LONG-RANGE FORECASTING
P
U R P O S ELong-range forecasting is a valued planning tool used to visualize and stimulate “big-picture” thinking. It enables the government to step back from the detail endemic of the budget process to think more strategically and holistically to plan responsible annual budgets that work toward Town Goals. Long-range forecasting of annual budget priorities creates a context for evaluating budgetary impacts, building a baseline for measuring long-term effects of decisions, test economic effects of best-case and worst-case funding scenarios, and provides a reasonable understanding of revenue and
expenditure projections, future cash flows and fund balances. Long-range forecasting does not present a 5-year budget or plan for the Town. It is not a static document to be approved and placed on a shelf. Forecast models are not absolute predictions of the future, instead are projections of possible outcomes based on a set of known variables and assumptions to evaluate annual decisions. The organization achieves a long-term financial goal of sustainability and serves the main financial goals of flexibility, efficiency, risk management, sufficiency, and credibility. The application of such analytical long-range forecasting principals contributes toward the following:
• Build awareness of the probable
results of projections with current operating and capital spending and funding levels
• Assist the Town in determining the
extent of its financial challenges with key decisions
• Generate discussion on the key
financial goals and strategies that should guide future planning
• Spur the development of actions in
future business plans that would respond to the long-term strategies
• Be a foundation to the annual
budget process.
The ability to make global adjustments to parameters within forecast helps decision makers and
recommending staff understand the impacts of external factors such as natural disasters, world
economic impacts, construction materials cost, labor, and equipment availability.
A
U D I E N C EThe applied use of long-range forecasting is primarily designed as an internal evaluation tool for staff, but outputs are useful in discussions with the following groups:
• Finance and Budgeting advisors
• Senior Administration
• Town Council
• Those involved in other major
planning initiatives
•
Intergovernmental contactsF
O R E C A S T I N GC
O M P O N E N T SREVENUE
A government’s revenue structure can be greatly influenced by many economic, political, and social factors. These factors are unknown at the time forecast are generated, therefore assumptions are drawn based on current circumstances and probable expectations. Forecasting models evaluate revenues based primarily on a hybrid qualitative and quantitative approach depending on the revenue source applying the following process characteristics to achieve reliable results:
• Historical trend data
• Consideration of all revenue
influences
• Consistent review of revenue source
characteristics
• Consensus evaluation
• Monitoring of revenue collections
and patterns
• Forecasting validation and
adaptation
Morrisville characterizes revenues as either routine (having predictable patterns and clear influences) or non-routine (unpredictable and sensitive to outside influences) classifications to understand the efficiency, elasticity, diversity, and dependability of a source to apply forecasting techniques to yield reasonable expectations. In recent years, forecasting has leaned
toward a more conservative forecasting foundation for major revenue sources since the recession until a more consistent pattern of economic recovery becomes evident within these sources.
BASE OPERATING EXPENSES
Forecasts project operational, personnel, and capital cost per department based on departmental 5-Year Business and Staffing Plans. Operating expenditure projections are based on a combination of historical trends, assumptions about the future, and other judgments deemed appropriate by staff. These plans assume various annual growth multipliers depending on the type of expenditure for basic operations, which are expenditures considered routine in nature
required annually to deliver services to the community. The level of routine operational expenses are
evaluated annually based on demands, planned service expansions, Consumer Price Index, trends, and affordability to assure basic operational expenses are both reasonable and flexible.
STAFFING PLAN
New staff authorizations are assumed within the projected forecast based on priorities, anticipated service expansions, capital improvement projects requiring additional operational staff once online, and workload management needs as determined by Town Manager and Senior Directors. Cost estimates include all benefits and any related cost associated with position type such as vehicle, equipment, etc... Total personnel costs per capita are forecasted to increase no more than the inflation rate. Some degree of inflationary cost representing possible merit and promotional progression assumptions are included across the five-year window. The Personnel Cost Per Capita Chart illustrates a comparison of personnel cost/per Capita to an average rate of inflation, demonstrating our ability to control personnel expenses within future budgets.
SPECIAL PRIORITIES
Special priorities are the result of one-time or short-term expenses from equipment replacement needs, small pay-as-you-go capital projects or
implementation projects, and new initiatives that may affect the cost structure creating budgetary
fluctuations annually. These items may or may not qualify as capital outlay. Such priorities are elevated in the budget process through the annual evaluation of the Performance Management Program assessing
progress toward Strategic Town Goals, celebration of successes, and recognition of areas to improve. The budget identifies such items within each department profile as non-routine/new items to differentiate between what is a base operational budget and one-time expenses.
