Plan (MHP) is a contractor with the AHCCCS Administration to provide health care services to eligible enrollees of the AHCCCS Plans. The MCHP accounts for both inpatient and outpatient medical and nursing services provided to eligible enrollees of the AHCCCS program. MHP receives monthly capitation payments from the AHCCCS Administration for all eligible enrollees under the AHCCCS program. The Maricopa Long-Term Care Plan (MLTCP) is a contractor with the AHCCCS Administration to provide health care services to eligible enrollees of the ALTCS Plans. The MLCTP provides inpatient and outpatient medical and nursing services in addition to managed institutional, home, and community-based long-term care services provided to eligible ALTCS program enrollees. The MLTCP receives monthly capitation payments from the AHCCCS Administration for all eligible enrollees under the ALTCS programs. 372 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance The Senior Select Plan is a Medicare + Choice Plan operating under contract with the Federal Government. The FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget assumes the Managed Care Growth by Plan continuation of the Senior Select Plan, however, on June 16, 2004 the Board of Supervisors approved Member Months public notice to auction this plan. Once proposals are accepted and a contact is awarded, the budget will be 70,000 amended to reflect this change. 60,000 The Health Select Plan is for County employees and was transitioned to the Benefits division of the Total Compensation department effective January 1, 2004. 50,000 40,000 30,000 The Senior Adult Independent Living (SAIL) program was transitioned to the Human Services Department effective July 1, 2004. 20,000 10,000 0 FY 2002 FY 2003 Health Plan (AHCCCS) Through the three health plans the Health Plan as seen in the chart at the right, we provide health care to approximately 55,000 members. FY 2004 FY 2005 Long Term Care Plan (ALTCS) Senior Select (Medicare) Criminal Justice Sheriff’s Office The mission of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office is to provide law enforcement, detention and crime prevention to the public so that they can be safe and secure in our community. The Sheriff’s Office provides professional law enforcement, detention, and support services to the citizens of Maricopa County and to other criminal justice agencies, including cities that contract with the Sheriff’s Office for basic enforcement. The Sheriff’s Office operates one of the largest jail systems operated by a sheriff in the nation. Average Daily Adult Jail Population 8,566 9,000 8,000 6,520 7,000 6,000 5,503 6,804 6,768 6,660 FY 98 FY 99 7,059 7,557 8,044 5,922 5,000 4,000 In FY 2003-04, Maricopa County’s jail facilities housed an average of over 8,556 inmates daily, an increase of 6.5 percent over the previous year. Last year the Sheriff’s Office booked 119,275 adult inmates. Adults make-up 95 percent of Maricopa County’s inmate population while remanded juveniles comprise 5 percent. 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 The Sheriff’s Office houses 1,500 convicts in tents, both men and women. A gleaning program results in costs of less than 37 cents per inmate meal served. The Sheriff’s Office utilizes men and women on chain gangs, and has a volunteer posse of 3,200 men and women. These volunteers spend their time and money to train to be volunteers helping to keep the county free from crime. In 1998, County voters approved a 1/5-cent Jail Excise tax for construction of new adult and juvenile detention facilities. Construction is coming to a close with phased-in operations beginning in FY 2004-05. Details on each new adult detention facility are as follows: • Central Services (Food & Laundry) Facility – A new food processing plant was opened during FY 2003-04. The new food factory contains an ice plant, dehydration plant, canning plant, cook-chill plant, meat-cutting plant, frozen storage plant, donated food processing plant, cold storage and dry goods storage. This structure also includes a new truck washing area to sanitize the distribution trucks used to move the food from the factory to other County facilities. 373 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance • 4th Avenue Jail – The new 4th Avenue Jail is a mid-rise high-security jail located in downtown Phoenix. This Jail contains 1,360 cells, including 144 special management cells for close-custody (“Super Max”) inmates. 4th Avenue Jail will house the new Central Intake Unit (capable of handling 600 bookings every 12 hours), two Initial Appearance (IA) courts (one for the County and one for the City of Phoenix) as well as a high-security Superior Court room and a new Early Felony Disposition courtroom. Construction on the new Fourth Avenue Jail is now complete with phased-in operations beginning in FY 2004-05. • Lower Buckeye Jail – The Lower Buckeye Jail contains 1,867 cells as well as units for remanded juveniles and maximum sentenced adults, a psychiatric unit and a minimum-security adult dormitory. In addition, the Jail will house a new Infirmary, medical clinic, Correctional Health Services Administration and Programs/Education Administration. County Attorney’s Office The mission of the Maricopa County Attorney's Office is to provide quality prosecution, victim services, crime prevention and legal counsel for County government on behalf of the people of Maricopa County so that they can live in a safe and well-governed community. As the chief advocate for the State and the citizens of the community in criminal matters, the County Attorney seeks to provide the highest quality service and to maintain the integrity of the criminal justice system. Criminals must be held accountable, while assuring that the statutory right and emotional needs of the victims and witnesses are properly addressed. In addition, the County Attorney seeks to implement, promote and participate in programs that reduce crime and enhance the quality of community life. From FY 2002-03 and FY 2003-04, the Maricopa County’s Attorney’s Office shows a total increase in the adult felony crime rate of 11.2 percent, or an additional 3,411 felonies filed. Drug offenses comprise the greatest number of adult felony case filings, followed by property crimes, DUI, Aggravated Assault and Vehicular Thefts. Indigent Representation – Public Defender, Legal Defender, Legal Advocate and Contract Counsel The collective mission of the Indigent Representation Agencies is to provide quality legal representation to indigent individuals as assigned by the court, thus safeguarding the fundamental legal rights of each member of the community. In order to provide constitutionally mandated legal representation to indigent individuals in the most cost-effective manner, Maricopa County created three in-house defender offices and maintains a limited number of contracts with private attorneys. Multiple offices are necessary to address legal conflicts of interest that rise primarily because of prior representation by attorneys of co-defendants, victims, or witnesses. Collectively, the Indigent Representation agencies provide legal defense services to indigent defendants in the following instances: • Criminal proceedings including felony, misdemeanor, probation violation, appeals, post-conviction relief, and cases in which defendants oppose extradition; • Juveniles facing delinquency or incorrigibility charges; • Witnesses in criminal cases, when assigned by the court; • Indigent individuals at risk of a loss of liberty in civil mental health proceedings; and • Those involved in civil child dependency or severance proceedings. Clerk of the Superior Court The mission of the Clerk of Superior Court is to demonstrate flexibility and make innovative changes in order to meet customers' expectations when providing access to court-related records, financial and family support services to the public, legal community and Superior Court. 374 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance The Clerk of the Superior Court provides legally mandated services, including fiduciary, family support and court records information management. The Clerk of the Superior Court further supports the Superior Court of Arizona by maintaining court files, records, and exhibits in a timely and accurate manner. Constables The mission of the Constables is to provide execution of mandated civil and criminal process to citizens of Maricopa County so that they can receive timely, cost effective and professional service. Maricopa County’s 23 elected Constables serve the criminal and civil process of the Justice Courts and other legal parties. Constables are the Executive and Enforcement Branch of the Justice Courts. The duties of the Constables are to execute and return writs of possession or restitution (evictions); serve orders of protection and orders prohibiting harassment; summons Jurors; serve criminal and civil summons and subpoenas; judicial security; levy and return writs of execution (seize property to satisfy judgments); store personal property levied on; and conduct Constable sales of property levied on to satisfy judgments. Judicial Branch The Judicial Branch includes the Superior Court, Justice Courts, Adult Probation and Juvenile Probation as follows. Superior Court The mission of the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County and Maricopa County Justice Courts is to provide people with access to a public forum for dispute resolution and court services so citizens can realize timely, fair, economical, individualized justice, and to also serve the community by assisting children and families in need. The Superior Court in Maricopa County integrates the use of cutting-edge technology in the courtroom. By operating new, high tech e-courtrooms offering state-of-the-art equipment and technology, the Superior Court reduces court times, court costs and complications for court customers. Each e-courtroom features flat-screen video monitors for jurors, listening enhancement devices for hearing impaired individuals, instant video recording, and monitors throughout the courtroom for evidence display and presentations. During FY 2002-03 128,373 cases were filed in Superior Court versus 136,673 cases filed in FY 2003-04, representing a 6.5 percent increase. Superior Court criminal cases increased 4.4 percent while juvenile court cases increased 8.2 percent and family court cases increased by 11.1 percent. SUPERIOR COURT CASE FILINGS COURT DEPARTMENT FY 2000 % FY 2001 % FY 2002 % FY 2003 % FY 2004 % Civil 31,258 27.3% 28,052 24.4% 31,188 26.1% 35,956 28.0% 37,422 27.4% Criminal 26,184 22.9% 28,106 24.4% 30,020 25.1% 35,200 27.4% 36,748 26.9% Family Court 28,551 25.0% 30,695 26.6% 29,894 25.0% 29,414 22.9% 32,666 23.9% Juvenile 19,439 17.0% 18,984 16.5% 18,367 15.3% 17,847 13.9% 19,317 14.1% Probate 6,414 5.6% 6,569 5.7% 7,047 5.9% 6,740 5.3% 7,067 5.2% Mental Health 1,518 1.3% 1,640 1.4% 2,104 1.8% 2,163 1.7% 2,178 1.6% Tax Court 1,043 0.9% 1,140 1.0% 1,008 0.8% 1,053 0.8% 1,275 0.9% Annual Totals 114,407 115,186 119,628 375 128,373 136,673 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Justice Courts Maricopa County Justice Courts Filings by Case Types, FY 1998 - 2003 Maricopa County’s 23 Justice Courts are limited jurisdiction courts that process traffic and civil cases, and are responsible for some criminal misdemeanors through preliminary hearing. Statistics regarding Justice Court case filings are illustrated in the chart at the right. 332,128 400,000 335,016 351,278 355,170 348,040 350,000 300,000 Adult Probation 250,000 200,000 The Mission of the Maricopa County Adult Probation Department is to provide assistance and adult probation services to neighborhoods, courts, adult probationers and victims so that they experience enhanced safety and well-being. The duties of the Adult Probation Department are as follows: 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 FY 2000 DUI FY 2001 Criminal Traffic FY 2002 Civil Traffic FY 2003 Misdemeanor FY 2004 Felony Civil • Managing offender risk by enforcing Court orders; • Encouraging probationers to engage in pro-social change, law-abiding behavior, and personal accountability under general and intensive supervision; • Providing pre-sentence reports to assess offender risk and needs in order to help guide Court decisions and to apply the appropriate level of service. • Working in community partnerships to provide crime prevention and intervention services. • Facilitating victim involvement and restorative justice services. With passage of HB 2533 in 2003, Maricopa County assumed program responsibility for funding most Adult Probation services, including intensive probation supervision, State Aid Enhancement, Interstate Compact and the Community Punishment Program, effective with the FY 2003-04 Adopted budget. As a result, from FY 2002-03 to FY 2003-04, the average annual Standard Probation caseload decreased 0.1 percent from 25,400 to 25,382. Similarly, the average annual Intensive Probation caseload decreased 1.3 percent from 1,267 to 1,250. During FY 2003-04, additional County funding was applied to restore caseload capacity. The full turnaround will not be achieved until FY 2004-05 as noted in the chart at the left. Adult Probation Caseload Recovery from State cuts due to County funding. 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 Standard FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 (Proj) Intensive Juvenile Probation The Mission of the Juvenile Probation Department is to provide information, services, and programs to county residents so that they can resolve problems associated with juvenile crime. The Juvenile Court has jurisdiction over the illegal acts of juveniles, except juveniles 15 and older accuse of homicide, aggravated assault and other violent crimes. The Juvenile Probation Department operates two juvenile detention centers, supervises the probation of juvenile offenders and administers community-based crime prevention programs targeted at the County’s youth population. 376 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Average Daily Juvenile Detention Population 450 400 350 334 339 350 363 376 398 400 407 401 As noted in the chart to the left, the average daily juvenile detention population increased from 401 to 431, or 7.5 percent, from FY 2002-03 to FY 2003-04, which is a marked change from the decline of 1.5 percent from FY 2001-02 to FY 2002-03. Per Juvenile Probation, the recent increase can be attributed to three things: (1) an overall increase in the average length of stay; (2) Judges are keeping more juveniles in detention after having been detained on warrants; and (3) Judges are using detention more frequently as a post-disposition consequence. 425 300 250 200 150 The Jail Excise Tax also supports construction and operation of new Juvenile Detention facilities. Phasedin operation of some facilities began in FY 2003-04 with remainder to begin in FY 2004-05: Details on each new juvenile detention facility are as follows: 100 50 0 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 • Southeast (SEF) – The approximately 80,000 square foot project contains a court building, 128 juvenile beds, a parking structure with 400 parking spaces for staff as well as space for supporting educational, program and administrative functions. Construction of this facility began in 2001 and was complete in 2003. Phased-in operation of this facility began in FY 2003-04. • Durango - The approximately 270,000 square feet project contains 220 beds, 12 new courts with judicial suites and associated office space for central administrative support staff and related functions. Operation of this facility will be phased-in beginning with FY 2004-05. • Residential Treatment Center – The Residential Treatment Center is located at the corner of Durango and 35th Avenue. Construction of this facility began in 2001 and was complete in 2003. The Juvenile Probation Department is currently under contract with Spectrum Health System to provide substance abuse treatment to male juveniles utilizing the first 24 beds. Operation of the remaining 24 beds is pending further review of the results achieved with the first 24 beds. Legislative Strategies 2004 Legislative Session The Second Regular Session of the 46th Legislature was a challenging one for Maricopa County, but the County was able to accomplish a great deal both offensively and defensively during the session. Maricopa County’s primary objectives going into the 2004 session were protecting state-shared revenues, minimizing state budget impacts on the county to the extent agreed upon in the preceding year, and passing legislation contained in the Board of Supervisors’ legislative package. Given that these priorities were met, and the fact that an unusually high number of unfavorable bills were introduced but eventually defeated or significantly modified this year, Maricopa County had a successful session. All of the priority bills in the Board’s legislative package were passed and signed by the Governor, including: • Prohibiting a natural gas storage facility from being located within Maricopa County if the proposed facility was within nine miles of an active duty military Air Force base (an important protection for Luke AFB strongly advocated by the Board); • Authorizing the newly created Maricopa County Special Health Care District approved by voters in November of 2003 to continue medical self-insurance benefits to its employees; • Broadening the County’s authority governing county prisoners healthcare grievance procedures; • Extending to county Flood Control Districts the ability to sell its excess property to other political jurisdictions for appropriate public purposes; 377 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance • Ensuring a $4 million legislative disbursement to counties in federal monies to help defray their required contributions to the Arizona Long-Term Care System ($2.4 million to Maricopa County); • Creating a statutory definition of a “rezoning ordinance” which will help all counties consistently and efficiently review and process rezoning applications; • Authorizing county health department personnel to be delegated as special dairy inspectors by the state Department of Agriculture, thus helping to ensure public health and safety in dairy products; and • Reinstating county Boards of Supervisors’ authority to honor “stale dated warrants”, which are checks or warrants drawn on the county general fund which for some reason has been presented by the person for payment later than one year after the date of issuance and considered void. Also of particular interest and importance to the Board this session was the issue of development of the Regional Transportation Plan, and placing the question of extending the current half-cent transportation tax on the ballot for Maricopa County voters’ consideration. The current transportation tax, originally approved by voters in 1985, will expire in 2005. Development of this ballot measure proved to be an extremely complex and at times contentious process involving Maricopa County, all twenty-seven cities and towns within Maricopa County, the Native American communities, the Legislature, the Governor's Office, and the business community. The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors played a strong leadership role in development of the measure, with Board members being very vocal and aggressive advocates for the inclusion of important accountability and performance audit provisions in the measure to extend the tax, so that voters would know exactly what they would be getting for their taxpayer dollar over the next twenty years. Many felt it was these provisions that convinced the state Legislature to pass the 20-year plan with few changes. After an exhaustive process lasting almost two years, the ballot measure was successfully passed and signed by the Governor, and will be before Maricopa County voters for their consideration on the November 2004 general election ballot. The legislation passed authorizing a public vote on the extension calls for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to call and conduct a countywide special election (concurrent with the general election) on November 2, 2004 for the levy of a transportation excise tax beginning in 2006. If approved by voters, revenues generated by the transportation excise tax (estimated at $9 billion) are dedicated to funding the 20-year Maricopa County Regional Transportation Plan certified by the Maricopa Association of Governments. The proposal is part of a $17 billion Transportation Plan to be implemented throughout the County. In addition, a number of bills extremely unfavorable to counties were defeated or modified. Unfavorable provisions this year seemed primarily to include damaging cost shifts or erosion of Board discretion or authority. One example would be the unusually high number of justice of the peace related bills introduced this year, several of which would have preempted county authority and the ability to implement cost-effective and innovative strategies to save taxpayer dollars. One bill in particular which was defeated would have impeded Maricopa County’s ability to sensibly “co-locate” justice courts within the County. The State Budget and Its Impact on Maricopa County Last year, Maricopa County worked closely with House and Senate leadership and the Governor’s Office in negotiating a mutually agreeable budget compromise that would represent something of a “win-win” for both parties, in a situation where the State was facing an historic $1 billion budget shortfall and was seeking to “share the pain”. Under last year’s budget agreement, Maricopa County agreed to assume mandates, acquire properties, and provide funding to the State, in an overall amount of $32 million for each of fiscal years 2004 and 2005. It can be said that this budget agreement, a year later, has actually, and verifiably, resulted in genuine improvements in government, particularly in the areas of adult probation, restoration to competency, and in the good public use of properties that had been languishing in the State’s possession. This year, Maricopa County’s strategy was to ensure that the state Legislature remained committed to adhering to the second year of the two-year budget agreement with the County. This course of action faced a series of hurdles, however, as a number of budget proposals continually surfaced, generated by both the Governor’s Office and non-leadership House and Senate budget negotiators, which would have required additional financial expenditures from Maricopa County far beyond what was called for in the two-year budget agreement. 378 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies County At A Glance Additionally, Maricopa County’s strategy was complicated by the fact that it was becoming increasingly clear as the session went on that Maricopa County needed to lobby not only within the confines of traditional legislative budget development, but outside of that structure, as well, as there were two very separate, diverse, and even opposing legislative factions simultaneously engaging in budget discussions, due to deep philosophical differences among members on the appropriate budget amount and priorities. Once a budget had been passed by the Senate and sent to the House, House leadership attempted for weeks to forge a compromise between Republican “Conservatives” and “Moderates”. This proved to no avail, however, and ultimately, a coalition comprised of House Moderate Republicans and Democrats passed a budget with literally no House leadership or Conservative input. In the case of every single budget bill, the House Appropriations Committee amendments modifying the Senate-passed budget were stripped off on the House floor and the new Moderate/Democrat amendments put on. Fortunately, Maricopa County had anticipated the possibility of such a Moderate/Democrat coalition ultimately prevailing given the circumstances, and budget provisions reflecting our two-year agreement were passed. Subsequently, the House-passed $7.35 billion budget package went back to the Senate for final concurrence, and the Senate voted to approve it. The Governor then signed all of the budget bills with only slight line-item changes. Overall, new or additional budget impacts to Maricopa County were fought off, and budget impacts were held to the previous year’s agreement. A number of unfavorable budget provisions were defeated. As enacted, the FY 05 state budget contains the following provisions for Maricopa County: • Continuation of Maricopa County Takeover of Adult Probation Funding; (Note: This is scored at $22 million from the State's perspective, but it is important to note that Maricopa County has in fact very responsibly put much more into this program: restoring previous state budget cuts; making appropriate salary adjustments; refurbishing the Black Canyon building which was one of last year's property purchases, in preparation for housing adult probation staff there; as well as shouldering the resulting ancillary costs of legislative changes made to CPS during the last special session in the areas of Juvenile Dependency representation and Juvenile Dependency court costs. Thus, the annualized cost of Maricopa County's adult probation takeover is closer to $27 million. The annualized cost of Juvenile Dependency funding is approximately $4.6 million.) • Continuation of Maricopa County Takeover of Restoration to Competency Program; • Continuation of last year’s elimination of any Maricopa County responsibility to pay a portion of state private prison contracts cost; • County Contribution Payment of $5.4 million for state services (General Fund); • County Transportation Contribution Payment of $4.8 million (HURF) (This replaces the previous year’s payments from the General Fund for property acquisition.) There was no additional HURF hit to counties. At one point, the Senate budget included a $6 million shift in county HURF monies to the Department of Public Safety to pay for an increase in officer salaries; • Maricopa County's AHCCCS acute care contribution is set at the same level as the previous year's; • Maricopa County's ALTCS contribution increases only in accordance with previous projections, rather than the $5 million increase proposed by the Executive. It was unfair to expect Maricopa and Pima Counties to pay 100% of the growth of the ALTCS program, as originally proposed; • County public health programs were funded at last year's appropriation level; (Note: Last year’s ill-conceived Judicial Collections budget provision requiring cities and counties to transfer to the State each year revenues from court collections over a FY 2002-03 baseline, up to $45 million annually, has since been repealed in an October 2003 special session.) • There was no loss to Maricopa Medical Center of $4.2 million in Disproportionate Share (DSH) payments, dollars critical for the operation of the health care system as the County prepares for a complex transition to the new Special Health Care District. This was part of the budget proposal at one time; and 379 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies • County At A Glance There was no inclusion in the budget of an “Intermediate Sanctions” provision, which would allow courts to impose intermediate sanctions on probationers as an alternative to probation revocation. This provision was in the Senate version of the budget and later removed in the House. Passage of such a provision represented a huge policy shift placed into a budget bill without appropriate stakeholder discussion, and would have created a new program which would have cost Maricopa County a minimum of $5.3 million per year. 2005 Legislative Session The 2005 Legislative Session opens on Monday, January 10, 2005, and will contain a number of new members following the 2004 primary and general elections. The House will have all new leadership, and there may be changes in Senate leadership, as well. In addition, committees may be reorganized, with new committee chairmanships in many cases. Maricopa County’s planning for the next legislative session has already commenced. Development of next year’s legislative package is underway, and key objectives will involve repelling any new or continued state budget cuts or cost-shifts. The state revenue picture is improving, and it is unreasonable to expect that local governments should continue to help shoulder a portion of the state deficit burden as revenues improve. This will be Maricopa County’s primary message as the next session begins. Given the fact that many believe the state still has a structural budget deficit to contend with, however, even as revenues improve, it may unfortunately be the case that counties are still at risk. 380 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing For Results Managing For Results Introduction For the past four years, Maricopa County has been one of the nation’s local government leaders in Managing and Budgeting for Results. It has become part of our culture, our identity, and is a major part of how we manage our organization. We expect the Managing for Results (MfR) process to become even more valuable as we get better data to utilize, and start seeing the results and achieving our strategic visions. Effective cost accounting is one of the most important elements of MfR, and is the linchpin of Budgeting for Results. The implementation of the new PeopleSoft Human Resource Information System in January 2004 has helped us improve the tracking of our personnel costs. That, along with a renewed emphasis on correctly allocating supplies and services costs will go a long way towards improving our cost accounting accuracy. Accurately reporting the cost to provide services allows policy-makers and managers to gauge the efficiency of services, as well as analyze expenditure trends and develop meaningful budgets. Managing for Results and Budgeting for Results require that Program/Activity/Service expenditures and revenues are aligned with outputs and results. Furthermore, aligning program revenues with expenditures by Activity (or Service) provides information useful for determining how well program revenues recover program costs. In order to facilitate this, departments are now required to match revenue received to one of their Programs or Activities. Maricopa County Mission Statement: The mission of Maricopa County is to provide regional leadership and fiscally responsible, necessary public services to its residents so they can enjoy living in healthy and safe communities. Strategic Priorities: • Provide regional leadership in critical public policy areas in a fiscally responsible manner. • Minimize the burden on the property taxpayer through rate reductions. • Healthy community and solvent healthcare system. • Safe community through a streamlined integrated criminal justice system. • Provide regional leadership for a regional transportation system. • Land use will be planned, managed and funded responsibly; Luke AFB will be preserved. • Maricopa County will continue to improve its positive public image based on results achieved. Managing for Results continues to be a part of the budgeting process. The Office of Management and Budget annually evaluates departmental funding requests based on the Board of Supervisors’ strategic direction and budget goals, ensuring that requests align with departments' strategic plans. The financial cost accounting system and the budgeting software were re-structured to include Programs, Activities, and Services (PAS) delineated within each department strategic plan. Why Are We Doing This? Strategic plans are developed to support management by: • Providing the right information to make good decisions; • Aligning every employee to organizational success; and • Compiling and reporting information to tell customers (citizens) what they are getting for their investment (taxes). The Managing for Results management system is designed to allow employees in Maricopa County to be able to make the following three statements: 381 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing For Results • What we are doing today contributes to our strategic direction. (Every department has a strategic plan linked to their operational plan and each employee’s performance plan.) • We know what we have done has been effective. (Performance measures are identified and managed by Activity, demonstrating the results produced.) • We know how much it costs to deliver our programs efficiently. (All human and financial resources are tied to the services delivered so we can tell how much they cost and how efficiently services are delivered.) Managing for Results System Managing for Results (MfR) is a comprehensive and integrated management system that focuses on achieving results for the customer and makes it possible for departments to demonstrate accountability to taxpayers. This on-going and cyclical system is depicted below: Decision Making Planning for Results • Future Demand • Vision & Mission • Performance Targets • Strategic - Goals • Adjust Allocations If Required • Operational - Results • Operational/Process Improvement • Family of Measures per Activity Evaluating Results • Employee Performance Plans • Performance Audit • Employee Evaluations • Resources Consumed • Citizen Survey & Input Reporting Results • Data Verified Deliver Services • Actuals vs. Forecasts • Baselines & Benchmarks • All Customers Included Collect Data Budgeting for Results • Demand for Services • Performance Budget • Resource Allocation Through the Managing for Results system, Maricopa County has engaged in substantive planning and performance measurement. This comprehensive planning methodology supports the: • Systematic creation of strategic goals that link to programs; • Use of measures to track performance, support operational improvement, and make informed resource allocation decisions; and • Communication of goals and progress both to employees and the public. Planning for Results A well-executed strategic plan promotes common understanding of the department’s/agency’s overall direction and purpose so that individual employees can readily determine how their work, actions and behavior support the 382 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing For Results strategic direction and business success. In Planning for Results, current and future trends are examined in terms of how they may affect business. Strategic goals and operational results are developed to best manage the anticipated challenges. Results are projected based on demand and internal capacity. Each departmental strategic plan includes three key strategic elements: Environmental Assessment and Issue Statements, a Mission Statement, and Strategic Goals. Operationally, departmental strategic plans organize how the department will deliver results into three levels: Services, Activity, and Program. Services describe the deliverables that the customer receives and, as such, are quantifiable. An activity is a set of services grouped together around a common output, for a common purpose or result. Sets of activities that have a common purpose or result are then grouped into programs. Programs provide operational and performance information for strategic decision-making. The chart below graphically depicts the strategic planning process. Maricopa County Developing the Strategic Plan Environmental Assessment Service Service Service Service Service Common Purpose Service Service Service Service Service Common Purpose Service Service Service Service Service Common Purpose Service Service Service Service Service Common Purpose = Activity A Purpose Statement = Activity B Purpose Statement = Activity C Purpose Statement = Activity D Purpose Statement = Activity E Purpose Statement Performance Measures - Result - Output - Demand - Efficiency Key Result A Performance Measure Performance Measures - Result - Output - Demand - Efficiency Key Result B Performance Measure Performance Measures - Result - Output - Demand - Efficiency Key Result C Performance Measure Performance Measures - Result - Output - Demand - Efficiency Key Result D Performance Measure Performance Measures - Result - Output - Demand - Efficiency Key Result E Performance Measure Issue Statements Common Purpose = Program Purpose Statement Result = Accomplishment of - Key Result A - Key Result B - Key Result C Common Purpose = Program Purpose Statement MISSION / VISION Common Purpose STRATEGIC GOALS Service Service Service Service Service Result = Accomplishment of - Key Result D - Key Result E Defining levels of operation in this manner makes it possible to demonstrate how each level contributes to results at higher levels, creating an aligned organization. The following table depicts this alignment strategy: 383 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing For Results ALIGNMENT BY ACTIVITY Strategic Plan Element Result Maricopa County Vision Maricopa County Mission Department Vision Department Mission Department Strategic Goals Program Program Purpose Statement Key Result(s) Activity Activity Purpose Statement Services that comprise the Activity Activity Performance Measures Results Outputs Demand Efficiency Activities and programs have a purpose statement that readily identifies the customer and the intended results for that customer. Managers are thereby able to make day-to-day decisions about resource allocation and service improvements in ways that align with the next higher level of results and ultimately ensure alignment with the department’s mission and goals. Budgeting for Results Maricopa County is committed to developing a budget system that provides financial and performance information to help decision-makers make informed business decisions that achieve results. The County uses the operational structure developed in the strategic plan to structure financial planning and reporting for each department/agency. This ensures that the budget is driven by Board policy and customer needs. Integrating Budgeting for Results with strategic planning is critical to creating an integrated management system where financial resources, policy, department operations, and County staff are all aligned to achieve results. Budgeting for Results is linked to and informed by performance measurements. Budgets are developed to provide resources to achieve desired levels of output to meet anticipated service demand. The expected output is directed to achieve desired measurable results. Delivering Services & Collecting Data Based on available resources established through the budgeting process, departments then deliver services and collect data about their performance. The financial cost accounting system parallels the Programs, Activities and Services (PAS) delineated within each department’s strategic plan. This allows departments to collect expenditure and revenue data associated with their Services, Activities and Programs. Along with collection of financial information, or inputs, departments also collect non-financial performance data related to demand, output, and results. Input data, or cost, is combined with output data to measure efficiency. Reporting Results Maricopa County is accountable to its residents by communicating what it does or does not achieve. The strategic plans, and the performance measures included within the plans, provide information about results that are meaningful both to employees and the public. During the planning process, departments develop a family of performance measures for each Activity. Each Activity includes at least one of each of the following performance measurements: Result: The impact or benefit customers receive from the Activity; expressed as a percentage or rate. 384 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing For Results Output: The number of units of service delivered or products produced for the customer; expressed as a number. Demand: The number of total units of service or product demanded or needed by the customer; expressed as a number. Efficiency: The average Activity cost per Output or Result; expressed as a dollar cost or man-hours expended. Countywide, on a quarterly basis, departments report performance measure information via the Managing for Results on-line database. This strategy provides an efficient and timely vehicle to ensure that data is complete or to identify incomplete reporting. In addition to specialized performance data created by individual departments, the Administrative Services Program provides standardized performance data on a variety of internal administrative and support services. This comprehensive, standardized Program is included within each departmental plan and ensures consistent data collection, measurement, and reporting of key administrative functions, including human resources, risk management, budgeting, financial services, procurement, and the office of the director/elected official Activities. Through the quarterly web-based reporting, performance data can be viewed on an individual department basis and consolidated to obtain countywide results, outputs, demands and efficiencies. Individual departments may also use the data to benchmark their results against other County departments and agencies. Each department’s strategic plan can be viewed at http://www.maricopa.gov/cio/mfr/changeYear.asp. Evaluating Results The integrity of the Managing for Results process and the information produced by the planning and budgeting systems are critical to the County’s efforts in Managing for Results and in sustaining public support. Maricopa County is committed to a management system founded on accurate information. The Maricopa County Internal Audit Department has established specific procedures to ensure that department performance information is sufficiently complete, accurate, valid and consistent. Performance audits provide assurance that reported data can be relied upon for decision-making purposes. In addition, taxpayers and other organizations are interested in determining the effectiveness of results produced by governments. One well-known evaluation of governments is the Government Performance Project (GPP). The GPP is a national project conducted by the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University in partnership with Governing magazine. The study collects, evaluates, and compares information about how well governmental jurisdictions are managed in five key areas: financial management, human resources, information technology, capital management, and managing for results. The specific criteria evaluated within the managing for results section of the study included: • Does the government engage in results-oriented strategic planning in which strategic objectives are identified and provide a clear purpose; government leadership effectively communicates objectives to employees; government plans are responsive to input from citizens and other stakeholders including employees; agency plans are coordinated with central government plans? • Does the government develop indicators and evaluative data that can measure progress toward results and accomplishments and does it take steps to ensure that these data are valid and accurate? • Do leaders and managers use results data for policymaking, budgeting, management and evaluation of progress? • Are there organizations within the government whose responsibility it is to evaluate programs or agencies, and are their conclusions utilized? • Does government communicate the results of its activities to stakeholders? Since the time of the project’s initiation in 1996, four studies have been conducted at the county, state, and city level. In 2001, Maricopa County was selected as one of 40 leading counties to participate in the project. The comparative results of the study were published in a special issue of Governing in February 2002. Maricopa 385 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing For Results County was identified as one of the best-run counties in the country and was one of only two counties in the nation to receive the highest overall scores of “A-“. One of the most powerful tools available to high-performing organizations is the employee performance management system. Maricopa County uses this system to make it possible for employees to see how they contribute at operational, departmental and corporate levels. More information about the Maricopa County Employee Performance Management can be found at: http://ebc.maricopa.gov/management/PMP_site/default.asp. Contributions to the achievement of departmental strategic goals and performance measures are the cornerstones of Maricopa County’s employee performance management and evaluation system. The Managing for Results process strengthens the alignment to the County’s strategic goals with the department’s strategic goals. This alignment, in turn, directly links to the performance expectations of each employee. Employee performance ratings are based on the employee’s contributions to the department’s performance results. Decision Making Based on the validated performance information gathered, decisions can be made more logically and rationally. Having supportable data allows the County to make decisions about resource allocation adjustments based on changes in demand or service delivery. If performance targets are not met, the County has information to decide if those targets were set appropriately or if there is a need for operation or process improvements. In July of 2001, Maricopa County implemented an enhanced Board agenda process, aligning it with the County’s Managing for Results (MFR) initiative. This process mandates that departments include performance-related information from their strategic plan within each agenda item being presented for Board approval. This allows the Board to use performance information to help make fact-based decisions and know what projected results are to be achieved. Implementation of this enhanced process further aligned the actions of the Board with Managing for Results. Decision making at all levels of the County organization has become results-based. Managing for Results and the information contained in each department’s strategic plan are used on a daily basis to help County managers make decisions. Most Maricopa County employees use MfR as part of their every workday lives. It is embedded in nearly all of our processes. The chart below shows many of the ways the County uses MfR information. Program Revenue Agenda Processing Employee Evaluations Cost Accounting (Advantage) Budget Request Employee Performance Plans Managing For Results Payroll Personnel Additions Purchase Orders 386 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing For Results We must plan ahead to make the best possible business decisions concerning future use of our limited resources. Good decisions produce results that make a difference in people’s lives and give taxpayers value for their money. In order to make the best business decisions, citizens and County government need the highest quality of performance information available. Department strategic plans provide essential information for making policy and budget decisions that produce a high return on taxpayer dollars. 387 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Managing For Results 388 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Financial Forecast Executive Summary Since 1994, the Maricopa County Office of Management and Budget has developed a financial forecast to assist in both short and long range financial planning. The FY 2004-05 version forecasts revenues, expenditures and ending fund balances for five years, beginning with the current fiscal year. Following is a summary and detailed narrative description of the assumptions used in this forecast. Two forecast scenarios are developed, “Most Likely” and “Pessimistic” Schedules for the “Most Likely” are included for the following major funds: • General Fund • Transportation - Operating and Capital Projects • Flood Control District - Operating and Capital Projects • Library District - Operating • Detention (Jail Excise Tax) Fund – Operating and Capital Projects “Pessimistic” versions of these schedules are not published in this document, but may be provided on request. General Assumptions This forecast provides a conservative estimate of the County’s fiscal condition through the next five years given realistic economic forecasts, current Board policies and existing laws. The forecast does not incorporate anticipated policy changes, spending priorities, or proposed new revenue sources. The forecast is based on the following assumptions: • The Maricopa Integrated Health System (MIHS) will transform to a Special Health Care District on January 1, 2005. The voters of Maricopa County approved this district on November 4, 2003. • Extension of the Jail Excise Tax, which was approved by the voters of Maricopa County in the November 2002 election. The tax will fund the operating costs of the new jail and juvenile detention facilities. • General Fund surpluses, if any, will be reserved to repay debt used to complete the current capital improvement program (CIP) for general government facilities and designated for budget stabilization purposes. No further capital improvements or debt issues are assumed in the forecast. Overall Fiscal Position The overall forecast is based on econometric forecasts of major revenues and demographic/economic cost drivers developed for Maricopa County by the consulting firm of Elliott D. Pollack and Company. In keeping with conservative planning practices, forecast information is provided to the County under both “most likely” and “pessimistic” scenarios; a “high” scenario is not considered. The key issues in the latest forecast update are similar to those of last year: the jail and juvenile detention program, the impact of escalating costs for indigent health care, funding requirements for the CIP, and the ongoing impact of the new responsibilities shifted to the County from the State of Arizona. The current forecast is similar to last year’s, as both were predicated upon a slow but steady economic recovery, the continuation of constraints placed on operating expenditures during fiscal years 2002-03 and 2003-04, the approval of the Jail Tax Extension, and the creation of a Special Health Care District. While the Most Likely scenario indicates that the General Fund will remain relatively healthy throughout this forecast period, the Detention Fund is forecasted to have operating deficits through FY 2006-07. The Pessimistic scenario indicates that expenditures will exceed revenues in the General Fund beginning in Fiscal Year 2007-08. In the Most Likely scenario, annual General Fund revenue growth averages at approximately 4.9% after FY 2005-06, while expenditures and fund transfers increase by the same amount over the same period. In the Pessimistic scenario, 389 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast General Fund revenue growth rates are lower, averaging just under 4.1% each year, while expenditure increases are higher, creating operating deficits that reach over $84 million by Year 5. The Most Likely scenario indicates that the Criminal Justice Facility Capital Plan will require short-term borrowing to bridge a temporary funding gap beginning in Fiscal Year 2003-04. The scenario assumes the short-term debt will continue through the entire 5 year period. Revenue The Board of Supervisors reduced the FY 2004-05 combined property tax rate by $0.07 from the prior year’s level, and the forecast assumes future reductions in the combined rates for the Primary, Debt Service, Flood Control District, and Library District levies. The primary rate is held at the FY 2003-04 level in FY 2004-05 and FY 2005-06, but is projected to naturally decline beginning in FY 2006-07. The Debt Service levy of $0.07 was eliminated entirely, as the voter-approved General Obligation bonds were fully repaid in FY 2003-04. The Library District and Flood Control District rates were held flat through the forecast horizon. The forecast continues to predict slower growth in primary net assessed value; assessed value growth due to market changes and new construction are projected to subside to lower levels after a drop in FY 2005-06 due to the delayed impact of the 2001-2002 recession. Estimated growth rates are conservative; market and growth estimates are based on local historical trends. However, assessed value could very well experience lower or no growth if the State Legislature makes further changes in the property tax system. Forecasts of other revenue sources are based on economic forecasts and historical trends. The forecast continues General Fund State Shared Sales Tax withholding at FY 2004-05 levels. Expenditures Expenditure projections include relatively small increases in the cost of existing programs, plus estimated annual increases in staffing levels consistent with population growth. Projections include funding for performance-based pay increases averaging 4.0% in FY 2004-05. Funding for performance pay increases is included in subsequent years commensurate with projected inflation. The forecast assumes biennial increases to the employer contribution rates for all retirement plans beginning in FY 2005-06. Major maintenance for current facilities continues through the end of the forecast period. County contributions to the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) and the Arizona LongTerm Care System (ALTCS) are projected to increase in line with State forecasted growth. The forecast assumes that the County will continue to be required to pay for the full impact of increases in the non-Federal portion of ALTCS, as well as 100% of the cost of restoration to competency costs, both of which resulted from cost-shifts in the State’s FY 2002-03 and FY 2003-04 budgets. Revenue Assumption Detail Net Assessed Value: Net assessed value includes: • locally assessed real property and improvements, • secured and unsecured personal property, and • centrally assessed real property and improvements The assessed value of each of these elements changes from year to year due to market trends, legislative changes and addition of new taxable property. For purposes of this forecast, each component of change was projected separately for each category of property. Market and growth estimates are based on historical trends; the impacts of legislative changes are also factored in where they are known. The forecasts should be considered conservative. 390 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Penalties and Interest: The base forecast assumes that revenue from this source will remain at current levels relative to property tax collections. Licenses and Permits: Overall, license and permit revenue is forecast to grow in line with the Consumer Price Index. General Fund license and permit revenue sources include liquor licenses, fiber optic franchise permits, and permits for peddlers and pawnbrokers. Intergovernmental Revenue (Excluding State Shared Sales Tax and Vehicle License Tax): Intergovernmental revenue is projected to grow in line with inflation; where appropriate, population growth is also considered. The major sources of intergovernmental revenue are Sheriff’s Office Patrol Service reimbursements, election reimbursements, and Justice of the Peace salary reimbursements. Election reimbursements are adjusted to coincide with the timing of primary and general elections. State Shared Sales Taxes: Based on econometric forecasts, growth in state shared sales tax revenue is expected to grow between 4.5% to 5.6% annually, depending on the forecast scenario. State Shared Vehicle License Taxes: Vehicle License Tax (VLT) revenue grew rapidly in prior years due to biennial registration and the strong economy, and remained strong through FY 2003-04 due to special financing incentives. Though new vehicles sales were projected to slow in both FY 2002-03 and FY 2003-04, this did not occur. Both VLT forecast scenarios assume continued growth, ranging from 4.0% to 7.0% annually, depending on the forecast scenario. Because the existing stock of vehicles continually depreciates, growth in VLT is dependent on sales of new vehicles and importation of existing vehicles from out of state by new residents. Movements to cut or eliminate VLT by the State Legislature could reduce the amount of revenue to Maricopa County. Charges for Services: Major sources of charges for services are recording fees, court fees, and tax sale fees. Most charges for service are expected to increase in line with County population growth. Fines and Forfeits: General Fund fine and forfeit revenue is primarily from Justice Court traffic fines. Fines are expected to grow in line with County population growth. The forecast assumes no change in fine rates. Patient Revenue: Patient charges collected in the General Fund consist of partial reimbursements by County residual long-term care patients for their cost of care. These revenues are projected to decline gradually in line with expenditures for residual long-term care, which are decreasing as the capped patient population decreases. Interest Earnings: Interest Earnings are forecasted proportionate to recent historical interest earnings relative to total revenue and fund balances. Miscellaneous Revenue: Major sources of miscellaneous revenue include Security Building lease revenue from Non-County organizations, Recorder fees for micro-graphics and Assessor Map and Copy fees. The forecast assumes that the County will phase out Non-County Security Building leases by FY 2006-07. The forecast assumes no change in current miscellaneous fee rates. Sale of Fixed Assets: No major property liquidations are anticipated through the forecast period. No revenue is projected through the forecast period. Operating Transfers-In: Operating transfers-in represent General Fund Departments’ central service cost allocation, along with reimbursement from the Maricopa Integrated Health System for Disproportionate Share withholding. FY 2004-05 includes a one-time transfer in from capital projects funds. The forecast assumes that Central Service transfers-in will increase with inflation. Expenditure Assumption Detail Wages & Salaries: Wages and salaries include the performance pay increases of 4.0% in FY 2004-05. Future years’ wages and salaries are projected to increase at the anticipated rates of inflation and population growth. Employee Benefits: Fiscal Year 2004-05 forecasted benefit costs are predicated upon known increases in several retirement plans associated with legal and law enforcement staff (non-ASRS). Biennial increases to all retirement plans are assumed through the remaining forecast period. The forecast also predicts the continuing rise in employee health and dental insurance costs. 391 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Supplies and Services: Supplies and services are projected to increase at the anticipated rates of inflation and population growth. Capital Outlay: Capital outlay expenditures are projected to increase at the anticipated rates of inflation and population growth. General Government: General Government is presented as a separate item because it is comprised of many program elements that must be projected individually. These programs include the following: • General Contingency - the FY 2004-05 budget of approximately $25 million increases each year in line with increases in the overall General Fund budget. • Major maintenance for current facilities continues through the end of the forecast period. • Vehicle Replacement - replacement of vehicles operated by General Fund departments is projected to increase with inflation and population growth through the forecast period. Jail/Juvenile Detention Maintenance of Effort: The General Fund contribution is projected to continue at the required statutory base through the forecast period. The tax revenue combined with the General Fund Maintenance of Effort is not forecasted to fully cover existing and future detention facility operating costs in FY 2005-06 and FY 2006-07. The forecast assumes that new facility operations will be phased on over several years. Election Costs: The incremental cost of administering primary and general elections is forecasted based on a four year recurring cycle. Health Care Mandates: Health Care Mandates include a variety of mandated and Board-sponsored health care related costs: the Arnold v. San Court Order requirements for treatment of the seriously mentally ill, an intergovernmental agreement for general mental health assistance, and the Long Term Care Residual program. The Arnold v. Sarn Court Order forecast includes anticipated medical inflation and an additional 2% inflation to account for a possible change in the pharmaceuticals weighting in future Intergovernmental Agreement formulae. For certain programs in Health Care Mandates, no growth is projected, while costs for some programs are projected to increase based on population growth and medical inflation. The forecast assumes continuation of the requirement for County payments to the Arizona State Hospital for 100% of costs or restoration of mental competency of criminal defendants. AHCCCS/ALTCS Contributions: Over the next 5 years, the County’s contribution to AHCCCS and ALTCS are projected to increase in line with State forecasted growth. The forecast assumes that the County will continue to cover the full impact of increases in the non-federal portion of the ALTCS program. Capital Projects Capital Project expenditures are forecasted based on the current approved Five-Year Capital Improvement Program. 392 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast General Fund Forecast Adopted FY 2004-05 Most Likely Sources of Funds: Revenue Property Taxes Tax Penalties & Interest Licenses & Permits Other Intergovernmental Payments in Lieu of Taxes State Shared Sales Tax State Shared Vehicle License Tax Other Charges for Services Patient Service Revenue Fines & Forfeits Interest Earnings Miscellaneous Revenue Gain On Fixed Assets Total Revenue Net Growth Rate Fund Transfers-In Disproportionate Share Match Central Service Allocation Transfers from Capital Total Transfers In Total Sources Net Growth Rate Uses of Funds: Expenditures: Personal Services Supplies & Services Capital Outlay General Government AHCCCS/ALTCS Contributions Transfer Out to Detention Fund Other Mandated Health Care Disproportionate Share Match Total Uses Net Growth Rate Projected Surplus/Deficit: Percent of Total Expenditures Fund Balance: Beginning Unreserved Balance Designation for Cash Flow Designation for Budget Stabilization Designation for Capital Projects Unreserved/Undesignated Balance Net Surplus/Deficit Appropriated Fund Balance Ending Unres./Undesig. Fund Bal. Ending Unreserved Fund Balance $ $ $ $ 2 FY 2005-06 339,882,099 $ 10,857,480 1,463,436 8,594,302 6,929,684 374,939,056 118,057,605 21,688,915 52,848 12,208,033 2,417,347 5,822,611 902,913,416 $ 5.36% 82,972,500 9,955,777 40,571,453 133,499,730 $ $ 3 FY 2006-07 365,391,667 $ 12,958,000 1,500,869 7,466,773 8,503,835 411,417,213 127,876,978 31,022,332 39,636 12,609,200 3,455,351 3,056,291 985,298,146 $ 9.12% 82,972,500 10,200,000 93,172,500 $ $ 4 FY 2007-08 5 FY 2008-09 373,414,669 $ 13,931,000 1,538,938 9,296,773 8,500,598 434,456,577 136,828,367 33,132,714 29,066 12,987,300 3,614,146 2,848,411 1,030,578,559 $ 4.60% 394,409,421 $ 14,237,000 1,577,863 9,970,773 8,551,378 458,786,145 146,406,352 35,473,119 15,854 13,363,800 3,819,910 2,640,746 1,089,252,362 $ 5.69% 82,972,500 10,460,000 93,432,500 82,972,500 10,720,000 93,692,500 $ $ $ $ 403,614,900 15,037,000 1,617,773 9,802,673 8,558,603 484,478,170 156,654,797 38,087,260 13,751,100 3,991,960 2,718,409 1,138,312,644 4.50% 82,972,500 10,990,000 93,962,500 $ 1,036,413,146 $ 7.35% 1,078,470,646 $ 4.06% 1,124,011,059 $ 4.22% 1,182,944,862 $ 5.24% 1,232,275,144 4.17% $ 320,420,925 $ 67,337,927 2,764,001 124,676,609 171,351,085 133,176,891 66,806,400 82,972,500 969,506,338 $ 13.07% 343,209,294 $ 66,482,965 2,926,417 103,595,704 180,402,700 145,724,930 49,804,760 82,972,500 975,119,270 $ 0.58% 365,640,367 $ 73,833,331 3,089,565 105,574,551 189,817,003 155,946,676 52,388,576 82,972,500 1,029,262,569 $ 5.55% 387,701,186 $ 76,573,898 3,258,642 109,588,599 199,841,045 161,344,619 55,153,554 82,972,500 1,076,434,043 $ 4.58% 410,701,148 82,129,966 3,436,971 113,900,367 210,566,769 165,378,234 58,093,305 82,972,500 1,127,179,260 4.71% 66,906,808 $ 6.90% 103,351,376 $ 10.60% 94,748,490 $ 9.21% 106,510,819 $ 9.89% 105,095,884 9.32% $ $ $ $ $ $ 289,627,904 (80,619,104) (74,226,339) (5,000,000) 129,782,461 66,906,808 (196,689,269) 159,845,443 $ $ $ $ 159,845,443 (86,700,000) (80,646,819) (7,501,376) 103,351,376 (95,850,000) 167,346,819 393 $ $ $ $ 167,346,819 (88,600,000) (80,545,309) (1,798,490) 94,748,490 (92,950,000) 169,145,309 $ $ $ $ 169,145,309 (93,600,000) (89,356,128) (13,810,819) 106,510,819 (92,700,000) 182,956,128 $ $ $ $ 182,956,128 (95,800,000) (100,052,012) (12,895,884) 105,095,884 (92,200,000) 195,852,012 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Detention Fund – Operations Forecast Adopted FY 2004-05 2 FY 2005-06 3 FY 2006-07 4 FY 2007-08 5 FY 2008-09 OPERATIONS (Fund 255) Most Likely Sources of Funds Revenues: Jail Excise Tax Jail Per Diem & Miscellaneous Charges for Services Interest Income Total Revenues $ $ 123,243,405 23,025,088 9,123 37,516 146,315,132 $ $ 130,145,036 23,533,794 9,351 20,972 153,709,153 $ $ 137,433,158 24,099,275 9,584 15,266 161,557,283 $ 145,129,415 24,701,757 9,824 11,981 169,852,976 133,176,891 133,176,891 266,949,566 $ $ $ 145,724,930 145,724,930 292,040,062 $ $ $ 155,946,676 155,946,676 309,655,829 $ $ $ 161,344,619 161,344,619 322,901,902 $ $ $ 165,378,234 165,378,234 335,231,210 $ $ 145,232,422 38,617,399 1,289,653 185,139,474 $ $ 151,207,660 39,580,453 1,321,815 192,109,928 $ $ 162,365,504 41,584,213 1,388,732 205,338,449 $ $ 156,621,294 40,569,964 1,354,860 198,546,118 $ 166,775,365 42,623,819 1,423,450 210,822,634 Operating Expenditures - New Facilities (Unallocated) $ Subtotal - New Facilities 16,544,838 $ 25,184,291 $ 27,499,291 $ 28,324,270 $ 29,173,998 Integ. Criminal Justice Info. System $ 1,691,380 $ 2,620,168 $ 2,681,516 $ 1,663,542 $ 1,691,675 Non-Departmental/Contingencies (Includes Major Maintenance) Total Operating Expenditures $ 25,823,091 $ 55,837,646 $ 59,410,965 $ 64,903,858 $ 67,288,417 $ 229,198,783 $ 275,752,033 $ 288,137,891 $ 300,230,118 $ 308,976,724 Operating Surplus/(Deficit) $ 37,750,783 $ 16,288,029 $ 21,517,938 $ 22,671,784 $ 26,254,486 $ $ $ 1,676,638 1,676,638 $ $ 4,503,094 1,849,542 6,352,636 $ $ 3,744,101 3,744,101 Appropriated Fund Balance Sub-Total Non-Recurring $ $ 47,446,851 51,190,952 $ $ 14,550,000 20,902,636 $ $ 14,750,000 16,426,638 $ $ 14,506,000 14,506,000 $ $ 14,769,000 14,769,000 Transfer to Detention Capital Projects $ 47,591,538 $ $ 7,226,562 $ 11,485,486 Total Non-Operating Expenditures $ 98,782,490 $ 20,902,636 $ 16,426,638 $ 21,732,562 $ 26,254,486 Total Expenditures (Operating Plus Non-Operating) $ 327,981,273 $ 296,654,669 $ 304,564,529 $ 321,962,680 $ 335,231,210 Total Projected Surplus/Deficit (Operating Plus Non-Operating) $ (61,031,707) $ (4,614,607) $ 5,091,300 $ 939,222 $ - $ 59,615,792 $ (61,031,707) (1,415,915) $ (1,415,915) $ (4,614,607) (6,030,522) $ (939,222) $ 939,222 $ - Fund Transfers In: Base Maintenance of Effort Total Transfers In Total sources $ $ $ 112,421,733 21,232,042 8,900 110,000 133,772,675 $ $ $ $ Uses of Funds: Operating Expenditures Personal Services Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Subtotal - Current Operations Non-Recurring Expenditures ICJIS - Phase I ICJIS - Phase II Subtotal ICJIS Non-Recurring Fund Balance: Beginning Fund Balance Projected Surplus/Deficit Ending Fund Balance $ 394 - $ - $ (6,030,522) $ 5,091,300 (939,222) $ - $ $ - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Detention Fund – Capital Projects Forecast Adopted FY 2004-05 2 FY 2005-06 3 FY 2006-07 4 FY 2007-08 5 FY 2008-09 CAPITAL PROJECTS (Fund 455) Most Likely Sources of Funds: Transfer-In from Detention Operating Fund Total Sources $ $ 47,591,538 47,591,538 $ $ - $ $ - $ $ Uses of Funds $ 40,162,409 $ - $ - $ Projected Surplus/Deficit: $ 7,429,129 $ - $ - $ Unreserved Fund Balance: Beginning Balance Net Surplus/Deficit Ending Balance $ $ (42,448,767) $ 7,429,129 (35,019,638) $ 395 (35,019,638) $ (35,019,638) $ (35,019,638) $ (35,019,638) $ 7,226,562 7,226,562 7,226,562 $ $ $ $ (35,019,638) $ 7,226,562 (27,793,076) $ 11,485,486 11,485,486 11,485,486 (27,793,076) 11,485,486 (16,307,590) Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Transportation Forecast – Operations and Capital Projects Forecast Adopted FY 2004-05 2 FY 2005-06 3 FY 2006-07 4 FY 2007-08 5 FY 2008-09 OPERATIONS (FUND 232) Most Likely Sources of Funds: Revenue Licenses & Permits Other Intergovernmental State Shared Highway User Rev. State Shared Vehicle License Taxes Interest Earnings Miscellaneous Revenue Gain on Fixed Assets Total Sources Net Growth Rate Uses of Funds: Expenditures Personal Services Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Net Growth Rate $ $ $ $ 1,700,000 $ 132,700 88,073,124 8,000,000 480,155 71,125 200,000 98,657,104 $ 1.08% 1,800,003 $ 136,018 91,965,534 8,560,000 432,929 72,903 205,000 103,172,386 $ 4.58% 1,900,353 $ 139,418 96,177,165 9,159,200 453,668 74,726 210,125 108,114,654 $ 4.79% 2,004,349 $ 142,903 100,311,502 9,800,344 474,274 76,594 215,378 113,025,344 $ 4.54% 2,114,037 146,476 104,863,499 10,486,368 496,854 78,509 220,763 118,406,506 4.76% 20,606,006 $ 26,585,207 4,143,829 51,335,042 $ 10.92% 21,965,083 $ 23,066,722 4,247,425 49,279,229 $ -4.00% 22,902,233 $ 24,352,692 4,353,610 51,608,535 $ 4.73% 24,097,252 $ 25,685,393 4,462,451 54,245,095 $ 5.11% 25,113,942 27,091,026 4,574,012 56,778,979 4.67% $ 1,373,637 52,519,519 53,893,157 $ 1,474,530 55,031,590 56,506,119 $ 1,588,606 57,191,643 58,780,249 $ 1,704,383 59,923,144 61,627,527 $ 103,172,386 $ 108,114,654 $ 113,025,344 $ 118,406,506 Fund Transfers Out Gen. Fund-Central Service Alloc. Debt Service Allocation Capital Projects Fund Total Transfers Out $ 1,396,041 61,695,868 63,091,909 Total Uses $ 114,426,951 Projected Surplus/Deficit: $ (15,769,847) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 15,769,847 $ (15,769,847) $ - $ - $ - $ - Fund Balance: Beginning Unreserved Balance Net Surplus/Deficit Ending Balance $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ CAPITAL PROJECTS (FUND 234) Most Likely Sources of Funds: Revenue Fund Transfers In Total Sources Uses of Funds: Fund Balance: Beginning Unreserved Balance Sources Less Uses Ending Unreserved Fund Balance $ $ 21,445,798 61,695,868 83,141,666 $ $ $ $ $ 9,062,360 52,519,519 61,581,879 77,959,051 $ 77,934,523 16,388,770 5,182,615 21,571,385 $ $ $ $ 735,250 55,031,590 55,766,840 $ 71,167,000 21,571,385 $ (16,352,644) 5,218,741 $ 396 $ $ 2,942,100 57,191,643 60,133,743 $ 57,000 59,923,144 59,980,144 $ 58,278,000 $ 61,873,000 5,218,741 $ (15,400,160) (10,181,419) $ $ (10,181,419) $ 1,855,743 (8,325,676) $ (8,325,676) (1,892,856) (10,218,533) Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Flood Control District – Operations Forecast Adopted FY 2004-05 2 FY 2005-06 3 FY 2006-07 4 FY 2007-08 5 FY 2008-09 OPERATIONS (FUND 991) Most Likely Sources of Funds: Revenue Property Taxes Licenses & Permits Other Intergovernmental Payments in Lieu of Taxes Interest Earnings Miscellaneous Total Sources Net Growth Rate 56,334,141 $ 2,101,404 19,557,000 137,612 400,000 139,481 78,669,638 $ 11.23% 60,016,607 $ 1,891,264 20,045,925 166,705 367,449 142,968 82,630,917 $ 5.04% 62,968,848 $ 1,946,110 20,547,073 170,873 384,370 146,542 86,163,817 $ 4.28% 67,920,548 $ 2,002,547 21,060,750 175,145 408,295 150,206 91,717,491 $ 6.45% 71,097,004 2,060,621 21,587,269 179,523 426,909 153,961 95,505,287 4.13% 10,968,350 $ 14,777,132 879,391 26,624,873 $ 20% 11,694,802 $ 15,646,397 931,121 28,272,320 $ 6% 12,187,643 $ 16,518,683 983,031 29,689,358 $ 5% 12,821,768 $ 17,422,668 1,036,828 31,281,264 $ 5% 13,355,922 18,376,124 1,093,568 32,825,614 5% $ $ 1,178,770 58,257,458 59,436,228 $ $ 1,091,495 54,782,964 55,874,459 $ $ 1,014,048 52,525,021 53,539,069 $ $ 931,667 63,446,899 64,378,566 $ 1,267,890 60,711,784 61,979,673 Total Uses $ 91,003,439 $ 81,811,388 $ 85,563,817 $ 90,717,491 $ 94,805,287 Projected Surplus/(Deficit): $ (12,333,801) $ 819,529 $ 600,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 700,000 $ 24,214,272 (11,880,471) 12,333,801 (12,333,801) 11,880,471 $ 13,300,000 (14,300,000) (1,000,000) 1,000,000 14,300,000 $ Uses of Funds: Expenditures: Personal Services Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Fund Transfers Out Gen. Fund-Central Service Alloc. Capital Projects Fund Total Transfers Out Fund Balance: Beginning Unreserved Balance Fund Balance Designations Unreserved/Undesignated Balance Net Surplus/Deficit Ending Unres./Undesig. Fund Bal. Ending Unreserved Fund Balance $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 397 11,880,471 (12,700,000) (819,529) 819,529 12,700,000 $ $ $ $ 12,700,000 (13,300,000) (600,000) 600,000 13,300,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ 14,300,000 (15,000,000) (700,000) 700,000 15,000,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Flood Control District – Capital Projects Forecast Adopted FY 2004-05 2 FY 2005-06 3 FY 2006-07 4 FY 2007-08 5 FY 2008-09 CAPITAL PROJECTS (FUND 990) Most Likely Sources of Funds: Revenue Fund Transfers In Total Sources Uses of Funds: Fund Balance: Beginning Unreserved Balance Sources Less Uses Ending Unreserved Fund Balance $ $ $ 63,446,899 63,446,899 $ $ $ $ $ 20,589,481 52,525,021 73,114,502 52,076,503 $ 11,370,396 11,370,396 $ $ 398 $ $ 1,301,481 54,782,964 56,084,445 58,047,000 $ 11,370,396 15,067,502 26,437,898 $ $ $ $ 1,339,481 58,257,458 59,596,939 $ 63,000 60,711,784 60,774,784 55,320,000 $ 55,630,000 $ 52,320,000 26,437,898 764,445 27,202,343 $ 27,202,343 3,966,939 31,169,282 $ 31,169,282 8,454,784 39,624,065 $ $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast Library District Forecast Adopted FY 2004-05 2 FY 2005-06 3 FY 2006-07 4 FY 2007-08 5 FY 2008-09 OPERATIONS (FUND 244) Most Likely Source of Funds: Revenue Property Taxes Other Intergovernmental Payments in Lieu of Taxes Other Charges for Services Fines & Forfeits Interest Earnings Miscellaneous Total Sources Net Growth Rate Uses of Funds: Expenditures Personal Services Supplies & Services Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Net Growth Rate $ 15,664,900 $ 16,763,701 $ 51,925 53,223 187,436 289,525 27,420 28,106 445,000 459,685 77,143 84,241 380,446 389,957 $ 16,834,270 $ 18,068,438 $ 6.17% 7.33% 17,588,945 $ 18,890,931 $ 19,812,862 54,554 55,918 57,315 296,763 304,182 311,787 28,808 29,528 30,267 473,476 487,206 501,335 92,059 103,474 116,518 399,706 409,699 419,941 18,934,311 $ 20,280,938 $ 21,250,026 4.79% 7.11% 4.78% $ 8,808,551 $ 9,134,631 $ 9,379,991 7,594,710 7,784,577 7,979,192 274,889 281,761 288,805 16,678,149 $ 17,200,969 $ 17,647,987 2.60% 3.13% 2.60% 8,124,356 $ 8,578,409 $ 7,228,754 7,409,473 261,643 268,184 $ 15,614,753 $ 16,256,066 $ -0.46% 4.11% Fund Transfers Out Gen. Fund-Central Service Alloc. Total Transfers Out $ $ Total Uses Projected Surplus/Deficit: Fund Balance: Beginning Unreserved Balance Fund Balance Designations Unreserved/Undesignated Balance Net Surplus/Deficit Ending Unres./Undesig. Fund Bal. Ending Unreserved Fund Balance 753,417 753,417 $ $ 792,304 792,304 $ 16,320,796 $ 17,009,482 $ 17,470,453 $ $ 1,058,956 $ $ 2,672,298 (1,500,000) 1,172,298 1,058,956 2,231,254 3,731,254 $ $ $ $ $ 706,043 706,043 $ $ 513,474 2,158,824 (1,443,926) 714,898 513,474 1,228,372 2,672,298 $ $ $ 399 $ $ $ $ $ 837,569 837,569 $ $ 880,819 880,819 $ 18,038,538 $ 18,528,806 1,463,858 $ 2,242,400 $ 3,731,254 (1,600,000) 2,131,254 1,463,858 3,595,111 5,195,111 $ 5,195,111 (1,700,000) 3,495,111 2,242,400 5,737,512 7,437,512 $ $ $ $ 2,721,219 7,437,512 (1,800,000) $ 5,637,512 2,721,219 $ 8,358,731 $ 10,158,731 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Financial Forecast 400 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates Mandates Introduction Maricopa County faces major issues relating to the vast growth in and significant cost of providing mandated services. A significant portion of the County’s budget is committed to satisfying unfunded mandates. Mandated services influence Maricopa County’s strategic planning process, operating policies and financial structure. Mandates, as defined for this study, are functions or services that meet constitutional, statutory or court-ordered requirements from either Federal or State entities. These mandates are generally not funded by the State or Federal government, forcing the County to provide funding. These create expenditures Maricopa County might not otherwise incur. They represent the portion of the County budget over which the Board of Supervisors has little or no discretion. Administrative mandates, as used throughout this document, refers to functions that provide essential support to State or Federally mandated programs, without which, those mandated provisions would either cease to exist, or function in a less than complete capacity. Due to the necessity of administrative mandates in support of mandated services, summary schedules, charts and tables provided within this section consolidate both mandates and administrative mandates. In preparation for the FY 2004-05 budget process, the Office of Management and Budget surveyed every County department in order to update the mandate study performed during FY 2003-04. County departments supplied all of the information contained herein. Mandate financials provided within this document do not include debt service or eliminations. This FY 2004-05 mandate summary section provides the citizens of Maricopa County with a comprehensive understanding of the County’s use of funds while ensuring that mandate compliance is maintained at a minimum service level. Summary mandate study results are presented on the following pages. Individual mandated programs and administrative mandates including their associated costs are located in the Department Summaries section of this Annual Business Strategies document. Please refer to the table of contents to find specific department information. Executive Summary Maricopa County faces a number of challenges to providing services to its citizens. Increased demands in basic services continue to expand as the County’s population increases. Maricopa County remains one of the fastest growing counties in the nation in terms of population, employment and personal income. County efforts to meet ever-growing citizen needs are undermined by the vast growth in and significant cost of providing mandated services, many of which are unfunded. These services include, but are not limited to, the cost of energy, water, land, building and infrastructure services, as well as the number and cost of crimes committed and the cost of health care to its citizens. As demonstrated on the table below, the County’s expenditure growth trend expands at a greater rate than the population increases. Maricopa County Population & Expenditure Growth Comparison Population Expenditures FY 2001 3,194,200 $ 2,031,413,660 FY 2002 3,289,600 $ 2,195,404,280 FY 2003 FY 2004 2.9% 3,386,100 2.8% 3,487,500 7.5% $ 2,533,530,867 13.3% $ 2,506,275,922 FY 2005 2.9% 3,595,700 -1.1% $ 2,585,202,470 3.0% 3.1% As demonstrated in the table on the following page, $1,520,350,096 or 47.8% of the Maricopa County FY 2004-05 budgeted expenditures of $3,183,297,586 (not including debt service of $53,646,320, and eliminations of -$651,741,436) are committed to satisfying mandated services. In addition, $530,463,508 or 16.7% in administrative mandates provides essential support to mandated services. The remaining expenditures of $1,132,483,982 or 35.6% are non-mandate, and a vast majority of these expenditures are associated with the County Hospital 401 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Fund General Fund $ Special Revenue Capital Projects Enterprise Internal Service Total All Funds $ Percent of Administrative Percent of Budget Mandates Budget 25.5% $ 349,700,689 11.0% $ 15.8% 117,256,774 3.7% 6.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 63,506,045 2.0% 47.8% $ 530,463,508 16.7% $ Mandates 812,295,496 501,867,879 206,041,573 145,148 1,520,350,096 NonPercent of Mandates Budget 4,199,422 0.1% 185,123,908 5.8% 53,550,857 1.7% 863,539,079 27.1% 26,070,716 0.8% 1,132,483,982 35.6% The table below breaks-out FY 2004-05 consolidated mandates (i.e., Mandates and Administrative Mandates) by fund as a percent of total mandates. Consolidated General Fund mandates of $1.2 billion represents 56.7% of all mandated expenditures, while Special Revenue, Capital & Internal Services Funds represent 30.2%, 10.0% and 3.1% of mandated expenditures, respectively. FY 2004-05 Consolidated Mandates by Fund Fund General Fund Special Revenue Fund Capital Projects Fund Internal Service Fund Mandates 1,161,996,185 619,124,653 206,041,573 63,651,193 $ $ $ $ Maricopa County FY 2004-05 Budget Mandate Comparison by Fund The chart at right shows the breakout of mandates and non-mandated expenditures by fund in the FY 2004-05 budget. Mandated Expenditures are categorized as Education, Culture & Recreation, General Government, Highways and Streets, Health, Welfare and Sanitation, or Public Safety. There are no mandates that fall under the Culture & Recreation category. The bulk of mandated $1,000 $800 $600 $400 Non-Mandate $200 50% $0 Education General Highway & Government Streets Health, Welfare & Sanitation 19.0% Public Safety Special Revenue Capital Projects Enterprise Internal Services Maricopa County’s FY 2004-05 mandated versus nonmandated expenditures as a percent of the total budget are shown on the chart at left. The expenditures are presented by category and include all funds. 0.3% 0.0% 6.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0% 0.5% 10% 0.1% 20% General Fund expenditures fall in the areas of Public Safety, General Government and Health, Welfare and Sanitation. 4.0% 30% 12.0% 27.8% 30.1% 40% Non-Mandated $1,200 Mandated Vs. Non-Mandated Expenditures as Percent of Budget Mandate Percent of Total Mandates 56.7% 30.2% 10.0% 3.1% Culture & Recreation FY 2004-05 Mandates For All Funds Mandated services benefit residents as well as visitors to Maricopa County by affording a better way of life in a safer environment. Maricopa County’s FY 2004-05 budget, including all funds, is comprised of 64.4% mandated services. The following tables below show budgeted expenditures versus mandated expenditures by expenditure category. 402 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates Mandated Expenditures By Category and Type For All Funds Expenditure Category Education $ General Government Highways & Streets Health, Welfare & Sanitation Public Safety Totals $ Judicial Branch 190,160,370 190,160,370 $ $ Elected Officials 1,984,742 28,609,407 277,379,472 307,973,621 Appointed Departments $ 849,088,359 192,386,002 379,560,575 111,839,318 $ 1,532,874,254 Special Districts $ $ 19,805,359 19,805,359 $ $ Total 1,984,742 877,697,766 192,386,002 379,560,575 599,184,519 2,050,813,604 FY 2004-05 Budgeted Expenditures vs. Mandated Expenditures For All Funds Expenditure Category Education $ Culture & Recreation General Government Highways & Streets Health, Welfare & Sanitation Public Safety Total $ Budget Expenditures FY 2004-05 18,330,538 9,356,833 906,820,910 192,636,002 1,329,907,373 726,245,930 3,183,297,586 Mandated Expenditures FY 2004-05 $ 1,984,742 877,697,766 192,386,002 379,560,575 599,184,519 $ 2,050,813,604 The chart at the right compares actual and projected population growth for the United States, Arizona and Maricopa County. Maricopa County’s population growth continues to expand. Maricopa County’s population grew by nearly 96,500 or 2.9% during 2003 while the state’s population increased more slowly, at 2.7%, and the nation’s population increased by 1.0%. Growth of this magnitude requires additional resources to support additional services. United States Maricopa County Annual Percent Change 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% FY 2004-05 $3,000 In Millions Arizona 3.0% $3,500 $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $500 Budget Expenditures 0.1% 0.0% 42.8% 9.4% 18.5% 29.2% 100.0% 3.5% Maricopa County’s Budgeted Expenditures & Mandated Expenditures – Year over Year $0 % Mandates of Total Mandates Population Growth Comparison As shown below, Maricopa County’s budgeted expenditures increased $116.3 million or 3.7% from FY 2003-04, and mandated expenditures alone increased by $550.5 million or 26.3% over the same period of time. FY 2003-04 % Mandates of Total Expenditures 0.1% 0.0% 27.6% 6.0% 11.9% 18.8% 64.4% Mandate Expenditures 403 0.0% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates FY 2004-05 General Fund Mandates The FY 2004-05 General Fund budget totals $1,166,195,607. General Fund mandates total $1,161,996,185, or 99.6% of the General Fund budget. Maricopa County’s General Fund budgeted expenditures increased $46,620,660 or 4.8% from FY 2003-04, and mandated expenditures increased by $ 235,147,889 or 20.2% over the same period of time. The following tables provide General Fund mandated expenditures by category and type, and a General Fund expenditure and mandate summary: Mandated General Fund Expenditures By Category and Type Expenditure Category Education $ General Government Highways & Streets Health, Welfare & Sanitation Public Safety Totals $ Judicial Branch 118,769,629 118,769,629 Elected Officials 1,984,742 23,001,189 122,596,599 147,582,530 $ $ Appointed Departments $ 504,472,952 333,665,022 57,506,052 $ 895,644,026 Special Districts $ $ - $ $ Total 1,984,742 527,474,141 333,665,022 298,872,280 1,161,996,185 General Fund Expenditure & Mandate Summary FY 2004-05 Budget FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Mandates Judicial Branch $ 118,769,629 $ 118,769,629 Elected Officials 147,582,530 147,582,530 Appointed Departments 899,843,448 895,644,026 Totals $ 1,166,195,607 $ 1,161,996,185 % Variance FY 2004-05 Budget Total Budget Non-Mandated 10.2% $ 12.7% 76.8% 4,199,422 99.6% $ 4,199,422 General Fund mandates of $1.16 billion equate to 44.8% of all funds budgeted for FY 2004-05; and total 57.2% of FY 2004-05 budgeted mandates for all funds. General Fund Mandates Year-Over-Year Comparison Mandated FY 2004-05 General Fund mandated expenditures by major department are shown on the chart at left. 100% $321.1 30% 96.6% 98.0% 98.3% 99.6% FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 10% $45.7 General Fund non-mandated expenditures represent $4.1 million or 0.4% of the FY 2004-05 General Fund budget, as outlined on the table on the following page. Adult Probation $17.3 Facilities Management $50.3 County Attorney $47.4 $61.3 Trial Courts Appropriated Fund Balance $50 0% Sheriff $100 Health Care Mandates 0.4% 20% $195.7 $257.7 $300 General Government 1.7% 60% 40% $0 2.0% 70% 50% $150 3.4% 80% $350 $200 Non-Mandated 90% General Fund Mandated Expenditures by Major Departments $250 % Variance Total Budget 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.4% 404 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates FY 2004-05 General Fund Non-Mandated Expenditures Appropriated Fund Balance General Government Human Services Parks & Recreation $ Total $ 991,074 150,000 1,787,032 1,271,316 4,199,422 General Fund Health, Welfare & Sanitation Mandates FY 2004-05 General Fund Budget Health, Welfare & Sanitation Mandates The largest portion of General Fund mandated activities, not including contingency fund located in General Government and Appropriated Fund Balance, falls under the category of Health, Welfare & Sanitation. $333.6 million or 28.8% of General Fund mandates fall in this category. The only nonmandated, General Fund expenditures in Health, Welfare and Sanitation is Human Services at $1.8 million for FY 2004-05. The breakout of mandates in the FY 2004-05 General Fund budget for Health, Welfare & Sanitation is shown on the chart at left. Mandates 99.5% 100% of all General Fund expenditures in Animal Care & Control, Environmental Services, Medical Examiner, Public Health and Health Care Mandates departments are mandated. 100% of the Human Services General Fund Expenditures are non-mandated. Non-Mandates 0.5% Maricopa County is responsible for the protection of the food and water supplies, the detection and abatement of environmentally transmitted disease and public health nuisances, and programs that control the release of hazardous air pollutants into the atmosphere. Maricopa County is required to provide for the indigent sick and general mental health of its indigent population. The County is mandated to enforce rabies quarantine and animal vaccine requirements. General Fund Public Safety Mandates General Fund Public Safety mandates total $298.9 million or 25.8% of total General Fund mandates. 100% of all General Fund Public Safety expenditures in the FY 2004-05 budget are mandated. These expenditures provide for the safety of Maricopa County citizens while protecting their unalienable rights by providing due process. Maricopa County funds prosecutors, defenders, the Judicial Branch, jails and policing activities, among other Criminal Justice activities. Average Daily Adult Jail Population The departments of Contract Counsel, Emergency Management, Legal Defender, Office of Legal Advocate, Public Defender, Clerk of Superior Court, Constables, County Attorney, Adult Probation, Juvenile Probation, Trial Courts, and the Sheriff’s Office comprise General Fund Public Safety mandated expenditures. 8,566 9,000 8,000 6,520 7,000 6,000 5,503 6,804 6,768 6,660 FY 98 FY 99 7,059 7,557 8,044 5,922 5,000 Maricopa County’s population growth, particularly in the unincorporated areas of the County, impacts public safety expenditures. The chart at right shows the average daily adult jail population in Maricopa County. Since 1991, Maricopa County’s adult jail 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 FY 95 405 FY 96 FY 97 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates population has almost doubled, which has significantly increased mandated Public Safety expenditures. General Fund General Government Mandates Maricopa County General Fund General Government Mandates The General Government category includes a broad range of mandated citizen oriented services. Taxation, elections, property assessment, revenue and expenditure accountability, support and care of persons, and legal proceedings make up the majority of these services. The governing body of the County, the Board of Supervisors, is also a mandated function. $257.70 General Government $195.70 Appropriated Fund Balance Facilities Management Assessor Elections Chief Information Officer $5.21 Treasurer $3.95 Human Resources $2.87 Total Compensation The General Fund County departments that provide General Government mandated services are shown on the chart at right. $17.33 $15.81 $10.49 $2.65 Finance $2.53 Recorder $1.99 Public Fuduciary $1.98 Management & Budget $1.76 County Administrative Officer $1.36 $1.35 The General Government category includes a $1.30 $1.25 department called General Government. The majority $1.04 $0.71 of the General Fund General Government $0.48 expenditures reside in this department. General $0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 Government department expenditures benefit the In Millions County as a whole. Examples of these General Government department expenditures include: Major Maintenance, Debt Service, Outside Legal Counsel, Tax Appeals, and Indigent Burials. Materials Management Call Center Board of Supervisors Internal Audit Communications Clerk of the Board of Supervisors General Fund Education Mandates The Maricopa County Superintendent of Schools is responsible for providing mandated services to the school districts within the County. Maricopa County’s Superintendent of Schools supports Accommodation Schools through a Special School Reserve Fund. Expenses are set aside annually for the establishment and operation of schools in the unincorporated areas of Maricopa County. The department of Superintendent of Schools is the only department within the education category. FY 2004-05 Mandates Excluding the General Fund The rapid population growth in Maricopa County over the past decade continues to place increased demands for services on County government. Excluding the General Fund, all other mandates total $888.8 million. The table below provides a breakout of these mandates. Fund Special Revenue Capital Projects Enterprise Internal Service $ Total $ Mandates 619,124,653 206,041,573 63,651,193 888,817,419 % Budget Non-Mandate 77.0% $ 185,123,908 79.4% 53,550,857 0.0% 863,539,079 70.9% 26,070,716 44.1% $ 1,128,284,560 406 % Budget 23.0% 20.6% 100.0% 29.1% 55.9% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates Mandate Study - Summary Schedules Consolidated Mandates – Including All Funds Consolidated Mandates - Include All Funds by Category Expenditure Category FY 2004-05 Budget Culture & Recreation $ 9,356,833 Education 18,330,538 General Government 906,820,910 Highways & Streets 192,636,002 Health, Welfare & Sanitation 1,329,907,373 Public Safety 726,245,930 Totals $ 3,183,297,586 FY 2004-05 Mandates $ - $ 1,984,742 877,697,766 192,386,002 379,560,575 599,184,519 $ 2,050,813,604 $ $ Variance 9,356,833 16,345,796 29,123,144 250,000 950,346,798 127,061,411 1,132,483,982 % Variance 100.0% 89.2% 3.2% 0.1% 71.5% 17.5% 35.6% Consolidated Mandates - Including All Funds by Department Type Expenditure Type FY 2004-05 Budget Judicial Branch $ 190,160,370 Elected Officials 307,973,621 Appointed Departments 2,522,155,854 Special Districts 163,007,741 Totals $ 3,183,297,586 FY 2004-05 Mandates $ 190,160,370 $ 307,973,621 1,532,874,254 19,805,359 $ 2,050,813,604 $ $ Variance 989,281,600 143,202,382 1,132,483,982 % Variance 0.0% 0.0% 39.2% 87.9% 35.6% Consolidated Mandates - By Fund Type Expenditure Type FY 2004-05 Budget General Fund $ 1,166,195,607 Speical Revenue Fund 804,248,561 Capital Projects 259,592,430 Enterprise 863,539,079 Internal Service Fund 89,721,909 Totals $ 3,183,297,586 FY 2004-05 Mandates $ 1,161,996,185 $ 619,124,653 206,041,573 63,651,193 $ 2,050,813,604 $ 407 $ Variance 4,199,422 185,123,908 53,550,857 863,539,079 26,070,716 1,132,483,982 % Variance 0.4% 23.0% 20.6% 100.0% 29.1% 35.6% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates FY 2004-05 Budgeted Mandates by Department and Fund Department General Fund Special Revenue Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ Internal Service Total Mandates Judicial Branch Adult Probation Juvenile Probation Trial Courts Sub-Total $ Elected Officials Assessor Board of Supervisors Clerk of the Court Constables County Attorney Recorder Sheriff Superintendent of Schools Treasurer Sub-Total $ 15,808,896 1,248,380 23,181,209 1,780,046 50,280,208 1,991,183 47,355,136 1,984,742 3,952,730 147,582,530 Appointed Departments Animal Care & Control $ Appropriated Fund Balance Board of Supervisors Clerk Call Center Chief Information Officer Communications Community Development Contract Counsel Correctional Health County Administrative Officer Elections Emergency Management Environmental Services Equipment Services Facilities Management Finance General Government Health Care Delivery System Health Care Mandates Health Plans Human Recources Human Services Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Internal Audit Legal Advocate Legal Defender Management & Budget Materials Management Medical Examiner Parks & Recreation Planning & Development Public Defender Public Fiduciary Public Health Research & Reporting Risk Management Solid Waste Telecommunications Total Compensation Transportation Sub-Total $ 385,109 195,698,195 478,788 1,298,676 5,208,429 707,968 9,384,406 3,461,426 1,358,665 10,494,469 155,628 1,369,912 17,333,572 2,532,036 257,703,500 321,129,985 2,872,815 1,035,910 6,383,337 7,021,181 1,762,186 1,354,842 4,189,649 31,100,074 1,983,422 6,590,367 2,649,479 895,644,026 Special Districts Flood Control District Library District Stadium District $ 45,668,897 11,832,089 61,268,643 118,769,629 $ $ $ $ $ $ - $ Total Mandates $ 1,161,996,185 Sub-Total $ 13,919,776 41,445,767 15,632,663 70,998,206 6,635,620 12,802,876 5,608,218 134,479,034 159,525,748 8,721,270 95,038,389 37,354,956 1,383,361 21,252,488 5,467,329 53,791,889 5,435,481 16,310 84,403 267,045 7,323,120 2,577,598 12,235,581 3,419,169 114,426,951 368,795,340 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 19,805,359 19,805,359 $ 619,124,653 392,535 392,535 865,343 865,343 158,037 38,746,494 87,920,113 77,959,051 204,783,695 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - $ 206,041,573 - $ $ - $ - $ $ $ - $ $ - $ 46,261 9,751,777 832,015 13,656,435 39,364,705 63,651,193 $ $ $ - $ - $ - $ 63,651,193 $ 59,588,673 53,670,391 76,901,306 190,160,370 15,808,896 1,248,380 29,816,829 1,780,046 63,083,084 7,599,401 182,699,513 1,984,742 3,952,730 307,973,621 9,106,379 290,736,584 478,788 1,298,676 5,208,429 754,229 9,384,406 40,974,419 1,358,665 10,494,469 1,538,989 22,622,400 9,751,777 61,547,395 2,532,036 399,415,502 321,129,985 2,872,815 5,435,481 1,035,910 6,399,647 7,105,584 1,762,186 2,186,857 4,456,694 7,323,120 33,677,672 1,983,422 18,825,948 3,419,169 13,656,435 42,014,184 192,386,002 $ 1,532,874,254 $ $ 19,805,359 19,805,359 $ 2,050,813,604 Departments with the greatest allocation of mandated dollars budgeted include General Government with $399.4 million, Health Care Mandates with $321.1 million, Appropriated Fund Balance with $290.7, the Sheriff’s Office with $182.7 million, Transportation with $192.4 million, and the Trial Courts with $76.9 million. 408 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates 2.0 1.9 192.4 95.3 534.8 599.2 489.8 379.6 372.1 In Millions 877.7 The chart at right compares mandated FY 2003-04 Mandate Expenditure Comparison budgeted expenditures for all funds to those of FY by Category 2004-05, by category. Mandates have increased by 27.2% from FY 2003-04. The largest increase FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 occurred in General Government, followed by Public $1,000 Safety, Highways & Streets, and Health, Welfare & $900 Sanitation. Increases in the General Government $800 mandates were due to a variety of reasons. The $700 $600 General Government department increases were due $500 to setting aside of contingency funds. Increases in $400 Appropriated Fund Balance were primarily due to $300 budgeted reserves for Health Plan losses, Delivery $200 System transfers and property acquisition. Election $100 $0 department increases were due to the presidential Health, Public Safety General Highways & Education election. The increase in Total Compensation is due to Welfare & Government Streets Sanitation the County taking over Health Select. The mandates in Facilities Management decreased due to infrastructure capital projects being completed. Public Safety mandate increases were due to new legal requirements affecting both prosecution and defense and the opening of new detention facilities. FY 2004-05 Mandated Expenditures By Type for All Funds Mandate Type Judicial Branch Elected Officials Appointed Departments Special Districts $ Total $ FY 2004-05 Budget All Funds Mandated Expenditures by Type Total Funds 190,160,370 307,973,621 1,532,874,254 19,805,359 2,050,813,604 The chart at left provides mandated expenditures by type for all funds as a percent of total mandates. Special Districts Judicial Branch 1.0% 9.3% Elected Officials 15.0% Appointed Departments 74.7% 409 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates FY 2004-05 Budget and Mandate Comparison by Category for All Funds Expenditure Category Culture & Recreation Parks & Recreation $ Stadium District Culture & Recreation Total $ Education Superintendent of Schools Library District $ Budget Expenditures 5,774,830 3,582,003 9,356,833 Education Total $ 1,984,742 16,345,796 18,330,538 General Government Appropriated Fund Balance $ Assessor Board of Supervisors Call Center Chief Information Officer Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Communications County Administrative Officer Elections Equipment Services Facilities Management Finance General Government Human Resources Internal Audit Management & Budget Materials Management Public Fuduciary Recorder Research & Reporting Risk Management Telecommunications Total Compensation Treasurer General Government Total $ 291,727,658 15,808,896 1,248,380 1,298,676 5,208,429 478,788 754,229 1,358,665 10,494,469 9,751,777 61,547,395 2,532,036 401,036,856 2,872,815 1,035,910 1,762,186 2,186,857 1,983,422 7,599,401 440,000 26,070,716 13,656,435 42,014,184 3,952,730 906,820,910 Highways & Streets Transportation $ Highways & Streets Total $ Mandated Expenditures $ $ $ $ $ Administrative Mandates - 1,984,742 1,984,742 $ 500,000 15,808,896 1,248,380 1,298,676 478,788 754,229 10,494,469 98,887 38,946,494 270,829,997 35,000 1,983,422 7,599,401 3,952,730 354,029,369 192,636,002 192,636,002 $ $ Health, Welfare & Sanitation Animal Care & Control $ Community Development Environmental Services Health Care Delivery System Health Care Mandates Human Services Maricopa County Health Plans Medical Examiner Public Health Solid Waste Health, Welfare & Sanitation Total $ 9,106,379 16,033,276 22,670,093 474,412,270 321,129,985 39,764,880 388,133,556 4,456,694 49,787,818 4,412,422 1,329,907,373 $ Public Safety Adult Probation $ Clerk of the Superior Court Constables Contract Counsel Correctional Health County Attorney Emergency Management Flood Control District Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Juvenile Probation Legal Advocate Legal Defender Planning & Development Public Defender Sheriff Trial Courts Public Safety Total $ 59,588,673 29,816,829 1,780,046 9,384,406 40,974,419 63,083,084 1,538,989 143,079,942 5,435,481 53,670,391 6,399,647 7,105,584 11,109,948 33,677,672 182,699,513 76,901,306 726,245,930 $ Grand Total $ 3,183,297,586 $ $ $ $ - - $ $ $ $ % Mandates of Total Expenditures 5,774,830 3,582,003 9,356,833 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16,345,796 16,345,796 100.00% 0.00% 10.83% 0.10% 0.00% 0.10% 99.66% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.60% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 96.79% 14.18% 0.77% 0.06% 0.06% 0.25% 0.02% 0.04% 0.07% 0.51% 0.48% 3.00% 0.12% 19.48% 0.14% 0.05% 0.09% 0.11% 0.10% 0.37% 0.00% 0.00% 0.67% 2.05% 0.19% 42.80% $ $ 991,074 1,621,354 440,000 26,070,716 29,123,144 192,386,002 192,386,002 $ $ - $ $ 250,000 250,000 99.87% 99.87% 9.38% 9.38% 9,106,379 22,622,400 317,071,747 4,456,694 16,089,075 3,419,169 372,765,464 $ 4,058,238 2,736,873 6,795,111 $ 16,033,276 47,693 474,412,270 39,764,880 388,133,556 30,961,870 993,253 950,346,798 100.00% 0.00% 99.79% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 37.81% 77.49% 28.54% 0.44% 0.00% 1.10% 0.00% 15.66% 0.00% 0.00% 0.22% 0.92% 0.17% 18.51% $ $ - $ $ 59,588,673 29,816,829 1,780,046 9,384,406 40,974,419 63,083,084 1,538,989 19,805,359 5,435,481 53,670,391 6,399,647 7,105,584 7,323,120 33,677,672 182,699,513 76,901,306 599,184,519 $ 123,274,583 3,786,828 127,061,411 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 13.84% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 65.91% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 82.50% 2.91% 1.45% 0.09% 0.46% 2.00% 3.08% 0.08% 0.97% 0.27% 2.62% 0.31% 0.35% 0.36% 1.64% 8.91% 3.75% 29.22% $ 1,520,350,096 $ 530,463,508 $ 1,132,483,982 64.42% 100.00% 410 $ $ % Mandates of Department Expenditures 290,236,584 5,208,429 1,358,665 9,652,890 22,600,901 2,532,036 128,585,505 2,872,815 1,000,910 1,762,186 2,186,857 13,656,435 42,014,184 523,668,397 $ $ Non-Mandated Expenditures $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates The table below compares year-over-year budgeted expenditures and year-over-year mandated expenditures for all funds. The total FY 2004-05 expenditure budget for all funds increased by 19.1% from FY 2003-04, whereas mandated expenditure increased by 27.2% over the same period of time. Budget Expenditures Expenditure Category FY 2003-04 Culture & Recreation $ 9,262,547 Education 14,435,572 General Government 481,487,692 Highways & Streets 126,095,364 Health, Welfare & Sanitation 1,266,067,070 Public Safety 678,213,132 Totals $ 2,575,561,377 Budget Expenditures FY 2004-05 $ 9,356,833 18,330,538 906,820,910 192,636,002 1,329,907,373 726,245,930 $ 3,183,297,586 411 Mandate % Budget Expenditures Variance FY 2003-04 1.0% $ 21.2% 1,898,675 46.9% 534,756,524 34.5% 95,258,600 4.8% 372,052,367 6.6% 489,779,445 19.1% $ 1,493,745,611 Mandate Expenditures % Mandate FY 2004-05 Variance $ 0.0% 1,984,742 4.3% 877,697,766 39.1% 192,386,002 50.5% 379,560,575 2.0% 599,184,519 18.3% $ 2,050,813,604 27.2% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates General Fund Budgeted Mandates FY 2004-05 By Category and Department Administrative Mandates Mandates Education Superintendent of Schools $ Education Total $ 1,984,742 1,984,742 $ $ General Government Appropriated Fund Balance $ Assessor Board of Supervisors Call Center Chief Information Officer Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County Administrative Officer Communications Elections Facilities Management Finance General Government Human Resources Internal Audit Management & Budget Materials Management Public Fiduciary Recorder Total Compensation Treasurer General Government Total $ 500,000 15,808,896 1,248,380 1,298,676 478,788 707,968 10,494,469 200,000 145,869,051 35,000 1,983,422 1,991,183 3,952,730 184,568,563 $ Health, Welfare & Sanitation Animal Care & Control $ Environmental Services Health Care Mandates Medical Examiner Public Health Health, Welfare & Sanitation Total $ 385,109 1,369,912 317,071,747 4,189,649 3,853,494 326,869,911 $ $ Public Safety Total $ 45,668,897 23,181,209 1,780,046 9,384,406 3,461,426 50,280,208 155,628 11,832,089 6,383,337 7,021,181 31,100,074 47,355,136 61,268,643 298,872,280 $ Total General Fund Mandates $ 812,295,496 $ Public Safety Adult Probation Clerk of the Superior Court Constables Contract Counsel Correctional Health County Attorney Emergency Management Juvenile Probation Legal Advocate Legal Defender Public Defender Sheriff Trial Courts $ 412 $ $ Consolidated Mandates - $ $ 1,984,742 1,984,742 195,198,195 5,208,429 1,358,665 17,133,572 2,532,036 111,834,449 2,872,815 1,000,910 1,762,186 1,354,842 2,649,479 342,905,578 $ 195,698,195 15,808,896 1,248,380 1,298,676 5,208,429 478,788 1,358,665 707,968 10,494,469 17,333,572 2,532,036 257,703,500 2,872,815 1,035,910 1,762,186 1,354,842 1,983,422 1,991,183 2,649,479 3,952,730 527,474,141 4,058,238 2,736,873 6,795,111 $ 349,700,689 $ $ $ 385,109 1,369,912 321,129,985 4,189,649 6,590,367 333,665,022 $ 45,668,897 23,181,209 1,780,046 9,384,406 3,461,426 50,280,208 155,628 11,832,089 6,383,337 7,021,181 31,100,074 47,355,136 61,268,643 298,872,280 $ 1,161,996,185 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates General Fund Mandate Comparison General Fund Budgeted Mandates FY 2003-04 General Fund Budgeted Mandates FY 2004-05 $ Variance Increase (Decrease) % Variance Increase (-)Decrease Mandated Services Judicial Branch Adult Probation Juvenile Probation Trial Courts $ 43,502,800 11,434,359 59,357,714 114,294,873 $ $ Elected Officials Total $ 15,623,329 1,090,007 23,257,552 1,716,309 48,872,846 1,914,027 42,617,353 1,898,675 3,737,821 140,727,919 Appointed Departments Animal Care & Control $ Appropriated Fund Balance Call Center Clerk of the Board Communications Contract Counsel Correctional Health Elections Emergency Management Environmental Services Facilities Management General Government Health Care Mandates Internal Audit Legal Advocate Legal Defender Medical Examiner Public Defender Public Fiduciary Public Health Appointed Departments Total $ 304,041 1,226,882 458,417 12,300,027 7,074,648 6,984,394 146,900 821,299 44,486 136,408,921 301,936,423 33,876 5,303,639 5,833,349 4,089,211 29,065,076 1,958,091 4,390,238 518,379,918 $ Total Mandated Services Percent of General Fund Expenditures 773,402,710 $ 81.9% Judicial Branch Total $ $ 45,668,897 11,832,089 61,268,643 118,769,629 $ 15,808,896 1,248,380 23,181,209 1,780,046 50,280,208 1,991,183 47,355,136 1,984,742 3,952,730 147,582,530 $ 385,109 500,000 1,298,676 478,788 707,968 9,384,406 3,461,426 10,494,469 155,628 1,369,912 200,000 145,869,051 317,071,747 35,000 6,383,337 7,021,181 4,189,649 31,100,074 1,983,422 3,853,494 545,943,337 $ $ 2,166,097 397,730 1,910,929 4,474,756 4.7% 3.4% 3.1% 3.8% 185,567 158,373 (76,343) 63,737 1,407,362 77,156 4,737,783 86,067 214,909 6,854,611 1.2% 12.7% -0.3% 3.6% 2.8% 3.9% 10.0% 4.3% 5.4% 4.6% 81,068 500,000 71,794 20,371 707,968 (2,915,621) (3,613,222) 3,510,075 8,728 548,613 155,514 9,460,130 15,135,324 1,124 1,079,698 1,187,832 100,438 2,034,998 25,331 (536,744) 27,563,419 21.1% 100.0% 5.5% 4.3% 100.0% -31.1% -104.4% 33.4% 5.6% 40.0% 77.8% 6.5% 4.8% 3.2% 16.9% 16.9% 2.4% 6.5% 1.3% -13.9% 5.0% Elected Officials Assessor Board of Supervisors Clerk of the Superior Court Constables County Attorney Recorder Sheriff Superintendent of Schools Treasurer $ $ $ $ $ $ 812,295,496 $ 69.7% 38,892,786 4.8% 991,074 150,000 1,787,032 1,271,316 4,199,422 58,169 50,000 (13,826,763) 841,325 122,341 (12,754,928) 5.9% 33.3% -100.0% 47.1% 9.6% -303.7% (12,754,928) -303.7% 112,568,837 735,868 282,273 (8,970,781) 179,467 91,851,838 (1,677,784) 176,306 29,307 122,782 11,253 337,546 608,191 196,255,103 57.7% 14.1% 20.8% -52.4% 7.1% 82.1% -41.3% 6.1% 2.9% 7.0% 0.8% 12.3% 23.0% 56.1% 196,255,103 56.1% 222,392,961 19.1% Non-Mandated Services Appropriated Fund Balance $ General Government Health Care Mandates Human Services Parks & Recreation Non-Mandated Services Total $ 932,905 100,000 13,826,763 945,707 1,148,975 16,954,350 Total Non-Mandated Services Percent of General Fund Expenditures 16,954,350 $ 1.8% $ $ $ $ $ 4,199,422 $ 0.4% Administrative Mandates Appropriated Fund Balance $ Chief Information Officer County Administrative Officer Facilities Management Finance General Government Health Care Mandates Human Resources Internal Audit Management & Budget Materials Management Public Health Total Compensation Administrative Mandates Total $ 82,629,359 4,472,561 1,076,392 26,104,353 2,352,569 19,982,611 5,736,022 2,696,509 971,603 1,639,404 1,343,589 2,399,327 2,041,288 153,445,586 $ Total Administrative Mandates Percent of General Fund Expenditures $ 153,445,586 $ 16.3% Grand Total of General Fund Expenditures $ 943,802,646 $ $ 413 195,198,195 5,208,429 1,358,665 17,133,572 2,532,036 111,834,449 4,058,238 2,872,815 1,000,910 1,762,186 1,354,842 2,736,873 2,649,479 349,700,689 $ $ 349,700,689 $ 30.0% 1,166,195,607 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Mandates 414 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Department Budget Schedules Maricopa County Organization Maricopa County is organized according to its accountability to the citizens it serves. There are Elected Officials, Appointed Departments and Special Districts. There is also a Judicial Branch, which includes the Trial Courts organization structure made up of Adult Probation, Justice Courts, Juvenile Probation, and Superior Court departments. Within the Judicial Branch are elected Superior Court Judges and Justices of the Peace. The citizens of Maricopa County elect a Board of Supervisors who serves as the responsible governing body, and a County Attorney, Sheriff, Clerk of the Superior Court, Treasurer, Assessor, Recorder, Superintendent of Schools and 23 Constables. There are 47 appointed departments, including 3 Special Districts, for which the County Board of Supervisors acts as the Board of Directors. Countywide Organization Chart Maricopa County Citizens Superintendent of Schools Constables (23) County Attorney Board of Supervisors Board of Directors for Flood Control, Library and Stadium Districts Sheriff Clerk of the Court Assessor Treasurer Recorder Elected Appointed County Administrative Officer Clerk of the Board Internal Audit STAR Call Center Elections Deputy County Administrator Legal Defender Contract Counsel Deputy County Administrator Public Defender Health Services Officer Health Care Delivery System* Legal Advocacy Community Services Officer Finance Officer Maricopa Health Plans Integrated Criminal Justice Information Systems Office of Communications Regional Development Services Agency Officer Information Technology Officer Management & Budget Public Health Finance Parks & Recreation Planning & Development Office of the CIO Human Resources Human Services Risk Management Community Development Emergency Management Telecommunications Research & Reporting Medical Examiner Materials Management Public Fiduciary Facilities Management General Government Animal Care & Control Services Library District Equipment Services Health Care Mandates Environmental Services Stadium District Public Works Total Compensation Correctional Health Transportation *The Health Care Delivery System will transition to the Special Health Care District on January 1, 2005 Solid Waste Flood Control District 415 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Countywide Organization Chart (Continued) Judges of the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County Superior Court Judges Administrative Advisory Committees Judicial Executive Committee Presiding Judge and Associate Presiding Judge Limited Jurisdiction Advisory Committees Superior Court Bench Juvenile Probation Department Adult Probation Department Trial Courts Administration - Operations and Caseflow Management - Budget and Management - Litigant Support Services - Court Human Resources - Judicial Information Systems (JIS) - Community and Media Relations - Training and Development - E-Courts & Electronic Records - Court Security - Law Library - Collections - Alternate Dispute Resolution - Jury Office 416 Justices of the Peace Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Judicial Branch Judicial Organization Chart Judges of the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County Judicial Executive Committee Juvenile Court (Durango and Southeast) Criminal Department Family Court Department Juvenile Probation Department Adult Probation Department Conciliation Services Presiding Judge and Associate Presiding Judge Trial Courts Administration Judges' Administrative Advisory Committees Civil Department Southeast Superior Court Facility Probate/ Mental Health Department Tax Court Special Assignment Department Northwest Superior Court Facility - Operations and Caseflow Management - Budget and Management - Litigant Support Services - Court Human Resources - Judicial Information Systems (JIS) - Community and Media Relations - Training and Development - E-Courts & Electronic Records - Court Security - Law Library - Collections - Alternate Dispute Resolution - Jury Office Court Jurisdiction The Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County is a general jurisdiction court handling criminal felonies, juvenile, family, probate/mental health, civil matters over $10,000 and statewide tax cases. Jurisdiction also extends to appeals from limited jurisdiction courts. The Superior Court is part of an integrated judicial system in the State under the administrative authority of the Arizona Supreme Court. Maricopa County Over 3.4 million of Arizona’s 5.5 million people reside in Maricopa County. It is one of the fastest growing urban areas in the country. The County, one of 15 in the state, encompasses almost 10,000 square miles. The Court conducts its business in four primary locations: a complex of buildings in downtown Phoenix; a Juvenile Court Center on Durango Avenue, southwest of downtown Phoenix; a Southeast Valley facility in Mesa with juvenile and adult court buildings; and a Northwest Regional Center in Surprise. Judges Of The Court Currently, 91 Superior Court judges and 42 court commissioners staff the Court. All judicial officers are lawyers. The Governor appoints judges after a selection process by a Qualifications Commission. The Merit Selection System is patterned after the “Missouri Plan” and applies only in Arizona's two most populous counties: Maricopa (Phoenix) and Pima (Tucson). Judges stand for election every four years on a yes-no retention ballot. Judges in Superior Court are full-time Constitutional “divisions” created by the State and standing for election. The Court also can have judges pro tempore. Judge pro tempores are lawyers appointed by the Court with the full powers of a constitutional division serving temporarily at the pleasure of the Court. Judge pro tempores are used sparingly as adjuncts to constitutional divisions. The Court’s presiding judge appoints Court commissioners. 417 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Judicial Organization (Continued) Court Judicial Departments The Court performs its work by departments, each headed by a departmental presiding judge selected by the Court's Presiding Judge. Departmental presiding judges generally serve in that capacity for two to four years. Trial judges of the Court rotate from one department to another, as assigned by the Presiding Judge, generally on twoyear cycles. Commissioners serve a variety of assignments. Judicial officers attend departmental meetings and as a full bench en banc once a month. Most of the calendars are structured on an individual basis, meaning that once a case is assigned to a judge early in the process, it stays with that judge until resolved. The Presiding Judge The Court’s Presiding Judge oversees the Superior Court and its departments and has superintendent responsibilities over the limited jurisdiction courts in the County. The Presiding Judge, appointed to his administrative position by the Supreme Court, serves in that position at the pleasure of the Supreme Court. The Presiding Judge appoints an Associate Presiding Judge to serve as an assistant. The Trial Courts Administrator A Trial Courts Administrator, appointed by the Court, functions as the Chief Executive Officer providing management support to each of the judicial departments and coordinating, together with the Presiding Judge, the work of the Superior Court and its departments, and the limited jurisdiction courts in Maricopa County. A number of standing committees, staffed by Court Administration, are utilized to perform the policy and program planning work of the Court. Non-Judicial Staffing Four major staffing units support the Court: Trail Courts Administration, Adult Probation, Juvenile Probation, and the Clerk of the Court. Also providing support to the Court is a small group of special purpose court agencies: Judicial Information Systems, Administrative Services, Conciliation Services and the Law Library. The Court operates its own Judicial Personnel Merit System, working in close harmony with the County of Maricopa. 