HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/20/2010 11 General Government Budget Reductions Report BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 11
For Meeting Of : April 20, 2010
ITEM TITLE: Report on General Government Budget Reductions
SUBMITTED BY: Dick Zais, City Manager
Rita DeBord, Finance Director
Cindy Epperson, Deputy Director of Accounting & Budgeting
CONTACT PERSON /TELEPHONE: Dick Zais, 575 -6040
Rita DeBord, 575 -6070
Cindy Epperson, 575 -6070
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
In response to the continuing deterioration of revenues, City Management prepared a cost
reduction proposal to reduce General Government (i.e. tax - supported) operational budgets by
$1,250,000. A detailed listing of budget reductions was presented to the Council Budget
Committee (CBC) at their April 8, 2010 meeting. The CBC modified management's proposal,
and made recommendations for action by the full Council. The modified proposal still slightly
exceeds the targeted amount.
Attached you will find:
• A memorandum dated April 20, 2010 that discusses the CBC recommendations and
addresses questions raised by the Committee regarding furloughs;
• Talking points titled "Key Messages- Budget Basics ". that summarizes the City's current
financial situation; and
• The minutes of the CBC meeting of April 8, 2010 preceding the information packet from
that meeting, as modified for the committee recommendations.
A motion to accept this report will in effect direct staff to take the next steps in implementing the
proposed reductions.
•
Resolution Ordinance Contract Other (Specify) Report
Funding Source: NA
APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL:
City Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept Report
BOARD /COMMISSION /COMMITTE RECOMMENDATION: The Council Budget Committee
reviewed management's proposal at their April 8, 2010 meeting, and approved a motion to retain
3 items, and forward the modified reduction plan to the full Council with their recommendation.
COUNCIL ACTION:
• MEMORANDUM
APRIL 20, 2010
To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Dick Zais, City Manager
Rita DeBord, Finance Director
Cindy Epperson, Deputy Director of Budgeting & Accounting
Re: General Government Budget Reductions — Mid -Year 2010
Background:
In response to the continuing deterioration of revenues, City Management prepared a cost reduction
proposal with a minimum target to reduce the General Government (i.e. tax- supported) operational
budgets by $1,250,000. The attached report was presented to the Council Budget Committee (CBC)
at their April 8, 2010 meeting. The plan consisted of several different reductions which totaled about
$90,000 more than the minimum target.
After much discussion on staff's proposed budget reductions, the CBC made its' recommendations
i for the full Council's consideration. Specifically, they recommended that three of the items be
removed from the list: (1) the elimination of Police special events overtime, (2) turn off non-
mandated arterial street lights, (3) reduced hours Tuesday and Thursday nights at the Harmon Center.
These three items amounted to $74,000. The Committee also agreed the concept of furloughs (i.e.
time off without pay) be researched and brought forward. The modified plan still meets the targeted
level of reduction.
Furlough Option:
Staff's budget reduction proposal included approximately $500,000 in personnel related reductions,
of which approximately $300,000 or 25% of the total $1.2 million reduction, would come from
employee furloughs (required time off without pay). The issue of employee furloughs was a primary
topic of discussion at the CBC meeting.
In way of background to this issue -- about $2.6 million or 4.1% of the amended 2009 General
Government budget was cut to arrive at the 2010 approved budget. This budget reduction included
the elimination of about 21 positions, with all but one being vacant at budget time. Therefore, there
are now over 40,000 fewer hours being worked on an annual basis, resulting in a similar reduction in
output / production being generated than in the prior year.
There are many issues surrounding the differences between employee layoffs and /or furloughs, the
following represents some of the 'factors relative to furloughs that resulted in the management
recommendation to use this method of additional work -force and budget reductions:
• Employee lay -offs trigger the "Reduction in Force" (RIF) Civil Service rules and union labor
issues, which can be extremely disruptive workflow and do not always result in the work that
was targeted for reduction being that of the employee who is actually laid -off;
• Furloughs allow for the retention of employee knowledge and experience within the City,
layoffs do not;
• Under the furlough option, the City retains the employee, but reduces the number of hours
they work; this provides management more flexibility in scheduling the day to day workload
and in covering unexpected employee absences (illness, accidents and other emergencies).
