Loading...
RPVCCA_CC_SR_2012_03_06_04B_City_Reserve_PolicyCrrvOF MEMORANDUM RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: REVIEWED: Staff Coordinator: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNC~ DENNIS McLEAN,DIRECTOR OF FINANCE &INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MARCH 6,2012 CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41:RESERVE POLICY CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER oS2- Kathryn Downs,Deputy Director of Finance &Information ",GO Technology Ryan Mills,Sejl~r Administrative Analyst,Finance &Information Technology lIV\ RECOMMENDATION 1)Direct Staff whether or not to prepare an analysis leading to a recommendation regarding revisions to the City Council Policy No.41:Reserve Policy;and 2)If the City Council elects to direct Staff to conduct an analysis,provide Staff with objectives for any such revisions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On January 17,2012 Staff was given the direction by the City Council to agendize a discussion regarding City Council Policy No.41:Reserve Policy,including the possible increase of the General Fund reserve level.The City currently has a Reserve Policy for a number of funds,including the General Fund that is set at 50%of General Fund operating expenditures and the Capital Improvement Projects Fund that is set at a minimum of $3 million,funded with amounts equal to Transient Occupancy Tax revenue.The purpose of the CIP reserve is to fund major improvement projects related to roadways,storm drains, parks,buildings,rights-of-way,and the sewer system in the case of an emergency. Staff has attached the City's current Reserve Policy,the December 21,2010 staff report that provides an in depth analysis of how the City arrived at its current policy levels,and a summary of reserve policies from comparable cities to serve as a benchmark.Staff has also included Best Practices from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA)to provide a general framework of what to consider when establishing a reserve policy.While the City's Reserve Policy should be based on its own unique state of affairs,this 4B-1 CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41:RESERVE POLICY March 6,2012 Page 2 of 4 information should help assist the Council in understanding the strategy for the City's reserves. BACKGROUND Staff has attached City Council Policy No.41 :Reserve Policy (Attachment A)and the staff report,dated December 21,2010 (see Attachment B)that led to the commitment to transfer all,or most all of,the transient occupancy tax revenue to the Capital Improvement Projects Fund Reserve.The Policy states: "The City will maintain a minimum of $3 million in the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP)fund as a reserve for major improvement projects related to roadways,storm drains,parks,buildings,rights-of-way,and the sewer system.Subject to the annual budgeting process.the CIP reserve will be funded.to the extent possible,by allocating amounts equal to the annual Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)revenue to the CIP fund.". The Estimated CIP Fund balance is expected to be about $8.5 million as of June 30,2012, about $5.5 million in excess of the $3 million reserve threshold. The set-aside of reserves,rainy-day funds,or contingency funds is a prudent fiscal policy and an important factor in the analysis of financial condition,credit worthiness and fiscal management.The establishment of prudent financial reserve policies is important to ensure the long-term financial health of the City.Reserves do not reflect an agency's financial capacity or underlying fiscal strength,per se,but rather the agency's ability absorb unexpected cash expenditure demands and manage risk.The Reserve Policy was developed using best practices,including a comprehensive review of reserve policies of other California cities and an internal assessment of the City's risk environment. On December 2,2008,the City Council adopted City Council Policy No.41 ,which changed the Reserve Policy threshold to be based on 50%percent of expenditures,as opposed to 50%percent of annual revenues,because the City has greater capability to control expenditure levels. BEST PRACTICES In 2009,the GFOA updated its recommended best practices to stipulate that a formal policy should establish the level of unrestricted fund balance in the General Fund.This policy should include a temporal framework and specific plans and trigger points for increasing or decreasing the level of unrestricted fund balance when the amount varies from the policy.While the adequacy of unrestricted funds in the General Fund should be assessed based on the City's own unique circumstances,GFOA recommends that the General Fund maintain,at a minimum,no less than two months of operating revenues or operating expenditures,depending on which measure is more predictable.Two months is equal to 16.67%of operating expenditures,in comparison to the City's Reserve Policy of 50%of operating expenditures.' 