|
SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUDGET WORK SESSION OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12, 2000, AT 4:30 P.M. Mayor Rosemary Waldorf called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Council members present were Flicka Bateman, Joyce Brown, Pat Evans, Kevin Foy, Lee Pavão, Bill Strom, Jim Ward, and Edith Wiggins. Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Finance Director Jim Baker, Personnel Director Pat Thomas, Public Works Director Bruce Heflin, Engineering Director George Small, Interim Transportation Director Scott McClellan, Police Captain Tony Oakley, Housing Director Tina Vaughn, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith. Mr. Horton asked that Personnel Director Pat Thomas be allowed to comment on Items 1and 4.I together. Mayor Waldorf agreed. Item 1 - Personnel Department Budget Presentation Personnel Director Pat Thomas pointed out that the Personnel Department’s requested budget was down 12% from the previous year because the Department was not funding “paid studies” in the coming budget year. She said the Department was hoping to form partnerships with others, such as Triangle J Council of Governments, to support the Safety Program through the Workers’ Compensation Program. Ms. Thomas explained that the Department’s priority for next year would be to implement the Classification and Pay Study, which will be the primary topic for the May 3rd work session. She stated that getting the Town’s employment application on the Town’s web page had greatly helped the Personnel Department with recruitment. However, Ms. Thomas said, the Department was continuing to have difficulty filling positions because of the tight labor market throughout the Triangle. She expressed hope that implementing the 75th percentile pay schedule as they do the classification and pay study will help recruitment efforts. Council
Member Brown asked what raising the median pay to the 75th
percentile will do to compression. Ms. Thomas replied that last year’s
actions to take people higher in the ranges they were in had helped to
relieve this problem. She added that there are jobs, for bus drivers
in particular, where salary ranges will be moving up and there will be
some compression. Ms. Thomas said that the Department was exploring ways
to help in those areas. Ms. Thomas noted that actions taken last year
would not be compounded this year because the Department intends to keep
people spread out to avoid compression with the exception of a few, which
the Department has plans to address. Ms. Thomas explained that this report summarizes efforts to hire youth within certain neighborhoods. She said that the Department has had very limited success filling these positions even though they have had Community Development funding to do so. Ms. Thomas added that positions often are not filled because youth do not know about them even though the Town has tried hard to fill them. She said there are contract positions for which the Town finds it difficult to hire youth, either because of their schedules, or because of labor laws, or because of liabilities for the Town. Ms. Thomas added that the Personnel Department makes ongoing efforts to get the message out that the Town has jobs for which youth can apply. Council Member Bateman stated that she had talked with Mr. George, of an alternative program called Phoenix Academy, who had never heard about the Town’s program and was enthusiastic about notifying people at Phoenix Academy and at both high schools as well. Council Member Bateman noted that the summer internships would be a wonderful opportunity for some of the youth and expressed gratitude that the Town was open to hiring them. Council Member Strom suggested that Ms. Thomas contact Susan Worley, at Volunteers for Youth, which he said is a pool of 60 or 75 teens that might be interested in summer positions. Item 2 - Legal Department Budget Presentation Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos stated that the Town Attorney’s Office had gone through significant changes last year when Toni Pendergraph was transferred from the Manager’s Office to the Legal staff. He noted that this change was reflected in the budget for this year. Mr. Karpinos said that the Department had added a substantial amount of money to the professional services line item last year in anticipation of initiatives the Council and staff were taking regarding various enforcement matters. But, he pointed, most people in the historic district had come into compliance, and the Town had not therefore had to spend money on outside counsel. Mr.
