HomeMy WebLinkAbout02_02_04_smCITY COUNCIL
ROLL CALL - PRESENT:
A Quorum was present.
ABSENT:
PRESIDING:
Alderman Wynne
Alderman Bernstein
Alderman Tisdahl
Aldermen Moran and Kent
Mayor Lorraine H. Morton
February 2, 2004
Alderman Rainey
Alderman Feldman
Alderman Newman
Alderman Jean -Baptiste
A SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL meeting was called to order by Mayor Morton, Monday, February 2, 2004 in the Aldermanic
Library at 6:14 p.m. Alderman Rainey moved that Council convene into Closed Session for the purpose of discussing matters
related to real estate and litigation pursuit to 5 Illinois Compiled Statues 1202 ( c ) (5) (6) and ( 11).
(5) The purchase or lease of real property for the use of the public body, including meetings held for the purpose of discussing whether
a particular parcel should be acquired.
(6) The setting of a price for sale or lease of property owned by the public body.
(11) Litigation, when an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court
or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding
shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meetings.
Roll call. Voting aye — Wynne, Bernstein, Tisdahl, Rainey, Feldman, Newman, Jean -Baptiste. Voting nay — none. Motion
carried. (7-0).
At 7:14 p.m. Alderman Rainey moved to reconvene into Open Session and recess. Seconded by Alderman Wynne. Motion
carried. No nays.
Mayor Morton reconvened the City Council at 7:23 p.m. in the City Council Chamber for the purpose of conducting a Public
Hearing on the 2004-05 Budget.
City Manager Roger Crum stated that evening was the Public Hearing on the proposed budget, which is required by state law.
Presentations have been made on the operating and capital budgets at two prior workshops. He announced the budget would
be adopted at the February 23 Regular City Council meeting. The budget presented showed three major revenue sources:
proposed natural gas tax adjustment to cover the sale of wholesale natural gas of $600,000; a proposed property tax increase
of 4% for the General Fund for $605,000; and recommended use of excess reserves (one-time only) of $500,000. The City is
required to meet actuarial requirements for fire/police pensions and those numbers are up 13% and 21.9%. Debt service on the
Capital Improvement Program requires a 4% budget increase. The only other major change in the budget is the planned 5% rate
change in the sewer tax.
Public Comment
Jeannie Sanke, 919 Hinman Ave., Evanston Community Media Center board president, thanked Council for holding their
budget allocation from the previous year. They appreciated holding funding steady from the prior year which showed
commitment to free speech rights and freedom of expression which Evanston residents value highly. They know that revenues
through franchise fees are increasing and were not asking for any increase this year, but plan to participate in next year's budget
discussions. She expressed thanks from the ECMC staff, board, user members and viewers for continued support
Jane Grover, 2703 Prairie Ave., Mental Health Board chair, said the recommended budget has no reductions to the Mental
Health Board's budget. She thanked them for that recommendation, which is to stay at $829,000. Because the last two years
City budgets included reductions in human services funding — two years ago 18.5% and last year 3.5 %, the Mental Health
Board presumes nothing about the outcome of the budget process. The general trend for human services is downward for the
2 February 2, 2004
past 15 years, where now purchased services account for about 1 % of the City's General Fund. Since purchased services were
consolidated into the Mental Health Board about a year and half year ago, their mission has expanded beyond mental health
to include a wide range of human services that reflect Evanston's commitment to residents most at -risk, largely the low-income
and invisible population. She reported that last year Mental Health Board funding supported services to 9,400 residents, 85%
who were low-income. This year the Mental Health Board will make recommendations to the Human Services Committee in
several weeks which entails funding to 18 agencies with 26 separate programs in those agencies. Those programs have changed
little from the previous year. The allocations they are recommending result from an intensive review of programs, their validity,
their success and relevance to Evanston. Support of human services funding comes at a time when agencies are living with
rather tight state and dwindling private funds. She stated that funding for human services is well spent and reaches many
residents.
