2022, 06-14 Budget Workshop Special Meeting MINUTES
SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
BUDGET WORKSHOP
Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers
Spokane Valley, Washington
June 14,2022
Mayor Haley called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m.The meeting was held in person by Council and staff
in Council Chambers, and also remotely via Zoom meeting.
Attendance:
Councilmembers Staff
Pam Haley,Mayor John Hohman, City Manager
Rod Higgins,Deputy Mayor Erik Lamb,Deputy City Manager
Tim Hattenburg, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director
Laura Padden, Councilmember Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Brandi Peetz, Councilmember John Bottelli, Parks,Rec &Facilities Dir.
Ben Wick, Councilmember Tony Beattie,Deputy City Attorney
Arne Woodard, Couneilmember Dave Ellis,Police Chief
Bill Helbig, Community &Public Works Dir.
Gloria Mantz, City Engineer
Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Admin. Analyst
John Whitehead,Human Resources Director
Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
Mike Basinger, Economic Development Dir.
Chaz Bates,Planning Manager
Chad Knodel, IT Manager
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
WELCOME: Mayor Haley welcomed everyone to the meeting.
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councihnembers were present.
Worksheet Overview--John Hohman, Chelsie Taylor
City Manager Hohman explained that staff will go through the department budgets as usual; and new for
this year, Finance Director Taylor will give a financial forecast; said we are now in unchartered territory
with unprecedented inflation and Council will hear what is the latest thinking on the economy;and will also
hear that staff recommends caution;that our sales tax is our primary source of revenue and we are tracking
it;that over the years the goal was to keep the entire budget increase at 1%;said this time staff went through
every item to eliminate anything extra,and then look at the best averages over the last three years; he said
there is no fat anywhere in this budget.However,he added,after doing our budget that way for many years,
it is not now possible to do that; it comes down to Council policy choice on what does Council want our
level of service to be on these various categories, as reducing anything will mean a reduction in service
levels.
1. Economic Forecast&Projections—Chelsie Taylor
Finance Director Taylor went over the information as noted on her Request for Council Action form; she
talked about the sales tax collection increases over the past few years; mentioned the May 13, 2022
Economic&Revenue Update from the State Economic and Revenue Forecast Council showing that retail
sales taxes have continued to increase; however, a reduction in spending is anticipated; she noted the
Telephone Utility Tax Collections decreased by over 21% in 2021, and said the sharp decreases in 2020
and 2021 are believed to be related to the COVID-19 pandemic but we appear to be back on par with pre-
pandemic levels; however,the recent increase in fuel likely means people will be driving less. Ms. Taylor
Council Special Meeting Workshop:06-14-2022 Page 1 of 8
Approved by Council:07-12-2022
explained that the City's fuel tax revenues are based on the number of gallons sold rather than the dollar
amount of sales, which means that a reduction in number of gallons will reduce the City's collections of
fuel taxes. She also went over the Lodging taxes which were also heavily impacted by the pandemic, with
a decrease in collections of over 40% in 2020; but those revenues have also bounced back to pre-pandemic
levels in 2021 and for the first few months in 2022, lodging taxes increased by almost 66%, and she noted
that she will have further estimates later this summer. Director Taylor then went over the real estate excise
taxes (REET) which have increased by 70% from 2020, which is primarily due to several months of
unusually large collections, a lot of which is related to the Northeast Industrial Area; said she expects the
REET receipts to fall in 2024, as noted on page 29 of 30 of the documents. City Manager Hohman said that
the initial planning for the Northeast Industrial area and budgeting some City funds to construct that
infrastructure has paid off and really made a difference to our City.
Director Taylor stated that the City has seen record highs in the last several years for permitting,with 202I
the highest; that 2022 is also seeing high numbers but valuations are more consistent with historic levels;
said she expects that revenues will be flat in 2022 compared with 2021, but some increases are due to
increases built into the fee schedule; said 2023 is estimated based on the last six years adjusting for
decreases,that the numbers are strong but not stable and she hopes for further clarity as the year progresses.
Director Taylor then moved back to the material in the front of the binder immediately after the agenda,
and she went over the budget calendar,amended 2022 figures in the general fund budget,recurring revenues
and expenditures, and nonrecurring revenues and expenditures; she also noted the ending fund balance as
a percent of recurring expenditures is a smaller percentage than we have seen in the past and that staff will
be monitoring that.Ms.Taylor went over the material for Street Fund version 1 compared to version 2,with
version 2 showing reduction in services.Director Helbig said that possibilities for reducing the street budget
include cutting services in two major areas: ongoing street maintenance like pothole repair which will lead
to road condition decreasing faster, and turning off street lights; he said we would keep the signals
operational but we spend about one-half million annually on street lights; roadside maintenance would
likely decrease by not mowing and irrigating;said the difference between version 1 and 2 is about$1 million
in reduced services.
Moving to the analysis of General Fund Pavement Management Support, City Manager Hohman said this
is a new piece and shows an historical viewpoint of different subsidies from the general fund to keep streets
going; said about$10.8 million has been transferred into this operation because we don't have sustainable
revenues in street fund 101; said fund 312 has had almost$24 million allocated for streets but that is also
$24 million that hasn't gone elsewhere; said staff recommends staying with the status quo now but we need
to contemplate that in the future we will likely have to cut something; said the bottom half of that page
shows allocating sales revenues for things associated with vehicles; that perhaps we could focus some of
that from vehicle sales taxes to support streets in pavement preservation and street maintenance 101; said
Council at some point might want to dedicate some percentage of this collection in the future for sustaining
roads; or choose another option like a Transportation Benefit District (TBD), or keep the status quo. In
looking at the auto sales tax as a percentage of actual sales tax, Director Taylor said she went through the
Department of Revenue historical data for 2019, 2020 and 2021 and came up with an average of 17% of
our total sales tax collections; and as the figures show, came up with our estimated auto related sales taxes
of about $5.2 million; then looking in the 2023 budget of the amount the general fund is providing to
pavement preservation 311, is about $1 million; then the proposed subsidy to the street fund 101 is $3.1
million for a total subsidy to funds 311 and 101 of about$4.1 million,which is about 80% of that 17%; so
if we were to take that$4.1 million and move that straight from the general fund to the street fund and fund
311,the general fund,which is the Iast section at the bottom of that page,would show a surplus of$823,118.
At 9:07 a.m. Mayor Haley called for a recess; she reconvened the meeting at 9:22 a.m.
