D002019CITY OF SAINT PAUL �� p�OI �T
OFFICE OF TAE MAYOR No.:
Date:
� ADMINISTKATIVE ORDER
BUDGET REVISIQN GS #: 102883
E��SI$ATIVE �RDEIZ, Consistent with the authority granted to the Mayor in Section 10.07.4 of the City Charter and
based on the request of the Director of the Department of Public Works
to amend the 20 00 budget of the Sewer Utility Enterprise Fund fund, the Director of the
Office of FinanciaT�rvices is authorized to amen sai u ge in e o owing manner:
Curre�t Amended
Budget Change Budget
1 260 - 22206 - 0544 Payment to Metro Sewer $17,272,423.00 ($250,000.00) $17,022,423.00
z 260 - 22200 - 0558
3 260 - 22200 - 0567
Transfer to Spec. Revenue
Transfer to Internal
$0.00 $147,956.00 $147,956.00
$0.00 $102,044.00 $102,044.00
Totals $17,272,423.00 $0.00 $17,272,423.00
4. Transfer spending authority to Transfers Out to Other Funds for Interest Revenue. Spending authority is
5. available due to decreases in Metropolitan Council Environmental Services charges for sewage treatment
6. in 2000.
.
4�
��� �����
Approvetl By Mayor /(r � ��,
Date
Public Works
:ONTACT PERSON 8 PHONE
Dick Rupert, 266-6058
ON COUNCILAGENDA BY (DAT�
IATEINITIATED
3l26/2001
QTV COUNCIL
ASSIGN
GI1Y ATCORNEI ❑ qTY CLERK
NUMBERF-0R
ROUTING ❑ FINANCIALSERVICESDIR. ❑ FINlWCIALSEflV/ACGTG
MAYOR(OR ASSISTANi)
(CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
a 2
�
TOTAL # OF SIGNATIiRE PAGES
ACTION pEQUESiED
Approve attached Administrauae Order transferri�g spending authority between ]ine items in the Public Works Sewer Utility F.r.terprise Fund
(Fund 260) for the year 2000.
PFGOMMENDATIONS Approve (A) or qeject (R)
PLANNING COMMISSION
�
A
CIB COMMITTEE
QVII SEFVICE COMMISSION
PubliC Works StaH
Offics of finar�cial Services ShH
O oi IDe State Autlnor
ANSWERTHE
1. Has this persorJfinn ever worketl under a Contract for this depanment?
YES NO
2. Flas this persONfirm ever been a ciry employee�
YES NO
Furid
�UESTIONS:
3. Does this persort�firm possess a skill not normalty possessed by any a;rent ciry smployee�
YES NO
4. Is this �CrsoNfirm a targetetl ventlor?
INiPAi1NG PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNIN (WHQ WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHV) YES NO
When the 2000 budget was developed and adopted, $250,000 of the interest revenue budgeted in the Sewer Utility w�as also budgetecl in other
operating funds in the Depattment �f Public Works This was a recognition that even though the Sewer Utili2y is the only operating fund in
Public Works to receive interest revenue from invested opezating cash, cash balances in other operating funds cons�hute ta the everall interest
eaznings of the City. The buciget was set to move interest eunings from the Sewer Utility to the interest revenue line 'r<�m en othe: operating
funds. Through audit of our financial records for 2000, the State Auditor has recommended reclassifying these revenues as transfers to other
funds in accordance with Govemmental Accounane Standasds (GASBI Statement 31.
ADVANiAGE51FAPPROVED
The financial records of Public Works Fureds will be in wmpliance with GASB Statement 31, "Accounting and Financial Reporting for
Certain Investments and for External Investment Pools."
DISADVAMAGESIFAPPROVED: �
None. The accounting treaunent of these transactions does not effect the overall 6nancial reporting of the City. It is merely a
reclassification from Interest Revenue to Transfers In for the recipient funds, and Interest Revenue to Transfers Out in the Sewer Utility.
OISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED�
The City may risk a negative comment on the management of our funds by the State Auditor and other reviewers of our financial
documents.
AMOUNTOFTRANSACTION
COST/REVENUE BUDGE7ED (CIRCLE ONE)
oa ao �
GREEN SHEET No. 102883
minavoaie
VES No
� NGSOURCE � ACTNITYNUMBER 22200
IAL INFOflMATION (EXPLAIM