Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Budget Records-Town - 6/30/1989
* • •• �1 C) C71 .t. IV ~ -4 Z r*l C7 -4 r- c7 (/0 G7 o O O x o o 0 rt o 17 rD -rl n ,-1 -4 o m,0 r+'*1 t� m r+-n v: `' a o v' ct-r1 n 0 Z A -z rt, c rt, rD c -,-C C 1 C X O C -S 0 r•+0 •-''..S •. 0 _., -S C 0. V,-o 0.• -0 Q.Cu 0. o.a a CD A r+fD ) a -S Vf -4 V1 C'r1 C fD v1 --+ r 0'T1- • N 'V CTCD C R < r xy Cu C a rD rD -s r+C ', CDD c n -rl O • rh G O. -� �. o t0 n < 0 C (n rD .:.� fD fD • Z of rD rD a o c C 0 0 -< a* -Tl C -' to N a r+ < rD C rD rD r+ - v1 V1 '-a c 0 X y - Cl. ID fl) 0 \., Q. C1l 4,..CA.) !vJrn A � 1,1 \ .4 X C \\ - In �rncC -s <rnCC) V X o r- CO CO o o . °o L,, m-<o c�"v \\ A r•-,N)r*1-1 N 'U (/)(+N --1,d CI P--. 7)N r--. O--1-4 MrD C Cu V) 0 CO(ID --1 N Cu Cr--••• -1 CD rD G o \� rn V)Cn))C� in Q.L. -4.rD r'rl 7)CDD Ca 4-1 N o c+n v1 1T1 fD .4 -n +N n C r+rr_ \\ r+ fl) o --'•0 >>< X 3 - _` 4� X 0. 3. �,r O.rD --,_ = A CT \\ N W '�'t7 aJ'O 0.0 Qr1 -4 p `� (fi <C) _ \� • rn N)O-4 (n rD iL 0 X (fl C C V 00 W X)O- -C rD n c+rD rD (") In \\{ r-. *C C 4- O_ c+CD -•rD Cl CD N \~ N)) po fD C Q Cn 9 y. \~ N J. 'T C 0 (-J. :LJ .• 44 A CO CO - C) -0 •--C fD v) v1 C,) GI C-= r+ VI O a,N c 0 a N .A --<C7►)A'fl C \ Ni W rTICZZC CDC) d 0° , s A7<7ZC7Z C- 0 CT r••0. 00 Cr, rn Z ••• 0 coZ C)> C o r*l v 0, rr -1 --1 CN) Orn 0 0. 0 X (0 'C7 rn -� rD rD \\\ \\\\ Cn\\44^p (/1 Cl \\\ \\\\ fD\\ "f n '� -‹ '-1 n\\ vni 0\\1 a -<7v-C---4OC Cu 3 Cu �-5 5��` 0\\o a rnwr*lA-to • rD J� o Cl I \\\ \\\\ d\\ -s \-..\ \\\\ a\\ << 7AoZCXrn7<7 m 0 -i rn - p V) C7 , - cv Co M r= -v \ N ut -� Co rn rD CD fD In I l.n Cl fD C A- • o CD O a < N iv4 '0-4X)rf CD kC C r • p I O Co N f-l a ,. 0 is y oN Ln "�O rnm--1 Cr) b 0. o N fl) C N lin - X m Z= A ift tea -N w f, . Cn A(ii m VC x rD O v Z C m 0 ca. '4 'l m \\\\ 44 0 73( 0 Z J. r•� Z C .� N CI o \\\\ 'T7"T1 r'T�o C) S p.,... C7 C I \\\\ CA C rn TJ C•'1fD InI \\\\ O Z p r1 C v, I• O "S \\\\ Z p O 3 f 73 CcD z 2. o m Z7 N rD r•, � 'S 4, n I '\`- 44 (-+ p \`` ►--r rD I \\ 10 Z--1)-+ O.rf \ I A-1 Z rn O 4, \`. (n•PO I \5-.- ,,, .6, .-�'.-^Tr�� 1 rD I \\ 10 O MI C C 70= '3 \.� 1 _-1(n�7 a `\ CI ft. 44 A 73'T1 4 , 1 �OA-1 r C Z A ro CDN o Ac�on�r ^S -' '' rr*1(rir NirD Cn CN ~ W 00 a -,. 4,4 \`. 44 f-1 0 \�, X CO rD \`. W t") C "S •-.` In (p C rn C -<7�7 Z G7 0 - ON p rn��OrTI Ln O) 7) '. W Co rn ft) \`�, Cn .J. vl C., t'J rD RESOLUTION NO. 346 FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 1988/89 WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of Title 42 Sections 301, 302, 303 and 304, A.R.S. , the Oro Valley Town Council did, on the 22nd day of June 1988, make an estimate of the different amounts required to meet the public expenditures for the ensuing year, also an estimate of revenues from sources other than direct taxation. WHEREAS, in accordance with said sections of said title, and following due public notice, the Town Council met on August 10, 1988, at which meeting any taxpayer was privileged to appear and be heard in favor of or against any of the proposed expenditures, ' WHEREAS, it appears that publication has been duly made as required by law, of said estimates together with a notice that the Town Council would meet on August 10, 1988, at the Oro Valley Town Hall for the purpose of hearing taxpayers, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the said estimates of revenues and expenditures shown on the accompanying schedules as now increased, reduced or changed by and the same are hereby adopted as the budget of the Town of Oro Valley for the fiscal year 1988/89. Passed by the Oro Valley Town Council, this 10th day of August, 1988. , / /6-9 Mayor ' i ATTEST: /1 r 7 Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ilt --12304 Town tto 'ne -� City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY OF TAX LEVY AND TAX RATE INFORMATION Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED PREVIOUS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR 1 . Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (A.R.S. §42-301 .A) $ -0- 2. Amount Received from Primary Property Taxation in the Previous Fiscal Year in Excess of the Sum of the Previous Year's Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (A.R.S. §42-302.C. 14) and Amount. of Escaped Taxes Collected . (A.R.S. §42-236) . -0- 3. Property Tax Levy Amounts A. Primary Property Taxes $ $ B. Secondary Property Taxes 'C. Total Property Tax Levy Amounts $ _ 0- R $___ -0- 4. Property Taxes Collected * A. Primary Property Taxes Previous Year' s Levy $ Prior Years ' Levies Total Primary Property Taxes $ B. Secondary Property Taxes Previous Year' s Levy $ Prior Years' Levies Total Secondary Property Taxes $ C. Total Property Taxes Collected * Includes actual property taxes collected as of the date the proposed budget was prepared and the property taxes expected to be collected for the remainder of the fiscal year. SCHEDULE B ( 1 of 2) City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY OF TAX LEVY AND TAX RATE INFORMATION Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED PREVIOUS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR 5. Property Tax Rates A. City/Town Tax Rate Primary Property Tax Rate $ $ Secondary Property Tax Rate Total City/Town Tax RateB. Special District Tax Rates Secondary Property Tax Rates As of the date the proposed budget was prepared, the city/town was operating ___ special assessment districts for which secondary property taxes are levied. For information pertaining to these special assessment districts and their tax rates , please contact the city/town. SCHEDULE B (2 of 2) City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY BY FUND OF REVENUES OTHER THAN PROPERTY TAXES Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED ACTUAL ESTIMATED SOURCE OF REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR GENERAL FUND Local taxes City Sales Tax $ 1,480,322 $ 852,000 $ 969,164 Renters Tax 32,000 56,580 54,600 Cable TV 3,000 6,552 6,000 Licenses and permits Business License 7,000 9,768 8,500 Building Permits 577,000 535,320 400,000 Intergovernmental revenues Federal 5,000 9,768 -0- State • 313,086 313,068 372,763 County 38,000 52,764 55,000 Charges for services Zoning Applications 300,000 276,324 165,000 Fines and forfeits 210,000 274,332 350,000 Interest on investments 80,000 123,528 118,000 In-lieu property taxes -0- -0- -0- Voluntary contributions Miscellaneous revenues 11,165 17,112 57,000 Carry Forward 956,623 956,623 1,433,641 Total General Fund $ 4,013,196 $ 3,483,739 $ 3,990,168 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ 223,248 $ 233,567 Total Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ 223,248 $ 233,567 * Includes actual revenues received as of the date the proposed and thep p budget was prepared estimated revenues expected to be received for the remainder of the fiscal year. SCHEDULE C ( 1 of 2) City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY BY FUND OF REVENUES OTHER THAN PROPERTY TAXES Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED ACTUAL ESTIMATED SOURCE OF REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ 29,852 52 $ 48,067 Total Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ 29,852 $ • Local Sts. & Rdso Rev: Interest � 48,067 3,000 1,000 1,000 Miscellaneous $ 500 $ 57,000 $ Permits 3,273 500 3,948 10,000 Carry Forward 213,890 213,890 Total Special Revenue Funds $ 487,224 224,846 $ 528,938 $ 520,775353 . DEBT SERVICE FUNDS $ $ • $ Total Debt Service Funds $ $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS $ $ $ Total Capital Projects Funds $ $ $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS $ $ $ Total Enterprise Funds $ $ EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ Total Expendable Trust Funds $ $ $ NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ Total Nonexpendable Trust Funds $ $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDS 4,500,420 $ 4,012,677 $ 4,510 921 * Includes actual revenues received as of the date ther re p oposed budget was prepared and h p the estimated revenues expected to be received for the remainder of the fiscal year. SCHEDULE C (2 of 2) City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY BY FUND OF BOND PROCEEDS AND INTERFUND TRANSFERS Fiscal Year 1988/89 PROCEEDS FROM SALE OR INTERFUND REFUNDING TRANSFERS FUND OF BONDS IN (OUT) GENERAL FUND $ $ SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Total Special Revenue Funds $ $ DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Total Debt Service Funds $ $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Total Capital Projects Funds $ $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS Total Enterprise Funds $ $ EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS Total Expendable Trust Funds $ $ NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS Total Nonexpendable Trust Funds $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDS -0- -O- ^--mss SCHEDULE D City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURES WITHIN EACH FUND Fiscal Year 1988/89 ADOPTED EMERGENCY BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ACTUAL BUDGETED FUND/ EXPENDITURES APPROVED EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES DEPARTMENT PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR GENERAL FUND Building Codes $ -0-* $ $ -0-* $ 167,425 Capital Improvements 100,000 36,387 100,000 Court 211,355 217,604 264, 188 General Administration 98,000 14,000 111,971 98,836 Mayor & Council 9,000 8,210 13,700 Planning & Zoning 93,535 50,000 _144,262 156,080 Police 1,102,890 1,030,068 1,319,950 Town Attorney 55.480 25,000 74,089 93,348 Town Clerk 392.269 299,270 187,368 Town Manager 65.960 51,820 92,191 Contingency 1,884,797 334,000 1,502, 140 *In Clerk's Budget Total General Fund $ 4,013,196 $ 89,000 $ 2.307.631 $ 3,995,226 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ $ 224,097 $ 233,567 Total Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ $ 224,097 $ 233,567 Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ $ 29,852 $ 48,067 Total Local Transportation - Assistance ransportation -Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ $ 29,852 $ 48,067 * Includes actual expenditures as of the date the proposed budget was prepared and expenditures expected to be made for the remainder of the fiscal year. SCHEDULE E (1 of 2) City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURES WITHIN EACH FUND Fiscal Year 198$/89 ADOPTED EMERGENCY BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ACTUAL BUDGETED FUND/ EXPENDITURES APPROVED EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES DEPARTMENT PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR Streets & Roads $ 217,890 $ 245,000 $ 40,872 $ 235,788, Total Special Revenue Funds $ 487,224 $ 245,000 $ 294,821 $ 515,695 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Debt Service Funds $ $ $ $ CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Capital Projects Funds $ $ $ $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Enterprise Funds EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Expendable Trust Funds $ $ $ $ NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Nonexpendable Trust Funds $ $ $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ 4,500,420 $ 334,000 21602,452 4,510,921 * Includes actual expenditures as of the date the proposed budget was prepared and expenditures expected to be made for the remainder of the fiscal year. SCHEDULE E (2 of 2) TOWN OF ORO VALLEY FINAL BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 88/89 REVENUES GENERAL FUND BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************ FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT Shared Taxes Auto Lieu 55, 000 52, 764. 00 38, 000 State Sales 189,245 150, 840. 00 157, 321 Urban Revenue 183,518 162 ,228. 00 154, 765 LOCAL REVENUES Building Permits 400, 000 535, 320. 00 577, 000 Business Licenses 8,500 9, 768 . 00 7, 000 Cable Television 6, 000 6, 552 . 00 3, 000 Fines & Forfeitures 350, 000 274, 332 . 00 210, 000 Interest 118, 000 123,528. 00 80, 000 Miscellaneous 55, 000 17, 112 . 00 11, 165 Renters Tax 54 , 600 56,580. 00 32 , 000 Sales Tax 969, 164 852 , 000. 00 1, 480, 322 Training, ALEOAC 2,500 3 , 660. 00 1, 000 Zoning Applications 165, 000 276, 324 . 00 300, 000 TOTAL INCOME 2, 556, 527 2, 521, 008 . 00 3, 051, 573 Cash Forward 1-Jul-87 1,433 , 641 956, 623 . 00 956, 623 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 3,990, 168 3,477, 631. 00 4, 008, 196 OTHER FUNDS - Police Police Grant 0 9, 379. 00 5, 000 HIGHWAY FUND ************ Highway User's 233,567 223, 248. 00 232 , 889 LTAF 48, 067 29, 852 . 00 36, 445 Interest 1, 000 1, 000. 00 3, 000 Miscellaneous 3 , 273 7, 000. 00 500 Permits 10, 000 3 , 948. 00 500 TOTAL INCOME 295,907 265, 048 . 00 273 , 334 Cash Forward 1-Jul-87 224, 846 213,890. 00 213 , 890 TOTAL HIGHWAY FUND 520, 753 478, 938 . 00 487,224 TOTAL REVENUE 4, 510, 921 3, 965, 948 . 00 4, 500,420 PROPOSED TENTATIVE BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 88/89 EXPENDITURES GENERAL FUND BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************ FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT Capital Improvements 100, 000. 00 49, 560. 00 100, 000 Building Codes 167, 425. 00 197, 364. 00 0 Court 264, 188. 00 206, 365. 00 211, 355 General Admin. * 98, 836. 00 99, 300. 00 98, 000 Mayor & Council 13,700. 00 9,420. 00 9, 000 Planning & Zoning* 156, 080. 00 145,752 . 00 93,535 Police* 1, 319,950. 00 920, 640. 00 1, 102 , 800 Town Attorney* 93 , 348. 00 72,420. 00 120,480 Town Clerk* 187, 368. 00 287, 592 . 00 392 , 269 * (see Bldg Town Manager* 92, 191. 00 56,484 . 00 65, 960 Codes) Contingency 1, 497, 082 . 00 320, 000. 00 1,819, 797 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 3, 990, 168. 00 2, 364,897. 00 4, 013 , 196 FED. REVENUE SHARING 0. 00 ($5, 000 included under Police Training) *HIGHWAY FUND 520, 753 . 00 318, 048 . 00 487, 224 ************* TOTAL EXPENDITURE 4, 510,921. 00 2 , 682, 945. 00 4,500,420 *See Expenditure Details on next page Exp. Detail 1 BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************* FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT COURT ALEOAC Surcharge 70, 000 52, 000 Contract Services 65, 000 54, 300 Dues & Subscriptions 600 600 Equipment Maintenance 3 , 300 2, 300 Furniture & Equipment 3,500 22, 000 Insurance 1, 500 800 Jury7, 000 6, 000 Meetings & Training 3, 300 1, 630 Miscellaneous 500 500 Office 7, 300 6,200 Personnel 92, 188 65, 025 Total Operating 254, 188 0. 00 211, 355 *Total Reserves* 10, 000 0 TOTAL COURT 264, 188 0. 00 211, 355 GENERAL ADMIN Capital Improve. 100, 000 100, 000 Animal Control 200 200 Bldgs & Grds (Admin) 71, 686 61, 000 Bldgs & Grds (PD) 19,750 15, 300 Insurance 3, 000 0 Pool Cars 1,200 6, 500 Miscellaneous 3, 000 2, 000 Total Operating 198, 836 185, 000 13, 000. 00 TOTAL GENERAL ADMIN 198,836 0. 00 198, 000 PLANNING & ZONING Advertising 2, 000 1, 000 Consulting Services 35, 000 0 Meetings & Training 6, 300 1, 000 Miscellaneous 1,500 1,700 Office & Supplies 9, 600 3 , 600 Outside Services 0 58, 000 Personnel 75, 180 67, 125 Refer. & Memberships 1, 500 460 Total Operating 131, 080 0. 00 132, 885 *Total Reserves* 25, 000 0 TOTAL P & Z 156, 080 0. 00 132 ,885 Exp. Detail 2 BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************* FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT POLICE Capital Expenditures 45, 900 39, 000 Dispatching 47,800 37, 500 Dues & Subscriptions 1, 100 850 Insurance 52, 000 45, 000 Maintenance/Repair 2 , 150 4, 200 Miscellaneous 1, 300 2, 100 Office & Supplies 6,550 10,850 Personnel1, 090, 900 785,400 Train./Tuition/Travel 5,400 4,500 Uniforms & Equipment 7,950 3 ,900 Vehicles 48, 900 49,500 Total Operating 1, 309, 950 0. 00 982 ,800 *Total Reserves* 10, 000. 00 120, 000 TOTAL POLICE 1, 319,950 0. 