CAPITAL RESERVE FUND
The use of this fund is to set aside money each year to pay for large fire apparatus items in accordance with an Apparatus Replacement Plan. Such items tend to be costly and can compete with basic operational needs for limited resources. This fund allows over time for the accumulation of funding to plan for and replace these items without significant impacts annually. When the reserve fund has enough money for an outlay, the money transfers from the reserve fund to the general fund for spending. These funds may not be transferred out to supplement shortfalls in other funds, but rather only transferred back to General Fund to purchase items for which the funds are designated.
CAPITAL INVESTMENT PROGRAM
PROJECTS
A portion of the Town’s annual expenses pay for debt obligation to complete major capital improvement projects. To provide for adequate financial planning while attempting to maintain an appropriate property tax rate, the Town maintains a 5-year Capital Improvements Program that list future capital project needs. The Town must plan for the Town’s future well- being for residential purposes, but also for providing infrastructure to support and promote commerce. Most annual costs relate to daily operations for personnel, equipment, and material costs. To preserve the future good use of public infrastructure the Town must provide for continued investment in existing and new facilities. Forecasting models includes assumptions for debt outlay and operation impacts for all CIP projects, which Town Council activated through prioritization and funding designation.
DEBT
Morrisville’s debt management policy states that annual debt service payments shall not be greater than 15 percent of total governmental revenues. Total net debt shall not be greater than 8 percent of the value of the Town’s property tax base (North Carolina General Statute § 159-55(c)). The Town’s
Debt Service Ratio in comparison to Operational Ratios and Unassigned Fund Balance levels are used to determine the Town’s ability to improve service levels or improve capital assets. Debt agreements are reviewed annually to examine and forecasting debt.
REPLACEMENT PLANS
The replacement of major equipment such as vehicles, heavy equipment, technology and fire apparatus can be costly and budgetarily overwhelming without replacement criteria, evaluation, and planning. Long-range forecasts include strategic replacements to effectively manage and carefully plan for such large expenses balancing needs with affordability. The goal is to achieve a pay-as-you-go approach, control debt obligation, and save on interest costs for these capital assets having a lifespan greater than 5 years, but less 8 years. Additionally, the organization can effectively anticipate surplus resources while they have remaining useful life allowing for better resale revenue. As equipment is replaced and declared surplus they are advertised for sale to other jurisdictions throughout the country. The replacement plan prioritizes replacement needs using qualifying criteria evaluated annually by plan managers. Assumptions are built-in for annual replacement needs and anticipated surplus in accordance with the replacement plans.
• Fleet Replacement Plan
In 2005, the Town consolidated vehicle acquisition and
maintenance into the Public Works Department. By reviewing individual vehicle use the fleet manager assigns vehicles based on need, availability and planned
replacement.
• Heavy Equipment Replacement Plan
Replacement of Heavy Equipment is important to maintaining service delivery. Each piece of equipment is programmed for replacement on a regular basis. As equipment is replaced and declared surplus they are advertised for sale to other jurisdictions throughout the country.
• Information Technology
Replacement Plan
Replacement and installation of technology equipment is based on an average lifespan of 4 to 5 years. Technology is an important factor in an organization’s systems efficiency and productivity.
ADOPTED PLANS
Forecasting models incorporate assumptions for small implementation projects, studies, and land acquisition as prescribed by adopted plans unless Council has directed otherwise. Such plans focus in on specific goals defining action plans, desired outcomes, and potential funding solutions.
• Recreational Facilities & Greenways Implementation Plan
In 2006, Town Council adopted The Parks, Recreation, Greenways, and Open Space Master Plan. The master plan designates an implementation plan for specific project segments to develop the Town’s parks and greenways system. Funding for this plan may be supplemented by the general fund, but primarily funds received from Parkland Payment in Lieu fees from new development support this plan. Revenues are booked directly to this Capital Project.
• Town Center Plan
Adopted in 2007, the Town Center Plan describes a vision for creating a vibrant Town Center at
Morrisville’s historic center. Key elements of the plan include preservation of historic structures, creation of community gathering places, linkage of parks and greenways and improving transportation.
