At the end of last week’s discussion on proposed charter changes, there was the feeling that an attempt should be made to synthesize and reconcile all the concerns voiced by the individual council members and attempt to come up with new wording for some of the proposals in time for the council to consider them at this coming Tuesday’s meeting. Well, whoever it was that came up with the language that replaces what was originally conceived for the proposed change in the Compensation portion of the charter (Section 3.09) succeeded in this endeavor beyond all expectations.
The author or authors of this new wording brilliantly synthesized what was needed to make sense of the section with the intent of the last Charter Review Commission to create a citizens review committee to recommend compensation changes. Unfortunately, that charter commission’s intent didn’t equate with its ability to legitimize such a compensation committee and the wording the commission ultimately came up with effectively neutered the compensation committee. And that’s basically the reason why this section of the charter was targeted for a change in language. The notion of this kind of citizen input into the process via an appointed committee, also received significant support last week from many council members.
Equally as brilliant, the new language converts the entire compensation procedure from a council decision to a legitimate process. For all practical purposes, under the original language, the council could propose to give themselves a salary hike, draft an ordinance legalizing such a hike, schedule two public hearings on the notion to accompany the two required readings of the ordinance and then, bang, after passing the ordinance on second reading they get a larger salary via a budget amendment.
That’s not going to happen under with this new wording. If this passes (and it should) "a salary adjustment approved in accordance with this section shall be included in the proposed budget for the subsequent fiscal year, and the effective date of the council salary adjustment shall be the first day of the fiscal year for the budget in which the salary adjustment is included. Council is prohibited from amending a budget to adjust council salary."
So there.
Although Tuesday’s meeting is labeled a ‘Special City Council Meeting," it has always been on the schedule because it is a meeting that’s legally required as part of the annual fiscal year budget adoption process. And Tuesday’s agenda contains all the requisite items required as part of that process. Chances are, however, that council debate about the charter — added to this agenda simply because the charter permits the council to recommend changes like this every two years and these changes must be done now in time to get them on the November ballot — will consume more time and energy and undoubtedly produce more fireworks (if last week’s discussions are any indicator) than debate on the proposed budget.
It will be fascinating, however, to measure the silliness factor. For example, what is the over and under on the number of council members who will vote not to give citizens a chance to render their opinion on these proposed charter changes because citizens were not given a chance to render their opinion on these proposed charter changes. Hey, I’m not making this stuff up. That exact line of thought was argued by as many as four council members last week.
How many times will council members venture wildly and erratically off topic like they did last week? For example, the subject of the compensation change is not how much council members should be paid or even whether they should be paid at all. It’s strictly about what process should be employed to arrive at those decisions.
And the discussion about the city’s manager residence should not involve whether that official should or should not be required to live within the city limits. The council should work from the assumption that such a residency requirement is needed and valid, so the debate should only be about what document should contain that requirement. Should it be in the charter, which provides council members with absolutely no flexibility, or in an employment contract, which gives council members a host of options in their hiring negotiations?
What happens when debate veers wildly off topic is that council members may say something that will come back to haunt them. About 30 years ago, the voters in one Dallas council district elected a vocal wildcat. This person would scream and yell and rudely criticize the mayor and her colleagues at just about every council meeting. On a trip I made to Atlanta at that time on behalf of a client, I discovered the City of Atlanta had made recordings of this wild women screaming during council proceedings and those recordings were part of presentations made to businesses Atlanta was trying to lure to the city to show them why they should never consider Dallas as a place for those relocations.
This last week I called around and tried to speak with officials involved in economic development efforts in Central Texas cities comparable to Kyle, Unfortunately, I couldn’t get any of them to speak to me on the record, but one individual, on the condition I would preserve her anonymity, told me that they are now the proud owners of a recording of a certain Kyle city council person saying any Kyle city manager "should have to drink the same water, drive the same roads" as everyone else in the city and has labeled that statement as "Kyle city council member equates living in the city with a prison sentence." Ouch!
The Kyle Report
Showing posts with label Kyle City Budget. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kyle City Budget. Show all posts
Saturday, August 11, 2018
Saturday, July 28, 2018
City manager’s proposed budget reduced to three words: streets, water, wastewater
City Manager Scott Sellers formally unveiled today his $84.9 billion budget recommendation for the upcoming fiscal year — a proposal he described as "fantastic" — that contains (as far as I can see) nothing that could be called frivolous, maintains the current property tax rate but does seek a wastewater service rate increase and concentrates on providing the funds necessary to guarantee the city’s water supply, to expand its wastewater capabilities and accelerate street reconstruction and maintenance.
"Kudos to the staff," Mayor Pro Tem Shane Arabie said at the conclusion of Sellers’ presentation. "What was accomplished through this budget, the amount that we can accomplish because of this budget, brings us to another level of sophistication that we’ve reached as an entity and the high level of service that we are providing."
After thanking all the staff members who worked on the budget, and comparing the budget favorably to earlier budget projections for the upcoming year, Sellers said "We have brought forward a budget that is fantastic."
"There’s no better time to live in the city of Kyle than right now," the city manager said. "The quality of life is extremely high, the ability to fund quality-of-life initiatives is there and we are looking to the future in a way we’ve never been able to do in years past. To maintain the level of service that we are in this budget is truly exceptional."
According to my (albeit, unofficial) calculations, $44,137,063 — 51.99 percent of the total budget — will go towards street maintenance, the city’s water supply and wastewater upgrades in the form of new hires, equipment purchases and capital improvements. These unofficial calculations were, admittedly at a glance, seconded by the city manager just prior to his formal presentation to the council.
In that presentation, Sellers said the highlights of his budget recommendation were:
Of the almost $1.24 million earmarked for new equipment, the bulk of it — $994,500 of it or 80.2 percent — will be going to Public Works for such items as two dump trucks, an asphalt zipper, a street sweeper, a broom roller, a tub grinder, two concrete mixers, a trench shoring box and litter abatement equipment. The total also includes $110,000 for a new radio system.
Although the tax rate remains at 54.16 cents, property owners will face higher tax bills because of an 5.47 percent increase in property valuations this year. One piece of good news for residential homeowners is that it appears Kyle’s economic development efforts are producing dividends as the residential share of the total property tax bill fell from 74.36 percent last year to 70.95 percent this year. Although Finance Director Perwez Moheet said immediately following the budget presentation this reduction was not that big a deal, both Arabie and council member Damon Fogley welcomed the change and did say the 3.4 percent drop in the residential share of the total property tax bill was "of major significance."
The city will enter the new fiscal year with a debt of $80.5 million as compared to $85.6 million at the same time last year, according to the city manager’s presentation. However, the city manager cautioned, that figure does not include the $9.5 million in new debt planned for the wastewater treatment plant expansion or the "debt issued and/or planned by ARWA (Alliance Regional Water Authority) for the city’s share of capital expenditures," namely the pipeline required to bring water from the Carrizo Springs Aquifer to Kyle.
"Kudos to the staff," Mayor Pro Tem Shane Arabie said at the conclusion of Sellers’ presentation. "What was accomplished through this budget, the amount that we can accomplish because of this budget, brings us to another level of sophistication that we’ve reached as an entity and the high level of service that we are providing."
After thanking all the staff members who worked on the budget, and comparing the budget favorably to earlier budget projections for the upcoming year, Sellers said "We have brought forward a budget that is fantastic."
"There’s no better time to live in the city of Kyle than right now," the city manager said. "The quality of life is extremely high, the ability to fund quality-of-life initiatives is there and we are looking to the future in a way we’ve never been able to do in years past. To maintain the level of service that we are in this budget is truly exceptional."
According to my (albeit, unofficial) calculations, $44,137,063 — 51.99 percent of the total budget — will go towards street maintenance, the city’s water supply and wastewater upgrades in the form of new hires, equipment purchases and capital improvements. These unofficial calculations were, admittedly at a glance, seconded by the city manager just prior to his formal presentation to the council.
In that presentation, Sellers said the highlights of his budget recommendation were:
- $84.9 million total proposed budget for all city funds;
- $45.4 million in planned spending on capital (long-term) improvements in FY 2019;
- $7 million dedicated to accelerate Stagecoach Road reconstruction project;
- $19 million for the wastewater treatment plant expansion project construction;
- $1.3 million for new equipment and vehicles;
- $778,000 for 16 new full-time positions — eight in Public Works, three each in Police and Parks and one each in utility billing and information technology;
- $441,511 for technology improvements;
- A $324,201 increase for employee benefits to cover rising health insurance costs as well as merit and longevity pay increases;
- No change in the property tax, water service or storm drainage rates although, according to Sellers presentation, the current property tax rate of $.5416 per $100 of assessed valuation exceeds the rollback rate by just under a penny, .96 of a cent;
- A 10 percent overall increase in the wastewater service rate that will translate into a 3.5 percent increase — around $3.54 per month — in the average household utility bill; and
- A 3.95 percent increase in the solid waste rates to pay for the annual increases included in the city’s contract with TDS
Of the almost $1.24 million earmarked for new equipment, the bulk of it — $994,500 of it or 80.2 percent — will be going to Public Works for such items as two dump trucks, an asphalt zipper, a street sweeper, a broom roller, a tub grinder, two concrete mixers, a trench shoring box and litter abatement equipment. The total also includes $110,000 for a new radio system.
Although the tax rate remains at 54.16 cents, property owners will face higher tax bills because of an 5.47 percent increase in property valuations this year. One piece of good news for residential homeowners is that it appears Kyle’s economic development efforts are producing dividends as the residential share of the total property tax bill fell from 74.36 percent last year to 70.95 percent this year. Although Finance Director Perwez Moheet said immediately following the budget presentation this reduction was not that big a deal, both Arabie and council member Damon Fogley welcomed the change and did say the 3.4 percent drop in the residential share of the total property tax bill was "of major significance."
The city will enter the new fiscal year with a debt of $80.5 million as compared to $85.6 million at the same time last year, according to the city manager’s presentation. However, the city manager cautioned, that figure does not include the $9.5 million in new debt planned for the wastewater treatment plant expansion or the "debt issued and/or planned by ARWA (Alliance Regional Water Authority) for the city’s share of capital expenditures," namely the pipeline required to bring water from the Carrizo Springs Aquifer to Kyle.
Thursday, July 26, 2018
City manager to propose $84.9 million budget with no property tax rate increase
I don’t know if there is such a thing as a "quick review" of a 200-page document, but I gave City Manager Scott Sellers’ proposed city budget for the upcoming fiscal year what I would call a "quick review" because spending too long carefully scrutinizing 200 pages of numbers quickly makes my head start spinning, my eyes start rolling and soon the hallucinations begin. I stagger around the abode like some deranged alcoholic following a 30-day bender. It’s not a pretty sight. Someone hand me a bottle of aspirin. Actually, a perfect Manhattan (straight up, not on the rocks) would be even better.
Here’s my overall quick summary — the overall impression I came away with once I began clearing away the spiderwebs in my brain caused by plowing through the document: Sellers is putting a lot of emphasis on improvements to the city’s street and wastewater infrastructure. Streets and wastewater. Those two areas seem to me to be the theme of the budget, the overriding concerns, the points of emphasis. But I’ll know better along with everyone else when Sellers formally presents the document Saturday morning to the city council.