418 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Presiding Superior Court Judge – Biography Hon. Colin F Campbell, Presiding Judge - Superior Court Judge Colin Campbell was appointed by Governor Rose Mofford to become a judge in January 1990. Before becoming Presiding Judge in July 2000, he served in each of the Superior Court departments: civil, criminal, family, and juvenile. He graduated from Northwestern University in 1974 with a Bachelor's degree in Economics. He graduated Summa Cum Laude from the University of Arizona Law School in 1977. After graduation, he was a law clerk for the Honorable William P. Copple, United States District Court Judge. He worked as an associate and later a partner at the Phoenix law firm of Meyer, Hendricks, Victor, Osborn & Maledon (formerly Martori, Meyer, Hendricks & Victor) from 1978 to 1990, except for two years as an Assistant Federal Public Defender from 1981 to 1983. Judge Campbell has been active in committees of the State Bar and the Judiciary. From 1988 to 1990, he was a member of the Maricopa County Community Punishment Committee. He is a former member and past chair of the State Bar Legal Services Committee and Committee on the Rules of Professional Conduct. He sat on the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee and the Arizona Judicial College prior to his appointment as Presiding Judge. As Presiding Judge, he sits on the Arizona Judicial Council, the State-Federal Judicial Council and is the former chairman of the Maricopa county Integrated Criminal Justice Information Systems Executive Committee. Judge Campbell has also been active in community activities. He is the former president and board member of the Greater East Phoenix Neighborhood Association, the St. Thomas More Society, The Southwest Phoenix Community Center, Community Legal Services and the Arizona Bar Foundation. He has sat as a board member on the Malta Center, Phoenix Natural Family Planning Center, Child and Family Resources, Inc., and Ville de Marie, a private, non-profit school. He is a former member of the Arizona Coalition for Tomorrow, which sponsors a yearly health fair clinic for head start children. In 1990, Judge Campbell received the Outstanding Graduate Award from the University of Arizona College of Law. 419 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Maricopa County Judges and Justices of the Peace Judge Cates, Jeffrey S Gottsfield, Robert L Gerst, Stephen A O'Toole, Thomas W O'Melia, Michael J Albrecht, Rebecca A Forman, John F Galati, Frank T Reinstein, Ronald S Hilliard, Ruth H Schneider, Barry C Sargeant, William Hotham, Jeffrey A Wilkinson, Michael O Armstrong, Mark W (h) (l) Fields, Kenneth L Franks, Pamela J Cole, David R Dunevant, Thomas Martin Gregory H Katz, Paul A Sheldon, Steven D Campbell, Colin F (a) Arellano, Silvia R (i) Mangum, J Kenneth Schwartz, Johathan H Hauser, Brian R Mundell, Barbara A (b) (g) Yarnell, Michael A Dairman, Dennis W Jarrett, Barbara M (a) (c) (e) (g) (i) (k) Div 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Judge McVey, Michael R Araneta, Louis A Baca, Anna Maria Ishikawa, Brian K Davis, Norman J (f) Aceto, Mark F Jones, Michael D (k) Hoag, Marion J Keppel, James H Akers, Linda A McClennen, Crane Ballinger, Eddward P (e) Obergbillig, Robert H Reinstein, Peter C Talamante, David M Hicks, Bethany G Gaines, F Pendleton Burke, Edward O Holt, Cathy M Verdin, Maria Willrich, Penny Anderson, Arthur T Heilman, Joseph B Willett, Eileen S Fenzel, Alfred M O'Connor, Karen L Granville, Warren J Gaylord, John M Downie, Margaret H (d) Ronan, Emmet J (c) Rayes, Douglas L Presiding Judge Presiding Judge - Juvenile Court Presiding Judge - Criminal Department Presiding Judge - Probate/Mental Health Depart Presiding Judge – Southeast Facility Presiding Judge – Lower Court Appeals Justice of the Peace G Michael Osterfeld C Steven McMurry Ronald D. Johnson R Wayne Johnson C A Mendoza Michael W Orcutt John R Ore Joe Getzwiller Quentin V Tolby Andy V Gastelum Lester Pearce Gerald A. Williams Precinct Buckeye Central Phoenix Chandler East Mesa East Phoenix #1 East Phoenix #2 East Tempe Gila Bend Glendale Maryvale North Mesa North Valley (b) (d) (f) (h) (j) (l) Div 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 Judge Gama, Joe R Donahoe, Gary Barton, Janet Budoff, Robert Hyatt, Carey Santana, Mark McNally, Colleen (j) Steinle, Roland Ditsworth, John Buttrick, John Harrison, Cari Stephens, Sherry Klein, Andrew Sanders, Teresa Trujillo, Richard Udall, David Contes, Connie Blakey, A Craig Miles, Linda Mahoney, Margaret Houser, Robert C Chavez, Harriett E Grant, Larry Foster, George H Swann, Peter B Lee, Raymond Duncan, Sally S. Rea, John Mroz, Rosa Associate Presiding Judge Presiding Judge - Civil Department Presiding Judge - Family Court Department Presiding Judge - Tax Court Presiding Judge – Northwest Facility Presiding Judge – Integrated Family Court Justice of the Peace Jacqueline McVay Hercules Dellas Lex E Anderson Michael Reagan Harrell Boyster Pamela C Gutierrez Joseph Guzman Clayton Hamblen Rachel Carrillo Victor Wilkins John Henry 420 Precinct Northeast Phoenix Northwest Phoenix Peoria Scottsdale South Mesa/Gilbert South Phoenix Tolleson West Mesa West Phoenix West Tempe Wickenburg Div 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation Organizational Chart Presiding Judge of the Superior Court Criminal Department Presiding judge Adult Probation Adult Probation Barbara Broderick Barbara Broderick Chief Probation Officer Chief Probation Officer Administration, Budget & Finance Community Supervision Assessment & Development Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Adult Probation Department (MCAPD) is to provide assistance and adult probation services to neighborhoods, courts, adult probationers and victims so that they experience enhanced safety and well-being. Vision An agency of professionals committed to continuous improvement in the quality of community life by offering hope to neighborhoods, victims and offenders. Goals • By the end of fiscal year 2007, MCAPD will enhance public safety by: - Reducing the number of probationers committed to the Department of Corrections to 20%. - Reducing the number of probationers convicted of a new felony offense to 10% - Increasing the rate of successful completions from probation to 65% - Increasing the rate of successful completions from Pretrial Supervision to 80%. • By the end of fiscal year 2007, employee resignations from MCAPD because of pay will be reduced to 30%. • By fiscal the end of fiscal year 2007, MCAPD will improve case processing as evidenced by: - Maintaining at least a 97% on-time rate for submitting presentence reports to the Court without a continuance. Increasing the rate of restitution collected to 80%. - Increasing the rate of community work service completed to 50%. - Increasing use of the Offender Screening Tool to 75% for newly sentenced probationers. - Making use of the Field Reassessment Offender Screening Tool to develop case management plans at least 67% of the time. • By the end of fiscal year 2007, MCAPD will improve customer satisfaction as evidenced by the following measurable increase in customers who report satisfaction: - 60% of victims will be satisfied with services provided by MCAPD. - 67% of offenders will be satisfied with services provided by MCAPD. - 75% of criminal court judges will be satisfied with services provided by MCAPD. - Staff satisfied with MCAPD will improve to an overall satisfaction score of 5.50 on the Employee Satisfaction Survey - The percentage of community and criminal justice partners satisfied with MCAPD will be maintained at level of 90% or higher. 421 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) • By the end of fiscal year 2007, MCAPD will have the equipment, facilities, support services and technological interconnectivity with agencies to provide efficient and effective probation services, and promote staff safety as evidenced by: - A minimum mean score of 5 on a scale of 2 to 8 on employee surveys that rate staff's satisfaction level with equipment, facilities, support services and staff safety services. - Attaining 100% of technology standards and replacement schedules recommended by the County Chief Information Officer. Issues • The high demand for educated and skilled staff is placing additional responsibilities upon the agency to use new and innovative practices to recruit, retain and reward staff. • The public demands that agencies and staff be held accountable for their practices and show positive results which requires the agency to develop methods to monitor and use performance measures. • The need to enhance staff safety has resulted in development of comprehensive safety policies, and pending implementation of safety procedures and training. • An increase in expectations that criminal justice agencies be more responsive to victims’ needs and rights requires the agency to provide mandated victim services. • The negative economic forecasts for state revenues jeopardizes the agency’s ability to provide probation services to the court and community and to enhance the safety and well being of neighborhoods. • Organizations are increasingly turning to technology to use, share and manage information which requires the agency to obtain more resources, allocate resources differently and shift current resources to acquire, use, stay current on and maintain the technologies. • The trend to treat substance abuse offenses as a public health issue within the criminal justice system requires partnerships and new methods of supervision and treatment. • Changes in laws, societal demands, criminal justice practices and demographic shifts in offender populations are causing criminal justice agencies - with limited resources - to develop specialization and expertise in managing and providing services to offenders. • Criminal justice agencies are relying more upon collaborations and partnerships with both public and private agencies to enhance the safety and well being of our neighborhoods. Our agency is committing additional resources and expertise to develop and sustain these relationships. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 110 ADULT PROBATION TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 11BC - BEHAVIORAL CHANGE $ 12,186,264 11CJ - COMMUNITY JUSTICE 38,172,005 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 2,559,804 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1,466,480 TOTAL $ 54,384,553 Supplies & Services $ 2,425,340 2,227,984 252,779 41,840 $ 4,947,943 422 Capital Outlay 135,830 120,347 $ 256,177 $ Total Expenditures $ 14,747,434 40,520,336 2,812,583 1,508,320 $ 59,588,673 Total Revenue 5,347,037 8,572,739 $ 13,919,776 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: ASSESSMENT and BEHAVIORAL CHANGE PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Assessment and Behavioral Change Program is to assess probationer and defendant risk/need and provide pretrial supervision, treatment and education services so that they can have opportunity for success and experience behavioral change as evidenced by successful completion of Pretrial release, treatment and education requirements. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of probationers who successfully completed MCAPD operated and/or funded treatment and residential services during the reporting period N/A N/A 57 55 Percent of students who successfully complete MCAPD operated education classes during the reporting period N/A N/A 63 60 Percent of pre-sentence investigation reports completed on time during the reporting period 96.1 99.9 100 99.9 61 68 78 78 Key Results: Percent of defendants who successfully complete release conditions without termination during the reporting period Program Name: COMMUNITY JUSTICE PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Community Justice Program is to provide public safety through offender accountability and restoration to victims and community members so that they can live in revitalized, restored and safer neighborhoods. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of active standard probationers not committed to the Department of Corrections for the reporting period N/A N/A 86 96 Percent of active IPS probationers not committed to the Department of Corrections during the reporting period N/A N/A 29 N/A Percent of probationers paying restitution and/or performing community work service during the reporting period N/A N/A 85 85 Percent of warrants cleared during the reporting period N/A N/A 84 85.4 Percent of probationers processed according to Indirect Services standards during the reporting period N/A N/A 100 100 Percent of jailed probationers who receive services under the In-Custody Management Activity during the reporting period N/A N/A 100 100 Key Results: 423 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 11,619,113 $ 39,165,557 $ 12,094,117 $ 40,556,800 $ 14,521,960 $ 37,826,109 $ 43,502,800 $ 12,627,583 $ 45,668,897 $ 13,919,776 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 50,784,670 52,650,917 52,348,069 56,130,383 59,588,673 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 11,610,956 $ 39,111,694 $ 12,094,117 $ 40,510,322 $ 14,521,960 $ 37,826,109 $ 43,502,800 $ 12,627,583 $ 45,668,897 $ 13,919,776 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 50,722,650 52,604,439 52,348,069 56,130,383 59,588,673 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 8,157 $ 53,863 $ $ 46,478 $ $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 62,020 46,478 - NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Adult Probation FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Non-Mandated 0.0% $60.0 $50.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 23.4% Adult Probation Mandates Vs. Expenditures $40.0 $30.0 $20.0 $10.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 76.6% 424 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 50.8 11.6 39.1 0.1 52.7 12.1 40.5 0.0 52.3 14.5 37.8 0.0 56.1 43.5 12.6 0.0 59.6 45.7 13.9 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Community Punishment Program, Literacy Programs AUTHORITY ARS §12-299.01(A) Community Punishment Programs, Submission Of Plan; Use Of Monies; Prohibitions HISTORY/ BACKGROUND This statute created probation treatment programs to both enhance the supervision of offenders and present an alternative to prison commitments for class 4,5, and 6 felonies. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Enhance the adult probation services system by developing additional probation conditions, programs and services for offenders placed on supervised probation and intensive probation. Provide programs, services and increased supervision, surveillance and control to special probation populations. Community Punishment Program, Literacy Programs FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 311,218 $ 3,253,054 $ 328,885 $ 2,660,870 $ 848,249 $ 1,887,624 $ 924,762 $ 2,031,739 $ 1,128,573 $ 1,998,528 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise Funds - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,564,272 2,989,755 2,735,873 2,956,501 3,127,101 TITLE Adult Intensive Probation AUTHORITY A.R.S. §§ 13-913 through 13-920 Intensive Probation HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Based on programs in Georgia, the legislature created another level of probation intensity. Intensive Probation (IPS) was a last chance effort for those who failed on standard probation. MANDATE DESCRIPTION A two-person intensive probation team shall supervise no more than twenty-five persons at one time, and a three-person intensive probation team shall supervise no more than forty persons at one time. The intensive probation team shall…exercise close supervision and observation over persons sentenced to intensive probation including (a) visual contact with each probationer at least 4 times per week, and (b) weekly contact with the employer of the probationer. Adult Intensive Probation FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 587,281 $ 7,868,708 593,870 $ 8,009,213 660,083 $ 7,169,684 7,565,679 $ 378,219 9,530,535 $ 473,729 425 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 8,455,989 8,603,083 7,829,767 7,943,898 10,004,264 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) TITLE Victim Notification AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 13-4415 Notice Of Probation Modification, Termination Or Revocation Disposition Matters; Notice Of Arrest HISTORY/ BACKGROUND This mandate was a major portion of the victims' rights legislation. Probation has a duty to inform opted-in victims at every step of the process. MANDATE DESCRIPTION On request of the victim, the court shall notify the victim of any probation revocation disposition proceeding or any proceeding in which the court is asked to terminate the probation or intensive probation of a person who is convicted of committing a criminal offense against the victim. On request of the victim, the court shall notify the victim of a modification of the terms of probation or intensive probation of a person only if the modification will substantially affect the persons; contact with or safety of the victim or if notification affects restitution or incarceration status. On request of the victim, the court shall notify the victim of the arrest of a person who is on supervised probation and who is arrested pursuant to a warrant issued for a probation violation. Victim Notification FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 25,942 $ 148,229 27,211 $ 151,781 27,551 $ 151,868 317,570 $ 105,861 269,009 $ 96,007 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 174,171 178,992 179,419 423,431 365,016 TITLE Drug Treatment and Education Fund AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 13-3422 Drug Court Programs; Establishment; Participation HISTORY/ BACKGROUND This mandate was passed as a voter initiative. The proposition mandates treatment of drug offenders rather than incarceration, and provides funding for treatment. MANDATE DESCRIPTION To cover the costs of placing persons in drug education and treatment programs administered by a qualified agency or organization that provides such programs to persons who abuse controlled substances. Drug Treatment and Education Fund FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 39,607 $ 1,001,093 62,169 $ 1,502,961 63,223 $ 2,051,119 489,397 $ 1,626,182 222,103 $ 2,328,464 426 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,040,700 1,565,130 2,114,342 2,115,579 2,550,567 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) TITLE Community Service AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 12-299.01(B) Community Punishment Program; A.R.S. § 13-914 Intensive Probation; Evaluation; Sentence; Criteria; Limit; Conditions; Court Order HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Community service is a politically popular and a good public relations program. It is a good example of Restorative Justice. It contributes extensively to the improvement of the community. Clean up and graffiti abatement programs have a major impact on our neighborhoods. The concept of giving "giving back to society" by those who have violated the law is its objective. The Chief Justice has incorporated community service into his "2002 Initiative." MANDATE DESCRIPTION Intensive probation shall be conditioned on the offender…being involved in…community service work at least six days a week throughout his term of intensive probation…performing not less than forty hours of community service each month. Promote accountability of offenders to their local community by requiring…community work service to local governments and community agencies. Community Service FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 135,853 $ 462,952 148,122 $ 442,496 166,289 $ 446,156 739,566 $ 235,688 622,084 $ 214,325 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 598,805 590,618 612,445 975,254 836,409 TITLE Drug Court AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 13-3422 Drug Court Programs; Establishment; Participation HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Drug Court was created because of the success of Drug Courts in other jurisdictions in dealing with first time drug offenders. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in each county may establish a drug court program. Cases assigned to a drug court program shall consist of defendants who are drug dependent persons and who are charged with a probation eligible offense under this chapter, including preparatory offenses. The terms and conditions of probation shall provide for the treatment of the drug dependent person and shall include any other conditions and requirements that the court deems appropriate. Drug Court FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 111,910 $ 658,070 163,301 $ 1,337,999 114,548 $ 940,669 365,960 $ 517,664 341,295 $ 728,056 427 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 769,980 1,501,300 1,055,217 883,624 1,069,351 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) TITLE Field Services Supervision AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 12-251 (A) Adult Probation Officers and support staff; appointment; qualifications HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Why is the service level at 60:1? In order to be effective, the probation officer must have the time to effectively manage offenders. In many states, where the ratio is much higher, probation has become purely a prison diversion. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Chief Adult Probation Officer, with the approval of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, shall appoint such deputy adult probation officers and support staff as are necessary to provide presentence investigations and supervision services to the court. Those deputy adult probation officers engaged in case supervision shall supervise no more than an average of sixty adults who reside in the county on probation to the court. Field Services Supervision FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 5,965,865 $ 20,024,684 6,231,604 $ 20,239,348 6,180,150 $ 19,242,684 24,316,152 $ 3,865,560 24,865,921 $ 3,982,805 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 25,990,549 26,470,952 25,422,834 28,181,712 28,848,726 TITLE Indirect Services AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 31-461 through 31-467 Compact Agreement/Adult Probation Procedures HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Indirect Services Unit manages felony offenders who are sentenced in Maricopa County and leave the state to reside elsewhere, and supervises felons sentenced in another state who come to reside in Maricopa County. The objective is to protect the community from and provide treatment resources to felony offenders whom, if not for the Interstate Compact Agreement, would be residing in Maricopa County without the knowledge or consent of the authorities or citizens of the County. MANDATE DESCRIPTION That each receiving state will assume the duties of visitation of and supervision over probationers or parolees of any sending state and in the exercise of those duties will be governed by the same standards that prevail for its own probationers and parolees. Indirect Services FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 91,632 $ 1,121,709 35,173 $ 1,120,219 119,555 $ 1,125,184 615,603 $ 192,623 641,090 $ 359,668 428 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,213,341 1,155,392 1,244,739 808,226 1,000,758 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) TITLE Presentence Investigations AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 12-251 (A) Adult Probation Officers And Support Staff; Appointment; Qualifications; A.R.S. § 12-253 (4) Adult Probation Officers Powers And Duties; A.R.S. § 13-914 (A) Intensive Probation; Evaluation; Sentence; Criteria; Limit; Conditions; A.R.S. § 13-701 (B) Sentence Of Imprisonment For Felony; Presentence Report; Rule 26.4 - Rules Of Criminal Procedure HISTORY/ BACKGROUND A 1988 amendment included all class felonies. In 1993, it was mandated that any person who committed a felony after January 1, 1994 needed a copy of a recent Presentence Investigation (PSI) report when transferring to the Department of Corrections. MANDATE DESCRIPTION An Adult Probation Officer shall investigate cases referred to him for investigation by the court in which he is serving and report thereon to the court. An Adult Probation Officer shall prepare a presentence report for every offender who has either been convicted of a felony and for whom the granting of probation is not prohibited by law, or violated probation by commission of a technical violation that was not chargeable or indictable as a criminal offense. No prisoner shall be transferred to the custody of the State Department of Corrections without a copy of a recent PSI report unless the court has waived preparation of the report. Presentence Investigations FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 3,761,388 $ 3,856,100 3,835,925 $ 4,203,750 3,641,076 $ 3,500,662 3,866,174 $ 3,040,386 3,943,890 $ 3,008,329 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 7,617,488 8,039,675 7,141,738 6,906,560 6,952,219 TITLE Warrants AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 13-901 (C) (D) Probation HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Warrants Locator Unit was created due to the safety risks posed to the community of leaving individuals, for whom warrants have been issued, to exist in the community without consequence. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The court may in its discretion issue a warrant for the re-arrest of the defendant. At any time during the probationary term of the person released on probation, any probation officer may, without warrant or other process, at any time until the final disposition of the case, re-arrest any person and bring the person before the court. Warrants FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 235,990 $ 429,947 282,867 $ 479,889 304,544 $ 591,121 566,104 $ 528,811 726,321 $ 641,388 429 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 665,937 762,756 895,665 1,094,915 1,367,709 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) TITLE Work Furlough AUTHORITY A.R.S. 13-901 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Work Furlough reduces full time jail bed occupancy and allows an offender to serve jail term as part of probation, yet be employed, pay restitution to victim and to be assessed a Work Furlough fee to offset part of the cost of the Work Furlough program. Work Furlough FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 344,270 $ 287,148 384,990 $ 261,796 384,347 $ 190,848 380,621 $ 104,850 368,797 $ 88,477 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 631,418 646,786 575,195 485,471 457,274 TITLE Officer Safety/Arming AUTHORITY A.R.S. 12-253 Probation Officer’s Peace Officer status, A.R.S. 12-251, A.R.S. 13-916, Supreme Court Administrative Order 2002-70 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The statute describing the duties of a probation officer as a peace officer authorizes the carrying of a firearm in the performance of the duties of an officer. During the last legislative session, a strong push was made to authorize any probation officer to carry a weapon without the department’s authorization while on duty. A compromise was reached stating that the AOC would create a Safety Committee with the purpose of establishing statewide policies on safety, use of force, firearms, and safety training. MANDATE/ DESCRIPTION The Administrative Orders allow any probation of surveillance officer who can qualify according to stated standards and training to request permission to carry a department authorized weapon in the performance of their duties. The orders also outline the specifics and required hours of training which the department must provide not only for firearms but in defensive tactics and safety. There is an increased cost to provide the training armory, and ongoing certification as well as to purchase firearms, ammunition, and to provide a shooting range for target practice. Officer Safety/Arming FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue $ $ 100,000 105,048 $ 47,589 320,720 $ 150,000 $ - 430 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - Total $ $ $ $ $ 100,000 152,637 320,720 150,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) TITLE Pretrial Services AUTHORITY ARS 13-3967C, E5, G, and J, Propositions 400 and 401, Rules 6.4b and 7.3b2 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Pretrial Services is a program designed to alleviate jail overcrowding, assist in providing equity in release decisions, and supervise offenders released into the community. MANDATE DESCRIPTION In determining release and conditions of release, the judicial officer is required to consider the offense, the evidence, and background of the offender. Pretrial services provides this information to the Court to help in making appropriate release decisions. When release is made, the judicial officer may impose a condition of supervision. Pretrial Services provides this supervision, reporting any violation of release conditions to the court. When releasing a juvenile who has been transferred to adult court, the appropriate school district must be notified. Pretrial Services provides this notification. A defendant desiring to proceed as an indigent shall complete under oath a questionnaire regarding his/her financial resources. This questionnaire is administered by Pretrial Services officers. Voters approved the expansion of Pretrial Services in 1978 as an alternative to jail. Pretrial Services FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget TITLE $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue $ $ $ 3,034,492 $ 2,859,279 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ 3,034,492 2,859,279 Mandatory Payment to the Sate of Arizona Mandatory Payment to State of Arizona FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue $ $ 1,907,297 $ 480,901 $ $ - 431 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Total 2,388,198 - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) TITLE DNA Testing AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 13-610 Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) Testing; Exception HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The legislature decided that sex offenders' DNA needed to be recorded for future investigation of offenses. Probation was viewed as an ideal point to enforce compliance. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The County Probation Department shall secure a blood sample sufficient for DNA testing ad extraction within 15 days after a person is convicted or adjudicated delinquent of a sexual offense* and is sentenced to a term of probation and within thirty days after the arrival of a person who is accepted under the interstate compact for the supervision of probationers. The County Probation Department shall secure a blood sample sufficient for deoxyribonucleic acid testing as extraction. The County department shall transmit the sample to the Department of Public Safety. *Since the inception of this statute the legislature has broadened the groups of offenses for which DNA testing is mandated. In addition to sex offenders, those convicted of burglary, use of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, or knowing infliction of serious physical injury have been added to the mandate. Beginning January 1, 2003, those convicted of drug offenses will be required to submit to DNA testing. Beginning January 1, 2004 are required to submit to DNA testing. TITLE Community Notification Of Sex Offenders AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 13-3825 Community Notification HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Responding to the massive public pressure, the legislature decided that the community needed to be notified of sex offender residence. Probation and law enforcement are held responsible. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Within seventy-two hours after a person who was accepted under the interstate compact for the supervision of probationers has arrived in the state, the agency that has accepted supervision shall provide information to the department of public safety. A law enforcement agency may delegate all or part of the notification process for offenders on community supervision to the county probation department as appropriate. 432 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 110 ADULT PROBATION Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 41,990,993 $ 12,393,560 54,384,553 $ Supplies & Services 3,507,131 $ 1,440,812 4,947,943 $ Capital Outlay 170,773 $ 85,404 256,177 $ Total Expenditures 45,668,897 $ 13,919,776 59,588,673 $ Total Revenue 13,919,776 13,919,776 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 110 ADULT PROBATION ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 29,474,531 7,906,506 125,458 76,849 37,583,344 $ $ 35,799,082 $ 191,636 71,518 8,365,498 338,269 (344,141) 84,660 44,506,522 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 375,132 3,294 16,709 396,720 1,548 146,762 1,766,193 831,804 222,064 2,388,958 632,536 269,711 82,041 73,958 106 21,522 7,229,057 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 33,511 92,769 126,280 $ Total Expenditures $ 51,861,860 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 6,014,945 15,000 8,040,000 125,000 40,000 14,234,945 $ $ 35,883,499 $ 164,740 117,310 9,447,336 346,896 (24,620,712) 21,880,206 43,219,275 $ 370,000 5,000 2,933 50,000 48,000 177,592 1,794,568 895,000 232,000 2,388,199 588,365 250,000 60,000 74,999 6,936,656 $ $ $ 97,308 97,308 $ 50,253,239 $ (14,278,516) $ 5,939,945 8,130,000 125,000 40,000 14,234,945 $ $ 40,008,196 $ 164,740 92,150 10,486,839 340,000 (352,308) 50,739,617 $ 761,663 5,000 4,291 312,813 48,000 353,658 2,452,774 901,492 842,396 9,017 670,865 301,544 95,000 56,000 6,814,513 $ $ $ 56,148 118,737 174,885 $ 57,729,015 $ (36,018,294) $ $ $ $ 38,777,105 $ 266,199 80,131 10,546,135 311,116 (352,308) 60,177 49,688,555 $ 41,118,827 227,000 76,510 11,770,827 280,509 74,307 53,547,980 $ $ $ $ 7,488 212,150 110,088 329,726 $ 56,270,953 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 5,442,776 15,000 8,210,000 105,000 52,000 13,824,776 481,808 4,255 16,776 170,958 24,471 299,755 2,426,266 974,202 591,328 23,325 589,918 484,922 79,561 84,996 130 6,252,672 (43,494,070) $ 433 5,502,973 7,494,669 110,396 52,977 13,161,015 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 560,110 8,500 36,412 27,500 35,015 335,000 1,824,630 378,941 661,034 14,500 599,002 283,983 86,275 91,484 4,942,386 $ $ $ 246,197 246,197 $ 58,736,563 $ (43,109,938) $ 5,442,776 15,000 8,305,000 105,000 52,000 13,919,776 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ 497,169 (15,000) (175,000) 20,000 (12,000) 315,169 8% 0% -2% 16% -30% 2% 41,701,705 $ 227,000 76,510 11,955,307 424,031 (74,307) 74,307 54,384,553 $ (1,693,509) (62,260) 15,640 (1,468,468) (84,031) (278,001) (74,307) (3,644,936) -4% -38% 17% -14% -25% 79% 0% -7% 201,553 745 (32,121) 285,313 27,691 18,658 628,144 522,551 181,362 (5,483) 71,863 (6,947) 8,725 (35,484) 1,866,570 26% 15% -749% 91% 58% 5% 26% 58% 22% -61% 11% -2% 9% -63% 0% 0% 27% 0% 0% 100% -116% -46% 560,110 4,255 36,412 27,500 20,309 335,000 1,824,630 378,941 661,034 14,500 599,002 308,491 86,275 91,484 4,947,943 $ $ $ 256,177 256,177 $ 56,148 (137,440) (81,292) $ 59,588,673 $ (1,859,658) -3% 2,174,827 -5% $ (44,911,787) $ $ (45,668,897) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Adult Probation (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 110 ADULT PROBATION Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CMNTY/INSTNL SUPVSN OFCR COMMUNITY SVCS SPECIALIST COUNSELING SUPERVISOR COUNSELOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR DISPATCHER EDUCATOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL MANAGER FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FTE 5.00 11.00 35.00 1.00 104.50 14.00 2.00 126.00 38.00 4.00 30.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 16.00 6.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH HR GENERALIST HR SPECIALIST INFO SYSTEMS PROJECT MGR INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR LEGAL ASSISTANT MANAGEMENT ANALYST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC PC SPECIALIST PROBATION OFFICER PROBATION OFFICER SUPV PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM SUPERVISOR SOCIAL WORKER (BS) TECH SUPPORT SPECIALIST TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST 434 FTE 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 11.00 601.50 80.00 26.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Total 1,153.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation Organizational Chart Presiding Judge of the Superior Court Juvenile Court Presiding Judge Director of Judicial Information Systems Chief Juvenile Probation Officer Chief Juvenile Probation Officer Cheryln K. Townsend Cheryln K. Townsend Assistant Director of Juvenile Court Services -Probation Probation Services - DUR Probation Services - SEF Community Services JIPS Services Operations Assistant Director of Juvenile Court Services - Detention Research & Planning Services Juvenile Detention Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Juvenile Probation Department (MCJPD) is to provide information, services, and programs to county residents so they can resolve problems associated with juvenile crime. Vision We envision Maricopa County as being a place where: Juveniles who come into contact with the Department become responsible citizens; Victims of juvenile crime experience justice; The Public feels safer. Goals • To reduce the dangers to children and staff and the increased expenses resulting from overcrowding, By July 2006 our detention facilities will be at or below capacity every day. • To provide high quality services to juveniles, and to provide awareness of that to the public, by July 2006 our detention facilities will be accredited by the American Correctional Association. • We will retain and develop staff positions to achieve the following retention rates by July 2006: YS: 0 - 2 years @ 85% 3 - 5 years @ 90% Over 5 years @ 95% All Other Positions: 0 - 2 years @ 90% 3 - 5 years @ 90% Over 5 years @ 95% and achieve and maintain an average staffing of 96.5% filled positions by July, 2006. • To provide a higher level of service to those families whose primary language is Spanish, by July 2006 all documents used by the public will be printed in both Spanish and English; 15% of our staff will be proficient in Spanish. • To provide judicial officers with reliable and validated information about a juvenile’s risk to the community, and to facilitate the use of the Risk/Needs instrument as a casework tool for probation officers, by July 2006 computer programs will be written that incorporate the Risk/Needs Instrument required by statute in all probation officer reports and case plans. • By July 2006 we will have reviewed all our programs and practices based on risk, needs, and benchmarks for successful outcomes. We will also match them to one or more of the competing needs of our stakeholders, including juveniles and their families. 435 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation (Continued) Issues • The need to retain qualified staff is impacted by increased competition among the public and private sector. This will challenge the department's ability to staff the expansion of the agency. • A large percentage of juveniles and families referred to the Court experience psychological, behavioral, educational and social problems in addition to delinquency. The impact on our department is that we must develop and fund programs that meet these needs in order to change behavior. The need for treatment will continue to be greater than funding levels. • The demand for resources devoted to employee safety has increased in response to changes in the Arizona Code of Judicial Administration. Our department must implement new and revised policies and provide training and tools needed to support a continuum of safety for all employees. • In the past year, in both of our detention facilities, the average daily population and average length of stay have increased to all time highs. This affects the safety of detainees and staff, increases the operating costs of detention, and hampers efforts to reach the standards required by the American Correctional Association. In FY04 average daily population was 21% over cap (38% at SEF); Average LOS was 16.2 days, and increase of 11% over the previous year, and 31% in the past five years. In the past two years the percentage of juveniles requiring Class I Incident reports has risen from 3.1% in FY 02 to 3.99% in FY04 (an increase of 28.7%) • The juvenile Hispanic population in Maricopa County increased from less than 25% in 1990 to approximately 35% in 2000. In 2003, Hispanic juveniles generated 38% of the complaints we received from law enforcement agencies. More than 40% of probationers are Hispanic. Our staff’s inability to speak Spanish restricts their effectiveness with this growing population, particularly with parents who are monolingual in Spanish. • We are beset by the varied and competing needs and wants of our clients, and with the difficulty of balancing these needs and still provide high quality services to each of them. The public at large wants to feel safe and know that juvenile offenders are held accountable for their actions and that there is a return on investment for services and supervision provided to juveniles. Victims seek restitution and a repair of the harm done to them; o juvenile offenders need help in developing the skills that will enable them to become productive citizens. Juvenile Court Judges want accurate and complete information about the juveniles who appear before them. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 270 JUVENILE PROBATION TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 26JT - JUVENILE DETAINEE TREATMENT $ 1,460,273 27CJ - COMMUNITY JUSTICE 22,264,949 27DP - DETENTION PROGRAM 18,761,430 27RT - RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT CENTER 27SP - OPERATIONAL SUPPORT PROGRAM 1,318,867 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 2,154,159 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1,086,893 TOTAL $ 47,046,571 Supplies & Services $ 300,570 2,336,033 1,102,899 1,644,981 14,172 499,902 270,162 $ 6,168,719 436 Capital Outlay 137,145 48,549 269,407 $ 455,101 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,760,843 24,600,982 20,001,474 1,644,981 1,333,039 2,702,610 1,626,462 $ 53,670,391 Total Revenue 14,701,970 145,999 1,000,000 1,096,514 70,000 $ 17,014,483 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: COMMUNITY JUSTICE PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Community Justice Program is to provide the residents of Maricopa County a juvenile justice system in which: offenders are held accountable and given the opportunity and encouragement to change; victims are acknowledged and compensated; and the community is actively involved, so that juveniles become personally responsible and community safety is enhanced. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of juveniles completing probation successfully 91.7 89.3 87.6 88 Percent of juveniles who complete programs without reoffending 79.02 77.8 78.8 78 Percent of Maricopa County residents who are Juvenile Probation Department volunteers N/A .0005 .0005 .0005 Percent of juveniles successfully completing diversion programs 80.7 79.1 81.3 80 Key Results: Program Name: DETENTION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Detention Program is to provide a secure and safe custody in an environment that promotes skill-building, accountability, and responsible citizenship to detained juveniles, so they can become responsible citizens and the public safety is enhanced. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of detainees requiring Class I Incident Reports 3.1 3.6 4.1 3.9 Percent of detainees completing cognitive skills programs 60.5 61.8 62.6 62 Key Results: 437 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation (Continued) Program Name: JUVENILE DETAINEE MEDICAL TREATMENT (TO COMMENCE IN FY 05) Program Purpose: To provide medically necessary healthcare to juveniles in County juvenile detention facilities in order to protect the health and safety of the community FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of psychiatric encounters provided within required time limits N/A N/A 23.5 40 Percent of ordered medications attempted to be distributed on date to be taken N/A N/A 72.4 72 Percent of sick call requests/appointments provided within required timelines N/A N/A 25.7 90 Percent of MIHS hospital days per 1,000 Man-days N/A N/A 0 0 Key Results: Program Name: OPERATIONAL SUPPORT PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Operational Support Program is to provide our employees with intellectual and emotional support so they will grow professionally. Key Results: Percent of employees who report they feel safe in doing their job Amount of revenue collected from Probation and Diversion Fees 438 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 71 78 78 78 1,199,531 1,198,565 1,105,809 1,128,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 10,577,644 $ 26,938,197 $ 10,601,402 $ 28,318,438 $ 11,038,054 $ 28,632,843 $ 11,434,359 $ 33,049,533 $ 11,832,089 $ 41,445,767 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ 506,121 $ $ 642,622 $ $ 392,535 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 37,515,841 38,919,840 40,177,018 45,126,514 53,670,391 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 10,577,644 $ 26,938,197 $ 10,601,402 $ 28,318,438 $ 11,038,054 $ 28,632,843 $ 11,434,359 $ 33,049,533 $ 11,832,089 $ 41,445,767 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ 506,121 $ $ 642,622 $ $ 392,535 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 37,515,841 38,919,840 40,177,018 45,126,514 53,670,391 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Juvenile Probation FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $60.0 General Fund Mandated 22.0% $50.0 Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.0% Juvenile Probation Mandates Vs. Expenditures $40.0 $30.0 $20.0 $10.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 78.0% 439 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 37.5 10.6 26.9 0.0 38.9 10.6 28.3 0.0 40.2 11.0 29.1 0.0 45.1 11.4 33.7 0.0 53.7 11.8 41.8 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Juvenile Court* AUTHORITY Constitution Article 6 § 15 Superior Court ; Procedures Affecting Children; A.R.S. §§ 8101 Through 8-863 Juvenile Court HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Juvenile Court is a part of the Superior Court, headed by a Juvenile Presiding Judge. While most of the funding for Juvenile Court is provided by County revenue sources, a significant portion is funded through Federal and State grant awards. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Juvenile Court has jurisdiction over cases involving crimes committed by persons under 18 years of age, including some traffic offenses. The Juvenile Court also has jurisdiction over adoptions, cases of neglect and abuse, termination of parental rights, Title 8 guardianships and other child-related matters. Juvenile Probation: The number of deputy probation officers must not exceed one for every thirty-five children under protective supervision or probation. Juvenile Detention: The Board of Supervisors is required to "maintain a detention center separate and apart from a jail or lock-up in which adults are confined where children alleged to be delinquent or incorrigible…shall, when necessary before or after hearing, be detained." The Juvenile Intensive Probation program is required by statute, but is funded by the State. Juvenile Probation Officers are required to provide post adjudication and transfer investigations and reports, standard probation supervision, and process and coordinate the transfer of juveniles for adult prosecution. *Juvenile Court has jurisdiction over all cases involving crimes committed by juveniles, therefore, total mandated expenditures for the Juvenile Court program is considered to be the consolidated Juvenile Probation department expenditures. In order to avoid double counting, the Juvenile Court program mandates calculation equals total department expenditures minus all other Juvenile Probation mandated program expenditures. Community Services FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 1,159,327 $ 4,762,544 1,826,850 $ 5,748,255 1,727,593 $ 6,076,756 1,989,739 $ 5,484,903 1,960,325 $ 5,685,087 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 5,921,871 7,575,104 7,804,349 7,474,642 7,645,412 Probation Services FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 6,996,465 $ 5,138,255 6,354,048 $ 4,921,144 6,261,740 $ 4,813,743 5,900,316 $ 4,348,405 6,320,038 $ 4,723,724 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 12,134,720 11,275,191 11,075,483 10,248,721 11,043,762 Juvenile Detention Center FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 91,296 $ 12,605,830 73,052 $ 12,832,636 79,220 $ 12,802,714 64,712 $ 17,293,044 91,875 $ 24,330,125 Capital Projects $ $ $ 506,121 $ 642,622 $ 392,535 $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 12,697,126 12,905,688 13,388,055 18,000,378 24,814,535 440 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation (Continued) Research and Planning Services (RAPS) FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 1,412,601 $ 224,109 912,293 $ 351,298 977,585 $ 659,160 1,148,098 $ 280,757 1,238,081 $ 502,078 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,636,710 1,263,591 1,636,745 1,428,855 1,740,159 Executive Services FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 295,852 $ 137,566 256,478 $ 183,808 221,292 $ 140,628 245,623 $ 154,304 227,232 $ 127,101 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 433,418 440,286 361,920 399,927 354,333 Administrative Services FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 622,103 $ 433,037 1,178,681 $ 515,372 1,770,624 $ 500,812 1,332,058 $ 753,022 1,225,486 $ 1,298,087 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,055,140 1,694,053 2,271,436 2,085,080 2,523,573 JIPS FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue $ 3,636,856 $ 3,765,925 $ 3,639,030 753,813 $ 4,735,098 769,052 $ 4,779,565 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,636,856 3,765,925 3,639,030 5,488,911 5,548,617 441 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 270 JUVENILE PROBATION Fund Type CAPITAL PROJECTS GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 258,465 $ 10,259,278 36,528,828 47,046,571 $ Supplies & Services 131,516 $ 1,309,811 4,727,392 6,168,719 $ Capital Outlay 2,554 $ 263,000 189,547 455,101 $ Total Expenditures 392,535 $ 11,832,089 41,445,767 53,670,391 $ Total Revenue 14,000 17,000,483 17,014,483 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 270 JUVENILE PROBATION ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 14,169,743 1,992 1,179,899 33,705 5,344 93,125 15,483,808 $ $ 26,270,237 $ 900,726 233,701 6,437,136 366,814 (1,068,910) 2,129,964 35,269,667 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 1,350,075 2,971 31,689 41,423 20,233 11,310 175,046 761,972 365,617 140,038 1,760,280 337,164 284,964 119,600 3,207 236,765 71,126 5,713,479 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 84,530 84,530 $ Total Expenditures $ 41,067,677 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 16,245,747 9,999 1,106,426 10,000 17,372,172 $ $ 27,976,974 $ 971,418 171,996 7,293,683 354,876 (1,767,602) 2,841,308 37,842,653 $ 2,339,088 2,504 32,416 10,931 23,411 4,800 5,600 3,298,930 448,990 218,778 913,488 275,059 218,036 134,143 13,500 38,991 7,978,665 $ $ $ 178,694 178,694 $ 46,000,012 $ (25,583,869) $ 16,245,747 9,999 1,106,426 10,000 17,372,172 $ $ 30,953,650 $ 941,417 230,174 8,525,026 366,031 (1,743,581) 2,848,321 42,121,038 $ 2,409,508 2,513 32,416 10,931 24,400 7,800 40,200 3,044,294 423,939 178,568 137,685 275,059 255,106 151,843 13,500 88,678 7,096,440 $ $ $ 218,876 218,876 $ 49,436,354 $ (28,627,840) $ $ $ 28,919,887 $ 949,447 571,834 8,041,518 427,035 (1,456,735) 2,393,237 39,846,223 $ 1,157,569 15,573 33,158 28,901 19,608 36,533 98,120 2,432,181 445,735 189,257 1,069,811 331,009 282,785 157,552 9,360 124,142 6,431,293 $ $ $ 71 195,273 195,344 $ 46,472,860 $ (32,064,182) $ 442 15,309,196 2,998 1,242,488 26,077 104,124 16,684,883 FY 2004-05 Requested 15,707,058 9,999 1,106,426 25,000 16,848,483 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 35,251,740 $ 527,162 265,457 10,663,756 478,784 (1,502,733) 2,385,912 48,070,078 $ 1,625,445 134,887 34,816 25,714 6,920 286,133 2,624,095 509,060 187,199 573,730 291,376 260,345 144,700 15,839 6,720,259 $ $ $ 45,995 411,660 457,655 $ 55,247,992 $ (29,787,978) $ 15,722,058 5,999 1,276,426 10,000 17,014,483 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ 523,689 4,000 (170,000) 357,689 3% 40% -15% 0% 0% 0% 2% 34,431,393 $ 527,162 265,457 10,330,206 662,081 (1,225,013) 2,055,285 47,046,571 $ (3,477,743) 414,255 (35,283) (1,805,180) (296,050) (518,568) 793,036 (4,925,533) -11% 44% -15% -21% -81% 30% 28% -12% 1,391,357 134,887 34,816 25,714 6,920 286,133 2,354,515 494,750 186,986 573,730 263,955 258,144 144,700 12,112 6,168,719 $ $ $ 45,995 409,106 455,101 $ (45,995) (190,230) (236,225) $ 53,670,391 $ (4,234,037) -9% 4,591,726 -14% $ (38,399,509) $ $ (36,655,908) $ 1,018,151 42% (132,374) -5268% (2,400) -7% (14,783) -135% 24,400 100% 880 11% (245,933) -612% 689,779 23% (70,811) -17% (8,418) -5% (436,045) -317% 11,104 4% (3,038) -1% 7,143 5% 1,388 10% 88,678 100% 0% 927,721 13% 0% 0% -87% -108% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Juvenile Probation (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 270 JUVENILE PROBATION Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CMNTY/INST SUPV OFCR SUPV CMNTY/INSTNL SUPVSN OFCR COMPUTER OPERATOR COUNSELOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DETENTION OFFICER DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL MANAGER FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FTE 2.00 8.00 7.00 14.00 55.00 10.00 4.00 5.00 332.00 1.00 12.50 2.00 3.00 55.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 Market Range Title GENERAL LABORER GENERAL MAINTENANCE SUPV GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GRAPHIC EQUIPMENT TECH INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR LICENSED PRACTICAL NURSE MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC MEDICAL ASSISTANT NURSE PC SPECIALIST PHYSICIAN PROBATION OFFICER PROBATION OFFICER SUPV PROGRAM COORDINATOR PSYCHOLOGIST PURCHASING SPECIALIST TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN UNDETERMINED 443 FTE 22.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 (4.00) 11.00 5.00 1.00 363.00 46.00 9.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 13.00 Total 1,012.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts Organizational Chart Judges of the Supe Superior rior Court and Justices of the Peace Superior Court Judges Administrative Advisory Committees Presiding Judge and Presiding Judge and Associate Presiding Judge Associate Presiding Judge Judicial Executive Committee Superior Court Branch Judges (91) Commissioners (37) Adult Probation Department Trial Courts Administration Limited Jurisdiction Advisory Committees Justices of the Peace (23) Juvenile Probation Department Mission The Mission of the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County and Maricopa County Justice Courts is to provide people with access to a public forum for dispute resolution and court services so citizens can realize timely, fair, economical, individualized justice, and to also serve the community by assisting children and families in need. Vision The Superior Court and Justice Courts in Maricopa County continually explore ways to improve services by experimenting with better methods to resolve disputes and designing programs that address civil and criminal issues fairly and without undue delay. We focus on how to be the best at what we do, whether providing a judicial forum or specific customer-centered programs, and how to position ourselves to anticipate change, rather than react to it. Goals • By June 2005, the Court will provide speedy and fair justice in case processing as follows: 95% of all cases, Superior Court and Justice Courts, shall be disposed in compliance with established trial court and limited jurisdiction court standards. • To prevent delay in judicial decisions, by June 2005, 95% of needs assessments, screenings, and evaluative reports will be made available to judges within guidelines adopted by the court. • Families will experience satisfactory resolution of their legal issues through earlier assessment, more individualized, appropriate decision-making, and coordinated use of available resources and court services as evidenced by: 80% of cases referred to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) through June 2005 will be resolved by ADR. • The public will experience increased access to the court system through improved affordability, convenience and understanding of court processes, while maintaining the efficiency of court services, as evidenced by: 85% of customers surveyed through June 2005 report satisfaction with the services and education provided through the Court's Self Service Centers. 444 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts (Continued) • By September 2004, the court and justice agencies will make informed decisions using timely, accurate and coordinated information provided through an enhanced, integrated Court Information System (iCIS), expanded to include Juvenile Detention Management. In addition, by June 2005, Maricopa County Justice Courts and Adult Probation Pretrial Services Agency will be fully integrated within iCIS. By December 2005, Juvenile Court and Juvenile Probation Department will also be fully integrated within iCIS. Issues • Delays in case processing negatively impact the purposes of the Court; to do individual justice in individual cases, to appear to do justice, to provide a forum for the resolution of legal disputes, to protect individuals from the arbitrary use of government power, to provide a formal record of legal status, to deter criminal behavior, to rehabilitate persons convicted of crime, to separate convicted persons from society, to protect the vulnerable. • The growing complexity of the Court's case processing demands, user needs, and the immediate need for information for decision-making requires an increasingly more sophisticated application of technology in the delivery of system integration, data sharing among justice agencies, and information access by the public. • The trend toward an increase in workload and case complexity will magnify the need for additional resources and re-engineering of case processing to avoid delay and maintain public trust and confidence in the justice system. • Increased internal and external demand for improved case monitoring and auditing systems and procedures impact on the Court's ability to meet its mandatory obligations. • Increasing complexity of court cases, legislative decisions, an expanded definition of family, and a desire by a judiciary unfamiliar with diagnostic adjudication to provide litigants and families with a more meaningful outcome, all drive the Court to provide expert ancillary services, thus taxing the current limited resources and available physical space. • Population growth, complexity of the justice system, citizen diversity, and the transitory nature of the Maricopa County population have increased the demand for existing and new court services, while available court space, staff, and physical infrastructure have failed to support expansion of court programs or diversification of customer services. • The public's increasing expectations for the court to provide social and customer services may be inconsistent with the court's role or ability, resulting in continued erosion of public trust in the judicial system. • Court reform will cause the court to examine and re-evaluate its role and organizational boundaries. • An uncertain economy, low unemployment, Maricopa County's compensation policies, and a lack of training make it increasingly difficult for the Court to attract and retain a qualified workforce. 445 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 800 TRIAL COURTS TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 80AP - PRE-ADJUDICATION PROGRAM $ 480,701 80CI - COURT INFORMATION SERVICES 1,570,601 80CS - CASE MANAGEMENT 17,690,598 80EA - ADR/EARLY ASSESSMENT 1,875,711 80OS - COURT OPERATIONS SUPPORT 8,914,077 80TD - TRIAL DELIVERY 25,267,089 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 5,495,985 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 2,433,491 TOTAL $ 63,728,253 Supplies & Services $ 26,670 1,068,486 1,170,878 61,374 709,267 7,160,218 1,325,679 830,167 $ 12,352,739 Capital Outlay 20,697 63,448 217,806 518,363 $ 820,314 $ Total Expenditures $ 507,371 2,659,784 18,861,476 1,937,085 9,686,792 32,427,307 7,039,470 3,782,021 $ 76,901,306 Total Revenue 460,224 1,128,700 7,544,980 1,664,010 684,246 16,455,330 1,132,001 1,591,433 $ 30,660,924 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: CASE MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Case Management program is to provide case flow management services to the Superior Court, Juvenile Court, and Justice Courts so they can advance case progress in a timely and efficient manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of criminal cases resolved within established trial court standards. 83 86 83.3 92 Percent of civil cases resolved within established trial court standards. 71 95 93.9 97 Percent of Family Court cases (pre-decree) resolved within established trial court standards. 85 85.5 85.2 93 Percent of Juvenile Dependency cases (pre-finding) resolved within established statutory standards. N/A 88.4 88.1 95 Percent of DUI cases resolved within established limited jurisdiction court standards. 56.7 42.5 48 70 Key Results: Program Name: COURT OPERATIONS SUPPORT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Court Operations Support program is to provide internal services to the court and interested parties so they can efficiently resolve court cases in a safe and productive work environment. Key Results: Percent of monies (revenues) collected in relation to the total amounts assessed in Justice Courts. 446 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 92.3 92.9 97 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts (Continued) Program Name: EARLY ASSESSMENT, ADR, SCREENING, AND MEDIATION PROGRAMS Program Purpose: The purpose of the Early Assessment (Conciliation Services), Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Screening, and Mediation (Juvenile Court) programs is to provide screening, intervention, dispute resolution, and mediation alternatives to litigants and interested parties so they can resolve case-related issues in a timely and appropriate manner. Key Results: Percent cases referred to ADR reach resolution through ADR services provided. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 65 56 57.4 75 Program Name: PRE-ADJUDICATION PROGRAMS Program Purpose: The purpose of Pre-Adjudication programs is to provide pre-file information services and monitoring activity to the court, defendants and interested parties so they can initiate court case activity and monitor case progress, as well as provide trained volunteer advocates for juveniles through the C.A.S.A. program so that a full understanding of juvenile's needs can be developed. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of in-custody cases processed within 24 hours of arrest, including advisements of allegations and determinations on release conditions, attorney status and interpreter needs. 100 100 100 100 Percent of reports submitted within guidelines established by C.A.S.A. standards. N/A 65 75 80 Key Results: Program Name: TRIAL DELIVERY Program Purpose: The purpose of the Trial Delivery program is to provide adjudication services to litigants and jurors to the court so that cases can proceed to trial and resolution without delay. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent judges receiving Judicial Performance Review (JPR) with a minimum 80 percent approval rating. 93 N/A 95 N/A Percent of jurors reporting for service that are sent to a courtroom. 80 91.3 86.9 95 Key Results: 447 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 54,434,566 $ 8,721,244 $ 57,338,629 $ 8,451,710 $ 57,242,411 $ 8,778,463 $ 59,357,714 $ 9,626,749 $ 61,268,643 $ 15,632,663 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 63,155,810 65,790,339 66,020,873 68,984,463 76,901,306 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 54,434,566 $ 8,721,244 $ 57,338,629 $ 8,451,710 $ 57,242,411 $ 8,778,463 $ 59,357,714 $ 9,626,749 $ 61,268,643 $ 15,632,663 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 63,155,810 65,790,339 66,020,873 68,984,463 76,901,306 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Trial Courts FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Non-Mandated 0.0% $80.0 $70.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 20.3% Trial Courts Mandates Vs. Expenditures $60.0 $50.0 $40.0 $30.0 $20.0 $10.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 79.7% 448 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 63.2 54.4 8.7 0.0 65.8 57.3 8.5 0.0 66.0 57.2 8.8 0.0 69.0 59.4 9.6 0.0 76.9 61.3 15.6 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Superior Court AUTHORITY Constitution Article VI. §10 Superior Court; Number Of Judges; Constitution Article VI. §11 Superior Court; Presiding Judges; Duties Constitution Article VI. §24 Superior Court; Court Commissioners, Masters And Referees; Constitution. Article VI. §31 Judges Pro Tempore; A.R.S. §12-128 Salary Of Judges; Payment By State And Counties; A.R.S. §12-141 Appointment Of Judges Pro Tempore; A.R.S. §12-143 Payment Of Salaries And Other Expenses; Providing Facilities; Judicial Employees; A.R.S. §12-161 Definition Of Tax Court; A.R.S.§12-162 Administration Of The Tax Court; Principal Office; Travel Expenses; Facilities; Employees; A.R.S. §12-211, Appointment; Qualifications And Residence (Court Commissioners); A.R.S. §12-213 Commissioners In Certain Counties; Appointment; Powers And Duties; Salary; A.R.S. §12-221, Appointment And Oath (Court Reporter); A.R.S. §12-223 Attendance At And Report Of Proceedings; Sale Of Transcripts; A.R.S. §12-224 Salary; Fees For Transcripts; Free Transcripts; Office Supplies; A.R.S. §12-225 Appointment Of Deputies; Compensation; A.R.S. §12-231 Appointment And Duties (Bailiff); A.R.S. §12-241 Appointment; Court Attendance (Interpreters); A.R.S. §12-242 Interpreters For Deaf Persons; Proceedings; Definitions. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The status of the courts as a separate branch of the government is established by the Federal and state constitutions. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Judges/Commissioners/Pro Tems: Every county must have at least one judge of the superior court, and may have additional judges up to a limit of one judge per 30,000 county residents. Superior Court judges may appoint court commissioners, masters, and referees; the presiding judge in counties with three or more superior court judges can appoint commissioners. Judges Salaries are set by the legislature and paid one half by the state and one half by the counties. The presiding judge can request authority from the chief justice of the supreme court to appoint judges pro tempore "subject to the approval of the board of supervisors of the county." The associated support personnel and other operating costs of judges pro tempore must be paid by the county. Tax Court: The Arizona Tax Court is required to be in the Superior Court in Maricopa County. The "county shall fund the personnel and budget requirements' of the Tax Court "as determined by the presiding Judge." Court Reporters: The statutes specify that "each judge of the superior court shall appoint a court reporter." Court Reporters' salaries are fixed by the presiding judge with the approval of the board of supervisors, and must be funded by the county. Bailiffs: "Each Judge … may appoint such bailiffs as necessary to ensure the orderly transaction of the business court." Interpreters: The court is required to provide interpreters for witness and defendants. Aside from the above, a number of laws, court rules, and judicial orders regulate the policies and procedures followed by the Superior Court. 449 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts (Continued) TITLE Justices of the Peace AUTHORITY Constitution Article 6, § 32 Superior and other courts; qualification of judges; A.R.S. §§ 22-101 through 22-125 Justice Precincts and Precinct Officers; A.R.S. §§ 22-201 through 22-284 Civil Proceedings in Justice Courts; A.R.S. §§ 22-301 through 22-375 Criminal Proceedings in Justice Courts, and Small Claims A.R.S. §§ 22-501 through 22-524 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The office of the Justice of the Peace is established in the Arizona Constitution. The Constitution was amended in 1990 to increase Civil Jurisdiction to $10,000 or less. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Board of Supervisors can create, change and abolish justice precincts, but may not abolish a precinct until the expiration of terms of office of the present Justice and Constable. Justices of the Peace may act in other precincts within the County. The County must pay for office rent, stationary, telephone, lights, official travel expenses when the Justice of the Peace is outside of h/her precinct and 60% of the salary and benefits of the Justice. Justices of the Peace salaries are established by judicial productivity credits, which entitle them to varying percentages of the salary of the Superior Court Judge ranging from 25% to 70% (A.R.S §§ 22-125). Justices of the Peace are required to prepare a schedule of misdemeanor traffic violations and specific amounts of bail each; they are also required to prepare a schedule of civil traffic violations and the specific amount of deposit for each. 450 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 800 TRIAL COURTS Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 51,875,154 $ 11,853,099 63,728,253 $ Supplies & Services 8,667,310 $ 3,685,429 12,352,739 $ Capital Outlay 726,179 $ 94,135 820,314 $ Total Expenditures 61,268,643 $ 15,632,663 76,901,306 $ Total Revenue 15,028,261 15,632,663 30,660,924 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 800 TRIAL COURTS ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 610 LICENSES AND PERMITS 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ 2,721,723 1,881,959 9,392,231 10,492,846 153,102 547,061 25,188,922 $ $ 2,957,927 2,258,492 11,097,997 10,168,900 49,333 376,178 26,908,827 $ $ 2,957,927 2,258,492 11,097,997 10,168,900 49,333 376,178 26,908,827 $ $ 2,839,182 1,964,027 10,408,964 10,612,755 69,555 547,649 26,442,131 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 2,505 2,975,325 2,047,984 13,126,374 10,384,381 31,502 595,138 29,163,209 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 2,975,325 2,138,256 14,158,833 10,642,443 36,403 709,664 30,660,924 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ (17,398) 120,236 (3,060,836) (473,543) 12,930 (333,486) (3,752,097) 0% -1% 5% -28% -5% 26% -89% -14% EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 44,175,593 $ 544,459 92,161 9,174,326 315,593 (583,543) 1,146,297 54,864,887 $ 45,015,456 $ 239,795 98,002 10,219,623 957,243 (747,080) 1,223,064 57,006,103 $ 45,525,200 $ 251,796 89,000 11,101,234 673,539 (747,080) 1,223,064 58,116,753 $ 44,494,998 $ 429,031 162,820 11,217,051 192,248 (589,076) 1,067,026 56,974,098 $ 46,262,929 $ 325,523 105,812 12,658,891 610,111 (949,960) 755,218 59,768,524 $ 48,520,051 $ 403,000 124,513 13,249,121 527,261 (1,235,927) 2,140,234 63,728,253 $ (2,994,851) (151,204) (35,513) (2,147,887) 146,278 488,847 (917,170) (5,611,500) -7% -60% -40% -19% 22% -65% -75% -10% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ 2,212,536 2,290 51,695 3,236,064 310,628 800,368 3,003,665 710,474 682,784 213,686 504,194 4,551 11,732,936 2,660,798 2,967 12,979 2,831,716 316,000 1,424,148 3,079,116 774,783 749,123 327,711 420,161 12,599,502 2,427,225 678 114,849 2,704,557 146,000 1,122,418 2,871,351 884,825 1,394 800,466 324,457 421,033 58,761 11,878,012 1,726,150 4 1,911 179,543 2,659,886 93,433 603,969 3,267,006 951,092 480,257 190,408 578,818 24,771 10,757,248 2,223,827 2,072 2,641,136 110,000 918,412 2,860,913 771,790 622,996 310,114 560,004 81,059 11,102,323 3,540,729 $ 2,072 (16,833) 2,686,211 110,000 882,964 2,860,913 775,240 622,996 250,114 550,000 71,500 16,833 12,352,739 $ (1,113,504) (1,394) 114,849 16,833 18,346 36,000 239,454 10,438 109,585 1,394 177,470 74,343 (128,968) (12,739) (16,833) (474,727) -46% 0% -206% 100% 0% 1% 25% 21% 0% 12% 100% 22% 23% -31% -22% 0% -4% CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ $ $ $ Sub Total $ 75,945 654,463 730,407 Total Expenditures $ 67,328,230 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ 871,496 871,496 $ 70,477,101 (42,139,307) $ $ $ $ $ 30,000 871,496 901,496 $ 70,896,261 (43,568,274) $ $ $ $ 767,360 767,360 $ 68,498,707 (43,987,434) $ 451 $ $ $ $ $ 752,360 752,360 $ 71,623,207 (42,056,575) $ $ $ 820,314 820,314 $ 76,901,306 $ (42,459,998) $ $ (46,240,382) $ 30,000 51,182 81,182 100% 6% 9% (6,005,045) -8% 2,252,948 -5% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Trial Courts (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 800 TRIAL COURTS Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV ATTORNEY COMPUTER OPERATOR CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR COUNSELOR COURT COMMISSIONER DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FACILITIES SVCS OFCR SUPV FACILITIES SVCS OFFICER FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR GRAPHIC EQUIPMENT TECH HR GENERALIST FTE 5.00 2.00 8.00 222.50 412.33 62.00 39.00 2.00 5.00 1.00 32.00 43.00 1.00 9.00 15.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 139.00 7.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 9.00 Market Range Title HR SPECIALIST HR SUPERVISOR INFO CENTER MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS PROJECT MGR INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INTERPRETER JUSTICE OF THE PEACE LEGAL ASSISTANT LEGAL SECRETARY SUPV LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST LIBRARY MANAGER LIBRARY SUPERVISOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC OPERATIONS MANAGER PC SPECIALIST PURCHASING SPECIALIST PURCHASING SUPERVISOR SOCIAL WORKER (BS) SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST UNDETERMINED 452 FTE 5.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 24.50 23.00 10.00 1.00 75.00 1.00 6.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 91.00 5.00 4.00 9.00 8.00 Total 1,316.33 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elected Officials Maricopa County Citizens Superintendent of Schools Dr. Sandra Dowling Sheriff Joe Arpaio Constables (23) County Attorney Richard Romley Board of Supervisors Board of Directors for Flood Control, Library and Stadium Districts Clerk of the Court Michael Jeanes Treasurer Doug Todd Assessor Kevin Ross Recorder Helen Purcell Board of Supervisors The five-member Board of Supervisors is the governing body of Maricopa County. Members are elected to fouryear terms and the supervisors elect a chairman during their first meeting each January. Appointed by the Board are the Internal Auditor, the Clerk of the Board, and the County Administrative Officer. Special functions of the Board of Supervisors are to also serve as the Board of Directors for the Flood Control District, the Library and Stadium Districts. Other duties include the Board of Equalization and the Planning and Zoning Commission. The board holds statutory and formal meetings that generally are scheduled twice each month on Wednesdays. Informal meetings generally are held on the Monday preceding the formal meetings. Although the adopted schedule can change, meetings are posted at least 24 hours in advance, in compliance with Arizona’s Open Meeting Law. Citizens are encouraged to attend. All meetings are videotaped and air on local government access channels throughout Maricopa County. Check your nearest cable company or city office for scheduling information. 453 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elected Officials (Continued) Elected Biographies Fulton Brock, District 1 (Republican) Fulton Brock was elected to the Board of Supervisors in November 1996. He was elected Chairman in 1999. In January 2000, Supervisor Brock was appointed Chairman of the Maricopa County Trails Commission. As a former State Representative of District 6 in the Arizona House of Representatives, Supervisor Brock served as Vice-Chairman of the Commerce Committee and member of the Economic Development, International Trade and Tourism, Banking and Insurance and Rules Committees. Supervisor Brock is a graduate of Centre College of Kentucky. In 1982, Supervisor Brock Founded LDC, Inc. a privately-held telephone/operator service company. Supervisor Brock, his wife Susan, and their three 3 daughters are residents of Chandler. Don Stapley, District 2 (Republican) Don Stapley was first elected to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors in November 1994 and re-elected for a four-year term in November 1996 and November 2000. Stapley was elected as the 1997 and 2002 Chairman of the Board of Supervisors. At the National Association of Counties (NACo), Stapley is the current Chairman of the Large Urban County Caucus (LUCC) and is active on such task forces as Homeland Security, Medicaid/Medicare Reform and the Justice and Law Enforcement Committee. He served as a member of the Board of Directors and Fiscal Affairs Committee of the Lutheran Health Care Network for more than 10 years and is an honorary member of the Mesa Baseline Rotary Club, having previously served as club director and president. Stapley and his wife Kathy have four children and are actively involved in the East Valley. Andrew Kunasek, District 3 – Chairman (Republican) By the unanimous vote of his fellow members, Andy Kunasek was appointed to the Board of Supervisors in September of 1997. Supervisor Kunasek was subsequently elected by the constituency of District 3 in 1998 and reelected in 2000. He was then elected Chair of the Board for 2000 and again in 2004. Supervisor Kunasek is an Arizona native and is a graduate of Mountain View High School. He earned a bachelor degree in management from Arizona State University in 1986. Kunasek owns interests in citrus and cattle operations, and is president of Mercado Management, a diversified land acquisition and real estate management company. Kunasek has been active in his community having served as treasurer of the Maricopa County Republican Party; Maricopa County Trial Court Selection Committee; Maricopa County Charter Committee; and the Maricopa County Citizens Judicial Advisory Council. He was also a 1996 Delegate to the Republican National Convention. In 2003, the National Association of County Parks and Recreation voted him the country’s Outstanding Public Official of the Year. Andy serves on the Public Lands Steering Committee for National Association of Counties and the Maricopa County Trail Commission. Andy, his wife Kim, and their three children live in North Phoenix. 454 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elected Officials (Continued) Max W Wilson, District 4 (Republican) Max Wilson has lived and worked in Maricopa County for the past thirtyfive years. His efforts have met with a great deal of success and he has had wonderful experiences along the way. Mr. Wilson’s management skills have been honed even further by his election to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. He now believe it is time to give back to the state and county he has enjoyed for so long, and he thinks the experience and knowledge he has gained over the years has put him in a position to do that service. Mr. Wilson was born in Salt Lake City, Utah and has attended Glendale Community College in Glendale, Arizona. He is married to Judith and has five children and eight grandchildren. Mr. Wilson currently serves on the Arizona Board of Realtors, the Southwest Valley Chamber of Commerce, and the Peeples Valley/Yarnell Historical Society Board of Directors. He has recently served on the Arizona Diamondbacks Charity Board of Directors and the Sun Health La Loma Board of Directors. Mary Rose Garrido Wilcox, District 5 (Democrat) Mary Rose Garrido Wilcox was born in Superior, Arizona and is a fourth generation Arizona native from a pioneer Mexican-American family. Ms. Wilcox was re-elected to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors in 2000 for a third four-year term. Ms. Wilcox previously served on the Phoenix City Council for nine years. She was honored as being the first Hispanic woman ever to serve on the Phoenix City Council and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. Ms. Wilcox has been involved with numerous boards and commissions, including her membership on the boards of the Phoenix Economic Growth Corporation, Downtown Phoenix Partnership, and the Arizona Hispanic Women’s Corporation. She is the Chair for National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund. Ms. Wilcox and her husband Earl have a daughter and five grandsons. Kevin M Ross, Assessor (Republican) Kevin Ross was elected to serve as Maricopa County Assessor in November of 1996 and re-elected in November 2000. Mr. Ross is a native of a small farming community in south central Minnesota. He earned his bachelor's degree at the University of Minnesota. Kevin trained from 1986 through 1989 in commercial and residential lending. In 1990, Kevin founded his own mortgage company in Tempe, specializing in Commercial and Residential accounts. He is a current member of the International Association of Assessing Officers, a member of the Board of Directors of the Father Joseph Patterson Foundation and is a past member of the National and State Associations of Mortgage Brokers. Kevin has been active in a variety of independent businesses and charitable causes. Kevin and his wife, Lisa, reside in Gilbert, Arizona. 455 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elected Officials (Continued) Richard M Romley, Attorney (Republican) Richard M. Romley’s first term as County Attorney began January 1, 1989. Now serving his fourth consecutive term, he has taken a leadership position on many criminal justice issues, including victims rights, DUI legislation, domestic violence, protection of children, slumlord abatement, and illegal drugs. During his tenure, the Office has received national recognition and numerous rewards for leadership and innovation. In 2001, the Disabled American Veterans awarded Romley the National Commander’s Award. He was subsequently honored in Washington, D.C., with LIFE’s Presidential Unsung Hero Award. An Arizona native, Romley served two years as a U.S. Marine in Vietnam. Afterwards, he enrolled in Arizona State University, earning degrees in Business and Law. Romley began his career as a prosecutor with the City of Phoenix in 1980. Two years later, he joined the Maricopa County Attorney's Office as a Deputy County Attorney, resigning in 1988 to make his successful run for County Attorney. He and his wife, Carol, live in Scottsdale. They have three grown sons. Michael K Jeanes, Clerk of the Superior Court (Republican) Michael K. Jeanes was elected by the voters of Maricopa County in November 1998 to serve a four-year term and re-elected to a second term in November 2002. He earned his Bachelor of Arts Degree in Political Science from Loyola University of Chicago and a Master of Public Administration Degree from Arizona State University. He has 23 years of court/county management experience, which include 17 years with the Clerk’s Office. As Clerk of the Court, Mr. Jeanes is the official record keeper and financial officer for the Superior Court and is responsible for administering a $20+ million budget; processing over $101 million in victim restitution, trust monies, fines and fees and over 1.7 million documents per year. Mr. Jeanes is active in many local and national professional organizations. Michael and his wife, Jill, have three sons. Helen Purcell, Recorder (Republican) Helen Purcell was elected to the Office of Maricopa County Recorder in November 1988, re-elected in 1992, 1996, and 2000. She has been a member of the Board of Directors of the National Association of Counties since 1997, and a member of the Board of Directors of the Kids Voting-Arizona. In 2002 she received three awards for her redistricting internet sites: a NACo eGovernance Award of Merit, a NACo Achievement Award, and a Special Achievement in GIS award from Environmental Systems Research Institute. In 2000 she was presented with an award designating the Elections Department Vote-by-Mail technology as part of the 2000 Computerworld Collection at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History in Washington, D.C. In July of 2001 she received the NACo Achievement Award for Digital Recording. She was recently appointed to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) Advisory Board and is the only County member appointed by the Chairman of the EAC to the Technical Guidelines Development Committee. Her responsibilities include recording and maintaining 4,500 to 10,000 documents for public record per day and administering the Elections Department that conducts all national, state and countywide elections, and provides support for cities, towns, schools, and other jurisdictions. She has two sons, Mark and Todd, and four grandsons. 456 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elected Officials (Continued) Joseph M Arpaio, Sheriff (Republican) Joseph M. Arpaio took office as Sheriff of Maricopa County in January 1993 and won re-election in 1996 and 2000. Labeled “the toughest Sheriff in America” after he opened the largest tent city jail in the U.S. and demanded spartan conditions in all county jails, Sheriff Arpaio is equally renowned for his extensive use of posse volunteers in major law enforcement operations. A distinguished law enforcement career spanning more than 45 years, primarily with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, shaped the philosophy that guides his actions as Sheriff. Programs that have made him a national and international leader in the anti-crime movement have simultaneously saved the county taxpayers millions of dollars. Sandra Dowling, Ed.D., Superintendent of Schools (Republican) was first elected School Superintendent in 1988. She was re-elected by a wide margin in 1992, 1996 & 2000. As Superintendent, her responsibilities include serving as fiscal agent for 40 school districts, providing educational programs, maintaining payroll services for 16,000 school district employees, conducting school district elections and technological support for school districts. Dr. Dowling is a member of over two dozen civic, educational, county and state organizations. Dr. Dowling earned a Bachelor’s degree in secondary education and a master’s in educational administration from Arizona State University. In 1994, she received her doctorate degree in school finance and education law from Northern Arizona University. Dr. Dowling and her husband Dennis live in Peoria. They have four children. Doug Todd, Treasurer Doug Todd was elected to the office of County Treasurer in November 1992, reelected in 1996 and 2000. Mr. Todd is a 14-year veteran of the Arizona Legislature, having served 4 terms as a member of the House of Representatives and 3 terms as State Senator from Legislative District 27 (Tempe). A native Arizonan and a lifelong Republican, Doug was born in Prescott and graduated from Prescott High School in 1947. He moved to Tempe in that year to attend Arizona State University, where he graduated in 1951 with a Bachelor’s Degree in Agronomy. He farmed 320 acres south of Tempe, raising alfalfa, cotton, barley, a small herd of Registered Hereford cattle, and retired from all farming operations in 1974. Doug lives in Tempe with his wife, Mary Anne Corbell Todd. They have five children and many grandchildren and a couple of great grandchildren. 457 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Assessor Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Assessor Assessor Kevin Ross, Kevin Ross,County CountyAssessor Assessor Administration Personal Property Real Property Support Services Information Services Quality Assurance GIS/ Mapping CAMA Modeling Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Assessor's Office is to efficiently administer state property tax laws and to provide quality information to the taxpayers and various taxing jurisdictions to assure that all county property is valued fairly and equitably. Vision To do our very Best. Goals • By June 2005 and annually thereafter maintaining an employee retention rate of at least 95% of quality, experienced employees exclusive of retirees. • By June 2005 and annually thereafter make fair and equitable valuation of property that continue to meet or exceed Department of Revenue guidelines. • By June 2006 and annually thereafter have quality customer service and information that annually “satisfies" at least 95% of the public and taxing jurisdictions based upon satisfaction surveys. • By June 2005 and annually thereafter achieve timely and accurate identification of property owners that are updated within 30 days of a recorded change 95% of the time. • By June 2005 and annually thereafter have new construction added to our system within 30 days of completion 99% of the time and passing audit compliance 98% of the time. Issues • Budgetary constraints limit our technological advancements and level of services available. • A competitive market for quality employees continues to create a problem of attracting and retaining qualified and experienced staff. 458 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Assessor (Continued) • The County's strong real estate industry continues to stretch our resources in keeping up with new construction and property, split sales, appeals and other growth issues. • Technological advancements and opportunities allow for more efficient work processes in every department and provide additional sources of analysis and information for the public. • Inter-operability of county and other government agencies impact departments' ability to achieve objectives. • Legislative changes, unfunded mandates, continue to demand more resources, specifically staffing and technology. • Demographic shifts creates a larger population eligible for exemptions benefits. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 120 ASSESSOR TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 12IR - INFORMATION RESOURCE $ 912,896 12PA - PROPERTY ASSESSMENT 10,417,759 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 475,319 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1,757,049 TOTAL $ 13,563,023 Supplies & Services $ 99,530 1,653,824 111,412 268,628 $ 2,133,394 Capital Outlay 68,394 44,085 $ 112,479 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,012,426 12,071,583 655,125 2,069,762 $ 15,808,896 Total Revenue 133,669 $ 133,669 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: PROPERTY ASSESSMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Property Assessment program is to provide ownership, mapping, property characteristics and valuation information to the public, government agencies and internal customers so that they can be assured that our valuations are fair and equitable. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of recorded documents processed within 45 days N/A 95 92 95 Percent of new construction parcels processed within 30 days of completion N/A 99.8 99.8 99.5 Percent of fair and equitable valuations that meet or exceed DOR guidelines N/A 100 98.5 100 Key Results: 459 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Assessor (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 14,354,295 $ $ 14,494,126 $ $ 14,410,210 $ $ 15,623,329 $ $ 15,808,896 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 14,354,295 14,494,126 14,410,210 15,623,329 15,808,896 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 14,354,295 $ $ 14,494,126 $ $ 14,410,210 $ $ 15,623,329 $ $ 15,808,896 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 14,354,295 14,494,126 14,410,210 15,623,329 15,808,896 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Assessor FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Assessor Mandates Vs. Expenditures $16.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $14.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $12.0 $10.0 $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 460 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 14.4 14.4 0.0 0.0 14.5 14.5 0.0 0.0 14.4 14.4 0.0 0.0 15.6 15.6 0.0 0.0 15.8 15.8 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Assessor (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE AUTHORITY Assessor A.R.S. § 11-401 Enumeration Of Officers; A.R.S. § 11-541 Powers And Duties Generally; A.R.S. § 11-542 Bond, Oath; A.R.S. § 11-401; Liability For Taxes On Property Unassessed Through Negligence; A.R.S. § 42 Taxation. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The County Assessor is an elected official of Maricopa County. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Assessor will to the best of his knowledge and ability, truly and fairly determine the valuation, without favor or partiality of all the taxable property in the County at its full cash value. The Assessor and his sureties shall be liable for all taxes on taxable property within the County, which through the neglect of the Assessor remains unassessed. The primary duties are dictated by ARS 42, Chapters 11-17 and include, but are not limited to the following: On any date before March 1 of each year the County Assessor shall notify each owner of record, or purchaser under a deed of trust or an agreement of sale, of property that is valued by the Assessor as to the property's full cash value and the limited value, if applicable, to be used for assessment purposes. For property that is valued by the Assessor, in the case of new construction, additions to or deletions from assessment parcels and changes in property use that occur after January 1 of the valuation year, the Assessor shall notify the owner of the property of any change in valuation on or before September 30 of the valuation year. The County Assessor shall prepare the assessment roll in the form and containing the information prescribed by the department. On or before December 1 of each year, the County Assessor shall complete property and mines listed in the roll, showing the ownership of the real property and mines and all assessment lists from which the roll was compiled. The Assessor shall deliver the list and certified roll to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors who shall file them in the Clerk's office. On or before February 10 of the tax year, the county assessor shall transmit and certify to the property tax oversight commission and to the governing body of the political subdivision or district in the county the values that are required to compute the levy limit prescribed by section 42-17051. On or before February 10 of the tax year, the county assessor shall determine the limited property value for the current tax year of each school district in the county and shall transmit the values to the county school superintendent to assist the superintendent in computing equalization assistance for education as provided in section 15-991. On or before February 10 of the tax year, the county assessor shall transmit to the staff of the joint legislative budget committee and to the governor's office of strategic planning and budgeting the values that are required to compute the truth in taxation rates prescribed by section 41-1276 461 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Assessor (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTEDD 120 ASSESSOR Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 13,563,023 $ 13,563,023 $ Supplies & Services 2,133,394 $ 2,133,394 $ Capital Outlay 112,479 $ 112,479 $ Total Expenditures 15,808,896 $ 15,808,896 $ Total Revenue 133,669 133,669 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 120 ASSESSOR ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % 0% 0% $ $ 129,189 129,189 $ $ 133,669 133,669 $ $ 133,669 133,669 $ $ 145,908 145,908 $ $ 133,669 133,669 $ $ 133,669 133,669 $ $ $ 9,698,586 126,357 30,109 2,395,569 11,147 12,261,768 $ 10,003,019 127,435 30,000 2,485,813 6,000 12,652,267 $ 10,335,705 127,452 30,000 2,919,451 6,000 13,418,608 $ 10,009,789 108,526 50,410 2,656,699 6,523 12,831,948 $ 10,294,972 127,452 30,000 3,109,007 6,000 13,567,431 $ 10,301,572 127,452 30,000 3,097,999 6,000 13,563,023 $ $ $ 295,848 20,000 3,750 464,909 438,835 150,000 42,234 198,388 480,000 39,430 2,133,394 $ $ 295,848 20,000 3,750 453,000 438,835 150,000 42,234 198,388 480,000 39,430 2,121,485 $ $ 286,088 20,419 3,750 1,693 240 477,040 439,076 147,706 40,642 190,895 471,341 39,430 2,118,320 $ $ 295,848 10,000 3,045 395,000 435,992 150,000 35,717 195,207 455,000 41,052 2,016,861 $ $ 295,646 10,000 3,000 395,000 435,992 150,000 35,717 195,000 455,000 41,052 2,016,407 $ Sub Total $ 293,211 21,653 3,108 18,531 431,578 430,705 155,772 62,121 181,270 415,335 37,136 2,050,419 $ Sub Total $ 98,023 98,023 $ $ 97,278 97,278 $ $ 97,278 97,278 $ $ 77,334 77,334 $ $ 44,085 44,085 $ $ Total Expenditures $ 14,410,210 $ 14,765,952 $ 15,532,747 $ 15,027,602 $ 15,733,001 $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ (14,281,021) $ $ (14,632,283) $ $ (15,399,078) $ 462 $ (14,881,694) $ $ (15,599,332) $ - 34,133 (178,548) (144,415) 0% 0% 0% -6% 0% -1% $ (10,000) (705) (69,909) (2,843) (6,517) (3,181) (25,000) 1,622 (116,533) 0% -100% -23% 0% 0% -18% -1% 0% -18% -2% -5% 4% -6% 112,479 112,479 $ $ (15,201) (15,201) -16% -16% 15,808,896 $ (276,149) -2% 276,149 -2% $ (15,675,227) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Assessor (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 120 ASSESSOR Market Range Title ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV APPRAISER APPRAISER SUPERVISOR AUDITOR COMPUTER OPERATOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR ELECTED ENGINEERING AIDE FTE 1.00 99.00 2.00 11.00 133.00 9.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 13.00 1.00 1.00 15.00 Market Range Title FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR SPECIALIST INFO CENTER MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS PROJECT MGR OPERATIONS MANAGER PC SPECIALIST SPECIALIZED MODELER TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST Total 463 FTE 1.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 321.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors Mission The Mission of Maricopa County is to provide regional leadership and fiscally responsible, necessary public services to its residents so they can enjoy living in healthy and safe communities. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Strategic Priorities • Provide regional leadership in critical public policy areas in a fiscally responsible manner. • Minimize the burden on the property taxpayer through rate reductions. • Healthy community and solvent healthcare system. • Safe community through a streamlined, integrated criminal justice system. • Provide regional leadership for a regional transportation system. • Land use will be planned, managed and funded responsibly; Luke AFB will be preserved. • Maricopa County will continue to improve its positive public image based on results achieved. 464 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,056,671 $ $ 1,041,302 $ $ 1,047,197 $ $ 1,090,007 $ $ 1,248,380 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,056,671 1,041,302 1,047,197 1,090,007 1,248,380 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,056,671 $ $ 1,041,302 $ $ 1,047,197 $ $ 1,090,007 $ $ 1,248,380 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,056,671 1,041,302 1,047,197 1,090,007 1,248,380 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Board of Supervisors FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Board of Supervisors Mandates Vs. Expenditures $1.2 Non-Mandated 0.0% $1.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 465 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Board of Supervisors AUTHORITY A.R.S. §11-201 Powers of county; A.R.S. §11-251 Powers of board; A.R.S. §11-214 Regular and special meetings. There are other statutory references regarding the Board of Supervisors, far too many to detail in this type of report. Everything the Board does is in some way mandated by statute; A.R.S. §11-251 lists some sixty (60) powers and duties of the Board. The Board of Supervisors are also the Board of Directors of the Flood Control District A.R.S. § 48-3602, Library District A.R.S. § 48-3901, and the Stadium District A.R.S. § 48-4202, SHCD A.R.S. § 5501.01, as well as numerous special districts. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Board of Supervisors is the governing body of Maricopa County with specific statutory duties. Boards of Supervisors in general and Maricopa County jurisdiction boundaries are delineated in A.R.S. § 11-211 and 11-109. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The powers of a County shall be exercised only by the Board of Supervisors or by agents and officers acting under its authority and authority of law. Action of the Board of Supervisors shall determine the budgets of all elected and appointed county officers. Regular meetings of the Board shall be held each month as designated by the Board. Special meetings may also be called with appropriate notice. Powers of the Board include, but are not limited to the following: supervise the official conduct of all county officers and officers of all districts; divide the counties into such districts as required by law; establish, abolish, and change election precincts; lay out, maintain, control and manage public roads; provide for the care and maintenance of the indigent sick of the county; cause to be erected and furnished buildings as necessary including jails; sell at public auction property of the county as may be necessary to defray general current expenses thereof; and direct and control prosecution and defense of all actions to which the county is a party. 466 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 1 Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Board of Supervisors Board of Supervisors District 1 - Fulton Brock District 1 - Fulton Brock Respective Direct Report Staff Constituent Services Administration Clerk of the Board County Administrative Officer Internal Audit Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 010 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 TOTAL FUNDS Program 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG $ TOTAL $ Personal Services 221,752 221,752 Supplies & Services $ 24,927 $ 24,927 467 $ $ Capital Outlay 2,997 2,997 Total Expenditures $ 249,676 $ 249,676 $ $ Total Revenue - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 1 (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 010 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 221,752 $ 221,752 $ Supplies & Services 24,927 $ 24,927 $ Capital Outlay 2,997 $ 2,997 $ Total Expenditures 249,676 $ 249,676 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 010 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ 167,114 34,366 201,480 $ $ Sub Total $ 3,797 2,005 3,149 104 135 7,145 3,088 143 19,566 $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ 165,374 36,002 201,376 $ $ $ 7,427 2,300 400 500 4,320 4,937 100 19,984 2,037 2,037 $ $ 223,083 $ $ (223,083) $ 169,504 43,974 1,115 214,593 $ $ $ 6,809 2,182 366 458 4,454 5,173 236 19,678 3,396 3,396 $ $ 224,756 $ $ (224,756) $ 167,519 37,765 205,284 $ $ $ 2,980 300 163 23 2,702 814 333 7,315 3,682 3,682 $ $ 237,953 $ $ (237,953) $ 168,857 43,303 2,091 214,251 $ $ $ 9,727 2,182 400 458 6,287 5,173 700 24,927 2,706 2,706 $ $ 215,305 $ $ (215,305) $ 175,457 44,204 2,091 221,752 $ $ $ 9,727 2,182 400 458 6,287 5,173 700 24,927 $ 2,997 2,997 $ $ 2,997 2,997 $ $ 242,175 $ 249,676 $ $ (242,175) $ $ (249,676) $ (5,953) (230) (976) (7,159) -4% -1% -88% -3% (2,918) (34) (1,833) (464) (5,249) -43% 0% 0% -9% 0% -41% 0% -197% -27% 685 685 19% 19% (11,723) -5% 11,723 -5% Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 010 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 1 Market Range Title ADMINISTRATOR FTE 2.00 Market Range Title ELECTED Total 468 FTE 1.00 3.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 2 Organizational Chart Maricopa C County ounty Citizens Board of Supervisors Board of Supervisors District 2 - Don Stapley District 2 - Don Stapley Respective Direct Report Staff Constituent Services Administration Clerk of the Board County Administrative Officer Internal Audit Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 020 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 TOTAL FUNDS Program 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG $ TOTAL $ Personal Services 212,723 212,723 Supplies & Services $ 34,966 $ 34,966 469 $ $ Capital Outlay 1,987 1,987 Total Expenditures $ 249,676 $ 249,676 $ $ Total Revenue - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 2 (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 020 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 212,723 $ 212,723 $ Supplies & Services 34,966 $ 34,966 $ Capital Outlay 1,987 $ 1,987 $ Total Expenditures 249,676 $ 249,676 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 020 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE 159,057 854 32,722 50 192,683 $ $ 155,796 2,094 32,327 190,217 4,181 $ 590 85 (300) 5,580 15,723 667 (300) 26,226 $ 11,000 1,350 645 120 9,200 11,564 300 34,179 $ $ $ 159,736 2,094 39,966 1,612 203,408 $ $ $ 159,242 107 37,788 7 197,144 $ $ 159,126 2,094 42,578 1,424 205,222 12,107 2,350 646 120 4,879 14,564 300 34,966 $ 10,950 1,350 646 120 9,200 11,564 300 34,130 $ 1,515 $ 161 93 4 34 4,418 8,834 86 (211) 14,934 $ $ $ $ 165,726 2,094 43,479 1,424 212,723 $ $ $ (5,990) (3,513) 188 (9,315) -4% 0% -9% 12% -5% -11% 0% -74% 0% 0% 0% 47% -26% 0% 0% -2% $ 12,107 2,350 646 120 4,879 14,564 300 34,966 $ (1,157) (1,000) 4,321 (3,000) (836) $ Sub Total $ 352 352 $ $ 360 360 $ $ 410 410 $ $ 724 724 $ $ 1,987 1,987 $ $ 1,987 1,987 $ $ (1,577) (1,577) -385% -385% Total Expenditures $ 219,261 $ 224,756 $ 237,948 $ 212,802 $ 242,175 $ 249,676 $ (11,728) -5% 11,728 -5% Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ (219,261) $ (224,756) $ (237,948) $ (212,802) $ (242,175) $ (249,676) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 020 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 2 Market Range Title ADMINISTRATOR FTE 2.00 Market Range Title ELECTED Total 470 FTE 1.00 3.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 3 Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Board of Supervisors Board of Supervisors District 3 - Andrew Kunasek - Chairman District 3 - Andrew Kunasek - Chairman Respective Direct Report Staff Constituent Services Administration Clerk of the Board County Administrative Officer Internal Audit Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 030 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 TOTAL FUNDS Program 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG $ TOTAL $ Personal Services 227,814 227,814 Supplies & Services $ 20,519 $ 20,519 471 $ $ Capital Outlay 1,343 1,343 Total Expenditures $ 249,676 $ 249,676 $ $ Total Revenue - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 3 (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 030 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 227,814 $ 227,814 $ Supplies & Services 20,519 $ 20,519 $ Capital Outlay 1,343 $ 1,343 $ Total Expenditures 249,676 $ 249,676 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 030 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE 144,688 20,459 26,245 60 191,452 $ $ 177,122 28,483 205,605 2,580 $ 1,158 13 (95) 2,781 1,832 1,238 (85) 9,421 $ 5,590 3,340 620 120 4,511 2,800 1,570 18,551 $ $ $ 181,891 36,912 218,803 $ $ $ 5,088 3,340 620 120 4,622 3,140 1,570 18,500 $ $ 169,221 7,807 34,593 5 211,626 $ $ 181,197 39,116 220,313 927 $ 61 131 3 109 3,620 2,649 1,447 (19) 8,928 $ 8,564 3,340 620 120 3,165 3,140 1,570 20,519 $ $ $ 187,797 40,017 227,814 $ $ $ (5,906) (3,105) (9,011) -3% 0% -8% 0% -4% -68% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 32% 0% 0% 0% -11% -107% -107% $ 8,564 3,340 620 120 3,165 3,140 1,570 20,519 $ (3,476) 1,457 (2,019) $ Sub Total $ 586 586 $ $ 600 600 $ $ 648 648 $ $ 597 597 $ $ 1,343 1,343 $ $ 1,343 1,343 $ $ (695) (695) Total Expenditures $ 201,460 $ 224,756 $ 237,951 $ 221,151 $ 242,175 $ 249,676 $ (11,725) -5% 11,725 -5% Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ (201,460) $ (224,756) $ (237,951) $ (221,151) $ (242,175) $ (249,676) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 030 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 3 Market Range Title ADMINISTRATOR ELECTED FTE 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT Total 472 FTE 1.00 0.50 3.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 4 Organizational Chart Maricopa C County ounty Citizens Board of Supervisors Board of Supervisors District 4 - Max Wilson District 4 - Max Wilson Respective Direct Report Staff Constituent Services Administration Clerk of the Board County Administrative Officer Internal Audit Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 040 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 TOTAL FUNDS Program 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG $ TOTAL $ Personal Services 215,826 215,826 Supplies & Services $ 33,093 $ 33,093 473 $ $ Capital Outlay 757 757 Total Expenditures $ 249,676 $ 249,676 $ $ Total Revenue - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 4 (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 040 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 215,826 $ 215,826 $ Supplies & Services 33,093 $ 33,093 $ Capital Outlay 757 $ 757 $ Total Expenditures 249,676 $ 249,676 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 040 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ $ $ $ Sub Total $ 1,731 515 22 399 488 74 3,229 $ Sub Total $ - Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) 136,614 27,992 164,606 $ 167,835 152,442 5,300 32,306 190,048 $ $ $ $ 16,338 8,000 500 120 3,750 4,900 1,100 34,708 $ $ - $ (167,835) $ 224,756 156,236 5,300 39,817 1,890 203,243 $ $ $ $ 16,338 8,000 500 120 3,751 4,900 1,100 34,709 $ $ - $ (224,756) $ 237,952 143,953 1,060 31,636 176,649 $ $ $ $ 946 217 5 364 170 74 1,777 $ $ - $ (237,952) $ 178,425 155,640 5,300 39,000 8,385 208,325 $ $ $ $ 17,856 8,000 500 120 617 4,900 1,100 33,093 $ $ $ (178,425) $ 162,240 5,300 39,901 8,385 215,826 $ $ (6,004) (84) (6,495) (12,583) -4% 0% 0% -344% -6% -9% 0% 0% 0% 84% 0% 0% 5% $ $ 17,856 8,000 500 120 617 4,900 1,100 33,093 $ (1,518) 3,134 1,616 757 757 $ $ 757 757 $ $ (757) (757) 0% 0% 242,175 $ 249,676 $ (11,724) -5% 11,724 -5% (242,175) $ (249,676) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 040 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 4 Market Range Title ADMINISTRATOR ELECTED FTE 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT Total 474 FTE 1.00 1.00 4.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 5 Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Board of Supervisors Board of Supervisors District 5 - Mary Rose Wilcox District 5 - Mary Rose Wilcox Respective Direct Report Staff Constituent Services Administration Clerk of the Board County Administrative Officer Internal Audit Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 050 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 TOTAL FUNDS Program 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG $ TOTAL $ Personal Services 234,240 234,240 Supplies & Services $ 13,321 $ 13,321 475 $ $ Capital Outlay 2,115 2,115 Total Expenditures $ 249,676 $ 249,676 $ $ Total Revenue - Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors – District 5 (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 050 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 234,240 $ 234,240 $ Supplies & Services 13,321 $ 13,321 $ Capital Outlay 2,115 $ 2,115 $ Total Expenditures 249,676 $ 249,676 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 050 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ $ $ $ Sub Total $ 1,841 533 259 5,990 2,518 417 11,558 $ Sub Total $ - Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) 179,242 2,724 41,973 60 224,000 $ 235,558 166,988 3,970 38,806 209,764 $ $ $ $ 3,000 1,600 793 100 5,699 2,800 1,000 14,992 $ $ - $ (235,558) $ 224,756 171,358 3,970 46,860 772 222,960 $ $ 172,966 589 46,132 219,687 $ $ 170,704 3,970 49,982 2,083 226,739 3,420 600 793 100 4,752 2,656 1,000 13,321 $ $ $ 2,823 1,600 793 100 5,876 2,656 1,000 14,848 $ 1,178 $ 22 8,432 16 10 5,938 1,187 435 (19) 17,199 $ $ $ 143 143 $ $ 621 621 $ $ $ 237,951 $ 237,508 $ (224,756) $ (237,951) $ (237,508) $ $ $ 177,304 3,970 50,883 2,083 234,240 $ $ $ $ 3,420 600 793 100 4,752 2,656 1,000 13,321 2,115 2,115 $ $ 2,115 2,115 $ $ 242,175 $ 249,676 $ (242,175) $ (5,946) (4,023) (1,311) (11,280) -3% 0% -9% -170% -5% (597) 1,000 1,124 1,527 -21% 0% 63% 0% 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 10% $ (249,676) $ (1,972) -1379% (1,972) -1379% (11,725) -5% 11,725 -5% Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 050 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIST 5 Market Range Title ADMINISTRATOR ELECTED FTE 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT Total 476 FTE 1.00 0.50 3.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Clerk of the Superior Court Organizational Chart Clerk of the Su Superior perior Court Clerk of the Superior Court Michael K. Jeanes Michael K. Jeanes Administrative Services Financial Services Customer Service Family Support Center Mission The Mission of the Clerk of Superior Court is to demonstrate flexibility and make innovative changes in order to meet customers' expectations when providing access to court-related records, financial and family support services to the public, legal community and Superior Court. Vision The Vision of the Clerk of Superior Court is to anticipate, meet, and exceed the expectations of our customers. Goals • By January 2007, the Clerk of Superior Court will have implemented the appropriate electronic system(s) by which up-to-date court/case user-appropriate data can be accessed appropriately by its customers. • By January 2006, the Clerk of Superior Court's restructured Human Resources program will have developed and implemented a written employee development plan which offers essential training, clarifies opportunities for personal and professional advancement, and encourages greater work schedule flexibility. • By the beginning of FY 2005-06 customer expectations will be more fully met when the Clerk of Superior Court begins providing family and civil court services at the new Northeast Court Facility, and by initiating criminal case electronic filings from County justice entities. • By July 2007, the Clerk of Superior Court will have drafted, proposed, and (if approved) implemented revisions to the Supreme Court Rule 123 to balance privacy concerns with public access needs. Issues • The demand for immediate, up-to-date, accurate, electronic court/case data is increasing faster than the Clerk of Superior Court can adjust its business practices and implement the most appropriate electronic systems for its customers. • A tightening, competitive employment market in Maricopa County makes it more difficult for the Clerk of Superior Court to hire and retain a creative, skilled and knowledgeable workforce. • Population growth and dispersion throughout the County result in further drives and longer waits for customers needing to access Clerk of Superior Court services. • The need to balance privacy issues in access to and the distribution of public documents places increasing legal and practical pressure on clerks to avail information to only the appropriate parties. 477 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Clerk of the Superior Court (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 16CR - COURT RECORDS $ 20,073,555 16FS - FIDUCIARY SERVICES 1,620,716 16PS - PUBLIC SERVICES 186,446 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 2,930,333 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1,769,065 TOTAL $ 26,580,115 Supplies & Services $ 1,935,150 141,917 28,996 287,766 476,456 $ 2,870,285 Capital Outlay 261,257 105,172 $ 366,429 $ Total Expenditures $ 22,269,962 1,762,633 215,442 3,218,099 2,350,693 $ 29,816,829 Total Revenue 5,799,189 6,121,426 181,000 $ 12,101,615 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: COURT RECORDS Program Purpose: The purpose of the Court Record Program is to provide access to the judicial system and related public records to the public, legal community, courts, and County/other governmental agencies so they can pursue legal processes and/or obtain and maintain legal and financial records and information. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of minute entries generated within established time frame N/A N/A 93.2 94 Percent of Juvenile minute entries generated within established time frame N/A 97.63 97.63 98 Key Results: Program Name: FIDUCIARY SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Fiduciary Services Program is to provide financial account services and fund oversight to the public, legal community, courts and County / other governmental agencies so they can be assured all monies are properly receipted, accounted for, and disbursed. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent CFO payments posted within established time frames. N/A 88 88 96 Percent billing payments posted within established timeframes. N/A N/A 90 95 Percent checks disbursed within established timeframes. N/A N/A 98 98 Key Results: 478 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Clerk of the Superior Court (Continued) Program Name: PUBLIC SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Public Services Activity is to provide access to the public so they can obtain documentation and information to complete applications for certification or licensing. Key Results: Percent applications (notary, marriage and passports) completed within established time standards FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 100 100 100 Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 19,302,059 $ 4,433,863 $ 20,147,782 $ 7,513,068 $ 20,713,646 $ 7,927,268 $ 23,257,552 $ 6,513,125 $ 23,181,209 $ 6,635,620 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 23,735,922 27,660,850 28,640,914 29,770,677 29,816,829 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 19,302,059 $ 4,433,863 $ 20,147,782 $ 7,513,068 $ 20,713,646 $ 7,927,268 $ 23,257,552 $ 6,513,125 $ 23,181,209 $ 6,635,620 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 23,735,922 27,660,850 28,640,914 29,770,677 29,816,829 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Clerk of the Superior Court FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Non-Mandated 0.0% $30.0 $25.