00 1, 102, 800 TOWN ATTORNEY Dues & Subscriptions 1, 000 1, 000 Furniture & Equipment 410 1, 330 Law Library 5, 000 5,200 Meetings & Training 4, 000 1, 700 Office 3, 800 1, 000 Outside Counsel 5, 000 26, 500 Personnel 59, 138 43 , 750 Total Operating 78, 348 0. 00 80, 480 *Reserves* 15, 000 0 TOTAL TOWN ATTORNEY 93, 348 0. 00 80, 480 TOWN CLERK Advertising 3, 000 2 , 700 Dues & Subscriptions 190 240 Equipment Maintenance 5, 000 3,780 Furniture & Equipment 12, 758 18, 158 Insurance 3, 000 0 Meetings & Training 3 , 620 2, 348 Miscellaneous 1, 600 7, 800 Office 8, 000 6, 600 Outside Services 6,500 12,800 Personnel 122 , 200 142 , 543 Building Inspectors 0 168,800 Recording Fees 1, 500 1, 500 Total Operating 167, 368 0. 00 367, 269 *Total Reserves* 20, 000 25, 000 TOTAL TOWN CLERK 187, 368 0. 00 392 ,269 Exp. Detail 3 BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************* FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT TOWN MANAGER OV Magazine 400 1,500 Dues & Subscriptions 840 820 Meetings & Training 3, 200 3 , 590 Office Supplies 500 1, 200 Personnel 75, 051 55, 650 Vehicle Maintenance/ 10, 200 1, 200 Repair Total Operating 90, 191 0. 00 63,960 *Total Reserves* 2 , 000 2 , 000 TOTAL TOWN MANAGER 92 , 191 0. 00 65,960 HIGHWAY Capital Expense 54, 400 0 General Maintenance 8, 000 7, 000 Insurance 27, 000 25, 000 Miscellaneous 5, 800 2 , 100 Personnel 144, 375 127, 525 Professional Services 20, 500 2 , 000 Road Improvements 58, 000 143 , 500 Street Maintenance 30,258 29,400 Vehicles/Equipment 17, 600 27, 100 Maintenance Contingency 70, 820 0 Total Operating 436, 753 0. 00 363 , 625 *Reserves* 84, 000 123 ,599 TOTAL HIGHWAY 520, 753 0. 00 487,224 BUILDING CODES Dues & Subscriptions 1, 200 0 Furniture & Equipment 800 0 Meetings & Training 1, 100 0 Office & Supplies 1, 200 0 Outside Services 35, 000 0 Personnel 128, 125 168, 800 Total Operating 167, 425 0. 00 168, 800 *Reserves* 0 0 TOTAL BUILDING CODES 167, 425 0. 00 168, 800 TOWN COUNCIL Interg. Liasion 3 , 000 1, 000 Meetings & Conferences 1, 500 1, 000 Memberships & Subsc. 4, 000 4, 000 Misc. Donations 200 200 OV Bikeathon 0 50 Pub. Liability Ins. 5, 000 2 , 000 Total Operating 13 , 700 0. 00 8, 250 *Reserves* 0 0 TOT. pu 13f " 0 Cou13 CIL Tor. R �,�, AFFIDAVIT OF BLICATION . r,niLUNA) ", . _, � .ss. / 7., COUNTY OF PIMA ) F P A NC E S E. A L E X'R N D E P being first duly sworn, deposes and says that (he)(she) is the Legal Advertising Manager of THE DAILY TERRITORIAL, a daily newspaper printed and published in the 1988 at the Oro Valley Town Hall, "—" fiscal ►avers and for ca- L E County of Pima, State of Arizona, and ofgeneral circulation in the budget for the 10900 N.Stallard Place,Suite 100!o- August 10,1988.This cated within the Foothills Business CE City of Tucson, mmence at or after Park,Oro Valley,Arizona. tdnesday,August 10, Members of the public are invited ,303 pr' to attend. ' County of Pima, State of Arizona and elsewhere, and the hereto attached EXPENDITURES t°E , 1r►SPY SC rIEDULE CF ESTI Y1AT`D PE E U Y a D PROCEEDS ' FROM TOTAL BUDGETED N SALE OR INTERFUNO FINANCIAL EXPENDITURES IF ` '�R ES - '� 1 REFUNDING TRANSFERS RESOURCES CURRENT p OF BONDS IN (OST) AVAILABLE YEAR 226$ -0- $-0- $-0- $3,995,226$ 3,995,226 4 907 515,695 515,695 was printed and published correctly in the regular and entire issue of said THE I/IlJJ:iri Ii'11 111/1111,1,'! r ///////////// //////////// r' t DAILY TERRITORIAL for issues;that the first was made on the I day of .1 19 d 3 111111111 ', i..;L. . ///////// and the last publication thereof was made on the day of 4 3 s -0 s -o,j...-o- s a.5a0 4.S1o.921 ��: M ,� 1 Current Fiscal Year that said publication 4510 921 was made on each of the following dates,to-wit: . ( -0- ) ftcrno2i 07/ j1/ .:16 J7 /08/38 Pee Eirlig.,,, expected to be mane for the rema inter of the fiscal yea.-. JUL ' • 1,`, 4•,,,4 •i m 4-(;1,r, r;;,w �'�; Request of �. ��� ORO A QRS Oro Valley CFVALLFY L Y ALLE' t AND TAX RATE INFORMATION Year 1988189 Daily ESTIMATED PREVIOUS CURRENT GcmGined with Daly Repaucr FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR :y \ c ,\ \c,..._k.\\ By i \_.\/A.U. , ) ,, 1 ' A Ckivis.ciLA k.),,_ e r t y I Year Subscribed and sworn to before me this r day of -J r Pvious iii 302.C.14) 19 llected -o- i 't. Notary- ublic in and for the County of Pima,State.of Arizona • leak C (114 4 --i Z rn r*I C) --1 r- O U) cto o x c, 0rv r m-I rt m y -T1 rt m VI Cr T o o c> (DCM (1) C -.0Ov ctCCoc 1Cx 0 •s0c+ Q-s .. o .s C70 I VI- a0. v M.0.) Q. U)CL0 a N I D c+ rD vt CL -S to -4 vn D v, -- 'T1 C, rD 4 --' I`r = CT -•r a r-- �l C1 --4 to "7 CT cC+ Cf < 70 -Ti 04 I C CuO o -s (+ C -. rD c C C C1-' -4 'T1 c._., t/)rD rD rD 0- cu C I= rD 'T C CDrD 4 0 `' to 0_ rpt < rD- c D rD c-t VIN p, C ? rD X r1 -s = 0_ (i) I rD VI 4/1 o _ Cl.. (.71 . w ry \ . x \ x -v �. -v Cry A 'z r n -r r- CO c7 1• 73 M C C3 �v CO A. O� rr i<o 0)CD rD x 0 rD c c VI "0 U)c+ CA -+,C L a o j• \�' J w CD►--•rn fT1 0 C 04N 0coca -4 - . 70O-ifirn CT -s o rD c N) F-' c c m v LI) ate,. \ cn rn v O rn av 0 0 rn I• �` A. VD N o rt n cn m C Cl..a I \�% $ C c+c+ v1 0 r- -s rt 0 rn m •-• \ r+ rD c+ x x \...., 4+ 0 a o f c P tl44 -.raj CDD -1 1 �, X N. r*�rD r+ 0 0 y i �, Z7't7 C1 3 X C].rD -+.C1 C1 -i (• \�� LI (,�) 7C7 rT1 •-<m Z C7 fa) �. 0.0 ......a. ..... I. 1.0 �/) �, 03 rn o c c+ rt r9 m 00 ►A rD CL O X r'-i C C 0 . , 7O CD-I> C 0 c+ 0 c+ C1.'C X ..--.-. "S -S O -i• rD n rt rD rD C) I \ : ,\ O '. *c c r 3 4) -+rD u) vi 6.4.4. t/)rn - \ CO �] 7v a I � N C C) C1 rD C 0 c.... r -s O C 4, CD CO CO --'•rD cn to C/) 1--, "71 m r 2 = -`. O 3.to r+ o ► -C C) -•>�1 rn v rD I• c -� O. I N '� rn c z z c to H rt. Ca. I • O 7�O7�o�m2r*� r... 0 CD -... 1 rn Z C7 "� rnZ 00 C:7 CT T3 1:: a \\\\ 00 O a. rn -‹ rD cD tI I \\,\\, o __- Oa.O-s mZxrnrn --i = I \\\\ Ic+ I � �7Zc 7:3 c--) rn \\\\ -4 rn �-i v C 23 I rD .11 \\,\\ .. fTl N Z - o I Ul c _ b� 0 Z m -,. in • I O o ',• N 0mmcn m �+ -<C � -1 o m -i • 1' N -Cs i I A. CD (11 c (.71 X ren Z~ CD N) -z co (n (•Tt m --1 c> Z 0 41111 • C) I v)-i"IC=m m C 3 Z C7 rn x O N x - C -0 13 rn \\,\\ 4" CD 70 to 'V = i.. h. �� VI :) 11 ���� '11 m> p n c . \\,\\ Crsr-77o ..... 1 ui �-i 11 . \\\� wcrn n CO 0 • �`�� p zv003m CO I O -� i \\,\\, I N Z o m CT rD c+ I \\\\, C) t/'1 N I-'I-' I--' \\� 4 4 I R. I O ` O --1•-� II \ I �-zi O \ m C r S I \ I 7v z O I 'I b., >70'n A. m. .-•i a I w -2.Cnz0 rD o e -z 1, V I-' I-, 1/40 2 73 C)r- 04 O 01 01 WC) •-i ,,f 7 V'0 I .... . rt 0, •1 10 cn N m cn rn (J1 01 ? � 117' q.44444 lfl N ,00 41.1 cmc3 (" a �+• W -< C z `r \`., LP lfl m Z7 C7 m +�.��� . I O \-` Ui ui 70 Z---1 rMn • ...., q N) 01 01 • r rREL1M1NARy City/Town of Oro Valley 0' \ ._ç1 . RECE1VEDSUMt1RY OF TAX LEVY AND TAX RATE INFORMATION Fiscal Year 1988/89 JUL 1 TOWN of ORO VALLEY ESTIMATED PREVIOUS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR 1 . Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (A.R.S. §42-301 .A) $ -0- 2. Amount Received from Primary Property Taxation in the Previous Fiscal Year in Excess of the Sum of the Previous Year' s Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (A.R.S. §42-302.C. 14) and Amount of Escaped Taxes Collected (A.R.S. §42-236) . $ -0- 3. Property Tax Levy Amounts A. Primary Property Taxes $ $ B. Secondary Property Taxes Total Secondary Property Taxes $ g C. Total Property Tax Levy Amounts $ -0- $ -0- 4. Property Taxes Collected A. Primary Property Taxes Previous Year' s Levy $ Prior Years ' Levies $ Total Primary Property Taxes $ B. Secondary Property Taxes Previous Year' s Levy $ Prior Years ' Levies $ Total Secondary Property Taxes $ C. Total Property Taxes Collected $ -0- * Includes actual property taxes collected as of the date of the proposed budget and the property taxes expected to be collected for the remainder of the fiscal year. SCHEDULE 8 (1 of 2) r� pRELI MINARY 1 • City/Town of oro Valley ; RECEIVJYARY OF TAX LEVY AND TAX RATE INFORMATION ` i JUL1 1 Fiscal Year 1988/89 7988 TOWN of ORO VALLEY ESTIMATED PREVIOUS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR 5. Property Tax Rates A. City/Town Tax Rate Primary Property Tax Rate $ $ Secondary Property Tax Rates Total City/Town Tax Rate $ -0- $ -0- B. Special District Tax Rates Secondary Property Tax Rates $ $ -:il.i.t *• :.-4 ' :'''' ..:,,,.,wt ,...,,. . ,,,, i. ..:i.:-1%. f:•:;:.: ' ' i ✓ l ,ge.5.14p. f•i .*,:, .-.. ..11, ,„..% , ..,, , - ,�rrw . r•- t tri?{, ,i* ' e. •4 )I.i r. • V14 1 l • t. • r r'!':%•''',. % • ,,... 'frifi:-.4: !,,, . 4.`ri.;;:p ' .�K•�A'ft i'9,:,c•A's 4 4,411 y y,. X44 P: r?.;'"*. : J..„...:,!,..„,::,., ; '•-J - SCHEDULE 6 (2 of 2) PuIN 010 I:71 MA111111111‘,/ City/Town of Oro Valley I n LLI WI I min 1 SUMMARY BY FUND OF REVENUES OTHER THAN PROPERTY TAXES1:) + Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED ACTUAL ESTIMATED SOURCE OF REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR GENERAL FUND Local taxes City Sales Tax $ 1,480,322 $ 852,000 978,000 Renters Tax 32,000 56,580 54,600 Cable TV 3,000 6,552 - 6,000 Licenses and permits Business Licenses 7,000 9,768 8,500 Building Permits 577,000 535,320 400,000 Intergovernmental revenues Federal 5,000 9,768 -0- State 313,086 313,068 365 126 Count ' y 38,000 52,764 55,000 Charges for services Zoning Applications 300,000 276,324 165,000 Fines and forfeits 210,000 274,332 350,000 Interest on investments 80,000 123,528 118,000 In-lieu property taxes -0- -0- -0- 8oluntary contributions 83, ,>► Z I iri 1-.4 or � QM Miscellaneous revenues Is 7 11,165 17,112 55,000 4 Carry Forward 956,623 956,623 1,440,000 f- Total General Fund $ 4,013,196 $ 3,483 739 . $ 3,9951226 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ 223,248 $ 233,567 Total Highway Users Revenue Fund $ �' 232,889 $ 223 24 � l 8 $ 233,567 \ \. )1 * Includes actual revenues received as of the date of the proposed � � � i estimated revenues . budget and the u, expected to be received for the remainder of the fiscal year. L..... SCHEDULE C Clof c, r 2) m CD -.1 ,„„ ART.,, City/Town of orn Val ley SUMMARY BY FUND OF REVENUE . . ' S OTHER THAN PROPERTY TAXE (4r �- S Fiscal Year 1988/89 ll< ESTIMATED ACTUAL ESTIMATED SOURCE OF REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR i Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ 29,852 $ 46,340 Total Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ 29,852 ,ocal Sts. & Rds. Rev: Interest $ 46,340 3,000 1,000 1,000 Miscellaneous $ 500 $ 57,000 $ 5,000 -Permits 500 3,948 10,000 Carry Forward 213,890 213,890 219,788 Total Special Revenue Funds $ 487,224 $ 528,938 515,695 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS $ $ $ Total Debt Service Funds $ $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS $ $ $ Q � 14 Total Capital Projects :ib ;i! Funds LU U " o ENTERPRISE FUNDS Cti SI t r $ $ $ a Total Enterprise Funds $ $ $ EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ Total Expendable Trust Funds $ $ $ 4, F- NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ .,..iit•', - "2,17: ..,.:,:i. . fvK,ii*: • otal Nonexpendable '...-.1C, � i: ` Trust Funds $ tr:J.;: * ,_, CZ W 4".. ,;!1.1' it.t .41 -.:, ,- TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ 4,500,420 $ 4 4 1 i, r• g ,0121677 $ ,5 0,921 ,, om.. •� � •�. .. ..h o .� * Includes actual revenues received as of the date of theli proposed p p sed and the estimated revenues expected to be received budget o w e ed for the remainder of the fiscal year. T o +— SCHEDULE C (2 of 2) a. CO H- 4 GRELIMINARY City/Town of pro Valley SUMMARY BY FUND OF BOND PROCEEDS AND INTERFUND TRANSFERS Fiscal Year 1988/89 REG€Jw /0.-) JUL 1 '1 1988 PROCEEDS FROM SALE OR INTERFUND TOWN of. ORO VALL Y REFUNDING TRANSFERS FUND OF BONDS IN (OUT) GENERAL FUND $ SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Total Special Revenue Funds $ $ DEBT SERVICE FUNDS �~ .• Total Debt Service Funds $ $ t • CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Total Capital Projects Funds $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS Total Enterprise Funds $ $ EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS Total Expendable Trust Funds $ NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS Total Nonexpendable Trust Funds $ TOTAL ALL FUNDS` * � ; ��� ,.r,.. i .,t ,,,,.�_ _0_ $ —0— $ _0_ 4.445," SCHEDULE D 1 • 0 aRELIMINARY. City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURES WITHIN EACH FUND i °Psi/ RECEIVED Fiscal Year 1988/89 4P n7 JUL ,1 �� $ (CONTINGENCY) L x__. ADOPTED EMERGENCY BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ACTUAL BUDGETED FUND4OWN of OKQ VMEENDITURES APPROVED EXPENDITURES N ITURES EXPENDITURES DEPARTMENT PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR GENERAL FUND Ru i l d i n g Codes $ -0-* $ $ 197,364 167,425 Capital Improverrnts 100,000 49,560 100 000 Court 211,355 ' 206,365 264,188 _ nera 1 Adm n i st-rat-,on 98,000 99,300 98,836 Mayor X Council 9,000 9,420 13,700 Planning k Zoning 93,535 50,000 145,752 156,080 Polire 1,102,800 920,640 1,319,950 950 Town Attorney 55,480 25,000 72,420 93,348 Town Clerk 392,269 287,592 187,368 Town Manager 65,960 56,484 92,191 Contingency 1,884,797 320,000 1,502,140 *In Clerk's Budget Total General Fund $4,013,196 $ 75,000 $ 2,364,897 $ 3,995,226 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ $ $ 233,567 Total Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ $ $ 233,567 ,Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ $ $ 46,340 Total Local Transportation • Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ $ $ 46,340 * Includes actual expenditures as of the date of the proposed budget and expenditures expected to be made for the remainder of the fiscaly ear. SCHEDULE E (1 of 2) nRELIMINARY , REL1MINARYM City/Town of Oro Valley r Q S WITHIN EACH SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURES FUND , 1/ A s,:yRECE SEgi) Fiscal Year 198 -�? . ea 8 89 (61 --iY))‘ i00,94, (Contingency) s, JUL 1. ;i 1YDOPTED EMERGENCY BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ACTUAL BUDGETED FUND/ NDITURES APPROVED N of ORO V EXPENDITURES EXPEND DEPARTMER'�� EVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUSYEAR* I TURES YEAR PREVIOUS CURRENT YEAR Streets & Roads $ 217,890 $ 245,000 $ 318,048 $ 235,788 Total Special Revenue Funds $ 487,224 $ 245,000 $ 318,048 $ 515,695 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS $ $ $ Total Debt Service Funds $ $ $ I CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS $ $ $ Total Capital Projects Funds $ $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS $ $ $ Total Enterprise Funds $ $ $ EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ Total Expendable Trust Funds $ $ NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ Total Nonexpendable Trust Funds $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ 4scnn $ "120,non $ 2,682,945 $ 4,51 n,9?_1 * Includes actual expenditures as of the date of the proposed budget and expenditures expected to be made for the remainder of the fiscal .Y ear. PUB: The Daily Territorial SCHEDULE E (2 of 2) July 1, 8, 1988 REQ: Kathryn Cuve l ier, Town Clerk 0111o ,.... ro ,, I. v. ,, ., it" i, 0,- • .,t,, � 914 r FOOTHILLS BUSINESS PARK 10900 NORTH STALLARD PLACE-SUITE 100 in ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737 (602) 297-2591 . le' IF -V . • 44, ' # z o P March 5, 1990 Ms. Kathleen Sprinkle State of Arizona Auditor General Office 2700 N. Central Avenue, Suite 700 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Dear Ms. Sprinkle: As requested, enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 346 approving the adoption of the Oro Valley Final Budget for Fiscal year 1988/89. A copy of the final budget is also enclosed. Sincerely, I thryn uvelier, g CMC Town Clerk enc. E.S "STEVE"ENGLE,Mayor CATHY HUFAULT,Vice Mayor CHERYL SKALSKY,Counciimember STEPHEN E.RENNECKAR,Councilmember WILLIAM H.SCROGGINS,III,Councilmember JON L DEVNER,Town Manager RECE1V0 � ' PROPERTY TAY OVERSIGHT COMMISSION EP �"�� REVENUE BUILDING • 1600 WEST MONROE • PHOENIX, AZ 35007 2 7 1988 :rowN of 0RO VA LLEY ROSE MOFFORD PAUL WADDELL Chairman Governor ALAN MAGUIRE Member JOHN B. STITELER Member September 22, 1988 Jon Devner, Town Manager Town of Oro Valley 10900 N. Stallard Place Suite 100 Tucson, AZ 85737 Dear Mr. Devner: On behalf of the Property Tax Oversight Comission, I would like to thankou for providingcopyyour us with a ofbudget. y Upon review, the Commission has determined that all requirements as indicated in A.R.S. 42-302 have been satisfied. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Elaine Jdinsen Research & Statistical Analyst II PTOC Staff EJ:rd A,_,,, z -1-4)(50 a.,,..641 Prt-t-A-42,C-Lalf ._. r 60-ei. stee-aitivca /4_6,0 rz.._\// --""7-a ) - r. Y� , I I . • . . . .. .. ,............. ......,.•..,......_ . ... ),.1. " e,,, , . ,,.,,. • ,,••• '..4-1,-,;(:-. 1"'' t51/2.67: ,--41,,,,,,''''..."''' ..0:4'' -**'"'er''''Cl44,,,,4'17 . .*:jetit,,,,f + QI4-14,41, ... '1),:-....7.k„::.:;Z,,,,,,...4::;"..,. .'..,..,....t.-,,,.1 6,4,'-i, 1,, -t,,..,,,, t„.. ,:;-;4.-4,,e 4..,...re,,,,,t _ , —,,,,'"i ,,,,,,,,, e, : 1 i(' , Y i Ff * ii.. : ., '10 ,-...."4,,l't,,,:—..P.L.,& ,,,,- - i....,, ,-., ,,,,,,,,,, • , 4., ,, ,' '-'.' '-', --,7- .\-' : % ,---- --- -,,,,.„.,,,, ---- ,„,, -•414 .....4, ,e,'w • .,, „....,,_,. .,,,-, •) Li—,...c.22-41/ ;...,.,.., i......................s......u....................,.......... . ,..- ( ,, ,,, : \ •:,...-- .....• •._,.......,...•____.........„.„.,.. ,‘ ..„ i i I el.14:tt.-.444.4e: . . .,...,........._.....„....,........ ....... ..,....._......_______..........................._,.................._._.......____ .......................,..........„.....,....._,.....___________ ,............................,.__...........,...,............._...... I _ 7 ---) _ .._ ____ .. . . _ _._ ....... . 4,.........- ,...m.. ....1,,, ..-- .,.. ,,-,.,-,,,----,,....., ,r,„.„,„ ,„,..0- . .._. ..) i :,...,--,•-? .--i , ----- 1 • - . _ _ ._____________....__._________.., ,_ ., ..„. , ....,.............___.,........„...._................„......,,___,..,....._______________________,..,.....,....._•„ _.... , ..., .,.... .........,..... _ . . . . ...,.,._ . „ .. .,...___..... 4.:2,.. x.,, ,1, , ,2 , , ...„,—. --/-0 ' I___________________ _............___________._,............•....,_________,.......• _..,, _,....• ______ ., _ . ,.,_ __... , . , ___ _ , . ..................................,..........____________ .11•. . ., . _ _......................„.,_____„•,.....___.......,.........................,....... .....„...........__________________.........................................____________ „.......... ...... .....,...........,...... ..,......_________. 1 . .. • ...............................________________•_____ ........._,___,______•,....... .... . . _ ............_ ............______ .....___.__.__.....________,__,„...._.______..... _____. •...,...... ......___ . .. , .. . ._ ......... - ....._......... ...... . ____________________________ ....,.............................„,„„_______.•_........... . _.._._.___.......,..._.._._......_,____._._.....____...........________.....___•_____.._..„,,......., ________,....... _.• _ , .....________________________ ........._________________________..,.......,_,.............___________________,___________________________________________..........„................_______________•............. ......._... ..................„_________________________________________________________ ..................______________,„_......................___.....„_____._• . ..____________________...„,................._____ ....____,_________._._._________.__________________.________________,............. •........._....... ....___, ........_. ...........„... .... . ....._ , .........._ _______ ..____,...,. _____,.. ..............,........ , _ ..... . .....• . ••...•... . _. _ ___________________________________ ........_.„___________________________________.___ _ _____________• ............. ____ ..___.,....•_.... .........., ,...... _ ,..._. ,......___.______ _ _, ...... _ .,__..... __ . 1 HCO02 ,iii1 sie;'jtk`41111111h.* 0 irki,:iii 1 �c`, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ,� 1600 WEST MONROE•PHOENIX,ARIZONA 85007 ROSE MOFFORD PAUL WADDELL Governor Acting Director RECEIVED May 9, 1988 MAY 2 5 1988 TOWN of ORO VALE City/Town Managers and Clerks City/Town Finance Directors Re: Preliminary Estimated FY 1988--89 Sales and Income Tax Distributions The enclosed pages show the preliminary estimates of 1988-89 state sales and income tax distributions to cities and towns. Please remember that these sales tax estimates correspond to Department of Revenue collections between July 1, 1988 and June 30, 1989. Some question may arise when verifying the distribution amounts to a particular city/town. The amount the Department calculates will differ from the amount calculated directly from the numbers shown. The reason for this is becausethe population percentage of total shown is a round number, while the population percentage of total used is not. All the calculations are on the computer which carries out a decimal to an infinitesimal amount. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Harry Cordova at 255-3887. Sincerely, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ....z.1.9 ,,,, ‹..., (......_)0....0-4.e.,—,---k., Paul Waddell , Acting Director PW:HC:nw Enclosures OTHER LOCATION:402 W. CONGRESS,TUCSON,AZ 85701 FISCAL. YEAR 1988-89: PREI.IMINARY ESTIMATE (F DISTRIB TION (F STATE SALES & INCOME TAX TO MUNICIPALITIES* ESTIMATED ESTIMATED 88/89 88/89 % OF SALES TAX URBAN REVENL E COUNTY MUNICIPALITY POPULATION* TOTAL DISTRIBUTION SHARING «rr.r___r__rw.w..rr___w______..r____-w._rr__.ir _-________M__row.r_ s_.r__rr____ APACHE EAGAR 4,001 0.1645% $239,342 $2,16,804 SPRINGERVILLE 1,879 0.0773% $112,403 $111,211 ST. JOHNS 3,368 0.1385% $201,476 $199,339 COCHI Sa BENSON 4,251 0.1748% $254,297 $251,601 BISBEE 7,154 0.2941% $427,956 $423,418 DOUGLAS 13,058 0.5369% $781,137 $772,853 4JACHUCA CITY 1,661 0.0683% $99,362 $'l,308 SIERRA VISTA 28,788 1.1836% $1,722,115 $1,703,852 TOMBSTONE 1,632 0.0671% $97,627 $%,592 WILLCOX 3,243 0.1333% $193,998 $191,941 COCONINO NO FLAGSTAFF 38,247 1.5725% $2,287,958 $2,263,694 FREDONIA 1,040 0.0428% $62,213 $61,554 PAGE 6,469 0.2660% $386,979 $382,875 WILLIA1 S 2,266 0.0932% $135,553 553 $134,116 GILA GLOBE 6,886 0.2831% $411,925 5 $407,556 PA YDEN 1,205 0.0495% $72,084 $71,319 MIAMI 2,716 0.1117% $162,473 $160,750 PAY9ON 7,003 0.2879% $418,924 $414,481 W INHELMAN 1,060 0.0436% $63,410 $62,737 GRAHAM PIM 1,599 0..06:7% $95,653 $34,633 SAFFORD 7,010 0.2882% $419,342 $414,895 THATCHER 3,436 0.1413% $205,544 $203,364 GREEt&EE CLIFTON 4,245 0.1745% *253,938 $251,245 DUNCAN 603 0.0248% $36,072 $35,689 LA PAZ PARHER 2,542 0.1045% $152,(64 $150,451 MAR I COPA AVONDALE 3,704 0.3990% $580,499 $574,344 BUCKEYE 3,779 0.1554% $226,062 $223,665 CAREFREE 1,518 0.0629% $90,808 $89,845 CAVE CREEK 2,301 0.0946% $137,647 $135,187 CHANDLER 63,817 2.6238% $3,817,570 $3,777,035 EL MI RAGE 4,307 0.1771% $257,647 $254,915 GILA BEND 1,999 0.0822% $119,581 $118,313 GI LBER T 12,102 0.4976% $723,949 $716,271 GLENDALE 122,392 5.0320% $7,321,561 $7,243,917 GOODYEAR 4,598 0.1890% $275,055 $272,138 GUADALUPE 4,609 0.1895% $275,713 $272.789 MESA 239,587 9.8503% $14,332,235 $14,180,243 PARADISE VALLEY 11,818 0.4859% $706,961 $699,462 PEORIA 27,598 1.1347% $1,650,929 $1,633,421 PHOENIX 881,640 36.2476% $52,740,223 $52,180,917 0 r-7 SCOTTSDALE 108,447 4.4587% $6,487,363 $6,418,565 SURPRISE 4,020 0.1653% $240,479 $237,929 TEMPE 132,942 5.4658% $7,952,669 $7,868,331 TOLLESDI 4,438 0.1825% $265,484 $262,668 WICKENBURS 3,925 0.1614% $234,796 $232,306 YOUNGTOWN 2,287 0.0940% $136,810 $135,359 MOHAVE &JW€AD CI TY 17,091 0.7027% $1,022,394 $1,011,551 COLORADO CITY 2,099 0.0863% $125,563 $124,232 KINGMAN 10,428 0.4287% $623,809 $617,194 LAKE HAVASU CITY 17,749 0.7297% $1,061,756 $1,050,496 NAVAJO 101.BROOK 5,785 0.2378% $346,062 $342,392 P I NETOP-LAKESI DE 2,389 0.0982% $142,911 $141,396 SHOW LOW 5,027 0.2067% $300,718 $297,529 SNOUFLAKE 3,656 0.1503% $218,704 $216,385 TAYLOR 2,006 0.0825% $120,000 $118,728 WINSLOW 7,921 0.3257% $473,839 $468,814 PIMA *IRANI 1,674 0.0688% $100,140 $99,078 ORO VALLEY 3,108 0.1278% $185,922 $183,951 SOUTH TUCSON 6,554 0.2695% $392,064 $387,906 TUCSON 364,766 14.9969% $21,820,516 $21,589,112 PINAL PAM JUNCTION 14,279 0.5871% $854,178 $845,120 CASA GRANDE 15,647 0.6433% $936,0j3 $926,086 COOLIDGE 6,851 0.2817% $409,831 $405,485 ELOY 6,240 0.2566% $373,280 $369,322 FLORENCE 6,094 0.2505% $364,547 $360,681 KEARNY 2,646 0.1038% $158,285 $156,607 MAMMOTH 1,906 O.0784% $114,018 $112,809 SUPERIOR 4,600 0.1891% $275,175 $272,256 SANTA CRUZ NOGALES 15,683 0.6448% $938,166 $928,217 PATPEON I A 980 0.0403% $58,624 $58,002 YAVAPAI CAMP VERDE 5,850 0.2405% $349,950 $346,239 CHINO VALLEY 3,817 0.1569% *228,335 $225,914 CLARKDALE 1,696 0.0697% $101,456 $100,380 COTTONWOOD 5,009 0.2059% $299,641 $296,464 JEROME 470 0.0193% *28,116 $27,813 PRESCOTT 21,335 0.8772% *1,276,272 $1,262,737 PRESCOTT VALLEY 5,471 0.2249% $327,278 $323,808 SEDONI 5,319 0.2197% $318,186 $314,811 YUMA SAN LUIS 2,809 0.1155% $168,036 $166,254 SOMERTON 4,381 0.1801% $262,074 $259,295 WELLTON 940 0.0386% $56,231 $55,635 YUrf) 46,807 1.9244% $2,800,022 $2,770,328 TOTAL 2,432,273 100.0000% $145,500,000 $143,956,934 * SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE to 14 4A Ill" F THE A LE G UEF ARIZONAO CITII1WNS '< 1820 WEST WASHINGTON ST, • PHOENIX ARIZONA 85007 • P — ,ha;r H. (602) 258 5786 APR 7 1988 April 6, 1988 TOWN of ORO VALLE1 TO: Selected City/Town Managers or Clerks and Finance Directors FROM: Jeff Martin, Senior Staff Associate SUBJECT: PROPOSED NEW BUDGET FORMS FOR FY 88-89 As you may know, the Arizona Finance Officers Association (AFOA) is very concerned with the changes proposed by the Auditor General's office to the budget forms for cities and towns. At the recent annual meeting of the AFOA, there were a tremendous number of concerns and questions raised over the proposed changes to the budget forms. In follow-up to the meeting, Bob DePoy, president of the AFOA, has sent a letter to the Auditor General's office detailing the concerns raised at the conference. A copy of the letter is enclosed. Because there were so many unanswered questions and concerns raised at the workshop, the attendees voted unanimously to pledge their cooperation to work with the Auditor General's office and establish a committee on the proposed new budget forms. The attendees also voted to urge continued use of the current forms for next fiscal year, subject to changes required by statute. We do not know how the Auditor General's office will respond to the concerns raised by the AFOA. The Auditor General's office is attempting to make any "necessary" revisions to the forms and send them out later this month. If you share the concerns expressed by the AFOA over the proposed changes, we suggest you contact the Auditor General's office at your earliest convenience. pV KIN 4.. . il iho--+A, c7 'iew 1 7 1. - -, ..........t * ,,p,.. ..-- --,/41,041, ep. 04 . ,/ / 4 .. ��'DE� .310 NORTH F 0 _cT K •1 I ,,I:1% 1' •• K i t t r:�l.x.'N •• -.., . , •_A • ,r ; • - -- March 31 , 1988 Mr. Robert A. Alexander Accounting Services Director Office of the Auditor General 2700 North Central Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Dear Mr. Alexander: As president of the Arizona Finance Officers Association (AFOA), I must convey to you the many concerns this association has with the proposed new budget forms for cities and towns. I understand from your discussion of the proposed forms with Jeff Martin of the League that you requested comments be provided to you in writing and this letter is in follow up to that request. The AFOA appreciates the presentation made by your staff on the proposed new budget forms. There were, however, a tremendous number of questions and con- cerns raised by the finance officers at the workshop on the new forms. A listing of these comments is attached. Because there were so many unanswered questions and concerns raised at the workshop, the attendees voted unanimously to pledge their cooperation to work with the Auditor General 's office and establish a committee on the proposed new budget forms. The attendees also voted to urge continued use of the cur- rent forms for this year, subject to changes required by statute. I understand that you and your staff have been working on the changes to the proposed budget forms for over a year and that you were disappointed with not receiving more written comments on the forms prior to the workshop. However, since a discussion of the proposed Changes was listed as a workshop at the recent AFOA conference, the finance officers felt they could make their com- ments at that time. As you know, many cities and towns will begin adopting their tentative budget next month. Quite frankly, I do not believe there will be enough time for your office to revise the forms and give our committee an opportunity to meet and comment on the revisions. We understand that the Auditor General 's office is responsible for the development of the budget forms. However, we do not feel it is in the best interest of the taxpaying public to provide them with budgets intended for their use which are confusing, even to experienced municipal finance officers. "GATEWAY TO THE FABULOUS RECREATIONAL AREA OF HOOVER AND DAVIS DAMS" Mr. Robert A. Alexander March 31 , 1988 Page 2 The AFOA is committed to working with you and your office on the proposed new budget forms. Many of the changes to the forms conceptually make a great deal of sense , however, we do believe extensive revisions to the forms are necessary. On behalf of municipal finance officers across the state, I look forward to working with you on the proposed changes to the budget forms . I believe you will find our comments quite helpful in the development of new budget forms. If you have any questions on our comments, please give me a call at 753-5561 . I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you on the proposed new forms. Sincerely, (./ a6(;) �bert J 1Poy finance Director, City of Kingman President, Arizona Finance Officers Association RJD:lkk cc: City and Town Finance Directors 2 COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS ON PROPOSED NEW BUDGET FORMS GENERAL COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED NEW BUDGET FORMS The purpose of the budget law, as interpreted in numerous Arizona court decisions, is to advise taxpayers of anticipated expenditures and to allow taxpayers an opportunity to object to any proposed expenditure (City of Phoenix v. Kidd, 54 Ariz. 75 and City of Tucson v. Tucson Sunshine Climate Club 64, Ariz. 1). Any changes to the budget forms should be to simplify them and make them easier to be read by taxpayers. The proposed changes to the budget forms unfortunately make the forms more complicated. These changes would lengthen the budget bythree pages p ges an d add a number of terms that the public will not understand. Two of the proposed budget forms in particular, Schedules A and C, are, in our opinion, overly complicated with the addition of the proposed changes. The inclusion of additional information on Schedule A places too much data on oneg a e P and will make it more difficult to read the form. Schedule C has been completely P Y reorganized, however, the change will mean valuable information will not be included on the form. Taxpayers will not be able to determine how much revenue is anticipated from other levels of government. The current forms are much simpler and easier to understand since revenues are listed by source. We hope the following questions and comments are valuable to you in the development of new forms. We do believe that many of the intended changes to the forms can be made without complicating the budget