Work Session Minutes of the Town of Cary , North Carolina
Subject: Proposed Operating and Capital Budget
Location:
120 Wilkinson Avenue , 2nd Floor Conference Room
Date: 
June 23, 2005

Present: Mayor Ernie McAlister, Council Members Marla Dorrel, Michael Joyce, Jennifer Robinson, and Julie Robison. Mayor Pro Tem Jack Smith and Council Member Nels Roseland arrived late, and their arrival times are noted in the minutes.

Mayor McAlister called the work session to order at 4:35 p.m.

Mr. Roseland arrived at 4:36 p.m.

The work session materials are attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit A.

Mr. Joyce provided a summary of the citizen budget review committee report (Exhibit A, pp. 1-15). He stated that the committee’s purpose was to find a way to offset any new debt issues in the general fund. He and Mr. Roseland discussed whether council would be willing to take funds currently reserved for open space acquisitions and put them back into the utility fund. This would involve pulling $5.1 million from the 6 month reserve and putting it back into open space. Mr. Joyce recommended reverting $5.1 million back to the utility fund to offset debt.

Mayor Pro Tem Smith arrived 4:40 p.m.

Mr. Joyce stated that he personally thinks the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Department should put a hold on all funding for the next few years until more cash is available. He urged council to focus on the 2008 county property valuation. He said that in three years the Town will be worth more, allowing Cary to stay revenue neutral, lower taxes, or remain at the same tax rate. He stated that if the Town’s net growth is greater than other cities Cary would see a sales tax distribution profit.

Mr. Joyce said that the Town already has reimbursement resolution authority and asked staff to provide details on the utilization of that authority. Finance Director Karen Mills stated that council makes decisions about projects and their funding source based on plans and values. Once a project is authorized the department moves forward and begins to spend money. She said that if a project is debt funded then staff does not move forward with a debt sale at that time—they wait until cash is needed. Ms. Mills said that staff postpones bringing on debt service as long as possible. Council has delegated authority to staff to take care of a technicality in the IRS regulations which states that the Town has to declare intent and reimburse itself within 60 days of funding. Staff takes care of the technicality, signs the reimbursement resolution stating the Town’s intent to reimburse itself with debt, settles the debt when needed, and the debt comes into the budget based on the debt sale. Ms. Mills stated that council can make changes in project funding until that particular project starts to spend money. The Town uses reimbursement resolutions all of the time in order to start projects and the debt can be sold later. Staff maintains the records in-house and there is nothing to be filed.

Mayor McAlister asked about the accounting for reimbursement resolutions. Ms. Mills responded that if council appropriates $1 million from utility rates for open space funding, the utility fund transfers money to that capital project; that capital project is then authorized to spend the money on open space at that time. She said that cash is not allocated until open space is identified.

Mayor McAlister is concerned that the proposal would dismantle a series of decisions and approvals already made for specific projects and the funding sources allocated to them. He stated it would be like pulling the plug on a project in mid-stream and not moving forward. Mr. Joyce disagreed, stating that staff can identify an amount of allocated money to be used to postpone debt service. He stated that cash exists from past allocations for the 10-year capital improvement budget which is not going to be spent this year because of ongoing funding. He questioned why the Town has cash in the bank if it’s not going to be used. He said unused allocated cash should be freed up for this fiscal year and that a reimbursement resolution can be used for the next fiscal year to borrow money and refund past allocations. Mayor McAlister stated that council agreed to fund projects with debt.

Mr. Roseland said that it is difficult enough for council to discuss appropriate funding sources for next year’s budget and he does not want to revisit financing for past decisions and does not want to jeopardize previous commitments. He said if the Town does have cash it can be used to pay off debt early in order to lower debt levels.

Mr. Coleman stated The 10 year capital improvement budget allows the Town to identify capital needs, infrastructure issues, and to plan ahead for them; however, it forces the Town to accumulate financial resources to pay for them. He said there is no question that staff can research projects in past budgets where funding has not been spent, do an analysis on the status of all of those projects, and give council a schedule of projects that can be stopped. He stated the $5 million for aquatics is an example of money just sitting there. He said they can also look into the $8 million in new debt in the FY06 budget for roads. Mr. Coleman asked council if they wanted to look at using this cash to pay down the debt. Council concurred with this exercise; however they do not want it to hold up the budget approval process.

Mrs. Robinson said that some of the money for projects is tied up in such a way that they cannot be stopped, such as Preston Village Subdivision where the front yards are torn up for sidewalk installation.

Mr. Joyce stated it is more of a philosophy change to use cash that’s allocated but won’t be spent in FY06.

Mr. McAlister stated that the citizen budget committee suggestions are worthy to pursue, but it is not possible to fold any of the suggestions into this year’s budget due to the timing of when council received the report.

Ms. Dorrel stated that cutting the budget is a matter of values and priorities which council needs to discuss. She said it does not mean that there is an agreement that everything the committee identified the council would automatically cut.

Mayor McAlister stated that council agrees that staff should come back with a further evaluation of capital projects and how to handle cash differently so as not to issue debt.

