04-27-1976 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BUDGET STUDY City Manager Bruce FISCAL YEAR 1976-77 Spragg distributed two reports which had been requested by Council: "Major Capital Expenditures Over $5,000 Currently Remaining in the Budget" and "Breakdown of State and Federal Grants Including City Matching Funds,', and pointed out high- lights of each. Police Chief Davis corrected the footnote at the bottom of Page 3 of the Breakdown report to read: "~*Additional Funds anticipated may total $50,000 requiring $2,500 Cash Match", with the other 5% ($2,500) from the State, pertaining to the Command and Control item. Mr. Spragg stated that in the current year the City's share was $307,000 cash match for a total of $9,300,000, most of which is in the gas tax program; and for next year City's Cash Match would be $6.6 million, of which' it is anticipated that $6.5 million would result from sale of Revenue Bonds for Redevelopment, leaving about $100,000 unfunded, to bring in about $14.5 million. He stated that the Budget is a little more than $1.6 million out of balance, and requested an expression of opinion from Council'to give Staff a sense of direction. In response~'to':a question- from"Councilman Britken as to which policy alternative might be most viable from Staff's point of view, Mr. Spragg responded that Council could suggest possible combinations of the Alternatives outlined;that health insurance is a negotiable item; that he does not recommend continuing the hiring freeze, elimination of positions in:the Crime Abatement Program or increased retention level in liability insurance. He pointed out that some of the reasons why the hiring freeze is not a good:option now are that it is not a true budget saving but only a deferment; that it promotes mediocrity of performance within departments4 that cost effectiveness in terms of overtime and contracting out, and inclusion of the CETA Program, tend to mitigate against it. Councilmen Ward and Bricken expressed the opinion that General Revenue Sharing should be separated from operating expenses, and kept for capital improvements only. In response to Councilman Bricken's question about Utility Users Tax revenues, Mr~ Spragg replied that it is difficult to estimate,:bu~ that the utility user tax and~the~26~ tax totally offset the Crime Abatement Program and the Paramedic Program in this Budget. Mr. Spragg suggested that a cut-back on the unallocated con- tingency reserve:might be one viable area; that if a real emergency should arise it would force a re-evaluation of the Program-at that time; and that there is a possib'ility that revenue estimates may also be increased. Councilman Ward stated that capital improvements can be cut in the event of an emergency. Councilman Brandt expressed, his opinion that if the contin- gency reserve were reduced, 2% more cut from the whole Bud- get, a cap put on employee health insurance, and salaries held down to minimum, the result would be a close ballpark figure towards a balanced Budget. Councilman Ward concurred. The City Manager asked Council if it were necessary to make a choice between cutting positions or raising taxes what its position would be. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 27, 1976