Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCounty Board of Supervisors - Minutes - 5/7/2013 381 Minutes of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors’ Budget Planning Meeting Of May 7, 2013 – 4:00 p.m. Bayfield County Board Room, Courthouse, Washburn, Wisconsin The Bayfield County Board of Supervisors called a special meeting for the purpose of budget planning on May 7, 2013. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Miller at 4:00 p.m. The following County Board Supervisors were present: Shawn W. Miller, Delores Kittleson, William D. Bussey, John Bennett, Beth Meyers, Kenneth Jardine, Dennis M. Pocernich, Harold A. Maki, Wayne Williams, Neil Schultz, James Crandall, Brett T. Rondeau and Marco T. Bichanich. A quorum of board members was present to conduct business. Also present were: County Administrator, Mark Abeles-Allison; County Clerk, Scott S. Fibert; Deputy County Clerk, Dawn M. Bellile; Tim Kane, Community Resource Agent; Tom Toepfer, Highway Commissioner; Paul Susienka, Sheriff; and Dan Anderson, Treasurer. 1. Welcome and Purpose. Chairman Miller welcomed everyone to this afternoon’s meeting. He stated that the purpose of this meeting is to come up with some direction for the 2014 county budget process. As everyone knows, we are in some tougher times here with the highway department, with levy freezes and hopefully we can come up with some ideas and solutions. Miller then turned the meeting over to Mark Abeles- Allison, County Administrator., who in turn, turned the meeting over to Tim Kane, who will be facilitating this meeting. Kane thanked Miller and Abeles-Allison. He stated that this year is no different from that of any other year as we embark on preparing the budget for the upcoming year. Our budget planning process is really an opportunity for County Board members to take information and input on critical issues that will affect your decision making. This is an excellent opportunity to do this. We are taking a different route this time. We have sent out a survey and will take a look at the results later. So for now, he turned the meeting back over to Abeles-Allison who started with the Budget Overview. Abeles-Allison stated that at the request of the Board, we have taken a route and we have some interesting information to share with you. 2. Budget Overview.  State Levy Limits and State Funding Projections. This year is not going to be unlike other years. We have had a tax freeze and levy freeze. The past couple of years we have had drops in valuations and are hoping that we will have stabilization next year and the mill rate will remain the same. We are estimating 2 more years of a budget freeze. As far as state funding projections, the Highway Department is taking a hit; we are not looking at receiving any extra dollars. We will probably receive approximately $65,000 where we used to get about $100,000. When we have opportunities to apply for grants, we will. Abeles-Allison went over levy dollars which are shared equally between Highway, Human Services and General Funds. 382 He presented a graph which shows equalized value declining at approximately 3.2% from 2003 to 2013.  County Revenues and Expenditure Trends. Abeles-Allison reported that there has been a big jump in sales tax from approximately $740,000 to $970,000. Hopefully we can build on this and see things pick up.  County Treasurer’s Report and County Valuation Anticipation. Anderson was asked to give information on our current interest rates. He reported that in the mid-2000’s we brought in a tremendous amount of interest and now we are looking at less than 1.10% for most of our dollars. He also reported that back in the 1980’s interest rates were at approximately 16-17%. It doesn’t look like the rates will be changing anytime soon. Abeles-Allison reported that Forestry revenues are going up. We will be hiring an FTE in the Forestry Department, however, Forestry revenues are not the same as tax revenue. Discussion took place on how our surrounding mills are doing, where Wausau Paper and Boise are buying up small mills and how that hurts our area. Anderson gave an update on the Treasurer’s Report. He reported that presently we have loan agreements Northern Lights, Iron River Incubator Building, and World Class. Northern Lights’ loan is in the approximate amount of $743,000; we have approximately $200,000 invested in the Incubator Building; and approximately $225,000. Anderson reported that the loans from these entities are current. Further discussion took place on the loans.  Tax Distribution by Taxing Entity. Fibert spoke on the property tax distribution. He informed the Board that disbursements are made as follows: County 24%, State 1%, Local 19%, Schools 48%, and WITC 8%. He reported that he believes Bayfield County does a very good job at giving the services we do for the amount of money we receive. Bayfield County shows that government can be successful. 