INCORPORATED COUNTY OF LOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO BIENNIAL BUDGET FY 2014 ADOPTED FY ADOPTED

Transcription

1 INCORPORATED COUNTY OF LOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO BIENNIAL BUDGET FY 2014 ADOPTED FY ADOPTED

2 Los Alamos County, New Mexico Biennial Budget Geoff Rodgers Council Chair David Izraelevitz Council Vice-Chair Fran Berting Councilor Kristin Henderson Councilor Steven Girrens Councilor Rick Reiss Councilor Pete Sheehey Councilor

3 Los Alamos County, New Mexico Biennial Budget Adopted for fiscal year ending June 30, 2014 Adopted for fiscal year ending June 30, 2013 Harry Burgess County Administrator Steven Lynne Deputy County Administrator/Chief Financial Officer Brian Bosshardt Deputy County Administrator Gina Coluzzi Barbara Lai Joseph D Anna Budget and Grants Manager Sr. Budget Analyst Deputy Chief Financial Officer The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented an award of Distinguished Presentation to Los Alamos County for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan, and as a communication device. The award is valid for a period of one year only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award.

4

5

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION This section will give the reader a brief overview of the budget process. The budget message from the County Administrator will summarize the goals of the County Council and how the budget will aid in the accomplishment of those goals. Also provided here is a brief overview of the County structure and general information about the County. Introduction Table of Contents. i Budget Message... ii Readers Guide General Budget Information... 3 Budget Calendar 7 General County Information... 8 STRATEGIC PLANNING This section provides an overview of the County Councils Strategic Goals and Objectives which resulted from their planning session with Senior Management. Updates to the Management Action Plans (MAPs) which detail how to achieve these goals and objectives are also included in this section. Strategic Planning Table of Contents. 13 Strategic Leadership Plan Vision Statement Strategic Focus Areas.. 17 Council Goals. 18 Department Cross Reference Table. 21 SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK This section provides a summary of the budget, a schedule of significant changes in both dollars and personnel, and the Long Range Financial Projection. A narrative along with graphs and pie charts compare the revenue and expenditures from FY 2011 through FY Budget Summary Table of Contents.. 23 Combined Budget Statement County-Wide Budget Revenue and Expenditure Statement.. 26 Summary of Significant Changes Summary of Significant Changes Staffing Changes. 32 Revenue and Expenditure Comparisons Long Range Financial Projection.. 45 FUND STATEMENTS A brief table of contents is provided at the beginning of this section to detail the funds and their cross reference to the Department Summaries. Fund revenue and expenditures are detailed here. Fund / Department Structure. 47 General Fund Budget Summary Special Revenue Funds Combining Fund Statement Special Revenue - State Shared Revenues Special Revenue Lodger s Tax. 53 Special Revenue State Grants.. 54 Special Revenue Health Care Assistance

7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Special Revenue Economic Development. 56 Special Revenue Other Special Revenue 57 Special Revenue Las Conchas Fire Debt Service Funds Capital Projects Funds Combining Fund Statement Capital Improvement Projects Fund 61 Capital Projects Permanent Fund 62 Enterprise - Joint Utilities Other Enterprise Funds Combining Fund Statement 69 Enterprise Environmental Services 70 Enterprise Golf Course 71 Enterprise Transit Enterprise Fire (LANL Contract) Enterprise Airport.. 74 Internal Service Funds Combining Fund Statement 75 Internal Service - Equipment Internal Service Risk Management.. 77 DEPARTMENT SUMMARIES and PERFORMANCE MEASURES Once again, a brief table of contents is provided at the beginning of this section to cross reference department information back to fund summaries. This section details all department descriptions, missions, goals, and expenditures by programs and line items. FTE numbers for each department and division are also illustrated here. Performance measure programs and FY performance targets are provided within each department section. Department / Fund Structure Navigating Los Alamos County Performance Measures 80 County Council 81 Municipal Court County Administrator. 83 County Assessor. 97 County Attorney.. 99 County Clerk 102 County Sheriff. 105 Community & Economic Development Administrative Services Community Services Fire 161 Police 167 Public Works Utilities. 201 Non Departmental.. 221

8 TABLE OF CONTENTS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS This section details the County s Capital Improvement Program, definitions, and details of each project. Introduction Purpose of the Capital Improvement Program Definition of Capital Expenditures Who may apply for a CIP Project?. 226 How the Project Development Process is Structured to Work CIP Project Evaluation Criteria Fund Structure Used to Account for Capital Projects CIP Planning in Context of Biennial Budgeting Approach Relationship Between CIP and Operating Budgets Current Approved On-going Projects Funding Sources Projects Operating Impacts of Potential Projects Group Infrastructure Capital and Maintenance. 248 Other Enterprise Funds CIP. 255 OTHER INFORMATION Other Information Table of Contents Financial Policies Schedule of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Positions Schedule of Interfund Transfers Equipment Replacement Schedule. 299 Schedule of Recurring Grants. 300 Debt Summary General Fund Revenue Detail Statistics Glossary Acronyms & Abbreviations Index

9 INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Budget Message... ii Readers Guide General Budget Information... 3 Budget Calendar 7 General County Information... 8 i

10 County Councilors and Citizens of Los Alamos I am pleased to present to you the Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 Adopted Budget. The County s objective is to continue to provide the high level of service our citizens depend upon, and this budget is designed to achieve that goal despite reductions in revenues associated with reduced Federal expenditures at the County s primary employer Los Alamos National Laboratory. Over the past fiscal year our gross receipts tax collections have fallen by 20% and efforts to balance this fact by reducing expenditures have required significant attention to the funds that rely on this revenue source primarily the County s General Fund. Through a thorough review of County operations, efforts have focused on mitigating longer term operational increases that would threaten the viability of this and similar funds. Many steps have already been taken to address the situation including elimination of some vacant positions where possible, postponing certain hiring decisions, and deferring some capital projects, as well as the refinancing of current debt obligations. The Adopted Budget reflects these actions and also incorporates further expenditure reductions included in individual departments. With expenditures totaling $186 million in FY2014, the enclosed budget summary outlines how County operations will adjust to meet the stated financial constraints, while still allowing for a continued high level of service to our citizens and progress towards the organizational goals established by the County Council. FY2014 and How We Got There Late FY2012 saw the promotion of Brian Bosshardt and Steven Lynne to Deputy County Administrators. The Community Development Department (CDD) and the Capital Projects & Facilities Department (CPFD) were combined and renamed the Community & Economic Development Department (CEDD), led by Anne Laurent, who was the CPFD Director at the time of the merge. Rebecca Ehler, the County Attorney, was also hired at the end of FY2012, providing leadership to the Attorney s Office which was very understaffed at the time due to vacancies. Charlie Kalogeros-Chattan, who was the Acting Community Services Department Director, was promoted into that position, and the Public Works Director, Philo Shelton, was hired completing the last vacancy on the Senior Management Team. I am excited to be fully staffed and know the County will benefit from the stability and expertise of this leadership team. As the news spread of spending reductions at LANL, the County began efforts to mitigate impacts within affected Departments. The County pulled together as a team, holding several meetings with Senior Management, Expanded Management and other employee groups to discuss ways the County could begin to save money in the current year and out-years, while at the same time limiting servicelevel impacts. Many great employee suggestions, ranging from operating efficiencies to areas where we could reduce funding with little impact, were received and implemented in the budget. With the help of these expenditure reductions, the County s Governmental Funds fund balances are able to remain positive. Through the County s history of a conservative approach to fund balance reserves, we are able to implement these changes through the remaining months of FY2013 and into FY2014 and keep our fund balance positive well into the future. ii

11 Governmental Activities Summary (in $ millions) Total beginning fund balance $ Revenues and other sources Expenditures and other uses (75) (75) (85) (90) (79) (82) (80) (83) (84) (86) (88) Total ending fund balance $ $ millions $180 $160 $140 $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 Fiscal Year Revenues and other sources Expenditures and other uses Total ending fund balance General Fund revenues are projected to be $8.6 million or 13% lower than in FY2013; expenditures are $2.2 million, or 5%, lower than adopted in FY2013; and transfers out of the General Fund to other funds are $3.5 million, or 23%, lower than in FY2013. Seven regular full-time equivalents (FTE) have been eliminated (all vacant positions) in the General Fund. The Golf Course has been transferred from an enterprise (business-like) fund to the General Fund. This decision was made due to declining revenues in the Golf Course Fund and an increasing subsidy for the past several years from the General Fund. If the Golf Course is removed from this equation, total General Fund expenditures have been reduced by $3.2 million, or 7%. This total reduction also includes increases in operations and maintenance (O&M) for the newly or soon to be completed capital projects such as the White Rock Visitor Center and RV Park, New Mexico State Road 4, Cañada del Buey Trail, Multi-Purpose Covered Arena, Municipal Building, and Golf Course Community Building. There is over $330K of new annual costs in O&M associated with these new facilities and infrastructure. In addition to the General Fund FTEs eliminated, there is an FTE eliminated in the Utilities Fund and a limited term FTE eliminated in the Transit Fund. As stated above, service level impacts with these reductions were kept to a minimum, but they are not entirely nonexistent. (There is more detail within the Department Summary/Performance Measure section within the Adopted Budget.) Common reductions in departments include less training and professional development, fewer supplies, and less equipment. With the elimination of regular FTEs, temporary and casual labor may be hired to avoid reducing hours at our public facilities such as the iii

12 Aquatic Center and the Library. Other potential impacts related to the elimination of FTEs could be longer wait times during high volume periods in permitting, the Library, and the Aquatic Center. In the Transit Fund, the Ski Hill service will be eliminated, and the Bandelier service will end a month earlier. Also, the fixed route in Pajarito Acres will be eliminated but the White Rock route will be increased, resulting in higher revenues from grants. The County will continue to provide many services to the Los Alamos Public Schools free of charge including two School Resource Officers, the School s Prevention Specialist, use of the Aquatic Center, use of the County s warehouse function. As Departments are faced with the need to reduce, they are looking for more efficient ways of operating. For instance, the Police Department is implementing a volunteer program for some of its administrative functions (such as finger printing) to keep Officers on the street. The Fleet Team was tasked with developing a pooled vehicle program to reduce the number of vehicles County-wide. This team also closely reviewed all FY2014 equipment replacement and deferred some of these replacements to later years. General Fund Budget at a Glance- Major Changes in Fund Revenues and Expenditures In FY2014, the Golf Course has been transferred from an enterprise (business-like) fund to the General Fund. This decision was made due to declining revenues in the Golf Course Fund and an increasing subsidy for the past several years from the General Fund. General Fund revenues are projected to be $8.6 million lower, or 13%, in FY2014 than in the FY2013 Adopted Budget for a total of $55.5 million. The majority of this is a projected decrease in gross receipts taxes (GRT) due to a decrease in spending at LANL. Interdepartmental revenues are also lower due to a different allocation method in the County s cost allocation plan, which is used to charge overhead to County Enterprise Funds. This decrease is also due to no longer collecting interdepartmental charges from the Golf Course Fund, now that it is part of the General Fund. At a total of $45.3 million, expenditures are $2.2 million, or 5%, lower in FY2014 than in the FY2013 Adopted Budget. Potential vacancy savings are realized when possible. There is a reduction of seven regular FTEs, offset by an increase of 2.76 FTEs in temporary and casual labor. This less expensive temporary labor is used to offset some of the service level impacts of the reduction in regular employees. Also, a portion of the Public Works Director s salary and benefits are allocated from the General Fund to the Transit Fund and the Environmental Services Fund. There was a general reduction of supplies, equipment and contracts in all departments, while service level impacts are kept to a minimum. Detail of the reductions and the impacts are located in the Department Summary / Performance Measure section of the budget. Increases for operations and maintenance for new buildings and roads were essentially absorbed into the budget. Another notable expenditure increase to the General Fund includes the sewer rate increase enacted in FY2013, which impacts County facilities. Special Revenue Funds These funds account for expenditures restricted to specific purposes such as grants, indigent health care, Lodgers Tax, economic development, and other special programs. FY2014 projected revenues total $3.5 million and expenditures total $3.9 million. This is $603K less, or 15%, and $2.1 million less, or 36%, than FY2013, respectively. Of the expenditure amounts, there is a $1.7 million decrease in the Economic Development Fund. In mid-fy2013, $4 million was appropriated for downtown iv

13 redevelopment, infrastructure and housing. Unused amounts of this funding will be carried over into FY2014, along with an additional $400K included for FY2014. In the Health Care Assistance Fund, revenues are projected to be $394K less, or 19%. This is based on a lower level of projected GRT. Expenditures in this fund are $215K less, or 12%. Because of high usage of this program, and potential State-mandated requirements, policy changes may be implemented in late FY2013 or early FY2014 to change program requirements and keep the fund positive. Debt Service Funds Due to the refinancing of debt, the County is able to reduce the principal and interest payment on the GRT revenue bonds that were issued for capital construction projects by $733K, or 11%. FY2014 projected revenues total $154K (based upon market projections and investment income). Capital Projects Funds Expenditures in the Capital Improvement Projects Funds total $5.3 million. This amount, which is $20.5 million, or 80%, lower than the FY2013 adopted amount is based on total available amounts without the inclusion of debt. Included within the $5.3 million are on-going amounts for roads, parks, and network infrastructure replacement ($4.5 million). Other than these ongoing infrastructure amounts, an amount of $774K for projects (Canyon Rim Trail and Ice Rink Parking Lot projects) is included. Joint Utility Funds Utilities Fund expenditures are $8.8 million, or 12%, higher in the FY2014 Adopted Budget than the FY2013 Adopted Budget. The majority of this is from an increase in purchased power, from projected load requirements and an increase in San Juan Operations due to environmental improvements. There is also an increase in planned capital expenditures. Revenues are $2.8 million lower, or 4%. There is a $13 million decrease in debt proceeds, and an offsetting increase in wholesale and retail sales of $7.5 million. The majority of this increase is revenue associated with the increase in power load requirements at LANL and Kirtland/Sandia. A Gas Water Sewer (GWS) position is eliminated which was being used to double-fill the Deputy Utilities Manager- Finance position until retirement of the incumbent. There is an increase in student intern labor to expand the program from summer only to include the winter breaks. The budget for FY2014 includes projected rate increases of 5% in the Gas sub-fund and 8% in Electric Distribution sub-fund. The rate increase addresses high capital and maintenance costs. It should also be noted that any utility rate changes will be subject to the normal review and approval requirements in the Charter, including notices and public hearings. v

14 Other Enterprise Funds FY2014 revenues totaling $30.9 million in these business-type activities funds are projected to be $37K, or.1%, less than FY2013. Total expenditures of $31.2 million are $172K, or 1%, more than FY2013. (Revenue and expenditures are not included in the variances for the Golf Course which is moved to the General Fund in FY2014.) In the Environmental Services Fund, 17% of the Public Works Director s salary and benefits are allocated to this fund from the General Fund for his oversight of the operation. There is an overall decrease in expenditures of $83K, or 2%, with the majority of the decrease from one-time capital outlay purchased in FY2013. Revenues are reduced by $252K, or 6%. The majority of this decrease is based on a lower level of projected GRT. In the Transit Fund, there is a reduction of one limited term position. 37% of the Public Works Director s salary and benefits are allocated to this fund from the General Fund for his oversight of the operation. Expenditures are reduced by $884K, or 17%, with the majority of the decrease in capital outlay purchases. A lower level of grant revenue is projected, with a decrease of $766K, or 20%. The transfer from the General Fund is reduced by $300K, or 19%. An $855K, or 4%, increase in expenditures in the Fire Fund is due to the average increase for salary and benefits and a slight increase in overtime. There is also an increase for indirect costs recoverable through the Cooperative Agreement. These increases are offset by the final payment in FY2013 for Fire Station 3 and reductions in supplies and equipment. Revenue is projected to be $683K higher, or 3%, mainly due to an increase in the LANL Fire Cooperative Agreement amount. There is a $299K, or 284%, increase in Airport Fund revenues, and a $284K, or 81%, increase in expenditures, mainly due to anticipated grant funding for rehabilitation of the engine run-up area. Internal Service Funds These funds account for goods and services provided by one County department to another. The Equipment Fund has a decrease of $147K, or 4%, due to a decrease in scheduled equipment replacement. The Risk Management Fund has an increase of $5.6 million in expenditures due to the County changing to a self-insured medical plan and the required accounting change to recognize the revenues and expenditures related to that plan. There is also a notable decrease in the long-term disability plan ($370K, or 71%) based on a new vendor and administration of that plan. Conclusion Through great effort and employee involvement from each and every department, the County is able to present a balanced budget with minimal service impacts during a time when our revenue is greatly reduced. All County employees have done a great job of continuing to provide excellent service to our citizens, and I would like to thank them all for the hard work and dedication they give to the County. From those on the front lines to those who work behind the scenes, they all are an integral part of making this County an organization of excellence. vi

15 I would also like to thank our County Council for their commitment, leadership, and guidance. As a team, we will all continue to move forward on the path to accomplishing Council s goals and thereby achieving this Los Alamos County vision: Los Alamos is a world-renowned community where discovery and innovation are inspired by its dramatic history and magnificent mountain setting. We offer extraordinary educational, recreational, and cultural opportunities in a vibrant, small town atmosphere. Respectfully submitted, Harry Burgess County Administrator vii

16

17 READER S GUIDE Presented here is the adopted budget for Fiscal Year (FY) the second year of the FY 2013 / 2014 Biennial Budget. Because New Mexico State Statute and County Charter require an annual budget, this is an update to the County s biennial budget in which the 1 st year only was adopted (FY 2013), and the second year was adopted in concept (FY 2014). Expenditure budgets and performance measures are incorporated into the Department Summaries Section and are shown in conjuction with program purpose statements. This is a continuation of the County s steps in developing a meaningful performance measurement system. Also included are the Long Range Financial Projection, a comprehensive Capital Improvement Program section, and a Strategic Goals and Objectives section and information about the County Council s Strategic Planning Session held in January The budget is both a policy document and a financial plan. Readers interested in learning about the County organization and its services, financial operations, and capital improvement budget should find this document very informative. Following is a brief description of the major sections of the budget: Introduction The Introduction presents the Budget Message, information about the budget and budget process, and general information about Los Alamos County. Budget Summary The Combined Budget Statement is a summary of the County s entire budget. Revenue and expenditure comparisons are also presented in this section. Strategic Planning The County Council held a facilitated Strategic Planning Session in January 2011, and this section has information on the results and status of the outcome of that meeting. The new Vision, Focus Areas, and Goals were adopted in July They are included in the Strategic Planning section along with a chart that cross references Focus Group areas, Goals, and Departments. Fund Statements The following chart provides a description of the columns that appear in the Fund Statements and Department Expenditure Summaries within this document. Fund Statements (1) (2) (3) (4) FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Actual Actual Budget Budget (1) The first column represents actual audited amounts as reported in the County's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, (2) The second column represents actual audited amounts as reported in the County's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, (3) This column represents the first year of the Biennial Budget - FY 2013 Adopted Budget. 1

18 READER S GUIDE (4) This column represents the second year of the Biennial Budget the FY 2014 Adopted Budget. Department Summaries, including Performance Results, Targets and Comparisons Department Summaries The following chart provides a description of the columns that appear in the Department Expenditure Summaries within this document. (1) (2) (3) (4) FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Actual Actual Budget Budget (1) The first column represents actual audited amounts as reported in the County's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, (2) The second column represents actual audited amounts as reported in the County's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, (3) This column represents the first year of the Biennial Budget - FY 2013 Adopted Budget. (4) This column represents the second year of the Biennial Budget the FY 2014 Adopted Budget. Performance Measurement and Performance Management (LA Scores!) The graphs showing Los Alamos results as compared to the average performance of ICMA Center for Performance Measurement (CPM) participant jurisdictions are presented as the first real step toward helping Council achieve its objective of establishing operating efficiencies against benchmarks for the purpose of advancing the wide-ranging Council Strategic Goal "Maintaining Quality Essential Routine Services. The purpose of benchmarking is to identify best practices and to identify operations that may benefit from being managed differently (retuned) for improved service delivery. With the exception of Elected Officials, each major department has presented a performance scorecard in conjunction with a history of operational inputs, such as expenditures and full time equivalent employees, and linkages to specific Council Goals and Comprehensive Plan Vision Statements. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) The County s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) presents the project evaluation process and project evaluation criteria, the CIP planning process as part of biennial budget development, and the relationship between the CIP and the Long Range Financial Projection, and the impacts upon the general fund operating budget and projected ending fund balance for governmental activities. The CIP presents project expenditure budgets and the types and sources of funding. The information is presented in both summary and detail formats, along with several color graphs and detailed tables, to discuss the purpose, timing, funding sources, estimated debt service, and estimated net operating impacts. 2

19 GENERAL BUDGET INFORMATION The Budget The County of Los Alamos has endeavored to produce the most comprehensive yet understandable budget document possible. Every year the budget continues to build on past successes and strives to incorporate appropriate suggestions that will improve its overall readability and usefulness. The GFOA (Government Finance Officers Association) has identified four general elements that "...constitute good budgetary practices." These four elements view the budget as a Policy Document, a Financial Plan, an Operations Guide, and a Communications Device and are detailed below. Policy Document: This is the most significant function of the budget document. In its broad context, it pertains to long-term, organization-wide policies that establish broad goals, direct how and where resources are spent, and establish a framework for providing and funding services. As a Policy Document, the budget also describes the County's short-term financial and operational policies, which influence the budget development process for the upcoming year. Finally, the policy function articulates the most significant choices and decisions regarding key issues, priorities, and ramifications and how these have changed from the prior year. Financial Plan: As a financial planning tool, the budget provides an explanation of the County's financial structure, descriptions of its funds, summaries of major revenues and expenditures, narratives for the major revenue sources, and assumptions associated with revenue estimates and trends. The budget provides a comprehensive discussion of capital projects and their impact on the operating budget, includes financial data and narrative on current debt levels and debt limits, and addresses the potential effect of existing debt levels on the future operations of the County. Operations Guide: The budget document is designed to be a readable guide to the County's varied activities and services. It is a valuable resource, which includes summary tables of personnel and positions, community statistical information, measurements of performance, and other information often referred to by department directors, managers, and the citizens. Communications Device: To be an effective communication tool, the budget must be able to clearly explain significant budgetary issues, trends, and priorities; short-term and long-term financial strategies; capital improvement plans; and significant budgetary impacts to elected officials, department heads and their staff, and to the citizens for whom they work. The Budget Process The budget process for the County of Los Alamos is an ongoing, year-round process. The formal budget process begins in October with meetings held by the County Council, the County Administrator, and department directors. Following these preliminary meetings, departments begin to prepare plans for maintaining current services, reducing or deleting other services, and planning for new services. Detailed budget guidelines are distributed to the departments in December. Departmental meetings are held to discuss the guidelines and the County Administrator's goals for the upcoming year. From these guidelines, the departments develop their preliminary budgets. Responsibilities County Administrator Budget Activities Discuss proposed operating and capital budget priorities, budget schedules, and guidelines with the Management Team. Brief the Council on the budget process, proposed financial policies, and budget guidelines. Hold budget meetings to review departments' budget requests. 3

20 GENERAL BUDGET INFORMATION Review budget requests, make budget decisions, and prepare budget message. Submit the proposed budget to the Council. Departments Submit to the County Administrator the department's budget requests, goals, and objectives for the new fiscal year and accomplishments during the current fiscal year. Meet with the County Administrator to review department's budget submittal, including performance targets. Participate in Council budget hearings to justify department's budget request. Implement and monitor the adopted budget for the department and funds. Office of Management and Budget Review previous year's budget process, and identify improvements to both manual and automated procedures. Develop proposed budget guidelines and calendar for the new fiscal year. Participate in Management Team discussion of budget issues, concerns, and procedural changes. Review current year financial performance, and develop financial forecasts. Issue budget guidelines and interdepartmental charge (IDC) guidelines and rates approved by the County Administrator to departments and outside agencies. County Council Establish County goals for coming year, and meet with County Administrator regarding proposed budget guidelines, financial policies, and budget schedule. Hold public hearings to review, amend if necessary, and adopt the budget. Budgets Annual appropriated budgets are adopted for all County funds except agency and pension trust funds. All annual operating appropriations lapse at fiscal year end unless specifically approved by the County Council to carry over to the next fiscal year. In contrast, project-length financial plans are adopted for all capital projects funds. 4

21 GENERAL BUDGET INFORMATION Encumbrances Encumbrances represent commitments related to unperformed contracts for goods or services. Encumbrance accounting is used by the County for budgetary control purposes. Encumbrances are re-appropriated through a revision of the subsequent year s budget. Budget Revisions Approval requirements for budget revisions are as follows: Type of Budget Revision Change from one object code detail to another object code within a division or between divisions within the same department or fund (excluding any changes to the salaries and benefits or interdepartmental charges categories.) Changes within a division or between divisions within the same department or fund which involve salaries and benefits or interdepartmental charges. Transfers from one department to another department within the same fund. Approving Authority Department Director or Utilities Manager County Administrator County Administrator and Council for all funds and departments, except the Utilities Department. Utilities Manager, Utilities Board, and Council for Utilities Department sub-funds. Budget increases to departments or funds and transfers between funds; transfers of cash, both permanent and temporary between funds; and any combination of the above. County Administrator, Utilities Manager (when involving Utilities sub-funds), Council, and State of New Mexico, Department of Finance and Administration. Description of County Fund Types The County uses funds to report on its financial position and operating results. Fund accounting is designed to demonstrate legal compliance and to aid financial management by segregating transactions related to certain County functions or activities. A fund is a separate accounting entity with a self-balancing set of accounts. The relationship between the County s fund structure and County departments is described in a table that is immediately inside the Fund Statements tab. Governmental Funds Governmental funds account for all or most of a government's general activities, including the collection and disbursement of earmarked moneys (special revenue funds), the acquisition or construction of general fixed assets (capital projects funds), and the servicing of general long-term debt (debt service funds). The General Fund is used to account for all activities of the general government not accounted for in some other fund. 5

22 GENERAL BUDGET INFORMATION Proprietary Funds Proprietary funds account for activities similar to those found in the private sector, where net income determination is necessary for sound financial management. Goods or services from such activities can be provided either to outside parties (enterprise funds) or to other departments or agencies primarily within the government (internal service funds). Non-Budgetary Funds Trust and Agency funds are used to account for the collection and payment of accounts for which the County acts as agent. The statements within this document present the budgetary funds used by the County. Measurement Focus and Bases of Accounting and Budgeting Fund Type Measurement Focus Basis of Accounting Basis of Budgeting Governmental Current financial Modified accrual Modified accrual resources flow Proprietary Economic resources flow Full accrual Modified accrual / Non- GAAP Measurement Focus The accounting and financial reporting treatment applied to a fund is determined by its measurement focus. All governmental funds and expendable trust funds are accounted for using a current financial resources flow measurement focus. With this measurement focus, only current assets and current liabilities generally are included on the balance sheet. Operating statements of these funds present increases (revenues) and decreases (expenditures) in net current assets. All proprietary funds are accounted for on an economic resources flow measurement focus. With this measurement focus, all assets and all liabilities associated with the operation of these funds are included on the balance sheet. Operating statements of these funds present increases (revenues) and decreases (expenses) in total net assets. Bases of Accounting and Budgeting The modified accrual basis of accounting is used for governmental-type funds. It requires revenues to be recognized when they are both measurable and available. "Measurable" means the amount of the transaction can be determined and "available" means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. The full accrual basis of accounting is used for proprietary-type funds. Under this method, revenues are recorded when earned, and expenses are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred. Estimated unbilled revenues are accrued for electric, gas, and water services provided from the last cycle meter reading dates to the end of the fiscal period. The modified accrual basis is used for budgeting of governmental funds. A non-gaap basis, similar to modified accrual, is used for budgeting of proprietary funds. 6

23 GENERAL BUDGET INFORMATION Fiscal Year 2014 Budget and Performance Measure Planning Calendar Starting Date Completion Date 1 Preliminary Budget Guidance to departments Fri Dec 21, 2012 Fri Dec 21, Equipment charges data due to OMB from Fleet Division Wed Jan 2, 2013 Wed Jan 2, Departments receive preliminary position control reports from Budget staff Tue Jan 8, 2013 Tue Jan 8, OMB prepares FY 2013 midyear revenue and expenditure projections Tue Jan 15, 2013 Tue Jan 15, Departments submit FTE Distribution Listing back to Budget staff Tue Jan 15, 2013 Tue Jan 15, Departmental FY 2014 Budget Requests, FY st half Performance Measure results and year-end projections, FY 2014 Performance Measure Targets are reviewed by OMB Departments review FY 2013 midyear projections and provide input to OMB. Departments also submit FY 2013 Revenue Projections to OMB for review. Thu Jan 31, 2013 Wed Feb 13, 2013 Tue Jan 22, 2013 Tue Jan 22, Departmental FY 2014 Budget Requests, FY st half Performance Measure results and year-end projections, FY 2014 Performance Measure Targets are reviewed by CAO Fri Feb 1, 2013 Wed Feb 20, Council meeting - FY 2013 midyear budget review, Council Budget Guidance Tue Jan 29, 2013 Tue Jan 29, Council meeting - FY 2013 midyear budget revisions Tue Feb 26, 2013 Tue Feb 26, Final changes and preparation of proposed budget by CAO and OMB staff Wed Feb 20, 2013 Fri Mar 15, Proposed Budget submitted to County Council & Advertised Fri Mar 29, 2013 Sun Mar 31, Budget hearing Mon Apr 15, 2013 Mon Apr 15, Budget hearing-possible Adoption Tue Apr 16, 2013 Tue Apr 16, Budget hearing-possible Adoption Wed Apr 17, 2013 Wed Apr 17, Budget hearing-discussion and Adoption-Regular Council Meeting Tue May 7, 2013 Tue May 7, Special Council Meeting to Consider Capital Improvement Projects Adopted budget submitted to the New Mexico DFA (Department of 18 Finance and Administration) Final Budget document complete. Adopted budget available to public. 19 Sent to GFOA (Government Finance Officers Association). Sat Jun 1, 2013 Sat Jun 1, 2013 Sun Jun 30, 2013 Sun Jun 30, 2013 HIGHLIGHTED ITEMS INVOLVE COUNCIL ACTION 7

24 GENERAL COUNTY INFORMATION ORGANIZATION CHART 8

25 GENERAL COUNTY INFORMATION ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS Elected: Council Geoff Rodgers, Chair David Izraelevitz, Vice-Chair Kristin Henderson Pete Sheehy Rick Reiss Fran Berting Steven Girrens Clerk Assessor Sheriff Probate Judge Municipal Judge Sharon Stover Joann Johnson Marco Lucero Y. Ellen Hong Alan Kirk Appointed: County Administrator County Attorney Utilities Manager Harry Burgess Rebecca Ehler John Arrowsmith 9

26 GENERAL COUNTY INFORMATION COUNTY SERVICES Services provided by the County of Los Alamos are grouped into three major categories. Fundamental Services - Services that are generally provided by local government or are legally mandated. Building Inspection Community Buildings & Services Court Services Debt Payments Elections & Voter Registration General Administrative Services Fire Protection & Emergency Services Indigent Health Care Law Enforcement & Other Public Safety Services Licensing & Permit Issuance Roads, Streets, Traffic Control and Signals, Snow Removal & Sidewalk Maintenance Solid Waste Management Tax Assessment, Billing, Collection & Distribution Water and Sewer Utilities Maintenance Services - Services that the County has historically provided or services that require large capital expenditures. Animal Control Cemetery Lot Sales & Grounds Maintenance Comprehensive Plan, Long Range Planning & Zoning Engineering Services for Public Projects Electric and Gas Utilities Governmental Facilities Maintenance Transportation Quality of Life Services - Services that enhance the desirability or the environment of the community. Community and Neighborhood Recreation Programs Community Swimming Pool, Golf Course & Rink Fair/Rodeo/Stable Library Services Vast network of hiking, biking and horseback riding trails Cultural services such as a Senior Center, an historical museum and an art center. Transit Airport Los Alamos Tidbit At 7300 feet, Los Alamos is home to North America s highest altitude Olympicsize pool at our Larry R. Walkup Aquatic Center. The Aquatic Center has hosted many Collegiate, National, and International Teams including teams from Maryland, St. Louis, Australia, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the Netherlands, to name just a few. 10

27 Geography GENERAL COUNTY INFORMATION LOS ALAMOS Los Alamos ("The Cottonwoods") is a scenic 40-minute drive from the historic New Mexico State capital in Santa Fe, just two hours by car from Albuquerque and about two hours from Taos. At an altitude of 7,300 feet, Los Alamos' clean mountain air is pleasantly cool in summer but warm enough for full enjoyment of a variety of outdoor activities. Ancient History Roughly 1.4 million years ago, a volcanic explosion created the Valle Grande, one of the world's largest calderas (collapsed volcanic peaks), and the area's dramatic cliffs and canyons. Anasazi Indians who farmed the fertile valleys of this area from 1100 to 1550 A. D. carved their dwellings out of these volcanic cliffs and etched symbols into the canyon walls. Ruins of their villages, trails worn deep into the volcanic tuff, petroglyphs and shards of pottery are all that is left of the civilization from which modern Pueblo Indians are descended. Legendary cities of gold and rumors of fabulous riches brought Spanish Conquistadors to northern New Mexico, beginning with Coronado's expedition in In 1598, Don Juan de Oñate founded the first European settlement a few miles north of Española. By 1610 the Spaniards claimed the wild and beautiful countryside, establishing their capital at Santa Fe, 35 miles away. Recent History The community of Los Alamos was founded in absolute secrecy in 1943 as a center for defense research for the Manhattan Project, known only to the country's highest-ranking government, military, and scientific personnel. Both civilians and military personnel lived under rigid control of the military, sequestered behind high fences and guarded gates. All residents were required to show badges both entering and leaving the site, and visitors were only permitted with special advance arrangements. Public disclosure of the town's existence in 1945 made national headlines. The County officially came into existence on June 10, 1949, and it took a state constitutional amendment passed in 1965 to give the County its charter government of an incorporated city-county. 1 Today Los Alamos is a relatively small county with a population of 18,159 (U.S. Census Data estimate for 2012). Los Alamos County has enjoyed the lowest unemployment rate and the highest income per capita in New Mexico for a number of years. January 2013 figures from the New Mexico Department of Workforce Solutions put the unemployment rate for Los Alamos County at 3.7% which is the lowest in the state, and 7.0% for the state overall. According to U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, the per capita income for Los Alamos County was $60,719 in 2011 compared to $34,133 for the state and $41,560 for the national average. The next highest county, Harding, had a per capita income of $48,069 in The 2010 census (U. S. Bureau of the Census) indicates that 81.3% of Los Alamos households have incomes of $50,000 or more per year compared to 44.4% of the households in all of New Mexico. Further, 30.4% of the County s population is 55 years of age or older compared to 13.8% ten years ago. The Los Alamos National Laboratory, one of the state's largest employers and an internationally recognized research center, directly employs nearly 10,500 men and women to conduct research in many fields including lasers, nuclear energy, superconductivity, and medicine. Another 1,000 are employed at the Lab as labor for subcontractors. For more economic and demographic information about New Mexico and Los Alamos County, visit the University of New Mexico, Bureau of Business and Economic Research web site at Did you know? At sea level, water boils at a temperature of 212 degrees Fahrenheit, but at 7300 feet above sea level, water boils at about 197 degrees. This can sometimes make cooking a challenge in Los Alamos. Thank goodness for those high altitude cooking directions!! 1 The Battle for Civil Rights or How Los Alamos Became a County, Marjorie Bell Chambers,

28 GENERAL COUNTY INFORMATION LOS ALAMOS Los Alamos County is located on the Pajarito Plateau in northern New Mexico, approximately 35 miles northwest of Santa Fe, the capital of New Mexico. The County covers approximately 112 square miles, of which 41.2% is owned by the National Forest Service, 35.3% by the Department of Energy, 14 % by County and private, and 9.5% by Bandelier National Monument. 12

29 STRATEGIC PLANNING Introduction Strategic Leadership Plan Vision Statement Strategic Focus Areas Council Goals Department Cross Reference Table 21 13

30 Introduction In mid-year FY 2011, Council met in a facilitated workshop to develop a new vision statement and strategic goals for FY 2011 and beyond. The previous goals had not been completely revised since their adoption in FY 2005 and the current Vision Statement had been in place since The workshop facilitator stressed the three important components of community leadership 1) set forth a vision of where we want to go, the future we, as a community seek to achieve; 2) set forth a strategy of how to achieve that vision; and 3) execute the strategy. The following Strategic Leadership Plan was developed from the facilitated meeting and refined further through public input. The Plan was adopted by Council on July 5, During FY 2012, staff developed management action plans to lay out the framework to achieve Council s goals. The FY2014 budget is developed based on a 20% reduction in the gross receipts tax collections. The County s objective to continue to provide a high level of quality routine service to the residents focuses on Operational Excellence and progress toward the organizational goals established by the County Council. 14

31 Los Alamos County Strategic Leadership Plan 2011 What will the Los Alamos community look like in 20 years? Will our unique combination of science and setting continue? Will we have preserved our small town atmosphere and natural surroundings? Will there be plenty of affordable neighborhoods and an excellent educational system? In order to accomplish these priorities and more, Los Alamos will need a strong leadership vision that serves as a basis for policy formulation and goal-setting. A flexible road-map is required, which will provide direction not only to the County enterprise but the community as well. The strategic focus areas or issues that will shape the County s future must be addressed with dynamic leadership commitment. For these reasons the Los Alamos County Council developed a 20-year Strategic Leadership Plan to help guide the community into the future. The Plan includes a shared vision for what the community can become. In support of the vision, ten strategic focus areas were identified along with actionable goals to help measure success. The Los Alamos community has volunteered countless hours of service to assisting the Council with its visioning and goal setting. The newly developed Strategic Leadership Plan incorporates the past work of community volunteers where at all possible. The newly created plan builds upon the foundational work developed by the Los Alamos community and adopted by the County Council. A Vision for the future 15

32 Imagine Los Alamos County in 20 years Los Alamos is a worldrenowned community where discovery and innovation are inspired by its dramatic history and magnificent mountain setting. We offer extraordinary educational, recreational, and cultural opportunities in a vibrant small town atmosphere. 16

33 Strategic Focus Areas Financial sustainability (Los Alamos County and community) Quality cultural and recreational amenities Economic vitality and innovation Well-planned commercial and residential growth Housing and employment diversity Operational excellence Communication Continuum of education (K-20) Environmental stewardship Intergovernmental Relations These strategic focus areas are items of extreme importance that will ultimately determine the nature and quality of the future of Los Alamos they define where our resources should be spent to attain our vision 17

34 How do we get there from here? In the next five years the County will address these sixteen major goals (focus areas with corresponding goals): Financial sustainability (Los Alamos County and community) Promote a strong and diverse economic base through recruiting businesses and encouraging new business growth Quality cultural and recreational amenities Market and brand Los Alamos as a scenic destination featuring recreation, science and history Implement a comprehensive recreational and cultural master plan Economic vitality and innovation Eliminate downtown blight Implement a strategy that results in 100% growth in retail activity Diversify the economy/revitalize White Rock and Los Alamos downtowns (current goal) Well-planned commercial and residential growth Dramatically simplify permit requirements and improve the overall process Adopt a comprehensive plan, including land use ordinances, with design/architectural components clearly identifying individual parcels by use Housing and employment diversity Promote the creation of a variety of housing options for all segments of the Los Alamos community Operational excellence Invest in staff and their development and create a high performing organization 18

35 Maintain quality essential routine services and supporting infrastructure (current goal) Communication Create a communication process that provides measurable improvement in citizen trust in government Continuum of education (K-20) Create a Los Alamos K-20 education continuum that ranks in the top 100 of schools in the nation at all levels Environmental stewardship Enhance environmental quality and sustainability (current goal) Improve transportation and mobility (current goal) Intergovernmental Relations Strengthen coordination and cooperation between LANL and the regional community (current goal) Goal statements reflect leadership priorities and direction that will define the basis for policy formulation and revenue and resource generation and allocation. 19

36 In spite of the FY2014 reduction in gross receipts tax collection, County staff continues to provide high levels of services to the community which reflects the Council goals. The performance measures report how effective and/or efficient the programs and staff have been over the past year. In addition, Performance Measures estimate outcomes for FY2014 are based on a more austere FY2014 Budget. The following chart is a depiction of the Council Strategic Focus Area, Goal and key Department(s) listing them as their responsibility. 20

37 Strategic Focus Areas Goals Department Financial Sustainability Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Promote a strong and diverse economic base Market and brand Los Alamos as a scenic destination Implement a comprehensive recreational and cultural master plan Eliminate downtown blight Community & Economic Development County Administrator s Office Community Services Economic Vitality and Innovation Well-Planned Commercial and Residential Growth Housing and Employment Diversity Operational Excellence Communication Continuum of Education Environmental Stewardship Intergovernmental Relations Implement a strategy that results in 100% growth in retail activity Diversity the economy/revitalize White Rock and Los Alamos downtowns Dramatically simplify permit requirements and Improve the overall process Adopt a comprehensive plan, including land use ordinances, with design/architectural components clearly identifying individual parcels by use Promote the creation of a variety of housing options for all segments of the Los Alamos community Invest in staff and their development and create a high performing organization Maintain quality essential routine services and supporting infrastructure Create a communication process that provides measurable improvement in citizen trust in government Create a Los Alamos K-20 education continuum that ranks in the top 100 of schools in the nation at all levels Enhance environmental quality and sustainability Improve transportation and mobility Strengthen coordination and cooperation between LANL and the regional community Community & Economic Development Community & Economic Development Community & Economic Development All Departments County Administrator s Office Community Services Public Works Utilities Department County Administrator s Office 21

38 22

39 BUDGET SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET SUMMARY Combined Budget Statement County-Wide Budget Revenue and Expenditure Statement.. 26 County-Wide Combined Budget by Expenditure Category 27 Summary of Significant Changes Summary of Significant Changes Staffing Changes. 32 Revenue and Expenditure Comparisons Long Range Financial Projection

40 COMBINED BUDGET STATEMENT SPECIAL DEBT CAPITAL GENERAL REVENUE SERVICE PROJECTS FUND FUNDS FUNDS FUNDS Fiscal Year (FY) Adopted Total beginning fund balance / working capital $ 26,906,674 6,673, ,657 27,954,592 Revenues and other sources 55,523,758 3,495, ,000 2,070,000 Transfers from other funds 3,042, ,000 6,178,291 5,591,000 Expenditures 45,329,674 4,166,517 6,178,425 5,254,000 Transfers to other funds 12,001,291 1,165, ,091,000 Total fund balance / working capital Ending FY 2014 $ 28,142,114 5,167, ,523 29,270,592 Total FY 2014 sources of funding $ 58,566,405 3,826,347 6,336,291 7,661,000 Total FY 2014 uses of funding 57,330,965 5,332,190 6,178,425 6,345,000 Net increase / (decrease) in fund balance / working capital $ 1,235,440 (1,505,843) 157,866 1,316,000 SPECIAL DEBT CAPITAL GENERAL REVENUE SERVICE PROJECTS FUND FUNDS FUNDS FUNDS FY 2014 Adopted Budget FTEs FY 2013 Adopted Budget FTEs Net increase / (decrease)

41 JOINT OTHER INTERNAL FY 2014 FY 2013 UTILITY SYSTEM ENTERPRISE SERVICE ADOPTED ADOPTED FUND FUNDS FUNDS BUDGET BUDGET 15,666,849 3,266,214 12,854,898 94,099, ,240,939 72,533,474 30,903,900 13,511, ,195, ,013, ,522, ,664,938 19,214,605 81,536,524 31,203,388 12,638, ,307, ,193, ,974 1,600, ,664,938 19,214,605 5,856,825 2,888,726 13,727,388 85,987, ,060,667 72,533,474 32,425,900 13,511, ,860,581 82,343,498 32,803,388 12,638, ,972,140 (9,810,024) (377,488) 872,490 (8,111,559) JOINT OTHER INTERNAL UTILITIES ENTERPRISE SERVICE TOTAL FUND FUNDS FUNDS FTEs (0.28) (11.97) 0.00 (4.94) 25

42 COUNTY-WIDE COMBINED BUDGET - REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE STATEMENT FY 2013 FY 2014 $ % FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance Variance Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v v 13 Total beginning fund balance / $ 169,579, ,480, ,240,939 94,099,342 (33,141,597) (26%) working capital Revenues: Taxes 62,746,786 57,048,854 58,422,000 48,416,000 (10,006,000) (17%) Intergovernmental 25,278,549 22,152,945 21,944,869 22,740, ,039 4% User Charges 64,144,170 65,473,979 66,434,455 76,739,651 10,305,196 16% Interdepartmental 13,652,781 14,603,500 17,568,657 22,417,488 4,848,831 28% Investment Income 11,022,061 1,119,945 5,164,179 5,543, ,106 7% Debt Proceeds 12,254, ,481, ,946 (13,207,661) (98%) Other 3,201,114 3,069,653 1,997,404 2,064,365 66,961 3% Revenues: 192,299, ,468, ,013, ,195,643 (6,817,528) (4%) Transfers from other funds 41,251,624 30,472,563 19,214,605 16,364,938 (2,849,667) (15%) Expenditures: County Council 329, , , ,311 (29,957) (7%) Municipal Court 389, , , ,325 25,229 5% County Administrator 7,308,225 7,415,786 7,456,007 12,657,682 5,201,675 70% County Assessor 583, , , ,440 3,490 1% County Attorney 714, , , ,394 (81,215) (10%) County Clerk 462, , , ,804 (54,527) (10%) County Sheriff 69,463 67,494 84,396 81,662 (2,734) (3%) Administrative Services 6,272,855 6,442,115 6,853,539 6,184,522 (669,017) (10%) Community Services 11,806,331 12,864,937 12,466,833 11,683,413 (783,420) (6%) Fire 23,670,170 24,736,784 25,568,849 26,210, ,912 3% Police 7,180,024 6,845,634 7,046,853 7,272, ,386 3% Public Works 25,833,196 30,778, ,006,796 21,924,891 (81,905) 0% Community & Economic Devel 12,871,765 23,975,953 34,310,547 9,906,809 (24,403,738) (71%) Utilities 64,688,297 63,933,761 72,680,144 81,536,524 8,856,380 12% Non-Departmental 7,409,348 8,453,851 6,912,225 6,178,425 (733,800) (11%) Expenditures 169,588, ,911, ,193, ,307,202 (11,886,241) (6%) Transfers to other funds 41,251,624 30,472,563 19,214,605 16,364,938 (2,849,667) (15%) Nonbudgeted Items (15,809,778) 11,250, N/A Total ending fund balance / $ 176,480, ,288, ,060,667 85,987,783 (28,072,884) (25%) working capital The difference between ending fund balance and beginning fund balance from FY 2012 to FY 2013 is because FY 2012 Actuals were not available when FY 2013 was adopted. The majority of this change is due to bond proceeds being spent during FY 2012 and timing of capital projects. 26

43 COUNTY-WIDE COMBINED BUDGET BY EXPENDITURE CATEGORY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ % FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance Variance Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v v 13 Category: Salaries $ 38,026,542 38,904,733 40,391,542 40,748, ,771 1% Benefits 14,559,281 14,820,688 16,716,789 16,460,434 (256,355) (2%) Operations 75,195,811 78,815,745 83,666,110 91,703,123 8,037,013 10% Capital Outlay 22,876,167 36,636,365 38,865,099 20,007,179 (18,857,920) (49%) Debt/Fiscal Charges 18,930,485 18,733,905 18,553,903 17,388,153 (1,165,750) (6%) Expenditures 169,588, ,911, ,193, ,307,202 (11,886,241) (6%) 0 20,000,000 40,000,000 60,000,000 80,000, ,000, ,000,000 Salaries Benefits Operations Capital Outlay Debt/Fiscal Charges FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Adopted FY2014 Adopted 27

44 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES This narrative describes the significant changes between the FY2014 adopted and FY2013 adopted budgets. Following this narrative are tables and graphs that provide additional information, including revenue and expenditure comparisons. Some of the changes are common to all departments and funds. They are described here by expenditure type so that the same comments will not be repeated throughout the fund and department statements. In some instances, the change described may not be apparent within a specific expenditure line item because offsetting changes are included in that line. Where those are significant they will be footnoted separately. COMMON CHANGES Salaries, Benefits, and Staffing Changes In the FY2014 adopted budget, salary costs are increased by 2% over the previous year. This target for estimated average salary adjustments was selected to provide a reasonable balance between trying to maintain pace with the market while also trying to limit expenditure growth. Although not impacting the County s contribution in FY 2014, employees will pay an addition 1.5% contribution in the Public Employer s Retirement starting July 1. In addition, turnover and other personnel changes that have occurred during the year will affect personnel costs. There is also a reduction of 9 FTEs county-wide offset by an increase in of 4.06 FTEs in temporary/casual labor to offset impacts to service levels due to revenue decreases and mandatory expenditure level reductions. A portion of this increase in temporary/casual labor will be used for new operating and maintenance costs associated with new roads and facilities. Medical insurance premiums have increased slightly. In FY 2013, the County went to a self-insured medical plan to mitigate double digit premium increases. Also, large savings have been realized by using a new vendor for the long-term disability benefit and the administration of that plan. Workers compensation premiums have been lowered due to improvement in the County s experience rating with workers compensation claims. Details of other specific staffing changes are summarized in the Summary of Significant Changes Staffing Changes. OTHER SIGNIFICANT CHANGES General Fund In FY2014, the Golf Course has been transferred from an enterprise (business-like) fund to the General Fund. This decision has been made due to declining revenues in the Golf Course Fund and an increasing subsidy for the past several from the General Fund. General Fund revenues are projected to be $8.6 million lower, or 13%, in FY2014 than in the FY2013 Adopted Budget for a total of $55 million. The majority of this is a projected decrease in gross receipts taxes due to a decrease in spending at LANL. Interdepartmental revenues are also lower due to a different allocation method in the County s cost allocation plan which is used to charge overhead to County enterprise funds. This decrease is also due to no longer collecting interdepartmental charges from the Golf Course Fund now that the Golf Course is part of the General Fund. At a total of $45.3 million, expenditures are $2.2 million lower, or 5%, in FY2014 than in the FY2013 Adopted Budget. There is a reduction of 7 regular FTEs (full-time equivalent) offset by an increase of 2.76 FTEs in temporary and casual labor. This less expensive (but also sometimes unavailable) temporary labor is used to offset some of the service level impacts of the reduction in regular employees. Also, a portion of the Public Works 28

45 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES Director s salary and benefits are allocated from the General Fund to the Transit Fund and the Environmental Services Fund. Potential vacancy savings are realized when possible. There was a general reduction in all Departments of supplies, equipment and contracts. Service level impacts are kept to a minimum. Detail of the reductions and the impacts are located in the Department Summary/Performance Measure section of this budget. Increases for operations and maintenance for new buildings and roads (White Rock Visitor Center and RV Park, State Road 4, Canada del Buey Trail, Covered Arena, and Municipal Building) were essentially absorbed in this budget. Another notable expenditure increase to the General Fund and its facilities includes the sewer rate increase enacted in FY Special Revenue Funds These funds account for expenditures restricted to specific purposes such as grants, indigent health care, lodgers tax, economic development, and other special programs. FY2014 projected revenues total $3.5 million and expenditures total $3.9 million. This is $603K less, or 15%, and $2.1 million less, or 36%, than FY2013, respectively. Of the expenditure amounts, there is a $1.7 million decrease in the Economic Development Fund. In mid FY 2013, $4 million was appropriated for downtown redevelopment and infrastructure and housing. Unused amounts of this funding will be carried over into FY 2014 along with an additional new $400K for FY2014. There is $300K for economic development loans, a $1.7 million decrease from FY2013. In the Indigent Health Care Fund, revenues are projected to be $394K less, or 19%. This is based on a lower level of projected GRT. Expenditures in this fund are $215K less, or 12%. Because of high usage of this program and potential state-mandated requirements, policy changes will be implemented in late FY2013 or early FY2014 to change program requirements to keep the fund positive. Debt Service Funds Due to the refinancing of debt, the County is able to reduce the principal and interest payment by $733K, or 11%, on the GRT revenue bonds that were issued for capital construction projects. FY2014 projected revenues total $154K (investment income and based upon market projections). Capital Projects Funds Expenditures in the Capital Improvement Projects Funds total $5.3 million. This amount, which is $20.5 million, or 80%, lower than the FY2013 adopted amount is based on total available amounts without the inclusion of debt. Included within the $5.3 million are on-going amounts for capital roads, parks, and network infrastructure replacement ($4.5 million). Other than these on-going infrastructure amounts, an amount of $774K for projects is included (Canyon Rim Trail and Ice Rink Parking Lot projects). Joint Utility Funds Utilities Fund expenditures are $8.8 million higher, or 12%, in the FY2014 adopted budget than the FY2013 adopted budget. The majority of this increase is from an increase in purchased power due to projected load requirements and an increase in San Juan Operations due to environmental improvements. There is also an increase in planned capital expenditures. Revenues are $2.8 million lower, or 4%. There is a $13 million decrease in debt proceeds and an offsetting increase in wholesale and retail sales of $7.5 million. The majority of this increase is revenue associated with the increase in power load requirements at LANL and Kirtland/Sandia. A GWS position is eliminated which was being used to double fill the Deputy Utilities Manager-Finance until retirement of the incumbent. There is an increase in student intern labor to expand the program from summer only to include winter break. 29