Karpinos pointed out that the only other items in the budget were salaries
and supplies. He said that the Department would not spend anything near
the amount that had been budgeted and would likely come in with Expenses
for Professional Services in the low $20,000 range. Attorney Karpinos
stated that the Legal Department’s proposed budget for this year would
request a reduction from the budget of the past year of about $25,000. Town Clerk Joyce Smith stated that the Mayor’s Office’s budget reflected a 7.3% decrease in expenditures, primarily due to a reallocation of telephone charges. She said that the Town Council’s budget reflected no change over the current year’s expenditures. Ms. Smith explained that there were no additional changes or additions proposed for the Mayor’s or the Council’s budgets. Ms. Smith reported that the Manager’s budget reflected a .4% decrease. She said that services to citizens and to the Town Council were going well, as were the general management of daily Town operations and the development of the operating budget within the Council’s guidelines. Ms. Smith noted that the staff had been working on improving public information through a variety of means, including increased use of E-mail and continuous up-grading of the Town’s website. She added that the staff also continues to improve its budget analysis. Ms. Smith proposed a decrease of 1% in the Clerk’s Office, due to no election costs for the November 2000 election. She noted that the Clerk’s Office continues to produce minutes of Town Council sessions within two weeks and that the stenographer services used for the past two years had been working extremely well. Ms. Smith stated that the Town Code of Ordinances had recently been republished, reformatted, and updated. She said that there has been a continuing increase in requests for information and that the Clerk’s Office is generally able to fill those requests within the same day. Ms. Smith noted that agenda packets continue to be produced on time. She pointed out that the agenda process takes about 40% of staff time each week, which causes the Clerk’s Office to delay other activities. Ms. Smith repeated her comments from last year that the Clerk’s Office needs additional clerical help. She said that the Manager’s Office needs additional clerical help as well, because professional staff members are doing their own typing and filing. Ms. Smith asked the Council to look at the information and costs that she had provided and to weigh that against other priorities. Ms. Smith pointed out that the mailings, such as notifications, had increased greatly over the past year and were becoming weekly tasks for the Clerk’s Office. She proposed that the Council allow her to purchase or lease an automatic folder/inserter that would eliminate having staff people hand-fold and insert these mailings. Ms. Smith explained that it had recently taken 3-1/2 hours for three people to prepare a mailing requested by the Council that would have taken one person an hour to prepare using this machine. Mayor Waldorf asked if the increase in mailings were the result of policy changes or ad hoc requests from the Council. Ms. Smith replied that it was the latter. Council Member Evans asked Ms. Smith to compare the number of mailings done today to the number done five or ten years ago. She asked what the increase in cost would have been. Ms. Smith replied that she did not have such figures, but guessed that the task had doubled in the last five years. She added that the Clerk’s Office had increase its E-mail use and suggested that citizens use the Town’s web page rather than regular mail. Council Member Brown asked Ms. Smith if she had looked at lease-to-purchase options for the mailer/inserter. Ms. Smith replied that it would cost about $231 per month to lease, adding that the equipment company does not offer a lease-to-purchase option. Council Member Ward suggested that Ms. Smith contact Personnel Director Pat Thomas, who lists temporary employee opportunities. Ms. Smith replied that she would be happy to do that if the Council would fund it, to which various Council members replied that Ms. Thomas had the money. Mr. Horton stated he did not believe the Personnel Department had the money. He added that he was sympathetic to Ms. Smith’s plight, but did not recommend purchasing the machine in view of the Council’s recommendation to “hold the line” this year. Council Member Strom asked Ms. Smith what was involved in production of the quarterly reports. He also asked if there were any non-mandated reports which were time-consuming that the Town might cut back on. Ms. Smith replied that there were none that she was aware of. Mr. Horton added that the staff had eliminated all that it could eliminate a couple of years ago. Council Member Ward suggested that the Council, at some point, review how much paperwork could be eliminated by using electronic formats. Council Member Brown noted that when an agenda item continues over time the Council repeatedly gets the same fat packet it received at the start. She asked if the Clerk’s Office had a scanner for putting it out electronically after the first time. Ms. Smith replied that she did not have a scanner, but added that the Planning Department and the Personnel Office each had one. Council Member Brown also asked if there might be a way of not repeating old material in the new packets. Ms. Smith replied that this could be done with the cooperation