Mr. Roseland stated that the Town is getting $17 million back from the Department of Transportation and council will have to make a decision on how to use that money. Mr. Coleman stated that the Town must use that money for roads or to pay off debt

Open Space Funding and Storm Water Assistance

Ms. Dorrel stated that the homeowner assistance stormwater program is new this year. She asked at the capital budget work session to reduce that program funding from $500,000 to $300,000, which council did before looking at the operations budget. She said that the $1.5 million reversion to the fund balance gives more leeway and asked council if they wanted to increase the funding back to $500,000. Mayor McAlister supports increasing the funding. Mayor Pro Tem Smith said that a good argument was presented to reduce funding to $300,000; his only concern is that council doesn’t habitually increase one area when another is decreased.

Mr. Joyce asked about the different line items in the budgets. Mr. Coleman stated that there are two: one for drainage projects on public property and another for similar projects on private property, which was reduced. He said that $500,000 still exists for public projects and that Ms. Dorrel’s suggestion is for private projects.

Mrs. Robison asked how ready the Town is to implement a $500,000 program. Mr. Coleman responded that several requests have already been submitted and those that are funded will require engineering work and a significant planning process. Mr. Bailey added that seven projects are currently being analyzed and that the sum of the projects greatly exceeds the $500,000 level.

He said that three to four citizens have expressed interest but they haven’t put anything in writing. Staff’s intends to bring information for the projects to council at the September 5th operations committee meeting.

Mrs. Robinson would prefer to budget money upfront and stay within the $500,000. She said that budgeting the $500,000 confirms that this is a high priority for council.

ACTION: Mrs. Robinson moved to approve $500,000 for the homeowner stormwater assistance program. Mr. Roseland provided the second.

Ms. Dorrel expressed concerned that there may be an expectation for a fixed amount every year. She said that the demand should be reduced over time because new situations are not being created.

ACTION: Vote was called for on the motion to approve, and Council granted unanimous approval.

Open Space Funding

Mr. Roseland stated that FY06 open space funding is $1 million. He said that there are significant stormwater problems throughout the Town and the open space plan identifies stormwater regional improvement areas. He said that the amount of funding provided to support stormwater improvements is a drop in the bucket compared to the severity of problems throughout the Town. He suggested using $1 million from the general government capital budget to move forward on land acquisition for regional stormwater improvement efforts and asked if it is something council should consider in the upcoming budget.

Mr. Joyce stated that open space is perceived as untouchable land instead of land that can be converted for some other use. Mr. Roseland stated that there are three strategies for open space: (1) acquire land for passive open space, which is the current program; (2) parkland acquisition, where land is developed with the future intent of creating a park; and (3) regional stormwater improvement efforts for land acquisition.

Mr. Roseland stated that there was an original recommendation of $2 million—$1 million for passive open space land acquisition and $1 million for future park development—but through budget process deliberations it was whittled down to $1 million. He suggested council consider $1 million for regional stormwater improvements instead of park development. Mayor McAlister stated that he recalls the $2 million was for open space and that park land acquisitions was a later discussion.

Ms. Dorrel stated that the line item was for open space and park land. Mr. Coleman concurred. She said whether $1 million or $2 million they are combined into one line item and can be used in either way or in combinations. Ms. Dorrel said Mr. Roseland is concerned that they don’t differentiate between open space and park land for development. She suggested council break those into separate line items for tracking purposes, in which case funding levels for each component will need to be determined. Ms. Dorrel stated that the open space plan defines open space to include parks, greenways, golf courses, etc.

Mayor McAlister said that is an accounting procedure and asked about the difficulty of splitting the categories. Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Director Mary Henderson responded that the stormwater issue may be okay, but others may get muddled. She referred to the “What is Open Space?” document provided to council (Exhibit A, pp. 32-35). She said that when the Town buys park land they are trying to buy it in conjunction with land identified in the open space plan, however, the lines can get blurry. Mayor McAlister said the divisions of open space are not a necessary part of the budget deliberations. He stated that the funding level is $1 million and council needs to determine how it is funded. Mayor McAlister suggested staff spend time breaking up the designations and bring information back to council in the future.

Mrs. Robison stated that the $1 million is from the utility dedicated revenue stream and is part of the budget. She asked where the money would come from for an increase. Mr. Roseland about the overage for the Town with the six month target level in the general fund cash balance. Mr. Coleman replied that the Town is about $4 million over. Mr. Roseland recommended the overage as a funding source.

Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated that he never looked to the bond referendum as doubling the Town’s obligations. Mrs. Robison said that she thought this decision had already been made. Mayor McAlister responded that council did make the decision to leave funds in the utility fund this year and use debt funding in the future when appropriate.

Mrs. Robinson is supportive of the $2 million because the Town should acquire open space sooner rather than later; however, she does not want to add $1 million at the last minute. She said that sacrifices have been made by all, especially with the pay plan.

Mrs. Robison recalls that council asked staff to provide more information on spending and the bond issue for financing open space after the budget process is completed.

ACTION: Mr. Roseland moved to increase the line item from $1 million to $2 million.  A second was not provided and the motion failed for lack of a second.