Management has more employees over which to spread hours of operation under the furlough
option, thereby providing better customer service even during the reduced work week. And
the furloughed employee can be more quickly and easily brought back to work if a critical
situation arises; thus, providing for fewer service interruptions to our citizens. (Note: the
elimination of the many positions over the past few years has left most divisions with
minimal, or no, "back -up" employee trained to perform the work should the primary
employee become unavailable for any reason; layoffs would further exacerbate this situation.)
• As the economy recovers, should the decision be made to bring back services eliminated do
to the furlough, the City can do so more quickly and within available resources - without the
need to incur additional hiring /training costs.
• Continuing to hold vacant positions open is somewhat arbitrary in that the work to be
eliminated is not managed, but is subject to "the luck of the draw ". Furloughs allow
managers to design absences for their operating units that would be least impactful to both
the public and their employees.
•
The City has been eliminating positions every year for many, many years. And although these
cost and service reductions have been necessary in order to maintain a sound fiscal condition
for the City, it still takes a significant toll on the remaining employees who may have lost a
friend at work and is continually asked to work harder and do more. Employee morale has a
significant impact on an employee's efficiency and productivity; therefore it is important that
the City implement budget reductions in a manner that allows management the most
opportunity to maintain positive employee morale. Retaining ones job — even with reduced
hours — is certainly viewed more positively than having your job eliminated. Thus, furloughs
are less damaging to employee morale than are layoffs.
• Furloughs are addressed in the Civil Service rules and in union contracts, thus a legal
challenge to this action should be significantly less likely or costly than achieving an equal
level of budget reduction through the elimination or reduction in an employee benefit that is
viewed by some as a "vested right ". If a legal challenge is mounted, the City would incur
additional out -of- pocket costs, and would likely not be able to act quickly to reduce personnel
costs to the extent necessary to meet the economic challenges we currently face.
Conclusion — Next Steps:
Most of the staff proposed budget and service reductions would be. implemented administratively at
this time, and maintain the balance between revenue and expenditures authorized by Council in the
adopted 2010 Budget. However, an employee furlough will require Council action -- a resolution
will need to be authorized by Council in order to enact the furlough option.. In the meantime,
management will be meeting with AFSCME to negotiate implementation of the furlough for their
employees.
Page 2 of 3
® Attached are both a summary and a detailed list of the staff proposed budget reductions. These lists
also identify the CBC's recommended modifications to staff's proposal. Staff is prepared to review
all of these reductions with the full Council, and if' so directed by Council, take the next steps toward
implementation, as noted below:
1) go forward immediately to implement the portions of the plan that are detailed and don't
require further Council action;
2) continue to work on the implementation of a furlough, including negotiation with applicable
bargaining units and drafting the required legislation; and
3) drafting other legislation for Council consideration (e.g.: the land use public notice
procedure), as appropriate
•
0
Page 2 of 3
Key Messages
2010 Budqet Basics
- The City's budget is divided into two main categories:
Y g g
o General Government - Programs and services that are paid
for with money primarily generated from taxes
• Examples - Police, Fire, Parks, Streets
o Non - General Government - Programs and services that are
paid for with money primarily generated by rates charged to
customers
• Examples - Water, Sewer, Refuse
- The General Government part of the budget is not based on
knowing for certain how much tax income we will have throughout
the year and deciding how best to spend it. We don't know for
sure how much tax income we will receive because tax income
goes up and down as the economy goes up and down.
- So, the General Government part of the budget is built based on an
estimate (a guess) of how much tax income we will have
throughout the year. If we don't actually get as much tax income
as we thought we would, then we have to figure out what things
we won't spend money on that year like we had planned to.
411
- Non - General Government income is more stable because the rates
charged are based on the cost of providing the program or service.
- As tax income has slowed in recent years, the City has had to cut
General Government costs. The City has spent less on equipment,
reduced travel, lowered training expenses, left vacant staff positions
unfilled, and laid off some General Government employees.
- The downturn in the economy has resulted in a downturn in the
amount of money the City receives in taxes. Tax revenue is less this
year compared to 2009, and tax revenue in 2009 was down from
the previous year. In fact, even though basic costs (supplies,
utilities, health insurance, etc.) have continued to go up, the City
originally expected to collect around the same amount in taxes this
year as it did in 2005.
