Joint City-County Planning Task Force
Regular MeetingSpringfield, MO · December 8, 2014
Agenda
Joint City-County Planning Task Force
REPORT
Joint City-County Planning Task Force Report
December
2014
Executive
Summary
The
City
and
County
share
a
lot
of
current
and
future
challenges,
many
of
which
overlap.
Addressing
these
challenges
together,
and
with
additional
community
partners,
makes
good
business
sense.
Having
a
high-‐functioning
City
and
County
government
can
make
a
difference
in
the
economic
vitality
of
our
community.
If
the
City
and
County
are
not
financially
stable,
the
entire
community
is
affected.
It
is
hoped
that
the
work
of
this
Task
Force
is
just
a
starting
point
for
decisions
and
future
work
that
affects
the
common
good.
In
addition
to
identifying
current
common
challenges,
the
Task
Force’s
work
has
also
shined
a
light
on
additional
sets
of
challenges
on
the
horizon.
Per
the
Task
Force’s
charge,
these
major
issues
are
outlined
below
along
with
options
for
elected
officials
to
consider.
Challenges
shared
by
the
City
and
County
can
be
grouped
into
the
following
“Big
Three”
categories:
•
Law
Enforcement
and
the
Criminal
Justice
System
•
Unfunded
State
and
Federal
Mandates
•
City
and
County
Financial
Stability
Within
each
of
the
“Big
Three”
are
urgent
issues
that
need
to
be
addressed
within
the
next
12-‐18
months,
as
well
as
issues
that
must
be
addressed
over
the
mid-‐term
and
long
term.
Among
the
issues
discussed
in
the
“Big
Three”
categories
are
three
very
specific
issues
that
rose
to
the
top
as
needing
to
be
addressed.
The
Task
Force
thinks
that
the
following
are
the
most
pressing
specific
issues
at
this
time:
•
Jail
Overcrowding
•
Stormwater
Funding
•
County’s
Financial
Situation
It
should
be
noted
that
throughout
this
document,
the
term
“City”
refers
to
the
City
of
Springfield
and
the
term
“County”
refers
to
the
entire
Greene
County,
which
includes
the
City
of
Springfield.
While
many
tend
to
refer
to
these
terms
as
exclusive
(e.g.,
the
County
is
separate
from
the
City)
and
they
are
separate
governmental
entities,
the
Task
Force
recognizes
the
City
of
Springfield
is
part
of
Greene
County.
The
Task
Force
also
recognizes
the
tight
connection
between
“City”
and
“County”
issues
and
provides
this
report
to
City
and
County
elected
officials
in
hopes
these
issues
can
be
addressed
for
the
benefit
of
both
entities.
1
“The
Big
Three”
Law
Enforcement
and
the
Criminal
Justice
System
Law
enforcement
and
the
criminal
justice
system
is,
in
fact,
a
system,
and
it
is
experiencing
a
systemic
problem.
A
single,
comprehensive
solution
is
one
option
to
be
considered.
A
piecemeal
solution
will
only
move
the
problem
to
another
area
and
not
fully
address
the
problem.
Near-‐Term
Issues
(issues
requiring
attention
within
18
months)
•
Jail
overcrowding,
which
is
now
at
a
critical
point,
is
a
symptom
of
larger,
system-‐wide
issues.
Nevertheless,
the
jail
population
must
be
addressed
soon.
•
State
under-‐funds
jail
operations.
•
Law
Enforcement
Sales
Tax
(LEST
I)
expenses
exceed
revenues.
•
Mental
health
impact
on
crime
and
jail
operations.
Mid-‐Term
Issues
(issues
requiring
attention
with
18-‐36
months)
•
Expansion
of
the
Judicial
Courts
Building,
Juvenile
Detention
Center
and
Municipal
Court
facilities,
plus
additional
Prosecutors
and
Public
Defenders,
will
be
needed
to
address
systemic
issues
in
the
law
enforcement
and
criminal
justice
system.
•
Expansion
of
the
jail
ultimately
cannot
be
avoided
no
matter
how
much
effort
may
be
put
into
case
management,
crime
prevention
or
other
measures.
•
Radio
system
replacement
needed.
Long-‐Term
Issues
(issues
requiring
attention
in
36+
months)
•
These
issues
will
affect
crime
rates
and
overall
public
safety
and
quality
of
life
for
our
community
if
left
unaddressed.
Unfunded
Federal
and
State
Mandates
The
City
of
Springfield,
Greene
County,
and
Springfield
City
Utilities
have
partnered
to
create
a
first-‐of-‐
its-‐kind
Integrated
Plan
for
the
Environment
that
has
been
proposed
in
an
attempt
to
make
compliance
with
Federal
mandates
as
affordable
for
our
citizens
as
possible,
while
still
protecting
the
environment.
Our
community
has
been,
and
intends
to
continue
to
be,
good
environmental
stewards
who
recognize
the
link
between
our
environment
and
our
local
economy.
This
is
a
careful
balancing
act
that
affects
every
community
throughout
the
country
and
needs
to
be
addressed
at
the
federal
level.
There
is
no
doubt
that
compliance
with
these
mandates
will
cost
our
citizens
more.
The
question
is
how
much
more?
And
how
do
these
mandates
impact
“the
least
among
us”
who
are
already
under-‐resourced?
Near-‐Term
Issues
(issued
requiring
attention
within
18
months)
•
Overall,
unfunded
federal
and
state
mandates
have
the
potential
to
be
2
the
largest
dollar
impact
on
our
community
over
the
next
10-‐20
years.
Whether
implemented
via
utility
rate
increases,
a
stormwater
tax,
sewer
rate
increases,
or
air
quality
actions,
the
funding
source
is
the
same
–
our
citizens.
Through
our
integrated
planning
approach,
“community
affordability”
is
strongly
encouraged
with
our
federal
and
state
authorities.
•
The
City’s
and
County’s
recent
loss
of
stormwater
funding
(as
the
Parks-‐Stormwater
Sales
Tax
sunset
in
2012),
combined
with
increasing
environmental
regulatory
standards/costs,
will
make
it
difficult
to
comply
with
federal
and
state
regulations.
Sewer
rate
increases
will
be
required
to
comply
with
these
regulations.
•
City
Utilities
will
be
forced
to
pass
along
rate
increases
to
cover
compliance
costs.
•
Continuing
shift
of
funding
burden
from
Federal
and
State
level
to
local
governments
will
be
an
ongoing
challenge.
As
noted
above,
the
State’s
shifting
of
jail
expenses
to
the
local
level
is
one
example.
Mid-‐Term
Issues
(issued
requiring
attention
18-‐36
months)
(combine
the
two
below)
•
There
is
little
or
no
funding
for
stormwater
operations
to
maintain
existing
systems
in
the
City
of
Springfield
or
the
County
areas
outside
the
City
of
Springfield.
•
No
funding
to
improve
stormwater
systems
in
poor
condition
and
to
reduce
flood
damage
risk
and
improve
public
safety.
Long-‐Term
Issues
(issued
requiring
attention
36+
months)
•
Based
upon
preliminary
estimates,
expected
state
and
federal
environmental
mandates
could
potentially
cost
our
community
as
much
as
$1.6
billion
over
the
next
20
years.
City
and
County
Financial
Stability
Near-‐Term
Issues
(issues
requiring
attention
within
18
months)
•
The
County’s
General
Fund
budget
continues
to
be
unsustainable.
•
Increasing
erosion
of
revenue
bases.
Mid-‐Term
Issues
(issued
requiring
attention
18-‐36
months)
•
County
animal
control
program.
•
Animal
Shelter
(City
and
County
shared
facility).