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 22.3% Clerk of the Superior Court Mandates Vs. Expenditures $20.0 $15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 77.7% 479 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 23.7 19.3 4.4 0.0 27.7 20.1 7.5 0.0 28.6 20.7 7.9 0.0 29.8 23.3 6.5 0.0 29.8 23.2 6.6 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Clerk of the Superior Court (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Clerk of the Superior Court AUTHORITY Arizona Constitution, Article VI, Section 23 – Superior Court Clerk, Arizona Revised Statutes. Supreme Court Administrative Orders. Local Rules. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Clerk of the Superior Court is an elected office established by the Arizona Constitution, Article VI, Section 23. Prior to 1982, the Clerk of Superior Court was defined as a “county officer.” In Laws 1982, Chapter 168, Section 1 amended A.R.S. Section 11-401 to delete the Clerk of the Superior Court from that statute. The position and duties of Superior Court Clerk were moved to Title 12 which relates to the courts, recognizing the Clerk as a judicial officer. Duties and responsibilities of this Constitutional Office are prescribed in state statute, court rule, and case law. Supreme Court Administrative Order 93-30 provides that the Presiding Judge may prescribe powers and duties of the Clerk of the Court, in addition to those prescribed by the Supreme Court. State law (A.R.S. 12-283) was further amended to clarify the Clerk authority to manage its own staff and operations. The Clerk of the Court’s Office serves one of the largest and fastest growing counties in the nation. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Clerk of the Superior Court is mandated to be the official record-keeper of the court and acts as a safeguard and processor of all monies collected. The functions of the Clerk of the Court satisfy more than 500 state statutes and court rules, i.e., provide appropriate public and court access to the records of the Superior Court in Maricopa County; attend each Superior Court session to record the actions of the court; be the first stop in initiating any Superior Court action in civil, criminal, probate, mental health, juvenile, tax, or family court matters; collect and disburse court-ordered fees, fines, and victim restitution in an expedient manner; provide various family support services to the public; receive, distribute and preserve official court documents; provide minute entries to all parties in a case; notify certain state agencies of case disposition information; maintain a docket of all actions and proceedings; process records in juvenile dependency, delinquency, severance, and adoption cases; process applications for certification to adopt and store these confidential records; issue and record marriage licenses; and store exhibits for all court cases. 480 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Clerk of the Superior Court (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 21,806,608 $ 4,773,507 26,580,115 $ Supplies & Services 1,269,429 $ 1,600,856 2,870,285 $ Capital Outlay 105,172 $ 261,257 366,429 $ Total Expenditures 23,181,209 $ 6,635,620 29,816,829 $ Total Revenue 6,105,265 5,996,350 12,101,615 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ 2,515,499 713,146 7,743,216 1,950,674 241,931 22,981 13,187,446 721,495 14,367 379,277 9,862 37 1,054,253 201,101 224,180 116,734 50,161 361,752 3,133,218 Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ 27,772,221 $ $ 18,731,101 $ 302,752 214,854 4,932,078 39,584 (832,906) 832,906 24,220,369 $ 39,072 379,562 418,634 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ 500,000 2,090,633 8,242,163 1,277,294 42,530 22,926 12,175,546 $ 19,340,848 $ 48,846 164,854 5,315,998 92,816 (875,000) 875,000 24,963,362 $ 1,060,905 11,700 25,800 8,000 1,525,002 211,200 214,572 127,700 81,770 336,900 3,603,549 $ 30,000 371,454 401,454 $ 28,968,365 (14,584,775) $ $ $ $ $ 2,827,544 554,311 7,450,942 1,277,294 42,530 22,925 12,175,546 $ 20,734,140 $ 151,581 71,049 6,052,392 2,138 (875,000) 875,000 27,011,300 $ 468,392 14,520 159,190 9,900 1,200 1,607,820 169,432 188,501 124,045 61,728 31,217 2,835,945 $ 30,000 371,454 401,454 $ 30,248,699 (16,792,819) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 19,840,081 $ 274,852 236,114 6,121,292 23,897 (842,994) 838,178 26,491,420 $ 722,228 13,646 295,727 8,633 1,305,099 169,656 199,338 107,243 69,798 428,205 3,319,573 $ 7,965 354,366 362,331 $ 30,173,325 (18,073,153) $ 481 1,601,231 655,422 8,534,627 1,513,703 18,020 64,461 12,387,464 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ 2,844,344 45,000 7,693,849 1,440,000 42,530 23,000 12,088,723 $ $ 20,505,602 $ 137,790 102,488 6,635,908 15,600 (275,000) 275,000 27,397,388 $ 674,252 13,900 259,958 8,600 1,400 1,008,072 171,019 120,410 110,000 67,141 360,325 2,795,077 $ 388,073 388,073 $ 30,580,538 (17,785,860) $ FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ $ 1,326,528 561,227 7,992,505 2,165,000 33,355 23,000 12,101,615 $ 53% -1% -7% -69% 22% 0% 1% 20,692,125 $ 224,846 180,522 6,650,666 15,600 (1,458,644) 275,000 26,580,115 $ 42,015 (73,265) (109,473) (598,274) (13,462) 583,644 600,000 431,185 0% -48% -154% -10% -630% -67% 69% 2% 670,427 13,900 259,958 8,600 1,141,690 171,019 65,724 110,000 68,967 360,000 2,870,285 $ $ 29,816,829 $ % 1,501,016 (6,916) (541,563) (887,706) 9,175 (75) 73,931 366,429 366,429 (18,491,815) $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ $ (202,035) -43% 620 4% (100,768) -63% 1,300 13% 1,200 100% 466,130 29% (1,587) -1% 122,777 65% 14,045 11% (7,239) -12% (328,783) -1053% (34,340) -1% $ 30,000 5,025 35,025 100% 1% 9% $ 431,870 1% (357,939) 2% (17,715,214) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Clerk of the Superior Court (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 160 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV AUDITOR CONFERENCE OFFICER DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST ELECTED FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST FTE 1.00 34.00 10.00 213.41 3.00 325.36 24.00 20.03 1.00 14.15 1.00 4.00 7.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 Market Range Title GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR GENERALIST HR SPECIALIST HR SUPERVISOR INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS PROJECT MGR INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST PC SPECIALIST PRGRM COORDINATION SPEC PROGRAM MANAGER TECH SUPPORT SPECIALIST TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECH TRAINING SPECIALIST Total 482 FTE 2.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 9.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 709.95 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Constables Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Constables Constable Joe Arredondo Constable Frank Canez Constable Alfredo Gamez Constable Phillip Hazlett Constable Tony Martineau Constable Joe Reyes Constable John Powers Constable Armando Saldate Jr. Constable Murel Stephens Constable Bill Taylor Constable Bob Weaver Constable Fred Arnett Constable Phil Freestone Constable Jimmie Munoz Constable Don Calender Constable Kevin Jones Constable Doug Middleton Constable Frank Outcalt Constable Billy Joe Spurlock Constable Bill Stout Constable Glenn Gill Constable Annette Clark Constable Ron Myers County Administrative Officer David Smith Special Assistant to CAO Constable Coordinator Mission The Mission of the Constables is to provide execution of mandated civil and criminal process to citizens of Maricopa County so they can receive timely, cost effective and professional service. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • By calendar year end 2006, all Writs of Restitution shall be served within 5 business days of issuance from the court. • By calendar year end 2006, all Writs of Execution shall be served within 60 working days of issuance from the court. • By the end of FY 2006, all citizen concerns and complaints will be resolved within 3 days of receipt. Issues • Continuing changes in population and demographics determines where, how and when Constables Office services may be provided and at what cost with available personnel. • The anticipated improvements in various technology formats will improve the ability of the Office of the Constable to improve accountability for services and fees. • Increasing operational cost due to mandated services, without increasing resources will decrease the department's ability to provide professional and timely service. 483 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Constables (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 250 CONSTABLES TOTAL FUNDS Program 25PS - SERVICE OF PROCESS 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 1,658,500 40,164 TOTAL $ 1,698,664 $ Supplies & Services $ 58,629 16,696 $ 75,325 Capital Outlay 6,057 $ 6,057 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,723,186 56,860 $ 1,780,046 Total Revenue 1,517,468 $ 1,517,468 $ Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,482,054 $ $ 1,535,013 $ $ 1,575,484 $ $ 1,716,309 $ $ 1,780,046 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,482,054 1,535,013 1,575,484 1,716,309 1,780,046 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,482,054 $ $ 1,535,013 $ $ 1,575,484 $ $ 1,716,309 $ $ 1,780,046 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,482,054 1,535,013 1,575,484 1,716,309 1,780,046 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Constables FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Constables Mandates Vs. Expenditures $1.8 $1.6 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $1.4 $1.2 $1.0 $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 484 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Constables (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Constables AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 22-101 Justice Precincts; A.R.S. § 22-102 Officers and Term of Office; A.R.S. § 22-131 Powers and Duties; A.R.S. § 22-132 Expenses HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Constables were among the original elected County officers. The law provides for establishment of Justice precincts in each county. The officers of a justice precinct are the Justice of the Peace and the Constable. The Board of Supervisors can establish, change or abolish justice precincts, but cannot abolish them until the end of the term of the Justice of the Peace and Constable. The Board of Supervisors sets Constables' salaries within specific ranges according to the number of registered voters in the precincts (A.R.S. § 11-424.01). MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Constables are mandated to: 1) Attend Justice Courts when required. 2) Execute, serve and return all processes and notices directed or delivered to them by a Justice of the Peace of the county or by other competent authority. Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 250 CONSTABLES Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 1,698,664 $ 1,698,664 $ Supplies & Services 75,325 $ 75,325 $ Capital Outlay 6,057 $ 6,057 $ Total Expenditures 1,780,046 $ 1,780,046 $ Total Revenue 1,517,468 1,517,468 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 250 CONSTABLES ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES Total Revenue EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES Adopted Vs Revised Variance % 1,213,402 1,213,402 $ $ 1,322,758 1,322,758 $ $ 1,322,758 1,322,758 $ $ 1,517,468 1,517,468 $ $ 1,634,880 1,634,880 $ $ 1,517,468 1,517,468 $ $ (194,710) (194,710) -15% -15% $ 1,246,646 5,196 244,522 1,496,363 $ $ 1,339,349 341,154 1,680,503 $ 1,295,608 34,372 332,106 1,662,086 $ 1,289,749 343,882 1,633,631 $ 1,289,749 37,101 346,720 25,094 1,698,664 $ $ 1,288,157 264,980 1,553,137 49,600 (37,101) (5,566) (25,094) (18,161) 4% 0% -2% 0% -1% 3,370 $ 23,658 3,683 177 (40) 24,489 18,838 74,175 $ 3,085 20,725 1,079 1,000 27,644 7,144 60,677 $ $ $ 7,035 31,512 2,300 1,000 24,613 8,833 32 75,325 $ $ 3,085 25,030 1,387 1,000 25,164 6,733 62,399 $ $ 5,193 31,512 2,300 490 0 25,794 8,833 32 74,154 $ $ 3,085 25,030 1,387 1,000 25,056 6,761 62,319 $ (3,950) (6,482) (913) 443 (2,072) (32) (13,006) -128% -26% -66% 0% 0% 2% -31% 0% -21% - $ $ - $ $ 2,524 2,524 $ $ - $ $ 6,057 6,057 $ $ (6,057) (6,057) 0% 0% $ 1,738,764 $ $ 1,780,046 $ (37,224) -2% (262,578) $ (157,486) 37% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 812 OTHER SERVICES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING Sub Total $ $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE FY 2004-05 Requested $ 1,570,538 $ $ $ (357,137) $ 1,613,814 $ $ (291,056) $ 1,742,822 $ (420,064) $ 485 $ (221,296) $ 1,696,030 $ (61,150) $ $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Constables (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 250 CONSTABLES Market Range Title ELECTED FTE 23.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST LEGAL ORDER SERVER Total 486 FTE 1.00 6.00 30.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Attorney Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens County Attorney County Attorney Richard M. Romley Richard M. Romley Southeast Division Investigation Division Executive Division Major Crimes Division Juvenile Crimes Division Victim Services Division Paralegal Division Trials Division Pre-Trial Division Administrative Services Division Appeals Division Support Services Division Training and Development Division County Counsel Division Information Technology Division Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Attorney's Office is to provide quality prosecution, victim services, crime prevention and legal counsel for county government on behalf of the people of Maricopa County so that they can live in a safe and well-governed community. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • Identify and implement strategies that provide market appropriate salaries for employees, salary advancements commensurate with performance and experience, career development counseling, training and other employee benefits and work/personal life balance issues to reduce turnover. This is ongoing. • Annually assess crime distribution trends and legislative changes to determine if additional enforcement initiatives and/or prosecution programs are needed, if staffing resources and facilities are required, and if changes to state statutes or court rules are needed; analyze the need for enhanced victim services and community interaction; analyze the case processing impact of Rule 8, Rule 15 and Capital Death Penalty cases, in order to incorporate this information into future strategic plans. • Reduce the percentage of criminal cases open longer than 180 days each year over the next five years while adhering to MCAO policies & procedures, quality standards and attorney ethics. • By 2005, implement computer applications that will integrate existing applications internal to MCAO in order to reduce redundant data entry, ensure data integrity, improve the MCAO's ability to adhere to statutory and county mandated deadlines, and enhance management processes and reports. This includes further enhancements to CAIS and VNS. • By 2005, implement designated projects in accordance with the Maricopa County Integrated Criminal Justice System strategic business plan to share case information data between other criminal justice agencies in a timely, secured manner in order to increase data integrity and reduce redundant data entry. 487 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Attorney (Continued) • By 2005, develop and implement a case tracking system for the Division of County Counsel to track and report information concerning civil lawsuits and advisory matters for Maricopa County, which will enable the Division to formulate and track measurable goals to increase the quantity and quality of legal services delivered, reduce the response time and/or completion time for the legal services delivered, and improve client satisfaction. • Ensure that the MCAO will keep pace with the increased number of criminal filings by regularly assessing staffing and related resource needs. Issues • Competition in the marketplace will affect our ability to attract and retain quality employees with the skills necessary to complete our mission. • Legislative and Judicial mandates (including service expectations from community groups, victims, businesses, law enforcement and a broader community focus on crime deterrence), will place an increased burden on available resources including time, money and equipment, and require an increased need to respond. • Changes in population and demographics such as the aging population, juvenile crime, and population diversity, will result in an increase in the number, type and complexity of prosecutions and victim services required. • The population growth (and resulting growth in county government) coupled with the trend toward increased professionalism in County management, will challenge the ability of the County Attorney's Office to meet the quantity and quality demands of a larger practice and a more sophisticated client base. • The rapid growth of advancing technology and public demand for it will challenge the Department to meet the increasing demand for technical support, make high quality decisions and improve productivity in certain areas for availability and access. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 19CL - CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES $ 1,778,942 19CS - COMMUNITY SERVICES 4,581 19PP - PROSECUTION 44,403,757 19TD - EMPLOYEE TRNG AND DEVELOPMENT 1,101,857 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 2,353,863 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1,907,731 TOTAL $ 51,550,731 Supplies & Services $ 188,104 2,063,177 7,492,954 36,500 201,600 1,081,592 $ 11,063,927 488 Capital Outlay 11,590 456,836 $ 468,426 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,978,636 2,067,758 52,353,547 1,138,357 2,555,463 2,989,323 $ 63,083,084 Total Revenue 15,000 1,570,295 9,931,818 65,515 $ 11,582,628 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Attorney (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Community Services Program is to provide a variety of special services and assistance to people in Maricopa County so that the office fulfills its statutory mandates. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 87.3 81 101.3 100 Percent of victim compensation claims completed. 94 84 68.5 100 Percent of sexually violent predator cases completed. 52 27.25 32 100 Key Results: Percent of uncontested adoptions cases completed. Program Name: EMPLOYEE TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Employee Training and Development Program is to provide training, education and career development to MCAO employees so that they can have the training, skills and support necessary to efficiently and effectively perform their job functions. Key Results: Percent of MCAO employees who received training. 489 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 64.2 73.8 70.03 70 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Attorney (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 40,119,027 $ 8,935,582 $ 41,507,122 $ 9,277,059 $ 42,880,245 $ 9,868,171 $ 48,872,846 $ 10,886,000 $ 50,280,208 $ 12,802,876 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 49,054,609 50,784,181 52,748,416 59,758,846 63,083,084 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 40,119,027 $ 8,935,582 $ 41,507,122 $ 9,277,059 $ 42,880,245 $ 9,868,171 $ 48,872,846 $ 10,886,000 $ 50,280,208 $ 12,802,876 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 49,054,609 50,784,181 52,748,416 59,758,846 63,083,084 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. County Attorney FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Non-Mandated 0.0% $70.0 $60.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 20.3% County Attorney Mandates Vs. Expenditures $50.0 $40.0 $30.0 $20.0 $10.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 79.7% 490 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 49.1 40.1 8.9 0.0 50.8 41.5 9.3 0.0 52.7 42.9 9.9 0.0 59.8 48.9 10.9 0.0 63.1 50.3 12.8 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Attorney (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE County Attorney Powers And Duties, Victims' Bill Of Rights, Crime Victim's Rights, Organized Crime And Fraud, And Juvenile Victim's Rights. AUTHORITY Constitutional Article 2-1, Victims' Bill of Rights; A.R.S. § 11-532 Powers and Duties; A.R.S. § 13-4400 et seq. Crime Victim's Rights; A.R.S. § 13-2314.03 County Antiracketeering Revolving Fund; A.R.S. § 8-381 et seq. Juvenile Victim's Rights. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The County Attorney is a constitutional officer. The County Counsel function is one of the original duties of the County Attorney. The Constitution of Arizona was amended by voter initiative to include a "Victims' Bill of Rights" in 1990. A Victims' Rights Implementation Act adding A.R.S. § 13-4400 et seq. was approved by the Legislature in 1991 and took effect in 1992. In 1994, the County anti-racketeering revolving fund was amended to require the County Attorneys Office to administer the fund. In 1995, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1149, which extended the Act to victims of juvenile crime. In 1998, Juvenile Victim's Rights for juvenile offenses were amended. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Prosecute Criminal Cases: Attend courts and conduct prosecutions of all misdemeanors in Justice Courts, felonies, delinquencies and incorrigible offenses in Superior Court. Seek arrest warrants from magistrates for persons suspected of committing crimes. Attend and advise Grand Jury. Draw indictments and information. Inform victims about the progress of the cases and expected outcomes. Represent Board of Supervisors and County in civil matters: Provide written opinions to County officers on legal matters related to their duties. Act as legal advisor to the Board of Supervisors. Act as attorney for school districts and community college districts. Defend all locally valued and assessed property tax appeals. 491 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Attorney (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 44,262,646 $ 7,288,085 51,550,731 $ Supplies & Services 5,584,837 $ 5,479,090 11,063,927 $ Capital Outlay 432,725 $ 35,701 468,426 $ Total Expenditures 50,280,208 $ 12,802,876 63,083,084 $ Total Revenue 51,271 11,531,357 11,582,628 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 7,403,294 455,031 2,576,785 135,011 31,685 10,601,807 $ $ 39,985,862 $ 223,674 (122,834) 7,951,303 143,194 (4,496,511) 379,964 44,064,652 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES Sub Total $ 837,528 47,994 92,793 1,297,644 1,652,221 1,773,176 1,327,045 257,089 715,104 159,126 236,344 142,127 12,224 8,550,415 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 160 46,133 36,184 267,746 350,223 $ Total Expenditures $ 52,965,291 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 5,263,576 1,789,626 838,498 1,338,195 40,000 1,284,002 10,553,897 $ $ 40,088,819 $ 95,812 60,568 8,342,619 1,376,774 (5,015,980) 379,961 45,328,573 $ 6,410,925 1,361,500 845,498 2,770,457 340,000 34,000 11,762,380 $ 1,835,418 50,052 55,716 1,995,965 1,833,020 2,796,968 1,218,046 259,994 438,184 172,162 257,326 124,219 10,738 11,047,809 $ $ $ $ 579,721 257,000 387,429 1,224,150 $ 61,445,055 $ $ $ 357,000 263,799 620,799 $ 54,982,195 $ 60,874,437 (44,428,298) $ $ 1,362,687 47,000 4,085 521,051 2,508,876 3,096,568 1,299,892 274,773 438,184 234,133 255,750 134,800 3,000 10,180,799 199,998 99,998 253,319 553,315 (42,363,484) $ $ 43,024,011 $ 125,804 70,754 10,376,681 138,766 (4,942,880) 379,961 49,173,096 $ $ $ $ 6,659,380 1,676,952 662,875 2,733,316 208,145 36,271 11,976,939 44,346,652 $ 99,278 62,068 10,200,860 (5,015,980) 379,961 50,072,839 $ 725,605 41,757 334,672 2,298,703 3,128,112 1,267,188 270,171 460,447 174,402 271,976 123,776 3,498 9,100,307 $ $ FY 2004-05 Requested $ (49,112,057) $ 492 6,275,814 1,524,066 807,556 2,768,957 50,487 35,500 11,462,380 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 44,764,959 $ 100,778 60,568 11,235,696 (5,103,962) 810,181 51,868,220 $ 1,166,003 48,000 4,085 521,051 2,296,393 2,565,391 1,152,295 278,473 80,000 174,402 280,200 144,700 9,000 8,719,993 $ $ $ 300,000 443,587 743,587 $ 61,331,800 $ (49,468,116) $ 5,827,233 1,825,081 807,556 3,036,000 50,487 36,271 11,582,628 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ 583,692 (463,581) 37,942 (265,543) 289,513 (2,271) 179,752 9% -34% 4% -10% 85% -7% 2% 44,100,049 $ 128,584 69,444 11,317,994 137,337 (5,012,858) 810,181 51,550,731 $ 246,603 (29,306) (7,376) (1,117,134) (137,337) (3,122) (430,220) (1,477,892) 1% -30% -12% -11% 0% 0% -113% -3% (99,866) (3,053) 4,085 (739,288) 138,586 (737,008) 125,139 14,510 353,747 61,515 11,143 (4,900) (7,738) (883,128) -7% -6% 100% -142% 6% -24% 10% 5% 81% 26% 4% -4% -258% -9% 0% 0% 93% -68% 25% 1,462,553 50,053 1,260,339 2,370,290 3,833,576 1,174,753 260,263 84,437 172,618 244,607 139,700 10,738 11,063,927 $ $ $ 25,000 443,426 468,426 $ 332,000 (179,627) 152,373 $ 63,083,084 $ (2,208,647) -4% 2,388,399 -5% $ (49,869,420) $ $ (51,500,456) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Attorney (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 190 COUNTY ATTORNEY Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ATTORNEY AUDITOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR ELECTED EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL MANAGER FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR GENERALIST HR SUPERVISOR FTE 1.00 6.00 13.00 172.50 13.00 352.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 6.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 Market Range Title INFO CENTER MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INFO TECHNOL CONSULTANT INVESTIGATOR INVESTIGATOR (AZ POST) LEGAL ASSISTANT LEGAL SECRETARY SUPV LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST MANAGEMENT ANALYST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT MEDIA ASSISTANT PC SPECIALIST PROGRAM COORDINATOR SOCIAL WORKER (BS) TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST Total 493 FTE 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 38.00 15.00 105.00 39.00 114.00 7.00 1.00 3.00 8.00 1.00 59.00 3.00 7.00 8.00 989.55 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Recorder Organizational Chart Recorder Recorder Helen Purcell, County Recorder Helen Purcell, County Recorder Micrographics Administration Public Records Mailout Recorder’s Information System Document Processing Southeast Office Mission The Mission of the Recorders Office is to maintain a perpetual, comprehensive set of public records consisting of all documents appropriately presented for recording for the public so that any member of the public can readily access the information to conduct their personal and business activities with the assurance that, where appropriate, privacy will be protected and that their transactions were executed in accordance with the law. Vision Our Vision is to be the most productive recording office with the best customer service and the best solutions for recording documents and accessing public records. Goals • Increase the percentage of documents recorded from digital and electronic sources to 55% by 2006. • By 2004, be able to selectively block information from public view. • Input legal descriptions, parcel #s and addresses on all recordings and make that data available to the public in a searchable format by 2005. • Reduce the space needed for document storage by 50% by 2006. Issues • Our sprawling population demanding easier commutes for recording and access to records will challenge the department to develop satellite facilities over the next few years. • The customers’ demand for inexpensive and simple digital recording requires flexible solutions. • The public demand for exclusion of personal data from the Internet versus the requirement that recording be public will need a creative solution. • With customer expectations rising, the department will need the ability and workforce to deliver more data, increasing the usefulness of the information to the customer. • Storage of records will become an internal issue due to the scarcity of storage space, creating the need for an external plan coordinated with the State Archivist and for new legislation. 494 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Recorder (Continued) • Pressure by customers for streamlined information will require more communication and sharing of information between the Recorder’s, Assessor’s and Treasurer’s Offices. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 360 RECORDER TOTAL FUNDS Program 36RP - RECORDER'S PROGRAM 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 1,388,492 2,119,688 TOTAL $ 3,508,180 $ Supplies & Services $ 265,790 3,045,431 $ 3,311,221 Capital Outlay 780,000 $ 780,000 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,654,282 5,945,119 $ 7,599,401 Total Revenue 15,600,000 70,000 $ 15,670,000 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: RECORDER’S PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Recorders program is to maintain a perpetual, comprehensive set of public records consisting of all documents appropriately presented for recording for the public so that any member of the public can readily access the information to conduct their personal and business activities with the assurance that, where appropriate, privacy will be protected and that their transactions were executed in accordance with the law. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected The average time to index a document 26.1 18.81 14.04 10 Average time to return documents 17.86 28.12 16.38 20 N/A 94.92 83.53 95 99.88 99.89 99.85 99.5 Key Results: The percentage of daily CD Master Reports completed within three work days following presentation The percentage of all copy requests of fewer than 10 pages completed within one hour and of all larger requests completed within 24 hours 495 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Recorder (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,609,897 $ 3,870,543 $ 1,777,221 $ 3,657,080 $ 1,820,448 $ 4,459,282 $ 1,914,027 $ 4,230,995 $ 1,991,183 $ 5,608,218 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 5,480,440 5,434,301 6,279,730 6,145,022 7,599,401 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,609,897 $ 3,870,543 $ 1,777,221 $ 3,657,080 $ 1,820,448 $ 4,459,282 $ 1,914,027 $ 4,230,995 $ 1,991,183 $ 5,608,218 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 5,480,440 5,434,301 6,279,730 6,145,022 7,599,401 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Recorder FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $8.0 General Fund Mandated 26.2% $7.0 Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.0% Recorder Mandates Vs. Expenditures $6.0 $5.0 $4.0 $3.0 $2.0 $1.0 $0.0 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 5.5 1.6 3.9 0.0 5.4 1.8 3.7 0.0 6.3 1.8 4.5 0.0 6.1 1.9 4.2 0.0 7.6 2.0 5.6 0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 73.8% Mandate Information TITLE Office Of The County Recorder AUTHORITY A.R.S. §§ 11-461 through 11-483 County Recorder. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Office of the County Recorder and its records date back to 1871 during the territorial days. However, the office, duties, powers, and qualifications of the County Recorder as they exist today were created in 1910 by Article XII § 3 of the State Constitution. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Recorder is mandated to record, index, and preserve certain documents as a permanent public record. The recorder is also required to register all voters, maintain voter registration rolls and perform election-related duties. 496 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Recorder (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 360 RECORDER Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS Personal Services 1,659,124 $ 1,849,056 3,508,180 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 332,059 $ 2,979,162 3,311,221 $ Capital Outlay $ 780,000 780,000 $ Total Expenditures 1,991,183 $ 5,608,218 7,599,401 $ Total Revenue 10,300,000 5,370,000 15,670,000 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 360 RECORDER ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ $ 19,049,874 109,307 1,390,121 20,549,302 $ 2,395,931 95,298 26,786 541,535 11,179 3,070,729 Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES Sub Total $ 1,071,490 110,169 530,502 26,609 118,951 10,730 44,346 344,965 1,634 2,259,397 $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 12,608,000 125,000 1,003,600 13,736,600 2,658,370 13,259 26,132 709,659 8,000 3,415,420 $ 729,700 452,000 567,320 25,302 82,600 12,000 121,500 186,200 2,100 2,178,722 959,685 959,685 $ $ 6,289,811 14,259,491 $ $ $ $ $ 12,608,000 125,000 1,003,600 13,736,600 2,691,150 13,259 26,132 752,557 8,000 3,491,098 $ 731,638 452,000 567,320 25,302 82,600 12,000 121,500 195,315 2,100 2,189,775 670,000 670,000 $ $ $ 6,264,142 $ 7,472,458 $ $ $ $ $ 17,923,780 96,146 1,337,831 19,357,757 2,461,752 171,096 23,138 639,658 8,040 3,303,685 $ 234,671 65,294 720,231 21,174 100,499 19,272 94,408 427,715 2,123 1,685,386 670,000 670,000 $ $ $ 6,350,873 $ 7,385,727 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ $ $ 12,608,000 125,000 1,003,600 13,736,600 2,680,934 20,000 853,599 8,000 3,562,533 $ 674,700 336,400 1,894,625 25,302 81,100 8,000 98,794 190,200 2,100 3,311,221 1,244,599 1,244,599 $ $ $ 6,233,670 $ 13,124,087 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ $ $ $ 14,137,170 125,000 1,337,830 70,000 15,670,000 2,595,929 133,197 20,000 751,054 8,000 3,508,180 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ $ $ $ % (1,529,170) (334,230) (70,000) (1,933,400) -12% 0% -33% 0% -14% 95,221 (119,938) 6,132 1,503 (17,082) 4% -905% 23% 0% 0% 0% 8% 26% -234% 0% 2% 33% 19% 3% 0% -51% $ 674,700 336,400 1,894,625 25,302 81,100 8,000 98,794 190,200 2,100 3,311,221 $ 56,938 115,600 (1,327,305) 1,500 4,000 22,706 5,115 (1,121,446) 780,000 780,000 $ $ 780,000 780,000 $ $ (110,000) (110,000) -16% -16% $ 7,653,754 $ 7,599,401 $ (1,248,528) -20% $ 6,082,846 $ 8,070,599 $ (684,872) -9% Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 360 RECORDER Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV COMPUTER OPERATOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR FTE 1.00 2.00 34.25 6.00 5.00 2.00 7.00 1.00 Market Range Title ELECTED EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS PROJECT MGR INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR PC SPECIALIST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN WEB SPECIALIST Total 497 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 70.25 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Sheriff Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Sheriff Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio, County Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio, County Sheriff Office of Public Information Intergovernmental Liaison Chief of Operations Administration Financial Management Technology Management Administration Management Special Operations Criminal Investigations Criminal Intelligence Professional Standards Patrol ICJIS Agency Chief of Custody Custody Support Custody Programs Custody Operations Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office is to provide law enforcement, detention and crime prevention services to the public so they can be safe and secure in our community. Vision The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office is a fully integrated law enforcement agency committed to being the leader in establishing the standards for providing professional quality law enforcement, detention, and support services to citizens of Maricopa County and to other criminal justice agencies. Goals • By FY 2006, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will recruit, hire and train the required number of staff as agreed upon from the Liebert Study to fill positions in the County Jail System so that the facilities can be operated safely and efficiently. • By July 2005, increase to 50% the number of Priority 1 calls responded to within acceptable standards in areas served by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. (Note: FY 2004--32%). • By January 2006, the Sheriff’s Office will increase the average annual clearance rate for investigations cases by 7% (to 69%) using innovative and cooperative (inter and intra agency) strategies. • The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will always meet constitutional standards for care, custody and control of inmates as well as a safe environment for staff. • The Sheriff’s Office will increase recruitment and retention success percentages by increasing the competitiveness of its compensation and benefits packages for all classifications to be consistently within 10% of regional law enforcement average, to the extent that County funding is made available, so that law enforcement and detention services can be delivered. 498 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Sheriff (Continued) • The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will establish and maintain fixed benchmarks and performance data concerning Civil Actions and other Court required services to pro-actively seek new funding at appropriate levels to accommodate the demand for increased service each time the Court system expands or changes its operational structure. • By FY2006, the backlog in Criminal Records and ID will be reduced by 25%. • By July 2007, and based on available funding, the Sheriff’s Office will obtain the technology, equipment and tools required to meet the demands placed upon law enforcement and detention due to population and business growth in Maricopa County. Issues • Maricopa County Sheriff's Office pay and benefits are less than those of other law enforcement agencies making it extremely difficult to recruit and retain a qualified workforce, affecting the ability to staff new jail facilities, maintain safety and security in jail facilities, reduce crime, and contain liability exposure. • The shrinking economy and the direction of the State to balance its budget on the backs of local governments, has influenced the County management’s policies and funding decisions and will affect the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office’s ability to deliver mandated service that meets the needs and expectations of the public. • Today’s law enforcement environment of cooperation and sharing among law enforcement agencies requires that the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office continually improve its technical skills and tools to remain standardized with corresponding law enforcement agencies. • Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 the demands and expectations for the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office to provide traditional and non-traditional services for overall public security have increased. • As new jail facilities come on line over the next decade, a 40% increase in jail population will require a substantial increase in staff (60-80%) and ancillary services. • Continued growth and expansion of the Superior Court, and additional mandates requiring the serving of specific types of court papers and notifications by Sheriff’s Office Deputies have increased the demand and volume of workload for Sheriff’s Office Civil Processing. • The continuing trend of state and federal agencies to reduce grant funding awards by increasing match obligations, the requirements that state and local funding not be supplanted by grants, and the increased competition for grant funding threatens the ability of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office to continue delivering programs and services that are mission critical. • Significant population growth in unincorporated areas of the county requiring more miles patrolled and more people being transported more miles to intake is creating labor and vehicle time intensive demands that diminish other areas of service. • Large, uncapped, annual increases in costs for software and information system maintenance are impacting the organization. 499 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Sheriff (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 500 SHERIFF TOTAL FUNDS Program 50CM - CUSTODY MANAGEMENT 50CO - CENTRALIZED MCSO OPERATIONS 50EN - ENFORCEMENT 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 84,274,107 10,139,646 43,795,088 11,058,265 TOTAL $ 149,267,106 $ Supplies & Services $ 16,727,380 3,590,606 6,772,619 5,108,145 $ 32,198,750 Capital Outlay 664,540 271,337 297,780 $ 1,233,657 $ Total Expenditures $ 101,666,027 14,001,589 50,865,487 16,166,410 $ 182,699,513 Total Revenue 33,327,373 8,433,997 414,400 $ 42,175,770 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: CENTRALIZED MCSO OPERATIONS Program Purpose: The purpose of the Centralized MCSO Operations Program is to provide comprehensive Enforcement and Custody Management support services that are unique to a Sheriff’s Office operation so that goals can be met in compliance with legal standards by a qualified and productive workforce. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A N/A 18.4 19 Percent of applicants hired 11.15 8.51 7.9 10 Percent of system availability (24x7) 97.6 99.5 99.9 99 70 70 80 75 89.7 85 80.7 85 Key Results: Percent of MCSO vehicle pool replaced annually Percent of recruits successfully completing the sworn basic training academy Percent of detention recruits who graduate from the detention training academy 500 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Sheriff (Continued) Program Name: CUSTODY MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Custody Management Program is to provide a safe and secure environment to inmates and Maricopa County Sheriff's Office staff so that inmates can be properly and expeditiously processed through the system. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of staff not assaulted while on duty N/A 96 96.8 98 Percent of uses of force meeting standards for appropriateness N/A 100 100 100 Percent of inmates properly processed in the intake area within 24 hours N/A 99.98 99.9 99.95 Percent of inmates released according to procedure from custody N/A 99.98 99.82 99.99 Percent of inmate population transported to court daily N/A 5.04 5.26 6 Key Results: Program Name: ENFORCEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Enforcement Program is to provide law enforcement response relative to crime and criminal activity, and crime prevention to the general public within Maricopa County so that they feel safe and secure in the community. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of level 1 priority calls dispatched within standards N/A N/A 86.14 86.28 Percent of Enforcement Program Activities that are enhanced through the use of volunteer services (5 activities) N/A 100 100 100 Percent of investigations cases cleared N/A N/A 62 N/A Key Results: 501 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Sheriff (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 39,261,813 $ 88,924,310 $ 37,811,831 $ 92,871,223 $ 36,876,553 $ 97,745,672 $ 42,617,353 $ 115,246,193 $ 47,355,136 $ 134,479,034 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ 1,559,971 $ $ 1,566,159 $ $ 865,343 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 128,186,123 130,683,054 136,182,196 159,429,705 182,699,513 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 39,261,813 $ 88,924,310 $ 37,811,831 $ 92,871,223 $ 36,876,553 $ 97,745,672 $ 42,617,353 $ 115,246,193 $ 47,355,136 $ 134,479,034 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ 1,559,971 $ $ 1,566,159 $ $ 865,343 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 128,186,123 130,683,054 136,182,196 159,429,705 182,699,513 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Sheriff FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $200.0 General Fund Mandated 25.9% $180.0 $160.0 Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.0% Sheriff Mandates Vs. Expenditures $140.0 $120.0 $100.0 $80.0 $60.0 $40.0 $20.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 74.1% 502 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 128.2 39.3 88.9 0.0 130.7 37.8 92.9 0.0 136.2 36.9 99.3 0.0 159.4 42.6 116.8 0.0 182.7 47.4 135.3 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Sheriff (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Sheriff's Office – Chief Law Enforcement Officer for the County AUTHORITY A.R.S §11-441 Powers and duties; A.R.S. §11-444 Expenses of sheriff as county charge; expense fund; A.R.S. §31-101, Common jails; duty of sheriff; use of jails; A.R.S. §31-121, Duty of Sheriff to receive and provide for prisoners; contracts for furnishing food; city or town prisoners; employment; A.R.S. §31-122; Receiving and keeping federal prisoners; Hart v. Hill amended Judgment; Arnold v. Sarn; Prop 102 Juvenile/Adult Special Education; A.R.S § 15-913.01 Juvenile Education; A.R.S §363701 to 36-3716, Sexually Violent Persons. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Primary focus for the Sheriff's law enforcement activities has been the unincorporated areas of the County and those cities and towns that contract for service. The population of the unincorporated areas has grown as quickly as Phoenix, Gilbert and other large cities. The changing characteristics of that population affect the demand for service. The Sheriff has called on his Reserve Officers and the Posse members, which numbers over 3,000, to assist in the keeping the citizens of Maricopa County safe. The County jail population has grown steadily over the years. The 1981 Hart v. Hill judgment placed more stringent standards on housing of pre-sentenced prisoners. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Sheriff as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer for the county shall preserve the peace. Arrest and take before a magistrate all persons suspected of committing crimes. "Prevent or suppress all affrays, breaches of peace, riots, and insurrections which may come to the knowledge of the Sheriff." Provide security in Superior Court when requested by the presiding judge. Serve Processes. "Take charge of and keep the county jail, including a county jail under the jurisdiction of a county jail district, and the prisoner therein." Receive all persons committed by competent authority and provide food, clothing, and bedding at cost to the county. May charge cities and town for inmates detained solely for violations of city or town ordinances. Accept federal prisoners, and the Sheriff may obtain reimbursement from the federal government. Transport and maintain prisoners for appearance as witnesses. 503 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Sheriff (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 500 SHERIFF Fund Type CAPITAL PROJECTS GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 748,034 $ 41,195,407 107,323,665 149,267,106 $ Supplies & Services 116,087 $ 6,148,446 25,934,217 32,198,750 $ Capital Outlay 1,222 $ 11,283 1,221,152 1,233,657 $ Total Expenditures 865,343 $ 47,355,136 134,479,034 182,699,513 $ Total Revenue 5,848,594 36,327,176 42,175,770 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 500 SHERIFF ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 610 LICENSES AND PERMITS 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 638 PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 52,000 5,053,375 22,590,026 350,745 50,848 629 131,622 10,282,603 38,511,848 $ $ 83,745,463 $ 396,386 2,273,064 22,028,238 1,856,168 (13,173,011) 12,482,717 109,609,025 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 10,763,673 102,152 1,479,453 756,533 96,793 173,835 1,035,923 2,776,098 1,708,284 668,511 3,599,208 1,160,051 403,207 6,911 198,520 478 24,929,629 CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE 955 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION OUT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ 8,066 524,014 437,725 551,717 1,521,522 $ Total Expenditures $ 136,060,176 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ 53,970 5,332,116 23,052,767 451,087 62,761 78,641 9,208,072 38,239,414 $ $ 86,155,607 $ 579,708 1,718,673 23,705,623 1,883,916 (15,041,762) 14,433,386 113,435,151 $ 12,456,105 68,147 1,354,750 112,185 89,003 268,333 843,209 2,979,777 1,587,511 815,983 4,260,626 935,835 581,012 247,559 26,600,035 $ $ $ $ 643,380 500,000 150,355 439,876 1,733,611 $ 141,768,797 (97,548,328) $ 53,970 5,315,790 23,728,220 451,087 62,761 78,641 9,208,072 38,898,541 $ $ 96,229,862 $ 583,040 1,488,827 28,837,435 2,312,074 (15,417,068) 14,433,386 128,467,556 $ 13,448,393 53,387 1,345,472 80,851 54,003 280,700 1,338,231 3,013,668 1,547,247 809,173 4,261,899 1,436,240 580,662 229,674 28,479,600 $ $ $ $ 809,942 641,790 145,376 2,444 439,876 2,039,428 $ 158,986,584 (103,529,383) $ $ $ 92,803,806 $ 463,315 3,788,307 29,217,408 2,445,835 (16,662,931) 15,841,341 127,897,082 $ 10,998,213 136,178 1,520,726 788,044 71,156 205,522 1,114,054 2,959,230 2,057,681 344,832 4,392,859 1,394,277 709,528 225,341 26,917,642 $ $ $ $ 218,877 421,935 334,268 814 359,886 1,335,780 $ 156,150,504 $ (120,088,043) $ 504 55,936 5,229,932 24,122,881 461,784 129,069 1,607 65,248 9,462,334 39,528,791 FY 2004-05 Requested $ (116,621,713) $ 46,500 3,783,597 26,555,411 465,500 178,865 1,400 107,750 9,439,644 40,578,667 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ -4% 28% -17% -3% -185% 0% -37% -3% -8% 107,000,310 $ 529,750 1,445,990 34,145,259 2,176,783 (15,643,697) 14,334,307 143,988,702 $ 110,027,532 $ 532,269 1,851,426 36,442,914 2,374,997 (17,020,123) 15,058,091 149,267,106 $ (13,797,670) 50,771 (362,599) (7,605,479) (62,923) 1,603,055 (624,705) (20,799,550) -14% 9% -24% -26% -3% -10% -4% -16% 12,402,305 $ 102,619 1,111,694 567,538 (1,048,770) 1,048,770 76,760 201,284 1,647,219 3,701,111 2,984,393 390,984 4,368,380 1,293,189 1,157,519 261,661 (2,313,274) 2,313,275 30,266,657 $ 12,124,058 $ 102,619 1,244,414 842,348 (1,048,770) 1,048,770 76,760 201,284 3,310,065 3,828,060 2,987,730 474,257 4,376,358 1,325,449 935,115 261,661 (2,313,274) 2,313,275 108,571 32,198,750 $ 1,324,335 (49,232) 101,058 (761,497) 1,048,770 (1,048,770) (22,757) 79,416 (1,971,834) (814,392) (1,440,483) 334,916 (114,459) 110,791 (354,453) (31,987) 2,313,274 (2,313,275) (108,571) (3,719,150) 10% -92% 8% -942% 0% 0% -42% 28% -147% -27% -93% 41% -3% 8% -61% 0% -14% 0% 0% 0% -13% 225,000 $ 165,000 48,500 592,859 (283,334) 283,334 1,031,359 $ 225,000 $ 629,453 48,500 330,704 (283,334) 283,334 1,233,657 $ 584,942 12,337 96,876 2,444 109,172 283,334 (283,334) 805,771 72% 2% 67% 100% 25% 0% 0% 40% (23,712,929) -15% 20,435,700 -17% $ $ (134,708,051) $ 55,936 3,801,693 27,729,982 465,500 178,865 396,400 107,750 9,439,644 42,175,770 182,699,513 $ % (1,966) 1,514,097 (4,001,762) (14,413) (116,104) (396,400) (29,109) (231,572) (3,277,229) 175,286,718 $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ (140,523,743) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Sheriff (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 500 SHERIFF Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV AUDITOR CHAPLAIN COMPUTER OPERATOR COUNSELING SUPERVISOR COUNSELOR CRIME LAB SPECIALIST CRIME LAB SUPERVISOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DETENTION OFCR SUPERVISOR DETENTION OFFICER DETENTION OFFICER MANAGER DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIETITIAN DIRECTOR EDUCATOR ELECTED ENGINEER EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FOOD SERVICE SUPERVISOR FOOD SERVICE WORKER GENERAL LABORER GENERAL MAINTENANCE SUPV FTE 11.00 10.50 21.00 211.00 4.00 12.00 40.00 2.00 5.00 12.00 13.00 45.00 29.00 7.00 1.00 12.00 199.00 1,487.00 12.00 17.00 1.00 3.00 10.00 1.00 1.00 13.00 3.00 20.00 43.00 22.00 2.00 Market Range Title GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR INFO SYSTEMS PROJECT MGR INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INFO TECHNOL CONSULTANT INVESTIGATOR LAW ENFORCEMENT MANAGER LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPV LEGAL ASSISTANT LEGAL ASSISTANT SUPV LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST LIBRARIAN MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC MECHANIC MEDIA SPECIALIST PC SPECIALIST PILOT POLYGRAPH EXAMINER PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM MANAGER PROGRAM SUPERVISOR PSYCHOLOGIST SAFETY REPRESENTATIVE TECH SUPPORT SPECIALIST TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS OPTR TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECH TELECOMMUNICTNS OPTR SUPV TRAINING SPECIALIST UNDETERMINED 505 FTE 2.00 1.00 2.00 8.00 1.00 11.00 20.00 624.00 118.00 13.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 12.00 4.00 1.00 14.00 2.00 5.00 12.00 3.00 17.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 34.00 9.00 4.00 1.00 11.00 Total 3,214.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Superintendent of Schools Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Superintendent of Schools Superintendent of Schools Sandra E. Dowling, Ed.D. Sandra E. Dowling, Ed.D. Deputy Superintendent of Schools Administration Education Services Technology Finance Mission The Mission of the Superintendent of Schools is to provide fiscal and educational services to school districts and the community so that they can ensure that students receive the best possible education in order to meet the challenges of tomorrow. Vision The Superintendent of Schools will provide cost-effective leadership and support services to school districts and the community to ensure that students meet their future educational challenges and become contributing members of society. Goals • By December 2005 MCSOS will begin implementation of new school district business software and have all districts converted. • By July 2006, the Maricopa County Educational Service Agency will increase its annual (school-year) number of training participants by 20% from the 2003-2004 participant count. • By July 2006, 100% of our staff will have received the necessary training to support school districts and we will have completed a reorganization as necessitated by the implementation of the new school district business software. • By December 2005 MCSOS will begin phasing out obsolete equipment and software and we will finalize the implementation of new school district business software and have all districts converted by July 2006. • By July 2006 MCSOS will develop a comprehensive grant manual which will include policies and procedures for grant development, writing, implementation and management of all of the Educational Service Agency grants. Issues • Without qualified staff and state of the art systems, we cannot deliver support and direction needed by the school districts. • Long and short-term planning may be difficult due to Legislative changes that impact educational programs. 506 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Superintendent of Schools (Continued) • Obsolescence of current school district business software will result in the department being unable to meet statutory requirements. • The Federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and Arizona Learns, the Arizona statute implementing the NCLB, have placed increased demands on school districts in the areas of accountability and teacher preparation/training. There are greater demands on the County Superintendent of Schools' office as the department seeks to support schools in these areas. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS TOTAL FUNDS Program 37SC - EDUCATION 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 1,393,748 438,741 TOTAL $ 1,832,489 $ Supplies & Services $ 139,083 5,599 $ 144,682 Capital Outlay 7,571 $ 7,571 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,540,402 444,340 $ 1,984,742 Total Revenue 155,000 $ 155,000 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: EDUCATION Program Purpose: The purpose of the education program is to provide fiscal and educational services to school districts and the community so that students receive quality education. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Home School families who report who reported on the annual survey "satisfied / very satisfied" with the services provided by the Home School Division. N/A 88.9 73 80 Percent of customers who report good/excellent service on annual district support survey 94 94.2 100 95 Percent of customers who report overall good/excellent service on annual small schools district support survey. N/A 98 100 98 Key Results: 507 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Superintendent of Schools (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,573,126 $ $ 1,435,236 $ $ 1,657,474 $ $ 1,898,675 $ $ 1,984,742 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,573,126 1,435,236 1,657,474 1,898,675 1,984,742 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,573,126 $ $ 1,435,236 $ $ 1,657,474 $ $ 1,898,675 $ $ 1,984,742 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,573,126 1,435,236 1,657,474 1,898,675 1,984,742 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Superintendent of Schools FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Superintendent of Schools Mandates Vs. Expenditures $2.0 $1.8 Non-Mandated 0.0% $1.6 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $1.4 $1.2 $1.0 $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 508 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.6 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Superintendent of Schools (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Superintendent of Schools AUTHORITY A.R.S. §11-511 Powers And Duties; A.R.S. §15-301-§15-310 Local Governance Of Schools-County School Superintendent. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The County Superintendent of Schools is an elected officer of the county. The first County School Superintendent in Maricopa County was elected in 1871. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Distribute all laws, reports, circulars, instructions and forms received for the use of school officers. Record all official acts. Appoint governing board members of school districts to fill all vacancies for the remaining portion of the term. Make reports, when directed by the superintendent of public instruction, showing matters relating to schools in his county as may be required on the forms furnished by the superintendent of public instruction, including a yearly report indicating the amount of monies received from state school funds, special school district taxes and other sources, the total expenditures for school purposes and the balance on hand to the credit of each school district at the close of the school year. Contracts with the Board of Supervisors to conduct all regular school district elections. Be responsible, in cooperation with the governing boards and the Board of Supervisors, for all special school district elections. Maintain teacher and administrator certification records of effective dates and expiration dates of teachers' and administrators' certificates in compliance with state guidelines. Adhere to the uniform system of financial records and accounting procedures proscribed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction and the State Auditor General and, for those school districts for which the county school superintendent is the fiscal agent, draw warrants on the County Treasurer for all necessary expenses against the school funds of the districts. Keep a register of warrants showing the funds upon which the warrants have been drawn. May provide educational services of an accommodation school using the facilities of the accommodation school or school district and determine the per student cost of such services which shall be reimbursed by the school district. File in writing with the governing board of each school district in the county and the Board of Supervisors an estimate of the amount of school moneys required by each school district for the ensuing year, including: student count; total amount to be reviewed for each school district from the county school fund and the special county school reserve fund; ending cash balance from the previous year; anticipated interest earnings; and an estimate of additional amounts needed for each school district from the primary property tax and secondary property tax. Notify a school district three years before the expiration of a revenue control limit override that the school district's budget must be adjusted in the final two years of the override if the voters do not approve another override. Provide assistance to school districts and charter schools on the use of student data, staff development, curriculum alignment and technology to improve student performance. Assist schools in meeting yearly adequate progress goals as defined by criteria established by the state board of education and implemented by the department of education. Designated as a local education service agency eligible to receive and spend local, state and federal monies to provide programs and services to school districts and charter schools within the county. 509 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Superintendent of Schools (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 1,832,489 $ 1,832,489 $ Supplies & Services 144,682 $ 144,682 $ Capital Outlay 7,571 $ 7,571 $ Total Expenditures 1,984,742 $ 1,984,742 $ Total Revenue 155,000 155,000 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue 66,569 167 66,736 $ 1,186,430 19,848 1,427 268,970 11,197 1,487,873 $ $ Sub Total $ 40,077 429 7,758 11,462 5,400 50,446 11,540 14,511 9,301 150,924 CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT $ 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 0 18,677 18,677 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,657,474 $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ $ $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ $ (1,590,738) $ 118,050 35,000 153,050 $ 1,345,828 21,000 339,622 5,400 1,711,850 $ 33,800 2,880 9,000 6,225 50,000 9,000 14,000 11,000 135,905 $ 1,847,755 $ $ $ 118,050 35,000 153,050 $ 1,412,662 394,324 5,400 1,812,386 $ 33,800 2,880 9,000 6,225 50,000 9,000 14,000 11,000 135,905 $ $ - $ $ (1,694,705) $ 1,948,291 $ $ $ $ $ $ (1,795,241) $ 510 FY 2004-05 Requested 353,891 39,804 393,695 $ 1,308,228 10,500 340,474 8,697 1,667,900 $ 33,800 2,881 9,000 6,225 50,001 8,999 14,000 10,999 135,905 $ 1,803,804 $ $ $ $ $ $ (1,410,109) $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 120,000 35,000 155,000 $ 1,396,970 418,898 9,120 1,824,988 $ 36,500 2,880 10,945 4,357 50,000 13,500 15,500 11,000 144,682 $ 1,969,670 Adopted Vs Revised Variance 120,000 35,000 155,000 $ 1,403,570 419,799 9,120 1,832,489 $ 36,500 2,880 10,945 4,357 50,000 13,500 15,500 11,000 144,682 $ $ $ 7,571 7,571 $ 1,984,742 $ $ $ $ (1,814,670) $ % (1,950) (1,950) -2% 0% 0% -1% 9,092 (25,475) (3,720) (20,103) 1% 0% 0% -6% -69% -1% (2,700) (1,945) 1,868 (4,500) (1,500) (8,777) -8% 0% 0% -22% 30% 0% -50% -11% 0% -6% $ (7,571) (7,571) 0% 0% 0% 0% $ (36,451) -2% 34,501 -2% $ $ $ (1,829,742) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Superintendent of Schools (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 370 SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR ELECTED FTE 4.00 1.00 7.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER PC SPECIALIST PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM SUPERVISOR TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN Total 511 FTE 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 32.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Treasurer Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Treasurer Treasurer Doug Todd, County Treasurer Doug Todd, County Treasurer Executive Assistant Internal Auditor Client Services Chief Deputy Investments Information Systems Accounting Services Technical Services Tax Services Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Treasurer is to provide both the administration of property taxation for the County's residents and the accounting and investment of public monies for county agencies, school districts and other sub-political jurisdictions, as mandated by state and federal law, so that they can provide appropriate services to the County's residents. Goals • By FY 2007, the Treasurer will excel in customer service using technological advances to provide taxpayers with access to all tax information via INTERNET applications through increased budget allocations of personnel and capital resources. Achievements will be measured by growth in internet business applications and daily internet activity during the two year period. • By FY 2007, the Treasurer will improve and refine all tax collection and revenue apportionment functions by upgrading computer hardware and software aspects related to these procedures. By 2007 the goal of the Treasurer is to have collected and apportioned to the appropriate county jurisdictions 98.0% of the annual levy effective the conclusion of the tax year. After the subsequent Tax Lien Auction held the following February, this collection rate will have increased to 99.3% each year. Results will be measured by comparing tax collections with the adjusted annual levy at each month-end as well as at the end of the tax year. • Per House Bill 2428 Legislation, by FY 2005, the Treasurer will have initiated the tax billing and collecting procedures for Unsecured Personal Property (e.g. commercial office equipment, heavy construction equipment and mobile homes) into the existing Treasurer's Secured Property tax activities (those which relate to real estate), thereby streamlining Unsecured Personal Property operations and enhancing collective Treasurer's Office customer services. By FY 2007 the Treasurer will have fully integrated 100% of all collection and apportionment procedures of the UPPS process into an efficient and streamlined “unified” Property Tax Levy collection and apportionment system. Incremental accomplishments of the new system will be measured based on monthly collection percentages of the unified levy and monthly dollar amounts apportioned to county jurisdictions. • By FY 2006, the Treasurer will have contracted with its servicing bank affiliate, Bank One, to accept property tax payments and issue Treasurer’s Office receipts in branch bank locations throughout the county. 512 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Treasurer (Continued) Issues • Continuous population growth of Maricopa County and the increase in related services demanded of county agencies, schools districts and other sub-political jurisdictions that rely on the Treasurer to complete their accounting and investment functions will result in increased “banking” service demands placed on the Treasurer. • Rapid residential and commercial parcel count growth within Maricopa County and the resulting demands placed on the Treasurer for effective and timely tax collection processes and then the proficient apportionment of these proceeds will require more efficient methods of property tax payment processing by the Treasurer • With exponential growth of the County’s annual levy, now approaching $3.3 billion and its parcel count, soon to exceed 1.4 million, the Treasurer’s Office is witnessing an associated growth in the number of “inperson” tax payments and the resulting higher per transaction cost. • House Bill 2428 Legislation, that will merge Unsecured Personal Property with Secured Property activities in FY 2005, will result in an increased workload for the Treasurer in billing and collecting Unsecured Property taxes, functions previously performed by the Assessor and the Sheriff. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 430 TREASURER TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 43AP - ACCOUNTING PROGRAM $ 332,944 43TP - PROPERTY TAX PROGRAM 1,227,315 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 803,371 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 814,870 TOTAL $ 3,178,500 Supplies & Services $ 3,000 641,307 102,500 $ 746,807 Capital Outlay 10,423 17,000 $ 27,423 $ Total Expenditures $ 343,367 1,247,315 1,444,678 917,370 $ 3,952,730 Total Revenue 4,000 $ 4,000 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ACCOUNTING PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Accounting Program is to provide accounting and investment services for the Treasurer and Maricopa County and its political subdivisions so that there is fiscal accountability to county residents. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Treasurer's Journal Entries created by month-end 100 100 100 100 Percent of Cash Receipts Actually Processed 100 100 100 100 Tax Apportionments - Percent of Levy apportioned 96.8 96.5 96.8 97 Month-end Closings - Percent time month-end balance/close by due date 100 100 100 100 Key Results: 513 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Treasurer (Continued) Program Name: PROPERTY TAX PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Property Tax Program is to provide tax information for owners of property in Maricopa County so that they may pay their taxes in an accurate and prompt fashion and that their payments are accurately posted (applied). FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Payments Posted - Percent of Levy collected 96.8 96.5 96.8 97 Percent of levy collected by LockBox (LB) facility 38.12 38.94 38.4 39 Percent of Tax Bills Correctly Mailed 95.33 95.55 95.55 95 Back Tax Sale - Percent of BTX Collected 42.63 49.78 55.57 45 Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 3,475,408 $ $ 3,505,567 $ $ 3,527,577 $ $ 3,737,821 $ $ 3,952,730 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,475,408 3,505,567 3,527,577 3,737,821 3,952,730 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 3,475,408 $ $ 3,505,567 $ $ 3,527,577 $ $ 3,737,821 $ $ 3,952,730 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,475,408 3,505,567 3,527,577 3,737,821 3,952,730 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Treasurer FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Treasurer Mandates Vs. Expenditures $4.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $3.5 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $3.0 $2.5 $2.0 $1.5 $1.0 $0.5 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 514 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Treasurer (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE County Treasurer Responsibilities And Reporting AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-491; A.R.S. § 11-494; A.R.S. § 11-604-605; A.R.S. § 11-484; A.R.S. § 15996; A.R.S. §§ 35-323 through 35-327; A.R.S. § 41-1285.21; A.R.S. § 42; IRC150,148. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The County Treasurer is an elected official whose duties are to enhance the accountability of public monies to the citizens at large and act as the ex-officio tax collector. The Office of the Treasurer of Maricopa County was established on February 14, 1871. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Maricopa County Treasurer provides both the administration of property taxation for the County’s residents and the accounting and investment of public monies for County agencies, school districts, and other sub-political jurisdictions as mandated by state and federal law, so that they can provide appropriate services to the County’s residents. Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 430 TREASURER Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 3,178,500 $ 3,178,500 $ Supplies & Services 746,807 $ 746,807 $ Capital Outlay 27,423 $ 27,423 $ Total Expenditures 3,952,730 $ 3,952,730 $ Total Revenue 4,000 4,000 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 430 TREASURER ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES Total Revenue EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ $ 5,686 5,686 $ $ 5,686 5,686 $ $ 4,087 4,087 $ $ 5,686 5,686 $ $ 4,000 4,000 $ $ $ 2,101,660 16,158 6,931 479,156 6,840 2,610,746 $ $ 2,238,875 60,578 58,530 554,370 2,912,353 $ 2,326,492 34,355 23,880 611,493 3,730 2,999,949 $ 2,454,191 33,570 8,215 682,524 3,178,500 $ $ 2,110,795 60,578 58,530 630,482 2,860,385 $ $ 2,258,705 22,578 8,530 567,364 2,857,177 74,627 $ 261 2,430 (6,841) 209,093 78,574 83,976 32,863 22,203 215,435 791 713,412 $ 90,000 300 289,071 80,000 132,500 15,000 35,000 203,450 2,000 847,321 $ 99,500 300 265,560 85,000 145,000 40,000 55,778 270,000 2,000 963,138 $ 55,437 $ 248 (3,504) 227,325 88,542 178,151 4,480 14,462 180,470 1,202 746,813 $ 99,500 300 265,560 85,000 145,000 40,000 55,778 270,000 2,000 963,138 $ 60,000 300 205,560 63,425 125,744 20,000 25,778 245,000 1,000 746,807 $ $ $ $ Sub Total $ 201,568 1,850 203,419 Total Expenditures $ 3,527,577 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) Adopted Vs Revised Variance 4,671 4,671 Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ $ $ 3,171 3,171 $ 3,707,669 (3,522,907) $ $ $ $ $ 3,171 3,171 $ 3,878,662 (3,701,983) $ $ $ 3,862 3,862 $ 3,750,623 (3,872,976) $ 515 $ $ $ $ 3,171 3,171 $ 3,826,694 (3,746,537) $ $ $ 1,686 1,686 % 30% 30% (215,316) 27,008 50,315 (128,154) (266,147) -10% 45% 86% -23% 0% -9% 39,500 60,000 21,575 19,256 20,000 30,000 25,000 1,000 216,331 40% 0% 0% 0% 23% 25% 13% 50% 54% 9% 50% 22% 0% -765% -765% $ $ 27,423 27,423 $ (24,252) (24,252) $ 3,952,730 $ (74,068) -2% 75,754 -2% (3,821,008) $ (3,948,730) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Treasurer (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 430 TREASURER Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV AUDITOR COMPUTER OPERATOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST FTE 1.75 4.00 4.00 11.00 1.00 7.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 Market Range Title DIRECTOR ELECTED FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR HR SPECIALIST INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC SVC SUPERVISOR TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN Total 516 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.75 8.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 59.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Appointed Appointed Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Board of Supervisors Fulton Brock, Chairman Don Stapley, District 2 Andrew Kunasek, District 3 Max Wilson, District 4 Mary Rose Wilcox, District 5 Elected Appointed Clerk of the Board Fran McCarroll County Administrative Officer David Smith Internal Audit Ross Tate Deputy County Administrator Sandra Wilson Health Services Officer Dr. Jonathan Weisbuch Legal Advocacy Community Services Officer William Scalzo Finance Officer Tom Manos Public Defender Regional Development Services Agency Officer Joy Rich Maricopa Integrated Health System Ted Shaw Contract Counsel Information Technology Officer Jim Price Legal Defender 517 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Animal Care and Control Organizational Chart County Adminis Administrative trative Officer Chief Health Services Officer Animal Care & Control Animal Care & Control Julie Bank, Interim Director Julie Bank, Interim Director Controller Field Services Public Programs Administration Shelter Operations/ Medicine Licensing/Call Center Mission The Mission of the Animal Care & Control (ACCS) department is to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of pets and people in Maricopa County so that citizens can be free from nuisances, diseases and other dangers caused by animals. Vision Animal Care and Control Services envisions the day when residents, their property and neighborhoods will be free from the dangers and nuisances of irresponsible pet ownership and when every pet born will be assured of a good home and care all its natural life and will not suffer due to abuse, neglect or ignorance. Goals • Develop and obtain funding for a master plan to build new animal care centers by June 2005. • By June 2006, increase the compliance rate for issuance of dog licenses by 2.5 percent from the FY 2004 level. • By 2010, reduce the euthanasia rate of "healthy adoptable" animals to zero percent. Issues • The increasing demands for quality pet adoption, licensing and contractual field services place substantial pressure on Animal Care & Control to provided high quality, cost-effective, efficient, and humane animal care and control services. • Citizens view Animal Care & Control as a refuge for unwanted animals and criticize the agency for destroying "adoptable" animals and request additional services that cause an increase in the scope and requirements of all aspects of AC&C non-mandated outreach programs. • With increasing demand from the public for outreach services provided to citizens, Animal Care & Control needs to increase its public outreach services that citizens receive within the Animal Welfare Safety Net Program. 518 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Animal Care and Control (Continued) • The design, condition, and age of Animal Care & Control's physical facilities cause a negative reaction in the community, which reinforces the negative public perception of the agency and creates difficulty in promoting its positive animal care and adoption programs. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 79AC - ANIMAL CONTROL PROGRAM $ 2,030,825 79AP - PED ADOPTION PROGRAM 1,448,650 79PL - PET LICENSING PROGRAM 290,413 79SH - ANIMAL SHELTERING PROGRAM 964,989 79SN - ANIMAL WELFARE SAFTEY NET PRG 202,429 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 643,127 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 43,257 TOTAL $ 5,623,690 Supplies & Services $ 606,376 573,747 499,967 744,271 172,062 516,785 18,996 $ 3,132,204 Capital Outlay 335,005 6,000 9,480 $ 350,485 $ Total Expenditures $ 2,972,206 2,028,397 790,380 1,709,260 374,491 1,169,392 62,253 $ 9,106,379 Total Revenue 2,901,763 40,000 3,900,106 2,166,741 60,000 $ 9,068,610 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: CUSTOMER SERVICE PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Customer Service Program is to provide interface with the public so that it can utilize AC&C customer services. Key Results: Percent of phone calls answered Percent of dog licenses issued within two weeks (after receipt of completed application) FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 92.75 91.77 N/A N/A 0 91.4 35 N/A Program Name: FIELD SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Field Services Program is to provide animal control services to the citizens of Maricopa County through contracts with participating Cities and Towns and the unincorporated areas within the County so the citizens can be free from the health and safety dangers of stray dogs and cats. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of calls dispatched to Animal Control Officers 100 100 N/A N/A Percent of Maricopa County cities and towns satisfied with the field enforcement service. 98 100 N/A N/A Key Results: 519 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Animal Care and Control (Continued) Program Name: SHELTERING AND ADOPTION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Sheltering and Adoption Program is to provide modern humane sheltering and professional adoption services to the people of Maricopa County so that they can manage animal issues in a humane, caring manner and adopt healthy well adjusted animals. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of animals humanely sheltered N/A 93 90 N/A Percent animals vaccinated N/A 93 91 N/A Percent of citizens satisfied with business office transactions N/A 95 98 N/A Percent of animals receiving spay/neuter surgeries 64 90 95 N/A Percent of sheltered dogs and cats adopted 37 35 33 N/A Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 228,096 $ 6,536,887 $ 304,041 $ 6,604,265 $ 304,041 $ 9,045,888 $ 304,041 $ 7,581,735 $ 385,109 $ 8,721,270 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 6,764,983 6,908,306 9,349,929 7,885,776 9,106,379 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 228,096 $ 6,536,887 $ 304,041 $ 6,604,265 $ 304,041 $ 9,045,888 $ 304,041 $ 7,581,735 $ 385,109 $ 8,721,270 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 6,764,983 6,908,306 9,349,929 7,885,776 9,106,379 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Animal Care & Control FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $10.0 General Fund Mandated 4.2% $9.0 $8.0 Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.0% Animal Care & Control Mandates Vs. Expenditures $7.0 $6.0 $5.0 $4.0 $3.0 $2.0 $1.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 95.8% 520 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 6.8 0.2 6.5 0.0 6.9 0.3 6.6 0.0 9.3 0.3 9.0 0.0 7.9 0.3 7.6 0.0 9.1 0.4 8.7 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Animal Care and Control (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Animal Control In Cities and Towns (Incorporated Areas) and Unincorporated Areas AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11, Chapter 7, Article 6 - Animal Control HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Maricopa County has the responsibility to enforce State legislation and County ordinances for the unincorporated areas within the County. Maricopa County is also mandated with enforcing State legislation for those municipalities that do not enact local ordinances that are equal to or more stringent than State Statutes. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Animal Care & Control is mandated to (1) provide dog licensing, durable dog tags, and enforce the laws and ordinances that govern anti-rabies vaccinations, (2) humanely shelter unwanted dogs and cats and provide them an opportunity for adoption to qualified guardians, or if necessary, euthanize dogs and cats, and to provide an opportunity for qualified citizens to reclaim their pet(s) (3) make provisions for the spaying and neutering of all adopted animals, (4) impound stray dogs, (5) control the handling and disposition of bite animals and vicious dogs, and (6) issue citations and license violation warnings to violators. 521 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Animal Care and Control (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 372,977 $ 5,250,713 5,623,690 $ Supplies & Services 11,197 $ 3,121,007 3,132,204 $ Capital Outlay 935 $ 349,550 350,485 $ Total Expenditures 385,109 $ 8,721,270 9,106,379 $ Total Revenue 9,068,610 9,068,610 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 610 LICENSES AND PERMITS 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE 955 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION OUT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 3,747,328 2,302,135 1,540,748 18,827 18,728 173,737 1,468,216 9,269,719 $ $ 3,850,000 89,438 2,224,643 1,550,000 10,532 258,818 7,983,431 $ $ 3,850,000 111,579 2,224,643 1,550,000 10,532 258,818 8,005,572 $ $ 3,515,695 59,016 2,460,623 2,232,412 15,005 150 691,820 8,974,721 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 4,137,382 110,039 3,422,058 1,677,334 10,532 358,818 9,716,163 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 3,837,382 112,131 2,874,505 1,877,334 10,532 356,726 9,068,610 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ 12,618 (552) (649,862) (327,334) (97,908) (1,063,038) 0% 0% -29% -21% 0% 0% -38% 0% -13% 3,514,731 $ 164,856 148,995 976,240 22,372 (497,289) 467,289 4,797,194 $ 3,937,920 $ 42,245 47,289 1,353,755 16,781 (467,189) 437,189 5,367,990 $ 4,044,382 $ 42,245 47,287 1,185,660 118,139 (467,189) 437,189 5,407,713 $ 3,985,253 $ 95,575 87,383 1,349,714 16,437 (694,551) 654,552 5,494,364 $ 3,971,007 $ 79,313 1,456,113 24,388 (804,546) 774,546 5,500,821 $ 3,949,923 $ 46,800 71,000 1,535,759 30,208 (702,063) 692,063 5,623,690 $ 94,459 (4,555) (23,713) (350,099) 87,931 234,874 (254,874) (215,977) 2% -11% -50% -30% 74% -50% -58% -4% 653,194 550,154 86,533 11,325 33,799 589,566 9,868 40,964 473,113 11,446 24,383 138,921 24,708 1,757,039 4,405,011 $ 189,978 429,515 81,798 4,395 10,476 791,915 19,468 47,248 489,729 2,547 25,116 150,561 588,590 2,831,336 $ 137,881 539,350 94,231 14,492 19,001 310,733 16,862 39,557 576,083 16,613 79,495 139,778 588,590 2,572,664 $ 548,399 685,358 157,137 4,395 56,604 245,620 94,739 51,504 601,941 15,479 121,346 134,996 630,598 3,348,117 $ $ 189,978 433,637 81,799 4,395 10,476 841,513 19,468 47,248 453,592 2,547 25,116 150,561 588,590 2,848,920 531,405 $ 630,518 100,039 9,695 (8,604) 8,604 63,732 228,626 19,464 45,280 575,959 31,730 126,919 161,996 (36,227) 36,227 606,841 3,132,204 $ (341,427) (201,003) (18,241) (5,300) 8,604 (8,604) (53,256) 563,289 4 1,968 (86,230) (29,183) (101,803) (11,435) 36,227 (36,227) (18,251) (300,868) -180% -47% -22% -121% 0% 0% -508% 71% 0% 4% -18% -1146% -405% -8% 0% 0% 0% -3% -11% (3,866) $ 71,420 357,291 424,845 $ 49,000 49,000 $ $ $ 334,702 350,000 684,702 $ $ 152,773 140,000 48,000 17,632 358,405 $ $ 49,000 49,000 $ 8,265,910 $ 8,288,049 $ 8,425,433 $ 9,533,640 $ (282,477) $ 549,288 $ 182,523 $ 9,627,051 $ $ (357,332) $ $ (282,479) $ 522 $ $ $ $ 17,520 302,800 30,165 (3,745) 3,745 350,485 $ 9,106,379 0% 0% (17,520) 0% (253,800) -518% (30,165) 0% 3,745 0% (3,745) 0% (301,485) -615% $ (818,330) -10% (37,769) $ (244,708) 87% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Animal Care and Control (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 790 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV ANIMAL CARE/CONTROL OFCR ANIMAL CARE/CTL OFCR MGR ANIMAL CARE/CTL OFCR SUPV CALL CTR REPRESENTATIVE DIRECTOR DISPATCHER EPIDEMIOLOGIST FTE 1.00 1.00 9.00 1.00 68.00 4.00 2.00 6.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR SPECIALIST PC SPECIALIST PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM MANAGER PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE PURCHASING SPECIALIST VETERINARIAN VETERINARIAN TECHNICIAN Total 523 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 22.00 1.00 3.00 9.00 144.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Appropriated Fund Balance Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 100,886,401 $ $ 11,806,236 $ $ 53,193,429 $ 103,004,854 $ 83,562,264 $ 60,063,927 $ 196,689,269 $ 95,038,389 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 100,886,401 11,806,236 156,198,283 143,626,190 291,727,658 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,192,000 $ $ $ $ 173,558 $ $ $ $ 500,000 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,192,000 173,558 500,000 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 99,694,401 $ $ 11,806,236 $ $ 52,974,700 $ 103,004,854 $ 82,629,359 $ 60,063,927 $ 195,198,195 $ 95,038,389 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 99,694,401 11,806,236 155,979,553 142,693,285 290,236,584 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ 45,172 $ $ 932,905 $ $ 991,074 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 45,172 932,905 991,074 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Appropriated Fund Balance FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Appropriated Fund Balance Mandates Vs. Expenditures Non-Mandated 0.3% $300.0 $250.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 32.6% $200.0 $150.0 $100.0 $50.0 $0.0 General Fund Mandated 67.1% Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated 524 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 100.9 100.9 0.0 0.0 11.8 11.8 0.0 0.0 156.2 53.1 103.0 0.0 143.6 82.6 60.1 0.9 291.7 195.7 95.0 1.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Appropriated Fund Balance (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 220,800 $ 220,800 $ Supplies & Services 162,235,070 $ 91,017,389 253,252,459 $ Capital Outlay 34,233,399 $ 4,021,000 38,254,399 $ Total Expenditures 196,689,269 $ 95,038,389 291,727,658 $ Total Revenue 43,381,453 43,381,453 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 480 APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 606 SALES TAXES 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ 98,172,824 919,904 4,510 99,097,238 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 204,689 22,725 25,549 92,449 345,413 $ $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ Sub Total $ 7,012,429 87,398 1,959,679 0 2,368,297 883,149 3,105 134,984,712 147,298,768 CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 7,820,922 821,694 23,550 8,666,166 Total Expenditures $ 156,310,347 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,237,500 1,237,500 $ 5,000,000 5,000,000 $ 139,909,923 56,118,296 196,028,219 $ $ 30,000,000 11,783,000 41,783,000 $ 242,811,219 (57,213,109) $ $ $ $ $ 1,204,587 1,237,500 2,442,087 $ 5,088,518 1,368,680 6,457,198 $ 6,801,897 124,932,047 2,157,026 59,992,296 193,883,266 $ $ 29,000,000 11,988,279 356,000 41,344,279 $ 241,684,743 (241,573,719) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 3,380 21,600 2,096 89,531 1,314,359 1,430,965 $ 4,046,153 53,385 13,166,637 240,496 1,084,447 25,511 124 101,242,296 119,859,049 $ $ 6,105,562 7,415,896 2,818,171 356,000 2,350 16,697,979 $ 137,987,993 (239,242,656) $ 525 2,744,587 250,000 312,282 3,306,869 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ - $ $ 100,000 100,000 $ 64,883 159,277,349 119,424 2,724,716 666,970 14,293,089 177,146,431 $ $ 20,410,236 13,244,279 268,000 33,922,515 $ 211,168,946 (134,681,124) $ FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ $ 2,810,000 40,571,453 43,381,453 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 26,746 194,054 220,800 $ 87,083 37,650 171,794,411 1,020,424 2,194,716 666,970 77,451,205 253,252,459 $ $ $ 0% 1,204,587 100% 0% (1,572,500) -127% (40,571,453) 0% (40,939,366) -1676% 5,061,772 1,174,626 6,236,398 0% 0% 0% 99% 86% 97% 6,714,814 (37,650) (46,862,364) (1,020,424) (2,194,716) 1,490,056 (17,458,909) (59,369,193) 99% 0% -38% 0% 0% 69% 0% 0% -29% -31% 28% -42% 0% 25% 0% 7% $ 20,980,531 17,005,868 268,000 38,254,399 $ 8,019,469 (5,017,589) 88,000 3,089,880 $ 291,727,658 $ (50,042,915) -21% 9,103,549 -4% (211,168,946) $ $ % (248,346,205) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors Clerk Organizational Chart Board of Supervisors Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Fran McCarroll Fran McCarroll Executive Assistant to Clerk of the Board Deputy Clerk of the Board Licenses/ Permits Agenda Processing Information/ Public Records Statutory Services Minutes Special Districts Agenda Preparation Administration Mission The Mission of the Office of the Clerk of the Board is to provide official record keeping and other statutory and policy-related services for the Board of Supervisors, other County Agencies, Special Districts, and the general public, so they can make informed decisions and conduct business affairs. Vision The Vision of the Office of the Clerk of the Board is to be recognized as a leader in the field of statutory and policy record keeping and procedures for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. Goals • By June 2005, provide all Clerk's Office forms and all County ordinances to citizens via the Internet. Ordinances are being reformatted and updated in order to provide accurate information on the Internet. • By June 2005, pursue legislative corrections and changes to the statutes to reduce and/or eliminate unnecessary or redundant processes mandated to the Clerk of the Board: 1) eliminate the requirement to publish BOS minutes in a newspaper; and 2) have copies of disciplinary / dismissal letters sent to Human Resources rather than to the Clerk's Office for filing. Legislation is formulated by the Arizona County Clerk's Association. Proposals will be submitted during the upcoming Legislative session by that organization. • By June 2005, move the record filing system in the Clerk's Office to imaged / stored documents versus paper copies in concert with a countywide effort. • By June 2005, begin to produce brochures highlighting and providing step-by-step information regarding Clerk of the Board processes used by the public and/or County Departments. (The goal is to provide one brochure by June 2003.) 526 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors Clerk (Continued) Issues • An increase in management demands and an increase in Board directives, reviews, reports, and official appointments has resulted in a significant increase in staff time devoted to administrative reporting and follow-up action. • An increase in the types and amounts of documents retained in the Clerk’s Office and the number of public records requests has revealed inadequate storage space and an inadequate records documentation and tracking system which results in the frequent redistribution of documents and an increase in staff time devoted to research. • Recent changes in the Procurement Code signing authority has resulted in an increase in confusion regarding Bid Serials, Agenda Information Forms (AIFs), and renewal of contracts and has led to inconsistencies in the processing and filing of documents. • An increase in County-wide and department policy violations, and an increase in incomplete and incorrect Agenda Information Form documentation (e.g. contract amendments don't follow contract guidelines, Department Directors signing contracts instead of the Chairman, and contracts have not been provided to the Clerk's Office at the time of agenda processing), has resulted in an increase in staff time devoted to researching, reconciling, correcting, and processing documents. This causes a much longer than necessary turn-around time in getting documents processed and returned to initiating departments. • An increase in new legislation, as well as an increase in legislative changes and amendments, has resulted in an increase in the number of statutory mandates required to be performed by the Clerk’s Office. As legislation is added, old or obsolete legislation is not necessary removed from the statutes. • An increase in the broad uses of computer technology has resulted in an increased need for staff technology training. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 060 CLERK OF THE BOARD TOTAL FUNDS Program 06ES - EXECUTIVE SERVICES 06IR - INFORMATION RESOURCES 06SS - STATUTORY SERVICES 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 182,559 120,311 27,364 73,606 TOTAL $ 403,840 $ Supplies & Services $ 600 13,500 1,500 57,329 $ 72,929 527 Capital Outlay 2,019 $ 2,019 $ Total Expenditures $ 183,159 133,811 28,864 132,954 $ 478,788 Total Revenue $ - $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors Clerk (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: EXECUTIVE SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Executive Services Program is to provide information and specialized assistance to elected and appointed officials and the public so they can make informed decisions, and understand and comply with County processes and protocol. Key Results: Percent of elected and appointed officials who received materials and support within statutory or specified time frames FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 100 100 100 100 Program Name: INFORMATION RESOURCES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Information Resources Program is to provide research, compilation, and management of official records for County staff and the public so they can store and access information. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of documents managed in accordance with retention schedule N/A 75 75 N/A Percent of requestors who are able to access the information they asked for in a specified time period 91 96.25 95.5 N/A Key Results: Program Name: STATUTORY SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Statutory Services Program is to provide applications processing and assistance for statutorily mandated procedures to applicants and/or requestors so they can conduct or maintain community related activities as needs arise. Key Results: Percent of applicants who obtain a fully processed license or permit application within the statutory time frame. 528 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 100 100 100 N/A Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors Clerk (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 414,579 $ $ 427,717 $ $ 463,725 $ $ 458,417 $ $ 478,788 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 414,579 427,717 463,725 458,417 478,788 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 414,579 $ $ 427,717 $ $ 463,725 $ $ 458,417 $ $ 478,788 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 414,579 427,717 463,725 458,417 478,788 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Board of Supervisors Clerk FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Board of Supervisors Clerk Mandates Vs. Expenditures $0.5 $0.5 Non-Mandated 0.0% $0.4 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $0.4 $0.3 $0.3 $0.2 $0.2 $0.1 $0.1 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 529 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 0.4 0.4 0 0 0.4 0.4 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors Clerk (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Clerk of the Board of Supervisors AUTHORITY A.R.S. §11-201 Powers of county; A.R.S. §11-251 Powers of board; A.R.S. §11-241 Clerk of Board appointment; duties; A.R.S. §11-214 Regular and special meetings. There are other statutory references regarding the Clerk of the Board, far too many to detail in this type of report. Because the Clerk of the Board works directly with and for the Board of Supervisors, everything the Clerk does is in some way mandated by statute, particularly recording all proceedings of the board, recording the vote of each member on every question, and preserving and filing all accounts and actions of the Board. The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is also the Clerk of the Flood Control District A.R.S. § 48-3602, Library District A.R.S. § 48-3901, and the Stadium District A.R.S. § 48-4202, as well as numerous special districts. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Clerk of the Board is an Officer of the County, appointed by the Board of Supervisors to perform all mandated statutory services for the Board of Supervisors, Flood Control District, Library District, Stadium District, Special Health Care District and Special Districts, and to be the official record keeper for these Boards. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Clerk of the Board has numerous statutory and constitutional duties including signing all orders made and warrants issued by order of the board for payment of money, publishing minutes, accepting notices of claim for the county, tracking Constables monthly logs, assisting in formation of special districts, special district annual reports, processing annexations and franchise applications, and licensing and permitting for certain special events. Regular meetings of the Board shall be held each month as designated by the Board; each meeting to be posted and conducted in accordance with the Arizona Open Meeting Law statute A.R.S. § 38-431 et. seq. . 530 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Board of Supervisors Clerk (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 060 CLERK OF THE BOARD Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 403,840 $ 403,840 $ Supplies & Services 72,929 $ 72,929 $ Capital Outlay 2,019 $ 2,019 $ Total Expenditures 478,788 $ 478,788 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 060 CLERK OF THE BOARD ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ $ $ $ Sub Total $ 9,748 87 7,535 49,695 8,559 391 1,551 1,204 886 79,656 $ Sub Total $ - Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) 315,477 9,262 59,330 384,069 $ 463,725 307,735 12,433 56,811 376,979 $ $ $ $ 7,500 15,000 36,500 7,500 1,000 3,090 1,100 1,500 73,190 $ $ - $ (463,725) $ 450,169 309,790 6,199 68,164 16,932 401,085 $ $ $ $ 7,536 15,000 36,500 7,500 998 3,089 1,100 1,500 73,223 $ $ - $ (450,169) $ 474,308 316,077 2,899 65,792 7 384,774 $ $ $ $ 5,890 51 11,774 28,683 7,899 654 910 465 721 57,047 $ $ - $ (474,308) $ 441,821 308,606 6,199 70,203 16,932 401,940 $ $ $ $ 10,552 15,000 33,835 10,960 998 934 1,100 1,450 74,829 $ $ $ (441,821) $ 308,606 14,403 70,831 10,000 403,840 $ $ 1,184 (8,204) (2,667) 6,932 (2,755) 0% -132% -4% 41% -1% -40% 0% 0% 7% -30% 50% 70% 18% 3% 0% $ $ 10,552 15,000 33,835 9,760 498 934 900 1,450 72,929 $ (3,016) 2,665 (2,260) 500 2,155 200 50 294 2,019 2,019 $ $ 2,019 2,019 $ $ (2,019) (2,019) 0% 0% 478,788 $ 478,788 $ (4,480) -1% 4,480 -1% (478,788) $ (478,788) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 060 CLERK OF THE BOARD Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR FTE 4.00 1.00 Market Range Title DIRECTOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST Total 531 FTE 1.00 1.00 7.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Chief Information Officer Organizational Chart County Adminis Administrative trative Officer Chief Information Officer Chief Information Officer Business Administration Office of the Chief Information Officer MIHS Technology Jim Price, Director Jim Price, Director Electronic Government Technology Telecommunications Infrastructure Technology Center Customer Support Center Mission The Mission of the Information Technology Department is to provide strategic vision, leadership, and enterprise solutions to County leaders and staff so they can meet their goals and deliver results to the Public. Vision Information Technology will champion Maricopa County into Information-Age Government. Goals • County employees will have the ability to fully perform their day-to-day jobs, within a secured IT environment, on demand from anywhere at any time by July 2008. • The Public and outside organizations will have the ability, within a secured IT environment, to obtain information from and conduct business transactions online with the County on demand from anywhere at any time by July 2008. • County decision-makers will have the ability to readily and easily access data and/or information on demand to make informed business decisions by July 2008. • Through Countywide standardized information technology, the County will maximize the use of its available support resources, optimize the cost of doing business, and expedite the sharing and distributing of data and information between systems utilized by distinct business units on demand by July 2008. • The County’s IT strategic goals will be achieved through information technology standards; experienced, knowledgeable, and informed staff; and transformed business processes through enabling IT services by July 2008. Issues • As the County increasingly depends upon collaboration in the workplace, supporting the process will be impossible if the technology infrastructure is inadequately funded and allowed to stagnate. • The lack of robust tools to manage, organize, maintain and catalog data will negate the usefulness of the constantly increasing supply of and demand for web-based information. 532 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Chief Information Officer (Continued) • Increased demand for video, imaging, and other high bandwidth applications to support business processes are greater than what current network capacity and flexibility can provide. • The lack of competitive compensation, education, and career development opportunities for IT staff will make it difficult to attract and retain skilled employees. • If IT doesn’t pursue alternative service delivery models, the shortage of IT talent may result in the inability to meet our customers’ demands for services. • Current development methodologies, tools, infrastructure, and organizational models won’t be able to support the Public’s demand for easy, online, 7X24 access to all government services from any location. • Existing systems are being challenged to present decision-making information to county staff, management, and citizenry to meet current and anticipated increase in demand. • The changing work environment and growth in population require county employees to perform their jobs from remote locations, seriously challenging the County telecommunications system, which was designed primarily to serve centralized locations. • Existing demand for decision-making information cannot be met with current applications. • The lack of integration frameworks between County departments and external agencies hinder the presentation of timely decision-making information demanded by County staff, management, and the Public. • The work environment, population growth, and urban sprawl continually change. Today's workforce is required to perform work from remote locations with both wired and wireless telecommunications-based technologies. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 410 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 41AP - INFO TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION $ 946,824 41IF - INFO TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE 106,725 41MG - INFO TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT 557,130 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 483,029 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 2,037,174 TOTAL $ 4,130,882 Supplies & Services $ 155,335 6,999 18,748 691,687 $ 872,769 533 Capital Outlay 204,778 $ 204,778 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,102,159 106,725 564,129 501,777 2,933,639 $ 5,208,429 Total Revenue $ - $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Chief Information Officer (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the IT Application Program is to provide County-wide solutions on behalf of administrative departments so that they can meet their goals and deliver maximum benefit from their technology investments. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent Customers Satisfied with Budget & MFR Applications Development Service Request Outcome. 100 N/A 90 90 Percent Customers Satisfied with Financial Applications Development Service Request Outcome. 83 N/A 100 100 85.7 N/A 87.5 87.5 Key Results: Percent Customers Satisfied with HR Applications Development Service Request Outcome. Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 5,175,454 $ $ 5,157,517 $ $ 5,195,691 $ $ 4,472,561 $ $ 5,208,429 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 5,175,454 5,157,517 5,195,691 4,472,561 5,208,429 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 5,175,454 $ $ 5,157,517 $ $ 5,195,691 $ $ 4,472,561 $ $ 5,208,429 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 5,175,454 5,157,517 5,195,691 4,472,561 5,208,429 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Chief Information Officer FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Chief Information Officer Mandates Vs. Expenditures $60.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $50.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $40.0 $30.0 $20.0 $10.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 534 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 50.8 11.6 39.1 0.1 52.7 12.1 40.5 0.0 52.3 14.5 37.8 0.0 56.1 43.5 12.6 0.0 59.6 45.7 13.9 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Chief Information Officer (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 410 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 4,130,882 $ 4,130,882 $ Supplies & Services 872,769 $ 872,769 $ Capital Outlay 204,778 $ 204,778 $ Total Expenditures 5,208,429 $ 5,208,429 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 410 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ 3,394,245 $ (0) 4,306 634,379 20,319 (317,283) 3,735,966 $ 3,232,595 $ 5,574 8,700 634,881 95,938 (335,920) 3,641,768 $ 3,615,006 $ 5,574 8,700 837,334 17,555 (596,820) 19,992 3,907,341 $ 3,411,070 $ (1,868) 9,013 721,707 22,533 (471,192) 16,660 3,707,924 $ 940,355 111,733 42,927 7,966 52,440 35,689 37,048 1,126 1,229,284 832,533 25,000 74,728 6,975 87,430 28,540 35,500 200 1,090,906 887,033 28,500 22,728 6,975 81,430 28,540 35,500 200 1,090,906 945,209 22 10,048 34,379 5,850 39,229 22,815 6,527 578 1,064,656 Sub Total $ 39,308 191,274 230,582 Total Expenditures $ 5,195,832 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ 145,276 145,276 $ 4,877,950 (5,195,832) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 145,276 145,276 $ $ 5,143,523 $ (4,877,950) $ $ (5,143,523) $ $ 786,184 28,500 23,031 6,142 76,430 22,600 36,000 200 979,087 (742) $ 129,815 129,073 $ 168,763 168,763 5,208,429 4,901,652 $ 3,471,776 $ 3,074 8,700 830,512 37,268 (290,751) 4,060,579 $ $ (4,901,652) $ $ $ $ 3,553,108 $ 2,000 5,000 843,969 17,556 (290,751) 4,130,882 $ 694,927 28,500 22,000 6,142 68,000 22,600 30,000 600 872,769 $ $ 2% 64% 43% -1% 0% 51% 100% -6% 192,106 728 833 13,430 5,940 5,500 (400) 218,137 22% 0% 0% 3% 12% 16% 21% 15% -200% 20% 0% -41% -41% $ 204,778 204,778 $ (59,502) (59,502) $ 5,208,429 $ (64,906) -1% 64,906 -1% (5,208,429) $ $ 61,898 3,574 3,700 (6,635) (1) (306,069) 19,992 (223,541) (5,208,429) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 410 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST CHIEF OFFICER COMPUTER OPERATOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR FTE 2.00 1.00 6.00 4.00 15.00 1.00 Market Range Title FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INFO TECHNOL CONSULTANT PC SPECIALIST TECH SUPPORT SPECIALIST TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN Total 535 FTE 1.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 1.00 5.00 8.00 63.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Communications Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Office of Communications Office of Communications Al Macias, Director Al Macias, Director Media Relations Internal Communications Community Relations Administration Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Office of Communications is to provide consistent, effective, and accurate communication, media relations, and community relations to the residents and employees of the County so they are informed of Maricopa County’s activities, services, and achievements. Vision The Office of Communications will disseminate information about County services through all forms of media including but not limited to print, broadcast, and interactive web based media. Goals • By August of 2004, there will be a 3% increase in the amount of press coverage for Maricopa County (measured by our media tracking service), achieved through a dedicated, unified effort from all County PIO’s to coordinate press through the Office of Communications for greater group impact. 2. By August of 2004, Maricopa County will increase public awareness of County services and goals by at least 5% over the 2000 results in each of the next two Customer Satisfaction Surveys (as measured by the Office of Research and Reporting). 3. By January 2005, the Office of Communications will create at least four new methods of sharing information with elected leaders and employees. • By August 2006, Maricopa County will increase public awareness of County Services and goals by at least 3% over the 2003 results in each of the next two Customer Satisfaction Surveys (as measured by the Office of research and Reporting). • By August 2006, the Office of Communications will begin streaming video via the intranet and internet to increase the County’s ability to communicate with its employees and residents. Issues • Increased production and use of streaming video may require additional resources in order to meet our goal timeframes. • Digital Television (DTV) has become an issue for over the air broadcasters due to the Federal Government’s requirement that all commercial outlets convert to the DTV format. That process is currently under way throughout the country. If cable providers convert to the DTV format (willingly or under government order) the Office of Communications would most likely be required to provide our programming to the cable providers in DTV format. That would require new cameras and editing equipment at significant cost, perhaps as much as two million dollars. It is difficult to predict when that point may be reached but more than likely it will happen within the next two to four years. 536 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Communications (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 710 COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL FUNDS Program 71CM - COMMUNICATIONS 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 477,737 87,893 TOTAL $ 565,630 $ Supplies & Services $ 120,208 44,665 $ 164,873 Capital Outlay 23,726 $ 23,726 $ Total Expenditures $ 621,671 132,558 $ 754,229 Total Revenue 46,261 $ 46,261 $ Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue N/A N/A N/A N/A $ 331,078 $ $ $ 711,251 $ 707,968 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds N/A N/A N/A N/A $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service N/A N/A $ 224,104 $ $ 46,261 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue N/A N/A N/A N/A $ 331,078 $ $ $ 711,251 $ 707,968 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds N/A N/A N/A N/A $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service N/A N/A $ 224,104 $ $ 46,261 $ $ $ Total N/A N/A 555,182 711,251 754,229 $ $ $ Total N/A N/A 555,182 711,251 754,229 NOTE: Prior to FY03, Communications was included in the County Administration Office. Please see County Administration Office for prior history. NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Communications FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Communications Mandates Vs. Expenditures $0.8 $0.7 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 6.1% $0.6 $0.5 $0.4 $0.3 $0.2 $0.1 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 93.9% 537 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.7 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Communications (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 710 COMMUNICATIONS Fund Type GENERAL FUND INTERNAL SERVICE ALL FUNDS Personal Services 519,369 $ 46,261 565,630 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 164,873 $ 164,873 $ Capital Outlay 23,726 $ 23,726 $ Total Expenditures 707,968 $ 46,261 754,229 $ Total Revenue 46,261 46,261 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 710 COMMUNICATIONS ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 636 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES Total Revenue $ 1,525 243,726 245,251 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 255,606 6,922 102 57,656 6,303 326,589 SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES $ $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ 800,490 800,490 $ $ 623,611 623,611 $ $ 46,261 46,261 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 408,713 $ 84,547 12,860 (23,857) 51,635 533,898 $ 464,196 $ 120,127 (72,396) 51,635 563,562 $ 434,803 $ 103,706 (72,396) 51,635 517,748 $ 432,550 125,956 53,385 611,891 13,665 149,736 13,284 20,000 500 10,000 1,500 208,685 $ 7,000 500 141,106 23,100 10,002 7,500 4,732 4,000 4,933 202,873 $ 7,000 442 141,106 23,100 8,571 7,500 1,964 4,000 4,933 198,615 $ 10,665 500 114,615 24,000 10,000 7,890 2,000 1,500 171,170 $ $ 29,493 29,493 $ 2,819 2,814 5,633 $ 5,633 5,633 $ 5,342 5,342 $ 772,076 $ 772,068 $ 721,996 $ 788,403 (309,931) $ 28,414 $ 28,422 $ (98,385) $ 3,065 17,853 193,618 13,647 335 74 228,593 555,182 $ 800,490 800,490 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 46,261 46,261 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 432,550 $ 125,956 (46,261) 53,385 565,630 $ 754,229 754,229 0% 94% 94% 31,646 (5,829) (26,135) (1,750) (2,068) 7% 0% 0% -5% 0% 36% -3% 0% (3,665) 32,788 (900) 2 (390) 2,732 2,500 4,933 38,000 -52% 0% 0% 23% -4% 0% -5% 58% 63% 100% 19% 10,665 500 108,318 24,000 10,000 7,890 2,000 1,500 164,873 $ $ 23,726 23,726 $ 2,819 (20,912) (18,093) 100% -743% -321% $ 754,229 $ 17,839 2% (707,968) $ 736,390 2591% $ (742,142) $ $ % $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 710 COMMUNICATIONS Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST DIRECTOR FTE 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR MEDIA ASSISTANT MEDIA SPECIALIST Total 538 FTE 2.00 2.00 2.00 8.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Community Development Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Community Services Officer Community Development Community Development Isabel McDougall, Director Isabel McDougall, Director Project Mgmt. Finance Deputy Director Monitoring Mission The Mission of Community Development is to provide Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Program funding to municipalities and other subrecipients not eligible for direct United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding so they can develop viable communities to primarily benefit low and moderate-income people. Vision Develop viable communities through the provision of affordable housing, suitable living environments and expansion of strong economic bases, principally for persons of low and moderate income. Goals • Meet the increasing demand for administrative services generated from population growth and any anticipated new HUD grant requirements, with a reduction in funding for such administrative services, by June 30, 2010. Issues • The increasing population growth of Maricopa County will lead to a reduction of urban county participating municipalities and a corresponding increase of Maricopa HOME Consortium members, which will result in an increased demand for administrative services while funding for these services will be decreased. • Anticipated new HUD requirements will require more administrative ability and expertise while administrative funding is decreasing. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TOTAL FUNDS Program 17CD - COMMUNITY DEV. BLOCK GRANT 17HM - HOME Personal Services 420,211 268,539 TOTAL $ 688,750 $ Supplies & Services $ 6,387,683 8,956,843 $ 15,344,526 539 Capital Outlay $ - $ Total Expenditures $ 6,807,894 9,225,382 $ 16,033,276 Total Revenue 6,807,894 9,225,382 $ 16,033,276 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Community Development (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Community Development Block Grant Program is to provide eligible community improvements to CDBG sub-recipients so that low and moderate income residents are empowered to develop viable communities. Key Results: Percent of dollars spent versus Dollars awarded for subrecipient projects FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 84 95 133 98 Program Name: HOME PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the HOME Program is to provide affordable housing opportunities to qualified HOME recipients, sub-recipients, and Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs) so that suitable housing for low and moderate income residents is preserved and expanded. Key Results: Percent of dollars spent versus dollars awarded for housing stock preservation and expansion 540 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 97 74 90 52 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Community Development (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 7,862,319 $ 7,755,494 $ 5,896,916 $ 9,566,275 $ 16,033,276 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 7,862,319 7,755,494 5,896,916 9,566,275 16,033,276 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 7,862,319 $ 7,755,494 $ 5,896,916 $ 9,566,275 $ 16,033,276 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 7,862,319 7,755,494 5,896,916 9,566,275 16,033,276 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Community Development FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Community Development Mandates Vs. Expenditures $16.0 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $14.