City Council

MURFREESBORO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Agenda Workshop Murfreesboro Municipal Airport – Business Center July 13, 2022 – 11:30 AM Action Items 1. Board of Zoning Appeals Reappointment (Administration) 2. Historic Zoning Commission Reappointments (Administration) 3. Planning Commission Reappointment (Administration) 4. Amendment to the Restated Agreement for Conveyance of Real Estate with Kasai North America 5. Salem Hwy. Sewer Upgrades-Easement Offers (Water Resources) Workshop Items 6. Solid Waste Management Solution Triple Bottom Line Weighting (Water Resources) 7. Road Project Update (Engineering) 8. May Dashboard Information (Administration) Licensing Payment of Statements Other Business Adjournment  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 07/13/2022 Item Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Department: Administration Presented by: Mayor Shane McFarland Summary Reappointment to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Background Information The Board of Zoning Appeals hears requests for variances from the Zoning and Sign Ordinances, requests for Special Use Permits as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and appeals from the administrative decisions. As established by M.C.C., Appendix A, §30 the Board consists of five members who serve three-year, staggered terms. Attachments Memo from Mayor McFarland  . . . creating a better quality of life. July 13, 2022 Members of City Council RE: Recommended Reappointment – Board of Zoning Appeals As an item for the Council Agenda, I am recommending the following reappointment to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Reappointment Mr. Ken Halliburton term expiring June 30, 2025 Sincerely, Shane McFarland Mayor Administration Department 111 West Vine Street * PO Box 1139 * Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37133-1139 * Phone 615 849 2629 * Fax 615 849 2679 TDD 615 849 2689 www.murfreesborotn.gov  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 07/13/2022 Item Title: Historic Zoning Commission Department: Administration Presented by: Mayor Shane McFarland Summary Reappointment to the Historic Zoning Commission. Background Information The purpose of the Historic Zoning Commission is to study, recommend, and oversee historic district boundaries and guidelines for renovation of existing structures or the building of new structures for the protection of historic neighborhoods and districts. As established by M.C.C.§, Appendix A, Section 24, H-I Historic District (f), the Historic Zoning Commission consists of nine members who serve five-year, staggered terms. Attachments Memo from Mayor McFarland  . . . creating a better quality of life. July 13, 2022 Members of City Council RE: Recommended Appointment – Historic Zoning Commission As an item for the Council Agenda, I am recommending the following appointments to the Historic Zoning Commission. Reappointment Mr. David Becker term expiring June 30, 2027 Mr. Chase Salas (Planning Commission liaison) term expiring June 30, 2027 Mr. Jim Thompson term expiring June 30, 2027 Sincerely, Shane McFarland Mayor Administration Department 111 West Vine Street * PO Box 1139 * Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37133-1139 * Phone 615 849 2629 * Fax 615 849 2679 TDD 615 849 2689 www.murfreesborotn.gov  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 07/13/2022 Item Title: Planning Commission Department: Administration Presented by: Mayor Shane McFarland Summary Reappointment to the Planning Commission. Background Information The Planning Commission is responsible for coordinating the physical development of the community by developing comprehensive land use plans, zoning regulations, a major thoroughfare plan and other plans and ordinances. As established by City Code § 22-2 the Planning Commission consists of seven members who serve three-year, staggered terms. Attachments: Memo from Mayor McFarland  . . . creating a better quality of life. July 13, 2021 Members of City Council RE: Recommended Reappointment– Planning Commission As an item for the City Council agenda, I am recommending the following reappointment to the Planning Commission. Reappointment Mrs. Kathy Jones term expiring June 30, 2025 Sincerely, Shane McFarland Mayor Administration Department 111 West Vine Street * PO Box 1139 * Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37133-1139 * Phone 615 849 2629 * Fax 615 849 2679 TDD 615 849 2689 www.murfreesborotn.gov  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 07/13/2022 