Fiscal Year 2009/10
City of Sacramento
APPROVED BUDGET
APPROVED
CITY OF SACRAMENTO
FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 BUDGET
KEVIN JOHNSON
Mayor
RAYMOND L. TRETHEWAY III LAUREN R. HAMMOND
Councilmember, District 1 Vice Mayor, District 5
SANDY SHEEDY KEVIN McCARTY
Councilmember, District 2 Councilmember, District 6
RAY KERRIDGE
City Manager
JOHN DANGBERG MARTY HANNEMAN
Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager
CASSANDRA JENNINGS GUS VINA
Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager
Prepared by
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
BUDGET, POLICY & STRATEGIC PLANNING DIVISION
In conjunction with Department Coordinators/Staff
CITY HALL
915 I STREET, 5TH FLOOR
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION – 1
Budget Message………………………………..3
SECTION – 2
Approved Budget Overview …………… 7
SECTION – 3
How to Read This Document…………….. 61
Appropriations and Changes
in Fund Balance…………………………. 73
2B Summary of 2009/10 Revenues,
Appropriations and Changes
in Fund Balance…………………………. 74
6 2009/10 Revenue Budget ……………. 79
7 Operating Grants ………………………..87
8 Summary of Reclassification
Requests……………………………………93
9 Principal and Debt Payments………..94
10 Summary of Revenues, Expenditures
and Budgeted Fund Balances ………95
SECTION – 5
Mayor and City Council …………………….97
SECTION – 6
City Attorney ………………………………….101
SECTION – 7
SECTION – 10
Code Enforcement………………………….125
SECTION – 11
Community Development…………………131
SECTION – 12
Convention, Culture & Leisure ………….137
SECTION – 13
Economic Development …………………..147
SECTION – 18
Information Technology …………………..183
SECTION – 19
Labor Relations………………………………189
Planning ………………………………………..211
SECTION – 23
Police ……………………………………………217
SECTION – 24
Transportation………………………………..223
SECTION – 25
Utilities ………………………………………….231
SECTION – 26
Non-Department …………………………….239
Debt Service ………………………………….241
Other Program Support……………………245
Reserves……………………………………….253
Glossary………………………………………..299
SECTION – 30
Resolutions ……………………………………305
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
3
1
SECTION – 1
BUDGET MESSAGE
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
4
5
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
6
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a
Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to the City of Sacramento, California for its annual budget
for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2008. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must
publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide,
as a financial plan, and as a communications device.
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
7
2
SECTION – 2
APPROVED BUDGET OVERVIEW
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
8
APPROVED BUDGET OVERVIEW
Summary of Approved Budget………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
Summary of Amendments to the Approved Budget ………………………………………………………..10
PROPOSED BUDGET OVERVIEW
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………16
The Challenge …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..18
Budget Balancing………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 19
General Fund – Five-Year Forecast …………………………………………………………………………….. 21
Long-Term Strategy……………………………………………………………………………………………….…..23
OTHER FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Total Proposed City Budget………………………………………………………………………………………...28
Total Proposed General Fund Budget…………………………………………………………………………..29
Enterprise Fund Five-Year Forecast……………………………………………………………………………..31
Parking Fund…………………………………………………………………………………………………..31
Water Fund ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 32
Sewer Fund……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 34
Utility Users Tax (UUT) ……………………………………………………………………………………. 46
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) ……………………………………………………………………….46
Business Operations Tax…………………………………………………………………………………. 47
Motor Vehicle License Fee (MVLF) ……………………………………………………………………47
Fees & Charges………………………………………………………………………………………………47
Employee Retirement Benefits ……………………………………………………………………………………. 48
Annual Pension Costs ……………………………………………………………………………………………..…48
Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) …………………………………………………………………….. 49
BUDGET STATEMENT
General Information…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 51
Budget Presentation …………………………………………………………………………………………………..51
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
9
APPROVED BUDGET OVERVIEW
The FY2009/10 Operating and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budgets were approved by
Council on June 16, 2009. At that time, the City was still in active negotiations with a number of our
labor unions, with the goal of achieving labor savings in lieu of program and staffing reductions. In
addition, the Council had not yet taken final action on utility rate increases for FY2009/10.
In order to appropriately reflect the legislative record, amendments related to successfully negotiated
labor agreements and Council adoption of FY2009/10 utility rates are not reflected in the “Approved
Summary of Approved Budget
The FY2009/10 Approved Budget totals $874.7 million from all funding sources and supports 4,548
authorized full time equivalents (FTE) positions. The General Fund totals $386.1 million and 3,183
authorized FTE positions.
The following chart summarizes the changes to the FY2009/10 Proposed Budget released on May 1,
2009.
