Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOther Auditor Reports 2000CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA OTHER AUDITOR REPORTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS DECEMBER 31, 2000 Page Independent Auditor's Report on Compliance and on Internal Control over Financial Reporting Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Govemment Auditing Standards 1-2 Independent Auditor's Report on Legal Compliance 3 Other Required Auditor Communications 4-6 Management Letter 7-15 LarsnAllen- Weishair & Co., LLP ACHIEVE THE DESIRED EFFECT' Business Consultants o Certified Public Accountants REPORT ON COMPLIANCE AND ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS To the Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota as of and for the year ended December 31, 2000 and have issued our report thereon dated March 29, 2001. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Govemment Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Compliance As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota's financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of 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 financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those 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 required to be reported under Govemment Auditing Standards. However, we noted certain immaterial instances of noncompliance that we have reported to management of the City of Lino Lakes in a separate letter dated March 29, 2001. Internal Control over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota's intemal control over financial reporting 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 intemal control structure over financial reporting. Our consideration of the intemal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the intemal control over financial reporting 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 low 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 performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the intemal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, we noted other matters involving the intemal control over financial reporting, which we have reported to management in a separate letter dated March 29, 2001. (1) This report is intended solely for the use of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota, the Office of the State Auditor, and other state and federal awarding agencies, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Austin, Minnesota March 29, 2001 fin-, ' A„ee44- 11",e40014"' °' L C t LARSON, ALLEN, WEISHAIR & CO., LLP (2) LarsonAlleria W e i s h a i r & Co., LLP ACHIEVE THE DESIRED EFFECT' Business Consultants u Certified Public Accountants INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT ON LEGAL COMPLIANCE To the Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota as of and for the year ended December 31, 2000, and have issued our report thereon dated March 29, 2001. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and the provisions of the Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Local Government, promulgated by the Legal Compliance Task Force pursuant to Minn. Stat. §6.65. Accordingly, the audit included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. The Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Local Govemment covers five main categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of interest, public indebtedness, and claims and disbursements. Our study included all of the listed categories. The results of our tests indicate that for the items tested the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota complied with the material terms and conditions of applicable legal provisions, except as noted below. Finding: Minnesota Statute 471.345 subdivision 3 requires that for contracts issued over $25,000 the City retain all the bids received on file. For one of the contract items selected for testing, the bids received were not retained on file. Response: The City will retain bids received on file. This report is intended solely for the use of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota, the Office of the State Auditor, and other state agencies, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Austin, Minnesota March 29, 2001 01_I, °;ee.2fy-4,-(56L, LARSON, ALLEN, WEISHAIR & CO., LLP (3) (This page intentionally left blank) L iL L LarsnAllens" Weishair & Co., LLP ACHIEVE THE DESIRED EFFECT' Business Consultants o Certified Public Accountants OTHER REQUIRED AUDITOR COMMUNICATIONS March 29, 2001 To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota Dear Committee Members: We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Lino Lakes for the year ended December 31, 2000, and have issued our report thereon dated March 29, 2001. Professional standards require that we provide you with the following information related to our audit. Our Responsibility Under Generally Accepted Auditing Standards As stated in our engagement letter dated December 13, 2000, our responsibility, as described by professional standards, is to plan and perform our audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. Because