05/22/1985 - Packet '4WO+'
CITY OF TIGARD
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
Durham Treatment Plant
Corner of Hall Blvd. & Durham Rd.
7:00 p.m. , May 22, 1985
7:00 1. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL:
Wally Hoffman, John Cook,
Judy Christensen, Tom Brian,
Howard Duffy, Phil Edin.
Dale Evans, Jerry Edwards,
Nick Frezza, Ima Scott,
7:05 2. Follow-up information
Recommended Budget Summary - Info. only/Follow-Up
Gas Tax
WCCLS - Fall Supplemental?
Budget History Summary
Control Budget/EFB-BFB
7:20 3. FY1985-86 Amended Recommendation Re: CIP $/EFB
7:35 4. FY1984-85 Audit Concerns
7:45 5. Civic Center Budget:
Furnishings/Related Costs
Bid
Budget Status
$100,000 Temporary cash flow or permanent
8:00 6. Budget Process Discussion
Council Goals & Service Level Priorities
Long Range Financial Plan
Operating Budget
Capital Projects/CIP
Labor Relations/Personnel Costs
Process
9:30 7. Budget Committee Work Plan
10:00 8. Adjournment
(0803F)
May 22 , 1985
MEMO
` ►+ TO: TIGARD CITY BUDGET COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: BUDGET PROCESS
At our last meeting we discussed how we could simplify our
budget process and shorten the length of the deliberations .
With that purpose in mind, I took the liberty to inquire
about the City of Newberg 's process and am attaching copies
of a portion of their budget document for your review and
consideration.
In discussing Newberg's process with their City Manager , I
noted the following:
1 ) There exists within their budget committee (and
presumably the community) a high level of trust
for the data that the administration provi e�s and the
integrity of the budget officer . Therefore, one sees a
"culture" that accepts the accuracy of both the data
itself and the judgment of the City Manager .
2) The City Manager considers the maintenance of that
trust as his highest priority. He makes every effort
to maintain that level of confidence.
3 ) The budget document evidences a philosophy of "KISS -
Keep it simple, stupid" (my wording, not Newberg 's ) .
Every effort is made to keep the document itself and
the attendant discussion aimed at the essential policy
questions . The City Manager reinforces this by using
a short narrative at the front of every department to
summarize the department 's goals and indicate the
overall dollar change from last year ' s budget .
4) The committee does not use meeting time to review detail
pages . Likewise, time is not consumed by having de-
partment personnel present detailed information. The
one page narrative is supposed to tell the committee
what program changes are contemplated . Any specific
questions are to be asked and answered
outside the public meeting process.
While there are definite differences in community thinking
and committee makeup between Newberg and Tigard, perhaps
there exists within the Newberg process some ideas we could
examine.
ai &&�_
Phil Edin
*400-
MEMO
TO: Budget Committee DATE: April 22, 1985
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: 1985-86 Budget/General Information
The general information that is presented to you has been given in past years,
but realistically unless you work with a municipal budget day in and day out,
it is very easy to forget department funds or our process. The purpose of this
memo and the other summary information is to prepare you for the budget review.
The State of Oregonrequires municipalities to separate their revenue expendi-
tures into various funds. The City of Newberg has 20 funds. These are:
1. General Fund
2. State Tax Street Fund
3. Capital Improvement Fund
4. Sanitary Sewer Fund
5. Water Fund
6. Debt Service Fund
7. Federal Revenue Sharing Fund
8. Special Assessments Fund
9. Bancroft Bond Fund
10. 911 Emergency Fund
11. Economic Development Revolving Fund
12. Title I Grant Funds
13. State Revenue Sharing Fund
14. Storm Sewer Fund
15. Hospital Fund
16. Library Gift and Memorial Fund
17. Library Building Fund
18. Sewer Improvement Reserve Fund
19. Water Improvement Reserve Fund
20. STP Building Fund
Each fund should stand on its own, i.e. , expenditures should be no more than its
revenues. Thera should not be a depen'.ency on borrowing from another fund. In
past years our community has scen tlzat' this can be extremely detrimental in the
long run.
The general fund has within it most of the City departments. Each department is
a part of the general fund and obviously, the sum total of the departments make up
the general fund. The departments within the general fund are: Non-departmental,
general government, recorder, municipal court, administration, finance, legal,
planning, police, fire, building inspection, engineering, city buildings, street
lighting, municipal garage, library, social services, transfers from general fund
and contingency.
ORGANIZATION OF BUDGET:
The custom has been to provide a budget message, a memorandum to the Budget Committee
explaining the process and various amounts of detail and a summary page before each
fund. The budget is organized from the very general to the very specific. The
deeper ___._.__..._--
pe you go into each fund or each department, the more detail you will see.
Memo to Budget Committee
April 22, 1985 Page 2
wrwv I suggest that each Budget Committee member read the budget message, this memo-
randum and the cover memo of each department and fund. By reading these three
documents you will have a very good sense of the 1985-86 budget.
The budget message is a glimpse of the past, current and future roles of the
City of Newberg. The future of our City is reassessed each year through the
City Council goal setting seminars. The past seminar produced the following
major goals:
A. Build new sewage treatment plant.
B. Build new library addition.
C. Extend Villa Road.
D. Improve Hancock and Main Street corner.
E. Secure library funding.
F. Annex "islands".
G. Create better development procedures.
H. Review and update Comprehensive Plan.
I. Street overlay program.
J. Public facility program.
K. Secure land for improvements.
L. Storm drainage utility plan.
M. Revise/codify ordinances.
N. Nuisance abatement procedures.
Also mentioned as minor goals were such items as computerization of departments,
revision of bookkeeping system in finance department, compliance with handicapped
regulations, updating of engineer maps, traffic plan for uptown area and installa-
tion of better emergency radio equipment. Almost all of the goals mentioned have
been or will be completed in the next fiscal year. The goals developed by the
City Council provide parameters of our City budget.
BUDGET EXPLANATION:
The first page of each department and fund is a brief narrative of that section
of the budget. Where appropriate, there will be a number in the upper left hand
corner indicating the increase or decrease from last years budget. The one or
two paragraphs describing a department or fund is intended to only give the high-
light of the differences from last years budget. It does not give all of the
, detail.
The next page of the department or fund is called the summary page. The first
column will show the budgeted amount for 1984-85 as approved by the Budget
Committee and the City Council and adjusted for budget transfers. This column
may have changed as authorized by the City Council during the fiscal year. In
most cases, it has not.
The next column will describe the department head request for 1985-86. The
following column lists the amount approved by the City Manager and recommeded
to the Budget Committee.
Memo to Budget Committee
April 22, 1985 Page 3
r
r
The following pages will contain a summary break-out of the employee services;
materials, supplies and services; and capital outlay. At the bottom of each one
of these categories will be figures that should correspond to the summary page
mentioned in the preceeding paragraph.
Each of the summary pages is followed by detailed descriptions and explanations
of the expenditures. In no case has any information been deleted because it was
not approved by the City Manager. The Budget Committee and the City Council should
see, in my opinion, both requests and approvals. Keep in mind that there are bound
to be differences between a department head request and a Citv Manager approval due
to responsibilities of each individual. A department head is looking only at his/her
section of the budget and describing what should be done in their department
ideally or at least in the most efficient manner. The City Manager will be
looking at an overall picture and must approve what can be funded due to the
future needs of the City.
