Transcript Formal PowerPoint Template

City of Port Moody
2013 - 2017 DRAFT Financial Plan
Thursday, January 31st, 2013
“PUBLIC INPUT”
2013 Financial Plan Process
Governed by a Legislative Process
 Municipal Purpose (Community Charter, Section 7)
•
•
•
•
Provide good government
Provide services, laws and other matters for community benefit
Provide stewardship of public assets
Foster economic, social and environmental well-being of community
 Financial Plan (Community Charter, Section 165)
• Adopt a 5-Year Plan (can be amended anytime during the year)
 Annual Property Tax Bylaw (Community Charter, Section 197)
• Tax rates adopted by bylaw before May 15, 2013
• Authority to levy taxes on properties to allocate funding for services
 Public Consultation Process (Community Charter, Section 166)
• Ensures the public have an opportunity to comment
2
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Financial Plan Process
Provision of Services
Provision of Services
Budget Driver
Essential Services
Police, Fire, Water, Sewer & Drainage, Garbage & Recycling, Roads
Priority Services
Parks, Recreation, Library, Bylaw Enforcement, Licensing, Arts, Culture,
Heritage, Planning, Environment/Sustainability Management
Support Services
Communications, Human Resources, Payroll, Finance, Administration,
Legislative Services, Information Technology, Records Management,
Clerical, Facilities
3
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Financial Plan Process
Community Enrichment
Community/Cultural Support
•
•
•
•
Financial
Accessibility
Sports Groups
Arts/Culture Groups
Business Support
• Chamber of Commerce
• Business Improvement Areas
• Events
Environmental Support
• Supports environmental groups
• Development sustainability checklist
• Environmental stewardship
4
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Financial Plan Process
Planning Process
Strategic Plan –
Articulates Council’s high level Goals & Objectives
Business Plan –
Identifies measurable departmental Tasks to meet the Strategic Plan
Financial Plan –
Attaches the Resources to achieve the Business Plan.
Strategic Plan
Business Plan
Financial Plan
5
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Financial Plan Process
Timeline
 Budget guidelines approved – June 05, 2012
 Budget packages distributed – Late June, 2012
 Budgets drafted by Departments – July/August, 2012
 Budget reviews with Financial Services Division – Late August, 2012
 Executive Leadership Team review – October, 2012
 Finance Plan Council workshop – October 27, 2012
 Preliminary budget deliberations – October , 2012 to December, 2012
 Public Input (Town Hall Meeting) – January 31, 2013
 Council deliberations – February, 2013 to April, 2013
 Adoption of tax rates bylaws – Prior to May 15, 2013
6
prepared by Financial Services Department
Budget Planning
Budget Considerations
 Residents enjoy and expect exceptional service
•
Recent City surveys indicated a 99% approval rate
 Level of reliance on reserves
• Major infrastructure historically funded from finite capital funding (e.g. land sales)
 Asset management
• Infrastructure funding gap
 Protective services emphasis (fire, police)
 Senior government downloading (provincial, federal)
 Taxation
• Business to Residential Tax Ratios – business retention issue
• Port Moody taxes and services relative to other municipalities
 Subsidy levels
• User fees versus taxation to fund services
7
prepared by Financial Services Department
Budget Planning
Service Costs - New Services
Provision of Services
Budget Driver
Capital
Infrastructure
Costs
Operational
Costs
Labour
Costs
8
prepared by Financial Services Department
Budget Planning
Service Costs – Service Industry
Supplies &
Equipment 6%
Salaries & Wages
64%
Training &
Development 1%
Reserve
Transfers 13%
Vehicle Charges 3%
Utilities 3%
9
prepared by Financial Services Department
Contracts & Fees
10%
Budget Planning
Service Costs – Operating vs. Capital
Operating Costs – Direct and ongoing tax impact
 Typically day to day costs of running of the City
• Wages/Benefits
• Materials/Supplies
• Training
• Utilities (heat, light)
• Insurance
Capital Costs – Not historically a tax impact
 Traditional capital funding sources (reserves, grants, development levies)
 Taxation quickly becoming most sustainable capital funding source
 What capital costs affect tax in 2013 budget?
