Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/08/2001 BAKERSFIELE Mike Maggard, Chair Harold Hanson Mark Salvaggio Staff: Darnell Haynes BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Thursday, March 8, 2001 4:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room, Suite 201 Second Floor - City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. ADOPT FEBRUARY 5, 2001 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Committee recommendation regarding a request for funding from the Bakersfield Museum of Art B. Public Works staff report and Committee review and recommendation regarding traffic light preemption devices C. Committee review and recommendation regarding amendments to the City of Bakersfield Operating and Capital Improvement Budgets for FY 2000-01 D. Committee review and recommendation on Audit Reports: 1. Independent Auditors Report, Single Audit Report, Schedule of Federal Expenditures for the City of Bakersfield for FY ended June 30, 2000 2. Independent Auditors Report on appropriations Limit Worksheet (GANN Limit) of the City of Bakersfield for the FY ended June 30, 2000 E. Committee review and recommendation regarding funding for Kern Bluffs Open Space Plan 5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 6. ADJOURNMENT S:\Damell~2001 BFCommittee~bf01 ma0r8agen.wpd DRAFT BAKERSFIELB Alan Tandy, City Manager Harold Hanson Staff: Darnel~ Haynes Mark Salvaggio AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE. Monday, February 5, 2001 4:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room 1. ROLL CALL Call to Order at 4:08 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Mike Maggard, Chair; Harold Hanson and Mark Salvaggio 2. ADOPT AUGUST 11, 2000 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Adopted as submitted. 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Bakersfield Senior Housing Project on Fourth Street and CDBG/HOME/Housing Set Aside financial assistance EConomic/Community Development Director Donna Kunz explained that this request is for an additional $280,000 bringing the applicants total request to $560,000. CHDO funds are available for the first request for $280,000 to build 80 Iow-income units of housing for seniors. The applicants are now requesting an additional $280,000 for acquisition of adjoining lots to shift the project 110 feet north. This shift will allow the exiSting recreation building, after school programs and parking lot to remain. Staff has met with the applicants and is recommending positive consideration of the extra land purchase; however, all of the HOME allocations for next year are pre-committed, so we do not have a budget on hand to accommodate this request in the form of a cash grant. Staff requested the Committee's concurrence to work with the applicants to structure some kind of financing plan (a note or loan) to allow them to proceed and then phasing the funding when it is available. Mr. Lynn Edwards and Mr. Vernon Strong spoke regarding their project. The Bakersfield Senior Center and Retirement Housing Foundation, co-applicants, received their entitlement for a HUD Section 202 grant award of $6.75 million in November 2000. Time is an issue as HUD established a .time frame of 18 months for the project to be completed. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Monday, February 5, 2001 Page.-2- The Committee unanimously approved allocating $280,000 of CHDO funds for the Bakersfield Senior Housing Project and directed staff to meet with the applicants to assist them in working out some type of financing for the additional $280,000 being requested. When completed, the Committee directed staff to prepare and forward the documents to the City Council. B, Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding amendment to KCEOC Agreement/ CDBG Action Plan On December 13, 2000, the City Council approved an agreement with Kern County Economic Opportunity Corporation (KCEO. C) for $255,000 for acquisition of an 18 acre parcel on Washington Street and Feliz Ddve. The property has been annexed to the City and escrow will be closing in two to three weeks. This amendment 'is for the second installment approved by the Council last year as part of the Action Plan, which provides $275,000 of additional CDBG funds toward the design, engineering and construction of the facility. Approval of this amendment will keep the project moving forward. It was noted that the City's Property Manager is working with-KCEOC on their relocation, as it will free up-the current lOcation for additional Centennial Garden parking. The Committee unanimously approved the amendment, which will increase the agreement to $530,000. Staff was directed to complete the amendment to the agreement and forward to the Council for approval. C. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding request received from Bethany Services for the City to.consider transferring ownership of the.Bakersfield Homeless Center, 1600 E. Truxtun Avenue, to Bethany Services The City received a request from Bethany Services to transfer the ownership of the Bakersfield Homeless Center to them. In 1990, Bethany Services, a non-profit corporation, entered into a lease agreement with the City to lease the Homeless Center from the City for an annual rent of $1.00 for the purpose of providing food, emergency shelter and transitional services to the homeless. Mr. Louis Gill spoke regarding their request. Bethany Services would like to have ownership of the facility in order to purchase land and expand the facility to accommodate the increase of single women with children and families by providing larger segregated areas. Ownership of the property would allow them to obtain financing for.the expansion and establish-a line of credit for operating expenses. Economic Development Director Donna Kunz stated that staff is recommending approval of their request, but recommended covenants or restrictions be added to the deed because the original source of funding was block grants that are .restricted to Iow and moderate individuals, and services for the .homeless were allowed. Mr. Gill stated that-the loan they will be applying for has some of the same restrictions and their long-term plans are to provide services to the homeless. The Committee unanimously approved Bethany Services' request to convey ownership of the Bakersfield Homeless Center property to them, but directed staff to meet with Bethany Services staff'and their bank lenders to work out language that will allow approval of their loan, continued use as a homeless center and an equity share provision on any future sale of the property. After the details are work out, staff was directed to prepare and forward the documents to the City Council. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT DRAFT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE Monday, February 5, 2001 Page -3- D. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding-request from Bruce Dolgin for Conditional 'Use Permit exception to.operate Sno-Shack shaved ice kiosks in C-1 zones Mr. Bruce Dolgin spoke regarding his request to continue operating his Sno-Shack shaved ice kiosks in a C-1 zone. Last year, he thoughtthe ordinance had been. changed to allow operating in a C-1 zone as stated in the first reading, but at the second reading of the ordinance, it was changed to a C-2 (which corrected an error). Due to the confusion, the City issued a temporary conditional use permit for last year so hecould operate at two.Rite Aid locations, which were received well and very successful. Although his business falls under a transient business with the City, he feels his business locations are established over a Iong-term,and he would like to see a change in the ordinance to allow him to continue operating his two locations in the C-1 zone. Staff explained that Transient Outdoor Businesses are allowed to operate in C-2 or less restrictive zones and when the term ofthe ordinance was changed from 90 to 180 days, it was always intended that it remain in a C-2 zone. However, due to the confusion between the first and second reading' of the ordinance and to resolve the situation last season, Mr. Dolgin was granted, at no cost to him, two 180- day Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) that expired at the end of October. A CUP could be issued that would allow Mr. Dolgin to keep operating his two sites in their present C-1 zone, with notification to residents within 300 feet of the site. However, it is very expensive, $1,325 per location. The Committee did not want to impair the integrity of the zoning ordinance or go through the process of amending the ordinance. Due to the original confusion, the Committee recommended that Mr. Dolgin reapply for the CUP's and that the City absorb half of the cost. Mr. Dolgin agreed with the recommendation. The Committee unanimously approved the recommendation and directed staff to follow through with Mr. Dolgin. E. Committee discussion and adoption of 2001 Budget and Finance Committee meeting schedule. The Committee unanimously adopted the calendar, with the provision that if scheduling conflicts occur, meetings can be canceled.and rescheduled at the direction of the Committee Chair. F. Committee-review and recommendation on financial and audit reports: 1. Comprehensive Annual-Financial Report (CAFR) (This item has previously been approved by the Council to meet legal reporting dates.) Finance Director Gregory Klimko briefed the Committee. It was noted that the format of the CAFR will be changing dramatically due -to the implementation of GASB 34 (Government Accounting Standards Board) to put government entities on more of a measurable basis with private business. The reporting will stay the same for the coming year, but will change format for FY 2001-02. Committee Chair Maggard stated it was discussed a year ago the possibility of changing the governmental fund accounting method that we use on accounting for Centennial Garden activities. The Finance Director explained that with the implementation of GASB 34 a year from now, it will be presented differently, more of an enterprise fund - propriety fund accounting. However, when this new accounting format is implemented, there will .be a downside as it will make it appear in the General Fund like it has huge losses, when in fact it balances every year. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE DRAFT Monday, February 5, 2001 Page -4- The Committee unanimously accepted the audit report as filed. 2, Centennial Garden Financial Statements (This item has previously been approved by the CounCil to meet legal reporting dates.) The Finance Director gave an overview of the financial operations of the Garden. The financial picture, which does not include the debt service or depreciation, is improving every year. The Convention Center operated with losses every year. With the opening of Centennial Garden and contracting with,professional management (currently SMG), the net loss for last year was $227,000; net loss the pr. ior year was $594,000, the year before with City'management of the Convention Center the operating loss was $1,137,000, for an improvement of approximately $900,000. Committee-Chair Maggard stated he-has concerns that in .the City's financial statement we don't match the debt service payment against the revenues from the operation of .the Center. It was discussed that there are revenues attributable to the Garden, as the City can now book many large events, that a financial statement does not articulate, such as Transient Occupancy Tax generated, sales tax, nearby redevelopment opportunities, visitors to local restaurants and retail shops, and other revenues that are not quantifiable. Committee Chair Maggard stated that perhaps it would serve to have a memo for reference to answer questions that could show the financial progress the City has made .to lower the deficit or a spreadsheet, and show some of the other benefits the City receives. It was discussed that the City has not had a year since the Garden was constructed in which the City did not adjust the size of staff to deal with increased population, there have been no cutbacks or restrictions in normal business activities and the Garden was absorbed without detriment to any City operations. The Committee unanimously accepted the audit report as filed. 3. 'Independent Auditor's Report on Compliance with Contractual Requirements relative to the Bakersfield Subregional Wastewater .Management Plan for FY ended June 30, 2000. This is a compliance audit which is required as part of an agreement between the City and the County service agencies. It provides a measurement that the City is in compliance with the .. Wastewater.Management Plan. 'fhe.Committee unanimously accepted the audit report and itwas forwarded to the Council. 4, lggg-00 Transportation Development Act Funds Financial Statements Public Works staff gave a brief overview. Kern COG contracts with an accounting firm to provide a compliance audit of all the agencies that receive Transportation Development Act Funds. This includes Article 3 and Article 8 funds. It was noted that Article 3 money can be applied for every year and used,for the Bike Path, which has been done in the past, and Article 8 money is-being used for maintenance atthe Amtrak Station. The Committee unanimously accepted the audit report and it was forwarded to the Council. 5. