HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/01/2011, B3 - 2010-11 MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW counat Mn„
3111
aGEnaa nEpoat '�"°.b" B 3
C I TY O F SAN LUIS O B 1 S P 0
FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Mary Bradley, Interim Director of Finance&Information Technology
Debbie Malicoat, Finance Manager
Jennifer Thompson, Revenue Supervisor
SUBJECT` 2010-11 MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW
RECOMMENDATION
Review and discuss the City's financial condition and status of City goals at the mid-point of fiscal
year 2010-11.
DISCUSSION
The accompanying Mid-Year Budget Review for 2010-11 provides a comprehensive overview of
the City's fiscal condition at the mid-point of the fiscal year. The Transmittal Memorandum
(starting on page A-1) sets forth a concise summary of key General Fund revenue and expenditure
trends since adoption of the 2009-11 Financial Plan Supplement in June 2010. The report's main
focus is on the General Fund, however updated information is provided for each fund. The report
also includes a comprehensive status of major City goals, capital improvement plan (CII') projects
and other important objectives. .
Background: Purpose of the Mid-Year Budget Review
The City's two-year Financial Plan provides for the submittal of a report on our financial status to
the Council every six months. For fiscal monitoring purposes, on-line access to up-to-date
information is available to all departments; financial reports are issued monthly to key staff
members; and quarterly financial reports are distributed to the Council and staff on an ongoing
basis. Additionally, we issue focused reports to the Council and staff on key revenues such as sales
tax, transient occupancy tax and investments, as well as ad hoc reports as needed.
However, the formal submittal of a review at the mid-point of the fiscal year provides an
opportunity to take a broader look at the City's financial picture, including:
1. Updating beginning fund balance projections based on actual results for the prior fiscal year.
2. Analyzing revenue trends since adoption of the Financial Plan, and revising revenues and
ending fund balance projections accordingly.
3. Identifying and presenting any fiscal problem areas to the Council, and recommending
corrective action or additional funding if required.
4. Presenting the status of major City goals, CIP projects and other important objectives.
B3-1
2010-11 Mid-Year Budget Review APage 2
Report Organization
The accompanying Mid-Year Budget Review is organized into five main sections:
Section A: Transmittal Memorandum, which provides a concise review and analysis of the
City's financial position and summarizes any mid-year budget adjustments which
might be requested.
Section B: Comprehensive presentations of projected revenues, expenditures and changes in
fund balance/working capital for each of the City's funds for 2010-11 compared
with original budget estimates and actual results from 2009-10.
Section C. Detailed supporting documentation for the requested mid-year budget adjustments.
(There are none this year.)
Section D: Recent financial and revenue reports: Quarterly Financial Report, Sales Tax
Newsletter and Monthly TOT Report.
Section E. Status reports on major City goals, other important objectives and major CIP
projects. This includes recommended "Action Plan" revisionsasdiscussed in the
report.
General Fund Summary
The Financial Plan Supplement adopted in June 2010 indicated that the General Fund was in
balance — that is, revenues and expenditures were equal, considering the $3 million in stop gap
measures implemented in the current fiscal year. Because the City has a two-year budget, at the end
of the first year of the Financial Plan, when there are non-staffing items that were not spent during
the year, budget for these items is generally carried forward to the second year of the Plan. At the
same time, because the expenditures did not occur, there is fund balance remaining, which also
carries forward to the second year of the Plan. This allows the City to manage expenses over the
two-year period.
At the end of 2009-10, there were unspent operating budgets, some of which were not required for
carryover to the next fiscal year. Of the unspent amount, $1.1 million carried over to the current
fiscal year. Along with this, an offsetting amount of fund balance rolled forward as well. In fact,
the beginning fund balance in the current year was actually $1.7 million higher than originally
budgeted — $1.1 million because of planned expenditures that didn't happen in the first year, but
still could be used in the second year of the Financial Plan and $600,000 because of other savings.
To date, the Council has approved about $200,000 in additional operating expenditures in the
current fiscal year. In addition to the carryovers, other changes to the budget include assumptions
made for adjustments to salaries and benefits that, due to recent employee group agreements, will
not be necessary in the current fiscal year as well as assumptions for current year expenditure
savings.