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
10
Summary of Amendments to the Approved Budget
Fire Department
On July 28, 2009 the City Council approved an agreement with the Firefighter’s Unit (Sacramento Area
Firefighters Local 522) to save $5 million in FY2009/10, which included “freezing” step increases and
deferring the FY2009/10 five percent salary adjustment for two and a half years (January 2012).
Given the significance of the concessions reached, the reduction of 50 FTE and service level reductions
identified for FY2009/10 were not implemented. However, the continuation of the rotational workforce
reduction of one fire company implemented in FY2008/09 will remain in effect.
Utilities Department
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
11
The City’s Utilities Rate Advisory Commission held a public hearing on May 27, 2009, on the following
proposed rate increases to the City’s utility service rates:
Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, the City’s Utilities Rate Advisory Commission approved the
following revised increases to the City’s utility service rates:
FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11
The Department of Utilities presented the Utilities Rate Advisory Commission’s recommendation for
increases to the City Council on June 9, 2009. At that time City Council adopted an intent motion
directing the Department of Utilities to return to the City Council on June 23, 2009, with a
recommendation for lower rate increases that would result in a 9% overall rate increase in FY2009/10
and a 9% overall rate increase in FY2010/11 for a typical residential customer receiving water, sewer,
solid waste, and storm drainage services.
FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11
As a result of the reduced revenues, the Department of Utilities implemented the following operational
and programmatic changes:
Reduced funding for water meter program from 5% to 3%;
The following charts are the amended budgets for each of the funds (water, sewer, solid waste, and
storm drainage) that reflect the reduced revenues and corresponding service level reductions, and
provide a five-year forecast for the Utility funds based on the revised rates:
Water service rates:
Sewer service rates:
Solid Waste rates:
19%
10%
12%
19%
12%
11%
Water service rates:
Sewer service rates:
Solid Waste rates:
15%
5%
9%
15%
5%
9%
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
12
2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Approved
Budget Amendments
Amended
Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate
Projected Rate Increase 15.00% 15.00% 13.00% 12.00% 12.00%
REVENUE
Charges, Fees and Services 77,657 (6,851) 70,806 81,426 92,012 103,053 115,420
Interest 2,398 (1,071) 1,327 1,000 1,455 1,455 1,455
EXPENDITURES
Operating 56,578 (2,928) 53,650 56,896 61,859 67,041 73,300
CURRENT SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (521) (1,202) (1,723) 288 3,246 3,561 1,950
Water Fund (6005)
Revenue and Expenditure Five Year Forecast
Dollars in Thousands
2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Approved
Budget Amendments
Amended
Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate
Projected Rate Increase 5.00% 5.00% 25.00% 15.00% 15.00%
REVENUE
Charges, Fees and Services 22,149 (1,926) 20,223 21,234 26,543 30,524 35,103
Interest 665 – 665 665 665 665 665
Other 1,286 – 1,286 1,225 1,225 1,225 1,225
EXPENDITURES
Operating 18,894 (949) 17,945 18,569 19,917 21,227 23,099
Debt Service 973 24 997 997 883 883 883
CIP 3,315 (200) 3,115 5,225 7,407 9,667 12,005
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 23,182 (1,125) 22,057 24,791 28,207 31,777 35,987
Sewer Fund (6006)
Revenue and Expenditure Five Year Forecast
Dollars in Thousands
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
13
2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Approved
Budget Amendments
Amended
Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate
Projected Rate Increase 9.00% 9.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%
REVENUE
Charges, Fees and Services 60,590 (2,830) 57,760 61,869 64,962 68,210 71,621
Other/Misc. 735 546 1,281 1,335 1,435 1,535 1,635
Development Fees – – – – – – –
TOTAL REVENUES 61,325 (2,284) 59,041 63,204 66,397 69,745 73,256
CURRENT SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) 3,024 (468) 2,556 1,450 2,595 6,803 3,949
Beginning Fund Balance (2,539) – (2,539) 17 1,467 4,062 10,865
ENDING FUND BALANCE 485 (468) 17 1,467 4,062 10,865 14,814
Solid Waste Fund (6007)
Revenue and Expenditure Five Year Forecast
Dollars in Thousands
2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Approved
Budget Amendments
Amended
Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate
Projected Rate Increase* 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
REVENUE
Charges, Fees and Services 33,117 – 33,117 33,117 33,117 33,117 33,117
EXPENDITURES
Operating 35,367 (1,714) 33,653 34,698 35,743 37,791 41,516
Debt Service 3,827 48 3,875 3,874 3,873 3,872 3,637
CIP 1,425 – 1,425 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 40,619 (1,666) 38,953 39,572 40,616 42,663 46,153
