HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-01-2017 Item 1, Bradford (2)Council Memorandum
Date:
TO:
FROM:
VIA:
SUBJECT:
June 1, 2017
Mayor and Council
Xenia Bradford, Interim Finance Director
Katie Lichtig, City Manager '1//[
COUNCIL MEETING: ❑ ( 0
ITEM NO,!-. ... 1 - --
RECEIVED
JUN 0Y 2011
SLO CITY CLERK
2017-19 Preliminary Financial Plan: Clarification document highlighting changes
adopted by the Council to Budget and Fiscal Policies during the 2017-19 Financial
Plan development and corrections to the published Preliminary Financial Plan
Budget and Fiscal Policies
During the 2017-19 Financial Plan Development, the Council adopted several changes to the
Budget and Fiscal Policies. For clarification, Attachment A, underlines all changes approved by
Council during the 2017-19 Financial Plan development compared to the policies adopted with the
2015-17 Financial Plan. This is being provided in response to a request from a council member.
Changes in Financial Position
Attachment B is a replacement to pages G 1-5 through G 1-3 5 to the published 2017-19 Preliminary
Financial Plan. The Changes in Financial Position statements were corrected due to formula error
G 1-5 through G 1-7; corrected to move Capital Improvement project funding for Public Art Master
Planning Initiatives to Public Art Fund from Parkland Development Fund; and corrected to
recognize receipt of a grant in the Law Enforcement Grant as originally adopted with the 2015-17
Financial Plan and 2016-17 budget. Changes are highlighted in yellow.
Climate Action Major City Goal Funding Classification
Page C1-26 illustrates costs associated with implementation of the work programs for the Climate
Action Major City Goal during the Financial Plan. For clarification, the Sustainability Coordinator
position is an ongoing full time equivalent position (Special Projects Manager assignment to
Sustainability Coordinator).
Downtown Business Improvement District
Page C1-46 indicates that the completion date of a Feasibility Study of Downtown Maintenance
District as summer 2019. The estimated completion time period is summer 2018.
Attachment:
A — Budget and Fiscal Policies
B — Changes in Financial Position
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Attachment 9
POLICIESBUDGET AND FISCAL
FINANCIAL PLAN PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION
A. Financial Plan Objectives. Through its Financial Plan, the City will link resources with results by:
1. Identifying community needs for essential services.
2. Organizing the programs required to provide these essential services.
3. Establishing program policies and goals, which define the nature and level of program services required.
4. Identifying activities performed in delivering program services.
5. Proposing objectives for improving the delivery of program services.
6. Identifying and appropriating the resources required to perform program activities and accomplish
program objectives.
7. Setting standards to measure and evaluate the:
a. Output of program activities.
b. Accomplishment of program objectives.
c. Expenditure of program appropriations.
B. Two -Year Budget. Following the City's favorable experience, the City will continue using a two-year
financial plan, emphasizing long-range planning and effective program management. The benefits identified
when the City's first two-year plan was prepared for 1983-85 continue to be realized:
1. Reinforcing the importance of long-range planning in managing the City's fiscal affairs.
2. Concentrating on developing and budgeting for the accomplishment of significant objectives.
3. Establishing realistic timeframes for achieving objectives.
4. Creating a pro -active budget that provides for stable operations and assures the City's long-term fiscal
health.
5. Promoting more orderly spending patterns.
6. Reducing the amount of time and resources allocated to preparing annual budgets.
C. Measurable Objectives. The two-year financial plan will establish measurable program objectives and allow
reasonable time to accomplish those objectives.
D. Second Year Budget. Before the beginning of the second year of the two-year cycle, the Council will review
progress during the first year and approve appropriations for the second fiscal year.
E. Operating Carryover. Operating program appropriations not spent during the first fiscal year may be
carried over for specific purposes into the second fiscal year with the approval of the City Manager.
F. Goal Status Reports. The status of major program objectives will be formally reported to the Council on an
ongoing, periodic basis.
G. Mid -Year Budget Reviews. The Council will formally review the City's fiscal condition, and amend
appropriations if necessary, six months after the beginning of each fiscal year.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
LONG - TERM FINANCIAL PLANNING
A. Balanced Budget. The City will maintain a balanced budget over the two-year period of the Financial Plan.
This means that:
1. Operating revenues must fully cover operating expenditures, including debt service.
2. Ending fund balance (or working capital in the enterprise funds) must meet minimum policy levels. For
the general and enterprise funds, this level has been established at 20% of operating expenditures.
Under this policy, it is allowable for total expenditures to exceed revenues in a given year; however, in
this situation, beginning fund balance can only be used to fund capital improvement plan projects, or
other "one-time," non-recurring expenditures.
B. Long -Term Liabilities and Maintenance of Infrastructure. The City wil!igive priority to applying
unassigned fund -balance due to one: -time expenditure savings or one-time increase in revenue to 12ay down long-
term unfunded liabilities and invest in infrastructure.
FINANCIAL REPORTING AND BUDGET ADMINISTRATION
.A
A. Annual Reporting. The City will prepare annual financial statements as follows:
1. In accordance with Charter requirements, the City will contract for an annual audit by a qualified
independent certified public accountant. The City will strive for an unqualified auditors' opinion.
2. The City will use generally accepted accounting principles in preparing its annual financial statements,
and will strive to meet the requirements of the GFOA's Award for Excellence in Financial Reporting
program.
3. The City will issue audited financial statements within 180 days after year-end.
B. Interim Reporting. The City will prepare and issue timely interim reports on the City's fiscal status to the
Council and staff. This includes: on-line access to the City's financial management system by City staff,
monthly reports to program managers; more formal quarterly reports to the Council and Department Heads;
mid -year budget reviews; and interim annual reports,
C. Budget Administration. As set forth in the City Charter, the Council may amend or supplement the budget
at any time after its adoption by majority vote of the Council members. The City Manager has the authority
to make administrative adjustments to the budget as long as those changes will not have a significant policy
impact nor affect budgeted year-end fund balances.
D. Development Services Revenue. The City Manager may allocate or designate 75% of over -realized
Develo mens Services revenues exceeding adopted bud ret For the current fiscal ear for temporgy
Development Services expenditures for the purpose of timely processing of development permit app Iications
•
,BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Attachment
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
in the current fiscal year or throughout life of applicable projects. Any and all City Manager authorized
allocations and funds set aside in a desi 7nation for future use shall be reported to the Council on a semi-
annual basis.
GENERAL REVENUE MANAGEMENT
- ..
A. Diversified and Stable Base. The City will seek to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base to protect
it from short-term fluctuations in any one revenue source.
B. Long -Range Focus. To emphasize and facilitate long-range financial planning, the City will maintain
current projections of revenues for the succeeding five years.
C. Current Revenues for Current Uses. The City will make all current expenditures with current revenues,
avoiding procedures that balance current budgets by postponing needed expenditures, accruing future
revenues, or rolling over short-term debt.
D. Interfund Transfers and Loans. In order to achieve important public policy goals, the City has established
various special revenue, capital project, debt service and enterprise funds to account for revenues whose use
should be restricted to certain activities. Accordingly, each fund exists as a separate financing entity from
other funds, with its own revenue sources, expenditures and fund equity.
Any transfers between funds for operating purposes are clearly set forth in the Financial Plan, and can only be
made by the Finance Director in accordance with the adopted budget. These operating transfers, under which
financial resources are transferred from one fund to another, are distinctly different from interfund
borrowings, which are usually made for temporary cash flow reasons, and are not intended to result in a
transfer of financial resources by the end of the fiscal year.
In summary, interfund transfers result in a change in fund equity; interfund borrowings do not, as the intent is
to repay the loan in the near term.
From time -to -time, interfund borrowings may be appropriate; however, these are subject to the following
criteria in ensuring that the fiduciary purpose of the fund is met:
1. The Finance Director is authorized to approve temporary interfund borrowings for cash flow purposes
whenever the cash shortfall is expected to be resolved within 45 days. The most common use of interfund
borrowing under this circumstance is for grant programs like the Community Development Block Grant,
where costs are incurred before drawdowns are initiated and received. However, receipt of funds is
typically received shortly after the request for funds has been made.
2. Any other interfund borrowings for cash flow or other purposes require case-by-case approval by the
Council.
3. Any transfers between funds where reimbursement is not expected within one fiscal year shall not be
recorded as interfund borrowings; they shall be recorded as interfund operating transfers that affect equity
by moving financial resources from one fund to another.
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Attachment 9
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
USER FEE COST RECOVERY GOALS
A. Ongoing Review
Fees will be reviewed and updated on an ongoing basis to ensure that they keep pace with changes in the cost -
of -living as well as changes in methods or levels of service delivery.
In implementing this goal, a comprehensive analysis of City costs and fees should be made at least every five
years. In the interim, fees will be adjusted by annual changes in the Consumer Price Index. Fees may be
adjusted during this interim period based on supplemental analysis whenever there have been significant
changes in the method, level or cost of service delivery.
B. User Fee Cost Recovery Levels
In setting user fees and cost recovery levels, the following factors will be considered:
1. Community -Wide Versus Special Benefit. The level of user fee cost recovery should consider the
community -wide versus special service nature of the program or activity. The use of general-purpose
revenues is appropriate for community -wide services, while user fees are appropriate for services that are
of special benefit to easily identified individuals or groups.
2. Service Recipient Versus Service Driver. After considering community -wide versus special benefit of
the service, the concept of service recipient versus service driver should also be considered. For example,
it could be argued that the applicant is not the beneficiary of the City's development review efforts: the
community is the primary beneficiary. However, the applicant is the driver of development review costs,
and as such, cost recovery from the applicant is appropriate.
3. Effect of Pricing on the Demand for Services. The level of cost recovery and related pricing of services
can significantly affect the demand and subsequent level of services provided. At full cost recovery, this
has the specific advantage of ensuring that the City is providing services for which there is genuinely a
market that is not overly -stimulated by artificially low prices.
Conversely, high levels of cost recovery will negatively impact the delivery of services to lower income
groups. This negative feature is especially pronounced, and works against public policy, if the services
are specifically targeted to low income groups.
4. Feasibility of Collection and Recovery. Although it may be determined that a high level of cost recovery
may be appropriate for specific services, it may be impractical or too costly to establish a system to
identify and charge the user. Accordingly, the feasibility of assessing and collecting charges should also
be considered in developing user fees, especially if significant program costs are intended to be financed
from that source.
C. Factors Favoring Low Cost Recovery Levels
Very low cost recovery levels are appropriate under the following circumstances:
1. There is no intended relationship between the amount paid and the benefit received. Almost all "social
service" programs fall into this category as it is expected that one group will subsidize another.
2. Collecting fees is not cost-effective or will significantly impact the efficient delivery of the service.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
3. There is no intent to limit the use of (or entitlement to) the service. Again, most "social service" programs
ft into this category as well as many public safety (police and fire) emergency response services.
Historically, access to neighborhood and community parks would also fit into this category.
4. The service is non-recurring, generally delivered on a "peak demand" or emergency basis, cannot
reasonably be planned for on an individual basis, and is not readily available from a private sector source.
Many public safety services also fall into this category.
Collecting fees would discourage compliance with regulatory requirements and adherence is primarily
self -identified, and as such, failure to comply would not be readily detected by the City. Many small-
scale licenses and permits might fall into this category.
D. Factors Favoring High Cost Recovery Levels
The use of service charges as a major source of funding service levels is especially appropriate under the
following circumstances:
1. The service is similar to services provided through the private sector.
2. Other private or public sector alternatives could or do exist for the delivery of the service.
3. For equity or demand management purposes, it is intended that there be a direct relationship between the
amount paid and the level and cost of the service received.
4. The use of the service is specifically discouraged. Police responses to disturbances or false alarms might
fall into this category.
5. The service is regulatory in nature and voluntary compliance is not expected to be the primary method of
detecting failure to meet regulatory requirements. Building permit, plan checks, and subdivision review
fees for large projects would fall into this category.
E. General Concepts Regarding the Use of Service Charges
The following general concepts will be used in developing and implementing service charges:
1. Revenues should not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service.
Cost recovery goals should be based on the total cost of delivering the service, including direct costs,
departmental administration costs and organization -wide support costs such as accounting, personnel,
information technology, legal services, fleet maintenance and insurance.
The method of assessing and collecting fees should be as simple as possible in order to reduce the
administrative cost of collection.
4. Rate structures should be sensitive to the "market" for similar services as well as to smaller, infrequent
users of the service.
5. A unified approach should be used in determining cost recovery levels for various programs based on the
factors discussed above.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
F. Low Cost -Recovery Services
Based on the criteria discussed above, the following types of services should have very low cost recovery
goals. In selected circumstances, there may be specific activities within the broad scope of services provided
that should have user charges associated with them. However, the primary source of funding for the
operation as a whole should be general-purpose revenues, not user fees.