of the departments who generate the agenda items. Mr. Horton added that it also was a function of requests by the Council. Ms. Smith agreed, but added that the Clerk’s Office keeps Council members’ packets for three months and recycles some of the information to Council members. Council Member Brown recommended slimming the packets down. Mayor Waldorf cautioned that the Council could end up not having something from a previous discussion that it wanted to have available. Council Member Brown noted that quarterly reports are always included in packets but never discussed. She wondered if there would be any cost savings from having only annual reports. Mr. Horton said that the staff certainly did not have to give those reports to the Council or to the public if there was no interest in them. He added, though, that he would continue to require that they be prepared because he always learns something of value from them. Mr. Horton added that the only cost savings to the Clerk’s Office would be elimination of copying. Council Member Bateman expressed concern that eliminating duplication would require a judgement call by the staff. Mr. Horton stated that they would use a clear guideline and would just not provide some information. Mayor Waldorf suggested that the Clerk or someone do a quick survey of the Council about what it does and doesn’t need and make suggestions about what the Council is doing that generates work which might be of marginal utility. Mayor Waldorf added that she would not be offended by such suggestions. Council Member Strom requested a report on the pros and cons of converting to an electronic information system. Mr. Horton agreed to provide that, and expressed appreciation that Council Member Strom had said “not in this budget cycle.” Council Member Foy stated that the Clerk might refer the Council to information that is on its web page. He encouraged the staff to recommend reducing paperwork gradually while the Council gets into the practice of going to the web page when the staff has told them that duplicate information is there. Council Member Foy commented that the Council and the public would benefit by a gradual shift. Mr. Horton replied that this is the approach they have been attempting to take, adding that he would attempt to be a little more aggressive about it. Council Member Foy asked if the Code of Ordinances was in electronic form. Ms. Smith replied that it was, noting that she had recently reached an agreement that the publisher would post it on their web page with a link to the Town’s web page, with the Town paying a fee each year for that service. Council Member Strom restated his request that the Manager bring a report on the pros and cons of moving toward an electronic agenda for the Council. Mayor Waldorf noted that this was part of the goal the Council had adopted at its planning retreat regarding how they would restructure operations and procedures with technology in mind. Mr. Horton stated that this would be a small part of that and that the Council would benefit by a specific report on this particular issue. He noted that there have been increasing requests for this, adding that the key cost may be the people who maintain and update the web. Council Member Foy recommended making it an integrated system. Mayor Waldorf asked for a show of hands and all Council members expressed interest in pursuing Council Member Strom’s suggestion. Council Member Bateman inquired about the amount for travel in the Council’s budget. Ms. Smith replied that a formula of $1,800 per Council member was used, or $14,400. Ms. Smith pointed out that the Council had exceeded that budget by about $4,000 already this year. She explained that the cost of travel had been increasing and that $1,800 is not enough for a national conference. Ms. Smith noted that the figure had been increased from $1,200 last year, and she suggested taking it to $2,000 or $2,200 per Council member for the coming year. She pointed out that this would allow Council members to attend the national conference each year and possibly a State or regional conference as well. Council Member Bateman asked if any Council members had been told they were exceeding their budget. Ms. Smith replied that the staff cuts other corners to allow the Council to do what it needs to do. Mr. Horton noted that the Council had not exceeded its overall budget, only that one line item. Mayor Waldorf suggested that Council members decide whether they want to leave it the way it is or increase it. Council Member Brown noted that not all Council members attend conferences each year. Council Member Ward said that he would like the Council to be notified when they go over a line item. Ms. Smith asked if Council Member Ward would like a summary of this year’s travel. He replied that he would, but added that he did not want to create an onerous task and was not sure how time-consuming this would be. Mr. Horton expressed appreciation for Council Member Ward’s comment, and said that the staff would always try to give feedback regarding this issue. Mayor Waldorf thanked Ms. Smith for doing a “ great job.” Discussion of the 2000-2001 Budget Finance Director Jim Baker reviewed a summary of current and proposed tax rate adjustments. He reported that there is a net change from a 3.1¢ to a 2.7¢ increase in the General Fund, which incorporates changes made since the last meeting. Mr. Baker said that these changes mainly involved School Resource