Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-01-22 MinutesMINUTES OF A RETREAT MEETING OP TEE CITY BOARD OP DIRECTORS A Retreat Meeting of the Fayetteville City Board of Directors was held on Tuesday, January 22, 1991 at 2:00 p.m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by the Mayor, with seven Directors present. He pointed out that no official Board action can be taken at the retreat meeting. PARKS AND LAKES. Steve Alexander, with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), addressed the Board concerning the meeting that was held by the PRAB the previous evening. He reported that it was the consensus of the Parks Board and the citizens that the lakes were very beneficial to the City, and that his group would do•everything possible in association with the City Board of Directors to help them balance the budget and improve the quality of life in Fayetteville. He asked the Board to consider the fact that parks are a part of what attract people to the City of Fayetteville. He stated the PRAB would be supporting a rate increase in lake fees to help cut the operating cost of the lakes. Director Coody suggested that to help reduce the deficit, volunteers might be considered to help maintain the parks and lakes. Presently those two lakes are operating at approximately a $29,000 deficit per year. The City will maintain liability on both Lake Fayetteville and Lake Sequoyah regardless of whether they are closed or not. It has been suggested that the price should be raised from $10 to $20, for an annual lake use fee. There is a provision there for the elderly and those under sixteen, which would reduce their fee to $10. He stated that there was CIP money available for construction of some new boat stalls. He thought that both lakes would be able to operate "in the black" with a little manipulating. BUDGET Mayor Vorsanger stated there are some revised revenue projections and expenditure reductions that were reviewed by the Board, and it was suggested that the Board examine these revisions and discuss these with Staff. REVENUE REVISIONS Kevin Crosson, Administrative Services Director, stated the first revenue projections that were revised were based on the 1990 46 • K( January 22, 1991 revenue receipts from the County sales tax. The 1990 actual receipts were greater than anticipated, so the projection for 1991 needs to be raised by $100,000. The second item, based on 1990 revenue received, was the franchise tax revenue from SWEPCO. That needs to be raised $17,000 to a total of $547,400 because of the increase of their income. The third item on the list is $20,000 based on the Arkansas Western Gas franchise. The gas company announced that customers can expect an 8.2% increase in rates during 1991. Since they are based on gross sales, the projection was raised proportionately. The final item is based on a situation where the cost of related operations will be covered on selected permits and fees. That Nis based on the cost of service study, and an additional $50,000 worth of revenue can be recognized in 1991. Director Green asked if this was assuming a full study would be done or if this was merely a study done in-house with the Planning Department for just these permits and fees. Crosson explained that this was done in-house. He stated that the increase in fees would probably go into effect in 10 months. It is anticipated that these fee increases should increase revenue by $19,000 per year. Mayor Vorsanger stated that the City would be getting back $122,500 from the Truck Weight Tax. The Board will have to show the state what the money will be used for; therefore, a plan should be worked into the budget possibly in the Street Department. Director Green asked when the proposal for increased lake fees was going to be presented to the Board. Alexander said this would be presented to the Board very soon. Elaine Walker, a representative of Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission, addressed the Board concerning the question of including the Commission in the 1991 budget. Vorsanger stated that Walker had been instrumental in obtaining transportation grants. Director Green, seconded by Vorsanger, made a motion to put the funding for the Northwest Arkansas Planning Commission back into the 1991 budget. Walker explained the benefits of the Elderly Taxi Program, the University Transit, etc. and the positive influence it has on the City of Fayetteville. She urged the Board to reconsider their vote on the deletion of the Northwest Arkansas Planning Commission in the 1991 budget proposal. Her concern was the financial influence the Board has on the operation of these programs, and that without that financial influence, the City might have to relinquish these programs. She reiterated that Fayetteville was the leading force in founding the Commission, and at the time it was established that the smaller cities just could not keep up their financial cooperation. These small cities would suffer the most if Fayetteville is no longer a part of the Commission. ;January 22, 199E Walker stated that she felt there was an urgent need for communication between the staff of the Commission and the City staff. The areas of improvements needs to be discussed and communicated between the two entities. She stated her regrets in the lack of communication between the two staffs and stated her willingness to start anew with open lines of communication being developed. She stated that admittedly the roles of the Northwest