No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04272010 CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS PRESENTATIONi yg -- r 9,~ S ~~ w Budget Workshop FY 2010-11 April 27, 2010 Constitutiona I Officers Constitutional Officers Constitutional Officers FY 2009 FY 2009-10 Actual Adjusted FY 2010-11 Proposed Change Budgeted Expenditures $ 54,948,520 $ 55,142,905 $ 54,382,867 -1.38% FTEs 816.06 800.06 777.70 -2.79% • Category includes the City Treasurer, the Commissioner of the Revenue, the Clerk of the Circuit Court, the Commonwealth's Attorney and the Sheriff • City Council Goals: - Create a financially sustainable City providing excellent services • Fee/Tax Increases: - Elimination of the grace period be for an administrative fee is proposed on delinquent fees Constitutional Officers 3.2% of Total Operating Budget ~~~ 2 Constitutional Officers Expenditures 8.0% 6.3% ~% 14.1% 41.0 .0% 42.5% 67.0% 0.4% Commissioner of the Revenue ^ Clerk of the Circuit Court Commonwealth's Attorney Sheriff ^ City Treasurer Revenue s „ ,,,,, 6.9% 6.3% Charges for Services State ^ City ^ Fund Balance ^ Administrative Fees ^ Federal Other Local ~ i ~ .~ r t- •k - x ' E. Aso l City Council Policy Title: d~8ot Supplanting :Mate,. Fedaral, and Private Funds with Local Funds Index fVumher: 47754 Cate of Adoption: 2J(J5f01 Qate of ReWision: Page: 1 of 1.C1 Purpose and Ikleed The citizens of Virginia Beach receive important, beneficial services frarn a wide Wart-iety of State, Fed era f, and private agenc`sas, as v~+ell as from City programs which rely on funding franc these agencies. These agencies are critical partners tivith the C"ity and the School systen7 in the proviisian of programs to our community. When these agencies tearrrinate pragramn~ing, reduce services, ar curtail funding, it cannot be assumed that the City of Virginia Beach k~vill maintain these prt-ograms. The City's abilit}r to assume the financial responsibility far these services k+~itf7out significantly impacting other service areas +.+vhich are solely the responsibility of the City, or +.vithaut ha+ring to raise taxes, is limited. 2.O PO~ICy It is the policy of City Council to prevent, to the extent possible, the shifting of financial responsibility for State, Federal, or privately funded programs to the Citizens of Virginia Beach by not supplanting those funds with local funds when those agencies reduce funding to various community programs that rely on that funding. 3.5 The Department of Management Services will provide information to the City IV'lanager on a periodic basis that reports any reductions in funding from State, Federal, or F~rivate sources that are expected to adversely affect services 'to the citizens of Virginia Beach. When :services are se+~erely affected by such reductions, the City Manager and the Departr~ient of Mar7agernent .Se€-vice:s will determine what actions, if any, may be necessary to mitigate the impact on local services. 3.~ The City fVlanager Uvill report to City C:aunciN any instances where reductions in State, Federal, or private funding kn~iPil have a severe enough effect an services that Council action is r~recessary. 4.4 F2esponsihiliity and Authority Tf-~e Depar-tment of Management Services is responsible for reporting to the City Manager any reductions in States, Federal, or- private funding tf~a,t could have an effect on services provided to the citizens of Virginia Beach. Constitutional Office Reductions in Proposed FY 2011 Commonwealth's Attorney Clerk of the Circuit Court Sheriff $7.7 million $7.65 million -0.66% $2.53 million $2.5 million -0.012% $36 million $36.4 million +1.24% Quality Organization Business Area Commissioner of the Revenue $3.8 million $3.4 million -10.61% City Treasurer $5.1 million $4.35 million -14.41% NOTE: The additional reductions from the Compensation Board based on the final approved State Budget are still not final, we hope to have final numbers prior to reconciliation. - $95,575 + $215,860 - $681,338 - $34,062 - $66,882 Safe Community Business Area r v BUR t~A~t~~~ Clerk of the Circuit Court Clerk of the Circuit Court Budget Summary Clerk of the Circuit $2,760,181 $2,529,706 47.00 $2,512,025 47.00 -$17,681 Court NOTE: The additional reductions from the Compensation Board based on the final approved State Budget are still not final; we hope to have final numbers prior to reconciliation. FY 11 Funding city °~ $904,460 State Op FY11 Expenditures Personnel $2,359,517 Clerk of the Circuit Court Funding Summary $3.000 $2.500 $2.000 $1.500 $1.000 $0.500 $- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Fiscal Years ^ State ^ City Notes: 1. Amounts for FY 2006 through 2009 are actuals. 