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS:
The number of employees, status of employees (full-time or part-time) or longevity
of an employee will change in each department. Comparing last year and the up-
coming year benefits will be difficult. There have been some changes in some of
the benefits. They are as follows:
Fica - .7% increase
Unemployment - 2.2% increase
Retirement percentages - no change
Health and dental policies - no change
Workers Compensation - no change
Long Term Disability - .012% increase
REVIEW PROCESS:
In almost all cases each department or fund has been reviewed no less than three
times. In some cases as many as five or six reviews have been made on the budget
in order to present to you an accountable, well thought out final budget.
While I will review the budget in detail with the Budget Committee, as a group,
I invite any committee member to come into my office for individual questions
or assistance. I will be happy to make time available to meet with you and go
into greater detail or explanations prior to any of our meetings.
'4W:f j
`4w,"'
MEMO
TO: Budget Committee DATE: April 24, 1985
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Budget Message
INTRODUCTION:
Transmitted herewith is the recommended City of Newberg budget for fiscal year
1985-86. The document represents a concerted effort on the part of all the
departments and this office in presenting not only a balanced budget but one
that is responsive to the people of Newberg. Each department or fund was reviewed
to assure the citizens of Newberg receive the maximum amount of service possible
for the minimum cost.
Generally, the 1985-86 budget contains:
I 1. A high level of service to the community.
2. A reflection of the community's desire for no increase in taxes.
3. A slight decrease in budgeted expenditures.
4. A sound financial plan that will allow the two-year tax base passed
in 1982 to be stretched into a five-year tax base through the 1986-87
fiscal year.
5. A means to accomplish the
p goals set by the City Council and community.
6. Continued funding of depreciation, plant replacement and reserve
accounts in accordance with the financial plans established for water
and sewer utilities.
ECONOMIC CONDITION:
The national economic picture has varied throughout the United States. Unfortunately,
the recovery of states such as Oregon and Washington lag behind California, Texas
and Arizona due to a variety of factors. These factcrs include the industrial base
within each state, the tax structure, the desirability for growth and the image of
the state.
In recent years the State of Oregon has realized that diversification of the
industrial base can only be accomplished through a concerted effort. We've recently
seen an attempt by the State Legislature to change its tax structure and for the
past two years the image of Oregon has begun to shift toward one that is desirous
of business and industrial growth.
The City of Newberg is in an enviable Position. It is located within the metropolitan
area of Portland, yet still is in a beautiful rural setting. Newberg has been officially
included in the Portland SMSA. While many communities have seen an increase in demand
for such services as police, fire, planning or library and a decrease in the ability
' to provide these services, Newberg has not only met the demands of the community but
has stabilized city services. This allows the City the unique distinction of being
Page 2
Memo to Budget Committee
RE: Budget Message
prepared for the growth that will surely come to this area. The low crime rate,
excellent fire rating, new sewage treatment plant and the library expansion
are all assets that a major industry or business will consider.
While the basic city services are in place, Newberg has gone one step-further
ia attracting major indu or business to come to the community. The Newberg
Centennia -Ved-eve opment Commission-and Economic Deve opment Grant funds
through the State of Oregon provide incentives that most communities do not
have available. Although the amount of funds that can be used for incentive
purposes may be small compared to the project itself, the two programs do change
the image of Newberg from a community that does not want growth to one that
will assist with development and to a community that has plans for its future.
The recent effort by the Chamber of Commerce and the Main Street Program should
provide additional assistance and enhance the progressive image of the Newberg
community.
GENERAL FUND:
In 1982, the City of Newberg asked the people of Newberg to approve a tax base
I . that would fund the departments in the general fund for two years. In 1983-84
the budget message stated "we should not have to go to theoters for assistance
, for at least two years." In 1984-85 the udzTe� g
messae stated that "we can
stretch the tax base through June 30, 1986." The 1985-86 budget was prepared
as a two year budget or through June 30, 1987. Even with a decrease in revenues
we will be able to stretch the two year tax base into five years due to the
efforts of the departments to curtail expenditures, assistance provided by the
grants the City has received and some changes in how we accomplish various tasks.
(i.e. , Computerization, equipment maintenance program and depreciation accounts.)
The cAsh_.balance, as of July- 1,_ 1985 will be $88,000 less than the previous year.
Interest earned will be $13,000 less than in 1984-85. Our dependency on the
federal revenue sharing fund will be $103,000 less than the previous year.
However, because of the 6% increase allowed to be added to the tax base each
year, slight increases in franchise payments, central services and our grants-
- ---- manship ability, we will see slight increases in our revenues over the next
two year period. After that time, due to revenue sharing curtailment, we should
see a leveling off, or perhaps, even a decrease in resources for the general
fund.
The recommended 1985-86 general fund budget provides the „same levelof service
s f
as in previous years. The total expend itureor the upcoming year are projected
to be $2,426,068. While this amount_r.epre"nts-a-1_B,%-derrEaAeL_from the previous
year it should be note"hat most of the budgeted monies for the library transfer
in 1984-85 have been carried over to the 1985-86 general fund expenditures.
However, if the City is successful in its bid for a Title II Library Construction
Grant, the expenditures projected for 1985-86 will be at least $100,000 less.
As mentioned earlier, the carryover balance from 1984-85 fiscal year into the
new fiscal year will decrease $88,000. In order to continue to fund expenditures
thesar_rvover blaance projected for the fiscal year 1986_87 will be approximately
0,000 les This, once again, illustrates the importance of preserving our
contingent r carryover balance.
Page 3
Memo to Budget Committee
RE: Budget Message
'wrw WATER/SEWER FUNDS:
The water and sewer funds have been carefully reviewed over the past two to
three years. One of the best things the City has done to insure the financial
stability of these two funds is the development of water and sewer financial
It was confirmed that the biggest problem with both of these funds was the
lack of funding for depreciation and plant replacement. The water fund made
a significant transfer of $541,327 last year to establish the depreciation and -�
plant replacement accounts. The sewer fund was unable to do this and consequently,
it must be done gradually through rates.
Although great strides have been made in both of these funds they require diligent
and constant review. A fund balance of $145,909 in the sewer improvement reserve
fund to begin the new fiscal year should continue to grow so that we will not
be faced with the same expensive "catch up" plan that we have been through the
past eighteen months.
The development fees that have traditionally, been used for operations have now
been segregated and will be received and expended separately.
The water improvement reserve fund carryover balance to begin the new fiscal
year is $543,327. This fund is doing well but should not be taken for granted
or used as a borrowing source.
'Wrry
FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING:
Last year the City received $314,583 through federal revenue sharing. These
funds come directly from the federal government to the City for use at our dis
cretion. Last year the City used $203,000 to supplement the general funds,
police, fire and social services departments.
It has become almost a certainty that federal revenue sharing funds will cease
to exist very shortly. The two most talked about reduction proposals are to
fund 50% of the normal allotment in each of the next two fiscal years or 100%
---- --
of the normal allotment next year. This budget is predicated on funding at
the 50% level for 1985-86 and 1986-87 fiscal years.