Item Title: Amendment to the Restated Agreement for Conveyance of Real Estate with Kasai North America Department: Administration Presented by: Craig Tindall, City Manager Requested Council Action: Ordinance ☐ Resolution ☐ Motion ☒ Direction ☐ Information ☐ Summary Approve First Amendment to Restated Agreement for Conveyance of Real Estate and authorize execution of Release of Option. Staff Recommendation Approve amendment to agreement with Kasai North America, Inc. Background Information In 2014, the City entered into an agreement with M-Tek, Inc., now Kasai North America, Inc., for the acquisition of approximately 10 acres on Garrison Drive. This agreement provided an option for Kasai to acquire two adjoining acres that would be used for surface parking requirements should a second building be developed on the site. The Agreement also provided that if Kasai sells the property , closes all or substantially all of its operations at the property, or relocates to another city within 10 years from 2016, it would pay the City $15 per square foot for the property. Kasai constructed a 64,000 square foot building, which the company now occupies. During the intervening years, Kasai has adjusted its space needs and desires to occupy only a portion of the building. The remain portion of this Class A office space would be available for lease. Kasai, however, is not in the real estate business and desires to sell the building so that the space can be relet to other office users. The proposed amendment eliminates the sell contingency of the clawback. It allows Kasai to sell and lease-back a portion of the building on a 10-year lease agreement for a portion of the building. This will keep Kasai’s operations and employment base within the City over the long term. Alternatively, Kasai will allow the clawback to expire and leave the City. Kasai will also forgo its option on the adjoining two acres. These the two acres can be joined with the adjoining seven-acres of City-owned land for economic development opportunities. Council Priorities Served Improve economic development Securing additional land that can be combined with other City-owned land in the Gateway area will assist with economic development projects. Fiscal Impact None. Attachments 1. First Amendment to Restated Agreement for Conveyance of Real Estate with M-Tek, Inc. 2. Release of Option and Lien with Kasai North America, Inc. 3. Aerial of 2-acre Option Parcel 2 2-Acre Parcel  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 07/13/2022 Item Title: Salem Hwy. Sewer Upgrades-Easement Offers Department: Water Resources Presented by: Darren Gore Requested Council Action: Ordinance ☐ Resolution ☐ Motion ☒ Direction ☐ Information ☐ Summary In order to upsize the sewer interceptor, it is necessary to purchase temporary construction easements parallel to the existing permanent easements. Staff Recommendation Approve $40,850 for purchase easements or, if easements are not obtained within a reasonable amount of time, approve moving forward with condemnation. Background Information The Department is under contract with ELI to design the sewer upgrades as presented to the Board at the combined Nov/Dec 2021 Board meeting. These upgrades are necessary to release the self- imposed sewer moratorium, continue development in the area and avoid sewer capacity issues. The design is nearing completion. In order to construct the sewer main as designed there are 4 permanent and 14 temporary construction easements needed. The easement amounts were figured based on the easement size along with an average of the tax assessors’ values except for Tract 15, which is a platted commercial lot fronting on the highway, so it was assumed it was purchased full retail price. It is typical for the City to offer 50% of the land value for permanent easement and 10% per year for temporary construction easement. These offer amounts should be worst case because they do not take into consideration that portions of these easements are within Floodway and/or Floodplain. We also anticipate that several properties may agree to donate the easement as they are in the process of redevelopment and are in hopes that this project will allow them to start construction on next phases soon. The easement offers were rounded up and also staff thought it best to offer a minimum of $1000. Council Priorities Served Expand infrastructure Obtaining these easements will allow the Department to move forward with the upsizing of the sewer interceptor. Maintain public safety Upsizing of the sewer interceptor will allow development