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $12.0 $10.0 $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 541 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 7.9 0.0 0.0 7.9 7.8 0.0 0.0 7.8 5.9 0.0 0.0 5.9 9.6 0.0 0.0 9.6 16.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Community Development (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fund Type SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS Personal Services 688,750 $ 688,750 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 15,344,526 $ 15,344,526 $ Capital Outlay $ $ Total Expenditures 16,033,276 $ 16,033,276 $ Total Revenue 16,033,276 16,033,276 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 652 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING $ Total Revenue $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 6,896,915 6,896,915 $ $ 441,455 $ 92,611 (11,247) 522,818 $ 14,382 956 25,509 63,927 89,654 1,639 6,149,283 27,395 2,255 1,156 540 33,989 6,410,685 $ $ Sub Total $ 22,898 22,898 $ $ Total Expenditures $ 6,956,402 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ (59,487) $ 15,857,672 15,857,672 $ $ 462,470 $ 11,575 114,284 (268,572) 268,572 588,329 $ 19,000 983 15,320 1,000 150,000 84,671 3,000 14,930,142 32,216 9,000 2,786 21,225 15,269,343 15,857,672 - $ $ 15,857,672 15,857,672 $ 13,246,744 $ (0) 1,243 13,247,986 $ 541,762 $ 11,575 144,477 (268,572) 268,572 697,814 $ 491,072 $ 116,890 (136,814) 134,286 605,434 $ 19,000 983 15,320 1,000 150,000 84,671 3,000 14,829,507 23,366 9,000 2,786 21,225 15,159,858 $ $ $ 15,857,672 $ - $ FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ $ $ $ 19,631 995 9,104 498 25,470 84,046 2,618 12,449,877 22,547 301 4,850 1,392 21,225 12,642,553 - $ $ $ $ 13,247,987 $ (1) $ 16,033,276 16,033,276 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 526,301 $ 14,914 145,293 (285,302) 285,302 686,508 $ 18,000 1,000 8,500 1,000 78,141 87,604 3,000 15,090,080 20,919 9,000 2,700 26,824 15,346,768 16,033,276 - $ $ $ $ $ $ 16,033,276 16,033,276 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ (175,604) (175,604) -1% 0% 0% -1% 526,301 $ 14,914 145,293 (268,539) 270,781 688,750 $ 15,461 (3,339) (816) (33) (2,209) 9,064 3% -29% -1% 0% -1% 1% 2,000 (17) 6,820 88,864 (2,933) (277,336) 2,447 (8,000) 6,300 2,786 (5,599) (184,668) 11% -2% 45% 0% 59% -3% 0% -2% 10% 0% 70% 100% 0% -26% -1% 17,000 1,000 8,500 1,000 61,136 87,604 3,000 15,106,843 20,919 8,000 2,700 26,824 15,344,526 16,033,276 - $ % $ $ $ $ $ (175,604) $ - 0% 0% -1% 0% Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTOR FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR PROJECT MANAGER Total 542 FTE 1.00 1.00 5.00 10.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Contract Counsel Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Contract Counsel Contract Counsel Mark Kennedy, Director Mark Kennedy, Director Mission The Mission of the Office of Contract Counsel is to provide quality legal representation to indigent individuals assigned to us by the court, thus safeguarding the fundamental legal rights of each member of the community. Vision The Vision of the office of contract counsel is to deliver America’s promise of justice for all. Goals • By July 1, 2006, the Office of Contract Counsel will resolve to disposition 90% of all felony cases, except those cases designated as complex by the court, within 180 days of arraignment or case assignment with no reduction in the quality of legal representation. • By July 1, 2006, the Office of Contract Counsel will maintain quality representation as measured by the established benchmarks. • By July 1, 2006, the Office of Contract Counsel will maintain cost effectiveness by limiting the percentage of increase in the annual cost per case to no more than the percentage of increase in the overall annual funding of the County's criminal justice group. Issues • Recent developments in case law, legislation and court rules have the potential to seriously impact current caseloads/workloads and timeliness, which could adversely affect the average cost per case. • Increasing case filings, combined with the courts’ continued emphasis on moving cases more quickly, will reduce efficiency, resulting in less time and resources available to assist clients, reducing the quality of legal representation, and increasing stress and staff turnover. • A tightening, competitive employment market in Maricopa County makes it more difficult for the Office of Contract Counsel to hire/contract and retain a creative, skilled and knowledgeable workforce. • The rapid increase in population and continued emphasis on law enforcement will increase the number of indigent defendants, resulting in more cases for the Office. • The lack of an effective, coordinated case management system continues to limit our ability to substantiate caseload issues and the related financial implications. • The increasing number of limited-English speaking clients and the shortage of qualified interpreters will reduce efficiency, delay case resolution, and deny these clients access to justice. 543 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Contract Counsel (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 52AC - ADULT CIVIL REPRESENTATION $ 52AF - ADULT FELONY REPRESENTATION 52AM - ADULT MISDEMNR REPRESENTATION 52AR - APPELLATE REPRESENTATION 52DR - DEPENDENCY REPRESENTATION 52JC - JUVENILE CIVIL REPRESENTATION 52JD - JUV DELINQ/INCORR REPRESENTN 52MH - MENTAL HEALTH REPRESENTATION 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 365,390 TOTAL $ 365,390 Supplies & Services $ 237,586 2,305,234 7,171 192,725 3,635,791 150,595 2,433,720 5,378 43,948 $ 9,012,148 Capital Outlay 6,868 $ 6,868 $ Total Expenditures $ 237,586 2,305,234 7,171 192,725 3,635,791 150,595 2,433,720 5,378 416,206 $ 9,384,406 Total Revenue $ - $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: CRIMINAL DEFENSE PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Criminal Defense Program is to provide legal defense services to assigned indigent clients charged with criminal offenses so that they can obtain the most favorable result under the circumstances. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Felony Cases with Disposition Less than Original Charge N/A 87.2 88.2 88.2 Percent of Appeals Briefs Completed Within 45-Day Due Date N/A 56.36 67.34 67.34 Key Results: Program Name: NON-CRIMINAL DEFENSE PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Non-Criminal Defense Program is to provide legal representation to assigned indigent persons in non-criminal matters so they can obtain the most favorable resolution to their case under the circumstances. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Cases with a Disposition Less Than the Original Charge N/A 80.3 84.3 84.3 Percent of Superior Court Mental Health Matters Concluded Within 30 Days N/A N/A 100 100 Key Results: 544 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Contract Counsel (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 9,798,643 $ $ 10,024,888 $ $ 11,210,498 $ $ 12,300,027 $ $ 9,384,406 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,798,643 10,024,888 11,210,498 12,300,027 9,384,406 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 9,798,643 $ $ 10,024,888 $ $ 11,210,498 $ $ 12,300,027 $ $ 9,384,406 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,798,643 10,024,888 11,210,498 12,300,027 9,384,406 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Contract Counsel FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Contract Counsel Mandates Vs. Expenditures $14.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $12.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $10.0 $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 545 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 9.8 9.8 0.0 0.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 11.2 11.2 0.0 0.0 12.3 12.3 0.0 0.0 9.4 9.4 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Contract Counsel (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Legal Defense of Indigent Criminal Defendants and Delinquent or Incorrigible Juveniles AUTHORITY U.S. Constitution, 5th and 6th Amendments; Arizona Constitution, Article 2, § 24; ARS §§ 11-581 to 587; Rule 6, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure; Rule 20, Arizona Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The United States and Arizona Constitutions provide that an individual facing criminal charges has a right to the assistance of counsel. The United States and Arizona Supreme Courts have interpreted these provisions as requiring that counsel be provided, at government expense, for individuals facing loss of liberty who cannot afford to hire counsel. Historically, in Maricopa County, indigent defendants charged in criminal cases, and juveniles accused of delinquency or incorrigibility, were assigned to private attorneys who contracted to provide those services. In order to maximize the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of services mandated, Maricopa County has since funded the creation of three on-staff public defender offices (Offices of the Public Defender, Legal Defender, and Legal Advocate). Contract private attorneys continue to be assigned to a lesser number of cases, specifically those that the other offices are unable to handle (typically due to conflicts of interest). Those contract assignments continue to be managed and monitored by the Office of Contract Counsel. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Legal defense of indigent criminal defendants at risk of loss of liberty in criminal proceedings, including felony, misdemeanor, and probation violation cases. Legal defense of indigent criminal defendants in appeals and post-conviction relief cases. Legal representation of juveniles facing delinquency or incorrigibility charges. Legal representation of defendants opposing extradition. Legal representation in postconviction relief cases of persons sentenced to death. Legal representation of witnesses in criminal cases, when assigned by the court. TITLE Judicial Mandates AUTHORITY A.R.S. §§ 36-528(D), 36-536(A), 36-537, 8-221. U.S. Constitution, 5th and 6th Amendments; Arizona Constitution Article 2, § 24; ARS §§ 11-584 to 587. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Historically, Public Defenders have not had the authority to handle civil proceedings. As a result, in Maricopa County, private attorneys who contracted to provide these services were used almost exclusively. Due to changes in legislation, Maricopa County became responsible to provide representation to indigent individuals facing mental health commitments and to those involved in child dependency and severance proceedings. In order to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of services mandated, Maricopa County has funded the creation of two on-staff dependency units (Offices of the Legal Defender and Legal Advocate) and one on-staff mental health unit (Public Defender). In addition, contracted private attorneys are assigned to cases that the other offices are unable to handle (typically due to conflicts of interest). Legal representation of indigent persons at risk of a loss of liberty in civil mental health proceedings. Legal representation of indigent individuals involved in civil child dependency or severance proceedings, including the minor children in question. MANDATE DESCRIPTION 546 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Contract Counsel (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS Personal Services 365,390 $ 365,390 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 9,012,148 $ 9,012,148 $ Capital Outlay 6,868 $ 6,868 $ Total Expenditures 9,384,406 $ 9,384,406 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES Total Revenue EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ $ $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ - 286,649 249 49,757 336,655 $ $ $ $ $ 289,363 47,537 336,900 14,801 $ 10,808,415 861 24,937 19,350 69 4,096 (157) 1,470 10,873,843 $ 11,241 8,970,945 5,000 23,425 200 225 1,500 9,012,536 $ $ $ $ 11,210,498 $ 41,158 20,871 62,029 (11,210,498) $ $ $ 62,029 62,029 300,679 1,890 61,261 363,830 $ $ $ $ $ $ 11,241 8,970,753 6,359 23,425 200 225 1,500 9,013,703 5,412 5,412 $ $ 9,354,848 $ (9,292,819) $ - 301,288 12,126 10,880 65,207 100 389,601 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ $ $ $ 9,404 3,669 11,510,978 5,825 22,935 100 166 1,204 11,554,281 5,412 5,412 $ $ 9,382,945 $ (9,320,916) $ 62,029 62,029 299,532 1,890 63,946 365,368 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ $ $ $ 11,241 8,968,200 8,000 23,380 593 756 9,012,170 3,819 3,819 $ $ 11,947,700 $ (11,947,700) $ - $ 299,513 1,890 63,987 365,390 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ % 62,029 62,029 100% 0% 100% 1,166 (2,726) (1,560) 0% 0% 0% -4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% -26% 0% 50% -93% 0% 47% 0% $ $ $ $ 11,241 8,968,200 8,000 23,380 100 434 793 9,012,148 $ 2,553 (1,641) 45 100 (209) 707 1,555 6,868 6,868 $ $ 6,868 6,868 $ $ (1,456) (1,456) -27% -27% 9,384,406 $ 9,384,406 $ (1,461) 0% 63,490 -1% (9,322,377) $ (9,384,406) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 560 CONTRACT COUNSEL Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV FTE 1.00 3.00 1.00 Market Range Title DIRECTOR LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST MITIGATION SVCS REP Total 547 FTE 0.50 1.00 0.75 7.25 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Correctional Health Organizational Chart County Admini Administrative strative Officer Chief Health Services Officer Correctional Health Services Correctional Health Services Joseph Scalzo, DDS, Director Joseph Scalzo, DDS, Director Quality Management Business Systems Mental Health Services Dental Services Ancillary Services Medical Services Mission The Mission of the Correctional Health Services Department (CHS) is to provide medically necessary health care to persons in County correctional facilities in order to protect the health and safety of the community. Vision CHS will demonstrate excellence in correctional health care and be an integral part of the health and safety of the community. Goals • CHS will maintain a community standard of care in correctional setting as evidenced by continued accreditation status granted by the National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC), while implementing a Manage Care Model of service. • By 2007, CHS will restructure and implement a Managed Care Model to provide constitutionally mandated health care services to those incarcerated in the Maricopa County jails to reduce the impact of the rising cost associated with delivering health care services. • CHS will improve the efficiency of health care delivery to the incarcerated population in Maricopa County jails by full implementation of telemedicine by FY 2008. Issues • The nationwide shortage of health care personnel puts CHS in direct competition with the private sector to employ qualified staff, thus increasing the difficulties for CHS to recruit and retain quality clinical personnel • The demand continues to increase for reports, data and information about health care deliverables provided by CHS despite the department's lack of automated technology and data management systems. • The increasing cost associated with providing health care will lead CHS to adopt a Manage Care Model of service in order to deliver an efficient and cost-effective health care system to the incarcerated population. 548 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Correctional Health (Continued) • The increasing number of inmates in the jails with mental health issues will continue to escalate the cost to CHS associated with providing health care to this growing population. • The opening of new jails facilities in Maricopa County will present challenges for CHS to staff the new capacity while providing services and treatment to the current population. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 26AR - ADULT/REMAND JUV INMATE TRTMT $ 8,140,240 26HC - HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT 1,231,634 26IA - INMATE ASSESSMENT 6,889,213 80RE - RESTORATION TO COMPENTENCY 1,540,071 86BD - BIO DEFENSE PREPAREDNESS 44,947 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 2,803,962 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 395,663 TOTAL $ 21,045,730 Supplies & Services $ 15,328,718 263,588 935,330 1,921,355 485,358 2,155 $ 18,936,504 Capital Outlay 866,057 126,128 $ 992,185 $ Total Expenditures $ 24,335,015 1,495,222 7,824,543 3,461,426 44,947 3,289,320 523,946 $ 40,974,419 Total Revenue 842,542 8,900 $ 851,442 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ADULT/REMANDED JUVENILE INMATE TREATMENT PROGRAM Program Purpose: To provide medically necessary health care to adults and remanded juveniles in County correctional facilities in order to protect the health and safety of the community. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of inmates treated who are returned to the general population N/A N/A 5.2 6.2 Percent of ordered medications attempted to be distributed on date to be taken N/A N/A 724 N/A Percent of psychiatric encounters provided within required timelines N/A N/A 23.5 N/A Percent of MIHS hospital days per 1,000 Mandays N/A N/A 0 N/A Percent of Acute infirmary days per 1,000 mandays. N/A N/A 0.23 N/A Percent Long Term Care infirmary days per 1,000 mandays. N/A 0 0 0 Percent of outpatient medical encounters provided within required timelines N/A N/A 25.7 N/A Key Results: 549 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Correctional Health (Continued) Program Name: HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: To provide CHS internal and authorized external agencies the necessary associated services that assist and complement the direct administration of health care to patients incarcerated in County jails. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of health records provided within required timelines N/A N/A 53.1 53.1 Percent of Risk Management Processes resolved without adverse outcomes. N/A N/A 96.45 96.45 Percent of inmates with a communicable disease/significant infection per 1,000 Mandays N/A N/A 0.06 0.06 Key Results: Program Name: INMATE ASSESSMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Inmate Assessment Program is to provide medically necessary health care to persons in County correctional facilities in order to protect the health and safety of the community. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of discharged inmates receiving discharge planning N/A N/A 0 0 Percent of assessments completed within 14 days of booking. N/A N/A 64.5 64.5 Percent of Receiving Screening assessments accomplished within timeframes to be determined N/A N/A 100 100 Percent of health service requests triaged within 24 hours N/A N/A 95.6 95.6 Key Results: Program Name: RESTORATION TO COMPETENCY PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Rule 11 Custody Restoration Program is to provide timely treatment to incompetent criminal defendants so they become able to understand the nature and object of the criminal proceedings against them or to assist in their legal defense or are found not restorable. Key Results: Percent of competency determinations performed within 78 days. 550 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A N/A 64 70 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Correctional Health (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ $ 19,856,743 $ 3,838,332 $ 20,779,507 $ 4,972,450 $ 25,826,324 $ 7,074,648 $ 36,717,994 $ 3,461,426 $ 37,354,956 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 156,499 $ $ 158,037 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 19,856,743 24,617,839 30,798,774 43,949,141 40,974,419 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ $ 19,856,743 $ 3,838,332 $ 20,779,507 $ 4,972,450 $ 25,826,324 $ 7,074,648 $ 36,717,994 $ 3,461,426 $ 37,354,956 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 156,499 $ $ 158,037 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 19,856,743 24,617,839 30,798,774 43,949,141 40,974,419 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Correctional Health FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Correctional Health Mandates Vs. Expenditures $45.0 $40.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 8.4% $35.0 $30.0 $25.0 $20.0 $15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 91.6% FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 19.9 0.0 19.9 0.0 24.6 3.8 20.8 0.0 30.8 5.0 25.8 0.0 43.9 7.1 36.9 0.0 41.0 3.5 37.5 0.0 Mandate Information TITLE Health Care to Indigents in County Correctional Facilities AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-291 Hospitalization and Medical Care of Indigent Sick HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The State has historically placed the burden of indigent care at the county level. The Board of Supervisors has the sole and exclusive authority to provide for the hospitalization and medical care of the indigent sick in the county, including indigent persons under the supervision of a county corrections agency, to the extent such expenses are not covered by a third party payor. Third party payor does not include the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) or the Arizona Long Term Care System (ALTCS). Health Care to Indigents in County Correctional Facilities FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 18,356,743 $ 18,230,886 $ 21,500,694 $ 26,243,830 $ 29,653,352 551 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ 156,499 $ 158,037 Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 18,356,743 18,230,886 21,500,694 26,400,329 29,811,389 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Correctional Health (Continued) TITLE Correctional Health Claims AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-251(8) HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Pursuant to A.R.S. § 11-251(8), Counties are authorized to provide for Jails. Where inmates in County jails need emergency medical attention or in-patient care, the County must provide those services. Maricopa Medical Center (MMC) currently provides such services. The Health Care Mandates Department, in conjunction with the Correctional Health Department, reviews the claims and determines the appropriate amount of payment to MMC. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County must continue to provide medical services to detainees in County jails. Where in-patient services are necessary, MMC provide the most cost-effective source of medical services to the County. Correctional Health Claims ‡ General Fund Special Revenue FY 2000-01 Actuals $ $ 1,500,000 FY 2001-02 Actuals $ $ 2,548,621 FY 2002-03 Actuals $ $ 4,325,630 FY 2003-04 Actuals $ $ 10,474,164 FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ 7,701,604 ‡ Prior to FY04-05, this mandate was performed by Health Care Mandates. Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,500,000 2,548,621 4,325,630 10,474,164 7,701,604 TITLE Competency Restoration AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 13-4512; A.R.Crim.P 10 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND State law requires that a criminal defendant must have the mental capacity to provide meaningful assistance to his/her defense counsel before standing trial. If it is determined by the Court that the Defendant does not have the mental capacity to stand trial, he/she must be “restored to competency” before the trial can be commenced. Previously, session law required that Maricopa County pay 86% of the cost of competency restoration for those defendants that are treated at the Arizona State Hospital following a referral from Superior Court. However, starting in FY 04, the County is required to pay 100% of these costs. A.R.S. § 13-4512 also requires that Maricopa County must pay an additional per diem in the event that an individual is not transported back to the County jail within certain perimeters. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County is required to pay 100% of the cost of competency restoration for those defendants that are treated at the Arizona State following a referral from Superior Court. A.R.S. § 13-4512 also requires that Maricopa County must pay an additional per diem in the event that an individual is not transported back to the County jail within certain perimeters. Competency Restoration ‡ General Fund Special Revenue FY 2000-01 Actuals* $ $ FY 2001-02 Actuals $ 3,838,332 $ FY 2002-03 Actuals $ 4,972,450 $ FY 2003-04 Actuals $ 7,074,648 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ 3,461,426 $ * Contract Counsel incurred some expenses ‡ Prior to FY04-05, this mandate was performed by Health Care Mandates. 552 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - Total $ $ $ $ $ 3,838,332 4,972,450 7,074,648 3,461,426 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Correctional Health (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH Fund Type CAPITAL PROJECTS GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 158,037 $ 1,540,071 19,347,622 21,045,730 $ Supplies & Services $ 1,921,355 17,015,149 18,936,504 $ Capital Outlay $ 992,185 992,185 $ Total Expenditures 158,037 $ 3,461,426 37,354,956 40,974,419 $ Total Revenue 851,442 851,442 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ 77,804 700 16,228 5,611 100,344 $ $ 1,050,486 500 7,100 1,300 1,059,386 $ $ 1,045,986 8,900 4,500 1,059,386 $ $ 457,458 5,214 0 462,673 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 842,542 8,900 851,442 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 842,542 8,900 851,442 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 203,444 4,500 207,944 % 19% 0% 0% 0% 100% 20% EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 8,622,662 $ 568,361 684,372 1,932,324 310,773 (822,078) 200,311 11,496,726 $ 10,305,359 $ 597,863 447,051 1,386,835 590,593 (776,767) 163,230 12,714,164 $ 12,768,042 $ 489,320 951,695 3,039,863 313,193 (2,658,822) 1,175,953 16,079,244 $ 11,271,492 $ 293,214 799,264 2,729,375 334,066 (1,518,100) 968,255 14,877,567 $ 14,984,843 $ 597,586 735,872 3,903,750 (110,097) 525,518 20,637,471 $ 15,036,917 $ 597,586 735,872 3,910,702 315,000 (461,982) 911,635 21,045,730 $ (2,268,875) (108,266) 215,823 (870,839) (1,807) (2,196,840) 264,318 (4,966,486) -18% -22% 23% -29% -1% 83% 22% -31% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT Sub Total $ 81,200 $ 3,005,471 2,917 (718) (20,233) 8,690,344 192,779 178,302 18,633 4,972,451 1,853,576 41,354 4,285 24,096 (236,765) 18,807,691 $ 45,450 $ 2,214,719 2,800 73,331 (23,411) 7,979,437 152,951 183,379 7,000 5,500,000 2,778,882 41,411 2,500 11,500 (38,991) 18,930,958 $ 66,315 $ 2,985,500 3,500 49,947 (24,400) 7,322,553 213,957 192,231 10,734 5,500,000 2,784,882 58,632 4,000 15,000 750 (88,678) 19,094,923 $ 101,400 $ 3,302,718 3,725 56,552 (19,608) 14,939,311 201,817 227,258 11,896 6,500,000 2,818,743 101,363 4,970 17,203 (124,142) 28,143,208 $ 269,588 3,162,194 3,786 29,434 10,275,955 140,821 214,847 5,304 2,961,429 67,367 6,876 11,546 17,149,147 $ 269,588 3,443,690 3,786 52,213 10,053,516 140,821 220,368 5,304 1,700,000 2,961,429 67,367 6,876 11,546 18,936,504 $ (203,273) (458,190) (286) (2,266) (24,400) (2,730,963) 73,136 (28,137) 5,430 3,800,000 (176,547) (8,735) (2,876) 3,454 750 (88,678) 158,419 -307% -15% -8% -5% 100% -37% 34% -15% 51% 69% -6% -15% -72% 23% 100% 100% 1% $ $ 732,445 259,740 992,185 $ $ 732,445 259,740 992,185 $ $ 106,243 172,357 52,774 331,375 $ $ 845,896 14,250 860,146 $ $ 845,896 14,250 860,146 $ Sub Total $ 16,343 16,343 Total Expenditures $ 30,320,760 $ 32,505,268 $ 36,034,313 $ 43,352,149 $ 38,778,803 $ 40,974,419 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ (30,220,416) $ (31,445,882) $ (34,974,927) $ 553 (42,889,476) $ $ (37,927,361) $ $ $ (40,122,977) $ (732,445) 0% 845,896 100% (245,490) -1723% (132,039) -15% (4,940,106) -14% 5,148,050 -15% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Correctional Health (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 260 CORRECTIONAL HEALTH Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR COUNSELING SUPERVISOR COUNSELOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DENTAL ASSISTANT DENTIST DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR HR GENERALIST HR SPECIALIST HR SUPERVISOR LICENSED PRACTICAL NURSE MANAGEMENT ANALYST FTE 1.00 1.00 10.00 7.00 22.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 23.25 1.00 4.50 2.50 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 63.00 1.00 Market Range Title MANAGING PHYSICIAN MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC MEDICAL AIDE MEDICAL ASSISTANT NURSE NURSE PRACT/PHYS ASST NURSING MANAGER NURSING SUPERVISOR PHARMACIST PHARMACY MANAGER PHARMACY TECHNICIAN PHYSICIAN PROGRAM COORDINATOR - RN PROGRAM SUPERVISOR PSYCHOLOGIST PURCHASING SPECIALIST RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGIST SOCIAL WORKER (BS) TRAINING SPECIALIST UNDETERMINED UNIT SECRETARY Total 554 FTE 1.00 2.00 11.00 40.00 67.50 16.00 9.00 3.00 6.50 1.00 8.00 15.00 4.00 1.00 8.00 1.00 4.50 7.00 3.00 3.00 18.00 380.75 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Administrative Officer Organizational Chart Board of Supervisors County Administrative Officer County Administrative Officer David R. Smith David R. Smith Government Relations Administration Office of Communications Mission The Mission of the County Administrative Office is to provide leadership and direction for county departments and agencies so that they can deliver services countywide to residents of Maricopa County. Vision To manage, lead, and direct countywide services. This includes managing the continued financial stabilization plan, responding to citizenry and meeting public needs, providing leadership for county initiatives, initiating program development, and implementation in response to policy direction set by the Board of Supervisors, coordinating county issues which have regional impact, providing leadership related to county legislative initiatives and intergovernmental issues, and providing information to employees and the public concerning county activities. To assist the Board of Supervisors in every way possible in meeting the challenges facing the county in the years ahead. These include the efficient responsive provision of services, sound financial planning, growth management, and insightful policy recommendations. Goals • Maricopa County will publish Livability Index and Value Driver reports under the MFR system by June 2006. • By June 2006, increase efficiencies in the criminal justice systems to 90% of cases processed within 180 days. • By June 2005, restore Adult Probation caseload levels back to December 2002 levels. • Increase juvenile crime prevention efforts by January 2006 by utilizing recommendations from the OJJDP Targeted Community Action Planning report and implementing myriad best practices strategies. Anticipate juvenile crime reduction by 10% within the first year of implementation. • Complete construction of the Human Services Campus in downtown Phoenix by December 2005. Expected fundraising efforts to yield $27.6 million. • Establish a competitive salary structure by June 2005 to increase staff recruitment and retention efforts by 10% and identify funding structure to support this initiative. • By June 2006, increase by 10% the number of staff in supervisory positions who have diverse backgrounds that is reflective of the current workforce. These efforts will be carried out in conjunction with the Diversity Director. • By June 2006, establish Maricopa County as “One of the Best Places To Work” as identified by Fortune magazine. 555 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Administrative Officer (Continued) Issues • Approximately 39,000 felonies, 36,000 juvenile delinquency referrals, over 9,000 persons in the county jail, and over 24,000 adults on probation represent a huge criminal justice services challenge in terms of crime victims, justice system coordination, and costs. However, the CAO must balance the need to fund capital projects to respond to the continual increase in criminal cases with diversion programs and alternatives to incarceration. Effective criminal justice initiatives are evidence-based, cost-effective programs that utilize prevention strategies to combat crime at an earlier stage. It is imperative that Maricopa County explores practical options to building new jails through coordinated efforts between the cities, county, and state. Implementing adult and juvenile crime reduction/prevention strategies can slow current trend lines to a manageable level. The 60,000-75,000 persons above, or about 2% of the overall county population, are to be targeted for crime prevention strategies. • Government Relations has spent countless hours advocating with the legislature and key stakeholders to create policies that would address the issue of diverting mentally ill defendants, accused of committing misdemeanor offenses, out of the criminal justice system. With the onset of a challenging 2004/05 legislative session, Government Relations is soliciting additional support from the CAO to continue to coordinate this crucial initiative. • Along with the Office of Environmental Services (OES), the CAO will continue West Nile virus prevention and education efforts. Based on last year’s expenditure of $3 million, at least a current or lower level of funding is expected for the upcoming fiscal year. However, it is too early to determine how prevalent the epidemic will be in the valley next year. In addition, other public health challenges in terms of new diseases and pests may invade the greater Phoenix area. Environmental Services may be brought in as advisors regarding public health and environmental assessments. If so, a coordinated response will be developed and proposed for Board approval. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 200 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER TOTAL FUNDS Program 20CA - COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 20GR - GOVERNMENT RELATIONS 20JS - JUSTICE SYSTEM COORDINATION 20OM - OMBUDSMAN 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 218,099 251,722 78,031 139,865 366,475 TOTAL $ 1,054,192 $ Supplies & Services $ 270,573 29,862 $ 300,435 556 Capital Outlay 672 672 674 674 1,346 $ 4,038 $ Total Expenditures $ 218,771 522,967 78,705 140,539 397,683 $ 1,358,665 Total Revenue $ - $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Administrative Officer (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Program Purpose: The purpose of the County Administrative Office program is to provide administrative leadership, budget and policy recommendations, and countywide management coordination for the Board of Supervisors so that they can achieve the county’s strategic goals and fulfill the county’s legal mandates and local policy initiatives in the most fiscally responsible manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of citizens satisfied with county services 75 81 83 83 Percent of complaints/concerns responded to within three days 100 100 100 100 Key Results: Program Name: GOVERNMENT RELATIONS Program Purpose: The purpose of the Legislative Service Activity is to provide representation and information to the Board of Supervisors and County Administrative Officer so they can pursue and achieve state and federal operational and fiscal legislative goals. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of targeted bills passed, favorably amended or defeated: low, medium, or high difficulty 92.5 95 95 100 Percent of BOS and CAO satisfied with research activities provided 100 100 N/A 100 Percent of grant dollars achieved vs. applied for 85 N/A 100 100 Key Results: Program Name: OMBUDSMAN Program Purpose: The purpose of the ombudsman activity is to provide investigation and consulting services to employees and department managers so that they can resolve workplace conflicts quickly. Key Results: Percent of requests responded to in a timely manner 557 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 100 100 100 100 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Administrative Officer (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,172,121 $ $ 1,253,252 $ $ 946,412 $ $ 1,076,392 $ $ 1,358,665 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,172,121 1,253,252 946,412 1,076,392 1,358,665 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,172,121 $ $ 1,253,252 $ $ 946,412 $ $ 1,076,392 $ $ 1,358,665 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,172,121 1,253,252 946,412 1,076,392 1,358,665 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. County Administrative Officer FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures County Administrative Officer Mandates Vs. Expenditures $1.4 Non-Mandated 0.0% $1.2 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $1.0 $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated* Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 558 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Administrative Officer (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 200 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 1,054,192 $ 1,054,192 $ Supplies & Services 300,435 $ 300,435 $ Capital Outlay 4,038 $ 4,038 $ Total Expenditures 1,358,665 $ 1,358,665 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 200 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 631,289 18,480 125,648 652 124,534 900,603 9,421 220,372 5,913 4,340 1,145 241,191 1,141,794 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ (1,141,794) $ 741,544 $ 7,554 152,287 (57,864) 90,887 934,408 $ 11,362 800 272,391 1,546 14,258 10,953 482 311,792 1,246,200 $ $ 837,053 $ 17,554 199,566 6,360 (121,862) 90,887 1,029,558 $ 11,418 800 236,840 1,546 14,258 10,953 442 276,257 $ $ $ (1,246,200) $ 1,305,815 $ $ $ $ $ (1,305,815) $ 791,504 $ 18,469 157,285 414 (100,508) 90,886 958,050 $ 772,690 17,554 185,336 21,360 996,940 2,275 $ 222,737 3,881 8,807 323 (180) 237,842 $ 11,418 800 266,233 1,546 9,585 14,644 442 304,668 $ $ $ $ 1,195,893 (1,195,893) $ $ $ 762,757 17,554 177,187 96,694 1,054,192 $ $ $ $ 11,418 266,233 546 7,152 14,644 442 300,435 4,038 4,038 $ $ 1,305,646 $ (1,305,646) $ 74,296 9% 0% 22,379 11% (90,334) -1420% (121,862) 100% 90,887 100% (24,634) -2% $ 800 (29,393) 1,000 7,106 (3,691) (24,178) 0% 100% -12% 65% 50% -34% 0% 0% -9% 4,038 4,038 $ $ (4,038) (4,038) 0% 0% 1,358,665 $ (52,850) -4% 52,850 -4% (1,358,665) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 200 COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT CHIEF OFFICER COUNSELOR DIRECTOR FTE 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR GENERALIST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT PROGRAM MANAGER PROJECT MANAGER Total 559 FTE 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 12.75 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Call Center Organizational Chart STAR BOARD Treasurer, Assessor, Recorder, Clerk of the Court STAR STARCall CallCenter Center David Sobieski, David Sobieski,Director Director Administration and Network Support STAR Operations Court Operations Mission The Mission of the STAR Center is to provide knowledgeable, courteous information to callers of the Treasurer, Assessor, Recorder, Elections and Clerk of the Court offices and the county switchboard so they can conduct their business with the county accurately and conveniently. Vision To increase STAR Center efficiency by expanding the information available on the 24-hour automated system Goals • In order to provide enhanced customer access, by the end of 2005, the STAR Center in collaboration with the Elections department will develop a plan to obtain and employ voice recognition capability. This technology enhances services by allowing voters to obtain polling place and other information on a 24hour basis. • By the end of 2005, transfer to the STAR Center the capability to create and edit automated voice prompt messages which will eliminate the cost and time loss associated with edits made by the telecommunications vendor. Issues • Limited resources require a greater use of technology in order to provide services to a continual growing population. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 140 CALL CENTER TOTAL FUNDS Program 14SC - STAR CENTER 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 962,216 216,838 TOTAL $ 1,179,054 $ Supplies & Services $ 91,104 $ 91,104 560 Capital Outlay 28,518 $ 28,518 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,081,838 216,838 $ 1,298,676 Total Revenue $ - $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Call Center (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: STAR CENTER Program Purpose: The purpose of the STAR Call Center is to provide an immediate information bridge for the residents of Maricopa County so that the caller and the customer service agent can identify and define the issue or problem and either solve the problem or recommend a course of action in a single telephone call. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of calls answered within 30 seconds 61 77 75 78 Percent of requested documents mailed within 24 hours 100 99 99.75 100 Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,221,730 $ $ 1,301,396 $ $ 1,323,323 $ $ 1,226,882 $ $ 1,298,676 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,221,730 1,301,396 1,323,323 1,226,882 1,298,676 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,221,730 $ $ 1,301,396 $ $ 1,323,323 $ $ 1,226,882 $ $ 1,298,676 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,221,730 1,301,396 1,323,323 1,226,882 1,298,676 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. County Call Center FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures County Call Center Mandates Vs. Expenditures $1.4 Non-Mandated 0.0% $1.2 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $1.0 $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 561 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Call Center (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE STAR Call Center AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-401 Enumeration Of Officers; A.R.S. § 11-541 Powers And Duties Generally County Assessor; A.R.S. §§ 11-461 through 11-483 County Recorder; A.R.S. § 11-491; A.R.S. § 11-494; A.R.S. § 11-604-605; A.R.S. § 15-996; A.R.S. §§ 35-323 through 35-327; A.R.S. § 41-1285.21; A.R.S. § 42, :IRC150, 148 County Treasurer; A.R.S. § 16-201 Primary Election; A.R.S. § 16-211 General Election; A.R.S. § 16-452 State of Arizona Electronic Voting System Instructions and Procedures Manual Elections Office. Arizona Constitution Article VI, Section 23 – Superior Court Clerk, Arizona Revised Statutes, Supreme Court Administrative Orders and Local Rules. A.R.S. 12-283 Powers and Duties of the Clerk of the Superior Court. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The STAR Call Center is the official communication medium between the Offices of the Board of Supervisors, Treasurer, Assessor, Recorder (including Elections), the Clerk of the Superior Court and the citizens of Maricopa County. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The STAR Call Center has numerous statutory and constitutional duties, which mirror those of the Assessor, Treasurer, Recorder, Elections and the Clerk of the Superior Court. The Call Center provides information, such as property tax information, assessed value of property, deed recording information, voter requests for early ballots and polling places on elections day. The Call Center also provides information concerning Family Court and Child Support proceedings, all without transferring between departments. Services extend to the citizens of Maricopa County such as property owners, mortgage banks, and title companies. 562 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules County Call Center (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 140 CALL CENTER Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 1,179,054 $ 1,179,054 $ Supplies & Services 91,104 $ 91,104 $ Capital Outlay 28,518 $ 28,518 $ Total Expenditures 1,298,676 $ 1,298,676 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 140 CALL CENTER ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 811,239 22,877 4,971 204,383 4,265 1,047,736 9,193 5,836 155,742 313 7,318 721 23 179,146 1,226,882 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ (1,226,882) $ 832,699 37,694 1,939 208,858 1,081,190 9,000 59,901 168,648 1,048 4,377 1,266 87 244,327 1,325,517 $ $ $ $ 856,751 54,020 6,939 253,000 1,170,710 9,000 75,294 129,426 4,377 1,963 87 220,147 $ $ $ (1,325,517) $ 1,390,857 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ (1,390,857) $ 813,259 36,339 2,336 218,908 1,672 1,072,514 7,180 80,152 129,426 679 4,165 861 59 222,521 1,295,035 $ $ $ 853,379 54,020 6,939 274,895 1,189,233 $ $ $ $ 15,643 75,294 4,377 1,963 87 97,364 $ $ - $ (1,295,035) $ 1,286,597 848,824 54,020 6,939 269,271 1,179,054 $ $ 7,927 (16,271) (8,344) 1% 0% 0% -6% 0% -1% -4% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 59% $ $ 9,383 75,294 4,377 1,963 87 91,104 $ (383) 129,426 129,043 $ $ 28,518 28,518 $ $ (28,518) (28,518) 0% 0% $ 1,298,676 $ 92,181 7% (92,181) 7% (1,286,597) $ (1,298,676) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 140 CALL CENTER Market Range Title ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV CALL CTR REPRESENTATIVE DIRECTOR FTE 2.00 27.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST Total 563 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 33.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elections Organizational Chart County Recorder Elections Elections Karen Osborne, Director Karen Osborne, Director Elections Cycle Operations Voter Registration Mission The Mission of the Elections Department is to provide access to the electoral process for citizens and candidates so that they have equal access and may readily participate in elections. Vision The Vision of the Elections Department is a County in which citizens may vote, initiate petitions, and run for office confident that every effort was made to: educate them about election laws and procedures, remove barriers to participation, provide equal access, and assure the integrity of elections. Goals • Increase the percentage of early votes to 55% by 2005. • Reduce the number of candidates fined to less than 10% of the total filing by 2005. • Reduce the hours worked per eligible voter by 5% by 2005. • Reduce the ratio of ballots to be verified to ballots cast by 5% by 2005. Issues • Due to the rising expectation of voters for convenience, budget restrictions, the inability to find polling places and obtain board workers, we need to create a culture accepting the transition from the polling place to the mailbox. • Rising expectations of voters for convenience, the need to accurately, consistently and promptly tally votes, and the demand of Jurisdictions for more data in a timely manner create the need for better access to technology. • Due to the impact of Federal and State legislators on the election process, we need to communicate our concerns to them through an aggressive, coordinated program. • Rising expectations of candidates and elected officials for ease of filing combined with complex regulations create the need for an aggressive education program using data processing technology to ease the process of candidate filing 564 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elections (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 210 ELECTIONS TOTAL FUNDS Program 21EL - ELECTIONS 21VR - VOTER REGISTRATION 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 2,521,162 833,086 947,306 TOTAL $ 4,301,554 $ Supplies & Services $ 5,949,820 125,900 117,195 $ 6,192,915 Capital Outlay $ - $ Total Expenditures $ 8,470,982 958,986 1,064,501 $ 10,494,469 Total Revenue 2,071,000 $ 2,071,000 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ELECTIONS Program Purpose: The purpose of the Elections Program is to provide access to the electoral process for citizens, jurisdictions, candidates, the legislature and special interest groups so that they have equal access and may readily participate in elections. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percentage of deliveries of supplies and equipment delivered to the correct precinct 100 100 99.89 100 Fines levied as a percentage of active political committees 6.96 18.53 0.53 10 The percentage of ballots returned for which an incorrect ballot selection was issued 100 99.96 99.98 99.5 Percentage of elections not postponed because of improper boundaries 100 100 100 100 Percentage of complaints about polls to the total voting at polls. 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.02 Percentage of board worker positions filled one week out from election 98.45 97.21 98.06 98 0 3.04 0.72 5 100 100 100 100 Key Results: Percentage of cost for ballots reprinted The percentage of special ballots processed in time to meet the statutory deadline 565 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elections (Continued) Program Name: VOTER REGISTRATION Program Purpose: The purpose of the Voter Registration Program is to provide registration services to eligible citizens who maintain residency in the County so they may readily express their preferences through the electoral process. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percentage of all valid registrations processed in time to meet election deadlines 100 100 100 100 The percentage of valid registrations scanned and indexed in time to meet election deadlines 100 100 100 100 Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 9,978,329 $ $ 5,937,614 $ $ 9,946,890 $ $ 6,984,394 $ $ 10,494,469 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,978,329 5,937,614 9,946,890 6,984,394 10,494,469 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 9,978,329 $ $ 5,937,614 $ $ 9,946,890 $ $ 6,984,394 $ $ 10,494,469 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,978,329 5,937,614 9,946,890 6,984,394 10,494,469 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Elections FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Elections Mandates Vs. Expenditures $12.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $10.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 566 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 10.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 5.9 5.9 0.0 0.0 9.9 9.9 0.0 0.0 7.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 10.5 10.5 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elections (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Elections AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 16-201 Primary Election; A.R.S. § 16-211 General Election; A.R.S. § 16-452 State of Arizona Electronic Voting System Instructions and Procedures Manual. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Beginning in 1875, the territorial legislature enacted laws to establish, maintain and continue the election process and the efficient management of voter registration records. The State of Arizona subsequently adopted these laws at the time of statehood in 1912. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Conduct elections with accuracy and consistency in accordance with Federal laws, state laws and established procedures. Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 210 ELECTIONS Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 4,301,554 $ 4,301,554 $ Supplies & Services 6,192,915 $ 6,192,915 $ Capital Outlay $ $ Total Expenditures 10,494,469 $ 10,494,469 $ Total Revenue 2,071,000 2,071,000 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 210 ELECTIONS ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ 2,472,069 1,426 17,538 14,059 2,505,092 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT Sub Total $ 1,877,810 636,225 423,778 630,403 16,980 3,585,196 $ $ Sub Total $ 157,186 8,004 5,016 5,168 4,707,712 676,717 15,104 78,687 62,276 635,834 9,234 6,360,940 Total Expenditures $ 9,946,135 SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES $ $ $ $ 2,145,980 2,500 15,000 2,163,480 $ $ 1,941,270 466,023 170,994 621,338 3,199,625 $ $ $ 186,270 2,500 3,000 3,492,045 630,575 5,000 30,000 42,250 624,123 4,500 5,020,263 $ 8,219,888 $ 2,145,980 2,500 15,000 2,163,480 $ $ 1,781,981 407 3,306 20,500 1,806,193 $ 1,957,809 $ 474,338 180,498 636,708 5,370 (37,380) 3,217,344 $ 2,037,823 1,065,376 404,545 841,884 4,349,628 $ $ $ $ 94,151 10,000 7,000 5,259,434 312,065 30,000 72,300 849,350 2,000 6,636,300 $ 10,985,928 $ $ $ 187,870 2,500 3,000 3,492,704 621,275 5,000 30,000 40,525 626,123 4,500 5,013,497 $ 169,046 4,599 150,000 5,054 3,326,277 630,338 3,366 62,830 44,560 695,282 5,730 5,097,082 $ 8,369,155 $ 8,314,425 $ $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 2,050,000 6,000 15,000 2,071,000 2,026,797 466,023 173,756 689,082 3,355,658 $ FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 2,050,000 6,000 15,000 2,071,000 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ % 95,980 (3,500) 92,480 4% 0% -140% 0% 4% (11,026) (599,353) (230,789) (104,728) (945,896) -1% -129% -133% -15% 0% 0% -28% 50% -300% 0% -133% -38% 50% 100% 0% -78% -36% 56% -24% 2,037,823 1,065,376 404,545 793,810 4,301,554 $ $ $ 94,151 10,000 7,000 4,814,434 313,680 30,000 72,300 849,350 2,000 6,192,915 $ 93,719 (7,500) (4,000) (1,321,730) 307,595 5,000 (31,775) (223,227) 2,500 (1,179,418) $ 10,494,469 $ (2,125,314) -25% 2,217,794 -36% $ $ CAPITAL OUTLAY Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ (7,441,044) $ (6,056,408) $ (6,205,675) $ 567 (6,508,232) $ (8,914,928) $ (8,423,469) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Elections (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 210 ELECTIONS Market Range Title ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTOR FTE 1.00 9.00 1.00 20.00 5.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title ENGINEERING AIDE EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL MAINTENANCE SUPV GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR SPECIALIST INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE Total 568 FTE 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 54.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Eliminations Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 980 ELIMINATIONS Fund Type ELIMINATIONS ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services $ $ Supplies & Services (442,029,692) $ (442,029,692) $ Capital Outlay $ $ Total Expenditures (442,029,692) $ (442,029,692) $ Total Revenue (442,029,692) (442,029,692) EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 980 ELIMINATIONS ALL FUNDS FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 636 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 638 PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % (20,647,992) $ (48,430,049) (5,248,439) (378,141,286) (452,467,766) $ (16,495,079) $ (47,407,631) (20,793,505) (305,020,010) (389,716,225) $ (29,476,105) $ (47,293,003) (7,812,479) (308,932,462) (393,514,049) $ (27,183,047) $ (48,332,015) (10,991,215) (353,679,201) (440,185,478) $ (30,464,011) $ (48,965,461) (5,000,000) (326,800,899) (411,230,371) $ (32,395,291) $ (50,375,372) (8,025,192) (351,233,837) (442,029,692) $ 2,919,186 3,082,369 212,713 42,301,375 48,515,643 -10% -7% -3% -14% -12% Sub Total $ (13,791,455) $ (12,104,976) (48,430,049) (378,141,286) (452,467,766) $ (23,807,558) $ (13,481,026) (47,407,631) (305,020,010) (389,716,225) $ (23,807,558) $ (13,481,026) (47,293,003) (308,932,462) (393,514,049) $ (24,736,613) $ (13,437,649) (48,332,015) (353,679,201) (440,185,478) $ (20,995,079) $ (14,468,932) (48,965,461) (326,800,899) (411,230,371) $ (23,895,946) $ (16,524,537) (50,375,372) (351,233,837) (442,029,692) $ 88,388 3,043,511 3,082,369 42,301,375 48,515,643 0% -23% -7% -14% -12% Total Expenditures $ (452,467,766) $ (389,716,225) $ (393,514,049) $ (440,185,478) $ (411,230,371) $ (442,029,692) $ 48,515,643 -12% EXPENDITURES SUPPLIES & SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ FY 2003-04 Projected Restated $ $ 569 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Emergency Management Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Regional Development Services Agency Officer Emergency Management Emergency Management Warren Leek, Acting Director Warren Leek, Acting Director Support Services Plans & Operations Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Department of Emergency Management is to provide community-wide education, planning, coordination, and continuity of government for the people of Maricopa County in order to protect lives, property and the environment in the event of a major emergency. Vision We will be a respected and effective leader in providing all aspects of a comprehensive emergency management program, including mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery, in a proactive manner. Goals • By June 2005, upgrade department’s website to ensure the ability of the department to communicate with other agencies and the general public during emergencies, as well as on a day-to-day basis. • By June 2005, develop career paths focusing on training, education, and experience, along with appropriate salary levels, for all non-exempt department employees. • By June 2005, complete hazard analyses for 16 developments with large populations in unincorporated areas of Maricopa County and develop written plans and procedures to address the hazards that are specific to those areas. • By the federal and state deadlines for each year that U.S. Department of Homeland Security funds are allocated to entities within Maricopa County, develop a plan to distribute those funds in a manner that upgrades both the statewide and the local response to terrorism to the greatest extent possible. • By June 2006, establish the department as a regional resource for Geographical Information System (GIS) support in emergency management through continued GIS development and creation of a webbased map delivery service. • By November 2004, develop the Maricopa County Disaster Mitigation Plan and ensure its approval by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). • By July 2006, ensure that all Citizen Corps programs (CERT, MRC, VIPS, USA on Watch) in the county are formed under a parent Citizen Corps Council in the local jurisdiction or under the Maricopa Citizen Corps Council. 570 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Emergency Management (Continued) Issues • Failing communication systems and inability to keep up with improvements in technology will degrade our ability to effectively communicate with outside agencies and coordinate our response to emergencies. • Increasing federal emphasis on hazard mitigation requires an immediate response and dedication of department resources to qualify for federal funding and prevent unnecessary loss of lives and property. • Increased population density in several areas of unincorporated Maricopa County will make residents of those areas increasingly vulnerable to the effects of major emergencies, necessitating the development of plans to deal with those events. • The country's reaction to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has created a greater demand for persons with disaster planning skills, making it difficult for the department to retain employees that have developed critical experience and interagency working relationships. A major investment of time and money will be lost if these personnel cannot be retained. • Homeland security has become a primary area of focus for department staff and resources. The federal government has made significant funding available to develop a capability to adequately respond to terrorism, requiring the department to facilitate distribution to appropriate local agencies. • New federal guidelines require the establishment of Citizen Corps councils to qualify for federal funding of the four programs within Citizen Corps – Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), Medical Reserve Corps (MRC), Volunteers in Police Service (VIPS), and USA on Watch. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TOTAL FUNDS Program 15MT - MITIGATION 15PR - PREPAREDNESS 15RR - RESPONSE AND RECOVERY 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 27,982 414,947 46,179 322,294 TOTAL $ 811,402 $ Supplies & Services $ 482,832 133,988 $ 616,820 Capital Outlay 110,010 757 $ 110,767 $ Total Expenditures $ 27,982 1,007,789 46,179 457,039 $ 1,538,989 Total Revenue 1,281,808 $ 1,281,808 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: MITIGATION Program Purpose: The purpose of the mitigation program is to provide mitigation plans and programs to Maricopa County and political subdivisions therein so that they can reduce or eliminate the effects of future disasters. Key Results: Percent of multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plans developed. 571 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 0 0 0 100 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Emergency Management (Continued) Program Name: PREPAREDNESS Program Purpose: The purpose of the preparedness program is to provide knowledge and experience to the people of Maricopa County so they can be prepared to respond to an emergency. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of county and city/town emergency operations plans updated within the past four years. 72 80 76 80 Percent of items evaluated in Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station exercise that meet or exceed Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) standards. 100 100 100 100 Key Results: Program Name: RESPONSE AND RECOVERY Program Purpose: The purpose of the response and recovery program is to provide a coordinated disaster response capability for the people of Maricopa County in order to protect their lives and property and allow them to recover from a disaster. Key Results: Percent of days 24-hour-a-day response and recovery capability was maintained. 572 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 100 100 100 100 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Emergency Management (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 136,354 $ 680,223 $ 59,182 $ 726,732 $ 65,898 $ 816,618 $ 146,900 $ 1,160,661 $ 155,628 $ 1,383,361 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 816,577 785,914 882,516 1,307,561 1,538,989 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 136,354 $ 680,223 $ 59,182 $ 726,732 $ 65,898 $ 816,618 $ 146,900 $ 1,160,661 $ 155,628 $ 1,383,361 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 816,577 785,914 882,516 1,307,561 1,538,989 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Emergency Management FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Emergency Management Mandates Vs. Expenditures $1.6 $1.4 General Fund Mandated 10.1% Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.0% $1.2 $1.0 $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 89.9% 573 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.0 1.3 0.1 1.2 0.0 1.5 0.2 1.4 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Emergency Management (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Emergency Management AUTHORITY Public Law (PL) 96-510; PL 97-499; Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief & Emergency Assistance Act (PL 93-288 as amended); Federal Response Plan; Presidential Decision Directives 39, 62, & 63; Homeland Security Presidential Directive 3; The Homeland Security Act of 2002; National Security Decision Directive No. 259, February 4, 1987 (NSDD 259); 44 Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR), parts 205 and 302; FEMA Civil Preparedness Guide 1-3; FEMA State & Local Guide (SLG) 101; A.R.S. Title 26, Chapter 2; A.R.S. Title 35, Article 2; State of Arizona Emergency Response and Recovery Plan; PL 99-499 (Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, Title III); Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulation 0654 (NUREG 0654); Joint State of Arizona/Maricopa County Fixed Nuclear Facility Emergency Response OffSite Plan*. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The emergency management function was created in 1953 to coordinate disaster response activities for the county and the metropolitan area. The department provides technical and administrative assistance and guidance to local government, commercial or private enterprise, and the general public, thereby assisting them in carrying out their responsibilities in accordance with federal and state policies, emergency plans, and programs in preparation for human-caused or natural disasters. Its mission is to provide community-wide education, planning, coordination, and continuity of government for the people of Maricopa County in order to protect lives, property, and the environment in the event of a major emergency. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Develop, test and maintain the capability to respond to a life-threatening emergency or disaster and to provide relief from damage to property. *Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station provides Special Revenue Funds based upon estimated expenditures for conducting Palo Verde emergency drills. 574 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Emergency Management (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 123,016 $ 688,386 811,402 $ Supplies & Services 31,855 $ 584,965 616,820 $ Capital Outlay 757 $ 110,010 110,767 $ Total Expenditures 155,628 $ 1,383,361 1,538,989 $ Total Revenue 1,281,808 1,281,808 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ 149,932 693,967 9,845 4,090 857,834 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 537,077 2,754 117,719 19,788 41,345 718,684 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ $ Sub Total $ 21,385 1,024 3,282 345 75,212 1,097 14,913 13,661 3,333 4,284 138,536 CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 25,296 25,296 $ Total Expenditures $ 882,516 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ 972,071 212,885 1,184,956 $ 524,308 133,959 98,567 56,202 813,036 $ 2,462 1,036 127,600 491,068 3,000 11,987 2,760 1,602 641,515 $ $ $ $ $ $ 25,000 25,000 50,000 $ 1,504,551 (24,682) $ 972,071 212,885 1,184,956 $ 598,832 4,500 165,998 29,993 72,702 872,025 $ 84,309 1,100 105,999 1,200 303,815 38,000 18,312 26,750 6,125 600 586,210 $ $ $ $ $ $ 25,000 25,000 50,000 $ 1,508,235 (319,595) $ FY 2004-05 Requested 1,030,633 271,174 8,464 8 1,310,279 $ 556,625 3,449 1,391 130,934 24,202 74,953 791,553 $ 31,226 1,162 56,232 169,462 246 1,377 18,024 9,392 1,726 1,333 290,180 $ $ $ $ $ $ 11,068 20,000 31,068 $ 1,112,801 (323,279) $ 197,478 $ 575 1,005,326 261,678 1,267,004 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ -5% -23% 0% 0% -8% 596,699 $ 10,000 151,354 50,616 (46,116) 77,134 839,687 $ 581,512 $ 2,500 147,796 48,576 (46,116) 77,134 811,402 $ 17,320 4,500 (2,500) 18,202 (18,583) 46,116 (4,432) 60,623 3% 100% 0% 11% -62% 0% -6% 7% 36,753 1,036 60,113 450,961 7,150 14,401 22,000 2,100 1,600 596,114 36,753 1,036 12,300 450,961 4,500 11,401 17,000 2,100 1,600 79,169 616,820 47,556 64 93,699 1,200 (147,146) 33,500 6,911 9,750 4,025 (1,000) (79,169) (30,610) 56% 6% 88% 100% -48% 0% 88% 38% 36% 66% -167% 0% -5% 0% -148% 100% 0% -122% $ $ $ $ 25,000 62,000 23,767 110,767 $ 1,546,568 $ % (48,059) (48,793) (96,852) $ 1,020,130 261,678 1,281,808 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ $ $ 25,000 62,000 23,767 110,767 $ (25,000) (37,000) 25,000 (23,767) (60,767) $ 1,538,989 $ (30,754) -2% (257,181) $ (66,098) 20% (279,564) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Emergency Management (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 150 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR FTE 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST OPERATIONS MANAGER PLANNER PRGRM COORDINATION SPEC PROGRAM COORDINATOR Total 576 FTE 1.00 1.00 6.00 1.00 1.00 15.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Health Services Officer Environmental Services Environmental Services Al Brown, Director Al Brown, Director Water & Waste Water Management Division Air Quality Division Business & Community Services Division Environmental Health Division Mission The Mission of the Environmental Services Department is to provide effective environmental management to the people of Maricopa County so that they can live in a safe and healthful environment. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • Implement the Department's business plan, staffing, and space requirements, while maintaining an annual productivity rate sufficient to meet the mandated State Implementation Plan, statutory and State delegation agreement levels while staying within budget limits. • Manage department programs to meet the increasing demand for essential environmental services resulting from Maricopa County growth. Issues • The rapid growth rate of Maricopa County will continue to increase the demand for mandated environmental services. • The external effects of catastrophic, or major change events such as: a spending CAP, lawsuits, public opinion, regionalization, etc. will increase the demand for environmental services. • New legislation and unfunded mandates strain the Environmental Services Department's ability to maintain its program quality and effectiveness. • Pressures of turnover and recruitment challenge the Environmental Services Department's ability to maintain a qualified workforce. 577 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 86BD - BIO DEFENSE PREPAREDNESS $ 247,793 88AQ - AIR QUALITY PROGRAM 5,634,272 88EH - ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 5,758,501 88MR - MOSQUITO & RAT CONTROL PROGRAM 638,527 88SW - STORM WATER CONTROL PROGRAM 100,937 88WW - WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT 2,286,938 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 1,625,255 TOTAL $ 16,292,223 Supplies & Services $ 40,212 2,974,459 772,430 412,355 172,107 1,086,208 $ 5,457,771 Capital Outlay 564,200 205,000 28,000 122,899 $ 920,099 $ Total Expenditures $ 288,005 9,172,931 6,735,931 1,050,882 128,937 2,459,045 2,834,362 $ 22,670,093 Total Revenue 403,029 10,084,562 7,056,674 3,385,861 $ 20,930,126 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: AIR QUALITY PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Air Quality Program is to provide air pollution information and regulatory services to industry, other governmental agencies, and the general public so that they can effectively contribute to the attainment of the national ambient air quality standards. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Air Quality Industrial Source Permits in Compliance With Air Quality Regulations 73.96 72.64 75.47 75 Percentage of Air Quality Industrial Sources in Compliance 73.96 72.64 75.47 75 Key Results: Program Name: BUSINESS SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Business Services Program is to provide enforcement of the Environmental Health Code and the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations to the residents of Maricopa County so they can enjoy a healthful environment Key Results: Percent of increase for Environmental Health Permits 578 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 8.3 8.6 6.1 2 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services (Continued) Program Name: COMMUNITY SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Community Services Program is to provide environmental regulatory and compliance information for the residents of Maricopa County so they can be informed of the County's Air Quality and Environmental Health regulations. Key Results: FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 1754 2,066 1,020 2,100 Number of businesses/citizens receiving assistance Program Name: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Environmental Health Division is to provide Environmental Health Inspections and educational services for the general public and regulated facilities so that compliance is maintained with applicable regulations of the Maricopa County Environmental Health Code. Key Results: Percent of Environmental Health Inspections in Compliance with Environmental Health Code FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 98 91 91.5 93 Program Name: WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Water and Waste Management Program is to provide plan review, inspection and vector control activities for stakeholders in Maricopa County so that they can be safe from hazards caused by non compliance with applicable rules governing environmental and public health protection for these facilities. Key Results: Percent of Engineering Permits Issued within timeframes established (by permit type) by Code, Rule, Delegation Agreement or County Department set timeframes. 579 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 100 66.85 88.5 75 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 677,647 $ 16,003,689 $ 783,013 $ 16,453,897 $ 666,056 $ 20,153,904 $ 821,299 $ 18,790,452 $ 1,369,912 $ 21,300,181 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 16,681,335 17,236,910 20,819,960 19,611,751 22,670,093 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 677,647 $ 16,002,734 $ 783,013 $ 16,442,936 $ 666,056 $ 20,136,514 $ 821,299 $ 18,761,153 $ 1,369,912 $ 21,252,488 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 16,680,381 17,225,949 20,802,570 19,582,452 22,622,400 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Special Revenue $ 955 $ 10,961 $ 17,390 $ 29,299 $ 47,693 Total 955 10,961 17,390 29,299 47,693 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Environmental Services FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Environmental Services Mandates Vs. Expenditures $25.0 General Fund Mandated 6.04% $20.0 Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.21% $15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 93.75% 580 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 16.7 0.7 16.0 0.0 17.2 0.8 16.4 0.0 20.8 0.7 20.1 0.0 19.6 0.8 18.8 0.0 22.7 1.4 21.3 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Voluntary Vehicle Repair and Retrofit Program AUTHORITY A.R.S. in Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, by adding Section 49-474.03 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Chapter 217 of the 43rd Legislature, Regular Second Session, Section 19 (SB1427) of the bill amends A.R.S. in Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, by adding Section 49-474.03. The bill specifies that a county with a population of more than 400,000 persons according to the most recent United States decennial census shall establish and coordinate a voluntary repair and retrofit program. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The program will offer citizens of Maricopa County the option of voluntarily repairing and retrofitting their eligible vehicles. It is anticipated that not more than 1,280 vehicles will be repaired and retrofitted. It is the intent of the Environmental Services Department to contract with an independent contractor to assist in the development and implementation of the program. Voluntary Vehicle Repair and Retrofit FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 46,250 $ 618,453 68,514 $ 691,614 49,633 $ 650,524 2,485 $ 587,728 $ 550,000 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 664,703 760,128 700,157 590,213 550,000 TITLE Environmental Health AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 36-167 Sanitary regulations; notice; violations; classification; A.R.S. § 36-136 (D1) Powers and duties of director; 36-601 (B,C) Public nuisances dangerous to public health; Maricopa Environmental Health Code - Chapters 1-12; U.S. District Court of Arizona Judgement No. Civ 77-479 Hart vs. Hill. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Maricopa County is responsible for the protection of the food and water supplies that sustain its residents, and for the detection and abatement of environmentally transmitted disease and public health nuisances within its boundaries. The Maricopa County Environmental Services Department enforces the provisions of the Maricopa County Environmental Health Code, Arizona State Statutes and Regulations that pertain to public health and environmental management. The Department has carried out these responsibilities since the establishment of those statutes that provide for the powers and authority of the Maricopa County Board of health, and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County Board of Health must develop regulations necessary for the public health and safety of inhabitants. These regulations, approved by the Board of Supervisors, are incorporated in the Maricopa County Environmental Health Code. The Environmental Services Department must apply this code. Environmental Health Program FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 631,397 $ 8,156,502 714,499 $ 8,319,303 616,423 $ 9,958,290 818,813 $ 9,423,518 1,369,912 $ 10,743,862 581 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 8,787,899 9,033,802 10,574,713 10,242,331 12,113,774 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services (Continued) TITLE Air Quality Control AUTHORITY The Federal Clean Air Act an Amendments of 1990;A.R.S. Article 1 General Provisions; A.R.S. § 49-401 Declaration of Policy; A.R.S. § 49-402 State and County Control; A.R.S. Article 3 County Air Pollution Control; A.R.S. § 49-473 Board of Supervisors; A.R.S. § 49-479 Rules; A.R.S. § 49-180 Permits HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Maricopa County has received grant funding from the Environmental Protection Department to carry out provisions of the Clean Air Act since the late 1960's. Arizona Revised Statutes established state and county control of air pollution, and Maricopa County established an Air Pollution Program in the 1960's. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Adopt and enforce rules to control the release into the atmosphere of air contaminates and hazardous air pollutants. Collect permit fees equal to the average cost of services to defray the costs of implementing the program. Air Quality Control Program FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 5,211,934 $ 5,588,154 $ 7,667,856 $ 6,625,611 $ 8,210,802 582 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 5,211,934 5,588,154 7,667,856 6,625,611 8,210,802 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services (Continued) TITLE Trip Reduction & Small Business Assistance Program AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 49-581, et seq. Trip Reduction Program; County Ordinance P-7 Trip Reduction Ordinance; Small Business Assistance Program - Federal Clean Air Act Title V, Small Business Assistance Program; A.R.S. § 49-507 Technical Assistance to Small Businesses. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND In 1987, a lawsuit was filed against the State of Arizona for exceeding the National Air Quality Standards for carbon monoxide. In response the Arizona Legislature passed the 1988 Air Quality Bill, which implemented the Trip Reduction Program for employers and schools in Maricopa County. Employers and schools with 100 or more employees or driving age students at any one site were affected by the requirements of the ordinance. In 1993 the Trip Reduction Ordinance No. P-7 was expanded requiring employers with 75-99 employees to participate in the program. The Ordinance was amended again in 1994 incorporating employers with 50-74 employees into the program. Recognizing the need for helping small businesses in the area of technical assistance. Congress required the creation of the Small Business Assistance Program (SBAP) as part of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990. The SBAP would require a full-time Environmental Specialist independent from department enforcement activities, but with access to full departmental technical and outreach resources for small businesses. Although the requirements of the 1990 CAAA and the 1992 Comprehensive Air Quality Act (CAQA) are specific to air pollution control programs, the complexity of solid and hazardous waste rules and water quality protection rules of the Environmental Protection Department (EPA) and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) suggests that the program will eventually be established to provide a wider range of technical assistance to small businesses. The SBAP will be funded by Maricopa County Environmental Services Department permit fees to provide technical assistance and site visits independent of departmental enforcement activities. Advocate the needs of the small business community with respect to departmental activities, while making the permit application process more user-friendly. Trip Reduction Program FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 1,062,241 $ 899,326 $ 867,568 $ 986,870 $ 948,575 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,062,241 899,326 867,568 986,870 948,575 TEA21 Grant-Trip Reduction Program FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 953,604 $ 944,540 $ 992,276 $ 1,137,426 $ 799,249 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 953,604 944,540 992,276 1,137,426 799,249 583 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 904,931 $ 15,387,292 16,292,223 $ Supplies & Services 435,049 $ 5,022,722 5,457,771 $ Capital Outlay 29,932 $ 890,167 920,099 $ Total Expenditures 1,369,912 $ 21,300,181 22,670,093 $ Total Revenue 20,930,126 20,930,126 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 610 LICENSES AND PERMITS 615 GRANTS 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 652 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING Total Revenue $ $ 11,797,253 1,734,056 543,954 790,343 139,217 1,104,629 16,109,452 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 10,438,253 70,321 67,996 2,329,508 47,484 214,332 13,167,894 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 536,058 58 56,095 76,904 10,040 11,379 1,660,652 953,637 28,723 482,962 219,144 86,783 7,980 3,065,725 7,196,142 CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE 955 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION OUT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ 6,443 176,631 193,743 76,877 453,695 $ Total Expenditures $ 20,817,730 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ $ 12,270,574 3,893,983 550,000 750,000 60,000 933,000 18,457,557 $ $ 10,844,416 $ 87,427 35,000 2,957,126 30,621 (270,679) 478,666 14,162,577 $ 492,212 200 69,668 21,834 5,500 1,187,977 1,009,604 50,888 592,485 195,342 33,256 8,000 587,876 4,254,842 $ $ $ $ 133,000 225,700 58,397 417,097 $ 18,834,516 (4,708,278) $ 12,909,742 4,256,526 550,000 750,000 60,000 933,000 19,459,268 $ $ 11,767,640 $ 79,356 44,884 3,104,449 15,615 (270,679) 435,036 15,176,301 $ 582,079 200 63,206 10,514 22,124 5,500 1,140,607 951,111 40,888 600,135 206,139 13,856 8,000 587,876 4,232,235 $ $ $ $ 30,000 374,185 58,397 462,582 $ 19,871,118 (376,959) $ 13,654,896 3,847,640 527,116 466,358 25,384 1,241,213 3,203 19,765,809 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 11,120,473 $ 104,440 89,944 3,341,933 50,552 (257,468) 478,666 14,928,540 $ 470,010 65,204 28,309 25,525 8,724 1,045,982 1,068,094 46,916 571,764 228,717 103,987 9,489 587,876 4,260,598 $ $ $ $ 198,000 77,975 275,975 $ (411,850) $ 584 13,340,000 4,746,035 523,856 653,000 50,000 1,044,000 20,356,891 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 11,876,425 $ 164,841 108,884 3,670,365 23,409 (531,523) 748,971 16,061,372 $ 639,719 200 99,023 27,000 59,765 8,000 1,405,526 1,038,490 98,600 587,647 277,739 27,500 129,238 8,000 460,543 4,866,990 $ $ $ $ 313,000 77,000 98,171 488,171 19,465,113 $ 21,416,533 $ 300,695 $ (1,059,642) $ $ 14,023,986 4,635,284 523,856 653,000 50,000 1,044,000 20,930,126 Adopted Vs Revised Variance % $ (1,114,244) (378,758) 26,144 97,000 10,000 (111,000) (1,470,858) -9% -9% 5% 13% 17% -12% 0% -8% 12,119,419 $ 160,405 98,000 3,650,464 48,409 (887,495) 1,103,021 16,292,223 $ (351,779) (81,049) (53,116) (546,015) (32,794) 616,816 (667,985) (1,115,922) -3% -102% -118% -18% -210% -228% -154% -7% 652,379 $ 200 91,523 45,600 (16,645) 16,645 59,765 8,000 2,005,526 1,038,490 73,600 578,813 254,239 75,500 10,000 (102,760) 102,760 564,136 5,457,771 $ (70,300) (28,317) (35,086) 16,645 (16,645) (37,641) (2,500) (864,919) (87,379) (32,712) 21,322 (48,100) (61,644) (2,000) 102,760 (102,760) 23,740 (1,225,536) -12% 0% -45% -334% 0% 0% -170% -45% -76% -9% -80% 4% -23% -445% 0% -25% 0% 0% 4% -29% $ 313,000 479,200 127,899 (18,602) 18,602 920,099 $ (283,000) (105,015) (69,502) 18,602 (18,602) (457,517) 0% -943% -28% -119% 0% 0% -99% (2,798,975) -14% 1,328,117 -322% 22,670,093 $ $ (1,739,967) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Environmental Services (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 880 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Market Range Title ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CHEMICAL APPLICATNS TECH CHEMIST DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR ELECTRONIC TECHNICIAN ENGINEER ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPCLST SUPV ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FTE 1.00 46.60 9.90 6.00 2.00 9.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 12.00 29.00 3.00 3.00 128.75 1.00 Market Range Title FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR GENERALIST INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT OPERATIONS MANAGER PC SPECIALIST PLANNER PLANNING SUPERVISOR PRGRM COORDINATION SPEC PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM MANAGER PROGRAM SUPERVISOR PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE TECHNICAL PROGRAM SUPV TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN Total 585 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 9.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00 303.25 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Equipment Services Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Regional Development Services Agency Officer Equipment Services Equipment Services Jim Hutchinson, Acting Director Jim Hutchinson, Acting Director Service Stations Fuel & Environmental Parts Room Motor Pool Automotive Equipment Mission The Mission of the Equipment Services Department is to provide vehicle, equipment, and fuel services to employees and departments of Maricopa County so they can have the transportation and equipment that is needed to perform their jobs. Vision To be recognized as a leader in providing professional, efficient, cost effective fleet management services. Goals • Bring the Total Maintenance & Repair Cost per Vehicle Equivalent (VE) into line with industry standards of $1,010 - $1,390 annually by end of calendar year 2006. • Bring the annual number of hours charged per FTE technician to the industry standard of 1,400 – 1,500 direct-billed hours by end of calendar year 2006. • Increase the PM Compliance rate to 95% or better by end of calendar year 2006 through customer education and notification of needed services. • Increase the percentage of work orders completed in one day to the industry standard of 80% - 90% by end of calendar year 2006. • Decrease the Replacement Backlog of vehicles due or overdue for replacement to the industry standard of 10% - 15% by end of fiscal year 2007. • Increase the level of overall customer satisfaction with our services to 85% by end of calendar year 2006. 586 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Equipment Services (Continued) Issues • The increase in County fleet size, type, variety, complexity of equipment means the development of unique private and public partnerships, flexible and more efficient work force and innovative management practices to find new ways of doing things with fewer resources, without compromising safety or the quality of service. • The erosion of our customer base by County departments taking their vehicle maintenance elsewhere has negatively affected the department’s budget and cash position. • Reorganization of Equipment Services is needed to become a department that is considered by our customers to be a high quality, cost efficient place with which to do business. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 74FM - FLEET MANAGEMENT $ 1,736,015 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 1,306,796 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 33,014 TOTAL $ 3,075,825 Supplies & Services $ 6,393,809 35,242 $ 6,429,051 Capital Outlay 233,000 13,901 $ 246,901 $ Total Expenditures $ 8,362,824 1,342,038 46,915 $ 9,751,777 Total Revenue 10,192,096 $ 10,192,096 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: FLEET MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Fleet Management Program is to provide operational vehicles and equipment to Maricopa County departments so they have reliable and cost-effective transportation for County activities. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent Fleet Availability 95.7 95.62 95.33 95 Percent of total fleet replacement vehicle purchased 98.49 112.06 111.88 100 Percent preventative maintenance services due that were completed 65.2 59.82 65.07 70 Percent fuel cost saving from county procurement of gasoline as compared to retail N/A 8.54 11.6 10 Percent alternative fueled vehicles in county fleet 22.1 21.96 22.31 20 Key Results: 587 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Equipment Services (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 10,078,256 $ 9,030,607 $ 9,683,882 $ 10,238,628 $ 9,751,777 $ $ $ $ $ Total 10,078,256 9,030,607 9,683,882 10,238,628 9,751,777 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 630,158 $ 112,485 $ 67,440 $ 79,298 $ 98,887 $ $ $ $ $ Total 630,158 112,485 67,440 79,298 98,887 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 9,448,098 $ 8,918,122 $ 9,616,442 $ 10,159,330 $ 9,652,890 $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,448,098 8,918,122 9,616,442 10,159,330 9,652,890 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Equipment Services FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Equipment Services Mandates Vs. Expenditures $12.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $10.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 100.0% 588 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 10.1 0.0 10.1 0.0 9.0 0.0 9.0 0.0 9.7 0.0 9.7 0.0 10.2 0.0 10.2 0.0 9.8 0.0 9.8 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Equipment Services (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Alternative Fuels AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 49-571 (SB1269 AZ Clean Air Bill) Alternative fuel requirements for new buses; A.R.S. § 49-474.01 (HB2002 AZ Clean Air Act) Vehicle fleet plan for alternative fuels HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 has provisions for controlling air quality in nonattainment areas by requiring fleet purchases to include cleaner fuels (i.e. compressed natural gas, propane, etc) as a motor vehicle fuel. Energy Policy Act of 1992 established a policy to develop domestically produced alternative fuels for motor vehicles. Currently applicable to federal, state, and alternative-fuel provider fleets. DOE rule making could extend requirements to municipal/private fleets. Arizona legislation has been enacted that has more stringent requirements with respect to type of vehicle and time schedule for accomplishment. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Arizona Revised Statutes alternative fuel requirements apply to all on-road vehicles in state, city or town, school district, and county (with a population greater than 1,200,000). Alternative fuels include electricity, propane, natural gas, hydrogen, solar, alcohol (85% content). Alternative Fuels FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - 589 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 630,158 $ 112,485 $ 67,440 $ 79,298 $ 98,887 $ $ $ $ $ Total 630,158 112,485 67,440 79,298 98,887 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Equipment Services (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES Fund Type INTERNAL SERVICE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 3,075,825 $ 3,075,825 $ Supplies & Services 6,429,051 $ 6,429,051 $ Capital Outlay 246,901 $ 246,901 $ Total Expenditures 9,751,777 $ 9,751,777 $ Total Revenue 10,192,096 10,192,096 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 636 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 651 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS 652 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ 8,900,814 0 552,183 (34,800) 9,418,196 $ 515,906 7,815,685 8,331,591 $ 1,948,071 32,348 56,459 547,148 12,301 51,682 2,648,009 1,831,992 26,580 80,000 630,402 47,782 2,616,756 $ 5,093,211 35,275 40,660 94,253 44,853 791,965 150,059 27,056 6,148 74,224 36,504 491,717 6,885,926 - $ $ $ $ $ 4,159,868 10,000 10,000 125,067 67,288 380,505 119,645 20,736 4,500 88,000 482,105 5,467,714 $ $ $ $ $ 630,534 7,701,057 8,331,591 $ 2,147,840 28,349 52,792 684,278 47,782 2,961,041 $ 3,919,916 10,000 125,067 12,064 370,456 111,694 20,736 4,500 90,500 482,105 5,147,038 $ $ $ $ 0 0 $ 18,000 15,000 23,600 29,952 86,552 $ $ 18,000 15,000 29,952 62,952 9,533,935 $ 8,171,022 $ 8,171,031 $ (115,739) $ 160,569 $ 160,560 $ 590 $ FY 2004-05 Requested 543,311 $ 8,424,174 (6,863) 10,492 5,751 (26,505) 8,950,361 $ 2,044,210 25,261 58,069 656,263 24,711 42,032 2,850,547 4,720,291 2,228 7,960 66,786 9,235 582,003 157,978 6,856 5,257 67,645 482,105 6,108,344 $ $ 630,534 9,676,190 10,306,724 $ 2,282,428 28,349 52,630 789,749 36,320 3,189,476 $ $ $ $ 4,830,887 19,392 112,119 8,847 796,448 76,009 20,731 4,500 84,500 480,618 6,434,051 $ (3,868) 21,341 17,473 $ 18,000 15,000 200,000 13,901 246,901 $ $ (26,004) $ 8,976,364 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance 515,906 9,676,190 10,192,096 $ 2,207,089 28,349 52,630 751,437 36,320 3,075,825 $ 4,830,887 19,392 112,119 8,847 796,448 76,009 15,731 4,500 84,500 480,618 6,429,051 $ $ $ $ % 114,628 (1,975,133) (1,860,505) 18% -26% 0% 0% 0% 0% -22% (59,249) 162 (67,159) 11,462 (114,784) -3% 0% 0% -10% 0% 24% -4% (910,971) (9,392) 12,948 3,217 (425,992) 35,685 5,005 6,000 1,487 (1,282,013) -23% 0% -94% 10% 27% -115% 32% 24% 0% 7% 0% 0% -25% 0% 0% 0% 54% -292% $ $ 18,000 15,000 200,000 13,901 246,901 $ (200,000) 16,051 (183,949) 9,870,428 $ 9,751,777 $ (1,580,746) -19% 436,296 $ 440,319 $ (279,759) -174% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Equipment Services (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 740 EQUIPMENT SERVICES Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT GENERAL LABORER HR SPECIALIST FTE 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.75 Market Range Title MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC MECHANIC PROGRAM COORDINATOR PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC SVC SUPERVISOR PURCHASING SUPERVISOR TECH SUPPORT SPECIALIST TRADES SUPERVISOR Total 591 FTE 4.00 37.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 60.75 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Facilities Management Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Regional Development Services Agency Officer Facilities Management Facilities Management Steve Conner, Director Steve Conner, Director Business Services Operations & Maintenance Capital Facilities Development Protective Services Mission The Mission of the Facilities Management Department (FMD) is to provide buildings and grounds to appointed and elected departments so they can work in a safe and efficient environment. Vision To provide excellent innovative facility services to every customer every time. Goals • By the end of FY09, FMD will develop a Countywide Master Plan addressing the space needs of all County departments in order to develop a strategic and comprehensive Capital Improvement Plan. This will be done within the annually approved budget. • By the end of FY07, have a database in place that will track historical trends, using available technology, that will promote the development of improved budgeting and scheduling methodologies in order to deliver projects within the Board of Supervisors approved budget and timeline. • By the end of FY08, improve the average County Facility Condition Index (FCI) by 4% by developing appropriate annual major maintenance and preventative maintenance programs to reduce future operating costs by $.20 per square foot. • By the end of FY07, the customer satisfaction rating for security services provided to all County owned, non-Court facilities, will be 98% or higher, as reported on the annual Research & Reporting customer service survey. • By the end of FY06, the capital improvement program and the major maintenance program (projects only) will be categorized as follows: preventative maintenance, tenant improvement, major maintenance, deferred major maintenance, and capital projects. Issues • Increasing utility rates and demand will impact the County’s ability to reduce utility cost per square foot. • Many County facilities are located in high crime areas, which increase the resources necessary to continue to provide a safe and secure environment for county staff and visitors. 592 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Facilities Management (Continued) • The continuing unpredictable increases in the cost of construction may impact FMD’s ability to deliver projects within budget. • The current County Facility Condition Index (FCI) indicates an aging building inventory that unless appropriately addressed will adversely affect future operating costs. • An increase in environmental and regulatory demands will result in the increased need for resources associated with FMD managed facilities and parcels of land. • For the County to succeed in the cost effective implementation of the Capital Program, the plan must remain consistent. • Policy #A1905 authorizes FMD as the BOS’ representative for facility management; however, various departments exercise their own discretion over facility operations, maintenance and construction, which adversely effect FMD’s operational cost. Decentralized facility operations, maintenance, and construction adversely affect FMD’s ability to plan and promote a County-wide Facilities Management program that could result in economy of scale-driven synergy and efficiencies. • Policy #A1922 states that all County Departments will utilize a standard county security system administered by FMD. At times this policy conflicts with actual practice when other departments purchase their own security system that is not compatible to the current County-wide system, thereby making County facilities vulnerable to security breeches and also resulting in duplicated efforts in programming access which inconveniences our customers and increases taxpayer costs. Decentralized security operations affect FMD’s ability to plan and promote a County-wide security program that could result in economy of scale-driven synergy and efficiencies. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 70BC - BUILDING CONSTRUCTION & RENOV $ 959,285 70OM - BLDG OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE 7,646,381 70PL - PLANNING 97,676 70PS - PROTECTIVE SERVICES 2,391,218 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 1,230,794 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 329,991 TOTAL $ 12,655,345 Supplies & Services $ 45,468 8,730,775 9,337 73,649 739,380 107,290 $ 9,705,899 593 Capital Outlay 38,557,526 601,667 26,958 $ 39,186,151 $ Total Expenditures $ 39,562,279 16,978,823 107,013 2,464,867 1,970,174 464,239 $ 61,547,395 Total Revenue 47,669,538 $ 47,669,538 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Facilities Management (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: BUILDING OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE Program Purpose: The purpose of the Building Operations and Maintenance Program is to provide cleaning and maintenance services to appointed and elected departments so they can have their employees work in safe, clean, and functional facilities. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of utility consumption reduced 2.3 -4.7 -2.68 3 Percent of maintenance work orders completed N/A 98 94 98 Key Results: Program Name: PROTECTIVE SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Protective Services Program is to provide security and parking services to County appointed and elected departments, and visitors so that they can efficiently conduct their business in a safe and secure manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of cars parked to the number of spaces available to employees within a 3 block area of their work site 100 100 100 100 Percent or rate of major crimes for Downtown/Durango County properties vs. crimes reported for those surrounding Phoenix areas. 5 6 6.3 8 Key Results: Program Name: BUILDING CONSTRUCTION Program Purpose: The purpose of the Building Construction Program is to provide design and construction services to Maricopa County so that they can successfully achieve their missions in fiscally prudent, efficient, enjoyable, and stimulating environments. Key Results: 100 percent of buildings delivered within 100 percent or less of the budget 594 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 100 100 100 100 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Facilities Management (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 72,870,338 $ $ 178,203,254 $ $ 196,748,909 $ $ 26,148,839 $ 985,234 $ 17,333,572 $ 5,467,329 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ 51,548,658 $ $ 154,960,729 $ $ 171,303,896 $ $ 74,479,972 $ $ 38,746,494 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 124,418,995 333,163,983 368,052,805 101,614,045 61,547,395 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 52,058,337 $ $ 155,103,059 $ $ 171,503,364 $ $ 44,486 $ $ 200,000 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ 51,548,658 $ $ 154,960,729 $ $ 171,303,896 $ $ 74,479,972 $ $ 38,746,494 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 103,606,994 310,063,788 342,807,260 74,524,458 38,946,494 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 20,812,001 $ $ 23,100,195 $ $ 25,245,545 $ $ 26,104,353 $ 985,234 $ 17,133,572 $ 5,467,329 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 20,812,001 23,100,195 25,245,545 27,089,587 22,600,901 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Facilities Management FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $400.0 $350.0 General Fund Mandated 28.2% Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.0% Facilities Management Mandates Vs. Expenditures $300.0 $250.0 $200.0 $150.0 $100.0 $50.0 $0.0 Other Fund Mandated 71.8% Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 124.4 72.9 51.5 0.0 333.2 178.2 155.0 0.0 368.1 196.7 171.3 0.0 101.6 26.1 75.5 0.0 61.5 17.3 44.2 0.0 The decrease of expenditures is due to the fact that new capital facilities have been completed. 595 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Facilities Management (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Construction Of Jail Detention And Justice Facilities AUTHORITY The Legislature, in Laws 1998, Chapter 225, amending A.R.S. § 42-1491, granted a one-time opportunity to Maricopa County voters to approve a jail facilities excise tax levy to construct and operate jail facilities. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The jail facilities excise tax levy was authorized at two-tenths of a percent (0.002) of the tax base to remain in effect until $900 million is collected, but not more than nine years after January 1, 1999. The Maricopa County voters approved the tax levy effective January 1, 1999. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Design and construct the new adult and juvenile detention and justice facilities. Construction of Jail Detention and Justice Facilities FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects $ 51,548,658 $ 154,960,729 $ 171,303,896 $ 74,479,972 $ 38,746,494 Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 51,548,658 154,960,729 171,303,896 74,479,972 38,746,494 TITLE Environment AUTHORITY Code of Federal Regulations 40 (CFR40) - Environment HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Facilities Management has been responsible for certain activities relating to buildings and grounds that are regulated by Federal, State and County statutes or laws. Particularly troublesome are environmental rules under CFR40 which include clean air, hazardous materials, and pollution of the ground, and protection of life and the environment. Facilities Management has an environmental engineer on staff who oversees programs and projects related to CFR40. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County, through Facilities Management, is responsible for pollution prevention through the maintenance and/or upgrade/replacement of equipment and facilities. They are also responsible for the investigation and reporting of any incidents related to accidental, intentional, or unintentional pollution or environmental hazard. Specific to CFR40 is control and management of asbestos, above and underground fuel storage tanks, land acquisition environmental site assessments, dust control of open areas and lots, all facility environmental permits (air, water, waste), interior (building) air quality, Freon, chemicals, and disposal of hazardous materials. This has been done efficiently for the past seven years or so, and regular and incident-related reports have been timely filed with OSHA, EPA, ADEQ and County Environmental officials. Environment FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 509,679 $ 142,330 $ 199,468 $ 44,486 $ 200,000 $ - 596 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 509,679 142,330 199,468 44,486 200,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Facilities Management (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Fund Type CAPITAL PROJECTS GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 186,458 $ 9,906,796 2,562,091 12,655,345 $ Supplies & Services 2,510 $ 7,327,818 2,375,571 9,705,899 $ Capital Outlay 38,557,526 $ 98,958 529,667 39,186,151 $ Total Expenditures 38,746,494 $ 17,333,572 5,467,329 61,547,395 $ Total Revenue 47,591,538 78,000 47,669,538 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ $ 8,085,314 $ 99,422 265,573 2,218,258 248,835 (1,155,126) 73,904 9,836,181 $ Sub Total $ 1,372,839 431 49,788 35,074 447 2,348 197,420 221,049 4,815,212 86,089 24,944 343,815 2,257,873 9,407,329 CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 168,466,817 113,012 7,297 168,587,126 $ Total Expenditures $ 187,830,636 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 1,316,947 98,138,712 99,455,659 $ $ $ 78,000 48,585,819 48,663,819 $ $ 8,128,325 $ 39,315 139,442 2,038,427 196,772 (1,204,249) 86,637 9,424,669 $ 1,668,490 479 53,613 1,500 19,397 3,763 89,128 180,981 3,969,087 221,140 30,579 344,900 391,574 6,974,631 $ $ $ $ 117,361,689 11,323 117,373,012 $ 133,772,312 (88,374,977) $ 78,000 48,585,819 48,663,819 $ $ 8,866,067 $ 8,609 175,569 2,503,871 352,327 (1,204,249) 86,637 10,788,831 $ 1,498,951 479 57,613 90,247 19,397 3,763 276,538 414,021 3,915,078 222,760 35,200 347,483 687,916 7,569,446 $ $ $ $ 117,361,689 833 11,323 117,373,845 $ 135,732,122 (85,108,493) $ $ $ 8,476,401 $ 93,135 339,232 2,409,864 288,515 (1,233,149) 34,492 10,408,490 $ 1,467,260 177 68,255 70,047 2,649 346,397 264,809 3,880,168 145,092 32,951 333,644 994,565 7,606,015 $ $ $ $ 98,127,542 12,051 98,139,593 $ 116,154,098 (87,068,303) $ 597 78,020 48,585,819 48,663,839 FY 2004-05 Requested 78,000 48,585,819 48,663,819 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 9,825,202 $ 7,000 175,569 3,047,059 396,517 (797,756) 194,520 12,848,111 $ 3,508,566 $ 479 74,371 133,647 3,763 48,388 253,534 4,221,059 63,705 32,000 346,483 348,127 (19,999) 9,014,123 $ $ $ 50,569,328 648,000 14,744 51,232,072 $ 73,094,306 (67,490,258) $ 78,000 47,591,538 47,669,538 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 9,569,991 $ 80,000 175,569 2,934,256 396,517 (698,114) 197,126 12,655,345 $ 3,523,566 479 74,371 124,247 3,763 234,051 253,534 4,704,432 53,746 32,000 346,483 355,227 9,705,899 $ $ 994,281 994,281 % 0% 2% 2% (703,924) (71,391) (430,385) (44,190) (506,135) (110,489) (1,866,514) -8% -829% 0% -17% -13% 42% -128% -17% (2,024,615) (16,758) (34,000) 19,397 42,487 160,487 (789,354) 169,014 3,200 1,000 332,689 (2,136,453) -135% 0% -29% -38% 100% 0% 15% 39% -20% 76% 9% 0% 48% 0% -28% 67% 0% 100% -153% 67% $ $ 38,557,526 600,000 28,625 39,186,151 $ 78,804,163 (600,000) 833 (17,302) 78,187,694 $ 61,547,395 $ 74,184,727 55% (73,190,446) 84% (24,430,487) $ (13,877,857) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Facilities Management (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR DISPATCHER ELECTRONIC TECHNICIAN ENGINEER ENGINEERING AIDE EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FACILITIES SVCS OFCR SUPV FACILITIES SVCS OFFICER FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FTE 1.00 2.00 7.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 7.00 5.00 11.00 1.00 3.00 68.00 2.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL LABORER GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH HR GENERALIST HR SPECIALIST INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INSPECTION SUPERVISOR INSPECTOR MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC OPERATIONS MANAGER PC SPECIALIST PLANNER PLANNING SUPERVISOR PRGRM COORDINATION SPEC TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TRADES SPECIALIST TRADES SUPERVISOR UNDETERMINED Total 598 FTE 1.00 47.00 22.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 6.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 71.00 8.00 7.00 301.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Finance Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Financial Officer Tom Manos Department of Finance Department of Finance General Accounting I Real Estate General Accounting II Debt/Reporting Accounts Payable Grants/Fixed Assets Financial Systems Collections Mission The Mission of the Department of Finance is to provide financial information and services to Maricopa County government so they can effectively manage their resources. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • By June 2007, in order to meet the increasing demands for governmental accountability; meet the increasing needs to improve our customers ability to manage results through enhancement and full utilization of our existing financial system; and ensure our customers ability to fully report results, we will develop financial reporting procedures for MfR, provide training to departments to ensure a complete understanding of the procedures, and provide training to departments on the PAS Code reporting models currently available on Info Advantage and Report.Web. • We will obtain and maintain a satisfaction rating of 6.0 or above for Overall Satisfaction within our department as measured annually by the employee satisfaction survey by the end of the fiscal year 2006. • We will obtain a turnover rate of less than 10% for all professional level staff as measured annually by Total Compensation by June 2008. • We will develop and implement new strategies to increase collections by 20% each year to reach an FY 2009 collected amount of $5,000,000.00. • By July 2007, we will generate $5,225,000 in revenue from the sale of surplus real estate assets. • We will refine, implement and complete a strategic plan to utilize all residual 2001 Lease Revenue Bond proceeds on specifically identified Board approved projects and report the financial activity by June 2007. 599 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Finance (Continued) • By June 2006, we will reengineer the Department of Finance to develop a stronger business structure, increased staffing levels with a competitive salary structure to improve recruitment and retention of qualified professional level staff to meet the increasing demands of governmental accountability and the increasing demands for governmental services from a technical and financial perspective. Issues • The demand for increased operational results; training statements, standards and auditors and management resources. • Increased demand for governmental services (internal and external) through technology results in a need for our department to provide services that meet customer expectations. • Continued growth of the County citizens will impact the need to increase County services and ensure effective strategic space planning and the management of a comprehensive capital financing plan. • Since the County has previously auctioned, or sold, many of the more “sought-after” surplus real properties, marketing the remaining non-critical real estate assets will become more challenging. • The process of transitioning the Maricopa Integrated Health Care System will increase the need for financial services. • Limited funding and space will challenge the Department of Finance to maintain the stable, highly qualified staff that we will need to effectively respond to increasingly difficult, complex financial issues. • Without countywide departmental management's complete understanding, commitment and acceptance of MfR principles, the County's ability to fully "Manage for Results," and, in particular, Finance’s ability to fully "Report Results" will be challenged. governmental accountability which includes the reporting of financial and and education on new reporting requirements; implementation of financial pronouncements; coordination of financial information as associated with of an extended audit cycle increases the need for additional financial Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 180 FINANCE TOTAL FUNDS Program 18FR - FINANCIAL REPORTING 18FS - FINANCIAL SERVICES 18RE - REAL ESTATE 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 385,403 1,528,676 284,950 24,827 TOTAL $ 2,223,856 $ Supplies & Services $ 179,908 109,085 1,854 $ 290,847 600 Capital Outlay 17,333 $ 17,333 $ Total Expenditures $ 565,311 1,655,094 286,804 24,827 $ 2,532,036 Total Revenue 576,138 $ 576,138 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Finance (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: FINANCIAL REPORTING Program Purpose: The purpose of the Financial Reporting Program is to provide timely financial and operational information to external entities such as external government and private financial institutions, as a measurement of financial health; and to Maricopa County government departments so they can make timely informed decisions, manage resources, and measure and report results. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of customers who indicate our reports facilitate informed decision-making. N/A 93 96 95 Percent of customers satisfied with the Advantage financial information provided on Report.Web. 85 95 95 95 Percent of customers satisfied with internally prepared reports provided by the Department of Finance staff which includes: Monthly Variance Report, Fund Balance Report, and Capital Project Report. 85 96 96 95 Key Results: Program Name: FINANCIAL SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Financial Services Program is to provide general accounting, technology systems, accounts payable, and debt service activities to Maricopa County government departments so they can make informed decisions, manage resources, and measure and report results. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 88.75 95 95 95 Percent of customers satisfied with the debt related services. 44 96 95 95 Percent of customers satisfied regarding the processing of various non-payment transactions. 88 100 97 95 Percent of new accounts processed. 100 100 100 100 Percent of accounts that are active and paying N/A 53 44.25 50 Percent of total active accounts sent to private collection agency. N/A 82 80.75 85 Key Results: Percent of payments processed within the established turnaround time. 601 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Finance (Continued) Program Name: REAL ESTATE Program Purpose: The purpose of the Real Estate program is to provide real estate services to appointed and elected departments so that County properties are managed in a professional manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of property/rights requests fulfilled N/A 31 77 31 Percent of studies and reports completed. N/A 57 75 57 Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,881,276 $ $ 1,859,183 $ $ 2,059,490 $ $ 2,352,569 $ $ 2,532,036 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,881,276 1,859,183 2,059,490 2,352,569 2,532,036 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,881,276 $ $ 1,859,183 $ $ 2,059,490 $ $ 2,352,569 $ $ 2,532,036 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,881,276 1,859,183 2,059,490 2,352,569 2,532,036 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Finance FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Finance Mandates Vs. Expenditures $2.5 Non-Mandated 0.0% $2.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $1.5 $1.0 $0.5 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 602 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 2.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 0.0 2.5 2.5 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Finance (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Finance AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 41-1346 State and local records management; A.R.S. § 11-622(c) Payment of Claims; A.R.S. § 11-644 Re-issuance of warrants; A.R.S. § 35-501 Requires County to report bond issues, debt level analysis, definition of outstanding indebtedness to the Arizona Department of Revenue; A.R.S. § 35-502 Notification requirements to Department of Revenue on retirement of a bond; A.R.S. § 35-503 Calculation of debt limits; A.R.S. § 42-304 Setting the tax rate; A.R.S. § 11-604.01 Revolving line of credit; A.R.S. § 42-301 Levy limits; A.R.S. § 42-302 Annual Financial Statements Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR); A.R.S. § 41-1279.07 (c) Issuance of the Expenditure Limitations Report; A.R.S. § 13-805 Criminal Restitution Orders; IRS Guidelines - Reporting requirements for Form 1099; IRS Guidelines – Reporting requirements for tax-exempt financings; A.R.S. § 11-251 Sale of County real estate; A.R.S. § 11-256 Leasing or sub-leasing County real estate; A.R.S. § 38-511 Cancellation of State Contracts; A.R.S. § 42-271 Exemption of taxable real estate; A.R.S. § 11-259 Intergovernmental Agreements; A.R.S. § 45-182 Claim of right to withdraw, divert or use public waters, exception, administration by director of water resources; Single Audit Act of 1984 and Amendments of 1996 - Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards; Federal OMB Circular A-102 Requirements for government Federal Awards; Federal OMB Circular A-87 General requirements for charging indirect costs to grants. