City of Rye, New York
Questions and Answers Concerning the 2008 Tentative Budget
Updated
11/30/2007 15:36
Following are questions raised by the City Council in their review and deliberation of the 2008 Tentative Budget, and the respective answers provided by City staff. The order of the questions does not express or imply any relationship or attribution, including but no limited to, priority or level of consideration given by the City Council.
At the November 28, 2007 public hearing on the 2008 Budget, a resident/merchant suggested increasing the hours of collection for the parking paystations to capture the central business district activity after 6:00pm. Are the paystations designed to operate only during special hours?
The paystations are currently programmed to accept payment only between the hours of operation authorized under City statute, namely 7:00am through 6:00pm. If the City Council desired to extend the time of collection the local law regarding same should be amended.
How many demolition permits were issued in 2005, 2006, and 2007?
To date (November 28, 2007) we issued 21 demolition permits. In 2006 and 2005 we issued 16 and 10 respectively
Is the $25,000 remaining in the 2007 Central Business District Traffic Signals Project needed for design on the project?
No. The funds required for the design have been encumbered and no further amounts are needed. Therefore, the $25k is available for other items in 2008 if desired.
Please explain the fines for false fire alarms, and provide some information on annual amounts collected.
Per City Code §46-8, there is no fine for the first and second false alarm, There is a $100 fine per false alarm charge for the third and fourth false alarm, and $200 fine per false alarm for the fifth and any subsequent false alarms. Our collection experience is as follows: 2007 (through November 28): $17,500; 2006: $12,500; 2005: $11,700; 2004: $9,900.
Finance is typically very conservative in its forecast of current year operations. Is it possible to eliminate the $280,000 provided for the CBD Traffic Signals but provide language in the budget document that notes the Council's intentions to amend the 2008 budget to include the CBD Traffic Signal project if early in 2008 the actual 2007 year-end results are determined to be equal or greater than $280,000 more than forecast?
Yes, the 2008 budget could be amended by the City Council anytime in 2008 to appropriate $280k for the traffic signals.
What would be the effect of dedicating 100% of the paystation revenues to CBD improvements?
There would be no effect on the 2008 revenues or the tax rate. There is $165k currently estimated as 2008 paystation revenues, and approximately $18,750 per year in maintenance and operational costs (including warranties, supplies, electronic reporting), for a net of $146,250. The $146,250 would be subtracted from undesignated fund balance and added to fund balance designated for CBD improvements.
What would be the impact of increasing offshore mooring fees from $150 to $175?
To date in 2007 we have collected $37,350 for 249 registered moorings, which has been approximately the same as 2005 and 2006. Increasing the fee to $175 would generate an additional $6,225 which would decrease the tax rate approximately .04%
What would be the impact of increasing the demolition permit fee from $1,500 to $1,750?
To date in 2007 we have collected $31,500 for 21 demolition permits. In 2005 we collected $24,000 (16 permits) and in 2006 we collected $15,000 (10 permits). Raising the permit fee $250 would generate anywhere from $2,500 to $5,250, which would decrease the tax rate from approximately .01% to approximately .03%.
Does the 2008 Tentative Budget provide financing of the local share of funding required for the various flood repair/mitigation projects?
No. It was after publication date of the 2008 Tentative Budget document that FEMA advised us that they would not be covering costs associated with the Central Avenue Bridge rebuilding, and we have recently been advised that the rebuilding of the Theodore Fremd retaining wall may not be covered as well. Both Central Avenue Bridge and Theo Fremd Wall will most likely be covered under NYS Dept of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration funding. While the project costs and federal/state aid amounts have not yet been finalized, we believe that our local share for Central Avenue Bridge will be approximately $290k and Theo Fremd Wall will be $175k. The City has also be awarded a grant for a Bowman Avenue Spillway Sluice Gate that requires local funding in the amount of $210k. The Elm Place retaining wall may or may not be covered 100% by FEMA. Staff would recommend that all of the local share amounts for these projects, as well as any other flood repair/mitigation projects, be consolidated into a single bond issue for Waterway Improvements. Depending on the final amount required, it will most likely require a mandatory referendum, especially if the Council desires to preserve its discretionary bonding authority (by Council vote, and by Council vote subject to permissive referendum).
Can we double parking fines?
A local law (after applicable public hearing) would be requred to change the appropriate sections of the City Code regulating the fines, and would have to be adopted before January 1, 2008 to assume that the full year's revenues would be collected at the higher fine rates. We also note that there may or may not be a one-to-one correlation between fine levels and actual fine revenues collected, as there are many factors that affect the revenue stream (adjudication and willingness/ability of violator to pay). We must also consider enough lead time to make appropriate system changes to our parking violation system, manual tickets, etc.
If we increase merchant parking permits by 50%, would we generate an additional $50,000 in revenue?
Increasing Merchant Parking Permits would generate approximately $50,000, assuming that parking habits do not change as a result of the increased fee, and assuming that the Council adopts the change prior to January 1, 2008.
What is the impact of increasing recreational fees $20 per child?
We are not certain that there is a one-to-one correlation between raising a recreation program fee and revenues, as participation may change with increased fees. We do know that the Recreation Commission reviews fees and compares them to surrounding communities, as well as other factors, before deciding on the appropriate levels. The City Council can certainly adopt whatever fee structure it desires.
Should we increase our estimate for mortgage taxes?
The 25% estimated reduction in mortgage taxes is recommended by Finance based on general information concerning residential home sales, the impact of the subprime mortgage debacle, and the current economic downturn in the financial district. However, the City Council ultimately decides and adopts what that estimate should be. A $105,000 increase would decrease the tax rate by 0.59%
Should we reduce the appropriations for workers compensation by $150,000?