4B-2 CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41:RESERVE POLICY March 6,2012 Page 3 of 4 According to the best practices recommendation 1 ,in establishing a policy governing the level of unrestricted fund balance in the General Fund,a number of factors should be considered,including: •The predictability of revenues and the volatility of its expenditures (Le.,higher levels of unrestricted fund balance may be needed if significant revenue sources are subject to unpredictable fluctuations or if operating expenditures are highly volatile). •The City's perceived exposure to significant one-time or ongoing outlays,such as, natural disasters,immediate capital needs,and state budget cuts. •The potential drain upon general fund resources from other funds,as well as the availability of resources in other funds (Le.,deficits in other funds may require that a higher level of unrestricted fund balance be maintained in the general fund,just as,the availability of resources in other funds may reduce the amount of unrestricted fund balance needed in the general fund) •Liquidity (Le.the disparity between when financial resources actually become available to make payments and the average maturity of related liabilities may require that a higher level of resources be maintained). •Commitments and assignments (Le.,maintenance of higher levels of unrestricted fund balance to compensate for any portion of unrestricted fund balance already committed or assigned by the City for a specific purpose). RISKS TO CHANGING THE RESERVE POLICY The City's Reserve Policy is not only important to its citizens,but also to potential financial markets.If the City were to take on any type of future debt to fund capital projects or to meet any other type of financial obligations,financial markets would be interested in the City's Reserve Policy as a basis for rating the City's credit worthiness before issuing debt. Any revision of the City's Reserve Policy should be consistent with Best Practices,based upon changes of circumstances,prudent financial management,and be memorialized with the rationale for the adjustment in both the staff report and the Reserve Policy document. It would be beneficial for City Council to formalize which future events (e.g.a loss of a significant revenue stream,a catastrophic event that caused unexpected uninsured expenditures)might give reason to potential changes in the Reserve Policy,as to communicate with financial institutions a sense of stability with the City's financial policies. With the foundation of the Reserve Policy established,future revisions are expected to be based upon a substantial change of circumstances. If Council decides to keep the Reserve Policy at its current level,this doesn't impair the City's ability to accumulate additional monies for Council objectives.The Council retains the ability to accumulate any type of funds necessary to achieve the City's goals without changing the actual Reserve Policy.On the other hand,if the Council chooses to change 1 Appropriate Level of Unrestricted Fund Balance in the General Fund (2009),Government Finance Officers Association http://www.gfoa.org/index.php?option=com content&task=view&id=1450 4B-3 CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41:RESERVE POLICY March 6,2012 Page 4 of 4 the Reserve Policy,it could create future impediments for Council to meet certain financial goals in lean years,such as the funding of projects. CURRENT RESERVE POLICY AND ESTIMATES In accordance with City Council Policy No.41:Reserve Policy,the chart below summarizes each fund's reserve level,the estimated reserve at June 30,2012 and identifies any expected excess or shortage.The estimates are based on the proposed FY11-12 budget. General Fund ~i!!!!!~T""ZiW_I:;;•.&g~E!+~1 50%of budgeted expenditures $9,719,748 $11,385,761 $10,987,229 $1,267,481 Capital Improvement Proiects Capital Improvement Proiects Street Maintenance Habitat Restoration Habitat Restoration Equipment Replacement Sub-region One Emergency Proiects FEMA Reserve One year of Portuguese Bend Road Maintenance Emergency Proiects Future Maintenance Estimated replacement cost of assets held Developer Endowment $3,000,000 $215,209 $516,400 $50,000 $74,784 $1,770,984 $750,000 $5,024,937 $215,209 $769,485 $50,000 $213,058 $1,733,217 $766,007 $8,250,937 $215,209 $631,355 $50,000 $175,358 $1,742,117 $759,807 $5,250,937 $- $114,955 $- $100,574 $(28,867) $9,807 With the average reserve policy for comparable cities at 40%,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes falls in the top one-third of most conservative reserve policies. