1. To: Wallingford City Council
From: Kevin Wren
Re: Journal Entry 4 – “Wallingford Preliminary BudgetMessage”
February 17, 2016
Honorable Wallingford Council Members,
Wallingford, our beloved new city, will be in a structural deficit unless we establish a setof policy
strategies, goals, and priorities in order to balance the budgetand provide essential municipal services for
the community. For a little context, the International City/County ManagementAssociation (ICMA) urges “a
[balanced budget] shapes the entire budgetprocess: itmakes budgetdeliberations…revenue driven,
meaning that available revenues determine the level ofspending” in The context of local government
budgeting. If we don’tincrease the revenues through taxing and fees, then many ofthe expectations you
promised to constituents will fail and you mightnot be reelected.Additionally, the Financial Times notes a
structural deficit“results from a fundamental imbalance in governmentreceipts and expenditures,as
opposed to one based on one-offor short-term factors. A governmentbudgetdeficitoccurs when a
governmentspends more than it receives in tax revenue, while a structural deficitis when a budgetdeficit
persists for some time.” Putsimply: we need to renegotiate the city’s priorities now, budgetallocations and
sources ofrevenue, for long-term success in order to deliver effective high quality services, balance the
budgetefficiently, exceed customer expectations, contribute to higher quality of life measures, suppo rts
implementation ofgovernmentpolicy,and enables elected governance to address community needs and
priorities.
Given the need to provide services (albeitthrough contracting or in-house) and attain revenues
(taxes or fees), many of the priorities defined in the “Wallingford Council Expectations” are at odds with
sustaining long-term fiscal health for the city. The city will be unable to meetcommunity needs and
priorities, like safety and increasing park, youth, and senior programs, ifthe council decides to opt-outof
new revenues, e.g. “no new taxes,” “maintain or lower property taxes,” “no business license fees,” and “no
B&O tax.” Having grown up in Wallingford, I am aware of some ofthe needs ofthe community, but need
you to prioritize, negotiate, and compromise on the ways to provide services defined as necessary for the
community. I understand many of your policy positions are atodds, like whether to contract with the sheriff
or establish a Wallingford Police Department (WPD) as you representdiffering community interests.
However, you risk community backlash ifyou are unable to compromise and provide these services, which
will have negative impacts come reelection time. The city is young and is primarily residential with some
business employmentsimilar to Seattle’s Fremontor Ballard neighborhoods. The residential population in
the neighborhood is about30,000 while the number employed is around 15,000 according to a 2014 study
by Sound Transit’s Ballard to Downtown Seattle Transit Expansion. Under the current structure and not
changing service or adopting new expenditures, Wallingford generates $17,535,000 in total revenue while
allocating $15,750,000 in expenditures,netting a positive, balance of$2,785,000.
The remainder of the documentattempts to categorize the council’s expectations, qualify budget
priorities, quantify goals, recommend potential strategies, and provide a suite ofsolutions. The priority most
mentioned by the council regards public safety (see appendix 1) under expenditures, e.g. contracting with
sheriff’s department, establishing a Wallingford PD, or a mix. Conversely, the priority regarding revenues is
no new taxes. There are some opportunities to increase service delivery thatmeetyour revenue needs,
which honor your budgetexpectations as much as possible.
Public Safety Priorities: Public safety is the Council’s greatestconcern according to the expectations list
and currently costs the city $10.6 million to contract with the sheriff, district fire department, emergency

2. management, and animal control. Public safety accounts for roughly 2/3 oftotal expenditures as the
community values these services most.
 Policing: The council is at odds regarding sheriffs or creating a WPD. Developing a police station and
employing 50 officers to replace the 40 contracted sheriffs will cost an additional $5.87 million in the
first year alone. Long-term savings will accrue overtime, butthe projectneeds extensive budget
support. Constituent supportis splintered as noted by the differing council positions with some merely
honoring their election supporters while others are addressing community needs,like focusing on
community policing.
 Fire: The fire districtwas a single pointofconsternation and the amount of savings by altering course
will save the city $1 million at risk of upsetting constituents. I am considering this a low-priority item
worth revisiting nextyear.
 Animal control: Another relevantpointthat costs the city $50 k with options to maintain one FTE or
hire two PTE at no additional cost. Iam considering this a low-priority item as well and worth revisiting
nextyear.
Goals
 Policing: Maintain or exceed policing effectiveness:Maintain or reduce crime levels;determine and
address community needs through engagement. Maintain or exceed policing efficiency:Reduce cost
generated by training and employing a single officer; amountgenerated for the city/costto residents by
police interventions.
 Fire: Maintain or exceed effectiveness:Lower response and completion times; number oflives saved
or lostfrom fires. Maintain or exceed efficiency:Reduce costgenerated by training and employing a
single fireman; amount costto residents, businesses, and the city by firemen dousing and response
interventions.
 Animal Control: Maintain or exceed effectiveness:Maintain or reduce number ofstray pets and wild
animals. Maintain or exceed efficiency:Reduce costgenerated by training and employing a single
officer; amount costto the city from a critter roaming the community.
Strategies for Policing
 Court fees and increased ticket costs: Increasing court fees can directly increase the city’s revenues
as a result of providing a necessary service.On the other hand, increasing fees too much results in a
public failure as seen in Ferguson. Increasing fees will upsetthe community, but can be justified by the
court aimed at deterring criminal activity through fines and fees.
 Phased approach: The benefits ofaffording in-house police departmentare apparent: greater
connection with the community, more direction and oversightofthe departmentby the city, and meets
the expectation ofcommunity policing. In order to afford this expectation, a phased approach will help
the city pay for the increased costs by allocating a portion ofthe reserve fund for the next few years
into a special fund to finance an in-house police department.
 Mixed services: By combining both sheriffs and a WPD, the overall costs ofdeveloping a stand-alone
WPD are much less with the benefitofpolice engaged with the community and sheriffs combating
crime. The overall costs ofbuilding a new police station are less as the WPD will need to deploy and
train less police, which means the police headquarters will need to be smaller and costless to build.
Recommendation: By slightly increasing service fees and urging a mix ofsafety providers over time, you
can generate more short-term revenue and less expenditures in the long-run while not crossing the
boundary into Ferguson territory. Increasing the total budgetby 25% (policing from roughly $15.75 to
$21.55 million) because ofadditional services will break even after three years ifthe reserve fund is
dedicated to increasing policing. By splitting the costs as a result of bundling sheriffs and police, the total
yearly expenditures are reduced ($7 million for sheriffs and police, no transition costs, less start-up and

