pages: CityCouncil/2009-05-05.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2009-05-05 | 7 | planning fee funds were transferred into the Capital Improvement Project fund for the Carnegie Building Council action would be required to undo prior decisions. Councilmember Tam inquired who has the flexibility and discretion to move funds that are earmarked for specific purposes; stated for example, Council chose to charge the Golf ROI in order to fund fire fighter operations for a short period of time. The Interim City Manager responded the Council has to determine whether or not to reduce a fee or give a credit back; stated the Council has to decide whether to use cash in the fund balance; after the Council has made a decision to earmark funds, only the Council can decided to reverse the earmark; said actions cannot be done administratively Mayor Johnson stated a decision was made not to reduce the [Golf] transfer so that the General Fund would not be reduced right then. Councilmember Gilmore stated Council was waiting to see the outcome of Measure P. Councilmember Tam stated the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) gives the impression that the City has a fund balance that allows some flexibility to deal with austere times; however, the Interim City Manager is suggesting the opposite because the cash balance is a subset of the fund balance. The Interim City Manager stated that she is suggesting that the $16 million is not liquid cash but is money due to the General Fund from a variety of sources $6.8 million is real cash in the General Fund; the only flexibility in the General Fund is $400,000 which is true cash set aside for a fire station; cash and fund balance are two different things. Councilmember Gilmore stated Council discussed the uncertainty of the State; the City would need to live off true cash in order to pay the City's obligations going forward if the State does not pay the City; inquired what would be the City's burn rate if the City would have to pay the State's IOUs. The Interim City Manager responded the burn rate for 90 days would be $12 million; stated the CAFR is an accounting document and is not in layman's language ; there is a huge misunderstanding of what is in the fund balance. Councilmember Matarrese stated exceptions need to be taken to accounting rules or footnotes are needed; Council is not looking Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 7 May 5, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-05-05.pdf |