Implementation plans define more than 20 projects. • Land Use Plan (LUP) and Transportation Plan (TP) Understanding the direction of the Town’s
development attitude provides insight useful in building certain revenue, expenditure, and capital assumptions. LUP seeks to capitalize on opportunities in Morrisville while maintaining the Town’s historic roots and small town feel. Key to the LUP is the balance of desired low density residential with the need for overall economic growth as well as nearby shopping and work opportunities. The Plan integrates transportation by linking land uses with appropriate transportation plan facilities that offer opportunities for walking, biking or driving.
FUND BALANCE
The model uses Unassigned Fund Balance as a measure of flexibility in conjunction with, revenue composition, operational cost structure, debt levels and mandates. The Policy prescribes that Unassigned Fund Balance shall be no less than 25% of major operating expenditures with a target of 45%. This is government’s ability to adapt its fiscal structure to changing conditions.
T
R A N S I T I O N T OB
U D G E TBudget development breaks away from the traditional methods generally used by local
governments. Traditionally, departments are required to identify their needs annually and provide
justification to the Budget Officer (Town Manager). Morrisville requires greater depth of analysis by departments to develop Business Plans looking forward 5-years. These plans provide for explanation of expenditures to line item detail
including unfunded or deferred expenditures depending on prior year’s outcome. The LRFM uses the 5-year Business Plans to evaluate additional financial capacity in comparison with revenue forecast to incorporate new initiatives and/or one-time priorities. Essentially, the 5-year plans provide a starting point annually causing departments to make priority-planning decisions understanding the competitiveness of limited resources. Managers start the planning process knowing a baseline budget. Each year departments reassess projections in a new 5-year window adapting existing projections based on performance execution of prior year, lessons learned, political temperature, and strategic guidance provided by senior budget team. Budget submittals evaluated by the budget office are presented to the Town Manager. The Town Manager prepares a balanced recommended budget to present to the Town Council. The elected body evaluates the proposed budget in comparison to Town Goals and Core Values to adopt and establish a management tool for finances, priorities, and services.
I
N D I C A T O R S A N DT
R E N D SThe span of our long-range forecasting evaluates economic influences in projections, considers the cause and effect of capital projects, adopted plans, and provides a responsible path for the annual budgeting process. Without it, annual budgeting would dissolve to a process with lack of vision and direction. Some important elements to track and evaluate in long-range modeling are growth of principle influences such as CIP, budgeting methodology
(conservative/aggressive), policy, public facilities, economic expansion or contraction and mandates. The following elements are considered as forecasting indicators in building assumptions and scanned periodically to make certain core components of model are technically sound.
Inflation
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
CPI-U The June Card for all items is
2.3%. Edged up from May. Bureau of Labor Statistics – South Region
The 12-month change has been slow since its recent peak of 2.12 percent in September 2012. As of the half-year point moved up by 0.3%
Growth
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Population FY2014 reflects a positive
increase per State Demographer. In house estimates show potential growth in FY201 based on number of approved Units to reach 22,260. Planning Department; State Demographer – State’s estimates lag in comparison to in-house estimates
Fixed boundaries result in an assumption of a slower growth. Population growth is an essential indicator in forecasting several major revenues calculated on a per capita basis or provides some parallel to substantiate other non-major revenue assumptions.
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
New Permits Calendar year 2013 held steady
compared to prior year. New Commercial attributed to Park West and New Residential Permits as result of approved site plans in queue will continue to sustain as FY2014 closes. New
permits have slowed in the 1st
half of calendar year 2014, this can be attributed to weather events & Park West approaching its final phase.
Wake County Statistics & Reports
Historically over a 10-year period, the trend of New Permit counts are slowing. Changes in tax base primarily results between revaluation through new development. Tracking new permits starts and site plan submittals provides an understanding of possible growth in Ad Valorem as well as some probable assumptions for Development Revenue.
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Tax Base
Components 44% Commercial - 56% Residential Wake County Statistics & Reports
Holding steady. Changes in commercial and residential development patterns are essential elements to gauge growth in Ad Valorem Taxes.
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Tax Base
Values FY2012 tax base growth increased by 1.42% and current in-house estimates for FY2013 ending at 3% are supported by Wake County Tax Assessor estimates. FY2014 holds a conservative estimate of 2%.