Although the Sellers is seeking to keep the property tax rate at 54.16 cents per $100 valuation, the budget is forecasting a healthy 21.87 percent increase in property tax revenues over the current fiscal year. How much of that comes from an increase in residential property tax evaluations is yet to be known. The certified evaluations are expected from the appraisal district sometime today or tomorrow at the latest.
Accompanying that emphasis I mentioned on wastewater will be a request that the council OK a 10 percent hike in wastewater fees. There’s also going to be a 3.48 percent increase in trash collection charges that’s part of the contract the city has with Texas Disposal Systems.
The budget calls for adding 16 positions to the city’s payroll. The Public Works Department would receive the most new hires — six, including two in street construction. The budget also includes $404,000 for new street maintenance equipment, $200,000 of which would pay for something called an asphalt zipper and $130,000 for a dump truck. Sellers’ requests for new equipment also includes $250,000 for a street sweeper that would be assigned to the Drainage Utility. Parks would get three new employees, two of whom would be for park maintenance.
Sellers’ proposed General Fund budget for overall city operations and maintenance is $23.4 million, an increase of $1,575,770 (7.23 percent) from the current General Fund budget plus a CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) budget of $11.7 million.
Along with the projected 21.87 percent increase in property tax revenues, the budget is projecting a 9.95 percent in sales taxes. That could be a tad optimistic. If the projection of this year’s final tax sales tax collections is correct, it will mean a 5.6 percent increase over what was collected in the previous fiscal year and that was down from a 10.5 percent increase from the year before.
The amount the city collected in Hotel Occupancy Taxes has increased over last year, but not nearly at the amount that was expected. So far the city has collected $241,271 in Hotel Occupancy Taxes this fiscal year and expects to receive $315,000 when the year ends on Sept. 30. However, the current budget projected that final figure was going to be $437,910. Sellers’ proposed budget predicts collecting $320,000 in Hotel Occupancy Taxes during the next fiscal year, 26.92 percent less than what was projected for the current fiscal year. Of course, that number could increase if the city takes action that permits it to collect these taxes from short term rentals, which is already required by state law.
The way I read it, the Engineering Department is the one receiving the largest monetary increase — $1.5 million — over last year with Police receiving the second largest ($841,422) and Public Works the third most ($594,167). In terms of percentages, Community Development’s 16.9 percent increase outpaced all other departments followed by Parks and Recreation (13.34 percent) and Police (12.66 percent).
The budget proposal calls for a $1.80-per-month increase in the residential wastewater fee for those living in the city limits, from $17.99 per month to $19.79. For those outside the city limits, the fee would increase from $24.28 to $26.71. Sewer fees are also targeted for an increase, from $3.48 per 1,000 gallons of water used to $3.83 for those in the city limits and from $4.70 to $5.17 for those outside.
The five-year CIP budget always includes a host of interesting nuggets and the one Sellers’ included in this budget proposal is no exception. Some of the highlights include (all expenses are for 2019 unless otherwise noted):
The first public hearing on the proposed budget is scheduled for 7 p.m. Aug. 14 with the second one planned for the same time a week later. An electronic copy of the proposed budget will be posted Monday on the city’s web site and printed copies may be reviewed beginning Monday at City Hall and the Kyle Public Library.
Here’s my overall quick summary — the overall impression I came away with once I began clearing away the spiderwebs in my brain caused by plowing through the document: Sellers is putting a lot of emphasis on improvements to the city’s street and wastewater infrastructure. Streets and wastewater. Those two areas seem to me to be the theme of the budget, the overriding concerns, the points of emphasis. But I’ll know better along with everyone else when Sellers formally presents the document Saturday morning to the city council.
Although the Sellers is seeking to keep the property tax rate at 54.16 cents per $100 valuation, the budget is forecasting a healthy 21.87 percent increase in property tax revenues over the current fiscal year. How much of that comes from an increase in residential property tax evaluations is yet to be known. The certified evaluations are expected from the appraisal district sometime today or tomorrow at the latest.
Accompanying that emphasis I mentioned on wastewater will be a request that the council OK a 10 percent hike in wastewater fees. There’s also going to be a 3.48 percent increase in trash collection charges that’s part of the contract the city has with Texas Disposal Systems.
The budget calls for adding 16 positions to the city’s payroll. The Public Works Department would receive the most new hires — six, including two in street construction. The budget also includes $404,000 for new street maintenance equipment, $200,000 of which would pay for something called an asphalt zipper and $130,000 for a dump truck. Sellers’ requests for new equipment also includes $250,000 for a street sweeper that would be assigned to the Drainage Utility. Parks would get three new employees, two of whom would be for park maintenance.
Sellers’ proposed General Fund budget for overall city operations and maintenance is $23.4 million, an increase of $1,575,770 (7.23 percent) from the current General Fund budget plus a CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) budget of $11.7 million.
Along with the projected 21.87 percent increase in property tax revenues, the budget is projecting a 9.95 percent in sales taxes. That could be a tad optimistic. If the projection of this year’s final tax sales tax collections is correct, it will mean a 5.6 percent increase over what was collected in the previous fiscal year and that was down from a 10.5 percent increase from the year before.
The amount the city collected in Hotel Occupancy Taxes has increased over last year, but not nearly at the amount that was expected. So far the city has collected $241,271 in Hotel Occupancy Taxes this fiscal year and expects to receive $315,000 when the year ends on Sept. 30. However, the current budget projected that final figure was going to be $437,910. Sellers’ proposed budget predicts collecting $320,000 in Hotel Occupancy Taxes during the next fiscal year, 26.92 percent less than what was projected for the current fiscal year. Of course, that number could increase if the city takes action that permits it to collect these taxes from short term rentals, which is already required by state law.
The way I read it, the Engineering Department is the one receiving the largest monetary increase — $1.5 million — over last year with Police receiving the second largest ($841,422) and Public Works the third most ($594,167). In terms of percentages, Community Development’s 16.9 percent increase outpaced all other departments followed by Parks and Recreation (13.34 percent) and Police (12.66 percent).
The budget proposal calls for a $1.80-per-month increase in the residential wastewater fee for those living in the city limits, from $17.99 per month to $19.79. For those outside the city limits, the fee would increase from $24.28 to $26.71. Sewer fees are also targeted for an increase, from $3.48 per 1,000 gallons of water used to $3.83 for those in the city limits and from $4.70 to $5.17 for those outside.
The five-year CIP budget always includes a host of interesting nuggets and the one Sellers’ included in this budget proposal is no exception. Some of the highlights include (all expenses are for 2019 unless otherwise noted):
- $10 million in 2019 and $7 million in 2020 for the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant that will come from the city issuing Certificates of Obligation. (The CIP also includes $250,000 in 2019 and $100,000 in 2020 for the engineering for the expansion to increase the plant’s capacity from 3 to 4.5 million gallons a day.)
- $8.18 million in 2019, $10.6 million in 2020, $14.3 million in 2021 and $14.2 million in 2022 for the ARWA water supply.
- $5 million in 2019 and $3.5 million in 2020 to complete the Lehman Road bond project.
- $4 million in 2019 and $3 million in 2020 to complete the North Burleson Street bond project
- $3.8 million in 2019 and $2.6 million in 2020 for the Southside Wastewater Collection System (funded by wastewater impact fees).
- $2.5 million in 2019 for engineering and $4.5 million in 2020 for construction of North Old Stagecoach, the project Mayor Travis Mitchell revealed during this State of the City address earlier this week.
- $1 million for Kyle Vista Park
- $900,000 to complete the Marketplace Extension bond project
- $800.000 in 2019 and $480,000 in 2020 for Kyle Crossing improvements,
- $500,000 in each of the next five years for street improvements.
- $250,000 for the Ash Pavilion Roller Rink.
- $100,000 to complete the construction of the quiet zones at the Center and South Street railroad crossings
The first public hearing on the proposed budget is scheduled for 7 p.m. Aug. 14 with the second one planned for the same time a week later. An electronic copy of the proposed budget will be posted Monday on the city’s web site and printed copies may be reviewed beginning Monday at City Hall and the Kyle Public Library.
Saturday, July 14, 2018
Budgets and annexations — two for the price of one
It happens every year on the last Saturday of July. The city council, the city manager, the finance director, various city department heads, the assistant city manager and the chief of staff gather around some tables grouped together in the council’s City Hall chambers to see and hear the first public presentation of the city manager’s proposed budget for the fiscal year that will begin in a little more than two months following the presentation. This will not be the council’s first view of the budget — the individual council members will receive a copy of it at the beginning of that week — but this will be the first time they will congregate as a body to talk about it and, of course, it will be the public’s first exposure to the city’s most important annual presentation. Which reminds me of a problem I have with the way the council conducts citizen comments during council meetings and the way the council’s agenda is arranged, but I’ll get back to that.
This year the last Saturday in July is on the 28th and that’s why, if you look at the meetings section of the city’s web page you will find a listing for a "Kyle Special City Council Meeting" scheduled for 8 a.m. on that day. But this year, that special 8 a.m. meeting on the last Saturday in July is going to include more than just a discussion of the manager’s proposed budget. It’s going to include annexations as well.
According to notices that appeared in this week’s edition of the Hays Free Press, the council will host the second public hearings on four proposed annexations totaling 259.59 acres. Granted, a total of 259.59 acres is not a lot to annex — about .4 of a square mile — so an 8 a.m. on a Saturday time is not going to inconvenience that many — if any — citizens who want to testify at said hearings. But, still, it’s interesting that the second public hearings on these four annexations will be held during what normally is a meeting reserved exclusively to discuss the proposed budget.
Which brings me back to the first of the two topics I said above I would return to, specifically, the way the council conducts citizen comments. These are always held at the beginning of each council meeting and there’s nothing wrong with that. However, if the council really desired to solicit meaningful comments from its citizens it would also include on its agenda a citizens comment period at the end of the meetings as well. And the upcoming annexation-budget "Kyle Special City Council Meeting" on the 28th is a perfect example of why a second comments section should be included. Although an agenda for this meeting hasn’t been posted it’s reasonable to assume it will feature, most likely, in this order 1. Citizens comments period; 2. Annexation public hearings and 3. Budget presentation. But how in heaven’s name are citizens going to be able to comment on the most important item of this meeting — the proposed budget — before they have any idea of what’s in the budget proposal? And they won’t know that until after the one and only citizens comments period has ended. This is compounded by the fact that the Kyle City Council is composed of individuals who, by design, do not take the initiative they should to inform constituents of the contents of the city manager’s proposed budget. I have spent the last four years attempting to shame council members into hosting budget town hall meetings, but to no avail. These folks feel no obligation towards keeping their constituents informed on the most important decisions they will make as council members or to seek input from their constituents about those decisions. I was talking with Jerry Hendrix, the city’s chief of staff, yesterday on a completely different subject (specifically mobility management when the city reaches a population over 100,000, expected in 22 years) and he said the city would do what it could to facilitate such budget town hall meetings — going so far as to design and produce a budget presentation slide show that could be featured at the meetings — but no council member has even inquired about one. Of course it can be argued that the council will hold four additional meetings on the budget — public hearings on Aug. 14 and Aug. 21, and formal budget adoption readings on Aug. 28 and Sept. 4 — and the public can make their opinions on the budget known on these occasions. But these meetings require the citizenry to come to the council; why does the council feel it doesn’t need to take the message out to the citizenry?