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A -City Council Policy No.41:Reserve Policies Attachment B -"Reserve Policies"Staff Report (December 21,2010) Attachment C -Reserve Policies of Comparable California Cities 4B-4 CITY COUNCIL POLICY NUMBER:41 (Amended) DATE ADOPTED/AMENDED:April 19,2011 SUBJECT:Reserve Policies POLICY: The City utilizes a variety of accounting funds for accounting and budgeting for revenues and expenditures of the City.Appropriations lapse at each fiscal year- end.The City Council authorizes continued appropriations for certain incomplete capital projects,other one-time projects and services which have not been billed. Remaining dollars left in each fund that are undesignated and unencumbered constitute available reserves of the City.It is appropriate that reserve policies for the City be established for each of the various funds,that the purpose of these reserves be designated,and that dollars available in excess of the reserve amounts be appropriately and effectively utilized.This policy governs the City's reserves as follows: A.General Fund The City will maintain a minimum fund balance of at least 50 percent of annual operating expenditures in the General Fund.This is considered the minimum level necessary to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for: 1.Economic uncertainties,local disasters,and other financial hardships or downturns in the local or national economy. 2.Contingencies for unseen operating or capital needs. 3.Cash flow requirements. B.Capital Improvement Fund The City will maintain a minimum of $3 million in the Capital Improvement Projects (CI P)fund as a reserve for major improvement projects related to roadways,storm drains,parks,buildings,rights-of-way,and the sewer system.Subject to the annual bUdgeting process,the CIP reserve will be funded,to the extent possible,by allocating amounts equal to the annual Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)revenue to the CIP fund.All interest earnings in this fund will be used for capital improvement projects. C.Equipment Replacement Fund The City will maintain retained earnings equal to the estimated replacement cost for equipment assets held by this fund. 1 4B-5 City Council Policy #41 (Amended) D.Water Quality Flood Protection Fund Project spending in the Water Quality Flood Protection (WQFP)fund fluctuates year to year.The Storm Drain User Fee is a source of funding for these projects.To avoid a fluctuating Fee,the City will maintain retained earnings over the life of the WQFP fee to establish rate stabilization,thereby enabling fund availability for scheduled projects and maintenance. E.Building Replacement Fund The City will maintain retained earnings in this fund to accumulate monies and interest earnings to finance major improvements (e.g.roofing),and partially provide for future replacement of City owned buildings. F.Utility Undergrounding Fund The City will maintain retained earnings in this fund to accumulate monies for relocating utility poles and lines on City arterial roadways underground, as well as provide residents assistance with the process leading to utility undergrounding in residential areas of the City. G.Street Maintenance Fund The City will maintain a minimum of one year's appropriations for road maintenance on Palos Verdes Drive South in the landslide area. H.Habitat Restoration Fund The City will maintain a minimum of $50,000 in this fund as required by the National Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP)for emergency use for habitat restoration purposes in addition to maintaining any interest earnings. I.Subregion One Maintenance Fund As part of the development agreement for SUbregion One,the developer provided $750,000 as an endowment to generate interest earnings for future maintenance of the open space area in Subregion One. J.Improvement Authority Abalone Cove Fund In connection with the Horan lawsuit,the Redevelopment Agency's Reimbursement and Settlement Agreement with property owners and the County stipulated that $1,000,000 of County loan proceeds was to be deposited in the Abalone Cove Maintenance Nonexpendable Trust Fund of the Joint Powers Improvement Authority.Interest earnings from this deposit are used to maintain landslide abatement facilities in the Abalone Cove area of the active landslide,except sewers in accordance with the reimbursement and settlement agreement 2 4B-6 City Council Policy #41 (Amended) Reserve levels will be reviewed annually during the budget process.Any recommended adjustments to reserve levels will be presented to City Council for its consideration during the annual bUdget process. COMMITMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS OF FUND