B3-2
I
2010-11 Mid-Year Budget Review Page 3
In analyzing current revenue and expenditure trends, the Mid-Year Budget Review also anticipates
that revenues will be about $300,000 higher than originally budgeted. As reflected in the Mid-Year
document, revenues from most of the City's key sources appear to have reached bottom and are
slowly recovering, however they remain below the levels experienced prior to the economic
downturn. Additional detail is provided in the Mid-Year Budget Review.
All of these changes will result in the General Fund ending the current fiscal year with$1.3 million
more in fund balance than was originally anticipated when the 2010-11 budget was prepared. This
is $1 million more than the minimum reserve policy requires. While this is positive news,the Mid-
Year Budget indicates that there is a structural gap between revenues and expenditure and absent
corrective action,this gap will continue.
The attached report is staffs best professional judgment about the state of the General Fund at this
point in time and it is subject to change as our assumptions become realities. More clarity on the
General Fund's financial position will be provided to the Council in April in the context of
Strategic Budget Direction, at which time the Council can provide direction on the best use of
reserves in excess of the policy minimum.
Updated General Fund Five-Year Fiscal Forecast
As part of the background materials prepared for the Council Goal Setting Workshop, the General
Fund Five-Year Fiscal Forecast (Forecast) was updated in December 2010. The December
Forecast projected a budget gap of$3 million in 2011-12, growing to $3.4 million in 2013-14. On
average,the budget gap was projected to be$2.7 million over the five-year period.
Based on the revised revenue and expenditure assumptions included in the Mid-Year Budget
Review, modifications to the budget that the Council has already approved, and staff's continued
analysis of current trends, we know that the projected gap between revenues and expenditures has
narrowed. This is primarily due to two factors: revenues appear to be recovering slightly better than
originally anticipated and recent employee contracts have helped contain costs. Staff is still in the
process of reviewing capital projects and the appropriate level of funding to meet those needs as
well as other factors that will impact the fiscal situation in the next five years. Council will receive
a formal update of the Forecast on April 12, 2011 in the context of providing Strategic Budget
Direction.
Significant Changes in Other Funds
Golf Fund
On June 2, 2010 Council deferred implementing a $1.00 per round rate increase. The Mid-Year
Budget Review reflects the fiscal impacts of this deferral, which results in an additional
contribution from the General Fund of$79,300.
B3-3
1 � l
2010-11 Mid-Year Budget Review Page 4
Parking Fund
On June 2, 2010 Council deferred implementing a proposed rate increase. The Mid-Year Budget
Review reflects the fiscal impacts of this deferral, which results in reduced revenues of$357,400
from the original budget.
Water Fund
Based on current trends, revenue estimates for water sales revenues have been revised downward
significantly. There are a variety of factors that influence water sales. A full fund analysis will be
presented in June 2011 with the 2011-13 Financial Plan.
Transit Fund
Public Works staff has recently discovered that there may be a shortfall of Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) funding for 2010-11. In February2011, the Federal government released its
first apportionment for FTA formula funding. FTA is one of the two largest funding sources for the
Transit Fund each year. Due to reporting inconsistencies in the National Transit Database, the
appropriation for the SLO Urbanized Area (UZA) was reduced by approximately $450,000. The
National Transit Database reporting was impacted by a medical leave of absence by SLO Transit's
Resident Manager. During this leave of absence, the City sought and received reporting
requirement waivers, however it was not known at the time that such a waiver would potentially
reduce transit funding for the UZA.
Staff is working with the FTA to discuss the circumstances that lead to the reporting
inconsistencies, which in tum lead to the reduction in funding. The hope is that the FTA will
reverse the decision. In the event that the decision stands staff proposes to offset the effect
primarily by deferring one capital bus replacement ($377,000) that was approved in this year's
federal program of projects.
This reduced amount affects the operating assistance grant that has been reflected for the Transit
Fund in the current fiscal year. To be conservative, these changes are being implemented with the
Mid-Year Budget and can be reversed should the FTA reverse its initial decision. Additionally,
staff will seek to program some of the existing SLO UZA reserve for operations to cover the
shortfall.
A final apportionment is scheduled for later this fiscal year.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Mid-Year Budget Review for 2010-11
G:\Budget Folders\C.Mid-Year Budget Reviews\Mid-Year Budget Review-2010-11\Council Agenda Report,2010-1 I.doc
B3-4
' 1
It has just come to my attention that when the Mid-Year Budget document was printed, page A-3
was printed twice and page A-4 was not printed. I apologize for not catching this error. Attached
is page A-4 for your reference.
