The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12/21/1992 BAKERSFIELD Kevin McDermott, Chair Patricia J. DeMond Ken Peterson Staff: John W. Stinson AGENDA BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITYEE Monday, December 21, 1992 12:00 noon City Manager's Conference Room 1. School Crossing Guard Report 2. Equity Adjustments Safety Management 3. Ambulance Rates 4. Project Clean Air 5. Mid-Year Budget Amendments 6. 1992-93 Sales Tax Shortfall (Second Quarter) 7. Set Next Meeting AMBULANCE SERVICE "We Serve, So Others May Lire" 327-9000 INCORPORATED /Ve CareeEvery HoureEvery Day' 327-4111 Nm~,-,her IS, Ice2 R E C E I V E D NOV£O lgg2 City of ~~eld Hono~le ~r ~d RISK MGMT. Ci~ ~ M~ 1~1 ~ A~nue ~~el~ ~o~ 9~1 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: H~LL and GOLDEN EMPi]LE AMH~~ SERVICE8 hereby respectfully request the Council inact the procedures necessary to initiate the process of the ~d/lqUAL REVIEW OF AMBULANCE .qI~VICE RATF-q and P, EGULATION8 for Ambulance Service provided within the City of Bakersfield. Company Representatives will upon request, provide all necessary assistance which will assist the Council and City Staff in this review process. Sincerely, H~,T.T. AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC. GOLDEN EMPIRE AMBUL~, INC. Harvey L. Hail, Allan M. Barks, Pr~ident President ;.._ ~.~ -: "' ~'"~ z,~z o ~ ~,~,'~; ' . _ ~ ~ AMBULANCEsERVICE INCORPORATED TO John Stinson, ~Assistant to City Manager / :=~,OM HARVEY L. HALL-~ ~ATF_: ~m~r 18, ~ PRESIDENT ~, x Please f'md attached the following for your review and consideration. 1) Proposed Ambulance Charge Schedule 2) 1992 MEDICARE AHowable Charge Schedule 3) Ambulance Charges Summary September 1991 - August 1992 HLH:cen Attachments PROPOSED 1992-1993 A.gOIULANCE BASE RATE- PARAMEDIC ............................. 4~eO0 MH,F, AGE..., ....................................... 16.00 A~I'ACItMENT NO. 1 CURRENT MEDICARE PREVAH.ING CHARGE SUMMARY BASE RATE - NON PARAMEDIC ......................... 236.00 BASE RATE - PARAMEDIC ................................ 502.00 NIGHT CHARGE ............................ 60 00 OXYGEN ................... , .....................................47.00 EMERGENCY ...... (INCLUDING BASE RATE) .00 MH.EAGE ........................................................ 16.10 WMTING TIME ............................................... ~ eO0 A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 2 .-..,.o~.,d F~,.~ - a,,dg,,t & Fi,..,. AMBULANCE RATES SURVEY ~1~ ~ ~: 91 ~ 91 ~ 91 ~ 91 ~ 91 ~ 91 ~ 91 I ~ Ra~ ~: ~:~ ~.~ ~o.~ ~.~ . ~.~ :.. ~.~: ~ ~.~ 136.~ ~A 4~.~ 126.~ 10.~ 0.~ ~.~ -6.~ 1~.~ 64.~ ~.~ 7.~ UNK -1~] ~ ~.~ 101.~ ~A 470.~ 1~.00 10.~ 0.~ ~.~ 9.~ ~.~ 19.~ 37.~ 4.~ ~ ~.~ 36.~ ~A 4~.~ 56.00 11.~ 1.~ UNK -46~ ~A N/A ~.~ 15.~ ~ ~] ~ Ra~ S~: - IN ~U~ G~ (~** 425.~ 4~.75 4~.75 16.~ 73.~ 73.~ 41 25 ~.~ - IN ~U~ ~ (C~ 4~.~ ~.~ ~.~ 16.~ 74.~ 74.~ ~.~ 23.~ MEDICARE lEI akeralield Ama - Hail) 212.67 48.67 N/A 43~.48 74.48 10.86 0.86 48.16 2.16 24.00 - 12.00 41.~8 8.88 14.66 -2.34 EMS Common Rate 1992 217.00 5300 N/A 425.00 61.00 10.00 0.00 46.00 2.00 4000 4.00 48.00 15.00 0.00 -~] AVERAGE RATE (4 G~,~ 235.00 71.00 N/A 432.50 68.50 9.63 -0.38 45.00 - 1.00 66.67 30.67 ~" 75 5.75 24.00 7.00 I-UM-L I[R~q,, ~,~__ ,~ 200.00 36.00 300.00 _,P)~.oo 45.00 11.00 100 48.25 2.25 50.00 -6.00 42.00 9.00 17.00~ Pmpoeed Flak,- - Budget & Finance 212.00 : : ' : ' ' : ' : ." : "" .... 