BALANCE: Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No.54,Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions,provides the City with a method to self-classify fund balance for financial statement reporting purposes. A.Committed Fund Balance Fund balance may be committed to specific purposes using its highest level of decision-making authority,the City Council.It is the City Council's policy that commitments of fund balance for a fiscal year must be adopted by resolution prior to fiscal year end.Amounts that have been committed by the City Council cannot be used for any other purpose unless the City Council adopts another resolution to remove or change the constraint. B.Assigned Fund Balance The General Fund balance may be assigned for amounts the City Council intends to use for a specific purpose.It is the City Council's policy that assignments of fund balance for a fiscal year must be approved by minute-order of the City Council prior to the fiscal year end.Any changes to assignments must also be made by minute-order of the City Council. It is the City Council's policy to spend classified fund balance in the following order when amounts in more than one classification are available for a particular purpose: 1.Restricted Fund Balance -amounts constrained to specific purpose by their providers through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. Examples include grants,bond proceeds and pass-through revenue from other levels of government. 2.Committed Fund Balance -amounts constrained to specific purpose by resolution of the City Council. 3.Assigned Fund Balance -amounts in the General Fund which are intended to be used for a specific purpose,expressed by minute-order of the City Council. 4.Unassigned Fund Balance -amounts available for any purpose in the General Fund. BACKGROUND: Reserves,rainy-day funds,or contingency funds are a prudent fiscal policy and an important credit factor in the analysis of financial analysis and management. Local governments have experienced much volatility in their financial stability due 3 4B-7 City Council Policy #41 (Amended) to the economy,natural disasters,terrorist attacks,and actions taken by state government which includes taking revenues from local governments to resolve state budget problems.California cities are at an even greater disadvantage than the rest of the country due to the unique regulations imposed by Proposition 13,and the inability to raise property taxes if the need would arise.Sound financial management includes the practice and discipline of maintaining adequate reserve funds for known and unknown contingencies.Such contingencies include,but are not limited to:cash flow requirements,economic uncertainties including downturns in the local,state or national economy,local emergencies and natural disasters,loss of major revenue sources,unanticipated operating or capital expenditures,uninsured losses,tax refunds,future capital projects,vehicle and equipment replacement,and capital asset and infrastructure repair and replacement.The establishment of prudent financial reserve policies is important to ensure the long-term financial health of the City. 4 4B-8 CITY OF MEMORANDUM RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: REVIEWED: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS DENNIS McLEAN,DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DECEMBER 21,2010 PROPOSED REVISION TO CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41 -RESERVE POLICIES CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER Staff Coordinators:Kathryn Downs,Deputy Director of Finance &Information Technology Adam Raymond,Senior Administrative Analyst RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached amended City Council Policy No.41-Reserve Policies. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION On December 2,2008,the City Council adopted City Council Policy No.41 -Reserve Policies (Reserve Policy,see attached).Reserves do not per se reflect an agency's financial capacity or underlying fiscal strength,but rather the agency's ability to manage risk. The Reserve Policy was developed using best practices,including a comprehensive review of reserve policies of other California cities and an internal assessment of the City's risk environment.As Rancho Palos Verdes is a coastal city with an active landslide that could contribute to several disasters simultaneously and is situated next to one of the world's largest and busiest ports,Staff recommended that Rancho Palos Verdes should have a more conservative policy than other cities. The set-aside of reserves,rainy-day funds,or contingency funds is a prudent fiscal policy and an important factor in the analysis of financial condition,credit worthiness and fiscal management.Local governments have experienced volatility in their