What makes this even more criminal is that every so often a council member will don their dunce cap, swallow another stupid pill and proclaim "We need to make sure our citizens are aware of this," whatever the particular "this" happens to be at that moment. They seem to think there’s this magic wand that is somehow going to be waved infusing widespread knowledge into the cranium of every resident in the city. Don’t they realize that they — the council members themselves — are the citizens’ link to their city government, the conduit for the transfer of information and knowledge? That one of the principle things they were elected to do was to keep those folks who voted for them informed about what’s going on at City Hall? How badly they have shirked this responsibility would be laughable if it didn’t border on criminally negligent. Unfortunately, they look upon public service as an opportunity to grandstand, but not to serve and inform.
The argument I have heard from one or more council members against having such a townhall meeting is that not many constituents would show up, which is tantamount to the ball player saying he doesn’t want to step up to the plate because he knows he’s going to strike out anyway. But it’s true. If a council member doesn’t put some effort into making the meeting a success, it might not be one. And, at first, perhaps only a dozen folks might show up to the meeting. But I’ve seen this happen many times before. Word starts getting around about how valuable these meetings are and then two dozen show up at the next one because "it’s the place to be." Then four dozen come to the one after that and before you know it, you have SRO crowds. Not only that, two council members could jointly co-sponsor one or more such meetings and, with each working their own constituency, attract a more significant crowd than by going it alone. So, yes, it does take effort to make these things work, but "effort" seems to be a dirty word at council chambers.
The second thing I said I would get back around to is the way the council agenda is arranged and, for once, the council has almost done a better job of arranging the agenda for this Tuesday’s meeting than at any time I can remember. My question is whether this might be just a one-off success tied to the proposed annexations.
Like I said earlier, the meeting on the 28th is for the second public hearings on the proposed annexations, and, if you’re wondering when the first of those public hearings are supposed to come along, the answer to that is they are on Tuesday’s agenda which correctly groups them all together under the heading of "Public Hearing" (to be grammatically correct, it should be plural "Hearings," but, hey, this is a step in the right direction here.) There will, of course, be one public hearing for each of the four proposed annexations and, like I said, I don’t expect them to attract that many speakers because it’s not going to directly affect that many people. I expect Lila Knight to speak at least one of the hearings to once again say the city needs an Annexation Plan which, in the case of these annexations, is not true because, as Section 43.052 (h)(1) of the Local Texas Government Code clearly states an Annexation Plan is not required if the area to be annexed "contains fewer than 100 separate tracts of land on which one or more residential dwellings are located on each tract." That means these four areas are definitely exempt from needing an Annexation Plan.
So it’s not that the public hearings will draw any meaningful contributions, it’s simply the fact they are categorized as such on the council’s agenda. But, wait. As I wrote above "the council has almost done a better job of arranging the agenda." It seems that even though there is a section on the agenda devoted to "Public Hearing" (sic), there is a rogue public hearing appearing all by its lonesome as Item 11 on the agenda. Why isn’t this item included with the other public hearings? Someone from the city will make the excuse that Item 11 has to do with a proposed natural gas franchise and not an annexation, but that’s exactly what that will be — an excuse, not a valid reason.
All future agendas should have all the public hearings grouped together and appearing on the agenda immediate following the Consent Agenda items, if there is a Consent Agenda, or, as the annexation ones are on Tuesday’s agenda, immediately following the Citizens Comments period. In that way, those citizens coming to council to speak at one of the public hearings (1) will know generally where on the agenda the hearings will appear at every meeting without having to actually review the agenda and (2), and even more importantly, those citizens wishing to speak won’t have to sit through a lot of junk waiting around for the public hearing during which they wish to speak. Will the council take this sensible step? Who knows. The fact that these council members refuse to keep their constituents informed about the most important function the council must perform — reviewing and approving a budget each year — indicates they only pay lip service to the concept of caring for their constituents.
A couple of other items worth noting on Tuesday’s council agenda:
This year the last Saturday in July is on the 28th and that’s why, if you look at the meetings section of the city’s web page you will find a listing for a "Kyle Special City Council Meeting" scheduled for 8 a.m. on that day. But this year, that special 8 a.m. meeting on the last Saturday in July is going to include more than just a discussion of the manager’s proposed budget. It’s going to include annexations as well.
According to notices that appeared in this week’s edition of the Hays Free Press, the council will host the second public hearings on four proposed annexations totaling 259.59 acres. Granted, a total of 259.59 acres is not a lot to annex — about .4 of a square mile — so an 8 a.m. on a Saturday time is not going to inconvenience that many — if any — citizens who want to testify at said hearings. But, still, it’s interesting that the second public hearings on these four annexations will be held during what normally is a meeting reserved exclusively to discuss the proposed budget.
Which brings me back to the first of the two topics I said above I would return to, specifically, the way the council conducts citizen comments. These are always held at the beginning of each council meeting and there’s nothing wrong with that. However, if the council really desired to solicit meaningful comments from its citizens it would also include on its agenda a citizens comment period at the end of the meetings as well. And the upcoming annexation-budget "Kyle Special City Council Meeting" on the 28th is a perfect example of why a second comments section should be included. Although an agenda for this meeting hasn’t been posted it’s reasonable to assume it will feature, most likely, in this order 1. Citizens comments period; 2. Annexation public hearings and 3. Budget presentation. But how in heaven’s name are citizens going to be able to comment on the most important item of this meeting — the proposed budget — before they have any idea of what’s in the budget proposal? And they won’t know that until after the one and only citizens comments period has ended. This is compounded by the fact that the Kyle City Council is composed of individuals who, by design, do not take the initiative they should to inform constituents of the contents of the city manager’s proposed budget. I have spent the last four years attempting to shame council members into hosting budget town hall meetings, but to no avail. These folks feel no obligation towards keeping their constituents informed on the most important decisions they will make as council members or to seek input from their constituents about those decisions. I was talking with Jerry Hendrix, the city’s chief of staff, yesterday on a completely different subject (specifically mobility management when the city reaches a population over 100,000, expected in 22 years) and he said the city would do what it could to facilitate such budget town hall meetings — going so far as to design and produce a budget presentation slide show that could be featured at the meetings — but no council member has even inquired about one. Of course it can be argued that the council will hold four additional meetings on the budget — public hearings on Aug. 14 and Aug. 21, and formal budget adoption readings on Aug. 28 and Sept. 4 — and the public can make their opinions on the budget known on these occasions. But these meetings require the citizenry to come to the council; why does the council feel it doesn’t need to take the message out to the citizenry?
What makes this even more criminal is that every so often a council member will don their dunce cap, swallow another stupid pill and proclaim "We need to make sure our citizens are aware of this," whatever the particular "this" happens to be at that moment. They seem to think there’s this magic wand that is somehow going to be waved infusing widespread knowledge into the cranium of every resident in the city. Don’t they realize that they — the council members themselves — are the citizens’ link to their city government, the conduit for the transfer of information and knowledge? That one of the principle things they were elected to do was to keep those folks who voted for them informed about what’s going on at City Hall? How badly they have shirked this responsibility would be laughable if it didn’t border on criminally negligent. Unfortunately, they look upon public service as an opportunity to grandstand, but not to serve and inform.
The argument I have heard from one or more council members against having such a townhall meeting is that not many constituents would show up, which is tantamount to the ball player saying he doesn’t want to step up to the plate because he knows he’s going to strike out anyway. But it’s true. If a council member doesn’t put some effort into making the meeting a success, it might not be one. And, at first, perhaps only a dozen folks might show up to the meeting. But I’ve seen this happen many times before. Word starts getting around about how valuable these meetings are and then two dozen show up at the next one because "it’s the place to be." Then four dozen come to the one after that and before you know it, you have SRO crowds. Not only that, two council members could jointly co-sponsor one or more such meetings and, with each working their own constituency, attract a more significant crowd than by going it alone. So, yes, it does take effort to make these things work, but "effort" seems to be a dirty word at council chambers.
The second thing I said I would get back around to is the way the council agenda is arranged and, for once, the council has almost done a better job of arranging the agenda for this Tuesday’s meeting than at any time I can remember. My question is whether this might be just a one-off success tied to the proposed annexations.
Like I said earlier, the meeting on the 28th is for the second public hearings on the proposed annexations, and, if you’re wondering when the first of those public hearings are supposed to come along, the answer to that is they are on Tuesday’s agenda which correctly groups them all together under the heading of "Public Hearing" (to be grammatically correct, it should be plural "Hearings," but, hey, this is a step in the right direction here.) There will, of course, be one public hearing for each of the four proposed annexations and, like I said, I don’t expect them to attract that many speakers because it’s not going to directly affect that many people. I expect Lila Knight to speak at least one of the hearings to once again say the city needs an Annexation Plan which, in the case of these annexations, is not true because, as Section 43.052 (h)(1) of the Local Texas Government Code clearly states an Annexation Plan is not required if the area to be annexed "contains fewer than 100 separate tracts of land on which one or more residential dwellings are located on each tract." That means these four areas are definitely exempt from needing an Annexation Plan.
So it’s not that the public hearings will draw any meaningful contributions, it’s simply the fact they are categorized as such on the council’s agenda. But, wait. As I wrote above "the council has almost done a better job of arranging the agenda." It seems that even though there is a section on the agenda devoted to "Public Hearing" (sic), there is a rogue public hearing appearing all by its lonesome as Item 11 on the agenda. Why isn’t this item included with the other public hearings? Someone from the city will make the excuse that Item 11 has to do with a proposed natural gas franchise and not an annexation, but that’s exactly what that will be — an excuse, not a valid reason.
All future agendas should have all the public hearings grouped together and appearing on the agenda immediate following the Consent Agenda items, if there is a Consent Agenda, or, as the annexation ones are on Tuesday’s agenda, immediately following the Citizens Comments period. In that way, those citizens coming to council to speak at one of the public hearings (1) will know generally where on the agenda the hearings will appear at every meeting without having to actually review the agenda and (2), and even more importantly, those citizens wishing to speak won’t have to sit through a lot of junk waiting around for the public hearing during which they wish to speak. Will the council take this sensible step? Who knows. The fact that these council members refuse to keep their constituents informed about the most important function the council must perform — reviewing and approving a budget each year — indicates they only pay lip service to the concept of caring for their constituents.
A couple of other items worth noting on Tuesday’s council agenda:
- It appears work is finally about to commence on the North Burleson Road bond project. Items 8-10 all involve work on or around North Burleson Road. The biggie, Item 8, is the authorization of $6.9 million for the construction of a new 42-foot-wide roadway, reconstruction and widening of North Burleson Street, water line relocations, wastewater line relocations, structure improvements, storm drain improvements, grading, base, pavement, curb and gutter, pedestrian improvements, illumination, construction of a new 8-inch wastewater line and 12-inch water line, and signing and markings for approximately 1.47 mile of roadway. Item 9 authorizes the spending of $613,244.73 for the construction of a new 42-foot-wide roadway, structure improvements, storm drain improvements, grading, base, pavement, curb and gutter, pedestrian improvements, signing and markings for approximately 800 feet of roadway extending Marketplace from Burleson to the I-35 frontage road. Item 10 authorizes the expenditure of an additional $73,344 for "construction administration, review, analysis, correction of contractor supplied material specifications, and revisions to plans during construction for N. Burleson Street and Marketplace Extension."