• Fire Hall #1 Debt
• Funding for the Asset Reserve (replacement/maintenance of assets)
10
prepared by Financial Services Department
Budget Planning
Service Costs – Service Value
Police Services
Fire Services
Water Utility
Sewer Utility
Garbage & Recycling Utility
Storm Drainage
Engineering, Roads & Parks
Recreation, Culture & Facilities
Planning, Bylaws, Heritage & Environment
Library Services
Financial Services
Corporate Services/Administration
Fiscal Services
Total
Cable TV (HD Basic)
Telephone & Internet
Home Security System
Home Insurance
Gas & Electricity
535
395
338
317
307
55
230
238
44
88
70
215
2,837
5
469
900
350
840
2013 proposed Costs based on Average 2012 Assessed value of household $531,600
11
prepared by Financial Services Department
2,250
Historical Perspective
12
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Tax Increases 1996 to 2012
13
Year
Average
Household
Taxes Paid
Average
Household
Tax
Increase
%
Running
Average
%
1996
235,200
930
2.50
2.50
1997
230,200
949
3.25
2.88
1998
237,000
973
0.00
1.92
1999
225,500
954
2.00
1.94
2000
224,100
1,026
5.46
2.64
2001
224,500
1,078
4.93
3.02
2002
227,500
1,119
3.84
3.14
2003
260,100
1,182
3.58
3.20
2004
295,000
1,242
3.47
3.23
2005
354,000
1,279
5.47
3.45
2006
389,900
1,362
3.99
3.50
2007
474,000
1,467
4.90
3.62
2008
521,400
1,494
3.58
3.61
2009
503,400
1,514
5.23
3.73
2010
481,000
1,586
4.75
3.80
2011
518,900
1,668
5.16
3.88
2012
531,600
1,758
5.36
3.97
prepared by Financial Services Department
$68 year or $1.30 week
Historical Perspective
Tax Increases 1996 to 2012
5.00
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
Vancouver CPI
Tax Increase
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
14
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Utility Single Family Fees 1996 to 2013 (Net of 5% Discount)
Year
Total Bill
Increase $
Increase %
1996
399.48
12.35
3.19
1997
424.65
25.17
6.30
1998
458.85
34.20
8.05
1999
494.95
36.10
7.87
2000
494.95
0.00
0.00
2001
499.70
4.75
0.96
2002
512.05
12.35
2.47
2003
522.50
10.45
2.04
2004
540.55
18.05
3.45
2005
555.75
15.20
2.81
2006
572.85
17.10
3.08
2007
627.00
54.15
9.45
2008
678.30
51.30
8.18
2009
778.05
99.75
14.71
2010
895.85
117.80
15.14
2011
932.90
37.05
4.14
2012
962.35
29.45
3.16
2013
962.35
0.00
0.00
$32.00 year or 62¢ week
5.27%
Average
15
prepared by Financial Services Department
Significant portion of costs
passed on to the City from
Metro Vancouver
Historical Perspective
Utility Increases 1999 to 2012
20
18
16
14
12
10
CPI
Utility Increase
8
6
4
2
0
16
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Combined Tax & Utility Increases 1996 to 2012
17
Year
Tax & Utility
Increase (%)
Running
Average
1996
2.50
2.50
1997
3.32
2.91
1998
4.31
3.38
1999
1.29
2.85
2000
4.92
3.27
2001
3.70
3.34
2002
3.31
3.34
2003
4.48
3.48
2004
2.95
3.42
2005
2.91
3.37
2006
5.43
3.56
2007
8.23
3.95
2008
3.73
3.93
2009
5.53
4.04
2010
8.43
4.34
2011
4.81
4.37
2012
4.59
4.38
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Combined Tax & Utility Increases form 1996 to 2013
Average combined Dollar increase: $68 Taxes + $32 Utilities = $100 year
Services have changed dramatically since 1995.