to continue in the area while reducing the threat of a sewer overflow due to lack of capacity and therefore maintaining public safety with regard to the health of Spence Creek. Fiscal Impact There are adequate reserves to fund this amount. These improvements are expected to be incorporated into a revised special sanitary sewer assessment district once the overall costs of the improvements are finalized. Attachments Easement Offer Spreadsheet 2  Total Temp Total Total Easement Offer Permanent Permanent Temporary Temporary Tract Address Name Map Parcel Total Value Prop. Acreage $/Acre Temporary Easement Easement Rounded + $1000 Easement Offer sq. ft acres sq. ft acres sq. ft acres acres Offer Offer Minimum 1 New Salem Hwy Jackson Family General Partnership 114 900 $93,000.00 21.2 34,693.63 24,027 0.55 $9,540.75 23,346 0.54 0.54 $1,873.46 $11,414 11,450.00 Trustees of River Rock Baptist 2 2248 New Salem Hwy 114D”A” 3100 $165,700.00 10.8 34,693.63 14,300 0.33 $5,724.45 10,380 0.24 3,308 0.08 0.32 $1,110.20 $6,835 6,850.00 Church World Outreach Church of 3 2151 New Salem Hwy 114 800 $1,082,600.00 67.5 34,693.63 5,392 0.12 $2,081.62 5,270 0.12 17,364 0.4 0.52 $1,804.07 $3,886 3,900.00 Murfreesboro Tennessee, Inc. G. Allen Jackson, Jr and Wife Kathy 4 2253 New Salem Hwy 114 810 $76,800.00 24 34,693.63 14,508 0.33 0.33 $1,144.89 $1,145 1,150.00 Jackson William Jonathon Scott and Brooke 5 106 Spence Creek 114 1310 $373,700.00 9.58 34,693.63 14,618 0.34 0.34 $1,179.58 $1,180 1,200.00 Scott Bryan K Holcomb and Wife Lorie A. 6 114 Spence Creek 114 1300 $356,500.00 8.8 34,693.63 15,656 0.36 0.36 $1,248.97 $1,249 1,250.00 Holcomb William A. Waite and Wife Caroline 7 2329 New Salem Hwy 114 1400 $614,200.00 20.9 34,693.63 27,707 0.64 0.64 $2,220.39 $2,220 2,250.00 A. Waite 8 2339 New Salem Hwy Bart Gordon and Leslie Gordon 114 1501 $2,056,000.00 18 34,693.63 44,392 1.02 1.02 $3,538.75 $3,539 3,550.00 9 2049 Cason Lane Creekside Villas, LLC 114 1508 Not Needed 10 Stonewater Ct Terrannova Development Corp. 114 1705 $527,800.00 11.8 34,693.63 2,174 0.05 $867.34 32,187 0.74 219 0.01 0.75 $2,602.02 $3,469 3,500.00 11 2727 Presley Dr Middle Tennessee Electric 114 1802 $60,300.00 1.32 34,693.63 3,969 0.09 0.09 $312.24 $312 1,000.00 12 Salem Creek Dr Salem Creek Partnership 114 1805 $296,200.00 9.08 34,693.63 6,605 0.15 8,058 0.18 0.33 $1,144.89 $1,145 1,150.00 Vansee Deep Nemala (Ashton at 13 2607 Salem Creek Ct 114F”A” 100 $12,500.00 5.88 34,693.63 3,126 0.07 0.07 $242.86 $243 1,000.00 Salem Creek) 14 2525 Salem Creek Dr Salem Creek Church of Christ 114 1807 $372,300.00 7.61 34,693.63 11,184 0.26 149 0 0.26 $902.03 $902 1,000.00 15 2433 New Salem Hwy Salem Creek Commons 114 1809 $799,700.00 1.53 522,679.74 1,209 0.03 0.03 $1,568.04 $1,568 1,600.00 Properties in the green belt. Total $39,107 40,850.00  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 07/13/2022 Item Title: Solid Waste Management Solution Triple Bottom Line Weighting Department: Solid Waste Presented by: Darren Gore Summary Provide input on the weight to be placed on the following three categories in selecting the City’s solid waste management solution:  Environmental Sustainability  Public Welfare and Social Implications  Financial Viability Exhibit 1 attached to this memo details the three categories along with the various criteria staff requests the Council to assess. A blank worksheet with these same categories and criteria is provided for the Council to provide their input on expected influence of each category and criteria. Background Information Staff has put together a Multiple Criteria Analysis (MCA) An MCA approach is particularly useful for evaluating options related to the City’s future municipal solid waste management options (after the anticipated closure of Middle Point Landfill), including, drop-off/transfer, processing, materials recovery, and disposing of non-diverted MSW. The options reviewed by staff are functionally different, with different ranges of effects. For these segments of the waste management system, there is value in applying a more rigorous evaluation process to determine which ones offer greatest value to Murfreesboro. An MCA framework has been developed to holistically assess the environmental sustainability, social implications, and financial viability of the options based on a set of nine criteria (three in each triple bottom line, or TBL, category) that reflect Council objectives and priorities. Criteria and indicators have been identified, based on staff’s technical knowledge and experience. The criteria and indicators selected for this process are those that are commonly used in similar evaluation processes. The indicators are the specific considerations or measures that are proposed to be applied where appropriate to identify the potential effects related to the respective criterion. In general, the MCA framework is intended to: • Facilitate and reflect meaningful collaboration through transparency in all assumptions and without the use of “black-box” processes where it is unclear how conclusions have been reached. • Enable consideration of matters such as climate impact, social implications, health, reliability, regulatory changes, and others as determined by the overall project objectives.  • Be consistent across options; • Be as simple as is reasonably possible (Note: too many individual criteria or indicators can result in overlap between individual criteria elements as well as making straightforward communication and understanding of outcomes more difficult. Too many individual criteria and indicators can often result in imbalance where one small consideration is treated the same as something else that is more significant. It is important to have enough to have a robust evaluation, without complicating the process; and, • Accommodate quantification where possible. The Council should use the attached table and fill it in based on their determination of each category and criteria meeting their expected influence on determining a highest and best solution to the City’s solid waste management challenge. 1. Assign a weight between the three major categories. a. One option would be an even split 33% assigned to Environmental Sustainability, 33% Public Welfare and Social Implications and 33% Financial Viability b. Another Option could be 25% Environmental Sustainability, 25% Public Welfare and Social Implications and 50% Financial Viability 2. Assign each criteria a score of one to five (with one being the lowest/worst and five being the highest/best). The process is kept simple and transparent so that the public and involved stakeholders can understand how the outcomes were arrived at. Based on the Council’s determination of weight on each category and the assessment of 1 – 5 on each of the criteria attached, staff will look at each option that is available or has been presented to the City and assign a score. Staff will meet either individually or in a workshop setting to review the results and determine if the Council is satisfied with staff’s determination of a highest and best solution for the City moving forward. Currently, there are four (4) options. They can be described in the graphic below: 40% Diversion – 40% Diversion - 0% Diversion – 90% Diversion – Materials Recovery Materials Recovery Transfer to another WastAway SE3 (Requires Curbside (No Curbside Landfill biomass fuel Recycling) Recycling Required) Staff will score each of the options based on the weight of each category and priority assessment provided by the Council. Staff will also review the aggregate or average of weight and assessment values of each City Council member. 2 Please note that the 40% diversion option that does not require curbside recycling has not been thoroughly vetted by staff at this point. Staff is awaiting additional information to analyze this option more thoroughly in order to determine how it compares to all of the other options identified. Council Priorities Served Establish strong City brand The Middle Point Landfill has been a blight to the citizens of Murfreesboro and diminished their quality of life through continued noxious odors, traffic, and other environmental concerns. A future solid waste management solution for the City should consider not only the financial impacts to solid waste customers, but also the social and environmental impacts to Murfreesboro residents. Fiscal Impact There are no immediate fiscal impacts associated with providing weighting factors for the various future solid waste management solutions. There are long-term fiscal impacts associated with managing solid waste differently in lieu of receiving free tipping fees at Middle Point Landfill after is closes. Future Council meetings or workshops will provide the costs, revenues and expenses associated with all viable solid waste management solutions. Attachments MCA Categories and Criteria for Weighting Diagram and Worksheet 3 City of Murfreesboro, TN Solid Waste Management Multi-criteria Analysis (MCA) Categories and Criteria for Weighting  City of Murfreesboro, TN Solid Waste Management Multi-criteria Analysis (MCA) Worksheet Weight 100% between 3 Categories Category