General revenue sharing has been budgeted into the police department ($35,196) ,
fire department ($29,000) , social services ($35,804) , and capital improvement
($50,000) . While the capital improvement transfer is a one time transfer for
computers, the other three transfers are within the general fund. The termination
of federal revenue sharing will have an effect on the revenue of these departments.
TAXES:
The City tax rate is $9.88. The general fund tax rate is $4.67 and $5.21 is
attributed to the debt service fund. In the upcoming year the tax rate will
be approximately $7.87 or 21% lower. This assumption is based on no growth.
Obviously, if there is any increase in the assessed value our tax rate will
drop even more.
The reason for the decrease in taxes is final payment of two past bond issues
and reduced payments on several others (600) , a decrease in library bond payment
(200) and a substantial decrease of $1.49 on the recent sewer bond issue.
j
Page 4
Memo to Budget Committee
RE: Budget Message
liww
When the sewer bond issue was passed in 1984 it represented a $9.1 million debt
for the City. All the $9.1 million would be needed if the City received only
a 55% grant for the new sewage treatment plant. Since we received the 75% grant
from the Environmental Protection Agency, the engineer's have estimated the
City may be able to get by with only $7 million of local funds rather than the
full $9.1 million. A policy decision was then made in the fall of 1984 to use
the interest on the $2 million (difference between the $7 million and the $9.1
million) to make the payment on the bonds and thereby lessen the burden to the
taxpayer.
1 The general fund portion of the tax rate represents the average tax rate for
municipality delivering the same services as Newberg. The debt service por-
tion of the rate has been high but the decrease in 1985-86 will help considerably.
It is expected that even with no growth in the Newberg community the City tax
rate will stabilize over the next few years.
The growth issue is an important point,rto--r!6ht71der when discussing the tax rate.
The City's current assessed valuet,of $255,000,000'As low compared to some cities
of similar size in the area. The increase.i-r-tlie assessed value through the
City's strong economic development program is another positive factor that will
help lower the community's tax rate in the future.
I
SUMMARY:
++ There are 20 funds within the 1985-86 City of Newberg budget. Most funds have
made substantial improvement over the past few years and the financial well
being of the City is fairly secure through June 30, 1987, despite some state
and national legislation that inhibits revenues and increases expenditures.
The City's tax rate and services should continue to improve for the next twenty-
four months while the goals of the City Council and community are being met.
. It is extremely important thgtthe City continue upon the same deliberate path
it has taken in the last few years. The funding of depreciation, capital improve-
ments and where appropriate, plant replacement, needs to be continued. Pressures
will surely come from those in city government or outside city government who
• may want to take an expedient and seemingly less costly route rather than follow
a strict financial plan which will provide for a financially stable city. We
should be extremely careful and not jeopardize the future of the City by making
r decisions that may seem politically astute but are actually financially irrespon-
sible.
My sincere thanks to the citizens for their support, the City Council for their
guidance and the department heads for their innovativeness and creativeness
in providing a budget that reflects a decrease in expenditures while at the
same time bringing in a high level of service to our community.
i Michael rren
City Mana er
MW/bjm
CITY OF NEWBERG
TAX RATE COMPARISON
Increase
Tax Rate Per Thousand: 1985-86 1984-85 (Decrease)
General Fund $4.95 $4.67 $ .28
Debt Service Fund $2.92 $5.21 $(2.29)
Net Change 7. �� " �� MALL
'1..1 Y VY" IVCYYL7CP'�U
GENERAL FUND
TAX RATE COMPUTATION
_ General Fund 1985-86
1985-86 Tax Base Calculation:
Current year tax base - 1984-85 1,189,741
Constitutional limit of 6% x 1.06
1,261,125
Adjustments for annexations + 969
1985-86 Tax Base 1,262,094 @86.7% Collection rate
or SL .235 projected
revenue fo, 1985-86.
(7�I z
City of Newberg actual assessed valuation
for 1984-85 *255,009,005
Estimated tax rate per thousand for 1985-86 4.95
Actual tax rate per thousand for 1984-85 4.67
Increase in General Fund tax rate per thousand .28
* This analysis assumes no increase in the City's assessed value in 1985-86.
This is a conservative approach as there has always been at least a 6%
increase in assessed value- from year to year for the last ten years.
4
CITY OF NEWBERG
COMPARIM: OF BUDGETED EXPENDITURES
FOR FYE 6/30/85, 6/30/86 and 6/30/87
Projected Proposed Projected
Budget Total Budget Budget
Fund 1984-1985 1984-1985 1985-1986 1986-1987
General 2,465,712 2,187,086 2,426,068 2,498,850
State Tax Street 356,625 187,546 459,907 225,000
Capital Improvements 115,385 93,410 144,700 110,000
Sewer 1,094,735 909,700 1,533,497 1,580,000
Water 1,398,315 1,050,529 779,396 802,000
Debt Service 1,639,676 1,596,955 2,142,619 1,908,378
Federal Revenue Sharing 350,804 350,804 150,000 150,000
Special Assessments 120,000 10,000 110,000 110,000
Bancroft Redemption 184,411 184,411 180,775 185,000
911 Emergency -0- -0- 44,000 44,000
EDRF 440,000 566,886 45,350 100,000
LSCA Title I -0- -0- 21,952 10,000
State Revenue Sharing 60,000 60,000 10,000 60,000
Storm Sewer 290,153 40,000 263,153 15,000
yW,v Library Gift 1,650 1,625 2,000 2,000
Library Building 1,315,000 1,113,444 254,549 -0-
Sewer Improve. Reserve -0- 81000 8,000 10,000
Water Improve, Reserve -0- -0- -0- -0-
STP Building 22,392,705 1,212,054 19,045,923 ---
Hospital 6,286,999 6,286,999 6,690,331 _ 6,891 041
SUBTOTAL 38,512,170 15,859,449 34,312,220 14,701,269
Less STP Buildinq (22,392,705) (1,212,054) (19,045,923) ---
TOTAL 16,119,465 14,647,395 15,266,297 14,701,269
4
• RI"VI"Nlti' I'I1talE'CT1��Nt;
j
f I-LIND: GENCRAL.