What service level increases have residents received since 1995?
 Police Services (new building; increased compliment)
 Fire Services (new #1 Hall; renovated #2 hall; firefighter force doubled)
 Recreation (new community centres; expanded Recreation Centre)
 Parks/Fields (artificial turfs; RP Park redeveloped; Westhill field; skate board park )
 Trails (Shoreline, Westhill, Bert Flinn Park; bike paths)
 Arts & Culture (new Library; new Theatre; new amphitheatre; funding for museum)
 Utilities (new pumps, filtration and treatment plants; in-house garbage & recycling)
 Other (new City Hall; bylaw officers; online services; environment protection funding)
18
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
2012 Total Taxes Comparison (Average SF Household)
Municipality
Taxes
Utilities
Total Charges
West Vancouver
3,144
1,332
4,476
North Vancouver District
2,050
1,294
3,344
Delta
1,920
915
2,835
Coquitlam
1,624
1,107
2,731
Port Moody
1,758
962
2,720
Vancouver
1,683
963
2,646
New Westminster
1,541
1,078
2,619
Maple Ridge 
1,707
816
2,523
Langley Township
1,453
1,052
2,505
Port Coquitlam
1,629
865
2,494
Abbotsford
1,616
840
2,456
Pitt Meadows
1,430
986
2,416
Burnaby
1,446
946
2,392
North Vancouver City
1,356
974
2,330
Richmond
1,359
922
2,281
Surrey
1,195
1,075
2,270
Langley City
1,155
888
2,043

19
Maple Ridge does not have Garbage & Recycling pickup – private collection paid for by residents or drop off
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Reserves (Designated for Capital & Operating Needs)
Year
Operating
Reserves
Capital
Reserves
Statutory
Reserves
Development
Levies
Accumulated
Surplus
Total
2002
3,300,000
3,800,000
18,900,000
5,200,000
4,300,000
35,500,000
2003
3,100,000
4,700,000
20,100,000
4,800,000
4,500,000
37,200,000
2004
3,100,000
5,800,000
21,100,000
5,500,000
4,500,000
40,000,000
2005
2,300,000
11,700,000
17,400,000
8,000,000
4,700,000
44,100,000
2006
3,300,000
7,500,000
13,200,000
5,400,000
4,700,000
34,100,000
2007
3,900,000
8,000,000
6,200,000
5,500,000
4,700,000
28,300,000
2008
3,700,000
7,800,000
4,300,000
5,700,000
5,000,000
26,500,000
2009
3,500,000
8,200,000
2,800,000
5,600,000
5,600,000
25,700,000
2010
3,600,000
10,400,000
6,800,000
5,800,000
6,000,000
32,600,000
2011
4,100,000
12,900,000
6,100,000
5,800,000
6,600,000
35,500,000
Average
3,390,000
8,080,000
11,690,000
5,730,000
5,060,000
33,950,000
20
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Reserves - Operating
4,500,000
Operating Reserves
Average
4,000,000
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
21
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Reserves - Capital
13,500,000
12,500,000
Capital Reserves
11,500,000
Average
10,500,000
9,500,000
8,500,000
7,500,000
6,500,000
5,500,000
4,500,000
3,500,000
22
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Reserves - Statutory
22,500,000
Statutory Reserves
Average
20,500,000
18,500,000
16,500,000
14,500,000
12,500,000
10,500,000
8,500,000
6,500,000
4,500,000
2,500,000
23
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Reserves – Development Levies
8,500,000
Development Levies
Average
7,500,000
6,500,000
5,500,000
4,500,000
3,500,000
2,500,000
24
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Reserves – Accumulated Surplus
4,500,000
4,000,000
GF Accumulated Surplus
SF Accumulated Surplus
3,500,000
WF Accumulated Surplus