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT DI AFT Monday, February 5, 2001 Page -5- Staff present: Mayor Harvey L. Hall; City Manager Alan Tandy; City Attorney Bart Thiltgen; Assistant City Manager Alan Christensen; Finance Director Gregory Klimko; Assistant to the City Manager Darnell Haynes; Economic/Community Development Director Donna Kunz; Community Development Coordinator George Gonzales; Interim Public Works Director Jack LaRochelle; Planning Director Stan Grady; Assistant Finance Director Nelson Smith; Treasurer Bill Descary; Deputy City Attorney Allen Shaw; Assistant to the Public Works Director Georgina Lorenzi; and Economic/Community Development Business Manager Rhonda Barnhard. Others present: James Burger, the Bakersfield Californian; Louis Gill, Bakersfield Homeless Center; Bruce Dolgin, Sno-Shack; .Kevin Ray, KCEOC; Lynn.Edwards, Bakersfield Senior Center; Vernon Strong and Valerie Strong, Bakersfield Senior Center Project. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council DWH:jp S:/Damell/2001 BFCommittee/bfOlfebOSsummary. wpd City of Bakersfield General Fund Contributions From FY 97-98 - FY 2000-01 Description Amount First Night Bakersfield First Night Celebration $30,000 Centennial Celebration Foundation Centennial Plaza $15,788 Bakersfield Senior Center Recreation Programs $25,000 Bakersfield Symphony Annual Rent $46,000 Arts Council Of Kern Entry Point Maquette $16,500 Bakersfield Museum Of Art Sculpture Garden $30,000 Bakersfield Museum Of Art Land $295,000 * Vision 2020 Communitywide Vision Plan $25,000 Kern County Museum Metro Recreation Master Plan $35,000 * Estimated value Bakersfield Museum of Art P. o. Box 1911, Bakersfield, CA 93303-1911 1930 R Street, Bakersfield, California 93301 661.323.7219 · fax 661.323.7266 February 8, 2001 EXECUTIVE COMMInEE Esteemed Members of the City council of Bakersfield: Tom Heath pr.,idont. The purpose of this letter and attached background information is to solicit your support for an SIonproside.ntESchnerEtect exhibit that will bring, much exposure and visitors throughout the state to Bakersfield, and to educate you aboUt the vast array of programs and services the Bakersfield Museum of Art Philip Zander Post Pre,i~ent. (BMoA) provides Kern County. Greg Hardy Administrative. Vice PresidentOn September 20, 2001, the Museum will open a significant exhibition, Russell and Remington: Susan Hemme ~,onciat vic. Pr.,~.~t Storytellers of the American West (pictures of some selected works .attached). This exhibit of' Te,y Werde~ popular paintings and sculpture will present the visitor a strong visual image of 19~ and early 20m nnonciot vl,, Prosi~.nt century life in the American West. Including works from the Smithsonian, San Francisco Sandy Denison Sec,,tory museums, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), the Gilcrease Museum in Tulsa Dr. Bobbi. George and the Remington Museum in New York, the exhibit's universal appeal is expected to draw an Assistant Secretary audience of 16,000 with at least 6,000 to 8,000 coming from outside Kern County. Bruce Maclin vice Prosident atLorg, The impact that Russell and Remington will have on our community can be likened t° the impact Jenny Hannah . . Vice President at Large that the Van Gogh exhibit had on the City of Los Angeles. LACMA Public Relations Department Rog.r, Brand°, shared some significant statistics with the BMoA. For every 1,000 out-of-town guests to woo Pre,i~on, at L,rg. LACMA, LOs Angeles' realized approximately $10,000. This translated to LACMA netting $10 Barbara Poe v~,. Pr°siUe,t otLorge million and Los Angeles earning $100 million. TRUSTEES Pete A~gro With that said, art is an attraction. The American Association of Museums and Wall Street R~chard B .... Journal maintain, "...More people visit art museums than amateur and professional sporting Bo~ Bo,ue events combined." From the experiences of our Georgia O'Keeffe, Mexican Art, Chagall and chonta B ..... ,.Rob~ .... Women in Art exhibits, our guest registry reveals visitors from around the world and we have L.J. Corby ' garnered considerable status in the art world. No other art museum or gallery in the San Joaquin Curtis Darling Jan Drew Valley offers the caliber of art that hangs on the walls of the BMoA (exhibit schedule attached). Diane Duquette Dr. Victor Ettinger During the Russell and Remington: Storytellers of the American West we .will be formally Ka,hy G~son surveying our visitors. Counting numbers is an indicator of success and with the Museum's Cyn,h~a G~ ...... tremendous new growth it is imperative that visitation numbers are tracked closely. This Coral Hansen cy.~h~o ~cordo information will be shared with the Council to verify the fact, 'that support of the arts results in Carolyn Johnston revenue.' Tom McCarthy S~ella McMurtrey To say that it is expensive to bring art of such Caliber to Bakersfield is an understatement. The Dr. W",am M .... total cost estimate for this exhibit is $53,500. We are asking for $28,500 from the Council to help David Morton underwrite the anticipated costs. Other underwriters include Wells Fargo Bank and Chevron. The Melissa Palmer Lila P .... BMoA suggests that this underwriting is an important investment for the City, and Russell and Barbara Reid Remington: Storytellers of the American West is the perfect venue - a high impact exhibit of Sunny Scofleld . extremely p0pular artisB with very large followings. And if LACMA statistics ring tree, then if G.y~o.d S,.~,h achieve no more than half the out-of-town anticipated Russell and Remington audience, the City Anne Spauldlng '~vill recOver'more than its initial investment. Mary Leu Thomson . E,therT ...... Thank you for y~ur consideration and thank you for your support. Claudia True . r Tom Webdell Marc Widelock ~ Belty Younger .. Carolyn Johnston . Chairman, Blue Ribbon Circle ' . Chades G. Meyer Executive D/rector .- STAMPEDED BY LIGHTNING Frederic Remington REMINGTON/RUSSELL EXHIBIT SEPTEMBER - NOVEMBER 2001 Staff Executive Director, Planning & Administration $ 3,000 Curator $ 4,800 Educational Director $ 2,000 Marketing Director $1,500 Clerical $ 800 Preparation and Shipping $10,800 Insurance $ 6,500 Gallery Preparation & Supplies $ 1,000 Printing, Catalog, Posters, Invitations, etc. $ 7i.600 Postage $ 500 Telephone $ 200 Office Supplies $ 500 Art Supplies, student tours $ 2,700 Travel $ 600 Marketing/Promotion $ 9,000 Contingencies $ 2,000 TOTAL $53,500 MARKETING 'PLAN RUSSELL & REMINGTON EXHIBIT SEPTEMBER 20 - NOVEMBER 25, 2001 Certified Folder Display 3-5 month display - from Bakersfield to San Diego 2,174 sites covered at hotels, restaurants, entertainment, car rental, RV park, military, gas outlets $4,370 Other Paid Advertising Out -of-Town: Fresno Bee $ 752 Santa Barbara Press $ 684 ArtScene MagaZine (S. California publication) $ 700 In-town: Bakersfield Californian, E1 Mexicalo, El Popular ads $2,500 Total Paid Advertising $9,006 Public Service Announcements To 87 media sources, (28 are out-of-town outlets, including AAA and The LA Times Calendar, R VMagaZine) Extensive publicity to numerous California coastal communities through American General Media Web sites Besides our own website (www.bmoa.org), we are linked to the Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce, Kern County Board of Trade, www. lKnowBakersfield.com, and www.bakersfield.com which are easily accessed · · when people are looking for information about Bakersfield. We are also listed in ArtScene Magazine's website which is an easily accessed lOcation for art seekers. ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART AND T~V~ VAN GOGH'S VAN GOGHS EXHIBITION Prepared by Morey and Associates, Inc. August' 18, 1999 LACMA ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FY 1997-98 AND FY 1998-99 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Los Angeles County Museum of Art commissioned Morey and Associates to conduct an economic impact analysis of LACMA on Los Angeles County for FY 1998-99 and to particularly assess the impact of the Van Gogh exhibition. Estimates in this analysis are based on data supplied by LACMA and the Los Angeles Convention and Visitors "Bureau, as well as on data obtained in a survey of visitors to LACMA conducted in August 1998 and during January-April 1999.' The economic contribution of LACMA on Los Angeles County was determined using an input-output model of Los Angeles County constructed specifically for this study. 'This model uses a conservative approach to determine output, income, jobs and taxes resulting from: visitor expenditures at LACMA, expenditures elsewhere in Los Angeles .County by visitors to the Museum, and expenditures'by the Museum from nonvisitor revenues. All expenditures and revenues which are deemed substitutable are not included · in .the overall economic impact figures because these expenditures and revenues would occur with or without LACMA. VISITORS Attendance LACMA had attendance of 1,330,000 in FY 1998-99 which was an increase of 775,976 over the previous year. This increase is attributed to the Van Gogh exhibition Which brought 821,000 visitors to LACMA. Visitor Origin 44% of all visitors to the Van Gogh exhibition were from Los Angeles County, 30% were from other areas of southern California, 11% were from northern California, 13% were from the U.S. outside of California, and I% were from outside the U.S. Decision to Visit 90% of visitors to the Van Gogh exhibition decided to visit LACMA before their arrival in Los Angeles and among those, 94% said the Van Gogh exhibition was a reason for coming to Los Angeles County. Advertising 92% of visitors to the Van Gogh exhibition saw advertising for LACMA prior to their .. visit, and 78% specifically recalled advertising for the Van Gogh exhibition. EXPENDITURES Combined expenditures of resident and non-resident visitors to LACMA during the Van Gogh exhibition total $48.5 million. The three largest expenditure categories were: Shopping at $14.2 million, Entertainment/Attractions at $12.7 million and, Restaurants at $10.6 million. ECONOMIC IMPACT The economic impact of LACMA during the Van Gogh exhibition on Los Angeles County was as follows (Results are inclusive of multiplier effects except taxes which are only the direct estimates): Output $121.9 million Personal income $39.0 million Jobs 2,872 Transient Occupancy Tax $ 0.8 million Sales Tax $2.1 million The economic impact of LACMA during all of FY 1998-99 on Los Angeles County was as follows: Output $195.4 million Personal Income $62.3 million Jobs 4,480 ..T~ansient Occupancy Tax $1.2 million Sales Tax $2.8 million The economic impact of LACMA during FY 1997-98 was as follows: Output $80.1 million Personal Income $25.3 million Jobs 1,752 Transient Occupancy Tax $0.4 million Sales Tax $0.8 million ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART AND THE VAN GOGH EXHIBITION TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES AND TABI~ES EXEcuTIVE SUMMARY I INTRODUCTION 1 Il DATA 3 Museum Expenditures 3 Number of Visitors 4 Selected Visitor Survey Results 5 Party Size 23 Type of Accommodations 24 " Visitor ExPenditures 25 Ill ECONOMIC CONTRIBuTION 32 Personal Income and Jobs 33 Economic Output 36 Taxes 37 IV CALCULATION OF ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION 40 Multipliers 40 V CONCLUSIONS 48 APPENDIX DISCUSSION OF INPuT-OuTPuT MODELS 1 Model Overview 1 I-O Models and the U.S. Economy 2 Regionalizing the Model 2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS 4 ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART AND THE VAN GOGH EXHIBITION LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Page- Figure ! LACMA Number Of Visitors 4 Figure 2 Origin Of Visitors 6 Figure 3 Length Of Visit To Los Angeles County 7 Figure 4 Decide To Visit LACMA Before Arrival In Los Angeles County 8 ,. Figure 5 Influence Of Van Gogh Exhibition On Decision To Visit Los Angeles Among Persons Who Decided To Visit Before Arriving 9 Figure 6 LACMA Advertising Awareness 10 · Figure 7 Aware Van Gogh Exhibition Was Sponsored 11 Figure 8 Excellent Ratings Of Overall Satisfaction 12 Figure 9 Excellent Ratings Of Value For Admission 13 Figure 10 Excellent Ratings Of Entertainment Experience 14 Figure 11 Excellent Ratings Of Educational Experience 15 Figure 12 Excellen.t Ratings Of Exhibition Quality 16 Figure 13 Excellent Ratings Of Employee Courtesy 17 Figure 14 Excellent Ratings Of Overall Cleanliness 18 Figure 15 Excellent Ratings Of Signage To The Museum 19 " Figure 16 Excellent Ratings .Of Signage Within The Museum 20 Figure 17 Excellent Ratings of Parking 21 Figure 18 Other Cultural Attractions Visited During Trip 22 Figure 19 Overnight Accommodations 24 Figure 20 Daily Visitor Expend. itures. 