- The situation this year, however, is worse than the City even
expected it might be. Income from taxes continues to go down, so
more General Government cuts, amounting to about $1.3 million,
need to be made now in order to balance this year's budget. The
City has to have a balanced budget under state law.
411
- Similar cost reductions don't need to be made for Non - General
Government programs and services right now because the rates
• charged to customers are generating enough money to keep
pace with the costs of providing Non - General Government
programs and services. Non - General Government income cannot
be used to pay General Government costs.
- City management is proposing a range of cost reductions for the
rest of 2010 that include spending less on travel for City Council
members, reducing the hours that some City facilities are open,
significantly reducing jail expenses, not filling several staff positions
that are currently vacant, and completely eliminating some staff
positions and functions. These reductions add up to about 77% of
the total amount of cuts that need to be made.
- City management is proposing to save another 23% of the money
needed to balance the 2010 budget by implementing a furlough
that will affect employees who's salaries and benefits are paid for
with tax income.
- The furlough would result in more than 200 General Government
employees, including management, supervisors, and front -line
• personnel, taking 5 to 7 days of unpaid leave this year. By having
those employees work fewer days, the City would save about
$300,000 this year.
- Of course, with that many employees working fewer days this year,
the City would not be able to provide all of its normal services at the
same levels as in the past. •
- The General Government budget reductions, including the
employee furlough, that are proposed for the rest of this year may
need to be kept in place throughout 2011. Other budget cuts may
even need to be made next year if the tax income trends that have
developed over the last few years continue.
- The hope is that as the economy recovers, tax income will return to
normal levels and additional budget reductions won't be
necessary. For now, though, there is simply not enough money
being generated by taxes for the City to continue to provide the
same levels of service that it has in the past.
„- .rA-F' � ,' � '$ �' i.'+�e � b "A�,a'o-f �-- � r.•�n ro��w-_ "'.� •r'ztn .v4 a5r;,rxZC�s. e" cis �'"'�aT”. �" Q i s e ..f��� � � � .
:=, r o ' :� Yakg � crL Cornm�tt Meet F R��� , �
1'. a� r��'
Council Budget Committee
OECD Conference mom (2nd fCoor)
City Mar
Special Meeting re: 2010 Budget Reductions
Thursday, April 8, 2009
8:45 — 9:45 a.m.
Meeting Minutes
Attendance: Council Members: Micah Cawley, Kathy Coffey, Maureen Adkison
Staff: Dick Zais, Rita DeBord, Cindy Epperson, Robin Dukart
Discussion:
> The City Manager presented to the Committee the strain on the 2010 General
Government budget as tax revenues have continued to decline. He relayed the
necessity for General Government budget adjustments to be completed as
swiftly as possible to avoid further reliance on reserves.
> The Committee reviewed the staff proposed reductions for the remainder of the
2010 budget. The target amount of $1,250,00 was exceeded by $89,500 for a total •
proposed reduction of approximately $1,339,500. The major component
consisted of $700,000 in outside jail savings. $500,000 of the proposed reduction
was personnel related including approximately $300k savings from temporary
furloughs.
> The CBC reviewed the proposed budget reductions; primary discussion
surrounded the furlough and vacant position reductions.
➢ There was considerable discussion concerning the Quality of Life benefits
received by Yakima's citizens for Police overtime during community events and
the hours of operation for The Harmon Center. A motion was made by Council
Member Kathy Coffey to forward the proposed reduction plan to the full
Council for review with the CBC recommendation to retain the special events
overtime, the operational hours for Harmon Center, and to maintain arterial
street lights. This motion was seconded by Maureen Adkison and approved
unanimously.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, April 28, 2010
8:30 — 10:00 a.m.
