Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Mail Packet - 09/24/2024 - Memorandum from Lawrence Pollack re Councilmember Questions and Requests from the September 10 Work Session on the 2025-2026 Budget 1 Financial Services 215 N Mason Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6795 fcgov.com/finance M E M O R A N D U M Date: September 19, 2024 To: Mayor Arndt and City Councilmembers Through: Kelly DiMartino, City Manager Travis Storin, Chief Financial Officer From: Lawrence Pollack, Budget Director Re: Councilmember questions and requests from the September 10 work session on the 2025-2026 Budget City Council held their first work session to review the 2025-2026 City Manager’s Recommended Budget on September 10. During the meeting, and prior to it, questions were asked about specific budget requests (offers), as well as some more general inquiries about the budget. Staff follow-ups that were not answered during the meeting were summarized in the September 10 work session summary memo and some of those responses are included below in this memo. Other requests made during the September 10 work session, however, require additional time to adequately research and respond. The answers to those will be communicated in future memos included in upcoming Council Thursday Packets. Inquiries of a general nature not specific to an individual Outcome 1) Question prior to Sept 10 work session: What is the best estimate of when our full streetlight conversion work will be completed? Response from Travis Walker (Light and Power): Economic Health offer 15.7- Utilities: Light & Power - Attrition-Based LED Streetlight Conversion Program supports the full conversion of the streetlighting system to LED fixtures. It is an “Attrition Based” which means that they are mostly replaced as aging lights fail. We anticipate the project will be completed by mid-2027, and we have applied for a grant that could accelerate the completion to mid-2026. Docusign Envelope ID: D7BFFC20-ED25-4C78-9C42-94CA28A7F5DC 2 2) Question prior to Sept 10 work session: Has the City received any grants from the Colorado Energy Office? If so, please summarize. Response from Kerri Ishmael (Finance): 1. The Colorado Energy Office (CEO) was awarded $20M under Department of Energy's Assistance for the Adoption of the Latest and Zero Building Energy Codes program. CEO will be passing $4.6M to the City as a subrecipient in support of a multi -year program commencing near the end of 2025/early 2026 to provide implementation support for commercial building owners in adopting updated building energy codes. The Energy Services group will be managing the program. 2. Operations Services submitted a $500k = maximum request on 8/30/24 to CEO under the Public Building Electrification Grant Program in support of updating the HVAC system at the senior center. The City will hear by November 2024 on the award, with project commencing FY25. Outcome: Economic Health 3) Question prior to Sept 10 work session: What is the estimated 'all in' cost to provide the Downtown flowers, including prorated staff? Response from Mike Calhoon (Parks): For the most recent full year, actual costs for the downtown horticulture program were $352K. This would represent annual increases of almost 4% per year to grow to $380K for the 2025 budget. The breakout of 2023 actuals was: The DDA pays for 2/3 of Old Town Square and 100% of direct costs for enhanced alleys. The City pays for 1/3 of Old Town Square and 100% of other downtown areas, which includes Oak Street Plaza, Linden, and downtown College Avenue horticulture. Docusign Envelope ID: D7BFFC20-ED25-4C78-9C42-94CA28A7F5DC 3 Outcome: Neighborhood and Community Vitality 4) Question from Mayor Pro Tem Francis: Why was Offer 44.10-Affordable Housing Fee Relief not funded since it looks like this has been funded since 2013? Response from Beth Yonce (Social Sustainability): The City has a long history of providing fee relief for affordable housing. Fee relief has been provided in different ways on an as needed basis. Since 2013, this relief has targeted homes for people making no more than 30% AMI. We never had dedicated funds in our budget process for them until ARPA funds were allocated for this use. When funds have been appropriated, we can use an administrative process for fee relief requests. If not, we use a discretionary process asking for approval by City Council and direction on where to pull the funding from – either General Fund Reserves or CCIP Affordable Housing Capital Fund (AHCF) dollars. An option to consider would be dedicating a certain amount of dedicated CCIP reserves (AHCF balance is $1.5M) to continue to support Fee Relief and allow for the faster administrative process. Staff believes $200k each year would be sufficient to meet the anticipated needs over the next 2 years. If no requests are made, those funds would roll back into the AHCF reserve at the end of each year. 5) Question from Mayor Arndt: What is the overall staffing for grant writing across the City, including functional area or department? Response from Joe Wimmer (Finance): Grant writing is primarily managed by program subject matter experts as part of that position’s overall program duties, apart from 1.0 FTE Senior Grant Analys t in central Financial Services who coordinates grant submittal and awards across all Service Areas. Within specific departments, Transfort has 3.0 FTE with partial position responsibilities associated with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant writin g, operational compliance, and financial reporting. Social Sustainability has 3.0 FTE with grant administration and compliance responsibilities for the two primary Housing and Urban Development (HUD) programs of HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. Other departments often write grants with assistance from outside consultants and in coordination with the City’s Senior Grant Analyst. Docusign Envelope ID: D7BFFC20-ED25-4C78-9C42-94CA28A7F5DC 4 Outcome: Environmental Health 6) Request from Kelly Ohlson: Please provide a simple graph of