29 .List of Figures and Tables Continued Figure 21 Total .Visitor Expenditures 30 Figure 22 Visitor Expenditures During The Van Gogh Exhibition 31 Figure 23 Personal Income Attributed To LACMA 34 I Figure 24 Number Of Jobs Attributed To LACMA 35 Figure 25. Economic Output Attributed To LACMA 36 Figure 26 Direct Taxes Attributable To LACMA 38 · 'Table I '" Expenditures By Visitors To The Los Angeles County Museum Of Art: FY t997-98 26 Table 2 Expenditures By Visitors To The Los Angeles County Museum Of Art: Van Gogh Exhibition 27 Table 3 Applicable Sales Tax Rates 39 Table 4 Output And Income Multipliers For Los Angeles County By Expenditure Category 42 Table 5 Employment Multipliers For "' Los Angeles County By Expenditure Category 43 Table 6 Estimates Of Economic Contribution Of The Los Angeles County Museum Of Art To Los Angeles County: FY 1997-98 45 Table 7 Estimates Of Economic Contribution Of The Los Angeles County Museum Of Art To Los Angeles County: Van Gogh Exhibition 46 Table 8 Estimates Of Economic Contribution Of The Los Angeles County Museum Of Art To Los Angeles County:.FY 1998-99 47 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART AND THE VAN GOGH EXHIBITION I INTRODUCTION The Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) commissioned Morey and Associates to conduct an analysis of the economic impact of the Museum and particularly the special Van Gogh exhibition, "Van Gogh's Van Goghs," which appeared at the Museum from January 17, 1999 through May 16, 1999. Significant cultural attractions such as .LACMA have an ongoing economic impact on their communities. These attractions are making expenditures in their community and they are attracting visitors, both local residents and visitors from outside the area, who are also spending money. While some visitors from outside the area might be visiting in order to see a specific cultural attraction, the unique Van Gogh exhibition presents a special opportunity to observe and measure LACMA's economic impact on Los Angeles County. Estimates-in this analysis are based on expenditure and attendance data supplied by LACMA as well as on data obtained in a survey of visitors to the Museum conducted in August 1998 and during the Van Gogh exhibition. Data obtained from LACMA provide information about the Museum's revenue and cost structure, employment, payroll, and attendance. Data obtained from the visitor survey provide information about the expenditure patterns of visitors to the Museum, their visit to the Los Angeles area, and their economic and demographic characteristics. The expenditure data are quite important to estimating the overall economic contribution of the Museum because visitors not only pay entrance fees, they also may stay in overnight accommodations, eat in nearby restaurants, and make other purchases related to their visit. Additional information was provided by the Los Angeles Convention & Visitors Bureau whose Cultural Tourism Department developed an extensive cooperative promotional program- with American Express and selected area hotels. These data are used with a specially developed input-output model of Los Angeles County to calculate the total impact of LACMA within LOs Angeles County. As outlined more completely in the Appendix, the methods used to construct this model can be applied to develop input-output models for any county in California (or, for that matter, any county or county-type area in the United States). These models could be used to evaluate the economic contributions or losses associated with a broad range of events, but are particularly well suited to making estimates of a unique facility that attracts out-of-town visitors. Page I LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis · The model developed for this study is very detailed. It is individualized for Los Angeles County, has built-in entry points for the data collected, and can be used to estimate the impact of the LACMA on output levels, incomes, and employment levels in Los Angeles County. The remainder of this report is organized into four sections. Section II presents an overview of the available data and projected visitor expenditures, Section Ill describes the economic coatribatioa.o£.the Museura(inclusive of multiplier effects), Section IV shows.how the economic contribution was calculated, and Section V presents conclusions. A discussion of input-output models and an explanation of the calculation of the economic .contribution.of the MuSeum is .provided in Section IV. Page 2 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis II DATA Museum Expenditures As mentioned previously, this study makes use of data available from the Los Angeles County Museum of Art as well as from visitors to the facility. Data from the Museum indicates that in the recent fiscal year (FY1998-99), total combined operating revenues and support reachedapproximately $49 million. Total operating expenses were approximately $44.3 million in FY1998-99. These figures represent a substantial increase over the previous fiscal year. In FY 1997-98,-estimated total revenues and support, were $31.6 million while total expenses came to $31.4 million. The most important reason for the increase in cash.flow in FY1998-99 was the exhibition of VanGogh masterpieces that were displayed at the Museum from January 17( 1999 through May 16, 1999. Total revenues during the Van Gogh exhibition were $22.7 million and total expenses directly attributable to hosting the exhibition were $10.6 million. With the exception of fees for the exhibition of $5.5 million, all expenditures by the Museum are assumed to be made within Los Angeles County. Page 3 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Number of Visitors In FY 1997-98, Museum admissions totaled 554,024 persons including total paid admissions of 227,736 persons. This latter figure does not include persons holding Museum memberships or those admitted at no charge. By comparison, FY 1998-99 Museum admissions totaled 1,330,000 persons including total paid admission of approximately 800,000 persons. Approximately 821,000 persons visited the Museum during the Van Gogh exhibition. Of these, 566,910 persons paid for admission under one of several ticket purchase plans. Figure I reflects the nur~ber of visitors. Fig.ur.e 1 LACMA NUMBER OF VISITORS* mTotal admissions nPaid admissions 1,500,000- 1,330,000 1,250,000- 800,000 821,000 554,024 566,910 500,000- .. 227,736 250,000- FY1997-98 FY1998-99' Van Gogh *Total admissions Includes paid and non-paid admissions and Includes Van Gogh Page 4 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Selected Visitor Survey Results To obtain information about visitors to the Museum, two surveys were conducted during FY 1998-99. The first survey was conducted in August 1998 and the second was conducted in early 1999 during the Van Gogh exhibition. In the August 1998 survey, 294 visitors were interviewed on the premises of the Museum. Members were excluded from the survey. · . During the Van Gogh exhibition 346 visitors including members and non-members were interviewed on the Museum premises. In each of the two surveys, respondents provided information on behalf of their party. Results of these sur~eys are presented in the following sections and incorporated into the analysis. Past Visits to the Museum 27% of residents and 52% of non-residents who attended the Van Gogh exhibition were making their first visit to LACMA. The Van Gogh exhibition also brought past visitors back to the Museum; 65% of the repeat visitors had not visited for one year or more. 76% of Los Angeles County residents at the Van Gogh exhibition had visited in the past year, and 79% expect to visit within the next year. Visitor Origin Nonresident visitors (among non-members) to LACMA increased significantly during the Van Gogh exhibition. In the August 1998 survey, about 34% of Museum visitors were from outside Los Angles County. During the Van Gogh' exhibition, this increased to 58% of Museum visitors, excluding members. Even with members included in the.~Van Gogh survey results, 56% of visitors were from outside Los Angeles County. The most significant increase in the percentage of visitors occurred from areas of California other than LOs Angeles County. And since the percentage of international visitors remains unchanged in comparing the 1998 and 1999 Van Gogh survey results, we can conclude there was an actual increase in the number of international visitors. Figure 2 shows the origin of Museum visitors. Throughout this report, comparisons with 1998 describe non-members surveyed during" the Van Gogh exhibition as "Van Gogh," and all respondents surveyed during the Van Gogh exhibition as "Van Gogh - All Respondents." Since members were excluded from the 1998 survey results, the results described as "Van Gogh" are directly comparable. However, we also thought it would be useful to describe all respondents during the Van Gogh exhibition. Page 5 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Figure 2 ORIGIN OF VISITORS 66% I,~1998 nVan Gogh - Nonmembers [3Van Gogh -All Respondents 44% 20%- 15% 13%__'13% 11% 12% 10%' 6% 6% 6% 6% 1% 1% Los Angeles Orange County San Diego Other So. Cal. No. Cal. Other U.S. Int'l. County County Page 6 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Length of Trip Figure 3 compares the length of stay of visitors from outside Los Angeles County. In comparing visitors to Los Angeles County in the 1998 survey and during the Van Gogh exhibition, we can-see the percentage of day visitors increased dramatically, from 29% to over 60%. This is due to dramatic increase in the number of visitors from Southern California residing outside Los Angeles County who came for the day. In t.he 1998 survey, 11% of the respondents were Southern California residents living outside Los Angeles County. During the Van Gogh exhibition this increased to 3 I% (among non-members). Figure 3 LENGTH OF VISIT TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY 100%- 111998 ElVan Gogh - Nonmembers ElVan Gogh - All Respondents 80%- 61% 63% 40%- 27% 20%' 13% 11% 9% 9% 9% 3% 3% Day Visitors I night 2 nights 3 to 5 nights 6 to 7 nights 8 nights or more Among visitors (non-members) who did stay overnight, the average length of stay was 3.3 nights during Van Gogh compared with 6.9 nights in August 1998. The difference is that August 1998 visitors were on a summer vacation while visitors during Van Gogh were making a special visit during a time of year that is not when primary vacations are taken. Page 7 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Reason for Visit The Van Gogh exhibition had a tremendous influence on the decision to visit Los Angeles County. Figure 4 shows that the percentage of nonresidents (all respondents) who decided to visit LACMA before arriving in the Los Angeles area increased dramatically. Figure 4 DECIDE TO VISIT LACMA BEFORE ARRIVAL IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY 1005 80% 60%- 40%" 20~ Aug-98 Van Gogh - All Respondents Page 8 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Figure 5 ~shows the significance of the Van Gogh exhibition, among all non-residents in motivating them to visit Los Angeles County. The exhibition was a reason for 80% of all nonresidents to visit Los Angeles County. And as seen in Figure 5, 94% of those persons who decided to visit LACMA before arriving said the Van Gogh exhibition was a reason for coming to Los Angeles County. Figure 5 INFLUENCE OF'VAN GOGH EXHIBITION ON DECISION TO VISIT LOS ANGELES AMONG PERSONS WHO DECIDED TO VISIT BEFORE ARRIVING Coming anyway One of several 6% reasons 19% Primary reason 75% n=160' These results are also reflected by the fact that 61% of all nonresidents purchased their tickets more than one month in advance. Page 9 LACMA~Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Advertising The impact of LACMA's advertising can be seen in Figure 6. 92% of all LACMA visitors had seen advertising for the Museum prior to their visit. Particularly astounding is the high percentage of nonresidents, 89% of whom saw advertising. 78% of all visitors specifically recalled advertising for the Van Gogh exhibition. Figure 6 LACMA ADVERTISING AWARENESS 91% 92% 100%' 80% - 61% 60% - 40% - Aug-98 Van Gogh - Nonmembers Van Gogh - All Respondents Page I0 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Sponsorship As seen in Figure 7, 58% of the LACMA visitors were aware the Van Gogh exhibition was sponsored by a corporation. 98% of those who were aware of this were aware it was sponsored by Washington Mutual. From our experience, this is an unusually high level of awareness of a sponsor. Figure 7 AWARE VAN GOGH EXHIBITION WAS SPONSORED No 42% Yes 58% n = 245 Page 11 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Experience at LACMA The average length of stay at the Van Gogh exhibition was 2.4 hours. 40% of the visitors to the Van Gogh exhibition toured some other area of the.Museum in addition to Van Gogh. Figure 8 through Figure 17 compare ratings by respondents in August '98 and during the Van Gogh. exhibition on a variety of categories. Ratings are based on a scale from "1" to "10" with "10" being the highest possible rating. Ratings of"9" or "10" are classified as "excellent." Ratings of overall satisfaction increased with the Van Gogh exhibition as seen in Figure 8. Figure 8 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF OVERALL SATISFACTION 68% 69% 60% 40%' Aug-98 Van Gogh - Nonmembers Van Gogh - All Respondents Page 12 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis 'Figure 9 shows that ratings for value for admission remained the same. It is important to note that the admission to the Museum in August '98 was $7.00 and this increased to between $17.50 and $20.00 for the Van Gogh exhibition. 84% of the respondents also described the price of admission during the Van Gogh exhibition as "about right" compared to 88% in August '98. 15% of respondents described the price of admission during the Van Gogh exhibition as "too high" compared with 10% of respondents in August '98. These results are strong indicators that visitors accepted this price differential for an exhibition of this quality. Figure 9 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF VALUE FOR ADMISSION 100%- 80%- 65% 65% 20%' 0%- Aug-98 Van Gogh - Nonmembers Van Gogh - All Respondents Page 13 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Figure 10 shows ratings of entertainment experience were essentially the same. Figure 10 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF ENTERTAINMENT EXPERIENCE ? 100%- / / 60% - 46% 47% 48% Aug-98 Van Gogh - Nonmembers Van Gogh - All Respondents Page 14 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis However, ratings of educational experience improved significantly, from 57% to 73%. This is reflected in Figure 11. Figure 11 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE / . ,'..,~ '-. 73% Aug-g8 Van Gogh - Nonmembers Van Gogh - All ~espondents Page 15 LACMA-Van Gog;h Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Ratings of exhibition quality also improved as shown in Figure 12. Figure 12 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF EXHIBITION QUALITY 76% 80% ' 62% 60% - 40%- 20%- Aug-98 Van Gogh - Nonmembers Van Gogh - All Respondents Page 16 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis As shown in Figure 13, ratings-of employee courtesy actually improved during the Van Gogh exhibition. This is extremely significant given the increase in the number of visitors. Figure 13 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF EMPLOYEE COURTESY ? 