•
Employee
recruitment
and
regention
(City
and
County).
•
Lifecycle
replacement
of
capital,
including
police/deputy
vehicles,
fire
vehicles,
information
technology
infrastructure,
neglected
building
maintenance
Long-‐Term
Issues
(Issues
requiring
attention
36+
months)
•
City
General
Fund
long-‐term
financial
stability.
•
Public
Health
funding
•
Funding
for
many
infrastructure
replacement
needs
•
Funding
for
needed
new
facilities
and
maintenance
of
existing
facilities.
3
Joint City-County Planning Task Force
Final
Report
December
2014
Task
Force
Charge:
The
Joint
City-‐County
Planning
Task
Force,
formed
by
the
Mayor
and
County
Commission
in
July
2013,
was
given
the
following
charge:
Through
a
series
of
meetings,
develop
an
internal
report
addressing
the
following:
•
Identify
mutual
fiscal
and
service
delivery
challenges,
both
current
and
future
•
Identify
options
to
address
current
and
anticipated
fiscal
and
service
delivery
challenges
via
increased
efficiencies,
service/cost
reductions,
and/or
revenue
enhancements
•
Develop
“dashboard”
performance
metrics
that
can
be
used
by
both
the
City
and
County
to
monitor
progress
(or
lack
thereof)
in
key
areas
Membership:
The
Task
Force
was
composed
of
key
management
staff
from
both
organizations.
It
was
not
intended
to
be
a
citizen
task
force.
The
group
was
not
charged
with
making
recommendations.
Its
purpose
was
to
explore
the
topics
given,
provide
options
for
addressing
issues
and
develop
metrics
to
monitor
performance
and
progress.
This
information
will
be
utilized
by
the
City
Council
and
County
Commission
to
determine
policy
and
funding
priorities.
It
is
anticipated
that
in
making
these
determinations,
the
Council
and
Commission
will
seek
additional
input
from
citizens
and
key
stakeholders.
The
following
key
managers
were
appointed
to
serve
on
the
Task
Force:
Co-‐Chairs:
City
Manager
Greg
Burris
and
County
Administrator
Tim
Smith
Five
Staff
Members
from
the
City
of
Springfield
City
Manager
Greg
Burris
Deputy
City
Manager
Fred
Marty
(later
Tim
Smith)
Assistant
City
Manager
Collin
Quigley
Director
of
Finance
Mary
Mannix-‐Decker
Fifth
Member
designated
based
on
topic(s)
being
discussed
Five
Staff
Members
from
Greene
County
County
Administrator
Tim
Smith
(later
acting
administrator
Chris
Coulter)
Prosecuting
Attorney
Dan
Patterson
Budget
Officer
Martha
Mundt
Auditor
Cindy
Stein
Fifth
Member
designated
based
on
topic(s)
being
discussed
4
The
following
topics
were
suggested
by
staff
for
Task
Force
discussion:
•
Stormwater
Funding
•
Unfunded
environmental
mandates
•
Employee
recruitment/retention/compensation
•
Healthcare
costs
and
wellness
•
Unfunded
capital
needs
•
Lifecycle
capital
replacement
costs
•
Law
enforcement
costs
•
Fuel
costs
•
Being
perceived
as
"business/development
friendly"
•
Need
for
more
civic
engagement
•
Growth
planning
•
Economic
development
•
Facilities
for
courts
•
Public
health
funding
disparity
and
service
impact
•
Information
systems
(shared)
•
Sales
tax
fluctuations
=
difficult
budget
projections
•
Shared
services
Health
9-‐1-‐1
Emergency
Communication
Emergency
Management
Parks
Library
•
Public
trust/distrust
Use
of
citizen
task
forces
Transparency
•
Communication
with
customers/citizens
In
addition,
a
call
was
issued
for
citizens
to
contribute
topics
for
discussion.
In
order
for
a
citizen
suggested
topic
to
be
included
on
the
Task
Force
agenda,
it
had
to
be
sponsored
by
an
elected
representative
on
City
Council
or
County
Commission.
As
a
result
of
this
process,
the
following
two
topics
were
added
for
consideration
by
the
Task
Force:
•
Consolidation
of
City
and
County
Services/Charter
Government
for
Greene
County
•
Animal
Control
5
Background
Nearly
58%
of
Greene
County
citizens
reside
within
the
Springfield
city
limits.
Eighty-‐five
(85)
percent
of
sales
tax
revenue
in
Greene
County
is
generated
within
the
City
of
Springfield.
The
City
and
County
jointly
administer
the
Urban
Services
Area
around
the
City
of
Springfield.
The
City
and
County
have
joint
departments
for
public
health,
library,
9-‐1-‐1
emergency
communication
services,
emergency
management
services
and
parks.
Greene
County
provides
criminal
courts,
prosecution,
a
jail
and
juvenile
services
for
the
citizens
of
Springfield.
The
vast
majority
of
adult
civil
and
criminal
cases
and
juvenile
cases
are
generated
within
the
City
of
Springfield.
Countywide
sales
taxes
for
parks,
9-‐1-‐1,
law
enforcement
and
roads
are
shared
by
both
organizations.
It
is
no
surprise
that
city
and
county
challenges,
opportunities,
and
finances
are
closely
intertwined.
In
the
past,
when
joint
financial
planning
has
been
done
–
usually
for
a
shared
tax
initiative
–
little
attention
has
been
given
outside
the
immediate
scope
of
the
initiative
to
a
broader
understanding
of
the
operations
and
finances
of
both
entities.
As
finances
have
become
more
strained,
contention
has
increased
over
distribution
of
shared
revenue,
particularly
in
the
area
of
law
enforcement.
The
distribution
of
the
1997
Law
Enforcement
Sales
Tax
revenues
has
been
a
source
of
contention
between
the
City
and
County
for
a
number
of
years.
Continued
increases
in
inmate
population
and
operational
costs
have
sparked
renewed
attention
in
how
the
tax
revenue
is
distributed.
In
June
2013,
as
a
part
of
its
financial
planning
process,
the
County
invited
the
City
to
make
a
presentation
to
County
leadership
about
how
the
City
spends
its
portion
of
the
Law
Enforcement
Sales
Tax.
In
part,
as
an
outgrowth
of
this
discussion,
it
was
suggested
that
it
could
be
mutually
beneficial
for
both
organizations
to
take
a
more
comprehensive
look
at
areas
of
joint
interest.
Springfield
Mayor
Bob
Stephens
proposed
the
formation
of
a
Joint
City-‐County
Planning
Task
Force
for
this
purpose
and
the
Greene
County
Commission
endorsed
the
proposal.
The
Task
Force
conducted
27
meetings
between
July
2013
and
November
2014.
The
research
and
study
done
both
in
preparation
for
and
during
the
course
of
those
meetings
shined
a
light
on
additional
sets
of
challenges
on
the
horizon.
Per
the
Task
Force’s
charge,
these
issues
are
outlined
below
along
with
options
for
elected
officials
to
consider.
Challenges
shared
by
the
City
and
County
can
be
grouped
into
the
following
“Big
Three”
categories:
Law
Enforcement
and
the
Criminal
Justice
System;
Unfunded
State
and
Federal
Mandates
and
City
and
County
Financial
Stability.
Law
Enforcement
and
the
Criminal
Justice
System
Greene
County
Jail
The
overcrowding
situation
in
the
jail
is
at
critical
point.
It
is
not
noticed
outside
of
the
circles
of
those
who
operate
and
manage
the
jail,
but
a
closer
look
shows
that
the
consequences
of
an
overcrowded
jail
could
affect
our
community’s
safety.