of the concept of reasonable assurance and because we did not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material errors, irregularities, or illegal acts, including fraud and defalcations, may exist and not be detected by us. As part of our audit, we considered the intemal control structure of the City of Lino Lakes. Such considerations were solely for the purpose of determining our audit procedures and not to provide any assurance conceming such intemal control structure. Other Information in Documents Containing Audited Financial Statements Our responsibility for other information in documents containing the City of Lino Lakes financial statements, including the supplementary information, does not extend beyond the information identified in our report on the financial statements, and we have no professional responsibility to perform audit procedures on such other information. (4) Significant Accounting Policies Management has the responsibility for selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. In accordance with the terms of our engagement letter, we will advise management about the appropriateness of accounting policies and their application. The significant accounting policies used by the City of Lino Lakes are described in Note 1 to the general purpose financial statements. No new accounting policies were adopted and the application of existing policies was not changed during 2000. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year that were both significant and unusual, and of which, under professional standards, we are required to inform you, or transactions for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. Management Judgments and Accounting Estimates Accounting estimates are an integral part of the general purpose financial statements prepared by management and are based on management's current judgments. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from managements current judgments. Significant accounting estimates include the following: Annual depreciation is provided in the proprietary funds using rates sufficient to fully depreciate the related fixed assets over their useful lives based on past experiences. The year end valuation of investments at fair value. The City records allowances for uncollectible receivables based upon an analysis of the collectibility of individual accounts and notes, taking into account delinquencies and payment histories. The City has recognized sick leave payable in the general long-term debt account group. The amount recorded includes amounts eamed through December 31, 2000 by employees eligible for retirement at that date. In addition, an amount is recorded for those individuals not eligible for retirement at December 31, 2000, but for whom pay -out of the amount eamed to that date is reasonably expected. This estimate is derived by an analysis of the pay -out history and current and anticipated future employment conditions. Significant Audit Adiustments For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a significant audit adjustment as a proposed correction of the general purpose financial statements that, in our judgment, may not have been detected except through our auditing procedures. Those adjustments may include those proposed by us but not recorded by the City that could potentially cause future financial statements to be materially misstated, even though we have concluded that such adjustments are not material to the current financial statements. As part of our audit we made year end adjustments to fixed assets and accounts receivable. 7 (5) L Disagreements with Management For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, conceming a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter that could be significant to the general purpose financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. L Consultations with Other Independent Accountants LTo the best of our knowledge, management has not consulted with or obtained opinions from other independent accountants during the past year that are subject to the requirements of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 50, "Reports on the Application of Accounting Principles." Issues Discussed Prior to Retention of Independent Auditors We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management prior to retention as the City's auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing our audit. This information is intended solely for the use of the Finance Committee, Board of Directors, and management of the City of Lino Lakes and is not intended to be, and should not be used for any other purpose. Sincerely, LLARSON, ALLEN, WEISHAIR & CO., LLP i L (6) (This page intentionally left blank) 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 Lars nAllen- Weishair & Co., LLP ACHIEVE THE DESIRED EFFECT' Business Consultants a Certified Public Accountants To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota In planning our audit of the General purpose financial statements of the City of Lino Lakes as of and for the year ended December 31, 2000, we considered its internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the general