46 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES The budget for 2014 includes projected rate increases of 5% in the Gas sub-fund and 8% in Electric Distribution sub-fund. The rate increase addresses high capital and maintenance costs. It should also be noted that any utility rate changes will be subject to the normal review and approval requirements in the Charter including notices and public hearings. Other Enterprise Funds FY2014 revenues totaling $30.9 million in these business-type activities funds are projected to be $37K, or.1%, less than FY Total expenditures of $31.2 million are $172K more, or 1%, than FY (Revenue and expenditures are not included in the variances for the Golf Course which is moved to the General Fund in FY2014.) In the Environmental Services Fund, 17% of the Public Works Director s salary and benefits are allocated to this fund from the General Fund for his oversight of the operation. There is an overall decrease in expenditures of $83K, or 2%, with the majority of decrease from one-time capital outlay purchased in FY2013. Revenues are reduced by $252K, or 6%. The majority of this decrease is based on a lower level of projected GRT. In the Transit fund, there is a reduction of one limited term FTE. 37% of the Public Works Director s salary and benefits are allocated to this fund from the General Fund for his oversight of the operation. Expenditures are reduced by $884K, or 17%, with the majority of the decrease in capital outlay purchases. A lower level of grant revenue is projected with a decrease of $766K, or 20%. The transfer from the General Fund is reduced by $300K, or 19%. A $855K, or 4%, increase in expenditures in the Fire Fund is due to the average increase for salary and benefits and slight increase in overtime. There is also an increase for indirect costs recoverable through the cooperative agreement. These increases are offset by the final payment in FY2013 for Fire Station 3 and reductions in supplies and equipment. Revenue is projected to be $683K higher, or 3%, mainly due to an increase in the amount of the LANL Fire Cooperative Agreement. There is a $299K, or 284%, increase in Airport Fund revenues and a $284K increase, or 81%, in expenditures mainly due to anticipated grant funding for rehabilitating the engine run-up area. Internal Service Funds These funds account for goods and services provided by one County department to another. The Equipment Fund has a decrease of $147K, or 4%, due to a decrease in scheduled equipment replacement. The Risk Management Fund has an increase of $5.6 million in expenditures due to the County changing to a self-insured medical plan vs. a premium collect and remit plan and the required accounting change to recognize the revenues and expenditures related to that plan. There is also a notable decrease in the long term disability plan ($370K, or 71%) based on a new vendor and administration of that plan. 30

47 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES Estimated annual salary adjustments (all funds) 2%: $ 757,000 Higher benefit costs (all funds): $ 93,000 Amounts below are net of salary and benefits increase Fund Department Description Amount (Net) Total Change General County Administrator Reduction in Progress Through Partnering program, lower level of advertising, less travel and training, lower level of supplies, lower level of hiring vs. budgeted vacancies, less capital outlay $ (427,000) County Council Decrease in contracts, travel, supplies and one-time purchases in FY13 (30,000) Clerk Less elections scheduled in FY14 (80,000) Attorney Elimination of contract attorneys (81,000) Administrative Services Community Services Reduction of two FTEs, recognition of potential vacancy savings, less equipment, supplies, materials, and contracts Net Reduction of 3 positions, decrease in Parks Maintenance Projects, reductions in supplies, materials, utilities, library collection, cultural services contracts, social service contracts, and contracts in general (670,000) (585,000) Community Services Transfer of Golf Course to General Fund 994,000 Police Increase due market adjustment of certain position classes in FY13 60,000 Fire Decrease in County Share per Cooperative Agreement with DOE (204,000) Public Works CEDD Decrease in pavement preservation, streetlight LED replacement program, recognition of potential vacancy savings, and lower level of supplies, contracts, and equipment in general Reduction of two FTEs, transfer of two FTEs to Public Works, rental of temporary office space ends in FY13 (607,000) (480,000) CEDD-Facilities Decrease in Major Facilities Maintenance (200,000) All Other changes, net (89,000) (2,399,000) Special Revenue Economic Development Decrease in amount for economic development loans (1,720,000) Lodgers' Tax Lower level of spending due to decrease in lodgers tax revenue (216,000) Indigent Health Care Lower level of spending due to decrease in GRT 85,000 All Other changes, net (12,000) (1,863,000) Debt Service Debt Service Decrease due to refinancing of debt to a lower interest rate (735,000) (735,000) Capital Projects Capital Projects Decrease in funding for and number of capital projects (20,500,000) (20,500,000) Utilities Utilities Higher cost of purchased power and increase in San Juan Operations 8,700,000 8,700,000 Other Enterprise Transit Elimination of one limited term position, elimination of Ski Hill shuttle service, reduction in Bandelier shuttle service (884,000) Golf Course Transfer of Golf Course to General Fund (994,000) Golf Course Elimination of Administrative IDCs due to Golf Course transfer to General Fund and other decreases from FY13 (224,000) Environmental Services Decrease in one-time capital outlay purchased in FY13 (85,000) Fire Increase in overtime and increase in allowable indirect costs reimbursable through DOE 500,000 Airport Increase for grant funded capital projects 284,000 (1,403,000) Internal Service Equipment Lower level of equipment replacement offset by an increase in fuel, automotive supplies, and outside repairs (150,000) Risk Management Net increase due to increase for change to self insured medical plan and accounting rules, decrease in long term disability insurance 5,600,000 5,450,000 Total FY 2014 Budget increase/(decrease): $ (11,900,000) 31

48 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES - STAFFING CHANGES Limited Temp./ Department Title Regular Term Casual Total Total County FY General Fund FY General Fund Positions added and deleted: Change in FTEs ASD Administrative Services Director (1.00) (1.00) ASD Management Analyst (1.00) (1.00) CSD-Library 2 part time Library positions (1.25) (1.25) CSD-Recreation 2 Recreation positions (2.00) (2.00) CSD-Recreation Sr Office Specialist to full-time CEDD 2 Planner positions (2.00) (2.00) Transferred Positions to/from Other Funds: From Golf Course Fund All Positions From General Fund to Environ Svcs Public Works Director allocation (0.17) (0.17) From General Fund to Transit Public Works Director allocation (0.37) (0.37) From General Fund to Transit Traffic-Transportation Safety Spec. (0.50) (0.50) From Transit to General Fund Traffic-Transportation Manger Subtotal (1.29) Other temp & casual changes Total FY 2014 General Fund Subtotal General Fund Change (1.29) Other Funds Positions added and deleted: Transit Transit position-limited term (1.00) (1.00) Utilities GWS position (1.00) (1.00) Other Funds Transferred Positions: From Golf Course to General Fund All Positions (6.25) (5.84) (12.09) From General Fund to Environ Svcs Public Works Director allocation From General Fund to Transit Public Works Director allocation From General Fund to Transit Traffic-Transportation Safety Spec From Transit to General Fund Traffic-Transportation Manger (0.50) (0.50) Other temp & casual changes County Total FY Total Changes (8.00) (1.00) 4.06 (4.94) 32

49 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS This section will provide comparisons of revenues and expenditures between fiscal years, categories and fund types. Following this introductory narrative will be graphs for the County in total, followed by more detailed information. Total revenues in FY 2014 are projected to be $178.2 million compared to $185 million in the FY 2013 adopted budget. This $6.8 million decrease includes a decrease of $8.6 million in the General Fund; a $.7 million decrease in the Special Revenue Funds; a decrease of $2.8 million in the Joint Utility System Fund; a decrease of $.6 million in the Other Enterprise Funds; and an increase of $5.9 in the Internal Services Funds. FY 2014 Sources of Funds Revenues by Type ($millions) Interdepartmental 12.8% $22.4 Investment Income 5% $9.1 Debt Proceeds.2% $.3 Other 1% $2.1 Taxes 27% $48.4 User Charges 41% $73.2 Intergovernmental 13% $22.7 Total Revenues $178.2 million 33

50 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS 4 Year Comparison of Revenues by Category $ millions FY 2011 Actual $192.3M FY 2012 Actual $163.5M FY 2013 Adopted $185M FY 2014 Adopted $178.2 NOTE: In addition to locally imposed taxes, the 'Taxes' category includes the portion of gross receipts tax imposed by the State and returned to the County for General Fund operations (also called State shared). The portion of the State shared gross receipts is as follows: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $21.7 million $19.4 million $20.0 million $16.2 million Actual Actual Adopted Projected Debt proceeds detail is as follows: FY 2011 $12.3 million - Joint Utilities Fund FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $0 $13.5 million - Joint Utilities Fund $.3 million - Joint Utilities Fund 34

51 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS Total expenditures in the FY 2014 budget are $186.3 million compared to $198.2 million in the FY 2013 adopted budget. This $11.9 million decrease includes a decrease of $2.1 million in the General Fund; a $1.8 million decrease in the Special Revenue Funds; a decrease of $.7 million in the Debt Service Fund; a decrease of $20.5 million in the Capital Projects Funds; an increase of $8.8 million in the Joint Utility System Fund; a decrease of $1 million in the Other Enterprise Funds; and an increase of $5.4 in the Internal Services Funds. FY 2014 Uses of Funds Expenditures by Department Utilities 43.8% Police 3.9% Fire 14% Community Services 63% 6.3% Administrative Services 3.3% County Sheriff.04% County Clerk.29% County Attorney.4% County Assessor.3% County Council.21% Municipal Court.26% County Administrator 6.8% Public Works 11.8% Comm & Econ Devel 5.3% Non Departmental 3.3% Total Expenditures $186.3 million $ In millions County Council $ 0.4 Administrative Services 6.2 Municipal Court 0.5 Community Services 11.7 County Administrator 12.7 Fire 26.2 County Assessor 0.5 Police 7.3 County Attorney 0.7 Public Works 21.9 County Clerk 0.5 Comm & Econ Development 9.9 County Sheriff 0.1 Utilities 81.5 Non-Departmental 6.2 Total $

52 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS 4 Year Comparison of Expenditures by Fund Type $ millions FY 2011 Actual $169.6M FY 2012 Actual $186.4M FY 2013 Adopted $198.2M FY 2014 Adopted $186.3M 36

53 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS - GENERAL FUND General Fund Revenues Comparison by Category FY 2014 User Charges 4.1% Interdepartmental 10% Investment Income 3.4% Other 1.9% Intergovernmental.9% Taxes 79.6% General Fund 4 Year Comparison of Revenues by Category $ millions FY 2011 Actual $67.9M FY 2012 Actual $59.7M FY 2013 Adopted $64.1M FY 2014 Adopted $55.5M 37

54 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS - GENERAL FUND General Fund Expenditures by Department FY 2014 Community Services 21% Fire 8.1% Police 15.8% Public Works 11.4% Community & Economic Development 16% Administrative Services 13.7% County Council 0.9% Municipal Court 0.9% County Sheriff 0.2% County Clerk 1% County Attorney 1.7% County Administrator 8.4% County Assessor 0.9% General Fund 4 Year Comparison of Expenditures by Category $ millions FY 2011 Actual $42.9M FY 2012 Actual $44.6M 0.3 FY 2013 Adopted $47.4M Salaries & Benefits Operations Capital Outlay 0.2 FY 2014 Adopted $45.3M 38

55 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS FY 2014 General Fund Revenue Investment income 3% Grants 2% Other 1% User Charges 4% Interdepartmental charges 10% Gross Receipts Taxes 70% Property Taxes 10% Revenues in the General Fund are projected to be $8.6 million lower in FY 2014 than the FY 2013 adopted budget. This change consists of the following items: Gross receipts tax (GRT) - $9.1 million decrease, primarily related to a reduction in spending at LANL. Property taxes - slight increase due to property valuation. Interdepartmental charges - $.6 million decrease mainly due to the collection of general fund interdepartmental charges on enterprise funds. The decrease is related to a different allocation method used in the County s cost allocation plan which is used to determine these charges from enterprise funds. There is also a decrease due to the transfer of the Golf Course into the General Fund. As an enterprise fund, it was subject to administrative interdepartmental charges paid to the General Fund. User charges - $0.5 million increase due to transfer Golf Course revenue into this fund and proposed increases in user fees for FY Investment income - $0.4 million decrease, based upon projected general market conditions. Grant and other revenues very slight increase due to projections. The General Fund s largest source of revenue is GRT. 39

56 Gross Receipts Taxes REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS The State of New Mexico levies a Gross Receipts Tax (sales tax) on all taxable sales and services. Additionally, municipalities (cities) and counties in New Mexico have the authority to impose a portion of the GRT that is dedicated to their county or municipality. In November 2008, voters approved the implementation of a 1/8 th increment for regional transit bringing the GRT rate to % which was effective July 1, In February 2010, the State Legislature passed another 1/8 th percent increment to help alleviate the State s financial crisis. This brings the total rate to % effective July 1, Because Los Alamos is classified as a Class H incorporated county government, it is eligible to impose both city and county portions of the GRT revenues. Additionally, the State remits a portion of the State s share (1.225 percent) back to the County under its Municipal Authority. The State s share is classified as intergovernmental revenue and the county and city portions are classified under taxes. For FY 2014, the General Fund s combined Gross Receipts Tax revenue, including the State Shared portion, is projected to be approximately $39 million or 70% percent of the General Fund s total projected revenues. Some increments of the total GRT are revenues for other funds as described in the table below. Summary of Gross Receipts Tax Rates at July 1, 2010 Source / Type GRT Rate % of Total Purpose Municipal % 17.13% Municipal General Fund Operations County % 1.71% County General Operations County % 1.71% Indigent Health Care Fund Municipal % 0.85% Refuse Fund Environment Municipal Infrastructure % 1.71% Infrastructure debt service County 3rd 1/8th % 1.71% Infrastructure debt service County Correctional % 1.71% Jail / Courts County Fire Protection % 1.71% Fire Station #3 and Fire Operations Municipal / State % 16.75% Portion of State Imposed Shared GRT County Portion % 44.99% NCRTD Portion Regional Transit % 1.71% North Central Regional Transit District (NCRTD) State Portion % 53.30% State Imposed - Retained by the State. Includes the new 1/8 increment effective 7/1/2010. Total % % 40

57 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS The County has the following additional Gross Receipts taxing authority remaining: Approximate Annual Election Type Increment Rate Revenue Required Restrictions 1 Municipal General One 1/4th cent % 3,202,000 no no 2 Municipal General Three 1/8th cents % 4,803,000 no no 3 Municipal Infrastructure Two 1/16th cents % 800,500 yes no 4 Municipal Infrastructure % 800,500 yes no 5 Municipal Capital Outlay Four 1/16th cents % 800,500 yes Infrastructure, and 6 Municipal Capital Outlay % 800,500 yes requires the two 7 Municipal Capital Outlay % 800,500 yes municipal increments 8 Municipal Capital Outlay % 800,500 yes above to be fully utilized. 9 County General The 1/16th cent % 800,500 no no 10 County General Three 1/8th cents % 4,803,000 no no 11 County Infrastructure Two 1/16th cents % 800,500 yes no 12 County Infrastructure % 800,500 yes no 13 County Capital Outlay Four 1/16th cents % 800,500 yes Infrastructure, and 14 County Capital Outlay % 800,500 yes requires the other 15 County Capital Outlay % 800,500 yes county increments 16 County Capital Outlay % 800,500 yes above to be fully utilized. subtotal % 23,214, County Health Care One 1/16th cent % 800,500 no yes 18 County Environmental One 1/8th cent % 1,601,000 no yes 19 County Fire Protection One 1/8th cent % 1,601,000 yes yes 20 County Local Hospital Four 1/8th cents % 6,404,000 yes yes 21 County Emerg. Comm. Four 1/16th cents % 3,202,000 yes yes Totals % $ 36,823,000 If all remaining taxing authority for general operating and infrastructure purposes (unrestricted increments) were implemented, the projected increase in GRT revenues would be approximately $23.2 million. Gross receipts taxing authority can only be implemented on either January 1 or on July 1. In addition, some of these increments have sunset provisions and some require referendum. Council could implement the remaining authority in one year, over several years, or not at all. 41

58 Property Taxes REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS Property taxes are the second major source of tax revenue to the County s General Fund. In FY 2014, property tax revenues are projected to be approximately $5.2 million, or 10% of the General Fund s total projected revenues. Property tax revenues are calculated by multiplying one-third of the assessed valuation of the property by the mill rate levy approved by the State Department of Finance and Administration. Because Los Alamos is a Class H County, it receives both municipal and County mill rate assessments on residential and commercial property. At the time the fiscal year 2013 budget was adopted, the State had not determined new property tax mill levies. Therefore, calendar 2011 levies have been used to project fiscal year 2013 property tax revenues. Total property tax rates for calendar year 2012 are mills for residential and mills for commercial properties respectively. This rate includes levies for State Debt Service, Los Alamos Schools Operational, Capital Improvements and Debt Service levies, and University of New Mexico Operational and Debt Service levies. Of the total residential levy, the County receives mils, or approximately 33 percent of the residential levy. The following tables show the breakdown of the rates and the remaining property tax levies that may be imposed by the Council for County and municipal operations. If G.O. bonds are used to fund Capital Improvement projects, and if approved by voters, property taxes would be increased. The amount of the increase would be dependent upon the terms of the debt. Property Tax Levies for 2012 Tax Year Residential Residential and Non Residential County Municipal Total Property Taxes Imposed for 2012 Tax Year Max Allowed by Statute Residential and Non Residential Imposed Unimposed Property Taxes** County Municipal Total **Must be imposed at the same rate for both residential and non residential and cannot exceed the maximum allowed by statute. 42

59 LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PROJECTION This Long Range Financial Projection (LRFP) is prepared in accordance with Financial Policies Section IX, Long Range Financial Projection. The purpose is to provide a longer-term context for the biennial budget, to clarify and illustrate Council s long-range financial policy direction, and to integrate the estimated longterm operating impacts from capital projects into the operating budget projections. The focus of the LRFP is on the general governmental operations of the County. The Joint Utilities and other proprietary funds are excluded from this analysis. Baseline Scenario The key assumptions built into the baseline LRFP are the following: Revenue Assumptions: 1. There are proposed user charge increases in FY Thereafter, charges for services, franchise taxes and interfund/interdepartmental charges are estimated using a simple forecast based upon past history and the new increase. The primary assumptions for each of these lines was that the specific mix of revenues would remain stable over time and that there were no significant plans or other revenue interrelationships that would require a more refined projection model. 2. Grants The detail for FY 2013 was reviewed and those items that were one time in nature or declining were reduced in future years. The base estimate for expected recurring revenues is $505,000 in FY In subsequent years this amount is inflated annually at a rate of 3% (the assumed inflation rate.) 3. Land Sales The County has future plans that would involve sale of County land parcels. There parcels include A-19 (residential), A-19 (affordable housing), A-3/A-7, A-8 (residential), and A-8 (affordable housing). Since the timing of sales will be subject to future development plans and subject to Council approval, they have not been included in the projections. When and if these sales occur the proceeds will be available to fund future CIP and affordable housing projects. 4. GRT revenue The two primary sources of input for GRT revenue projections are the federal budget projections and input from LANL regarding projected spending. While the first input drives the other, it is the spending that actually generates GRT. The most recent information now available is based upon lower estimated spending at LANL as a result of federal budget cuts. At this time, the federal budget for federal fiscal year (FFY) 2014 has not yet been proposed. Because this is one of the initial sources of input used by the County to estimate GRT revenues, the current projections may have a higher degree of potential variability than in prior years. The GRT revenues are estimated to change as follows (in $millions): (in $millions) Actual Actual Actual Actual Projected %Change -12.2% 13.4% -10.5% -17.3% 0.7% 0.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 43

60 LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PROJECTION There has been a significant amount of volatility in GRT and therefore the County is taking a conservative approach to budgeting this revenue source into the future. GRT revenues are projected to remain flat in After 2015, there is a 2% annual inflation factor assumed for GRT revenue growth. 5. Property tax revenues are projected to increase by 3% in In FY 2015, there is a projected property tax increase to re-implement the $1.5 million that was removed in FY After 2015, average annual valuation increases are estimated to be 3%. There is no property tax revenue increase included in the baseline related to any projected economic development activity. 6. If not specifically addressed, revenues are projected to follow either historical trends or historical averages. Operating Expenditure Assumptions: 1. In FY 2015 and beyond, General Fund Expenditures are estimated to inflate annually at an average of 3.25%. 2. In addition to the 3.25% factor, in FY 2015, $395,000 in additional new operating expenses has been included in the projections. There is also $200,000 in 2016 and $170,000 in These are the estimated new operating costs associated with capital projects currently approved and expected to be completed in those years. New operating expenses associated with other specific capital projects not yet approved are not yet included in the projection. Detail about those projected costs can be found in the CIP section of the budget. 3. Expenditures in other special revenue funds inflate at between 1 to 3% annually. 44

61 LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PROJECTION The following table and graph illustrate the projected outcomes. Governmental Activities Summary (in $ millions) Total beginning fund balance $ Revenues and other sources Expenditures and other uses (75) (75) (85) (90) (79) (82) (80) (83) (84) (86) (88) Total ending fund balance $ $ millions $180 $160 $140 $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 Fiscal Year Revenues and other sources Expenditures and other uses Total ending fund balance Financial Risks and Mitigation Strategies The most significant risk inherent in this LRFP is that projected GRT tax revenue from LANL decreases substantially (either the tax status of the contractor changes and/or the nature and size of LANL operations changes, and/or State tax law changes unfavorably). There are several suggested mitigation strategies. The first is already completed and involved the structure of the GRT revenue bonds. They were structured so that a portion is callable, allowing early repayment. They were also structured so that repayment is front-loaded requiring larger principle payments earlier. The second strategy was using a portion of projected surpluses (in the earlier years of the LRFP when the risks are less) to build up a committed fund balance to possibly repay the GRT revenue debt early, when it is callable. These two elements are going to be used in combination in the proposed refunding of the current debt. The committed fund balance is proposed to be used to refund the callable bonds early, reduce annual debt service costs, and realize an estimated current net present value savings of over $1.7 million. The third strategy has been to slow down the pace of the County s capital program to ensure that fund balance levels remain at targeted levels. 45

62 LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PROJECTION SUMMARY The purpose of the LRFP is to illustrate the potential long-term impacts of operating and capital plans from a comprehensive perspective. The Capital Improvement Program, implemented as a whole and based upon the stated assumptions, is projected to generate positive economic benefit and to improve the quality of life for the community, although there are risks that will need to be managed carefully. It also projects that some additional capacity for other projects will be available over the long-term. 46

63 FUND / DEPARTMENT STRUCTURE Note: Significant variances are explained in the Department Summary Section. Fund Fund Statement Department Summary Total Expenditures $$ Fund Type Department GOVERNMENTAL Page # General General Total $45,329,674 County Council $389,311 Municipal Court $421,641 What is a fund? County Administrator $3,781,075 c County Assessor $393,747 County Attorney $751,394 County Clerk $457,692 County Sheriff $81,662 Community & Econ Devel $7,295,114 Administrative Services $6,184,522 Community Services $9,576,580 Fire $3,668,219 Police $7,168,239 Public Works $5,160,478 A fund is an accounting means for recording various revenue generating activities and their related expenses. GOVERNMENTAL Special Revenue Total $4,166,517 State Shared Revenues Public Works and Community , Services 138 $0 Lodger s Tax Community & Econ Devel $202,695 State Grants Fire and Police , 167 $545,500 Health Care Assistance Community Services $1,920,633 Economic Development Community & Econ Devel $1,235,000 Other Special Revenue Municipal Court, Community 57 82, Services, Clerk, Assessor 138, 102, $262, Las Conchas Fire Recovery Non Departmental $0 GOVERNMENTAL Debt Service Debt Service Non Departmental $6,178,425 GOVERNMENTAL Capital Projects Total $5,254,000 Capital Improvement Projects Public Works, Community & Econ Devel , 106, 223 $5,254,000 Capital Projects Permanent Non Departmental $0 PROPRIETARY Enterprise Total $112,739,912 Joint Utilities System Utilities $81,536,524 Transit Public Works $4,457,058 Environmental Services Public Works $4,010,232 Golf Course-moved to Gen Fd Community Services $0 Fire Fire $22,101,042 Airport Public Works $635,056 PROPRIETARY Internal Service Total $12,638,674 Equipment Public Works $3,762,067 Risk Management County Administrator $8,876,607 47

64 GENERAL FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Nonspendable $ 1,177,271 1,266,859 1,297,000 1,813, ,799 40% Restricted for Cash Requirements 4,205,640 4,276,682 3,890,798 4,455, ,093 15% Other Restricted/Committed 6,365,579 3,031,471 3,120,000 5,940,000 2,820,000 90% Committed for Revenue Stabilization 14,514,109 9,867, ,194 3,479,859 2,788, % Unassigned 12,870,024 13,570,673 12,019,866 11,217,125 (802,741) (7%) Total beginning fund balance 39,132,623 32,013,489 21,018,858 26,906,674 5,887,816 28% Revenues: Gross Receipts Taxes 52,043,098 46,802,967 48,040,000 38,957,000 (9,083,000) (19%) [1] Property Taxes 5,082,287 5,181,012 5,119,000 5,250, ,000 3% Interdepartmental charges 4,006,858 4,140,973 6,239,330 5,615,758 (623,572) (10%) [2] User Charges 1,716,090 1,451,971 1,733,000 2,273, ,000 31% Investment income 3,140, ,279 1,471,000 1,883, ,000 28% Grants 844, , , ,000 5,000 1% Other 1,019,851 1,021,740 1,030,000 1,040,000 10,000 1% Revenues: 67,853,365 59,739,062 64,132,330 55,523,758 (8,608,572) (13%) Transfers from other funds 2,428,475 2,059,892 2,402,363 3,042, ,284 27% Total sources of funds $ 109,414,463 93,812,443 87,553,551 85,473,079 (2,080,472) (2%) Expenditures: County Council $ 329, , , ,311 (29,957) (7%) Municipal Court 329, , , ,641 25,148 6% County Administrator 4,778,564 4,342,590 4,207,609 3,781,075 (426,534) (10%) County Assessor 438, , , ,747 9,019 2% County Attorney 714, , , ,394 (81,215) (10%) County Clerk 446, , , ,692 (79,468) (15%) County Sheriff 69,463 67,494 84,396 81,662 (2,734) (3%) Administrative Services 6,272,855 6,442,115 6,853,539 6,184,522 (669,017) (10%) Community Services 8,248,905 8,651,283 9,102,076 9,515, ,574 5% Parks Maintenance Projects 156, ,030 67,700 60,930 (6,770) (10%) Fire 3,519,191 3,714,155 3,872,664 3,668,219 (204,445) (5%) Police 7,056,844 6,727,734 6,942,853 7,168, ,386 3% Public Works 4,089,170 5,913,807 5,767,622 5,160,478 (607,144) (11%) Community & Economic Development 5,313,582 5,122,250 5,956,283 5,495,114 (461,169) (8%) Facilities Maintenance Projects 1,157,795 1,152,124 2,000,000 1,800,000 (200,000) (10%) Expenditures 42,921,397 44,567,022 47,425,000 45,329,674 (2,095,326) (4%) [3] Transfers to other funds 34,479,575 26,539,952 15,175,242 12,001,291 (3,173,951) (21%) [4] Ending fund balance: Nonspendable 1,266,859 1,304,638 1,317,000 1,833, ,799 39% Restricted for Cash Requirements 4,276,682 4,434,937 3,936,275 3,762,363 (173,912) (4%) Other Restricted/Committed 3,031,473 3,805,621 3,120,000 3,620, ,000 16% Committed for Revenue Stabilization 9,867,804 1,212,461 3,753,568 7,821,200 4,067, % Unassigned 13,570,673 11,947,812 12,826,466 11,104,752 (1,721,714) (13%) Total ending fund balance 32,013,491 22,705,469 24,953,309 28,142,114 3,188,805 13% Total uses of funds $ 109,414,463 93,812,443 87,553,551 85,473,079 (2,080,472) (2%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (1.29) 0% Limited term N/A Casual, Student, & Temp % % 48

65 GENERAL FUND BUDGET SUMMARY - NOTES [1] [2] FY 13 decrease is a result of lower spending on construction (County and LANL) as well as an overall decrease in LANL spending and differences in the month-to-month pattern in LANL spending, and timing of LANL projects. The decrease is related to a different allocation method used in the County s cost allocation plan which is used to determine these charges from enterprise funds. There is also a decrease due to the transfer of the Golf Course into the General Fund. As an enterprise fund, it was subject to administrative interdepartmental charges paid to the General Fund. [3] Overall reductions in expenditures due to sharp decrease in revenues. See details in the Department Summaries/Performance Measures section [4] Summary of Transfers to Other Funds Actual Actual Adopted Adopted Other Special Revenue Fund $ 30,514 25,000 42,000 31,000 Debt Service Fund - GRT Revenue Bonds 529 6,913,038 7,490,456 6,912,742 6,178,291 Road Replacement - transfers start at $4M/yr in FY ,000,000 4,120,000 2,545,000 3,370,000 Capital Improvement Projects Major Network Replacements 480, , , ,000 Municipal Building Project 1,997,998 Parking Improvements 5,000,000 Golf Course Community Bldg 5,390,000 St. Rd 4 372,959 Iris St 200,000 Other Conceptual Designs 500, ,000 White Rock SR4 Improvements 738,130 North Mesa Ballfield Lights Replacement Electrical Design 62,740 White Rock Economic Development 1,650,000 1,127,697 0 Parks small projects 147, , ,000 Other Potential Projects 2,000,000 Other Potential Projects 191,363 3,750,000 2,500,000 Other Potential Projects 2,450, ,421 0 Schools / County Project Partnerships 0 3,000, Golf Course - Operations 485, , ,000 0 Transit - ongoing operations 1,458,448 1,634,758 1,600,000 1,300,000 Utilities - fiber, Camp May Road, LA Reservoir 223,750 Airport - Operations 150, , , ,000 Airport - Capital Project Match 116,305 46,000 15,000 Las Conchas Fire 650,000 1,600,000 FY11 & FY12 Equip Fund, FY14 IHC Fund 220,000 51, ,000 Total Transfers to Other Funds $ 34,479,575 26,539,952 15,175,242 12,001,291 49

66 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS COMBINING FUND STATEMENT STATE INDIGENT SHARED LODGERS' STATE HEALTH REVENUES TAX GRANTS CARE Fiscal Year (FY) Adopted Total beginning fund balance / working capital $ 203,026 2, ,611 Revenues and other sources 530, , ,500 1,636,000 Transfers from other funds ,000 Expenditures 0 202, ,500 1,920,633 Transfers to other funds 530, Total fund balance / working capital Ending FY 2014 $ 203,026 1, ,978 Total FY 2014 sources of funding Current year $ 530, , ,500 1,936,000 Total FY 2014 uses of funding Current year 530, , ,500 1,920,633 Net increase / (decrease) in fund balance / working capital $ 0 (695) 0 15,367 STATE INDIGENT SHARED LODGERS' STATE HEALTH REVENUES TAX GRANTS CARE FY 2014 Adopted Budget FTEs FY 2013 Adopted Budget FTEs Net increase / (decrease) Special Revenue Funds are used to account for revenues that are legally restricted to expenditures for specified purposes. 50

67 OTHER LAS FY 2014 FY 2013 ECONOMIC SPECIAL CONCHAS ADOPTED ADOPTED DEVELOPMENT REVENUE FIRE BUDGET BUDGET 5,280, , ,673 6,673,458 10,933, , , ,495,347 4,098, , ,000 42,000 1,235, , ,166,517 6,007, ,673 1,165, ,000 4,417, , ,167,615 8,536, , , ,826,347 1,235, , ,673 5,332,190 (862,653) (22,189) (635,673) (1,505,843) OTHER LAS ECONOMIC SPECIAL CONCHAS TOTAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE FIRE FTEs

68 STATE SHARED REVENUES FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Restricted for Major Street Maintenance $ 76, , , ,026 11,539 6% Restricted for Recreation 2,307 2, N/A Total beginning fund balance 79, , , ,026 11,539 6% Revenues: Major Street Maintenance: Motor vehicle tax 252, , , , % Gasoline tax 286, , , , % Revenues 539, , , , % Total sources of funds $ 618, , , ,026 11,539 2% Expenditures $ N/A Transfers to other funds 425, , , , % Ending fund balance: Restricted for Major Street Maintenance 191, , , ,026 11,539 6% Restricted for Recreation 2, N/A Total ending fund balance 193, , , ,026 11,539 6% Total uses of funds $ 618, , , ,026 11,539 2% For detailed department information, please see pages 174 (Public Works). The State Shared Revenues Fund accounts for the receipt and expenditure of certain state shared revenues. These include gasoline tax, arterial, cooperative, school bus route, and motor vehicle revenues, all of which provide funding for the general control and management of the County's roads, highways, and bridges. Historically, this included cigarette tax revenues which provided funding for recreation programs. 52

69 LODGERS' TAX FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Restricted for Lodgers' Tax $ 306, , ,012 2,549 (212,463) (99%) Revenues: Lodgers' Tax - Promotion 266, , , ,000 (101,000) (33%) Investment income 11,725 1,584 5,000 0 (5,000) (100%) Penalties 772 1,008 1,000 0 (1,000) (100%) Revenues 279, , , ,000 (107,000) (35%) Total sources of funds $ 585, , , ,549 (319,463) (61%) Expenditures: Professional / Contractual $ 318, , , ,000 (161,097) (46%) Interfund charges - Administration 5,243 5,244 17,167 12,695 (4,472) (26%) Capital ,000 0 (50,000) (100%) Expenditures 323, , , ,695 (215,569) (52%) Ending fund balance: Restricted for Lodgers' Tax 261, , ,748 1,854 (103,894) (98%) Total uses of funds $ 585, , , ,549 (319,463) (61%) For detailed department information, please see page 106 (Community & Econ Dev). The Lodgers' Tax Fund accounts for the proceeds of the lodgers' tax which is required to be used for promotional activities and for the acquisition of certain facilities as provided in the Los Alamos County Code Chapter

70 STATE GRANTS FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Restricted - Law Enforcement Protection $ 39,591 22,759 22,759 0 (22,759) (100%) Restricted - Local DWI 27,253 27,252 27,252 0 (27,252) (100%) Restricted - Forfeitures and Seizures (746) (100%) Restricted - Fire Marshal 238, ,756 7, (6,001) (86%) Restricted - Fire EMS 10,969 2, (79) (100%) Total beginning fund balance 316, ,456 57, (56,837) (98%) Revenues: State Grant - Law Enforcement Protection 39,800 39,200 40,000 40, % State Grant - Local DWI 66,547 59,638 64,000 64, % State Grant - Forfeitures and Seizures N/A State Grant - Fire Marshal 452, , , ,000 (9,760) (2%) State Grant - Fire EMS 9,626 10,646 10,500 11,500 1,000 10% Investment Income 11,727 3,794 1,000 0 (1,000) (100%) Revenues: 579, , , ,500 (9,760) (2%) Total sources of funds $ 896, , , ,499 (66,597) (11%) Expenditures: Law Enforcement Protection $ 56,632 58,261 40,000 40, % Local DWI 66,548 59,638 64,000 64, % Forfeitures and Seizures N/A Fire Marshal 452, , , ,000 (9,760) (2%) Fire EMS 17,652 13,589 10,500 11,500 1,000 10% Expenditures 593, , , , (8,760) (2%) Ending fund balance: Restricted - Law Enforcement Protection 22,759 3,698 22,759 0 (22,759) (100%) Restricted - Local DWI 27,252 27,252 27,252 0 (27,252) (100%) Restricted - Forfeitures and Seizures (746) (100%) Restricted - Fire Marshal 249, ,579 8, (7,001) (88%) Restricted - Fire EMS 2, (79) (100%) Total ending fund balance 303, ,280 58, (57,837) (98%) Total uses of funds $ 896, , , ,499 (66,597) (11%) For detailed department information, please see pages 161 (Fire) and 167 (Police). The State Grants Fund accounts for the receipt and expenditure of certain state grants. These include Law Enforcement Protection, Local DWI, Fire Marshal, and Fire EMS grants. 54

71 INDIGENT HEALTH CARE FUND BUDGET SUMMARY (Health Care Assistance) FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Restricted for Indigent Health Care $ 1,420,463 1,452,821 1,134,120 4,611 (1,129,509) (100%) Revenues: Gross Receipts Taxes 2,141,893 1,922,940 1,982,000 1,601,000 (381,000) (19%) Building (Rental) Income 0 22,239 22,000 35,000 13,000 59% Investment income 44,675 6,489 26,000 0 (26,000) (100%) Revenues 2,186,568 1,951,668 2,030,000 1,636,000 (394,000) (19%) Transfers from other funds ,000 Total sources of funds $ 3,607,031 3,404,489 3,164,120 1,940,611 (1,223,509) (39%) Expenditures: Salaries and benefits $ 66,970 53,986 68,587 71,233 2,646 4% Professional / Contractual services 2,040,253 2,576,400 1,762,800 1,845,000 82,200 5% Other services 6, ,400 3, % Materials and supplies ,000 1, % Intra / Interfund charges 39,941 39, N/A Expenditures 2,154,210 2,671,161 1,835,787 1,920,633 84,846 5% Transfers to other funds N/A Ending fund balance: Restricted for Indigent Health Care 1,452, ,921 1,328,333 19,978 (1,308,355) (98%) Total uses of funds $ 3,607,031 3,404,489 3,164,120 1,940,611 (1,223,509) (39%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) N/A For detailed department information, please see page 138 (Community Services). The Indigent Health Care Fund accounts for revenues and expenditures associated with the administration of the Indigent Health Care Program. 55

72 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Committed for Econ. Development $ 8,323,507 11,357,373 6,070,138 3,119,300 (2,950,838) (49%) Nonspendable 5,294,262 1,678,102 2,067,570 2,160,886 93,316 5% Total beginning fund balance 13,617,769 13,035,475 8,137,708 5,280,186 (2,857,522) (35%) Revenues: Interfund loan interest 62,439 9,949 9,949 0 (9,949) (100%) Loan interest 41,416 31, N/A User Charges 113,367 13, N/A Investment income 249,469 68, , ,000 (25,000) (14%) Loan repayment 214, , , ,347 25,558 14% Interfund loan repayment 0 198,987 0 (198,987) (100%) Revenues 681, , , ,347 (208,378) (36%) Total sources of funds $ 14,299,287 13,288,965 8,718,433 5,652,533 (3,065,900) (35%) Expenditures: Economic Development Programs $ 1,263, , , ,000 (420,800) (44%) Infrastructure and Housing , ,000 N/A Downtown Redevelopment , ,000 N/A Local Econ. Developm't Loans/Grants 0 2,000,000 2,000, ,000 (1,700,000) (85%) Expenditures 1,263,812 2,467,338 2,955,800 1,235,000 (1,720,800) (58%) Ending fund balance: Committed for Econ. Development 11,357,373 9,472,965 2,882,839 2,290,994 (591,845) (21%) non spendable 1,678,102 1,348,662 2,879,794 2,126,539 (753,255) (26%) Total ending fund balance 13,035,475 10,821,627 5,762,633 4,417,533 (1,345,100) (23%) Total uses of funds $ 14,299,287 13,288,965 8,718,433 5,652,533 (3,065,900) (35%) For detailed department information, please see page 106 (Community & Econ Dev). The Economic Development Fund accounts for the receipt, management, investment, and expenditure of the lump sum buyout payment received from the United States Department of Energy under the Atomic Energy Communities Act. 56

73 OTHER SPECIAL REVENUES FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Restricted for Property Tax Valuation $ 347, , , ,371 39,220 10% Restricted for Clerk's Recording Equipment 67,816 66,955 52,784 48,926 (3,858) (7%) Restricted for Bench Warrant Collections 3,354 1, ,696 9, % Restricted for Community Service N/A Restricted for Alternative Sentencing ,000 1,000 N/A Restricted for Aquatic Center Operations 49,979 49,733 48,733 44,699 (4,034) (8%) Restricted for Library Operations 16,998 15,915 15,215 17,722 2,507 16% Total beginning fund balance 486, , , ,414 44,047 9% Revenues: Property Tax Adminstration Fees 154, , , , % Clerk's Recording Fees 15,170 27,609 17,000 20,000 3,000 18% Bench Warrant Fees 7,147 5,814 7,000 7, % Community Service Fees 8,012 6,534 8,000 8, % Alternative Sentencing Fees 12,419 11,408 12,000 20,000 8,000 67% Aquatic Center Gifts / Donations ,000 1, % Library Gifts / Donations 747 3,663 2,000 2, % Investment income 2, ,500 1, % Revenues 199, , , ,500 11,000 6% Transfers from other funds 30,514 25,000 42,000 31,000 (11,000) (26%) Total sources of funds $ 716, , , ,914 44,047 6% Expenditures: Property Tax Valuation $ 144, , , ,693 (5,529) (4%) Clerk's Recording Equipment 16,031 31,267 33,171 58,112 24,941 75% Bench Warrant Collections 8,786 6,230 18,603 8,684 (9,919) (53%) Community Service 28,271 18,534 25,000 25, % Alternative Sentencing 22,674 14,408 25,000 35,000 10,000 40% Aquatic Center Gift 2,219 4,368 3,000 3, % Library Gift 2,115 1,156 3,200 3, % Expenditures 224, , , ,689 19,493 8% Transfers to other funds N/A Ending fund balance: Restricted for Property Tax Valuation 357, , , ,678 44,749 11% Restricted for Clerk's Recording Equipment 66,955 63,297 36,613 10,814 (25,799) (70%) Restricted for Bench Warrant Collections 1,715 11, ,012 7, % Restricted for Community Service N/A Restricted for Alternative Sentencing N/A Restricted for Aquatic Center Operations 49,733 45,699 47,733 43,699 (4,034) (8%) Restricted for Library Operations 15,915 18,422 14,515 17,022 2,507 17% Total ending fund balance 491, , , ,225 24,554 5% Total uses of funds $ 716, , , ,914 44,047 6% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % For detailed department information, please see pages 82 (Municipal Court), 97 (Assessor), 102 (Clerk), and 138 (Community Services). The Other Special Revenue Fund includes the following subfunds: Property Tax Valuation, Recording Equipment, Aquatic Center Gift, Library Gift, Bench Warrant, Community Service, and Alternative Sentencing. 57

74 LAS CONCHAS FIRE FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Actual Actual Budget Budget Beginning fund balance: Committed to Las Conchas Fire Recovery $ 0 153, , ,673 Revenues: Intergovernmental - Federal Indirect 0 75,831 0 Revenues 0 75, Transfers from other funds 650,000 1,600,000 Total sources of funds 650,000 1,829, , ,673 Expenditures: Professional / Contractual 496,310 1,539, Expenditures 496,310 1,539, Transfers to other funds ,673 Ending fund balance: Committed to Las Conchas Fire Recovery 153, , ,497 0 Total ending fund balance 153, , , Total uses of funds $ 650,000 1,829, , ,673 For detailed information, please see page 221 (Non-Departmental). The Las Conchas Fire Fund accounts for expenditures incurred by the County as a result of the Las Conchas Fire in June/July This fund will be closed once all activity is complete. 58

75 GRT REVENUE BONDS DEBT SERVICE FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Restricted for Debt Service $ 21,160 24,241 24, , , % Committed for Debt Service 6,424,030 6,674,758 6,825, ,093 (6,651,481) (97%) Total beginning fund balance 6,445,190 6,698,999 6,849, ,657 (6,073,158) (89%) Revenues: Investment income 253,809 47, , ,000 4,000 3% Transfers from other funds 6,913,038 7,490,456 6,912,742 6,178,291 (734,451) (11%) Total sources of funds $ 13,612,037 14,236,578 13,916,557 7,112,948 (6,803,609) (49%) Expenditures: Debt Service $ 6,913,038 6,914,438 6,912,225 6,178,425 (733,800) (11%) Ending fund balance: Restricted for Debt Service 24, ,564 24, , , % Committed for Debt Service 6,674,758 6,719,576 6,980, ,959 (6,648,132) (95%) Total ending fund balance 6,698,999 7,322,140 7,004, ,523 (6,069,809) (87%) Total uses of funds $ 13,612,037 14,236,578 13,916,557 7,112,948 (6,803,609) (49%) For detailed information, please see page 221 (Non-Departmental). Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for and the payment of long term debt principal and interest. The GRT Revenue Bond Debt Service Fund accounts for amounts to be accumulated for payment of principal and interest on GRT revenue bonds issued for the construction of specific capital projects, including the Airport Basin, Jail and Courthouse Projects. Debt Service is financed by a portion of the gross receipts tax imposed and collected by the State and distributed to the County. Please see future debt service schedule in the Other Information section under Debt Summary. 59

76 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS COMBINING FUND STATEMENT CAPITAL CAPITAL FY 2014 FY 2013 IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ADOPTED ADOPTED PROJECTS PERMANENT BUDGET BUDGET Fiscal Year (FY) Adopted Total beginning fund balance / working capital $ 344,593 27,609,999 27,954,592 46,600,674 Revenues and other sources 0 2,070,000 2,070,000 2,050,000 Transfers from other funds 5,591, ,591,000 7,407,500 Expenditures 5,254, ,254,000 25,770,500 Transfers to other funds 0 1,091,000 1,091,000 1,107,000 Total fund balance / working capital Ending FY 2014 $ 681,593 28,588,999 29,270,592 29,180,674 Total FY 2014 sources of funding $ 5,591,000 2,070,000 7,661,000 Total FY 2014 uses of funding 5,254,000 1,091,000 6,345,000 CAPITAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TOTAL PROJECTS PERMANENT FTEs FY 2014 Adopted Budget FTEs FY 2013 Adopted Budget FTEs Net increase / (decrease) The Capital Improvement Projects Fund accounts for financial resources used for the acquisition or construction of capital facilities. The Capital Projects Permanent Fund accounts for amounts received under a settlement of prior years' gross receipts taxes, set aside by the County Council and the County Charter for capital projects. These amounts are invested, and the real value of the fund principal is maintained using the implicit price deflator for the gross domestic product. When there is investment income in excess of the principal maintenance, it is made available for expenditure in the Capital Improvements Projects Fund. 60

77 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Committed for Capital Improvements $ 48,514,354 62,670,510 19,167, ,593 (18,823,192) (98%) Revenues: Intergovernmental - Federal Grants 1,901, , N/A Intergovernmental - State Grants 471, , N/A Other 1,985 2, N/A Revenues 2,374, , N/A Transfers from other funds General Fund 24,232,520 14,710,230 5,770,500 3,970,000 (1,800,500) (31%) State Shared Revenue 425, , , , % Capital Project Permanent 920,303 1,000,248 1,107,000 1,091,000 (16,000) (1%) 0 N/A Transfers from other funds 25,577,823 16,242,786 7,407,500 5,591,000 (1,816,500) (25%) Total sources of funds $ 76,466,307 79,318,149 26,575,285 5,935,593 (20,639,692) (78%) Expenditures: Capital Improvements $ 11,045,797 14,257,131 22,500, ,000 (21,756,000) (97%) Road Projects 0 8,666,354 2,545,000 3,900,000 1,355,000 53% Parks Small Capital 0 130, , ,000 (65,300) (27%) Information Technology Projects 0 606, , ,000 (50,200) (10%) Expenditures 11,045,797 23,660,230 25,770,500 5,254,000 (20,516,500) (80%) Transfers to other funds 2,750,000, N/A Ending fund balance: Committed for Capital Improvements 62,670,510 55,657, , ,593 (123,192) (15%) Total ending fund balance 62,670,510 55,657, , ,593 (123,192) (15%) Total uses of funds $ 76,466,307 79,318,149 26,575,285 5,935,593 (20,639,692) (78%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Limited term % % For information on the Capital Improvement Projects, please see detail beginning on page 223 In the Capital Improvements section. For department information, please see page 106 (Community & Econ Dev) and page 174 (Public Works). The Capital Improvement Projects Fund accounts for the financing and construction of structures and improvements approved by County Council. 61

78 CAPITAL PROJECTS PERMANENT FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning fund balance: Restricted for Revenue Stabilization $ 1,498,489 4,268,791 3,868,338 3,508,704 (359,634) (9%) Nonspendable for Capital Improvements 20,841,330 22,814,388 23,564,551 24,101, ,744 2% Total beginning fund balance 22,339,819 27,083,179 27,432,889 27,609, ,110 1% Revenues: Investment income 5,663,663 (444,932) 2,060,000 2,070,000 10,000 0% Total sources of funds $ 28,003,482 26,638,247 29,492,889 29,679, ,110 1% Transfers to other funds $ 920,303 1,000,248 1,107,000 1,091,000 (16,000) (1%) Ending fund balance: Restricted for Revenue Stabilization 4,268,791 2,003,855 3,878,756 3,764,665 (114,091) (3%) Nonspendable for Capital Improvements 22,814,388 23,634,144 24,507,133 24,824, ,201 1% Total ending fund balance 27,083,179 25,637,999 28,385,889 28,588, ,110 1% Total uses of funds $ 28,003,482 26,638,247 29,492,889 29,679, ,110 1% [1] Negative balances are shown to highlight the negative impact of the decline in the market value of investments. The Capital Projects Permanent Fund accounts for amounts received under a settlement of prior years' gross receipts taxes set aside by the County Council and the County Charter for capital projects. These funds are invested, and the real value of the fund principal is maintained using the implicit price deflator for the gross domestic product. Excess interest income from the fund is made available for expenditure in the Capital Improvements Projects Fund. 62

79 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Enterprise Funds account for activities financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprises. These activities generally provide goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis and are financed primarily through user charges. Joint Utility System Fund NOTE: The Joint Utility subfunds presented here are intended for informational purposes only. It is the Joint Utility System Fund level at which budget authority resides and at which the utilities budget is adopted. Electric Utility Subfund - accounts for the provision of electric utility services for the County. Gas Utility Subfund - accounts for the provision of natural gas utility services for the County. Water Utility Subfund - accounts for the provision of water utility services for the County. Wastewater Utility Subfund - accounts for the provision of wastewater utility services for the County. Other Enterprise Funds Environmental Services - accounts for the provision of refuse collection services for the County. Golf Course Fund - accounts for the operation and maintenance of the County-owned golf course. This fund will be closed at the end of FY 2013 and the Golf Course will be transferred to the General Fund. Transit Fund - provides for a community wide public transit system. Fire Fund - accounts for the fire protection services. Airport Fund - accounts for the operation and maintenance of the Los Alamos Airport. 63

80 JOINT UTILITY SYSTEM FUND FUND SUMMARY FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 9,664,314 13,747,174 14,793,000 15,666, ,849 6% Revenues: Wholesale sales 32,543,447 33,999,164 34,028,154 42,470,995 8,442,841 25% Retail sales 25,396,807 26,060,832 26,469,778 28,419,933 1,950,155 7% Other revenues 1,570, , , , % Debt Proceeds 13,939, ,481, ,946 (13,207,661) (98%) Interest income 940, , , ,785 7,106 1% 74,391,103 61,189,806 75,340,072 72,533,474 (2,806,598) (4%) Transfers from other funds 2,973, N/A Expenses by Program: Electric 47,722,127 48,344,987 50,750,120 57,365,339 6,615,219 13% Gas 5,760,578 5,290,942 5,981,674 6,776, ,221 13% Water 6,354,457 6,160,035 10,311,798 12,390,330 2,078,532 20% Wastewater 4,851,135 4,137,797 5,636,552 5,003,960 (632,592) (11%) 64,688,297 63,933,761 72,680,144 81,536,524 8,856,380 12% Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses 6,760,821 8,170, N/A Changes in long term assets (7,254,865) 810, N/A Changes in long term liabilities (7,958,280) 1,782, N/A Asset contributions 908, N/A (7,544,270) 10,763, N/A Transfers to other funds: 1,049, , , ,974 4,611 1% Ending working capital $ 13,747,174 20,990,984 16,650,565 5,856,825 (10,793,740) (65%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (1.00) (1%) Casual, Student,& Temp % (0.28) 0% NOTE: The Joint Utility subfunds presented are intended for informational purposes only. It is the Joint Utility Fund level at which budget authority resides and at which the utilities budget is adopted. The Utilities Department's function is to provide our customers with quality electric, natural gas, water, and wastewater services to meet current and future needs and to achieve the highest level of customer satisfaction. 64