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND In 1994 the Board of Supervisors and County Administrative Officer reorganized the Department of Finance as part of a Countywide restructuring effort. During the reorganization, the budget functions for the County were separated from Finance to form the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The Department of Finance is responsible for the oversight, reporting, processing, and analysis of the County's financial transactions. Finance provides services to all County departments and various external users and maintains the accounting records for all financial transactions. During FY 02-03, the Department of Finance took over the County Superior Court Collections Division. During, FY 03-04, the County’s Real Estate Division was transferred to the Department of Finance. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Department of Finance shall maintain the County's public records in the most efficient and cost effective manner; The Department of Finance shall prepare the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and Expenditure Limitation Reports; the Department shall also ensure compliance with the Single Audit Act of 1984 and cause a Single Audit to be performed; The Department of Finance shall monitor all real estate services to include sales and leases of County Real Estate; The Department shall report annual Form 1099 information to the IRS; The Department shall set the tax rates for the County, cities, schools and special districts. The Department of Finance will comply with all IRS arbitrage requirements, including audit of such, for all taxexempt financings. The Department of Finance will actively pursue all criminal restitution orders. 603 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Finance (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 180 FINANCE Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS Personal Services 2,223,856 $ 2,223,856 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 290,847 $ 290,847 $ Capital Outlay 17,333 $ 17,333 $ Total Expenditures 2,532,036 $ 2,532,036 $ Total Revenue 576,138 576,138 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 180 FINANCE ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES $ $ 1,561,091 $ 6,753 354,800 (135,027) 1,787,617 $ 88,136 955,940 1,044,076 $ $ 1,691,150 $ 98,807 447,194 (186,191) 2,050,960 $ $ 1,809,661 $ 80,605 477,640 (207,048) 31,710 2,192,568 $ $ $ 1,777,264 $ 53,040 447,962 877 (183,831) 2,095,313 $ $ $ 1,869,006 $ 70,444 503,887 (219,481) 2,223,856 $ $ $ 1,869,006 $ 70,444 503,887 (219,481) 2,223,856 $ 88,136 379,802 467,938 100% 40% 0% 45% (59,345) 10,161 (26,247) 12,433 31,710 (31,288) -3% 13% -5% 0% -6% 100% -1% 24% 38% 0% 17% 5% 0% -42% 54% 0% -10% 0% 4% 6,000 6,000 $ $ 6,000 6,000 $ $ 6,002 6,002 $ $ 7,238 7,238 $ $ 17,333 17,333 $ $ (11,333) (11,333) -189% -189% Total Expenditures $ 2,059,490 $ 2,360,213 $ 2,501,408 $ 2,395,163 $ 2,521,941 $ 2,532,036 $ (30,628) -1% (1,636,079) $ 7,823,306 $ 498,566 -34% (1,457,332) $ $ $ 22,660 309 500 198,595 13,200 10,250 3,136 3,091 39,106 290,847 576,138 576,138 $ $ (1,316,137) $ $ $ 21,938 393 2,600 309 196,266 13,200 13,575 4,674 3,377 37,400 118 293,849 576,138 9,769,109 10,345,247 6,012 6,012 (1,946,351) $ $ $ 29,838 502 600 209,041 13,200 7,215 6,876 35,568 302,840 49,197 709,888 759,084 % $ Sub Total $ $ $ $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance Sub Total $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) 15,813 500 600 218,758 13,200 7,200 6,873 3,749 36,560 303,253 88,136 955,940 1,044,076 FY 2004-05 Adopted 24,575 $ 588 297 174,471 6,117 3,982 24,064 32,151 (385) 265,861 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ 113,139 113,139 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 22,660 309 500 198,595 13,200 10,250 3,136 3,091 39,106 290,847 $ 7,178 193 100 10,446 (3,035) 3,740 (3,091) (3,538) 11,993 (1,955,898) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 180 FINANCE Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CHIEF OFFICER DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST FTE 8.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title DEPUTY DIRECTOR FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST MANAGEMENT ANALYST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT PRGRM COORDINATION SPEC Total 604 FTE 2.00 4.00 10.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 42.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules General Government Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 237,254,651 $ 110,528,803 $ 128,461,664 $ 110,540,249 $ 158,948,267 $ 21,677,255 $ 156,491,532 $ 2,487,425 $ 257,853,500 $ 53,791,889 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ 77,976,362 $ $ 27,290,093 $ $ 14,376,283 $ $ 26,438,934 $ $ 89,391,467 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 425,759,816 266,292,006 195,001,805 185,417,891 401,036,856 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 135,372,021 $ $ 123,079,120 $ 110,540,249 $ 136,713,545 $ 21,525,193 $ 136,408,921 $ 2,317,222 $ 152,099,197 $ 37,040,833 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ 27,290,093 $ $ 14,376,283 $ $ 26,438,934 $ $ 87,920,113 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 135,372,021 260,909,462 172,615,021 165,165,077 277,060,143 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 93,905,060 $ 110,128,803 $ $ $ 19,074,804 $ 152,062 $ 19,982,611 $ 170,203 $ 105,604,303 $ 16,751,056 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ 77,976,362 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 282,010,225 19,226,866 20,152,814 122,355,359 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 7,977,570 $ 400,000 $ 5,382,544 $ $ 3,159,918 $ $ 100,000 $ $ 150,000 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,471,354 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 8,377,570 5,382,544 3,159,918 100,000 1,621,354 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. General Government FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures General Government Mandates Vs. Expenditures Non-Mandated 0.4% $450.0 Dollars in Millions $400.0 Other Fund Mandated 35.3% $350.0 $300.0 $250.0 $200.0 $150.0 $100.0 $50.0 General Fund Mandated 64.3% $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated 605 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 425.8 229.3 188.1 8.4 266.3 123.1 137.8 5.4 195.0 155.8 36.1 3.2 185.4 156.4 28.9 0.1 401.0 257.7 141.7 1.6 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules General Government (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Fund Type CAPITAL PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services $ 22,300,987 24,426,572 46,727,559 $ Supplies & Services 7,633,001 $ 33,008,452 214,906,156 25,666,150 281,213,759 $ Capital Outlay 81,758,466 $ 15,122,774 20,646,357 3,699,167 121,226,764 $ Total Expenditures 89,391,467 $ 48,131,226 257,853,500 53,791,889 449,168,082 $ Total Revenue 31,462,012 7,867,500 866,773,056 249,177,516 1,155,280,084 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 470 GENERAL GOVERNMENT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 601 PROPERTY TAXES 605 TAX PENALTIES & INTEREST 606 SALES TAXES 610 LICENSES AND PERMITS 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 621 PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 625 STATE SHARED SALES TAX 630 STATE SHARED VEHICLE LICENSE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 651 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS 652 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ 295,995,307 12,228,739 759,314 249,773 7,808,630 330,260,143 103,532,057 2,983,356 16,100 11,609,197 2,000,021 21,199 203,187,680 970,651,517 $ 330,104,970 8,000,000 100,839,314 375,000 249,772 7,285,857 335,557,376 109,031,008 2,065,000 15,678,002 4,230,000 50,000 138,574,432 $ 1,052,040,731 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 269,306 $ 79,056 (7) 50,731 46,419 (99,889) 123,390 469,006 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 21,632 $ 121 11,268 2,081,764 2,662,823 5,280 5,879,926 2,953,411 (1,841,385) 1,099,570 200,000 206,615 6,784,118 154,676,733 174,741,875 $ $ 327,357,171 8,000,000 100,839,314 375,000 249,772 7,285,857 335,557,376 109,031,008 2,065,000 15,678,002 3,348,572 50,000 140,112,884 $ 1,049,949,956 $ 408,571 11,527,680 17,848,452 (151,524) 233,613 29,866,792 $ 50,000 3,300,000 62,631,515 12,780 8,424,056 15,361,488 1,500,000 200,000 400,000 10,707,736 120,866,924 223,454,499 $ $ $ 327,357,171 10,719,338 105,263,795 1,056,442 249,772 7,268,008 351,066,532 112,435,814 2,075,878 6,158,712 7,659,186 143,297,341 $ 1,074,607,989 $ 408,571 3,882,942 3,240,110 (151,524) 291,100 7,671,199 $ 50,000 3,300,000 38,853,794 12,780 8,424,056 15,312,949 1,500,000 200,000 400,000 10,686,648 120,866,924 199,607,151 $ $ $ 79,680,440 3,322,484 1,333,333 38,196,079 122,532,336 $ FY 2004-05 Requested $ 339,882,099 10,857,480 108,033,895 895,000 249,773 6,929,684 360,644,076 113,595,373 2,070,000 6,885,622 4,080,000 14,750,000 156,918,139 $ 1,125,791,141 (5,984) $ 8,323 (20,303) 197,152 179,188 $ 8,157 3,071 2,582,216 5,349,817 10,905 884,733 8,144,952 15,314,120 1,506,166 201,117 203,880 10,223,503 121,179,206 165,611,843 $ $ $ 300,000 33,427,065 3,322,484 36,454,627 73,504,175 $ 5,798,216 160,559 5,958,775 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ 339,882,099 10,857,480 112,421,733 1,407,500 180,000 524,162 6,929,684 374,939,056 118,057,605 2,070,000 5,299,704 5,646,892 28,850,000 148,214,169 $ 1,155,280,084 $ $ $ $ 64,000 3,300,000 79,813,244 12,780 5,730,800 8,429,380 13,280,386 1,500,000 200,000 400,000 15,925,154 4,330,996 135,602,625 268,589,365 $ $ $ 105,618,516 4,304,151 27,505,785 137,428,452 $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance 5,948,216 40,618,784 160,559 46,727,559 $ $ 64,000 3,300,000 53,994,618 12,780 5,830,800 8,429,380 15,312,949 1,500,000 200,000 400,000 15,925,154 176,244,078 281,213,759 $ $ $ 85,083,912 4,524,151 31,618,701 121,226,764 $ (12,524,928) (2,857,480) (11,582,419) (1,032,500) (180,000) (274,390) 356,173 (39,381,680) (9,026,597) (5,000) 10,378,298 (2,298,320) 50,000 (28,850,000) (8,101,285) (105,330,128) % -4% -36% -11% -275% 0% -110% 5% -12% -8% 0% 0% 66% -69% 100% 0% -6% -10% 0% 0% 408,571 100% (2,065,274) -53% (37,378,674) -1154% (151,524) 100% 130,541 45% (39,056,360) -509% (14,000) (15,140,824) (5,830,800) (5,324) (5,238,506) (55,377,154) (81,606,608) -28% 0% 0% 0% -39% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% -49% 0% -46% -41% $ (5,403,472) (1,201,667) 1,333,333 6,577,378 1,305,572 0% -7% -36% 100% 17% 1% $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 1,629,972 14,321,050 3,153,237 666,666 46,382,577 66,153,501 $ $ 78,437,709 3,322,484 38,196,079 119,956,272 Total Expenditures $ 241,364,383 $ 373,277,563 $ 329,810,686 $ 239,295,207 $ 411,976,592 $ 449,168,082 $ (119,357,396) -36% $ 729,287,134 $ 678,763,168 $ 720,139,270 $ 835,312,782 $ 713,814,549 $ 706,112,002 $ 14,027,268 2% Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) 606 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Delivery System Organizational Chart County Admin Administrative istrative Officer Maricopa Integrated Health System Chief Executive Officer Ted Shaw Chief Operations Officer Chief Operations Officer Perioperative Services Ambulatory Services Pharmacy Services Nursing Services Psychiatric Services Laboratory Services Professional Services Facilities/Support Services Radiology Services Home Health/ Attendant Care Mission The Mission of the Maricopa Health Care Delivery System is to provide quality, customer oriented health care services, medical education and research for patients so they can improve their health status in a cost efficient manner. Goals • The Department’s Goals will be developed for the Health Care Delivery System after the Health Care Delivery System is transitioned to the new Health Care District. Issues • The Department’s Issue will be developed for the Health Care Delivery System after the Health Care Delivery System is transitioned to the new Health Care District. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM TOTAL FUNDS Program 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG $ TOTAL $ Personal Services 180,778,632 180,778,632 Supplies & Services $ 198,837,524 $ 198,837,524 607 $ $ Capital Outlay 11,904,274 11,904,274 Total Expenditures $ 391,520,430 $ 391,520,430 $ $ Total Revenue 398,999,272 398,999,272 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Delivery System (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: ADULT HEALTH Program Purpose: The purpose of the Adult Health Program is to provide medical services to patients (ages 19 and over) so they can receive treatment for illnesses and injuries in a customer oriented and cost effective manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent Adult Emergency Department expenses to revenue 23.98 32.05 29.21 26.87 Percent Adult inpatient expenses to revenue 47.89 37.81 40.52 39.06 Percent Adult outpatient expenses to revenue 92.21 67.43 48.75 48.69 Key Results: Program Name: BEHAVIORAL HEALTH Program Purpose: The purpose of the Behavioral Health Program is to provide behavioral health services to patients so they can receive treatment for behavioral disorders in a customer oriented and cost effective manner. Key Results: Percent Behavioral health inpatient expenses to revenue FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 41.06 34 31.63 23.12 Program Name: CHILDREN'S HEALTH Program Purpose: The purpose of the Children's Health Program is to provide medical services to patients (birth through age 18 years) so they can receive treatment for illnesses and injuries in a customer oriented and cost effective manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent Children's outpatient expense to revenue 65.99 69.61 15.74 21.02 Percent Children's emergency expenses to revenue 34.58 29.93 28.62 25.79 Percent Children's inpatient expenses to revenue 41.68 40.24 45.58 42.90 Key Results: 608 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Delivery System (Continued) Program Name: HEALTH CARE SUPPORT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Health Care Support Program is to provide support services to patients so they may be treated for illnesses and injuries in a customer oriented and cost effective manner. Key Results: Percent Clinical Support Services expenses to revenue FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 38.8 36.54 29.62 35.68 Program Name: MEDICAL EDUCATION Program Purpose: The purpose of the Medical Education program is to provide medical education to residents and Allied Health students so that they can complete their training while treating patients in a cost effective manner. Key Results: Percent of residents who complete residency training FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 84 90 99 99 Program Name: WOMEN'S SPECIALTY HEALTH Program Purpose: The purpose of the Women's Specialty Health Program is to provide medical de services to patients so they may be treated for maternity care and illnesses in a customer oriented and cost effective manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent Women's outpatient expenses to revenue 45.73 33.47 26.43 26.64 Percent Inpatient obstetrical expenses to revenue 39.83 36.82 34.20 32.22 Key Results: 609 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Delivery System (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ 276,054,803 $ $ 285,854,279 $ $ 334,485,456 $ $ 466,122,392 $ $ 474,412,270 Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 276,054,803 285,854,279 334,485,456 466,122,392 474,412,270 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ 276,054,803 $ $ 285,854,279 $ $ 334,485,456 $ $ 466,122,392 $ $ 474,412,270 Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 276,054,803 285,854,279 334,485,456 466,122,392 474,412,270 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Health Care Delivery System FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Health Care Delivery System Mandates Vs. Expenditures $500.0 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $450.0 $400.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $350.0 $300.0 $250.0 $200.0 $150.0 $100.0 $50.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 610 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 276.1 0.0 0.0 276.1 285.9 0.0 0.0 285.9 334.5 0.0 0.0 334.5 466.1 0.0 0.0 466.1 474.4 0.0 0.0 474.4 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Delivery System (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM Fund Type ELIMINATIONS ENTERPRISE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services $ 180,778,632 180,778,632 $ Supplies & Services (82,891,840) $ 281,729,364 198,837,524 $ Capital Outlay $ 11,904,274 11,904,274 $ Total Expenditures (82,891,840) $ 474,412,270 391,520,430 $ Total Revenue (82,891,840) 481,891,112 398,999,272 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 638 PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ 4,525,488 101,760,800 246,567,983 2,143,123 7,855,347 362,852,741 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 117,194,739 $ 9,201,853 26,807,186 3,253,020 (3) 156,456,795 $ 120,371,450 9,687,509 31,643,614 10,109,766 3,000 171,815,339 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 865 DEPRECIATION 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 5,633,858 44,482,406 51,446 546 67 71,356,249 19,515,329 2,482,053 5,273,250 29,566 6,049,598 471,800 729,097 257,148 4,159,342 1,113,782 14,090,897 2,496,879 178,193,313 $ 5,867,319 $ 45,729,077 43,894 1,302,218 33,075,323 9,037,355 2,284,985 5,515,952 37,390 6,329,942 637,109 1,131,451 (19,354,363) 4,334,361 2,215,630 79,449,163 177,636,806 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 276 1,627,937 1,628,213 $ Total Expenditures $ 336,278,321 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ 5,688,257 293,848,230 36,355 2,151,026 21,797,997 323,521,865 $ $ $ 3,615,000 5,687,887 20,000 3,786,141 13,109,028 $ (12,756,456) $ $ $ $ 4,812,361 105,963,100 246,567,983 2,143,123 5,579,022 365,065,589 $ 125,599,601 10,065,615 32,225,123 5,806,927 3,000 173,700,266 $ $ $ 5,858,056 $ 45,727,087 43,894 1,481,561 33,066,958 9,037,003 2,284,985 5,516,426 37,390 6,329,942 640,127 1,131,451 (19,354,363) 4,334,637 2,215,630 79,449,163 177,799,947 $ $ 3,615,000 5,852,788 20,000 3,786,141 13,273,929 362,561,173 $ 291,568 $ 5,347,067 105,963,104 279,442,772 6,769 4,813,745 15,374,170 410,947,627 $ 124,121,028 8,896,784 32,179,349 3,103,385 628 168,301,174 $ $ 138,990,968 $ 9,121,500 34,740,724 (2,074,560) 180,778,632 $ 138,990,968 $ 9,121,500 34,740,724 (2,074,560) 180,778,632 $ (13,391,367) 944,115 (2,515,601) 5,806,927 2,074,560 3,000 (7,078,366) -11% 9% -8% 100% 0% 100% -4% 5,597,724 $ 48,659,249 77,441 2,380 46,601,698 12,722,058 3,463,288 4,520,868 16,871 5,656,762 429,079 1,111,014 (20,467,232) 4,430,323 735,994 106,453,554 220,011,071 $ 7,241,990 $ 48,759,232 85,455 43,703,497 10,852,778 3,359,133 5,480,856 8,266 7,002,655 526,240 1,163,536 (23,209,715) 4,466,658 875,527 84,993,416 195,309,524 $ 7,241,990 $ 48,759,232 85,455 3,528,000 43,703,497 10,852,778 3,359,133 5,480,856 8,266 7,002,655 526,240 1,163,536 (23,209,715) 4,466,658 875,527 84,993,416 198,837,524 $ (1,383,934) (3,032,145) (41,561) (2,046,439) (10,636,539) (1,815,775) (1,074,148) 35,570 29,124 (672,713) 113,887 (32,085) 3,855,352 (132,021) 1,340,103 (5,544,253) (21,037,577) -24% -7% -95% -138% 0% -32% -20% -47% 1% 78% -11% 18% -3% -20% -3% 60% 0% -7% -12% -63% 4% 100% 89% 10% -7% $ 15,018,258 414,016 15,432,274 $ 364,774,142 $ 396,022,123 $ 291,447 $ 14,925,504 $ $ $ 5,177,368 87,174,800 287,215,044 11,424 4,046,466 15,374,170 398,999,272 $ % $ $ $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance -8% 18% -16% 0% -89% -176% -9% $ 5,177,368 87,174,800 287,215,044 11,424 4,046,466 15,374,171 398,999,273 FY 2004-05 Adopted (365,007) 18,788,300 (40,647,061) (11,424) (1,903,343) (9,795,148) (33,933,683) 6,200,000 1,509,878 7,709,878 611 $ FY 2004-05 Requested $ 5,891,000 5,599,258 414,016 11,904,274 $ $ (2,276,000) 253,530 20,000 3,372,125 1,369,655 391,520,430 $ 391,520,430 $ (26,746,288) 7,478,843 $ 7,478,842 $ (7,187,395) -2466% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Delivery System (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 900 HEALTH CARE DELIVERY SYSTEM Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CHAPLAIN COMPLIANCE OFFICER COMPUTER OPERATOR CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR COOK DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DENTAL ASSISTANT DENTIST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIETITIAN DISPATCHER DRIVER-MEDICAL ELECTRONIC TECHNICIAN EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FACILITIES SVCS OFCR SUPV FACILITIES SVCS OFFICER FINANCIAL MANAGER FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FOOD SERVICE SUPERVISOR FOOD SERVICE WORKER GENERAL LABORER GENERAL MAINTENANCE SUPV GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH HEALTHCARE ADMINISTRATOR HEALTHCARE DIRECTOR HEALTHCARE MANAGER HEALTHCARE REGISTRAR HEALTHCARE SPECIALIST HEALTHCARE SUPERVISOR HR GENERALIST HR SPECIALIST REHABILITATION THERAPIST RESIDENT RESPIRATORY TECHNICIAN RESPIRATORY THERAPIST SCRUB TECHNICIAN SOCIAL WORKER (BS) FTE 5.00 35.69 7.00 2.79 118.50 248.25 16.34 1.00 1.00 6.73 3.61 11.38 5.92 19.76 12.60 1.00 7.17 2.87 28.52 3.99 6.89 2.00 28.52 2.00 2.00 3.07 35.96 131.76 3.00 20.81 3.00 25.08 10.00 3.96 6.87 17.84 5.50 3.98 13.68 194.00 12.43 17.29 22.67 28.10 Market Range Title INFECTION CONTROL SPEC INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INTERIOR DESIGNER INTERPRETER LABORATORY SUPERVISOR LIBRARIAN LIBRARY SUPERVISOR LICENSED PRACTICAL NURSE MANAGEMENT ANALYST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT MANAGING PHYSICIAN MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC MEDIA ASSISTANT MEDICAL AIDE MEDICAL ASSISTANT MEDICAL RECORDS CODER MEDICAL RECORDS SUPV MEDICAL TECHNICIAN MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIST MEDICAL TRANSCRIPTIONIST NURSE NURSE - ADVANCED PRACTICE NURSING DIRECTOR NURSING MANAGER NURSING SUPERVISOR OPERATIONS MANAGER PC SPECIALIST PHARMACIST PHARMACY MANAGER PHARMACY TECHNICIAN PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM COORDINATOR - RN PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC SVC SUPERVISOR PURCHASING SPECIALIST PURCHASING SUPERVISOR RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGIST RADIOLOGY SUPERVISOR TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECH TRADES SPECIALIST TRADES SUPERVISOR TRAINING SPECIALIST UNDETERMINED UNIT SECRETARY 612 FTE 2.00 7.00 1.00 14.63 5.00 1.00 2.00 42.08 1.00 1.64 2.00 11.73 0.98 839.12 231.90 9.60 3.99 39.16 47.02 19.29 782.24 8.46 4.00 17.20 55.70 1.00 6.93 42.20 2.00 47.20 14.19 51.46 0.82 1.00 4.99 1.00 57.93 4.55 2.00 0.96 11.39 5.00 4.98 62.42 80.15 Total 3,691.44 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Deputy County Administrator Health Care Mandates Health Care Mandates Shawn Nau, Administrator Shawn Nau, Administrator Litigation/Arbitration Operations Claims Resolution Medical Review Records Mission The Mission of the Health Care Mandates Department is to provide indigent and inmate health-related risk management services for Maricopa County Administration so they can control and reduce health care financial liability. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • By January 1, 2007, reduce average annual litigation judgments/settlements rate by 7% over the 1998 rate. • By June 30, 2004, reduce average turn-around time of all Correctional Health Services claims processing to within 70 days of submission while ensuring no percentage increase in re-submissions caused by Health Care Mandates Department errors in processing. Issues • Unresolved legal issues and their impact on pending litigation and claims resolution matters may increase the volume of activity and will require the Health Care Mandates Department to continuously reassess and adapt its focus and procedures in order to ensure that the County’s financial exposure is minimized. • The significant financial implications associated with both past and future healthcare claims create a politically volatile environment that challenges the Health Care Mandates Department’s capacity to communicate, influence, and sustain effective working relationships with outside attorneys, the State legislature, media, and other State and County officials. • Increases in correctional health claims due to a growth in inmate population affects the Department’s ability to minimize financial obligations and support Maricopa County’s need to reduce expenditures. • A rapidly changing work environment challenges the Heath Care Mandates Department’s capacity to retain, develop and motivate its employees. 613 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES TOTAL FUNDS Program 39BH - INDIGENT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH 39DI - DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE MATCH 39HC - INDIGENT HEALTH CARE 39LM - PRE-AHCCCS LIABILITY MGMT 39LT - INDIGENT LONG-TERM CARE 60ME - MEDICAL EDUCATION 80TD - TRIAL DELIVERY 861D - INFECTIOUS DISEASE CONTROL 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 1,264,685 607,690 TOTAL $ 1,872,375 $ Supplies & Services $ 35,109,904 82,972,500 68,834,102 255,411 125,790,463 3,547,900 270,000 500,000 1,886,969 $ 319,167,249 Capital Outlay 36,878 53,483 $ 90,361 $ Total Expenditures $ 35,109,904 82,972,500 68,870,980 1,520,096 125,790,463 3,547,900 270,000 500,000 2,548,142 $ 321,129,985 Total Revenue 82,972,500 52,848 $ 83,025,348 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ANCILLARY FUND ADMINISTRATION Program Purpose: The purpose of the Ancillary Fund Administration Program is to authorize payment for Maricopa County Administration of funds allocated for specialized inmate and/or indigent health services and support related litigation efforts so they can ensure accurate and proper distribution of funds. Key Results: Percent of full billed charges paid in ancillary fund claims processing activity FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 19.59 25.1 24.59 25 Program Name: PRE-AHCCCS LIABILITY MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Pre-AHCCCS Liability Management Program is to provide claims processing, disputed claims resolution and litigation support for Maricopa County Administration so they can manage and limit their pre-AHCCCS financial liability. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of full billed charges paid in claims resolution activity N/A 1.2 3.33 5 Percent of full billed charges paid in litigation activity N/A N/A 6.21 5 Key Results: 614 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) Program Name: STATE WITHHOLDINGS & CONTRACT MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the State Withholdings and Contract Management Program is to provide financial management and oversight for County Administration of funds that are paid to, or withheld by, the State and/or the Maricopa Integrated Health System so they can ensure accurate and proper distribution of funds to indigent health programs. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of state withholdings authorized 100 100 100 100 Percent increase in payments authorized over previous fiscal year in state mental health programs activity 17.1 5 5 5 Key Results: 615 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 211,706,179 $ 1,500,000 $ 259,434,988 $ 2,548,621 $ 291,157,330 $ 4,325,630 $ 321,499,208 $ 10,474,164 $ 321,129,985 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 213,206,179 261,983,609 295,482,960 331,973,372 321,129,985 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 209,162,332 $ 1,500,000 $ 233,449,714 $ 2,548,621 $ 273,543,209 $ 4,325,630 $ 301,936,423 $ 10,474,164 $ 317,071,747 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 210,662,332 235,998,335 277,868,839 312,410,587 317,071,747 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,916,498 $ $ 5,199,976 $ $ 3,787,358 $ $ 5,736,022 $ $ 4,058,238 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,916,498 5,199,976 3,787,358 5,736,022 4,058,238 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 627,348 $ $ 20,785,298 $ $ 13,826,763 $ $ 13,826,763 $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 627,348 20,785,298 13,826,763 13,826,763 - NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Health Care Mandates FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Health Care Mandates Mandates Vs. Expenditures $350.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $300.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $250.0 $200.0 $150.0 $100.0 $50.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 616 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 213.20 211.10 1.50 0.60 262.00 238.60 2.50 20.80 295.50 277.30 4.30 13.80 332.00 307.70 10.50 13.80 321.10 321.10 0.00 0.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE AHCCCS Acute Care Contribution AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-297 Tax levy for Medical Care; System Fund HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Before 1981, the State of Arizona did not participate in the Federal Medicaid program. The State Legislature created the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS), a Medicaid program which would bring Federal dollars to the State, in response to escalating costs for indigent health care. The State agency, AHCCCS, administers the program, which is organized as a managed care, capitated system. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County is required to contribute financial support to the State AHCCCS program to satisfy the Federal Medicaid matching requirement. The level of funding is set by the State Legislature. The total amount for the County contribution for the Acute Care "State match" is established in the State Health Omnibus Bill each year as part of budget negotiations. AHCCCS Acute Care Contribution FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 38,659,236 $ 42,959,692 $ 45,547,566 $ 45,669,938 $ 45,741,085 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 38,659,236 42,959,692 45,547,566 45,669,938 45,741,085 TITLE Arizona Long Term Care System Contribution AUTHORITY A.R.S. §11-297 Tax Levy for Medical Care; System Fund HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Arizona Long term Care System (ALTCS) is the long-term care program of the State of Arizona's Medicaid program, which began in 1989 and operates as a capitated, managed care system. The State agency, AHCCCS, administers the ALTCS program. The Arizona counties are responsible for paying nearly the entire Federal match requirement. County contributions are set annually by the State Legislature. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County is required to contribute financial support to the State long-term care program, as set forth by the State Legislature, based on the Federal match required for the program. Arizona Long Term Care System Contribution (ALTCS) FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 91,784,692 $ 101,811,878 $ 112,950,818 $ 110,407,460 $ 125,610,000 $ - 617 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 91,784,692 101,811,878 112,950,818 110,407,460 125,610,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) TITLE General Mental Health AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-0291.01 Eligibility standards for indigent health services HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Prior to the creation of AHCCCS, counties were providing behavioral health services to indigents who did not meet the criteria of being seriously mentally ill. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Counties are required by State law to maintain the same level of behavioral health services for indigents that were in place prior to the 1981 inception of the AHCCCS program. Maricopa County includes general mental services for the non-SMI population in its Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS). General Mental Health FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 4,856,580 $ 4,451,863 $ 4,451,863 $ 4,856,576 $ 5,099,404 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 4,856,580 4,451,863 4,451,863 4,856,576 5,099,404 TITLE Indigent Seriously Mentally Ill Behavioral Health Services AUTHORITY 1989 Arizona Supreme Court Ruling, Arnold v. Sarn HISTORY/ BACKGROUND In 1989, in the Arizona Supreme Court case Arnold v. Sarn, the Court granted class action status to indigent seriously mentally ill (SMI) persons and ruled that both the state and Maricopa County had failed to provide adequate services and funding for Maricopa County's SMI population. As part of the ruling Maricopa County was made responsible to pay for court monitoring. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County must contribute funding to Arizona Department of Health Services via an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). The funding formula for this agreement is based on 1994 service related expenditures, adjusted annually based on index tied to various factors within the Consumer Price Index. Indigent Seriously Mentally Ill Behavioral Health Services FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 24,366,689 $ 25,965,737 $ 25,965,737 $ 28,060,186 $ 30,010,500 $ - 618 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 24,366,689 25,965,737 25,965,737 28,060,186 30,010,500 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) TITLE Long Term Care Residual Population AUTHORITY A.R.S. 11-293 County Long Term Care Services; A.R.S. § 11-293.01 County Adult Foster Care Program HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Before the inception of ALTCS in 1989, the County provided long term care services to the elderly indigent population. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The County has residual responsibility to provide long term care services to clients who met County indigent standards at the time the ALTCS program, with it's eligibility standards, was adopted, but who did not meet ALTCS standards. Long Term Care Residual Population FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 388,738 $ 231,481 $ 128,967 $ 222,514 $ 180,463 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 388,738 231,481 128,967 222,514 180,463 TITLE Arnold v. Sarn IGA/Court Order Litigation Costs AUTHORITY 1989 Arizona Supreme Court Ruling, Arnold v. Sarn HISTORY/ BACKGROUND In 1989, in the Arizona Court case Arnold v. Sarn, the Court granted class action status to indigent seriously mentally ill (SMI) persons and ruled that both the State and County had failed to provide adequate services and funding for Maricopa County’s SMI population. The Court ordered the establishment of a Court Monitor to oversee compliance with the Court Order. These costs are shared with the State of Arizona. In addition, the Court ordered the state and county defendants to share the legal costs of the Plaintiff’s counsel. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County is responsible for paying one-fourth of the Plaintiff’s fees and onethird of the Court Monitor’s budget. In addition, the County pays outside counsel legal fees associated with the Arnold v. Sarn defense. Arnold v. Sarn IGA Court Order Litigation Costs FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 2,013 $ 6,589 $ 639 $ 11,500 $ 10,000 $ - 619 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,013 6,589 639 11,500 10,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) TITLE Pre-AHCCCS Hospital Settlements AUTHORITY Arizona Status §11-297, uncodified sections of SB 1577. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Prior to October 1, 2001, Arizona Counties were responsible for the medical care of indigents. Although the creation of AHCCCS diverted much of that responsibility, the County had residual responsibility for emergent services to indigents during the window between time such services begin until 48-hours prior to the time AHCCCS is notified of eligibility. Payment claims for such services were submitted to the Department of Medical Eligibility. For a variety of reasons, many claims were denied and hospitals file lawsuits against the County contesting these denial decisions. In past years, settlements have been reached between the County and hospitals to resolve these disputes. MANDATE DESCRIPTION AHCCCS has assumed responsibility for emergent services for eligible enrollees after October 1, 2001. . Services rendered before this date are the subject of “tail” litigation. Pre-AHCCCS Hospital Settlements FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 12,580,238 $ 4,118,468 $ 1,229,490 $ 2,614,502 $ 23,129,895 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 12,580,238 4,118,468 1,229,490 2,614,502 23,129,895 TITLE Mental Health Orders; Mental Health Testimony AUTHORITY ARS 36-545.04; Maricopa County/ ADHS IGA, paragraph 2.2.1 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Under the authority of the Arizona Revised Statutes and the Phoenix City Charter, the City of Phoenix may charge Maricopa County for the cost of service to process mental health detention orders and related expenses. In addition, as a result of the Arnold v. Sarn Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the Arizona Department of Health Services (Department) and Maricopa County, the County delegated to the Department responsibility for many behavioral health activities related to the involuntary commitment process. However, per the IGA, “To the extent obligated by law, the County shall retain financial responsibility for Court proceeding expenses for commitment actions brought under Title 36, including, but not limited to, the costs of independent evaluators…” Independent evaluators provide mental health testimony in support of petitions for involuntary commitments. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County must pay for the cost of mental health pickup orders and the cost of mental health testimony independent evaluators. Mental Health Orders; Mental Health Testimony FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 221,049 $ 216,435 $ 244,250 $ 277,520 $ 270,000 $ - 620 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 221,049 216,435 244,250 277,520 270,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) TITLE Psychiatric Teaching Program AUTHORITY 1989 Arizona Supreme Court Ruling, Arnold v. Sarn; Court Order; Monitor’s decision re: mediation, August 31, 1993. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND In 1989, in the Arizona Court case Arnold v. Sarn, the Court granted class action status to indigent seriously mentally ill (SMI) persons and ruled that both the State and County had failed to provide adequate services and funding for Maricopa County’s SMI population. In the 1993 Monitor’s decision re: mediation, the Court Monitor determined “…that Maricopa shall continue to provide at least the same level of service to class members through the residency program as it provided in FY 1992-1993…” MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County must continue to fund the psychiatric residency program at the same level as provided in FY 1992-1993. Psychiatric Teaching Program FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 3,547,898 $ 3,547,899 $ 3,547,899 $ 3,547,900 $ 3,547,900 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,547,898 3,547,899 3,547,899 3,547,900 3,547,900 TITLE Public Health TB Hospitalization AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-302 provides that Counties shall provide for the care of indigent individuals with tuberculosis. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Based on need and capacity in other facilities, the Public Health Department may refer TB patients to Maricopa Medical Center for care under quarantine. The Health Care Mandates Department reviews and pays for MMC claims under these circumstances. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County must continue to provide facilities to house indigent TB patients where active medical care or monitoring is needed. Public Health TB Hospitalization FY 2000-01 Actuals* FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget * Public Health incurred expenses $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue $ 405,840 $ 258,329 $ 78,679 $ 500,000 $ - 621 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - Total $ $ $ $ $ 405,840 258,329 78,679 500,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) TITLE Correctional Health Claims AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-251(8) HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Pursuant to A.R.S. § 11-251(8), Counties are authorized to provide for Jails. Where inmates in County jails need emergency medical attention or in-patient care, the County must provide those services. Maricopa Medical Center (MMC) currently provides such services. The Health Care Mandates Department, in conjunction with the Correctional Health Department, reviews the claims and determines the appropriate amount of payment to MMC. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County must continue to provide medical services to detainees in County jails. Where in-patient services are necessary, MMC provide the most cost-effective source of medical services to the County. Correctional Health Claims FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals ‡ FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget ‡ Correctional Health incurred expenses $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 1,500,000 $ 2,548,621 $ 4,325,630 $ 10,474,164 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,500,000 2,548,621 4,325,630 10,474,164 - TITLE Competency Restoration AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 13-4512; A.R.Crim.P 10 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND State law requires that a criminal defendant must have the mental capacity to provide meaningful assistance to his/her defense counsel before standing trial. If it is determined by the Court that the Defendant does not have the mental capacity to stand trial, he/she must be “restored to competency” before the trial can be commenced. Previously, session law required that Maricopa County pay 86% of the cost of competency restoration for those defendants that are treated at the Arizona State Hospital following a referral from Superior Court. However, starting in FY 04, the County is required to pay 100% of these costs. A.R.S. § 13-4512 also requires that Maricopa County must pay an additional per diem in the event that an individual is not transported back to the County jail within certain perimeters. Competency Restoration General Fund Special Revenue FY 2000-01 Actuals* $ $ FY 2001-02 Actuals $ 3,838,332 $ FY 2002-03 Actuals $ 4,972,450 $ FY 2003-04 Actuals $ 7,074,648 $ ‡ FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ * Contract Counsel incurred some expenses ‡ Correctional Health incurred expenses TITLE Disproportionate Share FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,838,332 4,972,450 7,074,648 - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 32,755,200 45,895,500 74,245,201 99,115,000 82,972,500 Disproportionate Share $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 32,755,200 $ 45,895,500 $ 74,245,201 $ 99,115,000 $ 82,972,500 $ - 622 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Health Care Mandates (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS Personal Services 1,872,375 $ 1,872,375 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 319,167,249 $ 319,167,249 $ Capital Outlay 90,361 $ 90,361 $ Total Expenditures 321,129,985 $ 321,129,985 $ Total Revenue 83,025,348 83,025,348 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 638 PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ 49,448 119,489 74,245,200 74,414,137 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ $ $ $ 52,848 101,760,800 101,813,648 1,297,080 $ 12,916 5,954 343,659 961 (64,492) 90,177 1,686,254 $ 1,149,214 260,271 1,409,485 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 70,189 12 23,515 1,245,620 586,434 2,026,280 8,565 9,428 264,446,778 5,093 3,338 5,880 69,143 17,374,663 285,874,938 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 993 29,939 30,932 $ Total Expenditures $ 287,592,124 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ 67,048 19,174,844 5,720,000 1,949,407 10,332 17,441 291,285,190 188,858 1,900 4,000 84,774 16,053,959 334,557,753 $ 28,716 28,716 $ $ $ 335,995,954 $ (213,177,987) $ 52,848 101,760,800 101,813,648 $ $ $ 35,858 2,951 101,760,800 101,799,609 1,208,497 $ 3,000 2,909 303,958 5,646 (59,195) 1,464,815 $ 1,144,560 2,557 6,714 278,208 1,432,039 $ 64,360 19,024,205 5,720,000 1,949,407 10,332 17,441 291,477,602 188,858 1,900 4,000 84,774 16,053,959 334,596,838 $ 28,716 28,716 $ $ $ 336,090,369 $ (234,182,306) $ FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 56,687 19 7,655,515 5,745,638 2,828,427 9,244 15,038 291,283,531 160,895 2,652 4,111 100,501 16,053,959 323,916,217 $ 36,052 36,052 $ $ $ 325,384,308 $ (234,276,721) $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 52,848 101,760,800 101,813,648 $ 1,264,370 267,654 32,000 396,644 1,960,668 $ $ $ 64,277 1,000 18,223,748 5,720,000 1,949,407 10,332 17,441 310,231,229 189,712 1,900 4,000 84,774 16,053,957 352,551,777 $ 90,361 90,361 $ $ $ 354,602,806 $ (223,584,699) $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance 52,848 82,972,500 83,025,348 $ 1,216,680 240,889 32,000 382,806 1,872,375 $ $ $ 18,788,300 18,788,300 % 0% 0% 18% 18% (8,183) -1% (237,889) -7930% (29,091) -1000% (78,848) -26% 5,646 100% (59,195) 100% 0% (407,560) -28% 64,277 1,000 18,103,017 5,720,000 1,949,407 10,332 17,441 289,473,489 189,712 1,900 4,000 84,774 3,547,900 319,167,249 $ 90,361 90,361 $ $ $ 321,129,985 $ 14,960,384 4% (238,104,637) $ 3,827,916 -2% $ (252,789,158) $ $ $ 83 (1,000) 921,188 2,004,113 (854) 12,506,059 15,429,589 (61,645) (61,645) 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 78% 5% 0% -215% -215% Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 390 HEALTH CARE MANDATES Market Range Title ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST FTE 2.00 14.00 7.00 1.00 Market Range Title DIRECTOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST HR SPECIALIST PROGRAM COORDINATOR - RN PROJECT MANAGER Total 623 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 30.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Resources Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Deputy County Administrator Human Resources Human Resources Gwynn Simpson, Director Gwynn Simpson, Director Payroll Records Administration Employee Relations/Staff Development Recruiting & Selection Information Services Mission The Mission of Human Resources is to provide strategic direction, state-of-the-art infrastructure support, customer service excellence, and a healthy workplace environment for County Departments, Employees and the Residents we service. Vision To become an “Employer of Choice,” we will work and create cost efficient services for the residents of Maricopa County. Human Resources will re-engineer its business practices and policies to help Maricopa County to become an “Employer of Choice.” Goals • By September 2006, Human Resources will develop a written succession plan for managers and directors that identify the leadership roles and associated skills necessary for upward mobility in County departments. • By May 2006, Human Resources will develop metrics to monitor the implementation of Maricopa County’s diversity plan. • By December 2006, Human Resources will complete a review and revision of all Human Resources policies to ensure legal compliance and compatibility with technology needs. • By January 2006, Human Resources will require 100% of County employees to have either direct deposit or utilize a pay card to eliminate the use of live checks. • By September 2006, Human Resources will achieve a rating of 80% satisfaction level or higher from their customers. • By July 2006, Human Resources will develop and implement a PeopleSoft training plan for all decentralized Human Resources Liaisons, Supervisors and Managers to update them on PeopleSoft system capability. • By July 2007, Human Resources will eliminate hard copy personnel files and tuition reimbursement application forms. 624 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Resources (Continued) Issues • The decentralization of the Human Resources system and the impact of PeopleSoft and other technologies creates inconsistent business practices and processes that will require Human Resources to re-examination the merit rules, policies/procedures and the County’s administrative infrastructure. • The fast paced business environment has strained relationships with our internal and external customers resulting in perceptions of poor customer service. • The perception by the community that Maricopa County’s leadership does not reflect the diversity of the public it serves and will require Human Resources to work hard to change this belief. • Maricopa County’s workforce is aging and is being impacted by demographic and economic changes that will require Human Resources to develop creative ways in which to recruit, retain, reward and recognize a qualified workforce. • As technology and work processes change, employee development, recruiting and retention strategies will need to be developed and implemented by Human Resources to ensure that Maricopa County has a diverse and qualified workforce. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 310 HUMAN RESOURCES TOTAL FUNDS Program 31ED - EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT 31ES - EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 31PR - PAYROLL & RECORDS MANAGEMENT 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 599,588 762,083 758,954 530,230 TOTAL $ 2,650,855 $ Supplies & Services $ 45,246 41,945 34,016 74,900 $ 196,107 Capital Outlay 4,397 15,365 6,091 $ 25,853 $ Total Expenditures $ 649,231 804,028 808,335 611,221 $ 2,872,815 Total Revenue 31,848 $ 31,848 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Employee Development program is to provide organizational development, services, competency-based training and strategic intervention for all County departments so there is a productive and harmonious workplace. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of grievances resolved through internal employee relations strategic interventions. N/A N/A 100 45 Percent of employees who indicated that the Edge and Leadership Schools were helpful to their career growth. N/A N/A 99 100 Key Results: 625 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Resources (Continued) Program Name: EMPLOYMENT SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Employment Services program is to provide recruitment and personnel processing services for County departments so they can interview and hire a diverse workforce. Key Results: Percent of new hires who complete initial probation FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A N/A 74 75 Program Name: PAYROLL AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Payroll and Records Management Program is to provide centralized payroll and records management services to County departments and employees so that they can be accurately paid. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of paychecks accurately processed N/A N/A 98.99 99.25 Percent of active personnel records accurately maintained N/A N/A 100 100 Key Results: 626 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Resources (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 4,429,680 $ $ 4,416,912 $ $ 3,568,317 $ $ 2,696,509 $ $ 2,872,815 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 2,965,867 $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 7,395,547 4,416,912 3,568,317 2,696,509 2,872,815 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 4,429,680 $ $ 4,416,912 $ $ 3,568,317 $ $ 2,696,509 $ $ 2,872,815 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 2,965,867 $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 7,395,547 4,416,912 3,568,317 2,696,509 2,872,815 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Human Resources FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Human Resources Mandates Vs. Expenditures $8.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $7.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $6.0 $5.0 $4.0 $3.0 $2.0 $1.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 627 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 7.4 4.4 3.0 0.0 4.4 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 0.0 0.0 2.7 2.7 0.0 0.0 2.9 2.9 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Resources (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 310 HUMAN RESOURCES Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS Personal Services 2,650,855 $ 2,650,855 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 196,107 $ 196,107 $ Capital Outlay 25,853 $ 25,853 $ Total Expenditures 2,872,815 $ 2,872,815 $ Total Revenue 31,848 31,848 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 310 HUMAN RESOURCES ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 33,476 53,924 87,400 $ $ 2,401,624 $ 35,039 2,127 572,016 9,788 (412) 3,020,181 $ 80,130 513 140 36,293 357,604 12,333 10,475 29,792 5,842 14,630 547,751 3,567,932 $ $ $ $ $ (3,480,532) $ 24,211 1,300 25,511 $ $ 1,979,475 $ 107,737 8,845 467,345 16,369 (46,226) 2,533,545 $ 81,024 42,000 2,307 27,776 4,430 28,623 8,113 14,016 208,289 2,741,834 $ $ 24,211 1,300 25,511 2,083,239 $ 107,737 5,492 553,460 71,191 (133,005) 2,688,114 $ 67,191 3,001 40,000 10,000 27,776 4,330 35,204 8,000 12,787 208,289 $ $ $ (2,716,323) $ $ $ 2,896,403 $ $ $ $ $ (2,870,892) $ 26,640 5,209 31,849 FY 2004-05 Requested $ 24,756 755 25,511 1,958,088 $ 47,397 10,852 533,390 64,117 (268,487) 2,345,358 $ 2,024,086 90,243 5,500 595,317 2,715,146 $ $ $ 57,663 1,100 40,000 23,060 23,740 5,479 33,296 9,520 12,212 206,070 $ $ $ 46,700 3,317 39,248 6,991 27,776 9,000 35,204 12,650 10,200 191,086 2,536,443 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted $ (2,504,594) $ $ $ 26,640 5,208 31,848 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % (2,429) (3,908) (6,337) -10% -301% -25% 93,141 36,137 (8) (30,197) 71,191 (133,005) 37,259 4% 34% 0% -5% 100% 100% 1% 30% 0% 100% 0% -131% 15% -75% 5% -19% 4% 6% $ 1,990,098 71,600 5,500 583,657 2,650,855 $ $ $ 46,700 40,000 23,060 23,740 7,579 33,296 9,520 12,212 196,107 $ 20,491 3,001 (13,060) 4,036 (3,249) 1,908 (1,520) 575 12,182 5,628 5,628 $ $ 25,853 25,853 $ $ (25,853) (25,853) 0% 0% 2,926,844 $ 2,872,815 $ 23,588 1% (29,925) 1% $ (2,901,333) $ $ (2,840,967) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 310 HUMAN RESOURCES Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR FTE 12.00 1.00 12.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST HR GENERALIST HR MANAGER HR SUPERVISOR PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC SVC SUPERVISOR TECHNOLOGY ANALYST Total 628 FTE 1.00 12.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 51.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Services Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Health Services Officer Human Services Human Services Annette Stein, Director Annette Stein, Director General Services Division Education Division Community Services/Special Transportation Services Division Workforce Development Division Mission The Mission of the Human Services (HSD) Department is to provide education, employment and basic needs services for individuals, children and families, so that they have opportunities to enhance their economic, social and physical well-being. Vision All Maricopa County residents will have opportunities to achieve economic self-sufficiency and enjoy a high quality of life. Goals • By June 2006, HSD will meet or exceed all contract performance standards established by all external funding agencies. Issues • The continual responsibility placed on local government to fund and design human services programs will put Human Services in direct competition with faith-based and for-profit organizations for available funds. • The demand for the services provided by the Human Services is increasing due to the population growth and fluctuation in the economy, however Human Services has a limited amount of resources to increase the capacity of services. • A shrinking supply of affordable housing, coupled with fewer entry level jobs that provide livable wages and full benefits, will result in greater demand for basic needs services provided by Human Services. • The trend in education reform to mandate the assessment of children's progress towards specific learning outcomes as evidence of program effectiveness, will increase pressures to expand Head Start to a fullday/year-round program, which will limit the number of families served by the department. • The number of individuals seeking employment or re-employment has significantly increased due to the slowing economy, making it difficult for Human Services to provide workforce development services to all persons in need of employment. • The increasing cost of public transportation throughout Maricopa County will result in greater public demand for the Department's limited transportation assistance service provided by Human Services. 629 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Services (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 220 HUMAN SERVICES TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 22CS - COMMUNITY SERVICES $ 464,687 22ED - EDUCATION 8,665,261 22TS - SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICE 2,540,995 22WD - WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT 2,939,394 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 2,943,148 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM TOTAL $ 17,553,485 Supplies & Services $ 5,105,964 10,237,017 1,776,005 3,285,439 1,239,120 $ 21,643,545 Capital Outlay 552,590 4,623 10,637 $ 567,850 $ Total Expenditures $ 5,570,651 18,902,278 4,869,590 6,229,456 4,192,905 $ 39,764,880 Total Revenue 5,137,651 17,915,612 4,533,244 6,886,919 3,075,935 428,487 $ 37,977,848 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: COMMUNITY SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Community Services Program is to provide an array of basic needs services for Maricopa County low-income individuals and families, so that they avoid becoming homeless and can maintain or achieve economic self-sufficiency. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of households contacted provided eviction prevention rent/mortgage assistance who do not become homeless based on 30-day follow-up. N/A 95 93 95 Percent of low-income home weatherization program recipients who rate services as exceptional. 93 99 44 50 Percent of low-income households engaged in Case Management 7+ months who moved up 3 or more levels in at least 5 categories of self-sufficiency matrix. N/A 34 12 30 Key Results: 630 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Services (Continued) Program Name: EDUCATION Program Purpose: The purpose of the Education Program is to provide educational opportunities for children (ages 0-5) and their families, so that they will be successful in school and move towards self-sufficiency. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of 4-year-old children enrolled > 120 calendar days who demonstrate a minimum of 20 percent increase on the Developmental Assessment by the end of the school year. 88.12 91 76 76 Percent of families enrolled > 120 days that are linked with a medical home. N/A 92.73 98 98 Percent of families enrolled > 120 days who sought social services and received needed services. N/A 81.07 75 75 Percent of families who were satisfied with the social services received. N/A 94.05 94 94 Key Results: Program Name: SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Special Transportation Services Program is to provide transportation options for the most transit-dependent populations in Maricopa County, so that a lack of transportation is not a barrier to enhancing their economic and social well-being. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of customer satisfaction. 90 87 96 85 Percent of clients provided employment transportation that remains employed for at least 90 days. 68 86.53 90 75 Key Results: Program Name: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Workforce Development Program is to provide qualified individuals and other resources to employers to meet their workforce needs. Key Results: Percent Customer (job seeker) satisfaction rate Percent of employer satisfaction. Percent skill attainment for youth 14 – 18. 631 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 72 90 80 80 88.4 88 89 89 77 89 71 71 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Services (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,310,530 $ 25,106,677 $ 1,307,798 $ 29,860,848 $ 1,267,078 $ 33,505,461 $ 945,707 $ 35,891,855 $ 1,787,032 $ 37,977,848 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 26,417,207 31,168,647 34,772,539 36,837,562 39,764,880 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,310,530 $ 25,106,677 $ 1,307,798 $ 29,860,848 $ 1,267,078 $ 33,505,461 $ 945,707 $ 35,891,855 $ 1,787,032 $ 37,977,848 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 26,417,207 31,168,647 34,772,539 36,837,562 39,764,880 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Human Services FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Human Services Mandates Vs. Expenditures $40.0 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $35.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $30.0 $25.0 $20.0 $15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 632 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 26.4 0.0 0.0 26.4 31.2 0.0 0.0 31.2 34.8 0.0 0.0 34.8 36.8 0.0 0.0 36.8 39.8 0.0 0.0 39.8 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Services (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 220 HUMAN SERVICES Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 872,032 $ 16,681,453 17,553,485 $ Supplies & Services 915,000 $ 20,728,545 21,643,545 $ Capital Outlay $ 567,850 567,850 $ Total Expenditures 1,787,032 $ 37,977,848 39,764,880 $ Total Revenue 37,977,848 37,977,848 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 220 HUMAN SERVICES ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ 32,328,304 27,175 65,233 32,420,712 $ $ 35,032,337 35,032,337 $ $ 35,032,337 35,032,337 $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 9,558,316 $ 129,096 5,777 2,494,755 48,528 (73,107) 72,421 12,235,786 $ 10,190,356 $ 170,000 6,000 3,168,887 45,000 (216,412) 219,412 13,583,243 $ 11,960,916 170,000 6,000 4,031,191 45,000 228,405 16,441,512 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 1,911,069 28,472 11,378 216,295 4,882 67,119 17,394,335 825,872 75,473 976,945 342,755 54,973 70,220 42,695 22,022,484 2,152,149 25,000 66,500 202,300 7,200 50,000 16,301,180 825,105 87,200 922,538 399,000 20,300 26,500 62,800 319,802 21,467,574 1,753,438 25,000 66,500 202,300 7,200 50,000 12,933,203 1,533,105 87,200 922,538 369,000 20,300 26,500 62,800 358,254 18,417,338 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE 955 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION OUT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ 137,014 484,541 621,554 $ Total Expenditures $ 34,879,825 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 20,000 440,500 660,000 1,120,500 $ 36,171,317 (2,459,112) $ $ $ $ $ 20,000 440,500 660,000 1,120,500 $ 35,979,350 (1,138,980) $ $ FY 2004-05 Adopted $ 39,500,000 39,500,000 10,967,680 $ 126,125 11,645 3,537,605 183,003 (1,355,649) 1,467,754 14,938,163 $ 11,221,218 240,000 6,500 4,141,644 45,000 228,405 15,882,767 $ 1,845,655 12,498 50,147 115,262 8,228 82,615 15,074,905 1,112,860 72,881 922,538 254,005 35,534 60,695 69,019 358,254 20,075,095 2,363,652 25,000 64,500 248,120 11,200 204,500 18,185,696 761,555 87,200 866,602 369,000 20,300 26,500 62,800 716,315 24,012,940 $ $ $ $ $ 9,998 405,426 550,862 966,285 $ 35,979,543 (947,013) $ 633 34,973,073 23,293 35,970 35,032,337 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ $ $ $ 550,000 550,000 $ 40,445,707 $ (947,206) $ $ (945,707) $ 37,737,848 240,000 37,977,848 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ (2,705,511) (240,000) (2,945,511) -8% 0% 0% -8% 12,863,556 $ 240,000 6,500 4,345,479 97,949 (2,169,118) 2,169,119 17,553,485 $ (902,640) (70,000) (500) (314,288) (52,949) 2,169,118 (1,940,714) (1,111,973) -8% -41% -8% -8% -118% 0% -850% -7% 2,566,872 $ 25,000 64,500 157,520 (231,626) 231,626 11,200 204,500 12,550,747 863,563 93,298 2,912,000 966,602 340,500 53,720 26,500 62,800 (516,217) 516,217 744,223 21,643,545 $ (813,434) 2,000 44,780 231,626 (231,626) (4,000) (154,500) 382,456 669,542 (6,098) (2,912,000) (44,064) 28,500 (33,420) 516,217 (516,217) (385,969) (3,226,207) -46% 0% 3% 22% 0% 0% -56% -309% 3% 44% -7% 0% -5% 8% -165% 0% 0% 0% 0% -108% -18% $ 550,000 17,850 (17,850) 17,850 567,850 $ 20,000 440,500 110,000 (17,850) 17,850 (17,850) 552,650 100% 100% 17% 0% 0% 0% 49% (3,785,530) -11% 39,764,880 $ % $ (1,787,032) $ 840,019 -89% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Human Services (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 220 HUMAN SERVICES Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV COMMUNITY SVCS SPECIALIST CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIETITIAN DIRECTOR DISPATCHER EDUCATOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL MANAGER FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FTE 2.00 4.00 9.00 76.00 1.00 6.00 31.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 6.00 110.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL LABORER GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR GENERALIST HR SPECIALIST HR SUPERVISOR INFO CENTER MANAGER MANAGEMENT ANALYST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT NURSE PC SPECIALIST PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM MANAGER PROGRAM SUPERVISOR PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST Total 634 FTE 4.00 52.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 70.00 5.00 18.00 29.00 3.00 9.00 461.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Integrated Criminal Justice Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Director Information System Director Don Thomas Don Thomas Agency Representation/ Process Analysis Network Integration/ Network Security App. Development/ Data Integration ITSM/ System Maintenance Mission The Mission of the Integrated Criminal Justice Information System (ICJIS) is to provide automated systems, information technology expertise, and information pathways to justice and law enforcement agencies, and to develop and implement systems that promote the sharing of criminal justice information that is timely, secure, reliable, and comprehensive, so that criminal justice agencies may more efficiently enhance public safety, improve service to the community, and make quality justice and law enforcement decisions. Vision Integration will allow enhanced productivity, efficiency, and communication, and will eliminate redundancy. As a result, ICJIS will have a positive impact on improved public safety by making available to criminal justice stakeholders timely, accurate, and complete information concerning offenders. Improved decisions will be made through the increased availability of performance measures relating to public policy. Productivity of stakeholder agency employees will increase with the elimination of redundant data collection and duplicate data entry. Paperbased processes will be reduced or eliminated with the rapid availability of electronic records. Criminal justice information will be accessible in a timely, accurate, and comprehensive fashion by criminal justice agencies. The public will have immediate access to relevant criminal justice information. Goals • By December 2005, ICJIS will facilitate the electronic exchange of information by developing and deploying prioritized data exchanges through the Integration Engine so that participating Maricopa County justice and law enforcement agencies can reduce data entry associated with increasing work loads through the elimination of redundant data entry. • By December 2005, justice and law enforcement agencies external to Maricopa County (federal, state, and local) will be enabled to share and exchange information electronically with county justice and law enforcement agencies on a timely, accurate, and secure basis through the integrated criminal justice information system. 635 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Integrated Criminal Justice Information System (Continued) • By December 2005, the ICJIS Agency will provide the information links necessary for criminal justice departments to develop and implement management information systems, including the Accused-InProcess (AIP) system to provide more complete information regarding individual cases and case processing, leading to better decision making. Issues • The demands of growing criminal justice workloads put excess strain on finite resources, resulting in system delays, process breakdowns, jail overcrowding, excessive staff turnover, and inefficiencies that affect system integrity and public safety. • County justice and law enforcement departments increasingly demand more accurate, timely, and complete information regarding individual cases and case processing. • Failure to develop an integrated criminal justice information system will result in decreased system integrity, public safety concerns, and slower processing of criminal cases. • Evolving privacy and national security concerns have resulted in Federal and State mandates to improve the security and efficiencies of the Maricopa County Justice and Law Enforcement computer network, interfaces, firewalls, encryption methods, and management of Criminal History Record Information. • Growing public concern over Homeland Security issues places a greater burden on ICJIS to more quickly and efficiently develop and implement data exchanges among justice and law enforcement agencies, resulting in improved public safety with faster and more accurate sharing of criminal justice information. • Rapid advances in automation and information technology make existing justice and law enforcement systems and redundant work processes inefficient, inaccurate, and obsolete. ICJIS is under pressure from justice and law enforcement agencies to increase its role in facilitating the resolution of these inefficiencies and inaccuracies through the development and implementation of technology solutions. • With the lack of widespread integration among justice and law enforcement agencies, there is decreased ability to make sound decisions based on system wide knowledge. Deficiencies in criminal justice system integration delay the detection, apprehension, and prosecution of criminals involved in multiple jurisdictions, and lessen the likelihood that criminal justice policymakers will discover and take into consideration broader trends that result in widespread harm to the public. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 420 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG $ 657,571 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1,087,664 TOTAL $ 1,745,235 Supplies & Services $ 207,488 3,179,360 $ 3,386,848 636 Capital Outlay 18,903 284,495 $ 303,398 $ Total Expenditures $ 883,962 4,551,519 $ 5,435,481 Total Revenue $ - $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Integrated Criminal Justice Information System (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 1,955,612 $ 3,656,622 $ 3,336,102 $ 4,206,344 $ 5,435,481 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,955,612 3,656,622 3,336,102 4,206,344 5,435,481 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 1,955,612 $ 3,656,622 $ 3,336,102 $ 4,206,344 $ 5,435,481 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,955,612 3,656,622 3,336,102 4,206,344 5,435,481 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Integrated Criminal Justice Information System FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Mandates Vs. Expenditures $6.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% $5.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $4.0 $3.0 $2.0 $1.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 100.0% FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 3.7 0.0 3.3 0.0 3.3 0.0 4.2 0.0 4.2 0.0 5.4 0.0 5.4 0.0 Mandate Information TITLE Implementing an Integrated Criminal Justice Information System AUTHORITY The Legislature, In Laws 1998, Chapter 225, Amending A.R.S. § 42-1491, Granted A one-time Opportunity To Maricopa County Voters To Approve A Jail Facilities Excise Tax Levy To Construct And Operate Jail Facilities. A.R.S. § 42-6109 D.3.A. Contains Provisions For Implementing An Integrated Criminal Justice Information System HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Jail Facilities Excise Tax Levy Was Authorized At Two-Tenths Of A Percent (0.002) Of The Tax Base To Remain In Effect Until $900 Million Is Collected, But Not More Than Nine Years After January 1, 1999. Initially, $25 Million Of The Tax Levy Has Been Allocated For Integrating The Criminal Justice Information System. The Maricopa County Voters Approved The Tax Levy Effective January 1, 1999. In 2002, voters approved Proposition 411, authorizing a 25-year extension on the special jail tax collection, including the clause from the previous Proposition 400, “implementing an integrated criminal justice information system.” MANDATE DESCRIPTION “Implement An Integrated Criminal Justice Information System.” 637 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Integrated Criminal Justice Information System (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 420 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO Fund Type SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 1,745,235 $ 1,745,235 $ Supplies & Services 3,386,848 $ 3,386,848 $ Capital Outlay 303,398 $ 303,398 $ Total Expenditures 5,435,481 $ 5,435,481 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 420 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 1,090,970 $ 4,787 180,097 260 (19,704) 131,887 1,388,297 $ 1,647,463 $ 284,242 (691,155) 875,217 2,115,767 $ 368,329 30,200 739,681 58,347 99,744 55,109 101,861 1,453,271 $ 2,395,035 35,000 1,517,310 70,816 369,512 51,848 194,500 4,634,021 $ $ $ 308,000 178,549 486,549 $ Sub Total $ 82,099 73,102 155,201 Total Expenditures $ 2,996,769 $ 7,236,337 SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ (2,996,769) $ 1,719,083 $ 334,046 (1,345,290) 1,529,276 2,237,115 $ 2,296,098 18,367 1,575,132 112,221 374,512 51,848 194,500 4,622,678 $ $ $ 313,748 178,549 492,297 $ 7,352,090 $ (7,236,337) $ 1,426,184 $ 204 290,906 101 (19,992) 121,151 1,818,554 $ 728,565 5,518 1,711,649 95,902 186,025 56,281 222,208 5 3,006,153 $ $ $ 576,183 104,581 680,764 $ 5,505,472 $ (7,352,090) $ 1,426,398 $ 318,066 (1,343,394) 1,344,165 1,745,235 $ 666,536 2,000 2,184,450 114,142 281,262 50,458 88,000 3,386,848 $ $ $ 37,835 265,563 303,398 $ 5,435,481 $ (5,505,472) $ 1,426,398 $ 318,066 (1,343,394) 1,344,165 1,745,235 $ 666,536 2,000 2,184,450 114,142 281,262 50,458 88,000 3,386,848 $ $ $ 37,835 265,563 303,398 $ $ 5,435,481 $ $ (5,435,481) $ $ (5,435,481) $ 292,685 15,980 (1,896) 185,111 491,880 17% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 12% 22% 1,629,562 16,367 (609,318) (1,921) 93,250 1,390 106,500 1,235,830 71% 89% -39% -2% 25% 3% 55% 0% 27% 275,913 (87,014) 188,899 88% -49% 38% 1,916,609 26% (1,916,609) 26% Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 420 INTEGRATED CRIMINAL JUST INFO Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST INFO SYSTEMS PROJECT MGR FTE 1.00 4.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 Market Range Title INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INFO TECHNOL CONSULTANT PC SPECIALIST TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN Total 638 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 19.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Internal Audit Organizational Chart Board of Supervisors Audit Committee County Management Internal Audit Internal Audit Ross Tate, County Auditor Ross Tate, County Auditor Auditors and Administration Mission The Mission of the Internal Audit Department is to provide objective, accurate, and meaningful information about County operations so the Board of Supervisors can make informed decisions to better serve County citizens. Vision To facilitate positive change throughout County operations while ensuring that public resources are used for their intended purpose. Goals • Annually, Internal Audit will assist the County in its mission to provide fiscally responsible public services by completing 90% of the Board of Supervisors' approved annual Audit Plan and reporting this objective, accurate, and meaningful information to the Board in a timely manner; no later than 90 days after the fiscal year-end. • Annually, Internal Audit will assist the County in its mission to provide fiscally responsible public services by providing objective, accurate, and meaningful information in a way that earns a 90% customer satisfaction rating each year from our primary customers, namely, the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrative Officer. • Annually, Internal Audit will assist the County in its mission to provide fiscally responsible public services by working with clients to ensure that 90% of audit report recommendations are implemented within three years of being reported. This goal will also assist Internal Audit in its vision to facilitate positive change throughout the County. • Annually, Internal Audit will assist the County in its mission to become a regional leader by creating and producing at least three innovative, effective audit products and methodologies. These developed products and methodologies will be shared on a regional and national level through publications, presentations, and award programs. Issues • The demand from the Board of Supervisors and County Management for objective analysis, interpretation, and reporting of county information is increasing. • The public's knowledge of government operations and desire for accountability is increasing. 639 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Internal Audit (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 230 INTERNAL AUDIT TOTAL FUNDS Program 23AS - AUDIT SERVICES 23MS - MANAGEMENT SERVICES 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 158,982 642,134 204,097 TOTAL $ 1,005,213 $ Supplies & Services $ 14,711 7,122 2,816 $ 24,649 Capital Outlay 6,048 $ 6,048 $ Total Expenditures $ 179,741 649,256 206,913 $ 1,035,910 $ Total Revenue 75 - $ 75 Key Performance Measures Program Name: AUDIT SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Audit Services Program is to provide independent assessments and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors and County management so they can make informed and fiscally prudent decisions. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of IA recommendations concurred with by clients. 96.3 100 97 95 Percent of IA recommendations implemented within three years after the report has been issued. 96.43 90 98.6 95 Percent satisfaction rating from BOS and County Mgmt with audit reports 97.5 84 96 90 5,329,804 1,500,000 1,371,236 3,000,000 Key Results: Economic impact of audit work. Program Name: MANAGEMENT SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Management Services Program is to provide strategic information and education to County officials and employees so that they can perform their jobs more effectively FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent satisfaction rating from customers indicating educational efforts (newsletters, courses, etc.) help them do their job more effectively 90 N/A 86 90 Percent overall approval rating by the Board of Supervisors and key County management of Internal Audit's strategic information reports. 97.75 N/A 100 90 Percent satisfaction rating from customers indicating consulting services delivered by IA helped them do their job more effectively N/A N/A 100 90 Key Results: 640 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Internal Audit (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 951,529 $ $ 967,480 $ $ 999,417 $ $ 1,005,479 $ $ 1,035,910 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 951,529 967,480 999,417 1,005,479 1,035,910 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 15,767 $ $ 36,679 $ $ 45,189 $ $ 33,876 $ $ 35,000 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 15,767 36,679 45,189 33,876 35,000 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 935,762 $ $ 930,801 $ $ 954,228 $ $ 971,603 $ $ 1,000,910 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 935,762 930,801 954,228 971,603 1,000,910 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Internal Audit FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Internal Audit Mandates Vs. Expenditures $1.2 Non-Mandated 0.0% $1.0 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 641 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Internal Audit (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Federal Grants Sub-recipient Monitoring for Compliance with the Single Audit Act AUTHORITY Federal Single Audit Act and Amendments of 1996; Federal Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Internal Audit monitors compliance of federal grant sub-recipients with the Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A-133. Internal Audit also consults with County departments concerning Single Audit Act requirements. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County, as a pass-through organization, must ensure that any sub-recipients spending $300,000 or more in federal awards during the sub-recipients fiscal year have an audit performed in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. Federal Grants Sub-recipient Monitoring for Compliance with the Single Audit Act FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 15,767 $ $ 15,282 $ $ 12,933 $ $ 11,232 $ $ 10,000 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise Funds - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 15,767 15,282 12,933 11,232 10,000 TITLE Minimum Accounting Standards Testing for Courts and Judicial Departments AUTHORITY Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) – Arizona Supreme Court, Administrative Order Number 93-52, revised by AO 94-68, revised by AO 97-62 HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Internal Audit performs financial and operational tests to ensure courts and judicial departments maintain effective controls over financial functions. This agreed-uponprocedures audit was performed by the Arizona Auditor General’s Office (AG) until 1999. If Internal Audit did not perform these audits, the courts and judicial departments would have to hire a CPA firm or consultant. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The mandate requires all courts, court Offices, and judicial financial functions to undergo an independent audit every three years. The AOC establishes audit procedures to be performed and requires the independent auditor to submit a report by a specified date detailing any accounting deficiencies or exceptions noted during the review. Minimum Accounting Standards Testing for Courts and Judicial Departments FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ $ $ 21,397 $ $ 32,256 $ $ 22,644 $ $ 25,000 $ - 642 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise Funds - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - Total $ $ $ $ $ 21,397 32,256 22,644 25,000 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Internal Audit (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 230 INTERNAL AUDIT Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS Personal Services 1,005,213 $ 1,005,213 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 24,649 $ 24,649 $ Capital Outlay 6,048 $ 6,048 $ Total Expenditures 1,035,910 $ 1,035,910 $ Total Revenue 75 75 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 230 INTERNAL AUDIT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ $ 784,451 $ 23,151 160,565 17,420 (12,933) 972,654 $ $ Sub Total $ 5,551 3,781 2,255 372 4,237 9,952 156 26,304 $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 875 875 $ 75 75 $ $ 782,175 $ 1,990 159,491 (12,000) 931,656 $ $ $ 5,000 2,069 2,070 150 6,000 9,081 100 24,470 459 459 $ $ 999,418 $ (998,543) $ 75 75 $ $ 815,066 $ 1,990 188,610 (12,000) 993,666 $ $ $ 3,500 2,900 2,070 150 6,001 9,750 100 24,471 1,896 1,896 $ $ 958,022 $ (957,947) $ 1,442 1,442 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 768,973 $ 1,354 177,661 (10,813) 937,175 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 75 75 $ $ $ $ - 0% 0% 1,566 (10) (11,103) (2,000) (11,547) 0% -1% -6% 0% 17% -1% 813,500 $ 2,000 199,713 (10,000) 1,005,213 $ $ $ $ 3,548 2,900 2,100 150 6,001 9,750 200 24,649 $ $ $ 3,548 2,900 2,100 150 6,001 9,750 200 24,649 1,896 1,896 $ $ 1,692 1,692 $ $ 5,682 5,682 $ $ 1,020,033 $ 960,939 $ 1,037,182 $ (959,497) $ % 813,240 $ 2,000 201,611 (10,000) 1,006,851 $ 4,815 4,663 1,198 137 6,031 5,059 169 22,073 (1,019,958) $ 75 75 Adopted Vs Revised Variance (1,037,107) $ $ (48) (30) (100) (178) -1% 0% -1% 0% 0% 0% -100% -1% 6,048 6,048 $ $ (4,152) (4,152) -219% -219% 1,035,910 $ (15,877) -2% 15,877 -2% (1,035,835) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 230 INTERNAL AUDIT Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST AUDITING SUPERVISOR FTE 1.00 2.00 Market Range Title AUDITOR DIRECTOR Total 643 FTE 11.00 1.00 15.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Advocate Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Legal Advocate Legal Advocate Susan Sherwin, Director Susan Sherwin, Director Mission The Mission of the Office of the Legal Advocate (OLA) is to provide quality legal representation to indigent individuals assigned to us by the Court, thus safeguarding the fundamental legal rights of each member of the community. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • By July 2006, OLA Dependency attorneys will accept 100% of demand without compromising quality, in response to the Court’s request that complex Dependency case are handled by OLA. • By July 2006, OLA Capital attorneys, in conjunction with the Public Defender Office and the Legal Defender Office, will accept 100% of demand, with “demand” being defined as all cases referred from the Courts, less those which constitute an actual legal conflict. • By July 2007, OLA Felony attorneys will accept 100% of demand for serious felony cases, with “serious felony” cases being defined as Class 2, 3 or higher and “demand” being defined as all cases referred from the Public Defender Office and the Legal Defender Office including “caseload withdrawals”, less those which constitute an actual legal conflict. • By July 2006, OLA Appeal attorneys will accept 100% of demand for appeals. “Demand” is defined as appeals in all capital and non-capital cases tried by OLA attorneys, and those referred by PD and OCC, except those cases for which an actual legal conflict exists. • By July 2006, OLA Appeal attorneys will accept 100% of demand for post-conviction relief cases in change of plea cases. “Demand” is defined as all post-conviction relief matters assigned by the Courts as well as any referrals from the Public Defender and Office of Contract Counsel, except those cases for which an actual legal conflict exists. • By July 2007, OLA SVP attorneys will collaborate with mental health evaluators to establish true “SVP” standards, work within the legal system to place additional pre-trial protections in the law, and influence systemic changes toward more expedient treatment of SVP clients in the state hospital, which will ensure due process, prevent clients from being inappropriately labeled as “sexually violent persons,” and expedite the release of clients, thereby reducing state expenditures. 644 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Advocate (Continued) Issues • The Court's continued emphasis on moving cases ever more quickly will result in less time and limited resources available to assist clients, which could potentially compromise the quality of legal representation, increase staff stress, and potentially increase staff turnover. • Rapid increases in population and poverty, coupled with a greater emphasis on civil and criminal enforcement have resulted in an increase in the number of indigent clients, causing burgeoning caseloads. • Attorneys and mitigation personnel frequently have to wait one to two hours to visit clients in jail, resulting in a waste of budget resources spent on unproductive work time for highly paid staff. • Changes in County Attorney administration will have an unpredictable effect on filing, plea and trial policies and resultant impact upon our department. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE TOTAL FUNDS Program 52AF - ADULT FELONY REPRESENTATION 52AR - APPELLATE REPRESENTATION 52DR - DEPENDENCY REPRESENTATION 52JC - JUVENILE CIVIL REPRESENTATION 52MH - MENTAL HEALTH REPRESENTATION 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 2,302,293 484,740 1,765,128 202,241 384,206 TOTAL $ 5,138,608 $ Supplies & Services $ 603,793 160,913 272,090 329 133,043 51,076 $ 1,221,244 Capital Outlay 17,027 3,557 14,833 18 1,453 2,907 $ 39,795 $ Total Expenditures $ 2,923,113 649,210 2,052,051 347 336,737 438,189 $ 6,399,647 Total Revenue 31,310 5,000 $ 36,310 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ADULT FELONY REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Adult Felony Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent adults charged with felony offenses so that their rights are protected. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of variance from current annual attorney capital caseload guideline N/A N/A 84 75 Percent of variance from current annual attorney "Other Homicide" caseload guideline N/A N/A 73 60 Percent of variance from current annual attorney Class 2 and 3 felony caseload guideline N/A N/A 8 8 Percent of variance from current annual attorney Class 4, 5, and 6 caseload guideline N/A N/A 11 10 Key Results: 645 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Advocate (Continued) Program Name: APPELLATE REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Appellate Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent persons appealing their convictions, adjudications, and dependency matters so that they can obtain the most favorable result under the circumstances. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent variance from current annual attorney adult appeal caseload guideline N/A N/A 60 50 Percent of variance from current annual attorney post conviction relief caseload guideline N/A N/A -1 5 Key Results: Program Name: DEPENDENCY REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Dependency Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent persons in dependency or severance matters so that their legal interests are protected. Key Results: Percent of variance from current annual attorney child dependency caseload guidance 646 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A N/A 26 25 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Advocate (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 2,155,530 $ 26,300 $ 3,069,586 $ 25,442 $ 4,212,527 $ 13,537 $ 5,303,639 $ 9,985 $ 6,383,337 $ 16,310 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,181,830 3,095,028 4,226,064 5,313,624 6,399,647 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 2,155,530 $ 26,300 $ 3,069,586 $ 25,442 $ 4,212,527 $ 13,537 $ 5,303,639 $ 9,985 $ 6,383,337 $ 16,310 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,181,830 3,095,028 4,226,064 5,313,624 6,399,647 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Legal Advocate FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Legal Advocate Mandates Vs. Expenditures $7.0 $6.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.3% $5.0 $4.0 $3.0 $2.0 $1.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 99.7% 647 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 2.2 2.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 4.2 4.2 0.0 0.0 5.3 5.3 0.0 0.0 6.4 6.4 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Advocate (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Legal Defense of Indigent Criminal Defendants and Delinquent or Incorrigible Juveniles AUTHORITY U.S. Constitution, 5th and 6th Amendments; Arizona Constitution, Article 2, § 24; ARS §§ 11-581 to 587; Rule 6, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure; Rule 20, Arizona Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The United States and Arizona Constitutions provide that an individual facing criminal charges has a right to the assistance of counsel. The United States and Arizona Supreme Courts have interpreted these provisions as requiring that counsel be provided, at government expense, for individuals facing loss of liberty who cannot afford to hire counsel. Historically, in Maricopa County, indigent defendants charged in criminal cases, and juveniles accused of delinquency or incorrigibility, were assigned to private attorneys who contracted to provide those services. In order to maximize the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of services mandated, Maricopa County has since funded the creation of three on-staff public defender offices (Offices of the Public Defender, Legal Defender, and Legal Advocate). Contract private attorneys continue to be assigned to a lesser number of cases, specifically those that the other offices are unable to handle (typically due to conflicts of interest). Those contract assignments continue to be managed and monitored by the Office of Contract Counsel. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Legal defense of indigent criminal defendants at risk of loss of liberty in criminal proceedings, including felony, misdemeanor, and probation violation cases. Legal defense of indigent criminal defendants in appeals and post-conviction relief cases. Legal representation of juveniles facing delinquency or incorrigibility charges. Legal representation of defendants opposing extradition. Legal representation in postconviction relief cases of persons sentenced to death. Legal representation of witnesses in criminal cases, when assigned by the court. TITLE Judicial Mandates AUTHORITY A.R.S. §§ 36-528(D), 36-536(A), 36-537, 8-221. U.S. Constitution, 5th and 6th Amendments; Arizona Constitution Article 2, § 24; ARS §§ 11-584 to 587. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Historically, Public Defenders have not had the authority to handle civil proceedings. As a result, in Maricopa County, private attorneys who contracted to provide these services were used almost exclusively. Due to changes in legislation, Maricopa County became responsible to provide representation to indigent individuals facing mental health commitments and to those involved in child dependency and severance proceedings. In order to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of services mandated, Maricopa County has funded the creation of two on-staff dependency units (Offices of the Legal Defender and Legal Advocate) and one on-staff mental health unit (Public Defender). In addition, contracted private attorneys are assigned to cases that the other offices are unable to handle (typically due to conflicts of interest). MANDATE DESCRIPTION Legal representation of indigent persons at risk of a loss of liberty in civil mental health proceedings. Legal representation of indigent individuals involved in civil child dependency or severance proceedings, including the minor children in question. 648 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Advocate (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 5,138,608 $ 5,138,608 $ Supplies & Services 1,204,934 $ 16,310 1,221,244 $ Capital Outlay 39,795 $ 39,795 $ Total Expenditures 6,383,337 $ 16,310 6,399,647 $ Total Revenue 20,000 16,310 36,310 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ 10,416 116,764 127,180 2,755,536 $ 85,731 1,109 502,392 2,504 (754) 16,800 3,363,317 $ 3,071,589 15,155 568,677 415,715 16,800 4,087,936 Sub Total $ 50,174 106,906 296,355 20,169 260,269 805 30,129 68,151 6,321 839,280 CAPITAL OUTLAY 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP $ 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 18,092 5,375 23,467 Total Expenditures $ 4,226,064 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 39,123 19,008 58,131 $ $ $ $ $ 35,000 212,565 23,610 281,342 250 11,428 51,916 5,340 621,451 $ $ $ $ $ $ 3,443,788 10,000 4,280 726,488 5,550 16,800 4,206,906 $ $ $ 12,907 20,000 32,907 $ 3,591,945 $ 10,001 2,902 805,643 4,974 (169,714) 186,097 4,431,848 $ 4,159,607 10,001 5,156 957,781 6,063 5,138,608 93,104 1,730 2,652 366,244 78,654 347,346 1,946 26,852 109,587 6,851 1,034,966 $ 61,849 2,050 497,562 20,655 436,670 2,578 29,422 162,310 8,148 1,221,244 $ $ $ $ 39,795 39,795 $ 6,399,647 $ $ 23,045 23,045 $ 5,489,859 $ $ $ 4,736,165 $ 4,984,493 $ (4,857,313) $ 649 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 11,310 116,764 5,000 133,074 $ 26,778 26,778 (4,608,985) $ $ 39,657 1,500 2,338 304,734 21,125 281,343 853 16,300 76,459 6,500 750,809 26,778 26,778 (4,167,934) $ $ 10,416 116,764 127,180 FY 2004-05 Requested $ (5,456,952) $ $ $ $ $ 11,310 20,000 5,000 36,310 4,159,607 10,001 5,156 957,781 6,063 5,138,608 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ $ $ % (894) 96,764 (5,000) 90,870 -9% 83% 0% 0% 71% (715,819) (1) (876) (231,293) (513) 16,800 (931,702) -21% 0% -20% -32% -9% 0% 100% -22% (22,192) (550) 2,338 (192,828) 470 (155,327) (1,725) (13,122) (85,851) (1,648) (470,435) -56% -37% 100% -63% 2% -55% -202% -81% -112% -25% -63% 0% -49% -49% 61,849 2,050 497,562 20,655 436,670 2,578 29,422 162,310 8,148 1,221,244 $ $ $ 39,795 39,795 $ (13,017) (13,017) $ 6,399,647 $ (1,415,154) -28% 1,506,024 -31% $ (6,266,573) $ $ (6,363,337) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Advocate (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 550 LEGAL ADVOCATE Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ATTORNEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FTE 4.00 2.00 39.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST INVESTIGATOR LEGAL ASSISTANT LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST MITIGATION SVCS REP SOCIAL WORKER (BS) Total 650 FTE 1.00 4.50 2.00 8.00 3.00 12.00 78.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Defender Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Legal Defender Legal Defender Robert B. Briney Robert B. Briney Juvenile Dependency/ Severance Representation Adult Criminal Representation Information Technology Administration Services Mission The Mission of the Office of the Legal Defender is to provide quality legal representation to indigent individuals assigned to us by the court, thus safeguarding the fundamental legal rights of each member of the community. Vision The Vision of the Office of the Legal Defender is to further justice by providing legal representation to indigents equal or superior to that of privately retained counsel while being regarded by the county as efficient. Goals • By July 2006, the Office of the Legal Defender, working with OMB, will establish a case weighting methodology that accurately portrays the Office’s workload. • By July 2006, with appropriate funding, the Office of the Legal Defender will assume all Office of Contract Counsel Criminal and Parental Representation cases that can be represented by the Office at a cost savings to Maricopa County. Issues • The statutory changes providing for jury trials in severance matters will significantly impact the Office’s Parental Representation activity, resulting in additional case processing time and additional staffing needs. • The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Ring v. Arizona and accompanying legislative changes, and procedural court rule changes will significantly impact current death penalty caseloads/workloads and the ensuing cost per case. • The courts’ continued emphasis on rapid resolution of cases will result in less time and fewer resources available to assist clients, reducing the quality of legal representation and increasing staff stress and turnover. • The uncertainty of additional staff, office and parking facilities will limit the Office's ability to plan for future growth and additional responsibilities. • A tightening, competitive employment market in Maricopa County makes it more difficult for the Office of the Legal Defender to hire and retain a creative, skilled, and knowledgeable workforce, particularly for staff associated with death penalty cases. 651 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Defender (Continued) • The rapid increase in population and continued emphasis on law enforcement and the County Attorney's filing practices will increase the number of indigent defendants, resulting in more cases for the office. • The uncertainty of additional staff, office and parking facilities will limit the Office's ability to plan for future growth and additional responsibilities. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 540 LEGAL DEFENDER TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 52AF - ADULT FELONY REPRESENTATION $ 4,201,993 52DR - DEPENDENCY REPRESENTATION 1,694,749 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 369,342 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 68,768 TOTAL $ 6,334,852 Supplies & Services $ 586,565 69,461 40,403 25,000 $ 721,429 Capital Outlay 35,147 14,156 $ 49,303 $ Total Expenditures $ 4,823,705 1,778,366 409,745 93,768 $ 7,105,584 Total Revenue 63,700 40,403 $ 104,103 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ADULT FELONY REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Adult Felony Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent adults charged with felony offenses so that their rights are protected. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Capital Caseload Guideline N/A N/A -150 -63 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney “Other Homicide” Caseload Guideline N/A N/A 17 20 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Class Two and Three Felony Caseload Guideline N/A N/A 28 28 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Class Four, Five, and Six Felony Caseload Guideline N/A N/A 34 24 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Felony DUI Caseload Guideline N/A N/A 26 -1 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Violation of Probation Caseload Guideline N/A N/A 45 45 Key Results: 652 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Defender (Continued) Program Name: DEPENDENCY REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Dependency Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent persons in dependency or severance matters so that their legal rights are protected. Key Results: Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Parental Dependency Representation Caseload Guideline FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A N/A 22 4 Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 4,122,360 $ 72,782 $ 4,293,040 $ 62,508 $ 4,763,050 $ 72,463 $ 5,833,349 $ 76,699 $ 7,021,181 $ 84,403 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 4,195,143 4,355,548 4,835,514 5,910,048 7,105,584 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 4,122,360 $ 72,782 $ 4,293,040 $ 62,508 $ 4,763,050 $ 72,463 $ 5,833,349 $ 76,699 $ 7,021,181 $ 84,403 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 4,195,143 4,355,548 4,835,514 5,910,048 7,105,584 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Legal Defender FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Legal Defender Mandates Vs. Expenditures $8.0 $7.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 1.2% $6.0 $5.0 $4.0 $3.0 $2.0 $1.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 98.8% 653 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 4.2 4.1 0.1 0.0 4.4 4.3 0.1 0.0 4.8 4.8 0.1 0.0 5.9 5.8 0.1 0.0 7.1 7.0 0.1 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Defender (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Legal Defense of Indigent Criminal Defendants AUTHORITY U.S. Constitution, 5th and 6th Amendments; Arizona Constitution, Article 2, § 24; ARS §§ 11-581 to 587; Rule 6, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The United States and Arizona Constitutions provide that an individual facing criminal charges has a right to the assistance of counsel. The United States and Arizona Supreme Courts have interpreted these provisions as requiring that counsel be provided, at government expense, for individuals facing loss of liberty who cannot afford to hire counsel. Historically, the Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office represented all indigent defendants when ethically permitted to do so. In those instances where the Public Defender had a conflict of interest, the case was assigned to private contract attorneys. The Office of the Legal Defender was established in 1995 to assume many of the cases that were being referred to private contract counsel. Since its inception, the Office has demonstrated that it could do so at substantial cost savings to the county. MANDATE DESCRIPTION When assigned by the court, legal defense of indigent criminal defendants at risk of loss of liberty in criminal proceedings, including felony, misdemeanor, and probation violation cases and legal representation of witnesses in criminal cases. TITLE Judicial Mandates AUTHORITY A.R.S. §§ 36-528(D), 36-536(A), 36-537, 8-221. U.S. Constitution, 5th and 6th Amendments; Arizona Constitution Article 2, § 24; ARS §§ 11-584 to 587. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Historically, Maricopa County contracted with private attorneys to represent clients in juvenile dependency and severance matters. Due to changes in legislation, Maricopa County was granted authority to provide on-staff legal representation to those involved these proceedings. The Office of the Legal Defender assumed the responsibility of representing one of the indigent parents in these matters. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Legal representation of indigent parents involved in child dependency and severance proceedings. 654 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Defender (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 540 LEGAL DEFENDER Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 6,291,683 $ 43,169 6,334,852 $ Supplies & Services 680,195 $ 41,234 721,429 $ Capital Outlay 49,303 $ 49,303 $ Total Expenditures 7,021,181 $ 84,403 7,105,584 $ Total Revenue 19,700 84,403 104,103 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 540 LEGAL DEFENDER ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ 48,142 60,300 339 108,781 $ 36,000 62,674 98,674 3,532,335 $ 248,514 707,192 5,424 (667) 4,492,797 $ 3,717,633 213,656 751,481 417,263 5,100,033 76,646 1,980 11,043 128,538 24,262 13,379 1,381 15,840 61,962 7,574 342,605 Sub Total $ 111 111 Total Expenditures $ 4,835,514 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ 44,000 2,000 212,729 29,000 17,500 2,050 9,318 63,800 6,500 386,897 $ $ $ $ $ $ 4,178,087 213,656 954,399 5,698 5,351,840 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 23,570 23,570 $ 5,507,320 $ 5,804,478 (5,408,646) $ $ 46,664 2,000 244,343 29,865 17,500 2,050 10,086 69,208 7,352 429,068 20,390 20,390 (4,726,732) $ $ 36,000 62,674 98,674 $ $ 40,403 63,700 104,103 4,374,680 $ 233,455 1,468 1,058,717 6,064 (2,032,907) 1,972,906 5,614,383 $ 4,137,029 213,656 1,031,442 7,372 5,389,499 107,755 1,987 50 195,259 24,590 16,366 4,785 18,666 94,567 10,011 474,035 $ $ $ 14,342 14,342 $ 6,102,759 $ (5,705,804) $ 655 40,403 21,233 45,166 106,802 FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ $ $ 71,664 2,229 229,597 29,865 16,300 2,050 9,429 74,034 7,352 442,520 $ $ $ 38,527 38,527 $ 5,870,546 $ (5,995,957) $ 40,403 19,700 44,000 104,103 4,894,822 213,656 1,219,002 7,372 6,334,852 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ $ $ % (4,403) (19,700) 18,674 (5,429) -12% 0% 30% 0% -6% (716,735) (264,603) (1,674) (983,012) -17% 0% 0% -28% -29% 0% 0% -18% (34,607) (229) (194,570) (3,456) (720) (4,417) (52,154) (2,208) (292,361) -74% -11% 0% -80% -12% -4% 0% -44% -75% -30% -68% 0% -63% -109% 81,271 2,229 438,913 33,321 18,220 2,050 14,503 121,362 9,560 721,429 $ $ $ 10,776 38,527 49,303 $ (10,776) (14,957) (25,733) $ 7,105,584 $ (1,301,106) -22% 1,295,677 -23% $ (5,766,443) $ $ (7,001,481) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Legal Defender (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 540 LEGAL DEFENDER Market Range Title ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ATTORNEY DIRECTOR INVESTIGATOR LEGAL ASSISTANT FTE 1.00 1.00 10.00 2.00 45.00 1.00 7.00 1.00 Market Range Title LEGAL ASSISTANT SUPV LEGAL ORDER SERVER LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT MITIGATION SVCS REP PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE SOCIAL WORKER (BS) TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN Total 656 FTE 1.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 6.00 4.00 9.00 1.00 96.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Management & Budget Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Deputy County Administrator Sandi Wilson Office of Management and Budget Office of Management and Budget Budgeting Budget Monitoring Management Information Services Strategic Planning Forecasting Mission The Mission of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is to provide organizational and strategic leadership and consultation to the Board of Supervisors so that they can make well-informed policy and budgetary decisions. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • By June 30th of each year, develop a structurally balanced budget for the Board that maintains a consistent level of service without a combined overall tax rate increase. • By June 30, 2006, Managing for Results will be implemented to a stage where departments are allocating expenses by program, activity, or service so that OMB can make meaningful budget recommendations tied to service levels and results. • By June 30, 2006, OMB will implement an annual report that communicates the results of high-level Countywide measures that are grouped by various categories of departments. • Each year for the legislative agenda, OMB will submit policy recommendations to the Board to be used by Government Relations in successful lobbying that results in passage of favorable legislative action to enhance Maricopa County's fiscal independence by June 30, 2006. • By June 30, 2007, establish a plan to fund all the facility needs known at 6/30/04 while maintaining an overall flat tax rate. • By June 30th of each year, OMB will re-evaluate and recommend appropriate reserves to secure fiscal stability. Issues • Statutory and constitutional State limitations, including our authority to raise revenues, challenge our ability to handle economic downturns and demographic changes to fund County service demands. 657 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Management & Budget (Continued) • Without countywide departmental management's complete understanding, commitment and acceptance of MfR principles, the County's ability to fully "Manage for Results," and, in particular, OMB's ability to fully "Budget for Results" will be challenged. • Limited funding and space will challenge OMB to maintain the stable, highly qualified staff that we will need to effectively respond to increasingly difficult, complex budget issues. • Critical facility shortages for the courts and other criminal justice agencies will limit the County’s ability to respond to increasing caseloads. • The larger proportion of the County budget that is dedicated to mandated fixed payments to the State minimizes the County’s ability to manage its long-term fiscal needs. • The uncertainty of the Health Plans financial liabilities could jeopardize the County’s fiscal stability. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 490 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET TOTAL FUNDS Program 49BD - BUDGET MANAGEMENT 49PP - MULTI-YEAR PLANNING PROGRAM 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 1,505,494 108,366 77,575 TOTAL $ 1,691,435 $ Supplies & Services $ 60,443 $ 60,443 Capital Outlay 10,308 $ 10,308 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,576,245 108,366 77,575 $ 1,762,186 Total Revenue $ - $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: BUDGET MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Budget Management Program is to provide the budget and related approvals, recommendations, and monitoring for the Board of Supervisors so that they can hold departments accountable for staying within approved budgets and achieving results. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of departments that stay within approved (by fund type) FY budget allocations. 98.5 100 95 100 Percent of departments that do not exceed their annual expenditure appropriation (by fund type) N/A 100 98 100 Key Results: 658 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Management & Budget (Continued) Program Name: MULTI-YEAR PLANNING PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Multi-year Planning Program is to provide forecasting and strategic planning services to the Board of Supervisors and County management so they can set policy and make strategic decisions. Key Results: Percent of forecasts (most likely scenario) within 10 percent of actual FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 100 100 90 100 Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,372,435 $ $ 1,545,124 $ $ 1,463,898 $ $ 1,639,404 $ $ 1,762,186 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,372,435 1,545,124 1,463,898 1,639,404 1,762,186 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,372,435 $ $ 1,545,124 $ $ 1,463,898 $ $ 1,639,404 $ $ 1,762,186 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,372,435 1,545,124 1,463,898 1,639,404 1,762,186 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Management & Budget FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Management & Budget Mandates Vs. Expenditures $1.8 $1.6 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $1.4 $1.2 $1.0 $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 659 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Management & Budget (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 490 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 1,691,435 $ 1,691,435 $ Supplies & Services 60,443 $ 60,443 $ Capital Outlay 10,308 $ 10,308 $ Total Expenditures 1,762,186 $ 1,762,186 $ Total Revenue - EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 490 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated FY 2004-05 Requested FY 2004-05 Adopted Adopted Vs Revised Variance % REVENUE EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 1,053,739 $ 35,172 200,421 360 (113,982) 285,779 1,461,488 $ 1,156,237 $ 217,083 36,450 (57,845) 217,331 1,569,256 $ 1,282,108 $ 1,108 283,770 18,896 (134,716) 224,721 1,675,887 $ 1,321,422 $ 7,720 242,575 (137,762) 224,721 1,658,676 $ 1,311,647 $ 310,755 (96,100) 165,133 1,691,435 $ 1,311,647 $ 310,755 (96,100) 165,133 1,691,435 $ (29,539) 1,108 (26,985) 18,896 (38,616) 59,588 (15,548) -2% 100% -10% 100% 29% 27% -1% Sub Total $ 7,446 12,716 39,816 6,470 21 12,516 676 638 80,299 $ 40,000 8,000 2,000 8,100 1,000 9,000 500 500 69,100 $ 40,000 2,000 8,100 1,000 2,271 500 500 54,371 $ 39,684 3,398 8,100 285 1,290 65 500 53,322 $ 39,998 2,405 8,100 1,000 7,340 1,000 600 60,443 $ 39,998 2,405 8,100 1,000 7,340 1,000 600 60,443 $ 2 (405) (5,069) (500) (100) (6,072) 0% 0% -20% 0% 0% -223% -100% -20% -11% $ Sub Total $ 1,378 1,378 $ $ 5,645 5,645 $ $ 5,645 5,645 $ $ 5,645 5,645 $ $ 10,308 10,308 $ $ 10,308 10,308 $ $ (4,663) (4,663) -83% -83% Total Expenditures $ 1,543,165 $ 1,644,001 $ 1,735,903 $ 1,717,643 $ 1,762,186 $ 1,762,186 $ (26,283) -2% 26,283 -2% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ (1,543,165) $ $ (1,644,001) $ $ (1,735,903) $ $ (1,717,643) $ $ (1,762,186) $ $ (1,762,186) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 490 MANAGEMENT & BUDGET Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST BUDGET ANALYST BUDGET SUPERVISOR FTE 2.00 10.50 5.00 Market Range Title CHIEF OFFICER DEPUTY DIRECTOR PROJECT MANAGER Total 660 FTE 1.00 2.00 1.00 21.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Maricopa County Health Plans Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Maricopa Integrated Health System Maricopa Integrated Health System Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer Ted Shaw Ted Shaw Health Plan Executive Director Maricopa Long Term Care Director Health Plan Medical Director Operations/Medical Management Director Member Service Director Health Plans Controller MSSP Plan Manager/ Compliance Claims Director Network Development & Contracts Business Systems Configuration Manager Mission The Mission of Maricopa County Health Plans is to provide quality, customer oriented health care services for health plan members so they can improve their health status in a cost efficient manner. Goals • The Department’s Goals will be developed for the Health Plans after the Health Care Delivery System is transitioned to the new Health Care District. Issues • The Department’s Issue will be developed for the Health Plans after the Health Care Delivery System is transitioned to the new Health Care District. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 600 HEALTH PLANS TOTAL FUNDS Program 60HP - HEALTH PLAN 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 20,929,304 TOTAL $ 20,929,304 $ Supplies & Services $ 367,145,557 $ 367,145,557 661 Capital Outlay 58,695 $ 58,695 $ Total Expenditures $ 388,133,556 $ 388,133,556 Total Revenue 381,473,634 8,850,000 $ 390,323,634 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Maricopa County Health Plans (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 1,587,220 $ 1,860,224 $ 1,889,242 $ 1,972,640 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ 351,037,221 $ $ 399,648,196 $ $ 412,907,438 $ $ 444,245,083 $ $ 388,133,556 Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 352,624,441 401,508,420 414,796,680 446,217,723 388,133,556 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 1,587,220 $ 1,860,224 $ 1,889,242 $ 1,972,640 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ 351,037,221 $ $ 399,648,196 $ $ 412,907,438 $ $ 444,245,083 $ $ 388,133,556 Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 352,624,441 401,508,420 414,796,680 446,217,723 388,133,556 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Maricopa County Health Plans FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Maricopa County Health Plans Mandates Vs. Expenditures $450.0 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $400.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $350.0 $300.0 $250.0 $200.0 $150.0 $100.0 $50.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 662 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 352.6 0.0 0.0 352.6 401.5 0.0 0.0 401.5 414.8 0.0 0.0 414.8 446.2 0.0 0.0 446.2 388.1 0.0 0.0 388.1 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Maricopa County Health Plans (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 600 HEALTH PLANS Fund Type ENTERPRISE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 20,929,304 $ 20,929,304 $ Supplies & Services 367,145,557 $ 367,145,557 $ Capital Outlay 58,695 $ 58,695 $ Total Expenditures 388,133,556 $ 388,133,556 $ Total Revenue 390,323,634 390,323,634 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 600 HEALTH PLANS ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 638 PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ 1,271,175 12,395,027 401,600,857 2,246,682 27,846 618,070 418,159,657 $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 17,974,400 $ 248 1,605,736 41,054 (495,361) 19,126,077 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 865 DEPRECIATION 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 1,279,653 $ 1,289,826 817 6,006,057 (599,643) 193,070,307 10,239,955 1,027,269 11,706 2,990 349,069 267,673 304,581 182,059,153 2,072 446,178 (9,488,346) 24,390 386,293,707 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ - $ 1,277,847 414,216,308 2,234,870 8,198,612 425,927,637 $ $ 1,277,847 414,216,308 2,234,870 10,474,937 428,203,962 $ $ 1,277,847 410,056,000 1,225,000 41,929,789 454,488,636 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 1,277,848 380,182,660 1,290,974 9,722,032 392,473,514 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 380,182,660 1,290,974 8,850,000 390,323,634 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 18,560,345 $ 3,508,443 (11,069,675) 10,587,087 21,586,200 $ 21,039,739 $ 4,122,605 (13,398,283) 9,823,773 21,587,834 $ 22,680,247 $ 3,397,264 (11,069,675) 15,007,836 $ 15,999,422 $ 4,018,922 965,064 (11,822,118) 13,763,770 22,925,060 $ 14,445,176 $ 3,630,361 912,115 (11,822,118) 13,763,770 20,929,304 $ 1,117,855 1,149,138 789 3,827,505 165,664,555 33,081,866 1,029,528 6,075 291,610 269,193 245,166 175,060,741 1,885 22,290,089 404,035,995 1,117,855 1,152,646 789 3,682,951 165,732,964 35,358,191 1,029,528 6,075 362,621 269,193 245,166 175,060,741 1,885 22,290,089 406,310,694 7,273,192 835,936 8,040,090 226,548,181 1,085,042 938,528 700,988 254,986 1,341,035 207,159,000 416,070 454,593,048 9,223,928 693,402 2,129,808 184,703,531 6,168,287 804,446 103,272 13,200 661,475 162,722,774 75,558 367,299,681 9,159,334 693,402 2,129,808 185,191,550 6,168,287 726,838 103,272 13,200 656,555 162,234,755 68,556 367,145,557 $ 458,496 458,496 405,419,785 $ 426,080,691 12,739,872 $ $ $ $ $ 458,496 458,496 $ 428,357,024 (153,054) $ $ $ $ $ 823,000 823,000 $ 470,423,884 (153,062) $ 663 $ $ $ $ 53,412 5,283 58,695 $ (15,935,248) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ % 1,277,847 34,033,648 943,896 1,624,937 37,880,328 100% 0% 8% 42% 0% 16% 9% 6,594,563 492,244 (912,115) (1,576,165) (3,939,997) 658,530 31% 0% 12% 0% 12% -40% 3% (8,041,479) 459,244 789 1,553,143 (19,458,586) 29,189,904 302,690 6,075 259,349 255,993 (411,389) 12,825,986 1,885 22,221,533 39,165,137 -719% 40% 100% 42% 0% -12% 83% 29% 100% 0% 72% 95% -168% 7% 100% 0% 0% 100% 10% $ 53,412 5,283 58,695 405,084 (5,283) 399,801 88% 0% 87% $ 390,283,436 $ 388,133,556 $ 40,223,468 9% 2,190,078 $ 2,190,078 $ (2,343,140) 1531% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Maricopa County Health Plans (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 600 HEALTH PLANS Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT CLAIMS PROCESSOR CLAIMS SPECIALIST FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH HEALTHCARE DIRECTOR HEALTHCARE MANAGER MANAGING PHYSICIAN FTE 8.00 34.60 58.00 16.00 18.50 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00 Market Range Title MEDICAL SERVICES MANAGER NURSE NURSING SUPERVISOR PHARMACY TECHNICIAN PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM COORDINATOR - RN PROGRAMMER/ANALYST PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEMS ANALYST Total 664 FTE 25.25 15.20 1.00 1.00 140.05 9.00 4.00 12.00 1.00 357.60 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Materials Management Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Financial Officer Materials Management Materials Management Wes Baysinger, Director Wes Baysinger, Director Procurement Reprographics Records Management Mission The Mission of Materials Management is to provide strategic procurement and records management services, delegated tactical procurement direction and oversight, and graphic communication services to County departments so they can achieve their goals and exceed the Public's performance expectations. Vision Through innovation and leadership Materials Management will champion the transition to e-business. Goals • Reduce procurement transactional costs by a measurable amount over the next five years. • Implement an E-Procurement application by June 2007. • Increase partnerships with other governmental entities to leverage resources and aggregate purchasing power to lower costs and increase services levels to internal customers. This would include sharing systems and applications, conducting collaborative procurement activities, and reducing commodity and services costs from previous contracts. • Increase services and capabilities offered to Graphics customers through targeted enhancement of skills, equipment, and systems as measured by the percentage of production produced in-house. • Maintain an annual customer satisfaction score of 90% or greater as measured through the Research and Reporting Internal Services Customer Survey. Issues • The value of progressive procurement, records management and graphic communications is not recognized therefore Materials Management finds it difficult to enlist the support of Senior County management and our customers for dramatic and substantive change. • Shrinking procurement resources and constantly increasing demands will result in a significantly lower level of service from Materials Management thereby negatively affecting our customers' ability to achieve their goals. 665 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Materials Management (Continued) • The transition to e-government to meet citizen expectations will stretch Materials Management's meager staff and limit our ability to provide strategic consulting services to their customers. • The ability to meet the challenges that confront Materials Management and the County from increased citizen demands and a changing business environment will be of limited success because of the lack of an aggressive strategy for facilitating change. • Materials Management's inability to consistently attract highly qualified employees and retain our core competencies will decrease our ability to meet customer needs and reduce operational costs. • The restrictive nature of statutory and procurement code requirements will limit the County’s ability to effectively implement innovative procurement solutions. • The lack of required employee knowledge and skills will limit the successful delegation of tactical procurement responsibilities to departments and our ability to refocus on providing proactive strategic value added services. • The lack of dedicated resources to manage organizational change and provide continuous training for customers, vendors and staff will significantly increase the risk of failure in implementing electronic procurement. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT TOTAL FUNDS Program 73BS - BUSINESS SERVICES 73CT - CONSULTING 73SS - SYSTEMS AND SUPPORT 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 824,842 456,824 224,814 203,272 TOTAL $ 1,709,752 $ Supplies & Services $ 356,039 846 86,080 $ 442,965 666 Capital Outlay 24,045 10,095 $ 34,140 $ Total Expenditures $ 1,204,926 456,824 225,660 299,447 $ 2,186,857 Total Revenue 1,010,775 20,000 $ 1,030,775 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Materials Management (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: BUSINESS SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Materials Management Business Services program is to provide products and services associated with graphics, procurement and records management to clients and the public so that they can satisfy their customers needs and obtain high quality competitively priced products and services, resulting in costeffective government programs. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of clients satisfied with Graphic Communications Manufactured Products. 98.8 89 84 98 Percent of clients satisfied with Graphic Communications Contract services. 100 100 84 100 Percent of clients satisfied with procurement products provided. 91.2 91 90 90 80 87 90 90 Key Results: Percent of clients satisfied with records management products provided. Program Name: CONSULTING Program Purpose: The Purpose of the Materials Management Consulting program is to provide training and customer support services to clients and the public so that they can meet their goals, participate in county contracting activities and deliver high quality competitively priced products and services. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of clients satisfied with Graphic Communications consulting results. 99.9 87 84 90 Percent of clients satisfied with Procurement consulting services. 83.3 90 92 90 77 83 90 90 Key Results: Percent of clients satisfied with Records Management consulting results. 667 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Materials Management (Continued) Program Name: SYSTEMS AND SUPPORT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Materials Management System Support program is to provide technology solutions to clients and the public so that they can access information and process business transactions that support the achievement of their goals without geographic constraints. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of clients satisfied with system and support services. 100 100 100 100 Percent of clients satisfied with Procurement System and Support services. 97 98 95 95 Percent of clients satisfied with Records Management System and Support services. 72 N/A N/A N/A Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,291,016 $ $ 1,383,197 $ $ 1,381,452 $ $ 1,343,589 $ $ 1,354,842 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 724,121 $ 856,778 $ 955,803 $ 834,991 $ 832,015 $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,015,137 2,239,975 2,337,255 2,178,580 2,186,857 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,291,016 $ $ 1,383,197 $ $ 1,381,452 $ $ 1,343,589 $ $ 1,354,842 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 724,121 $ 856,778 $ 955,803 $ 834,991 $ 832,015 $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,015,137 2,239,975 2,337,255 2,178,580 2,186,857 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Materials Management FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Materials Management Mandates Vs. Expenditures Non-Mandated 0.0% $2.5 Dollars in Millions $2.0 Other Fund Mandated 38.0% $1.5 $1.0 $0.5 General Fund Mandated 62.0% $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated 668 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 2.0 1.3 0.7 0.0 2.2 1.4 0.9 0.0 2.3 1.4 1.0 0.0 2.2 1.3 0.8 0.0 2.2 1.4 0.8 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Materials Management (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT Fund Type GENERAL FUND INTERNAL SERVICE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 1,282,640 $ 427,112 1,709,752 $ Supplies & Services 62,107 $ 380,858 442,965 $ Capital Outlay 10,095 $ 24,045 34,140 $ Total Expenditures 1,354,842 $ 832,015 2,186,857 $ Total Revenue 127,000 903,775 1,030,775 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 636 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 651 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ 1,058,956 2,783 106,751 1,400 1,169,890 $ $ 1,403,153 $ 3,918 78 306,720 666 (39,868) 1,674,666 $ 287,617 45 234 8,535 30,521 49,743 5,433 4,402 7,039 76,178 469,746 $ Sub Total $ 3,187 3,187 Total Expenditures $ 2,147,600 Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ 900,000 130,775 1,030,775 $ $ 1,335,303 $ 4,076 306,581 (53,158) 1,592,802 $ $ $ 1,368,740 $ 4,076 345,019 (53,158) 1,664,677 $ $ 900,000 130,775 1,030,775 1,383,234 $ 1,536 2,522 334,878 53 (33,899) 1,688,323 $ 1,319,019 4,076 384,760 1,707,855 $ 243,119 300 17,647 43,299 6,952 93,500 7,528 4,057 5,082 34,130 455,614 $ $ $ $ 1,320,043 4,076 385,633 1,709,752 $ 243,119 300 13,300 36,347 6,952 92,000 5,760 4,057 7,000 34,130 442,965 $ $ - 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 48,697 (40,614) (53,158) (45,075) 4% 0% 0% -12% 0% 100% -3% (5,430) 4,347 6,952 (6,952) 1,500 1,768 (1,918) 5,429 5,696 -2% 0% 0% 25% 16% 0% 2% 23% 0% -38% 14% 1% $ 46,709 46,709 $ 2,136 46,285 48,421 $ 32,373 32,373 $ 34,140 34,140 $ 12,569 12,569 0% 27% 27% $ 2,079,713 $ 2,160,047 $ 2,076,306 $ 2,195,842 $ 2,186,857 $ (26,810) -1% 26,810 -2% (1,048,938) $ $ (1,129,272) $ 669 $ $ 900,000 130,775 1,030,775 46,709 46,709 $ 218,187 7 232 1,329 12,770 52,477 5,546 2,173 7,282 39,559 339,562 $ % $ (977,710) $ $ $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 237,689 300 17,647 43,299 93,500 7,528 4,057 5,082 39,559 448,661 1,017,682 257,325 1,275,007 FY 2004-05 Adopted 228,218 300 18,741 43,299 93,500 7,528 4,057 5,000 39,559 440,202 $ $ 900,000 130,775 1,030,775 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ (801,299) $ $ $ (1,165,067) $ $ $ (1,156,082) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Materials Management (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 730 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FTE 6.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title GRAPHIC EQUIPMENT TECH HR SPECIALIST PC SPECIALIST PROGRAM COORDINATOR PURCHASING SPECIALIST PURCHASING SUPERVISOR TECHNOLOGY ANALYST Total 670 FTE 7.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 7.00 2.00 1.00 35.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Medical Examiner Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Health Services Officer Medical Examiner Medical Examiner Dr. Philip Keen, Director Dr. Philip Keen, Director Medical Staff Deputy Director Investigations & Transport Administration Admissions Examination Laboratory Office Operations Mission The Mission of the Office of the Medical Examiner is to provide medicolegal investigations into all deaths requiring a public inquiry to determine and record the cause and manner of death for the families of the decedent, and the legal and medical community so that they can effect a resolution and have closure, affix responsibility, and protect public health and safety. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • By 2007 the Office of Medical Examiner will improve service to families and other agencies by completing cases within established time frames of 90% of cases closed within 45 days and 100% of cases closed within 90 days. • By 2007, the Office of Medical examiner will receive accreditation from the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME) and Society of Forensic Toxicologists (SOFT) to increase the expertise of staff investigating death related cases. • By 2007, the Office of Medical Examiner will increase certification of investigative staff by 10% to compliment the cooperative efforts with law enforcement agencies, public health, and county attorney investigating death related cases to insure the safety and welfare of the residents of Maricopa County. Issues • Significant growth in the population of Maricopa County will result in an increase number of deaths requiring the Office of Medical Examiner to determine and investigate the cause of death. • The increasing public demand for information relating to deaths will require the Office of Medical Examiner to implement new technology to communicate public information as it relates to deaths in Maricopa County. 671 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Medical Examiner (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER TOTAL FUNDS Program 29ME - MEDICAL EXAMINERS 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 3,629,987 248,572 TOTAL $ 3,878,559 $ Supplies & Services $ 418,319 105,100 $ 523,419 Capital Outlay 23,373 31,343 $ 54,716 $ Total Expenditures $ 4,071,679 385,015 $ 4,456,694 Total Revenue 411,795 5,250 $ 417,045 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: MEDICAL EXAMINERS Program Purpose: The purpose of the Medical Examiners is to provide a determination and timely report of findings as to the cause and manner of death, and an authorization for the cremation of decedent remains, for the families of decedents and the legal and medical community so that they can have closure, prosecute offenders, and take actions to safeguard public health and safety. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of cases completed within 90 days 94 84 78 100 Percent of autopsies performed 60 55 51 60 Key Results: 672 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Medical Examiner (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 3,392,906 $ $ 3,472,800 $ $ 3,888,275 $ $ 4,089,211 $ 217,475 $ 4,189,649 $ 267,045 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,392,906 3,472,800 3,888,275 4,306,686 4,456,694 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 3,392,906 $ $ 3,472,800 $ $ 3,888,275 $ $ 4,089,211 $ 217,475 $ 4,189,649 $ 267,045 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,392,906 3,472,800 3,888,275 4,306,686 4,456,694 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Medical Examiner FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Medical Examiner Mandates Vs. Expenditures $4.5 $4.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 6.0% $3.5 $3.0 $2.5 $2.0 $1.5 $1.0 $0.5 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 94.0% FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 3.4 3.4 0.0 0.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.9 3.9 0.0 0.0 4.3 4.1 0.2 0.0 4.5 4.2 0.3 0.0 Mandate Information TITLE Medical Examiner AUTHORITY A.R.S. §§ 11-591 through 11-600 County Medical Examiner HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Medical Examiner reviews and authorizes all death certificates prior to cremation and has the sole responsibility for conducting complete and objective medico-legal investigations of unattended, violent, sudden, unexpected and suspicious deaths. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Medical Examiner must review and report on the following categories of death: Death occurring when not under the care of a physician for a potentially fatal illness or when an attending physician is unavailable to sign the death certificate; Death resulting from violence; Death occurring suddenly when in apparent good health; Death occurring in prison; Death occurring in a suspicious, unusual, or unnatural manner; Death believed related to the decedents occupation or employment; Death believed to present a public health hazard; Death occurring during a surgical or anesthetic procedure. The Medical Examiner must review and authorize all death certificates prior to cremation of decedent's remains. 673 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Medical Examiner (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 3,630,935 $ 247,624 3,878,559 $ Supplies & Services 503,998 $ 19,421 523,419 $ Capital Outlay 54,716 $ 54,716 $ Total Expenditures 4,189,649 $ 267,045 4,456,694 $ Total Revenue 150,000 267,045 417,045 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ $ 47,022 309,678 (175) 356,524 $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 2,625,787 $ 100,872 40,339 526,454 28,868 (140,766) 3,181,554 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 87,986 178,527 8,990 12,999 60,535 21,755 6,822 42,227 2,250 12,463 15,210 6,258 13,028 469,050 $ $ Sub Total $ 124,653 124,653 Total Expenditures $ 3,775,258 CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 207,614 60,000 300,000 567,614 $ $ 2,819,242 $ 68,748 11,700 623,663 23,708 (23,696) 23,696 3,547,061 $ 66,137 164,181 10,363 7,650 61,000 24,531 8,000 29,797 6,453 3,200 6,000 4,737 392,049 $ $ $ 5,800 143,907 149,707 $ 4,088,817 $ (3,418,733) $ 267,045 60,000 300,000 627,045 $ $ 2,983,107 $ 84,669 11,700 733,730 23,708 (32,686) 32,686 3,836,914 $ 58,104 164,181 10,363 8,207 61,000 24,531 8,000 40,834 6,453 8,450 6,000 4,737 400,860 $ $ $ 132,870 132,870 $ 4,370,644 $ (3,521,203) $ $ $ 2,906,803 $ 142,861 23,243 730,523 26,469 (32,686) 87,118 3,884,330 $ 58,090 204,991 11,154 9,621 53,111 25,373 7,779 68,311 7,634 16,005 6,420 14,188 482,677 $ $ $ 88,030 88,030 $ 4,455,037 $ (3,743,599) $ 674 267,045 92,439 233,292 592,776 FY 2004-05 Requested 267,045 60,000 300,000 627,045 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 2,992,451 $ 84,669 14,906 757,266 25,282 (32,686) 32,686 3,874,574 $ 56,104 166,181 10,363 4,756 61,000 19,531 13,000 40,834 9,182 7,455 6,000 4,737 399,143 $ $ $ 121,388 121,388 $ 4,395,105 $ (3,862,261) $ 267,045 60,000 90,000 417,045 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 2,979,682 $ 84,669 29,906 759,020 25,282 (32,299) 32,299 3,878,559 $ % 210,000 210,000 0% 0% 70% 0% 33% 3,425 (18,206) (25,290) (1,574) (387) 387 (41,645) 0% 0% -156% -3% -7% 1% 1% -1% 1,601 (21,411) 167 3,451 5,000 (63,217) (2,896) 995 (10,863) (35,386) (122,559) 3% -13% 2% 42% 0% 20% 0% -155% 0% -45% 12% 0% -229% 0% -31% 0% 59% 59% 56,503 185,592 10,196 4,756 61,000 19,531 8,000 104,051 9,349 7,455 6,000 15,600 35,386 523,419 $ $ $ 54,716 54,716 $ 78,154 78,154 $ 4,456,694 $ (86,050) -2% 296,050 -8% $ (3,768,060) $ $ (4,039,649) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Medical Examiner (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 290 MEDICAL EXAMINER Market Range Title ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CRIME LAB SPECIALIST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTOR FTE 1.00 10.00 5.00 1.00 3.00 16.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title DRIVER-MEDICAL EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT HR SPECIALIST INVESTIGATOR LABORATORY MANAGER LABORATORY SUPERVISOR MEDICAL TECHNICIAN PC SPECIALIST PHYSICIAN Total 675 FTE 4.00 1.00 1.00 8.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 10.00 66.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Parks & Recreation Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Community Services Officer William Scalzo Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation Commission Deputy Director West Side Parks East Side Parks Engineering Manager Design Construction/Trails Administrator Grants/Accounting Marketing/Contracts/ Administration Mission The Mission of the Parks and Recreation Department is to provide recreational and educational opportunities while protecting park resources for residents and visitors so they can enjoy a safe and meaningful outdoor experience. Vision Our Vision is for the Maricopa County Parks and Recreation Department to be the recognized leader in the delivery of regional park services by fully utilizing existing and future park resources. Goals • By July 2006, we will continue to expand the buffer zones around existing parks and acquire lands and trail segments identified through the Arizona Preserve Initiative, BLM R&PP lease applications and the Maricopa Regional Trail Plan, at McDowell Mountain Regional Park, Cave Creek Regional Park, White Tank Mountain Regional Park and Lake Pleasant. • By December 2006, in order to meet the increased park usage and demand for park services, we will identify a funding source for each of the capital projects in the improvement plan for the park system. • By December 2009, Parks and Recreation will become non-reliant on the general fund through alternate means of funding, which may include the development of a strong non-profit foundation or other special revenue sources. • By July 2007, we will increase community involvement and awareness through improved marketing and education programs thereby reducing the percentage of the general population reporting “little or no knowledge” of county parks from 72.2% (March 2000) to 65%. 676 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Parks & Recreation (Continued) Issues • Increased urban encroachment on county parks will diminish the open space experience and natural vistas for our many park visitors. • The continuing population growth will cause the existing park facilities to be inadequate for the growing public demand for our services. • Economic trends will continue to impact county resources and increase competition for funding of parks against the demand for mandated services and this will stretch services and staff to the limit. • Due to the increase in county population and its dispersal to all corners of the county, increased marketing and education will be necessary to reach the regional population. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 300 PARKS & RECREATION TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 30ER - PARK ED & RECREATION PRGM $ 1,812,579 30SP - PARK SUPPORT 1,345,626 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 773,504 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 13,335 TOTAL $ 3,945,044 Supplies & Services $ 433,294 781,364 233,463 $ 1,448,121 Capital Outlay 354,570 10,095 $ 364,665 $ Total Expenditures $ 2,245,873 2,481,560 1,017,062 13,335 $ 5,757,830 Total Revenue 3,909,706 233,100 $ 4,142,806 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: PARK EDUCATION & RECREATION Program Purpose: The purpose of the Park Education and Recreation Program is to provide natural resource interpretation and unique recreation facilities and opportunities for individuals and groups so they can appreciate and enjoy the natural environment and have a healthy and exhilarating outdoor experience. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Satisfaction rate of park users 88.3 91.4 91.4 92 Percent of park visitors who attend a program 7.21 5.43 6.4 6.9 Key Results: Program Name: PARK SUPPORT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Park Support Program is to provide well-maintained and safe facilities for park users so they can appreciate and enjoy the natural environment. Key Results: Percent of park user satisfaction as related to facilities 677 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 81.6 89.3 89.3 89.3 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Parks & Recreation (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,501,023 $ 3,918,946 $ 1,611,737 $ 6,750,568 $ 1,688,468 $ 7,141,350 $ 1,148,975 $ 4,400,083 $ 1,271,316 $ 4,486,514 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 5,419,969 8,362,305 8,829,818 5,549,058 5,757,830 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,501,023 $ 3,918,946 $ 1,611,737 $ 6,750,568 $ 1,688,468 $ 7,141,350 $ 1,148,975 $ 4,400,083 $ 1,271,316 $ 4,486,514 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 5,419,969 8,362,305 8,829,818 5,549,058 5,757,830 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Parks & Recreation FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Parks & Recreation Mandates Vs. Expenditures $9.0 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $8.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $7.0 $6.0 $5.0 $4.0 $3.0 $2.0 $1.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 678 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 5.4 0.0 0.0 5.4 8.4 0.0 0.0 8.4 8.8 0.0 0.0 8.8 5.5 0.0 0.0 5.5 5.8 0.0 0.0 5.8 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Parks & Recreation (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 300 PARKS & RECREATION Fund Type ELIMINATIONS GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services $ 688,933 3,256,111 3,945,044 $ Supplies & Services (17,000) $ 557,264 907,857 1,448,121 $ Capital Outlay $ 25,119 339,546 364,665 $ Total Expenditures (17,000) $ 1,271,316 4,503,514 5,757,830 $ Total Revenue (17,000) 4,159,806 4,142,806 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 300 PARKS & RECREATION ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 652 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ 42,780 410,000 2,832,370 1,050 98,488 908,083 0 4,292,772 $ $ 168,470 470,000 2,584,800 201,400 1,144,685 4,569,355 $ $ 168,470 470,000 2,584,700 201,400 1,144,785 4,569,355 $ $ 129,996 577,500 2,818,875 882 66,288 1,258,976 3,497 4,856,015 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 57,470 445,000 2,747,150 94,500 779,735 4,123,855 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 57,470 445,000 2,766,101 94,500 779,735 4,142,806 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ 111,000 25,000 (181,401) 106,900 365,050 426,549 66% 5% -7% 0% 53% 32% 0% 0% 9% EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 3,118,881 $ 58,111 2,831 893,296 12,367 (576,456) 476,423 3,985,453 $ 3,139,679 $ 64,000 5,700 1,104,154 (586,913) 481,282 4,207,902 $ 2,714,359 $ 69,250 5,700 932,787 116,538 (465,886) 481,282 3,854,030 $ 2,802,839 $ 55,547 3,324 917,150 7,224 (473,175) 498,533 3,811,443 $ 2,912,173 $ 56,000 2,300 967,542 26,775 (380,800) 451,687 4,035,677 $ 2,709,458 $ 51,000 2,300 931,364 (371,113) 622,035 3,945,044 $ 4,901 18,250 3,400 1,423 116,538 (94,773) (140,753) (91,014) 0% 26% 60% 0% 100% 20% -29% -2% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 357,944 2,249 117,798 34,680 103 450 256,898 33,610 94,275 64,132 107,840 15,180 3,575 269,930 98,019 1,456,681 597,691 650 104,772 24,888 471,799 27,148 171,560 64,000 121,901 23,644 3,100 251,300 60,366 1,922,819 590,322 650 101,772 24,888 390,728 27,148 168,560 65,700 111,826 21,394 2,750 261,300 60,366 1,827,404 430,915 273 107,581 18,356 248,933 19,828 69,214 63,951 112,101 21,081 2,606 236,567 60,366 1,391,770 586,254 500 99,372 19,370 158,000 27,148 67,200 66,700 114,951 31,374 2,660 213,416 1,386,945 514,414 500 107,472 10,870 130,095 178,469 63,200 66,700 114,951 26,374 2,660 232,416 1,448,121 75,908 150 (5,700) 14,018 260,633 (151,321) 105,360 (1,000) (3,125) (4,980) 90 28,884 60,366 379,283 13% 23% -6% 56% 0% 0% 67% -557% 63% -2% -3% -23% 3% 11% 100% 21% CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 3,199,118 28,014 134,045 3,361,177 $ 0% 35% 0% 100% 100% 0% 39% Total Expenditures $ 8,803,311 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 412,922 41,500 71,820 526,242 $ 6,656,963 (4,510,539) $ $ $ $ $ 524,118 49,820 28,500 602,438 $ 6,283,872 (2,087,608) $ $ $ $ 453,772 49,340 503,112 $ 5,706,324 (1,714,517) $ 679 $ $ $ $ $ 542,000 488,501 15,024 1,045,525 $ 6,468,147 (850,310) $ $ $ $ $ 339,546 15,024 10,095 364,665 $ 184,572 (15,024) 49,820 28,500 (10,095) 237,773 $ 5,757,830 $ 526,042 8% (99,493) 6% (2,344,292) $ (1,615,024) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Parks & Recreation (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 300 PARKS & RECREATION Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CHIEF OFFICER CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR EDUCATOR FTE 1.00 1.00 2.00 3.50 1.00 7.00 2.00 9.00 1.00 1.00 12.00 Market Range Title ENGINEERING AIDE ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR GENERAL LABORER GENERAL MAINTENANCE SUPV GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR SPECIALIST PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE TRADES SPECIALIST TRADES SUPERVISOR Total 680 FTE 2.00 1.00 1.00 21.00 1.00 8.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 86.50 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Planning & Development Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Regional Development Services Agency Officer Joy Rich Planning & Development Planning & Development Administration Technology Services Development Services Planning Services Mission The Mission of the Planning and Development Department is to provide planning and development services to constituents of unincorporated Maricopa County so they can responsibly develop and enjoy real property. Vision The Vision of the Planning and Development Department is to provide market competitive planning and development services that are safe, consistent, timely and convenient for our constituents. Goals • By the end of FY06, the first review turn around time for plan reviews in the One Stop Shop (OSS) process will be thirty (30) days or less. • By the end of FY06, all One Stop Shop (OSS) participating departments will have representatives physically located together to enhance customer service and reduce travel requirements of customers. • By the end of FY06, integrate Drainage Administration functions into Planning and Development Department. This will provide better administration and coordination of drainage regulations with planning and development activities resulting in more comprehensive inspections. • By the end of FY06, training/certification processes will be implemented to ensure 100% of inspectors are qualified to conduct both building and flood drainage inspections. • By the end of FY07, digital intake and online processing of application submissions will be available. Issues • Current business processes in support of OSS goals are not aligned within the OSS partners. Until the partners utilize tools such as workflow and digitalized distribution to analyze business processes, these goals cannot be aligned. • The OSS process does not provide a physical single stop for review of customer’s submittals. Without a physical single stop where the customer can obtain a completed submittal review by all OSS partners, reduction of time for this process can never be achieved. 681 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Planning & Development (Continued) • Current administration of inspections, building and flood, being provided by separate programs does not allow for a coordinated and timely completion of these tasks. This lack of centralized scheduling, inspecting and updating inspection results delays the status of the permit being changed to “Final” and the customer being able to obtain utilities. • The OSS partners currently depend on a manual paper based distribution and review to process documents and plans for each permit request. This system does not provide timely distribution and prevention of loss of these documents to OSS partners and within those departments. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 44SH - ONE STOP SHOP $ 5,303,563 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 2,051,507 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 713,325 TOTAL $ 8,068,395 Supplies & Services $ 801,315 1,312,999 605,158 $ 2,719,472 Capital Outlay 86,000 236,081 $ 322,081 $ Total Expenditures $ 6,190,878 3,600,587 1,318,483 $ 11,109,948 Total Revenue 11,138,503 236,497 $ 11,375,000 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ONE STOP SHOP Program Purpose: The purpose of the One Stop Shop program is to provide a single point of contact for coordinated county development services to the customer so they may complete their development projects in a faster and more cost efficient manner. Key Results: Percent of OSS actions taken within OSS targets 682 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A N/A 82 90 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Planning & Development (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 6,856,925 $ 6,787,741 $ 7,686,397 $ 8,846,649 $ 11,109,948 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 6,856,925 6,787,741 7,686,397 8,846,649 11,109,948 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 3,782,557 $ 4,222,810 $ 4,845,070 $ 5,469,256 $ 7,323,120 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,782,557 4,222,810 4,845,070 5,469,256 7,323,120 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 3,074,368 $ 2,564,931 $ 2,841,327 $ 3,377,393 $ 3,786,828 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,074,368 2,564,931 2,841,327 3,377,393 3,786,828 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Planning & Development FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Planning & Development Mandates Vs. Expenditures $12.0 General Fund Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions $10.0 Non-Mandated 34.1% $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Other Fund Mandated 65.9% Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated 683 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 6.9 0.0 3.8 3.1 6.8 0.0 4.2 2.6 7.7 0.0 4.8 2.8 8.8 0.0 5.5 3.4 11.1 0.0 7.3 3.8 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Planning & Development (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Issue Permits, Zoning Enforcement AUTHORITY A.R.S. 11-808A Enforcement; A.R.S. 11-808B Building Permits; A.R.S. 11-322 Violations. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Board of Supervisors adopted the current Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance in May 1969. The Uniform Building Code and other related codes were adopted in December 1974. In 1975, the Building Safety Division was established. Violations of the zoning ordinance were reported to Zoning Enforcement. The Zoning Division was reorganized in 1994 and is now known as Development Services. On March 13, 2000, the Planning and Development Department transitioned to the "One Stop Shop" permitting program, an interdepartmental approach to providing enhanced developmental services to citizens. In October 2002 the International Building Code was adopted, with an effective date of January 1, 2004. MANDATE DESCRIPTION It is unlawful to erect, construct, reconstruct, alter or use any building or other structures without obtaining a zoning clearance from the County in the unincorporated areas of the County. The County must enforce its adopted zoning ordinance. Issue Permits, Zoning Enforcement FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 1,853,084 $ 2,277,655 $ 2,659,526 $ 3,180,424 $ 4,368,771 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,853,084 2,277,655 2,659,526 3,180,424 4,368,771 TITLE Building Construction and Inspection AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-861 Adoption Of Building Codes, Limitations, Method Of Adoption, Rules And Regulation; A.R.S. § 11-862 Advisory Board; Appointment Terms; Duties. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Board of Supervisors adopted the current Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance in May 1969. The Uniform Building Code and other related codes were adopted in December 1974. In 1975, the Building Safety Department was established and a Building Code Advisory Board was formed. The Building Safety Department merged with the Planning and Development Department and became what is now known as Plan Review and Inspection Services. On March 13, 2000, Inspection Services became part of the "One Stop Shop" program, an interdepartmental approach to providing enhanced developmental services to citizens. In October 2002 the International Building Code was adopted, with an effective date of January 1, 2004. MANDATE DESCRIPTION It is unlawful to erect, construct, reconstruct, alter or use any building or other structures without obtaining a building permit from the County. All buildings and structures in unincorporated areas must be built to code and inspected. An Advisory Board, as required by the International Building Code, must determine the suitability of alternative materials and construction and interpret the provisions of the Code. Building Construction and Inspection FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 1,088,512 $ 1,119,160 $ 1,426,518 $ 1,439,354 $ 1,659,778 684 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,088,512 1,119,160 1,426,518 1,439,354 1,659,778 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Planning & Development (Continued) TITLE Zoning and Subdivision Regulations and Board of Adjustment AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 11-8-806.01 Subdivision Regulation; Platting Rules; Violation; Classification; Easement Vesting; A.R.S. § 11-821B County Plan; A.R.S. § 11-829 Amendment; A.R.S. § 11-807 Board Of Adjustment, Power, Appeals. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The current Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1969. The Subdivision Regulations were adopted in 1972. The Board of Adjustment hears variances to the ordinance and interprets appeals to the ordinance. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Develop and administer zoning ordinances for unincorporated areas. Review and act on citizen requests for amendment or change in the zoning ordinance of areas previously zoned. Regulates the subdivision of all lands within the unincorporated areas. The Board of Adjustment hears variance cases and appeals of zoning ordinance. Zoning & Subdivision Regulations and Board of Adjustment FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 539,280 $ 626,336 $ 561,875 $ 648,530 $ 966,111 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 539,280 626,336 561,875 648,530 966,111 TITLE County Comprehensive Plan AUTHORITY A.R.S. Title 11, Article 1, § 11-806 Powers and Duties, Comprehensive Plan; A.R.S. § 11-821(A) County Plan, definition; A.R.S. § 11-824(E) Adoption and Amendment of County Plan by Board of Supervisors. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND A.R.S. Title 11, Article 1, § 11-806 states "The board shall adopt a comprehensive plan and subsequently amend or extend the adopted plan." § 11-821(A) states, "…the Board of Supervisors shall adopt or readopt a comprehensive long-term county plan for the development of the area of jurisdiction. " On October 20,1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted "Maricopa County 2020, Eye to the Future" as the comprehensive plan of Maricopa County. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Adopt a comprehensive plan as the official guide to accomplish a coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the area of jurisdiction. The comprehensive plan shall be developed so as to conserve the natural resources of the county, to ensure efficient expenditure of public funds, and to promote the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the public. The Board of Supervisors shall consult and advise with citizens and stakeholders to secure the maximum coordination of plans to best promote with efficiency and economy the health, safety, and, general welfare of the public. County Comprehensive Plan FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 301,681 $ 199,659 $ 197,151 $ 200,948 $ 328,460 685 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 301,681 199,659 197,151 200,948 328,460 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Planning & Development (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Fund Type SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 8,068,395 $ 8,068,395 $ Supplies & Services 2,719,472 $ 2,719,472 $ Capital Outlay 322,081 $ 322,081 $ Total Expenditures 11,109,948 $ 11,109,948 $ Total Revenue 11,375,000 11,375,000 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 610 LICENSES AND PERMITS 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 9,273,841 2,794,026 2,230 280,189 26,463 12,376,749 $ $ 8,184,000 2,072,000 3,000 155,000 264,000 10,678,000 $ $ 8,184,000 2,072,000 3,000 155,000 264,000 10,678,000 $ $ 9,420,727 2,490,221 1,950 114,528 23,111 12,050,537 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 8,211,968 2,908,294 2,328 236,497 15,913 11,375,000 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 8,211,968 2,908,294 2,328 236,497 15,913 11,375,000 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ (27,968) (836,294) 672 (81,497) 248,087 (697,000) 0% -40% 22% -53% 94% -7% 4,156,603 $ 22,735 6,701 992,052 5,386 (26,670) 3,000 5,159,808 $ 4,802,163 $ 12,727 1,347,806 (51,748) 6,000 6,116,948 $ 5,934,906 $ 12,727 1,745,788 (56,141) 10,393 7,647,673 $ 4,748,005 $ (547) 6,929 1,311,031 1,791 (51,748) 10,393 6,025,854 $ 6,213,901 $ 15,427 1,904,983 (65,916) 8,068,395 $ 6,213,901 $ 15,427 1,904,983 (65,916) 8,068,395 $ (278,995) (2,700) (159,195) 9,775 10,393 (420,722) -5% 0% -21% -9% 0% -17% 100% -6% $ 192,849 35,010 8,500 223,177 654,251 58,941 405,771 90,879 254,112 1,923,490 $ 541,752 39,518 17,462 3,500 299,549 717,194 58,944 432,804 61,773 254,112 2,426,608 $ 532,900 46,159 14,593 10,340 279,311 717,194 32,196 416,054 54,198 14,667 254,112 2,371,723 $ 703,449 35,010 4,000 8,500 351,865 782,187 121,200 257,124 147,850 6,000 302,287 2,719,472 $ 546,738 35,010 4,000 8,500 351,865 782,187 121,200 413,835 147,850 6,000 302,287 2,719,472 $ Sub Total $ 275,475 46,817 12,146 11,016 408,664 651,496 55,378 210,188 69,446 14,556 481,675 2,236,857 (4,986) 4,508 13,462 (5,000) (52,316) (64,993) (62,256) 18,969 (86,077) (6,000) (48,175) (292,864) -1% 11% 77% -143% -17% -9% -106% 4% -139% 0% -19% -12% CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT $ 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 35,428 206,495 47,808 289,731 $ $ $ 86,000 236,081 322,081 $ $ 86,000 236,081 322,081 $ $ 76,460 101,600 208,770 386,830 $ $ 118,066 102,800 208,770 429,636 $ $ 170,408 170,408 $ 118,066 16,800 (27,311) 107,555 100% 16% -13% 25% Total Expenditures $ 7,686,397 $ 8,210,846 $ 10,503,917 $ 8,784,407 $ 11,109,948 $ 11,109,948 $ (606,031) -6% 4,690,352 $ 2,467,154 $ 174,083 $ 3,266,130 $ 265,052 $ 265,052 $ (90,969) -52% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 880 TRANSFERS OUT Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ 686 $ $ $ $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Planning & Development (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 440 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CHIEF OFFICER DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST ENGINEER ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR HR SPECIALIST INFO CENTER MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR FTE 5.00 7.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 6.00 1.00 7.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title INSPECTION SUPERVISOR INSPECTOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST OPERATIONS MANAGER PC SPECIALIST PLANNER PLANNING SUPERVISOR PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC SVC SUPERVISOR TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST UNDETERMINED Total 687 FTE 6.00 26.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 12.00 6.00 55.00 6.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 159.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Defender Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Public Defender Public Defender James J. Haas, Director James J. Haas, Director Adult Criminal Representation Juvenile Adjudication & Incorrigibility Representation Mental Health Representation Appellate Representation Information Technology Administrative Services Mission The Mission of the Public Defender’s Office is to provide quality legal representation to indigent individuals assigned to us by the court, thus safeguarding the fundamental legal rights of each member of the community. Vision The Vision of the Public Defender’s Office is to Deliver America’s Promise of Justice for All Goals • By July 2006, the goal of the Public Defender’s Office is to establish and maintain an effective, Countysanctioned case-weighting and counting system that includes acceptable performance standards, meets all ethical guidelines, and provides a mechanism for maintaining appropriate workloads consistent with the 2003 Spangenberg Case Weighting Study. • By July 2006, the goal of the Public Defender’s Office is to advocate for and work cooperatively with our justice system partners to develop an effective approach to indigency screening, which includes specific guidelines to distinguish defendants who, based on their financial status, qualify for court-appointed counsel from those who can afford private counsel and those who can contribute to the cost of a courtappointed defense. • By July 2006, the goal of the Public Defender’s Office is to implement a case management system that will meet our need for comprehensive case information, while simultaneously offering a tool to improve our ability to manage cases and share information, knowledge and resources, thus improving our ability to focus on case-specific work. • By July 2007, the goal of the Public Defender’s Office is to reduce the number of cases requiring administrative withdrawal by effectively advocating for the development of an Indigent Representation staffing plan that includes a commitment to sufficient funding and timely response to workload increases. • An ongoing goal of the Public Defender’s Office is to maintain cost effectiveness by limiting the percentage of increases in the annual cost per case to no more than the percentage of increase in the overall annual funding of the County’s justice group. 688 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Defender (Continued) Issues • Recent developments in case law, legislation and court rules have the potential to seriously impact current caseloads/workloads and timeliness, which could adversely affect the average cost per case. • Increasing case filings, combined with the courts’ continued emphasis on moving cases more quickly, will reduce efficiency, resulting in less time and resources available to assist clients, reducing the quality of legal representation, and increasing stress and staff turnover. • The lack of available and adequate office/parking space, and plans to relocate the Office in a building located several blocks from the downtown court complex will reduce efficiency by increasing the amount of time needed for staff to accomplish their duties. • A tightening, competitive external employment market and the lack of internal perceived parity of workload, salaries and other resources makes it difficult for the Public Defender Office to employ and retain a creative, skilled and knowledgeable workforce. • Rapid increases in population and continued emphasis on law enforcement will increase the number of indigent defendants, resulting in more cases for the office. • The increasing number of limited-English speaking clients and the shortage of qualified interpreters will reduce efficiency, delay case resolution, and deny these clients access to justice. • The lack of an effective, coordinated case management system continues to limit our ability to substantiate caseload issues and the related financial implications. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 52AF - ADULT FELONY REPRESENTATION $ 19,369,403 52AM - ADULT MISDEMNR REPRESENTATION 677,454 52AR - APPELLATE REPRESENTATION 2,284,912 52JD - JUV DELINQ/INCORR REPRESENTN 3,451,911 52MH - MENTAL HEALTH REPRESENTATION 640,357 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 1,173,910 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 453,985 TOTAL $ 28,051,932 Supplies & Services $ 1,309,811 32,460 720,533 264,941 62,103 2,226,563 550,635 $ 5,167,046 689 Capital Outlay 139,496 8,365 25,183 33,374 6,376 245,900 $ 458,694 $ Total Expenditures $ 20,818,710 718,279 3,030,628 3,750,226 708,836 3,400,473 1,250,520 $ 33,677,672 Total Revenue 1,406,967 413,751 808,875 $ 2,629,593 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Defender (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: ADULT FELONY REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Adult Felony Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent adults charged with felony offenses so that their rights are protected. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Capital Caseload Guideline N/A N/A -62 -134 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Other Homicide Caseload Guideline N/A 13.26 14 10 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Class Two and Three Felony Caseload Guideline N/A 13.26 14 10 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Class Four, Five, and Six Felony Caseload Guideline N/A 13.2 14 10 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Felony DUI Caseload Guideline N/A 13.26 14 10 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Violation of Probation Caseload Guideline N/A 13.26 14 10 Key Results: Program Name: ADULT MISDEMEANOR REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Adult Misdemeanor Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent adults charged with misdemeanor offenses so that their rights are protected. Key Results: Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Misdemeanor Caseload Guideline 690 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 13.26 14 10 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Defender (Continued) Program Name: APPELLATE REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Appellate Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent persons appealing their convictions, adjudications, and dependency matters so that their rights are protected. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Adult Appeal Caseload Guideline N/A N/A 40 39 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney PostConviction Relief Caseload Guideline N/A N/A 40 39 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Juvenile Appeal Caseload Guideline N/A N/A 56 50 Key Results: Program Name: JUVENILE DELINQ. AND INCORR. REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Juvenile Delinquency and Incorrigibility Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent juveniles charged with incorrigible or delinquent acts so that their rights are protected. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney FelonyLevel Juvenile Delinquency Caseload Guideline N/A 24.4 31 31 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Incorrigibility and Misdemeanor-Level Juvenile Delinquency Caseload Guideline N/A 24.4 31 31 Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Juvenile Violation of Probation Caseload Guideline N/A 24.4 31 30.6 Key Results: Program Name: MENTAL HEALTH REPRESENTATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of Mental Health Representation Program is to provide effective legal representation to assigned indigent persons who are at risk of loss of liberty in civil mental health matters so that their rights are protected. Key Results: Percent of Variance from Current Annual Attorney Mental Health Caseload Guideline 691 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 9.92 11 14 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Defender (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 23,218,924 $ 1,255,499 $ 24,965,487 $ 1,526,408 $ 26,625,443 $ 1,558,489 $ 29,065,076 $ 1,684,746 $ 31,100,074 $ 2,577,598 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 24,474,423 26,491,894 28,183,932 30,749,822 33,677,672 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 23,218,924 $ 1,255,499 $ 24,965,487 $ 1,526,408 $ 26,625,443 $ 1,558,489 $ 29,065,076 $ 1,684,746 $ 31,100,074 $ 2,577,598 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 24,474,423 26,491,894 28,183,932 30,749,822 33,677,672 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Public Defender FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Public Defender Mandates Vs. Expenditures $35.0 $30.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 7.7% $25.0 $20.0 $15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 92.3% 692 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 24.5 23.2 1.3 0.0 26.5 25.0 1.5 0.0 28.2 26.6 1.6 0.0 30.7 29.1 1.7 0.0 33.7 31.1 2.6 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Defender (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Legal Defense of Indigent Criminal Defendants and Delinquent or Incorrigible Juveniles AUTHORITY U.S. Constitution, 5th and 6th Amendments; Arizona Constitution, Article 2, § 24; ARS §§ 11-581 to 587; Rule 6, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure; Rule 20, Arizona Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The United States and Arizona Constitutions provide that an individual facing criminal charges has a right to the assistance of counsel. The United States and Arizona Supreme Courts have interpreted these provisions as requiring that counsel be provided, at government expense, for individuals facing loss of liberty who cannot afford to hire counsel. Historically, in Maricopa County, indigent defendants charged in criminal cases, and juveniles accused of delinquency or incorrigibility, were assigned to private attorneys who contracted to provide those services. In order to maximize the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of services mandated, Maricopa County has since funded the creation of three on-staff public defender offices (Offices of the Public Defender, Legal Defender, and Legal Advocate). Contract private attorneys continue to be assigned to a lesser number of cases, specifically those that the other offices are unable to handle (typically due to conflicts of interest). Those contract assignments continue to be managed and monitored by the Office of Contract Counsel. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Legal defense of indigent criminal defendants at risk of loss of liberty in criminal proceedings, including felony, misdemeanor, and probation violation cases. Legal defense of indigent criminal defendants in appeals and post-conviction relief cases. Legal representation of juveniles facing delinquency or incorrigibility charges. Legal representation of defendants opposing extradition. Legal representation in postconviction relief cases of persons sentenced to death. Legal representation of witnesses in criminal cases, when assigned by the court. TITLE Judicial Mandates AUTHORITY A.R.S. §§ 36-528(D), 36-536(A), 36-537, 8-221. U.S. Constitution, 5th and 6th Amendments; Arizona Constitution Article 2, § 24; ARS §§ 11-584 to 587. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Historically, Public Defenders have not had the authority to handle civil proceedings. As a result, in Maricopa County, private attorneys who contracted to provide these services were used almost exclusively. Due to changes in legislation, Maricopa County became responsible to provide representation to indigent individuals facing mental health commitments and to those involved in child dependency and severance proceedings. In order to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of services mandated, Maricopa County has funded the creation of two on-staff dependency units (Offices of the Legal Defender and Legal Advocate) and one on-staff mental health unit (Public Defender). In addition, contracted private attorneys are assigned to cases that the other offices are unable to handle (typically due to conflicts of interest). MANDATE DESCRIPTION Legal representation of indigent persons at risk of a loss of liberty in civil mental health proceedings. Legal representation of indigent individuals involved in civil child dependency or severance proceedings, including the minor children in question. 693 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Defender (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 26,586,589 $ 1,465,343 28,051,932 $ Supplies & Services 4,300,691 $ 866,355 5,167,046 $ Capital Outlay 212,794 $ 245,900 458,694 $ Total Expenditures 31,100,074 $ 2,577,598 33,677,672 $ Total Revenue 52,000 2,577,593 2,629,593 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 718,355 $ 398,625 567,965 (0) 10,378 1,695,323 $ $ 20,152,151 147,471 4,100,295 435,550 24,835,467 SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE Sub Total $ 349,624 $ 11,034 12,390 1,521,387 127,522 1,683,430 37,288 49,394 210,099 31,900 (2) 4,856 4,038,921 $ 312,000 12,000 1,528,741 13,000 135,314 1,887,000 55,000 80,500 207,585 35,000 4,266,140 CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT $ 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 5,168 5,168 Total Expenditures $ 28,183,495 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 20,014,151 184,591 3,915,423 25,241 24,139,407 $ 719,782 413,188 543,600 9,000 1,685,570 $ $ 143,753 143,753 $ 29,245,360 (26,488,173) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 719,782 413,188 603,600 9,000 1,745,570 21,160,829 147,471 4,875,068 44,927 26,228,295 314,664 12,000 3,180 1,669,496 13,000 242,491 1,887,000 55,000 81,268 207,459 35,852 4,521,410 $ 111,626 143,753 255,379 $ 31,005,084 (27,559,790) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 694 717,938 $ 400,465 650,490 (0) 9,000 1,777,893 $ 784,463 415,420 1,420,710 9,000 2,629,593 20,772,837 $ 169,020 785 4,726,246 28,920 (11,037,065) 11,253,914 25,914,657 $ 22,250,918 180,000 5,582,624 37,411 28,050,953 378,511 11,714 1,360 1,708,364 138 141,245 1,616,734 31,424 70,658 260,424 37,575 375 4,258,522 $ 19,500 120,023 139,523 $ 30,312,702 (29,259,514) $ FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ 565,000 12,000 1,720,000 431,705 2,026,068 30,000 54,835 296,412 32,000 5,168,020 $ 245,900 212,794 458,694 $ 33,677,667 (28,534,809) $ FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 784,463 415,420 1,420,710 9,000 2,629,593 22,250,920 180,000 5,583,601 37,411 28,051,932 565,000 12,000 1,720,000 431,705 2,026,068 30,000 54,835 295,438 32,000 5,167,046 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ $ $ $ $ (64,681) (2,232) (817,110) (884,023) -9% -1% -135% 0% 0% -51% (1,090,091) (32,529) (708,533) 7,516 (1,823,637) -5% -22% 0% -15% 17% 0% 0% -7% (250,336) 3,180 (50,504) 13,000 (189,214) (139,068) 25,000 26,433 (87,979) 3,852 (645,636) -80% 0% 100% -3% 100% -78% -7% 45% 33% -42% 11% 0% 0% 0% -14% -120% 0% -48% -80% $ 245,900 212,794 458,694 $ (134,274) (69,041) (203,315) $ 33,677,672 $ (2,672,588) -9% 1,788,565 -6% (31,048,074) $ $ % (31,048,079) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Defender (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 520 PUBLIC DEFENDER Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV ATTORNEY DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST HR SPECIALIST INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INVESTIGATOR FTE 5.00 1.00 46.00 2.00 1.00 243.80 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 36.00 Market Range Title LEGAL ASSISTANT LEGAL ASSISTANT SUPV LEGAL ORDER SERVER LEGAL SECRETARY SUPV LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT MITIGATION SVCS REP PC SPECIALIST PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC SVC SUPERVISOR TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST UNDETERMINED Total 695 FTE 27.00 2.00 1.00 8.00 58.00 1.00 14.00 4.00 6.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 466.80 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Fiduciary Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Community Services Officer Public Fiduciary Public Fiduciary Richard T. Vanderheiden, Director Richard T. Vanderheiden, Director Investigation Services Probate and Conservator Services Administrative Support and Legal Coordination Estate Operations Guardian Services Burial Services Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Public Fiduciary is to provide guardianship, conservatorship, decedent services and court ordered investigations for vulnerable persons so their estates and well being are protected. Vision To be a recognized leader in providing professional, efficient and compassionate fiduciary services. Goals • By September 1, 2006, we will develop and integrate a Knowledge Management system with our Case Management Plan into an upgraded case management application in order to achieve a 10% increase in fiduciary program productivity over fiscal year 2003-04 benchmarks. • By November 1, 2006, we will develop a mental health guardianship division for the efficient and effective intake and administration of these cases. • By January 1, 2007 we will have mapped all departmental operations and updated critical skill and core competency matrices for each position. Issues • The reactions of the State and the Courts to failing fiduciaries and financial abuse cases places an increased demand for accountability of fiduciaries and result in more cases and court ordered investigations and additional risk exposure for public fiduciary operations. • The increasing number of elderly and vulnerable adults in Arizona results in more persons needing fiduciary services and places increased demands on the public fiduciary requiring more staff for investigative services and the additional cases. • The increasing population of mentally ill patients that have or will be de-institutionalized and the lack of understanding, by other agencies and the Courts, of the Public Fiduciary’s role has resulted in unnecessary Court appointments, which places an increased demand for mental health guardianship services on the Public Fiduciary’s office. 696 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Fiduciary (Continued) • The existing case management system is not integrated with our time management and case notes systems, increasing the risk of errors and potential accountability gaps. • Within the next two to five years approximately 50% of the Public Fiduciary staff will be eligible to and may retire, which will impact the delivery of services in the future. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY TOTAL FUNDS Program 34BS - BURIAL SERVICES PROGRAM 34FS - FIDUCIARY SERVICES PROGRAM 34IS - INVESTIGATION SERVICES PROGRAM 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 79,614 1,483,018 55,246 112,989 TOTAL $ 1,730,867 $ Supplies & Services $ 203,537 39,392 $ 242,929 Capital Outlay 8,176 1,450 $ 9,626 $ Total Expenditures $ 79,614 1,694,731 55,246 153,831 $ 1,983,422 Total Revenue 930,000 $ 930,000 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: BURIAL SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Burial Services Program is to provide final disposition to decedents of indigent families of Maricopa County so that eligible burial services can be arranged. Key Results: Percent of indigent burial determinations made within five business days. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 94 93 96 95 Program Name: FIDUCIARY SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Fiduciary Services Program is to provide court appointed guardianship, conservatorship and probate services to those persons or estates when no other person or corporation is qualified and willing to serve so that their well being, property and interests are protected. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of annual Guardian reports filed with the Court on time. 99 99 99.64 99 Percent of inventories filed with the Court on time. 93 96.43 92 95 Percent of Court accountings filed with the Court on time. 100 100 100 100 Key Results: 697 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Fiduciary (Continued) Program Name: INVESTIGATION SERVICES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Investigation Services Program is to provide information and recommendations to the court and community so that adjudication or alternative services may be sought. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of timeliness in filing mental health mandated reports and Court ordered reports. 100 100 100 100 Percent of cases resulting in substantiation of financial exploitation. 56 44 35.63 40 Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,703,933 $ $ 1,820,125 $ $ 1,809,435 $ $ 1,958,091 $ $ 1,983,422 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,703,933 1,820,125 1,809,435 1,958,091 1,983,422 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 1,703,933 $ $ 1,820,125 $ $ 1,809,435 $ $ 1,958,091 $ $ 1,983,422 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,703,933 1,820,125 1,809,435 1,958,091 1,983,422 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Public Fiduciary FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Public Fiduciary Mandates Vs. Expenditures $2.0 $1.8 Non-Mandated 0.0% $1.6 Dollars in Millions Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $1.4 $1.2 $1.0 $0.8 $0.6 $0.4 $0.2 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated General Fund Mandated 100.0% 698 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Fiduciary (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Office of the Public Fiduciary AUTHORITY A.R.S. §14-5601 through 5606 Establishment Of Office Of Public Fiduciary; Appointments; Costs. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND In 1973, the legislature undertook a substantial revision of all laws relating to decedents' estates, guardianships, protective proceedings, and court investigations. The Office of the Public Fiduciary was established by statute in 1975. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Public Fiduciary is appointed for those persons or decedents' estates in need of guardianship, conservatorship or administration and for whom there is no person or corporation qualified and willing to act in that capacity. The Public Fiduciary is also mandated to do court ordered investigation under A.R.S. §36-540 and investigations under A.R.S. §46-454. Office of the Public Fiduciary FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 1,638,521 $ 1,733,689 $ 1,724,377 $ 1,855,708 $ 1,907,353 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,638,521 1,733,689 1,724,377 1,855,708 1,907,353 TITLE Indigent Burial Services AUTHORITY A.R.S. §36-831 Burial Responsibility HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Prior to 1988, the County Hospital performed the functions required for indigent burial services. Since 1988, the Office of the Public Fiduciary performs the following functions related to this mandate. The Public Fiduciary’s Office determines eligibility for burial in the County cemetery, makes arrangements for burials with funeral homes, processes records and payments for mortuaries (paid for by the General Government department), schedules burials weekly with Facilities Management Department (Facilities Management prepares the burial site, completes the grave preparation after the funeral, and maintains the cemeteries), and coordinates clergy attendance at funerals. Maricopa County has responsibility for the burial of deceased persons who have left neither spouse nor qualified kindred. Indigent Burial Services FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 65,412 $ 86,436 $ 85,058 $ 102,383 $ 76,069 $ - 699 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Enterprise - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 65,412 86,436 85,058 102,383 76,069 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Fiduciary (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY Fund Type GENERAL FUND ALL FUNDS Personal Services 1,730,867 $ 1,730,867 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 242,929 $ 242,929 $ Capital Outlay 9,626 $ 9,626 $ Total Expenditures 1,983,422 $ 1,983,422 $ Total Revenue 930,000 930,000 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES Total Revenue EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS % $ $ 650,000 650,000 $ $ 650,000 650,000 $ $ 925,000 925,000 $ $ 650,000 650,000 $ $ 930,000 930,000 $ $ (280,000) (280,000) -43% -43% $ 1,251,265 38,643 273,905 1,563,813 $ 1,260,526 31,000 282,759 1,574,285 $ 1,320,077 31,000 333,273 1,684,350 $ 1,331,577 27,851 356,650 1,716,078 $ 1,315,346 31,000 372,848 1,719,194 $ 1,325,835 31,000 374,032 1,730,867 $ (5,758) (40,759) (46,517) 0% 0% -12% -3% -60% -28% 34% 3% 7% 13% -9% -28% -1% $ $ $ Sub Total $ $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) Adopted Vs Revised Variance 1,010,358 1,010,358 16,620 2,401 5,860 194,023 96 9,456 7,952 8,087 244,495 CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ $ $ 15,455 2,500 5,025 199,451 3,000 12,201 7,000 7,400 252,032 864 864 $ $ 1,809,172 $ (798,814) $ $ $ $ 14,849 2,500 5,025 190,151 1,081 12,201 7,000 7,400 240,207 14,796 14,796 $ $ 1,841,113 $ (1,191,113) $ $ $ $ 23,484 2,659 2,668 178,188 283 12,259 7,080 7,791 234,412 14,796 14,796 $ $ 1,939,353 $ (1,289,353) $ $ $ $ 23,687 3,200 5,351 184,062 8,422 10,580 9,800 9,500 254,602 864 864 $ $ 1,951,355 $ (1,026,355) $ $ $ $ 23,687 3,200 3,300 184,062 1,000 10,580 7,600 9,500 242,929 $ (8,838) (700) 1,725 6,089 81 1,621 (600) (2,100) (2,722) 793 793 $ $ 9,626 9,626 $ $ 5,170 5,170 35% 35% 1,974,589 $ 1,983,422 $ (44,069) -2% (1,053,422) $ (235,931) 18% (1,324,589) $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 340 PUBLIC FIDUCIARY Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIRECTOR FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FTE 4.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST LEGAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM SUPERVISOR SOCIAL WORKER (BS) TECHNOLOGY ANALYST Total 700 FTE 10.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 7.00 1.00 34.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Health Services Officer Jonathan B. Weisbuch, M.D., Director Public Health Public Health HIV/HCV Services Community Development & Minority Health Chronic Disease & Tobacco Control BDPR Epidemiology/Vital Registration Administrative Services Maternal, Child & Family Health Public Health Clinical Services Mission The Mission of the Department of Public Health is to provide leadership, resources, and services to people and diverse communities in Maricopa County so that health is promoted, preserved, and protected. Vision The Maricopa County Department of Public Health will be the nationally recognized local leader in public health, and the agency that people and communities in Maricopa County look to for health resources and services. Our combination of organizational strength and public health leadership will be harnessed to fully integrate and utilize local academic communities to improve the quality of service, and the caliber of professional staff. Goals • Meet or exceed performance objectives for 95% of the Department’s program service output measures by the end of FY 2006. • By June 2007, increase the amount of new or expanded grant awards, contracts, and allowable fees/reimbursements by 4% to develop new programs to meet the emerging demand for public health services. • By June 2007, develop public health facilities that will ensure that client service needs are met in safe, efficient and regionally located working environments. • Develop, by June 2006, the Health & Human Services Constellation's capacity to respond rapidly to a bioterrorist attack or other public health emergency by: expanding and enhancing emergency response plans; developing and sustaining the ability of the HHS workforce to respond as needed in an emergency; and, at a minimum, meeting ADHS deliverables and federal requirements. • By June 2006, develop a 3-year maternal, child and family health strategic plan to reduce targeted health disparities in women, children, and families. • By June 2006, develop and implement a comprehensive strategic plan for reducing modifiable risk factors that lead to chronic disease and injuries. • By June 2007, identify and prioritize community and minority populations at risk for health disparities and establish a relationship with health related coalitions in the identified at-risk populations. 701 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Issues • Rapid population growth, as well as a rising number of medically uninsured individuals, results in an increased demand for public health services from an already strained public health service delivery system. • Major public health emergencies threaten the Department's ability to quickly respond to new demands while maintaining ongoing service levels. • Poor working conditions, inadequate compensation, and limited training and advancement opportunities within Public Health make it difficult to recruit and retain high quality employees. • Although a new Public Health facility is under construction, there are employees who will still be located in the old Public Health facilities, which require extensive maintenance, and are in limited locations, making them inefficient and unsafe for employees and clients and limiting the Department's capacity to deliver services while maintaining high standards for excellence in customer service. • In 2002, there were over 13,700 deaths from chronic diseases in Maricopa County; yet a great disparity exists between the amount of dollars provided for curative services vs. those provided for preventive services. • The lack of awareness among community leaders about the role and functions of the Public Health Department limits the Department's ability to effectively provide critical services to the community. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 860 PUBLIC HEALTH TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 86BD - BIO DEFENSE PREPAREDNESS $ 1,594,458 86CD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 244,922 86CM - HIV/HCV SERVICES 1,686,299 86FH - FAMILY HEALTH 2,305,802 86HD - HEALTH RELATED DATA 1,826,039 86HE - CHRONIC DISEASE & TOBACCO CONT 2,976,566 86HI - HEALTHCARE FOR HOMELESS INDVDL 1,803,369 86ID - INFECT DISEASE CNTRL & TREATMT 4,378,421 86IS - IMMUNIZATION SERVICES 1,722,214 86NR - NUTRITION 6,466,699 86OH - ORAL HEALTH 305,367 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 612,977 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM TOTAL $ 25,923,133 Supplies & Services $ 794,599 15,614 6,140,179 816,113 465,179 1,591,641 394,355 6,637,089 4,528,668 2,221,597 178,195 $ 23,783,229 702 Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Total Revenue 36,620 $ 2,425,677 $ 2,078,680 (2,552) 257,984 110,000 1,902 7,828,380 7,963,426 2,017 3,123,932 2,535,190 16,311 2,307,529 2,235,273 2,913 4,571,120 4,477,785 1,911 2,199,635 2,105,331 12,821 11,028,331 7,811,424 2,832 6,253,714 5,471,948 (1,544) 8,686,752 8,029,292 (2,350) 481,212 378,077 13,218 626,195 (2,643) (2,643) $ 81,456 $ 49,787,818 $ 43,196,426 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: BIO-DEFENSE PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE Program Purpose: The purpose of the Bio-Defense Preparedness and Response Program is to provide a comprehensive plan for detecting and responding to a public health disaster as well as provide leadership and coordination of the Department’s response so that the Department can mount a coordinated, rapid and appropriate response. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of plan developed for community-based surveillance system N/A 0 65 100 Percent of MCDPH employees to be trained to respond to a public health disaster or emergency within Maricopa County who attended formal training N/A 60 97 100 Key Results: Program Name: CHRONIC DISEASE & TOBACCO CONTROL Program Purpose: The purpose of Health Education is to provide prevention education to people living in Maricopa County so that healthy behaviors are increased and the incidence of disease is reduced. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 8.7 13.9 8 1,294 2,716 2,090 800 Percent of adult clients quitting tobacco use 43 N/A 0 20 Percent of women who complete the Women Together for Health activity N/A N/A 51 60 Key Results: Percentage of students participating in the P.L.A.Y. activity who receive the President’s Physical Activity Award. Car seats inspected and distributed 703 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Program Name: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Community Development Program is to provide facilitation and resources to communities at risk in Maricopa County so that they can reduce disease. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Number of grants facilitated by Community Development with Community-Based Organizations and Health Coalitions N/A 5 3 5 Percent of class participants who have mastered the skills required in the three areas of public health science, effective community engagement, and cultural competency. N/A 0 90 0 Percent of HIV Prevention Community Planning Group members supporting the direction of the plan 92 92 74 92 Percent of Executive Committee members who indicate they are satisfied with Planning Council Support's performance of administrative duties 80 96 84 80 Key Results: Program Name: FAMILY HEALTH Program Purpose: The purpose of Family Health is to provide assessment, services, and policy development leadership to families so that health disparities among women and children are reduced. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of pregnancy clients who, at delivery, had received 6 or more prenatal care visits 77 78 91 70 Percent of babies referred from the Newborn Intensive Care Unit that receive a home visit 88 86 80 80 Percent of lead hazard referrals who receive at least one home visit 98 100 97 98 2,055 1,319 621 200 Percent of clients that improve in post-intervention evaluations 85 81 81 70 Percent of Coalition members who report that there is progress towards implementation of plan goals. 70 70 70 70 Percent of women with abnormal cancer screening (Pap test) findings referred for colposcopy 48 49 55 45 Percent of clients returning for annual re-screening for breast and cervical cancer 52 50 56 50 Key Results: Community members reached with prevention and intervention services 704 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Program Name: HEALTH RELATED DATA Program Purpose: The purpose of Health Related Data is to provide accurate and timely data and documents to members of the public and service providers so that they have relevant information for disease detection, disease prevention, and legal documentation. Key Results: Percent of data requests filled Number of certified copies issued FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 100 100 95 225,224 217,686 257,249 225,000 Program Name: HEALTHCARE FOR HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS Program Purpose: The purpose of Healthcare for Homeless Individuals is to provide integrated medical and behavioral health services, in a holistic manner, to homeless individuals in Maricopa County so that an optimal level of health can be achieved. Key Results: Percent of homeless in Phoenix metropolitan area seen at least once at clinic FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 38 51 63 50 Program Name: HIV/HCV SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of HIV/HCV Services is to provide planning, procurement, execution, and monitoring of medical, health, and support service agreements to people living with HIV/AIDS and HCV so that morbidity and mortality will be reduced and overall quality of life will be improved. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of all Title I funded clients who access primary medical care 94 94 94 94 Percent of clients who said that their HIV test result was explained clearly and simply 100 100 100 97 Percent of participating inmates attaining a score of 80 percent or above on class post-test N/A N/A 73 75 Key Results: 705 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Program Name: IMMUNIZATION SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of Immunization Services is to provide immunizations to eligible children and adults so that vaccine-preventable diseases can be prevented in Maricopa County. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of children 0-2 years old receiving full complement of immunizations 43 31 48 44 Percent improvement in scores on immunization knowledge (as measured in pre/post tests) 11 28 22 15 Percent increase in mean immunization completion rate after intervention 4 9 10 15 Key Results: Program Name: INFECTIOUS DISEASE CONTROL AND TREATMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of Infectious Disease Control and Treatment is to provide clinical, outreach, and community-based interventions to defined populations and communities in order to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and tuberculosis, and promote the health of the community. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of general health surveillance reports investigated 45 42 30 40 Percent of investigated individuals who receive HIV prevention education 83 86 90 85 4,925,772 5,137,744 4,737,699 5,006,132 Percent savings over wholesale price: Rifampin 300 mg 77 72 65 66 Cost savings for treating congenital syphilis cases before the birth of the infant 2,642,000 2,254,000 1,225,000 1,800,000 Percent of TB suspects/cases who receive intervention 94 100 100 100 Percent of refugees entering Maricopa County who complete health screening 77 99 95 80 Clinic appointment show rate for clients seen in Hansen's Clinic 86 68 61 70 Key Results: Cost savings on lab tests 706 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Program Name: NUTRITION Program Purpose: The purpose of the Nutrition Program is to provide services, resources and referrals to residents of Maricopa County so that they will be empowered to realize, attain, and achieve food security and implement nutritional practices associated with disease reduction and optimal health. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Increase (percent) on post-survey vs. pre-survey: Identification of five or more as the correct number of fruits/vegetables to eat each day 53 40 41.5 40 Value of food draft redemption within Maricopa County N/A 46,510,724 58,800,064 51,600,000 Key Results: Program Name: ORAL HEALTH Program Purpose: The purpose of Oral Health is to provide education, preventive, and treatment services to targeted children, adults and healthcare providers so that oral disease is detected, reduced, and oral health is enhanced. Key Results: FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual` FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Amount of money saved by preventing tooth decay 942,686 1,485,903 919,813 750,000 Percent HIV/AIDS client satisfaction with the Office of Oral Health 92 92 95 84 Percent attendee satisfaction with oral health tobacco use training session 90 97 99 83 Percent of children with urgent oral health conditions (pain and/or infection) whose families are contacted and referred for dental appointments N/A 100 100 80 707 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 5,317,267 $ 30,111,405 $ 5,827,343 $ 36,609,715 $ 6,333,479 $ 39,732,825 $ 6,789,565 $ 45,095,423 $ 6,590,367 $ 43,197,451 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 35,428,672 42,437,058 46,066,304 51,884,989 49,787,818 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 3,246,906 $ 5,408,555 $ 3,211,999 $ 8,675,915 $ 3,830,692 $ 11,255,412 $ 4,390,238 $ 11,942,184 $ 3,853,494 $ 12,235,581 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 8,655,461 11,887,914 15,086,104 16,332,422 16,089,075 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue $ 2,070,361 $ $ 2,615,344 $ $ 2,502,787 $ $ 2,399,327 $ $ 2,736,873 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,070,361 2,615,344 2,502,787 2,399,327 2,736,873 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 24,702,850 27,933,801 28,477,413 33,153,240 30,961,870 Special Revenue $ 24,702,850 $ 27,933,801 $ 28,477,413 $ 33,153,240 $ 30,961,870 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Public Health FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Public Health Mandates Vs. Expenditures General Fund Mandated 13.2% $60.0 Dollars in Millions $50.0 Other Fund Mandated 24.6% $40.0 $30.0 $20.0 $10.0 Non-Mandated 62.2% $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated 708 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 35.4 5.3 5.4 24.7 42.4 5.8 8.7 27.9 46.1 6.3 11.3 28.5 51.9 6.8 11.9 33.2 49.8 6.6 12.2 31.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Control And Treatment Of Contagious Diseases AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 36-628 Provision For Care Of Persons Afflicted With Contagious Diseases. A.R.S. § 36-663 Communicable Disease Control. A.R.S. §§ 36-711 Through 738 (1997) Tuberculosis Control. A.R.S. 36-662 Access to Records. A.R.S. 36-104 Powers and Duties. Arizona Administrative Code R9-6-309 Chlamydia, R9-6-323 Gonorrhea, and R9-6-360 Syphilis. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Arizona public health statutes mandate county health departments to perform the above referenced functions. Specific rules and regulations are promulgated by the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS). ADHS has delegated the function of local tuberculosis control officer to Maricopa County Department of Public Health (MCDPH). Through the concerted efforts of county health departments, the Arizona Attorney General's Office and the Arizona affiliate of the American Lung Association, new tuberculosis control statutes were passed by the Arizona legislature in 1997. These new laws strengthen the mandate of a county health department to control tuberculosis through the use of involuntary isolation and quarantine of non-compliant individuals with or suspected of having active tuberculosis. Since the enactment of these statutes, MCDPH has issued less than 6 emergency custody orders. ADHS has also delegated control measures (follow-up on positive test results) and contact control measures (interview infected individuals, elicit contacts, and arrange treatment of contacts) for Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, and Syphilis to the local Health Department. This includes the identification and follow-up on all reported positive Syphilis serologies on infants with Congenital Syphilis in Maricopa County. MANDATE DESCRIPTION County health departments are mandated to order non-compliant persons with or suspected of having active tuberculosis, to comply with voluntary examination, monitoring, treatment, isolation or quarantine. If the individual fails to comply with such order, the local tuberculosis control officer or local health director, may issue an emergency custody order directing the sheriff or other law enforcement officer to take such individual into custody. These statutes outline the procedures local health officers must follow once an emergency custody order is issued. A health care provider who knowingly refuses to perform his/her legal duties under the above listed statutes can be held criminally liable. In 1995, sections B and C were added to A.R.S. § 36-663. Section B lists specific procedures a health care provider must follow in order to obtain written or oral consent of a patient in order to conduct an HIV test. Section C mandates that providers obtaining oral consent to conduct an HIV test must sign a form to that effect and return it to the ADHS. County health departments are also mandated to notify individuals who test positive for Syphilis of their test result within 30 days. It is also the responsibility of the local health department to conduct an epidemiological investigation on each reportable case and notify identified sexual contacts of patients and to arrange for treatment. The Arizona Revised Statutes provide local health departments, in the course of an investigation, access to medical records and lab reports concerning the diagnosis, treatment, and control of specific communicable diseases. There are also statute requirements for minors to obtain treatment for venereal disease without the consent of their parents (A.R.S.44-132.01.) and mandates for testing pregnant women for Syphilis at the time of their first prenatal exam (A.R.S.36-693). 709 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) TITLE Control And Treatment Of Contagious Diseases (See Previous Page) Control and Treatment of Contagious FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 1,342,334 $ 1,815,591 1,362,355 $ 1,873,474 1,435,484 $ 2,036,832 1,669,242 $ 2,224,979 1,570,097 $ 2,608,698 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,157,925 3,235,829 3,472,316 3,894,221 4,178,795 TITLE Medical Care Of Indigent AUTHORITY A.R.S. 11-291 Hospitalization And Medical Care Of The Indigent Sick HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Prior to the separation of the Medical Center from County management, Public Health Services received some county funding for the medical care of the indigent. Since the separation, Public Health Services has continued to operate a medical clinic servicing a portion of the indigent homeless population using only grant funding. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The counties are the mandated payor of last resort for emergency medical treatment of the indigent population of the County. Per A.R.S. 11-291, the Board `of Supervisors has sole and exclusive authority to provide for the hospitalization and medical care of the indigent sick. The Board of Supervisors may hire physicians and others to accomplish this function. Counties are not liable to provide care once the person is placed on the AHCCCS rolls. Medical Care of Indigent FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 1,625,757 $ 1,765,399 $ 2,035,842 $ 2,300,822 $ 2,190,864 710 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,625,757 1,765,399 2,035,842 2,300,822 2,190,864 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) TITLE Vital Registration AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 36-186 Director Of Local Health Departments; Powers And Duties; A.R.S. § 36-302 Vital Records And Public Health Statistics; A.R.S. § 36-322 Electronic Registration Of Birth Certificates; A.R.S. § 36-327 Electronic Filing Of Death Certificates; A.R.S. § 36-329 Electronic Filing Of Fetal Death Certificates. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The responsibility for information relative to vital statistics originates at the county level. The passage of the federal welfare reform law and it's requirements regarding the collection of child support, and tracking of births occurring outside marriage, required states to amend their laws concerning the collection of information to be recorded on the birth certificate. In addition, the Arizona State Legislature was interested in making birth certificates more easily available to the public. A.R.S. § 36-322 also allows the local registrar to electronically file birth certificates with the Arizona Department of Health Services. A.R.S. § 36-329 allows the electronic filing of fetal death certificates. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Register all births and deaths in the County and provide copies of birth and death certificates for sale. Monitor health statistics for births and deaths. Data collection: Section F of A.R.S. § 36-322 sets out the requirements regarding recordation of paternity. Section F also requires local registrars to allow public access to death certificates if 50 years have passed since the death occurred. Section G requires local registrars to report paternity determinations/recessions with the state registrar in order for the state registrar to fulfill their statutory obligation. Section N is entirely new and requires local registrars to make birth certificates available to the public if 75 years have passed since the birth was registered. Section A now permits electronic filing of birth, death, and fetal death certificates. Vital Registration FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 1,322,288 $ 1,349,433 $ 1,715,014 $ 2,054,326 $ 2,069,674 711 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,322,288 1,349,433 1,715,014 2,054,326 2,069,674 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) TITLE Office of the Director of the Department of Public Health AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 36-186 Director Of Local Health Department; Powers And Duties; A.R.S. § 36-602 Abatement Of Nuisances; A.R.S. § 36-624 Quarantine And Sanitary Measures To Prevent Contagion; A.R.S. § 36-628 Provision For Care Of Persons Afflicted With Contagious Disease; A.R.S. § 36-721 Rules And Regulations; A.R.S. § 36-722 Limitation Of Authority For Treatment. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND By statute, local health departments are mandated to control/eliminate sources of public health nuisance, filth and contagion. MANDATE DESCRIPTION A.R.S. § 36-186, as amended, mandates directors of local health departments to "enforce any law or ordinance " relating to public health, including laws/ordinances which concern public businesses, rental properties and vacant properties. A.R.S. § 36-602 now mandates that local health department directors assess fines against property owners who do not comply with health department orders to remove sources of public health nuisances or sources of filth from their property. Office of the Director of the Department of Public Health FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund Special Revenue 532,023 $ 644,393 $ 810,585 $ 836,129 $ 612,977 $ - Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 532,023 644,393 810,585 836,129 612,977 TITLE Immunization And Investigation, And Reporting AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 36-186 Director Of Local Health Department; Powers And Duties; A.R.S. § 36-621 Reports Of Contagious Diseases; A.R.S. § 36-622 Report By Hotel Keeper Of Contagious Diseases; A.R.S. § 36-623 Reports By Physicians Of Death From Contagious Diseases; Arizona Administrative Coder9-6-702 - County Health Departments Required To Provide Immunizations. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Local health officers are charged, by statute, to provide essential public health functions. In addition, local health departments are mandated by state statute to receive public reports of contagious disease and to provide immunization. Each local health department is further mandated to track disease statistics and trends, and reports them to the Arizona Department of Health Services. To better track childhood immunization rates, A.R.S. § 336-135 requires all health care providers who administer immunizations to children to electronically transmit immunization data to Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS). ADHS is required to report this information to federal Centers for Disease Control. Immunization and Investigation, and Reporting General Fund Special Revenue Capital Projects FY 2000-01 Actuals $ 1,372,549 $ 644,919 $ FY 2001-02 Actuals* $ 1,205,252 $ 3,687,608 $ FY 2002-03 Actuals* $ 1,584,623 $ 5,467,724 $ FY 2003-04 Actuals* $ 1,884,867 $ 5,362,057 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget* $ 1,670,420 $ 5,366,345 $ *Beginning in FY02, the value of donated vaccines is included in Special Revenue. 712 Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,017,468 4,892,860 7,052,347 7,246,924 7,036,765 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 860 PUBLIC HEALTH Fund Type GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 5,475,178 $ 20,447,956 25,923,134 $ Supplies & Services 1,088,646 $ 22,694,583 23,783,229 $ Capital Outlay 26,543 $ 54,912 81,455 $ Total Expenditures 6,590,367 $ 43,197,451 49,787,818 $ Total Revenue 43,196,426 43,196,426 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 860 PUBLIC HEALTH ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 638 PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ 24,233,008 11,250,789 1,751,822 1,091,579 84,885 86,617 53,594 38,552,293 $ $ 33,169,330 11,587,927 2,099,175 1,331,710 2,000 45,000 48,235,142 $ $ 32,046,864 12,606,668 2,099,175 1,331,710 2,000 45,000 48,131,417 $ $ 29,308,104 11,593,188 2,292,190 1,340,958 18,613 1,642 45,000 44,599,694 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 30,871,392 8,881,170 2,470,300 1,361,500 1,000 45,000 43,630,362 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 30,799,638 8,881,170 2,295,573 1,174,045 1,000 45,000 43,196,426 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 1,247,226 3,725,498 (196,398) 157,665 1,000 4,934,991 % 4% 30% -9% 12% 0% 50% 0% 10% EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 15,417,924 $ 543,087 191,711 3,832,113 154,606 (322,789) 475,162 20,291,814 $ 19,036,289 $ 506,794 43,151 5,147,847 243,410 (136,919) 185,251 25,025,823 $ 19,497,857 $ 477,291 30,520 5,714,817 231,804 (136,919) 185,251 26,000,621 $ 17,184,093 $ 668,772 278,841 5,306,009 156,862 (271,880) 357,705 23,680,404 $ 19,152,412 $ 296,531 40,126 5,811,013 494,155 (2,813,621) 3,884,918 26,865,534 $ 18,753,455 $ 296,531 40,126 5,820,712 494,155 (2,927,028) 3,445,183 25,923,134 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 805 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION OUT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 810 LEGAL SERVICES 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 872 SERVICES - ALLOCATION OUT 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 3,537,314 10,301,842 11,109 654,474 3,460 1,182,926 6,641,697 1,263,748 58,254 221,857 274,578 455,898 68,537 7,293 58,325 1,495,234 26,236,546 $ 7,818,507 6,431,790 11,150 375,953 6,550 962,018 8,998,695 1,443,943 186,246 582,672 509,704 716,808 102,114 142,838 77,086 1,459,058 29,825,132 $ 5,273,606 10,201,068 9,950 377,053 6,550 1,471,268 6,931,274 1,386,520 186,246 575,703 406,234 494,267 102,114 144,174 52,086 1,459,058 29,077,171 $ 3,691,068 10,423,493 11,494 489,065 4,579 1,920,966 6,430,003 1,490,048 75,111 383,020 278,447 514,012 103,196 33,005 87,624 1,459,058 27,394,190 $ 1,023,780 $ 10,484,860 11,450 140,624 (1,089,523) 1,035,700 4,342 1,038,783 7,249,098 1,576,774 57,745 133,088 299,894 466,622 101,135 9,500 138,233 (948,790) 814,646 1,518,949 24,066,910 $ 991,416 $ 10,335,965 11,450 140,624 (469,619) 406,698 4,342 1,038,783 7,291,496 1,584,561 57,445 300,393 464,372 101,135 9,500 138,233 (1,253,972) 853,062 1,777,345 23,783,229 $ 4,282,190 (134,897) (1,500) 236,429 469,619 (406,698) 2,208 432,485 (360,222) (198,041) 128,801 575,703 105,841 29,895 979 134,674 (86,147) 1,253,972 (853,062) (318,287) 5,293,942 81% -1% -15% 63% 0% 0% 34% 29% -5% -14% 69% 100% 26% 6% 1% 93% -165% 0% 0% -22% 18% CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE 955 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION OUT 956 CAPITAL - ALLOCATION IN Sub Total $ 118,053 9,500 17,335 144,887 $ $ $ 19,666 26,000 91,162 41,672 178,499 $ $ 115,000 42,179 157,179 $ $ 115,000 42,179 157,179 $ $ 15,000 69,332 (15,000) 38,101 107,433 $ $ 15,000 69,332 (33,500) 30,623 81,455 $ (15,000) 115,000 (27,153) 33,500 (30,623) 75,724 0% 0% 100% -64% 0% 0% 48% Total Expenditures $ 46,673,247 $ 55,008,134 $ 55,234,971 $ 51,253,093 $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ (8,120,954) $ $ (6,772,992) $ $ (7,103,554) $ 713 $ (6,653,398) $ 51,039,877 $ (7,409,515) $ 49,787,818 $ (6,591,392) $ 744,402 4% 180,760 38% (9,606) -31% (105,895) -2% (262,351) -113% 2,790,109 -2038% (3,259,932) -1760% 77,487 0% 5,447,153 (512,162) 10% 7% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Public Health (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 860 PUBLIC HEALTH Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CHIEF OFFICER COMMUNITY SVCS SPECIALIST CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR COUNSELING SUPERVISOR COUNSELOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DENTAL HYGIENIST DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIETITIAN DRIVER-MEDICAL EPIDEMIOLOGIST EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FACILITIES SVCS OFFICER FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HEALTH EDUCATOR HEALTH SERVICES AIDE HR GENERALIST HR SPECIALIST FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 32.30 8.00 69.15 4.00 11.00 1.00 19.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 5.00 1.90 13.00 8.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 50.40 110.95 3.00 2.00 Market Range Title HR SUPERVISOR INFECTION CONTROL SPEC INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR LABORATORY SUPERVISOR LICENSED PRACTICAL NURSE MANAGEMENT ANALYST MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT MANAGING PHYSICIAN MEDICAL ASSISTANT MEDICAL TECHNICIAN MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIST NURSE NURSE PRACT/PHYS ASST NURSING MANAGER NURSING SUPERVISOR PC SPECIALIST PHARMACIST PHARMACY ASSISTANT PHARMACY MANAGER PHARMACY TECHNICIAN PHYSICIAN PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM COORDINATOR - RN PROGRAM MANAGER PROGRAM SUPERVISOR PURCHASING SUPERVISOR RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGIST SOCIAL WORKER (BS) TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECH TRAINING SPECIALIST Total 714 FTE 1.00 21.67 1.00 1.00 4.00 7.00 1.00 3.43 2.00 2.00 7.00 41.55 10.00 3.00 4.60 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 14.00 3.50 5.00 22.00 1.00 2.00 16.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 556.55 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Research & Reporting Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Deputy County Administrator Research & Reporting Research & Reporting Ken Andersen, Director Ken Andersen, Director Survey Research Administration Mission The Mission of the Research & Reporting Department is to provide survey data services to county managers so they can more effectively manage for results using statistically reliable data. Goals • By July 2006, establish and/or identify an oversight, review and evaluation mechanism for each County Sponsored Survey. • By July 2005, incorporate each County Sponsored Survey into the countywide MfR plan. • By July 2005, develop and distribute a process to departments to contract for Research and Reporting services. Issues • The demand for services is unpredictable which makes planning and staffing difficult. • County sponsored surveys have no centralized oversight mechanism, which causes Research and Reporting staff to make decisions that affect the entire County with limited input from county management. • Since departmental functions rely on current management, the lack of a succession plan in the Department, could result in the survey data needs of the County being unmet if current management are unavailable to perform their functions. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING TOTAL FUNDS Program 46RR - RESEARCH AND REPORTING 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 290,825 19,436 TOTAL $ 310,261 $ Supplies & Services $ 122,633 5,844 $ 128,477 715 Capital Outlay 1,262 $ 1,262 $ Total Expenditures $ 414,720 25,280 $ 440,000 Total Revenue 413,600 26,400 $ 440,000 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Research & Reporting (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: RESEARCH AND REPORTING Program Purpose: The purpose of the Research And Reporting Program is to provide survey data services to county managers and external agencies so they can have statistically valid data upon which to base informed decisions. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of consultations providing information needed to make study decisions N/A 100 100 N/A Percent of customers reporting that study goals were met N/A 100 100 N/A Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 437,512 $ 375,189 $ 337,588 $ 415,997 $ 440,000 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 437,512 375,189 337,588 415,997 440,000 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 437,512 $ 375,189 $ 337,588 $ 415,997 $ 440,000 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 437,512 375,189 337,588 415,997 440,000 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Research & Reporting FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Research & Reporting Mandates Vs. Expenditures $0.4 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $0.4 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $0.3 $0.3 $0.2 $0.2 $0.1 $0.1 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 716 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Research & Reporting (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING Fund Type SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS Personal Services 310,261 $ 310,261 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 128,477 $ 128,477 $ Capital Outlay 1,262 $ 1,262 $ Total Expenditures 440,000 $ 440,000 $ Total Revenue 440,000 440,000 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 880 TRANSFERS OUT $ Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 950 DEBT SERVICE $ Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ (0) $ 323,482 323,482 $ 440,000 440,000 122,568 19,408 40,515 3,430 185,920 4,137 237 3,930 840 8 130 142,356 151,638 337,558 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ (14,076) $ 440,000 440,000 197,901 $ 121,108 67,969 5,000 (84,043) 307,935 $ 193,250 $ 119,109 75,034 5,000 (84,043) 308,350 $ 209,552 $ 41,823 61,275 3,198 (84,042) 231,807 $ 196,620 $ 109,000 87,512 5,000 (87,871) 310,261 $ 221,871 $ 85,483 85,778 5,000 (87,871) 310,261 $ 5,378 5,000 71,772 1,500 10,290 3,000 2,000 33,125 132,065 5,378 4,586 71,772 1,500 10,290 3,000 2,000 33,125 131,651 4,635 71,771 661 10,250 937 993 33,125 122,371 $ $ 6,560 5,000 71,772 1,000 8,509 3,000 1,000 31,636 128,477 $ $ 6,560 5,000 6,000 1,000 8,509 3,000 1,000 97,408 128,477 $ $ 1,262 1,262 $ $ 440,000 $ 440,000 - $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ 440,001 $ $ - $ $ 354,178 $ (1) $ 85,822 $ - $ $ $ 440,000 440,000 Adopted Vs Revised Variance (0) $ 440,000 440,000 $ $ 440,000 440,000 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ - $ FY 2004-05 Requested - 0% 0% 0% (28,621) 33,626 (10,744) 3,828 (1,911) -15% 28% -14% 0% -5% -1% $ (1,182) (414) 500 1,781 1,000 1,489 3,174 -22% -9% 0% 0% 33% 17% 0% 50% 0% 4% 2% 1,262 1,262 $ $ (1,262) (1,262) 0% 0% 440,000 $ 1 0% $ (1) 100% - $ % $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 460 RESEARCH & REPORTING Market Range Title ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV CALL CTR REPRESENTATIVE FTE 3.00 3.75 Market Range Title DIRECTOR PROGRAM COORDINATOR Total 717 FTE 1.00 1.00 8.75 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Risk Management Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Financial Officer Risk Management Risk Management Peter Crowley, Manager Peter Crowley, Manager Administration Safety & Loss Control Environmental Consulting Claims Mission The Mission of the Risk Management Department is to provide loss prevention and control, and insurance and claims management services for Maricopa County Government, so they can reduce or eliminate their losses. Vision The Risk Management Department will be recognized as a leader and relied upon for a county-wide risk management philosophy and culture. Goals • Over the next two to five years, departmental decisions involving risk to County assets will be made consistent with established risk management protocols. • By 2005, departments will be able to identify and manage areas of risk and reduce losses as a result of timely and relevant information and assistance provided by Risk Management. • County losses will be reduced by a measurable amount over each of the next five years. • Risk Management will sustain appropriate level of expertise by maintaining a personnel attrition rate of less than 10% over each of the next five years. Issues • The County’s failure to recognize the value of the Risk Management discipline and the impact it has on the protection of the County's assets, creates a lack of accountability and a failure to protect all the assets, and therefore, damages the credibility of County government. • The County's emphasis on managing for results presents us an opportunity, a challenge, and a forum to showcase our results for the County. • With an increasing population and workforce, the need for Risk Management services will become more integral in forecasting of future County financial liability. • As the number and costs of claims continue to increase and departments become more sophisticated and aware of their claim losses, demand for Risk Management services will increase and become more consultative in nature. 718 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Risk Management (Continued) • As the County's workforce and the regulatory environment continues to evolve, customers will demand more involvement from Risk Management to meet their needs for claims, environmental and safety services. • As County management stresses the need for a comprehensive county-wide loss prevention program, demand for Risk Management services will increase. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 750 RISK MANAGEMENT TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 75CR - CLAIMS RESOLUTION/LIT MGT PROG $ 304,716 75EM - ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROG 152,505 75RI - RISK MGMT SELF-INSURANCE PROG 113,838 75SM - SAFETY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 441,820 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 264,492 TOTAL $ 1,277,371 Supplies & Services $ 23,909,986 405,760 390,285 61,048 $ 24,767,079 Capital Outlay 26,266 $ 26,266 $ Total Expenditures $ 24,214,702 558,265 530,389 502,868 264,492 $ 26,070,716 Total Revenue 26,644,669 $ 26,644,669 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: CLAIMS RESOLUTION AND LITIGATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Claims Resolution and Litigation Management Program is to provide claims disposition and litigation management services to the County so they can reduce the cost of claims and expenses. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent decrease/increase of third party claims costs compared to a 3 year average N/A N/A 56 56 Percent decrease/increase of third party indemnity payments compared to a 3 year average N/A N/A -23 -23 Key Results: Program Name: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Environmental Management Program is to provide environmental technical services to the County so they can minimize or eliminate liabilities. Key Results: Percent reduction/increase in possible environmental liability exposures 719 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A -32.1 -4.3 -1 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Risk Management (Continued) Program Name: RISK MANAGEMENT SELF-INSURANCE PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Risk Management Self-Insurance Program is to provide coverage and liability reduction services to the County so they will have adequate protection of County assets. Key Results: Percent of risk management expenditures to County expenditures showing the cost of risk Percent of expenditures within budget FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 1 1 1 1 100 100 100 100 Program Name: SAFETY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Safety Management Program is to provide safety management services to the County so they can ensure standards compliance and control and/or prevent losses. Key Results: Percent reduction/increase of County quarterly injury incident rate compared to a 3 year average rate 720 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 47 -18 10 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Risk Management (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 18,795,176 $ 18,359,742 $ 19,038,025 $ 22,908,034 $ 26,070,716 $ $ $ $ $ Total 18,795,176 18,359,742 19,038,025 22,908,034 26,070,716 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 18,795,176 $ 18,359,742 $ 19,038,025 $ 22,908,034 $ 26,070,716 $ $ $ $ $ Total 18,795,176 18,359,742 19,038,025 22,908,034 26,070,716 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Risk Management FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Risk Management Mandates Vs. Expenditures $30.0 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $25.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $20.0 $15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 721 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 18.8 0.0 0.0 18.8 18.4 0.0 0.0 18.4 19.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 22.9 0.0 0.0 22.9 26.1 0.0 0.0 26.1 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Risk Management (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 750 RISK MANAGEMENT Fund Type INTERNAL SERVICE ALL FUNDS Personal Services 1,277,371 $ 1,277,371 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 24,767,079 $ 24,767,079 $ Capital Outlay 26,266 $ 26,266 $ Total Expenditures 26,070,716 $ 26,070,716 $ Total Revenue 26,644,669 26,644,669 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 750 RISK MANAGEMENT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 636 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS Total Revenue 23,343,431 520,493 23,863,924 $ $ Sub Total $ 924,135 490 199,087 2,000 1,125,712 SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 44,269 2,589 5,212 3,367,583 12,119,998 18,339 261 213,769 1,364,255 10,587 1,033 123,591 17,271,486 $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES $ $ $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT $ 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 25,676,986 1,009,135 26,686,121 $ 976,930 277,571 1,254,501 $ 28,121 2,259 1,000 2,896,858 19,664,572 15,600 750 175,000 1,415,990 9,500 2,525 500 122,626 24,335,301 $ $ $ 17,500 2,500 20,000 18,397,198 $ 5,466,726 $ - $ $ $ $ 25,676,986 1,009,135 26,686,121 $ 1,004,737 249,757 1,254,494 $ 28,121 2,259 1,000 2,896,858 19,664,572 16,100 750 175,000 1,415,990 9,500 2,525 122,626 24,335,301 $ $ $ 17,500 2,500 20,000 25,609,802 $ 1,076,319 $ $ $ $ $ $ 25,676,986 405,000 26,081,986 FY 2004-05 Requested $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 26,144,669 500,000 26,644,669 $ $ 938,529 $ (113) 266,376 2,000 1,206,792 $ 1,005,458 283,043 1,288,501 $ 28,121 2,259 1,000 3,219,031 19,763,380 16,100 750 220,000 1,476,761 9,500 2,525 114,652 24,854,079 $ $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance 26,144,669 500,000 26,644,669 $ 996,866 280,505 1,277,371 $ 38,121 2,259 1,000 3,219,031 19,763,380 16,100 750 220,000 1,379,761 9,500 2,525 114,652 24,767,079 $ $ $ 21,000 5,266 26,266 $ $ $ (467,683) 509,135 41,452 % -2% 50% 0% 7,871 1% 0% (30,748) -12% 0% (22,877) -2% $ 27,000 2,900 1,000 3,900,000 18,618,000 19,500 750 215,000 1,415,990 10,000 2,530 122,626 24,335,296 $ $ $ 17,500 2,500 20,000 $ 17,500 2,500 20,000 25,609,795 $ 25,562,088 $ 26,162,580 $ 26,070,716 $ (460,921) -2% 1,076,326 $ 519,898 $ 482,089 $ 573,953 $ 502,373 47% $ $ $ $ (10,000) -36% 0% 0% (322,173) -11% (98,808) -1% 0% 0% (45,000) -26% 36,229 3% 0% 0% 0% 7,974 7% (431,778) -2% 17,500 100% (21,000) 0% (2,766) -111% (6,266) -31% $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 750 RISK MANAGEMENT Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST DIRECTOR ENGINEER FTE 4.00 1.00 2.00 Market Range Title FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST RISK MGMT SUPERVISOR SAFETY REPRESENTATIVE Total 722 FTE 1.00 4.00 2.00 6.00 20.