BUDGET PROJECTED ESTIMATE
DESCRIPTION PRIOR YEAR FYE 6-30-85 FYE 6-30-86
----------------------------------- ------- ----- --------- --- -------------
1 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 4'20,000 r66 431 580,40
a
' CURRENT YEAR TAXES (est. @ :6.7%) 1,05:_:,869 110319505 1,0144,235
PRIOR YEAR TAXES c:2,000 52.,800 115,O00
j FRANCHISES 245,000 Z�15 1�� Z�G 600
GENERAL TELEPHONE 35,707 3 ,066
LIBERTY CABLE TELEVISION 11,600 12,0100
NEWBERG GARBAGE SERVICE 11,905 12,000
N.W. NATURAL GAS 60,538 61,000
PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC 166.031 175,000
AMUSEMENT MACHINES 2,500 2.500 :',500
'-' HOTEL/MOTEL TAX 3,000 4,000 4,000
! OTHER BUS & LIQUOR TAX 650 1,0100 1,000
,
PERMITS—
BUILDING PERMITS 40,000 35,000 ;)5.000
PLUMBING/MECHANICAL PERMIIS 6,,OIl0 4,000 4. cl.Tl'1
;TREET/CLIRR PERMITS 4010 4001
1"tC0UPANf:Y I .RM[TS 3b I) 50(1 501:1
M,lIt it 1 II1PML I'I. At:I tit NT :":,O 400 400
11I:=;C: LIGLN ;ES,/f'FRMT T5 ",ta Soo 500
GRANTS-
LIBRARY GRANTS 1.CIC10 995 995
PLANNING CRANI0 0 6,000
STATE F(ISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANT 17,000 17,700 0
REVENUE PROJECTI(INS
FUND: GENERAL
BUDGET PROJECTED ESTIMATE
DESC:RIPTI()N PRIOR YEAR FYE 6-30-85 FYE 6-30-86
----------------------------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
SAFETY BELT GRANT 12,435 8.055 4,380
}
INIGRGOVERNMENTAL-
51A1E LIQUOR TAX SF1,452 03,500 0:3 500
STATE CIGARETTE TAX 24,154 24,000 21,500
�`•r CHEHALEM PARK b RECREATION LEASE 865 865 865
DUNDEE COMMUNICATIONS 4,500 4,500 4,500
} REIMBURSED COSTS-
LEGAL HOSPITAL 2,400 2,400 2,400
} LIBERTY CABLE ACCESS 5,000 5,000 5,000
TOWING 600 330 300
MISCELLANEOUS SALES 1,500 1,200 1,200
' PLANNING APPLICATION FEES 2,000 1,800 2,500
DOG CONTROL REVENUES 1,201.) 1.500 1,500
FIRE PROTECTION CONTRACT 113,3.66 13.3.113 119,899 �l
ENGINEERING FEES 0 700 700
CENTRAL SERVICES 92,013 92,013 103,037
LIBRARY RECEIPTS 3,000 3,500 1.600
H
F1NFS-
1RAFFIG FINE'S 44,0[10 :56,000 36,000
1
i
REVENUE PROJECTI)NS
-1
FUND: GENERAL
BUDGET PROJECTED ESTIMATE
DESCRIPTION PRIOR YEAR FYE 6-30-85 FYE 6-30-86
----------------------------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
PARKING FINES 800 1,100 11000
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES 2,500 7,000 7,500
j } RENTAL RECEIPTS 0 0 0
INTEREST EARNED 20,000 55,000 42,000
SALE OF ASSETS 0 2,800 11000
!-� GIFTS & CONTRIBUTIONS 0 0 0
1 CONTRIBUTII7NS-^-,PECIFI(: & PRIVATE 0 0 0
VICTIM ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 0 1,000 1 ,000
t 1
TRANSFERS-
FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING 203,E,04 203,804 100,0(10
i
' STATE REVENUE SHARING 0 0 10.000
TITLE 1 LIBRARY GRANT 0 0
'all EMERGENCY FUND 0 0 3'4,'250
`iTP HIIILUIIJG FIiIJD - FirftlE ACCOIIN1 (.1 1.2,000 -'a'(100
TOTAL_ RESOURCES 2,500,55.3 2,797,492 2,795,567
------------ ------------ ------------
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES BUDGET PROPOSED
SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT X - 1985-86
Non Departmental 74,495 97,232
General Government 56,823 75,230
Recorder 36,664 38,081
Municipal Court 38,494 39,328
Administration 50,534 47,928
Finance/Recorder See Separate Classifications
Finance 92,389 105,229
Legal 75,342 74,366
Planning 96,761 93,989
Police 952,691 941,802
Fire 274,408 258,041
}wilding Inspection 54,299 56,513
Engineering 92,956 64,743
City Buildings 33,235 39,912
Street Lighting 85,000 86,000
Municipal Garage 47,870 55,137
Library 162,1.37 151,014
Social Services 39,304 35,804
Special Commissions 3,550 Combined with General Governmer
Transfers to Capital Fund 30,500 22,500
Transfers to Debt Service Fund 2,760 3,219
Transfers to Library Building Fund 165,000 140,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2,465,712 2,426,068
I
Reserve for Contingencies 232,646 369,499 /r, Zl
Unappropriated Fund Balance -0- -0-
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 2,698,358 2,795,567
''`�frr✓r ,��i
FINANCE
4
+$12,910
The most significant change of all the departments in the general fund can be
seen in the Finance Department. In 1984-85 the general fund and the utility
billing were put onto computers. In addition to the hardware and software changes,
there were significant responsibilities that were increased in the Finance Department.
The monitoring of three economic development grants received in the last eighteen
months has been and will continue to be the responsibility of finance. The com-
puterization and monitoring of the sewage treatment plant project will fall on
the shoulders of this department. A person was added in 1984-85 for the expressed
purpose of the sewage treatment plant. The 1985-86 budget includes a part-time
person which accounts for almost all of the increase over the previous year.
r
A,r W
CITY OF NEWBERG FUND: GENERAL
BUDGET REQUEST DEPARTMENT: FINANCE
SUMMARY PAGE FISCAL YEAR:1985-1986
ACCOUNT CLASS BUDGETED REQUESTED ADMIN COUNCIL
CURRENT YR THIS BUDGET APPROVED APPROVED
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PERSONAL SERVICES 83,469 94,704 94,704
MATERIALS,SUPPLIES & SERVICES 7,240 8,500 8,500
CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,680 2,025 2,025
TRANSFERS 0 0
RESERVES 0 0
OTHER 0 0
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
TOTAL 92,389 105,229 105,229 0
f♦)a► ; YW'"yN�f rf,til/ :-'; '•t A�s - .iii r1:S•. =�►N•..I:i•..I �. � >,. .t y...
CITY OF NEWBERG
BUDGET REQUEST FISCAL YEAR
SUMMARY OF DETAILS
FUND GENERAL
DEPARTMENT FINANCE
ACTUAL APPROX CURRENT DEPT. ADMIN. BUDGET COM.
ACCOUNT NO. ----SIX-MNS_ FYE 85 TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST APPROVED APPROVED
--------------------------- -- -------
PERSONAL SERVICES
110000 ADMINISTRATIVE SALARIES 8,697 26,262 47,394 44,441 44,441
120000 CLERICAL SALARIES 10,532 27,000 23.824 29,635 29,635
131000 OTHER SALARIES O 0
132000 OTHER SALARIES-INSPECTORS 0 0
135000 OVERTIME
140000 MISCELLANEOUS 25 O 45 98 98
141000 FICA 1,346 3.500 2.886 5.221 5,221
142000 WORKER'S COMP 102 250 294 244 244
143000 UNEMPLOYMENT 115 250 207 814 814
144000 RETIREMENT 3,490 6,200 4,718 8,097 8,097
145000 HEALTH/LIFE/LTD 11903 5,500 4.101 6,153 6,153
--------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
SUBTOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 26,215 60,962 83,469 94.704 94,704 O
. ,•. ...: -�.:. i ,'.:,+r . .w,: r..r .. "' yet. - '•.. �'. s;
t i,�;,t► -^,•qN v^'i!' +. .� - ::.rs4 w' 11,n}+r ��y. Ms..a..: } : '-or ;
PERSONAL SERVICE BUDGET DETAIL
DEPARTMENT: FINANCE
FUND: GENERAL
BASE NO.