81 JOINT UTILITY SYSTEM DETAIL Combined Electric Utility Subfund Summary FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ (12,240,166) (11,543,351) (9,130,108) (6,433,182) 2,696,926 (30%) Revenues: Wholesale sales 31,406,424 32,888,233 33,162,974 41,416,495 8,253,521 25% Retail sales 11,296,526 11,931,548 12,372,034 13,520,670 1,148,636 9% Federal Indirect-Other 753,766 59, N/A Other revenues 292, , , , % Debt Proceeds 12,254, N/A Interest income 160, , ,000 75,000 (175,000) (70%) Gain (loss) on investments (485,714) 286, N/A 55,678,562 45,717,424 46,093,235 55,320,392 9,227,157 20% Expenses: Salaries and benefits 4,702,907 4,866,220 5,324,613 5,330,382 5,769 0% Operations 23,746,185 30,904,222 32,819,208 39,786,667 6,967,459 21% Capital 9,417,975 2,641,255 2,676,085 2,679,685 3,600 0% Debt Service 9,855,060 9,933,290 9,930,214 9,568,605 (361,609) (4%) 47,722,127 48,344,987 50,750,120 57,365,339 6,615,219 13% Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses 6,045,908 6,635, N/A Changes in long term assets (6,244,718) 1,966, N/A Changes in long term liabilities (6,511,746) 1,469, N/A (6,710,556) 10,071, N/A Transfers to other funds: General Fund 549, , , , % 549, , , , % Ending working capital $ (11,543,351) (4,590,675) (14,318,990) (9,010,455) 5,308,535 (37%) The Utilities Electric Production and Distribution Divisions manage the County's electric generation and transmission resources to meet the electric energy requirements for LAC customers and the DOE's LANL in the most cost-effective manner. The Production Division Director is chairman of the LAC/DOE Operating Committee which sets policy for the combined LAC/DOE power pool. The Distribution Division is responsible for maintenance, operation, and repair of all electric distribution lines and equipment owned by the County of Los Alamos to provide delivery of electric power to its customers. 65

82 JOINT UTILITY SYSTEM DETAIL Gas Utility Subfund Summary FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2011 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 5,809,920 6,114,274 5,443,316 4,921,453 (521,863) (10%) Revenues: Retail sales 6,185,161 5,443,164 5,814,333 5,906,418 92,085 2% Other revenues 41,350 28,332 14,639 14, % Interest income 214,792 48,890 50,000 50, % 6,441,303 5,520,386 5,878,972 5,971,057 92,085 2% Expenses: Salaries and benefits 670, , , , ,417 23% Operations 4,820,110 4,258,626 5,465,490 6,148, ,804 12% Capital outlay 270, ,608 27,000 27, % 5,760,578 5,290,942 5,981,674 6,776, ,221 13% Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses 432, , N/A Changes in long term assets (461,382) (971,562) N/A Changes in long term liabilities 19,353 3, N/A (9,754) 14, N/A Transfers to other funds: General Fund 366, , , ,648 4,282 2% Ending working capital $ 6,114,274 6,075,900 5,070,248 3,840,967 (1,229,281) (24%) The Utilities Gas Distribution Division is responsible for maintenance, operation, and repair of all gas distribution lines and equipment owned by LAC in order to provide gas service to its customers. In addition, the division conducts gas leak safety checks on a regular basis and responds to customer gas safety requests. 66

83 JOINT UTILITY SYSTEM DETAIL Combined Water Utility Subfund Summary FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 13,654,423 17,675,496 17,427,615 14,458,200 (2,969,415) (17%) Revenues: Wholesale sales 1,137,023 1,110, ,180 1,054, ,320 22% Retail sales 4,229,952 4,548,217 4,195,466 4,468, ,120 7% Federal indirect 150, N/A State grants 782, N/A Other revenues 33,516 4, , , % Debt Proceeds 1,319, ,481, ,946 (12,207,661) (98%) Interest income 483, , , , ,106 33% 8,136,233 5,791,199 18,236,104 6,673,903 (11,562,201) (63%) Transfers from other funds: 2,750, N/A Expenses: Salaries and benefits 1,490,107 1,350,144 1,422,753 1,470,571 47,818 3% Operations 2,701,899 2,151,504 6,700,923 8,706,394 2,005,471 30% Capital Outlay 2,128,287 2,579,802 2,094,500 2,094, % Debt Service 34,164 78,585 93, ,865 25,243 27% 6,354,457 6,160,035 10,311,798 12,390,330 2,078,532 20% Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses (461,673) 615, N/A Changes in long term assets (885,762) (280,086) N/A Changes in long term liabilities (71,322) 220, N/A Asset contributions 908, N/A (510,703) 555, N/A Ending working capital $ 17,675,496 17,860,382 25,351,921 8,741,773 (16,610,148) (66%) The Utilities Water Division is responsible for maintenance, operation, and repair of all water lines and equipment owned by the County of Los Alamos to provide safe water services to its customers. The Water Production Division ensures water quality control measures that meet or exceed state and federal regulations on safe drinking water. 67

84 JOINT UTILITY SYSTEM DETAIL Wastewater Utility Subfund Summary FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 2,440,137 1,500,755 1,052,177 2,720,378 1,668, % Revenues: Retail sales 3,685,168 4,137,903 4,087,945 4,524, ,314 11% Other revenues 2, ,137 3, % Debt Proceeds 366, ,000,000 0 (1,000,000) (100%) Interest income 81,513 22,894 40,679 40, % 4,135,005 4,160,797 5,131,761 4,568,122 (563,639) (11%) Transfers from other funds 223, N/A Expenses: Salaries and benefits 1,184,791 1,172,952 1,255,871 1,277,981 22,110 2% Operations 1,835,064 1,677,067 2,591,822 1,750,642 (841,180) (32%) Capital Outlay 863, , , ,000 37,000 5% Debt service 968, ,473 1,000,859 1,150, ,478 15% 4,851,135 4,137,797 5,636,552 5,003,960 (632,592) (11%) Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses 744,311 (62,116) N/A Changes in long term assets 336,997 95, N/A Changes in long term liabilities (1,394,565) 88, N/A (313,257) 121, N/A Transfers to other funds: 133, N/A Ending working capital $ 1,500,755 1,645, ,386 2,284,540 1,737, % The Utilities Wastewater Division is responsible for maintenance, operation, and repair of all wastewater treatment buildings and equipment owned by the County of Los Alamos to provide wastewater services that meet or exceed state and federal wastewater regulations. 68

85 ENTERPRISE FUNDS OTHER THAN JOINT UTILITY SYSTEM COMBINING FUND STATEMENT FY 2014 FY 2013 ENVIRONMENTAL GOLF ADOPTED ADOPTED SERVICES COURSE TRANSIT FIRE AIRPORT BUDGET BUDGET Fiscal Year (FY) Adopted Total beginning fund balance / working capital $ 2,040, ,026,384 36, ,462 3,266,214 4,969,151 Revenues and other sources 3,779, ,018,858 23,702, ,000 30,903,900 30,941,024 Transfers from other funds 0 0 1,300, ,000 1,522,000 2,450,000 Expenses 4,010, ,457,058 22,101, ,056 31,203,388 31,031,046 Transfers to other funds ,600, ,600,000 1,600,000 Total fund balance / working capital Ending FY 2014 $ 1,809, ,184 37, ,406 2,888,726 5,729,129 Total FY 2014 sources of funding Current year $ 3,779, ,318,858 23,702, ,000 32,425,900 Total FY 2014 uses of funding Current year 4,010, ,457,058 23,701, ,056 32,803,388 Net increase / (decrease) in fund balance / working capital $ (231,232) 0 (138,200) 1,000 (9,056) (377,488) GOLF TOTAL REFUSE COURSE TRANSIT FIRE AIRPORT FTEs FY 2014 Adopted Budget FTEs FY 2013 Adopted Budget FTEs Net increase / (decrease) 0.17 (12.09) (0.63) (11.97) 69

86 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FUND FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 3,560,535 3,970,649 3,241,952 2,040,850 (1,201,102) (37%) Revenues: Gross receipts tax - special purpose 1,070, , , ,000 (191,000) (19%) Sales of trash bags 7,855 6,759 7,000 8,000 1,000 14% Residential service 1,531,499 1,555,700 1,530,000 1,555,000 25,000 2% Commercial service 559, , , ,000 (15,000) (3%) Landfill service 958, , , ,000 (70,000) (9%) Miscellaneous revenue 187, ,971 75, ,000 25,000 33% Interest income 129,044 28,167 73,000 46,000 (27,000) (37%) 4,444,570 3,817,301 4,031,000 3,779,000 (252,000) (6%) Expenses: N/A Salaries and benefits 1,126,347 1,130,142 1,145,886 1,215,412 69,526 6% Operations 3,042,171 4,251,011 2,476,108 2,433,251 (42,857) (2%) Capital Outlay 7,320 5, ,000 0 (110,000) (100%) Debt Service 360, , , , % 4,535,922 5,747,251 4,093,563 4,010,232 (83,331) (2%) Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses 417,562 1,213, N/A Changes in long term assets 732,136 1,467, N/A Changes in long term liabilities (622,745) (1,422,958) N/A 526,953 1,258, N/A Transfers to other funds: 25,487 4, N/A Ending working capital $ 3,970,649 3,293,903 3,179,389 1,809,618 (1,369,771) (43%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp N/A % For detailed department information, please see page 174 (Public Works). The Environmental Services Fund accounts for the operation of the County landfill, commercial and residential refuse collection, curbside and drop off recycling, and composting of yard waste. This fund, formerly known as the Refuse Fund, was renamed during FY

87 GOLF COURSE FUND MOVED TO GENERAL FUND IN FY 2014 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Actual Actual Budget Budget Beginning working capital $ 54,487 (112,115) 18,175 0 Revenues: Food / merchandise 136, , ,000 0 Golf fees 344, , ,000 0 Cart and other rentals 102,168 97, ,000 0 Miscellaneous revenue 13,246 1, Interest income 10, , , ,000 0 Transfers from other funds: General Fund 485, , ,000 0 Expenses: Salaries and benefits 592, , ,508 0 Operations 620, , ,462 0 Capital 17,453 6,350 3, ,230,589 1,196,493 1,209,770 0 Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses (35,415) (56,171) 0 0 Changes in long term assets 49,652 47, Changes in long term liabilities 5,339 3, Donations - capital assets 0 (6,350) 0 0 Changes in contributed capital (47,210) (27,634) (11,729) 0 0 Transfers to other funds 0 1, Ending working capital $ (112,115) 29,612 83,405 0 FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) Casual, Student,& Temp For detailed department information, please see page 138 (Community Services). Previous to FY 2014, the Golf Course was an enterprise fund. Due to declining revenues and increasing General Fund subsidies, the Golf Course has been transferred to the the General Fund in FY

88 TRANSIT FUND FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 15, , ,434 1,026,384 95,950 10% Revenues: FTA - DOT 5311 Rural 495, , , % FTA - DOT 5311 Capital 73,983 1,189,264 1,012,800 88,000 (924,800) (91%) FTA - DOT 5316 JARC 183, , ,856 0 (192,856) (100%) FTA - DOT 5316 JARC Capital , ,000 N/A FTA - DOT 5309 Capital 0 149,389 5,317 0 FTA 5317 New Freedom Oper 174, , , ,064 33,032 13% FTA 5317 New Freedom Capital 8, N/A FTA - DOT 5310 Capital 0 203,200 5,310 68,800 63, % NCRTD-Regional GRT 1,238,603 1,303,869 1,415,186 1,402,760 (12,426) (1%) Other revenue 70,944 39, , ,550 (5,000) (3%) Interest income 15,054 7,438 21,000 23,000 2,000 10% 2,260,660 3,430,723 3,785,735 3,018,858 (766,877) (20%) Transfers from other funds General Fund 1,458,448 1,634,758 1,600,000 1,300,000 (300,000) (19%) Expenses by Object: Salaries and benefits 1,941,701 2,068,968 2,555,525 2,536,986 (18,539) (1%) Operations 1,339,216 1,376,247 1,727,577 1,450,072 (277,505) (16%) Capital 55, ,365 1,058, ,000 (588,000) (56%) 3,335,992 4,286,580 5,341,102 4,457,058 (884,044) (17%) Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses 64, , N/A Changes in long term assets (80,459) (198,327) N/A Changes in long term liabilities 12,948 12, N/A Donation of capital assets 0 163, N/A (3,210) 722, N/A Transfers to other funds 0 755, N/A Ending working capital $ 395,370 1,141, , ,184 (86,883) (9%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Limited term (1.00) (13%) (0.63) (2%) For detailed department information, please see page 174 (Public Works). The Transit Fund provides for a community wide public transit system which was established in FY

89 FIRE FUND FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 587, , ,921 36,518 (596,403) (94%) Revenues: LANL Fire Cooperative Agmt 15,372,368 15,631,972 16,762,102 18,030,600 1,268,498 8% Ambulance revenues 458, , , , % Interdepartmental revenues 3,519,191 3,714,155 3,872,664 3,668,219 (204,445) (5%) Misc. revenue 0 7, N/A Donations 3, N/A Fire Protection Excise Tax 2,141,893 1,923,040 1,982,000 1,601,000 (381,000) (19%) 21,495,181 21,668,768 23,018,989 23,702, ,053 3% Expenses by Object: Salaries and benefits 14,072,407 14,854,376 16,101,338 16,627, ,417 3% Operations 4,398,875 5,497,705 4,891,451 5,406, ,939 11% Capital Outlay 533,636 33,546 44,200 66,897 22,697 51% Debt Service - interfund loan 676, , ,936 0 (208,936) (100%) 19,680,918 20,853,627 21,245,925 22,101, ,117 4% Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses (349,323) (146,445) N/A Changes in long term assets (17,540) N/A Changes in long term liabilities 177, , N/A (189,541) 90, N/A Transfers to other funds 1,600,000 1,262,898 1,600,000 1,600, % Ending working capital $ 612, , ,985 37,518 (768,467) (95%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Limited term Casual, Student,& Temp. For detailed department information, please see page 161 (Fire). The Fire Fund supports the development and delivery of fire protection of life and property to Los Alamos County and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The department responds to fire and rescue calls; maintains capabilities for fire suppression, crash fire rescue service, and hazardous material and other incident responses; and provides state of the art training to ensure the highest level of personnel safety and effectiveness. The department also ensures compliance with the fire services cooperative agreement with DOE. 73

90 AIRPORT FUND FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 251, , , ,462 16,793 12% Revenues: Intergovernmental revenues 3,258,531 1,030, , ,000 N/A State Grant 85,751 26, ,500 15,500 N/A Tie downs 38,139 36,867 37,000 35,200 (1,800) (5%) Commissions 48,644 52,066 65,300 70,300 5,000 8% Interest income 12, ,000 4,000 1,000 33% 3,443,854 1,146, , , , % Transfers from other funds: General Fund 266, , , ,000 22,000 11% Expenses: Salaries and benefits 150, , , ,080 15,058 9% Operations 3,540,415 1,201, , , , % Capital Outlay 0 0 3,000 0 (3,000) (100%) Debt service ,750 0 (36,750) (100%) 3,690,638 1,345, , , ,600 81% Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses 2,693, , N/A Changes in long term assets (2,699,121) (238,164) N/A Changes in long term liabilities 1, N/A (4,720) N/A Transfers to other funds N/A Ending working capital $ 266, , , ,406 52,893 53% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student, & Temp N/A % For detailed department information, please see page 174 (Public Works). The Airport Fund accounts for the County operation and maintenance of the Los Alamos Airport. This program includes the development and management of the Airport Operations contract; maintenance, repair, and renovation/alteration of airport facilities; establishment and maintenance of contracts with airport vendors (airline, bank, rental car company, aviation gas cooperative, aircraft maintenance, and other businesses); development and revision of airport ordinances, sub leases, operating plans, and procedures; establishment of sub leases for aircraft tie down spaces and airport facility use; establishment of commercial development and revenue enhancement master plans; and annual review and presentation of proposed airport fees. 74

91 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS COMBINING FUND STATEMENT RISK FY 2014 FY 2013 EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT ADOPTED ADOPTED FUND FUND BUDGET BUDGET Fiscal Year (FY) Adopted Total beginning fund balance / working capital $ 5,766,386 7,088,512 12,854,898 12,465,149 Revenues and other sources 4,050,635 9,460,529 13,511,164 7,574,887 Transfers from other funds Expenses 3,762,067 8,876,607 12,638,674 7,157,451 Transfers to other funds Total fund balance / working capital Ending FY 2014 $ 6,054,954 7,672,434 13,727,388 12,882,585 Total FY 2014 sources of funding Current year $ 4,050,635 9,460,529 13,511,164 Total FY 2014 uses of funding Current year 3,762,067 8,876,607 12,638,674 Net increase / (decrease) in fund balance / working capital $ 288, , ,490 RISK EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT TOTAL FUND FUND FTEs FY 2014 Adopted Budget FTEs FY 2013 Adopted Budget FTEs Net increase / (decrease) Internal Service Funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of a government on a cost reimbursement basis. 75

92 Fund Summary EQUIPMENT FUND FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 6,747,559 6,677,511 5,604,244 5,766, ,142 3% Revenues: Internal charges - County 1,884,116 2,236,742 2,372,465 2,366,155 (6,310) 0% Internal charges - Environ Ser 603, , , ,854 (66,338) (8%) Internal charges - Utilities 611, , , ,626 (31,903) (6%) Equipment proceeds 64, , , ,000 (10,000) (9%) Miscellaneous revenue 216, , , ,000 76,000 67% Contributed capital 762, N/A Interest income 258,796 43, , ,000 16,000 13% 3,638,476 4,904,983 4,073,186 4,050,635 (22,551) (1%) Transfers from other funds: 486,272 51, N/A Expenses by program: Equipment maintenance 2,770,932 2,627,583 2,945,653 2,926,467 (19,186) (1%) Equipment replacement 1,188,814 2,191, , ,600 (127,800) (13%) 3,959,746 4,819,060 3,909,053 3,762,067 (146,986) (4%) Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses (256,142) 602, N/A Changes in long term assets 19,103 (1,533,594) N/A Changes in long term liabilities 1,989 4, N/A (235,050) (926,906) N/A Transfers to other funds: 0 3,183 Ending working capital $ 6,677,511 5,884,545 5,768,377 6,054, ,577 5% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Expenses by object: Salaries and benefits $ 729, , , ,936 (63,550) (8%) Operations 1,883,300 1,959,522 2,191,167 2,235,531 44,364 2% Capital 1,346,472 2,183, , ,600 (127,800) (13%) $ 3,959,746 4,819,060 3,909,053 3,762,067 (146,986) (4%) For detailed department information, please see page 174 (Public Works). The Equipment Fund accounts for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of all County vehicles and heavy, light, and specmalized equipment; maintenance of specmal police systems and mobile radios; and distribution of fuels for County vehicles and equipment. 76

93 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Beginning working capital $ 6,566,457 6,565,434 6,860,905 7,088, ,607 3% Revenues: 0 N/A Contributions-County 2,710,764 2,781,893 2,871,525 7,768,895 4,897, % Contributions-Employees 102, , ,176 1,532,634 1,057, % Miscellaneous 2,357 5, N/A Interest income 278,240 51, , ,000 4,000 3% 3,093,381 3,199,263 3,501,701 9,460,529 5,958, % Expenses by program: Group health 478, , ,000 6,485,767 6,025, % Long Term Disability 0 487, , ,000 (370,000) (71%) Unemployment compensation 97,331 52,988 92, ,000 8,000 9% Workers' compensation 770, , , ,000 (5,000) (1%) Other risk management 1,183,284 1,461,746 1,421,398 1,390,840 (30,558) (2%) 2,529,661 3,073,196 3,248,398 8,876,607 5,628, % Nonbudgeted items: Nonbudgeted expenses (1,229) (4,938) N/A Changes in long term liabilities 186, , N/A Claims IBNR adjustment (749,561) (6,404) N/A (564,743) 102, N/A Transfers to other funds N/A Ending working capital $ 6,565,434 6,792,671 7,114,208 7,672, ,226 8% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % FY 2013 FY 2014 $ Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted Variance FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget 14 v 13 FY 2013 Expenses by object: Salaries and benefits $ 265, , , ,875 (3,924) (2%) Operations 2,264,127 2,814,968 2,987,599 8,619,732 5,632, % $ 2,529,661 3,073,196 3,248,398 8,876,607 5,628, % For detailed department information, please see page 83 (County Administrator). The Risk Management Fund accounts for the County's risk management activities which include Employee Group Insurances, Retiree Health Care, Unemployment Compensation Insurance, Workers' Compensation Insurance, and the County's liability insurances. The purpose is to minimize the probability of loss to LAC including personnel, property, and financial losses. This includes identifying and analyzing loss exposures, examining alternative risk management techniques, and selecting the most appropriate techniques for dealing with any given loss exposure. 77

94 78

95 DEPARTMENT / FUND STRUCTURE Department Summary Fund Statement Department Fund Page # Navigating Los Alamos County Performance Measures 80 County Council General Municipal Court General Municipal Court Other Special Revenue County Administrator General County Administrator Risk Management County Assessor General County Assessor Other Special Revenue County Attorney General County Clerk General County Clerk Other Special Revenue County Sheriff General Community and Economic Development General Community and Economic Development Economic Development Community and Economic Development Lodgers Tax Community and Economic Development Capital Projects Administrative Services General Community Services General Community Services Health Care Assistance Community Services Golf Course Community Services Other Special Revenue Fire General Fire Fire - Enterprise Fire State Grants Police General Police State Grants Public Works General Public Works Equipment Public Works Transit Public Works Capital Roads Projects Public Works Environmental Services Public Works Airport Utilities Joint Utilities System Non Departmental Las Conchas, Debt Service ,59 79

96 Navigating the Los Alamos County Performance Measures & Targets: Los Alamos County is progressing towards meeting its objective of benchmarking government efficiencies to evaluate programs and prioritize funding levels with the continuation of its performance management system, LA Scores! In the FY 2014 Proposed Budget, the County has migrated to an easy-to-read format for its performance measures. Program measures have separated into survey-type measures and output/result/efficiency-type measures. Trend indicators are shown for all but the survey-type measures. Arrows and colors are displayed according to the below legend depicting the direction of the trend and its performance indicator. The Narrative and Analysis section explains variances in measures. The following table displays the column headers used. Numbered, corresponding descriptions about what these headers set forth in the report immediately follow. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Trend Actual Actual Estimate Adopted 1. FY2011 Actual Actual performance for the entire fiscal year ended June 30, FY2012 Actual Actual performance for the entire fiscal year ended June 30, FY2013 Estimate Manager s forecast of the results for the entire FY FY2014 Adopted Manager s expectation of performance for the entire FY2014 based on budgeted staffing, funding and operating requirements. 5. Trend See key below: Performance Measures Indicator/Trend Legend INDICATOR TREND Good Downward Caution Upward Being Addressed Not consistently upward or downward Flat 80

97 COUNTY COUNCIL Description The County Council is the legislative and policy making body of the County and is directly responsible to the general public. The Council is vested with all powers and authority granted to counties and municipalities and their governing bodies by the constitution and statutes of the State of New Mexico, except as otherwise provided for in the charter, and is charged with all duties and obligations imposed on counties and municipalities and their governing bodies by the constitution and statutes of the State of New Mexico. Goals See the Strategic Planning section for details of Council's goals and objectives. Budget Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 99% County Council 1% % FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Council General $ 315, , , ,311 (19,957) (5%) Council Contingency 13,553 34,052 35,000 25,000 (10,000) (29%) $ 329, , , ,311 (29,957) (7%) Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 73,489 80,416 69,600 69, % Benefits 12,948 18,071 12,004 12, % Contractual services 98,626 70, , ,235 (25,001) (14%) Other services 119, , , ,093 3,194 2% Materials / supplies 23,456 28,535 26,810 18,075 (8,735) (33%) Interfund charges 1,549 1,625 1,719 1, % $ 329, , , ,311 (29,957) (7%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Reduction due to one-time purchase of IPADs in FY2013. Also a reduction in Council Contingency, contracts and meeting supplies. 81

98 MUNICIPAL COURT Description The Municipal Court handles traffic, DWI, animal control and other violations of the Municipal Code. Municipal Court is established by the County Charter, as authorized and required by state law. The Court has jurisdiction over petty misdemeanors created by the County Council in the form of ordinances collected in the County code and violated within the boundaries of Los Alamos County. The Municipal Court is capable of handling citations/criminal complaints from the Police Department, Animal Control, Code Enforcement, Building Inspector, and the Fire Marshall. Budget Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 99% Municipal Court 1% FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Fund: General Fund $ 329, , , ,641 25,148 6% Comm. Service Sub-Fund 28,271 18,534 25,000 25, % Alt. Sentencing Sub-Fund 22,674 14,408 25,000 35,000 10,000 40% Bench Warrant Sub-Fund 8,786 6,230 18,603 8,684 (9,919) (53%) 389, , , ,325 25,229 5% % Expenditures by Type: Salaries 209, , , ,661 (5,406) (2%) Benefits 81,284 82,865 89,429 95,538 6,109 7% Contractual services 60,336 59,548 85, ,000 34,000 40% Other services 15,470 24,588 29,020 29, % Materials / supplies 16,077 11,142 20,000 17,500 (2,500) (13%) Interfund charges 6,120 6,335 13,580 6,606 (6,974) (51%) Capital outlay 0 10, N/A Debt / Fiscal Charges 1, ,000 1, % 389, , , ,325 25,229 5% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp (0.05) (100%) (0.05) (1%) Increases for electronic monitoring and drug testing program. These increases are offset by revenues. Also an increase in the Alternative Sentencing sub-fund for programs and assessments for Teen Court. 82

99 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 83

100 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Description The County Administrator's Office provides the overall administrative leadership necessary for the implementation of County Council policies, administration of the organization and delivery of services to the citizens. The Office promotes interaction with other jurisdictions and levels of government in the region to serve the best interests of Los Alamos residents. The Public Information Division which informs, educates and involves citizens and employees about County projects, policies, and goals while enhancing the image of County government. Also included here is Media Services which provides duplication, graphic design, audio-visual, and mail support services to County employees. The Human Resources Division administers personnel management and human resources development to provide the County with a highly-qualified and motivated work force. It also supports County departments by providing services such as recruitment, selection, classification, work force management, compensation, salary administration, benefits, records, performance appraisal administration, compliance, staff training and development, and employee and labor relations. Department Summary Risk Management 44% Expenditures by Program County Administrator 13% Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 91% F Progress Through Partnering 13% Human Resources 21% Media Services 4% Comm & Public Relations 5% County FY2014 Admin 9% 84

101 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Budget Summary FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: County Administrator $ 1,191, ,010 1,011, ,941 (43,507) (4%) Progress Through Partnering 1,656,593 1,395,085 1,000, ,000 (175,000) (18%) Comm & Public Relations 445, , , ,067 (38,937) (11%) Media Services 278, , , ,124 (37,789) (13%) Human Resources 1,205,732 1,365,332 1,544,244 1,412,943 (131,301) (9%) Risk Management 2,529,661 3,073,196 3,248,398 8,876,607 5,628, % $ 7,308,225 7,415,786 7,456,007 12,657,682 5,201,675 70% % Expenditures by Fund: General $ 4,778,564 4,342,590 4,207,609 3,781,075 (426,534) (10%) Risk Management 2,529,661 3,073,196 3,248,398 8,876,607 5,628, % $ 7,308,225 7,415,786 7,456,007 12,657,682 5,201,675 70% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp N/A % FTEs By Program: County Administrator % Public Information % Media Services % Human Resources % Risk Management % % 85

102 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Administrator's Office The County Administrator's Office provides the overall administrative leadership necessary for the implementation of County Council policies, administration of the organization and delivery of services to the citizens. The Office promotes interaction with other jurisdictions and levels of government in the region to serve the best interests of Los Alamos residents. Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: County Administration $ 1,191, ,010 1,011, ,941 (43,507) (4%) Progress Through Partnering 1,656,593 1,395,085 1,000, ,000 (175,000) (18%) $ 2,848,058 2,330,095 2,011,448 1,792,941 (218,507) (11%) % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 760, , , ,695 (8,034) (1%) Benefits 180, , , ,113 (331) 0% Contractual services 1,823,215 1,464,176 1,027, ,000 (175,000) (17%) Other services 57,465 41,085 67,680 52,750 (14,930) (22%) Materials / supplies 16,433 12,739 35,360 17,800 (17,560) (50%) Interfund charges 9,329 11,059 13,235 10,583 (2,652) (20%) $ 2,848,058 2,330,095 2,011,448 1,792,941 (218,507) (11%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Vacancies were hired at a lower level than budgeted resulting in the small variances in salaries and benefits. There is a $175,000 reduction in the Progress Through Partnering program with $825,000 remaining. Overall reductions in other items with the majority in training and travel and meeting supplies. 86

103 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - COMMUNICATIONS & PUBLIC RELATIONS Communications and Public Relations Mission The Communication and Public Relations Division informs, educates and involves citizens and employees about County projects, policies, and goals while enhancing the image of County government. Also included here is Media Services which provides duplication, graphic design, audio-visual, and mail support services to County employees. Communications and Public Relations Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Comm & Public Relations $ 445, , , ,067 (38,937) (11%) Media Services 278, , , ,124 (37,789) (13%) $ 724, , , ,191 (76,726) (12%) % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 287, , , ,861 7,499 3% Benefits 95,578 95,928 83,603 83, % Contractual services 242, , , ,000 (43,000) (18%) Other services 59,963 52,235 45,750 29,650 (16,100) (35%) Materials / supplies 34,816 22,914 21,100 20,650 (450) (2%) Interfund charges 4,187 3,358 3,102 2,272 (830) (27%) Capital outlay ,000 0 (24,000) (100%) $ 724, , , ,191 (76,726) (12%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % FTEs By Program: Comm & Public Relations % Media Services % % Reduction in one-time capital outlay purchased in FY2013. Overall reduction in supplies, training and travel, and advertising. No public outreach advertising is included for potential charter vote. Reduction in funding for the PAC 8 contract. Because this contract is currently under negotiation, specific impacts are unknown at this time. Elimination of mail van with use of pooled vehicles. Also transfer of a copier and its lease amount to Utilities. 87

104 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC RELATIONS Program Purpose The purpose of the Communications and Public Relations program is to provide timely and accurate information to appropriately educate, inform and involve the citizens of Los Alamos County in County decisions. Strategic Focus Areas Communication Operational Excellence Goals Create a Communication Process that Provides Measurable Improvement in Citizen Trust in Government Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Launched a new Sunshine webpage with key links or listings to documents frequently requested by the public. Changes and additions are on-going to add new features to this page in FY2013. Implemented and moderated Open Forum on the County s webpage to open another communication avenue between residents and the County. Continued meeting with citizen/staff Communications Team (formed in 2011) to discuss such topics as the County s social media policy. As a result of these meetings, added a new Community Survey question to set a benchmark for measuring citizen trust. Participated in design/construction of a new Boards & Commissions, Public Meeting, Emergency Joint Information Center room for the first floor of the new Municipal Building - capable of broadcast, and new/improved technology for Council Chambers and other main conference rooms Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey is an integral part of the County's comprehensive performance measurement and management system. The primary objective of the Survey is to measure government accountability to its citizens. Strategic Focus Area: Communication Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Create a Communication Process that Provides Measurable Improvement in Citizen Trust in Government Outcome: County Communicates With Residents Percent of residents reporting that they feel they have the information they need to participate in County decisions as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of residents rating timeliness of information provided by the County as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual 53% 55% 53.2% 63% 68% 66.1% 88

105 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC RELATIONS Narrative and Analysis In the last two years, citizen satisfaction dropped slightly for those citizens reporting as "Good" or "Excellent" that they feel they have information to participate in County decisions (from 55% to 53%). Likewise the results dropped slightly (from 68% to 66%) for residents rating timeliness of information provided by the County as "Good" or "Excellent". The comments gathered tended thematically to reveal that respondents felt that the County is not listening to the Citizens - that the County does ask for input, but then they "do what they want to do". The age category giving the most "Poor" ratings for the participation question came from Age 65+ (19.3%) and those whose length of residency of 11 to 20 years. This drop occurred during a time when the County was still publishing the mailed out version of the County Line monthly newsletter; added information "banners" of meetings or topics of interest to the County's web site Home Page; reconstructed the County webpage; and restructured the home page layout; and, added more prominent display links such as "How do I..." and "Popular Links". Also, the Cap Committee process was launched in the last two years for more participation. Most recently, the County has also launched the use of Facebook pages, which may help with reaching the younger segment of the population (the second highest dissatisfied group in the survey results for the "participation" question). It is possible that offering some of these newer options for on-line participation, combined with traditional outreach methods, may assist the County on bringing the percentage back to or above the FY2011 results. The goal to address the results is to continue with traditional meetings, webpage postings, etc. but to also continue expansion of more broadcast or video-on-demand options for public meetings or availability of viewing information on-line or inside the Municipal Building, in order to draw in the citizens using more web-based options to participate. The County needs to invite the citizens to tune into County business using a variety of methods, so they feel they can be informed of topics and then participate in County decisions. Measures: Quality Percent of Residents Reporting That They Have the Information They Need to Participate in County Decisions 70% 65% 60% 55% 53% 55% 53.2% 50% FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 Percent of Residents Reporting Timeliness of Information Provided by the County 70% 68% 65% 63% 66.1% 60% 55% 50% FY2009 FY2011 FY

106 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - MEDIA SERVICES Program Purpose The purpose of the Media Services Program is to provide duplication, graphic design, audio-visual, and mail support services to County employees so they can obtain high quality printed materials, mail services, and technical support in a timely and accurate manner. Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Continued providing highly-rated Print Shop services despite budget reductions. Used a variety of methods to drive down number of copies being made on the copiers (two sided, less expensive paper, larger sized format paper cut in half to reduce run time on the copy machines) as well as continuing to evaluate inventory, reduce or eliminate less frequently used or expensive items. Participated in design and construction plans for the new, improved technology for audio and video services in the new Municipal Building (Boards and Commissions room, Council Chambers, Lobby, Conference Rooms). Explored and trained for newer video options using new software for video production, in anticipation of the new Municipal Building features (digital signage in the Lobby) and in keeping up with industry trends to move more toward digital or interactive, on-line options for information to conserve resources and reduce costs. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality and Effectiveness of Services The Office of County Administrator also participates in the Internal Quality Customer Service Survey which measures the satisfaction level of County staff with Media Services including printing, graphics and the mail system. The ratings here reflect the County values and behavior practiced by staff in providing customer service to one another. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Media Staff Provide Efficient i Services FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual Percent of employees rating of the quality of graphic design services as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of employees rating of the quality of duplication and printing services as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of employees rating of the quality of mail support as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of employees rating of the quality of audio and visual services as "Good" or "Excellent". 93% 86.0% 89.5% 94% 84.7% 89.4% 94% 81.8% 87.0% 91% 82.7% 88.3% Narrative and Analysis The internal customer survey shows that Media Services increased its customer satisfaction levels in the areas of graphic design, duplication and printing, mail support and audio/visual services. The most significant changes came from two key areas - mail support and audio/visual support. Both are significant because the County mail service ended use of a P.O. Box in 2010, (some departments may pick up mail on there own from the PO Box) and departments took on more active roles in sorting and distributing mail. At the same time, Media Services was working with the Warehouse to provide better, streamlined service for inter-office deliveries to address rising fuel costs. In addition, Media Services increased audio/visual support by using new software and providing graphic design service county-wide. 90

107 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - MEDIA SERVICES Measures: Quality Employees Rating of the Quality of Graphic Design Services Employees Rating of the Quality of Duplication and Printing Services 95% 93% 95% 94% 90% 89.5% 90% 89.4% 85% 86.0% 85% 84.7% 80% 80% 75% FY2010 FY2011 FY % FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 Employees Rating of the Quality of Mail Support Employees Rating of the Quality of Audio and Visual Services 95% 94% 95% 90% 87.0% 90% 91% 88.3% 85% 81.8% 85% 82.7% 80% 80% 75% FY2010 FY2011 FY % FY2010 FY2011 FY

108 Human Resources Division Mission COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - HUMAN RESOURCES The mission of the Human Resources Division is to support County employees with quality, innovative and timely human resource policies, programs and services. The Division partners with management and staff to foster excellence, productivity and fairness as well as to strengthen the County s ability to attract, develop and retain an excellent workforce. The Division also strives to maintain a workplace culture in which all employees feel valued and able to contribute their personal best to the achievement of County goals. The Risk Management Division is responsible for the safety and risk management functions of the County. This includes protecting the personnel and assets of the County from exposures to loss through hazard identification, loss prevention, loss reduction and exposure avoidance methods. Additionally, they provide safety training, compliance and workers compensation services to employees. Human Resources Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Human Resources $ 1,205,732 1,365,332 1,544,244 1,412,943 (131,301) (9%) Risk Management 2,529,661 3,073,196 3,248,398 8,876,607 5,628, % $ 3,735,393 4,438,528 4,792,642 10,289,550 5,496, % % Expenditures by Fund: General $ 1,205,732 1,365,332 1,544,244 1,412,943 (131,301) (9%) Risk Management 2,529,661 3,073,196 3,248,398 8,876,607 5,628, % $ 3,735,393 4,438,528 4,792,642 10,289,550 5,496, % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 825, , , ,256 (3,460) 0% Benefits 332, , , ,446 (53,752) (12%) Contractual services 1,556, ,670 2,060,310 1,534,513 (525,797) (26%) Other services 963,354 2,361,661 1,233,028 7,322,913 6,089, % Materials / supplies 45,871 44,073 76,335 65,346 (10,989) (14%) Interfund charges 11,762 12,191 12,055 13, % Fiscal charges N/A $ 3,735,393 4,438,528 4,792,642 10,289,550 5,496, % FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % FTEs By Program: Human Resources % Risk Management % % Level salaries and benefit reductions are due to hiring positions at a lower level than budgeted. Overall reductions in contracts, training and recruitment advertising (due to slowing County-wide recruitments) in HR. In the Risk Management Fund, a new contract for the long term disability program has resulted in significant savings. There is also a slight reduction in safety shoe allotments and workers' compensation premiums. The largest increase in the fund is due to the County going to a medical self-insured plan which causes an accounting change to recognize the amounts as an expense in the fund. In actuality, the self-insured plan allows the County to provide the same level of service in FY 2014 with a much lower increase than the traditional premium paid plans. 92

109 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - HUMAN RESOURCES PROGRAM Program Purpose The purpose of the Human Resources Program is to provide recruitment/retention, total rewards and career development services to the organization (management, current employees and potential employees) so the County can attract, retain and motivate people to accomplish the County and department goals. Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Goals Invest in Staff and their Development and Create a High Performing Organization Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Conducted successful Union Election for Plumbers and Pipefitters. Conducted ep and Cayenta interface upgrade for HRIS system. Conducted RFP for compensation services and awarded a contract to the successful agency. Implemented a "green" Benefit Open Enrollment process utilizing the internet. Implemented a contract with a new EAP provider. Coordinated with the Health Department to provide 100 free flu shots to County Employees. Conducted successful promotional recruitments for the Police and Fire Departments. Completed mandatory Harassment training for all County employees. Completed payroll processes during the Las Conchas Fire to ensure all County employees were paid on time. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality of Services Quality measures are used to evaluate how effectively services are provided to all County employees by Human Resources staff through a County-wide employee survey. The rating reflects the County values and behavior practiced by HR staff in providing customer service to one another. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goals: Invest in Staff and their Development and Create a High Performing Organization Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: HR Staff Provide Quality Services Percent of employees rating overall services provided by HR as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual 88.0% 76.8% 80.6% Measure: Quality County Employees Rate the Quality of HR Customer Service 90% 85% 80% 75% 88.0% 76.8% 86% CPM Median 80.6% 70% 65% 70% CPM Median FY2010 FY2011 FY

110 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - HUMAN RESOURCES PROGRAM Narrative and Analysis Even though there were significant vacancies within the HR staff, internal customer service improved by almost 4%. By filling the vacant positions in HR, internal customer services is expected to improve even more in FY2013. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goals: Invest in Staff and their Development and Create a High Performing Organization Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend Outcome: HR staff Provide Efficient Services Recruitment Number of external recruitments completed (Including full-time, part-time, casual). Employee Turnover Rate Turnover rate (excluding retirements, deaths, probationary and part timers) for all positions N/A % 6.0% 6.0% 6.5% Narrative and Analysis Human Resources continues to analyze the turnover rate as one indicator of employee satisfaction. Turnover rate affects the total number of positions that need to be filled and both tend to be affected by the current economic conditions. It is anticipated that there will be some attrition. Recruitments in FY2014 may be internal to the County rather than hiring outside staff. Human Resources staff will continue to strive to enhance the overall employee work experience and opportunities to improve employee satisfaction. Measure: Output Number of Positions Filled by HR FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Measure: Quality Los Alamos Employee Turnover Rate Compared to CPM Median 10% \ 7.2% 6.0% 6.0% 6.5% 5% 5% CPM Median 5% CPM Median 0% FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 94

111 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Program Purpose The purpose of the Risk Management Program is to conduct risk assessments, provide safety training and claims management services to the County, County employees and the public so the County can minimize losses, employees can return to work and the public can recover their loss. Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Goal Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Renewed staff certifications as a Certified Safety Professional and Certified Risk Manager. Increased County employee training opportunities throughout the organization. Reduced the number and severity of Workers Compensation claims. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality of Services Quality measures are used to evaluate how effectively services are provided to all County employees by Risk Management staff through a County-wide employee survey. The rating reflects the County values and behavior practiced by Risk staff in providing customer service to one another. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goals: Invest in Staff and their Development and Create a High Performing Organization Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Risk Management Staff Provide Quality Services Percent of employees rating overall timeliness of Risk Management services as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of employees rating overall quality of Risk Management services as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual 80% 71.7% 80.2% 78% 71.7% 81.8% County Employees Rating of Timeliness of Risk Management Services 90% 85% 80% 80% 81% CPM Median 90% CPM Median 80.2% 75% 71.7% 70% 65% 60% FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 County Employees Rating of Quality of Risk Management Services 95% 90% 85% 80% 78% 85% CPM Median 91% CPM Median 81.8% 75% 71.7% 70% 65% FY2010 FY2011 FY

112 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services FY2011 Outcome: RM Staff Provide Efficient Actual Services Number of work days lost per Workers Compensation claim. FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend Narrative and Analysis The increase in number of days lost per claim in FY2012 is the result of two major surgeries as opposed to the low number of claims actually filed. This measure will decrease with the advent of new light duty, return-to-work opportunities. Worker's Compensation Work Days Lost CPM Median 4.6 CPM Median FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 96

113 COUNTY ASSESSOR Description The County Assessor's Office is responsible for the implementation of the New Mexico Property Tax Code with regard to the determination of value and classification of all real property and certain personal property located within the County. The Office maintains property records, reviews the various property tax exemptions, determines property values, changes ownership records as a result of a sale or transfer, processes sales questionnaires and business and personal property tax returns, prepares the tax roll and notice of value forms, and conducts valuation protest hearings. Mission The mission of the Assessor's Office is to locate, identify and value all property; maintain current information on the ownership and characteristics of all properties; prepare and certify an accurate, annual assessment roll; make all non-confidential databases readily accessible in accordance with New Mexico law, Division of Property Tax regulations and guidelines, and the tenets of the International Association of Assessing Officers. Goals To provide a well managed office by performing required reappraisals and maintenance of values including physical inspections, using computer assisted mass appraisal techniques incorporating a geographic information system in accordance with the New Mexico Property Tax Code, and to serve the public with qualified, expert staff. Budget Expenditures by Fund General Fund 74% Property Valuation Fund 26% Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 99% Assessor 1% 97

114 COUNTY ASSESSOR FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Fund: General Fund $ 438, , , ,747 9,019 2% Property Valuation Fund 144, , , ,693 (5,529) (4%) $ 583, , , ,440 3,490 1% % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 303, , , ,920 1,786 1% Benefits 93,790 96, , ,203 4,013 4% Contractual services 6,242 6,826 8,000 7,500 (500) (6%) Other services 34,526 39,490 54,000 53,200 (800) (1%) Materials / supplies 130,616 18,598 34,000 30,350 (3,650) (11%) Interfund charges 7,259 11,978 9,626 12,267 2,641 27% Capital outlay 7, N/A $ 583, , , ,440 3,490 1% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Increase in interdepartmental charges for vehicle maintenance, fuel and replacement. Other reductions are in line with historical trends. 98

115 COUNTY ATTORNEY Description The County Attorney's Office is established in the County Charter to be the legal advisor to the Council, the County Administrator, County departments, board and commissions, and to represent the County in all legal proceedings. Mission The County Attorney's Office aims to deliver the highest quality legal services to its clients in an efficient and economical manner in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of County government to provide excellent service to the residents of Los Alamos County. The Office achieves this mission by assessing exposure and liability of the County in proposed actions and assisting in the development of preventive programs that reduce the risks inherent in governmental business. The staff of the County Attorney's Office is dedicated to providing superior public service while observing the highest standards of ethics and confidentiality. Budget Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund, 98% Attorney, 2% 99

116 COUNTY ATTORNEY FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 449, , , ,229 (9,950) (2%) Benefits 152, , , ,276 (22,701) (13%) Contractual services 68, , ,365 96,700 (46,665) (33%) Other services 11,593 7,992 23,155 20,423 (2,732) (12%) Materials / supplies 26,779 22,995 25,522 27,064 1,542 6% Interfund charges 5,005 5,179 5,411 4,702 (709) (13%) $ 714, , , ,394 (81,215) (10%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Reductions due to vacancies hired at a lower level than originally budgeted in FY Largest reduction is in contract attorneys. 100

117 Program Purpose COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE The purpose of the County Attorney's Office is to provide competent, balanced and preventative legal counsel to Council and other Elected Officials, the County Administrator, and County Managers so that they all have the opportunity to make well informed and legally sound decisions which optimize program outcomes and to act in accordance with the law while maintaining a fair and open County government. Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Goal Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality of Services Quality measures are used to evaluate how effectively services are provided to all County employees by the County Attorney's Office through a County-wide employee survey. The rating reflects the County values and behavior practiced by staff in providing customer service to one another. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Routine Services Outcome: County Attorney Staff Provide Quality Legal Advice Percent of County staff rating sound legal advice received from the County Attorney's Office as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual 75% 54% 66.6% Measure: Quality County Employee Satisfaction Level with County Attorney Legal Services 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 75% 66.6% 54% FY2010 FY2011 FY

118 COUNTY CLERK 102

119 COUNTY CLERK Description The County Clerk's Office maintains all public records of the County, is the main depository for official documents including Ordinances, Resolutions, Council Minutes, Probate records, and conducts all Elections. The Probate Court function is a part of the County Clerk's Office. The Probate Judge examines all applications for probate of estate, appointment of Personal Representative, examines all wills and documents filed in the case, signs Orders for appointment of Personal Representatives and signs Certificates closing estates. Supplies sample forms and copies of applicable law to the public, answers questions regarding probate procedures, and performs weddings. Mission To preserve the integrity of the County's official records which encompass business transactions, law and policy making, and property matters. Budget Expenditures by Program Clerk 99% Probate 1% Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 99% County Clerk 1% 103

120 COUNTY CLERK FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Clerk $ 455, , , ,057 (54,564) (10%) Probate 6,706 6,230 5,710 5, % $ 462, , , ,804 (54,527) (10%) % Expenditures by Fund: General Fund $ 446, , , ,692 (79,468) (15%) Recording Equip. Fund 16,031 31,267 33,171 58,112 24,941 75% $ 462, , , ,804 (54,527) (10%) Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 255, , , ,415 21,499 8% Benefits 84,782 91,132 93,921 94, % Contractual services 47,056 81, ,630 25,246 (77,384) (75%) Other services 34,183 38,285 51,191 45,661 (5,530) (11%) Materials / supplies 31,308 11,407 19,600 16,900 (2,700) (14%) Interfund charges 8,942 10,235 10,073 8,860 (1,213) (12%) Capital outlay 0 9,120 16,000 26,000 10,000 63% Fiscal charges N/A $ 462, , , ,804 (54,527) (10%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp % (0.01) 0% Lower number of elections scheduled in FY Increase in capital outlay in the Recording Equipment Fund for replacement scanner and microfiche reader. Increase in wages and decrease in contractual services due to IRS ruling that poll workers must be issued W-2's at year end. Therefore, the budget has been included in salaries but because of the nature of their work, they have not been included in the Casual FTE count in the FTE Summary. Previously, they were included as other professional services. 104

121 COUNTY SHERIFF Description The Sheriff enforces those Federal, State, and County laws not under the jurisdiction of the Los Alamos Police Department. This enforcement includes service of legal process from various courts and provision of bailiff services as requested by the court. Budget Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 99.8% Sheriff 0.2% FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 43,364 36,335 45,693 44,744 (949) (2%) Benefits 9,526 11,186 19,311 19, % Contractual services % Other services 9,401 14,910 9,771 9, % Materials / supplies 6,690 4,416 8,552 6,650 (1,902) (22%) Interfund charges (77) (17%) $ 69,463 67,494 84,396 81,662 (2,734) (3%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp (0.10) (34%) (0.10) (5%) % Reduction in supplies and casual labor which is in-line with historical spending trends. 105

122 COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (CEDD) In FY 2013, the Capital Projects and Facilities Department is merged with the Community Development Department to form the Community and Economic Development Department 106

123 Department Description COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT The Community and Economic Development Department, CED, consists of eight divisions: Administration, Economic Development, Housing, Planning, Building, Capital Project Management, Facilities Maintenance, and Custodial. CED serves as staff to the Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment, Lodgers' Tax Advisory Board, Fuller Lodge Advisory Board, White Rock Master Plan Implementation Committee and the Capital Improvements Evaluation and Oversight Committee. CED provides long range planning for economic development, housing and comprehensive planning and also performs a regulatory function. As part of the regulatory function, CED is responsible for code enforcement, and review of building and land development plans. This review ensures that land is developed and buildings, walls, fences and other structures are built in compliance with County Development Code and Building Code, thereby protecting public health, safety and welfare. CED, is responsible for all general fund, airport and solid waste capital improvement projects and associated project management. CED manages all Capital Projects irrespective of the department within which they may be sponsored, with the exception of Utilities and Road and Storm Water Projects. Additionally, the Department also performs the functions of capital projects planning; construction and inspection; oversight of county facility construction and the ongoing maintenance and upkeep of our facilities. Department Summary Expenditures by Program Custodial 11% Facilities Maintenance Projects 18% Housing 3% Economic Development 15% Lodgers' Tax 2% Building 3% Planning 3% Facilities 26% Project Management 3% Capital Improvements Projects 12% Administration 4% Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 86% Comm & Econ Dev 14% 107

124 COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Administration $ 316, , , ,039 92,304 26% Project Management 153,357 92, , ,097 (91,779) (26%) Facilities 2,796,241 2,661,367 2,831,274 2,556,219 (275,055) (10%) Custodial 948,438 1,015,064 1,060,851 1,143,791 82,940 8% Facilities Maintenance Projects 1,157,795 1,152,124 2,000,000 1,800,000 (200,000) (10%) Economic & Comm Development 1,099,033 1,057,845 1,366,547 (1,366,547) (100%) Housing 252, ,810 N/A Economic Development 1,263,812 2,467,338 2,955,800 1,448,529 (1,507,271) (51%) Lodgers' Tax 323, , , ,695 (215,569) (52%) Building 321, ,033 N/A Planning 309, ,596 N/A Capital Improvements Projects 4,812,758 14,863,687 22,980,200 1,174,000 (21,806,200) (95%) $ 12,871,765 23,975,953 34,310,547 9,906,809 (24,403,738) (71%) % Expenditures by Fund: General $ 6,471,377 6,274,373 7,956,283 7,295,114 (661,169) (8%) Economic Development Fund 1,263,812 2,467,338 2,955,800 1,235,000 (1,720,800) (58%) Lodgers' Tax 323, , , ,695 (215,569) (52%) Capital Improvements Projects 4,812,758 14,863,687 22,980,200 1,174,000 (21,806,200) (95%) $ 12,871,765 23,975,953 34,310,547 9,906,809 (24,403,738) (71%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (4.00) (8%) FTEs by Division: Administration % Project Management - General % Facilities (1.00) (7%) Custodial % Economic & Comm Development (2.00) (14%) Project Management - CIP (2.00) (40%) (4.00) (8%) In FY14, the Economic and Community Development Division is broken out into several different divisions: Housing, Economic Development, Building and Planning. Since Housing, Building and Planning were previously consolidated into one division, all historical data is in the Economic and Community Development Division for FY11, FY12, and FY13. Additional detailed explanations are provided within each division. Details on Capital Improvements Projects are provided in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Section beginning on page

