Loading...
Approved Minutes - 2009-05-11 LAKE°sip, /W CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO CITIZENS' BUDGET COMMITTEE MINUTES May 11, 2009 Proposed FY 2009-2010 Budget OREGON Chair Ron Smith called the meeting to order on May 11, 2009 at 6:32 p.m. in the Santiam Room of the West End Building, 4101 Kruse Way, Lake Oswego, Oregon. Members present: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Ron Smith, Chair Donna Jordan, Council President Katherine Shallenberger, Vice Chair Kristen Johnson Frank Bearden Sally Moncrieff Kelly Calabria Mary Olson Jeff Gudman Bill Tierney Daniel Williams Members excused: Roger Hennagin Staff present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager Darin Rouhier, Finance Director Jordan Wheeler, Management Analyst David Donaldson, Assistant City Manager Kim Gilmer, Parks & Recreation Director Brant Williams, Economic & Capital Development Director Denise Frisbee, Planning & Building Department Director Dan Duncan, Police Chief Guy Graham, Public Works Director Joel Komarek, Project Director, LOIS Jerry Knippel, Special Projects Director Bill Baars, Library Director Ed Wilson, Fire Chief Chip Larouche, Chief Technology Officer Carol Bryck, Assistant Finance Director Kam Frederickson, Budget & Financial Analyst Linda Dickhous, Administrative Support I. Welcome & Agenda Chair Ron Smith added the Arts Council presentation to the agenda. Value of the Arts in Lake Oswego Cheryl Brock, Executive Director of the Arts Council, advised that the City benefited from a strong public arts program in many ways and other cities wanted to copy Lake Oswego's program. She distributed a handout that described how public art was funded nationwide. She asked the Committee not to cut the arts funding in the proposed budget because the public arts program needed the contingent support of the City to continue to thrive and grow and it would give the Arts Council time to bridge a temporary situation. She advised that Percent for Art source was not a stable funding source. The Arts Council had a plan to find other partners City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 1 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 besides the City. Tierney asked if the $65,000 in the proposed budget was enough to sustain the Arts Council. Brock said it was less than what they had received in the past and $25,000 of it was for a new project to work on the concrete pads. Purpose and Process Smith highlighted all the issues listed in the City Manager's budget letter and asked Committee members to indicate if they had been answered and to add any additional issues they saw to the list so the Committee could eventually ensure they were all answered: o Library funding: How will the City apply the dollars? (Unanswered) o Economic Development Program: What was the city's investment to be? (Unanswered) o Foothills/Lake Grove/Streetcar: What is the financial strategy to move forward? McIntyre clarified this question was whether they should all be encompassed under an economic development strategy. No decision had yet been made about the streetcar, and the only decisions related to Foothills and Lake Grove were that consulting dollars and funding for Lake Grove Village Center Phase 2 had been built into the Planning Department budget. o West End Building: How will the city pay for the line of credit? McIntyre confirmed the proposed budget funded refinancing of the WEB. o The questions of balancing the available resources and CIP project priorities and General Fund balancing were to be discussed that evening. Unanswered questions from the last meeting Smith noted that Committee members and some city boards had submitted requests that still needed to be discussed. He asked Committee members start suggesting other "puts and takes." Jordan recalled a citizen's request to fund the Lake Grove Village Center style guidebook. She wondered if a Main Street matching funds grant might be available. She also noted the issue of funding the swim park was still open. Gudman asked if the City Attorney had answered his question whether the Percent for Art was required when the city purchased buildings. Hoffman said the City Attorney was still researching the matter. II. Approval of Meeting Minutes Jordan moved to approve the Minutes of April 20 and April 28, 2009. Hoffman seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote of those members present. III. Informational Session on the City's Financial Policies Rouhier pointed out the Financial Policies section of the budget binder explained that different funds were subject to different policies. Each individual fund had a different Contingency requirement and Ending Fund Balance requirement. When the individual funds were aggregated into the new General Fund the "sum of the parts" of all the funds that had been rolled into it was slightly more than the aggregate total of individual funds due to rounding. So the result of the new financial policies was at least as conservative as in the past. Shallenberger wanted to know how the Library reserve had been built up over time and did they actually own those reserves? Rouhier said the funds had come from property taxes. He assured her that the ACC, the Library and some smaller funds that had restricted reserves and endowments would continue to benefit from those restricted funds. But he and McIntyre explained that the City Council was the ultimate decision maker about how to allocate unrestricted