- The city is taking one more step in making toward making the roller hockey pavilion a reality with the first reading of an ordinance authorizing City Manager Scott Sellers to negotiate and enter into a professional services agreement for the design of the cement pavilion; authorizing the use of a Buy Board contractor to construct the cement hockey pavilion; and authorizing and directing Sellers to negotiate and bring back for city council an agreement with a Buy Board contractor for the construction of the pavilion. "As planning of this community project is getting underway, having the engineering firm and the contractor involved from the very beginning will save the city time and money," according to the agenda. "This process meets (the) state's and city's purchase policies for competitive bids. For a unique project involving many volunteers, in-kind donations and several different construction-industry participants, this is a preferred method to deliver a quality project."
Saturday, July 29, 2017
Mayor, Wilson, Mitchell, Fogley support, but Tenorio balks at 6 percent tax rate reduction
My very first assignment as a political reporter came almost exactly 57 years ago when I was part of a reporting team covering the 1960 Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles. In the intervening years I have seen and reported on, arguably, more than my share of municipal budget proposals and I have yet to see one in all that time that I could label as "a perfect budget."
That being said, after spending much of the last week reviewing Kyle City Manager Scott Sellers’s proposed budget for FY2017-18, I could easily label it "the ideal budget for Kyle at this time." And I guess I really shouldn’t be surprised at that. Sellers proposed a budget one year ago was exactly the ideal budget for Kyle at that time. Although I don’t agree with Sellers’s methodology — I have been a strong proponent for budgeting for outcomes for more than a decade now — this city manager seems to have the knack for nailing exactly the right budget for Kyle at any point in time.
Mayor Todd Webster was even more definitive about Sellers’s proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
"In all the budgets I have been associated with," Webster said at the conclusion of this morning’s special council meeting to discuss the manager’s budget proposal, "this is the very first one where I really felt that the budget was accomplishing everything I felt really needed to happen. On the whole, it’s light years above some of the budgets I’ve been looking at in terms of finally getting this community to a place where we’re getting ahead of this growth curve."
This year’s proposal provides funding not only for everything the city needs to manage its explosive growth, but also a lot of what the citizens have been wanting. And it rewards the efforts of groups such as KAYAC, who can look at this budget and realize their voice has been heard by those at the very top of the budget-formulating process as this proposal includes such KAYAC-promoted amenities as a skate park/water park. Not only that, Sellers managed to pull off this accomplishment while still recommending a half-cent reduction in the city’s property tax rate.
Then, at this morning’s special city council meeting during which Sellers officially unveiled his proposed budget, he told council members it’s possible that reduction can even be greater. In fact, he said, because of the 12.8 percent increase in property tax values, the number certified late Thursday evening by the Hays County Appraisal District, the property tax rate could conceivably be reduced by 3.3 cents per $100 valuation and still provide the same revenue. Specifically, Sellers told the council it could reduce the tax rate from its current $.5748 per $100 valuation to $.5418, a 6 percent tax rate cut.
"That would allow us to put forward the same budget that we have," Sellers told the council this morning.
Webster said he was surprised by the appraisal district’s number and called Sellers’s proposed cut "a lot better than I thought we would be able to do. As long as the budget is meeting what our priorities are, I can’t see a reason why we wouldn’t lower it to that number."
Council member David Wilson said the lower number "absolutely meets my expectations. That’s the number I had in my mind a month or so ago."
Council member and mayoral candidate (and so far, the only announced mayoral candidate) Travis Mitchell said "To be able to offer a lower tax rate while simultaneously increasing the services we’re providing is right in line with what I have as the highest ideal of what this council and this staff can deliver to our citizens. It’s a great thing, as I see it."
From Mayor Pro Tem Damon Fogley: "I am happy with the (new) rate also. I’ve always been a supporter of lowering rates since I got here," especially, he cautioned, because of new Emergency Service District’s taxes which, he said, "will kick in" sometime in November and will affect Kyle residents.
Interestingly, however, council member Daphne Tenorio cautioned against the reduction, saying she would "prefer to keep our tax rate steady."
"We have to be honest with what’s coming ahead and that’s what concerns me about lowering the tax rate three cents," she said. "We’re lowering the rate three cents right now but we’re going to add another $20 to your water bill. And that concerns me."
Finance Director Perwez Moheet acknowledged that while this proposed budget calls for no increases in rates or fees for city-provided goods and services, future hikes are inevitable. For example, he said, as he informed the council earlier this year, the Alliance Regional Water Authority will be issuing $60 million of debt between 2019 and 2022 to fund Kyle’s share of a project designed to provide water for Hays County communities.
"In 2019, we may have to adjust the water rate," Moheet said. "But we don’t know yet until I see the final structure of their financing. They had talked about getting state funding, Swift funding, which all have imbedded discounts."
But, down the line, he said, "we’re looking at between $31 and $36 per month (water rate) increase to a residential customer. That’s predicated on (the debt issuance) is going to happen on time, it will be the same amount and what interest rates will be at that time. That’s rough, preliminary numbers."
To help fund the expansion of the wastewater plant, Moheet said, in addition to the contributions from developers, "We’re looking at between a $5.50 and $7 per month increase. But that also depends on when we go into the bond market, what the actual size of the bond will be, what the interest rate will be and the term of the bonds that we decide to issue."
Webster said it is still to be determined whether water fees will "bear the entire burden" of paying off that debt. "You can cover some of that through the tax rate, the General Fund. So it’s not accurate to say a $36 water fee increase is actually going to happen."
Tenorio said, however, her concern was that "we did at one time lower the tax rate and then the very next year we had to up the tax rate. So I would prefer to keep our tax rate steady versus lowering it and then in 2019 having to up it again. We’ve lost our savings. We have no more cushion. I would love to see a three cent decrease in the tax rate but I’m worried that it’s a little premature."
Moheet said the city had not "lost our savings," and, in truth, was above the required fund balance.
Tenorio, however, appeared to do an about face at the end of the meeting, agreeing with the rest of the council to pass a resolution to place on a future council agenda an action item to adopt a tax rate not to exceed the rollback rate (currently estimated at that $.5418 number).
On another subject, Sellers informed the council about major savings the city found in the purchase of heavy equipment, which, he said, "the city is always in need of." Sellers said he set aside $100,000 for the purchase of one piece of heavy equipment that was needed, yet could only be used in limited situations.
"About this time we received an e-mail from military surplus saying ‘We have a discount on a lot of tow vehicles that we are basically giving away to governmental entities for $5,500 each’," Sellers said, "So we went down to the federal surplus yard in San Antonio and we looked through that yard and picked out a vehicle with an engine rebuilt in 2011. It runs extremely well. We drove up here with that and other pieces of equipment. We found a forklift we’ve needed for a long time for $4,500 which would have cost us over $40,000 through regular channels. We also purchased another vehicle we can use as a water vehicle that frees up a dump truck we were using as a water truck as well.
"So we initially had $100,000 budgeted for the truck and trailer," the manager said, "and now we’re going to have a truck, a trailer, a forklift and a water truck for $17,000."
Major concerns of the council members about the budget included:
Click here to view the city manager’s slide presentation on his proposed budget for FY 2017-18. Click here to view his entire budget proposal.
That being said, after spending much of the last week reviewing Kyle City Manager Scott Sellers’s proposed budget for FY2017-18, I could easily label it "the ideal budget for Kyle at this time." And I guess I really shouldn’t be surprised at that. Sellers proposed a budget one year ago was exactly the ideal budget for Kyle at that time. Although I don’t agree with Sellers’s methodology — I have been a strong proponent for budgeting for outcomes for more than a decade now — this city manager seems to have the knack for nailing exactly the right budget for Kyle at any point in time.
Mayor Todd Webster was even more definitive about Sellers’s proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
"In all the budgets I have been associated with," Webster said at the conclusion of this morning’s special council meeting to discuss the manager’s budget proposal, "this is the very first one where I really felt that the budget was accomplishing everything I felt really needed to happen. On the whole, it’s light years above some of the budgets I’ve been looking at in terms of finally getting this community to a place where we’re getting ahead of this growth curve."
This year’s proposal provides funding not only for everything the city needs to manage its explosive growth, but also a lot of what the citizens have been wanting. And it rewards the efforts of groups such as KAYAC, who can look at this budget and realize their voice has been heard by those at the very top of the budget-formulating process as this proposal includes such KAYAC-promoted amenities as a skate park/water park. Not only that, Sellers managed to pull off this accomplishment while still recommending a half-cent reduction in the city’s property tax rate.
Then, at this morning’s special city council meeting during which Sellers officially unveiled his proposed budget, he told council members it’s possible that reduction can even be greater. In fact, he said, because of the 12.8 percent increase in property tax values, the number certified late Thursday evening by the Hays County Appraisal District, the property tax rate could conceivably be reduced by 3.3 cents per $100 valuation and still provide the same revenue. Specifically, Sellers told the council it could reduce the tax rate from its current $.5748 per $100 valuation to $.5418, a 6 percent tax rate cut.
"That would allow us to put forward the same budget that we have," Sellers told the council this morning.
Webster said he was surprised by the appraisal district’s number and called Sellers’s proposed cut "a lot better than I thought we would be able to do. As long as the budget is meeting what our priorities are, I can’t see a reason why we wouldn’t lower it to that number."
Council member David Wilson said the lower number "absolutely meets my expectations. That’s the number I had in my mind a month or so ago."
Council member and mayoral candidate (and so far, the only announced mayoral candidate) Travis Mitchell said "To be able to offer a lower tax rate while simultaneously increasing the services we’re providing is right in line with what I have as the highest ideal of what this council and this staff can deliver to our citizens. It’s a great thing, as I see it."
From Mayor Pro Tem Damon Fogley: "I am happy with the (new) rate also. I’ve always been a supporter of lowering rates since I got here," especially, he cautioned, because of new Emergency Service District’s taxes which, he said, "will kick in" sometime in November and will affect Kyle residents.
Interestingly, however, council member Daphne Tenorio cautioned against the reduction, saying she would "prefer to keep our tax rate steady."
"We have to be honest with what’s coming ahead and that’s what concerns me about lowering the tax rate three cents," she said. "We’re lowering the rate three cents right now but we’re going to add another $20 to your water bill. And that concerns me."
Finance Director Perwez Moheet acknowledged that while this proposed budget calls for no increases in rates or fees for city-provided goods and services, future hikes are inevitable. For example, he said, as he informed the council earlier this year, the Alliance Regional Water Authority will be issuing $60 million of debt between 2019 and 2022 to fund Kyle’s share of a project designed to provide water for Hays County communities.
"In 2019, we may have to adjust the water rate," Moheet said. "But we don’t know yet until I see the final structure of their financing. They had talked about getting state funding, Swift funding, which all have imbedded discounts."
But, down the line, he said, "we’re looking at between $31 and $36 per month (water rate) increase to a residential customer. That’s predicated on (the debt issuance) is going to happen on time, it will be the same amount and what interest rates will be at that time. That’s rough, preliminary numbers."