As noted before, our self-insured workers comp program is not yet mature (established in June 2006), and for 2007 and 2008 we recommend funding at the levels we have recommended, to provide for current claims, unmatured claims, and incurred but not reported (IBNR) claims. The City Council can decide if this is an acceptable recommendation, or adopt a budget of whatever amount it believes is appropriate. A $150,000 decrease would decrease the tax rate by 0.88%
Can we transfer funds from the Cable TV Fund?
Funds in the Cable TV Fund are dedicated to the operations of RCTV, and it would be a deviation of City policy to transfer any balances in that fund to the General Fund. It should also be noted that the long-term future of continued franchise fees may be negatively affected by changes in Federal or State law.
Please provide information on the results of operations for the Whitby Castle while it was under the management of the former food service provider. Please also provide comments pertinent to the Whitby Castle operations since then, under the management of the Rye Golf Club.
The following numbers are the shortfalls from former provider's operation. These numbers do not include other costs including labor, operational, management and maintenance that were spent during the term of the contract: 2002: ($97,101); 2003: ($77,532); 2004: ($49,588); 2005: ($22,616). Other significant non-financial points to consider: management was particularly time consuming due to the fact that all complaints about the snack bar and or comments regarding the Castle came to the Golf Club Manager and there was little he could do to make any changes other then be sympathetic and suggest resolutions. There were complaints from Golf Club members that the former food service provider did not want golfers at the castle. The Castle was closed every time there was an event, leaving no dining option.
There is a cost of doing business in a club environment. From the beginning it was not all financial driven but access to the facility and reconnecting with the membership was the goal. Though the Golf Club may not meet all of the financial aspects, the facility is being used, much better maintained and providing access and dining options even during catered events. The City needs to remain flexible during off peak times to reduce hours and days of operation to allow for maximum profitability and focus on financial success as well.
Please provide us with the history, process, and results of offshore mooring fees.
The offshore mooring fee was instituted in 2003, and since its inception has contributed to the safety of the Milton Harbor while reducing the City's reliance on property taxes to support City programs. Those wishing to moor their boat(s) in Milton Harbor submit an application containing all required information (owner, boat description, mooring description and location, etc.) and fee (currently $150 annually per mooring) to the City of Rye Boat Basin. The Boat Basin enters the information into a database, provides the owner with a mooring permit number, and remits the fee to the City's Finance Department. The Finance Department records the fee as a revenue of the Marine Patrol cost center. The owner contracts with a private company to place the mooring, which must be clearly marked with the permit number. Complaints concerning unmarked, unregistered, or unsafe moorings are usually brought to the attention of the Boat Basin. If the Boat Basin cannot resolve the issue, it will request the Marine Patrol to inspect the situation. Since the program's inception the City has collected on average approximately $37,000 per year.
How much debt service (principal and interest) cost would be incurred if the City issued bonds?
Moody's Investor Services rates City of Rye debt Aaa, their highest rating. Our financial advisors advised us on November 20, 2007 that new issue Aaa 20-year New York municipal bonds were being sold at rates around 4.2%. They also advised that to be on the conservative side, we should consider that rates through 2008 might reach 4.5%. Based on that information, the respective rates and annual debt service payments for each $100,000 of bonds issued using level debt service are: 4.20% $7,489; 4.25% $7,521; 4.30% $7,555; 4.35% $7,588; 4.40% $7,621; 4.45% $7,654; 4.50% $7,688. For example, a $1 million Aaa 20 year maturity bond issued at 4.2% and using level debt service would require annual principal and interest payments totaling approximately $74,890 ($1,000,000 / $100,000 * 7,489). Please note that the foregoing is provided for general information only and should not be relied on in making an investment or financial decision.
How much has the City tax rate increased compared to the merchant parking permit fee over the past 10 years?
In 1998 the City tax rate was $73.72 and merchant parking permit fee was $275. In 2007 the City tax rate was $127.24 and the merchant parking permit fee was $336. This represents a 72.6% tax rate increase vs. and a 22.2% merchant parking permit fee increase over the past 10 years.
The County 2008 tentative budget provides for a 1.6% increase in sales tax compared to a 5% decrease proposed in the City's 2008 tentative budget. Please explain why the estimates would differ.
The County is budgeting a 1.6% increase from 2007 budget to 2008 budget. We are budgeting a 1.5% increase budget to budget. The 5% decrease noted represents the change from 2007 forecast to 2008 budget.
The County 2008 budget proposal shows a 10.3% increase in mortgage taxes compared to the 25% decrease proposed in the City's 2008 tentative budget. Please explain the rationale behind the City's 2008 estimate.
The County Budget Office advised that they project $33 million in 2007 mortgage taxes, well above the $26 million budgeted in 2007. Based on that information, the County believes that a 10.3% estimated increase 2007 budget to 2008 budget is reasonable. We believe that the economic downturn being experienced by the New York City financial district may have a significant impact on home financing, refinancing, and improvements. Supporting this view is a notice published by the Mortgage Bankers Association of America on November 15, 2007: "Total originations should decline another 19 percent next year as both purchase and refi originations drop. We project that total originations will drop an additional six percent in 2009 from 2008 as the 6-percent increase in purchase originations partially offset a projected 18 percent decline in refi originations."
Please provide additional information regarding the $100,000 Purchase Street Study. The underlying work is a few years away. Should we consider deferring the study?