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
25
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Growth
Year
Growth
(%)
1% tax
Equates to
Growth
($)
2003
2.27%
150,000
341,000
2004
3.20%
158,000
528,000
2005
3.50%
170,000
599,000
2006
4.86%
183,000
890,000
2007
6.93%
189,500
1,314,000
2008
3.17%
218,000
690,000
2009
4.82%
230,000
1,107,000
2010
1.43%
248,000
350,000
2011
0.07%
258,000
19,000
2012
0.24%
273,500
67,000
NOTE: Port Moody led the Region in population growth from 2006 to 2011 at 20%
26
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Protective Services Focus
2012
2003
27
Protective
Services
54%
Protective
Services 45%
prepared by Financial Services Department
City
Departments
46%
Other City
Departments
55%
Historical Perspective
Regional Labour Increases
Year
CUPE
Fire
Police
CPI
2000
2.0%
3.0%
3.0%
2.2%
2001
2.0%
3.0%
3.0%
1.8%
2002
3.0%
3.0%
3.0%
2.2%
2003
2.5%
3.8%
3.8%
2.0%
2004
2.5%
3.5%
3.5%
2.0%
2005
2.5%
3.5%
3.5%
1.9%
2006
3.0%
2.5%
2.5%
1.9%
2007
3.0%
3.5%
3.5%
2.0%
2008
3.0%
5.1%
4.0%
2.4%
2009
3.5%
5.1%
4.9%
0.1%
2010
4.0%
TBD
2.95%
1.8%
2011
4.0%
TBD
2.95%
2.1%
2012
1.75%
TBD
2.55%
1.5%
* Statistics courtesy of Metro Vancouver
28
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Labour Increases
5.00%
CUPE
Fire
Police
4.00%
CPI
3.00%
2.00%
1.00%
0.00%
29
prepared by Financial Services Department
Historical Perspective
Debt per Capita (with 2nd Fire Hall Borrowing $3M)
400
351
324
350
295
290
300
282
262
270
239
250
213
188
100
93
84
67
50
58
48
28 22 22
17 13
8
5
0
30
prepared by Financial Services Department
Projected
105
Projected
137
150
Projected
166
Projected
175
Projected
200
Historical Perspective
Declining Debt
400
351
350
324
300
290
262
250
239
213
200
188
175
156
150
137
105
100
93
95
84
67
50
295
282
270
258
245
233
220
209
198
187
174
162
155
147
139
131
123
114
105
75
58
65
53
48
42
28
22 22 17
13 8
5
0
Based on debt borrowing of $6 Million in 2012 and up to $3 Million in 2013.
Based on population topping out at 38,000 in 2021.
31
86
prepared by Financial Services Department
30
17
4 0
Current Perspective
32
prepared by Financial Services Department
Current Perspective
Asset Renewal – Closing the GAP
 City has approximately $650 Million in assets
•
•
•
$450 Million land / $200 Million infrastructure/equipment
Depreciation $6.2 Million per year
Annual replacement cost is significantly higher, possibly
$10,000,000
 Asset Funding
 Asset Levy (established 2009)
• 2009 – 2011: 3.50%
• 2013 – 2017: 1.00% per year Proposed
$852,000
1,621,000
 Other Capital Funding (2013 - 2017)
 Utility Capital Funding (2013 - 2017)
2,473,000
1,076,000
3,605,000
Total Annual Asset Funding (end of 2017)
$ 7,154,000
Total Annual Infrastructure Funding Gap (estimated)
$ 2,846,000
33
prepared by Financial Services Department
Current Perspective
Competitive Business Tax Rate
2012 Business Tax Survey - Metro Vancouver
2010
Rank
2012 Rank
Municipality
Commercial Mill
Rate
Residential Mill Rate
Commercial to
Residential Tax Ratio
2
1
Chilliwack
9.45
4.46
2.12
3
2
Langley (City)
8.61
3.73
2.31
4
3
White Rock
8.71
3.56
2.45
5
4
Abbotsford
12.43
4.91
2.53
1
5
West Vancouver
4.75
1.81
2.62
9
6
Maple Ridge
11.75
4.09
2.87
6
7
Langley (Township)
9.48
3.20
2.96
7
8
Port Moody
9.84
3.31
2.98
8
9
Surrey
7.07
2.35
3.00
11
10
Mission
14.62
4.62
3.16
13
11
Pitt Meadows
11.85
