FINANCE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL
CITY
HALL,
BUDGET
WORK SESSION
6:00
P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER. Mr. Sauer opened the Budget Work Session at 6:00
P.M., with roll call as follows: Mr.
Blair, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Barletta, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Sauer were present. Mr. Wisniewski arrived at 6:10 P.M. Mrs. Sanders was absent. Others present were: Bill Vance, Lynda Yartin,
Mr. Sauer stated prior to beginning the agenda he would like to call for an Executive session. Mr. Sauer moved for Executive Session under Section 121.22(G)(1), Matters involving an employee or public official’s employment; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Fix, Mr. Blair, Mr. Barletta, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yes.” Motion passed, 5-0.
Finance Committee adjourned into Executive Session at 6:03 P.M., and reconvened in open session at 6:45 P.M.
2. SCHEDULED MATTERS:
A. Review of proposed 2012 Budget for:
(1) Police Department. Mr. Vance requested Chief Taylor summarize for the Committee his proposals for 2012. Chief Taylor stated the biggest change would be his vehicle change. He stated he currently has 17 vehicles and he proposes to trade in six vehicles to get three new vehicles. Mr. Blair asked Chief Taylor to clarify what he was trading in to get three patrol vehicles. Chief Taylor stated he would be trading in six patrol vehicles. Mr. Blair stated he had spoken to the Chief and Commander Delp about a new car that is made specifically just for law enforcement vehicles. He stated it is run by diesel and gets about 28-30 miles per gallon. Mr. Blair stated there is a waiting list of about two years for these cars and they cost about $35,000, however, if you can double the life expectancy on the car as well as triple the mileage he felt it was worth exploring and potentially getting on the wait list for one of these cars to put it on a test run. He stated as they are specifically built for law enforcement they come pre-equipped and he would like to see the Chief at least get on the waiting list for one of these cars to add it to the fleet in future years. Commander Delp stated he had looked into these vehicles and they are supposedly guaranteed to go for 250,000 miles and the lights and everything are incorporated into the body of the vehicle so there would be no exterior lighting; it comes in one complete package. Chief Taylor stated although the costs sounds a little high up front, but by the time we get a regular car and pay our company to put the lights, etc., on the car it would come close to the same cost. He stated further to have the lights incorporated in the car and with a longer life expectancy and better mileage he felt it was well worth looking into. Mr. Sauer determined the Committee would like Chief Taylor to look into this and bring information back to the Committee. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that Chief Taylor did not have a problem with reducing his fleet by three vehicles. Mr. Blair inquired if any of the vehicles being traded in would be salvageable to the point it could be unstrapped and given to City Hall as a utility car they can use and Chief Taylor stated he did not think so as they had very high mileage.
With regard to staffing Chief Taylor stated he intends to promote one sergeant to commander, leave one sergeant position vacant, and have an additional replacement officer. Mr. Wisniewski clarified this meant there would be one less supervisor on the road for a couple of days a week and Chief Taylor stated he felt he could handle that. Mr. Vance stated we would reassess this throughout 2012 as needed to identify any situations Council would need to be made aware of. Mrs. Hammond stated then to clarify we would promote one person to commander and hire one replacement officer. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that a replacement hire would not be an additional officer hired. Mr. Fix clarified that the five-year plan identified hiring an additional officer in 2012 and 2014; one in each of those years, and that is included in the budget they were working on. Mr. Schornack stated if we had the replacement officer and no new hire in 2012 the police budget could be reduced by about $100,000. Mr. Sauer stated then to summarize we would not be filling the sergeant position and we would be hiring one replacement officer hired for the street and we would review this as the year goes on. Mr. Schornack stated the budget in front of the Committee includes the replacement officer as well as one new officer. He stated the Chief is proposing replacing the sergeant being promoted to commander with an officer on the street, leaving the sergeant position vacant, and not hiring an additional officer this year. Mr. Schornack stated then the officer forecast for 2012 would be removed from this budget and $100,000 less would be transferred from the General Fund. Mr. Fix stated then the proposed police budget for 2012 is $4.38 million and by not hiring the additional officer $100,000 would be removed from that. Mr. Schornack stated that was correct. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would rather leave the budget as it is with the replacement officer and one new officer. Mr. Sauer stated the goal was to add an additional officer on the street and keep the budget at a 3.5 percent growth. He stated Council could then monitor and review that and if that needed to be adjusted it could be done. Mr. Sauer stated with the Chief’s proposal we would be adding one officer to the street. Mr. Blair stated that also speaks to the performance audit that indicated we were understaffed in terms of patrol officers. Mr. Vance stated he had also discussed with the Chief that he might come back in 2013 with a request for that additional officer to be added in 2013.