GRD MO OF WORKER'S HEALTH LT
NAME/POSITION STEP WAGE MONTHS TOTAL MISC FICA COMP UNEMPLOY RETIREMT LIFE DISAS TOTAL
ADMINISTRATION----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=---------
Brenda Stroud, Fin. Dir. 136D 2,899 12 17,392 30 1,226 57 191 2,174 1,075 130 22,275
Doug Richmond, Asst Fin. Dir. 127C 2,217 8 17,737 30 1,250 59 195 2,217 1,837 133 23,458
Doug Richmond, Asst Fin. Dir. 127D 2,328 4 9,312 656 31 102 1,164 0 70 11,335
SUBTOTAL ADMIN 44,441 60 3,132 147 488 51555 2,912 333 57,068
CLERICAL
Pauline Maben,Acctg. Spvr. 112E 1,694 12 20,333 30 1,433 67 224 2,542 2,756 152 27,537
Part-time clerk 6.46 1,440 9,302 8 656 31 102 O 0 0 10,099
O 0 O O 0 O 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SUBTOTAL CLERICAL 29,635 38 2,089 98 326 2,542 2,756 152 37,636
OTHER
0 O O O O 0 0 O
0 0 O O 0 0 O 0
0 0 0 O O O 0 0
0 0 0 O O 0 O 0
O 0 O 0 0 O 0 0
0 0 0 O 0 0 O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 O O
SUBTOTAL OTHER 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0
OTHER-INSPECTOR
0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
SUBTOTAL OTHER INSPECTOR O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O
TOTAL 74,077 98 5,221 244 814 8,097 5,668 485 94,704
•
CITY OF NEWBERG
BUDGET REQUEST FISCAL YEAR =
SUMMARY OF DETAILS
FUND GENERAL
DEPARTMENT FINANCE
ACTUAL APPROX CURRENT DEPT. ADMIN. BUDGET COM.
ACCOUNT NO. SIX MNS. FYE 85 TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST APPROVED APPROVED
MATERIALS,SUPPLIES b SERVICES=________________________________________________________________________
210000 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,304 3,800 3,650 4,000 4.000
211000 POSTAGE 210 450 600 SOO 500
220000 UNIFORMS
223000 SUPPLIES
223002 SUPPLIES-DOG CONTROL
223003 VETERINARIAN FEES
251000 BOOKS
251001 AUDIO-VISUAL
251002 PERIODICALS
310000 PRINTING b ADVERTISING
320000 DUES, MTGS, TRAIN & TRAVEL 538 2,200 1,670 2,000 2,000
320001 DUES,MTGS,TRG & TRAVEL/ADMIN
331000 TELEPHONE
332000 RADIO
341000 ELECTRICITY
341001 STREET LIGHTING
342000 HEAT
350000 INSURANCE
350001 INSURANCE CLAIMS
362000 GASOLINE
3E30U0 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
:365000 CAR ALLOWANCE
366000 EQUIP REPAIR & MAINTENANCE
371000 FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT
371009 BUILDING REPAIR-RENTALS
371021 BLDG REPAIR-DOG POUND
371025 BLDG REPAIR-ANNEX
371026 BLDG REPAIR-CITY HALL
371033 BLDG REPAIR-GARAGE
371055 BLDG REPAIR-LIBRARY
375000 PROPERTY TAX-RENTALS
380000 PROFESSIONAL & CONTRACT SERV
CITY OF NEWBERG
BUDGET REQUEST FISCAL YEAR
SUMMARY OF DETAILS
FUND GENERAL
DEPARTMENT FINANCE
ACTUAL APPROX CURRENT DEPT. ADMIN. BUDGET COM.
ACCOUNT NO. ------SIX-MNS. FYE 85 TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST APPROVED APPROVED
----------------------------------- -------------- ---
380055 JANITOR SERV-LIBRARY
382000 CABLE TELEVISION
391000 ELECTIONS
392000 GENERAL PROJECTS
396000 RESERVE/VOLUNTEER COSTS
400000 FIRE PREVENTION
401000 CONFIDENTIAL FUNDS
402000 PRISONER EXPENSE
431000 REGIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE
433000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 910 1,900 1,320 21000 2,000
501000 SENIOR TRANSPORTATION
502000 SENIOR MEALS
503000 HUMAN RESOURCES
505000 SENIOR MEDICAL
320000 VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION
710000 PLANNING COMMISSION
730000 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
--------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
SUBTOTAL MAT, SUP & SERV 2,:62 8,350 7,240 8,500 8,500 0
CITY OF NEWBERG
MATERIALS,SUPPLIES,SERVICES
BUDGET DETAIL
DEPARTMENT: FINANCE
FUND: GENERAL
DEPT ADMIN
ACCOUNT NO. DESCRIPTION REQUEST APPROVED EXPLANATION
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------
1-415.210 Office supplies 4,000 4,000 Represents a 10% increase over the prior year. Increase is necessary
to cover additional/more expensive supplies required for the new
computer equipment and the new finance positions.
1-415.211 Postage 500 500 Increased 102 over expected fye 6-30-85 actualto reflect postage rate
increase.
1-415.320 Dues,mtg,trn.trvl 2,000 2,000 Dues: Govt finance officers(national) i membership $90.
OMFOA(2 0 $20) $40
Oregon society of CPA'S(2 @ $50) $100.
OSCPA Govt Acctg seminar(Eugene) $400.
OMFOA Annual conference (1 @ 5300) _
OMFOA Regional meetings (2*$15) 530_
Oregon Dept of Revenue workshop $15.
LOC Annual Convention Portland $150.
Finance Committee meetings (6*20) $160.
Misc_ meetings with consultants, agencies. etc. $170.
Misc OSCPA seminars to fulfill CPA requirements-
estimated 48 hours $500.
GASB subscription $45
1-415.433 Contract Services 2,000 2,000 Monthly payroll processing costs from ADP. Estimated at $150!mn.
--------------------
8,500 8.500
--------------------
--------------------
,^•s'M•a,i�:a '�•:. r.rl..w. �,}.,ti .f' s in a x. . -..J
CITY OF NEWBERG
BUDGET REQUEST FISCAL YEAR
SUMMARY OF DETAILS
FUND GENERAL
DEPARTMENT FINANCE
ACTUAL APPROX CURRENT DEPT. ADMIN. BUDGET COM.
ACCOUNT NO. SIX MNS. FYE 85 TOTAL BUDGET REQUEST APPROVED APPROVED
CAPITAL OUTLAY
610000 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 319 2,700 11680 2,025 2,025
610001 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT-GRANTS
--------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
SUBTOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 319 2,700 1,680 2,025 2,025 0
TRANSFERS
900000 TRANSFER-OTHER
904000 TRANSFER-CAP IMPROVE FUND
909000 TRANSFER-DEBT SERVICE FUND
--------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
SUBTOTAL TRANSFERS O O O 0 O 0
RESERVES
800000 RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES
--------- --------- --------- --------= --------- ---------
SUBTOTAL RESERVES O 0 0 0 0 0
OTHER
300000 UNAPPROPRIATED END FUND RAL
--------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
SUBTOTAL OTHER 0 0 0 0 O 0
TOTAL 29,496 80,012 92,389 105,29 105,229 0
.. ,.rAd .4, .K:. ✓ 1JH Li .. -..� w +Y'�,/ 3! .:,.Ai.,. .. - AJ .'1.31 -d.9r"h.�.�r ,}'R 4•:• h y..... T ♦•!: ''b 0. !r `r4 ''�:...' s
CITY OP NEWBERG
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
BUDGET DETAIL
DEPARTMENT: FINANCE
FUND: GENERAL
EQUIP OR NEW OR DEPT ADMIN
DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCTION REPLACE REQUEST APPROVED DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION
TYPEWRITER EQUIPMENT REPLACE 700 - 700Replacementof Acctg Supervisor's typewriter. This -
typewriter has been used by the Acctg Supervisor for
TYPEWRITER STAND EQUIPMENT REPLACE 150 150 over nine years and is beginning to malfunction quite
frequently. This purchase will depend upon the
outcome of the city wide typewiter study being
conducted during fye 6-85.