Looking at that new sheet,Councilmember Woodard suggested taking the B-$4,134,08,that would reduce
our overall general sales tax that we have for other services, but that would make Fund 101 complete at
least in a normal situation; he asked if we know, prior to those last three years, what kind of numbers we
had and if we averaged those what would be the outcome.Ms.Taylor said she went back to the Department
Council Special Meeting Workshop:06-14-2022 Page 2 of 8
Approved by Council:07-12-2022
of Revenue website, that they changed their website so she could only go back as far as March of 2018.
Councilmember Woodard asked if we have that data within our own records,from 2009 to 2013.Ms.Taylor
said she would have to research that,but we might have it.Mr.Hohman added that would be very interesting
because of the low sales tax collected in those years; again keeping in mind historic levels of service and
what we have discussed with our pavement management program;further Mr.Hohman stated that we have
had some estimates which are likely outdated, of how much additional money we need to put into our
streets; said based on the grants we have been able to receive, our traditional focus was on the arterials;he
noted the recent allocation of the street wear fee for local access streets but there is still a gap on funding
and as years go by, local access streets are getting worse and there are no grants available for.those which
means that gap is still growing; and he again noted that is not reflected in these numbers. Director Taylor
then went over page 7, Stormwater Fund#402,which shows a deficit for the first time, and mentioned it is
very timely that we are working on a rate study for stormwater. After briefly mentioning pages 8 through
11, she finished up by noting that as shown on page 12,there are no changes at this point in our FTE(full
time equivalent employees)for the 2023 budget.
2. City Council—John Hohman
City Manager Hohman went over the figures under General Fund, City Council, mentioning the changes
under wages are due to the Salary Committee's recommended changes in Council salaries,which is shown
in 2022 and will be carried over into 2023;that this fund is status quo as most are, with few adjustments;
and said overall, the combined nonpayroll increase is about 5%.
3. City Manager John Hohman
Under the City Manager fund, Mr. Hohrnan said this shows an employee count of 5.5; that there are some
modifications under supplies, and minor adjustments under cell phones,travel and mileage,and overall,the
combined nonpayroll increase is about 5%.
4. City Attorney-Cary Driskell
City Attorney Driskell said that his budget is also staying with the status quo with minor increases; he
mentioned the increased recording fees which means it cost more to file code enforcement cases like
recording judgments; said we routinely work with several outside attorneys on issues like lien foreclosures,
the shoreline master plan, and land use appeals and that we have had more in the last two years than in our
history, which is likely a reflection of the value of property.
5.Public Safety—Dave Ellis, Morgan Koudelka,Erik Lamb
Mr. Koudelka distributed copies of the '2023 Spokane Valley Budget Projections for Public Safety
Contracts' which he explained, summarizes amounts for the various contracts. Mr. Lamb added that this
new information explains why those changes are occurring; that we are starting to see impacts from the
Blake decision and some of the legislative changes that have occurred; said Blake dealt with eliminating
felony drug reduction; said there has also been a reduction in the number of state patrol offices who had
contributed to the traffic items; said with the number of patrol officers doing down, the County cases
decreased more than ours have,which means that we constitute a larger percentage of usage. Mr.Koudelka
continued with an explanation about the decrease in County cases; additionally, charges that might have
been felonies prior to Blake are now misdemeanors which increases our cases; he also noted that when
vaccine requirements and other Covid-19 stipulations came out, the County staff numbers dropped
dramatically;he noted that this year the State Patrol is putting in a lot of effort to increase staff but it remains
challenging; and said staff will provide updates throughout the year. Mr. Koudelka said that the additional
$1 million is due to the collective bargaining agreement. Mr. Lamb said this year's cost will be $500,000,
with an estimated$1 million next year and$1.4 million the following year. Mr.Hohman stated that the two
big challenges are public safety and streets, and both are putting a lot of pressure on the general fund; said
staff worked to put together a status quo budget that is affordable; that discussions about adding services
dictates a discussion of added revenues as he stated he doesn't think we can get there with the current
revenues. It was noted that there will be more discussion on this topic during the supplemental budget
requests item. Chief Ellis said that 21 lateral police offices are now sitting on the hiring list; and it is likely
that by July we will only have two vacancies;said the new bargaining agreement has resulted in more lateral
Council Special Meeting Workshop:06-14-2022 Page 3 of 8
Approved by Council:07-12-2022
officers,and the signing bonus has also helped in recruitment;said laterals are usually handling calls within
a couple months of hiring, but new hires takes much longer.
In addressing some of the other categories, Mr. Koudelka said that emergency management is based on the
population of participating jurisdictions; animal control jumped 6% for 2023, and noted the contingency
amount which is used to accommodate any unknowns or for the settle and adjustment. Mr. Lamb added
that our highest increase in the budget by dollar value is public safety; that we are not discussing any
changes in levels of service, and he mentioned the need to be very cautious and realistic.
6. Deputy City Manager—Erik Lamb
Deputy City Manager Lamb went through the figures under his budget, and mentioned the reorganization
this year which added the two contract analysis under his department; said the nonpayroll primary change
is in software licenses;and under memberships and registrations,that he is maintaining his attorney license.
7.Finance—Chelsie Taylor
Finance Director Taylor said that IT has now split off from Finance; that there was a change under travel
but not large;that staff didn't travel during the pandemic,but it is very useful to have that training off-site;
said the entire budget shows an increase of about 5%.
8. General Government—Chelsie Taylor
Director Taylor explained that this budget covers everything that doesn't specifically belong in a
department; so if it is city-wide it goes in here and she highlighted some of the changes.
9. Information Technology—Chad Knodel
Mr.Knodel mentioned that IT has moved out of Finance;that there is a small increase in wages and payroll,
but the remainder is mostly the same as last year.
10. Human Resources—John Whitehead
After Mr. Whitehead went over the highlights of the Human Resources budget, there was brief discussion
about increases in medical rates,with Director Taylor adding that we estimate increases of 10%for medical
and 5%for dental and vision; in response to a question about long term insurance,Director Taylor said we
were told not to collect that as it is in suspension. Councilmember Padden asked if the turnover rate has
increased in the last few years and Mr. Whitehead said it has but it appears to be stabilizing; that they did
some changes to recruitment and those seem to be paying off, and that he hopes to give Council a future
update.
11. Community & Public Works: Administration—Bill Helbig
Community and Public Woks Director Helbig said that this new group was created as part of the
reorganization in 2022; he noted positions moved from the Engineering Department; that under the
professional services category,that number has increased for when we need to hire consultants.
12. Community & Public Works: Engineering Gloria Mantz
City Engineer Mantz explained the information under her budget and she too mentioned the reorganization;
also noted the added wages for interns to help with the increasing workload; said there has been a huge
influx of federal dollars and that staff anticipated a lot of incoming projects; and that overall this budget
shows about a 2% increase.