3. County Budget Survey Results. The meeting was then turned over to Kane. Kane reported that we did something different this year. Instead of just the board being asked what the most important issues facing Bayfield County are, we also asked the public. This was done through an on-line. We received an excellent response back, approximately 205 results. This isn’t statistically valid, however, it is an opportunity to reach out to the public for input in preparing the budget. The survey was short and simply with only 4 questions being asked: 1) For each of the County-supported program/service areas listed below, please indicate how important each is to you. (Not Important To Me; Of Little Importance To Me; Somewhat Important To Me; Highly Important To Me; No Opinion). The following were the program/service areas: 383 1. Aging & Disability Services 2. Child Support Enforcement 3. Circuit Court & Clerk of Circuit Court 4. County Administrator 5. County Clerk 6. County District Attorney/Victim Witness 7. County Fair 8. County Forest Management 9. County Land Use Planning & Zoning Ordinance Administration 10. County Parks & Trails 11. County Register of Deeds 12. County Treasurer 13. Economic Development Support 14. Emergency Management Services 15. Family & Youth Services 16. Land & Water Conservation Programs 17. Land Records 18. Law Enforcement, Jail Operations & 911 Communications Services 19. Public Assistance Programs 20. Public Health Services 21. Public Libraries Support 22. Regional Airport Support 23. Rehabilitation Programs for Jail Inmates 24. Road/Highway Maintenance & Snowplowing 25. Tourism Promotion 26. University Extension Education Program 27. Veterans Services 2) Review the Bayfield County supported program/service areas list below and rant in order the top five most important to you by placing a 1,2,3,4 and 5 in the blank space preceding your top five priorities, with 1 being your top priority, 2 being your second priority and so on. (Only list 5). The same list of 1-27 entities followed. 3) Do you have any suggestions or recommendations for improving the delivery of Bayfield County services/programs? If so, please indicate in the space provided below. 4) Do you have any other comment(s) that you would like considered during Bayfield County’s 2014 budget planning process? If so, please indicate in the space provided below. Kane passed out 2 documents which contained survey results. The white copy contained public responses and the yellow copy contained County Board results. (A copy of the results are in the County Clerk’s office for review). 384 4. County Highway/Road Funding. Abeles-Allison introduced Tom Toepfer, Highway Commissioner. Toepfer reported that the department can pretty much take care of its own issues within the department except the critical issues the department is facing is funding for road construction. In order to fulfill promises to keep road maintenance on a schedule, we have spent down transportation fund. The problem now is that outside sources have dried up. Congressman Obey was able to allocate $1.2 million dollars a few years back. $1.6 was used for 6 miles on County Highway C. Last year we had about 140,000 for construction projects. This is what highway has today for an annual paving budget. We are in a serious problem as far as construction on highways. We have 180 miles of highways in Bayfield County. As part of the road maintenance , we should do 9 miles a year to sustain the miles. We don’t have the funds to keep this pace up. Toepfer also reported on capital improvements. It is thought that we should eventually shut down Grand View shop and move to Mason. It won’t save much in fact, it probably would cost money to do this as we would need to expand the Mason facilities. Abeles-Allison went over Highway Funding in 2014 and Beyond as follows:  180 miles county-wide / 20 year life = 9 miles a year;  9 miles x $225k a mile = $2 million;  $150k available now annually in the Highway budget for construction;  Shortfall: $1.85 million a year;  Critical need: 5 miles a year = $1,150,000 Summary: Annual Shortfall of $1,000,000 Abeles-Allison then went over the Revenue Generation Options:  Bonding;  Utilize General Fund Balances;  Wheel Tax: $10 would generate $140,000  Future Prospect of State or Federal Dollars: Not in Near Future;  Municipal Cooperation Opportunities;  Future Road Construction Referendum;  Other. Discussion on the possibilities that could be taken. For long range planning concerns, how are the roads that are to be replaced evaluated? Toepfer explained. Discussion on the State highways and Toepfer explained that the State has jurisdiction on all numbered highways. The State hires individual counties to do their maintenance. Every year we enter into routine or discretionary maintenance agreement. The county does not pave. Discussed satellite shops and what type of equipment they house and for what purposes. Highway workers are assigned a “beat” in which they take care of the same stretch of highway, this way they get to know the route, what needs to be done, etc. 385 Other options were discussed which are:  Returning Paved Roads to Gravel;  Weight Limit Enforcement;  Resurfacing Instead of Rebuilding;  Microcoating/Chip Seal;  Rut Wedging;  Reducing Operational Costs;  Allocation of Other Funds to Highway; Discussion on the fact that the county may have to try some other opportunities to try to save dollars instead going on the same way as we have been. Weight restrictions were discussed. 