revenue. City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 2 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 Rouhier discussed a summary of transfers and changes that had been made during the consolidation process. He explained a $500,000 transfer back to the General Fund from the Maintenance Services & Motor Pool reversed a previous transfer of funds for a new maintenance facility that would not be built in the near future. Another was a transfer to reflect the decision to use a laid off employee to do work the City would have otherwise contracted for. He confirmed for Gudman that the survey and ADA funding were reflected in the budget. He assured them that restricted funds would not be spent, except for Building Department reserves, which would drop because the department was not earning as much revenue. IV. Capital Improvement Program Guy Graham, Public Works Director, gave an overview of the proposed five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). He explained the projects in each program area had been ranked using sustainability and owner/operator criteria. Graham said the City was considering adding projected big rolling stock purchases to the CIP. Gudman observed that projects were chosen for funding based on sustainability and owner/operator criteria. There were around 15 of them and that could mean they could be used to justify just about any project. He asked which were the most important criteria and how did the budgeting team decide what to put in and what not to put in? Graham said they had modified criteria developed by the Tigard Water Department and their utility operator's knowledge. Because this was their first year they factored in immediate needs, but they hoped over time to be better able to weigh projects against each other. Gudman observed that some of the criteria were "social obligations," "social equity," and "health and safety." He asked how the team defined "social obligations." Graham explained that he did not know because sustainability staff had helped each program manager do those evaluations. Graham said the total amount of capital requests was about$270 million for five years. He estimated the 2009-10 projects were about $6 million, excluding LOIS. Gudman asked what factors the team used to determine a project should be cut? Graham said they used the ranking and score from the sustainability sheet and the program managers also gave them weight. They then funded projects down the priority list until there was no money left. He confirmed that he could provide the Committee with copies of the scoring sheets. Rouhier said there was one other important criterion and that was the availability of outside money from state and federal grants to leverage city investment. Graham clarified for Olson that repairs to the water treatment plant roof would be the minimum necessary pending the start of the larger water project. He also confirmed that the annual water main rehab project was necessary. He said the department would eventually have a master plan for pipe replacement. He offered to provide Tierney with the master list of street paving projects. When Tierney asked Graham which concept of managing surface water the department favored, Graham said they would be consistent with the Clean Streams approach to new projects, but sometimes there was an immediate need to fix pipes that were failing in order to keep water flowing. Gudman asked how confident the budget team was the City would receive grants for seven projects. Graham said the two street overlay projects were funded by stimulus dollars allocated by the County and they would be awarded. The City had applied for a Safe Routes to Schools grant for the Pilkington Pathway, but if they did not get the money for a project there would be no project. City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 3 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 Olson asked what the WEB mechanical upgrades were and what was the advantage of that project. B.Williams said the City had applied for an Energy Trust of Oregon grant for chillers. When Tierney asked why that grant would be used for the WEB instead of some other City facility, Graham said Energy Trust funds were available for specific types of projects and the WEB chillers likely fit those specs. Jordan said that made sense to use a grant for that purpose because it enhanced the value of the property and the equipment likely had to be replaced anyway. Rouhier verified for D.Williams that the Foothills boat dock grant had been reduced to $272,000. Public Input Carolyn Jones, 2818 S Poplar Way, asked if the size of the structure at the Marylhurst pump station would be enlarged or remain the same. Graham said it would remain the same size. She asked if there would be extra patrols there. Kim Gilmer, Parks & Recreation Director, said a park ranger would patrol it. John Pullen, 18 Brittany Ct., suggested the $300,000 from state revenue sharing should be used to supplement the pavement maintenance program budget. He said he followed notices of paving contracts and estimated the City had only spent $115,000 on pavement maintenance last year. Smith asked what amount he thought it should be. Pullen said the City collected $1,200,000 per year in street utility fees and he asked where it went. He opined the City Council did not prioritize adequate funding of streets and there would be another crisis in a few years that might require another bond measure. He had a copy of a memo from