1. Delivering public safety emergency response services such as police patrol services and fire suppression.
2. Maintaining and developing public facilities that are provided on a uniform, community -wide basis such
as streets, parks and general-purpose buildings.
3. Providing social service programs and economic development activities.
G. Recreation Programs
The following cost recovery policies apply to the City's recreation programs:
1. Cost recovery for activities directed to adults should be relatively high.
2. Cost recovery for activities directed to youth and seniors should be relatively low. In those circumstances
where services are similar to those provided in the private sector, cost recovery levels should be higher.
Although ability to pay may not be a concern for all youth and senior participants, these are desired
program activities, and the cost of determining need may be greater than the cost of providing a uniform
service fee structure to all participants. Further, there is a community -wide benefit in encouraging high -
levels of participation in youth and senior recreation activities regardless of financial status.
3. Cost recovery goals for recreation activities are set as follows:
High -Range Cost Recovery Activities - (60% to 100%)
a. Adult athletics
b. Banner permit applications
c. Child care services
d. Facility rentals (indoor and outdoor; excludes use of facilities for internal City uses)
Mid -Range Cost Recovery Activities - (30% to 60%)
e. Triathlon
f. Golf
g. Summer and Spring Break Camps
h. Classes
Major commercial film permit applications
Low -Range Cost Recovery Activities- (0 to 30%)
j. Aquatics
k. Community gardens
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Attachment 9
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
1. Junior Ranger camp
in. Minor commercial film permit applications
n. Skate park
o. Parks and Recreation sponsored events (except for Triathlon)_
Special 0 nrte• (a.,. ept f w T-Fia l,lan and Holiday in the Plaza)
p. Youth sports
Yeu4h STAR
q. Teen services
r. Senior/boomer services
4. For cost recovery activities of less than 100%, there should be a differential in rates between residents and
non-residents. However, the Director of Parks and Recreation is authorized to reduce or eliminate non-
resident fee differentials when it can be demonstrated that:
a. The fee is reducing attendance.
b. And there are no appreciable expenditure savings from the reduced attendance.
5. Charges will be assessed for use of rooms, pools, gymnasiums, ball fields, special -use areas, and
recreation equipment for activities not sponsored or co-sponsored by the City. Such charges will
generally conform to the fee guidelines described above. However, the Director of Parks and Recreation
is authorized to charge fees that are closer to full cost recovery for facilities that are heavily used at peak
times and include a majority of non-resident users.
6. A vendor charge of at least 10 percent of gross income will be assessed from individuals or organizations
using City facilities for moneymaking activities.
7. Director of Parks and Recreation is authorized to offer reduced fees such as introductory rates, family
discounts and coupon discounts on a pilot basis (not to exceed 18 months) to promote new recreation
programs or resurrect existing ones.
8. The Parks and Recreation Department will consider waiving fees only when the City Manager determines
in writing that an undue hardship exists.
H. Development Review Programs
The following cost recovery policies apply to the development review programs:
1. Services provided under this category include:
a. Planning (planned development permits, tentative tract and parcel maps, rezonings, general plan
amendments, variances, use permits).
b. Building and safety (building permits, structural plan checks, inspections).
c. Engineering (public improvement plan checks, inspections, subdivision requirements,
encroachments).
d. Fire plan check.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
2. Cost recovery for these services should generally be very high. In most instances, the City's cost recovery
goal should be 100%.
3. However, in charging high cost recovery levels, the City needs to clearly establish and articulate
standards for its performance in reviewing developer applications to ensure that there is "value for cost."
I. Comparability with Other Communities
In setting user fees, the City will consider fees charged by other agencies in accordance with the following
criteria:
1. Surveying the comparability of the City's fees to other communities provides useful background
information in setting fees for several reasons:
a. They reflect the "market" for these fees and can assist in assessing the reasonableness of San Luis
Obispo's fees.
b. If prudently analyzed, they can serve as a benchmark for how cost-effectively San Luis Obispo
provides its services.
2. However, fee surveys should never be the sole or primary criteria in setting City fees as there are many
factors that affect how and why other communities have set their fees at their levels. For example:
a. What level of cost recovery is their fee intended to achieve compared with our cost recovery
objectives?
b. What costs have been considered in computing the fees?
c. When was the last time that their fees were comprehensively evaluated?
d. What level of service do they provide compared with our service or performance standards?
e. Is their rate structure significantly different than ours and what is it intended to achieve?
3. These can be very difficult questions to address in fairly evaluating fees among different communities.
As such, the comparability of our fees to other communities should be one factor among many that is
considered in setting City fees.
ENTERPRISE FUND FEES AND RATES
A. Water, Sewer and Parking. The City will set fees and rates at levels which fully cover the total direct and
indirect costs—including operations, capital outlay, and debt service—of the following enterprise programs:
water, sewer and parking.
B. Transit. Based on targets set under the Transportation Development Act, the City will strive to cover at least
twenty percent of transit operating costs with fare revenues.
C. Ongoing Rate Review. The City will review and adjust enterprise fees and rate structures as required to
ensure that they remain appropriate and equitable.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
D. Cost of Service Fees. The City will treat the water and sewer funds in the same manner as if they were
privately owned and operated. This means assessing reasonable cost of service fees in fully recovering service
costs.
The purpose of the cost of service fee is reasonable cost recovery for the use of the city's services such as
street rights-of-way and public safety The appropriateness of charging the water and sewer fund a reasonable
cost of service fee for the use of the City streets is further supported by the results of studies Arizona,
California, Ohio, and Vermont which concluded that the leading cause of street resurfacing and reconstruction
is street cuts and trenching for utilities.
REVENUE DISTRIBUTION
The Council recognizes that generally accepted accounting principles for state and local governments discourage
the "earmarking" of General Fund revenues, and accordingly, the practice of designating General Fund revenues
for specific programs should be minimized in the City's management of its fiscal affairs. Approval of the
following revenue distribution policies does not prevent the Council from directing General Fund resources to
other functions and programs as necessary.
A. Property Taxes. With the passage of Proposition 13 on June 6, 1978, California cities no longer can set their
own property tax rates. In addition to limiting annual increases in market value, placing a ceiling on voter -
approved indebtedness, and redefining assessed valuations, Proposition 13 established a maximum county-
wide levy for general revenue purposes of 1% of market value. Under subsequent state legislation, which
adopted formulas for the distribution of this countywide levy, the City now receives a percentage of total
property tax revenues collected countywide as determined by the State and administered by the County
Auditor -Controller. The City receives 14.9% of each dollar collected in property tax after allocations to
school districts.
Accordingly, while property revenues are often thought of local revenue sources, in essence they are State
revenue sources, since the State controls their use and allocation.
With the adoption of a Charter revision in November 1996, which removed provisions that were in conflict
with Proposition 13 relating to the setting of property tax revenues between various funds, all property tax
revenues are now accounted for in the General Fund.
B. Gasoline Tax Subventions. All gasoline tax revenues (which are restricted by the State for street -related
purposes) will be used for maintenance activities. Since the City's total expenditures for gas tax eligible
programs and projects are much greater than this revenue source, operating transfers will be made from the
gas tax fund to the General Fund for this purpose. This approach significantly reduces the accounting efforts
required to meet State reporting requirements.
C. Transportation Development Act (TDA) Revenues. All TDA revenues will be allocated to alternative
transportation programs, including regional and municipal transit systems, bikeway improvements, and other
programs or projects designed to reduce automobile usage. Because TDA revenues will not be allocated for
street purposes, it is expected that alternative transportation programs (in conjunction with other state or
federal grants for this purpose) will be self-supporting from TDA revenues.
D. Parking Fines. All parking fine revenues will be allocated to the parking fund, except for those collected by
Police staff (who are funded by the General Fund) in implementing neighborhood wellness programs.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
INVESTMENTS
A. Responsibility. Investments and cash management are the responsibility of the City Treasurer or designee. It
is the City's policy to appoint the Finance Director as the City's Treasurer.
B. Investment Objective. The City's primary investment objective is to achieve a reasonable rate of return
while minimizing the potential for capital losses arising from market changes or issuer default. Accordingly,
the following factors will be considered in priority order in determining individual investment placements:
1. Safety 2. Liquidity 3. Yield
C. Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes: Not for Investment Purposes. There is an appropriate role for tax
and revenue anticipation notes (TRANS) in meeting legitimate short-term cash needs within the fiscal year.
However, many agencies issue TRANS as a routine business practice, not solely for cash flow purposes, but
to capitalize on the favorable difference between the interest cost of issuing TRANS as a tax -preferred
security and the interest yields on them if re -invested at full market rates.
As part of its cash flow management and investment strategy, the City will only issue TRANS or other forms
of short-term debt if necessary to meet demonstrated cash flow needs; TRANS or any other form of short-
term debt financing will not be issued for investment purposes.
As long as the City maintains its current policy of maintaining fund/working capital balances that are 20% of
operating expenditures, it is unlikely that the City would need to issue TRANS for cash flow purposes except
in very unusual circumstances.
D. Selecting Maturity Dates. The City will strive to keep all idle cash balances fully invested through daily
projections of cash flow requirements. To avoid forced liquidations and losses of investment earnings, cash
flow and future requirements will be the primary consideration when selecting maturities.
E. Diversification. As the market and the City's investment portfolio change, care will be taken to maintain a
healthy balance of investment types and maturities.
F. Authorized Investments. The City will invest only in those instruments authorized by the California
Government Code Section 53601.
The City will not invest in stock, will not speculate and will not deal in futures or options. The investment
market is highly volatile and continually offers new and creative opportunities for enhancing interest
earnings. Accordingly, the City will thoroughly investigate any new investment vehicles before committing
City funds to them.
G. Authorized Institutions. Current financial statements will be maintained for each institution in which cash is
invested. Investments will be limited to 20 percent of the total net worth of any institution and may be
reduced further or refused altogether if an institution's financial situation becomes unhealthy.
H. Consolidated Portfolio. In order to maximize yields from its overall portfolio, the City will consolidate cash
balances from all funds for investment purposes, and will allocate investment earnings to each fund in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
I. Safekeeping. Ownership of the City's investment securities will be protected through third -party custodial
safekeeping.
J. Investment Management Plan. The City Treasurer will develop and maintain an Investment Management
Plan that addresses the City's administration of its portfolio, including investment strategies, practices and
procedures.
K. Investment Oversight Committee. As set forth in the Investment Management Plan, this committee is
responsible for reviewing the City's portfolio on an ongoing basis to determine compliance with the City's
investment policies and for making recommendations to the City Treasurer (Finance Director regarding
investment management practices.
Members include the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Finance Director/City Treasurer, Accounting
Manager, the City's independent auditor, one City Council member, and one member of the public.
The member of the public shall be appointed by the City Council in accordance with the City's process for
appointing advisory body members.
L. Reporting. The City Treasurer will develop and maintain a comprehensive, well-documented investment
reporting system, which will comply with Government Code Section 53607. This reporting system will
provide the Council and the Investment Oversight Committee with appropriate investment performance
information.
APPROPRIATIONS LIMITATION
A. The Council will annually adopt a resolution establishing the City's appropriations limit calculated in
accordance with Article XIII -B of the Constitution of the State of California, Section 7900 of the State of
California Government Code, and any other voter approved amendments or state legislation that affect the
City's appropriations limit.
B. The supporting documentation used in calculating the City's appropriations limit and projected appropriations
subject to the limit will be available for public and Council review at least 10 days before Council
consideration of a resolution to adopt an appropriations limit. The Council will generally consider this
resolution in connection with final approval of the budget.
C. The City will strive to develop revenue sources, both new and existing, which are considered non -tax
proceeds in calculating its appropriations subject to limitation.
D. The City will annually review user fees and charges and report to the Council the amount of program subsidy,
if any, that is being provided by the General or Enterprise Funds.
E. The City will actively support legislation or initiatives sponsored or approved by League of California Cities
which would modify Article XIII -B of the Constitution in a manner which would allow the City to retain
projected tax revenues resulting from growth in the local economy for use as determined by the Council.
F. The City will seek voter approval to amend its appropriation limit at such time that tax proceeds are in excess
of allowable limits.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
FUND BALANCE AND RESERVES
A. Minimum Fund and Working Capital Balances. The City will maintain a minimum fund balance of at
least 20% of operating expenditures in the General Fund and a minimum working capital balance of 20% of
operating expenditures in the water, sewer and parking enterprise funds. This is considered the minimum
level necessary to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for:
1. Economic uncertainties, local disasters, and other financial hardships or downturns in the local or national
economy.