Officers, but also the plan to recapture a part of development review fees, which added an additional $120,000 in revenue. Mr. Baker noted that there was virtually no change in the Transportation Fund, and that the staff recommended a.4¢ increase for regular budget. The fare-free proposal, he said, would add another .6¢. Mr. Baker noted that there were several attachments, and read one which explained that 3.1¢ increase in taxes would be about $3.88/month for $150,000 worth of property. For $200,000 it would be $5.17/month, he said, and $7.75/month for $300,000 worth of property. Council Member Strom asked if the Finance Department still used the 98% collection rate of accessible property taxes, noting that historically the Town had collected closer to 99%. Mr. Baker replied that the Town currently used 98%, which is conservative. Mr. Horton added that the staff is intentionally being conservative because they do not want “the nasty surprise of having a revenue item come in far lower than estimated.” Council Member Foy ascertained that an average $265,000 house in Chapel Hill would experience a tax increase of about $6.50 per month if it included a fare-free bus system. He noted that the tax on $300,000 house would be about $1,800. Item 4 - Follow-up Reports from Various Departments 4. A. Public Works 1. Report on Curbside Refuse Collection. Public Works Director Bruce Heflin stated that there were few changes from previous years and the Department was assuming multiple-year progression into curbside collection, beginning halfway through the year and then halfway through the subsequent years. Mr. Heflin said they were assuming a reduction in two full garbage routes, and they also were assuming a slightly smaller roll-cart, but at the same price. He noted the possible future savings related to converting to two-person crews, and proposed using one two-person crew this year in order to see if productivity estimates were reasonable. Mr. Heflin noted that the Department had included information about possible relationship to pay-as-you-throw, as well as the impact of the Southern Village annexation. He noted that this analysis does not look at any of the possible tax revenues that would be accumulated from the annexation. He stated that they had assumed a 7% exemption rate, which is about the same number used in previous reports. Mr. Heflin noted that it is higher than any other exemption rate they know, and that it is conservative. Council Member Bateman said that the president of the Southern Village Homeowners Association had called and asked her where their garbage would be picked up. Mr. Heflin replied that Council approval regarding Southern Village stipulated that garbage would be picked up at the curb. He pointed out that the developer had elected to create alleyways that make it difficult for Town collection equipment, and said that the private collector that operates in Southern Village uses a smaller truck and collects some at the curb and some in the alleys. Council Member Foy clarified that there would be a reduction of two crews and that there would be a total of nine positions eliminated, including two crews and back-ups. He then asked where the exemption rate figure came from. Mr. Heflin replied that it had been an educated projection based on experience with their two-year pilot program and much consultation with others in the business. He said the 7% rate was a “magnification” of what they think is the national norm and what they experienced when they did the pilot program. Council Member Foy asked if collectors would have to physically inspect the trash under some of the programs that the Department had outlined. Mr. Heflin said that it would depend on the kind of pay-as-you-throw system the Town adopted, adding that the collectors’ functions would change depending on the system chosen. Council Member Evans asked what size the yard waste containers were, and Mr. Heflin replied that they were 68 gallons. Council Member Evans suggested looking at much smaller containers that would encourage people to conserve. Mr. Heflin explained that the Town could provide any size the Council wanted, but added that the Department was attempting to provide a cart that would meet the needs of as many citizens as possible. He mentioned one house had 12 cans. Mr. Horton added that people sometimes stuff smaller containers so much that it is hard to empty them. Council Member Evans commented that she had received calls from those in favor of once-a-week backyard garbage pickup. She said that she would be curious about the updated numbers for that service, noting that some of the savings for once-a-week curbside would translate into savings for once-a-week backyard collection as well. Mr. Heflin replied that there are some savings, but added that the fundamental issue having to do with productivity has not changed, such as the distance the collector has to travel. He added that they had not had the 17% increase in productivity that they need to eliminate a route. Council Member Brown asked what size container had been used in the pilot roll-out program. Mr. Heflin replied that it was a 90-gallon container. Mayor Waldorf, agreeing with Council Member Ward that the Council should be careful not to request excessive work from the staff, asked if the staff would be willing to gather some data that would give the Council a picture of the numbers of workers who have been injured on this job. She pointed