CED Conference Room
C)
Committee Chair (Micah Cawley)
Rd 4 -08 -10 CBC Minutes
• MEMORANDUM
APRIL 7, 2010
To: The Council Budget Committee •
From: Dick Zais, City Manager
Rita DeBord, Finance Director
Cindy Epperson, Deputy Director of Budgeting & Accounting
Re: General Government Budget Reductions — Mid -Year 2010
Background:
The nation and state are continuing to experience a rather broad, deep recession and the local
Yakima economy is still very stressed. Even though some economists have reported that there are
some underlying economic indicators that may be interpreted as positive, there is still widespread
unemployment, and the banking industry has not yet stabilized. The 2010 budget was developed
assuming a slight (1.3 %) increase in sales tax. However, the first 3 months of sales tax revenue still
demonstrated a 6% reduction from 2009 actual levels.
A 6% reduction in just the general sales tax is a loss of approximately $762,000. Both of the
• countywide criminal justice sales tax receipts are following a similar trend, also a loss of another
$150,000 a total potential reduction in sales tax for 2010 is $912,000 from the budgeted amounts.
The other major revenue that is substantially below 2010 estimates is natural gas utility tax. The .
budget included an estimate for the approved rate increase; however, the mild winter has reduced
this revenue by about 25% for the first 3 months. If this trend continues through 2010, we could
come in $340,000 below budget in this one revenue source. In response to this likely reduction in
General Government revenue, we have prepared targets for expenditure reductions from the 2010
budget to total about $1,250,000.
Keep in mind that we are still relying on $1.4 million of reserves to balance the 2010 budget. As this
amount was derived from maintaining a minimum reserve balance, the continuing pressure on
revenues coupled with the likelihood of less . expenditure savings because of tight budgets will likely
result in a much lower reserve balance to access when developing the 2011 budget.
The targets for expenditure reductions as determined by the Priorities of Government (POG) budget
model are as follows:
Priority % of Total Reduction Target
Public Health and Safety 68.7% ($859,000)
Resource Management 14.7% ($184,000)
Economic Development 5.3% ($66,000)
Quality of Life 7.2% ($90,000)
• Cust Svc &Communication 3.1% ($39,000)
Strategic Partnerships 1.0% ($12,000) _
Total 100.0% ($1,250,000)
Budget Reduction Plan:
110
The City Management team met and reviewed the 2010 budget. After much discussion and vetting,
the attached list represents the proposed reductions for the remainder of 2010. The summary sheet
groups the proposals by priority. The detail listing is organized by City Department with the
corresponding priority identified.
In order to provide adequate savings in light of the continuing recession, staff identified reductions in
excess of the original target by $89,500. The major components of the $1,339,500 reduction include:
• $700,000 -- Reduction of outside jail costs, resulting from Council approved changes in the
Criminal Justice system (i.e. Public Defender at arraignments, enhanced use of Electronic
Home Monitoring)
• $300,000 — Furlough (i.e. time off without pay) of all General Government non -24
hour /emergency personnel. This will likely require a minimum of 5 days (1.9 %), possibly up
to 7 days (2.7 %), depending on the final list of what positions are included /excluded. Human
Resources, Finance, and Legal are researching the implementation details.
• $212,000 — Not filling vacant positions
• $127,500 — Other cost reductions
0 Furloughs are being seriously considered and implemented in cities throughout the state. Attached
for your review are some background materials and newspaper articles concerning furloughs.
The specific reductions are summarized according to the POG model, but at this point in time the
furlough has not been quantified, and is therefore not allocated by priority. Because most of the
exemptions to the furlough will be in the category of Public Health and Safety, it is likely that this
reduction package will not maintain the relative "spread" among priorities. When the details of the
furlough are available, the summary chart will be modified accordingly.
Conclusion — Next Steps:
Most of these reductions would be implemented administratively at this time, to maintain the balance
between revenue and expenditures authorized by Council in the adopted 2010 Budget. The furlough
will require Council action -- a resolution with the details of the furlough will need to be presented
for Council approval. In the meantime, management will be meeting with AFSCME to negotiate
implementation of the furlough for their employees. Several other reduction proposals will need
Council concurrence.
Staff is prepared to review all of these reductions with the Council Budget Committee and the full
Council.
III
Page 2 of 2
• 0 •.