13. Community& Public Works: Building—Jenny Nickerson
Building Official Nickerson went over the highlights of the Building and Code Enforcement figures, and
stated that this.department includes 15 FTEs.
14. Community&Public Works: Planning—Chaz Bates
Planning Manager Bates hit the highlights of his budget,mentioning that this is a new division,and includes
five FTEs.
Council Special Meeting Workshop:06-14-2022 Page 4 of 8
Approved by Council:07-12-2022
15. Economic Development—Mike Basinger
Economic Development Director Basinger went over the information under his budget; mentioned the
regional planning efforts in relation to the Urban Growth Act; said his budget includes the position of the
Homeless Coordinator; said they also help connect people with properties whether that be for office,
industrial or retail; mentioned the coordinated tourism efforts, our Farmers market and that they facilitate
the City's marketing efforts; that they are also examining website development and are working on
overhauling the City's website and working with public relations to make sure the information gets out to
the public; said his department includes about 7 FTEs and is constantly evolving;that their department also
provides public outreach support to other departments like Public Works; said the increase in memberships
is to allow the joining of the Washington Economic Development Association. In going back to the topic
of our website,Mr.Basinger said our website needs to be upgraded and staff feels this can be accomplished
with the existing budget, adding that the last migration was about ten years ago and they are now looking
at entirely different systems. Budgeting for supplies for homeless services was also noted,to include such
things as gloves,and other safety equipment;with Mr.Hohman adding that staff is having discussions with
the County so that when the next request for proposals is published,we can apply and get funding for 2023.
16. Facilities—John Bottelli
Director Bottelli said the primary changes for this budget can be seen in the gray area,which is mostly for
City Flail but also includes additional properties like the former White Elephant; and mentioned that we
also took janitorial services in-house.
17, Parks&Recreation-John Bottelli
Director Bottelli went through the various divisions under Parks & Recreation; that mostly it too is status
quo but there is an increase in professional services based on anticipated needs for forest management
planning; said he is also working on a Greenacres Grant; said Senske Lawn services have increased as we
add new properties for care; said we have three large contracts with them which are up for renewal the end
of 2023; in Recreation,that too remains primarily status quo; said they want to purchase a video player and
PA system as they found that the rental might not be the best direction for that; mentioned the recreation
programs are offset by revenues; that under Aquatics the YMCA operates the three pools, and that staff
remains optimistic we will get fully staffed for pool season.
At 10:52 a.m. Mayor Haley called for a recess; she reconvened the meeting at 11:00 a.m.
18, Street Operations &Maintenance Fund—Bill Helbig, Gloria Mantz
Community&Public Works Director Helbig first went over Street Fund version 1,which he said is mostly
status quo with little changes in wages; said the general increase in operating supplies is due to inflation
and there is a significant increase in vehicle maintenance and supplies due to our aging fleet, most notably
in the snow fleet; said other services and charges decreased because we are not doing the street scan next
year, although we have to maintain the software license. Mr. Hohman mentioned the overtime increase
shown at the top of the page reflects staff,mostly our street inspector,trying to stay on top of right-of-way
inspections and that he is looking at supplementing that with a contract, but said we will have future
discussions on that once the details are worked out. There was also some discussion about the data from
the street scanning and Mr. Helbig said they expect to have the data analysis by mid-July, at which point
they can do a comparison with the scan done three years ago. Under traffic control improvements, Mr.
Helbig explained that we will have to replace aging traffic control equipment; said the area in green
highlights on page 1 of 3 is the Bridge Program and we need to plan for those costs; said the total budget
increase for this version is about 3.8%with total recurring activity increase of about 6%.
In looking at Street Fund version 2, Mr. Helbig said this is an exercise to see what we would do if we
decreased the general fund money by $1 million; in this version, we see decreases in levels of service but
would still need the same number of staff; said street sweeping would be decreased by half as would
stormwater; that the biggest street repair maintenance contract, currently the Poe Contract, would also be
decreased by half. A question came up about the bridge program, and Mr. Helbig said they have started
Council Special Meeting Workshop:06-14-2022 Page 5 of S
Approved by Council:07-12-2022
pre-planning for some of those major bridge maintenance projects, and that we have grant programs to fund
some of the bridge overlays which are minor repairs.There was also discussion about version 2 and whether
we would be in violation of some safety requirements, but Mr. Helbig said we would not turn off signals;
that we would likely keep lights on at intersections,and that decreased right-of-way maintenance and street
sweeping won't put us in violation, but neither would it meet the intended goal. Mr. Holunan reminded
Council that this is an exercise and not what staff is recommending; but we need to make sure revenues are
in good enough shape to keep historical levels of service, or choices would have to be made, and said that
decreasing the budget by$1 million would have a significant affect on levels of service.
19. Stormwater Fund—Gloria Mantz
City Engineer Mantz went over the information for the Stormwater Management Fund,which was followed
by brief discussion about the Geiger crews that might not be available in the future, and that we are already
seeing a decrease in service because there is a decrease in the number of those who would do the work.Ms.
Mantz also mentioned that we cannot use additional funds to supplement this fund, and that we have one
of the lowest stormwater funds in the state.
Mayor Haley called for a recess for lunch at 11:40 a.m.;the meeting reconvened at 12:30 p.m.
20. Supplemental Budget Requests—Chelsie Taylor, John Hohman
The individual requests as shown and explained in the documents, were discussed by the associated
Department Director,after which Deputy City Manager Lamb said there is another item not included in this
list, and he referred everyone to the additional handout from Mr. Koudelka showing "Additional Patrol
Officer Cost Estimates," with a reminder from Mr. Lamb that this is information and staff is not asking
Council for anything additional at this time.
Mr. Koudelka explained that the estimate is provided by the Sheriffs Office based on changes under the
just negotiated collective bargaining agreements;he mentioned the cost for hiring entry level officers;noted
the salary amount is a preliminary step for someone going through the academy, and once fully accredited,
that would change; he went over the salary and benefits along with equipment, training, and vehicle cost;
and he noted the right column shows the lateral hire coming in at a step 5,with the total costs for the lateral
hires would be just under $200,000, After further brief discussion about costs, vehicle depreciation, and
true contractual costs,Mr. Lamb said if Council is interested, staff would do a more complete analysis.
21. General Fund-Fund Balance—Chelsie Taylor
Finance Director Taylor briefly went over the material in the memorandum on the general Fund — Fund
Balance Discussion.
22. Potential & Pending Capital Projects—John Hohman, Chelsie Taylor
In looking at the information for potential and pending capital projects allocations, Mr. Hohman said we
want to be careful what we do with this money as we don't know what the economy will be in the future.
