Loading...
Minutes 09-19-11 MINUTES OF THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2011 AT 6:00 P.M. AT THE LIBRARY ROOM "A," BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PRESENT Don Scantlan, Chair George Feldman Merline Pamplona William Shulman Jeffrey Fisher, Alternate Barry Atwood, Finance Director Tim Howard, Assistant Finance Director ABSENT Terry Lonergan David Madigan 1. Call to Order Chair Scantlan called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The recording secretary called the roll. A quorum was present. There were no changes to the agenda. 2. Approval of Minutes > Augu~1,2011 The following comments were received regarding the minutes: > Page 6, there was a question what MOU meant as the definition was not delineated in the minutes. It was explained it stood for Memorandum of Understanding. > Page 2, first paragraph, last sentence, was corrected to read "workshop" and not "Workship." Motion Mr. Shulman motioned to move Jeff Fisher from an alternate to a regular member for the meeting. Mr. Feldman seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 3. Reminder of final Public Hearing on Tuesday, September 20, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. to set Millage Rate and to adopt the final budget for FY 2011-2012. 1 Meeting Minutes Financial Advisory Committee Boynton Beach, FL September 19, 2011 Chair Scantlan requested the members attend the final public hearing as it was the reason why the Committee was formed. It was important the members see the process. The meeting was anticipated to be lengthy. The millage would be set first and then the final budget adopted. 4. Consider recommendation to the City Commission to (1) appoint a Vice Chair and (b) fill the vacancy on the Committee. This item is on the Commission Agenda for September 20. Chair Scantlan explained the FAC would request the City Commission appoint members to fill the vacancies on the Board. It was noted two applications were received. Additionally, the Committee would request the Commission appoint a Vice Chair. 5. Discuss data collection perspectives for the studies, e.g.: Citizens, Staff, others. There was discussion of assignments and the format to use. Items 3, 4, 8, 10 and 21 were not referred back to the Committee. Item 14 was referred back to the Committee; however, Chair Scantlan advised he would take over that item and do a formal A76 study as contained in OMB Circular A76. Mr. Feldman inquired if tasks such as medians, which are contracted services, would also be studied to determine if funds could be saved by performing the service in-house or through consolidation of City services. It was explained there was already a savings obtained by contracting out the service; however, it could be determined if other entities, such as the County, provided the same service as there are benefits of combining services with another municipality and/or sharing bids, office supplies and bulk purchases. There was discussion which members were assigned to which task and the tasks were reviewed. Chair Scantlan recommended the members provide three different perspectives on each item. The member should speak with City Staff to understand the issue, find someone in the City that used that service, and then obtain the public's perspective of it. The member should research other independent resources such as finding out if other cities have best practices they can emulate. In this manner, when they make their recommendations to the City Commission, it would be clear the FAC conducted due diligence. It was noted items with governmental purview could not be outsourced. Further discussion followed about whom the members should approach to do a quantitative analysis of a department, its impact on the budget this year, and up to three years out. Mr. Atwood responded it was a mechanical exercise if they wanted to reduce the budget by a certain percent. If the member wanted to determine the impact on the budget for a one-day, citywide furlough, the Finance Department can develop those 2 Meeting Minutes Financial Advisory Committee Boynton Beach, FL September 19, 2011 figures; however, it was noted there are union contracts. It was also recognized there was a limited amount of what could be done before reducing hours. Chair Scantlan agreed to send an updated matrix of tasks and the members assigned to them in electronic format. 6. Consider input for questions for use in next Citizen Survey, changing existing questions and adding more. In light of different (and concluded) study topics, do we need to remove some of the questions. Last year, a long list of questions had originally been suggested for the report and some of the members' questions were included. Due to actions taken this year by the City Commission, some of the questions in the survey could be removed. Chair Scantlan recommended the members bring in all the questions for the next meeting and they would add and remove questions as appropriate. Chair Scant/an agreed to email the final copy of the questions to the members. He clarified he would email the updated matrix and survey questions from last year to the members a week in advance of the meeting. 