Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0489.093G) • 0 .., .,,' 't, ",' September 16, 1993 HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL City of Palo Alto Attention: Finance committee ·"; ,? . ."'. euXTNo IMPROVENII!T PROGJIAK (CIP) II!7R.ASTRUCTURE BODG21 P1l0l( 19B..1.=. 82 THROOGI 1"3-" Hembe~s of the Council: This is an informational report and no Council action is necessary~ I.port: in Briaf In an etfort to address questions about the City's long-term commitment to its capital infrastructure, staff has analyzed the past thirteen years of capital budgets~ Budgeted capital ~xpendi­ tures have been categorized to provide insight into the levels and trends for infrastructure and non-infrastructure spending. Comparisons of real dollar capital budgets over the past decade reveal that public infrastructure projects as a whole have. kept pace with inflation~ This is chiefly a result of the dedication of utility users tax monies for streets and sideWalks and shifting ~tOrD drain proJects to enterprise funding~ Othar infrastructu~e categories, such as public buildings and parks facilities improve­ aents, that are dependent upon the Ceneral FUnd, have. either not kept pace with inflation or experienced inconsistent levels of funding over the years~ Background: During recent budget hearings, as well as in reviewing the Economic Future study, council has expressed concern about long-term funding for the. City's infrastructure. ·One of the principal questions frequently asked is whether the City, over time, has devoted fewer C!!R:489,93 ,,-- o Capital Improvement Program (CIP) dollars in this area~ This quest.ion leads to .~ more. compleX' one. Staff interprets Council ts concern as not simply being over the absolute level of the capltal infrastructur:!: budget, but whether there is a backlog of infra­ structure improvements and whether that backlog is increasing or decreasing over time: in ~ther words~ what is the condition ot our buildings, roads, sidewalks and parks? Is the City's basic infrastructure deterioratinq, improving or being maintained, and at what level? categories of capital Expenditures As a first st~p in addressing Council's questions on the heal~~ of the City's infrastructure, statr exa.mi11ed budgeted capital expendi­ tures over the last 13 years. Projects were divided into three cateqories: PulI.lic lntr.st.~ctur.; The term .. infrastructurer. has several definitions. A prej9:ct is defined as infrastructure in this analysis if it is capital intensive (high cost), has a long public facility (qenerally 10 years or longer), and generates a public service. This definition has been refined further to include the acquisition, construction, and extension of the life of a physical entity. Thus~ this category includes public buildings, facilities and buildinq systems; streets ~nd ~idewalks; intersection, traffic and bike lane improvements; parks, qelf and open space improve­ aents; and stor)!;: drains. Storm drains, noll/' an enterprise fund item, have been included in this analysis because they were part of the General Fund CIP in past years. Exa.ples of CIP projects included in this category and other categories are listed on pages 3 through 5 of the attached worksheet. Budgeted dollars displayed or. the attached worksheet exclude rei~rsements from the Utilities. Note that some budqeted projects for buildings, an infrastructure category, may be for reasons other than extending the useful life of the capital as~et. Such expenditures are not included in this cateqory. Ml example would be projects related to making facili­ ties accessible to ci tiz.ans with disabilities. The purpose of these projects is to promote public access, not to extend the life of the modified structures. BOn-Infrastructure: This category includes projects for such it~ms as environmental and access improvements, communication and informational systems, and miscellaneous projects. Examples of these projects are provided on pages 4 through 5 of the attached worksheet. CHR:489:93 2 ---------- Bztraor4inary/On.-Time CIP Project.: This cateqory includes one­ t ille projec1:s fully funded by non-General Fund sourCeS~ 'rhese are, arquably, exceptional projects that miqht skew the level and trend ot budqeted capital expenditures included in the Public Infrastruc­ ture catelJory. ThirtatD-X.ar capital prograp Treud. The VClrksheet on pages 1 through 2: of the attachment shows the capital budget for the last 13 years, organized into the three cateqories discussed above~ It is important to note that fundinq by category can vary considerably Y2ar to year, depending upon the size of one or more projects. Therefore, in addition to comparing a "base year-to current year funding, it is instructive to t,rack tunding over the 13-year period. In t~e right-hand columns of page 2 or the attachment, buageted capital expenditures in 1981-82 are co.pared to budgeted capital expenditures in 1992-93. Adjustinq for in~lation# the