2. Contingencies for unseen operating or capital needs.
3. Cash flow requirements.
B. Fleet Replacement. For the General Fund fleet, the City will establish and maintain a Fleet Replacement
Fund to provide for the timely replacement of vehicles and related equipment with an individual replacement
cost of $15,000 or more. During the 2015-17 Financial Plan period, the City will establish and maintain a
minimum fund balance in the Fleet Replacement Fund equal to $500,000 for the emergency replacement of
vehicles that are damaged beyond repair, and are either not covered under the City's property insurance
program or the vehicle has a high replacement cost and insurance proceeds will be inadequate to provide for
the vehicle's replacement (fire engine). Above this contingency level, the amount retained in this fund,
coupled with the annual contributions received by it from any source, shall be adequate to fully fund the
equipment replacements approved in the Financial Plan._
Interest earnings and the proceeds from the _sales of surplus equipment as well as any related damage and
insurance recoveries will be credited to the Fleet Replacement Fund.
C. Information Technology (IT) Replacement Fund. The City will establish an IT Replacement Fund for the
General Fund to provide for the timely replacement of information technology, both hardware and software,
with an individual replacement cost of $25,000 or more. During the 2015-17 Financial Plan period, the City
will establish and maintain a minimum fund balance in this fund equal to $400,000 for the emergency
replacement of equipment that is damaged beyond repair and not covered under the City's property insurance
program.
Interest earnings and the proceeds from the sale of surplus equipment as well as any related damage and
insurance recoveries will be credited to the fund.
D. Major Facility Replacement Fund. The City will maintain a reserve within this fund for the purpose of
funding the cost of improvements having a cost of $25,000 or more to city -owned, general government
building and structures. The amount retained in this fund, coupled with annual contributions received by it
from any source, to adequately fund maintenance and replacement of City facilities.
E. Insurance Benefit Fund. The City will establish an Insurance Benefit Fund for the purpose_ ofsetting funds_
aside to manna the fluctuations in I iabi I ity and worker's corn pensation insurance programs. A reserve within
the Insurance Benefit Fund for the Liability Excess Insurance Program will be maintained at approximately_
75% funded confidence level based on the prior five-year average claims experience.
F. Infrastructure Investment Fund. The City will maintain a reserve within this fund for the purpose of
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
funding infrastructure projects that contribute to improved economic development and enhanced quality of
life in the City of San Luis Obispo. The following evaluation criteria shall be applied to project eligibility:
1. The use of City funds shall not offset any cost that would be expected to be paid to meet the fair share
obligation of any developer.
2. The use of City funds shall not offset a project specific cost identified through the environmental review
process or under existing regulations or policies.
3. The use of funds shall support a project that would not otherwise be feasible due to economic, timing or
other issues outside control of the project proponents or the City.
4. The project shall provide public benefit by contributing to economic development and quality of life within
the City.
E. Water and Sewer Rate Stabilization Reserves. The City will maintain a reserve for the purposes of
offsetting unanticipated fluctuations in Water Fund or Sewer Fund revenues to provide financial stability,
including the stability of revenues and the rates and charges related to each Enterprise. The funding target for
the Rate Stabilization Reserve will be 10% of sales revenue in the Water Fund and 5% of sales revenue in the
Sewer Fund.
Conditions for utilization and plan for replenishment of the reserve will be brought to Council for its
consideration during the preparation and approval of the Financial Plan or as may become necessary during
any fiscal year.
F. Future Capital Project Designations. The Council may designate specific fund balance levels for future
development of capital projects that it has determined to be in the best long-term interests of the City. For
example, replacement of critical information technology infrastructure or other projects.
G. Other Designations and Reserves. In addition to the designations noted above, fund balance levels will be
sufficient to meet funding requirements for projects approved in prior years which are carried forward into the
new year; debt service reserve requirements; reserves for encumbrances; and other reserves or designations
required by contractual obligations, state law, or generally accepted accounting principles.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT MANAGEMENT
A. CIP Projects: $25,000 or More. Construction projects and equipment purchases which cost $25,000 or
more will be included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP); minor capital outlays of less than $25,000 will
be included with the operating program budgets. Such projects are accounted for in the Capital Outlay Fund.
B. CIP Purpose. The purpose of the CIP is to systematically plan, schedule, and finance capital projects to
ensure cost-effectiveness as well as conformance with established policies. The CIP is a five-year plan
organized into the same functional groupings used for the operating programs. The CIP will reflect a balance
between capital replacement projects that repair, replace or enhance existing facilities, equipment or
infrastructure; and capital facility projects that significantly expand or add to the City's existing fixed assets.
C. Project Manager. Every CIP project will have a project manager who will prepare the project proposal,
ensure that required phases are completed on schedule, authorize all project expenditures, ensure that all
regulations and laws are observed, and periodically report project status.
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Attachment 9
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
D. CIP Review Committee. Headed by the City Manager or designee, this Committee will review project
proposals, determine project phasing, recommend project managers, review and evaluate the draft CIP budget
document, and report CIP project progress on an ongoing basis.
E. CIP Phases. The CIP will emphasize project planning, with projects progressing through at least two and up
to ten of the following phases:
1. Designate. Appropriates funds based on projects designated for funding by the Council through adoption
of the Financial Plan.
2. Study. Concept design, site selection, feasibility analysis, schematic design, environmental
determination, property appraisals, scheduling, grant application, grant approval, specification preparation
for equipment purchases.
3. Environmental Review. EIR preparation, other environmental studies.
4. Real Property Acquisitions. Property acquisition for projects, if necessary.
5. Site Preparation. Demolition, hazardous materials abatements, other pre -construction work.
6. Design. Final design, plan and specification preparation and construction cost estimation.
7. Construction. Construction contracts.
Construction Management. Contract project management and inspection, soils and material tests, other
support services during construction.
Equipment Acquisitions. Vehicles, heavy machinery, computers, office furnishings, other equipment
items acquired and installed independently from construction contracts.
10. Debt Service. Installment payments of principal and interest for completed projects funded through debt
financings. Expenditures for this project phase are included in the Debt Service section of the Financial
Plan.
Generally, it will become more difficult for a project to move from one phase to the next. As such, more
projects will be studied than will be designed, and more projects will be designed than will be constructed or
purchased during the term of the CIP.
F. CIP Appropriation. The City's annual CIP appropriation for study, design, acquisition and/or construction
is based on the projects designated by the Council through adoption of the Financial Plan. Adoption of the
Financial Plan CIP appropriation does not automatically authorize funding for specific project phases. This
authorization generally occurs only after the preceding project phase has been completed and approved by the
Council and costs for the succeeding phases have been fully developed.
Accordingly, project appropriations are generally made when contracts are awarded. If project costs at the
time of bid award are less than the budgeted amount, the balance will be unappropriated and returned to fund
balance or allocated to another project. If project costs at the time of bid award are greater than budget
amounts, five basic options are available:
1. Eliminate the project.
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Attachment 9
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
2. Defer the project for consideration to the next Financial Plan period.
3. Rescope or change the phasing of the project to meet the existing budget.
4. Transfer funding from another specified, lower priority project.
5. Appropriate additional resources as necessary from fund balance.
G. CIP Budget Carryover. Appropriations for CIP projects lapse three years after budget adoption. Projects
which lapse from lack of project account appropriations may be resubmitted for inclusion in a subsequent
CIP. Project accounts, which have been appropriated, will not lapse until completion of the project phase.
H. Program Objectives. Project phases will be listed as objectives in the program narratives of the programs,
which manage the projects.
[. Public Art. CIP projects will be evaluated during the budget process and prior to each phase for
conformance with the City's public art policy, which generally requires that 1% of eligible project
construction costs be set aside for public art. Excluded from this requirement are underground projects, utility
infrastructure projects, funding from outside agencies, and costs other than construction such as study,
environmental review, design, site preparation, land acquisition and equipment purchases.
It is generally preferred that public art be incorporated directly into the project, but this is not practical or
desirable for all projects; in this case, an in -lieu contribution to public art will be made. To ensure that funds
are adequately budgeted for this purpose regardless of whether public art will be directly incorporated into the
project, funds for public art will be identified separately in the CIP.
J. General Plan Consistency Review. The Planning Commission will review the Preliminary CIP for
consistency with the General Plan and provide is findings to the Council prior to adoption.
CAPITAL FINANCING AND DEBT MANAGEMENT
A. Capital Financing
1. The City will consider the use of debt financing only for one-time capital improvement projects and only
under the following circumstances:
a. When the project's useful life will exceed the term of the financing.
b. When project revenues or specific resources will be sufficient to service the long-term debt.
2. Debt financing will not be considered appropriate for any recurring purpose such as current operating and
maintenance expenditures. The issuance of short-term instruments such as revenue, tax or bond
anticipation notes is excluded from this limitation. (See Investment Policy)
3. Capital improvements will be financed primarily through user fees, service charges, assessments, special
taxes or developer agreements when benefits can be specifically attributed to users of the facility.
Accordingly, development impact fees should be created and implemented at levels sufficient to ensure
that new development pays its fair share of the cost of constructing necessary community facilities.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
4. Transportation impact fees are a major funding source in financing transportation system improvements.
However, revenues from these fees are subject to significant fluctuation based on the rate of new
development. Accordingly, the following guidelines will be followed in designing and building projects
funded with transportation impact fees:
a. The availability of transportation impact fees in funding a specific project will be analyzed on a case-
by-case basis as plans and specification or contract awards are submitted for City Manager or Council
approval.
b. If adequate funds are not available at that time, the Council will make one of two determinations:
• Defer the project until funds are available.
• Based on the high-priority of the project, advance funds from the General Fund, which will be
reimbursed as soon as funds become available. Repayment of General Fund advances will be the
first use of transportation impact fee funds when they become available.
5. The City will use the following criteria to evaluate pay-as-you-go versus long-term financing in funding
capital improvements:
a. Factors Favoring
Pay -As -You -Go Financing
1. Current revenues and adequate fund balances are available or project phasing can be accomplished.
2. Existing debt levels adversely affect the City's credit rating.
3. Market conditions are unstable or present difficulties in marketing.
b. Factors Favoring Long Term Financing
1. Revenues available for debt service are deemed sufficient and reliable so that long-term financings
can be marketed with investment grade credit ratings.
2. The project securing the financing is of the type, which will support an investment grade credit rating.
3. Market conditions present favorable interest rates and demand for City financings.
4. A project is mandated by state or federal requirements, and resources are insufficient or unavailable.
5. The project is immediately required to meet or relieve capacity needs and current resources are
insufficient or unavailable.
6. The life of the project or asset to be financed is 10 years or longer.
7. Vehicle leasing when market conditions and operational circumstances present favorable
opportunities.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
B. Debt Management
1. The City will not obligate the General Fund to secure long-term financings except when marketability can
be significantly enhanced.
2. An internal feasibility analysis will be prepared for each long-term financing which analyzes the impact
on current and future budgets for debt service and operations. This analysis will also address the
reliability of revenues to support debt service.
3. The City will generally conduct financings on a competitive basis. However, negotiated financings may
be used due to market volatility or the use of an unusual or complex financing or security structure.
4. The City will seek an investment grade rating (Baa/BBB or greater) on any direct debt and will seek
credit enhancements such as letters of credit or insurance when necessary for marketing purposes,
availability and cost-effectiveness.
5. The City will monitor all forms of debt annually coincident with the City's Financial Plan preparation and
review process and report concerns and remedies, if needed, to the Council.
6. The City will diligently monitor its compliance with bond covenants and ensure its adherence to federal
arbitrage regulations.
7. The City will maintain good, ongoing communications with bond rating agencies about its financial
condition. The City will follow a policy of full disclosure on every financial report and bond prospectus
(Official Statement).
C. Debt Capacity
1. General Purpose Debt Capacity. The City will carefully monitor its levels of general-purpose debt.
Because our general purpose debt capacity is limited, it is important that we only use general purpose
debt financing for high-priority projects where we cannot reasonably use other financing methods for two
key reasons:
a. Funds borrowed for a project today are not available to fund other projects tomorrow.
b. Funds committed for debt repayment today are not available to fund operations in the future.
In evaluating debt capacity, general-purpose annual debt service payments should generally not exceed
10% of General Fund revenues; and in no case should they exceed 15%. Further, direct debt will not
exceed 2% of assessed valuation; and no more than 60% of capital improvement outlays will be funded
from long-term financings.
2. Enterprise Fund Debt Capacity. The City will set enterprise fund rates at levels needed to fully cover
debt service requirements as well as operations, maintenance, administration and capital improvement
costs. The ability to afford new debt for enterprise operations will be evaluated as an integral part of the
City's rate review and setting process.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
D. Independent Disclosure Counsel
The following criteria will be used on a case-by-case basis in determining whether the City should retain the
services of an independent disclosure counsel in conjunction with specific project financings:
1. The City will generally not retain the services of an independent disclosure counsel when all of the
following circumstances are present:
a. The revenue source for repayment is under the management or control of the City, such as general
obligation bonds, revenue bonds, lease -revenue bonds or certificates of participation.
b. The bonds will be rated or insured.
