HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1999-09-25 Discussion Item (4)CITY OF MIAMI
BUDGET REDUCTION ALTERNATIVES
FY 2000 - 2004
Total Value of Vacant Positions
Less: Sworn Positions
Value of Positions To be Deleted
FICA Savings
Total Savings
Add Backs:
Additional Overtime
Additional Salaries
Additional FICA
Less: Total Add Backs
Increased Revenues
Vehicle Impoundment Program
Other Reductions
Unclassified Salary Reductions*
Commission Office Reductions
Bayfront Park
International Trade Board
Metro -Miami Action Plan
Management Recovery
Reduction in Fire Dept. Budget
Total Other Reductions
Total Reductions
$ 7,295,760
(908,349)
-- $ 6,387,411
488,637
887,606
TBD
TBD
$ 150,000
65,000
414,000
200,000
127,338
300,000
168,000
8/0 Sept. 18, 1999
$ 6,876,048
$ (687,605)
$ 500,000
$ 1,209,338
$ 7,897,781
Note: This reduction is in addition to the $700,000 contemplated In the
original submission.
CITY OF MIAMI
BUDGET WORKSHOP
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 25,
1999
DONALD H WARSHAW
ciry MANAGER
September 23, 1999
Robert G. Beatty, Chairman
c/o Holland & Knight
701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3000
N iami, FL 33131
Dear Chairman Beatty:
P O BOX 330708
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33E33.070�
(305)416.1025
FAX (305) 400.5043
Pursuant to the schedule outlined by the Oversight Board at the conference call meeting
of Friday, September 17, 1999, the City committed to provide the Estimating Conference
on or before Thursday, September 23, 1999, a revised budget, reflecting any changes that
the City Commission would make at its meeting of September 21, 1999.
On September 15, 1999, 1 submitted a budget to the City, Commission that contemplated
a $24 increase in the Fire Assessment Fee. This increase allowed for a budget of
projected revenues of $307.5 Million. In addition to providing for the funds necessary to
continue and augment service delivery, this budget allowed for a comfortable surplus that
would mitigate the impact of any unanticipated needs on the City's finances.
As a result of the City Commission voting not to increase the Fire Fee at the Commission
meeting of September 21, 1999, the FY 2000 budget has been reduced by $4.2 Minion to
reflect the lost Fire Assessment Fee Revenue with a correlating reduction in the projected
Operating Surplus. The City's General Fund Budget now reflects $303 Nfillion revenue
with a projected surplus of less than $2 Million.
Subsequently, the Commission directed me to make cuts in expenditures so as to reduce
the impact of the proposed increase. My staff has worked around the clock to determine
what cuts could be provided for the City Commission's consideration at the Budget
Workshop scheduled for Saturday, September 25,1999—an event that does not
contemplate any formal action by the City Commission.
I recognize that the lost revenue from the Fire Fee impacts not only the FY 2000 budget
but, also, has a dramatic impact on the outlying years of the forecast. Any formal action
that the City Commission might take in the upcoming Budget Hearing will be
incorporated within the revised forecast with any additional adjustments that may be
necessary.
In response to the Commission's request for cuts, attached Is 'a partial list prepared by my
staff to initiate a discussion. You should note that this list has been prepared for
discussion purposes only and in no way represents my recommendations or my
suggestion of cuts to be implemented by the Commission.
I will keep you apprised of any developments that may occur between now and Tuesday.
Upon formal action by the Commission, I will ensure the expeditious revision of the
forecast to reflect the Commission's decisions.
Sin yours,
?enal6dH. w
DHW54W •
C: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission
Members of the Financial Oversight Board
Gale Sittig, Chief of Staff
Members of the Revenue Estimating Conference
Public Financial Management
CITY OF MIAMI
BUDGET REDUCTION ALTERNATIVES
FY 2000 - 2004
Total Value of Vacant Positions
Less: Sworn Positions
Value of Positions To be Deleted
FICA Savings
Total Savings
Add Backs:
Additional OvOrtime
Additional Salaries
Additional FICA
Less: Total Add Backs
Increased Revenues
Vehicle impoundment Program
Other Reductions
Unclassified Salary Reductions*
Commission Office Reductions
Bayfront Park
International Trade Board
Metro -Miami Action Plan
Management Recovery
Reduction in Fire Dept. Budget
Total Other Reductions
Total Reductions
$ 7,295,760 a/o Sept. 18, 1999
(908, 349)
$ 6,387,411
488,637
$ 687,605
TBD
TBD
$ 6,876,048
$' (687,605)
$ 500,000
$ 150,000
65,000
414,000
200,000
127,338
300,000
168,000
$ 1,209,338
$ 7,8979781
*Note: This reduction is in addition to the $700,000 contemplated in the
original submission.