Dick Stillerman, 2330 Park P1., has testified at many budget hearings and had a perennial question — "Why is the substantial
in crease in the City's share of the real estate tax almost always the solution to balancing the budget?" This year the City
Manager proposed that the City's share be 6.85%. He quoted Mr. Crum "the property tax continues to make up the largest
percentage of City tax revenues. The relative economic stability and tax deductible feature of the property tax make it a
desirable revenue source." Mr. Stillerman said this tax may be desirable from the government's standpoint but not from the
standpoint of citizens, many of whom have been adversely affected by the economic downturn or are on fixed incomes. He
agreed the property tax was economically stable because people cannot avoid paying their property taxes, otherwise they would
lose their property. He asked why increased real estate taxes were preferable to reducing the overall budget by eliminating or
reducing some services. He noted year after year Council looks the other way when it comes to budget reductions and, by the
subjects of budget memos requested of staff, there is only one request that bears on a possible budget reduction — the memo
on the functions of the Human Relations Commission. He stated Council had not even hinted at a desired review of the City
Manager's list from last year of possible reductions or submitted their own suggestions for possible cuts. He said there is no
reference in the budget to the total number of City employees and no comparative chart showing the increase in number of
employees over the past ten years or the increased spending over that period. He wanted to know how many full time
equivalents (FTEs) are on the payroll compared to ten years ago. He guessed it was easier to plug in a large real estate tax
increase, a sewer rate increase, a higher fee for ambulance calls and more revenue from traffic tickets. He understood some of
the tax increase resulted from higher negotiated salaries, mandated pension allocations for fire/police and increased health
benefit costs and that was all the more reason to seek ways to reduce the number of City employees at a time of economic stress
for taxpayers. He then focused on several revenue items to see if estimates could be increased and cut the increase in the
projected tax levy. He noted the projected revenue in the real estate transfer tax is $3 million. However, the actual transfer tax
received for 2002-03 was $3,676,452 and in the next year they will see the closing of a large number of condominium units
at 1720 Maple, re -sales of units in numerous other buildings and normal home and investment property sales. He noted no
reduction in the value of real estate here. He believed an increase of at least $350,000 should be budgeted for the real estate
transfer tax. With the increased enforcement hours in the downtown area for traffic tickets, there is a projected $100,000
increase in parking fines. He asked if that was too conservative or was the major bump in revenue figured in last year's budget.
He noted the proposed budget has a new employee in the collection division, so the salary and benefits nearly balances the
proposed $100,000 increase. There is no net from that transaction. He suggested some revenue be budgeted for the Sherman
Avenue garage because it unlikely it will close before March 1. He noted the City Manager found $500,000 in reserves that
could be safely applied to the budget. He asked how much over the one month's 8.3% reserve does the City actually have. On
the expense side he said it was imperative that in any negotiation with employee unions, that employees must pay more for
health insurance costs. He did not think they could do anything about the 14% this year but next year do what private companies
do and ask employees to bear a greater share of health care costs. He suggested outsourcing more City functions. For example
some vehicle maintenance could be contracted out. He is involved with a charitable organization that saved $80,000 annually
by outsourcing maintenance of their busses, a function formerly done in-house. Could the City save money by outsourcing some
health services to hospitals or clinics? In this low -interest climate are there possibilities to refinance some of the City's debt
at lower interest rates? Other non-profit agencies have taken advantage of current low interest rates to lock in considerable
savings. The Finance Director will know better than he whether they have those opportunities. Revenue from the Downtown
II Tax Increment District is supposed to increase from $5.6 million to $8.6 million. That is $3 million. Only $257,000 is being
transferred to the General Fund, which he assumed was to cover administrative costs. He asked if there was a legitimate way
to transfer more funds to the General Fund from this TIF and other TIF funds. These were his thoughts about this difficult
annual task and he urged Council to think hard about ways to reduce the tax burden on Evanston citizens while still providing
the basic municipal services that are needed such as police, fire, garbage removal, sewer, water and infrastructure upkeep. He
February 2, 2004
asked them not to take the easy way out by accepting whatever the City Manager proposes.
Mimi Peterson, 748 Wesley Ave., was concerned over the lack of conversation available to residents regarding this budget; was
sorry that nearly every budget meeting prior to the public hearing was cancelled so there has not been a lot of dialogue between
Council and residents. Evanston taxpayers have suffered property tax increases every year since 1998. Last year's increase of
6.5% raised a theoretical property owner's $8,000 tax bill by slightly less than $100. She said this translates into an increase
of nearly $700 or 26.44% over the past five years only to the City's portion. She strongly opposed the proposed tax increase.
