HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/11/1993 FC minutesFINANCE COMNIISSION
Minutes of the Meeting
March 11, 1993
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Present were Chairman Richard Bachhuber,
Commissioners John Engel, Newt Hallman, James Morrison, Tom Pekras, and Earl Sutter. Also
present were Village Manager Michael Janonis, Finance Director David Jepson, Assistant Finance
Director Carol Widmer, one resident, and one member of the press. Absent were Commission
members Paul Davies, Vince Grochocinski, and Ann Smilanic.
II Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the February 25, 1993 meeting were accepted as presented.
III 1993/94 Budget Review
Village Manager Michael Janonis made the first of two scheduled presentations to the Finance
Commission on the proposed 1993/94 Village Budget. In his opening remarks, Mr. Janonis
stressed the importance of the Finance Commission's role in the budget process. He observed that
the members of the Commission are consumers of Village services, and can perhaps be more
objective than Staff and the Board itself regarding those services. He commented that the
Commission's thoughts and recommendations are highly valued.
The manager stated that the budget is both a policy statement and a planning document and
therefore it is important to focus on the big picture; namely, programs and service levels. The
proposed budget of $46,535,620, exclusive of interfund transfers and the Library, represents a
total increase of 2.68% over the 1992/93 budget of $45,321,300. By comparison, 1992 CPI for
Chicago was 3%. Within this proposed budget there are a number of significant infrastructure
improvements planned including the rehabilitation of the elevated water storage tank, four separate
flood control projects, completion of the Police and Fire Building, a community auditorium and
on-going roadway repair and reconstruction. The budget reflects a decrease in staffing of three
positions: one position in the Manager's Office; one in Inspection Services; and a maintenance
position in Public Works. However, Mr. Janonis is proposing the addition of three Police Officers
due to increased gang related activity in Mount Prospect. The budget reflects spending reductions
of $435,000, almost all of which came out of the General Fund.
This proposed budget is considered to be a transitional budget. In describing the budget as
transitional Mr. Janonis went on to state that the budget includes a planned reduction of $330,000
in General Fund balance and an interfund transfer of $650,000 from the Water Fund to the General
Fund which will be used to close a projected gap between revenues and expenditures. This is a
one-time solution which will not be available in the future to address projected deficits; therefore,
policy decisions will have to be made in 1993/94 and beyond in order to achieve a permanent
solution to the deficit problem.
Mr. Janonis directed the Finance Commissions' attention to the Budget Summary section of the
Budget. Pages 2 and 3 of that section include proposed Expenditures by Service Area and display
actual 1991/92 Expenditures, 1992/93 Budget Amounts, 1992/93 Estimated Amounts, 1993/94
Proposed Expenditures and the per cent change from 1992/93 Budget to 1993/94 Budget. He stated
that it is on these pages that the true impact of the budget is found. While individual departments
may show an increase or decrease in spending levels, in total the budget will increase only 2.68%.
Mr. Janonis discussed the impact of unfunded Federal and State mandates on the Village's budget.
On the State level, the mandates for recycling, yard waste disposal, and fees to JULIE are costly
to the Village. Federal mandates such as the Family Leave Act, Clean Air Act, and the Americans
with Disabilities Act also have substantial costs associated with them. Mr. Janonis went on to
predict that property tax caps combined with unfunded mandates will lead to jurisdictions trying
to shift costs to each other and it would result in a decrease in intergovernmental cooperation.
In the informal discussion that followed several Commission members expressed concern over the
planned drawdown of General Fund balance to $2.5M. One Commission member asked if there
was any evidence that adding more Police would help solve gang problems. Mr. Janonis responded
that there are no real cost/benefit ratios or hard data on results of more Police officers but that it
was a value judgement. In response to a question as to how the Village monitors gang activity,
Mr. Janonis suggested that Chief Pavlock and a representative of the Crime Prevention detail could
address the Finance Commission on that topic in the future.