L
N
930Oak Court Drive, Suits 143 201 South Orense Ave, Suite 720
Memphis, TN 38117-3722 Orlmdo, FL 32801
901.6624KL%6(Pax)901d62•K166 407-64W2208((es)407-648.1323
canaryhopublk6ncoen rutled6ev*pubWmcom
== = PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
Financial and Investment Advisors
September 24, 1999
Memorandum
To Members of the Estimating Conference
From Hal Canary and 'Virginia Rutledge
Re Budget Balancing Options
As all of you know, the Financial Oversight Board CTOB'� has requested that the Estimating Conference
C EC') and Public Financial Management, Inc. CTFM'7 review proposed changes to the Budget for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2000 (`Budget') and five-year forecast for the fiscal years ending September 30,
2001-04, (" Forecast'). These changes are proposed in lieu of certain revenues that were previously included
in the Budget and Forecast. Revenue issues are as follows:
0 The fire fee increase is not included in the Budget, or for any year in the Forecast. The fee was to
increase by $24, and was estimated to generate approximately $4.2 million annually.
The Save Our Seniors exemption program (" SOS') is included in the Forecast beginning in FY 2001,
which is the earliest year that it could be implemented by the City. The State law permits an
exemption up to $25,000 per qualified household. The City is proposing to establish the program at
the maximum level. The program is estimated to cause a loss of $2.2 million in property taxes
annually for the City.
By its actions, the City may have foreclosed certain revenue options for dealing with the FY 2000
Budget. It has sent on to the County a property tax rate of 9.5 mills, which appears to preclude
increasing it back to the current level of 10 mills. Additionally, it has sent fire fee rates to the County
for inclusion on the tax bills at their current level (excluding the planned increase for FY 2000).
While this might be increased to the planned level, the City will have to go through a notice and
hearing process, followed by separately collecting the increased amount from each taxpayer. This will
be both time-consuming and expensive.
To assist the EC as it begins to consider options provided by the City, PFM is attaching to this memo a
summary of the General Fund over the five years included in the Forecast. The first page shows the General
. Fund summary as it stood prior to the September 13, 1999 City Commission Budget Hearing. You will note
that it showed a gap in both FY 2003 and 2004 of $2.4 and $6.5 million, respectively. As discussed with the
FOB, these gaps were to be closed by either revenue increases and/or expenditure cuts. The second page
in
PFM Report to die Estimatinz, .onference
September 24, 1999
Page 2
shows the impact of removing the fire fee increase and implementing the SOS exemption. Additionally, PFM
has shown the impact of eliminating the suggested increase in the Solid Waste fee as a budget balancing
initiative, given the. Commission's reluctance to increase the planned fire fee increase. The impact of these
changes, before any expenditure cuts, is a budget gap that begins in FY 2001, as opposed to FY 2004.
Additionally, that gap in FY 2004 grows from $6.5 million to $15 million. This is the base from which the
City really starts to balance the General Fund.
This gap develops from the fact that revenues are projected to increase by about 2% per year and
expenditures are projected to increase at about 3.4%. In short, expenditures outpace revenues by about $4
million each year. This is not necessarily surprising; expenditures are primarily salary -based, and increase
according to contract agreements and other factors. Revenues, particularly fees, do not necessarily keep pace
with inflation, especially if fee changes are not regularly implemented as related expenditures grow. This
means that the City must continually seek ways to improve efficiency or seek additional revenues in order to
maintain a balanced budget.
The City has provided a list of budget reduction alternatives plus a trarismitrA letter to the FOB. Both items
are attached. As stated in the letter, die list has been prepared for discussion purposes only, and does not
represent any recommendation of the City Manager. The list can be summarized as follows:
Reduction Type
Value ($1,000)
Salary savings from vacant positions
$6,188
Revenues -Vehicle Impoundment Program
500
Unclassified salary reductions
150
Commission office reductions
65
Bayfront Park
414
International Trade Board
200
Metro -Miami Action Plan
127
Management Recovery
300
Fire Department reductions
If&
Total reductions
$
Nearly 80% of the value of the reduction alternatives, or $6.2 million, comes from the net value of vacant
positions. The balance comes from a series of smaller items. We have no specific information on the details
or the consequences of these smaller reductions; consequently, we expect that the City will be able to discuss
PFM Report to the Estimating, .anference
September 24, 1999
Page 3
them on our Friday conference call. We do, however, have the following preliminary comments about the
proposal to capture the value of the vacant positions. We expect that we will have more after our meeting.