Mr. Wisniewski stated he felt the police audit made the case that we should add another officer to the street and have one additional officer on the street. Mr. Sauer stated he understood Mr. Wisniewski’s point of view and he felt we were moving in that direction by reducing the sergeant and adding the officer. Mr. Fix stated our five year forecast was to add two officers by 2014. He stated our crime rates aren’t going up and Chief Taylor is happy with the proposal so he felt we should leave it as it is and add an additional officer either half-way through 2012 if the situation warrants it or in 2013 and 2014 according to the five year plan. Mrs. Hammond stated she would agree that we should wait until at least half-way through 2012 and then reconsider this issue.
Chief Taylor stated he would like to request his Travel and Transportation category be increased to $4,000 to allow personnel to attend the FBI training as we have not sent anyone to that in about seven years. There were no objections to increasing that category.
Mr. Wisniewski clarified the police department had spent approximately $12,000 for overtime for the police department for the Violet Festival. Mr. Wisniewski stated he thought that was more than was agreed on and Mr. Vance stated what was agreed on was the City Manager was given a budget to work within and if additional sums were needed that money had to be found somewhere else within the budget, without increasing the budget, but within the budget. Mr. Wisniewski stated he understood that, but he felt that was a lot more than was anticipated. Mr. Vance stated from his perspective this Violet Festival, as far as public safety concerns and services, ran so much better than the first one he had witnessed because the Chief had the additional personnel to take care of answering calls in the City and to keep the public safe at the Festival.
Mrs. Hammond stated for clarification the travel and transportation category was increased to a total of $4,000.
Mr. Schornack stated he would like to review the Land and Buildings proposed budget before moving on to the unfunded list. Mr. Vannatta stated we do have a roof concern at City Hall. He stated when the roof was reshingled about four years ago they did not put any ice guard down in the valleys. He stated with the recent rain we experienced some leaks in this building and he has received some quotes to get the valleys reworked, new soil boots, and flashing repaired. Mr. Schornack stated he had put an additional $12,000 in the budget to do this roof but he was requesting to bring this appropriation to Finance next month and try to get that done this year. Mr. Fix inquired if we have the money in this year’s budget to do this and Mr. Schornack stated he could move money to get it done this year and if everyone was okay with that he would reduce this from the proposed budget. He stated should he need more money he would ask for an appropriation in November. It was everyone’s opinion this should be done this year if possible. Mr. Schornack stated he would reduce the proposed budget by $12,500 in the appropriate category. Mr. Vannatta stated with regard to the Carnegie building we started some work on the building and the Township donated $5,000 toward that work and they are proposing to donate another $5,000 next year. Mr. Vannatta stated we have about $24,000 worth of restoration work that still needs to be done, as well as painting the lower level. Mr. Barletta stated the food pantry will be moving out of the Carnegie building into a new facility as soon as the construction is done. Mr. Fix questioned if some of this work could wait and Mr. Sauer stated since the problems are structural or the result of water damage, if we wait to make the repairs we may not have the building. Mrs. Hammond stated we have already repaired the steps and repointed the bricks. Mr. Vannatta stated the lentils on the second story windows on the backside were rusted through. Mr. Wisniewski clarified that for 2012 we have mortar joints in the brick exterior that need to be cut and refilled with new mortar and that is estimated at $8,485, repair masonry on the southeast wall area is $2,217, and then we need to power wash the building and put a sealant on the whole building. Mr. Sauer clarified the cost of the sealant was $3,900 and power wash is $9,780. Mr. Vannatta stated these would be the final steps in the restoration projects we had identified. Mr. Schornack clarified the power wash was not just water; it contained a chemical to preserve the brick prior to sealing it. Mr. Barletta clarified the floor replacement in the food pantry was not included in this budget. Mr. Barletta stated that carpet has to be replaced when the food pantry leaves. Mrs. Hammond stated the building is used by the Historical Society and we might be able to use it for recreational programs once the food pantry has moved. Mr. Sauer stated he felt this building was a landmark in the community and it should be preserved. Mrs. Hammond stated she would assume that most of this work has not been done for the first hundred years of its existence and if we do it now it should take care of it for quite some time. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would say the brick and mortar and masonry be done this year, and the remainder in the next year. Mr. Fix stated he would suggest we perhaps explore a public/private partnership to raise funds for the upkeep of this building. He stated his concern was this would turn into a money pit where every year something else needs to be done because it is a 100 year old building. He further stated he understands this building has an historic value to this community. Mr. Barletta stated he agreed with Mr. Sauer we should take care of this building and the reason this looks like a money pit is because we neglected it for probably 50 years. He stated we should fix it and put more money in so we can replace that carpet in the basement area. Mrs. Hammond stated she felt once the food pantry moves out we will have to look at the basement as a totally separate thing and see what it actually needs. Mr. Wisniewski stated if we are going to put more money into it, then we need to decrease somewhere else and not just keep increasing the budget across the board. Mr. Sauer stated he would like to know where everyone stands on the Carnegie building. Mrs. Hammond stated we own the building and it does have historical value and she felt it could be used in ways other than which it is being used and we could get more value out of it. She stated she did feel we need to maintain it. Mrs. Hammond stated she would definitely support the first two projects and if we can do all four of them so we shouldn’t have to be putting a large amount of money into it for a considerable time to come. Mr. Fix stated he would support doing all four projects this year and then after that he did not see putting a lot more money for it. Mr. Wisniewski stated he would support the first two projects. Mr. Blair stated he also felt this could be a money pit, but we have done so much on it he could not see stopping now. He stated he would support doing the four projects and then be done with it. Mr. Barletta and Mr. Sauer stated they would also support doing all four projects and completing the building.
Mr. Wisniewski stated he would like to discuss doing a performance audit on the city however he had to leave shortly. Mr. Sauer stated he would like to have a discussion regarding a performance audit for the City added to the next Finance Committee agenda.
Mr. Blair questioned the $8,000 included in the budget for banners, decorations, and flags since $5,000 was spent in 2011. Mr. Vannatta stated these are additional decorations for the downtown area. Mr. Blair stated he would recommend this be zeroed out since $5,000 was spent already. Mrs. Hammond stated she concurred with Mr. Blair on this issue. Mr. Fix and Mr. Sauer stated they agreed this should be zeroed out and if something is needed during the year it would be considered at that time.
Mr. Blair stated landscape supplies are also included in this category and he questioned if there was not some way all of the landscape costs could be put in one area rather than have them included in each individual fund. Mr. Schornack stated it depends on where it is located as to who is going to pay for it. Mr. Blair stated it just seemed like if one department is doing the work, it should be under one department. He stated he assumed our service workers were the ones doing it. Mr. Fix stated he understood it would be paid for from various funds for accounting purposes, but it seemed it would be nice to know as they are going through the budget process what the total cost was for landscaping. Mr. Schornack stated as he understood it Mr. Blair would like to see all of the line items together so they can see them all in one area, and Mr. Blair stated that was correct. Mr. Schornack stated Mr. Drobina did have some clarification on the landscaping issues that were discussed at the last work session.
The Budget Work Session recessed at 7:50 P.M. and reconvened in open session at 8:00 P.M.
Mr. Sauer stated there were several issues from the last Budget Work Session that they had requested additional information on and if there were no objections he would take those items at this time.