Most
people
don’t
realize
the
growing
list
of
crimes,
including
6
burglaries,
thefts,
assaults
and
lower-‐level
sex
offenses,
for
which
offenders
are
booked
and
released
because
there
is
no
jail
space.
The
jail
was
built
to
house
500
inmates.
Up
until
2010,
the
number
of
inmates
remained
within
that
number
for
the
most
part.
Beginning
in
2011,
the
population
rose
sharply
to
an
average
between
550
and
600
inmates.
In
2013,
the
jail’s
population
rose
sharply
again,
reaching
700
inmates.
It
continues
to
rise
in
2014.
To
cope
with
this,
the
County
has
been
housing
inmates
in
other
jails
across
the
state.
At
the
present
time,
Greene
County
is
paying
for
all
available
jail
bed
space
within
150
miles
of
Springfield.
Even
with
inmates
housed
in
other
counties,
the
number
of
inmates
remaining
in
the
jail
remains
between
600
and
640.
In
the
summer
of
2014
the
County
remodeled
part
of
the
jail
and
increased
the
capacity
to
592
inmates,
but
that
only
served
as
a
stopgap
measure.
A
more
permanent
solution
is
needed.
What
happens
if
we
do
nothing
about
this?
Other
counties
facing
the
same
issue
may
provide
insight
into
what
the
consequences
of
inaction
may
be.
Overcrowding
conditions
across
the
country
have
resulted
in
thousands
of
lawsuits,
including
a
notable
case
in
Jackson
County,
MO.
Complaints
filed
in
federal
court
could
also
lead
to
the
court
imposing
requirements
for
managing
jail
population
safely,
regardless
of
the
cost
to
the
community.
Why
should
this
matter
to
Springfield
residents?
The
1997
LEST
I
agreements
were
discussed
by
the
Task
Force
at
meetings
Aug.
7
and
Aug.
21,
2013.
It
was
noted
that
58%
of
bookings
at
the
jail
originate
from
the
Springfield
Police
Department
and
over
75%
of
all
felonies
prosecuted
by
the
Greene
County
Prosecuting
Attorney’s
Office
are
Springfield
Police
Department
cases.
Building
a
larger
jail
alone
does
not
solve
the
problem.
The
jail
is
a
symptom
of
a
larger,
more
systemic
problem
within
the
criminal
justice
system.
The
jail
is
not
a
prison.
The
jail
primarily
houses
people
(defendants)
who
have
been
accused
of
a
crime,
but
have
not
yet
been
sentenced.
The
only
way
to
move
defendants
out
of
the
jail
is
to
resolve
their
cases
via
the
criminal
justice
system.
That
requires
judges,
prosecutors,
and
public
defenders
–
and
a
place
to
house
them.
The
County
courthouse
is
currently
full
to
capacity.
Even
if
more
judges
and
prosecutors
were
hired,
there
is
no
facility
for
them
to
work.
Further,
if
the
City
of
Springfield
adds
more
police
officers
or
Greene
County
adds
more
deputies,
the
rest
of
the
system
cannot
accommodate
the
additional
inmates
that
could
result.
Springfield
Police
staffing,
in
particular,
is
an
interesting
challenge.
Springfield
pays
its
academy
participants
while
they
are
being
trained.
This
training
takes
nine
months
–
six
months
in
the
academy,
plus
three
months
of
field
training.
Thus,
these
academy
participants
are
counted
as
sworn
police
officers
in
the
City’s
staffing
numbers
while
they
are
being
trained,
since
they
are
being
paid.
Given
the
constant
“churn”
of
new
officers
being
trained
via
the
academy
while
more-‐experienced
7
officers
retire
or
resign,
there
is
a
consistent
staffing
level
that
is
less
than
the
Council-‐approved
authorized
police
staffing.
At
status
quo,
this
will
not
change.
A
systemic
problem
requires
a
systemic
solution.
Trying
to
solve
the
jail
capacity
challenge
without
confronting
the
underlying
issues
of
the
entire
criminal
justice
system
is
like
trying
to
cure
a
medical
disease
by
only
addressing
its
symptoms
and
not
getting
to
the
root
cause.
Some
of
our
citizens
and
elected
officials
are
asking
for
more
police
–
but
will
our
community
be
safer
if
we
have
no
place
to
house
criminals
they
apprehend?
Options
to
address
Law
Enforcement
and
Criminal
Justice
System
issues:
•
Strongly
urge
the
State
of
Missouri
to
honor
statutory
commitment
to
reimburse
inmate
housing
costs.
•
Request
that
both
the
state
and
federal
governments
refrain
from
mandates
that
place
additional
public
safety
costs
on
cities
and
counties,
which
would
make
the
funding
shortfall
even
more
severe.
•
Sales
tax
to
raise
funds
needed
for
personnel
and
facilities.
Available
options
include
another
countywide
law
enforcement
sales
tax
or
countywide
general
revenue
sales
tax.
*
New
City
sales
taxes
are
not
an
option
until
the
Police-‐Fire
Pension
Fund
sales
tax
sunsets,
per
City
Council
commitment
to
voters.
•
Eliminate
County
services
that
are
not
required
by
state
statute,
albeit
very
few
remain.
Unfunded
Federal
and
State
Mandates
Another
immediate
problem
is
the
lack
of
stormwater
funding
for
infrastructure
replacement
and
to
meet
environmental
regulations.
Unfunded
mandates
is
a
potentially
larger
dollar
item
than
any
other
that
will
affect
the
City
and
County
in
the
near
future.
How
do
we
know
this?
Since
its
formation
in
1972,
the
EPA
has
steadily
been
increasing
enforcement
of
all
provisions
of
the
Clean
Water
Act.
In
the
1970s,
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency’s
(EPA)
early
years,
enforcement
efforts
focused
more
on
the
basics
–
making
sure
communities
had
sanitary
sewers
and
functioning
treatment
plants.
Over
the
past
25
years,
attention
has
been
focused
on
“point
sources”
of
pollution,
such
as
wastewater
treatment
plants.
Springfield
has
spent
$205
million
over
the
last
24
years
in
required
compliance
efforts.
More
recently,
attention
has
shifted
to
preventing
sewer
“overflows”
that
occur
during
large
rains.
These
overflows
release
millions
of
gallons
of
untreated
sewage
across
the
country
each
year,
including
in
Springfield
and
Greene
County.
EPA
has
mandated
that
sewer
overflows
be
controlled.
In
2012,
the
City
of
Springfield,
entered
into
a
“consent
decree”,
a
court-‐ordered
agreement
that
requires
the
City
take
a
series
of
actions
to
control
overflows.
In
December
2014,
the
City
will
submit
to
the
Missouri
Department
of
Natural
Resources
8
(DNR)
a
“Long-‐term
Sanitary
Sewer
Overflow
Control
Plan”
estimated
to
cost
$200
million
over
the
next
10
years.
This
plan
must
be
funded
by
increased
sewer
rates.
Other
communities
in
the
country
are
being
required
by
Federal
court
orders
to
do
the
same
thing,
with
very
large
expenditures.
In
Missouri,
this
includes
St.
Louis,
$4.7
billion
(with
a
B!),
Kansas
City,
$4.5
billion
and
St.
Joseph
at
$462
million.
Stormwater
Management
Over
the
past
25
years,
the
Federal
government
has
enacted
a
series
of
amendments
to
the
Clean
Water
Act
that
address
“non-‐point
source”
pollution.
This
includes
stormwater
runoff.
EPA
and
DNR
now
require
cities
like
Springfield
and
Greene
County,
to
have
a
“Municipal
Separate
Storm
Sewer
System”
permit
(known
in
the
industry
as
an
“MS4”).