According to the annual financial report, the General Fund will end the year with a surplus of nearly $400,000 in addition to
exceeding the cash balance budget of 8% by $500,000. She could not see the reasoning for the proposed increase other than
not having the political will to look at any cuts that might bring out people in their defense. In March 2003 the debt limit was
increased to $84 million and that has a direct impact on the deficit this year, hence, the 4% increase in the debt service. At the
time she asked how that change would affect this upcoming budget and for this reason was strongly opposed to issuing $60
million in bonds over five years with $12 million the first year and $8 million thereafter. Some Council members compare
Evanston's needs with surrounding communities that can better afford to build and maintain new public facilities. She believed
that Evanston should work on maintaining the buildings the City has. Mr. Stafford has suggested going against the budget policy
and using a one-time surplus to decrease the amount of property tax increase needed. If they decide to heed this suggestion,
she urged they take it one step further and consider using the cash balance beyond the 8.3% reserve and return that as well to
the General Fund. The proposed increase does not include the numerous fees and fines that have increased over the same time
period for pet licenses, sewer and recycling fees, building permits. For the last two years the Parking Fund has operated at a
deficit. She never understood why and said it apparently is an acceptable practice for the garages to operate at a loss. In the
2002-03 budget, parking meter fines were increased from $10 to $30 adding $544,000 of revenue. Parking meter hours were
extended to add another $242,000 for a total of $786,000 in revenue. She asked them not to increase parking meter fines, as
staff has indicated. Parking in Evanston already has a detrimental effect in the downtown and will continue to drive people away
and not encourage them to come here. Average middle-class families like hers might think they can handle another 6.8% tax
increase until they realize this is a re -assessment year, the value of their property has gone up and all the other taxing bodies
will receive an increase. It is the total amount that counts. While it sounds good that the City's portion on the total tax bill is
only 1.2%, these tax increases are hitting people like herself the hardest.
She has advocated for the City's trees and this year is no different. Every year approximately 4% of the elm trees are lost to
Dutch elm disease. A not -for -profit group called TREE (To Rescue Evanston's Elms) realizes there is a way to abate this plague
on the elms. A commercial fungicide, Arbotect, can be injected into the root system and is 99% guaranteed to prevent the elm
from getting Dutch elm disease for three years. Some tree companies provide a money -back guarantee if the treated tree gets
Dutch elm disease within the three-year period. The City's Dutch Elm Tree containment policy is rapid detection and removal
of infected trees. TREE believes it would be more cost effective in the long run to spend money on preventing the disease rather
than on tree removal. For $356,000 they could inject 1/3 of the trees each year versus $425,000 for tree removal and
replacement. The City's policy is not to administer the fungicide to any elm trees. She suggested this as a way to save
Evanston's remaining elms and as a cost saving measure. Perhaps a 50150 program could be implemented. TREE has worked
with staff and the Environment Board to educate residents about remedies available and would like the City to lead by example.
She had read in the Saturday Chicago Tribune a remark attributed to Mayor Morton. When the City entered into the Research
Park venture, each party contributed $5 million. The university was repaid in cash and the City was never repaid. $16 million
of taxpayer funds was spent on land acquisition only to be given away years later after the failed venture that promised
thousands of jobs and $9 million annually to the City. Many people think that Evanston has survived in spite of Northwestern
University, not because of NU.
Alderman Jean -Baptiste moved that Council convene as Committee of the Whole. Seconded by Alderman Wynne. Motion
carried. No nays.
Alderman Newman clarified that $500,000 was being used to balance the budget and is one-time revenue. He said what they
heard from the last speaker was justified. When the budget is balanced with one-time revenues and they have a budget policy
not to use one-time revenues, they invite the public every year to say don't have a tax increase -- just take money from reserves.
The idea of balancing the budget with $500,000 is a lack of effort on their part. If they have $500,000 in reserves there is plenty
they could do with it such as the liability fund or for capital uses. By using the $500,000 it puts a hole in next year's budget
4 February 2, 2004
and invites the public to question what the City is doing, when they have had a budget policy to the contrary. He said they
should not finish the process until they wipe out that one-time revenue, take the $500,000 and use the funds for a one time City
expense, a park, street improvements, to replace money they are bonding for in the capital budget. He would have rather tried
to find $500,000 in revenues or made expenditure reductions. The message they put out becomes confusing to the public.