♦ The City's budget already takes into account an attrition factor of 2.5% of salaries, which recognizes
the fact that all positions will not be filled all the time. The attrition factor amounts to $4.2 million in
the General Fund. These savings are already considered in the budget; even under ideal
circumstances (i.e., all of these positions could be eliminated), the attrition would need to be netted
from the salary savings. Additionally, if the City were to consider some other (lesser) level of position
elimination, we may have to revisit the level of attrition; it does consider the level of active vacant
funded positions.
♦ We have no information about the service consequences of this reduction, or whether this impacts
the ability of the City to continue with the Blue Ribbon initiatives or other investments.
♦ The City has not definitively stated whether this is a permanent elimination of positions, or some sort
of temporary freeze. Anything short of position elimination raises concerns about whether recurring
revenues and expenditures will be in balance. We do not consider the freezing of positions to be a
permanent reduction of expenditures.
e The EC and PFM have raised concerns in the past about the careful balance between police officers
in the General Fund and those funded by federal grants. The grants currently provide funds for 134
police officers. Since the grants are scheduled to terminate annually over the next several years, and
regulations limit the amount of time that any officer can be funded by the program, the City must be
reasonably sure that they will have vacant General Fund positions into which to transfer the grant -
funded officers at the appropriate time. Additionally, the grants have certain conditions about
providing permanent City positions for officers funded by the grants. In recognition of its
obligations under the grant, the City has excluded vacant swom positions from the list of "Budget
Reduction Alternatives."
♦ Even if all reductions could legitimately be used, the City is still not in balance in the out years of the
forecast. We refer the EC to the discussion above on the Forecast.
♦ This alternative eliminates (or freezes) vacancies simply because they are vacant. This does not deal
with the City's spending or service priorities; it deals with what is expeditious, but still doesn't fix the
long-term structural imbalance of the budget.
This is not to say that the City can never achieve significant expenditure reductions. However, making
significant changes in budgets is a complex business and needs to be accomplished consistent with a plan that
will balance expenditure goals, revenue goals, service needs, and long-term fiscal health. The City has just
PFM Report to the Estimatit._ .:onference
September 24, 1999
Page 4
reached the point of having a budget that is not swimming in red ink Changing the structure is not something
that will be done in a couple of weeks. Additionally, the City's General Fund has a number of factors that
influence how changes should and can be made. The following is a list of some of those factors:
♦ The City's budget is salary -intensive. Approximately 75% of the General Fund expenditures relate to
salaries, fringe benefits or other personnel -related costs. The City cannot reasonably expect to make
cuts in the Budget without impacting personnel costs.
♦ About 90% of the City's positions are governed by some bargaining group. The City's ability to make
changes to its personnel costs is impacted by the terms of these various agreements. Most of the
agreements have restrictions on layoffs and/or other limiting factors that must be considered when
making personnel changes. Additionally, a number of individuals in those positions that are not
covered by such an agreement have certain roll back rights in the event their position is eliminated.
This comment is not intended to be critical of the bargaining units, but to simply recognize that there
are restrictions on what the City can do when it comes to personnel, particularly in the short-term.
♦ As has been discussed before, the City has no real capital plan. The City is working on a schedule to
develop such a plan, however, it is not currently in place. The City simply does not yet know the real
level of need for its infrastructure at this point, and how it will interface/impact with the operating
budget. The FOB has been trying to keep capital funds at the current level at this point, but we don't
know what the City needs to invest in its assets for the long-term.
♦ The City has not yet really defined service levels and productivity goals for its departments, and
measured them against those goals. It doesn't in all cases know whether it's getting a good deal for its
money, whether making cuts will cause a loss in productivity, or whether it can make technology
improvements that will produce gains in productivity.
♦ As is the case with most cities, the City has a substantial number of fees and charges for services.
While it has been making progress, it doesn't yet have firm policies about what services are intended
to be self-supporting from their own revenues, or a regular process for reviewing and making
changes to fees. Absent such a process, the City stands to stay in a continual process of erosion of
revenues, followed periodically by significant jumps in rates when it reaches a crisis level. This is part
of what is causing the imbalance in the out years.
PFM hopes this memo is helpful in framing die discussion this afternoon, given that the City has not
presented a definitive recommendation to be evaluated. We understand the City Commission will meet with
City staff tomorrow in a Budget Workshop to determine a course of action. Our conclusion at this juncture is
L
PFM Report to the Estimatit, 6nference
September 24, 1999
Page 5
r-�
that all of the alternatives listed above will not address the budget deficits in the Forecast and will place the
City in a weaker position to address those deficits in subsequent years.