2. The City will consider retaining the services of an independent disclosure counsel when one or more of
following circumstances are present:
a. The financing will be negotiated, and the underwriter has not separately engaged an underwriter's
counsel for disclosure purposes.
b. The revenue source for repayment is not under the management or control of the City, such as land-
based assessment districts, tax allocation bonds or conduit financings.
c. The bonds will not be rated or insured.
d. The City's financial advisor, bond counsel or underwriter recommends that the City retain an
independent disclosure counsel based on the circumstances of the financing.
E. Land -Based Financings
1. Public Purpose. There will be a clearly articulated public purpose in forming an assessment or special
tax district in financing public infrastructure improvements. This should include a finding by the Council
as to why this form of financing is preferred over other funding options such as impact fees,
reimbursement agreements or direct developer responsibility for the improvements.
New development should generally be expected to "pay its own way." (i.e.. provide funding through
one mechanism or another that funds its "Proportional share" of public improvement and infrastructure
costs and ongoing, operations and maintenance costs).
(l) The City will consider the use of city -based funding sources to fund public facility and
infrastructure improvements that provide for the health, safety and welfare of exis_t_in; and
future residents and/or 12rovide measurable economic development and fiscal benefits. In
evaluating whether the City will use city -based funding sources, the following, evaluation
criteria should be considered:
(a) Significant public benefit, demonstrated by compliance with and furtherance of
General Plan goals, policies, and pro rgams
(b) Alignment with the Major City Goals and other important objectives in place at the
time of the application
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
(c) Head of Household Join Creation
(d) Housing Creation
(e) Circulation/Connectivity Improvements
(f) Net General Fund fiscal impact
(2) The City generally will not fund or offer ublic financing for infrastructure_
improvements that confer only private benefit to individual property -owners or
development projects.
(3) The Ci!y shall seek continuity or im rovements to existing levels of municipal service
hy assuring adequate funding for the City's operation, maintenance and infrastructure
replacement costs_."
Eligible Improvements. Except as otherwise determined by the Council when proceedings for district
formation are commenced, preference in financing public improvements through a special tax district
shall be given for those public improvements that help achieve clearly identified community facility and
infrastructure goals in accordance with adopted facility and infrastructure plans as set forth in key policy
documents such as the General Plan, Specific Plan, Facility or Infrastructure Master Plans, or Capital
Improvement Plan.
Such improvements include study, design, construction and/or acquisition of:
a. Public safety facilities.
b. Water supply, distribution and treatment systems.
c. Waste collection and treatment systems.
d. Major transportation system improvements, such as freeway interchanges; bridges; intersection
improvements; construction of new or widened arterial or collector streets (including related
landscaping and lighting); sidewalks and other pedestrian paths; transit facilities; and bike paths.
e. Storm drainage, creek protection and flood protection improvements.
f. Parks, trails, community centers and other recreational facilities.
g. Open space.
h. Cultural and social service facilities.
i. Other governmental facilities and improvements such as offices, information technology systems and
telecommunication systems.
School facilities will not be financed except under appropriate joint community facilities agreements or
joint exercise of powers agreements between the City and school districts.
3. Active Role. Even though land-based financings may be a limited obligation of the City, we will play an
active role in managing the district. This means that the City will select and retain the financing team,
including the financial advisor, bond counsel, trustee, appraiser, disclosure counsel, assessment engineer
and underwriter. Any costs incurred by the City in retaining these services will generally be the
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Attachment 9
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
responsibility of the property owners or developer, and will be advanced via a deposit when an
application is filed; or will be paid on a contingency fee basis from the proceeds from the bonds.
Credit Quality. When a developer requests a district, the City will carefully evaluate the applicant's
financial plan and ability to carry the project, including the payment of assessments and special taxes
during build -out. This may include detailed background, credit and lender checks, and the preparation of
independent appraisal reports and market absorption studies. For districts where one property owner
accounts for more than 25% of the annual debt service obligation, a letter of credit further securing the
financing may be required.
Reserve Fund. A reserve fund should be established in the lesser amount of. the maximum annual debt
service; 125% of the annual average debt service; or 10% of the bond proceeds.
Value -to -Debt Ratios. The minimum value -to -debt ratio should generally be 4:1. This means the value of
the property in the district, with the public improvements, should be at least four times the amount of the
assessment or special tax debt. In special circumstances, after conferring and receiving the concurrence
of the City's financial advisor and bond counsel that a lower value -to -debt ratio is financially prudent
under the circumstances, the City may consider allowing a value -to -debt ratio of 3:1. The Council should
make special findings in this case.
Appraisal Methodology. Determination of value of property in the district shall be based upon the full
cash value as shown on the ad valorem assessment roll or upon an appraisal by an independent Member
Appraisal Institute (MAI). The definitions, standards and assumptions to be used for appraisals shall be
determined by the City on a case-by-case basis, with input from City consultants and district applicants,
and by reference to relevant materials and information promulgated by the State of California, including
the Appraisal Standards for Land -Secured Financings prepared by the California Debt and Investment
Advisory Commission.
Capitalized Interest During Construction. Decisions to capitalize interest will be made on case-by-case
basis, with the intent that if allowed, it should improve the credit quality of the bonds and reduce
borrowing costs, benefiting both current and future property owners.
9. Maximum Burden. Annual assessments (or special taxes in the case of Mello -Roos or similar districts)
should generally not exceed 1% of the sales price of the property; and total property taxes, special
assessments and special taxes payments collected on the tax roll should generally not exceed 2%.
10. Benefit Apportionment. Assessments and special taxes will be apportioned according to a formula that is
clear, understandable, equitable and reasonably related to the benefit received by—or burden attributed
to—each parcel with respect to its financed improvement. Any annual escalation factor should generally
not exceed 2%.
F. Development Impact Fees Guidelines and Policies
Development impact fees are one-time fees levied on new development, typically levied at the
time buiIdin r Permits are issued to fund a range of the Cit 's Rubl.ic facilities and infrastructure.
Such fees are levied both on a citywide basis as well as for specific areas (e.g., the Specific Plan
Areas). The levy of development impact fees is regulated by the State's Mitigation Fee Act
(Government Code Section 66000 et seg.).
1. Develol2ment impact fees should be seL consistent with the statute "nexus" analysis
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
and findings, to fund new development's proportional share of public facility and
infrastructure costs.
2. Improvements funded by development impact fees should be referenced generally in the
appropriate lannin documents (e.g.. General Plan Specific Plans etc. and reflected
in the City's Capital Improvement Program.
3. An exception to this polipy may be created by a development areement between the
City and a private developer. In this case public investments are offset by measurable
public benefits.
4. The City's development impact fees can be "leveraged" through the use of fee credit
and reim ursement agreements with developers and landowners.
5. The Cit 's a re ate fee levels should not render new development that is otherwise
consistent with City plans and regulations economically infeasible. Aggregate fee levels
should be evaluated in terms of a reasonable standard, but not a strict
asmyregate fee levels should not exceed an average_ of approximately 10 to 12 percent of
the market value of the new development, either on a per-unit or per -square foot basis).
G. The City may consider reductions or waivers of its development impact fees in cases
where a development proi.ect meets specific City planningor economic development
policies such as affordable housing.proiects. In such cases the amount of funding
foregone must be replaced with other funding sources available to the City.
1. Special Tax District Administration. In the case of Mello -Roos or similar special tax districts, the total
maximum annual tax should not exceed 110% of annual debt service. The rate and method of
apportionment should include a back-up tax in the event of significant changes from the initial
development plan, and should include procedures for prepayments.
1. Communijy Facilities Districts or Assessment Districts offer a wa to fund
infrastructure, maintenance, or municipal services through special taxes or assessments_
levied on property owners benefiting from the thus -funded improvements or services. It
can be used for both eapital improvements and ongoing facility maintenance or services.
2. The City will consider the formation of financing districts using the State's assessment
law or the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act for its newly develaping areas on a_
case- by -case basis, consistent with technical analysis and Cilypriorities [i.e_, capital or
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
ongoing funding).
3. The City will consider the effect of" the special tax on the City's ability to issue General
Obligation bonds or other prop!ga-based tax measures.
4. Such districts should fund infrastructure or services servingar otherwise providing
benefit to the area subject to the assessment or special tax.,
5. Such districts can fund public facilities or infrastructure otherwise funded with the
City's development im act fees or roiect-s ecific exactions. In such cases the area's
development impact fee obligations will be adjusted ro ortionatel .
C. Within any such districts, propLrty value -to -lien ratio should consistent with typical
underwriting standards, be at least 4.0:1 after calculating the value of the financed
public improvements to be installed and considering any prior or pending s ecial taxes
or improvement liens.
7. Consistent with underwritinp_ standards and market considerations, and as a matter of
policy, the City will limit the maximum amount of special taxes to be levied on an
parcel of property within a Communit ry Facilities District, in any given fiscal year,
together with thee�nera_l property taxes, general obligation Bonds, and other special
taxes and assessments levied on such 12arcel, shall not exceed an amount -equal to one
and eight- tenths percent (1.8 percent) of the projected a_ssessed value of the parcel (and
improvements if applicable). How the special tax capacity is allocated between capital
and ongoing expenditures will depend upon the City's priorities.
8. The City shall have discretion to allow a s tial tax in excess of the established limits
for any lands within the CFD which are designated For commercial or industrial uses.
9. As a part of such district Formations; the City will retain a special tax consultant to prepare a
report which recommends a special tax rate and method for the proposed CFD and evaluates the
special tax proposed to detennine its ability to adequately fund_ identified public facilities. City
administrative costs, services (if applicable) -and other related expenditures.
2. Foreclosure Covenants. In managing administrative costs, the City will establish minimum delinquency
amounts per owner, and for the district as a whole, on a case-by-case basis before initiating foreclosure
proceedings.
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS Attachment 9
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
3. Disclosure to Bondholders. In general, each property owner who accounts for more than 10% of the
annual debt service or bonded indebtedness must provide ongoing disclosure information annually as
described under SEC Rule 15(c)-12.
4. Disclosure to Prospective Purchasers. Full disclosure about outstanding balances and annual payments
should be made by the seller to prospective buyers at the time that the buyer bids on the property. It
should not be deferred to after the buyer has made the decision to purchase. When appropriate, applicants
or property owners may be required to provide the City with a disclosure plan.
G. Conduit Financings
1. The City will consider requests for conduit financing on a case-by-case basis using the following criteria:
a. The City's bond counsel will review the terms of the financing, and render an opinion that there will
be no liability to the City in issuing the bonds on behalf of the applicant.
b. There is a clearly articulated public purpose in providing the conduit financing.
c. The applicant is capable of achieving this public purpose.
2. This means that the review of requests for conduit financing will generally be a two-step process:
a. First asking the Council if they are interested in considering the request, and establishing the ground
rules for evaluating it.
b. And then returning with the results of this evaluation, and recommending approval of appropriate
financing documents if warranted.
This two-step approach ensures that the issues are clear for both the City and applicant, and that key
policy questions are answered.
3. The workscope necessary to address these issues will vary from request to request, and will have to be
determined on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, the City should generally be fully reimbursed for our
costs in evaluating the request; however, this should also be determined on a case-by-case basis.
B. Refinancings
1. General Guidelines. Periodic reviews of all outstanding debt will be undertaken to determine refinancing
opportunities. Refinancings will be considered (within federal tax law constraints) under the following
conditions:
a. There is a net economic benefit.
b. It is needed to modernize covenants that are adversely affecting the City's financial position or
operations.
c. The City wants to reduce the principal outstanding in order to achieve future debt service savings, and
it has available working capital to do so from other sources.
2. Standards for Economic Savings. In general, refinancings for economic savings will be undertaken
whenever net present value savings of at least five percent (5%) of the refunded debt can be achieved.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
a. Refinancings that produce net present value savings of less than five percent will be considered on a
case-by-case basis, provided that the present value savings are at least three percent (3%) of the
refunded debt.
b. Refinancings with savings of less than three percent (3%), or with negative savings, will not be
considered unless there is a compelling public policy objective.
C. Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District Guidelines and Policies
a. EIFD financing should be considered for public Facilities or infrastructure improvernents that confer
Citywide and/or regional benefits. This may include the "City share" of infrastructure included in the
City's development impact fees.
b. Unless there is a Development Agreement in place that provides otherwise EIFDs. should not be used
to fund real estate projects' proportional share of infrastructure costs otherwise included in the City's
development impact fees or char red as ro'ect-s ecific exactions e.g., subdivision improvements).
c. City should consider EIFDs when more than one local government jurisdiction is participating to
produce maximum benefit.
d. At the time of formation of the E1FD (or if chanes to the EIFD are contemplated), the City should
require a fiscal impact analysis to determine if an EIFD is fiscally prudent and analyzeop>,ortunity
cost to the Cirv's General Fund.
