My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-23-1993 Additions
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
06-23-1993 Additions
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2013 2:33:49 PM
Creation date
8/28/2013 2:33:40 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
`Lg4 9fr, .7 <br />MAYOR <br />Raymond G. Hanson <br />COUNCIL <br />Beverly Scalze <br />Jim LaValle <br />Steve MoreIan <br />Bob Pedersen <br />515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 ADMINISTRATOR <br />(612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 Joel R. Hanson <br />MEMORANDUM <br />TO: Mayor Hanson & Members of the City Council <br />FROM: Joel Hanson, City Administrator <br />DATE: June 23, 1993 <br />RE: General Fund Surplus Transfer Policy <br />According to some preliminary information from our <br />Auditors, it appears the General Fund will have a fairly <br />substantial surplus at the end of 1992. This surplus is <br />attributable to higher than expected revenue collections <br />associated with interest earnings, building permit fees, <br />tax collections, Local Government Aid, and refunds and <br />reimbursements. It also resulted from lower than <br />anticipated expenditures which relates to our prudent <br />spending practices. (The exact make -up of this surplus <br />will be discussed in detail when we review the 1992 audit <br />with Bob Voto.) <br />While I am very proud of our ability to generate this <br />surplus, I am concerned that we do not have a un- designated <br />fund balance in our 1992 audit which could be negatively <br />viewed by the State legislature. When one considers the <br />fact that Little Canada has not been levying or budgeting <br />for major capital expenditures, it seems apparent that <br />these additional funds could be put to good use from a <br />capital expenditure standpoint. Furthermore, we typically <br />experience some unfunded project costs which have been <br />located in our Interim Construction Funds. The General <br />Fund has typically been the source of financing to cover <br />these unfunded balances. <br />Based on these two factors, it is my recommendation that we <br />adopt a policy whereby any General Fund surplus from a <br />budget year will be applied as follows: <br />1. Existing surplus to be applied to unfunded interim <br />construction costs. <br />Page 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.