Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 01-16-99 PnSesRoanoke City Council Financial Planning Session January 16, 1999 Airport Conference Room A. B. C. Opening Comments Mayor and Members of City Council City Manager Director of Finance II. Capital Improvement Program Update A. Financial Assumptions B. Review of Updated CIP by Category C. Projects with funding needs 1. Jefferson Center 2. Police Building 3. Railside Linear Park D. Funding Strategy E. Other Unfunded Projects (Priority II List) F. Future Debt Capacity Break III. Financial Status Information - Operating Budget A. General Fund Revenues 1. Potential State Revenue Enhancements 2. Potential New Local Revenue Sources 3. Local and State Tax Relief B. Cost of Home Ownership C. General Fund Expenditures D. Financial Benchmarking E. Current Year Budget Status F. FY 1999-00 Budget Projections G. Roanoke City Schools' Budget (8:30 a.m. - 8:45 a.m.) (8:45 a.m. - 9:30 a.m.) (9:30 a.m. - 9:45 a.m.) (9:45 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.) IV. Fiscal Issues (11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.) A. Solid Waste Management Issues (Briefing) B. Report of City Attorney re: Council Requested Information during January 8, 1999 City Council Meeting C. Juvenile Detention Facility / Commission D. Pay Plan Study E. Y2K F. Roanoke Renaissance Recommendations G. CSA Utilization Management H. Animal Control Facility V. Closing Comments (12:30 p.m. - 1:00 p.m.) FINANCIAL PLANNING SESSION ........... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL January 16, 1999 8:30 a.m. The Council held its Financial Planning Session on Saturday, January 16, 1999, at 8:30 a.m., in the Conference Room at the Roanoke Regional Airport, with Mayor David A. Bowers presiding. PRESENT: Council Members C. Nelson Harris, W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Carroll E. Swain, James O. Trout, William White, Sr., Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor David A. Bowers ......................................................................................................... 7. ABSENT: None ..................................................................................... 0. OTHERS PRESENT: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager; James D. Ritchie, Sr., Assistant City Manager; Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney; James D. Grisso, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk; Robert H. Bird, Municipal Auditor; Willard N. Claytor, Director, Real Estate Valuation; William F. Clark, Director, Public Works; Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations; George C. Snead, Jr., Director, Public Safety; Glenn D. Radcliffe, Director, Human Development; George M. McMillan, City Sheriff; David C. Anderson, City Treasurer; Ann H. Allen, Manager, Accounting Services; Philip C. Schirmer, Civil Engineer; Sherman M. Stovall, Budget/Management Analyst; Jesse A. Hall, Deputy Director of Finance; Diane S. Akers, Budget Administrator; Kenneth S. Cronin, Manager, Personnel Management; Lori S. Spencer, Budget Analyst; Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget; and Angelita Y. Plemmer, Public Information Officer. Mr. William G. Ammen, 4938 Greenlee Road, S. W., requested that Council reduce the real estate tax rate by two cents in 1999, and that Council make a commitment to reduce the City's real estate tax rate until it reaches the same level as the City of Salem, which is $1.18 per $100.00 of assessed value. For the purpose of clarification, discussion throughout the remainder of the foregoing minutes relates to pages contained in a notebook entitled, "Budget and Financial Planning Work Session - January 16, 1999" on file in the City Clerk's Office. Ms. Akers reviewed portions of the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 1999 - 2003. (See document on file in the City Clerk's Office.) Mr. White referred to the growth rate of five per cent in the General Fund local tax revenues; and interest earnings on bond proceeds will not be appropriated for projects other than those included in the Capital Improvements Program until the estimate has been realized to fund the projects. He added that he did not see the benefit or impact of re-engineering on the capital debt structure, therefor, Council should engage in further discussion. Council Member Wyatt advised that items are periodically added to the Capital Improvements Program, with the current total at approximately $300 million of unmet needs. She stated that to her knowledge, Council has not established guidelines for reviewing the list on an annual basis and determining priorities. The City Manager explained that Council has before it the approved