FIVE YEAR FORECAST
FISCAL YEARS 2000 - 2004
GENERAL FUND
FY 1999 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004
Revised Year End Proposed Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Proposal as of 9113199:
r
Revenues(1)
300.003,817 300,706,118 307,501,886
311,978,268
318,281,070
325,050,079
331,849,225
Percent Change
2.26%
1.46%
2.02%
2.13%
2.09%
Expenditures
300,003,817 295,050,815 - 305,496,156
314,823,642
326.037,451
337,309,216
348,641,844
Percent Change
3.64%
3.050/6
3.666%
3.46%
3.42%
Budget Balancing Initiatives:
Revenues
Solid Waste Fee Increase(2) - - -_ — - - 1,821,288 2,081,472
300,003,817 300,706,118 307,501,886 311,978,268 318,281,070 326,871,367 333,930,697
Ex®errditures
Attrition @ 2.5% of GF Salaries - - (4,202,721) (4,296,755) (4,580,745) (4,816,804) (5,065,040)
1% City Imposed Reserve - - - - (3,182,811) (3,250,501) (3,318,492)
300,003,817 295,050,815 301,293,436 310,527,088 318,273,895 329,241,911 340,468,312
TaxlFee Increase andlor Expenditure Efficiencies 2,370,643 6,527,615
(1)Includes property tax at 9.6 mills and full fire fee Increase per previous five year plan.
(2) Fee increases of $28 and $32 for FY's'03 b'04, respectfully.
Pwbuc AMMdd MwKaw K INC. PVe ! 9/24P"
a
FIVE YEAR FORECAST
FISCAL YEARS 2000 - 2004
GENERAL FUND
Changes to Excessl(Deficit) as of 9121199
Removal of fire fee increase (4200,000) (4,200,000) (4,200,000) (4,200,000) (4,200,000)
Include SOS exemption (2,200,000) (2,200,000) (2,200,000) (2,200,000)
Excessl(Deficit) as of 9121199
Adjustment to Excessl(Deficit) assuming
no increase in Solid Waste fee
Pkk& r&XMdd MMgaws4 Inc
Pgtl
(1,821,288) (2,081,472)
�i }iok� -Y.�� ��✓"iF .r, e i is.. »y7-� y..k�edx �{j{,f �.;,. z i..; >,....r s i i.�.-
"4"
VACANCY REPORT 1'Y 1999 - 2000
AM VP''91019%)
NUMBER OF
OCC.
POS.
VACANCIES
FY 2000 COST OF
CODE OCCUPATION
NUMBER
AS OF 9110199
VACANT POSITIONS
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
8003 ADMIN ASST-CITY C
6530
1 31,839
9056 ADMIN DIR
10645
1 49,900
8091 GENFPAL CLERK
10153
1 16,304
9446 LEGAL LIASON - MAYOR
10063
1 47.300
TOTAL OFFICE OF TIIF. MAYOR - UNCLASSIFIED
4 145,542
SISTER CITIES
9430 SISTER CITIESTROTOCAL
9155
1 36,493
TOTAL SISTER CITIES
1 36,493
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SANCHEZ
8009 SPECIAL AIDE
10091
1 16,622
REGALADO
8002 COMMISSIONER'S AIDE
8786
1 11,447
9005 ADMIN ASST SR -CITY C
268
1 24,221
GORT
9009 SPECIAL AIDE
9905
1 16.304
SELF.
8005 ADMIN ASST SR -CITY C
10249
l 24,221
TOTAL COMMISSIONER'S - UNCLASSIFIED
5 92,915
OFFICE OF THE CITY M ANAGER
8082 ADMIN ASST 1
10269
1 27,226
TOTAL CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
1 27,226
CITY CLERK
8510 ARCHIVISTIRECORDS AD
9387
1 42,232
TOTAL CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
1 42,232
LAN'
1036 LEGAL ASSISTANT
2555
1 27,226
1036 LEGAL ASSISTANT
6194
1 27,226
UNCLASSIFIED
8014 ASST CITY ATTORNY
7831
1 48.041
8011 ASSISTANT CITY ATTOR
4002
1 109,471
TOTAL LAW CLASS & UNCLASS
4 210,964
FINANCE_
ACCOUNTING
1110 ACCOUNT CLEkK
4381
1 25,970
1123 SUPERVISOR OF PAYROLL
10239
1 41,108
1120 ACCOUNTANT SR
10272
1 26,504
TREASURY
9462 CHIEF ACCOUNTANT
4372
1 32,902
1072 CUST SERVICE REP 11
10321
1 19,731
1072 CUST SERVICE REP 11
10322
1 19,731
TOTAL FINANCE - CLASSIFIED & UNCLASSIFIED
6 165,946
HUMAN RESOURCES
1318 PERSONNEL OFFICER
8188
1 34,942
1322 PERSONNEL SUPERVISOR
4264
1 83?08
1303 PERSONNEL SERVICES REP
8779
1 21,115
8786 TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT
8613
1 35,511
TOTAL HUMAN RES. - CLASSIFIED & UNCLASSIFIED
4 174,776
FIRE RESCUE
5416 COMM OPERATOR SPVSR
1582
1 49,850
5416 COMM OPERATOR SPVSR
1858
1 46,341
TOTAL FIRE CIVILIAN & SWORN
2 96,191
POLICE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION
1010 CLERK 1
2693
1 20,272
1010 CLERK l
3699
1 19,338
1010 CLERK I
10601
1 19 338
1 OF 6
9/241999:03 PM
VACANCY REPORT FY 1999 - 2000
APL OF 9/18/99
OCC,
CODE
OCCUPATION
POS.
