Laserfiche WebLink
<br />State auditor reports on local <br />-fund balances <br /> <br />~) <br /> <br />Cities fund balances decline, counties increase between 1990 and 1991 <br /> <br />Sarah Hacke/( <br /> <br />Although individual situations <br />varied greatly among cities, those <br />above 2,500 population reduced their <br />fund balance total by9.2 percent <br />between 1990 and 1991. The report, <br />released by the Office of the State <br />Auditor, notes, however, that over half <br />of these 181 cities reported increases <br />in their fund balances, and that large <br />decreases in the fund balances of the <br />largest cities influenced the' decrease <br />in the total percentage change. <br />Encouraging to cities is a state- <br />ment in the auditor's report that <br />defends existing fund balance levels. <br />"W11ile the overall size of city and <br />county general fund balances may <br />appear large, many cities and counties <br />e will experience serious cash flow <br /> <br />,- <br /> <br />problems if the fund balances were to <br />be reduced below their current levels." <br />The report also notes that although <br />"the total size of ... fund balances may <br />appear large, the cash flow situation of <br />counties and cities requires substantial <br />fund balances to avoid the need for <br />short-term borrowing." The report <br />explains factors which contribute to <br />cities' need for adequate fund bal- <br />ances-the timing of state aid and <br />property tax payments, and the <br />dependence on these revenues for most <br />of their funding compared to the <br />state's ability to use multiple tax and <br />revenue sources it collects more <br />evenly through the year. <br />Just how much any particular city <br />or county may need for an adequate <br />fund balance though, depends on <br /> <br />State auditor's bill passes Senate <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Joel Jamnik <br /> <br />On Tuesday, the Senate gave <br />final approval to S.F.580 <br />(Reichgou, DFL-New Hope), the <br />state auditor's proposal to increase <br />the department's oversight role and <br />to limit or modify several local <br />government practices. The Senate <br />adopted an amendment to sever- <br />ance payments to highly compen- <br />sated employees. The amendment <br />would exempt some public manag- <br />ers and administrators who have <br />worked for some jurisdictions for <br />more than 10 years. Only a handful <br />of city employees are likely to <br />benefit from the amendment, which <br />the school lobby promoted. <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />fY1 />.1 IL/j J 1'13 <br /> <br />Ironically, later on Tuesday the <br />Minneapolis School Board reached a <br />severance settlement with Superin- <br />tendent Robert Ferrara worth <br />$187,000. The school board's <br />attorneys estimated that the school <br />could have lost almost $400,000, <br />exclusive of attorney's fees and <br />costs, had the severance agreement <br />not been reached. Because the <br />settlement with Superintendent <br />Ferrara included a $95,000 payment <br />to release any civil claims, even if <br />the state auditor's bill were in effect, <br />the total settlement would only have <br />decreased to $169,000 or $18,000 <br />less. 0 <br /> <br />several factors, according to tJ1C staLe <br />auditor. Certain cities will require <br />fund balances of 40 percent of their <br />total current expenditures, while others <br />with more revenues from fees, service <br />charges, or intergovernmental grants <br />would need lower fund balances-- <br />perhaps 10 percent. (The report does <br />not comment on those cities or <br />counties with unreserved fund bal- <br />ances of 60, 70, or even 100 percent of <br />their current expenditures.) There is <br />some discussion of the opportunity for <br />cities to "delay certain payments" until <br />they receive their aid and tax pay- <br />ments as a means of keeping down tJ1C <br />need for large fund balances. <br />Some otherhighlightsJrom the <br />report: <br />. In 1991, unreserved fund balances <br />for cities over 2,500 population <br />represented approximately 18.4 <br />percent of their total current <br />operating expenditures; <br />. Metro area counties and larger <br />counties reported significant <br />increases in their fund balances; a <br />total of 52 counties increased their <br />unreserved fund balance; <br />. Thirteen cities reported no <br />unreserved fund balance for <br />calendar year 1991; <br />. Cities have approximately $170.7, <br />million in unreserved special <br />revenue fund balances; counties <br />had fundbalanccs of approxi- <br />mately $372 million in their road <br />and bridge, and welfare funds; <br />. Two cities reported negative fund <br />balances; seven cities reported <br />elimination (or more) of their <br />1990 fund balances by 1991; <br />. Nearly all counties in the north- <br />west area of the state reported that <br />their fund balances had been <br />reduced by more than 10 percent <br />(1990 to 1991). 0 <br /> <br />.) <br /> <br />*' <br /> <br />LMC Cities Bulletin <br />