2. FY 2010 amount reflects a mid year ~S'tate funding cut of 529,122 resulting in the loss of 11 positions. 3. The Proposed FY 2011 budget reflects continuation of the FY 2010 level of funding. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% zo% 10% o% Note: 1. Average percentage finding over the six-year period: 6-~.~% State and 3J.J% City Percentage of City and State Funding City and State Funding (in millions) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Fiscal Years ^ State ^ City 8 Clerk of the Circuit Court Target Reduction of 11 positions (10 State and 1 City) and reduced customer service hours to the public (from 42.5 to 31.5 hours per week), and shortage of Deputy Clerks to assist judges in the courtrooms. The budget requested restoration of 8 positions. Total Reduction Reduction Criteria: -Meet all critical mandated services -Reduce customer service hours FY10-11 FY11 Restored Proposed FTE -$275,636 -8.00 No -$275,636 -8.00 9 Mid-year FY 10 cut in state funding resulted in the loss Clerk of the Circuit Court Initiatives and Highlight -The Clerk of the Circuit Court's Office was able to prevent further reductions in the number of hours serving the public. -This Office remains an "excess fees" office in which the revenues generated exceed the cost of collections. Zo r v BUR t~A~t~~~ Commissioner of the Revenue 11 ~~4~`N L p~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ y ~ r~ Commissioner of the Revenue ~a~4 ~ .,~: ~a~~ ~~~ o~R NAj`oNS~~ Proposed Expenditures Commissioner of the Revenue $3,815,157 $3,744,121 DMV Select 84,172 93,676 Total $3,899,329 $3,837,797 NOTE: The additional reductions from the Compensation Board based on the final approved State Budget are still not final; we hope to have final numbers prior to reconciliation. 60.24 $3,347,046 49.00 -$397,075 3.37 $83,667 2.93 -10,009 63.61 $3,430,713 51.93 -$407,084 FY11 Budget Personnel $3,194,471 $236,242 Operations 12 ~~4~`N L p~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ y ~ r~ Commissioner of the Revenue 1 _ ouR NAj`6Nr~ .~ ~s Proposed Funding City $2,959,755 $3,068,442 55.051 $2,629,740 45.001 ($438,702) DMV $155,398 $93,6762 4.00 $83,6672 2.93 ($10,009) State $784,176 $780,202 5.003 $627,275 4.003 ($152,927) Total $3,899,329 $3,942,320 64.05 $3,340,682 51.93 ($601,638) 1City FTE reduction is 19%. ZRevised DMV revenue estimates are $166,000 for FY10 and $178,000 FY11. This would increase available DMV funding by 32% and 42% respectively. 3State FTE reduction is 20%. ^ city ^DMV ^ State 13 FY10-11 Proposed Funding Assessment Staff-Business Revenue Assessment Staff-Compliance Additional Current Operating Costs Total Reductions Commissioner of the Revenue 15% Target Reduction ($214,265) ($257,947) ($60,144) ($32,610) ($573,373) (5.68) (5.00) (1.00) (0.00) (11.68) ~- -, No No No No 14 Assessment Staff-Personal Revenue Commissioner of the Revenue Affects of State Funding Reductions 4 (1) Cost of Employees Doing State Work Residual State Funding for City Use $352,139 $275,136 ($58,000) 15 State Funding $627,275 Commissioner of the Revenue Affects of City Funding Reductions Business Revenue 5 Compliance 1 1 $16, 600, 000 $700,000 Personnel cuts* equate to 12 FTE's resulting in $36,000,000 in delayed/lost revenue *Represents a 19% cut in city personnel ; 20% cut in state personnel 16 Personal Revenue 4 4 $18,600,000 75 70 .~ ~, 65 o v v >. 60 ~ o ~ ~ 55 Z w Commissioner of the Revenue Initiatives & Milestones 1999 Cross-trained staff; Created online forms 2000 Consolidated office from 5 to 4 divisions; Business license decal eliminated; Began outside services; Automated refunds of personal property bills; Consolidated audits. Community Events License instituted. 