To help fund the expansion of the wastewater plant, Moheet said, in addition to the contributions from developers, "We’re looking at between a $5.50 and $7 per month increase. But that also depends on when we go into the bond market, what the actual size of the bond will be, what the interest rate will be and the term of the bonds that we decide to issue."
Webster said it is still to be determined whether water fees will "bear the entire burden" of paying off that debt. "You can cover some of that through the tax rate, the General Fund. So it’s not accurate to say a $36 water fee increase is actually going to happen."
Tenorio said, however, her concern was that "we did at one time lower the tax rate and then the very next year we had to up the tax rate. So I would prefer to keep our tax rate steady versus lowering it and then in 2019 having to up it again. We’ve lost our savings. We have no more cushion. I would love to see a three cent decrease in the tax rate but I’m worried that it’s a little premature."
Moheet said the city had not "lost our savings," and, in truth, was above the required fund balance.
Tenorio, however, appeared to do an about face at the end of the meeting, agreeing with the rest of the council to pass a resolution to place on a future council agenda an action item to adopt a tax rate not to exceed the rollback rate (currently estimated at that $.5418 number).
On another subject, Sellers informed the council about major savings the city found in the purchase of heavy equipment, which, he said, "the city is always in need of." Sellers said he set aside $100,000 for the purchase of one piece of heavy equipment that was needed, yet could only be used in limited situations.
"About this time we received an e-mail from military surplus saying ‘We have a discount on a lot of tow vehicles that we are basically giving away to governmental entities for $5,500 each’," Sellers said, "So we went down to the federal surplus yard in San Antonio and we looked through that yard and picked out a vehicle with an engine rebuilt in 2011. It runs extremely well. We drove up here with that and other pieces of equipment. We found a forklift we’ve needed for a long time for $4,500 which would have cost us over $40,000 through regular channels. We also purchased another vehicle we can use as a water vehicle that frees up a dump truck we were using as a water truck as well.
"So we initially had $100,000 budgeted for the truck and trailer," the manager said, "and now we’re going to have a truck, a trailer, a forklift and a water truck for $17,000."
Major concerns of the council members about the budget included:
- Mitchell’s recommendations for two additional, but unfunded, police positions in recognition of a recommendation in the soon-to-be released results of a Police Department audit.
- Council member Shane Arabie’s recommendation for the hiring of two new inspectors to be paid from the various utility funds.
- Council member Becky Selbera’s wishes for the city to do more to help augment charity drives conducted by non-profits. Other than establishing a fund for which various non-profits could apply for funds from, other council members suggested recommending specific charity-driven projects the city could, at least, partially fund through an RFP process.
- Selbera’s and Fogley’s desire to expedite by two years the required engineering services for the Post Road improvements and include that $250,000 into CIP budget for this fiscal year.
Click here to view the city manager’s slide presentation on his proposed budget for FY 2017-18. Click here to view his entire budget proposal.
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
City manager’s proposed $74. 8 million budget to seek half-cent decrease in property tax rate
City Manager Scott Sellers will inform the City Council Saturday morning he is proposing a $74.8 million budget for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 that includes a half-cent reduction in the property tax rate, a 4.02 percent increase in sanitation fees, but no increase in water rates, wastewater rates, stormwater fees (or any other fees) and the proposed addition of three new positions.
Sellers’s proposal will call for a tax rate of $.5698 per $100 property valuation. Of course, his proposed 0.8 percent reduction in the property tax rate will most certainly be more than offset by projected increases in property valuations. Those certified valuations were supposed to be issued by the appraisal district yesterday, but the district informed city officials today it will now release those numbers Friday. Sellers’s proposed budget does, in fact, forecast a 12.45 percent increase in property tax revenue during the next fiscal year even with the proposed rate decrease.
However, this new budget has a far more realistic forecast this year when it comes to sales tax increases — 2.86 percent — a far cry from the double-digit projections of the last few years, projections that haven’t come close to how much has been collected. Through this month, the city’s sales tax collections are $212,624.51 below what was projected in the current budget.
A new franchise agreement with Pedernales Electric will more than double the revenue the city receives over the former agreement — $1.125 million under the new deal compared to $532,000 from the previous one.
The three new positions Sellers will be seeking are for building inspections, engineering services and municipal court.
The City Council begins discussions on Sellers’s proposed budget when it is officially presented at a specially called council meeting scheduled for 8 a.m. Saturday (and, I am assuming, a meeting Spectrum cable customers can watch live in their homes on Channel 10). The council also plans to host public hearings on the budget and proposed tax rates at 7 p.m. on Aug. 15 and Aug 22. It will approve a budget on first reading on Aug. 29 and adopt it on second reading Sept. 5.
"The budget was created first with the needs and desires of the citizens of Kyle," Sellers said in a prepared message he plans on delivering to the council Saturday. "These priorities were ascertained via the annual household survey and at the direction of council. The long-term needs of the city also directed much of the budget creation. The priorities contained in the recently adopted water and wastewater models, as well as the transportation master plan, are made evident in the five-year capital improvements plan.
"Staff has analyzed the effect of current and future growth on the city's infrastructure, especially in light of the city's recent 10 square mile annexation," he continued. "Understanding the extent of this growth and build-out has allowed staff to right-size major arterials and trunk lines, appropriately place and size water and wastewater infrastructure, correctly phase wastewater treatment plant expansions, acquire necessary road right of way, develop plans to address flooding, create the adequate amount of recreational opportunities, and plan for future staffing needs.
"We are in an unprecedented place and time in Kyle's development," the city manager’s budget message concluded. "With over 47,000 anticipated units planned over the next 20 years, it is imperative that the city lay the appropriate foundation for this inevitable growth. This budget is a major step toward this objective."
Sellers listed the following as the highlights of his proposed budget:
Among the 2018 expenses in Sellers's five-year CIP plan are:
The opening of a couple of new hotels in Kyle is presumably the reason behind a forecast in the proposed budget of a hefty 45.53 percent increase in Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax revenues.
The proposed budget also includes an allowance for a 10 percent increase in medical insurance costs.
Sellers’s proposal will call for a tax rate of $.5698 per $100 property valuation. Of course, his proposed 0.8 percent reduction in the property tax rate will most certainly be more than offset by projected increases in property valuations. Those certified valuations were supposed to be issued by the appraisal district yesterday, but the district informed city officials today it will now release those numbers Friday. Sellers’s proposed budget does, in fact, forecast a 12.45 percent increase in property tax revenue during the next fiscal year even with the proposed rate decrease.
However, this new budget has a far more realistic forecast this year when it comes to sales tax increases — 2.86 percent — a far cry from the double-digit projections of the last few years, projections that haven’t come close to how much has been collected. Through this month, the city’s sales tax collections are $212,624.51 below what was projected in the current budget.
A new franchise agreement with Pedernales Electric will more than double the revenue the city receives over the former agreement — $1.125 million under the new deal compared to $532,000 from the previous one.
The three new positions Sellers will be seeking are for building inspections, engineering services and municipal court.
The City Council begins discussions on Sellers’s proposed budget when it is officially presented at a specially called council meeting scheduled for 8 a.m. Saturday (and, I am assuming, a meeting Spectrum cable customers can watch live in their homes on Channel 10). The council also plans to host public hearings on the budget and proposed tax rates at 7 p.m. on Aug. 15 and Aug 22. It will approve a budget on first reading on Aug. 29 and adopt it on second reading Sept. 5.
"The budget was created first with the needs and desires of the citizens of Kyle," Sellers said in a prepared message he plans on delivering to the council Saturday. "These priorities were ascertained via the annual household survey and at the direction of council. The long-term needs of the city also directed much of the budget creation. The priorities contained in the recently adopted water and wastewater models, as well as the transportation master plan, are made evident in the five-year capital improvements plan.
"Staff has analyzed the effect of current and future growth on the city's infrastructure, especially in light of the city's recent 10 square mile annexation," he continued. "Understanding the extent of this growth and build-out has allowed staff to right-size major arterials and trunk lines, appropriately place and size water and wastewater infrastructure, correctly phase wastewater treatment plant expansions, acquire necessary road right of way, develop plans to address flooding, create the adequate amount of recreational opportunities, and plan for future staffing needs.
"We are in an unprecedented place and time in Kyle's development," the city manager’s budget message concluded. "With over 47,000 anticipated units planned over the next 20 years, it is imperative that the city lay the appropriate foundation for this inevitable growth. This budget is a major step toward this objective."
Sellers listed the following as the highlights of his proposed budget:
- Focus on funding much needed infrastructure improvements (CIP),
- Maintain all current city programs and services
- Property tax rate reduction of $0.0050 per $100/AV from $0.5748 to $0.5698
- No change in utility rates; water, wastewater or storm drainage.
- Funding provided for council initiatives including veterans' memorial ($10,000), community health, 1st year on us (tax rebate), sidewalk repairs ($50,000), dog park ($50,000), recreation pavilion ($250,000), community gardens ($11,730), skate/splash park ($130,000) and beautification projects.
- Wastewater treatment plant expansion
- General Fund contribution for wastewater treatment plant expansion to reduce debt issuance
- Kyle Vista Park infrastructure improvements
- Gateway and wayfinding signage ($250,000)
- Police body/vehicle camera system
- Equipment for public access TV channel
- Elimination of transfer to General Fund from Wastewater Utility
- Three new positions (building inspector, court clerk, & engineer-in-training)
Among the 2018 expenses in Sellers's five-year CIP plan are:
- $500,000 specifically devoted to "street improvement and upgrades"
- $100,000 for the quiet zone zones design/construction at Center and South streets;
- $150,000 for repairs on Windy Hill Road between Indian Paintbrush and Purple Mountain;
- $250,000 for relocating above ground utilities underground, mostly in the downtown area;
- $1 million for Phase 1 of Kyle Vista Park to be located near Science Hall Elementary
- $2,46 million to pay the city’s share of the ARWA (formerly HCPUA) water delivery project
- $300,000 for miscellaneous water line upgrades and improvements
- $500,000 for miscellaneous wastewater line upgrades and improvements
- $1.4 million in engineering costs and $1 million in construction costs for the needed expansion of the city’s wastewater treatment plant
- $12,96 million for additional wastewater projects such as interceptors, lift stations and general upgrades
- $765,000 for repairs on .6 mile of Kyle Crossing, northward from Kohlers.
The opening of a couple of new hotels in Kyle is presumably the reason behind a forecast in the proposed budget of a hefty 45.53 percent increase in Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax revenues.
The proposed budget also includes an allowance for a 10 percent increase in medical insurance costs.
Saturday, May 6, 2017
Council discussion ignores potential $26.5 million gap in Utility Fund
Today’s city council roundtable discussion of the budget for the next fiscal year completely disregarded City Manager Scott Sellers’s projection that the Utility Funds’s new budget needs exceed its new revenue estimates by $26,512,450 and instead concentrated on where to set the property tax rate.
Discussions with Sellers and Mayor Todd Webster after the meeting adjourned did deal more with the infrastructure needs funded by the Utility Fund. In fact, Webster went so far as to say it would be "irresponsible" not to deal with those needs, but, the actual council discussion itself seemed more like the opening salvo of November’s mayoral campaign than a reasoned approach to fund the services the city needs to provide.