7. Discuss techniques for collecting Citizen Survey responses. a. Can we use water bills this year to target some responses? b. Can we use water account numbers to avoid duplication and census characteristic strategy? c. How can we remove the weakness in last year's survey (namely that certain populations may not have been represented?) This year, Chair Scantlan wanted to have a way to ensure they target the entire community. In the past, the surveys were in different City facilities. He commented when conducting a statistical survey with a stratified sample, it was important to know all categories of the census were represented. He proposed to take a map of the City and ensure that a one-page paper survey was sent to 10 randomly selected water bill recipients in each voting district so the FAC could say all areas of the community were surveyed. The survey would be a slightly more detailed survey of 20 questions and the Committee could go from there; however, getting a response back was another matter. The survey could be sent to all residents. Including a one-page survey with the water bill €HG would not raise the mailing cost. There was discussion the water bills are sent to residents both in and outside City limits, They are set up on 16 cycles which mayor may not coincide with voting districts. One cycle may include 50% water service bills to individuals living outside the City, and the other 50% inside the City may cross two or three voting districts. The issue was they could not look at the data because so few people entered their address. The Committee could not say they had a representative sampling from the entire community. Chair 3 Meeting Minutes Financial Advisory Committee Boynton Beach, FL September 19, 2011 Scantlan thought it would be beneficial to take steps to ensure they have input from the entire community. Mr. Feldman, last year, had suggested an incentive to answer the survey. Surveys would be numbered and placed at, for example, Starbucks. When respondents answered, they would get a free cup of coffee. Discussion followed they would have to place the survey at every coffee shop. Mr. Feldman commented the surveys would have to be printed in numerical sequence to avoid duplication. Account numbers could also be used to avoid duplication. The goal was to obtain a significant number of responses and giving all segments of the community the opportunity to respond. The survey was important and was an extra data point as the FAC needed to obtain broad-based, defensible data. It was unlikely the County would assist them, as the County could provide a listing of addresses, but there is a cost. Additionally, renters would not be surveyed. Working through homeowners' associations would not always be representative of the entire City. Chair Scantlan suggested discussing the item at the next meeting and the members consider ways to have a more defensible survey. If Survey Monkey was used, adding the address could be a required field; however, it did not require an address on the last survey, rather it used the IP address. Including a house code to take the survey was discussed. Discussion returned to the stratified sample. It was a more detailed survey from a smaller group of people to try to obtain a specific response. It could be done by telephone call or direct mailings. It was also noted many areas do not have homeowners' associations. Chair Scantlan thought using taxable values of areas could make certain assumptions. Mr. Atwood suggested questions should be either/or questions which could narrow items down. They could also ask which voting district they reside in. Mr. Atwood explained the City had the license for Survey Monkey for a year. It was noted the employee who had assisted with the survey had left service. There were two other Public Information Officers and it was requested the City Manager indicate which officer would assist with the survey. 8. Review selected assignments for next year. As Mr. Feldman was not at the last meeting, he agreed to handle Items 44 and 12. There was discussion of combining the Police Dispatch Services and a consultant had already been retained. There was still time to address other unassigned items. Chair Scantlan explained the target date for conclusion of the review was January/February, in order to be in time for the budget process which starts in the spring. 4 Meeting Minutes Financial Advisory Committee Boynton Beach, FL September 19, 2011 It was suggested Mr. Feldman obtain a copy of the Oelray Beach and Boca Raton Financial Advisory Committee findings. It may be helpful to review their studies and recommendations. Mr. Feldman would also like to present how much money they saved and where they saved it. There could be additional items listed. 9. Establish dates and time of future meetings beyond set meeting of October 17, 2011. After a brief discussion there was agreement the Committee would meet on November 14, 2011 and December 12, 2011. Carryover items from this meeting would be addressed then. The Committee will discuss how to improve the survey sample characteristics and what steps to take to improve it for next year. The members would decide which questions from last year would be removed and new questions added, and a discussion on assignments would take place. 10. Adjournment There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was properly adjourned at 7:02 p.m. UUJ1JtL~ lUiJ)Ll~ Catherine Cherry <f Recording Secretary 092111 5