Finance Director Taylor brought attention to the two large spreadsheets, which shows the completed or in
process projects, as well as future construction; she said this is a living document that changes depending
on various factors. Ms. Taylor also went over the figures on page 2 of the memo which includes potential
allocation for Balfour Park as well as for City Hall repairs. Mr.Hohman said he still thinks the expo center
is a great project but we have to work through some of the setbacks with stakeholders;and we need to work
out a relationship/partnership with the County on this project. He also noted that we have contracted with
an outside construction management firm to help with City Hall repairs and that that fund will be
replenished when we get the settlement.
Couneilmember Peetz said she has no objections to the potential allocations and agrees with using caution;
she asked about the possibility of using ARPA funds to put in the restroom, showers and/or lockers in the
City Hall basement; said the basement is a great area to help take care of our employees, and it would be a
very small cost which would payoff in the long run. Mr. Hohman said that is on the pending agenda; that
we have had a set of design drawings for that from the onset; that there was also an idea of having an art
Council Special Meeting Workshop:06-14-2022 Page 6 of 8
Approved by Council:07-12-2022
gallery in the basement so the plumbing for restroom facilities is already there; but we would need to look
at that plan and get updated costs to bring to Council. Councilmember Padden said she is in favor of setting
some money aside for city hall but that roads is the primary function and asked if those funds could be used
for local road improvement. Mr.Hohman replied in the affirmative. There was also brief discussion about
the Pines Grade Separation project with Mr. Hohman explaining that we are still working on a possible
WSDOT grant of$5 million; said federal grant programs require a local match, but we don't have to use
City funds for that match,they can be state funds as well. Finance Director Taylor said this is just the first
touch on this allocation, and there will be more discussions in August or September. Councilmember
Woodard said he continues to advocate for Balfour Park with the funds as shown; said Council could
address this again in August or September and can always re-prioritize once we get reimbursement from
the settlement.
23. Fiscal Policies—John Hohman, Chelsie Taylor
Director Taylor said that Moody's Investors Service is pleased that this is part of our budget process, and
she went over the fiscal policies as shown in the budget material, including the Financial Management and
Financial Objectives.
24. Council Goals John Hohman
Mr. Hohman said that staff can work on any Council suggested edits and bring these goals back for a
discussion at a future meeting.
I. Work with state and federal legislators towards advancing the concepts outlined in the Bridging the
Valley study including obtaining financial assistance for the Pines, Sullivan, and Park Grade Separation
Projects. Mr. Hohman said that he feels the Pines and Sullivan Grade Separation Projects are good to
leave in this goal, but that the Park project will likely not be in a position in the foreseeable future; that
these are Council's goals so it is up to Council. Deputy Mayor Higgins suggested removing it and keep
those projects we can work with, or include the Park project in parenthesis. Mr. Hohman said staff will
work on edits for this concerning the Park project; and bring back for further Council discussion.
2. Actively pursue a plan to sustain the City's Pavement Management Program to include sustained
financing in Steel Fund#101 and Pavement Preservation Fund#311. There were no suggested changes.
3. Pursue state and federal financial assistance to address transportation concerns along the entire Barker
Corridor. There were no suggested changes.
4. Sustain and expand where possible, economic development efforts including the retention and expansion
of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses. Too, actively partner with local, state and
national partners to support the economic and community recovery from the impact of the COVID-19
pandemic. There were no suggested changes.
5. Continue to foster relationships with federal, state, county and local legislators. It was suggested to add
'and municipalities and agencies.'
6. Pursue financing for Balfour Park and Appleway Trail amenities and continue the acquisition of park
land It was suggested to add to `pursue with the County, the ownership of Appleway Trail and/or other
facilities.'
7.Pursue financing for design and construction of connections between the Appleway Trail, Balfour Park,
Dishman Mills, the Centennial Trail and Spokane Valley Riverloop Trail, creating where possible, a
continuous loop for users. It was suggested to include a clause such as `where/when opportunities arise to
our benefit.'
8. Maximize the law enforcement contract to address staffing levels by enhancing recruiting efforts,
minimizing out-of-service days, increasing retention, and taking steps to make the officer positions and the
Council Special Meeting Workshop:06 14-2022 Page 7 of 8
Approved by Council:07-12-2022
Spokane Valley Police Department increasingly appealing as a career path for those seeking to pursue a
law enforcement career in Spokane Valley. There was brief discussion including those items noted by Chief
Ellis which are now part of the collective bargaining agreement, as well as other policy changes, such as
officers doing their training on their off-days; and the addition of Spokane Valley Police cars.
Councilmember Padden suggested not including things over which we have no control, such as the
collective bargaining agreement since we don't participate in the negotiation. Mr. Hohman said staff will
work on re-writing this to possibly state, enhancing the contract with the County to provide continuing law
enforcement services' and he and Mr. Lamb said staff will work on this re-write for the next Council goal
discussion.
9. Increase community interactions, share information, and obtain feedback on current and future projects
and priorities. There were no suggested changes.
10. Prioritize involvement in public safety, in particular discussions regarding major policy considerations
from the 2021 State Legislative Session, the jail and the criminal justice system, in order to maintain an
understanding of options to keep our costs under control. Mr. Hohman said this will be updated, including
changing the 2021 date. Councilmember Peetz suggested adding language to look at funding mechanisms
and unfunded mandates, or to look for other funding opportunities to offset mandates. Deputy Mayor
Higgins also suggested adding something about our priority is to keep our City safe.
In closing, City Manager Hohman thanked Council and staff for today's work; said this is a preliminary
draft; that there will be items to follow up on such as personnel needs especially concerning the right-of-
way permitting; said this is a solid budget for 2023 and our City is in an enviable position as we are still
looking at a balanced budget with a surplus of 60% ending fund balance; he said we all have worked hard
to get there and he knows Council will work hard to keep us there, and the way to keep us there is by not
straying out into risky arenas, but to keep the focus on Council's levels of service.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 2:18 p.m.