out that this has implications for absenteeism, Workers’ Compensation, and turnover. Mr. Horton replied that the Town does have those records and that he would furnish them for a three-year period. Council Member Wiggins remarked that there must be some savings when the Town is collecting once a week rather than twice a week in the backyards. Mr. Heflin replied that there are some savings, but the only way to make more savings would be to reduce a route. He said that to achieve savings by forcing the reduction of a crew the Town jeopardizes its ability to collect brush and to have backup services as needed. Mr. Heflin pointed out that the more trash the collector has to pick up the longer it takes to do the route. Mayor Waldorf noted working condition issues associated with collectors having to carry twice the load. Council Member Wiggins stated that working conditions were very important to her, and that she supported curbside collection but had just wanted a fuller answer to Council Member Evans’s question. Mayor Waldorf emphasized that “if it’s borderline inhumane to do it twice a week then it goes over the border if it’s just once a week.” She added that it was not worth considering, and commented that Council Members Brown and Evans may have a “non-injury-causing amount of garbage,” but others in Chapel Hill have more. Council Member Foy remarked that it was clear that changing to curbside is a reduction in service to citizens. He suggested that the Town at least find out the cost of twice a week curbside collection. Although he agreed that the working conditions for collectors were not good, he said he did not agree that curbside collection was the only solution. Council Member Foy suggested looking at the working conditions rather than cutting services to citizens while simultaneously raising taxes. He noted that this issue had to do with the quality of life in this community and said that he did not think curbside collection was the right way to go. Council Member Ward asked what kinds of solutions were available for Southern Village and if this situation will be repeated with Meadowmont. Mr. Heflin replied that it will not be an issue with Meadowmont, and that the solution for Southern Village seems to be using specialized equipment, which is expensive and sacrifices productivity gains from curbside collection. Mr. Heflin remarked that Southern Village would then have a different level of service than the rest of the Community. Mr. Horton added that another solution would be for the Southern Village Homeowners Association to continue their contract for service with the private company. He noted that they had chosen to live in an area that avoided costs by not providing facilities for Town collection and where the Council already had said it would not provide those services. Council Member Bateman asked if that had been made clear to homebuyers. Mr. Horton replied that the Town had done all it could to alert them. Council Member Bateman stated that she would not support annexing them and then taxing them at the same rate as the rest of the Town without providing the same services. Council Member Ward noted that they would offer the same service and that it would be curbside collection. Council Member Evans noted that the neighborhood of Gimgoul is similar but they get backyard alley pickup. She asked what the Town would do with them. Mr. Heflin replied that they would convert to curbside, and Council Member Evans expressed dismay over that prospect. Mr. Heflin noted that the alleyways at Gimgoul were different from those at Southern Village, which intersect the street at difficult angles. He pointed out that Southern Village’s roads were not built to withstand the traffic of the Sanitation trucks and the intersections were unacceptable and unsafe. Mayor pro tem Pavão asked if the Town provided back-yard pickup to every resident in Chapel Hill. Mr. Heflin replied that it did except for those who have elected to bring it out to the street and a few recently built homes that have long, steep driveways. He said that this is generally decided on a lot-by-lot basis, and gave Ironwoods as an example of a neighborhood where about 90% of the residents bring their garbage to the curb. Council Member Wiggins asked what the Manager was supposed to do with the proposed budget. Mayor Waldorf replied that she had thought there was support on the Council for including curbside in the budget. Mr. Horton added that he was working under that assumption. Council Member Bateman ascertained that the public would have an opportunity to speak for or against this issue at an upcoming public hearing. Council Member Foy asked if the Manager would be presenting a spreadsheet. Mr. Horton replied that there would be little change from last year. He said he would continue to update the spreadsheet as they work on the budget and would provide details on any aspect that the Council requested. Council Member Foy stated that if the budget is prepared with curbside collection included then people should know how not adopting curbside would affect the tax rate. Mr. Horton replied that the staff would give a five-year projection of savings on any position deleted. Council Member Brown said that she had thought that the Council had agreed to keep this open to discussion of a pay-as-you-throw system, and asked if she had misunderstood. Council Member Ward said that he had understood that the Council wanted to get the