Agenda - Council - 06/09/2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

GOVERNMENTAL FUND REVENUES The following table presents the per capita revenue of the City's governmental funds for the past three years, along with state-wide averages. We have included the most recent comparative state-wide averages available from the Office of the State Auditor to provide a benchmark for interpreting the City's data. The amounts received from the typical major sources of governmental fund revenue will naturally vary between cities based on factors such as the City's stage of development, location, size and density of its population, property values, services it provides, and other attributes. It will also differ from year-to-year due to the effect of inflation and changes in the City's operation. Also, certain data on these tables may be classified differently than how it appears on the City's financial statements in order to be more comparable to the state-wide information, particularly in separating capital expenditures from current expenditures. We have designed this section of our management report using per capita data in order to better identify unique or unusual trends and activities of your city. We intend for this type of comparative and trend information to complement, rather than duplicate, information in the Management's Discussion and Analysis. An inherent difficulty in presenting per capita information is the accuracy of the population count, which for most years is based on estimates. A city's stage of development, along with the way a city finances various capital projects, will impact the mix of revenue sources it receives. The City's governmental fund revenues for 2014 were $15,546,376, a decrease of $903,447 (5.5 percent) from the prior year. On a per capita basis, the City received $624 in governmental fund revenue for 2014, a decrease of $53 from the prior year. The City has generally generated less revenue per capita than the average City. The largest change in the table above occurred in the "tax increments" category of revenues, which decreased $65 per capita from the prior year. This decrease was caused by the decertification of a large tax increment financing district at the end of 2013, which reduced the amount of tax increment collected in 2014. The second largest change in the table above occurred in the "other" category, which increased $22 per capita from the prior year. This increase was caused in part by the unrealized gain on marking investments to market at year-end in accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) standards. -7- Governmental Funds Revenue per Capita With State -Wide Averages by Population Class State -Wide City of Ramsey Year December 31, 2013 2012 2013 2014 Population 2,500-10,000 10,000-20,000 20,000-100,000 23,835 24,306 24,935 Property taxes $ 422 $ 388 $ 423 $ 371 $ 340 $ 356 Tax increments 30 42 40 113 92 27 Franchise and other taxes 31 39 34 — — — Special assessments 63 58 72 18 15 13 Licenses and permits 27 26 38 22 30 18 Intergovernmental revenues 253 268 148 157 120 105 Charges for services 109 84 91 71 36 39 Other 56 33 30 103 44 66 Total revenue $ 991 $ 938 $ 876 $ 855 $ 677 S 624 A city's stage of development, along with the way a city finances various capital projects, will impact the mix of revenue sources it receives. The City's governmental fund revenues for 2014 were $15,546,376, a decrease of $903,447 (5.5 percent) from the prior year. On a per capita basis, the City received $624 in governmental fund revenue for 2014, a decrease of $53 from the prior year. The City has generally generated less revenue per capita than the average City. The largest change in the table above occurred in the "tax increments" category of revenues, which decreased $65 per capita from the prior year. This decrease was caused by the decertification of a large tax increment financing district at the end of 2013, which reduced the amount of tax increment collected in 2014. The second largest change in the table above occurred in the "other" category, which increased $22 per capita from the prior year. This increase was caused in part by the unrealized gain on marking investments to market at year-end in accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) standards. -7-