3.73
3.18
10
12
Delta
10.71
3.33
3.22
15
13
Port Coquitlam
13.07
3.71
3.52
12
14
North Vancouver (District)
8.54
2.36
3.61
14
15
Richmond
7.54
2.00
3.77
16
16
New Westminster
13.55
3.54
3.82
18
17
North Vancouver (City)
9.14
2.38
3.84
19
18
Vancouver
8.78
2.02
4.35
17
19
Burnaby
10.10
2.23
4.52
20
20
Coquitlam
14.52
3.11
4.66
** Data courtesy of the National Association for Industrial and Office Parks (NAIOP)
34
prepared by Financial Services Department
Current Perspective
Competitive Business Tax Rate
Business to Residential Tax Ratio
4.66
Coquitlam
4.52
Burnaby
4.35
Vancouver
North Vancouver (City)
3.84
New Westminster
3.82
3.77
Richmond
3.61
North Vancouver (District)
3.52
Port Coquitlam
3.22
Delta
3.18
Pitt Meadows
3.16
Mission
3.00
Surrey
2.98
Port Moody
2.96
Langley (Township)
2.87
Maple Ridge
2.62
West Vancouver
2.53
Abbotsford
2.45
2.31
White Rock
Langley (City)
2.12
Chilliwack
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
** Data courtesy of the National Association for Industrial and Office Parks (NAIOP)
35
prepared by Financial Services Department
4.00
5.00
Current Perspective
Changing Tax Base
36
prepared by Financial Services Department
Current Perspective
Evolving Tax Base - Value of Corporate Citizens
70.0%
60.0%
Property Tax Allocation Comparison
1993 - 2012
67.4%
50.0%
40.0%
48.3%
2012
1993
Residential Class paying proportionately more of total tax!
30.0%
33.7%
13.8% 14.6%
20.0%
16.6%
10.0%
0.3%
1.2%
0.0%
37
prepared by Financial Services Department
1.8%
2.0%
0.1% 0.2%
Future Perspective
38
prepared by Financial Services Department
Future Perspective
Challenges
 Evergreen Line
• Growth management
• Traffic and parking issues
• Police enforcement
 Diminishing land inventories
• City will not be able to sell land to finance capital much into the future
 Replacement & renewal of critical assets
• Assets are being used up and need more funding to replace & maintain
 Work force (aging, skills shortage, knowledge/experience gap)
• The City will need to compete for talent and skilled labour
• Succession planning and alternative work force strategies (retirees)
 Limited revenue opportunities under the Community Charter
39
prepared by Financial Services Department
Future Perspective
Opportunities
 Evergreen Line
•
•
•
Developments and revitalizations along the corridor
Improved access to businesses
Improved commuter options
 Shared Services
•
•
•
Potential cost savings
Improved services
Village of Anmore contributing to recreation costs
 Debt Capacity
•
•
City’s debt per capita currently favourable
Debt allows the allocation of the capital cost to be spread over several generations
 Leverage Technology
40
prepared by Financial Services Department
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
2013 Operating Budget
 Developed by City Management
 Starting point was zero increase over 2012
 No new extravagant programs
 One new position proposed – Police Constable
 There are 8 distinct categories driving the
PROPOSED Budget increase of 6.65%:
41
prepared by Financial Services Department
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
1. Revenue Changes ($108,600)
- 0.37%
 Increases to fees for programs, grants and other revenues
are reducing the budget increase
42
prepared by Financial Services Department
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
2. Growth ($69,700)