4800 227.00 27.00 ,109.00 45.00 10.~5 0.85 48.25 225 50.00 -6.00 42.00 900 1~.OO Incrm,-,~ Compared Io Current Rates: MEDICARE ~akeraiield A~ea) 29.7% N/A 20.5% 11.6% 4.7% -- N/A 26.9% ' EI~L~ Common ~a;,, 1992 32.9% N/A ?-.9% 0.9% 4.3% 11.1% 45.5% - AVI~AGE RATE (4 Cities} 43.9% N/A 16.9% - 3.9% - 2.2% 65.2% 17.4% 41.2% HALL ~Reque~ed} 22.0% N/A 12.4% 10.9% 4.9% - 16.7% 77.5% 0.0% C~I AC astment Factom: Cormumer % Increaae: prOVider % Incr · i~ ~ ~ ~ I~il ..... ~ii,.,.,, ~ ~ ~.o~ ~ : ,o.o% ~. ~ ~ 0.a% ALS w/: lO.5% · Emergency response rate charged with BLS only · * Doe,a not include additional charges for medical supplies and additional medical services ~ a-~ob-~a -FI nTon, GOp. Don& m onJe L~LUtJt~i~.S December 21, 1992 BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1115~Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Re: Reservation of Rights on Behalf of Hall Ambulance Service, Inc. and Golden Empire Ambulance Service, Inc. Dear Committee Members: This letter is presented jointly by this firm and the law offices of Etcheverry, Rodriguez and Noriega. This letter is serve notice upon the City of Bakersfield that the foregoing ambulance services reserve all rights that each possesses regarding the power of the City of Bakersfield to regulate providers of emergency medical services within the city limits as set forth in the various letters submitted heretofore by Hall Ambulance Service and Golden Empire Ambulance Service, Inc. Very truly yours, ANTON, By: ~, TJA:dt CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1992 DATA AMBULANCE REQUEST BY PAY CATEGORY PAY CATEGORY PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN Medicare 46% · Medi-Cal 19 % Indigent 10% Insurance/Contracts 19% Private Pay 6% NOTE:~ Dry Runs represent 26 % of City Ambulance sales which provide zero reimbursement. / 5 5;/ Dry Runs 15% HALL AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC. GOVERNMENT REIMBURSEMENT VS. CITY RATES CITY MEDICARE MEDtCakL BASIC LIFE SUPPORT 212.00 212.67 '61.71 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT PARAMEDIC 227.00 212.67 61.71 ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT 409.00 438.48 61.71 MILE~AGE 10.85 10.96 3.18 EMERGENCY RESPONSE BLS , 30.00 0 9.88 EMERGENCY RESPONSE ALS 30.00 0.00 9.88 OXYGEN (PER CYLINDER) 42.00 41.88 9.88 NIGI-rr CHARGE 48.25 48.16 9.88 WAITING TIME 17.00 14.66 9.88 December 21, 1992 MEDICARE PATIENT PATIENT MAXIMUM CHARGES REIMBURSEMENT ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT 409.00 438.48 EM~GENCY RESPONSE 30.00 I~C. B/RATE MIIJ~AGE 5 MII.F_S @ 10.85 PER Mll.g. 54.25 54.25 NIGHT CHARGE 48.25 48.16 OXYGEN 42.00 41.88 TOTAL 583.50 582.77 NOTE: This pay category (MEDICARE) represents 46% of City Ambulance Patients. Approximately 53 % of MEDICARE patients have supplemental Medi-Cal coverage which leaves balance after MEDICARE payment to be adjusted off. t December 21, 1992 STATE OF CALIFORNIA MEDI-CA!, PROGRAM ADVANCF~D LIFE SUPPORT 409.00 61.71 EMFRGENCY RESPONSE 30.00 9.88 MILEAGE 5 MIIJFS @ 10.85 PER 'MILE 54.25 15.90 NIGHT CHARGE 48.25 9.88 OXYGEN 42.00 9.88 TOTAL 583.50 107.25 NOTE: This pay category (MEDI-CAL) represents 19% of City Ambulance patients. December 21, 1992 INDIGENT PATIENT PATIENT MAXIMUM CHARGES REIMBURSEMENT ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT 409.00 52.45 PARAM~DIC ALLOWANCE 42.50 EMERGENCY RESPONSE 30.00 8.39. MILEAGE 5 MILFS @ 10.85 PER MII.E 54.25 13.51 NIGHT CI~IARGE 48.25 8.39 OXYGEN 42.00 8.39 TOTAL 583.50 133.63 NOTE: This pay category (INDIGENT) represents 10% of City Ambulance Patients. December 21, 1992 INS CE/CON CTS 'PATIENT MAX]MUM CHARGES RRIMBURSEMF~NT ADVANCI~J) LIFE SUPPORT 409.00 409.00' EMERGENCY RESPONSE 30.00 30.00 MII.