City of West Richland Town Hall Police Facility Proposed Bond Levy - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

City of West Richland Town Hall

Police Facility Proposed Bond Levy Financial Presentation

SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 PRESENTED BY JESSICA PLATT, FINANCE DIRECTOR

Presentation Outline

• City Budget Basics
• Funding Challenges
• Funding Large Capital Projects
• Financing the Proposed Police Facility

West Richland 17/18 Amended Budget Resources $57.8 Million

Charges for Services 28% Taxes 22% Other Financing Resources 19% Intergovernmental Revenues/Grants 12% Fund Balance 9% Other Increases in Revenues 6% Licenses & Permits 2% Interest/Misc 1% Fines & Penalties 1%

West Richland 17/18 Budget Appropriation

General Fund 29% Special Revenue Funds 8% Capital Project Funds 12% Utility Funds 51%

$57.8 Million

Utility Funds: Water, Sewer, Irrigation, Stormwater, & Solid Waste

West Richland 17/18 Amended Budget By Fund Type ‐ Operations

Enterprise Fund 51% General Fund 37% Special Revenue Fund 8% Capital Funds 4% Criminal Justice 27% Street Maintenance 37% Library Operations 36% Park Impact 0% Tourism 0% Water/Sewer 78% Solid Waste 16% Stormwater 5% Irrigation 1%

Total 2017/2018 Amended Budget Appropriation = $32.8 Million

2017/2018 General Fund Revenue Budget

Where does the money come from? $14.9 Million

Utility Taxes 27% Property Tax 23% Sales Tax 13% Miscellaneous & Other Revenues 13% Transfer In 6% Intergovernmental Revenue 5% Building Permits 5% Charges For Services 3% Fines and Forfeiture 3% Other Licenses & Permits 2% Other Taxes 0%

2017/2018 General Fund Expenditure Budget ‐ Operations

Where does the money go? $12.6 Million

Public Safety 56% Community Development 12% Finance & Administration 8% Parks Maintenance 7% Public Works 6% Non-Departmental 4% Facilities & Grounds 3% Mayor/Council 2% City Clerk 2%

2017/2018 General Fund Expenditure Budget Expenditures by Category

Personnel 60% Capital 14% Transfers 13% Intergovernmental 6% Services 5% Office & Operating Supplies 2%

Funding Challenges

State and Federal Legislative Actions:

• Reduction of state shared revenues (i.e. Liquor related revenues)
• Mandate for increased education funding – McCleary decision

Revenue growth limitations & unpredictability:

• Property Taxes I-747 – limited to lessor of 1% growth or IPD, excluding new

construction

• Unpredictable building revenues
• Limited & unpredictable sales tax revenues

Economic Influences

• National and State economy
• Hanford cleanup activities

Retail Sales Tax

Funding Challenges

Property Taxes – Where do these tax dollars go?

Richland School District 39% State Schools 22% Fire District #4 14% City of West Richland 11% Benton County 9% WR Library Levy 3% Port 2%

Funding Challenges

$- $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000

2016 Sales Tax Per Capita - Similar Population Statewide (13k - 17k)

Funding Challenges

$- $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 Prosser Kennewick Richland Pasco Benton City West Richland Connell

2016 Sales Tax Per Capita - Regional Comparison

What has the City done to control costs?

Cost Control Measures Include: 1. Increase employee cost sharing on medical premiums 2. Development of an employee Pay for Performance Plan for non-bargaining employees 3. Elimination of positions including City Administrator 4. Grants and low interest loans 5. Deferring preventative maintenance 6. Delaying capital expenditures and/or using one-time unanticipated carryover to fund some capital

Funding Large Capital Projects

• Cities have very limited options

when financing large capital projects.

• Most cities will seek bond financing

to fund large capital projects (either voted or non‐voted).

• Some cities may also use general

fund reserves and/or real estate excise tax revenues to pay for a portion of the project depending on their financial means and project amount.

How was the Municipal Services and Maintenance Shop Facilities Paid For?

Total Anticipated Project Cost: $8 Million Anticipated % Split General Fund 30% Real Estate Excise Tax I Fund 7% Utilities 63%

Note: General Fund portion paid through unanticipated carryover due to increase in

• ne-time building revenues, staff vacancies, and prudent financial management.

How will the proposed police facility be funded?

The City can place a general obligation bond on the ballot (voted bonds).

• Requires voter approval of 60% or more.
• Special excess bond levy for the term of the financing.
• Requires voter validation with a turnout of at least 40% of the voters from the

previous year’s November election.

• Only registered voters within the city limits of West Richland can vote.

What is the amount being proposed for a new police facility and how much will this cost me?

• $12,465,000 is the proposed amount

for a new police facility including the building, land and equipment

• The proposed bond is estimated at

$0.42 per $1,000 of assessed value

• n 29-year financing.
• For a home with an assessed value
• f $300,000, the monthly cost is

estimated at $10.50 ($126 per year).

Note: Staff is working on an online calculator for residents to use to determine the impact of the bond on their

• household. Residents will have access to the online calculator via the City’s website. This feature will be available

soon.

How would this bond impact the City’s existing debt capacity?

• The City of West Richland has a very small amount of existing general
• bligation debt.
• Over the past several years, the City has paid off approximately $2

million in bonds and loans early saving $200,000 in interest costs.

• The City has a very small amount of general obligation debt in relation

to the City’s overall debt capacity.

• West Richland achieved a AA bond rating in 2014 due to the City’s

excellent financial management practices, strong ending fund balances, small amount of debt, and experienced management in

• perating the city in an efficient manner.

How would this bond impact the City’s existing debt capacity?

• Currently, the City’s General Fund does not pay for any debt service.
• Debt service is paid through dedicated funding sources outside of the

General Fund.

How would this bond impact the City’s existing debt capacity?

• Est. Remaining Amount Available All

GO Debt Categories (General Purpose, Parks, & Utility Purposes)

• Est. % Used
• Est. Remaining

Existing Remaining General Obligation Debt Capacity $ 93,927,231 3% 97% Remaining Debt Capacity with Proposed Police Facility Bond $ 81,462,231 16% 84% Debt Capacity Used 3% Remaining Debt Capacity 97%

• Est. Existing GO Debt

Debt Capacity Used 16% Remaining Debt Capacity 84%

• Est. GO Debt w/ Proposed Police

Facility

Note: The remaining combined voted and non-voted general purpose debt would be $16.7 million. Of this figure, $16.2 million could be designated as non-voted (subject to an affordability analysis).

When would the bond levy be put on the ballot and when would it take effect if approved by voters?

• The bond levy for a new police facility

is proposed to go on the April 23, 2019 special election ballot.

• If approved by voters, residents

would see the bond levy starting on their 2020 tax statements provided by Benton County.

• Property taxes collected for the bond

levy are restricted by state law and can only be used for bond payments.

Who can I contact for questions and/or more information?

For financial related questions, contact Jessica Platt, Finance Director at (509) 967-7134 or jplatt@westrichland.org. For all other questions, contact Ben Majetich, Chief of Police at (509) 967-7121 or bmajetich@westrichland.org.