tree removal and replacements per year and indicate how many years it will take to catch up Response from Kendra Boot (Parks - Forestry):  Tree removals are on a downward trend (Note: 2019 and 2020 were bad early/late freeze years increasing # of removals; 2021 were mostly March 2021 snowstorm removals)  Tree replacements are beginning to trend upwards with additional resources added the last few budget cycles (Note: 2023 and 2024 we received a planting donation of $100,000 total from local resident)  Ongoing Offer 59.2 plants 640 trees/year  Enhancement Offer 73.1 (Climate 2050 Tax), if funded, will plant an additional 360 trees/year bringing the total to 1000 trees planted per year  If this trend in funding continues, then the vacant tree locations in the public tree inventory will be filled within 10-years  The Urban Forest Strategic Plan, once adopted, has supporting initiatives especially focusing tree planting where people need trees most 7) Question from Mayor Pro Tem Francis: For community renewable energy, why is the City paying the repair costs for a facility that only benefits a few solar panel owners? Response from Brian Tholl (Utilities Customer Connections): Ongoing Offer 7.1 - Community Renewable Purchased Power funds the purchase of solar electricity generation from local solar arrays, including Riverside solar. The electricity purchases offset the need to purchase additional wholesale electricity through Docusign Envelope ID: D7BFFC20-ED25-4C78-9C42-94CA28A7F5DC 5 Offer 15.1 - Wholesale Purchased Power. Offer 7.1 does not contain budget for the repair and repowering of the failed inverter at the Riverside Project. At the time of the Riverside Project development, participating solar owners provided the capital needed to a third party to develop the site from brownfield to a valuable community renewable asset. Utilities acquired the assets at the site from the third -party developer in 2020 and now co-owns and manages the equipment at the site. The failure of the Riverside inverter resulted in an expense that exceeded the available site operations & maintenance fund, which is and continues to be funded by participating solar owners. Staff are working with participating solar owners to determine what changes are needed to the operation & maintenance fund contributions for the remaining lifetime of the site. The electricity produced at Riverside not only benefits participating solar owners, but importantly, this local solar generation benefits the broader community in our pursuit of 100% renewable electricity. City Council supported repowering the Riverside Project through Ordinance No. 058, 2024, making supplemental appropriations of the 2050 tax on May 21, 2024. Repowering Riverside using 2050 tax funds reaffirmed the City’s commitment to advancing the Our Climate Future goals, represented a timely funding solution for accelerating the repowering and has maintained relationships with participating solar owners. 8) Questions from Julie Pignataro: Could Offer 74.1- CDNS - Carbon Sequestration in Areas Protected by the Land Use Code legitimately be funded with Open Space Yes! tax dollars? Response from Katie Donahue (Natural Areas): Per the Open Space Yes! Ballot language, Natural Areas funds may be used to support enhancement of habitat for native plants and animals on privately owned lands. Each year, a small allocation of restoration funding ($15,000/year) is dedicated to support native habitat enhancement on privately owned land. Natural Areas’ primary focus is on native plant and wildlife habitat. While some projects may improve carbon sequestration, Natural Areas is not seeking carbon sequestration projects as a primary focus of restoration work on privately owned properties. 9) Request from Kelly Ohlson: In Offer 37.12 - Natural Areas - Bridge Replacements please provide detail on how the Dry Creek Corridor bridge is the sole responsibility of the Natural Areas. Response from Katie Donahue (Natural Areas): In 2022, Natural Areas acquired fee title to a 9.5-acre addition to properties previously conserved along Dry Creek, north of Willox Lane. Privately owned lands bound the parcel to the north and east, with the Larimer and Weld Canal forming the southern boundary and Dry Creek forming the west boundary. Conservation values that drove acquisition of the parcel include riparian habitat, scenic views, and connectivity to a significantly underserved neighborhood (Poudre Valley Mobile Home Park). Docusign Envelope ID: D7BFFC20-ED25-4C78-9C42-94CA28A7F5DC 6 The bridge in need of repair is within unincorporated Larimer County, outside Fort Collins City Limits. It crosses the Larimer and Weld Canal providing access from Willox Lane and is the only access to this 9.5-acre parcel. The bridge is not on a publicly accessible road and is not a public right-of-way. It only provides access to this section of the of Natural Areas land conserved along Dry Creek. Bridge improvements are required for staff to access the property for restoration efforts, as well as emergency response, if needed. 10) Question from Kelly Ohlson: How many staff FTE are currently directly involved in land conservation efforts? Response from Katie Donahue (Natural Areas): In the past 5 years, Natural Areas has increased its FTE related to land conservation efforts from 1.5 to 2.8 FTEs. This level of staffing supports consistently growing NAD's land portfolio, while ensuring that the vast majority of land acquisition funds are dedicated to acquisitions and conservation easements. Staff continue to monitor the volume of available properties and will request additional resources if this staffing level becomes insufficient to manage the volume of available properties. Staff working on land conservation efforts provide the following services: build long-term relationships with landowners; lead acquisition efforts including fee title and conservation easements; manage existing conservation easements; support real estate transactions, draft and review legal documents. Outcome: Safe Community 11) Question prior to Sept 10 work session: The Police staffing offer (29.26) looks to use camera radar revenue. What is the rationale for using that funding and for which specific positions? Response from Greg Yeager (Police): Offer 29.26 for Police staffing utilizes $210k in 2025 and $580k in 2026 of Camera Radar Red Light revenue to fully fund 4 Traffic Officers. By utilizing this revenue to specifically focus on traffic safety, we are able to utilize General Fund revenue to pay for the police officers who are dedicated to the Homeless Outreach and P roactive Engagement (HOPE) Team. 12) Question from Tricia Canonico: Has the City looked into any possible funding for Cyber Security needs from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)? Response from Joe King (Information Technology): The City has explored several grant opportunities, including those offered through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), in the domain of Information/Cyber Security. However, these grants often come with limitations, such as being one -time funds or requiring matching contributions, which largely restrict their applicability to non- recurring initiatives, tools, and technologies. Consequently, they are most effective for Docusign Envelope ID: D7BFFC20-ED25-4C78-9C42-94CA28A7F5DC 7 discrete, short-term activities such as penetration testing, security assessments, or targeted consulting engagements. Offer 10.3 for 2.0 FTE staffing for Cyber Security needs consists entirely of recurring commitments. While we continue to address modernization and maturity efforts identified from previous assessments, some of which has been funded with Federal Grants, the current capacity of the information security team is stretched thin, particularly as we handle increasingly more and complex, day-to-day security incidents. Our ability to seek, as well as effectively and prudently manage additional grant opportunities is limited. This offer, which includes the creation of a CISO position along with a Senior Security Engineer, was created to help address this gap. A CISO would have the responsibility to not only lead the organization’s cybersecurity efforts but also strategically pursue and manage grant funding, like IIJA, to support our security modernization initiatives. Outcome: Culture and Recreation 13) Question prior to Sept 10 work session: What are the main expenses in Offer 60.3- Community Park Development? Response from Jill Wuertz (Parks): During this budget cycle, the following community park development efforts are planned: • Pre-development of East Community Park site, located near the intersection of Drake and Ziegler. Per the 2021 Parks & Recreation Plan, this will be a new community park for the east side of the city. Pre-development efforts are needed prior to design that include acquisition of additional raw water shares, stockpiling fill dirt, analysis of raw water storage options and stormwater capacity. Coordination and planning efforts are needed with adjacent development to accommodate future park access, utilities, trails and infrastructure. • Pre-development of Northeast Community Park site, located within the Montava Development near the intersection of Mountain Vista Drive and Timberline Road. Per the 2021 Parks & Recreation Plan, this will be a new community park for the northeast quadrant of the city. Pre-development efforts are needed with adjacent development to accommodate future park access, grading, utilities, trails, infrastructure, irrigation sources, and site detention/stormwater capacity. A timeline for construction of East Community Park and Northeast Community Park is unknown. Significant impact fees will need to be collected before either of these projects can move forward. The largest expenses in the offer are for purchasing of water rights for East Community Park, consultant and staff time related to pre-development planning for both future community parks, and potential soil import to East Community Park. Docusign Envelope ID: D7BFFC20-ED25-4C78-9C42-94CA28A7F5DC 8 Outcome: Transportation and Mobility 14) Question prior to Sept 10 work session: For the activation of Routes 11/12 in Transfort, the offer has roughly $240k of personnel charges within the overall $500k annual cost. Are there any other personnel costs directly related to operating these routes that are funded in a different offer? Response from Monica Martinez and Kaley Zeisel (Transfort): Approximately $268,000 in additional bus operator personnel costs can be attributed to Route 11/12 service. These expenses are included in Transfort's Ongoing Fixed Route Offer 65.1. While Route 11/12 cost estimates are based on the operator hours needed to run the service, it is challenging to directly correlate these hours with full-time equivalent (FTE) positions due to the complexity of Transfort's scheduling. The current enhancement offer for Route 11/12 service reflects five hourly positions that were previously unfilled due to budget constraints and reduced service levels during the pandemic. The reinstatement of Route 11/12 service represents a significant service increase and a need to return to pre-pandemic staffing levels. Route cost estimates are based on operator hours, but reducing what would be the equivalent of five FTEs would affect services beyond Route 11/12. Because operators drive multiple routes to create optimal schedules, a reduction in staffing impacts the broader network. Personnel expenses can vary based on how drivers are scheduled. Longer shifts, split shifts, or insufficient breaks typically lower personnel costs. However, recent changes to Transfort’s scheduling practices, including more consistent schedules, adequate breaks, and fewer split shifts, are expected to raise personnel costs. These adjustments are aimed at improving recruitment and retention, as difficult schedules have been identified as the primary reason drivers consider resignation. Though improved operator scheduling results in higher initial costs it reduces expenses associated with turnover, such as training. Docusign Envelope ID: D7BFFC20-ED25-4C78-9C42-94CA28A7F5DC