A S Pam Haley,Mayor
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Special Meeting Workshop:06-14-2022 Page 8 of 8
Approved by Council:07-12-2022
ADDITIONAL PATROL OFFICER COST ESTIMATES
Entry Level-No Previous Experience Laterial-w/Previous Experience Added
COMPENSATION
Salaryl $49,871.54 $84,926.40
Benefits $32,538.43 $37,218.25
Subtotal $82,409.97 $122,144.65
PERSONAL EQUIPMENT
Uniform Allowance $2,200 $2,200'
Body Camera/Taser2 $2,508 $2,508
Body Armor $675 $675I
Weapons $4,650 $4,650
Peperball Launcher $795 $7951
Misc. Equipment3 $1,600 $1,600
Subtotal $12,428 $12,428
TRAINING
CJTC Tuition Reimbursement Fee $4,431 $0
Per Diem/Fuel/Etc. (Cost is more if in Burien on weekends) $2,100 $500
OT for post-academy instructors./(per student) $1,700 $1,700
Subtotal $8,231 $2,200
COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT
Laptop& Related Equipment $4,413.75 $4,413.75
Portable Radio/Car Radios $0 $0
Cell Phone6 $650 $650
Subtotal $5,063,75 $5,063.75
VEHICLE
Equipped Patrol Vehicle' $57,000 $57,000
Subtotal $57,000 $57,000
TOTAL $165,132.72 $198,836.40
1=Laterals-Based on recent hires,laterals start at STEP 5(on average)due to previous law enforcement experience
2.includes upfront cost of body camera($699)plus subscription for all AXON software and taser subscription
3=Ballistic helmet($633),gas mask($530),OC($11.50), handcuffs($26), baton ($205),First Aid Kit(IFAK)($100), badge($70),leg restraints($20),etc.
./=Calculated as total 0T for post-academy(listed in SETS-2021)divided by It of students in post-academy during 2021
5=Portable radio and vehicle radio provided at no cost by SREC,may change in future for"additional/new positions"
6= Includes monthly phone&hotspot subscription
7=Price based on 2022 costs including add-on equipment
2023 Spokane Valley Budget Projections for Public Safety Contracts
Contract 2022 Budget 2023 Budget ' $ Difference %Difference Remarks
District Court $ 1,033,823 $ 1,358,296 $ 324,473 31.39% County cases-16.2%; SV cases +1%. WSP Vacancies
Public Defender $ 811,915 $ 855,426 $ 43,511 5.36%
Prosecutor $ 350,000 $ 400,000 $ 50,000 14.29% Blake Effect- Higher Usage
Pretrial Services $ 142,062 $ 180,895 $ 38,833 27.34% Blake Effect- Higher Usage
A
Sheriff Contract $ 24,958,601 $ 26,846,825 $ 1,888,224 7.57% Vehicles and CBA Impact
Emergency Management $ 85,000 $ 90,000 $ 5,000 5.88% Population Based
Detention Services $ 1,714,507 $ 1,972,198 $ 257,691 15.03% Shift in ADP % Due to Blake "Drug Possession"
Animal Control $ 330,000 $ 350,000 $ 20,000 6.06% CPI Only(High Inflation)
Contingency $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ - 0.00%
Total $ 29,625,908 $ 32,253,640 $ 2,627,7321 8.87%
2023 Spokane Valley District Court Contract Budget Forecast
District Annual Under
Court Annual Cost Budget Budget/
Cost Source -
Year Costs Change _ City Budget Change (Over Budget) Notes
Actual 2004 $ 653,165 $ 910,000 $ 256,835
-
Actual 2005 $ 675,619 3.44% $ 691,328 -24% $ 15,709
Actual 2006 $ 688,979 1.98% $ 839,817 21% $ 150,838
Actual 2007 $ 724,153 5.11% $ 816,111 -3% $ 91,958
Actual 2008 $ 929,644 28.38% $ 820,000 0% $ (109,644)
Actual 2009 $ 940,289 1.15% $ 787,231 -4% $ (153,058)
Actual 2010 $ 946,353 0.64% $ 982,937 25% $ 36,584 _
Actual 2011 $ 996,205 5.27% $ 819,345 -17% $ (176,8601
Actual 2012 $ 917,135 _ -7.94% $ 1,071,588 31% $ 154,453 First Year of New Methoodlogy
Actual 2013 $ 868,862 -5.26% $ 898,375 -16% $ 29,513
Actual 2014 $ 805,811 -7.26% $ 891,304 -1% $ 85,493
Actual 2015 $ 670,945 -16.74% $ 902,201 1% $ 231,266
Actual 2016 $ 658,049 -1.92% $ 822,076 -9% $ 164,027
ir - -
2013 $ 836,9a5 22.90% " $ (157;$04)•Re-training,cf Deputies to Assign Correct jurisdichdn
2019. $ 888,965 6 21% $ 855,53g 6 26% 5 (33.426) Hi her CPC,Added Judoe,Shined costs to Mental Health
r 120,-- i ,. 950 tt 0 $ 11,72't
E V • 4
gl'f - ,a -3%,; $ (216,809) Much Hiiner CFC County cases-12%, 5'•/-7°
_- 124 $ 290.576 HonerValley cases and lower SF rases
City Budgeted 2023 $ 1,358,296 $ 1,358,296 ' _ ....41% $ z. '; 1
13.3% Budget Change 31.4%
Avg Change Total Costs 2.56%
Total Costs for Misdemeanor Criminal Cases Excluding Mental Health Current Year Projection
2013 $ 3,626,525 Cases Cost
2014 $ 3,648,273 0.6% 4392 $ 1,324,399
2015 $ 3,646,764 0.0%
2016 5 3,805,573 4.4%
2017 $ 3,907,636 2.7%
2018 $ 3,740.835 -4.3%
2219 $ 4,007,052 7.1% tour sv
2020 5 4,191,431 4.6% 2019 Cases 61509 5530
2021 S 4,325,113 3.2%c. 2020 Cases 46237 4032
2021 Cases 40442 4072
5 Yr Annual Growth 2.56% Total Change -34% -26%
SV Cases by Year
Criminal
Year Infractions DUI Criminal Traffic Non-Traffic Misd.DV Total SV Cases
2013 6,608 288 1,145 714 344 9,099
2014 6521 275 945 715 312 8,766
2015 5,202 230 930 652 258 73272
2015 4,830 258 675 515 233 6,511
2017 3,561 237 338 284 439 4,859
2018 .4.491 304 515 680 420 6,410
2019 3,445 288 522 723 520 5,498
2020 2,212, 242 380 656 543 4,033
21 2,656 224 � 9E 487 486 4.072,
Total 5 Yr.Change -5% -13% -68% -5% 109% -37%
5 Yr.Avg.Change -12% -3% -23% -1% 15% -9%
Expected Changes to Service:None
SV Goals: Continue to expand pre-file diversion and increase efficiency of program;pursue more efficient docket system;match staff to workload.