the Public Works Director to the City Manager that indicated the street fee needed to be raised because of the street pavement index. Joel Komarek said the contract Pullen was referring to was an annual slurry seal project. He said last year the City also did a complete reconstruction of West Bay Road as part of a storm drain capital project and overlaid a segment of Boones Ferry Road. He said the overlays were all done using street maintenance dollars. IV. City General Fund Balancing McIntyre said the General Fund the budget team proposed was balanced. He hoped the Committee would be able to agree on how to balance the General Fund that night. The staff was present to explain the consequences of trade offs. The Committee then began the "trade off" discussion. The Committee had received new material for their binders containing the April 13th version of the General Fund Proposed Budget, which included an updated Budget Crosswalk. Rouhier said that the change in balance included $1.5 million for a loan to Tri-Met that was to be repaid in three years at $1.8 million. He said the real change in balance was $886,000, which was coming out of General Fund reserves to fund some "one-time" capital projects (about $540k of it). He said the strategy for this budget was rather than reduce operations and service level as far as necessary to fund every expenditure out of current revenue, the budget funded all operating expenses with current operating revenue and used reserves to buy some one-time items. $886,000 in reserves that had built up during good times would now be used in tough times to keep service levels intact. Gudman indicated that he preferred not to go through the budget line by line, but to focus on three, broad target areas: the Library, FTEs and operating capital expenses. Moncrieff recalled the department heads had told the Committee what staffing levels were necessary to City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 4 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 accomplish their jobs. Some FTEs were dedicated to the LOIS, the water project and City Council goals. She reasoned that when an FTE was eliminated, a certain level of service was reduced somewhere. The Committee needed to understand what that relationship was. Tierney said the City Council's philosophy was the budget had to be balanced in the traditional way: Current revenue should equal current expenditures and the financial policies regarding contingencies should be followed. He said he would prefer to see less reserves used. Bearden said if the City could not afford this budget the Committee had to decide what to pull out of it. If they did not challenge it this year, they should be very aware they were dipping into reserves which they cannot do every year. At least next year there would be this year's budget to compare it too. Every department had made their case for FTEs, but the Committee members did not know which were absolutely essential - which were coming out of the General Fund and which were based on revenue or some asset they did not have to worry about. He said without knowing that the Committee was just looking at numbers. Smith suggested that maybe the Tri-Met loan payback was a "safe bet." Moncrieff was concerned about tapping into reserves to make the budget work. Smith asked if taking $886,000 out of reserves was the right thing to do at this time? Jordan stated that Citizens seemed to be supportive of keeping the WEB and paying on the line of credit and they expected reserves would be used, but they did not expect the City to cut services to do that. Tierney said his analysis was the City did not need to cut services to reduce their operating budget. Gudman explained that although the budget team had factored a 6% property tax delinquency rate into the budget, he had looked at the two and four year averages and they were 4% and 3.25%, so he thought 4% was reasonable assumption. He said 6% represented $520,000 in property tax revenue that could be used for any number of things. He noted next year$2.6 million more would be pulled out of citizens' pockets for water and sewer and the new library tax. To tighten up the budget would build credibility for the bond measure. He suggested the Committee direct McIntyre to aim for a target number they all agreed on and come back to the next meeting to report whether he could meet it or not. Hoffman said he would not feel comfortable asking McIntyre to remove 15 employees in 48 hours. He did not question his assumed delinquency rate. He agreed that the Committee had to look at the "big picture" because they could not follow every transfer that was made, even though he was sure Rouhier could track every transfer. Johnson agreed the Committee needed to look at the bigger picture, but maybe they could ask McIntyre to find out if a specific department could cut staff if they looked at more details. D.Williams would support a five-year average FTE count because it was a prudent practice and McIntyre knew better where the necessary cuts should be made. Shallenberger suggested focusing on the high dollar items. She worried abut the message that leaving the budget $886,000 in the hole would convey. Moncrieff stressed the FTEs in the budget were there to accomplish City Council projects. Maybe projects should be reduced so not as many FTEs were necessary. She said her experience was the staff in every department was a hard working group. Jordan explained she did not believe that staffing