purpose financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. During the course of our audit, several items came to our attention that we feel could be addressed by the City of Lino Lakes to more efficiently run the City's operations or improve its internal controls. We herein submit the following suggestions to the City of Lino Lakes for their consideration. Auditor Comments: Capital Proiect Deficits The financial statements for the capital project funds are presented in Statements 13 and 14 of the 2000 Annual Financial Report. As of December 31, 2000 many of the capital project funds have deficit fund balances. These deficits total $5,425,964. The fund balances at December 31, 2000 and 1999 for these funds are as follows: Fund Dedicated Parks MSA Construction 1994 Construction 1997 Construction 1998 Construction Town Center Project Tax Increment Administrative Tax Increment # 1-6 Tax Increment # 1-7 Tax Increment # 1-9 Tax Increment # 3-1 Fund Balance (Deficit) December 31, Increase 1999 2000 (Decrease) $ (40,342) $ (155,052) (424,881) (425,143) (436,219) - (1,205,499) (1,374,287) (2,579,952) (2,839,838) 26,290 (1,690) (7,184) (12,974) (40,536) (40,950) (458,497) (421,838) (11,896) (8,238) (316,270) (145,954) $ (114,710) (262) 436,219 (168,788) (259,886) (27,980) (5,790) (414) 36,659 3,658 170,316 $ (5,494,986) $ (5,425,964) $ 69,022 The City needs to review each of these funds to determine how the deficits will be eliminated. In some cases, transfers from other funds may be needed to eliminate the deficits. These transfers should be made as soon as the amount can be determined so as not to overstate the fund balances in the transferring funds. We also recommend that the City close funds once the related projects are complete. (7) Budgeting for Multi -Year Projects Currently, the City adopts a budget for the operating funds of the City, including the general fund, program recreation, capital equipment and the utility funds. Current practice for project budgeting is to adopt a project budget as part of the Capital Improvements Program and the related bond issue. This budget is not currently entered into the finance system, however by entering these budgets into the finance system, budgetary controls could easily be added to the project expenditures. The current chart of accounts in use includes an account segment that is used for the project (each project is given a unique number) which accumulates the costs for each individual project. At the end of a project, staff goes back over the expenditures to determine if there were costs charged to the project that should have gone against another project. By adding the budgets into the system at the beginning of the project, it would assist in monitoring the expenditures on an ongoing basis and help to identify the revenue sources for the project. For multi -year projects, the total budget would be entered in the first year. In the second year, the budgeted amounts would be reduced for the amounts recorded in the first year. The benefits to be derived include that all revenue sources are identified up front and that staff members from differing departments can work together to identify the expected project costs. This should help to reduce coding errors in the processing of payments. An example of this methodology follows: Revenues Bond Issue Transfer from fund Received/ Remaining Original Expended budget for Budget in 2000 future year(s) $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ 25 25 $ 1,025 $ 1,000 $ 25 Expenditures Construction $ 900 $ 750 $ 150 Engineering 80 50 30 Prof services, legal 25 15 10 Bond issue costs 20 20 $ 1,025 $ 835 $ 190 Town Center Construction Fund Over the past four years, the City has purchased two different parcels in the "Village Area" of Lino Lakes for the purpose of reselling the property for development. A third parcel was traded for the land the Civic Complex is located on. Future land sales are intended to cover the purchase of these three parcels. In addition, the proceeds from the sale of the former police station land and adjacent lots will also go toward covering these costs after repaying an interfund loan made by the Water and Sewer Fund in 1998. The total amount of the costs incurred on the acquisition of these parcels and the costs associated with them through the end of 2000 is $2,090,332. Two of these parcels were financed with contracts for deed; as of 12/31/00, the remaining principal balance of the two contracts is approximately $859,352. (8) Town Center Construction Fund (Continued) Summary of Activity Description of Expenditure 1996 -1998 1999 2000 Total Capital Outlay (inc.land) $ 1,733,560 $ 163,962 $ (120,000) $ 1,777,522 Interest expense 30,128 27,811 57,939 Engineering 31,958 18,051 50,009 Professional services 175,473 14,674 - 190,147 Legal 13,812 360 - 14,172 Other 348 26 169 543 $ 1,985,279 $ 197,073 $ (92,020) $ 2,090,332 Revenues Net land sale proceeds 158,257 - 158,257 Remaining deficit $ (1,827,022) $ (197,073) $ 92,020 $ (1,932,075) Note: the expenditures above do not include any accrued interest on the Rehbien contract. The interest (and principal portion) will be paid as land is sold. At the end of 