Failure
to
comply
with
the
MS4
permit
can
result
in
fines
of
$10,000
to
$25,000
per
day,
depending
on
the
nature
of
the
violation.
Just
like
what
is
happening
now
with
sanitary
sewer
overflows,
EPA
and
DNR
are
increasing
requirements
for
stormwater
discharge.
Though
we
don’t
like
the
rate
increases
required
to
pay
for
complying
with
our
consent
decree
for
wastewater,
we
at
least
have
the
ability
through
our
sewer
rates
to
pay
for
what
we
must
do.
This
is
not
the
case
with
stormwater.
Stormwater
has
always
been
an
“orphan
child”,
partly
paid
from
road
funds,
partly
from
other
sources,
but
no
dedicated
funding.
The
parks
tax
provided
an
innovative
way
to
stretch
dollars
by
implementing
parks
and
open
space
projects
that
also
provided
flood
control
and
water
quality
benefits.
These
projects
proved
to
be
very
popular
with
citizens
as
well.
Revenue
from
that
tax
also
funded
the
minimum
programs
needed
to
comply
with
our
stormwater
permits.
However,
that
portion
of
the
sales
tax
sunset
in
mid-‐2012.
Both
the
City
and
County
have
cut
programs
and
conserved
as
much
money
as
possible,
but
both
will
run
out
of
money
for
this
program
in
2015.
EPA
is
not
required
to
consider
whether
a
community
has
a
funding
source
for
mandated
stormwater
programs.
Based
on
the
findings
of
the
2013
Stormwater
Management
Task
Force,
the
current
additional
need
for
the
City
and
County
stormwater
programs
is
$7.75
million
annually,
projected
to
increase
to
$11
million
annually
by
2020.
This
is
the
funding
required
to
address
three
major
areas
of
stormwater
management:
ongoing
operating
expenses
including
water
quality
mandates,
infrastructure
repair/replacement,
and
flood
risk
reduction.
The
cost
to
comply
with
water
quality
related
stormwater
mandates
for
both
the
City
and
the
County,
independent
of
infrastructure
and
flooding
needs,
was
estimated
by
the
Task
Force
to
be
approximately
$1.5
million
currently
and
to
steadily
increase
to
$2.8
Million
by
2020.
It
should
be
noted
that
this
estimate
does
not
include
some
of
the
unknown,
and
potentially
significant,
federal
mandates
related
to
Total
Maximum
Daily
Loads
(TMDLs).
9
Other
Mandates
and
Cost
Shifting
There
are
also
stringent
rules
expected
for
drinking
water,
air
quality
and
landfills.
Altogether,
we
estimate
that
unfunded
federal
environmental
mandates
could
cost
our
community
at
least
$1.6
billion
over
the
next
20
years.
This
is
unaffordable
for
some
of
our
citizens,
particular
those
with
low
incomes.
In
order
to
minimize
these
impacts,
the
City
and
County
and
City
Utilities
proposed
the
first
Integrated
Plan
for
the
Environment
of
its
kind
in
the
country.
It
is
our
hope
that
by
focused,
common
sense
applications
we
will
be
able
to
reduce
this
cost
as
much
as
possible
for
our
citizens,
while
still
meeting
environmental
goals.
We
are
already
seeing
some
benefits
of
this
approach.
Using
traditional
methods
our
wastewater
overflow
control
plan
could
cost
as
much
as
$800
million.
Using
the
approach,
the
City
proposes
using
the
integrated
plan
approach
to
hold
this
cost
to
“only”
$200
million.
While
that
is
still
a
staggering
figure,
it
is
still
a
vast
potential
savings.
In
addition
to
environmental
mandates,
increased
Federal
and
State
requirements,
such
as
Health
Insurance
Portability
and
Privacy
Act
(HIPPA),
Americans
with
Disabilities
Act
(ADA),
and
other
requirements
will
continue
to
add
cost
to
many
of
the
City’s
and
County’s
operations.
Reductions
of
State
and
Federal
funding
also
continue
to
shift
costs
to
the
City
and
County.
For
example,
if
the
State
fully
funded
inmate
per
diem
for
the
jail
at
$37.50
per
day
as
set
by
State
law,
the
County
would
receive
an
additional
$2.7
to
$3
million
per
year
toward
jail
operations
that
are
otherwise
cost
shifted
to
local
citizens.
With
the
failure
of
the
statewide
transportation
sales
tax
last
August,
MODOT
has
eliminated
$3.5
million
in
Springfield-‐Greene
County
annually
that
was
used
for
cost
share
projects
very
popular
with
citizens.
Recent
projects
are
the
James
River
Freeway
and
Highway
65
interchange
improvements
and
lane
additions
of
Hwy
65
between
Route
60
and
I-‐44.
Future
projects
such
as
these
will
now
have
to
rely
solely
on
local
funding
for
the
foreseeable
future.
The
state’s
reduction/elimination
of
mental
health
funding
during
the
past
decade
has
placed
cities
and
counties
in
the
position
of
either
(a)
replacing
those
services
at
the
local
taxpayer’s
expense,
(b)
ignoring
the
problem,
or
(c)
using
the
county
jail
as
the
“service
provider
of
choice”
by
default
at
the
local
taxpayer’s
expense.
Budget
reductions
to
community
health
programs,
especially
mental
health
and
substance
abuse
programs,
pose
a
serious
and
immediate
impact
to
locally-‐funded
programs,
such
as
jails
and
emergency
rooms.
There
is
a
strong
correlation
between
the
amount
of
money
a
community
spends
on
mental
health
and
substance
abuse
services
and
the
size
of
jail
populations.
People
with
mental
illness
or
substance
abuse
issues,
frequently
come
into
contact
with
law
enforcement
for
behaviors
and
actions
that
result
from
their
mental
illness.
When
an
individual
with
a
serious
mental
illness
or
substance
abuse
issue,
does
not
receive
the
services
necessary
to
manage
their
illness,
they
are
more
likely
to
engage
in
behaviors
like
trespassing
or
minor
theft
that
cause
contact
with
the
criminal
justice
system.
The
financial
consequence
of
shifting
the
burden
of
treating
people
with
mental
illness
to
jails
is
significant.
The
average
daily
cost
of
jail
for
an
inmate
with
a
serious
illness
is
more
than
double
that
of
an
inmate
with
a
serious
illness.
10
Options
to
address
Unfunded
Federal
and
State
mandates:
•
Provide
additional
funding
for
stormwater
via:
-‐
1/8-‐cent
parks-‐storm
water
sales
tax.
-‐
1/10-‐cent
countywide
water
quality
sales
tax.
-‐
Stormwater
user
fee
(stormwater
utility).
*
New
City
sales
taxes
are
not
an
option
until
the
Police-‐Fire
Pension
Fund
sales
tax
sunsets
(2020
at
the
earliest),
per
a
City
Council
commitment
to
voters.
•
Make
cuts
in,
or
eliminate
services
not
required
by
state
statute
to
shift
funding
from
existing
sources
to
this
purpose.
This
would
be
a
minimal
number,
however.
•
Strongly
urge
the
Missouri
legislature
to
restore
funding
to
the
Department
of
Natural
Resources
so
that
some
of
the
fees
that
DNR
charges
cities
and
counties
can
be
reduced.
Missouri’s
permit
fees
are
significantly
higher
than
other
states.
•
Strongly
urge
state
and
United
States
congressional
delegation
to
encourage
adoption
of
our
Integrated
Planning
approach
and
to
require
EPA
to
consider
community
affordability
when
dictating
unfunded
mandates.
•
Comply
with
the
many
varied
mandates
for
air,
land
and
water
quality
in
the
order
in
which
they
are
mandated.