100%- 81% i.!~.~,~~ :~ : :.: I ~'- ~~'~/ &u9-98 ~an Gogh - ~onmombora Yah Gogh - &Il ~oapondanta Page 17 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis It is also significant to note that ratings of overall Cleanliness improved as shown in Figure 14. Figure 14 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF OVERALL CLEANLINESS / 100'~ ,- Aug-98 Van Gogh - Nonmembers Van Gogh - All Respondents Page 18 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Ratings of signage to the Museum improved during the Van Gogh exhibition as shown in · · Figure 15. Figure 15 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF SIGNAGE TO THE MUSEUM 100% - 65% Aug-98 Van Gogh - Nonmembers Van Gogh - All Respondents Page 19 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Excellent ratings of signage within the Museum also improved as shown in Figure 16. Ratings in August were of signage in the main Museum facility, while ratings during the Van Gogh exhibition were of the special exhibition facility. Figure 16 EXCELLENT RATINGS .OF SIGNAGE WITHIN THE MUSEUM / 100O/o- Au0-98 Van Go0h - Nonmembers Van Go0h - All ~esponden~ Page 20 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Ratings of parking improved as shown in Figure 17. Figure 17 EXCELLENT RATINGS OF PARKING / 68% / 40%' Aug-g8 Van Gogh - Nonmembers VaB ~ogh - All Raspondents Visits to Other Cultural Attractions 39% of all nonresidents, and 78% of those nonresidents staying overnight in Los Angeles County, visited another cultural attraction in addition to LACMA during their trip to Los Angeles. The attractions which they visited are shown in Figure 18. " Page 21 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Figure 18 OTHER CULTURAL ATTRACTIONS VISITED DURING TRIP 90% 80% ' 60% ' 40%' 15% 14% 20%- 11% 8% 7% 7% 4% 0%- Getty Museum Huntington Southwest Mus. Of Nat. Page Museum A. Hammer Petereen Mus. N. Simon Mus. Mus. Mus. History Mus. Page 22 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Party Size Visitors surveyed during August 1998 were in parties averaging 2.1 persons (1.9 adults and 0.2 children). About 10% of these parties included children. Non-member visitors surveyed during thc Van Gogh exhibition were in parties averaging 3.2 persons (2.9 adults and 0.3 children). Among all visitors surveyed during the Van Gogh exhibition, the average party size was also 3.2 persons (2.9 adults and 0.3 children). 15% of all parties included children. 18% of resident parties and 12% of nonresident visitor '>arties included children. Page 23 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Type of Accommodations Among parties surveyed during August 1998 who stayed overnight in Los Angeles County, 54% stayed with friends and relatives, and 44% stayed in hotels and motels. Among non-member parties surveyed during the Van Gogh exhibition who stayed overnight in Los Angeles County, 33% stayed with friends and relatives and 66% stayed in hotels or motels. Among all parties surveyed during the Van Gogh exhibition who stayed ovemight in Los Angeles County, 32% stayed with friends and relatives and 67%.stayed in,hotels or motels. These results are shown in Figure 19 and will be further discussed, in considerations of economic impact. It is apparent that the special promotional program of the Los Angeles Convention & Visitors Bureau had some impact in encouraging,use of hotel'accommodations. Figure 19 '~ OVERNIGHT ACCOMMODATIONS I11998 [] Van Gogh - Nonmembers r~ VanGogh'~ Ali"Respondents' 8O°/, 66% 67% 54% 33% 32% 20%' 2% 2% 2% 0%' Frlend~Relatives Hotelh~otel Other Page 24 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis LACVB Promotion The Los Angeles Convention & Visitors Bureau developed a special promotional program with selected area hotels and has reported this as being responsible for 12,435 room nights. This estimate understates the overall impact on area hotels. Of the 144,437 nonresident parties, 21% stayed oVernight in a hotel or motel. Based on one-night occupancy and all persons in the party occupying one room, this equates to 30,332 room nights. The average length of stay of these persons was 2.7 nights, so counting multiple nights this equates to 81,896 room nights. Visitor Expenditures Table 1 shows August 1998 expenditures per party for resident (of Los Angeles County) and nonresident visitor parties by category. The table also extends per party expenditures to expenditures by all visitors in FY1997-98 based on attendance of 554,064. The idea behind this calculation is to estimate the annual expenditures accounted for by Museum visitors during a "normal year" just prior to the Van Gogh exhibition. As previously indicated, in FY 1998-99, Museum attendance rose to 1,330,000 and about 821,000 persons visited during the Van Gogh exhibition. The difference between these figures (509,000) is roughly equal to the number of visitors to the Museum during FY 1997-98. Thus, it appears that the Museum would have had another "normal year" in attendance had the Van Gogh masterpieces not been exhibited. In other words, the Van Gogh exhibition represented a substantial one-time increase in the Museum's economic contribution to the LOs Angeles County economy. Figures presented on average per party expenditures were taken from the survey and pertain to the day that someone in the party was interviewed. Expenditures for. entertainment/attractions include admission paid at LACMA, and expenditures for restaurants and shopping include expenditures made at LACMA. Page 25 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Table 1 EXPENDITURES BY VISITORS TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART: FY 1997-98 Expenditure Average All Parties Category per Party (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Resident Nonresident Resident Nonresident Total Accommodations $ 0.00 $ 41.40 -0- ....$3,604,325. $3,604,325 Restaurants 8.80 44.10 $1,555,488 3,839;390 5,394,898 Groceries 3.60 3.40 636,336 ...... 296,007 .... 932343 Entertainment/ Attractions 11.90 19.10 2,103,444 1.,662,865... 3,766,309 Car Rental 0.00 5.50 -0- 478,835 478~835 Shopping 9.50 38.80 1,679,220 .3377,966 5,057,186 Gasoline 4.00 7.80 707,040 679,075 1,386,115 Total $37.80 $160.10 $6,681,528 $13,938,463 $20,619,991 Figures presented for expenditures by all parties were obtained by multiplying the average per party values by the number of resident and nonresident parties. There were 176,760 resident visitor parties and 87,061 nonresidentvisitor parties. The expenditure figures for all parties are used later in the report-tocompute estimates of the · economic contribution of LACMA to Los Angeles County in FY 1997-98. Those calculations and their implications assume that all expenditures were made 'within Los Angeles County and the visit to the Museum was the main activity that visitors engaged in on that day. Table 2 shows expenditure figures by visitors during the Van Gogh exhibition. Residents spent a total of $14,233,091 while nonresidents spent a total of $34,240,084 for total expenditures of $48,473,175. As shown, total expenditures on the day of the visit by LOs Angeles County residents were larger than those reflected in the August 1998 survey. Expenditures reported by nonresidents were of a comparable magnitude to the August 1998 survey. Average expenditures per party are taken from Van Gogh visitor survey data. Expenditures by all parties were obtained by multiplying the average expenditure values by numbers of resident and nonresident parties. Page 26 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis There were 118,019 resident visitor parties and 138,544 nonresident visitor parties. Also, the expenditure figures for all parties are used later in the report to compute estimates of economic contribution by the Van Gogh exhibition. These calculations are based on the assumption that all expenditures were made within Los Angeles County, and the visit to the Museum was the main activity that visitors engaged in on the day they responded to the survey. Table 2 EXPENDITURES BY VISITORS TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART: VAN GOGH EXHIBITION Expenditures Average All Parties Category Per Party (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Resident Nonresident Resident Nonresident Total Accommodations $ 0.00 $39.00 -0- $6,416,691 $ 6,416,691 Restaurants 24.10 44.40 $2,844,258 _ 7,783,288 ..10,627,546 Groceries 1.70 1.90 200,632 327,075 527,707 Entertainment/ Attractions 45.40 41.10 5,358,063 7,365,994 12,724,056 Car Rental 0.00 9.50 -0- 1,575,522 1,575,522 Shopping 43.00 51.60 '5,074,817 9,100,010 14,174,827 Gasoline 6.40 9.30 755,322 1,671,505 2,426,827 Total $120.60 $196.80 $14,233,091 $34,240,084 $48,473,1:/5 Estimates of economic contribution obtained using figures presented in Tables 1 and 2 account not only for Museum admissions and merchandise expenditures, but also Museum- related expenditures for accommodations, restaurant meals, admissions paid to other attractions, other shopping activities and so forth. Because Museum visitors are doing other things besides visiting the Museum, resident .. expenditures are counted toward the economic contribution of the Museum only on the day of the visit. If nonresident survey respondents stayed more than one day in the Los Angeles area, it was assumed to be for the purpose of engaging in other types of activities, except for nonresident parties who indicated the Van Gogh exhibition was their primary reason for visiting Los Angeles. In these cases the entire expenditures of their visit were added to the daily expenditures. This equated to an average additional stay of .36 nights among 80% of nonresident.parties (110,835). A separate daily expenditure schedule was computed for these parties who spent slightly less on a daily.basis, $174.80 compared with $196.80 among all respondents. Page 27 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Expenditures of nonresidents obviously exceed those of residents on a day when a visit to the Museum takes plac. e. This outcome would be expected because residents of Los Angeles County would be unlikely to use commercial overnight accommodations and less likely to eat all three of a day's meals in a restaurant. In any case, Table 1 shows that in the August 1998 survey, nonresident visitor parties spent about $160. I0 on the day of the interview, whereas resident visitor parties spent about $37.80 per day on the day of the interview. Also, Table 2 shows that in the survey taken during the Van Gogh exhibition, nonresident visitor parties spent an average of $196.80 on the day of the interview, whereas resident visitor parties spent an average of $120.60 on the day of the interview. Also, average expenditures by nonresidents for accommodations ($41.40 in the August 1998 survey and $39.00 in the Van Gogh exhibition survey) may appear to be unreasonably low when compared to rates charged 'by Los Angeles County hotels and motels.. However, recall that the survey indicates that a substantial fraction of nonresident visitors to the Museum in both surveys are accounted for by people who travel to Los Angeles for that day only or who stay overnight with friends and .relatives. The expenditure figure presented is the average for all nonresident parties, whether they actually spent anything on accommodations or not. Among parties who did stay in commercial accommodations, the average expenditure was $139.90. The figures for resident and nonresident expenditures for entertainment/attractions are inclusive of admissions to the Museum and would also include what was spent on other types of entertainment/attractions on the day of the visit. Notice that reported expenditures on entertainment/attractions were larger in the Van Gogh exhibition survey as compared with the August 1998 survey. Expenditures for restaurants and shopping include expenditures made at LACMA. Page 28 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Figure 20 compares daily expenditures among parties during the August 1998 Survey and during the Van Gogh exhibition. Figure 20 DALLY VISITOR EXPENDITURES $196.80 IlResident I:]Nonresident I $200- $160.10 $150- $120.60 $100- FY1997-98 Van Gogh Page 29 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Tables 1 and 2 also show total expenditures by category for each of the two visitor groups. Table 1' shows estimates of total expenditures by Museum visitors based on average per party expenditures from the August 1998 survey together with attendance figures for FY 1997- 98. Thus, this calculation shows the total direct economic contribution of Museum visitors to Los Angeles County in the absence of (prior to) the Van Gogh exhibition. Corresponding figures in Table 2, then, show the direct economic contribution to Los Angeles County by visitors to the Van Gogh exhibition. Notice that total expenditures by visitors .to the Van Gogh exhibition are larger than those for FY 1997-98 ($48.5 million vs. $20.6 million) even though the Van Gogh exhibition lasted only four months. This is also shown in Figure 21. Figure 21 TOTAL VISITOR EXPENDITURES (millions) l Resident [] Nonresident []Total I $48.5 $40- $34.2 ~1997-98 Van Gogh Page 30 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Expenditures for entertainment/attractions (including Museum fees) total about $3.8 million for FY 1997-98 and $11.4 million for the Van Gogh exhibition. These figures are larger than the dollar value of admissions received by the Museum during those time periods and reflect the fact that Museum visitors have other entertainment/attraction expenditures on the day of the their