Criteria 1 lowest; 5 highest % Weight Environmental Sustainability Description Assessment (1-5) Potential to avoid/reduce/reuse/recycle waste Resource Efficiency Potential to increase diversion of materials from landfill Potential to recover additional marketable materials ______ % Potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (from Climate Impact facility operations & material transportation) Potential to reduce energy consumption (fuel, power, etc.) Impact on land, air and water quality resources Local Environmental Impact Impact on transportation resources / roadway capacity Public Welfare and Social % Weight Implications Description Assessment (1-5) Potential for impacts to public and staff safety Safety and Health Impact Potential for impacts to public health from water/air contaminant emissions, odor, noise, vector/vermin, increased litter ______ % Public acceptance of Murfreesboro receiving outside region trash Public Perception Risk of community interruption from increased traffic, odor and noise Potential for new local jobs Economic Development Potential to support economic growth and innovation % Weight Financial Viability Description Assessment (1-5) Initial and Future replacement capital costs for City Direct Cost Annual operating and maintenance costs for City (including contracted costs & any additional staffing) Potential cost savings to other components of City services Revenue and Savings Potential Potential to generate revenue from sale of recovered ______ % materials Risk of issues with reliability or availability of facilities / Risk and Reliability vendors / technology Risk of system complexity and maintenance requirements Risk of contractual issues and liability 5  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 07/13/2022 Item Title: Overview of Traffic Planning for Economic Development Projects Department: Administration Presented by: Administration Summary Information for Council regarding the traffic planning efforts associated with major economic development projects. Background Information Staff consistent engages a process that is intended to address traffic as the City and the surrounding area continues to grow. As part of that project, traffic consideration associated with major economic development projects are included in that process. Because roadway development is a major capital investment, the process informs the Community Investment Plan and Budget. Council Priorities Served Improve Economic Development Traffic is considered as a part of every economic development project; major projects require extensive consideration that begins well before the usual process for addressing traffic resulting from new development, which occurs during the planning process  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 07/13/2022 Item Title: May 2022 Dashboard Department: Administration Presented by: Erin Tucker, Budget Director Summary May 2022 Dashboard packet Background Information Dashboard information includes relevant Financial, Building & Codes, Risk Management and Construction data. Council Priorities Served Responsible budgeting Providing Council with assessable financial information on a regular basis assists in critical decision-making about the fiscal affairs of the City. Fiscal Impacts None Attachments: 1. May 2022 Dashboard 2. City Schools May Dashboard  MAY DASHBOARD Property Tax 70,000,000 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 - FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 Property Tax notices were mailed in early October. While the FY22 budget reflects a 3.08% increase over FY21, actual results show a 4% increase over FY21. LOCAL SALES TAX BUDGET vs ACTUAL 8 70 Millions 7 60 Millions 6 50 Cumulative Total 5 Monthly Total 40 4 30 3 20 2 1 10 - 0 JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY22 Budget FY22 Actual FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulative FY22 Local Sales Tax collections continue to outpace FY21. Through May, collections are trending over FY21 and over budget by 17.8%. This revenue stream will be closely monitored for major fluctuations.  STATE SALES TAX BUDGET vs ACTUAL 1,800 16 Thousands 1,600 14 Millions 1,400 12 1,200 Cumulative Total 10 Monthly Total 1,000 8 800 6 600 4 400 200 2 - 0 JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY22 Budget FY22 Actual FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulative State Sales Tax collections continue to outpace FY21 and budget by 30.5% through May. This revenue stream will be closely monitored for major fluctuations.  