General Government Budget - Priorities Model
City Manager's 2010 Budget Reduction Plan
(4- 15 -10)
Cust Svc & Comm (CS). /
Public Health & Safety (PH) VA Resource Management (RM) Econ. Development (ED) M Quality of Life (QL) Strategic Partnerships (SP)
s $39,000
- $859,000 Target Reduction $184,000 Target Reduction - $66,000 Target Re duction y - $90 Target Reduction 12 000 Target Reduction
44 A 6
$10,000 Street markin.s /Su..Iies $2,500 Charge Plan review u'front pi $10,000 Reduce Hear /Exam case $55,000 Elim. Lead Life•uard Pos a $5,000 Purch /Prof Svcs
$700,000 Jail costs savin.s $60,000 Elim Fin Svc S•ec A/Rec vacs $5,000 Reduce public notice 1 $15,000 Dela Parks Plan. Pos
$15,000 Reduce Pension Cost a $4,000 Council travel $33,000 Shift CED Planner $20,000 Reduce Parks Maint tl
$70,000 Fire Under Bud•et Ad If $29,000 Freeze BId• Maint Position vattit. it'
$35,000 Freeze Parks Suer.
$50,000 *Elim Stec. events OT $2,000 Pre- em .loy Ph sicals N 11, $9,000 *Reduce Harmon Ctr hrs
$15,000 *Art. Street Ii.hts /Elec A $10,000 Legal Prof. Svc
i i $25,000 Reduce Contin.enc Transfer _- -
$720,000 Sub Total $132,500 Sub Total
fl
$48,000 Sub Total $134,000 Sub Total � $5,000 Sub Total
W
$139,000 Balance to Goal $51,500 Balance to Goal- 41. $18,000 Balance to Goal - $44,000 Balance to Goal ti $46,000 Balance to Goal
Summary - Staff Proposed:
$1,250,000 Reduction Goal
$1,039,500 Reductions Identified by City Management Team (exclusive of employee furloughs)
$210,500 Difference .
$300,000 Furlough (all Gen. Gov.; non -24 hr oper. Emp.: min. 5 -7 days /lwk) .
$89,500 Amt. over targeted reduction goal ,
•
CBC Recommendation *Less changes recommended by Council Budget Committee (Maintain budget for : $50,000 /PH - Police special events OT;
- $74,000 $15,000 (PH) - Arterial Street Lights; $9,000 (QL) - Harmon Ceter Hours .
$15,500 Net budget reduction amount over target (estimate)
• Fire Dept: already underfunded by $70k (2009 OT & cashout; transfer from Police Jail): Budget adjustment included in above (PH)
•IS Div: underfunded by $62,000 Retirement Cash Out (RM)
•Election costs underfunded $25,000 (CS)
1 of 4
rd Budget Reduction Wk Sheet 4-09-10
- City Manager's 2010 Budget Reduction Plan - By Department
(4- 15 -10)
Personnel Non - Personnel o T a ,
Police
Jail Costs Savings: Change in System el a
PS (i.e. Public Defender at arraignments; increased Home lk
Monitoring) r 0,0
,. . -..- ,. - - T- 1 °w u':. 1 1 f, 1 , e , i $700,000
,` . 7e.r � - ^>' °. ... « : b rip , 7 0 4 O .' ..<. e2, s . 4 ,. , .. 7
. . "... . � ... . � ':. , -°. `'3a` L -,: .,. i. > 4 ,�?.. r +u- ; . r �... ,..." r ..�`S„�'. �'s� . .Y.�, .,. � +fid :ma.r � +�i:. =4 ".' x -'�a t"'�.., 4 .�' O 0 � t6es. _ �iF _ 4 „ O+. ,."=F_';
, ...a,.i ��f . �.'��., `'��i�,`�.`.' 4� . -. .`�* ��. .. .. v �, . « n a�f,':'.e+t r Ta'3.` - w:... :x + , .. ._. ., i ._.,, . hs: ,� a ... x ..�..� , < � "� � �4_ "� :µ :. �` -,.'. ..,