visit. Figure 22 shows expenditure categories as a percentage of total expenditures for all parties visiting LACMA during the Van Gogh exhibition. These percentages remain the same when computing percentages on a per party basis. As indicated the largest expenditure categories were shopping at $14.2 million, entertainment at $12.7 million, restaurants at $10.6 million, and lodging at $6.4 million.' Figure 22 VISITOR EXPENDITURES DURING THE VAN GOGH EXHIBITION Gasoline $2,426,827 5% .Accommodations Shopping $6,416,691 $14,174,827 13% 3O% Restaurants $10,627~5'46 22% Car Rental $1,575,522 Groceries $527,707 3% 1% Entertainment $12,724,056 26% Page 31 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis III ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION Estimates of the economic contribution of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art to the Los Angeles County economy make use of visitor party expenditure data reported in Tables 1 and 2 together with financial information provided by the Museum. The idea here is to account for: (1) Visitor expenditures at the Museum, (2) expenditures elsewhere in Los Angeles County by visitors to the Museum, and (3) expenditures by the Museum from nonvisitor revenues. Expenditures by visitors both at the Museum and elsewhere in Los Angeles County are reported in Tables 1 and 2. Additionally, the Museum received revenues from merchandising, food service, and special events during FY 1997-98 as well as during the. Van Gogh exhibition. These revenues are assumed accounted for by the visitor expenditure data. Notice that the visitor expenditure data would include not only food and retail purchases,made, at. the..Museum, but. also similar purchases made elsewhere in Los Angeles County. Finally, the Museum earns revenues that do not come directly from visitors. These revenues include investment income, memberships, gifts,.and grants.. These revenues represent further injections of funds into the Los Angeles County economy and are incorporated into the analysis below. In FY 1997-98, estimated nonvisitor rewenuesmtaled$13.9~million and during FY 1998-99, forecasted nonvisitor revenues totaled $17.4 million. A fraction of this latter figure (4/12) is attributed to the Van Gogh exhibition in light of the fact that.it .a, as.held in four.out of 12 months of the fiscal year.' These estimates of nonvisitor revenues were taken from data provided by LACMA of estimated revenue sources for FY 1997-98 (Museum Comhined.Revenue.~& Expense Report Fiscal 1998-99) and forecasted results for FY 1998-99 (Los Angeles County Museum of Art Recommended Budget Fiscal 1998-99). The following revenue sources were included: membership dues, unrestricted investment income, restricted investment income, and total Associates support. Other income sources were not included because they are either County appropriations which would be spent in other areas if LACMA did not exist, redundant revenue sources, or were not definable as they impact this analysis. The economic contribution of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art is measured in terms of incomes, jobs, and taxes. As previously indicated, calculations of economic contribution are made using an input-output model of Los Angeles County constructed -- specifically for this study. Estimates of economic contribution presented below rest on an important assumption: It is assumed that day visitors to the Museum who live outside Los Angeles County make all of their expenditures within the County on the day of their visit. Methods for making the estimates of economic contribution are fully described in Section IV. Page 32 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Personal Income and Jobs Within Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art generated about $25.3 million in personal income for Los Angeles County residents in FY1997-98. Also within Los Angeles County LACMA generated approximately 1,752 jobs in FY 1997-98. During thc Van Gogh exhibition, when the number of visitors rose substantially, the Museum generated about $39.0 million in increased income for Los Angeles County residents and about 2,872 jobs. Notice that these figures are larger than those for FY 1997-98 despite the fact that the Van Gogh exhibition lasted only about four months. We have also estimated LACMA's economic impact for all of FY 1998-99. This was accomplished by subtracting the number of visitors to the Van Gogh exhibition from total attendance in FY 1998-99 (1,330,000- 821,000 = 509,000). 509,000 visitors represents 91.8% of the.number of visitors. We have then applied the percentage to FY- 1997-98 results and combined them with Van Gogh exhibition results to produce an estimate for all of FY 1998-99. For all of FY 1998-99 we estimate LACMA produced personal income of $62.3 million and 4,480 jobs. Page 33 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis These results are reflected in Figure 23 and Figure 24. Figure 23 PERSONAL INCOME ATTRIBUTED TO LACMA (millions) $70' · $62.3 $60 ' $50' $39.0 $4O' $25.3 $30- $20' $10- $0' FY 1997-98 Van Gogh FY 1998-99' *Includes Van Gogh exhibition Page 34 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Figure 24 NUMBER OF JOBS ATTRIBUTED TO LACMA 5,000- 4,480 4,000- 2~872 1,752 2,000' 1,000- FY 1997-98 Van Gogh FY 1998-99' *Includes Van Gogh exhibition Page 35 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Economic Output Another' way of describing the economic impact is by "economic output" which is the total economic activity associated with the expenditures. This is reflected in Figure 25. Economic output can be defined as the value of final goods and services produced by all sectors of the Los Angeles County economy. It reflects the impact of multipliers on the actual spending of visitors to LACMA. Figure 25 ECONOMIC OUTPUT ATTRIBUTED TO LACMA (millions) S195.4 $200- $150- $121.9 $1Oo. $8o.1 $50 ' FY 1997-98 Van Gogh FY 1998-99' *Includes Van Gogh exhibition Page 36 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Taxes Also, expenditures by visitors to the Museum for accommodations arc subject to a 14% (in the City of Los Angeles) transient occupancy tax (TOT) and remaining expenditures are subject to an 8.25% sales tax. The visitor expenditure data include taxes paid. Thus, an estimate of tax collections is computed by removing taxes from the expenditure data. Using this approach implies that TOT collections in Los Angeles attributed to nonresident visitors to the Museum during FY 1997-98 were $442,636. Corresponding TOT collections in LOs Angles attributable to Museum visitors during the Van Gogh exhibition were $788,045 and for all of FY 1998-99 are estimated at $1,194,385. Sales tax collections in Los Angeles attributable to nonresident Museum visitors wcrc $787,$91 during FY 1997-98 and $2,120,490 during the Van Gogh exhibition. During all of FY 1998-99, we estimate attributable sales tax collections at $2,843,499. Page 37 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Total estimated tax collections are shown in Figure 26. .Figure 26 DIRECT TAXES A'I-i'RIBUTABLE TO LACMA ' ~ (millions) / SS' IITOT [:]Sales rlTotal I $4.0 $4- / / $2.9 $2- / ~ $1.2 S,-/ s°'8 ! ~ !!!i:~,i~?~:~i FY 1997-98 Van Gogh FY 1998-99' *Includes Van G0gh exhibition These estimates of tax collections attributable to the Museum are quite conservative in that they do not account for indirect effects associated with the multiplier process. These indirect effects on tax collections are difficult to estimate because of uncertainty about how incomes attributable to the Museum will be respent. Page 38 _LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Table 3 shows sales tax rates which were applied to expenditure data to develop estimates of tax contributions. Notice that there is no sales tax levied on hotel occupancies. Instead, there is 14% transient occupancy tax (TOT) in the city of Los Angeles. Table 3 APPLICABLE SALES TAX RATES State 7.25% L.A. County transportation 1.00% ' T6tal 8.25% Page 39 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis IV CALCULATION OF ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION The specially developed input-output model (See Appendix) was used to calculate total output, income, and employment contributions of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art on Los Angeles County. The first step in making these calculations is to estimate a set of multipliers, and the second step involves applying these multipliers to the expenditure data reported in Tables 1 and ~2 and other data supplied by the Museum. In this context, a multiplier is a number that accounts for the fact that dollars received by the Museum or spent by Museum visitors.for other services or goods are then respent in Los Angeles County. As this respending process continues, total sales of all businesses, total incomes of county residents, and employment levels continue to rise. A multiplier, therefore, represents the total magnitude of increase in these variables. Multipliers .Table 4 presents output and income multipliers together with related data forthe economic sectors in which Museum visitors spend money. These are the same sectors listed in Tables 1 and 2 of the main body of this analysis. It is important to note this process for calculating economic impact calculates multipliers for each spending category because each spending type produces different multipliers. The output multipliers labeled Type I, show the total change in the value of output that occurs when expenditures in the sector indicated change by $1, and only respending by business is accounted for. The output multipliers labeled Type Il, reflect the same concept, but are larger because they account for respending of both businesses and households. Forexample, in Los Angeles County, when expenditures on accommodations change by $1, total value of output in all sectors of the economy changes by $1.57 when accounting for business respending only, and $3.09 when accounting for respending by both businesses and households. As indicated below, estimates of economic contribution of the LACMA to the Los Angeles County economy should be based on the larger Type II multipliers because it is important to take account of the fact that as business revenue rises, a portion of that increase will become income to .households. The income multipliers developed for this analysis require somewhat more explanation. The direct effect shows the direct income change to residents of Los Angeles County that comes about for every $1 change in expenditures made in the categories shown. For example, when -- visitors to .the Museum spend an additional $1 on restaurant meals, about $.34 is paid out to workers in the form of wages and salaries. In other words, slightly above one-third of all gross receipts to Los Angeles County eating and drinking establishments find their way directly into paychecks of workers. Page 40 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis The indirect effect reflects the fact that as gross receipts to Los Angeles County business establishments rise, a portion of these funds is used to make purchases of goods and services from businesses both within the county as well as outside the county. For example, a $1 increase in revenues earned by the retail trade sector results in increased interindustry purchases that, in turn, create an additional $. 14 of income for County residents,Over and above that accounted for by the direct effect. Finally, household respending of incomes produces an induced effect. In other words, when an additional $1 is spent in retail trade, the $.40 of directly created incomes for residents of Los Angeles County are then respent and that respending induces an additional $.46 of income creation. The total income changes arising from a $1 change in revenues to a sector then would be the sum of direct, indirect, and induced income changes; i.e., a $1 change in retail trade expenditures results in a Countywide income change of about an additional $1. Two types of income multipliers can be calculated. Type I income multipliers do not account for household respending of incomes and are computed by dividing the sum of the direct and indirect income changes by the direct income change. Type II income multipliers are inclusive of respending by households and are computed by dividing the total income change by the direct income change. Both types of multipliers show the extent to which direct income changes in the sectors named at the left result in further income changes when business and/or household respending is accounted for. Notice that the Type II multipliers are larger than the Type I multipliers because they are inclusive of both business and household respending. Page 41 LACMA-Van Go~h Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Table 4 OUTPUT AND INCOME MULTIPLIERS FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY BY EXPENDITURE CATEGORY OUTPUT INCOME MULTIPLIERS MULTIPLIERS EXPENDITURE CATEGORYa Type Type Direct Indirect Induced Type Type I II Effect Effect .Effec~ I l_.._! Accommodations 1.57 3.09 0.40 0.17 0.48 1.43 ~ 2.63 Restaurants 1.78 3.24 0.34 0.20 0.46 1.59 2.94 Retail Trade 1.50 2.96 0.40 0.14 0.46 1.35 2.50 (Including gasoline and groceries) Entertainment/ .. 