CAFR Report, Wake County Tax Assessor Data
While permit activity has improved, we must recognize the magnitude that the Park West project has lent to sustaining our growth in FY13. While there are a number of projects on the horizon at the present, there currently is not another project of the same size and magnitude as Park West that would support a growth assumption of 3% or greater. Park West Phase 4 may influence FY14. Between revaluations, changes in tax base values are affected by new development.
Economic Growth
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
GDP Up at an annual rate of 3.4% for
2013, 2nd qtr. of 2014 at 4%
increase.
Commerce Dept. An improving index represents the economic health of the nation. ISM
Non-Manufacturing Index
Down to 56% nationally from
56.3% in May Institute for Supply
Management
Reading above 50 indicates non-manufacturing sector economy is expanding; Below 50 is contraction.
ISM
Manufacturing 55.3% in June. Overall the index indicates expansion for the 13th consecutive month. Institute for Supply Management Below 42.2 is contraction. NCSU Index of
North Carolina Increased in May dropped 5.8%, but the index is up 4.5% year over year and significantly higher than its recessionary bottom.
NCSU Professor
Walden The immediate outlook is for a continued economic growth, however not as robust as earlier indications in the year.
Consumer
Confidence The Index improved in June and July to 90.9 up from 86.4. The index stands at its highest level since before the Great Recession. The surge fueled by job growth and personal incomes.
The Conference Board of Consumer Research Center
A reading above 90 would signal a stabilized consumer. Consumer
confidence and market trends are key to building assumptions for Sales Tax, can correlate to trends seen in many Recreation Fees, and housing market relating to qualifying development revenue assumptions.
Housing & Real Estate
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Housing Starts Nationally, June housing start
decreased by 9.3% as compared to May, but 7.3% above June 2013
US Census -
national Up 24.9 year over year. This can show willingness on consumer to make major purchases.
Residential Sales Properties sold in Morrisville up 11% at 2013 year end as compared to same period in 2012
Wake County Tax Assessor Median Home
Sale Price Morrisville $220,000 Wake County Statistic Reports
Median Home
Value Morrisville $252,000 as of Jan. 2014 Wake County Statistic Report
Employment
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Unemployment
Rate June 2014 is down to 5.1 from the 6.5 June 2013 and lower as compared to the overall State Unemployment Rate of 6.5
Bureau of Labor Statistics – Raleigh – Cary NC Metro area
Jobless rates are lower. Lower unemployment can signal a healthier economy.
Fiscal Health
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Unassigned Fund
Balance FY2013 Ended with a 49.7% Unassigned Fund Balance or $11.1M. Projections are based on worst-case scenarios, therefore actual results can vary in
comparison.
FY2013 CAFR Unassigned balance grew by $853K.
Assessing the organization possible financial flexibility allows decision-makers to visualize and plan budget priorities providing sustainability. Projections are within policy limits, suggesting flexibility.
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Operational
Ratio FY2014 Ratio is estimating greater than 1 - Likely influences will materialize as delayed grant related items that are known carryovers to FY2015, a process change in handling Fund Loans for cash flow purposes, and occurrence of lapse salary.
FY2014 estimated actuals
A measure of 1 or better indicates the organization is living within its resources
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Revenue Per
Capita Revenue continue to show improvement base on trends demonstrated over the past 3-years. FY2014 does incorporate some onetime influences from effects of Tax & Tag program inflating Ad Valorem collections. FY2015 projections have accounted for this affect
FY2013 CAFR & Long-range Forecasting
Revenue per capita indicates the average level of income generated per person.
Expenditures Per
Capita 2014 and 2016 identify spike in expenditures per capita largely based on the planned 2012 Bond design and associated debt cost to implement the projects.
FY2013 CAFR &
LRFM Increasing expenditures per capita may indicate cost of services is increasing beyond ability to afford. Rising expenditures per capita may also indicate declining productivity.
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Key Debt Ratio By year 2018 new debt outpaces
debt retirement. This indicates competitive challenges between operational needs and
obligations due to capital investment decisions.
FY2013 CAFR & Long-range Forecast
Debt should be no greater than 15% of the governmental expenditures less capital outlay. Indicates controlled debt obligation to sustained long-term financial integrity, while influencing high credit ratings.