in Lake Oswego could be compared to West Linn because they were very different operations. She did not want the City to reduce services. It was hard for her to say where to cut because the budget reflected things the community had requested —things like neighborhood planning and staff was needed for that. Calabria said it would be interesting to find out the relationship of service to FTEs. Olson suggested the Committee invite public comment on the swim park and the library. City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 5 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 Public Input regarding Swim Park and library Phil Meaney did not want the swim park closed. It was important to his family and others. He suggested checking to ensure swimmers actually lived in Lake Oswego and he suggested that he should be able to us the Lake Grove swim park too. Colleen Bennett, Chair, Friends of the Library had emailed comments to the Committee. She said voters expected the City to keep up their level of support of the library when they voted for the new district. She said they should put that extra district money aside for future library because the current building was too small. She clarified that Friends support was supposed to be spent to enhance the library, not serve as stable funding. Jim Bolland, 804 5th Street, opined the City had tried to make everyone happy instead of prioritizing facilities and services. It would remain in a quagmire until it did that. He observed that the supervisor to employee ratio had gotten much smaller over the years. Dick Raymond, Library Board, lived close to lake and worried that the quality of the water was not good enough to let kids swim in it. . John Surrett, 1685 Edgecliff Terrace, contended that the WEB had basically initially been 100% paid for out of reserves even though General Fund policy was that no more than 25% of General Fund reserves could be held in land at any one time. He said it was not good policy to take $800,000 out of reserves for interest only line of credit payments. Another $250,000 would be required for maintaining it. He asked for rent revenue forecast. He observed that Parks & Recreation generated about $3 million in fees and sales. Dorothy Atwood, Vice Chair of the Sustainability Advisory Board, asked if the Committee had a copy of the SAB budget request. Smith confirmed they did. She did not see a specific line item for funding the SAB staff's work plan, which accomplished City Council goals. She said they needed the additional funding they asked for. Matt Finnegan and John Surrett, representing LONAC, delivered LONAC's recommendations regarding five areas of concern. Library funding should remain at the same level and the $900,000 of new county funding should be used to build library reserves. They stressed the need to fund pathways. They supported visioning, neighborhood planning and plan implementation, and a residential design review commission. Olson was a LONAC member and she asked if LONAC had held a general membership vote on the recommendations. Finnegan said the general membership had voted on a committee's recommendations and only one or two out of 25-30 people there had opposed it. Smith asked if the Committee would support taking the $886,000 shortfall out of reserves as the budget proposed. Olson said they did not yet know if the shortfall would be that much. Gudman agreed if they adjusted some outflows they might be able to reduce it. Jordan observed the reserves were needed to pay for one-time items in the operating budget. She cautioned members to get out of the mindset that there were little things they could adjust to make up for paying for the WEB. Jordan observed the refinancing number was the same as the shortfall. Tierney said the City could not avoid paying it in this budget. Hoffman asked McIntyre what projects the $886,000 would be used for. McIntyre said the administration had balanced operating revenue with operating expenditures and then he had told his team he was willing to ask the CBC for another$1 million to pay for one-time capital City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 6 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 items. Rouhier listed some of them: Westlake playground, Waluga picnic shelter; Bill Gerber Garden. McIntyre explained he was trying to use reserves to make strategic investments like that, which was what reserves were for. He said when he first arrived in Lake Oswego he was told the City did not invest enough in their assets. He said it was not accurate to say the $886,000 was being used to pay for the WEB even though the numbers lined up. Olson agreed his approach was a good idea, but it did not preclude looking for cuts in other areas of the budget. Smith asked what percentage of reserves $886,000 was? Olson calculated it was 4.5% of the reserve balance (after removing the Tri-Met loan). Smith asked what the budget team's plan was to replace it. Rouhier indicated there was not yet such a plan. He said next year they would continue to be conservative about property tax revenue estimates. Vote on the proposed budget Smith then asked for a show of hands of those who wanted to accept the budget as proposed (using $886,000 reserves) and the total was four, The Committee then moved forward to discuss library funding. McIntyre said the proposed budget put the $900,000 from the County into reserves. He asked if the Committee wanted to do that, or only put part of it in reserves, or