Alderman Rainey argued if you have a surplus of $500,000 taken from the public, to give it back to them in some way. She had
no problem with the City Manager's concept. She asked for help on budget page 38. On transfer from other funds, was that
$100,000 from the 2003-04 budget the money they budgeted to cover all additional police/fire and emergency calls to the
Howard/Hartrey area based upon the shopping center? She had argued last year that the intense amount of service required for
a vibrant shopping center needed to use some of the TIF resources to pay for those services. Finance Director Bill Stafford said
that was correct. She asked what was actually spent there. He will check on that. She asked why such a small increase was being
budgeted (from $100,000 to $103,000 because it is a lucrative TIF)? She knows the services required. Mr. Stafford said in most
TIFs, they allowed a 3% cost of living increase; more could be budgeted. She asked about the Southwest TIF? Mr. Stafford said
it was the same a cost of living of only $600 more. She noted there are no police/fire services there. She said these enterprises
place a burden on the City's General Fund. While they contribute lots, they also create a burden and use police/fire services.
She thought it legitimate to use some TIF monies to offset some of those expenses.
Alderman Tisdahl asked how much the City projects would be spent on the Northwestern University lawsuit up until the City
wins and in the worst case scenario, how much the City would spend if they lose and have to pay NU's legal fees? She also
wanted numbers if there is an appeal and the City wins and if there is an appeal and the City loses.
Alderman Newman asked to see the rules on what can be removed from TIF districts and why; asked would it subject them to
litigation from other taxing bodies? Ultimately, monies not spent in a TIF district are dispersed to the taxing bodies on a pro
rata basis. He wanted to see the rules for taking monies for the general operations of the City. Where the City can be reimbursed
it should be done. It is one thing to reimburse for administrative costs and another for police/fire calls. He did not know the kind
of police/fire services provided where Sam's is located; wanted to know if there have been many police/fire calls to
Howard/Hartrey. He said it would be great to return surplus to taxpayers. All know the City has a judgment of $11 million that
will have to be paid and it seemed the $500,000 would be better applied there. He reiterated if they used one-time revenue to
fund recurring expenses, they create a hole in next year's budget. In reference to Alderman Tisdahl's request, he believed that
information is privileged and reported in closed session. It is privileged for the other side of a lawsuit to know what the City
spends on legal fees and is not subject to public dissemination. It should not be in a budget memo unless the Council decides
to release it. Council controls that privilege.
Alderman Bernstein spoke about a half-time civilian employee to do data entry on Illinois' new state law on racial profiling.
Every time an officer makes a traffic stop, they are now mandated to fill out a long form. In the first 15 days of the year there
has been no reduced productivity and he did not know whether that would continue. Even though the City is mandated by the
state to collect it, there was no mandate that it be reported to the state. He asked for a clarification. Mr. Crum stated the City
must report to IDOT annually but they don't have to report the ongoing data.
In reference to the proposed gas utility tax, Alderman Bernstein understood that this information is confidential and the City
could not find out who specifically will pay this tax. This data is controlled by Nicor. He understood it will be paid by
condominium associations, non -for -profit organizations and businesses.
Alderman Bernstein asked why there is a new position in the Collector's office. Management & Budget Director Pat Casey
clarified the new position is in the Parking Fund and is budgeted for the Parking Systems office.
Alderman Jean -Baptiste wanted clarity on whether the higher revenue will offset net in parking and clarification on the racial
profiling mandate from the state. He asked was Alderman Bernstein saying that they don't need to take the initiative to do it
because no charges have been brought against the City. Alderman Bernstein responded that it was economics. He said the City
suffers from unfunded mandates. Absent some reason for doing this, he did not know what purpose would be served. He thought
the ultimate end might be that it reduces policing effectiveness because the forms the City came up with have expanded beyond
state requirements largely because some Evanston police cover areas where it is likely they will stop 100% minorities or 100%
non -minorities on a shift. He was concerned how it would impact the City in the long term when police officers have to take
February 2, 2004
extra time. The data sheet is extensive and takes a long time to fill out. He was not suggesting that they should racially profile
or bias police and if there was that they should get to the bottom of that. His experience with the Police Department is that it
is strong, well run and non-discriminatory. If they can save a few dollars and extend the short services of police they already
have he wanted more police on the streets but not diminish the effectiveness of the officers they have. Alderman Jean -Baptiste
asked what his request was. Alderman Bernstein wanted to know Chief Kaminski's rationale for this activity and knew it was
a reaction to the state's request. His concern was that it might result in police making fewer stops or result in the feeling by
police officers if they make a stop they should issue a ticket rather than a warning because they have to justify the stop. He was
concerned about what this would do in context of Evanston policing. Alderman Jean -Baptiste asked if he was requesting a
budget memo on the impact of this mandate. Yes. Alderman Bernstein explained citizens were given an additional seminar at
the Police Academy and he understood the rationale for this but his concern was that to address a problem that may not exist
in this community it will cost them reduced capacity of police long-term.