Indicator
Results
Source
Trend/Significance
Retired Debt Morrisville is capable of staying
within Debt Ratio Policy with use of retired debt. 2018 debt ratio assumptions are resulting within close range to 15%.
FY2013 CAFR
and LRFM Using 2013 debt service obligation as an annual baseline, we can understand the re-investment of retired debt and evaluate the affordability of increased obligations in relation to expected resources and other competing needs.
M
A J O RL
O N G-
R A N G EF
O R E C A S TA
S S U M P T I O N S Major Category2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Revenues Revenues • Conservative • $0.39 Tax Rate • Ad Valorem collection Rate increased to 99%• $15 Vehicle Decal (Increase) • $25 Stormwater ERU Fee
(Increase)
• Sales Tax 6.7% growth
• Privilege License reduced
15%
• 3% average growth
• Conservative
• $0.41 Tax Rate (increase/Bond)
• Ad Valorem collection rate
99%
• $15 Vehicle Decal • $25 Stormwater ERU
• Sales Tax 6.3% growth
• Privilege License reduced
by 50% • 2.3% average growth • Conservative • $0.41 Tax Rate • Ad Valorem collection rate 99% • • $15 Vehicle Decal • $25 Stormwater ERU
• Sales Tax 5% growth
• Privilege License reduced
by 50% • 1% average growth • Revaluation • Conservative • $0.41 Tax Rate • Ad Valorem collection rate 99% • • $15 Vehicle Decal • $25 Stormwater ERU
• Sales Tax 5% growth
• Privilege License reduced
by 50% • 2.4% average growth • Conservative • $0.41 Tax Rate • Ad Valorem collection rate 99% • $15 Vehicle Decal • $25 Stormwater ERU • Sales Tax 5% growth
• Privilege License reduced by 50%
• 3% average growth
Transfers In
• Capital Reserve Fund-SCBA replacement
• MSD Transfer In/Debt
• Capital Reserve Fund
• MSD Transfer In/Debt • Reimbursement from
Bond Project Cash Flow Loan NC54
• Capital Reserve Fund
• MSD Transfer In/Debt
• None/Capital Reserve Fund
• MSD Transfer In/Debt • Reimbursement from
Bond Project Cash Flow Loan MAFC/MCPII
• None/Capital Reserve Fund
• MSD Transfer In/Debt
Expenditures
Personnel • Merit average 3.4% • Plus 5 Positions $360K • Insurance12% increase • Retirement 18% Gross Wages • OPEB 3% • LEO Separation 3% • Merit average 2% • Insurance 9% increase • Retirement 3% increase • OPEB 3% • LEO Separation 3% • Merit average 2% • Insurance 8% increase • Retirement 3% increase • OPEB 3% • LEO Separation 3% • Merit average 2% • Plus 3 Positions • Insurance 7% increase • Retirement 3% increase • OPEB 3% • LEO Separation 3% • Merit average 2% • Insurance 6% increase • Retirement 3% increase
• LGERS Buy Back Ends • OPEB 3%
• LEO Separation 3%
Operations • Inflationary Adjustments
• Operations Reserve • Branding / Survey $75K • Facility studies $60K • LAPP Funds $120K
• Future Roadway Design (TBD) $300K
• GHSP Grants $20K
• Inflationary Adjustments
• Operations Reserve • Bond Sale Cost $250K
• Inflationary
Adjustments
• Operations Reserve • Small Area Planning
$100K
• Inflationary
Adjustments
• Operations Reserve • Small Area Planning
$100K
• Inflationary
Adjustments
• Operations Reserve • Small Area Planning
$100K Capital Outlay • SCBA replacement 305K (CRF) • Vehicle Replacements $356K • IT & Equipment Replacements • Software Upgrade • CAMPO Grant Sidewalk
