Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7C <br /> <br />issuer, they will examine how the issuer is managing this liability. S&P does not, however, Page 4 <br />have a prescribed approach to how this liability should be managed. <br /> <br />Alternatives <br />The City Council may change the recommended progressive funding schedule. <br /> <br />The City Council may opt to not fund any of the ARC, in which case the OPES unfunded <br />liability will continue to increase. Following this alternative could adversely affect the City's <br />credit rating. <br /> <br />The City Council may choose to not implement GASB 45 in FY 2007/08, in which case the <br />City's independent auditor will issue a qualified or adverse opinion, and there will be an <br />adverse impact on the City's credit rating. Not implementing GASB 45 means that the City <br />would not change its existing accounting practices and would not recognize the ARC as <br />required under GASS 45. <br /> <br />The City Council may opt to fully fund the ARC in which case the City would place funds in <br />an irrevocable trust arrangement. Staff does not favor this approach as funds would be <br />tied up and not available for balancing the City's budget in the event of a downturn in <br />revenues. <br /> <br />A decision on how to fund the OPES liability should be made by the end of November 2006 <br />if such amounts are to be included in the FY 2007/08 budget. <br /> <br />Fiscal Impact <br />The fiscal impact upon the general fund and other major funds is presented in the <br />respective tables in the preceding respective sections of this staff report. <br /> <br />Br:{[~ <br /> <br />Director of Finance and <br />Financial Planning <br /> <br />( <br /> <br />Ed Everett ffv <br />City Manager <br /> <br /> <br />Attachment: <br />Attachment 1 - OPES Executive Summary <br />