~AGE 5 MIl.ES @ 10.85 PER MII.E 54.25 54.25 NIGHT CHARGE 48.25 48.25 OXYGEN 42.00 42.00 TOTAL 583.50 583.50 NOTE: This pay category (INSURANCE/CONTRACTS) represents 19% of City Ambulance patients. December 21, 1992 PRIVATE PAY PATIENT PATIENT MAXIMUM C-'nARc;ES RmrMBLrRSEMm,,rr ADVANCq::.r} LIFE SUPPORT 409.00 409.00 EMERG~CY RESPONSE 30.00 30.00 MIIJEAGE 5 MIl.ES @ 10.85 PER MILla. 54.25 54.25 NIGHT CHARGE 48.25 48.25 OXYGEN 42.00 42.00 TOTAL 583.50 583.50 NOTE: This pay category (pRIVATE PAY) represents 6 % of City Ambulance patients. Recent months have shown a 75 % increased dollar amount being turned over tO a collection agency. December 21, 1992 ...... ' .(~~ We are all Victims of poor air quality in Kern County. From the hazardous effects on our health to the strain on our agri-. culturally based economy, air PRO~ pollution is a serious threat to ~ our' rich quality of life. The~ AIR problem could get'much worse. Project Clean Air is an or- : County residents Working to- CLEAN .. MAINTAIN a citizen and industry forum~ gether to implx~e ~ air quality. which provides input into the devel°pment Seven ail-volunteer task force of policies that will improve air quality;groups review and evaluate spe- cific Kern County air quality is- ENCOURAGE AND DEV!Y,i~P specific sues and mal~ recomm~tions dtizen-based pwjects that will result/n the immedia~ red. on of polluting gmission~, on methods of improvemem which help us achieve Federal PROVIDE an eduction program ~at win and State air quality'standards. give Kern County citizens a better , RIrC'D & PLAC[:D, 0I~[:tk£ understanding of air quality challenges, Project Clean Air needs ',. ,AT COUNCIL. M'Efi I F te afives and solutions; your help. Tn many ways we ca~ : r.: ./~ 7, "~('~5 ~ -'.. ' . IDENTIFY, DEVELOP, AND each become part of the air poi, ~ ' RF~O~.~ effective land-uae ~and lution solution. Now is the time transportation management policies; for each of us to make personal choice~ ~hat will improve our air. ...toSee the mountains! DEVELOP public understanding and For more information, or to get 'i support for these polities; involved, please call Project I SUPPORT the Kern County and 'San Cleon Air at · Jooquin Valley Clean Air Attainm~t Plan. ':~Fro~ : PCA PHONE No. : 805 321 05J9 Oct. 21 1992 2:44PM PO~ ~ Become a member of Pr°Ject Clean Air. PROJF~--~ Your membership dues will help keep the campaign going ~ and you'll receiveThe Clean Air Cour~er fOur times a year with information that will help you and your community AI~ win the clean air campaign! Annual xs ~. t.:_~,.emoersmp Dues cra~ Deductible) · Students .................................... $5.00 · Individual Professionals, Non-profit Organizations, ,~ttvice Clubs, & Small · Other Individuals .................... $10.00 Businesses ................ $50.00 - $100.00 · Large Businesses & Corporate · Families .................................. $25.00 Branches .............. $500.00- $1,000.00 Donations beyond the memt~s~ip ch~ will help ensur~ the continuea exist~nc~ of Project Clean Air's work to improve our air. The first issue of The Clean Air Courier will report to members in June about tl~e.Rally, the Kern Auto Recycle (KAR) Project, thc Advanced Engine Technology worksaop, and muca more~ Name Company, Address .City, Zip Code Phone Mombership Cat~gory $ cr~ Deductible) Additional Donation $. (Tax Deductible)' PCA's Fedc-ral ID Projo~t Clean Air 1401 L Sixe~t, Suit~ 1 Bakersfield, CA 93301 ,-',,:~ '~ Project Clean Air Sponsors Board ofDir~ ~'~ Headline Spon ~r Gene Lundqnirl Board I~ 4 Prt~nt Betroth ~ &'Contort ~ ~mori~ ~spital BO~TO~ PETRINI & ~ONRON 6 o~ R~y~ ~ AR) T~ol~ A~mn~ ~g p~u~. ~ ~y 8~ of~ ~ ~ ~a~o ~ ~t ~ ~fi~ ~ ~ ~ys ~ event held at ~. ~ a p~ conm~u~ 24~ of ~~~ ~llution ~oblems. f~es 'a vmety of ~~~g~ buy ~ck ~-1975 ~y~~~ ~, To~ave~ ~y~~~m ~b~~~ economy by 56~. of PubUc ~c~. ~- of ~~fi~, t~ C~ty ~~ c~ ~A'~~~ c~ng ~h~es. walk,g, bussing. 0 ~rta_fion S~atioeary ~d Use Sources ttlnues to Emiz~iom f~om sta- ~velop, m~l fionary somces (i~- ! effective duatrial, commercial, md t~-~-- works wkb in a ~ commis- ovemment skmed by ~ luk f~ de~,elopi~g m dct~mim ~he effects 'asures that of tbese emissions on serve the ICe~ County's air. This m m~-I Iraqi- task force als° : of Kern tecommeads effocli~e BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM December 17, 1992 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS THROUGH: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ~ FROM: M.A. DUNWOODY, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST II - SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 BUDGET AMENDMENTS On June 24, 1992, Council adopted Resolutions 98-92, 99-92, and 100-92 approving the Operating and Capital Improvement Budgets for the City of Bakersfield, the Central District Development Agency, and Community Development Block Grants, respectively. In September, the State of California finally closed its budget gap and adopted a budget for FY 1992-93. As a result, the City was faced with a net revenue loss of $1,861,000 and had to implement several budget reduction measures. On September 30, 1992, Council adopted Resolutions 189-92 and 190-92 reflecting these changes for the Operating and Capital Improvement Budgets for the City of Bakersfield and Central District Development Agencies, respectively. Since then, Council has taken action to transfer and/or appropriate additional funds and as a result, these budgets must be amended to reflect these changes in appropriations. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET AMENDMENTS Actions taken by Council affecting these budgets include: · the transfer of Council Contingency monies to fund school crossing guards; · the appropriation of revenues from the County of Kern for the County's share of the operating costs for the Metropolitan Bakersfield Incentive Area program; · the appropriation of TDA Article 3 funds for construction of a bike path between Manor Street and Fairfax and the acquisition of bicycle lockers; · the appropriation of bond proceeds and assessment payments for Assessment District 91-1, Hosking Trunk Sewer; · the appropriation of the balance of Rancho Laborde Special Assessment interest earnings to complete the construction of Assessment District 86-2. Work to be done includes street improvements, repairing two curb and gutter returns, and testing of a sewer main line on Ol~ive