use it to replace City funds that could be put back into the General Fund and used for other things. Gudman estimated keeping the library funding level flat year-to-year would free up about $600,000 that could be used elsewhere. Smith suggested the county funds could be reserved for capital improvements to the library. He asked how much of those General Funds the Committee wanted to allocate? Olson suggested not putting the entire $900,000 into library reserves because the Library budget was fine and they would not be reducing their operations. Some if it— perhaps $600,000 - could replace General Funds so they could be used elsewhere. Johnson observed that the money from the County had to be used for the library. Tierney asked for a show of hands of those who wanted to reserve the $900,000 windfall for a future library building. The result was seven members for it out of the 12 members who were present Smith commented the City could honor the intentions of the voters by putting some, but not all, of the $900,000 in a library reserve for capital improvements. When Smith asked, Rouhier confirmed that the City would receive more library money every year— it was not a "one time shot." Tierney proposed to maintain the level of service at the swim park in the 2009-10 budget using $21,000. McIntyre reminded them there had to be a tradeoff. Olson suggested reducing the Centennial Celebration budget by $21,000. Smith counted hands for maintaining the swim park using Celebration funds and all members indicated they agreed. Smith noted the Centennial budget had just been reduced from $250,000 to $229,000. When Gudman asked McIntyre explained that the Centennial Celebration budget covered two years, but it was front-loaded because more work needed to be done the first year. He clarified that he could not guarantee that he would not request more money the next year. Rouhier observed the Committee had just agreed to trade money for a one time savings for the Centennial project for the ongoing cost of the swim park. City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 7 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 Tierney said the budget problem might be related to increased salary levels, and increases in Materials & Services, not the headcount. He wanted more detailed explanations of those items. He thought the operating budget could be reduced as much as 2% to 3% while still maintaining the level of City services. Rouhier clarified for Jordan that using $886,000 of reserves did not violate the General Fund policy because even after it was subtracted from the reserves the $18.7 million balance was still well above the minimum requirement. The Committee had just reduced the $250,000 Centennial Celebration budget by $21,000 for the swim park. Olson then proposed to reduce it by another$79,000 to $150,000. McIntyre said the tradeoff was the City would have fewer events and would have to try to raise more private money. D.Williams observed the City Attorney's opinion about the Percent for Art would impact the budget because it was a large amount of money. McIntyre related the City Attorney had found the code contradicted itself and he was researching past practice of previous city attorneys. Any change would have to be approved by the City Council if it were not applied to the arts program it would likely be returned to the General Fund reserves. Olson proposed to reduce the centennial celebration budget for the next fiscal year to $150,000. D.Williams seconded the motion. Discussion followed. Tierney said $150,000 was a "placeholder" until the staff had a more specific cost estimate. Jordan did not think that was a prudent approach to budgeting. Tierney explained that in other cases the budgeters had a history of spending to look at, but this was a one-time event Smith advised the City Council would make the final decision about how much to spend. The vote was 11 for and 1 against. Olson and Tierney had questioned how the Municipal Court lost money when it should be making money. McIntyre explained the court had never lost money— it always transferred a large amount of money to the General Fund to support operations per City Council policy. Tierney observed that was a uniquely different kind of"transfer" than the transfers from department to department. Rouhier advised court revenue was siphoned off to the General Fund so the court actually broke even. It did not lose money. Olson and Tierney discussed FTEs. They noted McIntyre had already reduced his staff by one FTE. Tierney suggested the proposed communications manager position be reconsidered. Moncrieff saw a need for a dedicated professional in that position because he/she could actually save the City money by ensuring the city communicated well with citizens at the front end of each process. A lot of money had been spent due to poor communications about the WEB. Hoffman asked McIntyre if the reclassification of the vacant Assistant City Manager position increased FTEs. McIntyre said no, they had planned to have Stephen Lashbrook's position replace Public Affairs Director position when she moved to the LOIS project, but when Lashbrook left the City they down graded the position to Communications Manager level and combined it with the intergovernmental effort. So that FTE had a lower compensation rate now. Hoffman observed that meant the position was already funded and was not a new FTE. The sustainability position was not new but had been moved from another