1.52 ..2.72 0.30 0.15 0.38 1.50 2.77 Attractions Car Rental 1.56 2.71 0.28 0.15 0.36 1.54 2.82 aln the input-output model developed, expenditure categories refer to "official" sectors. In the federal government's economic accounting system: (1) accommodations .refers .to hotels and lodging places (I-0 sector 72.0100; 1987 SIC Code #70), (2) restaurants refers to eating and drinking places (I-0 sector 74.0000, SIC Code #58), (3) retail trade (including groceries and gasoline) refers to retail trade except eating and drinking places (I-0 sector 69.0200, SIC Code #52-57 (except 546), 59, 7389, and 8042), (4) entertainment/attractions refer to amusements and other recreation services (I-0 sector 76.0206, SIC Code #791, 7992-3, 7996, 7999), and (5) parking refers to automotive parking and car washes (I-0 sector 75.0003, SIC Codes #752 and #7542). Page 42 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Table 5 presents employment multipliers and related data for Los Angeles County. Apart from a change in the unit of measure, direct, indirect, and induced employment changes are interpreted similarly to those same types of income changes. For example, Column 1 shows that a $1 million change in expenditures in the retail trade sector leads to a direct change of 46.60 jobs in Los Angeles County. Alternatively stated, from a Countywide perspective, the retail trade sector offers about 1 job per $21,459 of direct expenditure. These direct expenditures lead to indirect and induced employment changes that are similar to those described in the context of income changes. The figures in the indirect employment change column arise from business respending of gross receipts, and the figures in the induced employment change column are attributable to household respending of incomes. Total employment changes per $1 million of expenditures, which are the sum of the figures in Columns l, 2, and 3, are presented in Column 4. The Type I employment mult!plier is computed by dividing the direct plus indirect employment change by the direct employment change. The Type II multiplier is computed by dividing the total employment change by the direct employment change. Again, the Type II multiplier includes the respending of incomes by households, whereas the Type I multiplier does not. Table 5 EMPLOYMENT MULTIPLIERS FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY BY EXPENDITURE CATEGORY EMPLOYMENT MULTIPLIERS (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Expenditure Direct Indirect Induced Type Type Categ°rya Effectb Effect Effect Total I II Accommodations 18.60 9.67 30.46 58.73 1.52 3.16 Restaurants 56.70 1 ! .38 29.09 97.17 1.20 1.71 Retail Trade 46.60 8.00 29.15 83.75 1.17 1.80 (Including groceries and gasoline) Entertainment 16.76 9.23 24.17 50.16 1.55 2.99 Car Rental 18.37 8.29 22.94 49.60 1.45 2.70 aSee note to Table 4. number of jobs required to fill an additional $1 million of final demand. Page 43 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Table 6 shows how the previous analysis translates into estimates of the economic contribution of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art to Los Angeles County in FY 1997-98. These estimates were computed by applying the Type II multipliers just discussed to expenditure data presented in Table 1. In particular, figures in Table 6 were obtained using only the portion of expenditures that comes from non-residents of Los Angeles County. This approach: (1) treats expenditures by visitors .to the Museum from outside the county as an injection into the local economy and (2) assumes that Museum-related expenditures .by Los Angeles County residents would be spent locally on other goods and services if the Museum did not exist. Notice that this approach yields conservative estimates of economic contribution because it is assumed that Museum-related .expenditures are perfect substitutes for other goods and services provided in the local economy; i.e., money not spent by local residents when visiting the Museum would be spent locally on other types of activities. This conservative assumption leads to the estimates of economic contribution shown in Table 6. This series of tables (Table 6, Table 7, and Table 8) describe three different measurements of economic contribution which are a result of expenditures by visitors to LACMA and spending by LACMA. (The measurement of taxes is treated separately.) "Output" describes the total economic activity stimulated by the expenditures of LACMA visitors or the value of final goods and services produced by all sectors of the Los Angeles County economy. "Income" describes the dollar amount paid to workers as a result of this "output" or actixtity, and "Jobs" describes the number of jobs which occur as a result of this "output" or "activity." For example, as shown in Table 6, in FY 1997-98 LACMA generates about $25'.3 million in incomes for local residents and about 1,752 jobs from total output of $80,088,000. Total figures are the sums of the amounts in each category, with each category having different expenditure levels and multipliers. Expenditures on entertainment and attractions had the greatest impact on income and jobs, resulting in personal income of $12.9 million and 779 jobs. I' Page 44 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Table 6 ESTIMATES OF ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION OF THE LOS ANGLES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY: FY 1997-98 Expenditure Output Income Employment Category (in $000) (in $000) (in jobs) Accommodations $11,136 $3,791 212 Restaurants 12,438 3,837 372 Retail Trade 12,885 4,353 365 · (Including groceries and gasoline Entertainment/ 42,331 12,932 779 Attractions Car Rental 1,298 398 24 $80,088 $25,291 1,752 Table 7 presents a corresponding analysis for the Van Gogh exhibition. Again, figures in Table 7 were obtained using only the portion of expenditures that,comes'from nonresidents. Results show that the Van Gogh exhibition was responsible for creating $39.0 million of increased incomes for Los Angeles County residents as well as 2;872'jobs in .the Los Angeles County economy with total output of $121.9 million. Expenditures during the Van Gogh exhibition reflect increases in all categories, particularly entertainment and attractions which increased from $1.7 million to $7.4 million and shopping which increased from $3.4 million to $9.1 million. Page 45 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis ' Table 7 ESTIMATES OF ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART TO LOS ANGLES COUNTY: VAN GOGH EXHIBITION Expenditure Output Income Employment Category (in $000) (in $000) (in jobs) Accommodations $19,828 $ 6,750 377 Restaurants 25,218 7,780 755 Retail Trade 32,852 I 1,099 930 (including groceries and gasoline) Entertainment/ 39,756 12,146 732 Attractions Car Rental 4,270 !,244 78 $121,924 $39,019 2,872 Page 46 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis Table 8 reflects estimates of total economic impact for FY 1998-99. Total output increased to $195 million with $62 million in personal income and 4,480 jobs. The Van Gogh exhibition had on obviously major impact on FY 1998-99. Table 8 ESTIMATES OF ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION .OF THE LOS A'NGLES COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY: FY 1998-99 Expenditure Output Income Employment Category (in $000) (in $000) (in jobs) Accommodations $30,051 $10,230 572 Restaurants 36,636 11,302 1,096 Retail Trade 44,680 '15,095 1,265 (including groceries and gasoline) Entertainment/ 78,616 24,018 1,447 Attractions Car Rental 5,462 .1,609 100 $195,445 $62,254 4,480 Page 47 LACMA-Van Gogh Exhibition Economic Impact Analysis V CONCLUSIONS This analysis has assessed the economic impact of the Los Angles County Museum of Art, particularly the impact of the exhibition, "Van Gogh's Van Goghs." This analysis has been approached from the conservative standpoint of describing LACMA's unique impact. Consequently, we can make the statement that if LACMA did not exist, or if LACMA had not had this exhibition, Los Angeles County would actually lose this impact. We can therefore state that this impact is attributable to LACMA. The overall economic contribution of-LACMA to Los Angeles County accounts for expenditures at LACMA by visitors, expenditures elsewhere in Los 'Angeles County by visitors to LACMA, and expenditures by LACMA from nonvisitor revenues. The gross effect of these expenditures on the economy is also considered and accounted for in terms of taxes, personal income, and total output. In the case of taxes, we only describe the direct effect and do not apply any multipliers, as there is not a reliable multiplier for taxes. The overall economic contribution of LACMA to LOs Angeles County during FY 1998- 1999 was $195.4 million in output, $62.3 million in income, 4,480 jobs, and $4.0 million in direct taxes. This is an increase of $115.3 million in output,'$37:0 million in'income arid 2,728]obs from FY 1997-1998. The increase in economic contribution can be attributed almost entirely to the Van Gogh exhibition. The number of visitors to LACMA during.the Yan'Goghexhibition'-numbered 821,000 bringing the total number of visitors to LACMA during FY 1998-99 to 1,330,000, an increase of nearly 800,000 visitors compared to the previous year/The economiC' contribution 'of the Van Gogh exhibition to LOs Angeles County was $121.9 million in output, $39.0 million in income, and 2,872 jobs, exceeding the total output, income and number of jobs from LACMA in FY 1997-98. These results establish that LACMA had significant economic impact at FY 1997-98 attendance of 524,024 of $80.1 million in output, $25.3 million in personal income, and 1,752 jobs. Economic impact increased dramatically with the Van Gogh exhibition. The results show the effect of increased attendance from persons outside LOs Angeles County, and we would expect similar results in the future with other exhibitions of this magnitude. Page 48 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT MEETING DATE: February 28, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM: ~. Y"~. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: John W. Stinson, Assistant City Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: February 20, 2001 CITY A'I'I'ORNEY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: Amendment No. 1 to Resolution No.76-00 approving and adopting the City of Bakersfield Operating and Capital Improvement Budgets for Fiscal Year 2000-01 to incorporate previous budget actions approved by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends referral to Budget and Finance 'Committee. BACKGROUND: On June 28, 2000, the City Council adopted ~Resolution No.76 -00 approving and adopting the City of Bakersfield Operating and Capital Improvement Budget for the Fiscal Year 2000-0t. From July 1, 2000 through December 31, 2000, Council has taken action to transfer and/or appropriate funds for specific services and as a result, the respective budgets must be amended to reflect these changes for the first six months of the fiscal year. The fiscal year 2000-01 Amended Budget is $ 308,222,690, with the Operating and Debt Service (which includes the Community Development Block Grant) Budget totaling $ 225,745,090, the Capital Improvement Program totaling $ 76,097,408, and'the Central District Development Agency Budget totaling $ 6,380,192. A detailed listing of the items approved by Council action(Exhibit WA"), which amends the 2000-01 budgets, is attached. dwh s: amend 2000-01 February 22, 2001, 3:27pm RESOLUTION NO. AMENDMENT NO. I TO RESOLUTION NO. 76 - 00 ADOPTING THE OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGETS FOR THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1999-00. WHEREAS, in accordance with the Charter of the City of Bakersfield and applicable ordinances, the City Council of said City approved Resolution No. 76-00 adopting the Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets for the City of Bakersfield, California, for the fiscal year 2000-01 on June 28, 2000; and, WHEREAS, the City desires to make amendments thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: · 1. That the Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets for the ~ '~"' City of Bakersfield, California, for the fiscal year 2000-01, as adopted by Resolution No. 76-00, are hereby further amended to reflect the applicable changes included in Exhibit "AII · 2. That said Budgets for said fiscal year 2000-01, so amended, shall be the Budgets For the City of Bakersfield, California, for said fiscal year 2000-01 as contemplated to be made by this Council. 3. That said Budgets for fiscal year 2000 -01 shall total $308,222,690 with the Operating, CDDA and Debt Service (which includes the Community-Development Block Grant) Budget and transfers totaling $232,125,282, and the Capital Improvement Program totaling $76,097,408. 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of the resolution, and henceforth and hereafter the same shall be in full .force and effect. .......... O00 .......... CITY OF BAKER .D FISCAL YEAR 200u-01 BUDGET AMENDMENTS EXHIBIT" A" BEGINNING CIP BUDGET JULY 1, 2000 $68,075,637 PAGE 1 OF 2 DATE FUND ITEM AMOUNT COMMENTS Isummard 07119/00 668 Appmp. Bond Proceeds for Assmt. Dist. 99-2 $3,518,499 To Establish Assmt. Dist. 99-2 Seven Oaks West 07/19/00 191 / 311 App. additional revenue from Transient Occupancy Tax Fund and Economic $125,000 Construction of three additional suites al Centennial Garden (Item 8.1.) Dev revolving loan balance to CIP within the Capital Outlay Fund 08/16/00 321 App. fund balance to Rec & Parks ClP within Park Improvement Fund $52, t 11 Additional funding for Installation of playground equipment and letup fencing (Item 8.gg.) 08/30/00 151 App. Surface Trans Prg Funds & State Seismic Fund to CIP within $15,000 Additional funding for seismic retrofit design of 6 bridges (Itsm 8.1.) Sudace Trans & Gas Tax Funds 08/30/00 451 App. State Grant and fund balance to CIP within General Aviation Fund. $95,000 Slurry Seal Improvements at the Bakersfield Municipal Airport (item 8.j) 09/13/00 321 App. fund balance to CIP within Park Improvement Fund $111,746 Acquisition of real property f,0r futura park site east of Akers and McKee (Item 8.1.) 