There are a number of improvements that are required in the central business district (CBD), including signal upgrades, street reconstructions (including Purchase Street, Smith Street, Fremd/Purdy interesection, etc.), curb and sidewalk enhancements and other infrastructure provided on page 7-6 of the budget, The study is intended to comprehensively identify these necessary improvements and develop a detailed plan for their implementation. Professional consultants (including engineer and design professionals) would work with City Staff and community members to prepare a plan that would include a phasing plan and multi-year budget for the City Council's consideration. Given limited resources and other challenges in the CBD, smart planning is essential before implementing significant improvements in the CBD. If the Council is seeking to defer a CBD project, it might consider deferring the CBD signals until this study is completed. The CBD Signals Project was approved by the Council in the 2007 Budget, but deferred due to the March and April 2007 floods. The CBD Signals Project requires significant street and sidewalk repairs, but it is not completely clear how the signals would be integrated within the context of the overall CBD plan. It should be noted that the Purchase Street Study has been deferred for many years and contributes to our inability to advance other necessary infrastructure improvements in the CBD.
Please provide information on the hand-held units used by our parking enforcement officers (PEOs) to write tickets?
The PEOs use a Casio IT 3000. These units were selected on recommendation from our parking violation processor based on the unit's durability, features, ease of use, and technology.
Please provide information concerning mechanical failures at the parking pay stations, and the cost of maintaining and repairing them.
We experience minor operational issues during rain events, namely jammed coins and bills, which are reported to us electronically by the machines, and to which personnel are dispatched very quickly to clear. The use of shelters, such as the one we recently purchased through the FEMA flood reimbursement program, would probably reduce these calls. Therefore it may be prudent to install additional shelters in the future. While we have not experienced any major problems recently, the machines and their parts are covered by an all-parts warranty.
As to the cost of maintaining and repairing the units, all off-street parking revenue and expenditure activity (other than permits) is captured in one cost center, and covers both the new paystations and the traditional single-head coin meters. Following is a summary of the current and past three years revenue and expenditure activity for off-street parking. It should be noted that the paystations were installed in August 2005, and the information for 2007 is our current forecast. As you can see, it would appear that while expenditures have risen, the revenues have not only offset those increases, but have increased the net revenue realized.
2007
2006
2005
2004
Revenues $ 608,287 $ 626,864
$ 488,196 $367,871
Expenses 237,292
63,958 208,036
119,368
Net $
370,995 $ 562,906
$ 280,160 $248,503
How do our parking fine levels compare to other Westchester communities?
We are currently updating a parking fine rate survey that was last done in 2004. Initial information being received from three other communities indicates that their fine levels, like ours, has not changed since that time. The 2004 survey of the City of Rye and 13 surrounding communities indicated that most of our fines were within the average or median, with a few fines above and a few below the average and median.
Did the city do a cost/benefit analysis prior to purchasing the electric car for the police, and are there plans for more of them?
The Global Electric Motorcars (GEM) vehicle was purchased in 2002 as an alternative to assigning a second regular vehicle to the Parking Enforcement Officers. Although much of their time is spent on foot, they cover a significant number of different locations - including the downtown parking lots, the commuter lots, outlying areas where complaints are frequently received (such as Wappanocca Avenue, Cowles Avenue, and, seasonally, the beach area). They also travel to and from school crossings throughout the City, and the vehicle is used as a utility vehicle for events such as Purchase Street closures or Rye Town Park events. No extensive cost/benefit analysis was done prior to the vehicle's purchase. The vehicle was purchased at a discounted initial price of about $7000. It has had a mediocre repair record; early experience with the batteries was far from satisfactory. Many of the early problems were corrected, however, and it has provided somewhat better service for the past year or two. It should be noted, however, that this is an all-electric limited use vehicle. It has a range of approximately thirty-five miles per day, and a top speed of approximately thirty miles per hour. It was purchased as an inexpensive and environmentally conscious alternative to a former patrol vehicle. It is not, however, a hybrid vehicle of the type that has been purchased for other Departments, and cannot be compared with them.
Can we get further detail on the sources and uses of the capital items cited on pages 2-6 and 2-7? How much of the state and federal aid shown has actually been secured?
Further detail on sources and uses of capital items can be found in the Capital Projects and Building and Vehicle Fund sections of the 2008 Annual Budget Document. Of the $5,240,000 state and federal aid we are budgeting, the only "guaranteed aid" is the New York State Local Highway Improvement Program ("CHIPS") aid of $240,000. In fact, this picture changed after publication date when we found that FEMA would not be funding the Central Ave Bridge reconstruction, and the other two retaining wall projects may require local (City) funding to some extent yet unknown.
Why do the Personnel (page 3-20) and the MIS (page 3-21) amounts swing so significantly from 2007 Budget to 2007 Forecast, and then to 2008 Budget?
The 2007 forecast represents changing in staffing due to retirements and terminations, as well as a shift in resources due to reorganization. This generally shows a 2007 forecast that is lower than the amount budgeted, and a 2008 budget greater than the 2007 forecast.
Why did materials and supplies in the City Manager's budget increase significantly from 2006 budget to 2007 budget? Why does the 2007 forecast appear to show that much of this increase will not actually be spent?
In 2007, the City Manager's materials and supplies budget included $175,000 for challenge grants. To date (November 19, 2007), only $55,000 of the $175,000 has been requested and awarded to individuals or organizations that wish to take advantage of the grants.
How much of the revenues generated by the Police Department is from parking fines, and how much from speeding fines?
In fiscal 2006 revenues from parking fines were $248,000, and vehicle and traffic (we don't have detail for speeding only) fines were $168,000. Through October parking fines were $209,000 in 2007 vs. $225,000 in 2006, and vehicle and traffic fines were $96,000 in 2007 vs. $124,000 in 2006.
Have the parking paystations facilitated parking enforcement, and have we seen a demonstrably larger increase in parking fines since the installation of the parking paystations?
The parking paystations were intended to help control and better understand parking needs in the central business district. The paystations certainly make it easier to enforce parking as opposed to single meters. The paystations do indeed give us valuable information on parking habits and needs. While at this time we cannot present a direct correlation between the paystation use and parking violation fines, the parking situation has improved and there is better compliance in the CBD.