2000, the accrued interest is approximately $124,512. When future payments are made the payments will be applied first to accrued interest and the remainder then applied to the principal balance. There are approximately 11.5 developable acres that remain for sale, including the 3 acres from the former police station land. The above deficit of $1,932,075 (in addition to any other costs that are charged to this project in future years) will need to be funded from either land sales or other revenue sources, if the revenues generated from the land sales are not sufficient. The following table calculates what the "breakeven" price on the remaining "Rehbein" and "Funkhouser" parcels will need to be to cover the costs incurred through the end of 2000. In addition to these costs, the sale prices will need to be sufficient to cover any additional costs that will be incurred in future years; including interest that will be paid as the land is sold. Assuming that the land remaining near the former police station land is sold for the appraised value of $82,500 per acre, the remaining parcels will need to be sold for an average of $5.94 per square foot, or approximately $259,000 per acre in order to cover costs incurred through the end of 2000 (9) Town Center Construction Fund (Continued) .1 Calculation of Sales Price Needed (to cover costs through 12/31/00) Current deficit to cover $ 1,932,075 Plus: Accrued interest through 12/31/00 124,512 Repayment of interfund loan 130,634 Less: Proceeds from sale of "Former Police Station Site" (3 acres @ $82,500/acre) (247,500) Equals Cost to be recovered in Town Center Project $ 1,939,721 '-I "Hotel site" 4.5 acres "Retail strip on north end of rehbien parcel" 3.0 acres Remaining Acres to sell 7.5 =___»> 7.5 Approximate price per acre needed (through 2000) $ 258,629 Approximate price per foot needed (through 2000) $ 5.94 We recommend that the City continue to closely monitor the status of the Town Center Fund and identify other revenue sources if and when it is determined they are needed. 1 SAC Revolving 1 The SAC Revolving Fund was established in 1990 to account for a refund from the MCES (formerly MWCC) of past SAC charges which were paid by residents that had not hooked up to the sewer system. A summary of financial activity of this fund is as follows: i Prior Years 2000 Total Revenue SAC refund $ 368,816 $ 18,418 $ 387,234 Investment earnings 208,597 208,597 Total revenue 577,413 18,418 595,831 Expenditures: Refunds 230,219 5,955 236,174 Fund balance - December 31, 2000 359,657 The City is allowing current homeowners to request a refund with 4% interest. If refunds and claims are not submitted, the City will pay the full SAC charge from this fund at the time of hook-up. This policy will likely require a supplemental future revenue source as the current MCES SAC charges times the potential hookups exceeds the available balance. If the MCES SAC fees continue to increase at a rate that is faster than the investment eamings rate, other revenue sources will be needed in the future to fund the actual connections when they occur. (10) Area and Unit Charge Fund On January 11, 1988, the City Council approved Resolution 1-88, which established the Area and Unit Charge Fund for the City. The purpose of this fund is to collect various area and unit charges to be used to meet debt payments. Before October 1 of each year, the City estimates the required transfer needed to meet debt payments for the subsequent year. In December, these estimated amounts are transferred to the various debt funds. We recommend that the City continue to closely monitor actual versus projected area and unit assessment collections to assure that debt payment requirements will be met. Designations of balances required for debt service is necessary to define discretionary construction balances available to the City. The financing plan for the following bond issues have pledged area and unit charges for the repayment of debt service: • Improvement Refunding Bonds of 1992A • Improvement Refunding Bonds of 1996A • Water Revenue Bonds of 1992B • Water Revenue Bonds of 1996B The Water Revenue Bonds of 1992E have future debt service requirements totaling $743,855 (principal and interest). The City annually transfers amounts from the Area and Unit Charge Fund to the Water Fund sufficient to cover the debt services of the 1992B Bonds. During 2000, a transfer of $301,709 was made to the Water Fund. It is the City's intention to repay the Water Revenue Bonds of 1992E and 1996B with revenues of the Water Fund. If revenues are not sufficient to meet the debt requirements, funds will be transferred from the Area and Unit Charge Fund. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS The combining financial statements for the debt service funds are presented in Statements 11 and 12 of the 2000 Annual Financial Report. Debt service funds are a type of governmental fund used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of principal and interest on general obligation debt (other than enterprise fund debt). Debt service funds may have one or a combination of revenue sources pledged to retire debt including property taxes, tax increments, special assessments and area and unit charges. The diverse nature of the type of debt included in the same fund type requires careful analysis to determine the adequacy of the fund balance and projected fund balance. The following schedule extracts information from Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 of the 2000 Annual Financial Report to assist in this analysis. The following schedule compares outstanding debt with assets pledged for debt retirement. This comparison provides a means to judge (at least on a preliminary basis) the financial position of each individual debt service fund. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS (Continued) Fund Description General Debt Certificates of Indebtedness Lease Revenue Bonds of 1998 99C Public Project Revenue Bonds Special Assessment Debt Improvement Bonds of 1992A Improvement Bonds of 1996A Improvement Bonds of 1998A Improvement Bonds of 1998B Refunding Imp. Bonds of 1999A December 31, 2000 Fund Balance Deferred Revenue $ 49,632 833,613 (94,789) $ 7/18,456 $ 3,454 3,282 $ 6,736 Total Remaining Debt Service Scheduled $ 53,086 $ 707,608 836,895 8,437,305 (94,789) 1,169,105 $ 795,192 $ 10,314,018 $ 10,339,624 Scheduled Property Taxes $ 737,900 7,537,686 2,064,038 $ 66,221 $ 38,758 $ 104,979 $ 2,034,403 $ 1,798,741 785,474 304,528 1,090,002 3,660,880 - 56,561 199,548 256,109 5,812,475 - 265,638 385,416 651,054 2,762,167 2,161,532 1,716,356 - 1,716,356 2,004,489 855,608 $ 2,890,250 $ 928,250 $ 3,818,500 $ 16,274,414 $ 4,815,881 Final Maturity Date 12/31/03 02/01/10 02/01/10 02/01/06 02/01/07 02/01/15 02/01/15 02/01/06 Note: Deferred revenue in the above table does not include the future scheduled "interest portion" of the adopted assessment rolls. The 1992A and 1996A Improvement Bonds also include a pledge from the Area and Unit Fund that has not been included above. The above table provides a means for the monitoring the status of the debt service funds. For the General Debt funded solely by property taxes, it appears that there are adequate planned levies to retire the debt when the future lease revenues scheduled to be received from the school district are included. Schedule of Special Assessment Debt: Total resources available + Scheduled property tax levies - Debt Service ,$ 3,818,500 4,815,881 $ 8,634,381 16,274,414 Deficit in scheduled funding (at 12/31/00) $(7,640,033) This deficit will need to funded by future adopted assessment rolls, special assessment levies, investment earnings, transfers from other funds, property taxes or other available means. Factors to consider when analyzing debt service funds: • Are all the anticipated assessment rolls being adopted as soon as appropriate? • Have all the planned financing sources been identified, such as pledged amounts from the area and unit fund or future MSA funds? • Are there significant "prepayments" received from property owners? In the current investment environment, will the eamings the City will receive on these prepayments be lower than the interest rate that was being charged on the adopted assessment roll? • Have the scheduled debt service payments been scheduled around the anticipated assessment rolls in addition to any anticipated prepayments to avoid accumulating excess balances and generating excess earnings that potentially could be subject to arbitrage? (12) DEBT SERVICE FUNDS (Continued) We recommend that all Debt Service Funds of the City be reviewed at least annually by applying the above criteria. The Area & Unit Fund is committed to the debt service of some special assessment bonds as well as toward the water revenue bonds. We recommend that the City determine the full commitment of the Area and Unit Fund whenever this fund is used to pledge toward future bond issues and construction projects. Computerization of Special Assessment Records. During the course of the audit we noted the City has not computerized its special assessment records. There are many items that must be tracked throughout the special assessment process; the adopted assessment roll, the annual special assessment levy (principal and interest), property owner prepayments and remaining deferred balances. The current method of tracking this process is predominately done manually and requires manual tracking and verifying of assessments. Because of the importance and dollar amount of the special assessments, the number of parcels to be accounted for and number of separate assessment rolls for each parcel, we recommend that the city investigate computerizing the special assessment records. This will not only assist in maintaining the deferred receivable balances and the certification of the annual spread levy but it will also prove valuable in the certification of payoff balances for individual property owners. Centralization of Bid Records Minnesota Statutes require that specific bidding procedures be followed for contracts entered into by the City meeting certain dollar value criteria. One of the requirements is that documentation of the bidding process be retained. During the course of the audit, it was noted that certain supporting documentation for the contracts selected for testing was unavailable. We suggest the