NUMBER
NUMBER OF
VACANCIES
AS OF 9/18199
FY' 2000 COST OF
VACANT POSITIONS
loll
CLERK II
2606
1
21.251
1020
TYPIST CLERK 1
1024
1
13.076
1021
TYPIST CLERK11
1007
1
16.622
1021
TYPIST CLERK ti
1429
1
16,622
1021
TYPIST CLERK It
3507
I
16,622
1021
TYPIST CLERK Il
3536
1
16,622
1021
TYPIST CLERK II
3690
1
16.622
1021
TYPIST CLERK 11
4576
1
16,622
1021
TYPIST CLERK II
3083
1
18,314
1022
TYPIST CLERK III
4036
1
35,462
1022
TYPIST CLERK 111
2494
1
43,139
1031
CIS DESK OPERATOR
9640
1
37,220
1037
INTERROGAT STENO
2945
1
20,272
1110
ACCOUNT CLERK
4532
1
19,314
1305
ADMIN AIDE 1
3787
1
21,356
1305
ADM1N AID171
9059
1
45,266
1392
TECHNICAL SUPPORT ANALYST
4364
1
63,641
3455
FLEET MANAGEMENT REP
8975
1
23,494
5022
POL PROP SPEC 1
571
1
32,906
3027
ID:TECH SERVICES SUPV
3944
1
31,503
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
105
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
129
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
231
1
17,826
3040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
288
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
3146
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
4256
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
398
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
452
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE. AIDE
491
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
519
1
17.826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
542
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
740
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
%%1
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
897
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
1103
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
1142
1
t7,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
1203
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
1492
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
1570
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE: AIDE
1793
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
2004
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
2040
1
17,826
$040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
2045
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
2238
1
17.926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
2987
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
3097
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
3256
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
4134
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
4150
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE. AI DE
4423
1
17,926
3040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
5040
1
17,826
3040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
5041
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
5042
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
3043
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
5046
l
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
5047
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
775t
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7752
1
17,926
3040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7758
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7766
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7767
1
17,926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7768
1
17,826
3040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7769
1
17.926
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7770
1
17,826
5040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7771
1
17,826
3040
PUBLIC SERVICE AIDE
7773
1
17,926
5413
COMMUNICATIONS ASST
300
l
38,172
5433
COMMUNICATIONS ASST
329
1
22,570
5413
COMMUNICATIONS ASST
2904
1
23,127
3413
COMMUNICATIONS ASST
5060
1
21,356
5413
COMMUNICATIONS ASST
5063
1
21,356
5413
COMMUNICATIONS ASST
9690
1
21,356
5413
COMMUNICATIONS ASST
9691
1
21,356
5414
POLICE COMMUNICATION
2364
1
22,859
5415
COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
544
1
23,494
5413
COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
3002
1
34,7431
2 OF 6 9124/999:03 PM
VACANCY REPORT FY 1999 - 2000
All, OV' 9113/99
OCC.
CODE OCCUPATION
POS.