The
cost
for
compliance
will
be
passed
along
costs
to
citizens
in
the
form
of
increased
utility
rates,
fees,
and
taxes.
•
Comply
with
mandates,
using
an
integrated
approach
to
ensure
that
we
are
addressing
issues
relative
to
their
impact
on
the
environment
and
to
the
degree
in
which
they
address
a
community
priority.
Any
environmental
investments
would
be
viewed
in
the
context
of
overall
community
affordability.
•
Our
existing
local
environmental
protection
programs
can
be
examined
to
ensure
that
there
is
minimal
redundancy
among
different
programs
and
that
we've
maximized
efficiencies
and
multi-‐benefit
solutions.
This
would
maximize
the
effectiveness
of
the
programs
we
currently
have
in
place.
•
Do
not
comply
with
mandates,
forcing
the
issue
to
court
where
we
will
likely
be
required
to
comply
with
federal
law.
For
other
communities,
this
has
often
resulted
in
a
higher
ultimate
cost
of
compliance.
•
Appeal
upcoming
mandates
on
one
of
a
variety
of
legal,
technical,
or
financial
grounds.
While
this
can
sometimes
delay
the
costs
associated
with
compliance,
the
individual
results
are
very
specific
to
the
mandate.
City
and
County
Financial
Stability
County
Budget
The
County’s
financial
situation
continues
to
be
a
serious
concern.
The
County’s
current
five-‐year
“High
Involvement
Plan”
forecasts
that
the
County’s
General
Fund
balance
will
continue
to
decline.
Adding
to
this
problem,
the
County
will
lose
vehicle
sales
tax
revenue
beginning
in
2017
if
an
election
to
restore
this
existing
tax
is
not
approved
by
voters
by
November
2016.
If
not
approved
by
voters,
11
the
loss
of
this
revenue
will
cost
the
County
an
estimated
$1.75
million
dollars
per
year
for
all
sales
taxes
($350,000
per
year
from
the
general
fund).
County
sales
taxes
currently
fund
the
following
services:
•
¼-‐cent
–
General
Revenue
•
¼-‐cent
–
Road
&
Bridge
•
¼-‐cent
-‐
Law
Enforcement
Sales
Tax
I
(LEST
I)
•
1/8-‐cent
-‐
Law
Enforcement
Sales
Tax
II
(LEST
II):
•
3/8-‐cent
-‐
Parks
Sales
Taxes
•
1/8-‐cent
-‐
9-‐1-‐1
Sales
Tax
Law
enforcement
costs,
primarily
operating
costs
for
the
jail,
will
continue
to
consume
the
majority
of
the
County’s
General
Fund
budget.
As
a
result,
additional
cuts
in
non-‐law
enforcement
services,
such
as
those
already
made
in
animal
control,
will
most
likely
be
necessary
if
alternative
solutions
are
not
found.
The
County,
however,
has
a
limited
number
of
services
that
can
be
cut
that
are
not
mandated
by
the
state.
Because
of
its
financial
situation,
the
County
has
been
unable
to
keep
employee
pay
competitive
with
the
market.
In
September,
the
County
gave
its
first
pay
increase
of
any
kind
(3%)
in
nearly
seven
years.
County
salaries,
however,
remain
more
than
20%
lower
than
comparable
agencies.
As
a
result,
there
has
been
an
exodus
of
experienced
employees
–
and
the
County
is
struggling
to
attract
qualified
replacements
for
the
salaries
they
can
offer.
Why
should
the
County’s
financial
situation
be
a
concern
to
the
City?
Perhaps
most
importantly,
though
funded
through
the
County,
the
criminal
justice
system
primarily
serves
residents
of
Springfield.
Prosecuting
Attorney
Dan
Patterson
estimates
that
75%
of
the
cases
filed
by
his
office
are
for
arrests
made
in
Springfield.
The
1997
Law
Enforcement
Sales
Tax
(LEST
I)
continues
to
be
a
vexing
problem
for
both
the
City
and
County.
For
a
number
of
years,
revenue
from
the
tax
has
not
been
sufficient
to
cover
the
expenses
for
the
services
promised
to
voters
when
the
tax
was
passed.
The
City
runs
an
annual
deficit
of
approximately
$855,000
for
this
fund,
which
must
be
subsidized
by
the
City’s
General
Fund
each
year.
The
County
runs
an
annual
deficit
of
$1.6
million
per
year,
which
must
be
subsidized
by
the
County’s
General
Fund
each
year.
Without
this
drain,
the
City
and
County
General
Funds
would
be
more
stable.
But
these
are
inherited
agreements
that
must
be
abided
by
to
maintain
citizen
trust.
The
City’s
financial
situation
is
currently
better
than
the
County’s.
Current
long-‐term
forecasts
show
that
as
the
Springfield
community
continues
to
grow,
the
demand
for
services
continues
to
increase.
The
City’s
current
revenue
base
is
not
likely
adequate
to
fund
these
increased
service
demands.
As
operational
costs
(including
personnel
costs)
continue
to
increase,
and
without
an
adequate
funding
source
for
lifecycle
capital
replacements
and
one-‐time
capital
needs,
the
City
will
need
to
consider
service
reductions
if
a
significant
new
revenue
source
is
not
available.
The
City’s
10-‐year
budget
analysis
is
expected
to
be
available
for
review
by
Spring
2015.
12
Permanent
and
reliable
funding
sources
have
not
been
identified
for
some
current
and
future
needs.
Neither
the
City
nor
the
County
has
a
funding
source
for
the
lifecycle
replacement
of
capital
equipment,
such
as
police
vehicles
and
fire
engines.
The
inability
to
provide
competitive
pay
is
also
an
issue
for
the
City,
which
could
erode
the
quality
of
services
the
City
can
provide.
The
strain
on
the
City
and
County
General
Funds
is
inhibiting
or
preventing
progress
in
a
number
of
areas
that
are
cause
for
concern.
Among
these
are:
•
Public
Health
Funding:
Cuts
in
State,
Federal
and
County
support
have
made
it
increasingly
difficult
for
the
Public
Health
Department
to
maintain
services.
Public
Health
provides
programs
that
are
essential
in
addressing
physical,
mental
health,
and
social
problems,
which
in
turn
affect
the
cost
of
the
criminal
justice
system
since
many
of
these
individuals
end
up
in
incarcerated.
•
Lifecycle
Capital
Replacement:
Neither
the
City
nor
the
County
has
a
funded
program
for
lifecycle
replacement
of
vehicles,
information
technology
infrastructure,
or
other
capital
needs
within
the
General
Fund.
Police,
Fire,
and
Sheriff
vehicles
present
the
majority
of
this
expense.
While
federal
grants
have
been
used
to
try
to
keep
pace
with
needs
in
the
past,
continued
cuts
at
the
Federal
level
have
eliminated
much
of
this
funding.
•
Facility
Maintenance:
While
neither
the
City
nor
the
County
has
sufficient
funds
available
to
fund
ongoing
facility
maintenance
needs,
this
is
particularly
severe
in
the
County,
whereby
nearly
all
building
upkeep
funding
has
been
eliminated
from
the
budget.
This
may
be
a
necessary
evil
in
the
short
term,
but
is
unwise
in
the
long
term.
•
Constructing
Facilities:
Needed
facilities,
such
as
a
new
animal
shelter
and
fire
station,
remain
on
hold
because
no
funds
are
available
within
the
City’s
budgets.
•
Springfield-‐Greene
County
Park
System:
Because
of
the
County's
financial
situation
and
inability
to
fund
urgent
law
enforcement
needs,
the
planned
renewal
of
the
parks
sales
tax
was
not
placed
on
the
ballot
in
2011.