Alderman Newman asked if the collector in the Parking Systems is paid out of the General Fund. Mr. Casey said that employee
will be paid out of the Parking Fund. Alderman Newman said one reason the Parking Fund is not balanced is due to money
going into the General Fund and noted that position is not paid for from property taxes.
Alderman Newman stated the City Manager's office is breaking with prior years and significantly increasing the projected real
estate transfer tax and had no problem with that if it was justified. He would like a better understanding of where the real estate
transfer tax was collected in 2002-03 and what has been collected this year -- $3.6 million in 2003 and $4.1 million this year.
He wanted a breakdown on where it comes from — single-family homes, condominiums and large properties to give them an
idea of where the projection would go. If they get the transfer tax from condominium turnover, perhaps the City will receive
more next year. He asked if the building going up near 1800 Sherman would pay transfer taxes. Yes. There will be significant
transfers there. They need to look at future revenues and the basis for the $3 million projection. He would rather have a $3.5
million projection, if there is a basis that it will come in the future, than take $500,000 from reserves to balance the budget. He
would rather use recurring revenues for recurring expenditures and make that decision with appropriate information.
Alderman Rainey implored Council to look at minutes from last year's budget discussion where members argued there were
large sales, therefore, had a large transfer tax and this year things would be gloomier and the City would not realize $3 million.
She thought there was room to enhance projections on the real estate transfer tax. On Alderman Bernstein's discussion, she
asked if he was questioning the state-wide mandate because the City has to do that. Alderman Bernstein said it was explained
to him that the City had to collect this data, but don't have to submit it. It was explained differently to her by the Police
Department that it has to be collected and submitted. Everybody thinks that IDOT won't look at it. Alderman Rainey said there
is an insistence that the City comply. Mr. Crum said it is specific and must be submitted to the state. A budget memo would
be prepared. Alderman Rainey commented on the gas utility charge and who it would be collected from to get the estimated
$600,000. She thought it important that people know who will not have to pay. It will not be collected from anybody who
currently buys from Nicor Gas but instead will hit all those who have been getting a pass and exempt from the burden gas
customers of Nicor have carried. She said it was a fair imposition of a tax and will even everybody out. She knows that
condominiums that buy wholesale gas will pay more, but pointed out they are all in this together. She did not know whether
they could find out who buys wholesale gas but perhaps they could find out from Nicor about retail customers they no longer
have.
Alderman Newman was interested in who will pay this gas tax ; wanted to fully understand it and to determine how fair it is.
He suggested staff provide information on who will pay this tax and the amount of increase that would occur. He did not think
anything wrong with a condominium association trying to find a way to pay less for gas. He might end up supporting this.
Somebody will pay the $600,000. He said the utility taxes that the City imposes are among the sneakiest taxes one can imagine,
imposed by government because nobody will notice them. If a municipality can impose a tax on a utility or cell phone it is put
on because it is not on their property tax bill. Does the City do anything? They should fully understand it and who will pay and
the amount of increase. He would support it if it is as fair as has been said. Mr. Casey said they will again contact Nicor Gas
Company to see if they can determine who pays this. Nicor does not release the names of their customers. Council members
have received three memos on this. The only thing staff knows about who will pay this tax is from the newspapers, where Mr.
Sunshine was quoted "Northwestern would pay $200,000 of this tax."
Alderman Feldman stated that the A&PW Committee tried to get information when this was brought before them. They begged
February 2, 2004
those who opposed this tax to tell them how much this would cost them. They gave nothing and had many weeks to do it; got
anecdotal information about one person's tax bill that had a business. It was an insignificant difference although it was an
additional cost. It was shockingly low. They are still waiting for information. Even people who called him have yet to present
him with evidence to make a reasonable decision. He wanted to see their gas bills to know what the difference would be; they
never got back to him. Predictions of dramatic increases have yet to be proven.