Why do benefits for the police (page 3-36) increase (up 6.8%), but fall for traffic enforcement (down 14%).
There was a retiree crossing guard (traffic enforcement) receiving health care benefits who passed away in 2007, thus reducing benefits costs.
On page 3-33, the Fire Department mentions the possible purchase of an inflatable boat. Was there any issue with boats used in floods earlier this year? How much will the boat cost, and how would it be paid for?
The Fire Department wants to purchase two 14 foot ridged hull inflatable rescue boats to supplement the one 12 foot aluminum boat currently used by the Department. The inflatable boats are capable of handling six people at one time. Cost factor $1250 for the boat and $1441 for a 15 HP motor w/short shaft. The Fire Department does not recommend the disposal of the aluminum boat at this time. It has been used three times during winter months at Oakland Beach, twice for humans and once for a dog stranded on the breakwater. There was slush ice involved and the Department would prefer not to use an inflatable for that type of rescue.
How many LED lights remain to be installed on the fire equipment, and how much is this costing us?
The two fire trucks recently purchased came equipped with all LED emergency lighting. It is now standard with new deliveries. Engines191 and 193, Ladder 26, and Utility 39 presently are using halogen (incandescent) warning lights. We want to replace the present lighting, which include lightbars, front flashers, side flashers and rear brake and warning lights. The retail cost of an LED lightbar is $1189, and we will receive discount pricing under New York State contract.
How many Fire Department volunteers and how many paid employees lack the requisite turnout gear? How is the FD tracking inventory?
The new members of our department received used turnout gear. This is replaced with new gear once the candidate takes and passes the Firefighter 1 course. A yearly inspection of gear takes place in June. The Fire Department keeps records on all the turnout gear, pagers and portable radios, and who they are issued to. Current requirements state that turnout gear must be inspected every year and replaced every five years.
Why the jump in Fire Department equipment - is this a one-year increase to cover improvements to capital equipment (trucks) or is there another reason for the increase, and do we expect this cost to decrease next year?
The increase reflects increasing prices on all items purchased; the beginning of computerization in our vehicles; boat purchases; conversion to LED lighting, and additional equipment for Ladder 26 that was taken off the older ladder truck and placed on the new truck.
On page 3-44, why the jump of 27% ($97,600) in expenditures for the building department?
The 2008 budget provides for an additional staff member in the Building Department to process and expedite paperwork associated with building inspections and reports.
From the multi-year plan, it appears we are spending double in fuel than we were in 2002, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of about 15%. Has the city done a review of possible fuel savings by changing routes, timing/duration of patrols, options of moving more police to "walking the beat", limiting the use of city-owned autos, etc.
Although foot patrol is an effective means of patrol in certain areas, such as business districts - and we currently assign an officer on bicycle and foot patrol in the Village - it is of limited applicability to the geography of our community and to the nature of this Department’s work. The City is divided into three patrol posts (Post 1, the Village post, is essentially a foot post contained within Post 2). The area covered by each post is large; for example, the officer on Post 4 may be expected to respond from the High School to the American Yacht Club for an emergency. Therefore, although we assign the Village Officer to foot or bicycle patrol, and we assign the Post 2 Officer to walk in the Village between 4:00 P.M. and 6:00 P.M. unless called for an assignment, the nature of our responsibility is not conducive to increased foot patrol. Additionally, the goal of the Police Department - and the expectation of many of our residents - is to maximize the number of random patrols throughout the jurisdiction with the goal of deterring crime while being ready to respond quickly to emergency calls for service. With rare exceptions, we do not prescribe specific routes for officers on patrol, but encourage them to move randomly through their assigned posts, hopefully covering as much ground as possible to be visible to both the residents and to anyone intent on criminal conduct.
There appears to be no clear plans for the Police Impound Facility Project. Should we defer this project and utilize the $113,000 appropriated for other projects?
The impound facility has been requested for several years. The proposal calls for the installation of a metal-framed storage building on city-owned land at Disbrow Park, similar structurally to the existing DPW garage, that will fill a number of functions. The Police Department is often required to take vehicles or other bulky items into its custody as evidence. Vehicles present a particular issue, since they are often taken into custody to be processed for fingerprints. Such processing requires that they be stored in a climate-controlled environment; the processing cannot be done outdoors, and the vehicle cannot be exposed to weather. Our practice has been to tow evidence vehicles to the DPW garage, where they are placed in a bay, and may remain for several days while the County Police Identification Unit responds and conducts the necessary processing. This presents several problems: first, it occupies a bay in the garage that should be used for mechanical work; secondly, it does not provide a secure location in which to house the vehicle, potentially disrupting the chain of custody required to defend against charges that the evidence has been tainted. This is not a security issue that can be addressed by the installation of a fenced area, but rather is a legal issue. For fingerprint evidence to be of value, the item to be dusted should be secured in an area that reduces or eliminates the potential for contamination. Storage in an outdoor facility, or in a DPW bay that is accessible by numerous people, does not provide that.
A fenced area would provide a measure of security, which would address one issue. Vehicles and other items of evidence may remain in the custody of the Department for quite some time; at the moment, for example, two vehicles are being held by the Department pending the outcome of forfeiture proceedings resulting from their involvement in felony arrests. They are stored at various secure and non-secure locations at DPW. Just as vehicles held as evidence should be stored in a secure facility, so should vehicles that may ultimately be returned to their owners. However, the principal purpose of the impound facility - to maintain an area that protects the chain of custody for purposes of prosecution - would not be adequately met by an outdoor facility. The Department also takes into its custody bulky items of evidence; a search warrant executed at a local residence some time ago, for example, resulted in the seizure of a significant quantity of automobile parts. Items like this should be stored in a secure location, both to maintain the chain of custody, and to prevent their “re-appropriation” by the defendants. Although the use of the DPW facility has been restricted primarily to large items such as vehicles and vehicle parts, it should also be noted that the Department’s Evidence Room is small and nearing capacity, and the proposed facility would serve as a potential expansion site for the storage of various categories of evidence property.