Mr. Schornack stated with regard to the pool, the budget was revised slightly based on some of the recommendations at the last work session. He stated more information has come to light about some of the ADA requirements and one suggestion was to come up with a formula on what is necessary to operate the pool and what is not. Mr. Schornack stated there were a couple of maintenance items such as painting and power washing the pool this year that are included in this year’s budget, and the net change in fund balance demonstrates that the pool would probably bring in $32,000 if we can keep the revenues consistent with the current year. He stated we also showed some debt to be taken out to do the pool improvements and we have a payment of $40,000 a year in 2013 and 2014, so he felt we could do about $30,000 to $40,000 of profit a year to help pay down a note or some other type of borrowing. He stated another recommendation was to advance money from the General Fund and pay back the General Fund without paying interest on it, so we would pay down that $30,000 to $40,000 that we make annually would be advanced back to the General Fund to pay it back. Mr. Schornack stated the two ADA compliant items that need to be discussed is fixing the baby pool and the lifts for the regular pool and we have had someone look at this and while he hasn’t given us his final quote, it looks like it would be close to $150,000 to $175,000. He stated he has also spoken to our legal counsel and one of the stipulations you can try to argue is that this is a financial burden, however, that doesn’t work very well with cities according to our law director. Mr. Sauer clarified that the baby pool is eight inches deep and for that pool we need to have a zero depth entry. Mrs. Hammond stated it just does not make sense because if this is a baby pool one would assume there would be a parent there lifting the baby into the pool. Ms Medinger stated we need to be able to remove the barrier so a wheelchair can be wheeled into the pool. Mrs. Hammond stated if it is only eight inches deep and you are in a wheelchair you would not even be in the water. Mrs. Hammond stated ADA requirements are supposed to make things reasonable, and this is not reasonable. Ms Medinger stated we could not do a lift because we do not have two feet of water. Mr. Blair inquired if we could just close the baby pool and Mr. Schornack stated we could do that, but we would risk a lot of patrons leaving. Mr. Blair stated the options appeared to either meet the ADA requirements or close the baby pool, and Mr. Schornack stated that was correct and we needed to decide tonight. Mr. Sabatino stated as someone suggested maybe we should close it down and sell the land because we are looking at putting a whole lot of money into something where you will never recoup all the expenses. Mr. Fix stated he would suggest a plan be created to deal with the baby pool issue and when forced to evaluate whether or not we will enact that plan, but not until we are forced to. Mr. Barletta stated he did not know if he would support that idea because part of being a City and having a recreation department is having these facilities. He stated whether or not we like it or not, the law is the law and they are sworn to uphold it. He stated if we are going to have a baby pool he did not see there was any choice but to do this. Mr. Sauer stated they were looking at $190,000 and he asked Mr. Schornack to explain how we would budget this, finance this and pay for it out of the aquatic fund and not touch the general fund. Mr. Schornack stated he could not promise that at some point we would not have to touch the general fund. He stated there are two options, we can advance the $190,000 from the general fund and pay it back over a period of time as the profits come in. He stated the second option was to take out a note for aquatic improvements, but it would have to be backed by the general fund money. He stated at some point in time if the profits and the memberships go down, something will have to pay down that note. Mr. Fix clarified that other cities with older pools are in the same boat. Ms Medinger stated the other two pools in this area are private pools so the ADA requirements are different than for a public pool, and Groveport has a newer facility so they already meet the ADA requirements. Mrs. Hammond stated from the information provided it also appeared that our diving board is not safe to use and the slide does not work either, so she felt we needed to look at a slightly bigger picture. Mrs. Hammond stated she felt we need to find a way to make this work or do away with it altogether. Mr. Fix stated we spent $2 million putting in an RO system at the water plant because the EPA was worried about us killing fish and now the ADA is saying we need to put a ramp into an eight inch pool and that does not make sense. He stated he could not support spending $200,000 on this when that could be four or five police officers. He stated he felt we needed to find an alternative way, we need to fight against the machine and say we were not going to do it because it just doesn’t make any sense. He stated maybe we need to look at a private entity we can sell it to or something. Mr. Schweitzer stated perhaps looking into sponsorship opportunities might help pay for this work. Mr. Sabatino stated he agreed that might be a good idea, but he felt the threshold here was too high. Mr. Sabatino stated when purchasing this pool was discussed part of the agreement was that we would never use general fund money for the operation of the pool. Mr. Blair stated he agreed with Mrs. Hammond that we were not in this to make money, but we were also not in it to lose a lot of money either. Mr. Blair stated he did not see how the money would be recouped and he felt we would just continually be making repairs on the pool so he just did not see how a note could be paid off without paying it out of the general fund. Mr. Blair stated he