2001 Boat tax reporting 2002 Vehicle decal elimination; Militaryexemption process 2003 Launch of Local Vehicle Registration (LVR) with Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) 2004 Cross Training Complete-Telephone Routing System Installed; City Council administration of non-profit exemptions 2005 Earned income tax credit assistance; Document imaging; Reduction of office space 2006 Consolidated office from 4 to 3 divisions; DMV Select; APZ 1/Tech Zone Licensing begins 2007 New real estate tax data management; Admissions tax to school events exempted 2008 City non-profit exemption policy amended 2009 Participatory sport tax amended 2010 State Cigarette Stamps Sales 17 1998 DriveThru Appeals; Admissions Tax Audits; Consolidated office from 11 to 5 divisions Commissioner of the Revenue Proposed Solutions Problem: The Commissioner's Office generated $313,000,000 in assessments for the City in FY09. The City Manager's proposed cuts for FY11 will delay and remove available City revenue (Slide 5). Solution: Cut expenses, but also save revenue, and improve compliance. How?: - Eliminate two FTE's (Deputy Commissioner and Revenue Agent) -savings $151,000 per annum - Downgrade two FTE's & staff as PT Investigators -save $46,000 & generate $400,000 per annum - Fund vacant Auditor Position -generate $350,000 per annum Zs r v BUR t~A~t~~~ Commonwealth's Attorney 19 Commonwealth's Attorney's Office 6,913,253 6,765,667 Consumer Affairs 337,270 Victim Witness 239,800 DEASeized Property 82,324 Victim Witness Grant 294,786 Tota I 7,867,433 Total without DEA 7,785,109 NOTE: The additional reduc tions from the Compensation Board based on the final approved State Budget are still not final; we hope to have final numbers prior to reconciliation. 235,810 258,603 114,500 323,638 7,698,218 7,583,718 77.9 6,911,671 3.0 0 4.0 212,438 200,000 6.5 322,968 91.4 7,647,077 7,447,077 77.9 146,004 0 (235,810) 3 (46,165) 85,500 6.5 (670) 87.4 (51,141) (136,641) 1(11 Budget ^ Personnel ^ Operating II Judicial o~ ~~ om monwea t s ~~ a~ ~ ,. a=} y~ ~~ r~~ ttorne s ice 5% Target Re d u ct i o n Restitution Program (transferred to Treasurer) Efficiency Savings Total Reduction Reduction Criteria: -Eliminated programs not statutorily mandated to do -$235,810 -$46,165 a -3.00 -1.00 -$2,324 -$284,299 -4.0 No Yes No 21 Consumer Affairs Program ~~4~`l.}lA: L O~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~'~ 1 1 • ~-~-.- .~~y: ~~ Commonwealth s Attorne s Office ~a ~4~ ._~,.~ ~~z=~ ~- s ^_ ~uR NAj~aNS FY11 Challenges -State budget estimated reduction: $199,851 -Will need to cut 3 additional FTE's -Non mandated programs: e.g. DUI misdemeanors and Domestic Violence FY11 Department Highlights -Violent crime prosecutions have increased from 2008 - 2009 -Homicide prosecutions have doubled -District court misdemeanor prosecutions (mostly DUI) have increased 70% -Prosecuting almost 2,200 Domestic Violence cases a year r v BUR t~A~t~~~ Treasurer 23 Treasurer City Treasurer NOTE: The additional reductions from the Compensation Board based on the final approved State Budget are still not final; we hope to have final numbers prior to reconciliation. FY11 Funding State Loca I $666,827 $3,682,581 FY11 Budget perations Personnel $521,364 $3,828,044 24 r v BUR t~A~t~~~ Sheriff 25 Sheriff and Corrections FY11 Budget ~ Personnel ~I Operating Reserves ~ Transfers Sheriff's Office 2,148,690 1,750,101 23.43 2,051,430 23.43 301,329 Court Support Services 3,191,268 3,262,299 63.84 3,075,259 61.84 -187,400 Correctional Operations 25,750,849 26,385,155 362.60 26,456,627 362.60 71,472 Work Release 151,739 134,121 1.00 - - -134,121 Central Booking 1,879,256 2,031,662 37.00 1,958,626 37.00 -73,036 D.A. R. E. 584,877 682,151 11.00 707,608 11.00 25,457 Sheriff's Workforce 925,513 940,518 13.00 898,888 13.00 -41,630 Law Enforcement Training 107,804 139,566 1.00 141,182 1.0 1,616 Inmate Services 591,613 668,608 11.50 854,024 14.50 185,416 Transfers & Reserves 436,513 276,102 - 574,551 - 298,449 Total 35,768,122 36,270,283 524.37 36,718,195 524.37 447,912 NOTE: The additional reductions from the Compensation Board ba sed on the final approved State Budget are still not final; w e hope to have final numbers prior to reconciliation. Sheriff and Corrections 5% Target Re d u ct i o n a a Central Booking $966,139 17.0 Total Reduction* *Reduction was on the City's General Fund Transfer, not total Budget Reduction Criteria: 966,139 17.0 -Reduce Central Booking (City Funded Program) to meet target reduction -Utilized Fund Balance Yes 27 ~~4~`N L O~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~°~ • • ~-~-.