Five Year Capital Improvements Program, which has been approved by Council and funding is in place. He stated that ideas continue to surface, but those ideas do not move into the approved Capital Improvements Program without Council's approval proJect by project. He explained that those items referred to by Council Member Wyatt are included under Priority II Unfunded Capital Projects Requests, totaling $165,302,860.00. The City Manager advised that Vice-Mayor Harris and Council Member White have met with their counterparts on the Roanoke City School Board, and the School Board would like to meet with Council to discuss funding scenarios for high school renovation. Mr. White inquired as to City policy on existing projects that require additional funding, i.e.: if a project is estimated to cost $2 million, but the project actually costs $4 million, is the City automatically obligated to fund the additional $2 million. The City Manager advised that projects have been submitted without reliable cost estimates, and explained that the City has assisted the School system with up front funds for architectural/engineering services to provide accurate cost estimates for middle and elementary school renovations. He called attention to the need to increase estimates on the Jefferson Center Performance Hall renovation, the police building and the railside linear park, and added that Council may want to lean in the direction of not entertaining projects unless they are submitted with reliable engineering estimates. Mr. Schirmer reviewed projects completed during the last fiscal year and no longer included in the Capital Improvements Program; viz: Program expansion of Juvenile Detention Home Valley-wide Storm Water Management Plan Hunting Hills Plaza Water Fund - eight inch line - Statesman/RClT He reviewed new projects considered by Council and added to the Capital Improvements Program, viz: Regional Fire-EMS Training Center Shenandoah Hotel Partnership Victory Stadium Renovations Higher Education Center School Projects Franklin Road Water Main Replacement He reviewed proJects requiring additional funding for completion of the current phase; i.e.: Jefferson Center Performance Hall Renovation ($800,000.00) New Police Building ($1,260,000.00) Railside Linear Walk ($788,500.00) Mr. Swain inquired if Roanoke County, Salem, and Vinton have contributed funds toward the railside linear walk; whereupon, Mr. Schirmer advised that there is approximately $300,000.00 of ISTEA money from the Virginia Department of Transportation to support the project, therefore, some regional money is involved. Ms. Akers reviewed the funding strategy for capital projects requiring additional funds; viz: Series 1994 General Obligation Bonds proceeds originally dedicated for Juvenile Detention Home Expansion - ($1,400,000.00). Proceeds from Roanoke Valley Detention Commission - ($700,000.00). Series 1996 General Obligation Bond proceeds dedicated for 1-581 Interchange Project - ($800,000.00). She advised that these sources of funds could be reallocated to the following projects: Jefferson Center Performance Hall Renovation - $800,000.00, new police building - $1,260,000.00, and Railside Linear Walk - $788,500.00. She stated that at the Council meeting on Tuesday, January 19, 1999, Council will be requested to approve the Updated Capital Improvements Program for Fiscal Years 1999-2003. Ms. Akers stated that there is adequate funding available to continue the Capital Improvements Program, however, there are numerous other capital needs as contained in Exhibit 3 (Priority II unfunded capital project requests) totaling $165,302,860.00 that have not been funded; whereupon, Ms. Wyatt and the Mayor 3 advised that there should be further discussion and prioritization. The City Manager advised that discussion would be premature until the following is known: debt capacity, revenue projections, and a long range policy as to when Council wishes to hold the next bond issue. Ms. Allen reviewed debt service: Citizens approved by referendum and City Council authorized $39.03 million of General Obligation bonds as approved in the November 1997 Referendum to be issued on or after January 1, 2000. $13.01 million of the authorized amount was issued in December 1997 with the remaining $26.02 million to be issued in fiscal year 2000 with the first payment due in fiscal year 2001. $7.5 million for Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project. Bond issuance approved through voter referendum in April 1989. $2.5 million for the Higher Education Center. In adopting the fiscal year 1999 General Fund budget, City Council designated funding in the amount of $250,000.00 for these bonds. $9.0 million for Victory Stadium. In