2023 Spokane Valley Public Defender Contract Budget Forecast
Annual
Public Defender Budget Under Budget/
Year Costs Change City Budget Change (Over Budget) Notes
Actual 2004 $ 297,700 $ 294,400 $ (3,300)
Actual 2005 $ 318,870 7.11% $ 310,028 5.3% $ (8,842)
Actual 2006 $ 313,412 -1.71% $ 342,705 10.5% $ 29,293
Actual 2007 $ 313,892 0.15% $ 363,349 6.0% $ 49,457
Actual 2008 $ 390,351 24.36% $ 335,000 -7.8% $ (55,351)
Actual 2009 $ 540,881 38.56% $ 351,745 5.0% $ (189,136).Added 3 PD Attorneys
Actual 2010 $ 561,229 3.76%_$ 468,172 33.1%0 $ (93,057)
Actual 2011 $ 690,294 23.00% $ 510,746 9.1% $ (179,548) New Methodology
Actual 2012 $ 674,304 -2.32% $ 582,643 14.1% $ (91,661)
Actual _ 2013 $ 630,620 -6.48% $ 672,894 15.5% $ 42,274
Actual 2014 $ 624,848 -0.92% $ 852,965 26.8% $ 228,117
Actual _ 2015 $ 713,998 14.27% $ 813,554 -4.6% $ 99,556 (+3 Attorneys)for Caseload Standards(+$134,216)
Actual 2016 $ 735,184 2.97% $ 832,182 2.3% $ 96,998 New Methodolo. 1MisdInvesti.etorOnl
=- - - -
ra.:,. 2019 $ 751 _14 3.10% 816
u.;: � I. � 8 i6 167 -
ual - 2020 5 754,752 0.38% $ BD-5,941 •�
-', I .:1 1.9 'd..;Si"�'•%„;I ' "-r't v,i. .y, ,1 _ ,u. _DI i
City Budget 2023 $ 865,426 3.00% $ 855,426 14.1% - +3%over 2022 estimate. 2022 at 36%usage. Watching actual trend.
5Yr.Avg Change 3.01% Budget=1- 5.4%
SV CASES -
Cases Usage Annual Change 2022 Cases
2010 2,885 35.1% 1st Qtr 397
2011 2,731 34.6% -1.2% Annualized 1588
2012 3,298 37.9% 9.3% Usage 40.1%
2013 2,795 33.9% -10.3% 5Yr Avg Cases 1,806
2014 2,744 33.5% -1.3% 5Yr Avg Usage 34.2%
2015 2,536 33.1% -1.2%
5 Yr.Avg.Change -6.32% 1.60%
5 Yr.Change in Cases -27%
PD Misdemeanor Budget
i Change
2015 $ 2,146,196
2016 $ 2,149,723 0.2%
5 Yr.Avg Change 1.2%
2023 Spokane Valley Prosecutor Contract Budget Forecast
Under
Prosecutor Budget/
Year Costs Change City Budget (Over Budget) Notes
Actual 2004 1 $ 296,175 $ 369,000 $ 72,825
Actual 2005 $ 321,380 8,51% $ 294,159 $ (27,221)
Actual 2006 $ 315,887 -1.71% $ 357,520 $ 41,633
Actual 2007 $ 359,884 13.93% $ 277,243 $ (82,641)
Actual 2008 $ 450,349 25.14% $ 350,000 $ (100,349)
Actual 2009 $ 441,606 -1.94% $ 374,903 $ (66,703)
Actual 2010 $ 419,047 -5.11% $ 503,152 $ 84,105
Actual 2011 $ 400,363 -4.46% $ 400,342 $ (21)
Actual 2012 $ 424,375 6.00% $ 430,074 $ 5,699 Old Methodology,to be revised
Actual 2013 $ 389,626 -8.19% $ 393,219 $ 3,593 Based on New Methodolonv
Actual 2014 $ 408,735 4.90% $ 406,777�$ (1,958)
Actual 2015 S 437,519 7.04% $ 420,151 $ (17,368) Added 2 Attorneys mid-year
MIIIIET VP 2016 1 S 479,362 Mr 9= 8,722 $ (30,6401 2.Add't[onal Attorneys fcr Fill Year{1 111111
, ctua'P 2017 $ 425,998 -11-1 fo :" 5.42.747 $5 1'16,749 Impact of, re-File Diversion
Actual 2018 $ 406,511 -4.57% $ 558.234 S 151,723
Actual 2019 I $ 322,349 -20.70% $ 463.968 1 a 141.619 12 FTE shifted to felonies
Actual 2020 �S 354,506 9.98% $ 487,882 $ 130 376
p si1ORIa to y:3„80 5s.' : _ 7-36 pi$ 450 00tt, $ 6,,4130 ,Relicensin p.ragrarn terVirtate4L Shifted to letor;eo.,
County Estimate 2022 $ 328,733 ' $ 350,000 $ 21,267
City Budget 2023 $ 400,000 21.68% $ 400,000 $ - Expect State Patrol Numbers to increase.
5 Yr.Avg Change -4.6% Budget Change 14.3% Used Years 2016-21
SV Cases and Usage ' 2022 Projection
Year Misd Cases itsaae 1st Qtr Cases 501
2010 3,016 34.2% Annualized 2004
2011 3,147 34.1% Usage 45.63%
2012 3,370 37.7% Projected Cost $ 421,309
2013 2,819 33.3% 5 Yr.Avg Cases 1,786
2014 2,840 34.0% 5 Yr Avg Usage 34.8%
2015 2,636 36.4%.
i
5 Yr.Total Change -29%
5 Yr Avg Change -6.80%
Total Prosecutor Misd Budget
§. Change
2015 $ 1,168,344
•
5 Yr Avg Change -7.3%
2023 Spokane Valley Pre-Trial Contract Budget Forecast
Pre-Trial Under Budget/
Year Costs Change City Budget (Over Budget) Notes
Actual 2004 $ 34,652 $ 24,000 $ (10,652)
Actual 2005 $ 31,859 -8.06% $ 32,908 '$ 1,049 New Tracking System
Actual 2006 $ 43,526 36.62% $ 48,383 $ 4,857 Spokane charges more for LEIS
Actual 2007 $ 43,602 0.17% $ 41,080 _$ (2,522)
Actual 2008 $ 64,101 47.01% $ 48,500 $ (15,601)
Actual 2009 $ 80,931 26.26% $ 47,400 $ (33,531)
Actual 2010 $ 91,735 13.35% $ 69,125 $ (22,610)
Actual 2011 $ 106,362 15.94% $ 96,111 $ (10,251)
Actual 2012 $ 111,480 4.81% $ 128,393 $ 16,913
Actual 2013 $ 108,314 2.84%0 $ 125,838 $ 17,524
Actual 2014 $ 110,357 1.89°Ao $ 102,894 $ (7,463)
Actual 2015 $ 129,730 17.55% $ 117,738 $ (11,992) Misdemeanor usage much higher
Actual 2015 $ 130,131 0.31% $ 122,372 $ (7,759)
- 2017 24 445 --7rb/o' $ 135.4`32,.,$- 104987 7CitytiS'atge?A'eol5.-- i1
2018 $ - 115,463 -7.22% $ 139.892 5 24,429 7
2019 :a 108,219 -6.27% $ 120,352 5 12,133 -
I 2020 111,666 3.19`r° $ 120,000 8 8,334
2021 _ r 159.505 42_84% $ 120,00,0 $ (39 505) Loss of Grant Revenue,BOCC approval or staff increase
City Budget 2023 $ 180,895 ' 14.3 °f $ $ (16.1601 Likely Usage%is low and actual will be highs
timimi
3% $ 180,895 $ - 14.8%Increase over City Projected 55172.605 for 2022
5 Yr Avg Change 2017-22 4.80% Budget Change 27.34%
SV Case History 2022 Projection
Cases Misd Usage Total Usage 1st Qtr 0
2010 2,945 32.7% 16.19% Annualized 0
2011 3,426 33.7% 15.85% Usage 0.00%
2012 3,688 36.5% 16.29% Projected$ $172,605
2013 3,281 34.1% 15.07% 5 Yr Case Avg 2,525
2014 3,420 36.1% 17.24% 5 Yr Usage Avg 14.06%
2015 3,595 37.8% 18.31%
5 Yr Total Change -27%
5 Yr Avg Change -6.2%
Total Pre-Trial Budget(not including indirect)
$ Change
2015 $ 592,136
2016 $ 641,428 8.3%
5 Yr Avg Change 2016-20 9.0%
2023 Spokane Valley Law Enforcement Contract Cost Forecast
- Under Budget!