125 CEDD - ADMINISTRATION Administration Division Mission The Administration Division provides the Community and Economic Development Department with support services and courteous customer service to internal staff and the community. Administration Division Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 218, , , ,956 20,514 9% Benefits 77,030 83,094 83,085 91,455 8,370 10% Contractual services 4,543 5,061 6,000 37,000 31, % Other services 5,978 7,138 13,695 21,555 7,860 57% Materials / supplies 7,772 2,972 4,570 18,500 13, % Interfund charges 2,535 3,201 2,943 13,573 10, % $ 316, , , ,039 92,304 26% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp N/A % Salary and benefits increase due to promotion of Capital Projects and Facilities Department Director for taking over Comunity Development Department and Economic Development. Also, Office Manager position was downgraded to a Sr. Office Specialist. Management Analyst position (which is a higher level) is moved to this division from Facilities Division. An increase is also included for software maintenance for new permitting software. Increases in other services, materials and supplies, and interfund charges are a reallocation of administrative costs from the previous Community Development Department. 109

126 Project Management Mission CEDD - CAPITAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT DIVISION The Project Management Division provides the County of Los Alamos residents, Council, Boards and Commissions, and Departments with professional project management expertise required to build new, and maintain existing, County infrastructure. The Division provides oversight to the Facilities Maintenance Projects and the Capital Improvement Projects. The purpose of the Facilities Maintenance Projects is to provide major maintenance of the County s building infrastructure so the buildings can continue to meet the needs of the community. The purpose of the Capital Improvements Projects is to provide major replacements and improvements to general County infrastructure. Project Management Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Type: Salaries & Benefits $ 124,416 50, , ,176 (66,501) (24%) Contractual services 6,060 5,826 8,800 1,800 (7,000) (80%) Other services 9,269 7,605 29,466 20,118 (9,348) (32%) Materials / supplies 7,092 7,387 16,145 14,825 (1,320) (8%) Interfund charges 6,520 20,705 20,788 13,178 (7,610) (37%) $ 153,357 92, , ,097 (91,779) (26%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) Gen Fund % Regular (full & part time) CIP Fund (2.00) (40%) (2.00) (29%) Two project manager FTEs are transferred to Public Works Engineering due to a lower level of capital projects. Due to the FTE reduction, less training and supplies are required. Interfund charges are less due to a reduction in equipment maintenance, replacement and insurance. 110

127 Program Purpose CEDD - CAPITAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT DIVISION The CPMD staff have a two-fold responsibility: 1) staff operate the Major Facilities Maintenance Projects that provides major rehabilitation of the County's building infrastructure so the buildings can continue to meet the needs of the community; and, 2) staff are responsible for Project Management for the Capital Improvement Program Projects scheduled in the County's annual Capital Improvement Program. Fuller Lodge Electrical Upgrade is Well Underway Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Major Facilities Projects Completed the Mesa Library flat roof replacement, $265,000 actual cost from a $280,000 budget. Completed the Little Theatre exterior siding and roof replacement, $450,000 actual cost from a $515,000 budget. Completed building new dumpster enclosures at 10 locations, $130,000. Replaced the domestic hot water boiler at Larry R. Walkup Aquatic Center for $55,000. Completed many other small infrastructure improvement projects under $50,000 improving the health and safety of Countyowned Buildings. CIP Projects Completed the White Rock Visitors Center and RV Park, $3.1 million actual cost from a $3.3 million budget. Completed the Smart House construction contract, $633,000. Multi-Purpose Covered Arena, $786,000 budget, anticipate completion under budget. Los Alamos County Municipal Building, $25.8 million, anticipate completion under budget. 111

128 CEDD - FACILITIES DIVISION Facilities Division Mission Provide preventive facilities maintenance, major repairs, work space planning support, emergency facilities-related support, review of contract documents for contracted facilities construction and maintenance projects, and provide small construction projects with its licensed contractor staff. Facilities Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 758, , , ,685 (61,361) (8%) Benefits 302, , , ,321 (7,816) (2%) Contractual services 561, , , ,579 (329,716) (53%) Other services 52,642 55,213 53,756 49,120 (4,636) (9%) Materials / supplies 201, , , ,532 1,072 1% Interfund charges 919, , , , ,599 21% Capital outlay 0 23,784 37,197 0 (37,197) (100%) Fiscal charges N/A $ 2,796,241 2,661,367 2,831,274 2,556,219 (275,055) (10%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (1.00) (7%) Reduction in salaries and benefits due to the Management Analyst position transferred to the Administration Division. In FY 2014 approximately $400K of portable offices and temporary offices will no longer be required due to the move into the new Municipal Building. This is offset by an increase in expenses for maintenance of the new Municipal Building, Golf Course Community Building, and White Rock Visitor Center. Also, there is an increase in utilities for the new facilities and also an increase due to the sewer rate increase. Capital outlay decrease due to one-time purchase of a vehicle in FY

129 Program Purpose CEDD - FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR DIVISION The purpose of the Facilities Program is to provide routine maintenance and repair, and event support services to enusre users have timely, safe and reliable use of County facilities. Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Began maintenance of the new White Rock Visitor Center. Assisted with the system design of the new Municipal Building. Assisted with the electrical service upgrade at Fuller Lodge. Established a preventative maintenance team of two facility staff dedicated to PM work order requests. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality and Effectiveness of Services The Facilities Maintenance and Repair Program participates in the Internal Quality Customer Service Survey which measures the satisfaction level of County staff. The ratings here reflect the County values and behavior practiced by staff in providing customer service to one another. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Outcome: Facilities Staff Provide Quality Services Employees rating overall satisfaction with Facilities services as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual 73% 70.1% 69.5% 80% 75% 70% Internal Customer Satisfaction Level With Facilities Services 73% 71% CPM Median 70.1% 79% CPM Median 69.5% 65% 60% FY2010 FY2011 FY

130 CEDD - FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR DIVISION Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Facilities Staff Operate Efficiently Total facilities cost per square foot FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend $ 3.96 $ 3.87 $ 4.26 $ 2.90 Narrative and Analysis The Facilities Program budget reductions do not impact the maintenance and repairs for County facilities. The FY2014 reduction is in Contractual Services which budgeted funds for renting the portable and temporary office spaces. These offices are no longer needed with the opening of the LAC Municipal Building. The operating budget for materials and supplies remains flat. The addition of square footage for the LAC Municipal Building, Golf Course Community Center and White Rock Visitors Center reduce the overall cost per square foot. Measure: Efficiency $4.50 $4.00 $3.96 $3.87 $4.26 $3.50 $3.00 $2.90 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 114

131 Custodial Division Mission CEDD - CUSTODIAL DIVISION Provide regular daily custodial-type maintenance on County facilities as well as Event Support for community uses of various County-owned facilities including night and weekend hours. Program Budget % FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 528, , , ,777 31,518 6% Benefits 231, , , ,376 50,280 20% Contractual services 101, , , ,314 2,378 2% Other services 50 11,708 12,654 12, % Materials / supplies 58,438 81,098 74,789 72,833 (1,956) (3%) Interfund charges 29,277 39,012 39,117 39, % $ 948,438 1,015,064 1,060,851 1,143,791 82,940 8% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Increase in salaries and benefits due to the transfer of a Sr. Office Specialist from the Administration Division to this division. Also, there is a higher level of benefit participation. Decreases in replacement equipment and furniture. 115

132 CEDD - CUSTODIAL DIVISION Program Purpose The purpose of the Custodial Program is to provide cleaning, planned maintenance, and event support services to County staff and facility users so they can have attractive, clean, and timely use of County facilities. Custom-made Ortega Weaving Rugs Adorn Fuller Lodge Windows Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Goal Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Completed improvements at Fuller Lodge including: refinishing wood and leather period furniture; ordered and hung custom-made Ortega's Weaving Rugs as curtains to replace stolen originals; installed an alarm system, replaced all conference tables and chairs in meeting rooms. Organized and worked a "Site Cleanup Day" for the Pajarito Cliff Site and the Pueblo Canyon Rim Trail to protect the environment. Completed setups and takedowns for County special events averaging 60 events per week and over 3,000 per year for County and community activities. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality and Effectiveness of Services The Custodial Division participates in the Internal Quality Customer Service Survey which measures County staffs satisfaction level with Custodial Services. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Routine Services Outcome: Custodial Staff Provide Quality Services Employees rating custodial services overall as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual 74% 71.3% 72.8% 116

133 CEDD - CUSTODIAL DIVISION Internal Customer Satisfaction Level With Custodial Services 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 74% 71.3% 66% CPM Median 72.8% 71% CPM Median FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Custodial Staff Provide Efficient Services Total custodial costs per square foot. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend $ 1.94 $ 2.06 $ 2.16 $ 2.00 Narrative and Analysis The Custodial Program budget changes do not impact the Custodial staff, or cleaning materials and supplies. In FY2014, while the Custodial staff and materials remain level, the cost per square foot decreases due to an increase in square footage with the addition of LAC Municipal Building and the Golf Course Community Building. Staff will continue to deliver quality services. Measure: Efficiency Custodial Services Cost Per Square Foot Decreases in FY2014 $2.50 $2.00 $1.94 $2.06 $2.16 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 117

134 CEDD - ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Economic and Community Development Mission The mission of the Economic and Community Development Divisions is to enhance the County of Los Alamos as a globally competitive community in which to foster new high-quality business growth and capital investment, develop the capacity to attract and expand current business operations, develop affordable housing, administer the Development Code, and encourage and facilitate the revitalization of housing thereby enhancing the livability of all neighborhoods. Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Community Dev/Housing/Econ Dev $ 1,099,033 1,057,845 1,366,547 (1,366,547) (100%) Housing 252, ,810 N/A Economic Development 1,263,812 2,467,338 2,955,800 1,448,529 (1,507,271) (51%) Lodgers' Tax 323, , , ,695 (215,569) (52%) Building 321, ,033 N/A Planning 309,596 N/A $ 2,686,663 3,895,738 4,740,611 2,534,663 (2,205,948) (47%) % Expenditures by Fund: General Fund $ 1,099,033 1,057,845 1,366,547 1,096,968 (269,579) (20%) Economic Development Fund 1,263,812 2,467,338 2,955,800 1,235,000 (1,720,800) (58%) Lodgers' Tax Fund 323, , , ,695 (215,569) (52%) $ 2,686,663 3,895,738 4,740,611 2,534,663 (2,205,948) (47%) Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 723, , , ,191 (145,089) (16%) Benefits 218, , , ,163 (57,503) (19%) Contractual services 1,622,882 2,898,178 3,407,897 1,502,695 (1,905,202) (56%) Other services 67,879 51,655 50,300 37,200 (13,100) (26%) Materials / supplies 30,602 24,549 20,050 5,100 (14,950) (75%) Interfund charges 22,778 19,161 31,418 11,314 (20,104) (64%) Capital outlay ,000 0 (50,000) (100%) 2,686,663 3,895,738 4,740,611 2,534,663 (2,205,948) (47%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (2.00) (14%) FTEs by Program Community Dev/Housing/Econ Dev Housing N/A Economic Development N/A Building N/A Planning N/A (2.00) (14%) In FY2014, this division is split into several programs for ease of management and accountability. Also, the Economic Development Fund is now housed in this division. There is a reduction of one Planner and one Office Manager FTEs which could potentially create longer waits for permits and plan reviews during high volume times. Expenses related to economic development have been moved to the Economic Development Fund. Administrative expenses have been reallocated to the Administration Division. This budget does include contractual funding to implement a contract housing rehabilitation program. 118

135 Program Purpose CEDD - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION The purpose of the Economic Development Division is to enhance the County of Los Alamos as a globally competitive community in which to foster new high-quality business growth and capital investment, develop the capacity to attract and expand current business operations, promote the development of affordable housing, and attract and retain a highly-educated and labor-ready work force and job opportunities through strong public and private partnerships. The Division will focus on targeted business retention and expansion as well as capacity development to support new high-quality economic growth. Smith's New Fueling Center Strategic Focus Areas Financial Sustainability Economic Vitality and Innovation Housing and Employment Diversity Operational Excellence Goals Promote a Strong and Diverse Economic Base Through Recruiting Businesses and Encouraging New Business Growth Eliminate Downtown Blight Implement a Strategy that Results in 100% Growth in Retail Activity Diversify if the Economy/Revitalize White Rock and Los Alamos Downtowns Promote the Creation of a Variety of Housing Options for all Segments of the Los Alamos Community Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Held Small Business Assistance seminar attended by 30 participants. Partnered with LANL to advance major technology transfer project (Project Target) that would potentially triple space and add 100+ net new jobs at the Research Park by Completed Air Service marketing RFQ and selection of airline in partnership with the Airport and Marketing Team. Commercial Air Service begins in April of 2013 between Los Alamos County Airport and Albuquerque International Airport. Attended the 2011 annual International Conference of Shopping Centers (ICSC), the nation's major retail marketplace, and brought two national clients for site visits. Revised Local Economic Development Action business loan and grant process and the document is in final legal review. Completed the first national Economic Development article published in March of Assisted in wayfinding planning and funding in partnership with Public Works. Completed branding RFQ and selected vendor to develop a Los Alamos brand. Completed Economic Vitality Action Team annual report. 119

136 Performance Measures Results CEDD - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION Strategic Focus Areas: Financial Sustainability Economic Vitality and Innovation Operational Excellence Goals: Promote a Strong and Diverse Economic Base Through Recruiting Businesses and Encouraging New Business Growth Eliminate Downtown Blight Implement a Strategy that Results in 100% Growth in Retail Activity Diversity the Economy/Revitalize White Rock and Los Alamos Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Outcome: Los Alamos enjoys economic stability. Economic Stability of LAC GRT revenues remain stable. Unemployment rate in Los Alamos County. Median Household Income. Economic Development Capacity Growth Total commercial air service passengers. Occupany rate for Los Alamos hotels and motels. Business and Job Growth Capital Investment by Existing Businesses. Capital Investment by New Businesses. Jobs Created by Retention/Expansion of Existing Businesses. Projected New Jobs Created Through Attraction Efforts. Data for these new measures will be completed in FY2014 after further research and study. 120

137 CEDD - HOUSING DIVISION Program Purpose The Housing Division is responsible for developing housing initiatives in support of the plans, strategies and ordinances approved by County Council utilizing citizen feedback received from the FY2012 Community Survey. Housing staff will apply existing County mechanisms to spur new housing development and to implement a owner-occupied housing rehabilitation program. In addition, Housing staff will develop a first-time homebuyers program. Strategic Focus Areas Well-Planned Commercial and Residential Growth Housing and Employment Diversity Operational Excellence Goals Dramatically Simplify Permit Requirements and Improve the Overall Process Adopt a Comprehensive Plan Promote the Creation of a Variety of Housing Options for all Segments of the Los Alamos Community Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Hired a Housing Program professional to coordinate the Housing Initiative. Completed the A-19 Master Plan. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Citizen Input on Housing Programs In support of affordable housing plans, strategies and ordinances that have been approved by Council over the past three years and utilizing citizen feedback received from the 2012 LA County Community Survey, staff will be developing housing program initiatives for implementation. In addition to new programming, staff will be strategically applying existing County mechanisms to spur new development of housing. The following housing programs are projected to be completed over the next two years, dependent upon: 1) the availability of funding from local, state and federal sources; 2) the capacity of the County to implement new housing programs; and, 3) the financial capacity of the private sector to respond to local housing development needs. Strategic Focus Area: Housing and Employment Diversity Goal: Promote the Creation of a Variety of Housing Option for all Segments of the Los Alamos Community Outcome: LA County Housing Programs Meet the Needs of the Community New Housing Development Produce 50 new housing units as part of the A-19 Development. Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Implement a pilot program that provides financial assistance to 5 homeowners in energy efficiency updates and/or emergency repairs. Homeownership Assistance Develop and Implement a partnership program to provide financial assistance to income eligible, first-time homeowner in purchasing a home in Los Alamos County. Measures for the New Division. 121

138 Program Purpose CEDD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, BUILDING DIVISION The purpose of the Community Development Program is to administer the Development Code of Los Alamos (Chapter 16 of the Municipal Code), land use plans, the nuisance codes within the Los Alamos Municipal Code, and the adopted building codes in such a way as to encourage and enforce positive development improvements within the community. Mechanical, electrical and plumbing plan review, permitting and inspections are handled by the New Mexico Construction Industries Division (CID). The Building Division is responsible for providing consultation, permits, and inspections to builders and homeowners to ensure compliance with applicable building codes. The Building Division also provides and coordinates nuisance Code Enforcement and works in cooperation with County Fire, Police, Public Works, and Public Utilities Departments to enforce the building and nuisance codes. Inspector and Contractor at Multi-Family Site Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Completed Plan review, issuance of Building permit, construction inspections, and issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the following projects: Mesa del Norte, North Mesa Apartment Complex exterior and Interior apartment remodel. Little Theater renovation Dixie Girl renovation Pajarito Brew Pub renovation Hampton Inn interior remodel New Smith's Refueling station NM Consortium project United Church phase 1 renovation Crossroads Bible Church - final phase LA Visiting Nurses renovation of former Boy Scout Lodge Re-Max and YMCA renovation at Central Park Square Methodist Church renovation St. Vincent Clinic Worked a significant increase in nuisance code cases and roofing/siding/window permits. 122

139 CEDD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, BUILDING DIVISION Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Area: Well-Planned Commercial and Residential Growth Building Permits and Activities Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Outcome: The Permitting and Code Enforcement Processes are Promoting Code Compliant Development in a Clear and Efficient manner. Code Enforcement Number of code enforcement cases. Percent of code enforcement cases corrected. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted % 87% 90% 90% Number of residential permits issued Number of commercial permits issued Number of building permit inspections and educational activities. 1,475 1,037 1,250 1,350 Trend Narrative and Analysis Code Enforcement. Code Enforcement had a 20% increase in enforcement cases for FY2012 for a total of 223 cases. Of the 223 cases, 87% were resolved; lower than the goal of 90% case resolution. A noteworthy factor to not reaching this goal is the increase in vacant and/or abandoned properties. As homes are foreclosed on or otherwise abandoned, their exterior and property maintenance conditions decline. Presently, the County does not have a vacant property ordinance or programmatic funding allocated to allow more timely intervention. Subsequently, nuisance complaints in these circumstances are going unresolved until the lending agencies take action or the property sells. Residential and Commercial Building Permits. Although the number of Residential permits declined in FY2012 most likely due to the downturn in the economy, the number of Commercial permits issued and inspections performed not related to an active building permit increased. The residential permit activity has increased in FY2013 and is anticipated to continue increasing with the largest volume of building permits being window replacement, re-roofing, and siding projects. Commercial permits continue to increase from FY2012 to 2013, specifically tenant improvement projects. Commercial construction projects generate more required inspections and are driving the increase in the number of inspections in FY2012 and FY2013. Of special note, 15 of all commercial building permits issued since FY2012 were related to new businesses or expansion of existing businesses in the County. In addition to inspecting permit work, building inspectors provide training and education of the code to contractors. These discussions assist the contractor in producing a better product, with minimal expensive redos. Measure: Efficiency Code Enforcement - Violations and Resolutions Percent of Code Enforcement Cases Corrected Number of Code Enforcement Cases FY2014 Adopted % FY2013 Estimate % FY % FY % 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 123

140 CEDD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, BUILDING DIVISION Measure: Output Residential and Building Permits Issued Number of Residential Permits Issued Number of Commercial Permits Issued 1, FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Measure: Quality Number of Permit Inspections and Educational Activities by Inspectors 1,600 1,400 1,200 1, ,475 1,350 1,250 1,037 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 124

141 Program Purpose CEDD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, PLANNING DIVISION The purpose of the Community Development Program is to administer the Development Code of Los Alamos (Chapter 16 of the Municipal Code), land use plans, the nuisance codes within the Los Alamos Municipal Code, and the adopted building codes in such a way to encourage and enforce positive development improvements within the community. Mechanical, electrical and plumbing plan review, permitting and inspections are handled by the New Mexico Construction Industries Division (CID). The Planning Division is responsible for developing the Comprehensive Plan and providing consultation, permits and plan review to builders and homeowners to ensure compliance with the Development Code. The Planning Division ensures coordinated and efficient use of the land in the County, supports Economic Development and Housing Program initiatives, issues Business Registration/Licenses, and serves as the liaison to the Planning Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment, and the Fuller Lodge/Historic Districts Advisory Board. Strategic Focus Areas Well-Planned Commercial and Residential Growth Operational Excellence Goals Dramatically Simplify Permit Requirements and Improve the Overall Process Adopt a Comprehensive Plan Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments New Sign Code completed and adopted. Case manager for the following notable projects through the site plan approval: CO-OP Grocery Store Municipal Building White Rock Visitor Center Smart House NM Consortium Trinity Site A-19 Master Plan Support. Drafted the Historic Preservation Ordinance and ready for Board and Council Consideration. Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Area: Well-Planned Commercial and Residential Growth Operational Excellence Goals: Dramatically Simplify Permit Requirements and Improve the Overall Process Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Outcome: Planning Staff Provide Efficient Services Business Licenses, Registrations Number of business licenses and registrations. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 1,059 1,070 1,090 1,

142 CEDD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, PLANNING DIVISION Measure: Output Business Licenses and Registrations Activities 1,110 1,100 1,090 1,080 1,070 1,060 1,050 1,040 1,030 1,100 1,090 1,070 1,059 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Strategic Focus Area: Well-Planned Commercial and Residential Growth Goals: Dramatically Simplify Permit Requirements and Improve the Overall Process FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Land Use Applications Building Related Subdivisions Summary Plat Special Use Permits Waivers Site Plans Rezoning Sign Permits Placement Permits (Fences, and Structures under 120 sq ft) * * * * * * * * Total * Detail for FY2011 not available. Planning reviews and building permits when applicable. Narrative and Analysis The Community Development Program tracks Land Use and Building Permit activity rates in order to identify trends in development and manage limited staffing resources and establish workload priorities accordingly. These indicators may also assist in understanding economic trends and forecast potential development opportunities within the County. 126

143 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT 127

144 Department Mission Together we provide quality services to our customers. Description ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT The Administrative Services Department is responsible for overseeing and coordinating functions that provide internal services. All divisions provide support for efficient and effective operations. Administrative Services is comprised of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and Information Management. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provides budgeting and financial management support necessary for prudent decision making and sound municipal stewardship. OMB functions include planning, organizing, directing and monitoring the accounting, auditing, grant management and collection of funds. The office has responsibility for preparing budgets, financial statements and reports, investing public funds, and monitoring expenditures. Within OMB is Procurement and Materials Management which provides responsible supply management. Procurement assures effective contracting, and the timely acquisition of goods, services and construction through competitive bidding and other sourcing mechanisms. Its materials management function provides receiving, inventory control, logistics, distribution and transportation services for the County and Los Alamos Public Schools. Procurement is also responsible for asset disposition. Los Alamos County continues to move toward a centralized Procurement model. The Information Management Division provides support and governance of County Technology and Records within two areas: Information Technology (IT) and Records Information Management (RIM). IT supports the information systems and IT telecommunications infrastructure used to provide services to citizens. Functions include project management, planning, implementation, security, upgrade, support and maintenance for physical plant, network, servicers, computers, geographical information services (GIS), applications, and internet. RIM provides the structure to meet legal and regulatory requirements for protection, accountability, transparency, integrity, compliance, availability, retention and disposition of County physical records in accordance with industry best practices. RIM trains employees and elected officials to manage active records and manages inactive physical archives. RIM plans to use the same best practices with electronic information and has future goals of classifying and managing e- records. Department Summary Expenditures by Program Records Management 5% Accounting & Budget 21% Information Management 58% Proc & Materials Mgmt 16% 128

145 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Budget Summary % FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Accounting & Budget $ 1,220,857 1,247,767 1,561,927 1,311,480 (250,447) (16%) Proc & Materials Mgmt 952,561 1,037,008 1,024,770 1,018,826 (5,944) (1%) Information Management 3,820,369 3,881,869 3,941,243 3,560,729 (380,514) (10%) Records Management 279, , , ,487 (32,112) (10%) $ 6,272,855 6,442,115 6,853,539 6,184,522 (669,017) (10%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (2.00) (4%) Limited term % Casual, Student,& Temp % (2.00) (4%) FTEs By Program: Accounting & Budget (2.00) (16%) Information Management % Records Management % Proc & Materials Mgmt % (2.00) (4%) 129

146 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT - OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET Office of Management & Budget Mission The mission of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is to preserve the County's strong financial position by creating a responsible financial strategy, facilitating effective management of County resources through sound budgetary practices, and providing analysis and recommendations that optimize economic outcomes. Program Budget % FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Accounting & Budget $ 1,220,857 1,247,767 1,561,927 1,311,480 (250,447) (16%) Proc & Materials Mgmt 952,561 1,037,008 1,024,770 1,018,826 (5,944) (1%) $ 2,173,418 2,284,775 2,586,697 2,330,306 (256,391) (10%) Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 1,312,829 1,348,477 1,583,934 1,420,507 (163,427) (10%) Benefits 399, , , ,844 (62,688) (11%) Contractual services 156, , , ,000 (43,700) (23%) Other services 86, ,128 83,886 87,890 4,004 5% Materials / supplies 149, , , ,500 2,900 2% Interfund charges 42,237 40,581 44,545 51,565 7,020 16% Capital outlay 26,804 33, N/A Fiscal charges (500) (100%) $ 2,173,418 2,284,775 2,586,697 2,330,306 (256,391) (10%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (2.00) (8%) Limited term N/A Casual, Student,& Temp N/A (2.00) (8%) FTEs By Program: Accounting & Budget (2.00) (16%) Proc & Materials Mgmt % (2.00) (8%) OMB is reduced by two FTEs, the Administrative Services Director and the Management Analyst responsible for grant accounting. The director functions have been absorbed by the Deputy County Administrator. The grant function will be spread to remaining Accounting & Budget FTEs potentially resulting in less coordination and no centralization of grants and grant reporting requirements throughout the County. Contract labor is reduced in Procurement potentially resulting in slower delivery times. Also, contractual services are reduced by a one-time contract in FY2013 for process mapping. There is a slight increase in tools and shelving for the warehouse. 130

147 ASD - ACCOUNTING AND BUDGET PROGRAM (OMB) Program Purpose The purpose of the Accounting and Budget program is to provide budget planning support and financial management services to the County management and its leadership so that they can make well-informed, prudent decisions that soundly steward fiscal resources and optimize program outcomes Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Significant Accomplishments Goal Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Budget and Accounting staff worked through the Las Conchas fire to ensure that all County employees were able to purchase and pay for needed materials and supplies to fight the fire and to protect the residents' personal safety and property. Received an Audit opinion for FY2011 with no findings for the FY2011 Audit and Comprehensive Annual Financial Statement. Received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the FY2012 Budget document from the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. Received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the FY2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report from the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality of Services Quality measures are used to evaluate how effectively services are provided to all County employees by the Office of Management and Budget staff through a County-wide employee survey. OMB initiated the Customer Service Improvement Team which was an Administrative Services Department effort to improve internal services to County customers. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Accounting and Budget Staff Provide Quality Services Percent of employees rating the quality of Budget and grants staff services as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of employees rating overall general accounting and reporting services as either good or excellent. New measures in FY2011. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual 67.3% 80.8% 66.0% 78.6% Measures: Quality County Employees Rating for Quality of Budget and Grants Services 90% 85% 80% 80.8% 75% 70% 65% 60% charts 67.3% FY2011 FY

148 ASD - ACCOUNTING AND BUDGET PROGRAM (OMB) County Employees Rating for Quality of General Accounting and Reporting Services 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 66% FY2011 FY % Annual Measures by Financial Management Factor Debt Management FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual County's Bond Rating on New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax Improvement Revenue Bonds Series 2008 Standard & Poor's A1 A1 Moody's AA++ AA++ Narrative and Analysis The Office of Management and Budget continues to meet the highest fiscal, operational, and budget standards for local governments. This is evidenced by the national awards the Office continues to receive and by its exceptional bond ratings. The County continues to receive superior bond ratings for its 2008 Series Bonds. Bond ratings take into account the overall financial strength of the County and its ability to repay its debt. 132

149 ASD - PROCUREMENT Program Purpose The Procurement Division provides responsible supply management throughout the County. This includes competitive sourcing, purchasing, contracting, inventory control, delivery and distribution, material management and supplier relationship management. In addition, the Division provides material management, distribution and inventory management for the Los Alamos Public Schools. Los Alamos County continues to move toward a centralized Procurement model. Procurement follows the principles of the National Institute of Governmental Purchasing and the Institute for Supply Management. Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Goal Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishment Facilitated effective emergency procurement during the Las Conchas Fire. Implemented posting of County bids and other solicitations on the County public website in support of transparency. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality and Effectiveness of Services The Procurement Division also participates in the Internal Quality Customer Service Survey which measures County staffs satisfaction level with all procurement services. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Purchasing Division Provides Quality Services Percent of employees rating the level of service at the Stores/Warehouse counter as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of employees rating the level of customer service focus of Purchasing/Contracting as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual 74.3% 85.2% 62.7% 63.3% Narrative and Analysis In FY2012, Customer Service at the Warehouse counter improved by almost 11% over FY2011. Staff participated on the Customer Service Improvement Team in OMB. Through staff discussion and training, front-line staff became aware of how important excellent communication and service are to internal employees. This added awareness appears to have had an impact on customer service skills applied on the job. Measures: Quality Customer Service Rating for the Warehouse Counter 90% 85.2% 85% 90% 85% Customer Service Rating for Purchasing/Contracting Staff 80% 75% 74.3% 83% CPM Median 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 72% CPM Median FY2011 FY % 65% 60% 62.7% 63.3% FY2011 FY

150 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT - INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Information Management Division Mission The Information Management (IM) Division improves County staff effectiveness and citizen services by supporting and upgrading County IT assets and managing the County's records. Assets include the integrated County network (ICN), the central server facility (CSF), desktop computing resources, and all software applications used by County organizations. Information Management Budget % FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Information Technology $ 3,820,369 3,881,869 3,941,243 3,560,729 (380,514) (10%) Records Management 279, , , ,487 (32,112) (10%) $ 4,099,437 4,157,340 4,266,842 3,854,216 (412,626) (10%) Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 1,464,484 1,607,841 1,746,065 1,685,419 (60,646) (3%) Benefits 508, , , ,828 (75,661) (12%) Contractual services 1,322,487 1,181,832 1,096,819 1,013,993 (82,826) (8%) Other services 322, , , ,480 (26,830) (8%) Materials / supplies 309, , , ,500 (181,390) (63%) Interfund charges 42,554 42,873 40,169 48,996 8,827 22% Capital outlay 130, ,228 90,100 96,000 5,900 7% $ 4,099,437 4,157,340 4,266,842 3,854,216 (412,626) (10%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Limited term % Casual, Student,& Temp % % FTEs By Program: Information Technology % Records Management % % The reduction in salaries and benefits is due to recognizing potential vacancy savings. The possible overall impact of IM budget reductions include an increase in staff time to maintain and repair hardware equipment, an increase in downtime for non-operational equipment countywide, loss of redundancy for external web based IT services, increased time to produce records, use of workarounds for functionality provided by eliminated software packages, additional work for IM staff, additional work for Record Data Liaisons staff, and less training provided for internal staff. 134

151 Program Purpose ASD - INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Information Management provides support and governance of County Technology and Records within two areas: Information Technology (IT) and Records Management (RIM). IT supports the information systems and IT telecommunication infrastructure required to provide services to citizens. IT utilizes industry standards and best practices and Project Management Institute methodology. The RIM program began at the County in RIM provides the mechanism for the County to meet legal and regulatory requirements for protection, confidentiality and security of County physical records. Future goals for RIM include enabling the County to meet legal and regulatory requirements protection, confidentiality and security of County electronic records. The program is centered on the Generally Accepted Recordkeeping Principles (GARP). Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Goal Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Established the Recovery Operation Center (ROC) for Las Conchas fire which coordinated fire operations and communications. In particular, the ROC planned and coordinated the reopening of the Los Alamos town site and was kept operational for two months after the fire in case of flooding or other emergencies. Established ebusiness for Court payments. Completed the orthophotography update of the County in which aerial photographs are taken and scaled so that they can be utilized to determine true distance and topography. This data is used by a number of agencies. Completed the Intergraph update to meet FBI audit exceptions. Developed and implemented the physical Records Management System and received approval of the Records Management Policy. Completed the ANA/ALI Database population p which transmits locations of County phone lines to 911 services in case of an emergency. Implemented the Library Public Wireless access system. Completed design for the Community Broadband Network. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results (IQCSS) - Quality and Effectiveness of Services The Information Management Division also participates in the Internal Quality Customer Service Survey which measures County staffs satisfaction level with IT and Records Services. The ratings here reflect the County values and behavior practiced by staff in providing customer service to one another. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Outcome: IM Staff Provide Quality Services Percent of employees rating the overall quality of IM services as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of employees rating the overall satisfaction with desktop services (HELP Desk) as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual 92% 76.2% 75.4% 92% 74.0% 80.6% Narrative and Analysis The overall customer satisfaction level with IT decreased less than 1%. In the year preceding the internal services survey, IT experienced an unusually high turnover in staff. This highlighted the need to continue to improve succession planning, cross training, and customer service training. A highlight of the internal services survey was Desktop Services, which has the most direct contact with internal customers and at one point had a 75% vacancy in FY2012. The Desktop Services team received an increase in customer satisfaction of 6.6% and many positive customer comments regarding the professionalism of the new Desktop Services Team. 135

152 Measures: Quality ASD - INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Percent of Employees Rating Overall Quality of IM Services 95% 90% 85% 92% 83% CPM Median 89% CPM Median 80% 75% 70% 76.2% 75.4% 65% FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 Percent of Employees Rating Quality of HELP Desk Services 95% 90% 92% 88% CPM Median 85% 80% 80% CPM Median 80.6% 75% 70% 74.0% 65% FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Routine Services FY2011 FY2012 Outcome: IM Provides Efficient Services Actual Actual e-government Indicators Number of unique user sessions on County website. Number of online transactions, approvals and payments processed. FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 137, , , ,000 83,873 88,106 90,000 92,000 Dollar amount of electronic payments accepted. Number of Geographical Information Systems queries (Internet and Intranet total). System Reliability Percent of scheduled systems uptime. Records Management Number of internal physical records requests received by RIM. Average time to respond, fill, complete internal records request for physical records stored in RIM Records Center (In Minutes). $559,202 $638,258 $640,000 $645,000 1,415 1,885 1,900 1, % % 99.80% 100% 532 1,232 1,566 2,

153 ASD - INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Narrative and Analysis The demand for Information Management services continues to grow. This is especially true in the areas of citizen requests and egovernment services. The addition of the Inspection of Public Records function to the Records program in FY2013 has seen an increase in both volume and complexity of requests. The Information Technology (IT) program has seen increases in internet transactions and the volume of requests for the services and information provided by the County through the internet. The internal Records program, which began in late FY2009, has continued to grow and has seen significant increases in the number of internal physical records requests. These increases are expected to continue as more records become centrally managed. Additionally, given the increased volume of records processing, retrieval time may continue to increase in the next few fiscal years as contract staff has been phased out. Measures: Output Number of Unique User Sessions Number of Geographic Information Systems Queries 160, , , ,000 2,500 2,000 1,885 1,900 1, ,000 1,500 1, , ,309 1, , ,000 FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 0 FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Number of On-Line Transactions and Dollar Value of Electronic Payments 700, , , ,000 $559,202 $638,258 $640,000 $645, , , , ,873 88,106 90,000 92,000 FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Measure: Efficiency Average Staff Time Taken to Respond to Records Requests Number of Records Requests Received Average Time to Complete Request 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, Minutes Minutes 1, Minutes 1, Minutes 2,025 FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 137

154 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 138

155 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Department Description The Community Services Department (CSD) includes Library, Parks, Recreation and Social Services programs, and certain cultural service contracts with outside agencies. The Library Division manages the Mesa Public Library and the White Rock Branch Library, providing informational, educational, recreational and research services, including acquisition and circulation of library materials, both print and electronic; answering reference questions; offering public Internet access; and, presenting youth and adult programs and art exhibits. The Parks Division is the steward of all County parks, trails, open space, public landscapes, Guaje Pines Cemetery, public grounds and athletic facilities. Duties of the Parks Division include but are not limited to, general and turf maintenance, design and development of new facilities and the renovation of old facilities, horse stables, general horticulture, arboriculture and response to snow and ice removal. The Recreation Division provides recreation programs, sponsors activities, initiates and plans projects and provides reservations for County facilities. It also assesses leisure time needs and desires of citizens to develop viable recreation programs; sponsors activities such as the Fair and Rodeo; and develops, coordinates, and implements special events. Facilities include an aquatic center, a golf course and an outdoor rink used for ice skating in the winter and day camp programs in the spring and summer. The Social Services Division provides programs in parent education, family development, and after-school activities for children and teens which are delivered to the community through contractual relationships with non-profit organizations. This division also administers and manages the Healthcare Assistance Program. Department Mission The Community Services Department is committed to enhancing the quality of life in the community through cultural and social services, recreational and informational opportunities, and park lands and open spaces. Department Summary Expenditures by Program Recreation 35% Social Services 26% Cultural Services 3% Admin 3% Expenditures as % of General Fund Cemetery 1% Parks 19% Library 19% General Fund 82% CSD 18% 139

156 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Administration $ 255, , , ,321 65,495 22% Library 2,271,518 2,268,163 2,393,323 2,176,269 (217,054) (9%) Parks 2,263,344 2,349,841 2,356,299 2,184,967 (171,332) (7%) Cemetery 108, , , ,769 (11,697) (9%) Recreation 3,429,995 3,590,446 3,684,937 3,277,418 (407,519) (11%) Social Services 3,187,090 3,853,183 3,251,109 3,238,621 (12,488) 0% Cultural Services 289, , , ,048 (28,825) (8%) $ 11,806,331 12,864,937 12,466,833 11,683,413 (783,420) (6%) % Expenditures by Fund: General $ 8,405,887 8,861,569 9,169,776 9,576, ,804 4% Health Care Assistance 2,154,210 2,671,161 1,835,787 1,920,633 84,846 5% Golf 1,230,589 1,196,493 1,209,770 0 (1,209,770) (100%) Capital Improvement Fund 11, , , ,000 (65,300) (27%) Aquatic Center Gift Sub-Fund 2,219 4,369 3,000 3, % Library Gift Sub-Fund 2,115 1,156 3,200 3, % $ 11,806,331 12,864,937 12,466,833 11,683,413 (783,420) (6%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (3.00) (4%) Casual, Student,& Temp % % FTEs by Division Library (0.49) (2%) Parks % Recreation (2.74) (6%) Social Services % Administration % % In FY2014, the Golf Course will be transferred to the General Fund and will no longer be an enterprise fund. Golf revenues have been trending downward for the past several years which has made it rely heavily on the subsidy of the General Fund. 140

157 Administration Division Mission COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT - ADMINISTRATION To ensure that the community has a balanced program of cultural, informational, recreational, and social services. Administration Division Budget % FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 180, , , ,363 51,273 26% Benefits 52,653 70,059 59,391 78,898 19,507 33% Contractual services ,760 15,000 0 (15,000) (100%) Other services 12,363 10,892 10,588 15,248 4,660 44% Materials / supplies 4,391 4,867 6,493 4,000 (2,493) (38%) Interfund charges 5,484 7,820 7,264 14,812 7, % Total to be allocated $ 255, , , ,321 65,495 22% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % A half time FTE is transferred from the Library Division to this division. Also an increase in salaries and benefits because Administrative Division salaries are no longer allocated to the Social Services and Cultural Services Divisions. Also a one-time amount is budgeted in FY 2013 for the cultural/recreational master plan. 141

158 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT - LIBRARY Library Division Mission The Library offers opportunities for our diverse, regional community to learn, know, gather and grow by providing open and equal access to a variety of ideas and information through evolving technology and services. Library Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Fund: General $ 2,269,403 2,267,007 2,390,123 2,173,069 (217,054) (9%) Library Gift Fund 2,115 1,156 3,200 3, % $ 2,271,518 2,268,163 2,393,323 2,176,269 (217,054) (9%) % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 1,352,639 1,303,351 1,421,994 1,344,924 (77,070) (5%) Benefits 413, , , ,552 (58,331) (13%) Contractual services 96, , ,126 94,871 (24,255) (20%) Other services 52,087 50,474 48,171 31,295 (16,876) (35%) Materials / supplies 330, , , ,836 (41,235) (13%) Interfund charges 26,013 26,576 29,078 29, % Capital outlay 0 26, N/A $ 2,271,518 2,268,163 2,393,323 2,176,269 (217,054) (9%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (1.75) (6%) Casual & Temp % (0.49) (2%) Reduction of 1.25 FTEs and the.5 Sr Office Specialist is moved to the Administrative Division. The reduction in FTEs may result in longer lines at service desks, more desk shifts for managers and administrators leaving less time for strategic planning, reducing collection maintenance activities such as book repair, longer for new books to reach shelves, smaller number of projects completed. There is also a reduction in collection expenditures which result in fewer items on shelves, smaller selection of materials, and potentially longer wait for popular material. The ability to offer downloadable material and electronic periodicals will slow significantly. Technology enhancements will be reduced such as no hold or overdue notices via text messaging, public computer replacement delayed, elimination of databases impacting users ability to retrieve relevant information. Training is also reduced. 142

159 CSD - LIBRARY PROGRAM Program Purpose The purpose of the Library Division is to provide informational, recreational, educational and research services, helping community members connect to each other and to the greater world of ideas. Boy Scouts and Friends Help Parks Rehab Library Walkway Finished Walkway Strategic Focus Areas Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Continuum of Education Operational Excellence Goals Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Plan Create a Los Alamos K-20 Education Continuum Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Completed the rebuilding of the walk way in partnership with the Boy Scouts, residents, and the Parks Department. Continued to grow the children and teens programs adding Celebrate Your Grade, revised the Teen Book Club, and the Make-A-Mess, Every Child Ready to Read, and Hawk Hangout programs. Celebrated the New Mexico Centennial with exhibits, community contributions, readings and lecture on the history of New Mexico and Los Alamos. Replaced all public computers and upgraded the PC reservation system for ease of use by the public. Continued to expand the selection of downloadable e-books and audiobooks and held training sessions for the public. Expanded wireless service throughout the library. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey is an integral part of the County's comprehensive performance measurement and management system. The ratings reflect the level of quality Library and customer service provided to the community by Library staff. Strategic Focus Areas: Continuum of Education Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Create a Los Alamos K-20 Education Continuum Outcome: County Residents Enjoy Quality Library Services Percent of citizens surveyed who used the Library and rated library services as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual 92% 98% 98.8% 143

160 Measure: Quality CSD - LIBRARY PROGRAM Percent of Citizens Surveyed Who Rated Library Services as Good and Excellent 100% 98% 98.8% 95% 90% 92% 87% CPM Median 98% CPM Median 85% 80% 75% FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 Narrative and Analysis The vast majority of citizens (98.8%) rated Library services as good or excellent, achieving an almost perfect 100%, significantly higher than the CPM Median of 87%. Strategic Focus Areas: Continuum of Education Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Routine Services Create a Los Alamos K-20 Education Continuum Outcome: County Residents Use the Library at a High Rate Number of Library Visits (Persons Entering). Circulation Rates per Registered Borrower. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 325, , , , Narrative and Analysis The performance of Library staff improved greatly in reaching the Council goal of providing a quality cultural and recreational amenity to the community. For FY2011, circulation rates per registered borrower increased 2% over FY2010, while the number of visitors into the Library dropped by about 3 percent. However, the circulation rate per registered borrower remained level because the number of borrowers also increased slightly. Overall, circulation rates per registered borrower continued to be well above levels seen by benchmark libraries nationwide. For FY2013 and FY2014, Library visits and circulation rates are expected to remain level. Measure: Output Number of Library Visits 340, , , , , , , , , ,000 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 144

161 CSD - LIBRARY PROGRAM Measure: Efficiency Circulation Rates Per Registered Borrower CPM Median 14 CPM Median 5 0 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 145

162 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT - PARKS Parks Division Mission The Parks and Cemetery Division strives for continuous improvement in the promotion of safety and quality of the Parks infrastructure through reliable and consistent maintenance, design and development and enhancement of existing and new facilities and aesthetics of parks, trails and open spaces of Los Alamos County. Parks / Cemetery Program Budgets FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Parks $ 2,095,051 2,009,622 2,043,299 1,944,037 (99,262) (5%) Parks Maintenance Proj-GF 156, ,030 67,700 60,930 (6,770) (10%) Small Capital Maint Proj-CIP 11, , , ,000 (65,300) (27%) Cemetery 108, , , ,769 (11,697) (9%) $ 2,371,931 2,513,889 2,491,765 2,308,736 (183,029) (7%) % Expenditures by Fund: General $ 2,360,620 2,383,700 2,246,465 2,128,736 (117,729) (5%) Capital Improvement Fund 11, , , ,000 (65,300) (27%) $ 2,371,931 2,513,889 2,491,765 2,308,736 (183,029) (7%) Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 947, , , ,553 53,273 6% Benefits 376, , , , % Contractual services 204, , , ,430 (150,570) (35%) Other services 26,757 21,077 26,271 17,800 (8,471) (32%) Materials / supplies 296, , , ,000 (43,000) (19%) Interfund charges 510, , , ,789 (28,171) (6%) Capital outlay 10,364 81,211 10,000 3,000 (7,000) (70%) Fiscal charges N/A $ 2,371,931 2,513,889 2,491,765 2,308,736 (183,029) (7%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp % % There is a reduction in parks small capital projects and parks maintenance projects due to a lower level scheduled for FY2014. Major impacts are in materials and supplies and water utility which may result in a reduction of the quality of the conditions of parks - less weed control, longer grass. Trash will be picked up on one day during the weekend instead of both days. Turf will be watered less potentially resulting in browning of grass. Burials will no longer be performed on the weekends unless dictated by religion. No funding is budgeted for fuel mitigation, but there is a significant enough balance in this area to carry over for the next several years. In addition to reductions for current facilities, this budget includes an increase of $116K for new operating and maintenance costs related to new facilities and roadway maintenance - covered arena, Canada del Buey trail, State Road 4, White Rock Visitor Center and RV Park, and Municipal Building. 146

163 CSD - PARKS & CEMETERY PROGRAM Program Purpose The purpose of the Parks Program is to provide maintenance, design, and development of trails, open space and outdoor recreational facilities, including the perpetual care of Guaje Pines Cemetery, horse stables, public garden, public landscaped areas, etc., so the public may have a safe and enjoyable outdoor recreational experience. North Mesa Park - Renovated Family Picnic Area Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Received four awards including NMPRA Trail Award for the Canyon Rim Trail, Southwest Contractors Award for the Canyon Rim Trail Bridge, ASLA NM Chapter award for the Canyon Rim Trail and the NMPRA award for East Park Mini-Golf Course. Responded to the call for assistance in the protection of Los Alamos during the Las Conchas fire. Replaced the North Mesa Ball Field lights. Completed the landscape design and installation of the Diamond Drive Medians and design and installation for the Oppenheimer & Groves Monument Plaza, tree planting along Central Avenue, Rover, Overlook, Barranca Mesa Parks and Guaje Pines Cemetery. Completed park renovations at the North Mesa Park and picnic grounds, FEMAville play lot area, Rover Park, San Ildefonso Park, and Community Park; and, renovated the infields at Minor, Bomber and Tee Ball Fields in North Mesa. Installed a 9-hole disc golf course. Completed construction of rest rooms at the Canyon Rim Trail, Camp May and Guaje Pines Cemetery. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey is an important tool to measure the level of quality provided to the public by the Parks Division. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Residents are Satisfied with the Condition of Parks' Amenities FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual Percent of residents surveyed who rate the condition of County parks, including tot lots and playgrounds as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of residents surveyed who rate the condition of County hiking and bicycling trails as "Good" or "Excellent". 88% 94% 91.7% 87% 94% 91.5% 147

164 CSD - PARKS & CEMETERY PROGRAM Measures: Quality Residents Give High Ratings to County Parks 95% 94% Ratings of the Hiking/Biking Trails Remain Over 90% 95% 94% 90% 85% 88% 82% CPM Median 82% CPM Median 91.7% 90% 85% 87% 91.5% 80% 80% 75% FY2009 FY2011 FY % FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 Narrative and Analysis The Parks Division continues to receive ratings above 90% for the satisfaction level with Parks' amenities. The rating for parks and playgrounds exceeds the CPM median by 12 percentage points. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Outcome: Parks Operations are Efficient Total Expenditures Per Acre. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend Narrative and Analysis In FY2014, there are budget reductions in contractual services and supplies and materials. These reductions in fertilizer, weed control, and water may negatively affect the general condition of the parks, i.e. greening, grass level, weeds, etc. In FY2014, Parks will be maintaining additional acreage for the White Rock Visitors Center, State Road 4, Rendija Forest Service Parcel, and Guaje Canyon Water Parcel. This added acreage reduces the expenditures per acre for FY2014. Measure: Efficiency Parks Expenditure Per Acre $300 $290 $280 $270 $260 $250 $240 $230 $220 $ $ $ $ FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 148

165 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT - RECREATION Recreation Division Mission The Recreation division provides a variety of recreational opportunities for the citizens and visitors of Los Alamos County. Recreation Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Sub-Program: Aquatic Center $ 1,075,446 1,221,796 1,215,281 1,138,782 (76,499) (6%) Golf 1,230,589 1,196,493 1,209, ,527 (216,243) (18%) Rink 183, , , ,441 (24,544) (11%) Other Recreation 940, ,677 1,045, ,668 (90,233) (9%) $ 3,429,995 3,590,446 3,684,937 3,277,418 (407,519) (11%) % Expenditures by Fund: General $ 2,197,187 2,389,584 2,472,167 3,274, ,251 32% Golf 1,230,589 1,196,493 1,209,770 0 (1,209,770) (100%) Aquatic Center Gift Fund 2,219 4,369 3,000 3, % $ 3,429,995 3,590,446 3,684,937 3,277,418 (407,519) (11%) Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 1,609,236 1,663,867 1,748,687 1,661,683 (87,004) (5%) Benefits 534, , , ,041 (45,626) (8%) Contractual services 262, , , ,003 (45,348) (17%) Other services 59,907 61,023 59,210 38,498 (20,712) (35%) Materials / supplies 398, , , ,709 (55,981) (14%) Interfund charges 523, , , ,256 (140,593) (23%) Capital outlay 29, ,651 17,255 4,000 (13,255) (77%) Fiscal Charges 12,639 12,101 8,228 9, % $ 3,429,995 3,590,446 3,684,937 3,277,418 (407,519) (11%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (1.75) (6%) Casual, Student,& Temp (0.99) (7%) (2.74) (6%) In FY2014, the Golf Course will be transferred to the General Fund and will no longer be an enterprise fund. Golf revenues have been trending downward for the past several years which has made it rely heavily on the subsidy of the General Fund. Reduction of Recreation Specialist FTE and Lifeguard Supervisor FTE (this FTE will be offset with an increase in casual hours in order to eliminate impacts to pool hours or programming). The Sr Office Specialist FTE is increased by.25 in order to reduce impacts due to the reduction of the Recreation Specialist. There will still be impacts with these reductions in the areas of quality of programming and implementation of various programs such as golf outings and tournaments. The reduction in equipment and supplies will reduce the amount available to replace aquatic water toys, fitness tools, ice skates, mowers and large tools and equipment at the Golf Course. There is also a reduction in training which will not provide for staff professional development. Adverstising is also decreased which will reduce public awareness of various recreational events, programs and activities. With the Golf Course transfer to the General Fund, interfund charges for General Fund administrative overhead will no longer be accounted for now that this is no longer an enterprise fund. 149

166 CSD - RECREATION PROGRAM Program Purpose The purpose of the Recreation Program is to provide a variety of indoor and outdoor recreational opportunities to citizens and visitors of Los Alamos County so they can have a safe, enjoyable recreational experience that improves their mental and physical health. Strategic Focus Areas Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Plan Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Participated in a community partnership with the Los Alamos Tennis Club for U.S. Tennis Association grants in 2011 and 2012 to start an Under-10, QuickStart Tennis program. Received a grant from the National Recreation and Parks Association to fund a Starting New at Golf (SNAG) golf program. Partnered with the Los Alamos Pony Club to host the Cowboy Dinner. Completed building a disc golf course on North Mesa in partnership with Parks Division and the local disc golf club. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey is an integral part of the County's comprehensive performance measurement and management system. The ratings reflect the level of citizen satisfaction with the level of service provided to the community. Strategic Focus Areas: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Plan Outcome: Residents Enjoy Quality County Recreational Activities FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual Percent of residents surveyed who used the Golf Course and rated the quality as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of residents surveyed who used the Aquatic Center and rated the quality as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of residents surveyed who used the Outdoor Rink and rated the quality as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of residents surveyed who participated in Recreation programs, events, and activities and rated the quality as "Good" or "Excellent". 92% 87% 77% 86% 90% 87% 90% 90% 84% 83% 85% 85% 150