Arkansas Planning Commission have changed due to finances, but the needs have not changed, and due to the withdrawal of certain finances, that is why the Commission appears to be less productive than it has in past years. There is certainly no lack of desire on the part of the Commission. Upon roll callthe motion to include the Northwest ,Arkansas Regional Planning Commission from the 1991 budget failed by a vote of 2-5. Crosson stated that when the Board approved the 1990 budget, there was projected an ending undesignated fund balance of just under one million dollars. At that time the Board mandated that City Staff go back and implement an austerity program. They came up with a spending reduction plan when Scott Linebaugh was Interim City. Manager. The taskat hand was to reduce spending through a number of different mechanisms by over $500,000. Five positions were eliminated; every purchase and every travel and training account was scrutinized; every publication of dues account was reviewed; and limits on spending were implemented on non -mandatory items. As a result, the undesignated fund balance, at the end of 1990, was $2.4 million. All money will be used very discriminately. Expenditures will have to be cut to the point that there is strictly a basic service budget. To increase services on the police and fire departments would either require a revenue increase or program reductions and eliminations. Those have been reviewed at past retreats. The budget will not allow Staff to fall back and make further cuts in non -mandatory expenditures. That has been done over the past several years. The problem is that the growth of the City ;requires program increases in the future. The situation is that revenues and resources are not keeping up with the growth of the City and the growth of cost of living, etc. The fund balance at this point will help us through possible recessions that are being talked about. Something else is going to have to be done to preserve the economic future of Fayetteville. EXPENDITURE REDUCTIONS The City's biggest reduction on the expenditure side is the City's IBM System 36 computer lease. This can be funded as a capital item. The second item was the $50,000 expenditure reduction in the economic development program that the Board mandated. The General Fund's portion of that is $25,000. The travel and training accounts were reduced by an additional $15,000, which represents 4,4 January 22, 1991 14.4% of budgeted travel and training expenditures. Office supply accounts have been reduced 5% based on implementation of the central store. Various minor equipment accounts were reduced to a total of $2,300 which is 5% of the budgeted funds for minor equipment. Publications and dues are being reduced by $1,400, which is 2% of budgeted funds. Again, this only balances the budget without addressing any additional needs in police and fire. To do anything further in the police and fire departments, there will have to be additional cut-backs or revenues. There was discussion about the fact that the lack of industrial development was creating a bigger and bigger budget deficit. The increase in residential building permits are not going to take care of this kind of deficit. There needs to be some kind of industrial attraction within the next two years to realize a painless absorption of the deficit. Vorsanger complimented the unity of the staff involved in working the budget down to the point where it ought to be. He stated that the projection for 1991 was $3,633 net revenues over expenditures. Also, the actual ending fund equity balance for 1989 was $2.26 million. It is estimated that for 1990, $2.4 million is in reserve. The estimation for the 1991 budget is $2.7 million more than 1990, and approximately the same thing is projected for 1992, with a little decrease in the undesignated fund balance for 1993. He stated that these figures were very commendable. One police officer has been added in the 1991 budget. Vorsanger asked what the Board would recommend in committing to increase the fire and police department staff. It was the consensus of the Board that no recommendation could be made as of yet. There was discussion about the construction of a new fire station, but there were no cost figures currently available. Director Spivey stated that the Board should go ahead and pass the budget and look at the additions to police and -fire departments at a later date. The Board and Staff agreed that this subject could be discussed at greater length and a new proposal would be ready for review by the Board by March 1, 1991. Vorsanger stated that the Staff had done a very good job in targeting reductions in-house so far, and staff was complemented on this responsibility. VOTING RULES City Attorney Jerry Rose addressed the Board concerning abstention voting. He stated that an abstaining vote attempts to be as neutral a proposition as you can possibly do. In doing that, the general rule is that an abstaining vote will not frustrate the will of the remaining members. An abstention is simply the person ,January 22, 1991;,= saying that he does not want to be a part of the decision; he does not want to help or hurt the decision being made. It is generally counted to constitute a quorum because the member is present, he is just abstaining. It is generally counted as a "yes" vote and other times it is phrased "as a vote with the majority" whatever that majority is. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 3:58 p.m. • •