was fine with turning the pool over to a private entity, but he could not support spending any money of this nature on this pool. Mr. Barletta stated he was surprised when the City bought this pool, but now we have it and it is a part of recreation facilities that we offer the public, and he cannot see doing away with it. He stated he could see filling in the baby pool and trying to find some other option such as a splash pad or something. He stated he would like to look for compromises such as that rather than getting out of the pool business completely and maybe we can be a little creative with what we do and make it a win-win situation. Mr. Sauer stated he agreed with Mr. Sabatino that when the pool was purchased they said they would not spend any money out of the general fund and they wouldn’t put anything on the general fund to fund anything. He stated that was the promise that was made and he will live by that promise. Mr. Sauer stated if we want to offer a pool to our community we all know we have a park impact fee fund that is growing so he did not know why we could not build a new pool in a different location, and if we did fill this pool in or close this pool you would make something off of the land you sell and you could take that money and put it towards a down payment toward the facility you are building. He stated in that case you would be building an updated facility with all the bells and whistles and all the ADA compliance, and you can tailor it however you want and pay for it that way instead of continually trying to fix an old pool. Mrs. Hammond clarified we get about $120,000 annually in park impact fees. Mr. Schornack stated we can pass a budget for operational purposes and leave the capital out and he will talk with our attorney more and see where we can go with this. Mr. Sauer stated he felt it was a reasonable solution to pass the operating funding now leaving out all the improvements and see what our options are. Mr. Barletta stated closing the baby pool would at least cut our expense, but we have a pool and we have ADA requirements that we didn’t see coming. Mr. Sauer stated that is exactly why the commitment was made that this would not dip into general fund revenues because some council members at that time figured that eventually it would become what it has become. He stated they were guaranteed that when and if that day ever approached that this was a discussion that would take place and the discussion to close it would be a very real one. Mr. Fix stated he concurred that it was stated at that time that if it ever got to be a financial burden it could always be closed and we could sell the land because it is somewhat valuable land. Mr. Schornack stated he would contact the law director and try to get more information on where we can go with this and bring that back to Finance Committee. Mr. Sauer stated then we would leave the funding for the operations and any improvements will be discussed at Finance and if it can’t be resolved at Finance it is something that can be amended next year. Mr. Schornack stated we won’t start selling memberships until February so we need to have resolution before February. Mr. Sauer requested this issue be added to the agenda for the next Finance Committee meeting. Mr. Sabatino stated he felt a logical approach might be to take a look at what the cost of filling in the baby pool would be and see how it impacts your revenue.
Mr. Drobina stated he would address the issues raised at the last work session regarding the $8,000 budgeted for landscaping in the street department budget. He stated this past year he spent $4,409 for flowers and mulch and the plan was to expand the hanging baskets every year, and we did 20 last year. He stated if he were to do 35 baskets he would need to purchase 15 additional brackets for the light poles and do the same amount of mulch it would cost $7,856. He stated if we want to keep everything the same, the budget can be cut down to a little over $3,500. Mr. Blair stated he was fine with keeping it the same and Mr. Barletta stated keeping it the same would leave money for other things. Mr. Drobina stated he was fine with that and Mr. Sauer, Mr. Fix, and Mrs. Hammond all concurred with keeping it the same next year. Mr. Drobina stated the $2,000 for mulch in the parks budget was for putting mulch in the playground areas in the three playgrounds within Sycamore Park. All members concurred with this expense.
Mr. Sauer stated Mr. Henderson was present to address the questions regarding membership with MODE from the last budget work session. Mr. Henderson stated membership in MODE would cost $5,487 and that would make us a member of Columbus 20/20. Mr. Henderson stated we could join Columbus 20/20 independently of MODE, however, our role in Columbus 20/20 would be diminished since MODE has a larger impact on the changes and progress that Columbus 20/20 does. Mr. Blair inquired if the Fairfield Regional Planning Commission was more a township function than a city function and Mr. Henderson stated he felt one of the most important things was for us to know what is going on around us and to have a voice in that. Mr. Fix clarified there are approximately 25 members and Mr. Fulton attends those meetings now for the City. Mr. Blair stated he did not know if he could justify spending the money for this membership when it seemed we got the same things from someone else such as MORPC, and we have the agreement with the Township, etc. Mr. Henderson stated he would like to have a member of the FCRPC attend the next Finance Committee and give the Committee their opinion as to why we should stay a member. Mr. Blair stated he felt that was fair. Mr. Sauer stated he would like a presentation by FCRPC added to the agenda for the next Finance Committee. Mr. Henderson stated he would like to have representatives from the 33 Alliance at the next Finance Committee and Mr. Sauer stated he would like to have them added to the Finance agenda as well.