information that they received today, with curbside pickup that would accommodate pay-as-you-throw and not preclude it if they wanted to take that step as well. Eunice Brock noted that more information was needed, and more effort should be made to inform citizens. Mayor Waldorf replied that her comments were well taken and that the Town needed to make an effort to get more information out to citizens about the savings. Mayor Waldorf stated that the Council appreciated her comments but could not debate the issue at this time. Item 4.B. Transportation B.1. Report on Fare-Free System Option. Interim Transportation Director Scott McClellan explained the option to dispense with fares on the Town’s buses, except for the Tarheel Express and evening and Sunday shared-ride services. Mr. McClellan explained that costs would be shared differently than they have been under the current Memorandum of Understanding, which included Carrboro and UNC. He outlined the three basic steps of the proposed cost-sharing arrangement: · Take total system expenditures ($6.9-million), subtract revenues from federal and State sources (approximately $1.5-million), eliminate operating revenue from Tarheel Express, and arrive at a system-wide net cost of almost $5.5-million. · Calculate a system net cost per service hour to be used for assigning costs to the University based on specific services that they have asked for, such as campus shuttle routes and some of the supplementary park-and-ride services. Would subtract that from the system wide net costs. · Divide the balance of the cost among the three partners, using the Town’s population percentages. Under this proposal, Mr. McClellan explained, Chapel Hill would have about 35% of the cost assigned to it, with the University getting 53% and Carrboro getting a little over 12%. He said they had estimated that this could increase ridership by 5-10%. Based on their experience with a new free route on campus, Mr. McClellan said that the University had estimated that about 60% of the increased ridership had been due to “route-jumping,” where people had stopped riding the old route in order to take the free one. Mr. McClellan explained that they had considered offering it only to students who would swipe their UNC 1 cards on the buses, but discovered that the cards are not compatible with fare boxes. He stated another option would be to print passes and hand them out to students, but there had been concern about possible fraudulent use. Mr. McClellan listed the advantages of a fare-free system:
The disadvantages, he said, are: · possible increase in cost for increased services to match increased demand, and · difficulty capturing ridership statistics. He pointed out that the Town may need to buy automated counting devices. Council Member Evans asked if the current Memorandum of Understanding was based on where ridership comes from. Mr. McClellan replied that it divides cost among partners based on population, and assigns cost to the University for specific services that they have requested. Council Member Evans asked if the University would have service to park and ride lots. Mr. McClellan replied that the University had requested some supplemental service to park and ride lots to help attract patrons to use the services. He said that the Town added a second bus at the C express route a couple of years ago at the request of the Hospital for more frequency and capacity for some whom they were trying to encourage to use park and ride service. Mr. McClellan stated that they had added an H express from the Highway 54 lot for peak hours to the Hospital and then around the campus. He said that the Department also operates a bus during peak hours for service between the Southern Village lot and the Hospital. Council Member Evans said that she understood why the University ought to pay those costs, adding that they also ought to pay the cost of transit from their own park and ride lots, such as the two on Estes Drive. Mr. McClellan replied that the Town had included those lots in assignment of cost to the University. Council Member Evans asked if the Town would be eligible for additional funding from either the federal or State government if the Town implements a fare-free system. Mr. McClellan replied that the Town might get a small amount from the federal government. Council Member Evans asked if the Town had been able to separate out the cost for EZ Rider service. Mr. McClellan did not have that figure available but agreed that it was an expensive service. He noted that the Town was required by the federal government to provide ADA service. Mr. Horton added that the Town has no choice but to provide it in a manner which parallels other services that the Town provides, and agreed to provide a report that would have that information. Council Member Brown asked if there had been any studies showing that the fare-free system on campus had resulted in fewer cars. Mr. Horton replied that there had been no studies that normal logic tells you that this is the case. Council Member Ward established that the present bus system cost was $7 million per year, and asked what the increase in net cost would be to the participants. Mr. McClellan replied that it would be the foregone operating revenue of about $1.6 million. Council Member Ward said that plowing that kind of money into the system would significantly improve the system and thereby generate more riders. Mr. Horton replied that this