tollowinq tentative conclusions appear: o The overall tot~l public inf~astructure budget has increased by 109 percent in real dollars from 1981-82 through 1992-93. o Public capital dollars Buildings, Facilities and Building projects have decrea6ed by 73 percent from 1981-82 through 1992-93~ systems in real o streets and Sidewalk elP capital budqets have increased by 140 percent in real dollars froll 1981-82 through 1992- 93. o Intersection, Traffic and Bike Lane Improvements cepital budqets have increased by 454 percent in real dollars from 1983-84 thrcugh 1992-93 (this category did not have a budget until 1983-84). o Storm Drainage capital budgets have increased by over 4000 percent in real dollars from 1982-83 throuqh 1992- 93. (This category did not have a. budget until 1982-83.) o Parks, Golf, Open Space and School Site Improvements capi tal budgets have increased by 12 percent in real dollars from 1981-82 through 1992-93. o The cityrs non-infrastructure CIP project budgets have increased by 595 percent in real dollars from 1981-82 th~ouqh 1992-93. CMR'489,93 3 ' .. ·-k. ____ -__ ... :-:: o Overall, the City has been able to keep pace ~ith inflation for its total infrastructure budget. 'l'his has been accomplished through dedication of the "Utility users tax monies to fund str-e.et and sidewalk projects. by shifting storm drainaqe rrojects to enter­ prise funding, and by the application of qas tax tunds, federa.l funds and traffic mitigation fees for intersection, traffic and bike lane improvements. PUblic Ipil~inq. FUndil\9 for improvements to public bu.5.1dings, facilities, and building systems has decreased, when adjusted fo~ inflation, since 1981-92. The type of projects in this catlP-gory include root repairs, seismic improvements, major remodeling of buildings, building system improvements, dam repairs, and building new facilities. In the main, these projects are supported by the General Fund ~ Park. &ad Op.p Space Facilities The public and council have expressed concerns regarding the level of CIP funding for the City's parks and playgrounds. Within the category ·Parke r Golf, Op&n Space and School Sites,· fundinq ~etail is provided for park facility improvements over time. Funding for infrastructure improvements such as playground equipment, park a.enitiea such as benches and fences. and irrigation repair& has been inconsistent since 1981-82. The 1993-94 park facility budget of $344, SOO represents the highest level of funcling tor infrastruc­ ture improvements over the lJ-year period. From 1981 through 1992- 93 the city has spent an average of $84,000 per year (adjusted for inflation) on park infrastrUcture improvelllents. The 1993-94 fundinq or $344,500 for parks facility improvements reflects the level of annual fundinq necessary to implement major components of Community Services' Parks Master Plan (scheduled for the next five years}. As with public building projects, parx prcjects have been deper.dent upon the level of General Funds available for crp projects. BoD-Xlfra'~ctur. Project. The City's non-infrastructure eIP budget has increased Significant­ ly since 1981-82. This is a result of federal mandates. such as the Americans with Disabilities Act and environmental mandates. such as underqround tank removals. Projects such as Police and Fire communication systems have been added to the elF budget. The City has increased funding tor management information systeros t such as Geographic Information Systems, Information Systems Development, and Computer Aided Mapping. There has also been an increase in a variety of miscellaneous, non-infrastructure projects, such as Art C'MR:489:93 4 • in Public Places, printing Services equipment upq~ades. MUnicipal Service center security improvements, and fire station dormitory lI.odificaticns~ COpplll.ioB overall, capital budqet dollars devoted to public infrastructure projects have kept pace with inflation and have not declined over tiae. This is a consequence, hOlrr'ever, of dedication of the utility users tax JU.onies to fund street and siaewalk project£l. and the shiftlnq ot storm drain projects to enterprise tunding. Other project categories, more dependent upon the availability of General Fund finanCing, such as iaprcvements to public buildings and park infrastructure t have experienced declines ia real dollar terms or inconsistent funding over ti~e. Non-infrastructure projects have experienced steady qrOYth based on regulatory changes, enhanced public sat"ety systems, and the emergen~e of new computer technoloqy to increase productivity and satisfy the demand for more informa­ tion. Respectfully submitted, \ I.. ., \r.. ~..J'J."' ... JOE SACCZO S~~ior Financial Analyst ----:1?~'rto'-~ 1::: Cft J Y CMR:489,93 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ § ~ I n ~ ~ " " .