DESK CHAIR EQUIPMENT REPLACE 175 175 Purchase of ergonomic chair.
This will replace the last chair in the finance area
which is not an ergonomic chair.
DICTAPHONE EQUIPMENT NEW 1,000 1,000 This will be used by the finance director.
----------------------
2,025 2,025
----------------------
'
7
�
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD' OREGON
T0' Budget Co itt
. Committee May 22' 1.985
FROM: Bob Jean' City Administrator/Budget Officer
SUBJECT: 5-Year Budget History
Picking up your concerns about losing the "big picture" amongst the details, I
prepared a 5-year history summary. The Budget trends are quite interesting
compared with population and valuation growth. I started with 1981-82 since
that was the first year following the November' 1080 Tax Bane approval.
POPULATION AND VALUATION
At the start of FY 1981-82` the City' s population was 15,580 and the total
assessed value was $628.8 million. At the start of FY 1985-06, our population
is estimated at 20'008 and our assessed value at $020 million. By the end of
this FY 1085-86, we should be around 22,000 population and about $1 billion
valuation.
In those five years, the City' s population will be up 6,500 persons or 41%.
Assessed valuation, in a period of almost level or deflated assessments, will
be up $371 million or almost 60%. Inflation for this period in also up 25 -
30%.
BUDGET AND STAFFING
In that same 5--year period, the City' s Operating Budget is up 6% total over 5
years, or about 1% per year! The City' s Operating Budget only went from
$3,757'510 to $3'983,492. City staff went from 80.6 to 85' up 4.5 staff or 5%
total over 5 years.
The FY 1985-86 Operating Budget is up 1% from the FY 1984-85 Operating Budget,
COMPARATIVE COSTS
The total Operating Budget cost in FY 1081-82 was $3'757'510 or $242.42 per
oapita. The recommended FY 198S-86 Operating Budget is $3'983'492 or $199.17
per capita now and $181.86 per capita by June, 1906. The 5--year average per
capita cont is DOWN 25% in that time.
In 1081-82, 80.25 staff served 15,500 or a otaff:oitizen ratio of 1: 193 . By
June' 1986' some 86 staff will be serving 22,000 citizens, a 1:259 ratio. The
ntaff:uitizen ratio has improved by 34%.
~~
One final comparison, however, needs to be examined. The street and utility
areas have been less impacted by our Budget limits and service cuts these last
5 fiscal years. To illustrate, total staff in 1081-82 less Streets, Wastewater
^ ~
Budget Committee Memo
May 22' 1005
From: Bob Jean
and Shops was 69.5 full-time equivalents. For 1985-86 the comparable is 70
FTE. City staff members for Police, Library, Parks and Operations are
essentially the name now for 20,000-22,000 citizens as we had 5 budget-years
back for 15'500.
SUMMARY
The City' s productivity improvements, averaging about 20%, have made up about
half the 5-year Budget shortfall, The other half came in the form of service
level cuts. Better equipment, streamlined purchases, improved management
systems and employee involvement have dramatically increased overall City
productivity levels, and should continue to serve us well in the years ahead.
Community volunteerism is up too, from about 6,081) hours to almost 14,000
hours, a 180% increase! All involved deserve a lot of credit, but next year' s
Budget challenge remains, The City of Tigard has earned the right to
recommend a new Tax Base to the voters in May, 1086.
GJ: lw/0857p
CC: All Board and Committee Members
'w��
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council May 20, 1985
FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Civic Center Project Budget and e ted Costs
By its nature, the Civic Center Project touches all Departments of the City .
Almost every City Fund is involved to some extent. Within the legal limits
established for each Fund and Budget appropriation, considerable discretion
still exists at the Council level. This Memo is intended to outline the Civic
Center Project financial status, to review policy options, and to suggest
recommended -actions.
COSTS
Two remaining unknowns until now have been the actual construction bid cost
and the interiors furnishing costs. The bids were opened on May 15, 1985 and
the apparent low bidder at $1,741,000 was within 2% of the Architect' s
$1,700,000 estimate. Total bid spread from high to low was 10%. Meanwhile,
the Interiors Architect has completed her work and will report to you on
May 20, 1985. Here too, we're essentially in line with previous Budget
allowances. With these costs we can now update the financial plan and
evaluate alternatives.
DEDUCTIVE ALTERNATES
The Committee recommended four deductive alternates, if necessary, in order to
balance the Budget: #1 Paving Reductions; #2 Canopy; #3 Quiet Room; and #4 the
Southeast Corner of City Hall. Under present assumptions, all four alternates
would be necessary and yet still not provide for any contingency .
FINANCIAL ALTERNATIVES
There are four financial alternatives available to Council. which might be used
instead or in conjunction with the Deductive Alternates to keep the Budget in
balance and fund a project contingency as recommended by the Committee.
1. Release $98,000 held in the Bond Debt Fund. The voters authorized the
City to sell a $2.2 million bond to be repaid by the Bond Debt Fund from taxes
over the next 20 years . That bond was sold and the first payment due before
the taxes levied in July, 1984 could be received in November, 1984 adequate to
make the bond payment. A temporary withholding of $98,000 was used to make
the payment. The Committee then began its efforts with $2. 1 million instead
of the $2.2 million the voters authorized. This caused other displacements
and shifts in the form of interfund loans and General Fund costs. I checked
with the Budget Committee Chairman and those Council members at last year' s
Civic Center Project Memo
May 20, 1985
t Page 2
Budget Committee meetings and they all remembered the withholding as a
TEMPORARY action. If so, $98,000 can now be released from the Bond Debt Fund
and made available to the Civic Center Project Building Fund. Reversing
adjustments can be reported at the May 22 Budget Committee and made ready by
staff for Council action at the June 24, 1985 Budget Adoption meeting,
2. $25,000 Bancroft Bond. The City can bond its Hall Boulevard half street
improvements and make annual payments instead of a lump sum payment.
3 . Parks SOC Funds can be used for landscaping costs ($20,000 sprinklers in
construction budget and $5,000 materials in Related Costs) , or to
complete landscaping.
4 . The Old Police Station can be sold ($30,000-$40,000) and the proceeds
used for the project, either in Building fund or General Fund .
RECOMMENDATION
It is my recommendation that Council NOT use the Deductive Alternates, since
the building is closer to a 7 year than 10 year facility and since
construction later will be disproportionately greater.