Alderman Rainey asked for all documentation and support information that the A&PW Committee was provided with originally.
In addressing the charge that the utility tax is "sneaky," she did not see how a municipal utility tax was any sneakier than an
auto rental tax, athletic contest tax, fire insurance tax, cigarette tax, liquor tax, parking tax, gasoline tax. Every time a person
receives a utility bill, there is a lengthy list of taxes so they are not sneaky. They cannot want property tax increases and not
want fees, fines and permits but there has to be some way to make up the cost of running this City between the $14 million in
property taxes for the General Fund and the $78 million it takes to run the City. The money has to come from someplace. She
said that utility taxes are disliked and nobody wants to pay taxes but they are there and are not sneaky. People can see what the
charge is. If they don't want to charge them, they have $30 million they can cancel and come up with another way. She said
they do everything in public every year.
Alderman Jean -Baptiste said he wanted to frame an issue to consider a policy. When they get ready to balance the budget, they
use the property tax but they levy the tax at the end of the year. By then it may be known that they have a surplus like this year.
He asked why not develop a policy that says if they have a surplus they cancel the levy? It made sense to him but he might not
have the entire picture. He suggested adopting that as a policy. They start the year by increasing the tax for making up the
shortfall and when they have a surplus at year's end, they could automatically fill the hole and not raise property taxes.
Alderman Newman said that utility taxes are opposed because mainly public bodies can get away with taxing at small amounts
on a monthly basis and it isn't a big hit to the taxpayer. He did not say they don't know about the taxes. Citizens don't complain
because it is not like when they get $7-10,000 property tax bills. They are not notified when these are imposed. Nobody was
notified when the real estate transfer tax was doubled in the 1980s but found out when they went to a real estate closing and
told they had to pay a certain amount. Not everybody reads the City budget every year. On the proposed utility tax, some on
Council think that it is a fair tax and it may be. He thought the fairest thing to do, is to tell the condominium associations in
advance that Council is contemplating raising the utility tax on those who buy wholesale gas. Affected people can come and
comment. The word "sneaky" was to emphasize that most of these condominium associations, unless they read the Evanston
Review or look at the proposed budget do not know this proposed utility tax would increase their monthly gas charge. When
the City imposes the tax, customers will find out about it and will not be able to complain. If they know the list of potential
customers, give them notice prior to February 23 and, if they come in with information that the increase is miniscule, then
customers' will be little affected. But if Council finds out that the increase will be substantial, if passed, it means they have
made it more expensive to live in Evanston. He suggested they know the impact in advance. Evidently NU knows about this,
which was good, and who are the others that buy wholesale gas. He wanted condominium associations notified.
Alderman Feldman spoke about examining ways to cut the budget. He noted the City Manager's message listed a group of
issues previously examined by Council in an attempt to cut services and programs, after which serious debate and struggle, were
sustained. In prior years social services were cut to a point that the agencies complained they could no longer provide for their
constituencies. Proposed cuts including closing branch libraries, additional cuts to mental health; elimination of the Summer
Youth Employment Program, elimination of police officers in middle schools, elimination of support for Fleetwood-Jourdain
Adult Theater, elimination of program coordinator at the Levy Center, closure of South Blvd. Beach, and replacing the public
service requirement at Noyes Cultural Arts Center with rent were discussed by Council. His interpretation of that process was
having them remain as they are or changed a little, that these programs were essential to this community. Council did not think
they were fluff, but essential and were those things that helped define this community. They got a list of what Evanston has that
others don't have and get rid of them because other communities don't have them. The reason they have them is because that
is how they want to serve the community and how citizens want them to serve the community. He said these things have been
thrashed over and anybody who wants to bring them up can for re -consideration.
Alderman Rainey was thinking about a notification process to condominiums. She asked if they even knew that all
condominium buildings buy wholesale gas. Like Alderman Feldman she talked to many condominium associations when the
committee considered this tax. She asked at least three of them who said if this tax was put on it would kill them. She asked
February 2, 2004
for a copy of their bill so she could calculate the tax and never heard from any of them. It was not because they did not pursue
the tax; it was because they did not respond. She asked why it was different than a letter telling citizens of a 4-5% increase in
their property tax. Why should one group be singled out for notification that there would be an increase in the utility tax when
there is an entire community who probably does not know about the increase in the property tax. Her concern was that one
group was being singled out for special treatment while the rest of the community is being socked with something. She hoped
that Highlights, the City's newsletter that goes to every household, would be used as a form of notification.
