Laserfiche WebLink
REPORT <br />Tp the Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From the City Manager <br />February 3, 2003 <br />Subject <br />General Fund Financial Condition <br />�A1 <br />Recommendation <br />Approve the City Manager's initial recommendation to direct City departments to identify <br />savings equal to at least 1/3 ($1.2 million) of the projected 2002/03 deficit of $3.5 million <br />and draw down our reserves by the remaining 2/3 ($2.3 million). Approve the suggested <br />calendar for future meetings and decisions to work on the short-term and long -term <br />solutions to our deficit problem. <br />Background <br />Effect of the Slowdown in the Local Economv <br />The City continues to experience a substantial erosion in sales taxes and transient <br />occupancy taxes (TOT) due to the slowdown in the local economy. Together, staff expects <br />that these two revenues will be about $3.5 million lower than estimated when the FY <br />2002/03 budget was adopted by Council in August 2002. The $3.5 million decline in the <br />revenues represents about 5.7% of the current year's general fund revenue. Since the <br />budget that Council adopted was balanced, this shortfall, if not corrected, will reduce the <br />City general fund reserves by $3.5 million. It is important to be mindful of the fact that we <br />do not yet know whether these two revenue sources have "bottomed out" or if they will <br />decline further this fiscal year. While the TOT is received monthly, sales tax is received <br />quarterly and is reported to the City approximately 2 Yz months after the close of the <br />calendar quarter. For example, the information on sales tax for the quarter covering July — <br />September of 2002 is not known until December 2002. Accordingly, at this point we only <br />have information for one of the four quarters of this fiscal year. <br />In FY 2003/04, staff forecasts a $5.2 million operating deficit along with a $9.3 million <br />operating deficit in FY 2004/05 if no action is taken in 2002/03 or 2003/04 to correct the <br />problem. In each of these two years, the problem goes beyond the decline in revenues as <br />the City will also experience increased retirement system costs due to the poor investment <br />returns experienced by CalPERS. <br />The following table summarizes the major components behind the projected deficits forthis <br />year and the following two fiscal years: <br />All Figures are Deficits <br />FY02 /03 <br />FY03 /04 <br />FY04 /05 <br />Original Forecasted Deficit <br />---- - -- <br />$0.2M <br />$1.8M <br />Sales Tax Decline <br />3.OM <br />$3.1 M <br />$3.2M <br />TOT Decline <br />0.5M <br />0.6M <br />0.6M <br />Increased PERS Costs <br />- - -- <br />JAM <br />3.8M <br />Current Projected Deficit <br />$3.5M <br />$5.3M <br />$9.4M <br />Percentage of Revenues <br />5.7% <br />8.2% <br />13.8% <br />