 New developments means new taxation
 Used in 2013 to offset increased costs
43
prepared by Financial Services Department
- 0.24%
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
3. Salaries ($570,700)
 No new City positions
 Union collective agreements
44
prepared by Financial Services Department
+ 1.93%
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
4. Inflation ($192,500)
+ 0.65%
 General increase to the cost of doing business
 Similar to all businesses and households
45
prepared by Financial Services Department
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
5. Fire Hall Debt Levy ($143,500)
+ 0.49%
 Interest and principal repayment costs for the $3 Million
second phase of borrowing to construct the new Hall
 Total construction costs $11 Million
 30 year term
46
prepared by Financial Services Department
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
6. Legislation/Regulations ($138,100)
+ 0.47%
 0.28% ($82,900) to fund accounting requirements for
increases to employee benefit obligations
 0.19% ($55,200) to meet new Provincial regulation to
control noxious weeds (e.g. knotweed, thistle, hogweed)
47
prepared by Financial Services Department
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
7. High Service Priorities ($444,000)
+ 1.51%
 1.00% ($295,000) increase to the Asset Renewal Levy to
provide ongoing funding to maintain and replace aging
assets
 0.37% ($109,000) to eliminate an unsustainable budget
practice meant to generate budget savings from position
vacancies
 0.14% ($40,000) to provide a Council contingency to
address unforeseen expenditures that typically arise each
year
48
prepared by Financial Services Department
What’s in the Budget Proposal?
8. Police Budget ($651,000)
+ 2.21%
 1.78% ($524,000) to fund Police union collective
agreements
 0.25% ($73,600) to fund a new recruit constable
 0.33% ($98,800) to fund some minor increases to
operations (e.g. vehicle, firearms, heat/light)
 - 0.15% ($45,400) reduction over 2012 funded from
operational efficiencies
49
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Capital Projects
 Capital funding from taxation
 1.5% tax increase to fund capital
 Total 2013 capital budget proposed at $6.9 million
 The capital plan mostly includes repair, renewal or safety projects
like the ones listed below:
Capital Project
50
Capital
Budget
Rocky Point Park sidewalk replacement
$
128,000
Westhill Pool repairs
$
220,000
Moody Street overpass sidewalk widening
$
750,000
Ioco Road safety improvements
$
330,000
Permanent Noons Creek Drive traffic calming measures
$
75,000
Sewer & drainage repairs and upgrades
$ 1,500,000
Water repairs and upgrades
$ 1,800,000
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Budget Deliberations
2013 Budget Summary (1% ~ $295,000)
Item
Amount Tax
$
%
2012 Baseline Budget
Comment
0.00
0.00
Starting point is same service level as 2012
Revenue Changes
-108,612
-0.37
Fees, grants in lieu of taxes increases
Growth
-69,700
-0.24
New tax revenues from development (BCA estimate)
Salaries
570,669
1.93
Salary contractual increases – no new positions
Inflation/3 Year Average
192,531
0.65
Inflation
Inlet Centre Fire Hall Debt Levy
143,500
0.49
Second Phase of Borrowing ($3 Million)
728,388
2.46
Unavoidable Legislation/Regulation
138,090
0.47
Post Employment Benefits; Invasive plant mgmt.