The Department also has a number of specialized vehicles and other items that require storage, such as the Army surplus generator truck; the prisoner van; the speed monitoring trailers; the command post trailer; and the inflatable boat. Several of these are items with lengthy anticipated useful lifecycles, which can be extended by reducing their exposure to harsh weather conditions. There is insufficient room at Police Headquarters to house these items, and they are not readily accessible when stored at DPW, which has space limitations of its own. The impound facility has been proposed as a prefabricated structure with several drive-through bays, so that vehicles could be towed directly into the building, and a separate area for secure storage of evidence. To allow for the processing of evidence, and to avoid freezing or, alternately, the development of mold, it must be climate-controlled. Ideally, the facility should have a rest room and a slop sink, although a rest room is now available at the Tactical Training Center at the other end of the park, so installation of plumbing could be deferred. Access to the building would be limited by a key fob system and an alarm system. The site would not be staffed; it would be utilized purely for storage.
A question has been raised as to whether this facility is required by the New York State Law Enforcement Accreditation Standards. While the standards clearly do not require a particular facility for, or methods of, securing evidence, they do require accredited agencies to maintain a secure chain of custody of property held as evidence. Our property controls were examined during the recent reaccreditation assessment, and determined to be in compliance, although this is a potentially weak area. Essentially, while there is not a specific connection between the accreditation standards and the need for this facility, compliance with the standards requires enhancement of our evidence storage facilities. Security of evidence - whether high-security items such as narcotics or currency, or less sensitive items such as vehicles - is paramount, from the standpoints of integrity, prosecution of cases, and professionalism. That is why this facility has been requested for several years.
Cost estimates were developed with the assistance of the City Engineer and the Department of Public Works.
Can the acquisition of 2008 police vehicles be postponed until 2009?
The Police Department makes and justifies funding requests for new vehicles and equipment. Four new vehicles have been ordered under the 2007 budget and are expected to be delivered by the end of this year. The four vehicles to be replaced will be determined by the Police Department. The funds requested in the 2008 budget represent funds needed to replace police vehicles that are estimated to meet or exceed 70,000 miles of use.
The City’s vehicle replacement policy was recently revised to address two issues: first, to ensure that a reasonable mileage target was set for replacement of patrol vehicles, and secondly, to account for the introduction of a Supervisor’s Truck into the fleet. The move to the truck was done for several reasons: it provides the capability for rapid deployment of specialized equipment to the scene of a critical incident; it accommodates the growing amount of equipment that is needed to support patrol operations; and it provides additional four wheel drive capability, which has proven to be an important need with the weather patterns of recent years.
That vehicle has a longer anticipated lifecycle than the standard marked cars, and will ultimately be recycled after about four years to replace the Marine Unit truck. The combination of the longer lifecycle for the vehicle with some changes in the timing of purchases warranted a review of the policy, and I believe the recently revised policy, which will target 70,000 miles as a replacement goal for standard marked patrol cars, will address the situation.
At this time, four vehicles are on order. One will replace the supervisor’s truck, which will replace the current Marine Unit truck. One will replace a vehicle that was a total loss in a collision. A third will replace a vehicle that currently has in excess of 70,000 miles. The fourth will be held back until another vehicle reaches appropriate mileage, or it is determined that its mechanical condition renders replacing it more economical than keeping it in the fleet. It should be noted that there have been cars that simply have not held up well under the difficult conditions of police use, and, unfortunately, accidents can be an unpleasant but realistic fact of life.
A snapshot of our current fleet during the past three months indicates that our post cars are averaging approximately 2,500 miles per month. At least three of them should reach replacement criteria during 2008; in addition, one unmarked vehicle is already past the age criterion, and should reach the mileage criterion during the year. The possibility of catastrophic mechanical failure or loss due to accident must also be considered (we lost one vehicle earlier this year when it was totaled in a collision).
Therefore, as we evaluate the effectiveness of the revised replacement policy, I would strongly recommend against elimination of the funding requested for replacement of vehicles. Although we will be reviewing each vehicle replacement closely, and I anticipate that at least one potential replacement may be eliminated, I still expect that at least three vehicles will be due for replacement – in the absence of additional losses due to accident, etc. -- during 2008. Furthermore, any funds not spent by the end of the year would be used to reduce replacement costs during 2009.
Why are contractual costs increasing in the 2008 MIS budget (page 3-21)?
Approximately $12,000 represents temporary help needed to address growing IT issues (larger, more sophisticated network), and approximately $18,000 increase in support contract costs.
Does the City leverage the County contracts for fiberoptic data or voice services?
We have participated in the County contract for fiberoptic services since March of 2002. The City benefits in participating include two fiber optic circuits (City Hall and Police building); ten managed high-speed cable modem circuits at "remote" city offices, and a high-speed electronic Police Department fingerprint application. Our current telephone system is a Verizon Intellipath II Digital Service (Centrex) system provided under the terms and conditions (including discounted pricing) of a New York State contract. In 2006 a comparative analysis between commercially-available fiberoptic voice services and Verizon's state contract was performed, with the Verizon state contract proving to be the most cost effective and reliable solution for the City at that time. One of the Information Technology department's objectives for 2008 will be to explore new and emerging telecom solutions for the City. During this discovery and analysis we will seek out services and systems that will reduce total cost of operation while maintaining a high availability, scalable and feature-rich telecom solution.
What will the balance remaining in the Recreation Master Plan ($7,164) be used for?