financial stability due to the economy,natural disasters,terrorist attacks,and actions taken by state government such as taking revenues from local governments to resolve state budget problems. California cities are at an even greater disadvantage than the rest of the country due to the 4B-9 PROPOSED REVISED CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41-RESERVE POLICIES December 21,2010 Page 2 unique regulations imposed by Proposition 13 and the inability to raise property taxes if the need would arise.Sound financial management includes the practice and discipline of maintaining adequate reserve funds for known and unknown contingencies.Such contingencies include,but are not limited to:cash flow requirements,economic uncertainties including downturns in the local,state or national economy,local emergencies and natural disasters,loss of major revenue sources,unanticipated operating or capital expenditures,uninsured losses,unanticipated tax refunds,future capital projects,vehicle and equipment replacement,and unexpected capital asset and infrastructure repair and replacement.The establishment of prudent financial reserve policies is important to ensure the long-term financial health of the City. As a bes,t practice,the Reserve Policy should be reviewed periodically.At this time,Staff is recommending the City Council amend the Reserve Policy to allow for change in the way the Capital Improvement Fund reserve is funded.Specifically,Staff recommends changing Section B,Capital Improvement Fund to state (the recommended text addition is underlined): The City will maintain a minimum of $3 million in the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) fund as a reserve for major improvement projects related to roadways,storm drains,parks, buildings,rights-of-way,and the sewer system.Subject to the annual budgeting process, the CIP reserve will be funded,to the extent possible,by allocating annual Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)revenue to the CIP fund.All interest earnings in this fund will be used for capital improvement projects. Due to the potential volatility of TOT revenue,Staff and the City's Financial Advisor feel that the dedicated use of TOT revenue for capital projects and debt retirement would be fiscally prUdent.Staff is not requesting the reserve amount be increased,but rather the TOT revenue received is transferred to the CIP fund and committed for future capital projects. As a General Fund revenue source,future TOT cannot be restricted to a specific purpose. Staff's recommendation seeks to formalize the process of allocating TOT to fund capital projects. Status of Reserves The following table is a summary of the current reserve levels and estimated reserves at June 30,2011. 4B-10 PROPOSED REVISED CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41-RESERVE POLICIES December 21,2010 Page 3 General Fund 50%of budgeted expenditures 8,988,303 10,243,052 One ye ar of P ortugue se Be nd S tre et M ainten ance road maintenance (1)450,300 356,951 Habitat Restoration Emerg ency projects 50,000 50,000 Habitat Restoration Fu ture m aintenan ce 64,443 135,688 S ubreg ion One Developer endowment 750,000 751,436 Capital Improvement Projects Emerg ency projects (2)3,000,000 2,757,458 Capital Improvement FE MA reserve for FY04-05 Projects winter storms 274,430 274,430 Equipment Estimated replacement cost of Replacem'ent assets held 1,661,947 1,695,958 1,254,750 (93,349) 71,245 1,436 (242,542) 34,011 (1)Road maintenance in the Portuguese Bend (the City's active landslide area)has recently increased.The estimated reserve is expected to increase to policy level with expenditure savings. (2)The Capital Improvement Projects (CIP)Fund contributed about $375,000 to the Upper Filiorum open space land purchase during FY09-10.The estimated reserve is expected to return to policy level with both expenditure savings and interest earnings. Fiscal Risks Revenue Volatility In General,the City does not face significant revenue volatility risk due to the City's large dependence on property tax revenues (about 46%of annual General Fund revenue)and the City's strong property tax base.The average property assessment in the City is still considerable less than current market values.As long as a small number of properties transfer ownership each year,an overall decrease ofthe City's total property tax revenue is a highly improbable event.However,TOT and community development permit revenue (together representing about 18%of General Fund revenue)are certainly more affected by the economy and can be more volatile. Cash flow is another factor that can impact revenue volatility.In staff's analysis of the City's cash flow,it proved to be an insignificant risk due to the steady and predictable trend. The only spikes in the fiscal year reflect the two large collections of property tax revenues in December and April. Another variable to consider in examining revenue volatility is the stability of revenue receipts from the state,especially in light of continued State budget issues.The State of California has a history of taking revenues from local governments to resolve the State's budget problems.However Proposition 1A established by California voters in 2006 and Proposition 22 established by California voters in 2010 have restricted the State's ability to raid local government revenue. 