167 CSD - RECREATION PROGRAM Measures: Quality Citizen Satisfaction Level with the Golf Course Citizen Satisfaction Level with Aquatics Center 95% 90% 85% 92% 87% 95% 90% 85% 86% 90% 87% 80% 80% 75% FY2009 FY2012 FY % 75% FY2009 FY2012 FY2013 Citizen Satisfaction Level with the Ice Rink Citizen Satisfaction Level with Recreation Programs 95% 95% 90% 85% 80% 90% 90% 84% 90% 85% 80% 75% 83% 85% 85% 78% CPM Median 75% FY2009 FY2012 FY % FY2009 FY2012 FY2013 Strategic Focus Areas: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Plan Outcome: Recreational Programs & Services are Operated Efficiently Percent of Golf Program expenditures offset by fees and other revenues. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 56% 42% 56% 54% Percent of Aquatics Program expenditures offset by fees and other revenues. Percent of Ice Rink Program expenditures offset by fees and other revenues. Percent of Recreation Program expenditures offset by fees and other revenues. 30% 24% 25% 28% 50% 51% 57% 60% 48% 40% 60% 58% Narrative and Analysis Due to the reductions in staffing, replacement aquatics and sports equipment, the ability to advertise upcoming recreation events, the quality of programs and the revenues generated by recreation programs may be affected. 151

168 CSD - RECREATION PROGRAM Measures: Efficiency Golf Expenditures Offset by Revenues Aquatics Expenditures Offset by Revenues 60% 55% 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 56% 42% 56% 54% 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 30% 24% 25% 28% 25% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 20% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Ice Rink Expenditures Offset by Revenues Recreation Programs Expenditures Offset by Revenues 65% 60% 55% 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 50% 51% 57% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate 60% FY2014 Adopted 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 48% 40% 60% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate 58% FY2014 Adopted 152

169 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT - CULTURAL SERVICES Cultural Services Program Budgets % FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 1,848 2,194 6,642 0 (6,642) (100%) Benefits 993 1,176 2,093 0 (2,093) (100%) Contractual services 286, , , ,048 (17,267) (5%) Other services 0 0 2,000 0 (2000) (100%) Interfund charges (823) (100%) $ 289, , , ,048 (28,825) (8%) Reduction in funding for historical museum and museum educator. Because these contracts are currently under negotiation, specific impacts are unknown at this time. The cooperative extension is being reduced and the County will be requesting of NMSU to return to the traditional funding formula where the County pays for 1/3 of the program. In the past few years, the County has paid a larger portion and paid fully for one agent with no subsidy from Federal or State funding. Programs supported by the County are listed below including direct costs and indirect costs. Direct amounts include payments made by the County to a community agency contract. Indirect amounts (which are not entirely located in this department/division) include building maintenance, utilities, use of premises, some limited custodial, etc. FY 2014 FY 2014 FY 2014 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Estimated Estimated Estimated Direct Direct Direct Direct Indirect Total Cultural Services Programs Funding Funding Funding Funding Funding Funding Performing Arts 8,668 8,885 8,928 9,000 9,044 18,044 Fuller Lodge Art Center 19,112 5,358 5,000 5, , ,928 Cooperative Extension 92,985 95, , ,311 22, ,930 Historical Museum 92, , , , , ,300 Concert Series 72,000 72,000 72,000 72,000 72,000 Other 121, Environmental Education 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Total 406, , , , , ,

170 Program Purpose CSD - CULTURAL SERVICES PROGRAM The purpose of the Cultural Services Program is to provide social and educational programs to residents and visitors to the community so they can enjoy and participate in special events, concerts, visual and performing arts and cultural programs. Adults Enjoying a Cultural Outing with PEEC Lecturer Strategic Focus Areas Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Pl Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Increased attendance and participation at the downtown and community-wide events including: Halloweekend and Winterfest. Increased attendance and participation at the free summer concert series. Increased participation in the LA Historical Museum programs due to the addition of a Museum Educator position. Increased program participation by youth and adults in programs and classes offered through Fuller Lodge and the Pajarito Environmental Education Center. Increased artist participation at the Arts Council Arts and Crafts Fairs. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey is an integral part of the County's comprehensive performance measurement and management system. The ratings reflect the level of customer service provided to the community. Strategic Focus Areas: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Plan Outcome: County Citizens Value the Quality of the Community Concerts. Percent of residents surveyed through the community survey that rated free community concert series as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual 82% 92% 94% Measure: Quality Residents Give the Quality of the Free Community Concert Series High Ratings 95% 90% 92% 94% 85% 82% 80% 75% FY2009 FY2011 FY

171 CSD - CULTURAL SERVICES PROGRAM Strategic Focus Areas: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Plan Outcome: County Residents Enjoy Quality Services Number of participants served through Historical Society programs. Number of participants served through the Fuller Lodge Art Center programs. Number of participants served through Arts Council programs. Number of participants served through Nature Center programs. Number of participants served by the NMSU Cooperative Extension Program. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 34,572 31,885 35,000 35,500 23,340 25,760 25,900 26,300 12,134 11,871 12,000 12,200 10,497 12,996 12,350 13,000 16,205 15,909 17,504 18,000 Narrative and Analysis Quality cultural and recreational programs are provided to the community through contractual relationships with local, nonprofit organizations. Several of these organizations occupy County-owned facilities and use a substantial amount of volunteer time to control their operating expenses. The amount of funding provided for these non-profits has remained flat for many years. Yet, many of the programs and services continue to attract higher participation and attendance levels each year. In FY2014, there will be reductions to the contracts with non-profits because of budget reductions. The providers are on working on the details of the reduced budget contract service levels. Measures: Output Historical Society Programs Participation Level Fuller Lodge Art Center Programs Participation Level 36,000 35,000 34,000 33,000 32,000 34,572 31,885 35,000 35,500 27,000 26,000 25,000 24,000 23,340 25,760 25,900 26,300 31,000 23,000 30,000 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 22,000 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Arts Council Programs Participation Level Nature Center Programs Participation Level 12,300 12,200 12,100 12,000 11,900 11,800 11,700 12,134 11,871 12,000 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate 12,200 FY2014 Adopted 14,000 13,000 12,000 11,000 10,000 10,497 12,996 12,350 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate 13,000 FY2014 Adopted 155

172 CSD - CULTURAL SERVICES PROGRAM NMSU Cooperative Extension Program Participation Level 18,500 17,500 17,504 18,000 16,500 15,500 16,205 15,909 14,500 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 156

173 Social Services Budget COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT - SOCIAL SERVICES FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Fund: General $ 1,032,880 1,182,022 1,415,322 1,317,988 (97,334) (7%) Health Care Assistance 2,154,210 2,671,161 1,835,787 1,920,633 84,846 5% 3,187,090 3,853,183 3,251,109 3,238,621 (12,488) 0% % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 55,534 51, , ,545 (5,825) (5%) Benefits 33,218 24,124 60,299 55,732 (4,567) (8%) Contractual services 3,024,087 3,701,332 3,015,690 3,021,483 5,793 0% Other services ,600 5, % Materials / supplies ,000 (5,000) (38%) Interfund charges ,977 35,350 27,261 (8,089) (23%) $ 3,187,090 3,853,183 3,251,109 3,238,621 (12,488) 0% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % This division was created in FY2013. In FY2014, the Indigent Health Care function is transferred from the Office of Management and Budget to this division. Other community service contracts are reclassed from cultural services to social services because they are more in-line with the mission and function of this division (senior center, teen center, youth activities centers). Teen Center and JJAB funding is reduced to bring them in-line with actual spending. The County also now pays for the prevention specialist for the Los Alamos Public Schools. The community health council coordinator contract is no longer required as the new Social Services Manager will perform this function. Due to reduced revenue, the Health Care Assistance program is reduced and the policy has been revised to tighten income qualifications and eliminate preventative services, to mention a few. Programs supported by the County are listed below including direct costs and indirect costs. Direct amounts include payments made by the County to a community agency contract. Indirect amounts (which are not entirely located in this department/division) include building maintenance, utilities, use of premises, some limited custodial, etc. FY 2014 FY 2014 FY 2014 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Estimated Estimated Estimated Direct Direct Direct Direct Indirect Total Social Services Programs Funding Funding Funding Funding Funding Funding Social Services Programsuncommitted 150, , ,000 Public Health Office Lease 44,542 39,734 47,131 48,484 2,040 50,524 Behavioral Health 100, Substance abuse & suicide prevention 100,000 27,000 School Prevention Specialist 65,000 65,000-65,000 Behavioral Health-uncommitted 8,000 - Community Health Council Coordination 60,000 36, Senior Services 292, , , , , ,905 Juvenile Services including grants 224, , , , ,000 Parent Education 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000-35,000 Teen Center Operations 182, , , ,000 Youth Activity Centers 156, , , , , ,312 Total 852,990 1,111,138 1,252,890 1,176, ,257 1,640,

174 Program Purpose CSD - SOCIAL SERVICES PROGRAM The purpose of the Social Services Program is to provide recreational, educational and social services to all generations of Los Alamos. Teens Chill'in at the Center Strategic Focus Areas Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Plan Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Three active RSVP volunteers received honors at the NM Governor's Spotlight on Volunteerism conference. LARSO Executive Director attended the National Institute of Senior Center meetings in conjunction with the National Conference on Aging in Washington, D.D. Increased participation by teens in Teen Center programs. Increased participation by youth in Youth Activity Center programs. Increased number of participants served by Family Strengths Network which provides parental education and family development. Increased participation by seniors in Senior Center programs. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey is an integral part of the County's comprehensive performance measurement and management system. The ratings reflect the level of customer service provided to the community. Strategic Focus Areas: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Master Plan Outcome: County Seniors Receive Quality Services Percent of seniors rating Senior Services as "Good" or "Excellent". FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual 82% 94% 91% 158

175 Measure: Quality 95% CSD - SOCIAL SERVICES PROGRAM Seniors Rate Senior Services as Good or Excellent 94% 90% 91% 85% 82% 80% 75% FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 Strategic Focus Areas: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Implement a Comprehensive Recreational and Cultural Outcome: Services Provided to Residents of All Ages Number of participants served by the Youth Activity Centers. Number of participants served by Teen Center. Number of participants served by Family Strength Network. Number of meals served to Seniors. Number of vehicle trips provided to Seniors. Number of claims processed in the Health Care Assistance Program. Value of claims paid out. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 14,445 14,500 14,940 15,000 N/A 14,920 18,928 20,000 4,896 6,140 6,900 7,000 21,744 22,101 24,580 24,950 9,453 9,661 7,800 7,920 8,173 8,509 10,500 7,500 $ 597,654 $ 610,000 $ 900,000 $ 550,000 Narrative and Analysis The Social Services Programs are delivered to the community through contractual relationships with non-profit organizations. Programs include: parent education, family development, and after-school activities for children and teens. In addition, Social Services contracts with the Juvenile Justice Advisory board to provide restorative justice services and other juvenile programs and services to youth. Due to the reduction in GRT, there will be reductions in the contract services in FY2014, some of these include funding for the Teen Center, Senior Center, Youth Activity Center and JJAB. The Healthcare Assistance Program has experienced growth in claims of roughly 35% over FY2013. Due to a decline in revenues coupled with a significant increase in claims activity, the Los Alamos County Council, acting as the Indigent Health Care Board, approved modifications to the Health Care Assistance Program (HCAP) in an effort to bring service levels in line with available resources beginning July 1, The model of the HCAP will shift from a pre-approval, preventative care program to one that is based on the need for reimbursement of emergency care or other hospitalization in an effort to assist participants for unforeseen events that they cannot pay for on their own with the reduced funds that are available. The eligibility requirements will be scaled back to more restrictive levels present from which lowers the limits on claims that will be reimbursed, asset values of applicants, and lowers the income limits from 275% of the United States Department of Health and Human Services poverty level to 225% in order to qualify for assistance. The management of the HCAP will also be transitioning to the Social Services division beginning July 1, 2013 where the focus and efforts will be on providing assistance to formerly active participants, providing case management, and providing care coordination services to help ease the burden placed on these individuals during this transition. 159

176 Measures: Outputs CSD - SOCIAL SERVICES PROGRAM Social Services Program Participants Continue to Increase Number of participants served by the Youth Activity Centers Number of participants served by the Teen Center 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 Number of participants served by Family Strength Network 18,928 20,000 14,445 14,920 15,000 14,500 14,940 7,000 4,896 6,140 6,900 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Number and Value of Claims Paid Out in the Health Care Assistance Program 1,000, , , , , , , , , ,000 $900,000 $597,654 $610,000 $550,000 8,173 8,509 10,500 7,500 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 160

177 FIRE DEPARTMENT 161

178 FIRE DEPARTMENT Description With the intent to protect life and property, the Los Alamos Fire Department (LAFD) develops and delivers fire protection to Los Alamos County and Los Alamos National Laboratory. The LAFD responds to fire and rescue calls; maintains capabilities for fire suppression, crash-fire-rescue service, and hazardous material and other incident responses; and provides state-of-the-art training to ensure the highest level of personnel safety and effectiveness. The LAFD also ensures compliance with the Cooperative Agreement with the Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration ( beginning October 1, 2008). Mission We dedicate our efforts to provide for the safety and welfare of the citizens and visitors of the County of Los Alamos, our community, the Department of Energy, and the Los Alamos National Laboratory through the preservation of life, the environment, and property. Budget Fire Cooperative Agmt (CA) 84.3% Expenditures by Fund EMS (State Grants) 0.01% Fire (General Fund) 14.0% Fire Marshal (State Grants) 1.6% 162

179 FIRE DEPARTMENT FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Fund: Fire - Cooperative Agmt (CA $ 19,004,919 20,385,627 21,036,989 22,101,042 1,064,053 5% Fire (Non-CA) 676, , ,936 0 (208,936) (100%) Fire (General Fund) 3,519,191 3,714,155 3,872,664 3,668,219 (204,445) (5%) Fire Marshal (State Grants) 452, , , ,000 (9,760) (2%) EMS (State Grants) 17,652 13,589 10,500 11,500 1,000 10% $ 23,670,170 24,736,784 25,568,849 26,210, ,912 3% Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 9,877,342 10,415,661 11,058,763 11,530, ,250 4% Benefits 4,195,065 4,438,715 5,042,575 5,097,742 55,167 1% Contractual services 620, , , ,702 59,281 12% Other services 333, , , ,729 4,113 1% Materials / supplies 1,083,452 1,219,071 1,407,816 1,002,353 (405,463) (29%) Interfund charges 6,350,312 6,945,815 6,803,708 7,345, ,460 8% Capital outlay 533, , , , ,040 54% Debt /Fiscal Charges 676, , ,936 0 (208,936) (100%) $ 23,670,170 24,736,784 25,568,849 26,210, ,912 3% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % FTEs by Division: Emergency Medical % Fire Life Safety % Operations % Training % Administration % % Budget Summary The majority of the increase in the FY 2014 Fire Department budget is for increases in salary and benefits. In Interfund charges, there is an increase in Fire's portion of the Consolidated Dispatch Center (CDC) allocated from the Police Department (allowed by the Cooperative Agreement with the Department of Energy and the County's share for fire service). Also in this line is the increase in the indirect costs from the County's cost allocation plan (which calculates the actual rate to be used). The above reductions will slow the formation of the hazardous materials response team, less paramedic training, and less training for technical rescue. There is also a reduction in replacement of safety related equipment, protective clothing, and cardiac monitors. Some of these costs for equipment have been offset using Fire Marshal Funds instead of funding from the Cooperative Agreement. In the November 2006 election, voters passed a new GRT fire excise tax that took effect on July 1, Amounts received from this new tax was used to repay the Economic Development Fund for the construction of the Fire Station 3 capital project. The loan will be paid off as of the end of FY Total amount of the Fire cooperative agreement (CA) is $22,101,042. General Fund portion is decreased by $204K. 163

180 Program Purpose LOS ALAMOS FIRE DEPARTMENT The main purpose of the Fire Department is to maintain a state of readiness and to respond to emergency incidents throughout the Los Alamos County community, the Department of Energy and the Los Alamos National Laboratory so that life, environment, and property are preserved. The Fire Department also trains and qualifies its personnel to cope with real and potential emergency incidents throughout the Los Alamos County community, the Department of Energy and the Los Alamos National Laboratory. The LAFD Protected the Families and Property of all Los Alamos Residents from the Las Conchas Fire Vision Statement Public Safety underpins the entire Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement as stated in its preamble: "We will preserve our safe, small town atmosphere." Strategic Focus Areas Goals Operational Excellence Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Significant Accomplishments Deployed all personnel on the Las Conchas Fire that started on June 29 with no injuries while providing for the safety of all citizens Recognized at the NM Fiftieth Legislature Second Session 2012; A Memorial honoring the Los Alamos Fire Department's Firefighters for their action during the Los Conchas Fire. Recipient of a Humanitarian Award from the Red Cross for actions during the Las Conchas Fire. Received Accreditation from CFAI/CPSE on Fire Service Excellence. Entered into a 4-year agreement with IAFF Local Tested and hired two recruit classes with 18 firefighters joining the LAFD. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey is an integral part of the County's comprehensive performance measurement and management system. The rating reflects the quality of service provided to the community by the Fire Department. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Outcome: County Residents Receive Quality Fire and Rescue Services FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual Percent of residents surveyed that rated Fire services overall as "Good" or "Excellent". 91% 98% 98% 164

181 LOS ALAMOS FIRE DEPARTMENT Measure: Quality Residents Continue to Give High Ratings to Fire and Rescue Services 100% 98% 98% 95% 90% 91% 93% CPM Median 96.0% CPM Median 85% 80% 75% FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Outcome: Fire and Rescue Operate Efficiently For Suburban EMS incidents, crews will arrive within 7 minutes/15 seconds. For Suburban Fire & Rescue incidents, crews will arrive within 7 minutes/15 seconds. For Suburban Advanced Life Support Calls, the first arriving unit will be on scene within 480 seconds. For all Suburban Emergency Incidents, other than ALS, the first unit will be on scene initiating action within 495 seconds. For all Suburban Emergency Incidents, other than ALS, the Effective Response Force will be on scene initiating action within 735 seconds. Number of Public Education Events Conducted FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 86% 86% 87% 88% 80% 93% 95% 96% 89% 89% 93% 94% 84% 81% 85% 85% 99% 98% 99% 99% Narrative and Analysis The Los Alamos Fire Department is continually striving for Operational Excellence through investments in staff and their development to create a high-performing organization while maintaining quality essential routine services. Fire reports monthly, quarterly and annually deliverables and how the services are delivered through efficient and timely communication with our stakeholders. Los Alamos Fire Department recognizes stakeholders are necessary and the Department always looks to strengthen cooperation and coordination among Los Alamos National Laboratory, NNSA, DOE and LANS with another 5-year cooperative agreement. The Los Alamos Fire Department is committed to the safety and welfare of everyone in this diverse community. The Department is committed to delivering exceptional services in the preservation of life, the environment and property. Measures: Efficiency Percent of Suburban EMS Crews That Arrive at an Incident Within 7 Minutes, 15 Seconds Percent of Suburban Fire and Rescues Crews That Arrive at an Incident Within 7 Minutes, 15 Seconds 100% 95% 100% 95% 93% 95% 96% 90% 85% 80% 86% 86% 87% 88% 90% 85% 80% 80% 85% CPM Median 75% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 75% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted CPM Median is percentage of all calls that arrived in 8 minutes or less. 165

182 LOS ALAMOS FIRE DEPARTMENT 100% Percent of Advanced Life Support Calls Response Time Within 480 Seconds Percent of Units Arriving on Scene at all Suburban Emergency Incidents Within 495 seconds 100% 95% 90% 89% 89% 93% 94% 95% 90% 85% 80% 85% 80% 84% 81% 85% 85% 75% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 75% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Percent of Effective Response Force Units Arriving on Scene at all Suburban Emergency Incidents Within 735 seconds 100% 99% 98% 99% 99% 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 166

183 POLICE DEPARTMENT 167

184 POLICE DEPARTMENT Description The Los Alamos Police Department responds to calls for service, investigates crimes and accidents, and serves as a resource to local and surrounding communities, other law enforcement agencies and other organizations. The Los Alamos Police Department is involved in programs including, but not limited to, crime prevention, Region III Drug Task Force, domestic violence, preventative DWI efforts, juvenile justice initiatives, animal services, volunteer programs, (e.g. reserves, patrol, detention, animal control) and emergency management coordination. Mission The mission of the Los Alamos Police Department is to provide for law enforcement and public safety services that help to give the people of the community a safe and secure environment through the administration of programs developed by members of the police department and through community and intergovernmental partnerships. Budget Expenditures by Program Operations** 53% Consolidated Dispatch 9% Detention 19% Animal Control 3% Records / Administration 16% Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 85% Police 15% 168

185 POLICE DEPARTMENT Budget Summary FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Animal Control $ 326, , , ,548 (123,391) (36%) Detention 1,029,491 1,064,015 1,098,325 1,359, ,043 24% Consolidated Dispatch 689, , , ,465 98,528 18% Operations** 3,637,722 3,683,688 3,624,815 3,866, ,584 7% Records / Administration 1,497,336 1,314,599 1,436,837 1,184,459 (252,378) (18%) $ 7,180,024 6,845,634 7,046,853 7,272, ,386 3% % Expenditures by Fund: General $ 7,056,844 6,727,734 6,942,853 7,168, ,386 3% State Grants 123, , , , % $ 7,180,024 6,845,634 7,046,853 7,272, ,386 3% Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 4,273,726 4,207,572 4,366,932 4,583, ,254 5% Benefits 1,748,211 1,726,913 1,954,089 2,066, ,581 6% Contractual services 197, , , ,600 (4,300) (2%) Other services 358, , , ,950 (5,100) (2%) Materials / supplies 435, , , ,700 (16,650) (6%) Interfund charges-cdc (259,078) (523,885) (547,330) (642,464) (95,134) 17% Interfund charges-other 411, , , ,597 17,735 4% Capital outlay 15,166 37,087 80,000 80, % Fiscal charges N/A $ 7,180,024 6,845,634 7,046,853 7,272, ,386 3% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp % % By Division: Animal Control (1.97) (39%) Detention % Consolidated Dispatch % Emergency Management % Records / Administration (2.35) (20%) Operations % % In FY2013, the Police Department restructured its programs to be more efficient and provide better minimum staffing levels without increasing FTEs. Some Animal Control employees have been reclassed to Detention Officers. Also, Police Officers are performing some animal control functions. A vacant Sr Office Specialist position has been converted to a Detention Officer. One command level position was downgraded to a Police Officer position in order to provide police coverage to LANL. There is an increase in the the Consolidated Dispatch Center (CDC) due to an increase in the allocation of management administration and oversight to this function. 50% of the CDC is charged to the Fire Department for its share of dispatch services. There is also a reduction department-wide in supplies, training and copier rentals. **The Operations Program includes Emergency Management. 169

186 Program Purpose LOS ALAMOS POLICE DEPARTMENT The purpose of Los Alamos Police Department (LAPD) is to provide police patrol, emergency response investigative services, records management, and emergency planning and disaster recovery services to citizens, visitors, and employees within Los Alamos so they can feel safe. The LAPD manages a Detention facility to monitor, detain and hold inmates so that their basic personal needs are met during a safe confinement, and the LAPD also provides an Animal Control Program to provide animal pick up, enforcement, sheltering, fostering and adoption services to the community so that unwanted, dangerous, or noisy animals do not negatively impact citizens. Vision Statement Public Safety, implying Law Enforcement, underpins the entire Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement as stated in its preamble: "We will preserve our safe, small town atmosphere." Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Chief Torpy Welcomes Volunteers to the LAPD Goal Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Coordinated d with numerous federal, state, t and locall agencies for the preservation of property and safety of Los Alamos residents during the Las Conchas fire. No reported accidents or major incidents in the town during the Coordinated and managed the safe and efficient evacuation and re-population of Los Alamos during the Las Conchas fire. Received the 2012 Department of Defense - Employer Supporting the Guard and Reserve for being a patriotic employer. Received the award for employing numerous National Guard and Reserve members and working with their schedule so that they can meet their military obligations. Received accreditation in 2010 and continued to maintain a Police Department exemplifying operational excellence. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey is an integral part of the County's comprehensive performance measurement and management system. The rating reflects the level of service provided to the community by the Police Department. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: County Residents Receive Quality Police Services Percent of residents surveyed through the community survey that rated Police services as either "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of residents surveyed through the community survey that rated law enforcement of DUI/DWI as either "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of residents surveyed through the community survey that rated how safe the citizens felt from crime as either "Always Safe" or "Usually Safe". FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual 87% 89% 90% 89% 89% 89% 99% 99% 99% 170

187 Measures: Quality LOS ALAMOS POLICE DEPARTMENT Citizen Satisfaction Level with Police Services Citizen Satisfaction Level with Enforcement of DUI/DWI 100% 100% 95% 95% 90% 87% 89% 90% 90% 89% 89% 89% 85% 85% 80% 80% 75% FY2009 FY2011 FY % FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 Citizen Rating of How Safe They Feel in the Community 100% 99% 99% 99% 95% 90% 85% 80% 78.5% CPM Median 79% CPM Median 75% FY2009 FY2011 FY

188 LOS ALAMOS POLICE DEPARTMENT Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Routine Essential Services Outcome: PD Operates Efficiently Core Officer Staffing Per 1,000 Standards Nationwide City Agencies * Nationwide County Agencies N/A * West Region (10,000-24,999) * Mountain Region (10,000-24,999) * New Mexico * Los Alamos Number of Sworn Officers Number of Officers per 1,000 FY2009 Actual FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Uniformed Crime Reports-Violent Crime Rates Based On Incidents Reported Per 100,000/Population West Region Mountain Region New Mexico Los Alamos * * * Uniformed Crime Reports-Property Crime Rates Based On Incidents Reported Per 100,000/Population West Region 2, , ,831.5 * Mountain Region 3, , ,948.3 * New Mexico 3, , ,531.5 * Los Alamos 1, , Uniformed Crime Reports-Violent Crimes Cleared by Law Enforcement National 47.1% 47.2% 47.7% * West 45.7% 45.4% 45.8% * Mountain 47.5% 48.4% 48.0% * Los Alamos 67.8% 73.6% 78.0% 80.0% 80% 80% Uniformed Crime Reports-Property Crimes Cleared by Law Enforcement National West Mountain Los Alamos * Data not available until September % 18.3% 18.6% * 16.4% 16.3% 16.0% * 19.1% 19.0% 18.9% * 10.9% 24.0% 29.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Narrative and Analysis The Police Department uses the National Uniformed Crime Reports (UCR) as the basis for comparisons in the performance measures. By continually evaluating these UCR figures the Department is able to identify emerging trends and change tactics to quickly address issues as they arise. As shown by the Crime Stats, incidents of crime in Los Alamos County remain considerably lower than the National and Regional comparisons, while the Percentage of Crimes Cleared in Los Alamos County remains considerably higher than the National and Regional Comparisons. 172

189 Measures: Efficiency LOS ALAMOS POLICE DEPARTMENT Comparison of Violent Crime Rate Los Alamos West Region Mountain Region New Mexico FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Comparison of Violent Crimes Cleared 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Los Alamos National West Mountain 78.0% 80.0% 80% 80% 73.6% 67.8% 47.5% 48.4% 48.0% 47.1% 47.7% 47.2% 45.7% 45.4% 45.8% FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Comparison of Property Crime Rates Los Alamos West Region Mountain Region New Mexico 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,000.0 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Comparison of Property Crimes Cleared 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Los Alamos West Mountain National 29.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 24.0% 19.1% 19.0% 18.9% 18.6% 18.3% 18.6% 16.4% 16.0% 16.3% 10.9% FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 173

190 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 174

191 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Description The Public Works Department is comprised of the following areas of responsibility: engineering and surveying, project management, equipment and fleet maintenance, street maintenance, traffic operations and maintenance, transit, environmental services, airport, and support of Major Maintenance and Capital Improvement programs. Department Summary Expenditures by Program Transit Environmental Services Traffic Airport Streets Capital Projects - Roads Administration Equipment Engineering/ Surveying Expenditures as % of General Fund General Fund 88% Public Works 12% 175

192 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Administration $ 333, , , ,665 (97,227) (28%) Engineering/Surveying 565, , , ,275 69,399 12% Equipment 3,959,746 4,819,060 3,909,053 3,762,067 (146,986) (4%) Streets 1,753,958 3,572,194 3,233,433 2,907,368 (326,065) (10%) Traffic 1,435,458 1,489,648 1,624,421 1,371,170 (253,251) (16%) Transit 3,335,992 4,286,580 5,341,102 4,457,058 (884,044) (17%) Environmental Services 4,535,922 5,747,251 4,093,563 4,010,232 (83,331) (2%) Airport 3,690,638 1,345, , , ,600 81% Capital Projects - Roads 6,221,728 8,666,354 2,545,000 3,900,000 1,355,000 53% $ 25,833,196 30,778,894 22,006,796 21,924,891 (81,905) 0% % Expenditures by Fund: General $ 4,089,170 5,913,807 5,767,622 5,160,478 (607,144) (11%) Equipment Fund 3,959,746 4,819,060 3,909,053 3,762,067 (146,986) (4%) Transit 3,335,992 4,286,580 5,341,102 4,457,058 (884,044) (17%) Environmental Services 4,535,922 5,747,251 4,093,563 4,010,232 (83,331) (2%) Airport 3,690,638 1,345, , , ,600 81% Capital Projects - Roads 6,221,728 8,666,354 2,545,000 3,900,000 1,355,000 53% $ 25,833,196 30,778,894 22,006,796 21,924,891 (81,905) 0% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Limited term (1.00) (13%) Casual, Student,& Temp % % FTEs by Division: Administration (0.54) (18%) Engineering/Surveying % Equipment % Streets % Traffic (0.87) (8%) Transit (0.63) (2%) Environmental Services % Airport % Capital Improvements Projects % % Details on Capital Improvements Projects are provided in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Section beginning on page

193 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ADMINISTRATION Administration Division Mission The Administration Division provides the Public Works Department with support services and courteous customer service to internal staff and the community. Administration Division Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 236, , , ,538 (68,331) (29%) Benefits 69,616 60,749 77,934 56,083 (21,851) (28%) Contractual services 3,375 3,372 3,535 7,000 3,465 98% Other services 12,480 12,924 15,730 7,270 (8,460) (54%) Materials / supplies 2,504 11,428 5,565 2,625 (2,940) (53%) Interfund charges 9,713 7,442 6,259 7, % $ 333, , , ,665 (97,227) (28%) % FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (0.54) (18%) Casual, Student,& Temp N/A (0.54) (18%) A portion of the Public Works Director's salary and benefits is allocated from the General Fund to the Environmental Services Fund. Out of state training and travel reduced. Reduction in memberships and staff will not attend 3CMA's conference on public outreach. Also, less materials and supplies. 177

194 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ENGINEERING/SURVEYING Engineering/Surveying Mission The Engineering Divison is responsible for the design, construction and supervision of municipal improvements within the public right-of-way. It also provides technical and administrative expertise for technical review, contracting, budgeting, scheduling, procuring, managing, and overseeing countywide engineering projects in the capital improvements program, street replacement and street maintenance projects. Provides oversight of improvements completed in conjunction with private developments and coordinates a variety of programs to ensure County operations comply with County, State and Federal regulations. Works closely with developers to ensure public improvements are built in accordance to County Construction Standards. Serves on Interdepartmental Review Committee to review development applications and advises the planning and zoning commission, other boards and commissions and County Council. The Survey Division provides survey support to County owned properties to properly assess boundaries and support in the vacating and granting of easements, the disposal and leasing of County owned real property, as well as other types of real property and land related transactions. Also provides survey support for the County s Capital Improvement Program and activities. The purpose of the CIP Program - Streets is to provide major maintenance of the roadway infrastructure including pavement, curb/gutter, sidewalks, and storm drains, so that reasonably safe streets are provided for the community. Engineering/Surveying Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 389, , , ,299 39,568 11% Benefits 113,145 91, , ,293 6,394 5% Contractual services 18,087 24,149 7,200 25,033 17, % Other services 7,807 17,934 20,311 24,624 4,313 21% Materials / supplies 12,963 10,461 10,510 6,000 (4,510) (43%) Interfund charges 24,813 20,620 21,225 27,026 5,801 27% $ 565, , , ,275 69,399 12% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) Gen Fund % Regular (full & part time) CIP Fund % % Includes addition of two FTEs transferred from Community and Economic Development, Project Management Division. Although there is an increase in contractual services, the majority of the increase is from costs being transferred from other divisions ($20K). The net amount is a reduction. The impact of this reduction is to bring project inspection in-house which requires two staff per street project which will reduce the number of reconstruction/rehab projects that can be scheduled in any given year. 178

195 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING PROGRAM Program Purpose The purpose of the Engineering Program is to provide project management, civil design, survey and inspection services to County departments and private contractors so they can make thrifty, timely and informed decisions. Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Significant Accomplishments Provided emergency operations support during the Las Conchas fire. Completed various road reconstruction or rehabilitation projects, including: Phase 3 of the Diamond Drive reconstruction; and, the Barranca Mesa Phase 1 Pavement Rehabilitation Project. Performance Measures Results Measures: Quality Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Outcome: Road Conditions Meet the Community's Need Percent year over year increase in the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend -8.23% -0.67% 1.36% 0.00% Paved lane miles assessed as being in "Fair" or better condition (PCI>61) as a percentage of paved lane miles assessed 69.90% 74.66% 76.39% 76.39% Average Pavement Condition Index FY2010 Actual 03/15/10 FY2011 Actual 09/23/11 FY2012 Actual 03/07/12 FY2013 Actual 03/01/13 FY2014 Adopted 76.47% 70.18% 69.71% 70.66% 70.66% Narrative and Analysis The high variance between FY 2012 (September 2011) and FY 2011 is attributed to the County wide pavement condition reassessment completed in The update revealed a 8.23% drop from previous year due to implementation of a different methodology that included roughness and structural capacity. The equivalent lane miles continue to be reported since June FY2012. Equivalent lane miles are calculated by taking the actual total area of a respective road segment and then dividing it by its assumed/equivalent lane width of 12' as defined in the "Highway and Road Maintenance Descriptors" of the ICMA survey procedures. As of March 1, 2013, Los Alamos County has approximately Lane Miles. Public Works anticipates no increase in lane miles having a PCI 61 or better for FY2014. This is due to current and future funding level reductions that reduce size and scope of projects as well as deferring them to later years. Currently, the PCIs for those segments that will not receive maintenance treatments in FY will continue to fall. 179

196 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING PROGRAM County has an equivalent (12ft wide) total of lane miles (Does not include Parking Lot Pavements) Length in Lane- Feet Length in Lane- Miles Percent PCI Range Condition Rating 23, Poor 177, Unacceptable 128, Satisfactory 441, Fair 392, Good 230, Excellent Total Miles % CPM Measure % PCI 61 or Better 180

197 Equipment Division Mission PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - EQUIPMENT Respond to County equipment needs using creativity, flexibility, training depth, and technical expertise. equipment to operating divisions on a rental rate recovery basis. Provide Equipment Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 525, , , ,974 (44,830) (8%) Benefits 204, , , ,962 (18,720) (9%) Contractual services 108, , , ,500 39,500 36% Other services 27,804 32,049 43,510 30,910 (12,600) (29%) Materials / supplies 1,454,610 1,489,770 1,607,527 1,680,047 72,520 5% Interfund charges 291, , , ,074 (55,056) (13%) Capital outlay 1,346,470 2,183, , ,600 (127,800) (13%) $ 3,959,746 4,819,060 3,909,053 3,762,067 (146,986) (4%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Capital outlay purchases scheduled for FY2014 have been reviewed, and where possible, have been deferred into out-years. There is the potential by deferring purchases for an increase in maintenance costs. Salaries and benefits have decreased and contractual labor has increased due to a temporary employee issue. There is also an increase for fuel and parts. Interfund charges have decreased with a new cost plan allocation method for administrative overhead charged to this fund. 181

198 Program Purpose PUBLIC WORKS - FLEET EQUIPMENT PROGRAM The purpose of the Fleet Program is to provide vehicle maintenance, repair and replacement services to County staff so they use safe and reliable County vehicles. Fleet Mechanics Work Diligently to Ensure Vehicles are Road Ready and Safe Strategic Focus Area Operational Excellence Goal Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Significant Accomplishments Fully implemented the new Fleet Management System (Assetworks). Implemented a real-time Labor Capture Module that allows for real-time cost analysis and reporting. Upgraded the Fleet Management software and implemented a Passive Fueling System (AIM2) which ensures fuel accountability and security. Automated the process of recording maintenance and repair expenditures in a paperless system. Performance Measures Results Internal Quality Customer Service Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Services The Fleet Division participates in the Internal Quality Customer Service Survey which measures the satisfaction level of County staff with vehicle maintenance and repair services. Fleet made a number of improvements to their fueling system, Equipment Management System, and increased communication among users and staff. 182

199 PUBLIC WORKS - FLEET EQUIPMENT PROGRAM Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Fleet Staff Provide Quality Repairs FY2010 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual Percent of employees rating overall quality of Fleet services as "Good" or "Excellent". 74% 57.9% 62.9% Measure: Quality 100% 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% County Employees Rate Fleet Services 74% 57.9% 98% CPM Median 62.9% FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Goal: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Outcome: Fleet Staff Operate Efficiently FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend Core Staffing Indicator Hours billed as a percentage of hours available. 67% 70% 73% 73% Narrative and Analysis The percentage of billable hours increased with the full implementation of the new Fleet Management System which captures real-time labor statistics. Demand for services increased and the amount of downtime decreased resulting in greater work efficiencies. There will be a reduction in the number of replacement vehicles purchased in FY2014. However, there will be no delay in purchasing safety and mission critical vehicles and equipment. 183

200 PUBLIC WORKS - FLEET EQUIPMENT PROGRAM Measure: Efficiency Percentage of Hours Billed for Vehicle Maintenance and Repairs Increase 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 62% 67% 65% CPM Median 70% 70% CPM Median FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate 73% 73% FY2014 Adopted 184

201 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - TRAFFIC AND STREETS Traffic and Streets Division Mission Provide both planned and responsive monitoring and repair to minimize the life-cycle cost of our County transportation system and to ensure safe, comfortable and reliable infrastructure. Traffic and Streets Program Budget Expenditures by Program: FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Streets $ 1,753,958 3,572,194 3,233,433 2,907,368 (326,065) (10%) Traffic 1,435,458 1,489,648 1,624,421 1,371,170 (253,251) (16%) $ 3,189,416 5,061,842 4,857,854 4,278,538 (579,316) (12%) % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 1,212,652 1,288,746 1,407,587 1,362,974 (44,613) (3%) Benefits 515, , , ,799 (35,982) (6%) Contractual services 256,430 1,692,321 1,145, ,045 (264,514) (23%) Other services 43,629 43,046 46,922 41,130 (5,792) (12%) Materials / supplies 616, , , ,592 (73,523) (12%) Interfund charges 422, , , ,198 (101,668) (11%) Capital outlay 121, ,563 69,024 15,800 (53,224) (77%) $ 3,189,416 5,061,842 4,857,854 4,278,538 (579,316) (12%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp (0.37) (34%) (0.37) (1%) FTEs by Program Streets % Traffic (0.87) (8%) (0.37) (1%) In the Streets program, benefits have decreased due to a decrease in expenses for worker's compensation and long term disability. Also, there is a lower level of medical benefit participation. Contractual services are reduced which will result in a lower level of service for snow removal, including plowing, hauling and clearing right of ways. This also includes a reduction in snow removal at Pajarito Cliffs Site. Pavement preservation program is reduced resulting in lower level of service in maintaining existing pavement, total area preserved each year will be less deferring pavement maintenance and life of existing pavement. There is also a reduction in equipment maintenance and replacement interdepartmental charges. In the Traffic program, a portion of the salary and benefits for the Transportation Safety Specialist are allocated to the Transit Fund from the General Fund. Overall reductions in this division result in the following impacts: Streetlight night patrol will occur only one time per month instead of weekly potentially resulting in citizen complaints; lower level of roadway striping will occur potentially falling below minimum federal standards and special projects for parking lots, roadway overlays and repairs that require striping will no longer be covered; eliminate traffic count stations that provide traffic count data as required by development code (the County will pursue changing the code so that it is not required to provide baseline data to developers which is in line with other jurisdications); reduce the pace of the LED replacement project which reduces potential utility savings; reduce all supplies 20% across the board for uniforms, signals, flashers, signs, etc. 185

202 PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC AND STREETS TRAFFIC Program Purpose The purpose of the Traffic Program is to install and maintain traffic control equipment (roadway signage, roadway striping, traffic signals, streetlights and school flashers), manage roadwork zones, support special events, and provide analysis services to the traveling public, police, fire, and road construction crews so they can travel and work more efficiently and in a safe environment. Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Significant Accomplishments Completed replacing streetlights on Trinity Drive with LEDs. Upgraded traffic signal cabinet at Trinity and Oppenheimer. Installed permanent count stations on Central, Diamond, East Road, and Canyon. Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Outcome: County Roads are Safe and Efficiently Operated Number of work zones managed. Number of linear feet of lane lines striped. Number of traffic signs fabricated, maintained or repaired. Number of traffic signals replaced, maintained or repaired. Number of flashers replaced, maintained or repaired. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend , , , ,000 1,585 1,500 2,000 2, Narrative and Analysis Due to FY2014 budget cuts, the amount of striping work to be completed is expected to decrease by approximately 10 percent. The number of signs fabricated or repaired is expected to increase in FY2013 due to scheduled work that involves replacing many small street identification signs in designated areas (each street identification sign has four small signs that will be replaced, each counting as one sign). Although the number of signs will increase, the overall budget for sign materials will decrease by approximately 20 percent. Also, due to FY2014 budget cuts, streetlight night patrols will occur only one time per month instead of every week. Measures: Outputs Number of Work Zones Managed Number of Linear Feet of Lanes Striped , , , , , , , , , FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 100,000 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 186

203 PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC AND STREETS Measures: Outputs Traffic Signs Fabricated, Maintained, or Repaired Traffic Signals Replaced, Maintained, or Repaired 2, ,000 1,500 1,915 1,585 1,500 2,000 2, , FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 0 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Traffic Flashers Replaced, Maintained, or Repaired FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 187

204 STREETS Program Purpose PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC AND STREETS The Streets Program is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, repairing, and maintaining the surface transportation system in Los Alamos County. The Program purpose is to provide responsible, quality maintenance of the transportation system to ensure safe, comfortable and efficient roads and streets, while minimizing citizen inconvenience. Streets Crew Resurfacing East Park Parking Lot East Park Lot Ready for Families and other Park Visitors Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Significant Accomplishments Completed 3,970 lane miles of street sweeping. Expended $644,000 on snow and ice removal in FY2012. Replaced 2,992 square feet of sidewalk. Spent 866 employee hours patching potholes throughout the County. Spent almost $1.0 million on streets preservation projects including rehabilitation of various White Rock streets. Street Preservation also included fog sealing on various townsite streets. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey results are reported in the following table and charts. The ratings reflect the public's perception of road and sidewalk conditions. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Outcome: County Residents Travel on Quality Surfaces Percent of citizens surveyed reporting road conditions as "Good" or "Mostly Good Condition". Percent of citizens surveyed reporting sidewalk conditions as "Good" or "Mostly Good Condition". FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual 69% 62% 66.9% 68% 72% 65.5% 188

205 Measures: Quality PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC AND STREETS Citizen Satisfaction Level with Road Conditions Citizen Satisfaction Level with Sidewalk Conditions 75% 75% 72% 70% 65% 69% 62% 66.9% 70% 65% 68% 65.5% 60% FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Service and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Outcome: County Residents Travel on Quality Surfaces Operating and maintenance expenditures for street sweeping per lane mile. Road rehabilitation expenditures per lane mile. 60% FY2011 Actual FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend $ $ $ $ $ 3,194 $ 6,359 $ 4,073 $ 3,037 Narrative and Analysis Costs for street sweeping increased slightly. The FY2013 Estimate and FY2014 projected costs for road rehabilitation have gone down due to budget reductions in the Pavement Preservation Program. Less road rehab/paving work will be completed in FY2014. Measures: Efficiency Street Sweeping Cost Per Lane Mile $40 $39.29 $39.32 $39.81 $35 $30 $32.20 $34.00 CPM Median $25 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Street Rehabilitation Cost Per Lane Mile $7,000 $6,000 $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $ $6,359 $4,073 $3,194 $3,037 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 189

206 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - TRANSIT Transit Division Mission Improve and strengthen mobility in Los Alamos County and the surrounding region through an effective, efficient, and dependable transit system. Transit Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 1,326,101 1,424,160 1,699,604 1,748,285 48,681 3% Benefits 615, , , ,701 (67,220) (8%) Contractual services 82,969 38,613 74,600 45,600 (29,000) (39%) Other services 60,153 81,164 78,951 72,951 (6,000) (8%) Materials / supplies 113, , , , % Interfund charges 1,082,843 1,134,103 1,442,636 1,199,241 (243,395) (17%) Capital outlay 55, ,365 1,058, ,000 (588,000) (56%) $ 3,335,992 4,286,580 5,341,102 4,457,058 (884,044) (17%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Limited term (1.00) (13%) (0.63) (2%) Elimination of one limited term Transit Operator FTE. Also salary and benefits allocation increased from the General Fund for the PW Director and the Transportation Safety Specialist. There is a lower level of benefit participation than what was budgeted in the FY2013 budget for the new limited term FTEs. Budget reduction impacts include the elimination of the Pajarito Acres fixed-route service, elimination of the Ski Hill service, and Bandelier service will end on Oct 28, 2013 instead of Nov. 30, Interfund charges have decreased with a new cost plan allocation method for administrative overhead charged to this fund. Also a lower level of bus purchases is scheduled for FY

207 PUBLIC WORKS - TRANSIT DIVISION Program Purpose The purpose of the Transit Program is to provide safe, efficient, and dependable transportation choices to the traveling public of Los Alamos County so they will experience improved mobility throughout the community. The Atomic City Transit System Serves Transportation Needs of LA County Residents and Visitors. Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Significant Accomplishments Implemented the Bandelier Shuttle Service in June of 2012 in partnership with Bandelier National Park Service. Implemented the Pajarito Ski Route in December of Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey results are reported in the following table and charts. The ratings reflect the level of customer service provided to the community. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual Outcome: Residents Enjoy Quality Transit Services Percent of citizens surveyed that indicated someone from their household had used transit at least once in the prior month. Percent of citizens surveyed that used transit and rated their experience as "Good" or "Excellent". 43% 25% 66% N/A 99% 97.9% 191

208 Measures: Quality PUBLIC WORKS - TRANSIT DIVISION Number of Citizens Indicating They Use Transit Rises Riders' Satisfaction Level with Transit Services 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 43% 25% 66% 100% 95% 90% 85% 80% 99% 97.9% 0% FY2009 FY2011 FY % FY2011 FY2013 Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend Outcome: Residents Enjoy Efficient Transit Services Number of one-way passenger trips. Number of miles of service provided. Total LAC General Fund contribution. Cost per mile from General Fund. 449, , , , , , , ,000 $ 1,458,448 $ 1,634,758 $ 1,600,000 $ 1,300,000 $ 2.32 $ 2.42 $ 2.06 $ 1.70 Narrative and Analysis The number of Passenger Trips and Miles of Service has risen significantly since FY2010. Therefore, the General Fund has been able to contribute less to the Transit Fund. Federal grant awards throughout the first few years of operations as well as the NCRTD Transit GRT allocated for Atomic City Transit, allow the County contribution to decline. However, due to reduced GRT county-wide, some reductions are being made in FY2014 in the Transit operation. Bandelier service will end on October 28, 2013 instead of November 30, The Pajarito Acres fixed route and the ski hill service are eliminated. The reduced Miles of Service measure is reflected in the FY2014 Proposed column. 192

209 Measures: Outputs PUBLIC WORKS - TRANSIT DIVISION Number of One-way Passenger Trips and Miles Driven Number of miles of service provided Number of one way passenger trips 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000, , , , , , , , ,157 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate 575, , , ,000 FY2014 Adopted Measures: Efficiency Los Alamos County General Fund Contribution to Transit General Fund Cost Per Mile $1,700,000 $1,500,000 $1,300,000 $1,100,000 $900,000 $1,458,448 $1,634,758 $1,600,000 $1,300,000 $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $2.32 $2.42 $2.06 $1.70 $700,000 $0.50 $500,000 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted $0.00 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 193

210 Department Description PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES The Environmental Services Division accounts for the operation of the County landfill, commercial and residential refuse collection, curbside and drop off recycling, and composting of yard waste. Environmental Services Division Mission Provide exceptional solid waste and sustainability services to create a better community for current and future generations. Environmental Services Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 775, , , ,972 36,333 5% Benefits 350, , , ,440 33,193 10% Contractual services 1,968,232 3,190,098 1,373,001 1,196,000 (177,001) (13%) Other services 29,864 37,872 47,030 47, % Materials / supplies 96,512 93,153 93, ,770 10,020 11% Interfund charges 947, , ,327 1,085, ,604 13% Capital outlay 7,320 5, ,000 0 (110,000) (100%) Fiscal charges 360, , , , % 4,535,922 5,747,251 4,093,563 4,010,232 (83,331) (2%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp N/A % A portion of the PW Director salary and benefits is allocated here from the General Fund. Reduction in contractual services for solid waste transfer and disposal based on historical usage and current activity. Net increase in interdepartmental charges for administrative overhead, building maintenance, equipment replacement and maintenance. One-time purchase of capital outlay in FY

211 PUBLIC WORKS - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Program Purpose The Environmental Services Division provides solid waste and recycling services to the community while pursuing waste management strategies that emphasize waste reduction, reuse and recycling; and works to advance sustainable practices within the County and community. Preparing Landfill Base Area for the Installation of Geosynthetic Clay Liner, a Barrier Designed to Keep Water Out of the Landfill Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Significant Accomplishments Assisted with debris management during the Las Conchas fire. Completed the installation of cap for landfill closure. Adjusted the Quarterly Pick-Up program to increase efficiencies and address customer feedback. Performance Measures Results Biennial Community Survey Results - Quality and Effectiveness of Programs The Los Alamos County Community Survey results are reported in the following table and charts. The ratings reflect the level of satisfaction with Environmental Programs provided to the community. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Outcome: Residents Appreciate Sustainability Programs FY2009 Actual FY2011 Actual FY2013 Actual Percent of citizens rating the effectiveness of environmental sustainability programs as "Good" or "Excellent". Percent of citizens rating residential recycling service "Good" or "Excellent". N/A 67% 72.9% 83% 82% 71.3% 195

212 PUBLIC WORKS - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Measures: Quality Citizens Rate Environmental Sustainability Services Citizens Rate Recycling Services 90% 90% 85% 80% 75% 72.9% 85% 80% 75% 83% 82% 81% CPM Median 85% CPM Median 70% 67.0% 70% 71.3% 65% FY2011 FY % FY2009 FY2011 FY2013 Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Outcome: Residents Enjoy Efficient Recycling Residential waste generated per account (in tons). Percent of waste recycled per EPA guidelines.* Percent of waste diverted from the landfill.** Monthly cost per residential customer. Cost per commercial dumpster pick up completed. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend % 21% 23% 27% 70% 43% 50% 60% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ * Calculated using EPA recycling rate calculation guidelines which does not include concrete, oil, or wastewater treatment plan sludge recycle. ** Includes all materials diverted from the landfill through recycling which includes concrete, oil and wastewater treatment plan sludge. Narrative and Analysis Closure work done on the Los Alamos County landfill in FY2012 negatively affected recycling and diversion operations. Green waste and concrete recycling operations were shut down for a limited period of time during the closure process. Wastewater treatment plant sludge was and continues to be, sent off the hill for disposal until the new composting facility in Bayo Canyon is established. In FY2012 the Environmental Services Division completed an audit of all the commercial dumpsters. This audit resulted in an improved estimation of the number of dumpster pick-ups. As a result, there was a significant reduction in the estimated number of dumpster pick ups. Therfore, the same expenditure level is spread over a fewer number of commercial properties, causing the increase in the cost per dumpster pickup between FY2011 and FY