The balance in the Master Plan is earmarked to fund the Commission’s objective to review and update the current Master Plan. A Master Plan Review Committee was appointed by Chair this past year but has been put on hold as other issues came to the forefront. I would expect that the Commission will be returning to this in 2008.
Why is there an increase in the amount for interfund services charged to the Rye Golf Club in 2008 and a decrease for the Boat Basin in the same year?
These amounts represent an allocation of Risk Retention Fund charges, based proportionately on the most recently completed year's (2006) expenses. As a result, charges may increase or decrease in from any given year to the next.
Page 9-10 of the budget provides information on Whitby Castle operations. Could we please have more information regarding the difference in expected revenues for 2007 and the current forecast? To what extent does the 2007 revenue forecast reflect unbooked catering slots compared to the booking schedule of the former concessionaire? What are the plans for better revenue results in 2008? Can we get a five-year history of Whitby Castle operations?
We need to be careful when we analyze departments within the overall budget. Not all departments are profitable but contribute to the overall success of the Golf Club.One of our key objectives was the reconnection of the Castle with the membership. Albeit many members have never been in the building many other have enjoyed many meals, social gatherings and other special events. With the response received this year we anticipate the usage by the membership to increase as we move forward. Given the restaurants location and connection with the club it is more seasonal in nature. We will develop new seasonal schedules and hours to reduce expense and maximize revenue potentials.
The Castle was in need of numerous repairs and deferred maintenance. Many of these items have been addressed over these past two years and in addition most of the equipment, supply and other non-annual expenditure needs have been satisfied as well. Member usage at the Castle is on the rise, the book of business continues to grow and the Club’s overall membership and special event participation has increased as well. The club is having a great year and will cover 100% of its cost for 2007. All parts of the club -- pool, golf, food and beverage, and administration -- are essential and contribute to the overall experience of the club as a whole. The proposed membership dues increase is 4% given the current model and activities. If the current model was to change, the increase would not decrease and could possibly increase.
2008 brings new challenges and ideas for the castle. Continued sales efforts, adjusted hours in the off season and using other parts of the castle for unique ala carte dining experiences in season, will allow for larger and additional catered events. This coupled with many of the major deferred maintenance items out of the way will bring us yet another step closer to achieving a cost neutral or acceptable position.
Five year history of Whitby Castle operations (per Finance Department records; 2007 amounts through November 13):
Operations Year
2007
2006
2005 2004
2003
2002
Revenues
$1,554,210 $ 877,147
$325,996 $302,323 $284,950
$266,921
Expenses
2,339,081 1,517,566
343,696 351,166
362,482 362,642
Net
$ (784,871) $(640,419)
$(17,700) $(48,843) $(77,532)
$(95,721)
Assuming we move the Boston Post Road up to 2008 what capital projects proposed would staff suggest be deferred to help pay for the project or what combination of cuts, borrowing, or use of undesignated fund balance might staff propose?
Staff continues to recommend that the project be funded by bonds approved by Council resolution subject to permissive referendum.
How many demolition permits were issued in 2006 and 2007?
Forty-one demolition permits were issued from January 1, 2006 through November 13, 2007.
What is the status of the retaining wall project on Elm and what is our projected share, if any? Do we have any cost exposure for the Theo Fremd brook wall repair? What is the latest status of these projects and the Central Avenue bridge project?
This is the updated status for flood control/repair projects:
Total Estimated Cost
Estimated Local Share
Central Ave. Bridge
$1,450,000
$290,000
Theodore Fremd
$926,000
$175,000
Elm Place
$1,050,000
$ -0-
Bowman Sluice Gate
$1,670,000
$210,000
If DEC approves the sediment approval project at the Marina what, if any, City cost will we carry?
FEMA will fund the removal of 500 cubic yards. We have applied to the DEC for amending and placement of that material on the area of the Golf Club they would like to fill and improve. The DEC has requested a sampling and analysis plan which we have submitted but have not yet heard back from them. We really have no estimates other than "ball park" for that type of project as we know no contractor will mobilize in for 500 cubic yards. Our best estimate for that type of project assuming the DEC will approve 25,000 cubic yards or more is in the price range of $75 to $100 per cubic yard. This involves dredging the Boat Basin and channel and moving the material to the amending site off the Golf Club. Fuel or transport costs are minimized but we are now handling it twice, and we don't know what level of amending the DEC will require or if they will even approve it. Additionally we may be dealing with two separate contractors, one to dredge and another to amend and place the material. The nice thought about the Golf Club area is that it could represent a viable disposal area for the next 2 or more dredge cycles if approved.
Plan "A" or open water disposal at the Connecticut Long Island Sound (CLIS) disposal site with a 2:1 capping ratio has been estimated at $60 per cubic yard. This disposal methodology does involve high transport costs and assumes we may have to pay a portion of the capping costs, which is why the City of Rye has coordinate an application for 28 projects from New Rochelle to Bridgeport that are looking for capping. So far we have been unsuccessful in finding a cap-approved project of sufficient quantity going to the CLIS disposal site at the same time as ours. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection officials have indicated that cap suitable material will be used for Connecticut projects requiring capping.
Are there any recapture opportunities for old capital projects on page 7-9?
Not to any great extent. The most significant projects are financed by bonds and the funds can only be spent on those projects or projects having the same purpose (sewers, drains, streets, etc.). The bonded projects on the list include Traffic Signals 2003, Theall Road 2007, the various Kirby Lane sewer and drain projects, Peck Ave Pump Station 2003, Upper Dogwood Lane Sewer 2007, and Highland/Onondaga Drain 2004. Of the significant projects not funded by bonds: Purchase Street Roundabout is currently in the plan/design phase, Peck Ave Intersection Improvements will be done after completion of the Peck Ave Pump Station project, and most of the other projects involve our planned street resurfacing and drainage improvements.