5. Critical Issues and Capital Projects Identified by County Department Heads Affecting Department Budgets. Abeles-Allison went over health insurance costs. The family plan now averages $25,000. We see a decline and a tentative 7% rate. This should put us into a very good category for a zero percent increase for next year. A graph was shown. Wages. Another graph shown depicting Bayfield County Wages from 2008-2012 with a 1% increase per year. We have reduced some staffing positions. While we have gone up, the net increase has been 1% or less. Legal costs. Another graph showing past 5 years, vary from $130,000 to $160,000 in legal fees. Part due to new law firm corporation counsel. We have contested cases which increase legal fees. Discussion on zoning legal fees and why they are so high. Contractual Services. A graph showing contractual services in Bayfield County from 2008-2012 was provided by which Highway, Human Services and Land Conservation use these services. Fund Balance: Anderson provided information on Bayfield County’s fund balances. Discussed with the Board tax certificates. The County makes the towns whole by paying the entire amount of taxes to the towns, which includes what the taxpayer doesn’t pay. The 2nd portion of taxes are then paid directly to us. If the taxpayer is late, the County charges interest to the taxpayer, which is also paid to the County. If the taxpayer should become delinquent for many years, the County would become the owner of the property in question and be the one that would foreclose. Anderson and the Board discussed the county operations fund, which is like a “rainy day” fund. The County is allowed to have 25% of its operating budget as a reserve in case of hard times, delinquent taxes, etc. Further discussion took place. 6. Major Budget Policy Questions. Abeles-Allison spoke about dedicating 1.6 million to the highway from the general fund balance. It is there to use, but it is only part of a solution. We need a plan in place so that we know what we will do after 3 years? Maybe an increased levy starting sooner rather than later. This would have to go to referendum. Discussed the possibility of bonding. We know that the State and Federal 386 governments won’t address an increase in gas tax to help solve the problem. Discussed looking at the entire budget more seriously to see what could be placed in the Highway budget; discussed the possibility of trying new procedures that could possibly help cut down expenses, or a combination of the two; and also discussed using the general fund balance. Maki made a statement that we should take a million from the general fund balance and have a good plan after that. Making sure that the monies are designated. A lengthy discussion took place on the possibility of a referendum. It was thought that this might be a hard sell as the County does have the money in the General Fund Balance that could be used; it’s very possible this wouldn’t pass because of that. Toepfer was asked if it was possible that we could receive any other dollars from the State – which he stated was pretty unlikely. Discussion on whether the State bonds. WRS Contributions. Discussed that since Act 10 was put into place, approximately 20 employees have been paying the WRS contributions which has made this fund drop significantly. Now that the Union contracts are done, the rest of the employees will also be paying their share of the WRS contributions which will make the fund drop even further freeing up this amount of fund balance. Library Funded. We remain a constant at 92% funding. Alternatives were discussed. If we continue to fund at $187,000, we are thinking about making a $25,000 contribution for capital projects to keep circulation costs down. This way there wouldn’t be an increase in circulations costs, while at the same time it would be a way for us to increase payments to the libraries. This amount does not include what we pay to Ashland, Superior, and Sawyer County, however, we also receive monies from the other counties that our citizens attend. The more money we send to them, the more it increases the cost per circulation. This could help maintain their infrastructure. Discussed putting them in library districts. A short recess was taken at 6:00 p.m. 7. County Wage Study. Abeles-Allison placed a telephone conference “skype” call into the WIPFLI and spoke with Julia Johnson. Johnson spoke about the merit based system where you pay for performance. A merit decision worksheet was distributed to the Personnel Committee prior to this meeting who have reviewed the same. In general speaking, she didn’t believe in cost of living raises and wouldn’t recommend this for Bayfield County. It was discussed that if the Board is going to make any decisions regarding this merit pay that we do this as a whole County Board and not through the Personnel Committee. The Personnel Committee stated that they need to know if this is what the Board wants and if this is the direction that they want the Committee to take. If not, there is no point in discussing this at the Personnel Committee level if the Board doesn’t want it at all. 387 The Wage Study will be good as a tool. We can look at the wage study and correct any inaccuracies and not go into the merit system, or we can do both. Board members had many concerns with the merit system. We have different departments. We have some department heads that favor certain employees so you know the merit system will work favorably in some departments. We have a discontent among employees now, why feed the fire. It is important that we are having this discussion as the wage study shows us we have inaccuracies. Discussed how far apart the bottom wages are from the top wages. How do we train department heads to do the evaluations and determine wages. Discussion on how Board members felt about the merit pay and that the Personnel Committee needs direction. It was recommended that the age study be look at and start to straighten out what is inaccurate now. Discussion turned to having the Personnel Committee look at the job descriptions. 8. Wrap Up. Abeles-Allison stated that this has been a good meeting and we will give direction to Department Heads. In July and August we will start looking at the 2014 budget. There being no further business to come before the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors, Chairman Miller adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Scott S. Fibert, Bayfield County Clerk SSF/dmb