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
A. Regular Staffing
The budget will fully appropriate the resources needed for authorized regular staffing and will limit
programs to the regular staffing authorized.
Regular employees will be the core work force and the preferred means of staffing ongoing, year-round
program activities that should be performed by full-time City employees rather than independent
contractors. The City will strive to provide competitive compensation and benefit schedules for its
authorized regular work force. Each regular employee will:
a. Fill an authorized regular position.
b. Be assigned to an appropriate bargaining unit, unless designated as an unrC121-esented management or
confidential classification.
c. Receive salary and benefits consistent with labor agreements or other compensation plans.
3. To manage the growth of the regular work force and overall staffing costs, the City will follow these
procedures:
a. The Council will authorize all regular positions.
b. The Human Resources Department will coordinate and approve the hiring of all regular and
supplemental staff.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
c. All requests for additional regular positions will include evaluations of:
• The necessity, term and expected results of the proposed activity.
• Staffing and materials costs including salary, benefits, equipment, uniforms, clerical support and
facilities.
• The ability of private industry to provide the proposed service.
• Additional revenues or cost savings, which may be realized.
4. Periodically, and before any request for additional regular positions, programs will be evaluated to
determine if they can be accomplished with fewer regular employees. (See Productivity Review Policy)
5. Staffing and contract service cost ceilings will limit total expenditures for regular employees,
supplemental staff, and independent contractors hired to provide operating and maintenance services.
B. Supplemental Staff
1. The hiring of supplemental staff will not be used as an incremental method for expanding the City's
regular work force.
Supplemental staff include all employees other than regular employees, elected officials and volunteers.
Supplemental staff include temporary employees, interns, and contract employees. Supplemental staff
ma work on a full-time or art -time basis -and -will generally augment regular City staffing. Supplemental
staff ma„y be used as extra -help during peak workloads, as coverageuring extended absences of regular
employees, seasonal workforce as a means to assess ongoing staffing needs or as the staffing method for
prograrn delivery that is most effectively staffed using part-time hours to ensure adequate coverage.
3. The City Manager and Department Heads will encourage the use of supplemental staff rather than regular
employees to meet peak workload requirements, fill interim vacancies, and accomplish tasks where less
than full-time, year-round staffing is required.
Under this guideline, supplemental_ gaff hours will generally not exceed 50% of a regular, full-time
position (1,000 hours annually). There may be limited circumstances where the use of supplemental staff
on an ongoing basis in excess of this target may be appropriate due to unique programming or staffing
requirements. However, any such exceptions must be approved by the City Manager based on the review
and recommendation of the Human Resources Director.
4. Contract employees are defined as supplemental staff with written contracts approved by the City
Manager who may receive approved benefits Contract employees will generally be used for medium-term
(generally between six months and two years) projects, programs or activities requiring specialized or
augmented levels of staffing for a specific period.
The services of contract employees will be discontinued upon completion of the assigned project, program or
activity. Accordingly, contract employees will not be used for services that are anticipated to be delivered on
an ongoing basis and as such, a determination as to the expected need will be made at the end of each contract
term and prior to extending or renewing a contract.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
C. Overtime Management
1. Overtime should be used only when necessary and when other alternatives are not feasible or cost
effective.
2. All overtime must be pre -authorized by a department head or delegate unless it is assumed pre -approved
by its nature. For example, overtime that results when an employee is assigned to standby and/or must
respond to an emergency or complete an emergency response.
3. Departmental operating budgets should reflect anticipated annual overtime costs and departments will
regularly monitor overtime use and expenditures.
4. When considering the addition of regular or temporary staffing, the use of overtime as an alternative will
be considered. The department will take into account:
a. The duration that additional staff resources may be needed.
b. The cost of overtime versus the cost of additional staff.
c. The skills and abilities of current staff.
d. Training costs associated with hiring additional staff.
e. The impact of overtime on existing staff.
D. Independent Contractors
Independent contractors are not City employees. They may be used in two situations:
1. Short-term, peak workload assignments to be accomplished using personnel contracted through an outside
temporary employment agency (OEA). In this situation, it is anticipated that City staff will closely
monitor the work of OEA employees and minimal training will be required. However, they will always
be considered the employees of the OEA and not the City. All placements through an OEA will be
coordinated through the Human Resources Department and subject to the approval of the Human
Resources Director.
2. Construction of public works projects and delivery of operating, maintenance or specialized professional
services not routinely performed by City employees. Such services will be provided without close
supervision by City staff, and the required methods, skills and equipment will generally be determined
and provided by the contractor. Contract awards will be guided by the City's purchasing policies and
procedures. (See Contracting for Services Policy)
PRODUCTIVITY
.._.... -...:..3
Ensuring the "delivery of service with value for cost" is one of the key concepts embodied in the City's Mission
Statement (San Luis Obispo Style— Quality With Vision). To this end, the City will constantly monitor and
review our methods of operation to ensure that services continue to be delivered in the most cost-effective manner
possible.
This review process encompasses a wide range of productivity issues, including:
A. Analyzing systems and procedures to identify and remove unnecessary review requirements.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
B. Evaluating the ability of new technologies and related capital investments to improve productivity.
C. Developing the skills and abilities of all City employees.
D. Developing and implementing appropriate methods of recognizing and rewarding exceptional employee
performance.
E. Evaluating the ability of the private sector to perform the same level of service at a lower cost.
F. Periodic formal reviews of operations on a systematic, ongoing basis.
G. Maintaining a decentralized approach in managing the City's support service functions. Although some level
of centralization is necessary for review and control purposes, decentralization supports productivity by:
1. Encouraging accountability by delegating responsibility to the lowest possible level.
2. Stimulating creativity, innovation and individual initiative.
3. Reducing the administrative costs of operation by eliminating unnecessary review procedures.
4. Improving the organization's ability to respond to changing needs, and identify and implement cost-
saving programs.
5. Assigning responsibility for effective operations and citizen responsiveness to the department.
H. Maintaining City purchasing policies and procedures that are as efficient and effective as possible.
CONTRACTING FOR SERVICES
A. General Policy Guidelines
1. Contracting with the private sector for the delivery of services provides the City with a significant
opportunity for cost containment and productivity enhancements. As such, the City is committed to using
private sector resources in delivering municipal services as a key element in our continuing efforts to
provide cost-effective programs.
2. Private sector contracting approaches under this policy include construction projects, professional
services, outside employment agencies and ongoing operating and maintenance services.
3. In evaluating the costs of private sector contracts compared with in-house performance of the service,
indirect, direct, and contract administration costs of the City will be identified and considered.
4. Whenever private sector providers are available and can meet established service levels, they will be
seriously considered as viable service delivery alternatives using the evaluation criteria outlined below.
5. For programs and activities currently provided by City employees, conversions to contract services will
generally be made through attrition, reassignment or absorption by the contractor.
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
B. Evaluation Criteria
Within the general policy guidelines stated above, the cost-effectiveness of contract services in meeting
established service levels will be determined on a case-by-case basis using the following criteria:
1. Is a sufficient private sector market available to competitively deliver this service and assure a reasonable
range of alternative service providers?
2. Can the contract be effectively and efficiently administered?
3. What are the consequences if the contractor fails to perform, and can the contract reasonably be written to
compensate the City for any such damages?
4. Can a private sector contractor better respond to expansions, contractions or special requirements of the
service?
5. Can the work scope be sufficiently defined to ensure that competing proposals can be fairly and fully
evaluated, as well as the contractor's performance after bid award?
6. Does the use of contract services provide us with an opportunity to redefine service levels?
7. Will the contract limit our ability to deliver emergency or other high priority services?
8. Overall, can the City successfully delegate the performance of the service but still retain accountability
and responsibility for its delivery?
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION I
ALL FUNDS COMBINED
Revenues
Tax Revenues
Fines and Forfeitures
Investment and Property Revenues
Subventions and Grants
Service Charges
Governmental Funds
Enterprise Funds
Trust and Agency Revenues
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Community Safety
Public Utilities
Infrastructure & Transportation
Community & Neighborhood Livability
Culture & Recreation
Environmental Health & Open Space
Fiscal Health & Governance
Ca1PERS Discount Rate
Total Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Reimbursed Expenditures
Debt Service
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Adjustment to Working Capial
Operating Transfers In
Operating Transfers Out
Proceeds from Debt Financings
Projected MOA Adjustments
GST Loan per Council Approval
Other Sources (Uses)
Expenditure Savings
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance/Working Capital,
Beginning of Year
Fund Balance/Working Capital,
End of Year
Prior Year Restatement
Adjustment for Long Term Accruals
Reserved for Debt Service
Unreserved
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
°
/o Change
Proposed
°
�° Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
-42%
2018-19
-2%
56,318,548
56,640,730
58,035,218
2%
59,710,423
3%
752,176
825,900
734,900
-11%
740,800
1%
1,932,386
465,400
512,898
100/0
516,898
1%
14,581,707
20,921,552
5,323,605
-75%
18,678,083
251%
13,659,017
11,423,383
11,573,271
1%
11,493,599
-1%
42,991,282
39,794,789
41,030,083
3%
42,131,220
3%
1,135,935
1,140,205
1,310,950
15%
1,177,691
-10%
1,031,450
166,100
500,360
201%
550,431
10%
132,402,501
131,378,059
119,021,285
-9%
134,999.146
13':/0
25,718,455
26,902,897
29,782,942
11%
30,536,947
3%
27,669,793
34,427,550
30,290,423
-12%
30,864,742
2%
8,433,268
10,245,126
9,074,845
-11%
8,815,479
-3%
7,505,856
8,627,251
3,613,123
-58%
3,858,583
7%
-
-
8,673,430
8,811,479
2%
22,835,600
27,306,548
22,279,840
-18%
22,384,524
0%
-
-
432,211
92,162,971
107,509,372
103,714,603
-4%
105,703,965
2%
26,717,422
72,506,914
34,574,100
-52%
92,810,707
168%
(4,008,992)
(4,164,747)
(4,264,633)
2%
(4,264,633)
7,668,076
7,844,645
7,969,872
2%
8,860,368
11%
122,539,478
183,696,184
141,993,942
-23%
203,110,407
43%
10,123,214
11,999,475
12,219,102
2%
11,592,133
-5%
(9,950,118)
(11,998,475)
(12,218,759)
2%
(11,592,133)
-5%
688,500
1,166,600
20,095,000
1623%
65,624,000
227%
-
(15,398)
-
-100%
-
(500,000)
-
-100%
-
-
1,428,944
1,268,462
-11%
1,300,000
2%
861,596
2,081,146
21,363,805
927%
66,924,000
213%
10,724,619
(50,236,979)
(1,608,852)
-97%
(1,187,262)
-26%
108,867,259
119,556,437
69,319,458
-42%
67,710,607
-2%
(709,020) - -
(35,441) - - -
2,119,724 2,119,724 2,119,723 0% 2,119,721 0%
48,130,091 67,199,735 65,590,884 -2% 64,403,625 -2%
Total Fund Balance/Working Capital 119,556,437 69,319,458 67,710,607 -2% 66,523,345 -2%
ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS COMBINED
Expenditures
Operating Programs'
Community Safety
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
o
�o Change
Proposed
o
�o Change
Infrastructure & Transportation
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
179%
2018-19
1%
Revenues
7,505,856
8,619,751
3,605,623
-58%
3,851,083
7%
Tax Revenues
56,318,548
56,640,730
58,035,218
2%
59,710,423
3%
Fines and Forfeitures
172,353
156,000
147,600
-5%
147,600
2%
Investment and Property Revenues
630,908
308,600
356,098
15%
356,098
0%
Subventions and Grants
11,692,887
16,750,282
2,401,968
-86%
14,872,325
519%
Service Charges
13,659,017
11,423,383
11,573,271
1%
11,493,599
-1%
Other Revenues
272,299
72,500
170,660
135%
210,660
23%
Total Revenues
82,746,011
85,351,495
72,684,815
-15%
86,790,706
19%
Expenditures
Operating Programs'
Community Safety
25,718,455
26,902,897
29,782,942
11%
30,536,947
3%
Infrastructure & Transportation
3,146,156
4,050,322
11,281,049
179%
11,443,756
1%
Culture & Recreation
7,505,856
8,619,751
3,605,623
-58%
3,851,083
7%
Community & Neighborhood Livability
8,433,268
10,245,126
8,558,952
-16%
8,283,932
-3%
Environmental Health & Open Space
-
-
1,023,313
-11%
1,044,495
2%
Fiscal Health & Governance
16,698,171
22,138,801
14,976,666
-32%
14,968,836
0%
Ca1PERS Discount Rate
-
-
-
0%
375,000
-12%
Total Operating Programs
61,501,905
71,956,897
69,228,545
4%
70,504,049
2%
Reimbursed Expenditures
(4,008,992)
(4,164,747)
(4,264,633)
2%
(4,264,633)
Total Operating Expenditures
57,492,913
67,792,150
64,963,912
4%
66,239,416
2%
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
19,102,153
40,473,435
7,574,100
-81%
23,515,607
210%
Debt Service
3,101,381
3,245,866
3,374,758
4%
3,506,210
4%
Total Expenditures
79,696,448
111,511,451
75,912,770
-32%
93,261,233
23%
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers In
7,826,118
10,259,577
11,469,102
12%
11,092,133
-3%
Operating Transfers Out
(8,514,070)
(10,946,912)
(10,212,193)
-70/o
(9,362,660)
-8%
Proceeds from Debt Financings
688,500
1,166,600
595,000
-49%
624,000
5%
Projected MOA Adjustments
47,199,704
-
-
-48%
-
0%
Expenditure Savings
-
1,428,944
1,268,462
-11%
1,300,000
2%
Total Other Sources (Uses)
548
1,908,209
3,120,371
64%
3,653,473
17%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses 3,050,111 (24,251,747) (107,584) -1000/0 (2,817,054) 2518%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
47,908,724
50,249,815
25,998,068
-48%
25,890,485
0%
Prior Year Restatement
(709,020)
-
Non -Dispensable Restricted
-
-
-
-
47,199,704
50,249,815
25,998,068
-48%
25,890,485
0%
Fund Balance, End of Year
Reserved for Debt Service
2,119,724
2,119,724
2,119,723
0%
2,119,721
0%
Unreserved
48,130,091
23,878,344
23,770,762
0%
20,953,709
-12%
Total Fund Balance
50,249,815
25,998,068
25,890,485
0%
23,073,430
-11%
Prior to 2017-18, Operating and Capital expenditures were categorized into different City Functions.