4B-11 PROPOSED REVISED CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41-RESERVE POLICIES December 21,2010 Page 4 Uninsured Losses These risks from potential uninsured losses are best estimated through a complete actuarial analysis,which can be very costly to perform.Insurance deductibles and co- insurance terms were evaluated by staff and showed to be immaterial.The deductibles range from $1,000 for city-owned vehicle losses to a maximum of $100,000 for earthquake and flood damages.As noted in the City's financial statements,during the prior three fiscal claim years,no settlements or judgments have exceeded pooled or insured coverage. Liability risks not normally covered by insurance,such as labor relations issues should also be given some consideration in evaluating the City's reserve level. Over the,last decade,the City has been a defendant in several significant lawsuits resulting from challenges by property owners regarding regulatory decisions, including view,antenna and other land use issues.Insurance loss protection would not have been available in the event significant monetary damages were awarded by trial courts.Several lawsuits were the result of City ordinances that have been enacted by voters and/or the City Council and facts and circumstances that may continue to be challenged by property owners.The possibility of uninsured future trial court awards should continue to be considered during the assessment of the City's reserve policy. Environmental and Regulatory Risks Rancho Palos Verdes'physical characteristics create a substantial risk to the environment due to the City's aged infrastructure,land movement,and changing environmental regulations and penalty provisions.With 7.5 miles of coastline,the City carries a significant risk for polluting the shoreline and the ocean in the event that a sewer line or storm-drain system fails.Environmental fines can cost at least $10,000 per day for these types of events.Other cities have faced significant fines;and typically these are settled for an agreed upon amount,but they can still be very costly.The City should strongly consider this risk in the development of the reserve policy. Disaster and Terrorism Risks Many costs of declared disasters are covered by state and federal funds;but there is still a portion of the cost that is not,and the receipt of state and federal funds may not be immediately available.The City faces risk from fire,earthquakes,flood,landslide,and terrorist threats at the Port of Los Angeles;and it is critical that reserves be available to respond to these events appropriately.Staff consulted with the Office of Emergency Preparedness Area G coordinator to gather information about disaster risks specific to Rancho Palos Verdes.The City's coordinator stated that there are no best practices for quantifying the potential damages.The City's portion of uncovered disaster costs would be 6.25 percent of the total amount of qualifying damages.FEMA provides cash advances for disaster relief differently depending on the size of the event,and the amount would likely be immaterial.There is a high level of uncertainty in trying to determine the amount needed for upfront costs for repairs due to so many unknown variables.Additionally,federal funds for disaster assistance are SUbject to audit,disputes,potential negotiations and settlements.The City should consider this risk in the development of the reserve policy. 4B-12 PROPOSED REVISED CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41-RESERVE POLICIES December 21,2010 Page 5 Capacity Maintenance and Transition Policies When permanent changes in resources or costs occur,reserves should be adequate to provide funds for a smooth transition while seeking new resources or reducing ongoing costs.A common example of this change would be the bUilding and development activity, which is significantly impacted by the local and national economy.When the economy slows down,it is common for building activity to also slow,and this can cause a loss in revenue.Reserves are necessary to balance any cyclical changes in activity.This risk factor is of moderate significance because these fees are only a small percentage of the City's total revenue. In frastru9ture