03/24/2004 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Finance Committee Meeting SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2004 -APPROPRIATIONS Attendance: Kasler, Gazeau, Limpert ; Nashaz; McKay; O'Grady; Directors -Finance and Service, residents Barker and Barrett Portions of the budget discussed were: 1) REVENUES: Some highlights include: Estate Tax: Only estimated revenue that is "already in the pipe line" - $ 188,000 that is due to be received already. This estimate does not include any estate taxes that will be received for the second half of the yeaz - in other words - estimates 0 for the remainder of the year. The Finance Director has stated that she will not project revenue for this line item past the first half since this is a decreasing revenue. I stated my objections to estimating "0" in a fund that will undoubtedly have some revenue - in fact, in keeping with last year, will probably realize another 180,000. On going disagreement that , in my opinion, Council is not given the complete revenue picture and is therefore unable to appropriate without knowledge of certain revenue sources. '~ Revenue to the General Fund from the Casualty Loss Fund. We have not done this since 2001 and are doing this and able to do this this yeaz to cover the repair of a seriously damaged vehicle. EMS fee: The revenue does not reflect any revenue from the EMS funds for the 25% of the residential fees collected. It has been requested that this once again be "redirected" to the general fund. This is before Council in the form of legislation. It should be noted that the reduction in sewer fees for those residents using less than 1 MCF of water is not reflected as a reduction in revenue to the city. The Finance Department has informed Council that it has been unable to determine the amourrt of this revenue reduction. We awaiting further information on this issue. The revenue page reflects a carry over amount from 2003 of $ 1.7 million - approximately6 $ 1 million of which is attributed to unexpended operating funds and $ 700,000 attributed to excess in revenue over and above the estimated revenues projected for the year. This of course raised several questions and some philosophical differences regarding the size of the carry over an d the make ~p of that figure. Some members of Council are satisfied with that carry over while others question the size of the carry over, -first as it reflects underestimated revenue and second, as if reflects overestimated operating costs. Council considered this figure in ,.~.,