Can we get a total for annual revenue for parking meter pay stations? (separate from the old meters) Last year we indicated that these revenues would be used for the central business district only. What is the status of any expenditures for 2007 revenues from this account?
2005: $74,688; 2006: 185,569; 2007 through November 13: 144,647. In 2007, $90,000 (representing approximately 50% of the estimated 2007 parking station revenues) was transferred from the General Fund to the Capital Projects Fund to help fund the Central Business District Traffic Lights project. The budget update of December 14, 2006 found on Page 2-9 of the 2007 Annual Budget Document states, "On November 29, 2006 the City Council resolved to:...Reclassify as undesignated the $90,000 proposed designation of fund balance for the parking fund, so that these funds can be appropriated for capital improvements (more specifically the central business district traffic lights)..." The CBD Traffic Signals project is underway, with $45,000 spent in 2007 for engineering and design.
The City budget proposal assumes a year end $2,201,390 deficit by year end. Could we have any updated insight or explanation of the estimate?
As we have noted in past budgets, our revenue and expenditure forecasts are developed based on the best information available. We stand by our forecasts in the proposed budget document. While we may experience some pleasant last-quarter surprises, unless we receive new and documented information that would cause us to change our forecasts significantly, we recommend remaining with the conservative approach we have taken.
Police Overtime - Could we please have a 5 year breakdown on police overtime? Can the 2007 numbers differentiate regular overtime and the overtime from the two storm events? To what extent is our overtime being driven by vacancies in the force?
Below is the five-year history of police overtime and the Police Commissioner's response to the question of vacancies driving overtime costs. We do not have a breakdown of the March 2007 storm event overtime. Approximately $26,000 was expended on police overtime for the April 2007 storm event.
Year
2007*
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
Amount $360,281 $390,847
$354,709 $347,692
$340,218 $323,834
* 2007 through November 13, 2007
It is not possible to provide a dollar-for-dollar estimate on the impact of vacancies on overtime due to the complexities of staffing. The duty schedule is designed to assign one supervisor and four police officers to each tour. One officer is assigned as the desk officer, three cover posts, and the sergeant is a patrol supervisor. Minimum staffing is three posts; when insufficient officers are available, the sergeant assumes the role of desk officer. Although this is an undesirable arrangement, since the sergeant is not able to provide supervision of officers’ activities in the field and to immediately respond to major events, it is frequently done in order to limit overtime expenditures. When vacancies occur, they first impact operational efficiency by increasing the number of times the supervisor is assigned to the desk. The secondary impact is an increase in overtime, since absences – sick leave, personal leave, vacation, training – must be covered with overtime. Finally, they inhibit the Department’s ability to perform other than strictly essential tasks -- items such as training, traffic enforcement, checkpoints, enhanced patrol, tactical drills, planned events – without the use of overtime.
A review of the five year overtime history indicates that overtime expenditures increased 5% from 2002 to 2003; 2% from 2003 to 2004; 2% from 2004 to 2005; and 10% from 2005 to 2006. This is at least indirect evidence of the impact of vacancies on overtime. During 2003, when we experienced an extended vacancy on the midnight tour, the increase was approximately 5%. During the following two years, it was 2%. During those years, salaries increased by at least 3.75% annually pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement. This, in my opinion – especially in light of the increased operational challenges that have faced the Department – is indicative of our conservative management of overtime expense. During 2006, overtime increased approximately 10%; that year, we experienced significant impact from vacancies, with one midnight squad officer absent on disability from April through the end of the year and a second from August through the end of the year. While, again, a strict comparison is not possible, there is a correlation.
The Department is currently operating with two vacant positions. One will be filled by an officer being appointed on December 3, 2007, and we are interviewing candidates for the second position. The greater impact, however, arises from the fact that three officers are on long-term medical leave arising from work-related injuries with no prospect of returning to duty in the near future. The dollar impact of these vacancies can be projected to some degree, since two of the officers were assigned to steady midnight tours for the past year. One was assigned to each of the two four-officer midnight squads. As a result, almost all midnight tour absences – sick leave, vacation, training, etc, -- resulted in overtime expense, since the slots had to be covered to maintain minimum staffing. Assuming that each officer was absent from duty for approximately 35 days during the year – 20 vacation days, four personal leave days, six sick days, and five days for training or other reassignments – backfilling those assignments over the course of an entire year could be responsible for as much as $67,000. This is a worst-case projection, however; there are many factors that impact the situation.
What would it cost to add addition bicycle racks at the train station? Can we get a price estimate? Can we add them underneath the Boston Post Road Bridge by the Northbound platform?
Public works is researching the cost of the additional bicycle racks. The MTA and/or Metro North must approve any racks placed on their property.
Can we get further explanation of the expense increases for the following budget lines?
City Clerk up 22% (page 3-17): Due to reorganization of
personnel from the City Clerk's Office the 2007 forecast is lower than the 2007
amount budgeted. The 2008 budget assumes a return to normal staffing.
Personnel up 54% (page 3-20): As with the City Clerk's office, the
retirement of a part-time employee and subsequent restaffing with a full-time
employee resulted in a 2007 forecast lower than budgeted. Funding for the
full-time position was provided by the reorganization of Finance, the City
Clerk, and Personnel, and resulted in a minor savings.
MIS up 73% (page 3-21): In 2007 a full-time employee left City
employment, resulting in a lower 2007 forecast. 2008 assumes that we return to
full staffing, and there are additional costs related to service contracts that
support our information technology.
General Staff up 14% (page 3-27): General staff includes City Clerk,
Personnel, and Law. The above answers provide the answer to this question.