forms, and we will work with the Auditor General's office to that end. RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION OF BUDGET o References to property taxes in the resolution should be highlighted so that cities and towns that do not impose a property tax may delete this reference. Thirty-five of the eighty-three incorporated cities do not impose a property tax. o Reference should be made to hearing taxpayers on the proposed budget pursuant to Section 42 - 302 (F) A.R.S. as follows: Paragraph 3, line 4, after "of" insert: "hearing taxpayers and" INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FORMS o A number of definitions should be added to clarify terms used in the budget forms. Many of the persons who will be completing the forms do not have accounting backgrounds and definitions should be provided for the following terms. Expendable and Nonexpendable Trust Funds. Are these reserve funds? More explanation on what these are is needed. In - lieu , Jperty taxes. What does this iter,. include? Does this include vehicle license tax and voluntary contributions such as those made bySalt River Project in lieu of property taxes? • p pe y More explanation on this item is necessary. Special Revenue Funds. This seems to include highway user revenue and lottery funds. Are there other special funds that should be included and what funds would these include? More explanation of what these funds are is needed. o Pane 7, Paragraph 1. The levy limit worksheets referred to as provided by the Department of Revenue are provided by the county. o Page 7, Paragraph 3B. Reference to special assessment districts should be deleted. These districts are used by counties, not cities. o Page 8, Paragraph 5B. Again, special districts are used by the counties• this does not apply to cities and towns. o Page 9, Paragraph 3. Information on voluntary contributions are not provided by the Department of Revenue as suggested in this portion of the instructions. SCHEDULE A o This schedule has become unnecessarily complicated. Many taxpayers will not read past this page in our opinion. Columns 2 and 7 are (see comments below) unnecessary. o Column 1. This column heading should have the word "adopted" added so that it reads as it did in the current forms - Adopted Budgeted Expenditures Previous Year. o Column 2. This column is not necessary. Emergency expenditures rarely occur and if they do they would be reported in the UERS report. o Column 3. The work "actual" in this heading should be replaced with the word "estimated". Since the budget is completed before the end of the fiscal year, actual expenditures are not available and an estimate must be used. Referring to these expenditures in the forms as actual is not accurate since material amounts are expended during the last two months of a fiscal year. Referring to expenditures as actual amounts would be misleading to the public. o Column 5. Does this column refer to previous or current year direct property tax revenue? The instructions seem to refer to this as current year revenue and, if so, this should be labeled as such. Also this column has traditionally followed the general fund columns and we would suggest the column be moved to follow column 8 on interfund transfers. o Column 7. The information called for in this column heading entitled Proceeds From Sale Or Refunding Of Bonds should be listed as a revenue item in Schedule C. Placing this information on Schedule A only serves to make this form longer and more difficult to read. o Expendable and nonexpendable trust funds should be defined in the instructions. SCHEDULE B o Many of the cities and towns (36) will not need to publish this form since these communities do not levy a property tax. This form, as well as the instructions, should clearly state that it is only for those cities and towns that impose a property tax, and that other cities do not need to publish it. o The second column refers to actual amounts for the fiscal year but should be entitled, Estimate For Current Fiscal Year. Again, these figures can onlybe estimated and to refer to them as actual is misleading and simply not accurate. o Page 1, Paragraph 3B. This section of the form calls for secondaryproperty taxes and provides a number of lines P � y to list items along with, Total Secondary Property Taxes. Only one line is necessary since the city or town will only have one secondary levy. o Page 1, Paragraph 4. The references to property taxes in this section are inconsistent. In part A and B tax levy information is called for, however, part C calls for total property taxes collected while the title of the section also refers to collected property taxes. Property taxes collected and the amount levied will not be equal, and this may confuse the public unless this section is clarified. o Page 2, Paragraph 5A. Again, the additional lines listed under Secondary Property Tax Rates are unnecessary "Rates" and Rates in this title should be changed to rate. o Page 2, 5B. This section entitled, Special District Tax Rates, is not applicable to cities and towns. Again, cities do not have such districts. With the elimination of this section and by taking out the unneeded lines in 3B and 5A this schedule should fit on one page. SCHEDULE C o This schedule has been reorganized to list revenues by fund which may make good accounting sense, however, listing revenues by fund does not make good budgeting sense. Bylistingrevenues byfund, the forms are confusing in terms of where certain revenues should be listed (see comments on next page). Also the public will no longer be able to determine specifically icall how P Y much revenue has come from sources such as federal, state and county government. One of the primary purposes of the budget has been to show what the various sources of revenues are and in what amounts. Simply listing the source of such funds.Y the names of revenue funds will not indicate o Column 2. As in the case of the other schedules, actual revenue can not be T[ited for the previous year. The budget will be completed prior to the end of the fiscal year and, therefore, actual revenue information is not available and an estimate must be used. In most cases, ten-twelfths of actual revenue are known, however, in many cases over fifty percent of budgeted revenues are received in the last quarter of the year and are therefore material. This column should read, Estimated Revenues Previous Year, and Column I should read, Budgeted Revenues Previous Year, for consistency with Schedule E. o Page 1, Ir1__cgovernmental Revenues. It is not ,.,ear what revenues should be listed under this section of the schedule. These specific revenue sources should be discussed in the instructions. o Page 1, In-lieu property taxes. Again, it is not clear what revenues should be listed here. Further explanation is required along with specific examples. o Page 1, Voluntary Contributions. This section appears to call for contributions such as the in - lieu from Salt River Project. What is the difference between in lieu property taxes and voluntary contributions, and is the difference significant enough to require separate disclosure? o A separate fund group is needed for inter service funds. If these funds are not listed, the in - out interfund transfers will not balance. A number of the cities at the finance officers meeting commented on the need for inter service fund transfers to be disclosed in order to properly present their budget document. o Page 2, Special Revenue Funds. From an accounting standpoint, this section probably makes a great deal of sense, however, from a budgeting standpoint it makes more sense to list all state shared revenues together. Again, this gets back to the problem of listing revenues by fund. By doing so, it will be difficult for taxpayers to determine the source of revenues. Listing revenues by source, as we currently do, provides essential information to taxpayers. Again, the taxpayers are the users of this information and the forms should be developed for their use. o Page 2, Special Revenue Funds. Only one line is needed for listing highway user and lottery funds, and one page of this schedule could possibly be eliminated. SCHEDULE D o This schedule is not necessary in our opinion. Interfund transfers by fund are listed on Schedule A, and listing them a second time is duplicative. Taxpayers will not understand what an interfund transfer is, unless they have an accounting background. Providing additional detail and an extra form is only going to be confusing and reduce the number of citizens who will read the city's budget in the newspaper. Again, we must keep in mind the forms are published in the newspapers to be read by taxpayers. Making the forms unnecessarily long and more difficult to understand only makes them less "user friendly". Information on proceeds from sale or refunding of bonds is also listed on Schedule A and does not need to be repeated. In addition, many of the funds listed on Schedule D should never receive proceeds from bonds and therefore should not be listed. SCHEDULE E o Page 1, General Fund. The departments listed under general fund are not commonly used by most cities and towns. Eliminating the departments listed in favor of just providing space for the departments to be listed by the city or town would make more sense. o Pages 1-3. Summaries of expenditures by department will limit the information in this section of the budget. Expenditures by program should also be listed to more properly disclose the activities of the city or town. o Page 1, Column 3. An estimate of expenditures for the previous year should be listed here. Actual expenditure information for previous year is not available since the forms are completed prior to the end of the fiscalear. to the public. to such expenditures as actual is misleadingy o Page 2, Special Revenue Funds. Only one line is needed for highway user Y revenue and lottery funds. Reducing the number of lines for this section could reduce the number of the pages necessary for this schedule. Comments compiled from the workshop on the new budget forms at the Arizona Finance Officers Association Annual Conference held last week in Tucson. aa�rs.:^n`rwww»....,.....,.;.,v.:..s.,...w.rc+a.rwe.:_._.,__...._:..�,..,,,+Mr!!rye,.r.!►dtaa�itllfriiliiilY 7lYwf�If�YWMINMi.rYrf�tlrR/W�r/YYrr.w».rar�i.iYWru`+raYnfrWMa..ra.......,.......,1....,.+..r.,..•.rwaa..ry,wio wnw•earw+ .�flYylYfY'.;.. ...;.. ,-.a «..M.r r,'w� Ci*0_1fie, EE CO3 ii, ECONOMIC ESTIMR1S COMMISSION jIII REVENUE BUILDING r C. "NOS' HOSK1NS 1600 W. MONROE 'timov CheIrmen PNQENIH, ARIZONA 85007 ROBERT J. EGGERT,SR. EVAN MECUIIM Member GOVERNOR ELLIOTT D. POLLACK ROSE MOFFORO Member ACTING GOVERNOR March 23, 1988 RECEIVED MAR 2 8 1988 TOWN of oRo VALLEY CITY/TOWN MANAGERS AND FINANCE DIRECTORS RE: FINAL 1988-89 EXPENDITURE LIMITS The final 1988-89 expenditure limits for all cities and towns are being supplied in accordance with Article IX, Section 20 of the Arizona Constitution and A.R.S. 41-563. The 1979-80 base limit has been adjusted for changes in population and the cost of living between 1978 and 1987. The formula is shown below. Final GNP 1987 Implicit Price 1988-89 Population X Deflator 1987 1979-80 = Final 1978 GNP Implicit Base Limit Expenditure Population Price Deflator Limit 1978 Please call 255-3887 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ECONOMIC ESTIMATES COMMISSION i 4 / ` C. "Hos" Hoskins, Chairman CHH:nw Ec=onomic Estimates Cominlssloit • FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 FINAL EXPENDITURE LIMITS FOR MWICIPALITIES FINAL FY 1988-83 POPULATION*. POPULATION IIFLATION FY 1979-60 EXPENDITURE CITY 1987 1978 FACTOR FACTOR* MASE LI hi I T LIMITATION APACHE JUNCTION 15,485 9,MO 1.6300 1.6274 $1,581,484 $4,195,143 AVONDALE 11,475 5 6,900 1.6630 1.6274 $1,525,417 $4,128,445 BENSON 3,915 3,925 0.9975 1.6274 $1,317,815 $2,139,148 RI SSEE 8,060 6,860 1.1749 1.6274 $1,559,907 $2,982,661 BUCKEYE 4,027 3,175 1.2683 1.6274 $1,048,270 $2,163,741 BULLHEAD CITY 20,315 13,830 1.4689 1.6274 $5,493,553 $13,132,345 CAMP VERDE 5,::5 5,650 1.0416 1.6274 $2,072,112 $3,512,413 CAREFREE 1,610 1,744 0.9232 1.6274 $594,948 $893,825 CASA GRANDE 17,207 14,100 1.2204 1.6274 $3,743.397 $7,434,406 CAVE CREEK 2,410 2,025 1.1901 1.6274 $656,393 $1,271,307 CHANDLER 78,210 23,500 3.3281 1.6274 $7,245:,951 $39,244,981 CHINO VALLEY 4,340 2,400 1.8083 1.6274 $255,094 $750,711 CLARi{DALE 1,990 1,200 1.6583 1.6274 $255,,616 $689,849 CLIFTON 4,225 4,515 0.9358 1.6274 $656,956 $1,000,460 COLORADO CITY 2,290 1,730 1.3237 1.6274 $687,191 $1,480,338 COOL IDLE 7,491 6,775 1.1057 1.6274 $1,530,413 $2,753,807 COTTOWOOD 5,400 4,200 1.2857 1.6274 $1,105,601 $2,313,M8 DOUGLAS 14,090 12,600 1.1183 1.6274 $4,067,476 $7,402,182 DUNCAN 690 700 0.9857 1.6274 $177,389 $284,559 EAGAR 4,560 2,450 1.8612 1.6274 $627,268 $1,899,968 EL MIRAGE 4,290 4,025 1.0658 1.627 4 $774.680 $1,343,718 ELOY 7,I.5 6,300 1.1325 1.6274 $1,419,813 $2,616,850 FLAGSTAFF$*f 41,170 32,000 1.2:.6 1.6274 $17.968,474 $37,621,525 7 ,A,:.r..;a,.a • , „ „,„ Economk Estimates Commission FISC YEAR 1988-89 FINAL EXPENDITURE LIMITS FOR MUNICIPALITIES FINAL FY 1988-89 POPULATION** POPULATION MOTION FY 1979-80 EXPEMITURE CITY 1987 1978 FACTOR FACTOR* BASE LIMIT LIMITATION .0.••••••••• FLORENCE 6,690 3,175 2.1071 1.6274 $714,110 $2,448,735 FREDCNIA 1,285 850 1.5118 1.6274 $329,695 $811,131 GILA FEND 2,090 1,575 1.3270 1.6274 $684,678 $1,478,585 GILBERT 17,475 4,250 4.1118 1.6274 $1,161,450 $7,771,826 GLENDALE 136,315 84,000 1.6228 1.6274 $21,45,628 $56,663,044 GLOBE 6,455 6,550 0.9655 1.6274 $2,436,186 $3,907,147 GOODYEAR 5,665 2,500 2.2660 1.6274 $883,878 $3,259,467 GUADALUPE 4,720 4,300 1.0977 1.6274 $549,792 $962,124 HAYDEN 1,095 1,200 0.9125 1.6274 $408,838 $607,125 HOLBROOK 5,960 5,450 1.0936 1.6276 $2,585,121 $4,600,711 HUACHUCA CITY 2,115 1,690 1.2515 1.6274 3317,153 $645,932 JE ROME 490 395 1.2405 1.6274 3112,6:: $267,871 KEARNY 2,765 2,665 1.0375 1.6274 $950,057 $1,604,139 KINGMAN 11,322 8,745 1.2947 1.6274 34,426,468 $9,326,462 LAKE HAVASU CITY 19,530 13,000 1.5023 1.6274 $4,211,119 310,295,578 LI ICIC IELD PARK 3,835 3,835 1.0060 1.6274 $1,242,818 $2,022,562 MONTH 1,955 1,960 0.9974 1.6274 343,048 $689,959 MARANA 2,2% 1,425 1.6070 1.6274 $202,239 $528,908 tilESA 267,085 130,000 2.0545 1.6274 $54,090,640 3180,851,692 2,555 2,615 0.9771 1.6274 $878,262 $1,396,489 NOGALES 19,275 11,740 1.6418 1.6274 33,245,377 $8,671,331 ORO VALLEY 5,577 1,475 3.7810 1.6274 $272,317 11,675,628 ...............• • • .. ,,.• ....�.irr..:,,,..,....`.....+..:wy-�wca :.,.�. .;--�._:iKcv....M ..... - ... ...� .•..:M►+.r--�-�..--w.. • ' ••t..bF i �...q. ,.-..� .a.• .....err...a. Economies Estimates Commission FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 FIi41L. EXPENDITURE LIMITS FOR MtICI'ALITIES • FINAL FY 1988-,89 POPOWTION" POPULATION IIFLATION FY 1979-80 EXPENDITURE CITY 1987 1978 FACTOR FACTOR* BASE LI MIT LIMITATION PAGE 6,940 4,375 1.5863 1.6274 $3,381,616 $8,729,714 PARADISE VALLEY 11,905 10,425 1.1420 1.6274 $2,363,966 $4,393,280 PARKER 2,590 2,485 1.0423 1.6274 $1,145,364 $1,942,724 PATA6ON I A 1,155 925 1.2486 1.6274 $213,500 $433,843 PAYSON 7,445 4, 5 1.7294 1.6274 11,267,200 $3,566,633 PEORIA 36,350 10,500 3.4619 1.6274 $3,247,857 $18,298,114 PHOENIX 930,395 717,000 1.2976 1.6274 $229,200.,625 $484,014,443 PIMA 1,900 1,465 1.2969 1.6274 $275,,000 $580,421 P I NETOP-LAKESI OE 2,650 2,635 1.0057 1.6274 $1,214,814 $1,988,243 PRESCOTT 23,145 19,25) 1.2023 1.6274 $8,4E,931 $16,623,85 PRESCOTT VALLEY 7,315 1,520 4.8125 1.6274 $380. 