CHANGES IN VINANCIAL POSITION
ALL ENTERPRISE AND AGENCY FUNDS COMBINED
Revenues
Fines and Forfeitures
Investment and Property Revenues
From Other Governments
Service Charges
Other Revenues
Trust and Agency Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs'
Community Safety
Community & Neighborhood Livability
Environmental Health & Open Space
Infrastructure & Transportation
Culture & Recreation
CalPERS Discount Rate
Fiscal Health & Governance
Total Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Debt Service
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Adjustment to Working Capial
Operating Transfers In
Proceeds from Debt Financings
Operating Transfers Out
GST Loan per Council Approval
Projected MOA Adjustments
Other Sources (Uses)
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Working Capital, Beginning of Year
Adjustment for Long Term Accruals
Working Capital, End of Year
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
Uo
YO Change
Proposed
�o Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
2%
579,823
669,900
587,300
-12%
593,200
1%
1,301,478
156,800
156,800
160,800
3%
2,888,820
4,171,270
2,921,637
-30%
3,805,758
30%
42,991,282
39,794,789
41,030,083
3%
42,131,220
3%
759,151
93,600
329,700
252%
339,771
3%
1,135,935
1,140,205
1,310,950
15%
1,177,691
-10%
49,656,490
46,026,564
46,336,470
1%
48,208,440
4%
»
-
515,893
531,547
3%
-
-
7,650,117
7,766,984
2%
24,523,637
30,377,228
19,009,374
-37%
19,420,986
2%
-
7,500
7,500
7,500
-
-
-
57,211
6,137,429
5,167,747
7,303,174
4t%
7,415,688
2%
30,661,066
35,552,475
34,486,058
-3%
35,199,916
2%
7,615,269
32,033,479
27,000,000
-16%
69,295,100
157%
4,566,695
4,598,779
4,595,114
0%
5,354,158
17%
42,843,030
72,184,733
66,081,172
-8%
109,849,174
66%
2,297,096
1,739,898
750,000
-57%
500,000
-33%
-
-
19,500,000
65,000,000
233%
(1,436,048)
(1,051,563)
(2,006,566)
91%
(2,229,473)
11%
-
(500,000)
-
-100%
-
-
(15,398)
-
-100%
-
861,048 172,937 18,243,434 10449% 63,270,527 247%
7,674,508 (25,985,232) (1,501,268) -94% 1,629,793 -209%
61,667,555 69,306,622 43,321,390 -37% 41,820,122
(35,441)
69,306,622 43,321,390 41,820,122 -3% 43,449,915 4%
'Prior to 2017-18, Operating and Capital expenditures were categorized into different City Functions.
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
GENERAL FUND
Revenues
Tax Revenues
Fines and Forfeitures
Investment and Property Revenues
Subventions and Grants
Service Charges
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Community Safety
Infrastructure & Transportation
Culture & Recreation
Community & Neighborhood Livability
Environmental Health & Open Space
Fiscal Health & Governance
CalPERS Discount Rate
Total Program Expenditures
Reimbursed Expenditures
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers In
Proceeds from Debt Issuance
Operating Transfers Out
Expenditure Savings
Other Sources
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Transfer to Local Revenue Measure Fund
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Prior Year Restatement
Non-Dispensible Restricted
Fund Balance, End of Year sub -total
Fund Balance Components:
Designated Reserves
Policy Reserve Level @ 20%:
Amount Over (Under) Policy Reserve:
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
°
/° Change
Proposed
°
�O Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
49,140,388
49,249,730
50,428,218
2%
52,031,423
3%
172,353
156,000
147,600
-5%
147,600
380,946
281,700
264,798
-6%
264,798
1,459,775
316,000
316,000
316,000
9,623,282
8,769,518
9,596,384
9%
9,484,425
-1%
86,259
55,000
130,660
138%
130,660
60,863,003
58,827,948
60,883,660
3%
62,374,906
2%
24,870,762
25,985,759
27,996,083
8%
28,679,650
2%
2,291,830
2,734,553
10,766,356
294%
10,912,749
1%
7,311,138
8,137,529
3,605,623
-56%
3,851,083
7%
7,834,301
9,826,194
8,283,022
-16%
8,000,386
-3%
-
-
878,628
892,427
2%
15,080,806
20,425,177
13,409,321
-34%
13,396,029
0%
-
-
-
375,000
57,388,837
67,109,212
64,939,032
-3%
66,107,324
2%
(4,008,992)
(4,164,747)
(4,264,633)
2%
(4,264,633)
53,379,845
62,944,465
60,674,399
4%
61,842,691
2%
2,920,748
2,353,342
3,398,300
44%
3,259,635
4%
(6,975,470)
(9,605,233)
(4,707,714)
-51%
(5,148,535)
90/0
1,428,944
1,268,462
-11%
1,300,000
2%
(4,054,722) (5,822,947) (40,952) -99% (588,900) 1338%
3,428,437 (9,939,464) 168,309 -102% (56,685) -134%
22,140,527 24,859,944 14,920,480 -40% 15,088,789 1%
(709,020) - -
24,859,944 14,920,480 15,088,789 ° 15,032.104 0%
(4,112,465) (489,000) (489,000) (489,000)
(11,475,178) (10,851,000) (10,708,080) -1% (10,777,000) 1%
9,272,301 3,580,480 3,891,709o 3,766,104 _3%
'Prior to 2017-18, Operating and Capital expenditures were categorized into different City Functions.
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
LOCAL REVENUE MEASURE SUB -FUND
Revenues
Tax Revenues
Investment & Property Revenue
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Community Safety
Infrastructure & Transportation
Culture & Recreation
Community & Neighborhood Livability
Environmental Health & Open Space
Fiscal Health & Governance
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers In
Operating Transfers Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Actual Mid -Year Proposed ° /O Proposed °
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 /° Change 2018-19 Change
7,178,160 7,391,000 7,607,000 3% 7,679,000 1%
9,043 - - -
7,187,203 7,391,000 7,607,000 3% 7,679,000 1%
705,843
812,655
1,786,859
120%
1,857,297
4%
854,326
1,315,769
514,693
-61%
531,007
3%
194,718
208,187
-
-100%
-
328,737
5,000
83,520
1570%
84,563
1%
144,685
152,068
5%
2,797,460
10,030,836
4,946,700
-51%
4,737,323
4%
4,881,084
12,372,447
7,476,458
-40%
7,362,258
-2%
-
-
1,658,400
1,197,723
-
-
(1,788,400)
(1,462,723)
-18%
-
-
(130,000)
(265,000)
104%
2,306,119
(4,981,447)
542
-100%
51,742
9442%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 2,426,279 4,732,398 (249.149) -105% (248.507) 00/0
Fund Balance, End of Year sub -total* 4) ()!° (196,765) a
Fund Balance Components:
Reserved (3,962,736)
Unreserved 769,662
*20% Reserve fund balance is fully reported -calculated within General Fund Changes in Financial Position.
Expenditures may be adjusted at each year-end to maintain the sub -fund balance above negative and the difference will be absorbed by the General Fund.
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
INSURANCE BENEFIT
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
Service Charges
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Fiscal Health & Governance
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed ° ° Proposed
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �O Change 2018-19 �O Change
987 -
987 - - -
2,128,437
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
2,128,437
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
2,124,000
1,739,898
750,000
-57%
500,000
-33%
2,124,000
1,739,898
750,000
-57%
500,000
-33%
(3,450)
739,898
(250,000)
-134%
(500,000)
100%
343,301
339,851
1,079,749
218%
829,749
-23%
339,851
1,079,749
829,749
-23%
329,749
-60%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FUND
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
Service Charges
Assessments
Other Service Charges
Total Service Charges
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Fiscal Health & Governance
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Prior Year Restatement
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed o Proposed
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �o Change o 2018-19 �o Change
222,111 214,000 227,000 6% 227,000
222,111 214,000 227,000 6% 227,000
222,111 214,000 227,000 6% 227,000
222,111 214,000 227,000 6% 227,000
2229111 214,000 227,000 6% 227,000
1,122 1,122 I A 22 1.122
1,122 1,122 1,122 1,122
TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FUND
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
Service Charges
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Fiscal Health & Governance
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Prior Year Restatement
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed O ° O Proposed °
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �Change 2018-19 �Change
1,723 1,100 1,400 27% 1,400
1,429,190 1,433,975 1,464,387 2% 1,493,675 2%
1,430,913 1,435,075 1,465,787 2% 1,495,075 2%
1,395,253 1,499,624 1,340,345 -11% 1,345,807 0%
1,395,253 1,499,624 1,340,345 -11% 1,345,807 0%
(28,412) (28,679) (27,679) -3% (28,679) 4%
(28,412) (28,679) (27,679) -3% (2$,679) 4%
7,247 (93,228) 97,763 -205% 120,589 23%
333.028 340,275 247,047 -27% 344.810 40%
340,275 247,047 344,810 40% 465,399 35%
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND
Revenues
From Other Governments
CDBG Allocation*
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Community & Neighborhood Livability
Fiscal Health & Governance
Total Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Debt Service
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Total Other Sources (uses)
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
°
/o Change
Proposed
°
/° Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
304,004
597,863
232,623
-61%
-
-I
304,004
597,863
232,623
-61%
-
-100%
270,230
413,932
192,410
-54%
198,983
3%
270,230
413,932
192,410
-54%
198,983
3%
164,853
337,899
105,000
-69%
-
-1000/0
435,083 751,831 297,410 -60% 198,983 -33%
147,487 153,969 154,000 0% 154,000
147,487 153,969 154,000 0% 154,000
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses 16,408 1 89,213 8921200% (44,983) -150%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year (83) 16,325 16,326 0% 105,539 546%
Fund Balance, End of Year 16,325 16,326 105,539 546% 60;556 -43%
*The City will hove more infoimalion whelherfund arc available in 2018-19 by the end gffiscal year 2017-18. No revenues are expected in 2018-19 at this lime.
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
GAS TAX FUND
Revenues
From Other Governments -
Gasoline Tax
Total Revenues
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed o Proposed
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �o Change o 2018-19 �o Change
1,033,757 965,000 965,000 965,000
1,033,757 965,000 965,000 965,000
(1,033,757) (965,000) (965,000) (965,000)
(1,033,757) (965,000) (965,000) (965,000)
In March 2010, the Legislature passed ABx8 6 and ABx8 9, which contained the provisions for a swap of
Proposition 42 state sales tax on gasoline with allocations from the motor vehicle excise tax (gas tax).