213 PUBLIC WORKS - ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Measures: Outputs Residential Waste Collected (In Tons) Percent of Waste Recycled Per EPA Guidelines 30% 25% 24% 21% 23% 27% % % % 5% 0% FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 0.00 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Measures: Efficiency Percent of Waste Diverted From The Landfill Monthly Cost Per Residential Customer 80% 70% 60% 50% 70% 43% 50% 60% $20.00 $19.75 $ % 30% $19.50 $19.46 $19.40 $ % 10% $ % FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted $19.00 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Cost Per Commercial Dumpster Pick Up $17.50 $17.00 $16.50 $16.00 $15.50 $15.00 $14.50 $14.00 $14.92 $16.90 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate $17.20 $17.22 FY2014 Adopted 197

214 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - AIRPORT Airport Division Mission The Airport Division will maintain and enhance the Los Alamos Airport to ensure safe air transportation and mobility is maintained for both general aviation and the new commercial air service. Airport Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 105, , , ,184 13,951 11% Benefits 44,403 37,266 46,789 47,896 1,107 2% Contractual services 3,440,518 1,091,976 13, , , % Other services 10,756 14,726 10,014 12,600 2,586 26% Materials / supplies 4,887 6,299 12,050 12, % Interfund charges 84,254 88,282 99, , % Capital outlay 0 0 3,000 0 (3,000) (100%) Fiscal charges ,750 0 (36,750) (100%) $ 3,690,638 1,345, , , ,600 81% % FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp N/A % Possible use of casual labor due to increase in hours of operation related to the new air service. Also increase for grant funded capital project to rehabilitate Taxiways C and F. Fiscal charges for debt service related to a loan for the new hangars have been removed with the delay of that project. 198

215 PUBLIC WORKS - AIRPORT Program Purpose The Airport Division will maintain and enhance the Los Alamos Airport to ensure safe air transportation for the general aviation needs of the County and its business community. Commercial air service between Los Alamos County Airport (LAM) and Albuquerque International Airport (ABQ) is scheduled to start in April Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Routine Essential Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Significant Accomplishments Inaugurated scheduled commercial air service between Los Alamos County Airport and Albuquerque International Airport. Completed the agreement in partnership with New Mexico Airlines, the County and LANL. Initiated an update to the Airport Master Plan; the first comprehensive review of the Airport operations since Completed the rehabilitation and extension of the runway, adding 450'. Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Improve Transportation and Mobility Outcome: The Airport is Operated Safely and Efficiently Number of based aircraft. Percent of aircraft parking spaces leased. Percent of operating expenses recovered through revenues. Number of takeoffs and landings. Expenditure per takeoff and landing accommodated. Percent of take offs and landings without an accident or incident attributed to airport facilities. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend % 85% 79% 79% 38.2% 33.4% 34.5% 33.4% 13,510 13,500 13,500 15,264 * $ $ $ % 100% 100% 100% 199

216 Narrative and Analysis PUBLIC WORKS - AIRPORT The number of aircraft parking spaces leased declined slightly after the October 2012 hail storm. The number of takeoffs and landings is expected to increase after the scheduled air service between Albuquerque International Airport and the Los Alamos Airport begins. The expenditures per takeoff and landing will also decrease as the commercial flights increase. Measures: Efficiency Percentage of Aircraft Spaces Under Lease Number of Aircraft Parked at the LA Airport Number of Lease Spaces Available % 85% 79% 79% 20 0 FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Expenditures Per Takeoffs and Landings Number of Takeoffs and Landings Accommodated Expenditure per Takeoff and Landing Accommodated 15,500 15,000 14,500 14,000 13,500 13,000 12,500 $ ,264 $24.36 $ ,500 13,500 FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 200

217 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 0 201

218 Department Vision, Values and Mission UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Vision: The Utilities Department provides world-class services to our unique market. Values: We value our customers, employees, natural resources, community and partnerships. Mission: To provide safe and reliable utility services at competitive rates to support the community now and to explore diversified choices for our community's future. Department Description Los Alamos County (LAC) Utilities Department's function is to provide our customers with quality electric, natural gas, water, and wastewater services to meet current and future needs and to achieve the highest level of customer satisfaction. Department Summary Expenditures by Program/Subfund Water Distribution Wastewater Water Production, Gas Electric Distribution Electric Production 202

219 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Electric Production $ 42,716,499 42,928,801 45,209,186 51,504,165 6,294,979 14% Electric Distribution 5,005,628 5,416,186 5,540,934 5,861, ,240 6% Gas 5,760,578 5,290,942 5,981,674 6,776, ,221 13% Water Production 4,715,155 4,310,088 8,313,534 10,014,157 1,700,623 20% Water Distribution 1,639,302 1,849,947 1,998,264 2,376, ,909 19% Wastewater 4,851,135 4,137,797 5,636,552 5,003,960 (632,592) (11%) $ 64,688,297 63,933,761 72,680,144 81,536,524 8,856,380 12% % Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 5,949,122 5,988,742 6,130,853 6,318, ,359 3% Benefits 2,100,685 2,133,282 2,361,568 2,362, % Contractual services 39,606,006 38,447,883 46,303,735 55,040,842 8,737,107 19% Other services 1,316,707 1,334,690 1,494,090 1,501,944 7,854 1% Materials / supplies 1,568,080 2,126,065 1,171,408 1,169,789 (1,619) 0% Interfund charges 2,756,110 2,698,087 3,784,995 3,797,456 12,461 0% Capital outlay 424, , , ,150 99,350 24% Fiscal charges 10,966,707 10,976,132 11,024,695 10,837,807 (186,888) (2%) $ 64,688,297 63,933,761 72,680,144 81,536,524 8,856,380 12% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (1.00) (1%) Casual, Student,& Temp % (0.28) 0% By Division: Electric Production % Electric Distribution (0.42) (1%) Gas % Water % Wastewater % (0.28) 0% 203

220 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Budget Summary Utilities Fund expenditures are $8.8 million higher, or 12%, in the FY2014 proposed budget than the FY2013 adopted budget. The majority of this increase is from an increase in purchased power due to projected load requirements and an increase in San Juan Operations due to environmental improvements. There is also an increase in planned capital expenditures. Revenues are $2.8 million lower, or 4%. There is a $13 million decrease in debt proceeds and an offsetting increase in wholesale and retail sales of $7.5 million. The majority of this increase is revenue associated with the increase in power load requirements at LANL and Kirtland/Sandia. A GWS position is eliminated which was being used to double fill the Deputy Utilities Manager- Finance until retirement of the incumbent. There is an increase in student intern labor to expand the program from summer only to include winter break. Electric Distribution (included in Admin) includes an increase for the scheduled management audit. There is also an increase for planned capital expenditures. The majority of the increase in Gas is for planned capital expenditures. Also there is an increase in the cost of gas based on a projection of a more typical seasonal weather/consumption. Both Water Production and Water Distribution have increases for planned capital expenditures. There is also an increase in Water Distribution for additional water meters to ramp up the water meter replacement program. The majority of the decrease in Wastewater is due to a decrease in planned capital expenditures offset by an increase in debt service. The budget for 2014 includes projected rate increases of 5% in the Gas sub-fund and 8% in Electric Distribution sub-fund. The rate increase addresses high capital and maintenance costs. It should also be noted that any utility rate changes will be subject to the normal review and approval requirements in the Charter including notices and public hearings. Significant Regional Recognitions and Accomplishments New Mexico Quality Award John Arrowsmith, Utilities Manager accepted an award at the 2011 Quality New Mexico Learning Summit and New Mexico Quality Awards Ceremony for the largest percentage of staff participating in the program. DPU had five staff members trained as examiners for Quality New Mexico. The New Mexico Association of Energy Engineers presented the 2010 Energy Leadership award to Utilities Manager John Arrowsmith and the Los Alamos Department of Public Utilities in connection with the Smart Grid Project. The American Public Power Association (APPA) offers a Public Power Manager (PPM) Certificate Program. Since its conception 50 individuals have taken the course, but only 20 have received the PPM certification. Deputy Utility Manager, Tim Glasco is one of the successful twenty to receive this prestigious certification. DPU s 60-second animated vignette featuring a robot character called Rec-Bot was awarded a first place Platinum Hermes Creative Award for best animation and a second place Gold Hermes Creative Award for educational video from the Association of Marketing and Communication Professionals. DPU employees shined during the Las Conchas fire and evacuation. While the town was evacuated, many DPU staff stayed behind to ensure that services continued. DPU staff answered phones, restored power to our ski hill and responded to calls for both emergency and non-emergency service. Damage to utility infrastructure was minimal. 204

221 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - ELECTRIC Division Description The Utilities Electric Production and Distribution Divisions manage the County's electric generation and transmission resources to meet the electric energy requirements for LAC customers and the DOE's LANL in the most costeffective manner. The Deputy Utilities Manager, Power Supply/Electric Production is chairman of the LAC/DOE Operating Committee which sets policy for the combined LAC/DOE power pool. The Distribution Division is responsible for maintenance, operation, and repair of all electric distribution lines and equipment owned by the County of Los Alamos to provide delivery of electric power to its customers. Electric Production Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Revenue and Expenditure Summary: Revenues $ 40,468,601 42,944,301 40,468,601 51,115,550 10,646,949 26% Expenditures 42,716,499 42,928,801 45,209,186 51,504,165 6,294,979 14% Net Revenues (Exp.) $ (2,247,898) 15,500 (4,740,585) (388,615) 4,351,970 Expenditures by Sub-Program: El Vado Generation $ 416, , , ,933 32,834 7% Abiquiu Generation 447, , , ,591 21,173 5% Contract Administration 16,387 14,222 18,065 18, % Load Control 1,194,745 1,276,881 1,390,247 1,546, ,613 11% Transmission - PNM 1,087,551 1,462,557 1,389,000 1,389, % Transmission - Other 2,931,289 2,722,666 3,469,947 3,202,121 (267,826) (8%) Purchased Power 13,174,790 12,795,411 14,601,603 17,744,394 3,142,791 22% Debt Service 9,112,621 9,147,842 9,084,275 8,748,251 (336,024) (4%) Property Taxes 323, , , , % Insurance 88, , , , % San Juan Operations 9,814,519 10,504,640 12,293,701 15,641,967 3,348,266 27% Interdepartmental Charges 254, , , ,193 (72,111) (16%) Eng/Admin O/H 698, , , ,856 (105771) (13%) San Juan Plant Adjustment N/A Capital Expenditures 3,156,671 3,251, , , , % $ 42,716,499 42,928,801 45,209,186 51,504,165 6,294,979 14% Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 1,062,765 1,118, ,417 1,071,082 81,665 8% Benefits 351, , , ,418 17,172 5% Contractual services 30,710,366 30,138,780 32,834,751 39,536,482 6,701,731 20% Other services 447, , , ,500 (26,000) (5%) Materials / supplies 50, ,508 67, ,900 43,150 64% Interfund charges 980, ,892 1,329,947 1,144,482 (185,465) (14%) Capital outlay 192,212 20,300 19,050 (1,250) (6%) Fiscal charges 9,112,622 9,147,842 9,084,275 8,748,251 (336,024) (4%) $ 42,716,499 42,928,801 45,209,186 51,504,165 6,294,979 14% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % 205

222 UTILITIES - ELECTRIC PRODUCTION Program Purpose The purpose of the Electric Production Program is to provide electrical energy services to the Los Alamos County Electric Distribution Division and the Department of Energy/Los Alamos National Laboratory so they can reliably serve their customers at competitive prices. The one megawatt solar array, Smart House and battery banks will test smart grid technology and applications for a period of two years. The Smart Grid Demonstration is a joint project between DPU, NEDO and LANL. Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Routine Essential Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Significant Accomplishments On Sept. 17, 2012, DPU, the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) and LANL were joined by Governor Susana Martinez and US Congressman Ben Ray Lujan to cut the ribbon for the U.S. - Japan Smart Grid Demonstration Project here in Los Alamos. It is the first international project in the U.S. to demonstrate how to place renewable energy safely and reliably onto the electric grid to meet a residential community's needs. The new electric generating unit at Abiquiu Lake completed its first year of operations having generated 22 thousand megawatt- hours of renewable energy and passing the one year warranty inspection with flying colors. The Department of Public Utilities along with PNM (operating agent) and other San Juan owners negotiated a lower cost solution to the Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) with the same level of reduced emissions. Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Areas: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Service and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Outcome: Provide Electrical Energy Services Reliably and Cost Effectively While Enhancing the Environmental Quality and Sustainability. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend Supply Percent of total energy supplied from County-owned resources and long-term purchase contracts. Cost per MWH Cost per MWH generated from owned resources and long term contracts. 84% 83% 91% 81% $ $ $ $ Narrative and Analysis In FY14, DPU is projecting lower production at El Vado and Abiquiu due to drought conditions and available water supply which lowers the percent of energy supplied from County-owned resources. For cost per megawatt, DPU discounted FY2013 for trending purposes as DPU had planned for no outages at San Juan in FY2013 and full production at the hydro plants which would have led to lower costs in megawatt hours generated from owned resources. 206

223 Electric Distribution Program Budget UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - ELECTRIC FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Revenue and Expenditure Summary: Revenues $ 2,955,665 2,773,123 4,961,904 4,204,842 (757,062) (15%) Expenditures 5,005,628 5,416,186 5,540,934 5,861, ,240 6% Net Revenues (Exp.) $ (2,049,963) (2,643,063) (579,030) (1,656,332) (1,077,302) 186% Expenditures by Sub-Program: Supervsn, Misc. Dir. Admin. $ 464, , , , ,202 74% Substation Maintenance 68,313 14,781 31,881 39,766 7,885 25% Switching Station Maint. 35,345 40,340 20,877 31,194 10,317 49% Overhead Maintenance 185, , , ,868 (7,857) (2%) Underground Maintenance 368, , , ,315 (45,281) (12%) Meter Maintenance 56,337 54,597 66,854 62,511 (4,343) (6%) Interdepartmental Charges 240, , , ,242 (40,202) (7%) Eng/Admin O/H 895, , , ,617 (83,765) (10%) In Lieu Taxes 400, , , , % Debt Service 742, , , ,353 (25,586) (3%) Capital Expenditures 1,549,176 2,114,968 1,503,124 1,686, ,870 12% $ 5,005,628 5,416,186 5,540,934 5,861, ,240 6% Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 2,453,569 2,495,659 2,877,316 2,837,199 (40,117) (1%) Benefits 835, ,301 1,136,634 1,083,684 (52,950) (5%) Contractual services 1,090,950 1,523,287 1,982,132 2,131, ,553 8% Other services 544, , , , ,854 6% Materials / supplies 797, , , ,489 (66,569) (18%) Interfund charges (1,710,121) (1,530,136) (2,400,793) (2,146,339) 254,454 (11%) Capital outlay 251,815 5, , ,600 63,600 45% Fiscal charges 742, , , ,354 (25,585) (3%) $ 5,005,628 5,416,186 5,540,934 5,861, ,240 6% % FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) (1.00) (2%) Casual, Student,& Temp % (0.42) (1%) 207

224 UTILITIES - ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION Program Purpose The purpose of the Electric Distribution Program is to provide electric energy services to Los Alamos County retail customers so they have access to reliable service at a reasonable price. The Electric Distribution Program includes a high degree of customer contact, including the operation of the Customer Care Center. The purpose of the Customer Care Center is to provide information and payment processing services to citizens of Los Alamos County so they can have easy access to the information they need about Los Alamos County government and a convenient method for making utility and property tax payments. The Customer Care Center is budgeted in the Electric Distribution fund, however its personnel serve all County citizens and Utility customers by providing General County information and answering 311 calls. Feeder overhead rebuild Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship DPU lineman ties into the distribution power grid Goals Maintain Quality Routine Essential Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Significant Accomplishments Completed the Feeder Electrical Overhead Rebuild in FY2012. Wooden poles were replaced in Pueblo and Walnut Canyons and overhead lines were replaced to enhance electric reliability to the many neighborhoods served: Barranca and North Mesas, North Community, Aspen, Quemazon and Ponderosa Estates. Configured and constructed the new Townsite electric circuit 18 in the autumn of 2011 by DPU linemen. It marks the beginning of a longer term effort to place commercial accounts on separate circuits from residential. Together with downtown commercial circuit 17, the newly built circuit 18, creates redundancy to enhance electric reliability. Worked with LANL to integrate the photovoltaic array and battery system into DPU's power grid. For six months of FY2012, Electric Distribution met the System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) target of sixty minutes for the prior twelve month period. 208

225 UTILITIES - ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Areas: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Service and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Outcome: Provide Electric Power to Customers Reliably and Cost Effectively While Enhancing the Environmental Quality and Sustainability. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend Reliability of Supply System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI), or the amount of time the average customer could expect to be without power, as a percentage of the American Public Power Association (APPA) average for this region. 337% 203% 100% 100% Rate Benchmark Ratio of Los Alamos County residential rate to the average residential rate of the 3 nearest electrical utilities. 85% 79% 85% 84% Narrative and Analysis The SAIDI measure for the duration of electric service interruptions for communities of our size is sixty minutes accumulated down time over a twelve month period as set by the American Public Power Association. Although the trend is improving, the actual SAIDI performance is still being addressed through capital projects to improve the infrastructure and provide greater reliability. The FY14 budget includes an electric rate increase of 8%. This is based primarily on the increase in the cost of power for FY14 due, in part, to the environmental improvements at San Juan and a continued program to increase electric reliability. Measure: Efficiency Electric Distribution Rate Comparison LAC Rate Average PNM, NORA, Jemez $80 $70 $60 $50 $40 $30 $20 $10 $ $62.54 $67.49 $63.23 $68.59 $53.55 $53.55 $53.55 $53.55 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) Los Alamos DPU 60 APPA Regional Average In Minutes for 12 Months, Ending

226 UTILITIES - CUSTOMER CARE CENTER Strategic Focus Areas: Operational Excellence Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Service Outcome: Achieve Excellence in Customer Service, Satisfaction and Loyalty. Percent of calls answered before rolling to a backup queue or going to Voice Mail. Number of customer care contacts. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 91% 92% 90% 92% 59,917 55,959 54,000 58,

227 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - GAS DISTRIBUTION Division Description The Utilities Gas Distribution Division is responsible for maintenance, operation, and repair of all gas distribution lines and equipment owned by LAC in order to provide gas service to its customers. In addition, the division conducts gas leak safety checks on a regular basis and responds to customer gas safety requests. Gas Distribution Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Revenue and Expenditure Summary: Revenues $ 6,441,303 5,520,386 5,878,972 5,971,057 92,085 2% Expenditures 5,760,578 5,290,942 5,981,674 6,776, ,221 13% Net Revenues (Exp.) $ 680, ,444 (102,702) (805,838) (703,136) 685% Expenditures by Sub-Program: Supervsn, Misc. Dir. Admin. $ 251, , , ,481 8,758 4% Gas Distribution 271, , , ,502 (37,055) (9%) Gas Meters 116,218 99, , ,727 (15,880) (10%) Interdepartmental Charges 160, , , ,906 46,132 13% Eng/Admin O/H 493, , , ,950 (66,367) (9%) In Lieu Taxes 171, , , , % Cost of Gas 3,540,342 2,468,984 3,357,672 3,387,190 29,518 1% Capital Expenditures 756,277 1,308, ,885 1,330, , % $ 5,760,578 5,290,942 5,981,674 6,776, ,221 13% Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 624, , , ,836 75,846 22% Benefits 47,775 88, , ,765 36,571 25% Contractual services 3,982,440 3,431,531 3,842,172 4,619, ,146 20% Other services 189, , , , % Materials / supplies 190, , , ,350 (7,000) (5%) Interfund charges 726, ,614 1,270,397 1,183,055 (87,342) (7%) Capital outlay 0 29,608 27,000 27, % $ 5,760,578 5,290,942 5,981,674 6,776, ,221 13% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Casual, Student,& Temp % % Note: FTE includes Gas, Water Distribution & Sewer Collections 211

228 UTILITIES - NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION Program Purpose The Utilities Natural Gas Distribution Program is responsible for maintenance, operation and repair of all gas distribution lines and equipment owned by Los Alamos County in order to provide gas service to its customers. In addition, the division conducts gas leak safety checks on a regular basis and responds to customer gas safety requests. Natural gas is a safe, clean, and efficient resource to use to heat water, homes, and cook meals. Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Routine Essential Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Significant Accomplishments Two major gas distribution projects were completed. The system now has greatly improved reliability and capacity as a result of completing the pipe line loop to North and Barranca Mesas. This marks the completion of three major capital improvement projects over the last six years to complete the loop. DPU replaced 1,250 feet of steel corroded gas main on East Road from Tewa Loop to Airport Road with HDPE and MDPE pipe. DPU replaced 2,200 feet of gas mainlines around the new Municipal Building. Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Essential Routine Service and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Outcome: Provide Natural Gas to Customers Reliably and Cost Effectively While Enhancing Environmental Quality and Sustainability. Rate Benchmark Percent of LAC price to New Mexico Gas Company rate to its customers. Customers Expenditure per natural gas customer served. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 95% 87% 85% 89% $ $ $ $ Narrative and Analysis The FY2014 budget includes a 5% increase in gas rates. This is due to lower sales and projected increases in the cost of gas. Measure: Rate Benchmark Average Gas Bill Comparison Los Alamos County and New Mexico GC $65 LAC Average Bill New Mexico Gas Company Average Bill $60 $55 $50 $58.83 $59.60 $60.00 $56.41 $53.18 $51.23 $50.65 $50.64 $45 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 212

229 UTILITIES - NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION Measure: Cost Effectiveness Expenditures Per Natural Gas Customer $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 $50 $ $ $ $ $ FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 213

230 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - WATER Division Description The Utilities Water Division is responsible for maintenance, operation, and repair of all water lines and equipment owned by the County of Los Alamos to provide safe water services to its customers. The Water Production Division ensures water quality control measures that meet or exceed state and federal regulations on safe drinking water. Water Production Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Revenue and Expenditure Summary: Revenues $ 4,851,636 3,642,569 16,264,558 4,239,003 (12,025,555) (74%) Expenditures 4,715,155 4,310,088 8,313,534 10,014,157 1,700,623 20% Net Revenues (Exp.) $ 136,481 (667,519) 7,951,024 (5,775,154) 13,726,178 Expenditures by Sub-Program: Supervision and Oper. $ 925, , ,478 1,008,858 55,380 6% Pumping Power 770, , , , % Wells 159, , , ,643 6,035 3% Booster Pump Stations 72,690 97, , ,720 (22,494) (11%) Treatment 48,508 47,832 77,970 87,753 9,783 13% Storage Tanks 61,724 41,842 24,033 27,093 3,060 13% Transmission Lines 10,507 32,480 78,750 60,707 (18,043) (23%) Non Potable System 132,392 87,145 67,675 90,382 22,707 34% Interdepartmental Charges 172, , , ,092 21,529 9% Eng/Admin O/H 174, , , ,913 (43,658) (12%) State Water Tax 42,975 41,609 43,050 43, % Capital Expenditures 2,095,902 1,568,294 5,150,000 6,791,081 1,641,081 32% Debt Service 47,812 47,812 93, , % $ 4,715,155 4,310,088 8,313,534 10,014,157 1,700,623 20% Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 625, , , ,874 32,356 5% Benefits 250, , , ,761 3,290 1% Contractual services 2,230,231 1,895,264 5,376,080 7,024,857 1,648,777 31% Other services 117, ,987 63,050 63, % Materials / supplies 156, , , , % Interfund charges 1,242,544 1,286,609 1,520,293 1,510,950 (9,343) (1%) Capital outlay 44,320 1, , , % Fiscal charges 47,812 78,585 93, ,865 25,243 27% $ 4,715,155 4,310,088 8,313,534 10,014,157 1,700,623 20% FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % 214

231 UTILITIES - WATER PRODUCTION Program Purpose The purpose of the Water Production Program is to provide water supply and treatment services to Los Alamos National Laboratory and Los Alamos County water distributors so they can provide safe, pure water to their customers. Los Alamos Canyon Dam Undergoes Major Reconstruction Following the Las Conchas Fire and Subsequent Flooding Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Routine Essential Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Significant Accomplishments Fire damage to the Los Alamos Canyon watershed greatly delayed the reconstruction of the Los Alamos dam which was underway at the time of the Las Conchas fire. DPU staff and contractors continued work on the project throughout 2011 and 2012 despite monsoon rains and flash floods which led to two federal disaster declarations. DPU applied for and received federal funds to dredge the reservoir and rebuild the access road so work could continue. Scheduled for completion Spring Worked on the preliminary engineering report to evaluate options for development of the county's 1,200 acre feet of San Juan Chama water rights began in FY12. The first test well will be drilled in FY14. Completed the triennial Lead and Copper testing of household pipes. All 75 homes tested were below the EPA limits which keeps the community in compliance with the Safe Water Drinking Act standards. Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Outcome: Water Supply and Related Services are Delivered Reliably and Cost Effectively While Enhancing Environmental Quality and Sustainability. Percent of water tests in compliance with SDWA standards. Total operating and maintenance expense per thousand gallons of water produced. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 100% 100% 100% 100% $ 2.17 $ 2.15 $ 2.26 $ 2.30 Narrative and Analysis Although no rate increase is proposed for FY2014, the ten-year projection assumes a 5% increase will be necessary in FY2015 and FY2016 to address the increasing operating and maintenance costs and the cost of the wells to preserve the County's San Juan Chama water rights. 215

232 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - WATER Water Distribution Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Revenue and Expenditure Summary: Revenues $ 1,965,216 2,148,630 1,971,546 2,434, ,354 24% Expenditures 1,639,302 1,849,947 1,998,264 2,376, ,909 19% Net Revenues (Exp.) $ 325, ,683 (26,718) 58,727 85,445 (320%) Expenditures by Sub-Program: Supervsn, Misc. Dir. Admin. $ 165, , , ,002 27,764 13% Hydrants 79,364 78,760 69,716 62,191 (7,525) (11%) Water Distribution 363, , , ,366 (7,096) (2%) Water Meters 155, , , ,702 65,658 48% Interdepartmental Charges 109, , , ,747 37,664 17% Eng/Admin O/H 348, , , ,165 31,444 7% Capital Expenditures 418, , , , ,000 40% $ 1,639,302 1,849,947 1,998,264 2,376, ,909 19% Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 377, , , ,114 16,909 5% Benefits 236, , , , % Contractual services 312, , , , ,000 39% Other services 5,074 4,830 11,000 11, % Materials / supplies 173, ,973 94, ,500 67,000 71% Interfund charges 534, , , ,237 68,737 9% Capital outlay ,500 42, % $ 1,639,302 1,849,947 1,998,264 2,376, ,909 19% Note: FTES for Gas, Water Distribution & Sewer Collections are included under Gas. 216

233 UTILITIES - WATER DISTRIBUTION Program Purpose The purpose of the Water Distribution Program is to provide potable and fire suppression water supply services to Los Alamos County utility customers and the Los Alamos Fire Department so they can meet their consumptive and fire protection needs at a competitive price. Community Tank at Sandia/Trinity Loop in the Western Area was Recently Repaired and Repainted Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Routine Essential Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Significant Accomplishments Repaired and repainted the Community Water Tank. The project included repainting the interior of the tank with zincrich primer and epoxy coating. The exterior was recoated with a urethane coating. Relocated a water main line that crossed through the middle of the new municipal building site. The new water line in Iris Street was placed in service. Initiated a commercial water conservation audit by DPU's Conservation Coordinator and a consultant. Detailed recommendations included a five-year payback analysis. Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals: Maintain Quality Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Outcome: Provide Water to Customers Reliably and Cost Effectively While Enhancing Environmental Quality and Sustainability. Rate Benchmark Average LAC customer 6,000 gallon bill as compared to neighboring communities. Reliability of Supply Number of water service disruptions per 100 customers. Customers Operating and maintenance expenditures per customer served. FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend 69% 75% 80% 80% $188 $164 $197 $

234 UTILITIES - WATER DISTRIBUTION Narrative and Analysis Although no rate increase is proposed for FY2014, the ten-year projection assumes a 5% increase will be necessary in FY2015 and FY2016. Measure: Rate Benchmark Water Distribution - Water Bill Comparison (Per 6,000 Gallon) LA County Espanola & Santa Fe $60 $50 $40 $30 $43.46 $50.65 $50.65 $50.65 $31.20 $32.69 $32.69 $32.69 $20 $10 $ FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Measure: Cost Effectiveness Operating & Maintenance Expenditure Per Water Customer $250 $200 $188 $164 $197 $197 $150 $100 $50 $ FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted 218

235 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - WASTEWATER Division Description The Utilities Wastewater Division is responsible for maintenance, operation, and repair of all wastewater treatment buildings and equipment owned by the County of Los Alamos to provide wastewater services that meet or exceed state and federal wastewater regulations. Wastewater Program Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 % Revenue and Expenditure Summary: Revenues $ 3,768,742 4,160,797 5,131,761 4,568,122 (563,639) (11%) Expenditures 4,851,135 4,137,797 5,636,552 5,003,960 (632,592) (11%) Net Revenues (Exp.) $ (1,082,393) 23,000 (504,791) (435,838) 68,953 (14%) Expenditures by Sub-Program: Supervsn, Misc. Dir. Admin. $ 224, , , ,248 (82,570) (25%) Wastewater Collection 404, , , ,910 (13,521) (3%) Lift Stations 88, , , ,998 4,816 4% Effluent Irrigation N/A Wastewater Treatment 1,119,654 1,233,045 1,232,815 1,321,783 88,968 7% Interdepartmental Charges 390, , , ,171 51,693 12% Eng/Admin O/H 207, , , ,014 (53,355) (10%) Debt Service 1,063, ,257 1,000,859 1,150, ,477 15% Capital Expenditures 1,353, ,553 1,461, ,500 (778,100) (53%) $ 4,851,135 4,137,797 5,636,552 5,003,960 (632,592) (11%) Expenditures by Type: Salaries $ 805, , , ,107 20,700 2% Benefits 379, , , ,874 1,410 0% Contractual services 1,279, ,740 1,674, ,500 (770,100) (46%) Other services 13,394 13,234 35,321 31,321 (4,000) (11%) Materials / supplies 200, , , ,750 (38,500) (14%) Interfund charges 981,226 1,009,606 1,332,651 1,304,071 (28,580) (2%) Capital outlay 128, , ,000 37,000 59% Fiscal charges 1,063, ,257 1,000,859 1,150, ,478 15% $ 4,851,135 4,137,797 5,636,552 5,003,960 (632,592) (11%) FTE Summary: Regular (full & part time) % Note: FTES for Gas, Water Distribution & Sewer Collections are included under Gas. 219

236 Program Purpose UTILITIES - WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT The purpose of the Wastewater Program is to provide sanitary sewer collection and treatment services to Los Alamos utility customers so they can have their wastewater safely and efficiently handled, and that downstream communities can have an environmentally safe river and effluent customers can receive inexpensive irrigation water. Aerial View of the Los Alamos Wastewater Treatment Plant Strategic Focus Areas Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goals Maintain Quality Routine Essential Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Significant Accomplishments Installed fine screen in the White Rock Treatment Plant entrance works to remove rags and trash from plant influent to keep out of the treatment process. Flushed 110,000 feet of sewer line to maintain the integrity and efficiency of the sewer lines. Performance Measures Results Strategic Focus Area: Operational Excellence Environmental Stewardship Goal: Maintain Quality Routine Services and Supporting Infrastructure Enhance Environmental Quality and Sustainability Outcome: Provide Wastewater Services Reliably and Cost Effectively While Enhancing Environmental Quality and Sustainability. Reliability of Supply FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate FY2014 Adopted Trend Number of sewer back-ups per 100 customers. Customers Operating expenses per sewer customer served Narrative and Analysis The FY2014 budget includes an 8% increase in wastewater rates effective July 1, 2013, as previously approved by Council. 220

237 NON DEPARTMENTAL - OTHER FUNDS The funds in this section do not specifically fall under any one department and are therefore, included in this section. Other Funds Descriptions Special Revenue Funds are used to account for revenues that are legally restricted to expenditures for specified purposes. The Las Conchas Fire Fund accounts for expenditures incurred by the County as a result of the Las Conchas wildfire in June/July 2011 Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for and the payment of long-term debt principal and interest. The State Loans Debt Service Fund accounts for amounts to be accumulated for payment of a loan from the State of New Mexico Environment Department for the construction of the County's Bayo Canyon effluent water line and a loan from the New Mexico Finance Authority for specific capital projects. Debt Service is financed by a portion of the gross receipts tax imposed and collected by the State and distributed to the County. Please see future debt service schedule in the Other Information section under Debt Summary. Other Funds Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 Variance Variance FY 2011 FY 2012 Adopted Adopted FY 2014 vs FY 2014 vs Actual Actual Budget Budget FY 2013 FY 2013 Expenditures by Program: Other non-specific program 7,409,348 8,453,851 6,912,225 6,178,425 (733,800) (11%) $ 7,409,348 8,453,851 6,912,225 6,178,425 (733,800) (11%) % Expenditures by Fund: Las Conchas Fire Fund 496,310 1,539, N/A Debt Service 6,913,038 6,914,438 6,912,225 6,178,425 (733,800) (11%) $ 7,409,348 8,453,851 6,912,225 6,178,425 (733,800) (11%) Expenditures: Las Conchas Fire Fund 496,310 1,539, N/A Debt Service 6,913,038 6,914,438 6,912,225 6,178,425 (733,800) (11%) $ 7,409,348 8,453,851 6,912,225 6,178,425 (733,800) (11%) Due to the refinancing of debt, the County is able to reduce the principal and interest payment by $733K, or 11%, on the GRT revenue bonds that were issued for capital construction projects. 221

238 222

239 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Purpose of the Capital Improvement Program Definition of Capital Expenditures Who may apply for a CIP Project?. 226 How the Project Development Process is Structured to Work CIP Project Evaluation Criteria Fund Structure Used to Account for Capital Projects CIP Planning in Context of Biennial Budgeting Approach Relationship Between CIP and Operating Budgets Current Approved On-going Projects Funding Sources Projects Operating Impacts of Potential Projects Group Infrastructure Capital and Maintenance. 248 Other Enterprise Funds CIP

240 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Introduction and Background Los Alamos County s FY 2014 Capital Improvement Program is the outcome of a Council Meeting on February 19, 2013 to discuss deferral of some CIP Projects and to reaffirm a modified FY 2013 CIP. Due to declining GRT revenues, the County Administrator recommended to Council that up to $12.5 million in projects be deferred up to four years to assist with projected revenue shortfalls. As reported to Council, the deferral of CIP projects would accomplish two things. First, it would help bolster the General Fund s reserves at a time that revenues dropped sharply and reserves are projected to fall below required levels. Second, it would delay the addition of new operating costs as the County seeks to find a new balance for general operations with a lower level of revenues. Prior to the February 19 County Council meeting, the County Public Information Officer (PIO) conducted outreach to advise the public of the Capital Projects discussion through ads in the Monitor and Daily Post, press releases, web postings and announcing the meeting in the County Line newsletter. At the February 19, 2013 County Council Meeting, Council reviewed and reaffirmed the following projects to continue as budgeted in the FY2013 Capital Improvement Program: White Rock Civic Center, Teen Center, Ashley Pond Improvements, Nature Center, Canyon Rim Trail, and the Eastern Area Sound Wall. The Council reviewed the Ice Rink Project and separated the Parking Lot improvements from the Ice Rink Restroom and Locker Room portions. Since the Ice Rink Parking Lot project resolves safety issues, this project will continue as scheduled in the FY2013 Budget. The Restroom and Locker Room renovations were deferred for two years. In addition, the Golf Course renovations were deferred for three years with the project scheduled to be completed within two years rather than the original four year schedule. Purpose of the Capital Improvement Program The purpose of the Capital Improvement Program is to create and implement a predictable and synchronized system for government decision-makers to determine what public facilities to build or upgrade, where and when they should be built, what their budget and schedule should be, and how to appropriate the necessary funds. The New Mexico Engineering Research Institute s New Mexico Capital Improvements Programming Manual lists the following advantages of a well-conceived CIP process. Such a program: Facilitates the repair or replacement of existing facilities before they fail; Promotes more efficient government operations; Provides a framework for decisions about community growth and development; Helps preserve existing property values; Focuses community attention on priority goals, needs and capabilities; Serves as a community education tool. 224

241 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Definition of Capital Expenditures The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) identifies Capital Projects that will replace and improve infrastructure assets, diversify the economy and improve the general quality of life. For the purposes of the Capital Improvement Program, a capital improvement project is any physical asset with a useful life of three years or more and a total project cost of more than $50,000 that will be funded or used by County government, and that is expected to be constructed, improved or purchased in the next ten years. A capital project s total project cost means all direct costs including departmental staff time, gross receipt taxes, an allocation for the Art in Public Places fund, plus a construction contingency. TABLE 1 provides several examples of projects that either would or would not be classified as capital improvement projects. TABLE 1 EXAMPLE OF PROJECTS Asset Category Considered a Capital Improvement Project Public Facilities Parks & Recreation Facilities Streets, Traffic Signals & Lighting A Maintenance Project or Expenditure New facility construction. Major replacement or upgrading of the design of existing major building components (roof replacement, major heating system improvements.) Major remodeling and structural alternations to improve space utilization or increase capacity. Program to make energy-related physical improvements. Program to make handicappedaccessibility physical improvements. Development of a new park or public plaza. New park buildings or major new recreation facility within an existing park. Major new physical improvements to parks and playgrounds, such as program of new landscaping or Preventive maintenance repairs that do not significantly upgrade the structure or increase its previously estimated useful life (for example minor roof patching or gutter repair work.) Repair or replacement of furnishings, equipment or landscape plantings that do not substantially upgrade the park or plaza. General maintenance and repair of parks, park facilities and buildings. irrigation. New streets and roadways. Routine repair/patching/ sealing and other methods to extend pavement life. Lane marking and delineation. Physical alteration of street capacity or design including addition of bicycle lanes, medians, sidewalk configurations, and street landscaping. New or upgraded signal equipment or other physical improvements that enhance safety or system capabilities Equipment repair or replacement to maintain system operations or extend life. Repair or replacement, even if increasing width of existing sidewalks. 225

242 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Asset Category Considered a Capital Improvement Project Paving where none existed previously or new sidewalks, curbs & gutters. Addition of street lights or conversion of street lights to new fixtures. A Maintenance Project or Expenditure Replacement or repair of damaged lights. Who may apply for a Capital Improvement Project? The CIP application process is open to anyone who lives in the County, to any County civic organization or County Board or Commission (except the Planning & Zoning Commission), or to any County department or division with the permission of the County Administrator, or County employee with the permission of their department head and County Administrator. The Community and Economic Development Department provides expertise as to whether a Phase 1 or Phase 2 application should be submitted based on the nature of the project. Due to declining GRT revenues, the process for FY2014 has been for County Council to review the CIP plan approved in FY2013 Budget to determine which projects to move forward with as scheduled and which ones to defer for two or three years. How the Project Development Process Is Structured to Work For proposing future CIP projects, the basic process will continue to be followed for newly proposed project selection and planning. Phase 1 of the program involves soliciting conceptual proposals for preliminary approval by Council. Projects receiving this preliminary approval receive an initial allocation of CIP funds to conduct a feasibility study to prepare a detailed program scope, an initial rough design layout (schematic design), proposed project schedule and rough-order-of-magnitude cost estimate. Phase 2 of the process involves Council approval of the actual project. The key difference between Phase 1 and Phase 2 is that Phase 2 projects must have the following: 1) Site Selection; 2) Final Project Scope; 3) Final Project Schedule; 4) a baseline construction budget that can be added to the CIP. o Note - Phase 1 project approval does not mean that the project will receive Phase 2 approval because the Phase 1 study may (a) reveal problems with the proposal; (b) indicate that the proposal needs further refinement, or (c) is less needed than previously thought. During Phases 1 and 2, Council and the County Administrator receive recommendations on project approvals from a group of senior County staff members known as the CIP Evaluation and Oversight Committee. As the name implies, the CIP Evaluation and Oversight Committee fulfills two functions. First, it will investigate and make recommendations on all Phase 1 and Phase 2 applications for new projects. Second, it will also monitor the progress on approved applications in Phase 3 and beyond under the new project development system shown on the Project Development Flowchart. Since approved projects do not necessarily have to go back to Council at each phase after Phase 2 approval, committee meetings will give the public a chance to learn about, and comment on the current status of each CIP project. 226

243 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY After Phase 2 approval by Council, the project then moves through a series of additional phases concluding with the County s acceptance of the completed project and a final report to Council. During each project phase, the CIP Evaluation and Oversight Committee will monitor progress on each project, paying special attention to the project s scope, budget, and schedule, including decision points at which Council needs to be briefed and give its approval to proceed. CIP Project Evaluation Criteria The CIP Evaluation and Oversight Committee used the form, shown herein as Table 2, to score each CIP application it received. Project scores formed the basis of the committee s recommendation to the County Administrator, but in making its recommendations the Committee also took into account certain unique and special circumstances unforeseen at the time the projects were scored. Projects that receive a rating of 0 in any category were not recommended. TABLE 2 CIP Project Evaluation Criteria Application Name & Number Upgrade or replacement of existing facility, or New facility Phase 1application, or Phase 2 Application Criterion Measurement 1. Extent to which the project 4= Very high will meet a health, safety, or 3= High legal mandate. 2= Moderate 2. Extent to which the project will help to achieve the County s current strategic goals. 3. Estimated impact the project will have on the County s on-going budget. 4. Extent to which the project is likely to increase government efficiency and control future expenditures. 1= Low or can t tell based on application information submitted. 4= The project is judged to be of significant value in meeting at least 2 or more strategic goals. 3= The project is judged to be of significant value in meeting at least 1 strategic goal. 2= The project is judged to contribute to at least 1 strategic goal. 1= The project may have some impact on meeting strategic goals, or impact is difficult to determine. 0= The project does appear to relate to any strategic goal or objective. 4= Project fees and/or tax revenue generated are expected to exceed the yearly costs of debt service and operation. 3= Fees and/or tax revenue generated are expected to meet or almost meet debt service and operational costs. 2= The cost impact will be negative but well within the County s estimated ability to meet it. 1= The cost impact will be significant, or can t tell based on application information submitted. 0= The cost impact will be so significant that other high priority capital improvement projects may have to be cancelled or significantly delayed. 4= Very high. 3= High. 2= Moderate amount. 1= Unlikely or difficult to determine. Score 227

244 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY The extent to which the public will use and benefit from the project. 6. Extent to which the project has documented public support. 7. Estimated extent to which the project will stimulate private investment in the County. 8. Extent to which non-county funds in the form of grants, matching funds, or private donations are likely to be available to fund the project. 9. Special circumstances or benefits not included in the criteria listed above. TOTAL SCORE 4= Half or more of the County s population will directly use and benefit from the project. 3= A significant part of the population will use and benefit from the project or it will have a significant use and benefit for one particular group of users. 2= Project will have a positive impact on one group of users. 1= There will be some public benefit but the extent is hard to determine or relatively minor in nature. 4= Project application shows two or more Boards or Commissions or other civic groups as project applicants or sponsors, and the public record shows widespread support. 3= At least one Board or Commission or civic group is the applicant or sponsor and there is little or no public opposition on the public record. 2= The public record shows both support and opposition for the project. 1= Project application does not show public support or the public record shows widespread opposition. 4= Project estimated to leverage private investment at a ratio of at least 5 dollars in private funds to every 1 dollar of public funds spent. 3=Project estimated to leverage private to public at a ratio of at least 1 to 1 or more. 2=Project likely to stimulate future private investment but can t identify specific investments at this time. 1=Project not expected to stimulate private investment, or prospects for investment are unclear. 4= Specific outside funding sources totaling 25% or more of the project cost have been secured and documented. 3= Funding sources for at least 20% of the project cost are likely but have not been secured. 2= Outside funding sources for the project have been identified but amounts not certain or likely to be less than 20% of the project total. 1= Unlikely that outside funding sources can be obtained. 4= The project responds to significant and unique special circumstances and confers such a special benefit that it deserves extra evaluation consideration. 3=The project has some unique positive aspects and benefits that are not adequately recognized by the standard evaluation criteria listed above. 1= Criteria 1-8 above adequately evaluate the Adopted project. Fund Structure Used to Account for Capital Projects The County primarily uses one fund, the Capital Improvement Projects Fund (CIP Fund), to budget and account for Capital Project expenditures when those assets will be used in the County s general governmental activities. The Capital Projects Permanent Fund accounts for amounts received under a settlement of prior years gross receipts taxes, established by the County Council and the County Charter for Capital Projects. The corpus of this Permanent Fund is invested, and the real value of the fund principal must be maintained at a level that keeps pace with a federally published inflation index. Distributions from the CIP Permanent Fund to the CIP Fund are based upon a formula set in the County Code. 228

245 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY To construct infrastructure assets to use in the County s business-type activities, there are several enterprise funds, also called Major Proprietary Funds in the County financial reports, which the County uses to account for Capital Project expenditures. Joint Utility System Fund for electric, gas, water, and wastewater projects. Environmental Services Fund (formerly Refuse). Golf Course Fund for the Golf Course projects, such as the conceptual design project to replace the Clubhouse and Pro Shop. The Airport Fund for projects such as the extension of the runway. CIP Planning in the Context of a Biennial Budgeting Approach Beginning with FY2005 budget development, Los Alamos County has used a biennial budgeting approach. The first year of a biennial cycle is adopted by County Council to provide the appropriations. The second year acts as a projection only, and is not adopted, so that the budget can be more easily reformulated to address evolving needs and conditions. For most aspects of the budget, the second year of the biennial cycle essentially is an update of the original projection that becomes formally adopted. However, the second year still undergoes a rigorous examination by staff and must receive formal adoption by County Council. FY2013 is the first year of the current biennial cycle and FY2014 is the second year. According to State law, the fiscal year begins on July 1 st and ends on June 30 th. The FY2014 Capital Improvement Program Expenditure Summary presents a multiple year plan beginning with FY2014. The FY2014 CIP provides the funding levels only within the Capital Budget. The budgets for the years FY2014 through FY2024 are also projected for long-range financial planning purposes. Within this context, the County annually updates its CIP. The update process means evaluating potential changes and incorporating new information, including mid-year budget revisions approved by Council or the findings of engineering studies, which would naturally require some re-prioritization or adjustments to the scope of projects. For projects that construct new infrastructure assets, the County has estimated the year impacts of these assets upon the governmental operating budgets and fund equity and includes these impacts the Long Range Financial Projection (LRFP). Each fall, County staff will re-evaluate the County s LRFP and Capital Improvement Budget by updating future County revenue and expense estimates and by incorporating any changes in CIP project schedules and budgets that may have been approved by Council during the preceding year. Each year s Adopted CIP budget will contain line items for particular approved projects, as well as lumpsum budget allocations for possible future project studies and possible projects that may still be in the conceptual phase. 229

246 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Relationship between the CIP and the Operating Budgets The County coordinates the operating and capital budgets so that future capital needs will be integrated with projected operating requirements. For the General Fund, all the various recurring revenue streams are forecasted in the LRFP across a 10-year horizon to demonstrate any foreseeable, significant changes. Whenever possible, non-recurring revenues are programmed for one-time expenditures (such as capital expenditures for infrastructure or economic development assets). Additionally, changes in operating expenditures are also forecasted. Prior to approval of the CIP, the future maintenance and operating impacts (both revenues and expenditures) on the General County operating budgets are analyzed, and these impacts, if significant, are then disclosed in the budget document s Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) to demonstrate the long-term impact of the CIP on the financial condition and position of the County. How Are the Operating Budgets Affected by Capital Project Construction? Operating impacts were estimated and then projected over 10 years for each of the following seven categories. 1. Personnel costs 2. Program costs 3. Custodial/Facilities maintenance (other than personnel) 4. Parks/Landscape 5. Pavement/Parking lots 6. Utilities 7. Operating revenues from leases, fees, property tax, and GRT Assumptions Applied to Calculate the Operating Expense Impacts o Operating expense impact is defined as the amount of incremental, new costs associated with a project. o Programs costs are associated with new or increased programming due to the new asset. For instance, the new teen center has the amount to run the actual program as a program cost. o For the maintenance and utility impacts, the baseline expenditure level against which the incremental change was calculated was derived from an average of the past two or three fiscal years interdepartmental charges (IDCs) by facility of the maintenance, custodial and utility costs. In some cases, actual utility costs are used. o It is estimated that having new replacement facilities will initially decrease average annual maintenance, and perhaps even initially decrease the combined utility expenses on a prorated square foot basis. However, it is also assumed that these savings will naturally erode over time, as systems in the new buildings wear and the cost of repair components and associated labor increases. Therefore, the cost of maintenance is assumed to conservatively increase an 230

247 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY average of 3.0% annually over the life of the asset. It is also assumed that the combined utility rate (combined consumption of water, gas and electric) would increase at an average annual rate of 3%. These average rates of increase are used in the calculations to smooth the likely ups and downs in the costs over time due to unforeseeable events and natural economic pressures. Projected new revenue assumption (where applicable) o The assumption is that County staff and the public will at least utilize the replacement asset as much as the current one and that utilization would increase in many cases. Completed CIP - Foot Bridge on Canyon Rim Trail 231

248 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY 2013 CIP Status of Current, Approved On-going Projects, Funding Sources, and Potential Projects Status of Current, Approved On-going Projects (Funded Prior to FY 2013) Approved and Funded Prior to FY2013 Underway La Plaza Mainstreet 80,731 White Rock Arroyo Trail 876,056 State Road 502 local match 1,125,000 Eastern Area Road Project 4,415,000 Golf Course Community Building 5,324,959 Art in Public Places Ongoing 824,506 Projects Completed in FY2013 Municipal Building Replacement 25,800,877 Iris Street 1,023,393 White Rock Visitor Center /RV Lot 3,502,925 Stables Area Covered Arena 806,422 State Road 4 Improvements 7,216,392 Total 50,996,261 Approved Projects Underway (Funded Prior to FY2013) La Plaza Mainstreet - Project for streetscape beautification and pedestrian improvements on Knecht Street. White Rock Arroyo Trail This project is for building a trail connecting Canada del Buey, east of Rover Blvd., to Piňon Park, west of Sherwood Avenue. State Road 502 This amount represents the County s matching funds for the Governor s Road Improvement Project funding from the State of New Mexico. Eastern Area Road Project This project is for planned road reconstruction / rehabilitation in the Eastern Area. Golf Course Community Building This project constructs a new Golf Course Community Building located on the Golf Course in the location of the old Golf Course Club House. Art in Public Places This is not a project. Rather, it is a set aside portion of construction budgets (1% for facilities and 0.5% for roads) to purchase, commission and install artwork in public places throughout Los Alamos County 232

249 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Projects Completed (Funded Prior to FY2013) Municipal Building. The new Los Alamos County Municipal Building gets its finishing touches before County staff started moving into the building May, The building will house most County Administrative staff as well as County Records and Historical Archives. Iris Street. The rebuilding of Iris Street was completed in late The widened street and angle parking next to the new Municipal Building will serve the public doing business with the County. White Rock Visitor s Center. The regional Visitor s and Orientation Center was completed in the Fall of 2012 and has been serving residents and tourists alike. RV Park. Conveniently located next to the Visitor s Center is the RV Park. The RV Park was also completed in the Fall of 2012 and serves visitor s to the County with a place to stay for 14 days with available utilities. 233

250 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY State Road 4. State Road 4 into White Rock was rebuilt as a modern gateway into the Town of White Rock. The newly widened road with landscaping and bike paths welcomes visitors, enhances businesses along the road and makes it safer for bicyclists to get around town. Covered Arena. The community came out in March, 2013 to celebrate the opening of the Multiuse Covered Arena. The structure will serve the community during inclement weather and accommodate horse activities, Search and Rescue practice, the 4H, and the Los Alamos Dog Obedience Club. 234

251 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Funding Sources The amount available to fund CIP projects in FY 2014 is $5,254,000, without the inclusion of debt. Of this amount, $4,510,000 is to fund on-going group infrastructure projects such as roads, parks small capital and information technology projects. Those projects are listed in the Group Infrastructure section. FY 2013 FY 2017 Funding Sources Adopted Adopted Planned FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Total Fund Balance** 18,363, ,363,000 General Fund Transfer 5,770,500 3,970,000 4,170,000 6,907,500 9,500,300 30,318,300 Permanent Fund Transfer 1,107,000 1,091,000 1,216,000 1,262,000 1,292,000 5,968,000 Grant Revenue 530, , , , ,000 2,650,000 Debt Proceeds Land Sale Proceeds Subtotal 25,770,500 5,591,000 5,916,000 8,699,500 11,322,300 57,299,300 Programmed for group infrastructure projects Available for potential projects (3,270,500) (4,510,000) 22,500,000 1,081,