054 $2,976,531 SAEFORD 7,740 6,200 1.2484 1.6274 $5,484,597 $11,142,645 SAN LUIS 3,165 1,690 1.8728 1.6274 $724, 909 $2,209,351 SCOTTSDALE 120,675 83,000 1.4539 1.6274 $31,361,444 $74,204,386 SENA 9,020 9,020 1.0000 1.6274 $3,308,730 $5,384,627 S1-134 LOW 5,410 3,800 1.4237 1.6274 11,443,667 $3,344,837 SIERRA VISTA 32,351 24,0W 1.3452 1.6274 15,020.502 $10,990,415 SNOWFLAKE 3,815 3,000 1.2717 1.6274 $741,469 $1,534,478 MERTON 4,580 3,540 1.2938 1.6274 $681.,742 $1,435,412 SOUTH TUCSON 6,745 6,275 1.0749 1.6:74 11,879,168 $3,287,215 SPRI NSERVI LLE 2,040 1,400 1.4571 1.6274 $678,299 $1,608,487 ST. JOHNS 3,875 4,100 0.9451 1.6274 $819,104 $1,259,857 SUPERIOR 4,800 4,700 1.0213 1.6274 $682,763 $1,134,770 .. .. - .� _ .......«w..wsa,•L �u4.nwtww...aZ,..- ,rrw,.. o..,.,.. .. .. +...�.....�...-.......rte....._.:..,_ .._�.,. .�.�.._-..a,._....�......-... ww•..srwrt�ta � +dirui°�i•.w, ►...:__,,.,_...,.e.. - • or...•anM �..►:a..+w nvnrYam. ' rilii..warkr isi iY .::..rM Ecoiwmic Estimates Conimissioit FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 FIN..L EXPENDI TITRE LIMITS FOR MUNICIPAL'TIES FINAL FY 1988-89 POPULATI CN'* POPLLAT ION 11MLATION FY 1979-80 EMU.) CITY 1987 1978 FACTOR FACTOR* BASE LIMIT LIMITATION �•4ri ww•��r w��.����r�M�•/r��•!.��y�r N rr N raryaw.�fr ii r���r.���.w.r�.ams•rr�••!�l.�•al��.r��.rrw�S+•iw.��a..a�aM.� SURPRISE 5,535 3,550 1.5592 1.6274 $474,998 $1,205,245 TAYLOR 2,035 1,740 1.1695 1.6274 $245,508 $467,278 TEMPE 141,270 102,000 1.3850 1.6274 $29,579,379 $66,670,412 THATCHER 3,470 3,170 1.0346 1.6274 $860,674 $1,533,216 TOLLESON 4,810 4,190 1.1480 1.6274 $966,494 $1,,805,612 TOMBSTONE 1,790 1,600 1.1188 1.6274 $508,007 $924,905 TOXON**f 406,277 311,400 1.3047 1.6274 $138,057,586 $293,213,544 WELLTON 995 900 1.1056 1.6274 $278,477 $501,031 W I CK ENBU R8 4,185 3,300 1.2682 1.6274 $1,605,966 $3,727,223 WILLCOX 3,935 2,985 1.3183 1.6274 $10,497,909 $22,521,511 WILLIAMS 2,450 2,100 1.1667 1.6274 $1,254,501 $2,381,837 W INKELMAN 945 1,010 0.9356 1.6274 1 183,579 $279,530 W I NSLOW 8,795 7,76 1.1385 1.6274 $4,995,579 $9,255,875 YOU TOWN 2,350 2,100 1.1190 1.6274 $559,874 $1,019,608 YUMA 49,109 34,500 1.4234 1.6274 $15,663,245 $36,264,241 T0Ta. 2,666,771 1,871,429 1.4250 $667,952,977 $1,544,637,504 * INFLATION FACTOR = (1987. GTP DEFLATOR)/(1978 GNP DEFLATOR) = 117.5/72. f* FIGURES AS OF JULY 1 (SOURCE: DEPT. OF ECMONI C SECURITY) *4* PERMANENT INCREASE IN BASE LIMIT APPROVED BY VOTERS IN FY 1987/88 SOURCE: EEC STAFF 3/23/88 HCOO2 IL' ‘ Iattle AMMEm14, $ il . .!"-",,,,,. iii ARILONA DEPARTMENT OF KEVENUE A) . t%,--4.1 4 1600 WEST MONROE" PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85O0 ***7:11;, ROSE MOFFORD PAUL WADDELL GOVERNOR ACTING DIRECTOR .1**.ek,„ June 30, 1988 _ .�«^ ��*� ~,�� �� ^m��. Skit9�, '' OF nm� ' '�A�^ .~° City/Town Managers and Clerks City/Town Finance Directors Re: Final Estimated FY I988-89 Sales and Income Tax Distributions The enclosed pages show the final estimates of 1988-89 state sales and income tax distributions to cities and towns . Please remember that these sales tax estimates correspond to Department of Revenue collections between July 1, I988 and June 30, 1989. Please note that the estimate does not reflect any legislative changes that are proposed but have not passed a this time. If any changes are passed which affect the city/town share of sales tax significantly, we will send a revised estimate. Some question may arise when verifying the distribution amounts to a particular city/town. The amount the Department calculates will differ from the amount calculated directly from the numbers shown. The reason for this is because the population percentage of total shown is a round number, while the population percentage of total used is not. All the calculations are on the computer which carries out a decimal to an infinitesimal nmount. If you have any questions , please feel free to contact Harry Cordova at 255-3887. Sincerely, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE -\ zr/f) Paul Waddell , Acting Director PW:HC:tg Enclosures OTHER LC; ..^ .`�'` -1:wYV. CONGRESS" TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701 . FIc5 YEAR 1988-89: Fir. ESTIMATE OF DISTRIBU'Tlel) STATE SALES & INCOME TAX TO MUNI CI PAL I T I ES ESTIMATED ESTIMATED .:189 W89 % OF SALES TAX URBAN REVENUE COUNTY MUNICIPALITY POPULAT ION TOTAL DISTRIBUTION SHARING M�r_M�_.AVM... .....wryN�...w�1��--��......�...!-____A_____......M--...wY APACHE EAGAR 4,001 0.1645% $236,875 $236,804 SPRINEERVILLE 1,879 0.0773% $111,244 $111,211 ST. JOHNS 3,368 0.1385% $199,399 $199,339 COCHI BENSON 4,251 0.1748% $251,676 $251,601 B I SBEE 7,154 0.2941% $423,545 $423,418 DOUGLAS 13,058 0.5369% $773,084 $772,853 H JACHUCA CITY 1,661 0.0683% $98,338 $98,308 SIERRA VISTA 28,788 1.1836% $1,704,361 $1,703,852 TOMBSTONE 1,632 0.0671% $96,621 $96,592 WILLCOX 3,243 0.1333% $191,998 $191,941 CONI NO FLAGSTAFF 38,247 1.5725% $2,264,371 $2,263,694 FREDONIA 1,040 0.0428% $61,572 $61,554 PAGE 6,469 0.2660% $382,990 $382,875 WILLIAMS 2,266 0.093'% $134,156 $134,116 GILA GLOBE 6,886 0.2831% $407,678 $407,5%,. HAYDEN 1,205 0.0495% $71,341 $71,319 MIAMI 2,716 0.1117% $160,798 $160,750 PAYSON 7,003 0.2879% 3414,605 $414,481 WINKELMAN 1,060 0.0436% $62,756 $62,737 GRAHAM PIMA 1,599 0.0657% $94,667 $94,639 SAFFORD 7,010 0.2882% $415,019 $414,895 THATCHER 3,436 0.1413% $203,425 $203,364 GRE NLEE CLIFTON 4,245 0.1745% $251,320 $251,245 DUNC144 603 0.0248% $35,700 $35,689 LA PAZ PARKER 2,542 0.1045% $150,496 $150,451 MAR I COPA AVONDALE 9,704 0.3990% $574,514 $574,343 BUCKEYE 3,779 0.1554% $223,731 $223,665 CAREFREE 1,518 0.0624% $89,871 $89,845 CAVE CREEK 2,301 4.0946% $136,228 $136,187 CHANDLER 63,817 2.6x38% $3,778,214 $3,777,085 EL MIRAGE4,307 0.1771% $254,991 $254,915 GILA BEND 1,999 0.0822% $118,349 $118,313 GILBERT 12,102 0.4976% $716,485 $716,271 GLENDALE 122,392 5.0320% $7,246,081 $7,243,917 GOODYEAR 4,`98 0.1890% $272,219 $272,138 GUADALUPE 4,609 0.1895% $272,871 $272,789 MESA 239,587 9.8503% $14,184,480 $14,180,243 PARADISE VALLEY 11,818 0.4859% $699,671 $699,462 PEORIA 27,598 1.1347% $1,633,909 $1,633,421 PHOENIX 881,640 36.24r 6% $52,196,509 $`2,180 917 EI YEAR 1988--89: FINAL ESTIMATE L OF DISTRIBUTI tr STATE SALES & INCCME TAX TO MUNICIPALITIES ESTIMATED ESTIMATED 88/89 88/89 % OF SALES TAX URBAN REVENUE CITY MUNI CI PALI TY POPULATION TOTAL DISTRIBUTION SHARI NG ATARI COPA SC3TTSDALE 108,447 4.4587% $6,420,483 $6,416,565 CON'T SURPRISE 4,020 0.1653% $238,00 0 $237,929 TEMPE 132,942 5.4658% $7,870,682 $7,868,331 TOLLESON 4,438 0.1825% $262,747 $262,668 WICKENBUR6 3,925 0.1614% $232,375 $232,306 YOUNGTOWN 2,287 0.0940% $135,399 $135,359 MOHAVE BULLHEAD CITY 17,091 0.7027% $1,011,854 $1,011,551 COLORADO CITY 2,099 0.0863% $124,269 $124,232 KINGPIN 10,428 0.4287% $617,378 $617,194 LAKE 1- VASU CITY 17,749 0.7297% $1,050,810 $1,050,496 NAVAJO HOLBROOK 5,785 0.2378% $342,494 $342,392 PINETOP-LAKESIDE 2,389 0.0382% $141,438 $141,396 SHOW LOW 5,027 0.2067% $297,618 $297,529 SNOWFLAKE 3,656 0.1503% $216,449 $216,385 TAYLOR 2,006 0.0825% $118,763 $118,728 WINSLOW 7,921 0.3257% $468,954 $468,814 PIMA MARANA 1,674 0.0688% $99,107 $99,078 ORO VALLEY 3,108 0.1278% $184,006 $183,951 SOUTH TUCSON 6,554 0.2695% $388,022 $387,906 TUCSON 364,766 14.9969% $21,595,563 $21,589,112 PINAL APACHE JUN T I ON 14,279 0.5871% $345,372 $845,120 CASA GRANDE 15,647 0.6433% $926,363 $926,086 COOLIDGE 6,851 0.2817% $405,606 $405,485 ELOY 6,240 0.2566% $369,432 $369,322 FLORENCE 6,094 0.2505% $360,7:; $360,681 KEARNY 2,646 0.1088% $156,653 $156,607 MOTH 1,906 0.0784% $112,843 $112,809 SUPERIOR 4,600 0.1891% $272,338 $272,256 SANTA CRUZ NALES 15,683 0.6448% $928,494 $928,217 PATAGONIA 980 0.0403% $58,020 $58,002 YAVAPAI CAMP VERDE 5,850 0.2405% $346,343 $346,239 CHINO VALLEY 3,817 0.1569% $225,981 $225,914 CLARKDALE 1,696 0.0697% $100,410 $100,380 COTTONWOOD 5,009 0.2059% $296,t52 $296,464 JEROME 470 0.0193% $27,626 $27,816 PRESCOTT 21,335 0.8772% $1,263,115 $1,262,737 PRESCOTT VALLEY 5,471 0.2249% $323,904 $323,808 SEDOOA 5,319 0.2187% $314,905 $314,811 YUMA SAN LUIS 2,609 0.1155% $166,304 $166,254 SOAERTON 4,381 0.1801% $259,372 $259,295 i ELLTON 940 0.0386% $55,652 $55,635 YUMlA 46,807 1.9244% $2,171,156 $2,770,328 TOTAL 2,432,273 100.0000% $144,000,000 $143,956,984 TAX PACKAGE HELPS CITIES, TOO S. 1261. TAX PACKAGE The tax package passed by the Legislature last night provides an increase in state shared revenues to cities and towns as well as providing the revenue to balance the state budget. The city share for 1988-89 will equal $4.4 million. The package in total raises about $200 million. Here's what the main features of the package are: 1. Property tax changes including an assessment ratio freeze at 1987 levels for utilities, a cap on homeowners' rebates at $500 and a tax on property in unorganized school districts (Sun City) for a total of $66.5 million. 2. For the sales tax, they closed several loopholes, increased the state tax on hotels and motels to 5/2% and rental of real property to 5% and capped the accounting allowance for businesses to collect the state sales tax at $500 for a total of $34.5 million. 3. For the income tax, they capped the windfall at 63%, repealed the gas tax deduction, made changes to the tax on corporate capital gains and controlled corporate dividends, imposed a minimum corporate tax and made several minor changes for a total of $64.4 million. 4. They increased the gas tax by one cent (this change was scheduled to go into effect in 1990); the entire amount goes to the state highway fund, not to the highway user revenue fund. They also increased the insurance premium tax for a total of $23.5 million. Obviously, all of the figures are estimates, including the city by city figures. We have attached an estimate of the increase for each city and town. If necessary, you will be allowed to do a one-time adjustment to your 1988-89 budget to reflect the increase. The additional amount should be added to the estimate of state shared sales tax sent to you by the Arizona Department of Revenue. The increase in the income tax will also be shared but not until FY 1991-92 due to the distribution formula. It's a pleasure to bring you some good financial news! . . . . NEW LAWS REPORT We will publish our summary of new laws of municipal interest as soon as possible. The Governor has ten days now that the Legislature has adjourned, to sign or veto the remaining bills, and it always takes a few days for the state printer to finish up. We will get the report to you as soon as we can, but since the general effective date of the new laws is September 30 you will have plenty of time to prepare. . . . . . COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS, CRITICISM We hope the Legislative Bulletin has been both interesting and informative to you during this 1988 session. Please let us know how we can make it better. Your comments, suggestions and criticism are always welcome. 43 ADDITIONAL AMOUNT FOR 1988-89 VA' tto STATE SALES TAX SHARE FOR CITIES AND TOWNS ' tit/Ail/ POPULATION X PER CAPITA FIGURE lv APACHE JUNCTION 14, 279 $ 26, 049 AVONDALE 9, 704 17, 703 BENSON 4, 251 7, 755 BISBEE 7, 154 13, 051 BUCKEYE 13, 779 6,894 BULLHEAD CITY 17, 091 10, b72 CAMP VERDE �' 18 2, 769 CAREFREE 15' 647 28' 544 CASA GRANDE CAVE CREEK 2, 301 4, 198 CHANDLER 63, 817 116, 419 CHINO VALLEY 3, 81 7 6, 963 CLARKDALE 1 , 696 3, 094 CLIFTON 4, 245 7, 744 COLORADO CITY 2, 0993, 829 COOLIDGE 6, 851 1 , 498 COTTONWOOD 5, 09 3' 2 DOUGLAS313, 058 2 DUNCAN 603 1, g1 100 EAGAR 4, 001 7, 899 EL MIRAGE 4, 307 ELOY 6, 240 11, 383 FLAGSTAFF 38, 247 69, 773 , 7 11, 117 FLORENCE 6' 4' 1, 897 1 FREDONIA ' D0 3 67 GILA BEND 1, 999 GILBERT 121 22' 1022 223' �75 77 GLOBE GLENDALE 6, 886 12,562 GOODYEAR 4, 598 8, 388 GUADALUPE 4, 609 8, 408 HAYDEN 1, 205 2, 198 HOLBROOK 5, 785 10, 553 HUACHUCA CITY 1, 661 3, 030 JEROME 470 857 KEARNY 2, 646 4, 827 KI NGMAN � �D' 7�8 32, 379 LAKE HAVASU CITY 17, 749 LI TCHFI ELD PARK 3, 708 6, 764 MAMMOTH 1, 906 3, 477 MARANA 1, 674 3, 054 MESA 239, 587 437, 070 MIAMI 2, 716 4, 955 NOGALES 15, 683 28, 610 OR Q._V A_L L E Y s 5.., 6.10 PAGE 6, 469 1 1 , 801 PARADISE VALLEY 11 , 818 21, 559 PARKER 2, 542 14, 637 PATAGONIA 980 , 77 PAYSON 7, 003 12, 775 PEORIA 27, 598 50, 46 PHOENIX 881, 640 1 608 343 PIMA 1, 599 ' 2, 917 PINETOP-LAKESIDE 2, 389 4, 358 PRESCOTT 21, 335 38, 921 PRESCOTT VALLEY 5, 471 9, 981 SAFFORD 7, 010 12, 788 SAN LUIS 2, 809 5, 1 24 SCOTTSDALE 108, 447 197, 836 SEDONA 5'009 9, 171 SHOW LOW SIERRA VISTA 28, 788 52, 517 SNOWFLAKE 3, 656 6, 670 SOMERTON 4, 381 7, 992 SOUTH TUCSON 6, 554 11, 956 SPRI NGERVI LLE 1, 879 3, 3, 42828 ST. JOHNS 3, SUPERIOR 4, 600 8, 392 SURPRISE 4, 020 7, 334 TAYLOR 2, 006 3, 659 TEMPE 132, 942 242, 521 THATCHER 3, 436 6, 268 TOLLESON 4, 438 8, 02968 TOMBSTONE 1' 665, 429 7 WELLTON TUCSON 364, 766 940 1, 715 WICKENBURG 3, 925 7, 160 WILLCOX 3, 243 5, 916 4 1 WILLIAMS 2, 266 41, 934 , 34 WINKELMAN , 0 , 9 WINSLOW 7, 921 14, 450 YOUNGTOWN 2, 287 4, 172 YUMA 46, 807 85, 388 2, 437, 971 $ 4, 447, 499 RECEIVES - ' ,a.;$01.1A c ,e,, - JUL 1 1 1988 4; r fo 4' - * * *.r 1'''' THE LEAGUE OF ARIZONA ClrI °91NS 0 .4 l'.40. ‘ ,„.*, lb 1820 WEST WASHINGTON ST. • PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007 • PH. (602) 258-5786 July 8, 1988 TO: City/Town Managers or Clerks and Finance Directors FROM: Kent Fairbairn, Staff Assistant SUBJECT: REVISED 1988-89 STATE SHARED REVENUE ESTIMATES We realize that it is very late in the budget process, but we have just received some good news in regard to the state shared sales tax estimates for 1988-89. We received information that the Department of Revenue is expecting a higher sales tax distribution for 1988-89 than their preliminary projections. The increase in total sales tax distribution is estimated at $3 million over the previous projections mailed to you by our office. In addition to this $3 million, cities and towns can also expect an estimated $4.4 million in increased state shared sales tax as a result of the tax package which the State Legislature passed last week. This combined increase of $7.4 million brings the total estimated distribution from state shared sales tax in 1988-89 to $148,447,499. The Department of Revenue has also announced that the total amount to be distributed from state shared income tax will be slightly higher than first anticipated. The increase in distributions will be about $300,000 over previous projections. The amount which each city and town will receive from the HURF and LTAF distributions has also changed slightly. This is due to a reduction in the population figure used for the City of Sedona for HURF and an error we made in the City of Casa Grande's population when calculating the totals for LTAF distributions. If you have already adopted your 1988-89 budget, and it is tight, there is an option available to you to include these funds. The tax package allows (does not require) cities and towns, after notice and a hearing held prior to September 15, 1988, to modify any portion of the budget affected by the increased revenues resulting from the tax package. If you have any questions, please give us a call. REVISED 7/6/88 CITY/TOWN PROJECTED ESTIMATES LOCAL Ti ;4SPORTATION ASSISTANCE, HIGHWAY USER, S. SALES TAX AND STATE INCOME TAX REVENUES FOR FY 88-89 CITY/TOWN LTAF HIGHWAY USER SALES TAX INCOME TAX APACHE JUNCTION $133,462 $1 ,379,609 $869,445 $843, 139 AVONDALE 98,392 652,154 590,874 572,997 BENSON 33,743 323,351 258,842 251 ,011 BISBEE 69,467 552,089 435,605 422,426 BUCKEYE 34,708 253,967 230,102 223,140 BULLHEAD CITY 175,390 1,927,295 1,040,667 1,009,180 CAMP VERDE 50,721 503,818 356,205 345,428 CAREFREE 13,885 102,017 92.431 89,634 CASA GRANDE 148,303 1 ,511, 782 952,742 923,916 CAVE CREEK 20,771 154,638 140.107 135,868 CHANDLER 674,083 4,288,302 3.885,803 3,768,232 CHINO VALLEY 37,405 328,730 232,416 225,384 CLARKDALE 17,151 146,064 103,269 100,144 CLIFTON 36,414 345,721 258,477 250,656 COLORADO CITY 19,737 236,697 127,808 123,941 COOLIDGE 64,563 661,930 417,156 404,534 COTTONWOOD 46,541 431,389 304,997 295,769 DOUGLAS 121 ,439 1,007,713 795,099 771,042 DUNCAN 10,000 49, 109 36,717 35,606 EAGAR 39,302 749,854 243,620 236,249 EL MIRAGE 