HomeMy WebLinkAboutM-01-0808CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
6 32
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members DATE JUL 1 E "';tal FILE:
of the City Commission
su6JECT : Proposed FY 2002
Annual Budget
FROM: REFERENCES:
Carl<M�
City ager ENCLOSURES:
Discussion concerning the Proposed Fiscal Year 2002 Annual Budget.
CAG/LIvl1-1/srr
City of Miami
2002 Budget Overview
0
a
City of Miami
2002 Budget Overview
0
pp
_AF
AP tz
- .7-
m i n is ra ion
Recommendation
E
0'
w
Recommendation
Institute 3% expenditure savings
� Maintain millage at 8.995 mills
Increase fire assessment to $70
Provide for adequate budget surpluses
so as to address contingencies
Union Negotiations
� VIP Program Litigation
Accelerated Retirements
•
•
ar
GO
n I s
Recommendation
Institute 3% expenditure savings
� Maintain millage at 8.995 mills
Increase fire assessment to $70
Provide for adequate budget surpluses
so as to address contingencies
Union Negotiations
� VIP Program Litigation
Accelerated Retirements
•
•
ar
GO
An integral part of the recommendation �
of the Administration is the promise
that,, in the event of a retroactive
reinstatement of the parking surcharge,
we will reimburse citizens for the fire
assessment increase and reinstate •
previously planned service levels.
a>
0
AP -1
JA
•
Rationale
0
Ip 0
Rationale
The Recommendation Enhances
the City'sBorrowing Potential
Maintaining the millage rate at 8.995 mills
provides sufficient taxing capacity to make
bond issuances more attractive.
Taxing capacity enhances the potential for
higher bond. rating.
•
A
Cd
old
��4r tom. i
e
a■ona
� Limiting Expenditure Cuts to 3%
Limits the Adverse Impact on �
Service Delivery
Positions added in recent past to address
citizen concerns are frozen
� Expenditure reductions above 3% cut more
deeply into service delivery �
We are committed to $7 million in
expenditure cuts and will submit a more
strategic
approach
in.September
Op
s
Rationale
The Recommendation Leaves i
Previously Enacted Tax Reductions
Substantially in Place
� Previous tax cuts resulting from the
surcharge amount to $7 million annually
� The increase in the fire assessment �
recoups only $2.1 million of those citizen
savings
Rationale
The Increase in the Fire Assessment
Results in a Lower Cost to the Average •
Citizen Than an Increase in Millage Rate
A millage increase of .15 would be needed
to yield $2.1 million of incremental
revenues
s Average cost per residence in City would
be $13.83 for millage increase versus $9 •
for a fire assessment increase yielding the
same incremental revenues
a
tlow
-'.-...
Rationale
The Increase in the Fire Assessment
Results in a Lower Cost to the Average •
Citizen Than an Increase in Millage Rate
A millage increase of .15 would be needed
to yield $2.1 million of incremental
revenues
s Average cost per residence in City would
be $13.83 for millage increase versus $9 •
for a fire assessment increase yielding the
same incremental revenues
a
Rationale
An Increase in the Fire Assessment 4
Distributes the Burden of the Loss
of the. Parking Surcharge Fairly
Single family homes bear 34% of the cost
Multifamily residents bear Z4% of the cost
•
Commercial sector bears 43% of the cost
V
r
`
Rationale
An Increase in the Fire Assessment 4
Distributes the Burden of the Loss
of the. Parking Surcharge Fairly
Single family homes bear 34% of the cost
Multifamily residents bear Z4% of the cost
•
Commercial sector bears 43% of the cost
City Flexibility to Address Risks
Currently Identified �
v Union negotiations
➢COLA or Anniversary forsworn fire and police
($866,000 per percent)
Change in COLA or Anniversary Increases for
others ($760,000 per percent)
Pension adjustments
� VIP program litigation
�, Accelerated retirements
Rationale
The promise to provide a refund in
the event of successfully
retroactively restoring the parking
surcharge fulfills our promise to
the citizens of Miami to use the
surcharge to reduce taxes and
fees.
i
0
N
Rationale
The promise to provide a refund in
the event of successfully
retroactively restoring the parking
surcharge fulfills our promise to
the citizens of Miami to use the
surcharge to reduce taxes and
fees.
i
0
t
r
i.
'y
Summary
);;;.Administration Recommendation �
Maintain millage rate at 8.995 mills as per
the Five -Year Plan
s Increase fire assessment by $9 to $70
s Maintain solid waste fee per Five -Year Plan
of $345, or an increase of $20 over FYO1 •
� Implement expenditure cuts of 3%
Alternative
C;__
*'d
0*
17J
The current proposal reflects the same
millage rate as FY O1, but increases fire
assessment and solid waste fee of $9 and
$20, respectively, over FY 01.
);o, This represents an increase of $9 over the
Five -Year plan
A modest additional increase of $5.50 in the
fire assessment would obviate the need for
an increase in the solid waste fee.
Not increasing the solid waste fee has
implications vis-a-vis the financial integrity
ordinance.
•
•
Alternative Proposal
Millage at 8.995 mills.
Solid Waste fee. at $325, a savings of
$20 versus the Five -Year Plan.
Fire fee at $75.50, an increase of
$14.50 versus the five year. plan.
Expenditure reductions of $7 million in
order to limit adverse impact on service
el ive
d ry..
•A
•
•
Alternative Proposal, continued
)oWe would recommend resuming the �
scheduled increases in solid waste fee
in FY03 in order to comply with the
ordinance.
s*
s
J
+
Alternative Proposal, continued
)oWe would recommend resuming the �
scheduled increases in solid waste fee
in FY03 in order to comply with the
ordinance.
s*
s
The fee increase would be entirely in
the fire assessment.
The millage rate is the same as the
Five -Year Plan.
The
increase in
fees
would be $5.50 •
less
than in the
five
year plan,
notwithstanding the loss of the parking
surcharge.
CO
Conclusion
9
0
4<ry
�
t
.r
.: .'.
r
ow_
1
Conclusion
9
0
Conclusion
Either the Administration Proposal or the
Alternative produce a balanced response to
j the loss of the surcharge.
)o- The Administration proposal complies in its.
entirety with the financial integrity ordinance.
The alternative proposal does not bring the
solid waste fee closer to actual cost of the
service.
Both scenarios limit
manageable level.
expenditure cuts to a
7-
0
-
Conclusion
Either the Administration Proposal or the
Alternative produce a balanced response to
j the loss of the surcharge.
)o- The Administration proposal complies in its.
entirety with the financial integrity ordinance.
The alternative proposal does not bring the
solid waste fee closer to actual cost of the
service.
Both scenarios limit
manageable level.
expenditure cuts to a
7-
0