CURRENT SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (4,323) 1,581 (2,742) (3,341) (4,282) (6,170) (9,377)
Additional SAFCA Positions – Fully
Offset 11.0 (1.0) 10.0 FTE
Storm Drainage Fund (6011)
Revenue and Expenditure Five Year Forecast
Dollars in Thousands
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
14
Fines, Forf eitures
Concessions
2.0%
Licenses
2.2%
Other Sources
Charges, Fees,
and Services
26.9%
11.5%
0.0%
Beginning
Undesignated
34.9%
4.5%
Contingency
8.3%
Property
2.4%
Services &
Supplies
15.7%
18.9%
Total Approved City Budget: $874.7 Million
Revenues
Expenditures
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
15
0.7%
Intergovernmental
13.0%
Charges, Fees,
and Services
0.3%
2.8%
Contributions from
Other Funds
6.1% Other Sources
1.3%
71.9%
0.3%
0.4%
Employee Services
85.0%
5.5%
0.5% Ending
Undesignated
Balance
0.0%
1.4%
Debt Service
Total Approved General Fund Budget: $386.1 Million
Revenues
Expenditures
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
16
PROPOSED BUDGET OVERVIEW
(As written on May 1, 2009)
INTRODUCTION
The FY2009/10 Proposed Budget for the City of Sacramento is balanced, totaling $875.1 million from
all funding sources. Proposed staffing for FY2009/10 includes 4,545 funded full time equivalent (FTE)
The Proposed Budget was developed in the context of the Mayor and Council’s Strategic Planning-
Strategic Budgeting policies. In this context the City Manager has led proactive efforts to address our
financial challenges in an open and transparent way, and as a result of this process, the Proposed
Budget reflects the Council’s direction. The Council provided policy direction at Budget workshops held
in January and February 2009. Additionally, five community meetings were held to discuss the budget
with interested residents. The programs and services included in the Proposed Budget reflect the City
Council’s commitment to keeping Sacramento a full service City, and maintain the structural framework
Code Enforcement 10,533,162 (470,940) 10,062,222 6,282,939 3,779,283 89.00
Community Development 14,632,259 (1,354,041) 13,278,218 7,927,751 5,350,467 106.50
Economic Development 4,749,608 (190,087) 4,559,521 3,651,251 908,270 22.00
Finance 8,631,682 (3,039,852) 5,591,830 2,246,500 3,345,330 75.50
Fire 100,954,628 (1,373,731) 99,580,897 21,217,740 78,363,157 582.00
CIP 1,818,000 – 1,818,000 – 1,818,000 –
General Fund Total $423,936,096 ($93,304,223) $330,631,873 $66,699,541 $263,932,332 3,180.32
Overall gross expenditures in the General Fund total $423.9 million. These expenditures are funded
with department revenues, discretionary taxes, other revenues, and reimbursements from other funds
(grants, work on capital improvement projects, and the City’s cost recovery plan). The City’s Gross
General Fund expenditures for operating departments and the capital budget totals $423.9 million, of
FY2009/10 Approved Budget
17
which $93 million (22 percent) is recovered through reimbursements and $66.7 million (16 percent) is
recovered from department revenues, resulting in a $263.9 million Net General Fund cost.
While the budget is balanced in the sense that the various funding sources support the expenditures,
there continues to be a structural gap between ongoing revenues and expenditures, currently closed
FY2009/10 Budget Reductions
In the past several years, no one predicted the breadth and depth of the current economic crisis. The
City’s budget problems emerged and became progressively worse when revenue growth failed to keep
pace with expenditure growth. Now the problem is more severe and longer in duration because major
General Fund tax revenues, property taxes and sales tax are in significant year to year decline. In
addition, General Fund expenditures continue to grow as a result of increases in personnel costs and
the operating costs of new facilities. The unfortunate result is that the gap between ongoing
expenditures and revenues continues to widen even after very deep expenditure reductions were
included in the Approved FY2008/09 Budget.
In recent years, without an understanding of the duration of the unprecedented economic downturn,
the City has used a substantial portion of the General Fund Economic Uncertainty Reserve to provide
Given that labor costs account for nearly 85 percent of all expenses of the General Fund, one of the
central strategies to close the gap between revenues and expenses in the FY2009/10 Proposed
Budget is to minimize growth in the City’s personnel costs. In order to do so, the City has asked our
labor unions to consider freezing salaries and step increases; and in the case of non-public safety
reductions.
However, it is important to remember that due to the significant reductions in property tax and sales tax
revenues, even with salary freezes, extensive reductions in services and the use of one-time funding
sources are necessary to balance the FY2009/10 Budget. This is in addition to the 20 percent
reduction that most departments sustained in the development of the current year budget. The table
below shows the cumulative impact of the current and Proposed Budget reductions.