adopting the fiscal year 1999 General Fund budget, City Council designated partial funding in the amount of $300,000.00, with plans to add additional funding over the next two fiscal years. The Mayor inquired if the City has approached other Roanoke Valley jurisdictions with regard to funding assistance for the Higher Education Center; whereupon, the City Manager advised that Salem, Roanoke County and Botetourt were approached, but no response was received. The Mayor stated that the point should be made that the City of Roanoke is the only locality supporting this important project. Mr. White advised that sometimes, the issue of regional cooperation is stressed to the point that it becomes a negative rather than a positive, and if a first class higher education facility is developed, people from throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia will spend their money in Roanoke City, therefor, there will be a positive spin-off to the City. Mr. Trout advised that the Higher Education Center can be used as an economic development tool by attracting industry, thus, the City pays the price for being the leader. 4 Ms. Allen also reviewed debt service for fiscal years 1999-2014 (page 16), School Debt Service for fiscal year 1999 - 2014 (page 17), and the ratio of debt service expenditures to General Fund expenditures, per capita bonded debt for Roanoke City, Alexandria, Danville, Fredericksburg, Lynchburg, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Richmond, Salem and Roanoke County. Mr. Hall reviewed Revenue Highlights (pages 20 -43). As an additional source of revenue, Mr. Hudson suggested a City of Roanoke vehicle license plate. Council Member Wyatt inquired about the amount of revenue that would be generated to the City if the prepared food tax is increased by one per cent from four to five per cent. She also requested specific figures on the amount of revenue generated to the City as a result of the annual local option sales tax received by the City from the sale of food and the amount of revenue as a result of the alcoholic beverage tax. Mr. Swain inquired about the amount of revenue that would be generated to the City by increasing the penalty for failure to display a current vehicle inspection sticker and failure to display a City decal; whereupon, the City Attorney advised that the City is currently at the maximum on City decal enforcement. In regard to failure to display a current vehicle inspection sticker, he called attention to a traffic infraction under State Code at $200.00, the City is currently at $100.00, and the fine could be increased to $200.00 which will not result in significant revenue to the City. The Mayor having previously raised the question as to whether the City can enforce prosecution and law enforcement fees, the City Attorney advised that the prosecution fee is addressed in the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. He added that the law enforcement fee is not addressed by State Code, however, all fees are controlled by the General Assembly pursuant to the Dillon Rule, and he was of the opinion that the City cannot impose any additional fees in criminal cases. Following a review of potential revenue initiatives (pages 44 - 45), Mr. Swain requested that the Director of Finance provide a recommendation with regard to a fund balance that could be used in emergencies. Mr. Grisso reviewed Local and State Tax Relief (pages 46 - 47). Council Member White having previously raised a question with regard to comparative cost of home ownership in the City of Roanoke with certain other Virginia jurisdictions, Ms. Allen explained various scenarios in Roanoke City as compared with Roanoke County, Salem, Alexandria, Lynchburg and Portsmouth. She reviewed pages 49 and 50 of the CIP notebook, total expenditures per capita and taxes paid by homeowners in the City of Roanoke. Mr. Stovall reviewed pages 51 and 52, expenditures per capita regarding public safety, public works, social services, parks recreational and cultural, and community development in Roanoke City as compared with Roanoke County, Salem and all cities average. Ms. Akers reviewed pages 53 - 60 in connection with the General Fund expenditures by function and General Fund expenditures by category. She advised that General Fund expenditures are monitored monthly by both department managers and the Office of Management and Budget; as of December 31, 1998, 52.78 per cent of the budget had been obligated; most expenditures are on-target for the fiscal year and a mid-year expenditure review will be conducted on February 2. She reviewed an analysis of General Fund revenue increase for fiscal year 2000 in the amount of $3,903,546.00, which is proposed for