Below is a link to the electronic document on the website, which has the correct pages.
http://www.slocity.org/finance/download/bud,getO9-11/Mid-Year%20Document%202010-11.pdf
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Thanks!.
Debbie Malicoat
Finance Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 RED FILE
voice: 805-781-7128
fax: 805-781-7401 MEETING AGENDA
DATE4L1/_jL ITEM # 13 3
RECEIVED o . .
v COUNCIL o CDD DIR
c My MOR o FrrDIR
FEB 2 8 2011 ° "STCM °MEC1W
a ATTORNEY a PW DIR
o CLSUUORIO o POUCECHMF
SLO CITY CLERK C PIS
° RISC DIR
o TRIBUNE a tMLDI UTILDlR
o NEW MW o HR DIR
o SLOCrrYNEWS o COUNCIL
o CM MOR
o CLERK
1 �
TRANSMITTAL
MEMORANDUM
Based on current trends, revenue estimates for water Interfund Transactions
sales revenues have been revised downward
significantly. There are a variety of factors that This portion of Section B reflects actual interfund
influence water sales. A full fund analysis will be transfers for 2009-10 along with the original budget
presented in June 2011 with the 2011-13 Financial and revisions for 2010-1T. The revised operating
Plan. transfers are generally driven by Council approved
changes since the adoption of the 2010-11 budget.
Transit Fund The reimbursement transfers are based on the 2009-
2011 Cost Allocation Plan adopted by Council on
Public Works staff has recently discovered that there February 2,2010.
may be a shortfall of Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) funding for 2010-11. In February 2011, the Projected Ending Fund Balances/Working
Federal government released its first apportionment for Capital
FTA formula funding. FTA is one of the two largest
funding sources for the Transit Fund each year. Due to Based on the revised revenue projections and
reporting inconsistencies in the National Transit expenditures summaries, this part of Section B
Database, the appropriation for the SLO Urbanized includes a summary of projected changes in
Area (UZA) was reduced by approximately $450,000. financial position for each of the City's operating
This reduced amount affects the operating assistance funds. As with the revenue projections, the changes
grant that has been reflected for the Transit Fund in the in financial position schedules include the actual
current fiscal year. Staff proposes to offset the effect fund balances/working capital for.2010-11 and the
primarily by deferring one capital bus replacement original budget and revised projections for 2010-11.
($377,000) that was approved in this year's federal
program of projects.These changes are reflected in the Based on the revised revenue and expenditure
enclosed Mid-Year Budget Review. Additionally, projections for the General Fund, the ending fund
staff will seek to program some of the existing SLO balance is anticipated to be $1.3 million higher than
UZA reserve for operations to cover the shortfall. originally budgeted. This is $1 million more than the
minimum reserve policy requires. While this is
Staff is working with the FTA to discuss the positive news, the Mid-Year Budget indicates that
circumstances that led to the reporting inconsistencies, there is a structural gap between revenues and
which in tum led to the reduction in funding. The expenditure and absent corrective action, this gap will
National Transit Database reporting was impacted by a continue.
medical leave of absence by SLO Transit's Resident
Manager. During this leave of absence, the City MID-YEAR BUDGET RE UESTS
sought and received reporting requirement .waivers,
however it was not known at the time that such a
waiver would potentially reduce transit funding for the As noted previously, there are no mid-year operating
UZA. A final apportionment is scheduled for later this or capital budget requests that need to be approved
fiscal year. now.
Capital Improvement Plan PROSPECTS FOR THE FUTURE.
This part of Section B reflects the original CIP
budgets for 2010-11 by fund, re-appropriations for General Fund Five-Year Forecast
encumbrances and carryovers, and budget changes
to date since approval of the 2010-11 Financial Plan As part of the background materials prepared for the
Supplement in June 2010. The total capital Goal Setting Workshop, on December 14, 2010
improvement plan. is $8,981,700 greater than Council received an updated General Fund Five-
projected in the Supplement due primarily to Year for 2011-12 through 2015-16. The Forecast
carryovers and encumbrances. There are no new projected a budget gap of $3 million in 2011-12,
CIP projects for Council consideration. growing to $3.4 million in 2013-14. On average, the
A-4