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Solid Waste (A division of Public Works) Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Regional Development Services Agency Officer Transportation Director Solid Waste Solid Waste Ash Madhok, Director Ash Madhok, Director Administration Landfill Closure & Post- Closure, Transfer Stations Operation Tire Recycling Program Environmental Monitoring & Operations Mission The Mission of Solid Waste Management Department is to provide collection sites and tire recycling programs for residents and businesses so they may dispose of waste and tires conveniently in a safe manner that preserves and protects the environment and public health. Vision Provide solid waste transfer, disposal and recycling services for our County residents with emphasis on our everexpanding role. Goals • By 2007, formulate a west side area wide community consortium to collaboratively address and implement a Household Hazardous Waste Program or conduct multi-area events. • BY 2008, develop a public /private partnership program to recycle used tires into useable products. • By 2008, continue to expand the ongoing Illegal dumping clean-up program by collaborating with the west side communities. Issues • Collaborative efforts are needed to formulate a west side community consortium to decrease the illegal dumping of household hazardous waste into landfills and reduce costs for the Maricopa County. • Due to fluctuating and uncertain market conditions in the manufacturing of products from waste tires, a need for public/private partnership is essential. The long-range continued existence of the program depends upon the County to share the risk of market conditions along with private entities. 723 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Solid Waste (Continued) • The absence of County landfills, coupled with the high cost of disposal fees by private landfill operators and population growth are contributing to the increase in illegal dumping. The west side communities adjoining unincorporated areas collaboratively need to implement an area wide program to reduce costs. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 670 SOLID WASTE TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 67EW - ENVIRONMENTAL WASTE MANAGEMENT $ 263,771 67WD - WASTE DISPOSAL MANAGEMENT 265,506 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 24,589 TOTAL $ 553,866 Supplies & Services $ 3,327,003 234,133 218,211 $ 3,779,347 Capital Outlay 75,000 4,209 $ 79,209 $ Total Expenditures $ 3,665,774 499,639 247,009 $ 4,412,422 Total Revenue 3,770,000 50,000 400,000 $ 4,220,000 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ENVIRONMENTAL WASTE MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Environmental Waste Management Program is to provide management services for household hazardous waste and illegal dumping clean-up as well as waste tire storage, disposal and recycling services so that it can provide its citizens with convenient, safe and economical and environmental sound waste disposal. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of funded household hazardous waste events requested 0 0 100 100 Percent of tire tonnage processed by acceptable recycling methods. 48 100 100 100 Key Results: Program Name: WASTE DISPOSAL MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Waste Disposal Management Program is to provide convenient, safe and economical waste disposal services for the remotely located areas of the County and perform closure and post-closure services to protect public health and the environment. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent customers satisfied 86 84 92 90 Percent of groundwater well tests completed. 95 100 100 100 Key Results: 724 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Solid Waste (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 2,994,897 $ 2,349,862 $ 2,679,414 $ 3,399,096 $ 3,419,169 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ 1,333,771 $ $ 745,428 $ $ 653,853 $ $ 2,510,264 $ $ 993,253 Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 4,328,668 3,095,290 3,333,267 5,909,360 4,412,422 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 2,994,897 $ 2,349,862 $ 2,679,414 $ 3,399,096 $ 3,419,169 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,994,897 2,349,862 2,679,414 3,399,096 3,419,169 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ 1,333,771 $ $ 745,428 $ $ 653,853 $ $ 2,510,264 $ $ 993,253 Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,333,771 745,428 653,853 2,510,264 993,253 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Solid Waste FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $6.0 General Fund Mandated 0.0% $5.0 Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 22.5% Solid Waste Mandates Vs. Expenditures $4.0 $3.0 $2.0 $1.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 77.5% 725 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 4.3 0.0 3.0 1.3 3.1 0.0 2.3 0.7 3.3 0.0 2.7 0.7 5.9 0.0 3.4 2.5 4.4 0.0 3.4 1.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Solid Waste (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Waste tire fund and program AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 44-1305. C. HISTORY/ BACKGROUND Each county shall establish a waste tire program and shall submit by September 1 of each year a waste tire management plan to the department of environmental quality for review and approval. A waste tire program may include contracts with private enterprise to do any of the following, either individually or collectively: Develop an accounting system for the waste tires managed with monies from the waste tire fund. The department of revenue shall provide an annual report to the legislature and to the department of environmental quality on the collection and distribution of monies in the waste tire fund. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Develop a plan to manage waste tires in the county. Construct, operate, or contract for the construction or operation of a waste tire processing facility and purchase equipment for that facility. Contract for a waste tire processing facility service. Remove or contract for the removal of waste tires from the county or other region. Establish waste tire collection centers at solid waste disposal facilities or waste tire processing facilities. Waste Tire Fund FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 2,994,897 $ 2,349,862 $ 2,679,414 $ 3,399,096 $ 3,419,169 726 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 2,994,897 2,349,862 2,679,414 3,399,096 3,419,169 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Solid Waste (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 670 SOLID WASTE Fund Type ENTERPRISE SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS Personal Services 225,058 $ 328,808 553,866 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 763,986 $ 3,015,361 3,779,347 $ Capital Outlay 4,209 $ 75,000 79,209 $ Total Expenditures 993,253 $ 3,419,169 4,412,422 $ Total Revenue 450,000 3,770,000 4,220,000 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 670 SOLID WASTE ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE Total Revenue $ 2,936,602 55,828 445,516 182,730 3,620,675 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 343,408 27,851 3,832 93,582 71 1,192 469,936 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 33,237 24,354 3,254,183 40,612 350 191,286 429 10,063 268,547 3,823,060 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP $ 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 11,376 11,376 $ Total Expenditures $ 4,304,372 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ 3,300,000 30,000 725,232 30,000 4,085,232 $ $ 407,809 90,000 20,000 135,112 652,921 $ 9,000 28,000 2,000 2,946,231 51,000 6,468 237,686 4,000 1,500 10,000 177,117 3,473,002 $ $ $ 205,100 4,209 209,309 $ 4,335,232 $ $ (683,697) $ 3,300,000 30,000 725,232 30,000 4,085,232 $ $ 420,374 77,467 20,000 135,414 653,255 $ 9,000 23,000 2,000 2,967,853 51,000 9,436 218,097 2,000 2,500 1,000 10,000 177,117 3,473,003 $ $ $ 205,100 4,209 209,309 $ 4,335,567 $ $ (250,000) $ 3,988,152 249,440 158,960 146,488 4,543,040 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 366,624 35,433 2,444 112,182 516,683 $ 14,951 25,673 115 2,051,575 54,000 212,105 441 1,570 12,391 177,117 2,549,939 $ $ $ 205,100 4,209 209,309 $ (250,335) $ $ $ 3,950,000 50,000 390,000 30,000 4,420,000 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 386,217 78,484 37,330 133,915 635,946 $ 10,000 38,000 2,000 3,222,462 34,300 27,968 193,360 2,820 1,500 3,000 7,000 77,667 3,620,077 $ $ $ 75,000 4,209 79,209 3,275,930 $ 1,267,110 $ $ $ 3,950,000 50,000 190,000 30,000 4,220,000 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ % (650,000) (20,000) 535,232 (134,768) -20% -67% 74% 0% -3% 70,265 13,983 5,000 10,141 99,389 17% 18% 25% 7% 0% 0% 15% (1,000) (15,000) (418,898) 16,700 4,436 33,737 (200) 1,000 1,000 3,000 68,881 (306,344) -11% -65% 0% -14% 33% 47% 15% -10% 40% 100% 30% 39% -9% 63% 0% 62% 350,109 63,484 15,000 125,273 553,866 $ 10,000 38,000 2,000 3,386,751 34,300 5,000 184,360 2,200 1,500 7,000 108,236 3,779,347 $ $ $ 75,000 4,209 79,209 $ 130,100 130,100 4,335,232 $ 4,412,422 $ (76,855) -2% 84,768 $ (192,422) $ (57,913) 23% $ $ $ $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 670 SOLID WASTE Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST DIRECTOR EQUIPMENT OPERATOR FTE 2.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title GENERAL MAINTENANCE SUPV GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE Total 727 FTE 2.00 2.00 4.00 12.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Telecommunications Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Information Officer Telecommunications Telecommunications Jim Price, Director Jim Price, Director Administration Data Communications Voice Communications Wireless Systems Mission The Mission of the Telecommunications is to provide strategic vision, leadership, and enterprise solutions to County leaders and staff so they can meet their goals and deliver results to the Public. Vision Telecommunications will champion Maricopa County into Information-Age Government. Goals • County employees will have the ability to fully perform their day-to-day jobs, within a secured IT environment, on demand from anywhere at any time by July 2008. • The Public and outside organizations will have the ability, within a secured IT environment, to obtain information from and conduct business transactions online with the County on demand from anywhere at any time by July 2008. • County decision-makers will have the ability to readily and easily access data and/or information on demand to make informed business decisions by July 2008. • Through Countywide standardized information technology, the County will maximize the use of its available support resources, optimize the cost of doing business, and expedite the sharing and distributing of data and information between systems utilized by distinct business units on demand by July 2008. • The County’s IT strategic goals will be achieved through information technology standards; experienced, knowledgeable, and informed staff; and transformed business processes through enabling IT services by July 2008. Issues • As the County increasingly depends upon collaboration in the workplace, supporting the process will be impossible if the technology infrastructure is inadequately funded and allowed to stagnate. • The lack of robust tools to manage, organize, maintain and catalog data will negate the usefulness of the constantly increasing supply of and demand for web-based information. 728 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Telecommunications (Continued) • Increased demand for video, imaging, and other high bandwidth applications to support business processes are greater than what current network capacity and flexibility can provide. • The lack of competitive compensation, education, and career development opportunities for IT staff will make it difficult to attract and retain skilled employees. • If IT doesn’t pursue alternative service delivery models, the shortage of IT talent may result in the inability to meet our customers’ demands for services. • Current development methodologies, tools, infrastructure, and organizational models won’t be able to support the Public’s demand for easy, online, 7X24 access to all government services from any location. • Existing systems are being challenged to present decision-making information to county staff, management, and citizenry to meet current and anticipated increase in demand. • The changing work environment and growth in population require county employees to perform their jobs from remote locations, seriously challenging the County telecommunications system, which was designed primarily to serve centralized locations. • Existing demand for decision-making information cannot be met with current applications. • The lack of integration frameworks between County departments and external agencies hinder the presentation of timely decision-making information demanded by County staff, management, and the Public. • The work environment, population growth, and urban sprawl continually change. Today's workforce is required to perform work from remote locations with both wired and wireless telecommunications-based technologies. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 41IF - INFO TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE $ 2,398,420 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 319,713 TOTAL $ 2,718,133 Supplies & Services $ 10,312,361 475,592 $ 10,787,953 Capital Outlay 136,749 13,600 $ 150,349 $ Total Expenditures $ 12,847,530 808,905 $ 13,656,435 Total Revenue 14,133,393 $ 14,133,393 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE Program Purpose: The purpose of the IT Infrastructure program is to provide an integrated, robust, electronic platform to County departments, participating jurisdictions and the Public so that they can conveniently and dependably conduct business regardless of location. Key Results: Percent of time we complete work orders to our customers' satisfaction and within our committed time frames 729 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 98.24 N/A 97.25 97 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Telecommunications (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 13,639,620 $ 14,837,863 $ 12,622,738 $ 14,414,056 $ 13,656,435 $ $ $ $ $ Total 13,639,620 14,837,863 12,622,738 14,414,056 13,656,435 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ 13,639,620 $ 14,837,863 $ 12,622,738 $ 14,414,056 $ 13,656,435 $ $ $ $ $ Total 13,639,620 14,837,863 12,622,738 14,414,056 13,656,435 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Telecommunications FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Telecommunications Mandates Vs. Expenditures $16.0 $14.0 Non-Mandated 0.0% Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $12.0 $10.0 $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 100.0% 730 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 13.6 0.0 13.6 0.0 14.8 0.0 14.8 0.0 12.6 0.0 12.6 0.0 14.4 0.0 14.4 0.0 13.7 0.0 13.7 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Telecommunications (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS Fund Type INTERNAL SERVICE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 2,718,133 $ 2,718,133 $ Supplies & Services 10,787,953 $ 10,787,953 $ Capital Outlay 150,349 $ 150,349 $ Total Expenditures 13,656,435 $ 13,656,435 $ Total Revenue 14,133,393 14,133,393 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 636 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ $ 572,940 326 14,883,122 175 400,080 23,550 15,880,193 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 1,990,133 3,583 53,292 416,142 35,429 8,506 2,507,085 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 855 INTEREST EXPENSE 865 DEPRECIATION 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ 499,012 12,214,470 10,000 12,723,482 $ $ $ 2,148,739 10,000 48,000 442,837 2,649,576 872,256 $ 14,392 85,871 (60) 721,873 1,630,453 1,505,719 7,267 119,236 24,160 6,777 4,922,705 18,382 1,159,098 11,088,130 $ 140,000 15,000 556,630 1,670,427 1,535,850 104,462 43,000 10,000 4,784,242 306,000 284,563 9,450,174 $ $ $ $ $ $ 498,012 12,214,470 11,000 12,723,482 $ 2,086,461 10,000 48,000 516,921 27,094 2,688,476 $ $ $ 343,177 15,500 1,601,773 1,450,900 1,491,981 4,719 104,462 43,000 2,000 3,763,201 306,000 284,563 9,411,276 $ $ $ FY 2004-05 Requested 414,275 12,589,561 2,124 12,250 13,018,210 $ 2,023,983 9,432 50,051 464,060 31,032 11,190 2,589,748 $ $ $ 611,473 14,842 5,001 620,746 1,445,720 1,473,218 6,239 52,721 42,997 3,525 3,766,322 306,000 284,563 8,633,366 $ $ $ FY 2004-05 Adopted 514,141 12,198,341 11,000 12,723,482 $ 2,068,571 10,000 48,000 545,623 34,959 10,980 2,718,133 $ $ $ 1,186,000 15,000 953,649 1,499,775 1,395,714 4,020 154,417 43,000 500 3,478,217 335,000 312,750 9,378,042 $ $ $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance 514,141 13,608,252 11,000 14,133,393 $ 2,068,571 10,000 48,000 545,623 34,959 10,980 2,718,133 $ $ $ 1,186,000 15,000 1,409,911 953,649 1,499,775 1,395,714 4,020 154,417 43,000 500 3,478,217 335,000 312,750 10,787,953 $ $ $ % (16,129) -3% 0% (1,393,782) -11% 0% 0% 0% (1,409,911) -11% 17,890 1% 0% 0% (28,702) -6% (7,865) -29% (10,980) 0% (29,657) -1% (842,823) 500 (1,409,911) 648,124 (48,875) 96,267 699 (49,955) 1,500 284,984 (29,000) (28,187) (1,376,677) -246% 3% 0% 0% 40% -3% 6% 15% -48% 0% 75% 8% 0% -9% -10% -15% $ Sub Total $ 3,939 3,939 $ 114,720 114,720 $ 114,720 114,720 $ 835,817 111,467 947,284 $ 150,349 150,349 $ 150,349 150,349 $ 0% (35,629) -31% (35,629) -31% Total Expenditures $ 13,599,154 $ 12,214,470 $ 12,214,472 $ 12,170,398 $ 12,246,524 $ 13,656,435 $ (1,441,963) -12% 2,281,039 $ 509,012 $ 509,010 $ 847,812 $ 476,958 $ 476,958 $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 731 32,052 6% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Telecommunications (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 760 TELECOMMUNICATIONS Market Range Title ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV DIRECTOR INFO TECHNOL CONSULTANT FTE 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPV TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECH TELECOMMUNICATNS ANALYST Total 732 FTE 2.00 4.00 16.00 14.00 42.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Total Compensation Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Deputy County Administrator Total Compensation Total Compensation Michael Schaiberger, Director Michael Schaiberger, Director Employee Compensation Employee Health Initiatives Mission The Mission of the Total Compensation Department is to provide Board approved compensation and benefit plans which are effectively communicated, and provide department leadership with strategic direction and administrative support related to compensation and benefits so they can attract and retain qualified employees to achieve their business results. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • By June 30, 2006, increase Maricopa County employee satisfaction with pay by 2% over the FY02 level as measured by the annual employee satisfaction survey. • By June 30, 2006, increase Maricopa County employee satisfaction with benefits by 2% over the FY02 level as measured by the annual employee satisfaction survey. • Over the next four plan years, beginning with plan year 2003, the negotiated premium rates for the medical (general medical, vision, behavioral health/substance abuse, and pharmacy) insurance component of the benefits plan for the active employees will be no greater than 5 percentage points above the local market percentage of increase for public sector employer groups as provided by the external benefits actuary. • Over the next five years, beginning with FY 2004, implement the action plan developed by County Counsel to ensure current and on-going Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) compliance within the Employee Benefits Division of Total Compensation. • By June 30, 2006 increase Maricopa County department up-to-date job descriptions by 20% (11) per year from baseline year ending June 2004. Issues • The significant skyrocketing costs of health care expenditures in the U.S and the current market trends will directly impact the structure of the benefit plan and fiscal impact of the health insurance program offered by Maricopa County to their employees and dependents. 733 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Total Compensation (Continued) • The “soft” economy and resulting declining revenues combined with the rising cost of non-wage benefits increases the challenge of developing a competitive total compensation package to attract and retain qualified and motivated employees. • The complexities and severe financial consequences associated with State and Federal regulatory compliance will require changes to the Total Compensation Department’s business processes. e.g. Federal mandated HIPAA and State mandated Chiropractic visits. • Benefits vendors utilized by Maricopa County are demanding greater automation and enhanced security of the benefits processes, which will initially increase our cost and reshape our benefits workforce. • Paper-based data transmission of new and ongoing benefits enrollment information does not allow for efficient processing of benefits related services, which could result in a service delay for employees and their dependents. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION TOTAL FUNDS Program 35CO - EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION 35EH - EMPLOYEE HEALTH INITIATIVES 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 386,575 1,250,669 278,544 TOTAL $ 1,915,788 $ Supplies & Services $ 22,475 40,069,637 2,206 $ 40,094,318 Capital Outlay 872 3,206 $ 4,078 $ Total Expenditures $ 409,922 41,320,306 283,956 $ 42,014,184 Total Revenue 7,545,007 39,384,705 $ 46,929,712 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Employee Compensation Program is to provide Board approved compensation to department leadership so that they can attract and retain qualified employees to achieve their business goals. Key Results: Percent of employees voluntarily leaving employment who report pay as the primary reason for leaving Maricopa County FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 0.21 0.31 0.25 Program Name: EMPLOYEE HEALTH INITIATIVES PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Employee Health Initiatives Program is to provide Board approved benefit plans to department leadership so that they can attract and retain qualified employees to achieve their business goals. Key Results: Percent of employees voluntarily leaving employment who report benefits as the primary reason for leaving Maricopa County 734 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A 0.01 0.08 0.05 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Total Compensation (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue N/A N/A $ 970,183 $ $ 980,542 $ $ 2,041,288 $ $ 2,649,479 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds N/A N/A $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service N/A $ 6,606,958 $ 13,806,513 $ 25,080,623 $ 39,364,705 Total Administrative Mandates FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund Special Revenue N/A N/A $ 970,183 $ $ 980,542 $ $ 2,041,288 $ $ 2,649,479 $ - Capital Projects Enterprise Funds N/A N/A $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service N/A $ 6,606,958 $ 13,806,513 $ 25,080,623 $ 39,364,705 $ $ $ $ Total N/A 7,577,141 14,787,055 27,121,911 42,014,184 $ $ $ $ Total N/A 7,577,141 14,787,055 27,121,911 42,014,184 NOTE: Prior to FY 2001-02, Total Compensation was included in the Human Resources Department. See Human Resources for FY 2000-01 history. NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Total Compensation FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Total Compensation Mandates Vs. Expenditures $45.0 General Fund Mandated 6.3% $40.0 Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.0% $35.0 $30.0 $25.0 $20.0 $15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 93.7% 735 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.6 1.0 6.6 0.0 14.8 1.0 13.8 0.0 27.1 2.0 25.1 0.0 42.0 2.6 39.4 0.0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Total Compensation (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION Fund Type GENERAL FUND INTERNAL SERVICE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 1,915,788 $ 1,915,788 $ Supplies & Services 729,613 $ 39,364,705 40,094,318 $ Capital Outlay 4,078 $ 4,078 $ Total Expenditures 2,649,479 $ 39,364,705 42,014,184 $ Total Revenue 20,000 46,909,712 46,929,712 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 638 PATIENT SERVICE REVENUE 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 652 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 802 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 806 SUPPLIES - ALLOCATION IN 811 HEALTH CARE SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 845 SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS 873 SERVICES - ALLOCATION IN 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 950 DEBT SERVICE $ 12,591,375 12,424,568 162,171 51,936 0 25,230,050 $ $ 571,918 $ 773 (0) 119,491 10,001 (68,887) 495,361 1,128,656 $ 206,687 599,643 5,324,035 8,344,421 4,570 300 20,598 2,289 4,583 9,488,346 23,995,472 $ $ $ $ 1,171,487 $ 4,500 234,419 13,841 (68,887) 487,906 1,843,266 $ 252,279 87,119 683 444,726 10,398,620 24,471,520 14,318 2,857 52,819 5,587 28,696 13,074 1,950,968 37,723,266 $ Sub Total $ $ Total Expenditures $ 25,151,519 $ 39,566,532 78,532 $ (2,059,758) $ $ - $ 27,390 27,390 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ 23,535,004 13,780,299 176,471 15,000 37,506,774 23,535,004 13,780,299 176,471 15,000 2,374,000 39,880,774 $ 1,378,063 $ 4,500 327,449 3,315 (68,887) 553,219 2,197,659 $ 252,279 87,119 683 444,726 26,208,315 8,661,825 14,318 2,857 52,819 5,587 28,696 13,074 1,950,968 37,723,266 $ - $ $ $ 38,307,260 15,000 38,322,260 1,914,248 $ 65,248 81 435,699 206,727 (155,482) 548,986 3,015,507 $ 1,171,515 4,500 291,504 392,870 1,860,389 $ 29,726 673 476 35,105,010 3,804,304 8,436 2,857 48,833 8,363 23,768 39,032,446 $ 160,586 87,119 679 445,826 28,514,202 9,946,282 13,949 3,539 43,849 4,970 32,538 13,074 5,053 39,271,666 $ $ $ $ $ $ 39,384,705 7,545,007 46,929,712 $ $ 1,280,314 4,500 317,243 313,731 1,915,788 $ 32,126 673 476 36,284,066 3,682,693 8,436 7,857 48,833 5,390 23,768 40,094,318 $ $ $ $ (15,849,701) 13,780,299 176,471 15,000 (5,171,007) (7,048,938) -67% 100% 100% 100% 0% -218% -18% 97,749 7% 0% 0% 10,206 3% (310,416) -9364% (68,887) 100% 553,219 100% 281,871 13% 220,153 87,119 10 444,250 (10,075,751) 4,979,132 5,882 (5,000) 3,986 197 4,928 13,074 1,950,968 (2,371,052) 87% 100% 1% 100% 0% -38% 57% 41% -175% 8% 4% 17% 100% 0% 100% -6% $ $ $ $ 42,287,173 $ 40,896,913 $ 42,014,184 $ (2,093,259) (40,151) $ 2,695,906 $ (2,574,653) $ 4,915,528 $ (4,955,679) 12343% 736 $ $ % (4,078) (4,078) $ - $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance 4,078 4,078 39,920,925 $ 28,648,005 13,780,299 169,275 11,500 2,374,000 44,983,079 FY 2004-05 Adopted 4,078 4,078 $ $ $ FY 2004-05 Requested 0% 0% 0% -5% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Total Compensation (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 350 TOTAL COMPENSATION Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST DIRECTOR ERGONOMIST FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR FTE 1.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 Market Range Title HEALTH EDUCATOR HR GENERALIST HR MANAGER MANAGEMENT ANALYST PROGRAM MANAGER PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE Total 737 FTE 1.00 9.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 26.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Transportation (A division of Public Works) Organizational Chart County Administrative Officer Chief Regional Development Services Agency Officer Transportation Transportation Mike Ellegood, Director Mike Ellegood, Director Technology Planning & Community/ Governmental Relations Construction & Operations Engineering Administration Lands/ Right of Way Mission The Mission of the Department of Transportation (MCDOT) is to provide a quality transportation system to the travelers in Maricopa County so they can experience a safe, efficient and cost-effective journey. Vision We set a standard of excellence regionally enabling us to consistently deliver on our commitment to provide the right transportation system for Maricopa County at the right time and the right cost. Goals • By December 2006 MCDOT will complete a transportation system plan update, including specific policies and strategies that support the implementation of the MAG Regional Transportation Plan. • By December 2006 MCDOT will demonstrate support for the MAG Regional Transportation Plan and cooperation with our regional partners by proactively establishing partnership agreements with other local governments on the regional arterial projects contained in the Plan. • MCDOT will optimize the existing roadway system by annually deploying 25 safety improvement projects in addition to the Transportation Improvement Program. • By June 2006 MCDOT will increase customer satisfaction and MCDOT institutional recognition through improved, proactive stakeholder involvement processes and initiatives to a stakeholder satisfaction survey rating of 6 as reported in the annual survey conducted by MCDOT Community Relations. • Beginning in FY 2005 MCDOT will plan for and improve the consistency of our delivery of budgeted projects by improving our capital expenditure rate to 85% and our operations expenditure rate to more than 95%, but less than 98%. 738 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Transportation (Continued) • Annually, the occupational injury rate and severity of injuries and illnesses at MCDOT will decrease 5% from the previous year. Issues • Our existing regional transportation system is fragmented among multiple jurisdictions resulting in a lack of diverse forms of transit, connectivity, alignment of traffic control measures, and other discontinuous infrastructure that is not meeting our customers' needs. • Inadequate integration of land use planning, environmental issues, and transportation planning will result in MCDOT's inability to deliver the right transportation system at the right time and the right cost. • MCDOT is experiencing difficulty in attracting and retaining a sufficient number of qualified employees which negatively impacts succession planning and introduces a lack of continuity in staffing critical positions. • The condition of uncoordinated and rapid rural and residential development in formerly rural areas, in combination with air quality mandates, have created extraordinary demands on our resources for the maintenance and improvement of county maintained and non-county maintained roads. • MCDOT’s lack of understanding of what drives private sector development schedules and locations impact our ability to adequately plan for and preserve the County’s interest for an interoperable transportation system in the years to come. At the same time, private sector development provides collaborative planning and funding opportunities to deliver an adequate transportation system network. • Lack of commitment to improve MCDOT's image and increase public involvement will result in loss of customer and partner support. • The County’s Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) carryover may be used by the cities and towns as evidence that the HURF distribution should be changed to direct more money to the municipalities instead of to the County. • MCDOT’s collective group failure to focus on the basics of safety is causing an increase in workplace accidents. Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 640 TRANSPORTATION TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 64BT - BUILD ROADS AND BRIDGES $ 6,200,794 64MT - MANAGE TRAFFIC 1,562,507 64RB - MAINTAIN ROADS AND BRIDGES 10,394,973 64ST - SUPPORT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 3,208,507 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 1,854,884 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1,567,341 TOTAL $ 24,789,006 Supplies & Services $ 8,181,303 2,071,406 14,074,205 2,596,129 7,751,388 1,224,700 $ 35,899,131 739 Capital Outlay 66,138,168 95,000 2,889,015 340,000 789,814 $ 70,251,997 $ Total Expenditures $ 80,520,265 3,728,913 27,358,193 6,144,636 9,606,272 3,581,855 $ 130,940,134 Total Revenue 75,265,642 2,873,893 20,706,304 6,500,349 12,305,179 2,701,535 $ 120,352,902 $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Transportation (Continued) Key Performance Measures Program Name: BUILD ROADS AND BRIDGES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Build Roads and Bridges program is to provide design and construction of roads and bridges to the traveling public so that they can get to their destination in a safe and efficient manner. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent Particulate Matter (PM-10) roads that have been paved per County Air Quality regulations for dust suppression/mitigation 38 89 81 80 Percent of land rights acquired by bid date within budget 100 100 100 95 Percent of lane miles completed that were planned for new or improved roadway construction (excluding PM 10 roads) 58 60 90 80 Percent of bridges completed that were planned for new or improved construction N/A 67 75 80 Percent of utility relocation permits completed w/o delays 100 100 100 100 Key Results: Program Name: MAINTAIN ROADS AND BRIDGES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Maintain Roads and Bridges program is to provide roadway upkeep and traffic flow management to the traveling public so they can have safe trips on smooth, cost effective roads. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of total road mileage with pavement condition rating of "good" or better 98 98 98 95 Percent of bridges with sufficiency rating of "good" of better 81 67 73 70 Key Results: Program Name: MANAGE TRAFFIC Program Purpose: The purpose of the Manage Traffic program is to provide traffic safety solutions to contractors and provide coordinated traffic information, and emergency and event control services to the traveling public so that their trip is safe and travel delays are minimized. Key Results: Percent reduction in accidents per intersection or roadway segment 740 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A N/A 87 70 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Transportation (Continued) Program Name: SUPPORT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Program Purpose: The purpose of the Support Transportation Systems program is to provide information, tools, and guidance to teams within MCDOT, and their designers and builders so that they can prepare and efficiently deliver effective products and services and coordinated designs and construction. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of MCDOT projects that go to bid and are eligible for partnerships and have partnerships in place N/A 74 58 67 Percent increase in customer satisfaction and institutional recognition N/A 78 2.3 2.5 Key Results: Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 113,744,601 $ 45,239,435 $ 46,476,736 $ 43,867,392 $ 114,676,951 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ 48,684,801 $ $ 56,164,787 $ $ 51,407,046 $ $ 77,959,051 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 113,744,601 93,924,236 102,641,523 95,274,438 192,636,002 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 112,893,384 $ 45,215,397 $ 45,794,755 $ 43,851,554 $ 114,426,951 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ 48,684,801 $ $ 56,164,787 $ $ 51,407,046 $ $ 77,959,051 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 112,893,384 93,900,198 101,959,542 95,258,600 192,386,002 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 851,217 $ 24,038 $ 681,981 $ 15,838 $ 250,000 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 851,217 24,038 681,981 15,838 250,000 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Transportation FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $200.0 General Fund Mandated 0.0% $180.0 $160.0 Dollars in Millions Non-Mandated 0.1% Transportation Mandates Vs. Expenditures $140.0 $120.0 $100.0 $80.0 $60.0 $40.0 $20.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Other Fund Mandated 99.9% 741 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 113.7 0 112.9 0.9 93.9 0 93.9 0 102.6 0 102 0.7 95.3 0 95.3 0 192.6 0 192.4 0.3 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Transportation (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Transportation System Environmental Mitigation Operation, AUTHORITY Title 11 Powers and obligations of the county; A.R.S. § 28-18 Distribution of Highway Users Revenue Fund (HURF) funds; A.R.S. § 28-19 County highways; A.R.S. § 41-4 and 41-5 Historic preservation; Title 49 Environment; General Order R-1 of the Corporation Commission; The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21); The National Environmental Policy Act; The Clean Water Act; The Americans with Disabilities Act; Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The State of Arizona adopted statutes defining powers and duties of various levels of government in operating and maintaining the public transportation system. It also defined a funding mechanism and allocation formula for HURF revenue collected by the State. The Constitution and state statutes restrict how the funds can be spent. The specifics of HURF, its distribution, and the powers and duties of the levels of government have been amended numerous times. 742 Maintenance, Improvement, Planning And Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Transportation (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 640 TRANSPORTATION Fund Type CAPITAL PROJECTS ELIMINATIONS SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 4,183,000 $ 20,606,006 24,789,006 $ Supplies & Services 7,667,883 $ (61,695,868) 89,927,116 35,899,131 $ Capital Outlay 66,108,168 $ 4,143,829 70,251,997 $ Total Expenditures 77,959,051 $ (61,695,868) 114,676,951 130,940,134 $ Total Revenue 83,141,666 (61,695,868) 98,907,104 120,352,902 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 640 TRANSPORTATION ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 610 LICENSES AND PERMITS 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 626 STATE SHARED HIGHWAY USER REV 630 STATE SHARED VEHICLE LICENSE 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 651 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue 17,205,153 $ 94,816 518,112 4,143,873 234,253 (4,295,538) 4,248,411 22,149,081 $ 18,631,248 $ 169,774 555,754 5,067,134 179,323 (4,464,335) 4,183,490 24,322,388 $ 18,434,147 $ 169,774 570,754 5,332,383 179,323 (4,464,335) 4,183,490 24,405,536 $ 17,797,974 $ 82,230 490,503 4,981,513 177,321 (4,464,335) 3,924,845 22,990,050 $ 18,309,369 $ 89,774 520,200 6,033,192 243,768 (4,142,768) 4,285,529 25,339,064 $ 17,892,019 $ 89,774 520,200 5,977,475 243,768 (4,219,759) 4,285,529 24,789,006 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 1,387,326 687,623 235,197 16,434,173 216,286 5,282,806 4,786,138 215,772 27,588 651,242 1,925,005 31,849,156 $ 1,373,333 762,915 114,600 9,816,313 228,540 5,971,236 5,429,533 297,504 18,000 660,755 2,006,719 26,679,448 $ 1,361,343 753,990 114,600 9,753,186 228,540 5,766,235 5,536,676 270,269 19,221 660,755 2,006,719 26,471,534 $ 1,235,760 717,963 77,850 11,312,602 228,540 4,909,149 5,536,674 220,958 17,115 688,850 2,006,719 26,952,180 $ 1,261,654 737,282 77,850 20,337,271 246,540 5,508,936 4,870,511 316,943 18,000 685,755 1,716,924 35,777,666 $ 1,261,654 737,282 77,850 15,962,183 246,540 5,301,432 4,800,000 4,870,511 221,000 18,000 685,755 1,716,924 35,899,131 $ CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 12,584,672 210,464 285,826 1,560,331 34,011,616 193,139 48,846,048 $ $ $ 3,739,000 340,000 146,000 2,868,015 62,369,168 789,814 70,251,997 $ $ 4,029,000 340,000 146,000 2,868,015 57,704,080 789,814 65,876,909 $ $ 10,376,317 227,606 140,078 1,531,510 40,520,252 576,406 53,372,170 $ $ 6,830,500 267,215 191,379 1,840,000 65,512,787 576,406 75,218,287 $ $ 9,480,500 72,215 191,379 1,910,241 62,862,787 576,406 75,093,528 $ 3,091,500 (72,785) 45,379 (1,028,015) 3,143,619 (213,408) 4,966,290 Total Expenditures $ 102,844,285 $ 126,095,364 $ 126,095,357 $ 103,314,400 $ 126,993,639 $ 130,940,134 $ (4,844,777) -4% (8,855,710) $ 3,323,089 $ (12,594,016) $ 1,731,522 -20% (1,472,829) $ $ $ (8,855,717) $ 1,700,000 350,000 18,644,647 86,300,000 7,200,000 500,000 2,315,000 230,000 117,239,647 743 $ $ $ 1,805,235 498,085 11,744,728 80,489,274 7,666,635 413,133 3,907,701 112,699 0 106,637,490 $ $ $ 1,700,000 250,000 21,335,498 82,000,000 8,000,000 600,000 314,125 200,000 114,399,623 $ $ $ 1,700,000 250,000 21,335,498 88,073,124 8,000,000 480,155 314,125 200,000 120,352,902 $ % EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ $ $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ $ 1,400,000 350,000 20,899,647 86,300,000 7,500,000 500,000 60,000 230,000 117,239,647 FY 2004-05 Adopted 1,563,228 $ 550,128 5,702,499 82,153,375 7,071,602 (0) 667,127 3,564,319 99,177 0 101,371,455 $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ FY 2004-05 Requested $ 100,000 (2,690,851) (1,773,124) (800,000) 19,845 2,000,875 30,000 (3,113,255) 0% 29% -14% -2% -11% 0% 4% 86% 13% 0% -3% 542,128 80,000 50,554 (645,092) (64,445) (244,576) (102,039) (383,470) 3% 47% 9% -12% -36% 5% -2% -2% 99,689 16,708 36,750 (6,208,997) (18,000) 464,803 (4,800,000) 666,165 49,269 1,221 (25,000) 289,795 (9,427,597) 7% 2% 32% -64% -8% 8% 0% 12% 18% 6% -4% 14% -36% 45% -27% 24% -56% 5% -37% 7% $ (10,587,232) $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Transportation (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 640 TRANSPORTATION Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR DISPATCHER ENGINEER ENGINEERING AIDE ENGINEERING MANAGER ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN EQUIPMENT OPERATOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL MANAGER FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL MAINTENANCE SUPV GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS SUPV HR GENERALIST FTE 1.00 4.00 16.00 1.00 24.00 3.00 8.00 2.00 4.00 10.00 1.00 1.00 22.00 7.00 2.00 11.00 38.00 100.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 16.00 94.00 7.00 2.00 2.00 Market Range Title HR SPECIALIST HR SUPERVISOR INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS PROJECT MGR INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INFO TECHNOL CONSULTANT INSPECTION SUPERVISOR INSPECTOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST MATERIALS HANDLING SPEC MEDIA ASSISTANT MEDIA SPECIALIST OPERATIONS MANAGER PLANNER PLANNING SUPERVISOR PRGRM COORDINATION SPEC PROGRAM COORDINATOR PROGRAM MANAGER PROGRAM SUPERVISOR PROJECT MANAGER PURCHASING SUPERVISOR SURVEY TECHNICIAN TECH SUPPORT SPECIALIST TECHNICAL PROGRAM SUPV TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST WEB SPECIALIST Total 744 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 20.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 8.00 4.00 15.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 10.00 6.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 479.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Special Districts Special Districts Organizational Chart Maricopa County Citizens Flood Control District Board of Directors Fulton Brock, District 1 Don Stapley, District 2 Andrew Kunasek, Chairman Max Wilson, District 4 Mary Rose Wilcox, District 5 Stadium District Board of Directors Fulton Brock, District 1 Don Stapley, District 2 Andrew Kunasek, Chairman Max Wilson, District 4 Mary Rose Wilcox, District 5 Library District Board of Directors Fulton Brock, District 1 Don Stapley, District 2 Andrew Kunasek, Chairman Max Wilson, District 4 Mary Rose Wilcox, District 5 Mike Ellegood, Chief Engineer/General Manager David Smith Executive Director Harry Courtright, Director 745 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (A division of Public Works) Organizational Chart Flood Control District Board of Directors County Administrative Officer Chief Regional Development Services Agency Officer Flood Control District Flood Control District Timothy S. Phillips, P.E., Timothy S. Phillips, P.E., Acting Chief Engineer & General Manager Acting Chief Engineer & General Manager Executive Operations & Maintenance Land Management Regulatory Administration Engineering Information Technology Planning & Project Management Mission The Mission of the Flood Control District of Maricopa County is to provide flood hazard identification, regulation, remediation, and education to the people in Maricopa County so that they can reduce their risks of injury, death, and property damage due to flooding while enjoying the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains. Vision The Vision of the Flood Control District of Maricopa County is that the people of Maricopa County and future generations will have the maximum amount of protection from the effects of flooding through fiscally responsible flood control actions and multiple-use facilities that complement or enhance the beauty of our desert environment. Goals • By FY 2008-09, the Flood Control District will develop and implement a model for flood hazard risk mitigation that measures the amount of risk mitigated through actions taken by each of its programs in terms of the number of people affected and the inflation adjusted cost per resident. • Beginning in FY 2004-05 and for each year for the next five years, the Flood Control District will continue to identify flood and erosion hazard areas by delineating at least 5% of the existing (3,334) linear miles of undelineated watercourses and conducting studies on 5% of the total number of square miles (7,070) of watershed needing study. • Beginning in FY 2004-05 and for each year for the next five years, the Flood Control District will continue to provide maximum flood hazard mitigation to the people who live and work in Maricopa County by completing 10% of the structural projects listed in the 5-year CIP plan (40). And, to the extent allowed by its enabling statutes, the District will include provisions for multiple use opportunities incorporating the principles of landscape architecture and land use planning in their siting, planning, and design. 746 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) • Beginning in FY 2004-05 and for each year for the next five years, the Flood Control District will provide floodplain compliance guidance, direction, permitting, and enforcement so that 100% of the structures permitted for building within delineated floodplains are in compliance with applicable state and federal laws and are not flooded during storm runoff events. • Beginning in FY 2004-05 and for each year for the next five years, 50% of those who live in and visit Maricopa County will be exposed to flood hazard information, flood mitigation project information, and flood safety guidance through mass media and public education programs. • By the end of calendar year 2007, the Flood Control District will have the requisite number of 500 points to increase its CRS rating from a level 5 to a level 4; thereby saving the property owners in unincorporated Maricopa County an additional 5% on their annual flood insurance premiums. Issues • In addition to changing regulations, standards, and geologic conditions fissures and cracks threaten the integrity of the District's structures. Therefore, the Flood Control District has to increase the safety monitoring procedures for its structures, increase its maintenance efforts (beyond those needed in the past), and implement plans to mitigate, upgrade, and/or redesign structures that are in danger of compromise or are no longer in compliance. • The preservation of natural resources for public use is one of Maricopa County's Livability Indicators. County residents request wildlife habitats and aesthetically pleasing open areas; and they are reluctant to accept concrete flood control structures. This in turn, requires the Flood Control District to design and construct, within it statutory limitations, more costly and complex flood control structures which support multi-use purposes and the residents' requests. • In the past, the Flood Control District was able to use some of its capital funds to implement flood hazard mitigation measures through its education, identification, and regulation programs. Today, primarily because of GASB 34, the Flood Control District must seek additional operating funds to sustain these less costly flood hazard mitigation programs and thereby reduce the per capita flood hazard mitigation costs in Maricopa County. • The population of Maricopa County is expected to increase by approximately 62% over the next 15 years with many of these people living in what is presently now rural or agricultural areas. Most of these people (as well as a number of existing residents) will have difficulty believing that flooding can occur in the desert and the impact significant runoff can have on flooding, especially during a period of drought. This population increase will put severe strains on all of the Flood Control District's flood hazard mitigation programs. • The Flood Control District is rated by the FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS) at a level 5, which is in the top 1% of all the flood control districts in the United States. A level 5 rating provides the property owners in unincorporated Maricopa County with a 25% discount on their annual flood insurance premiums. To save property owners even more by providing them with a 30% discount on their annual flood insurance premiums the District must increase its CRS score to a level 4. 747 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 69FH - FLOOD HAZARD REGULATION PROGRA $ 2,329,966 69HE - FLOOD HAZARD EDUCATION PROGRAM 471,053 69HI - FLOOD HAZARD IDENTIFICATION 1,853,834 69HR - FLOOD HAZARD REMEDIATION 6,109,567 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 1,480,372 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 1,073,558 TOTAL $ 13,318,350 Supplies & Services $ 745,090 50,897 7,295,252 10,192,869 3,052,122 454,072 $ 21,790,302 Capital Outlay 8,000 39,630 44,272,150 53,000 151,611 $ 44,524,391 $ Total Expenditures $ 3,083,056 521,950 9,188,716 60,574,586 4,585,494 1,679,241 $ 79,633,043 Total Revenue 2,101,404 19,696,481 56,871,753 $ 78,669,638 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: FLOOD HAZARD EDUCATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Flood Hazard Education program is to provide information to the public so that they can be more knowledgeable about the risks of floods and flood hazards, and the Flood Control District projects, studies, and activities that will affect them. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of presentation, program, and stormwater quality consultation requests completed. N/A 106.8 101.85 100 Percent of dollar value of positive media attention received at a rating of five or above (on a scale of one to nine). N/A 93.91 89.75 90 Key Results: Program Name: FLOOD HAZARD IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Flood Hazard Identification program is to provide the identification of, and alternative solutions to flood hazards, and flood warning data to public and private organizations so that they can incorporate knowledge of flood hazards in their plans within presently developed and future urban growth areas. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of square miles of watershed identified for plan studies where the studies were completed in the fiscal year. N/A 0.15 11.06 5 Percent of cumulative linear miles of watercourses requiring approximate or detailed delineation that were delineated up to the end of the current fiscal year. N/A 13.23 39.05 5 Percent of sensor days that was operational during the quarter. N/A 99.34 99.36 99 Key Results: 748 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) Program Name: FLOOD HAZARD REGULATION PROGRAM Program Purpose: The purpose of the Flood Hazard Regulation program is to provide guidance, direction, and enforcement for the public so that they can avoid causing adverse impacts to floodplains, and use their property safely and in compliance with applicable state and federal laws. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of storm water samples collected. N/A 84 98.21 90 Percent of drainage complaint cases in which an initial site investigation is conducted within 30 days of receipt of violation complaint. N/A 89 44.16 N/A Percent of inspection stops completed within one day of receiving the request for an inspection. N/A 94.99 87.16 N/A Percent of drainage plans reviews completed in the quarter within the One-Stop-Shop goals. N/A 97 99.34 N/A Percent of floodplain complaint cases in which an initial site investigation is conducted within 30 days of receipt of violation complaint. N/A 87 71.88 100 Percent of inspection stops completed within one day of receiving the request for an inspection. N/A 95 67.93 70 Percent of Flood Determinations responded to within 24 hours of receiving the request. N/A 100 100 100 Percent of floodplain plans reviews completed in the quarter within the One-Stop-Shop goals. N/A 89.32 97.39 93 Key Results: 749 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) Program Name: FLOOD HAZARD REMEDIATION Program Purpose: The purpose of the Flood Hazard Remediation program is to provide protection to the public from flood hazards through structural mitigation and buy-out so that they can live with an acceptable risk of loss of life or property due to flooding. FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected Percent of structural projects on the current 5-Year Capital Project Plan that are completed in the current fiscal year. N/A 10.71 12.5 10 Percent of eligible property acquired in the fiscal year. N/A N/A N/A 10 Percent of priority 1 work orders (work required to assure safety, or for a structure to function as designed) that were completed within 60 days of issuance. N/A 72.54 96.34 95 Percent of budgeted revenue realized through the use or sale of Flood Control District property. N/A 178 22.05 75 Key Results: 750 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 23,016,038 $ 20,240,575 $ 55,518,204 $ 78,829,285 $ 91,003,439 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ 56,829,046 $ $ 45,933,266 $ $ 40,773,261 $ $ 47,719,673 $ $ 52,076,503 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 79,845,084 66,173,841 96,291,465 126,548,958 143,079,942 Total Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 14,728,899 $ 13,499,531 $ 14,101,198 $ 18,339,179 $ 19,805,359 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 14,728,899 13,499,531 14,101,198 18,339,179 19,805,359 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 8,287,139 $ 6,741,044 $ 41,417,006 $ 60,490,106 $ 71,198,080 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ 56,829,046 $ $ 45,933,266 $ $ 40,773,261 $ $ 47,719,673 $ $ 52,076,503 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 65,116,185 52,674,310 82,190,267 108,209,779 123,274,583 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Flood Control District FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $60.0 Other Fund Mandated 13.8% $50.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% Flood Control District Mandates Vs. Expenditures $40.0 $30.0 $20.0 $10.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 86.2% 751 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 50.8 11.6 39.1 0.1 52.7 12.1 40.5 0 52.3 14.5 37.8 0 56.1 43.5 12.6 0 59.6 45.7 13.9 0 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) Mandate Information TITLE Flood Detection and Data Collection AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 48-3608 Assistance In Flood Insurance Program; A.R.S. § 48-3609B Floodplain Delineation And Regulation; Arizona Administrative Code § 12-15-1219 Dam Safety Procedures; Owners Responsibilities HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The program was initiated to monitor impoundments behind the District's dams and to measure flood flows in our flood channels and on the major rivers. A comprehensive system now provides essential rainfall, stream flow and weather data to the District. This information is electronically relayed to the National Weather Service, the State, the County Departments of Transportation and Emergency Management, and many cities. MANDATE DESCRIPTION The Flood Control District, as owner of 23 dam and drainage facilities regulated by the State, must monitor flood control facilities, watersheds and floodplains for structure integrity and evaluation purpose and is responsible for their safe operation. This is accomplished through periodic maintenance, inspection, and early warning and emergency action plans. During the past 12 months, the operational efficiency of all remote stations was approximately 99%. This level of performance will be maintained or increased slightly. Flood Detection and Data Collection FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 994,426 $ 1,182,780 $ 1,199,727 $ 1,421,190 $ 1,401,103 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 994,426 1,182,780 1,199,727 1,421,190 1,401,103 TITLE Floodplain Administration AUTHORITY A.R.S. § 48-3609 Floodplain Delineation And Regulation Of Use. A.R.S. § 48-3610 Assumption Of Powers And Duties By Cities And Towns HISTORY/ BACKGROUND The Flood Control District administers the floodplain regulation for the unincorporated areas of Maricopa County, plus 13 municipalities. Additionally, the district delineates areas subjected to the "100-year" flood throughout Maricopa County. The minimum level of service is the regulation of new development in the floodplains and the enforcement of the floodplain regulations. MANDATE DESCRIPTION Maricopa County must manage and regulate delineated floodplains. Floodplain Administration FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 3,139,379 $ 3,136,398 $ 2,587,362 $ 2,857,852 $ 2,833,109 752 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 3,139,379 3,136,398 2,587,362 2,857,852 2,833,109 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) TITLE Planning FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget TITLE Structure FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget TITLE Drainage FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget Planning $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Special Revenue $ 4,385,910 $ 3,110,548 $ 3,503,051 $ 5,260,529 $ 5,941,312 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 4,385,910 3,110,548 3,503,051 5,260,529 5,941,312 Special Revenue $ 4,851,018 $ 3,874,262 $ 4,276,303 $ 6,062,535 $ 7,214,285 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 4,851,018 3,874,262 4,276,303 6,062,535 7,214,285 Special Revenue $ 1,358,166 $ 2,195,543 $ 2,534,755 $ 2,737,073 $ 2,415,550 Capital Projects $ $ $ $ $ - Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 1,358,166 2,195,543 2,534,755 2,737,073 2,415,550 Structure $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - Drainage $ $ $ $ $ General Fund - 753 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT Fund Type CAPITAL PROJECTS ELIMINATIONS SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 2,350,000 $ 10,968,350 13,318,350 $ Supplies & Services 6,081,503 $ (63,446,899) 79,155,698 21,790,302 $ Capital Outlay 43,645,000 $ 879,391 44,524,391 $ Total Expenditures 52,076,503 $ (63,446,899) 91,003,439 79,633,043 $ Total Revenue 63,446,899 (63,446,899) 78,669,638 78,669,638 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 601 PROPERTY TAXES 610 LICENSES AND PERMITS 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 621 PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 651 GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS 652 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ 44,165,629 1,759,324 14,482,555 136,905 608,132 14,827,082 3,346 0 75,982,973 $ $ 51,153,993 1,800,700 16,554,000 137,612 391,606 5,954,832 75,992,743 $ $ 51,153,993 1,800,700 357,000 16,554,000 137,612 391,606 5,954,832 76,349,743 $ $ 51,153,993 1,922,157 357,000 16,542,697 148,917 444,386 1,018,823 21,223 71,609,196 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 62,600,291 4,500,000 19,557,000 168,404 400,000 139,481 87,365,176 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 56,334,141 2,101,404 19,557,000 137,612 400,000 139,481 78,669,638 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ (5,180,148) (300,704) 357,000 (3,003,000) (8,394) 5,815,351 (2,319,895) -10% -17% 100% -18% 0% -2% 98% 0% 0% 0% -3% EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 9,670,957 $ 250,062 39,556 2,070,412 21,276 (324,603) 298,192 12,025,852 $ 10,390,573 $ 353,420 41,330 2,465,849 (2,784,124) 2,651,612 13,118,660 $ 10,496,737 $ 375,117 39,050 2,881,331 (2,934,826) 2,802,315 13,659,724 $ 10,194,917 $ 351,201 106,416 2,694,252 22,241 (263,505) 282,245 13,387,767 $ 10,536,320 $ 370,000 25,900 2,963,649 (2,530,000) 2,363,784 13,729,653 $ 10,214,917 $ 370,000 25,900 2,873,749 (2,530,000) 2,363,784 13,318,350 $ 281,820 5,117 13,150 7,582 (404,826) 438,531 341,374 3% 1% 34% 0% 0% 14% 16% 2% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 984,320 133,095 83,610 406,899 13,049,080 181,740 174,626 93 1,615,581 117,570 18,218 276,966 1,122,858 18,164,658 1,085,501 144,999 72,510 351,000 14,588,968 192,634 205,900 600 1,826,404 166,325 11,300 196,435 1,136,127 19,978,703 831,285 144,999 71,510 337,500 15,715,906 258,134 215,900 600 1,826,404 139,585 11,300 228,335 1,136,127 20,917,585 821,489 145,459 73,293 325,523 16,577,233 258,134 215,391 532 1,835,729 142,424 15,653 264,786 1,136,127 21,811,773 1,151,780 144,987 39,313 320,900 16,677,045 260,809 178,950 400 1,853,885 142,070 11,500 227,560 1,144,170 22,153,369 862,564 144,987 39,313 320,900 16,677,045 260,809 178,950 400 1,780,034 142,070 11,500 227,560 1,144,170 21,790,302 (31,279) 12 32,197 16,600 (961,139) (2,675) 36,950 200 46,370 (2,485) (200) 775 (8,043) (872,717) -4% 0% 45% 5% -6% -1% 17% 33% 3% -2% -2% 0% -1% -4% CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 940 INFRASTRUCTURE 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 15,579,357 7,486 16,041 413,922 15,502,365 29,694 31,548,864 Total Expenditures $ Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 14,902,947 724,650 31,000,283 80,000 46,707,880 $ $ 8,412,000 7,500 802,450 36,603,000 80,000 45,904,950 61,739,374 $ 79,805,243 $ 80,482,259 14,243,599 $ (3,812,500) $ $ $ $ $ 14,402,393 13,246 763,957 29,974,800 109,147 45,263,543 $ 80,463,083 (4,132,516) $ 754 $ $ $ $ 9,990,000 15,500 712,280 33,655,000 147,000 44,519,780 $ (8,853,887) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 9,990,000 15,500 712,280 33,655,000 151,611 44,524,391 $ $ 80,402,802 $ 79,633,043 $ 6,962,374 $ (963,405) $ (1,578,000) (8,000) 90,170 2,948,000 (71,611) 1,380,559 849,216 (3,169,111) -19% 0% -107% 11% 8% -90% 3% 1% 77% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Flood Control District (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 690 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMIN & OPERATIONS MGR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT SUPV ADMIN/OPERATIONS SUPV CHEMICAL APPLICATNS TECH CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEVELOPER/PRGRMR ANALYST DIRECTOR ELECTRONIC TECHNICIAN ENGINEER ENGINEERING AIDE ENGINEERING MANAGER ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST EQUIPMENT OPERATOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR FTE 1.00 3.00 3.00 12.00 1.00 7.00 1.00 6.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 9.00 1.00 4.00 33.00 3.00 3.00 14.00 24.00 2.00 11.00 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST GENERAL LABORER GENERAL MAINTENANCE SUPV GENERAL MAINTENANCE TECH GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS SUPV HR GENERALIST HR SPECIALIST INFO SYSTEMS MANAGER INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR INSPECTION SUPERVISOR INSPECTOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST MECHANIC OPERATIONS MANAGER PC SPECIALIST PLANNER PRGRM COORDINATION SPEC PROGRAM MANAGER PROGRAM SUPERVISOR SURVEY TECHNICIAN TECHNICAL PROGRAM SUPV TECHNOLOGY ANALYST TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN Total 755 FTE 2.00 7.00 7.00 15.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 10.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 227.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Library District Organizational Chart Library District Board of Directors Library Director/County Librarian Library Director/County Librarian Harry Courtright Harry Courtright Service Agencies Service Coordinators Support Services Finance & Facilities Information Technology Mission The Mission of Maricopa County Library District is to provide access to a wealth of informational and recreational resources for people of all ages and backgrounds so that they may have the opportunity to expand their horizons through reading and learning. Goals • By December 31, 2005, develop a new model for providing equitable access to electronic resources to 75% of public libraries in the county. • By June 30, 2006, customer satisfaction with the library’s collection of books and other materials will increase to 90%. • By June 30, 2007, increase the number of library cardholders by 27% over cardholders on June 30, 2004. • By June 30, 2008, increase resource usage to meet or exceed the average increase of 10 benchmark libraries. • By June 30, 2009, increase the number of active (card is used at least 3 times in 12 months) cardholders by 40% over cardholders on June 30, 2004. Issues • Our efforts to facilitate shared access to library and information resources countywide will result in the Library District's leadership role expanding and will provide cost savings. • The decrease in reading nationwide which challenges libraries to find opportunities for developing new ways that will result in more active readers. • Our ability to afford, become proficient with, and provide current technology in its ever-changing formats will challenge both our existence and continuing relevance to our customers. • Continuing change in demographics brings diverse customer expectations for services and challenges our ability to respond to varied cultures, languages and levels of technological literacy. • Customer surveys show that citizens value and expect high quality library services. The Library District must pursue strong political support that provides appropriate facilities and funds so that we meet customer needs. • Responding to and collaborating with our competition challenges us to continually assess and upgrade our skills, collections, merchandizing and technology so that we may thrive. 756 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Library District (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT TOTAL FUNDS Program Personal Services 65PL - PUBLIC LIBRARY SERVICE $ 6,431,046 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG 1,191,720 99IT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 501,590 TOTAL $ 8,124,356 Supplies & Services $ 6,857,892 868,463 233,442 $ 7,959,797 Capital Outlay 232,831 28,812 $ 261,643 $ Total Expenditures $ 13,521,769 2,060,183 763,844 $ 16,345,796 Total Revenue 16,401,681 457,589 $ 16,859,270 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: PUBLIC LIBRARY SERVICES Program Purpose: The purpose of the Public Library Service program is to provide resources, activities and skilled assistance to our customers, so that their needs, interests and goals are met. Key Results: Percent of library users who report that they received the information in a timely manner 757 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected N/A N/A 96.4 97 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Library District (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 9,277,831 $ 10,032,880 $ 12,633,244 $ 16,484,097 $ 16,345,796 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,277,831 10,032,880 12,633,244 16,484,097 16,345,796 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 9,277,831 $ 10,032,880 $ 12,633,244 $ 16,484,097 $ 16,345,796 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,277,831 10,032,880 12,633,244 16,484,097 16,345,796 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Library District FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures Library District Mandates Vs. Expenditures $18.0 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $16.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $14.0 $12.0 $10.0 $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 758 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 9.3 0.0 0.0 9.3 10.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 12.6 0.0 0.0 12.6 16.5 0.0 0.0 16.5 16.3 0.0 0.0 16.3 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Library District (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT Fund Type SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $ $ Personal Services 8,124,356 $ 8,124,356 $ Supplies & Services 7,959,797 $ 7,959,797 $ Capital Outlay 261,643 $ 261,643 $ Total Expenditures 16,345,796 $ 16,345,796 $ Total Revenue 16,859,270 16,859,270 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 601 PROPERTY TAXES 615 GRANTS 620 OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL 621 PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES 635 OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 637 FINES & FORFEITS 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 652 PROCEEDS OF FINANCING Total Revenue $ $ 11,568,233 25,000 397,140 187,436 300,260 180,000 63,060 12,721,129 EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 710 OVERTIME 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 4,529,096 $ 596,634 1,262 1,056,135 10,056 (283) 6,192,900 $ 4,763,312 569,581 1,473,413 13,703 167,028 6,987,037 $ SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 803 FUEL 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 830 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Sub Total $ 2,082,151 11,436 32,871 524,827 125,175 71,422 1,792,480 365,577 70,941 152,104 171,190 594,766 5,994,940 1,950,356 12,000 903,733 96,711 99,800 830,583 384,482 104,496 100,500 186,700 681,388 5,350,749 CAPITAL OUTLAY 910 LAND $ 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS 920 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 930 VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 169,502 57,706 26,226 172,686 426,120 Total Expenditures $ 12,613,960 Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ 10,182,607 163,526 6,802 186,473 339,099 140,262 172,877 11,191,646 $ $ $ $ $ 27,000 248,000 275,000 $ 12,612,786 (1,422,314) $ 108,343 $ $ $ $ $ 14,316,032 25,000 397,140 187,436 300,260 180,000 210,135 15,616,003 $ 4,660,540 638,555 1,409,611 99,862 167,028 6,975,596 $ 3,390,808 14,500 165,000 422,553 119,364 127,167 963,100 373,776 103,000 109,600 195,750 681,388 6,666,006 $ $ $ $ $ 1,540,000 1,219,200 891,299 27,000 248,514 3,926,013 $ 17,567,615 $ (1,951,612) $ 759 $ 14,316,032 104,000 430,000 187,336 25,006 460,000 75,272 368,290 5,401 15,971,336 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 12,342,816 25,000 6,785 208,565 27,420 445,000 77,143 260,446 13,393,175 4,789,089 $ 666,243 65 1,514,590 11,644 (51) 158,313 7,139,892 $ 5,146,592 948,161 1,675,348 86,954 166,752 8,023,807 $ 3,955,243 12,329 232,667 595,369 97,534 30,591 963,100 385,704 73,187 129,522 173,179 681,388 7,329,814 1,973,340 15,000 181,828 37,345 125,295 963,100 445,052 105,000 91,600 195,750 467,330 4,600,640 $ $ 1,540,000 538,790 1,018,173 27,000 240,545 3,364,507 $ 17,834,213 $ FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ $ $ 27,000 234,643 261,643 $ 12,886,090 (1,862,877) $ 507,085 $ $ $ $ Adopted Vs Revised Variance 15,664,900 25,000 51,925 187,436 27,420 445,000 77,143 380,446 16,859,270 $ 5,229,622 948,161 1,692,867 86,954 166,752 8,124,356 $ 2,323,340 15,000 2,819,263 181,828 37,345 125,295 963,100 396,233 105,000 91,600 195,750 706,043 7,959,797 $ $ 27,000 234,643 261,643 $ 16,345,796 $ 513,474 $ $ $ $ % (1,348,868) 345,215 (27,420) (144,740) 102,857 (170,311) (1,243,267) -9% 0% 87% 0% 0% -48% 57% -81% 0% -8% (569,082) (309,606) (283,256) 12,908 276 (1,148,760) -12% -48% 0% -20% 13% 0% 0% -16% 1,067,468 31% (500) -3% (2,654,263) -1609% 240,725 57% 82,019 69% 1,872 1% 0% (22,457) -6% (2,000) -2% 18,000 16% 0% (24,655) -4% (1,293,791) -19% $ 1,540,000 1,219,200 891,299 13,871 3,664,370 100% 100% 100% 0% 6% 93% $ 1,221,819 7% $ (2,465,086) 126% Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Library District (Continued) Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 650 LIBRARY DISTRICT Market Range Title ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMIN/OFFICE SUPPORT DATABASE ADMIN/ANALYST DIRECTOR FINANCIAL SUPERVISOR GOVT/COMMUN AFFAIRS OFCR HR SUPERVISOR INFO SYSTEMS SUPERVISOR FTE 1.00 3.00 4.00 6.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 Market Range Title LIBRARIAN LIBRARY MANAGER LIBRARY SUPERVISOR PC SPECIALIST PLANNER PUBLIC SVC REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC SVC SUPERVISOR TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT ADMIN TRAINING SPECIALIST UNDETERMINED Total 760 FTE 31.00 6.00 11.90 5.00 1.00 58.50 9.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 147.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Stadium District Organizational Chart Stadium District Board of Directors Executive Director David Smith Executive Director Representative Executive Director Representative William C. Scalzo William C. Scalzo Finance Event Management Administration Mission The Mission of the Maricopa County Stadium District is to provide fiscal resources and asset management of BankOne Ballpark and funding for Cactus League facilities for the community and visitors to Maricopa County so they can attend Major League Baseball games and other entertainment events in state-of-the-art, well-maintained facilities. Vision Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Goals • The District will provide management oversight and facility inspections of Bank One Ballpark for the Stadium District Board of Directors, the community and its visitors to ensure that the facility is maintained consistent with all agreements and is compliant with 95% of the required inspections within 5 years beginning July 2005. • The District will increase Bank One Ballpark revenues for non-baseball activities by 30% within 3 years beginning July 2003. • The District will increase use of Bank One Ballpark and public exposure to the facility through meetings, seminars, and conferences for non-baseball activities by 30% within the three years beginning July 2003. • The District will obtain 5 new entrepreneurial revenue sources within 5 years beginning July 2003 to ensure the future stability of the Stadium District. Issues • Increased usage of Bank One Ballpark will result in increased revenue to the District, which in turn will provide funding to maintain Bank One Ballpark. • Restructuring of team ownership could impact revenues to District. • Development of local venues will increase competition for District events, which may impact the number of events held at the ballpark and the District revenue from these events • As the facility ages, preventive maintenance will become increasingly important in order to contain the cost of capital repairs and prevent depletion of facility reserves at Bank One Ballpark. 761 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Stadium District (Continued) Total Budget by Program TOTAL BUDGET BY PROGRAM FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 680 STADIUM DISTRICT TOTAL FUNDS Program 68EM - ENTERTAINMENT MANAGEMENT 68FM - FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 99AS - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROG Personal Services 66,146 488,986 246,359 TOTAL $ 801,491 $ Supplies & Services $ 258,347 440,545 65,795 $ 764,687 Capital Outlay 5,870,782 $ 5,870,782 $ Total Expenditures $ 324,493 6,800,313 312,154 $ 7,436,960 Total Revenue 824,971 10,010,627 $ 10,835,598 $ Key Performance Measures Program Name: ENTERTAINMENT MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Entertainment Management Program is to provide ticketing and entertainment event services to the Maricopa County community and visitors so they can attend baseball and other entertainment events. Key Results: Percent increase in revenue FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 55.06 -15.23 -24.05 0 Program Name: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT Program Purpose: The purpose of the Financial Management Program is to provide fiscal resources and asset management of Cactus League Facilities and Bank One Ballpark for the Board of Directors of the Stadium District, the community, and for its visitors, in order to ensure sound fiscal management of publicly owned facilities. Key Results: Percent increase in reserves 762 FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Actual FY 2005 Projected 30.88 46 15.31 15.26 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Stadium District (Continued) Mandate Consolidated Financial Data Total Department Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 8,063,782 $ 12,467,581 $ 1,711,610 $ 2,995,158 $ 3,579,003 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ 1,429,825 $ $ 6,616,203 $ $ 92,707 $ $ 353,935 $ $ 3,000 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,493,607 19,083,784 1,804,317 3,349,093 3,582,003 Total Non-Mandated Expenditures FY 2000-01 Actuals FY 2001-02 Actuals FY 2002-03 Actuals FY 2003-04 Actuals FY 2004-05 Adopted Budget General Fund $ $ $ $ $ - Special Revenue $ 8,063,782 $ 12,467,581 $ 1,711,610 $ 2,995,158 $ 3,579,003 Capital Projects Enterprise Funds $ 1,429,825 $ $ 6,616,203 $ $ 92,707 $ $ 353,935 $ $ 3,000 $ - Internal Service $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ Total 9,493,607 19,083,784 1,804,317 3,349,093 3,582,003 NOTE: Mandate financials do not include appropriated beginning fund balance, debt service, or eliminations. Stadium District Mandates Vs. Expenditures Stadium District FY 2004-05 Budget Expenditures $20.0 Other Fund Mandated 0.0% $18.0 $16.0 Dollars in Millions General Fund Mandated 0.0% $14.0 $12.0 $10.0 $8.0 $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 Expenditures General Fund Mandated Other Fund Mandated Non-Mandated Non-Mandated 100.0% 763 FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 9.5 0 0 9.5 19.1 0 0 19.1 1.8 0 0 1.8 3.3 0 0 3.3 3.6 0 0 3.6 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Departmental Budget Schedules Stadium District (Continued) Departmental Budget Information DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY BY FUND TYPE & CATEGORY - FY 2004-05 ADOPTED 680 STADIUM DISTRICT Fund Type CAPITAL PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE ELIMINATIONS SPECIAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS Personal Services $ 801,491 801,491 $ $ $ Supplies & Services 3,000 $ 110,000 (1,660,137) 2,311,824 764,687 $ Capital Outlay $ 5,405,094 465,688 5,870,782 $ Total Expenditures 3,000 $ 5,515,094 (1,660,137) 3,579,003 7,436,960 $ Total Revenue 2,293,820 5,515,094 (1,660,137) 4,686,821 10,835,598 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE BY DEPARTMENT/SELECT FUND/OBJECT 680 STADIUM DISTRICT ALL FUNDS FY 2003-04 Projected Restated FY 2002-03 Actual FY 2003-04 FY 2003-04 Restated Adopted Restated Revised Restated REVENUE 606 SALES TAXES 645 INTEREST EARNINGS 650 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 680 TRANSFERS IN Total Revenue $ $ EXPENDITURES PERSONAL SERVICES 701 REGULAR PAY $ 705 TEMPORARY PAY 750 FRINGE BENEFITS 790 OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES 795 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC OUT 796 PERSONNEL SERVICES ALLOC IN Sub Total $ 5,336,587 541,532 4,620,150 200,000 10,698,269 $ $ 5,500,800 514,035 4,810,121 10,824,956 $ $ 5,500,800 514,035 4,810,121 10,824,956 $ $ 5,266,096 521,314 4,956,968 10,744,377 FY 2004-05 Requested $ $ 5,280,768 747,583 4,906,121 10,934,472 FY 2004-05 Adopted $ $ 5,215,094 714,383 4,906,121 10,835,598 Adopted Vs Revised Variance $ % $ 285,706 (200,348) (96,000) (10,642) 5% -39% -2% 0% 0% 117,164 $ (119) 25,584 60 (23,663) 591,499 710,526 $ 183,530 $ 40,451 (78,115) 585,667 731,533 $ 183,504 $ 42,861 (78,115) 585,667 733,917 $ 153,171 $ 5,949 34,349 (32,608) 555,014 715,876 $ 183,848 $ 42,942 (11,743) 585,915 800,962 $ 206,084 $ 47,985 (11,743) 559,165 801,491 $ (22,580) (5,124) (66,372) 26,502 (67,574) -12% 0% -12% 0% 85% 5% -9% $ Sub Total $ 2,354 228 27,724 345,326 2,100 1,046 47,182 744 111 250 231,122 658,188 10,000 2,000 70,005 603,790 2,819 5,160 47,135 9,400 650 600 36,253 787,812 10,000 2,000 70,005 601,402 2,819 5,160 47,135 9,400 650 600 36,253 785,424 6,612 2,000 60,121 567,073 2,511 4,666 43,199 8,508 526 401 36,253 731,869 9,306 12,500 65,000 599,341 2,450 1,160 31,636 9,850 400 600 34,741 766,984 9,306 65,000 620,976 2,450 1,160 20,204 9,850 400 600 34,741 764,687 694 2,000 5,005 (19,574) 369 4,000 26,931 (450) 250 1,512 20,737 7% 100% 7% -3% 13% 78% 57% -5% 38% 0% 4% 3% CAPITAL OUTLAY 915 BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS $ 950 DEBT SERVICE Sub Total $ 100,570 4,511,095 4,611,665 $ 416,455 5,583,463 5,999,918 $ $ 5,870,782 5,870,782 $ $ 5,429,015 5,429,015 $ $ 351,435 6,920,143 7,271,578 $ $ 416,455 5,583,463 5,999,918 $ $ $ 416,455 (287,319) 129,136 100% -5% 2% Total Expenditures $ 5,980,379 $ 7,519,263 $ 7,519,259 $ 8,719,323 $ 6,996,960 $ 7,436,960 $ 82,299 1% 4,717,890 $ 3,305,693 $ 3,305,697 $ 2,025,055 $ 3,937,512 $ 3,398,638 $ (92,941) -3% SUPPLIES & SERVICES 801 GENERAL SUPPLIES 804 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 810 LEGAL SERVICES 812 OTHER SERVICES 820 RENT & OPERATING LEASES 825 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 839 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES 842 TRAVEL & EDUCATION 843 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING 850 UTILITIES 880 TRANSFERS OUT Operating Balance ( Rev. - Exp.) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Position Distribution MARKET RANGE TITLE DISTRIBUTION: FY2004-05 ADOPTED 680 STADIUM DISTRICT Market Range Title ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST ADMINISTRATOR FTE 1.00 1.00 Market Range Title EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FINAN/BUSINESS ANALYST MANAGEMENT ANALYST Total 764 FTE 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Attachments Maricopa County’s Mission Statement The mission of Maricopa County is to provide regional leadership and fiscally responsible, necessary public services to its residents so they can enjoy living in healthy and safe communities. Maricopa County’s Vision Statements Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, efficiently and innovatively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent. Maricopa County’s Strategic Priorities • Provide regional leadership in critical public policy areas in a fiscally responsible manner. • Minimize the burden on the property taxpayer through rate reductions. • Healthy community and solvent healthcare system. • Safe community through a streamlined, integrated criminal justice system. • Provide regional leadership for a regional transportation system. • Land use will be planned, managed and funded responsibly; Luke AFB will be preserved. • Maricopa County will continue to improve its positive public image based on results achieved. 765 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budgeting for Results Policy Guidelines Introduction The purpose of this policy is to set forth the guidelines for developing budgets for Maricopa County, as well as the Flood Control, Library, and Stadium Districts. Maricopa County’s budget process provides for responsible management of taxpayers’ resources, while insuring that funds are directed towards achieving results at all levels. Definitions Budgeting for Results: A process in which budgetary decisions are based on or informed by performance information that describes the cost or efficiency of producing an activity and the results achieved for customers. This is accomplished by structuring the accounting and budgeting systems according to the structure of Departments' Strategic Plans. Structurally Balanced Budget: A budget in which all recurring expenditures are fully supported by recurring sources of funding. Policy Guidelines General Guidelines for Budget Development The budget will be based on conservative revenue estimates and will be structurally balanced. The budget will be formulated in accordance with the Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy Guidelines. In accordance with the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors’ Managing for Results Policy, Budgeting for Results is part of an overall management system that integrates planning, budgeting, reporting, evaluating and decision-making that is focused on achieving results and fulfilling public accountability. Departments/Special Districts are required to participate in the strategic planning process, and their plans and performance measures, along with strategic direction from the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors, will be the primary basis for funding decisions. The Office of Management and Budget will analyze all base budgets to identify possible reductions, and will analyze all results initiative requests in detail, with particular focus on their impact on results. Directors and Program Managers will critically review new, unfunded or under-funded program mandates from the State and Federal governments in order to determine the fiscal impact to the County and to identify funding solutions. All positions will be fully funded in the budget or designated for elimination in accordance with the Funded Position Policy. Wherever possible, grants and other non-local revenue sources will be used before allocating General Fund resources or other local revenues. Grant and other special revenue budgets will be developed in accordance with the Policy for Administering Grants and the Indirect Cost Policy for Grant Programs. Matching funds will be budgeted only to the extent required by law or by contracts and agreements specifically approved by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors. Wherever possible, the annual budget will provide for the adequate and orderly replacement of facilities and major equipment from current revenues based on confirmed analytical review of need. Vehicle replacement will conform to the Policy for Vehicle Replacement. 766 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budgeting for Results Policy Guidelines (Continued) Revenue Existing grant agreements or grant applications must support budget requests for grants. Where appropriate, services and programs will be supported by user fees. User fees will recover the County's full direct and indirect costs, unless market considerations dictate otherwise. All user fees will be reviewed annually in conjunction with the budget development process. Because expenditures supported by user fees are generally subject to the Constitutional expenditure limitation, such expenditures must be carefully reviewed, and user fee rates should be reduced if they can no longer be justified by actual expenditures. Anticipated revenue to the County from fee increases will not be budgeted unless the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors has approved such increases. All Departments/Special Districts, including elected officials and the Judicial Branch, will report to the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors via the Office of Management and Budget all non-appropriated funding sources available to support their operations and programs, either directly or indirectly. When investigatory or security issues are of concern, such issues will be addressed on an individual basis. Expenditures Departments/Special Districts shall submit base expenditure requests within the budget target provided by the Office of Management and Budget. The Office of Management and Budget will develop targets for each fund budgeted by a Department/Special District according to its current budget, with adjustments as directed by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors. Requests for funding above base level must be submitted as Results Initiatives Requests, and must be directed to achievement of approved strategic goals that align with the direction of the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors. Requests for additional funding will be considered only if departments/special districts have met the requirements for “Planning for Results” under the Managing for Results Policy. Results Initiative Requests must be supported by complete performance measures that can be used to monitor and evaluate the initiative’s success if funded. The Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors may annually adopt guidelines and priorities for results initiative requests. The Office of Management and Budget will review all results initiative requests and make recommendations according to the guidelines and priorities established by the board of supervisors/board of directors. In order to promote consistent and realistic budgeting of personnel, all personal service budgets shall include a reasonable allowance for personnel savings due to natural staff turnover. The rate of personnel savings should be budgeted based on past experience. Budgeted personnel savings may be budgeted conservatively for smaller departments that are subject to greater variations in staff turnover. No "carryover" capital outlay or capital improvements will be budgeted unless specifically approved by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors. Departments that do not identify and receive approval for carryover items will be required to eliminate them or fund them from within their operating budgets. Major Maintenance projects and Vehicle Replacement for General Fund Departments will be budgeted in General Government. All non-General Fund Departments will fund their own Major Maintenance projects and Vehicle Replacement. Budget Process All Appointed, Elected and Judicial Branch Departments/Special Districts will follow these policy guidelines in preparing their Annual budget requests. 767 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budgeting for Results Policy Guidelines (Continued) All Appointed, Elected, and Judicial Branch Departments/Special Districts will submit budget requests to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) following the detailed timeline, directions and format prescribed by OMB. Department/Special District financial reporting structures will be established by the Financial Reporting Review Committee and must be finalized prior to budget submission. All budget requests will be submitted at a detailed level by department, fund, organization unit, Program/Activity, object/revenue source, and month. Departments/Special Districts will prepare their budget requests in the budget preparation system provided by the Office of Management and Budget, and will follow all system instructions. The Deputy County Administrator (DCA) will negotiate budget recommendations with Elected Officials and Judicial Branch departments. If agreement cannot be reached with the DCA, the Presiding Judge and elected officials may first continue negotiation directly with the County Administrative Officer or, if agreement still cannot be reached, with the Board of Supervisors. Capital Improvement Projects Upon recommendation of the Facilities Review Committee and identification of available funding, the Office of Management and Budget will recommend a five-year Capital Improvement Program to Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors in accordance with the Capital Improvement Program Policy. The Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors may allocate carry-over fund balances to one-time capital items in accordance with the Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy. When requesting funding for capital improvement projects, Departments/Special Districts will provide estimates of increased operating costs associated with each individual project. Capital improvement program budgets may include a contingency budget reserve to fund project overages of up to 10% or $1,000,000, whichever is less. Internal Charges and Indirect Cost Allocations Internal service departments and County Counsel will develop estimates of base and discretionary charges for each Department/Special District they serve according to instructions and schedules provided by OMB. All estimates will be reviewed by the user departments, OMB and Finance. All internal charges will be based strictly on recovery of actual costs for providing services or sharing use of equipment or facilities; charges between Departments/Special Districts that are based on “market rates” and exceed actual costs are prohibited. Allocation of costs between funds for shared use of buildings or equipment will be determined consistent with the Central Service Cost Allocation plan prepared by the Department of Finance. Base-level or non-discretionary internal services will be charged at the fund level. General Fund department charges will be budgeted in, and paid from, General Government. Discretionary internal service charges are the responsibility of the requesting Department/Special District. The Department of Finance will assess Central Service Cost Allocation charges from all non-General Fund agencies except grants based on a full-cost allocation methodology. The Department of Finance will provide departments that administer grants with an indirect cost rate established according to the methodology allowable by the grantor. Funding for the Self-Insurance Trust Fund will be assessed from all funds as a base-level charge based on a funding plan developed by the Risk Management Department. The funding plan will provide for an ending cash balance equal to the projected paid losses and claims-related expenses for the upcoming fiscal year. 768 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budget Priorities - Maricopa County (Approved by the Board of Supervisors December 1, 2003) The purpose of these guidelines and priorities is to provide direction from the Board of Supervisors to the Office of Management and Budget and all departments so that a structurally balanced budget is developed for FY 2004-05. Base Budget Targets: Budgets for all departments and funds will be prepared within target amounts equal to their current budgets plus authorized adjustments. The Office of Management and Budget is directed to adjust budget targets for the following: • the annualized cost of FY 2003-04 approved Results Initiative Requests; • the annualized impact of FY 2003-04 mid-year appropriation adjustments; • the annualized impact of other items including intergovernmental agreements approved by the Board of Supervisors if the impact was disclosed at the time of Board approval; and • other technical adjustments as required. All departments must submit base budget requests within their budget targets. Employee Related Budget Adjustments The Office of Management and Budget, in coordination with the Total Compensation Department, is directed to allocate funding for salary and health care increases. Therefore, departments should not include funding for these items in their budget submissions. Requests for Additional Funding (Results Initiative Requests): Only Results Initiative Requests that are funded by the original $900 million of Jail Excise Tax for phased-in operation of new facilities will be considered, as authorized by A.R.S. §42-109 and approved by the voters of Maricopa County in November 1998. 769 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budget Priorities - Flood Control District (Approved by the Board of Directors December 1, 2003) The purpose of these guidelines and priorities is to provide direction from the Board of Directors to the Office of Management and Budget and the Flood Control District so that a structurally balanced budget is developed for FY 2004-05. Base Budget Targets: Budgets for all funds will be prepared within target amounts equal to their current budgets plus authorized adjustments. The Office of Management and Budget is directed to adjust budget targets for the following: • the annualized cost of FY 2003-04 approved Results Initiative Requests; • the annualized impact of FY 2003-04 mid-year appropriation adjustments; • the annualized impact of other items including intergovernmental agreements approved by the Board of Directors if the impact was disclosed at the time of Board approval; and • other technical adjustments as required. All departments must submit base budget requests within their budget targets. Employee Related Budget Adjustments Funding for employee salary and benefit increases will be included in the budget request consistent with Maricopa County departments, as directed by the Office of Management and Budget and Total Compensation.Requests that are funded by the Jail Excise Tax for operation of new facilities will be considered. 770 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budget Priorities - Library District (Approved by the Board of Directors December 1, 2003) The purpose of these guidelines and priorities is to provide direction from the Board of Directors to the Office of Management and Budget and the Library District so that a structurally balanced budget is developed for FY 200405. Base Budget Targets: Budgets for all funds will be prepared within target amounts equal to their current budgets plus authorized adjustments. The Office of Management and Budget is directed to adjust budget targets for the following: • the annualized cost of FY 2003-04 approved Results Initiative Requests; • the annualized impact of FY 2003-04 mid-year appropriation adjustments; • the annualized impact of other items including intergovernmental agreements approved by the Board of Directors if the impact was disclosed at the time of Board approval; and • other technical adjustments as required. All departments must submit base budget requests within their budget targets. Employee Related Budget Adjustments Funding for employee salary and benefit increases will be included in the budget request consistent with Maricopa County departments, as directed by the Office of Management and Budget and Total Compensation. 771 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budget Priorities – Special Health Care District (Approved by the Board of Directors December 1, 2003) The purpose of these guidelines and priorities is to provide direction from the Board of Directors to the Office of Management and Budget and to the Maricopa Integrated Health System (MIHS) so that a structurally balanced District budget is developed for FY 2004-05. Base Budget Assumptions: Budgets for all funds will be prepared and submitted to the Office of Management and Budget according to the following assumptions: • MIHS is directed to submit a budget request for FY 2004-05 that maintains all current programs at their current level of service, unless otherwise instructed or authorized by the Board of Directors. • Funding for employee salary and benefit increases will be included in the budget request consistent with Maricopa County departments, as directed by the Office of Management and Budget and Total Compensation. • Budgeted expenditures and revenues may be adjusted to reflect anticipated changes in service volume, so long as current budgeted net income (excluding subsidies) is maintained. 772 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budget Priorities - Stadium District (Approved by the Board of Directors December 1, 2003) The purpose of these guidelines and priorities is to provide direction from the Board of Directors to the Office of Management and Budget and the Stadium District so that a structurally balanced budget is developed for FY 2004-05. Base Budget Targets: Budgets for all funds will be prepared within target amounts equal to their current budgets plus authorized adjustments. The Office of Management and Budget is directed to adjust budget targets for the following: • the annualized cost of FY 2003-04 approved Results Initiative Requests; • the annualized impact of FY 2003-04 mid-year appropriation adjustments; • the annualized impact of other items including intergovernmental agreements approved by the Board of Directors if the impact was disclosed at the time of Board approval; and • other technical adjustments as required. All departments must submit base budget requests within their budget targets. Employee Related Budget Adjustments Funding for employee salary and benefit increases will be included in the budget request consistent with Maricopa County departments, as directed by the Office of Management and Budget and Total Compensation. 773 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budget Calendar 12/1 Board Approves Budget Guidelines 12/8 – 1/19 Budget Targets Distributed to Departments, Budget Prep Instructions & Information Available, Budget Prep System Training, Budget Prep System Available to Departments 12/9 – 3/15 OMB Analyzes Base Budget Requests/Develops Recommendations 4/5 – 4/23 OMB Consolidates and Finalizes Budget Recommendations 4/22 Board Study Session on CIP 5/3 – 5/7 Board Briefings 5/10 CAO Presents FY 2004-05 Tentative Budget to Board 5/17 Board Adopts FY 2004-05 Tentative Budget 6/21 Final Adoption of FY 2004-05 Budget 8/16 Board sets Tax Rates Note: Dates are subject to change. 774 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy Introduction According to A.R.S. §42-17106, the County may not incur expenditures in excess of the amounts appropriated by the Board of Supervisors in the annual budget. The purpose of the Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy is to provide Departments/Special Districts with flexibility in managing their allocated public resources to achieve program results, while upholding accountability for spending within legal appropriations. Definitions Appropriation: Authorization by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors to incur expenditures for a specific purpose, defined in Maricopa County as total expenditures by Department/Special District and fund; “budget items” as referenced in A.R.S. §42-17106. Department: All County Departments, including Elected Official Offices, Court Departments, and Appointed Departments. Detailed Budget: Budget allocation within an appropriation by month, organization unit, program/activity/service, object/source, and position. Special District: All Maricopa County Special Districts, including the Flood Control District, Library District, and Stadium District. Policy Guidelines Budgets shall be appropriated and controlled by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors at the level of Department/Special District and fund and, where applicable, by capital improvement project. Appropriation levels are not guaranteed from one fiscal year to the next. Each year, appropriation amounts for each Department/Special District and fund shall be recommended by OMB for approval by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors, based on detailed reviews of spending needs, priorities, expected results, and available funding. Departments/Special Districts shall develop and maintain detailed revenue and expenditure budgets that will be loaded into the main financial system. Detailed budgets will be prepared by month, organization unit, object/source and position according to instructions developed by the Office of Management and Budget. Beginning in FY 2002-03, detailed budgets will also be allocated to programs and activities. Detailed budgets shall exactly equal Board appropriations. Appropriations shall be changed during the fiscal year only with Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors approval, with the exception of grants approved by the Board in the previous fiscal year and carried over into the new year. The Office of Management and Budget may approve appropriation adjustments for carried-over grants if the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors previously appropriated the grant, and the Department of Finance certifies the carried-over grant balance. The Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors must approve all changes in capital improvement project appropriations. All requests for project appropriations must be accompanied by a request for Board approval to amend the five-year capital improvement program, or by notification that an amendment is not required. Capital improvement project appropriations do not need to be adjusted so long as project overruns do not exceed 10% or $1,000,000, whichever is less. 775 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Budgeting for Results Accountability Policy (Continued) In order to maximize results, Departments/Special Districts will have the flexibility to reallocate their detailed budgets for the remainder of the current fiscal year within appropriations approved by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors. Budgetary flexibility is accompanied by the responsibility to produce expected results while absorbing unanticipated spending increases. If a Department/Special District requests an appropriation increase or contingency transfer for an unanticipated spending increase, the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors shall determine whether the department will be controlled according to its detailed budget. The Office of Management and Budget shall validate that all detailed budget adjustments balance and reconcile to appropriations set by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors. All positions must be fully funded and budgeted in accordance with the Funded Positions Policy. In order to create new positions, departments/special districts must first verify full-year funding. If a position loses funding, it shall be identified and eliminated. Departments/Special Districts shall recommend for approval any agreements that commit the County/Special District to expenditures for which funding is not identified in future years. Departments/Special Districts shall verify funding for all purchase requisitions or other contracts or agreements. Department/Special District expenditures and revenues shall be monitored and reported on a monthly basis throughout the fiscal year. The Department of Finance shall prepare and submit to the Board a comprehensive monthly analysis of budget variances by Department/Special District and fund, and will investigate any negative year-to-date variances. Any Departments/Special Districts for which the Department of Finance reports a negative year-to-date expenditure or revenue variance must provide a written explanation and corrective action plan to the Department of Finance and the Office of Management and Budget. The Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Finance will review and approve all corrective action plans, and report them to the Board once they are finalized. If there is a significant risk that a Department/Special District will exceed its annual appropriation, the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors may place restrictions on the ability of a Department/Special District to adjust its detailed budget, and may also control its expenditures according to the detailed budget. Departments/Special Districts shall not exceed their expenditure appropriations. Departments/Special Districts shall be required to reduce expenditures to offset any revenue shortfall. Departments/Special Districts may expend up to 10% or $1,000,000 (whichever is less) over budget for a specific capital improvement project, so long as overall expenditures do not exceed the Department/Special District fund appropriation. At the close of the fiscal year, the Department of Finance will prepare and submit to the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors a comprehensive report of all audited actual expenditures relative to all Department/Special District appropriations. The report will include an explanation of each instance in which expenditures exceed appropriations by the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors. If a Department/Special District exceeds its annual expenditure appropriation, its expenditures will be reviewed by Internal Audit. Internal Audit will review the Department/Special District’s expenditures, identify the causes of the overrun, and report its findings to the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors. A Department/Special District that exceeds its expenditure appropriation shall be appropriated and controlled according to the specific line-items in its detailed budget for the entire succeeding fiscal year, and any changes in the detailed budget shall require Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors approval. The Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors may reduce a Department or Special District’s appropriations for the subsequent fiscal year by an amount equal to the overrun in the previous fiscal year. In the event of such an overrun, the Office of Management and Budget will automatically submit an agenda item to the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors to implement the budget reduction. 776 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Funded Position Policy Introduction The purpose of the Funded Positions Policy is to establish guidelines for adding, deleting and changing positions so that all authorized positions are fully funded on an annualized basis, and that any filled or vacant position that becomes unfunded or under-funded is either fully funded or deleted. Definitions Full Time Equivalent (FTE): A value equivalent to a number of employees paid full time (forty hours per week, or from 2,080 to 2,096 hours per year, depending on the calendar). A half-time position that is paid 20 hours per week equates to .5 FTE; four half-time positions, each paid for 20 hours per week, equals 2.0 FTE, and so on. A single position may have an FTE value greater than zero, but not greater than 1.0. A group of positions has an aggregate FTE value based on the FTE values of the specific positions within the group. Fully Funded Position: An authorized position that is fully funded by the general revenues of the County, a special revenue source, or a grant. Payroll Liability: The salaries, benefits, payoff of accrued vacations and compensatory time, and career center expenses that result from a reduction in force. Under-funded Position: A position for which a County Department/Special District has 1% to 99% of the funding required to support it on an annualized basis Unfunded Position: A position that is not funded. New Position Establishment Policy Guidelines In order to create a new position, County Departments/Special Districts must submit a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on an official form that includes the following information: • Working title and description of the position or positions requested. • The number of positions requested and FTE value(s) of the position(s) requested. • A Brief description of the purpose of the new position(s), including relation to program/ activity/service, performance measures, key results, and strategic goals. • The full cost of the requested position(s), including not only direct salaries and benefits, but also indirect costs such as uniform allowances, equipment, and mandated or essential training. The County Department/Special District will also indicate whether it has enough building space, or identify the costs and sources of funding for additional space if needed. • The funding source of the position(s) and location in the current budget. • A list of any positions to be deleted in conjunction with creating the new position, along with a description of any other budgetary reductions made to offset the cost of the new position(s). • Justification of why budget savings, including savings from deleted positions, should be used to create new positions and not result in a budget reduction. The County Department/Special District director, elected official or chief deputy to an elected official must sign all position requests. 777 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Funded Position Policy (Continued) Position requests must be sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. OMB will verify that the requested positions have been budgeted appropriately and that there is adequate funding to support the budget as a whole, including the requested position(s). OMB will not approve new positions unless their fully annualized cost can be supported within the County Department’s/Special District’s current appropriation, or if the Board of Supervisors/Directors has approved other funding. OMB will also verify that the request complies with established policies and priorities of the Board of Supervisors/Directors. If a position request is denied, Elected or Judicial Branch departments may appeal the decision to the Board of Supervisors/Directors. If the Board of Supervisors/Directors approves a position request on appeal, the approval must be accompanied by an action to provide funding for the position(s) as necessary. Position Funding Policy Guidelines Each year as part of the budget process, County Departments/Special Districts must verify that budgets and funding are adequate to support all authorized positions. The Office of Management and Budget will validate that position funding is adequate, and will identify all positions that are potentially unfunded or underfunded. Personnel will be budgeted by market range title, full-time equivalent (FTE) and average wage and benefit rates at the fund and organizational unit level within County Department/Special District budgets. Total authorized FTE’s and average wage and benefit rates must be at or lower than budgeted levels at all times, and fully funded on an annualized basis with current appropriation levels and funding. Personnel savings due to natural staff turnover will be budgeted in all County Departments/Special Districts at appropriate levels. If actual personnel savings reaches high levels due to failure to fill positions for extended periods, adjustments will be made to either eliminate the positions or make efforts to fill them. County Departments/Special Districts with vacant underfunded positions will discuss the funding shortfall with OMB. County Departments/Special Districts have the option of eliminating the position(s) or identifying additional funding for the position(s). OMB and County Departments/Special Districts will delete any vacant positions identified as unfunded or underfunded. If filled positions are identified as unfunded or under-funded, the County Departments/Special Districts will provide the following information: • The position or positions’ contribution to provision of service and results. • The full cost to continue the position. • The resulting payroll liability if current employee(s) are terminated due to lack of funding. This information will be forwarded for review and validation by the Office of Management and Budget. OMB will consolidate the information and forward it to the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors for possible action. If eliminating unfunded or under-funded positions results in a Reduction In Force, the process will be conducted in a uniform manner in accordance with procedures administered by the Human Resource Department. Any payroll liability costs will be funded from within the County Department’s/Special District’s current appropriation. 778 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Managing for Results Policy Purpose This policy establishes a framework that integrates planning, budgeting, reporting, evaluating and decision making for all Maricopa County departments and agencies. This framework is called Managing for Results; a management system that establishes the requirements to fulfill the County’s Mission and Vision of accountability to its citizens. This policy is promulgated as part of the annual County budget process under the authority of the Board of Supervisors. Definitions Managing for Results System: Managing for Results means that an entire organization, its management system, its employees and the organizational culture (beliefs, behavior and language) are focused on achieving results for the customer. Managing for Results provides direction for making good business decisions based on performance, and makes departments/agencies accountable for results. Strategic Plan: A Strategic Plan sets forth the mission, strategic goals, performance measurements for a department, agency and the County. A Strategic Plan provides information to department/agency staff, corporate decision makers, the Board of Supervisors and the public about how the department/agency is organized to deliver results and what results the department/agency is accountable for achieving. It also provides the opportunity for all County employees to see how they contribute at all levels in the organization. Managing for Results Resource Guide: This guide describes Maricopa County’s strategic planning process, and how to develop and implement a plan. The Resource Guide is available to all County employees. Department/Agency: This includes appointed departments, offices, elected departments, special districts and the judicial branch. General Policy All Maricopa County departments/agencies will participate in the Maricopa County Managing for Results system and shall comply with this policy. General Requirements Planning for Results Each department/agency will develop and submit to the Office of Management and Budget a department/agency strategic plan as part of the budget process. All strategic plans will be developed and presented to the Office of Management and Budget in required format as outlined in the Managing for Results Resource Guide. All strategic plans will be submitted according to the annual budget calendar. All managers will work with assigned employees to establish performance plans that align with department/agency strategic plans. Performance plans will be developed in accordance with the Performance Management policy. 