1 / 43

FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 Financial Report August 2008 Year To Date

FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 Financial Report August 2008 Year To Date. August 2008 Beginning Fund Balance (Unaudited) ($ 10,509) APPROVED REVENUE BUDGET $324,973 YTD REVENUES $ 23,851 APPROVED EXPENDITURE BUDGET $346,067

leila-thornton
Download Presentation

FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 Financial Report August 2008 Year To Date

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 Financial Report August 2008 Year To Date

  2. August 2008 Beginning Fund Balance (Unaudited) ($ 10,509) APPROVED REVENUE BUDGET $324,973 YTD REVENUES $ 23,851 APPROVED EXPENDITURE BUDGET $346,067 YTD EXPENDITURES $ 23,855 JUNE 30, 2009 Projected Ending Fund Balance ($ 31,603)

  3. YEAR-TO-DATE SUMMARY • $346.1M - GOB Budget • $476.3M - District Total Budget • Total District Cash - $175.3M • GOB Revenues in line with budget • GOB Expenditure Variance Analysis • Salaries & Benefits – fewer FTEs (classroom teachers & administrators), delay in allocation of retirement expenses. • Non-Payroll Expenditures – variances due to timing, additional expenditures for Early Retirement, Acuity Benchmark, and Long Range Plan.

  4. CONCERNS AND RISKS • State Tax Commission protested tax rulings • Equitable distribution of funds to charter schools • Charter School Enrollment • Unanticipated expenditures • Unforeseen expenditures/impact of using 07/08 actuals as 08/09 budget base

  5. * * 08/09 Year End Projections assume no corrective action taken. Options are currently under review to mitigate potential deficit of $20M.

  6. * * 08/09 Year End Projections assume no corrective action taken to mitigate potential deficit.

  7. Second Budget Amendment August 2008 Fiscal Year 2009 Complete Report

  8. * 08/09 Year End Projections assume no corrective action taken. Options are currently under review to mitigate potential deficit of $20M.

  9. * * 08/09 Year End Projections assume no corrective action taken. Options are currently under review to mitigate potential deficit of $20M.

  10. Tax Increment Financing

  11. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) September 25 2008, Update May 5 2008, Status What is TIF? How is TIF used? What is MODESA? How much has been approved? How many projects are completed? What is the current impact on SLPS? What additional projects are pending public hearing? Revenue funds derived mainly from property taxes used to finance redevelopment projects Notes/bonds are issued to pay redevelopment costs and property tax pay-off notes over 23 years. 58% of taxes are from SLPS tax base A super TIF which also captures state taxes (use of state taxes restricted to infrastructures). 111 TIF projects that cost $3.5B with TIFs of $0.6B. 98 projects that cost $1.7B with TIFs of $0.2B. $155M TIF assessments(market value $631M) = $5.9M/ yr loss 9 projects totaling $130.5m with TIFs of $18.3M. Potential fiscal impact on SLPS: $0.7M. 60% of taxes are from SLPS tax base 100 TIF projects that cost $3.4B with TIFs of $0.5B 60 projects that cost $1.5B with TIFs of $0.2B $142M TIF assessments (market value $568M) = $5.3M/yr loss 9 projects totaling $520.8M with TIFs of $79.2M. Potential fiscal impact on SLPS: $5M. SLPS

  12. SLPSRS Worst Case Scenario

  13. A DEEPER LOOK AT EVALUATING INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE • Top performing money managers typically beat not only their comparative style index but also exhibit above median performance in their peer group for longer periods (i.e. 5 years+). • Active managers should not be expected to outperform in every month, quarter, or year. However, persistent underperformance (i.e. 5 years+) should warrant concern and a re-investigation of the manager’s process, philosophy and people. • As of 6/30/08, SLPSRS engaged 6 traditional managers with below-median peer returns for the trailing 5 years. These managers oversee a combined $197 million under management.* Three of the six underperformed more than 70% of their peers in that timeframe. *Source: PSRS Investment “Flash” Report, dated 6/30/08 and PSN. Past performance is not indicative of future performance.

  14. WORST CASE SCENARIOS • Six of the equity managers (totaling $197 million in assets) have below median performance for the 5 years ending 6/30/08. • Using only those manager’s returns and calculating the difference between their returns and the return of the median of each manager’s peer group, the dollar return differential was $9 million over 5 years. *Source: PSRS Investment “Flash” Report, dated 6/30/08 and PSN. Past performance is not indicative of future performance.

  15. Quartile Report Slides

  16. Full deck

  17. CAPITAL FUNDS A/C Fund Balance = $ 19,008,577 M DESEG Fund Balance = $ 99,600,771 M

  18. DEBT SERVICE

  19. FEDERAL FUNDS

  20. FOOD SERVICE

  21. TRUST & AGENCY

More Related