$217K
• TOC Pedestrian Crossing $78K
• NCDOT/Progress Energy
Project $348K
• Pool Resurface $25K
• Higher Street Maintenance
• CDBG Sidewalk $92K • $100K Sidewalk Funds • Farmer’s Market Grant
Match $10K
• GHSP Grants $20K
• Providence Place BMP
Retro Fit $75K
• Small Apparatus/ Vehicle
Replacements $812K
• IT & Other Equipment Replacement
• Plans Review Software
$145K
• Increased Software
Maintenance
• Higher Street Maintenance
• MSV Prkwy Signal Pole Upgrade $26K
• $100K Sidewalk Funds
• Quint Apparatus/
Vehicle Replacements $1.2M
• IT & Other Equipment
Replacements • Software Upgrade • Higher Street Maintenance • $100K Sidewalk Funds • Vehicle Replacements $140K
• IT & Other Equipment
Replacements • Higher Street Maintenance • $100K Sidewalk Funds • Vehicle Replacements $134K
• IT & Other Equipment
Replacement • Higher Street Maintenance • $100K Sidewalk Funds Debt Service • Retiring Debt • 2004 RTP Full Year Debt
Begins
• MSD Debt
• Public Safety Radio
Replacement Debt
• Retiring Debt • 2012 Bond Debt NC54
Bypass
• MSD Debt
• Public Safety Radio
Replacement Debt
• Minor Retiring Debt
• MSD Debt
• Public Safety Radio
Replacement Debt
• Minor Retiring Debt • 2012 Bond Debt
MAFC/MCPII
• MSD Debt
• Public Safety Radio
Replacement Debt
• MSD Debt
• Public Safety Radio
Replacement Debt
Transfers Out
• To Capital Reserve Fund
$555K
• To MSD $110K
• To Capital Reserve Fund
$170K
• To MSD $110K
• Assumes Loan Cash Flow
MAFC/MCPII • To Capital Reserve Fund $373K • To MSD $110K • To Capital Reserve Fund $50K • To MSD $110K • To Capital Reserve Fund $50K • To MSD $110K
5-Year Long-Range Forecast
actual 2012 actual 2013 estimated actual 2014 proposed 2015 forecast 2016 forecast 2017 forecast 2018 forecast 2019
Revenues by type
Ad Valorem $ 12,480,910 $ 12,947,762 $ 14,397,685 $ 14,536,816 $ 15,655,586 $ 15,811,012 $ 16,124,972 $ 16,525,271 Intergovernmental Revenues Total $ 5,068,135 $ 5,346,806 $ 5,435,721 $ 5,712,945 $ 5,884,888 $ 6,111,929 $ 6,349,590 $ 6,598,423 Intergovernmental Restricted Revenues Total $ 642,114 $ 902,914 $ 500,526 $ 645,580 $ 525,849 $ 541,826 $ 558,242 $ 575,100 Other Taxes & Licenses Total $ 1,449,940 $ 1,505,393 $ 1,690,000 $ 1,643,934 $ 1,358,466 $ 1,378,404 $ 1,401,229 $ 1,420,428 Permits & Fees Total $ 900,934 $ 1,057,788 $ 971,310 $ 969,700 $ 912,090 $ 881,473 $ 904,161 $ 905,440 Stormwater Revenues Total $ - $ 473,230 $ 707,000 $ 502,000 $ 512,000 $ 517,000 $ 522,000 $ 527,000 Sales & Services Total $ 1,041,832 $ 1,031,857 $ 1,063,304 $ 1,090,950 $ 1,104,062 $ 1,126,641 $ 1,151,670 $ 1,175,218 Investment Earnings $ 25,886 $ 23,520 $ 16,200 $ 17,000 $ 17,170 $ 17,342 $ 17,515 $ 17,690 Miscellanous $ 560,725 $ 404,773 $ 275,978 $ 596,075 $ 326,320 $ 229,643 $ 232,970 $ 236,299
Transfers In from Other Fund Sources $ 571,635 $ 1,340,146 $ 1,707,209 $ 505,100 $ 1,116,400 $ 1,173,422 $ 506,100 $ 200,100
Appropriation of Fund Balance $ - $ - $ 651,460 $ - $ - $ - $
-Total Revenues $ 22,742,111 $ 25,034,188 $ 26,764,933 $ 26,871,560 $ 27,412,831 $ 27,788,691 $ 27,768,449 $ 28,180,969 Total Revenues without Transfers $ 22,170,476 $ 23,694,042 $ 25,057,724 $ 25,715,000 $ 26,296,431 $ 26,615,269 $ 27,262,349 $ 27,980,869