Drive between Riverlakes Drive and Coffee Road. Also, the external auditors have requested that two invoices received in FY 1992- 93 be accrued to the 1991-92 fiscal year. The costs were incurred by the Oity Clerk for the June 2, 1992, election and by the Fire Department for the City's portion of the shared costs for operating the Emergency Communications Center for calendar year 1991. As these items were included in the Fiscal Year 1992-93 appropriations, it is now necessary to reduce these budgets accordingly. However, this action does reduce the Fiscal Year 1992-93 beginning balance by a like amount since the items were counted as part of the Fiscal Year 1991-92 ending fund balance. CDBG OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET AMENDMENTS With respect to the Community Development Block Grant budget, Council took action to appropriate $810,000 in Federal Funds for the Home Investment Partnership Program. The program is authorized under the National Affordability Act of 1990 and the purpose is to increase the available affordable housing stock in our community. eDDA OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET AMENDMENTS When the budget was adopted, it was thought that the one-time shift in redevelopment tax increment funds to schools would be withheld by the county. Since then, communication from the County specifies that the City make a $208,315 payment to the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) by May 10, 1993. The necessary appropriations and transfers to complete this transaction are reflected as part of the budget amendments. CORRECTING ENTRIES The worksheet used to prepare the resolutions adopting the annual budgets for the City of Bakersfield and the Central District Development Agency contained two discrepancies which were not apparent until after those budgets were adopted. As a result, the Fiscal Year 1992-93 Annual Budget Resolution is understated by $1,285,400. These discrepancies must be corrected for accounting purposes and do not affect the City's ability to provide services. For the reader's benefit, Attachment A demonstrates what should have been reflected when the resolutions were adopted. However, please note, the budget file and the Annual Budget document do reflect these items as if they had been correctly reflected on the resolution and therefore these items are not included in the attached as amendments. The first discrepancy is a result of not carrying a figure across the spreadsheet which is used as back up for the resolution. Consequently, the budget resolution adopted in June for the City of Bakersfield was understated at that time by $1,285,400. The second discrepancy occurred in September when adjustments were made to the budget as a result of action taken by the State of California. The discrepancy concerns the interagency loan to the Central District Development Agency for the one-time shi.ft in Redevelopment Property Tax increments to the State. The loan is from the General Fund to the Redevelopment Fund and shouldhave been shown in the General Fund column of the worksheet. As a result, the resolution adopting the CDDA budget was overstated by $226,000 and the resolution adopting the Operating Budget for the City of Bakersfield was understated by an additional $226,000. As a result of these discrepancies, a new method for tracking budget amendments has been