department. But there was a new FTE to do disaster preparedness work. McIntyre stressed that it was a City Council goal to enhance communication with the public. Calabria said she could agree with the concept of reducing FTEs to a level that was similar to the last 5 years, but she was not comfortable voting on not funding a specific position because she felt the staff should determine the best use of FTEs. Jordan said how much money could City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 8 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 be saved by reducing FTEs also depended on whether you were eliminating lower paid positions or higher paid positions. Hoffman added that not all FTEs were paid from the General Fund. Bearden said it was too late in the process to be second guessing the number of FTEs. Shallenberger calculated that the Committee needed to find an amount close to 1% of the $65 million budget to break even. She suggested asking for an across the board cut. Each department could look for ways to do that. Moncrieff cautioned the Committee not to micromanage the departments. Shallenberger agreed that should be left up to the staff. Jordan suggested an approach that offered an incentive for individual departments to look for ways to save a percentage. They could carry the savings over in their own budgets and add it to the next year's budget. Shallenberger suggested just asking them to lock in 1% savings now. Hoffman asked McIntyre why he had not proposed a budget that was1% or 2% less? McIntyre said they built the budget around City Council priorities and goals and maintaining existing services. He had told the City Council that if they took on new initiatives they would do that in a responsible and quality way. He said he would not cut more FTEs unless the City Council told him what services to cut. He said he could likely cut 1%. Rouhier said they had already cut 1.4%. Olson said she and Tierney saw things in the budget like 16% increases in materials and services that could not be explained to their satisfaction [in many areas that includes fuel and repairs that were previously budgeted as transfers out to the Maintenance & Motor Pool Fund] and 14% increases in electricity that were really 5%. They recommended cutting or delaying filling the Economic Development Director position. They questioned budgeting Special Pay for people who might retire. Moncrieff pointed out the Committee itself had used materials and staffing resources and utilities and they kept asking for more reports. Tierney asked them to consider the budget history. He asked why the city would need so much more this year. He said they could provide the same high level of services and still reduce the operating budget by 2%, not the magnitude it was proposed to be. One example was computer replacement. If 1/3 of the computers were to be replaced every year, and it was an ongoing program of replacement, then 1/3 of them had been replaced last year. So he suggested reducing new personnel and keeping spending closer to the level it was last year. Olson clarified that she was not proposing budget "cuts," but reductions in the proposed increases. Johnson explained that more FTEs were necessary to accomplish City Council goals. Besides their salaries and benefits the City had to provide them with computers and office supplies. She did not want to have to examine the budget for office supplies in detail to find a 1% cost savings, she would let McIntyre suggest how to do that. She was comfortable dipping in the $886,000 (now about $700,000) in reserves to fund retirements. Smith observed the $886,000 to be taken from reserves had now been reduced to about $700,000, which was 1% of the cost to run the city next year. He said the Committee might decide to agree to that, which would reduce current reserves by 5%. The other 95% would still be there and there were budgeted contingencies based on risk analyses. Rouhier advised that the General Fund contingency for a labor settlement was $716,000, but it might actually be less. Smith summarized that the Committee had decided the issue of library funding and agreed to fund the swim park. He recommended that they come back to the next meeting prepared to address the remaining issues and finalize their budget recommendation. Jordan recalled that there was typically no budget for boards and commissions, but the SAB and PRAB had asked for funding. Olson observed that the Parks budget would cover PRAB activates and she reasoned that since the Sustainability Planner position was now in the City Manager's office his budget would provide SAB support. City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 9 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009 VI. 2009-10 Proposed Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA) Budget The budget team distributed copies of the LORA budget. Smith stated that the Committee planned to discuss it at their next meeting. The City Councilors invited the other members to come to the Council special meeting the following evening for the presentation on LORA.. VII. Adjournment Chair Smith adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m. The Committee's last regularly scheduled meeting is Wednesday, May 13, 2009. Respectfully submitted, Kam Frederickson /s/ Kam Frederickson Budget & Financial Analyst APPROVED BY THE CITIZENS' BUDGET COMMITTEE: April 19, 2010 City of Lake Oswego Citizens' Budget Committee Page 10 of 10 Minutes of May 11, 2009