was a valid point of view, but that the University has not said they were willing to spend additional money to increase frequency or improve service. Mr. Horton explained that the University would spend additional money to provide a fare free service. He offered to try and negotiate that if the Council directed him to, but pointed out that there was not time to get them to agree on that between now and when the Council needs to adopt the budget. Mr. Horton added that the University had acted based on what they feel is a mandate from the student body to use some of the student fees to help pay for a fare free service. He added that he did not understand that the University had a mandate as strong for improvements in service. Council Member Wiggins asked if all cities with bus systems provide something comparable to EZ Rider. Mr. McClellan replied that all federally-funded urban transit systems must provide “complementary ADA service.” Mayor Waldorf asked if EZ Rider had to be fare free if the system was fare free. Mr. McClellan replied that it did not have to be. Mayor Waldorf asked if anyone knew of a system that had gone to fare free service and then reverted back. Mr. Horton said that most systems that are fare free are associated with universities or a special population of some kind, and that he had not heard of any changing back. Mayor Waldorf said that she was assuming that going fare free would not disturb the Town’s federal and State funding. Mr. McClellan replied that it would not compromise that funding. Council Member Brown asked the staff to find out how many fare free systems existed and how they were funded. Mr. Horton predicted that they would find that with most fare free systems a corporation or university had agreed to pay the basic cost. Mr. McClellan noted that Duke University has such an arrangement. Council Member Wiggins pointed out that the Council was about to make the judgement that citizens would rather have their taxes increased to pay for a free bus service at the same time they will in the long run save on taxes by changing to another trash collection service. She wondered what citizens would say if they had a choice regarding the fare free bus service and curbside collection. Council Member Evans responded that this was something that would help reduce traffic, which is a major concern of the citizens. Council Member Wiggins replied that she knows the advantages of each but wondered what citizens would say if they had a choice, since expenses go down on one and up on the other. Council Member Brown said that she hoped there would be a lot of publicity on both issues so that the Council would hear from many citizens at public hearing time. Mayor Waldorf added that it was important for the public to know about the huge share of the cost that the University was willing to bear. She added that she agreed in principle with Council Member Ward’s comments about spending money on a better system that would serve more people better than having a free system. Mayor Waldorf noted, however, that the Town did not “have a deal for that.” Council Member Ward said that going to a fare free system would make improving it more difficult. Mr. Horton commented that the Town would spend the money to improve it, adding that the net cost would increase for partners for the portion of the improvements that applied to them. Council Member Foy stated that it was an important point that this would be a partnership and that improving ridership would give the Town more leverage to seek more contribution and cooperation from the University in improving the system. He added that the Town could always pull out if it saw no advantage in continuing the arrangement. Mr. Horton added that the Council is the voting partner in the end. He explained that Carrboro contracts with Chapel Hill to receive services and they have a choice to receive a contract offered by the Council, or not. Mayor Waldorf noted that there was a meeting set up with Carrboro to discuss this subject on April 26th. Council Member Evans asked if it was possible to have a fare free service on major corridors. Mr. Horton replied that the staff did not think it was possible to have fare free service with those kinds of distinctions. Council Member Evans commented that buses are sometimes empty, but Mr. Horton replied that that was “just the nature of things,” noting that buses had hauled more than three million passengers last year, setting a new record. Mr. Horton again explained that the University wanted to have fare free service for all who are affiliated with the University and that the Town cannot find a way to do that without making the service Town-wide, because there is no technology right now that lets fare boxes read different cards. Council Member Ward stated that the University was a focused destination, and that it seems as though they could cover most of their needs with the existing services with minor expansions. He pointed out that the Town has a much wider area, and that some areas have poor service. Council Member Ward pointed out that the Town has an interest in improving that service, and that it will be more difficult to improve with a fare-free system. Council Member Bateman departed at 6:40 p.m.. Mayor
Waldorf excused Engineering Director George Small and suggested that he
reschedule his Department discussion. Mr. Horton pointed out that they
would be postponing the Capital Improvements Program as well.