implemented that will help reduce errors and the duplication of efforts. Previously, all changes were tracked in a computer spreadsheet which was used as Page 2 back up to the resolutions amending the budget. Attached to each resolution was a spreadsheet that contained all the amendments that were made to date, regardless of which budget that was affected. At a later date, amendments would be keyed into the budget file on the PRIME. Generally, any discrepancies would become apparent while reconciling the budget file to the spreadsheet. Under the new method, budget amendments are keyed directly into the PRIME and posted to the budget file. Reports detailing amendments for each budget can then be generated and used as attachments to the resolutions. In addition to saving time and effort, one advantage to this process is that the number of back up pages attached to each resolution will be reduced and will only reflect changes that relate to that particular budget resolution. SUMMARY As a matter of conformance to City accounting practices and budgetary controls, it is necessary that the budget be amended to reflect these changes. The total net changes to appropriations is summarized on Attachment B. Attachment C lists the amendments in the order they occurred. All of these items, with the exception of the corrections to the resolutions; the reductions to City Clerk's the Fire department's budget; and the transactions relating to the payment to the ERAF, have been previously approved by Council. Upon the review of these amendments, the City Manager's Office recommends the approval of this report and the adoption of the proposed resolutions. madwp\midyrads Page 3 DEMONSTRATION OF SPREADSHEET DISCREPENCIES SPREADSHEET AS ATTACHED TO RESOLUT/ON COB - OPERATING BIJDGETS NET COB OP BUD GENERAl_ Al.l_ OlltEg COB CDBG CDBG CDDA CDDA DESCRII'TIOrJ AccolJrJ1 t,lo. I t~¢)M 10 AMOIJI',,IT CIIAr,JGE _ A_ I I. Fur,J_~I?.~__' ..F~II/JI) FIJI',IDS CIP OI'EHA lING CIP (.)I'EI~,AI"IN(; CIP Citv Manager PROPOSED Appropriations 190,372,201 127,109,097 73,412.530 53,696,567 59,318,902 1,439,499 289,700 12,203,003 12,000 City Manager PROPOSED Interfund Transfers 11,292.210 10,162,210 6,187,470 3,974,740 ! 1,130,000 Total PROPOSED Budget in May 201,664,411 137,271,307 79,600,000 57,671,307 59,318,902 1,439,499 289,700 3,333,003 12,000 REPLACEMENT OF GAS TAX FUNDS USED FOR K.R. FWY RO.W. ACQUISITION Street Imprevements 323 743 79500 2,168.000 882,600 (1.285.400) {1,285,400 ~11.285,400) Translsers to Other Funds 323 991 79900 0 1,285,400 ""i,285,400. 0 0 0 Changes to PROPOSED Appropriations . (5,744.996 (2,002,550) (1,420,000) (582,550) (3,928.400 112.954 4,000 69,000 0 Changes to PROPOSED Interfund Transfers 413,400 413,400 {934,000) 1,347,400 0 0 0 0 0 Total Changes less Interfund Transfers (6,158,396 (2.415,950) (486,000) (t,929,950( (3,928.400 112,954 4,000 69,000 0 Total ADOPTED Appropriations, June 24, 1992 184,213.805 124,693,147 72,926,530 51,766,617 55,390,502 1,552.453 293,700 2.272.003 12,000 Total ADOPTED Interfund Transfers. June 24, 1992 11,705,610 10.575,610 5,253,470 5,322.140 0 0 0 1,130,000 0 Total ADOPTED Budget, June 24, 1992 195.919.415 135,2(30,757 78,180,000 57,088,757 55,390,502 1.552,453 293,700 3,402,003 12,000 This shouk haw b~en fund "011' /"~" .