Loading...
FC060821FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING June 8, 2021 Elected Officials Participating Virtually Staff Participating Virtually Councilmember Vivian Olson Dave Turley, Finance Director Councilmember Diane Buckshnis Phil Williams, Public Works Director CALL TO ORDER The Edmonds City Council virtual online Finance Committee meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Councilmember Buckshnis. A discussion of regarding Bond Refinancing was added as Agenda Item 2.3. 2. COMMITTEE BUSINESS 1. April 2021 Monthly Financial Report Mr. Turley reviewed: • What's happening in the Finance Department: o Things going well so far with annual SAO Audit. Financial audit should be finished before next month's finance report. o Received several good resumes for the Systems Support Technician and Deputy Administrative Services Director. Both positions have their "first priority" review this week and interviews will be scheduled soon. o First four months have gone according to budget, nothing negative to report. Sales tax and REET continue to come in ahead of budget. • Noteworthy things in the April report: o REET is up $659,343 from this point in time last year. o Sales Tax is up $350,180 from this point in time last year. o General Fund expenses are $1 million (6.6%) under budget for this time of year. Just part of normal cyclical spending. o Telephone Utility tax is $(63,412) less than at this point in time last year. o Liquor Excise Tax is up $25,216 from this point in time last year. o Development Services revenues are down a total of $(69,739) from this point in time last year. o Plan Checking Fees are up $107,781 from this point in time last year. o January -April of 2020 Engineering Overhead was not recorded until May of 2020 which is the main reason for the large difference between years. January -April 2020 Engineering Overhead totaled $680,271. Questions and discussion followed regarding the Investment portfolio summary and investments that are maturing, moving funds to the Snohomish County Pool, and the Edmonds real estate market. Action: Consent Agenda 2. Job Order Contracting — Proposal and Agreement Mr. Williams reported staff has been working of this for a couple years. An RFP was issued for an administrator of a JOC process; one proposal was submitted by Gordian who is providing that service 06/08/21 Finance Committee Minutes, Page 2 in several municipalities in the area including Everett, Port of Everett, Bellevue, Shoreline, and others. The packet includes the draft agreement and Gordian's response to the RFP. The City hires an administrator to set up and implement the program on the City's behalf and they enter into contractual relationships with up to three separate JOCs. Spending limits on the program are $500,000 per project and $3M per contractor/year. The plan is to start slow, do some small projects and see how it works. When the City has a project that is suitable for a JOC, the City presents the scope to Gordian, Gordian works with the appropriate JOC to develop a price, returns to the City where the scope and price are agreed to and then they will deliver the project. It is similar to ESCO contracts where Gordian is responsible to deliver the work for the quoted price. Gordian owns and maintain the RSMeans construction database that includes material, labor and equipment costs. Gordian receives a fee (approximately 15%) to manage entire project. The same financial policies are in place; anything over $100,000 requires Council approval. This process will reduce the timeframe for projects which also saves money. Questions and discussion followed regarding the scope of work, Gordian's fee, individual project and JOC limitations, the PPW Committee's requests (include the scope of work and detailed implementation schedule in the packet as well as how Gordian would incentivize/demonstrate equity and inclusion in awarding of contracts to MWB and DBE subcontractors). Action: Full Council 3. Bond Refinancing Councilmember Buckshnis provided her recollection from the previous presentation regarding bond refinancing including the threshold of $10M for taxable and non-taxable bonds, bonds that are callable at the end of the year, historically low rates, and the possibility of adding projects to the bond refinancing. She suggested including Civic Park in a bond and scheduling a special meeting to review refinancing. She recalled Mr. Williams had utility projects he was interested in bonding for. Mr. Williams agreed the need exists such as building maintenance as well as paving. Another factor is American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds that the City will receive ($9.278M on a per capita basis) for water, sewer and stormwater, climate resiliency, energy efficiency projects and other expenses such as assisting citizens and business recover from the pandemic. Mr. Turley relayed the City definitely wants to refund the sewer bonds to lower the payment. The ECA has also requested the City refinance $2.6M on their behalf to guarantee their sales tax revenue stream. Ms. Feser relayed she communicated with Councilmembers last week regarding the need for additional funding for Civic Park project and plans to talk with Councilmembers further next week about options for funding the difference. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for bonding to complete Civic Park. Questions and discussion followed regarding the financial gap for the Civic Park project, favorable interest rates, having discussions with the Finance Committee before going to full Council, ad deciding whether or not to bond and the repayment source. Action: Discussion only Councilmember Olson asked if any of the candidates for Finance Director had applied for the Assistant Administrative Services position. Mr. Turley advised he did not have access to that information. 3. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 6:34 p.m.