City of Creswell 2024-25 Budget

Q:  From p.38 – second bullet point states that the revenue is “related to a combination of increases of $367,027 for charges for services”.  Can you explain what these charges were for and where the funds generated go?

A:   The combination of increases in charges for services is related primarily to the following:

  • Public Safety Fee in the Public Safety department of the General Fund ($27,012)

  • Transportation Utility Fee in the Street Fund ($225,000)

  • Sewer Collections in the Sewer Fund ($97,151)

Q:  P.45 – under Parks Maintenance & Supply, there is a large increase in the expenses from 23/24 ($16,850) to 24/25 ($61,800).  What accounts for this?

A:  This is due to maintenance projects from 23/24 carrying over into 24/25 due to other emergency projects taking precedence, like the ice storm clean up.  Also, approximately $20,000 in parks playground equipment repair is scheduled for FY 24/25.

Q:  P.48 – Under Major Goals for 24/25, the fourth bullet point refers to “Review application for 30-40 housing project on N. Mill St.”  Can you elaborate?  Are these apartments?  Single-family homes?  How does this work with our current moratorium? 

A:  The property owner would like to develop their property to medium density housing standards. City staff does not know what types of housing will be provided, although the project will have to be a minimum of 8 dwellings per acre (Boulder Butte was a little over 4 dwellings per acre).  The planning department’s goal is to have land use approval for a phased project, starting with roughly 30-40 units.  After land use approval, the builder can apply for permits.  The city is allotting the available sewer connections under the current moratorium to the building permit applicants on a first come first serve basis. 

Q:  P.51 – Under Performance Measures, there is a bullet point that refers to “286 decorative streetlights operated and maintained”.  I didn’t realize we had 286 decorative streetlights.  Is this accurate?

A:  Yes, that is correct.

Q:  P.51 – Under Major Goals for 24/25, there is a bullet point which states, “Identify funding stream for future projects within our Transportation System Plan”.  Are we looking for another funding stream in addition to the TUF that was created? 

A:  City staff are gathering the information needed to prepare a local improvement district (LID) for the 2nd Street project.  This will be an additional funding stream for this street project.  This will go through a public hearing process and go before the City Council for adoption.  This will take considerable staff time.  Staff is also looking for any grant opportunities that may arise before the project goes into the construction phase. 

Q:  P.87 – Several references are made to “Robinett-Hughes Park”.  When I look in The Blue Valley: A History of Creswell, on pp.87-88, all of the references to “James Robinette” are spelled with an “e” at the end of his name – “Robinette”.  Does this need to be corrected?

A:  The spelling of the park name was taken from the suggested motion in the April 8th City Council meeting packet.  Follow-up with the City Recorder will be done and a correction to the spelling will be made before the approved budget report is issued.

Q:  P.99 – When is our projected payoff of the Business OR, Full Faith & Credit loan (Est. Princ. Bal. 6/2024 - $1,610,103)?

A:  The projected payoff is December 1, 2035.

Q:  P.99 – When is our projected payoff of the USDA, RUS – Revenue Bond (Est. Princ. Bal. 6/2024 - $265,525)?

A:  The projected payoff is June 1, 2027.

Q:  P.102 – I think there is an error in the Salary “Annually . . . High” given for the AP/Payroll Clerk.  It is listed as $659,059. Is this an error and what is the correct amount?

A:  Yes, this was a scrivener’s error.  The correct amount is $65,059.  This correction will be made before the approved budget report is issued.

Q:  PP.105-106 – There is a phrase repeated several times: “contingency reserve requirement” (see p.105 – General Fund, line 7; p.106 – State Tax Street Fun, line 3; Airport Operating Fund, lines 3-4).  Can you explain what this means?

A:  General operating contingency (“contingency”) is required to be 15% of operating expenditures for each operating fund under the city’s fiscal policy as further defined in Resolution 2014-19.  The purpose of a contingency is to reserve some of the fund balance during the budget year for emergencies.  Ending fund balances cannot be legally appropriated during the budget year.  Contingency that is not appropriated as operating expenditures during the budget year (most likely all of it) closes to the next fiscal year’s beginning fund balance.  In other words, unused contingency reserve plus ending fund balance equals next fiscal year beginning fund balance.

Q:  From the CIP, pp.26-28 – The proposed solution for the wastewater treatment facility is estimated to be $64,520,000.  Do we have any estimates as to the increase in residential/business sewer rates that will be needed to cover this cost?

A:   As presented in the CIP, the city would have to secure grant funds equal to $40 million.  The debt proceeds of $20 million will require a rate increase of approximately $25 per month per unit.  After this proposed budget year, it could be achieved by 2 more years of 15% rate increases or approximately $10 monthly sewer bill increases each year.  The sewer base rate would end up at about $75 per month by fiscal year 2026-27.   All these numbers are preliminary, and the final Wastewater Facilities Plan Update has not been approved.  Staff have asked the engineers to investigate more options.  

Q:  From the CIP, pp.32-35 – The construction of new hangars at the airport is shown as a 23/24 project on p.35, with $753,200 proposed for 25/26 on p.33.  Utilities for new hangars is budgeted for 24/25 at $150,000 and was scheduled for 22/23.  What is our current timeline for the construction of the new hangars? 

A:    The construction of hangars requires the installation of new taxi lanes and utilities.  The Airport secured grant funding for the taxi lanes and utilities a couple years ago.  However, there have been some concerns raised by National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) around whether paving the taxi lanes will cause harm to salmon fisheries on the Willamette River.  The timeline to conduct a study keeps getting pushed back NMFS.  The hangars must be built in fiscal year 25/26 to utilize the BIL grant funds.  The airport’s project engineers are working on a plan to build hangars without paved taxi lanes.  City staff are reaching out to other agencies to get some movement on the study from NMFS.