As
a
result
the
third
phase
of
the
20-‐year
Parks,
Open
Space
and
Greenways
plan
adopted
as
a
part
of
Vision
20/20
was
placed
on
hold.
While
the
Park
Board
has
been
resourceful
in
making
as
much
progress
as
possible,
lack
of
anticipated
funds
from
the
sales
tax
renewal
has
caused
a
delay
the
projects
included
in
the
third
phase
of
the
plan.
Springfield
and
Greene
County
continue
have
a
shortage
of
land
banked
for
public
use
when
compared
to
other
communities.
The
next
phase
of
the
Parks
sales
tax
needs
to
be
approved
by
the
voters
in
order
for
progress
to
continue
on
the
20-‐year
plan.
Both
the
City
and
County
rely
heavily
on
sales
tax
revenue.
Sales
tax
provides
57%
of
the
revenue
for
the
City’s
general
fund
and
33%
for
the
County’s
general
fund.
Sales
tax
revenue
is
tied
directly
to
the
strength
of
both
the
local
and
national
economies.
While
it
is
expected
that
revenue
will
improve
in
the
future,
the
economy
remains
fragile
and
sales
tax
revenues
are
much
more
volatile
than
other
funding
sources.
It
is
not
expected
that
a
robust
growth
in
sales
tax
will
occur
in
the
near
future,
so
both
the
City
and
County
will
likely
need
to
manage
the
anticipated
increase
in
expenses
by
13
eliminating
services
to
cut
costs
and
balance
budgets.
Compounding
this
problem
is
the
continuing
trend
of
shifting
costs
from
the
Federal
and
State
governments
to
local
governments
will
persist
as
lawmakers
lean
in
favor
of
more
funding
cuts
at
both
the
federal
and
state
level.
Both
the
City
and
the
County
have
suffered
a
significant
loss
of
revenues
due
to
non-‐taxed
Internet
sales.
Each
holiday
season,
the
media
reports
on
the
growing
number
of
purchases
conducted
online.
In
fact,
the
Nov.
27,
2014
edition
of
USA
Today
included
the
results
of
a
recent
poll
in
which
56%
of
those
polled
indicated
they
would
do
some
or
all
of
their
holiday
shopping
online.
The
amount
of
tax-‐
free,
Internet
shopping
conducted
in
the
future
is
anticipated
to
continue
to
increase;
thus,
this
problem
will
only
get
worse
if
left
unattended.
“Brick-‐and-‐mortar”
retail
stores
are
at
a
disadvantage,
since
they
must
charge
sales
tax.
Options
to
address
City
and
County
financial
stability
issues:
•
Renew
County
vehicle
sales
tax
by
November
2016.
•
County
Use
Tax
on
out-‐of-‐state
purchases.
Would
raise
an
additional
$4
million
per
year
for
the
County
budget.
•
Internet
sales
tax.
Endorse
and
aggressively
promote
legislative
changes
at
the
federal
and/or
state
level
that
would
“level
the
playing
field”
for
all
retailers
by
taxing
Internet
sales.
•
Strongly
urge
the
state
legislature
not
enact
tax
cuts
or
exemptions
that
reduce
City
or
County
revenue
from
existing,
voter-‐approved
sources.
•
Strongly
urge
the
State
and
Federal
government
leaders
to
refrain
from
enacting
further
unfunded
mandates
or
shift
costly
responsibilities
to
local
government.
•
Address
the
funding
inequity
between
City
and
County
residents
for
Public
Health
services.
Consider
a
Countywide
property
tax
for
public
health
services
in
conjunction
with
a
corresponding
reduction
in
the
City
property
tax
for
public
health
services.
This
would
attempt
to
reach
an
equilibrium
so
that
Springfield
residents
are
no
longer
subsidizing
non-‐Springfield
residents’
public
health
services
within
Greene
County.
•
Continue
to
examine
efficiencies
and
reduce
operating
costs
wherever
possible,
practical
and
effective.
Ask
staff
to
“dive
deeper”
into
specific
additional
services
that
can
be
combined
between
the
City
and
the
County.
•
Review
services
and
redirect
existing
funding
by
cutting
or
eliminating
some
services
in
order
to
fund
unfunded
needs
and/or
increased
operational
costs.
Is
Maintaining
the
Status
Quo
Viable?
The
charge
to
the
Joint
City-‐County
Planning
Task
Force
does
not
include
making
recommendations.
As
a
part
of
its
charge,
the
Task
Force
was
asked
to
provide
options
for
consideration
addressing
challenges
that
are
listed
throughout
this
report.
This
section
of
the
report
outlines
“likely
outcomes”
if
status
quo
continues.
14
Law
Enforcement
and
the
Criminal
Justice
System
The
County
is
at
a
point
where
something
must
be
done
to
alleviate
overcrowding
in
the
jail,
or
risk
potentially
millions
of
dollars
in
losses
if
a
serious
injury
should
occur
to
an
inmate
or
jail
staff
member,
or
a
lawsuit
results
in
a
Federal
court
mandate.
In
either
case,
the
likely
outcome
is
that
a
court
will
order
the
existing
overcrowded
conditions
be
alleviated.
This
could
come
in
the
form
of
a
court-‐ordered
cap
on
the
number
inmates
housed
in
the
jail.
In
order
to
comply
with
such
an
order,
the
County
would
need
to
either
reduce
the
inmate
population
by
releasing
inmates,
house
additional
inmates
in
other
jails,
or
some
combination
of
the
two.
There
are
no
pleasant
alternatives
to
reducing
the
jail
population.
The
Sheriff
is
required
by
law
to
accept
and
house
inmates
who
are
committed
to
the
jail
on
state
or
federal
charges.
It
is
only
through
outstanding
management
and
operation
of
the
jail
by
the
Sheriff
and
his
staff
that
the
jail
is
not
a
visible
community
crisis.
State
and
Federal
inmates
make
up
over
90%
of
the
jail
population.
This
leaves
three
options
to
reducing
the
jail
population:
Option
#
1.
Release
state
and/or
federal
inmates,
(state
and
federal
judges
are
the
only
ones
that
have
the
authority
to
this).
Option
#
2.
The
Sheriff
refuses
to
accept
municipal
inmates
due
to
the
jail
being
full
(in
violation
of
the
signed
agreement
between
the
City
and
County).
Option
#
3.
The
Sheriff
can
close
the
jail
if
he
feels
it
becomes
unsafe
for
officers
and
inmates.
Option
#1
would
release
state
and
federal
inmates
from
custody,
allowing
for
more
criminals
to
be
out
in
the
community.
Option
#
2
would
breach
the
1997
agreement
whereby
the
County
agreed
to
house
City
prisoners
in
return
for
the
City’s
support
of
the
LEST
I
sales
tax.
This
agreement,
signed
by
City
and
County
authorities,
is
made
binding
by
a
state
statute
that
was
passed
at
that
time
at
the
City’s
request.
The
City
would
have
no
choice
but
to
legally
challenge
any
such
action
by
the
County.
Under
Option
#3,
the
County
would
still
be
required
to
pay
for
housing
the
inmates
somewhere,
so
total
costs
would
likely
increase.
The
most
likely
near-‐term
results
of
the
third
option
would
be:
a)
The
County
would
be
forced
to
spend
additional
money
to
house
inmates
in
other
facilities.
Funds
for
this
would
have
to
be
cut
from
other
County
services
that
are
not
mandates
by
State
or
Federal
law.
The
problem
with
this
option
is
that
the
County
provides
very
few
services
that
are
not
mandated
by
State
or
Federal
law.
The
County
recently
suspended
animal
control
services
outside
the
City
of
Springfield
due
to
lack
of
funds.
