By Harry Gatjens
Members of Edmonds’ Transportation Benefit District (TBD) Board had their quarterly meeting Monday night. The board, made up entirely of Edmonds City Council members, heard a report from Edmonds Public Works Director Phil Williams, who summarized street repairs and maintenance completed during the second quarter of 2012.
As examples of the type of work being done, Williams showed pictures of pavement repairs currently being done on Olympic View Drive.
Williams stated that the Transportation Benefit District had revenues of approximately $270,000 — which come from a $20-per-year, per-vehicle registration fee assessed to Edmonds vehicle owners — but added that expenses for the quarter were slightly over $320,000. The difference, $50,000, will be paid by a transfer from the city’s street fund.
Transportation Benefit District revenues can only be used for certain specific expenses. If, in a particular quarter, TBD expenses are less than revenues, those excess revenues are transferred to the street fund. However, during this past quarter the opposite happened, so money needed to be transferred back to the TBD. At the end of 2011, the TBD fund had extra revenue, so those funds were transferred to the street fund. The key is that the TBD must each quarter with no excess revenues.
However, Williams explained that this system does create a need for oversight of the transfers, to ensure that TBD revenues are only spent on qualified expenses, and that funds transferred to the street fund are always returned.
Williams was then asked if revenues were coming in at budgeted levels. He pointed out that second-quarter revenues — if multiplied in a straight-line basis — would exceed the annual budget. However, revenues are seasonal and in actuality 2012 revenues were 12 percent below 2011 revenues for the second quarter. Williams was confident that revenues for the year would still reach their $600,000 budget.
The public works director pointed out that even if revenues reached the budget, the actual number of dollars to maintain Edmonds’ streets on an ongoing basis would require $1.5 million per year or $900,000 more than is provided by the TBD.
Board member Diane Buckshnis asked Williams if issuing revenue bonds might help with the needs. Williams pointed out that in order to issue revenue bonds, you would need a new source of revenue. During the last two elections, Edmonds voters have not been willing to fund proposals for new transportation-related revenue sources, he noted.
Board member Strom Peterson asked Williams if there were any other sources of revenue that the TBD could procure without getting approval of the voters. Williams answered that the $20-per-vehicle fee currently in effect is the only revenue available without the consent of voters.
Peterson then asked if there were any other categories of expenses that could be paid out of TBD revenues. Williams replied that there were other items, such as signal repair and maintenance, that could be included; however the city already doesn’t have enough revenue to cover the items currently included so there was no reason to add more categories.
After the TBD meeting, Edmonds Finance Director Shawn Hunstock was asked about the revenue bond issue. He did say that the city could raise about $6 million in revenue bonds by pledging the $600,000 revenue that the TBD currently receives. While that would provide a $6 million fund today, any future TBD revenues would have to pay off the bonds and couldn’t be used for streets.
Since streets are an ongoing maintenance issue rather than a one-time project like a new building, revenue bonds do not seem to be a smart or viable issue.
Before 2009, street maintenance was part of the city’s general fund. The Transportation Benefit District was established in 2009 in an effort to keep the general fund in balance by establishing a $20 fee, which is allowed without a public vote. The TBD board is comprised of Edmonds City Councilmembers so that the council can maintain control and coordinate TBD revenues with the rest of the city budget. Under state law, the TBD can also impose — with voter approval — up to an additional $60 license fee.
A TBD request in the November 2010 general election for an additional $40 fee received only 27-percent approval by Edmonds voters.
;
;
There’s no doubt that more funds are needed for street overlays, and citizens have said that they do not want to pay additional taxes to accomplish that. One way to alleviate this situation is to use the Real Estate Excise Taxes (REET). Virtually all of those funds now are dedicated to parks uses. City Council could vote to shift, at least on an interim basis, some of the funds to street overlays. It seems to me that maintaining our streets is a higher priority then new parks projects.
How about stop spending money on those all those consultants who tell us the things we already know?! I would vote for the additional taxes, if I thought the Council,l were acting responsibly with my money.
In 2009 the Council eliminated street maintenance as a General Fund expenditures, so the citizens of Edmonds agreed to a $20/vehicle tax to fund road maintenance. As a temporary measure…fine, but I doubt the average citizen thinks that street maintenance should not normally be paid for from the existing tax burden…real estate, sales, excise, etc. The citizens responded to extraordinary times, but for our politicians to assume the TBD as the NEW NORMAL will…sooner or later, cause political heads will roll over the issue. The Council is well paid to set our budgetary priorities. Assuming that in the long term we will always be willing to pay more for decent roads is as much of a mistake as suggesting a special levy to fund the Police Dept.
“The Council is well paid…”
Mike, I hope your other information is better researched.
general fund monies would be m;ade avaiolable for street repairs if the voters would approve formation of a park district. The citizens committee that is studying this option could recommend this by h;aving a 38 mill levy submitted to the voters.
Bob, As I understand it a 38 mil levy would raise far more than the needed $1.4m for street overlays. If we want to fund the streets why not just have a tax just for steets?