36,983 289,451 262,252 254,317 ELOY 61,495 602,896 379,952 368,456 FLAGSTAFF 354.835 4,573,220 2,328,851 2,258.343 FLORENCE 57,660 588,790 371,062 359,835 FREDONIA - 11,075 124,354 63,325 61,409 GILA BEND 18,005 134,342 121,719 118,036 GILBERT 150,613 813,311 736,388 714,592 GLENDALE 1,174,351 8,225,317 7,452,421 7,226,937 GLOBE 55,634 656,929 419,287 406,601 GOODYEAR 48,825 309,007 279,971 271,500 GUADALUPE 40,689 309,746 280,641 272,150 HAYDEN 10,000 114,958 73,372 71,152 HOLBROOK 51,368 787,700 352,247 341,590 HUACHUCA CITY 18,229 128,183 101,138 98,078 JEROME 10,000 40,478 28,618 27,752 KEARNY 23,831 255,651 161,114 156,240 KINGMAN 97,220 1,175,930 634,959 615,747 LAKE HAVASU CITY 168.325 2,001,495 1,080,733 1,048,033 LITCHFIELD PARK 33,062 249,195 225,779 218,948 MAMMOTH 16,850 184,154 116,056 112,544 MARANA 19,737 136,465 101,929 98,845 MESA 2,301,946 16,101,372 14,588,398 14,147,004 MIAMI 22,021 259,108 165,377 160,373 NOGALES 166,127 1,190,590 954,934 926,041 ORO VALLEY __ _ 48,067 233,637 X82 45 183,520�, AGE 59,814 , • 393,896� � 381,978 PARADISE VALLEY 102,607 773,526 719,595 697,823 PARKER 22,323 731,964 154,782 150,099 PATAGONIA 10,000 74,398 59,672 57,867 PAYSON 64,167 668,091 426,411 413,509 PEORIA 313,275 1,854,715 1,680,436 1,629,592 PHOENIX 8,018,848 59,250,350 53,682,859 52,058,604 PIMA 16,376 130,274 97,363 94,417 PINETOP-LAKESIDE 22,840 325,292 145,466 141,064 PRESCOTT 199.482 1,837,428 1.299,083 1,259,778 PRESCOTT VALLEY 63,046 471,177 333,128 323,049 SAFFORD 66.709 571,121 426,831 413,923 SAN LUIS 27,278 271.993 171,039 165,864 ' SCOTTSDALE 1.040.071 7,288,148 6.603,313 6,403,520 SEDONA 77,741 706,267 445,043 431,578 SHOW LOW 46,628 684,488 306,093 296,832 SIERRA VISTA 278,826 2,221,630 1,752,895 1,699,858 SNOWFLAKE 32.881 497,810 222,613 215,878 SOMERTON 39,474 557.833 266.758 258.687 SOUTH TUCSON 58,134 534,285 399,072 386,997 SPRINGERVILLE 17.582 352.156 114,412 110,950 ST. JOHNS 35,768 631,219 205,077 198,872 SUPERIOR 41,370 444,443 280,093 271,618 SURPRISE 47,722 270.163 244.777 237,371 TAYLOR 17,539 273.142 122,145 118,449 TEMPE 1.217,566 8,934,327 8.094,808 7,849,888 THATCHER 29,907 279,939 209,217 202,887 TOLLESON 41,456 298,254 270,229 262.053 TOMBSTONE 15,428 125,945 99,372 96,365 TUCSON 3,501,610 29,018,082 22.210,519 21,538,507 WELLTON 10,000 91,019 57,236 55,505 WICKENBURG 36,061 263,778 238,992 231, 761 WILLCOX 33,915 250,269 197,466 191,491 WILLIAMS 21,116 270,947 137.976 133,802 WINKELMAN 10,000 101,125 64,543 62,590 WINSLOW 75,802 1,078,542 482,308 467,715 YOUNGTOWN 20,254 153,697 139,255 135,042 YUMA 423,259 4,532,283 2,850,068 2,763,835 $23,000,000 $182,686,633 $148,447,499 $143,956,000 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY PUBLIC NOTICE In accordance with the provisions of Title 42, Sections 302, 303 and 304, Arizona Revised Statutes, the Oro Valley Town Council did on the 22nd day of June 1988 adopt a tentative budget for the fiscal year 1988/89 which is published herewith. The Town Council will meet for a final hearing of taxpayers and for adoption of the final budget for the fiscal year 1988/89 on August 10, 1988. This hearing will commence at or after 6: 30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 10, 1988 at the Oro Valley Town Hall, 10900 N. Stallard Place, Suite 100 located within the Foothills Business Park, Oro Valley, Arizona. Members of the public are invited to attend. POSTED: June 23 , 1988 1 : 35 p.m. CA) CO TOWN OF ORO VALLEY PUBLIC NOTICE In accordance with the provisions of Title 42, Sections 302 , 303 and 304, Arizona Revised Statutes, the Oro Valley Town Council did on the 22nd day of June 1988 adopt a tentative budget for the fiscal year 1988/89 which is published herewith. The Town Council will meet for a final hearing of taxpayers and for adoption of the final budget for the fiscal year 1988/89 on August 10, 1988. This hearing will commence at or after 6: 30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 10, 1988 at the Oro Valley Town Hall, 10900 N. Stallard Place, Suite 100 located within the Foothills Business Park, Oro Valley, Arizona. Members of the public are invited to attend. PUB: The Daily Territorial June 27 and July 5, 1988 REQ: Kathryn Cuvelier, Town Clerk TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: June 22 , 1988 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Linda Frew for Kathi Cuvelier, Town Clerk SUBJECT: Resolution No. 338 - Adoption of Tentative Budget Fiscal Year 1988/89 SUMMARY: In accordance with State Statutes, it is necessary that, prior to the end of July, the Council adopt a tentative budget for the coming fiscal year. Attached you will find figures on projected revenues and expenditures which have been prepared for your review and approval. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 338, adopting Tentative Budget for Fiscal Year 1988/89 2 . Proposed Tentative Budget for 1988/89 RECOMMENDATIONS: I recommend that the resolution adopting the tentative budget for fiscal year 1988/89 be approved. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to adopt Resolution No. 338 approving the tentative budget for the Town of Oro Valley for the fiscal year 1988/89 . Le ,,, \-,4-- ,--TmyK) C.90.k._ SI AT R OF DEPARTMENT HEAD c-- 64, TOWN MANAGER'S REVIEW RESOLUTION NO. 338 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA, ADOPTING THE TENTATIVE ESTIMATES OF THE AMOUNTS REQUIRED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1988-1989 AS A TENTATIVE BUDGET; SETTING FORTH THE RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1988-1989 ; GIVING NOTICE OF THE TIME FOR HEARING TAXPAYERS AND FOR ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 ; PROVIDING FOR CONTINGENCIES; PROVIDING FOR THE USE OF FUNDS; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA: SECTION 1. That the statements and schedules of the tentative budget for the fiscal year 1988-89 accompany and be included as part of this resolution. SECTION 2 . That the statements and schedules herein contained be adopted for the purpose as hereafter set forth as the tentative budget for the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona for the fiscal year 1988-89. SECTION 3 . That the statements setting forth the receipts, expenditures and amounts collectible for the fiscal year 1988-89 accompany and be included as part of this resolution. SECTION 4 . That the Town Clerk be and hereby is authorized and directed to publish in the manner prescribed b;y law, the estimates of expenditures, as hereinafter set forth, together with a notice that the Town Council will meet for the purpose of final hearing of taxpayers and for adoption of the budget for fiscal year 1988-89 for the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona on the 10th day of August , 1988. SECTION 5. That upon recommendation by the Mayor and Council, expenditures may be made from the appropriation for contingencies, the transfers of any sums within any specific appropriation may be made only upon the approval of the Mayor and Council. SECTION 6. That money from any fund may be used for any of the appropriations except money specifically restricted by State Law or by Town Ordinance or Resolution. SECTION 7. That the various Town officers and employees by and they hereby are directed to perform all acts necessary or desirable to give effect to this resolution. SECTION 8 . WHEREAS, it is necessary for the preservation of the peace, health and safety of the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, an emergency is declared to exist and this resolution shall be effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. APPROVED by the affirmative vote of three-fourths of the Council of the Town of Oro Valley this 22nd day of June 1988. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of June , 1988 . 7//4/7 ngle, Mayor ATTEST: . 6,_� '�--�- •.���C(�� / Kathryn . Cuvelier, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Gary , ior 1, _ D `dd Town ttorne Y F. :RELI M I NARY CITY/TOWN OF Oro Valley FISCAL YEAR 1988/89 OFFICIAL FORMS FOR CITY/TOWN BUDGET DEVELOPED BY STATE OF ARIZONA OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL Rev. /88 PROOFED/FOOTED BY TO - AELIMINARY CITY/TOWN OF Oro Valley TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 1988/89 Resolution for the Adoption of the Budget Schedule A Summary Schedule of Estimated Revenues and Expenditures Schedule B Summary of Tax Levy and Tax Rate Information Schedule C Summary by Fund of Revenues Other Than Property Taxes Schedule D Summary by Fund of Bond Proceeds and Interfund Transfers Schedule E Summary by Department of Expenditures Within Each Fund PROOFED/FOOTED BY �_ i t I ~-0 -4 Z' r1 rn ---i r, C7 V) G-) I O O X C Cu 0 rt rD -a rD -T1 n I--1 -4 3 '♦1 Z7 r-t M-0 'T1 rt ',1 v! Cr'r1 CD = C "' > -sfD C rD rD C -..C a o v- - C () rD Z c I r- c x = = -s = c+ = --41 •• = -•, -1 o CD I> +ova v-4No-Tic) rDv v) t- O CT' 1 r '*1 a. .-, LA Cr cc+V < Cu C N rD rD -S c+ C -. -r- (1) c n `'1 = CT 0 'S cc n < c+ C CZ-1 -1 -T) tom, (fl rt) = rD rD Cr, Cv) CD 1 C a) rD Q O Cu (p C z n -5 -<c-- Ti- C "'' VI v1 0 r-t < ft) - C CD c+ v) v) Cu C (1) n -s - a. -- I rD N N rD a. *et rn u-, A c...) N-+ m I , X _.. >< I . "t7-v CDA c+ - ��, 7DPCC) O -s m --i r- coca .m `, CO F- m v-GI'V CD >c O rD c c C) I� -. J W >.--..-..m-4 cn - N ct N -+,Q.C1 ►-♦ ( " - X)C)-I--I In Cu = CT Cu N -s CD COc -�" N) H' _,,.. I. C C rn o �" v)Po C7 �► N Q.O-rn CD CD m l• \�y A. 0\ N o cP0 v) Pi(I) a.a. I � - -m C r-i-c+ N1 C) r- -4-cf. O m P .-. - \�, 6t et rD et a -r-= X X \�., M S 0 Cu a () D-v i ��., N. X rD r" et CU -'-r, rD -1 I ,,, , 't7 Z7 Q. a•xaC --'•o.o. � (• .-- C"� W -<1,1 c+ et CD m c0 c+c+ O \..~ CO '� >...� C C rD Cu = x r*1 cc z �, x)o--1> 3 o a� CIc CDDCD C) �� *tCn7CDr- -+, 0 c+o o COO 00 J N 73 a C CI. C c+ -z -'-tri >CL > ii rD o c o I- H (DCD m E C) I-'3 = C •-. H► mIn> S c+ -'.II) IA in , 3 vl rt V) -<( ►--I>"Ts P4 o o rD z =• N ►� I • �. O �7D,'rncDPa m0 • Cl. = x• •Cep OO -i -i o� n -n n Cr "v •• CO O P1 -.41c rD �. Cn�N+"Ci CA CL = �, �, CD -1 C-)70 ,v ....< --1 C� OO rfl ~ -, O a -‹7v --ICuc* U I �, �, Ia I Cu r*1X)mAv7a i ` Oo.,O-S >rn x rn rn -4 O %_ I I (c 7v-4 1 --4-4� o '< C/') -< CNS ........II- .a .. ; S x 1. . ',p _ In r*1 `o I N In C = ' ( a < Z7��P*'t C 11 �. r*1 C�r m c I I ( O -0 i�• N (.71 A'V XI m.-.4. 7. rD N -s CJS (T1 =r*1--I o vs OD • C) i >Cn r*1 ► l0 NJ Z o In rD O N x x J Cs m rD - I. n � � I ���� � O 7D to 'D Z r+D Ib. �b. t,.p N r) I 1 \..,\� -mr1 r p n c 1 �, . CO C m C) --4 o. i I (Tt �,--s �I - -.J 10 Z CC)C) PI C rn I o o : I. I O -<= i ' -- C/)z C(i) Cmi) GI rD N �� N I---,CI---, F-' I -' I ---I a-• O ., O 7o Z I ` I m -S I In C= #- O •• I 77Z c+ I \"-., O N o �`` I Z 2 b, x 7D-n Cu ►A W rys.--.--1 Ci) Z O 'i U1 U1 r--c Z> C I--, 73 CD r- O 01 C11 r P A 0-- N m V)r- c-t LP N (0 N a' ~ �, 4, rn rD �., XCD '.. n'o "* \--.� W C) 1 C ..... 01 \ -<70 Z O cuO \�. 01 01 7D Z --I 711 -i C N ---s N m y `, (O N Cn ' 01 0) REL1M1 NARY City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY OF TAX LEVY AND TAX RATE INFORMATION Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED PREVIOUS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR 1 . Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (A.R.S. §42-301 .A) $ -0- 2. Amount Received from Primary Property Taxation in the Previous Fiscal Year in Excess of the Sum of the Previous Year' s Maximum Allowable Primary Property Tax Levy (A.R.S. §42-302.C. 14) and Amount of Escaped Taxes Collected (A.R.S. §42-236) . $ -0- 3. Property Tax Levy Amounts A. Primary Property Taxes $ $ B. Secondary Property Taxes Total Secondary Property Taxes $ $ C. Total Property Tax Levy Amounts $ -0- $ -0- 4. Property Taxes Collected A. Primary Property Taxes Previous Year' s Levy $ Prior Years' Levies $ Total Primary Property Taxes $ B. Secondary Property Taxes Previous Year' s Levy $ Prior Years ' Levies $ Total Secondary Property Taxes $ C. Total Property Taxes Collected $ -0- * Includes actual property taxes collected as of the date of the proposed budget and the property taxes expected to be collected for the remainder of the fiscal year. SCHEDULE B (1 of 2) RELIMINARY City/Town of Oro valley SUMMARY OF TAX LEVY AND TAX RATE INFORMATION Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED PREVIOUS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR 5. Property Tax Rates A. City/Town Tax Rate Primary Property Tax Rate $ $ Secondary Property Tax Rates Total City/Town Tax Rate $ -0- $ -0- B. Special District Tax Rates Secondary Property Tax Rates SCHEDULE B (2 of 2) City/Town of Oro Valley "bR ELI MI NARY SUMMARY BY FUND OF REVENUES OTHER THAN PROPERTY TAXES Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED ACTUAL ESTIMATED SOURCE OF REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR GENERAL FUND Local taxes City Sales Tax $ 1,480,322 $ 852,000 $ 978,000 Renters Tax 32,000 56,580 54,600 Cable TV 3,000 6,552 _ 6,000 Licenses and permits Business Licenses 7,000 9,768 8,500 Building Permits 577,000 535,320 400,000 Intergovernmental revenues Federal 5,000 9,768 -0- State 313,086 313,068 365,126 County 38,000 52,764 55,000 Charges for services Zoning Applications 300,000 276,324 165,000 Fines and forfeits 210,000 274,332 350,000 Interest on investments 80,000 123,528 118,000 In-lieu property taxes -0- -0- -0- Voluntary contributions Miscellaneous revenues 11,165 17,112 55,000 Carry Forward 956,623 956,623 1,440,000 Total General Fund $ 4,013,196 $ 3,483,739 $ 3,995,226 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ 223,248 $ 233,567 Total Highway Users o1 \ N\ Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ 223,248 $ 233,567 u„ j * Includes actual revenues received as of the date of the proposed budget and the C3 ;. ; estimated revenues expected to be received for the remainder of the fiscal year. ua CD SCHEDULE C (1 of 2) cc "-- © 'r d. az H RELIMINARY City/Town of c- SUMMARY BY FUND OF REVENUES OTHER THAN PROPERTY TAXES Fiscal Year 1988/89 ESTIMATED ACTUAL ESTIMATED SOURCE OF REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES REVENUES PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ 29,852 $ 46,340 Total Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ 29,852 $ 46,340 Aocal Sts. & Rds. Rev: Interest 3,000 1,000 1,000 Miscellaneous $ 500 $ 57,000 $ 5,000 Permits 500 3,948 10,000 Carry Forward 213,890 213,890 219,788 Total Special Revenue Funds $ 487,224 $ 528,938 $ 515,695 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS $ $ $ Total Debt Service Funds $ $ $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS $ $ $ Total Capital Projects Funds $ $ $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS $ $ $ Total Enterprise Funds $ $ $ EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ Total Expendable Trust Funds $ $ $ NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ Total Nonexpendable Trust Funds $ $ $ 0 U TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ 4,500,420 $ 4,012,677 $4,510,921 * Includes actual revenues ' received as of the date of the proposed budget and the U.1 � � estimated revenues expected to be received for the remainder p of the fiscal year. o ULJ SCHEDULE C (2 of 2) RELI M I NARY City/Town of pro Valley SUMMARY BY FUND OF BOND PROCEEDS AND INTERFUND TRANSFERS Fiscal Year lggg/gg PROCEEDS FROM SALE OR INTERFUND REFUNDING TRANSFERS FUND OF BONDS IN (OUT) GENERAL FUND $ $ $ SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Total Special Revenue Funds $ $ $ DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Total Debt Service Funds $ $ $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Total Capital Projects Funds $ $ $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS Total Enterprise Funds $ $ $ EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS Total Expendable Trust Funds $ $ NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS Total