bidding process be centralized and appropriate procedures be implemented or reviewed to ensure compliance with Statutes and that proper documentation is retained. Reporting Model The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has issued Statement No.34 on issues related to the Governmental Financial Reporting Model. The implementation date for an organization the size of the City is the year 2003. This new reporting model significantly changes governmental accounting, which will impact the intemal financial accounting and external financial reporting of the City. As a result, it will involve a significant commitment of time by the finance department staff. A summary of the key provisions of the statement is presented below: Key features of the new model. Even though the new governmental financial reporting model has deep roots in traditional public sector accounting and financial reporting, it offers many new features. The most important of these new features are: • Govemment-wide financial reporting. For the first time, users of state and local govemment financial reports have access to government -wide financial statements that provide a clear picture of the govemment as a single, unified entity. These new government -wide financial statements complement rather than replace traditional fund -based financial statements. (13) Reporting Model (Continued) • Additional long-term focus for governmental activities. Traditional reporting for tax -supported (governmental) activities has focused on near -term inflows, outflows, and balances of spendable financial resources. The new financial reporting model retains this short-term focus in the governmental fund financial statements while providing a long-term perspective on these same activities in the government -wide financial statements. • Narrative overview and analysis. The new governmental financial reporting model provides financial report users with a simple narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the basic financial statements in the form of management's discussion and analysis (MD&A). • Information on major funds. It is widely agreed that fund information is most useful when presented for individual funds rather than for aggregations of funds (e.g., all special revenue funds). Accordingly, the new govemmental financial reporting model presents individual fund data for each of a government's major funds. • Expanded budgetary reporting. In the past, budgetary comparisons were based solely on the final amended budget. Under the new governmental financial reporting model, information on the original budget is also presented. In addition, the new model eliminates aggregated budget presentations (e.g., totals for all budgeted special revenue funds) in favor of comparisons for the general fund and 'i each individual major fund. Infrastructure reporting. As with any major change, adoption of a new governmental financial reporting model sparked some controversy. Specifically, many preparers of state and local government financial statements generally supported the new model but were not persuaded that the proposed benefits of capitalizing and depreciating a government's general infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, bridges, dams) outweigh the related costs. Accordingly, the Govemment Finance Officers Association (GFOA) has formally taken the position that each govemment must make its own decision on whether to comply with the infrastructure reporting provisions of GASB Statement No. 34 based on its own evaluation of the relative costs and benefits of infrastructure reporting. For governments that elect to implement the infrastructure reporting provisions of GASB Statement No. 34, GFOA recommends adopting a least -cost implementation strategy consistent with the provisions of that statement. The practical application of such a strategy would reflect the following recommendations: • Limit the retroactive reporting requirements for infrastructure to major classes of infrastructure assets. • Define major classes of infrastructure as narrowly as possible. • Limit infrastructure reporting to assets acquired during fiscal years ended after June 30, 1980. • Use estimates whenever possible. • Use composite approaches to calculate depreciation expense. 7 (14) 7 Conclusion We welcome the opportunity to discuss the points mentioned in this letter or any other accounting and procedural issues in order to coordinate our efforts with you, the mutual objective being the development of more effective accounting procedures for the City. We understand that some of the aforementioned points are in the process of implementation or may already have been implemented; however, these points are noted so that effective follow-up can be accomplished. We sincerely appreciate all the courtesies and cooperation extended to us by you and the staff of the City, and thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you. We look forward to working with you in the future. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City, its management, the City Council and others within the administration. Austin, Minnesota March 29, 2001 LARSON, ALLEN, WEISHAIR & CO., LLP (15)