Operational Service Priorities - High
444,000
1.51
Service levels prioritized HIGH by management
1,310,478
4.44
650,998
2.21
1,961,476
6.65
2013 Commitments:
Subtotal
Subtotal
Police
TOTAL
51
prepared by Financial Services Department
As presented at October 23, 2012 Council Meeting
2013 Budget Deliberations
$531,600 Average 2012 Assessed Household *
Proposed Budget
2013
Budget
2014
Budget
2015
Budget
2016
Budget
2017
Budget
General Government
2.95%
1.11%
1.62%
1.54%
1.51%
Port Moody Police
2.21%
1.16%
1.14%
1.47%
0.92%
Asset Renewal Levy
1.00%
1.00%
1.00%
1.00%
1.00%
Fire Hall #1 Debt Levy
0.49%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
6.65%
3.27%
3.76%
4.01%
3.43%
Total Tax Increase
* Average value based on April, 2012 BC Assessment Roll;
2013 Average assessed value will not be known until tax rolls published in 2013
** Approximately $17 for every 1% increase (e.g. 6.65% x $17 ~ $114)
52
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Budget Deliberations
$531,600 Average 2012 Assessed Household *
Proposed Budget
2013
Budget
2014
Budget
2015
Budget
2016
Budget
2017
Budget
$ 50
$ 20
$ 30
$ 30
$ 31
Port Moody Police
38
21
21
29
19
Asset Renewal Levy
17
18
19
19
20
Fire Hall #1 Replacement Levy
9
0
0
0
0
Total Property Charges
$ 114
$ 59
$ 70
$ 78
$ 70
General Government
* Average value based on April, 2012 BC Assessment Roll;
2013 Average assessed value will not be know until tax rolls published in 2013
** Approximately $17 for every 1% tax increase (e.g. 6.65% x $17 ~ $114)
53
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Budget Deliberations
Utilities – Water, Sewer, Garbage & Recycling, Drainage
 City provides 4 utility services
 Self balancing funds
• Capital and operating costs = Revenues billed
 3 are funded by user fees; 1 by taxation
• Water, Sanitary Sewer, Garbage & Recycling – user fee
• Storm Drainage – taxation
 Utilities are for the most part “regionalized”
• Significant cost passed from Metro Vancouver
• Jointly fund major infrastructure (dams, filtration plants, pipes, etc.)
• Local costs include workers/infrastructure with city boundaries
54
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Budget Deliberations
(Net of 5% Discount)
2012
Budget
2013
Budget
$
%
Variance Variance
Sanitary Sewer Services
$ 317
$ 317
$0
0.00%
Water Services
$ 338
$ 338
$0
0.00%
Garbage & Recycling Services
$ 307
$ 307
$0
0.00%
$ 962
$ 962
$0
0.00%
$ 52
$ 55
$3
5.77%
$ 1,014
$ 1,017
$3
0.30%
Subtotal (User Fee Charges)
Storm Drainage Services
Total Utility Charges
55
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Budget Deliberations
($531,600 Average 2012 Assessed Household *)
Fire
Hall #1
Debt
Levy
Subtotal
Storm
Drainage
Utility
General
Gov’t.
Police
Asset
Levy
2013
$ 50
$ 38
$ 17
$ 9
$114
2014
$ 20
$ 21
$ 18
$ 0
2015
$ 30
$ 21
$ 19
2016
$ 30
$ 29
2017
$ 31
$ 19
User Fee Utilities
(Water, Sewer, Garbage)
City
Metro
$ 3
-$5
$5
$117
$ 59
$ 4
-$3
$27
$87
$ 0
$ 70
$ 4
-$4
$34
$104
$ 19
$ 0
$78
$ 4
$0
$28
$110
$ 20
$ 0
$ 70
$ 4
$10
$21
$105
*
Average value based on April, 2012 BC Assessment Roll;
2013 Average assessed value will not be known until tax rolls published in 2013
** Approximately $17 for every 1% tax increase (e.g. 6.65% x $17 ~ $114)
56
Total
with
Utilities
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Budget Deliberations
($531,600 Average 2012 Assessed Household *)
2012
Budget
2013
Budget
$
Variance
User
Fee/Tax
Impact
General Government
$ 1,139
$ 1,189
$ 50
2.95%
Port Moody Police
$
$
535
$ 38
2.21%
$ 1,636
$ 1,724
$ 88
5.16%
Asset Renewal Levy
$
51
$
68
$ 17
1.00%
Fire Hall #1 Replacement Levy
$
19
$
28
$
9
0.49%
Subtotal
Subtotal - Operating
497
$ 1,706
$ 1,820
$ 114
6.65%
Storm Drainage