252 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Projects The projects in the below list have been through the Phase 1 process or are nearing completion of the process during FY Due to declining GRT revenues, the County Administrator recommended to Council that up to $12.5 million in projects be deferred up to four years to assist with projected revenue shortfalls. At the February 19, 2013 County Council Meeting, Council reviewed the list of projects and recommended funding in the fiscal year noted. Following this list, the projects indicated with an * have further information on costs and operating impacts. Projects Fiscal Year(s) White Rock Civic Center* 8,400,000 FY13 Golf Course Improvements* 11,289,800 FY16-17 Teen Center* 4,000,000 FY13 Ashley Pond Improvements* 2,226,471 FY13 Ice Rink Parking* 244,000 FY14 Ice Rink Restrooms, Locker Rooms* 1,278,000 FY16 Nature Center* 4,300,000 FY13 Canyon Rim Trail* 500,000 FY14 Eastern Area Sound Wall* 655,000 FY13 Public Schools' Projects Placeholder 500,000 FY15 Community Broadband 60,000,000 TBD FUNDING TBD Public Safety Radio System 10,000,000 TBD Total 103,393,271 White Rock Civic Center - To provide White Rock with a remodeled Town Center including a Senior Center, Activity Center and Town Hall. Also, a new Library will be built at Pinon Park and the Youth Activity Center will be remodeled. Golf Course Improvements Rebuilding the greens, tees, bunkers, and re-grassing the entire course while maintaining trail access. Teen Center Project for a teen center facility to provide a safe place for teens to bond with their peers, adults and pursue healthy, positive recreational, social, cultural, and educational opportunities. Ashley Pond Improvements Recommended health and safety improvements to the water quality of the pond, ADA compliance for walkways, and enhanced recreational opportunities. Ice Rink Parking - The parking lot will be redesigned to provide for safety lighting, an expanded parking area, and a guard rail at the Ice Rink. It also addresses ADA compliance issues. 236

253 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Ice Rink Restrooms and Locker Rooms - The new 2,520 square foot building will house locker rooms with dedicated space for female and male patrons. Also, the addition and upgrade of restrooms will allow for an increase in the number of children in Bear Camp, which has been limited in the past due to the number of existing restrooms. Nature Center To provide a nature center for educational opportunities, recreation and awareness of Los Alamos's natural beauty, open space, trail system, abundant wildlife, mountain vistas and promote environmental sustainability. Canyon Rim Trail This project expands the Canyon Rim Trail. Eastern Area Sound Wall Install a sound wall along NM502 in the Eastern Area to reduce traffic noise. Community Broadband Network Design This study phase of this project is for the conceptual design of an expansion to County network infrastructure. The project should provide for a conceptual design study at that will (1) meet planned County government communication needs and (2) be capable of providing the foundation for an open access network delivering advanced broadband communications to all Los Alamos citizens, should such a network be created by future Council action. Public Safety Radio System Study for County integrated radio system including public safety, County operations, and schools. Operating Impacts and Detailed Costs The following pages provide additional information on some of the projects listed above. 237

254 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Project Name: White Rock Civic Center Council Goal: Description: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Continuum of Education To provide White Rock with a renovated Town Hall Complex. A new library will be built and the Youth Activity Center at Pinon Park will be remodeled. The Town Hall will be reconfigured to house a remodeled Senior Center, Activity Center and Town Hall. Project Budget Current Approved Funding $ 155,522 8,400,000 Total $ 8,555,522 Anticipated Construction Date: FY Projected Completion Date: FY Current Town Hall Remarks: Phase 1 study began in 2011 and identified potential needs and square footage for the Center. This was ranked as the top priority at the Capital Improvements Program Committee meeting on March 14, In the County Council meeting of May 16, 2012, Council approved a budget of $8,400,000 as a placeholder. At the February 19, 2013 meeting, County Council reaffirmed this project as a 2013 project. Due to the two different physical sites, the project is split into two smaller projects, the first, Pinon Park Library and WR Youth Activity Center. A new Library will be designed and built at Pinon Park. The current Youth Center at Pinon will be remodeled. The second project is the WR Town Hall Complex Remodel. The Town Hall project will update the existing facilities in the WR Complex with a Senior Center reconfigured in the current library space. The existing Senior Center will be reconfigured for more programmatic uses and may include a new kitchen for the home bound senior citizens. The Activity Center and Town Hall will also be reconfigured and updated. Capital Costs and Funding Sources Thru Five Year Plan FY Total Cost Study 155, ,522 Design/Engineering $ 588,000 $ 588,000 Construction $ 5,460,000 $ 5,460,000 Equipment/moving etc. $ 1,680,000 $ 1,680,000 GRT $ 588,000 $ 588,000 Art in Public Places $ 84,000 $ 84,000 Total Cost 155,522 $ 8,400,000 $ $ $ $ $ 8,555,522 Sources of Funding Project Funding TBD Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: With the new facility, anticipate a growth in the program. The costs of operating the facility will be determined after the revised scope of work is presented to County Council. Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan Total Cost New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs Custodial/Facilities $ 56,000 $ 56,000 $ 56, ,000 Parks/Landscape $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 45,000 Pavement $ 52,000 $ 52,000 $ 52, ,000 Utilities $ 57,000 $ 57,000 $ 57, ,000 Total Operating Costs $ 180,000 $ 180,000 $ 180,000 $ 540,

255 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Project Name: Golf Course Improvements Council Goal: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Description: To provide a course with quality playing conditions by rebuilding the greens, tees, bunkers, and regrassing the entire course while maintaining trail access. Project Budget Overview of Golf Course Current Approved Funding $ 75,424 Proposed Budget 11,289,800 Total $ 11,365,224 Anticipated Construction Date: FY Projected Completion Date: FY2018 Remarks: The Phase 1 study completed the analysis of the irrigation system, cart path conditions, tee, greens, fairways, etc. The community ranked this project as the second priority at the Capital Improvements Program Committee meeting on March 14, In the County Council meeting on May 16, 2012, the Golf Course Improvements project was approved with an $11.3 million budget with work to begin in FY2013 and completed in FY2016. With the phased implementation over 4 years, the Golf course will remain open during construction. However, in the February 19, 2013 County Council meeting, the Golf Course renovation project was deferred for three years, to begin in FY2016, with the constuction to be completed within two years. Capital Costs and Funding Sources Thru Five Year Plan Total FY Cost Study 75,424 75,424 Design/Engineering $ 753,624 $ 753,624 Construction $ 3,355,876 $ 5,127,329 $ 8,483,205 Equipment/moving etc. $ 650,000 $ 650,000 $ 1,300,000 GRT $ 200,000 $ 456,611 $ 656,611 Art in Public Places $ 96,360 $ 96,360 Total Cost 75,424 $ $ $ $ 4,959,500 $ 6,330,300 $ 11,365,224 Sources of Funding Project Funding Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: Operating costs will be determined as the project nears completion. New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs Custodial/Facilities Parks/Landscape Pavement Utilities Total Operating Costs Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan Total Cost 239

256 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Project Name: Teen Center Council Goal: Description: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities To provide a safe place for teens to bond with their peers, adults and pursue healthy, positive recreational, social, cultural, and educational opportunities. Project Budget Current Approved Funding $ 150,000 4,000,000 Total $ 4,150,000 Anticipated Construction Date: FY Projected Completion Date: FY2015 LA Community Building is the Future Site of the Teen Center Remarks: Phase 1 study began in FY2011. The community ranked the Teen Center project in the top three priorities at the Capital Improvements Program Committee meeting on March, 14, In the County Council meeting of May 16, 2012, County Council discussed the construction of a building, but also heard an alternative which discussed renting and renovating office space. Currently, staff is continuing analysis and discussions to determine the optimal location for the Center. Once a location is secured, a final project plan and schedule will be generated. The Council reaffirmed the project for FY2013 at its February 19, 2013 meeting. The LA Community Center was unanimously approved by the County Council for reuse as the new Teen Center at the March 26, meeting. The Building will be remodeled to accommodate the Teen Center activities. Thru FY2012 Capital Costs and Funding Sources Five Year Plan Total Cost Study 150, ,000 Design/Engineering 500, ,000 Construction/Rehab 3,500,000 3,500,000 Total Cost 150,000 4,000,000 4,150,000 Sources of Funding Project Funding TBD Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: The cost of operating the facility will be determined after the design and renovation of the 9,500 square foot space is completed. Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan Total Cost New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs $ 117,000 $ 117,000 Custodial/Facilities $ 44,000 $ 44,000 Parks/landscaping $ Pavement $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Utilities $ 27,000 $ 27,000 Total Operating Costs $ 190,000 $ 190,

257 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Project Name: Ashley Pond Council Goal: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Environmental Stewardship Economic Vitality and Innovation Description: To provide a quality park environment with a concert venue, improve park lighting, wetlands and promenade around the pond. Also, includes ADA improvements to ensure the park is accessible to all. Ashley Pond Layout and Amenities Project Budget Current Approved Funding $ 134,701 2,226,471 Total $ 2,361,172 Anticipated Construction Date: FY Projected Completion Date: FY2014 Remarks: Work Underway on the ADA Sidewalk The Phase 1 study recommended health and safety improvements to the water quality of the pond, ADA compliance for walkways, and enhanced recreational opportunities. The community ranked this project as a mid level priority at the Capital Improvements Program Committee meeting on March 14, In the County Council meeting of May 16, 2012, Ashley Pond projects were approved with a budget of $2.2 million. The Council reaffirmed the project for FY2013 at its February 19, 2013 meeting. Thru FY2012 Capital Costs and Funding Sources Five Year Plan Study 134, ,701 Design/Engineering $ 103,693 $ 103,693 Construction $ 1,542,100 $ 1,542,100 Equipment/moving etc. $ 408,420 GRT $ 150,214 Art in Public Places $ 22,044 Total Cost Total Cost 134,701 $ 2,226,471 $ $ $ $ $ 2,361,172 Sources of Funding Project Funding TBD Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: With the new facility, anticipate a growth in the program. The costs of operating the facility are explained the chart. The programming decisions will be discussed as the project nears completion. New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs Custodial/Facilities Parks/Landscape Pavement Utilities Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan Total Cost 22,300 22,300 22,300 66,900 25,000 25,000 25,000 75,000 12,700 12,700 12,700 38,100 Total Operating Costs 60,000 60,000 60, ,

258 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Project Name: Nature Center Council Goals: Description: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Continuum of Education Environmental Stewardship To provide a building for nature educational opportunities, recreation and awareness of Los Alamos's natural beauty, open space, trail system, abundant wildlife, mountain vistas and promote environmental sustainability. Project Budget Current Approved Funding $ 119,669 4,300,000 Total $ 4,419,669 Anticipated Construction Date: FY Projected Completion Date: FY2015 Rendering of the New Nature Center Building Remarks: Phase 1 study began in FY2011. The operating costs are based on a 6,000 square foot building. The community ranked this project as a priority at the Capital Improvements Program Committee meeting on March, 14, In the County Council meeting of May 16, 2012, County Council discussed the project and modified the project to remove the Net Zero Energy Solar Array. Council approved a budget of $4.3 million with staff direction to present County Council with a revised scope of work in the Fall of The Council reaffirmed the project for FY2013 at its February 19, 2013 meeting. Thru FY2012 Capital Costs and Funding Sources Five Year Plan Total Cost Study 119, ,669 Design/Engineering $ 387,000 $ 387,000 Construction $ 3,475,000 $ 3,475,000 Equipment/moving etc. $ 98,000 $ 98,000 GRT $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Art in Public Places $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Total Cost 119,669 $ 4,300,000 $ $ $ $ $ 4,419,669 Sources of Funding Project Funding TBD Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: With the new facility, anticipate a growth in the program. The costs of operating the facility are explained the chart. The programming decisions will be discussed as the project nears completion. New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan Total Cost 95,000 95,000 95, ,

259 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Project Name: Ice Rink Restroom and Lockers Council Goal: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Description: To provide for modern, clean changing areas and lockers for participants with upgraded restroom facilities. Project Budget Proposed Budget FY2014 1,278,000 Total $ 1,278,000 Anticipated Construction Date: FY2016 Projected Completion Date: FY2017 Remarks: Restroom and Locker Room Improvements The new, 2,520 square foot Restroom/Locker room building will house locker rooms with dedicated space for female and male patrons. Also, the addition and upgrade of restrooms will allow for an increase in the number of children in Bear Camp, which has been limited in the past due to the number of existing restrooms. These projects were ranked as a mid to lower level priority at the Capital Improvements Program Committee meeting on March, 14, In the County Council meeting of May 16, 2012, these projects were approved with a combined budget for FY2014 of $1.5 million. In the February 19, 2013 County Council meeting, Council deferred this project to FY2016 with a budget of $1.3 million. Capital Costs and Funding Sources Thru Five Year Plan Total FY Cost Study Design/Engineering $ 350,000 $ 350,000 Construction $ 928,000 $ 928,000 Equipment/moving $ GRT $ Art in Public Places $ Total Cost $ $ $ $ 1,278,000 $ $ 1,278,000 Sources of Funding Project Funding TBD Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: With the new facility, anticipate a growth in the program. The costs of operating the facility are explained the chart. The programming decisions will be discussed as the project nears completion. New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs Custodial/Facilities Parks/Landscape Pavement Utilities Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan Total Cost 11,000 11,000 4,000 4,000 Total Operating Costs 15,000 15,

260 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Proposed Project Name: Ice Rink Parking Lot Council Goal: Description: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Operational Excellence To provide for safe parking and walkway areas to the Ice Rink to accommodate the many skaters and guests. Addresses ADA Compliance issues. Project Budget FY2014 Proposed Budget 244,000 Total $ 244,000 Anticipated Construction Date: FY2014 Projected Completion Date: FY2014 Remarks: Parking Area Improvements Phase 1 study identified the need for safety upgrades in the parking lot. The parking area projects includes safety lighting, an expanded parking area, and a guard rail at the Ice Rink. The community ranked this project as a mid level priority at the Capital Improvements Program Committee meeting on March, 14, The Council reaffirmed the project for FY2014 at its February 19, 2013 meeting. Thru FY2012 Capital Costs and Funding Sources Five Year Plan Total Cost Study Design/Engineering $ Construction $ 244,000 $ 244,000 Equipment/moving etc. $ GRT $ Art in Public Places $ Total Cost $ 244,000 $ 244,000 Sources of Funding Project Funding TBD Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: With the expanded parking lot and walk ways, there will be operating costs associated with snow and ice removal. New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs Custodial/Facilities Parks/Landscape Pavement Utilities Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan Total Cost 15,000 15,000 15,000 45,000 Total Operating Costs 15,000 15,000 15,000 45,

261 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Project Name: Extension of Canyon Rim Trail Council Goal: Quality Cultural and Recreational Amenities Maintain Quality Routine Services and Infrastructure Description: This project funds extending the Canyon Rim Hiking Trail to the Trinity Development site. Proposed Budget FY 2014 $ 500,000 Remarks: Total $ 500,000 Capital Costs and Funding Sources Five Year Plan Study Design/Engineering $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Construction $ 425,000 $ 425,000 Equipment/moving etc. Project Budget Anticipated Construction Date: FY2014 Projected Completion Date: FY2015 Thru FY2012 Currently, the Canyon Rim Trail Ends in the 200 Block of East Road In the County Council meeting of May 16, 2012, County Council discussed extending the Canyon Rim Trail to the Trinity development site and approved the project with a budget of $500,000 for FY2014. The Council reaffirmed the project for FY2014 at its February 19, 2013 meeting. GRT Art in Public Places Total Cost $ $ 500,000 $ $ $ $ 500,000 Sources of Funding End of Canyon Rim Trail at 200 Block of East Road Total Cost Project Funding TBD Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: There is minimal operating budget impact with the extension of the Trail. Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs Custodial/Facilities Parks/Landscape Pavement $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Utilities Total Operating Costs $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Total Cost 245

262 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Project Name: Eastern Area Sound Wall Council Goal: Maintain Quality Routine Services and Infrastructure Description: To provide the residents of East Road with a sound wall to remediate the noise generated by traffic on N.M. 502 which disrupts the peace and quiet of the neighborhood. Project Budget Current Approved Funding $ 655,000 Total $ 655,000 Anticipated Construction Date: FY Projected Completion Date: FY Potential Site for Eastern Sound Wall Remarks: The residents living in the East Road neighborhood requested that a sound wall be built along the N.M. 502 to mitigate the constant traffic noise generated by cars and trucks entering Los Alamos. In the County Council meeting of May 16, 2012, County Council discussed the project and approved a budget of $655,000 for the construction. The Council reaffirmed the project for FY2013 at its February 19, 2013 meeting. Capital Costs and Funding Sources Five Year Plan Study Design/Engineering $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Construction $ 565,000 $ 565,000 Equipment/moving etc. Thru FY2012 GRT $ 10,000 Art in Public Places $ 5,000 Total Cost Total Cost $ 655,000 $ $ $ $ $ 655,000 Sources of Funding Project Funding TBD Estimated Impact on Future Operating Budgets: There is minimal operating budget impact with the construction of a sound wall. Projected Operating Costs Five Year Plan New FTEs Personnel Costs Program Costs Custodial/Facilities Parks/Landscape $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Pavement Utilities Total Operating Costs $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Total Cost 246

263 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY

264 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Group Infrastructure Capital and Maintenance The following section shows projected amounts and projects for Road Reconstruction, Information Technology Capital, Parks Small Capital and Major Maintenance, and Major Facilities Maintenance. These on-going group infrastructure projects require year to year funding. Amounts from previous years are carried over to provide continuous funding for these planned projects. The new amounts for FY 2014 are shown below. FY 2013 Adopted/ FY 2014 Adopted Group Infrastructure FY 2013 FY 2014 Adopted Adopted Road Reconstruction 2,545,000 3,900,000 Information Technology Capital 480, ,000 Parks Major Maintenance General Fund 67,700 60,930 Parks Small Capital CIP Fund 245, ,000 Major Facilities Maintenance General Fund 2,000,000 1,800,000 Total 5,338,200 6,370,930 The next section provides more information on individual group projects and amounts. Ashley Pond Park in the Spring 248

265 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Road Reconstruction These projects address the Transportation Improvement and Maintenance Plan developed by the Public Works Department. Road Reconstruction these projects are budgeted in the CIP Fund ROADS through FY 2019 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2019 Total All Years New Funding 3,075,000 3,900,000 18,000,000 24,975,000 Carryover from prior years 2,205,000 2,205,000 TOTAL PROJECTS 3,977,000 3,117,000 18,199,000 25,293,000 Eastern Area Project Phase 2 2,898,000 2,898,000 Western Area Project Phase 1 and 2 1,079,000 1,347,000 1,914,000 4,340,000 Central Ave (4th to 20th) Mill & Overlay 1,770,000 1,770,000 Oppenheimer/Trinity Signal Replace 350, ,000 White Rock 4,860,000 4,860,000 PCI Road Survey 275, ,000 Various roads 10,800,000 10,800,000 Detail of Road Construction Projects in FY13 and FY14 Geo Tech Services and Design/Survey/Drafting, Canyon Road (9th to 15th) (PCI 24), 15th Street Eastern Area (Central Ave to Canyon Road) (PCI 44), Arroyo Lane (East Rd to End)(PCI 35), Verde Ridge (Arroyo Lane to End)(PCI 41) Geo Tech Services and Design/Survey/Drafting, 41st Street (Trinity to Cul de Sac)(PCI 28), 42nd Street (Trinity to Cul de Sac)(PCI 37), 43rd Street (Trinity to 45th St)(PCI 41), 44th Street (Trinity Western Area to Cul de Sac)(PCI 31), 45th Street (Trinity to 43rd St)(PCI 41), 46th Street (Trinity to Cul de Sac)(PCI 40), 47th Street (Trinity to 48th ST)(PCI 20). Central Avenue Geo Tech Services and Design/Survey/Drafting, Construction, Mill and Overlay 249

266 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Information Technology Capital Projects Information Technology Capital Projects include equipment, new software, software upgrades, fiber connections, etc. that meet the County s capitalization criteria and are accounted for in the CIP fund. Information Technology Capital these projects are budgeted in the CIP Fund Information Technology Capital FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2021 Total All Years New Funding 480, ,000 3,010,000 3,920,200 Carryover from prior years 1,340,348 1,340,348 TOTAL PROJECTS 999, ,500 3,010,000 4,490,500 Financial System upgrade 100, ,000 Computer Aided Dispatch 372, ,500 Permitting System 250, ,000 HR/Payroll System 140,000 50, ,000 Recreation System 80,000 80,000 UPWE Projects 150, ,000 VoIP Reprogramming 15,000 15,000 E Records Document Mgmt 50,000 50,000 Project Management 136, , ,000 Software and hardware upgrades 3,010,000 3,010,000 County Servers in the IT Server Room 250

267 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Parks Maintenance and Small Capital The projects listed below are split into two categories Parks Small Capital and Parks Major Maintenance. Small Capital Projects are capital in nature and are accounted for in the CIP Fund. Parks Major Maintenance Projects are significant maintenance projects but do not meet the County s capitalization criteria and, therefore, are accounted for in the General Fund. All of these projects are part of the Parks Integrated Maintenance Plan updated annually. Major Parks Maintenance Small Capital Projects are budgeted in the CIP Fund, Parks Maintenance Projects are budgeted in the General Fund FY 2014 FY 2020 Total All Years PARKS FY 2013 FY 2014 TOTAL 313, ,930 1,329,130 1,944,480 Parks Maint. Projects General Fund 67,700 60, , ,830 Parks Small Capital CIP Fund 245, , ,000 1,176,650 Central District 123,200 50, , ,000 Ashley Pond Library/Skatepark Maint. Projects 8,000 12,000 Library/Skatepark Small Capital 22,000 22,000 Small Sites Small Capital 45,000 45,000 Fuller Lodge Small Capital 28,000 Camp May Maint. Projects 12,000 Camp May Small Capital 123,200 50,000 50, ,200 Eastern District 24,800 15, , ,200 Central Ave Streetscape Maint. Projects 14,800 15,200 71,200 99,000 Entrance Park Maint. Projects 35,000 35,000 Trails Maint. Projects 19,500 23,500 Community Park Small Capital 10,000 10,000 East Park Maint. Projects 8,500 28,500 Northern District 86,400 69, , ,400 N Mesa Stable/Rodeo Grounds Maint. Projects 29,300 29,300 N Mesa Stable/Rodeo Grounds Small Capital 35,000 35,000 N Mesa Picnic Grounds Small Capital 30,400 35,000 65,400 Femaville/N Mesa Soccer Small Capital 40,000 40,000 N Mesa Sports Complex Maint. Projects 24,000 76, ,400 N Mesa Sports Complex Small Capital 32,000 19, , ,000 Barranca Mesa Park Maint. Projects 16,000 16,000 Barranca Mesa Park Small Capital 15,000 15,000 52,000 Western District 17,000 21,000 76, ,000 Guaje Pines Cemetery Maint. Projects 36,000 36,000 Guaje Pines Cemetery Small Capital 16,000 Small Sites Small Capital 12,000 12,000 Urban Park Maint. Projects 5,000 5,000 Urban Park Small Capital 21,000 40,000 40,

268 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY PARKS cont'd FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2014 FY 2020 Total All Years White Rock District 61,600 48, , ,500 Overlook Park Maint. Projects 20,900 11,500 46,400 Overlook Park Small Capital 40, , ,000 Pinion Park Small Capital 40,000 40,000 Rover Park Maint. Projects 15,000 40,000 Rover Park Small Capital 37,700 37,700 WR Misc. Maint. Projects 3,000 8,500 11,500 WR Community Complex Small Capital 29,000 29,000 Other 37, , ,230 Playgrounds/Playlots Small Capital/Maint. Projects 17, , ,350 Misc. Small Capital Tennis Courts Maint. Projects 20, , ,230 Detail of Parks Maintenance and Small Capital Projects in FY13 and FY14 Central District SC Camp May rebuild/replace retaining walls and parking lots, construct amphitheatre, stage, walls, and pathways, intall toilet units, campsites/walls Central District MP N/A Eastern District SC Community Park irrigation Eastern District MP Central Ave flower baskets NM Picnic Grounds small picnic shelter, tables, grills, hand water hydrants; NM Sports Complexnew Northern District SC bathrooms at Bun Ryan Field, Senior Field fencing/backstop; Rodeo Ground repair/replace bleachers; Barranca Mesa Park irrigation Northern District MP NM Sports Complex Cavaglia, Bomber, Minor Field irrigation Western District SC Western Area Park irrigation; Urban Park new shelter Western District MP Urban Park backflow preventer White Rock District SC Rover Park New pavilion and pad, new pads, tables and grills; Dara Jones/Spirio fields new fencing White Rock District MP Overlook Byers Field irrigation, Ballfield 4 fencing, NM4 holiday lights, WR complex wood stockage fencing Other SC Oppenheimer Green irrigation Other MP Tennis Court resurfacing Canyon Rd, Rover; Western Area Park Playlot safety zone/walls; Firemen's Playlot fencing 252

269 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Major Facilities Maintenance These on-going Major Facilities Maintenance projects are significant enough to be segregated but are not capital in nature. They are accounted for in the General Fund. Major Facilities Maintenance these projects are budgeted in the General Fund FACILITIES FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2021 Total All Years New General Fund Dollars 2,000,000 1,800,000 12,600,000 16,400,000 Carryover from prior years 2,022, ,433 TOTAL PROJECTS 4,022,000 2,400,233 12,813,528 19,235,761 Fuller Lodge 3,000,000 2,000,000 5,000,000 Historical Museum 88, , ,518 Betty Ehart Senior Center 726, ,517 Mesa Public Library 2,829,055 2,829,055 Community Bldg 2,347,779 2,347,779 Aquatic Center 200,000 2,098, ,955 3,029,082 Ice Rink 15,000 15,000 Fire Station No. 2 63,386 63,386 Fire Station No. 3 Fire Station No , ,252 Fire Station No , ,601 Little Theatre 1,336,775 1,336,775 Eco Station 15,000 15,000 PCS Chassis Wash 38,567 38,567 Project Management 150, ,000 1,050,000 1,350,000 Overlook Park Maint. Bldg 130, ,765 Golf Course Maintenance Building Red Cross Bldg. 55,263 55,263 Civil Defense PCS Justice Center Other 603,433 63, , ,

270 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Detail of MFM Projects in FY13 and FY14 Fuller Lodge Health and safety upgrades including ADA compliance issues, mechnical, plumbing and electrical system upgrades Historical Museum Infrastructure improvements, mechnical, plumbing and electrical system upgrades Ice Rink Brine System Community Bldg Boiler replacement Aquatic Center Bldg and pool hvac replacement, fire alarm system replacement, ada modifications Ice Rink Replace furnace and boiler, fire alarm system install Fire Station No. 2 Boiler replacement Little Theatre Fire alarm system install PCS Chassis Wash Relocate electrical for chassis wash Eco Station Upgrades to solar power radiant heat and domestic hot water, night sky cooling Other Unidenitified projects that development during the year. All amounts are subject to reprioritizing based on emergencies or actual costs of projects. Crews painting the Los Alamos Little Theater 254

271 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Other Enterprise Funds CIP Airport Fund CIP The Airport Fund CIP includes contingent FAA funding. Future projects include: 1. Rehabilitate Run-up Area (2014) - $310, Runway Tow Broom (2015) - $300, Construct Shade Hangars (2015) - $400, New Security Fence (2015) - $410, Design Taxiway F (2015) FY2015 estimate of $34, Design West Area Development (2016) FY2016 estimate of $175, Airport Entrance Road, Parking Lots, Hangar Site (2018) $1,872, Acquire and Remove Taxiway F Hangers (2019) - $608,000 Utility Fund CIP Total Capital projects in the Joint Utility Fund for FY 2014 total $12,595,075. Specific projects and amounts in each sub-fund for FY FY 2022 are included in this section. San Juan Chama Water Project A multi-year project. Los Alamos County has a contract (water right) for 1,200 acre-feet of surface water from the San Juan Chama Project. Ongoing work includes phase 1 completion of a Preliminary Engineering Report (PER). This PER will recommend a final approach for Council approval and funding. FY 13 will be for additional required studies and value engineering of the project recommended in the FY 11 & 12 PER. FY 14 will be for right-of-way acquisition, environmental clearances, permitting and design. FY 15 will be for initial construction. FY 16 will be for construction completion. 255

272 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY Utility CIP Expenditure Budgets by Project FY FY14 Budget ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 620,000 Abiquiu Governor Software Upgrades 320,000 PRV Gate Hoist and Electric Yard Expansion 250,000 El Vado Engineering and Manufacture Collector Ring and Brush Gear System 50,000 ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 1,686,994 Overhead Distribution & Pole Replacement Replace 13 poles on Barranca Mesa 65,000 Replace multiple poles and crossarms 150,000 Underground Residential Distribution (URD) Replacement Replace 1 phase primary on Sioux; 3600 ft 450,000 Replace 1400 ft 3 phase primary from 1745 to 901 Trinity 50,000 Install 600 ft new 6 in. PVC and Cable from SC1401 to 600 Trinity 50,000 Miscellaneous URD Replacements (replacements after power outages) 200,000 NM 502 (Knecht to DP) 216,276 NM 502 (DP to Canyon) 92,689 County Labor and Benefits 413,029 GAS DISTRIBUTION 1,330,000 Steel Riser and Meter Replacements 350,000 Various Steel Replacements 110,000 NM 502 (Knecht to DP) 360,000 NM 502 (DP to Canyon) 360,000 East Park Gas Reg Station Rebuild 100,000 LA Middle School Gas Extension 50,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 800,000 NM 502 (Knecht to DP) 362,500 NM 502 (DP to Canyon) 362,500 LA Middle School Water Extension 75,000 WATER PRODUCTION 6,791,081 San Juan Chama Project ROW Acquisition & Design (Test Well Site 2/Design Site 3&2) 4,500,000 Water Production SCADA System Evaluation/Upgrades 50,000 Otowi Booster Station No. 1 - Construction 1,500,000 Pajarito Wells RTU Replacement - 5 Each 125,000 Los Alamos Reservoir Road Reconstruction (87.5% FEMA & State Funded) 313,081 NM 502 (DP to Canyon) 303,000 SEWER COLLECTION 433,500 NM 502 (Knecht to DP) 42,500 NM 502 (DP to Canyon) 85,000 Chamisa Arroyo Replacement 306,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 250,000 WRTP Elimination Study 200,000 LAWWTP Blower Installation 50,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 683,

273 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY15 Budget ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 1,000,000 El Vado Clean Rotor and Stator & Replace Generator Excitation Brush System 1,000,000 ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 3,400,000 Los Alamos URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 200,000 White Rock URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 200,000 New TA-3 Switchgear substation; backfeed Circuits 13,15,16, LAMC 2,500,000 Overhead Distribution & Pole Replacement 500,000 GAS DISTRIBUTION 1,160,000 Steel Riser and Meter Replacements 200,000 Western Area/Quemazon Loop 520,000 Gas System Steel Replacements 8" San I (Roundabout to Ball Fields Reg Station) 350,000 Western Area Phase 2 50,000 Gold Street Road Utilities 40,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 1,100,000 Eastern Area Water Line Replacements 100,000 Western Area /Quemazon Water Line Loop 300,000 PRV Replacement 50,000 Western Area Phase 2 650,000 WATER PRODUCTION 10,700,000 Paint Pajarito Well No. 5 tank 200,000 East Jemez Road Water Line (PW3 to NM4) 1,000,000 San Juan Chama Project Construction - (Test Well & Design Site 1 & Construct Site 3) 9,000,000 NP Group 12 Tank Repaint/Refurbish/New Intake Piping (Water Trust Board) 500,000 SEWER COLLECTION 734,000 Rio Bravo Lift Station 173,000 Western Area Phase 2 100,000 Rim Road Sewer Canyon Drop 461,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 200,000 White Rock Plant Drain Lift Station 200,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 934,

274 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY16 ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 0 Budget ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 1,100,000 Los Alamos URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 200,000 White Rock URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 200,000 North Road 200,000 Overhead Distribution & Pole Replacement 500,000 GAS DISTRIBUTION 1,050,000 Barranca Mesa Replacement Ph1 700,000 Steel Replacement San I. (Mazanato to Reg. Sta. No. 23) 350,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 761,000 North Mesa Distribution Upgrade 761,000 WATER PRODUCTION 7,310,000 PW-5 MCC Design 35,000 Paint Guaje Booster Station No. 1 & 2 Tanks 450,000 RTU Replacement - 5 Each 125,000 San Juan Chama Utilization Project Construction (Construct Well Site 2) 6,200,000 NP North Mesa Booster Station (Water Trust Board) 500,000 SEWER COLLECTION 700,000 Loma Vista Lift Station 177,000 Camino Redondo Sewer Canyon Drop 427,000 Backyard Replacement Between 43rd & 44th off Sandia 96,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 150,000 WRTP MIOX 150,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 850,

275 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY17 ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 0 Budget ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 3,280,000 Los Alamos URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 300,000 White Rock URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 300,000 Meadow Lane URD Replacement 300,000 WR Substation Oil Retention 200,000 WR1/WR2 3 PH Rebuild Phase 1 1,313,000 DP Road (Trinity to TA 21 Entry) 867,000 GAS DISTRIBUTION 1,055,000 Barranca Mesa Steel Mainline Replacement Ph II 710,000 DP Road (Trinity to TA 21 Entry) 345,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 1,239,000 PRV Replacement 150,000 Eastern Area Water Line Replacements 320,000 Western Area Water Line Replacements 320,000 DP Road (Trinity to TA 21 Entry) 449,000 WATER PRODUCTION 7,990,000 PW-5 MCC Replacement 265,000 Trinity Drive Transmission Line Replacement 600,000 Paint Guaje Booster Station No. 3 Tanks 350,000 RTU Replacement - 3 Each 75,000 San Juan Chama Project (Construct Well Site 1) 6,200,000 NP North Mesa Exposed Pipe Replacement (Water Trust Board) 500,000 SEWER COLLECTION 1,721,000 Paseo Penasco Lift Station 181,000 Camino Cereza Sewer Canyon Drop 434,000 Cheryl Avenue Replacement 148,000 DP Road (Trinity to TA 21 Entry) 958,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 150,000 WRTP Facilities Plan & Environmental Assessment 150,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 1,871,

276 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY18 ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 0 Budget ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 2,400,000 Los Alamos URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 300,000 White Rock URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 300,000 Tsikumu Village 300,000 Circuit 15 3 PH Rebuild 750,000 Circuit 13 3 PH Ski Hill Rebuild 750,000 GAS DISTRIBUTION 720,000 Barranca Mesa Steel Mainline Replacement Ph III 720,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 1,235,000 Eastern Area Water Line Replacements 330,000 Western Area Water Line Replacements 330,000 Paint Barranca Mesa Tank No ,000 PRV Replacement 75,000 WATER PRODUCTION 1,250,000 Pajarito Road Transmission Line Replacement (PB1 to White Rock) 750,000 NP New Bayo Booster Tank & Booster Station Upgrades (Water Trust Board) 500,000 SEWER COLLECTION 929,000 El Gancho Lift Station 183,000 Airport Sewer Canyon Drop 550,000 Mimbres Drive Replacement 196,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 900,000 WRTP Design 900,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 1,829,

277 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY19 ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 0 Budget ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 2,863,000 Los Alamos URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 300,000 White Rock URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 300,000 DP Road Replacement 350,000 WR1/WR2 Phase 2 Rebuild 1,313,000 Circuit 16 3 PH Rebuild Phase 1 600,000 GAS DISTRIBUTION 730,000 Barranca Mesa Steel Mainline Replacement Ph IV 730,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 730,000 Eastern Area Water Line Replacements 340,000 Western Area Water Line Replacements 340,000 PRV Replacement 50,000 WATER PRODUCTION 1,475,000 Otowi Well No. 2 (Hydrogeology/EIS/Design) 175,000 State Road No.4 Pipeline Rehabilitation 800,000 NP New Connections (Golf Course, Pueblo Complex, LAHS, LAMC, etc. Water Trust Bo 500,000 SEWER COLLECTION 936,000 North Road Lift Station 186,000 Laguna Sewer Canyon Drop 750,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 10,000,000 WRTP Design/Bid/Construction 10,000,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 10,936,

278 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY20 ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 0 Budget ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 4,350,000 Los Alamos URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 300,000 White Rock URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 300,000 Eastgate Substation 2,500,000 New Circuit 18T (Towards DP Road) 1,250,000 GAS DISTRIBUTION 740,000 Barranca Mesa Steel Mainline Replacement Ph V 740,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 750,000 Eastern Area Water Line Replacements 325,000 Western Area Water Line Replacements 350,000 PRV Replacement 75,000 WATER PRODUCTION 3,000,000 Otowi Well No. 2 Construction 2,500,000 NP Transmission Extension to Guaje Cemetery (Water Trust Board) 500,000 SEWER COLLECTION 700,000 Ridge Park Lift Station 190,000 Cooper Road Sewer Canyon Drop 510,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 0 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 700,

279 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY21 ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 0 Budget ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 3,300,000 Los Alamos URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 400,000 White Rock URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 400,000 Circuit 13 3 PH Rebuild 750,000 EA4 Phase 1 Rebuild 1,250,000 Replace 25% padmount transformers 500,000 GAS DISTRIBUTION 750,000 Barranca Mesa Steel Mainline Replacement Ph VI 750,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 750,000 Eastern Area Water Line Replacements 350,000 Western Area Water Line Replacements 325,000 PRV Replacement 75,000 WATER PRODUCTION 1,000,000 Paint Tank TA (Replace with FY 14 Deferral Pajarito Tank 4A) 500,000 NP Extension to Urban Park (Water Trust Board) 500,000 SEWER COLLECTION 443,000 Sewer Line Rehab or Replacement 200,000 Connie Avenue Replacement 243,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 0 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 443,

280 FY 2014 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for FY FY22 ELECTRIC PRODUCTION (LAC 20%, DOE 80%) 0 Budget ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION 3,300,000 Los Alamos URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 400,000 White Rock URD Replacement (cables, jboxes, pedestals) 400,000 EA4 Phase 2 Rebuild 1,250,000 Overhead Distribution & Pole Replacement 750,000 Replace 25% padmount transformers 500,000 GAS DISTRIBUTION 760,000 Barranca Mesa Steel Mainline Replacement Ph VII 760,000 WATER DISTRIBUTION 700,000 Eastern Area Water Line Replacements 350,000 Western Area Water Line Replacements 350,000 WATER PRODUCTION 1,250,000 Pajarito Well No. 6 (Hydrogeology/EIS/Design) 750,000 NP Transmission Extension to Barranca Mesa Phase 1 (Water Trust Board) 500,000 SEWER COLLECTION 791,000 Sewer Line Rehab or Replacement (Revise Cost) 200,000 Camino Encantado Sewer Canyon Drop 276,000 Old Pueblo WWTP Sewer Canyon Drop 315,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT 0 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND SEWER COLLECTION TOTAL 791,

281 OTHER INFORMATION TABLE OF CONTENTS OTHER INFORMATION Financial Policies Schedule of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Positions Schedule of Interfund Transfers Equipment Replacement Schedules Schedule of Recurring Grants. 300 Debt Summary General Fund Revenue Detail. 309 Statistics. 312 Glossary. 318 Acronyms and Abbreviations Index

282 FINANCIAL POLICIES I. PURPOSE The purpose of these financial policies is to give overall direction to Council, management, and employees for the long-term financial operation of the Incorporated County of Los Alamos. This direction is not only intended to be the basic framework for strategic long-term financial planning for the delivery of services to all the citizens and visitors of the County, but is also intended to provide specific policy guidance for the development of the annual budget. These policies may also be used by those who are familiar with County operations to communicate to others how certain community goals are being addressed. II. GENERAL POLICY STATEMENT The Incorporated County of Los Alamos shall strive to maintain a sound financial condition by taking a fiscally conservative and disciplined approach to revenue forecasting, budgeting, capital improvement programming, investing of public funds, and managing its expenditures and debt. This goal will be accomplished by making financial decisions based on the community's ability to pay; maintaining reserves for emergencies and future expenditure demands; and providing future generations with the ability to borrow capital without severe financial burden or undue constraint. III. OPERATING POSITION A. Council Contingency Appropriation The Council Contingency appropriation shall be appropriated annually and shall be the primary source used by Council and management to deal with unforeseen contingencies or to fund necessary and worthwhile projects and programs which may arise during the course of the fiscal year but have no specific long-term funding source. Examples include (but are not limited to) the matching of grants, funding of loans to other funds, and providing capital for operating transfers to other funds. The method to be used for utilization of this appropriation will be by formal action taken by Council. The Council shall determine an adequate level for this contingency during the annual budget cycle. B. General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance The General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance shall be the third source, after the Council Contingency appropriation and the balance Committed for Revenue Stabilization, used by Council and management to deal with unforeseen contingencies or to fund necessary and worthwhile projects and programs which may arise during the course of the fiscal year but have no specific long term funding source. Examples include (but are not limited to) the matching of grants, funding of loans to other funds, and providing capital for operating transfers to other funds. This can also be a source of funds that helps to mitigate the magnitude of adverse budget changes if larger and longer-term negative revenue trends occur. The method to be used for utilization of this account is by formal budget revision approved by the Council. 266

283 FINANCIAL POLICIES The target amount to be maintained in the General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance is twenty percent (20%) of General Fund actual revenues. The amount should be adjusted during the course of budget development and re-adjusted based upon audited figures. The following process must be followed whenever the General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance falls below 10% of actual revenues: Within 90 calendar days of the acceptance of a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report that indicates that the balance is below the 10% level, the Council must approve a documented plan to rebuild the balance to at least 10% of actual revenues within a period of three fiscal years. The plan may include enhanced or new revenues, reduced expenditures, or a combination utilizing both additional revenue and reduced expenditures. The documented plan must be considered by Council during each annual budget development cycle until the balance is restored to the 10% level. C. Nonspendable Fund Balance Nonspendable fund balances are recorded in governmental funds, where the resources cannot be spent to satisfy current obligations. This includes resources that are not in a spendable form (inventories, prepaid amounts, long-term loans/receivables, or assets held for resale) and resources that are legally or contractually required to remain intact, such as the principal balance in the CIP Permanent Fund. D. Restricted Fund Balances Restricted fund balances are recorded in governmental funds, where there are constraints placed upon the use of the resources either by an external party (grants, donations for a specified purpose, bond agreements, etc.) or imposed by law (federal, state, or local). The most significant restricted balances are described below. 1. Restricted for Cash Requirements. The purpose of this balance Restricted for Cash Requirements is to provide a margin to help maintain services during periods of economic decline; meet emergency conditions which may threaten the life, health, or safety of our citizens; meet major unanticipated cash flow shortfalls; and maintain the County's credit rating. The account is established to satisfy the requirements of the State Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) to maintain a cash balance of at least one twelfth of annual General Fund revised budgeted expenditures. The amount to be maintained in the balance Restricted for Cash Requirements is one twelfth (8.3%) of General Fund revised budgeted expenditures. The amount should be adjusted during the course of budget development and re-adjusted based upon audited figures. 2. Restricted for Income Stabilization (CIP Permanent Fund). In accordance with County Code section , the resources in the Permanent Fund in excess of principal are restricted and should be accumulated for eventual transfer to the Capital Improvement Project Fund or addition to principal. 267

284 FINANCIAL POLICIES E. General Fund Balance Committed for Revenue Stabilization The purpose of this balance Committed for Revenue Stabilization is to provide an additional margin of safety so that short-term (less than three years) negative fluctuations in projected revenue growth do not unnecessarily restrict operating expenditures if after the short-term period, normal revenue growth is projected. This is intended to be used to balance the budget during short-term periods of revenue volatility. This can also be a source of funds that helps to mitigate the magnitude of adverse budget changes if larger and longer-term negative revenue trends occur. The amount to be maintained in the Committed for Revenue Stabilization will be any amount by which the General Fund Unassigned fund balance exceeds 20 percent of General Fund actual revenues. The minimum target amount to be maintained is five percent (5%) of General Fund actual revenues. The amount should be adjusted during the course of budget development and re-adjusted based upon audited figures. The following process must be followed whenever the Committed for Revenue Stabilization Fund Balance falls below 5% of actual revenues: Within 90 calendar days of the acceptance of a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report that indicates that the balance is below the 5% level, the Council must approve a documented plan to rebuild the balance to at least 5% of actual revenues within a period of three fiscal years. The plan may include enhanced or new revenues, reduced expenditures, or a combination utilizing both additional revenue and reduced expenditures. The documented plan must be considered by Council during each annual budget development cycle until the balance is restored to the 5% level. In the event the balance Committed for Revenue Stabilization exceeds fifteen percent (15%) of annual General Fund operating expenditures for more than a one year period, the County should take specific actions to reduce the balance through such means as tax reductions or by funding, as one time programs, projects or services that are consistent with County goals and do not excessively increase ongoing expenditures of the County. These actions should be undertaken after a multi-year analysis is conducted to verify that the planned action will not result in future operating costs increases that in turn would require tax increases or significant expenditure reductions in other areas. F. General Fund Balance Committed for Maintenance and Replacement The purpose of this balance Committed for Maintenance and Replacement is to accumulate a balance to be used for non-routine major maintenance and replacement of County assets, including information technology hardware and software systems. Additions to this balance will be made from GRT revenues associated with the LANL CMRR project. The overall level of this balance, the annual additions, and any use of this balance, will be at the direction of the County Council. 268

285 FINANCIAL POLICIES G. Economic Development (formerly the Self Sufficiency Fund) Fund Balance Committed for Economic Development The purpose of this fund was initially to account for the receipt, management, investment, and expenditure of the $22.6 million lump-sum buyout payment from DOE that was the negotiated payment the County received under the Atomic Energy Community Act. It was established as a special revenue fund in recognition of the unique circumstances under which the County received the funds and because the use of the funds is intended to be limited. This fund is not intended to be a permanent fund. The establishment of this separate fund recognizes: 1. The dependence the County has upon actions related to our single largest employer (DOE/LANL) and the impact of decisions made by other entities that may have far reaching and significant effects upon County resources and service levels; and 2. The need to invest and expend the balance in this fund in order to create economic development and diversify the economy, and to decrease the County s dependence upon DOE/LANL. By County Council direction, the balance in the Economic Development Fund, including interest earnings, should be used for providing initial capital for economic development projects, economic development loans, housing rehabilitation loans, land development, or similar activities which are designed to achieve Council s economic development strategic goals. H. Debt Service Fund Balance Committed for Debt Service The County s Gross Receipts Tax (GRT) taxpayor base is significantly concentrated in a single taxpaying entity. This represents an additional unique risk for the County whenever GRT revenue bonds are outstanding. To help mitigate this additional risk, the County may, at the direction of the County Council, accumulate a Fund Balance Committed for Debt Service over and above any legally required debt service reserve amount. With County Council direction, this balance may also serve as a discretionary sinking fund to accumulate funds to be used to call early any debt that is callable. I. General Fund Balance Committed for Fire Services At direction of County Council this account commits a portion of the fund balance within the General Fund. The amount committed shall be 1% of total cumulative cooperative agreement expenses for activities of the Fire Department. This designation was established when the County entered into the Fire Department cooperative agreement with the Department of Energy (DOE). This committed balance is available to repay the DOE at the conclusion of the agreement period in the event that audit findings conclude that overbillings have occurred or costs are disallowed. If no overbilling has occurred, the committed balance reverts to the Unassigned Fund Balance in the General Fund. 269

286 FINANCIAL POLICIES J. Fund Balances Committed for Continuing Appropriations The fund balances Committed for Continuing Appropriations segregates a portion of fund balance which reflects part of the unexpended appropriations at June 30th that are re-appropriated and carried forward to the subsequent fiscal year. County Council approval is required through the established formal budget revision process. K. Fund Balance Committed for Capital Projects The fund balance Committed for Capital Projects segregates a portion of the fund balance in the Capital Improvement Projects Fund to reflect Council s intent that these funds be spent for approved capital projects. L. Fund Balance of Other Funds Financial planning for other County operating funds should provide a positive fund balance, the appropriate level of which would be dictated by legal requirements and specific characteristics of the individual fund and the specific purpose(s) of the fund. These would include, as appropriate: 1. Legal or regulatory requirements affecting revenues and expenditures, e.g., Charter requirements to maintain the real value of the Capital Projects Permanent Fund. 2. Cash flow requirements to support operating expenses. 3. Relative rate stability from year to year for enterprise and internal service funds. 4. Susceptibility to emergency or unanticipated expenditures. 5. Long-term maintenance and replacement plans for infrastructure and equipment. 6. Ability to support debt service requirements. The financial planning for other County operating funds should avoid large rate increases from one year to the next. If the unassigned fund balance or working capital balance becomes excessive within any fund, action shall be taken in the subsequent budget cycles to reduce the balance. Reductions may be accomplished by the deferral of rate increases, rebates to customers, or utilization of funds for one-time expenditures that do not unduly increase ongoing operating expenses. IV. INTERFUND ACTIVITIES A. General Fund Transfers to Other Funds Annual transfers of General Fund revenues to other funds should be construed as payments intended only for the support of specific programs. If revenues generated within those funds exceed the budgeted estimates, the amount of the budgeted transfer from the General Fund will be reduced accordingly. 270

287 FINANCIAL POLICIES B. Utility Profit Transfers to the General Fund The General Fund shall include a utility profit transfer as a source of its annual revenues. The amount of the profit transfer shall be based upon independently audited figures and calculated in accordance with the County Code to ensure that budgeted transfers from the Utility Funds to the General Fund will occur without impact to operations. C. Interfund Loans Interfund loans are made under the following conditions: The loan is approved by the County Council. The County Council shall review and approve the proposed lending terms including interest rate, period of repayment, and other terms. D. Interdepartmental Charges Los Alamos County will use Interdepartmental Charges (IDCs) in order to fully account for all costs of providing services including administrative and indirect support. IDCs will be utilized, particularly for enterprise and internal service fund activities, to account for and recover only those costs where it is determined to be reasonable and cost effective to do so. IDCs will be allocated in an equitable and reasonable manner among benefited departments. E. Pooling of Cash and Investments Funds which participate in the pooled cash and investments portfolio are allocated investment earnings on a pro-rata basis, for eligible funds. Funds with positive cash balances are credited their pro-rata share of investment earnings, while funds with negative balances are charged interest expense. F. Recording of Interfund Transactions Whenever interfund transactions occur the County shall record the complete transaction within the financial records. The financial records include the budget, the comprehensive annual financial report, and applicable interim reports. V. OPERATING BUDGET A. Pay-As-You-Go Operating Budget The County shall conduct its operations on a pay-as-you-go basis from available current revenues. To the fullest extent possible, the County shall fund from general revenues those activities that generally benefit a significantly large number of County citizens. Activities that benefit a small portion of the community should be funded directly by those benefited through user fees in accordance with the adopted User Fee Policy rather than through general County resources. 271

288 FINANCIAL POLICIES To carry out these policy objectives, the County will adhere to the following practices: 1. The County will fund annual operating expenses from current revenues and available fund balances consistent with these financial policies. 2. The County will only fund a new recurring activity if there is an assured funding source for continuing the activity. 3. To initiate new General Fund supported activities, trade-offs of existing activities must first be considered by the County, unless there is a new revenue source available to fund such activities. 4. The County will review existing activities annually to determine the need to continue or modify them. The County shall observe the following practices regarding the management of its resources: 1. The County will encourage economic development activities to broaden its tax base. 2. The County will minimize its General Fund contributions to fund special activities that can be supported by dedicated tax revenues or user fees. 3. The County will annually plan and budget for a reasonable level of maintenance to existing major infrastructure including streets and facilities in order to minimize lifecycle costs. 4. Services for the public or others that can be accomplished effectively by outside agencies for less cost will be performed by an outside agency instead of the County. 5. The County s compensation program will be competitive to attract and retain motivated and high-performing staff members. 6. The County will coordinate the operating and capital budgets so that future capital needs will be integrated with projected operating requirements. 7. The County will seek regional cooperation and funding for any program that has regional benefits. 8. The County will only participate in any intergovernmental program that is consistent with the long-term vision and goals of the County. While observing these practices, the County will strive to prepare a balanced budget that adheres to the following definition: An individual fund's adopted budget is considered balanced if the current year estimated revenues, plus transfers in from other funds, plus appropriations of fund balance is at least as much as the current year estimated expenditures, plus transfers out to other funds. 272