Year Law Enf.Costs Change City Budget (Over Budget) Notes
Actual 2004 $ 11,744,409 $ 11,690,000 $ (54,409)
Actual 2005 $ 12,698,261 8.12% $ 12,892,303 $ 194,042 2004 Retro Pay of$216,325
Actual 2006 $ 13,333,456 5.00% $ 13,419,812 $ 86,356
Actual 2007 $ 13,906,413 4.30% $ 14,557,484 $ 651,071
Actual 2008 $ 14,642,767 5.30% $ 15,575,000 $ 932,233
Actual 2009 $ 15,466,593 5.63% $ 17,054,909 $ 1,588,316
Actual 2010 $ 16,636,941 7.57% $ 16,581,860 $ (55,081)Added Precinct Commander/New Contract,New Methodology(Fixes Double Billing)
Actual 2011 $ 16,687,516 0.30% $ 17,070,538 $ 383,022
Actual 2012 $ 17,053,167 2.19% $ 16,693,908_ $ (359,259) PSB Credit of$97K.No Colas
Actual 2013 $ 17,420,900 2.16% $ 17,175,721 $ (245,179) No Colas
Actual 2014 $ 17,181,525 _ -1.37% $ 18,144,552 $ 963,027 County Estimate Plus Retro Pay for 2.5%COLA
Actual 2015 $ 17,758,027 3.36% $ 18,896,608 $ 1,138,581 Includes addition of 2 Officers for$321,478. Does not include COLA,
Actual 2016 $ 17,326,325 -2.43% $ 19,713,401 $ 2,387,076 COLA paid out of 2017,3 FTE vacancies
Actual 2017 $ 18,889,880 9.02%I $ 20,036,884 $ 1,147,004 1 COLA's for 2016 and 2017 paid out of 2017.
5.¢051,063 I 6.15%1 $ _ 57 6=11 INew Megelfoloov Alr W Illi
11 - .137,758 i 5.42% $ 20,444,84'S '$ .(692.l3) Inciuues 14 pool positions and supplemental budget increase.Des not incIit tO?A—,.
... +. ,113.463 =0.11% S 22,218,101 $ 1.101,e:33 Many vacancies resulted in unspent budget. _ -
_ .23,354 146 $ 694,886 Several vacancies
I %7 fz0_ 7 32 a v5
City Budget 2023 $ 26,846,825 11.55% $ 26,846,825 - includes 5.31%annual growth+vehicle costs and CBA impact shoi,vn oolovn
Annual Growth(18-22) 5.31% Budget+1- 7.6% Taken from estimates below.
Cost Additions
Bodycams $ - In estimate
Training Center $ - Only Firing Range Open in 2023. Training Center likely open in 2024
Budget Plan Mental Health CentE $ - No indication of costs for jurisdictions
1. Evaluate districts and call loads. Deputy for Homeless $ - Take this out for supplemental
2. Evaluate units and shifts. Vehicles $ 453,677 Includes increase to replacement(11 to 15 vehicles)and residual depreciation costs
3. Identify new call drivers such as large retail or low-income housing CBA Impact $ 1,046,137
$ 1,499,814
County Estimates
2018 S 19,458,385
2019 $ 20,576,089 5,7%
2020 $ 22,1461373 7.6%
2021 $ 23,598,922 6.6%
2022 $ 24,067,821 2.0%
Avg Change 5.3%
2023 Spokane Valley Emergency Management Contract Budget Forecast
Emergency
Mgmt. Under Budget/
Year Costs Change City Budget (Over Budget) Notes
Actual 2004 $ 60,868 $ 64,590 $ 3,722
Actual 2005 $ 82,059 34.81% $ 64,700 $ (17,359)
Actual 2006 $ 71,338 -13.06% $ 72,397 $ 1,059
Actual 2007 $ 74,715 4.73% $ 88,090 $ 13,375
Actual 2008 $ 85,626 14.60% $ 92,000 $ 6,374
Actual 2009 $ 81,704 -4.58% $ 121,942 $ 40,238
Actual 2010 $ 73,657 -9.85% $ 101,402 $ 27,745
Actual 2011 $ 79,758 8.28% $ 90,233 $ 10,475 -
Actual 2012 $ 73,026 -8.44% $ 84,970 $ 11,944
Actual 2013 $ 84,630 15.89% $ 82,291 $ (2,339)
Actual 2014 $ 81,769 -3.38% $ 81,398 _$ (371)
Actual 2015 $ 85,123 4.10% $ 84,892 $ (231)
2C16 $ 90.747 6_ 1% $ 90,558 $ (189) -
Aeft of 2017 I $ 77.676 14.40%I $ 89,371 $ 11,693 1 _
Actual 2018 `,$ _ 78,556 1.13% $ 99629 I $ 21.073 Grant offset salary costs. 111.
Actual 201 l $ 11114.859 _4,71% $ 105.687 $ 30828 Grant offset and fess lease costs for space.