Overall Revenue Growth (not including interfund transfers) 8% 7% 6% 3% 2.3% 1% 2.4% 3%
Overall Revenue Growth (includes interfund transfers) 2% 10% 7% 0% 2% 1% 0% 1%
Revenue Per Capita Less Transfers $ 1,185.59 $ 1,220.96 $ 1,242.70 $ 1,155.21 $ 1,146.91 $ 1,127.00 $ 1,131.78 $ 1,138.82 Expenditures by type Personnel Service $ 12,516,043 $ 12,491,731 $ 13,227,682 $ 14,402,155 $ 14,762,077 $ 15,137,581 $ 15,517,379 $ 15,892,654 Operations $ 4,882,942 $ 5,065,805 $ 6,119,212 $ 7,156,560 $ 6,933,511 $ 6,815,049 $ 6,980,352 $ 7,186,868 Capital Outlay $ 1,685,709 $ 3,176,135 $ 2,990,548 $ 2,645,085 $ 2,240,832 $ 2,453,926 $ 1,347,392 $ 1,484,693 Interfund Transfers $ 1,315,000 $ 1,203,500 $ 1,625,000 $ 665,000 $ 892,000 $ 483,000 $ 160,000 $ 160,000 Debt $ 1,647,464 $ 1,611,580 $ 1,518,181 $ 2,002,760 $ 3,094,299 $ 3,025,303 $ 3,526,400 $ 3,444,946 Total Expenditures $ 22,047,159 $ 23,548,751 $ 25,480,623 $ 26,871,560 $ 27,922,719 $ 27,914,859 $ 27,531,523 $ 28,169,161 Total Expenditures without Transfers $ 20,732,159 $ 22,345,251 $ 23,855,623 $ 26,206,560 $ 27,030,719 $ 27,431,859 $ 27,371,523 $ 28,009,161
Overall Expenditure Growth (not including interfund transfers) 9% 8% 7% 10% 3% 1% 0% 2%
Overall Expenditure Growth (includes interfund transfers) 10% 7% 8% 5% 4% 0% -1% 2%
Expenditures Per Capita Less Transfers $ 1,108.67 $ 1,151.46 $ 1,183.08 $ 1,177.29 $ 1,178.94 $ 1,161.58 $ 1,136.31 $ 1,139.97
Transfers (In/Out) other Sources Transfers In $ 571,635 $ 1,340,146 $ 1,707,209 $ 505,100 $ 1,116,400 $ 1,173,422 $ 506,100 $ 200,100 Transfers out $ 1,315,000 $ 1,203,500 $ 1,625,000 $ 665,000 $ 892,000 $ 483,000 $ 160,000 $ 160,000 Claims/Settlements $ - $ 349,000 Total Transfers $ (743,365) $ (212,354) $ 82,209 $ (159,900) $ 224,400 $ 690,422 $ 346,100 $ 40,100
Total Revenues (all sources) $ 22,742,111 $ 25,034,188 $ 26,764,933 $ 26,871,560 $ 27,412,831 $ 27,788,691 $ 27,768,449 $ 28,180,969 Total Expenditure (all sources)
22,047,159
$ $ 23,548,751 $ 25,480,623 $ 26,871,560 $ 27,922,719 $ 27,914,859 $ 27,531,523 $ 28,169,161
Surplus/(deficit) - includes transfers in/out effect $ 694,952 $ 1,485,437 $ 1,284,310 $ - $ (509,888) $ (126,168) $ 236,926 $ 11,808 Debt Outlay Analysis
Maximum debt outlay annually within Policy1 $ 3,059,954 $ 3,290,576 $ 3,594,366 $ 3,730,320 $ 3,724,263 $ 3,733,433 $ 3,600,768 $ 3,708,632
Retiring Debt from previous year $ 148,399 $ 116,481 $ 331,677 $ 26,461 $ 26,366 $ 24,669 Existing Long-term Debt $ 1,647,464 $ 1,611,580 $ 1,463,181 $ 1,346,700 $ 1,015,024 $ 988,562 $ 962,196 $ 937,528 New CIP Debt Service $ - $ - $ 53,642 $ 656,060 $ 2,079,274 $ 2,036,739 $ 2,564,203 $ 2,507,417
Total Long-term Debt Service (including New Debt) $ 1,647,464 $ 1,611,580 $ 1,516,823 $ 2,002,760 $ 3,094,298 $ 3,025,301 $ 3,526,399 $ 3,444,945
Debt Service Ratio Performance Indicator
Debt outlay as % of prior year expenditures indicates the service flexibility within the amount of expenditures committed to annual debt service. 15% or higher
Current and Projected Tax Rate 0.3665 0.3665 0.3900 0.3900 0.4100 0.4100 0.4100 0.4100
Tax Base $ 3,381,598,636 $ 3,521,406,350 $ 3,612,522,538 $ 3,702,835,601 $ 3,795,406,491 $ 3,833,360,556 $ 3,910,027,768 $ 4,007,778,462