Business Licenses

Mr. Coleman stated that staff looked at how to deal with differences in business licenses having no gross receipts. The Town needs a way to levy the fee from an equity standpoint. Staff looked at different schedules from different communities (Exhibit A, pp. 21-22). Staff recommends using the Charlotte schedule which has more gradations and treats smaller businesses with a lower fee. Mayor McAlister stated that he hasn’t heard any concerns about an increase in fees except for a comment at the budget public hearing, which included concerns about the affect it would have on employees and hiring. Council members concurred.

Mayor McAlister asked if the chamber expressed a concern about the fees. Mr. Coleman stated that the chamber board did not take a position on the subject.

ACTION: Ms. Dorrel moved to accept the staff recommendation to adopt the Charlotte model for the miscellaneous fee structure for businesses. Mrs. Robinson provided the second and council granted unanimous approval.

Nonprofit Funding Levels

Mr. Coleman stated that early budget discussions considered reducing funding amounts for nonprofits. He said that some of the nonprofits are directly related to programs undertaken by the Town—for example, Emergency Medical Services is directly related to the fire department mission, The Carying Place is related to the Town’s Community Development Block Program, etc.—and the question was raised whether funding decisions should be considered by departments where nonprofits are assisting the Town in pursuing a mission within a particular department’s function.

Mrs. Robison said that she brought this up, stating that council should evaluate the possible consequences of making a one-third cut in funding requests for this year (Exhibit A, p. 24). As an example, she pointed to The Carying Place which is implementing improvements to an Urban Street triplex that is part of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program fund. She said that particular project is moving the Carying Place into a broader responsibility and the Town’s funding is their second largest source of operational funds. She asked staff to evaluate how the nonprofits help the Town achieve its mission and then evaluate the funding.

Mrs. Robison proposed keeping the funding levels the same as last year and having staff evaluate each organization, which would take the process out of council hands.

Mayor McAlister asked if The Carying Place gets funded from the CDBG program funds and, if so, how much. Assistant Town Manager Ben Shivar stated they receive CDBG funds in addition to Town funding but he did not know the amount.

Mayor McAlister agreed that council could do a better job in ensuring that nonprofits are aligned with the Town’s overall goals and objectives; however, he is concerned with turning the responsibility for funding over to staff because each council member clearly has a nonprofit of interest. He doesn’t want to set council members against staff.

Mayor Pro Tem Smith is willing to stay with the weaning program so long as the funds are taken from somewhere else. He does not want to add new things and asked why the Town is adding cultural arts but dropping other funding. Mrs. Robison said that if it is going to be done then the standard should be applied evenly.

Ms. Dorrel said that the Town does not have a standard for nonprofits. She said that Council has not given direction to the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Advisory Board nor to the Cultural Arts Committee regarding cultural arts funding, and they are the ones who bring forward recommendations for funding. She said that council should share their expectations with those groups. She supports cutting back some but is reluctant to have discussions because everyone has their favorites.

Mr. Coleman said that deciding on nonprofit funding is arbitrary and has continually been a problem. Historically the cultural arts groups were in the council’s budget but council decided to have those decisions reviewed and recommended by the cultural arts committee. He said that all of the groups are seen as lower cost ways to enhance the parks, recreation and cultural resources mission by expanding offerings in the community. He said that it goes well with the philosophy to have other nonprofits tied to particular departments since there are department ties for most of the nonprofits; however there are some that may not have ties for which funding could be council’s decision. He said it is a good way to evaluate the mission, determine how the nonprofit’s mission ties in with functions provided by Town, and allows council to see more clearly when making funding decisions. He stated that staff can provide an analysis to help eliminate some of the arbitrary nature of the funding decisions.

Mr. Roseland stated that there are three flavors of nonprofit: (1) legislative boards and commissions, (2) cultural art organizations, and (3) the Cary chamber. He stated that all are in different parts of the budget and he advocated for a new approach.

Mrs. Robison suggested that the manager evaluate departments and where the nonprofits should go. She suggested not cutting funding this year but commit to reform the process to ensure consistent handling.

ACTION: Mrs. Robison moved to fund the existing organizations as estimated for FY05, keeping the funding level the same. Mr. Roseland provided the second.

Mr. Roseland said that the state auditor requires accountability. He said if staying with the prior year’s funding then the nonprofits should provide an accountability report to the Town. He said that there is a standard format that can be used so there is no need to reinvent the wheel. Mr. Coleman stated that staff already receives that information and he will forward it to the council.

Mr. Joyce asked how a new organization came in for funding. Ms. Dorrel stated that the motion on the floor does not apply to cultural arts which is where that new organization falls.

Mrs. Robinson reluctantly supports the motion. She wants these details ironed out in advance of the budget next year. She said if there is no direct link to the department, then cut the funding to zero.

ACTION: Vote was called for on the motion to restore the funding to the level of $69,700. Mayor Pro Tem Smith and Mr. Joyce voted “no.” All others voted “aye.” The motion carried by majority vote.

Mayor Pro Tem Smith disagreed because he feels the money should come from somewhere else.

Ms. Dorrel stated that she will contact staff and council members to see if the funding for nonprofits can be approached in the same way as the budget committee.

Work Session adjourned at 5:45 p.m.