Mr. Janonis then reviewed the planning process the staff undertook in developing the proposed
1993/94 budget and Mount Prospect 2000. Mount Prospect 2000 is a long-range planning model
that attempts to address or enhance four areas: long-range strategic planning, multi-year
revenue/ spending plans, incentive or performance budgeting and enhanced Board/Staff partnership
to discuss policies and the philosophy of various departments.
In a series of meetings, with the Village Board, staff pointed out that a combination of short-term
thinking, a traditional approach to business, changes in the revenue stream, changes in the
community makeup and mandates have led to the revenue/expenditure imbalance. During the
meetings it was mentioned that staff has the responsibility to hold down costs and maximize service
levels. The Village Board's responsibilities are to identify services and to provide the funding
necessary for those services. For 1993/94, direction from the Village Board included $435,000
in spending reductions, no new revenues, and maintaining the General Fund Balance at $2.5M.
Mr. Janonis then presented the formula staff used to distribute the spending reductions among the
departments.
Continuing his overview of the Budget, Mr. Janonis suggested that the summary section (pages 1-
30) provides the basics of the budget. Information regarding staffing levels, the Village tax levy,
the Village tax rate, and the Village's share of the total property tax can be found within that
section. On page 27 an explanation of how property tax dollars are used shows 62.50 of each
dollar is spent on public safety, 25.4C on refuse disposal and 12.1 C on public improvements.
Mr. Janonis discussed the implications of the Park Ridge survey (exhibit A). Once again the
Village of Mount Prospect has the lowest cost per capita of 18 participating communities. This
survey has been in existence for 10 years and measures the same types of services in all the
participating communities. At $693 per capita for Village services, Mount Prospect is 39% below
the mean.
Finance Director David Jepson presented the revenue section of the proposed 1993/94 Budget. The
resources for the 1993/94 fiscal year will consist of $41,646,155 in revenues and $4,889,465 of
available fund balances. Property taxes are the single largest source of revenue with sales tax the
next largest source. The pie chart on page 10 of the budget shows the types of revenues that will
be used to finance the budget. Tax revenues in the amount of $18,126,700, including Property
Tax, Sales Tax, Home Rule Sales Tax, Food & Beverage Tax and Real Estate Transfer Tax,
account for 44% of total 1993 Village Revenues. Service charges of $8,955,350 including Water
& Sewer Fees, Refuse Disposal Fees and Internal Services fees for insurance and vehicle funds are
the next largest source of revenue. Investment income is estimated to be $3,935,400 in 1993/94,
a 2.0% decrease from the $4,016,100 budgeted in 1992/93. Village revenues are basically stagnant
with little growth except for property taxes and a planned increase of 5 % in water and sewer fees.
Mr. Jepson requested that the Finance Commission prepare a list of recommendations for the
Village Board. At the request of the members of the Finance Commission, Mr. Jepson will
prepare a list of issues to be considered.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Enc
3
Respectfully submitted,
Carol L. Widmer
Assistant Finance Director
Exhibit A
MOUNT PROSPECT RESIDENTS RECEIVE A FULL RANGE
OF HIGH QUALITY SERVICES AT THE LOWEST PER
CAPITA COST IN THE NORTHWEST SUBURBAN AREA
PARK RIDGE SURVEY
MEAN 43,155 , 964
Cost Per
Capita of
Rank
Municipality
Population
Government
1
Highland Park
30,575
$1,390
2
Lake Forest
17,836
1,344
3
Winnetka
12,300
1,195
4
Schaumburg
68,586
1,172
5
Oak Park
53,648
1,128
6
Niles
28,284
983
7
Wilmette
26,530
953
8
Downers Grove
46,858
923
9
Naperville
85,351
921
10
Arlington Heights
76,053
908
11
Elmhurst
42,029
876
12
Skokie
59,432
870
13
Northbrook
32,308
864
14
Deerfield
17,327
847
15
Des Plaines
53,414
803
16
Glenview
37,093
766
17
Park Ridge
361000
710
18
Mount Prospect
53,168
693
MEAN 43,155 , 964