Sportsbetting Receipts 1.00% Mixed Drink Tax 3.23% Telecom Sales Tax State Street Aid - 0.13% Gas Tax Gas Tax Allocation 0.49% 10.31% State Sales Tax 33.15% Business Tax - Gross Receipts Tax 51.68% Gross Receipts (Business Tax) made up nearly 52% of the State Shared collections for May while Sales Tax followed at 33%. State Street Aid Gas Tax (restricted to road improvements) made up an additional 10%. The remaining 5% was made up with mixed drink, beer and other miscellaneous taxes.  State Revenue Collections 5.00 30 Millions 4.50 Millions 25 4.00 3.50 20 3.00 Total Collections 2.50 15 2.00 10 1.50 1.00 5 0.50 0.00 0 JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE FY21 Actual FY22 Actual FY21 Cumulative FY22 Cumulative Overall, State Shared Revenue collections showed 28% growth for May as compared to FY21 and reflect a 17% increase cumulatively for the year. Sales Taxes receipts are showing a 25% increase as compared to May 2021. Mixed Drink taxes continue to increase over last year, reflecting an 11% increase for the month and 29% cumulatively compared to FY21, bringing this revenue over and above pre-pandemic levels. State Street Aid Gas Tax has also bounced back to pre- pandemic levels with a 34% increase over May 2021 and overall, 20% cumulatively - these revenues are restricted and can only be spent on eligible roadway maintenance and construction projects.  HOTEL/MOTEL BUDGET vs. ACTUAL 400 4 Millions Thousands 350 4 300 3 Monthly Collections Cumulative Collections 250 3 200 2 150 2 100 1 50 1 - - JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY22 Budget Actual FY21 Cumulative FY22 Cumulative FY21 Hotel/Motel tax results indicated fewer receipts than previous years, therefore, the FY22 budget was conservatively budgeted. However, FY22 results indicate an increase over pre-pandemic tax collections and an increase over budget by 60% for the month and 38% for the year. Results also show an increase over last year through May of 60%. This upward trend is expected to continue.  Salaries & Benefits 14,000,000 100,000,000 90,000,000 12,000,000 80,000,000 10,000,000 70,000,000 60,000,000 8,000,000 50,000,000 6,000,000 40,000,000 4,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 2,000,000 10,000,000 - - JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY 22 Budget FY 22 Actual FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulative Salaries & Benefits make up 45% of General Fund’s budget. The FY22 budget included 23 additional full-time positions, increasing full-time approved positions from 1,018 to 1,041 positions. As of 5/31/22, there were 992 filled full-time positions and 49 vacancies, compared to 54 vacancies in April. Police had 41 open positions at the end of May, including 34 sworn officer positions. Salaries & Benefits are running 8% under budget for the month and 6% under budget for the year. Schools Transfer 700,000 9,000,000 8,000,000 600,000 7,000,000 500,000 6,000,000 400,000 5,000,000 300,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 200,000 2,000,000 100,000 1,000,000 - - JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY 22 Budget FY 22 Actual FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulative Transfers to City Schools makes up 4% of General Fund’s budget. Budgeted Transfers to City Schools is budgeted at $7.885M. This transfer is made in monthly increments evenly distributed throughout the year.  Debt Service Transfer 25,000,000 40,000,000 35,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 25,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 - - JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY 22 Budget FY 22 Actual FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulative Budgeted Debt Service makes up 18% of General Fund’s budget. The budgeted Debt Service Transfer increased by $990k in FY22. This is due to the 2021 Bond issuance. Repairs & Maintenance 5,000,000 12,000,000 4,500,000 10,000,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 8,000,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 6,000,000 2,000,000 4,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 500,000 - - JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY 22 Budget FY 22 Actual FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulative Repairs & Maintenance make up 7% of General Fund budgeted expenses and are up 5% as compared to FY21 budget. This includes maintenance of software ($1.5M), fleet services ($3.5M), and Police R&M for radios, mobile data terminals, etc. ($1.28M). State Street Aid R&M of streets, markings and right of way totals $4.3M. These expenses are seasonal and fluctuate depending on contract timing and timing of repairs. This was trending over budget by 9% and 53% over FY21 through May, primarily due to differences in timing of State Street Aid paving projects.  