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) FUND
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed °
�° Change
° Proposed
�O Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
Revenues
Subventions and Grants 40,531
41,100
45,000 9%
45,000
Total Revenues 40,531
41,100
45,000 9%
45,000
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers Out (40,531) (41,100) (45,000) 9% (45,000)
Total Other Sources (Uses) (40,531) (41,100) (45,000) 9% (45,000)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year -
Fund Balance, End of Year - - - -
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANTS FUND
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
Subventions and Grants
Service Charges
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Community Safety
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Actual Mid -Year Proposed ° ° Proposed
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �O Change 2018-19 �o Change
12 - - -
206,831 105,708 81,345 -23% 21,325 -74%
1,782 69,000 - -100% -
208,625 174,708 81,345 -53% 21,325 -74%
141,850 104,483 - -100%
60,169 69,607 - -100% -
202,019 174,090 - -100% -
6,606 618 81,345 13063%
21,325 -74%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 16,886 23,492 24,110 3% 105,455 337%
Fund Balance, End of Year 23,492 24,110 105,455 337% 126,780 20%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
PUBLIC ART (PRIVATE SECTOR CONTRIBUTIONS) FUND
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
Service Charges
In -lieu fees
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Cultural & Recreation
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed ° /O Proposed °
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �° Change 2018-19 Change
2,892 2,100 2,100 2,100
- 40,000 35,500 -11% 38,500 8%
79,994 - - -
82,886 42,100 37,600 -11% 40,600 8%
274,035 -1000/0
58,321 40,061 124,700 211% 126,700 2%
58,321 314,096 124,700 -60% 126,700 2%
36,400 39,900 - -100% -
36,400 39,900 - -100% -
60,965 (232,096) (87,100) -62% (86,100) -1%
362,844 423,809 191,713 -55% 104,613 -45%
423,809 191,713 104,613 -45% 18,513 -82%
GENERAL PURPOSE CIP
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers In
Operating Transfers Out
Other Sources (Uses)
Sale of Surplus Property
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Prior Year Restatement
Fund Balance, End of Year
9,972,831
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed °
�° Change
° Proposed
�° Change
1372%
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
Revenues
1372%
281,733
439,900
743,700
Subventions and Grants
8,574,127
12,124,611
702,000 -94%
13,525,000 1827%
Service Charges
-
-
-
-
Other Revenues
2,506
-
-
-
Total Revenues
8,576,633
12,124,611
702,000 -94%
13,525,000 1827%
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers In
Operating Transfers Out
Other Sources (Uses)
Sale of Surplus Property
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Prior Year Restatement
Fund Balance, End of Year
9,972,831
15,499,077
966,000
-94%
14,216,000
1372%
9,972,831
15,499,077
966,000
-94%
14,216,000
1372%
281,733
439,900
743,700
69%
257,400
-65%
(53,900)
(39,900)
-100%
227,833
400,000
743,700
86%
257,400
-65%
(1,168,365)
(2,974,466)
479,700
-116%
(433,600)
-190%
4,352,266 3,183,901 209,435
-93% 689,135 229%
3,183,901 209,435 689,135 229% 255,535 -63%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION I
PARKLAND DEVELOPMENT FUND
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
Subventions and Grants
Service Charges
Park In -Lieu Fees
Dwelling Unit Fees
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers In
Operating Transfers Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed O ° ° Proposed
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �Change 2018-19 �° Change
5,756 3,000 3,900 30% 3,900
174,799 - -
7,950 - -
34,320 - - -
222,825 3,000 3,900 30% 3,900
1,572 252,697 85,000 -66% 179,000 111%
1,572 252,697 85,000 -66% 179,000 111%
900,000
-100%
- (640,000) -100%
900,000 (640,000) -171% - -100%
221,253 650,303 (721,100) -211% (175,100) -0.75717654
620,558 841,811 1,492,114 77% 771,014 -48%
Fund Balance, End of Year 841,811 1,492,114 771,014 -48% 595,914 -23%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
1 ► a • 0 : • l
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
°
�O Change
Proposed
°
�O Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
107,807
1,000
46,000
4500%
46,000
Subventions and Grants
-
-
Impact Fees
1,356,158
889,990
250,000
-72%
250,000
Other Revenues
-
-
Total Revenues
1,463,965
890,990
296,000
-67%
296,000
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
3,803,935
3,734,040
310,500
-92%
1,369,000
341%
Total Expenditures
3,803,935
3,734,040
310,500
-92%
1,369,000
341%
Other Sources (Uses)
Proceeds from Debt Financing
-
-
Operating Transfer In
-
Operating Transfer Out
(320,000)
(250,000)
(250,000)
(250,000)
Total Other Sources (Uses)
(320,000)
(250,000)
(250,000)
(250,000)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
(2,659,970)
(3,093,050)
(264,500)
-91%
(1,323,000)
400%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
8,879,649
6,219,679
3,126,629
-50%
2,862,129
-8%
Prior Year Restatement
Fund Balance, End of Year
6,219,679
3,126,629
2,862,129
-8%
1,539,129
-46%
FLEET REPLACEMENT FUND
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
Service Charges
Other Revenues
Sale of Surplus Property
Green Vehicle Rebates
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Proceeds from Debt Financing
Operating Transfers Out
Operating Transfers In
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual
2015-16
13,625
69,220
82,845
Mid -Year
2016-17
6,000
10,000
7,500
23,500
Proposed % Change
2017-18
10,000 67%
Proposed % Change
2018-19
10,000
40,000 300% 80,000 100%
-100%
50,000 113% 90,000 80%
686,387
2,154,331
625,000
-71% 699,000
12%
686,387
2,154,331
625,000
-71% 699,000
12%
-
1,166,600
595,000
-49% 624,000
5%
-
-
(768,000)
(773,000)
1%
384,100
-
768,000
773,000
1%
384,100
1,166,600
595,000
-49% 624,000
5%
(219,442)
2,029,047
(964,231)
1,809,605
20,000
845,374
-102%
-53%
15,000
865,374
-25%
2%
1,809,605
845,374
865,374
2%
880,374
2%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
OPEN SPACEPROTECTION
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
32,743 2,970,881 -100%
32,743 2,970,881 - -100% -
18,726 (363,981) - -1000/0 -
530,623 549,349 185,368 -66% 185,368
549,349 185,368 185,368 185,368
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed ° /O Proposed °
/O Change Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18 2018-19
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
4,101
-
-
Subventions and Grants
2,600,000
-100%
Service Charges
47,369
6,900
-100%
Other Revenues
-
- -
Total Revenues
51,470
2,606,900
- -100% -
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
32,743 2,970,881 -100%
32,743 2,970,881 - -100% -
18,726 (363,981) - -1000/0 -
530,623 549,349 185,368 -66% 185,368
549,349 185,368 185,368 185,368
CHANGES 1N FINANCIAL POSITION
AIRPORT
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
Service Charges
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer Out
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
°
�O Change
° Proposed
�O Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
8,248
1,000
5,000
400%
5,000
134,210
-
-
-
142,458
1,000
5,000
400%
5,000
-
56,669
55,000
-3%
750,000 1264%
-
56,669
55,000
-3%
750,000 1264%
142,458 (55,669) (50,000)
937,498 1,079,956 1,024,287
-10% (745,000) 1390%
-5% 974,287 -5%
1,079,956 1,024,287 974,287 -5% 229,287 -76%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
Subventions and Grants
Service Charges
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Transfer Out
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed °
�° Change
° Proposed
�O Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
34,415
8,000
14,000 75%
14,000
625,506
-
-
-
659,921
8,000
14,000 75%
14,000
636,978
1,524,227
- -100% -
636,978
1,524,227
- -100% -
(62,000)
(17,000)
- -100% -
(39,057) (1,533,227) 14,000 -101% 14,000
2,601,882 2,562,825 1,029,598 -60% 1,043,598 1%
2,562,825 1,029,598 1,043,598 1% 1,057,598 1%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
Service Charges
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed ° ° Proposed
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �O Change 2018-19 �0 Change
2,586 1,700 1,700 1,700
14,661 - -
17,246 1,700 1,700 1,700
17,246
1,700
1,700
1,700
146,723
163,969
165,669
1% 167,369 1%
163,969
165,669
167,369
1% 169,069 1%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects 481,374 2,803,400 304,000 -89% 1,294,294 326%
Total Expenditures 481,374 2,803,400 304,000 -89% 1,294,294 326%
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In 617,000 2,621,000 689,745 -74% 1,350,967 96%
Operating Transfer Out (536,500) (182,023) -66%
Debt Proceeds 688,500 - - -
Total Sources (Uses) 1,305,500 2,621,000 153,245 -94% 1,168,944 663%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses 900,753 (180,900) (85,755) -53% (120,350) 40%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year (159,846) 740,907 560,007 -24% 474,252 -15%
Fund Balance, End of Year 740,907 560,007 474,252 -15% 353,902 -25%
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed °
�O Change
° Proposed
�o Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
2,765
1,500
5,000 233%
5,000
Subventions and Grants
73,861
-
60,000
- -100%
Service Charges
Total Revenues
76,626
1,500
65,000 4233%
5,000 -92%
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects 481,374 2,803,400 304,000 -89% 1,294,294 326%
Total Expenditures 481,374 2,803,400 304,000 -89% 1,294,294 326%
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In 617,000 2,621,000 689,745 -74% 1,350,967 96%
Operating Transfer Out (536,500) (182,023) -66%
Debt Proceeds 688,500 - - -
Total Sources (Uses) 1,305,500 2,621,000 153,245 -94% 1,168,944 663%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses 900,753 (180,900) (85,755) -53% (120,350) 40%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year (159,846) 740,907 560,007 -24% 474,252 -15%
Fund Balance, End of Year 740,907 560,007 474,252 -15% 353,902 -25%
MAJOR FACILITY REPLACEMENT
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
Service Charges Donation
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfer Out
Actual Mid -Year Proposed O ° ° Proposed
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �Change 2018-19 �0 Change
606 500 1,300 160% 1,300
22,000 - - -
22,606 500 1,300 160% 1,300
405,530 749,710 52,200 -93% 144,290 176%
405,530 749,710 52,200 -93% 144,290 176%
163,250 504,600 682,200 35% 593,200 -13%
- - (483,900) (507,700) 5%
163,250 504,600 198,300 -61% 85,500 -57%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses (219,674) (244,610) 147,400 -160% (57,490) -139%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 488,636 268,962 24,352 -91% 171,752 605%
Fund Balance, End of Year 268,962 24,352 171,752 605% 114,262 -33%
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
Service Charges
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Debt Proceeds
Total Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed °
/O Change
/O Proposed °
Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
1,660
1,000
900 -10%
900
1,660
1,000
900 -10%
900
250,000
- -100% -
-
250,000
- -100% -
250,000
1,000
- -1000/0 --
250,000
1,000
- -100% -
251,660
(248,000)
900 -100% 900
60,105
311.765
03.765 -80% 64,665 1%
311,765
63,765
64,665 1% 65,565 1%
DEBT SERVICE FUND
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers In 3,025,400 3,245,866 3,374,757 4% 3,506,208 4%
Operating Transfers Out - - -
Proceeds from Debt Financing - - -
Total Other Sources (Uses) 3,025,400 3,245,866 3,374,757 4% 3,506,208 4%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
°
�O Change
Proposed
°
�° Change
2,119,723 0%
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
2,119,724
Revenues
0% 2,119,721 0%
Total Fund Balance
2,119,724
2,119,724 2,119,723
0% 2,119,721 0%
Investment Property Revenue
54,725
Total Revenues
54,725
Expenditures
Debt Service
Cost of debt issuance
-
-
2012/2001 Refunded Revenue Bonds
388,725
385,350
385,075
0%
387,875
1%
2004/1994 Refunding Revenue Bonds
-
-
-
-
2005/1996 Refunding Revenue Bonds
467,851
466,789
469,589
l%
466,789
-1%
2006 Lease Revenue Bonds
460,374
459,914