Public Sanitation has "other uses" of $148,000, almost double 2007 (page
3-52): "Other uses" is essentially debt service payments. 2008 includes
payment of interest on the 2007 Kirby Lane North Sewer bond anticipation note,
part of which will be repaid to the General Fund through special assessments
against the benefited properties when the project is complete. Part of the note
relates to funding City drainage work on the project.
Recreation Services up 5.3% (3-60): The 5.3% is considered a normal
increase when contracted salaries/benefits and operating cost increases are
taken into account.
What is the source used to estimate a 5% decrease in sales and use (page 3-76)?
Finance did not use a specific source with a specific number in developing this estimate. Rather, we assume that the difficulties faced by the financial district will have a negative impact on retail spending in Westchester County, resulting in a reduction of sales and use tax revenues.
Last year we anticipated savings associated with transitioning from a traditional premium-based workers compensation program to a self-insured program. Did we realize those savings? If so, have we reflected savings in the 2008 budget?
The self-insured workers compensation program was started mid-year (June) of 2006. Of the $686,000 budgeted for the General Fund that year, $303,000 was expended and $382,000 reserved for maturing and incurred but not reported (IBNR) claims. In 2007 we budgeted $698,000 for the General Fund and at the close of October had expended $228,000. It remains to be seen as to what amount will be required to be reserved for maturing and IBNR claims. Being that we anticipate the program taking two to three years to mature, we have proposed $723,000 as the budgeted amount for 2008, and would caution making any significant adjustments in funding of the program at this time.
If we increased merchant permit parking fees by 50%, how many additional dollars would this generate?
By the close of October we had collected $103,000 in merchant parking permits, which is essentially what we would anticipate collecting for 2007. Raising the merchant fees 50% would theoretically generate an additional $50k, assuming that those acquiring the permits do not change their parking habits in a way that would significantly affect merchant permit sales. The 2008 budget provides for a 3.6% increase.
What is the current schedule of parking and traffic violation fines? When were these last increased? What would be the impact if the fines were doubled?
Traffic violation fines are regulated by New York State and beyond our control to change. Parking violation fines are regulated by our City Code §191 and require a local law to change. The majority of our parking violations fines are issued pursuant to City Code §191-34, which sets forth $25 for most parking violations and a provision that if the violator has less than three parking violations issued in the past 12 months and makes payment within 48 hours of issuance, the fine is reduced to $15. City Code §191-34 was last amended in 1993. Actual revenues 2004, 2005, 2006 and estimated for 2007 are $281,000, $265,000, $248,000, and $250,000, respectively, and we are budgeting $250,000 for 2008. Doubling all parking fines (and late-payment penalties) could theoretically generate an additional $250,000.
If all increased by a minimum of $15 per event or $25 per event, what would that generate? What is the collection rate on outstanding violations?
Over the three years 2004, 2005, and 2006, the City issued an average of 8,800 parking violations per year with an average collection rate of 86%. Assuming that 86% of the 8800 tickets issued (7568) were increased $15 it would generate an additional $114,000; and if increased $25 it would generate an additional $189,000. However, our parking violations processing company has advised that our 48 hour "incentive" of $15 is a major contributor to our excellent collection rate. Please also note that in last year's budget deliberations we surveyed several surrounding communities as to their parking violation fines and found ourselves to be within the average, with some of our fines higher and some lower. It is also extremely difficult to predict how actual revenues are affected by changes in our laws. The amount of revenues are affected by many factors, including but not limited to, the type of parking violation, the plea and/or judgment, and the ability and willingness of the violator to make payment.
Why should other fines go down due to improved enforcement? Any proof that strict enforcement will result in greater compliance in 2008? Any idea as to percentage of those in violation who are captured?
We do not have a specific study that associates violations with strength of enforcement. If it is any indicator, in 2003 over 10,000 parking violations were issued and in 2004 that dropped to 8,600. In 2005 it rose again to 9,700 and in 2006 fell to 8,200. While this might indicate that heavy enforcement in one year results in better compliance the next (and vice-versa), the data is too limited to determine whether or not other factors had a greater impact on the results.
How many children participate in Rye Recreation programs?
Through October 2007 there have been 4,346 youth participating in recreation sponsored activities. (Number will increase by year's end) This does not include Special Events or Community Youth Sport Leagues.
What is the Rye Recreation fee schedule?
The fee schedule for recreation programs may be found on pages 3-159 through 3-161 of the 2008 Annual Budget Document. The fee schedule represents core programs only. The fees are reviewed and approved by the Recreation Commission before submission to the City Manager and City Comptroller. New programs are set at a fee that results in a self sustaining level or better return.
Any non-Rye children in the programs? If so, fees for them?
Non-resident children participation is less then 5% of all programs offered and will typically carry an additional charge of $25. This excludes camp fees which can be substantially higher then resident fees.
Results if we increased fees by $15 per child per sport? $25 per child per sport?
The Youth Sport Leagues are run independently by each organization who set their own fees, except for Youth Basketball and Flag Football, which is run by Rye Recreation and does include a fee increase each year. Increases of $15 per child in Youth Basketball would generate $3,750 and $25 per child would generate $6,250. Increases of $15 per child in Flag Football would generate $1,275 and $25 per child would generate $2,125.
Does Rye Recreation provide scholarships to children who could not otherwise afford participation fees? If so, how much?
Rye Recreation does provide Camp scholarships to children who could not otherwise afford participation fees. Typically, it is 75% of the Camp fee (approximately $12,000 annually). This full scholarship cost is covered by donations received by private individuals and non-profit organizations.
How many additional dollars if we increased senior fees by 5%?
The City Council has supported the Recreation Commission's recommendation not to increase fees for senior programs. Increase might lead to a reduction in participation and only generate approximately $500 in additional revenues.