Utilities 900,000 5,000,000 800,000 4,500,000 4,000,000 700,000 3,500,000 600,000 3,000,000 500,000 2,500,000 400,000 2,000,000 300,000 1,500,000 200,000 1,000,000 100,000 500,000 - - JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY 22 Budget FY 22 Actual FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulative Utilities make up 2% of General Fund’s budget. Results are up 1% as compared to FY21 and are running 6% under budget through May.  Fixed Assets 10,000,000 6,000,000 9,000,000 5,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 - - JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN FY 22 Budget FY 22 Actual FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulative Fixed Assets make up 13% of General Fund’s budget, totaling $28M These items include: • $6.9M in Infrastructure for grant funded road construction • $4.0M – Transit Facility • $2.0M – Police Equipment • $4.65M – Police Vehicles (from CIP) • $3.0M – Community West Park • $860k – Skate Park • $1.5M – Siegel Soccer Park building • $1.4M – Transit Buses • $600k – Parks & Recreation equipment • $500k – Fire equipment Timing on spending in Fixed Assets is also seasonal and can fluctuate based on the construction schedules and delivery of equipment. Through May, fixed asset spending was up 36% as compared to last year. This includes the $650,000 purchase of the Church Street property for Economic Development purposes and the grant funded portion of the Infrastructure road projects totaling $1.47M. As compared to budget, actual results are under budget by 79% - mainly due to delays in several large projects, including the purchase of police vehicles, community west park construction and the skate park construction.  MAY SAFETY REPORT City Cumulative All Incidents as of May Yr 2021 = 64 Yr 2022 = 62 35 30 30 26 25 20 18 16 15 10 7 7 5 5 3 3 4 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 Fire Police Parks & Water Fleet Golf Solid Street Transp Rec Waste Yr 2021 Yr 2022 Safety incidents are reflected on a calendar vs. fiscal year basis. Overall, for the City, total incidents for 2022 are down by 2 incidents or 3% from 2021.  WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Cost of PEP Claims as of May $1,000,000 $900,000 $800,000 312,578 $700,000 Fire $600,000 229,509 Police $500,000 P&R $400,000 411,514 Water $300,000 254,587 8,518 Other $200,000 18,370 2,908 171,226 17,113 $100,000 141,532 127,110 1,035 0 111,271 49,330 $- 2020 2021 2022  Number of PEP Claims as of May 200 180 160 42 63 140 Fire 120 Police 100 P&R 74 80 64 Water 60 18 Other 9 40 9 11 15 28 20 31 3 22 7 8 0 2020 2021 2022  BUILDING & CODES New Dwelling Units (Single Family, Townhomes & Apartments) 450 2,500 400 350 2,000 300 1,500 250 200 1,000 150 100 500 50 0 0 JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE New Permits Cumulative FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Cumulatively, FY22 dwelling permits are up 9% from FY21 and show a decrease for the month of May of 63%. Due to rising interest rates, the department expects fluctuations like this to occur as new residential building tapers off. Total Permits (all types) 1,400 14,000 1,200 12,000 1,000 10,000 800 8,000 600 6,000 400 4,000 200 2,000 - - JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE FY 22 Total Permits Cumulative FY 22 Cumulative FY 21 Total permits were trending down from last year by 13% in May. This is mainly due to the higher-than-average commercial permits and residential pool and fence permits from last summer.  625,000 Revenues 5,100,000 600,000 4,700,000 575,000 550,000 4,300,000 525,000 3,900,000 500,000 475,000 3,500,000 450,000 3,100,000 425,000 2,700,000 400,000 375,000 2,300,000 350,000 1,900,000 325,000 300,000 1,500,000 275,000 1,100,000 250,000 225,000 700,000 200,000 300,000 JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE FY 22 Monthly Revenues FY 22 Cumulative Revenues FY 21 Cumulative Revenues Revenues are up 2.7% as compared to last year due to a large commercial permit issued in September for an existing facility improvement and a large warehouse permit in November. However, May revenues are down 19% as compared to last May.  