Finance Committee Agenda and Packet 2016 07 18

Home Browse Search

City Council Finance Committee Meeting Minutes 06/14/16 Page 2 of 4 REVIEW OF FISCAL IMAPCT MODEL Scott Robinson, Planner, led the discussion of the Fiscal Impact Model and answered questions from the Committee. The major outcomes of the Committee's discussion were, as follows: • The model needs to incorporate some assumptions/tables pertaining to residential and office spending. • The model is too "aggressive" and should be more conservative in its assumptions. Councilmember Maloney estimated the fiscal impacts calculated for the South Boulder Road Small Area Plan may be off by as much as 50% • The Finance Committee should review all the assumptions. A table of general assumptions for an "average" city should be presented, along with the specific adjustments to those assumptions for Louisville. • There are two models — a City-wide model using more marginal costing and a development-specific model using more average costing. It is important to know what model is being used and presented. • The Impact Fee Study needs to be updated and the relevant updates need to be incorporated into the Fiscal Impact Model. • In order to gain more confidence in the model's output, the Committee requested staff to run hypothetical scenarios within a sales tax area and present the calculations or operational impacts. John Leary stated that all the issues discussed should be resolved prior to using the model on the McCaslin Small Area Plan. Mr. Leary also requested that the model's outputs be presented by land use and that the hypothetical scenarios requested by the Committee be run as both "mixed use" and "non-mixed use". Mr. Leary also had questions regarding the current service levels and existing capacities. The Committee stated it would like to see a first pass at the requested changes in the next couple of months. DISCUSSION OF KEY INDICATORS Malcolm Fleming, City Manager, presented preliminary key performance indicators for City Clerk/Public Records Subprogram and the Human Resources & Organizational Development Subprogram. The Committee discussed the content and format and had the following recommendations/comments: • Each subprogram should have a general description of its functions and responsibilities, similar to the department descriptions in the 2016 budget document. 3