Mr. Henderson stated he and Mr. Vance had met with the Business First newspaper and they would like to do a marketing campaign in that publication. Mr. Henderson stated they felt that was a good way to put our community out to the business leaders in the area and also gives us the opportunity to put articles in about our community as well. Mr. Henderson stated the cost would be about $20,000 for the marketing and advertising for the City. All Committee members concurred with adding this to the Development Department budget.
(2) Unfunded List. In a review of the items listed on the unfunded list, Mr. Henderson stated the City’s zoning code has not been updated for quite some time and there are several inconsistencies in it. He stated we would like to get our code up to date and make it easier to understand. Mr. Schornack stated after looking at the Park Capital Improvement fund he found there were enough funds available to purchase the swing set for the playground for the Hill Top Shelter so this item could be removed from the list if there were no objections to using these funds. With regard to a vehicle for use by City Hall Mr. Blair inquired if one of the police vehicles could be refurbished for use at City Hall. Mr. Schornack stated when the city hall vehicle is not available then personnel can use their own vehicle and we pay mileage for that. The Committee determined not to fund the additional tree trimming or the chain link fence and vertical pivot lift gates for the police department. Mr. Vance stated he would like to look further into the fiber optic cabling at the police department. The funding for the docuscan was approved and the Committee would like to see some justification for the authority utility software. With regard to the comprehensive revision of the land use code, Mr. Fix requested this be added to the Planning, Projects & Services Committee agenda and Mr. Henderson stated he would bring more information on this project to the Committee. Mr. Schornack stated he would not include this in the budget and if necessary the appropriation can be added. Additional funding will not be added to the budget for tree trimming and Mr. Drobina will do what he can with the funds already included in the budget. Mr. Schornack stated he would get more information on the fiber optic cabling for the police department and funding for the chain link fence would not be included in the budget. Funding for the docuscan would be included in the budget as this scanner can be used by all departments, however, the Committee would like to have someone come to Finance Committee to justify the $30,000 request for the Authority Utility Software. Mr. Sauer requested this item be added to the December Finance Committee agenda.
Mr. Sauer stated with regard to questions on the Mayor’s budget at the last work session, he had spoken to Mr. Gray earlier this week and Mr. Gray is comfortable with maintaining staffing in the Mayor’s office as it currently is. He stated further they had discussed putting the Public Information Officer directly under the Mayor’s purview and they both agreed it was best to leave that where it is under the City Manager. Mr. Schornack clarified the PIO budget would be at $12,000 and the staffing for the Mayor’s office would remain at 25 hours per week.
(3) Mr. Schornack stated to summarize the police budget would reflect the reduction of $100,000 and the increase of the travel/transportation category to $4,000. Further the Carnegie building repairs were approved and the additional flags and banners category was reduced to zero. The landscaping budget for the street department would not be increased, an additional $20,000 would be added to the Development Department for the marketing campaign in Business First, and the discussion for the Code revisions would be added to the November Planning, Projects & Services Committee agenda. Mr. Sauer clarified that the funding for the docuscan would be included in the budget.
Mrs. Yartin clarified that the next Finance Committee agenda would contain the presentation by various agencies to include Fairfield County Regional Planning Commission and the 33 Alliance, as well as an update on the pool items. The December Finance Committee agenda would contain discussion regarding a Performance Audit for the City and a presentation to justify the Authority Utility Software.
Mr. Schornack stated he would request a Special Finance Committee meeting prior to Council on November 15th in order to move the Budget out of Committee to Council for a vote. Mrs. Yartin stated the companion legislation to be included on the Special meeting agenda would be the Pay Plan and Authorized Strength for 2012 and the Capital Improvements Plan.
3. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, the work session adjourned at 9:15 P.M., October 25, 2011.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
____________________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, City Clerk