NUMBER
NUMBER OF
VACANCIES
AS OF 9179499
Fr 2000 COST OF
VACANT POSITIONS
5415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
3437
1
23,494
$415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
3534
1
23.494
5413 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
2391
1
23,484
$415 COMML NICATIONS OPERATOR
2915
1
23,494
3415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
3720
1
23.484
5415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
4108
1
23.494
5413 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
4226
1
23,494
5415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
4365
1
23,494
5415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
4460
1
23,484
5415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
4614
1
23.494
5415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
5054
1
23,484
5415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
5055
1
23,484
5415 COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
9644
1
24.292
5520 STABLE ATTENDANT
10240
1
19,314
7021 COMM INVOL SPEC
10689
1
32,411
RITAL I'Ol./('1i ('117L. - ( IASS11.71ip
94
2,013,076
POLICE TEMPORARY
9069 SCHOOL CROSG GUARD
704
1
6,812
9069 SCHOOL CROSG GUARD
3549
1
6.912
9069 SCHOOL CROSG GUARD
3605
1
6,912
9069 SCHOOL CROSG GUARD
6925
1
6,812
9069 SCHOOL CROSG GUARD
6827
1
6,812
9069 SCHOOL CROSG GUARD
8713
1
6,912
9240 STAFF SERVICES AIDE
9695
t
19,192
9270 OFFICE EQUIP OPERATOR
9209
1
18,614
9270 OFFICE EQUIP OPERATOR
10757
1
18,614
9270 OFFICE EQUIP OPERATOR
9210
1
19,614
9270 OFFICE EQUIP OPERATOR
10691
1
18.614
9402 POLICE AIDE If
8432
1
13,700
TOL4L P0lJ('F. 7T.i//'0X4RF
12
148,210
POLICE OPERATIONS
5005 POLICE OFFICER
700
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
1069
1
31102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
1277
1
31,,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
1360
1
31,102
5005 POLICEOFFICER
9900
t
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
3147
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
4348
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
9867
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
2466
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
2763
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
9868
1
31,102
5003 POLICE OFFICER
7423
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
2922
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
36%
1
31,102
5005 POLICE OFFICER
1546
1
31,102
5011 POLICE SERGEANT
1768
1
35,119
5012 POLICE LT
3555
1
61,776
5012 POLICE LT
4049
1
63,221
5012 POLICE LT
5073
1
68.040
7O7',41.I'DLI('i: ti11'Uk,4'-('L4,1:1'
19
694,696
POLICE OPERATIONS - UNCLASSIFIED
9077 POLICE MAJOR
1189
1
44,395
8077 POLICEMAJOR
1302
1
44,395
8180 EXEC ASST-POL CHF. SR
2243
1
42,329
9280 ASSTCHIEFPOLICE
138
1
51,442
7'O7AL POLI('F..SICOPW-Uhf'1.4.SS
4
I82,561
COPS UNIVERSAL HIRING PHASE I
5003 POLICE OFFICER
9744
1
31,102
707AL /Vi.l('E' COPS fJSll7-xv4L WRING PN.431i l
I
11301
COPS UNIVERSAL HIRING PHASE: it
TOT4LSII'ORA'POLICE
24
908,349
TOTALPOLICE- CIVILIAN&SWORN
130
3.069.635
PUBLIC WORKS
PUBLIC WORKS - DIR.OFC
1121 ACCOUNTANT SUPERVISOR 1324 1 56,317
PUBLIC WORKS DESIGN
2033 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ill 2660 1
PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION
2015 F:NG TECI1 Il 1307 1 28.628
-------------
3OF6
9124/999:03 PM
VACANCY REPORT FY 1999 - 2000
AM M 9/1819Y
NUMBER OF
OCC,
POS.
VACANCIES
FY 2000 COST OF
CODE OCCUPATION
NUMBER
AS OF OH6188
VACANT POSITIONS
PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS
3104 AUTO FQP OP 1
1332
1
20.272
3104 AUTO EQP OP 1
3513
1
20,272
3104 AUTO EQP OP 1
3960
1
22,120
3105 AUTO EQP OP It
1931
1
27,226
STORMWATER UTILITY - MAINT
3104 AUTO EQP OP 1
978
1
33,627
3104 AUTO EQP OP 1
154
1
20,272
3104 AUTO EQP OP I
5030
1
20,272
TOTAL PIIBLIC WORKS
10
249,606
SOLID WASTE
S1W DIRECTOR'S OFFICE
1021 TYPIST CLERK 11
10265
1
16,622
1305 ADMIN AIDE 1