allocation as follows: City Schools - $951,944.00, State targeted and local match - $740,800.00, Maintenance of Effort - $208,180.00, and Priority Items - $2,002,622.00. She also reviewed the following priority funding items for fiscal year 2000: Employee Pay and Benefits - For Demonstration Purposes, 3 per cent - $1,850,000.00 Pay Plan Recommendations - ? ICMA Match Increase - $125,000.00 Retirement Supplement to Age 65 ($159 per month) - $100,000.00 Health Insurance - $387,795.00 Police Reorganization/Program Enhancements - $200,000.00 Juvenile Detention Center Staffing - $125,000.00 Juvenile Detention Commission Operations -3 months -$100,000.00 Community Planning Staffing/Operations -$75,000.00 Social Services - Foster Care - Local Match - $35,000.00 Cultural/Human Services - $42,000.00 6 Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk - $100,000.00 Fleet Replacement - $75,000.00 Fixed Asset Maintenance - $50,000.00 Victory Stadium Capital Funding - $300,000.00 Additional Debt Service - $100,000.00 Landfill Tipping Fees - $96,700.00 State Tax on Landfills ($1 per ton) - $50,000.00 Landfill Tonnage Increase -$184,705.00 Homeowner's Free Disposal Program -$189,475.00 CIS Operating Costs - $100,000.00 50th Anniversary of Star Celebration - $25,000.00 YWCA Children's Garden - $400,000.00 Northwest Child Development Center - $400,000.00 Public Safety Automation project - Phase II - ? Tax Rate Reduction ($.02) - $766,000.00 Other Supplemental Items - ? Council Member Swain inquired if the City can place a cap on the amount of funds contributed by the City to the International City Manager's Association on behalf of City employees for the Deferred Compensation Plan. The Mayor expressed concern in regard to the issue of recycling and since plastic is no longer acceptable for recycling purposes, he inquired if the amount of refuse will increase; whereupon, the Director of Public Works advised that an in- house task force will study the issue and provide a cost benefit analysis. 7 Ms. Akers reviewed an analysis of expenditure increases: Increase in Total Revenues City Schools State Targeted/Local Match Maintenance of Effort Balance Priority Items Unfunded $ 3,903,546.00 (951,944.00) (740,800.00) (208,180.00) 2,002,622.00 (5,876,675.00) (3,874,053.00) Potential new/increased State Revenues in the amount of: HB 599 - Local Law Enforcement Increased Funding Deputy Sheriffs $2,254,701.00 489.812.00 Total $2,744,513.00 Mr. White suggested that the committee which was appointed on August 18, 1996, consisting of John H. Parrott, Carroll E. Swain, James O. Trout, William White, Sr., William F. Clark, Jesse A. Hall, and James D. Ritchie be reactivated, with the appropriate substitutions to address solid waste management issues; whereupon, the Mayor requested that the City Clerk call the matter to his attention at the Council meeting on Tuesday, January 19, 1999. The City Manager advised that tentative information from the consultant which was engaged to study the City's pay and benefits program will be available in early February. The City Manager advised that City staff will report to Council on a 60 day cycle regarding Y2K issues. The Mayor suggested that the City obtain a copy of a video tape from Lubuck, Texas, regarding Y2K compliance. The City Manager called attention to the rezoning of properties in Raleigh Court and stated that one of Council's greatest concerns has been abandoned vehicles along City curbs in the neighborhoods; therefor, Council appropriated approximately $300,000.00 to hire rental inspectors to inspect the growing number of rental units in the City. He advised that in the last ten years, some of Roanoke's most solid residential neighborhoods were rezoned in mass from single family to multi-family and the City has been unable to hire enough rental inspectors, or police officers, or construct enough school classrooms to slow down the number of children coming into the community unprepared over the next 10 to 20 years in order to address all of the City's needs if this conversion rate continues to increase. He added that unless the City is in control of the issue, zoning will become the driving force. 8 Council Member Wyatt advised that before going forth with neighborhood plans, the City should be aware of all legal resources so that one neighborhood is not penalized while a land use study is prepared for another neighborhood. Vice-Mayor Harris advised that Roanoke Renaissance is vitally needed; and the leadership of the Raleigh Court community is looking to Council to rezone properties in that neighborhood in what may be considerable opposition from landlords and from persons who make their living off of multi family housing units. Council Member Hudson expressed an interest in knowing how many property owners actually reside in the houses they have purchased. Council Member Wyatt inquired if Council can adopt a measure requiring a landlord who evicts a tenant to be responsible for disposing of the furnishings; whereupon, the City Attorney advised that the Dillon Rule prohibits adoption of such a measure by Council. The Mayor advised that revenue trends are disturbing and if the City is to go forth with a Capital Improvements Program, it will be necessary to identify new revenue sources. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Financial Planning Session adjourned at 12:20 p.m. APPROVED ATTEST: Mary F. Parker City Clerk David A. Bowers Mayor 9 JAMES D. GRISSO Director of Finance CITY OF ROANOKE DEPARTMENT OF FINAi~CE 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 461 R O. Box 1220 '~ Roanoke, Virginia 24006-1220 Telephone: (540) 853-2821 Fax: (540) 853-2940 JESSE A. HALL DepuW Director January 27, 1999 Mr. Carroll E.'Swain 3434 Kershaw Road, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24017 Dear Mr. Swain: We are writing in response to a question you raised at our recent Financial Planning Session held at the Airport on January 16, 1999. You asked if the City should create a fund balance to be used in emergencies or perhaps to take advantage of certain opportunities. We assume that you are referring to economic development opportunities whereas the City might offer incentives to entice companies to locate in our City to expand our tax base. The GoVernment Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommends certain "Best Practices" for budgeting for governments. One of their best practices pertains to the establishment of stabtltTation funds to protect against revenue shortfalls or unpredicted one-time expenditures. We believe this is the nature of the type of fund and situations to which you were referring when you posed the question. StabiliT~tion funds are most typically created by reserving a portion of the General Fund Balance at year-end. Currently we reserve the General Fund balance each year for $250,000 Insurance Reserve funding and Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement (CMERP) per ordinances adopted by City Council. We believe that if Council wanted to reserve a portion of the General Fund balance each year for a stabili~,ation fund, we would need to consider that in conjunction with the Insurance Reserve and CMERP ordinances previously adopted by City Council. Attached is an excerpt from the GFOA Best Practices recommendations describing a stabili=ation fund and examples from a couple of localities that have created one. Mr. Carroll E. Swain January 27, 1999 Page 2 We would be pleased to discuss this with you and other members of City Council in more detail. Sincerely, Grisso Director of Finance JDG:s Attachments C: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Wllbum C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Mary F. Parker, City Clerk Practice 4.1 - Develop Policy on Stabilization Funds · Principlee · Elements Budget Practices · Practice Examplee Practice: A government should develop policies to guide the creation, maintenance, and use of resources for financial stabilization purposes. Rationale: Governments should maintain a prudent level of financial resources to protect against reducing service levels or raising taxes and fees because of temporary revenue shortfalls or unpredicted one-time expenditures. Outputs: The policies should establish how and when a government builds up stabilization funds and should identify the purposes for which they may be used. Development of a policy on minimum and maximum reserve levels may be advisable. Policies on stabilization funds should be publicly available and summarized in materials used in budget preparation. They also should be identified in other government documents, including planning and management reports. Notes: Stabilization funds are called by many names including rainy day funds, unreserved, undesignated fund balances, and contingency funds. These funds may be used at a government's discretion to address temporary cash flow shortages, emergencies, unanticipated economic downtums, and one-time opportunities. They provide flexibility to respond to unexpected opportunities that may help a government achieve its goals. Policies on the use, of these funds may also be tied to an adverse change in economic indicators (such as declining employment or personal income) to ensure that the funds are not depleted before an emergency arises. The minimum and maximum amounts to be accumulated may be based on the types of revenue, the level of uncertainty associated with revenues, the