City Projected 2320 $ 90.32:1 20.66%0 $ 100,000 $ 9,676 Facilities maintenance and accrued leave costs increased -
`= - ' 2021r, $ 80.421 6"/° $ 100,000 $ 19,579 New Contract:.,.,.,.:,
County Estimate 2022 -100.00% $ 85,000 Estimate Not Received
City Budget 2023 $ 90,000 L__ $ 90,000 $ - Spokane re-joining dropping cost per capita
Annual Increase from 2016-2021 -2.42% Budget+1_ 5.9%
Usage determined by Population-Does not change significantly year-to-year.
2023 Spokane Valley Detention Services Contract Cost Forecast
Under
Detention Budget!
Services (Over
Year Costs Change City Budget Budget) Notes
Actual 2004 $ 384,782 $ 258,000 $ (126,782),
Actual 2005 $ 430,485 11.88% $ 289,798 $ (140,687)
Actual 2006 $ 658,809 53.04% $ 564,000 $ (94,809)
Actual 2007 $ 677,670 2.86% $ 802,406 $ 124,736
Actual 2008 $ 845,693 24.79% $ 667,000 $ (178,693)
Actual 2009 $ 937,635 10.87% $ 682,400 $ (255,235)
Actual 2010 $ 1,113,641 18.77% $ 900,000 $ (213,641) New Methodology
Actual 2011 $ 1,226,600 10.14% $ 837,661 $ (388,939)
Actual 2012 $ 1,362,020 11.04% $ 1,333,131 $ (28,889)
Actual 2013 $ 1,201,658 -11.77% $ 1,301,540 $ _ 99,882
Actual 2014 $ 1,168,024 -2.80% $ 1,501,222 $ 333,198 Usage dropped from 3.8%to 3.4% 13-14
Actual 2015 $ 1,213,502 3,89% $ 1,368,475 $ 154,973 Fewer Outside Agency Days,ADP Down to 3.2%
;:
Actual 2017 S 1.302.657 -9.56% $ 1..389,039 $ 86,372
Actual 2018 $ 1.249.948 -4.05% $ 1.588.841 $ 338,893 ADP Decreased to 3.0%
Actual 2019 _ $ 1.493.325 19.47% $ 1.395,580 $ (97.745) ADP increased to 3.5%.
Actual 2020 $ 1.282.843 -14.09% 8 1.467,189 $ 184.346 3.0% ADP
. ual=- -,--- ,s 232 , 1,982 271 _ 54.54Q $ 1.,55t.0, 0.0 $ _k48 71).Blake G:a at shifted ADP % 4).gitteil 4_.9,% __:
County Estimated _ 2022 $ 1,445,872 -27.06% $ 1,714,507 $ 268,635 Estimate low due to using 3,0 ADP from 2020
City Budgeted 2023 $ 1,972,198 36.40% $ 1,972,198 ADP dropped to 4%. Used 3% increase.
2016-21 Avg Change 6.4% Budget+I- 15.0% Did not use 2022 estimate due to inaccurate ADP
SV ADP Usage 2022 Projection
Housing Costs-Total Countywide) Annual Increase Days %of Total 1st Qtr Days 2292
2010 $ 30,023,386 8,751 3.7% Annualized 9168
2011 $ 30,960,511 3.1% 9,808 4.0% ADP % 3.97%
2012 $ 30,551,657 -1.3% 12,344 4.5% Projected $ $1,914,755
2013 $ 31,713,056 3.8% 11,604 3.8% 5 Yr Avg Days 9,628
2014 $ 34,093,040 7.5% 10,326 3.4% 5 Yr Avg % 3.5%
2015 $ 37,892,696 11.1% 9,960 3.2%
$ ?.9 74, 111111r 4 a5%° _11.785 '. .N",
2� $ 42.419.3' - 7.1% 10,150 31%'
201 n: $ 41.639.834 -1,4% 9,270 3.0%
2019 $ 42,168,322 0.8% 10.707 3.5%
2020 $ 42.792,385 1.5% 6.728 3,0%
_ 2021 $ 40.343.997 -5.7% 11.285 4.T
5 Yr Avg Increase 2.43%
2023 Spokane Valley Animal Control Contract Budget Forecast
Under
Animal Control Budget/
Year Costs Change City Budget (Over Budget) Notes
Actual 2004 $ 375,137 $ 369,000 $ (6,137)
Actual 2005 $ 372,491 -0.71% $ 402,295 $ 29,804
Actual 2006 $ 377,232 r 1.27% $ 433,484 $ 56,252
Actual 2007 $ 387,190 2.64% $ 444,008 $ 56,818
Actual 2008 $ 329,642 -14.86% $ 400,000 $ 70,358
Actual 2009 $ 322,570 -2.15% $ 333,575 $ 11,005
Actual 2010 $ 299,319 -7.21% $ 350,920 $ 51,601
Actual 2011 $ 318,165 6.30% $ 311,783 $ (6,382)
Actual 2012 $ 319,382 I 0.38% $ 319,382 $ -
Actual — 2013 $ 343,877 7.67% $ 268,351 $ (75,526)
Actual 2014 $ 287,081 -16.52% $ 287,081 $ - New Contract, Fixed Costs
Actual 2015 $ 290,228 1.10% $ 291,923 $ 1,695 Fixed Capital, 1.3%CPI on operating
Actual 2016 $ 291,209 0.34% S 295,133 $ 3,924
!fferWI 2017 $ 293,425 0 76% $ :,r I .s.I In c_ :. I,
Actual 2018 $ 299,139 1.95% S 299,630 .97
Actual 2019 $ 306,509 2.46%I $ 350,000 $ -0,491� •
Lam .' 2020 $ 313,046 2.13% $ 350,030 $ 36,954
2021 $ 317,603 1.46% $ 350.000 $ 32,397
--ii I 7 $ 330.961 4.21%1 S 330,000 $ (961) CPI Increase 6 4'9'0 - -
City Budgeted 2023 $ 350,000 5.75% $ 350,000 CPI Increase of 6.6%
2016-21 Avg Change 2.4% Budget+1- 6.1%
-New Methodology Started in 2014-Cost are Controlled,Operating costs not to increase more than CPI,Debt Service is fixed
Capital is fixed at$45,000 per year
2023 Calculation
2021 Operating $ 285,961
6.6%Inflation $ 18,873
Capital $ 45,000
Total 2022 $ 349,834
CPI-WC Size B/C Current Year Previous Year
Apr 165.088 158.824
May 166.813 158.301
Jun 168.425 158.857
Jul 169.267 159.752
Aug 169.477 160.528
Sep 169,977 160.846
Oct 171.226 161.141
Nov 172.214 161.069
Dec 172.722 160.84
Jan 174.269 161.199
Feb 175.69 162.042
Mar 178.019 163.257
Avg, 171.12 160.55
Change 6.6%