|
Question 2: Please give an explanation of how the technical amendment is reflected in the
<br />ordinance. Also, in the Carry Forwards section for this project, it is stated that $1,030,000 "will be
<br />listed as revenues (actuals) in the Transfers from the General Fund line item (Social Services)."
<br />Where is that amount listed as revenues, either in this project or elsewhere?
<br />Document Reference: Agenda Abstract and Attachment 6, Human Services Offices & Clinics
<br />and Hillsborough Commons Capital Project Ordinance
<br />Technical Amendment Response:
<br /> Through FY
<br />2007-08 Through FY
<br />2008-09 FY 2009-10
<br />Amendments Through FY
<br />2009-10
<br />Sales Tax and Dedicated Property
<br />Tax
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />$0
<br />ARematrve Financing $0 $0 $0 $0
<br />2004 Two Thinis Net Debt $0 $0 $0 $0
<br />Grand Funds $0 $2,720,000 ($x3'25,000) $1,8.95,000
<br />Fees $0 $0 $0 $0
<br />Other- Owner Reimbtxsements $0 $1,070,000 ($470,000) $600,000
<br />Transierfrom the General Fund $0 $0 $1,295,000 $1,295,000
<br />Total Funding SO S3,790,000 SO 53,790,000
<br />Grant Funds: $825,000 net decrease (Owner's reimbursement from the state (+$470,000) minus
<br />state reimbursements not related to the project (-$1,030,000) and county CIP contribution
<br />(-$265,000).
<br />Owner Reimbursements: $470,000 decrease (Moved the state reimbursement portion
<br />(-$470,000) to the Grant Funds line item. The $600,000 that remains is revenue from the owners
<br />contribution).
<br />Transfer to the General Fund: New line item. Net increase of $1,295,000. (Moved the state
<br />reimbursements not related to the project (+$1,030,000) and county CIP contribution (+$265,000)
<br />from the Grant Funds line item).
<br />The change clarifies the funding sources for auditing purposes and county review, in the future.
<br />Please see the diagram on page 4 for a visual explanation.
<br />The $1,030,000 (for Hillsborough Commons) is in fund balance. _In FY 2008-09, the Board
<br />approved a $1,874,374~carryforward to the Hillsborough Commons project. These were state
<br />reimbursements DSS received in prior fiscal years for its programs (i.e. Work First, Medicaid).
<br />Once approved, these funds should have been transferred to the capital project, but were not. As
<br />a result, the funds again reverted to fund balance at the end of FY 2008-09.
<br />The revised ordinance and the above diagram show how the $1.03 million is part of the
<br />Hillsborough Commons budget. In May 2008, staff transferred $265,000 in pay-as-you-go funds
<br />to the project; once the $1.03 million is transferred, the only outstanding revenue is for the owner
<br />purchase and state reimbursement.
<br />Carry Forwards- Response: The majority of the canyforward in the two previous years is related
<br />to the Hillsborough Commons project and the Department of Social Services (DSS). Fiscal Year
<br />2006-07 appears to have been when the funds accumulated in the General Fund for the
<br />Hillsborough Commons Project and other capital needs. Because the funds for the Hillsborough
<br />Commons Project were not appropriated for transfer to the County Capital Project last fiscal year,
<br />they reverted again to fund balance. Additionally, in the Hillsborough Commons Capital Project
<br />Ordinance, the amount to be transferred from the General Fund was included in the amount
<br />shown as coming from Grant Funds. The funding for this project and the remaining amounts
<br />listed for DSS accounts for $1,892,505 of the carryforward.
<br />2 c.:
<br />December 15"' Budget Amendment Questions Page 2 of 4
<br />
|