Alderman Newman had no problem with notifying all of the proposed gas tax increases in Highlights. What is widely reported
in the press are property tax increases and if somebody reads the article, in the fine print, the gas tax will be mentioned. He
referred to page 31 in the budget noting it explains what is happening in the General Fund. He understood that there have been
salary increases due to union contracts, but when looking at some departments, a 29.53% increase in health and human services.
He did not know what that was about. There are cost of living increases of 34% and an increment for increased health insurance
costs but in looking at the numbers for example the police, there is a 9% increase. There was a 9% increase in the Fire
Department and a 16% increase in the Finance Department. He asked for an explanation. He was not trying to create work, but
there must be an explanation for the increases above cost of living and health insurance. The way the numbers are presented
it seemed they were doing more and anybody picking up the budget would be confused. For Police it was an increase of $1.4
million and there are not more officers.
City Manager Crum explained when last year's budget was adopted, they did not have all union contracts settled. Thus, they
see a compound effect of two years on most budgets. In Health & Human Services, staff shifted grant funds to fully 100% to
show their full impact as opposed to the net. Alderman Newman asked if some of the departments they were showing two years
of cost of living increase. Mr. Crum explained it was set aside in contingency. Alderman Newman stated if they are showing
two years of increase, there would not be two years of increase next year and found the answer confusing. Mr. Crum explained
when the budget was adopted a year ago, there were several unsettled union contracts. They had money set aside in contingency
but applied to the departments. Mr. Casey urged them to look at page 31, where the Management & Budget Department went
down by $1.6 million, that is where the contingency fund is now. That was where last year's raises were. The reason the
departments look higher is that it was spread out for last year and this year. They are seeing a double bump. Alderman Newman
clarified the double bump would not occur each year. Mr. Crum stated the total is the new base. Alderman Newman said that
becomes the new expenditure level that they have to meet. Mr. Crum stated this year is unusual in that all union contracts are
settled; normally they don't have that. Next year will not have a double bump. Alderman Newman said staff needed to break
it down to show the increase to departments. Mr. Crum said the bottom line was correct.
Alderman Rainey said it made sense about the management & budget line. She asked for an explanation for the increase of
29.5% in health and human services. Mr. Casey said when the financial systems were changed, some of the accounting work
changed. Previously they put revenues/expenditures on the same line and netted them out. If they had a $1 million grant and
budgeted only $900,000 for expenditures, they would budget it at $100,000 net. They cannot do that anymore. So they have
to budget the revenue as a revenue line item and expenditure as an expenditure line item, so it makes it look like it is going up
by a huge amount. Mr. Crum explained it was added on both sides of the budget in the amount of $800,460. Mr. Casey said
it would be explained again. Alderman Rainey looked at the grants page and it seemed that grants were decreasing this year.
Mr. Casey would provide an explanation. Health & Human Services Director Jay Terry reported that the actual programmatic
substance, the budget reflects for the first time the SEED program that the City received from the Federal Department of Health
& Human Services — the child lead paint abatement program for the County, and funds for bio-terrorism for the first time. It
is all state and federal grant money. Alderman Newman confirmed that all services funded by these grants, if not funded next
year, will disappear from the General Fund. For it to make budgeting sense, if grants don't come next year, those expenditures
are gone unless Council decided to fund those expenditures. Mr. Crum recalled law enforcement grants and they had to decide
when the grants ended whether to continue the program. Mr. Crum said any change in funding source would be brought to the
Council. Alderman Newman asked if these are continuing grants? Mr. Terry stated the City would have to re -apply and noted
there are no ongoing operations funded by these grants. With the SEED program, the vast majority of funds are sub -contracted
to Metropolitan Family Services for their program. The child lead paint grant is administered by existing City staff. The bulk
of funds are used to abate apartments where lead paint has been identified. The expectation is if those funds ended so would
the program. The bio-terrorism funds are used for equipment purchases to improve the community's readiness and no salaries
are funded through those dollars. The expectation is that if the funding ended so would the expenditures. Alderman Newman
said where increases are above 7% he would like an explanation. Mr. Crum stated a memo would be provided.