Tax Base Growth 1.37% 4.13% 2.59% 2.50% 2.50% 1.00% 2.00% 2.50%
Population 18,700 19,406 20,164 22,260 22,928 23,616 24,088 24,570
Per Penny $ 340,543 $ 353,281 $ 369,171 $ 372,739 $ 381,844 $ 385,634 $ 393,292 $ 403,055 Expenditures Per Capita $ 1,178.99 $ 1,213.48 $ 1,263.67 $ 1,207.17 $ 1,217.84 $ 1,182.03 $ 1,142.96 $ 1,146.49 Fund Balance Analysis - CAFR Exhibit 5
Beginning Total Fund Balance $ 11,381,376 $ 12,076,324 $ 13,212,761 $ 14,497,071 $ 13,845,611 $ 13,335,723 $ 13,209,555 $ 13,446,482 Revenues based on Current Tax Rate $ 22,170,476 $ 23,694,042 $ 25,057,724 $ 25,715,000 $ 26,296,431 $ 26,615,269 $ 27,262,349 $ 27,980,869 Expenditures with New CIP $ 20,732,159 $ 22,345,252 $ 23,855,623 $ 26,206,560 $ 27,030,719 $ 27,431,859 $ 27,371,523 $ 28,009,161
Surplus/(deficit) $ 694,952 $ 1,136,436 $ 1,284,310 $ (651,460) $ (509,888) $ (126,168) $ 236,926 $ 11,808
Assigned Fund Balance actual or assumption $ 3,028,571 $ 3,285,067 $ 3,254,173.10 $ 3,298,633.73 $ 3,210,312.53 $ 3,065,944.69 $ 2,906,116.91 $ 2,969,240.70
Prior Period Adjustment
Assigned/Unassigned $ 12,076,324 $ 13,212,761 $ 14,497,071 $ 13,845,611 $ 13,335,723 $ 13,209,555 $ 13,446,482 $ 13,458,290 Capital Reserve Fund Balance $ 1,217,293 $ 1,190,372 $ 496,719 $ 746,719 $ 600,389 $ 67 $ 50,067 $ 100,067 Assigned / Unassigned Fund Balance including Capital Reserve Fund $ 13,293,616 $ 14,403,133 $ 14,993,790 $ 14,592,330 $ 13,936,112 $ 13,209,622 $ 13,496,549 $ 13,558,357
Unassigned Fund Balance $ 10,265,046 $ 11,118,066 $ 11,739,617 $ 11,293,696 $ 10,725,800 $ 10,143,678 $ 10,590,432 $ 10,589,116
Unassigned Fund Balance Performance Indicator
Percentage of expenditures indicates Morrisville's ability to handle long-term obligations - 25% or less fails to meet Policy. Over 45% may indicate flexibility for
onetime outlays. 49.51% 49.76% 49.21% 43.09% 39.68% 36.98% 38.69% 37.81%
Fund Balance High Policy 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45%
Fund Balance Low Policy 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%
notes:
1 - Deficit inidicates potenital to use Fund Balance to balance revenues to expenditures, cut operations, or raise revneues / Surplus indicates revenues in excess of expenditures should current tax rate be held the same. 2 - Change in Fund Balance Reporting can limit year to year comparison in previous years.
3 - Current year estimates include encumbrance assumptions that by June 30th may become part of the Purchase Order Rollover required by financial reporting, affecting assumptions used to forecast Fund Balance.
4 - Unassigned Fund Balance assumptions are long projections, in that estimates must span over a two year period . Should any one varible change it can radically alter the assumptions overall. However estimates are procduced to reasonibly understand potential impacts of budgetary decisions.
49.5% 49.8% 49.2% 43.1% 39.7% 37.0% 38.7% 37.8% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55%
Unassigned Fund Balance
Unassigned Fund Balance Performance Indicator Fund Balance High Policy
Fund Balance Low Policy
7.95% 7.21% 6.36% 7.64% 11.45% 11.03% 12.88% 12.30% 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00%