It is m recommendation that the full amount of Bond Sale
y proceeds approved by
the voters be made available to the Project. This funds the bid, all related
costs and still provides a $54,000 contingency as recommended by the
Committee. Any remaining contingency at close-out in January can be charged
out to zero by reversing some of the costs currently being absorbed in the
General Fund. This, I believe, is proper and adequate.
I do not recommend using Parks SDC Funds, at least at this time, The Parks
and Recreation Board is working with the Civic Center Advisory Committee in a
joint landscaping effort for the Civic Center and the Fanno Creek Park. I
believe they should be allowed to finish and then make any recommendations.
The Park and Recreation Board is also completing its Park Plan and CIP for
this Fall. That's when any available SDC funds should be allocated in my
judgement.
I also do not recommend using the Old Police Station asset at this time. If
used, per Council policy, I understand that as a capital asset it should be
used for capital purchases, and should be applied to the General Fund' s
assumed related costs.
Attached are the various worksheets still in draft form. Since we had bid
opening on Wednesday and recalculations on Thursday, I decided to send it to
you in draft in your packet rather than in final but hand-carried on Monday .
Please feel free to contact me this weekend if I may explain further.
+4jw,
(dc:0849p)
I dichilcc s
I 20915 &W. 105th AVENUE, TLJALATK OREGON 97062 503/692`6065
TIGARD CIVIC CENTER /
RESOURCES
4—
Bond
Bond Sale 2,200,000.00
Interest
Pinebrook Lot 25,000.00 —40
WCCLS 35,000.00
Old City Hall --1.95,000. �0�O�0
S.D.C. (Participation in bus
stop and 1/4 of half
street improvement)
Sub Total 4rW
J �
RELATED COSTS
Bond Cost 37,000.00
Land Cost A00 Cy R,
Debt Service 98 00.00 �.y6/ 00 Sy p 0 0
Legal/Appraisal/Soi ls�,E'S'��G 3,,Ooo)_gsSgrg60 0
�� S ;�o,oao
Fees & Charges
Program 3,000.00 -
Varner 3,000.00 00 2 000
G7f- —,rte .�.�1 3 39 0 0
�voo�
Sub Total - �y �0 6z 17
I
TOTAL PROJECT FUNDS AVAILABLE _ � a00 ! 008
PROJECT COSTS:
CONTINGENCY for CHANGE ORDERS
13 z 15- 5�,5q�
A/E FEES 12 6,407—.eO-- 1`1 a� 0 0� 1 y aj oo0
pCONSTRUCTION BUDGET 0— 6/X ` 7ql ySf
q�3 000
0HT
oR co ^� s,,&@ - L/3, L{s9 062, A4-rs,
I (
.�I V
Pdi1rPtnh1Q, dlChIICC�)
20915 S.W. 105th, AVENUE, TUALATK OREGON 97062 503/6926065
-
TIGARD CIVIC CENTER
Design Development Cost Estimate
Architectural/Structural $ 986,532. @- 1100717or
Mechanical 2279800.00
Electrical 141,700.00
Dra,hq
Landscaping/Paving/Oamage-� -Ms��?=� IY3)1612- 000 A-gr �
Half Street Improvement 33 300 cs7Y {.A4'Q
SUB TOTAL I -may 17
Contractors Site Cost & Overhead @ 6% -92,294.90 93`d2y`�
y...:•a�, cc� Fes--)
6L17i36Y
Contractors Profit ] -65-;22t. �j/91 yo2�
7 9S.
Credit Cost Of Permits 7,000.00 l 0r70>
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
1
_• I li'�• � I I I I I I
f l ? 1:10111111:11■1111:1111► j 11111:111■I IIIIINI■I
�iill::il■1111::11■11111111 Iii?4''�li]Illliill■Ililllll■11111111■i
■IIIIIIiI■IIIIIIII■1111::11■�If�G���7711 1:11■Ililllll■IIIIIIII■I
y ■I % !;:1■IIV��1A '.�G■! It�,G■11 "] �■! u�:FRAMIIIIIIiI■11111111
' ■■III ��'�fJ■Ill�i� ■111��i!� pq■IIIZ2� 1■I�u��_'�7��■11111111■11111111
J►.• . •1r 79�■IIIt����■12� . Fri■1111 1■1111
PRY s►�19.■IIG1Y.2��■!I 12►,��►,■II'/.- 11
'� ' '�� '7►1�''■IIR�'a� 7� .■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII
■I►���1►��,■Illry�?��■II������, ,■11���►�1'il��,�al�����llllllll■11111111■I
■I►�.�71G�?■111��%�s■I�%1��IAC■117a�l1�17■1�11�lI��r11111111■11111111■I
�Il��illli��s��lrl ?�■Il��la%ail■I� "Optl)mIlllllll■IN INN
s ■11.31 3r:�NI11�Cs � rl!!� FG■11�I� �a �� �■IIIIll Ihill
i1► 1rII11.►� oi11 � ��G■1111►�►�li 1 ►�:.2oldli11111IN
NJ
7■1117: 1■1/!?:�%�7■IF ►�►��i11?�r11�1■I ► !�!��s■IIIIIIII■IllllIn
■111FERM■I11IM-301190:10■III�C;�11■111�� 1■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII
■illlillll■1� � ,��■IIIIIIII■R JS"Irllllllll■IIIIIIiI■I
■IIIIIIII■� I::�a�llllillllillllllll■II 11111■IIIIIIII■Illllill■I
■1111118NIIG!��r'��JIIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■I 11111■IIIIIIII■IIIlilll
_ � r: X711111111■11111111x11111111■11111111■IINIIII■11111111■11111111
■Ili!,1%��■11111111■11111111■11111111■11111111■11111111■11111111■i
IIN:'lh��i�!111��!!fix IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII
■II� �.� ■11111111■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■I 11111■I■11N1■Ililllli■I
�I�Z� S',,,■IIIlilll■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■II 1111■Illllin■IINIIN■I
■Ililllll■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■II 1111■Illlllii■IIIIIIN■i
■IIIIIIII■11111111■IIIIIIII■11111111■INIIIII■IIIIIIII■IIINIiI■I
■11111111■11111111■11111111■IIIloll■IlNllll■1181111■IIININ
■IIIlilll■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■Ililllll■IIIIINI■I■IIIN
■IIIIIIII■IIIlilll■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■INIIIII■IIIIIIiI■IIIIIIN
�IIIIIIII�IIIIIIII�IIIIIIII�illlllll�llllilll■IIIIIIII■11111111■!
