HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Information Received after Posting of Agenda - Item B and EI VCS 6 aY-\A
Robin Roberts
From: Robert Goldberg <rgoldberg @live.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 12:06 PM
To: Sandra Massa - Lavitt; Ellery Deaton; Thomas Moore; Schelly Sustarsic; Mike Varipapa
Cc: Robin Roberts; Jill Ingram
Subject: Re: Questions & Comments for Council Meeting 3/13/17
Attachments: 3.13.17.Questions & Comments.doc; Mid Year.last years.pdf
Dear Council,
Please find attached my questions related to Monday's agenda items. I have also attached last year's Mid -Year
report since I reference it frequently.
Thank for your consideration in advance,
Robert Goldberg
Questions & Comments for 3/13/17
Item B: Demands of Treasury
Page 1" near bottom: Check #115724 to BrightView Landscape Services for work on the Blue
Cottage in October
What work did they do?
E. Mid Year Budget Review
On page 1 of the staff report, the third paragraph of the Background and Analysis section states
that revenue is up about $500,000 compared to last year and that "The primary reason for the
increase is improvement in prices in the oil and petroleum services industry." Attachment A,
pages 1 and 2, show the December 2016 combined total for Barrel Taxes, Oil Production
Licenses, and Fuel Royalties to be $81,121 (see table below). Looking at last year's Mid -Year
Review (2/22/16 Agenda Item K, Attachment A), the same sources generated $123,665.
Oil and Petroleum Services Industry
2016
2015
Barrel Tax $65,426
$99,074
Oil Production Licenses $12,060
$12,060
Fuel Royalties $3,635
$12,530
$81,121
$123,665
Given this drop in direct oil revenues, why does the staff report highlight revenue from
the oil and petroleum services industry as notable positive?
This same paragraph on page 1 of the staff report also attributes the comparative rise in
revenue from last year to "increases in Property Tax, UUT, and Sales Tax." Attachment A, page
1, shows the UUT revenue at $1,807,165 in December 2016. The comparative figure from last
year was $1,882,547 (2/22/16 Agenda Item K, Attachment A).
Why does the report attribute a comparative rise in revenue to the UUT?
Attachment A, page 2 shows that revenue from "Rental of Property" is $72,906 with total
expected for the entire year only $30,000.
What additional property rentals resulted in the unexpected income?
Attachment A, page 3 shows no revenue for "Settlement /Court Judgement." However, in
August 2016 the City signed a settlement agreement with Consolidated /Republic Services
(waste hauler) requiring an immediate payment to the City of $300,000.
Has this settlement amount not been paid?
Attachment A, page 4 (top line), shows $44,292 in revenue for "Waste Disposal" when $0 was
expected.
What is this unanticipated revenue from?
Attachment A, page 4, shows $0 Budgeted Revenue for Inmate Self Pay and Booking Fees.
However, page 20 of the adopted FY 16 -17 budget shows budgeted revenue at $320,000 and
$6000, respectively.
Why are these budgeted revenues not included in the mid -year review?
The last paragraph on the first page of the staff report states that the "total general fund
expenditures are less than the same period last year by approximately about $100 thousand."
However, the "001 Total YTD Amount" on page 33 of Attachment B is $16,486,285 which is
about $518,000 higher that the equivalent figure for last year of $15,968,605 (per 2/22/16
Agenda Item K, Attachment B).
Why are total expenditures reported as dropping compared to last year?
Police field service overtime (Attachment B, page 10) is almost $228,000 with only $200,000
budgeted for the year. This is before all of the overtime for the storms in January and February.
What is causing this high rate of overtime usage?
Police field service "Deferred Comp- Cafeteria" (Attachment B, page 10) is $661,000 with a
budgeted amount of only $49,000. On the other hand, PERS retirement is exceptionally low at
$352,000 out of $1,359,000 budgeted.
Did the accounting for these two accounts get intermixed somehow?
Attachment B, page 33, show the Budgeted Amount for CIP Transfers Out (001- 080 - 47000) at
$9,604,100. However, the last budget amendment, which added $200,000 for the WEPS (BA 17-
07-02, 1/17/17), brought the approved total to only $9,283,500.
Why is the Budgeted Amount for CIP Transfers $320,000 higher than the last Budget
Amendment?
The first sentence at the top of page 2 of the staff report states that "revenues... are slightly
below expectations." This assessment does not seem to be consistent with statements on page
1 regarding revenues being $500,000 more than last year due to various improvements in
revenue sources.
Is revenue increase of $500,000 compared to last year still less than expectations for
this year?