...a.. ... , t -�- ) s a s .. u r .J ' _ N 5 @ S c .`+. a': k�`f: te a.. t i i.'. _. - d t
�; .or.�s onsor� a, s• � � a ,.„ � �� , f � � 50 000 � ;v4371-406;-,:,.4 I � �.� 3 � ��$.50 OOQ�
�Elimrnate OTC( � p p y )�;� <;�, � .:� ;,.�,., .._ ..,.. a _m,.. , _ � . 8
3 . ^ ._ € ,n ,.v
CED
$50,0001 $700,000 $750,000
RM Charge for Engineering Plan Review up front (Cost �_._ ___ -
recovery - additional revenue $2,500 $2,500_
ED Reduce Hearing Examiner case load:
Establish Voluntary Planning Commission $10,00 ' $10,000
Land Use Application - Reduce area notification boundary Rs m
from 500 ' to the State required 300' (Reduce printing & � k
II
postage costs requires Council action) $5,000 {, $5,000
Re- assign 75% Associate Planner from Planning to Fed. �
Block Grant mid year and freeze resulting vacancy 0 $33,000 $33,000
Freeze Building Maintenance Spec. position (Vacant) k ; i
defer /redistribute City Hall maintenance �, e $29,000 $29,000
Fire
F $62,000 $17,500 $79,500
ki
Fire Overtime & Year -end holiday cash out Under 43, fir4
Ps budgeted by $35,000 each (based on 2009 actual):
NA
K4
Administrative budget transfer from outside Jail account to g g,
- $70,000 - $70,000
- $70,000 $0 R - $70,000
el
Finance __. : — _..___._ tr
Eliminate Financial Services Specialist position y-
RM () () $60,000 $60,000
Acct. Rec. vacant redistribute duties.
Fund transfers _ 0 _
$25,00 $25,000
PS Reduce Pension Costs (est.) Medical costs trending below
tftl
budget. $15,000 $15,000
$60,000. $40,000 0 $100,000
rd Bud e ductio
n 4-07-10 2 of
s City Manager's 2010 Budget -15- R tion Plan - By Department III
_ - -- _
1
Personnel Non - Personnel � � fis Dota �M
City Council _ h,,,-,- � � U� ___� _ __ _ _ _ ._ �_._ RM 2010 Council Travel (saved $$ on DC trip) . _ _� � $4,000 $4,000
Purchasing _ ____ _ .. -_.�__
$4 $4,000 Lk'
__ _ _
SP Reduce Purchasing - Professional Services $5,000 $5,000
�" $0 $5,000 Ej $5,000
6,- 1
Human Resources _ 1� _
Eliminate non - critical pre - employment _T —
RM physicals (May require Administrative
Policy ._ $2,000 N $2,000
$0 $2,000 $2
Legal 111
RM Reduce legal outside professional services $10,000 $10,000
$0 $10,000 r.,1 $10,000
Public Works
v El
QL Eliminate Aquatics Specialist position (vacant) _ M $55,000 _ $55,000_
__- __•-- - - - - -- Wit:.
Delay filling Parks Planner another 3 months to 7/01/2010 $15,000 $15,000
__ Freeze Parks Supervisor Position (vacant after 6/30 _ ^— —
_— retirement); (Div. retain $15k - 2010 for re -org) ____ $35,000 _ _ `_` $35,000
Reduce Parks maintenance seasonals (from 9 mo to 8
mo) (may trigger Civil Service lay -off procedures) $,0_ 00 $2
0000
F , b�yv", tl b'�a.�.y,�... T✓ '�'r,� 't"r;r '`r.: -:; �� ; Y , .:" x�,� ° .� $ ' "_^ *Y,�` .+;• s,�r� `a; Y - . t+r.. =,. Y i `hs" ; Y. r. 43;_to , : � 4 � , � . t g' c A . , , c'• "'` i n! ; .,� lak ik t '. .. @'fir Y. q?. - 'r"t � ' .5 5 [ 2.. k �. . ,Cl.os;Harr -non Center,, �� . 5 `� � �. �. ,�,�,, �,��„ � x 20 - � . � �. � z �:: . .as �, �� -:; -.