condition of capital assets, or the government's level of security with its financial position. Stabilization funds may be constrained by state or locai laws. Legally required reserves should be distinguished from discretionary reserves. Examples of Practice 4.1 ExamPle 4.1.1 - City of Corvallis, OR - Financial Plan Example 4.1.2 - Oty of Fort Worth, TX - Finandal Mgr. Policy S*,Ttemcn- Example 1 Practice Statement on DEVELOP POLICY ON STABILIZATION FUNDS SOURCE: City of Corvallis, Oregon, Ri~htsizing II: Compacting. Volume I: Financial Plan, 1991, p. XI-4. FINANCIAL POLICIES Fiscal Year 1991-92 Annual Budget REVENUE POLICIES statements dealing with taxes and the means whereby the city raises revenue to fund operations Revenue Policy #1: Fund Balance · To maintain the City's credit rating and meet seasonal cash flow shortfalls, the budget shall provide for an anticipated undesignated fund balance between 5% and 8% for general government and enterprise fund types, of estimated annual revenues. The fund balance shall be exclusive of all reserves not anticipated to be readily available for use in emergencies and contingencies. · Should the fund balance fall below 5% of revenues a plan for expenditure reductions and/or revenue increases shall be submitted to the City Council via the Administrative Services Committee. · In the event the fund balance is above 8%, the difference may be used to fund the following activities: one-time capital expenditures which do not increase ongoing City costs; other one-time costs; and ongoing or new City programs, provided such action is considered in the context of a 3-year projection of revenue and expenditures. · Generally, the fund balance levels are dictated by: cash flow requirements to support operating expenses; relative rate stability from year to year for enterprise funds; susceptibility to emergency or unanticipated expenditure; credit worthiness and capacity to support debt service requirements; legal or regulatory requirements affecting revenues, disbursements, and fund balances; and reliability of outside revenues. · If, at the end of a fiscal year, the fund balance falls below 5%, then the City shall rebuild the balance within one year. Revenue Policy ~2: Continnencv · To help maintain services during short periods of economic decline and meet emergency conditions, in addition to the Fund Balance, the budget shall provide for a contingency equivalent to 2% of estimated annual operating revenues. All general government and enterprise fund types shall maintain a contingency. The contingency shall also be exclusive of all reserves not anticipated to be readily available for use in emergencies. The contingency is established to provide for nonrecurring unanticipated expenditures, or to meet small increases in service delivery costs. · Contingencies should be planned to avoid large rate increases from one year to the next. Where correction of a fund balance deficit causes the contingency to fall below 2% of operating revenue, a gradual correction of the problem over a two year period is preferable to a one-time jump in rates. Example 2 Practice Statement on DEVELOP POLICY ON STABILIZATION FUNDS SOURCE: City of Fort Worth, TX, Financial Management Policy Statements, FY96-97 CITY OF FORT WORTH FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICY STATEMENTS IlL Fund Balance/Retained Earnings To main._t_~_ .' the fund balance and retained earnings of the various operating funds at levels sufficient to protect the City's creditworthiness as well as its financial positions from unforeseeable emergencies. A. General Fund Undesignated Fund Balance The City shall strive to maintain the General Fund undesignated fund balance at 10 percent of current year budget expenditures. After completion of the annual audit, if the undesignated fund balance exceeds 10 percent, the excess must be specifically designated for subsequent year expenditures or transferred to the Capital Projects Reserve Fund. (The use of this Fund shall be guided by the Capital Expenditures and Improvements Policy Statements.) B. Retained Earnings of Other Operating Funds In other enterprise operating funds, the City shall strive to maintain positive retained earnings positions to provide sufficient reserves for emergencies and revenue shortfalls. Specifically, in the Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund, an operating reserve will be established and maintained at 20 percent of the current year's budget appropriation for operation and maintenance, which is defined as the total budget less debt service and capital project expenditure. C. Use of Fund Balance/Retained Earnings Fund Balance/Retained Earnings shall be used only for