February 2, 2004
Alderman Rainey said if they looked at page 176 they would see the difference in grants of $48,300 and this year are projecting
$804,600, which includes lead paint and SEED grant expenses. Mr. Crum stated that is largely an accounting change. Mr. Casey
explained they are starting to identify grants by what they are. They used to group them in services billed out. Now as they
receive grants they track in a line item so they know what they are spending and what they are getting in. What happened they
reduced the General Fund by $48,300 a negative number and had more money than they spent. It is an accounting change and
will explain it again in a memo. She urged a look at page 158. Mr. Casey stated that was a history of Health Department
expenditures. Another change is that staff is putting all revenues associated with business units to show revenues and the
expenses. Staff is trying to make it clearer.
Mayor Morton noted a resolution was passed in 1993 to set up a Sister City relationship with Belize City and that Evanston
has been generous to Belize City. She said they don't have anything in the budget and asked that something be put in; suggested
$5,000. She asked if there was a listing of unanticipated revenues that have come into the City in last year's budget. She knows
that they allow for a 2% loss on property taxes. She recalled several years ago that the City received about $268,000. Mr. Casey
stated the $268,000 was a one-time revenue as the County caught up with their bookkeeping. Mr. Casey stated there are no
significant revenues that they don't know of. She asked if there were any funds that would account for eliminating the 2% loss
in the budget. Mr. Casey said none were received that were more than expected. Mr. Stafford stated historically, losses on
property taxes run 1.5 to 2.5% depending on the year. It is hard to tell due to tax appeals. There is a year's lag between what
is budgeted for property taxes and what the City receives. They moved the Township's to 3%. 2% is tight. Mayor Morton
confirmed 2% loss is anticipated, but it could be higher. Mayor Morton noted since they passed the levy in December, is there
time between March and December 31 to make some changes? City Manager Crum suggested this year that they have a mid-
year review. Mr. Stafford stated that the police/fire pension levies cannot be changed and are based on long-term actuarial
assumptions. The third is debt service, which they are locked into, because debt service schedules are set up ahead. The only
one they have flexibility with is the General Fund and they are a year behind. When they end the budget year he will get the
first dollars from the tax levy in March and April that were budgeted for this year. This came up in the Budget Committee. One
of the things discussed was going to a calendar year budget because they could actually do that. They could deliberate the
budget around Thanksgiving, then pass the tax levy and it would go the following year. The policy Alderman Jean -Baptiste
suggested would be a good one if the City was on a calendar year. One issue is the lag so they are always behind and is the
reason they need good cash flow. Mayor Morton thought the amount for legislative was low. Legislative covers the Council
and City Clerk. Mayor Morton questioned the Legal Department expenditures. Mr. Casey said the Legal Department budget
only reflected the attorneys and support staff salaries, other equipment and material they use. It does not reflect the legal
settlements or expenses of the City, which are in the Insurance Fund. Page 425 contains the Insurance Fund summary.
Regarding revenues on parking fines, Alderman Newman wanted to see what was budgeted and what was taken in since
extending the downtown parking meter hours and hiring additional enforcers. What has that done to revenue fines? He wanted
to compare it with the projection; noted nighttime enforcement is all over the City.
Mayor Morton understood that portions of the debt were refinanced in reference to Mr. Stillerman's comments. Mr. Stafford
agreed that they should and the City refinanced twice last year. He is in discussion about refinancing one bond issue. Mayor
Morton asked how they determined the amount of reserves for the General Fund? Mr. Stafford said it is a budget policy to have
8.33% of the total expenditures of the year. That comes to one month of revenue. Moody's likes to see it at 10%. The City
thinks they can live leaner. Alderman Newman was correct that if the reserves go above 8.33% to 10% they have to decide what
to do with that. If over 10% it goes to capital improvements or one time funds. They will put that in a memo. If the City runs
out of money, they don't want to have to borrow money to make ends meet. Mayor Morton asked if the actual amount is in
writing? Mr. Stafford stated that it is in the audit and it fluctuates each year.
Mr. Crum confirmed that Council would meet Saturday, February 7, 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chamber for a budget workshop.
There being no further business to come before Council, Mayor Morton asked for a motion to adjourn. The Council so
moved at 9:10 p.m.
Mary P. Morris,
City Clerk
A videotape recording of this meeting has been made Dart of the permanent record and is available in the Citv Clerk's office