289 FINANCIAL POLICIES This condition must be true for the single annual budget and in total for the projected following three years. The entire County budget is considered balanced when each individual fund budget is balanced. When looking to see if a fund has a balanced budget, the use of (or appropriation of) fund balance is considered a satisfactory source for balancing the budget if the fund balance is already restricted or committed for such use. For example, using the committed fund balance in the Capital Projects Funds as a source for capital projects, even with no other current revenues or operating transfers in, is a legitimate use and would balance the budget. On the other hand, using the unassigned fund balance in the General Fund as a source for regular ongoing operations for multiple years would not be a preferred use and if it was necessary, the budget would not be considered balanced. B. Revenues The County shall observe the following practices to manage its revenues effectively: 1. Encourage economic development activities to broaden the County's tax revenue base. 2. Pursue state-wide tax structure revisions to obtain the greatest tax source flexibility for the County. 3. Aggressively collect revenues and coordinate revenue reporting with appropriate parties. 4. To the fullest extent possible and when appropriate, establish user fees and charges at levels which recover the full costs of providing the services. 5. Review fees and charges annually, and develop a system for periodically changing rates to keep pace with changes in the costs of providing services. 6. Charge fees for all services that benefit limited interests within the community with the exception of human services needs for persons with limited ability to pay. 7. Whenever possible and practical, use multi-year forecasting techniques and tools in order to detect in advance significant changes in revenue. 8. Use one-time revenues for one-time expenditures whenever appropriate. 9. Provide management with regular reports comparing actual revenue to budget estimates. 273

290 FINANCIAL POLICIES C. Expenditures The County shall observe the following practices to manage its expenditures effectively: 1. Ensure that the expenditure growth rate will not exceed the revenue growth rate. 2. Where possible, use performance measures and productivity indicators and integrate them into the annual budget. 3. Analyze all costs of a service and make cost projections for at least three years before increasing a level of service or adding new services. 4. Take advantage of changing technology, improved systems, and management techniques whenever available in order to reduce long-term costs and improve productivity. 5. Eliminate any program or service which is no longer necessary. 6. Before undertaking any agreements that would create fixed costs, determine fully and project for at least three years the cost implications (both operating and capital) of such agreements. 7. Whenever possible and practical, use multi-year forecasting techniques and tools in order to detect in advance significant changes in expenditures. 8. Prior to any change in the salary and benefit level, prepare a complete cost analysis and multi-year year projection of salaries and benefits. 9. Provide management with regular reports comparing actual expenditures to budgeted appropriations. 10. Transfers into or out of budget line items for salaries or employee benefits may be made only after the County Administrator has approved the transfer. D. Grants The Council shall review and approve non-recurring grants during the fiscal year. The annual budget will recognize non-recurring grant revenues and expenditures only after Council acceptance of such grants. Prior to accepting any grant, the County shall analyze the cost-effectiveness of the grant. The analysis should include the consistency of the grant with the County vision and long-term goals, the full costs associated with administering the grant including indirect support for grant management, accounting and auditing, the feasibility of continuing the program with County resources after the conclusion of grant funding, and that the program offered by the grant will benefit a significant number of County citizens. 274

291 FINANCIAL POLICIES VI. INVESTMENTS County funds will be invested in accordance with State law, the Charter, the County Code and the adopted Investment Policy. The County will apply the prudent investor rule to all its investments. This standard states that investments are made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence would exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of the capital as well as the probable income to be derived. All idle cash shall be continuously invested at the highest available rate, but only in instruments allowed under the investment policy. Disbursement, collection, and deposit of all funds will be scheduled to ensure maximum cash availability and investment earnings. VII. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING, FINANCING, AND MAINTENANCE A. Capital Improvement Programming In developing the County's capital improvement projects, the County shall evaluate the need for the capital project and its urgency; perform a long-term cost-benefit analysis of the project; determine the financing sources available for the project and the project's impact on the County's ongoing operating and maintenance costs; and plan for its future replacement. Highest priority capital improvement projects should be those projects deemed necessary to remedy deficient conditions adversely impacting safety, health, and security; those projects necessary to meet mandatory federal, state, and local legal requirements; those projects which represent a phase of an approved master plan or represent ongoing implementation of phased projects approved in previous years; or those projects which maintain the structural or architectural integrity of existing infrastructure. B. Capital Improvement Financing Annually, a 10-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) will be updated and incorporated into the Long Range Financial Projection (LRFP). The process of updating the CIP will include evaluating new proposed major CIP projects (over 1% of the General Fund s operating budget) and prioritizing them with already approved projects, as well as adding a new year to the plan. It will not include a comprehensive re-evaluation of all projects already included in the CIP. Those, generally, should proceed as previously programmed. CIP projects will not be funded unless they are included in the approved CIP budget. Addition of new projects to the CIP will be contingent upon identifying the funding sources for all phases of the project and committing, through Council approval, all such sources. The annual budget, the LRFP, and the 10-year CIP should include sufficient funding for adequate maintenance and the orderly replacement and/or upgrade of all capital plant and equipment. All County assets should be maintained at a level that protects the initial capital investment and 275

292 FINANCIAL POLICIES minimizes future maintenance and replacement costs. Prior to approval of any capital project, the future maintenance and operational costs of the project must be fully analyzed and those costs must then be included in the approved LRFP for full disclosure of the long-term maintenance and operating impact of the project. The annual budget should include funding for capital programs as identified in the CIP. The County will actively pursue external long-term financing in accordance with its Debt Management Policy. The County will also pursue external grant funding for CIP project financing whenever it is available and practical to do so. C. Capital Plant Maintenance The County shall establish and maintain an inventory showing the condition of its capital plant and shall develop long-term replacement schedules for use in setting priorities and capital financing plan development. VIII. DEBT MANAGEMENT The County will manage its debt in accordance with its adopted Debt Management Policy. IX. LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PROJECTION The County Administrator will, as an initial step in the development of the annual budget, present to Council for consideration and approval a Long Range Financial Projection (LRFP). This action recognizes that short-term financial plans (annual budgets) need to be placed within a long-term context to be effective and properly coordinated from year to year. Approval by Council indicates their long-range financial policy direction. The projection will cover 10 years, and will include operational and capital budgets that impact the General Fund. The projection will be updated at least annually. Updatingincludes: A. Adding new items from the updated CIP, including the operating impact of new capital items; B. Reviewing and updating assumptions used for forecasting purposes; C. Adding any changes which reflect more current information and significantly change the projection; and D. Determining the financial effect of any significant changes in County policy. Only the annually adopted budget appropriates funds for expenditure. However, the annual budget should be developed to fit within the context of the LRFP. The LRFP should be approved annually concurrently with the annual budget. This approval shall not be construed as agreement with every aspect and assumption within the plan, but shall be considered as a formal acknowledgment of the projected potential long-term impact of adoption of the annual budget. 276

293 FINANCIAL POLICIES X. ACCOUNTING & FINANCIAL REPORTING The County shall follow a high standard in all financial reports by: A. Preparing appropriate financial reports in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP); B. Making all possible and ethical efforts to obtain unqualified independent audit opinions on every annual report; C. Adopting a spirit of full disclosure in preparing annual reports; D. Refraining from the use of creative accounting to defer costs or hide long-term problems; E. Disclosing within interim reports or analysis all pertinent assumptions which may impact decision making; and F. Minimizing the number of funds and accounts to prevent unnecessary complexity and cost of maintaining and auditing the records while maintaining ease of reporting. XI. PERFORMANCE MEASURES The County will develop strategic and program performance measures to be used as a component of decision making and to be incorporated into the budgeting process. The performance measures should: A. Be based upon program goals and objectives that relate to a statement of program purpose that are developed within the context of broader strategic goals and objectives; B. Measure program results or accomplishments; C. Provide for comparisons over time; D. Measure efficiency and effectiveness; E. Be reported internally and externally; F. Be monitored and used in decision-making processes; and G. Be limited to a number and degree of complexity that can provide an efficient and meaningful way to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of key programs. 277

294 FINANCIAL POLICIES GLOSSARY OF TERMS Advances An account used to segregate a portion of fund balance to indicate the noncurrent portion of longterm interfund receivables that do not represent expendable and available financial resources. This reserve is established by GAAP and is used by the County for interfund loans--particularly from the General Fund to other County funds. Capital Projects An account that segregates a portion of the fund balance that reflects money set aside for capital improvement projects. Cash Requirements An account which reserves a portion of the fund balance within the General Fund that is equal to one twelfth of General Fund revised budgeted expenditures. The amount is segregated to provide a margin to help maintain services during periods of economic decline; meet unanticipated cash flow shortfalls; meet emergency conditions which may threaten the life, health and safety of our citizens; and maintain the County s credit rating. Cemetery Perpetual Care An account used to record a portion of the fund balance in the General Fund, which by contract with the purchasers of cemetery lots, is reserved for future care of the cemetery. When the cemetery is fully developed and all lots are sold, the interest earnings from this reserve will be used to guarantee the maintenance of the cemetery property. Committed Fund Balance A committed fund balance is a portion of the fund balance that is earmarked for a special purpose as determined by and approved by Council. These accounts may be appropriated for other purposes, but only with the approval of the Council. Continuing Appropriations An account which segregates a portion of fund balance which reflects part of the unexpended appropriations at June 30th that are re-appropriated and carried forward to the subsequent fiscal year. Council and County Administrator approval is required through the established formal budget revision process. Debt Service An account used to record the fund balance in the Debt Service funds to demonstrate that this balance is only expendable for debt service purposes as required by provisions of individual legal debt instruments. Encumbrances An account used to segregate a portion of fund balance for expenditure upon vendor performance. This account is updated at the close of each fiscal year to reflect the amount of purchase orders which existed at year end, but for which the vendor has not yet delivered the requested goods or services. 278

295 FINANCIAL POLICIES Fire Services An account which designates a portion of the fund balance within the General Fund which is based upon 1% of total cumulative cooperative agreement expenses for activities of the Fire Department. This designation was established when the County entered into the Fire Department cooperative agreement with the Department of Energy (DOE). This designation is available to repay the DOE/LANL at the conclusion of the agreement period in the event that audit findings conclude that overbillings have occurred or costs are disallowed. If no overbilling has occurred, the designated amount reverts to the Unassigned Fund Balance in the General Fund. Fund Balances Fund Balance is generally defined as the difference between fund assets and fund liabilities of governmental type funds. In enterprise and internal service type funds, Retained Earnings is a similar concept. The State Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) is required to report local governments fund balances at the end of each fiscal year to the state legislature. Los Alamos County shall record certain reserves and designations of fund balance which have specific and/or legal future local uses. Grants An account used to segregate a portion of fund balance for expenditure once certain grant requirements are met. This account is established by GAAP and by conditions of the grant award. Indigent Health Care (Health Care Assistance) An account used to record the full fund balance in the Indigent Health Care Fund to demonstrate that this balance is only expendable on the specific activities allowed by the applicable statutes. This reserve is established by the statutory restrictions on the second County increment of Gross Receipts Tax revenue and may be expended with Council approval only for those allowed purposes. Further information, restrictions, and guidelines are contained in the Council approved Health Care policy which is updated periodically. Inventories An account used to segregate a portion of fund balance to indicate that portion which is not expendable because supplies inventories are not readily available financial resources. This reserve is established by GAAP and is limited to warehouse stock items. Lodgers Tax An account used to segregate a portion of fund balance in the Lodgers Tax Fund which is planned for promotional activities or expenditure on specific capital infrastructure items allowed by statute. This reserve is established by the statutory restrictions on the lodgers tax revenue and may be expended with Council approval only on those allowed purposes. Prepaid Items An account used to segregate a portion of fund balance which is not available for expenditure. This reserve is established by GAAP. 279

296 FINANCIAL POLICIES Restricted Fund Balances A restricted fund balance is a portion of the fund balance that has external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors, laws, regulations, or enabling legislations which require the resources to be used only for a specific purpose. Unassigned Fund Balances The amount of the fund balance that is totally available for appropriation for any legal purpose. This term is limited in usage to governmental type funds. In proprietary type funds working capital is a similar concept. 280

297 FTE SUMMARY - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Department FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted County Council Municipal Court County Administrator's Office (CAO) County Assessor's Office County Attorney's Office County Clerk's Office County Sheriff Administrative Services Community Services Department Fire Department Police Department Public Works Department Community & Economic Development Utilities Department Total FTEs - All Funds

298 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted County Council Council Chair Council Total FTEs Municipal Court Municipal Judge Probation Officer Court Administrator Court Clerk Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Bench Warrant Fund Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs Department Total Temp/Casual Department Total All FTEs County Administrator's Office (CAO) County Administrator Deputy County Administrator Economic Vitality Administrator Assistant to County Administrator Office Manager Sr. Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Communications & Public Relations Comm. & Public Relations Administrator Marketing Specialist Comm. Spec. II Total Regular FTEs

299 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Media Services Comm. Spec. I Comm. Spec. I Total Regular FTEs Human Resources Human Resources Manager HRIS Manager Payroll Coordinator Benefits & Pension Manager Human Resources Technician Training & Special Projects Manager Employee Services Manager Payroll Specialist Sr Human Resources Technician Sr. Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Human Resources Spec.-Limited Term Total FTEs Human Resources-Safety/Risk Management Procurement & Risk Administrator Risk Manager Safety Specialist Total Regular FTEs Total HR FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs County Assessor's Office County Assessor-Elected Official Chief Deputy Assessor Chief Appraiser Appraiser Apprentice Appraiser Sr. Assessment Specialist Assessment Specialist Total Regular FTEs

300 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Property Valuation Fund Chief Appraiser Appraiser Apprentice Appraiser Total Regular FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs County Attorney's Office County Attorney Assistant County Attorney Jr. Assistant County Attorney Legal Assistant I Legal Assistant II Total Regular FTEs County Clerk's Office Elections/Recording County Clerk-Elected Official Chief Deputy Clerk Bureau of Elections Manager Sr. Deputy Clerk Deputy Clerk Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Probate Court Probate Judge-Elected Official Total Regular FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs Department Total Temp/Casual Department Total All FTEs County Sheriff Sheriff-Elected Official Sr. Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs

301 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Administrative Services Office of Management and Budget ASD Director/CFO Deputy Chief Financial Officer Accounting Operations Manager Budget & Grants Manager Sr. Budget Analyst Sr. Accountant Senior Management Analyst Accountant Management Analyst Account Clerk Health Care Total Regular FTEs OMB-Purchasing Chief Purchasing Officer Procurement & Risk Administrator Purchasing Agent Material Planner Buyer-Planner Sr. Buyer-Planner Contract Specialist Material Management Supervisor Supply Specialist Material Management Assistant Total Regular FTEs Total OMB FTEs Information Management-Information Technology Chief Information Officer Systems Manager Senior Web Developer App Analyst-Developer Network Wiring Specialist Network Engineer IT Business Analyst Sr IT Business Analyst Sr. System Administrator Systems Administrator Database Administrator GIS Specialist IT Project Manager Service Desk Supervisor Sr. Technical Support Specialist Technical Support Specialist Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Project Manager-Limited Term Temp/Casual Total IT FTEs

302 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Information Management-Records Records and IM Administrator Sr. Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total Records FTEs Information Management subtotals Total Regular FTEs Limited Term Temp/Casual Total IM FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs Department Total Limited Term Department Total Temp/Casual Department Total All FTEs Community Services Department CSD-Administration Community Services Director Management Analyst Sr. Management Analyst Office Manager Sr. Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Library Library Manager Program Support Specialist Office Manager Office Specialist Sr. Office Specialist Assistant Library Manager Sr. Librarian Librarian Sr Library Specialist Library Specialist Sr Library Technician Library Technician Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs

303 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Parks Parks Division Manager Parks Superintendent Open Space Specialist Parks Maintenance Spec. III Parks Maintenance Spec. II Office Specialist Sr. Office Specialist Parks Maintenance Spec. I Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Recreation-Administration Recreation Manager Sr. Office Specialist Customer Service Supervisor Sr. Customer Service Associate Customer Service Associate Custodian Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Recreation-Programs Recreation Leader Sr. Recreation Leader Recreation Programs Manager Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Recreation-Aquatic Center Recreation Programs Manager Aquatics Ctr Program Coordinator Lifeguard Supervisor Aquatics Maintenance Specialist Sr. Lifegaurd Custodian Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Recreation-Rink Recreation Programs Manager Assistant Golf Professional Sr. Recreation Leader Recreation Specialist Recreation Leader Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs

304 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Recreation-Golf Course Maintenance Golf Course Maintenance Superintendent Golf Course Maintenance Asst Supv Golf Course Equipment Mechanic Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Recreation-Golf Course Pro Shop Golf Course Manager Head Golf Professional Recreation Leader Assistant Golf Professional Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Recreation subtotals Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Social Services Social Services Manager Total Regular FTEs CSD (formerly OMB)-Health Care Assistance Fund Accounts Payable Supervisor Account Clerk Health Care Total Regular FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs Department Total Temp/Casual Department Total All FTEs Fire Department Administration Fire Chief Deputy Fire Chief Fire Battalion Chief Administrative Services Manager Management Analyst Operations Analyst Management Analyst Sr Accountant Office Manager Sr. Office Specialist Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs

305 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Operations Deputy Fire Chief Fire Battalion Chief Sr. Office Specialist Management Analyst Fire Captain Fire Lieutenant Driver Engineer Firefighter II Firefighter I Total Regular FTEs Fire Life Safety Assistant Fire Chief/Fire Marshall Fire Battalion Chief Sr. Office Specialist Computer Aided Designer Total Regular FTEs Training Fire Battalion Chief Assistant Fire Chief/Fire Marshall Fire Captain Firefigher II Fire Lieutenant Sr. Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Emergency Medical Services Fire Battalion Chief Sr. Office Specialist Ambulance Billing Specialist EMS Trainer Total Regular FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs Police Department Animal Control Sr Public Services Aide PSA Supervisor Public Services Aide Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs

306 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Detention Detention/PSA Supervisor Detention Shift Supervisor Detention Officer II Detention Officer I Total Regular FTEs Dispatch CDC Supervisor Police Chief Sr. Office Specialist Dispatcher Shift Supervisor Dispatcher II Dispatcher I Total Regular FTEs Emergency Management Emergency Management Coor Police Commander-non uniform Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Operations Police Sergeant Police Corporal Police Officer Total Regular FTEs Administration/Records Police Chief Deputy Police Chief Police Captain Police Commander Police Lieutenant Police Sergeant Staff Services Manager Office Manager Sr. Office Specialist Records Specialist Total Regular FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs Department Total Temp/Casual Department Total All FTEs

307 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title Public Works Department FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted PW Administration Public Works Director Office Manager Sr. Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Engineering Services* Engineering Manager Engineering Project Manager Projects Manager Sr. Engineer Chief of Surveying Engineering Associate Engineering Aide Total Regular FTEs *In FY 14, 5 FTEs have been reclassified from the General Fund to the Capital Improvements Projects Fund. Equipment Equipment Mechanic Fleet Supervisor Sr. Office Specialist Equipment Service Worker Fleet Manager Lead Shop Mechanic Total Regular FTEs Pavement Transportation Manager Pavement Manager Pavement Superintendent Lead Equipment Operator Sr. Equipment Operator Sr. Office Specialist Equipment Operator Total Regular FTEs Traffic Engineering Transportation Manager Traffic Operations Manager Traffic Electrician III Transportation Safety Specialist Traffic Electrician II Signs & Marking Technician III Signs & Marking Technician II Sr. Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs

308 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Transit Public Works Director Transportation Manager Transportation Safety Specialist Transit Manager Transit Operations Manager Sr. Office Specialist Management Analyst Transit Operations Supervisor Transit Disp-Operator II Transit Operator I Transit Operator II Transit Operator III Total Regular FTEs Total Limited Term - Tranist Operators Total FTEs Environmental Services Public Works Director Environmental Services Manager Assistant to County Administrator Environmental Services Supt Asst Environmental Services Supt Lead Equipment Operator Environmental Services Specialist Management Analyst Scale Operator Sr. Office Specialist Sr. Equipment Operator Office Specialist Laborer Equipment Operator Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Airport Airport Manager Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Department Total Regular FTEs Department Total Limited Term Department Total Temp/Casual Department Total All FTEs

309 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Community and Economic Development Administration CED Department Director Office Manager Management Analyst Sr. Office Specialist Budget Technician Total Regular FTEs Capital Projects Management Capital Projects Manager Projects Manager Engineering Aide Total Regular FTEs *In FY 14, 3 FTEs have been reclassified from the General Fund to the Capital Improvements Projects Fund. Facilities Internal Services Division Manager Facilities Manager Construction Spec. III Facilities Electrician III Construction Spec. II Sr. Office Specialist Office Specialist Construction Spec. I Total Regular FTEs Custodial Lead Custodian Sr. Office Specialist Custodian Superintendent Custodian Total Regular FTEs Housing Housing & Special Project Manager Sr. Office Specialist Office Specialist Total Regular FTEs Economic Development Economic Vitality Administrator Marketing Specialist Total Regular FTEs

310 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Building Building Safety Manager Building Inspector Permit Technician Code Enforcement Inspector Total Regular FTEs Planning Community Development Director Sr. Office Specialist Planner II Planner I Principal Planner Associate Planner Planning Application Technician Total Regular FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs Utilities Department Administration Utilities Manager Dep. Util. Mgr.-Finance Public Relations Manager Utilities Business Operations Manager Customer Care Center Supv Sr. Office Specialist Water & Energy Conservation Officer Public Affairs Specialist-Utilities Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Billing Sr Customer Care Center Rep Customer Care Center Rep Management Analyst Customer Care Center Supv Total Regular FTEs

311 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Engineering Dep. Util. Mgr.-Engineering Dep. Util. Mgr.-Elec. Dist Environmental Compliance Specialist Water & Energy Conservation Officer SCADA System Coordinator Sr. Engineer Engineering Project Manager Sr. Engineering Aide Engineering Associate Total Regular FTEs Meter Reading Meter Reader Supervisor Meter Reader II Meter Reader I Total Regular FTEs Electric Production Dep. Util. Mgr.-Power Supply Power Scheduler/Energy Analyst Power System Supervisor Sr. Power System Operator Power System Operator Lead Hydro. Plant Maint. Tech Hydro. Plant Maint. Tech Total Regular FTEs Electric Distribution Electric General Superintendent Dep. Util. Mgr.-Elec. Dist Line Electrician Supervisor Engineering Associate Sr Engineering Aide Engineering Project Mgr Line Electrician Lead Equipment Operator Total Regular FTEs

312 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted Gas/Water/Sewer Dep. Util. Mgr.-GWS Services GWS Superintendent GWS Supervisor GWS Pipefitter Utility Line Locator GWS Service Worker GWS Shop Supervisor GWS Apprentice II GWS Apprentice I GWS/WWTP/WP Trainee Total Regular FTEs Temp/Casual Total FTEs Waste Water Treatment Plant Dep. Util. Mgr.-GWS Services WW Treatment Plant Superintendent WW Treatment Plant Supervisor Sr. WW Treatment Plant Operator WW Treatment Plant Operator WW Treatment Plant Oper. Appr II WW Treatment Plant Oper. Appr I GWS/WWTP/WP Trainee Total Regular FTEs Water Production Dep. Util. Mgr.-GWS Services Water Systems Superintendent Water Systems Elec. Technician Water Systems Operator GWS/WWTP/WP Trainee Water Systems Apprentice II Water Systems Apprentice I Total Regular FTEs Department Total Regular FTEs Department Total Temp/Casual Department Total All FTEs

313 FTE DETAILED SCHEDULE - FY 2011 THROUGH FY 2014 Position Title FY 2011 Adopted FY 2012 Adopted FY 2013 Adopted FY 2014 Adopted County Totals County Total Regular FTEs County Total Limited Term FTEs County Total Temp/Casual County Total All FTEs General Fund Total Regular FTEs Total Temp/Casual Total All FTEs All Other Funds Total Regular FTEs Total Limited Term FTEs Total Temp/Casual Total All FTEs

314 SCHEDULE OF INTERFUND TRANSFERS - FY 2014 Adopted FY 2014 Proposed Operating transfers out of: State Shared / Capital Electric Gas Other Special Projects General Utility Utility Revenues Fire Permanent Total Operating transfers into: General $ 0 532, , ,673 1,600, ,042,647 Indigent Health Care 300, ,000 Other Special Revenues 31, ,000 Debt Service Fund - Revenue Bonds 6,178, ,178,291 CIP Permanent Fund Capital Improvement Projects 3,970, , ,091,000 5,591,000 Golf Transit Fund 1,300, ,300,000 Airport 222, ,000 $ 12,001, , ,648 1,165,673 1,600,000 1,091,000 16,664,

315 FY 2014 Equipment Replacement Schedule Year of DESCRIPTION Estimated Replacement Unit # Division Unit Cost 3025 CSD Parks Maintenance 2004 Toro 7 Gang Mower 70, CSD Parks Maintenance 2007 Ford 350 Superduty w/lift gate 40, Police Operations 2004 Crown Victoria 27, Police Operations 2005 Crown Victoria 27, PW Pavement ' Western Plow 7, PW Pavement 2002 International 10YD Dump Truck 150, PW Pavement 2002 Meyer 2 cu yd Sander 8, PW Traffic 2001 Chevy S 10 4WD 24, Golf Course 2001 Greensmaster Riding Mower 33, Util Meter Readers 2004 Chevrolet 2WD Mini Truck 16, Util Waster Water 2001 High Pressure Sewer Rodder 150,000 Equipment Fund subtotal $ 552,000 Because these buses are grant funded, the grant funded portion resides in the Transit Budget. The replacement cost of these buses is split between the Transit Fund and the Equipment Fund. Full Cost In Transit Fund Budget In Equipment Fund Budget 4093 PW Transit 2009 Arboc Bus (80/20 grant/local split) 154, ,200 30, PW Transit 2009 Arboc Bus (80/20 grant/local split) 154, ,200 30,800 Equipment Fund subtotal Equipment Fund Total $ $ 61, ,

316 Schedule of Recurring Grants Estimates for FY 2014 FY 2014 Dept/Div Funding Grant Description Amount Fire NMPRC Fire Protection Fund $ 439,760 NMDOH Emergency Medical Services Fund 10,500 Municipal Court Community Services Police Transit Public Works NMAOC Automation Fund 13,500 NMCYFD Juvenile Justice Advisory Board 85,000 NMDCA Library State Aide 8,508 NMDFA Local DWI Distribution 64,000 NMDOT Operation DWI 18,000 NMDFA Law Enforcement Protection Fund 40,000 NMDHSEM Emergency Management Planning Grant 91,154 NMDHSEM State Homeland Security Grant Program 58,502 USDOJ Bulletproof Vest Program 4,000 NMDOT Transit ,685 NMDOT Transit ,000 NMDOT Transit ,064 NMDOT School Bus Route Program 91,368 NMDOT County Arterial Program 22,089 NMDOT Cooperative Program 63,045 Total $ 2,373,175 Note: These figures are based on estimated grant amounts. Adjustments to actual amounts will be presented to Council for approval during mid year budget revisions. 300

317 DEBT SUMMARY General Obligation Debt The County has no General Obligation debt. Computation of the Legal Debt Limit The County of Los Alamos is the only Class H (city / county government) in the state of New Mexico. A review of Article IX, Section 13 of the New Mexico Constitution limits the amount of general obligation indebtedness for a county, city, town, or village to four percent (4%) of the assessed valuation. This article is silent regarding an entity which is both a city and a county. However, the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) indicates that the limitation for Los Alamos County should also be four percent (4%) of assessed valuation. The County relies on this guidance in calculating the legal debt limit for FY 2013 at approximately $28 million. This limit applies to general obligation debt. As the County presently has none outstanding, $28 million is also the County s current general obligation debt capacity. Gross Receipts Tax (GRT) Revenue Bonds On October 21, 2008, the County closed on the sale of The Incorporated County of Los Alamos, New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series The bonds were issued in the amount of $75,000,000 with a final maturity date of June 1, Interest on the bonds is payable semi-annually beginning June 1, 2009 at rates ranging from 3.75% to 6.00%. The bonds were issued for the purpose of providing funds for public projects related to public facilities, roads and streets, public works, parks and recreation, and community services. The two largest projects to be funded with the proceeds are the Airport Basin Project and the Judicial / Police / Jail Complex Project. Revenues pledged to cover debt service include (1) the County's State-Shared Gross Receipts Tax Revenues, at the rate authorized (currently 1.225%), (2) the Municipal Gross Receipts Tax Revenues, which equal one and one quarter percent (1.25%), (3) the Municipal Infrastructure Gross Receipts Tax Revenues, in an amount of one-eighth of one percent (0.125%), and (4) the third one-eighth of one percent (0.125%) increment of County Gross Receipts Tax Revenues. The County is in the process of planning refunding these bonds prior to the beginning of FY2013. The County anticipates a reduction of approximately $650,000 per year in annual debt service as compared to the current debt repayment scheudule. The actual repayment schedule upon refunding will be subject to market rates and will not be determined until the refunding occurs. Schedule of current debt service (prior to any refunding) shown on next page. 301

318 DEBT SUMMARY Summary of Principal and Interest Payments GRT Revenue Bonds Year ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2013 $ 3,470,000 3,442,225 6,912, ,615,000 3,303,425 6,918, ,795,000 3,121,806 6,916, ,970,000 2,945,519 6,915, ,175,000 2,736,056 6,911, ,935,000 10,389,207 29,324, ,665,000 5,150,781 25,815, ,880, ,699 5,166,699 $ 63,505,000 31,375,718 94,880,718 Utility Revenue Bonds All Joint Utility System revenue bonds are secured by a pledge of the net revenues of the Joint Utility System and certain funds established pursuant to the bond indentures. Accordingly, the bondholders may not seek repayment from the general public or any other fund of the County. The County has complied with all indenture requirements. Utility Revenue Bonds 2004/2006 Series On July 8, 2004 the County issued $69,445,000 in Utility Revenue bonds (2004 Series A) with an average interest rate of 4.92% to retire the outstanding 1994 Series Utility Revenue Bonds, which had an average interest rate of 6 percent and a maturity date of The net proceeds of $76,362,372 (including $4,035,073 in premiums, $14,245,628 from the 1994 Series sinking fund proceeds, $403,507 additional funding from the County less $1,212,708 in underwriting, insurance and issuance costs) were used to retire the outstanding 1994 Series Utility Revenue Bonds plus accrued July interest, provide $7,348,007 for future debt service payments and $3,206,121 in rate stabilization funds. As a result, the 1994 Series Utility Revenue Bonds have been removed from the government wide statement of net assets. The advanced refunding resulted in a difference between the reacquisition price and the net carrying amount of the old debt of $8,023,543. The difference, reported in the accompanying financial statements as a deduction from bonds payable, is being charged to operations through the year 2024 using the straight-line method. The County completed the advance refunding in order to reduce its total debt service payments over the next 19 years by $2,769,413 and to recognize an economic gain (difference between the present values of the old and new debt service payments) of $4,647,598. On July 8, 2004 the County also issued $1,475,000 in Utility Revenue Bonds (2004 Series B) maturing in 2017 with an average interest rate of 4.67% to fund a $1,300,000 capital project. 302

319 DEBT SUMMARY On December 28, 2006, the County issued $7,695,000 in Utility Revenue Bonds, including a taxexempt series A in the amount of $2,930,000 and a taxable series B in the amount of $4,765,000 with all inclusive interest rates of 4.26% and 5.87%, respectively. The primary purpose of this bond issue was to finance the County s share of environmental improvements at San Juan Generating Station Unit 4. Also funded were electrical distribution improvements associated with major road reconstruction projects within the County. These are 15-year bonds and will be fully amortized on July 1, Summary of Principal and Interest Payments 2004/2006 Utility Revenue Bonds Year ending 2004 A Series 2004 B Series 2006 A Series 2006 B Series June 30 Principal Interest Principal Interest Principal Interest Principal Interest Total 2013 $ 6,990,000 1,411,500 65,000 51, ,000 87, , ,663 9,270, ,320,000 1,062,000 65,000 48, ,000 80, , ,985 9,246, ,660, ,000 70,000 46, ,000 72, , ,235 9,224, ,260, ,000 70,000 42, ,000 64, , ,698 7,433, ,000 39, ,000 56, , , , , ,925 1,200, ,000 2,055, ,437 4,322, ,000 32, ,000 $ 28,230,000 3,482,500 1,090, ,112 2,195, ,400 3,635,000 1,164,390 40,710, A Series Principal $ 28,230, B Series Principal 1,090, A Series Principal 2,195, B Series Principal 3,635,000 Unamortized balances: Refunding costs (2,188,239) Discounts and premiums 1,119,624 $ 34,081,385 Utility Revenue Bonds 2010 Series On August 12, 2010, the county issued $13,085,000 in Utility Revenue bonds (2010 Series A, B, C, D). These are 20-year bonds and will be fully amortized on June 1, The Series A are tax-exempt bonds with an aggregate principal of $3,785,000. The Series B are taxable direct payment Build America bonds with an aggregate principal of $1,535,000. Series C are taxable direct payment Recovery Zone Economic Development bonds with an aggregate principal of $3,680,000. Series D are taxable bonds with an aggregate principal of $4,085,000. The bonds have various interest rates with a blended interest rate of 5.355%. The Build America and Recovery Zone Economic Development bonds both include a federal subsidy component, receipt of which is dependent on meeting federal reporting requirements. The total federal subsidy is $2,168,587 for the life of the bonds and is recorded as intergovernmental revenue when earned. The primary purpose of the bond issue was to enhance the County s Utility System by constructing a low flow turbine generator at the County s Abiquiu hydroelectric plant, constructing new and renovating existing electric distribution lines both in the overhead and underground systems, including but not limited to transformers, switchgear, protective devices and other appurtenances and equipment; and improving and renovating water distribution and transmission systems. 303

320 DEBT SUMMARY Summary of Principal and Interest Payments 2010 Utility Revenue Bonds Year ending 2010 A Series 2010 B Series 2010 C Series 2010 D Series June 30 Principal Interest Principal Interest Principal Interest Principal Interest Total 2012 $ 0 105, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,400, , , ,110, , ,991 6,237, ,095,000 66,200 1,535, , ,000 1,110,836 1,160, ,607 6,221, ,410, ,752 1,525, ,104 5,858,856 $ 3,785,000 1,175,378 1,535,000 1,151,536 3,680,000 3,923,444 4,085,000 2,832,951 22,168, A Series Principal $ 3,785, B Series Principal 1,535, C Series Principal 3,680, D Series Principal 4,085,000 Unamortized balances: Discounts and premiums 159,976 $ 13,244,976 Utility State Loans In December 2005, the County entered into an agreement to borrow up to $15,000,000 from the New Mexico Environment Department to partially fund the construction of a new wastewater treatment facility. The loan proceeds were drawn as needed for construction expenses. The County received $14,355,105 in loan proceeds and capitalized interest, which were/are recorded in the Joint Utility System Fund. The term of the loan is 20 years, at an interest rate of 3%. The loan is payable solely from the net revenues from the operation of only the Wastewater subfund, which is a part of the joint Utility System Fund. Summary of Principal and Interest Payments Year ending Interest/ June 30 Principal Finance Fee Total 2013 $ 566, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,488,324 1,336,116 4,824, ,043, ,518 4,824, ,729, ,372 2,894,667 $ 13,270,606 4,097,387 17,367,

321 DEBT SUMMARY In April 2007 the County entered into a loan and grant agreement with the Water Trust Board and the New Mexico Finance Authority (NMFA). The agreement includes a $585,720 grant with a $65,080 loan for the purpose of constructing a water line to transfer treated effluent water to County parks and ball fields. The loan is to be repaid from existing Utility system revenues. During fiscal year 2008 the County received the $65,080 of loan proceeds under this agreement. The loan is interest free with a term of 20 years. Summary of Principal and Administrative Fee Payments Year ending Administrative June 30 Principal Fee Total 2013 $ 3, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,708 $ 49, ,125 In November 2008 the County entered into a loan and grant agreement with the Water Trust Board and the New Mexico Finance Authority (NMFA). The agreement includes a $319,648 grant with a $79,912 loan for the purpose of financing the costs of Phase II of the water conservation, treatment and reuse infrastructure project. The loan is to be repaid from existing Utility water system revenues. During fiscal year 2009 the County received $79,912 of loan proceeds under this agreement. The loan is interest free with a term of 20 years. Summary of Principal and Administrative Fee Payments Year ending Administrative June 30 Principal Fee Total 2013 $ 4, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,190 $ 65,636 1,404 67,

322 DEBT SUMMARY In July 2010 the County entered into a loan and grant agreement with the Water Trust Board and the New Mexico Finance Authority (NMFA). The agreement includes a $590,000 grant with a $147,500 loan for the purpose of financing the costs of Phase III of the water conservation, treatment and reuse infrastructure project. The loan is to be repaid from existing Utility water system revenues. During fiscal year 2011 the County received $147,500 of loan proceeds under this agreement. The loan is interest free with a term of 20 years. Summary of Principal and Administrative Fee Payments Year ending Administrative June 30 Principal Fee Total 2013 $ 7, , , , , , , , , , ,825 1,024 37, , , , ,711 $ 133,080 3, ,263 In July 2010 the County entered into a loan and grant agreement with the Water Trust Board and the New Mexico Finance Authority (NMFA). The agreement includes a $200,000 grant with a $50,000 loan for the purpose of financing the costs of environmental studies for a proposed collector well for water from the San Juan/Chama Diversion Project. The loan is to be repaid from existing Utility water system revenues. During fiscal year 2011 the County received $50,000 of loan proceeds under this agreement. The loan is interest free with a term of 20 years. Summary of Principal and Administrative Fee Payments Year ending Administrative June 30 Principal Fee Total 2013 $ 2, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,698 $ 45,112 1,079 46,

323 DEBT SUMMARY In November, 2011 the County entered into a loan and grant agreement with the New Mexico Water Trust Board and the New Mexico Finance Authority (NMFA). The agreement includes a $900,000 grant with a $600,000 loan for the purpose of financing the costs of the project to upgrade public safety at the Los Alamos Canyon Dam. The loan is to be repaid from existing Utility water system revenues. During fiscal year 2012 the County received $222,270 of loan proceeds under this agreement. The loan is interest free with a term of 20 years. Summary of Principal and Administrative Fee Payments Year ending Administrative June 30 Principal Fee Total 2013 $ 30,251 1,469 31, ,324 1,393 31, ,398 1,317 31, ,472 1,241 31, ,546 1,165 31, ,780 1,984 59,764 $ 209,771 8, ,341 In December 2009 the County entered into a loan and grant agreement with the New Mexico Environment Department Construction Programs Bureau. The agreement includes a $150,000 grant subsidy under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and a loan for the purpose of financing the costs of Phase II of the effluent reuse infrastructure project. The loan is to be repaid from existing Utility water system revenues. During fiscal year 2011 the County received $234,812 in loan proceeds and capitalized interest under this agreement. The loan has a combined administrative fee/interest fee rate of 3% with a term of 20 years. Summary of Principal and Administrative Fee Payments Year ending Administrative June 30 Principal Fee / Interest Total 2013 $ 9,001 6,782 15, ,271 6,512 15, ,549 6,234 15, ,835 5,948 15, ,131 5,653 15, ,397 23,518 78, ,221 14,694 78, ,667 4,465 63,132 $ 226,072 73, ,

324 DEBT SUMMARY Refuse State Loan In May 2007 the County entered into a loan agreement with NMFA to borrow $5,861,189 to construct a solid waste transfer station. The loan term is twenty-seven (27) years with an interest rate of 4.059%. The loan is to be repaid from Municipal Environmental Services Gross Receipts Tax revenues. Summary of Principal and Interest Payments Year ending June 30 Principal Interest Total 2013 $ 152, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,222 1,808, ,209, ,647 1,808, ,479, ,963 1,809, ,310 42, ,079 $ 5,183,068 2,776,027 7,959,095 Interfund Loans An interfund loan is contemplated from the General Fund to the Airport in the amount of $400,000 for the construction of hangars. The repayment terms are anticipated to be 30 years at a 5% interest rate. The actual amortization schedule will be finalized when the loan proceeds are actually needed and drawn from the General Fund. 308

325 REVENUES TOTAL REVENUES GENERAL FUND REVENUE DETAIL FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Adopted FY2014 Adopted $ Variance 14 vs 13 Variance FY2014 vs FY2013 Gross receipts taxes 52,081,903 46,802,697 48,040,000 38,957,000 (9,083,000) (19%) Property taxes 5,082,287 5,181,012 5,119,000 5,250, ,000 3% Interdepartmental charges 4,006,858 4,140,973 6,239,330 5,615,758 (623,572) (10%) User charges 1,716,086 1,451,969 1,733,000 2,272, ,999 31% Investment income (loss) 3,140, ,521 1,471,000 1,883, ,000 28% Grants 806, , , ,000 5,000 1% Other 1,019,850 1,004,769 1,030,000 1,040,000 10,000 1% 67,853,360 59,739,062 64,132,330 55,523,757 (8,608,573) (13%) GROSS RECEIPTS TAXES Gross Rec Tax-Muni-Prior 17,410,038 15,630,314 16,114,000 13,011,000 (3,103,000) (19%) Gross Rec Tax-Municipal 4,283,786 3,845,883 3,964,000 3,202,000 (762,000) (19%) Gross Rec Tax-Muni Infra 2,141,893 1,922,940 1,982,000 1,601,000 (381,000) (19%) Gross Rec-County 3rd Pledged 2,141,893 1,922,940 1,982,000 1,601,000 (381,000) (19%) Gross Rec Tax-County 2,141,893 1,922,940 1,982,000 1,601,000 (381,000) (19%) Gross Rec Tax-Co. Correctional 2,141,893 1,922,940 1,982,000 1,601,000 (381,000) (19%) St Shared-Gross Rec Tax 21,653,702 19,440,165 20,034,000 16,182,000 (3,852,000) (19%) St Shared-Small Cty Assistance 128, , , ,000 N/A State Shared Revenues-Other 38,805 61,575-30,000 30,000 N/A Total Gross Receipts Tax 52,081,903 46,802,697 48,040,000 38,957,000 (9,083,000) (19%) PROPERTY TAXES Prop Taxes-Residential 4,060,418 4,164,985 4,113,062 4,218, ,412 3% Prop Taxes-Nonresidential 1,021,869 1,016,027 1,005,938 1,031,526 25,588 3% Total Property Taxes 5,082,287 5,181,012 5,119,000 5,250, ,000 3% INTERDEPARTMENTAL CHARGES IDC Charges-General County 868, ,055 1,306,830 1,071,119 (235,711) (18%) IDC Charges-Refuse 239, , , ,279 80,980 28% IDC Charges-Utilities 700, ,398 1,965,797 1,777,115 (188,682) (10%) IDC-Indirect O/H-LANL Contract 2,198,583 2,312,101 2,674,404 2,394,245 (280,159) (10%) IDC-Interdepartmental Charges 4,006,858 4,140,973 6,239,330 5,615,758 (623,572) (10%) USER CHARGES Alcoholic Beverage Licenses 2,250 7,316 4,285 4,285-0% Business License Fees 32,255 31,410 32,537 32,537-0% Animal Licenses % Building Permits 198, , , ,352 (1) 0% Marriage Licenses 900 1, (1) 0% Other Nonbus Licenses/Permits - - 2,101 2,101-0% Lemon Lot Permits 6,300 7,035 6,575 6,575-0% Licenses And Permits 240, , , ,175 (1) 0% Fines-Traffic 85,188 68, , ,008-0% Correction Fees-Magistrate Ct 9,444 23,141 11,003 11,003-0% Correction Fees-Municipal Ct 30,680 24,163 36,998 36,998-0% Field Sobriety Training Fees % Traffic Safety Fee-LAC 7,456 5,973 8,930 8,930-0% Muni Ct DWI Probation Fees N/A Probation Fees ,606 1,606-0% Miscellaneous Court Fees Other 3, % Deposit/Bond Forfeitures - 6, % Magistrate Probation Fees 4,820 6,419 2,817 2,817-0% Fines And Forfeits 141, , , ,230-0% Probate Court Fees 1, % Candidate Filing Fees % Recording Fees 46,824 67,568 41,480 41,480-0% 309

326 GENERAL FUND REVENUE DETAIL FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Adopted FY2014 Adopted $ Variance 14 vs 13 Variance FY2014 vs FY2013 Planning Fees 6,489 6,812 6,933 6,933-0% Plan Review Fee 34,260 40,364 63,135 63,135-0% Duplicating/Printing Services 2,343 1,588 2,894 2,894-0% Sale Of Documents/Publications 44,094 40,885 28,432 28,432-0% Sales Of Food 15,765 13,789 15,500 47,500 32, % Sales Of Merchandise 11,007 17,468 8,800 94,800 86, % Art Commission Sales 116-5,000 5,000-0% Other Charges For Services 146,213 13, , ,836 17,000 13% Chgs Svcs-General 308, , , , ,000 44% Civil Service Fees 10,880 5,600 7,118 7,118-0% Fingerprinting Fees 3,378 3,098 4,542 4,542-0% Prisoner Housing Reimbursement - 5,100 4,450 4,450-0% Special Services-Police 63,893 26,040 65,000 65,000-0% Chgs Svcs-Public Safety 78,151 39,838 81,110 81,110-0% MISC SALES/SERVICE N/A REVENUES N/A Cemetery Liners 11,380 16,555 10,468 10,468-0% Cemetery Openings - (145) 3,495 3,495-0% Sales-Cemetery Lots (40%) 11,798 16,312 9,925 9,925-0% Sales-Cemetery Lots (60%) 17,697 24,468 14,888 14,888-0% Animal Pickup Fees % Animal Shelter Fees 1,615 2,506 1,832 1,832-0% Chgs Svcs-Environment 43,321 59,731 41,014 41,014-0% Activity Fees N/A Daily Fees/Passes-Adult 22,551 21,323 59,810 59,810-0% Daily Fees/Passes-Family 2,968 4, N/A Daily Fees/Passes-Group 13,332 11,960 5,350 5,350-0% Daily Fees/Passes-Senior 2,525 2,597 1,520 1,520-0% Daily Fees/Passes-Youth/Junior 22,420 20,237 15,700 15,700-0% Annual Passes-Adult 13,863 13,685 16,600 16,600-0% Annual Passes-Family 7,238 7,746 6,600 6,600-0% Annual Passes-Senior 13,198 12,736 14,750 14,750-0% Annual Passes-Youth/Junior 34,652 28,060 44,242 44,242-0% Three-Month Passes-Adult 15,570 14,225 15,900 15,900-0% Three-Month Passes-Family 7,469 7,194 5,700 5,700-0% Three-Month Passes-Senior 5,919 6,709 6,200 6,200-0% Three-Month Passes-Youth/Jr 7,698 8,530 8,702 8,702-0% 10/12 Punch Passes-Adult 40,635 42,622 39,021 39,021-0% 10/12 Punch Passes-Senior 7,441 8,764 7,757 7,757-0% 10/12 Punch Passes-Youth/Jr 15,875 14,620 14,800 14,800-0% Recreation Fees-Classes 59,551 59,041 66,370 66,370-0% Recreation Fees-Special Events 18,538 22,230 46,680 46,680-0% Recreation Fees-Sports 8,325 7,000 11,655 11,655-0% Recreation Fees-LA Schools 44,300 14, N/A Recreation Fees-Other 142, , , , , % Camping Fees 2,671 3, N/A Library Fees 6,971 5, N/A Chgs Svc-Culture/Recreation 516, , , , ,000 59% Bldg Rental-Fuller Lodge 43,939 58,452 46,828 46,828-0% Bldg Rental-LA Comm Building 10,999 10,996 11,609 11,609-0% Bldg Rentals-Other 2,263 2,806 12,553 12,553-0% Land Rental-LA Gymnastics 16,038 15,900 17,500 17,500-0% Land Rental-Sombrillo 57,352 57,650 59,508 59,508-0% Land Rental-Stables 44,308 62,246 48,333 48,333-0% Land Rental-RV Storage 28,190 29,034 28,000 28,000-0% Land Rentals-Other 138,811 91,499 40,000 40,000-0% Rentals-Concessions % Rentals-Lane Time 6,325 16,149 13,493 13,493-0% 310

327 GENERAL FUND REVENUE DETAIL FY2011 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Adopted FY2014 Adopted $ Variance 14 vs 13 Variance FY2014 vs FY2013 Rentals-Lockers And Storage 19,854 13,052 13,500 13,500-0% Rentals-Special Contracts % Rentals-Sports Equipment 15,454 16,949 14,203 94,203 80, % Rentals-Training Room 2,178 2,172 2,500 2,500-0% Rentals-Miscellaneous % Rentals/Concessions-Outside 387, , , ,689 80,000 26% TOTAL USER CHARGES 1,716,086 1,451,968 1,732,999 2,272, ,999 31% INVESTMENT INCOME Interest Income-Investments 4,593, ,267 1,471,000 1,883, ,000 28% Interest Income-Res Assets 139,900 (10,366) N/A Interest Income-Prorated (1,478,467) (378,342) N/A Gain(Loss)-Invest Adjust To FV (140,188) 136, N/A Interest-Deliquent Accounts 25,118 17, N/A Investment Income 3,140, ,521 1,471,000 1,883, ,000 28% GRANTS Federal Indirect-Other 177, ,480 80,502 90,502 10,000 12% Federal Sh Rev-Forest Reserve 5,373 4,716 5,300 5,300-0% Federal In Lieu Taxes (PILT) 82,450 84,392 52,800 52,800-0% Federal In Lieu Taxes (DOE) 247, , ,000-0% Intergov't Revenue-Federal 513, , , ,602 10,000 3% State-Library Operations 8,648 8,966 8,966 - (8,966) (100%) State-G.O. Bond Distribution 2,000 27, N/A State Grant-E , , N/A State Grants-Other 151, , , ,398 3,966 4% Intergov't Revenue-State 292, , , ,398 (5,000) (4%) TOTAL GRANT REVENUE 806, , , , ,000 1% OTHER REVENUE In Lieu Tax-Electric Utility 174, , , ,000 (10,000) (5%) In Lieu Tax-Gas Utility 47,631 49,922 47,000 47,000-0% Franchise Tax-Cable TV 53,817 94,868 75,000 75,000-0% Franchise Tax-Telephone 42,335 31,685 40,000 42,000 2,000 5% Franchise Tax-Electric Utility 225, , , ,000-0% Franchise Tax-Gas Utility 123, , , ,000-0% Property Taxes-Interest 26,656 31,887 22,000 30,000 8,000 36% Property Taxes-Penalty 18,519 21,580 17,000 21,000 4,000 24% Other Taxes\Licenses-Penalty N/A Taxes 713, , , ,000 4,000 1% Pension Forfeitures 111, , , ,000 (5,000) (4%) Insurance/Pension Forfeitures 111, , , ,000 (5,000) (4%) Donations-Library 49,089 61,144 45,000 45,000-0% Donations-Recreation 8,750-2,000 8,000 6, % Donations-Parks 250-2,068 8,000 5, % Donations 58,089 61,144 49,068 61,000 11,932 24% Discounts Taken 786 2, % Cash Over (Short) (54) N/A Jury Duty/Witness Fee Reimb N/A Miscellaneous Revenues-Other 131,082 68, ,432 99,500 (932) (1%) Miscellaneous Revenues 136,387 70, , ,000 (932) (1%) TOTAL OTHER REVENUE 1,019,850 1,004,769 1,030,000 1,040,000 10,000 1% TOTAL REVENUE 67,853,360 59,739,062 64,132,330 55,523,757 (8,608,573) (13%) 311

328 LARGEST EMPLOYERS TYPE OF NUMBER OF EMPLOYER BUSINESS EMPLOYEES Los Alamos National Laboratory Research and Development 10,490 Los Alamos County Government e 687 Los Alamos Public Schools Education 532 SOC (Guard Force) Security 510 Los Alamos Medical Center Medical Services 320 Los Alamos National Bank Banking 216 Actual number of local employees per employer were obtained directly from the employers, and include temporary, part-time, student, and full time employment status. These top six employers represent more than 80% of the total workforce in Los Alamos County which as of the last quarter of 2011 was 10, For rankings, number of employees who work in the County is not limited to those who also live in the County. 312

329 OTHER DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT (b) YEAR POPULATION (a) (Grades K through 12) ,305 3, ,805 3, ,796 3, ,822 3, ,931 3, ,022 3, ,130 3, ,150 3, ,950 3, ,159 3,528 SOURCES: (a) The U. S. Census Bureau, in addition to conducting population surveys every ten years, makes annual population estimates by County. (b) New Mexico Public Education Department, 313

330 AGE BRACKET POPULATION BY AGE BRACKET, COUNTS AND PERCENTAGES NUMBER % NUMBER % NUMBER % NUMBER % NUMBER % NUMBER % 0-4 years 1, % 1, % 1, % 1, % 1, % % 5-19 years 4, % 5, % 4, % 4, % 4, % 3, % years % % % % % % years 2, % 2, % 2, % 3, % 3, % 1, % years 2, % 2, % 3, % 3, % 3, % 2, % years 1, % 2, % 2, % 3, % 3, % 3, % years % % 1, % 1, % 2, % 2, % 65 and over % % % % % 2, % Totals 13,037 15,198 17,599 18,115 18,343 17,950 SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau 8,000 Los Alamos County Population Trend by Age Group 7,000 6,000 Population 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1, years years years 55 and over