- ~~ ~~ Sheriff and Corrections r ~~ ~'~ O~ ~ ... r2 /~" 9 ~- s ^_ ~uR NAj~aNS FY11 Challenges -State revenue reduction of over $3,000,000 FY11 Department H igh I fights -Pursue additional revenues to absorb State reductions Zs N ~L U (a N m (6 .~ .~ i ~_ U Q • _ i ; V ~! ~- $ R `, }+ Y .. ..~°~, .~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V J ~ ~ Q •~ ~ ~ ~ V L O ~ ~ ~ v U w ~~ ~O D c~ ~^L LL V , ^ • W U O ~ ~ Cl) O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ . - ~ ~ O C~ ~ C~ L.. .~ c~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ O 0 c~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ _ C~ 0 ~ "'~ O O • c 0 c~ a 0 a a~ ca c N ~ ~' O O 00 C~ ~ O N ~ ~ ~ N (6 0 a~ .U .~ .. ~ ~ L ~~ ~ ~ 0 0 O ._ tC~ .~ 0 ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - C~ ~L ~--+ r n ^^L. V I..L O O N N O z 0 o°o 0 0 w z c~ w Q Q Z O • ~-=+ Q a~ c~ c •~ L U ~X (a C~ .~ ._ -_ ~U C~ Ll. O O ._ ~-+ ~--~ .~ ~~ X ~ V, X ~ ~ ~ O ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ . > Cn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O '- ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ,~ ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ > ~ ca ~ ~ ~ >~ -_ .~ O O ~ U ~ .~ C~ ~ X ~ C~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ -_ C~ C6 ~ C~ s... Q~ MO W L L O }, O U O o ~ ~ m ca c Q. ~~/ L.l.. O V 1 Z X L ,~-+ M~ W X O t~ L (~ ~ .L ~.~... (n ~V ~ y--- O 00 ~ ~_ O Ca .. O J ~ N ~ i-- U -~ ~x ~~ N ~ O ~ O U~ ~O ~ Q•~O ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U U ~~ O O ~ ~ O ~~~Q~U~ c~ `Z ~. ~ U •- ~~ ~ -~ ca .. cn ~ O OCR ~~X ~~O ~ cn a. cn cn cn ~ <t 0 c6 c~ U ~: 0 .. a~ ~ ~X c~ ~ UL a~ ~ +~ ~_ ~~ >~ cn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 • N U C (a C LJ._ y~.+ '~iA'd '~ ~ ~+• V O ~ 0 ~- N N N Ll. ~ !r e~ ~ M M M C~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O • N N U (6 O r O N LL O 0 0 N CO .. ti {~} ~ O O ~ 0 ~ U ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ca ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ o ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~= ~ ~ o OC ~ U > Q ~t ~ oo O O 00 O I` O M ~ O O ~ 00 00 ~ M N ~ I` d7 N ~ {~} Ems} ~} ~} ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ N (a , ~ ~ LL L.L ~ ,~ . ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ :~ _ ~ ~, ~ © N try '~ O O ~ N 'fit ~ ~ ~.. ~ ~ cMV N 0p tl' N ~ ~ ~,. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LL. O • E 0 1L1 L.1.. U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C!~ L O `'- N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ o a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ (~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ccs o ~ ~ .~ . ~ U i ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ti ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ~ u- Z ~ Cn ~ ~ ~ ~ OC ~ ~- 0 0 ca N c co ~ o N .~ ~ ~ m LL . ~^, W ~~ V J 0 •~ V, W -~ ~ ~ C~ ~ - ~ 0- ~ ~ ~ .U c~ ~ ~O 0 ^~ W .~ ~^• ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ -- (~ ~ ~ ~ U U ~ .~ L U ~ O .~ ~ ~ >O O L ^~ O ~+-- O ~~ ,~ .~: ~ ~I r • L 0 L- ~~"' C'V N ~ ~ ~ _~ C1 ~ O ~ _ > ~ p p ~ ~ ~ ~ 4- O O ~' _ i p Ca ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ M ,. ~ ~ - 0 ~ ~ '~ Y.y ~ N ~ ....~ J O i p p~ ~- ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~ ~ p ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ _ O o o ~ • W ^,^ •^ ~ •W^ .. ~~ n ~ ~-- ~ ~, O O ~. ~ ~ L •~' ~ Q~ 0 -~ ~ ._ .~ a~~~~ U ~ ~ ~ C~ ~ 4) _ - ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~4-~L ~ o~ ~ i ,+~ ~ _,_,, O O ~ ~ 4) ~ ~ ~ ~ i V ~ .~ ~ ,~ ~ •- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,_ ~ .._ ~ ~-- ~ O > ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ -~ ~ cn ~ o to -- , ~ ~' ~- `~ ~' U v o ~ .- a~ ~- .- ~ ~ - ._~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ .~ ~ o ~ O I- ~ ~ cn ~ v ~. V o 0