emergencies, non-recurring expenditures, or major capital purchases that can not be accommodated through current year savings. Should such use reduce the balance below the appropriate level set as the objective for that fund, restoration recommendations will accompany the decision to utilize said balance. D. Retained Earnings of Internal Service Funds The City shall not regularly maintain positive retained earnings in internal service funds. When an internal service fund builds up retained earnings, the City shall transfer it to other operating funds. E. Debt Service Funds The City shall maintain sufficient reserves in its debt service funds which shall equal or exceed the reserve fund balances required by bond ordinances. Office of the,,~,t, ......... , January 14, 1999 Honorable Mayor David A. Bowers and Members of Council Roanoke, Virginia Subject: Financial Planning Session Dear Mayor and Council Members: Attached is the agenda for the Financial Planning Session which will be held on Saturday, January 16 at the Roanoke Regional Airport Conference Room. The session will start at 8:30 a.m. and conclude at 1:00 p.m. Breakfast v~ill be available beginning at 8:00 a.m. We look forward to meeting with you on Saturday. Please give me a call if you have any questions prior to our meeting. Sincerely, W. Robert Herbert City Manager Attachment cc: James D. Grisso, Director of Finance Mary F. Parker, City Clerk Room 364 Municipal South 215 Church Avenue, S.W Roar~oke, Virginia 24011-!591 (540) 853-2333 F,:~ i:-~'' :; · C tyWeb:www ci roanoke.va.us Roanoke City Council Financial Planning Session January 16, 1999 Airport Conference Room A. B. C. Opening Comments Mayor and Members of City Council City Manager Director of Finance II. Capital Improvement Program Update A. Financial Assumptions B. Review of Updated ClP by Category C. Projects with funding needs 1. Jefferson Center 2. Police Building 3. Railside Linear Park D. Funding Strategy E. Other Unfunded Projects (Priority II List) F. Future Debt Capacity Break III. Financial Status Information - Operating Budget A. General Fund Revenues 1. Potential State Revenue Enhancements 2. Potential New Local Revenue Sources 3. Local and State Tax Relief B. Cost of Home Ownership C. General Fund Expenditures D. Financial Benchmarking E. Current Year Budget Status F. FY 1999-00 Budget Projections G. Roanoke City Schools' Budget (8:30 a.m. - 8:45 a.m.) (8:45 a.m. - 9:30 a.m.) (9:30 a.m. - 9:45 a.m.) (9:45 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.) IV. Fiscal Issues (11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.) A. Solid Waste Management Issues (Briefing) B. Report of City Attorney re: Council Requested Information during January 8, 1999 City Council Meeting C. Juvenile Detention Facility / Commission D. Pay Plan Study E. Y2K F. Roanoke Renaissance Recommendations G, CSA Utilization Management H, Animal Control Facility V. Closing Comments (12:30 p.m. - 1:00 p.m.) JAMES D. GRISSO Director of Finance January 22, 1999 CITY OF ROANOKE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 461 P. O. Box 1220 Roanoke, Virginia 24006-1220 Telephone: (540) 853-2821 Fax: (540) 853-2940 :07 JESSE A. HALL Deputy Director Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mayor Bowers and Members of Council: Thank you again for the opportunity to work together Saturday in our Budget and Financial Planning Session. We appreciate the opportunity to address and discuss some of the City's financial planning issues and we believe this session initiated a positive start to the fiscal year 2000 annual budget. During Saturday's session, Council member Linda Wyatt inquired about the amount of annual local option sales tax received by the City from the sale of food. In the 1999 Virginia General Assembly, House Bill 1434 proposes a phased-in reduction of the State sales tax on food purchased for preparation and consumption away from the place of purchase. Beginning July 1, 1999, the bill proposes to reduce the State portion of the tax (currently 3.5%) to 1.5%. The bill proposed to further reduce this to 1.0% on July 1, 2000 and to.5% on July 1,2001.. This bill preserves the.5% State portion of this tax earmarked for transportation. The bill enables localities to continue to collect the 1.0% local option sales ta~ Each fiscal year, the City receives approximately $1.9 million in local option tax r~venue on the sale of such food. We hope this information is beneficial to members of City Council. Please contact me at 853-2821 should you have any further questions. Sincerely, Director of Finance JDG/aha:s C: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Wllburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Mary F. Parker, City Clerk