9513
1
27,233
SAV DIRECTOR'S OFFICE - UNCLASS
9272 ASST Dill SOLID WASTE
6558
1
46,664
SAV - WASTE COLLECTOR
3109 WASTE COL OP 1
464
1
29,139
3108 WASTE COL OP 1
2196
1
29.139
3103 WASTE COL OP 1
951
1
30,481
3108 WASTE COL OP 1
1689
1
29,139
3108 WASTE COL OP 1
475
1
32,008
3108 WASTE COL OP 1
4543
1
23,139
3108 WASTE COL OP I
1755
1
29,139
3109 WASTE COL OP It
4659
1
31,871
3109 WASTE COL OP It
1191
1
31,871
3109 WASTE COL OP 11
3711
1
33,333
3109 WASTE COL OP II
6170
1
33,333
3107 WASTE COLLECTOR - GARB
2464
l
21275
3017 WASTE COLLECTOR - GARB
3403
1
22,273
7035 SAM INSP
1810
1
20,272
TOTAL SOLID WASTE
17
488,533
CONFERENCES & CONVENTIONS
CONVENTION BUREAU
8110 ADMIN OFFICER CC
9679
1
41,108
COCONUT GROVE EXHIBITION CENTER
1430 SPECIAL EVENTS AGENT
6695
1
29,860
DINNER KEY MARINA
6068 MARINAS AIDE
9313
I
17.493
TOTAL CONF & CONV. - CLASSIFIED
3
88,461
BUDGET & MGAIT ANALYSIS
BUDGET
1011 CLERK If
10270
1
21,356
1309 ADMIN ASST 1
4522
1
33,076
1333 OPERATIONS ANALYST
10494
1
34,743
1336 BUDGET ANALYST
10056
1
33,076
1336 BUDGET ANALYST
10057
1
33,076
1329 MANAGE ANALYST ASST
10539
1
34,929
1329 MANAGE ANALYST ASST
10053
I
42,224
CAPITAL ISIPROV PROJ CIP
1340 CAPITAL IMPROV ASSISTANT
10502
1
40,226
TOTAL BUDGET CLASS & UNCLASS
8
272,706
GENERAL. SERVICE ADMINISTRATION
GSA BLDG MAINT
3301 MAINT MECH HELPER 1644 l 34,346
3301 MAINT MECH HELPER 2816 1 37,185
3350 WELDER 79 1 45,169
BLDG & VEH MAINT PRINT SHOP
1525 DUPLICATING EQUIP OPERATOR 64 1 31,339
4 OF 6 9/24/999:03 PM
VACANCY REPORT FY 1999 - 2000
AFL VP' 9/1S/99
NUMBER OF
OCC.
POS.
VACANCIES
FY 2000 COST OF
CODE OCCUPATION
NUMBER
AS OF 911BIBB
VACANT POSITIONS
FLEETDIAINT Dl%' F'l' 89
3410 HEAVY FQP MFCH
274R
1
19.350
GSA ►.IGHT FLEET MGMT
1404 AUTO MECHIIELPFR
3714
1
26,766
1405 AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE WRITER
2135
1
20,272
3336 AUTO BODY WORKER/PAINTER
757
1
47502
TOTAL GSA - CLASSIFIED & UNCLASSIFIED
8
262,128
RISK MANAGEMENT
PROPERTY & CASUALTY
1330 SAFETY COORD
1256
1
57,521
1309 ADMIN ASST 1
1317
1
26,504
1912 CLAIMS ADJUSTOR 11
350
1
-
1812 CLAIMS ADJUSTOR 11
338
1
-
1812 CLAIMS ADJUSTOR 11
7273
1
-
1812 CLAIMS ADJUSTOR II
7967
1
1816 CLAIMS ADJUSTOR 111
4262
1
1824 CLAIMS SUPERVISOR
3226
1
61,647
1820 COLUSUBROGATION SPE
4070
1
24,035
GROUP BENEFITS
1912 CLAIMS ADJUSTOR II
1090
1
31,338
1021 TYPIST CLERKII
408
1
16,180
TOTAL RISK MANAGEMENT
11
217,225
INFO TECHNOLOGY
1540 SYSTEMS ENGR 1
6407
1
29,629
1533 COMPUTER OP II
2769
1
49,799
1562 SYSTEMS PROGRAMMER
3093
1
32,195
1567 PROGRAMMER
1461
1
38,317
1567 PROGRAMMER
3251
1
39,317
1580 NFnVORK ADMINISTRATOR
10289
t
77,052
1559 COMPUTER TRAINING SP
10284
1
40,226
5425 TELECOMMUNICATIONS T
405
1
27,968
8352 DIR INFORMATION TECH
10286
1
97,610
TOTAL INFO TECHNOLOGY
9
430.012
INTERNAL AUDITS
1125 STAFF AUDITOR
2712
1
28,628
1126 STAFF AUDITOR SR
2849
1
31,505
9174 CHIEF INTERNAL AUDITS
8777
1
73,324
1127 STAFF AUDITOR PRINC
7733
1
51,341
TOTAL INTERNAL AUDITS - CLASSIFIED & UNCLASSIFIED
4
186.998
BUILDING AND ZONING
$053 DEPUTY DIRECTOR
1694
1
96,378
B & Z INSPECTION SERVICES
1021 TYPIST CLERK 11
2972
1
17,926
2111 BUILDING INSPECTOR 11
2738
1
38,317
2116 STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
2756
1
44,335
2120 ELEC INSP I
3899
t
44,700
2165 ELEVATOR INSPEC
9439
1
30.054
$745 CHIEF OF INSPECTION
2232
1
39,137
8 &L CODE ADMISTRATION
1011 CLERK II
8213
1
30,6t0
2150 70NING INSPECTOR 1
658
1
24,692
TOTAL BUILDING AND ZONING - CLASS & UNCLASS
9
366.069
PARKS AND RECREATION
PKS & REC - DIP, OFC
9770
ADMIN AIDE 1
9793
SPEC PROJECTS COORD
RECREATION DIV
6080
PARKS & RECREACTION MOR 1
6080
PARKS & RECREACTION MGR 1
6149
REC SPECIALIST
6149
REC SPECIALIST
6149
REC SPECIALIST
8206
ADMIN ASST HI
5OF 6
9915 1
20,790
5131 1
33,949
10410 1
24,692
10411 {
24,692
2644 1
19,350
9137 1
24,476
6190 1
19,350
10414 1
35.311
9/24/999:03 PM
IN
VACANCY REPORT FY 1999 - 2000
AM OF 9118/99
NUMBER OF
OCC,
POS.