Sellers, as is his unflappable style, took it all in stride, promising the city’s staff would not "reduce the level services to our citizens," regardless of where the council eventually sets the tax rate.
"The council wants to reflect the increased valuations that will come upon the homeowners by some form of reduced tax rate," the city manager said following the formal adjournment of the council’s gathering. "Staff understands we will not reduce the current level of service delivery, but yet we will operate at an effective rate rather than the new rate which will be given to us later. Where we land in there is up to our budgeting process over the next two months, but we will ensure that we do not reduce the level of services to our citizens."
Sellers said despite the fact the council did not discuss the need for funding the needed water/wastewater infrastructure improvements required of a city growing as quickly as Kyle, those needs will not be ignored as the staff prepares the actual proposed budget it plans to deliver to council at the end of July.
"The other thought is that the priority is on the infrastructure development of the city," the manager said. "We are obligated. We have a responsibility to extend our wastewater infrastructure as the city grows to accommodate that growth. We are expanding the wastewater treatment plant to match that growth as well. The interceptors — those sewer lines that will accommodate that growth — unfortunately need to be put into the ground before the development occurs. Over time we will recover those costs, but today those costs are coming due. So the budget will reflect that wastewater and water infrastructure that we need to sustain a growing community."
Those wastewater infrastructure needs are paid for out of a Utility Fund which derives its income predominantly from water and wastewater fees paid by residents, not the General Fund, whose money source comes predominantly from property taxes, sales taxes and franchise and other corporate fees. More than two thirds of the General Fund goes to financing public safety as well as parks/recreation as well as paying off debt service incurred by bond sales.
Sellers said a drastic reduction in the tax rate would have an effect on city services far greater than the overall proportion of that reduction
"The overall property tax rate used to fund the General Fund has two components," Sellers said. "The debt component is the larger component of our tax rate so the city service delivery is really only from 24 cents of the current overall tax burden (of around 57 cents). So when you put that into perspective you realize that much of what has happened in the past from a tax rate and a utility perspective has been done to manage the rapid pace of growth."
Mayor Webster emphasized the General Fund over the Utility Fund in a post-meeting discussion, saying it could be difficult to enact a major property tax rate reduction, as at least one that one council member proposed, because "it’s clear there isn’t any fluff in the budget."
"There’s not fluff in anything they talked about here," the mayor said. "It’s all real needs. It’s very hard to look at what was presented and say any of these things aren’t something you could qualify as something the city needs to have. At the same time, what I think you heard from a majority of the council is a desire to try to balance those things."
Webster did touch tangentially on the possible Utility Fund deficit.
"I think the desire is to do things as fast as possible — and I share that desire — but if doing them fast results in a substantial increase in costs to taxpayers we have to balance that out." he said. "At the same time, the city went through a long period where the city either didn’t have resources or just didn’t have the wherewithal to address a lot of these things. So I’m lucky I walked in when the recession was over. But I think the growth in appraised values and the growth in commerce in this city is a reflection of the commitment the city has made to infrastructure."
He called today’s gathering "a really good meeting."
"It was clear to me that a majority of the council seemed to have a very clear understanding in ways I haven’t necessarily seen in the past," the mayor said. "I think the conversations and the feedback from the council was a higher level from what I’ve experienced.
"And everyone on the council — except one — seems to be putting some real thought into it in terms of how can we really balance what the needs are versus what we can afford to do."
Webster echoed Sellers’s concern that reducing the tax rate has a far greater impact on the city’s ability to provide services than the amount of that reduction would suggest.
"That’s the thing that’s going to hang us up the most when it comes to dealing with the tax rate," Webster said. "A good 60 percent of our tax rate is covering debt service, so when you reduce the M&O (maintenance and operation) side, you create a further imbalance there so you become very debt heavy. And that has impacts on lots of things. It has impacts on your potential bond ratings. So we have to demonstrate some wisdom when we push through it."
The mayor said the message Saturday’s meeting sent to the average Kyle taxpayer is that "the council is looking to try to find a way to fund the city to the extent possible within the existing revenue stream and we will do our best this time around not to try to grab all that growth."
Webster said he was hoping this was the budget cycle the city could say it had made all the needed investments in its infrastructure and then could simply concentrate its efforts on daily municipal operations.
"But there’s no question it would be irresponsible not to plan for and acquire the water we need for the long term," the mayor said. "And historically there has been very little accomplished for more than a decade in terms of upgrading our wastewater infrastructure. So we’re now having to pay for years of catch-up on wastewater.
"So there is a desire and there’s going to be a serious effort to really come to the budget to try to find a way — given all the things we’ve identified — not to just grab all the additional revenue that’s been generated and spend it,
"The second thing is everyone really needs to understand that there are some very significant infrastructure issues coming, one of those is our wastewater infrastructure which would have a horrible impact on them if we don’t deal with it. If we don’t deal with it, it’s irresponsible."
Webster said residents must be aware that the city council’s budget deliberations must include deciding on where the city’s future water needs are going to come from.
"We have a plan for that," he said. "We’re trying to keep that as low as possible and we have 13 entities and communities all coming together to bring water to this region so that as the growth comes everyone who lives here and is invested here continues to have water. But that costs money and it costs a lot of money. And our share of that is a lot of money. The decision there is what do you do now versus what do you do later.
"But the wastewater thing is literally a problem right now. If something isn’t done with wastewater it will prevent us from growing commercially. It will have health effects. It could lead to state intervention, fines and a whole bunch of things. And you could see a situation where, in a worst case scenario if something isn’t done, you could actually see wastewater backup."
Webster noted that council member Shane Arabie advocated for keeping the tax rate at its current level so that the city can invest in all its needs while council member Travis Mitchell went to the opposite end, proposing a reduction to the effective tax rate, i.e., the rate that would provide the city the same amount of revenue it received in the current fiscal year.
"The answer I think is that it will be somewhere in between," the mayor said. ‘And that’s just the nature of the compromises that have to be made. It’s going to be a hard conversation."
Discussions with Sellers and Mayor Todd Webster after the meeting adjourned did deal more with the infrastructure needs funded by the Utility Fund. In fact, Webster went so far as to say it would be "irresponsible" not to deal with those needs, but, the actual council discussion itself seemed more like the opening salvo of November’s mayoral campaign than a reasoned approach to fund the services the city needs to provide.
Sellers, as is his unflappable style, took it all in stride, promising the city’s staff would not "reduce the level services to our citizens," regardless of where the council eventually sets the tax rate.
"The council wants to reflect the increased valuations that will come upon the homeowners by some form of reduced tax rate," the city manager said following the formal adjournment of the council’s gathering. "Staff understands we will not reduce the current level of service delivery, but yet we will operate at an effective rate rather than the new rate which will be given to us later. Where we land in there is up to our budgeting process over the next two months, but we will ensure that we do not reduce the level of services to our citizens."
Sellers said despite the fact the council did not discuss the need for funding the needed water/wastewater infrastructure improvements required of a city growing as quickly as Kyle, those needs will not be ignored as the staff prepares the actual proposed budget it plans to deliver to council at the end of July.
"The other thought is that the priority is on the infrastructure development of the city," the manager said. "We are obligated. We have a responsibility to extend our wastewater infrastructure as the city grows to accommodate that growth. We are expanding the wastewater treatment plant to match that growth as well. The interceptors — those sewer lines that will accommodate that growth — unfortunately need to be put into the ground before the development occurs. Over time we will recover those costs, but today those costs are coming due. So the budget will reflect that wastewater and water infrastructure that we need to sustain a growing community."
Those wastewater infrastructure needs are paid for out of a Utility Fund which derives its income predominantly from water and wastewater fees paid by residents, not the General Fund, whose money source comes predominantly from property taxes, sales taxes and franchise and other corporate fees. More than two thirds of the General Fund goes to financing public safety as well as parks/recreation as well as paying off debt service incurred by bond sales.
Sellers said a drastic reduction in the tax rate would have an effect on city services far greater than the overall proportion of that reduction
"The overall property tax rate used to fund the General Fund has two components," Sellers said. "The debt component is the larger component of our tax rate so the city service delivery is really only from 24 cents of the current overall tax burden (of around 57 cents). So when you put that into perspective you realize that much of what has happened in the past from a tax rate and a utility perspective has been done to manage the rapid pace of growth."
Mayor Webster emphasized the General Fund over the Utility Fund in a post-meeting discussion, saying it could be difficult to enact a major property tax rate reduction, as at least one that one council member proposed, because "it’s clear there isn’t any fluff in the budget."
"There’s not fluff in anything they talked about here," the mayor said. "It’s all real needs. It’s very hard to look at what was presented and say any of these things aren’t something you could qualify as something the city needs to have. At the same time, what I think you heard from a majority of the council is a desire to try to balance those things."
Webster did touch tangentially on the possible Utility Fund deficit.
"I think the desire is to do things as fast as possible — and I share that desire — but if doing them fast results in a substantial increase in costs to taxpayers we have to balance that out." he said. "At the same time, the city went through a long period where the city either didn’t have resources or just didn’t have the wherewithal to address a lot of these things. So I’m lucky I walked in when the recession was over. But I think the growth in appraised values and the growth in commerce in this city is a reflection of the commitment the city has made to infrastructure."
He called today’s gathering "a really good meeting."
"It was clear to me that a majority of the council seemed to have a very clear understanding in ways I haven’t necessarily seen in the past," the mayor said. "I think the conversations and the feedback from the council was a higher level from what I’ve experienced.
"And everyone on the council — except one — seems to be putting some real thought into it in terms of how can we really balance what the needs are versus what we can afford to do."
Webster echoed Sellers’s concern that reducing the tax rate has a far greater impact on the city’s ability to provide services than the amount of that reduction would suggest.
"That’s the thing that’s going to hang us up the most when it comes to dealing with the tax rate," Webster said. "A good 60 percent of our tax rate is covering debt service, so when you reduce the M&O (maintenance and operation) side, you create a further imbalance there so you become very debt heavy. And that has impacts on lots of things. It has impacts on your potential bond ratings. So we have to demonstrate some wisdom when we push through it."
The mayor said the message Saturday’s meeting sent to the average Kyle taxpayer is that "the council is looking to try to find a way to fund the city to the extent possible within the existing revenue stream and we will do our best this time around not to try to grab all that growth."
Webster said he was hoping this was the budget cycle the city could say it had made all the needed investments in its infrastructure and then could simply concentrate its efforts on daily municipal operations.
"But there’s no question it would be irresponsible not to plan for and acquire the water we need for the long term," the mayor said. "And historically there has been very little accomplished for more than a decade in terms of upgrading our wastewater infrastructure. So we’re now having to pay for years of catch-up on wastewater.
"So there is a desire and there’s going to be a serious effort to really come to the budget to try to find a way — given all the things we’ve identified — not to just grab all the additional revenue that’s been generated and spend it,
"The second thing is everyone really needs to understand that there are some very significant infrastructure issues coming, one of those is our wastewater infrastructure which would have a horrible impact on them if we don’t deal with it. If we don’t deal with it, it’s irresponsible."