458,940
0%
459,832
0%
2009 Lease Revenue Bonds
829,998
826,610
826,779
0%
820,501
-1%
Fire Engine/Truck Lease Purchase
127,492
129,203
125,764
-3%
127,326
I%
Capital Lease / Fire Truck 2014
116,702
116,702
116,702
116,702
Capital Lease (I.T. Equipment)
195,190
199,049
199,235
0%
199,236
0%
2014 Lease Revenue Bond/ LOVR
515,050
422,181
422,606
0%
422,881
0%
Insurance Retrospective Charges
-
PERS Side Fund Payment
-
Fleet Debt Service
240,068
370,068
54%
505,068
36%
Total Expenditures
3,101,381
3,245,866
3,374,758
4%
3,506,210
4%
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers In 3,025,400 3,245,866 3,374,757 4% 3,506,208 4%
Operating Transfers Out - - -
Proceeds from Debt Financing - - -
Total Other Sources (Uses) 3,025,400 3,245,866 3,374,757 4% 3,506,208 4%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
(21,256)
- (1)
(2) 100%
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
2,140,980
2,119,724 2,119,724
2,119,723 0%
Fund Balance, End of Year
Reserved for Debt Service
2,119,724
2,119,724 2,119,723
0% 2,119,721 0%
Total Fund Balance
2,119,724
2,119,724 2,119,723
0% 2,119,721 0%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION I
WATER FUND
Revenues
Service Charges
Water Sales
Water Service Charges
Sales to Other Agencies
Development Impact Fees
Connection Charges and Meter Sales
Late Charges and Credit Card Fees
Account Set-up Fee
AB 939 Reimbursement
Total Service Charges
Other Revenues
Subventions and Grants
Investment and Property Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Community & Neighborhood Livability
Environmental Health & Open Space
Infrastructure & Transportation
Fiscal Health & Governance
CaIPERS Discount Rate
Total Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Debt Service
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Other Sources (Uses)
Proceeds from Debt Financing
Projected MOA Adjustments
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfers Out
Expenditure Savings
Other Sources (Uses)
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Working Capital, Beginning of Year
Adjustment for Long Term Accruals
Working Capital, End of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed ° ° Proposed
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �° Change 2018-19 �° Change
17,084,904
17,216,708
17,623,312
2%
18,167,251
3%
862,813
850,000
866,250
2%
892,238
3%
1,542,268
800,000
800,000
800,000
60,421
71,000
61,000
-14%
61,000
39,584
65,000
23,000
-65%
23,000
107,159
100,000
156,000
56%
156,000
141,957
135,000
145,000
7%
147,900
2%
19,839,106
19,237,708
19,674,562
2%
20,247,389
3%
46,439
50,000
283,000
466%
283,000
544,808
50,000
50,000
50,000
20,430,353
19,337,708
20,007,562
3%
20,580,389
3%
-
-
515,893
531,547
-
-
2,791,977
2,761,401
12,909,891
16,438,538
11,217,372
-32%
11,415,616
2%
1,328,061
1,477,598
2,191,201
48%
2,230,068
2%
-
-
-
24,414
14,237,952
17,916,136
16,716,443
-7%
16,963,046
1%
2,366,716
7,514,756
3,277,500
-56%
9,362,100
186%
2,169,951
2,193,792
2,194,005
0%
2,955,652
35%
18,774,619
27,624,684
22,187,948
-20%
29,280,798
32%
8,500,000
(469,607) (561,244) (967,599) 72% (1,027,176) 6%
(469,607) (561,244) (967,599) 72% 7,472,824 -872%
1,186,127 (8,848,220) (3,147,985) -64% (1,227,585) -61%
21,876,499 22,929,660 14,081,440 -39% 10,933,455 -22%
(132,966) - - -
22,929,660 14,081,440 10,933,455 -22% 9,705,869 -11%
SEWER FUND
Revenues
Service Charges
Customer Sales
Sewer Service Charges
Sales to Cal Poly
Development Impact Fees
Account Set -Up Fees
Late Charges and credit card fees
Industrial User Charges
Connection Charges and Meter Sales
Tota! Service Charges
Other Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Community & Neighborhood Livability
Environmental Health & Open Space
Infrastructure & Transportation
Fiscal Health & Governance
CalPERS Discount Rate
Tota[ Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Debt Service
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Cashflow adjustment for working capital
Proceeds from Debt Financing
Projected MOA Adjustments
Operating Transfer In
Operating Transfers Out
Other Sources (Uses)
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Working Capital, Beginning of Year
Adjustment for Long Term Accruals
Working Capital, End of Year
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
°
/O Change
Proposed
°
�° Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
-84%
2018-19
1%
14,526,664
14,300,000
14,301,464
0%
14,741,100
3%
888,437
875,000
875,000
901,250
3%
502,393
300,000
300,000
4%
300,000
3%
107,131
100,000
156,000
56%
156,000
164%
40,066
65,000
23,000
-65%
23,000
0%
79,822
70,000
85,000
21%
85,000
112%
60,241
71,000
61,000
-14%
61,000
190%
16,204,754
15,781,000
15,801,464
0%
16,267,350
3%
50,718
37,500
34,000
-90/0
44,071
30%
388,540
50,000
50,000
50,000
16,644,012
15,868,500
15,885,464
0%
16,361,421
3%
-
-
4,858,140
4,973,738
6,018,807
7,098,843
1,126,926
-84%
1,142,593
1%
1,576,026
1,591,041
3,027,860
90%
3,101,507
2%
-
-
-
24,713
7,594,833
8,689,884
9,012,926
4%
9,242,551
3%
5,178,481
19,677,576
22,042,500
12%
58,162,000
164%
1,437,543
1,435,587
1,433,709
0%
1,431,006
0%
14,210,857
29,803,047
32,489,135
9%
68,835,557
112%
-
19,500,000
56,500,000
190%
173,096
-
-
(493,073)
(490,319)
(817,715)
67%
(901,818)
10%
(319,977)
(490,319)
18,682,285
-3910%
55,598,182
198%
2,113,177
(14,424,866)
2,078,614
-114%
3,124,046
50%
27,071,809
29,096,197
14,671,331
-50%
16,749,946
14%
(88,789)
-
-
-
29,096,197 14,671,331 16,749,946 14% 19,873,992 19%
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
WHALE ROCK COMMISSION
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
Service Charges
Member Agency Contributions O & M
Member Agency Contributions CIP
Water Distribution Charges
Other Service Charges
Total Service Charges & Interest
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Infrastructure & Transportation
Fiscal Health & Governance
Total Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfers Out
Other Sources (Uses)
Adjust for working capital
Total Other Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Working Capital, Beginning of Year
Actual Mid -Year Proposed ° Proposed °
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 �° Change 2018-19 �° Change
19,273
1,000
1,000
1,000
724,058
735,828
808,845
10% 845,179 4%
411,877
404,377
502,105
24% 332,512 -34%
277,791
370,000
337,500
-9% 351,000 4%
838,529
1,006,373
1,026,637
2%
1,070,745 4%
1,432,999
5,508
1,511,205
1,500
1,649,450
6,000
9%
300%
1,529,691 -7%
6,000
1,438,507
1,512,705
1,655,450
9%
1,535,691 -7%
838,529
1,006,373
1,026,637
2%
1,070,745 4%
115,989
125,510
141,937
13%
141,937
954,518
1,131,883
1,168,574
3%
1,212,682 4%
49,525
606,419
520,000
-14%
36,000 -93%
1,004,043
1,738,302
1,688,574
-3%
1,248,682 -26%
(2,210)
(15,963) 622%
- - (2,210) (15,963) 622%
434,464 (225,597) (35,334) -84% 271,046 -867%
1,122,068 1,556,532 1,330,935 -14% 1,295,601 -3%
Working Capital, End of Year 1,556,532 1,330,935 1,295,601 -3% 1,566,647 21%
PARKING FUND
Other Sources (Uses)
Cashflow adjustment for working capital -
Expenditure Savings -
Operating Transfer In - -
Operating Transfer Out (473,368) - (157,644) (169,865) 8%
PERS 1% Contribution - - -
Proceeds from Debt Financing - - -
Other Sources (Uses) - - - -
GST Loan per Council Approval - (500,000) -100% -
PotentialMOAAdjustments - (11,198) -100% -
Total Other Sources (Uses) (473,368) (511,198) (157,644) -69% (169,865) 8%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses 3,579,703 (2,347,911) 355,279 -115% 509,821 43%
Working Capital, Beginning of Year 8,391,033 12,305,964 9,958,053 -19% 10,313,332 4%
Adjustment for Long Term Accruals 335,228 - - -
Working Capital, End of Year 12,305,964 9,958,053 10,313,332 4% 10,823,153 5%
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
°
�O Change
Proposed
°
�O Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
Revenues
Service Charges
Parking Meter Collections
Lots
304,345
166,200
140,400
-16%
141,900
1%
Streets
1,526,182
1,539,100
1,648,100
7%
1,664,700
1%
Parking Structure Collections
1,162,982
1,054,700
1,489,500
41%
1,504,400
l%
Long -Term Parking Revenues
642,483
434,900
795,000
83%
802,900
1%
Lease Revenues
403,630
500,500
502,900
0%
509,800
1%
Parking In -Lieu Fees
2,641,296
20,200
20,400
1%
20,600.
1%
Other Service Charges
(15,096)
100
(89,100)
-89200%
(90,000)
1%
Total Service Charges
6,665,822
3,715,700
4,507,200
21%
4,554,300
1%
Investment and Property Revenues
333,687
48,200
48,000
0%
52,000
8%
Fines and Forfeitures
579,823
669,900
587,300
-12%
593,200
1%
Other Revenues
827
-
100
100
Total Revenues
7,580,159
4,433,800
5,142,600
16%
5,199,600
1%
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Infrastructure & Transportation
1,835,753
2,385,106
2,215,088
-7%
2,274,025
3%
Fiscal Health & Governance
711,587
684,603
622,189
-9%
622,189
Ca1PERS Discount Rate
-
-
-
6,200
Total Operating Programs
2,547,340
3,069,709
2,837,277
-8%
2,902,414
2%
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
20,547
2,231,404
825,000
-63%
650,000
-21%
Debt Service
959,201
969,400
967,400
0%
967,500
0%
Total Expenditures
3,527,088
6,270,513
4,629,677
-26%
4,519,914
-2%
Other Sources (Uses)
Cashflow adjustment for working capital -
Expenditure Savings -
Operating Transfer In - -
Operating Transfer Out (473,368) - (157,644) (169,865) 8%
PERS 1% Contribution - - -
Proceeds from Debt Financing - - -
Other Sources (Uses) - - - -
GST Loan per Council Approval - (500,000) -100% -
PotentialMOAAdjustments - (11,198) -100% -
Total Other Sources (Uses) (473,368) (511,198) (157,644) -69% (169,865) 8%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses 3,579,703 (2,347,911) 355,279 -115% 509,821 43%
Working Capital, Beginning of Year 8,391,033 12,305,964 9,958,053 -19% 10,313,332 4%
Adjustment for Long Term Accruals 335,228 - - -
Working Capital, End of Year 12,305,964 9,958,053 10,313,332 4% 10,823,153 5%
TRANSIT FUND
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues
From Other Governments
TDA Revenues (LTF)
TDA Revenues (STA)
Other Grants
FTA Grants
Service Charges
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Infrastructure & Transportation
Fiscal Health & Governance
CalPERS Discount Rate
Tota! Operating Programs
Capital Improvement Plan Projects
Total Expenditures
Other Sources (Uses)
Cashflow adjustment for working capital
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed
o
/o Change
Proposed
o
�o Change
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
11,202
5,800
5,800
5,800
1,312,716
1,286,625
1,166,759
-9%
1,166,759
162,418
159,890
154,027
4%
152,748
-1%
39,738
1,300,200
174,600
-87%
1,060,000
507%
1,373,948
1,424,555
1,426,251
00/0
1,426,251
3,809
690,381
709,357
3%
711,181
0%
655,660
4,600
6,600
43%
6,600
3,559,492
4,872,051
3,643,394
-25%
4,529,339
24%
2,920,657
3,448,368
3,423,351
-1%
3,518,007
3%
277,329
288,995
319,987
11%
319,987
-
-
-
1,884
3,197,986
3,737,363
3,743,338
0%
3,839,878
3%
-
2,003,324
335,000
-83%
1,085,000
224%
3,197,986
5,740,687
4,078,338
-29%
4,924,878
21%
Projected MOA Adjustments - (4,200) -100%
Operating Transfer In - - - -
Operating Transfer Out - - (61,398) (114,651) 87%
Other Sources - -
Expenditure Savings - - -
Total Other Sources (Uses) - (4,200) (61,398) 1362% (114,651) 87%
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses 361,506 (872,836) (496,342) -43% (510,190) 3%
Working Capital, Beginning of Year 2,775,920 2,988,512 2,115,676 -29% 1,619,334 -23%
Adjustment for Long Term Accruals (148,914)
Prior Year Restatement
Working Capital, End of Year 2,988,512 2,115,676 1,619,334 -23% 1,109,144 -32%
BOYSEN RANCH CONSERVATION FUND
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Debt Proceeds
Total Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
2,981
Actual
Mid -Year
Proposed °
�O Change
° Proposed
�o Change
86,925
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenue
2,981
1,800
2,000 11%
2,000
Service Charges
-
-
-
Total Revenues
2,981
1,800
2,000 11%
2,000
Expenditures
Culture & Recreation
7,500
7,500
7,500
Total Expenditures
-
7,500
7,500
7,500
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Transfer In
Debt Proceeds
Total Sources (Uses)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balance, Beginning of Year
Fund Balance, End of Year
2,981
(5,700)
(5,500)
4%
(5,500)
86,925
89,906
84,206
-6%
78,706 -7%
89,906
84,206
78,706
-7%
73,206 -7%