VACANCIES
Pr 2000 COST OF
CODE OCCUPATION
NUMBER
AS OF 9119199
VACANT POSITIONS
5529 FACILITY ATTEND
9141
1
17,027
5529 FACILITY ATTEND
3686
1
17.027
6003 GROUNDS TENDER
3783
1
17,026
6003 GROUNDS TENDER
8486
1
17,026
VIRGINIA KEY
6003 GROUNDS TENDER
10729
1
17,026
6049 PARK OPERATIONS COORD
10730
1
29255
TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION CLASS & UNCLASS
14
317.197
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
1010 CLERK 1
6187
1
15,924
2220 PLANNER 1
9812
1
36,483
2221 PLANNER it
946
1
36,483
2221 PLANNER 11
4535
1
39,973
222t PLANNER II
5143
1
36,483
2259 DEVELOPMENT COORD.
%16
1
53.977
TOTAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT - CLASS & UNCLASS
6
221,223
HEARING BOARDS
1021 TYPIST CLERK 11
10086
1
16,304
1022 TYPIST CLERK 111
10060
1
26,790
TOTAL 11EARING BOARDS - CLASS & UNLCASS
2
43,094
OFFICE OF EQUAL OPPORT/DIV PGNIS
8544 EOlDIVERSITYSP£C
7701
1
41.521
TOTAL OFFICE OF EQ.OPIDiY PGNIS- CLASS & UNLCASS
1
41,521
PURCHASING
PURCHASING -CLASS
1022 TYPIST CLERK 111
8175
1
27,146
1022 TYPIST CLERK 111
3
1
22,031
TOTAL PURCHASING
2
49,371
-,. TQ.- FUND-.._ -.• ..'.,:
_: :.
:.,: -'262
..:' ---• i-,,17.295.760
n=,. k.r,.x•....,s. •, ,. - ., .ERAL ,.
CREDIT POLICE SWORN
(24)
(908,349)
6OF6
9/241999:07 PM
30534 ,73
OFFICE OF THE t...AlERN
OVERSICirr BOARD
150 West Flagler Street Suite 1815
Miami, Florida 33130
Phone (305) 347.5633 Fax (305) 371-3160
FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT BOARD
AGENDA
Meeting for Monday, September 27,1999
at 1:00pm
1:00pm Call to Order
Welcome, Opening Remarks
1:05pm Summary of Legal Parameters for
Adoption of FY 1999-2000 Budget and
5 Year Forecast
1:10pm Presentation by City of Amendments to
FY 1999-2000 Budget and 5 Year
Forwast Proposed by City Commission
1:20pm Report of September 20 Estimating
Conference
Robert Beatty, Chairman
Chairman Beatty/
Mark Wallace
Don Warshaw/ Staff
Phil Brown, Chairman
1:35pm PFM Presentation on Report and Hal Canary, PFM
Recommendation regarding the City of
Miami's FY 1999-2000 Proposed Budget
5 Year Forecast
2:00pm Discussion and Action Board Members
2:45pm Outstanding Issues/ Next Meeting Gale Sittig
3:00pm Adjourn
Note: Minutes will be distributed, but actions will not take place tall the next meeting.
PAGE 02
Robert Beatty
Chairman
Sharon Brown
Maria Carnila Leiv
Sheldon Schneider
Qabriel Bustamart
9/24199 6:17n