Would
the
County
be
forced
to
consider
eliminating
Planning
&
Zoning
or
Building
Regulations
services?
These
services
are
not
required
by
State
or
Federal
law,
but
would
require
referendum
elections
for
repeal.
15
b)
The
Courts
could
agree
to
release
additional
inmates
on
bond.
However,
the
jail
is
already
so
over-‐crowded
that
the
County
is
forced
to
“book
and
release”
the
type
of
offenders
that
the
community
would
likely
consider
unacceptable.
Focusing
only
on
the
jail
addresses
only
a
symptom
of
an
overloaded
criminal
justice
system;
not
the
cause.
Shortages
of
prosecutors,
public
defenders,
and
support
staff
severely
limit
the
ability
to
move
more
cases
through
the
system.
Compounding
this
problem
is
the
lack
of
space.
Even
if
funding
were
available
for
additional
staff,
there
is
no
place
to
house
the
staff
and
no
funding
source
available
to
build
additional
space.
It’s
a
systemic
problem
that
will
require
action
that
takes
into
account
all
components
of
the
criminal
justice
system
to
effectively
address
the
challenges.
With
these
constraints,
we
can
expect
that
the
challenges
to
maintain
a
safe
community
will
only
increase.
We
can
expect
these
challenges
to
accelerate
over
time
as
the
population
within
the
Springfield
MSA
grows
and
our
ability
to
deter
crime
by
threats
of
jail
time
or
other
penalties
is
diminished.
Unfunded
Federal
and
State
Mandates
Our
immediate
concern
is
focused
on
our
ability
to
meet
the
requirements
of
our
state
and
federal
stormwater
permits.
With
the
loss
of
funding
due
to
the
sunset
of
the
countywide
Parks/Stormwater
Sales
Tax,
both
the
City
and
County
have
lost
the
vast
majority
of
funding
dedicated
to
maintaining
state
and
Federal
stormwater
permit
compliance.
How
will
these
mandates
be
funded
in
the
future?
Compliance
with
our
stormwater
permits,
however,
is
only
part
of
the
challenge.
As
noted
above,
environmental
regulation
will
have
to
be
met
concerning
air,
land,
drinking
water
and
wastewater.
The
combined
cost
of
meeting
the
current
and
anticipated
mandates
already
greatly
outpaces
the
current
sources
of
revenue.
City
and
County
Financial
Stability
Greene
County
Current
projections
show
the
County’s
general
fund
balance
continuing
to
decline
in
future
years,
assuming
current
sources
of
revenue
and
spending
at
current
levels.
This
problem
will
be
compounded
if
County
voters
do
not
vote
to
permanently
reinstate
the
vehicle
sales
tax
by
November
2016.
County
law
enforcement,
primarily
jail
operations,
will
continue
to
consume
more
of
the
County’s
general
fund,
as
noted
above.
As
a
result,
any
citizen
services
not
required
by
State
or
Federal
law
will
likely
face
deep
cuts
or
complete
elimination.
Because
of
this,
assuming
status
quo,
Greene
County
will
continue
to
be
unable
to
attract
and
retain
qualified
personnel
because
of
non-‐competitive
salaries,
which
in
2011
already
lagged
more
than
20%
behind
benchmark
organizations.
The
result
could
be
an
erosion
in
quality
and
efficiency
of
services
as
16
the
County
continues
to
suffer
from
high
levels
of
staff
turnover
and
must
continually
train
new,
inexperienced
employees.
This
is
currently
a
critical
issue
for
the
County
as
experienced
employees
continue
to
leave
for
better
paying
jobs
elsewhere.
Due
to
lack
of
funds,
the
County
has
eliminated
any
replacement
of
vehicles
from
the
general
revenue
fund.
The
Sheriff's
office
has
been
able
to
continue
replacement
of
patrol
vehicles
using
federal
grants
and
drug
forfeiture
funds.
Due
to
budget
issues
at
the
federal
level
the
percentage
of
forfeiture
funds
which
as
distributed
to
counties
has
recently
been
reduced.
There
are
indications
that
distribution
of
these
funds
could
be
completely
eliminated
in
the
future.
The
County
will
also
continue
to
be
unable
to
take
care
of
basic
building
maintenance
needs,
which
have
already
been
deferred
for
the
past
seven
years
due
to
budget
cuts.
The
County
will
continue
to
struggle
to
keep
software
and
IT
equipment
current,
which
each
year
becomes
more
integrated
into,
and
essential
for,
providing
basic
services
that
citizens
expect.
A
good
example
of
this
is
the
Niche
records
management
software
utilized
by
the
Sheriff’s
Office
that
helps
eliminate
duplicated
information
entry,
streamlines
report
entry
by
police
officers
and
deputies
in
patrol
cars,
and
makes
more
information
available
in
the
field.
The
sharing
of
a
common
electronic
records
management
system
was
a
recommendation
of
the
Safety
&
Justice
Roundtable.
City
of
Springfield
City
staff
members
are
currently
evaluating
10-‐year
revenue
and
expenditure
projections
under
varying
scenarios.
The
current
analysis
shows
the
City’s
general
fund
to
be
sustainable
at
current
levels
assuming
(a)
no
significant
future
expense
(service)
increases,
(b)
no
significant
future
revenue
increases,
and
(c)
no
attempts
to
fully
address
lifecycle
capital
needs,
competitive
employee
pay,
or
new
facility
needs.
The
task
force
does
not
anticipate
significant
future
revenue
increases
for
the
City,
so
significant
future
expense
(service)
reductions
are
the
most
likely
scenario
if
the
City
elects
to
address
any
of
these
unmet
needs
listed
above.
The
City’s
lifecycle
replacement
plan
cannot
currently
be
funded.
Current
funding
levels
do
not
allow
for
the
annual
budgeting
of
the
lifecycle
replacement
of
police
vehicles,
fire
vehicles,
public
works
vehicles,
software
and
IT
hardware,
building
maintenance
needs,
or
additional
buildings/facilities.
New
facility
needs
that
are
currently
unfunded
include
a
new
Municipal
Court,
additional
Police
and
Fire
practical
training
facilities,
an
additional
Fire
Station,
and
an
Animal
Shelter.
If
funds
are
shifted
to
fund
any
of
these
new
facility
needs,
it
will
likely
come
at
the
cost
of
reducing
the
limited
funds
available
partially
fund
lifecycle
capital
replacement
needs.
Unless
expenses
are
significantly
reduced
or
revenues
are
significantly
increased,
the
City
will
likely
struggle
to
keep
up
with
competitive
employee
pay,
which
could
eventually
erode
the
quality
of
services
that
can
be
offered
to
City
residents
and
those
citizens
who
work
and
play
in
Springfield.
Retail
tax
revenues
pay
for
a
majority
of
the
public
safety
and
other
vital
services
within
Springfield.
Left
unaddressed,
the
loss
of
retail
tax
revenues
to
tax-‐free,
Internet-‐based
sales
will
(a)
continue
to
erode
the
City
and
County
tax
bases
and
(b)
make
the
already
uneven
playing
field
more
uneven
17
between
“brick-‐and-‐mortar”
retailers
and
online
retailers.
The
Task
Force
believes
this
will
quickly
become
a
major
issue
for
Springfield,
Greene
County,
and
all
other
municipalities
and
counties
within
Missouri
and
throughout
the
country.
Conclusion
The
City
and
County
face
a
number
of
mutual
challenges.
Some
are
urgent
and
require
attention
within
the
next
12-‐18
months.
Others
are
more
long
term,
but
must
be
anticipated
and
planned
for
in
order
to
keep
them
from
becoming
future
problems.