- 0 p • • • • • : t I J I J • J ~ I I l J • 0 ~ ~ 0 • ! • : if! " II. ! #' # # " "-~ ~ ~ • • :!; 0 ~ ~ ~ 0. " • 0 0 • ! ~ ~ ~ R ~ • .... ~ • ~ ~~ • Hi lij I-" " " '" '" '" '" II ~ a ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ 0 • ,; ~ • • " • ;; • ~ • • I· ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ & 8 ~ • • • ~~8o§g ~ l f • • ~ • ~ • • ". 'II_m.",_8 __ "t .. • ~ • • ~ • .-~ .; • • i;;g:eg~ '" ,; ~ " • 5 • • • " • '" ~ 0 " :; " ~ ~ '" ~N • ~-.. ~ ~ u ! u ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ • • ~ UU ~ 0 § ~ ~ ! 0 ~ 0 : ... ., 8 ~! 00 • s 0 ~ • ; 0 ........ .. ~ ~ .. • .~ ; :e ~ ! ~~j:j ... ~ g ll. "' " " • • ~ .. " • " • I ~ u I i ~ ~ ! ~ u ~ ~ I ~ U~U ~ ~ i "-0-~ ~~ ~ Sl~ • 0 • • illll~:;' • ~. 0 • • 5 Ii • ~ ~ 0 • • • · " " •• 0 o. N • ~ U ~ ~ ~ § ~ 08 g§ § 8 • • UU~ ! • §. ! i j ~" • • .. " '. '" • • ~: • • 0 0 ~o gg , ~ • • IIJO .. OII_ • 0 .. ¥ • ~ ~ ~ 1; o. 0 • • • C.«IO><'l= • • • : ~ :, -0 • '" • • • -o-N ~ • .. .. " • 0 ! t " • 1 I .-• "" ~ Ii t 2e I ! ) ; 11 jj I i • • .. f I • £ i 1 I ! j • 1 iii , . • • i l! '!!! i , • t .' ~ • • w ! i " ~ • • t ~ ! &! • • t-i g • ! t_ ~ ~ • j ~ j t t ~1~;! i. • "'. ~! 1 0 ii I I u ~ • L • "" i ~ i k ! • .! ! !§~i~! " • •• ~ ~ • L 31j~! 1 I I I H • II ! S •. ] , • J J • t • " I J' 1 , ~ • " ~ • i H 1 ~. Ii ~ c , !: 8 ~. ~ !~ il ~ ! ! Hi .-! x. j • • • ~HH 1 ~~ 1 .~ • ~ I • g ! l ~ : .. i e , ~ 2; i~ I • ! I ~ ~ !l ~ !!~~.§ • i l I • ~~ • E • J ; ~ i 1'1 1 11g ~ :.-S' j~ :i • i ;. j .• "! J ~ "09 .-. C -1§ l 1;1 • l~-.H £ :!ii r ; ~ ~ f I l -Plor j c!::;<i J J i " J i ~ f-f ~ I i 1= j ~ 1: i s-~ii j§! ~! ~.! ~ ~i ~ • , ~ : r~ 1I'i .! E-~ i ~ • • 1 ! H ~ 9 ~ • i ] ;; .e. i'la ;; tli.H ~ i • j ~l:S ~~ ~ ~ 5 • ~J8:1! ... i ~ ~ ; = • CUI!:::!,):! 0 -_._--_. -:- Page J of 5 examples of projects ift Each CIP cateqory public Buildings. structures and Facilit~and Systems • Foothill and Arastradero Dam Repairs • Childt"en's and Community Theatre and Cult,ural Center ~4ilding and Auditorium Improv~ents • Correct structural Deficiencies in Lucie Stern Building • Architectural and St.n!ctural Investigation of Public Assembly Buildings • Main Library Building Remodeling' and Structural Deficiency correction • Roof Repairs and Replacements at City Facilities • Public Buildings: structural Improvements • Foothills Fire Facility • Civic center Fire Sprinkler System • Lucie Stern Mechanical System Improvements • HVM Energy conservation Retrofit • Civic Center Energy Management System • Rinconada Pool Renovation and Improvements • Civic Center Air Intake Modification • Heating and ventilation Systems at Lucie Stern • CUbberley Roof Repairs • celifornia Avenue Underpass Improvements Parks and Playgroynds • Renovation of Mitchell Parx Tot Lot • Downtown Park North • Greer Park Development • Tennis and Sasketball Co~rt Resurfacings • Renovation of Irrigation Systems and Installation of Backflow Devices • Playground Furniture and Equip~ent Replacement • Baylands Reclaimed water System • Parks Facilities Improvements and Repairs • Baylands Athletic Center Circuit Replacement Golf CQurse • Maintenance Building Improvements • Service Yard and storage Pad Improvements • Golf cart Path Improvements • Golf Course Perimeter Fence and Driving Ran.ge Fence Installation and Repair • Water Reclamation I • , Page 4 of 5 ~Space, Yacht Harbor. and San f'rilDci~guito Cr€elc: • Erosion control on San Francisquito Cre~k • yacht Harbor Rastoration and Improvements • Baylands Duck Pond Filtration System • Boronda Lake ¥..tblic Doc.k Replacement • Foothills Park Picnic Facility Heplacement SOhool Site Acquisition and Improvements • Terman School Site Development • Surplus school site Purchase • school site Improvements Environwenta~~vements • Hazardous Materials storage • Hazardous Materiels Underground Tank Removal • Airport Tank Removal and Cleanup • Ta~~ Investigation and Removal • Fuel storage Tank Upgrades Copunications • Police Mobile Radio System Upgrade • Dispatch Console Replacement • Tel~phone System Replacement • Microwave Radio system • police and Fire communications computer System • PBX Software and Hardware Upqrade • Voice Processing System Management and Information ~ystems • Information systems Development • Library computerization • Financial Data Base Upgrade • computer Aided Happing • Geographic Information Systems • wide Area Networkinq • Warehouse Inventory Control System • Personal Computer Upgrades • payroll/Personnel System Miscellaneous projects • city Facilities carpet Replacement and painting • Art in Public Places • Facilities Maintenance • Replacement ot Reproduction Equipment G Garage Hoise and Equipment Overhaul • Vehicular Washing Facility , Page 5 of 5 • Communications center Remodel • Hearinq ru:paired Systems • Civic Canter Conservation Lighting Improvements • Fire station CVe~head Door Modification • Fire station Dormitory Modifications • Sign Replacement in Downtown parking Lots • Records Management • Evidence storaqe Expansion • computer Room and Finance Vault Remodel • Fire Apparatus Hearinq Protection • Cable Television Equipment • Printing Services Equipment Upq~ade