Webster said residents must be aware that the city council’s budget deliberations must include deciding on where the city’s future water needs are going to come from.
"We have a plan for that," he said. "We’re trying to keep that as low as possible and we have 13 entities and communities all coming together to bring water to this region so that as the growth comes everyone who lives here and is invested here continues to have water. But that costs money and it costs a lot of money. And our share of that is a lot of money. The decision there is what do you do now versus what do you do later.
"But the wastewater thing is literally a problem right now. If something isn’t done with wastewater it will prevent us from growing commercially. It will have health effects. It could lead to state intervention, fines and a whole bunch of things. And you could see a situation where, in a worst case scenario if something isn’t done, you could actually see wastewater backup."
Webster noted that council member Shane Arabie advocated for keeping the tax rate at its current level so that the city can invest in all its needs while council member Travis Mitchell went to the opposite end, proposing a reduction to the effective tax rate, i.e., the rate that would provide the city the same amount of revenue it received in the current fiscal year.
"The answer I think is that it will be somewhere in between," the mayor said. ‘And that’s just the nature of the compromises that have to be made. It’s going to be a hard conversation."
Friday, May 5, 2017
Workshop may provide hint on city’s taxing, spending priorities
There are two directions the in which the city can direct itself for the upcoming budget. It can decide to spend new-found money without having to raise the tax rate or it can ignore needs to satisfy those demanding a tax-rate cut. And if the city council ultimately decides on the latter option, then the question becomes will that cut be sufficient enough to avoid an overall property tax payment increase for Kyle property owners.
The public may get a hint on which direction the city is going when the council meets at 8 a.m. Saturday at City Hall for its first workshop and public discussion of the FY 2017-18 budget.
Another issue sure to be raised and discussed at the workshop is the funding of unfilled positions.
According to preliminary valuations released by the Hays Central Appraisal District earlier this week, the taxable values on homes in Kyle increased 9.97 percent. And Kyle Finance Director Perwez Moheet told me during a break in Tuesday’s city council meetings he doesn’t expect the certified numbers this year to vary that much from these initial estimates. If anything, he said, they may even go higher.
"I have seen instances where the preliminary numbers were lower than the certified (valuations) in July," Moheet said. "Based on the numbers I’ve seen this year, I think it will stay about the same. Right now, when I compared the numbers, it was 11.9 percent change. We’ve added new properties."
But assuming HCAD’s 9.97 percent increase is close to the certified valuations, that means the council would have to set a tax rate, according to my calculations, of $.5226 per $100 valuation, which is a little more than a five-cent reduction in the current rate, to keep residents from having a higher tax bill than this year’s. In other words, a tax rate of $.5226 would be the maximum allowable to provide an actual tax cut, Anything between that and the current rate of .$5748 would merely be a reduction in the increase, but not an actual tax cut. It would also mean the city would have to hope for another 10.6 percent increase in sales tax collections as the main source for additional General Fund Revenues and that may not be nearly enough to meet the city’s needs.
Exactly what those needs are remains to be seen. Hopefully, Saturday’s workshop will provide a clearer picture of the actual needs inventory.
Sources have told me City Manager Scott Sellers will propose keeping the tax rate exactly where it is, at .5748 per $100. That position could be welcomed news for Police Department advocates who are demanding the construction of a new, high-tech, police headquarters building, a position, according to the results just released of a city survey, that does not have much public support. Such a project would have to be funded by a bond sale and keeping the current rate might provide the cushion needed to finance that sale without an additional property tax rate increase. It should be noted that along with this idea having litte public support, I have not seen the endorsement of a new KPD headquarters from a majority of council members either — at least, not at this time.
The current budget focused its spending priorities on one-time purchases (i.e., vehicles, other heavy equipment), so it’s likely that this year could begin a cycle of recurring expenditures such as devoting more funds to street maintenance and repair. According to the results of that survey commissioned by the city, 91.5 percent of all respondents said "routine street maintenance and repair" should be a high priority for the city, with more than a quarter of them — 27.48 percent — saying it should be the city’s highest priority. That’s a pretty clear message. On the other side of that same coin, more than half — 56.82 percent — of the respondents said they were either very dissatisfied or dissatisfied with the city’s routine street maintenance and repair. No other subject received more than a 50 percent dissatisfaction rate.
On the other hand, three quarters of the respondents — 76.46 percent — said the construction of a new police headquarters should be a low priority item. In fact, more respondents ranked a new police headquarters as the city’s lowest priority than any other item. So clearly, the public does not appear to be supporting the police on this issue and that fact will resonate with political leaders.
One other result of the survey I found interesting was that 45.75 percent of respondents complained the city provided "too few services" (49.56 percent said city services were "about the right amount.") The question not asked was whether that 45.75 percent would support a property tax rate hike to improve the amount of services provided.
The unfilled positions issue is slightly trickier. If the city intends to higher someone, it obviously must not only pay that person, but provide all such ancillary benefits as health insurance, retirement funds, etc. Thus, if next year’s budget calls for adding a new code inspector to the staff, it should, in theory at least, set aside the money for that position’s salary/benefits. But what happens to that money if the position is not filled? That’s a question that might be up for discussion at Saturday’s workshop as well. Sources close to the budget process have said, for example, there’s more than $1 million sitting in the city’s treasury that can’t be touched because it’s specifically designated for police officer positions that have never been filled.
Although the meeting is scheduled to last four hours, Sellers said during Tuesday's council meeting he hoped to end the workshop at 10 a.m. because of other activities scheduled for Saturday, including the Hays school district's anniversary parade that's scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. and school bond/board election. There's also a little matter of the Kentucky Derby.
The public may get a hint on which direction the city is going when the council meets at 8 a.m. Saturday at City Hall for its first workshop and public discussion of the FY 2017-18 budget.
Another issue sure to be raised and discussed at the workshop is the funding of unfilled positions.
According to preliminary valuations released by the Hays Central Appraisal District earlier this week, the taxable values on homes in Kyle increased 9.97 percent. And Kyle Finance Director Perwez Moheet told me during a break in Tuesday’s city council meetings he doesn’t expect the certified numbers this year to vary that much from these initial estimates. If anything, he said, they may even go higher.
"I have seen instances where the preliminary numbers were lower than the certified (valuations) in July," Moheet said. "Based on the numbers I’ve seen this year, I think it will stay about the same. Right now, when I compared the numbers, it was 11.9 percent change. We’ve added new properties."
But assuming HCAD’s 9.97 percent increase is close to the certified valuations, that means the council would have to set a tax rate, according to my calculations, of $.5226 per $100 valuation, which is a little more than a five-cent reduction in the current rate, to keep residents from having a higher tax bill than this year’s. In other words, a tax rate of $.5226 would be the maximum allowable to provide an actual tax cut, Anything between that and the current rate of .$5748 would merely be a reduction in the increase, but not an actual tax cut. It would also mean the city would have to hope for another 10.6 percent increase in sales tax collections as the main source for additional General Fund Revenues and that may not be nearly enough to meet the city’s needs.
Exactly what those needs are remains to be seen. Hopefully, Saturday’s workshop will provide a clearer picture of the actual needs inventory.
Sources have told me City Manager Scott Sellers will propose keeping the tax rate exactly where it is, at .5748 per $100. That position could be welcomed news for Police Department advocates who are demanding the construction of a new, high-tech, police headquarters building, a position, according to the results just released of a city survey, that does not have much public support. Such a project would have to be funded by a bond sale and keeping the current rate might provide the cushion needed to finance that sale without an additional property tax rate increase. It should be noted that along with this idea having litte public support, I have not seen the endorsement of a new KPD headquarters from a majority of council members either — at least, not at this time.
The current budget focused its spending priorities on one-time purchases (i.e., vehicles, other heavy equipment), so it’s likely that this year could begin a cycle of recurring expenditures such as devoting more funds to street maintenance and repair. According to the results of that survey commissioned by the city, 91.5 percent of all respondents said "routine street maintenance and repair" should be a high priority for the city, with more than a quarter of them — 27.48 percent — saying it should be the city’s highest priority. That’s a pretty clear message. On the other side of that same coin, more than half — 56.82 percent — of the respondents said they were either very dissatisfied or dissatisfied with the city’s routine street maintenance and repair. No other subject received more than a 50 percent dissatisfaction rate.
On the other hand, three quarters of the respondents — 76.46 percent — said the construction of a new police headquarters should be a low priority item. In fact, more respondents ranked a new police headquarters as the city’s lowest priority than any other item. So clearly, the public does not appear to be supporting the police on this issue and that fact will resonate with political leaders.
One other result of the survey I found interesting was that 45.75 percent of respondents complained the city provided "too few services" (49.56 percent said city services were "about the right amount.") The question not asked was whether that 45.75 percent would support a property tax rate hike to improve the amount of services provided.
The unfilled positions issue is slightly trickier. If the city intends to higher someone, it obviously must not only pay that person, but provide all such ancillary benefits as health insurance, retirement funds, etc. Thus, if next year’s budget calls for adding a new code inspector to the staff, it should, in theory at least, set aside the money for that position’s salary/benefits. But what happens to that money if the position is not filled? That’s a question that might be up for discussion at Saturday’s workshop as well. Sources close to the budget process have said, for example, there’s more than $1 million sitting in the city’s treasury that can’t be touched because it’s specifically designated for police officer positions that have never been filled.
Although the meeting is scheduled to last four hours, Sellers said during Tuesday's council meeting he hoped to end the workshop at 10 a.m. because of other activities scheduled for Saturday, including the Hays school district's anniversary parade that's scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. and school bond/board election. There's also a little matter of the Kentucky Derby.
Saturday, October 1, 2016
Happy New (Fiscal) Year
"Culture is the fountain of our progress and creativity and must be carefully nurtured to grow and develop."
The new year’s greeting incorporated in the above headline has nothing to do with the fact that Rosh Hashanah begins at sundown tomorrow. I’m not inviting anyone to join me in eating apples dipped in honey and celebrating the arrival of year 5777. This has everything to do with the fact that the city entered its new year today and is now operating under the terms of the recently passed budget for Fiscal Year 2016-17. Among other things, it means the salary increases granted to all those city employees kick in today as well as the pay increases given to police officers under terms of the meet-and-confer agreement approved by the City Council yesterday.
It also means it’s time to officially start thinking about next year’s budget. In fact, I’m betting City Manager Scott Sellers and Finance Director Perwez Moheet have already thought about it and have even had a few discussions about it.
This year’s budget includes what amounts to a completely new department, a Stormwater Management Department. The creation of such a department and a means to fund it, which will be instituted next month, was long past due.
I, too, have already been thinking about next year’s budget and I would like to see another department added for FY 2017-18, an Office of Cultural Affairs.
Mention the term "culture" or "arts" in Kyle, and the discussion usually stops at mariachi festivals. (Yes, I’m aware of the culturally enriching programs at the Katharine Anne Porter house, but my sense is those behind those programs, even though the house is within easy walking distance of City Hall, would rather keep their distance from city government.) And far be it for me to disparage mariachi festivals, but there’s more to culture than performances of 18th century musical expressions from Mexico.