JUNE 9, 2022 Project Tracking Project Cost (including approved Change Orders) Billed to Date (Construction Only) Project Days (including approved Change Orders) Days Used $4,500,000.00 500 $4,000,000.00 450 400 $3,500,000.00 350 $3,000,000.00 300 $2,500,000.00 250 $2,000,000.00 200 $1,500,000.00 150 $1,000,000.00 100 $500,000.00 50 $0.00 0 Bradyville Pike Cherry Lane Phase II Cherry Lane Phase III Dr. Martin Luther King Blvd Sidewalks Rucker Lane Phase 1 Brinkley Road Phase 1 Gateway Boulevard Extension Front/ Vine Intersection Pareto Chart for Cumulative Percent of Annual Costs across all Cost Centers is in cells B2 through E3. Project Limits Project Cost (including Billed to Date Project Days (including Estimated Substantial Project Name From To Distance approved Change Orders) (Construction Only) approved Change Orders) Days Used Percent Days Completion N.T.P. Bradyville Pike SE Broad Street S Rutherford Blvd 2.10 Miles $10,570,000 (Est Cost) $0.00 0 0 0% Cherry Lane Phase II Siegel Soccer Park Sulphur Springs Road 1.73 Miles $13,800,000 (Est Cost) $0.00 0 0 0% Cherry Lane Phase III Broad Street Memorial Blvd (231) 1.10 Miles $46,000,000 (Est Cost) $0.00 0 0 0% Dr. Martin Luther King Blvd Sidewalks SE Broad Street Middle TN Blvd .70 Miles $1,100,292 $681,119.80 365 373 102% 5/25/2022 5/17/2021 Rucker Lane Phase 1 Muirwood Blvd Veterans Parkway .75 Miles $2,299,947.00 $1,969,983.33 244 244 100% 1/9/2022 5/10/2021 Brinkley Road Phase 1 Timber Creek Blaze Drive .3 Miles $3,839,997 $149,515.75 462 67 15% 7/10/2023 4/4/2022 Gateway Boulevard Extension Gateway Robert Rose .3 Miles $1,432,842(Est Cost) $0.00 0 0 0% Front/ Vine Intersection Front Street Vine Street .1 Miles $0.00 0 0 0% Total $79,042,078 $2,800,619  JUNE 9, 2022 Project Status / Comments Contractor has completed clearing and grubbing. Stream diversion and EPSC measures installed. Contractor has completed concrete pours on one of the two piers along west side of bridge and has Brinkley Road Phase I started foundation of second pier along the same side. They have also begun adding fill to the northwest side of the existing bridge. Chaffin Place City is finalizing right of way acquisition. Construction scheduled to begin within the next month. Corps of Engineers requested additional information concerning the environmental and right of way impacts of the proposed Cherry Lane alignment on 5/26/22. Consultant is finalizing response and is Cherry Lane Phase II scheduled to send response to the Corps this week. Cherry Lane Phase III Right-of-way consultant (Volkert) continuing to work on second batch of appraisals for right of way acquisition. Front / Vine Street Intersection Transportation Planning Report was submitted TDOT for their review. City staff and consultant working with TDOT to address their comments. Gateway Blvd Extension Two out of three appraisals complete. Consultant finalizing plans for construction. City beginning right of way acquisition. Dr. Martin Luther King Blvd Sidewalks Work was complete on 5/25/2022. Contractor working on punch list items. Final TDOT walkthrough scheduled for 6/14/2022. Staff working on project closeout. Rucker Lane Phase I Final change order approved by Council on 3/17/2022. Staff working on project close out. Project ROW Updates Bradyville Pike 75% of ROW Acquisition completed Brinkley Road 95% ROW acquired. 100% agreed upon. Chaffin Place Right of way agreed upon. Finalizing documents. Cherry Lane Phase III Volkert continuing ROW acquisition. Appraisals in process. Gateway Boulevard Extension Appraisal services 66% complete  COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 7/13/2022 Item Title: May 2022 MCS Cash Flow Statement and Revenue and Expenditure Budget Comparison Reports Department: Murfreesboro City Schools Presented by: Kim Williams Requested Council Action: Ordinance ☐ Resolution ☐ Motion ☐ Direction ☐ Information ☒ Summary FY22 Cash Flow Statement (May 2022) FY22 Revenue and Expenditure Budget Comparison Reports (May 2022) Background Information The State has recommended the Schools provide a Cash Flow Statement to the City Council on a monthly basis to indicate enough cash reserves are forecasted to be available to pay monthly expenses. We also will be including Revenue and Expenditure Budget Comparison Reports, that is provided to the Murfreesboro City School Board each month. This information will be included in the Wednesday agenda each month. A formal presentation will not be made each month, however there will be an opportunity for questions and comments. Council Priorities Served Strong and Sustainable Financial and Economic Health Fiscal Impact None Attachments May 2022 MCS Cash Flow Statement May 2022 MCS Revenue and Expenditure Budget Comparison Reports