,v?:Y ,. :. [ ..y,.,,. .... .., .. ...� � �. , �, , . . ��: ,s +..s,3 -"�.., ,. ' " � a. -§� ;t �7f '�'�':�.;. .�. �a :. , a te` -^�.+
=.. u, G ..3k tq, , z" i, .. .,'^: . . 1 . .: , 4,+ 'F . Ott.. i ; w * ; f . . v .a . ... L , .7,+ , 2V'(,:,. dt. s r , t6 S qk a. �F
R .. , .Y�r'� , _.,,� w�� �� o-�.�. - "� . w ��'* `� , ..U� ., e r F. r � r i �w ��..�s �:,�� #; ,� ar s �,, �?�, _�-.:� a x � g ,��� ...,:
TUES/Tl1ur nl htS� _ a r = �<; { a . �.,; F y a
s_ . �..���� 9 �..� x .,�•� F �r �� :l . t:�.�. x � � ��.� ��,� f�.. �;.�r�� �,� �-� ._,� }� 9, 000. °; ,�k� � ��; � , ri
—a-7-- i• 3?` "� , r :�'.'�'! ,. s i! e. : y d�f $ sa r; 414N4041,:;. -q, "r;++ ! r. �- .s: w.,. ,r2a 7
, 2»w - . ; . rr .: ; ,n3 .4 .1k�s ..: , >. :u ;fi ,,33 � � 1 . i; a k . � 1 , :.3 'u
". ♦� G., � , �,rT,��'�` •'s } {� � F �!' P.! k '4t � a�M1 H,�W �# � , r �j^ :T !�'N :r�� i' of 'T
Tdrn o ff�.no,n- m andate d arte ial 1Wetf � -� �- =u , _ ,,� da , >� , -. .., �; ,: )
•,�,:_ -:. ,u°� . ,'.'�,: ,. .. �. . , < z3- =•;n• > a.. z a� ` '��s -`'�' z: 5 � J tL `�+` a '" 5 rE } r r ., _.. ks�,. � • ;.... �' n , �w.�� OAP' �'w .: S >ss . `yam 7 ,. . y t
PS �.' . - . �` ry� > _.. y-�`�? .. .'� -.. � -g'� ��y � .a�S. -• a- .,c 'z;,�.c .�`€., N. . .,, : � 72 �' -� 7r ,° '�Sm s -T y , .
:'tF# .c�. A.ax �W.. a. #�`�.a r' S. `,�. tl "m- n . 9 ^Fv .n I,a�l,�.:�.zT� 7 .i��� p���a
` �.. �ri �r.V :� �'s" -4 � ���E :' 5, oy�� � 4. '"�� - . • r . � " y �' 3'�;K� 4 :b sa w .. £
1 ts:- reduce - I n o is �, a , ,44 `:` ;7„1. �. l., ,t ,,' � r ��, �$1t.5 000 . i , 1'Orv
._..r_.... - .7,. :_...,. r _.. S : •- n,.n;.,�_.W� "- s> a.,.x�rYv�;rL.�- »�a3.�y:�.s;� .* .3c..� .....�- ., ?��, �E` ���' �e., �v� >��1'�.�- "lar.`r'�;.4,�.�ta,,. �� ,� - _��,`� ,s..�..,:, a s�,��,:}�. ,-
Cut back on non - mandated street markings - reduce
supplies 1 ls�i $10,000 LI $10,000
$125,000; $34,000 0 $159,000
rd Budget Reduction 4 -07 -10 3 of 4
City Manager's 2010 Budget Reduction Plan - By Department
(4- 15 -10)
Personnel Non - Personnel � �.: ff _
t
IV ri
PI Furlough
.
Minimum 5 up to 7 days in 2010: General Gov, Non- :, ,j
Emergency Employees; Broad estimate - Finance, Human
0 41
ro
Resources and Leal to research implementation details $300,000 Pli
:5 W
II - fti, $300,000
x X;
4.
Total Identified Reductions: ,e; $527,000 $812,500 0 $1,339,500
Fo ri
Identified Reductions Over Target Level (Target = $1,250,000) : NI $89,500 ril $89,500
FA
Pt) %
M 01
Less CBC recommendations (shaded items) to Council - $50,000 - $24,000 M - $74,000
11 RA
43 RI
Total Reductions Recommended by CBC (Target = $1,250,000) H $477,000 $788,500 �< $1,265,500
t2 l
It
LA kl
RN
7 ; s
o
m w 6
r
0
S , .
g al
rd Bud eduction 4 -07 -10 4 off" 9 III