Two new hotels are scheduled to open in Kyle during this year and more are on the way. These hotels pay the city a Hotel Occupancy Tax that goes directly into the appropriately named HOT fund. The dollars in this fund, under state laws, can only be spent on narrowly defined items. They "must clearly fit into one of nine statutorily provided categories for expenditure …" And Category No. 4 is "Expenditures that promote the arts."
"Specifically, it allows funding the encouragement, promotion, improvement, and application of the arts including instrumental and vocal music, dance, drama, folk art, creative writing, architecture, design and allied fields, painting, sculpture, photography, graphic and craft arts, motion pictures, radio, television, tape and sound recording, and other arts related to the presentation, performance, execution and exhibition of these major art forms," according to this presentation from the Texas Hotel & Lodging Association to the Texas Municipal League. The one caveat is that the cultural programs receiving these HOT funds must "also directly promote tourism and the hotel and convention industry."
Specifically, it would allow the city to fund such a program as a summer Concerts in the Parks series. Imagine gathering at City Square Park at dusk on a June evening to hear a chamber music quarter play on the gazebo there. Imagine the family spreading the blankets and lawn chairs out at Lake Kyle Park to hear a performance from the Mid-Texas Symphony, the Austin Philharmonic Orchestra or the Starlight Symphony, to name just a few.
My son’s best friend, Peter Seymour, is a member of an innovative chamber music ensemble called Project Trio. Not only do they perform absolutely marvelous concerts (you can see Project Trio's version of Sergio Prokofiev's Peter and the Wolf here), they will also go into the area schools and conduct educational programs. It’s web page states "Project Trio is dedicated to galvanizing artistic awareness through performance, education and community engagement. We believe that there is a direct correlation between artistry and scholastic achievement. Creativity encourages critical thinking. By combining classical repertoire with elements of hip-hop and popular music, Project Trio engages today’s younger audience." A performance by a group such as Project Trio combined with an educational presentation to music students at Hays and/or Lehman high schools would truly be an enriching event on a number of levels.
There’s the Hill Country Community Theater outside Marble Falls, the Sam Bass Theater in Round Rock and the Amilyann Theater in Wimberley. Why can’t Kyle form its own community theater group? I’m sure there has to be a handful of theatrically inclined residents in Kyle with greasepaint in their veins or at least on their minds, who would like to find some way to work with city officials to get a community theater program underway and successful here.
What’s wrong with devoting one weekend out of the year to hosting a juried art show at Texas Old Town?
An Office of Cultural Affairs funded by an ever increasing influx of HOT funds could help facilitate all of these activities as well as such events as the Hogwash Festival, should it become an annual event, and the Fourth of July fireworks display. It could be the department that creates the standards that promoters of such events as Veterans Day concerts must meet in order to be eligible for city subsidies. It could then be the office that screens the applications for the money and recommend to the City Council which ones should receive such HOT-funded largesse. It could also be the umbrella under which the so-called city special events coordinator operates. In fact, that coordinator might become the City of Kyle’s very first Director of Cultural Affairs.
Kyle is becoming large enough to begin hosting events that will enrich the cultural fabric of our city, to provide enjoyable and enriching cultural events not only for our own residents, but those of such significance that they attract visitors from outside our community, including those who might even spend a night at one of our local hotels. I encourage you to read this presentation, How the Arts Impact Communities, presented by Princeton University's Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies.
Pardon the pun, but this is a HOT topic for next year’s budget and one definitely in need of serious consideration. And it’s never too early to begin thinking about the next fiscal year, even, on this, the first day of the new year.
—World Commission on Culture and Development
The new year’s greeting incorporated in the above headline has nothing to do with the fact that Rosh Hashanah begins at sundown tomorrow. I’m not inviting anyone to join me in eating apples dipped in honey and celebrating the arrival of year 5777. This has everything to do with the fact that the city entered its new year today and is now operating under the terms of the recently passed budget for Fiscal Year 2016-17. Among other things, it means the salary increases granted to all those city employees kick in today as well as the pay increases given to police officers under terms of the meet-and-confer agreement approved by the City Council yesterday.
It also means it’s time to officially start thinking about next year’s budget. In fact, I’m betting City Manager Scott Sellers and Finance Director Perwez Moheet have already thought about it and have even had a few discussions about it.
This year’s budget includes what amounts to a completely new department, a Stormwater Management Department. The creation of such a department and a means to fund it, which will be instituted next month, was long past due.
I, too, have already been thinking about next year’s budget and I would like to see another department added for FY 2017-18, an Office of Cultural Affairs.
Mention the term "culture" or "arts" in Kyle, and the discussion usually stops at mariachi festivals. (Yes, I’m aware of the culturally enriching programs at the Katharine Anne Porter house, but my sense is those behind those programs, even though the house is within easy walking distance of City Hall, would rather keep their distance from city government.) And far be it for me to disparage mariachi festivals, but there’s more to culture than performances of 18th century musical expressions from Mexico.
Two new hotels are scheduled to open in Kyle during this year and more are on the way. These hotels pay the city a Hotel Occupancy Tax that goes directly into the appropriately named HOT fund. The dollars in this fund, under state laws, can only be spent on narrowly defined items. They "must clearly fit into one of nine statutorily provided categories for expenditure …" And Category No. 4 is "Expenditures that promote the arts."
"Specifically, it allows funding the encouragement, promotion, improvement, and application of the arts including instrumental and vocal music, dance, drama, folk art, creative writing, architecture, design and allied fields, painting, sculpture, photography, graphic and craft arts, motion pictures, radio, television, tape and sound recording, and other arts related to the presentation, performance, execution and exhibition of these major art forms," according to this presentation from the Texas Hotel & Lodging Association to the Texas Municipal League. The one caveat is that the cultural programs receiving these HOT funds must "also directly promote tourism and the hotel and convention industry."
Specifically, it would allow the city to fund such a program as a summer Concerts in the Parks series. Imagine gathering at City Square Park at dusk on a June evening to hear a chamber music quarter play on the gazebo there. Imagine the family spreading the blankets and lawn chairs out at Lake Kyle Park to hear a performance from the Mid-Texas Symphony, the Austin Philharmonic Orchestra or the Starlight Symphony, to name just a few.
My son’s best friend, Peter Seymour, is a member of an innovative chamber music ensemble called Project Trio. Not only do they perform absolutely marvelous concerts (you can see Project Trio's version of Sergio Prokofiev's Peter and the Wolf here), they will also go into the area schools and conduct educational programs. It’s web page states "Project Trio is dedicated to galvanizing artistic awareness through performance, education and community engagement. We believe that there is a direct correlation between artistry and scholastic achievement. Creativity encourages critical thinking. By combining classical repertoire with elements of hip-hop and popular music, Project Trio engages today’s younger audience." A performance by a group such as Project Trio combined with an educational presentation to music students at Hays and/or Lehman high schools would truly be an enriching event on a number of levels.
There’s the Hill Country Community Theater outside Marble Falls, the Sam Bass Theater in Round Rock and the Amilyann Theater in Wimberley. Why can’t Kyle form its own community theater group? I’m sure there has to be a handful of theatrically inclined residents in Kyle with greasepaint in their veins or at least on their minds, who would like to find some way to work with city officials to get a community theater program underway and successful here.
What’s wrong with devoting one weekend out of the year to hosting a juried art show at Texas Old Town?
An Office of Cultural Affairs funded by an ever increasing influx of HOT funds could help facilitate all of these activities as well as such events as the Hogwash Festival, should it become an annual event, and the Fourth of July fireworks display. It could be the department that creates the standards that promoters of such events as Veterans Day concerts must meet in order to be eligible for city subsidies. It could then be the office that screens the applications for the money and recommend to the City Council which ones should receive such HOT-funded largesse. It could also be the umbrella under which the so-called city special events coordinator operates. In fact, that coordinator might become the City of Kyle’s very first Director of Cultural Affairs.
Kyle is becoming large enough to begin hosting events that will enrich the cultural fabric of our city, to provide enjoyable and enriching cultural events not only for our own residents, but those of such significance that they attract visitors from outside our community, including those who might even spend a night at one of our local hotels. I encourage you to read this presentation, How the Arts Impact Communities, presented by Princeton University's Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies.
Pardon the pun, but this is a HOT topic for next year’s budget and one definitely in need of serious consideration. And it’s never too early to begin thinking about the next fiscal year, even, on this, the first day of the new year.
Thursday, September 22, 2016
City finishes year with a quarter million dollar sales tax deficit
Last year, sales taxes not only increased dramatically, they were actually 13.56 percent above the bean counter’s projections. "Boom times are here! This growth in sales taxes will continue unabated!" This type of myopic thinking led the city to project the city would collect 18.56 percent more in sales taxes this fiscal year than last.
Unfortunately, that turned out not to be the case. In fact, the final numbers are not even close to those rosy predictions. Sure, sales tax income increased, but they increased, somewhat coincidentally, by 13.56 percent, not the 18.67 projected, and thus the city finishes the current fiscal year with what essentially amounts to a $281,897.11 budget gap.
Practically speaking, that’s not as serious as it might sound because the city not only has plenty of reserves to cover the deficit, but it was also fortunate that the budgeted number of police officers were never hired, so that money more than compensates for the quarter million in lost sales tax revenues.
But it should also be noted that, of the 12 months that make up the year, sales tax revenues exceeded projections in only three of them. September’s revenues of $519,583.11 were 9.68 percent below the projections for the month and it marked the fifth consecutive month revenues failed to meet expectations.
Frankly, however, I don’t expect to see a repeat of this in the fiscal year that begins nine days from today because the budget for FY 2016-17 is only forecasting a 9 percent increase in sales tax revenues over this year’s collections. In fact, I could argue that, in actual dollar figures, the forecast for FY16-17 is downright pessimistic in that expects the total increase in sales tax revenues to be $187,903.40 less than it was this year.
It took one bad year for those bean counters to come to their senses, to realize that "good times are not the same as boom times." But come to their senses they did and we can all celebrate that because it should give the city far more financial flexibility beginning Oct. 1.
Unfortunately, that turned out not to be the case. In fact, the final numbers are not even close to those rosy predictions. Sure, sales tax income increased, but they increased, somewhat coincidentally, by 13.56 percent, not the 18.67 projected, and thus the city finishes the current fiscal year with what essentially amounts to a $281,897.11 budget gap.
Practically speaking, that’s not as serious as it might sound because the city not only has plenty of reserves to cover the deficit, but it was also fortunate that the budgeted number of police officers were never hired, so that money more than compensates for the quarter million in lost sales tax revenues.
But it should also be noted that, of the 12 months that make up the year, sales tax revenues exceeded projections in only three of them. September’s revenues of $519,583.11 were 9.68 percent below the projections for the month and it marked the fifth consecutive month revenues failed to meet expectations.
Frankly, however, I don’t expect to see a repeat of this in the fiscal year that begins nine days from today because the budget for FY 2016-17 is only forecasting a 9 percent increase in sales tax revenues over this year’s collections. In fact, I could argue that, in actual dollar figures, the forecast for FY16-17 is downright pessimistic in that expects the total increase in sales tax revenues to be $187,903.40 less than it was this year.
It took one bad year for those bean counters to come to their senses, to realize that "good times are not the same as boom times." But come to their senses they did and we can all celebrate that because it should give the city far more financial flexibility beginning Oct. 1.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)