--" .... -,.. This should .' '' have boon lot Ger~ral Fund instead shown in of '39 7. fo/ rh~ G~n~tal ' Fund Redevelop. ,.' ",~, " Column \ Contributions to Other Agencies ,'3~i '675 74800 / 0 226,000 226,000 226,000 0 0 "--~' 226,000 Changes to ADOPTED ApprOpriations (730,000 ~786,000) 1956,000) 170.000 [170,000 0 0 226.000 0 Changes to ADOPTED Intedund Transfers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Changes less Interfund Transfers (730,000 (786,000) 1956,000) 170.000 (170.000 0 0 226.000 0 Total ADJUSTED Appropriations, September 30, 1992 183,483.805 123,907,147 71.970,530 51,936,617 55,220.502 1,552,453 293.700 2.498,003 12.000 Total ADJUSTED Interfund Transfers, September 30, 1992 11,705,610 10,575,610 5,253,470 5,322,140 0 0 0 1,130,000 0 Total ADJUSTED Budget, September 30, 1992 195,189.415 134,482,757 77,224,000 57,258,757 55,220,502 1,552,453 293,700 3,628,003 12,000 MAD.'RESXMP~E. XLS 12/18/92 10.'14 AM A TTA CHMENT A SUMMARY OF NET CHANGES TO APPROPRIATIONS BUDGET ' ' COR-R-E~I~-~ ............. -A~NUAL MID-YEAR AMENDED I BUDGET RESOLUTIONS ENTRIES BUDGET AMENDMENTS BUDGET ! City of Bakersfield Operating 123,907,147 1,511,400 (1) 125,418,547 (546,051) 124,872,496 Capital Improvements 55,220,502 55,220,502 3,040,862 58,261.364 Subtotal 179,127,849 1,511,400 180,639,049 2,494,811 183,133,860 Transfers Out 10,575,610 10,575,610 208,'315 10,783,925 Total Budget 189,703,259 1,511.-¢00 !91,214,659 2,703,126 193,917,785 CDBG Operating 1,552,453 1,55'2,453 810,000 2,362,453 Capital Improvements 293,700 293,700 293,700 Subtotal 1,846,153 0 1,846,153 810,000 2,656,153 Transfers Out 0 0 0 Total Budget 1,846,153 0 1,846,153 810,000 2.656,153 CDDA Operating 2.498,003 (226,000) (2) 2,272,003 208,315 2,480,318 Capital Improvements i 2,000 12,000 12.000 Subtotal 2,510,003 (226,000) 2,284,003 208,315 2,492,318 Transfers Out 1,130,000 1,130,000 1,130,000 Total Budget 3,640,003 (226,000) 3,414,003 208.315 3,622,318 TOTAL BUDGETS Operating 127,957,603 1,285,400 129,243,O03 472,264 129,715,267 Capital Improvements 55,528,202 0 55,526,202 3,040,862 58.567,064 Subtotal 153,483,805 1,285,400 184,769,205 3,513,126 188,282,331 Transfers Out 11,705,610 0 11,705,610 208,315 11,913,925 Total Budget 195.189,415 1,285,400 196,474,815 3,721,441 200,196,258 (1) Reflects the additional $1,285,400 not carried across the spreadsheet attached to the original budget resolution and the $226,00 for the property tax shift to ERAF that was reflected in the CDDA budget but should have been shown in the General Fund. See Attachment A for further details. (2) Backs out the $226,000 that was originally reflected in the CDDA budget but should have been shown in the General Fund. See Attachment A for further detads. .. MA D :A DSA TTCH. XL S 9:40 AM 12/18/92 ATTACHMENT B BUDGET AMENDMENTS Summary - ALL Budgets Council Amendments in Numerica[ Order id Action Obit Obit ~ Date Fund Sprg No Description Amount Comment 26 AUG 92 112 652 75700 LOAN PROGRAMS 810,000 Federal funds for Home Investment Partnership program. 08 OCT 92 011 392-74500 OTHER OUTSIDE SERVICE -64,586 Shared costs for Emergency Corrraunications Center - Pay in 91-92, per Auditors. 08 OCT 92 011 251 74400 ELECTIONS -68,349 Costs for June 1992 ELection - Pay in 91-92, 'per Auditors. 21 OCT 92 142 743 79400 NON-STRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS 130,361 TDA 3 Funds - Bike Path; Manor to Fairfax 21 OCT 92 142 411 78300 EQUIPMENT HOC 2,400 TDA 3 Funds - BicycLe Lockers 18 NOV 92 011 672 74800 CONTRIBUTIONS TO OTHER AGENCIES 11,920 County Revenues - County share of operating costs for Incentive Area program. 