My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2011-08-22
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
AgdaPkt 2011-08-22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2012 12:02:59 PM
Creation date
8/18/2011 4:39:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
8/22/2011
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
456
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
6.1.G. - Page 26 <br /> Recommendations <br /> The 2011 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury recommends: <br /> A. the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors and each City Council, by Ju1y l, 2012: <br /> 1. Eitk�er revise the existing or implernent a new poiicy for specific levels of reserves using <br /> Ianguage cansistent with the new GASB Statement 54 hierarchy. <br /> a. Establish in the policy the rec�uired l�vel of General �'und Balance for <br /> classifications that are spendable wit�in the complete contral o� the government's <br /> locai decision makix�g authority <br /> b. Require in the poIicy development of speci�ic plans to restore the required 1e��e1 of <br /> reserves zn the event they fall below that level. <br /> c. Includ� the policy in the annual CAFR and budget documen�s. <br /> 2. Direct their City/County Mana�ers to direct their F�nance Direciors to collaboratively <br /> develop a standard "scarecard" that shows how the city/County is doing with respect to <br /> key measures of fiscal health and make this avaiiable o� city/County websites. Upda�e it <br /> at least semi-ann�ai�y or when major changes oceur. <br /> 3. Direct their City/County Managers to formally evaluate the value of a clearly defned <br /> Runnin� Lic�uidity metric as an additional measure of the cityfCounty's fiscal health with <br /> specific target minimums, and make a specific recommendation back Eo the CiEy Council <br /> or Board of Supervisors for action. <br /> B. the City Co�ancils of Srisbane, Coltna, Pacifica, and Portola ValEey: <br /> 1. Post FY 2010 CAFRs and/or other FY 2010 audited financial statements to public <br /> websites by September i, 20I �. Impl�ment systemslpracesses to anab2e a rr�ore timaly <br /> pastang of CAFRs and/or other audited fZr�ancial stateme�ts within six mont�s after the <br /> end of the fiscal year. <br /> C. the City Councils of MiIlbrae, Foster City, Woodside, Brisbane, CoIrna, and Portala <br /> VaIley by July l, 2012: <br /> 1. Provide citizens with tirnely and comprehensive information regarding the financial <br /> condition of their city and Caunty by providing a minimum of three yea.rs of approve� <br /> budgets and CAFRs on their websites and through other communicatians. <br /> D. the City Councils of Atherton, Brisbane, Burlingame, Daly City, Foster City, Nlillbrae, <br /> Redwood City, San Bruno, San Mateo, and South San Francisco by July 1, 2012: <br /> 1. Explain in CAFR. IVlanage�nent Notes, Azu�ual Bu�get, oz� other approprzate dacuznent <br /> available to the public why fuli annua� required OPEB payments are not being; made. <br /> 21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.