09/13/00 151 App. fund balance to CIP within Gas Tax Fund $17,000 Additional funding for pavement management system (Item 8.j.) 09/27/00 336 App. Stale Funds to CIP within Amtrak Railway Fund. $389,998 Additional revenue for Amtrak Railway Fund (Item 8q.) 09/30/00 151 Reduce Estimated Revenue And Approp.For Gas Tax Fund ($91,000) Reduce Prior Year Cam/over Request For Q Street Bddge Project 10/11/00 431 App. from other agencies to ClP within Agriculture Water Fund $100,000 Construct Rock Webs across Kern River (Item 8.f.) 10/11/00 411 App. County share to CIP within Sewer Enterprise Fund $75,000 Allen Road Trunk Sewer Phase 2 (Item 8.t.) 10/11100 411 App. fund balance to CIP within Sewer Enterprise Fund $594,000 Allen Road Trunk Sewer Phase 2 (llem 8.1.) 10/11/00 411 App. fund balance to CIP within Sewer Enterprise Fund $138,886 Ashe Road Irnprovernenls Panama Lane to San Joaquin Valley RR (Item 8.j.) 1 0/11/00 411 App. fund balance to CIP within Sewer Enterprise Fund $123,892 Ashe Road Improvements Panama Lane to San Joaquln Valley RR (Item 8.j.) 10/11/00 662 App. Excess Interest Earnings to the ClP within Assmt. Dlsl. 94-3 Fund $286,112 Ashe Road Improvements Panama Lane to San Joaquln Valley RR (Item 8.J.) 10/11/00 321 App. fund balance to Rec/Parks CIP within Park Improvement Fund $10,000 Installation of Playground Equipment al Centennial Park (item 8.k.) 10/11/00 142 App. TDA Article 3 funds to CIP within bikeway Ped Pathway Fund $3,681 Extension of Northeast bike path. (Item 8.o.) 11115/00 412 App. fund balance to ClP within the Sewer Enterprise Fund' $61,000 Union Avenue Median Island Upgrade (Item 8.k.) 11/15/00 412 App. fund balance to CIP within the Gas Tax Fund $46,000 Union Avenue Median Island Upgrade (Item 8.k.) 11115K)0 411 App. Hogan Family Foundation contribution to ClP within Amtrak Railway Fund $43,660 To cover costs associated with Installation of the Kugel (Item 8.w.) 11/15/00 151 App. fund balance to ClP within Amtrak Railway Fund $10,915 For misc. Amtrak Station construction costs (Item 8.w.) 11/15/00 336 App. TDA Article 3 funds to ClP within Bikeway Pedestdan Pathway Fund $157,000 Shoulder expansion on N. Fairtax from Paladino to A.H. Hwy. (Item 8.y.) 11115/00 336 App. AB2928 Trans Cong Relief Fund to CIP within Gas Tax Fund $1,690,871 Street maintenance (Item 8.cc.) 11115/00 191 1311 App. fund batance to CIP within Trnn{ient Lodglng Tax Fund $135,000 ArtilicialturtforCentennlalGarden(llem8.o.) 11/29/00 151 App. Dev. Contribution to CIP within Gas Tax Fund $9,400 Downtown Streetscape Expansion Project (item 12.b.) 11/29/00 111 App. prior year DCBG entitlement funds to ClP within CDBG $73,000 Downtown Straetscape Expansion Project (Itam t2.b.) 12/13/00 321 App. fund balance to ClP within Pad< Improvement Fund $2,000 Property Acqulslllon Costs (Item 8.k.) 11/29/00 111 App. fund balance to CIP within Equipment Management Fund $210,000 For construction of the downtown tleet facility (Item 8.o.) 12/13/00 321 App. TDA Article 3 funds to CIP wtthln Bikeway Pedestrian Pathway Fund $180000 For rasurfaclng/tntarconnect various streets (Item 8.u,) TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENTS $8,021,771 AMENDED CIP BUDGET DECEMBER 31, 2000 $76,097,408 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD FISCAL YEAR 2000-01 BUDGET AMENDMENTS EXHIBIT" A" BEGINNING OPERATING BUDGET JULY 1, 2000' $229,444,393 PAGE 2 OF 2 DATE FUND AMOUNT COMMENTS 07119/00 668 'Approp. Bund Proceeds lor Assmt. Dist. 99-2 $696,501 To E~tabiish Assmt. Dist. 99-2 Seven Oaks West 07119/00 Var Approp. to Operating Budgets Within The PFA Operating And Debt Svc. Fund $1.243,000 Special Assmt. Bond Payoffs and Interest (Item 8.1.) 07/19/00 311 Transfer From Transient Occupancy Fund to Capital Outlay Fund $81,000 Construction of three additional suites at Centennial Garden (Item 8.i.) 07119/00 Var Approp. Revenue/Expenses to Roc & Paff, s Operating Budget within General Fund $103,250 Coordination and Funding ol Disney Keys to Excellence Training Seminar (item 8.v.) 07/19/00 311 Transtar Approp. From Retuse Fund to Landfill Closure Reserve Fund $169,000 Sanitary Landfill Capping and Closure (item 8.h.) 08/16/00 011 Approp. Fund Balance to City Attorney Dp Budget within Sewer Ent. Fund $7,000 Additional Funding For Outside Counsel To Finalize A Settlement (Item 8.y.) 08/16/00 423 Approp. Dev. Contribution to City Center Development Project Fund $125,000 Real Property Appraisal, Environmental and Acquisition Svcs. (item 8.u.) 08/16/00 411 Approp. Albartson's Grant Revenue to Fire Dept Dp Budget within General Fund $5,252 Host a safety and wellness fair for all age groups (Item 8.1.) 08/16/00 01 l& 012 Approp. Dev. Contribution to Dev. Svcs. Op. Budget within General Fund $4,580 EIR Report For City In The Hills Project (item 8.s.) 09/13/00 011 Approp. TDA Article 4 Funds to PW Op. Budget within Amtrak Op. Fund $105,306 Operation And Maintenaqce Costs Of Amtrak Station (Item 8.bb.) 11115/00 012 Approp. Revenue to Fire Dept. Op. Budget within Ge.neral Fund $12,000 Reimbursement for removal,of two underground storage tanks. (Item 8.u.) 11115/00 336 Transler From Transient Occupancy Fund to Capital Outlay Fund $135,000 Artificial Tud For Arena Football 11/29/00 011 Reduce Estimated Revenue And Approp. For Assmt. DIst to Zero ($6,000) To Close Out Assmt. Dist. Fund TOTAL OPERATING AMENDMENTS $2,680,889 AMENDED OPERATING BUDGET DECEMBER 31, 2000 $232,125,282 AMFNDED OPERATING & CIP BUDGETS - DECEMBER 31, 2000 $308,222~690, ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: Gregory J. Klimk(~, Finance Director DEPARTMENT HE~ DATE: February 9, 2001 CITY ATTORNEY~ CITY MANAG ER__~=~ SUBJECT: Audit Reports: 1. · Independent Auditors Report - Single Audit Report- Schedule of Federal Expenditures for the City of Bakersfield for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000. 2. Independent Auditors Report on Appropriations Limit Worksheet (GANN Limit) of the City of Bakersfield for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends audit reports be received and referred to the Budget and Finance Committee for review. BACKGROUND: 1. Attached is the City's Single Audit Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000. The Single Audit Report pertains to federal program monies expended by the City during the specified fiscal year. An Independent Audit is performed annually to review internal control procedures and compliance with federal guidelines in accordance with Office of Management &' Budget (OMB) Circular A-133. This annual audit was performed by Brown, Armstrong, Randall, Reyes, Paulden & McCown as part of their contract to provide auditing services to the City of Bakersfield. The current compliance report, issued by the outside auditors, indicates that the City complied, in all matedal respects, with federal program guidelines. 2. Attached is a letter from the City's independent auditors, Brown, Armstrong, Randall, Reyes, Paulden & McCown indicating they have completed their annual review of the Appropriations Limit Worksheet prepared by the City in accordance with Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution (GANN Limit). This annual review is performed by the auditors as part of their contract to provide auditing services to the City of Bakersfield. The agreed upon review procedures are substantially less in scope than an audit and therefore no audit opinion is expressed regarding the calculation. s:~nelson~adminf-l.singleaud.gann,wpd nks CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SINGLE AUDIT REPORTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 (With Auditor's Reports Thereon) CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SINGLE AUDIT REPORTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Auditor's Report on Compliance and on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards Auditor's Report on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to Each Major Program and Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 ........................................................ Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards ...................................................................... 7 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs I ? ~u~on H.A~n~ CP& M~ AUDITOR'S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE AND ON INTERNAL Je~E.~d~LCPA/ABV CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE ~jam~ ~ey~,CPA WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS ~dmw J. Pauld~, CPA ~d~a Ru~edo~-Hill, CPA To the Honorable Mayor and -. Members of the Ci~ Council Ci~ of Bakemfleld, California 5tev~ [ S=rbu~, Ai~n~.~te~,CPA We have audited the financial statements of the Ci~ of Bakersfield, California, as of and L~[~,CPA for the year ended June 30, 2000, and have issued our repo~ thereon dated October 6, 2000. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards 5a~'LW~tem, CPA and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing ~.~om~=~,CPA Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. ~ M. ~de~n, CPA Comoliance  '"'~.H~,GA AS pa~ of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Ci~ of Bakersfied. . ..eV.~er. CPA California's, financial statements are free of material misstatement, we Performed tests of E~cH.X~,~A its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of MeI~daA. McD~e~,~A financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those ~o==~.Yo~A provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance that are ~nieL. Chmmn, CpA required to be reposed under Government Auditing Standards. internal Control Over Financial Repo~in~ In planning and pedorming our audit, we considered the Ci~ of Bakersfield, California's, internal control over financial reposing in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose.of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reposing. Our consideration of the internal control over financial reposing would not necessarily disclose all ma~ers in the internal control over financial reposing that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the'internal control components does not reduce to a relatively Iow level the risk that misstatements in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of pedorming their assigned.functions. We noted no maEers involving the internal control over financial reposing and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. M[/aiI[R ot SIC Practice Section o[ the American Institute of Certilied Public Accountants · - :..5~.?; ..~.~?~-;,;:.~ .~ .:,;. . -... . This report is ·intended for the information of the audit committee, management and federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. BROWN ARMSTRONG RANDALL REYES PAULDEN & McCOWN ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION Bakersfield, California October 6, 2000 UDITOR 8 REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO EACH MAdOR PROG~M AND INTERNAL ~u~on ~. ~n~ ~A, ~ CONTROL OVER COUPLIANC E IN ACCORDANCE WITH Ie~' [. ~daIL C~.~/i~V OMB CIRCULAR A-133 ~nja~ E R~, CPA ~d~wL Paulden, CPA TO the Honorable Mayor and Ha~'eyI. M~o~,CPA Members of the Ci~ Council City of BakerSfield, California ad~a Ruteffog-Bill, CPa , - -- Compliance We have audited the compliance of the Oity of Bakersfield, California, with the '~pes of ~mplian~ ~" requirements desc~bed in the U. 8. Ofce of Mane ement an Steven R. S~uck, CPA ~ C°moliance Supplement that are applicable to each of its major federal programs for the year , _ d Bud et OMB Circular A-133 ~ Ail~n~.[~ter, CPA ended June 30, 2000. The City of Bakersfield's major federal programs are identified in the summa~ of auditor's results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned L~E~u~,CPA costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants appli~ble to ~. Sta~ L WaJtem, CPA each of its major federal programs is the responsibility of the City of Bakersfield's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the City of Bakersfield's compliance based on our ~ M. ~omb~, C~A audit. ! Jo~ M. ~de~n, CPA We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards;  '"wM. H~,CpA the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standa~s. issued by .'. ,e ~Ter, CpA the Comptroller General of the -United State~; · and OMB Circular A-133, 'Audits of States. Lo~l Governments. and Non-Profit Orqanization:;. Those standards and OMB~ircular A-133 ~equir~ EdcH. X~,CpA {hat we plan and pedorm the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncomplian~ with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material Mel~daA. McDaniels, CPA effe~ on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, eviden~ ~o~ M. Yo~ CPA about the City of Bakersfield, California's compliance with those requirements and pedo~ing su~ other procedures as we considered necessa~ in the circumstances. We believe that our audit Vo~eL~,Cpa provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination on the Ci~ of Bakersfield's compliance with those requirements. In our opinion, the Ci~ of Bakersfield, California, complied, in all matedal respects, with ~e requirements referred to above that are applicable to ea~ of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2000. Internal Control Over Compliancn The management of the Cia-of Bakersfield, California, is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants applicable to federal programs. In planning and pedorming our audit, we considered the Ci~ of Bakersfield's internal control over compliance.with requirements that could have a dire~ and material effe~ on a major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and to test and repo~ on internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. MEMBER of SEC Practice Section of the American Institute o[ Certi[ied Public Accountants '-:"~;'"**"" ii' ''~: "' · -',-,:.,',,~.:~...:'9.:".' ;~' : "" , ' ' ' · ;'*".