3. station maintenance fees). Increasing ticketfees will help generate funding for the particular department,
while also reducing the number ofadditional taxes or fees allocated from other sources needed to support
safety. By combining all the strategies, public safety is affordable in the next five years despite short-term
shocks to the budget.
Other Priorities: Parks, Biz development, Large Capital Projects/Investments, and Staffing Council were
all mentioned as expectations, and make up the remaining $5 million in expenditures.
Public safety is the Council’s greatestconcern according to the expectations listand currently costs the city
$10.6 million to contract with the sheriff, district fire department, emergency management, and animal
control. Public safety accounts for roughly 2/3 oftotal expenditures as the community values these services
most.
Parks: Accountfor 20% ofthe current budgetwith $1 million extra required to fully staff (increased
maintenance and expanded programming).
 Goals: Provide clean and safe recreational and parks services; increase programming
 Strategies: User and rental fees generates $500 k.
 Recommendation: Hire half the necessary employees needed and charge rental fees to balance
the parks budgetto increase services and preserve parks.
Business: The planning and community developmentteam currently costs $2.5 million (1/6 ofthe budget)
for 12 FTE with three additional staff costing $500 k.
 Goals: Draw in more medium and large businesses to help employ locals and drive up taxes
(sales and property); CED staff draw in employers.
 Strategies: Establish business license fees to pay for additional developmentstaff
 Recommendation: While many of you mentioned notincreasing fees, CED requires additional
funding in order to make an impact. This may be more politically feasible compared to increasing
taxes as these fees will affect a small proportion ofthe community, businesses owners, as
opposed to residents in general.
Capital: Large, one-time projects do nothave a specific allocation in the budget, butcan accrue to long-
term costsavings and a way to increase service effectiveness.
 Goals: Increase quality of infrastructure (completed streets), long-term savings (WPD hq, City Hall)
 Strategies: Determine one large projectper year to fund based on community needs.
 Recommendation: Money for completing roads can be leveraged from a transportation
improvementfee, which meets your expectations. This action should be addressed firstto
determine the scope ofthe problem and how much the new fees will impact completing roads,
which also dovetails to issues ofpublic safety.
Staffing council: Because the city is brand new, it is difficult to determine the need for the council to hire
supportstaff and increase benefits compared to competing budgetpriorities.
 Goals: Maintain service delivery effectiveness and efficiency; maintain residentsatisfaction with
services.
 Strategies: New college graduates are capable ofproviding many ofthe functions you expectand
there is some overlap in their functions.
 Recommendation: Many recentMPA graduates are capable administrators, skilled social media
practitioners, policy analysts, and planners. Issaquah’s Autumn Monohan currently occupies all
these functions well, which reduces costs and provides effective services. Paying for additional
staff would require compromising on increasing fees or taxes, with an animal license fee providing
enough financial capital for four FTE working on planning, analysis, administration, TV, and social
media. This fee is also less contentious and more politically feasible than increasing taxes or some
other fee.

4.  Appendix 1
Revenues Expenditures
1. No New Taxes
2. No Utility Taxes
3. Same/Lower Total Property Tax
4. No Dog Or Cat Licenses
5. No Business License Fees
6. No B&O Tax
7. Increase Impact And Permit
Fees
8. No Impact And Low Permit Fees
9. Growth Should Pay Its Own Way
10. No Trans BenefitDistrict $20 /
Vehicle Fee
11. Don’t Price Seniors Out Of
Homes
12. No Storm Water Fees ($120/Yr?)
13. No Debt For Wallingford
14. No SupportOf Councilmanic
Bonds
15. Voter Approved Bonds Only
1. Safety
 ProtectNeighborhoods: Sheriff/WPD/Mix
 Fire District: No Opting Out & Contracting Back
2. Parks
 Senior And Youth Centers/Programs
 Expanded Recreation Programs
 More Parks Maintenance
3. Biz development
 SupportSmall Businesses
 Encourage Economic Development
4. Large Capital Projects/Investments
 Own Police Station
 Completed Streets
 Owning City Hall
 No Kill Animal Shelters
5. Staffing Council
 Council Members Need Health Insurance
 City Cable TV Program
 Social Media Communications Programs/Staff(3)
 Councilmembers’ Own Admin Assistant(7)
 Planning Staff (3)
 Council Policy Analysis Staff (3)