Browse
Search
Agenda - 10-28-2008 - 5
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2008
>
Agenda - 10-28-2008
>
Agenda - 10-28-2008 - 5
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/27/2008 10:45:19 AM
Creation date
10/27/2008 10:45:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/28/2008
Meeting Type
Work Session
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20081028
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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).
View images
View plain text
Source of Funds School Capital County Capital ` <br /> Pro'ect Fund Pro'ect Fund <br />Additional Funds Needed $8,430,000 $7,100,000 <br />Unallocated Alternative Financing 1,347,000 <br />Unallocated Bonds 907,000 <br />School Capital Reserve Funds 580,000 <br />From Closed Projects 455,000 <br />Parks Open Space Bonds to be issued 5,500,000 <br />Interest Earnin s 850,000 <br />Total Funds Available $3,289,000 $6,350,000 <br />Net Shortfall $5,141,000 $750,000 <br />Total Both Funds $5,891,000 <br />Auditor Responsibility <br />Two reasons external audits would not have revealed these misalignments are: <br />1) The County's annual audit focuses on the financial statements as a whole which are <br />not presented at the individual project level. These problems only become apparent <br />when analyzed at the individual project level. <br />2) The capital project funds are budgeted on a project length or multi-year basis. The fact <br />that revenue received for particular revenue is less than budget at the end of a fiscal year <br />is not an abnormal condition. It requires knowledge of when the specific funding sources <br />for a project are expected to be received to determine whether a problem exists. This <br />type of analysis is beyond the scope of the audit. <br />The presentation of the financial statements for the two capital project funds has been expanded <br />for FY 2007-08 to provide a comparison of budget and actual project expenditures for auditor <br />review. <br />Staff Proposal for Covering Remaining Shortfall <br />As stated earlier, $5.89 million in additional capital funding is needed to cover the shortfall. <br />Based on current year cash flow needs, at least $3.5 million of the shortfall is needed in the <br />current fiscal year. The remaining $2.391 million will be needed in FY 2009-10. <br />Staffs analysis shows the majority of the remaining shortfalls resulted from differences between <br />the pay-as-you-go funds budgeted for projects in the two capital project funds and the amount of <br />money transferred to the two capital projects funds from the General Fund. Most of these <br />differences existed when the conversion to MUNIS was made. This means they occurred prior <br />to the end of fiscal year 2003 over one or more fiscal years. If those additional amounts of pay- <br />as-you-go revenue had been transferred from the General Fund, the fund balance would be less <br />than it currently stands. <br />Staff recommends the Board approve atwo-year funding plan to replenish the shortfall by <br />appropriating General Fund available fund balance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.