779 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Managing for Results Policy (Continued) The County Administrative Officer will develop and present to the Board of Supervisors a Countywide strategic plan, which contains strategic priorities and key result measures. Budgeting for Results The Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Finance will develop and maintain a financial structure aligned with the Managing for Results system. The Board of Supervisors directs the Office of Management and Budget to review department/agency strategic plans and performance measures as a basis for making funding recommendations. Reporting Results Departments/Agencies will report quarterly to the Office of Management and Budget on their family of measures for budget and planning purposes according to the annual budget calendar. The Office of Management and Budget will prepare and distribute a summary of measures. Evaluating Results Internal Audit will review and report on strategic plans and performance measures. Decision Making and Accountability The Board of Supervisors directs all Management to use performance information to manage activities effectively and efficiently. Management will consider performance information in making policy and program decisions. 780 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Performance Management Process Policy Purpose This policy integrates the Performance Management Process with the Managing for Results system in Maricopa County. The Performance Management Process is a tool for managers, supervisors, and employees to align organizational, departmental, and personal goals and to provide a basis for measurement of employee performance. This policy supersedes any other policy or procedure related to performance management. Process The Performance Management Process is annually administered by each department through this four-step cycle: Develop Performance Plan - Supervisors and employees shall collaborate in the development of an individualized annual Performance Plan that supports the overall department/division results. This written plan should clearly communicate performance expectations and behaviors. It should describe what results are expected and should establish how each employee’s performance will be measured and tracked. The Performance Plan will include a Planning & Alignment Worksheet and an Employee Development Plan. Employees will document that they reviewed the performance factors that will be rated. They will also record the support they will need to accomplish the goals and expectations. These documents shall be filed in the official employee personnel file at Human Resources at the beginning of the cycle. Monitor Performance - Each supervisor is strongly encouraged to meet with an employee at least every six months. Ideally, supervisors will meet with each employee on a quarterly basis to monitor the progress made on goals, development, and performance factors with a focus on achieving results. Performance data and measurements should be presented by both the supervisor and the employee for review and discussion. Expectations may be renegotiated to meet current circumstances. These meetings should be formally documented, signed by the supervisor and employee, and then placed in the employee’s departmental personnel file. Coach and Counsel - Each supervisor is encouraged to regularly coach an employee about progress or lack of progress on goals and work behavior. The purpose of coaching is to help the employee attain their performance results and promote ongoing communication. Coaching sessions are ongoing and can be formal or informal. Counseling is used by a supervisor to help an employee define and work through a problem or work habit that is negatively affecting work performance. Evaluation - At the end of the performance cycle, a formal, written evaluation shall be conducted. The evaluation discussion shall include a follow-up on the Performance Plan, progress on the employee’s development plan and a discussion of future goals as the new performance cycle begins immediately. The employee and supervisor will discuss Performance Results Ratings for the period and record the results on the Performance Management Evaluation form. This form must be submitted to Human Resources/Records. Each employee will be asked for comments and responses to questions about the process. If they disagree with their evaluation, they may request a higher review. Performance Management Process Materials Human Resources will provide standard forms for the Performance Management Evaluation and Performance Plan. These forms must be sent to Human Resources/Records as described in the Performance Management Process cycle. These forms are available electronically on the Electronic Business Center (EBC), from Human Resources, or your department’s HR Liaison. Human Resources may occasionally approve the use of alternative formats for specific business reasons. 781 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Performance Management Process Policy (Continued) Ratings A standard five-level scale will be provided for ratings on the Performance Results Ratings and Performance Factors. Performance results can fall into five possible ratings: Distinguished Performance; Consistently Exceeds Performance Expectations; Good Solid Performance; Partially Meets Performance Expectations; or Does Not Meet Expectations. Performance Factors will also be rated on a five-point scale. Some departments may need to use an alternative rating scale to fit their internal needs. However, in the final annual evaluation, all performance ratings must fit into the county standard as listed above and reported on the Performance Management Evaluation Report form. Ratings should accurately reflect the employee's performance in relation to agreed-upon expectations set forth in the Performance Plan. Rating inflation should be avoided. All Performance Result Ratings, with the exception of Good Solid Performance, require a justification on the Performance Management Evaluation Report Form. If a Performance Result Rating indicates Does Not Meet Expectations, the evaluation must be accompanied by a corrective action plan and a monitoring schedule that the supervisor writes and discusses with the employee. Organizational Roles In The Performance Management Process Elected Officials, County Administrative Officer and Chief Officers will support this Performance Management Process by implementing it with their direct reports and then holding them accountable for completing the process throughout the organization. The management of the Performance Management Process should be a specific expectation and result in every supervisor’s annual Performance Plan. Department directors will direct the Performance Management Process to ensure alignment with Maricopa County and department’s strategic and annual plans. They will hold middle managers and supervisors accountable for the annual implementation of this process by including this responsibility in the annual Performance Plan of their subordinates. They will be available to serve as the final step in a higher review of the evaluation as requested by an employee. Supervisors and managers will drive this process in collaboration and cooperation with their direct reports. They shall meet with each employee to set up a Performance Management Plan and will regularly meet with each employee to monitor performance. Supervisors and managers are encouraged to meet at least quarterly to monitor performance and as needed to coach and counsel. Supervisors will complete the evaluation annually. The management of the Performance Management Process with their direct reports will be an expectation and result in their own Performance Management Plan. Managers shall be available to serve as the first step in a higher review of the evaluation for all their staff other than their direct reports and when requested by an employee. Employees will actively participate in the Performance Management Process. In collaboration with their supervisor, they will be asked to develop an annual Performance Plan that is agreed on by both the supervisor and the employee. It will include a plan for development. Throughout the year, they will track their accomplishments that will provide a basis for regular discussion with their supervisor. Human Resources will offer: • Training for employees, supervisors and managers in the Employee Course Catalog and Management Institute. • Consulting, as requested, with directors and managers on the use of tools and the process itself. • Coaching for supervisors, as requested, during implementation of the process. • Development and electronic distribution of standard forms. Human Resources/Records will receive all performance plans and annual evaluations, record the dates completed into HRMS, and file them in the official employee personnel file at Human Resources. 782 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy Introduction The purpose of this policy is to provide for long-term financial stability and low, sustainable tax rates through responsible use of non-recurring resources, appropriate and minimal use of debt, and maintenance of reserve funds. Adherence to the policy will insure that Maricopa County maintains recurring revenue streams sufficient to support ongoing spending requirements. Adequate reserves will allow the County to maintain services during economic downturns without drastic expenditure reductions or tax increases while longer-term budgetary adjustments are put in place. Further, this policy sets budgetary and financial guidelines regarding the reduction of taxes. The Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy demonstrates a commitment to the maintenance and, when possible, reduction of tax rates while ensuring that Maricopa County remains financially stable and accountable to the citizens. Definitions Fund Balance: The difference between fund assets and fund liabilities. Reserve Policy Guidelines The Board of Supervisors will maintain reserve fund balances in the General Fund, and in other funds as appropriate. Reserves will be designated for elimination of cash flow borrowing in the General Fund and in other funds as necessary. Unreserved beginning fund balances will be estimated and included in the annual budget; such expenditures will be designated in the budget as appropriated fund balance. Fund balances may be appropriated for the following specific uses: • Acquisition of fixed assets. • Retirement of outstanding debt. • Fiscal stabilization by offsetting operating revenue shortfalls due to economic downturns, so long as adjustments are made to restore the structural balance of the budget within one to two fiscal years. As an alternative method of acquiring assets, estimated fund balances may be reserved for repayment of debt used to build or acquire capital improvements. This method of financing will set aside fund balances that will fully or partially cover the outstanding debt, while maintaining additional cash reserves. As a guideline, no less than 25% of the outstanding debt principal must be held in reserve, or the capital acquisition must result in operating savings, such as building leases, that offset the ongoing debt service expenditures. The Board may consider exemptions to this guideline if there is a strong business justification for doing so. Proceeds from the sale of real property will be reserved for capital improvements or to repay debt used to finance capital improvements, so long as future liabilities associated with the property, including environmental clean-up, have been met. Use of fund balances must be consistent with the Tax Reduction Policy Guidelines, as outlined. 783 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Reserve and Tax Reduction Policy (Continued) Tax Reduction Policy Guidelines Unless otherwise required by law, the Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors will strive to maintain the combined primary, debt service, Library District, and Flood Control District property tax rates at current or lower levels. The Board of Supervisors/Board of Directors may reduce property tax rates under the following conditions: • The tax reduction is sustainable for the foreseeable future according to reasonable and conservative forecasts. • The budget is currently structurally balanced, e.g., recurring revenue exceeds recurring expenditures and will remain so into the future according to reasonable and conservative forecasts. • Fund balance reserves are sufficient to eliminate cash-flow borrowing and unexpected economic changes. • Fund balances have been appropriated or reserved for repayment of outstanding debt. • Necessary capital expenditures are appropriated from fund balance, or supported by debt that is backed by reserved fund balances. 784 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Minimum Fund Balances for Cashflow Purposes Each year, the Department of Finance, in collaboration with the Office of Management and Budget, calculates the minimum fund balances needed for the upcoming fiscal year to avoid short-term borrowing (such as Line of Credit, Tax Anticipation Note, or Internal Borrowing Agreement) in the General Fund, Flood Control District, and Library District. OMB uses trend analysis to estimate revenue collection and spending patterns for each fund. In addition, the calculation model assumes growth commensurate with the Consumer Price Index. The model assumptions are re-examined each year and modified when necessary. Calculated minimum fund balance requirements for FY 2004-05 are listed in the table below, followed by fund-specific information. Required Minimum Fund Balance $80,619,104 $11,880,471 $1,674,708 Fund General Flood Control District Library District General Fund Cash from a variety of sources can be used in the calculation of the minimum fund balance requirement for the General Fund. These include: 1) General Fund 2) Internal Service Funds 3) a. Equipment Services Fund b. Reprographics Fund c. Telecommunications Fund Enterprise Funds a. Solid Waste Fund The internal service funds listed above are included because they are an extension of General Fund activities and represent available cash for county administrative operations. The Solid Waste Fund is included because it has a significant cash balance generated by the sale of the Northwest Regional Landfill in September, 1996. These funds were set aside by the County to separately account for and fulfill the General Fund obligation to fund longterm (25 plus years) landfill post-closure costs. Given this connection to the General Fund and that it is not anticipated that these post-closure costs will ever require significant draws on this cash, the balance is available for the County’s administrative/ operational cashflow needs. The General Fund’s strongest financial position, due to property tax payments, occurs in November and May. Historically, the General Fund reaches its lowest fund balance position between September and October. However, this low point is expected to occur between December and January of Fiscal Year 2004-05, based on current revenue and expenditure trend analysis. This year’s calculated General Fund minimum fund balance is significantly less than last year’s, due to a recalculation of average available cash associated with the prior year’s unreserved fund balance. The recalculation identifies amounts due from other governmental entities as available cash, whereas historically these amounts have been excluded. 785 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Minimum Fund Balances for Cashflow Purposes (Continued) Flood Control District The Flood Control District has one fund available to finance its operational expenditures. They also utilize a separate capital projects fund for their CIP, with expenditures supported by fund transfers from the Flood Control District’s operational Fund. The Flood Control District’s operational fund is primarily funded with property tax. As a result, it shares the same pattern of fiscal low and high points as the General Fund. For purposes of calculating the minimum fund balance, it is assumed that major intergovernmental revenue will be collected and transfers to the capital projects fund will occur uniformly during the year. Library District Similar to the Flood Control District, the Library District only has one fund to finance its operations. It is primarily funded through property tax and has a fairly uniform spending pattern during the year. 786 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Policy for Administering Grants Introduction Maricopa County receives significant funding from federal, state and local agencies annually; however, it does not have a formal Policy to follow when applying for and receiving grant funds. In order to ensure that the County is fully and timely reimbursed for all allowable expenses associated with grants, it is imperative that Responsible Departments negotiate to consistent goals, closely monitor their expenditures and claim reimbursement in a consistent and timely manner. This Policy shall serve as the framework for Responsible Departments to follow when applying for grants and negotiating the terms and conditions of the agreements. This Policy is not intended to discourage Responsible Departments from seeking grant funding as a means to support various services and programs. Rather, it is intended to provide consistent guidelines for grant administration to ensure optimum financial arrangements for Maricopa County and to enhance Board acceptance of grants conforming to this Policy. Definitions Dept. Overhead: refers to departmental costs incurred for the joint benefit of both grant and non-grant programs. Grantor Agency: refers to a federal, state, local or private agency or organization which provides the grant funding and/or grant funding oversight. One-time Grants: refers to funding from a Grantor Agency which is provided for a limited duration for a specified project or program. This type of grant may be provided to start a new program or service or for a program or service which has a limited life. Ongoing Grants: refers to funding from a Grantor Agency which is expected to be provided year after year for a specified program(s) or service(s). Overhead (A-87): refers to costs, benefiting both grant and non-grant activities, allocated by the Department of Finance to all non-General Fund departments. An allocation is also calculated for Responsible General Fund departments to be included in departmental overhead. Responsible Dept: refers to the department, office or agency under budgetary responsibility of the Board of Supervisors, which has direct oversight responsibility for the program(s) funded partially or totally with the grant funds. The elected official or department director of the Responsible Department shall act as the agent of the County for purposes of this policy. Implementation This policy will take effect immediately. Provisions under sections titled "FUNDING" and/or "OVERHEAD/INDIRECT COSTS (A-87 CHARGES)" will not apply to 1995-96 grants if the grant has already been submitted and/or approved by the Grantor Agencies. Grants which are in the application or negotiation stage of the process may continue; however, final acceptance of the grant must be approved by the Board. 787 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Policy for Administering Grants (Continued) Grant Submittal While all grants must be accepted by the Board of Supervisors before funding can be expended, grant applications which fully comply with this Policy do not require Board approval at the time of submission for funding. Except as noted, applications for funding which deviate from this Policy (for any reason) shall require Board approval prior to submission. The County Administrative Officer may approve exemptions to this policy with regards to indirect cost reimbursement. EXCEPTION: The Board of Supervisors shall be notified by any affected Responsible Department in an annual or more frequent presentation of their intent to apply for all ongoing grants which deviate from this Policy, the nature of the deviation(s) and the reason for it (i.e. the grantor agency or the terms of a specific grant prohibit charging overhead, etc.). Once acknowledged and approved by the Board that it continues to support applying for such grants(s), the Responsible Department will not be required to obtain Board approval prior to the submission for continued like funding from the same Grantor Agency. Nothing contained within this Section shall preclude a Responsible Department from seeking approval for both the submission and acceptance of award at the pre-submission stage, provided that all terms of the grant are consistent with the information presented to the Board. Grants for the Judicial Branch in Maricopa County will be identified by the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in an annual presentation to the Board of Supervisors. The presentation will reference the individual grants, and whether any of the provisions of the grants deviate from this Policy. After these grants have been reviewed and accepted by the Board of Supervisors, subsequent grants for that fiscal year from the same Grantor Agency with like provisions do not require the Board’s review and acceptance of the grant. Subsequent grants from a new Grantor Agency will be transmitted to the Board of Supervisors for review and acceptance. Funding To improve cash management practices, it is the County’s preference to receive funding on an advance basis instead of a reimbursement basis. Therefore, every effort is to be made by Responsible Departments to obtain advance funding from the Grantor Agency. This is especially critical for one-time grant funded programs/activities and where the County is advancing funds to nonprofit subcontractors. Responsible Departments with existing grant agreements are to contact their Grantor Agencies and attempt to renegotiate the terms of these agreements. Upon request, the Department of Finance will assist in negotiations with Grantor Agencies. If funding is to be provided on a reimbursement basis, Responsible Department staff will note this in any submittal or correspondence to the Board of Supervisors. The Board may request staff to present the cost/benefits of accepting a reimbursement grant versus not accepting a particular grant. The cost/benefit analysis will take into account if the grant funded services are mandated. The analysis should also consider the impact of indirect cost recovery and advance funding requirements on the competitiveness in obtaining grant funding. One-time Grants which are actually start-up grants for new programs or services will be so noted in the submittal to the Board of Supervisors. Program costs which Responsible Departments wish to continue once the grant funding has been depleted will be identified and reported to the Board of Supervisors at the time of submittal for consideration. The Responsible Department will present adequate analysis and information to the Board of Supervisors to assist the Board in deciding whether the County should fund expenses for the project or program from other County funds following the depletion of the grant funds. Whenever permitted by the Grantor Agency, grants requiring County matching funds will first use County Overhead (A-87) as a match. If the required match exceeds County Overhead (A-87) or Overhead is not an allowable expense by the Grantor Agency, the Responsible Department shall inform the Board of Supervisors of the exception and estimate the relative financial in-kind impact. 788 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Policy for Administering Grants (Continued) Claiming Responsible Departments will provide to the Department of Finance a copy of the grant agreement, including the award amount. Responsible Departments will record and track grant revenues and expenditures. Responsible Departments shall submit claims for either an advance or reimbursement to the Grantor Agency as frequently as permitted under the grant agreement. Ideally, this will be no less frequent than monthly. At grant year end, each Responsible Department shall close out its respective grants. This includes preparing and submitting any required final reports to the Grantor Agency and either returning excess funds or requesting final reimbursement for the grant year. A copy of the final report shall be provided to the Department of Finance. Overhead/Indirect Costs (A-87 Charges) Annually, the Department of Finance will prepare or cause to be prepared a cost allocation plan consistent with Federal Circular A-87. The Department of Finance and the Office of Management and Budget will inform each Responsible Department of their share of the A-87 charges for that particular fiscal year. Generally, grants are to financially support 100% of their A-87 charges. On a year-by-year basis, a Responsible Department may request that the Board of Supervisors waive all or a portion of their A-87 charges for that fiscal year, for all or specific grantor agencies. (A waiver or disallowance of A-87 charges results in a General Fund subsidy for paying the support costs for the grant funded program.) Purchase of Computing and Network Systems To ensure compatibility and supportability of the County computing and network infrastructure, Responsible Departments are to consult with and obtain approval from the Chief Information Officer prior to purchasing any desired equipment. This applies to hardware, software and communications technologies including data, voice, video, image radio telemetry and facsimile purchased under the provisions of the County’s Procurement Code. Departments in the Judicial Branch of Maricopa County will consult with the Chief Information Officer prior to any purchases under the Judicial Procurement Code to determine whether the purchase will require compatibility and supportability of the County computing and network infrastructure. Accounting for Grant Funded Programs Effective July 1, 1995, each department will have its own fund designated for grant activities. This will permit both the Responsible Department and the Department of Finance to readily identify the cash balance of grant funded programs at any point during the fiscal year. Grant Monitoring by Department of Finance The Department of Finance will monitor grant expenditures and revenues on a regular basis. At a minimum, the Department of Finance will: • prepare and provide to the Responsible Departments a quarterly grant schedule. This schedule will include year to date revenues and expenditures and inception to date receivable or deferred revenue balance for each individual grant. • ensure that grant expenditures do not exceed grant awards or available funding if balances are carried forward from a preceding year. This expenditure limit will be noted on the grant schedule and any grant that approaches the maximum available funding will be immediately identified. The Responsible Department will be contacted and all grants which are projected to exceed the expenditure limit will be reported to them and the Board of Supervisors. 789 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Policy for Administering Grants (Continued) • examine individual grant balances on a monthly basis to identify departments that are not requesting reimbursement from the Grantor Agency on a monthly basis. Responsible Departments which are not regularly claiming reimbursements will be contacted by the Department of Finance and directed to submit the appropriate documentation to the Grantor Agency. • examine the final reports submitted by the Responsible Departments to ensure that indirect costs either identified in the County’s A-87 Plan or approved by special action by the Board of Supervisors are being reported to and reimbursed by the Grantor Agency. General Support from the Department of Finance While each Responsible Department has staff assigned to monitor and report the financial activities of grants, the Department of Finance will provide general and technical oversight and monitoring of all grant funds. 790 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Indirect Cost Policy for Grant Programs Purpose To establish a standard policy and general procedures governing the receipt, recording and disposition of OMB Circular A-87 allowable indirect costs recovered from the grantors. Definitions Grants: transactions in which an entity transfers cash or other items of value to (or incurs a liability for) Maricopa County as a means of sharing program costs or otherwise reallocating resources to the recipients. OMB Circular A-87: the Federal government circular that defines allowable indirect costs for federal programs. Cognizant Agency: the Federal agency responsible for reviewing, negotiating, and approving cost allocation plans or indirect cost proposals developed under OMB Circular A-87 on behalf of all Federal agencies. Indirect Costs: refers to those costs incurred for a common or institution-wide objective that benefits more than one grant program or project. Such costs are not readily assignable to the cost objective specifically benefited. County-wide Full Cost Allocation: used to allocate the full cost of running the County’s Central Service Departments. County-wide A-87 Indirect Costs: Central Service department costs, benefiting both grant and non-grant programs. These costs are allocated by the Department of Finance in accordance with OMB Circular A-87. Central Service Departments: departments that support, manage, and maintain County operations (i.e. Finance, OMB, etc.) Department A-87 Indirect Costs: departmental costs benefiting both grant and non-grant programs. Background Currently there is no standard policy in effect for the treatment of recovered A-87 indirect costs from grants funds. All departments are required to charge their grant funds for A-87 indirect costs unless prohibited by the grant contract, law, or County Board of Supervisors approval. Policy On an annual basis the Department of Finance-Grants Unit prepares an A-87 County-wide indirect cost allocation plan. The Department of Finance-Grants Unit is responsible for maintaining, updating and negotiating the Countywide A-87 plan with the cognizant agency, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The County’s A-87 indirect costs plans are used as a means of equitably recovering indirect costs from both federal and non-federal grant programs. All departments receiving grant funds shall submit a written request to the Department of Finance-Grants Unit to prepare a Departmental A-87 cost allocation plan. 791 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Indirect Cost Policy for Grant Programs (Continued) For General Fund departments• All recovered Departmental A-87 costs from grants will be charged to the grant fund under sub-object code 0831-01 and deposited into the department’s General Fund operating agency under revenue source 0621-01. • All recovered County-wide A-87 indirect costs from grants will be charged to the grant fund under subobject code 0831-00 and deposited into the General Fund, agency 180, org 1810, revenue source 062100. For non-General Fund departments• The Department of Finance-Grants Unit will prepare the County-wide monthly indirect cost charge (full indirect or A-87 indirect, as applicable) to the non-General Fund departments. The Department’s operating agency will be charged under sub-object code 0831-00 and revenue will be deposited into the General Fund, agency 180, org 1810, revenue source 0621-00. • All recovered Departmental A-87 indirect costs from grants will accumulate in the Department’s operating agency, sub-object 0831-01 will be expensed to the Department’s grant agency, sub-object code 083101. • All recovered County-wide A-87 costs from grants will be treated as a transfer of expenses from the Department’s operating agency, sub-object 0831-00, to the Department’s grant agency, sub-object code 0831-00. The above accounting strings are subject to change by the Department of Finance, and departments will be notified as necessary. In some cases the grantor may limit the recovery of indirect costs at a percentage less than the combined Departmental and County-wide A-87 indirect rate. In these cases, the Departmental A-87 rate shall be satisfied first. Any remaining funds will then be applied to the County-wide A-87 rate. Procedures Both recoverable and unrecoverable estimated A-87 indirect costs should be fully disclosed and quantified on the Board agenda and included in the local match if allowable. This information enables the Board of Supervisors to have a clear understanding of the financial impact on Maricopa County for each individual grant/program. Prior to submission to the Board of Supervisors, a copy of all grant applications and contracts must be submitted to the Department of Finance-Grants Unit to ensure compliance with this policy. Departments are required to prepare journal vouchers to charge grants for the eligible A-87 costs through the previous month end. The journal voucher must be submitted to the Department of Finance-Grants Unit for approval. Indirect cost allocations will be monitored by the Department of Finance-Grants Unit, as part of the Grant Monitoring Procedures. Summary This policy will ensure that all indirect costs are handled in a fair and consistent manner regarding the receipt, recording and/or the disposition in accordance with the applicable grant contract and laws. 792 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments General Government Policy Purpose The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for development and administration of the General Government budget to County Departments so that the General Government budget is handled according to Board policy and direction. Budgeted Revenues The revenues budgeted in the General Government budget are revenues that may be specific to particular funds, but benefit several departments and not a particular department or program within a department. Examples of these revenues include: • Property Taxes (General Fund and Debt Service Fund) • Anticipated Grants from outside sources • State Shared Sales Taxes • State Shared Vehicle License Taxes • Cable TV Application Fees for franchise agreements with the County • Liquor Licenses fees • Jail Excise Taxes (Detention Fund) • Other Miscellaneous Revenue as appropriate. Budgeted Expenditures The expenditures budgeted in the General Government budget are general expenses not specific to a particular department, or which benefit the County as a whole. These expenses can include budgeted contingencies, general debt service, taxes and assessments, legal expenses, and various Board-approved special projects or initiatives Expenditure items will be listed in the Recommended budget, and individual items are subject to Board approval. Procedures Budget Process General Government will follow all County budgeting policies and guidelines including the approval process established by the Board of Supervisors. The Office of Management and Budget, along with the County Administrative Officer, will be responsible for developing the General Government budget for each fiscal year. The recommended budget will include an itemized schedule of proposed expenditures by fund. Approval Of Expenses The Deputy County Administrator or designee must authorize all expenditures prior to processing. This authority has been delegated to the manager responsible for a particular item within General Government. If the expenditure is not approved it will be returned and absorbed within the budget of the department that submitted it. 793 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments General Government Policy (Continued) Contingency Fund If a contingency fund is adopted in the General Government budget during a fiscal year, General Fund departments can request funding for unanticipated expenditures or unfunded projects. These requests must be handled via a Board agenda item, and submitted by the responsible department. The Board of Supervisors must approve all requests for contingency funds. Authority/Responsibility The administration and maintenance of the General Government budget is the responsibility of the Office of Management & Budget. Expenditures charged to General Government must be approved by the Deputy County Administrator or designated to ensure that the expenditures are budgeted and appropriate. If approved, the contingency budget will be reduced and the appropriate department appropriation or other General Government item will be increased. 794 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Vehicle Replacement Policy Introduction The purpose of this Policy is to provide County Departments/Special Districts with guidelines so that existing vehicles can be replaced in a timely and cost-effective manner. Background Equipment replacement must be planned and approval for replacement received through the budget process. The Equipment Services Department has the responsibility to plan for replacement needs in conjunction with the County Departments/Special Districts. During development of each fiscal year’s budget, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviews requests received from Departments/Special Districts for replacement of existing vehicles. In determining the amount of funding required, only the cost to replace existing vehicles with their equivalents is considered. Upgrades and additional new vehicles may not be charged to the appropriate vehicle replacement budget. Sheriff’s Office Only: The Sheriff’s Office equipment replacement schedule will be discussed and approved during the annual budget process. Due to the unique nature of the functions of the Sheriff’s Office, the equivalent replacements and upgrades may be changed to meet departmental needs, if the costs remain within budget targets. However, these changes will be discussed with OMB prior to proceeding to ensure costs are appropriate. Guidelines The Department/Special District, working with Equipment Services, prepares a needs assessment to determine which vehicles require replacement for upcoming fiscal years. Vehicle replacement will be funded only for the current equivalent equipment class, make, model and equipment extras. Upgrades are not funded under the appropriate vehicle replacement budget. If a Department/Special District determines upgrades are necessary, the Department/Special District has two options: (a) pay for the upgrades from the Department’s/Special District’s current operating budget; or (b) request upgrades and additions during the development of the Department/Special District budget. If the full cost of replacement is actually lower than originally estimated, the savings will revert to the appropriate fund. Possible cost overruns will be absorbed by the appropriate vehicle replacement budget. OMB must approve all charges to the vehicle replacement budget. Exceptions If, during the replacement process, the Department/Special District requires changes to the original vehicle replacement request, the Department/Special District must request reconsideration of their initial vehicle replacement plan. The criteria OMB will consider during the review of the Department’s/Special District’s revised plan includes funding and the impact on current and future costs for maintenance, operation and replacement. To assist OMB in performing a full analysis of the revised replacement plan, Departments/Special Districts are requested to provide: A justification statement which supports changes to be in the best interest of Maricopa County citizens, enhances services provided to the citizens and benefits the County/County Special District overall. This statement can also include information on changes in service levels which require the use of a different vehicle class, the impact on current and future costs for maintenance, operation and replacement as well as information on funding. 795 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Vehicle Replacement Policy (Continued) A spreadsheet which reflects the current vehicle replacement schedule with costs and the proposed vehicle schedule with costs. The spreadsheet needs to reflect the increase or decrease of cost for each vehicle and an explanation for the cost change. A complete justification for any equipment additions to the replacement vehicles and how these equipment additions enhance the service levels being provided to Maricopa County citizens. OMB will review the request and provide the Department/Special District and Equipment Services with final approval or disapproval of the proposed change to the Department’s/Special District’s equipment vehicle replacement plan within three working days of receipt. 796 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Fund Descriptions 100 General Fund — is the County’s primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial resources of the general government, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. 201 Adult Probation Fees — Collects the fees assessed to persons placed on probation in the Superior Court per A.R.S. §13-901. Monies collected are used to supplement County General Fund appropriations for the compensation costs of probation officers who provide pre-sentence investigations (A.R.S. §12267). 203 Sheriff Donations — Accounts for and segregates funds to be used in support of mandated functions. Funding is provided by non-specific donations and proceeds from the sale of donated items. 204 Justice Court Judicial Enhancement — Revenues consist of fees and surcharges collected under the authority of A.R.S. §22-281; and time payment fees collected under authority of A.R.S. §12-116; and Online access subscription fees collected under authority of A.R.S. §22-284. Expenditures are used to improve, maintain and enhance the ability to collect and manage monies assessed or received by the courts and to improve court automation projects. 205 Court Document Retrieval — Accounts for the collection of an additional filing or appearance fee, not to exceed five dollars, to be used to defray the cost of converting the Clerk of Superior Court’s document storage and retrieval system to micrographics or computer automation as established by A.R.S. §12284.01. 207 Palo Verde — Palo Verde receives an annual allocation of approximately $200,000 from the State of Arizona. Expenditures are utilized for nuclear disaster training. 208 Judicial Enhancement — Revenues consist of fees and surcharges collected under authority of A.R.S. §12-284.03 and time payment fees collected under authority of A.R.S. §12-116. In addition, revenues are received from the State Judicial Enhancement Fund established by A.R.S. §12-113. Expenditures are used to improve, maintain and enhance the collection and management of funds and court automation projects. 209 Public Defender Training — Established by A.R.S. §12-117 to account for fees that are paid on a time payment basis as established by A.R.S. §12-116. Expenditures are utilized for Public Defender Training. 210 Waste Management — Established by the Board of Supervisors to segregate this activity from the General Fund. This fund accounts for a fixed $65,000 fee from Waste Management Corporation plus a percentage based on the tonnage’s of refuse dumped. Expenditures are used for economic development in Mobile and other unincorporated areas of the County. 211 Adult Probation Grants — Revenues consist of grant funds that are used for domestic violence, women’s treatment programs, gang prevention and criminal justice records improvement. 212 Sheriff RICO Fund — This fund consists of monies received as result of participation in any investigation or prosecution, whether by final judgment, settlement, or otherwise. Monies may be used for the funding of gang prevention programs, substance abuse prevention programs substance abuse education programs and witness protection or for any purposes permitted by federal law relating to the disposition of any property that is transferred to a law enforcement agency. 213 County Attorney RICO — Accounts for the funds provided by the sale of confiscated property. Operated by the County Attorney, RICO consists of all the activity of the Anti-Racketeering Program. 214 Sheriff Jail Enhancement Fund — Per ASRS 41-2401, the Arizona State Department of Corrections allocates criminal justice enhancement funds to County Sheriffs for the purpose of enhancing County Jail facilities and operations. 215 Emergency Management — Emergency Management activity consists of disaster planning and training. 216 Clerk of the Court Grants — Accounts for the grant funds that are utilized for the improvement of court automation systems, child support enforcement and the processing of criminal history dispositions. 797 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Fund Descriptions (Continued) 217 CDBG Housing Trust — Accounts for the grant funds that are utilized to expand the supply of low income housing through the rehabilitation and reconstruction of single family occupancy homes. 218 Clerk of Court Fill the GAP — This fund was set up as indicated by ARS 41-2421F and accounts for monies distributed under ARS 41-2421. Funds are to be used to supplement, not supplant, funding at the level provided in fiscal year 1997 – 1998 by the counties for the processing of criminal cases in the superior court, including the office of the clerk of the superior court, and justice courts. 219 County Attorney Grants — Accounts for funds that are utilized for the investigation and prosecution of child abuse and domestic violence cases and the enhancement of anti-gang enforcement efforts to deter, investigate, prosecute or adjudicate gang offenders. Victim assistance is provided to include transportation, payment of emergency expenses, education programs and training to children’s advocates. 220 Diversion — Pursuant to A.R.S. §13-1811, funds are utilized for the investigation, prosecution and deferred prosecution of bad check cases. 221 County Attorney Fill the GAP — County Attorney Fill the GAP was set up as indicated by ARS 412421F and accounts for monies distributed under ARS 41-2421. Funds are to be used to supplement, not supplant, funding at the level provided in fiscal year 1997-1998 by the counties for the processing of criminal cases by county attorneys. 222 Human Services Grants — Accounts for the grant funds that are utilized for community action services designed to help the disadvantaged achieve self-sufficiency and family stability. 223 Transportation Grants — Transportation Grants was set up to account for all Grant activity administered by the County Transportation Department. 224 Medical Examiner Grant Fund — Accounts for the grant funds that are utilized to support the County’s anti-bioterrorism efforts. 225 Parks Spur Cross Ranch Conservation — To account for the money collected from a Town imposed ½% transaction privilege tax for the operation of the County park. The Town was to commence collection of the tax by December 1, 2000. 226 Planning and Development Fees — Performs mandated community planning functions. Funding is provided mainly through license and impact fees. 227 Juvenile Probation Grants — Accounts for the grant funds that are utilized for the child nutrition program, family counseling and safe schools program. 228 Juvenile Probation Special Fees — This fund was established by A.R.S. §12-268 to account for juvenile probation fees collected and used for the purpose of supplementing County General Fund appropriations for the compensation of personnel of the Juvenile Court. 229 Juvenile Restitution Fund — Pursuant to A.R.S. §8-346, the fund was established for the payment of restitution in juvenile delinquency proceedings. This fund consists of state and local appropriations, gifts, devices and donations from any public or private source. 230 Parks & Recreation Grants — Accounts for the grant funds that are utilized for state lake improvements, park restoration and the construction and maintenance of hiking trails. 232 Transportation Operations — Plans and implements an environmentally balanced multi-model transportation system. Operations are funded through highway user taxes. 233 Public Defender Grants — Accounts for grant funds that are utilized for public defender training and to increase the processing of drug cases. 798 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Fund Descriptions (Continued) 234 Transportation Capital Project — Transportation Capital Projects was set up administratively as a capital project fund to track capital project activity of the County Transportation department. Funding is provided by a reimbursement transfer from the Transportation Fund that derives it’s funding from the State Highways User’s Tax. 235 Del Webb Special Revenue Fund — A special revenue fund to account for revenue received from the Del Webb Anthem community that is restricted to expenditure for development services (the implementation and enforcement of the development master plan) and recreational services (trail system and library) supporting that community. 236 Recorder’s Surcharge — Accounts for the collection of a special recording surcharge, not to exceed four dollars, to be used to defray the cost of converting the County Recorder’s document storage and retrieval system to micrographics or computer automation as established by A.R.S. §11-475.01. 238 Superior Court Grants — Grant funds are used for drug enforcement accounting, court appointed special advocates and case processing assistance. 239 Parks Souvenir Fund — Accounts for sales proceeds of sundry items at the Maricopa County Parks. 240 Lake Pleasant Recreation Services — Provides the public with positive leisure opportunities in a safe, accessible and efficient manner through quality development and programming while conserving and protecting unique and environmentally sensitive areas. 241 Parks Enhancement Fund — Accounts for park and recreation revenues and expenditures associated with enhancing parks and recreation programs pursuant to A.R.S. §11-941. 242 Library District Grants — Library District Grants was set up to account for all Grant activity administered by the County Library District. 243 Parks Donations Fund — Contributions accounts for activities that are financed through donations by citizens or groups. 244 Library District — Provides and maintains library services for the residents of Maricopa County. Operations are funded by a secondary tax levy. 245 Justice Court Special Revenue — Established for the purpose of defraying expenses of justice court services by providing improvements in court technology, operations and facilities to enable the courts to respond quickly to changing statutory and case processing needs. Operations are funded by an $18 user’s charge to be added to the Defensive Driving School Diversion Fee as of March 1, 1998. 246 Justice Court Grants — Accounts for funds that are utilized to reduce the backlog of existing criminal cases, juvenile crime reduction and to initiate a pilot video conference/personal computer project for 3 courts. 249 General Government Grants — General Government Grants was set up to account for all nondepartment specific grant activity. 250 Cactus League Operations — Provides regional leadership and financial resources to assure the presence of Major League Baseball in Maricopa County. Operations are funded by a rental vehicle surcharge. 251 Sheriff Grants — Accounts for grant funds that are utilized for patrolling lakes, improving the fingerprinting system, and enhancing DUI and overall traffic enforcement capabilities. 252 Inmate Services — Accounts for the funds that are held in trust for the benefit and welfare of the inmates, established under A.R.S. §31-121. The majority of revenues are derived from sales of food and sundries to the inmates. 253 Ballpark Operations — Accounts for all revenues and expenditures related to Bank One Ballpark. 799 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Fund Descriptions (Continued) 254 Inmate Health Services — Accounts for the copayments received from inmates for self initiated health service pursuant to A.R.S. §31-161 and A.R.S. §31-162. 255 Detention Operations — was established under the authority of propositions 400 and 401, which were passed in the General Election of November 3, 1998 and extended in the General Election of November 5, 2002. These propositions authorized a temporary 1/5-cent sales tax to be used for the construction and operation of adult and juvenile detention facilities. 256 Probate Fees — Administers the monies received by the Clerk of Court pursuant to A.R.S. §14-5314 and A.R.S. §14-5414 to preserve, audit, and safeguard the estates and wards for whom the court has a fiduciary responsibility. 257 Conciliation Court Fees — Accounts for monies collected under A.R.S. §25-311.01 related to the dissolution of marriages. The funds collected are used by the Domestic Violence Shelter fund and the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment fund. 258 Court Automated Services — Accounts for the collection and expenditure of a $10 fee collected by Clerk of the Court staff upon a filing of the original complaint and answer in all civil, domestic relations, probate and tax cases pursuant to A.R.S. §11-251.08. The funds are utilized to offset the various expenses incurred in the development, enhancement and on-going operation of the Court’s automated information systems. 259 Superior Court Special Revenue — Accounts for monies received under an intergovernmental agreement with the Department of Economic Security to conduct Title IV-D child support enforcement enhancements. 260 Research and Reporting — Accounts for the activity of governmental research projects that are billed back to the municipalities contracting for these services on a cost reimbursement basis. 261 Law Library Fees — Established by A.R.S. §12-305 to account for a portion of the fees collected by the Clerk of Superior Court to be used for the purchase of books for the county law library. 262 Public Defender Fill the GAP — Public Defender Fill the GAP was set up as indicated by ARS 41-2421F and accounts for monies distributed under ARS 41-2421. Funds are to be used to supplement, not supplant, funding at the level provided in fiscal year 1997-1998 by counties for the processing of criminal cases by the county public defender, legal defender and contract indigent defense counsel in each county. 263 Legal Defender Fill the GAP — Legal Defender Fill the Gap was set up as indicated by ARS 41-2421F and accounts for monies distributed under ARS 41-2421. Funds are to be used to supplement, not supplant, funding at the level provided in fiscal year 1997-1998 by counties for the processing of criminal cases by the county public defender, legal defender and contract indigent defense counsel in each county. 264 Superior Court Fill the GAP — Superior Court Fill the Gap was set up as indicated by ARS 41-2421F and accounts for monies distributed under ARS 41-2421. Funds are to be used to supplement, not supplant, funding at the level provided in fiscal year 1997-1998 by the counties for the processing of criminal cases in the superior court, including the office of the clerk of the superior court, and justice courts. 265 Public Health Fees — Accounts for public health programs that are self-supported by Vital Health fees and pharmacy operations. 266 Check Enforcement Program — Accounts for fees that are collected pursuant to sections 13-1809 and 13-1810, any investigation and prosecution costs and any monies that are obtained as a result of a forfeiture and that are recovered for the county through enforcement of section 13-1802, 13-1807, 132002 or 13-2310, whether by final judgment, settlement or otherwise. The monies in the fund shall be used for the investigation, prosecution and deferred prosecution of theft, forgery and fraud. 800 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Fund Descriptions (Continued) 267 Criminal Justice Enhancement — The Criminal Justice Enhancement fund accounts for monies that are allocated to county attorneys from the Arizona State Criminal Justice Enhancement fund (ARS 41-2401). The funds are to be used for the purpose of enhancing prosecutorial efforts. 268 Victim Compensation Restitution Fund— Victim Compensation and Assistance Fund was established to administer funding provided from the State Victim Compensation and Assistance fund.(ARS 41-2407) and from prisoner supervision fees under ARS 31-418. Fund is used for establishing, maintaining and supporting programs that compensate and assist victims of crime. 269 Victim Compensation Interest Fund— The County Attorney Victim Compensation and Restitution Fund was established as authorized by ARS 11-538 consisting of monies that are distributed pursuant to ARS 12-286 (seventy-five per cent of the interest earned on restitution monies that are received in trust). The county attorney shall use monies in the fund to assist eligible victims of crime with medical, counseling and funeral expenses and lost wages. 270 Child Support Enhancement — Accounts for funds received from a federal incentive award that is utilized for the enhancement of child support collections through efficient operation of the IV-D program. 271 Expedited Child Support — Accounts for the funds that are utilized to establish, maintain and enhance programs designed to expedite the processing of petitions filed and enforce the resultant court orders. Revenues collected for subsequent case filing fees for post-decree petitions in dissolution cases, pursuant to A.R.S. §25-412 and A.R.S. §12-284, fund operations. 273 Victim Location — Revenues are derived from interest earned on restitution monies received in trust and are to be distributed to the County Attorney and Clerk of the Superior Court on a pro rata basis (County Attorney – 75% and Superior Court – 25%). Fund was established by A.R.S. §12-287. 274 Clerk of the Court EDMS — The Clerk of Court EDMS Fund was established to account for Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) Fees which are collected as authorized by Board Agenda C16020028, ADM1005 and State Attorney General’s Opinion 195-18 (R94-63). 275 Juvenile Probation Diversion — The Juvenile Probation Diversion fund was established by ARS 11-537 and consists of diversion fees that are collected pursuant to section 8-321(N). The monies shall be used at the discretion of the county attorney for administering county community based alternative programs that are established pursuant to section 8-321. 276 Spousal Maintenance Enforcement Enhancement — The Spousal Maintenance Enforcement Fund is established for the clerk of the Superior Court consisting of monies received pursuant to A.R.S. §12-289. The clerk will spend monies in the fund to enhance enforcement of spousal maintenance orders. In addition to the fees required by section A.R.S. §12-284, the clerk shall charge and collect a surcharge of five dollars for each filing of a petition or an answer for annulment, dissolution or marriage or legal separation. The clerk will use the surcharge only for the purposes prescribed by this statute. 280 Old Courthouse Restoration — Accounts for the funds that are utilized for the restoration and preservation of the Old Maricopa County Courthouse. Donations and contributions fund operations. 281 Children’s Issues Education — Accounts for the funds that are utilized for educational programs regarding the impact that divorce, the restructuring of families and judicial involvement have on children pursuant to A.R.S. §25-354. Revenues that are received from the Clerk’s educational program fees supplement any state or county appropriations. 282 Domestic Relations Mediation Education — Accounts for the funds that are utilized to establish, maintain and enhance programs designed to educate individuals regarding the impacts on children associated with marriage dissolution, legal separation, restructuring of families and the programs available for mediation of visitation or custody disputes, pursuant to A.R.S. §25-413. Operations are funded by revenues from a surcharge received by the Clerk for each filing of a post-adjudication petition in a domestic relation’s case, pursuant to A.R.S. §12-284. 801 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Fund Descriptions (Continued) 290 Waste Tire — Accounts for the activity for the operation of the waste tire processing center for the removal of waste tires from the County pursuant to A.R.S. §44-1305. 292 Correctional Health Grants — The Arizona Department of Health Services was awarded a grant by the Department for Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to generate surveillance data for the Center for Disease Control and supplement the syphilis screening activities at the Madison Street Jail. 320 County Improvement Debt — Accounts for the debt service on the Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2001. Funding is provided by transfers from the General Fund. 370 Stadium District Debt Series02 — 422 Intergovernmental Capital Projects — Intergovernmental Capital Projects account for capital project spending predominantly funded from General Fund revenues. 435 County Improvement Fund — Accounts for capital projects funded through the issuance of the Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2001. 440 Criminal Justice Capital Projects — Accounts for capital projects associated with criminal justice departments. Funding is provided by ***. 445 General Fund County Improvements — General Fund Capital Projects account for capital project spending funded from General Funds. 450 Long Term Project Reserve — Accounts for sales tax (Stadium Tax) proceeds collected in excess of the $238,000,000 cap imposed by County Board Resolution. 455 Detention Capital Projects — Accounts for the proceeds associated with the 1/5 of one-cent sales tax approved by voters in the General Election on November 3, 1998 and extended by voters in the General Election on November 5, 2002. The proceeds are for the construction and operation of adult and juvenile detention facilities. 504 Air Quality Fees — Air Pollution works to protect the environment and public health through control, preservation, and improvement of the County’s air quality. Permit revenue is the funding source. 505 Environmental Services Grant — Environmental Services Grants was set up to account for all Grant activity administered by the County Environmental Services Department. 506 Environmental Services Environmental Health — Environmental Services – Health Fund was established to account for activities related to the protection of food and water supplies consumed by residents. Funding is provided by fees collected from Health Inspections and the sale of Health Permits. 532 Public Health — Protects, improves and preserves the physical, mental and social well being and the environment of the entire population of Maricopa County with a special responsibility to serve those most vulnerable. Federal and State grants fund operations. 535 Health Care Delivery System — provides quality, cost competitive health care and health professional education to assure the health security of individuals, families, and the community. 541 Health Plan — is an ambulatory health care plan operated by Maricopa Managed Care Systems (MMCS). MMCS contracts with the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) which provides monthly capitation revenues based on Maricopa County Health Plan enrollment. 551 Long-Term Care Plan — is a managed care, long term care plan operated by Maricopa Managed Care Systems (MMCS). Chronically ill and physically disabled patients receive medical services as a result of an annual contract with the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS). 566 Senior Select — A Medicare plan operating under contract with the Federal government. 802 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments Fund Descriptions (Continued) 572 Animal Control License/Shelter — Animal Control reduces the incidences of animal inflicted injuries and reduces the risk of exposure to rabies through enforcement of dog licensing laws, leash laws, capture and impoundment of stray dogs, public education, adoption or humane disposal of excess animals. Licenses and fees are the primary funding source. 573 Animal Control Grants — Animal Control Grants was set up to account for all Grant activity administered by Animal Control. . 574 Animal Control Field Operation — Animal Control Field Services was set up in FY2003 to segregate field services which are an optional County Service from Animal Control Pound Activities which are required by Arizona State Statute. 580 Solid Waste Management — Solid Waste assists the cities and towns, businesses, and citizens in continuously improving regional waste management systems. This includes an ever-increasing focus on reducing the amount of waste generated, maximizing resource recovery, proper management of special wastes, and environmentally sound disposal. 652 Health Select Self-Insured Trust Fund — This fund collects employee and employer contributions for payment of the employees’ health insurance premiums for the County-run insurance plan. 654 Equipment Services — This fund provides assistance to other Maricopa County departments to ensure quality service to the citizens of Maricopa County by furnishing and maintaining the necessary County mobile equipment in an efficient manner. 673 Reprographics — This fund provides the County’s printing and duplicating services. 675 Risk Management — This fund supports the comprehensive insurance/self-insurance program, which safeguards County assets and employees by means of a Trust Fund. Personnel skilled in loss control, claims and litigation and workers’ compensation work together to avert risk and conserve the human and financial resources of Maricopa County. 681 Telecommunications — This fund provides cost effective voice, data, and radio communications to County employees. 685 Benefits Trust — This fund collects employee and employer contributions for payment of the employees’ dental and short-term disability benefits. 748 Juror Improvement — This fund accounts for donated juror fees and mileage to be used for juror enhanced services such as educational initiatives about the importance of jury service; new and improved programs for summoned and empanelled jurors; research and programs directed at improving the response levels of those summoned for jury service. Approved by agenda number C-38-02-002-8-00. 990 Flood Control Capital Projects — Flood Control Capital Projects was set up administratively as a capital project fund to track capital project activity of the Flood Control District. Funding is provided by a reimbursement transfer from the Flood Control District which derives it’s funding from an annual Property Tax Levy. 991 Flood Control — Provides flood control facilities and regulates floodplains and drainage to prevent flooding of property and endangering the lives of people in Maricopa County. Operations are funded by a secondary tax levy. 803 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments FY 2004-05 Revenue Object and Sub-Object Codes Revenue Source 0601 0601 0601 0601 0601 0605 0606 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0610 0615 0615 0615 0615 0620 0620 0620 0620 0620 0620 0620 0621 0621 0621 0621 0625 0626 0630 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 Sub-Revenue Source 00 01 02 03 04 00 00 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 00 01 02 03 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 00 01 02 03 00 00 00 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 Revenue Source 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0635 0636 0637 0637 0637 0637 0637 0637 0638 0638 0645 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0650 0651 0652 0652 0652 0652 0680 0690 Sub-Revenue Source Name PROPERTY TAXES REAL PROP TAXES - CURRENT YEAR REAL PROP TAXES - PRIOR YEAR PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES CURREN PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES PRIOR TAX PENALTIES & INTEREST SALES TAXES LICENSES AND PERMITS LIQUOR LICENSES PAWN SHOP LICENSES PEDDLERS LICENSES AIR POLLUTION PERMITS ANIMAL LICENSES BUILDING SAFETY PERMITS ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS FLOOD CONTROL LICENSES MARRIAGE LICENSES MOBILE HOME MOVING PERMIT MOBILE HOME USE PERMIT PLANNING VARIANCE PERMIT PUBLIC HEALTH ENG PERMIT COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY USE CABLE TV LICENSE FEES GRANTS FEDERAL STATE OTHER GRANTS OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL FEDERAL SHARED REVENUE OTHER SHARED REVENUE FEDERAL SHARE OF COSTS STATE SHARED REVENUE STATE SHARE OF COST OTHER GOVERNMENT SHARE OF COST PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES SALT RIVER PROJECT FEDERAL STATE STATE SHARED SALES TAX STATE SHARED HIGHWAY USER REV STATE SHARED VEHICLE LICENSE OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES CABLE TV RECEIPTS FEE GARNISH & SUPPORT FEES TAX SALE FEES CABLE TV APPLICATION FEES CERTIFICATIONS COURT FEES CONSTABLE FEES FIDUCIARY FEES JURY FEES LEGAL SERVICES PASSPORTS PROBATE FEES RECORDING FEES RECORD AUTOMATION SURCHARGE 804 Sub-Revenue Source 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 00 00 01 02 03 04 05 00 01 00 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 00 00 01 02 03 00 00 Sub-Revenue Source Name SUBDIVISION FEES ZONING CLEAR REVIEW FEES ZONING APPLICATION ROOM & BOARD PROBATION KENNEL FEES VITAL STATISTICS CAMPGROUND RESERVE FEES TARGET RANGE FEES PARK ENTRANCE FEES REC ACTIVITIES FEES BUILDING PLAN REVIEWS AUTOPSIES INDIGENT DEFENSE REVENUES PROBATION SERVICE FEES SPECIAL LAW ENFORCE SERVICE DAMAGE RECOVERY LANDFILL CHARGES INSURANCE PREMIUMS COUNTY PREMIUM HLTH/LIFE EMPLOYEE PREMIUM HLTH/LIFE CIGNA DEDUCTIBLE COUNTY PREMIUM PHARMACY ACCRUED REVENUE-PAYROLL HEALTH SELECT INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES FINES & FORFEITS CIVIL SANCTIONS TRAFFIC COURT FINES LIBRARY FINES ANTI-RACKETEERING FINES DIVERSION FINE PATIENT SERVICES REVENUE REVENUE DEDUCTIONS INTEREST EARNINGS MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE BUILDING RENTALS EQUIPMENT RENTALS PAYPHONE RECEIPTS VENDING MACHINE RECEIPTS OTHER RENTS & COMMISSION SALE OF BOOKS/COPIES/ETC. SALE OF FIXED ASEST SALE FOOD BULK NOURISHMENT SALE OF POSTAGE SALE OF DATA INFORMATION INSURANCE RECOVERIES CASH OVER/SHORT DONATIONS/CONTRIBUTIONS BAD CHECK FEES (NSF) GAIN ON FIXED ASSETS PROCEEEDS FROM FINANCING CAPITAL LEASE PROCEEDS CERT OF PART PROCEEDS BOND PROCEEDS TRANSFERS IN INVENTORY Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments FY 2004-05 Expenditure Object and Sub-Object Codes Object Sub Object 0701 00 0701 01 0701 02 0701 03 0701 04 0701 05 0701 06 0701 07 0701 08 0701 09 0701 10 0701 11 0705 00 0710 00 0750 00 0750 01 0750 02 0750 03 0750 04 0750 05 0750 06 0750 07 0750 08 0750 09 0750 10 0750 11 0750 12 0750 13 0750 14 0750 15 0750 16 0750 17 0750 18 0750 19 0750 20 0750 21 0750 22 0790 00 0790 01 0790 02 0790 03 0790 04 0790 05 0790 06 0790 07 0790 08 0790 09 0790 10 0790 11 0790 12 0790 13 0795 00 0796 00 0801 00 0801 01 0801 02 Sub Object Name REGULAR PAY FULL TIME REGULAR SALARIES PERMANENT PART TIME OTHER SALARIES & WAGES COMPENSATORY TIME HOLIDAY PAY VACATION PAY JURY DUTY ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE WITH PAY ON THE JOB INJURY LEAVE MILITARY LEAVE SICK LEAVE TEMPORARY PAY OVERTIME FRINGE BENEFITS FICA MEDICARE TAX ELECTED OFFICIALS RETIREMENT CORRECTIONS OFFICERS RETIREMNT PUBLIC SAFETY RETIREMENT STATE RETIREMENT PLAN DENTAL PLAN EMPLOYER'S DENTAL SERVICES HEALTH SELECT PLAN CIGNA HEALTH PLAN MANUFACTURERS LIFE ON THE JOB INJURY INSURANCE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BUS FARE SUBSIDY PLAN ASRS LONG TERM DISABILITY INVESTIGATOR RETIREMENT CONCORDIA DENTAL RELIASTER LIFE MEDICAL/DENTAL WAIVER CIGNA DEDUCTIBLE PARK RANGERS RETIREMENT SELF-INSURED PHARMACY OTHER PERSONAL SERVICES PRODUCTION BONUS DIFFERENTIALS WORKING CONDITION WEEKEND PREMIUM STANDBY PAY REGULAR OVER BUDGET PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE AWARD BUDGET DEFERRED HOURS PAID LUMP SUM PAYMENT EMPLOYEE SUGGESTION AWARD AWARDS PROGRAM CREDIT OTHER ADJUSTMENTS PEAK PERFORMERS PERSONAL SERVICE ALLOC OUT PERSONAL SERVICE ALLOC IN GENERAL SUPPLIES AUTO-GAS OIL LUBE AUTO-TIRES TUBES BATTERY Object 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0801 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0802 0803 0804 0804 0804 0804 0804 0804 0804 805 Sub Object 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 00 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 Sub Object Name OTHER AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY BEDDING & LINEN CLEANING & JANITORIAL CLOTHING/UNIFORMS TECHNOLOGY SUPPLIES SOFTWARE EDUCATIONAL SUPPLIES ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLIES FOOD-PERISHABLE FOOD-PREPARATION FOOD-NON PERISHABLE FOOD-SPECIAL FUNCTIONS FOOD-NOURISHMENTS KITCHEN & DINING SUPPLIES LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES RECREATIONAL SUPPLIES SAFETY APPAREL SMALL TOOLS & EQUIPMENT FURNITURE UNDER $1000 LAUNDRY SUPPLIES PROCUREMENT CARD BOOK/PAMPHLET/SUBSCRIPTIONS AUTOMOTIVE R&M SUPPLIES BUILDING R&M SUPPLIES COMMUNICATION R&M SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL R&M SUPPLIES GROUNDS R&M SUPPLIES HEAT/LIGHT/COOL R&M SUPPLIES OFFICE R&M SUPPLIES PLUMBING R&M SUPPLIES ROAD R&M SUPPLIES OTHER R&M SUPPLIES MEDICAL SUPPLIES DENTAL SUPPLIES LABORATORY SUPPLIES LAB-REAGENTS & MEDIA LAB-CONSUMABLES RADIOLOGY SUPPLIES X-RAY FILM X-RAY CONTRAST & MEDIA PHARMACEUTICALS BLOOD & PLASMA SUPPLIES ANESTHETIC SUPPLIES OXYGEN & OTHER GASES RADIOACTIVE SUPPLIES O R INSTRUMENTS MEDICAL R&M SUPPLIES FUEL NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT CONS EQUIP NON-MOTORIZED EDUCATION/REC EQUIPMENT ENGR/SCIENTIFIC EQUIPMENT KITCHEN/LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT HEAT/COOL/LIGHT EQUIPMENT Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments FY 2004-05 Expenditure Object and Sub-Object Codes (Continued) Object Sub Object 0804 07 0804 08 0804 09 0804 10 0804 11 0804 12 0805 00 0806 00 0810 00 0810 01 0810 02 0810 03 0810 04 0810 05 0810 06 0810 07 0810 08 0810 09 0810 10 0810 11 0810 12 0810 13 0810 14 0810 15 0810 16 0810 17 0810 18 0810 19 0810 20 0810 21 0810 22 0810 23 0810 24 0810 25 0810 26 0810 27 0810 28 0810 29 0810 30 0810 31 0811 00 0811 01 0811 02 0811 03 0811 04 0811 05 0811 06 0811 07 0811 08 0811 09 0811 10 0811 11 0811 12 0811 13 0811 14 0811 15 0811 16 Sub Object Name MEDICAL/LAB EQUIPMENT OFFICE FURNITURE/EQUIPMENT SHOP EQUIPMENT WEAPONS/GUNS COMPUTER EQUIPMENT FURNITURE OVER $1000 SUPPLIES-ALLOCATION OUT SUPPLIES-ALLOCATION IN LEGAL SERVICES PARALEGAL/STUDENT TIME ATTORNEYS CRIM INDIG-COURT ATTORNEYS NON-CRIMIN COURT ATTORNEYS-JUVENILE COURTRT ATTORNEYS OTHER NON-COURT EXPERT WITNESS FEES/EXPENSE EYE WITNESS FEES/EXPENSE INTERPRETER FEES/EXPENSE VISITING JUDGES FEES MENTAL EXAMINATION FEES RULE 11 EXAM RULE 26.5 EXAM DEPOSITION REPORT SERVICE PRELIM HEARING/GRAND JURY TRIALS REPORT SERVICE APPEALS TRANSRIPTION SERVICE DEPOSITION TRANS SERVICE PRELIM HEAR/GRAND JURY TR S TRANSCRIPT MISCELLANEOUS JURY FEES JURY LODGING JURY MEALS JURY MILEAGE ARBITRATION EXPENSE JUDGEMENTS/SETTLEMENTS LITIGATION EXPENSE MERIT SYSTEM HEARING EXPENSE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE COURT IN INVESTIGATION TIME INVESTIGATION EXPENSE OTHER LEGAL NOTICE PUBLICATION HEALTH CARE SERVICES NURSES MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DENTISTS PHYSICIANS CONTRACT MEDICAL PROVIDER HOSPITAL/MEDICAL SERVICES PRIMARY CARE SERVICES THERAPY SERVICES RADIOLOGY SERVICES EMERGENCIES PRESCRIPTIONS LABORATORY SERVICES TRANSPORTATION/AMBULANCE PATIENT TRANSPORT SVCS - MMC BAD DEBT EXPENSE REBATES Object 0811 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0812 0820 806 Sub Object 17 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 00 Sub Object Name SHORT-TERM DISABILITY CLAIMS OTHER SERVICES ACCOUNTING & AUDITING ACTUARIAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES HSA ALLOCATION ARCHITECTURAL APPRAISAL SERV CONSULTING & MANAGEMENT BROKER FEES EDUCATORS & TRAINERS ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY CONSULTING SECURITY GUARD SVCS CLAIMS ADMIN SERVICE FEE ARCOR PERSONNEL SERVICES ELECTION WORKERS OUTSIDE LAUNDRY/DRY CLEANING SVCS PERSONNEL HIRE/TEST SVCS TEMPORARY HELP OUTSIDE COLLECTION FEES JTPA-OCCUPATIONAL/VOCATIONAL JTPA-OJT GP - AUTO LIABILITY GP - GENERAL LIABILITY GP - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE OTHER INSURANCE AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE CLAIMS AUTO LIABILITY CLAIMS ENVIRONMENTAL LIAB CLAIMS BOILER INSURANCE COURSE CONST INSURANCE GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE WORKMENS COMP INDEMNITY WORKMENS COMP INSURANCE WORKMENS COMP MEDICAL DENTAL INSURANCE DISABILITY INSURANCE HEALTH CLAIMS HEALTH INSURANCE INDIVIDUAL/BLANKET BONDS UNEMPLOYMENT CLAIMS PROPERTY CLAIMS PROPERTY INSURANCE MALPRACTICE CLAIMS MALPRACTICE INSURANCE LIFE INSURANCE MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAM NOTARY BONDS SIGHT CARE PRINTING-BINDING-DUPLICATION TAX SALE PUBLICATION OTHER PUBLICATION & ADV EXP RECORDS MANAGEMENT SERVICES MEMBERSHIPS/CERT/LICENSE RENT & OPERATING LEASES Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments FY 2004-05 Expenditure Object and Sub-Object Codes (Continued) Object 0820 0820 0820 0820 0820 0820 0820 0820 0820 0820 0825 0825 0825 0825 0825 0825 0825 0825 0825 0825 0825 0825 0830 0830 0830 0839 0839 0839 0839 0839 0839 0839 0839 0839 0842 0842 0842 0842 0842 0842 0842 0842 0842 0842 0842 0842 0843 0843 0843 0843 0843 0843 0845 0845 0845 0845 0845 0845 Sub Object 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 00 01 02 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 00 01 02 03 04 05 00 01 02 03 04 05 Sub Object Name RENT AUTOMOBLE RENT BUILDING RENT SPECICAL FUNCTION RENT COPYING EQUIPMENT RENT COMMUNICATION EQUIP RENT DATA PROCESSING EQUIP RENT GROUNDS/LAND RENT MEDICAL EQUIPMENT RENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT RENT REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE AUTOMOTIVE R&M BUILDING R&M CONSTRUCTION EQUIP R&M COMMUNICATION EQUIP R&M DATA PROCESS EQUIP R&M GROUNDS R&M HEAT/LIGHT/COOL R&M MEDICAL/LAB EQUIP R&M COPYING EQUIP R&M OFFICE EQUIP R&M JANITORIAL SERVICE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS TAXES & ASSESSMENTS MANDATED HEALTH CARE PAYMENTS INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES TELECOM DISCRETIONARY COUNTY COUNSEL BASE LEVEL EQ SERVICES CHARGES RISK MANAGEMENT BASE LEVEL TELECOM TELECOM WIRELESS SYSTEMS REPROGRAPHICS MOTOR POOL TRAVEL & EDUCATION COUNTY SPONSORED TRAINING AIRLINE/BUS/TAXI MEALS LODGING EVENT COST MILEAGE ALLOWANCE EDUCATION SEMINAR FEES INVESTIGATIVE TRAVEL WITNESS TRAVEL PRISONER/COURT WARD TRAVEL POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING FREIGHT MOVING SERVICES POSTAGE SHIPPING COURIER SERVICE SUPPORT AND CARE OF PERSONS BURIAL OF INDIGENTS PERSONAL CARE HOME MEALS SERVICE JTPA-FINANCIAL ASST.(NBP/NRP) NURSING HOMES Object 0850 0850 0850 0850 0850 0850 0850 0850 0850 0850 0850 0855 0865 0870 0870 0870 0870 0872 0873 0880 0880 0890 0910 0910 0910 0910 0915 0915 0915 0920 0920 0920 0920 0920 0920 0920 0920 0920 0920 0930 0930 0930 0930 0930 0930 0930 0930 0940 0950 0950 0950 0950 0950 0950 0950 0955 0956 807 Sub Object 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 00 00 00 02 04 05 00 00 00 01 00 00 01 02 03 00 01 02 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 00 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 00 00 Sub Object Name UTILITIES MICROWAVE U S WEST CHARGES LONG DISTANCE CHARGES OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES ELECTRICITY NATURAL/PROPANE GAS REFUSE REMOVAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL WATER INFECTIOUS WASTE DISPOSAL INTEREST EXPENSE DEPRECIATION OTHER ADJUSTMENTS ITEMS FOR RESALE ITEMS FOR INVENTORY INTERGOVT HOLDING ACCOUNT SERVICES-ALLOCATION OUT SERVICES-ALLOCATION IN TRANSFERS OUT CENTRAL SERVICE COST ALLOCAT LOSS ON FIXED ASSETS LAND LAND ACQUISITION-ROW LAND ACQUISITION-OTHER RELOCATION-FACILITIES BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTION WORK IN PROGRESS ALTERATIONS/IMPROVEMENTS CAPITAL EQUIPMENT COMMUNICATIONS CAP EQUIPMENT CONS CAP EQUIP NON-MOTORIZED EDUCATION/REC CAP EQUIPMENT ENGR/SCIENTIFIC CAP EQUIPMENT KITCHEN/LAUNDRY CAP EQUIPMENT HEAT/COOL/LIGHT CAP EQUIPMENT MED/LAB/ CAP CAP EQUIPMENT SHOP CAP EQUIPMENT COMPUTER CAP EQUIPMENT VEHICLES & CONSTRUCTION EQUIP CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES TRAILERS OTHER MECHANIZED TRUCKS WATERCRAFT AIRCRAFT\HELICOPTERS PASSENGER VEHICLES INFRASTRUCTURE DEBT SERVICE PRINCIPAL BOND INTEREST BOND PRINCIPAL COP INTEREST COP PRINCIPAL CAPITAL LEASE INTEREST CAPITAL LEASE CAPITAL-ALLOCATION OUT CAPITAL-ALLOCATION IN 808 35,358,360 238,960,263 87,361,502 935,249,028 35,017,173 322,232,028 85,171,432 881,678,366 97,161,780 77,022,166 25,796,699 19,423,268 129,782,461 145,216,234 97,161,780 339,882,099 71,999,041 9,939,483 23,163,103 91,284,899 848,440,576 563,031,317 500,689,915 9,939,483 EXPENDITURE LIMITATION COMPARISON 1. Budgeted expenditures/expenses 2. Add/subtract: estimated net reconciling items 3. Budgeted expenditures/expenses adjusted for reconciling items 4. Less: estimated exclusions 5. Amount subject to the expenditure limitation 6. EEC expenditure limitation 28,850,000 $ 28,850,000 $ 2,506,275,922 2,585,202,470 1,822,237,677 1,786,603,714 $ 684,038,245 $ 798,598,756 $ 684,038,246 $ 798,598,757 2003-04 2004-05 $ 2,506,275,922 $ 2,585,202,470 881,678,366 935,249,028 19,423,268 848,440,576 (595,729,831) (621,242,404) (173,687,695) $ 2,506,275,922 $ 2,276,319,396 $ 494,402,608 $ 411,881,140 $ 1,862,861,598 $ 953,250,298 647,382,350 35,358,360 1,058,047,578 719,859,176 35,017,173 $ 1,058,047,578 $ 2004-05 SOURCES OTHER FINANCING $ $ 24,224,170 (478,053,741) 3,443,111 175,922,832 7,545,007 24,224,170 133,499,730 133,418,891 3,443,111 $ TOTAL FINANCIAL RESOURCES AVAILABLE 2004-05 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2004-05 85,130,554 (478,053,741) 33,118,452 8,166,387 942,150 85,130,554 169,199,149 181,497,049 33,118,452 53,646,320 259,592,430 89,721,909 863,539,079 1,166,195,607 804,248,561 53,646,320 892,088,014 863,539,079 (651,741,436) (651,741,436) $ 2,797,995,346 $ 2,585,202,470 110,544,374 304,958,101 124,626,605 892,088,014 1,166,195,607 851,324,081 110,544,374 169,199,149 $ 1,166,195,607 $ 1,166,195,607 2004-05 133,499,730 $ IN INTERFUND TRANSFERS * Includes Expenditure/Expense Adjustments Approved in 2003-04 from Schedule E. ** Includes actual amounts as of the date the proposed budget was prepared, adjusted for estimated activity for the remainder of the fiscal year. (1) Amounts in this column represent Fund Balance/Net Asset amounts except for amounts invested in capital assets, net of related debt, and reserved/restricted amounts established as offsets to assets presented for informational purposes (i.e., prepaids, inventory, etc.). General Fund - Override Election Total General Fund Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Funds Available Less: Designation for Future Debt Retirement 7. Total Debt Service Funds 8. Capital Projects Funds 9. Internal Service Funds 10. Enterprise Funds Available 11. Less: Designation for Future Debt Retirement 12. Total Enterprise Funds 13. Eliminations TOTAL ALL FUNDS 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. General Fund FUND ADOPTED FUND BUDGETED ACTUAL BALANCE/ EXPENDITURES/ EXPENDITURES/ NET EXPENSES EXPENSES ASSETS (1) 2003-04* 2003-04** July 1, 2004** ESTIMATED DIRECT REVENUES PROPERTY OTHER THAN PROPERTY TAX REVENUES TAXES 2004-05 2004-05 Primary: 953,250,298 $ 129,782,461 $ 339,882,099 $ 563,031,317 $ Secondary: MARICOPA COUNTY Summary Schedule of Estimated Revenues and Expenditures/Expenses Fiscal Year 2004-05 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule A) Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule B) Maricopa County Summary of Tax Levy and Tax Rate Information Fiscal Year 2004-05 2003-04 FISCAL YEAR 1. 2. 3. Maximum allowable primary property tax levy calculated in accordance with A.R.S. §42-17051(A). $ Amount received from primary property taxation in the 2003-04 fiscal year in excess of the sum of that year’s maximum allowable primary property tax levy. A.R.S. §42-17102(A)(18). $ 320,821,057 $ 346,394,541 308,122,580 $ 339,882,099 Property tax levy amount A. Primary property taxes $ B. Secondary property taxes General Fund-Override election Debt Service Flood Control District Library District Total secondary property taxes $ C. Total property tax levy amounts 4. 2004-05 FISCAL YEAR $ $ 19,234,591 51,153,993 14,316,032 84,704,616 $ 56,334,141 15,664,900 71,999,041 $ 392,827,196 $ 411,881,140 $ 308,122,580 $ 308,122,580 $ 84,704,616 $ 84,704,616 $ 392,827,196 Property taxes collected* A. Primary property taxes (1) 2003-04 year’s levy (2) Prior years' levies (3) Total primary property taxes B. Secondary property taxes (1) 2003-04 year’s levy (2) Prior years' levies (3) Total secondary property taxes C. Total property taxes collected 5. Property tax rates A. County tax rate (1) Primary property tax rate (2) Secondary property tax rates General Fund - Override election Debt Service Flood Control District Library District (3) Total county tax rate 1.2108 1.2108 0.0700 0.2119 0.0521 1.5448 0.2119 0.0521 1.4748 * Includes actual property taxes collected as of the date the proposed budget was prepared, plus estimated property tax collections for the remainder of the fiscal year. 809 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule C) MARICOPA COUNTY Summary by Fund Type of Revenues Other Than Property Taxes Fiscal Year 2004-05 ESTIMATED REVENUES 2003-04 SOURCE OF REVENUES GENERAL FUND Taxes Tax Penalties & Interest Payments in Lieu of Taxes State-Shared Sales Tax State-Shared Vehicle License Tax $ 8,000,000 6,929,684 335,557,376 109,031,008 Licenses and permits Licenses & Permits $ 10,719,338 6,929,684 351,066,532 112,435,814 ESTIMATED REVENUES 2004-05 $ 10,857,480 6,929,684 374,939,056 118,057,605 428,970 1,112,378 1,463,436 7,610,981 9,542,663 8,594,302 Charges for services Charges for Service Patient Service Revenue 19,633,244 52,848 24,725,060 35,858 21,688,915 52,848 Fines and forfeits Fines & Forfeits 10,838,123 11,560,128 12,208,033 Investments Interest Earnings 12,008,440 2,417,347 2,417,347 3,888,497 50,000 3,949,141 5,822,611 Intergovernmental Intergovernmental Miscellaneous Miscellaneous Gain/Loss on Fixed Assets Total General Fund * ACTUAL REVENUES 2003-04* $ 514,029,171 $ 534,493,943 $ 563,031,317 Includes actual revenues recognized on the modified accrual or accrual basis as of the date the proposed budget was prepared, plus estimated revenues for the remainder of the fiscal year. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Road Fund Transportation Total Road Fund $ $ 96,433,380 96,433,380 $ $ 91,382,865 91,382,865 $ $ 98,907,104 98,907,104 Total Health Services Fund $ $ 1,394,471 1,394,471 $ $ 1,470,027 1,470,027 $ $ 1,352,910 1,352,910 $ 385,452,215 $ 380,529,515 $ 400,429,901 $ 483,280,066 $ 473,382,407 $ 500,689,915 $ 24,997,362 5,700,800 30,698,162 $ 22,160,218 5,533,745 27,693,963 $ 4,424,389 5,515,094 9,939,483 Health Services Fund Patient Service Revenue Grants, Misc. Revenue, etc. Total Special Revenue Funds DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Debt Service Stadium District Total Debt Service Funds $ 810 $ $ Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule C- Continued) ESTIMATED REVENUES 2003-04 SOURCE OF REVENUES CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Transportation General Government Stadium District $ Total Capital Projects Funds ENTERPRISE FUNDS Health Plans Health Care Delivery System Solid Waste $ Total Enterprise Funds INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Equipment Services Total Compensation Materials Management Risk Management Telecommunications Communications $ $ 20,806,267 1,009,203 514,135 22,329,605 $ 416,451,178 420,781,968 650,000 837,883,146 $ Total Internal Service Funds $ 8,331,591 37,491,774 903,775 26,686,121 12,723,482 800,490 86,937,233 Total Eliminations Funds $ $ (150,480,789) (137,757,307) TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ ELIMINATIONS FUNDS Eliminations * $ ACTUAL REVENUES 2003-04* 1,837,400,076 $ $ $ 15,254,625 8,259,524 730,431 24,244,580 $ 411,281,000 465,673,726 400,291 877,355,017 $ $ $ 21,445,798 973,622 743,683 23,163,103 381,473,634 466,516,942 450,000 848,440,576 $ $ 8,950,361 42,586,867 1,023,916 26,081,986 13,018,210 623,611 92,284,951 $ 10,192,096 39,364,705 903,775 26,644,669 14,133,393 46,261 91,284,899 $ $ (156,606,546) (143,588,336) $ $ (173,687,695) (173,687,695) $ 1,885,866,525 Includes actual revenues recognized on the modified accrual or accrual basis as of the date the proposed budget was prepared, plus estimated revenues for the remainder of the fiscal year. 811 ESTIMATED REVENUES 2004-05 $ 1,862,861,598 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule D) MARICOPA COUNTY Summary by Fund Type of Other Financing Sources/ and Interfund Transfers Fiscal Year 2004-05 FUND GENERAL FUND Health Care Mandates General Government Appropriated Fund Balance Sheriff's Office Medical Examiner Total General Fund SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Parks & Recreation Recorder Health Plans Stadium District General Government Public Health Emergency Management Community Development Human Services Planning & Development Transportation Library District Appropriated Fund Balance Research & Reporting Solid Waste Environmental Services Animal Care & Control Flood Control District Total Special Revenue Funds DEBT SERVICE FUNDS General Government Stadium District Total Debt Service Funds CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Transportation General Government Stadium District Facilities Flood Control Total Capital Projects Funds ENTERPRISE FUNDS Health Care Delivery System Health Plans Solid Waste Total Enterprise Funds INTERFUND TRANSFERS 2004-05 OTHER FINANCING 2004-05 SOURCES IN $ $ $ 82,972,500 9,955,777 40,571,453 $ $ $ $ 133,499,730 $ 3,592,900 135,602,625 29,859,667 108,571 35,386 169,199,149 $ $ $ 17,000 70,000 $ 17,000 110,000 133,176,891 45,000 1,584,878 $ $ $ 133,418,891 $ $ $ $ 3,443,111 $ $ $ $ 3,443,111 $ $ $ $ $ $ 61,695,868 1,638,390 1,550,137 47,591,538 63,446,899 175,922,832 $ $ $ 15,374,170 8,850,000 $ $ $ $ 24,224,170 $ $ 28,850,000 $ 28,850,000 812 $ 1,732,345 79,169 26,824 744,223 302,287 63,091,909 706,043 47,591,538 31,636 39,654 564,136 606,841 64,378,566 181,497,049 33,008,452 110,000 33,118,452 320,883 7,633,001 212,503 8,166,387 84,993,416 68,556 68,582 85,130,554 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule D - Continued) FUND INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Total Compensation Equipment Services Materials Management Risk Management Telecommunications Total Permanent Funds ELIMINATIONS Stadium District Flood Control District Transportation Parks & Recreation Eliminations Total Permanent Funds INTERFUND TRANSFERS 2004-05 OTHER FINANCING 2004-05 SOURCES $ $ IN $ 7,545,007 $ $ 480,618 34,130 114,652 312,750 942,150 $ $ $ $ $ $ (1,660,137) (63,446,899) (61,695,868) (17,000) (351,233,837) $ (1,660,137) (63,446,899) (61,695,868) (17,000) (351,233,837) $ $ $ (478,053,741) $ (478,053,741) 813 7,545,007 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule E) MARICOPA COUNTY Summary by Department of Expenditures/Expenses Within Each Fund Type Fiscal Year 2004-05 FUND/DEPARTMENT GENERAL FUND Board of Supervisors District 1 $ Board of Supervisors District 2 Board of Supervisors District 3 Board of Supervisors District 4 Board of Supervisors District 5 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Adult Probation Assessor Call Center Emergency Management Clerk of the Superior Court Finance County Attorney County Administrator Elections Human Services Internal Audit Constables Correctional Health Juvenile Probation Medical Examiner Parks & Recreation Human Resources Public Fiduciary Total Compensation Recorder Superintendent of Schools Health Care Mandates Chief Information Officer Treasurer General Government Appropriated Fund Balance Management & Budget Sheriff Public Defender Legal Defender Legal Advocate Contract Counsel Facilities Management Communications Materials Management Animal Care & Control Services Trial Courts Public Health Environmental Services Total General Fund $ ADOPTED BUDGETED EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2003-04 224,756 224,756 224,756 224,756 224,756 450,169 36,018,294 14,765,952 1,325,517 152,182 21,246,744 2,360,213 43,850,402 1,246,200 8,219,888 1,138,980 958,022 1,613,814 5,500,000 11,440,037 3,881,203 1,487,694 2,741,834 1,841,113 1,945,819 1,859,996 1,847,755 335,995,954 4,877,950 3,707,669 241,528,949 137,492,963 1,644,001 37,273,015 27,611,790 5,428,346 4,725,749 9,354,848 15,347,116 51,635 1,244,722 304,041 58,826,583 6,493,512 753,844 1,059,678,295 EXPENDITURE/ EXPENSE ADJUSTMENTS APPROVED 2003-04 $ 13,197 13,192 13,195 13,196 13,195 24,139 7,475,781 766,795 65,340 3,168 1,280,340 141,195 4,669,123 59,615 149,267 (191,774) 62,011 129,008 ACTUAL EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2003-04* $ 210,812 222,396 (373,111) 154,569 98,240 354,393 86,736 100,536 94,415 265,573 170,993 (23,623,953) (2,331,063) 91,902 4,401,079 1,499,708 297,156 248,328 28,097 807,557 80,337 419,154 330,551 34,895 (1,630,717) $ 814 $ 215,305 212,802 221,151 178,425 237,508 441,821 42,776,501 15,027,602 1,295,035 109,579 23,218,005 2,395,163 48,918,105 1,195,893 8,314,425 947,206 960,939 1,738,764 7,537,604 11,361,812 4,187,992 1,110,668 2,536,443 1,951,355 3,093,896 2,065,171 1,803,804 325,384,308 4,901,652 3,750,623 174,901,281 80,467,417 1,717,643 41,722,147 28,612,320 6,024,137 5,476,952 11,947,700 16,291,772 46,275 1,292,653 304,041 58,804,078 6,764,022 788,298 953,250,298 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2004-05 $ $ 249,676 249,676 249,676 249,676 249,676 478,788 45,668,897 15,808,896 1,298,676 155,628 23,181,209 2,532,036 50,280,208 1,358,665 10,494,469 1,787,032 1,035,910 1,780,046 3,461,426 11,832,089 4,189,649 1,271,316 2,872,815 1,983,422 2,649,479 1,991,183 1,984,742 321,129,985 5,208,429 3,952,730 257,853,500 196,689,269 1,762,186 47,355,136 31,100,074 7,021,181 6,383,337 9,384,406 17,333,572 707,968 1,354,842 385,109 61,268,643 6,590,367 1,369,912 1,166,195,607 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule E - Continued) ADOPTED BUDGETED EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2003-04 FUND/DEPARTMENT SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Adult Probation $ Emergency Management Clerk of the Superior Court Community Development County Attorney Human Services Correctional Health Juvenile Probation Medical Examiner Parks & Recreation Recorder Integrated Criminal Justice Info Syste Planning & Development Research & Reporting General Government Appropriated Fund Balance Sheriff Public Defender Legal Defender Legal Advocate Health Plans Transportation Library District Solid Waste Stadium District Flood Control District Facilities Management Animal Care & Control Trial Courts Public Health Environmental Services Total Special Revenue Funds $ DEBT SERVICE FUNDS General Government Stadium District Total Debt Service Funds CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Correctional Health Juvenile Probation General Government Sheriff Transportation Stadium District Flood Control District Facilities Management Total Capital Projects Funds $ $ $ $ 14,234,945 1,352,369 7,721,621 15,857,672 11,131,793 35,032,337 26,848,769 33,778,577 207,614 5,186,269 4,404,146 7,236,337 8,210,846 440,000 35,075,639 105,318,256 102,790,411 1,633,570 78,974 10,416 1,957,636 105,638,136 12,612,786 3,435,232 3,581,308 79,805,243 7,961,869 11,650,518 48,514,622 18,080,672 709,788,583 EXPENDITURE/ EXPENSE ADJUSTMENTS APPROVED 2003-04 $ (5) 516 (6) ACTUAL EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2003-04* $ 1,223,119 (193) 3,528,801 3,225,531 59,431 20 (5) 115,753 2,293,071 1 (22,418,988) 1,204,587 12,816,708 260,016 2 1 (7) 4,954,829 6 (4) 735,016 1,152,255 22,139 6 (103,714) 1,001,707 10,070,593 $ $ 29,892,079 5,125,094 35,017,173 $ $ $ $ 156,499 781,398 66,780,896 1,705,371 77,457,228 407,135 54,000,000 118,425,196 319,713,723 $ 244 (1) 2,576,064 (58,000) (2) 2,518,305 $ 815 $ $ BUDGETED EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2004-05 13,494,452 1,003,222 6,955,320 13,247,987 12,526,950 35,032,337 35,658,454 34,405,795 267,045 4,620,657 4,168,499 5,505,472 8,784,407 354,178 5,154,324 57,520,576 112,950,646 1,700,382 78,622 12,907 1,957,636 104,448,546 17,834,213 2,615,542 4,499,046 80,463,083 1,140,147 8,121,391 9,694,628 44,489,070 18,676,816 647,382,350 $ 30,204,361 5,153,999 35,358,360 $ 156,091 705,253 29,035,240 1,477,710 55,865,855 353,935 52,644,000 98,722,179 238,960,263 $ $ $ $ 13,919,776 1,383,361 6,635,620 16,033,276 12,802,876 37,977,848 37,354,956 41,445,767 267,045 4,503,514 5,608,218 5,435,481 11,109,948 440,000 53,791,889 95,038,389 134,479,034 2,577,598 84,403 16,310 114,676,951 16,345,796 3,419,169 3,579,003 91,003,439 5,467,329 8,721,270 15,632,663 43,197,451 21,300,181 804,248,561 48,131,226 5,515,094 53,646,320 158,037 392,535 89,391,467 865,343 77,959,051 3,000 52,076,503 38,746,494 259,592,430 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Attachments State of Arizona Auditor General Forms (Schedule E - Continued) ADOPTED BUDGETED EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2003-04 FUND/DEPARTMENT ENTERPRISE FUNDS Health Plans Solid Waste Health Care Delivery System Total Enterprise Funds INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Total Compensation Communications Materials Management Equipment Services Risk Management Telecommunications Total Internal Service Funds ELIMINATIONS FUNDS Parks & Recreation Transportation Stadium District Flood Control District Health Care Delivery System Eliminations Total Eliminations Funds TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ $ $ $ $ $ $ EXPENDITURE/ EXPENSE ADJUSTMENTS APPROVED 2003-04 424,123,055 900,000 452,165,681 877,188,736 $ 37,620,713 720,441 834,991 8,171,022 25,609,802 12,214,470 85,171,439 $ (17,000) (57,000,000) (1,594,274) (54,000,000) (89,604,508) (389,716,225) (591,932,007) $ 2,494,625,942 ACTUAL EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2003-04* 2,276,332 329 2,212,969 4,489,630 $ $ $ $ (8) (3) 9 (7) 2 (7) $ $ $ $ (3,797,824) (3,797,824) $ $ 11,649,980 $ 468,466,248 660,388 466,122,392 935,249,028 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES/ EXPENSES 2004-05 $ $ 39,193,277 675,721 783,653 8,976,364 25,562,088 12,170,398 87,361,502 $ (25,000) (57,000,000) (1,287,657) (52,644,000) (70,100,269) (440,185,478) (621,242,404) $ 2,276,319,396 $ $ $ 388,133,556 993,253 474,412,270 863,539,079 39,364,705 46,261 832,015 9,751,777 26,070,716 13,656,435 89,721,909 (17,000) (61,695,868) (1,660,137) (63,446,899) (82,891,840) (442,029,692) (651,741,436) 2,585,202,470 * Includes actual expenditures/expenses recognized on the modified accrual or accrual basis as of the date the proposed budget was prepared, plus estimated expenditures/expenses for the remainder of the fiscal year. 816 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Glossary Glossary Activity: A set of services grouped together around a common purpose or result. AHCCCS: Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System. ALTCS: Arizona Long Term Care System. Balanced Budget: An annual budget in which expenditures or uses do not exceed available resources. Must take into account current year spending as well as future spending obligations. Base Level Internal Service Charge: A base-level, fixed charge that is required by all agencies for normal business operations that cannot be controlled directly by department management. As an example, Telecommunications provides base-level services that include phone line administration, 506 and 372 exchange, voice mail, transmission systems, etc. Base Level Request: An initial fiscal year’s budget amount, with adjustments for program changes, grants, departmental realignment, changes approved by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and annualized costs for previously funded budget issues (initiatives). A department’s base budget request must be within the budget target provided. Baseline: An established level of previous or current performance that could be used to set improvement goals and provide a comparison for assessing future progress. Benchmarking: A continuous process of collecting information on internal or external standards, processes, and/or best practices, evaluating why they are successful and applying what is learned. Budgeting for Results: A budgeting strategy where decisions are based on or informed by performance information that describes the cost or efficiency of producing an activity and the results achieved for customers— those whose best interests are served by or who receive or use the products or services of a department or program. This is accomplished by structuring the accounting and budgeting systems according to the structure of departments' strategic plans. Note: Accountability is at the heart of Budgeting for Results—County Government is willing and able to tell taxpayers what they are getting for their money in terms of results for customers. Capital Budget: The first year of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Capital Improvement Program (CIP): A five-year plan of capital improvement projects that outlines project costs, funding sources and future operating costs associated with each capital improvement. Capital Improvement Project: A major, nonrecurring expenditure of $150,000 or more used to expand or improve the County’s physical assets, including land, facilities and infrastructure. Capital improvement projects generally result in new facilities with expected life spans of many years, in substantial extension of the useful life and monetary value of existing facilities, or in increases to the existing “footprint” of a building. Capital improvement projects generally span two or more years. Note: Separate and distinct new facilities should be budgeted as discrete projects. Portions of new facilities should be included in the overall project budget for the overall facility. Capital Outlay: An expenditure from a department operating budget for the acquisition of, or addition to, a fixed asset. A fixed asset is an item that costs $5,000 or more and has a useful life of at least one year. Fixed assets with costs over $5,000 should be budgeted and itemized in the capital object codes (900 series). Capital Projects Fund: A fund established to account for the proceeds of bond issues and other resources for the acquisition, construction or reconstruction of major capital facilities. Carryover Funding: An amount budgeted for FY 2002-03 to pay for a capital expenditure budgeted for FY 200102 for which an obligation has been incurred that cannot be paid by June 30, 2002. Note: Carryover items should be identified in the base budget submission. Central Services Cost Allocation Plan: An allocation of General Fund Central Service departments costs (i.e. human resources, internal audit) to all non-General Fund departments through a consistent, logical methodology in proportion to the service or benefit received. 817 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Glossary COP’s (Certificates of Participation): A method of structuring and securitizing lease payments to investors by dividing the lease payments into fractionalized interests or shares for individual sale to investors. A formal certificate represents each share, much like a bond. However, unlike bonds, COPs are typically subject to annual appropriation and do not represent a “debt” of the issuer or other lessor, but rather a proportionate interest in a flow of lease payments that are pledged to a trust. County: Maricopa County government. DCA: Deputy County Administrator. Debt Service Fund: A fund used to account for the accumulation of resources for and payment of general obligation, special assessment, and stadium district bond principal and interest. Demand Measure: A measure of the number of total units of service or product anticipated to be demanded or needed by the customer. Examples include, number of residents eligible for job training or number of building inspection applications received. Department: An organizational unit headed by a director or elected official. In terms of financial structure, departments can have multiple funding sources, (i.e. general fund, special revenue etc.) that are based on specified uses. The combination of the various funds are consolidated at the department level. Discretionary Internal Service Charge: A charge for a service above the base service level that can be controlled at the discretion of the requesting department, such as fuel use, motor pool, reprographic services, long distance, cellular phones, pagers, telecom work orders. Econometrics: A forecasting method that captures the behavioral relationships of many variables (called explanatory variables) on the variable being forecast. The method applies regression analysis to historical data to determine the marginal impact of the explanatory variable. Typically, the explanatory variables are related to the demography or economy of the community. Efficiency Measure: A performance measure that measures the average activity cost per output or result. Examples include cost per participant served or cost per building inspection completed within seventy-two hours. Eliminations: Eliminations are included in the budget to offset amounts budgeted as expenditures in one fund that are associated with offsetting revenues and expenditures in another fund. Interdepartmental charges from the Reprographics (print shop) fund to various County departments are one example. Departments pay the print shop for services, and these costs are included in departments’ budgeted expenditures, supported by revenues from sources external to the County. The print shop, in turn, budgets these payments as revenue, along with expenditures related to the cost of providing printing services. Enterprise Fund: A fund used to account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private enterprises where the intent of the County is that the costs of providing goods and services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed through user charges. This allows for the evaluation of these funds on the same basis as investor-owned enterprises in the same industry. Environmental Assessment: An analysis of the internal and external trends and issues that will have a major impact on the department and its customers over the next two to five years. Issue statements summarize the trends and the impact on the department. The environmental assessment is based on data-based information and reasoned professional judgment that describes changes anticipated both from inside and outside the department. Family of Measures: A set of the four categories of performance measures that are used to measure the performance of an activity. The categories of measure are result, output, demand and efficiency. Full Time Equivalent (FTE): A value equivalent to a number of employees paid full time (forty hours per week, or from 2,080 to 2,096 hours per year, depending on the calendar). A half-time position that is paid 20 hours per week equates to .5 FTE; four half-time positions, each paid for 20 hours per week, equals 2.0 FTE, and so on. A single position may have an FTE value greater than zero, but not greater than 1.0. A group of positions has an aggregate FTE value based on the FTE values of the specific positions within the group. Fund: A fund is used to account for revenues and expenditures with a specified purpose. Fund Balance/Equity: An amount comprised of accumulated excess or deficiency of revenues less expenditures of a fund. This is measured at the beginning or end of a fiscal year. 818 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Glossary GAAP: Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. General Fund: A fund accounting for all financial resources of the County, except those required to be accounted for in other funds, and serves as the County’s primary operating fund. GO Bond: General Obligation Bonds are approved by a majority of Maricopa County residents that are sold to raise funding for capital expenditures. Funding for repayment is provided by the County’s secondary debt service property tax levy. Indirect Cost: A cost that is necessary for the functioning of the organization as a whole, but which cannot be directly assigned to one service. The central service cost allocation is an example of the allocation of indirect costs. Input: A volume of resources used to provide an activity. Inputs are typically stated in terms of dollars or hours, but are sometimes stated in terms of people or material resources. Internal Charge: A cost billed to one County department by another County department for base level or discretionary services provided. ISF (Internal Service Fund): A proprietary fund that accounts for the financing of goods or services provided by one department to other departments on a cost-reimbursement basis like a business. Issue Statement: A summary statement of an issue and trend that will have a major impact on the department and its customers over the next two to five years. Issue statements include what that impact will be and are the products of the environmental assessment phase in strategic planning. Key Result Measure: A performance measure that is directly related to the program purpose statement and measures the impact that a program had on citizens/customers. Major Maintenance: A category of non-routine projects comprised of major maintenance or upgrades to facilities and/or equipment that will achieve demonstrable savings in operational cost, extend the useful life of assets, or achieve at least ten percent savings in current energy consumption. Each project cost must exceed $20,000 for it to be classified as a major maintenance item. Examples of Major Maintenance projects include replacing heating, ventilation, and cooling (HVAC) systems, replacing roofs, repairing building exteriors, retrofitting light fixtures, installing variable drive fan motors, installing energy management systems, etc. Maintenance projects costing less than $20,000 will be treated as Facilities base-level or discretionary services, and charged accordingly (refer to Internal Charges section). Mandate: A program that meets constitutional, statutory or court-ordered requirements from either Federal or State entities. MCSO: Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. MFR (Managing for Results): A systemic approach to management decision-making, resource allocation, and accountability for results. It includes an integrated system of processes: Planning for Results, Budgeting for Results, Delivering Services and Collecting Data, Reporting Results, Evaluating Results, and Decision Making. MHP: Maricopa Health Plans. MHS: Maricopa Health System or Maricopa Health Delivery System. MIHS: Maricopa Integrated Health System. Mission: A clear, concise statement of purpose for the entire department. The mission focuses on the broad, yet distinct, results the department will achieve for its customers. MMC: Maricopa Medical Center. MOE: Maintenance of Effort. Maintaining funding of maintenance and operational expenditures, including detention personnel compensation, employee related expenses, utility expenses of the facility, costs of food and care of prisoners, administrative support costs and costs of maintaining and repairing the facility and grounds, at a level before the voter approved detention excise tax. Object Code: Identifies the balance sheet account (assets, liabilities, or fund equity), revenue source, or expenditure/expense type (e.g., cash, accounts payable, real property taxes, salaries and wages). 819 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Glossary OMB: Office of Management and Budget. Org: A level two budget under the budget org. This usually denotes a unit under the division. Example of a departmental budget structure: Department 110 Adult Probation Budget Org (level 1) 1100 Administration Services " Org (level 2) 1101 Department Administration Output Measure: A performance measure that measures the number of units produced. Examples include number of participants enrolled in job training courses or number of building inspections completed. PCN: A position control number assigned to a position. Performance Measure: An on-going, quantitative indicator of resources consumed, workload, productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness. Performance measures should relate directly to objectives and allow for measurement of the same thing over a period of time. (See Family of Measures) Personal Services: A category of expenditures within the budget that includes salaries, benefits, temporary help, special pay, overtime, and salary adjustments. Personal Services Allocation – Out (-In): An object code (795 or 796) used to record payroll expenditures that will be charged/credited to a department for work performed on a special assignment basis. The department providing the personal services will record the expenditure as a credit and the receiving department will record the expenditure as a debit. Personnel Savings: A savings normally realized when positions are vacant or employees are paid at lower rate than budgeted. Object code 701, sub-line “Regular Pay Personnel Savings” and object code 750 sub-line “Benefits Personnel Savings” are provided to recognize expenditure. This reduction (negative) to the personal services budget allows the department to use these budget dollars to fund other items. Position: A specific employment, whether occupied or vacant, involving duties requiring the services of one person. A position may be full or part-time as reflected in the FTE value. Program: A set of activities that have a common purpose or result. Programs provide operational and performance information for strategic decision making. Restatement: A budgetary transfer which provides for a specific increase for programs or expenditures in one department with a corresponding decrease in other programs and expenditures in another department for a net impact of zero (or less). Result Measure: A performance measure that measures the impact or benefit that customers experience as a consequence of receiving a department’s services, stated as a percentage or rate. Examples include percentage of job trainees who had jobs for six months or longer or percentage of building inspections completed within seventy-two hours. Results Initiative: A request for funding above the budget base to support a program, activity and strategic goal identified in the strategic planning process. Results initiatives address mandates, demands for service caused by demographic changes, new programs, or expansion of existing programs. Results initiatives must clearly relate to the department’s mission and be supported by relevant performance measures. Service: A service is the deliverable or product that the customer receives from a department. Services are described as nouns, not verbs, thus defining services in terms of what the customer receives rather than in terms of what the department does. Special Revenue Fund: A fund that accounts for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than major capital projects) that is legally restricted to specific purpose expenditures. Strategic Goal: A strategic goal translates resources into significant results to be achieved over the next two to five years, providing the basis for evaluating the department as a whole. 820 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Glossary Strategic Plan: A strategic plan sets forth the purpose, strategic goals, operational organization, and performance expectations for a department. The strategic plan provides information to department staff, corporate decision makers, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and the public about how the department is organized to deliver results and what results the department is accountable for achieving. The plan provides the opportunity for all department staff to see how they contribute at all levels in the organization. Sub-object Code: Identifies detailed balance sheet account, revenue source, or expenditure/expense type (e.g., cash on hand, current real property taxes, overtime wages). Supplies and Services: A category of expenditures within the budget for all standard costs of daily operations, including such items as office supplies, rent, contractual services, and travel. Technology Results Initiative: A results initiative for technology expenditures for more than $20,000 or that are above a department’s base budget for new or improved technology systems or for maintaining existing information technology systems. Trend: A documented recurrence of a measurable event or circumstance over time that is increasing, decreasing or even staying the same. The size of the number of occurrences often determines whether the recurrences constitute a trend. If the number of recurrences is very small, such as number of floods in a year, it may take a number of years to document a trend in one direction or another. While a large number of events or occurrences, such as the number of court cases of a particular type, may reveal a trend within months or a few of years. 821 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Glossary 822 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Acknowledgements Acknowledgements The Fiscal Year Maricopa County 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies was made possible with the help of many dedicated individuals. Most importantly, the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrative Officer for providing the policy guidance and leadership that is the backbone of the budget process. Thanks must also be given to the Elected Officials, Deputy County Administrator, Chief Officers and Department Directors and Managers for their cooperation during this past year. This document could not have been produced without the conscientious and creative efforts of the entire staff of the Office of Management and Budget whose members include, Lee Ann Bohn, Chris Bradley, Don Colvin, Frances Delgado, Neeraj Deshpande, Nadia Feeser, Daren Frank, Cindy Goelz, Brian Hushek, Lisa Johnson, Heather Kettering, Vickie Mouland, Jack Patton, Ernie Prindle, Scott Rothe, Jamie Rullo, Don Tellis, Dexter Thomas, Maria Tutelman, Sharon Walker, Victor Wickersham, Sandi Wilson and Ryan Wimmer. We would also like to thank Derek Neighbors and David Hill of the Administrative Technology Center who have spent many hours working to provide us the schedules for this document. With the Board’s approval of the FY 2004-05 Budget on July 12, 2004, and the corresponding tax rates on August 16, 2004, we start down the path of developing the FY 2005-06 Budget. 823 Maricopa County, Arizona FY 2004-05 Annual Business Strategies Acknowledgements 824