18 NOV 92 866 746 74100 PROFESSIONAL AND CONSULTING SERVICES 60,900 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - Assessment Engineer 18 NOV 92 866 746 74100 PROFESSIONAL AND CONSULTING SERVICES 60,300 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pyn~qts - Bond Counsel 18 NOV 92 866 746 74100 PROFESSIONAL AND CONSULTING SERVICES 29,600 'AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Py~mqts - Appraisal 18 NOV 92 866 746 73000 PRINTING AND BINDING 13,000 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - Bond & Other Printing 18 NOV 92 866 746 7-5200 LEGAL ADVERTISING 3,000 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pyllrlts - Legal Publication & Notices 18 NOV 92 866 746 74600 FISCAL AGENT FEES 10,050 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pym~ts - Bond Administration & Registration 18 NOV 92 866 746 74500 OTHER OUTSIDE SERVICE 590 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - CDAC. MSRB. PSA Fees 18 NOV 92 866 746 74500 OTHER OUTSIDE SERVICE 6,000 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - Environmental Approval Processing 18 NOV 92 866 746 75400 ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ALLOCATED 5,000 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - Auditor's Record 18 NOV 92 866 889 78850 UNDERWRITER'S DISCOUNT 33,500 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - Underwriter's Discount (1%) 18 NOV 92 866 889 78950 CAPITALIZED INTEREST 171,611 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - Capitalized Bond Interest 18 NOV 92 866 889 79050 DEBT SERVICE RESERVE 335,000 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - Debt Service Reserve 18 NOV 92 866 746 79400 NON-STRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS 2,712,061 AD 91-1 Bond Proceeds & Assess Pymnts - Construction Fund 18 NOV 92 011 91~ 76100 UNAPPLIED APPROPRIATIONS (Contingency) -221,880 Transfer Council Contingency to Police - School Crossing Guards ' 18 NOV 92 011 321 74500 OTHER OUTSIDE SERVICE 221,880 ~ounci~ Contigency - School Crossing Guards, Po[ice ; 09 DEC 92 011 675 74800 CONTRIBUTIONS TO OTHER AGENCIES -226,000 Delete. Original estimate for interagency loan to CDDA. ~ 09 DEC 92 011 911 76100 UNAPPLIED APPROPRIATIONS (Contingency) 17,685 Increase Council Contingency. Interagency [oat to CDDA [ess than budgeted. ~ 09 DEC 92 011'991 79900 TRANSFERS TO OTHER FUNDS 208,]15 lnterfund Transfer for loan to CDDA for Property Tax revenue shift to schools. ~ 09 DEC 92 391 277 74800 CONTRIBUTIONS TO OTHER AGENCIES 208,315 Appropriation for one-time property tax revenue shift to schools. I 30 JUN 92 551 843 78800 PAYMENT ON OTHER DEBT -663,996 Reduce Airpark Fund Appropriations - Liquidate Airport Debt. ~ 30 JUN 92 551 843 78900 DEBT INTEREST CHARGES -52,472 Reduce Airpark Fund Appropriations - Liquidate Airport Debt. I 30 JUN 92 551 843 79000 DEBT SERVICE RETIREMENT -42,764 Reduce Airpark Fund Appropriations - Liquidate Airport Debt. 09 DEC 92 863 743 79500 STREET IMPROVEMENTS 10,000 Appropriate AD 86-2 Interest Earnings. Final work to complete project. Total Amendments 3,721,441 Operating Budget 472,264 Capital Improvements 3,040,862 3,513,126 Transfers Out 208,315 Total Amendments 3,721,441 29:20 12-17-92 ATTACHMENT C