During the City's early history,financial resources were not sufficient to fund repair and maintenance of infrastructure resulting in further deterioration.Over the last decade,the City has begun to establish systems to regularly evaluate the status and need for repair and maintenance of its street,arterial roadways,sewer and storm drain infrastructure. Although the City has made significant progress improving the condition of its infrastructure systems,Staff believes that the cost of known repairs and maintenance of infrastructure exceeds the current level of net annual revenue and fund reserves.As an example,the proposed Lower San Ramon storm drain project was not included in the storm drain program established in 2005,and is currently estimated to cost about $20 million. Staff has provided a summary of the trend of infrastructure capital improvement expenditures over the last 6 years below: Total Capital Expenditures 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 FY04-05 FY05-06 FY06-07 FY07-08 FY08-09 FY09-10 Historical Events In developing the original reserve policy,staff looked back from a historical perspective to consider the unplanned events from the past ten years which required a large unexpected disbursement from the General fund or money from the General fund reserves.Events such as the Bronco storm drain project ($1 million)in FY01-02,the Upper San Ramon 4B-13 PROPOSED REVISION TO CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO.41-RESERVE POLICIES December 21,2010 Page 6 drainage and landslide stabilization project ($4 million)in FY02-03,and the McCarrell Canyon storm drain project ($7.5 million)completed in FY08-09 are examples of how the City's physical characteristics,aging of infrastructure,and unexpected events have cost the City millions to repair. Recent Accounting Pronouncement In March 2009,the Governmental Accounting Standards Board issued Statement No.54 (GASB 54),Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions,to address issues related to how fund balance was being reported.The City will be required to implement GASB 54 with the FY10-11 financial statements issued December 2011.Prior to the close of FY10-11,Staff will provide recommendations to the City Council for implementation. The following fund balance classifications are allowed by GASB 54: );>Nonspendable -amounts that are in a nonspendable form (e.g.inventory,or the $750,000 Subregion 1 endowment); );>Restricted -amounts constrained to specific purposes by their providers (e.g.grant funds advanced to the City); );>Committed -amounts constrained to specific purposes by the City Council via resolution or ordinance (e.g.TOT revenue that has been transferred to the CIP fund to be used for future capital projects); );>Assigned -amounts the City Council intends to use for a specific purpose (e.g. incomplete projects carried forward to the next fiscal year);and );>Unassigned -amounts available for any purpose,only to be reported in the General Fund.The City's General Fund Reserve would be reported in this category. As part of GASB 54 implementation,Staff will likely recommend the City Council adopt a resolution to "commit"TOT revenue that has been transferred to the CIP fund for capital projects.Once funds are committed,they can only be uncommitted by adoption of another resolution. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact resulting from Staff's recommendation.If the revised Reserve Policy is approved by the City Council,Staff will include a transfer of TOT revenue to the CIP Fund in the draft FY11-12 budget. The City has not included the use of TOT revenue for the annual operating bUdget. Budgeted FY1 0-11 TOT revenue is $2,026,100.Through November 15,2010,the City has collected more than $1.1 million of FY1 0-11 TOT revenue. 4B-14 Table of Reserve Policies from Comparable Cities \tldm":iiilll14.ft~~~'JM~:ili~fJf~Mi·i·;~:::;lifaf~&iija&flflf@l)~:~&i.'N'~I.lil;ljii~~rjl:@r!JEtiWfHf#&f~l~~f~lMw.l:::[~:@::::f::~il:¥:~~j:~! Dana Point Cash Flow Reserve 10%of General Fund Revenue Emer enc Reserve 20%of General Fund Revenue Calabasas Hermosa Beach La Car'iada/Flintrid e La una Hills Los AltOs Manhattan Beach Malibu Palos Verdes Estates Redondo Beach Rollin Hills Capital Projects Sinkin Fund State Budget 1m acts Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund Community Facilities Fund Municipal Self Insurance Fund OPEB Fund Minimum balance of $2.5 million Minimum cash &investments equal to 100%of the latest 30 year actuarial estimate in the CalPERS California Employer's Retirement Benefit Trust Unrestricted fund balance of 100%of budgeted annual ex enditures Miniumum balance of $1.2 million Minimum balance of $2 million Funded with excess development end-of-year balances Funded with Refuse surchar e fees 4B-15