5.C.1. Report on costs for capital equipment replacement programs.Police Captain Tony Oakley reported that the Police Department would need $255,000 for the vehicle replacement fund this year to bring 46 vehicles into the replacement cycle system that the Town developed for its Town-wide fleet management system. He said that this would include 13 vehicles in the third year, 17 in the second year, and 16 this year. 5.C.2. Report on School Resource Officers’ costs and revenues. Captain Oakley explained that in January of 1995 the Town and the School System had jointly funded a School Resource Officer (SRO) for Chapel Hill High School. He noted that this arrangement continued through ’95 and ’96, and an additional SRO was assigned in ’96 to East Chapel Hill School. Captain Oakley said that these two SRO positions were jointly funded as well. In 1998, Captain Oakley explained, the School System inquired about having SROs in the middle schools, and the Police Department made them aware of a community policing grant which would provide 75% of police servicing fees as long as there was a 25% matching funding. He said that the School System agreed to pay that 25% and also to continue paying for half of the fourth SRO. Captain Oakley stated that although the grant ended this year the School System wanted to keep all four police officers in the schools. He said that the School System is willing to put $110,000 towards that. Mr. Horton added that when he and the School System met as the Council had advised them to do, they agreed to recommend to each of their respective Boards that the Town and School System split the cost of the four officers. Mr. Horton recommended reviewing it in future years with the goal of getting the Schools to pick up more and more of the cost each year. He added that the Town can cover $110,000, and added that this would be a reasonable compromise position. Council Member Foy thanked Mr. Horton for negotiating the deal, but argued that the schools should fund the SROs. He said that he would support a token good faith contribution, but not $110,000. Council Member Ward commented that he would agree to spend the $110,000 if it was clear to the School System that they would pick up more of the cost each year. Mr. Horton replied that the Town could say fifty percent this year, 75^% next year, and then all of it. Council Member Strom argued that the School System is in a better position with the School District Tax to fund this than the Town is and that he would not support the $110,000 split. Council Member Brown asked if police officers assigned to schools can be used anywhere else. Captain Oakley replied that they are used for special events in Town rather than everyday police needs. Council Member Brown suggested that the schools’ could have their own security system, which would then free the police officers for general police needs. Mr. Horton explained, though, that security officers are not able to do general police work. Mayor Waldorf ascertained that they work for the Town during the summer, and Captain Oakley added that in a sense they also work for the Town during the school year because otherwise the Police would have to dispatch officers to the schools. Council Member Brown inquired about the difference between a police officer and a school security officer. Captain Oakley explained that police officers are sworn and certified by the State. Mr. Horton pointed out that they are not law enforcement officers. In response to a question by Council Member Evans, Mr. Horton explained that the School System is eligible for grant funds to address school violence in the schools. He said that they have applied and received those funds, and have chosen to use a small portion of them to help pay for SROs. Council Member Evans noted that if the Town had not applied for the C.O.P.S. grant then the School System would have been spending their own State money for this purpose. Mayor Waldorf expressed interest in knowing how much money the Chapel Hill/Carrboro School System gets from the State and from other sources for the purpose of violence reduction, and how they spend it. She noted that the School System does not have to tax for this, adding that she felt the Town should contribute something, but less than 50%. Council Member Evans stated that she, too, would like it to be less than 50%. Council Member Ward expressed support for the SROs as long as the Town can move in the direction of weaning the School System from the Town’s budget. He said that the cost on the tax rate was minimal and that he was willing to pay it. Mr. Horton remarked that he did not have a clear idea of what the Council wanted him to do regarding negotiations with the School System. He explained that he had a sense that the Council wanted him to seek a greater portion paid by the schools, but did not know what portion would be satisfactory to the Council. Mr. Horton wondered if it might be 75%. Mayor Waldorf asked if there was consensus around that, and Council Member Foy replied that 75% would be the maximum. Council Member Foy wondered whether the School System thought it was important to fund this since it was asking the Town to do so. Mr. Horton commented that the rationale might be that because the SROs work in the schools 80% of the year, the Town paying 75% of the cost would be a token contribution. Council Member Strom added that part of the negotiation should be getting the program down to a level where the Manager could say that the Town was getting direct value for these positions. Mr. Horton replied that saying 80% would do that. Council Member Brown pondered the societal problems that are causing violence in schools. Mayor Waldorf said that she did not think there was a great deal of violence in the Town’s schools, and she and Council Member Brown agreed that it would be interesting to find out if the SROs’ presence has prevented violence. Police Department Analyst Jane Cousins said that schools are required to issue a report every year about incidents that happen. She agreed to make that available to the Council. Ms. Cousins added that the SROs who are assigned to schools work closely with the staff on prevention and education. Mayor Waldorf noted that the Town’s Crisis Unit also devotes much time to the schools. Council Member Evans asked Ms. Cousins to also obtain information on how much time the Crisis Units spends in the schools. Council Member Wiggins suggested that the Manager tell the School Board that the Council will only allocate 20%, and that it is their decision whether or not to fund the balance. Mr. Horton replied that he understood that the Council would entertain a proposal that the School System pay 80% of the cost for four officers. After a brief exchange Council Members agreed to 75%, rather that 80%. Council Member Strom remarked that the 80% was just for next year. The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m. |