~:,*~':2-* ' : .. . . * :: ..... Our consideration of the internal control over compliance would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the intemal control components does not reduce to a relatively Iow level the risk that noncompliance · with applicable 'requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants that would be material in relation to a major "' federal program being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control over compliance and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Award.,'. We have audited the general purpose financial statements of The City of Bakersfield, California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2000, and have issued our report thereon dated October 6, 2000. Our audit was performed for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by OMB Circular A-133 and is not a required part of the general purpose financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the general purpose financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. · .. This report is intended for the infon:nation of the audit committee, management and federal awarding agencies and ;..~ pass-through entities. However, this-report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. BROWN ARMSTRONG RANDALL REYES PAULDEN & McCOWN ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION Bakersfield, California October 6, 2000 4 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS JUNE 30, 2O00 Federal Program Accrued Financial Accrued CFDA or Award Revenue Assistance Olher Disbursements/ Revenue Number Amounl July 1, 1999 Reco.qnized Revenue Expenditures June 30, 2000 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Direct Program - Community Development Block Grant Entitlement 14.218 $ 6,416,622 $ 9,926 $ 2,711,292 $ 217,829 $ 2,954,984 $ 166,100 Emergency Shelter Grant 14.231 156,900 33,646 90,018 90,018 Home Program 14.239 2,671,660 240,588 1,121,608 142,697 1,446,042 31,363 Total Depadment of Housing and Urban Development .9,245,182 284,160 3,922,918 · 360,526 4,491,044 197,463 U.S. Department of Transportation: Passed through California.' Department of Transportation: Surface Transportation Program 20.205 3,989,007 202,306 1,152,996 1,152,996 346,762 Transportation Enhancement Act 20.205 2,843,706 - 409,971 - 409,971 409,971 Congestion Mitigation and Air Qualily Program 20.205 2,419.857 518.201 - 518,201 Highway/Bridge Replacement 20.205 75,633 75,633 Environmental Enhancement 20.205 537,517 400,520 400,520 40,470 Office of Traffic Safety Traffic Offender Program 20.600 Total Department ol~ Transportation 9,790,087 202,306 2,557,321 - 2,557,321 797,203 Federal Emergency Management Agency: Public Assistance Grant 83.544 18,624 8,329 - 18,624 U.S. Department of Justice: Seized Asset Funds - Federal 16.579 - 10,570 - 10,570 Community Oriented Policing Services Universal Hiring Program 16.710 13,383 - Local Law Enforcement Block Grant 16.592 247,999 247,999 Total Department of Justice 13,303 258,569 258,569 - Total Granls ~; 19,035,269 ~ 518,473 ~; 6,747.137 ~ 360,526 ~; 7,306,934 ~; 1,013.290 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 5 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA NOTES TO SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS JUNE 30, 2000 NOTE 1 - GENERAL The accompanying Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance presents the activity of all Federal Financial Assistance programs of the City of Bakersfield, California (City). As defined in Note 1 of the Notes to the City's General Purpose Financial Statements, those financial statements and the accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards presents the government and its component units, entities for which the government is considered to be financially .accountable. Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are, in substance, part of the government's operations and so data from these units are combined with data of the primary government. Discretely presented component units, on the other hand, are reported in a separate column in the combined financial statements to emphasize that they are legally separate from the Government. Each blended and discretely presented component unit has a June 30 year end. Blended and diScretely presented component units are: 1. Discretely Presented Component Unit: The Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency (the Agency) is responsible for the development and financing of projects within (1) the Southeast Bakersfield Project Area. (2) the Old Town Kern-Pioneer Project Area, and (3) the Downtown Bakersfield Project Area. The Agency is governed by a board comprised of members appointed by the City Council. The Agency is reported as a Governmental Fund Type. 2. Blended Component Unit: The Bakersfield Public Financing Authority (the Authority) is a joint exercise of powers authority formed on July 7, 1993 by and between the City of Bakersfield, California (the City), and the Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency (the Agency). The Authority was created to assist the City, the Agency and other local public agencies in financing and refinancing, through the issuance of bonds or other instruments of indebtedness, public capital improvements and working capital pursuant to-the Marks- Roos Local Bond Pooling Act of 1985. The Authority is authorized to make and enter into Bond Purchase Agreements and to purchase Obligations of any Local Agency. The Authority is governed by a board consisting of the Mayor and the City Council. The Authority is reported as a Governmental Fund Type. Complete financial statements for each of the individual component units may be obtained at the City's Finance Department. Federal financial assistance received directly from Federal agencies as well as Federal financial assistance passed through other government agencies are included on the schedule. NOTE 2 - ..BASIS OF ACCOUNTING The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards is presented using the modified accrual basis of accounting, which is described in Note I of the Notes to the City's General Purpose Financial Statements. NOTE 3 - O~THER REVENUE Amounts reported as other revenue relate primarily to interest income and reimbursements for the year · ... ended June 30, 2000. NOTE 4 - RELATIONSHIP TO FEDERAL FINANCIAL REPORTS Amounts reported in.the accompanying schedule agree with the amounts reported in the related periodic Federal financial reports. NOTE $ - RECONCILIATION TO GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The following is a reconciliation of the amounts listed in the Schedule of Financial Assistance to the City's general purpose financial statements: Federal Grantor/Pro.qram Title Federal U.S. Department of Emergency Housing and Urban U.S. Department of Management Development . _. Transl~ortalion _. Aqency U.S. Department of Juslice Communily Orienled Community Intermodal Surface Public Policing Services - Local Law Development Transportation and Assislance Seized Universal Hiring Enforcemenl Block Gran! Efficiency Ac! Granl Asse!s .. Pro.qram Block Granl Federal Financial Assislance Recognized $ 3,922,918 $ 2,557,321 $ 8,329 $ 10,570 $ Other 360..~526 . $ 247,999 Tolal ~; 4,283,444 .~ 2,557,321 .~ 8'329 ~ ~ ~ 247,999 Increase in Contributed Capilal Reimbursable Disbursemenl/Expendilure ~ 4,491,044 ~ ~; - ~ 10,570 ~; ~; 247,999 Tolal Disbursement/Expendilure ~ 4,491,044 ~ 2,557,321 ~- ...... ' ~ ~- ~; . 247,999 Accrued Revenue June 30, 2000 .~ 197,463 ~ 797,203 ~ 18,624 ~; _ ~; . ~ Due from Federal Government .~ 197,463 ~ 797,203 =~=~,====~ .~ ~ NOTE $ - RECONCILIATION TO GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS' (Continued) The following is a reconciliation of the variances between Expenditures and Financial Assistance recognized: Federal Grantor/Pm.qram Title Federal U.S. Departmenl of Emergency Housing and Urban U.S. Department of Management Development Transportation A_qency U.S. Deparlment of Justice Community Oriented Communily Intermodal Surface Public Policing Services - Local Law Development Transportation and Assistance Seized Universal Hiring Enforcement Block Granl Efficiency Act Grant Assets Proqram Block Grant Federal Financial Assistance Recognized $ 3,922,918 $ 2,557,321 $ 8,329 $ 10,570 $ $ 247,999 Olher 360,526 _ Tolal 4,283,444 2,557,321 8,329 10,570 247,999 Total Disbursement/Expendilures 4,491,044 2,557,321 - 10,570 .. 247.999 Variance of Revenues Recognized Overl(Under) Expenditures (207,600) - 8,329 . Expended Surplus Program Income 207,600 Pdor Year Reimbursement - 1995 Winter Storms (1046) _ - (8,329) . _ 9 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS ~--.. JUNE 30, 2000 1. .Summary of Audit Results 1. The auditor's report expresses an unqualified opinion on the general purpose financial statements of the City of Bakersfield, California. 2. No reportable conditions were disclosed during the audit of the financial statements. 3. No instances of non-compliance material to the financial statements of the City of Bakersfield, California were disclosed during the audit. 4. No reportable conditions, were disclosed during the audit of the major federal award programs. 5. The auditor's report on compliance for the major federal award programs for the City of Bakersfield, California expresses an unqualified opinion on all major federal programs. 6. The audit disclosed no findings relative to the major federal awards programs. 7. The programs tested as major programs included: (1) U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant - Entitlement (CFDA Number 14.218), (2) U.S. Department 'of Housing and Urban Development Home Investment Partnership Program (CFDA Number 14.239), (3) Department of Transportation Highway Planning and Construction (CFDA Number 20.205). 8. The threshold for distinguishing Types A and B programs was $300,000. 9. The City of Bakersfield, California was determined to be a Iow-risk auditee 2. Findin s Relatin to Financial Statements Re uired Under GAGAS. None. 3. Findin s and Questioned Costs -Ma'or Federal Award Pro rams Audit None.  · Main Office 4200 Trux~n Ave., Suite BROWN ARMSTRONG .. I~kers~eld. Cdif~a 93~ . RANDALL Re'ESPAULDEN'&'McCowN ~ 661.324.49/1 f~ 661.324.4997 I e-reel: barrinfo~lx~q~.c0m PUS£1C CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS · Shafter Office  560 Centrd Avenue Shofte-, Cal'~0rnia 93263 Td 661'746'2680 Fax 661'746'1218 Peter C. Brock'n, s,.,on H..~s~n~ CP.~..~ST TO the Honorable ~ayor and ~embers of the City Council je~. E. ~,d~J], C?^,'ASV City of]3akersfieid, California 8er.~amin R Reyes, C?A Andmw].Paulden, C?A ~V'e have applied the procedures enumerated be]ow to the accompanying ~,-,.~,-~..~kce,,-~ c~.~ Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six of the City of ]3akersfie]d, California, (the AndreaRuthe:'ford-HitLC~A City) for the ybar ended June 30, 2000. These procedures, which were agreed to by the League of California Cities and presented in their Article X~TTR Appropriations Limitation Uniform G-uide]ines, were performed solely to assist you in meeting the-requirements of Section !.5 of,Mticie :X:[TTR of the California Steven R. Starbuck, C?A Constitution. This report is intended for the information of management and the a~e,~.~te,.¢p.~ City Council This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this c,~ R. ~,~s,.cP^ report, which is a matter of public record. Stack. L. Walten CPA Chris M. Thombu~h, C?A The procedures performed and our findings were as follows: Joan M. Anderson, C?A ]. We obtained the City's completed worksheets required to determine that -'-~]~,..'.~[.m,k~,,cP.~ the con'ect annual adjustment factors were adopted by resolution of the £ric H..'(in. C?A .~zd~,d.,.~..~kmm~,~. CP.~2. Tot the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six, we added line T~o,~,:.~X.~.¥o~,~ CP.~ A, last year's limit, to line 1:., totg] adjustments, and agreed the resulting vom~L. Ch~om.,n. Cp.~ amount to line F, this year's limit. We noted that the adjustment for Property Tax Administration Fees exceeded the actual fees ch~ged, causing the Appropriations Limit adopted by the City Council of $ ! ] 9,828,073 to be understated by $ 67,48 ]' 3. We agreed the cun'ent year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six to the other Worksheets described in #! above. 4. We were unable to agree the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six to the prior year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council during the prior year. These agreed-upon procedures are substantially less in scope than an audit, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion on the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Practice Sec:ion 0i ..'he ,l~e:c:.~ "*'!;'~:e :: ~',-.:.'~ :,:.: lc::..-':.-: Based on the application of the procedures referred to above, except as noted, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet .--.. Six was not computed in accordance with Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. Had we .. performed additional procedures or had we made an audit of the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet Six and the other completed worksheets described in #1 above, matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. BROWN ARMSTRONG RANDALL KEYES PAULDEN & McCOWN ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION Bakersfield, California October 16, 2000 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD APPROPRIATIONS ~. WORKSFrEET SIX FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 A. Last year's limit ~ B. Adjustment factors: 1. Population % ' 1.0453% 2. Inflation % ~. 1.0453% Total adjustment % 9 2_~652% C. Annual adjustment 11,102,310 D. Other adjustments Miscellaneous Booking fees (74,116) 790,000 Property tax administration fees 475,000 E. Total adjustments / ' 12,293,194 ", F. This years limit ~[,~.2m[2,~7,~