$
52
$
55
$
3
5.77%
User Fee Utilities (Water, Sewer, Garbage & Recycling)
$
962
$
962
$
0
0.00%
$ 117
4.30%
Total Property Charges
*
$ 2,720
$ 2,837
Average value based on April, 2012 BC Assessment Roll;
2013 Average assessed value will not be known until tax rolls published in 2013
** Approximately $17 for every 1% tax increase (e.g. 6.65% x $17 ~ $114)
57
prepared by Financial Services Department
2013 Budget Deliberations
($531,600 Average 2012 Assessed Household *)
$531,600
Household
$750,000
Household
$1,200,000
Household
General Government
$ 1,189
$ 1,677
$2,684
Port Moody Police
$
$
755
$1,208
$ 1,724
$ 2,432
$3,892
Asset Renewal Levy
$
68
$
96
$153
Fire Hall #1 Replacement Levy
$
28
$
40
$63
$ 1,820
$ 2,568
$4,108
Storm Drainage
$
55
$
78
User Fee Utilities (Water, Sewer, Garbage & Recycling)
$
962
$
962
Subtotal
Subtotal - Operating
Total Property Charges
*
58
535
$ 2,837
$ 3,608
Average value based on April, 2012 BC Assessment Roll;
2013 Average assessed value will not be known until tax rolls published in 2013
prepared by Financial Services Department
$124
$
962
$5,194
Budget Options
Increase Non-Tax Revenues
 Explore Other Revenues
• Revenue opportunities limited by the Community Charter
• May require capital investments.
• Sensitive revenues (e.g. pay parking)
 Leverage Developer Contributions
• Share revenues from increased densities, or require developers to provide amenity
contributions as part of development.
 Leverage Assets
• The City has leased land instead of selling it (e.g. Inlet Centre Residences), and
negotiated revenue sharing agreements (e.g. Boathouse Restaurant) on City land.
 Increase User Fees
• Most programs are subsidized to some extent. The City could reduce or eliminate
subsidies from taxation.
 Special Capital Levies
• Special capital levies can address specific needs, and be discontinued once the
initiative is complete or funding met (e.g. Fire Hall Debt Levy)
59
prepared by Financial Services Department
Budget Options
Expenditure Controls
 Economies of Scale
•
The City does pools its volumes with other cities in a regional purchasing
consortium to leverage volume buying power.
 Municipal Service Assessments
•
•
•
Transparent, detailed review of each business unit
Finding efficiencies
Right level of service at right cost
 Value
•
The City uses value not just cost as the criteria for purchases to avoid long term
costs (e.g. higher maintenance, shorter useful life, poor service, etc.)
 Alternative Service Providers
•
Some services can be contracted out successfully but others belong in the
public domain and should not be run on the bottom line.
 Partnerships/ Shared Services
•
•
60
Partnerships reduce costs and transfer or broaden the financial risk
Staffing, operating and capital costs can be shared
prepared by Financial Services Department
Budget Options
Service Adjustments
 Built-In Service Levels
•
•
Citizens are accustomed to a certain service level and usually want it maintained.
Surveys can assist with service adjustments.
 Which Services does the City adjust?
•
•
This is an ongoing debate. No two people are going to agree on the same level for
every service.
Citizens generally expect the same services and service levels delivered in
neighbouring communities.
 Sustainable Service
•
What is a reasonable or sustainable level of service? What level is required versus
level desired?
 Shared Services (e.g. dog control)
•
61
The City purchases dog compounding services from Coquitlam. Are there other
services we could share to maintain a high quality of service?
prepared by Financial Services Department
Public Input
Questions, Comments, Suggestions ???
62
prepared by Financial Services Department