The
Task
Force
feels
the
following
are
the
most
pressing
specific
issues
at
this
time:
•
Jail
Overcrowding
and
Criminal
Justice
Capacity
•
Stormwater
Funding
•
County’s
Financial
Situation
We
must
recognize
the
reality
that
it
is
human
nature
not
to
recognize
a
problem
until
it
affects
us
personally.
Please
consider
this
report
a
“warning
flag”
highlighting
the
issues
that,
if
left
unaddressed,
will
begin
to
negatively
affect
our
City
and
County
citizens
directly
as
well
as
our
community’s
economic
vitality.
We
hope
this
report
has
accomplished
that
charge
and
proves
to
be
a
valuable
resource.
18
BIG THREE ISSUES
City/County
Financial Stability
• Unsustainable County budget
• Operational funding challenges
• Employee recruitment and retention
• Lack of lifecycle funding for capital replacements
• Long-term concern regarding City’s budget
• Lack of funding for facility construction & maintenance
• Increasing erosion of revenue bases
• Increasing community poverty levels
• Animal Control / Animal Shelter
• Stormwater mandates/funding • Jail overcrowding
• Wastewater mandates/funding • Criminal Justice facility needs
• Air quality mandates/funding • Citizen “Quality of Life” issues
• Solid waste mandates/funding • LEST 1 expenses exceed revenues
• Integrated Plan • Mental health impact
• Public Health funding on crime & jail
Citizens
• Radio system replacement
Federal/State Law Enforcement
Unfunded Mandates • State requires & Criminal
a County jail Justice System
• State under-funds
jail operation
LEST I GENERAL FUND SUBSIDY
$2M
$1.5M
$1M
$1.6M
$.5M
$855,000
0
County City
JAIL POPULATION VS. CAPACITY
800
685
700 616
544 559 592 cap.
600 492 492
500
400
300
200
100
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Jail Capacity
UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING HISTORICAL DATA PART 1 (B)
Greene County
Property Crimes
1500
Stolen Vehicle
1200 Larceny
Burglary
900
600
300
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING HISTORICAL DATA PART 1 (B)
City of Springfield
Property Crimes
15000
Stolen Vehicle
12000 Larceny
Burglary
9000
6000
3000
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING HISTORICAL DATA PART 1 (A)
Greene County
Crimes Against Persons
500
Homicide
400 Robbery
Rape
300
Agg. Assault
200
100
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING HISTORICAL DATA PART 1 (A)
City of Springfield
Crimes Against Persons
1500
Homicide
1200 Robbery
Rape*
900
Agg. Assault
600
300
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
* Effective Jan.1, 2013, the Department of Justice changed the definition of rape with the goal of a more
comprehensive statistical reporting of rape nationwide. Due to the definition change, many more cases are now
classified as rape, causing the increase between 2012 and 2013 to be vast.
FELONY REFERRALS FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT
7,000 6,457
5,907 5,829
6,000
4,855 4,867 4,838
5,000
4,128 4,223 CASES REFERRED
3,875
4,000 3,707
CHARGES REFERRED*
3,360 3,334
3,000
*A case referred may contain
more than one charge
2,000
1,000
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
PERCENTAGE INCREASE
ATTORNEY STAFF VS. FELONIES ISSUED
250%
200%
150%
100%
50%
0%
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Attorneys
Felonies Charged
Unfunded Environmental Mandates
The EPA has stepped up its enforcement of the 1972 Clean Water Act,
the Clean Air Act, and solid waste regulations in recent years.
STORMWATER WASTEWATER
AIR QUALITY
LANDFILLS
DRINKING WATER
The Challenge
Recent sunset of 1/8-cent Propose a plan to DNR
sales tax means there is no to prevent sewer
longer a funding source for overflows that occur
projects in order to comply during heavy rains,
with rising regulatory causing untreated water
standards & costs. to flow into waterways.
!!! - Loss of funding will result !!! - Sewer rate increases
in inability to comply with will be mandated to comply
regulations. Could be fined with regulations.
$10,000 - $25,000 per day.
The Issues
! - Proposed Overflow
!! - Stormwater operation Control Plan to cost
& maintenance needs; $200 Million over the
no funding to maintain next 10 years.
existing systems.
!! No funding to alleviate
flooding
!!! - Continuing shift of funding burden from Federal and State government to local governments.
Unfunded environmental mandates
could cost the City & County no less than
$1.6 BILLION
over the next 20 years, which is
potentially unaffordable to our citizens.
!!! - Near-Term Issues
(within 18 months)
!! - Mid-Term Issues
(18-36 months)
! - Long-Term Issues
(36+ months)
Integrated Planning Approach
!!! - In 2012, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its “Integrated Municipal Stormwater
and Wastewater Planning Approach Framework” which emphasized a commitment to work with states and
communities to implement an integrated planning approach to address environmental objectives. In response
to this opportunity, leaders from the City of Springfield, Greene County and City Utilities developed a local
approach to integrated planning. This holistic approach proposes to use local knowledge to examine our
environmental resources in regards to air, water and land taking into account community affordability.
SEWER RATE PROJECTIONS
$$$
$$
$
2015 2020 2025 2030
Traditional OCP Proposed OCP
FUNDING: NEEDS VS. REVENUE
$200 M
$180 M
$160 M
$140 M
Mandate ++
$120 M
$100 M
$80 M
Mandate +
$60 M
$40 M
Available Revenue Mandate
$20 M
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Available Revenue
Mandate
Mandate and Current Programs for Flood Control/SW System
Mandate, Current Flood Level Service, Repair and Replacement ($5 Million/year)
GREENE COUNTY GENERAL FUND
CASH PROJECTIONS
$9 M
$8 M 90-Day Reserve
$8.5 Million
$7 M
Greene County General Fund
$6 M
$5 M
$4 M
Minimum Cash Reserve
$3 M $4 Million
$2 M
$1 M
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
CITY AND COUNTY 10-YEAR
TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROJECTS
Funded
$99 M
Unfunded
$251 M
GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL CAPITAL GENERAL FUND ANNUAL BUILDING
REPLACEMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR
$5 M $3 M
$4 M
$3.2 M
$2 M
$3 M
$2 M $1 M
$1 M $320,000
$0 $4,000
0 0
Available Budget Capital Needs Available Budget Needs
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
ANNUAL CAPITAL GENERAL FUND ANNUAL BUILDING
REPLACEMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR
$5 M $4.5 M $3 M
$2.4 M
$4 M
$2 M
$3 M
$2 M
$1 M
$1 M $1 M $500,000
0 0
Available Budget Capital Needs Available Budget Needs
MISSOURI COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH FUNDING COMPARISON
$40
$31.00
$30
$23.31 $22.27
$21.73
$19.97
$20 $18.46
$16.02
$10.96
$10 $7.90
$4.05 $4.19
$2.24 $2.34 $2.50
ay n au ss ay le ne lin e r te s y
w de e Ca Cl Co o k en spe at fi eld c oi ne
llo m rd Bo an Gr
e Ja Pl g ra
n T a
Ca Ca i ra a- Fr rin .F
eG bi Sp S t
Ca
p lum
Co
PUBLIC HEALTH FUNDING DISPARITY
Springfield Annual Per Capita Contribution vs.
Greene County (non-Springfield) Annual Per Capita Contribution
$22.27
Springfield Greene County
SPRINGFIELD-GREENE COUNTY
HEALTH DEPARTMENT FUNDING SOURCES
FY 2015
Greene Co. Funding
$690 K
Charges
for Service
$1.3 M
State/Federal/Local
Grant Funding
$532 K
City Funding
$4.4 M