Gary bloom any pay is more than they should be taking. Ever heard of the term ” public service?”
Mike I generally don’t find argument with you, but I think your comment about council pay is off mark. They get a $600 a month base pay plus $50 per extra meeting they attend up to a maximum of $400 extra.
For this they put in a minimum of 20 hours per week (or at least those who work at it do) and try and balance all the issues the city faces. Mostly the only time they hear from citizens are with complaints.
While I don’t think, they always make the right decisions for the best interests of all the citizens, but those are individual cases, I don’t think to say they are either over paid or highly paid is either accurate or fair.
Rather you should comment and let them know, about the lack of good decisions you think they make.
Harry, are you sure it is 8 meetings @ $50 for $400 or is it 10 meetings @ $50 for $500? Do Council members or there families have any health benefits? Do they have any retirement benefits? Not that these are bad just that when we look at compensation we should know what is the total story. Is knowing this part of open government or should we just not allow the public to know? If it is something we should know then we should have an easy way to find it out and not spend all the time guessing. Not a shot at you Harry but we often go around and around about the same things and not get to the heart of the issues presented.
Darrol:
It is 8 meetings, council meetings included, at $50. Councilmembers have health insurance, but not their dependents. Councilmembers and the city pay small amounts into the Municipal Employees’ Benefit Trust – a retirement plan. After 4 years as a councilmember my account had $5,356 in it; I later rolled it into my IRA. A small amount, but better than nothing.
All of the details are readily available for the public every two years when the Salary Commission for Elected Officials meets. You have to read the council meeting minutes for the meeting at which their findings are presented.
Thanks Ron, so how would one go about searching the city web site to find this information if they did not know what you know?
I have a huge appreciation for all people that get involved in our City, Council, etc. the amount of BSthey put up with takes quite the person. I for one don’t have the thick skin it takes so thank you all. The pay is not worth it that is for sure.
Darrol Haug, I have heard such great things about you, all the things you do without ANY pay so my heartfelt appreciation for you. Your excellent knowledge of the inner workings of the City is really needed. How you explain the road maintenance issue, how it will cost us two or three times the amount if we don’t do something fast. I wish you would become a Council person. We need more folks like you and less of the folks who just complain without solutions, or even offering any Sort of ideas. Think of what it would be like if we had less of the complainers and all of the fixers. Wow.
To clarify, when I say offering solutions, not the idea of saving the City $12,000 by trying to “balance” the budget by hurting our city workers. To cut the pay of our police, guys that get shot at, please. Or the water department guy that DOES not make $100, 000 a year. I looked at the staff pay and I make more in private accounts receivable than
A pipe layer for the city. There is something wrong with that. I love my job even more now. I think I know why a few guys complain here. They are anti union and will say and do anything to break them. They are not middle class and never will understand our struggle.
Darrol:
I don’t have a satisfactory answer for you. I have not been able to use the website’s search feature to find much of anything. Perhaps it’s not a weakness in the search feature, perhaps I don’t have sufficient skills to do it.
I can tell you that this year’s action is in the minutes for the council meeting of May 1st. Council approved a number of changes to take effect Jan 1, 2013.
https://www.edmondswa.gov/images/COE/05-01-12_Approved_City_Council_Minutes.pdf
Darrol,
Go to the agenda for the May 1 2012 city council meeting. The compensation committees report is attached.
To get to it go to the City’s website, link on MyEdmondsNews.
Look about 1/3 way down on right side, click on agendas, fill in the boxes to search May 2012, the first I ten should be the May 1 city council meeting.
In the agenda you will see a link to the report
Ron and Harry, I understand that you and others can find all this stuff after a fashion but it should be simplier. Simple questions like compenstation of counci should ge just a google search away. One should not have to KNOW where it is. Simple questions by simple people should have simple answers. We have the technology to do it now all we need is the will to do it.
Kathhern, I am so taken back by you comments I have to think about it a bit before answering. Thanks
My intent was a compliment and I hope you consider a Council position but totally understand if you didn’t. I do hope you continue to educate us because you really have helped me understand how government works and why we need action before failure (road repair) to save money. You always make perfect sense to me.
Sorry I miss speeeeeled your name Katherine.
Katherin, Thanks again for your kind words. I will continue to try to learn more about how our city operates and offer ideas for moving forward. Volunteering for the Technology Committee was an eye opener of how govt runs. I still serve on that committee. Working on the Levy committee was a thrill a minute. Council took a different path than our recommendation so we were not very successful with that work. So many issue, so many parts in that equation it was not as easy as herding cats. Serving on the Ecomomic Development commission has been meaningful and many important things have been done. But serving on the council is not on my bucket list. It takes 7000 people to vote you in and if appointed it takes 4. My sampling shows neither would work.
It is time for a reset in my life and evaluate what makes the most sense. When my terms are up on the various committees I will still try to keep up with issue and speak out. Thanks again for you comments, I have thought of them often as I go about my work.