FT's Rom
I , O. I - I I Ipy I
■i �i �■iN�� ll■ill, :--■ic.,■i . '41, illN iIN
■III!d1��L■IIIl �ii■IIS %��■III!'� '1■II
F
IIIIIIII III 111■IIIN
■1i197�'7■III! Illsliln�,c��■IIII�:II■Il11112:1■11111111■11111111■IIII
■III!!;��C■IIIE�III■111l�� 7■III!=.il■11IZ2111■1111■111■I■NNI■I
11�:!��■1111111■III��� i■111I„��■IIi���i ■I■nllll■11111111■11 �
IIIC11�7■IIIl�311■IIlE�I%7■III��:11■IIIA �.■IINIIN■IIslim
■IIIEi9:1■111:=111■1111c►:i■Ilii�.'ss■II►179177■11111111■IIIIIIII■11
■IIIIl117■II►�1%���■II?!1 ��■111����"■11!117���NI1111111■IIIIIIII■I■
11117827■1127� �,�■111�131i■1117I�G1■il?,3 ► ? IIIIIIII■IINIiII■IIIN
■1111911,1■1FE,. K50II% 9WAN■111!!':11■IIS#I114ns 11111111■Iml1M1mIl 1
•� ■1111 FORA■11��1: 11■11F91Eri54 11!all11■1�71�C►�a��11111111■IIIIIIII■I
■111171!!■IIF��1 C%11��11 E■Ill:�i11■IM'1 01 IIIIIIII■111111■1■I■ii■IN
c lil■li ll�li11111111■IIIIIIII■IINII i
E1��■Ifl-3�D�i11:.�►ii��■1111.
� ■Ira /II!?II•��� ��,11■II?� , illlllll■IIIIIIII■IIIN i
■11161,��■111 ►��1■111��:�,���I■1.�:�1■111r�' �IIIIIIII■1111■til■11111■
• ■Illir��%�111�,�% !��ol►1,i?o,��E■11�i'', C��I, I7��i1■111111■1111■111.1■
11111111■IIIIIIII■illlllll■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■IIIlilll■IIIIIIII■IINI
■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■illlllll■IINIIII■IIIlilll■IIIIIIII■illy
it ■ILII:•Z■IZll:W''rJl1:"1 :41■Iillllll■IIIIIIII■IINI
■Ili�1,��■11111111■11111111■illlllll■II1�7�3�■11111111■11111111■IIIN
�, .r _ .�_- ■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■IIiU,I�.s■II111111■III���'z■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIN■IIIn
..� ■IRi"�;��■11111111■11111111■11111111■IliY3D�N■illlllll■IIIIIIN■I
�7■Iilliss�■illll i
_ _ 9 ■Illl�a� •** 111■I■111111■i1l9���■1111■111■1111■111.1
_ _ _,-�_�, , ■IIIIIIII■11111111■11111111■111l.!��■III� �?;■IIIIIIII■IIIiINI■I
_ _ ■IIII�.��■Illillll■IIIIIIII■illlllll■III „����■11111111■iillllil■I
-� �, _ ■IIII",I�a,I, 'III■■II■I1l111111r■I111L1i1�1%1S1Go1
Silo-
INS i�I111R1.3rx�"I�z■III�:.:'�
1=X11111111■illlllll■II
,��C■I ►iZ'j, ; l l,illlllil■11111111■IIIN
■IIIIIIII■11111111■11111111■11111III■Il11 i ■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII■IINI
■IIIIIili�11111111■I■111111■I111■111■I■111i■i11111�■�■��■�■�.�■...
MAY 1985
TIGARD CIVIC CENTER
BUILDING PERMIT FEES
BASED ON ESTIMATE OF 1,700,000.00 VALUATION
ITEM Amount Waived To be Paid
Building Permit 3,733 .00 3,733 .00 0
Plan Check (City) 2,426.45 2,426.45 0
TRFD Plan Check 1,493.20 0 1,493.20
Storm Drain SDC 8 X 250 2,000.00 2,000.00 0
Street Insp. SDC 90 spaces 6,075.00 6,075.00 0
San. Sewer USA 9 DU' s Hookups 9,250.00 7,850.00 7,400.00
San. Sewer Insp. 150.00 150.00 0
Plumbing Permit 510.00 510.00 0
Mech. Permit 385.00 385.00 0
TOTAL 17,129.45 8,895.20
Tigard * Civic Center
Bid TallG? Ye )),4,
'.
BidderBase Bid Unit Alter tes
Price D- 1 D-2 D ' 3 D-4 S- 1
Berge Brothers 0.d
x I91d a Ss ,pX9000
r i
Contractors, Inc, a...dd
b093 , 300 . 00 X00 v / oc9a 00 L20,ovo i9 000
E. Lee Robinson
Construction
8 p c�G ..- � ?o G UC.� a o Sou O o r>
Hyland & Sons, Inc. Q dd
? 00 ,6, 5-7 ?guo NS"o /.4/ ,VA /.P coo
Juhr Corporation dd
JW Mills & Associates
�C Contractors
7 Oo 5. 00 It 6 00• 0000 cam, .23000
McCartney/Johnson
1, 741 q 5-8, � a -7s Z 1 a .
OTKtd Construction
s3z 94 4? 16,,5-o -1 F/ 7
Silco Construction
Coma o, 0 9y ctd d
/ 9/ ! .S: 19 a X5'8 a2 U o ?o °Q o od
Slayden Construction add
/ 7 •qA: o oU 3, oo 7 Jac) /4( ,7vu 7 Soo I M, 110a e2 o .5--w
C4 d
Thompson Construction
a
dchilect5
20915 S.W. 105TH AVE., TUALATIN, OR 87082 503/892-6085
ct a c lS�cS'7
CT`/IC RELATED BUILDING FIXTURES & SUB-TOTAL ALL TOTAL
COSTS BUILT-IN PROJECT OTHER
FURNISHINGS
RESOURCES
Bond Sale 708000 1492000 __O_ 2200000 -0- 2200000
Interest -0- 202000 _O_ 202000 -0- 202000
Pinebrook Lot -0- -0- 25000 25000 -0- 25000
Old City Hall -0- -0- 4068 10 __468 ffl
,�WV --0- 405eM
WCCLS -0- -0- 35000 35000 65000 100000
Rotary -0- -0- -0- -0- 10000 10000
S.O.C.(1/2 ST.) -0- 10000 _40- 10000 __O_ 10000
Parks S.D.C. -0- 20000 20000
General Fund -0- 52000 52000
708000 1704000 __r65_Ow _25;P7000 147000 .Z2~
EXPENDITURES
Related Costs 708000 -0- 708000 -0- 708000
Arch./Bldg. 4eeee*_,:Z,4V 986532 -0- 986532
Mechanical 200000 27800* 227800 -0- 227800
Electrical 41700* 141700 -0- 141700
Landscape/Paving( 2 tomo*-6- 148202 20000 168202
Half Street (14OiOO) -0- 34000 -0- 34000
Overhead 83924 8370* 92294 -0- 92294
rofit 59641. 5580* 65221 -0- 65221
"Atess Permits (7000> <7000> <7000>
SU8-TOTAL 708000 -16 'S 2396749/ 20000 2416749
W-9 N, -0-
-53'.34
C/O Contingency -0- 4r3l
A/E Fees -0- 126907 -0- 126907 5000 126907
SUB-TOTAL 708000 1704000✓ -+650011r -.2527ae9 25000 W42QeWp7j
Partitions 20000 20000
Blinds two 1500
Furniture 2500 2500
Moving Files 7500 7500
Town Hall Furn. 5500 5500
Misc. & Phones 10000 10000
L8 Shelv. & Furn. 75000 75000
TOTAL 708000 1704000 -166000. 244-7GN 147000 -Ift4oee-
'Poo
*ESTIMATED
**ORIGINALLY $50,000 FOR MORE PARTITIONS, NOW LESS BUT BUILT-IN. . .
(BJ;pm/0674p)