Nonexpendable Trust Funds $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ _o_ $ _o_ $ _0_ SCHEDULE D ORELIMINARY City/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURES WITHIN EACH FUND Fiscal Year 1988/89 (CONTINGENCY ADJUSTMENT) ADOPTED EMERGENCY BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ACTUAL BUDGETED FUND/ EXPENDITURES APPROVED EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES DEPARTMENT PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR GENERAL FUND R1i i l d i ng Codes $ -0-* $ $ 197,364 $ 167,425 .. • ,O,. . _„- 100,000 49,560 100,000 Court 211,355 206,365 264,188 C' neral Administration 98,000 99,300 98,836 Mayor Council 9,000 9,420 13,700 Planning F., Zoning 93,535 50,000 145,752 156,080 Police 1,102,800 920,640 1,319,950 Town Attorney 55,480 25,000 72,420 93,348 Town Clerk 392,269 287,592 187,368 Town Mana oer 65,960 56,484 92,191 Contingency 1,884,797 320,000 1,502,140 *In Clerk's Budget Total General Fund $4,013,196 $ 75,000 $ 2,364,897 $ 3,995,226 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ $ $ 233,567 Total Highway Users Revenue Fund $ 232,889 $ $ $ 233,567 ,Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ $ $ 46,340 Total Local Transportation Assistance Fund $ 36,445 $ $ $ 46,340 * Includes actual expenditures as of the date of the proposed budget and expenditures expected to be made for the remainder of the fiscal year. • SCHEDULE E (1 of 2) DRELIMINARY city/Town of Oro Valley SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURES WITHIN EACH FUND Fiscal Year 1988/89 (CONTINGENCY ADJUST. ) ADOPTED EMERGENCY BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ACTUAL BUDGETED FUND/ EXPENDITURES APPROVED EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES DEPARTMENT PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR PREVIOUS YEAR* CURRENT YEAR Streets & Roads $ 217,890 $ 245,000 $ 318,048 $ 235,788 Total Special Revenue Funds $ 487,224 $ 245,000 $ 318,048 $ 515,695 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Debt Service Funds $ $ $ $ CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Capital Projects Funds $ $ $ $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Enterprise Funds $ $ $ $ EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ $ Total Expendable Trust Funds $ $ $ $ NONEXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS $ $ $ $ F Total Nonexpendable Trust Funds $ $ $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDS $ 4 500,42.0 $ "120,000 $ 2,682,949 $ 4,910,921 * Includes actual expenditures as of the date of the proposed budget and expenditures expected to be made for the remainder of the fiscal year. SCHEDULE E (2 of 2) TOWN OF ORO VALLEY PROPOSED TENTATIVE BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 88/89 REVENUES GENERAL FUND BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************ FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT Shared Taxes Auto Lieu 55, 000 52 ,764 . 00 38, 000 State Sales 179, 625 150, 840. 00 157, 321 Urban Revenue 183 , 001 162 , 228. 00 154, 765 LOCAL REVENUES Building Permits 400, 000 535, 320. 00 577, 000 Business Licenses 8, 500 9, 768. 00 7, 000 Cable Television 6, 000 6, 552 . 00 3 , 000 Fines & Forfeitures 350, 000 274, 332 . 00 210, 000 Interest 118, 000 123,528. 00 80, 000 Miscellaneous 55, 000 17, 112 . 00 11, 165 Renters Tax 54, 600 56, 580. 00 32 , 000 Sales Tax 978, 000 852, 000. 00 1,480, 322 Training, ALEOAC 2 ,500 3, 660. 00 1, 000 Zoning Applications 165, 000 276, 324 . 00 300, 000 TOTAL INCOME 2 , 555, 226 2,521, 008. 00 3 , 051, 573 Cash Forward 1-Jul-87 1,440, 000 956, 623 . 00 956, 623 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 3, 995, 226 3 , 477, 631. 00 4, 008, 196 OTHER FUNDS - Police Police Grant 0 9, 379. 00 5, 000 HIGHWAY FUND ************ Highway User's 233 ,567 223, 248 . 00 232 , 889 LTAF 46, 340 29, 852 . 00 36,445 Interest 1, 000 1, 000. 00 3 , 000 Miscellaneous 5, 000 7, 000. 00 500 Permits 10, 000 3, 948. 00 500 TOTAL INCOME 295,907 265, 048. 00 273 , 334 Cash Forward 1-Jul-87 219,788 213,890. 00 213 , 890 TOTAL HIGHWAY FUND 515, 695 478,938 . 00 487, 224 TOTAL REVENUE 4, 510, 921 3 , 965, 948 . 00 4, 500, 420 PROPOSED TENTATIVE BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 88/89 EXPENDITURES GENERAL FUND BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************ FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT Capital Improvements 100, 000. 00 49, 560. 00 100, 000 Building Codes 167, 425. 00 197, 364 . 00 0 Court 264, 188. 00 206, 365. 00 211, 355 General Admin. * 98,836. 00 99, 300. 00 98, 000 Mayor & Council 13 ,700. 00 9,420. 00 9, 000 Planning & Zoning* 156, 080. 00 145,752 . 00 93 ,535 Police* 1, 319, 950. 00 920, 640. 00 1, 102,800 Town Attorney* 93 , 348. 00 72 , 420. 00 120;480 Town Clerk* 187, 368. 00 287, 592 . 00 392,269 * (see Bldg Town Manager* 92 , 191. 00 56,484 . 00 65,960 Codes) Contingency 1,502 , 140. 00 320, 000. 00 1,819, 797 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 3 , 995,226. 00 2 , 364,897. 00 4, 013 , 196 FED. REVENUE SHARING 0. 00 ($5, 000 included under Police Training) *HIGHWAY FUND 515, 695. 00 318, 048 . 00 487, 224 ************* TOTAL EXPENDITURE 4, 510, 921. 00 2 , 682 , 945. 00 4, 500, 420 *See Expenditure Details on next page Exp. Detail 1 BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************* FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT COURT ALEOAC Surcharge 70, 000 52, 000 Contract Services 65, 000 54, 300 Dues & Subscriptions 600 600 Equipment Maintenance 3, 300 2 , 300 Furniture & Equipment 3,500 22 , 000 Insurance 1,500 800 Jury 7, 000 6, 000 Meetings & Training 3 , 300 1, 630 Miscellaneous 500 500 Office 7, 300 6, 200 Personnel 92 , 188 65, 025 Total Operating 254, 188 0. 00 211, 355 *Total Reserves* 10, 000 0 TOTAL COURT 264, 188 0. 00 211, 355 GENERAL ADMIN Capital Improve. 100, 000 100, 000 Animal Control 200 200 Bldgs & Grds (Admin) 71, 686 61, 000 Bldgs & Grds (PD) 19,750 15, 300 Insurance 3 , 000 0 Pool Cars 1,200 6, 500 Miscellaneous 3 , 000 2 , 000 Total Operating 198,836 185, 000 13 , 000. 00 TOTAL GENERAL ADMIN 198,836 0. 00 198, 000 PLANNING & ZONING Advertising 2 , 000 1, 000 Consulting Services 35, 000 0 Meetings & Training 6, 300 1, 000 Miscellaneous 1, 500 1,700 Office & Supplies 9, 600 3, 600 Outside Services 0 58, 000 Personnel 75, 180 67, 125 Refer. & Memberships 1,500 460 Total Operating 131, 080 0. 00 132, 885 *Total Reserves* 25, 000 0 TOTAL P & Z 156, 080 0. 00 132, 885 Exp. Detail 2 BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************* FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT POLICE Capital Expenditures 45,900 39, 000 Dispatching 47,800 37, 500 Dues & Subscriptions 1, 100 850 Insurance 52 , 000 45, 000 Maintenance/Repair 2 , 150 4 , 200 Miscellaneous 1, 300 2 , 100 Office & Supplies 6,550 10, 850 Personnel 1, 090,900 785,400 Train./Tuition/Travel 5,400 4,500 Uniforms & Equipment 7,950 3 ,900 Vehicles 48, 900 49, 500 Total Operating 1, 309,950 0. 00 982,800 *Total Reserves* 10, 000. 00 120, 000 TOTAL POLICE 1, 319, 950 0. 00 1, 102 , 800 TOWN ATTORNEY Dues & Subscriptions 1, 000 1, 000 Furniture & Equipment 410 1, 330 Law Library 5, 000 5, 200 Meetings & Training 4, 000 1, 700 Office 3 ,800 1, 000 Outside Counsel 5, 000 26, 500 Personnel 59, 138 43 ,750 Total Operating 78, 348 0. 00 80, 480 *Reserves* 15, 000 0 TOTAL TOWN ATTORNEY 93, 348 0. 00 80, 480 TOWN CLERK Advertising 3, 000 2,700 Dues & Subscriptions 190 240 Equipment Maintenance 5, 000 3 ,780 Furniture & Equipment 12,758 18, 158 Insurance 3, 000 0 Meetings & Training 3, 620 2, 348 Miscellaneous 1, 600 7, 800 Office 8, 000 6, 600 Outside Services 6, 500 12, 800 Personnel 122,200 142, 543 Building Inspectors 0 168, 800 Recording Fees 1,500 1, 500 Total Operating 167, 368 0. 00 367, 269 *Total Reserves* 20, 000 25, 000 TOTAL TOWN CLERK 187, 368 0. 00 392, 269 Exp. Detail 3 BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET ************* FY 88/89 FY 87/88 FY 87/88 ADJUSTMENT TOWN MANAGER OV Magazine 400 1, 500 Dues & Subscriptions 840 820 Meetings & Training 3,200 3 ,590 Office Supplies 500 1, 200 Personnel 75, 051 55, 650 Vehicle Maintenance/ 10,200 1, 200 Repair Total Operating 90, 191 0. 00 63 ,960 *Total Reserves* 2, 000 2, 000 TOTAL TOWN MANAGER 92 , 191 0. 00 65,960 HIGHWAY Capital Expense 52 , 000 0 General Maintenance 8, 000 7, 000 Insurance 27, 000 25, 000 Miscellaneous 3, 000 2 , 100 Personnel 144,375 127, 525 Professional Services 20,500 2 , 000 Road Improvements 60, 000 143 , 500 Street Maintenance 40, 000 29,400 Vehicles/Equipment 6, 000 27, 100 Maintenance Contingency 70,820 0 Total Operating 431,695 0. 00 363, 625 *Reserves* 84, 000 123 ,599 TOTAL HIGHWAY 515, 695 0. 00 487,224 BUILDING CODES Dues & Subscriptions 1,200 0 Furniture & Equipment 800 0 Meetings & Training 1, 100 0 Office & Supplies 1,200 0 Outside Services 35, 000 0 Personnel 128, 125 168,800 Total Operating 167,425 0. 00 168, 800 *Reserves* 0 0 TOTAL BUILDING CODES 167, 425 0. 00 168, 800 TOWN COUNCIL Interg. Liasion 3 , 000 1, 000 Meetings & Conferences 1,500 1, 000 Memberships & Subsc. 4, 000 4, 000 Misc. Donations 200 200 OV Bikeathon 0 50 Pub. Liability Ins. 5, 000 2, 000 Total Operating 13,700 0. 00 8,250 *Reserves* 0 0 TOTAL TOWN COUNCIL 13,700 0. 00 8, 250 Opti A c 44•4, ^ ITS BUDGET TIME cla * March 22, 1988 INTRODUCTION It's budget time again. In this report, we have summarized a number of subject areas - from the local transportation assistance fund to the budget forms for FY 1988-89. We suggest review of this special report by all persons directly involved in the budget process. The report is being mailed to city/town managers or clerks, finance directors and attorneys so it may be necessary for you to copy the report and distribute it further. EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS All cities and towns in Arizona are subject to some form of expenditure limitation. However, forty-nine cities and towns have adopted alternative expenditure limitations or modified their expenditure limits. Some communities have adopted a pure home rule option which includes language that states that each year the council will, after a public hearing, set the coming year's expenditure limitation. This is just a reminder to pure home rule communities to set your 1988-89 expenditure limit by the date specified in your particular home rule language. Be sure to set your limit to include all expenditures. Currently, there are no excludable items under pure home rule. There is, however, a bill in the Legislature to apply exclusions under the state limit to alternative expenditure limits without having specified such exclusions in your home rule option. Since we do not know whether this bill will be adopted by the Legislature, we suggest you continue to include all expenditures in establishing your alternative limit. Also, if you are considering adopting a home rule option for 1989-90, you should begin your preparation this fall. Please give us a call this summer if you are going to consider adopting a home rule option. We will have a revised 1989 Guide For An Alternative Expenditure Limitation which contains election calendars, sample reporting forms and summaries of the requirements for adopting an alternative expenditure limit. PROPERTY TAXES IN 1988-89 We suggest exercising extra care in calculating your property tax levy for next fiscal year. As you may know, the Legislature has established a Property Tax Oversight Commission which will review the primary property tax levy of each city, town, county and school district. The commission will review whether the levy is correct, and in compliance with levy information required in the annual budget. Notice of any violation of the levy limit will be sent by September 15, along with the adjustment that must be made before the county will begin making the levy. Disputes may be appealed to the superior court. For fiscal year 1986 ), your primary property tax levy v,„1 be allowed to increase above your 1987-88 maximum allowable primary levy by 2%, plus an amount for net new property. To assist you in calculating your levy, your county assessor must provide the council with property value information on or before the tenth day prior to the day the levy must be adopted. These values must be made available for public inspection seven days prior to adoption of the levy. Also, primary property taxes collected over the maximum allowable levy in 1987-88 must be reported on schedule B of the budget forms. This amount must be used to reduce your primary levy in 1988-89, except for amounts collected from escaped property. Escaped properties are those parcels which did not appear on the assessment rolls for the tax year, but which would have appeared if they had been identified. THE UNIFORM EXPENDITURE REPORTING SYSTEM (UERS) The UERS report must be filed by all cities and towns no later than four months after the end of the fiscal year. This requirement applies even if you have adopted an alternative to the State imposed expenditure limitation. As you will recall, the UERS report actually consists of three reports; (1) an annual expenditure limitation report, (2) a financial statement (performed when audits are done), and (3) a reconciliation report (reconciling total expenditures reported in the expenditure limitation report to total expenditures reported in the financial statement). Figures used in these reports are to be audited figures. To meet the four month filing deadline, you should contact your auditor soon after the close of the fiscal year. If you cannot meet the October 31 filing deadline, an extension of up to 120 days may be granted by the Auditor General. Such an extension must be requested in writing. Also, the statutes require that each city and town provide the Auditor General with the name of the chief fiscal officer of the community by July 31 of each year. The chief fiscal officer is responsible for filing the UERS report. EXPENDITURE LIMIT AND (UERS) DATES DATE EVENT February 1 Economic Estimates Commission (EEC) notifies cities and towns of their estimated expenditure limitation. April 1 EEC determines the actual expenditure limitation for the coming fiscal year and notifies the city or town. July 31 Provide name of chief fiscal officer to the Auditor General. October 31 Reports required by UERS must be submitted to the Auditor General unless an extension is requested (in writing) and approved. REPORTING ANNEXATIONS FOR EXPENDITURE LIMITATION ADJUSTMENTS Cities and towns should report all annexations to the Population Statistics Unit at the Department of Economic Security. The population in the annexed area will be considered when developing the population estimate which is used in determining the expenditure limitations by the Economic Estimates Commission (EEC) as well as for distribution of the lottery funds. Annexations occurr_ o after the EEC determines your —penditure limit (on or before April 1) but before the beginning of the fiscal year can also be used to adjust your population estimate for that year if they are submitted in time for both DES and the EEC to act. The EEC requires that requests for such adjustments be provided to them at least three weeks prior to the adoption of that city's tentative budget. Also, prior to action by the EEC, DES must review the requested population increase. The necessary materials should be provided to DES with sufficient lead time for their review. In prior years you sent these materials to the Attorney General's office. However, this was due to the requirement that the Attorney General certify annexations for federal revenue sharing purposes. With the loss of Federal revenue sharing, it is no longer necessary to send this information to the Attorney General. FEDERAL SINGLE AUDIT ACT Several years ago Congress enacted the Federal Single Audit Act. The act imposes minimum Federal audit requirements for organization-wide audits of state and local governments that receive $100,000 or more in Federal financial assistance. The purpose of the Act is to improve financial accountability of state and local governments with respect to federal financial assistance programs. Those of you that must conduct such an audit should include requirements for a single audit in your bids for doing your next audit. The Auditor General is responsible for receiving the single audits and has asked us to remind you to send two copies of the audited financial statements and one copy of the single audit report along with the expenditure limitation report. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE FUND (LTAF) To receive local transportation assistance fund monies, cities and towns must apply each year to the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT). The deadline to apply to ADOT for LTAF monies is June 20, 1988 - the third Monday in June. Revenues from this fund must be used for transportation purposes (except in Phoenix and Tucson where it must be used for transit purposes). If the fund reaches $23 million - the maximum amount that may be distributed in a fiscal year, then 10% of the LTAF monies you receive may be used for cultural, educational, historical, recreational or scientific facilities or programs. This 10% money may also be used for programs for the developmentally disabled. Before this percentage may be spent, an equal match must be obtained from non-public monies. With the January payment for LTAF the total city and town share reached the maximum $23 million mark for 1987-88. Since the fund has reached the maximum, cities and towns may spend the 10% monies on alternative uses. We are also anticipating that LTAF revenues for 1988-89 will reach the $23 million amount. HIGHWAY USER REVENUE FUND (H URF) MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT As a reminder, cities and towns with a population over 30,000 in Maricopa and Pima Counties must maintain expenditures of local revenue for streets at a level to be computed as an average of local funds expended for any four of the fiscal years 1981-1982 through 1985-1986. All other cities and towns were exempted from this requirement by 1986 legislation. BUDGET FORMS The Auditor General's office has substantially revised the budget forms. The revised forms were sent out to all cities and towns for comment and the deadline for comments has passed. There will be a workshop at the Arizona Finance Officers Associate. conference in Tucson at which . _presentatives from the Auditor General's office will make a presentation on the new forms and answer any questions that you may have on the revised forms. SOCIAL SECURITY INCREASES The scheduled increase in social security contributions are listed below. The maximum amount of salary on which contributions are calculated for 1988 is the actual figure while those from 1989 to 1992 are not available. The changes go into effect on January I of each year. Percentage of Employer/Employee Calendar Year Contribution Maximum Salary 1988 7.51% $45,000 1989 7.51% Not Available 1990 7.65% Not Available 1991 7.65% Not Available 1992 7.65% Not Available CONSUMER PRICE INDEX In preparing your budget it may be useful to compare previously budgeted items with the ones anticipated for the upcoming fiscal year. To aid you in doing this, listed below is the consumer price index for the Metropolitan Phoenix area. This index was provided to us by the Arizona State University, College of Business Administration, Bureau of Business and Economic Research. Although the index is for the Metropolitan Phoenix area, it may also be useful to cities and towns outside this area. To familiarize you with using the index here is an example. To convert 1977 figures to 1987 dollars you multiply the 1977 amount by 2.008 as listed in the index for 1987. This means that a $5.00 purchase in 1977 would cost $10.04 in 1987. Using the index in this way you can make comparisons between budget items for different years by adjusting for inflation. Metropolitan Phoenix Consumer Price Index (1977 = 100) Year Index for All Items 1977 1.000 1978 1.101 1979 1.261 1980 1.453 1981 1.603 1982 1.687 1983 1.713 1984 1.812 1985 1.904 1986 1.929 1987 2.008 We hope the information in this report will be of use to you in the preparation of your budget. If you have any questions or if we can be of assistance, please give us a call. 0 1988-89 BUDGET CALENDAR Deadline for ACTION FY 1988-89 1. Compile pertinent budget information. None 2. Distribute budget instructions, information and work sheets None to department heads. (A general meeting with department heads could also be held at this time.) 3. Complete compilation of the forthcoming fiscal year's revenue estimates None including State shared revenues, debt service requirements, etc. 4. Submit departmental budget estimates to appropriate reviewing official None or office. Review of departmental budgets and revenue estimates by appropriate reviewing official or office. (An individual hearing with each department head may be held in conjunction with the review step.) 5. Make approved changes and prepare summary of tentative budget. None 6. Begin typing and duplication of proposed budget. None 7. Deliver proposed budget to city council for review. None 8. Adopt tentative budget. (//- `, I VI.. ......:1.A.,,A--LC, July 18 9. Publish budget once a week for two consecutive weeks. Include time Depends upon and place of budget hearing, and a statement indicating where the newspaper proposed budget may be examined. publishing date 10. Receive from the county assessor certified property values necessary to August 5 calculate the property tax levy limit. 11. Make the property values provided by the county assessor available for August 8* public inspection. 12. Hold public hearing on budget and property tax levy. Convene special August 8* meeting to adopt final proposed budget. 13. Adopt property tax levy. (Levy must be adopted exactly seven days after August 15* final budget.) 14. Forward certified copy of tax levy ordinance to county. (The tax levy by August 15* the board of supervisors must be made on or before the third Monday in August - A.R.S. 42-304 A.) * Check with your county board of supervisors as to their deadline for receiving your levy. Dates may change to conform to their schedule. I, No A c INFORMATION 41 - r k to! fr" krii) * at, \ * * \IP REPORT STATE SHARED REVENUES - BUDGET ESTIMATES March 22, 1988 We have good news to report on the state shared revenue estimates for cities and towns for 1988-89. Overall these revenue estimates are slightly higher than state shared revenues estimated for 1987-88. The table on the following page lists the distribution for these projections. Included are estimates for revenue from the state sales tax, state income tax, highway user revenue fund (HURF) and the local transportation assistance fund (LTAF). Each of these estimated distributions are based on the appropriate population figures. The distribution listed for the local transportation assistance fund includes all cities and towns, however, you must apply for these funds to receive them. The total amount for HURF is a preliminary estimate provided to us by the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT). The 1988-89 HURF estimate represents a 3.5% increase over the total amount distributed for this fiscal year. The amount individual cities and towns will receive will vary according to changes in county of origin motor vehicle fuel sales. Not included in the HURF projections are the seven percent monies for Phoenix and Tucson. Cities and towns in Coconino and Yavapai County experienced a slight decrease in HURF revenue due to the incorporation of Sedona. The most accurate estimate provided on the following page is for the income tax revenue. Monies distributed from this source are collected two years prior to distribution. Income tax increased by 9.9%, and for the first time, surpassed the amount distributed from sales tax. The state sales tax distribution is a preliminary Department of Revenue estimate and represents a 4.8% increase over amounts estimated for distribution for this fiscal year. This report also includes estimates of the Local Transportation Assistance Fund. We anticipate that the fund will reach the $23 million figure, the maximum amount that may be distributed in a fiscal year. However, due to an increase in population statewide, a number of cities and towns will receive less money from LTAF. The total state shared revenues for cities and towns in the upcoming fiscal year from each of the sources are estimated as follows: Total State Sales Tax $141,000,000 Total State Income Tax 143,650,000 Total Highway User Revenue 182,686,633 Total Local Transportation Assistance 23,000,000 These revenue estimates are, to our knowledge, the best available at this point in time. However, if there are any significant changes in these revenue estimates, we will notify all of you immediately. If you have any questions, please give us a call. 1820 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 258-5786 CITY/TOWN PROJECTED ESTIMATES LOCAL TR, ORTATION ASSISTANCE, HIGHWAY USER, SI SALES TAX AND STATE INCOME TAX REVENUES FOR FY 88-by CITY/TOWN LTAF HIGHWAY USER SALES TAX INCOME TAX APACHE JUNCTION 134, 504 1, 378, 786 825, 246 840, 756 AVONDALE 99, 664 651, 917 560, 837 571, 378 BENSON 33, 832 323, 109 245, 684 250, 302 BISBEE 70, 010 551,677 413, 461 421, 232 BUCKEYE 34, 935 253, 874 218,405 222, 510 BULLHEAD CITY 176, 458 1, 926, 309 987, 764 1,006, 329 CAMP VERDE 51, 118 497, 094 338, 097 344, 452 CAREFREE 13, 985 101, 980 87, 732 89, 381 CASA GRANDE 13,993 1, 510, 880 904, 309 921, 305 CAVE CREEK 20, 925 154, 582 132, 985 135, 484 CHANDLER 679, 349 4, 287, 242 3, 688, 266 3, 757,585 CHINO VALLEY 37, 698 324, 343 220, 601 224, 747 CLARKDALE 17, 285 144, 115 98, 019 99, 862 CLIFTON 36, 699 345, 476 245, 337 249, 948 COLORADO CITY 19, 891 236, 576 121, 310 123, 590 COOLIDGE 65, 059 661,535 395, 950 403, 391 COTTONWOOD 46, 905 425, 632 289, 492 294, 933 DOUGLAS 122, 387 1, 006, 960 754, 680 768, 863 DUNCAN 10, 000 49, 075 34, 850 35, 505 EAGAR 39, 609 749, 624 231, 235 235, 581 EL MIRAGE 37, 272 289, 345 248, 921 253, 599 ELOY 61, 975 602, 537 360, 637 367, 415 FLAGSTAFF 357,607 4, 544, 750 2, 210, 463 2, 252,007 FLORENCE 58, 110 588, 439 352, 199 358, 819 FREDONIA 11, 162 123, 579 60, 106 61, 236 GILA BEND 18, 145 134, 293 115, 531 117, 702 GILBERT 151, 790 813, 015 699, 428 712, 573 GLENDALE 1, 184, 029 8, 222, 324 7, 073, 574 7, 206, 517 GLOBE 56, 069 656, 532 397, 972 405, 452 GOODYEAR 49, 207 308, 895 265, 739 270, 733 GUADALUPE 41, 007 309, 634 266, 374 271, 381 HAYDEN 10, 000 114, 888 69, 642 70, 951 HOLBROOK 51, 769 787, 366 334, 341 340, 624 HUACHUCA CITY 18, 371 128, 087 95, 997 97, 801 JEROME 10, 000 39, 937 27, 163 27,674 KEARNY 24, 017 255, 499 152, 924 155, 798 KI NGMAN 97, 979 1, 175, 329 602, 680 614, 007 LAKE HAVASU CITY 169, 640 2, 000, 472 1, 025, 793 1, 045, 072 LI TCHFI ELD PARK 33, 320 249, 104 214, 302 218, 329 MAMMOTH 16, 981 184, 044 110, 156 112, 226 MARANA 19, 891 136, 424 96, 748 98, 566 MESA 2, 314, 229 16, 095,513 13, 846, 791 14, 107, 032 MIAMI 22, 193 258, 952 156, 970 159, 920 NOGALES 167, 425 1, 189, 686 906, 390 923, 425 ORO VALLEY 46, 340 233, 567 179, 625 183, 001 PAGE 60, 282 768, 687 373, 872 380, 899 PARADISE VALLEY 103, 408 773, 245 683, 014 695, 851 PARKER 22, 497 731, 817 146, 913 149, 675 PATAGONIA 10, 032 74, 341 56, 639 57, 703 PAYSON 64, 668 667, 687 404, 734 412, 341 PEORIA 315, 722 1, 854, 040 1, 595, 010 1, 624, 987 PHOENIX 8, 081, 488 59, 228, 790 50, 953, 870 51, 911, 514 PIMA 16, 504 130, 182 92, 41 3 94, 150 PINETOP-LAKESIDE 23, 018 325, 154 138, 071 140, 666 PRESCOTT 201, 040 1, 812, 907 1, 233, 044 1, 256, 218 PRESCOTT VALLEY 63, 539 464, 889 316, 193 322, 136 SAFFORD 67, 230 570, 717 405, 139 412, 753 SAN LUIS 27, 492 271, 831 162, 345 165, 396 SCOTTSDALE 1, 048, 195 7, 285, 496 6, 267, 631 6, 385, 427 SEDONA 78, 349 859, 555 521, 306 531, 103 SHOW LoW 46, 992 684, 199 290, 533 295, 993 SIERRA VISTA 280, 995 2, 219, 970 1, 663, 786 1, 695, 055 SNOWFLAKE 33, 137 497. 599 211, 296 215, 268 SOMERTON 39, 782 557, 501 253, 197 257, 956 SOUTH TUCSON 58,588 534, 124 378, 785 385, 904 SPRI NGERVI LLE 17, 720 352, 048 108, 596 110, 637 ST. JOHNS 36, 047 631, 025 194, 652 198, 310 SUPERIOR 41, 693 444, 178 265, 854 270, 851 SURPRISE 48, 095 270, 065 232, 334 236, 700 TAYLOR 17, 676 273, 026 115, 936 118, 115 TEMPE 1, 227, 077 8, 931, 076 7, 683, 305 7, 827, 708 THATCHER 30, 141 279, 741 198, 582 202, 314 TOLLESON 41, 780 298, 146 256, 492 261, 312 TOMBSTONE 15, 548 125, 851 94, 320 96, 093 TUCSON 3, 494, 679 29, 009, 377 21, 081, 438 21, 477, 650 WELLTON 10, 000 90, 965 54, 327 55, 348 WICKENBURG 36, 343 263, 682 226, 843 231, 106 WILLCOX 34, 180 250, 082 187, 427 190, 950 WILLIAMS 20, 760 269, 260 130, 962 133, 423 WINKELMAN 10, 000 101, 064 61, 262 62, 413 WINSLOW 76, 394 1, 078, 086 457, 790 466, 393 YOUNGTOWN 20, 412 153, 641 132, 176 134, 660 YUMA 425, 662 4, 529, 585 2, 705, 183 2, 756, 025 23, 000, 000 182, 686, 633 141, 000, 000 143, 650, 000 RECEIVED AUG 1 019 88 TOWN of ORO VALLEY RAUSCHER PIERCE REFSNES, INC. )Lo August 9, 1988 Mrs.Kathryn Cuvelier, Clerk Town of Oro Valley 10900 N.Stallard P1./Suite 100 Oro Valley,Arizona 85704 Dear Mrs. Cuvelier: We would very much appreciate receiving a copy of the adopted budget for fiscal year 1988-89 and the annual report for fiscal years 1987-88, 1986-87 and 1985-86. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, RAUSCHER PIERCE REFSNES,INC. 04"4-1- Mrs.Carol Ann Milford Two North Central Avenue, Suite 1900 • Phoenix, Arizona 85004 • (602) 257-7770 Member New York Stock Exchange, Inc. 6M014 Paul4411111116.fi* ,...- .„.., ___ ..t. PROPERTY TAX OVERJGHT COMIVIISSION ;if '' ' '7:LIli tk - "ui Waddell =VENUS BUILDING Chairman 1600 W.BONBON Alan""t ,,.,- u�gu�ne Pw�M�IE"J�mUM��k88N��' Rose M�ford ~~ilif tOP m*mber Governor John B. Stiteler Member RECEIVED A 6.,,,c p-er ~.., JUNO9988 June 3, 1988 AO e p,49 11-r TOWN of ORO VALLEY, L/ [�~ - = uQ ‘\44—c ' '\\''' County, City, Town, and Community College Budget Directors or Finance Officers: The Property Tax Oversight Commission was created by the 38th Legislature , becoming effective January 1, 1988. This Commission consists of three members: Paul Waddell , Acting Director of the Arizona Department of Revenue, Chairman; Alan Maguire, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representa- tives; and John Stiteler, appointed by the President of the Senate. One of the Commission's mandated activities is to review all county, munici- pality, and community college budgets to determine if the budgets contain the information on property tax levies as required by A.R.S. 42-302. Completion of the budget forms provided by the Auditor General ' s office will satisfy the statutory requirements. If the Commission determines that the budget forms are not satisfactorily completed, we are required to take action as set forth in A.R.S. 42-302G, which may cause a reduction in your property tax levy. Copies of these budget forms must be submitted to the Property Tax Oversight Commission within one week of completion of final adoption of your budget. For cities and towns, if your property tax levy ordinance imposes a different levy than contained in your final budget, please submit the ordinance immediately after adoption. Send them to: Georganna Meyer Arizona Department of Revenue 1600 West Monroe, 9th Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85007 If you have any questions , feel free to contact Georganna at 255-3887 , ext. 141. Sincerely, PROPERTY TAX OVERSIGHT COMMISSION /9 4./3:::—....), c\_..--),._ „_....„......._.c. Paul Waddell , Chairman